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
Still in existence is the old self-help law of hamsocne, the thief
hand-habbende, the thief back-berend, the old summary procedure
where the thief is caught in the act, AEthelstan's laws, Edward
the Confessor's laws, and Kent's childwyte [fine for begetting a
bastard on a lord's female bond slave]. Under the name of "actio
furti" [appeal of larceny] is the old process by which a thief can
be pursued and goods vindicated. As before and for centuries
later, deodands were forfeited to the king to appease God's wrath.
These chattel which caused the death of a person were usually
carts, cart teams, horses, boats, or millwheels. Then they were
forfeited to the community, which paid the king their worth.
Sometimes the justices named the charitable purpose for which the
deodand was to be spent, such as the price of a boat to go to the
repair of a bridge.
Five cases with short summaries are:
CASE: "John Croc was drowned from his horse and cart in the water
of Bickney. Judgment: misadventure. The price of the horse
and cart is 4s.6d. deodand."
CASE: "Willam Ruffus was crushed to death by a certain trunk. The
price of the trunk is 4d., for which the sheriff is to answer.
4d. deodand."
CASE: "William le Hauck killed Edric le Poter and fled, so he is
to be exacted and outlawed. He was in the tithing of Reynold
Horloc in Clandon of the abbot of Chertsey (West Clandon),
so it is in mercy. His chattels were 4 s., for which the
bailiff of the abbot of Chertsey is to answer."
CASE: "Richard de Bregsells, accused of larceny, comes and denies
the whole and puts himself on the country for good or ill.
The twelve jurors and four vills say that he is not guilty,
so he is quit."
CASE: William le Wimpler and William Vintner sold wine contrary
to the statute, so they are in mercy.
Other cases dealt with issues of entry, e.g. whether land was
conveyed or just rented; issues of whether a man was free, for
which his lineage was examined; issues of to which lord a villein
belonged; issues of nuisance such as making or destroying a bank,
ditch, or hedge; diverting a watercourse or damming it to make a
pool; obstructing a road, and issues of what grazing rights were
conveyed in pasture land, waste, woods, or arable fields between
harvest and sowing. Grazing right disputes usually arose from the
ambiguous language in the grant of land "with appurtenances".
Courts awarded specific relief as well as money damages. If a
landlord broke his covenant to lease land for a term of years, the
court restored possession to the lessee. If a lord did not perform
the services due to his superior lord, the court ordered him to
perform the services. The courts also ordered repair by a lessee.
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