Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ANIMALS.

AMONG the many curious customs and superstitions preserved in the records of the Middle Ages, few are more strange and interesting than the legal proceedings, civil, criminal, and ecclesiastic, brought against offending animals. Few, moreover, combine so strikingly the opposing characteristics of that romantic epoch: its childlike faith and childish superstition; its thoughtless cruelty and lofty ideal of justice for all; its belief in the direct action of God in all the affairs of life, and its doctrine that the prince of this world is the devil himself.

So strange are some of these records that it was suggested that they were composed by ancient lawyers or their clerks as amusing exercises for leisure hours, till they were shown to be genuine by the researches of such writers as Menabrea,' Agnel,2 and Berriat St. Prix.3

Whatever the frogs of Ireland may or may not have suffered from St. Patrick, there is no doubt that snails, flies, beetles, rats, and eels were excommunicated, or threatened with excommunication, by other saints and bishops, and however fabulous may be the story of the jackdaw of Rheims, it is an historical fact that a cock was publicly burnt at Basle in August 1474, for the diabolical crime of laying an egg; the egg being also burnt lest it should produce a cockatrice, or fiery flying serpent.

[ocr errors]

'On the Thursday before St. Laurence's day,' writes Gross in his 'Kurtze Basler Kronik,' they burnt a cock on the Kolenberg together with an egg which he had laid, for they feared that a dragon might be hatched therefrom. The executioner cut open the cock and found three more eggs in him. For, as Vicentius saith in the VIth book of his "Speculum Naturale," it hath always been held that a cock in his old age may lay an egg whence ariseth a basilisk, if it be hatched out on a dungheap by the serpent called coluber. Wherefore the basilisk is half cock and half serpent. He saith also that certain persons declare they have seen basilisks hatched from such eggs.'

1 Les jugements rendus au Moyen-Age contre les animaux, 1846.

2 Curiosités judiciaires et historiques du Moyen-Age, 1858.

3 Rapport et recherches sur les procès et jugements relatifs aux animaux.

But the animal which most frequently came before the criminal courts was the pig. At Mesnil St. Denis, near Paris, there still exists a spot called Truye Pendue, after a sow which was once hanged there for killing an infant, and about twenty similar cases are recorded in France alone by the writers above mentioned. Thus, in 1386, the magistrates of Falaise condemned a pig to have its snout and one leg cut off and then to be hanged for having killed an infant and eaten part of its face and arm. The pig was executed in the market-place dressed in human apparel, and the executioner received ten sous ten deniers and a new glove as his fee.

The following is the statement of expenses sent to the bailiff of Mantes in March 1403, for the execution of a sow which had killed a baby:

[merged small][ocr errors]

Item, to the hangman who came from Paris to make the said execution

.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

24 sols.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

In all these cases the animal was duly arrested, imprisoned, tried, and condemned with every legal formality.

About the year 1313 a bull belonging to a farmer of Moisy killed a man, whereupon Charles Count of Valois ordered its arrest and trial, which took place accordingly, and the animal was condemned to be hanged. But the order of the Hospitallers claimed jurisdiction over the village, and appealed to the Parlement against the judgment. The latter confirmed the verdict, but declared at the same time that the Count of Valois had no jurisdiction over the territory of Moisy. The bull was hanged in due course. The Council of Worms decreed that, in a case where a child was stung to death by bees, the whole hive and its contents must be burnt.

All these proceedings were based upon the Mosaic law (Exodus xxi. 28) which, as a tribute to the sanctity of human life, ordained that an ox which killed a man was to be stoned, and that its flesh must not be eaten. In the Middle Ages there came the additional belief that such animals belonged to the kingdom of the evil one, and were very possibly possessed by demons, for there was the highest authority for believing that devils might enter into swine, and it was generally held that they might convert themselves

bodily into animal forms, more especially those of he-goats and black cats.

Our ancestors, moreover, by no means denied to animals the possession of moral sense, and therefore of moral responsibility. Thus, William of Paris relates, in his book 'De Universo,' iii. 8, how he saw certain storks hold judgment over a female who had deserted her mate and committed adultery, after which they all fell upon her and tore off nearly all her feathers.

Still more interesting than the criminal, are the civil and ecclesiastic proceedings against animals. Insect and vermin plagues are not amenable to magistrates, hangmen, and other executors of the criminal law. Besides, the plagues of Egypt and the threatenings of the prophets show that they are often sent as divine punishments. It was therefore necessary for the victims of such plagues to proceed with caution, and, above all, to call in the aid of the Church, lest haply they might be found even to fight against God.

The usual procedure in such cases has been described by the famous mediæval jurist Chasseneuz (1480-1530), President of the Parlement of Provence. In the first of his 'Consilia,' or Consultations, published at Lyons in 1531, he discusses the question whether it is lawful to excommunicate destructive animals. He first adduces nine reasons for holding that such excommunications are absurd and impious, and then brings forward twelve other reasons to show that they are pious, profitable, and edifying. To these he adds numerous instances to prove the antiquity and efficacy of the custom. Thus, God cursed the serpent, and Christ cursed the fig-tree. Eels which caused damage in the Lake of Geneva, sparrows which disturbed the divine service in the church of St. Vincent de Mâcon disappeared on being excommunicated. He had himself heard sentences of malediction and anathema pronounced against locusts, rats, and snails by the episcopal courts of Autun, Lyons, and Mâcon, after the following procedure. The people of the invaded territory appealed to their bishop or his proctor, who first recommended prayers, penance, processions, and, more especially, the punctual payment of tithes, Should this fail, it was probable that the plague came from below rather than from above, and severer measures might be taken. Still, absolute justice must be observed; an advocate was appointed to plead the cause of the 'vermin,' and they were only finally excommunicated if they obstinately refused to retire to the place appointed for them

Such proceedings were sanctioned by the highest authority, for did not Pope Stephen (A.D. 890) drive away a plague of locusts by sprinkling the fields with holy water, while St. Bernard destroyed an innumerable multitude of flies which filled his church and interrupted his sermon by simply pronouncing the words excommunico eas (I excommunicate them')?

According to the historian De Thou, Chasseneuz himself first became famous through the skill with which he advocated the cause of the rats of Autun. They had been summoned to appear before the bishop's proctor and show cause why they should not be excommunicated. Chasseneuz was appointed to defend them, and began by demanding that the summons should be read in every parish, since the rats were widely scattered, and might otherwise not hear of it. He next excused their non-appearance by saying that the roads were dangerous for his clients, seeing that cats were everywhere lying in wait for them, and finally, having exhausted all modes of delay, he made an eloquent speech on the injustice of proceeding against the whole number at once, and demanded that each rat should be tried separately. This speech, says the historian, was recalled to his memory by the Waldensians when, as President of the Parlement of Provence, he was obliged to take part in the persecution of those unfortunate sectaries.

[ocr errors]

Felix Malleolus, in his Tractatus de Exorcismis,' relates how, in his own days (1451), the Bishop of Lausanne solemnly cursed the leeches which did much harm to the larger fish in the lake. 'Whereby he accomplished much in repelling and driving away those beasts. But many persons, not weighing the divine mysteries or entirely ignorant of them, spoke evil of the said bishop on this matter. Nevertheless, all the doctors of Heidelberg having read and considered the thing gave their approval of it.'

About the same time caterpillars with black heads and about the size of a woman's little finger did much harm in the diocese of Coire in Switzerland. In winter' (says Malleolus) 'they enter the ground and devour the roots of grass and herbs, so that the whole territory appears withered in spring-time. And in summer they take wings and sit on the trees and eat leaves and fruit.' They were summoned before the provincial magistrate, but did not appear, so the judge 'on account of their small size and tender age' appointed a curator and advocate who urged that they were creatures of God, in immemorial possession of the country, and

only followed their natural instincts. So the inhabitants make a yearly compact with these insects, and devote to them a certain plot of ground, and so it is done to this day.'

Very similar to this is the following case extracted by Menabrea from the records of the commune of St. Julien, a place still famous for its vineyards.

In the year 1545 the vineyards were ravaged by a small green beetle or weevil, Rhynchites auratus. The people demanded their excommunication in the episcopal court of St. Jean de Maurienne. But the bishop's proctor replied that the earth was created to nourish insects as well as men, and that therefore they must not act with too great rashness against these animals, but rather implore the divine mercy, repent of their sins, and pay their tithes. The commune then resorted to arbitration before François Bonnivard, doctor of law, the insects being represented by two advocates; but before the case was finished the beetles had disappeared. They returned, however, shortly afterwards in still greater numbers, and after prayers and processions had failed, the insects were regularly put on their trial, being represented by Antoine Filliol as procureur and Pierre Rambaud as advocate. On June 5 the latter proceeded to show cause why his clients should not be excommunicated. He urged first that only contumacious persons may be anathematised, and his clients had not been regularly summoned; secondly, animals were created before man, and were bidden by God to increase and multiply; they have therefore a divine right to the food requisite for this purpose; thirdly, animals are not to be excommunicated for following their natural instincts. Anticipating his opponent's case, he went on to urge that the subjection of animals to man, and the assertion that he who sows shall reap, are of no avail against the preceding arguments, and finally he advised the people of St. Julien to leave the insects alone and repent of their sins like the Ninevites. The advocate of the commune, François Foy, demanded a week's delay to reply to this, at the end of which the counsel for the defence requested a foreclosure; but another week was granted, and on June 19 Foy made a short speech arguing that animals were made for the use of man, wherefore they were acting wrongly if they harmed him, and might lawfully be anathematised. Another week was granted for Rambaud to reply, which he did in much the same terms as before. The plaintiffs seem to have now become doubtful as to the justice of their case, and a meeting of the parishioners

« AnteriorContinuar »