vill2-第33章
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
n the precarious character of the holding。（82*） The owner may take it away when he pleases； and alter its condition at will。 The Abingdon Chronicle tells us （83*） that before the time of Abbot Faritius it was held lawful on the manors of the Abbey to drive the peasants away from their tenements。 The stewards and bailiffs often made use of this right； if anybody gave them a fee out of greed； or out of spite against the holder。 Nor was there any settled mode of succession； and when a man died； his wife and children were pitilessly thrown out of their home in order to make place for perfect strangers。 An end was put to such a lawless condition of things by Faritius' reforms： he was very much in want of money； and found it more expedient to substitute a settled custom for the disorderly rule of the stewards。 But he did not renounce thereby any of his manorial rights： he only regulated their application。 The legal feature of base tenure its insecurity was not abolished on the Abingdon estates。 Our documents sometimes go the length of explaining that particular plots are held without any sort of security against dispossession。 We find such remarks in the Warwickshire Hundred Rolls for instance。（84*） Sometimes the right is actually enforced： in the Cartulary of Dunstable Priory we have the record of an exchange between two landlords； in consequence of which the peasants were removed from eight hides of land by one of the contracting parties。（85*） The villain is in no way to be considered as the owner of the plot of land he occupies； his power of disposing of it is stinted accordingly； and he is subjected to constant control from the real owner。 He cannot fell timber。 oaks and elms are reserved to the lord。（86*） He cannot change the cultivation of the land of his own accord； it would be out of the question； for instance； to turn a garden…close into arable without asking for a licence。（87*） He is bound to keep hedges and ditches in good order； and is generally responsible for any deterioration of his holding。 When he enters into possession of it； he has to find a pledge that he will perform his duties in a satisfactory manner。（88*） There can be no thought of a person so situated alienating the land by an act of his own will； he must surrender it into the hand of the lord； and the latter grants it to the new holder after the payment of a fine。 The same kind of procedure is followed when a tenement is passed to the right heir in the lifetime of the former possessor。（89*） A default in paying rents or in the performance of services； and any other transgression against the interests of the lord； may lead to forfeiture。（90*） The lord takes also tenements into his hand in the way of escheat； in the absence of heirs。 Court…rolls constantly mention plots which have been resumed in this way by the lord。（91*） The homage has to report to the steward as to all changes of occupation； and as to the measures which are thought necessary to promote the interests of the landowner and of the tenantry。（92*） As to the treatment of tenure in manorial documents； it is to be noticed that a distinction which has no juridical meaning at all becomes all important in practice。 At common law； as has been said repeatedly； the contrast between free land and servile land resolves itself into a contrast between precarious occupation and proprietary right。 This contrast is noticed occasionally and as a matter of legal principle by manorial documents （93*） quite apart from the consequences which flow from it； and of which I have been speaking just now。 But in actual life this fundamental feature is not very prominent； all stress is laid on the distinction between land held by rent and land held by labour。 In the common phraseology of surveys and manorial rolls； the tenements on which the rent prevails over labour are called 'free tenements；' and those on the contrary which have to render labour services； bear the names of 'servile holdings。' This fact is certainly not to be treated lightly as a mere result of deficient classification or terminology。 It is a very important one and deserves to be investigated carefully。 In the ancient survey of Glastonbury Abbey； compiled in 1189； the questions to be answered by the jury are enumerated in the following way： 'Who holds freely' and how much； and by what services； and by whose warrant； and from what time？ Has land which ought to perform work been turned into free land in the time of Bishop Henry； or afterwards？ By whose warrant was this change made； and to what extent is the land free？ Is the demesne land in cultivation； or is it given away in free tenure or villain tenure； is such management profitable； or would it be better if this land was taken back by the lord？'（94*） The contrast is between land which provides labour and land which does not； the former is unfree； and villain tenure is the tenure of land held by such services； portions of the demesne given away freely may eventually be reclaimed。 The scheme of the survey made in answer to these questions is entirely in keeping with this mode of classification。 All holdings are considered exclusively from the economic point of view； the test of security and precarious occupation is never applied。 It is constantly noticed； on the other hand； whether a plot pays rent or provides labour； whether it can be transferred from one category into the other； on what conditions demesne land has been given to peasants； and whether it is expedient to alter them。 Let us take the following case as an instance： John Clerk had in the time of Bishop Henry one virgate in Domerham and holds it now； and another virgate in Stapelham for ten shillings。 When he farmed the Domerham manor he left on his own authority the virgate in Stapelham and took half a virgate in Domerham； as it was nearer。 This half virgate ought to work and is now free。 And the virgate in Stapelbam； though it was free formerly； has to work now； after the exchange。（95*） The opposition is quite clear； and entirely suited to the list of questions addressed to the jury。 The meaning of the terms free and freedom is also brought out by the following example。 Anderd Budde holds half a virgate of demesne land； from the time of Bishop Henry； by the same services as all who hold so much。 The village has to render as gift twenty…nine shillings and six pence。 Six pence are wanting （to complete the thirty shillings？） because Anderd holds more freely than his ancestors used to。（96*） Such phraseology is by no means restricted to one document or one locality。 In a Ramsey Cartulary we find the following entry in regard to a Huntingdonshire manor： 'Of seven hides one is free； of the remaining six two virgates pay rent。 The holder pays with the villains； he pays merchet and joins in the boon…work as the villains。 The remaining five hides and three virgates are in pure villainage。'（97*） The gradation is somewhat more complex here than in the Somersetshire instance： besides free land and working land we have a separate division for mixed cases。 But the foundation is the same in both documents。 Earlier surveys of Ramsey Abbey show the same classification of holding into free and working virgates （liberae； ad opus（98*））。 In opposition to free service； that is rent； we find both the villenagium （99*） and the terra consuetudinaria or custoniaria；（100*） burdened with the usual rural work。 Sometimes the document points out that land has been freed or exempted from the common duties of the village；（101*） in regard to manorial work the village formed a compact body。 The notion which I have been explaining lies at the bottom of a curious designation sometimes applied to base tenure in the earlier documents of our period terra ad furcam et flagellum；（102*） fleyland。 The Latin expression has been construed to mean land held by a person under the lord's jurisdiction； under his gallows and his whip； but this explanation is entirely false。 The meaning is； that a base holding is occupied by people who have to work with pitchfork and flail； and may be other instruments of agriculture；（103*） instead of simply paying rent。 In view of such a phraseology the same tenement could alternately be considered as a free or a servile one； according to its cha
