90 Erlestoke and its Manor Lords. 



admission was called a fine, and varied in amount according to the 

 size of tlie holding, the conditions of soil, &c. ; the highest fine 

 recorded in later times being £100, l)ut the more frequent sum 

 £80, per virgate. Tn all cases it was stipulated that a heriot was 

 to be paid when due, but it is not possible to state what were the 

 exact circumstances that made the heriot payable, though it seems 

 to have been due at the next death following the termination of a 

 certain period of years. The heriot varied greatly in value, the 

 usual payment being 15rZ. in cash, but in several cases it was the 

 best beast, and in one case a cauldron or chafing-dish (caldarium) 

 of the value of 10s. It is evident from many entries in the court 

 book that the yard-lands had other burdens attaching to them and 

 shared l^y all the tenants according to the size of their holdings, 

 such as the scoiiring of adjoining ditches and water-ways, and the 

 maintenance of fences, gates and Inidges. Of the rights of the 

 tenants the most ancient and the most important was that of 

 " boots." In Anglo-Saxon hot signified compensation, and the word 

 is more frequently found used in relation to payments due for 

 offences against the law, but in this case the boot was a custom 

 due from the lord to the tenants. In 1677 the homage presented 

 that '' it is our custom to have four Boots, that ia to say, House- 

 boot, Plough-boot, Fire-boot, and Eail-boot by assignment of the 

 lord," and the same presentment is made at almost every court 

 with an occasional alteration of " Eail " to " Stile " or " Gate-boot." 

 The explanation of the custom is that the tenants received periodical 

 gifts of timber for the repair of their houses, ploughs, and fences, 

 and for fuel, but in all cases application had to be made to the lord 

 and a fee of fourpence paid for every tree marked or " assigned " 

 for the purpose. The fines for offences against the lord in this 

 matter were severe and apparently it was only the widows of 

 tenants who were rash enough to take the risk, for three of these 

 only were arraigned at different times for cutting trees without 

 assignment, of whom one was fined £3, and another forfeited her 

 tenement to the lord, but the third seems to have made her peace 

 with the court by a timely acknowledgment of her guilt. Another 

 important right was that referring to the field called Fernham, 



