the history of the common law of england-第17部分
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
Law of Normandy and the Law of England agreed in the Fact； and in the Manner of Proceeding； yet there was an apparent Discrimination in their Law from ours： As for Instance； The Husband seized in Right of the Wife； having Issue by her； and she dying； by the Custom of Normandy he held but only during his Widowhood； Contiumier； cap。 119。 But in England； he held during his Life by the Curtesy of England。 4thly； But in some Things； the Laws of Normandy agreed with the Laws of England； especially as they stood in the Times of Hen。 2 and Rich。 I so that they seem to be as it were Copies or Counterparts one of another； tho' in many Things； the Laws of England are since changed in a great Measure from what they then were？ For Instance； at this Day in England； and for very many Ages past； all Lands of Inheritance； as well Socage Tenures； as of Knights Service； descend to the eldest Son； unless in Kent and some other Places where the Custom directs the Descent to all the Males； and in some places to the youngest； but the ancient Law used in England； though it directed Knights Services and Serjeanties to descend to the eldest Son； yet it directed Vassalagies and Soccage Lands to descend to all the Sons； Glanvil。 Lib。 7。 cap。 3。 and so does the Laws of Normandy to this Day。 Vide Contumier； cap。 26。 & post hic； cap。 11。 Again。 Leprosy at this Day does not impede the Descent； but by the Laws in Use in England； in the elder Times； unto the Time of King John； and for some Time afterwards； Leprosy did impede the Descent； as Placito Quarto Johannis； in the Case of W。 Fulch； a Judge of that Time； and accordingly were the Laws of Normandy。 Vide Le Contumier； cap。 27。 Again。 At this Day； by the Law of England； in Cases of Trials by Twelve Men； all ought to agree； and any one dissenting； no Verdict can be given； but by the Laws of Normandy； tho' a Verdict ought to be by the concurring Consent of Twelve Men； yet in Case of Dissent or Disagreement of the Jury； they used to put off the lesser Number that were Dissenters； and added a kind of Tales equal to the greater Number so agreeing； until they had got a Verdict of Twelve Men that concurred； Contumier； c。 95。 And we may find some ancient Footsteps of the like Use here in England； tho' long since antiquated； Vide Bracton； Lib。 4。 cap。 19。 where he speaks thus； Contingit etiam multotiens quod Juratores in veritate dicenda sunt sibi contrarii ita quod in unam concordare non possunt sententiam； Quo casu de Consilio Curiae affortietur Assisa； ita quod apponantur alii juxta numerum majoris partis quae dissenserit； vel saltem quatuor vel sex & adjungantur aliis； vel etiam per seipsos sine aliis； de veritate discutiant & judicent； & per se respondeant & eorum veredictum allocabitur & tenebitur cum quibus ipsi convenirent。 Again。 At this Day； by the Laws of England； a Man may give his Lands in Fee…simple； which he has by Descent； to any one of his Children； and disinherit the rest： But by the ancient Laws used here； it seems to be otherwise； as Mich。 10。 Johannis Glanv。 Lib。 7。 cap。 2。 the Case of William de Causeia。 And accordingly were the Laws of Normandy； as we find in the Grand Contumier； cap。 36。 〃Quand le Pere avoit plusieurs fills； ils ne peut fairde de son Heritage le un Meillenr que le auter〃； and yet it seems to this Day； in England； it holds some Resemblance in Cases of Frank…Marriage； viz。 That the Doness； in Case she will have any Part of her Father's other Lands； ought to put her Lands in Hochpot。 Again； By the Law of England； the younger Brother shall not exclude the Son of the elder； who died in the Life…time of the Father： And this was the ancient Law of Normandy； but received some Interruption in Favour of King John's Claim； Vide Contumier。 cap。 25。 & hic ante； and indeed； generally the Rule of Descents in Normandy was the same in most Cases with that of Descents with us at this Day； as for Instance； That the Descent of the Line of the Father shall not resort to that of the Mother； Et e converso； and that the Course was otherwise in Cases of Purchases。 But in most Things the Law of Normandy was consonant to the Law with us； as it was in the Time of King Richard I and King John； except in Cases of Descents to Bastard eigne； excluding Mulier Puisne； as aforesaid。 Again； at this Day there are many Writs now in Use which were anciently also in Use here； as well as in Normandy： As Writs of Rights； Writs of Dower； Writs De novel Desseisin； de Mortdancestor； Juris utrum； Darrein presentment； &c。 And some that are now out of Use； though anciently in Use here in England； as Writs De Feodo vel Vado； De Feodo vel Warda； &c。 All which are taken notice of by Glanville； Lib。 13。 cap。 28； 29。 And the very same Forms of Writs in Effect were in Use in Normandy； as appears by the Contumier Per Totum； and the Writ De Feodo vel Vado； （ibid。 cap。 11。） according to Glanville； Lib。 13。 cap。 27。 runs thus； viz。 Rex Vicecomiti salutem： Summone per bonos summonitores duodenim liberos & legales homines de vicineto quod sint coram me vel Justiciis meis eo die parati Sacramento Recognoscere utrum N。 teneat unam Carucatem Terrae in illa villa quae R。 clamat versus eum per Breve meum in Feodo an in vadio； invadiatem ei ab ipso R。 vel ab H。 antecessore ejus； （vel aliter si sit Feodam vel haereditas ipsius N。 an in vadio invadiata ei ab ipso R。 vel ab H。 &c。 Et interim terram illam videant； &c。 （Vide ibid。） And according to the Grand Contumier； that Writ runs thus； viz。 Si Rex fecerit te securum de clamore suo prosequend' summoneas Recognitores de Viceneto quod sint ad primas Assisas Ballivae； ad cognoscendum utrum Carucata Terrae in B。 quod。 G。 deforceat R。 sit Feodum tenentis vel vadium novum dictum per manus G。 post Coronationem Regis Richardi & pro quanta； & utrum sit propinquior Haeres ad redimendum vadium； & videatur interum Terrae； &c。 So that there seems little Variance； either in the Nature or in the Form of those Writs used here in the Time of Henry 2。 And those used in Normandy when the Contumier was made。 Again； The Use was in England； to limit certain notable Times； within the Compass of which those Titles which Men design'd to be relieved upon； must accrue： Thus it was done in the Time of Henry 3 by the Statute of Merton； cap。 8。 at which Time the Limitation in a Writ of Right was from the Time of King Henry I and by that Statute it is reduced to the Time of King Henry 2 and for Assizes of Mortdancestor they were thereby reduced from the last Return of King John out of Ireland； which was 12 Johannis； and for Assizes of Novel Disseisin； a Prima Transfretatione Regis in Normanniam； which was 5 Hen。 3 and which before that had been Post ultimum redditum Henricus 3 de Britannia； as appears by Bracton。 And this Time of Limitation was also afterwards； by the Statutes of Westm。 I。 cap。 39。 and West。 2。 cap。 2。 46。 reduced unto a narrow Scantlet； the Writ of Right being limited to the First Coronation of King Richard I。 But before the Limitation set by that Statute of Merton； there were several Limitations set for severals Writs； for we find among the Pleas of King John's Time； the Limitation of Writs； De Tempore quo Rex Henricus avus noster fuit vivus & Mortuus； and in a Writ of Aile； Die quo Rex Henricus obiit in the Time of Henry 2。 as appears by Glanville； Lib。 13。 cap。 3。 there were then divers Limitations in Use； as in Moridancestors； Post Prima Coronationem nostram； viz。 Henrici secundi； Glanvil。 Lib。 I。 cap。 I and touching Assizes of Novel Disseisin； Vide ibid。 cap。 32。 where he tells us； Cium quis intra Assisam； &c。 And the Time of Limitation in an Assize； was then post ultimdm meam Transfretationem； （viz。 Henrici Primi） in Normanniam； Lib。 13。 cap。 33。 But in a Writ of Right； as also in a Writ of Customs and Services； it was de Tempore Regis Henrici avi mei； viz。 Hen。 I。 vid。 ib。 Lib。 12。 cap。 10； 16。 and it seems very apparent； that the Limitations anciently in Normandy； for all Actions Ancestral was Post Primam Coronaiionem Regis Henrici fecundi； as appears expresly in the Contumier； cap。 111。 De Feofe & Gage。 So that anciently the Time of Limitation in Normandy was the same as in England； and indeed borrowed from England； viz。 In all Actions Ancestrel from the Coronation of Henry 2。 And thus in those Actions wherein the Limitation was anciently from the Coronation of King Richard I was substituted as in the Writ De Feofe & Gage； in the Contumier； cap。 111。 De Feofe & Forme； cap。 112。 In the Writ De Ley Apparisan； ib。 cap。 24。 & cap。 22。 〃Ascun Gage ne peut estre requise en Normandy； si il ne suit engage post le Coronement de Roy Richard ou deins quarante annus〃： So that the old Limitation； as well for the Redemption of Mortgages； as for bringing those Writs above…mentioned； was post Coronationem Regis Henrici Secundi； but altered； as it seems； by King Philip； the Son of Lewis King of France； after King John's Ejectment out of Normandy； and since the Time from the Coronation of King Richard I is estimated to bear Proportion to 40 years。 It is probable this Change of the Limitation by King Philip of France； was about the Beginning of the Reign of King Henry 3 or about 30 or 40 years after the Coronation of Richard I from whose Coronation about 30 years were elapsed； 5 aut。 6 Henrici 3 for anciently the Limitation in this Case was 30 years。 Fourthly； I now come to the Fourth Inquiry； viz。 How this great Parity between the Laws of England and Normandy came to be effected； and before I come to it； I shall premise Two Observables； which I would have the Reader to carry along with him through the whole Discourse； viz。 First； That this Parity of Laws does not at all infer a Necessity； that they should be imposed by the Conqueror； which is sufficiently shewn in the foregoing Chapters； and in this it will appear that there were divers other Means that caused a Similitude of both Laws； without any Supposition of imposing them by the Conqueror。 Secondly； That the Laws of Normandy were in the greater Part thereof borrowed from ours； rather than ours from them； and the Similitude of the Laws of
