APPEALS AGAINST HUMAN INJUSTICE. THE right of might has often enough perverted justice; and those who have misused their power and their office to obtain the condemnation of the innocent have been brand-marked by history. When the weak has been overborne by the strong, in the consciousness of his innocence, he has in certain cases appealed from the unright eous judgment of the human judge to the righteous Judge of all the earth. That such appeals should be made was in fact encouraged by the practice in the Middle Ages of submitting doubtful cases to the judgment of Heaven. Trial by ordeal wasnothing else but this. When two men ap peared before the judge, and one swore one thing and the other swore the exact opposite, the judge remitted the case to the Judge of all the world, and bade them fight the mat ter out, in full confidence that victory would be on the side of the innocent. The ordeal of plunging the arm in boiling oil, or of walking over red-hot ploughshares, was also an appeal to God. Cunegunda, the wife of the Emperor Henry II., was charged — so ran the legend — with infidelity, and was forced to prove her innocence by walking barefoot over red-hot ploughshares. The story is not historically substantiated; but it is quite certain that such ordeals were un dergone, and they were a direct appeal to the judgment of Heaven. There were many ways in which the de cision of Heaven was arrived at. Richardis, wife of Charles the Fat, had to prove her in nocence by walking in a waxed linen dress between two blazing piles of logs. Another form was that of plucking a ring from out of a caldron of boiling water. Another was the cold-water. Another form was to offer blessed bread to the accused, who said, " If I be guilty, may this bit of bread choke me." Unhappily, with the abolition of the or deal, in place of it in all European lands,

save England, came the use of torture for the extraction of a confession. The fact of appeal to Heaven to give right judgment being acknowledged in Europe, naturally gave occasion to those who had been wrongly sentenced to appeal away from their unjust judges to the highest court of all, — that in heaven. In 624 sat the Council of Macon, before which Eustace, Abbot of Luxeuil, was sum moned by one Agrestin, a former monk of Luxeuil, who charged him with observing certain peculiarities which had come from Ireland with the founder, Saint Columbanus, and were, indeed, common to the Celtic churches, but which Agrestin considered as schismatical, because contrary to Roman usage. The gentle Eustace explained that he followed the customs of the founder, and justified the usage of Luxeuil; but as Agres tin always returned to the charge, and the bishops in conclave seemed dubious how to decide, he exclaimed : " In the presence of these bishops, I, the disciple and successor of him whose institute you despise, cite you to appear, within a year, along with Colum banus, at the Divine tribunal, to plead the case against him there." The solemnity of this appeal awed the prelates who leaned to the Roman usage, and they urged Agrestin to be reconciled to his former abbot; and the latter, who was gentleness itself, offered him the kiss of peace. But Agrestin re fused it. Before the end of the year he was slain by the blow of an axe by a serf in an ignoble brawl. Robert Grostete, Rishop of Lincoln, had many a struggle with Pope Innocent IV. against papal encroachments on the rights of his see. According to Knyghtoh, the old chronicler, a year after his death the Bishop appeared to the Pope, and called to him: "Stand up, wretched one, and come to judg ment! " As the Pope hesitated, he raised his pastoral crosier and struck Innocent on