FETTERS. A sort of iron put on the limbs of a malefactor or a person accused of crime.
When a prisoner is brought into court to plead, he shall not be put in fetters ; Co. 2d Inst. 315; Co. 3d Inst. 34; 2 Hale, Pl. Cr. 119; Kel. 1 Chitty, Cr. Law 417; 4 Bla. Com. 322; It is usual to remove them at the trial; Faire v. State, 58 Ala. 74; State v. Lewis, 19 Kan. 260, 27 Am. Rep. 113; to re tain them Is justifiable only where a reason able necessity exists ; 59 J. P. 393, per Rus sell, C. J.; or where it is necessary to pre vent an escape; 4 B. & C. 596. In comment ing on these cases, it is said that it is jus tified only with a prisoner of notoriously bad character, or dangerous, or the offense is grave, or there is an attempt to escape ; 29 Chi. L. News 88.
In the first case In this country in which the old common-law doctrine was consid ered and enforced, the court held that to try a prisoner in shackles was to deprive him of his rights, and that a conviction, under such circumstances, would be revers ed; People v. Harrington, 42 Cal. 165, 10 Am. Rep. 296, followed in State v. Kring, 64 Mo. 591 (affirming State v. Kring, 1 Mo. App. 438). A single expression on this subject seems to be opposed to these cases. An Eng
lish writer, commenting on the action of a barrister who withdrew and refused to pro ceed with a case because the judge ordered his client fettered during the trial, considers the removal of fetters to be a mere matter of courtesy, being designed to relieve the prisoner, so far as is practicable, from all that might enlist prejudice against him or disturb his sell-possession, and that such re moval cannot be considered a matter of right ; 43 L. T. 390.
An officer having arrested a defendant on a civil suit, or a person accused of a crime, has no right to handcuff him unless it is necessary or he has attempted to make his escape ; 4 B. & C. 596. It is not conclu sive on a question of escape that the arrest ing officer did not handcuff the prisoner ; State v. Hunter, 94 N. C. 829. See PRISONER.
FEU. In Scotch Law. A holding or tenure where the vassal in place of military service makes his return in grain or money. Dis tinguished from wardholding, which is the military tenure of the country. Bell, Diet.; Drskine, Inst. lib. ii. tit. 3, § 7.