Alfred the Great : $b containing chapters on his life and times
History
Alfred the Great : $b containing chapters on his life and times
Alfred, King of England, 849-899; Great Britain -- History -- Alfred, 871-899
Inasmuch as all the early modes of proof involved large elements of
unknown risk, it was rather common for the parties to compromise at
the last moment. Also, since there were no ready means of enforcing the
performance of a judgment on unwilling parties, great men supported by
numerous followers could often defy the court, and this naturally made
it undesirable to carry matters to extremity which, if both parties were
strong, might mean private war. Most early forms of jurisdiction, indeed,
of which we have any knowledge, seem better fitted to put pressure on the
litigants to agree than to produce an effective judgment of compulsory
force. Assuredly this was the case with those which we find in England
even after the consolidation of the kingdom under the Danish dynasty.
Rigid and cumbrous as Anglo-Saxon justice was in the things it did
provide for, it was, to modern eyes, strangely defective in its lack of
executive power. Among the most important functions of courts as we know
them is compelling the attendance of parties and enforcing the fulfilment
both of final judgments and of interlocutory orders dealing with the
conduct of proceedings and the like. Such things are done as of course
under the ordinary authority of the court, and with means constantly at
its disposal; open resistance to judicial orders is so plainly useless
that it is seldom attempted, and obstinate preference of penalties to
submission, a thing which now and then happens, is counted a mark of
eccentricity bordering on unsoundness of mind. Exceptional difficulties,
when they occur, indicate an abnormal state of the commonwealth or some
of its members. But this reign of law did not come by nature; it has
been slowly and laboriously won. Jurisdiction began, it seems, with
being merely voluntary, derived not from the authority of the State but
from the consent of the parties. People might come to the court for a
decision if they agreed to do so. They were bound in honour to accept the
result; they might forfeit pledges deposited with the court, or put their
neighbours who had become sureties in an awkward position; but the court
could not compel their obedience any more than a tribunal of arbitration
appointed at this day under a treaty between sovereign States can compel
the rulers of those States to fulfil its award. Anglo-Saxon courts had
got beyond this most early stage, but not very far beyond it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account