which of them the proof of bastardy or legitimacy falls. It seems that it will always  fall to him who is out of seisin, since he who is in seisin has no need to prove, neither  the exception, if he excepts bastardy, or the replication of legitimacy if bastardy is  objected against him, because of the advantage of possession,1 because when a  tenant raises the exception of bastardy against a demandant [the demandant will be  forced to the proof of legitimacy, [not] the tenant to the proof of bastardy]2 by excepting,  the demandant must show that he is legitimate by replicating, otherwise his  case will fall and possession remain with the tenant. Conversely, if bastardy is objected  against the tenant by the demandant, that he has no right in the land he holds  because he is a bastard, he may be answered that he, the tenant, is in seisin as lawful  heir, whereupon the demandant must replicate that he is a bastard, and so by replicating  prove the bastardy, and so the demandant must sue [to prove bastardy] because  the tenant would never sue [to prove legitimacy]. Thus in both cases proof of  the replication falls upon the demandant, either to prove that he is legitimate, as in  the first case, or that the tenant is a bastard, as in the second.
An enquiry as to bastardy is sent to court christian by writ.
 When, in the proper circumstances, a plea is to be transmitted to court christian,  [when] that is permissible and proper, because3 cognisance and the enquiry as to  bastardy ought to be made in court christian, let a writ then issue to the ordinary of  the place, in this form, [if the ordinary is within the realm [and] under4 the king's  potestas. If he is outside the realm and not under the king's potestas, [since] he is not  bound to obey unless he wishes, and may not enquire unless the matter is entrusted  to him by the king,5 the demandant's action may fall for lack of proof.][And note  that before the plea and enquiry as to bastardy is sent to court christian, the view must  be made of the land claimed, because, since the whole cause is decided by the enquiry  so made, and nothing remains after the inquest except to give judgment in the king's  court, it would be preposterously done if the view were then first claimed. Let the  view therefore he made first, that the justice may give a judgment certain as to a  thing certain. When the enquiry has been returned by