|
No. 1
[a1] A.D. 1271, Friday after the feast of the translation of
St. Thomas,
martyr [10 July], Alice of Winterbourne Stoke appeared against William
Smith saying against him that he contracted marriage with her, wherefore
she asked that he be adjudged her husband by sentence; she says this,
etc. The man, joining issue, denies
the contract; the parties sworn to tell the truth say the same thing as
before. The reception and
examination of witnesses is committed to the dean of Amesbury.
[a2] Thursday next after the feast of St. Peter in chains
[30 July], the parties appeared personally and the woman asked for a second
production and got it.
[a3] Wednesday next after the feast of St. Matthew the
apostle [23 September], the parties appeared personally; the woman
renounced further production; the attestations were published with the
consent of the parties; the parties were given a copy; a day was given for
sentencing if it was clear. The
woman constituted her brother Roger her proctor in the acts to hear the definitive
sentence.
[a4] Monday next after the feast of the apostles Simon and
Jude [26 October], the parties appeared personally; the man under interrogation
confessed in court that he had carnal knowledge of the said Alice a half a
year ago. The same man proposed an
exception in the following form: “Before you, sir judge, I, William of
Winterbourne Stoke, peremptorily excepting propose against the witnesses of
Alice Dolling that they depose falsely because from the ninth hour of the
day on which her witnesses depose that I contracted marriage with her until
the first hour of the subsequent day I was continuously at Bulford, so that
it would have been impossible for me at the hour about which the witnesses
depose to have contracted marriage at Winterbourne Stoke. And this I offer to prove.” The reception
of the witnesses produced by the man on his exception and their examination
is committed to the dean of Amesbury.
[a5] Wednesday next before the feast of St. Edmund, king and
martyr [28 October], the parties appeared personally; the woman made a
replication of presence; let the woman produce her witnesses before the
rectors of Berwick and Orcheston, however many she wishes to produce before
the next consistory; let the man also produce however many witnesses he
wishes to produce about his absence before the said dean and the chaplain
of Amesbury before the next consistory.
[a6] Tuesday after the feast of St. Lucy the virgin [15
December, 1271], the parties appeared personally; the woman excepting
proposed that it was not her fault that her witnesses had not been examined
and asked that they be admitted in court; they were sworn, their
examination committed to the dean of Amesbury and Richard de Rodbourne, and
the way of further production precluded for her. On the same day the attestations both on
absence and presence were published with the consent of the parties; copies
of the attestations were offered to and obtained by the parties, and a day
was given for doing what law shall dictate.
Wednesday next after the octave of St. Hilary [27
January, 1271/2], the parties appeared personally, and when there had been
some dispute among the parties about the attestations of the parties, a day
was given for sentencing if it was clear.
[a7] The day after St. Scholastica the virgin [11 February,
1271/2] the parties appeared personally.
It was decreed that the aforesaid W. produce in the next consistory
all his witnesses whom he had previously produced on his exception so that
it might be inquired more fully about the continuity of absence.
Production of Alice Dolling on the principal
[dp 1] Celia daughter of Richard Long sworn and carefully
examined about the contract of marriage between William Smith of Stoke
Winterbourne and Alice Dolling says that she saw and was present when the
said William gave his faith in the hand of the said Alice by these words:
“I William will have you Alice as wife so long as we both live, and thereto
I give you my faith.” And she
replied, “And I Alice will have you as husband, and thereto I give you my
faith.” Asked about the hour, she
says it was at the hour of sunset.
Asked about the place, she says in the house of John le Ankere
before the bed of the said women, Celia and Alice, on the west side of the
house. Asked if they were standing
or sitting, she says sitting. Asked
about their clothes, she says that the man was dressed in a black tunic of
Irish, an overtunic of russet, and a hood of the same color, and the woman
was dressed in a tunic of white and a blue hood, and on her feet she had
strapped shoes. Asked how she knows
this, she says that she was present in the house when all this
happened. Asked why the said William
came there, she says to have carnal intercourse with her if he could. Asked if she ever saw them having
intercourse, she says no, but she saw them naked in one bed. Asked who were present at the said
contract, she says the contracting parties, she herself, Margaret, her
sister, and no more.
[dp 2] Margaret, sister of the said Celia, sworn and carefully
examined about the aforesaid contract says that she saw and was present
when the said William gave his faith to the said Alice by these words: “I
William will have you Alice as wife
as long as we shall live, and thereto I give you my faith.” And she replied, “And I Alice will have
you William as husband by such a pact.”
About the year, the day, the hour and the place, she agrees with the
said Celia, her cowitness. Asked
about their clothing, she says that the man was wearing a gray tunic of
Irish cloth, and an overtunic of gray and a hood of gray. About the clothes of the woman she agrees
with her cowitness. About her
knowledge, she agrees with the said Celia.
Asked why the said W. came there, she says that she does not know,
unless it was to have carnal intercourse with her. Concerning those in the house, she agrees
with the said Celia. Asked if she
ever saw them having intercourse, she says no, nor did she see them
together in one bed.
[dp 3] Margaret daughter of Michael sworn and carefully examined
about the marriage contract between William Smith of Stoke Winterbourne and
Alice Dolling, says that on St. Stephen martyr’s day at Christmas, two years ago,
she was present and saw that William Smith whom the case is about gave his
faith to the said Alice by these words: “I William take you Alice as my
wife if holy church permits, and thereto I give you my faith.” And Alice
replied by these words. “And I Alice will have you as husband and will hold
you as my husband.” Asked about the
hour she says that this was done before the hour of sunset. Asked about the place, she says in the
house of John le Ankre in the southern part before the bed of the said Alice. Asked who were present, she says Celia
daughter of Richard Long and Margaret the sister of Alice whom the case is
about and the contracting parties and no more. Asked why the said William came there,
she says she does not know. Asked if
she ever saw them having intercourse, she says no. Asked in what garments they were clothed,
she says that the said William was wearing an overtunic of russet and a
hood and a tunic of grey Irish, and Alice was wearing a white tunic and a
blue hood.
Production of the said Alice about the presence of the said
William
[dr 1] Edith of Winterbourne Stoke sworn and carefully
examined about the presence of William Smith says that she saw the
aforesaid William Smith in the eastern part of the church of St. Peter of
Winterbourne Stoke, leading a crowd of women
after him on the day of St. Stephen martyr
there were three years past.
Asked about the hour of the day, she says that it was after dinner
before the hour of sunset. Asked
about clothing, she says the she does not recall. Asked where he went, she says she does
not know. Asked how she remembers
the lapse of time, she gives no cause of her knowledge. Asked if she saw him many times, she says
only once. Asked who saw him with
her, she says Edith, Alice and Agnes, her cowitnesses and many others of
the parish.
[dr 2] Edith Dolling, the sister of her whom the case is
about, sworn and carefully examined about the presence of William Smith,
says the same as the aforesaid Edith in all things, adding that she saw him
many times that day and that the man was dressed in a cloak of russet and a
hood of blue, and that she herself went in his hand.
[dr 3] Agnes Grey sworn and examined
says the same in all things as Edith the next previously sworn, except that
she gives the reason for her knowledge of the lapse of time that she was
pregnant at the time.
[dr 4] Alice daughter of William Chaplain sworn
and carefully examined says the same in all things as the aforesworn Edith
Dolling.
Production of William Smith on his exception
of absence previously proposed
[de 1] John Chaplain, sworn and carefully examined, asked for
what he was produced, says to prove a certain exception proposed by William
Smith against Alice Dolling of Winterbourne in court. Asked what the exception is, he says that
the said William proposed by way of exception that he was not present on
St. Stephen’s day on which the witnesses of the said woman depose that he
ought to have contracted marriage with her.
Asked where the said William was on the said day, he says that he
well knows and that he saw him and spoke with him on the day of St. Stephen
martyr, at Christmas there will be three years passed, at Bulford from the
ninth hour of the aforesaid day of St. Stephen and for the entire night
following up to midday on the following St. John’s day [26–27 December,
1268 or 1269; see below fn. 3].
Asked how he knows this, he says that they serve[d] a guild of
parishioners in the said town of Bulford
finding food and other things necessary for those serving, as is customary,
along with Alice his mother. Asked
where he was at table that day, he says in the house of Alice his mother at
Bulford. Asked if he left at any
hour of the aforesaid day or night, he says no. Asked how he knows this, he says that
both of them were together at the said guild and in eating at the house of Alice the mother of
the aforesaid William from the ninth hour until midnight, and immediately
afterwards they went to the house of the mother of the aforesaid William
where the said William spent the night.
Asked who were at the guild, he says the guild brothers. Asked who the guild brothers are, he says
almost all the better men of the parish.
Asked if all his cowitnesses were present, he says yes. Asked if he knows Alice whom the case is
about, he says no. Asked how far
Winterbourne Stoke is from the town of Bulford, he says four miles. Asked how he recalls such a lapse of
time, he says by this: that in the same year, the guild ceased.
[de 2] Richard Sturre sworn, examined and carefully asked,
says that William Smith whom the case is about was present in the town of
Bulford from the ninth hour of St. Stephen, at Christmas there will be
three years passed, continuously for the whole day and the night following
and St. John’s day until noon. Asked
how he knows this he says by this that he saw him at the guild of Bulford
and spoke with him and saw him serving as butler at the said guild until
midnight. And the same day, along
with Alice his mother, he found food and other necessaries for the guild,
as is customary, for each guild bother in his course when he came to
him. About the rest he agrees with
John, previously sworn.
[de 3] Walter de Ponte, sworn, examined and carefully asked
about all the circumstances, agrees in all things with the previously sworn
John and Richard, previously sworn.
[de 4] Hugh Meriot, sworn, examined and carefully asked,
agrees in all things with the previously sworn John and Richard, adding
however that they lay in one bed in the house of his mother at
Bulford. Asked who spent the night
in that house that night, he says the witness himself, William whom the
case is about, and their mother and a serving maid and no more.
[de 5] John le Devenes sworn and carefully examined agrees in
all things and through all things with the previously sworn John and
Richard.
[de 6] John Stirie sworn, examined and carefully asked agrees
in all things and through all things with the previously sworn.
[de 7] Hugh Baghe sworn and carefully examined agrees in all
things and through all things with the previously sworn.
[de 8] Peter son of Alice sworn and carefully examined says
that he well knows and it well comes to his memory that William Smith whom
the case is about was continuously in the town of Bulford on St. Stephen’s
day from the ninth hour through the whole day and the following night until
the third hour of the next day, this year there will be three years
elapsed. Asked how he knows this, he
says that he saw him on the said St. Stephen’s day eating and drinking at
the table of the mother of the said William. Asked where the said W. went after
dinner, he says to the guild at the hour of sunset and he stayed there with
many others drinking until almost midnight, and afterwards he went to the
home of his mother to bed and lay there until morning. Asked how he knows this, he says that he
was in his company and is his next-door neighbor. Asked how he remembers when so much time
has elapsed, he says by this that in the same year the guild ceased. Asked how far Bulford is from Maiden
Winterbourne, he says three leagues.
Asked if the said William left Bulford any hour of the day or night
between the ninth hour of the aforesaid St. Stephen’s day and the third
hour of the following St. John’s
day, he says no.
[de 9] John son of the weaver sworn and carefully examined
agrees in all things and through all things with the previously sworn
Peter.
[de 10] Roger de Cowland sworn and carefully examined agrees in
all things and through all things with the previously sworn P. and J. except
that he does not give the reason for his knowledge.
[a8] Tuesday after the feast of St. Mathias the apostle,
continued until Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday next following [1–5
March, 1271/2], the parties appeared personally. The same man alleged that he could not
produce his witnesses before us because some of them did not exist in the
nature of things and some of them had left the province for a journey and
for other necessary cause. And when
the parties had disputed for a while about the processus, the same William
demanded that a copy of the entire processus be made for him, which decreed
and obtained, a day was given for doing what law shall dictate in the next
consistory after Easter.
[a9] Wednesday after ‘Misericordia’ Sunday [11 May], A.D.
1272, the parties appeared personally and
concluding the case asked that sentence be given. We the official of Salisbury proceeded to definitive
sentence in this way: “In the name of the Father, amen. We the official of
Salisbury having examined the merits of the aforesaid cause and having gone
over the acts of court carefully, because we find the claim of the said
Alice sufficiently proven, notwithstanding the exception proposed on the
part of William, which is not proved clearly in its form, as it ought to
be, adjudge William by sentence and definitively to be husband to the same
Alice.”
No. 4
An initial long paragraph in this document recites the
procedural steps in the Salisbury
court and those taken in the Court of Canterbury. The only thing worth noting is that the
woman at no time appears in the proceedings at Canterbury.
Item, having examined the statements of the witnesses of
the said Alice
on the de presenti marriage contract that she proposed, the first two
witnesses seem to depose that they contracted between themselves by words
of the future tense. And these
witnesses were sisters of each other, as the second witness seems to
depose. Item, the third witness
seems to depose that the man contracted by words of the present tense and
the woman by words of the future tense, and she says that the second
witness is the sister of Alice.
Item, having examined the witnesses of William produced
on his exception of absence it seems that he proved by ten witnesses his
absence at the same hour about which the witnesses of the said woman
depose. Item, having inspected the
statements of the witnesses produced on the replication of presence, they
do not seem to obviate the statements of the witnesses on the exception of
absence nor do they help the claim of the woman because they seem to speak
of the previous year,
and even if they are speaking about the same year they seem to depose less
fully, and they are only four in number and the witnesses of the man are
ten.
No. 5
Acta, etc., on the
Monday next after the feast of the apostles Simon and Jude [31 October
1272], continued and prorogued from the next preceding Saturday [29
October], in the year, etc., before us, brother Henry [Depham],
etc., in a marriage case which is pending between Alice Dolling of
Winterbourne Stoke, plaintiff, in no way appearing on the one side, and
William Smith of Bulford, defendant, personally appearing on the other: to
wit, since it appeared to us by the previous acta that that various iniquities had been proposed by the
party of this W. against the processus
held before the official of Salisbury between the same parties and
transmitted by him under his seal and against the sentence that the same
official rendered against this W., and that it had been decreed that the processus be handed over to
masters P. le Conte and J. de Meriton, examiners of the said court, along
with the aforesaid sentence and the mentioned iniquities, to be examined by
them, and what they found to be referred to us in writing on the said
Saturday, and that the same said Saturday had been fixed by us for the
party of the said W. for doing and receiving what justice might persuade
and to hear sentence, if the matter was clear, in the said case, and it also
appeared that it had been decreed that the said Alice Dolling should be
peremptorily cited by the said official of Salisbury that she appear before
the said official or his commissary on the said Saturday and in the said
place to proceed, do, and receive what justice might persuade and to hear
sentence, if it was clear, and it also appeared by certifying letters of
the lord official of Salisbury that the said Alice had been peremptorily
cited for the said day and place to do and receive the aforesaid things, at
length the said Alice long awaited, and, as is customary, many times called
for by the crier’s voice, did not care to appear. The party of this William charged this Alice with absence
and contumacy and immediately asked that as a penalty for her contumacy the
cause proceed as it ought to proceed.
Whence, we, after waiting a long time, making reference [to the acta], there having also been
recited before us in court that entire processus held before the mentioned official between the
same parties, having fully understood this, we proceeded to sentencing in
this manner:
“In the name of God, amen. Having heard and fully understood the
merits of a marriage case formerly moved before the official of Salisbury,
hearing the case by ordinary authority, between Alice Dolling of
Winterbourne Stoke, Salisbury diocese, woman, plaintiff on the one side,
and William called ‘Smith’ of Bulford, of the same diocese, defendant on
the other, and afterwards lawfully devolved on the Court of Canterbury by
appeal of the said William from the same official of Salisbury as from an
iniquitous definitive sentence, and in the said court long litigated, there
being recited before us in court the whole processus had before the official of Salisbury in the said
cause between the same parties and the said sentence of the official of
Salisbury, having uncovered the iniquities of them, because it lawfully
appears to us that the said official of Salisbury rendered a rash sentence
in the said case and the said William Smith has well appealed, we, brother
Henry Depham, penitentiary of Christ Church Canterbury and commissary of
the official, etc., with the counsel of legal experts sitting with us,
pronounce the aforesaid sentence of the official of Salisbury rendered
against the before-mentioned William in the said case to be unjust, and we
quash the same sentence by the authority of the see of Canterbury,
absolving the same William from the petition of the said Alice by sentence
and definitively by the authority of the aforesaid see, decreeing that the
aforesaid official of Salisbury be required by the lord official of
Canterbury aforesaid to hold the said William as thus absolved and public
and solemnly and to declare him thus absolved or have him [so] declared at
times and places which the party of the said William might require in this
matter.”
|