出国留学首选一诺留学

【一诺留学】ACT真题练习（三十一）

　　SOCIAL SCIENCE: This passage is adapted from Leonard W.Levy's Origins of the Fifth Amendment: The Right Against Self Incrimination. (©1968 by Clio Enterprises Inc.).Community courts and community justice pre-

　　vailed in England at the time of the Norman Conquest

　　[1066]. The legal system was ritualistic, dependent

　　upon oaths at most stages of litigation, and permeated

　　5 by both religious and superstitious notions. The pro-

　　ceedings were oral, very personal, and highly con-

　　frontative. Juries were unknown. One party publicly

　　"appealed," or accused, the other before the community

　　meeting at which the presence of both was obligatory.

　　10 To be absent meant risking fines and outlawry. After

　　the preliminary statements of the parties, the court ren-

　　dered judgment, not on the merits of the issue nor the

　　question of guilt or innocence, but on the manner by

　　which it should be resolved. Judgment in other words

　　15 preceded trial because it was a decision on what form

　　the trial should take. It might be by compurgation, by

　　ordeal, or, after the Norman Conquest, by battle.

　　Excepting trial by battle, only one party was tried or,

　　more accurately, was put to his "proof." Proof being

　　20 regarded as an advantage, it was usually awarded to the

　　accused party; in effect he had the privilege of proving

　　his own case.

　　Trial by compurgation consisted of a sworn state-

　　ment to the truth of one's claim or denial, supported by

　　25 the oaths of a certain number of fellow swearers.

　　Presumably they, no more than the claimant, would

　　endanger their immortal souls by the sacrilege of false

　　swearing. Originally the oath-helpers swore from their

　　own knowledge to the truth of the party's claim. Later

　　30 they became little more than character witnesses,

　　swearing only to their belief that his oath was trust-

　　worthy. If he rounded up the requisite number of com-

　　purgators and the cumbrous swearing in very exact

　　form proceeded without a mistake, he won his case. A

　　35 mistake "burst" the oath, proving guilt.

　　Ordeals were usually reserved for more serious

　　crimes, for persons of bad reputation, for peasants, or

　　for those caught with stolen goods. As an invocation of

　　immediate divine judgment, ordeals were consecrated

　　40 by the Church and shrouded with solemn religious mys-

　　tery. The accused underwent a physical trial in which

　　he called upon God to witness his innocence by putting

　　a miraculous sign upon his body. Cold water, boiling

　　water, and hot iron were the principal ordeals, all of

　　45 which the clergy administered. In the ordeal of cold

　　water, the accused was trussed up and cast into a pool

　　to see whether he would sink or float. On the theory

　　that water which had been sanctified by a priest would

　　receive an innocent person but reject the guilty, inno-

　　50 cence was proved by sinking—and hopefully a quick

　　retrieval—guilt by floating. In the other ordeals, one

　　had to plunge his hand into a cauldron of boiling water

　　or carry a red hot piece of iron for a certain distance, in

　　the hope that three days later, when the bandages were

　　55 removed, the priest would find a "clean" wound, one

　　that was healing free of infection. How deeply one

　　plunged his arm into the water, how heavy the iron or

　　great the distance it was carried, depended mainly on

　　the gravity of the charge.

　　60 The Normans brought to England still another

　　ordeal, trial by battle, paradigm of the adversary

　　system, which gave to the legal concept of "defense" or

　　"defendant" a physical meaning. Trial by battle was a

　　savage yet sacred method of proof which was also

　　65 thought to involve divine intercession on behalf of the

　　righteous. Rather than let a wrongdoer triumph, God

　　would presumably strengthen the arms of the party who

　　had sworn truly to the justice of his cause. Right, not

　　might, would therefore conquer. Trial by battle was

　　70 originally available for the settlement of all disputes

　　but eventually was restricted to cases of serious crime.

　　Whether one proved his case by compurgation,

　　ordeal, or battle, the method was accusatory in char-

　　acter. There was always a definite and known accuser,

　　75 some private person who brought formal suit and

　　openly confronted his antagonist. There was never any

　　secrecy in the proceedings, which were the same for

　　criminal as for civil litigation. The judges, who had no

　　role whatever in the making of the verdict, decided only

　　80 which party should be put to proof and what its form

　　should be; thereafter the judges merely enforced an

　　observance of the rules. The oaths that saturated the

　　proceedings called upon God to witness to the truth of

　　the respective claims of the parties, or the justice of

　　85 their cause, or the reliability of their word. No one gave

　　testimonial evidence nor was anyone questioned to test

　　his veracity.

　　In a trial by ordeal, innocence could be proven by:

　　F. displaying an uninfected wound.

　　G. floating when cast into the water.

　　H. wearing bandages for three days.

　　J. swearing an oath in a precise form.

　　答案：F

　　【解析】The best answer is F. Support for the answer is found in lines 54–56. Floating proved guilt (line 51), which means G is incorrect; H is incorrect because simply wearing bandages for three days did not determine innocence (proof of innocence or guilt came with their removal and inspection of the wound); and J is incorrect because oaths were part of trial by compurgation, not trial by ordeal.

　　以上是一诺留学小编给大家介绍的内容，希望可以帮助到同学们!同学们如果还有任何关于ACT的问题，可以拨打一诺留学的免费热线400-003-6508或者010-62680991进行咨询，或者点击一诺留学官方网站http://www.yinuoedu.net/页面的“在线咨询”与一诺留学专家直接对话。微信订阅号：留学圈 (微信帐号：yinuoliuxue )