tho townes, and the suburbis be to beestis and help|ing beestis: whiche suburbis schulen strecche withoute forth fro the wallis of the citees bi space of [of is interlineated by a later (?) hand.] a thou|sind pacis, that is to seie, a myle. Thanne, sithen it is seid that tho citees weren ȝouun for to in hem dwelle, summen wolen thenke to folewe ther of and ther bi, that in this word "forto in hem dwelle" is expressid al the riȝt which the preestis and Leuytis hadden in tho citees; and if this be trewe, that al her riȝt had into tho citees was for to in hem [inhem, MS.] dwelle, folewith nedis that al her riȝt had into tho citees was the riȝt to vse tho citees, sithen in|dwelling [in dwelling, MS., and so also on p. 283 and p. 288.] is no more than an vsing; and so folewith ferther, that bi thilk ȝift mad to hem thei hadden no riȝt of lordschip, sithen riȝt of vce is dyuers and departable fro the riȝt of lordschip.
The ije. colour forto grounde and strengthe the seid answere mai be this: That Ebron was oon of the seid xlviij. citees ȝouun to preestis and dekenes, as it is open, Iosue xxe. capitulum.; and ȝit this same Ebron was [was is interlineated by a later (?) hand.] ȝouun into the propre lordschip of Caleph, as is open, Iosue xve. capitulum. But so it is, that thilk citee was not in propirte of lordschip to gidere and at oonis to Caleph, (which was a lay man,) and to the clergi of preestis and dekenis: and herwith open it is, that thilk cite was not in vce of Caleph; for it was in the vce of preestis or Leuitis, as it is open, Iosue xxje. capitulum. Wherfore thei wolen seie to folewe nedis, that the seid citee was of Caleph as in propirte and in lordschip, and was of the clergie as for her vce without theryn had lordschip. [lorschip, MS. The same cleri|cal (?) error occurs at p. 287.]
