a great local reputation for craft and low cunning, and together they manufactured title-deeds and invented a likely story, but Sir Humfry stood out for his rights. And so in October of 1194, Sir Humfry and Sir Ralf had a lawsuit at the assize of Nor wich. Sir Ralf, Isaac and their fellow conspira tor " Ralf, son of Alfred," came into court, produced their forged deeds, swore their false oaths, and the jury listened, and after the fashion of the day, told what they them selves knew of the case. Now Jurnet saw how matters stood, and came to the rescue of Sir Humfry, for he knew the statute which the king lately had enacted. "Omnia debita et vadia Judaeorum imbrevientur, terrae, domus, redditus, et possessiones . . . et cartae praestitorum fiant in modium cirograffi. Et altera pars remaneat Judaeo, sigillata sigillo illius cui pecunia traditur; et altera pars remaneat in area communi in qua sunt tres serrurae, unde duo Christiani habeant unam clavem, et duo Judaei unam et clericus Willelmi de Sanctae Mariae Ecclesia et Magistri Willelmi de Chimilli habeant tertiam; . . . et de cretero nullum net praestitum, nulla Judseis net solutio, nulla net cartarum mutatio, nisi coram praedictio vel majori parte, si omnes interesse nequiverint. . . ." "All the debts, pledges, mortgages, lands, houses, rentes, and possessions of the Jews shall be registered . . . and charters shall be made of their contracts by way of inden ture. And one part of the indenture shall remain with the Jew, sealed with the seal of him, to whom the money is lent, and the other part shall remain in the common chest; wherein shall be three locks and two Christians shall hold one key, and two Jews another, and the clerks of William of the Church of St. Mary and of William of Chi milli shall keep the third . . . and from henceforth no contracts shall be made with, nor payment made to, the Jews, nor any

alterations made in the charters except be fore the said persons or the greater part of them, if all of them cannot be present." So Jurnet called into court as a witness one of these bailiffs or keepers of the Jewish records, who testified that there were no such deeds as Sir Ralf and Isaac claimed, but that Sir Humfry had his land clear of the claims of any Jew, or the grantee of any Jew, save only the claims which Jurnet himself and his family had upon them. The court record is clear. "Ralf de Erlham and Ralf son of Alfred unjustly disseissined Humfry de Erlham of his free tenement in Herlham, . . . and they (that is the two Ralfs) say that they have not disseissined him since they have a certain mill, which the jury had visited, from Isaac the Jew to farm, . . . and the bailiff of the Jews showed a certain charter in which it was contained that the same Humfry had pledged his whole land of Herlham to Jurnet the Jew and Miryld his wife, and Isaac his son for five shillings principal and one penny every week for interest from the time Walter de Custances was hallowed Bishop of Worcester, and for that reason he had delivered that will to the aforesaid Ralf de Herlham." Then the jury, like any honest jury, ren dered a verdict for Sir Humfry, but Sir Ralf appealed the case. We do not know just how matters were settled between the brothers, but we believe they dragged on for several years until at last Sir Humfry became disgusted with the whole proceedings and made up his mind that he was unfit for business, and that it would be better for him to travel. We find that in the year 1199 they compromised the suit, and Sir Humfry sold all his inheritance in Erlham to Sir Ralf for "one hundred shillings paid to Humfry for his pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and a settlement on Miryld, daughter of Humfry, who escheated her lands by marrying Jurnet the Jew." So Lady Miryld came into her own again.