Page:Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, Volume 1.djvu/157

 5. JENKS: EDWARD I 143 him on his journeys. But its legal validity has never been questioned, and its importance is beyond dispute. A mer- chant who doubts the honesty of his would-be debtor may insist upon his " recognising " or admitting his liability in a fori pal docume nt, sealed in the presence of the mayor of a chartered borough, and entered upon a roll which remains in the official custody, while a " bill " or " obligation," sealed by the debtor and authenticated by the royal seal, is handed over to the creditor. If the debtor fails to pay, at the v/3, appointed time, he may not only be imprisoned, but his ' chattels and " burgage " tenements (i e., lands in the borough) may be sold, without any preliminary proceedings, by the majfor to satisfy the debt, or, if there is any difficulty in effecting the sale, the debtor's chattels and all his lands may be handed over at a reasonable valuation to the creditor, until, out of the issues, the debt is liquidated. Even the d eath of the debtor will not destroy the creditor's remedy against his lands, which will remain liable in the hands of his heir, against whom, however, there will be no personal remedy.^ No apology is needed for the space which has been given to the Statute of Merchants. Under the cover of its technical phrases, the King dealt a death-blow at the still surviving forces of patriarchalism and feudalism, and recognised the new principles of individual responsibility and commercial probity which were to be watchwords of the political and social future. Like a wise legislator, he had merely inter- preted and guided the overwhelming drift of evolution, and distinguished between obstruction and progress. He saw that the future greatness of England lay, not with the feudal | landowner, but with the despised merchant. His enactment i is admirable in its simplicity and effectiveness. It was freely used, not only by merchants, but by every class of society, until improvements in the procedure of the courts had ren- dered it unnecessary. The still simpler machinery of " nego- tiable paper " (Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes) Statute of 1283 and the amending ordinance of 1285. But it would have been pedantic, in a general work, to have separated the two.
 * Legal readers will realise that I have combined into one the original