Page:MS V.b.104 137v.png

the offence, and as him self sholde have bene punished, yf he had
bene victored, or els requireth to have the accuser for his prisonner
as him self sholde have bene losinge the victorie. The question
demaunded of the Iudge is whether the demaunde of the accused
be iuste & reasonable, wherunto was answered, the first pte
of the demaunde was reasonable, & that he ought be absolued
& acquieted of the accusation, also the accuser ought to confesse
& pnounce him self a slaunderer, that vniustlie hath taken
armes against the gent accused, & therfore ought to receive
condemnacion as periured. Touching the seconde parte, where
he desireth to have him punished accordinge to the faulte obiected
the Ciuile lawes doe saye that everie slaunderer ought be punished
Concerninge the thirde where he requireth to have the accusor
prisonner, the request is not reasonable. ffor it suffizeth that
the accusor be condemned as a slaunderer, periured, & the accused
be acquite of the fault wth honnor. And albeit diuers lawes
doe saye, & the custome of Chevalrie hathe decreed, that the
accuser ought receive the punishements required by the accused.
yet when the Iudge enioyned him to suffer otherwise, that Iudge:
mente sholde suffize, for otherwise the punished shold for one
faulte, receive manie punishments. But yf this accuser
shall Challenge one other gent, he may be repulsed. And by the
constitucion of Federigo ought be punished for making such
Challenge. Also in the case abouesaide, the accusor shalbe
condemned in money for havinge rashlie defamed & chardged
the accuzed.

Whether a Prisonner is taken by a base soldier
oughte to be the prisonner of him selfe or
his capteine.

Ca. 16.