[817]. See, e.g., Pike, House of Lords, 217, citing Littleton in Year Book, Easter, 10 Edward IV., No. 17, fo. 6.
[818]. If “vel” might be translated by “and” and “imprisonetur” by “detained in gaol,” the phrase would then mean that no freeman should be kept too long in prison pending his trial, or permanently imprisoned without trial.
[819]. For this word cf. supra, c. 18. The treaty entered into by John in 1191 (discussed infra) speaks of the “disseisin of chattels,” showing that the word had not yet been absolutely restricted to real estate.
[820]. See Rot. Claus., I. 215. Mr. Pike (House of Lords, p. 170) maintains, indeed, that the prevention of disseisins “sine judicio” was the chief, if not the sole, object of the chapter under discussion:—“The judgment of peers had reference chiefly to the right of landholders to their lands, or to some matters connected with feudal tenure and its incidents.” This goes too far: the barons by no means confined the safeguard afforded by the judicium parium to questions of land and land-tenure. Pollock and Maitland, I. 393, countenance a broader interpretation. One point is beyond doubt: judicium parium extended to the assessing of amercements. In c. 21 earls and barons are confirmed in the right to be amerced only per pares suos.
[821]. De libero tenemento suo vel libertatibus vel liberis consuetudinibus suis.
[824]. Second Institute, p. 47.
[825]. See, e.g., Creasy, Hist. of Const., p. 151, n.: “Monopolies in general are against the enactments of the Great Charter.” See also Taswell-Langmead, Eng. Const. Hist., 108.