ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. 87

The feoffment recited in this deed still remains in Lord Scarsdale's possesbiun ; but it is of thirty-fuur, and not of forty, acres of land, and they arc set out by metes ami bounds, and instead of " ex dimissione," it is "ex dono et feoffamento, Ade de Meygnill," and the laud is to be held "ad fo^saudum claudendum ct omnibus teniponbus anui iuclusas tenendum." This shows that the inclosure was to be made by William de Irton. The last deed, which was executed between 1100 and 1135, may interest some persons, as it is, perhaps, the oldest deed in existence that was executed by a Byron. Its form is remarkable. The deed shows tliat Henry, the son of Fulcher, held a fief or parcel of land in Weston of Roger de Buron by fealty and a certain rent, and that Roger released Henry from five shil- lings a year of tliat rent, so that (ut) he shall pay these five shillings to the Canons of Derby. Wiiether tliese words created a condition, so that Henry would not be released fium the j)ayment to Roger unless he paid the rent to the Canons, may well be doubted ; for it is expressly laid down that the conjunction ut, with a verb following, is not a condition/ Again, the deed says that Henry shall do fealty to the Canons ; but the Canons had no interest in the fief or the rent issuing out of it, for there is no grant of cither to them, and therefore fealty could not be due to them. The "Cestria" here mentioned was probably a manor close to Derby, now c;lled Little Chester, where there was a Roman camp. It may be inferred from the direction of this deed that it was executed at a time when a Great Council was held at Nottingham. At the time of the Domesday Survey, Ralph de Burun held tlie manor of Weston and four otlier manors in Derbysliire, and he was probably the father of the Rogjc who executed this deed ; but Collins gives the name of Hugh to the sju and grandson of Ralph ; ■" Collins' statement is that to the Ralph of Domesday " sue 'ceded Hugh de Buron, who in the 9th of Stephen, together with Hugh his son and heir, gave to Lenton Abbey the church of Oscinton, about which there was a dispute in the 7th Richard I. with the prior of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, when the prior of Lenton produced the grant of the said Hugh, and the prior of the Hospital of St. John that of Roger de Buron, by which he gave to that house the town of Oscinton, with the appurtenances, whereupon no judgment was given, because the prior of Lenton's attorney knew not whether he should put his case to an issue before he had his client's direction." Now I observe, 1. That the deed of Hugh is after our deed, and after the time of Hen. I. 2. The deed of Roger could be no answer to that deed, unless it was executed before the deed of Hugh, and whilst Hugh owned the estate. It, therefore, shows that Roger was seised in fee before Hugh, and the only way that coidd bo would be that he succeeded as heir to Ralpli, and was either the elder brother or the father of Hugh. It seems, however, that the record on which Collins relics, as stated l)y himself, proves the contrary. He says there was a dispute between the

• Dyer, 133 (6). Rot. xi., Prior of St. John of Jerusalem'a
• See Placita apud Westm. A. 7 R. !■ case.