50 THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE SEA 



Richard Bush against " Reyner Grymaus," complaining of 

 goods having been taken from a ship going from Winchelsea 

 to Dieppe, in August 1301, by Michel de Navare and others of 

 Calais, who took the goods thither and disposed of them. The 

 "chevalier" denied this, and asserted he was "not in that 

 country " at the time specified nor for nearly a year afterwards, 

 and in the " rejoinder " note was taken of the answer " that he 

 was not admiral till some time after the events specified." The 

 eighth complaint refers to the seizure of goods from a ship 

 going from Berwick to London in August 1303, off Blakeney, 

 " by men from Calais." In reply John (Pederogh) says the de- 

 mand concerns " mi sire Reniers de Grimaus " only, for he was 

 then admiral, and said John was on shore at the date specified, 

 and was only in the company of Reniers in Zealand and 

 Holland. The twelfth complaint declares that the ship Michele 

 de Arwe, from London to Brabant, with a cargo valued at 

 556, was seized " on the high seas " by Sire Reyner Grimbaud, 

 admiral, in September 1303, taken to Normandy, and the crew 

 sent to Calais and imprisoned. In reply the " chivaler " con- 

 fesses he took such a ship, and seized it rightfully, as it was 

 consorting with the enemies of France ; and in response to the 

 demand of one of the crew still in prison at Calais, he says he 

 is there as a malefactor against the King of France, and that 

 the commission of the deputies does not extend to such cases. 

 The fourteenth complaint is by John de Chelchethe against 

 Reyner de Grymaus, and John Pedrogh replies "as he did to 

 William Servat," the latter name not occurring elsewhere in 

 the record, a circumstance which points to these libels being 

 only part of those brought before the commissioners. 



It is to be noted that, with the exception of the Michele 

 de Arwe above mentioned, which was taken "on the high 

 seas," an elastic term, all the ships were attacked near the 

 English coast, and well within what may be called the sea of 

 England, or the waters included in the King's Chambers in 

 1604, where the jurisdiction of the English Admiralty un- 

 doubtedly extended. In all cases, moreover, the goods seized 

 belonged to Englishmen, though some of the ships were 

 foreign. 



Too much importance appears to have been attached to the 

 roll De Superioritate. It furnishes no proof, or even reason- 



