Friday, May 27, 2011
72. Charny asks: A man at arms has taken another prisoner in a deed of war. It happens that the prisoner puts himself to ransom with the agreement of his master for a certain sum to be paid on a set day, and if he does not pay he will return to captivity as if he had never set a ransom. And after this agreement is made, and when the day comes the prisoner comes to his master and gives him money for his ransom, but he is not able to find any more. And the master takes this money and gives his prisoner permission and a new day to pay the remainder. The prisoner leaves and comes back and brings nothing with him, for he is not able to do so, and his master says that he will set him a very great ransom, which he had not done before. The prisoner says he is not able to do this nor ought he. The master says that he can. They submit the dispute to the law of arms. How will it be judged?
Posted by Steve Muhlberger at 4:03 PM