Criminal matters such as killing the king or sedition or betraying the nation or the army, fraudulent concealment of treasure trove [finding a hoard of coins which had been buried when danger approached], breach of the King's peace, homicide, murder (homicide for which there were no eye-witnesses), burning (a town, house, men, animals or other chattel for hatred or revenge), robbery, rape and falsifying (e.g. false charters or false measures or false money) were punishable by death or loss of limb. All murders were now punished alike because the applicability of the murdrum couldn't be determined since it was impossible to prove that the slain man had been English.
Trespass was a serious and forcible breach of the peace onto land that developed from the criminal law of felony. One found guilty of it could be fined and imprisoned as well as amerced.
House-breaking, harboring outlaws, and interference with the royal perquisites of shipwreck and the beasts of the sea which were stranded on the coast [such as whales and sturgeon] were also punishable in the Royal Court.
The Royal Court had grown substantially and was not always presided over by the King. To avoid court agents from having too much discretionary power, there was a systematic procedure for bringing cases to the Royal Court. First, a plaintiff had to apply to the King's Chancery for a standardized writ into which the cause had to fit. The plaintiff had to pay a fee and provide a surety that the plea was brought in good faith. The progress of the suit was controlled at crucial points by precisely formulated writs to the sheriff, instructing him for instance, to put the disputed property under royal protection pending a decision, to impanel an assize and have it view the property in advance of the justices' arrival, to ascertain a point of fact material to the plea, or to summon a 'warrantor' to support a claim by the defendant.
The Royal Court kept a record on its cases on parchment kept rolled up: its "rolls". The oldest roll of 1194 is almost completely comprised of land cases.
Anyone could appoint an agent, an "attorney", to appear in court on his behalf, it being assumed that the principal could not be present and royal authorization given. A wife could represent her husband. The principal was then bound by the actions of his agent. Gradually men appeared who made a business of representing whoever would employ them. The common law system became committed to the "adversary system" with the parties struggling judicially against each other.
The Royal Court took jurisdiction over issues of whether certain land was civil or ecclesiastical [assize utrum], and therefore whether the land owed services or payment to the Crown or not. It also heard issues of disturbance of advowson, a complex of rights to income from a church and to the selection of a parson for the church [assize of darrein [last] presentment]. Many churches had been built by a lord on his manor for his villeins. The lord had then appointed a parson and provided for his upkeep out of the income of the church. In later times, the lord's chosen parson was formally appointed by the bishop. By the 1100s, many lords had given their advowsons to abbeys. This procedure used twelve recognitors selected by the sheriff.
As before, the land of any person who had been outlawed or convicted of a felony escheated to his lord. His moveable goods and chattels became the King's. If he was executed, his heirs received nothing because they were of the same blood as the felon, which was corrupt: "corruption of the blood". The loss of civil rights and capacities after a sentence of death for felony or treason, which resulted in forfeiture of property and corruption of the blood, was called "attainder".
The manor court heard cases arising out of the unfree tenures of the lord's vassals. It also heard distraint, also called "distress", issues. Distraint was a landlord's method of forcing a tenant to perform the services of his fief. To distrain by the fief, a lord first obtained a judgment of his court. Otherwise, he distrained only by goods and chattels without judgment of his court. A distraint was merely a security to secure a person's services, if he agreed he owed them, or his attendance in court, if he did not agree that he owed them. Law and custom restricted the type of goods and chattels distrainable, and the time and manner of distraint. For instance, neither clothes, household utensils, nor a riding horse was distrainable. The lord could not use the chattels taken while they were in his custody. If cattle in custody were not accessible to the tenant, the lord had to feed them at his expense. The lord, if he were not the King, could not sell the chattel. This court also determined inheritance and dower issues.
The court of the vill enforced the village ordinances. The hundred court met twice a month and dealt with the petty crimes of lowly men in the neighborhood of a few vills. The county and borough courts heard cases of felonies, accusations against freemen, tort, and debts. The knights make the county courts work as legal and administrative agencies of the Crown.