the free borough of warrington in the thirteenth … · and variable definition in the same book,...

THE FREE BOROUGH OF WARRINGTON IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY

BY GEORGE A. CARTER, F.L.A.

Read 17 September 1953

IT is clear from the hundreds of charters of privileges granted by the crown and by mesne lords to English towns in the twelfth

and thirteenth centuries, that the average Englishman at that time was strongly moved by a desire for some measure of local self- government, and that the goal was to achieve the status of a borough. "In the first place", says Adolphus Ballard' 11 "the borough was a home of freedom"; "in the second place ... it was a jurisdictional unit". Professor Tait notes that the borough charters of the thirteenth century emanating from the royal chancery "show an increasing tendency towards uniformity of privilege and phrasing, whilst the charters of mesne lords to their boroughs show a much greater variety both in form and substance".

This "variety in form and substance" creates the difficulty of denning exactly what was meant by the term "borough" in the thirteenth century. Ballard stated in one book that, "Two features, and two features only, can be predicated of every borough of the twelfth century, the application of burgage tenure to all tenements within its borders, and the possession of a law court with jurisdic tion over all the inhabitants of these tenements". Commenting upon this definition Professor Tait said, "It may be doubted whether either or both of these tests will give us a perfectly clear-cut dis tinction between a vill which was also a borough, and a vill which remained a mere rural township". He continued that, "Burgage tenure was more distinctive than the possession of a court", and quoted another authority, Dr. Hemmeon, who regarded burgage tenure as the infallible test of a borough. Burgage tenure, he said, was the distinguishing mark of a borough "for every borough must have it, and it could not exist outside a borough". But com menting on this definition in a later book121 , Professor Tait rue fully admits that "there are exceptions to all rules, and the Middle Ages were full of them". Nevertheless, Tait did attempt a lengthy and variable definition in the same book, the first article of which reads, "In the thirteenth century as in the twelfth, any place, large or small, old or new, royal or mesne, which had the specific burgage tenure, could be described as a borough, or free borough, for the

111 Ballard, A., The English borough in the twelfth century, C.U.P., 1914. Ballard, A., and Tait, James. British borough charters, 1216-1307, C.U.P., 1923.

121 Tait, J., The mediaeval English borough, Manchester U.P., 1936.

25

26 THE FREE BOROUGH OF WARRINGTON

epithet merely emphasized the contrast with manorial unfreedom, but beyond this there were wide differences in the privileges enjoyed by them". And with regard to the second part of Ballard's defini tion concerning a court, Tait stated (in the Addenda and Corri genda contained in Appendix C of British Borough Charters) that, "The case of Warrington may be thought to prove that a free court was more essential to a borough than burgage tenure".

It is the interesting struggle which took place in the thirteenth century between the seventh lord of the manor of Warrington and his tenants concerning a "free court" and their individual status that I wish to discuss. Many of the facts concerning this dispute have unfortunately been relegated to the footnotes and appendices of Tail's British Borough Charters and the Victoria County History of Lancashire. It seems desirable, therefore, to gather these facts together for examination in order that fresh judgment may be passed upon the interesting suits between the lord of the manor and certain inhabitants of Warrington in the last quarter of the thirteenth century, for, unhappily, none of these suits was brought to a satisfactory conclusion in court, and although the final chapter was written in the year 1300 on a small piece of vellum sealed in Warrington with the common seal of men who had been proud to describe themselves as burgesses, final judgment on their claims and their status has never been pronounced authoritatively. Per haps it never will be until a missing charter, upon which the claims of the thirteenth century inhabitants of Warrington were based, is found.

The first record of the dispute that I can trace is an extract from the Common Plea Roll (C.P.40 No. 10 m.45 (1)) dated 1275 (Trinity 3 Ed. 1.) The following is a translation: "Richard Attewell, William le Clerk, Simon son of Gilbert, Gilbert son of Gilbert, Henry son of Ralph, Ralph son of Henry d; Upton, John Hamelyn, Hugh Bisshop, Gilbert Dublerose, and Richard de Whittelegh, and other burgesses of Werington appeared on the fourth day against William le Botiller on a plea that although by the Charter of William le Botiller, the grandfather of the aforesaid William le Botiller, whose heir he is, which they have thereof, the same burgesses ought to hold their court of their community of Werington and to receive and have the amercements and other issues and profits arising therefrom and their ancestors were accustomed to hold it and to have the amercements and other issues and profits therefrom arising, the same William le Botiller does not permit his aforesaid burgesses to hold their aforesaid court there and to have the amercements and other issues and profits therefrom arising to the no small loss and injury of the same burgesses etc. And he came not. And was summoned etc. And the judgment is that he be attached to appear on the Octave of St. Michael etc." [See Plate 4.]

In this suit Richard Attewell and the rest are described as burgesses of Werington, burgenses de Werington. They are supporting their claim to a court of the community, curiam suam communitatis, by virtue of a charter, "which they have therof". This charter, they say, was granted by William le Boteler, grandfather of the afore said William. "The aforesaid William" was the seventh lord of Warrington, and his grandfather, the fifth lord of the manor, died

THE FREE BOROUGH OF WARRINGTON 27

in 1233. It follows, therefore, that the charter, which is lost and which was alleged to concede to the burgesses a burgess court (as will be seen later), together with the benefit of amercements and profits etc., must have been granted by the fifth lord before he died in the year 1233. As the fifth lord had succeeded to the lord ship about 1176, the charter may have been granted any time between 1176 and 1233.

At the same time as the burgesses of Warrington sued their lord for withholding the privileges of a burgess court, they commenced another suit against their lord concerning other privileges con ceded by the same charter. [See Plate 5.] In this suit, which commenced on the same day, they alleged that "each of them ought to hold his separate burgage in Werington of the aforesaid William le Botyller for twelve pence each only by the year and their ancestors have been accustomed to hold the same of the ancestors of the aforesaid William le Botiller by the same service quit of tolls, tallages, aids and of all pleas and plaints to the afore said William le Botiller and his heirs issuing therefrom, together with free fishing in the water of the Mersea and the Mere of Longe- ford". They complained in this suit that William "now anew grievously distrains the aforesaid Burgesses to pay to him tolls, tallages and aids, [and] to render unto him other customs and services than they ought and [that] they themselves or their ancestors have been accustomed to render, and the fish which they are wont to catch in the aforesaid fisheries, he compels them to sell to the same William le Botiller to his own use for a lower price than they could sell it to others, and he does not cease to inflict other enor mities upon them to the most grievous hurt of the same Burgesses and against the terms of their feoffment aforesaid etc. And he came not. And was summoned etc. And the judgment is that he be attached to appear on the Octave of St. Michael etc." This suit is repeated, almost word for word, on the De Banco roll for the Hilary term 1276 (C.P. 40 No. 13 m. 75d.) except that it ends as follows: "And he came not and many times made default. There fore it is commanded to the sheriff that he distrains him by all his lands etc. and that from his issues etc. and that he have his body on the Octave of the Holy Trinity etc." [See Appendix I.] In view of the number of times William failed to appear to answer the suit of the burgesses, one can only conclude that he felt suffici ently strong to defy the sheriff and the burgesses, possibly because he had been High Sheriff of Lancashire himself from 1259-60 and prior to that he had been deputy to Patricius de Ulceby, or because he realised that the claims of the burgesses were well founded and that he had everything to gain by postponing the matter for as long as possible. The suit, however, does not appear to have been renewed until 1292.

Among the Dodsworth MSS in the Bodleian Library, there is a record concerning the sale of a burgage in Warrington in the year 1261. It is translated by William Beamont as follows: (Annals,


Vol. I, p. 74). "Know all men by these presents that I, Jordan fitz Robert de Hulton have given and granted to Roger de Hopton and his heirs, for his homage, the burgage in Werinton, which 1 bought from William Pincerna for xls." Jordan was, in that year, the parson of Warrington Church, and, if Dr. Hemmeon's assertion concerning burgage tenure is correct "that every borough must have it, and it could not exist outside a borough" then sufficient proof that Warrington was a borough in the thirteenth century is con tained in the grant of Jordan de Hulton to Roger de Hopton.

But in the suits of 1275 and 1276 the burgesses claimed that they ought to hold their individual burgages for an annual rent of twelve pence as their ancestors had done, and by so doing they showed themselves to be either well informed and well advised concerning the practice elsewhere, 'or they were speaking the truth in all their claims. It is an interesting point, however, that Roger de Poitou, who had most probably granted the manor of Warring- ton to its first lord, Paganus de Vilers, was also the lord of Preston, to which manor it is believed he had granted a custumal embodying the customs of the small town of Breteuil in Normandy. In so doing, Roger had probably imitated the practice of his relative, William Fitz-Osbern, earl of Hereford, for the town of Breteuil had grown up around William Fitz-Osbern's castle, and he had granted privileges similar to those of his French bourgs to town ships in his English possessions. Both Roger and his kinsman had recognised the advantage to themselves of inducing people to settle in troubled or thinly populated districts by relaxing their normal feudal claims and making these grants. The central idea of the Customs of Breteuil was, in fact, to grant holdings of land which were known as burgages for an annual rent of twelve pence, and to confer upon the holders certain privileges, in order to en courage people to settle at a given place. The Customs of Breteuil, or something very like them, can be traced in many Welsh border towns as well as Preston, and in consequence, one of two con clusions may be drawn from the claims of the burgesses of Warring- ton in 1275-6. Either, the charter which was granted by the fifth lord of Warrington between 1176 and 1233 was inspired by the Customs of Breteuil, possibly because the Customs were well known to the lords of Warrington through the earlier influence of Roger de Poitou; or, the inhabitants of Warrington in the thirteenth century were well aware of the privileges belonging to burgesses and their holdings in towns like Preston and the Welsh border towns and were merely alleging that their charter conceded them similar rights. Considering that each time they appeared in Court, the burgesses of Warrington produced their charter and it could be read by those hearing the various suits, it seems difficult to believe that their allegations can have been untrue, unless their charter was a forgery. This seems improbable when all the im plications of such a forgery are considered, and especially in view of the definite evidence of the existence of a burgage in Warrington


in 1261 already submitted. It becomes more improbable still when the events of 1292 and 1300 are considered.

William was compelled to attend the Court at Lancaster upon the octave of the Holy Trinity (8 June 1292) in accordance with a writ of Quo Warranlo, in order to show by what right he held markets and fairs and other franchises in Warrington and else where. It may be that the burgesses, realising that their lord would be compelled to appear at Lancaster in answer to the royal summons, decided that the moment was opportune for the renewal of their suit against him. Be that as it may, he certainly appeared before Sir Hugh de Cressingham and other judges on 8 June 1292. not only to defend his rights to markets and fairs, but also to answer the suit of the burgesses of Warrington concerning their burgess court. Through their attorney, the burgesses again claimed that the charter of William's grandfather, which they produced once more, had granted them a burgess court which William would not permit. William denied that they had been in possession of such a court, either in his time, or in the time of his father, and de manded that the burgesses should state whether they had a mayor or a common seal. Both parties finally agreed to submit their case to a jury, but alas, before that happened something inter vened, and in the words of the Assize Roll the case in court ended in this miserable fashion.

"And concerning this they put themselves on the country. And William likewise. Therefore let a jury be taken thereon etc. Afterwards the aforesaid community of the aforesaid town of Weryngton did not prosecute. Therefore the said community and its pledges to prosecute are in mercy [subject to amerce ment]. And the aforesaid William Botiller is to go thereof without day. And the names of the pledges are asked for etc. And the pledges are Robert de Wulston and Richard de Penketh." [Justices Itinerant I Roll 416 m.6. See Appendix II.]

"Afterwards the aforesaid community of the aforesaid town of Weryngton did not prosecute". After what? In view of subse quent events it can only be assumed that it was after Sir William had talked to the burgesses and promised to settle the matter satisfac torily out of court if they would not press their suit there and then. The burgesses evidently agreed, and six weeks later, on 22 July, the feast of Mary Magdalene, a charter was drawn up and sealed in the circuit of Sir Hugh de Cressingham and his associates at Lancaster between Sir William and his free tenants of Warrington. This charter is still preserved in the Warrington Municipal Library, and it begins by stating that it is a settlement of the dispute between the two parties. It carefully avoids all mention of the terms "burgess court", "burgess", and "burgage" and merely grants certain privileges to "the free tenants of Wering- ton", such as "that they shall be quit of toll in all the fairs and markets of Werington" and "that keepers of the Assize of bread and beer shall be chosen by the aforesaid tenants and not by others". [See Plate 6 and Appendix III.]

u

30 THE FREE BOROUGH OF WARR1NGTON

Not one of the privileges conceded by this settlement can be regarded as essential to borough status, unless one is prepared to accept the odd definitions of borough status that appear in a few charters granted to other boroughs such as Kirkham, for in the Kirkham charter of 1296 it is stated that, "There shall be also in the same Borough an Assize of bread and drink, as to a free borough belongeth". (3> It would seem, however, that Sir William whilst appearing to be magnanimous, had cleverly defeated the claims of his tenants to those rights commonly accepted as being only associated with boroughs. Perhaps he felt that his hand had been strengthened by another suit at Lancaster dated Trinity 20 Edward I (1292) (Assize Roll 408 m. 16) when William himself had sued the holders of certain tenements in Warrington for the seisin of those tenements. In this suit the jury found that while William was under age, his guardian had demised of the waste of the vill of Warrington to the ancestors of the defendants the tene ments now claimed by William to wit: "each acre for twelve pence just as they rendered ancient burgages of the same vill". It was adjudged that as this was done whilst William was under age he should now recover his seisin of those tenements. But notice the phrase "just as they rendered ancient burgages of the same vill". Clearly this suit shows that burgages with an annual rent of twelve pence did exist in Warrington prior to the time of William's father, Emery, and in all probability, the phrase refers to the burgages created by the charter of William's grandfather.

Despite William's cleverness the question of the burgess court remained unsettled, and a surprising conclusion concerning the court was reached in the year 1300. On the feast of Mary Mag dalene, the free tenants, either of their own free will or as a result of some persuasion, formally renounced in favour of their lord, "the burgess court of Werington with all its liberties, appurtenances and appendages. So that neither we nor our heirs, nor anyone on our behalf or in our right shall ever in future be able to demand, challenge or maintain any right, claim or pretension to the afore said court ... on the ground of any gift or grant or any other title to the same". And in witness to this document there was fixed the seal of the community of Warrington. It will be remembered that in 1292 William had challenged the burgesses in open court to say if they had a common seal, the implication being that such a seal was necessary to substantiate their claims. In 1300 he accepted this seal in witness of the renunciation. It seems difficult to believe that if the burgesses had not possessed "a gift, grant or title" to a burgess court, this phrase would have been included in the docu ment of renunciation, for the gift, grant or title could surely only be the charter of William's grandfather. In other words, this document of renunciation of 1300 appears to be the strongest evidence we have to prove that the charter of William's grandfather

131 Shaw, R. C, Kirkham in Amounderness, Preston 1949, p. 313.


produced in court by the burgesses of Warrington in 1275, 1276, and 1292, was not a forgery. [See Plate 7.]

One or two subsequent facts have a bearing on the events of the thirteenth century. Only thirteen years after the renunciation of the burgess court, the eighth lord of the manor granted a burgage in Warrington to Geoffrey his cook (MS444 Warrington Municipal Library). More interesting still is an indenture (MS506 W.M.L.) whereby John le Botiller of Weryngton leased for their lives to Robert le Bakester de Weryngton, Alice his wife, and John his son, a piece of land in the vill of Weryngton for which the grantees were to render yearly twelve pence, in two equal portions for all service, with permission to build, enclose, and to make other improvements as seemed best to them, and to trade with bread, iron, fish, and other saleable articles, and to sell them without toll as freely as other burgesses in the vill of Werynglon. The indenture is dated, "Given at Beause, Wednesday after the Feast of St. Gregory the Pope 37 Ed. Ill" [1363]. And as late as 1441, in an Inquisition Post Mor tem held in Warrington on the death of Isabella Boteler, she was found to have held ten burgages and a third part of the court of the borough and fee of Warrington in jointure. (Chetham Society, V. 99, p. 49.)

Despite these documents, however, the seignorial control of Warrington continued until the nineteenth century, but this fate was not peculiar to Warrington. Professor Tait states that "Of the nineteen lesser boroughs, in addition to the four greater ones (Lancaster, Preston, Wigan and Liverpool), which were created in Lancashire during the Middle Ages, and chiefly in the thirteenth century, nearly all relapsed sooner or later into the status at best of large villages which, from the sixteenth century onwards, were only distinguished from their neighbours by a certain survival of burgage tenure, which itself gradually died out. The few which retained a real urban character nevertheless failed to attain a municipal government".

The author wishes to thank Dr. Dorothea Oschinsky for checking the transcriptions of the documents.

APPENDICES

I

The following is the translation of the De Banco roll for the Hilary Term 1276 (C.P. 40, No. 13, m. 75d.) referred to on page 27. The original document is in the Public Record Office.

Richard de Fonte, William le Clerk, Simon son of Gilbert, Gilbert son of Gilbert, Henry son of Ralph, Ralph son of Henry, Hugh Biscop, Henry de Upton', Adam son of Alward, John Hamelyn, Gilbert Dublerose, and Richard de Whyteleye, burgesses of Werington and the community of their fellow burgesses of the same vill by their attorney appeared on the fourth day against


William le Botiller on a plea of that although by charter of William le Botiller, grandfather of the aforesaid William le Botiller, whose heir he is, which they have thereof, each of them ought to hold his separate burgage in Werington' of the aforesaid William le Botiller for twelve pence each only by the year and their ancestors have been accustomed to hold the same of the ancestors of the aforesaid William le Botiller by the same service quit of all tolls, tallages, aids and of all pleas and plaints to the aforesaid William and his heirs in respect thereof, together with free fishing in the water of the Mersea and the Mere of Longefprd, the aforesaid William le Botiller now anew grievously distrains the aforesaid Burgesses to pay to him tolls, tallages and aids and to render unto him other customs and other services than they ought and they themselves or their ancestors have been accustomed to render and the fish which they are wont to catch in the aforesaid fisheries, he compels them to sell to the same William le Botiller to his own use for a lower price than they could sell it to others, and he does not cease to inflict other enormities upon them to the most grievous loss of the same Burgesses and against the terms of their feoffment aforesaid etc. And he came not and many times made default. Therefore it is commanded to the sheriff that he distrains him by all his lands etc. and that from his issues etc. and that he have his body on the Octave of the Holy Trinity etc.

nThe following are the transcription and translation of the Justices

Itinerant I Roll 416, m. 6, 1292, referred to on page 29. The original document is in the Public Record Office.PLACITA DE JURATIS ET ASS1SIS CORAM HUGONE DE CRES- SINGHAM W1LLELMO DE ORMESBY JOHANNE WOGAN MAGISTRO JOHANNE LOVELL ET WILLEMLO DE MORTUO MARI JUSTIC1ARIIS INTINERANTIBUS APUD LANCASTRIAN! IN OCTABIS SANCTE TRIN1TATIS ANNO REGNI REGIS EDWARDI F1LII REGIS HENR1CI VICESIMO.

CRESSINGHAM

Willelmus filius Almarici le Butiller de Weryngton' summonitus fuit ad respon- dendum communitati ville de Weryngton' de placito quare cum eadem communitas per cartam Willelmi le Butiller avi predict! Willelmi cuius heres ipse est habere debeat et a tempore confectionis eiusdem carte hactenus habere consueverit curiam suam de burgensibus eiusdem ville predictus Willelmus predictam cpmmunitatem curiam predictam habere non permittit ad grave dampnum eiusdem communitatis et contra tenorem carte predicte etc. Et unde predicta communitas per attornatum suum queritur quod cum Willelmus le Butiller avus predicti Willelmi cuius heres ipse est per scriptum suum con- cessisset burgensibus suis de Werington' quod haberent curiam suam quietam et solutam ab omnibus querelis et placitis que ad ipsum Willelmum pertinent et homines eiusdem communitatis a tempore confectionis eiusdem carte hactenus habere consueverint curiam suam de burgensibus predictis predictus Willelmus predictam communitatem curiam predictam habere non permittit unde dicunt quod deteriorati sunt et dampnum habent ad valenciam quingentarum librarum etc. Et inde producunt sectam. Proferunt etiam predictum scriptum quod predictam concessioner!) testatur.

Et Willelmus venit. Et petit quod ipsi ostendant si quid habeant a domino Rege vel eiusdem progenitoribus quod possint habere burgum vel communitatem etc. Et eciam quod dicant si habeant maiorem vel balliuum in predicta [m erased] villa vel sigillum commune etc. que si non ostendant petit iudicium si debeat hominibus predicte ville sub nomine communitatis inde respondere etc.

Et communitas per attornatum suum dicunt quod predictus Willelmus avus etc. pro se et heredibus suis quicquid in ipsis est concessit predictis burgensibus quod haberent liberam curiam sicut predictum est petunt iudicium si contra factum antecessoris sui possit communitatem calumpniare etc. Et dictum est predicto Willelmo quod dicat aliud si sibi viderit expedire. Et Willelmus petit


quod communitas per attornatum suum dicat a quo tempore queruntur quod predictus Willelmus non permisit ipsos habere predictam curiam etc. Et communitas per attornatum suum dicit quod ipsi fuerunt in seisina habendi predictam curiam usque iam triginta annis elapsis quod predictus Willelmus ipsos non permisit etc. Et Willelmus dicit quod predictus Almaricus [written above the line over caret] pater suus toto tempore suo habuit curiam suam de omnibus tenentibus in predicta villa et inde obiit in seisina iam quadraginta annis elapsis et amplius. Ita quod homines predicte ville qui modo se dicunt de communitate etc. nunquam habuerunt curiam de se ipsis tempore predicti Almarici patris sui et post mortem ipsius Almarici patris etc. dominus Rex de quo predictus Almaricus tenuit etc. seisivit omnia tenementa ipsius Almarici in manum suam nomine custodie ratione minoris etatis ipsius Willelmi qui tune fuit infra etatemet custodiam illam dimisit Comiti de Ferariis. Et idem Comes toto tempore quo habuit custodiam illam habuit predictam curiam. Et ipse Willelmus similiter semper postea habuit predictam curiam de predictis tenen tibus in predicta villa. Ita quod predicti homines predicte ville nunquam tempore ipsius Willelmi nee tempore quo dominus Rex habuit custodiam etc. fuerunt in seisina habendi liberam curiam de se ipsis. Et hoc paratus est verificare per patriam. Unde petit iudicium si ad tale breve et ad talem narra- cionem per que supponunt se ipsos esse in seisina habendi predictam curiam de se ipsis tempore ipsius Willelmi debeat eis inde respondere.

Et communitas per attornatum suum dicit quod ipsi homines predicte ville qui modo se dicunt de communitate etc. fuerunt in seisina habendi liberam curiam de se ipsis tempore predicti Almarici patris etc. Et similiter tempore ipsius Willelmi quousque idem Willelmus curiam predictam eos habere non permisit. Et de hoc ponit se super patriam. Et Willelmus similiter. Ideo fiat inde lurata etc. Postea predicta communitas predicte ville de Weryngton' non est prosecuta. Ideo ipsa communitas et plegii sui de prosequendo in misericordia. Et predictus Willelmus le Botiller inde sine die. Queruntur nomina plegiorum etc. Et sunt plegii Robertus de Wlston' et Ricardus de Penketh. [misericordia in margin.]

Pleas of Juries and Assizes before Hugh de Cressingham, William de Ormesby, John Wogan, Master John Lovell and William de Mortimer, Justices Itinerant at Lancaster on the octave of the Holy Trinity in the twentieth year of the reign of King Edward the son of King Henry.

William, the son of Emery le Butiller of Weryngton was summoned to answer the community of the town of Weryngton on a plea that, although the same community by the charter of William le Butiller, the grandfather of the afore said William, whose heir he is, ought to have and from the time of the making of the same charter has hitherto been accustomed to have its court of the bur gesses of the same town, the aforesaid William does not permit the aforesaid community to have the aforesaid court to the grievous loss of the same community and contrary to the tenor of the charter aforesaid etc. And with regard to this the aforesaid community by its attorney complains that, although William le Butiller, the grandfather of the aforesaid William, whose heir he is, by his writing granted to his burgesses of Werington that they should have their caurt quit and free from all suits and pleas which pertain to the said William, and the men of the same community from the time of the making of the same charter have hitherto been accustomed to have their court of the burgesses aforesaid, the aforesaid William does not permit the aforesaid com munity to have the aforesaid court, whereby they say that they are wronged and have (suffered) loss to the value of five hundred pounds etc. And with regard to this they bring suit. They also bring forward the aforesaid writing which attests the aforesaid grant.

And William comes, and demands that they show if they have any grant from the lord King or from his progenitors to enable them to have a borough or community etc. and also that they say if they have a mayor or a bailiff in the aforesaid town or a common seal etc. and if they do not show these he demands judgment whether he ought to answer thereon to the men of the aforesaid town under the name of a community etc.


And the community by their attorney say that the aforesaid William, the grandfather etc. for himself and his heirs, as far as in them lies, granted to the aforesaid burgesses that they should have a free court, as is aforesaid, and they demand judgment if against the deed of his ancestor he may challenge the community etc. And the aforesaid William is told he may say something else if it seems to him expedient. And William demands that the community say by its attorney from what time they complain that the aforesaid William has not permitted them to have the aforesaid court etc. And the community by its attorney says that they have been in seisin of having the aforesaid court until thirty years ago since the aforesaid William did not permit them etc. And William says that the aforesaid Emery, his father, for the whole of his time had his court of all his tenants in the aforesaid town and died in seisin thereof now forty years past and more. So that the men of the aforesaid town who now call themselves of the community etc. never have had a court of them selves in the time of the aforesaid Emery his father, and after the death of the said Emery his father etc. the lord King of whom the aforesaid Emery held etc. seized all the tenements of the said Emery into his own hand in the name of the wardship by reason of the minority of the said William, who was then under the age and he demised that wardship to Earl Ferrers. And the same earl all the time wherein he had that wardship had the aforesaid court. And the said William always afterwards in the same way has had the aforesaid court of the aforesaid tenants in the aforesaid town. So that the aforesaid men of the aforesaid town never in the time of the said William nor in the time in which the lord King had the wardship etc. have been in seisin of having a free court of them selves. And this he is prepared to prove by jury. And with regard to this he demands judgment whether he ought to answer them thereon in accordance with such a writ and such a claim by which they suppose themselves to be in seisin of having the aforesaid court of themselves in the time of the said William.

And the community by its attorney says that the said men of the aforesaid town who now call themselves of the community etc. have been in seisin of having a free court of themselves in the time of the aforesaid Emery, father, etc. and likewise in the time of the said William until the same William did not permit them to have the aforesaid court. And concerning this they put them selves on the country. And William likewise. Therefore let a jury be taken thereon etc. Afterwards the aforesaid community of the aforesaid town of Weryngton did not prosecute. Therefore the said community and its pledges to prosecute are in mercy [subject to amercement]. And the aforesaid William le Botiller is to go thereof without day. And the names of the pledges are asked for etc. And the pledges are Robert de Wulston and Richard de Pen- keth. (Mercy in the margin struck through.)

inCHARTER GRANTED TO THE "FREE TENANTS"

OF WARRINGTON BY WILLIAM LE BOTELER, 1292

Contention having arisen between Sir William le Botiler, Lord of Werington, on the one part and all his free tenants of Werington on the other, concerning pleas, trespasses, plaints, and all kinds of other injuries formerly received, a settlement was effected as follows in the circuit of the justices, Sir Hugh de Cressingham and others his associates, at Lancaster on St. Mary Magdalene's day [July 22] in the twentieth year of the reign of King Edward, viz: That the aforesaid Sir William granted for himself and his heirs to all his aforesaid free tenants and their heirs forever that they shall be quit of toll in all the fairs and markets of Werington everywhere;


and also that they may have their free measures after the standard of the Lord King's measures. He granted also to the same for himself and his heirs that they make no satisfaction or damages for the trespass of the cattle of the aforesaid or their heirs within the bounds of Werington, except in proportion to the magnitude of the offence, and this by the judgment and discretion of good and lawful men of Werinton, at any time of the year, save corn for corn and grass for grass.

The aforesaid Sir William also granted for himself and his heirs to his above-mentioned free tenants that they shall be quit of every kind of pannage for all their swine reared and bought within the bounds of Werington unless they have entered his wood elsewhere, and then they give pannage as the other strangers of the country do. The aforesaid Sir William also granted for himself and his heirs, that they should not be put to take any oath against their will save by the order of the Lord King. And if any of the afore said free tenants are to be amerced for any offence in the court of the aforesaid Sir William, that they shall be amerced according to reasonable taxation in full court of the same and this in proportion to the magnitude of the offence by the view of their neighbours of Werington. The same Sir William also granted for himself and his heirs to his free tenants and their heirs that they will not take any inquest on any of the aforesaid tenants without the assent and consent of the said parties. And also that they shall not from henceforth be compelled to guard any man arrested or attached by the bailiffs of the said Sir William and his heirs, save according to the custom of the realm of England. Sir William also granted to the same free tenants and their heirs that they shall not in future be compelled to drive their own distresses or others taken in the town of Werinton against their will. The same Sir William also granted for himself and his heirs to his free tenants and their heirs that none of the heirs of the above-mentioned free tenants shall do ward and pay relief for their tenements except according to the tenor of his feoffment. And that keepers of the assize of bread and beer shall be chosen by the aforesaid free tenants and not by others.

All the above written things the abovesaid Sir William granted for himself and his heirs to the aforesaid free tenants and their heirs to have and to hold forever, so that neither the said Sir William nor his heirs nor any other in their name or right shall be able in future to exact, claim or obtain any right, claim or pretention to any of the aforesaid articles. In testimony to which the said Sir William has attached his seal to the present writing on behalf of himself and his heirs. These being witnesses, Sir Henry de Keighley, Sir Nicholas de Leicester, Sir John de Evyas(?), Adam de Hoghton, Alan le Norrays, Robert le Norrays, Robert de Bold, Robert de Woolston, Alan de Rixton, Richard de Samlesbury, Robert de Sankey and Gilbert de Werington clerk with others. Given at Lancaster on the day and in the year before-mentioned. [Plate 6.]

o\

' '*

a ra

TR

AN

SC

RIP

T

% tn

tnR

icar

dus

Atte

wel

l, W

illel

mus

le

Cle

rk,

Sim

on

filiu

s G

ilber

t!,

Gilb

ertu

s fil

ius

Gilb

ert!

, H

enri

cus

filiu

s R

adul

fi,

wR

adul

fus

filiu

s H

enri

ci d

e V

pton

', Jo

hann

es H

amel

yn,

Hug

o B

issh

op,

Gilb

ertu

s D

uble

rose

et

Ric

ardu

s de

Whi

tte-

ole

gh' e

t ce

teri

bur

gens

es d

e W

erin

gton

' op

tule

runt

se

quar

to d

ie v

ersu

s W

illel

mum

le

Bot

iller

de

plac

ito q

uare

cum

o

iidem

bur

gens

es c

uria

m s

uam

com

mun

itat

is s

ue d

e W

erin

gton

' te

nere

et

amer

ciam

enta

et

alia

com

oda

et p

rofi

cua

cin

de p

rove

nien

cia

per

cart

am W

illel

mi

le B

otill

er a

vi p

redi

cti

Will

elm

i le

Bot

iller

cui

us h

eres

ips

e es

t qu

am i

nde

§ha

bent

per

cipe

re e

t ha

bere

deb

eant

et

ante

cess

ores

eor

um e

arn

tene

re e

t am

erci

amen

ta e

t al

ia c

omod

a et

pro

ficu

a _

inde

pro

veni

enci

a ha

bere

con

suev

erun

t. Id

em W

illel

mus

le

Bot

iller

pre

dict

os b

urge

nses

suo

s cu

riam

sua

m p

re-

«di

ctam

ibi

dem

ten

ere

et a

mer

ciam

enta

et

alia

com

oda

et p

rofi

cua

inde

pro

veni

enci

a eo

s ha

bere

non

per

mitt

it in

^

ipso

rum

bur

gens

ium

dis

pend

ium

non

mod

icum

et

grav

amen

etc

. E

t ip

se n

on v

enit.

E

t su

mm

onitu

s et

c.

ludi

- >

cium

att

achi

atur

quo

d si

t in

Oct

abis

San

cti

Mic

hael

is e

tc.

g

The

tra

nsla

tion

of

this

doc

umen

t w

ill b

e fo

und

on p

. 26

. o o

PLA

TE

4:

BU

RG

ESS

ES

OF

WA

RR

ING

TO

N C

OM

PLA

IN T

HA

T W

ILL

IAM

, SE

VE

NT

H L

OR

D O

F W

AR

RIN

GT

ON

, H

AS

WIT

HH

EL

D

FRO

M T

HE

M

TH

E

PRIV

ILE

GE

S O

F A

BU

RG

ESS

CO

UR

T,

1275

(C

omm

on P

lea

Rol

l, C

.P.4

0, N

o. 1

0, m

.45,

1, T

rini

ty 3

Ed.

I,

1275

. T

he o

rigi

nal

is in

the

Pub

lic R

ecor

d O

ffic

e)

H X

m TI

73

m

m O

C O a z o H o ' z

TR

AN

SCR

IPT

H rn

Ric

ardu

s de

Fon

te,

Will

elm

us l

e C

lerk

, Si

mon

fili

us G

ilber

ti, G

ilber

tus

filiu

s G

ilber

ti, H

enri

cus

filiu

s R

adul

fi,

>nR

adul

fus

filiu

s H

enri

ci,

Hug

o B

issh

op,

Hen

ricu

s de

Vpt

on',

Ada

m f

ilius

Alw

ardi

, Jo

hann

es H

amel

yn,

Gilb

ertu

s *

Dub

lero

se e

t R

icar

dus

de W

ytel

eye

burg

ense

s de

Wer

ingt

on e

t co

mm

unita

s co

mbu

rgen

sium

suo

rum

eiu

sdem

vill

e m

optu

leru

nt s

e qu

arto

die

ver

sus

Will

elm

um l

e B

otill

er d

e pl

acito

qua

re c

um s

ingu

li eo

rum

sin

gula

bur

gagi

a su

a de

*

Wer

ingt

on'

pro

sing

ulis

duo

deci

m d

enar

iis t

antu

m p

er a

nnum

de

pref

ato

Will

elm

o le

Bot

ylle

r te

nere

deb

eant

et

»an

tece

ssor

es e

orum

ea

de a

ntec

esso

ribu

s pr

edic

t! W

illel

mi

le B

otill

er p

er i

dem

ser

vici

um t

ener

e co

nsue

veru

nt q

uiet

a °

de t

heol

onei

s ta

llagi

is a

uxili

is e

t de

om

nibu

s pl

aciti

s et

que

relis

ad

pref

atum

Will

elm

um l

e B

otill

er e

t he

rede

s su

os

oin

de p

rove

nien

tibus

sim

ul c

um l

iber

a pi

scar

ia i

n aq

ua d

e M

erse

a et

Mar

a de

Lun

gefo

rd p

er c

arta

m W

illel

mi

le

sB

otill

er a

vi p

redi

ct!

Will

elm

i cu

ius

here

s ip

se e

st q

uam

ind

e ha

bent

pre

dict

us W

illel

mus

le

Bot

iller

pre

fato

s bu

r-

oge

nses

iam

de

novo

gra

vite

r (w

ritte

n ab

ove

line

with

car

et)

dist

ring

it ad

red

dend

um e

i th

elon

ea t

alla

gia

et a

uxili

a ^

ad f

acie

ndum

ei

cons

uetu

dine

s et

alia

ser

vici

a qu

am f

acer

e de

bent

et

ipsi

vel

eor

um a

ntec

esso

res

face

re c

onsu

e-

^ve

runt

et

pisc

em q

uern

in

pis[

c]ar

iis p

redi

ctis

cap

ere

sole

nt e

idem

Will

elm

o le

Bot

iller

ad

opus

suu

m p

ropr

ium

pro

J

min

ori

prec

io q

uam

iliu

m a

liis

vend

ere

poss

ent

vend

ere

com

pelli

t et

alia

eno

rmia

eis

infe

rre

non

desi

nit a

d ip

soru

m

2bu

rgen

sium

dam

pnum

gra

viss

imum

et

cont

ra f

orm

am f

eoff

amen

ti su

i pr

edic

t! e

tc.

Et

ipse

non

ven

it.

Et s

um-

zm

onitu

s et

c.

ludi

cium

atta

chia

tur

quod

sit

in O

ctab

is S

anct

i M

icha

elis

etc

. E] o

The

tra

nsla

tion

of th

e es

sent

ial

part

s of

this

doc

umen

t w

ill b

e fo

und

on p

. 27

. z


>W-^ltI:t***(]l<M - *£fc^ tit * t4- ",H 1*1 t if^^3*lJ3.<M*J5<i«H

^ -or L-(N O o

CJ

LU o

d (2

O 'So

fc 'i -

s K3--U -d

^^i^ 2^ O 'c

S 5£ z.tq oo ?"

« -.. o ^ a!UJ 03H i< ^Hi §

Eo O

TR

AN

SCR

IPT

Cum

con

tent

io e

sset

mot

a in

ter

dom

inum

Will

elm

um le

Bot

iler

dom

inum

de

Wer

ingl

on' e

x pa

rle

una

et o

mne

s su

ps l

iber

e te

nent

es d

e W

erin

gton

' ex

alte

ra d

e pl

aciti

s tr

ansg

ress

ioni

bus

quer

elis

et

omni

mod

is a

liis

iniu

riis

int

er e

osde

m p

rius

hab

itis

sic

in i

tiner

e ju

slic

iari

o-

rum

dom

ini

Hug

onis

de

Cre

ssin

gham

ali

orum

que

soci

orum

eju

s ap

ud L

anca

slri

am d

ie s

anct

e M

arie

Mag

dale

ne a

nno

regn

i reg

is E

dwar

di

H

vice

sim

o co

nqui

evit

vide

licet

quo

d pr

edic

tus

dom

inus

Will

emus

con

cess

it pr

o se

et

here

dibu

s su

is o

mni

bus

pred

ictis

lib

ere

tene

ntib

us

^

suis

et

here

dibu

s su

is i

nper

petu

urn

quod

sin

t qu

iet i

de

theo

lone

o in

om

nibu

s fe

riis

et

mer

catis

de

Wer

ingt

on'

ubiq

ue e

t et

iam

quo

d rn

ha

bean

t m

ensu

ras

suas

lib

eras

sec

undu

m m

ensu

ras

dom

ini

Reg

is.

Con

cess

it et

iam

eis

dem

pro

se

el h

ered

ibus

sui

s qu

od n

ulla

s ev

asio

nes

^,

nee

emen

das

exib

eanl

de

anim

alib

us p

redi

ctor

um n

ee h

ered

um s

uoru

m i

nfra

met

as d

e W

erin

gton

' ni

si s

ecun

dum

qua

ntil

atem

del

icti

jc

et h

oc s

ecun

dum

con

side

ratio

nem

et

disc

retio

nem

pro

boru

m e

t le

galiu

m v

iror

um d

e W

erin

ton'

nul

lo t

empo

re a

nni

nisi

bla

dum

pro

£]

bl

ado

et e

rbam

pro

erb

a.

Con

cess

it et

iam

pre

dict

us d

omin

us W

illei

mus

pro

se

et h

ered

ibus

sup

radi

ctis

lib

ere

tene

ntib

us s

uis

quod

qui

eti

sint

de

omni

mod

o pa

nnag

io d

e om

nibu

s po

rcis

sui

s nu

triti

s et

em

ptis

inf

ra m

etas

de

Wer

into

n' n

isi

infr

a bo

scum

suu

m a

libi

intr

aver

int

*

et t

une

dant

pan

nagi

um s

ecun

dum

quo

d al

ii ex

tran

ei p

atri

e fa

ciun

t. C

once

ssit

etia

m a

nted

ictu

s do

min

us W

illei

mus

pro

se

et h

ered

i-

^

bus

suis

quo

d no

n po

nanl

ur a

d al

iquo

d sa

cram

enlu

m p

resl

andu

m c

onlr

a vo

lunl

alem

eor

um n

isi

sit

per

prec

eptu

m d

omin

i re

gis.

E

t o

si a

liqui

s [s

ic]

pred

icto

rum

lib

ere

tene

nliu

m s

inl

adm

erci

andi

pro

aliq

uo d

elic

to i

n cu

ria

pred

ict!

dom

ini

Will

elm

i qu

od a

dmer

cien

tur

c

secu

ndum

rac

iona

bile

m t

axac

ione

m i

n pl

ena

curi

a ej

usde

m e

t ho

c se

cund

um q

uant

ilat

em d

elic

ti pe

r vi

sum

vic

inpr

um s

uoru

m d

e W

er-

C>

ingt

on'.

Con

cess

it et

iam

ide

m d

omin

us W

illei

mus

pro

se

et h

eied

ibus

sui

s su

prad

ictis

lib

ere

tene

nlib

us e

l he

redi

bus

quod

non

cap

ianl

*

aliq

uam

inq

uisi

tione

m s

uper

aliq

uibu

s pr

edic

toru

m l

iber

e le

nenl

ium

sin

e as

sens

u et

con

sens

u di

ctar

um p

artiu

m e

t et

iam

quo

d no

n Q

de

cete

ro d

istr

inga

ntur

cus

todi

re a

lique

m h

omin

em c

aptu

m s

en a

tach

iatu

m p

er b

alliv

os d

ied

dom

ini

Will

elm

i el

her

edum

suo

rum

nis

i *n

se

cund

um c

onsu

elud

inem

reg

ni A

nglie

. C

once

ssil

elia

m i

dem

dom

inus

Will

eim

us e

isde

m l

iber

e le

nenl

ibus

et

here

dibu

s su

is q

uod

non

^,

dece

tero

dis

trin

gant

ur f

ugar

e na

mea

s su

as n

ee a

lias

capi

as i

n vi

lla d

e W

erin

ton'

con

tra

volu

ntal

em e

orum

. C

onee

ssit

etia

m i

dem

dom

inus

J

Will

eim

us p

ro s

e et

her

edib

us s

uis

eisd

em l

iber

e te

nent

ibus

et

here

dibu

s su

is q

uod

nullu

s he

redu

m s

upra

dict

orum

lib

ere

tene

ntiu

m

#

faci

al w

arda

m e

t re

levi

um p

ro t

enem

entis

sui

s ni

si s

ecun

dum

ten

orem

feo

ffam

enli

sui

El

quod

cus

tode

s as

sise

pan

is e

t ce

rvis

ie e

ligan

tur

ja

per

pred

iclo

s lib

ere

tene

ntes

et

non

per

alio

s.

2

Om

nia

ista

sup

resc

ript

a co

nces

sit

supr

adic

tus

dom

inus

Will

eim

us p

ro s

e et

her

edib

us s

uis

ante

dicl

is l

iber

e te

nent

ibus

et

here

dibu

s ^

suis

hab

enda

et

tene

nda

inpe

rpel

uum

ila

quc

d ne

e di

ctus

dom

inus

Will

elm

us n

ee h

ered

es s

ui n

ee a

liqui

s al

ius

nom

ine

suo

seu

jure

in

H

pred

ictis

art

icul

is a

liqui

d ju

ris

clam

ei a

ut c

alum

pnie

dec

eter

o ex

iger

e ve

ndic

are

pote

runl

vel

opl

iner

e. I

n cu

jus

rei

test

imon

ium

dic

tus

O

dom

inus

Will

eim

us s

igill

um s

uum

pro

se

et h

ered

ibus

hui

c pr

esen

li sc

ript

o ap

posu

it. H

iis l

eslib

us d

omin

o H

enri

co d

e K

yche

ley,

dom

ino

*

Nic

hola

o de

Ley

cesl

r, d

omin

o Jp

hann

e de

Evy

as, A

dam

de

Hoc

ton'

, Ala

no le

Nor

rays

, R

ober

to le

Nor

rays

, R

ober

to d

e B

olde

, R

ober

to

de W

lsto

n, A

lano

de

Ryx

ton"

, R

icar

do d

e Sa

mel

isbu

r', R

ober

to d

e So

nky

et G

ilbe

rlo

de W

erin

gton

' cl

eric

o cu

m a

liis.

Dat

um a

pud

Lan

cast

rian

! di

e et

ann

o pr

enot

ato.

The

tra

nsla

lion

of

Ihis

cha

rier

will

be

foun

d in

App

endi

x II

I.

"iTr.*

r* i-f

-^

rCT

7'--s

~

f 53fc

te^3*^

T i

' B^

**ra

^^«

airS

^S

^3M

UW

,

J?l

PLA

TE

6 :

CH

AR

TE

R G

RA

NT

ED

TO

TH

E F

RE

E T

EN

AN

TS

OF

WA

RR

ING

TO

NB

Y W

ILL

IAM

LE

BO

TE

LE

R

1292

(The

ori

gina

l is

in t

he W

arri

ngto

n M

unic

ipal

Lib

rary

)

H ffi m m

m O c O a O

H

O

Z

TR

AN

SC

RIP

T

i

Om

nibu

s ho

min

ibus

pre

sent

ibus

et

futu

ris

hoc

scri

ptum

vis

uris

vel

aud

itur

is o

mne

s lib

ere

tene

ntes

et

com

mun

itas

to

tius

vill

e de

Wer

into

n' s

alut

em i

n D

omin

o se

mpi

tern

am.

Nov

eriti

s no

s co

nces

siss

e re

mis

isse

et

omni

no p

ro n

obis

et

her

edib

us n

ostr

is q

uiet

umcl

amas

se d

omin

o no

stro

cap

itali

Will

elm

o le

Bot

iller

dom

ino

de W

erin

ton'

cur

iam

bu

rgen

tium

de

Wer

into

n' c

um o

mni

mod

is l

iber

tatib

us p

ertin

entii

s et

ape

ndic

iis s

uis.

It

a qu

od n

os n

ee h

ered

es

H no

stri

nee

aliq

uis

per

nos

nee

jure

nos

tro

aliq

uid

jus

clam

eum

vel

cal

umpn

iam

rat

ione

alic

ujus

don

acio

nis

vel

ra co

nces

sion

is a

ut a

licuj

us a

lteri

us t

ituli

vers

us p

redi

ctam

cur

iam

cum

om

nibu

s pe

rtin

entii

s lib

erta

tibus

et

apen

dici

is

-n su

is n

unqu

am d

ecet

ero

exig

ere

vend

icar

e po

teri

mus

in

perp

etuu

m v

el o

ptin

ere.

In

cuj

us

rei

test

imon

ium

hui

c j|j

pres

ent!

sc

ript

o si

gillu

m c

omm

unit

atis

pre

dict

e vi

lle d

e W

erin

ton'

pr

o no

bis

et h

ered

ibus

nos

tris

app

osui

mus

. m

Hiis

tes

tibus

dom

ino

Hen

rico

de

Kyc

hel',

Joh

anne

de

Lan

geto

n',

Nic

hola

o le

Bot

iller

, M

athe

o de

Hay

doc,

Gilb

erto

w

de S

othe

wrt

h, A

lano

de

Rix

ton'

, W

illel

mo

de A

dert

on',

Hen

rico

de

Tild

esle

gh,

Et

Gil

bert

o de

Cul

chit

cum

alii

s.

§ D

atum

apu

d W

erin

gton

' di

e V

ener

is i

n fe

sto

sanc

te M

arie

Mag

dale

ne a

nno

regn

i re

gis

Edw

ardi

vic

esim

o oc

tavo

. o o s

TR

AN

SL

AT

ION

?

To

all

men

pre

sent

and

fut

ure

who

sha

ll se

e or

hea

r th

is w

ritin

g al

l th

e fr

ee t

enan

ts a

nd c

omm

unity

of

the

who

le

* to

wn

of W

erin

ton,

ete

rnal

sal

vatio

n in

the

Lor

d.

Kno

w y

e th

at w

e ha

ve g

rant

ed,

rem

ised

and

who

lly q

uitc

laim

ed

» fo

r us

and

our

hei

rs t

o ou

r ch

ief

lord

Will

iam

le

Bot

iller

, lo

rd o

f W

erin

ton,

the

bur

gess

cou

rt o

f W

erin

ton

with

all

2 its

lib

ertie

s, a

ppur

tena

nces

and

app

enda

ges.

So

tha

t ne

ither

we

nor

our

heir

s, n

or a

nyon

e on

our

beh

alf

or i

n ou

r ^

righ

t, sh

all

ever

in

futu

re b

e ab

le t

o de

man

c, c

halle

nge

or m

aint

ain

any

righ

t, cl

aim

or

pret

ensi

on t

o th

e af

ores

aid

H co

urt

with

its

app

urte

nanc

es,

liber

ties

and

appe

ndag

es,

on t

he g

roun

d of

any

gif

t or

gra

nt o

r an

y ot

her

title

to

the

^ sa

me.

In

witn

ess

whe

reof

we

have

aff

ixed

to

the

pres

ent

wri

ting,

for

us

and

our

heir

s, t

he s

eal

of t

he c

omm

unity

of

the

afor

esai

d to

wn

of W

erin

ton.

T

hese

bei

ng w

itnes

ses

Lor

d H

enry

de

Kyc

hele

y, J

ohn

de L

ange

ton,

Nic

hola

s le

Bot

iller

, M

athe

w d

e H

aydo

c, G

ilbe

rt d

e So

thew

rth,

Ala

n de

Rix

ton,

Will

iam

de

Ade

rton

, H

enry

de

Tild

esle

gh,

and

Gil

bert

de

Cul

chit

with

oth

ers.

D

ated

at

Wer

ingt

on o

n F

rida

y th

e fe

ast

of S

t. M

ary

Mag

dale

ne i

n th

e tw

enty

ei

ght

year

of

the

reig

n of

Kin

g E

dwar

d.

jo

m

m ca

O

73

O c O I jo

73 z O

H

O

Z

PLA

TE

7:

RE

NU

NC

IAT

ION

OF

BU

RG

ESS

CO

UR

T B

Y "

FR

EE

TE

NA

NT

S"

OF

WA

RR

ING

TO

N,

1300

(The

ori

gina

l m

anus

crip

t is

in

the

War

ring

ton

Mun

icip

al L

ibra

ry)

the free borough of warrington in the thirteenth … · and variable definition in the same book,...

Documents