[1084] This account, with unimportant variations, is given by Roger of

Wendover, ann. 1054, Matthew of Westminster, ann. 1054, the Chronicles

of Croyland, ann. 1053, Henry of Huntington, ann. 1053, and William of

Malmesbury, Lib. II. cap. 13, which shows that the legend was widely

spread and generally believed, although the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle,

ann. 1052, and Roger de Hoveden, ann. 1053, in mentioning Godwin’s

death, make no allusion to its being caused in this manner. A similar

reticence is observable in an anonymous Life of Edward (Harleian MSS.

526, p. 408 of the collection in M. R. Series), and although this is

perhaps the best authority we have for the events of his reign, still

the author’s partiality for the family of Godwin renders him not

altogether beyond suspicion.

No great effort of scepticism is requisite to suggest that Edward,

tired of the tutelage in which he was held, may have made way with

Godwin by poison, and then circulated among a credulous generation the

story related by the annalists.

[1085] Lives of Edward the Confessor, p. 119 (M. R. Series).

[1086] Dooms of Ethelred, IX. § 22; Cnut. Eccles. Tit. v.

[1087] Alium examinis modum, nostro etiamnunc sæculo, sæpe malo modo

usitatum.—Cod. Legum Antiq. p. 1418.

[1088] De Mirac. S. Benedicti. Lib. I. c. v.

[1089] Gesta Treverorum, continuat. I. (Migne’s Patrol. CLIV. 1205-6).

[1090] Ayeen Akbery, II. 498.

[1091] Ali Ibrahim Khan (Asiatic Researches, I. 391-2).

[1092] Lieut. Shaw in As. Researches, IV. 80.

[1093] Institutes of Vishnu, XIV.—Yajnavalkya, II. 112-13.

[1094] Vitodurani Chron. ann. 1336.

[1095] Roger of Wendover, ann. 1051.

[1096] Cæsar. Heisterbacens. Dial. Mirac. Dist. II. c. v.

[1097] Ibid. Dist. IX. c. xxxviii.

[1098] Baluz. et Mansi Miscell. II. 575.

[1099] Rod. Glabri Hist. Lib. V. cap. i.

[1100] Greg. Turon. Hist. Lib. X. cap. 8.

[1101] Dooms of Ethelred, X. § 20; Cnut. Eccles. Tit. V.

[1102] C. 23, 26 Caus. II. q. v.

[1103] Reginonis Continuat. ann. 941.

[1104] Dithmari Chron. Lib. II.

[1105] Hist. Archiep. Bremens. ann. 1051.—Lambert. Hersfeld. ann.

1050.—Hartzheim. Concil. German. III. 112.

[1106] Regino ann. 869.—Annal. Bertiniani.

[1107] Helgaldi Epitome Vitæ Roberti Regis.

[1108] Duclos, Mémoire sur les Épreuves.

[1109] Lambert. Hersfeld. ann. 1077.

[1110] This anecdote rests on good authority. Peter Damiani states that

he had it from Hildebrand himself (Opusc. XIX. cap. vi.), and Calixtus

II. was in the habit of relating it (Pauli Bernried. Vit. Greg. VII.

No. 11).

[1111] Bernald. Constant. Chron. ann. 1077.

[1112] Hugon. Flaviniac. Chron. Lib. II. ann. 1080.—Lambert. Hersfeld.

ann. 1076.

[1113] Ciruelo, Reprovacion de las Supersticiones, P. II. cap. vii.

Barcelona, 1628. The first edition appeared in 1539 at Salamanca.

[1114] Del Rio Disquis. Magic. L. IV. c. iv. q. 3.—P. Kluntz Dissert,

de Probat. per S. Eucharist. Ulmæ, 1677.

[1115] Ayeen Akbery, II. 498. This form of ordeal is allowed for all

the four castes.

[1116] Ali Ibrahim Khan (As. Researches I. 392).

[1117] “Sors enim non aliquid mali est, sed res est in dubitatione

humana divinam indicans voluntatem.”—S. Augustini Enarrat. in Psal.

XXX. Serm. ii. §13.—Gratian. c. I. Caus. XXVI. q. ii.—Gratian, however,

gives an ample array of other authorities condemning it.

[1118] Ad ignem seu ad sortem se excusare studeat.—Tit. XXXI. § 5.

[1119] Pact. Childeberti et Chlotarii, ann. 593, § 5: “Et si dubietas

est, ad sortem ponatur.” Also § 8: “Si litus de quo inculpatur ad

sortem ambulaverit.” As in § 4 of the same document the _æneum_ or

hot-water ordeal is provided for freemen, it is possible that the lot

was reserved for slaves. This, however, is not observed in the Decret.

Chlotarii, ann. 595, § 6, where the expression, “Si de suspicione

inculpatur, ad sortem veniat,” is general in its application, without

reservation as to station.

[1120] Ecgberti Excerpt. cap. lxxxiv. (Thorpe, II. 108).

[1121] Conc. Calchuth. can. 19 (Spelman. Concil. Brit. I. 300).

[1122] Leon. PP. IV. Epist. VIII. c. 4 (Gratian, c. 7. Caus. XXVI.

q. v.).

[1123] L. Frision. Tit. XIV. §§ 1, 2. This may not improbably be

derived from the mode of divination practised among the ancient

Germans, as described by Tacitus, De Moribus German, cap. x.

[1124] Sullivan, _ap._ Pictet, Origines Indo-Européennes, III. 179.

[1125] When used for purposes of divining into the future, these

practices were forbidden. Thus, as early as 465, the Council of Vannes

denounced those who “sub nomine fictæ religionis quas sanctorum

sortes vocant divinationis scientiam profitentur, aut quarumcumque

scripturarum inspectione futura promittant,” and all ecclesiastics

privy to such proceedings were to be expelled from the church (Concil.

Venet. can. xvi.). This canon is repeated in the Council of Agde

in 506, where the practice is denounced as one “quod maxime fidem

catholicæ religionis infestat” (Conc. Agathens. can. xlii.); and a

penitential of about the year 800 prescribes three years’ penitence for

such acts.—Ghaerbaldi Judicia Sacerdotalia c. 29 (Martene Ampl. Coll.

VII. 33).

[1126] Baldric. Lib. I. Chron. Camerac. cap. 21 (Du Cange, s. v.

_Sors_).

[1127] Decret. Caus. XXVI. q. ii.

[1128] Concil. Barcinon. II. ann. 599 c. 3.

[1129] Goll, Quellen und Untersuchungen, II. 99-105.

[1130] Hist. Monast. de Abingdon. Lib. I. (M. R. Series I. 89).

[1131] Grimm’s Teutonic Mythology, Stallybrass’s Translation, p. 1109.

[1132] E. B. Tylor on Ordeals and Oaths (Macmillan’s Mag. July, 1876).

[1133] Patetta, Le Ordalie, p. 216.

[1134] Grimm’s Teutonic Mythology, pp. 1108-9. Grimm quotes Theocritus

and Lucian to show that similar forms of divination with a sieve were

familiar in classical antiquity.

[1135] Inderwick, Side-lights on the Stuarts, p. 152.

[1136] Patetta, Le Ordalie, p. 158.

[1137] Carena, Tractatus de Officio Sanctiss. Inquisit. P. II. Tit.

xii. § xxii. In Carena’s first edition (Cremona, 1636) there is no

allusion to the subject. His attention apparently was attracted to it

by a case occurring at Cremona in 1636, where he was acting as criminal

judge. In this, Gonsalvo de Cremona, the clerical governor of Cremona,

applied to the Council of Milan in February for instructions and

received an unsatisfactory reply. He returned to the charge in June and

was effectually snubbed by the following:—

“Philippus IV. Hispaniarum Rex et Mediolani Dux.

“Dilectiss. Noster: satis fuit responsum litteris quas die 28 Febr.

proxime præteriti scripsistis ad magnificum Senatus nostri præsidem de

nece Juliæ Bellisellæ et Jo. Baptisti Vicecomitis, cujus ex vulneribus

sanguis exivit in conspectu Vespasiani Schitii, non autem Gasparis

Picenardi, pariter suspectorum eius facinoris. Igitur novissimis

litteris quibus petiistis vobis dici quid de ea re sentiamus nihil est

quod præterea respondeamus nisi ut meliora quæratis indicia et juxta ea

procedatis ad expeditionem causæ, referendo referenda.

“Mediolani 3 Julii, 1636.”

[1138] Marsilii Ficini de Immortal. Animæ Lib. XVI. c. 5.—Del Rio,

Magicarum Disquisit. Lib. I. cap. iii. Q. 4, ¶ 6.—C. C. Oelsner de Jure

Feretri cap. I. § 6 (Jenæ, 1711).

The passage relied on has usually a much less decent significance

ascribed to it—

“Idque petit corpus mens, unde ’st saucia amore:

Namque omnes plerumque cadunt in volnus et illam

Emicat in partem sanguis unde icimur ictu,

Et si cominus est hostem ruber occupat humor.”

De Rer. Nat. IV. 1041-44.

[1139] Gamal. ben Pedazhur’s Book of Jewish Ceremonies, London, 1738,

p. 11.

[1140] Roger de Hoveden, ann. 1186; Roger of Wendover; Benedicti

Abbatis Gesta Henricii II. ann. 1189.

[1141] Scott’s Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border.

[1142] Nam ut in homicidio occulto sanguis e cadavere, tangente

homicida, erumpit, quasi cœlitus poscens ultionem.—Demonologiæ Lib.

III. c. vi.

[1143] Scott’s notes to the ballad of Earl Richard.

[1144] Cobbett’s State Trials, XI. 1371.

[1145] Spottiswoode Miscellanies, II. 69.

[1146] Alphonsi de Spina Fortalicium Fidei Lib. III. consid. vii.

[1147] Vitodurani Chron. ann. 1331.

[1148] Swartii Chron. Ottbergensis § xlvii. (Paullini Antiq. Germ.

Syntagma).

[1149] Val. Anshelm, Berner-Chronik, ann. 1503 (Bern, 1886, II. 393).

[1150] Oelsner de Jure Feretri c. iii. § 8. This little thesis was

written in 1680. It seems to have met with approval, for it was

reprinted in 1711 and 1735.

[1151] Oelsner _op. cit._ cap. iii. § 7. A variant of this story is

told by Scott in his notes to the “Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border.”

In this the bone chances to be fished up from a river, where it had

lain for fifty years, and the murderer, then an old man, happens to

touch it, when it streams with blood. He confesses the crime and is

duly condemned.

[1152] Carena, _op. cit._ P. II. Tit. xii. § 22.

[1153] Oelsner, cap. iii. § 6. Joh. Christ. Nehring de Indiciis, Jenæ,

1714, p. 19.—Königswarter (_op. cit._ p. 183) tells us that this custom

was observed also in the Netherlands and throughout the North.

[1154] Unde forte contingit ut occisi hominis vulnus etiam jacente

cadavere, in eum qui vulneraverat, si modo ille comminus instet,

vulnus ipsum inspiciens, sanguinem rursus ejiciat, quod quidem

evenire nonnunquam Lucretius affirmavit et judices observarunt.—De

Immortalitate Animæ Lib. XVI. c. 5.

[1155] Marsil. Pract. Criminal. (_ap._ Binsfeld, de Confess. Maleficar.

pp. 111-12).

[1156] Carena, _loc. cit._

[1157] Patetta, Le Ordalie, p. 34.

[1158] Cujus rei rationem petunt e causis naturalibus et reddere

conatur Petrus Apponensis; quæ qualescunque tandem hæ sint, constat

evenisse sæpe, et magnis autoribus tradita exempla.—B. d’Agentré

Comment, in Consuet. Britann. p. 145 (Ed. Antverp. 1644).

[1159] Carena, _loc. cit._—Oelsner, _op. cit._ c. iv. § 2.

[1160] Carena, _loc. cit._ A similar dramatic exhibition by a corpse is

recorded in a case occurring in Germany in 1607.—Oelsner, c. iii. § 5.

[1161] I owe this account to the kindness of L. S. Joynes, M.D., of

Richmond, who informs me that he found it while examining the Accomac

County records.

[1162] Annual Register for 1767, pp. 144-5.

[1163] Dunglison’s Human Physiology, 8th Edition, II. 657.

[1164] Phila. Bulletin, April 19, 1860.—N. Y. World, June 5,

1868.—Phila. North American, March 29, 1869.

[1165] Oelsner, _op. cit._ cap. i. § 10; c. iii. § 8.

[1166] Malleus Maleficarum, Francof. 1580, pp. 21, 32.

[1167] Magicarum Disquisit. Lib. I. cap. iii. Q. 4, ¶ 6.

[1168] Tract. de Officio Sanctiss. Inquisit. P. II. Tit. xii. §

22.—“Sed utcunque sit certum est in judiciis passim fuisse practicatum

indicium istud sanguinis emissi sufficere ad torturam si doctoribus

nostris credendum est.”

[1169] De Jure Feretri, cap. ii.

[1170] Oelsner, _op. cit._ c. iv. §§ 2, 3. Cf. Zangeri Tract. de

Quæstionibus cap. ii. n. 160.—It is perhaps worthy of remark that the

earlier jurists made no allusion to it. Angelus Aretinus, Albertus

de Gandavo, and Bonifacius de Vitellinis, in discussing the proofs

requisite to justify torture, do not mention it.

[1171] As late as 1678, an anonymous _Praxis Criminalis_, printed at

Altenburg, speaks of it as a recognized process, gives instructions

as to the cautions requisite, and says the record must be sent to the

magistrate (Ib. c. i. § 11).—In 1714, Nehring (De Indiciis, Jenæ, 1714,

pp. 42-3) still quotes authorities in favor of its justifying torture,

and feels obliged to argue at some length to demonstrate its inadequacy.

[1172] Martene de antiq. Ecclesiæ Ritibus, Lib. III. c. vii. Ordo 8, 16.

[1173] Hesiodi Theogonia, v. 794-806.

[1174] August. Epist. lxxviii. §§ 2, 3 (Ed. Benedict.).—“Ut quod

homines invenire non possunt de quolibet eorum divino judicio

propaletur.”

[1175] Decreti c. 6, Caus. II. q. v.—Gregor. PP. I. Homil XXXII. in

Evangel. cap. 6.

Dr. Patetta (Ordalie, p. 15) informs us that in some parts of Piedmont

it is still believed that a perjurer will die within the year.

[1176] Munionis Histor. Compostellan. Lib. I. cap. 2, § 2.

[1177] Gregor. Turon. De Gloria Martyrum cap. 58, 103.

[1178] Sancta enim adeo est, ut nullus, juramento super eam præstito,

impune et sine periculo vitæ suæ possit affirmare mendacium.—Hist.

Monast. Abing. Lib. I. c. xii. (M. R. Series).

[1179] Radulph. Tortarii Mirac. S. Benedicti cap. xxii. (Migne’s

Patrol. T. CLX. p. 1210).

[1180] Gregor. Turon. de Glor. Confess. c. xxix.

[1181] Chambers’s Book of Days, I. 384.

[1182] Patetta, Le Ordalie, p. 34. In Tonga and Samoa false oaths taken

on certain sacred articles are likewise believed to be followed by

speedy death (Ib. p. 63).

[1183] Vit. S. Bertrandi Convenar. No. 26 (Martene Ampliss. Collect.

VI. 1035).

[1184] Cæsar. Heisterbach. Dial. Mirac. Dist. IV. c. lviii.

[1185] Institutes of Vishnu XIII.—Yajnavalkya, II. 110-111. Yajnavalkya

classes it among the ordeals reserved for the Sudra caste (Ib. II. 98).

[1186] Ayeen Akbery, II. 497.

[1187] Ali Ibrahim Khan (As. Researches, I. 391).

[1188] Wheeler’s India, III. 262.

[1189] Ali Ibrahim Khan, _ubi sup._

[1190] Fratricidas autem et parricidas sive sacerdotum interfectores

... per manum et ventrem ferratos de regno ejiciat ut instar Cain jugi

et profugi circueant terram.—Leg. Bracilai Boæmor (Annal. Saxo ann.

1039). So also a century earlier for the murder of a chief.—Concil.

Spalatens. ann. 927, can. 7 (Batthyani, I. 331).

[1191] De Successoribus S. Hidulfi cap. xviii. (Patrolog. CXXXVIII. p.

218). A similar case attested the sanctity of St. Mansuetus (Vit. S.

Mansueti Lib. II. c. 17.—Martene et Durand. Thesaur. III. 1025).

[1192] Folcardi Mirac. S. Bertin. Lib. I. c. 4.

[1193] Batthyani, Legg. Eccles. Hung. T. I. p. 413. See also Mirac. S.

Swithuni c. ii. § 32.—Mirac. S. Yvonis c. 21 (Patrol. CLV. 76, 91).

Various other instances may be found in Muratori, Antiq. Med. Ævi,

Diss. 23. Charlemagne seems to have considered it a deception to be

restrained by law.—Car. Mag. cap. I. ann. 789, § lxxvii.

[1194] Martene de antiquis Ecclesiæ Ritibus Lib. I. cap. vi. art. 4 n.

12.

[1195] Cæsar. Heisterb. Dial. Mirac. Dist. XI. c. xxvii. xxix.

[1196] Greg. Turonens. Vitæ Patrum, Cap. viii. n. 10.

[1197] Bernald. Vit. S. Gerald. cap. xv. (Baluz et Mansi I. 134).

[1198] Socratis Hist. Eccles. Lib. I. c. 25.

[1199] Theodori Lector. H. E. Lib. II. When, about the year 500, St.

Avitus bishop of Vienne was disputing with the Arians before King

Gundobald, he offered to leave the decision as to the rival faiths to

Heaven by both parties going to the tomb of St. Justus and appealing

to him, but the Arians prudently refused to imitate Saul and practise

necromantic arts.—Collatio Episcoporum coram R. Gundebaldo (Migne’s

Patrologia, LIX. 391).

[1200] Remberti Vit. St. Anscharii c. xvi. (Langebek I. 458-9).

[1201] Gesta Consul. Andegavens. c. iii. § 16 (D’Achery III. 241).

[1202] Cæsar. Heisterbach Dial. Mirac. Dist. VIII. c. lxxiii.

[1203] Legendæ de S. Olavo (Langebek II. 551-2).

[1204] Pet. Damian. Opusc. LVII. Diss. ii. c. 3, 4.

[1205] Conc. Roman. ann. 904 (898) c. 1 (Harduin. VI. I.

487).—Liutprand. Antapodos. Lib. I. c. 30, 31.

[1206] Patetta, Le Ordalie, p. 218.

[1207] Wieri de Præstigiis Dæmonum, pp. 589-90.

[1208] That this was a settled practice is shown by its existence in

the earliest text of the law (Tit. LVI.) as well as in the latest (L.

Emend. Tit. LIX.).

[1209] Si aufugerit et ordalium vitaverit, solvat plegius compellanti

captale suum et regi weram suum.—L. Cnuti Sæc. cap. xxx.—See also cap.

xli.

[1210] Et eligat accusatus alterutrum quod velit, sive simplex

ordalium, sive jusjurandum unius libre in tribus hundredis super xxx.

den.—L. Henrici I. cap. LXV. § 3. By the municipal codes of Germany,

a choice between the various forms of ordeal was sometimes allowed to

the accused who was sentenced to undergo it.—Jur. Provin. Alaman. cap.

xxxvii. §§ 15, 16. Jur. Provin. Saxon. Lib. I. Art. 39.

[1211] Dooms of Ethelstan, I. cap. 21.

[1212] First Text, Tit. LIII. and L. Emend. Tit. LV.

[1213] Jura primæva Moraviæ, Brunæ, 1781, p. 27.

[1214] Yajnavalkya, II. 96.

[1215] Institutes of Vishnu, IX. 18-19.

[1216] Yajnavalkya, II. 22.

[1217] Leg. Frision. Tit. III. c. 8, 9.

[1218] Guthrunarkvida Thridja, 9, 10 (Thorpe’s Elder Edda, pp. 106-7).

[1219] Roberti Pulli Sententt. Lib. VI. cap. liv. (Migne’s Patrologia,

T. CLXXXVI. p. 905).

[1220] Si certa probatio non fuerit.—L. Sal. Tit. XIV. XVI. (MS.

Guelferbyt). The same is found in the Pact. Childeberti et Chlotarii

§ 5.—Decret. Chlotarii II. ann. 595, § 6.—Capit. Carol. Calvi,

ann. 873, cap. 3, 7.—Cnuti Constit. de Foresta § 11: “Sed purgatio

ignis nullatenus admittatur nisi ubi nuda veritas nequit aliter

investigari.”—In the customs of Tournay in 1187, when a man has been

wounded and has no witnesses the accused can clear himself with six

conjurators if the affair occurred in the daytime, but if at night he

is forced to the cold-water ordeal (Consuet. Tornacens. § ii. _ap._

D’Achery, Spicileg. III. 551). Horne’s Myrror of Justice, cap. III.

Sect. 23: “En case ou battaille ne se poit joindre ne nul tesmognage

n’avoit lieu ... e le actor n’ad point de testmoignes a prover sa

action, adonque estoit en le volunt del deffendant a purger sa fame

per le miracle de Dieu.” Yet in an English case of murder early in the

thirteenth century, the accused was found with the murdered man’s cap

and the knife with which he had been slain, and the whole vicinage

testified to it, yet he was allowed to purge himself with the water

ordeal.—Maitland, Pleas, etc., p. 80.

[1221] Ruskaia Prawda, art. 28. Even the evidence of a slave was

sufficient to condemn the accused to the red-hot iron. If he escaped,

the accuser paid him a small fine, which was not required if the

witnesses had been freemen. In all cases of acquittal, however, there

were fines payable to the sovereign and to the ministers of justice.

[1222] Et omnis accusator vel qui alium impetit, habeat optionem quid

velit, sive judicium aque vel ferri ... et si fugiet (accusatus) ab

ordalio, reddat eum plegius wera sua.—Ethelr. Tit. III. c. vi. (Thorpe

II. 516).

[1223] Thus, in the Icelandic code—“Quodsi reus ferrum candens se

gerere velle obtulerit, hoc minime rejiciatur.”—Grágás, Sect. VI.

c. 33. So in the laws of Bruges in 1190 (§ 31), we find the accused

allowed to choose between the red-hot iron and a regular inquest—“Qui

de palingis inpetitur, si ad judicium ardentis ferri venire noluerit,

veritatem comitis qualem melius super hoc inveniri poterit, accipiet”

(Warnkönig, Hist. de la Fland. IV. 372)—showing that it was considered

the most absolute of testimony. And in a constitution of Frederic

Barbarossa “Si miles rusticum de violata pace pulsaverit ... de duobus

unum rusticus eligat, an divino aut humano judicio innocentiam suam

ostendat.”—Feudor. Lib. II. Tit. xxvii. § 3.

[1224] Thus an anonymous ecclesiastic, in an epistle quoted by Juretus

(Observat. in Ivon. Carnot. Epist. 74)—“Simoniaci non admittuntur ad

judicium, si probabiles personæ, etiam laicorum, vel feminarum, pretium

se ab eis recipisse testantur; nec aliud est pro manifestis venire ad

judicium nisi tentare Dominum.”

[1225] Duellum vel judicium candentis ferri, vel aquæ ferventis,

vel alia canonibus vel legibus improbata, nullomodo in curia

Montispessulani rati sunt, nisi utraque pars convenerit.—Statut.

Montispess. ann. 1204 (Du Cange).

[1226] Si accolis de neutrius jure constat, adeoque hac in re

testimonium dicere non queant, tum judicio aquæ res decidatur.—Jur.

Provin. Alaman. cap. cclxxviii. § 5.—Poterit enim alteruter eorum

petere probationem per aquam (wasser urteyll) nec Dominus nec

adversarius detrectare possit; sed non, nisi quum per testes probatio

fieri nequit.—Jur. Feud. Alaman. cap. lxxvii. § 2.

“Aut veritas reperiatur de hoc per aquaticum Dei judicium. Tamen

judicium Dei non est licitum adhiberi per ullam causam, nisi cujus

veritas per justitiam non potest aliter reperiri, hoc terminabitur

judicio Dei.”—Jur. Feud. Saxon. § 100 (Senckenberg. Corp. Jur. Feud.

German. p. 249).—So, also, in a later text, “judicium Domini fervida

aqua vel ferro non licet in causa aliqua experiri, nisi in qua modis

aliis non poterit veritas indagari.”—Cap. xxiv. § 19 (Ibid. p. 337).

[1227] Établissements de Normandie, Tit. de Prison (Éd. Marnier).

Precisely similar to this was a regulation in the early Bohemian

laws.—Bracilai Leges. (Patrol. CLI., 1258-9). And an almost identical

provision is found in the Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence.—L. Cnuti Sæc. cap.

xxxv.—L. Henric. I. cap. lxi. § 5.—See, also, Assises de Jerusalem,

Baisse Court, cclix.

[1228] Batthyany, Legg. Eccles. Hung. II. 105.

[1229] Et qui inveniatur per sacramentum prædictorum rettatus vel

publicatus quod fuerit robator vel murdrator vel latro vel receptor

eorum, postquam dominus rex fuit rex, capiatur et eat ad juisiam

aquæ.—Assisa de Clarenduna § 2 (Stubbs, Select Charters, p. 137). For

examples, see Maitland, Pleas, pp. 3, 4, 5, etc.

[1230] Maitland, Pleas, etc., I. 1. P. 75 is a case of a youth detained

in prison and sent to the ordeal apparently without a trial.

[1231] Ruskaia Prawda, Art. 28.

[1232] Maitland, Pleas, etc., I. 10.

[1233] Hincmari Capit. Synod. ann. 852, II. xxi.

[1234] Hincmari Epist. xxxiv.

[1235] Capit. Car. Mag. ann. 794, § 7.

[1236] Se juratores non potuerit invenire, aut ad ineum ambulat aut,

etc.—MS. Guelferbyt. Tit. XIV.

[1237] Quod si ... juratores invenire non potuerit, ad ignem seu ad

sortem se excusare studeat.—L. Ripuar. Tit. xxxi. § 5.

[1238] Dooms of Edward the Elder, cap. iii. So also in the laws of

William the Conqueror, Tit. I. cap. xiv.—“Si sen escundira sei duzime

main. E si il auer nes pot, si sen defende par juise.” The collection

known by the name of Henry I. has a similar provision, cap. lxvi. § 3.

[1239] Radevic. de Reb. Frid. Lib. I. cap. xxvi. This was an old

feature of the Barbarian codes which continued till late in the Middle

Ages. See _ante_, p. 22.

[1240] Concil. Tribur. ann. 895, can. xxii.

[1241] Yajnavalkya, II. 99.

[1242] Chart. Commun. Laudun. (Baluz. et Mansi IV. p. 39).

[1243] Consuetud. Tornacens. § iii. (D’Achery III. 551). See above, p.

54.

[1244] Ut deinceps non sint digni juramento sed ordalio.—Legg. Edwardi

cap. iii.; Æthelredi cap. i. § 1; Cnuti Sæcul cap. xxii. xxx.; Henrici

I. cap. lxv. § 3.

[1245] Capit. Car. Mag. I. ann. 809, cap. xxviii.—Capit Ludov. Pii. I.

ann. 819.

[1246] Burchardi Decret. Lib. XVI. cap. 19.

[1247] Keure de la Châtellenie de Bruges, § 28 (Warnkönig, Hist. de la

Fland. IV. 371).

[1248] Jur. Provin. Alaman. cap. clxxxvi. §§ 4, 6, 7; cap.

ccclxxiv.—Jur. Provin. Saxon. Lib. I. Art. 39.—Sachsische Weichbild,

Art. xcii. § 2.—Richstich Landrecht, cap. lii.

[1249] Si non fuere provada por mala, que aya yazido con cinco

omes.—Fuero de Baeça (Villadiego, Fuero Juzgo, fol. 317 _a_).

[1250] Capit. Car. Mag. III. ann. 813, cap. 46.

[1251] Concil. Mogunt. ann. 847, can. xxiv.—Burchardi Decret. Lib. XVI.

cap. 19.—Keure de Gand, §§ 7, 8, 12 (Warnkönig, II. 228).

The law of William the Conqueror (Tit. II. c. 3.—Thorpe, I. 488) by

which the duel was reserved for the Norman, and the vulgar ordeal for

the Saxon, might be supposed to arise from a similar distinction. In

reality, however, it was only preserving the ancestral customs of the

races, giving to the defendant the privilege of his own law. The duel

was unknown to the Anglo-Saxons, who habitually employed the ordeal,

while the Normans, previous to the Conquest, according to Houard, who

is good authority (Anc. Loix Franc. I. 221-222), only appealed to the

sword.

[1252] Martene de Antiq. Eccl. Ritibus Lib. III. c. vii. Ord. 6. For

the beliefs connected with mortuary masses see Concil. Toletan XVII.

ann. 694 c. 5; D’Argentré Collect. Judic. de novis Error. I. II. 344;

Angeli de Clavasio Summa Angelica s. v. _Interrogationes_; Diaz de

Luco, Practica Criminalis Canonica cap. xxxv.; Grillandi de Sortilegiis

q. xiv.

[1253] The severity of the ordeal, when the sufferer had no friends

among the operators to save him, may be deduced from the description of

a hand when released from its three days’ tying up after its plunge in

hot water: “inflatam admodum et excoriatam sanieque jam carne putrida

effluentem dexteram invitus ostendit” (Du Cange, s. v. _Aquæ Ferv.

Judicium_). In this case, the sufferer was the adversary of an abbey,

the monks of which perhaps had the boiling of the caldron.

[1254] L. Wisig. L. VI. Tit. i. § 3.

[1255] Ivon. Carnot. Epist. 74; Ejusd. Decr. X. 27.—C. 20 Decr. Caus.

II. q.v.

This epistle is generally attributed to Stephen V., but two MSS. of Ivo

of Chartres ascribe it to Sylvester II. (Migne’s Patrologia CLXII. 96).

[1256] Concil. Basol. cap. xi. Rainer, private secretary of Arnoul,

offered to prove his statement by giving up a slave to walk the burning

ploughshares in evidence of his truth (Ibid. cap. xxx.).

[1257] Yajnavalkya, II. 99.

[1258] Wharton and Stillé’s Med. Jurisp., 2d Edit. 1860.

[1259] Michelet, Origines du Droit, p. 349.—Proost, Jugements de Dieu,

p. 80. This seems to be derived from the _skirsla_ of the Norsemen

described above.

[1260] London Athenæum, Aug. 20, 1881, p. 247.

[1261] Polyptichum Irminonis, App. No. 34 (Paris, 1836, p. 373).

[1262] Martene, De Antiq. Eccles. Ritibus Lib. III. cap. vii. Ordo 5.

[1263] Patetta, Le Ordalie, p. 192.

[1264] Hincmari Remens. Epist. XXII. (Migne’s Patrol. CXXVI. 136).

[1265] Quod si accusatus contendere voluerit de ipso perjurio stent ad

crucem.... Hoc vero de minoribus rebus. De majoribus vero, aut de statu

ingenuitatis, secundum legem custodiant.—Capit. Car. Mag. ann. 779, §

10. That this was respected as law in force, nearly a hundred years

later, is shown by its being included in the collection of Capitularies

by Benedict the Levite (Lib. V. cap. 196).

[1266] Ut omnes judicio Dei credant absque dubitatione.—Capit. Car.

Mag. I. ann. 809, § 20.

[1267] Aimoini Chron. Continuat. Lib. V. c. 34.

[1268] Assisa facta apud Clarendune §§ 12, 13, 14 (Gesta Henrici II. T.

II. p. clii.—M. R. Series). A case in accordance with this occurs in

1212 (Maitland, Pleas, I. 63).

[1269] Gesta Henrici II. T. I. p. 108.—Cf. Bracton. Lib. III. Tract,

ii. cap. 16 § 3.

[1270] Simili modo, cauterium militis nullum tibi certum præbet

argumentum, cum per examinationem ferri candentis occulto Dei

judicio multos videamus nocentes liberatos, multos innocentes sæpe

damnatos.—Ivon. Carnot. Epist. cccv.

[1271] Pet. Cantor. Verb. Abbreviat. c. lxxviii.

[1272] Vit. Carol. Comit. Flandren. cap. xx.

[1273] Collin de Plancy, op. cit. S. V. _Fer Chaud_.

[1274] Cæsar. Heisterbach. Dial. Mirac. Dist. X. c. xxxv.

[1275] Ciruelo, Reprovacion de las Supersticiones, P. II. c. vii.

[1276] Othlon. Narrat. de Mirac. quod nuper accidit, &c. (Migne’s

Patrol. CXLVI. 243-4).

[1277] Polyptichum Irminonis, App. No. 20 (Paris, 1836, p. 354).

[1278] Olaf Haraldssons Saga, cxlv. (Laing’s Heimskringla, II. 210).

[1279] Enimvero mirum fuit ultra modum, quod fautores arsuram et

inflationem conspiciebant; criminatores ita sanam ejus videbant palmam,

quasi penitus fulvum non tetigisset ferrum.—Mirac. S. Swithuni c. ii.

§ 37. In this case the patient was a slave, whose master had vowed to

give him to the Church in case he escaped.

[1280] Ad utramque partem sint ternas personas electas, ne conludius

fieri possit.—Decret. Chlotharii II. cap. VII.

[1281] Ethelred, III. § 4.

[1282] Synod. Zaboles can. 27 (Batthyani, Legg. Eccles. Hung. T. I. p.

439).

[1283] Martene de Antiq. Eccl. Ritibus Lib. III. c. vii. Ordo 1.

[1284] Statut. Wilhelmi Regis cap. 7 § 3 (Skene II. 4).

[1285] Ibid. cap. 16.

[1286] Maitland, Pleas of the Crown, I. 75.

[1287] Nam criminosos eodem chrismate unctos aut potatos nequaquam ullo

examine deprehendi posse a multis putatur.—C. Turonens. III. ann. 813

c. 20 (Harduin. IV. 1026).

[1288] Capit. Car. Mag. II. ann. 809.—Capitul. Lib. III. c.

55.—Reginon. de Discip. Ecclesiæ I. 73.

[1289] Reginon. _op. cit._ I. 72.—Burchardi Decret. IV. 80.—Ivon.

Carnot. Decret. I. 274.

[1290] Martene de Antiq. Ritibus Ecclesiæ Lib. III. c. vii. Ordo 8.

So in a ninth century exorcism of the hot water—“et si culpabilis de

hac causa est et aliqua maleficia aut per herbas peccatum suum tegere

voluerit tua dextera evacuare dignetur.”—Patetta, Archivio Giuridico,

Vol. XLV.

[1291] Martene, _loc. cit._ Ord. 10, 18.

[1292] Du Cange, s. v. _Ferrum candens_.

[1293] Experimentum mirabile quod facit homines ire in ignem sine

læsione, vel portare ignem vel ferrum ignitum sine læsione in manu.

Recipe succum bismalvæ et albumen ovi et semen psilli et calcem et

pulveriza et confice; cum illo albumine ovi succum raphani commisce et

ex hac confectione illinas corpus tuum et manum et dimitte siccari; et

postea iterum illinas et post hoc poteris audacter sustinere ignem sine

nocumento.—Alb. Mag. de Miraculis Mundi (Binterim, Denkwürdigkeiten der

Christ-Katholischen Kirche, Bd. V. Th. iii. p. 70).

[1294] The “Liber adversus Legem Gundobadi” and “Liber contra Judicium

Dei.”

[1295] Concil. Salisburg. I. can. ix. (Dalham Concil. Salisburg. p. 35).

[1296] Ahytonis Capitular, cap. xxi. (D’Achery I. 585).

[1297] Capit. Carol. Calvi Tit. XI. c. iii. (Baluze).

[1298] Concil. Turon. ann. 925 (Martene et Durand Thes. T. IV. pp.

72-3).

[1299] Annalist. Saxo. ann. 1028.

[1300] Höfler, Concilia Pragensia, p. xiv. Prag. 1862.

[1301] Burchardi Decret. Lib. XIX. c. 5 (Migne’s Patrologia CXL. p.

973).—Corrector Burchardi cap. 155 (Wasserschleben, Bussordnungen der

abenländischen Kirche, p. 660).

[1302] Batthyani, Legg. Eccles. Hung. II. 126.

[1303] Examinati judicio aquæ mendaces inventi sunt ... aqua eos non

suscipiente.—In Cantica, Sermon. 66 cap. 12.

[1304] De Vita Sua Lib. III. cap. 18.

[1305] Concil. Remens. ann. 1157, can. 1 (Martene Ampl. Coll. VII. 75).

[1306] Hist. Vizeliacens. Lib. IV. (D’Achery Spicileg. II. 560).

[1307] Godefridi S. Pantaleon. Annal. ann. 1172 (Freher et Struv. Rer.

German. Scriptt. I. 340).

[1308] Pet. Cantor. Verb. Abbreviat. cap. lxxviii. (Patrol. CCV. 230).

[1309] Cæsar. Heisterbach. Dial. Mirac. Dist. III. c. xvi. xvii.

[1310] Döllinger, Beiträge zur Sektengeschichte des Mittelalters,

München, 1890, II. 621, 622.

[1311] Theodericus Abbas Vice-Comitem adiit paratus aut calidi ferri

judicio secundum legem monachorum per suum hominem probare, aut scuto

et baculo secundum legem secularium deffendere.—Annal. Benedict. L. 57,

No. 74, ann. 1036 (_ap._ Houard, Loix Anc. Franç. I. 267).

[1312] Judicium ferri igniti et aquæ ferventis Abrincis portaretur, si

clerici lapsi in culpam degradationis forte invenirentur.—Chart. Joan.

Abrinc. (Patrolog. CXLVII. 266).

[1313] Ivon. Carnot. Epist. ccxxxii. ccxlix. cclii.

[1314] C. Remens. ann. 1119 (Harduin. VI. 1986).—Hildeberti Cenomanens.

Epist. (D’Achery Spicileg. III. 456).

[1315] Gemma Animæ, Lib. 1 cap. 181. At least this is the only reading

which will make the passage intelligible—“Horum officium est ... vel

nuptias vel arma, vel peras, vel baculos vel judicia ferre et aquas vel

candelas ... benedicere,” where “ferre et aquas” is evidently corrupt

for “ferri et aquæ.”

[1316] Hoc autem utrum ad omnia genera purgationis, an ad hæc duo

tantum, quæ hic prohibita esse videntur, pertineat, non immerito

dubitatur propter sacrificium zelotypiæ, et illud Gregorii.—C. 20,

caus. II. q. v.

[1317] Ordo ad Frigidam Aquam, etc. (Pez, Thesaur. Anecd. T. II. P. II.

p. 635).

[1318] Ivon. Decret. X. 15.

[1319] Dialog. Ecbert. Ebor. Interrog. III. (Thorpe, II. 88).

[1320] Abbon. Floriac. Epist. viii.

[1321] Ivon. Carnotens. Epist. lxxiv.

[1322] I have treated this matter in some detail in “Studies in Church

History,” pp. 69-74, 190 sqq.

[1323] Du Cange, s. v. _Adramire._

[1324] Revue Hist. de Droit, 1861, p. 478.

[1325] Decret. Coloman. c. 11 (Batthyani T. I. p. 454).

[1326] Lagrèze, Hist. du Droit dans les Pyrénées, p. 246.

[1327] “Presbyter de ferro duas pensas et de aqua unam pensam

accipiat.” Synod. Zabolcs. ann. 1092 can. 27 (Batthyani I. 439).

Another reading makes the fee equal for both (Ib. II. 101).

[1328] Jura Primæva Moraviæ, Brunæ, 1781, p. 26.

[1329] Pet. Cantor. Verb. Abbreviat. cap. xxiv.

[1330] Orderic. Vital. Lib. V. cap. v.

[1331] Leg. Scanicar. Lib. VII. cap. 99 (Ed. Thorsen, p. 171). There

is another provision that in certain cases of murder the accused could

not be compelled to undergo the ordeal of the red-hot ploughshares

unless the accuser was supported by twelve conjurators, when, if the

accused was successful each of the twelve was obliged to pay him three

marks, and the same sum to the priest.—Ib. L. V. c. 58 (p. 140). It

was scarcely intelligible why these ordeals were not allowed to be

performed in any week in which there was a church-feast (Ibid. p.

170-1).

[1332] Post. Concil. Lateran. P. II. cap. 3, 11.

[1333] Holophernicos.... Presbyteros, qui animas hominum carissime

appreciatas vendant; fœminas nudatas aquis immergi impudicis oculis

curiose perspiciant, aut grandi se pretio redimere cogant.—De Casibus

S. Galli cap. xiv.

[1334] Alex. PP. III. Epist. 74.

[1335] Alex. PP. III. Epist. (Harduin. VI. II. 1439).

[1336] Pet. Cantor. Verb. Abbreviat. cap. lxxviii.

[1337] Hermanni Opusc. de sua Conversione c. 5 (Migne, CLXX. 814).

[1338] Anon. Libell, adversus Errores Alberonis (Martene Ampl. Coll.

IX. 1265).

[1339] C. 8 Extra V. xxxiv.

[1340] Can. 10 Extra V. 31.

[1341] Innoc. PP. III. Regest. XIV. 138.—Yet abundant miracles in

Strassburg testified to the divine favor in these trials.—Cæsar.

Hiesterbac. Dist. III. c. 16, 17.

[1342] Nec ... quisquam purgationi aquæ ferventis vel frigidæ, seu

ferri candentis ritum cujuslibet benedictionis seu consecrationis

impendat.—Concil Lateran. can. 18. In 1227, the Council of Trèves

repeated the prohibition, but only applied it to the red-hot iron

ordeal. “Item. nullus sacerdos candens ferrum benedicat.”—Concil.

Trevirens. ann. 1227, cap. ix.

[1343] Trithem. Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1215.

[1344] Vulgaris purgatio est quæ a vulgo est inventa, ut ferri

candentis, aquæ ferventis vel frigidæ, panis vel casei, monomachiæ id

est duelli et ceteræ hujusmodi: sed ista hodie in totum reprobata est

et maledicta, tum quia inventa est a diabolo fabricante.—S. Raymundi

Summæ Lib. III. Tit. xxxi. § 1.

[1345] Ergo hujusmodi judicia sunt penitus reprobanda et purgatio per

talia.—Alex. de Ales Summæ P. III. Q. xlvi. Membr. 3.

[1346] Hostiensis Aureæ; Summæ Lib. V. _De Purg. Vulg._ § 3.

[1347] Joh. Friburgens. Summæ Confessorum Lib. III. Tit. xxxi. Q. 2, 3.

[1348] Astesani de Ast Summæ de Casibus Conscientiæ, P. I. Lib. I. Tit.

xiv.

[1349] Sachsenspiegel, ed. Ludovici, 1720, p. 619.

[1350] Fontanon, IV. 942.

[1351] Rymer, Fœd. I. 228.

[1352] Prohibitum est judicium quod fieri consuevit per ignem et per

aquam.—Mat. Westmon. ann. 1250.

[1353] De cetero non fiat judicium per aquam vel ferrum, ut consuetum

fuit antiquis temporibus.—Statut. Alex. II. cap. 7 § 3. There is some

obscurity about this provision owing to variants in the MSS., but Mr.

Neilson holds (Trial by Combat, p. 113;) that there can be little doubt

that it abolished the ordeal wholly.

[1354] Leges quæ a quibusdam simplicibus sunt dictæ paribiles ...

præsentis nostri nominis sanctionis edicto in perpetuum inhibentes

omnibus regni nostri judicibus, ut nullus ipsas leges paribiles, quæ

absconsæ a veritate deberent potius nuncupari, aliquibus fidelibus

nostris indicet.... Eorum etinim sensum non tam corrigendum duximus

quam ridendum, qui naturalem candentis ferri calorem tepescere, imo

(quod est stultius) frigescere, nulla justa causa superveniente,

confidunt; aut qui reum criminis constitutum, ob conscientiam læsam

tantum asserunt ab aquæ frigidæ elemento non recipi, quem submergi

potius aeris competentis retentio non permittit.—Constit. Sicular. Lib.

II. Tit. 31. This last clause would seem to allude to some artifice of

the operators by which the accused was prevented from sinking in the

cold-water ordeal when a conviction was desired.

This common sense view of the miracles so generally believed is the

more significant as coming from Frederic, who, a few years previously,

was ferociously vindicating with fire and sword the sanctity of the

Holy Seamless Coat against the aspersions of unbelieving heretics. See

his Constitutions of 1221 in Goldastus, Const. Imp. I. 293-4.

[1355] Statut. MSS. Caroli I. cap. xxii. (Du Cange, s. v. _Lex Parib._).

[1356] Königswarter, _op. cit._ p. 176.

[1357] Emon. Chron. ann. 1219 (Matthæi Analect. III. 72).

[1358] Issued in 1323.

[1359] Cod. Leg. Norman. P. II. c. X. §§ 2, 3 (Ludewig, Reliq.

Mictorum. VII. 292). It is a little singular that the same phrase is

retained in the authentic copy of the Coutumier, in force until the

close of the sixteenth century.—Anc. Cout. de Normandie, c. 77 (Bourdot

de Richebourg. IV. 32).

[1360] C. iii. Extra, Lib. V. Tit. xxxv.—As embodied in the Decretals

of Gregory IX. this canon omits a clause indicating how great was the

detestation of the people for the ordeal thus imposed on them—“quare

conversis et convertendis scandalum incutiunt et terrorem.”—Quint.

Compilat. Honorii III. Lib. IV. Tit. xiv.

[1361] Batthyani, Legg. Eccles. Hung. T. II. p. 436.—Hartzheim, IV. 27.

[1362] Rogeri Bacon Epist. de Secretis Operibus Artis c. ii. (M. R.

Series I. 526).

[1363] Richstich Landrecht, cap. LII. The same provisions are to be

found in a French version of the Speculum Suevicum, probably made

towards the close of the fourteenth century for the use of the western

provinces of the Empire.—Miroir de Souabe, P. I. c. xlviii. (Éd.

Matile, Neufchatel, 1843).

[1364] Villaneuva, Viage Literario, XXII. 288.—Du Cange, s. vv. _Ferrum

candens_, _Batalia_.

[1365] Coleccion de Cédulas, etc., Madrid, 1830, Tom. V. p. 142.

[1366] Memorial Histórico Español, Madrid, 1850, Tom. I. p. 47.

[1367] Concil. Palentin. ann. 1322, can. xxvi.

[1368] Non es tenuda la parte de probar lo que niega porque non lo

podrie facer.—Las Siete Partidas, P. III. Tit. xiv. l. 1.

[1369] S. Antonini Confessionale.

[1370] Angeli de Clavasio Summa Angelica s. v. _Interrogationes_. The

contemporary Baptista de Saulis speaks of ordeals in the present tense

when saying that all concerned in them are guilty of mortal sin.—Summa

Rosella, s. v. _Purgatio_.

[1371] Patetta, Le Ordalie, p. 450.

[1372] Plees del Corone, chap. xv. (quoted in 1 Barnewall & Alderson,

433).

[1373] Ciruelo, Reprovacion de las Supersticiones. P. II. cap. vii.

Salamanca, 1539.

[1374] Aventini Annal. Boior. Lib. IV. c. xiv. n. 31.

[1375] When, in 1692, Jacques Aymar attracted public attention to

the miracles of the diving-rod, he was called to Lyons to assist the

police in discovering the perpetrators of a mysterious murder, which

had completely baffled the agents of justice. Aided by his rod, he

traced the criminals, by land and water, from Lyons to Beaucaire,

where he found in prison a man whom he declared to be a participant,

and who finally confessed the crime. In 1703 Marshal Montrevel and

the intendant Baville made use of Aymar to discover Calvinists,

of whom numbers were condemned on the strength of his revelations

(Patetta, Le Ordalie, p. 33). Aymar was at length proved to be merely

a clever charlatan, but the mania to which he gave rise lasted through

the eighteenth century, and nearly at its close his wonders were

rivalled by a brother sharper, Campetti. The belief in the powers of

the divining-rod has not yet died out, and it is frequently used to

discover oil wells, springs, mines, etc.

A good account of Aymar’s career and the discussion to which it gave

rise may be found in Prof. Rubio y Diaz’s “Estudios sobre la Evocacion

de los Espiritus,” Cadiz, 1860, pp. 116-28.

[1376] Diod. Sicul. 1. lxxv.—Sir Gardiner Wilkinson (Ancient Egyptians,

Vol. II.) figures several of these little images.

[1377] See the translation of the Amherst Papyrus by Chabas,

Mélanges Égyptologiques, III.^e Serie, T. II. p. 17 (Sept. 1873).

The interpretation of the groups relating to the hands and feet is

conjectural, but they unquestionably signify some kind of violence.

M. Chabas qualifies this passage as highly important, being the first

evidence that has reached us of the judicial use of torture in Egypt.

The question has been a debated one, but the previous evidence adduced

was altogether inconclusive.

[1378] Lenormant, Man. de l’Hist. Ancienne de l’Orient, II. 141.

[1379] Herod. I. 116.

[1380] Behistun Inscription, col. II. 25-6 (Records of the Past,

VII. 98-99). It is worthy of remark that this Medic version of the

Inscription is more circumstantial as to these inflictions than the

Persian text translated by Rawlinson (Records I. 118-19).

[1381] Manu, Bk. VIII.—Institutes of Vishnu, VI. 23, VIII. IX.—Ayeen

Akbery, Tit. Beyhar, Vol. II. p. 494—Halhed’s Code of Gentoo Laws,

chap. xviii.

[1382] Albany Law Journal, 1879.

[1383] Lib. III. cap. iii.

[1384] Aristophanes (_Ranæ_, 617) recapitulates most of the processes

in vogue.

_Aiachos._ καὶ πῶς βασανίζω?

_Xanthias._ πάντα τρόπον, ἐν κλίμακι

δήσας, κρεμάσας, ὑστριχίδι μαστιγῶν, δέρων,

στρεβλῶν, ἔτι δ’είς τὰς ῥῖνας ὅζος ἐγχέων,

πλίνθους ἐπιτιθείς, παντα τἄλλα.

The best summary I have met with of the Athenian laws of torture is in

Eschbach’s “Introduction à l’Étude du Droit,” § 268.

[1385] Sueton. August. xxii.

[1386] Sueton. Tiberii lxii.

[1387] Ibid. Caii xxxii.—Claud. xxxiv.

[1388] Ibid. Tiber. lviii.

[1389] Tacit. Annal. XV. xliv.

[1390] Lactant. de Mortib. Persecut. cap. xiii.

[1391] Tormentorum genera inaudita excogitabantur (Ibid. cap.

xv.).—When the Christians were accused of an attempt to burn the

imperial palace, Diocletian “ira inflammatus, excarnificari omnes suos

protinus præcipit. Sedebat ipse atque innocentes igne torrebat” (Ibid.

cap. xiv.).—Lactantius, or whoever was the real author of the tract,

addresses the priest Donatus to whom it is inscribed: “Novies etiam

tormentis cruciatibusque variis subjectus, novies adversarium gloriosa

confessione vicisti.... Nihil adversus te verbera, nihil ungulæ, nihil

ignis, nihil ferrum, nihil varia tormentorum genera valuerunt” (Ibid.

cap. xvi.). Ample details may be found in Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. Lib.

V. c. 1, VI. 39, 41, VIII. passim, Lib. Martyrum; and in Cyprian,

Epist. X. (Ed. Oxon. 1682).

[1392] Tacit. Annal. XV. lvi. lvii.

[1393] L. 10 § 6, Dig. XLVIII. xviii.

[1394] L. 12, Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Ulpian.).

[1395] Const. 8 Cod. IX. xli. (Dioclet. et Maxim.).

[1396] Const. 11 Cod. IX. xli.

[1397] Ibid. § 1.

[1398] Const. 16 Cod. IX. xli.

[1399] Const. 8 Cod. I. 3.

[1400] Const. 4 Cod. IX. viii.

[1401] Dion. Cass. Roman. Hist. Lib. LX. (Ed. 1592, p. 776).

[1402] Sueton. Domit. cap. viii. To Domitian the historian also

ascribes the invention of a new and infamously indecent kind of torture

(Ibid. cap. x.).

[1403] Const. 3 Cod. IX. xli.

[1404] Const. 31 Cod. IX. ix.

[1405] Const. 7 Cod. IX. viii.

[1406] Novell. CXVII. cap. xv. § 1.

[1407] Hieron. Epist. I. ad Innocent.

[1408] Const. 17 Cod. IX. ii.—Const. 10 Cod. IX. xlvi.

[1409] Const. 3 Cod. IX. viii.

[1410] Acts, XXII. 24 sqq.

[1411] L. 21 § 2, Dig. XXII. v.

[1412] Novell. XC. cap. i. § 1.

[1413] Quæstiones neque semper in omni causa et persona desiderari

debere arbitror; et cum capitalia et atrociora maleficia non aliter

explorari et investigari possunt, quam per servorum quæstiones,

efficacissimas esse ad requirendam veritatem existimo et habendas

censeo.—L. 8, Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Paulus).

[1414] L. 9, Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Marcianus).

[1415] L. 9 § 1, Dig. XLVIII. xviii.—L. 1 § 16, Dig. XLVIII. xvii.

(Severus)—L. 1 § 18, Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Ulpian.).

[1416] Pauli Lib. v. Sentt. Tit. xvi. § 7.—The same principle is

involved in a rescript of the Antonines.—L. 1 § 14, Dig. XLVIII. xvii.

(Severus).

[1417] L. 1 § 7, Dig. XLVIII. xvii. The expression “in caput domini”

applies as well to civil as to criminal cases.—Pauli Lib. V. Sentt.

Tit. xvi. § 5.

[1418] L. 3, Dig. XLVIII. xviii.—Const. 13 Cod. IX. xli.

[1419] L. 10 § 2, Dig. XLVIII. xviii.—Const. 2 Cod. IX. xli. (Sever. et

Antonin. ann. 205).

[1420] L. 1 § 11, Dig. XLVIII. xvii.

[1421] L. 1 § 9, Dig. XLVIII. xvii.

[1422] L. 1 § 13. XLVIII. xvii.—Pauli Lib. V. Sentt. Tit. xvi. § 9.

[1423] Const. 10 Cod. IX. xli. (Dioclet. et Maxim.).

[1424] Tacit. Annal. II. 30. See also III. 67. Somewhat similar

in spirit was his characteristic device for eluding the law which

prohibited the execution of virgins (Sueton. Tiber. lxi.).

[1425] This principle is embodied in innumerable laws. It is sufficient

to refer to Constt. 6 § 2, 7 § 1, 8 § 1, Cod. IX. viii.

[1426] L. 18 § 6, Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Paulus).

[1427] L. 1 § 19, Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Ulpian.).

[1428] Const. 1 Cod. IX. xli. (Sever et Antonin.).

[1429] Constt. 3, 32 Cod. IX. ix.—L. 17, XLVIII. xviii. (Papin.).

[1430] L. 5 Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Marcian.).

[1431] Fl. Vopisc. Tacit. cap. IX.

[1432] Du Boys, Hist. du Droit Crim. des Peup. Anciens. pp. 297, 331,

332.

[1433] Const. 7 Cod. IX. xli. (Dioclet. et Maxim.).

[1434] Pauli Lib. v. Sentt. Tit. xvi. § 3.—See also Ll. 6, 13 Dig.

XLVIII. xviii.

[1435] Const. 6 Cod. IX. xlvi. This provision of the L. Julia appears

to have been revived by Diocletian.

[1436] Lib. IX. Cod. Theod. i. 14.

[1437] L. 16 § 1, Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Modestin.).

[1438] L. 10 Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Arcad.).

[1439] L. 3 Dig. XLVIII. xix. (Ulpian.).

[1440] L. 10 § 3, Dig. XLVIII. xviii.

[1441] L. 22 Dig. XLVIII. xviii.

[1442] L. 21 Dig. XLVIII. xviii.

[1443] L. 1 § 1, Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Ulpian.).

[1444] Const. 8 Cod. IX. xli. (Dioclet. et Maxim.).

[1445] L. 7, Dig. XX. v.

[1446] L. 1 § 4, Dig. XLVIII. xviii. (Ulpian.).

[1447] L. 1 § 23, Dig. XLVIII. xviii.—Res est fragilis et periculosa et

quæ veritatem fallat.

[1448] Altera sæpe etiam causam falsa dicendi, quod aliis patientia

facile mendacium faciat, aliis infirmitas necessarium.—M. F. Quintil.

Inst. Orat. V. iv.

[1449] Val. Maximi Lib. VIII. c. iv.

[1450] Philostrati vit. Apollon. VII. xxiv.

[1451] Valer. Maxim. Lib. VIII. c. iv.

[1452] Hieron. Epist. I. ad Innocentium.

[1453] Q. Curt. Ruf. Hist. VI. xi. Anceps conjectura est quoniam et

vera confessis et falsa dicentibus idem doloris finis ostenditur.

[1454] Pauli Lib. V. Sentt. Tit. xiv. § 2.—L. 18 Dig. XLVIII. xviii.

[1455] Aurel. Prudent. de Vincent. Hymn. v.

[1456] Greg. Turon. Hist. Franc. Lib. II. c. xxvii.

[1457] De Bell. Gall. VI. xix.

[1458] These provisions are specified only in the Salic Law (First Text

of Pardessus, Tit. XL. §§ 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.—L. Emend. Tit. XLII. §§ 8, 9,

10, 11, 12, 13), but they were doubtless embodied in the practice of

the other tribes.

[1459] L. Burgund. Tit. VII.—The other allusions to torture in this

code, Tit. XXXIX. §§ 1, 2, and Tit. LXXVII. §§ 1, 2, also refer only to

slaves, _coloni_, and _originarii_. Persons suspected of being fugitive

slaves were always tortured to ascertain the fact, which is in direct

contradiction to the principles of the Roman law.

[1460] L. Baioar. Tit. VIII. c. xviii. §§ 1, 2, 3.

[1461] L. Salic. First Text, Tit. XL. §§ 1, 2, 3, 4.—L. Emend. Tit.

XLII. §§ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.—In a treaty between Childebert and Clotair,

about the year 593, there is, however, a clause which would appear to

indicate that in doubtful cases slaves were subjected, not to torture,

but to the ordeal of chance. “Si servus in furto fuerit inculpatus,

requiratur a domino ut ad viginti noctes ipsum in mallum præsentet.

Et si dubietas est, ad sortem ponatur” (Pact. pro Tenore pacis cap.

v.—Baluz.). This was probably only a temporary international regulation

to prevent frontier quarrels and reprisals. That it had no permanent

force of law is evident from the retention of the procedures of

torture in all the texts of the Salic law, including the revision by

Charlemagne.

[1462] First Text, Tit. XL. § 4.—MS. Monaster. Tit. XL. § 3.—L. Emend.

Tit. XLII. § 6.

[1463] Grimnismal, Thorpe’s Sæmund’s Edda, I. 20.

[1464] Greg. Turon. Hist. Franc. Lib. VII. c. xx.; Lib. VIII. cap.

xxxi. Also, Lib. V. cap. xxxvii.—Aimoin. Lib. III. c. xxx. xlii. li.

lxiv. lxvii.—Flodoard. Hist. Remens. Lib. ii. c. ii.—Greg. Turon.

Miraculorum Lib. I. cap. 73.

[1465] Gregor. Turon. Hist. Franc. Lib. V. c. xlix.

[1466] Edict. Theodor. cap. c. ci. cii.

[1467] Cassiodor. Variar. iv. xxii. xxiii.

[1468] L. Wisigoth. Lib. VI. Tit. i. l. 5.

[1469] Ibid.

[1470] Ibid. II. iv. 4.

[1471] Ibid. VI. i. 4; VII. vi. 1; VIII. iv. 10, 11.

[1472] L. Wisigoth. VI. i. 1.

[1473] Ibid. VI. i. 2.

[1474] Concil. Toletan. XIII. ann. 683, can. ii.

[1475] See the Fuero Juzgo, Lib. I. Tit. iii. l. 4; Tit. iv. l. 4.—Lib.

III. Tit. iv. ll. 10, 11.—Lib. VI. Tit. i. ll. 2, 4, 5.—Lib. VII.

Tit. i. l. 1; Tit. vi. l. 1. The only points in which these vary from

the ancient laws are that, in Lib. VI. Tit. i. l. 2, adultery is

not included among the crimes for suspicion of which nobles can be

tortured, and that the accuser is not directed to conduct the torture.

In Lib. VII. Tit. i. l. 1, also, the informer who fails to convict is

condemned only in a single fine, and not ninefold; he is, however,

as in the original, declared infamous, as a _ladro_; if a slave, the

penalty is the same as with the Wisigoths.

[1476] Jacobi Regis constitutio adversus Judæos, etc. c. xiii. (Marca

Hispanica, p. 1416).

[1477] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. i. l. 26.

[1478] Ibid. P. VII. Tit. ix. l. 16.

[1479] Ca por los tormentos saben los judgadores muchas veces la

verdad de los malos fechos encubiertos, que non se podrian saber dotra

guisa.—Ibid. P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 1.

[1480] Por premia de tormentos ó de feridas, ó por miedo de muerte ó de

deshonra que quieren facer á los homes, conoscen á las vegadas algunas

cosas que de su grado non las conoscerien: e por ende decimos que la

conoscencia que fuere fecha en algunas destas maneras que non debe

valer nin empesce al que la Face.—Ibid. P. III. Tit. xiii. l. 5.

[1481] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 4.—Porque la conoscencia que es

fecha en el tormento, si non fuere confirmada despues sin premia, non

es valedera.

[1482] Alvari Pelagii de Planctu Ecclesiæ, Lib. II. Art. xli.

[1483] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 2. Except the favor shown to the

learned professions, “por honra de la esciencia,” which afterwards

became general throughout Europe, these provisions may all be found in

the Roman law—Const. 4 Cod. IX. viii.; L. 3, Dig. XLVIII. xix.; L. 10,

Dig. XLVIII. xviii.; Const. 11 Cod. IX. xli.

[1484] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 5.—Imitated from L. 18, Dig.

XLVIII. xviii.

[1485] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 7. Cf. Tacit. Annal. XIV.

xliii.-xlv.

[1486] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 16.

[1487] Ibid. P. III. Tit. xvi. l. 43.—P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 8.

[1488] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. i. l. 26, “Home mal enfamado.”—P. VII.

Tit. xxx. l. 3, “Et si fuere home de mala fame ò vil.”

[1489] Ibid. P. VII. Tit. i. l. 26.

[1490] Ibid. P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 4; Tit. ix. l. 16.

[1491] Ibid. P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 9.

[1492] Ibid. P. III. Tit. xxiii. l. 13.

[1493] Partidas, P. VII. Tit. xxx. l. 1.

[1494] Ordenamiento de Alcalà, Tit. xxviii. l. 1.

[1495] Simancas, however, states that a single repetition of the

torture was allowable.—De Cathol. Instit. Tit. LXV. No. 76.

[1496] De Cathol. Instit. Tit. LXV. No. 44-48. Cf. Novísima

Recopilacion, Lib. VI. Tit, ii. leis 4 y 5 (Ed. 1775).

[1497] Villadiego, Gloss, ad Fuero Juzgo, Lib. VI. Tit. i. l. 2, Gloss.

_c_, _d_, _e_, _f_, _g_.

[1498] Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. vii. leis 1 y 13.

[1499] Villadiego, _op. cit._ Lib. VI. Tit. i. 1. 5, Gloss. _b_, _c_.

[1500] Simancæ de Cathol. Instit. Tit. LXV. No. 8.

[1501] Novísima Recopilacion, Lib. II. Tit. vi. lei 6; Lib. VIII. Tit.

i. lei 4. Aragon is said to have been an exception as regards the use

of torture (Gomez Var. Resolut. T. III. c. 13—_ap._ Gerstlacher. de

Quæst. per Torment. p. 68). In Navarre there is no trace of the use of

torture prior to the fifteenth century.—G. B. de Lagrèze, La Navarre

Française, II. 342.

[1502] Capit. Carol. Mag. II. ann. 805, § xxv. (Baluz.). No other

interpretation can well be given of the direction “diligentissime

examinatione constringantur si forte confiteantur malorum quæ

gesserunt. Sed tali moderatione fiat eadem districtio ne vitam perdant.”

[1503] Capitul. Lib. VI. cap. cxxix.

[1504] Non solum se tradunt sed ultro etiam non admoti quæstionibus

omnem technam hujus rebellionis detegunt.—Goldast. Constit. Imp. I. 151.

[1505] Non licet presbytero nec diacono ad trepalium ubi rei torquentur

stare.—Concil. Autissiodor. ann. 578, can. xxxiii.

Ad locum examinationis reorum nullus clericorum accedat.—Concil.

Matiscon. II. ann. 585, can. xix.

[1506] Under Charlemagne and Louis le Débonnaire seems to have

commenced the usage of holding the court under shelter. Thus

Charlemagne, “Ut in locis ubi mallus publicus haberi solet, tectum tale

constituatur quod in hiberno et in æstate observandus esse possit”

(Capit. Carol. Mag. II. ann. 809, § xiii.). See also Capit. I. eod.

ann. § xxv. Louis le Débonnaire prohibits the holding of courts in

churches, and adds, “Volumus utique ut domus a comite in locum ubi

mallum teneri debet construatur ut propter calorem solis et pluviam

publica utilitas non remaneat” (Capit. Ludov. Pii. I. ann. 819, § xiv.).

[1507] In 769, we find Charlemagne commanding the presence of all

freemen in the general judicial assembly held twice a year, “Ut

ad mallum venire nemo tardet, unum circa æstatem et alterum circa

autumnum.” At others of less importance, they were only bound to attend

when summoned, “Ad alia vero, si necessitas fuerit, vel denunciatio

regis urgeat, vocatus venire nemo tardet” (Capit. Carol. Mag. ann. 769,

§ xii.).

In 809, he desired that none should be forced to attend unless he had

business, “Ut nullus ad placitum venire cogatur, nisi qui caussam habet

ad quærendam” (Capit. I. ann. 809, § xiii.).

In 819, Louis ordered, that the freemen should attend at least three

courts a year, “et nullus eos amplius placita observare compellat,

nisi forte quilibet aut accusatus fuerit, aut alium accusaverit, aut

ad testimonium perhibendum vocatus fuerit” (Capit. Ludov. Pii. V. ann.

819, § xiv.).

[1508] Placuit ut adversus absentes non judicetur. Quod si factus

fuerit prolata sententia non valebit.—Capit. Lib. V. § cccxi.

[1509] This right of appeal was not relished by the seigneurs, who

apparently foresaw that it might eventually become the instrument of

their destruction. It was long in establishing itself, and was resisted

energetically. Thus the Kings of England who were Dukes of Aquitaine,

sometimes discouraged the appeals of their French subjects to the

courts of the King of France by hanging the notaries who undertook to

draw up the requisite papers.—Meyer, Instit. Judiciaires, I. 461.

[1510] Annalist. Saxo ann. 928.

[1511] Dithmari Chron. Lib. VII. ad. fin.

[1512] Multa dissimulatione renitebant, adeo ut nullis suppliciis

possent cogi ad confessionem.—Synod. Atrebatens. ann. 1025 (Hartzheim

III. 68).

[1513] Hermannus de S. Mariæ Lauden. Mirac. Cf. Guibert. Noviogent. de

Vita Sua. cap. xvi.

[1514] “Cumque captum eduxissit Isaac, virgis et vinculis coactum et

flagellatum constringit, et ita extorsit ab eo ut reos in comitis

traditione proderet.”—Galberti Vit. Caroli Boni cap. ix. n. 66.

[1515] Chron. Montis Sereni (Mencken. Script. Rer. Germ. II. 172).

[1516] Radulf. de Coggeshale Chron. Anglic. ann. 1192.

[1517] Hildebert. Cenoman. Epist. xxx.

[1518] Feudor. Lib. II. Tit. xxvii. § 8.

[1519] Fred. II. Lib. Rescript. II. §§ 1, 6. (Goldast. Constit. Imp.

II. 54).

[1520] Erphurdianus Variloquus, ann. 1125.

[1521] Annal. Bosovienses, ann. 1129.

[1522] Cod. Epist. Rudolphi I. p. 216-7 (Lipsiæ, 1806).

[1523] Cosmæ Pragens. Lib. III. ann. 1108.

[1524] Annalist. Saxo ann. 1123. See also, about the same date,

the Chron. S. Trudon. Lib. XII. (D’Achery II. 704); and the Epist.

Friderici Episc. Leodiens. in Martene, Ampliss. Collect. I. 654.

[1525] Gerardi Hist. Compostellan. Lib. II. cap. 80.

[1526] Anglo Saxon Chronicle, ann. 1137.

[1527] Pike, History of Crime in England, I. 427.

[1528] Jaffé Regesta p. 884.

[1529] Matt. Paris. Hist. Ang. ann. 1210.

[1530] Synod. Roman. ann. 384, can. 10.

[1531] Innocent PP. I. Epist. III. cap. iii.

[1532] De Civ. Dei Lib. XIX. cap. vi.

[1533] Gregor. PP. I. Lib. VIII. Epist. xxx.

[1534] Nicolai PP. I. Epist. xcvii. § 86.

[1535] Pseudo-Alexand. decret. “Omnibus orthodoxis.”

[1536] Ministrorum confessio non sit extorta sed spontanea.—Ivon.

Panorm. IV. cxvii.

[1537] Quod vero confessio cruciatibus extorquenda non est.—C. I.

Decreti Caus. XV. q. vi.

[1538] Cæsarius of Heisterbach, writing in 1221, gives a story of an

occurrence happening in 1184 which, if not embellished by some later

transcriber, would seem to indicate that the judicial use of torture

was known at an earlier period than is stated in the text. A young

girl, in the disguise of a man, was despatched with letters to Lucius

III. by the partisans of Wolmar in his struggle with Rudolph for the

bishopric of Trèves. Near Augsburg she was joined by a robber, who,

hearing his pursuers approaching, gave her his bag to hold while he

retired on some pretext to a thicket. Captured with the stolen property

she was condemned, but she told her story to a priest in confession,

the wood was surrounded and the robber captured. He was tortured until

he confessed the crime. Then he retracted, and the question between the

two was settled, at the suggestion of the priest, by the ordeal of hot

iron, when the robber’s hand was burnt, and the girl’s uninjured. The

tale is a long one, very romantic in its details, and may very probably

have been ornamented by successive scribes.—Cæsar. Heisterb. Dial.

Mirac. Dist. I. c. xl.

[1539] Assises de Jerusalem, Baisse Court, cap. cclix.

[1540] Lib. Juris Civilis Veronæ cap. 75 (p. 61).

[1541] Constit. Sicular. Lib. I. Tit. xxvii.

[1542] Du Boys, Droit Criminel des Peup. Mod. II. 405.

[1543] Monach. Paduan. Chron. Lib. II. ann. 1252-3 (Urstisii Script.

Rer. German. p. 594).—Quotidie diversis generibus tormentorum

indifferenter tam majores quam minores a carnificibus necabuntur. Voces

terribiles clamantum in tormentis die noctuque audiebantur de altis

palatiis.... Quotidie sine labore, sine conscientiæ remorsione magna

tormenta et inexcogitata corporibus hominum infligebat, etc.

[1544] Mevii Comment. in Jus Lubecense, Lib. IV. Tit. vi. Art. 4

(Francofurt. 1664).

[1545] Concil. Lateran. IV. can. iii.—Goldast. Constit. Imp. I.

293-5.—Harduin. Concil. VII. 164. See above, p. 89.

[1546] Teneatur præterea potestas seu rector omnes hæreticos quos

captos habuerit, cogere citra membri diminutionem et mortis periculum,

tanquam vere latrones et homicidas animarum et fures sacramentorum Dei

et fidei Christianæ, errores suos expresse fateri et accusare alios

hæreticos quos sciunt, et bona eorum, et credentes et receptatores et

defensores eorum, sicut coguntur fures et latrones rerum temporalium

accusare suos complices et fateri maleficia quæ fecerunt.—Innocent IV.

Bull. _Ad extirpanda_ § 26.

[1547] Alex. P. P. IV. Bull. _Ut negotium_, 7 Julii, 1256 (MSS. Doat,

XXXI. 196).—Ripoll. Bullar. Ord. Prædic. I. 430.—Mag. Bullar. Roman. I.

132.

[1548] Trac. de Hæres. Paup. de Lugd. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1787). In

the tract, Frederic II., who died in 1250, is spoken of as “quondam

imperator.”

[1549] Clamor validus et insinuatio luctuosa fidelium subditorum ...

processus suos in inquisitionis negotio a captionibus, quæstionibus

et excogitatis tormentis incipiens personas quas pro libito asserit

hæretica labe notatas, abnegasse Christum ... vi vel metu tormentorum

fateri compellit.—Lit. Philip. Pulchri (Vaissette, Hist. Gén. de

Languedoc, T. IV. Preuves p. 118).

[1550] The fearful details of torture collected by Raynouard (Mon.

Hist. rel. à la Condamnation des Chev. du Temple) show that the

Inquisition by this time was fully experienced in such work.

[1551] Simancæ de Christ. Instit. Tit. LXV. No. 19.—To the Inquisition

is likewise attributable another of the monstrous iniquities of

criminal justice—the denial to the accused of the assistance of

counsel. Under the customary law of the feudal courts, the avocat or

“avantparlier” was freely admitted, but such privilege was incompatible

with the arbitrary process of which the sole object was to condemn for

a crime scarce susceptible of proof. The decretal against heretics

issued in 1235 by Gregory IX. forbids all judges, advocates, and

notaries from helping the suspected heretic under pain of perpetual

deprivation of function—“Item, judices, advocati, et notarii nulli

eorum officium suum impendant; alioquin eodem officio perpetuo sint

privati” (Harduin. Concil. VII. 164); and the same rule was enjoined

“ne Inquisitionis negotium per advocatorum strepitum retardetur” by the

Council of Valence (can. xi.) in 1248 and that of Alby (can. xxiii.) in

1254 (Harduin. VII. 426, 461).

[1552] Personas autem honestas vel bonæ famæ, etiam si sint

pauperes, ad dictum testis unici, tormentis seu quæstionibus

inhibemus, ne ob metum falsum confiteri, vel suam vexationem redimere

compellantur.—Fontanon, Edicts et Ordonn. I. 701.—A somewhat different

reading is given by Isambert, Anciennes Loix Françaises I. 270.

[1553] Cil qui est pris et mis en prison, soit por meffet ou por dete,

tant comme il est en prison il n’est tenus à respondre à riens c’on li

demande fors es cas tant solement por quoi il fu pris. Et s’on li fet

respondre autre coze contre se volenté, et sor ce qu’il allige qu’il ne

veut pas respondre tant comme il soit en prison; tout ce qui est fait

contre li est de nule valeur, car il pot tout rapeler quand il est hors

de prison.—Beaumanoir, cap. LII. § xix.

[1554] Quant tel larrecin sunt fet, le justice doit penre toz les

souspeçonneus et fere moult de demandes, por savoir s’il porra fere

cler ce qui est orbe. Et bien les doit en longe prison tenir et

destroite, et toz cex qu’il ara souspechonneus par malvese renommée.

El si’l ne pot en nule maniere savoir le verité du fet, il les doit

delivrer, se nus ne vient avant qui partie se voille fere d’aus acuser

droitement du larrecin.—Ibid. cap. XXXI. § vi.

[1555] Si li bons n’est connoissans de son mesfet, ou s’il l’a coneu et

ce a esté par covent, s’en li fait jugement, apeler en puet.—Conseil,

ch. xxii. art. 28 (Édition Marnier, Paris, 1846).

[1556] Tanon, Registre Criminel de la justice de S. Martin-des-Champs,

Introd. p. lxxxvi. (Paris, 1877); Vaissette, Ed. Privat, VIII.

1348.—L’Oiseleur (Les Crimes et les Peines, Paris, 1863, p. 113) says

that it was enacted for the baillages of Beauvais and Cahors, but we

have seen from Beaumanoir that torture was not used in the Beauvoisis.

[1557] Baluz. Concil. Gall. Narbon. p. 75.

[1558] Chassaing, Spicilegium Brivatense, p. 92.

[1559] Conseil ch. xxi. art. 8.

[1560] Fontaines, Conseil, art. 14. Et encor ne puisse li vileins

fausser le jugement son seignor.

[1561] Actes du Parlement de Paris, I. 382 (Paris, 1863).

[1562] Olim. T. II. p. 451.

[1563] Olim. III. 49-50.

[1564] Ibid. III. 185-6.

[1565] Olim. III. 221-2.

[1566] Ibid. III. 505-6.

[1567] Ibid. III. 751-2.

[1568] Ibid. III. 1299.

[1569] Guill. de Nangis Continuat. ann. 1304.

[1570] Ibid. ann. 1314.

[1571] Ibid. ann. 1315.

[1572] Grandes Chroniques, T. V. p. 221 (Ed. Paris, 1837).

[1573] Isambert, Anciennes Loix Françaises, III. 131, 60, 65.

[1574] Ordonnance, 1^{ier} Avril, 1315, art. xix. (Ibid. III. 58).

[1575] Cart. Norman I. Mar. 1315, cap. xi. Cart. II. Jul. 1315, cap.

xv. (Ibid. 51, 109).

[1576] Ordonn. Mai 1315, art. v. xiv. (Bourdot de Richebourg, III.

233-4).

[1577] Ordonn. Mars 1315, art. ix. (Ibid. p. 235). This ordonnance is

incorrectly dated. It was issued towards the end of May, subsequently

to the above.

[1578] Ordonn. Jul. 1319, art. xxii. (Isambert, III. 227).

[1579] Tout Lieu de Saint Disier, cap. cclxxii. (Olim, T. II. Append,

p. 856).

[1580] Ibid. cap. cclxxiii.

[1581] Roisin, Franchises, Lois et Coutumes de Lille, p. 119. Thus, “on

puet et doit demander de veir et de oir,” but when this is impossible,

“on doit et puet bien demander et enquerre de croire et cuidier. Et

sour croire et sour cuidier avoec un veritet aparent de veir et d’oir,

et avoec l’omechide aparant, on puet bien jugier, lonc l’usage anchyen,

car d’oscure fait oscure veritet.”

[1582] Rabanis, Revue. Hist, de Droit, 1861, p. 515.—No volgoren los

savis antiquament qu’om pergossa sa franquessa ni sa libertat.

[1583] Registre Criminel de la Justice de St. Martin-des-Champs, p. 50.

[1584] Du Cange s. v. _Quæstionarius_.

[1585] Letters granting exemption from torture to the consuls of

Villeneuve for any crimes committed by them were issued in 1371

(Isambert, V. 352). These favors generally excepted the case of high

treason.

[1586] He pleaded his rank as baron as an exemption from the torture,

but was overruled. Dumoulin, however, admits that persons of noble

blood are not to be as readily exposed to it as those of lower

station.—Desmaze, Les Pénalités Anciennes, d’après des Textes inédits,

p. 39 (Paris, 1866).

[1587] Du Cange s. v. _Quæstio_ No. 3.

[1588] Pour denier mettre à question et tourment.—Jean Desmarres,

Décisions, Art. 295 (Du Boys, Droit Criminel II. 48).

[1589] L. Tanon, Registre Criminel de la Justice de S.

Martin-des-Champs, Introd. p. lxxxv. (Paris, 1877).

[1590] Registre Criminel du Châtelet de Paris. Publié pour la première

fois par la Société des Bibliophiles Français. 2 tom. 8vo. Paris, 1864.

[1591] Ibid. I. 9, 14.

[1592] Ibid. I. 143. See also the similar case of Raoulin du Pré (p.

149), who recanted on the scaffold and protested his innocence “sur

la mort qu’il attendoit à avoir et recevoir presentement,” but who

nevertheless was executed. Also that of Perrin du Quesnoy (p. 164).

[1593] See the case of Berthaut Lestalon (Ibid. p. 501) accused of

sundry petty thefts and tortured unsuccessfully. The court decided that

in view of the little value of the articles stolen and of their having

been recovered by the owners, the prisoner should be tortured again,

when, if he confessed, he should be hanged, and if he still denied,

he should have his right ear cropped and be banished from Paris. This

logical verdict was carried out. No confession was obtained, and he

was punished accordingly. Somewhat similar was the case of Jehan de

Warlus (Ibid. p. 157), who was punished after being tortured five times

without confession; also that of Jaquet de Dun (Ibid. p. 494).

[1594] In the Registre Criminel de St. Martin-des-Champs the cases are

recorded with too much conciseness to give details as to the process,

only the charge and the sentence being stated. It frequently happens,

however, that a man convicted of some petty larceny is stated to have

confessed more serious previous crimes, which necessarily implies their

confession being extorted. See, for instance, the case of Jehannin

Maci, arrested in 1338 for having in his possession two brass pots,

the stealing of which he not only confessed but also “plusures murtres

et larrecins avoir fais” for which he was duly drawn on a hurdle and

hanged (_op. cit._ pp. 120-1). The case of Phelipote de Monine (p. 178)

is also suggestive.

[1595] Registre Criminel du Châtelet de Paris, I. 36.

[1596] Ibid. I. 201-209.—Somewhat similar was the case of Marguerite

de la Pinele (Ibid. p. 322), accused of stealing a ring, which she

confessed under torture. As she did not, however, give a satisfactory

account of some money found upon her, though her story was partially

confirmed by other evidence, she was again twice tortured. This was

apparently done to gratify the curiosity of her judges, for, though no

further confession was extracted from her, she was duly buried alive.

Crimes for which a man was hanged or decapitated were punished in a

woman by burying or burning. Jews were executed by being hanged by the

heels between two large dogs suspended by the hind legs—a frightful

death, the fear of which sometimes produced conversion and baptism on

the gallows (Ibid. II. 43).

[1597] Ibid. I. pp. 1, 268, 289; II. 66, etc.

[1598] Ibid. I. 419-475.—The same result is evident in a very curious

case in which an old sorceress and a young “fille de vie” were accused

of bewitching a bride and groom, the latter of whom had been madly

loved by the girl (Ibid. I. p. 327).

[1599] Ibid. I. 516.

[1600] Ibid. I. 151, 163, 164, 173-77, 211, 269, 285, 306, 350, etc.

[1601] See, for instance, the case of Pierre Fournet (Ibid. I. 516).

[1602] Très Ancienne Cout. de Bretagne, cap. CI. (Bourdot de Richebourg

IV. 224-5)—“Et s’il se peut passer sans faire confession en la gehenne,

ou les jons, il se sauveroit, et il apparestroit bien que Dieu

montreroit miracles pour luy.”

[1603] Concil. Remens. ann. 1408, cap. 49 (Martene Ampliss. Collect.

VII. 420).

[1604] Bull. Aur. cap. xxiv. § 9 (Goldast. I. 365).

[1605] Chron. Cornel. Zantfleit, ann. 1376 (Martene Ampl. Coll. V.

308-9).

[1606] Statut. Criminali cap. xiv. (Gregorj, Statuti di Corsica, p.

101).

[1607] Ibid. cap lx. (p. 163).

[1608] Statuta Criminalia Mediolani e tenebris in lucem edita, cap. 3,

24-28 (Bergomi, 1694).

[1609] Statuti della Terra del Comune della Mirandola, Modena, 1885, p.

91.

[1610] Statuta et Decreta antiqua Civitatis Placentiæ, Lib. v. Rubr. 96

(Placentiæ, 1560, fol. 63_b_).

[1611] Statuts de l’Inquisition d’Etat, 1^e Supp. §§ 20, 21 (Daru).

[1612] Li Statuti de Valtellina Riformati nella Cità di Coira nell’

anno del S. MDXLVIII. Stat. Crimin. cap. 8, 9, 10 (Poschiavo, 1549).

[1613] Synod. Reg. ann. 1514, Proœm. (Batthyani Legg. Eccles. Hung. I.

574). According to some authorities, this was a general rule—“Judex

quamvis viderit committi delictum non tamen potest sine aliis

probationibus reum torquere, ut per Specul. etc.”—Jo. Emerici a Rosbach

Process. Criminal. Tit. V. cap. v. No. 13 (Francof. 1645).

[1614] Du Boys, Droit Criminel, I. 650.

[1615] Jo. Herb. de Fulstin. Statut. Reg. Polon. (Samoscii, 1597, p. 7).

[1616] Esneaux, Hist. de Russie, III. 236.

[1617] Pauli Jovii Moschovia.—This is a brief account of Russia,

compiled about the year 1530, by Paulus Jovius, from his conversations

with Dmitri, ambassador to Clement VII. from Vasili V., first Emperor

of Russia. Olaus Magnus, in the pride of his Northern blood, looks upon

the statement in the text as a slander on the rugged Russ—“hoc scilicet

pro terribili tormento in ea durissima gente reputari, quæ flammis et

eculeis adhibitis, vix, ut acta revelet, tantillulum commovetur”—and

he broadly hints that the wily ambassador amused himself by hoaxing

the soft Italian: “Sed revera vel ludibriose bonus præsul a versuto

Muscovitici principis nuntio Demetrio dicto, tempore Clementis VII.

informatus est Romæ” (Gent. Septent. Hist. Brev. Lib. XI. c. xxvi.).

The worthy archbishop doubtless spoke of his own knowledge with

respect to the use of the rack and fire in Russia, but the contempt

he displays for the torture of a stream of water is ill-founded. In

our prisons the punishment of the shower-bath is found to bring the

most refractory characters to obedience in an incredibly short time,

and its unjustifiable severity in a civilized age like this may be

estimated from the fact that it has occasionally resulted in the

death of the patient. Thus, at the New York State Prison at Auburn,

in December, 1858, a strong, healthy man, named Samuel Moore, was

kept in the shower-bath from a half to three-quarters of an hour, and

died almost immediately after being taken out. A less inhumane mode

of administering the punishment is to wrap the patient in a blanket,

lay him on his back, and, from a height of about six feet, pour upon

his forehead a stream from an ordinary watering-pot without the rose.

According to experts, this will make the stoutest criminal beg for his

life in a few seconds.

During the later period of our recent war, when the prevalence of

exaggerated bounties for recruits led to an organized system of

desertion, the magnitude of the evil seemed to justify the adoption

of almost any means to arrest a practice which threatened rapidly to

exhaust the resources of the country. Accordingly, the shower-bath

was occasionally put into requisition by the military authorities to

extort confession from suspected deserters, when legal evidence was not

attainable, and it was found exceedingly efficacious.

[1618] Du Boys, _op. cit._ I. 618.

[1619] Quod iidem prælati et inquisitores de ipsis Templariis et eorum

corporibus, quotiens voluerint, ordinent et faciant id quod eis,

secundum legem ecclesiasticam, videbitur faciendum.—Rymer, Fœdera, III.

203.

[1620] C. 1 § 1 Clement, V. 3.—Bern. Guidonis Gravamina (MSS. Doat,

XXX.).

[1621] Haroldus, Lima limata Conciliis etc. Romæ, 1672, pp. 75, 76.

[1622] Statut. S. Ludov. ann. 1254, §§ 20, 21 (Isambert, I. 270).

[1623] Thus Gratian, in the middle of the twelfth century—“Qui

calumniam illatam non probat pœnam debet incurrere quam si probasset

reus utique sustineret.”—Decreti P. II. caus. v. quæst. 6, c. 2.

[1624] Ordonnance, Mars 1498, §§ 110-116 (Isambert, XI. 365.—Fontanon,

I. 710). It would seem that the only torture contemplated by this

ordonnance was that of water, as the clerk is directed to record “la

quantité de l’eau qu’on aura baillée audit prisonnier.” This was

administered by gagging the patient, and pouring water down his throat

until he was enormously distended. It was sometimes diversified by

making him eject the water violently, by forcible blows on the stomach

(Fortescue de Laudibus Legg. Angliæ, cap. xxii.). Sometimes a piece of

cloth was used to conduct the water down his throat. To this, allusion

is made in the “Appel de Villon”:—

“Se fusse des hoirs Hue Capel

Qui fut extraict de boucherie,

On ne m’eust, parmy ce drapel,

Faict boyre à celle escorcherie.”

[1625] Ordonn. de Villers Cotterets, Août 1539, §§ 162-164 (Isambert,

XIII. 633-4). “Ostant et abolissant tous styles, usances ou coutumes

par lesquels les accusés avoient accoutumés d’être ouïs en jugement

pour sçavoir s’ils devoient être accusés, et à cette fin avoir

communication des faits et articles concernant les crimes et délits

dont ils étoient accusés.”

[1626] Anc. Cout. de Bretagne, Tit. I. art. xli.—D’Argentré’s

labored commentary on this article is a lamentable exhibition of the

utter confusion which existed as to the nature of preliminary proof

justifying torture. Comment. pp. 139, sqq.

[1627] Nemo igitur de proprio crimine confitentem super conscientia

scrutetur aliena.—Const. 17 Cod. IX. ii. (Honor. 423).

[1628] Nemini de se confesso credi potest super crimen alienum, quoniam

ejus atque omnis rei professio periculosa est, et admitti adversus

quemlibet non debet.—Pseudo-Julii Epist. II. cap. xviii.—Gratian.

Decret. P. II. caus. v. quæst. 3, can. 5.

[1629] Inhærendo decretis alias per felicis recordationis Paulum papam

quartum Sanctissimus dominus noster Pius papa quintus decrevit omnes et

quoscunque reos convictos et confessos de heresi pro ulteriori veritate

habenda et super complicibus fore torquendos arbitrio dominorum

judicum.—Locati Opus Judiciale Inquisitorum, Romæ, 1570, p. 477.

[1630] Chéruel, Dict. Hist. des Institutions, etc. de la France, p.

1220 (Paris, 1855).

[1631] Isambert, XIV. 88. Beccaria comments on the absurdity of such

proceedings, as though a man who had accused himself would make any

difficulty in accusing others.—“Quasi che l’uomo che accusa sè stesso,

non accusi più facilmente gli altri. E egli giusto il tormentare gli

uomini per l’altrui delitto?”—Dei Delitte e delle Pene, § XII. A

curious illustration of its useless cruelty when applied to prisoners

of another stamp is afforded by the record of a trial which occurred

at Rouen in 1647. A certain Jehan Lemarinier, condemned to death for

murder, was subjected to the _question définitive_. Cords twisted

around the fingers, scourging with rods, the strappado with fifty

pounds attached to each foot, the thumbscrew were applied in succession

and together, without eliciting anything but fervent protestations of

innocence. The officials at last wearied out remanded the convict to

prison, when he sent for them and quietly detailed all the particulars

of his crime, committed by himself alone, requesting especially that

they should record his confession as having been spontaneous, for the

relief of his conscience, and not extorted by torment.—Desmaze, Les

Pénalités Anciennes, p. 159, Paris, 1866.

[1632] Ordonnance Criminel d’Août 1670, Tit. xiv. xix. (Isambert, XIX.

398, 412).

[1633] Nicolas, Dissertation Morale et Juridique sur la Torture, p. 111

(Amsterd. 1682).

[1634] Déclaration du 13 Avril 1703 (Ordonnances d’Alsace, I. 340).

[1635] Coutumier de Picardie, Éd. Marnier, p. 88.

[1636] Registre Criminel de la Justice de S. Martin-des-Champs. Paris,

1877, p. 229.

[1637] Desmaze, Pénalités Anciennes, p. 204.

[1638] Bodini de Magor. Dæmonoman. Basil. 1581, pp. 325, 334, 390.

[1639] Scialojæ Praxis torquendi Reos c. i. No. 12 (Neap. 1653).

[1640] Thomæ Grammatici Decisiones Neapolitanæ, pp. 1275-6 (Venetiis

1582). Cf. Scialojæ _op. cit._ c. i. No. 22.

[1641] L’Oiseleur, Les Crimes et les Peines, pp. 206-7.

[1642] Braune Dissert. de Tortura Valetudinar. Halæ Cattor. 1740, p. 28.

[1643] Meyer, Institutions Judiciaires, IV. 285, 293.

[1644] Legg. Capital. Caroli V. c. lx. lviii.

[1645] Ibid. c. xx. lviii.

[1646] Ibid. c. lv. lvi. lvii.

[1647] Legg. Capital. Carol. V. c. xxii. lxix.

[1648] Ibid. c. xxviii.

[1649] Ibid. c. xxiii. xxi.

[1650] Ibid. c. xxxiii.-xliv.

[1651] Ibid. c. xx. lxi.

[1652] Ibid. c. lviii. lix. Accusatus, si periculum sit, ne inter vel

post tormenta ob vulnera expiret, ea arte torquendus est, ne quid damni

accipiat.

[1653] Heineccii Hist. Jur. Civ. Lib. II. §§ cv. sqq.—Meyer (Instit.

Judiciaires, Liv. VI. chap. xi.) gives a very interesting sketch of the

causes which led to the overthrow of the old system of jurisprudence

throughout Germany. He attributes it to the influence of the emperors

and the municipalities, each equally jealous of the authority of

the feudal nobles, aided by the lawyers, now becoming a recognized

profession. These latter of course favored a jurisprudence which

required long and special training, thus conferring upon them as a

class peculiar weight and influence.

[1654] My principal authorities are:—

Rerum Criminalium Praxis, by Josse Damhouder, a lawyer and statesman

of repute in Flanders, where he held a distinguished position under

Charles V. and Philip II. His work was received as an authority

throughout Europe for two centuries, having passed through numerous

editions, from that of Louvain, in 1554, to that of Antwerp, in 1750.

My edition is of Antwerp, 1601.

Tractatus de Quæstionibus seu Torturis Reorum, published in 1592 by

Johann Zanger, of Wittenberg, a celebrated jurisconsult of the time,

and frequently reprinted. My edition is that of 1730, with notes by the

learned Baron Senckenberg, and there is a still later one, published at

Frankfort in 1763.

Practica Criminalis, seu Processus Judiciarius ad usum et consuetudinem

judiciorum in Germania hoc tempore frequentiorem, by Johann Emerich von

Rosbach, published in 1645 at Frankfort on the Mayn.

Tractatio Juridica, de Usu et Abusu Torturæ, by Heinrich von Boden, a

dissertation read at Halle in 1697, and reprinted by Senckenberg in

1730, in conjunction with the treatise of Zanger.

Scialojæ Praxis torquendi Reos, Neapoli, 1653.

Tractatus de Maleficiis, nempe D. Alberti de Gandino, D. Bonifacii de

Vitalianis, D. Pauli Grillandi, D. Baldi de Periglis, D. Jacobi de

Arena. Venetiis, 1560.

[1655] Cum nihil tam severum, tam crudele et inhumanum videatur quam

hominem conditum ad imaginem Dei ... tormentis lacerare et quasi

excarnificare, etc.—Zangeri Tract. de Quæstion. cap. I. No. 1.

Tormentis humanitatis et religionis, necnon jurisconsultorum argumenta

repugnant.—Jo. Emerici a Rosbach. Process. Crimin. Tit. v. c. ix. No. 1.

Saltem horrendus torturæ abusus ostendit, quo miseri, de facinore

aliquo suspecti, fere infernalibus, et si fieri possit, plusquam

diabolicis cruciatibus exponuntur, ut qui nullo legitimo probandi

modo convinci poterant, atrocitate cruciatuum contra propriam salutem

confiteri, seque ita destruere sive jure sive injuria, cogantur.—Henr.

de Boden Tract. Præfat.

[1656] Zangeri cap. I. Nos. 49-58.

[1657] Zangeri cap. I. Nos. 59-88.—Knipschild, in his voluminous

“Tract. de Nobilitate” (Campodun. 1693), while endeavoring to exalt to

the utmost the privileges of the nobility, both of the sword and robe,

is obliged to admit their liability to torture for these crimes, and

only urges that the preliminary proof should be stronger than in the

case of plebeians (Lib. II. cap. iv. Nos. 108-120); though, in other

accusations, a judge subjecting a noble to torture should be put to

death, and his attempt to commit such an outrage could be resisted

by force of arms (Ibid. No. 103). He adds, however, that no special

privileges existed in France, Lombardy, Venice, Italy, and Saxony

(Ibid. Nos. 105-7). Scialoja expressly says (Praxis c. xiii. Nos.

40-49, 55) that in Naples no dignity, secular or ecclesiastical, except

that of judges, conferred immunity from torture; and all privileges

were set aside by a direct order from the sovereign.

[1658] Erphurdianus Variloquus, ann. 1514 (Mencken. Script. Rer.

German. II. 527-8).

[1659] Grillandi de Quæst. et Tortura Q. vi.—Baldi de Periglis de

Quæstionibus c. iii. § 4.—Alberti de Gandino de Quæstionibus §§ 7, 9,

36, 37.

[1660] Damhouder. Rer. Crimin. Praxis cap. xxxvii. Nos. 23, 24. Cf.

Passerini Regulare Tribunal Quæst. xv. Art. ix. No. 117.

[1661] Emer. a Rosbach Process. Crimin. Tit. v. cap. xiv.

[1662] Simancæ de Cathol. Instit. Tit. LXV. No. 50.

[1663] Willenbergii Tract. de Excess. et Pœnis Cleric. 4to. Jenæ, 1740,

p. 41.

[1664] Braune Diss. de Tortura Valetudinar. p. 32.

[1665] Grillandi de Quæstione et Tortura, Q. vi. §§ 4, 6, 9.—Baldi de

Periglis de Quæstionibus cap. i. § 4.

[1666] Zangeri _op. cit._ cap. I. Nos. 34-48.

[1667] Scialojæ c. xiii. No. 21.

[1668] Ibid. Nos. 24-30.

[1669] Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, Lipsiæ, 1742, pp. 46-8.

[1670] Braune Diss. de Tortura Valetudinar. pp. 24, 43.

[1671] Zangeri cap. V. Nos. 73-83.

[1672] Del Rio Magicarum Disquisit. Lib. v. Sect. iii. L.

[1673] Damhouder. _op. cit._ cap. xxxviii. Nos. 3, 4.—Rosbach. Tit. V.

cap. xv. No. 14.—Simancas, however, declares that only two applications

of torture are allowable (De Cathol. Instit. Tit. LXV. Nos. 76, 81).

[1674] Disquis. Magicar. Lib. V. sect. ix.

[1675] Assessores tamen honoris et avidi et cupidi hoc non servant imo

quotidie quæstiones repetunt absque novis indiciis.—Baldi de Periglis

de Quæstionibus cap. i. § 6. So also Alberti de Gandino de Quæstionibus

§ 20, and Bonifacii de Vitalianis, Rubr. _Quæ Indicia_ § 8.

[1676] Zangeri Præfat. No. 31.

[1677] Scialojæ _op. cit._ cap. i. No. 27.

[1678] Statuta Criminalia Communis Bononiæ (Bononiæ, 1525, fol. 15 _a_).

[1679] Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, pp. 52-3.

[1680] Zangeri Tract. Not. ad p. 903.

[1681] Grillandi de Quæst. et Tortura Q. vii.

[1682] Scialojæ _op. cit._ cap. i. No. 34.—Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura,

p. 53.—Grillandi, _loc. cit._—Bernhard (Diss. Inaug. de Tort. cap. I.

§ iv.) states that in these cases not only the principals but even the

witnesses could be tortured if suspected of concealing the truth.

[1683] Grillandi de Quæst. et Tortura, Q. V. § 6.

[1684] Baldi de Periglis de Quæstionibus cap. iii. § 2.—Damhoud. cap.

xxxviii. No. 13.—Alberti de Gandino de Quæstionibus § 31.

[1685] Zangeri Præfat. No. 32.—Tortura enim datur non ad liquidandum

factum sed personam.—Damhouder. Rer. Crimin. Prax. cap. xxxv. No. 7.

[1686] Process. Criminal. Tit. V. cap. ix. No. 17.

[1687] De Usu et Ab. Tort. Th. IX.—Qui aliter procedit judex, equum

cauda frenat et post quadrigas caballum jungit.

[1688] Boyvin du Villars, Mémoires, Liv. VII.

[1689] Godelmanni de Magis Lib. III. cap. x.

[1690] Not. ad p. 907 Zangeri _op. cit._

[1691] Del Rio Magicar. Disquisit. Lib. V. sect. ix.

[1692] Grillandi de Quæst. et Tortura, Q. vi. § 10.

[1693] Simancæ de Cathol. Instit. Tit. LXV. No. 56.

[1694] De Usu et Abusu Tort. Th. XIII.

It must not be supposed from this and the preceding extracts that von

Boden was an opponent of torture on principle. Within certain bounds,

he advocated its use, and he only deplored the excessive abuse of it by

the tribunals of the day.

[1695] Quando quis dicatur competenter tortus vel non, similiter quando

quis dicatur purgasse indicia vel non, omnia ista demum relinquuntur

arbitrio et discretioni honesti judicis, quoniam in his certa regula

tradi non potest.—Grillandi de Quæst. et Tortura Q. vii. § 10.—Cf.

Godelmanni de Magis Lib. III. cap. x. § 36.—Baldi de Periglis de

Quæstionibus cap. i. § 5.

[1696] Zangeri _op. cit._ cap. I. Nos. 42-44.

[1697] Ibid. cap. III. Nos. 20-22.

[1698] Baldi de Periglis cap. iii. § 7.

[1699] Bonifacii de Vitalianis, Rubr. _de Perseverentia_ § 5.—Alberti

de Gandino, De Quæstionibus § 35.

[1700] Godelmanni l. c. § 54.

[1701] Cap. xxxviii. No. 18.

[1702] Zangeri cap. III. Nos. 20-22.

[1703] Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, p. 74.

[1704] So thoroughly was this recognized, that in 1668 Racine

represents a judge, desirous of ingratiating himself with a young girl,

as offering to exhibit to her the spectacle of the question as an

agreeable pastime.

“DANDIN. N’avez vous jamais vu donner la question?

ISABELLE. Non, et ne le verrai, que je crois de ma vie.

DANDIN. Venez, je vous en veux faire passer l’envie.

ISABELLE. Hé! Monsieur, peut-on voir souffrir les malhereux?

DANDIN. Bon! cela fait toujours passer une heure ou deux.”

_Les Plaideurs_, Acte III. Sc. dernière.

[1705] Fortescue, in his arguments against the use of torture, does

not fail to recognize that the acquittal of a tortured prisoner is the

condemnation of the judge—“qui judex eum pronuntiet innocentem, nonne

eodem judicio judex ille seipsum reum judicat omnis sævitiæ et pœnarum

quibus innocentem afflixit?”—De Laud. Legg. Angl. cap. xxii.

[1706] Occurrit hic cautela Bruni dicentis, si judex indebite torserit

aliquem facit reum confiteri quod fuit legitime tortus, de qua

confessione faciat notarium rogatum.—Rosbach. Process. Crim. Tit. V.

cap. xv. No. 6.

[1707] Quoted by Nicolas, Diss. Mor. et Jurid. sur la Torture, p. 21.

This mode of torture consisted in placing the accused between two

jailers, who pummelled him whenever he began to doze, and thus, with

proper relays, deprived him of sleep for forty hours. Its inventor

considered it humane, as it endangered neither life nor limb, but the

extremity of suffering to which it reduced the prisoner is shown by its

efficaciousness.

Marsigli received much credit for this ingenious invention. Grillandus

informs us that he experimented with it in a difficult case of two

monks “et profecto vidi ea quæ prius non credebam, quod illud affert

maximum tormentum et fastidium in corpore absque aliqua membrorum

læsione.”—Grillandi de Quæstione et Tortura Art. ii.

I have purposely abstained from entering into the details of the

various forms of torture. They may be interesting to the antiquarian,

but they illustrate no principle, and little would be gained by

describing these melancholy monuments of human error. Those who may be

curious in such matters will find ample material in Grupen Observat.

Jur. Crim. de Applicat. Torment., 4to., Hanov. 1754; Zangeri _op. cit._

cap. IV. Nos. 9, 10; Hieron. Magius de Equuleo cum Appendd. Amstelod.

1664, etc. According to Bernhardi, Johann Graefe enumerates no less

than six hundred different instruments invented for the purpose.

Damhouder (_op. cit._ cap. xxxvii. Nos. 17-23) declares that torture

can legally be inflicted only with ropes, and then proceeds to describe

a number of ingenious devices. One of these, which he states to produce

insufferable torment without risk, is bathing the feet with brine and

then setting a goat to lick the soles.

The strappado, or suspension by the arms behind the back with weights

to the feet, was the torture in most general use and most favored by

legal experts.—Grillandus, _loc. cit._

[1708] Augustin Nicholas, _op. cit._ pp. 169, 178.

[1709] Even this, however, was not deemed necessary in cases of

conspiracy and treason “qui fiunt secreto, propter probationis

difficultatem devenitur ad torturam sine indiciis”—Emer. a Rosb. Tit.

V. cap. x. No. 20.

[1710] Fama frequens et vehemens facit indicium ad torturam (Zanger.

c. II. No. 80. Cf. Alberti de Gandino de Quæst. § 39). Reus ante

accusationem vel inquisitionem fugiens et citatus contumaciter absens,

se suspectum reddit ut torqueri possit (Ibid. No. 91. Cf. Simancæ

Cathol. Instit. Tit. LXV. Nos. 28-30). Inconstantia sermonis facit

indicium ad torturam (Zanger. Nos. 96-99). Ex taciturnitate oritur

indicium ad torturam (Ibid. No. 103). Physiognomia malam naturam

arguit, non autem delictum (Ibid. No. 85). How exceedingly lax was the

application of these rules may be guessed from a remark of Damhouder’s,

that although rumor was sufficient to justify torture, yet a contrary

rumor neutralized the first and rendered torture improper.—Damhouder.

Rer. Crimin. Praxis cap. xxxv. Nos. 14, 15.

[1711] Deinde a pallore et similibus oritur indicium ad torturam

secundum Bartol. (Emer. a Rosbach Tit. V. c. vii. Nos. 28-31).

Whereupon von Rosbach enters into a long dissertation as to the causes

of paleness.

[1712] Godelmanni de Magis Lib. III. cap. x. § 29.

[1713] Scialojæ cap. iii. Nos. 5, 6.

[1714] Judicis arbitrio relinquitur an indicia sint sufficientia

ad torturam (Zanger. cap. II. Nos. 16-20). An indicia sufficiant

ad torturam judicis arbitrio relictum est.... Indicia ad torturam

sufficientia relinquuntur officio judicis (Emer. a Rosbach Tit.

V. c. ii. p. 529). Damhouder, indeed, states that no rules can be

framed—“neque ea ullis innituntur regulis: sed universum id negotium

geritur penes arbitrium, discretionem ac conscientiam judicis.”—Rer.

Crimin. Praxis cap. xxxvi. Nos. 1, 2. Cf. Braune Dissert. de Tortura

Valetudin. Halæ Cattor. 1740.

So Grillandus (De Quæstione et Tortura Q. iii.)—“Quæ autem indicia

dicantur esse sufficientia ad torturam certa regula tradi non potest,

sed hoc relinquitur arbitrio et discretioni boni judicis.”

And Albertus de Gandino (De Quæstionibus § 14)—“Nec de his possit dari

certa doctrina sed hoc committitur arbitrio judicantis.”

[1715] Sunt tamen nonnulli prætores et judices sanguine fraterno

adeo inexsaturabiles ut illico quemvis malæ famæ virum, citra ulla

certa argumenta aut indicia, corripiant ad sævissimam torturam,

inclementer dicentes, cruciatum facile ab illis extorturum rerum omnium

confessionem.—Damhouder. Rer. Crimin. Praxis cap. xxxv. No. 13.

[1716] Hipp. de Marsiliis Singularia, No. 455 (Venet. 1555).

[1717] Godelmanni de Magis Lib. III. cap. v. § 26.—Emer. a Rosbach Tit.

V. c. x. No. 25.

[1718] Groot, Historia Eclesiastica y Civil de Nueva Granada, Bogotá,

1869, T. I. pp. 114-5, 116-20. Cf. Scialojæ Praxis torquendi Reos, cap.

i. No. 25.

[1719] Rosbach Tit. V. cap. x. No. 2.

[1720] Ibid. Tit. V. cap. xiv. No. 16.—Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, p.

54.—Grillandi de Quæst. et Tortura, Q. vii.

[1721] Scialojæ cap. xiv. Nos. 5-20.—Jo. Frid. Werner Dissert. de

Tortura Testium, Erford. 1724, pp. 72 sqq.

[1722] Passerini Regulare Tribunal, Quæst. XV. Art. ix. No. 115 (Colon.

Agripp. 1665).

[1723] Process. contr. Card. de Caraffa (Hoffman. Collect. Script. I.

632).

[1724] Scialojæ c. xiv. No. 2.

[1725] Statuta Criminalia Communis Bononiæ (Bononiæ 1525, p. 15 _b_).

[1726] Damhouder, _op. cit._ cap. xlvii. No. 3.

[1727] Passerini, _loc. cit._ Nos. 122-3.

[1728] Ibid. No. 118.

[1729] Simancæ de Cathol. Instit. Tit. LXV. No. 73.

[1730] Zangeri, _op. cit._ I. Nos. 8-25.

[1731] Zangeri cap. IV. Nos. 25-30.—Damhouder, _op. cit._ cap. xxxvii.

Nos. 15, 16.—Baldi de Periglis de Quæstionibus, cap. i. § 7.—Alberti de

Gandino de Quæstionibus § 11.

[1732] Grilland. de Quæstione et Tortura Q. iv. §§ 2-10. “Quod tunc

corpus ipsius rei dilaniatur membraque et ossa quodammodo dissolvuntur

et evelluntur a corpore.”

[1733] Zangeri, _op. cit._ cap. III. No. 3.

[1734] Process. Criminal. Tit. V. cap. x. No. 7.

We have already seen (p. 514) that in France the accused was not

allowed to see the evidence against him; and the same rule was in force

in Flanders—“Toutes depositions de tesmoins en causes criminelles

demeureront secrètes à l’égard de l’accusé.”—Coutume d’Audenarde, Stile

de la Procedure, Art. 10. (Le Grand, Coutumes de Flandre, Cambrai,

1719, p. 103).

[1735] Diss. Inaug. cap. I. § xii.

[1736] Goetzii, _op. cit._ p. 36.

[1737] Zangeri, _op. cit._ cap. III. Nos. 1, 4, 5-43.

[1738] Process. Crim. Tit. V. cap. xi. No. 6.

[1739] Goetzii, _op. cit._ p. 35.

[1740] Zangeri cap. II. Nos. 49-50.—Cum enim confrontatio odiosa sit

et species suggestionis, et remedium extraordinarium ad substantiam

processus non pertinens, et propterea non necessaria.

[1741] Zangeri, cap. IV. Nos. 1-6.

[1742] Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, p. 34.

[1743] Braune Dissert. de Tortura Valetudin. p. 16.

[1744] Process. Crimin. Tit. V. cap. ix. No. 10.

[1745] Zangeri cap. I. No. 37.

[1746] Rer. Crimin. Praxis cap. xxxviii. Nos. 6, 7.

[1747] Boden de Usu et Abusu Torturæ Th. XII. Damhouder declares this

practice to be unjustifiable, though not infrequent (Rer. Crimin.

Praxis cap. xxxvii. No. 12).—Bonifazio de’ Vitaliani speaks of it as a

common but evil custom.—De Quæstionibus, Rubr. _Quæ indicia_, § 7.

[1748] He represents the judge as addressing his victim “Tu sei il reo

di un delitto, dunque è possibile che lo sii di cent’ altri delitti:

questo dubbio mi pesa, voglio accertarmene col mio criterio di verità:

le leggi ti tormentano, perche sei reo, perche puoi esser reo, perche

voglio che tu sii reo.”—Dei Delitti e delle Pene, § XII.

[1749] Martini Bernhardi Diss. Inaug. de Tortura cap. I. § 4. Scialoja,

in 1653, assures us that this torture after confession to prevent

appeals was no longer permitted in the Neapolitan courts, and that it

was only allowed for the discovery of accomplices (Praxis torquendi

Reos. c. i. Nos. 8-10).

[1750] Scialojæ, _op. cit._ cap. i. No. 14.

[1751] Damhouder, Rer. Crimin. Prax. cap. xxxv. No. 9, cap. xxxviii.

No. 14.—Werner Dissert. de Tortura Testium, pp. 76 sqq.

[1752] Damhoud. cap. xxxix. No. 6.

[1753] Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, p. 26.

[1754] Emer. a Rosbach Process. Criminal. Tit. V. cap. x. Nos.

8-16.—Simancæ Cath. Inst. LXV. 17.

[1755] Bernhardi, _loc. cit._ The difference between the practice

and principles of the law is shown by the rules laid down in 1647

by Brunnemann, coexisting with the above. He directs that the

proceedings are to be exhibited to the accused or his friends, and

then submitted to a college of jurists who are to decide as to the

necessity of torture, and he warns the latter that they can have no

graver question placed before them—“Et sane nullam graviorem puto esse

deliberationem in Collegiis Juridicis quam ubi de tortura infligenda

agitur.”—Brunneman. de Inquisitionis Processu cap. VIII. Memb. iv. No.

10; Memb. v. No. 1.

[1756] Passerini Regulare Tribunal; Praxis, cap. viii. No. 170.

[1757] Louïse, Sorcellerie et Justice Criminelle à Valenciennes

(Valenciennes, 1861, pp. 121-125).

[1758] Goetzii Diss. de Tortura, p. 71.

[1759] Bodin de Magor. Dæmonom. (Basil. 1581, p. 325).

[1760] Zangeri cap. V. Nos. 79-81.

[1761] Bernhardi Diss. Inaug. cap. I. § xi.

[1762] Emer. a Rosbach, _op. cit._ Tit. V. cap. xviii. No.

13.—Godelmanni de Magis L. III. cap. x. § 52.—Gerstlacheri Comment.

de Quæst. per Tormenta, p. 35.—Grillandi de Quæst. et Tortura Q. vii.

§ 11. So Beccaria (Delitt. e Pene, § XII.)—“Alcuni dottori ed alcune

nazioni non permettono questa infame petizione di principio che per

tre volte; altre nazioni ed altri dottori la lasciano ad arbitrio del

giudice.”

[1763] This custom prevailed in Electoral Saxony until the abrogation

of torture (Goetzii Diss. de Tort. p. 33), and was especially the case

at Amsterdam. Meyer (Institutions Judiciaires, IV. 295) states that the

registers there afford scarcely an instance of a prisoner discharged

without conviction after enduring torture.

[1764] Zanger. _loc. cit._

[1765] Bernhardi, cap. I. § xii.—Goetzii _op. cit._ p. 74.—Cf. Caroli

V. Const. Crim. cap. XX. § 1.—Goetz (p. 67) derives _urpheda_ from _ur_

before, and _fede_ enmity.

[1766] Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, p. 31.

[1767] Werner. Dissert. de Tortura, pp. 91-2.

[1768] Zangeri cap. II. Nos. 9-10; cap. V. Nos. 19-28.—Damhouder. _op.

cit._ cap. xxxvi. No. 36.—Baldi de Periglis de Quæstionibus cap. ii. §

9.

[1769] Zangeri cap. V. Nos. 1-18.—Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, pp. 67-9.

[1770] Damhouder. _op. cit._ cap. xl. No. 3.—Bigotry and superstition,

especially, did not allow their victims to escape so easily. In

accusations of sorcery, if appearances were against the prisoner—that

is, if he were of evil repute, if he shed no tears during the torture,

and if he recovered speedily after each application—he was not to

be liberated because no confession could be wrung from him, but was

to be kept for at least a year, “squaloribus carceris mancipandus

et cruciandus, sæpissime etiam examinandus, præcipue sacratioribus

diebus.”—Rickii Defens. Aq. Probæ cap. I. No. 22.

[1771] Alberti de Gandino de Quæstionibus § 21.

[1772] Zangeri cap. V. No. 53-61.—Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, p. 57.

[1773] Boden, _op. cit._ Th. V. VI.

[1774] Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, p. 72.

[1775] Boden, _op. cit._ Th. V. VI.

[1776] Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, p. 76. Distinction was sometimes

made between crimes involving death or corporal punishment and those of

lighter grade, but Goetz states that in his time (1742) in Saxony the

above was the received practice.

[1777] Dissert. Mor. et Jurid. sur la Torture, pp. 36-7.

[1778] Ibid. p. 169.

[1779] Damhoud. Rer. Criminal. Prax. cap. 34, § 7.

[1780] Const. 7 Cod. IX. xviii.

[1781] Concil. Emeritan. ann. 666 can. xv.

In the middle of the thirteenth century, the Emperor Theodore Lascaris

invented a novel mode of torture in a case of this kind. When a noble

lady of his court was accused of sorcery, he caused her to be inclosed

naked in a sack with a number of cats. The suffering, though severe,

failed to extort a confession.—Georg. Pachymeri Hist. Mich. Palæol.

Lib. I. cap. xii.

[1782] Bodini de Magorum Dæmonoman. Lib. IV. cap. 2.

[1783] Boguet, Discours des Sorciers, chap. lv. (Lyon, 1610).

[1784] Louïse, La Sorcellerie et la Justice Criminelle à Valenciennes

(Valenciennes, 1861, pp. 133-64).—For other similar instances see

Bodin, _op. cit._ Lib. IV. cap. 1, 2.

[1785] Bodin. Lib. I. cap. 2.

[1786] Per legales testes hujus rei ad convincendum fides certa haberi

non potest.—Rickii Defens. Aquæ Probæ cap. III. No. 117.

[1787] Idque facilius in excepto et occulto difficilisque probationis

crimine nostro sortilegii admiserim quam in aliis.—Disquisit. Magicar.

Lib. V. Sect. iii. No. 8.

[1788] Boguet, Instruction pour un juge en faict de Sorcelerie, art.

xxxii.

[1789] Soit pour ne trouver les délitz suffisament vérifiez, ou pour

savoir tous les complices, _ou autrement_.—Chart. nouv. du Haynau,

chap. 125, art. xxvi. (Louïse, p. 94).

[1790] Nicolas, p. 145. The curious reader will find in Del Rio (Lib.

V. Sect. ix.) ample details as to the arts of the Evil One to sustain

his followers against the pious efforts of the Inquisition.

[1791] “Qu’après qu’on eut lavé ses jambes, qui avoient été déchirées

par la torture, et qu’on les eut présentées au feu pour y rapeller

quelque peu d’esprits et de vigueur, il ne cessa pas de s’entretenir

avec ses Gardes, par des discours peu sérieux et pleins de railleries;

qu’il mangea avec apétit et but avec plaisir trois ou quatre coups;

et qu’il ne répandit aucuns larmes en souffrant la question, ni après

l’avoir souffert, lors même qu’on l’exorcisa de l’exorcisme des

Magiciens, et que l’Exorciste lui dit à plus de cinquante reprises

‘præcipio ut si sis innocens effundas lachrymas.’”—Hist. des Diables de

Loudon, pp. 157-8.

[1792] Rerum Crimin. Praxis Cap. xxxvii. Nos. 21, 22. Cf. Brunnemann.

de Inquisit. Process. cap. VIII. Memb. v. No. 70.

[1793] Rickii _op. cit._ cap. I. No. 24.

[1794] Grillandi de Quæstione et Tortura, Art. iii. §§ 12-16. One of

the conjurations is an allusion to the Crucifixion,

“Imparibus meritis tria pendent corpora ramis.

Dismas et Gestas, in medio est divina potestas.

Dismas damnatur, Gestas ad astra levatur.”

Another “Quemadmodum lac beatæ gloriosæ Mariæ virginis fuit dulce et

suave domino nostro Jesu Christo, ita hæc tortura sit dulcis et suavis

brachiis et membris meis.”

[1795] Boguet, Instruction pour un juge, art. xxix.—Damhouderi Rer.

Crim. Prax. cap. xxxviii. No. 19.

[1796] Sprenger Mall. Maleficar. P. III. q. xvi. This was directly

in contradiction to the precepts of the civil lawyers. Ippolito dei

Marsigli says positively that a confession uttered in response to a

promise of pardon cannot be used against the accused (Singularia,

Venet. 1555, fol. 36 _b_). The Church, however, did not consider

itself bound by the ordinary rules of law or morality. Marsigli in

another passage (fol. 30 _a_) relates that Alexander III. once secretly

promised a bishop that if he would publicly confess himself guilty of

simony he should have a dispensation, and on the prelate’s doing so,

immediately deposed him.

[1797] Bodin. Lib. IV. cap. I.

[1798] Boguet, Instruction, art. xxvii.

[1799] De Cathol. Instit. Tit. XIII. No. 12.

[1800] Disquisit. Magicar. Lib. V. Sect. x.

[1801] Father Tanner states that he had this from learned and

experienced men.—Tanneri Tract. de Proc. adv. Veneficas, Quæst. II.

Assert. iii. § 2.

[1802] Ibid. _loc. cit._

[1803] Nicolas, p. 164.

[1804] Chabot, Encyclopédie Monastique, p. 426 (Paris, 1827). For

instances see Angeli Rumpheri Hist. Formbach. Lib. II. (Pez, I. III.

446).—A. Molinier in Vaissette, Ed. Privat, IX. 417.

[1805] “Ita torquatur ut nec plagam referat nec color cutis

livescat.”—Grágás, Festathattr cap. xxxiii.

[1806] Grágás, Vigslothi cap. cxi.

[1807] Ibid. Vigslothi cap. lxxxviii.

[1808] Schlegel Comment. ad Grágás § xxix.

[1809] Legg. Cimbric. Woldemari Lib. II. cap. i. xl. (Ed. Ancher,

Hafniæ, 1783).

[1810] Christiani V. Jur. Danic. Lib. I. cap. xx. (Ed. Weghorst,

Hafniæ, 1698). Senckenberg (Corp. Jur. German. T. I. Præf. p. lxxxvi.)

gives the chapter heads of a code in Danish, the _Keyser Retenn_,

furnished to him by Ancher, in which cap. iv. and v. contain directions

as to the administration of torture. The code is a mixture of German,

civil, and local law, and probably was in force in some of the Germanic

provinces of Denmark.

[1811] Legg. Opstalbomicæ ann. 1323 (_ap._ Gärtner, Saxonum Leges Tres.

Lipsiæ, 1730).

[1812] Raguald. Ingermund. Leg. Suecor. Stockholmiæ, 1623.

[1813] Ll. Henrici I. cap. v. § 16.

A curious disregard of this principle occurs in the Welsh laws, which

provide that when a thief is at the gallows, with the certainty

of being hanged, his testimony as to his accomplices is to be

received as sufficient without requiring it to be sworn to on a

relic—the inseparable condition of all other evidence. By a singular

inconsistency, however, the accomplice thus convicted was not to be

hanged, but to be sold as a slave.—Dimetian Code, Bk. II. ch. v. § 9

(Owen I. 425).

[1814] Many interesting details on the influence of the Roman law upon

that of England will be found in the learned work of Carl Güterbock,

“Bracton and his Relation to the Roman Law,” recently translated by

Brinton Coxe (Philadelphia, 1866). The subject is one which well

deserves a more thorough consideration than it is likely to receive at

the hands of English writers.

It is curious to observe that the _crimen læsæ majestatis_ makes its

appearance in Bracton (Lib. III. Tract. ii. cap. 3, § 1) about the

middle of the thirteenth century, earlier than in France, where, as we

have seen, the first allusion to it occurs in 1315. This was hardly to

be expected, when we consider the widely different influences exerted

upon the jurisprudence of the two countries by the Roman law.

[1815] The passage which has been relied on by lawyers is chap. xxx.:

“Nullus liber homo capiatur, vel imprisonetur, aut dissaisiatur, aut

utlagetur, aut aliquo modo destruatur; nec super eum ibimus, nec super

eum mittemus, nisi per legale judicium parium suorum, vel per legem

terræ.” If the law just above quoted from the collection of Henry I.

could be supposed to be still in force under John, then this might

possibly be imagined to bear some reference to it; but it is evident

that had torture been an existing grievance, such as outlawry, seizure,

and imprisonment, the barons would have been careful to include it in

their enumeration of restrictions. Moreover, Magna Charta was specially

directed to curtail the royal prerogative, and at a later period was

not held by any one to interfere with that prerogative whenever the

king desired to test with the rack the endurance of his loving subjects.

[1816] Et come ascuns felons viendrount en Jugement respondre de lour

felonie, volons que ils viegnent dechausses et descients sauns coiffe,

et a teste descouverte, en pure lour cote hors de fers et de chescun

manere de liens, ïssint que la peine ne lour toille nule manere de

rason, selon par force ne lour estouva mye respondre forsque lour

fraunche volunte.—Britton, chap. v.

[1817] Per volunté aussi se fait ceste pesché [homicide] si come

per ceux qui painent home tant que il est gehist pur avouer pesché

mortelment.—Horne, The Myrror of Justice, cap. I. sect. viii.—See also

Fleta, Lib. I. cap. xxvi. § 5.

[1818] Ou faussement judgea Raginald ... ou issint; tant luy penia pur

luy faire conoistre, approver il se conoist faussement aver pesché ou

nient ne pescha.—Horne, cap. II. sect. xv.

[1819] Pike (Hist. of Crime in England I. 427) quotes a document of

1189 which seems indirectly to show that torture could be inflicted

under an order of the king. The expression is somewhat doubtful, and as

torture had not yet established itself anywhere in Europe as a judicial

procedure the document alleged can hardly be received as evidence of

its legality.

[1820] See Fortescue de Laud. Legg. Angliæ. cap. xxxiii.—The jealousy

with which all attempted encroachments of the Roman law were repelled

is manifested in a declaration of Parliament in 1388. “Que ce royalme

d’Engleterre n’estait devant ces heures, ne à l’entent du roy nostre

dit seignior et seigniors du parlement unque ne serra rulé ne governé

par la ley civill.”—Rot. Parl., II Ric. II. (Selden’s Note to

Fortescue, _loc. cit._).

[1821] De Laudibus Legum Angliæ, cap. xxii.

[1822] See Jardine’s “Reading on the Use of Torture in the Criminal Law

of England,” p. 7 (London, 1837), a condensed and sufficiently complete

account of the subject under the Tudors and Stuarts.

[1823] Partim tormentis subjecti, partim crudelissime laniati, et

partim etiam furca suspensi fuerant.—Wilkins Concil. III. 617.

[1824] Jardine, _op. cit._ pp. 8-9, 24-5. It is due to Sir Thomas

to add that he earnestly begs Lord Burghley to release him from so

uncongenial an employment.

[1825] Ibid. pp. 8, 47.

[1826] Bacon’s Works, Philadelphia, 1846, III. 126.

[1827] Strype’s Eccles. Memorials, III. 101.

[1828] Burnet, Hist. Reform. Bk. III. pp. 341-2.

[1829] According to Nicander Nucius (Travels, Camden Soc. 1841, pp. 58,

62), the investigation of these deceptions with the severest tortures,

Βασάνοις ἀφορήτοις, was apparently the ordinary mode of procedure.

[1830] Diarium rerum gestarum in Turri Londinensi (Sanderi Schisma

Anglicanum, _ad calcem_, Ingolstadt, 1586).

[1831] Sir William Skevington, a lieutenant of the Tower, under Henry

VIII., immortalized himself by reviving an old implement of torture,

consisting of an iron hoop, in which the prisoner was bent, heels to

hams and chest to knees, and was thus crushed together unmercifully. It

obtained the nickname of Skevington’s Daughter, corrupted in time to

Scavenger’s Daughter. Among other sufferers from its embraces was an

unlucky Irishman, named Myagh, whose plaint, engraved on the walls of

his dungeon, is still among the curiosities of the Tower:—

“Thomas Miagh, which liethe here alone,

That fayne wold from hens begon:

By torture straunge mi truth was tryed,

Yet of my libertie denied.

1581. Thomas Myagh.” (Jardine, _op. cit._ pp. 15, 30).

[1832] Jardine, pp. 53, 57-8.

It is rather remarkable to find torture legalized at this period,

even in qualified form of the _question définitive_ in the Colony of

Massachusetts. The Body of Liberties, enacted in 1641, declares:—

“45. No man shall be forced by Torture to confesse any crime against

himselfe nor any other, unlesse it be in some Capitall case where

he is first fully convicted by cleare and suffitient evidence to be

guilty, After which if the case be of that nature, That it is very

apparent there be other conspiritours or confederates with him, Then

he may be tortured, yet not with such Tortures as be Barbarous and

inhumane.”—Whitmore’s Colonial Laws of Massachusetts, Boston, 1889 (N.

Y. Nation, No. 1268, p. 318).

From this it would appear safe to conclude that this is a limitation on

a pre-existing, more general use of torture.

[1833] Jardine, p. 65.

[1834] Lecky, Hist. of Rationalism, Am. ed. I. 122.—In his very

interesting work, Mr. Lecky mentions a case, occurring under the

Commonwealth, of an aged clergyman named Lowes, who, after an

irreproachable pastorate of fifty years, fell under suspicion. “The

unhappy old man was kept awake for several successive nights, and

persecuted ‘till he was weary of his life, and was scarcely sensible of

what he said or did.’ He was then thrown into the water, condemned, and

hung.”—Ibid. p. 126.

[1835] Cobbett’s State Trials, VI. 686.—Although ostensibly not used to

extort confession, this pricking was practically regarded as a torture.

Thus in 1677 the Privy Council of Scotland “found that they (_i. e._,

the inferior magistracy) might not use any torture by pricking or by

withholding them from sleep” (_loc. cit._).

[1836] Spottiswoode Miscellany, Edinburgh, 1845, II. 67.

[1837] Rogers’s Scotland, Social and Domestic, p. 266.

[1838] Statut. Roberti III. cap. xvi. (Skene).

[1839] Lecky, _op. cit._ I. 145-6.—Rogers, _op. cit._ pp. 267-300.

[1840] I quote from Mr. Lecky (p. 147), who gives as his authority

“Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials of Scotland.”

“But others and perhaps worse trials were in reserve. The three

principal that were habitually applied were the penniwinkis, the boots,

and the caschielawis. The first was a kind of thumbscrew; the second

was a frame in which the leg was inserted, and in which it was broken

by wedges driven in by a hammer; the third was also an iron frame

for the leg, which was from time to time heated over a brazier. Fire

matches were sometimes applied to the body of the victim. We read, in

a contemporary legal register, of one man who was kept for forty-eight

hours in ‘vehement tortour’ in the caschielawis; and of another who

remained in the same frightful machine for eleven days and eleven

nights, whose legs were broken daily for fourteen days in the boots,

and who was so scourged that the whole skin was torn from his body.”

These cases occurred in 1596.

These horrors are almost equalled by those of another trial in which

a Dr. Fian was accused of having caused the storms which endangered

the voyage of James VI. from Denmark in 1590. James personally

superintended the torturing of the unhappy wretch, and after exhausting

all the torments known to the skill and experience of the executioners,

he invented new ones. All were vain, however, and the victim was

finally burnt without confessing his ill-deeds (Ibid. p. 123).

[1841] Rogers, _op. cit._ p. 307.

[1842] Diurnal of Occurrences in Scotland (Spottiswoode Miscellany, II.

90-91).

[1843] 7 Anne c. 21.—While thus legislating for the enlightenment

of Scotland, the English majority took care to retain the equally

barbarous practice of the _peine forte et dure_. This was commenced in

1275 simply as a “prisone forte et dure” (First Statute of Westminster,

cap. xii.; Cf. Britton, cap. xi.) for felons refusing to plead, and

speedily developed into starvation and nakedness (Fleta, Lib. I. cap.

xxxii. § 33). Horne (Myrror of Justice, cap. I. § viii.; cap. II. §

ix.) evidently regards as illegal “le horrible et perillous lien,” and

treats as murder a death occasioned by it. In spite of this protest the

process was rendered still more barbarous by piling weights of iron on

the poor wretch, and finally the device of a press was adopted in which

he was squeezed. In this shape it lost its original justification of

wearing out his endurance and forcing him to plead either guilty or

not guilty, and became a simple punishment of peculiar atrocity, for,

after its commencement the prisoner was not allowed to plead, but was

kept under the press until death, “donec oneris, frigoris atque famis

cruciatu extinguitur” (Hale, Placit. Coron. c. xliii.). This relic of

modern barbarism was not abolished until 1772, by 12 Geo. III. c. 20.

The only case of its employment in America is said to have been that

of Giles Cory, in 1692, during the witchcraft epidemic. Knowing the

hopelessness of the trials, he refused to plead, and was duly pressed

to death (Cobbett’s State Trials, VI. 680).

When the _peine forte et dure_ had become simply a punishment, it was

sometimes replaced by a torture consisting of tying the thumbs together

with whipcord until the endurance of the accused gave way and he

consented to plead. This practice continued at least until so late as

1734. See an interesting essay by Prof. James B. Thayer, Harvard Law

Review, Jan. 1892.

[1844] Rogers, _op. cit._ p. 301.

[1845] Herzog, Abriss der Gesammten Kirchengeschichte, II. 346.

[1846] His arguments are quoted and controverted by Simancas, Bishop of

Badajos, in his Cathol. Institut. Tit. LXV. No. 7, 8.

[1847] Essais, Liv. II. chap. v.—This passage is little more than a

plagiarism on St. Augustin, de Civ. Dei Lib. XIX. cap. vi.—Montaigne

further illustrates his position by a story from Froissart (Liv. IV.

ch. lviii.), who relates that an old woman complained to Bajazet

that a soldier had foraged on her. The Turk summarily disposed of

the soldier’s denial by causing his stomach to be opened. He proved

guilty—but what had he been found innocent?

[1848] Bayle, Dict. Hist. s. v. _Grevius_.—Gerstlacheri Comment. de

Quæst. per Torment. Francof. 1753, pp. 25-6.

[1849] Frid. Kelleri Paradoxon de Tortura in Christ. Repub. non

exercenda. Reimp. Jenæ, 1688.

[1850] Déclaration du 24 Août, 1780 (Isambert, XXVII. 374).

[1851] Nicolas is careful to assert his entire belief in the existence

of sorcery and his sincere desire for its punishment, and he is

indignant at the popular feeling which stigmatized those who wished for

a reform in procedure as “avocats des sorciers.”

[1852] Dict. Histor. s. v. _Grevius_.

[1853] Bernhardi Diss. Inaug. cap. II. §§ iv. x.—Bernhardi ventured

on the use of very decided language in denunciation of the

system.—“Injustam, iniquam, fallacem, insignium malorum promotricem, et

denique omni divini testimonii specie destitutam esse hanc violentam

torturam et proinde ex foris Christianorum rejiciendam intrepide

assero” (Ibid. cap. I. § 1).

[1854] Meyer, Institutions Judiciaires, IV. 297. Even, then, however,

the inquisitorial process was not abolished, and criminal procedure

continued to be secret. For the rack and strappado were substituted

prolonged imprisonment and other expedients to extort confession;

and in 1803 direct torture was used in the case of Hendrik Janssen,

executed in Amsterdam on the strength of a confession extracted from

him with the aid of a bull’s pizzle.

[1855] An enumeration of the opponents of torture may be found in

Gerstlacher’s Comment. de Quæst. per Tormenta, pp. 24-30, and Werner’s

Dissert. de Tortura Testium, pp. 28-31.

[1856] M. A. Engel de Tortura ex Foris Christ. non proscribenda.

Lipsiæ, 1733.

[1857] Jo. Frid. Werner Dissert. de Tortura Testium, Erford. 1724.

Reimpr. Lipsiæ, 1742.

[1858] Carlyle, Hist. Friedrich II. Book XI. ch. i.

[1859] I find this statement in an account by G. F. Günther (Lipsiæ,

1838) of the abolition of torture in Saxony.

[1860] Günther, _op. cit._

[1861] Gerstlacheri Comment. de Quæst. per Tormenta, Francofurti, 1753,

p. 56.

[1862] Goetzii Dissert. de Tortura, Lipsiæ, 1742, p. 24.

[1863] Constitutio Criminalis Theresiana, Wien, 1769.

[1864] Du Boys, Droit Criminel des Peuples Modernes, I. 620.

[1865] Instructions addressées par sa Majesté l’Impératrice de toutes

les Russies à la Commission établie pour travailler à l’exécution

du projet d’un Nouveau Code de Lois Art. X. §§ 82-87 (Pétersbourg

1769).—See also Grand Instructions of Catherine II., London, 1769, pp.

113-8.

[1866] Jardine, Use of Torture in England, p. 3.—Meyer, Institutions

Judiciaires, T. I. p. xlvi.—T. II. p. 262.

[1867] Groot, Hist. Ecles. y Civil de Nueva Granada II. 79-80.

[1868] Toreno, Levantamiento, Guerra y Revolución de España, Paris,

1838, II. 371, 438.

[1869] Tant d’habiles gens et tant de beaux génies ont écrit contre

cette pratique que je n’ose parler après eux. J’allois dire qu’elle

pourroit convenir dans les gouvernements despotiques; où tout qui

inspire la crainte entre plus dans les ressorts du gouvernement:

j’allois dire que les esclaves, chez les Grecs et chez les Romains——

Mais j’entends la voix de la nature qui crie contre moi.—Liv. VI. ch.

xvii.

[1870] Desmaze, Pénalités Anciennes, Pièces Justicatives p. 423.

[1871] Mary Lafon, Histoire du Midi de la France, T. IV. pp.

325-355.—The theory of the defence was that the murdered man had

committed suicide; but this is incompatible with the testimony, much of

which is given at length by Mary Lafon, a writer who cannot be accused

of any leanings against Protestantism.

[1872] Chéruel, Dict. Hist. des Institutions de la France. P. II. p.

1220.

[1873] Déclaration du 24 Août 1780 (Isambert, XXVII. 373).

[1874] Desmaze, Pénalités Anciennes, pp. 176-77.

[1875] Déclaration du 3 Mai 1788, art. 8. “Nôtre déclaration du 24 Août

sera exécutée” (Isambert, XXIX. 532).

[1876] Louīse, Sorcellerie et Justice Criminelle à Valenciennes, p. 96.

[1877] Isambert, XXIX. 529.—It is noteworthy, as a sign of the temper

of the times, on the eve of the last convocation of the Notables,

that this edict, which introduced various ameliorations in criminal

procedure, and promised a more thorough reform, invites from the

community at large suggestions on the subject, in order that the reform

may embody the results of public opinion—“Nous élèverons ainsi au rang

des lois les résultats de l’opinion publique.” This was pure democratic

republicanism in an irregular form.

The edict also indicates an intention to remove another of the blots

on the criminal procedure of the age, in a vague promise to allow the

prisoner the privilege of counsel.

[1878] Dei Delitti e delle Pene, § XII.—The fundamental error in the

prevalent system of criminal procedure was well exposed in Beccaria’s

remark that a mathematician would be better than a legist for the

solution of the essential problem in criminal trials—“Data la forza dei

muscoli e la sensibilitá delle fibre di un innocente, trovare il grado

di dolore che lo farà confessar reo di un dato delitto.”

[1879] Carlo di la Varenne, La Tortura in Sicilia, 1860.

* * * * * *

Transcriber’s note:

Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.

Variations in hyphenation have been standardised but all other

spelling and punctuation remains unchanged.