and by oath taken among them, making unlawful assemblies of their own authority on Monday next after the feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the thirtieth year of the lord the King that now is,[180] ordained and decreed that none should remain among them in the said town having chattels worth 20s. who would not pay them 2s. 1d., which payment they call among themselves hansing-silver, which money they took on that pretext respectively from Reynold del Blackhouse and Robert the Carpenter, men dwelling in the town aforesaid, and also beyond this 12d. of gersom from each of the said Reynold and Robert. And likewise … they decreed among themselves that every man of the same town having chattels to the value of 10 marks should pay them 46s. 8d., which by that authority they took from Robert Scot, a man dwelling in the aforesaid town. And also the same day and year they decreed among themselves that no man should stay in the aforesaid town beyond a year and a day without being distrained to take oath to maintain their aforesaid assemblies and ordinances. …
The aforesaid Nicholas Fouk and others readily acknowledge that the Abbot is lord of the whole town aforesaid, and ought to appoint his bailiffs to hold his court in the same town. But as for the conspiracy aforesaid, etc., they make stout defence that they are not guilty of the aforesaid conspiracy, etc. And as for the Abbot's charge against them that they have made unlawful assemblies in the aforesaid town, decreeing and ordaining that every man dwelling in the same town having chattels to the value of 20s., etc. as above, they say that the aforesaid Abbot makes plaint unjustly, for they say that they have an alderman and a gild merchant in the aforesaid town and are free burgesses, etc., rendering judgments by their alderman of pleas pleaded in the court of the same abbot before his bailiffs in the town aforesaid. And that without any trespasses or unlawful assemblies they meet at their Gildhall in the same town, as often as need be, to treat of the common profit and advantage of the men and burgesses of the aforesaid town, as is quite lawful for them. And that they and their ancestors and predecessors, burgesses, etc., have used such a custom from time whereof no memory is, to wit, of taking 2s. 1d. from every man dwelling in the aforesaid town, being in the tithing of the Abbot of the place aforesaid, having chattels to the value of 20s., that he may trade among them and enjoy their market customs in the same town, and likewise of receiving 46s. 8d. from every man of the town aforesaid having chattels to the value of 10 marks to keep[181] their gild merchant. And that there is the following custom among them beyond this, to wit, that twelve burgesses of the aforesaid town have been accustomed to elect four men of the same town yearly to keep their gild merchant, each of whom shall have chattels to the value of 10 marks. Which four men so elected have been accustomed to be forewarned by two burgesses of the gild aforesaid, who are called les Dyes, to keep their gild aforesaid; and the same men so elected have been accustomed to find pledges before the alderman and burgesses in the Gildhall aforesaid to keep the gild aforesaid, or that each of them would pay 46s. 8d., who should refuse to keep that gild. And for the doing hereof the alderman and burgesses in the town aforesaid have been accustomed to distrain every man in the same town having chattels to the value of 10 marks, wishing to trade among them and to enjoy their market customs. And thus then each of the aforesaid four men so elected should enjoy burgess-ship among them and their custom hereafter, and the burgesses of the aforesaid town in form aforesaid have been used to receive 2s. 1d., etc. And this they are ready to verify, whereof they crave judgment, etc. …
The jurors say, etc. that … the Abbot must answer whether the aforesaid Nicholas Fouke and others have a gild merchant in the aforesaid town or not, etc. The abbot says that they have not a gild merchant nor cognisances of pleas pertaining to a gild merchant, nor a commonalty nor a common seal nor a mayor; but they hold a gild at the feast of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist in a certain place to feast and drink together, there holding their unlawful assemblies and taking from every man dwelling in the said town the aforesaid 2s. 1d. and also 46s. 8d., levying such money from the men aforesaid, that the payers thereof may be of their fellowship, by distraints made upon them; and he does not deny that the ancestors of the aforesaid Nicholas and others have been long accustomed to receive such extortions of 2s. 1d. and 46s. 8d., but against the Law Merchant and against the will of the aforesaid payers and against the peace, etc., and beyond the amount of a third part of their goods; and by such extortions and ransoms they claim to make burgesses within his liberty and lordship, which there pertains to the Abbot himself and to no other to be done, etc.
A day is given. … It is awarded that the aforesaid Abbot [recover] his damages of 199l. 13s. 4d. against the aforesaid Nicholas and others. … And let the same Nicholas and others be committed to gaol, etc. Afterwards the aforesaid Nicholas and others came and made fine, etc. And let certain others in the dispute be imprisoned for a month owing to their poverty, etc. And the aforesaid Nicholas and others came before the justices and satisfied the lord Abbot, etc.; therefore let them be delivered from prison, etc.
[179] Tuesday after December 13.
[180] Monday after September 8, 1302.
[181] i.e. To uphold.
12. Complaints of the Men of Leicester Against The Lord [Inquisitions Miscellaneous, 87, No. 46], 1322.
Inquisition taken at Leicester on Saturday next after the feast of St. Barnabas the Apostle[182] in the 15th year of the reign of King Edward, son of King Edward, before Roger Beler, guardian of the castles, lands and tenements of Thomas, late earl of Lancaster,[183] and other enemies and rebels of the lord the King in the County of Leicester, in the hand of the lord the King by their forfeiture, by the oath of William le Palmere of Leicester.[184]. …
Who say on their oath that in the time of Edmund, late earl of Leicester, uncle of the lord the King that now is, while he had the lordship of the town aforesaid, the men of the same town who were in the gild of the same town gave nothing for the retailing or sale of cloth or other merchandise, but in the time of Thomas, late earl of Leicester, by distraints of farmers[185] and extortions they were compelled to make heavy fines yearly.
Further, in the time of the aforesaid Edmund, the fullers dwelling in the same town gave nothing to any man for exercising that craft, but in the time of Thomas they were compelled to pay 40s. a year, so that the aforesaid farmers would not permit other fullers to come into the same town, whereby none remains in the same town save one only, and he is poor.
Further, in the time of Edmund, the butchers of the same town used to give nothing to any man for exercising their trade, but in the time of Thomas they were compelled to give 10s. a year to the farmers.
Further, in the time of Edmund, for four days at Christmas no court of pleas of the Portmanmoot used to be holden, but in the time of Thomas by extortions and distraints the farmers[185] used to compel those who owed to others any debt, upon plaint made against them, to pay their debts within the aforesaid four days, or to imprison their bodies until they should have paid.
In the time of Edmund vendors of oatmeal sold their meal, giving nothing to any man except toll; in the time of Thomas they were not permitted to sell the aforesaid meal except by great measures, and then the beadles of the farmers of the same town took by extortion from the buyers a great quantity for measuring it, and to have that profit the said beadles gave to the farmers 40s. a year.
Further, in the time of Edmund, the farmers
