Definition
Homine capto in withernam (Latin: "for a man taken in withernam") was a writ in old English law directed at recovering a bondman or bondwoman who had been unlawfully removed from the jurisdiction by another party. When a villein or serf was taken and carried out of the country — meaning beyond the reach of ordinary legal process — so that the person could not be replevied (restored through replevin proceedings) in the normal course, this writ provided a remedy. It authorized the taking of the wrongdoer, or in some formulations a substitute person or property belonging to the wrongdoer, as a counteraction against the removal.
The term is drawn from the broader legal concept of withernam, which was itself a retaliatory or counter-taking remedy. Where the original subject of a replevin or similar action had been spirited away and could not be produced, withernam allowed a kind of proportionate response — a taking in return.
This writ is obsolete. It belongs entirely to the pre-modern English legal system, tied to the institution of villeinage and the procedural law governing bondmen under the feudal common law. It has no functional equivalent in modern law.
---
Common Confusion
Homine capto in withernam is closely related to, but distinct from, the general writ of withernam and the writ of capias in withernam. Withernam in its broader sense applied to the wrongful taking of goods or chattels — particularly in connection with distress and replevin — and the counter-taking permitted when those goods had been removed beyond the sheriff's reach. Homine capto in withernam is the specific variant addressing persons (bondmen and bondwomen) rather than goods. Researchers encountering "withernam" in historical sources should determine whether the context involves goods, distress, or persons, as the procedural rules and applicable writs differed accordingly.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This term appears almost exclusively in the oldest strata of English legal materials — Year Books, early registers of writs, and treatises on the forms of action predating the abolition of villeinage. The entry in Black's 2nd Edition cites Reg. Orig. 79, referring to the Registrum Omnium Brevium (Register of Writs), the foundational medieval compilation of writ forms. Researchers consulting Black's should be aware that the 2nd Edition entry is truncated, trailing into the adjacent entry for Homine Eligendo — a common artifact of early legal dictionary pagination and typesetting — and does not constitute a full description of the writ's procedural scope.
The research significance of this term is almost entirely antiquarian. It surfaces in historical studies of:
— Villeinage and feudal tenure in English common law
— The forms of action and the development of replevin
— The Register of Writs as a source on pre-modern procedural law
— The legal status of unfree persons in medieval England
Because the writ presupposes the legal institution of villeinage — the condition of being a bondman subject to a lord — it becomes a dead letter following the effective disappearance of villeinage in English practice by the early modern period. No American jurisdiction ever recognized this writ, and it has no analogue in equity or modern civil procedure.
Researchers using full-text historical corpus searches should note that "withernam" is the operative search term likely to surface relevant primary materials. "Homine capto in withernam" as a complete phrase will appear rarely outside writ registers and dictionaries that catalogue it.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's 2nd Edition provides the core entry, citing Reg. Orig. 79 as authority. The entry is brief, functional, and accurate as far as it goes: it correctly identifies the writ as a remedy for the removal of a bondperson beyond the reach of ordinary replevin. The truncation of the entry in the printed source (running immediately into Homine Eligendo) leaves the procedural mechanics underdeveloped, but this reflects the dictionary's format rather than any error in the definition itself.
Earlier English legal lexicographers — Rastell, Cowell, Blount, and Jacob — catalogued variants of withernam writs in their respective works on law terms, though coverage varies in depth. The consensus across historical sources is consistent: withernam remedies were counter-taking procedures, and the homine capto variant addressed the specific problem of personal bondage and removal of unfree persons. None of the historical dictionaries provide significant elaboration on procedural steps or jurisdictional scope beyond the basic identification of the writ's purpose.
What historical sources collectively underemphasize is the writ's embeddedness in the lord-villein relationship. The remedy was not available for free persons; its entire rationale depended on the legal concept that a villein was, in a qualified sense, the property of the lord, recoverable through legal process analogous to the recovery of goods.
---
Jurisdictional Note
This writ is specific to the historical common law of England and has no reception history in American, Scottish, or other common law jurisdictions. It is a term of purely historical and comparative legal interest.
---