Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 14.pdf/362

 IVager of Battle. probably "affirmed with costs" in a very emphatic manner. But as a means of attacking the credi bility of witnesses, the Wager of Battle was universally approved. In case of a chal lenge, as we have stated, the main trial was suspended while the question of evidence was argued " by apostolic blows and knocks." Women, priests and cripples were generally excused from defending their veracity by

323

two generations ago, when a stone in a stock ing was used with terrible effect, will believe that the woman in this form of judicial duel generally had the best of it. After several centuries of this procedure, a change took place, which, necessarily, although gradually, led to the abolition of the whole system. This change was the employment of hired champions to do the fighting in place of the parties. So many

DUEL CONCERNING THE HONOR OF LADIES. From a manuscript of the Fifteenth Century. vigor of arm; but in some parts of Ger many even a woman had to accept the Wager of Battle, the disparity in physical strength being equalized by the man being compelled to stand waist-deep in a hole, with his left hand tied behind his back; while the woman had the full use of her limbs. As a weapon against his ironbound club, she was armed with a heavy stone securely fastened in a cloth. Any one who has read of the prowess of the female peasantry of Ireland in faction fights,

cases had occurred wherein the wrong party had prevailed and might had become right that a custom was accepted in all courts that a person whose veracity was impeached, but who was physically incapable of killing his accuser, could employ a delegate as a more potential vehicle of the decision of the God of Truth. The result of this change from personal to vicarious liability was the creation of a profession,— not Doctors of Laws, or even Bachelors of Law, but Cham pions in Law. These gentlemen were not