68
MEMOIRS OF THE SANSONS.
To this cross-bar is added a thick iron ring, in
which is passed a rope which fixes and retains
a ram. This is perpendicularly armed with a
sharp and broad blade, which gradually be-
comes broader on all its surface, so that instead
of striking perpendicularly, it strikes sideways,
so that there is not an inch of the blade that
does not serve. The ram weighs from sixty to
eighty pounds, and its weight is doubled when
it begins to slide down. It is inclosed in the
groove of the bars. A spring makes it fast to the
left bar; a band of iron descends along the out-
side of this same bar, and the handle is locked
to a ring with a padlock, so that no accident is
possible, and the weight only falls when the
executioner interferes. To a weigh-plank strong
straps are fastened, by which the criminal is
attached under the armpits and over the legs,
so that the body cannot move. As soon as the
weigh-plank goes down, the head, being be-
tween the bars, is supported by a rounded
cross-bar, the executioner's assistants lower an-
other rounded crossbar, the head being thus
grooved in a perfect circle, which prevents it
from moving in any way. This precaution is
indispensable, in regard to the terrible incon-
veniences of fear. The executioner then touches
the spring. The whole affair is done so quick-
ly that only the thump of the blade when it
slides down informs the spectators that the cul-
prit is no longer of the living. The head falls
into a basket full of bran, and the body is
pushed into another wicker basket lined with
very thick leather.
Although the guillotine was the common in-
strument of death, according to the law, hang-
ing was frequently resorted to during the Rev-
olution. "A la lanterne!" was a well-known
cry. It signified hanging from a gibbet to
which was attached a lantern. Foulon, the
Councilor of State, was the first who suffered in
this way.1 But the lantern was rather the in-
strument of summary justice.
JUDICIAL  ORDEALS AND  TORTURES.
In their search for the truth our ancestors
often trusted to hazard, and soon persuaded
themselves that its decrees came from the Di-
vinity. The duel or judicial combat was insti-
tuted at the time of the invasion of the barbari-
ans. The law of Burgundy decreed the duel
when the parties would not abide by the primi-
tive test of oath. Feudalism extended judicial
combat; women, children, and priests were
bound to bring forth a champion to sustain
their cause Dy arms. The ordeal which at first
only consisted in a struggle, was afterward at-
tended with solemn and specified formalities.
It was preceded by a challenge, uttered before
the tribunal; the person who asked for a judi-
cial duel, threw down a glove as a gage of bat-
tle. The judges who ordered the duel were
bound to. see it out. The champions, before
coming to blows, swore on the cross and missal
not to have recourse to magic in the just quar-
rel they were about to fight for. The weapons
differed according to classes: serfs were armed
with a stick or a knife, and had a shield of
leather called canevas ; squires used only sword
and shield. The conquered was regarded as
condemned by judgment of Heaven, and an ig-
nominious death awaited him if he did not
perish by the blows of his opponent. In certain
cases men, as well as women and children,
could defer a quarrel to champions. In 591,
Goutray ordered one of his chamberlains aud
one of his gamekeepers, who charged each other
with having killed a buffalo, to fight in the
lists. The chamberlain's champion and the
gamekeeper killed each other. The chamber-
lain, duly convicted of the crime by the death
of his champion, was chained to a post and
stoned. In certain cases a combat between a
mau and an animal was permitted. The judicial
duel was authorized in civil and criminal
actions. St. Louis attempted to substitute for
it proof by witnesses; and from the time of
Philippe Auguste as late as the seventeenth cent-
ury, the duel could only take {place with the
permission of the King.
One of the most celebrated instances of these
judicial combats was that of Jarnac and La
Châtaigneraie in 1547, under the.reign of Henry
1 The Abbé Maury was once pursued by a mob, who
cried "A la lanterne 1" "Do you think you can see
the clearer for putting me in the place of a lantern?"
said he. coolly. A general burst of laughter followed
this sally, which saved his life. It was by the hand of
this prelate that I was confirmed.—S.
IL, when Jarnac cut his antagonist's ham by a
blow which remained famous.
The so-called ordeals by the elements were
four in number:
1.   The ordeal of the cross, in use in France at
the beginning of the ninth century, consisted in
holding out one's arms cross-shape as long as
possible during divine service. He who re-
tained this position the longest had the better
of his opponent. In his will Charlemagne or-
dered that the judgment of the cross should be
resorted to in all quarrels that might arise out
of the division of his states between his chil-
dren.
2.   Ordeal by fire was one of the most solemn.
When it applied to writings the books were
thrown into the fire, and the orthodoxy or the
faUeness of their contents were judged by the
manner in which the works suffered the ordeal.
When the ordeal was applied to men, two piles,
of which the flames touched each other, were
erected side by side. The accused, with the
Host in his hand, rapidly traversed the flames,
and if he succeeded in accomplishing the peril-
ous journey, be was declared innocent. Among
the most noteworthy examples of this kind of
judgment, which al»so consisted in burning the
feet of the accused, or in exposing them bare
before an ardent brazier, I may quote Pierre
Barthélémy, who pretended, at the time of the
first crusade, that he had found the spike of the
holy lance; charged with falsehood, he crossed
through the flames with the Host in his hands,
and accomplished the test successfully—but it
is said that he died shortly after.
3.   Ordeal by cold or boiling water.—The first
of these tests was generally applied to people of
low condition. The prisoner heard mass, after
which the priest made him kiss the cross and
the gospel, and finally sprinkled him with holy
water. He was then undressed, his right hand
was tied to his left foot, and he was thrown in-
to the water. If he went to the bottom, as was
natural, he was reputed innocent; if, on the
other hand, he remained at the surface, it wal
said that the water would not take him, and he
was considered guilty. Ordeal by boiling water
consisted in placing a caldron full of water on
a large fire; when the water was in a state of
ebullition it was taken away from the flames, a
rope was tied above it to which was suspended
a ring, or any other object, which was then
lowered into the water at different depths. At
the first ordeal, the accused had only to plunge
his hand to catch hold of the ring; at the sec-
ond ordeal he plunged the arm up to the elbow;
and at the third all the arm. Wheu the ordeal
was accomplished, the sufferer's arm was in-
serted in a bag on which the judge imprinted
his seal, which was broken three days after,
and then, if any mark of burning was still ap-
parent, the accused was declared guilty; in the
other case, he was absolved.
4.   Ordeal by warm, hot, and red-hot iron.—
This ordeal consisted in taking with the hand
a heated iron, or in walking with bare feet on
burning iron. In the middle ages noblemen
and priests had recourse to it. The accused,
after fasting for three days, attended mass, and
was led to the part of the church where the or-
deal was to take place ; there he took the iron
which had been more or less healed, according
to the gravity of the crime ; he raised it two or
three times, or carried it more or less far, ac-
cording to the sentence. As in the preceding
test, his hand was thrust into a bag, and was
sealed for three days, and if it was without scar
the accused was declared innocent Ordeal by
red-hot iron consisted in putting on a red-hot
iron gauntlet, or in walking on iron bars, of
which the usual number was nine, but which
could be extended to twelve.
Ordeals founded on the belief that God al-
ways proved the innocence of the accused by a
miracle were abandoned in the thirteenth cent-
ury, when St. Louis declared that combat was
not a proof of right, and substituted evidential
proof for judicial tests. The traces of this in-
stitution, however, existed until the sixteenth
century.
There can be no doubt that torture was the
result of the ancient superstition which had
given birth to judicial ordeals. Torture com-
prised certain graduated torments inflicted upon
a prisoner either to compel him to confess his
crime, or to obtain the names of his accomplices.
While he was subjected to these sufferings, a
judge, standing close to the torturer or question-
naire, called upon the accused to say the truth,
and wrote down his declarations, whence the
name of question which was given to torture.
Question was of two sorts, either definite or pre-
These two categories were subdi.
vidëd into question ordinaire and extraordinaire.
Through the first it was sought to exact from
tbe accused the confession of his guilt; through
the second it was endeavored to discover the
names of the accomplices who had helped him.
in the perpetration of his crime. Torment car-
ried to a certain limit constituted question ordi-
naire; it was doubled in question extraordinaire,
wliich, as a rule, was only inflicted upon cul-
prits previously sentenced to death.
Torturers had multiplied the instruments of
punishment Further it may be seen that each
provincial parliament had its particular inflic-
tion, from which it could not depart. I shall
begin by dwelling on the more general species
of tortures, in which water, wood, fire, andiron
were always used.
Torture by water consisted in seating the cul-
prit on a stone stool, after his sentence had been
read to him. His wrists were attached behind
his back to two iron rings distant from each
other. All the cords then entwined round his
limbs and body were then pulled as much as
possible, and when the body of the sufferer
could not be stretched any more, a trestle was
placed under his back. The questionnaire held
a horn in one hand, and with the other he
poured water in, and obliged the criminal to
swallow four pints in question ordinaire, and
eight pints in question extraordinaire,   .
The boot was an instrument consisting of four
planks, between which the sufferer's leg wai
pressed. The planks were pierced with holes,
through which ropes were passed, so as to press
the planks together. The executioner then drove
wedges between the planks with a mallet, thus
compressing and even breaking the limbs of the
culprit. Ordinary torture included four wedges;
eight wedges were used in question extraordi-
naire.
The Parliament of Paris applied only two
kinds of torture, by water and boot. In Brit-
tanv, the sufferer was tied to an iron chair,
while his legs were brought by degrees in con-
tact with the fire. At Rouen, the thumb and
another finger, or the leg, were compressed ; at
Besançon, the horse, which consisted in a piece
of wood garnished with spikes, on which the
culprit was placed astride, was generally used.
At Autun torture was inflicted by pouring boil-
ing oil on the feet. Estrapade prevailed at Or-
leans.
France was the country in which torture pre-
vailed the longest. A declaration, dated Octo-
ber 24, 1780, abolished preparatory question,
and another decree (March 1, 1788) did away
with torture altogether.
THE EXECUTIONER.
In the primitive times of French society, the
man on whom devolved the sad mission of put-
ting criminals to death, or exacting confession
by torture, took the name of Executioner of
High Justice, because high judges and also royal
judges alone had the right to pass senteuce of
death. In 1323 executioners were also designated
as commissaires spiculateurs. It was only under
Louis XL that the epithet of Bourreau was ap-
plied to the executioner. Before the Revolution
he was considered as a servant of the State, and
held letters patent signed by the King. Custom
had established a degree of hierarchy in tbe pro-
fession. When the King had chosen a new exe-
cutioner, the letters of nomination were thrown
on the table by the wax-chafers of the high
chancellor's office, and the executioner was to
pick them up. The custom was abolished in
1645, and the title of executioner was given
from hand to hand to the holder. The heads-
man was sworn before the court of his place of
residence, and was nominated after ample in-
formation had been obtained concerning his
habits, conduct, and piety. As a rule he was
not allowed to reside iu town, unless he took up
his residence iu the house of pillory, which was
assigned to him as his quarters.
In certain localities he wore a costume con-
sisting in a jacket bearing the arms of the town,
with a ladder embroidered on the breast, and a
gibbet on the back. The office of executioner
was not in France, as in Spain, strictly hered-
itary; but for many reasons not difficult to im-
agine, it will be readily understood that the func-
tion seldom passed out of a family when they
had once got into it. This respect of directana
legitimate succession went so far as to admit of
kind of minority in the monopoly of the scat-
fold, and this led to a decision of which the
sacrilegious horror was not probably realized