首页 >出版文学> Lectures on the Early History of Institutions>第31章
  thedebthasbeensatisfied。Ontheotherhand,severalfeatures
  oftheIrishsystem,whicharewhollyabsentfromtheContinental
  Teutonicprocedure,orveryfaintlymarkedinit,belong
  conspicuouslytotheEnglishlaw。Amongthesemaybeplacedthe
  impounding,andthe’takinginwithernam,’butthegreat。
  Resemblanceofall,andthecommonpointofdissimilarityfrom
  themostancientoftheLegesBarbarorum,liesinthefactthat
  theIrishprocedure,liketheEnglish,requiresneither
  assistancenorpermissionfromanyCourtofJustice。Inallthe
  TeutonicbodiesofcustomexcepttheEnglishandtheLombardic,
  evenwhenthegreatestlatitudeofseizureisallowedto
  litigantsoutofCourt,some。judicialpersonorbodymustbe
  appliedtobeforetheyproceedtoextremities。Withus,however,
  theentireseizureiscompletedbeforeauthorityiscalledin;
  andtheIrishlawhasexactlythesamepeculiarity。Notonlyso,
  buttheIrishlawcorrespondstotheEnglishlawofDistressina
  veryadvancedstageofdevelopment。Itdoesnotemploythe
  seizureofcattlemerelyasamethodofextortingsatisfaction。
  Itprovides,asyouhaveseen,fortheirforfeitureindischarge
  oftheDemandforwhichtheyweretaken;andthusis
  distinguishedbyanimprovementwhichwasonlyaddedtothe
  Englishlawbystatuteafterthelapseofseveralcenturies。
  ThetruedifficultyinestimatingtheplaceofthisIrish
  procedureinthehistoricaldevelopmentoflawarisesfromdoubts
  astothepartreallyplayedbythelegalproceedinginwhichit
  terminated。TheEnglishprocessofdistress,whereveritwasfelt
  tobeunjust,ledupto,andendedin,theactionofreplevin,
  andthecourt,whichultimatelytriedtheaction,practically
  acquireditsjurisdictionthroughtheinterpositionofthe
  Sheriffinrestoringthecattleuponsecuritygiven。Nosuch
  interferencewithahighhandasthatoftheSheriffappearsto
  becontemplatedbytheIrishlaw。buttheBrehonlawyerwhoought
  properlytoaccompanythedistrainorisexpresslystatedbythe
  SenchusMortoaidhim’untilthedecisionofaCourt。’’Ancient
  LawsofIreland,’i。85。Whatwastheproceedingthusreferred
  to?WhatauthorityhadtheIrishCourtsatanytimeatwhichthe
  Brehonlawwasheldinrespect?WhatweretheseCourts?Towhat
  extentdidtheycommandthepublicforceofthesovereignState?
  wasthereanysovereignpoweratanytimeestablishedinanypart
  ofIrelandwhichcouldgiveoperativejurisdictiontoCourtsof
  Justiceandoperativeforcetothelaw?Allthesequestions——of
  whichthelastareintruththegreatproblemsofancientIrish
  history——mustinsomedegreebeansweredbeforewecanhave
  anything,likeaconfidentopinionontheactualworkingofthe
  LawofDistresssetforthatsuchlengthintheSenchusMor。
  ThelearnedEditorsofthevariousIntroductionsprefixedto
  theofficialpublicationsofAncientIrishLawareplainlyof
  opinionthatsuchjurisdictionasanyIrishCourtspossessedwas,
  tousethetechnicalphrase,voluntary。TheLawofDistress,in
  thisview,wasclearlyenoughconceivedbytheBrehonlawyer,but
  itdependedforthepracticalobediencewhichitobtainedonthe
  aidofpublicopinionandofpopularrespectforaprofessional
  Caste。Itsobjectwastoforcedisputantstosubmittowhatwas
  ratheranarbitrationthananaction,beforeaBrehonselectedby
  themselves,oratmostbeforesomerecognisedtribunaladvisedby
  aBrehon。Atthesametime,itwouldseemthatthereareancient
  Irishtractsorfragmentsoftractsinexistencewhichdescribe
  theancientIrishashavinghadamostelaboratepublic
  organisation,judicialaswellaslegislative。DrSullivan,in
  hisIntroduction,admitsthattheinformationwhichhascomedown
  tousonthesesubjectsisveryfragmentary,andsoobscurethat
  itwillbeimpossibletogiveasatisfactoryaccountofthem
  untilthewholeofthelaw-fragmentsinIrishMSS。arepublished
  oratleastmadeaccessibletoscholars;buthenevertheless
  believesinthehistoricalrealityofthisorganisation,andhe
  speaksIntroduction,pp。cclii。cclxii。oftheIrishCourtsin
  languageofextremelymoderntinge。EnoughisknownofIrish
  historytomakeitverydifficulttounderstandwhenthis
  elaboratejudicialsystemcanhaveexisted;butaplaceisfound
  foritbyattributingittoaperiodnotonlybeforethe
  Anglo-NormaninvasionsofIreland,butbeforetheVikingdescents
  ontheIrishcoasts。Thesafestcourseiscertainlytoreserve
  one’sopiniononthesubjectuntiltheauthoritiesforDr
  Sullivan’sstatementshavebeenmuchmorecriticallyexamined
  thantheyhavebeen;butIamboundtosaythattheyarenotso
  inherentlyimprobable,norareDrSullivan’sopinionssohardto
  reconcilewiththeviewsoftheEditorsofthetranslations,as
  personsunacquaintedwithlegalhistorymightsuppose。Thereare
  analogiestomanyofthetribunalsdescribedamongthe
  rudimentaryinstitutionsofseveralcommunities。Suchtribunals
  mightfurtherbehighlydevelopedandyettheirjurisdiction
  mightbeonlyvoluntary。Sohmappearstometohaveprovedthat
  theFrankishPopularCourtsdidnotexecutetheirowndecrees;if
  thedefendanthadpromisedtosubmittoanaward,thelocal
  deputyoftheKingmightberequiredtoenforceit,but,ifthere
  hadbeennosuchpromise,theplaintiffwasforcedtopetition
  theKinginperson。Thereismuchreasoninfactforthinking
  that,intheearliesttimesandbeforethefulldevelopmentof
  thatkinglyauthoritywhichhaslentsomuchvigourtothearmof
  thelawinmostAryancommunities,butwhichwasvirtuallydenied
  totheIrish,CourtsofJusticeexistedlessforthepurposeof
  doingrightuniversallythanforthepurposeofsupplyingan
  alternativetotheviolentredressofwrong。Eventhenifwe
  supposethattheIrelandwhichissaidtohaveenjoyedan
  elaboratejudicialorganizationwasgreatlyruderandwilderthan
  Irishpatriotswouldprobablyallowittohavebeen,thereisno
  suchinconsistencybetweentheprevalenceofdisorderandthe
  frequencyoflitigationaswouldmakethemexcludeoneanother。
  TheNorseliterature,whichMrDasenthaspopularisedamongus,
  showsthatperpetualfightingandperpetuallitigationmaygoon
  sidebyside,andthatahighlytechnicalproceduremaybe
  scrupulouslyfollowedatatimewhenhomicideisaneveryday
  occurrence。ThefactseemstobethatcontentioninCourttakes
  theplaceofcontentioninarms,butonlygraduallytakesits
  place;anditisatenabletheorythatmanyofthestrange
  peculiaritiesofancientlaw,thetechnicalsnares,traps,and
  pitfallswithwhichitabounds,reallyrepresentandcarryonthe
  feints,stratagems,andambuscadesofactualarmedstrifebetween
  manandman,betweentribeandtribe。Eveninourownday,whena
  wildprovinceisannexedtotheBritishIndianEmpire,thereisa
  mostcuriousandinstructiverushofsuitorstotheCourtswhich
  areimmediatelyestablished。Thearmofthelawsummarily
  suppressesviolence,andthemenwhocannolongerfightgoto
  lawinstead,innumberswhichsometimesmakeIndianofficials
  believethattheremustbesomethingmaleficentinthelawand
  procedurewhichtemptmenintoCourtwhoneversawaCourt
  before。Thesimpleexplanationisthatthesamenaturalimpulse
  isgratifiedinanewway;hastyappealstoajudgesucceed
  hurriedquarrels,andhereditarylaw-suitstaketheplaceof
  ancestralblood-feuds。Ifthetransitionfromonestateof
  societytoanotherinmodernIndiawerenotsuddenbutgradual
  andslow,asituniversallywasintheoldAryanworld,weshould
  seethebattlewithtechnicalitiesgoingoninCourtatthesame
  timethatthebattlewaswagedoutofCourtwithswordand
  matchlock。
  When,however,weareconsideringtheplaceinlegalhistory
  oftheoldIrishLawofDistress,thepointtowhichwehaveto
  attendisnotsomuchthemereexistenceofCourtsofJusticeas
  theeffectivenessoftheirprocess,orinotherwordsthedegree
  inwhichtheycommandthepublicforceoftheCommonwealth。I
  thinkIhaveshownittobeprobablethat,inproportionas
  Courtsgrowstronger,theyfirsttakeundertheircontrolthe
  barbarouspracticeofmakingreprisalsonawrongdoerbyseizing
  hisproperty,andultimatelytheyabsorbitintotheirown
  procedure。Now,theIrishLawofDistressbelongsinonerespect
  toaveryearlystageinthiscourseofdevelopment,sinceitis
  evenmorecompletelyextrajudicialthanisthatfragmentofthe
  primitivebarbarousremedywhichhassurvivedamongourselves。On
  theotherhand,thereareseveralparticularsinwhichitisnot
  morebutdistinctlylessarchaicthantheEnglishCommonlaw。The
  ’Notice’tothedefendant,forwhichitprovides——the’Stay,’
  ortemporaryretentionofthegoodsbytheowner,subjecttoa
  lien——thewitnesseswhohavetobepresent,andtheskilled
  legaladviserwhohastoattendthroughouttheproceedings——
  belongtoarangeofideasgreatlymoreadvancedthanthatunder
  whichalltheseprecautionsaredispensedwith。Evenstronger
  evidenceofmaturityisfurnishedbythealmostinconceivable
  multitudeofrulesanddistinctionswhichtheSenchusMorapplies
  toeverypartoftheproceedings;andourownexperienceshows
  thatthemostremarkablefeatureoftheoldIrishlaw,the
  forfeitureofthepropertytakenindistresswhentheoriginal
  debtandtheexpensesofcustodycomeuptoitsfullvalue,has
  itsplaceamongthelatestimprovementsinjurisprudence。
  Whatever,then,bethetruthastotheIrelandofthegolden
  age,thesecharacteristicsoftheIrishLawofDistressleaveon
  mymindaverydistinctimpressionthatitwasbroughttothe
  shapeinwhichwefinditamidasocietyinwhichtheactionof
  CourtsofJusticewasfeebleandintermittent。Itsaysmuchfor
  thespiritofequityandreasonablenesswhichanimatedtheBrehon
  lawyerswhogaveititsform,andmuchalsofortheiringenuity,
  butsuggeststhattheyreliedlittleontheassistanceofCourts
  anddirectedtheireffortstomakingthemostofaremedywhich
  wasalmostwhollyextrajudicial。ThecomparisonoftheTeutonic
  lawsshowsthattheyhadabasisofAryancustomtoworkupon;
  but,whileinothercommunitiesthesuperstructureonthis
  foundationwastheworkofCourtseverfeelingthemselves
  stronger,inIrelanditseemstohavebeentheworkoflawyers
  dependentinthemainfortheusefulnessoftheirlabourson
  popularrespectfortheirorder。Idonotaffecttosayhowthe
  ancientlawofIrelandistobefittedtotheancienthistory。It
  maybethatthepictureofjudicialorganisationfoundinsome
  law-tractsis,likethedescriptionofprivatelawfoundin
  others,ratherarepresentationofwhatoughttobethanofwhat
  isorhasbeen。Itmaybealsothatthelawlaiddowninthe
  SenchusMorisofmuchlaterdatethanthecompilersofthat
  tractpretend,andthatthereforeitreceiveditsshapeintimes
  ofdisturbanceandconfusion。ButIcannotbelievethatitever
  synchronisedwithaperiodofjudicialactivityandefficiency。
  FromwhatIhavesaidIthinkyouwillhavecollectedthe
  chiefpointsofdifferencebetweentheIrishLawofDistress,as
  laiddownintheSenchusMor,andtheenglishCommonLawof
  Distress,asdeclaredbytheearliestauthoritieswhichour
  Courtsrecognise。Bothhadthesameorigin,buttheIrish
  distraintwasanuniversal,highlydevelopedproceedingemployed
  inenforcingallkindsofdemands,whilethecorresponding
  Englishremedy,thoughmuchlesscarefullyguardedbyexpress
  rules,wasconfinedtoaverylimitedandspecialclassofcases。
  Ihaveamelancholyreasonforcallingyourattentiontothe
  contrast。EdmundSpenserhasspokenofit,inhis’Viewofthe