Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 01.pdf/211

186 THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS.

HE criminal code of the Anglo-Saxons will be found, by the general reader, more interesting than any other branch of the laws of that remarkable people. The grand principle remarkable in their criminal laws, and in those of German nations generally, is pecuniary punishment.

The Saxons made many distinctions in homicides; but the lives of all men were not of equal value in the estimation of the law. Every man was valued, according to his rank, at a certain sum, which was called his "were;" and whoever took another's life was punished by having to pay this "were" to the family or relatives of the deceased, as a compensation for the loss of his life. The "were," whose amount was thus regulated by a regard to the different ranks in society, became, nevertheless, augmented from time to time; greater pecuniary value being assigned to human life as order and civilization appear to have increased.

If the person slain was an esne, a slave, the "were" seems to have become the property of the lord. On the murder of a foreigner, two thirds of the "were" went to the king, and one third only to his son or relatives; if the deceased had no relatives, the king had one half, and the "gild-scipe," or fraternity with which he was associated, received the other. The laws of Edward and Guthrun required the punctual payment of the "were" (which was to be made, it would seem, within forty days of the death), to be secured by the responsibility of eight paternal and four maternal relations.

The killing of a thief was at one time exempted from the payment of the "were;" but this exemption was afterward made subject to the qualification under oath, that the thief was killed "sinning,"—in the act of stealing, or in the act of fleeing on account of the theft.

Our Saxon ancestors, however, were not so ignorant of the true principles of criminal jurisprudence as to fail in recognizing in homicide the public crime, and in awarding to the community accordingly a recompense for the wrong inflicted on society. Hence, beside the redress assigned to the family of the deceased, another pecuniary fine was imposed on the man-slayer; this fine was called the "wite." It was paid generally to the magistrate in whose jurisdiction the offence was committed; and its amount appears to have been regulated by reference as well to the dignity of the magistrate as to the rank of the deceased, and the circumstances under which the act was committed. The "wite" in a king's town was fifty shillings; in an eorl's, twelve. If the deceased was a freeman, the "wite" was fifty shillings to the king as lord of the land; if an eorl, six shillings was the "wite." So as to the place,—if the act was done at an open grave, the sum of twenty shillings was sometimes the "wite." If a laec killed the noblest guest, the "wite" was eighty shillings; if the next in rank, sixty; if the third, forty shilingsshillings [sic]. If the criminal fled from justice, his relations or the guild to which he belonged were made responsible for the payment of the "wite."

Even in the case of what we term justifiable homicide, the slayer was by no means free from responsibility; he was bound to make recompense to the family of the deceased by payment of the "were," though he was not, under these circumstances, liable to the penalty of the "wite."

The following extracts from the Laws of Alfred on the subject of injuries to the person will be found remarkably curious. It can scarcely fail to occur to the reader that the principle on which the valuations were fixed was applied in many cases very capriciously.

"If a man strike off another's nose, let him make 'bōt' [i. e. pay a fine], with ix. shillings.

"If a man strike out another's tooth in the front