thedebthasbeensatisfied。Ontheotherhand，severalfeatures
　　oftheIrishsystem，whicharewhollyabsentfromtheContinental
　　Teutonicprocedure，orveryfaintlymarkedinit，belong
　　conspicuouslytotheEnglishlaw。Amongthesemaybeplacedthe
　　impounding，andthe’takinginwithernam，’butthegreat。
　　Resemblanceofall，andthecommonpointofdissimilarityfrom
　　themostancientoftheLegesBarbarorum，liesinthefactthat
　　theIrishprocedure，liketheEnglish，requiresneither
　　assistancenorpermissionfromanyCourtofJustice。Inallthe
　　TeutonicbodiesofcustomexcepttheEnglishandtheLombardic，
　　evenwhenthegreatestlatitudeofseizureisallowedto
　　litigantsoutofCourt，some。judicialpersonorbodymustbe
　　appliedtobeforetheyproceedtoextremities。Withus，however，
　　theentireseizureiscompletedbeforeauthorityiscalledin；
　　andtheIrishlawhasexactlythesamepeculiarity。Notonlyso，
　　buttheIrishlawcorrespondstotheEnglishlawofDistressina
　　veryadvancedstageofdevelopment。Itdoesnotemploythe
　　seizureofcattlemerelyasamethodofextortingsatisfaction。
　　Itprovides，asyouhaveseen，fortheirforfeitureindischarge
　　oftheDemandforwhichtheyweretaken；andthusis
　　distinguishedbyanimprovementwhichwasonlyaddedtothe
　　Englishlawbystatuteafterthelapseofseveralcenturies。
　　ThetruedifficultyinestimatingtheplaceofthisIrish
　　procedureinthehistoricaldevelopmentoflawarisesfromdoubts
　　astothepartreallyplayedbythelegalproceedinginwhichit
　　terminated。TheEnglishprocessofdistress，whereveritwasfelt
　　tobeunjust，ledupto，andendedin，theactionofreplevin，
　　andthecourt，whichultimatelytriedtheaction，practically
　　acquireditsjurisdictionthroughtheinterpositionofthe
　　Sheriffinrestoringthecattleuponsecuritygiven。Nosuch
　　interferencewithahighhandasthatoftheSheriffappearsto
　　becontemplatedbytheIrishlaw。buttheBrehonlawyerwhoought
　　properlytoaccompanythedistrainorisexpresslystatedbythe
　　SenchusMortoaidhim’untilthedecisionofaCourt。’’Ancient
　　LawsofIreland，’i。85。Whatwastheproceedingthusreferred
　　to？WhatauthorityhadtheIrishCourtsatanytimeatwhichthe
　　Brehonlawwasheldinrespect？WhatweretheseCourts？Towhat
　　extentdidtheycommandthepublicforceofthesovereignState？
　　wasthereanysovereignpoweratanytimeestablishedinanypart
　　ofIrelandwhichcouldgiveoperativejurisdictiontoCourtsof
　　Justiceandoperativeforcetothelaw？Allthesequestions——of
　　whichthelastareintruththegreatproblemsofancientIrish
　　history——mustinsomedegreebeansweredbeforewecanhave
　　anything，likeaconfidentopinionontheactualworkingofthe
　　LawofDistresssetforthatsuchlengthintheSenchusMor。
　　ThelearnedEditorsofthevariousIntroductionsprefixedto
　　theofficialpublicationsofAncientIrishLawareplainlyof
　　opinionthatsuchjurisdictionasanyIrishCourtspossessedwas，
　　tousethetechnicalphrase，voluntary。TheLawofDistress，in
　　thisview，wasclearlyenoughconceivedbytheBrehonlawyer，but
　　itdependedforthepracticalobediencewhichitobtainedonthe
　　aidofpublicopinionandofpopularrespectforaprofessional
　　Caste。Itsobjectwastoforcedisputantstosubmittowhatwas
　　ratheranarbitrationthananaction，beforeaBrehonselectedby
　　themselves，oratmostbeforesomerecognisedtribunaladvisedby
　　aBrehon。Atthesametime，itwouldseemthatthereareancient
　　Irishtractsorfragmentsoftractsinexistencewhichdescribe
　　theancientIrishashavinghadamostelaboratepublic
　　organisation，judicialaswellaslegislative。DrSullivan，in
　　hisIntroduction，admitsthattheinformationwhichhascomedown
　　tousonthesesubjectsisveryfragmentary，andsoobscurethat
　　itwillbeimpossibletogiveasatisfactoryaccountofthem
　　untilthewholeofthelaw-fragmentsinIrishMSS。arepublished
　　oratleastmadeaccessibletoscholars；buthenevertheless
　　believesinthehistoricalrealityofthisorganisation，andhe
　　speaksIntroduction，pp。cclii。cclxii。oftheIrishCourtsin
　　languageofextremelymoderntinge。EnoughisknownofIrish
　　historytomakeitverydifficulttounderstandwhenthis
　　elaboratejudicialsystemcanhaveexisted；butaplaceisfound
　　foritbyattributingittoaperiodnotonlybeforethe
　　Anglo-NormaninvasionsofIreland，butbeforetheVikingdescents
　　ontheIrishcoasts。Thesafestcourseiscertainlytoreserve
　　one’sopiniononthesubjectuntiltheauthoritiesforDr
　　Sullivan’sstatementshavebeenmuchmorecriticallyexamined
　　thantheyhavebeen；butIamboundtosaythattheyarenotso
　　inherentlyimprobable，norareDrSullivan’sopinionssohardto
　　reconcilewiththeviewsoftheEditorsofthetranslations，as
　　personsunacquaintedwithlegalhistorymightsuppose。Thereare
　　analogiestomanyofthetribunalsdescribedamongthe
　　rudimentaryinstitutionsofseveralcommunities。Suchtribunals
　　mightfurtherbehighlydevelopedandyettheirjurisdiction
　　mightbeonlyvoluntary。Sohmappearstometohaveprovedthat
　　theFrankishPopularCourtsdidnotexecutetheirowndecrees；if
　　thedefendanthadpromisedtosubmittoanaward，thelocal
　　deputyoftheKingmightberequiredtoenforceit，but，ifthere
　　hadbeennosuchpromise，theplaintiffwasforcedtopetition
　　theKinginperson。Thereismuchreasoninfactforthinking
　　that，intheearliesttimesandbeforethefulldevelopmentof
　　thatkinglyauthoritywhichhaslentsomuchvigourtothearmof
　　thelawinmostAryancommunities，butwhichwasvirtuallydenied
　　totheIrish，CourtsofJusticeexistedlessforthepurposeof
　　doingrightuniversallythanforthepurposeofsupplyingan
　　alternativetotheviolentredressofwrong。Eventhenifwe
　　supposethattheIrelandwhichissaidtohaveenjoyedan
　　elaboratejudicialorganizationwasgreatlyruderandwilderthan
　　Irishpatriotswouldprobablyallowittohavebeen，thereisno
　　suchinconsistencybetweentheprevalenceofdisorderandthe
　　frequencyoflitigationaswouldmakethemexcludeoneanother。
　　TheNorseliterature，whichMrDasenthaspopularisedamongus，
　　showsthatperpetualfightingandperpetuallitigationmaygoon
　　sidebyside，andthatahighlytechnicalproceduremaybe
　　scrupulouslyfollowedatatimewhenhomicideisaneveryday
　　occurrence。ThefactseemstobethatcontentioninCourttakes
　　theplaceofcontentioninarms，butonlygraduallytakesits
　　place；anditisatenabletheorythatmanyofthestrange
　　peculiaritiesofancientlaw，thetechnicalsnares，traps，and
　　pitfallswithwhichitabounds，reallyrepresentandcarryonthe
　　feints，stratagems，andambuscadesofactualarmedstrifebetween
　　manandman，betweentribeandtribe。Eveninourownday，whena
　　wildprovinceisannexedtotheBritishIndianEmpire，thereisa
　　mostcuriousandinstructiverushofsuitorstotheCourtswhich
　　areimmediatelyestablished。Thearmofthelawsummarily
　　suppressesviolence，andthemenwhocannolongerfightgoto
　　lawinstead，innumberswhichsometimesmakeIndianofficials
　　believethattheremustbesomethingmaleficentinthelawand
　　procedurewhichtemptmenintoCourtwhoneversawaCourt
　　before。Thesimpleexplanationisthatthesamenaturalimpulse
　　isgratifiedinanewway；hastyappealstoajudgesucceed
　　hurriedquarrels，andhereditarylaw-suitstaketheplaceof
　　ancestralblood-feuds。Ifthetransitionfromonestateof
　　societytoanotherinmodernIndiawerenotsuddenbutgradual
　　andslow，asituniversallywasintheoldAryanworld，weshould
　　seethebattlewithtechnicalitiesgoingoninCourtatthesame
　　timethatthebattlewaswagedoutofCourtwithswordand
　　matchlock。
　　When，however，weareconsideringtheplaceinlegalhistory
　　oftheoldIrishLawofDistress，thepointtowhichwehaveto
　　attendisnotsomuchthemereexistenceofCourtsofJusticeas
　　theeffectivenessoftheirprocess，orinotherwordsthedegree
　　inwhichtheycommandthepublicforceoftheCommonwealth。I
　　thinkIhaveshownittobeprobablethat，inproportionas
　　Courtsgrowstronger，theyfirsttakeundertheircontrolthe
　　barbarouspracticeofmakingreprisalsonawrongdoerbyseizing
　　hisproperty，andultimatelytheyabsorbitintotheirown
　　procedure。Now，theIrishLawofDistressbelongsinonerespect
　　toaveryearlystageinthiscourseofdevelopment，sinceitis
　　evenmorecompletelyextrajudicialthanisthatfragmentofthe
　　primitivebarbarousremedywhichhassurvivedamongourselves。On
　　theotherhand，thereareseveralparticularsinwhichitisnot
　　morebutdistinctlylessarchaicthantheEnglishCommonlaw。The
　　’Notice’tothedefendant，forwhichitprovides——the’Stay，’
　　ortemporaryretentionofthegoodsbytheowner，subjecttoa
　　lien——thewitnesseswhohavetobepresent，andtheskilled
　　legaladviserwhohastoattendthroughouttheproceedings——
　　belongtoarangeofideasgreatlymoreadvancedthanthatunder
　　whichalltheseprecautionsaredispensedwith。Evenstronger
　　evidenceofmaturityisfurnishedbythealmostinconceivable
　　multitudeofrulesanddistinctionswhichtheSenchusMorapplies
　　toeverypartoftheproceedings；andourownexperienceshows
　　thatthemostremarkablefeatureoftheoldIrishlaw，the
　　forfeitureofthepropertytakenindistresswhentheoriginal
　　debtandtheexpensesofcustodycomeuptoitsfullvalue，has
　　itsplaceamongthelatestimprovementsinjurisprudence。
　　Whatever，then，bethetruthastotheIrelandofthegolden
　　age，thesecharacteristicsoftheIrishLawofDistressleaveon
　　mymindaverydistinctimpressionthatitwasbroughttothe
　　shapeinwhichwefinditamidasocietyinwhichtheactionof
　　CourtsofJusticewasfeebleandintermittent。Itsaysmuchfor
　　thespiritofequityandreasonablenesswhichanimatedtheBrehon
　　lawyerswhogaveititsform，andmuchalsofortheiringenuity，
　　butsuggeststhattheyreliedlittleontheassistanceofCourts
　　anddirectedtheireffortstomakingthemostofaremedywhich
　　wasalmostwhollyextrajudicial。ThecomparisonoftheTeutonic
　　lawsshowsthattheyhadabasisofAryancustomtoworkupon；
　　but，whileinothercommunitiesthesuperstructureonthis
　　foundationwastheworkofCourtseverfeelingthemselves
　　stronger，inIrelanditseemstohavebeentheworkoflawyers
　　dependentinthemainfortheusefulnessoftheirlabourson
　　popularrespectfortheirorder。Idonotaffecttosayhowthe
　　ancientlawofIrelandistobefittedtotheancienthistory。It
　　maybethatthepictureofjudicialorganisationfoundinsome
　　law-tractsis，likethedescriptionofprivatelawfoundin
　　others，ratherarepresentationofwhatoughttobethanofwhat
　　isorhasbeen。Itmaybealsothatthelawlaiddowninthe
　　SenchusMorisofmuchlaterdatethanthecompilersofthat
　　tractpretend，andthatthereforeitreceiveditsshapeintimes
　　ofdisturbanceandconfusion。ButIcannotbelievethatitever
　　synchronisedwithaperiodofjudicialactivityandefficiency。
　　FromwhatIhavesaidIthinkyouwillhavecollectedthe
　　chiefpointsofdifferencebetweentheIrishLawofDistress，as
　　laiddownintheSenchusMor，andtheenglishCommonLawof
　　Distress，asdeclaredbytheearliestauthoritieswhichour
　　Courtsrecognise。Bothhadthesameorigin，buttheIrish
　　distraintwasanuniversal，highlydevelopedproceedingemployed
　　inenforcingallkindsofdemands，whilethecorresponding
　　Englishremedy，thoughmuchlesscarefullyguardedbyexpress
　　rules，wasconfinedtoaverylimitedandspecialclassofcases。
　　Ihaveamelancholyreasonforcallingyourattentiontothe
　　contrast。EdmundSpenserhasspokenofit，inhis’Viewofthe