Page:English Historical Review Volume 35.djvu/196

188 BARONY AND THANAOE April 1215 their claim was admitted.^ Then in 1297 the men of Cumberland and Westmorland wrung from Edward I an admission that their service was only to meet the king on his march to Scotland at the Rerecross on Stanemoor and go in his vanguard as far as the march of Solway, and on his return in the rearguard from Solway to the Rerecross.^ Thus limited, the service might well be called ' endmot ', the march-meeting ; but as the service of going to the border against the Scots was not restricted to the march shires but was required of all landholders north of the Trent, even from customary tenants as the condition of their tenant-right down to the seventeenth century,^ * endmot ' must in that case have been neither more nor less than the general service in the fyrd required by English law from every freeman. There is, however, some ground for thinking that ' endmot ' was really a special service required only from some landholders. The definition of their service given by the cornage tenants-in- chief reminds us forcibly of the service required of the Hereford men, who, according to Domesday, were bound both to attend shiremoot and hundred when summoned, and to go with the sheriff into Wales at his precept. ' When the army advances against the enemy these by custom form the vanguard and in returning the rearguard.' * Certainly, John de Reigny, who held Newton of the king by cornage, suit of court, and ' endmot ', going at the king's precept in the army of Scotland with a hauberk, had to find for the king an armed horseman to go in the army has- these words : ' Omnes supradicti tenentes per comagium ibunt ad preceptum domini Regis in exercitu Scotie, in eundo in anteguarda et redeundo in retroguarda ' (Testa de Nevill, iL 699). ' When service was called for against Fulkes de Breautd in 1224, the sheri£f of Cumberland was forbidden to distrain on Richard de Levington, since he did not hold of the king in chief by military service but by cornage (Maitland, vbi supra, p. 629). ' Bain, ii, no. 899 ; iii, no. 716. Similar admissions were made to the men of Northumberland in 1303 (Cal. of Pal. Rolls, 1301-7, p. 101), to the men of Durham in 1317 (Rot. Scot. i. 169), and to the whole country in 1327 (1 Edward III, st. 2). It does not follow that the claim was a sound one. ' ' The customary tenants of the earls ' of Northumberland and Westmorland 'in all the counties of Cumberland, Westmorland, Northumberland, York, and the bishopric of Durham have in all the ancient grants and copies, to hold to them and their heirs according to the custom of the honor of Cokermouth ', that is to say, ' by copy of court roll . . . doing suit to the lord's court, service by himself and all his family to the borders when necessity shall require, and paying his fine at the lord's will after the death, alienation, or exchange of any lord or tenant ' (Humberstori' s Survey). ♦ Domesday Book, i. 179 : ' Similiter emendat qui iussus a uicecomite seciun ire in Walls non pergit. Nam si uicecomes non uadit nemo eorum ibit. Cum exercitus in hostem pergit, ipsi per consuetudinem faciunt Auantwarde et in reuersione Redre- warde.' Compare with one of the ancient laws of Wales which in the Venedotian Code (c. 7) runs thus : ' The king is not to lead hosts out of the country except once a year, and then not to continue more than six weeks. In his own country he is free to have hosts when he will.' In the Demetian Code (c. 6) the same law runs thus : ' Once a year the king is to have hosts along with him into a border country ; always, however, when it may be necessary, a host is to attend him in his own country.' t