1660 : Objections to jury verdict in Musgrave and Soulby
Wednesday, January 20, 2010 at 1:25PM
Petra Mitchinson in Court Baron, DANTESON, LANCASTER, TEBAY, Westmorland

 

Update on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 at 5:19PM by Registered CommenterPetra Mitchinson

1660. OBJECTIONS TO JURY VERDICT IN MUSGRAVE AND SOULBY. A neat document, a bit grubby. Objections by the Lord of the Manor or his representative against the findings of a Jury of Survey, almost identical but a little neater than that of 1656. Excepcons to the Jurey of Survay in Musgrave and Soulby in the yeare 1660 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ County of } Exceptions against the verdict of the Jurey of Survay Westmorland } Latly mad for the Manors of Great and Little Musgrave Soulby and Kirkby=Stephen:/ 1 First they doe not say in the said Verdict of what Court they were Chosen or by what Authorety or what there Charge was:/ 2 They have Incerted into the Said Verdict severall men to be the Lords Tennants which at that tyme was not:/ 3 They have not mad up a perfect Rentall of the Lords Rents but come much short in the Mannor of Soulby although they had severall accoumpts that did show them the contrary:/ 4 They have not mad a perfect particular of boones and servisses but have omitted severall formerly due and Lessened the Rentes of others vide TEABEs case in the Indenture and Booke of Admittance foll (94) and LANCASTERs case in the Blacke booke:/ 5 They have omitted what the Tennents serves is to the Milne of Musgrave and Soulby what everye Tennents particular part of wall Thatch and dam is and what the Moulter is:/ 6 They have omitted to sett downe what Customary bigg was pad by the Tennents of Soulby who should pay the same what bushels or peckes every one should pay and what tyme of the yeare also what the Messure was Anncently this they have omitted which was given them in Charge and have sett downe moneys in stead thereof fore short of the value thereof:/ 7 They have omitted to give an accoumpt what was the Anncent Amerciments for such Tennents as did not doe the Lords suite of Court or servis to his Milnes and Kilnes:/ 8 They have omitted to present all Improvements of the Lords wasts and Commons:/ 9 They have omitted to make up a particular of the boundes of the Mannor or Lordship of Soulby:/ 10 They have omitted to make a particular of the severall names of Closses and Lands with there particular Rents and servisses belonging to the Indenture Tennents so that Indenture Tennents Lands might be destinguished from Arbitrary Lands and Closses which causes a great confusion and severall cheats for some tymes they put Arbitrary Land for Indenture Land and Indenture Land for Arbitrary vide DANTESONs [?] case:/ All thesse particulars they have omitted which was given them in Charge which was the Cheife causes for which the Lord mad choyse of this Jury to his great damage and almost Imparable Lose:/ By there Infusing into the said verdict severall shewing [?] new opinions of there owne Invencion concerning there Costome which may be proved was contrary to all former Costome used or allowed within the said Mannors and is Alredy confessed by some of the Jurrours to be false and eronious:/

Article originally appeared on CeeJ (http://www.rumbutter.net/).
See website for complete article licensing information.