LES GRANDS JOURS. THE GRANDS JOURS were a sort of special criminal assizes of two kinds, the one ROYAL, the other, SIGNIORAL; but the latter, though so similar in name, appear to have been very different in their uses from those ordered by the monarch, of which indeed they are but an imitation. They were established, in virtue of an ordinance of Roussillon, which forbids the nobles to have two classes of jurisdiction in the same place, and there was a power of appeal from them to the parliament. The right of holding these Signioral courts was also accorded in ancient days by the king to the princes of the blood royal, and sometimes in virtue of a special authority to that effect they were constituted courts of final judgment. The Royal Grands Jours date from the early times of the French monarchy; they were ordinary, but sovereign, tribunals, established by the kings in the form of solemn and especial sessions, and over which they themselves presided to pronounce definitive judgment in all criminal, as well as civil, cases. Under the monarchs of the first and second race, they were composed of a certain number of persons chosen and deputed by the sovereign, much as the commissioners, called Missi Dominici.* These judges were sent into the remote provinces to enquire into the conduct of the dukes, counts, and other principal nobles, to receive any complaints made against them, and to reform whatever abuses had crept into the administration of justice or the finances, to the detriment of the public weal. They used formerly to be held at stated periods, and in some respects they bore a resemblance to the assizes. The object of both was the same, but they differed essentially in the extent of their power, the Grands Jours pronouncing judgment without appeal, in addition to which, while the assizes were each attached to its particular jurisdiction, the former, as we have already seen, were an extraordinary tribunal, without any fixed establishment, and were constituted by letters patent submitted to the form of registration. We find it recorded of Louis XII. that he revived them to repress the continued attacks of the nobles upon his authority, commanding by an especial ordinance that they should be held once a year in all the towns and villages where it previously had been the custom to establish them. In a short time however they would * There appears to have been no difference in the judicial powers of the two, the "Missi Dominici," or Royal Commissioners, being of the same class and having the same objects as the nobles and men of influence deputed to hold the Grands Jours. Du Cange tells us that the Missi Dominici were sent "ut in comitum et judicum pravitates inquirerent," that they should enquire into the corruptions of the magistrates and judges-" in ipsos etiam episcopos et abbates inquirebant," they looked after the bishops and abbots—" curabant ut provinciæ latronibus ac prædatoribus purgarentur," they took care that the provinces should be cleared from thieves and robbers-and finally "seligebantur ex ditioribus et honoratioribus palatii, ne si pauperiores essent, muneribus corrumperentur," they were chosen from the richest and most respected of the court, lest if they were poor they should be corrupted by presents. seem to have fallen again into disuse, the last that were ever held being at Clermont for Auvergne in the end of the year 1665 and the commencement of the year 1666, as also at Limoges for Limousin in 1668, and at Puy-enVelay for Languedoc. About this period the wars both civil and foreign, which had for thirty years before desolated France, had produced a general state of license wherein the strong universally plundered and oppressed the weak. This evil was not a little aggravated by the marauding habits of the nobles, the difficulty of getting at offenders from the universal absence of good roads, and the general want of strength in the government. The laws were thus in many places reduced to a dead letter, and the most frightful disorder reigned in every department, but more particularly in Auvergne, which being remote from the central power of government could get little aid from the provincial judges. With them bribery and the influence of rank or connexions were unbounded, and under the circumstances just mentioned they might be well called devoid of all responsibility. To such a height had this evil attained, that Louis XIV. at length resolved to interfere, and on the thirty-first of August, 1665, he established a sitting of the Grands Jours at Clermont in Auvergne. The account of their proceedings we owe to the Abbe Flechier, afterwards Bishop of Nismes, who accompanied one of the members, M. de Caumartin, in the capacity of tutor to his son, from whom the father was unwilling to be separated. According to the details afforded by him, this tremendous tribunal struck a wholesome terror into offenders, many of whom preferred being convicted of contumacy to awaiting the probable results of its judgment. Nor had they who remained and appeared any great cause to rejoice in the wisdom of their election. Punishments of all kinds were dealt out with an unsparing hand, and the executions even were numerous, proving plainly enough that the social ulcer was both deep and dangerous. But amidst these details we have others of a less gloomy nature, the Abbe amusing himself mightily with the gossip of the town and the awkward manners of the provincials. "When the ladies of the city," says the author of the Abstract, came to visit the commissioners, the Abbe Flechier, who observed every thing with inquisitive eyes, was present, and the manner in which he paints this scene, so novel to him, is exceedingly pleasant. The ladies arrived in troops that they might keep each other in countenance and be less remarked. Their manner of presenting themselves, their awkward and confused air, their arms hanging straight down, or crossed immovably upon the bosom, their costume in which the fashions of the day were carried to excess, as is the habit of provincials when they plume themselves on dressing well, the affectation of standing in a circle, according to the rank of their husbands, or the date of their marriage; nothing, in short that can complete the picture of perfect absurdity, escapes his observation.” Much more there is to the same effect-how the judges gave balls to the ladies, or accompanied them to the theatre, in the evening, and the next morning dealt out justice upon all offenders-how the prisons were full and the condemnations numerous-and how the alarm reached its height when instead of confining themselves, as had been expected, to lay criminals, the judges set about reforming the clergy, and rectifying the abuses that had crept into the chapters and monasteries of both sexes. But even the epitome of these things is much too long for our purpose, and the reader therefore is referred to the works of Flechier himself. THE MONTHS-APRIL. WRITERS are by no means agreed in their derivation of the Latin name assigned to this month. Ovid stoutly maintains that it was called April from the Greek name of Venus, ̓Αφροδίτη, the deity having been born of ἀφρὸν, i. e. the sea-foam.* At the same time he notices, although with the contempt becoming a descendant of Venus, that there were some who endeavoured to rob the goddess of her just rights by deriving the month from aperire, to open, because at this season the spring uncloses everything, and the prolific earth is open to receive the seeds.† Macrobius gives us a variety of derivations for the word. First he says that as Romulus called the first month of the year March after his father, Mars, so he named the second month April, in honour of the mother of Æneas; but he admits that some have imagined the founder of Rome to have been influenced by other and more ab "Sed Veneris mensem Graio sermone notatum P. Ovidii Nasonis Fastorum, lib. iv., v. 61. P. Ovid. Nas. Fast., lib. iv., v. 85-90. |