THE OBLIGATION OF ATTENDANCE 201
and various methods were used to ensure this. On some manors
the date of the next court was known before the court then sitting
was adjourned:1 on others it was always held on a definite day,
as at Forncett and elsewhere.2 In such cases no warning appears
to have been necessary, unless, as we learn from an early seven-
teenth-century cartulary, the day of the court was altered. When
this \vas necessary on the manors of the lordship of Gower eight
days' warning had to be given.3 In general, however, there seems
to have been a good deal of variation, but here we must again
remember that the majority of our records concern the manors of
great lords or corporations. It is probable that smaller lords who
held their own courts in person found it convenient to hold them
on a given day. On the other hand, lords who were forced to use
deputies had to consider the most economical way of proceeding,
and hence their courts were not held with the same regularity.
The best they can do is to give "reasonable summons*', or three
days' notice,4 or even only one day or one night's warning.5 The
full harshness of the lord's will is shown on a Gloucester Abbey
manor, where the serf is bound to appear on the morrow, even if
he is not warned until the middle of the night.6
Bond and free were not always treated the same in this respect.
The free man was much more difficult to control, and the rule
seems to have been that if the lord wanted service of court he had
to say so definitely when he granted the land. Bracton lays it
down that
in the absence of special stipulation the tenant is bound to attend his
Lord's court for what are considered matters of royal concern, but
only for those: he is bound to attend when a writ of right is to be tried,
when a thief is to be judged, or when there is any business which
touches the King's peace___But if the Lord wants more suit than
this, if for example he wishes that his tenant should do suit from three
weeks to three weeks, he must expressly bargain for it.7
The Statute of Marlborough (1267) finally settled the matter:
1 Hales Rolls, 342, 521, 534.
2 Davenport, op. cit. LXIX; Abbots Langley, passim; (Clare) C.R. 171/45;
(Claret) C.R. 171/48.
3 Gotuer Surveys, 184; cf. 172, 300 op. cit.
4 Ramsey Cart, m, 62; Blount, op. cit. 304.
5 Mon. Exon. 2546; Page, op. cit. 9.
6 Glouc. Cart, m, 208.
7 Selden Soc. n, xlviii, quoting Bracton, f. 35, 35 bt 37.