Inaugural Address. XXIIE 
particular custom, there was an absolute necessity for a re- 
course to parole testimony, by which means all questions of 
Law became mere questions of fact, in which he who held the 
affirmative was required to prove what he asserted, by the 
production of ten witnesses at least.(1) 
In such an enquiry, which was called an “ Enquéle per 
turbes,” so much depended upon the influence and industry 
of the suitors, and upon the experience and integrity of the 
witnesses, that it was, at all times, difficult to come to the 
truth, especially when evidence was adduced by both parties ; 
in such cases equal proof was sometimes made of two cus- 
toms, in cirect opposition to each other, in the same place, 
and upon the same fact.(2) 
The reduction of the whole to writing was pointed out, by 
reference to the Roman Law, as an effectual remedy for these 
evils, and was adopted. At first the usages of certain Baili- 
wicks were collected by individuals:—Pierre Desfontaines 
(the earliest writer on the Law of France,) published his 
** Conseil,”’ which contains an account of the customs of the 
country of Vermandois, and Beaumanoir, the ‘* Coustumes 
de Beauvoisis,’ during the reign of St. Louis, which began 
in the year 1226.(3) These works were followed by others 
of the sam2 deseription,(4) and by one of a public natuye, 
€* Les élablissemens de St. Louis,” which contained a large 
collection of the Law and customs which prevailed within the 
Royal Domaines, and was published by the authority of that 
Monarch .(5) 
The compilations of individuals could have no weight in 
the King’s Courts, except what they derived from the truth 
and notoriety of the subjects upon which they wrote; yet it 
cannot 
(1) Fleury’s Hist. du Droit Francois, p. 85, Ferriére’s gd. Com, vol. 1st. 
p- 5, sec. 2, art. 1. 
(2) Fleury's Histoire du Droit Frangois, p. 85, 
(3) Robertson's Charles V. vol. Ist. p. 317. 
(4) Montesquieu, Lib. 28. ch, 45. vol. 2d. p. 324, 
(5) Dictionnaire de Jurisprudence, vol, 3. 
