Thereisacuriousexplanatorygloss，inaCambridgeMS。ofBracton，whichseemstogobackatleasttothebeginningofthefourteenthcentury，anditmaintainsthatfreestockdoingvillainservicelapsesintovillainageinthefifthgenerationonly。*Ontheotherhand，Brittonflatlydeniesthepossibilityofsuchathing；accordingtohimnolengthoftimecanrenderfreemenvillainsormakevillainsfreemen。Moreoverhegivesasupposedcasepossiblybasedonanactualtrial，inwhichapersonclaimedasavillainismadetogobacktothesixthgenerationtoestablishhisfreedom，*Itdoesnotseemlikelythatpeoplecouldoftenvindicatetheirfreedombysuchelaborateargument，butthelegalassumptionexpoundedinBrittondeservesfullattention。Itisonlyaconsequenceofthegeneralview，thatneithertheholdingnortheservicesoughttohaveanyinfluenceonthestatusofaman，andinsofaritseemslegallycorrect。Butitiseasytoseehowdifficultitmusthavebeentokeepupthesenicedistinctionsinpractice，howdifficultforthosewhoforgenerationshadbeenplacedinthesamematerialpositionwithserfstomaintainpersonalfreedom。*Forbothviews，thoughabsolutelyopposedtoeachother，areinasenseequallytrue：theonegivingthelogicaldevelopmentofafundamentalruleofthelaw，theothertestifyingtothefacts。
Andsowehaveonemoregeneralobservationtomakeastothelegalaspectofvillainage。Eveninthedefinitionofitsfundamentalprinciplesweseenotablediscrepanciesandvacillations，whicharetheresultoftheconflictbetweenlogicalrequirementsandfluctuatingfacts。
Theoriginalunityofpurposeandfirmnessofdistinctionareevenmorebrokenupwhenwelookatthecriminalandthepolicelawwheretheytouchvillainage。Inthecriminallawofthefeudalepochthereishardlyanydistinctionbetweenfreemenandvillains。Inpointofamercementsthereisthewell-knowndifferenceastothe’contenement’ofafreelandholder，amerchantandavillain，butthisdifferenceispromptednotbyprivilegebutbythediversityofoccupations。TheDialogusdeScaccarioshowsthatvillainsbeingreputedEnglishareinalowerpositionthanfreemenasregardsthepresumptionofEnglishryandthepaymentofthemurder-fine，*butthisfeatureseemstohavebecomeobliteratedinthethirteenthcentury。Insomecasescorporalpunishmentmayhavedifferedaccordingtotherankoftheculprit，andtheformalitiesofordealwerecertainlydifferent。*Themainfactremains，thatbothvillainsandfreemenwerealikeabletoprosecuteanybodybywayof’appeal’*forinjurytotheirlife，honour，andevenproperty，*andequallyliabletobepunishedandprosecutedforoffencesofanykind。
Theirequalrightwascompletelyrecognizedbythecriminallaw，andasanaturalsequenceofthis，thepleasofthecrowngenerallyomittotakeanynoticeofthestatusofpartiesconnectedwiththem。OnemayreadthroughMrMaitland’scollectionofPleasoftheCrowneditedfortheSeldenSociety，orthroughhisbookofGloucestershirepleas，withoutcomingacrossanybutexceptionalandquiteaccidentalmentionsofvillainage。InfactwerewetoformourviewoftheconditionofEnglandexclusivelyonthematerialaffordedbysuchdocuments，wemightwellbelievethatthewholeclasswasallbutanextinctone。OneglanceatAssizeRollsoratCartularieswouldteachusbetter。StillthesilenceoftheCoronaRollsismosteloquent。
Itshowsconvincinglythatthedistinctionhardlyinfluencedcriminallawatall。