ITS HISTORY
7
greatest offences of the Forest euen of auncient
time. But the offence of Vert (except it be for
the breach of our Roiall free chace) it is so little,
and of so smal an account, that this our Constitu-
tion or Law doth scantly respect the same. ..."
" If any freeman shall chase away a Bere, or a
wilde beast out of the Forest: whether the same
be done by chaunce, or of a set purpose, so that
thereby the wilde beast is forced by swift running
to lyll out the tong, or to breathe with his tong
out of his mouth : he shall paie to the king ten
shillings amends for the same offence : but if he
be a seruile person, then he shall double the same
recompence : but if he be a bondman, then he
shall lose his Skinne. ..."
" If a greedy rauening dogg shall bite a wild
beast, then the owner of the same dogg shall yeeld
a. recompence to the king for the same according
to the valew of a freeman which is twelue times a
hundred shillings. If a Roiall beast shall be bitten,
then the owner of the dogg shal be gilty of the
greatest offence. ..."
These laws were put in force by Forest Courts
maintained for the purpose of resisting encroach-
ments, and protecting the deer and the vert.
These were the Court of Attachment,1 or forty-day
court, presided over by four verderers, who were
chosen by the freeholders of the county, hearing
cases against offenders, in the first instance, and
dealing at once with offences when the damage
was not more than fourpence; the Court of
Swainmote, also presided over by the verderers,
but assisted by a jury of freeholders in the Forest,2
1 Some speak also of a Cheyne Court for the expeditation of
dogs.
2 In the Stowe Collection, recently acquired by the British
Museum, there is the transcript of a charge delivered to the
jury and officers constituting the Swainmote Court in 1634,
and the Court seems to have been presided over on that
occasion by one of the judges. It is probable that he was a
creature of Charles I., and that this unusual step was taken to
enable him to allay the rising irritation, felt at that time against
the Forest Laws, and the strained interpretation which Charles
sought to place upon them. A large part of the charge is
occupied by an elaborate vindication of the king's rights.