The feoffment recited in this deed still remains in Lord Scarsdale's possesion; but it is of thirty-four, and not of forty, acres of land, and they are set out by metes and bounds, and instead of "ex dimissione," it is "ex dono et feoffamento, Ade de Meygnill," and the land is to be held "ad fossaudum claudendum et omnibus teniponbus anui iuclusas tenendum." This shows that the inclosure was to be made by William de Irton.
The last deed, which was executed between 1100 and 1135, may interest some persons, as it is, perhaps, the oldest deed in existence that was executed by a Byron.
Its form is remarkable. The deed shows that Henry, the son of Fulcher, held a fief or parcel of land in Weston of Roger de Buron by fealty and a certain rent, and that Roger released Henry from five shillings a year of that rent, so that (ut) he shall pay these five shillings to the Canons of Derby. Whether these words created a condition, so that Henry would not be released from the payment to Roger unless he paid the rent to the Canons, may well be doubted; for it is expressly laid down that the conjunction ut, with a verb following, is not a condition.[1]
Again, the deed says that Henry shall do fealty to the Canons ; but the Canons had no interest in the fief or the rent issuing out of it, for there is no grant of either to them, and therefore fealty could not be due to them.
The "Cestria" here mentioned was probably a manor close to Derby, now called Little Chester, where there was a Roman camp. It may be inferred from the direction of this deed that it was executed at a time when a Great Council was held at Nottingham. At the time of the Domesday Survey, Ralph de Burun held the manor of Weston and four other manors in Derbyshire, and he was probably the father of the Roger who executed this deed ; but Collins gives the name of Hugh to the son and grandson of Ralph:[2]
Collins' statement is that to the Ralph of Domesday "succeded Hugh de Buron, who in the 9th of Stephen, together with Hugh his son and heir, gave to Lenton Abbey the church of Oscinton, about which there was a dispute in the 7th Richard I. with the prior of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, when the prior of Lenton produced the grant of the said Hugh, and the prior of the Hospital of St. John that of Roger de Buron, by which he gave to that house the town of Oscinton, with the appurtenances, whereupon no judgment was given, because the prior of Lenton's attorney knew not whether he should put his case to an issue before he had his client's direction."
Now I observe, 1. That the deed of Hugh is after our deed, and after the time of Hen. I.
2. The deed of Roger could be no answer to that deed, unless it was executed before the deed of Hugh, and whilst Hugh owned the estate. It, therefore, shows that Roger was seised in fee before Hugh, and the only way that could be would be that he succeeded as heir to Ralph, and was either the elder brother or the father of Hugh.
It seems, however, that the record on which Collins relics, as stated by himself, proves the contrary. He says there was a dispute between the
