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。