92, THE KNIGHTS TEMPLARS
he must plead guilty to the crime charged against him or his
accuser must produce two witnesses who had actually seen
the accused commit the crime. The defendant could contest
the testimony by submitting other witnesses and, if these
witnesses were out of the country, could demand that the case
be adjourned for a year. If the accuser did not appear at the
end of that time, the case was dismissed; if the accused
absented himself or if he failed to produce his witnesses, he
was adjudged guilty.
A knight could demand trial by battle in a civil case and in
all criminal cases. Where accusations of murder, treason and
certain other crimes were made in which a knight was
involved, trial by battle was obligatory. God, it was felt,
would not allow the innocent to suffer or the traducer to
escape punishment. The fight might be on horseback or on
foot 5 and the Assizes laid down in great detail the appropriate
mode of fighting in specified crimes and the procedure to be
followed before and during the combat. A knight could
demand trial by combat against a commoner, but the
fight must then always be on foot, since the knight, trained
from youth to fight on horseback, would otherwise have too
great an advantage. While the Crusaders firmly believed
that God would strengthen the arm of the man who had
right on his side, the divine providence apparently could not
be expected to extend to horses.
Before trial by combat, the accuser swore the guilt of the
accused, who in turn swore his innocence of the charge.
Infamy was the lot of the vanquished or the coward in a civil
casej in a criminal case, the vanquished—whether he survived
or not—was hanged, and the same fate awaited him if he
cried for mercy. The victor in a fight was regarded as
innocent if he were the accused, or justified in his charge if
he were the complainant. An accuser or defendant who was
sixty years of age or who had lost a limb could choose a
champion to fight for him, and a woman was compelled to