[Tractatus plurimi iuris]

how much and for what he cited the defendant. And this report of the messenger is to be written in the acts. And thus let the notary write: "In the year of the Lord, etc., on such a day before such a judge, in my, the notary's, presence, such a messenger reported himself to have cited such a one, found and apprehended personally, or if he was not apprehended, he reported himself to have told a procurator such or his family that on such a day and such an hour he should appear before the aforementioned lord judge to proceed and to see proceedings in such a cause which is turning between him and such a one over such a matter, or to swear, or to see the calumny oath a formal oath that the party is acting in good faith sworn, or to see witnesses sworn, etc." He, however, to whom the citation is committed to be made by letters, ought to write on the schedule attached to the citation, or on the citation paper itself on the back, under this form: "I, N., parish priest or rector of such a church, have cited such a one according to the form of the present mandate or citation on such a day, so that on such a day he may appear before such a judge in such a cause, preferably by a procurator, according to the contents and tenor of the present letters, or I have published and intimated the present letters to him on such a day or such a day, and I have faithfully executed the same by citing him, as I received in the mandates. In testimony of which my seal has been affixed to the present." Does an ordinary, however, have the power to cite his subject outside his jurisdiction by messenger or letters? Note that he can, in the chapter Roman original: "c. romana", § "Drawing," "On the Forum of the Competent," book 6. Because, therefore, one cited thus by a judge and by his mandate ought to appear in the term before the judge himself. And this if this one who cites or orders to cite is his ordinary judge, or a delegate who expresses this in the citation, as has been said above. Or if he is not his own proper ordinary judge, he has nevertheless other ordinary jurisdiction, and in the citation such a cause is expressed: which, if it were true, he ought to answer before him, namely because he says he contracted or committed a delict in the land which is of the jurisdiction of the one citing. About which more fully through the whole chapter 2, "On dilatory exceptions"

if he did not appear, he would be reputed contumacious. If, however, the citation were such that it did not constrain one to come, and consequently did not bring about contumacy, such is a foolhardy citation which does not constrain the one cited, as in the chapter Good 2, "On Election," concordant with the Clementine Pastoral original: "cle. pastoralis", "On Res Judicata," verse "The notorious indeed." And there are many cases in which the one cited is not held to come, about which in the notable gloss in the chapter Coming original: "c. veniens", "On Accusations," to you by Joannes Andreae upon it. And one should provide a general rule about this in chapter 2, "On dilatory exceptions," namely that whenever something unjust or dishonest is placed in the citation, or such that it is certain that a declinatory exception of the judgment pertains to the one cited. As if a despoiled person is cited so that he may answer the despoiler in a civil cause, or otherwise in a criminal cause, or to manage the business of another, from which such an error is expressed in the citation, the one cited is not held to go. And the same if it is otherwise notorious according to some, about which one must speak as there. Some, however, distinguish: Because either the jurisdiction is lacking to the one citing by the law itself, and then, if that is notorious, the one cited is not held to come, nor is the process valid against him, or by the operation of an exception the one cited can withdraw himself from the jurisdiction of the one citing, and then he is held to withdraw himself and appear and except, otherwise the process will hold against him, about which through Joannes Andreae in the additions to the Speculum, "On Citation," § 1. A contumacious person is one who, cited by edicts or one peremptory [citation], does not come, or comes but does not obey, or leaves without license. Thus Guillelmus defines in the Speculum, "On Contumacy," § 1. Hostiensis in his Summa defines thus: Contumacy is disobedience committed against a judge or prelate. And he says "committed," because one must always obey, about which "On Time of Ordination," in the chapter To the ears original: "ad aures" in the gloss and upon it. And there are diverse modes of contumacy, about which in chapter 2, "On Dolo and Contumacy," in the gloss and upon it, in chapter 2, Since frequently original: "quoniam frequenter", as in book On not contesting the suit.