was succeeded by his only son, Edward
(1661-1724), as 3rd earl of Clarendon; and, the latter having no
surviving son, the title passed to Henry, 2nd earl of Rochester
(1672-1753), at whose death without male heirs it became extinct in the
Hyde line.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] _Hist. MSS. Comm.: MSS. of the Duke of Buccleuch_, ii. 31.

[2] _Correspondence and Diary_ (1828), ii. 286.

CLARENDON, CONSTITUTIONS OF, a body of English laws issued at Clarendon
in 1164, by which Henry II. endeavoured to settle the relations between
Church and State. Though they purported to declare the usages on the
subject which prevailed in the reign of Henry I. they were never
accepted by the clergy, and were formally renounced by the king at
Avranches in September 1172. Some of them, however, were in part at
least, as they all purported to be, declaratory of ancient usage and
remained in force after the royal renunciation. Of the sixteen
provisions the one which provoked the greatest opposition was that which
declared in effect that criminous clerks were to be summoned to the
king's court, and from there, after formal accusation and defence, sent
to the proper ecclesiastical court for trial. If found guilty they were
to be degraded and sent back to the king's court for punishment. Another
provision, which in spite of all opposition obtained a permanent place
in English law, declared that all suits even between clerk and clerk
concerning advowsons and presentations should be tried in the king's
court. By other provisions appeals to Rome without the licence of the
king were forbidden. None of the clergy were to leave the realm, nor
were the king's tenants-in-chief and ministers to be excommunicated or
their lands interdicted without the royal permission. Pleas of debt,
whether involving a question of good faith or not, were to be in the
jurisdiction of the king's courts. Two most interesting provisions, to
which the clergy offered no opposition, were: (1) if a dispute arose
between a clerk and a layman concerning a tenement which the clerk
claimed as free-alms (frankalmoign) and the layman as a lay-fee, it
should be determined by the recognition of twelve lawful men before the
king's justice whether it belonged to free-alms or lay-fee, and if it
were found to belong to free-alms then the plea was to be held in the
ecclesiastical court, but if to lay-fee, in the court of the king or of
one of his magnates; (2) a declaration of the proced