« PrejšnjaNaprej »
rence is made to Glanville, Bracton, Britton and even Hawkins' Pleas of the Crown), besides monuments of Jurisprudence such as the Olims Landgerichte Cartularies, Notorial Acts and Terriers. These notices cover in a few pages an immense amount of ground, as yet virgin as regards textbooks professing the same scope. Nevertheless, when writing about the Fueros of Spain, it might have been better to have made more use of the truly monumental work of Marichalar Y.Manrique in nine volumes, published by the Spanish Academy of History, or at least to have explained that therein is to be found in the middle volumes all that is as yet known upon this vast subject. Indeed, we are hardly given even the barest outline' about, for example, the remarkable Customs of Catalonia, the Fuero Général of Navarre, the Forum Judicum or the Siete Partidas, all of which, if mentioned at all, surely merit some careful explanation as to their methods and objects. The same section closes with observations on the rise of commercial and maritime law, on legal writers of the period, including Sir John Fortescue, and on Royal Ordinances, from which we learn, among other things, that the English "bill" comes from the French billet. After this the book next treats of the Monarchical period (16th century to 1789), and here it ends in 416 pages its first, and particularly to non-Frenchmen, probably most interesting part, namely, that concerning the sources of law in their relation to France.
The second part, or the History of Public Law, begins with an Introduction touching the origin of the Family, of Property, and of the State, with special reference to Keltic and German Institutions. Here McLennan, Morgan, and Laboulaye are laid under contribution, as well as Seebohm, J. Williams, Maitland, Digby, and Harrison, but there
1 Cf. The "Intelligent Man" of Vishnu, Maine's: Early Law and Custom. P. 74.
is not as much reference to De Laveleye as might perhaps have been expected, although the work of Bagehot, H. Spencer and E. Ferri does not escape adequate notice. Even a questionable institution like the Couvade is referred to, and Irish gavelkind, while Sir H. Maine is largely drawn upon as to the Niyoga, of which the Levirate is but a special case. Furthermore, due recognition is given to the researches of M. Bogisic in the matter of the Servian Zadruga. La Gaule Romaine, the Epoque Franque ou Barbare, and L'Eglise sous l'ancien régime are next treated of, and then follows a long and thorough summary relating to the elements of Society in Feudal Days. This brings to an end the first three fascicules containing some 768 pages, while in the fourth and last that has appeared, we have nearly 250 pages more upon the Monarchical Epoch, in which the Villages, Towns, Parliaments, Intendants, Advocates, and Imposts of the time obtain considerable detailed notice. The English Frankpledge, Sergeants-at-law and even the Select Vestry are discussed; but here M. Brissaud is not always quite up-to-date. Upon the whole, however, it is matter for wonder how well he illustrates the history of the Institutions of his own country by those on our side the Channel, while his notes in almost all cases put those who want further information on the track to get it from acknowledged sources.
Judging from the 1,000 pages M. Brissaud has already published, the farrago libelli in its entirety will be extensive. He uniformly adopts the comparative method, or that of illustrating the growth of Institutions in France by parallel passages in the history of other countries. Perhaps he is not quite so happy in his Spanish and
1 See an article by M. Brissaud on the Couvade, Revue des Pyrénées, 1900, pp. 225, et seq.
2 e.g., at p. 897, Note 5.
English references, as in those taken from Ancient Rome and Germany. As he gives us no table of contents, and as yet, of course by necessity, no index, and since his compendium has not even the homogeneous alphabetical arrangement of our own Bacon's Abridgment, but depends upon chronology not only in its Parts, but also in each Section, it is in its present inchoate condition not unlike a very excellent spade of the finest steel without even a wooden handle. Furthermore, although both Bentham and Austin are referred to nominatim, we do not learn that their splendid achievements in classification have been apprehended or had any influence in France. And yet, against these infinitesimally small shortcomings, some of which will, on the book's completion, remedy themselves, we have to set the exceptionally high grade of excellence of M. Brissaud's teaching as a whole. There may be a little too much here and there in the way of facts, especially for the stranger who is intermeddling in details of matters, to him, of minor historical importance; but if such a fault exists it is ore upon the right side. As a whole the Manual is so good that to suggest improvement would be a counsel of perfection. It is to similar compendious summaries, except that of M. Viollet, what a proper science primer is to the Roman student's cantilena of the Leges, or a Modern Medical Text Book to the Aphorisms of the School of Salerne which tell that Contra vim mortis non est medicamen in hortis.
In brief, this particular Manual manifests throughout originality, much taking of pains, and a vast experience of students of legal history, their requirements, and the things that should be most surely believed by them, an experience, that is, of such matters as relate to the growth of the great France of to-day. The more it is read, marked, learned and inwardly digested by students of other countries, the more the aggregate stock of know
ledge only to be got by means of the comparative method In its light will they indeed see light. A. R. WHITEWAY.
will be extended.
III. DEBT-SLAVERY IN THE MALAY
(Continued from page 334)
OMPARING the Roman with the Malay institution, it will be seen that there is no necessity, in the latter case, for any formality accompanying the loan. But it is probable that the use of the copper and scales at Rome was, in primitive times, not formal at all, but essential to the transaction. The exact incidents of nexal debt are not easy to ascertain, because of the difficulty of discriminating between nexal debtors and judgment debtors, both of whom were subject to manus injectio. But it is clear that nexi and judicati alike had 30 days allowed, in which to endeavour to pay the amount owing, the nexi being termed damnati by Gaius and (apparently) aeris confessi by Aulus Gellius. Some writers also think that nexi had the benefit of the further delay of 60 days which was accorded to judicati. It is interesting to observe, therefore, that in Malaya a period is fixed at the outset for repayment, and that a further grace of two, three, or six months is allowed after its expiration, before apprehension.1
The Roman creditor took the debtor before the judge; but only as a precautionary measure, and to ensure the regularity of the proceedings, not with a view to any magisterial decree or trial. This requirement was introduced by the early statute of the twelve tables, and has no counterpart in Malay law. According to the Roman system, the judgment debtor finally became addictus to the
1 Swettenham, P.p., 1882 (c. 3,285), XLVI., 10,
creditor, and lost the opportunity of redeeming himself; but the better opinion is that this was not the case with regard to the nexal debtor, as such, who could consequently tender the sum owing, if he became possessed of it, and by this means at any time recover his freedom. A very remarkable analogy, however, to the Roman way of dealing with judgment debtors is afforded by a custom which obtained in the island of Sumatra, where the slave-debtor (then called menjiring) had the right of paying off the debt and enlarging himself, but could be deprived of this right, by the creditor's demanding formally the amount of the debt at three several times, allowing a certain number of days between each demand ;-when, if the debtor was not able to persuade any person to redeem him, he became a pure slave, upon notice being given, to the chief, of the transaction. This only differs from the Roman addictio in not appearing to require the existence of a judgment to ground the process, and in the resultant status of the debtor, who does not seem, at Rome, technically to have become a slave.
In Malaya, some diversity of opinion exists as to the possibility of opening the foreclosure. Captain Speedy, in the extract quoted on page 332, says that if the debtor acquires or is supplied with the means of discharging the debt, the creditor may refuse to accept it when tendered. And another authority says-"Nor has the debtor under this system any means of becoming free, unless some relative or friend comes forward to pay for him; and even in this case the creditor might, if he so willed--and if he was a raja, in all probability would-under some pretext, refuse the offer of payment.'
The words "under some pretext " show that this aspect of the institution was rather an abuse pro loco et tempore
1 Marsden: Sumatra, p. 214.
2 P.p. 1882 (c. 3,285) XLVI. 6,