The Placer herald., 1856-11-29
AUBURN, NOVEMBER 20, 1866.
DIJEILING.

appeal was based upon the behef, that prOvl-
dence interposed directly and at once, to
shield the innocent, punish the guilty, and
establish complete justice here on earth-
Our honest ancestry had other modes of in
voking the Divine Power in behalf of the in
nocent and we read of the trial by fireordesl,
whereby the aristocracy shamed their ac-
cusers by holding in the hand red hot iron
and walking blindfolded among red hot
pow shares, receiving no harm by contact
Herewith
In this way we are told Queen Emma the
certain ISLANDERS regarding her chastity The
low born had their waterordeal. and they
could thrust their arm into boiling water
without receiving injury, the accused was
pronounced innocent. History does not give
an instance that we are aware of, where an
innocent person was tried in this way
There was another mode of trial by water
in which, to use a slang phrase, the prosecu-
ton had if possible "a deader thing" than
the mode just mentioned. The accused bv
this mode of trial, was thrown into the mid
die Of pond, and if he could float without
any action of swimming he was declared de-
cidedly guilty but if the poor devil sank into
a watery grave, the relatives and friends of
the accused had the satisfaction of knowing
that no stain of guilt rested upon his or her
reputation. Then there WAS the trial by
corsned, which required the accused to swsl
low great chunk of bread or cheese, and
in the event Of the throat refusing a passage
for this dogs-fill, the party was at once visited
with punishment.
Sir William Blackstone is good enough to
inform us how one Goodwin, Earl Of Kent,
was overcome with a chunk of cheese, in the
vain attempt to establish his innocence, in
the time of Edward the Confessor.
The Jews had the water of jealousy, the
effects of which was supposed to establish
beyond all question the guilt or innocence
of the adulterous wife.
Besides these there are many other foolish
and most impious appeals made to God by
equally ridiculous modes, but the particular
humbug that is more closely allied to our
subject, is "the trial by Jattel duel, or single
combat"
Our stout Norman ancestry claim the hon
or of introducing this test of right into the
English jurisprudence.
In civil suits the parties might fight by
proxy but in criminal cause, it was suppo
sed Heaven would not interfere unless the
parties came in person. The trial was con-
Quoted with great ceremony, and none but
real simon pure gentlemen were allowed to
kill each other in this way. A suitable piece
of ground was selected, of which sixty feet
square was enclosed, with lists.
The Judges of the Court attended in scar
let robes, accompanied by the learned Ser
geants of the law.
Before entering the lists the champions
took an oath to the effect chat they had not
that day neither eat, drank, nor had upon
them, neither bone, stone nor grass; nor any
enchantment, sorcery or withcraft, whereby
the law of God might be debased or the law
of the devil exalted" Those were days long
gone by, when men were ignorant of letters,
aud besotedly superstitious. To their be-
nighted minds it was a real test of justice,
and for that reason we cannot Judge them by
the same rules that we do person in this
age. Their intelligence was not above it, and
no code of morals then taught forbade it. TO
them it was law conscientiousy y adhered to;
religion sanctioned it, and the statutes Of the
land enforced it-why should they be blamed
for practicing it, Indeed to them it may
have proved something, for the guilty man
could scarcely fight as if he had chance of
success believing implicitly that the powers
of Heaven were battling against him. No
wonder his courage should fail and his knees
tremble under his weight of coat of mail and
load of guilt. "Conscieace makes towards
of us all.''
The law that sanctioned, and the reasons
which induced that law, have long since pas
sed awav. Reason and science have taught,
as that God works by certain unchanging
laws-the same to day as thousand years
hence-that such has ever been, and ever
will be the case.
The common consent of the good and the
wise have discarded the duel, as a mode of
trial. No one believes it proves anything
further than that one man has more com
mand over his nerves than another, or is