Compurgator

One of several neighbors of a person accused of a crime or charged as a defendant in a civil action, who appeared and swore that they believed him on his oath.

3 Bla. Com. 341.

Formerly, when a person was accused of a crime, or sued in some kinds of civil actions, he might purge himself upon oath of the accusation against him, whenever the proof was not the most clear and positive; and if upon his oath he declared himself innocent, he was absolved. This usage, so eminently calculated to encourage perjury by impunity, was soon found to be dangerous to the public safety. To remove this evil, the laws were changed, by requiring that the oath should be administered with the greatest solemnity; but the form was soon disregarded, for those who cared not to violate the truth did not hesitate to treat the form with contempt. In order to give a greater weight to the oath of the accused, the law was again altered so as to require that the accused should appear before the judge with a certain number of his neighbors, who were freeholders of the hundred, who should swear that they believed the accused had sworn truly. This new species of witnesses were called compurgators. If it was his first offence or if his compurgators did not agree to make the oath, he was put to the ordeal (q. v.). The origin of the system lies back in the history of the Teuton race. It is said still to survive in the practice of the criminal courts by which an accused person is allowed to call witnesses as to his character, as a defence, while the prosecution is not allowed to traverse their testimony. Inderwick, The King's Peace. See Wager of Law. The number of compurgators varied according to the nature of the charge and other circumstances, and the rank of the party — formerly, from two to five; later the practice was twelve.

See 2 Holdsw. Hist. E. L. See Du Cange, Juramentum; Spelman, Gloss. Assarth; Termes de la Ley; 3 Bla. Com. 341-348.

The last reported case is 2 B. & C. 538; see 2 Poll. & Maitl. 600.