9. HOLDSWORTH: THE LAW MERCHANT 297 The Courts of Common Law sometimes, but rarely inter- fered in such matters.^ They had in fact no jurisdiction over contracts made or torts committed abroad.^ With respect to crimes committed out of the bodies of counties, the question how far the Common Law Courts had jurisdiction is perhaps more doubtful. Hale asserts that they did possess such jurisdiction before 1365. He cites eight cases of the reigns of Edward I., II., and HI.' These cases do not however completely prove Hale's position, as Cockburn, C. J., points out in Reg. v. Keyn.'^ It is not, however, improbable that, at a period when the court of Admiralty did not exist, the ordinary courts did sometimes exercise such jurisdiction. Criminal cases are still tried by a jury,'^ and in cases of piracy the commissioners are sometimes directed to proceed " secundum legem et consue- tudinem regni nostri." Generally, however, the procedure is " secundum legem mercatoriam," or, " maritimam." ® The maritime law is clearly a law apart from the common law and practically identified with the law of the mer- chants. ^ It would appear that in 1296 (case cited by Selden iii 1895) the Common Pleas declined to recognise the jurisdiction of the Admiral and asserted that it had general jurisdiction. The court said it could try a murder committed at sea as well as on the land when the mur- derer came to land. The MS. from which Selden cites has disappeared (Select Pleas of the Admiralty i xvii, xviii). 1322 action to recover damages for spoil at sea in the King's Bench (ibid xxiii). 1323 a case before the Bristol court moved by certiorari into the King's Bench (ibid xxiv).
- At the end of the 14th century it would appear that there was no
remedy for breach of charter party made abroad, Copyn v. Snoke (ibid, ii lix). In 1280 it was decided that the Common Law Courts had no jurisdiction over torts committed abroad (ibid ii xliii, xliv). •Hale, 2 P. C. 12-15.
- (1876) L. R. 2 Ex Div. 163-167. " It appears that of these eight
cases four were in the nature of a civil remedy, and, as it would seem were properly within the jurisdiction of the Court of King's Bench; four were cases of piracy, which may have been dealt with on the prin- ciple that piracy is triable anywhere and everywhere. Moreover as to two of the latter cases, it is doubtful whether the offence was not com- mitted within the body of a country, and therefore triable at common law." "Ibid i xxi, xxii, xxiv; Black Book of the Admiralty i 45, 49, 83. • Ibid i xvi. In 1377 a case of piracy is tried at common law " secun- dum legem et consuetudinem regni ac legem maritimam." There is a proviso that this is not to be an encroachment on the Admiral's rights, ibid i xlviii.
