Definition
A member of the human body. In legal usage, the term carries two distinct registers depending on context:
1. General bodily integrity: In the constitutional phrase "life and limb," limb functions broadly to mean the physical body as a whole — bodily safety, soundness, and freedom from physical harm. The Fifth Amendment's double jeopardy clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb") uses the term in this expansive sense.
2. Mayhem-specific: In the common-law crime of mayhem, limb has a narrower and more technical meaning — restricted to those members of the body that are useful to a man in fighting or self-defense. Historically this included arms, hands, fingers, legs, and eyes, but excluded parts considered less directly relevant to combat capacity. Bouvier adds a statutory gloss: "limb" has been construed to include from the hip to the sole of the foot.
3. Figurative legal usage: "Limb of the law" is an informal, metaphorical expression for a member of the legal profession or, in some historical usage, a law enforcement officer. Anderson's notes the phrase is of uncertain origin.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): A major appendage of a human or animal used for locomotion, such as an arm, leg, or wing; also a branch of a tree, or figuratively a person regarded as part of something else.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): An arm or leg of a human being, or leg, arm, or wing of an animal; also a large branch of a tree; also a person regarded as a part or member of something else.
The common meaning is not far from the legal, but the gap is real: ordinary usage treats "limb" as a self-evident anatomical term, while legal usage subdivides it by context. Whether "limb" means the body generally or only combat-relevant members depends entirely on which legal doctrine is invoked. A researcher who imports the plain meaning into a mayhem analysis will get the doctrine wrong.
Common Confusion
"Life and limb" (constitutional) vs. "limb" in mayhem: These are not the same concept dressed in the same word. The constitutional phrase extends limb to cover bodily integrity broadly; mayhem doctrine contracts it to specific, functionally defined members. Historical sources sometimes elide this distinction. Additionally, "limb of the law" — though appearing in Anderson's and in older English usage — is a colloquial expression entirely unrelated to the anatomical senses, and should not be imported into doctrinal analysis.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers encountering "life and limb" in constitutional or criminal procedure sources should not read mayhem definitions back into that context, and vice versa. The two bodies of doctrine have different ancestry and different functional logic.
In the mayhem context, the definition of limb was genuinely contested in historical common law. Whether a particular body part qualified as a "limb" for mayhem purposes determined whether the offense was made out — a high-stakes distinction in an era when mayhem carried severe penalties. Early sources, including Blackstone (1 Bl. Comm. 130), draw the line at parts useful in fighting, but later courts and statutes expanded or redefined the category. Bouvier's statutory gloss (hip to sole of foot) reflects a particular jurisdiction's legislative resolution of this ambiguity, not a universal rule.
The phrase "limb of the law" appears in older legal literature and literary sources and can cause confusion when encountered in historical materials. It is not a term of art.
For constitutional research, "life and limb" in the Fifth Amendment context should be traced through double jeopardy doctrine rather than through mayhem or tort sources. The phrase is archaic as a constitutional formulation — modern doctrine frames double jeopardy without relying on the limb language — but it appears in foundational texts and early commentary.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's (1st and 2nd editions) are in close agreement, reproducing the same dual-register definition and the Blackstone citation. Both note that "limb" in "life and limb" denotes bodily integrity generally, while in mayhem it is restricted to combat-useful members. Neither edition offers a clear resolution of where exactly the mayhem line falls, which is historically accurate — the question was jurisdiction-dependent and contested.
Anderson's adds the "limb of the law" figurative usage, which Black's omits. This is a useful addition for researchers working in older English sources or literary legal history.
Bouvier's takes a different approach: rather than doctrinal synthesis, it supplies a statutory construction — "from the hip to the sole of the foot" — citing a specific decision. This reflects Bouvier's characteristic reliance on case law over treatise authority, and the definition is more specific (and more limited) than the Black's formulation. Researchers should not treat Bouvier's definition as universally applicable; it reflects one court's reading.
What the historical dictionaries collectively miss: none of them address the evolution of "limb" in modern tort or workers' compensation contexts, where the term has been given precise statutory definitions that may differ from both the common-law and constitutional meanings.
Jurisdictional Note
Statutory definitions of "limb" in workers' compensation, disability, and criminal codes vary by jurisdiction and often supersede common-law meaning. Some statutes enumerate specific body parts; others adopt the hip-to-sole construction; others are silent, leaving courts to apply common-law analogy. Researchers working in any modern statutory context should verify the operative definition in the relevant code rather than relying on historical dictionary formulations.