Bracton: Thorne Edition: English. Volume 4, Page 326

Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Volume 4, Page 326

Next

Go to Volume: Page:

[001] Since, with the exception of certain persons, it is forbidden to pray or to speak, either
[002] openly or in secret, or to feed, one who has been excommunicated.> For every legal
[003] act is forbidden one who is excommunicated, so that he cannot sue or summon anyone,
[004] though he may be sued by others. He who puts forward this exception must have
[005] proof, [because no faith is to be put in the mere word of the tenant, nor in the testimony
[006] of anyone of the populace,]¹ the letters of the ordinary, as the archbishop, or
[007] bishop or other judge, ordinary or delegated, testifying to the truth, that such a one
[008] is excommunicated by name and for such reason, or, if the ordinary is present, oral
[009] testimony to that effect. [He may be sued, as said above, lest he be in a better
[010] position than one who is not excommunicated, lest he profit by his own wrong,²

If a woman's husband is appealed of felony, the action begun before his conviction does not fall.

[012] as where a man and his wife are impleaded with respect to the wife's inheritance, and
[013] the man is appealed of felony and convicted; an action begun before conviction does
[014] not fall on that account and so they do not profit by the wrong (to the extent that
[015] the action may fall, though it may be postponed for a time, because of the doubtful
[016] outcome of the appeal), provided the convicted husband is not condemned to death,
[017] natural or civil. Natural, as where he is hanged, in which case the action falls; civil,
[018] as where he is outlawed, where the action also falls. If it is a crime which does not
[019] involve the extreme penalty, only the loss of members, as eyes or testicles or both,
[020] an action begun earlier does not fall on that account, as [in the roll] of the eyre of
[021] Martin of Pateshull in the county of Lincoln, [the case] of Thomas de Rasne.]³ He
[022] may be answered by the demandant in this way: ‘Brother, if I was excommunicated,
[023] I am absolved by such a one, a superior judge, ordinary or delegate, to whom I appealed.’
[024] He may also say that if he was excommunicated it was de facto, because there
[025] was no cause except that he was unwilling to obey an ecclesiastical judge taking
[026] cognisance of lay fee, or of chattels and debts which are not testamentary

Notes

1. Om: ‘Quia . . . habere,’ a connective

2. X. 2.1.7: Supra ii, 133

3. Not in B.N.B.