the spirit of laws-第129部分

快捷操作: 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! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！

　upon　that　as　a　sacrilegious　law　which　authorized　the　taking　of　an　oath。

The　trial　by　combat　had　some　reason　for　it；　founded　on　experience。　In　a　military　nation；　cowardice　supposes　other　vices；　it　is　an　argument　of　a　person's　having　deviated　from　the　principles　of　his　education；　of　his　being　insensible　of　honour；　and　of　having　refused　to　be　directed　by　those　maxims　which　govern　other　men；　it　shows　that　he　neither　fears　their　contempt；　nor　sets　any　value　upon　their　esteem。　Men　of　any　tolerable　extraction　seldom　want　either　the　dexterity　requisite　to　co…operate　with　strength；　or　the　strength　necessary　to　concur　with　courage；　for　as　they　set　a　value　upon　honour；　they　are　practised　in　matters　without　which　this　honour　cannot　be　obtained。　Besides；　in　a　military　nation；　where　strength；　courage　and　prowess　are　esteemed；　crimes　really　odious　are　those　which　arise　from　fraud；　artifice；　and　cunning；　that　is；　from　cowardice。

With　regard　to　the　trial　by　fire；　after　the　party　accused　had　put　his　hand　on　a　hot　iron；　or　in　boiling　water；　they　wrapped　the　hand　in　a　bag　and　sealed　it　up；　if　after　three　days　there　appeared　no　mark；　he　was　acquitted；　Is　it　not　plain；　that　among　people　inured　to　the　handling　of　arms；　the　impression　made　on　a　rough　or　callous　skin　by　the　hot　iron　or　by　boiling　water　could　not　be　so　great　as　to　be　seen　three　days　afterwards？　And　if　there　appeared　any　mark；　it　showed　that　the　person　who　had　undergone　the　trial　was　an　effeminate　fellow。　Our　peasants　are　not　afraid　to　handle　hot　iron　with　their　callous　hands；　and；　with　regard　to　the　women；　the　hands　of　those　who　worked　hard　might　be　very　well　able　to　resist　hot　iron。　The　ladies　did　not　want　champions　to　defend　their　cause；　and　in　a　nation　where　there　was　no　luxury；　there　was　no　middle　state。＇88＇

By　the　law　of　the　Thuringians＇89＇　a　woman　accused　of　adultery　was　condemned　to　the　trial　by　boiling　water　only　when　there　was　no　champion　to　defend　her；　and　the　law　of　the　Ripuarians　admits　of　this　trial＇90＇　only　when　a　person　had　no　witnesses　to　appear　in　justification。　Now　a　woman　that　could　not　prevail　upon　any　one　relative　to　defend　her　cause；　or　a　man　that　could　not　produce　one　single　witness　to　attest　his　honesty；　was；　from　those　very　circumstances；　sufficiently　convicted。

I　conclude；　therefore；　that　under　the　circumstances　of　time　in　which　the　trial　by　combat　and　the　trial　by　hot　iron　and　boiling　water　obtained；　there　was　such　an　agreement　between　those　laws　and　the　manners　of　the　people；　that　the　laws　were　rather　unjust　in　themselves　than　productive　of　injustice；　that　the　effects　were　more　innocent　than　the　cause；　that　they　were　more　contrary　to　equity　than　prejudicial　to　its　rights；　more　unreasonable　than　tyrannical。

18。　In　what　manner　the　Custom　of　judicial　Combats　gained　Ground。　From　Agobard's　letter　to　Louis　the　Debonnaire；　it　might　be　inferred　that　the　custom　of　judicial　combats　was　not　established　among　the　Franks；　for　having　represented　to　that　prince　the　abuses　of　the　law　of　Gundebald；　he　desires　that　private　disputes　should　be　decided　in　Burgundy　by　the　law　of　the　Franks。　But　as　it　is　well　known　from　other　quarters　that　the　trial　by　combat　prevailed　at　that　time　in　France；　this　has　been　the　cause　of　some　perplexity。　However；　the　difficulty　may　be　solved　by　what　I　have　said；　the　law　of　the　Salian　Franks　did　not　allow　of　this　kind　of　trial　and　that　of　the　Ripuarian　Franks　did。＇91＇

But；　notwithstanding　the　clamours　of　the　clergy；　the　custom　of　judicial　combats　gained　ground　continually　in　France；　and　I　shall　presently　make　it　appear　that　the　clergy　themselves　were　in　a　great　measure　the　occasion　of　it。

It　is　the　law　of　the　Lombards　that　furnishes　us　with　this　proof。　〃There　has　been　long　since　a　detestable　custom　introduced；〃　says　the　preamble　to　the　constitution　of　Otho　II：＇92＇　〃this　is；　that　if　the　title　to　an　estate　was　said　to　be　false；　the　person　who　claimed　under　that　title　made　oath　upon　the　Gospel　that　it　was　genuine；　and　without　any　preceding　judgment　he　took　possession　of　the　estate；　so　that　they　who　would　perjure　themselves　were　sure　of　gaining　their　point。〃　The　Emperor　Otho　I　having　caused　himself　to　be　crowned　at　Rome＇93＇　at　the　very　time　that　a　council　was　there　under　Pope　John　XII；　all　the　lords　of　Italy　represented　to　that　prince　the　necessity　of　enacting　a　law　to　reform　this　horrible　abuse。＇94＇　The　Pope　and　the　Emperor　were　of　opinion　that　the　affair　should　be　referred　to　the　council　which　was　to　be　shortly　held　at　Ravenna。＇95＇　There　the　lords　made　the　same　demands；　and　redoubled　their　complaints；　but　the　affair　was　put　off　once　more；　under　pretence　of　the　absence　of　particular　persons。　When　Otho　II　and　Conrad；　King　of　Burgundy；　arrived　in　Italy；＇96＇　they　had　a　conference　at　Verona＇97＇　with　the　Italian　lords；＇98＇　and　at　their　repeated　solicitations；　the　Emperor；　with　their　unanimous　consent；　made　a　law；　that　whenever　there　happened　any　disputes　about　inheritances；　while　one　of　the　parties　insisted　upon　the　legality　of　his　title　and　the　other　maintained　its　being　false；　the　affair　should　be　decided　by　combat；　that　the　same　rule　should　be　observed　in　contests　relating　to　fiefs；　and　that　the　clergy　should　be　subject　to　the　same　law；　but　should　fight　by　their　champions。　Here　we　see　that　the　nobility　insisted　on　the　trial　by　combat　because　of　the　inconvenience　of　the　proof　introduced　by　the　clergy；　that　notwithstanding　the　clamours　of　the　nobility；　the　notoriousness　of　the　abuse　which　called　out　loudly　for　redress；　and　the　authority　of　Otho　who　came　into　Italy　to　speak　and　act　as　master；　still　the　clergy　held　out　in　two　councils；　in　fine；　that　the　joint　concurrence　of　the　nobility　and　princes　having　obliged　the　clergy　to　submit；　the　custom　of　judicial　combats　must　have　been　considered　as　a　privilege　of　the　nobility；　as　a　barrier　against　injustice　and　as　a　security　of　property；　and　from　that　very　moment　this　custom　must　have　gained　ground。　And　this　was　effected　at　a　time　when　the　power　of　the　Emperors　was　great；　and　that　of　the　popes　inconsiderable；　at　a　time　when　the　Othos　came　to　revive　the　dignity　of　the　empire　in　Italy。

I　shall　make　one　reflection　which　will　corroborate　what　has　been　above　said；　namely；　that　the　institution　of　negative　proofs　entailed　that　of　judicial　combats。　The　abuse　complained　of　to　the　Othos　was；　that　a　person　who　was　charged　with　having　a　false　title　to　an　estate；　defended　himself　by　a　negative　proof；　declaring　upon　the　Gospels　it　was　not　false。　What　was　done　to　reform　the　abuse　of　a　law　which　had　been　mutilated？　The　custom　of　combat　was　revived。

I　hastened　to　speak　of　the　constitution　of　Otho　II；　in　order　to　give　a　clear　idea　of　the　disputes　between　the　clergy　and　the　laity　of　those　times。　There　had　been　indeed　a　constitution　of　Lotharius　I＇99＇　of　an　earlier　date；　a　sovereign　who；　upon　the　same　complaints　and　disputes；　being　desirous　of　securing　the　just　possession　of　property；　had　ordained　that　the　notary　should　make　oath　that　the　deed　or　title　was　not　forged；　and　if　the　notary　should　happen　to　die；　the　witnesses　should　be　sworn　who　had　signed　it。　The　evil；　however；　still　continued；　till　they　were　obliged　at　length　to　have　recourse　to　the　remedy　above…mentioned。

Before　that　time　I　find　that；　in　the　general　assemblies　held　by　Charlemagne；　the　nation　represented　to　him＇100＇　that　in　the　actual　state　of　things　it　was　extremely　difficult　for　either　the　accuser　or　the　accused　to　avoid　perjuring　themselves；　and　that　for　this　reason　it　was　much　better　to　revive　the　judicial　combat；　which　was　accordingly　done。

The　usage　of　judicial　combats　gained　ground　among　the　Burgundians；　and　that　of　an　oath　was　limited。　Theodoric；　King　of　Italy；　suppressed　the　single　combat　among　the　Ostrogoths；＇101＇　and　the　laws　of　Chaindasuinthus　and　Recessuinthus　seemed　as　if　they　would　abolish　the　very　idea　of　it。　But　these　laws　were　so　little　respected　in　Narbonne　Gaul；　that　they　looked　upon　the　legal　duel　as　a　privilege　of　the　Goths。＇102＇

The　Lombards　who　conquered　Italy　after　the　Ostrogoths　had　been　destroyed　by　the　Greeks；　introduced　the　custom　of　judicial　combat　into　that　country；　but　their　first　laws　gave　a　check　to　it。＇103＇　Charlemagne；＇104＇　Louis　the　Debonnaire；　and　the　Othos　made　divers　general　constitutions；　which　we　find　inserted　in　the　laws　of　the　Lombards　and　added　to　the　Salic　laws；　whereby　the　practice　of　legal　duels；　at　first　in　criminal；　and　afterwards　in　civil　cases；　obtained　a　greater　extent。　They　knew　not　what　to　do。　The　negative　proof　by　oath　had　its　inconveniences；　that　of　legal　duels　had　its　inconveniences　also；　hence　they　often　changed；　according　as　the　one　or　the　other　affected　them　most。

On　the　one　hand；　the　clergy　were　pleased　to　see　that　in　all　secular　affairs　people　were　obliged　to　have　recourse　to　the　altar；＇105＇　and；　on　the　other；　a　haughty　nobility　were　fond　of　maintaining　their　rights　by　the　sword。

I　would　not　have　it　inferred　that　it　was　the　clergy　who　introduced　the　custom　so　much　complained　of　by　the　nobility。　This　custom　was　derived　from　the　spirit　of　the　Barbarian　laws；　and　from　the　establishment　of　negative　proofs。　But　a　practice　that　contributed　to　the　impunity　of　such　a　number　of　criminals；　having　given　some　people　reason　to　think　it　was　proper　to　make　use　of　the　sanctity　of　the　churches