which were before nay sometimes less or none when formerly there were some as in Surrey Robert de Wate holds one House which paid all Services in the time of Kind Edward now nothing at all But to the Claims or Titles allowed Hantescire Aldredus frater Ode calumniatur unam virgatam terrae de hoc Manerio dicit se eam tenuisse die quâ Rex Edwardus fuit vivus mortuus disaisitus fuit postquam Rex Willielmus mare transiit ipse dirationavit coram reginâ inde est testis ejus Hugo de Port homines de toto hundredo Aldred the Brother of Ode claims one Rood of that Manner and says That he held it the day that King Edward was alive and dead and was disseized after that King William past the Seas and he recovered it before the Queen Hugo de Port is Witness of it and the whole Hundred 'T is to be observed that where the County or Hundred attests any mans Plea or Title this is a solemn Judgment in Domesday Book that being the way appointed of ascertaining Estates and Titles In the same County and Hundred Hugh de Port has his Claim allowed Hanc hidam calumniatur Hugo de Port dicens eam pertinere ad sua Maneria de Cerdeford Eschetune ibi eam tenuerunt sui antecessores hoc testantur tot ' Hundr ' This Hide Hugh de Port claims saying that it belongs to his Mannors of Cerdeford and Eschetune and there his Ancestors held it and this the whole Hundred testifies So the same Hugh claims three Houses and a Corner of a Field and one Rood and five Acres of Land of Turstin the Chamberlain and of this he brings the Hundred to witness that his Ancestors were seized Die quo Rex Edwardus fuit vivus mortuus The Tryal in this Couâ—ty between William de Chornet In Forcingbridge Hundr in Clatings and Picot the Sheriff of Cambridgeshire is very remarkable In isto Hundr in isto Maner tenet Picot 2 Virgat dimidium istam terram calumniatur Willielmus de Chornet dicens pertinere ad Maner de Cerdeford feudum Hugonis de Port per haereditatem sui antecessoris de hoc suum testimonium adduxit de melioribus antiquis hominibus totius Comitatûs Hundr Picot contraduxit suum testimonium de Villanis vili plebi de prepositis qui nolunt defendere per Sacramentum aut per Dei judicium quod ille qui tenuit terram liber homo fuit potuit ire cum terrâ quo voluit sed testes Willielmi nolunt accipere legem nisi Regis E. usque dum definiatur per Regem In that Hundred and in that Mannor Picot holds two Rood and a half of Land that Land William de Chornet claims saying that it belongs to the Mannor of Cerdeford of the Feud of Hugh de Port by the Inheritance of his Ancestor And of this produced his Testimony of the better and ancient men of the whole County and Hundred and Picot on the other side brought his of Villains and inferiour People and of Bailiffs who will not defend by Oath or by Gods Judgment which I take here not to be the Ordail but the Battail as we find the Tryals vel bello vel judicio that he who held the Land Which was the Issue against being of Hugh de Port's Feud was a Freeman and might go with it whither he would Here the County or Hundred testifies that the stress of de Chornet's Cause depends upon the Confessor's Law and so give the Title with him In the North and West riding of Yorkshire many Claims may be seen as of Earl Hugh which I take it was Hugh de Ferrers Henry de Ferrers being disseized in that County and 't is likely both claim'd by the same Title Hugh was a very considerable Free holder There are many others who are in like Circumstances as George Malet William Malet Orm and Bunde Osburn de Arcis William de Warren Ligulf Wido de Credun Percy Sortebrand Gislebert SECT 4. 'T is evident that King William did not so much as make a new Grant or Confirmation to men of what was theirs before the old Title being sufficiently firm hence in Amelbrice Hundred in Surrey tenuit Almaris sine dono Regis eò quod antecessor ejus Almar tenuit Almar held without the King's Grant because his Ancestor Almar held it In Glocestershire Brictric tenet de Rege 4 Hidas in Lechametone Geldant ipse tenuit earum 2 Hidas T. R. E. Ordric alias duas Rex Willielmus utramque eidem Brictric concessit pergens in Normaniam Brictric holds of the King in Lechametâ—ne four Hides and they pay a Quit-rent he held two Hides of them in the time of King Edward and Ordric the other two King William when he went into Normandy granted both that is the two Hides which Ordric held to Brictric so that Brictric enjoyed the other two not contained in the King's Grant upon his prior Title SECT 5. WHereas this Author is pleased to exercise his reflecting Faculty upon that Lawyer in Ed. 3. Reign Against Mr. Petyt p. 28. who affirmed That the Conquerour came not at all to out those who had right Possession Should be rightful but to out those which by their wrong doing had occupied any Land in Disinheritance of the King and of his Crown that is such Land as was forfeited to the Crown by their being in Arms against the King upon which p. 29. he says that this Judge spoke out of Design and studied and knew only popular and lucrative Law and not the Constitution of the Nation before his own time 'T is manifest that this free Censurer studies only parasitical Law and that if he were acquainted with Domesday book he would not censure this nor would challenge his Adversary to find any one Plea or Grant of the like Nature p. 26. with Swanborn's who pleaded p. 25. That he was never against the King Now 't is observable that we find many Forfeitures mentioned in this Book which were needless if the King seized without so in Essex in Barstable Hundr In Burâ de istis Hidis est una de hominibus forisfactis erga Regem in Bury one of those Hides belonged to the men that were forfâ—ited to the King and this was the way of Expression accordingly in the Active we find in Norfolk Earl Ralf held such Lands Quando se forisfecit But more particularly in Cambridgeshire in Wardune Hardwin holds of Richard this did not belong to Richard's Ancestor but Ralf Waders held it Die quo deliquit contra Regem that day on which he was in Arms or Rebellion offended against the King and so forfeited whereas otherwise it had continued with him but this compar'd with Indulphus the then King's Secretary makes a full proof Erle Yvo sends to Anjou to the Abbot of St. Nickolas
and gives a Cell Lands and Tenements for a Prior and five Monks in Spalding Wulketul Abbot of Croyland Indulphi Hist. fo 902. commences his Suit for this in Curia Regis all the Normans being confederate together justifie and approve of the Depredations Oppressions Slaughters and all other Injuries committed by Yvo Talbois against the Croylanders and as in the body of Behemoth one Feen is joyned to another they refute the Truth And that which added to the Heap of the Calamity of Croyland was the cruel beheading of Erle Walden of Croyland who was very kind to all the Religions and was chiefly the best and most worthy Friend to the Monastery of Croyland and although Arch-bishop Lanfranc his Confessor asserted that he was free from all Faction and Conspiracy and if he died in the Cause that he would be a Martyr yet his most impious Wife thirsting after another Marriage and therefore most wickedly hastening the Death of her Husband Also some Normans gaping after his Counties of Northampton and Huntington According to our Author he had all the Lands of these Counties whereas the King had some especially the Anjovin Erl Yvo Talbois thirsting for his Blood being most greedy for his Lands and Tenements which were very many in all the Counties of England the innocent and harmless man is martyr'd at Winchester the day before the Kalendâ— Here we see they were forc'd to accuse him of Faction and Conspiracy or Rebellion that the Lands might be forfeited to the Crown and they might get them for their good Service Our man of mighty Vndertakings thinks to set aside Edwin of Sharburn's Evidences and exposes the Credulity of his Friend Sir William Dugdale whose Obligation for leading him the way in his Origines Juridiciales he has returned to the purpose because he tells us Sharnburn's name is not to be found in Domesday book or the Conquerour's Survey and the Owners of Sharburn which are there only to be found are William de Warennâ Odo Bishop of Bajeux Bernerius Arbalistarius and William de Pertenac 'T is not material that they are reputed Owners since Sharborn had the King's Mandat p. 25. and possibly might not have the Possession restored till after this Survey 2. Often only the chief Lords of the Fee are named though not all the Proprietors under them 3. Though we find not Edwin of Sharburn we find in the same County Edwin a Proprietor and Lord of a Mannor with a mesne Lord under his Bailiwick and Care though not holding of him Sislanda tenuit Ketel liber homo Edvini commendatus tantum pro Manerio duo Car. Ketel Edwins Free-man held Sisland within his Bailiwick only for a Mannor and two Carvs of Land Now 't is very obvious that there were great Proprietors whose Christian Names only were mentioned in Domesday book They are frequently named without their Additions to be sure not all the Addition by which they were known to instance in Edric cognomento Sylvaticus this Sirname of his is not to be found there as I take it and yet he kept great Possessions which he had of a Title prior to William's Eo tempore Florentius wigorniensis extitit quidam praepotens Minister Edricus cognomento Sylvaticus cujus terram quia se dedere regi dedignabatur Herefordenses Castellani Ricardus Scrob frequenter vastaverunt sed quotiescumque super eum irruerant multos è suis militibus Scutariis perdiderunt At that time there was a certain powerful Officer Edric whose 〈◊〉 was Silvaticus whose Land because he scorn'd to yield to the Conquerour the Castellans of Hereford and Richard Scrob often wasted but as often as they fâ—ll upon him they lost many of their Souldiers and Tenants by Knights Service Hitherto he had kept his Lands and a little after we find the King and him reconciled 〈…〉 Vir strenuissimus Edricus cognomento Silvaticus cujus supra meminimus cum Rege Gulielmo pacificatur And soon after this he accompanies the King to Scotland but if the Dr. finds him by this Addition in Domesday book I will allow him to be a man of a very sagacious Invention p. 26. 4. We find whole Counties left out of Domesday book and therefore admit Edwin were not there 't is not strange that he though a Proprietor should be omitted if it were only through the Influence of Erl Warenn Notwithstanding the Exceptions taken to what he calls the famous Legend and trite Fable of Edwin of Sharnborn he himself confesses that he had the King's Mandat and so this Plea was allowed in the very Instance which he thinks to be on his Side How idle is his note on the Margin of p. 24. against Mr. Petyt Against Mr. Petyt c. p. 19. Can any man forfeit his Lands to a Stranger a Conquerour that could not pretend Title but by Violence and Conquest As if a Conquerour could not make what he pleas'd a Forfeiture and were not the more likely to use Rigor for being a Stranger having no Tyes of Familiarity or Blood besides will not a Conquerour pretending an Hereditary Right make them who oppos'd it forfeit And it shall be taken for just too by them who acknowledge his Title Noâ— is there more to favour his Fancy that King William by giving away the Lands of Great men nay whole Counties or the Government of them thereby defeated the Inheritance or lesser Rights of those who held under them As if for the purpose the King should grant away the Estate of the Lord Stafford which if any were left in him after any Settlement was really forfeited thereby all that had Leases under him or any other Interest were wholly divested which were to make the Attaindure to reach farther than the Blood SECT 6. BUT because our Author is a very sagacious Person for Informations sake I am bold to ask him some Questions occasioned by Domesday-book In Andover Hundred Sorry Rex tenet in dominico Cladford de feudo Rogeri Comitis If this had been the King 's own Feud 't would have been Rex habet de feudo â—uo as we find Robert de Statford had thirteen houses De honore Comitum de feudo suo Wherefore Quere whether all the Lands of the Kingdom were held mediately or immediately of the Crown What thinks he of Est de regno Angliae â—on subjacet alicui Hundredo neque est in consuetudine ullâ So in Surrey Non adâ—acet alicui Manerio or as elsewhere Fuit posita extra Manerium or such an one is commendatus homo to another Glos. tit commendare who if we believe Sir Henry Spelman â—wore no Fealty and held not by any kind of Tenure What of Nunquam geldavit or geldum dedit nec hidata fuit or distributa per Hidas What of potuit ire cum terrâ quo voluit â—otuit se vertere ad alium Dominum Which I should think argued Freedom from the Feudal Law
learn'd Antiquary Lamb. Leges Etheâ—redi cap. 1. Mr. Lambart renders Ascitis sibi ingenuis quinque taking to him five Freemen for what he calls ingenuus Bromton calls liber homo Ingenuus quisque fidejussores c. fidissimos adhibeto Vt omnis liber homo habeat credibile plegium Let every Free-holder have a credible pledge this must be confin'd to Dominus familiae unless it be of such as cannot be Pledges themselves but under Free-pledges their Masters And this is farther evident in that it answers to the Head-borough's purging himself Quinque Thanis i. e. Nobilibus Leg. Canut and his Tithing with five Friborgi or Frank-pledges se duodecimo existente that is Duodecimâmanu with the 12th hand as is required by St. Edward's Law de Friborgis where no other Nobility is exacted than what every Free-pledge had The ancient Laws give farther Proof in that Satrapas a Peer or Noble and Paganus a Chorle or Villain as we find Chorle render'd in an ancient Manuscript cited by Mr. Selden Vid. Jan. p. 32. in his Titles of Honour took in all the Orders of men Idem juris esto per omnes hominum ordines Leges Aluredi de proditione dominorum sive Satrapae sive Pagani fuerint So in the Laws of William 1. whereas 't is supposed that the Thayni or Barons since answering to them were denominated from holding of the King So Domesday Bronâ—ton Leges Canuti apud Lamb. de we find Thanus Regis and Mediocris Thaynus or inferiour sive infamae conditionis distinct And 't is to be observ'd that this took in all that paid the Hereot which was then a payment relating to the Army so that this to be sure reach'd to all that held of any by Knights Service but it appears by St. Edward's Laws that it reach'd to all that bore Arms. De Heretochiis In quolibet comitatu semper fuit unus Hereteoch per electionem electus ad conducendum exercitum Comitatûs sui c. Et qui in bello ante Dominum suum ceciderit sit hoc in Terrâ sit alibi sint ei relevationes condonatae habeant Haeredes ejus pecuniam terram ejus sine aliquâ diminutione rectè dividant inter se. But it will be said whatever was the Law before William's time it was not so after Leges H. 1. cap. 29. Qui debent esse judic 7. Rs. but for this I will one a Law express Whereas the Thayns are called Nobles in the Laws by me cited and as all Authors agree have generally since been called Barons not but that in William the First 's time Terra Tainorum Regis they retain'd their old names as appears by Domesday book we find in this Law that they who had Free-lands in any County and according to the known Law were and still continue Judges in the County Court were Barons Regis Judices Barones Comitatus qui liberas in eis terras habent Leges Hen. 1. cap. per quos debeâ—t causae singulorum alternâ prosecutione tractari Villani verô vel Cocsetti vel Perdingi vel qui sunt viles vel inopes personae non sunt inter Legum Judires numerandi unde nec in Hundredo vel comitatu pecuniam suam vel dominorum sâ—orum forisfaciunt The King's Judges are the Barons of the County they who have free Lands there who are to try one anothers Causes But Villains or Beggars or they who are base and indigent persons are not to be reckon'd amonst the Judges of the Laws wherefore they neither forfeit their own nor their Masters Money in the Hundred or County 'T is plain that the Judgments in the Hundreds and Counties are those which are here intended so that the Barons which have Free Lands De generalibus placitis Comit. answer to the Bishops Counts c. And the Headboroughs and other Owners of Land who were to be at the County Court And the true Sir Henry Spelman agrees that the Barones Comitatus were amongst others fundorum proprietarii Free-holders and these he says were Feudal Barons Baronum feodalium species where Feudal must be meant in a Sense different from our Authors But our Undertaker will prove that none but such as held by Knights Service were Barones Comitatûs This of being Suitors to the County and Hundred Courts Against Mr. Petyt p. 40. c. was a Service incident to their Tenures For proof he refers us to Glanvil but with very little Success for in the 13th Book which he fancies throughout to agree with his Vagary Liberi legales homines are as often named as Milites sometimes indeed Milites strictly were required at the Common Law 1 Inst. f. 256. a. as where a Peer of the Realm was concern'd in the Action and four Knights upon their Oaths ought to return twelve Knights to try the Mise in a Writ of Right â—b f. 159. a. But the Supposition that the Freemen Masters of Families such as were Conservators of the Peace anciently and had given the Government Security for their Obedience to the Laws could not be probi legales homines is a Conceit p. 26. for which I dare say our Man of sagacious Invention was beholden to no man If he had looked a little better into Hoveden who sometimes is in great Request with him he might have found other free and legal men besides Knights and own'd so by a positive Law Siquis retatus fuerit coram justitiis Domini Regis Assisae Hen. 2. Factae apud Clarendum renovatae apud Northamptune Hoveden f. 549. de murdro vel â—atrocinio c. per Sacramentum duodecim militum de Hundredo si Milites non adfuerint per Sacramentum duodecim liberorum legalium hominum per Sacramentum quatuor hominum de unaquaque Villâ Hundredi eat ad judicium aquae But for his Notion to give it's due 1. 'T is absurd 2. 'T is dangerous 1. We know that the Titles to Estates from before the reputed Conquest are allowed upon the Presentments of the Counties and Hundreds Testatur Comitatus Testatur Hundredus c. If these were all Strangers brought in with the Conquerour how could they know the Tithe and who enjoyed the Land Die quo Rex Edwardus fuit vivus mortuus and by what Services nay who was the third Heir as we find they present Besides is it supposable that they would have allowed the old Inhabitants such large Shares as we find in domesday-Domesday-book but if our Author had read the Tryal between Sheriff Picot and William de Chornet he would have found that the Meliores of the County and Hundred that present the Right to be in Chornet were the English who were not Tenants by Knights Service since we are told that they were all Normans and this appears in that they were Antiqui such as were antient and knew how it was in the time of the
Statute of the Great men The Law made à Rege ib. p. 11. Baronibus Populo had the like Legislators and I do affirm Against Mr. Petyt p. 13. that the word Populus is not to be found in any of these Thus I have wonderfully discovered the unsoundness of Mr. Petit's Assertions ib. p. 2. though it will be objected I have jumpt over several Arguments and they material ones concerning Great Councils before the Conquest Upon which it follows that if the Populus were admitted after it must be by the bounty of the Conquerour who might at pleasure revoke his Concessions For the Story of Edwin of Sharnborn b. p. 24. supposed to have enjoyed his Lands by a Prior Title 't is a famous Legend and trite Fable though he had the King's mandat for Recovering his Estate Sir Edward Coke ib. p. 30. who to avoid the evidence that our English Laws were the Norman Laws Against Jan◠c. p. 89. said The Laws of England are Leges non scriptae said it precatiously without any Foundation or Authority Besides 't was ridiculous as if they were known by Revelation divinely cast into the hearts of men Though some may impertinently ask me Whether there were not Laws before Writing and that without Revelation or divinely casting into the hearts of men But that Against Mr. Petyt p. 167. if affirmed is a palpable and gross Error What though that Clergy-man-Lawyer Bracton agree with Coke yet he spoke out of Ignorance or Design when he said Absurdum non erit leges Anglicanas licet non scriptas leges appellare Bracton l. 1. fol. 1. William the Conquerour brought in a New Law Against Mr. Petyt p. 29. and imposed it upon the People The greatest part of the Antient Law as it was brought hither by the Normans was exacted and observed by ib. p. 43. and upon only the Normans For the English they had no Property or Rights left And so were all Outlaws This domesday-Domesday-Book in every County shews though 't is said several English-men are there mentioned holding by Titles not derived from the Conquerour p. 176. And for a farther proof of this King William ' s Law to all the Freemen of the whole Kingdom was made only to Tenants in Military Service ib. p. 39. which were French p. 35. Flemings Anjovins Britains Poictovins and People of other Nations When this King in the 4th of his Reign summon'd Anglos Nobiles Sapientes suâ lege eruditos to give an account of their Laws 't was a Sham Summons for no English were Nobles nay none were so much as Free-men but the Foreigners amongst whom William divided the Kingdom and therefore Strangers that had their Estates came in their steads and gave an Account upon Oath of the Laws before their own time as they us'd to do of matter of Fact p. 39. when sworn upon common Juries William the Second and Henry the First were Usurpers and Traitors p. 51. notwithstanding the People's Elections Clerus and Populus are to be understood onely of Tenants in Capite p. 56. never of the inferiour sort of People Wherefore they dote who say that the inferiour Clergy nay the dignified not Tenants in Capite came to Great Councils before 49 H. 3. It 's very true Against Jan. c. p. 70. that in our Ancient Parliament-Rolls the Knights of Shires are sometimes called Grantz des Counties or Great men of the Counties and well they might for without doubt they were most commonly the greatest Tenants in Capite under the degree of Barons in each County Against Mr. Petyt p. 116. 117. And for evidence of this the Great Tenants in Capite that were no Barons and perhaps the least Tenants in Capite in the times of Ed. 3. and Ric. 2. are call'd autres grantz or Grandes autres Nobles which were Barons Peers called by the King 's Writ into the Lords House at pleasure and omitted at pleasure Wherefore 't is to be observed that the Knight for the Shires might well be Noble or Grantz since they were call'd sometimes to sit in the Lords House And whether they that were chose for the Counties and did not sit in the Lords House as Barons Peers were Grantz or Nobles perhaps may be a Question As a choice piece of Learning I must acquaint you that though sometimes Fideles signifie qui in Principis alicujus potestate Glos. p. 15. ditione sunt qui vulgo subjecti appellantur Subjects in general yet unless there be special matter to shew the contrary 't is meant of Uassals who having received Fees are in the Retinue of some Patron or Lord if in the King's Retinue they are Tenants in Capite So when we find Writs directed Omnibus Christi Fidelibus Glos. p. 17. Here when there is no more Subject matter to determine it than when 't is omnibus Fidelibus Regni they must be our Saviour's Tenants in Capite When the Form of Peace Against Mr. Petyt p. 125. in the 48th of H. 3. was by the Assent of the King the Bishops and the whole Community of the Kingdom can any man say the Earls and Great Barons these Tenants in Capite gave not their Consents They must be included in and were a part of the whole Community of the Kingdom And indeed to speak the truth it is not denied against me Against Jani p. 71. but proves their Notion to those Vnwary Readers whom they seduce to have some good opinion of their Fancies Though that Form of peace is said in the Record to be Actum in Parliamento London Against Mr. Petyt p. 208. yet the Prelates and Barons were such as sided with Montfort p. 120. and the Community was the Body of his Army and the Citizens and other of the Faction they were not the Community of the Prelates and Barons onely as at other times Nay here were the Citizens and others besides the Army And yet the Community or Body of the Army took in all besides the Prelates and Barons And this must needs have been the Army Mat. Westm. p. 394. Posted convenientibus Londini Praelatis c. partis illius quae Regem suum tam seditio è tenuit captivatum because 't was after their work was over that the Assembly at London was And the Army it must be though as 't is idely objected it is far from appearing that all the Bishops Earls and Barons which consented had been in Arms. Though they that were of the Faction as is usual caball'd together and as some will say onely resolved upon what they would press the King to they hereby Statuebant c. made Laws before the consent of the King and all the Bishops Earls and Barons and it should seem before all were assembled or could be a Parliament And which such as never intended to understand will make a wondring
could bring many Arguments from the Doctor Against Mr. Petyt p. 183. 192. as besides others that the Vniversitas Militiae or 〈◊〉 militare servitium debebant that 〈◊〉 as Record explains Ma. P. aris the â—â—ideles besides Milites were Members 〈◊〉 Parliament but I may spare farther â—â—oof till he gives me fresh occasion 14. And possibly then amongst his other marvellous discoveries I may have time to animadvert a little more largely upon his fancy Against Jani c. p. 34. that the Suitors in the County Court were all Tenents in Military Service except Barons both in the Saxon and Norman times Yet this tenure came in with Will 1st by the way you must understand that the Barons were not Tenents in Military Service Against Mr. Petyt p. 31. though they held in Capite by Knights Service And that William the the First made no alteration of the Government for Tenents by Military Service were the only legal men and the only Members of the Great Counciâ— before But as Tenents in Capite Glos. p. 26. and their Tenents in Military Service were 〈◊〉 the Great Councils in Person all the Suitors at the County Court who werâ— according to the Charter of H. 1. qâ—â—liberas habent terras in each Countâ—â— respectively were there in Person aâ— Members Though not relating to the foundation of my Essay Against Mr. Petyt p. 43. according to him who makes the Question about the Conquest not directly to reach the Controuersy between us Against Jani p. 15. I may make a little â—port with his Arguing that William 1st gave whole Counties to his Followers Against Mr. Petyt p. 29. â—nder the word Comitatus that is as â—he renders it all the Lands in the Counties and yet that besides whole Counties Glos. p. 8. he gave a great proportion of Lands in them But since he taxes what I lay for the foundation of my Essay for precarious â—et's see a little whether he does not â—ender his own so where it opposes â—ine His whole Book in that respect resolves its self into these three Heads 1. That King John's Charter in affirâ—ance of the Law imposed by William â—r in force before declares that the Tenents in Capite were the only Members of the General Council of the Kingdom 2. That from thence to the 49 H. 3. the practice or fact was for Tenents only 〈◊〉 compose the Great or General Council 3. That none but Tenents in Capite were Nobles 1. If he himself yields that tiâ— King John's Charter there was no such Council as one made up only of Tenent in Capite he thereby renders all undeâ— this head precarious but this he does iâ— two places at least One where hâ— urges that if the Curia Regis Ordinaria which I say was the Court of the King Tenents Against Jani p. 46. 47. and Officers exclusive of others went off by reason of the Clause iâ— King John's Charter it certainly wenâ— off before it began that is such a Courâ— began not before and agreeable to this he says that after the granting of thiâ— Charter by King John there were man General and Great Councils or Colloâ—quiums summon'd by Edict according tâ— the form there prescribed that is aâ—â— he will have it after that the Tenent in Capite only were summon'd to thâ— Great Council but not before for the began this form In another place though he chargeâ— upon me what are his own words hâ— says King John resigned his Crown the 15â— ib. p. 22. 23. of May in the 14th of his Reign Thus p. 48. 49. he charges Mr. Petyt and me for averring that even Servants who are not in a legal sense people of the Kingdom were Members of the Great Council and he granted the great Charter of the Liberties three years after on the 15. of June in the 17. of his Reign and therefore could not resign it in such a Council as was Constituted three years after his Resignation And 't is a question whether he asserts not this in a third place where he affirms that before this Charter the Kingdom had been Taxt by our ancient Kings and their Privy-Council only 2. But in truth he not only yields that the Tenents in Chief were first made the General Council by King John's Charter My words are in such a Council as this here but that after that more than such were Members Jani p. 15. which is as much as to say that there was such a Council as this before p. 118. not only the Tenents in Military Service of Tenents in Chief but other ordinary Freeholders So that he submits himself to be goard by both the horns of that Dilemma inforc't in my former Treatise viz. that King John's Charter was either declarative of the Law as 't was before Against Jani p. 66. Jani p. 236. or introductive of a new Law And yields the precariousness of his own vagaries 3. But does he not own that the Notion that Tenents in Capite only were Noble is precarious Since he yields that no kind of tenure does nobilitate or so much as make a man free who was not so before according to his Blood or Extraction Glos. p. 10. Though according to this one that held of the King in Chief might have been a Subjects Villain yet none that held a certain Estate of Freehold could be a Villain because 't is contrary to the nature of a Freehold that it should be so no longer than another pleas'd that is only an Estate at will He will have it that Mr. Petyt is guilty of some horrible Design Against Mr. Petyt p. 1. from the effects of which it seems this mighty Champion is to rescue the Government And for me I am a Seducer one who would seduce unwary Readers Against Jani p. 71. a malicious insinuation as if I would wheedle to my side a party against Truth and the Government but whether he who would set aside the evidences for the Rights of the Lords and Commons or they who produce them fair and would render them unquestioned is guilty of the worst design the World will judge and I doubt not but he has at home a thousand Witnesses Conscientia millâ— testes who if he will hear their unbyast Testimonies will inform him whose are the groundless and designing interpretations Against Mr. Petyt p. 1. But I must confess they are so weak that these sacred things need very little help to rescue them ib. especially since their Enemies are so far from agreeing amongst themselves that 't is more easie to conquer than to reconcile them As on Mr. Petyts and my side the design can be no other than to shew how deeply rooted the Parliamentary Rights are So the Doctors in opposition to ours must be to shew the contrary a design worthy of a Member of Parliament and 't is a Question whether he
men Against Jan. c. p. 99. so that even the Normans Estates were taken away too And this that erroneous Glossary makes under the Feudal Law too for from thence 't is inferr'd that the great Tenants in Capite had Right to impose Laws upon them that held of them and to exclude the whole Kingdom besides from the Great Councils This though no Conquerour the Dr. left out either as being ashamed of it being 't is little less than a Contradiction to say a man was no Conquerour and yet seized upon all the Lands of the Kingdom and forc'd them to submit to such Seizure so that he conquer'd the Land or because it contradicts his Notion of William's being a Conquerour so that he himself had as much reason to exeept against this Book as others but it seems Against Mr. Petyt p. 35. out of a stark Love and Kindness to Truth he left only what was against him but took what was for his Purpose And for the Support of it's Credit tells us a formal Story the Attestation to which from outward Circumstances I never thought it worth the while to examine since I have so much Reason from within it self to believe it to be spurious Against Petyt p. 13. and so ought he For if he have any respect to that great man's Memory he will not suffer him to say that William divided out the whole Kingdom to hold under the Feudal Law when before he had observ'd of Gavelkind the general Tenure of the Lands in Kent Feudalibus legibus non coercetur 3. The Lands of all these Grantees of King William the First descended to the eldest being held in Knights Service Si miles fuerit vel per militiam tenens tunc secundum jus regni Angliae primogenitus filius patri succedit in totum Glanvil lib. 7. c. 2. If a man be a Knight or holding by military Service then according to the Law of the Kingdom the Eldest shall succeed his Father to the whole But for the greatest Authority we have an Act of Parliament which having full Power to alter the Tenure 31 H. 8. c. 3. enacts that certain Lands in Kent shall descend as Lands at Common Law and as other Lands in the said County which never were holden by Knights Service us'd to descend Here the Descent of Knights Service is the same with Descent at the Common Law which was to the Eldest and this is oppos'd to the Descent of Lands in Gavelkind which was Socage And thus have I proved every thing which upon this Head was needful to vindicate the Right of the English and to prove that their Rights were own'd in Practice notwithstanding the vain Flourish of a Conquest It may be objected perhaps that the Feudal Law which was exacted and observed by and upon only the Normans might have related only to such as held immediately of the King for that his Grantees might and did often grant out to others and their Heirs for ever to hold in free Socage Yet this will not do because such Grantees would have been Free-men but all the Free-men of the Kingdom were Tenants by military Service though by their Tenure any of them were only to pay a Rose a Spur a Sum of Money or any other thing Therefore hereby is my Argument inforc'd if William had been a Conquerour in the Sense strove for as disseizing all the English and making Grants of their Lands to the Normans and that to hold by Knights Service and all the Normans both they who were here before William's Entrance if any such had any shares allow'd them and they that came in with him or followed for the spoil were under the Feudal Law requiring Knights Service and these were the only Free-men How came there to be such a Race of lawless Free-men as the Sokemanni p. 31. And how is it possible that the manner of holding our Estates in every Respect with all the Customs incident thereto should be brought in by the Conquerour p. 29. Whoever reflects upon these things will as he says of a reverend Judge acknowledge the Dr. to be very ignorant in the History of this Nation or that he spoke out of Design the words which I fairly cite from him in relation to the Conquest and the Great Council suppos'd to have been establish'd thereby CHAP. VI. Proved from the Beginnings of Charters and Writs that the English were not disseized of all by William the First THough even the former Head of the Socmen such as I find holding in parigio was a needless Addition to the particular Consideration of Domesday book Domesday which might serve instead of a thousand proofs that William the first did not divide all the Land of the Kingdom to his Followers and consequently did not impose upon the people such a Representative as is fondly conjectured Yet I cannot omit the mention of those numerous Writs and Charters Vid. numbers in the Monasticon which are directed Omnibus Baronibus hominibus suis Francis Anglis Or as one of the Charters of William the First Carta W. 1. Monasticon vol. 1. f. 397. into one County and so on occasion into all Archiepisc. Justiciariis Vicecomitibus Baronibus fidelibus suis Francis Anglis Eborascire Admit that Fideles signified Feudal Tenants this shews that the English had shares as well as others but here being the Vicecomites before Barones I should vehemently suspect That the Free-holders of the County were meant At least Carta Antiqua n. 11. we find the ordinary Free-holders and they English as well as French Vid. his Glos. complemented by Matildis as persons of some Quality and Interest in the Nation Matildis Dei gratia Anglorum Regina Episcopo London Justiciariis Vicecomitibus Baronibus Ministris omnibus fidelibus Francis Anglis Here being Ministri between Barones fideles the Ministry must be such as by their Tenures were bound to attend in the Wars and the Fideles the King 's ordinary Subjects there being no Mat. Paris to explain fideles here and help us out of this Difficulty which is made greater by King Stephen's Charter Archiepis Episcopis Abbatibus Comitibus Justiciariis Baronibus Vicecomitibus Ministris omnibus fidelibus suis Francis Anglis totius Angliae Nay to perplex the Cause the more we find under Subjects Free-holders English as well as French and these were such as were the Curia Baronum where Tenants in free and common Socage were Suitors as well as such as held by Knights Service Willielmus Comes Gloucestriae omnibus Baronibus hominibus suis Francis Anglis atque Walensibus 'T is not improbable that the Welsh Vid. Taylors Hist. of Gavelkind Jani Angl. p. 41. which were some of his Tenants were then all Socagers but then the Codex Roffensis shews how greatly the English were interested in the Counties in the time of William the First Praecepit
at the Community was the Body of Montfort ' s Army Against Jan. c. p. 26. and the Citizens and others of the Faction Against Mr. Petyt p. 125. yet here at this very time and place the Community of the Kingdom of England must needs be the Community of the Barons and Great men Tenants in Capite by Military Service and no other Not onely because here was the Body of the Army and Citizens and others of the Faction but because as is clear from an impregnable instance viz. of the same kind of Council which sent the Letter to the Pope in the Case of Adomar or Aymar de Valentia besides the Earls p. 126. 127. Noblemen or Barons Great men there were the Tenants by Military Service that held of and attended the Barons and Great men and when the King said that though He and the Great men should be willing that Adomar who withdrew himself out of the Kingdom should return tamen Communitas ipsius which is the Community not his would not suffer his coming into England the Great men were the Kings Friends p. 121. the Community his Enemies So that here are two Armies the Great men the King's Friends on one side and the Community his Enemies on the other which is just such another Council as that in the 48th yet without doubt none of the King's Party or Friends were there Rot. Parl. 42 H. 3. m. 3. n. 9. Though in the Articuli Cleri 9 Ed. 2. about fifty years after we find Petitions presented by the Clergy temporibus progenitorum nostrorum quâ—ndam Regum Angliae in diversis Against Mr. Petyt p. 121. Parliamentis Which includes the time of H. 3. Grandfather to Edw. 2. At least this was meant of several Armies and so was the Parliamentum Oxon. Against Mr. Petyt p. 192. but six years before the Military Parliament of the 48th an Army being a Parliament in the sense and general use of the word at that time ib. p. 183. that is a great Assembly Convention or Meeting of the Faction and their Army And thus in the 30th of this King the Parliament is call'd the Vniversity of the Militia that is of them Qui militare servitium debebant the Milites Fideles It seems in many of these Parliaments or Armies chuse you whether the Clergy in their Canonical Habits address'd themselves to the Military men upon which sort of Parliaments they could not fail of prevailing with their brutum fulmen of Excommunication and Ecclesiastical Scare-crows What Against Mr. Petyt p. 135. is Petyt so ridiculous to have the Commons an essential part of the Parliament from Eternity 'T is plain that the Commons began by Rebellion Nota. To lessen their own power because their Constitution was not forc'd by the Barons with their Swords in their hands or promis'd to them then Ib. p. 226. but began from the King's pleasure when the Rebellion was over and the King was restored to his Regality Post magnas perturbationes enormes vexationes inter ipsum Regem Simonem de Monteforti alios Barones motas sopitas And none but Tenants in Capite were Barons before Ad summum honorem pervenit ex quo c. because then and not before the word Baro became a word of greater Honour Against Mr. Petyt p. 226. that is appropriated to Tenants in Capite or their Peers So that before 't was so appropriated more were Barons What though in the Letter to the Pope Jani c. p. 244. the Nobiles portuum maris habitatores necnon Clerus Populus Universus Against Mr. Petyt p. 157. are named yet these troup of words were only to make an Impression upon the Pope who good man knew nothing of the English Constitution or what was done here but would think all they were assembled in such a Great Council as other Parts of Christendom then had I shall not scruple to discover some mysteries to you The Liberi Homines were Tenants in Capite or at least their Retinue and Tenants in Military Service Glos. p. 26. which were with them at Runnemede These liberi homines or Free-men were the onely men of Honour Faith Trust and Reputation in the Kingdom These were the Free-men which made such a cry for their Liberties ib. p. 27. as appears by Magna Charta most of which is onely an abatement of the Rigour and a Relaxation of the feudal Tenures Nay Against Mr. Petyt p. 39. 't is to them these Free-men onely that the Grants were made They that are there mention'd holding of the King in Fee Farm Vide King John ' s Charter petit Serjeanty free or common Socage and Burgage held not so Jan. p. 181. But they all held by Knights Service and so were the King's Barons Of these Barons some might be Villains for that a Tenement or Possession neither added to Glos. p. 10. or detracted from the Person of any man if free or bond according to his Blood or Extraction ib. p. 30. Nay the Freemen or Tayns Theyns were anciently no part of the Kingdom for that was all divided into Frank-pledges of which there was to be a general view in the Sheriff's Tourn but these Frank-pledges were all pitiful Fellows bound with Sureties to their good behaviours ib. p. 31. which the Theyns were not .. Which answer his quotation out of Briton Glos. p. 31. In after times some might have had particular Charters of Exemption or else generally such of them as grew to be Great men were excused Whereas Mr. Petyt contends Against Mr. Petyt p. 177. that the liberè tenentes de Regno came to the Great Councils 't is a giddy Notion Whoever heard of Tenure of the Kingdom Though indeed we find in Domesday Book that such an one holds de Comitatu But more directly to the point Herefordshire Castellum de Cliford Such a Castle est de Regno Angliae non subjacet alicui Hundredo neque est in consueâ—â—dine ulla And I 'll warrant it he with his designing Interpretations Against Mr. Petyt p. 1. will render it That this held not of the Kingdom but that it was of it or in it and so were the Free Tenants But to load this Opinion according to the literal meaning of the words Omnes de Regno p. 187. which sometimes occur all Copy-bolders all Tradesmen all Bondmen and Villains and all Servants were Members of Parliament Yet there having been no Representatives before 49 H. 3. all the Inhabitants of Cities Burroughs holding in Capite or Chief and several Towns Corporate not holding in Chief came to the great Councils in their own Persons which some will say made a greater Body than the Inferiour Proprietors and the Representatives of these Places and were Persons of as mean condition For the Lords themselves they have no better Against Mr.
Petyt p. 228. nor earlier Commencement than the Commons What King Henry a little before his death begun that is to call such Earls and Barons ib. p. 228. quos dignatus est such as he pleased Edward the First and his Successors constantly observed This was the Constitution of the House of Lords Viz. The rebellious Barons who framed the new Government p. 210. the Lords made the Commons and the King made the Lords The Kings follow'd Montfort's Pattern Against Mr. Petyt p. 229. for calling the Commons to Parliament Which yet was not Montfort's alone for they the rebellious Barons fram'd and set up the new Government p. 210. After which they sent out Writs in the King's Name to summon a Parliament with Commons as well as Noblemen And yet Camden cited p. 226. Cotton cited p. 228. according to two Authors whom I receive H. 3. set the Pattern who after the Victory at Evesham wisely began in This what his Successors fortunately finish'd And the King's beginning this was a Reason why those Kings follow'd Montfort's Pattern Though 't was by the Power of Montfort alone that is of him and the other Barons that the Commons were let in to the great Councils to lessen the strength and power of the great Lords that is their own strength and power yet it was by the King's Authority though 't was before the Battel of Evesham when Montfort prevail'd yet it was done after when the King recovered the Regality I shall come now to the particular consideration of Jani Anglorum facies nova The Author of which sufficiently shews his fantasticalness in the Title of his Book Jani Anglorum facies nova What because his Shreds of Antiquity are thought doubtful by some taken in one sense by others in another do's he therefore make Janus bifrons of his Composition He had as good call it a Spread Eagle which looks both wayes too I am sure it suits better with my Book which is an high Flyer His Allusion to Selden's Jani Anglorum facies altera will not justifie him since that Antiquary was chiefly conversant in Popular and Lucrative Law Besides the Title imports the Novelty of his Opinion though perhaps he would have us believe that he puts a New Face upon those musty old things which have been thought to look with a different Aspect Nor can he shrowd himself under my Title for mine is an old Face which has honourable Scars and Flaws in it and a Professor's Aspect And they understand not Railery and Figure who observe not how I expose him by the Allusion He will have it and brings many Arguments Jan. Angl. c. p. 22. amongst which the Judgment of a whole Parliament of that famous King Ed. 3. but that is not Infallible that the Common Council of the Kingdom in King John's Charter is onely a Council for Scutage and Aid granted by Tenants in Capite Whereas Aid sometimes signifies such as to be sure is granted by the greatest Council and therefore does alwayes Against Jani c. p. 10 11 12. Farther What need was there to have the Cause of Summons declared if it were onely about Aids and Escuage or other ordinary business of course though indeed whether it was for Aids or other Business might not be known without this Declaration ib. p. 12. Lastly If all Proprietors were Members of the Great General Council 't is strange there should not have been the same care taken that they might be summoned Alas What signifies the Provision of the Common Law But he brings an Argument from the Earl of Chester's being a Count Palatine Against Jan. c. p. 20. and not subject to the Feudal Law whereas he was a feudal Tenant Though Bracton lib. 3. ca. 8. I must confess the old Dotard Bracton sayes Comites Paleys Counts Palatine have Regal Jurisdiction salvo dominio Domino Regi sicut Principi saving to the King his Dominion as Prince not as Lord of the Feud Besides in one of the Quotations which he brings to prove that the Earl of Chester however came to Parliament Against Jan. c. p. 17. he leaves out Laici because it manifestly destroys his Whimsey for it shews that all the Laity were Tenants in Chief in that they as a great Council say that the Tenants in Chief did owe no Service But he has another fantastical Notion that this Council in King John's Charter was an ordinary Court. Upon which he has these Arguments which I put among his Unintelligible Vagaries that there was a Court held thrice a year Against Jan. p. 26. which treated onely of Matters of ordinary Justice Vid. Jan. c. unless when 't was united with the Great Council And in these two Senses taken together was an Ordinary Court that the Tenants were obliged by their Tenure to be there Bract. l. 2. c. 16. p. 37. Consensu communi totius Regni introducta But at the Great Councils were more for which he cites Bracton who speaks of several Vnintelligible Businesses for which the Common Consent of the Kingdom was always required That to King John's Charter the Liberi Homines totius Regni were Parties Against Jan. c. p. 5. whereas in truth the Great Charters were onely the Petitions of the People drawn into the form of Charters as Statutes now are upon the Petitions of the Commons drawn into the Form of Statutes and pass'd by the Concurrence of the King and Lords Since I am fallen into the Learning of Charters I must inform you that though the Charter of H. 3. has the inspeximus of Edward the First and is enrolled in the 25th of his Reign in ipsissimis verbis when 't is confirmed 〈…〉 in full Parliament Per commune assent de tut le Royaume Rot. Stat. 25 Ed. 1. m. 38. to have been made by the Common Assent of all the Realm in the time of H. 3. nostre Pere meaning the Father of Edward the First and though as appears in the Statute Roll the Date and Witnesses were of the time of H. 3. yet Against Jan. c. p. 63. this Great Charter was properly the Charter of Ed. 1. or perhaps rather his Explication or Enlargement of that Charter of King John and H. 3. for we find not the Great Charter either of that or King John ' s Form in any of the Rolls until the 25th of Ed. 1. and therefore 't was impossible that any such Charter could be found in the 25th of that King though he Reign'd so long since or indeed that King John's Charter was made by him And there is Demonstration that 't was not the Charter of H. 3. in that Rot. Parl. 15. Ed. 3. N. 150. dor when 't is confirm'd in Parliament in the 15th of Edward the Third 〈…〉 〈…〉 The Great Charter and the Charter of the Forest and other Statutes made by our Sovereign Lord the King
is positive that Tenants in Military Service were the only Free-men and the only legal men Thus I have done right to his Omissions So Against Jani p. 36. passing by nothing which has not received justice before and shall add some confirmations of what I have taken leave to assert in other places I had affirmed for one reason why the Doctor could have small assistance from Domesday Book p. 78. that the Titles whereby men enjoy'd their Estates are seldom mentioned there And if I find by Record a whole County in the Doctors sense that is all the Lands of the County enjoy'd by descent from before the imaginary Conquest What will he say in justification of his whymsies upon the Conquest and the authority he would fetch for it from Domesday Book He may please to consider and give 〈◊〉 Categorical Answer to this memoâ—able Record IN placito inter Regem priorem Ecclesiae de Coventre de annua pensione 〈◊〉 Clericorum Regis Placita coram Regeâ— Hill Anno 14 R. 2. Rot. 50â— warw ratione nove creationis ejusdem prioris quousque c. prior venit defendit vim injuriam quicquid est in contemptu domini Regis c. non cognovit Ecclesiam suam beatae Mariae de Coventre fore Ecclesiam Cathedralem nec ipsum priorem tenere aliquid de domino Rege per Baroniam prout â—ro domino Rege in narratione sua proâ—onitur Et dicit quod tenet prioratum praedictum ex fundatione cujusdam Leoâ—â—ici quondam Comitis Cestriae qui prioâ—atum praedictum fundavit tempore sancti Edwardi dudum Regis Angliae progenitoris domini Regis nunc per Cartam suam in haec verba Anno dominice incarnationis 1043. Ego Leofricus Comes Cestriae Consilio â—ssensu Regis qui literas suas infrascriptas sub sigillo misit testimonio aliorum religiosorum virorum tam laicorum quam Clericorum Ecclesiam Coventre dedicari â—eci in honore dei Ecclesiae sanctae Mariae genitricis ejus sancti Petri Apostoli sancte Osburge Virginis omnium sanctorum Has igitur viginti quatuor villas eidem Ecclesiae attribui ad servitium dei ad victum vestitum Abbatis Monachorum in eodem loco deo servientium videlicet Honiton Newenham Chaldeleshunt Icheâ—ton Vlston Soucham Grenesburgh Burthenburgh Mersten juxta Avonam Hardewick Wasperton Creastorton Sotham Rugton dimidium Sowe Merston in Gloucestriae provincia Salewarpe in Wigorniensi Eton juxta amnem qui dicitur dee in Cestriae provincia Keldesbye Windwyk in Hamptoniensi provincia Borbach Barewell Scrapstofte Pakinton Potteres Merston in Leycestrensi provincia Hâ—s autem terras dedi huic Monasterio cum Soca Saca cum telonio theme cum libertatibus omnibus consuetudinibus vbique Sicut a Rege Edwardo melius unquam tenui Cum hiis omnibus Rex Edwardus ego libertates huic Monasterio dedimus ita ut Abbas ejusdem loci Soli Regi Angliae sit Subjectus Ibidem recitatur Charta ejusdem Regis Edwardi quas donationes concessiones diversi alii Reges confirmaverunt dicit quod postea per processum temporis â—â—men Abbatiae praedictae divertebatur in nomen prioratus eo quod Leofwinus ad tunc ibidem creatus fuit in Episcopum Cestriae ordinavit per assensum Monachorum ibidem quod Abbatia praedicta ex tunc foret prioratus quod Superiores ejusdem Ecclesiae forent priores successive in perpetuum dicit quod de ipso Leofrico quia obiit sine herede de corpore suo descendente advocatio Ecclesie predicte tempore Willielm ' Conquest ' Angliae cuidam Hugoni Comiti Cestriae ut Consanguineo heredi ipsius Leofrici Na. this is the Hugh to whom he imagines that William gave all the Lands of the County of Chester viz. Filio Erminelde sororis ejusdem Leofrici de ipso Hugone cuidam Ricardo ut filio heredi de ipso Ricardo cuidam Ranulpho ut Consanguineo heredi viz. filio Matildis sororis praedicti Hugonis de ipso Ranulpho cuidam Ranulpho ut filio heredi de ipso Ranulpho filio Ranulphi quia obiit sine herede de corpore suo descendente advocatio praedicta simul cum Comitatu Cestre Huntingdon aliis diversis Castris Maneriis terris tenementis cum pertinentis in Anglia Wallia quibusdam Matildae Mabilliae Ceciliae Margeriae ut sororibus heredibus predicti Ranulphi inter quas propertia facta fuit de predictis Comitatibus advocationibus Castris Maneriis terris tenementis cum pertinentiis supradictis Et predicta advocatio Simul cum toto predicto Comitatu Cestriae cum pertinentiis allocata fuit predicte Matilde pro proparte sua in allocationem diversorum aliorum Castrorum Maneriorum terrarum tenementorum cum pertinentiis praedictis Mabilliae Ceciliae Margeriae seperatim allocatorum de ipsa Matilda descendebant predicta advocatio simul cum praedicto Comitatu Cestriae cum pertinentiis post propertiam predictam cuidam Johanni Scot ut filio heredi praedictae Matildae Qui quidem Johannes Scot advocationem praedictam simul cum praedicto Comitatu Cestriae cum pertinentiis dedit Henrico quondam Regi Angliae filio Regis Johannis heredibus suis in perpetuum c. praedictus prior sine die This was a Judgment upon solemn Debate and Tryal and it cannot be believed but the Judges and Kings Council so many hundred years ago knew as much of the right of the Conquest as our Doctor can discover 'T will be said notwithstanding this Record that Hugh had the Confirmation of his Kinsman the Conqueror Admit he had he being his Kinsman would either thereby wheedle others in to the like acknowledgment of Williams power Or else having the Government of the County would do this in complement to the supream Governour But that such Confirmation as to the Lands he had there and all appendants or appurtenances to them was wholly neeedless appears in that the Title is laid only in descent nor does it in the least appear that William either granted or confirm'd more than the Comitatus Government or Jurisdiction of it or that more than that was held by the Sword which the Doctor makes Tenure in Capite Let him shew how by what manner of tenure his Land was held Not being aware that so great an Author as the Doctor would have condemn'd for precarious Against Jani c. p. 89. all that I think I have prov'd from the Records and Histories which I cite for the foundation of my former Essay Jani c. p. 264. viz. that till the 48. and 49th H. 3. all Proprietors of Land came to the Great Council without exclusion ib. p. 264. I had asserted that the probi homines or bonae conversationis came to the Great Councils which in