It would certainly appear the case that the monks approached the landlordly duties with zeal, but also that the manumissions that did occur were insufficient to quell the villagers' ire. Either way, the two villages not only must have conspired together ("maliciously," states the abbey's own manorial roll), but pooled mutual resources, for their campaign would not have been cheap. Both travel and litigation cost money, from the writing of the petition by clerks to their advisement on it by lawyers. There was no such thing after all, says Edward Powell, "as cheap litigation." The tenants' resistance included refusing to grind flour at the abbot's mill, a rejection of their own bondage, continuing efforts to prevent restrictions from the abbot on the leasing of their land, and the concomitant right to lease it out for up to ten years. This resistance in 1328 led only to punishment in the form of fines, imprisonment, and eventual submission. The abbey's ledger book records how in 1329 — as they saw it — the rebellious tenantry "plotted maliciously" against the abbey's "liberty." The Darnhall villagers had approached (on the first of many occasions) the Cheshire Justiciar, claiming to have been granted their freedom by an "aforetime" royal charter. Although the legal response is now unknown, it was presumably unsuccessful, as, on their return to the village, they were thrown in gaol until they swore an oath to cease their complaints. Presumably this oath was under duress, for they did so, and were released, only to send a delegation to the King (at this time in the north) on the same matter. It is unknown whether the party ever reached the King, but it is known to have at some point ended up in a Nottingham prison, for some reason only narrowly avoiding being executed there as thieves. This was followed by a petition before the King in parliament at Westminster, which resulted in a new Justiciar being sent to Cheshire to hear their petition. Before he did, however, he read — and had been immediately persuaded by — the abbey's royal charters. As a result, the villagers were again returned to the abbey for punishment. The abbey's recorder returned to logging similar complaints in 1337 when, again, the tenants of Darnhall and Over "conspired against their lords" and "endeavoured to gain their liberty." Recording how the people firstly complained to the Chester Justiciar, then petitioned parliament, and finally sent a deputation from among their own to present their case to the King at Windsor, the writer concluded they were behaving "like mad dogs."