Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 3, Page 73  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    




[001] have access to them or conversation with them until they have given their verdict,
[002] nor are they to manifest to anyone by sign or word what they are about to decide.
[003] 1It often happens that the jurors in giving their verdict do not agree among themselves
[004] and cannot fall into a single judgment. Then, by counsel of the court, let the
[005] assise be afforced in this way, that others be added to the greater part, accordingly
[006] to the number of those who dissent,2 or let six, or at least four,3 be joined to the others,
[007] or let them discuss and decide the truth of the matter by themselves without the
[008] others and answer by themselves; their verdict will be allowed and hold with [that
[009] of those] with whom they agree. But the others will not thereby be convicted, only
[010] amerced for a trespass, so to speak, because it may well be that they have spoken
[011] the truth and the others a falsehood, since they may still be convicted of perjury.
[012] When, after their oath, they have given their verdict, for one party or the other,
[013] judgment will be rendered accordingly (unless they have said something which is
[014] not clear, because of which the judges are led to examine) and seisin adjudicated to
[015] the plaintiff or the tenant will withdraw quit with his seisin. It will sometimes happen
[016] that both parties will be in mercy or one only, [And similarly, where several are
[017] named disseisors, some will be subject to the penalty for disseisin and some withdraw
[018] quit.] as where4 the jurors decide for the tenant, the plaintiff alone will be in mercy,
[019] not his pledges, because he prosecuted, though he has an adverse judgment. The
[020] recognitors may also explain the whole truth of the matter to the justices in a few
[021] brief words, if all is clear and plain and there are no difficulties. But if a doubt or
[022] difficulty arises so that the explanation is hard to understand, let them then be
[023] compelled to put what is obscure more plainly and clearly, if that is possible, and
[024] let the justices proceed to judgment in accordance with their verdict. But if they
[025] cannot in any way make clear what is doubtful and obscure, that is, neither the
[026] recognitors themselves nor the others called to afforce them, it will then be safer for
[027] the parties to be induced to come to an agreement, if that can be done, or let judgment
[028] be referred to the great court and the matter determined there by counsel of the
[029] court.5 If everything in the record is clear, their verdict must be followed. If they have
[030] sworn properly, their verdict will stand;6 if improperly, they will be open to a
[031] conviction. If they have expressed themselves obscurely and darkly, where a single
[032] speech may have a double meaning, or if the parties have not been fully examined, a
[033] certification will lie,7 as will be explained below.8 We must see therefore whether they
[034] speak in certain or uncertain terms, with clarity or obscurely, whether they show
[035] doubt in their verdict or complete ignorance. Also whether they say anything against
[036] the person



Notes

1. New paragraph

2. Reading: ‘apponantur alii maiori parti iuxta numerum partis quae dissenserit’

3. ‘sex vel saltem quatuor’

4. ‘ut si’

5. Supra ii, 21

6. Somerset Pleas, no. 1491: ‘the record was shown by the said Henry de Bracton according as the assise was taken and examined before him, and because in that record there is no obscurity, nothing doubtful, nothing wanted, nor too little answered, but everything is plain and sufficiently examined, and according to the record the judgment is just and there was no room for certification, therefore let the judgment remain and hold.’

7. Supra ii, 308

8. Infra 342, iv, 279


Contact: specialc@law.harvard.edu
Page last reviewed April 2003.
© 2003 The President and Fellows of Harvard College