478 which meant that the administrators of justice were forced, to a greater extent, to take into consideration the letter of the law. The right to reduce sentences on account of special circumstances was reserved primarily for the higher courts of justice. When the law readers were abolished during the course of the 17th century, the Appeal Courts became training centres for the prospective judges in the town and county courts. It was clearly established in the second half of the 17th century that it was the King and not the merchants who would appoint the mayors in towns. Slowly but surely the influence of the jury decreased in rural areas. At the end of the 17th century government interests left more traces in the lists of fines than was the case earlier. The percentage and number of those convicted of crimes against state statutes was greater and more were convicted for not paying their taxes or not having met other state obligations. This was especially clear in rural areas during the first two decades of the 18th century, when the expensive wars put the population under great strain. Apart from extra contributions, horse transportation and other obligations, the government had also increased its claims on the forests. The local courts became, to a much greater extent than previously, repressive instruments against contumacious farmers. This trend continued until the end of this investigation, the vear of 1839. The forest statutes became more lenient in time, but instead another form of regulization was extended. One of the farmers’ most important side-lines, the distillation of alcohol, came into conflict with fiscal interests during some decades at the end of the 18th century. These government claims were, without doubt, in reality the greatest source of conflict between state and local community ever to be brought before the district courts. Town people were not plagued to such an extent by obligatory horse transports and other fcirms of obligatory duties, nor was the forest an acute source of conflict. Instead, the sale of illicit alcohol became a relatively usual cause for fines, but not to the same extent as did crimes against statutes in the countryside. At the same time the Church made claims on the courts’ participation in order to increase its own authority and that of religion. During the 17th century a criminalization of the female party in fornication was enforced, which notably increased the workload of the courts. Sin became seriously to be accepted as lawful ground for sanctions. Oaths and swearing were, from the year 1687, a secular crime and absence fromHigh Mass, Communion or parish catechetical meetings could, in the final instance, be punished by the county court or a magistrate. If crimes against the laws governing sexual acts and other religious crimes are consolidated then the curve culminates for all court districts at some time during the 18th century. The exact point in time depends on, above all, the number of illegitimate births combined with the court’s capacity and will to punish. In reality the Church’s power over the Lawshould
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=