| 1372.081 |
1372 |
|
Trespass for breaking into a house and taking cows |
Trespas |
Tauke, William Sjt Tauke (for D)
Percy, Henry Sjt Persay (for P)
Wychyngham, William de JCP Wich
Tauke, William Sjt Tanke
Percy, Henry Sjt Persay
Fyncheden, William de CJCP Finchden
Tauke, William Sjt Tanke
Fyncheden, William CJCP Finchden
Percy, Henry Sjt Persay
Tauke, William Sjt Tanke
Percy, Henry Sjt Persay
Tauke, William Sjt Tanke |
|
|
|
|
|
Salisbury (Sarum), Bishop of |
|
|
| Trespas port, que le defendant vient & debrusa la meason le plaintife, & ses vaches prist & amesna en |
29 |
|
Robert Wyvil was Bishop of Salisbury from 16 Apr. 1330 to 4 Sep. 1375. |
| Trespass brought, that the defendant came and broke into the plaintiff's house and took his cows and led them to a certain place, and from there drove them to another place, and there detained them in a park (en park', perhaps impounded) until two of the cows had died for lack of sustenance, to his damages etc. The defendant said that he who pleaded this held the same house of him for a certain rent, and because the rent was in arrears etc., he had entered into the house, of which the doors were open, and had taken the distraint for the rent, and had driven them and impounded them etc. in an open park, and he demanded judgment, and as to the cows, the plaintiff had sued deliverance in the county court, and had the deliverance, and the defendant demanded judgment of this writ. The plaintiff said that the defendant had taken various matters to excuse himself of tort, so that the plaintiff prayed that the defendant be held to one. Wychyngham JCP said that if you take my animals without cause, although I sue deliverance afterwards, do you think that I will not have an action for a trespass committed against me by that taking? The defendant said that he thought not. The plaintiff said that the defendant had pleaded various matters, and this was a writ of Trespass to recover all in damages; the defendant had justified the taking for cause, so that the plaintiff did not have anything else to do but to maintain his writ, so they were at traverse, so that the plaintiff prayed to be discharged of the rest. Fyncheden CJCP said that to speak of the state of being open to distraint (overture), he did not know to see how this could be, except in a Replevin, because this writ supposed to recover in damages, so it was necessary to take issue on the nature of the writ, and on one point. The defendant said that although he had taken various pleas, he had concluded on one. Fyncheden CJCP said that it was necessary to do so. The plaintiff said that the Court saw plainly how the defendant said that the doors were open, and also that he took the cows for rent in arrears, and that the park was open, so he was in traverse of the plaintiff's action, so that no law compelled the plaintiff to answer to what the defendant said and pleaded in abatement of the writ, that the deliverance was made of this, and also the defendant had not supposed that it was done by the plaintiff, or that the plaintiff had appeared in the county court, so that it would not be adjudged his act. The defendant told the plaintiff to demur in judgment then, because it was necessary that the defendant answer in that manner to all the trespasses, as he understood, because they demanded various answers, because in effect they were various trespasses, so that he would be adjudged on the manner of his conclusion. The plaintiff's counsel said that his client was a poor man, and desired his deliverance, so the defendant said that, where the defendant justified the taking etc. by reason of lordship of a reversion granted, one had brought a writ against the Bishop of Salisbury, process was sued until he recovered, and the lease and the grant of reversion were intervening (mesne) etc., and he demanded judgment if the defendant could justify himself by reason of such lordship. The defendant told the plaintiff to maintain his writ etc. first etc. |
|
