Willis: Anglo-American Law 
97 
paid, and the covenant to stand seised where there was no 
other consideration than relationship of blood or marriage, in 
both of which cases the man seised of an estate of freehold 
covenanted to stand seised of the land to the use of another, 
as in the declaration of modern trusts. After the passage of 
the Statute of Uses these equitable forms of conveyance be- 
came common law forms of conveyance. 
Agency* In this period the law of representation, or 
agency, rested upon the basis of commanded acts, 29 that is, 
the master in torts and crimes and the principal in contracts 
was liable only where the servant or agent did what he was 
told to do, or his act was ratified afterwards. The ancient 
law, which made the master absolutely liable for the acts of 
his slaves and free members of his household, disappeared 
after the Conquest with the disappearance of slavery; it did 
not apply to the acts of Villeins : and the more modern doctrine 
of representation had not as yet developed. 
Bailments. The bailee’s liability to the bailor in this period 
was probably that of absolute insurer, 30 owing to the fact that 
the remedy and the only remedy given the bailor against the 
bailee was detinue, under which the theory was that the bailee 
owed to the bailor the chattels bailed and he had either to 
return them or pay for them. The liability of innkeepers for 
injury to guests did not arise until as late as 1584. 
Torts. In the law of torts, the rule in this period was 
absolute liability. The tort law, like criminal law, was written 
in blood. The law did not ask whether an act had been com- 
mitted in self-defense, but only whether the act had been com- 
mitted. If it had, the guilty party had to make reparation. 
If he thought he had a defense, he had to sue in an independent 
action. This was the Strict Period of Anglo-American law! 
Practically the only tort known to English law prior to the 
sixteenth century was the tort of trespass. There was no 
redress for negligence, nuisance, slander, libel, and deceit until 
the sixteenth century. Other torts, like malicious prosecu- 
tion, alienation of affections, violation of copyright, and pro- 
curing breach of contracts, were not recognized at all in this 
period. 
Remedies. The thing which the common law emphasized 
in the Strict Period was remedies, which meant writs, for if 
29 7 Harv. L Rev. 330, 332, 335, 384. 
30 Southcotes Case, 4 Coke 83 b. 
7—36004 
