« AnteriorContinuar »
ed them is a proof, not of the illegality of private war, but of the supremacy of Parliament, to which the King himself, as well as the proudest baron of the land, was bound to give obedience. Nor is this the only remarkable instance on record of a private war in England. Mr Hallam might have found in Madox a formal truce, or cessation of hostilities, between the Earl Mirshall and the Earl of Gloucester, in the reign, probably, of Henry III. J He has himself, indeed, in a subsequent part of his book, related some acts of violence, 'amounting in effect to a private war.' § But he is mistaken in classing Foulkes de Breaute among the confederate barons at the accession of Henry III. That worthy partisan was a sturdy royalist, and steady adherent of John. His subsequent misfortunes arose from the error of supposing he might commit the same excesses, with impunity, under Hubert de Burgh, which he had successful practised by the favour and, example of his old master.
W - were inclined to have entered into some discussion with Mr Hallam concerning the state of the English boroughs at the time of the Conquest; Dut the subject is too extensive for our limits. We are apprehensive, that, notwithstanding his well-founded suspicions of Brady, he has confided too implicitly in that author's history of boroughs, the most imperfect and unfair of all his works. He is inclined, we perceive, to doubt the existence of municipal jurisdiction among the Saxons. He quotes indeed the charter of Lincoln, which * refers to municipal privileges of jurisdiction enjoyed by the citizens under the Confessor 5 * but supposes, that as Lincoln was one of the five Danish towns, * it might be in a more advantageous situation than the generality' of boroughs, If he had looked to the charter of Henry II. to the burgesses of Wallingford, published by Brady himself, he would have found a similar recognition of munici-r pal jurisdiction nnder the Confessor, and, in particular, a confirmation of their mercantile gild, with all its laws and customs, as then enjoyed, among which was this privilege, ne propositus •metis, vel aliqua justicia mea de gilda eorum se intromittat, nisi jpropvie aldermannus et minister eorum. * From a charter of Henry I. published by Madox, it appears, that the Cnihtengild of London had a soke or manor within the city, which they had enjoyed under the Confessor, and probably from the time of Edgar, with sac and soc and other privileges of Saxon jurisdiction. These privileges they transferred in the time of Henry I. to the priory of the Holy Trinity, in consequence of which the
i Formulare Anglican. *>. 84• § p. 375. 377.
* Foedera, 1.471.
prior of that monastery became one of the aldermen of London, and continued to exercise that office till the suppression of convents in 1531. The ward governed so long in this extraordinary manner, is now called Portsokcn ward. f
We are not in the least disposed to enter on the controversy concerning the origin of the House of Commons. We are inclined, in the main, to agree with Mr Hallam; but we cannot help remarking to him, that the villain mentioned in the 16 Henry III. were not villeins, but townsmen, as he will at once perceive, if he takes the trouble to peruse the writ. % We are agreed also, that some of his Parliaments, after the 49 Henry III. must-be rejected as spurious. The citizens and burgesses were not summoned to a Parliament in 1269, but to assist at a religious ceremony. The instance at the accession of Edward I. is a case more in point; but the chief object of the meeting was to swear fealty to the King.
But, without searching further for errors and omissions unavoidable in a work like this, we shall proceed to the more pleasing task of giving some extracts, as specimens of the tone and spirit of Mr Hallam's constitutional remarks. After relating the impeachment of Suffolk, and the appointment of a parliamentary commission for reform, in the tenth of Richard II., he makes the following observations.
'Those, who have written our history with more or less of a Tory bias, exclaim against this parliamentary commission as an unwarrantable violation of the King's sovereignty; and even impartial men are struck at first sight by a measure that seems to overset the natural balance of our constitution. But it would be unfair to blame either those concerned in this commission, some of whose nanu s at least have been handed down with unquestioned respect, or those highspirited representatives of the people, whose patriot firmness has been hitherto commanding all our sympathy and gratitude, unless we could distinctly pronounce by what gentler means they could restrain the excesses of government. Thirteen Parliaments had already met since the accession of Richard; in all, the same remonstrances had been repeated, and the same promises renewed. Subsidies, more frequent than in any former reign, had been granted for the supposed exigencies of the war; but this was no longer illuminated by those dazzling victories• which give to fortune the mien of wisdom. The coasts of England were perpetually ravaged, and her trade destroyed; while the administration incurred the suspicion of diverting to private uses that, treasure which they so fully and unsuccessfully-applied to the public service. No voice of his people, until it spoke in
f Firma Burgi, 23— Stow's Survey of London, L 3,45.
thunder, would stop an intoxicated boy in die wasteful career of dissipation. He loved festivals and pageants, the prevailing folly of bis time, with unusual frivoHty; and his ordinary living is represented as beyond comparison more showy and sumptuous than even that of Lis magnificent and chivalrous predecessor. Acts of Parliament were no adequate barrier to his misgovernment. Of what avail are statutes, says Walsingharo, since the king, with his privy council, is wont .to abolish what Parliament has just enacted? The constant prayer of the Commons in every session, that former statutes might be kept in force, is no slight presumption that they were not secure «£ being regarded. It may be true that Edward IIL's government had been full as arbitrary, though not so unwise as his grandson's; but this is the stronger argument, that nothing less than an extraordinary remedy could preserve the still unstable liberties of England.
'The best plea that could be made for Richard was his inexperience, and the misguiding suggestions of favourites. This, however, made it more necessary to remove those false advisers, and to supply that inexperience. Unquestionably, the choice of ministers is reposed in the sovereign ;' a trust, like every other attribute of legitimate power, for the public good; not, what no legitimate power can. ever be, the instrument of selfishness or caprice. There is something ■rore sacred than the prerogative, or even than the constitution; the public weal, for which all powers axe granted, and to which they must all he referred. For this public weal, it is confessed to be sometimes Beccssary to shake the possesso* of the throne out of his seat: could it never be permitted l» suspend, though but indirectly and for a time, the positive e-jcexcise of misapplied prerogatives? He has learned in a very different school from myself,. who denies to Parliament, at the present day, a preventive as well as vindictive control over the administration of affairs ;' a right of resisting, by those means which lie within its sphere, the appointment of uafit ministers. These means are now indirect; they need not be the less effectual, and they are certainly more salutary on that account,'
After tliis opinion of tl*e conduct aml character of Richard, the rentier of' Mr Hallam will. not be surprised to find him approving of his subsequent deposition, and of the elevation of Henry'of Lancaster to the throne.
• His government, for nearly two years, was altogether' tyrannical; and, upon the same principles that cost James II. his throne, it was unquestionably far more necessary, unless our fathers would have Abandoned all thought of liberty, to expel Richard II.'—' The revolution which elevated Henry IV. to the throne, was certainly so far accomplished by force, that the king was in captivity; and those whq might still adhere to him, in no condition to support his authority. Jpat the sincere concurrence, which most of the prelates and nobility, if ith. the'mass of the people, gave to changes that could not have been otherwise effected by one so unprovided with foreign support as •Henry, proves this revolution to have been, if not an indispensable, yet -a national act, and should prevent our considering the Lancastrian Kings as usurpers of the throne.'—' The claim of Henry, as opposed to that ,of the Earl of March, was indeed ridiculous; but it is by no means evident, that, in such cases of extreme urgency, as leave ,00 security for the common weal but the deposition of a reigning prince, there rests any positive obligation upon the Estates of the realm to fill his place with the nearest heir. A revolution of this Jiind seems rather to defeat and confound all prior titles, though in the new settlement it will commonly be prudent, as well as equitable, to treat them with some regard.'
In discussing the claim of the House of York, he does justice to the moderation and humanity of the excellent person who first brought forward that pretension; and remarks, that the sanguinary violence of Margaret left him not the choice of perhaVirng a subject with impunity.
* But with us, who are to weigh these antient factions in the balance of wisdom and justice, there should be no hesitation in deciding, that the House of Lancaster were lawful sovereigns of England. i am indeed astonished,' says Mr Hallam, ' that not only such historians as Carte, who wrote undisguisedly upon a Jacobite systemi j?ut even men of juster principles, have been inadvertent enough to mention the right of the house of York. If the original consent of the nation,—if three descents of the throne,—if repeated acts of parliament,—if oaths of allegiance from the whole kingdom, and more particularly from those who now advanced a contrary pretension,—if undisturbed, unquestioned possession during sixty years, could not secure the reigning family against a mere defect in their genealogy, when were the people to expect tranquillity? Sceptres were committed, and governments were instituted, for public protection and public happiness,—not certainly for the benefit of rulers, or for the security of particular destinies. No prejudice has less in its favour; and none has been more fatal to the peace of mankind, than that which regards a nation of subjects as a family's private inheritance. For, as this opinion induces reigning prinfces and their courtiers, to look on the people as made only to "obey them; so, when the tide of events has swept them from their thrones, it begets a fond hope of restoration, a sense of injury and imprescriptible rights, which give the show of justice to fresh disturbances of public order, and rebellious against established authority.'
On the Regency question we have the misfortune to differ from Mr Hallam. The narrative on the rolls of Parliament, t» which he refers, (p. 398), does not, in our opinion, prove, that^ during the infancy or infirmity of the King, the ' right of determining the persons by whom, and fixing the limitations under which, the executive government shall be conducted in the King's name alid behalf, devolves upon the great Council of Parliament,' understanding by that phrase the two houses of Parliament without the King, or some one to represent his person. Mr Hallam's mistake arises from his not adverting to the fact, that the Parliament which met at the accession ot Henry Vlth, was a full and complete Parliament, being held by the }>uke of Gloucester, under a commission from the Great Seal.
Mr Hallam's last chapter contains a variety of miscellaneous information on the state of society in Europe in the middle ages. It is full of curious and entertaining matter, but obviously incapable of abridgement.
Art. VI. fyon en Mil Huit Cent Dix-Sept. Par Ie Colonel Fabvien, ayant fait les Fonctions de Chef de l'Etat Major du Lieutenant du Roi dans les 7me et 19me Divisions Militaircs. Paris. Delaunay, 1818.
't'his little tract is full of interest to those who read for mere amusement; and it is calculated to convey much useful instruction to the government of every country, which either is, or, from sinister views, is represented to be, in a disturbed state. We regard it as teaching a most valuable lesson to those who are at the head of affairs in France :—and it is very melancholy to add, that it may not be thrown away upon the rulers of our own country, where no such excuses are to be found for rashly charging the people with disaffection, and treating them as traitors, because. one set of men are alarmed at nothing, and another have an interest in pretending to be so.
It is well known, that, in the course of the last summer, serious discontents existed in the city of Lyons .and its neighbourhood. These feelings broke out into acts of open violence. Many examples were made; the jails were filled with prisoners | the eouvsjirevotales were busily occupied; the publick functionaries were incessant in their pursuit of delinquents. All that transpired of the effects of these proceedings, was the increase of the evil—although the disturbed districts exhibited the imposing appearance of a most active and indefatigable government, bent upon investigation and punishment. The government having, for a considerable time, been misled by the usual false statements of the local authorities, and perceiving, at last, that there were gross crror« committed somewhere, resolved, most judiciously, to send an officer of high rank to the spot, and arm him with the fullest powers. Equally happy was the selection.