Page:Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, Volume 1.djvu/165

 5. JENKS: EDWARD I 151 his ward ; the man who warrants title to land and then re- fuses to defend it ; the man who shams illness and lies in bed to delay proceedings, are put under heavy penalties ; and their acts are not allowed to prejudice their intended victims. Finally, the Statute contains, in its twenty-fourth chapter, a clause of which lawyers have long recognised the impor- tance, but which lay historians are too apt to regard as mere '^ technical jargon. Carefully concealed under the guise of an ' administrative regulation, the Statute lays it down, that the )f^ chancery officials, through whose hands must pass every royal writ, which was then, and still is, the normal beginning of every action in the royal courts, need no longer be guided by a strict adherence to precedent in the issue of these documents. It is sufficient if the remedy sought and the circumstances of the case are like those for which writs have previously been issued. In other words, principle, not precedent, is hence- forth t o guide the Chancellor and his officials in the issue^ writs. To a layman, impatient of the intricacies of legal history, such a direction may seem the most obvious piece of official platitude. In truth, it covered a daring attempt at com- pleting, by a master stroke, a revolution which had been gradually proceeding during the twelfth and thirteenth cen- turies. Once more it is necessary to remind the reader, that the conception of the Crown, as the sole fountain of justice, is a very modern conception in legal history. The Crown in the later Middle Ages was but one of many competitors for the profitable business of judicature. The Church, the feudal nobles, the chartered boroughs, the merchant guilds, the shire and hundred moots, were all rivals, more or less formidable. And any premature attempt on the part of the Crown to claim universal and exclusive jurisdiction would assuredly have led to the fiercest opposition, even if it had not resulted in the dissolution of the State. Time was on the side of the Crown ; but the King had to walk warily, and to be content for a long time with small things. Bit by bit, as chances offered, the royal officials filched the business of their rivals; and, as each claim was established, it was carefully enshrined Kjr^