Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: allmendream

In fact, they had courts where they presided. The system was legalistic; abuses, of course happened.


250 posted on 05/14/2011 9:33:27 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies ]


To: annalex
Courts to sort out disputes between lords- often where the King himself was judge jury and he would send over his executioner. A model of jurisprudence only a bootlicker would advocate.

A Lord on his fiefdom was a law unto himself over his peasants. They had no right to go to the King for a redress of grievances - and they would be executed for such effrontery - and their wife and children raped and killed themselves for good measure.

A court system of the Aristocracy - by the Aristocracy - FOR the Aristocracy.

The people had no rights. The Court was there to sort out conflicting duties - not to recognize the individual rights of the people - they had none.

252 posted on 05/14/2011 9:41:50 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson