Definition
"For good and evil" (Latin). A term with two distinct historical legal meanings:
1. Criminal pleading formula. In ancient English criminal procedure, the phrase by which a prisoner formally placed himself on a jury for trial. When an accused submitted to jury trial, the formal record reflected that he put himself upon the country "de bono et malo" — for good and evil — signifying unconditional acceptance of whatever verdict the jury returned. The phrase captures the absolute and irrevocable nature of the submission: the defendant accepted both acquittal and conviction as equally binding.
2. Writ of jail delivery. The name of a specialized writ of jail delivery formerly used in England, issued for each particular prisoner individually as a matter of course. The writ was superseded by more general procedural mechanisms, and it fell out of use as English criminal administration was modernized.
The Latin phrase is the direct equivalent of the Law French "de bien et de mal," and the two forms appear interchangeably in medieval and early modern sources.
Common Language
This is pure legal and procedural Latin with no meaningful common English counterpart. The component words ("bono," "malo") appear in modern English borrowings — "bona fide," "malodorous" — but the compound phrase carries no ordinary-language meaning. Section omitted.
Common Confusion
The two distinct uses of the term — as a pleading formula and as a writ name — appear in different contexts and should not be conflated. A researcher encountering "de bono et malo" in a medieval plea roll is almost certainly reading the submission formula. A researcher encountering it in a discussion of writs or jail delivery is reading about the procedural instrument. The historical dictionaries do not always distinguish the two uses clearly.
Why It Matters in Research
This term is a marker of chronological depth. It appears almost exclusively in pre-modern English legal records — plea rolls, Year Books, treatises by Bracton and Fleta — and its presence in a source signals engagement with medieval or early modern criminal procedure rather than anything recognizable in contemporary practice.
For corpus researchers, three navigational points matter:
First, the pleading formula use predates the standardization of criminal procedure and reflects a system in which jury trial was not automatic but required the prisoner's affirmative submission. Understanding "de bono et malo" is therefore inseparable from understanding the older framework of trial by ordeal, compurgation, and the gradual displacement of those modes by jury trial. A researcher tracking the history of jury trial in England will encounter this phrase at key transitional moments.
Second, the writ of jail delivery bearing this name was a discrete procedural instrument, distinct from the general jail delivery commissions that eventually replaced it. Sources discussing the writ are discussing a specific pre-commission mechanism. Researchers should not read references to the writ as equivalent to later general delivery commissions.
Third, Rapalje & Lawrence's entry cross-references rather than defines, directing readers to "BONO ET" — a reminder that Latin phrases are inconsistently indexed in historical dictionaries. Researchers should search both the full phrase and its components when working across multiple reference works.
Historical Dictionary Support
The historical sources are in broad agreement on the core pleading meaning. Burrill provides the most useful documentation, quoting directly from Bracton (fol. 138b and 143b) to show the phrase in its original procedural context: "Et quod inde culpabilis non sit, ponit se super patriam de bono et malo" — and that he is not guilty thereof, he puts himself upon the country for good and evil. This situates the phrase precisely within the formal language of medieval criminal pleading.
Black's (both editions) adds the writ-of-jail-delivery meaning and the Law French parallel ("de bien et de mal"), which Burrill does not address. Neither Black's edition provides the Bracton citations that make Burrill's entry the more useful primary-source anchor for researchers working with medieval materials.
What the historical dictionaries collectively omit is any account of why the formula disappeared and when. They document what the phrase meant without tracing the procedural history of its obsolescence — the transition from individual submission formulas to standardized arraignment procedure. Researchers needing that arc will need to look beyond the dictionary shelf to treatise and historical literature on English criminal procedure.
Jurisdictional Note
This term is specific to historical English law and has no recognized use in American, Scottish, or other common law jurisdictions as a term of practice. American criminal procedure developed no equivalent formula. Researchers encountering the phrase in American sources are almost certainly reading texts that quote or describe English historical practice.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See Law Mind Encyclopedia: Jury Trial (Historical Development); Writ of Jail Delivery; Medieval Criminal Procedure