[If one lies a night in a house alone with another who is slain, or if two or more do  so and have not raised the hue nor received a wound in defending themselves from  the thieves or others who did the slaying, and are unable to show who slew the man,  whether one of themselves or others, they cannot deny responsibility for the death,  as [in the roll] of Michaelmas term in the ninth and the beginning of the tenth  years of king Henry in the county of Kent, [the case] of Adam de la Burgh.]1  2if one has received a known man or a stranger into his house, as a guest or for some  other reason, who was seen to go in alive and well and never seen afterwards except  as a corpse; the owner of the house, if he was there at the time, or others of his household  who were then present, will not escape capital punishment, unless they are  acquitted by the country, if the justices come to the conclusion that the truth ought  to be investigated by the country. 3[But since the country cannot learn4 the truth of  so secret an act, how will he who has put himself on the country be acquitted? In  truth it gives an adequate acquittal since it does not expressly condemn, as may be  said of a charter which acquits since it does not burden specifically.]5
No one is to take a stranger into his house except in broad daylight.
 It was because of this suspicion that it was established that no one receive a stranger  into his house or permit him to depart except in broad daylight.67as where a  lord and his man lie in one house and the lord is found slain, the man who neither  raised a cry nor received a wound nor offered resistance in his [lord's] defence  (and the same may be said of a stranger) will be held responsible and can hardly  escape danger by an inquest of the country, because of so strong a presumption as  to so secret a deed, [A deed may be so secret that suit is void as8 improperly  made, because when the deed was committed cannot be known,9 as where poison  has been administered, nevertheless it cannot be challenged.] and thus will not  have the choice of putting himself on the country or of defending himself by his  body but must defend himself by his body, because the country can know nothing  of the deed except by presumption and hearsay, which serves neither as proof for  the appellor nor as grounds of acquittal for the appellee, [unless one says, as above,  that he is adequately discharged since he is not condemned.][But the election will  of necessity be allowed him because of the improper result which would [otherwise]  follow, for were he always bound to defend himself by his body anyone might  appeal another of such deed by a hired champion, which is not to be tolerated.]
1. C.R.R., xii, no. 1172, side-lined on roll; not in B.N.B.
2. Continued from 386, n. 16; om: Eodem mode ... ut, a connective