Hi, Susan - Well, then, evidently the unfortunate countess's jointure was also
set aside as (from memory) the earldoms of Warwick and Salisbury went to
Clarence initially, didn't they? And then upon Clarence's attainder I believe
his son received Warwick and Richard's son received Salisbury.
Regards, Annette

--- In richardiiisocietyforum@yahoogroups.com, "boswellbaxter@..."
<boswellbaxter@...> wrote:
>
>
> The Countess of Warwick indeed had a jointure interest in her husband's lands.
In her letter to Parliament written while she was still at Beaulieu Abbey, she
(referring to herself in the third person) asked it "to ponder and weigh in your
consciences her right and true title of her inheritance, as the earldom of
Warwick and Spencer's lands, to which she is rightfully born by lineal
succession, and also her jointure and dower of the earldom of Salisbury
aforesaid." (The letter can be found on page 100 of Mary Anne Everett Green's
Letters of Royal and Illustrious Ladies of Great Britain, online at Google
Books.)
>
> A widow's jointure was legally supposed to be unaffected when a husband was
attainted, but this was not always honored.
>
> J. R. Lander's chapter on "Attainder and Forfeiture" in his book Crown and
Nobility is helpful on this subject,
>
> Susan Higginbotham
>