登陆注册
15416700000030

第30章

I must preface the argument from precedent with a reference to what has been said already in the first Lecture about early forms of liability, and especially about the appeals.It was there shown that the appeals de pace et plagis and of mayhem became the action of trespass, and that those appeals and the early actions of trespass were always, so far as appears, for intentional wrongs. The contra pacem in the writ of trespass was no doubt inserted to lay a foundation for the king's writ; but there seems to be no reason to attribute a similar purpose to vi et armis, or cum vi sua, as it was often put.Glanvill says that wounds are within the sheriff's jurisdiction, unless the appellor adds a charge of breach of the king's peace. Yet the wounds are given vi et armis as much in the one case as in the other.Bracton says that the lesser wrongs described by him belong to the king's jurisdiction, "because they are sometimes against the peace of our lord the king," while, as has been observed, they were supposed to be always committed intentionally.It might even perhaps be inferred that the allegation contra pacem was originally material, and it will be remembered that trespasses formerly involved the liability to pay a fine to the king. If it be true that trespass was originally confined to intentional wrongs, it is hardly necessary to consider the argument drawn from the scope of the general issue.In form it was a mitigation of the strict denial de verbo in verbum of the ancient procedure, to which the inquest given by the king's writ was unknown. The strict form seems to have lasted in England some time after the trial of the issue by recognition was introduced. When a recognition was granted, the inquest was, of course, only competent to speak to the facts, as has been said above. When the general issue was introduced, trespass was still confined to intentional wrongs.

We may now take up the authorities.It will be remembered that the earlier precedents are of a date when the assize and jurata had not given place to the modern jury.These bodies spoke from their own knowledge to an issue defined by the writ, or to certain familiar questions of fact arising in the trial of a cause, but did not hear the whole case upon evidence adduced.

Their function was more limited than that which has been gained by the jury, and it naturally happened that, when they had declared what the defendant had done, the judges laid down the standard by which those acts were to be measured without their assistance.Hence the question in the Year Books is not a loose or general inquiry of the jury whether they think the alleged trespasser was negligent on such facts as they may find, but a well-defined issue of law, to be determined by the court, whether certain acts set forth upon the record are a ground of liability.

It is possible that the judges may have dealt pretty strictly with defendants, and it is quite easy to pass from the premise that defendants have been held trespassers for a variety of acts, without mention of neglect, to the conclusion that any act by which another was damaged will make the actor chargeable.But a more exact scrutiny of the early books will show that liability in general, then as later, was founded on the opinion of the tribunal that the defendant ought to have acted otherwise, or, in other words, that he was to blame.

Returning first to the case of the thorns in the Year Book, it will be seen that the falling of the thorns into the plaintiff's close, although a result not wished by the defendant, was in no other sense against his will.When he cut the thorns, he did an act which obviously and necessarily would have that consequence, and he must be taken to have foreseen and not to have prevented it.Choke, C.J.says, "As to what was said about their falling in, ipso invito, that is no plea, but he ought to show that he could not do it in any other way, or that he did all in his power to keep them out"; and both the judges put the unlawfulness of the entry upon the plaintiff's land as a consequence of the unlawfulness of dropping the thorns there.

Choke admits that, if the thorns or a tree had been blown over upon the plaintiff's land, the defendant might have entered to get them.Chief Justice Crew says of this case, in Millen v.

Fawdry, that the opinion was that "trespass lies, because he did not plead that he did his best endeavor to hinder their falling there; yet this was a hard case." The statements of law by counsel in argument may be left on one side, although Brian is quoted and mistaken for one of the judges by Sir William Blackstone, in Scott v.Shepherd.

The principal authorities are the shooting cases, and, as shooting is an extra- hazardous act, it would not be surprising if it should be held that men do it at their peril in public places.The liability has been put on the general ground of fault, however, wherever the line of necessary precaution may be drawn.In Weaver v.Ward, the defendant set up that the plaintiff and he were skirmishing in a trainband, and that when discharging his piece he wounded the plaintiff by accident and misfortune, and against his own will.On demurrer, the court says that "no man shall be excused of a trespass,...except it may be judged utterly without his fault.As if a man by force take my hand and strike you, or if here the defendant had said, that the plaintiff ran cross his piece when it was discharging, or had set forth the case with the circumstances so as it had appeared to the court that it had been inevitable, and that the defendant had committed no negligence to give occasion to the hurt." The later cases simply follow Weaver v.Ward.

同类推荐
热门推荐
  • 一个我们从未发现的新世界的故事

    一个我们从未发现的新世界的故事

    这是三个各自拥有超越常人能力的人聚集在一起,在一个新世界里为了实现各自的愿望而努力,无论敌人是神秘的古代文明的遗留者,还是拥有超级科技的军队,古老的神秘暗影王朝,还是在神的领导下的忍者部队。都无法阻止这三个人实现愿望的故事。
  • 废恤诡异事务所

    废恤诡异事务所

    你相信幽灵的存在吗?你相信超自然的灵异吗?在你身边奇奇怪怪的幽灵又像是无所不在但当幽灵有了麒麟的东西幽灵却又有了它们自己的存在它们的存在又让人感到好奇但看到了却又让人心里产生了恐惧感另外,你相信人性吗?一个人凶悍起来还有人性可言吗?报复?报仇?有比灵异来得可怕吗?那么这世界到底是人可怕还是灵异可怕呢?就让MONSTER故事带你走进不可思议的诡异事件里....
  • 福妻驾到

    福妻驾到

    现代饭店彪悍老板娘魂穿古代。不分是非的极品婆婆?三年未归生死不明的丈夫?心狠手辣的阴毒亲戚?贪婪而好色的地主老财?吃上顿没下顿的贫困宭境?不怕不怕,神仙相助,一技在手,天下我有!且看现代张悦娘,如何身带福气玩转古代,开面馆、收小弟、左纳财富,右傍美男,共绘幸福生活大好蓝图!!!!快本新书《天媒地聘》已经上架开始销售,只要3.99元即可将整本书抱回家,你还等什么哪,赶紧点击下面的直通车,享受乐乐精心为您准备的美食盛宴吧!)
  • 龙之逆鳞

    龙之逆鳞

    龙有逆鳞触之必怒!万古洪荒,没有人能惹恼龙族全身而退,但是如果龙没有逆鳞会如何?且看龙九如何在这乱世之中恢复龙身,找寻自己的逆鳞!
  • 路过你的城

    路过你的城

    人生本就寂寞,和你重逢以前,我并不惧怕,那些漫长的黑夜与孤独。
  • 遇见我的傲慢网球王子

    遇见我的傲慢网球王子

    希望大家喜欢这个作品,不过他与原作的差异比较大。越前龙马这个傲慢的网球王子,当你遇到一个和你半斤八两的傲慢小女生时……一场网球赛事就此开幕。看好的读者请留下意见,我会改进(鞠躬ing)当然啦~~希望大家多多推荐o(∩_∩)o...
  • 梅希树下

    梅希树下

    少女时代,敢作敢为,不怕辛劳,是什么引起她的奋斗目标。命运转折,又奈何?茫茫大海,我们又经历什么?那谁?给你的人生道路留点数据缓存吧!
  • 帝皇的绝宠毒兽

    帝皇的绝宠毒兽

    片段一:叶叶,我做的不好吗?某妖孽霸占着叶邪的胸口,巴巴地说。片段二:孤叶邪,我是真的喜欢你,你不嫁给我,我娶你还不行吗?某妖孽嘶吼道片段三:叶邪,你真的不信我吗?某妖孽演戏演得惟妙惟肖片段四:君临天,我不怨你,我也不恨你,我从此以后,和你不相往来。叶邪冷冷地凝视着君临天,淡漠道。
  • 大周风云志

    大周风云志

    大周更始元年,春寒料峭,坊间突传“苍天已死,黄天当立”,天下动乱,大陆开始上演一段波澜壮阔的英雄演绎......
  • 网游之龙腾东方

    网游之龙腾东方

    重剑无锋、大巧不工、轻剑游龙、翩然千里!身佩轻重二剑、运使如意、大巧似拙、举重若轻、锋芒毕露!奇才赵黎颠覆游戏法则、重掌生杀大权、开辟混沌、一扫域内!提轻重二剑、远赴南洋、东欧、扬我国威、决战诸神!本书包涵网游、都市、历史、军事、玄幻、武侠、爱情、冒险等八大要素!花一份时间、读八本小说、兄弟、你赚大发了、还不快来点击点击!每日三更、六千保底!求收藏、推荐!