(1) Encroachments

These are mentioned in various forms but generally concern a trespass on the Lord's waste. They are noted in a number of ways e.g., "an encroachment", "an encroachment on the Lord's waste", "detaining part of this manor paying no acknowledgement to Lord or tenant" or "an encroachment by enclosing a part of the waste ground belonging to the manor of Wrington". In 1739 Edward and Thomas Ford were brought before the Court for obtaining a piece of land belonging to the Lord of the Manor lying in Arthur's Meadow, and paying no rent for it. Penalties usually varied from 5s. to 10s. each offence, although in 1739 Paul Hill was told to pull down encroachments upon the tenants' common, on penalty of £5 if it was not done by Christmas next.

(2) Highways, Hedges and Watercourses

The maintenance and repair of highways and farm-tracks kept the courts perpetually busy. Places are described, though usually with reference to owners which makes them difficult to identify today. Penalties range from about 10s. to 40s. Sample entries are :

1733: " John Hailstone to showl up the soil lying in the way between his Leas
            and Mr. John Inmans orchard".

1733: The way to be cleansed from the Cross to Mr. Dyers corner of his house
          and the Market Place to be done every month under a penalty of 5s.
          each offence by the "present Bayliff of the Market".

1739: Mrs. Lowle gives her evidence concerning a way leading from Aldwick to
          Wrington. She says she remembers the way "sixty years", and that it was
         no other than a halter-way; her husband used it for carrying timber.

1741: "We present Samuel Brean to put up another bridge between the two
           garstons two foot wide in ten days under the penalty of one pound".

1741 : "We present Mr. Rains to put up a lane and bridge between Whatley
             Mead and Broadmead before the 20th Nov. next under penalty of one
             pound".

The need to cut back overgrown hedges is obviously a side-line on maintaining the roads.

1733: Two men named and presented to cut up the two brakes near Lye Cross.
1747: "We present Mr. Richard Parsley and Nicholas Walker to make or cut
            their hedges in Neat's lane to be done in a month's time under penalty
            of 10s. each as presented last year".

1747: "We present Thomas Organ senior and James Lovel to shear their hedges against
            Cop thorn Lane in three months, under penalty of 10s. each."

Commander Lawder notes that, in 1965, this lane is still impassable!

The court could also order the repairing of broken-down hedges :

1737: A party hedge: "Richard Parsley to make up his hedge lying against John
          Hills ground, and John HiIJ to make up his hedge lying against Richard Parsleys
          upper ridings".

!741: "We present Porter Thompson Esq. or occupier to have the hedge made from
           Rush Hill batch to the upper end of the ground by Xmas Day next
           under the penalty of one pound".

In 1738 a presentment is made of specific trees to be felled, detailing the tenants to do the jobs, the location of the trees, in one case the species of tree (a witchhazel), a time limit of 20 days in each case, and a penalty of 5s. each if the order is not carried out.

Watercourses, whether the River Yeo itself, or field ditches, had to be scoured by their tenants in order to prevent flooding :

1739: Charles Barnes and Sarah Brown are to put their flood-hatches in good
           repair by Christmas under penalty of a fine of £1 10s.

1739: The millers are ordered to "draw their waters in time of high water", on
           penalty of 20 shillings.

1740: "We continue the presentment of Richard Chapman to throw his ditch
            from the pool at his house leading down to the County bridge by Mid-
            summer next on the penalty of one pound".

1740: "We present Charles Barns to put his flood hatch at Perry bridge in good
            repair by Xmas next on a penalty of one pound ten shillings".

(3) Cutting of Fern

One of the ancient common rights which the courts seem to have been most concerned with preserving at this time is that of cutting fern as bedding for animals. Only those with the ancient manorial rights of common could do so, and the date - "not before sunrise on September 14th" - when cutting could commence is regularly laid down.

Before this deadline, the commoners could mark out their areas for cutting; but if they had not cut their piece by November , any commoner might cut it. Anyone who cut fern before dawn on 14th September was liable to a fine of 20s. "according to the custom of the manor". In October 1737 seven people are presented for "Cutting fern having no right of common" and each are fined 20s. One person is named for "cutting turf, fern, and furse and selling it off this manor having no right of common himself" and another for "cutting of fern and carrying it off on another lords manor". In each of these cases the penalty was 20s.

(4) Repairs to Buildings, etc.

The court had power to order the repair of buildings, both farm and residential, though as these are almost always identified only by their then owner, it is not often possible to identify them in the village now. Penalties varied enormously, from 5s. for barn repairs, to £50 for a house. The Mill House, together with another house, were presented as needing repair on 24th October 1737, and again on 28th July 1738, both times under a penalty of 20s. each: presumably nothing had been done. In 1739 there is a reference to the "Blew Bell", probably the Bell Inn, in existence until a few years ago, and now a garage in Broad Street.

1740. "We present Widow Dammas Snigg to thatch her house by Midsummer
            next on the penalty of ten shillings".

(5) Stocks and Pounds

The stocks and whipping post in Wrington were reported out of repair in 1747. The painting of Broad Street (see paper A Map of Wrington in 1738) shows the stocks outside the Old Rectory wall, next to the present bakery shop, and set on the edge of the pavement. Burrington, too, had its own stocks, which the tithing was ordered to repair in 1750, under penalty of 20s.

Each of the three tithings had a pound, in which the Hayward put stray animals: either to be reclaimed on payment of a fine, or to become the property of the lord. Wrington Pound was attached to the Manor House; Broadfield Pound has been identified as the long, narrow enclosure in front of Chancellor's Farm, and now incorporated in the farmyard. In 1737 the Lord of the Manor was requested to repair the pounds at Wrington and Burrington, as they were both very much out of repair. In 1737 at the Court Leet the presentment was made that the Pound at Wrington was to be mended and put in repair in ten days time. A cryptic marginal note reads "Don". But in 1750 the Lord of the Manor was again "humbly presented" to repair the Wrington Pound, from which group of persons had removed their sheep without leave, and were fined 5s. "Pound-breaking", as it was known, was a risky sport !

(6) Weights and Measures

In 1733, John Badman was ordered to find sufficient weights for the weigh house, suitable for use at the Market. In 1737 a presentment of short measure was made to the court by the Ale Tasters. Five names are listed, three residents of Wrington, and two from Broadfield. We are not told the judgement of the court! At the same court, the Lord of the Manor was humbly requested to find "standing (i.e. ,standard) weights and measures" for the officers "to walk (for 'work' ?) by".

(7) Nuisances

A variety of minor offences can be included under this head. No names are mentioned, but the presentment in each case was prefaced by the words " All those that. ..." In this connection we have presentments for the restraint of all those that "keep pigs about the streets", "who keep goods on Haviots Green", and "keep ducks two be annoyance in ye brook". Penalties varied from 5s. for the pigs and ducks, to 10s. for the goods on the Green. Certainly the 18th century painting of Broad Street previously referred to provides ample illustration of this offence !

(8) Behaviour

The courts could exercise control not only over unruly behaviour, but also over matters which now would be regarded as purely personal :

1733: Mr. William Pierce is presented for selling cider without a licence, and
           for "Keeping a disorderly house", penalty 10s.

1733: Three persons are cited for not frequenting some place of worship, under
           a penalty of 10s. each.

1739: Mention is made of four people fined 2s. 6d. each "for not attending
          Church on Sunday".

(9) The Lord of the Manor

Where others were summarily "presented" for their offences, the Lord, as has been already noted, is occasionally "humbly requested" to set something to rights. Other requests were also made to him on the occasion of the courts - it was, indeed, probably the only opportunity the villagers had to voice their collective opinion in public, with impunity.

1737: The Lord of the Manor was requested to go in procession according to custom, "his lordship and tenants being sufferers for want thereof". Is this perhaps a request to survey the manor and its bounds, which resulted in the making of the 1738-9 map ?

1738: The Court desires that the Lord of the Manor puts up Mere Stones, one at the head of Water Combe (the southwest corner of Blackdown) and the other at the Fox Hole (Reads Cavern). This too would appear to be associated with the map and survey then being made. See also the paper The Boundaries of the Manor of Wrington.

In 1738 a legal trial of strength appears to have occurred, the protagonists being two tenants in Burrington, and the Lord of the Manor (Rt. Hon. William Pultney, Esq.). William Purnell, one of the tenants, ultimately withdrew from the action and appears to have been followed by the other, John Dyer.

William Pultney was in no doubts where the right lay and says in a letter that he would not give any allowances for Law Charges as "whatever these may be have been caused in great measure by their own obstinacy and folly in this dispute, which hath put me, as well as themselves, to a great expense and trouble, without any possible hopes of success".

(10) Arbitrations

Disputes between two tenants, if not decided "according to custom" by the Jury in court, were often referred to an appointed panel of the jurors for further consideration, and a decision. In 1737 -8 there were these examples of the procedure :

(i) In 1737 the panel viewed a boundary and a tree in dispute between the Rev. Goddard and Mr. Totton; the verdict of the jury was that the tree was to be felled and divided: the body (trunk) to Mr. Goddard, the shroud (crown) to Mr. Totton. The tree was to be felled in equal cost to both parties within two months. The fences were to be reinstated at the same time. The penalty for non-compliance with the ruling of the court was to be 20s. each.

(ii) Five members of the Jury, being appointed to view a watercourse under dispute between two persons (one of whom was a juror!), adjudged "that according to equity and the custome of the mannor they ought to be at equal charges in throwing or cleansing the watercourse for the future".

(iii) The way to the Rector's property being under dispute, five members of the jury were chosen to view, and adjudged a right of way through a stated property.

These form good examples of the power of the jury to apply "the custom of the manor"-even in defence of the villager against the lord, if it were justified. Manorial custom or precedent, although in many ways it imposed on the ordinary villager, also offered him great security.

(11) Contracts for Tenancies

These are recorded by the court. The final deed would be entered on the finished court roll of business, and a copy of the entry handed to the tenant as his title deed; hence, "copyhold" tenure. The following tenancy contracts are drawn up in 1737-8:

(i) It was contracted with John Gibbs (apothecary) of Wrington, that he pay £172 for the fee simple and inheritance of a messuage or tenement and about 8 acres of land, claimed by William Thomas for his wife's life. To be conveyed to John Gibbs and his heirs clear of incumbrances together with the Lord's Rent and Heriot.

(A letter from William Thomas to John Gibbs states him to be most anxious to have Gibbs as his tenant upon almost any terms. He allows him half a year's rent from the executors of the late tenant to repair the house, agrees to discharge the Heriot when it occurs, but insists on Gibbs paying the Lord's Rent (7s. 0¾d. yearly), and all taxes and reparations, and requests the rent due to him to be paid half yearly. His letter ends "Mine and my spouses services attend you and yours".)

(ii) For the sum of £30 John Gibbs to have the reversion in fee after three lives (named), of all the house and garden in Wrington in possession of John Baldwin, conveyed to him and his heirs clear of incumbrances, together with the Lord's Rent and Heriot.

(iii) It was contracted with Thomas Hort, Yeoman that for £300 to be paid to Mr. Pulteney a leave was to be granted to him of a messuage or tenement of about 19 acres (late Joseph Hort's ?) for a term of 99 years under a yearly rent of 11 s. 5d. and heriot of best beast or best goods.

(iv) It was contracted with Samuel Hort, Yeoman, that for £60 he was to have a lease granted for a piece of ground called Goose Acre (about 5 acres), late Hugh Emery's, for a term of 99 years under a yearly rent of 3s. 7d.

The terms of these tenancies would have been laid down not by the jury, but by the Steward (and solicitor) Jarrit Smith.

MR. AND MRS. D. JAMES; COMMANDER AND MRS. P. B. LAWDER;

COLONEL AND MRS. J. M. LEE; MR. AND MRS. H. SMITH.