The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1892-03-03
ANIMALS IN COURT,
a Queer Custom Once in Vogue.

have recently discovered some very
interesting old records concerning .hs
trials of animals for all sorts of Ofienses
These documents are authentic, and in
most cases are official records, and they
show the curious views entertained re-
speeding animals by the most enlightened
portions of ChristendOm from the begin
ming of the twelfth century down to IA
The right to try animals was founded
on the Jewish law as laid dow. in Exc
dus. Xxi IS "lf an OK gore II man or
woman that they die, then the OK shall
be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not
be eaten; but the owner OF the OK shall
be quit There are among the official
records in the French courts elaborate
accounts OF nincty-twO legal processes
against animals, extending from 1920 to
17iI, when the last trial and execution
that of u cOw-tOOk place. There are.
also many records OF similar trials in the
English courts, showing that animals
came before the Judgment seat, were ar
raigned, tried and sentenced with all the
formaIity and dignity observed in deal
ing with human beings.
But these trials We're exceedingly COM
plicated, and gave rise to vast discus
siOns between civil court authorities and
authorities on canOnIcal law. For exam
pie all the domestic animals We're tried
i'm the civil courts, but wild animals of a
nOxiOus description, such as rats, cater
pillars, mice, iOcusts and such like, were
arraigncd before ecclesiastical tribunals.
In the "EssalS iIistoriques sur Paris, "
st. Folk points out that the Bishop of
IaOu first took judicial action against
noxious animals by pronouncing an in
Il | i
and caterpillars, because it had been re-
ported to him that these creatures were
working great ravages among the crops
and sorely distressing the peasants
Especial Justification for ecclesiastical
proceedings against the caterpilIars and
field mice WAS argued by the bishop in
this way: As God cursed the serpent,
David the mountains of Gilboa, and our
Saviour the barren tg-trec, so. in like
manner, the Church had full power and
authority to exercise, mathematics and
cxcommunicatc all animals and inani-
mate things. But as the lower animals,
being created before man, were the elder
born and first heirs OF the earth as God
blessed them and gave them every green
herb for meat, us they were provided
for in the ark, and entitled to the priv
lcgcs OF the Sabbath, they must be treat
ed with the greatest Clcmcncy consistent
with Justice. Some learned cauOniStS
however called i'll question tn" authority
of the church OanathematiZc these cr /
lures of God which she did not undertake
to baptizc, and cndeavOrcd TO make a
strong point by citing he example OF the
Archangcl Michael, who when contend,
ing with Satan for the body OF Moses
did not make IL railing accusation
against the old serpent, but left it t.
the Lord to rcbuke him.
Men like ChsIsSeneuZ, who were strong
supporters of ecclesiastical jurisdiction
held that every thing that exists was
created for mans use and benefit: that
we should not misintcrprct Gods provi
dence by tolerating any creatures that
rendered themselves i'll any way harmfu
to man, and he wound up his Learned
thesis by saying: Religion permits
snarcs to be laid for birds and other an
imals, and the best of all nets is the light
ming OF anathcmatization.'
SO it came to pass that the bishop.
and other dignitaries OF the Church. act
ing, rs they believed, under the sacred
sanction of the Scriptures. soemnly me-
many times III the year, but most IRE
quently i'll harvest season. and then an,
there deliberately tried all offenders o
the animal kingdom against which com
plants had been made. In the civi
courts there was hardly n week in an,
large town i'll France that one or NOR
domestic animals We're not brought be
fore the bar to answer through couns,.
to- the charges preferred against them
The same practice was adopted for ;
time in the English courts But themes
interesting part OF ii all is the method
adopted Ill trying the animals
"A hen lOcuStS. rats, field mice or an,
other creatures harasSed the peasantrv
they first prayed that God would ri,
them Of the nuisance; but If their pray
Crs were unanswered. they at once cam
to the nearest town where there was ;
bishop, laid the ease before him. and be
sought him Ia take action III the matter
The bishop, when satisfied that thci
representations were correct at once al
pointed number OF experts to 90 on
and examine the ravagcd districts.
these experts reported that crops q
other property had been seriously in
!ured by theSr creatures. then the biSho
at once instituted proceedings again-
them. His first step was to appoint a
advocate. who was usually an eccesiae
tic well YerSed III canon law, his duty be-
ing TO defend the animal \ regular i
gal document was next made out. cal
ing upon him 10 show cause why the dt
PENDANTS should not be summoned. an
ii he could not show good cause to III
court theinscvt, animal or whateverit was
was then cited three times to appear b,
fore the tribunal. Ii they did not appea
after the third citation, Judgment wa
given against them by default
The court then issued an admonitior
warning the animals 20 leave the distric
within Il certain time. under penalty {
adluratlon; and if they did not disappea
on or before the period appointed, til
exorcism was with all due solemnit
pronounced. The court, however, b
every available reason for delay. evade
the last extremity OF pronounciny I'll