though he, the appellee, came into the presence of the appellor and stood among  several others, he neither recognised him nor was able to distinguish him from them.1  He may also pray that many other things be allowed him, a variance as to the day  and the hour and many others, as will be explained below [in the portion] on  appeals.2 The appellor must answer each of these exceptions in order, [and if] so,  let the appeal remain. If [it proceeds] to judgment, we must then see who may and  ought to judge. It is clear that it cannot be the king himself in his own suit, for he  would thus be both actor and judge in a cause involving life and members and  disherison, though this would not be so if the suit were another's. Nor can it be a  justice, since in judicial matters he represents the person of the king whose deputy  he is. Who then shall judge when the king himself must be the actor at the trial?3  Without prejudice to any better opinion, it is submitted that the court and the peers  shall render judgment, lest wrongful deeds remain unpunished, particularly where  life and members or disherison are at stake; [But in this connexion we must distinguish  the kind of deed for which the appeal is brought, that is, whether there is  a felony or a trespass, for every trespass ought not to be termed felony though the  converse is true.4 If it is adjudged felony the words of the appeal, the order and process,  are then to be examined in order to ascertain whether the duel may be joined  between appellor and appellee; even if5 the appellee be prepared to wage the duel  against the accuser's appeal without making answer an examination ought to come  first, as was said above,6 and if the duel has been unlawfully waged without examination  it may be de-waged by examination.7 If the deed is such that it ought to be  designated trespass rather than felony the duel will remain.]8 [if it is a trespass],  whether [done] to him or his wife or children, for the king may be wronged in the  persons of his family,9 we must see whether it10 is grievous or slight. If it is a slight  trespass which calls for a pecuniary penalty only, that is, a light pecuniary penalty,  the justices may well sit without the peers. But if it is serious enough to involve  ransom, the next thing to disherison, the peers ought there to be associated with the  justices, lest the king, in person or through his justices without the peers, be plaintiff  and judge.
Of the crime of forgery and its species.
 There is another division of the crime of lese-majesty which, since it involves the  supreme penalty and leads to sentence of death, is reckoned among the more  serious crimes, that is, the crime of forgery,11 which, in one of its aspects, touches  the crown of the lord king,12 as where one is accused and convicted of forging the  king's seal, authenticating charters and writs with it, or of drawing charters and  writs and attaching false seals to them; if he is found guilty, or seised [of the charter]
1. Ibid.: Petit etiam sibi allocari quod idem Ricardus non cognovit eum, cum bis requisitus esset si videret Vitalem Engaing in curia domini regis coram eodem domino rege; infra 431