if it is objected that his ancestor did not put in a claim, if he who is said to be his  ancestor was not the ancestor of him who now claims, <as in the case of warranty of  charter,> in the sense that any right could descend to him through the aforesaid  ancestor.
[If] the fine was made in secret, before the lawful time, that is, at least a month.  One is also excused for not putting in his claim if the chirograph is made and fraudulently  delivered before the lawful time, one month at least. And though at first sight  a fine and chirograph may be revoked by reason of the persons involved, those who  hold tenements only for life, as women holding in the name of dower and the like,  or villeins [who] make a fine and chirograph of their lords' villeinage, in many cases1  it is prejudicial to such lords when they are present, [who] cannot be excused if they  have not put in their claim. On this matter may be found [in the roll] of Trinity term  in the fourteenth year of king Henry in the county of Norfolk, [the case] of Richard  Angod.2 One is sometimes excused for not putting in his claim by the king's service,  since that ought to be no one's prejudice, provided that he is so in service that he can  neither come nor send,3 as where he is besieged in a castle within the realm or hindered  in some other way.
One is also excused if he speaks of his own seisin.
 One is also excused for not making his claim if he speaks of his own seisin before a fine  made after a disseisin, and impetrates his writ before the fine, because the thing is thus  made litigious.4
In some cases he is not excused.
 Note that one is not excused for not making his claim if he is in the realm within the  four seas and may, if he wishes, come or send. And that he is not excused if he can  send may be found in the roll of Hilary term in the seventh year of king Henry, in the  county of Lincoln [the case] of William de Scotingny.5 Nor is he excused though languor  has been a warded him, because he can send, as in the same roll in the county of  Lincoln [the case] of Simon de Hales.67<Languor did not excuse him because he could have sent his man to put in his claim.>
If one says that he was hindered he must prove it, as where he says that he was overseas or in prison and the like.
 It does not suffice to say that he was hindered, he who alleges an impediment, unless  he proves it by suit or the country, as where one says by way of replication that he