French Monks, as a continuance of the work that had been begun by Dunstan and his contemporaries, while the monastery of Bec, in Normandy, must be regarded as the actual training school of the Anglo-Saxon monasteries which had been then recently appropriated by the Normans.

The seeds of the gradual decay of these institutions were, however, planted in the same age. It was obviously necessary that the monasteries should be organised in accordance with the sharply defined feudal system that had been introduced into the State by William the Conqueror. Thus in regard to all lands which were not included in the ancient freehold property of the Church, the Benedictine abbots enjoyed the same rights, and tendered the same duties as their ecclesiastical and secular brethren—the bishops and barons. They exercised the right of jurisdiction over the property which they held, and supplied the king with subsidies of knights and squires, or in default of this, paid the customary amount of scutage, in accordance with the number and value of their fiefs. When, at a subsequent period, the parliament was constituted and organized by the representatives of the different shires and boroughs of the kingdom, a large number of abbots, who were distinguished as the mitred abbots, took their places in the Upper House, and continued to sit as peers of the realm until the time of the reformation. Thus the monastic houses became on the one hand important agents in the mechanism of the secular State, whilst on the other hand, the tendency of the new interpretation of the canonical right of the Church, which had originated with William the Conqueror's great cotemporary, Gregory VII.,was to establish

the hierarchy on a perfectly distinct footing in the world, and to place it far above the supremacy of the State. The conflict between the secular and the ecclesiastical power, and the fear lest the Church should make use of her sacred and religious character as a cloak to cover an unrighteous desire for mere external gain were strongly manifested in the history of English monastic institutions in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. At that period their original purpose was still manifest, but it was gradually lost sight of in the course of time, through the obstinate adherence to their much cherished principles, which resulted in their destruction. The good and the bad elements inherent in these institutions were at that time nearly equal, and in the following remarks we will trace the subsequent course of both.

We hear nothing more of missions for the conversion of heathen races; while nobles and peasants have long been rivalling the monks in the art of cultivating the soil. The sphere of activity of the monastic clergy was therefore greatly circumscribed, but they were still suffered, without let or hindrance, to practise the duties prescribed to them by their Church, of singing the praise of God, exercising mercy and charity, instructing the young and cultivating learning. In some of these particulars they subsequently achieved great success. Several of the abbeys acquired the reputation of being benefactors of suffering humanity; some prosecuted the instruction of the young with signal success, whilst others acquired lasting fame by the writings of their members. As Latin continued to be the language used in the services and public business of the Church, the study of this tongue was never wholly neglected, and

many English monks, more especially in the time of the first of the Plantagenets, industriously contributed by their copies to keep up an acquaintance with ancient models of style, or to multiply later writings that treated of spiritual matters, while they also collected together an important mass of writings, consisting of the annals of their respective houses, the biographies of their most distinguished brethren, numerous letters, and even state papers. It would almost appear as if the office of a royal historiographer, or keeper of the archives, had been permanently associated with the distinguished Abbey of St. Albans, since we find that, for several centuries, regular historical annals of the realm were kept there, together with copies of the protocols of the diplomatic transactions, enacted both at home and abroad, but more especially with the Papal and Imperial court. Simultaneously with this varied activity, which has proved alike valuable to their own and subsequent times, there prevailed a condition of things lamentably the reverse, but which was undoubtedly favoured by circumstances. Since the new dynasty, in the person of Henry II., had established internal order and peace in the kingdom, new sources of wealth, such as they had never before known, had been opened to the monastic institutions. Their crops and cattle, their trade and barter, had brought them very considerable profit, whilst the constantly increasing prosperity of the country augmented the tithes, and increased the money fines paid in default of penances, at the same time that it had become almost a fashion among princes and nobles, that scarcely any one should make his last will and testament without bequeathing to the monastic

institution with which he had been most closely connected during his life, some rich gift, in land or other property, or large sums for the altar, and for the saying of masses. Sometimes even, rich men founded monastic houses from their own resources. Thus avarice and an eager desire for acquisition grew with increasing wealth, and every device was soon deemed justifiable that could satisfy this passion for power. Donations, which would never have been freely made, were extorted from the dying, under the threat of withholding extreme unction, or in return for its administration and the assurance of eternal salvation. The superior knowledge of the monks, and their acquaintance with the art of writing, were prostituted to the lowest ends; and records of olden times were forged or falsified to give validity to the tenure of any questionable property which their house might hold. The State, which in the meanwhile was becoming more and more firmly based upon law and order, now therefore felt itself imperatively called upon to take up the cause of those who died intestate, and by legal enactments to put a stop to further usurpation in the name of the dead, and at the same time to prevent the annihilation of its own supremacy by the subdivision of the feudal tenures. The ecclesiastical powers came into conflict in the twelfth century with the market towns and boroughs, of which a large number had been formed through their own instrumentality, exactly as they had previously come into collision with the crown. In these boroughs and towns commerce and trade had acquired an independent footing, and had already secured special municipal rights; but notwithstanding this, the ecclesiastical houses obstinately insisted upon

their claim to receive the principal proceeds of the market and other tolls, without themselves contributing to them in any form whatever. In many instances, lawsuits arose out of these differences, as between the abbey at Westminster and the city of London, while in other cases, as at Bury St. Edmunds, the monks and townspeople fell to blows, and fought their rude brawls within the very churchyard, or even inside the walls of the abbey. At length the State was obliged to interfere, and under Edward III., a statute was passed, forbidding priests and monks from taking part in future in trade or business. While these spiritual Lords were careful to appeal to the exceptional rights which their Church claimed whenever they made any attempts unjustly to appropriate the property of others, or to maintain unchanged their old privileges, notwithstanding the totally different circumstances of the times, they were still more disposed to advance such assumed claims whenever the canonical jurisdiction came into collision with the laws of the land and the officers appointed to enforce them. A singular cause of irritation had existed throughout all the Middle Ages, which finally grew to such a height, that it required the most stringent measures for its removal. The beneficent privilege of an asylum, or sanctuary, which in olden times had once attached to certain consecrated spots where oppressed innocence might secure safety from the rough hand of power, had, through the pertinacious adherence of the clergy to their ecclesiastical exemptions, gradually grown into an abuse by becoming the means of affording the ordinary criminal illegal, and sometimes even treasonable, protection. Many of the monastic houses about this time secured