Anglo-Saxon Institutions.   449-1066 67
But it is to be remarked here that an examination of the
make-up of these court assemblies will show that many
of the same men had to go to both hundred and shire,
some to both hundred and manor, and some to both
shire and borough.   There were probably other duplica-
tions, and we do not know how much in the way of market
or inferior borough courts.   In all courts the critical de-
cisions—when the case should end, who should furnish
proofs, and what the proofs should be—lay with the
people.   They were the courts; neighbours judged one an-
other.   In connection with the whole procedure, espe-
cially perhaps in connection with the tariff of fines, the
people must know much law, or call it the legal lore, of the
locality.   They must keep up also with those amendments
and additions which king and witan were making, the
written laws.   As to the litigants, a man conducted Ms
own case from summons to collection of fine, or he de-
fended himself in litigation; and success depended upon
knowledge and observance of form.   Litigation may seem
to us occasional and largely voluntary, but in this early
society there was little routine protection of person or
property: on many occasions in a man's life he would prob-
ably have to litigate or fight or suffer wrong.   In the liti-
gation of others there was great force of moral obligation
or social pressure which drew men in.   They might be
asked to come in the suit of witnesses which established
a prima facie case, they might be called upon to witness
sales with much chance of bearing testimony on the
matter later in court, and especially in compurgation
men were constantly coming to court for their neighbours
(for compurgation was ceasing to be an affair of the kin),
and often ran great moral risks.
Something has been said of the hue and cry and surety-
ship,1 and something more must be said here, for these
vffl. They embody an important representative idea, and we wonder how
the four men were chosen. It is one of the earliest traces of the represen-
tation of a group by any of its own members, and it shows somes kmd.<&
public function performed by men, most of whom would not be freemen.
1 See above, pp. 18, 19.