Part 7

{73c} In allusion to this rude and arbitrary process of distress, Mr. Smirke states that it is abundantly countenanced by ancient usage, especially in the Hartz Mines. Haltaus says--"Olim pignoris captio ex debitoris rebus moventibus diu privatorum arbitrio permissa."

{73d} The "cattle" here must not be understood as exclusively applicable to live stock, it refers to all personal "chattels" or goods.

{74a} However whimsical this claim may appear, observes Mr. Smirke, it is almost exactly paralleled in the law ascribed to Rob. I. of Scotland:--"Si debitor per vim a parte creditoris namos abstulerit, creditor cum secta vel huesis persequatur ablatorem."

{74b} A copy of the Holy Gospels was eventually used on such occasions.

{74c} This phrase, "to enquire the myne," Mr. Smirke considers of Latin origin, "libertatim inquirendi mineam"--in which language he thinks the whole of the document was probably first composed.

{75a} The German miners, Mr. Smirke says, enjoyed a similar liberty. See former liberty on this head.

{75b} According to Mr. Smirke, the corresponding demand made upon the Bergmeister, by the German miners, is equally imperative, unless conflicting claims are put in, when the first finder and not the first claimant is entitled to preference.

{75c} Mr. Smirke has discovered that a like obligation was imposed on the Irons, or Iron Miners, of the forests in the ancient Earldom of Namur. He very plausibly suggests that the appellation, "Verus," by which the Dean Forest Miners designate each other, is derived from the word Firon.

{75d} Mr. Smirke has traced the giving of similar doles in the ancient constitutions of the Miners of Bohemia, Saxony, and the Hartz.

{76a} The proportion of Profit to the Crown is found to vary in different places, sometimes being no more than a tenth part or even a twentieth or less. These provisions respecting the right of the lord of the soil, whether king or subject, have their counterparts in the old summary laws, which regulate the participation of the landowner in the discovery and working of mines; the _droit de partage_, or "mit-bauhalf," &c. of the German miners.

{76b} See the Regard of 10 Edw. I., &c., which contains a similar specification.

{77} The occurrence of these pre-Reformation terms, more especially the latter, proves the original of this document to be of earlier date than that event. The portion of the day, as thus defined, would seem to answer to our forenoon.

{78} An expression that indicates a Latin original--"judicium firmum et stabile remanebit in perpetuum absque ulla appellatione." No appeal or "calling" lies further. This appeal to successive inquests is remarkable. It resembles the process of reversing a verdict of twelve jurors by a verdict of twenty-four by the old writ of attaint. (See Blackst. Com, vol. iii.)

{79a} The German Miners Mr. Smirke found to possess these rights also. The tin-bounders of the Stannaries also bequeath their dormant liberty of mining, which is in Cornwall regarded as personal property, and passes to executors, and not to the heir.

{79b} This claim to timber, at least where the forest is a royal one, has also been generally admitted into the continental mine codes. King John granted it to the tinners of Devon and Cornwall, but such a grant is now inoperative except as against the Crown.

{80} The Mendip Miners are observed by Mr. Smirke to determine the intervening distance of their pits by a throw of "the hache" two ways, the miner standing up to the girdle in the mine groof. In Bohemia the arrow-flight fixes the limits of the work.

{81a} It is presumed that "winde" in this place, and "win" or "wyne" a little further on, is the same word, viz., "win," and refers to the area or space round the pit which circumscribes the working ground of the miner, within which he is to win his ore.

{81b} An original and local word. It seems to be allied to drill a hole. (I do not think the word strictly local. Thrull, drill, thrill, thirl, and thurl, are all current elsewhere--all from Saxon [Greek text].)

{82} Of course there should be forty-eight signatures, as appended, doubtless, to the original document. Probably some of them had become illegible, and therefore were omitted altogether by the copyist of 1673.