It seems to be a perfectly well established fact that, at common law,
several magistrates, bearing the names of aldermen, sheriffs, stewards,
coroners and bailiffs, were chosen by the people; and yet it appears,
from Magna Carta itself, that some of the _king's_ officers (of whom he
must have had many) were also called "sheriffs, constables, coroners,
and bailiffs."
But Magna Carta, in various instances, speaks of sheriffs and bailiffs
as "_our_ sheriffs and bailiffs;" thus apparently intending to recognize
the distinction between officers _of the king_, bearing those names, and
other officers, bearing the same official names, but chosen by the
people. Thus it says that "no sheriff or bailiff _of ours_, or any other
(officer), shall take horses or carts of any freeman for carriage,
unless with the consent of the freeman himself."--_John's Charter_, ch.
36.
In a kingdom subdivided into so many counties, hundreds, tithings,
manors, cities and boroughs, each having a judicial or police
organization of its own, it is evident that many of the officers must
have been chosen by the people, else the government could not have
maintained its popular character. On the other hand, it is evident that
the king, the executive power of the nation, must have had large numbers
of officers of his own in every part of the kingdom. And it is perfectly
natural that these different sets of officers should, in many instances,
bear the same official names; and, consequently that the king, when
speaking of his own officers, as distinguished from those chosen by the
people, should call them "our sheriffs, bailiffs," &c., as he does in
Magna Carta.
I apprehend that inattention to these considerations has been the cause
of all the confusion of ideas that has arisen on this subject,--a
confusion very evident in the following paragraph from Dunham, which may
be given as an illustration of that which is exhibited by others on the
same points.
"Subordinate to the ealdormen were the _gerefas_, the sheriffs, or
reeves, _of whom there were several in every shire, or county_.
_There was one in every borough, as a judge._ There was one at every
gate, who witnessed purchases outside the walls; and there was one,
higher than either,--the high sheriff,--who was probably the reeve of
the shire. This last _appears_ to have been appointed by the king.
Their functions were to execute the decrees of the king, or
ealdormen, to arrest prisoners, to require bail for their appearance
at the sessions, to collect fines or penalties levied by the court of
the shire, to preserve the public peace, _and to preside in a
subordinate tribunal of their own_."--_Dunham's Middle Ages_, sec. 2,
B. 2, ch. 1. 57 _Lardner's Cab. Cyc._, p. 41.
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