[1] In this revision of James Clerk Maxwell's classical article in
the ninth edition of the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, additions are
marked by square brackets.
[2] See Enrico Betti, _Teoria della Capillarita: Nuovo Cimento_
(1867); a memoir by M. Stahl, "Ueber einige Punckte in der Theorie
der Capillarerscheinungen," _Pogg. Ann._ cxxxix. p. 239 (1870); and
J.D. Van der Waal's _Over de Continuiteit van den Gasen
Vloeistoftoestand_. A good account of the subject from a mathematical
point of view will be found in James Challis's "Report on the Theory
of Capillary Attraction," _Brit. Ass. Report_, iv. p. 235 (1834).
[3] _Nouvelle theorie de l'action capillaire_ (1831).
[4] _Determinatio superficiei minimae rotatione curvae data duo
puncta jungentis circa datum axem ortae_ (Gottingen, 1831).
[5] _Lecons de calcul des variations_ (Paris, 1861).
[6] "Sur la surface de revolution dont la courbure moyenne est
constante," _Liouville's Journal_, vi.
[7] "Theorie geometrique des rayons et centres de courbure," _Bullet,
de l'Acad. de Belgique_, 1857.
[8] _Tractatus de Theoria Mathematica Phaenomenorum in Liquidis
actioni gravitatis detractis observatorum_ (Bonn, 1857).
[9] _Journal de l'Institut_, No. 1260.
[10] _Statique experimental et theorique des liquides_, 1873.
CAPISTRANO, GIOVANNI DI (1386-1456), Italian friar, theologian and
inquisitor, was born in the little village of Capistrano in the Abruzzi,
of a family which had come to Italy with the Angevins. He lived at first
a wholly secular life, married, and became a successful magistrate; he
took part in the continual struggles of the small Italian states in such
a way as to compromise himself. During his captivity he was practically
ruined and lost his young wife. He then in despair entered the
Franciscan order and at once gave himself up to the most rigorous
asceticism, violently defending the ideal of strict observance. He was
charged with various missions by the popes Eugenius IV. and Nicholas V.,
in which he acquitted himself with implacable violence. As legate or
inquisitor he persecuted the last Fraticelli of Ferrara, the Jesuati of
Venice, the Jews of Sicily, Moldavia and Poland, and, above all, the
Hussites of Germany, Hungary and Bohemia; his aim in the last case was
to make conferences impossible between the representatives of Rome and
the Bohemians, for every attempt at conciliation seemed to him to be
conniving at heresy. Finally, after the taking of Constantinople, he
succeeded in gathering troops together for a crusade against the Turks
(1455), which at least helped to raise the siege of Belgrade, which was
being blockaded by Mahommed II. He died shortly afterwards (October 23,
1456), and was canonized in 1690. Capistrano, in spite of this restless
life, found time to work both in the lifetime of his master St
Bernardino of Siena and after, at the reform of the order of the minor
Franciscans, and to uphold both in his writings and his speeches the
most advanced theories upon the papal supremacy as opposed to that of
the councils.
See E. Jacob, _Johannes von Capistrano_, vol. i.: "Das Leben und
Wirken Capistrans;" vol. ii.: "Die handschriftlichen Aufzeichnungen
von Reden und Tractaten Capistrans," (1st series, Breslau, 1903-1905).
(P. A.)
CAPITAL (Lat. _caput_, head), in architecture, the crowning member of
the column, which projects on each side as it rises, in order to support
the abacus and unite the square form of the latter with the circular
shaft. The bulk of the capital may either be convex, as in the Doric
capital; concave, as in the bell of the Corinthian capital; or bracketed
out, as in the Ionic capital. These are the three principal types on
which all capitals are based. The capitals of Greek, Doric, Ionic and
Corinthian orders are given in the article ORDER.
From the prominent position it occupies in all monumental buildings, it
has always been the favourite feature selected for ornamentation, and
consequently it has become the clearest indicator of any style.
The two earliest capitals of importance are those which are based on the
lotus (fig. 1) and papyrus (fig. 2) plants respectively, and these, with
the palm tree capital, were the chief types employed by the Egyptians
down to the 3rd century B.C., when, under the Ptolemaic dynasties,
various river plants were employed decoratively and the lotus capital
goes through various modifications (fig 3) Some kind of volute capital
is shown in the Assyrian bas-reliefs, but no Assyrian capital has ever
been found, those exhibited as such in the British Museum are bases.
[Illustration: FIG. 1.--Lotus Capital from Karnak.]
[Illustration: FIG. 2.--Papyrus Capital from Karnak.]
The Persian capital belongs to the third class above mentioned, the
brackets are carved with the lion (fig. 4) or the griffin projecting
right and left to support and lessen the bearing of the architrave, and
on their backs carry other brackets at right angles to support the cross
timbers. The profuse decoration underneath the bracket capital in the
palace of Xerxes and elsewhere, serves no structural function, but gives
some variety to the extenuated shaft.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.--Modified Lotus Capital from Philae.]
[Illustration: FIG. 4.--Persian Capital from Persepolis.]
The earliest Greek capital is that shown in the Temple-fresco at Cnossus
in Crete (1600 B.C.); it was of the first type--convex, and was probably
moulded in stucco: the second is represented by the richly carved
example of the columns (fig 5) flanking the tomb of Agamemnon in Mycenae
(c. 1100 B.C.), also convex, carved with the chevron device, and with an
apophyge on which the buds of some flowers are sculptured. The Doric
capital of the temple of Apollo at Syracuse (c. 700 B.C.) follows, in
which the echinus moulding has become a more definite form: this in the
Parthenon reaches its culmination, where the convexity is at the top and
bottom with a delicate uniting curve The sloping side of the echinus
becomes flatter in the later examples, and in the Colosseum at Rome
forms a quarter round.
[Illustration: FIG. 5.--Early Greek Capital from the Tomb of Agamemnon,
Mycenae.]
In the Ionic capital of the Archaic temple of Diana at Ephesus (560
B.C.) the width of the abacus is twice that of its depth, consequently
the earliest Ionic capital known was virtually a bracket capital. A
century later, in the temple on the Ilissus, published in Stuart and
Revett, the abacus has become square. One of the most beautiful
Corinthian capitals is that from the Tholos of Epidaurus (400 B.C.)
(fig. 6); it illustrates the transition between the earlier Greek
capital of Bassae and the Roman version of the temple of Mars Ultor
(fig. 7).
[Illustration: FIG. 6.--Corinthian Capital from the Tholos of
Epidaurus.]
The foliage of the Greek Corinthian capital was based on the Acanthus
spinosus, that of the Roman on the Acanthus mollis; the capital of the
temple of Vesta and other examples at Pompeii are carved with foliage of
a different type.
[Illustration: FIG. 7.--Roman Capital from the Temple of Mars Ultor,
Rome.]
[Illustration: FIG. 8.--Byzantine Capitals from the central portal of St
Mark's, Venice.]
[Illustration: FIG. 9.--Byzantine Capital from the Church of S. Vitale,
Ravenna.]
[Illustration: FIG. 10.--Byzantine Capital from the Church of S. Vitale,
Ravenna.]
[Illustration: FIG. 11.--Cushion Capital.]
[Illustration: FIG. 12.--Romanesque Capitals from the Cloister of
Monreale, near Palermo, Sicily.]
Byzantine capitals are of endless variety; the Roman composite capital
would seem to have been the favourite type they followed at first:
subsequently, the block of stone was left rough as it came from the
quarry, and the sculptor, set to carve it, evolved new types of design
to his own fancy, so that one rarely meets with many repetitions of the
same design. One of the most remarkable is the capital in which the
leaves are carved as if blown by the wind; the finest example being in
Sta Sophia, Thessalonica; those in St Mark's, Venice (fig. 8) specially
attracted Ruskin's fancy. Others are found in St Apollinare-in-classe,
Ravenna. The Thistle and Pine capital is found in St Mark's, Venice; St
Luke's, Delphi; the mosques of Kairawan and of Ibn Tulun, Cairo, in the
two latter cases being taken from Byzantine churches. The illustration
of the capital in S. Vitale, Ravenna (figs. 9 and 10) shows above it the
dosseret required to carry the arch, the springing of which was much
wider than the abacus of the capital.
[Illustration: FIG. 13.--Gothic Capitals from Wells Cathedral.]
The Romanesque and Gothic capitals throughout Europe present the same
variety as in the Byzantine and for the same reason, that the artist
evolved his conception of the design from the block he was carving, but
in these styles it goes further on account of the clustering of columns
and piers.
The earliest type of capital in Lombardy and Germany is that which is
known as the cushion-cap, in which the lower portion of the cube block
has been cut away to meet the circular shaft (fig. 11). These early
types were generally painted at first with various geometrical designs,
afterwards carved.
In Byzantine capitals, the eagle, the lion and the lamb are occasionally
carved, but treated conventionally.
[Illustration: FIG 14.--Gothic Capitals from Amiens Cathedral.]
In the Romanesque and Gothic styles, in addition to birds and beasts,
figures are frequently introduced into capitals, those in the Lombard
work being rudely carved and verging on the grotesque; later, the
sculpture reaches a higher standard; in the cloisters of Monreale (fig.
12) the birds being wonderfully true to nature. In England and France
(figs. 13 and 14), the figures introduced into the capitals are
sometimes full of character. These capitals, however, are not equal to
those of the Early English school, in which the foliage is
conventionally treated as if it had been copied from metal work, and is
of infinite variety, being found in small village churches as well as in
cathedrals.
[Illustration: FIG 15.--Italian Renaissance Capital from S. Maria dei
Miracoli, Venice.]
Reference has only been made to the leading examples of the Roman
capitals; in the Renaissance period (fig. 15) the feature became of the
greatest importance and its variety almost as great as in the Byzantine
and Gothic styles. The pilaster, which was employed so extensively in
the Revival, called for new combinations in the designs for its
capitals. Most of the ornament can be traced to Roman sources, and
although less vigorous, shows much more delicacy and refinement in its
carving. (R. P. S.)
CAPITAL (i.e. capital stock or fund), in economics, generally, the
accumulated wealth either of a man or a community, that is available for
earning interest and producing fresh wealth. In social discussion it is
sometimes treated as antithetical to labour, but it is in reality the
accumulated savings of labour and of the profits accruing from the
savings of labour. It is that portion of the annual produce reserved
from consumption to supply future wants, to extend the sphere of
production, to improve industrial instruments and processes, to carry
out works of public utility, and, in short, to secure and enlarge the
various means of progress necessary to an increasing community. It is
the increment of wealth or means of subsistence analogous to the
increment of population and of the wants of civilized man. Hence J.S.
Mill and other economists, when seeking a graphic expression of the
service of capital, have called it "abstinence." The labourer serves by
giving physical and mental effort in order to supply his means of
consumption. The capitalist, or labourer-capitalist, serves by
abstaining from consumption, by denying himself the present enjoyment of
more or less of his means of consumption, in the prospect of a future
profit. This quality, apparent enough in the beginnings of capital,
applies equally to all its forms and stages; because whether a
capitalist stocks his warehouse with goods and produce, improves land,
lends on mortgage or other security, builds a factory, opens a mine, or
orders the construction of machines or ships, there is the element of
self-deprival for the present, with the risk of ultimate loss of what is
his own, and what, instead of saving and embodying income productive
form, he might choose to consume. On this ground rests the justification
of the claims of capital to its industrial rewards, whether in the form
of rent, interest or profits of trade and investment.
To any advance in the arts of industry or the comforts of life, a rate
of production exceeding the rate of consumption, with consequent
accumulation of resources, or in other words, the formation of capital,
is indispensable. The primitive cultivators of the soil, whether those
of ancient times or the pioneers who formed settlements in the forests
of the New World, soon discovered that their labour would be rendered
more effective by implements and auxiliary powers of various kinds, and
that until the produce from existing means of cultivation exceeded what
was necessary for their subsistence, there could be neither labour on
their part to produce such implements and auxiliaries, nor means to
purchase them. Every branch of industry has thus had a demand for
capital within its own circles from the earliest times. The flint
arrow-heads, the stone and bronze utensils of fossiliferous origin, and
the rude implements of agriculture, war and navigation, of which we read
in Homer, were the forerunners of that rich and wonderful display of
tools, machines, engines, furnaces and countless ingenious and costly
appliances, which represent so large a portion of the capital of
civilized countries, and without the pre-existing capital could not have
been developed. Nor in the cultivation of land, or the production simply
of food, is the need of implements, and of other auxiliary power,
whether animal or mechanical, the only need immediately experienced. The
demands on the surplus of produce over consumption are various and
incessant. Near the space of reclaimed ground, from which the cultivator
derives but a bare livelihood, are some marshy acres that, if drained
and enclosed, would add considerably in two or three years to the
produce; the forest and other natural obstructions might also be driven
farther back with the result, in a few more years, of profit; fences are
necessary to allow of pasture and field crops, roads have to be made and
farm buildings to be erected; as the work proceeds more artificial
investments follow, and by these successive outlays of past savings in
improvements, renewed and enhanced from generation to generation, the
land, of little value in its natural state either to the owner and
cultivator or the community, is at length brought into a highly
productive condition. The history of capital in the soil is
substantially the history of capital in all other spheres. No progress
can be made in any sphere, small or large, without reserved funds
possessed by few or more persons, in small or large amounts, and the
progress in all cases is adventured under self-deprival in the meanwhile
of acquired value, and more or less risk as to the final result.
Capital is necessarily to be distinguished from money, with which in
ordinary nomenclature it is almost identical. Wealth may be in other
things than money; oxen, wives, tools, have at different stages of
civilization represented the recognized form of capital; and modern
usage only treats capital as meaning the command of money because money
is the ordinary form of it nowadays. The capital of a country can scarce
be said to be less than the whole sum of its investments in a productive
form, and possessing a recognized productive value.
Adam Smith's distinction of "fixed" and "circulating" capital in the
_Wealth of Nations_ (book ii. c. i.) cannot fail to be always useful in
exhibiting the various forms and conditions under which capital is
employed. Yet the principal phenomena of capital are found to be the
same, whether the form of investment be more or less permanent or
circulable. The machinery in which capital is "fixed," and which yields
a profit without apparently changing hands, is in reality passing away
day by day, until it is worn out, and has to be replaced. So also of
drainage and other land improvements. When the natural forests have been
consumed and the landowners begin to plant trees on the bare places, the
plantations while growing are a source of health, shelter and
embellishment--they are not without a material profit throughout their
various stages to maturity--and when, at the lapse of twenty or more
years, they are ready to be cut down, and the timber is sold for useful
purposes, there is a harvest of the original capital expended as
essentially as in the case of the more rapid yearly crops of wheat or
oats. The chief distinction would appear to rest in the element of time
elapsing between the outlay of capital and its return. Capital may be
employed in short loans or bills of exchange at two or three months, in
paying wages of labour for which there may be return in a day or not in
less than a year or more, or in operations involving within themselves
every form of capital expenditure, and requiring a few years or
ninety-nine years for the promised fructification on which they proceed.
But the common characteristic of capital is that of a fund yielding a
return and reproducing itself whether the time to this end be long or
short. The division of expenditure or labour (all expenditure having a
destination to labour of one kind or another) into "productive" and
"unproductive" by the same authority (book ii. c. 3) is also apposite
both for purposes of political economy and practical guidance, though
economists have found it difficult to define where "productive
expenditure" ends and "unproductive expenditure" begins. Adam Smith
includes in his enumeration of the "fixed capital" of a country "the
acquired and useful abilities of all the inhabitants"; and in this sense
expenditure on education, arts and sciences might be deemed expenditure
of the most productive value, and yet be wanting in strict commercial
account of the profit and loss. It must be admitted that there is a
personal expenditure among all ranks of society, which, though not in
any sense a capital expenditure, may become capital and receive a
productive application, always to be preferred to the grossly
unproductive form, in the interest both of the possessors and of the
community.
The subject in its details is full of controversies, and a discussion
of it at any length would embrace the whole field of economics. The
subject will be found fully dealt with in every important economic
work, but the following may be specially consulted:--J.S. Mill,
_Principles of Political Economy_; J.E. Cairns, _Some Leading
Principles of Political Economy_; F.A. Walker, _Political Economy_; A.
Marshall, _Principles of Economics_; E. Bohm v. Bawerk, _Capital and
Interest_; K. Marx, _Capital_; J.B. Clark, _Capital and its Earnings_;
see also the economic works of W.H. Mallock (_Critical Examination of
Socialism_, 1908, &c.) for an insistence on the importance of
"ability," or brain-work, as against much of modern socialist
theorizing against "capitalism."
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. By this term is now meant the infliction of the
penalty of death for crime under the sentence of some properly
constituted authority, as distinguished from killing the offender as a
matter of self-defence or private vengeance, or under the order of some
self-constituted or irregular tribunal unknown to the law, such as that
of the Vigilantes of California, or of lynch law (q.v.). In the early
stages of society a man-slayer was killed by the "avenger of blood" on
behalf of the family of the man killed, and not as representing the
authority of the state (Pollock and Maitland, _Hist. Eng. Law_, ii.
447.) This mode of dealing with homicide survives in the vendetta of
Corsica and of the Mainotes in Greece, and in certain of the southern
states of North America. The obligation or inclination to take vengeance
depends on the fact of homicide, and not on the circumstances in which
it was committed, i.e. it is a part of the _lex talionis_. The mischief
of this system was alleviated under the Levitical law by the creation of
cities of refuge, and in Greece and Italy, both in Pagan and Christian
times, by the recognition of the right of sanctuary in temples and
churches. A second mode of dealing with homicide was that known to early
Teutonic and early Celtic law, where the relatives of the deceased,
instead of the life of the slayer, received the wer of the deceased,
i.e. a payment in proportion to the rank of the slain, and the king
received the blood-wite for the loss of his man. But even under this
system certain crimes were in Anglo-Saxon law bot-less, i.e. no
compensation could be paid, and the offender must suffer the penalty of
death. In the laws of Khammurabi, king of Babylon (2285-2242 B.C.), the
death penalty is imposed for many offences. The modes for executing it
specially named are burning, drowning and impalement (_Oldest Code of
Laws_, by C.H.W. Johns, 1903). Under the Roman law, "capital" punishment
also included punishments which deprived the offender of the status of
Roman citizen (_capitis deminutio, capitis amissio_), e.g. condemnation
to servitude in the mines or to deportation to an island (_Dig._ 48.
19).
British and foreign laws and methods.
_United Kingdom._--The modes of capital punishment in England under the
Saxon and Danish kings were various: hanging, beheading, burning,
drowning, stoning, and precipitation from rocks. The principle on which
this variety depended was that where an offence was such as to entitle
the king to outlaw the offender, he forfeited all, life and limb, lands
and goods, and that the king might take his life and choose the mode of
death. William the Conqueror would not allow judgment of death to be
executed by hanging and substituted mutilation; but his successors
varied somewhat in their policy as to capital punishment, and by the
13th century the penalty of death became by usage (without legislation)
the usual punishment for high and petty treason and for all felonies
(except mayhem and petty larceny, i.e. theft of property worth less than
1s.); see Stephen, _Hist. Cr. Law_, vol. i. 458; Pollock and Maitland,
_Hist. Eng. Law_, vol. ii. 459. It therefore included all the more
serious forms of crime against person or property, such as murder,
manslaughter, arson, highway robbery, burglary (or hamesucken) and
larceny; and when statutory felonies were created they were also
punishable by death unless the statute otherwise provided. The death
penalty was also extended to heretics under the writ _de heretico
comburendo_, which was lawfully issuable under statute from 1382 (5 Ric.
II. stat. 5) until 1677 (29 Chas. II. c. 9). For this purpose the
legislature had adopted the civil law of the Roman Empire, which was not
a part of the English common law (Stephen, _Hist. Cr. Law_, vol. ii.
438-469).
The methods of execution by crucifixion (as under the Roman law), or
breaking on the wheel (as under the Roman Dutch law and the Holy Roman
Empire), were never recognized by the common law, and would fall within
the term "cruel and unusual punishments" in the English Bill of Rights,
and in the United States would seem to be unconstitutional (see
_Wilkinson v. Utah_, 1889, 136 U.S. 436, 446).
The severity of barbarian and feudal laws was mitigated, so far as
common-law offences were concerned, by the influence of the Church as
the inheritor of Christian traditions and Roman jurisprudence. The Roman
law under the empire did not allow the execution of citizens except
under the _Lex Porcia_. But the right of the emperors to legislate _per
rescriptum principis_ enabled them to disregard the ordinary law when so
disposed. The 83rd novel of Justinian provided that criminal causes
against clerics should be tried by the judges, and that the convicted
cleric should be degraded by his bishop before his condemnation by the
secular power, and other novels gave the bishops considerable influence,
if not authority, over the lay judiciary. In western Europe the right
given by imperial legislation in the Eastern Empire was utilized by the
Papacy to claim privilege of clergy, i.e. that clerks must be remitted
to the bishop for canonical punishment, and not subjected to civil
condemnation at all. The history of benefit of clergy is given in
Pollock and Maitland, _Hist. English Law_, vol. i. pp. 424-440, and
Stephen, _Hist. Cr. Law_, vol. iii. 459, 463. By degrees the privilege
was extended not only to persons who could prove ordination or show a
genuine tonsure, but all persons who had sufficient learning to be able
to read the neck-verse (Ps. li. v. 1). Before the Reformation the
ecclesiastical courts had ceased to take any effective action with
respect to clerks accused of offences against the king's laws; and by
the time of Henry VII. burning on the hand under the order of the king's
judges was substituted for the old process of compurgation in use in the
spiritual courts.
The effect of the claim of benefit of clergy is said to have been to
increase the number of convictions, though it mitigated the punishment;
and it became, in fact, a means of showing mercy to certain classes of
individuals convicted of crime as a kind of privilege to the educated,
i.e. to all clerks whether secular or religious (25 Edw. III. stat. 3);
and it was allowed only in case of a first conviction, except in the
case of clerks who could produce their letters of orders or a
certificate of ordination. To prevent a second claim it was the practice
to brand murderers with the letter M, and other felons with the Tyburn
T, and Ben Jonson was in 1598 so marked for manslaughter.
The reign of Henry VIII. was marked by extreme severity in the execution
of criminals--as during this time 72,000 persons are said to have been
hanged. After the formation of English settlements in America the
severity of the law was mitigated by the practice of reprieving persons
sentenced to death on condition of their consenting to be transported to
the American colonies, and to enter into bond service there. The
practice seems to have been borrowed from Spain, and to have been begun
in 1597 (39 Eliz. c. 4). It was applied by Cromwell after his campaign
in Ireland, and was in full force immediately after the Restoration, and
is recognized in the Habeas Corpus Act 1677, and was used for the
Cameronians during Claverhouse's campaign in south-west Scotland. In the
18th century the courts were empowered to sentence felons to
transportation (see DEPORTATION) instead of to execution, and this state
of the law continued until 1857 (6 _Law Quarterly Review_, p. 388). This
power to sentence to transportation at first applied only to felonies
with benefit of clergy; but in 1705, on the abolition of the necessity
of proving capacity to read, all criminals alike became entitled to the
benefit previously reserved to clerks. Benefit of clergy was finally
abolished in 1827 as to all persons not having privilege of peerage, and
in 1841 as to peers and peeresses. Its beneficial effect had now been
exhausted, since no clergyable offences remained capital crimes.
At the end of the 18th century the criminal law of all Europe was
ferocious and indiscriminate in its administration of capital punishment
for almost all forms of grave crime; and yet owing to poverty, social
conditions, and the inefficiency of the police, such forms of crime were
far more numerous than they now are. The policy and righteousness of the
English law were questioned as early as 1766 by Goldsmith through the
mouth of the vicar of Wakefield: "Nor can I avoid even questioning the
validity of that right which social combinations have assumed of
capitally punishing offences of a slight nature. In cases of murder
their right is obvious, as it is the duty of us all from the law of
self-defence to cut off that man who has shown a disregard for the life
of another. Against such all nature rises in arms; but it is not so
against him who steals my property." He adds later: "When by
indiscriminate penal laws the nation beholds the same punishment affixed
to dissimilar degrees of guilt, the people are led to lose all sense of
distinction in the crime, and this distinction is the bulwark of all
morality."
The opinion expressed by Goldsmith was strongly supported by Bentham,
Romilly, Basil Montaguand Mackintosh in England, and resulted in
considerable mitigation of the severity of the law. In 1800 over 200 and
in 1819 about 180 crimes were capital. As the result of the labour of
these eminent men and their disciples, and of Sir Robert Peel, there are
now only four crimes (other than offences against military law or naval
discipline) capitally punishable in England--high treason, murder,
piracy with violence, and destruction of public arsenals and dockyards
(The Dockyards, &c., Protection Act 1772). An attempt to abolish the
death penalty for this last offence was made in 1837, but failed, and
has not since been renewed. In the case of the last two offences
sentence of death need not be pronounced, but may be recorded (4 Geo.
IV. c. 48). Since 1838 it has in practice been executed only for murder;
the method being by hanging.
The change in the severity of the law is best illustrated by the
following statistics:--
+--------+-------------------+---------------------+
| | Death Sentences. | Sentences Executed. |
| Years. +---------+---------+----------+----------+
| | For all | For | For all | For |
| | Crimes. | Murder. | Crimes. | Murder. |
+--------+---------+---------+----------+----------+
| 1831 | 1601 | 14 | 52 | 12 |
| 1833* | 931 | 9 | 33 | 6 |
| 1838* | 116 | 25 | 6 | 5 |
| 1862* | 29 | 28 | 15 | 15 |
+--------+---------+---------+----------+----------+
* Each of these years followed upon legislation mitigating severity
of punishment.
During the twelve years from 1893 to 1904, 788 persons were committed
for trial for murder, being an average of 65. The highest number was in
1893 (82) and the lowest in 1900 (51). Of those tried in 1904, 28 (26
males and 2 females) were convicted of murder, 16 (all males) were
executed; 9 males and 2 females had their sentences commuted to penal
servitude for life.
In Scotland capital punishment can be imposed only for treason, murder
and offences against 10 Geo. IV. c. 38, i.e., wilful shooting, stabbing,
strangling or throwing corrosives with intent to murder, maim,
disfigure, disable, or do grievous bodily harm, in all cases where if
death had ensued the offence would have been murder. Prior to 1887 rape,
robbery, wilful fire-raising and incest, and many other crimes, were
also capital offences; but in practice the pains of law were restricted
at the instance of the prosecution. The method is by hanging.
In Ireland capital punishment may be inflicted for the same offences as
in England, except offences under the Dockyards Protection Act 1772, and
it is carried out in the same manner.
_Offences under Military Law_.--Thus far only crimes against the
ordinary law of the land have been dealt with. But both the Naval
Discipline Act of 1866 and the Army Act empower courts-martial to pass
sentence for a number of offences against military and naval laws. Such
sentences are rarely if ever passed where an ordinary court is within
reach, or except in time of war. The offences extend from traitorous
communication with the enemy and cowardice on the field to falling
asleep while acting as a sentinel on active service. It is for the
authority confirming a sentence of death by court-martial to direct the
mode of execution, which both in the British and United States armies is
usually by shooting or hanging. During the Indian Mutiny some mutineers
were executed by being blown from the mouth of cannon. As to the history
of military punishments see Clode, _Military and Martial Law_.
_British Colonies and Possessions_.--Under the Indian Penal Code
sentence of death may be passed for waging war against the king (s. 121)
and for murder (s. 302). If the murder is committed by a man under
sentence of transportation for life the death penalty must be imposed
(s. 303). In other cases it is alternative. This code has been in
substance adopted in Ceylon, in Straits Settlements and Hong-Kong, and
in the Sudan. In most of the British colonies and possessions the death
penalty may be imposed only in the case of high treason, wilful murder
and piracy with violence. But in New South Wales and Victoria sentence
of death may be passed for rape and criminal abuse of girls under ten.
In Queensland the law was the same until the passing of the Criminal
Code of 1899.
Under the Canadian Criminal Code of 1892 the death sentence may be
imposed for treason (s. 657), murder (s. 231), rape (s. 267), piracy
with violence (s. 127), and upon subjects of a friendly power who levy
war on the king in Canada (s. 68). But the judge is bound by statute to
report on all death sentences, and the date of execution is fixed so as
to give time for considering the report. The sentence is executed by
hanging. In South Africa the criminal law is based on the Roman-Dutch
law, under which capital punishment is liable for treason (_crimen
perduellionis_ or _laesae majestatis_), murder and rape (van Lecuwen, c.
36). In the Cape Colony rape is still capital (_R. v. Nonosi_, 1885; 1
Buchanan, 1898). In Natal rape may be punished by hanging (act no. 22,
1898). Though the Roman-Dutch modes of executing the sentence by
decapitation or breaking on the wheel have not been formally abolished,
in practice the sentence in the Cape Colony is executed by hanging. In
the Transvaal hanging is now the sole mode of executing capital
punishment (Criminal Procedure Code, 1903, s. 244). The Roman-Dutch law
as to crime and punishments has been superseded in Ceylon and British
Guiana by ordinance.
_Austria-Hungary_.--In Austria capital punishment was in 1787 for a time
abolished, but was reintroduced in 1795 for high treason, and in 1803
for certain other crimes. Under the penal code still in force in 1906 it
might be inflicted for the offences in the table given below, but not on
offenders who were under twenty when they committed the offence. The
annexed table indicates that the full sentence was sparingly executed.
Under a Penal Code drafted in 1906, however, only two offences were made
capital, viz. high treason against the person of the emperor and the
graver cases of murder. The sentence is executed by hanging.
+-----------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| Crimes Punishable by | 1853 to 1873. | 1875 to 1900. | 1901 to 1903. |
| Death. +----------------------+-----------+----------+-----------+----------+
| | Condemned.| Executed.| Condemned.| Executed.| Condemned.| Executed.|
+-----------------------------+----------------------+-----------+----------+-----------+----------+
| High treason | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Murder s. 136 | 880 | 102 | 2085 | 81 | 180 | 9 |
| Killing by robbers, s. 141 | 12 | 3 | 35 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
| Public violence, ss. 85, 87 | . . | . . | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Incendiarism, s. 167 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Criminal use of explosives | . . | . . | . . | . . | . . | . . |
| (explosives law, s. 4) | | | | | | |
+-----------------------------+-----------+----------+-----------+----------+-----------+----------+
_Belgium_.--Under the Belgian Penal Code of 1867 the death penalty is
retained for certain forms of high treason, and for assassination and
parricide by poisoning. It may not be pronounced on a person under
eighteen. The sentence is executed publicly by the guillotine. No
execution seems to have taken place since 1863.
_Denmark_.--Sentence of death may be imposed for most forms of high
treason, aggravated cases of murder, rape and piracy. It is executed
publicly by the axe. Offenders under eighteen are not liable.
_Finland_.--In Finland the death penalty is alleged not to have been
inflicted since 1824. It may be imposed for the assassination of the
grand duke or grand duchess or the head of a friendly state, and wilful
murder of other persons.
_France_.--Under the _ancien regime_ in France, 115 crimes had become
capital in 1789. The mode of execution varied, but in some cases it was
effected by breaking on the wheel or burning, and was coupled with
mutilation. Under the Penal Code of 1810, as amended in or after 1832,
even so late as 1871, thirty offences were capital, one being perjury
against a prisoner resulting in his condemnation to death (art. 361). At
present it may be imposed for wounding a public official with intent to
murder (art. 233), assassination, parricide, poisoning, killing to
commit a crime or escape from justice (arts. 302, 304). But juries
freely exercise the power of acquitting in capital cases, or of
defeating the capital sentence by finding extenuating circumstances in
more than seven-eighths of the cases, which compels the court to reduce
the punishment by one or more degrees, i.e. below the penalty of death.
And in recent times the prerogative of mercy has been continually
exercised by the president, even in gross cases where public opinion
demanded the extreme penalty. The sentence is executed in public by the
guillotine.
_Germany_.--In many of the states of Germany capital punishment had been
abolished (Brunswick, Coburg, Nassau, Oldenburg in 1849; Saxe-Meiningen,
Saxe-Weimar, 1862; Baden, 1863; Saxony, 1868). But it has been restored
by the Imperial Criminal Code of 1872, in the case of attempts on the
life of the emperor, or of the sovereign of any federal state in which
the offender happens to be (s. 80), and for deliberate homicide (s.
211)--as opposed to intentional homicide without deliberation--and for
certain treasonable acts committed when a state of siege has been
proclaimed. The sentence is executed by beheading (s. 13).
_Holland_.--In Holland there have been no executions since 1860. Capital
punishment (by hanging) was abolished in 1870, and was not reintroduced
in the Penal Code of 1886.
_Italy_.--Capital punishment was abolished in Tuscany as far back as
1786, and from Italy has come the chief opposition to the death penalty,
originated by Beccaria, and supported by many eminent jurists. Under the
Penal Code of 1888 the death penalty was abrogated for all crimes, even
for regicide. The cases of homicide in Italy are very numerous compared
with those in England, amounting in 1905 to 105 per million as compared
with 27 per million in the United Kingdom.
_Japan_.--The penalty of death is executed by hanging within a prison.
It may be imposed for executing or contriving acts of violence against
the mikado or certain of his family, and for seditious violence with the
object of seizing the territory or subverting the government or laws of
Japan, or conspiring with foreign powers to commence hostilities against
Japan. It is inflicted for certain forms of homicide, substantially
wilful murder in the first degree.
_Norway_.--Under Norwegian law, up to 1905, sentence of death might be
passed for murder with premeditation, but the court might as an
alternative decree penal servitude for life. Sentence of death had also
to be passed in cases where a person under sentence of penal servitude
for life committed murder or culpable homicide, or caused bodily
injuries in circumstances warranting a sentence of penal servitude for
life, or committed robbery or the graver forms of wilful fire-raising.
The sentence was carried out by decapitation (see BEHEADING); but there
had been no execution since 1876. The new Norwegian Code, which came
into force on the 6th of January 1905, abolished capital punishment.
_Portugal_.--There has been considerable objection in Portugal to
capital punishment, and it was abolished in 1867.
_Rumania_.--Capital punishment was abolished in 1864.
_Russia_.--In 1750, under the empress Elizabeth, capital punishment was
abolished; but it was restored later and was freely inflicted, the
sentence being executed by shooting, beheading or hanging. According to
a Home Office Return in England in 1907 the death penalty is abolished,
except in cases where the lives of the emperor, empress or heir to the
throne are concerned.
_Spain_.--Under the Spanish Penal Code of 1870 the following crimes are
capital:--inducing a foreign power to declare war against Spain, killing
the sovereign, parricide and assassination. The method employed is
execution in public by the garrote. But the death sentence is rarely
imposed, the customary penalty for murder being penal servitude in
chains for life, while a parricide is imprisoned in chains "in
perpetuity until death."
_Sweden_.--The severity of the law in Sweden was greatly mitigated so
far back as 1777. Under the Penal Code of 1864 the penalty of death may
be imposed for certain forms of treason, including attempts on the life
of the sovereign or on the independence of Sweden, and for premeditated
homicide (_assassinat_), and in certain cases for offences committed by
persons under sentence of imprisonment for life. In 1901 a bill to
abolish capital punishment was rejected by both houses of the Swedish
parliament.
_Switzerland_.--Capital punishment was abolished in Switzerland in 1874
by Federal legislation; but in 1879, in consequence of a plebiscite,
each canton was empowered to restore the death penalty for offences in
its territory. The Federal government was unwilling to take this course,
but was impelled to it by the fact that, between 1874 and 1879, cases of
premeditated murder had considerably increased. Seven of the cantons out
of twenty-two have exercised the power given to restore capital
punishment. But there do not seem to have been any cases in which the
death penalty has been inflicted; and on the assassination of the
empress of Austria at Geneva in 1898 it was found that the laws of the
canton did not permit the execution of the assassin. The canton of Zug
imposes the lowest minimum penalty known, i.e. three years' imprisonment
for wilful homicide, the maximum being imprisonment for life.
_United States of America_.--Under the Federal laws sentence of death
may be passed for treason against the United States and for piracy and
for murder within the Federal jurisdiction. But for the most part the
punishment of crime is regulated by the laws of the constituent states
of the Union.
The death penalty was abolished in Michigan in 1846 except for treason,
and wholly in Wisconsin in 1853. In Maine it was abolished in 1876,
re-enacted in 1883, and again abolished in 1887. In Rhode Island it was
abolished in 1852, but restored in 1882, only in case of murder
committed by a person under sentence of imprisonment for life (Laws,
1896, c. 277, s. 2). In all the other states the death penalty may still
be inflicted: in Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, and West
Virginia, for treason, murder, arson and rape; in Alaska, Arizona,
Kansas, New Jersey, Mississippi, Montana, New York, North Dakota,
Oregon, and South Dakota, for treason and murder; in Colorado, Idaho,
Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New
Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Utah and Wyoming, for
murder only; in Kentucky and Virginia, for treason, murder and rape; in
Vermont, for treason, murder and arson; in Indiana, for treason, murder,
and for arson if death result; in California, for treason, murder and
train-wrecking; in North Carolina, for murder, rape, arson and burglary;
in Florida, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas, for murder
and rape; in Arkansas and Louisiana, for treason, murder, rape, and
administering poison or use of dangerous weapons with intent to murder.
Louisiana is cited by Girardin (_le droit de punir_) as a state in which
the death penalty was abolished in 1830. Under the influence of the
eminent jurist, E. Livingston, who framed the state codes, the
legislature certainly passed a resolution against capital punishment.
But since as early as 1846 it has been there lawful, subject to a power
given to the jury, to bring in a verdict of guilty, "but no capital
punishment," which had the effect of imposing a sentence of hard labour
for life. In certain states the jury has, under local legislation, the
right to award the sentence. The constitutionality of such legislation
has been doubted, but has been recognized by the courts of Illinois and
Iowa. Sentence of death is executed by hanging, except in seven of the
states, where it is carried out by "electrocution" (q.v.).
The question of abolition.
With the mitigation of the law as to punishment, agitation against the
theory of capital punishment has lost much of its force. But many
European and American writers, and some English writers and
associations, advocate the total abolition of the death punishment. The
ultimate argument of the opponents of capital punishment is that society
has no right to take the life of any one of its members on any ground.
But they also object to capital punishment: (1) on religious grounds,
because it may deprive the sinner of his full time for repentance; (2)
on medical grounds, because homicide is usually if not always evidence
of mental disease or irresponsibility; (3) on utilitarian grounds,
because capital punishment is not really deterrent, and is actually
inflicted in so few instances that criminals discount the risks of
undergoing it; (4) on legal grounds, i.e. that the sentence being
irrevocable and the evidence often circumstantial only, there is great
risk of gross injustice in executing a person convicted of murder; (5)
on moral grounds, that the punishment does not fit the case nor effect
the reformation of the offender. It is to be noted that the English
Children Act 1908 expressly forbids the pronouncing or recording the
sentence of death against any person under the age of sixteen (s. 103).
The punishment is probably retained, partly from ingrained habit, partly
from a sense of its appropriateness for certain crimes, but also that
the _ultima ratio_ may be available in cases of sufficient gravity to
the commonweal. The apparent discrepancy between the number of trials
and convictions for murder is not in England any evidence of hostility
on the part of juries to capital punishment, which has on the whole
lessened rather than increased since the middle of the 19th century. It
is rarely if ever necessary in England, though common in America, to
question the jurors as to their views on capital punishment. The reasons
for the comparatively small number of convictions for murder seem to be:
(1) that court and jury in a capital case lean _in favorem vitae_, and
if the offence falls short of the full gravity of murder, conviction for
manslaughter only results; (2) that in the absence of a statutory
classification of the degrees of murder, the prerogative of mercy is
exercised in cases falling short of the highest degree of gravity
recognized by lawyers and by public opinion; (3) that where the
conviction rests on circumstantial evidence the sentence is not executed
unless the circumstantial evidence is conclusive; (4) that charges of
infanticide against the mothers of illegitimate children are treated
mercifully by judge and jury, and usually terminate in acquittal, or in
a conviction of concealment of birth; (5) that many persons tried as
murderers are obviously insane; (6) that coroners' juries are somewhat
recklessly free in returning inquisitions of murder without any evidence
which would warrant the conviction of the person accused.
The medical doctrine, and that of Lombroso with respect to criminal
atavism and irresponsibility, have probably tended to incline the public
mind in favour of capital punishment, and Sir James Stephen and other
eminent jurists have even been thereby tempted to advocate the execution
of habitual criminals. It certainly seems strange that the community
should feel bound carefully to preserve and tend a class of dangerous
lunatics, and to give them, as Charles Kingsley says, "the finest air in
England and the right to kill two gaolers a week."
The whole question of capital punishment in the United Kingdom was
considered by a royal commission appointed in 1864, which reported in
1866 (Parl. Pap., 1866, 10,438). The commission took the opinions of all
the judges of the supreme courts in the United Kingdom and of many other
eminent persons, and collected the laws of other countries so far as
this was ascertainable. The commissioners differed on the question of
the expediency of abolishing or retaining capital punishment, and did
not report thereon. But they recommended: (1) that it should be
restricted throughout the United Kingdom to high treason and murder; (2)
alteration of the law of homicide so as to classify homicides according
to their gravity, and to confine capital punishment to murder in the
first degree; (3) modification of the law as to child murder so as to
punish certain cases of infanticide as misdemeanours; (4) authorizing
judges to direct sentence of death to be recorded; (5) the
abolition--since carried out--of public executions.
AUTHORITIES.--Beccaria, _Dei Delitte e delle Pene_ (1790); Bentham,
_Rationale of Punishment_; Lammasch, _Grundris des Strafrechts_
(Leipzig, 1902); Olivecrona, _De la peine de mort_; Mittermaier,
_Capital Punishment; Report of the Royal Commission on Capital
Punishment_ (Parl. Pap., 1866, No. 10,438); Oldfield, _The Penalty of
Death_ (1901); Pollock and Maitland, _History of English Law_; Pike,
_History of Crime_; Sir J.F. Stephen, _History of Crime in England_;
S. Walpole, _History of England_, vol. i. p. 191; vol. iv. p. 74;
Andrews' _Old Time Punishments; A Century of Law Reform_ (London,
1901); Lecture ii. by Sir H.B. Poland; Howard Association
Publications. (W. F. C.)
CAPITO (or KOPFEL), WOLFGANG [FABRICIUS] (1478-1541), German reformer,
was born of humble parentage at Hagenau in Alsace. He was educated for
the medical profession, but also studied law, and applied himself so
earnestly to theology that he received the doctorate in that faculty
also, and, having joined the Benedictines, taught for some time at
Freiburg. He acted for three years as pastor in Bruchsal, and was then
called to the cathedral church of Basel (1515). Here he made the
acquaintance of Zwingli and began to correspond with Luther. In 1519 he
removed to Mainz at the request of Albrecht, archbishop of that city,
who soon made him his chancellor. In 1523 he settled at Strassburg,
where he remained till his death in November 1541. He had found it
increasingly difficult to reconcile the new religion with the old, and
from 1524 was one of the leaders of the reformed faith in Strassburg. He
took a prominent part in the earlier ecclesiastical transactions of the
16th century, was present at the second conference of Zurich and at the
conference of Marburg, and along with Martin Bucer drew up the
_Confessio Tetrapolitana_. Capito was always more concerned for the
"unity of the spirit" than for dogmatic formularies, and from his
endeavours to conciliate the Lutheran and Zwinglian parties in regard to
the sacraments, he seems to have incurred the suspicions of his own
friends; while from his intimacy with Martin Cellarius and other divines
of the Socinian school he drew on himself the charge of Arianism. His
principal works were:--_Institutionum Hebraicarum libri duo;
Enarrationes in Habacuc et Hoseam Prophetas_; a life of Oecolampadius
and an account of the synod of Berne (1532).
CAPITULARY (Med. Lat. _capitularium_), a series of legislative or
administrative acts emanating from the Merovingian and Carolingian
kings, so called as being divided into sections or chapters
(_capitula_). With regard to these capitularies two questions arise: (1)
as to the means by which they have been handed down to us; (2) as to
their true character and scope.
(1) As soon as the capitulary was composed, it was sent to the various
functionaries of the Frankish empire, archbishops, bishops, _missi_ and
counts, a copy being kept by the chancellor in the archives of the
palace. At the present day we do not possess a single capitulary in its
original form: but very frequently copies of these isolated capitularies
were included in various scattered manuscripts, among pieces of a very
different nature, ecclesiastical or secular. We find, therefore, a fair
number of them in books which go back as far as the 9th or 10th
centuries. In recent editions in the case of each capitulary it is
carefully indicated from what manuscripts it has been collated.
These capitularies make provisions of a most varied nature; it was
therefore found necessary at quite an early date to classify them into
chapters according to the subject. In 827 Ansegisus, abbot of St
Wandrille at Fontenelle, made such a collection. He embodied them in
four books: one of the ecclesiastical capitularies of Charlemagne, one
of the ecclesiastical capitularies of Louis the Pious, one of the
secular capitularies of Charlemagne, and one of the secular capitularies
of Louis, bringing together similar provisions and suppressing
duplicates. This collection soon gained an official authority, and after
829 Louis the Pious refers to it, citing book and section.
After 827 new capitularies were naturally promulgated, and before 858
there appeared a second collection in three books, by an author calling
himself Benedictus Levita. His aim was, he said, to complete the work of
Ansegisus, and bring it up to date by continuing it from 827 to his own
day; but the author has not only borrowed prescriptions from the
capitularies; he has introduced other documents into his collection,
fragments of Roman laws, canons of the councils and especially spurious
provisions very similar in character to those of the same date found in
the _False Decretals_. His contemporaries did not notice these spurious
documents, but accepted the whole collection as authentic, and
incorporated the four books of Ansegisus and the three of Benedictus
Levita into a single collection in seven books. The serious historian of
to-day, however, is careful not to use books v., vi. and vii. for
purposes of reference.
Early editors chose to republish this collection of Ansegisus and
Benedictus as they found it. It was a distinguished French scholar,
Etienne Baluze, who led the way to a fresh classification. In 1677 he
brought out the _Capitularia regum francorum_, in two folio volumes, in
which he published first the capitularies of the Merovingian kings, then
those of Pippin, of Charles and of Louis the Pious, which he had found
complete in various manuscripts. After the date of 840, he published as
supplements the unreliable collection of Ansegisus and Benedictus
Levita, with the warning that the latter was quite untrustworthy. He
then gave the capitularies of Charles the Bald, and of other Carolingian
kings, either contemporaries or successors of Charles, which he had
discovered in various places. A second edition of Baluze was published
in 1780 in 2 volumes folio by Pierre de Chiniac.
The edition of the Capitularies made in 1835 by George Pertz, in the
_Monumenta Germaniae_ (folio edition, vol. i., of the _Leges_) was not
much advance on that of Baluze. A fresh revision was required, and the
editors of the _Monumenta_ decided to reissue it in their quarto series,
entrusting the work to Dr Alfred Boretius. In 1883 Boretius published
his first volume, containing all the detached capitularies up to 827,
together with various appendices bearing on them, and the collection of
Ansegisus. Boretius, whose health had been ruined by overwork, was
unable to finish his work; it was continued by Victor Krause, who
collected in vol. ii. the scattered capitularies of a date posterior to
828. Karl Zeumer and Albrecht Werminghoff drew up a detailed index of
both volumes, in which all the essential words are noted. A third
volume, prepared by Emil Seckel, was to include the collection of
Benedictus Levita.
(2) Among the capitularies are to be found documents of a very varied
kind. Boretius has divided them into several classes:--
(a) The _Capitula legibus addenda._--These are additions made by the
king of the Franks to the barbarian laws promulgated under the
Merovingians, the Salic law, the Ripuarian or the Bavarian. These
capitularies have the same weight as the law which they complete; they
are particular in their application, applying, that is to say, only to
the men subject to that law. Like the laws, they consist chiefly of
scales of compensation, rules of procedure and points of civil law. They
were solemnly promulgated in the local assemblies where the consent of
the people was asked. Charlemagne and Louis the Pious seem to have made
efforts to bring the other laws into harmony with the Salic law. It is
also to be noted that by certain of the capitularies of this class, the
king adds provisions affecting, not only a single law, but all the laws
in use throughout the kingdom.
(b) The _Capitula ecclesiastica._--These capitularies were elaborated in
the councils of the bishops; the kings of the Franks sanctioned the
canon of the councils, and made them obligatory on all the Christians in
the kingdom.
(c) The _Capitula per se scribenda._--These embodied political decrees
which all subjects of the kingdom were bound to observe. They often bore
the name of _edictum_ or of _constitutio_, and the provisions made in
them were permanent. These capitularies were generally elaborated by the
king of the Franks in the autumn assemblies or in the committees of the
spring assemblies. Frequently we have only the proposition made by the
king to the committee, _capitula tractanda cum comitibus, episcopis, et
abbatibus_, and not the final form which was adopted.
(d) The _Capitula missorum_, which are the instructions given by
Charlemagne and his successors to the _missi_ sent into the various
parts of the empire. They are sometimes drawn up in common for all the
_missi_ of a certain year--_capitula missorum generalia_; sometimes for
the _missi_ sent only on a given circuit--_capitula missorum specialia_.
These instructions sometimes hold good only for the circuit of the
_missus_; they have no general application and are merely temporary.
(e) With the capitularies have been incorporated various documents; for
instance, the rules to be observed in administering the king's private
domain (the celebrated capitulary _de villis_, which is doubtless a
collection of the instructions sent at various times to the agents of
these domains); the partitions of the kingdom among the king's sons, as,
the _Divisio regnorum_ of 806, or the _Ordinatio imperii_ of 817; the
oaths of peace and brotherhood which were taken on various occasions by
the sons of Louis the Pious, &c.
The merit of clearly establishing these distinctions belongs to
Boretius. He has doubtless exaggerated the difference between the
_Capitula missorum_ and the _Capitula per se scribenda;_ among the first
are to be found provisions of a general and permanent nature, and among
the second temporary measures are often included. But the idea of
Boretius is none the less fruitful. In the capitularies there are
usually permanent provisions and temporary provisions intermingled; and
the observation of this fact has made it possible more clearly to
understand certain institutions of Charlemagne, _e.g._ military service.
After the reign of Louis the Pious the capitularies became long and
diffuse. Soon, from the 10th century onwards, no provision of general
application emanates from the kings. Henceforth the kings only regulated
private interests by charters; it was not until the reign of Philip
Augustus that general provisions again appeared; but when they did so,
they bore the name of ordinances (_ordonnances_).
There were also capitularies of the Lombards. These capitularies formed
a continuation of the Lombard laws, and are printed as an appendix to
these laws by Boretius in the folio edition of the _Monumenta Germaniae,
Leges_, vol. iv.
AUTHORITIES.---Boretius, _Die Capitularien im Longobardenreich_
(Halle, 1864); and _Beitrage zur Capitularienkritik_ (Leipzig, 1874);
G. Seeliger, _Die Kapitularien der Karolinger_ (Munich, 1893). See
also the histories of institutions or of law by Waitz, Brunner, Fustel
de Coulanges, Viollet, Esmein. (C. Pf.)
CAPITULATION (Lat. _capitulum_, a little head or division; _capitulare_,
to treat upon terms), an agreement in time of war for the surrender to a
hostile armed force of a particular body of troops, a town or a
territory. It is an ordinary incident of war, and therefore no previous
instructions from the captor's government are required before finally
settling the conditions of capitulation. The most usual of such
conditions are freedom of religion and security of private property on
the one hand, and a promise not to bear arms within a certain period on
the other. Such agreements may be rashly concluded with an inferior
officer, on whose authority the enemy are not in the actual position of
the war entitled to place reliance. When an agreement is made by an
officer who has not the proper authority or who has exceeded the limits
of his authority, it is termed a _sponsion_, and, to be binding, must be
confirmed by express or tacit ratification. Article 35 of the Hague
Convention (1899) on the laws and the customs of war lays down that
"capitulations agreed on between the contracting parties must be in
accordance with the rules of military honour. When once settled they
must be observed by both the parties."
In another sense, capitulation is the name given to an arrangement by
which foreigners are withdrawn, for most civil and criminal purposes,
from the jurisdiction of the state making the capitulation. Thus in
Turkey arrangements termed capitulations (q.v.), and treaties
confirmatory of them, have been made between the Porte and other states
by which foreigners resident in Turkey are subject to the laws of their
respective countries. The term is also applied by French writers to the
oath which on his election the Holy Roman emperor used to make to the
college of electors; this related chiefly to such matters as regalian
rights, appeals from local jurisdictions, the rights of the pope, &c.
CAPITULATIONS (from Lat. _caput_, or its Low-Latin diminutive
_capitulum_, as indicating the form in which these acts were set down in
"chapters"; the Gr. equivalent _cephaleosis_, kephalaiosis, is
occasionally used in works of the 17th century), treaties granted by a
state and conferring the privilege of extra-territorial jurisdiction
within its boundaries on the subjects of another state. Thus, in the 9th
century, the caliph Harun-al-Rashid engaged to grant guarantees and
commercial facilities to such Franks, subjects of the emperor
Charlemagne, as should visit the East with the authorization of their
emperor. After the break-up of the Frank empire, similar concessions
were made to some of the practically independent Italian city states
that grew up on its ruins. Thus, in 1098, the prince of Antioch granted
a charter of this nature to the city of Genoa; the king of Jerusalem
extended the same privilege to Venice in 1123 and to Marseilles in 1136.
Salah-ud-din (Saladin), sultan of Babylon (Cairo), granted a charter to
the town of Pisa in 1173. The Byzantine emperors followed this example,
and Genoa, Pisa and Venice all obtained capitulations. The explanation
of the practice is to be found in the fact that the sovereignty of the
state was held in those ages to apply only to its subjects; foreigners
were excluded from its rights and obligations. The privilege of
citizenship was considered too precious to be extended to the alien, who
was long practically an outlaw. But when the numbers, wealth and power
of foreigners residing within the state became too great, it was found
to be politic to subject them to some law, and it was held that this law
should be their own. When the Turkish rule was substituted for that of
the Byzantine emperors, the system already in existence was continued;
the various non-Moslem peoples were allowed their semi-autonomy in
matters affecting their personal status, and the Genoese of Galata were
confirmed in their privileges. But the first capitulation concluded with
a foreign state was that of 1535 granted to the French. Lest it should
be imagined that this was a concession wrested by the victorious
Christian monarch from the decadent Turk, it should be borne in mind
that Turkey was then at the height of her power, and that Francis I. had
shortly before sustained a disastrous defeat at Pavia. His only hope of
assistance lay in Suleiman I., whose attack on Vienna had been checked
by the victorious Charles V. The appeal to Suleiman on the ground of the
common interest of France and Turkey in overcoming Charles V.'s
overweening power was successful; the secret mission of Frangipani, an
unofficial envoy who could be disowned in case of failure, paved the way
for De la Forest's embassy in 1534, and in 1536 the capitulations were
signed.[1] They amounted to a treaty of commerce and a treaty allowing
the establishment of Frenchmen in Turkey and fixing the jurisdiction to
be exercised over them: individual and religious liberty is guaranteed
to them, the king of France is empowered to appoint consuls in Turkey,
the consuls are recognized as competent to judge the civil and criminal
affairs of French subjects in Turkey according to French law, and the
consuls may appeal to the officers of the sultan for their aid in the
execution of their sentences. This, the first of the capitulations, is
practically the prototype of its successors. Five years later, similar
capitulations were concluded with Venice. The capitulations were at
first held to be in force only during the lifetime of the sultan by whom
they were granted; thus in 1569 Sultan Selim II. renewed the French
capitulations granted by his predecessor. In 1583 England obtained her
first capitulation, until which time France had been the official
protector of all Europeans established in Turkey. Later on, England
claimed to protect the subjects of other nations, a claim which is
rejected in the French capitulations of 1597, 1604 and 1607, the
last-named of which explicitly lays down that the subjects of all
nations not represented at Constantinople by an ambassador shall be
under French protection. In 1613 Holland obtained her first
capitulation, with the assistance of the French ambassador, anxious to
help a commercial rival of England. In 1673 the French, represented by
the marquis de Nointel, succeeded in obtaining the renewal of the
capitulations which, for various reasons, had remained unconfirmed since
1607. Louis XIV. had been anxious to secure the protectorate of all
Catholics in Turkey, but was obliged to content himself with the
recognition of his right to protect all Latins of non-Turkish
nationality; his claims for the restoration to the Catholics of the Holy
Places usurped by the Greeks was also rejected, the sultan only
undertaking to promise to restore their churches to the Jesuit
Capuchins. An important commercial gain was the reduction of the import
duties from 5 to 3%; and all suits the value of which exceeded 4000
_aspres_ in which French subjects sued, or were sued by, an Ottoman
subject, were to be heard not by the ordinary tribunals but at the Porte
itself. Later, France's friendship secured for Turkey a successful
negotiation of the peace of Belgrade in 1739, and the result was the
capitulation of 1740; this is no longer limited in duration to the
sultan's lifetime but is made perpetual, and, moreover, declares that it
cannot be modified without the assent of the French. It conferred on the
French ambassador precedence over his colleagues. Austria had obtained
capitulations in 1718, modified in 1784; Russia secured similar
privileges in 1784. In the course of the 18th century nearly every
European power had obtained these, and such newly-established countries
as the United States of America, Belgium and Greece followed in the 19th
century.
The chief privileges granted under the capitulations to foreigners
resident in Turkey are the following: liberty of residence,
inviolability of domicile, liberty to travel by land and sea, freedom of
commerce, freedom of religion, immunity from local jurisdiction save
under certain safeguards, exclusive extra-territorial jurisdiction over
foreigners of the same nationality, and competence of the forum of the
defendant in cases in which two foreigners are concerned (though the
Sublime Porte has long claimed to exercise jurisdiction in criminal
cases in which two foreigners of different nationality are
concerned--the capitulations are silent on the point and the claim is
resisted by the powers).
The same system has been followed by such countries as Persia, China,
Japan and Siam.
The practical result of the capitulations in Turkey is to form each
separate foreign colony into a sort of _imperium in imperio_, and to
hamper the local jurisdiction very considerably. As the state granting
the capitulations progresses in civilization it chafes under these
restraints in its sovereignty. Turkey's former vassals, Rumania and
Servia, though theoretically bound to respect the capitulations so long
as they formed part of Turkey, had practically abrogated them long
before securing their independence through the treaty of Berlin in 1878.
The same may be said of Bulgaria. Japan was liberated from the burden of
the capitulations some years ago.
The extra-territorial jurisdiction exercised by the foreign powers over
their subjects in Turkey and other countries where capitulations exist
is regulated by special legislative enactments; in the case of the
United Kingdom by orders in council.
In Turkey the capitulations are practically the only treaties in force
with the powers, since the expiration about 1889 of the commercial
treaties concluded in 1861-1862. As they all contain the "most-favoured
nation" clause, the privileges in any one apply to all the powers,
though not always claimed. Thus America and Belgium claim under their
treaties with Turkey the right to try all their subjects, even if
accused of offences against Ottoman subjects--a claim recently made by
Belgium in the case of the Belgian subject Joris, accused of
participation in the bomb outrage of 1905 at Yildiz. One peculiar
privilege granted in the capitulations of 1675 (Art. 74) authorizes the
king of England to buy in Turkey with his own money two cargoes of figs
and raisins, in fertile and abundant years and not in times of dearth or
scarcity, and provides that after a duty of 3% has been paid thereon no
obstacle or hindrance shall be given thereto.