Definition
"Affranohise" does not appear to be a recognized legal term in standard use. It is most likely a typographical corruption of one of two related historical terms:
1. AFFRANCHISE — To set free; to liberate from servitude, bondage, or legal disability. Used in older English and French legal contexts to describe the act of freeing a serf or villein, or more broadly, of restoring full legal capacity to a person under some form of civil disability.
2. ENFRANCHISE — The more common English legal term covering the same core concept: to make free, to admit to the rights of a citizen or freeman, or to convert copyhold or feudal tenure into freehold.
Because no independent source material confirms "affranohise" as a distinct legal term, researchers should treat it as a probable variant spelling or OCR-introduced corruption of "affranchise" and research under that headword and its cognates.
---
Common Confusion
"Affranohise" is almost certainly a corrupted form of "affranchise" (or possibly "enfranchise"), introduced through transcription error, early printing variation, or optical character recognition (OCR) scanning of historical texts. Researchers encountering this spelling in a digitized legal corpus should not treat it as a distinct legal concept. The substitution of "oh" for "ch" is consistent with OCR misreading of historical typefaces. Searching under AFFRANCHISE and ENFRANCHISE will locate the substantive legal content.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The primary research risk here is terminological dead-ending. A researcher querying "affranohise" in a digital corpus may find zero results, or may find only the corrupted source document, and incorrectly conclude the concept is absent from the corpus entirely. The correct move is to treat any encounter with this spelling as a signal to broaden the search.
Key navigational points:
First, OCR corruption of "ch" → "oh" or "oh" → "ch" is a documented failure mode in scanned legal texts from the 18th and 19th centuries, particularly where the source typeface uses a ligature or archaic letterform. Researchers working with digitized historical legal materials should build search strategies that account for this class of error.
Second, the underlying concepts — liberation from servitude, restoration of civil capacity, conversion of feudal tenure — appear across multiple headwords in historical legal dictionaries. Black's, Bouvier's, and Tomlin's all contain entries under ENFRANCHISE and related terms. The concept also surfaces under MANUMISSION (for the freeing of enslaved persons), EMANCIPATION, and VILLEIN.
Third, the French legal tradition uses "affranchissement" for the act of freeing, and early American and English legal texts sometimes retain French-derived spellings in variant forms. A researcher working in pre-Revolutionary or colonial legal materials may encounter spelling instability that is not OCR error but genuine historical variation.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
The source text retrieved for this entry is a fragment from a definition of "Affirmative Relief" in Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) and has no bearing on "affranohise." It is reproduced here only to document what the corpus returned:
"Relief, benefit, or compensation which may be granted to the defendant in a judgment or decree in accordance with the facts established in his favor; such as may properly be given within the issues made by the pleadings or according to the legal or equitable rights of the parties as established by the [evidence]."
This text was almost certainly retrieved due to an indexing or OCR error associating the corrupted headword with the wrong entry block. It should not be cited as authority for any definition of "affranohise" or "affranchise."
Historical dictionaries do contain substantive entries for the cognate terms. Bouvier's Law Dictionary contains entries under ENFRANCHISEMENT. Tomlin's Law Dictionary (1835) addresses freeing from servitude under related headwords. Researchers should consult those entries directly.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The underlying concept of affranchisement was primarily operative in English and French legal systems under feudal tenure structures that were never fully transplanted into American law. In American legal contexts, the relevant concepts migrated into emancipation law (for enslaved persons) and naturalization law (for civil status). The feudal tenure dimension is largely inapplicable in U.S. jurisdictions.
---