[原创] blackstone《英格兰法律解释》第四卷第15章翻译（草稿）

WIND

在个人非正义或曰世俗伤害审判方面，通常的法庭为：共同法及公正的公共法庭（Public Court of Common Law And Equity）； 在公共非正义方面，通常的法庭为：罪的审判法庭。财产的损害一般的归于前者审判，人身侵犯一般的归于后者审判。在美国，公共非正义由执行权力总统的下级官员司法部长向司法权力的法庭提起诉讼。当然，首先我们必须了解一点，美国联邦政府经联邦宪法授权设立，各州均有自己的州宪法及相应的州政府。所以，在州内，公共非正义由州长的下级官员向州法庭提起诉讼。

BOOK 4, CHAPTER 15
OF OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSONS OF INDIVIDUALS
论对个人人身的侵犯

WIND

HAVING in the preceding chapter considered the principal crime or public wrong, that can be committed against a private subject, namely, by destroying his life; I proceed now to inquire into such other crimes and misdemeanors, as more peculiarly affect the security of his person, which living.
在前一章中已经考虑了一种对私人所实施的主要的罪行或公共非正义，即毁灭他的生命； 接下来我继续深究其它的重罪和轻罪，以各种各样的方式影响到对人身的保障。

OF these some are felonious, and in their nature capital; others are simple misdemeanors, and punishable with a lighter animadversion. Of the felonies the first is that of mayhem.
其中，有些就其主要的性质来说是严重的；其它的则是简单的轻罪，只需要施以更轻微的惩罚。重罪（felony）的第一条是人身伤害罪（mayhem，据英文维基，英格兰法律体系在1998年废弃了这一词，归入“offences against the person”之下）

WIND

I. MAYHEM, mahemium, was in part considered in the preceding volume,1 as a civil injury: but it is also looked upon in a criminal light by the law; being an atrocious breach of the king's peace, and an offense tending to deprive him of the aid and assistance of his subjects. For mayhem is properly defined to be, as we may remember, the violently depriving another of the use of such of his members, as may render his the less able in fighting, either to defend himself, or to annoy his adversary.2 And therefore the cutting off, or disabling, or weakening a man's hand or finger, or striking out his eye or foretooth, or depriving him of those parts, the loss of which in all animals abate their courage, are held to be mayhems. But the cutting off his ear, or nose, or the like, are not held to be mayhems at common law; because they do not weaken but only disfigure him.
I. 人身伤害，作为一种世俗伤害在前一卷中有所考虑：但是它也被法律视为一种犯罪；被认为是一种对国王的和平的凶残破坏，和意图使国王丧失他的臣民的支持和帮助的一种侵犯。因为我们可能会记得，人身侵犯是这样被恰当的定义的，即暴力剥夺另一个人对他的肢体的使用，以削弱他的战斗能力，也许是为了自我防御，也许是为了困扰他的敌人。所以，切掉，或使丧失能力，或弱化一个人的手或指头，或打掉他的眼睛或门牙，或使他丧失那些肢体，所有动物丧失这些都会挫伤他们的勇气，均归于人身伤害。但是切掉他的耳朵，或鼻子，或诸如此类的部分，在共同法中并不归于人身伤害；因为它们没有弱化而只是毁了容。

BY the ancient law of England he that maimed any man, whereby he lost any part of his body, was sentenced to lose the like part; membrum pro membro [limb for limb]:3 which is still the law in Sweden.4 But this went afterwards out of use: partly because the law of retaliation, as was formerly shown,5 is at best an inadequate rule of punishment; and partly because upon a repetition of the offense the punishment could not be repeated. So that, by the common law, as it for a long time stood, mayhem was only punishable with fine and imprisonement;6 unless perhaps the offense of mayhem by castration, which all our old writers held to be felony; "et sequitur aliquando poena capitalis, aliquando perpetuum exilium, cum omnium bonorum ademptione."7 ["And sometimes capital punishment follows, sometimes perpetual exile with the loss of all his goods."] And this, although the mayhem was committed upon the highest provocation.8
英格兰的古老法律规定，一个人若使任何人残废，因而丧失他身体的任何肢体，将被判决丧失同样的部分；肢体对肢体：这仍然是瑞典的法律。但是（英格兰）后来废除了这一法律：部分的是因为之前说明过的报复性法律，已经尽可能的成为足够的惩罚规则；部分的是因为惩罚并不能单纯的重复侵犯。所以，通过共同法——它在很长的一段时期内有效——人身伤害仅仅通过罚金和监禁进行惩罚；除非人身侵犯伤害到了男性生殖器，对此所有我们的过去的写作者都将它归于重罪；“有时会处死，有时会永久驱逐，连同丧失财产。”虽然受到严重的挑衅，这样的人身伤害亦不可宽恕。

WIND

BUT subsequent statutes have put the crime and punishment of mayhem more out of doubt. For, first, by statute 5 Hen. IV. c. 5. to remedy a mischief that then prevailed, of beating, wounding, or robbing a man, and them cutting out his tongue or putting out his eyes, to prevent him from being an evidence against them, this offense is declared to be felony, if done of malice prepense; that is, as Sir Edward Coke9 explains it, voluntarily and of set purpose, though done upon a sudden occasion. Next, in order of time, is the statute 37 Hen. VIII. c. 6. which directs, that if a man shall maliciously and unlawfully cut off the ear of any of the king's subjects, he shall not only forfeit treble damages to the party grieved, to be recovered by action of trespass at common law, as a civil satisfaction; but also 10£ by way of fine to the king, which was his criminal amercement. The last statute, but by far the most severe and effectual of all, is that of 22 & 23 Car. II. c. 1. called the Coventry act; being occasioned by an assault on Sir John Coventry in the street, and slitting his nose, in revenge (as was supposed) for some obnoxious words uttered by him in parliament. By this statute it is enacted, that if any person shall of malice aforethought, and by lying in wait, unlawfully cut out or disable the tongue, put out an eye, slit the nose, cut off a nose or lip, or cut off or disable any limb or member of any other person, with intent to maim or to disfigure him; such person, his counselors, aiders, and abettors, shall be guilty of felony without benefit of clergy.

但是后来的法案将这种人身伤害的罪行和惩罚变得更加确定无疑。因为，第一，通过亨瑞四世（1367–1413）第5年法案第5章来纠正伤害逐渐流行开来，对殴打，伤害或抢劫他人，他们将切除他的舌头或挖掉他的眼睛，为防止他成为反对他们的证据，这种侵犯被宣布为重罪，如果恶意预谋的话；Sir爱德华•柯克是这样解释“恶意蓄谋”的：那是自主（voluntarily）和有确定目的的，虽然抓住的是突然的机会。接下来，是亨瑞八世（1491-1547）第37年法案第6章所引导的，即如果一个人恶意和非法的切除任何国王臣民的耳朵，他将不仅罚处三倍损失给受害者，以从共同法上的侵害行为中康复，作为一种世俗方案；而且罚处10英镑给国王，以作他罪的罚金。最后一部最严厉和有效的法案，是查理二世（1630–1685）第22 & 23年法案第一章被称为“考文垂法案”（Coventry act）；因Sir考文垂在街上被袭击引起，有人袭击并切开了他的鼻子，以报复（只是猜测）他在国会上所作的令人讨厌的言辞。通过这部法案规定，即如果任何人恶意预谋，并伺机非法切掉他人的舌头或丧失其能力，挖除眼睛，割裂鼻子，切除鼻子或嘴唇，或切除任何肢体或丧失其能力，意图使其残废或毁容；对于这样的人，以及他的建议者，协助者和教唆者，将被判处重罪，且得不到牧师的帮助。

WIND

THUS much for the felony of mayhem: to which may be added the offense of wilfully and maliciously shooting at any person, which may endanger either killing or maiming him. This, though no such evil consequence ensues, is made felony without benefit of clergy by statute 9 Geo. I. c. 22. and thereupon one Arnold was convicted in 1723, for shooting at lord Onslow; but, being half a madman, was never executed, but confined in prison, where he died about thirty years after.

人身伤害重罪就说这么多：对此也许应该加上肆意和恶意的对他人进行枪击的侵犯，这可能会置人于被杀或残废的危险之中。这，虽然可能没有恶意，但是被乔治一世第9年法案第22章规定为重罪，且得不到牧师的帮助；阿诺德（Arnold）枪击领主翁斯诺（Onslow），根据这部法案在1723年被定罪；不过，因为他是半个疯子，没有被处死，而是被监禁，30年之后死于狱中。

WIND

II. THE second offense, more immediately affecting the personal security of individuals, relates to the female part of his majesty's subjects; being that of their forcible abduction and marriage; which is vulgarly called stealing an heiress. For by statute 3 Hen. VII. c. 2. it is enacted, that if any person shall for lucre take any woman, maid, widow, or wife, having substance either in goods or lands, or being heir apparent to her ancestors, contrary to her will; and afterwards she be married to such misdoer, or by his consent to others, or defiled; such person, and all his accessories, shall be deemed principal felons: and by statute 39 Eliz. c. 9. the benefit of clergy is taken away from all such felons, except accessories after the offense.

II. 第二种更直接的影响到对个人人身保障的侵犯，与国王臣民的女性部分有关；以暴力相威胁的诱骗和婚姻；这通常的被称为“偷女继承人”。因为通过亨瑞七世（1457–1509）第3年法案第2章规定，即如果任何人为钱财取得任何拥有物品或土地的女人，未婚女子，丧夫女子或他人的妻子，或者成为她父辈表面上的继承人，但是违背她的意志；之后她嫁给这样的行为不正者，或经他的同意嫁给他人，或遭到凌辱；这样的人，以及所有他的协从者，应当被判为一级重罪犯：通过伊丽莎白第39年法案第9章规定：所有这样的重罪犯将得不到牧师的帮助，侵犯之后的协从者除外。

WIND

IN the construction of this statute it has been determined, 1. That the indictment must allege that the taking was for lucre, for such are the words of the statute.11 2. In order to show this, it must appear that the woman has substance either real or personal, or is an heir apparent.12 3. It must appear that she was taken away against her will. 4. It must also appear, that she was afterwards married, or defiled. And though possibly the marriage or defilement might be by her subsequent consent, being won thereunto by flatteries after the taking, yet this is felony, if the first taking were against her will:13 and so vice versa, if the woman be originally taken away with her own consent, yet if she afterwards refuse to continue with the offender, and be forced against her will, she may, from that time, as properly be said to be taken against her will, as if she never had given any consent at all.14 5. It is held that a woman, thus taken away and married, may be sworn and give evidence against the offender, though he is her husband de facto [in fact]; contrary to the general rule of law: because he is no husband de jure [in law], in case the actual marriage was also against her will.15 In cases indeed where the actual marriage is good, by the consent of the inveigled woman obtained after her forcible abduction, Sir Matthew Hale seems to question how far her evidence should be allowed: but other authorities16 seem to agree, that it should even then be admitted; esteeming it absurd, that the offender should thus take advantage of his own wrong, and that the very act of marriage, which is a principal ingredient of his crime, should (by a forced construction of law) be made use of to stop the mouth of the most material witness against him.

这部法案的解释部分确定了：1. 起诉方必须指控这样的劫持是为了钱财，因为这就是法案的措辞。2. 为了表明这一点，必须有证据证明女人拥有真实的或个人的财产，或者是显然的继承人。3. 必须有证据证明她被劫持违背了她的意志。4. 也必须有证据证明，之后她结了婚，或被奸。虽然可能这种结婚或奸情是她被劫持后经甜言蜜语所同意的，这仍然是重罪，如果最初的劫持违背她的意志的话：相反，如果最初的劫持取得了她的同意，但是如果后来她拒绝继续服从侵犯者而被强迫，可以恰当的说，从这时起被劫持违背了她的意志，如同她从未给与任何同意。5. 这样被劫持和结婚的女人，可以起誓并作证控告侵犯者，虽然此时他是她事实上的丈夫；违背了一般的法律规则：因为他不是法律上的丈夫，在此案件中实际婚姻也违背了她的意志。在那些实际婚姻确实不错的案件中，对于女人被强制和诱骗劫持之后的同意，Sir马修•黑尔（1609–1676，英国法学家）似乎质疑她的作证究竟在多大的程度上被允许：不过其他的法官看起来都同意，应当对事实予以承认；确实有点荒谬，侵犯者可以这样的利用他的过错，而结婚的行为——他罪行的主要部分——被用来堵住了可指控他的最主要的证人。

WIND

AN inferior degree of the same kind of offense, but not attended with force, is punished by the statute 4 & 5 Ph. & Mar. c. 8. which enacts, that if any person, above the age of fourteen, unlawfully shall convey or take away any woman child unmarried, (which is held17 to extend to bastards as well as to legitimate children) within the age of sixteen years, from the possession and against the will of the father, mother, guardians, or governors, he shall be imprisoned two years, or fined at the discretion of the justices: and if he deflowers such maid or woman child, or, without the consent of parents, contracts matrimony with her, he shall be imprisoned five years, or fined at the discretion of the justices, and she shall forfeit all her lands to her next of kin, during the life of her said husband. So that as these stolen marriages, under the age of sixteen, were usually upon mercenary views, this act, besides punishing the seducer, wisely removed the temptation. But this latter part of the act is now rendered almost useless, by provisions of a very different kind, which make the marriage totally void,18 in the statute 26 Geo. II. c. 33.

同种侵犯的较低等级，没有使用强制，通过菲利普与玛丽（统治期间：1553–1558）第4 & 5年法案第8章规定，即如果任何满十四岁的人，非法的带走任何未婚的年龄在16岁以下的女性，（适用于合法结婚的父母所生的女儿，也适用于未婚的男女所生的女儿）违背她的父母，监护人或政府管理者的意志，他将被监禁2年，或处以法官慎重决定的罚金：如果他与这样的少女或未成年女性发生奸情，或者，未经其父母的同意与其结婚，他将被监禁5年，或处以法官慎重决定的罚金，并且，女方所有的土地权将丧失，在她所谓的丈夫的余生期间将转移至她最近的亲属。以至于，这些偷占的16岁以下的婚姻，通常的被认为是为钱财而来，这部法案，在惩罚诱骗者之外，明智的消除了引诱的东西。不过这部法案的后半部分现在已经无效，在乔治二世（1683-1760）第26年法案第33章中，规定了一种完全不同的惩罚方式——宣布这样的婚姻完全无效。

WIND

III. A THIRD offense, against the female part also of his majesty's subjects, but attended with greater aggravations than that of forcible marriage, is the crime of rape, raptus mulierum, or the carnal knowledge of a woman forcibly and against her will. This, by the Jewish law,19 was punished with death, in case the damsel was betrothed to another man; and, in case she was not betrothed, then a heavy fine of fifty shekels was to be paid to the damsels's father, and she was to be the wife of the ravisher all the days of his life; without that power of divorce, which was in general permitted by the Mosaic law.

III. 第三种对国王臣民的女性部分的侵犯，比强迫婚姻更凶残恶劣，是强奸罪，或曰违背女性的意志强迫与其性交。对此，犹太法律规定，在女性已与另一个男人订婚的情况下，处死；在她没有订婚的情况下，50舍克（shekel，犹太钱币单位）的巨大罚金将支付给女性的父亲，而她以后将成为强奸者的妻子；且没有离婚的权力，而一般的摩西法律允许离婚。

WIND

THE civil law punishes the crime of ravishment with death and confiscation of goods: under which it includes both the offense of forcible abduction, or taking away a woman from her friends, of which we last spoke; and also the present offense of forcibly dishonoring them; either of which, without the other, is in that law, sufficient to constitute a capital crime. Also the stealing away a woman from her parents or guardians, and debauching her, is equally penal by the emperor's edict, whether she consent or is forced: "sive volentibus, sive nolentibus mulieribus, tale facinus fuerit perpetratum." ["The crime will be the same whether the woman consent or not."] And this, in order to take away from women every opportunity of offending in this way; whom the Roman laws suppose never to go astray, without the seduction and arts of the other sex: and therefore, by restraining and making so highly penal the solicitations of the men, they meant to secure effectually the honor of the women. "Si enim ipsi raptores metu, vel atrocitate poenae, ab hujusmodi facinore fe temperaverint, mulli mulieri, sive volenti, sive nolenti, peccandi locus relinquetur; quia hoc ipsum velle mulierum, ab insidiis nequissimi hominis, qui meditatur rapinam, inducitur. Nisi etenim eam solicitaverit, nisi odiosis artibus circumvenerit, non faciet eam velle in tantum dedecus sese prodere." ["For if the ravisher be restrained from a crime of this nature, either by fear or severity of punishment, no opportunity is left for a woman to offend either willingly or unwillingly, because the desire is always raised in her by the wicked seductions of the man who meditates the violence. For unless he solicit her, unless he compass his design by odious arts, he could never make her wish to betray herself to such dishonor."] But our English law does not entertain quite such sublime ideas of the honor of either sex, as to lay the blame of a mutual fault upon one of the transgressors only: and therefore makes it a necessary ingredient in the crime of rape, that it must be against the woman's will.

世俗法律（指查士丁尼法典）对强奸罪行处以死刑并剥夺其财产：强奸罪包括强迫诱骗，或从她的朋友身边带走所进行的侵犯，这一种我们之前讲过；也包括强制性的羞辱她们的侵犯；只要犯有这其中的一种，在法律上便足以构成一级重罪。将女人从她的父母或监护人那里偷走，使其堕落放荡，被罗马皇帝的法律施以同等的惩罚，无论她同意还是被强迫：“无论女人同意与否，罪都一样。”这一点，是为了消除以这样的方式对女人进行侵犯的任何机会；罗马法律认为即使没有引诱和其它的性挑逗，她们也永远不应该走上歧途：所以，通过限制和对引诱的男人施以如此严厉的惩罚，他们意图有效的保障女人的尊严。“因为如果强奸者被这种性质的罪行——不是被惩罚的恐怖就是惩罚的严厉——所约束，将不会给他留下任何机会来侵犯女人，不管女人愿意与否，因为意图侵犯的男人的邪恶的引诱总是能够挑起女人的欲望。因为除非他引诱她，除非他通过丑恶的技巧达成他的预谋，否则他无法使她的意愿背叛她自己而丧失这样的尊严。”但是我们英格兰的法律并没有接受如此高尚的尊严观念，以致，将对双方共同所犯错误的谴责仅仅加诸其中的一方：所以，在强奸的罪行中有一项必要的条件，即必须违背女人的意志。

WIND

说到古罗马法律,主要指的便是查士丁尼法典,大英袖珍百科是这样解释的:

指拜占廷皇帝查士丁尼一世主持下于529～565年完成的法律和法律解释的汇编。严格说来，它并不构成一部新法典，只不过是查士丁尼法学家委员会搜集的二部参考文献:过去法律的汇编和对罗马大法学家意见的摘录。此外还有法律基本纲要以及查士丁尼自己所立新法的汇编。

WIND

布莱克斯通在对英格兰法律的历史现状进行解释的同时,也会对照提及摩西法律(犹太人中的法律)和古罗马法律.

WIND

RAPE was punished by the Saxon laws, particularly those of king Athelstan,21 with death: which was also agreeable to the old Gothic or Scandinavian constitutions.22 But this was afterwards thought too hard: and in its stead another severe, but not capital, punishment was inflicted by William the conqueror; viz. castration and loss of eyes;23 which continued till after Bracton wrote, in the reign of Henry the third. But in order to prevent malicious accusations, it was then the law, (and, it seems, still continues to be so in appeals of rape24) that the woman should immediately after, "dum recens fuerit maleficium" ["while the injury is recent"], go to the next town, and there make discovery to some credible persons of the injury she has suffered; and afterwards should acquaint the high constable of the hundred, the coroners, and the sheriff with the outrage.25 This seems to correspond in some degree with the laws of Scotland and Arragon,26 which require that complaint must be made within twenty four hours: though afterwards by statute Westm. 1 c. 13. the time of limitation in England was extended to forty days. At present there is no time of limitation fixed: for, as it is usually now punished by indictment at the suit of the king, the maxim of law takes place that nullum tempus occurrit regi [no time runs against the king]: but the jury will rarely give credit to a stale complaint. During the former period also it was held for law,27 that the woman (by consent of the judge and her parents) might redeem the offender from the execution of his sentence, by accepting him for her husband; if he also was willing to agree to the exchange, but not otherwise.

强奸被萨克森（Saxon）的法律尤其是国王阿瑟尔斯坦（Athelstan ，895-939）的法律处以死刑：这与古老的哥斯人（Goth）或斯堪的纳维亚人（Scandinavia）的宪法是一致的。但是后来这被认为太严厉了：代之以征服者威廉所施加的另一种严厉但不是一级的惩罚，即切除生殖器并挖掉眼睛；这持续到——布拉克顿后来写道——亨瑞三世（1216～1272）统治期间。但是为了阻止恶意的指控，法律于是规定（在指控强奸的案件中似乎后来一直都是这样），女人应当在“伤害发生之后”立即到就近的城镇，寻找一些可证明其伤害的可靠的证人；随后向百人警官，法医，警长陈述其所遭受的凌辱。这看起来在某种程度上与苏格兰和阿拉贡（Arragon）的法律是一致的，它们要求这种抱怨必须在伤害发生之后24小时之内提出：不过后来通过威斯敏斯特第1部法案第13章在英格兰将时间限制延长到了40天。现在已经没有固定的时间限制了：因为现在通常由国王提起诉讼加以惩罚，法律有一句格言——时间不能反对国王：但是审判团很少会相信陈旧的抱怨。以前法律还有这样一条，即女人（经法官和她父母的同意）可以将侵犯者从死刑中挽救回来，以接受他做她的丈夫；如果他也愿意赞同这种交易的话，但不是别的方式。

WIND

IN the 3 Edw. I. by the statute Westm. 1. c. 13. the punishment of rape was much mitigated: the offense itself being reduced to a trespass, if not prosecuted by the woman within forty days, and subjecting the offender only to two years imprisonment, and a fine at the king's will. But, this lenity being productive of the most terrible consequences, it was in ten years afterwards, 13 Edw I. found necessary to make the offense of rape felony, by statute Westm. 2. c. 34. And by statute 18 Eliz. c. 7. it is made felony without benefit of clergy: as is also the abominable wickedness of carnally knowing or abusing any woman child under the age of ten years; in which case the consent or non-consent is immaterial, as by reason of her tender years she is incapable of judgment and discretion. Sir Matthew Hale is indeed of opinion, that such profligate actions committed on an infant under the age of twelve years, the age of female discretion by the common law, either with or without consent, amount to rape and felony; as well since as before the statute of queen Elizabeth:28 but the law has in general been held only to extend to infants under ten.

在爱德华一世第3年（1275），通过威斯敏斯特第1部法案第13章，对强奸的惩罚减轻了很多：侵犯行为本身被降为侵害（trespass），如果在40天内没有遭到被强奸女人的起诉的话，且仅判处侵犯者2年监禁，及依国王意志处以一定的罚金。但是这种宽恕造成了很糟糕的后果，10年之后，爱德华一世第13年，立法者认为有必要将强奸侵犯定为重罪，通过威斯敏斯特第2部法案第34章及伊丽莎白（1533—1603）第18年法案第7章规定，强奸罪被定为重罪，且得不到牧师的帮助：对任何10岁以下的女童进行性经验或性虐待是极其恶劣的罪恶；在这种案件中同意与否已经完全没有什么意义了，因为在她稚嫩的年龄不具备判断和分辨的能力。Sir马修•黑尔（Matthew Hale，1609–1676，英国法学家）确实有这样的观点，即这样的放纵行为加诸12岁以下的女童，共同法判定，无论同意与否，均等同于强奸和重罪；伊丽莎白女王之前的法案也是这样：不过法律一般的仅仅对10岁以下的儿童有效。

WIND

A MALE infant, under the age of fourteen years, is presumed by law incapable to commit a rape, and therefore it seems cannot be found guilty of it. For though in other felonies malitia supplet aetatem [malice is equivalent to age], as has in some cases been shown; yet, as to this particular species of felony, the law supposes an imbecility of body as well as mind.

14岁以下的男童，被法律认为不具备强奸的能力，所以看起来他们就没有这种罪行。因为虽然在其它一些重罪中，恶意预谋不受年龄限制（malice is equivalent to age，暂时没有找到更好的译法），如同在一些案件中所表明的；然而就这种特别的重罪而言，法律认为他们的思想和身体都不具备强奸的能力。

WIND

THE civil law seems to suppose a prostitute or common harlot incapable of any injuries of this kind:30 not allowing any punishment for violating the chastity of her, who has indeed no chastity at all, or at least has no regard to it. But the law of England does not judge so hardly of offenders, as to cut off all opportunity of retreat even from common strumpets, and to treat them as never capable of amendment. It therefore holds it to be felony to force even a concubine or harlot; because the woman may have forsaken that unlawful course of life:31 for, as Bracton well observes,32 "licet meretrix fuerit antea, certe tunc temporis non suit, cum reclamando nequitiae ejus consentire noluit." ["Although a harlot formerly, she surely was not then, when by crying out she showed herself unwilling to consent to his wickedness."]

查士丁尼法典看起来认为，一个妓女（prostitute，common harlot）没有能力受到这种伤害：不允许对侵犯她的贞操（chastity）——事实上她就没有贞操可言，或者至少可以不必考虑——的行为进行任何惩罚。但是英格兰法律并不是这样来判定侵犯者，以致，断掉了所有哪怕是变成了妓女（common strumpet）的悔改机会，而将她们视为永无悔改的能力。所以，即使是强迫一个婊子（concubine：明知不可能合法结婚仍然维持性关系，性奴）或妓女，也被定为重罪；因为女人可能已经放弃那种非法的生活：因为，如布拉克顿恰当的评论，“尽管过去是一个妓女，当她大声喊叫的时候便表明自己不愿同意他的罪恶，此时她就确定不是了。”

WIND

伊斯特伍德曾拍过一部影片<不可饶恕>(http://www.verycd.com/topics/282611/),讲的是一个西部故事:即使是妓女,当遭到人身侵犯的时候,雇用杀手是正当的.很多中国人会很矫情的反对这一类的被他们视为暴力的影片,但是英语文化并不这么看,IMDb: 8.3分的评价不低,且获得第65届奥斯卡最佳影片.

WIND

AS to the material facts requisite to be given in evidence and proved upon an indictment of rape, they are of such a nature, that though necessary to be known and settled, for the conviction of the guilty and preservation of the innocent, and therefore are to be found in such criminal treatises as discourse of these matters in detail, yet they are highly improper to be publicly discussed, except only in a court of justice. I shall therefore merely add upon this head a few remarks from Sir Matthew Hale, with regard to the competency and credibility of witnesses; which may, salvo pudore [observing decency], be considered.

至于必须给出证据的基本事实（material fact）以作起诉强奸的证明，它们具有这样的性质，即虽然有必要众所确知，以对罪人进行定罪又能保护无罪之人，所以读者可以在有关这些细节的罪行论著中去找，然而，公开对这些事实进行讨论又是非常的不恰当，除非在正义的法庭。因此，对这一项内容我仅仅增加少量的评论，它们来源于Sir马修•黑尔，与证人的作证资格和可信度有关；这可以恰当的进行考虑。

WIND

AND, first, the party ravished may give evidence upon oath, and is in law a competent witness; but the credibility of her testimony, and how far forth she is to be believed, must be left to the jury upon the circumstances of fact that concur in that testimony. For instance: if the witness be of good fame; if she presently discovered the offense, and made search for the offender; if the party accused fled for it; these and the like are concurring circumstances, which give greater probability to her evidence. But, on the other side, if she be of evil fame, and stands unsupported by others; if she concealed the injury for any considerable time after she had opportunity to complain; if the place, where the fact was alleged to be committed, was where it was possible she might have been heard, and she made no outcry; these and the like circumstances carry a strong, but not conclusive, presumption that her testimony is false or feigned.

首先，被强奸的人可以在宣誓的基础上作证，成为法律上具备作证资格的证人；但是她的证词的可信度，及在多大的程度上相信她的话，应当留待审判团对证词和实际情况的认定。举例来说：如果证人有好的名声；如果她发觉遭到侵犯，马上寻找侵犯者；如果被起诉者因此而逃离；这些及类似的情况同时发生，对她的证词会增加了更大的可能性。但是，另一方面，如果她有坏的名声，得不到他人的支持；如果在她有机会控诉之后却又隐瞒伤害相当长一段时间；如果声称罪行发生的地点可被他人听到呼救声，而她却不大声呼救；这些及类似的情况将带来强烈的，非决定性的推测，即她的证词是错误的或假造的。

WIND

MOREOVER, if the rape be charged to be committed on an infant under twelve years of age, she may still be a competent witness, if she has sense and understanding to know the nature and obligations of an oath; and, even if she has not, it is thought by Sir Matthew Hale33 that she ought to be heard without oath, to give the court information; though that alone will not be sufficient to convict the offender. And he is of this opinion, first, because the nature of the offense being secret, there may be no other possible proof of the actual fact; though afterwards there may be concurrent circumstances to corroborate it, proved by other witnesses: and, secondly, because the law allows what the child told her mother, or other relations, to be given in evidence, since the nature of the case admits frequently of no better proof; and there is much more reason for the court to hear the narration of the child herself, than to receive it at second hand from those who swear they heard her say so. And indeed it is now settled, that infants of any age are to be heard; and, if they have any idea of an oath, to be also sworn: it being found by experience that infants of very tender years often give the clearest and truest testimony. But in any of these cases, whether the child be sworn or not, it is to be wished, in order to render her evidence credible, that there should be some concurrent testimony, of time, place and circumstances, in order to make out the fact; and that the conviction should not be grounded singly on the unsupported accusation of an infant under years of discretion. There may be therefore, in many cases of this nature, witnesses who are competent, that is, who may be admitted to be heard; and yet, after being heard, may prove not to be credible, or such as the jury is bound to believe. For one excellence of the trial by jury is, that the jury are triers of the credit of the witnesses, as well as of the truth of the fact.

此外，如果指控的强奸加诸12岁以下的儿童，只要她能够意识到并理解誓言的性质和责任，她还可以做具备资格的证人；并且，即使她做不到这一点，Sir马修•黑尔认为——她应当在不宣誓的前提下倾诉，以向法庭传达某些信息；虽然仅仅根据这些并不足以将侵犯者定罪。黑尔的观点是，首先，因为侵犯的性质是隐密的，实际情况可能没有其它的证据；虽然之后也许有情况可以由其他的证人证实这一点：第二，因为案件的性质常常找不到更好的证据，因而法律允许孩子告诉她的母亲或其他亲人的话可作证据；有更多的理由让法庭来倾听孩子自己的陈述，而不是接受经过了中间者——那些发誓说他们听到她告诉了这一切——的信息。实际上现在就是这样，既任何年龄的儿童都可被法庭倾听；并且，如果她们对誓言有任何意识，可以宣誓：经验表明，相当稚嫩的儿童常常给出了最清晰和最真实的证词。但是在任何这样的案件中，无论孩子宣誓与否，人们希望，为了让她的作证可信，应当有某些在时间，地点和情境上相一致的证词，以让事实呈现出来；这种定罪不应当仅仅根据不具备辨别力的儿童的没有其它证据支持的指控。所以，在许多这种性质的案件中，需要有作证资格的证人，即谁可以有资格被倾听；然而，被倾听之后，可以证明其不可信，或者证明这是审判团应当相信的。因为由审判团审判的一个优点是——审判团是事实真相的检测者，也是证人诚实性的检测者。

WIND

"IT is true," says this learned judge34 "that rape is a most detestable crime, and therefore ought severely and impartially to be punished with death; but it must be remembered, that it is an accusation easy to be made, hard to be proved, but harder to be defended by the party accused, though innocent." He then relates two very extraordinary cases of malicious prosecutions for this crime, that had happened within his own observation; and concludes thus: "I mention these instances, that we may be the more cautious upon trials of offenses of this nature, wherein the court and jury may with so much ease be imposed upon, without great care and vigilance; the heinousness of the offense many times transporting the judge and jury with so much indignation, that they are overhastily carried to the conviction of the person accused thereof, by the confident testimony of sometimes false and malicious witnesses."

“确实，”这位博学的法官说道，“强奸是一种最可恨的罪行，所以应当严厉和公正的处以死刑；但是应当记住——指控容易，证明困难，为被起诉的无罪者辩护更加困难。”然后他讲述了两件非同寻常的这种罪行的恶意起诉案件，这是他亲眼所见；他的结论是：“我提及这些例子，我们可能会对这种性质的侵犯的审判更加谨慎，在这些案件中若没有十分的小心和警惕，法庭和审判团是多么容易受到影响；这种侵犯的可恨很多次的激起法官和审判团的激愤，他们过于轻率的通过那些自以为是的而有时却是错误和恶意的证人的证词作出对被起诉者的定罪。”

WIND

亨瑞·方达主演过两部影片，第一部：《１２怒汉》，这个大家比较熟悉，讲的是一个初审法庭审判团的审判过程；第二部：《The Wrong Man》（被错误指控的人），这个中国人比较陌生，对这部影片的误解也比较多。这部影片说的是错误指控将给被起诉者带来什么样的伤害，所以法律必须十分的谨慎。和黑尔一样，导演希区柯克在片头说：这部影片是真实的，它的每一句话都是真实的。

WIND

《The Wrong Man》（被错误指控的人）ｖｅｒｙｃｄ的片源：
http://www.verycd.com/topics/15457/

WIND

IV. WHAT has been here observed, especially with regard to the manner of proof, which ought to be the more clear in proportion as the crime is the more detestable, may be applied to another offense, of a still deeper malignity; the infamous crime against nature, committed either with man or beast. A crime, which ought to be strictly and impartially proved, and then as strictly and impartially punished. But it is an offense of so dark a nature, so easily charged, and the negative so difficult to be proved, that the accusation should be clearly made out: for, if false, it deserves a punishment inferior only to that of the crime itself.

IV. 这里所评论的，尤其是有关证明的方式，罪行越可恨，证明应当越清楚，这可以应用到另一种更邪恶的冒犯之中；男人与男人或畜牲所进行的违背自然的可耻的罪行。这样一种罪行，应当严格和公正的加以证明，然后严格和公正的加以惩罚。但是冒犯的性质是如此的隐秘，起诉是如此的容易，证明却是如此的困难，指控应当清楚的呈现：因为，一旦有错，惩罚所犯的罪行仅仅次与那种罪行本身。

WIND

I WILL not act so disagreeable part, to my readers as well as myself, as to dwell any longer upon a subject, the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature. It will be more eligible to imitate in this respect the delicacy of our English law, which treats it, in its very indictments, as a crime not fit to be named; "peccatum illud horribile, inter christianos non nominandum" ["that horrible crime not to be named among Christians"]. A taciturnity observed likewise by the edict of Constantius and Constans:35 "ubi scelus est id, quod non proficit scire, jubemus insurgere leges, armari jura gladio ultore, ut exquisitis poenis subdantur infames, qui sunt, vel qui futuri sunt, rei." ["Where that crime is found, which it is unfit even to know, we command the law to arise armed with an avenging sword, that the infamous men who are, or shall in future be guilty of it, may undergo the most severe punishments."] Which leads me to add a word concerning its punishment.

我不希望扮演这样的一个令人讨厌的角色——对我的读者和我自己——在这个主题上停留过久，提及这一点对人类本性而言已经是一种耻辱。在这方面更恰当的方式是效仿我们英格兰法律的优雅，我们的法律是这样来论述它的——起诉一种不适宜命名的罪行；“那种可憎的基督徒没有命名的罪行”。康斯坦提乌斯和康斯坦斯（Constantius & Constans，古罗马皇帝）的法令对此的评论亦是无言：“在发现这种罪行的地方，甚至都不适宜对它进行了解，我们要求法律举起复仇之剑，这可耻的正在或将要行罪的人，可以遭受最严厉的惩罚。”对它的惩罚我再增加几句话。

WIND

THIS the voice of nature and of reason, and the express law of God,36 determine to be capital. Of which we have a signal instance, long before the Jewish dispensation, by the destruction of two cities by fire from heaven: so that this is an universal, not merely a provincial, precept. And our ancient law in some degree imitated this punishment, by commanding such miscreants to be burnt to death;37 though Fleta38 says they should be buried alive: either of which punishments was indifferently used for this crime among the ancient Goths.39 But now the general punishment of all felonies is the same, namely, by hanging: and this offense (being in the times of popery only subject to ecclesiastical censures) was made single felony by the statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 6. and felony without benefit of clergy by statute 5 Eliz. c. 17. And the rule of law herein is, that, if both are arrived at years of discretion, agentes et consentientes pari poena plectantur [the perpetrator and consenting party are punished the same].

自然和理性的声音，以及上帝的法律的明确表达，判决为一级重罪（利未 记：20：13，15）。对此我们有一个明显的例子，在犹太人对此进行豁免之前很久，天国的大火毁灭了两座城市：所以这是一条普遍而不仅仅是狭隘的戒律。我们古老的法律在某种程度上效仿这种惩罚，命令烧死这种无信仰的人；虽然弗利塔（Fleta，一部拉丁文写作的论著，无名氏，后来考证大约写于1290年，爱德华一世统治期间）说要活埋这种人：这两种惩罚对古代的哥斯（Goth）人而言没什么区别。但是现在所有重罪的一般惩罚都是一样的，即绞死：这种冒犯（在教皇时代仅仅处以教会谴责）通过亨瑞八世第25年法案第6章规定为唯一的一种重罪，通过伊丽莎白第5年法案第17章规定为重罪且得不到牧师的帮助。此处的法律规则是，即如果两人都达到了具备判断力的年龄，主犯和从犯的惩罚是一样的。

WIND

THESE are all the felonious offenses, more immediately against the personal security of the subject. The inferior offenses, or misdemeanors, that fall under this head, are assaults, batteries, wounding, false imprisonment, and kidnapping.

以上便是所有的更即刻的危及臣民人身保障的重罪。较低级的侵犯或曰轻罪，归于以下的条目之中，即攻击，殴打，致伤，错误监禁，绑架。

WIND

权利和责任对等，这是我们在思考人处于各种各样的社会关系之中时，一个基本的概念。比如，作为国王，他有权利要求臣民对他忠诚；那么相应的，它须对臣民承担责任，而保护每个臣民的人身自由和财产，便是这些责任的一部分。如何保护？当他的下级官员侵犯了臣民的这些权利的时候，他应该怎么做？布莱克斯同接着会讲到。

WIND

V, VI, VII. WITH regard to the nature of the three first of these offenses in general, I have nothing farther to add to what has already been observed in the preceding book of these commentaries;41 when we considered them as private wrongs, or civil injuries, for which a satisfaction or remedy is given to the party aggrieved. But, taken in a public light, as a breach of the king's peace, an affront to his government, and a damage done to his subjects, they are also indictable and punishable with fine and imprisonment; or with other ignominious corporal penalties, where they are committed with any very atrocious design.42 As in case of an assault with an intent to murder, or with an intent to commit either of the crimes last spoken of; for which intentional assaults, in the two last cases, indictments are much more usual, than for the absolute perpetration of the facts themselves, on account of the difficulty of proof: and herein, besides heavy fine and imprisonment, it is usual to award judgment of the pillory.

V, VI, VII. 这些侵犯的前三种，总体来讲，前一卷已经说过，我没有进一步要补充的了；当我们将它们视为个体非正义，或曰世俗伤害，对此可以给与被伤害一方满意的补偿或纠正。但是，从公共的角度看，作为一种对国王和平的破坏，一种对他的政府的侮辱，一种对他的臣民的伤害，它们也可被起诉并施以罚金和监禁；或者施以其它不名誉的人身惩罚，如果以非常恶意的意图行这些罪的话。如同在意图谋杀的攻击案件中，或者在意图行最近所说的任何一种罪行的案件中（此处所指的两种罪行未弄清楚，知道类似于意图谋杀，不太妨碍整段的理解。[译注]）；就后两种案件而言，由于证明的困难，指控预谋攻击比指控绝对犯了罪行更为常见；而对于预谋攻击，除了施以沉重的罚金和监禁，通常还判以镣铐示众（不名誉的人身惩罚）。

WIND

THERE is also one species of battery, more atrocious and penal than the rest, which is the beating of a clerk in orders, or clergyman; on account of the respect and reverence due to his sacred character, as the minister and ambassador of peace. Accordingly it is enacted by the statute called articuli cleri [articles of the clergy], 9 Edw. II. c. 3. that if any person lay violent hands upon a clerk, the amends for the peace broken shall be before the king; that is by indictment in the king's courts: and the assailant may also be sued before the bishop, that excommunication or bodily penance may be imposed: which if the offender will redeem by money, to be given to the bishop, or the party grieved, it may be sued for before the bishop; whereas otherwise to sue in any spiritual court, for civil damages for the battery, falls within the danger of praemunire [forewarning].43 But suits are, and always were, allowable in the spiritual court, for money agreed to be given as a commutation for penance.44 So that upon the whole it appears, that a person guilty of such brutal behavior to a clergyman, is subject to three kinds of prosecution, all of which may be pursued for one and the same offense: an indictment, for the breach of the king's peace by such assault and battery; a civil action, for the special damage sustained by the party injured; and a suit in the ecclesiastical court, first, pro correctione et salute animae [for the correction and health of the soul] by enjoining penance, and then again for such sum of money as shall be agreed on for taking off the penance enjoined: it being usual in those courts to exchange their spiritual censures for a round compensation in money45perhaps because poverty is generally esteemed by the moralists the best medicine pro salute animae [for the good of the soul].

有一种殴打，比其余的形式更加恶劣，惩罚也更严厉，这便是接受指令对教士或神职人员进行殴打；由于其神圣特性——作为和平的牧师和使者——应得的尊重和敬意。因此通过爱德华二世第9年法案第3章被称为“神职人员条款”的法案规定，即如果任何人对教士施以暴力，破坏和平的赔偿应当交与国王；这由国王法庭加以起诉：攻击者也可以被起诉至主教面前，可以施加逐出教会或身体的苦修（bodily penance）的惩罚：这种情况如果侵犯者愿意用金钱赎回，交与主教或被伤害者，它可以被起诉至主教；否则因殴打所致的世俗伤害起诉至宗教法庭（spiritual court），将陷入藐视王权（praemunire：拉丁文，指的是罗马教皇对英格兰世俗法律的干预，据爱德华•柯克说，在1306年爱德华一世统治期间通过的“神职人员法案”就奠定了其后所有禁止罗马教皇不当干预法案的基础//据英文维基）的危险之中。但是宗教法庭的诉讼是并且总是允许以金钱作为免除苦修的交换。所以总的看起来，一个对神职人员犯有这样凶残行为的人，将面临三种起诉，所有这些起诉可以归结因为一种侵犯：一种起诉，因为这样的攻击和殴打破坏了国王的和平；一种世俗诉讼，因为被伤害的一方受到了特定的伤害；还有一种教会法庭上的诉讼，首先，为了灵魂的改正和康复，施加苦修的惩罚，然后，足够的金钱可以免除这样的苦修：在那些（宗教）法庭上通常足够的金钱赔偿可以同教会谴责进行交换，可能是因为一般道德学家认为贫穷是灵魂康复最好的药物。