excerpt (p. 1)
In our last publication in the History of Cradley series, we transcribed the surviving wills and inventories of Cradley people living in the 16th and 17th centuries.

We now examine another source of largely unpublished material that is available to us from this period, namely the Court Rolls of the Manor of Cradley.

In this book we cover the rolls for the years 1519 to 1558 when the St Leger family held the manor. In the court rolls the name St Leger is spelt in a variety of ways.

From hereon we shall use the most common medieval spelling, Seyntleger. It is our intention in our next volume to cover the rolls from 1565 to 1643 when the manor passed into the hands of the Lyttleton family.

This document begins with a brief description of the origin of the manor courts, the sort of business that came under their jurisdiction and the way it was recorded.

We then record the Cradley Court Rolls that are still in existence and their location.

Next we outline brief details of the lords of Cradley Manor from 1485 to 1564.

There follows a detailed analysis of the earliest Cradley rolls up to the year 1558. This is illustrated on page 72 with a reconstructed map showing the main features of Cradley in Tudor times. Finally, we have produced a transcription of each available document.

excerpt (p. 2)
The earliest surviving manor court roll in this country dates from 1264. The earliest document we have for Cradley is 1339, written on the back of a Halesowen Court Roll, but, unlike Halesowen, no further rolls have survived until 1519. We are fortunate that Cradley is one of only 20% of English manors that have surviving 16th century court rolls. There are rolls from 1519 to 1558, two for 1565, then a run from 1569 to 1596. A gap until 1609 is probably due to violent disputes within the Lyttleton family that produced chaos in this area around this time. The court rolls resume in 1609 until 1643. The are all preserved in the Hagley Hall papers at Birmingham Library, where they were deposited by the Lyttletons for safekeeping following a fire at Hagley Hall in 1925. The City of Birmingham purchased them from Lord Cobham for £100,000 in the 1980's, thus ensuring their location in this country.

In addition there are also a number of extracts from court rolls. There are two books of extracts recording some land transactions that took place between 1503 and 1562. A third book contains extracts from 1622 to 1626. In a legal dispute between Thomas Lyttleton and the customary tenants of Cradley that was heard in Chancery in 1630, some extracts from court rolls dating from 1344 to 1592 were used a evidence in the hearing.

Later court rolls, covering the years 1716 to 1850, are held at Worcestershire Record Office. These rolls deal only with land transfers as the other functions of the manor court had been taken over by bodies such as Quarter Sessions.

excerpt (p. 4)
Another list gives the names of those who had failed to attend without providing an essoin. They were said to be in default of court and were required to pay a penalty of 2d each. These were often people who held land in Cradley and therefore had a duty to attend the court, but who lived outside the manor. For example the name of Robert Cokerell appears regularly from 1523 to 1547 as a non-attender. He came to court in March 1522 to receive land in Cradley through an inheritance of his wife, Katrina, and is described as being "of London".

excerpt (p. 8)
[...] The post of ale-taster was coveted as it involved checking the quality of beer and ale for sale by personal consumption. Ale and beer were the most common beverages. They provided nutritious drinks that were far healthier than un-boiled water. However, as ale did not keep for more than a few days before going sour, fresh supplies were constantly needed. [...]

excerpt (p. 8)
The names of any who were annoying or disturbing their neighbours were presented in court. These included those who reprimanded, reviled and scolded their neighbours, those who carried false stories and spied suspiciously.
They were mainly women and included Agnes Hipkis (October 1527), Joyce Hay (May 1534), Elizabeth Perks, Dorothy Mansell and Margaret Chyltren (October 1545) and Elizabeth Bell (October 1557). Elizabeth Perks was a persistent offender and on one occasion her son Edmund was also presented for carrying false stories (March 1556).

excerpt (p. 13)
All tenants were obliged to ensure that their holdings were properly fenced and closes made when required so that others would not suffer through their neglect.

It would appear that not all tenants were conscientious in their duties, as in March 1522 the jurors petitioned that the bailiff and four jurors should make sure that court orders were being carried out.
John Hort (March 1550) was presented for "not repairing nor making lawful closes outside the lord's park as here ordered." The park was rigorously protected from trespassers and straying animals.

Penalties were incurred for encroaching on to a neighbour's land. Richard Wall "had his fence near Polecroft beyond the right course" (October 1526). William Wall's hedges overhung his neighbours land and "he destroyed his neighbour's meadow by his carriage" (April 1542).

excerpt (p. 16)
On the death of a tenant it was the custom for the lord to receive the best beast of the deceased or its monetary equivalent. This practice originated from the time when the lord issued cattle, particularly plough oxen, to the tenants and when a tenant died the land and animals were taken back into the lord's own hands and re-issued as he though fit. Heriots ranged from a sheep, price 12d (March 1547) through various cattle and oxen to the most expensive bay horse of John Forest, chaplain (March 1525) and grey horse of William Wall, price 14s (June 1556).

excerpt (p. 19)
23rd June 1339 Court Roll of Cradley (BRL ref. 346288)

Before giving a transcription of the court rolls from 1519 - 1558, we first include a single surviving roll from the year 1339. The reason for its preservation is that it was written on the back of a court roll for Halesowen dated 7th April 1339. As can be seen from the photograph, the document is stained and faded, but we give the original Latin text with a line by line translation.

Court Roll, 23rd June 1339

First line:	Curia de Credyle tenta die mecurii proxima ante festum nativitatis Sancti Johannis Baptiste anno regni regis Ed III a conquestum xiij.
Second line:	Johannes Orm decessi. Tenute de domino unum messuagium et una virgata terre per serviis quattuor solidi redditus per annum.
Third line:	Domino habet ibi nomine herietti precapali unam equam pretium ijs vjd bonae pretium iiijs modo venit Rob filius he-
Fourth line:	-res ipsius Johannes. Dat domino per relevio iiijs. Plegii Rob de Chilton. Rog filius Thomas. Fecit feodelitatum.
Fifth line:	Relevio iiijs
Sixth line:	Herietum vs vjd

Translation:

First line:	Court of Cradley held the nearest Wednesday before the feast of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist the thirteenth year of the reign of King Edward III after the conquest.
Second line:	John Orm deceased. He held of the lord one messuage and one virgate of land for services four shillings rent a year
Third line:	The lord has then in the name of heriot received in advance one horse price 2s 6d goods price 3s. Now came Robert son and he-
Fourth line:	-ir of the same John. He gives the lord for relief 4s. Pledges Robert of Chilton and Roger son of Thomas. He has done fealty.
Fifth line:	Relief 4s
Sixth line:	Heriot 5s 6d

The lord of the manor is not named in the opening sentence, contrary to the normal practice. Joan de Bottetourt was lady of the manor of Cradley from 1321 until her death in 1338. Her son, John, was 20 years old at the time of her death, so custody of her estates was given to a kinswoman, Elenor Beaumont, for one year until John reached the age of majority.

The roll records the decease of John Orm and the name of the new tenant, Robert, his son and heir. The payment of relief rather than a fine indicates that this was a freehold tenancy. Pledges were offered as a surety that the money would be paid when the land was issued. Surnames were only just beginning to come into general use. They commonly referred to a parent's name or a place. Shelton Lane probably derived from the name Chilton.

excerpt (p. 34)
View of frankpledge with Great Court held there Friday 7th day of November, 25th year of the reign of Henry VIII.

12 there sworn: Robert Mansell, Robert Wall, John Halmore, William Wall, Thomas Perks, William Darby, Thomas Wall, William Forrest, John Sergeant, William Hill, William Knowles, Richard Hill.

Which true sworn and charged say on their oath that Nicholas Hacket (2d), Edward Roe (2d), Thomas Briggs (2d), Robert Cokerel (2d), Henry Osborn (2d) owe suit of court and made default and therefore each of them in mercy.

Likewise they present that William Darby (2d) the miller there receives excessive tolls, therefore in mercy.
Likewise they present that Edward Selner (2d) made an attack on Joyce Hay and is therefore in mercy. Likewise they present that the aforesaid Joyce (2d) rebuked and spoke badly to the aforesaid Edward with words of criticism, therefore she is in mercy.
They present that Richard Hay (2d) and Henry Shepperd (2d) brewed ale and broke the assize. Therefore each of them is in mercy.

Elected Thomas Mansell constable and sworn. Elected Thomas Wall bailiff and sworn. Elected John Rowley ale taster and sworn for this year.
Assessors: John Halmore & Thomas Wall. Sworn.

excerpt (p. 46)
View of frankpledge with court there 29th day of March 35th year of the reign of Henry VIII, by grace of God of England, France and Ireland King, defender of the faith and on earth supreme head of the English and Irish church, before Henry Stafford first born Henry Lord Stafford, deputy steward of the said Lord Stafford, Thomas Holte esquire, Thomas Langhorne [...] John Seyntleger and others more.

Richard Osborn, Robert Hill, John Sergeant, Thomas Wall are essoined.

12 tenants for the Lord King: John Halmore, Robert Wall, William Wall, William Mansell sen., William Darby, William Mansell jun., William Hill, William Knowles, John Mansell, Anthony Wall, William Perks, John Smyth, John Rowley.

Who say and present on their oath that Robert Reynolds (2d), Robert Cokerel (2d), Thomas Briggs (2d), Nicholas Hacket (2d) are suitors and made default, therefore each in mercy.

Likewise they present that Nicholas Williams (2d) assaulted John Halmore & the aforesaid John (6d) assaulted the same Nicholas & drew blood from him.
And that Richard Smith (6d) & Humphrey Hill (6d) assaulted neighbours & drew blood of their neighbours on another with a buckle price 1d and with a tool called a spade price 1d. Likewise that Thomas Adenbroke (6d), William Mansell senior (6d), Agnes Smyth (6d), John Mansell of the Green (6d), Robert Hill senior (6d), Thomas Wall (6d), Richard Knowles (6d) each not made their gaps as here ordered, and each of them in mercy.
And that John Mansell (4d) brewed & broke the assize, therefore himself in mercy.
And that Henry Swynton (2d) & Elizabeth Perks (4d) broke their neighbours' hedges, therefore in mercy.

And that William Darby (2d) is the miller there and takes excessive tolls, therefore in mercy. William Darby (2d) has not yoked his pig, therefore in mercy. Richard Knowles (2d) by advice. Assessors: William Mansell & William Darby sworn.

excerpt (p. 52)
Small Court of John Sentleger, knight, lord of the manor of Cradley, held there Thursday in the close of Easter week in the 3rd year of the reign of King Edward VI by grace of God King of England, France & Ireland, defender of the faith, and on earth supreme head of the English & Irish church.

To this court came Thomas Whyle & Agnes his wife in their own persons and arraigned themselves against William Darby in a plea of land, namely one messuage, forty acres of land, forty acres of pasture & 3 acres of meadow with its appurtenances in Oldnall within the manor of Cradley within the jurisdiction of this court. And made protestation following their aforesaid complaint in nature and form of writ to the lord King of right to proceed [with a] common law petition and thence to them [illegible]
And the aforesaid plaintiffs in their own persons say that a certain Philip Lydyat was seised of the aforesaid messuage, 40 acres of land, 40 acres of pasture & 3 acres of meadow with their appurtenances in the demesne as of enfeoffment and right at the will of the lord, according to the custom of the manor of Cradley aforesaid in peace time time of the Lord King Henry VII formerly King of England, head there [...] etc and within 60 years last elapsed etc. And from him, Philip descended the right to the messuage and holding aforesaid with its appurtenances to the aforesaid Agnes as blood and heir of him, Philip, namely, daughter of John, son of Thomas, son of John, son & heir of Philip. And that [...]. Therefore it is ordered that Anthony Wall, deputy bailiff there summon, by a good summons, the aforesaid William Darby also that he appear at next small court there held, namely Thursday 16th May, year as above.
As indeed they say the aforesaid court bailiff preserve by direct force of a document indeed the order summoned by good summons the aforesaid William Darby and land. And the aforesaid William Darby has been charged and does not appear and makes essoin by the bailiff in the aforesaid plea in this against William Darby essoin, against plaintiffs in the aforesaid plea.
And to the court there held from then next following, namely Thursday etc the aforesaid plaintiffs have been charged and come and [...] against the said William Darby in the aforesaid plea. To which court the aforesaid William Darby was charged and in their own persons appear and petition for a day between independent right of possession at the next small court there from then next following, namely Thursday 2nd January, year as above if they cannot come to an agreement in 3 weeks time].

excerpt (p. 64)
In addition to the full court rolls there are also some extracts. It was not unusual for such collections to be drawn up containing information from earlier court rolls that might be useful for future reference. This saved the bother of consulting a mass of individual documents. We have located, and include here, three sets of extracts.

excerpt (p. 72)
This is our reconstruction of the manor showing the location of places mentioned in the court rolls. We have used additional information from later documents such as property deeds, the 1782 survey of Cradley and other maps.