Our Legal Heritage, King AEthelbert, 596 to King George III, 1775Reilly, S. A.
History
Our Legal Heritage, King AEthelbert, 596 to King George III, 1775
Reilly, S. A.
Law -- England -- History
Henry involved the Royal Court in many criminal issues, using the
agencies of the county and hundred courts. To detect crimes, he
required royal justices to routinely ask selected representatives:
knights or other landholders, of every neighborhood if any person
were suspected of any murder, robbery, theft, etc. A traveling
royal justice or a sheriff would then hold an inquest, in which
the representatives answered by oath what people were reputed to
have done certain crimes. They made such inquiries through assizes
of presentment, usually composed of twelve men from each hundred
and the four best men of each township. (These later evolved into
grand juries). These assizes were an ancient institution in many
parts of the country. They consisted of representatives of the
hundreds, usually knights, and villages who testified under oath
to all crimes committed in their neighborhood, and indicted those
they suspected as responsible and those harboring them. What
Henry's assize did was to insist upon the adoption of a standard
procedure everywhere systematically. The procedure was made more
regular instead of depending on crime waves. If indicted, the
suspected persons were then sent to the ordeal. There was no trial
by compurgation in the Royal Courts, which was abolished by Henry.
If determined guilty, he forfeited his chattels to the king and
his land reverted to his landlord. If he passed the ordeal but was
ill-famed in the community, he could be banished from the
community. The ordeal was abolished by the Lateran Council of
1215.
As before, a person could also be brought to trial by the
accusation of the person wronged. If the accused still denied the
charge after the accuser testified and the matter investigated by
inquiries and interrogation and then analyzed, trial by combat was
held, unless the accuser was over the age of sixty or maimed, in
which case the accused went to the ordeal.
If a man failed at the ordeal, the penalty prescribed by the
assize of Clarendon of 1166 was loss of a foot and abjuring the
realm. The assize of Northhampton of 1176 added loss of the right
hand. Under the former assize, a man who had a bad reputation had
to abjure the realm even if he had successfully undergone the
ordeal.
Criminal matters such as killing the king or sedition or betraying
the nation or the army, fraudulent concealment of treasure trove
[finding a hoard of coins which had been buried when danger
approached], breach of the King's peace, homicide, murder
(homicide for which there were no eyewitnesses), burning (a town,
house, men, animals or other chattel for hatred or revenge),
robbery, rape and falsifying (e.g. false charters or false
measures or false money) were punishable by death or loss of limb.
All murders were now punished alike because the applicability of
the murdrum couldn't be determined since it was impossible to
prove that the slain man had been English.
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