is, every seventh day.  The summons was issued four times, after which, if the accused did not appear, he lost the right of counterplea, or was nonsuited.  The Salic law allowed but two summonses before a count, which had to be issued at an interval of forty nights the one from the other.  The third, which summoned the accused before the King, was issued fourteen nights later, and if he had not put in an appearance before sunset on the fourteenth day, he was placed hors de sa parole, his goods were confiscated, and he forfeited the privilege of any kind of refuge.

Among the Visigoths justice was equally absolute from the count to the tithe-gatherer.  Each magistrate had his tribunal and his special jurisdiction.  These judges called to their assistance assessors or colleagues, either rachimbourgs, who were selected from freemen; or provosts, or echevins (scabini), whose appointment was of an official and permanent character.  The scabins created by Charlemagne were the first elected magistrates.  They numbered seven for each bench.  They alone prepared the cases and arranged as to the sentence.  The count or his delegate alone presided at the tribunal, and pronounced the judgment.  Every vassal enjoyed the right of appeal to the sovereign, who, with his court, alone decided the quarrels between ecclesiastics and nobles, and between private individuals who were specially under the royal protection.  Criminal business was specially referred to the sovereign, the missi, or the Count Palatine.  Final appeal lay with the Count Palatine in all cases in which the public peace was endangered, such as in revolts or in armed encounters.

As early as the time of the invasion, the Franks, Bavarians, and Visigoths, when investigating cases, began by an inquiry, and, previously to having recourse to trials before a judge, they examined witnesses on oath.  Then, he who swore to the matter was believed, and acquitted accordingly.  This system was no doubt flattering to human veracity, but, unfortunately, it gave rise to abuses; which it was thought would be avoided by calling the family and friends of the accused to take an oath, and it was then administered by requiring them to place their hands on the crucifix, on some relics, or on the consecrated Host.  These witnesses, who were called conjuratores, came to attest before the judges not the fact itself, but the veracity of the person who invoked their testimony.

[Illustration:  Fig. 300.—­The Judicial Duel.  The Plaintiff opening his Case before the Judge.—­Fac-simile of a Miniature in the “Ceremonies des Gages des Batailles,” Manuscript of the Fifteenth Century in the National Library of Paris.]

The number and respectability of the conjuratores varied according to the importance of the case in dispute.  Gregory of Tours relates, that King Gontran being suspicious as to the legitimacy of the child who afterwards became Clotaire II., his mother, Fredegonde, called in the impartial testimony of certain nobles.  These, to the number of three hundred, with three bishops at their head (tribus episcopis et trecentis viris optimis), swore, or, as we say, made an affidavit, and the queen was declared innocent.