NOTES AND QUERIES. D>* s. XIL JULY 25, 1903.
Ifroin that time I have kept note of everything
relating to the subject which has come to my
knowledge. I have also an almost complete
collection of drawings and photographs of
IJondon sculptured signs, and I would gladly
at any time have revised my writings, from
mere love of the subject. In 1897, however,
without my being in any way consulted, or
even made aware of the fact, except by
casually seeing advertisements, the book was
reissued at a cheaper price as one of the
"Antiquary's Library," with no indication
that it had been written four years previously.
It was generally considered by the reviewers
to be a new work, and some of them blamed
me for imaginary carelessness in ignoring
recent changes. I think I was even scolded
for not mentioning a sculptured sign which
I had just then discovered in a tradesman's
back yard, and which is now at the Guildhall
Museum. I have made the foregoing remarks
without any wish to impute blame to the
publisher who would say, no doubt, that in
its original form the book sold badly but
because, for the sake of my own reputation, I
wish the facts to be placed on record.
PHILIP NORMAN.
ANCIENT DEMESNE OR CORNWALL FEE (9 th S. x. 443 ; xi. 153, 210, 449). It is clear from the extracts quoted by Miss LEGA-WEEKES that the South Tawton folk at various times not only asserted that South Tawton was ancient demesne, but also successfully claimed the privileges of ancient demesne. All the same, the evidence of Domesday is against them, and Miss LEGA-WEEKES "appears to have herself confounded the king's demesne, otherwise known as the lands of the earls, with ancient demesne. The Exeter Domes- day first gives a list of ancient demesnes u,nder the heading * Dominicatus Regis ad Regnum pertinens in Devenescira,' and amongst these occurs a Tawton, which is North Tawton. Then follow the Crown lands set apart for the service of the royal family and the earls, headed ' Dominicatus Regis in Devenesira,' and among the latter is a Tawton, which, as Miss LEGA-WEEKES says, is indis- putably South Tawton. The latter group of royal estates are rearranged in the Exchequer book, Githa's, Queen Eddida's, Earl Harold's, Earl Lewin's estates, &c., being sorted out ; but it is in this latter group, not among ancient demesnes, that South Tawton occurs.
Izacke, in his ' Memorials of the City, of Exeter,' p. 19, quotes an exemplification under the Great Seal, dated 3 Feb., 39 Ed. III., which recites : " It appears from the book of Domesday ' remaining in the Exchequer that Exeter fair belonged wholly to the Com-
monalty of the City.' " Nothing of the kind
appears in Domesday. A market is only
twice mentioned in Devonshire viz., at
Otterton and Okehampton, and never a fair,
and there is no mention of either at Exeter.
Again, shortly after the year 1280, as appears from the Hundred Rolls, No. 9, p. 67 :
" Emma de Hochesham came before the barons of the Exchequer, and, in the name of her son, prayed for the Hundred of Budleigh as held in socage, and invited an investigation of Domesday, and it was found that the king had granted it to be held at will."
In Domesday there is not a word about any grant of Budleigh, but it is described among ancient demesnes.
It is evident that in both these cases the examination must have been most perfunc- tory, if, indeed, it was ever held at all. If such astounding assertions could be made in official documents, purporting to be extracted from Domesday, one can readily understand that the mere fact of a Tawton appearing among royal estates was taken to be sufficient evidence of its being ancient demesne, or the Tawton which was ancient demesne viz., North Tawton was taken to be South Tawton without further inquiry.
May I point out that the words " Hec xix. maneria fuerunt in Dominis Regis Ed- wardi et pertinent ad regem" occur at the end of the ancient demesnes, and refer to them, not to what follow 1
OSWALD J. REICHEL.
Of my evidence in favour of the claim of South Tawton to rank as ancient demesne, one piece is, I find, faulty, and I withdraw it with an apology for my misinterpretation.
The heading "Hec xix. maneria fuerunt in D'nis Regis Ed wardi & p'tinen' ad rege' " applies, MR. REICHEL tells me, to the pre- ceding and not to the succeeding ones. I had reckoned the former as about twenty- four, I think, or more if including subsidiary manors ; but Sir Frederick Pollock explains to me that " the names entered with ' rex tenet,' not counting the boroughs of Barn- staple and Sidford, do amount to nineteen." He says also :
" If the rolls you quote certainly refer to S. T. [they indubitably do. E. L.-W.], that manor was reputed to be ancient demesne in the reign of Edward I. ; nevertheless its description in D.B. does not answer the legal definition, as it was not in King Edward's hand. I do not doubt that many claims to hold in ancient demesne were made in many parts of the country without adequate proof."
The explanation of the persistent description of South Tawton as " ancient demesne " must be, I should think, as MR. REICHEL has sug-
