freedom from the wager of battle as a judicial proceeding. The custom of settling disputes of right or wrong by duel is among the oldest judicial customs that can be traced. We meet with it in England in the laws of King Alfred, in which it is stipulated what course a man has to take against his foe in order to obtain justice before he proceeds to judicial settlement by force of arms.[1] To a commercial people such as the Frisians there was an injustice involved in the merchant being liable to be challenged to wager of battle in order to settle a dispute with a possible swash-buckler, whose profession was that of arms, concerning the terms of a purchase or the price of a commodity. In the old Flemish charters, which apparently embody still more ancient privileges and customs, we find a law which exempts the Frisians of the early part of the twelfth century from duel in every market of Flanders.[2] Similarly, in London one of the oldest franchises was that none of the burgesses should be compelled to wager of battle, but that they might settle their disputes according to the custom of London; and although this privilege was subsequently granted to thirteen cities and boroughs,[3] such grants do not diminish the significance of it in London, where its origin is lost in antiquity, the custom being known as the ‘Custom of London.’
The evidences of the early trade of London in the Anglo-Saxon period also point to its connection with the chief traders of Northern Europe at that time—the Goths and Frisians. That the maritime trade of London went on without any great break from the Roman period into that of the Saxons is extremely probable. In a charter dated A.D. 734, by which Ethelbald, King of Mercia, granted leave for a ship to pass into the port of
