204
THE SAXONS IN ENGLAND.
[book i.
obviously cannot apply to free landowners, who
would have been included in a tithing, and could
not have been thus compulsorily commended to a
lyhl. Where a man is slain as a thief, the relatives
are to clear him, if they can1, inasmuch as they
would have a right to pursue the slayer and claim
the compensation for their kinsman’s death. Again
it is provided that if a lord has so many dependents
that he cannot personally exercise a due supervision
over them, he shall appoint efficient reeves or bai-
liffs in his several manors, to be answerable to him.
And if need be, the bailiff shall cause twelve rela-
tives of any man whom he cannot trust, to enter
into sureties for him2.
Eadmund permitted the m⅛g⅛> to avoid the con-
sequences of their kinsman’s act, by refusing to abet
him in his feud3. I imagine that this law must be
taken in connection with that of Eadweard4, and
that it implies a total desertion of the criminal by
his kindred, with all its consequences, viz. loss of
liberty to him, and of his wergyld to them. The
troubled time of Æftelred, “ the ill-advised,” sup-
plies another attempt to secure peace by holding the
relatives strictly and personally responsible : in his
law we find it enacted, “ If breach of the peace be
1 Ægelst. i. § 11. Thorpe, i. 204.
2 “ Ut oɪnnis homo teneat homines suos in Adeiussione sua contra
oɪnne furtum. Si tunc sit aliquis qui tot homines hat>eat quod non suf-
Iiciat omnes eustodɪre, pι,aeponat sibi singulis villis praepositum ununi,
qui credibilis sit ei, et qui concredat hominibus. Et si piaepositus ali-
cui eorum hominum concredere non audeat, inveniat xii plegios cogna-
tionis suae qui ei stent in fideiussione.” ÆîSelst. ii. § 7. Thorpe, i. 217.
3 Eadm. ii. § 1. 4 Eâdw. ii. § 9.
сн. ɪɪj
THE TITHING AND HUNDRED.
265
committed within a town, let the inhabitants of the
town go in person, and take the murderers, alive or
dead, or their nearest of kin, head for head. If
they will not, let the ealdorman go ; if he will not,
let the king go ; if he will not, let the whole dis-
trict be in a state of war1.” Though this perhaps is
less a settled rule of law than the convulsive effort
of an authority striving in vain to maintain itself
amid civil discords and the horrors of foreign in-
vasion, it still consecrates the old principle, and
returns to the true basis on which Anglosaxon
society was founded, namely treaties of peace and
mutual guarantee between the several parties that
made up the State.
Such were the means by which the internal peace
of the land was attempted to be secured, and it is
evident that better could hardly have been devised
in a state of society where population was not very
widely dispersed, and where property hardly ex-
isted, save in land, and almost equally unmanage-
able cattle. The summary jurisdiction of our police
magistrates, our recognizances and bail and bind-
ing over to keep the peace, are developments ren-
dered necessary by our altered circumstances ; but
these are nevertheless institutions of the same na-
ture as those on which our forefathers relied. The
establishment of our County-courts, in which jus-
tice goes forth from man to man, and without ori-
ginal writ from the Crown, is- another step toward
the ancient principle of our jurisprudence, in the
θɪd Hundred.
ɪ Æ'Selr. ii. § 6. Thorpe, i. 286.