TheprodigiousluxuryofthatimmensecityofRomeencouragedsensuouspleasures。ThetranquillityoftheplainsofGreecegaverisetothedescriptionofthesentimentsoflove。[134]Theideaofknights—errant，protectorsofthevirtueandbeautyofthefairsex，ledtothatofgallantry。
Thisspiritwascontinuedbythecustomoftournaments，which，unitingtherightsofvalourandlove，addedstillaconsiderableimportancetogallantry。
23。OftheCodeofLawsonjudicialCombats。Someperhapswillhaveacuriositytoseethisabominablecustomofjudiciarycombatreducedtoprinciplesandtofindthegroundworkofsuchanextraordinarycodeoflaws。Men，thoughreasonableinthemain，reducetheirveryprejudicestorule。Nothingwasmorecontrarytogoodsense，thanthosecombats，andyetwhenoncethispointwaslaiddown，akindofprudentialmanagementwasusedincarryingitintoexecution。
Inordertobethoroughlyacquaintedwiththejurisprudenceofthosetimes，itisnecessarytoreadwithattentiontheregulationsofSt。
Louis，whomadesuchgreatchangesinthejudiciaryorder。Défontaineswascontemporarywiththatprince；Beaumanoirwroteafterhim，[135]andtherestlivedsincehistime。Wemust，therefore，lookfortheancientpracticeintheamendmentsthathavebeenmadeofit。
24。RulesestablishedinthejudicialCombat。Whentherehappenedtobeseveralaccusers，theywereobligedtoagreeamongthemselvesthattheactionmightbecarriedonbyasingleprosecutor；and，iftheycouldnotagree，thepersonbeforewhomtheactionwasbrought，appointedoneofthemtoprosecutethequarrel。[136]
Whenagentlemanchallengedavillain，hewasobligedtopresenthimselfonfootwithbucklerandbaston；butifhecameonhorsebackandarmedlikeagentleman，theytook。hishorseandhisarmsfromhimand，strippinghimtohisshirt，theycompelledhimtofightinthatconditionwiththevillain。[137]
Beforethecombatthemagistratesorderedthreebanstobepublished。Bythefirsttherelativesofthepartieswerecommandedtoretire；bythesecondthepeoplewerewarnedtobesilent；andthethirdprohibitedthegivingofanyassistancetoeitheroftheparties，underseverepenalties，nay，evenonpainofdeathifbythisassistanceeitherofthecombatantsshouldhappentobevanquished。[138]
Theofficersbelongingtothecivilmagistrate[139]guardedthelistorenclosurewherethebattlewasfought；andincaseeitherofthepartiesdeclaredhimselfdesirousofpeace，theytookparticularnoticeoftheactualstateinwhichtheymutuallystoodatthatverymoment，totheendthattheymightberestoredtothesamesituationincasetheydidnotcometoanunderstanding。[140]
Whenthepledgeswerereceivedeitherforacrimeorforfalsejudgment，thepartiescouldnotmakeupthematterwithouttheconsentofthelord；andwhenoneofthepartieswasovercome，therecouldbenoaccommodationwithoutthepermissionofthecount，whichhadsomeanalogytoourlettersofgrace。[141]
Butifithappenedtobeacapitalcrime，andthelord，corruptedbypresents，consentedtoanaccommodation，hewasobligedtopayafineofsixtylivres，andtherighthehadofpunishingthemalefactordevolveduponthecount。[142]
Therewereagreatmanypeopleincapableeitherofoffering，orofacceptingbattle。Butlibertywasgiventhem，oncausebeingshown，tochooseachampion；andthathemighthaveastrongerinterestindefendingthepartyinwhosebehalfheappeared，hishandwascutoffifhelostthebattle。[143]
Whencapitallawsweremadeinthelastcenturyagainstduels，perhapsitwouldhavebeensufficienttohavedeprivedawarriorofhismilitarycapacitybythelossofhishand；nothingingeneralbeingagreatermortificationtomankindthantosurvivethelossoftheircharacter。
When，incapitalcases，theduelwasfoughtbychampions，thepartieswereplacedwheretheycouldnotbeholdthebattle；eachwasboundwiththecordthatwastobeusedathisexecutionincasehischampionwasovercome。[144]Thepersonovercomeinbattledidnotalwayslosethepointcontested；if，forinstance，theyfoughtonanimparlance，helostonlytheimparlance。[145]
25。OftheBoundsprescribedtotheCustomofjudicialCombats。Whenpledgesofbattlehadbeenreceiveduponacivilaffairofsmallimportance，thelordobligedthepartiestowithdrawthem。
Ifafactwasnotorious；forinstance，ifamanhadbeenassassinatedintheopenmarketplace，thentherewasneitheratrialbywitnesses，norbycombat；thejudgegavehisdecisionfromthenotorietyofthefact。[146]
Whenthecourtofalordhadoftendeterminedafterthesamemanner，andtheusagewasthusknown，[147]thelordrefusedtograntthepartiestheprivilegeofduelling，totheendthattheusagesmightnotbealteredbythedifferentsuccessofthecombats。
Theywerenotallowedtoinsistuponduellingbutforthemselves，forsomeonebelongingtotheirfamily，orfortheirliegelord。[148]
Whentheaccusedhadbeenacquitted，anotherrelativecouldnotinsistonfightinghim；otherwisedisputeswouldneverbeterminated。[149]
Ifapersonappearedagaininpublicwhoserelatives，uponasuppositionofhisbeingmurdered，wantedtorevengehisdeath，therewasthennoroomforacombat；thesamemaybesaidifbyanotoriousabsencethefactwasprovedtobeimpossible。[150]
Ifamanwhohadbeenmortallywoundedhadexculpatedbeforehisdeaththepersonaccusedandnamedanother，theydidnotproceedtoaduel；
butifhehadmentionednobodyhisdeclarationwaslookeduponasaforgivenessonhisdeath—bed；theprosecutionwascontinued，andevenamonggentlementheycouldmakewaragainsteachother。[151]
Whentherewasaconflict，andoneoftherelativeshadgivenorreceivedpledgesofbattle，therightofcontestceased；forthenitwasthoughtthatthepartieswantedtopursuetheordinarycourseofjustice；thereforehethatwouldhavecontinuedthecontestwouldhavebeensentencedtomakegoodallthelosses。
Thusthepracticeofjudiciarycombathadthisadvantage，thatitwasapttochangeageneralintoanindividualquarrel，torestorethecourtsofjudicaturetotheirauthority，andtobringbackintothecivilstatethosewhowerenolongergovernedbutbythelawofnations。
Asthereareaninfinitenumberofwisethingsthataremanagedinaveryfoolishmanner；sotherearemanyfoolishthingsthatareverywiselyconducted。
Whenamanwhowaschallengedwithacrimevisiblyshowedthatithadbeencommittedbythechallengerhimself，therecouldbethennopledgesofbattle；forthereisnocriminalbutwouldpreferaduelofuncertaineventtoacertainpunishment。[152]
Therewerenoduelsinaffairsdecidedbyarbiters，[153]norbyecclesiasticalcourts，norincasesrelatingtowomen’sdowries。
\"Awoman，\"saysBeaumanoir，\"cannotfight。\"ifawomanchallengedapersonwithoutnamingherchampion，thepledgesofbattlewerenotaccepted。Itwasalsorequisitethatawomanshouldbeauthorisedbyherbaron，thatis，byherhusband，tochallenge；butshemightbechallengedwithoutthisauthority。[154]
Ifeitherthechallengerorthepersonchallengedwereunderfifteenyearsofage，therecouldbenocombat。[155]Theymightorderit，indeed，indisputesrelatingtoorphanswhentheirguardiansortrusteeswerewillingtoruntheriskofthisprocedure。
Thecasesinwhichabondmanwasallowedtofightare，Ithink，asfollows。Hewasallowedtofightanotherbondman；tofightafreedman，orevenagentleman，incasehewerechallenged；butifhehimselfchallenged，theothermightrefusetofight；andeventhebondman’slordhadarighttotakehimoutofthecourt。[156]Thebondmanmightbyhislord’scharterorbyusagefightwithanyfreeman；[157]andthechurchclaimedthisrightforherbondmen[158]asamarkofrespectduetoherbythelaity。[159]
26。OnthejudiciaryCombatbetweenoneofthePartiesandoneoftheWitnesses。Beaumanoirinformsus[160]thatapersonwhosawawitnessgoingtoswearagainsthimmighteludetheotherbytellingthejudgesthathisadversaryproducedafalseandslanderingwitness；andifthewitnesswaswillingtomaintainthequarrel，hegavepledgesofbattle。
Theinquirywasnolongerthequestion；forifthewitnesswasovercome，itwasdecidedthattheadversaryhadproducedafalsewitness，andhelosthiscause。
Itwasnecessarythatthesecondwitnessshouldnotbeheard；forifhehadmadehisattestation，theaffairwouldhavebeendecidedbythedepositionoftwowitnesses。Butbystayingthesecond，thedepositionofthefirstwitnessbecamevoid。
Thesecondwitnessbeingthusrejected，thepartywasnotallowedtoproduceanyothers，buthelosthiscause；incase，however，therehadbeennopledgesofbattle，hemightproduceotherwitnesses。
Beaumanoirobserves[161]thatthewitnessmightsaytothepartyheappearedfor，beforehemadehisdeposition：\"Idonotcaretofightforyourquarrel，nortoenterintoanydebate；butifyouarewillingtostandbyme，Iamreadytotellthetruth。\"Thepartywasthenobligedtofightforthewitness，andifhehappenedtobeovercome，hedidnotlosehiscause，[162]butthewitnesswasrejected。
This，Ibelieve，wasamodificationoftheancientcustom；andwhatmakesmethinksoisthatwefindthisusageofchallengingthewitnessesestablishedinthelawsoftheBavarians[163]andBurgundians[164]withoutanyrestriction。
IhavealreadymadementionoftheconstitutionofGundebald，againstwhichAgobard[165]andSt。Avitus[166]madesuchloudcomplaints。\"Whentheaccused，\"saysthisprince，\"produceswitnessestoswearthathehasnotcommittedthecrime，theaccusermaychallengeoneofthewitnessestoacombat；foritisveryjustthatthepersonwhohasofferedtoswear，andhasdeclaredthathewascertainofthetruth，shouldmakenodifficultyofmaintainingitbycombat。\"Thusthewitnessesweredeprivedbythiskingofeverykindofsubterfugetoavoidthejudiciarycombat。
27。OfthejudicialCombatbetweenoneofthePartiesandoneoftheLords’Peers。AppealoffalseJudgment。Asthenatureofjudicialcombatswastoterminatetheaffairforever，andwasincompatiblewithanewjudgmentandnewprosecutions，[167]anappeal，suchasisestablishedbytheRomanandCanonlaws，thatis，toasuperiorcourtinordertorejudgetheproceedingsofaninferior，wasathingunknowninFrance。
Thisisaformofproceedingtowhichawarlikenation，governedsolelybythepointofhonour，wasquiteastranger；andagreeablytothisveryspirit，thesamemethodswereusedagainstthejudgesaswereallowedagainsttheparties。[168]
Anappealamongthepeopleofthisnationwasachallengetofightwitharms，achallengetobedecidedbyblood；andnotthatinvitationtoapaperquarrel，theknowledgeofwhichwasreservedforsucceedingages。
ThusSt。Louis，inhisInstitutions，[169]saysthatanappealincludesbothfelonyandiniquity。ThusBeaumanoirtellsusthatifavassalwantedtomakehiscomplaintofanoutragecommittedagainsthimbyhislord，[170]hewasfirstobligedtoannouncethathequittedhisfief；
afterwhichheappealedtohislordparamount，andofferedpledgesofbattle，Inlikemannerthelordrenouncedthehomageofhisvassal，ifhechallengedhimbeforethecount。
Foravassaltochallengehislordoffalsejudgmentwasasmuchastosaytohimthathissentencewasunjustandmalicious；nowtouttersuchwordsagainsthislordwasinsomemeasurecommittingthecrimeoffelony。
Hence，insteadofbringingachallengeoffalsejudgmentagainstthelordwhoappointedanddirectedthecourt，theychallengedthepeersofwhomthecourtitselfwasformed，bywhichmeanstheyavoidedthecrimeoffelony，fortheyinsultedonlytheirpeers，withwhomtheycouldalwaysaccountfortheaffront。
Itwasaverydangerousthingtochallengethepeersoffalsejudgment。[171]Ifthepartywaitedtilljudgmentwaspronounced，hewasobligedtofightthemallwhentheyofferedtomakegoodtheirjudgment。[172]Iftheappealwasmadebeforeallthejudgeshadgiventheiropinion，hewasobligedtofightallwhohadagreedintheirjudgment。Toavoidthisdanger，itwasusualtopetitionthelordtodirectthateachpeershouldgivehisopinionaloud；[173]andwhenthefirsthadpronounced，andthesecondwasgoingtodothesame，thepartytoldhimthathewasaliar，aknaveandaslanderer，andthenhehadtofightonlywiththatpeer。
Défontaines[174]wouldhaveitthat，beforeachallengewasmadeoffalsejudgment，itwascustomarytoletthreejudgespronounce；andhedoesnotsaythatitwasnecessarytofightthemallthree；muchlessthattherewasanyobligationtofightallthosewhohaddeclaredthemselvesofthesameopinion。Thesedifferencesarosefromthis，thatinthosetimestherewerefewusagesexactlyinallpartsthesame；
BeaumanoirgivesanaccountofwhatpassedinthecountyofClermont；
andDéfontainesofwhatwaspractisedinVermandois。
Whenoneofthepeersoravassalhaddeclaredthathewouldmaintainthejudgment，thejudgeorderedpledgesofbattletobegiven，andlikewisetooksecurityofthechallengerthathewouldmaintainhiscase。[175]Butthepeerwhowaschallengedgavenosecurity，becausehewasthelord’svasal，andwasobligedtodefendthechallenge，ortopaythelordafineofsixtylivres。
Ifhewhochallengeddidnotprovethatthejudgmentwasbad，[176]hepaidthelordafineofsixtylivres，thesamefinetothepeerwhomhehadchallenged，andasmuchtoeveryoneofthosewhohadopenlyconsentedtothejudgment。[177]
Whenaperson，stronglysuspectedofacapitalcrime，hadbeentakenandcondemned，hecouldmakenoappealoffalsejudgment：[178]forhewouldalwaysappealeithertoprolonghislife，ortogetanabsolutedischarge。
Ifapersonsaidthatthejudgmentwasfalseandbadanddidnotoffertoproveitso，thatis，tofight，hewascondemnedtoafineoftensousifagentleman，andtofivesousifabondman，fortheinjuriousexpressionshehaduttered。[179]
Thejudgesorpeerswhowereovercomeforfeitedneitherlifenorlimbs，[180]butthepersonwhochallengedthemwaspunishedwithdeath，ifithappenedtobeacapitalcrime。[181]
Thismannerofchallengingthevassalswithfalsejudgmentwastoavoidchallengingthelordhimself。Butifthelordhadnopeers，[182]orhadnotasufficientnumber，hemightathisownexpenseborrowpeersofhislordparamount；[183]butthesepeerswerenotobligedtopronouncejudgmentiftheydidnotlikeit；theymightdeclarethattheywerecomeonlytogivetheiropinion：inthatparticularcase，thelordhimselfjudgedandpronouncedsentenceasjudge；[184]andifanappealoffalsejudgmentwasmadeagainsthim，itwashisbusinesstoanswertothechallenge。
Ifthelordhappenedtobesoverypoorasnottobeabletohirepeersofhisparamount，[185]orifheneglectedtoaskforthem，ortheparamountrefusedtogivethem，then，asthelordcouldnotjudgebyhimself，andasnobodywasobligedtopleadbeforeatribunalwherejudgmentcouldnotbegiven，theaffairwasbroughtbeforethelordparamount。
This，Ibelieve，wasoneoftheprincipalcausesoftheseparationbetweenthejurisdictionandthefief，whencearosethemaximoftheFrenchlawyers，\"Thefiefisonething，andthejurisdictionisanother。\"Forastherewereavastnumberofpeerswhohadnosubordinatevassalsunderthem，theywereincapableofholdingtheircourt；allaffairswerethenbroughtbeforetheirlordparamount，andtheylosttheprivilegeofpronouncingjudgment，becausetheyhadneitherpowernorwilltoclaimit。
Allthejudgeswhohadbeenatthejudgmentwereobligedtobepresentwhenitwaspronounced，thattheymightfollowoneanother，andsayayetothepersonwho，wantingtomakeanappealoffalsejudgment，askedthemwhethertheyfollowed；[186]forDéfontainessays[187]thatitisanaffairofcourtesyandloyalty，andthereisnosuchthingasevasionordelay。Hence，Iimagine，arosethecustomstillfollowedinEnglandofobligingthejurytobeallunanimousintheirverdictincasesrelatingtolifeanddeath。
Judgmentwasthereforegiven，accordingtotheopinionofthemajority；
andiftherewasanequaldivision，sentencewaspronounced，incriminalcases，infavouroftheaccused；incasesofdebt，infavourofthedebtor；andincasesofinheritance，infavourofthedefendant。
Défontainesobserves[188]thatapeercouldnotexcusehimselfbysayingthathewouldnotsitincourtiftherewereonlyfour，[189]orifthewholenumber，oratleastthewisestpart，werenotpresent。Thisisjustasifheweretosay，intheheatofanengagement，thathewouldnotassisthislordbecausehehadnotallhisvassalswithhim。Butitwasthelord’sbusinesstocausehiscourttoberespected，andtochoosethebravestandmostknowingofhistenants。ThisImention，inordertoshowthedutyofvassals，whichwastofight，andtogivejudgment：andsuch，indeed，wasthisduty，thattogivejudgmentwasallthesameastofight。
Itwaslawfulforalord，whowenttolawwithhisvassalinhisowncourt，andwascast，tochallengeoneofhistenantswithfalsejudgment。Butasthelatterowedarespecttohislordforthefealtyhehadvowed，andthelord，ontheotherhand，owedbenevolencetohisvassalforthefealtyaccepted，itwascustomarytomakeadistinctionbetweenthelord’saffirmingingeneralthatthejudgmentwasfalseandunjust，[190]andimputingpersonalprevaricationstohistenant。[191]Intheformercaseheaffrontedhisowncourt，andinsomemeasurehimself，sothattherewasnoroomforpledgesofbattle。Buttherewasroominthelatter，becauseheattackedhisvassal’shonour；andthepersonovercomewasdeprivedoflifeandproperty，inordertomaintainthepublictranquillity。
Thisdistinction，whichwasnecessaryinthatparticularcase，hadafterwardsagreaterextent。Beaumanoirsaysthatwhenthechallengeroffalsejudgmentattackedoneofthepeersbypersonalimputation，battleensued；butifheattackedonlythejudgment，thepeerchallengedwasatlibertytodeterminethedisputeeitherbybattleorbylaw。[192]ButastheprevailingspiritinBeaumanoir’stimewastorestraintheusageofjudicialcombats，andasthisliberty，whichhadbeengrantedtothepeerchallenged，ofdefendingthejudgmentbycombatornotisequallycontrarytotheideasofhonourestablishedinthosedays，andtotheobligationthevassallayunderofdefendinghislord’sjurisdiction，I
amapttothinkthatthisdistinctionofBeaumanoir’swasanoveltyinFrenchjurisprudence。
Iwouldnothaveitthoughtthatallappealsoffalsejudgmentweredecidedbybattle；itfaredwiththisappealaswithallothers。Thereadermayrecollecttheexceptionsmentionedinthe25thchapter。Hereitwasthebusinessofthesuperiorcourttoexaminewhetheritwaspropertowithdrawthepledgesofbattleornot。
Therecouldbenoappealoffalsejudgmentagainsttheking’scourt，because，astherewasnooneequaltotheking，noonecouldchallengehim；andasthekinghadnosuperior，nonecouldappealfromhiscourt。
Thisfundamentalregulation，whichwasnecessaryasapoliticallaw，diminishedalsoasacivillawtheabusesofthejudicialproceedingsofthosetimes。Whenalordwasafraidthathiscourtwouldbechallengedwithfalsejudgment，orperceivedthattheyweredeterminedtochallenge，iftheinterestsofjusticerequiredthatitshouldnotbechallenged，hemightdemandfromtheking’scourtmenwhosejudgmentcouldnotbesetaside。[193]ThusKingPhilip，saysDéfontaines，[194]
senthiswholecounciltojudgeanaffairinthecourtoftheAbbotofCorbey。
Butifthelordcouldnothavejudgesfromtheking，hemightremovehiscourtintotheking’s，ifheheldimmediatelyofhim；andiftherewereintermediatelords，hehadrecoursetohissuzerain，removingfromonelordtoanothertillhecametothesovereign。
Thus，notwithstandingtheyhadinthosedaysneitherthepracticenoreventheideaofourmodernappeals，yettheyhadrecoursetotheking，whowasthesourcewhenceallthoseriversflowed，andtheseaintowhichtheyreturned。
28。OftheAppealofDefaultofJustice。Theappealofdefaultofjusticewas，whenthecourtofaparticularlorddeferred，evaded，orrefusedtodojusticetotheparties。
Duringthetimeofourprincesofthesecondrace，thoughthecounthadseveralofficersunderhim，theirpersonwassubordinate，butnottheirjurisdiction。Theseofficersintheircourtdays，assizes，orPlacita，gavejudgmentinthelastresortasthecounthimself；allthedifferenceconsistedinthedivisionofthejurisdiction。Forinstance，thecounthadthepowerofcondemningtodeath，ofjudgingofliberty，andoftherestitutionofgoods，whichthecentenariihadnot。[195]
Forthesamereasonthereweregreatercaseswhichwerereservedtotheking；namely，thosewhichdirectlyconcernedthepoliticalorderofthestate。[196]Suchwerethedisputesbetweenbishops，abbots，counts，andothergrandees，whichweredeterminedbythekingtogetherwiththegreatvassals。[197]
Whatsomeauthorshaveadvanced，namely，thatanappeallayfromthecounttotheking’scommissary，orMissusDominicus，isnotwell—grounded。ThecountandtheMissushadanequaljurisdiction，independentofeachother。[198]ThewholedifferencewasthattheMissusheldhisPlacita，orassizes，fourmonthsintheyear，[199]andthecounttheothereight。
Ifaperson，whohadbeencondemnedatanassize，demandedtohavehiscausetriedoveragain，andwasafterwardscast，hepaidafineoffifteensous，orreceivedfifteenblowsfromthejudgeswhohaddecidedtheaffair。[200]
Whenthecounts，ortheking’scommissariesdidnotfindthemselvesabletobringthegreatlordstoreason，theymadethemgivebailorsecurity[201]thattheywouldappearintheking’scourt：thiswastotrythecause，andnottorejudgeit。IfindinthecapitularyofMetz[202]alawbywhichtheappealoffalsejudgmenttotheking’scourtisestablished，andallotherkindsofappealareproscribedandpunished。
Iftheyrefusedtosubmittothejudgmentofthesheriffs[203]andmadenocomplaint，theywereimprisonedtilltheyhadsubmitted，butiftheycomplained，theywereconductedunderaproperguardbeforetheking，andtheaffairwasexaminedinhiscourt。
Therecouldbehardlyanyroomthenforanappealofdefaultofjustice。
Forinsteadofitsbeingusualinthosedaystocomplainthatthecountsandotherswhohadarightofholdingassizeswerenotexactindischargingthisduty，[204]itwasageneralcomplaintthattheyweretooexact。Hencewefindsuchnumbersofordinances，bywhichthecountsandallotherofficersofjusticeareforbiddentoholdtheirassizesabovethriceayear。Itwasnotsonecessarytochastisetheirindolence，astochecktheiractivity。
But，afteraninfinitenumberofpettylordshipshadbeenformed，anddifferentdegreesofvassalageestablished，theneglectofcertainvassalsinholdingtheircourtsgaverisetothiskindofappeal；[205]
especiallyasveryconsiderableprofitsaccruedtothelordparamountfromtheseveralfines。
Asthecustomofjudicialcombatsgainedeverydaymoreground，therewereplaces，cases，andtimes，inwhichitwasdifficulttoassemblethepeers，andconsequentlyinwhichjusticewasdelayed。Theappealofdefaultofjusticewasthereforeintroduced，anappealthathasbeenoftenaremarkableerainourhistory；becausemostofthewarsofthosedayswereimputedtoaviolationofthepoliticallaw；asthecause，oratleastthepretence，ofourmodernwarsistheinfringementofthelawsofnations。
Beaumanoirsays[206]that，incaseofdefaultofjustice，battlewasnotallowed：thereasonsarethese：1。Theycouldnotchallengethelordhimself，becauseoftherespectduetohisperson；neithercouldtheychallengethelord’speers，becausethecasewasclear，andtheyhadonlytoreckonthedaysofthesummons，oroftheotherdelays；therehadbeennojudgmentpassed，consequentlytherecouldbenoappealoffalsejudgment：infine，thecrimeofthepeersoffendedthelordaswellastheparty，anditwasagainstrulethatthereshouldbebattlebetweenthelordandhispeers。
Butasthedefaultwasprovedbywitnessesbeforethesuperiorcourt，[207]thewitnessesmightbechallenged，andthenneitherthelordnorhiscourtwereoffended。
Incasethedefaultwasowingtothelord’stenantsorpeers，whohaddelayedtoadministerjustice，orhadavoidedgivingjudgmentafterpastdelays，thenthesepeerswereappealedofdefaultofjusticebeforetheparamount；andiftheywerecast，theypaidafinetotheirlord。[208]
Thelattercouldnotgivethemanyassistance；onthecontrary，heseizedtheirfief，tilltheyhadeachpaidafineofsixtylivres。
2。Whenthedefaultwasowingtothelord，whichwasthecasewhenevertherehappenednottobeasufficientnumberofpeersinhiscourttopassjudgment，orwhenhehadnotassembledhistenantsorappointedsomebodyinhisplacetoassemblethem，anappealmightbemadeofthedefaultbeforethelordparamount；butthenthepartyandnotthelordwassummoned，becauseoftherespectduetothelatter。[209]
Thelorddemandedtobetriedbeforetheparamount，andifhewasacquittedofthedefault，thecausewasremandedtohim，andhewaslikewisepaidafineofsixtylivres。[210]Butifthedefaultwasproved，thepenaltyinflictedonhimwastolosethetrialofthecause，[211]whichwastobethendeterminedinthesuperiorcourt。And，indeed，thecomplaintofdefaultwasmadewithnootherview。