Bracton: Thorne Edition: English. Volume 2, Page 355

Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Volume 2, Page 355

Next

Go to Volume: Page:

[001] wishes to sue, he ought to be heard, since there is no one who ought to or can
[002] challenge the suit as improperly made.¹ ²If when suit has been properly brought
[003] from the outset the prosecutor interrupts his suit at some county court he may well
[004] resume it if he wishes, provided that the court omitted by his negligence is not
[005] counted within the period required for outlawry. And what is said of one county
[006] court may be said of several, for all accrue to the advantage of the appellee because
[007] of the negligence of the appellor.

If he refuses to resume his suit; no proceedings to outlawry may take place without suit.

[009] But if before it has been completed² ³he dies, or refuses to sue, or being seriously ill
[010] cannot sue, we must see whether the county court may carry it to completion without
[011] the warrant and order of the justices.⁴ Without suit it cannot proceed to outlawry,
[012] but let the coming of the justices be awaited, [unless someone able and willing to sue
[013] takes up the suit on his own behalf and carries it to completion; if it has not been
[014] completed before the eyre of the justices, let the justices instruct him to continue,
[015] ⁵<taking into the reckoning the county courts in which suit had previously been
[016] made,> until the appellee is outlawed.] ⁶[who], without taking an inquest as to
[017] whether the appellee is guilty or not because of the suit begun earlier, which raises a
[018] strong presumption, will order the county court to complete it, taking into their
[019] reckoning the preceding county courts in which suit was made prior to the eyre,
[020] though if no suit and appeal had previously been made this would not be done without
[021] an inquest as to guilt or innocence. Flight alone does not in itself suffice to outlaw
[022] anyone, nor does going into hiding without contumacy⁷ [because of] indictment
[023] [and] accusation,⁸ rumour [or suspicion],⁹ unless someone sues in the county
[024] court,¹⁰ [or] has appealed prior to the eyre of the justices so that¹¹ the county court
[025] may be ordered by the justices in their eyre to sue on the king's behalf from one
[026] county court to the next until the accused has been outlawed according to the law
[027] of the land, [or] if, there having been no prior suit, an inquest has first been taken by
[028] the justices as to whether the indicted person is guilty or not, [for if there was an
[029] earlier suit, even though subsequently abandoned, it raises a presumption sufficient
[030] to make unnecessary any further inquiry into whether the accused is guilty or not],
[031] for either suit alone or inquest alone fully suffices,¹² this qualification being added,
[032] that if the inquest declares him innocent let the county court be instructed not to
[033] proceed to outlawry, but whenever such person

Notes

1. Altered from ‘audiri non debet cum causari possit sectam [ut] minus rite factam’; ed. of 1569, list of variants following preface: ‘audiri non debet.’

2. ‘Si autem antequam perfecta fuerit’

3-4. ‘mori contigerit . . . praecepto,’ from infra 356, lines 5-9; om: ‘Sed cum . . . praecedentibus’

5. Supra i, 386

6. Om: ‘Si autem . . . resumpserit’

7. Infra 359, 362, 374

8. ‘rettum’

9. Infra 404

10. Infra 356, 357, 359, 374

11. ‘[vel] ante iter iustitiariorum appellavit, ita quod’

12. ‘sufficit’