In 1166, Henry issued a Declaration at the Assize of Clarendon...
The Assize of Clarendon ordered the remaining non-King’s Bench judges to travel the country – which was divided into different circuits – deciding cases.
In his article Medieval English government, Professor Johann P. Sommerville gives more details:
From the mid 12th Century, the crown sent royal judges to try legal cases throughout the country. The circuits of these Justices in Eyre (and later of the Justices of Assize) covered the whole realm and they heard both civil and criminal cases. They often also performed administrative duties, enquiring for example into the conduct of local royal officials.
There is no mention of any kind of remuneration in either of the above sources, nor in this source which also seems to be referring to the 1166 declaration. However, in the article Why Roman Law Did Not Succeed in England, Bernard W. Hoeter says:
The English Crown exercised supervision over local courts by dispatching itinerant, unpaid judges to preside during assizes.
It seems that Hoeter is referring to the same judges as the other sources (but I could be wrong). Later in the article he mentions "revenue from fines" but it's not clear from the context if that money went to the judges or to the crown. If to the former, this would surely be open to serious abuse.
- Were these travelling / itinerant judges unpaid? If so, was this because they were already independently wealthy (e.g. lords)?
- Did they get a percentage of the fines and, if so, did this lead to some judges abusing their power?
- Were there any fringe benefits? Most obviously, I'm thinking that there might have been some kind of recognition or 'promotion' if they did a good job.