Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 5.djvu/277

261 THE JURY AND ITS DEVELOPMENT. 2 6l ness, speed, and economy. 1 He goes on to explain that the tenant, appealing from the local court to the king's court, so as to have the benefit of this assise, may have a writ of prohibition to the lower tribunal. It was when the proceedings under the original writ had taken this turn that the plaintiff might have his auxiliary writ (cc. 10 and 1 1) for summoning four knights of the county and neighbor- hood to choose twelve others of the same neighborhood qui melius veritatem sciant, ad recognoscendum super sacramentum suum utrum M. an R. majus jus habeat. The details of this election and of the summoning of the twelve knights are then given (cc. 12, 14, 15). It is remarkable how free from technicality and how liberal in tone are the provisions of this ordinance of the king and the prac- tice under it, as explained by Glanville (c. 12). When once the twelve knights have assembled (cc. 17, 18), it is first ascertained by their oath whether any of them are ignorant of the fact (rei veritatem). If there be any such, they are rejected and others chosen. If the twelve differ in their verdict, others are added until there are twelve who agree, on one side or the other. The knowledge required of them is their own perception, or what their fathers have told them, or what they may trust as fully as their own knowledge (per proprium visum et auditum . . . vel per verba patrum suorum, et per talia quibus fidem teneantur habere ut pro- priis). The twelve knights may either say, directly and shortly, that one party or the other has the greater right, or merely set forth the facts, and thus enable the justices to say it, — what we call a special verdict. The interesting fact is stated (c. 19) that the king's ordinance provides a punishment for the false swearing of these persons ; viz., the loss of all chattels and movable goods, but not the freehold. They are also to be imprisoned for at least a year, and to lose their legem terrae, being no longer the legalis homo, and becoming for ever infamous. 2 It will be observed that the writ of right, the only one thus far considered by Glanville, had no necessary relation to the new 1 Harv. L. Rev. v. 67; Reeves, Hist. Com. Law, Finl. ed. 187-8. An interesting question exists as to whether the word magna belongs in this passage. Reeves, i. 187, note; Beames's Glanv. 54, note. Whether it belongs here or not, it is found elsewhere in Glan- ville, and in our other early books, as designating this particular recognition. 2 Legalis, in jure nostro de eo dicitur qui stat rectus in curia, non ex lex seu utlagatus, non excommunicatus, vel in/amis &*c, sed qui et in lege postulel et postuletur. Hoc sensu vulgare illud in formulis juridicis, probi et legates homines. Spelman, Gloss.