arbitrators within their respective dioceses; and the officers of
justice were compelled to execute their decisions without either delay
or appeal. At first, to authorize the interference of the spiritual
judge, the previous consent of both the plaintiff and defendant was
requisite; but Theodosius left it to the option of the parties, either
of whom was indulged with the liberty of carrying the cause in the
first instance into the bishop's court, or even of removing it thither
in any stage of the pleadings before the civil magistrate. Charlemagne
inserted this constitution of Theodosius in his code, and ordered it
to be invariably observed among all the nations which acknowledged his
authority. If by the imperial law the laity were permitted, by the
canon law the clergy were compelled, to accept of the bishop as the
judge of civil controversies. It did not become them to quit the
spiritual duties of their profession, and entangle themselves in the
intricacies of law proceedings. The principle was fully admitted by
the emperor Justinian, who decided that in cases in which only one of
the parties was a clergyman, the cause must be submitted to the
decision of the bishop. This valuable privilege, to which the teachers
of the northern nations had been accustomed under their own princes,
they naturally established among their converts; and it was soon
confirmed to the clergy by the civil power in every Christian country.

Constantine had thought that the irregularities of an order of men
devoted to the offices of religion should be veiled from the
scrutinizing eye of the people. With this view he granted to each
bishop, if he were accused of violating the law, the liberty of being
tried by his colleagues, and moreover invested him with a criminal
jurisdiction over his own clergy. Whether his authority was confined
to lesser offences, or extended to capital crimes, is a subject of
controversy. There are many edicts which without any limitation