SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY 



The records in the northern part of the county are extremely scanty, 

 but in the Chiltern districts and the Vale of Aylesbury a fairly complete 

 picture of local organization can be drawn. 



The private jurisdictions which existed in all parts of England may 

 be divided into two classes, the franchises of regalities, and the feudal 

 rights inherent to the possession of a manor and the mere fact of having 

 tenants. According to the royal theory regalia could only be exercised by a 

 subject in virtue of a direct grant from the crown, and it was this theory 

 that Edward I adopted in the vigorous ' Quo Warranto ' inquiry. Very few 

 lords in these cases could show a definite grant of regalia, but relied on the 

 vague words of the old charters granting ' sac and sok, toll and theam and 

 infangfhief.' In entry after entry in the Quo Warranto Rolls, 1 ' the royal 

 lawyers declared that this formula only gave the right to an ordinary manorial 

 court and not to the view of frankpledge. Some lords too could not even 

 show a charter at all, but could only plead their prescriptive right to hold the 

 view of frankpledge and other royal privileges, the most common of which 

 were the assize of bread and ale, infangthief, waifs and strays, and the right 

 to hold markets and fairs. The great abbeys and barons held many such 

 franchises, and the different manors belonging to the great tenants in chief in 

 some cases formed an ' honour.' The earl of Gloucester held the honour of 

 Giffard," of which Crendon was the chief manor, and lands in the county 

 were parcel of the honours of Dudley, Peverel, Toctesburg, Chester, Berk- 

 hampstead, and Wallingford, the last being in the hands of the earl of Corn- 

 wall, brother of the king. Honour courts are not definitely mentioned in 

 the hundred rolls except for the honour of Peverel. 



The most important franchises were held by the abbot of St. Albans and 

 by the lords of the honours of Wallingford and Peverel. The abbot at 

 Winslow and Horwood had ' all liberties, pleas of replevin, and the return of 

 writs,' and the earl of Cornwall had the same franchises in the manors of the 

 honour of Wallingford, but in the honour of GifFard the return of writs was 

 not granted, and thus the sheriff and his officers were not excluded from the 

 carl of Gloucester's lands. 



At Fawley William de Valence held all the pleas belonging to the 

 sheriff, and the abbot of Westminster held the manor of Denham with ' all 

 liberties and regalia ' by charter. 



The great majority of lords did not possess the important franchises, but 

 a view of frankpledge was held so universally that at one time it must have 

 been regarded as a manorial right rather than as a royal jurisdiction. At the 

 same time, however, small payments were made by some lords for this right 

 to the sheriff or bailiff of the hundred. 



The feudal lords held the view of frankpledge for their men, with- 

 drawing their suit from the sheriff's view, and making their manorial court 

 a court for the presentment of offences against the peace. The jury of 

 twelve freeholders was continually dispensed with ; probably on many 

 manors it could not be obtained, but in spite of this the lord still held 

 his view. Thus at Kingsey, Cippenham, and Eton, for instance, in the 

 fourteenth century only the tithing-men made presentments. On the other 

 hand, in the Fawley courts, the twelve free jurors were regularly called 



u Plac. de Quo tTarranto for Bucb. " HtaiJ. R. (Rcc. Com.), i. 



2 41 6 



