An Essay On The Trial By Jury, Lysander Spooner [ebook reader browser .txt] 📗
- Author: Lysander Spooner
Book online «An Essay On The Trial By Jury, Lysander Spooner [ebook reader browser .txt] 📗». Author Lysander Spooner
They Force Him To Transfer The Dominions Of The Roman Church To
Others? By St. Peter, This Injury Must Not Pass Unpunished. Then
Debating the Matter With The Cardinals, He, By A Definitive Sentence,
Damned and Cassated forever The Charter Of Liberties, And Sent The
King a Bull Containing that Sentence At Large." Echard'S History Of
England, P. 106-7
These Things Show That The Nature And Effect Of The Charter Were
Well Understood By The King and His Friends; That They All Agreed
That He Was Effectually Stripped of Power. Yet The Legislative Power
Had Not Been Taken From Him; But Only The Power To Enforce His
Laws, Unless Juries Should Freely Consent To Their Enforcement.
[10] The Laws Were, At That Time, All Written In latin.
[11]"No Man Shall Be Condemned at The King"S Suit, Either Before
The King in his Bench, Where Pleas Are Coram Rege, (Before The
King,) (And So Are The Words Nec Super Eum Ibimus, To Be
Understood,) Nor Before Any Other Commissioner Or Judge
Whatsoever, And So Are The Words Nec Super Eum Mittemus, To Be
Understood, But By The Judgment Of His Peers, That Is, Equals, Or
According to The Law Of The Land." 2 Coke'S Inst., 46.
[12] Perhaps The Assertion In the Text Should Be Made With This
Qualification That The Words "Per Legem Terrae," (According to The
Law Of The Land,) And The Words "Per Legale Judiciun Parium
Suorum," (According to The Legal Judgment Of His Peers,) Imply That
The King, Before Proceeding to Any Executive Action, Will Take
Notice Of "The Law Of The Land," And Of The Legality Of The Judgment
Of The Peers, And Will Execute Upon The Prisoner Nothing except
What The Law Of The Land Authorizes, And No Judgments Of The Peers,
Except Legal Ones. With This Qualification, The Assertion In the Text
Is Strictly Correct That There Is Nothing in the Whole Chapter That
Grants To The King, Or His Judges, Any Judicial Power At All. The
Chapter Only Describes And Limits His Executive Power.
[13] See Blackstone'A Law Tracts, Page 294, Oxford Edition
[14] These Articles Of The Charter Are Given In blackstone'S
Collection Of Charters, And Are Also Printed with The Statutes Of The
Realm. Also In wilkins' Laws Of The Anglo- Saxons, P. 350.
[15] Lingard Says, " The Words, ' We Will Not Destroy Him Nor Will
We Go Upon Him, Nor Will We Send Upon Him,' Have Been Very
Differently Expounded by Different Legal Authorities. Their Real
Meaning may Be Learned from John Himself, Who The Next Year
Promised by His Letters Patent,... Nec Super Eos Per Vim Vel Per
Arma Ibimus, Nisi Per Legem Regni Nostri, Vel Per Judicium Parium
Suorum In curia Nostra, (Nor Will We Go Upon Them By Force Or By
Arms, Unless By The Law Of Our Kingdom, Or The Judgment Of Their
Peers In our Court.) Pat. 16 Johan, Apud Drad. 11, App. No. 124.
He Had Hitherto Been In the Habit Of Going with An Armed force, Or
Sending an Armed force On The Lands, And Against The Castles, Of All
Chapter 2 (The Trial By Jury, As Defined by Magna Carta) Section 2 (The Language Of Magna Carta) Pg 40Whom He Knew Or Suspected to Be His Secret Enemies, Without
Observing any Form Of Law." 3 Lingard, 47 Note.
[16] "Judgment, Judicium. * * The Sentence Of The Law,
Pronounced by The Court, Upon The Matter Contained in the Record."
8 Blackstone, 895. Jacob'S Law Dictionary. . Tomlin'S Do.
"Judgment Is The Decision Or Sentence Of The Law, Given By A Court
Of Justice Or Other Competent Tribunal, As The Result Of The
Proceedings Instituted therein, For The Redress Of An Injury."
Bouvier'S Law Dict.
"Judgment, Judicium. * * Sentence Of A Judge Against A Criminal. *
* Determination, Decision In general." Bailey'S Dict.
"Judgment. * * In a Legal Sense, A Sentence Or Decision Pronounced
By Authority Of A King, Or Other Power, Either By Their Own Mouth,
Or By That Of Their Judges Andofficers, Whom They Appoint, To
Administer Justice In their Stead." Chambers' Dict.
"Judgment. * * In law, The Sentence Or Doom Pronounced in any
Case, Civil Orcriminal, By The Judge Or Court By Which It Is Tried."
Webster'S Dict.
Sometimes The Punishment Itself Is Called judicium, Judgment; Or,
Rather, It Was At The Time Of Magna Carta. For Example, In a Statute
Passed fifty-One Years After Magna Carta, It Was Said That A Baker,
For Default In the Weight Of His Bread, " Debeat Amerciari Vel Subire
Judicium Pillorie;" That Is, Ought To Be Amerced, Or Suffer The
Punishment, Or Judgment, Of The Pillory. Also That A Brewer, For
"Selling ale Contrary To The Assize," "Debeat Amerciari, Vel Pati
Judicium Tumbrelli "; That Is, Ought To Be Amerced, Or Suffer The
Punishment, Or Judgment, Of The Tumbrel. 51 Henry 3, St. 6.
(1266.)
Also The "Statutes Of Uncertain Date," (But Supposed to Be Prior To
Edward Iii., Or 1326,) Provide, In chapters 6, 7, And 10, For
"Judgment Of The Pillory." See 1 Rughead'S Statutes, 187, 188. 1
Statutes Of The Realm, 203.
Blackstone, In his Chapter "Of Judgment, And Its Consequences,"
Says, "Judgment (Unless Any Matter Be Offered in arrest Thereof) Follows
Upon Conviction F Being the Pronouncing of That Punishment Which
Is Expressly Ordained by Law." Blackstone'S Analysis Of The Laws
Of England, Book 4, Ch. 29, Sec. 1. Blackstone'S Law Tracts, 126.
Coke Says, "Judicium .. The Judgment Is The Guide And Direction Of
The Execution." 3 Inst. 210.
[17] This Precedent From Germany Is Good Authority, Because The
Trial By Jury Was In use, In the Northern Nations Of Europe
Generally, Long Before Magna Carta, And Probably From Time
Immemorial; And The Saxons And Normans Were Familiar With It
Before They Settled in england.
Chapter 2 (The Trial By Jury, As Defined by Magna Carta) Section 2 (The Language Of Magna Carta) Pg 41
[18] Beneficium Was The Legal Name Of An Estate Held By A Feudal
Tenure. See Spelman'S Glossary.
[19]] Contenement Of A Freeman Was The Means Of Living in the
Condition Of A Freeman.
[20] Waynage Was A Villein'S Plough-Tackle And Carts.
[21] Tomlin Says, "The Ancient Practice Was, When Any Such Fine
Was Imposed, To Inquire By A Jury Quantum Inde Regi Dare Valeat
Per Annum, Salva Sustentatione Sua Et Uxoris Et Libe- Rorum Suorum,
(How Much Is He Able To Give To The King per Annum, Saving his
Own Maintenance, And That Of His Wife And Children). And Since The
Disuse Of Such Inquest, It Is Never Usual To Assess A Larger Fine Than
A Man Is Able To Pay, Without Touching the Implements Of His
Livelihood; But To Inflict Corporal Punishment, Or A Limited
Imprisonment, Instead Of Such A Fine As Might Amount To
Imprisonment For Life. And This Is The Reason Why Fines In the
King'S Courts Are Frequently Denominated ransoms, Because The
Penalty Must Otherwise Fall Upon A Man'S Person, Unless It Be
Redeemed or Ransomed by A Pecuniary Fine." Tomlin'S Law Dict.,
Word Fine.
[22] Because Juries Were To Fix The Sentence, It Must Not Be
Supposed that The King was Obliged to Carry The Sentence Into
Execution; But Only That He Could Not Go Beyond The Sentence. He
Might Pardon, Or He Might Acquit On Grounds Of Law, Not
Withstanding the Sentence; But He Could Not Punish Beyond The
Extent Of The Sentence. Magna Carta Does Not Prescribe That The
King shall Punish According to The Sentence Of The Peers; But Only
That He Shall Not Punish "Unless According to" That Sentence. He
May Acquit Or Pardon, Notwithstanding their Sentence Or Judgment;
But He Cannot Punish, Except According to Their Judgment.
[23] The Trial By Battle Was One In which The Accused challenged
His Accuser To Single Combat, And Staked tbe Question Of His Guilt Or
Innocence On The Result Of The Duel. This Trial Was Introduced into
England By The Normans, Within One Hundred and Fifty Years
Before Magna Carta. It Was Not Very Often Resorted to Even By The
Normans Themselves; Probably Never By The Anglo-Saxons, Unless
In Their Controversies With The Normans. It Was Strongly
Discouraged by Some Of The Norman Princes, Particularly By Henry
Ii., By Whom The Trial By Jury Was Especially Favored. It Is Probable
That The Trial By Battle, So Far As It Prevailed at All In england, Was
Rather Tolerated as A Matter Of Chivalry, Than Authorized as A Matter
Of Law. At Any Rate, It Is Not Likely That It Was Included in the
"Legem Terrae" Of Magna Carta, Although Such Duels Have
Occasionally Occurred since That Time, And Have, By Some, Been
Supposed to Be Lawful. I Apprehend That Nothing can Be Properly
Said To Be A Part Of Lex Terrae, Unless It Can Be Shown Either To Have
Been Of Saxon Origin, Or To Have Been Recognized by Magna Carta.
The Trial By Ordeal Was Of Various Kinds. In one Ordeal The Accused
Chapter 2 (The Trial By Jury, As Defined by Magna Carta) Section 2 (The Language Of Magna Carta) Pg 42Was Required to Take Hot Iron In his Hand; In another To Walk
Blindfold Among Red-Hot Ploughshares; In another To Thrust His Arm
Into Boiling water; In another To Be Thrown, With His Hands And Feet
Bound, Into Cold Water; In another To Swallow The Morsel Of
Execration; In the Confidence That His Guilt Or Innocence Would Be
Miraculously Made Known. This Mode Of Trial Was Nearly Extinct At
The Time Of Magna Carta, And It Is Not Likely That It Was Included in
"Legem Terrae," As That Term Is Used in that Instrument. This Idea Is
Corroborated by The Fact That The Trial By Ordeal Was Specially
Prohibited only Four Years After Magna Carta, "By Act Of Parliament
In 3 Henry Iii., According to Sir Edward Coke, Or Rather By An
Order Of The King in council." 3 Blacks,One 345, Note.
I Apprehend That This Trial Was Never Forced upon Accused persons,
But Was Only Allowed to Them, As An Appeal To God, From The
Judgment Of A Jury. [24]
The Trial By Compurgators Was One In which, If The Accused could
Bring twelve Of His Neighbors, Who Would Make Oath That They
Believed him Innocent, He Was Held To Be So. It Is Probable That This
Trial Was
Comments (0)