Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 2, Page 372  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] our same justices appealed B. and others of the death of his brother C., the said B.,
[002] a timid man and frightened for himself, withdrew himself and did not stand trial
[003] on that appeal before our said justices and was therefore held suspect of the said
[004] death by the jurors and the vills, especially because of his flight, and in consequence
[005] by order of our said justices he was exacted from county court to county court
[006] until he was outlawed according to the law of the land. Nevertheless,1 since the
[007] same C.2 who was supposed to be slain has been found to be alive and well, we,
[008] being unwilling that the presumption raised by flight be preferred to the truth,
[009] and because it is now plain that there was no true cause for the outlawry, have
[010] forgiven B. the said flight and pardoned the outlawry, so that of our special grace
[011] he may come to our peace. Therefore we order you to cause the same C., who was
[012] said to be slain, to be produced in your full county court, where the same B. was
[013] outlawed, to be viewed by all, and then to cause B. to be inlawed and received into
[014] our peace and also to have it publicly proclaimed that we have received him into
[015] our favour and given him our steadfast peace. Witness etc.’

Of inlawry and to what an inlaw may be restored.

[017] When one has thus been inlawed by grace of the prince to what may he be restored?
[018] Here we must distinguish whether the outlawry was done properly according to
[019] the law of the land, whether there was a true or presumptive cause, and is thus valid
[020] and lawful, or contrary to the law of the land and thus invalid, unlawful and void.3

4Before inlawry the cause for which he was outlawed must first be considered, that he may be admitted more readily to the peace according to the cause of the outlawry.

[022] [Also where there was a cause, what and of what kind it was, and whether in view of
[023] the preceding act it may be called a felony, perpetrated with evil intent5 and [in a]
[024] premeditated assault,6 or occurred by misadventure without felony, as where when
[025] one intended a lawful act something else occurred by misadventure, an improper
[026] act he had not intended, or of necessity, as where one has killed a man in self-defence,
[027] when he could not otherwise escape danger, or if there was no cause at all, as in the
[028] case of the timid man, where he alleged to be slain is produced alive. In the first case,
[029] where the act may be designated a felony, he ought never to be admitted to grace, or
[030] only with great hesitation, because from such inlawry and such grace easily obtained,
[031] from such ease of pardon, an excuse for offending is furnished not only those inlawed
[032] but others who place their reliance thereon.7 If the deed has occurred by misadventure
[033] without felony, or if


1. ‘Verumtamen’

2. ‘C’ for ‘B’

3. Continued infra 373, n. 3

4. Supra i, 387

5. ‘iniqua voluntate,’ as infra 375: ‘ex mala voluntate’; ‘in qua,’ CM, MG, V, Y

6. Infra 375

7. Decretum: supra 369, infra 375

Contact: specialc@law.harvard.edu
Page last reviewed April 2003.
© 2003 The President and Fellows of Harvard College