Page:A History of the Knights of Malta, or the Order of St. John of Jerusalem.djvu/362

332 any of the conventual bailiffs be absent and his lieutenant as well, the master of the horse announced the fact and called for the senior member for the langue of ———, the commander ———, whereupon the knight so named took his seat with the other councilors.

The court being duly organized, the vice-chancellor announced the various matters to be brought under discussion, which usually consisted of appeals from the decisions of the inferior courts. In any case requiring pleading the rival parties were bound to appear in person unless they could show a good and sufficient reason for employing a deputy. The following exceptions were made to this general rule. Members of the English and German langue. were permitted to employ advocates, as they would not have been able to make themselves intelligible in their own tongue. Knights who were unavoidably absent from the convent at the time when their cases came on for hearing might provide duly authorized substitutes to appear on their behalf. The same privilege was accorded to all knights of the grand-cross, who were never called on to plead in person. It appears to have been a main object in framing the regulations to throw as many obstacles as possible in the way of needless litigation amongst the fraternity. The “custom” or preamble which is attached to the statutes relating to these councils marks this principle very distinctly. It says—“In order that our brethren may study hospitality and the noble exercise of arms rather than embroil themselves in litigation and legal discussions, our predecessors have handed down the following very laudable custom—whenever differences shall arise between our brethren they shall be decided in council summarily—that is to say, there shall be no writings upon the subject in dispute, the parties shall plead their cause in person and state their cases simply, after which, judgment shall be passed. Writings which have been previously made and which have not been prepared expressly for the purpose may be produced in evidence, as also such witnesses as may be required, and, if necessary, the depositions of these latter may be reduced to writing.”

The case under consideration having been pleaded and responded to, the court was cleared for deliberation, and after