The Difference between an Absolute and a Limited Monarchy

OTHER WISE CALLEDThe Difference between an Absoluteand a Limited MonarchyBY SIR JOHN FORTESCUE, KT.SOMETIME CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE KING'S BENCHSecond Impression 1ga6First Edition I 885This inrpression has been produced photographically by theRlusro~ COYP.~NY,~YO~Z sheefs of the First EditionEDI I'EDWITH INTRODUCT/ON, NOTES, AND APPENDICESBYCHARLES PLURIMER, M.A.Fellow and Cha#hi~z of Cows Clrrisfi College, OxfordPyi~zled ZU~OL)IY in EngZaud for the MUSTON COMPANYBy LOWE & BRY~ONE, PRINTERS. LTD.PARK STREET. CAMDRN TOWN, LONDON, N.W. IOXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESSLONDON : HUMPHREY MILFORD

PAGEvxiii'The idea of a polity in which there is the same law for all, a polity administeredwith regard to equal rights and equal freedom of speech, and theidea of a kingly government which respects most of all the liberty of thego5erned.'-LONG'S TRANSLATION.INTRODUCTION :Part I. Constitutional Sketch of the Lancastrian and YorkistPerlod (1399-1483). . . . . .Part 11. Life of Sir John Fortescue . . . . .Part 111. Writings, Opinions, and Character of Sir John Fortescue. . . . . . . .SIR JOHN FORTESCUE ON THE GOVERNANCE OF ENGLAND .APPENDIX A. 'Example what Good Counseill helpith andavantageth, and of the contrare whatfolowith. Secundum Sr. J. Ffortescu,Knighte ' . . . . . . .APPENDIX B. 'Articles sente fro the Prince, to therle ofWarrewic his fadir-in-lawe '. . .APPENDIX C. ' The Replication agenst the clayme and titleoftheDucoffYorke'. . . . .APPENDIX D. Fragment of the treatise 'On the Title of theHouseofYork'. . . . . .

THE work here presented to the reader has been threetimes previously printed ; twice, in 1714 and 1719 by Mr..afterwards Sir John, Fortescue-Aland, who ultimatelybecame Lord Fortescue of Credan, and once by LordClermont in his edition of the collected works of Fortescuel.Of these editions the two first havc become very scarce.while the third is only printed for private circulation. Ofall three the value is very much impaired by the fact thatthe text is based on a comparatively late manuscript;while no attempt has ever been made to bring out tliehistorical significance and relations of the treatise. It ishoped therefore that the appearance of the presentedition, which aims at supplying these deficiencies, will notbe considered to be without justification.Had the treatise ' On the Governance of England ' noother claims on our attention, it would deserve considerationas the earliest treatise on the English Constitution writtenin the English language. Rut as a matter of fact, itshistorical interest is very high indecd ; far higher, I ventureto think, than that of the author's better-known Latintreatise De Lalm7i6us Leg-~~g~t AfgZia. We here see thatFrom two notices in Heame's Collections (ed. Doble, i. 46, 154) it woilldthat Lord Fortescue of Credan at one time entertained the idea, ultlmatel~carried out by Lord Clermont, of printing a collected edition of theworks of their ancestor.

iiipreface.Fortescue, while remaining true to those liberal principlesof government which he had previously enunciated, was yetIceenly sensible of the evils of Lancastrian rule, and that inthe various remedies suggested by him, which have fortheir object the strengthening of the powers of the Crownand the reduction of the influence of the nobles, he was,consciously or unconsciously, helping to prepare the wayfor the New Monarchy.This connexion of the work with the history of the timeI have endeavoured to draw out, by bringing together fromcontemporary authorities whatever seemcd to illustrate themeaning of the author. The closeness of the connexion isshown by the fact, more than once pointed out in the notesto the present edition, that the language of Fortescue isoften identical with that of the public documents of theperiod. And this in turn illustrates another point of someimportance to which I have also drawn attention ; the factnamely that Fortescue, first of medixval political philosophers,based his reasonings mainly on observation of existingconstitutions, instead of merely copying or commentingon Aristotle.It follows from this that the inspiration which Fortescuederived from literary sources is subordinate in importanceto that which he drew from the practical lessons of historyand politics. But I have endeavoured to illustrate thispoint also. The four works of which Fortescue seems tohave made most use are : the De Regignine Przlzcipunzwhich goes under the name of St. Thomas Aquinas, thoughonly a portion of it is by him; the treatise with the sametitle by Agidius Romanus; the De Morali PyincipumInstitutione of Vincent of Beauvais ; and the Cowi$~ndizigriMorale of Roger of Waltham. The first two works havebeen often printed, and are more or less well known; thetwo last exist only in manuscript. It has added interest tomy study of Vincent of Beauvais' treatise that I have beenable tc. read it in the very manuscript used by Fortescuehimself. The Comn$e?zdiz~nt Morale of Roger of WalthamI think I may almost claim to have discovered ; for thoughit is mentioned by Leland and his copyists, it is clear thatthey cannot have had much acquaintance with its contents,they would not have fixed the author's j'orz~it asthey have done. Of Aristotle, except so far as Aristoteliandoctrines are embodied in the above-named works, Ihave shown that Fortescue knew nothing beyond thecollection of quotations which goes by the name of theAuctoritntes Avistotclis.One of the most important sources from which an authorcan be illustrated is himself. From this point of view I amunder the greatest obligations to the collection of Fortescue'sWorks printed-I wish I could have added, published-by his descendant, Lord Clermont. It is I trust in nocaptious spirit that I have occasionally pointed out what seemto me omissions and mistakes on the part of the noble editor.If all representatives of historic houses would imitate theexample set by Lord Clermont, light would be thrown onmany a dark corner of English history. I have also derivedmuch assistance from the scholarly notes on Fortescue'slongest work, the ?De Natu~d Lcgis Arnture, with whichLord Carlingford, then Mr. Chichester Fortescue, enrichedhis brother's edition of that treatise.In regard to the Appendices, the first and third aremerely reprints from older and completer MSS. of documentsalready given by Lord Clermont ; the second andfourth are new, though I have given reasons for believingthat the last is a fragment of a treatise of which otherhave been printed by Lord Clermont. Fromthe second a brief extract was printed by Sir Henryin his Historical Letters, though without recognisingeither its author or its importance. It is however, as Ihave shown, closely connected with the present work, theb

preface. preface, xihistorical bearing and significance of which it illustrates in avery striking manner.In reference to the life and times of Fortescue I havebeen able to glean some facts which have escaped previousbiographers. These are derived chiefly from French andBurgundian sources. I cannot help thinking that the valueof these authorities for English history, though long agopointed out by Mr. Kirk in his History of Charles the Bold,has hardly been sufficiently appreciated by English historians; while if the archives of France contain many moredocuments bearing on English history equal in importanceto those printed by Mdlle. Dupont in her edition of Waurinand by M. Quicherat in his edition oi Basin (both publishedunder the auspices of the Socidti: de 1'Histoire de France),much light may be hoped for from that quarter. A visit tothe Record Office enabled me to clear up some mistakes andobscurities in regard to Fortescue's landed property.It will be seen that I have edited this work from a historicaland not from a philological point of view. Of the MSS.employed in the formation of the text a sufficient accountwill be found in the Introduction. A few words may herebe said as to the manner in which I have dealt with them.I have, I believe, noted all cases in which I have departedfrom the reading of the MS. on which I have based mytext. In other instances I have only given such variousreadings as seemed to me to have some historical or philologicalinterest, or to be of importance as illustrating therelations of the MSS. to one another. For9ns of wordswhich appeared to me worthy of notice I have frequentlyincluded in the Glossary, with an indication of the MS.from which they are taken. Stops and capitals are intro-duced in conformity with modern usage; quotations havebeen indicated, as in MS. Y, by the use of Gothic letters.I have not attempted to distinguish between Early English) and Middle-English y, as they are sometimes called ;they are used promiscuously, they fade imperceptibly intoand after all the y is only badly written.1 have printed P throughout. In regard to the junctionand of words the MS. has been closely followed.The only exception is in the case of the indefinite article aor an, which in the MS. is sometimes joined with and sometimesseparated from the word to which it belongs ; I havealways separated it. In the case of words just hovering onthe verge of becoming compounds, and neither completelyjoined nor completely separated in the MS., I have followedthe example of Professor Earle and divided the elements bya half-space, objecting with him to-the use of hyphens asa purely modern invention. In the MS. the worcr n?zd issometimes abbreviated, sometimes written in full ; it ishere always printed in full. With these exceptions thepeculiarities of the MS. followed are, I believe, faithfullyreproduced, extended contractions being marked in theusual way by italics.The Glossarial Index is merely intended to give help tothose who, reading the text for historical purposes, may bepuzzled by Middle-English forms or meanings. It makesno pretensions to any philological value.I trust that this work may prove useful both to teachersand students of history in Oxford and elsewhere. But mymain object has been to illustrate my author, and that isthe point of view from which I would desire to be judged.In a body of notes ranging over so many subjects, someof them lying far outside the sphere of my ordinary studies,it is possible that there should not be slips andFor the correction of these, whether publiclyOr privately, I shall always be grateful ; and I should wishas my own the words of one of the most unselfishlabourers in the field of learning, Hermann Ebel : opprobretnobis, qui volet, mod0 corrigat.'Itfor me to pay the tribute of my heartyb 2

thanks in the many quarters where that tribute is due.I have to thank the Delegates of the Clarendon Press forthe generous confidence with which they accepted the workof an untried hand, and for the liberality with which theypermitted an extension of its scope much beyond what wasoriginally contemplated. To the Lord Bishop of Chester Iam under special obligations ; who not only encouragedme to undertake the work, but both as a Delegate of thePress and in his private capacity heIped it forward at a greatexpenditure of trouble to himself; to his published writingsI, in common with all students of history, owe a debt ofgratitude which can never be adequately expressed. To theRev. C. W. Boase, Fellow of Exeter College, I am indebtedfor constant encouragement and assistance ; nor am I the firstwho has profited by his wealth of historical learning ; whileProfessor Skeat gave me much kind help and advice withreference to points of philology. Mr. Edward Edwards.the well-known and accomplished author of the Life ofRalegh, took more trouble than I like to think of, in theendeavour to clear up some points in which I was interested.That his researches were not always crowned with successdoes not diminish my sense of gratitude. The help whichI have received in regard to special points is acknowledgedin the book itself. I am indebted to Lord Calthorpe forthe facilities which he afforded me in consulting the YelvertonMS., to Mr. Henry Rradshaw for similar favours inregard to the Cambridge MS., and to the Master andFellows of Trinity College, Cambridge, for the loan of theirMS. containing the Epitome; while to the Provost andFellows of Queen's College, Oxford, my thanks are due forallowing me even a larger use of their valuable library thanthat which they so liberally accord to all Graduates. Ihave to thank Mr. W. D. Selby, who directed my researchesat the Record Office ; and Mr. E. J. L. Scott, of the Departmentof MSS., who did me the like service at the Britishg%eface,Museum. At the Bodleian I received constant help fromMr. Madan the Sub-Librarian, while Mr. Macray was anunfailing oracle on all points of palaography. I shouldlike also to thank generally the officials of all the threeinstitutions which I have named, for their unfailing courtesy,and helpfulness. To the many friends who havehelped me, if indirectly, yet very really by their sympathyand the interest they have taken in my work, I would alsohere return my grateful thanks. To one of them this workwould probably have been dedicated, were it not thatdedications are said to be somewhat out of date in thisenlightened age.C. C. C., OXON.,]U& 29, 1885.xiii

NOTE.-AS a general rule the authorities referred to will be easilyidentified ; only those are given here as to which any doubt might belikely to arise.-[C. S. = Camden Society. R. S. = Rolls Series.]ERRATA.p. 41, 1. 13, for Chief Justice of England, rcad Chief Justice of the King'sBench.p 64, note 5; p. 65, note z ; p. 215, 1. 13 from bottom, for Ormond, rtadOrmonde.p. 81, 1. zz, for trace, readtract.p. 84,l. 10, for 1464, read 1463.p. 249, 1. 6 from bottom,for de, read le.p. 263,l. 7 from bottom,for sports, read spots.p. 349, margin, insert his after Warrewic.Xgidius Romanus, De Regivzi~ie Pri?zcz$wn. English translation inMS. Digby 233.Ulakman, in Hearne's Otterbourne.Burton, History of Scotland. Cabinet edition.Chastellain, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove.Continuator of Croyland, in Fulman's Scriptores Veteres, vol. i.fol. 1684.De Coussy, ed. Buchon.English Chronicle, ed. Davies. C. S.Fabyan, ed. Ellis, $0.Fortescue's Works, etc., ed. Clermont.The writings of Fortescue occupy the first volume of a work in twovolumes by Lord Clermont, with the title 'Sir John Forteshe andhis Descendants ;' the Family History forming the second volume.The latter was however subsequently reprinted as a substantivework, and it is always this second edition which is cited under thetitle ' Family History.' The Legal Judgements of Sir John Fortescuewill be found at the end of his Works, with a separatepagination. Of his works, the De Naturd Legis Nature is citedfor shortness as N. L. N., the L Governance of England ' as theMonarchia.Froude, History of England. Cabinet Edition.Grego~'s Chronicle, in Gairdner's ' Collections of a London Citizen.'C. S.Chronicle, 4to., ed. 1809.

xviai$t of autboritiea.Hallam, Constitutional History. Library Edition, 1854.,, Literature of Europe. Cabinet Edition.,, Middle Ages. Cabinet Edition, 1872.Hardyng, ed. Ellis. 4to.Hearne's Fragment, in Hearne's ' Sprotti Chronica.'Household, Ordinances of the Royal, published by the Society ofAntiquaries. (Cited as ' Ordinances, &C.')ivlartineau, History of the Peace. 4 vols. 8vo., 1877-8.Monstrelet. 3 vols. fol., 1595.Paston Letters, ed. Gairdner.Political Songs, ed. Wright. C. S.99 9) R. S.Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council, ed. Sir HarrisNicolas. (Cited as P. P. C.)Pseudo-Aquinas. Under this title is cited that part of the De RegiminePrincz~unz which is not by St. Thomas Aquinas.Rede's Chronicle, in MS. Rawl. C. 398.Rymer's Fcedera. Original Edition, 1704-1735.Stowe's Annals, ed. 1631, fol.Stubbs' Constitutional History. Cabinet Edition.(Cited as S. C. H,)Turner, Sharon, History of England during the Middle Ages. 8vo.Edition.Vincent of Beauvais, De MoraLiPrincifizr7lt Institzrtione, in MS. Raw].C. 398.\iTaltham, Roger of, Co~~ipendii~~i~ Morale, in hIS. Laud. hlisc. 616.Wars of8 the English in France, Letters and Papers illustrative of the,ed. Stevenson. K. S. (Cited as ' English in France.')Waurin, Anchiennes Chroniques, ed. Mdlle. Dupont. (Societ.6 de1'Histoire de France.)\Vhethamstede. R.S.Worcester, Willialn, Collections, and i\nnals, in Wars of the Englishin France, q. v.atbronoiogical Cable of tbe Life, Cimes, ano? 1390-1400, Birth of Fortescue.1399. Oct. Accession of Henry IV.1413. &farch. Accession of Henry V.1422. Sept. Accession of Henry VI.1425, 1426, and 1429. Fortescue Governor of Lincoln's Inn.1429 or 1430. Fortescue becomes a Sergeant-at-Law.1429. NOV. 6. Coronation of Henry V1 at Westminster.1431. Dec. 17. 9, ,, at Paris.1435. Aug. Conference of Arras.? 143 j-6. Fortescue marries Elizabeth or Isabella Jamyss.1435-6. Fortescue acquires lands in Devonshire by grant of hisbrother Henry.1439. Conference of Calais.1440. Jzmc. Gloucester's manifesto on the release of the Duke ofOrleans.1440 and 1441. Fortescue acts as Judge of Assize on the Norfolkcircuit.I44I. Easter Temt. Fortescue made a King's Sergeant.- Grant to Fortescue and his wife of lands at Philip's Norton.'44% /a?t.Fortescue made Chief Justice of the King's Bench.Feb. Grant to Fortescue of a tun of wine annually.Oct. Fortescue -ordered to certify the Council as to certainindictments brought against the Abbot of Tower Hill.FOrtescue ordered to commit to bail certain adherents of SirWilliam Boneville.Or I443. Fortescue knighted.

xviii CLbconological Cable, QLbronologicaI Cable, six1443. Jan. or Feb. Fortescue sent on a special commission intoNorfolk.1March 4. Letter of thanks from the Council to Fortescue.- 14. Fortescue ordered to send to the Council a list ofpersons eligible for the offices of J.P. and Sheriff inNorfolk.23. Fortescue makes his report to the Council on theaffairs of Norfolk.April3 and May 3. Fortescue attends the Privy Council.May 8. Warrant ordered for the payment of 50 marks toFortescue.May 10. Fortescue summoned to advise the Council withreference to the attacks on Cardinal Kemp's estates.- I I. Fortescue makes his report to the Council.- 18. Fortescue sent on a special commission into Yorkshire.May. Grant to Fortescue of a tun of wine annually.Ju& 11. Fortescue attends the Privy Council.Confirmation to Fortescue and his wife of the lands at Philip'sNorton.1444. Jan. Fortescue ill of sciatica, and unable to go on circuit.1445. Feb.-1455. /U&. Fortescue a trier of petitions in Parliament.r445. April 22. Marriage of Henry V1 with Margaret of Anjou.1447. Feb. 23. Death of Gloucester.March. Fortescue receives an addition ofA4o to his salary.April I I. Death of Cardinal Beaufort.Oct. Fortescue and his wife receive letters of confraternityfrom Christ Church, Canterbury.Fortescue refuses to deliver Thomas Kerver out of WallingfordCastle.I 447-8 Fortescue arbitrates between the Chapter and Corporationof Exeter.lqjo. ja/~.-~lFarch. Fortescue acts as spokesman of the Judges inrelation to the trial of Suffolk.May. Murder of Suffolk. Rising of Cade.Aug. Fortescue sent on a special commission into Kent.Sejnf. The Duke of York comes over from Ireland.1451. May-June. Fortescue expecting to be attacked in his house.,452. Oct. Fortescue acquires the manor of Geddynghall, and otherlands in Suffolk.1~53. ]U& 6. The King falls ill at Clarendon.Oct. 13. Birth of Prince Edward of Lancaster.1454. Feb. Fortescue delivers the opinion of the Judges on the caseof Thorpe.March 22. Death of Kemp.Apn'l 3. York appointed Protector.June g. Edward of Lancaster created Prince of Wales.Dec. 25. Recovery of the King.Fortescue divests himself of his lands in Devonshire in favourof his son Martin.1455. May 22. First battle of St. Alban's. Death of Fortescue'syounger brother, Sir Richard Fortescue.Oct. The King falls ill again at Hertford.Nov. rg. York reappointed Protector.1456. Feb. The King recovers.Feb. 25. York dismissed from the Protectorship.Feb. Fortescue arbitrates between Sir John Fastolf and SirPhilip Wentworth.March. Fortescue consulted by the Council with reference tothe Sheriffdom of Lincolnshire.May. Fortescue sits on a special commission at the Guildhall.Fortescue acquires the reversion of the manor of Ebrington.1457. May. Fortescue acquires lands at Holbeton, Devon.'458. March 25. Peace made between the Lancastrians and I'orkists.Margaret of Anjou instigates Charles V11 to send French troopsto England.'459 Sept. 23. Battle of Bloreheath.Oct. 12. Dispersal of the Yorkists at Ludlow.Nov. Parliament of Coventry. Activity of Fortescue.Dec. 7. Attainder of the Yorkists.Foftescue appointed a feoffee for executing the King's will.'4". Feb. Negotiations of Margaret of Anjou with France.Jub 10. Battle of Northampton.Oct. The Duke of York claims the crown.

Oct. Margaret and the Prince in Wales.Dec. 31. Battle of Wakefield.1461. ]an.Negotiations of Margaret and the Dowager Queen ofScotland at Lincluden.Jan. 20. Bond of Lancastrian lords to induce Henry V1 to 4accept the terms agreed upon.Feb. 3. Battle of Mortimer's Cross.- 17. Second battle of St. Alban's.? Fortescue joins the Lancastrian forces.March 4. Edward IV proclaimed.- 29. Fortescue present at the battle of Towton.The Lancastrians take refuge in Scotland.Apvii! 25. Agreement of the Lancastrians to surrender Berwickto the Scots.May. Berwick full of Scots. Carlisle besieged by the Scots.The siege raised by Montague.June 26. Fortescue and others 'rear war' against Edward IVat Ryton and Brancepeth.- 28. Coronation of Edward IV.July 22. Death of Charles V11 of France.1462. Feb. Lancastrian plots for invading England.Feb. 20. Execution of the Earl of Oxford.June 1461-March 1462. Somerset and Hungerford negotiateon the Continent in behalf of the Lancastrian cause.1462. March. Somerset and Hungerford return to Scotland. A fleetfor invading England assembles in the Seine.Apn'Z. Margaret and Prince Edward go to the Continent.June 28. Treaty signed between Margaret and Louis XI.Summer. Negotiations of the Scots with Edward IV.- The Northern castles lost by the Lancastrians.Sept. Warwick defeats the invading fleet.Oct. Margaret returns from France and recovers the Northerncastles ; is joined by Henry V1 in Northumberland.Nov. Henry V1 and Margaret retire to Scotland.Dec. 24. Bamburgh and Dunstanburgh surrender, and Somersetsubmits to Edward IV.1463. jan. 6. Alnwick falls.Before A@. 29. Bamburgh and two other castles recovered bythe Lancastrians.May. Alnwick goes over to the Lancastrian side.Jwe. Henry V1 and Margaret at Bamburgh.The Lancastrians dispersed by Warwick.Henry and Margaret retire to Scotland.]g&. Margaret, Prince Edward, and Fortescue go to the Continent.Sejt. 1-2. Interview of Margaret with Philip the Good atSt. Pol.The Lancastrian exiles retire to St. Mighel in Barrois. Negotlationswith foreign courts.Dec. Somerset returns to the Lancastrian allegiance.1461-1463. Fortescue writes the 'De Naturii Legis Naturte,'and various tracts on the succession question.1464. ]an. Henry V1 at Edinburgh.Spring. Norham and Skipton in Craven captured by theLancastrians. Lancastrian rising in Lancashire andCheshire.March. Henry V1 at Bamburgh.April 25. Battle of Hedgeley Moor.May I. Edward IV privately married to Elizabeth Wydv~lle.- 8. Battle of Hexham.- I g. Execution of Somerset.- 27. Execution of Hungerford.Henry V1 retires to Scotland.June. Surrender of Alnwick and Dunstanburgh. Capture ofBamburgh.Before Dec. Fortescue goes to Paris.Dec. Letter of Fortescue to Ormonde. Henry is safe and outof the hands of his rebels.1465. March. ?Henry V1 at Edinburgh.July. Henry V1 captured in Lancashire and sent to theTower.Summer. Fortescue goes to Paris.War of the Public Weal in France.

INTRODUCTION.PART I.TIIE fifteenth century opens in two of the principal Contemcountriesof Europe with a revolution. On September 29, c:{,":i',:i1399, Richard 11 of England resigned the crown ; the next Englandand theday he was deposed on charges, which were taken as Empire.proved by common notoriety, and Henry IV was acceptedin his place. On August 20, I 400, a section of the electorsof the Holy Roman Empire by an equally summary processdeposed their head, Wenzel king of Bohemia, and on thefollowing day elected Rupert of the Palatinate in his stead.The fortunes of the two deposed monarchs had not beenunconnected. Richard's first wife, Anne of Bohemia, wasWenzel's half-sister: and there is extant a letter fromWenzel to Richard, dated Sept. 24, 1397, in which heoffers Richard help against his rebellious nobles, in returnfor similar offers made by Richard to himself1. The comparisonis further worth making, because of the similarityof the charges which served to overthrow the two brothersin-law.Another comparison, which to students of English His- Comparisonof thetor^ is even better worth making, is the comparison between ~,,,1,,-the revolution of 1399 and that of 1688. In both cases a 1399 andgreat effort was made by the lawyers to preserve the for- ,688.malities of the constitution, and to disguise by legal fictionsl Bekynton's Correspondence, I. hi. 287-9.B

?sal fic- what was in reality a breach of continuity: in both it wastlons.found necessary to pass over the immediate heir, so thatParliament had not merely, as in the case of Edward 11,to claim the right of setting aside an unworthy king, buthad implicitly to make the further claim to regulate thehfally were succession. So on both occasions probably many wereled furtherthan they carried by the course of events further along the path ofhad in- revolution than they had intended. There were many whotended.would gladly have seen Henry restored to his Duchy ofLancaster, and who were prepared heartily to support himin insisting that Richard should abandon his recent unconstitutionalproceedings and return to his former mode ofgovernment, who yet felt themselves duped, when theyfound that he used the opportunity which they had givenhim to seat himself on the throne. So too there weremany who were truly anxious that by means of the comingof the Prince of Orange the religion, laws, and libertiesof England should be securely established in a free parliament,but who were disappointed when James 11'spusillallimity paved the way for the elevation of his sonixenryandin-law to the crown. Both Henry and William came as\\ i111~1nc,,Ee the deliverers of a church which was threatened alike intleliverels doctrine and in property by a hostile form of religion, andof Chn~chI , of a nation perplexed and unsettled by a feverish attempt"o".at arbitrary rule. In both cases questions of foreign policyForcignPO~,LY.had much to do with the result. But whereas at the closeof the seventeenth century it was absolutely necessary for thesalvation of Europe that England should be rescued fromher subservience to France, at the close of the fourteenthcentury, on the other hand, France was by no means adangerous power. It was her very weakness which temptedthe unscrupulous and hypocritical aggression of Henry V.Theory of In both cases one of the chief advantages secured by theroyalty.change of dynasty was that the royal authority was placedupon a proper footing, and seen to rest upon the consent ofthe nation. Richard 11, like James 11, had imbibed anentirely baseless view of English monarchy. The assertionthat he had declared the laws to be in his own mouth andbreast, is an exaggeration of his enemies: but iftrue, such language is no worse than James 11's prattleabout 'his sovereign authority, prerogative royal, andabsolute power, which all his subjects were to obey withoutreserve'.' By the change of dynasty theories of thiskind were got rid of. Whether from choice or fromnecessity, the Lancastrians always professed to rule as constitutionalkings.The Lancastrian period must always be of importance, Importasthe period in which political liberty, at any rate in ance of theLancastritheory,reached its highest point during the middle ages. an period.In fact the people acquired a larger measure of liberty thanthey were able to use: and the Commons, though boldin stating their grievances, were often helpless in devisingremedies. In the words of Dr. Stubbs, ' Constitutionalprogress had outrun administrative order2.'And this,combined with other causes which will be noticed later,made possible those disturbances which culminated in thecivil war, and which wearied out the national patience,until even Tudor despotism seemed more tolerab!e thanconfusion.The advantages of Lancastrian rule were mainly prospec- Its adtive,and its chief claim on our gratitude is the fact that it z:nysupplied the precedents on which the constitutional pnrty in prospectheseventeenth century based their resistan-tive.~e to that caricatureof Tudor despotism which the Stuarts attempted toperpetuate? Viewed in relation to contemporary history itwas prenlature ; and it combines with the fruitless rising ofthe Hussites in Bohemia, with the abortive attempts of theChurch to reform itself in the Councils of Pisa, Constance,and Basle, and with the equally abortive attempts torestore administrative and constitutional unity to the disintegratedGerman Empire, to stamp upon the fifteenththat character of futility which has becn SO justlyascribed to it4.Hallam, Const. Hist. iii. 71. ' Weak as is the fourteenth' Stubh~, Const. Hist. iii. 269. century, the fifteenth is weakerS. C. H. iii. 2-5 ; cf. Rogers' still ; more firtde, more bloody,Gascoigne, pp. lviii; ff. more immoral.' S. C. H. ii. 624.B 2

Key-note ' The key-note of the Lancastrian policy,' says Dr.of LancastrianStubbs, 'was struck by Archbishop Arundel in Henry IV's~'olicy, its first Parliament, when he declared that Henry would beappeal tona~ional governed, not by his own "singular opinion, but by com-'Onsent. mon advice, counsel, and consent l."' For the tendering ofthis 'common advice, counsel, and consent,' there wereduring this period three organs: 1. The Privy Council ;Privy 2. The Great Council ; 3. The Parliament. On theCouncil.character and composition of the Privy Council duringthe Lancastrian period, and the schemes of Fortescue forGreat reorganizing it, I have spoken at length elsewhere2. OnCouncil.the Great Council also something will be found in thesame place. Fortescue says nothing about it; perhaps, asI have there suggested, he disliked the institution as givingtoo much influence to the aristocracy. It forms howevera characteristic feature of Lancastrian rule : for whereasin former reigns it appears as a mere survival of the oldbaronial parliaments, it now assumes special functions anda special position of its own, standing midway between thePrivy Council and the Parliament, advising on matterswhich the former did not feel itself competent to settle, andpreparing business for the meeting of the latter.ParIia- On the composition and powers of Parliament Fortescuement.is also silent. Probably he considered them to be toofirmly settled and too well known to require any commentary.The increase of the power of parliament underthe Lancastrians is indeed too obvious to escape notice.' Never before,' says Dr. Stubbs, ' and never again for morethan two hundred years, were the Commons so strong asthey were under Henry IV"'Henry IV Henry IV came to the throne as the representative ofa Saviourof society. the ' possessioned ' classes--to use a contemporary expression4.The crude socialism of the Lollards, as the baronssaw, and as the Churchmen were careful to point out,threatened the foundations not merely of the Church, butof all property. It was the mission of Henry IV to putS. C. H: iii. 14 S. C. H. iii. 72.Wotes to Chap. xv. below. ' Sharon Turner, iii. 105.down these anarchical tendencies, to maintain vested interestsand the existing state of things. He came, in modernphrase, as a saviour of society. Richard 11, even in hisbest days, had not been very favourable to the interests ofthe propertied classes. He had not been forward in persecutingthe Lollard, and he had wished to give freedom tothe serf. These errors Henry was expected to correct.The second great object of Henry's reign was the main- Histenance of himself on the throne and the continuance ofhis dynasty. From this point of view his reign was one himself.long struggle against foreign and domestic enemies. Hisultimate success is a proof of his great ability, but he wasat no time free from anxiety. Hallaml sgeaks as ifHenry IV's submission to the demands of the Commonswas unaccountable. But the causes of his weakness areplain enough. He was weak through his want of title,weak through the promises by which he had bound himselfto those whose aid had enabled hinl to win the crown,weak most of all through his want of money. It was this Hiswhich gave the Comnlons their opportunity, it was this pOve*y.which caused all the disasters of the reign, the rebellion ofthe Percies, the ill-success of the Welsh campaigns, thewretched state of Ireland, the danger of Calais. The most' exquisite means '-to use Fortescue's phrase-of raisingmoney were resorted to; the constitutional character ofsome of them being, to say the least, questionable. Thisscarcity of money was due partly to the general want of Reqctionagalnstconfidence in the stability of the government which suc- him.ceded the brief enthusiasm in Henry's favour2, and whichl Middle Ages, iii. 95.The letter of Philip Repingdon,the King's confessor, afterurdsBishop of Lincoln, datedMay 4, 1401, is worthy of careful~tudy In regard to this point. ItIS no mere rhetorical cornpositionmade up of phrases al\\ays kept1" stock and not intended to fit"?Y thought in particular ; but itgibes a genuine picture of the un-Satisfactory state of the country,and of the deep disappointmentfelt at the way in \vhich Henryhad belied the (perhaps unreasonablyhigh) expectations that hadbeen formed of him. The authoralludes in reference to Henry toLuke xuiv. 2 I, ' Nos autein sperabamusquia ipse esset redernpturusIsrael.' Bekynton's Correspondence,i. I 51-4 ; cf. also Engl.Chron., ed. Davies, pp. 23,28, 31 ;Hardyng, p. 371.

led people to hoard their gold and silver, so that not onlywas none forthcoming to meet the demands of the government,but- capital, which ought to have been employedproductively, was withdrawn from circulation, thus causingfor the time a general diminution of the resources of thecountry. As soon as the accession of Henry V had show11that the dyilasty was firmly established, abundant suppliesDisturb- were at once at his comnlandl. Another cause was theance ofcommerce. disturbance of commerce, and consequent decline of thecustonls which followed the accession of Henry IV, owingpartly to the unsettled state of the relations betweenEngland and France" But the comn~ons could not be gotto believe in the poverty of the Government, and Henrydid not dare to press for heavier taxation, for fear ofincreasing the already dangerous amount of discontent.Theun- In this way passed what the chronicler Hall has justlyquiet t~nleof~enry called ' the unquiet time of King Henry the Fourth.'1 ~ . Harassed as he was by enemies foreign and domestic,deserted by many of the Lords, worried by the Commons,con~cious that he had lost the love of his people, jealousand doubtful of his heir ; with a divided court and brokenhealth, which his enemies regarded as a judgement uponhim, we can hardly refuse him our sympathy, althoughwre may be of opinion that many of his troubles were selfcaused.The interest which he is said to have taken inthe solving of casuistical questions3, shows the morbidlines on which his burdened conscience was wearily working.There is psychological if not historical truth in thestory that he expired with the sigh that God alone knewby what right he had obtained the crown4. It was ahrious choice that he should wish to be buried so nearthe man whose son he had discrowned, if not done todeath.' S. C. H. iii. 87. S. C. H. iii. 65, note I.On this, and on the general S Capgrave, Ill. Henr. pp. xxxiii,decline of England's maritime 109.power during the reigns of Henry * Monstrelet, ii. f. 164a, citedIV and Henry VI, see notes to by Sharon Turner.chaps. \i. xrii. below, and cf.The accession of Henry V was by no means his first .\ccessionappearance either as a statesman or a warrior.He OfHenr~v.His previhadserved with distinction both in council and in the oushistory.field, and had received in both capacitics the thanks ofparliament. He had had his own policy, and his ownparty, who had urged him to claim the regency on theground that his father was incapacitated by the diseasefrom which he was suffering, which was said to be leprosy1.The words which Shakespeare puts into the mouth of Hisadvantages.the dying Henry IV represent no more than the literaltruth as to the advantages with which Henry V came tothe crown :'To thee it shall descend with better quiet,Better opinion, better confirmation;For all the soil of the achievement goesWith me into the earth2.'He reaped the benefit of an usurpation of which he hadnot shared the guilt. In accordance with these advantageshe adopted a policy almost ostentatiously conciliatory.Even the unjustifiable attack on France may havebeen in part due to the same motive3. Only, if this washis idea, it was singularly falsified by the result. Thecauses which suspended for a time the outbreak of discord,did but make it the more intense when it came. And it is' I am inclined to think that Regiinine Principum, 111. ii. 15 :the above is the true account of a ' Guerra enim exterior tollit sediveryobscure transaction. Henry tiones et reddit cires magis unani-Beaufort was said to have ' stired ' riles et concordes. Exemplumthe prince ' to have take ye gouver- enim hujus habemus in Romanis,nance of yis Reume and (of) ye quibus postquain defecerunt excrouneuppon hym ;' (so I would teriora bella intra se ipsos bellareconstrue the passage,) Rot. Parl. coeperunt.' 'For outward werreIv. 298 h ; cf. Sharon Turner, ii. aley)P inward strif, and makeP362. Leprosy was a bar to the citeseyns be more acorded. Herdescentof real property ; Hardy, of we hauen ensample of theClose Rolls, I. xxxi. In Rymer, Romayns, for whanne hem failedexi. 635, is a certificate of the king's outward werre, thei by gunne tophysicians that a certain person 1s haue werre among hemself.' MS.a leper, which is very interest- Digby, 233, fo. 142 c. To this'W yith reference to the nature of moti\e also Basin ascribes themedloval leprosy.warlike policy of Humphrey ofSecond Part of King Henry Gloucester. He too cites the15 Act iv. sc. 4. example of the Romans ; i. 189.Cf. Egidius Romanus, De

3(n troduction,His reign only as developing causes, and those evil causes, whichconst~tu-,ionallyun- hardly began to act until he had passed away, that theiml)oltalit. reign of Henry V has any place in constitutional history.He did nothing permanent for the good of England, andthe legacy which he left her was almost wholly evil : afalse ideal of foreign conquest and aggression, a recklesscontempt for the rights and feelings of other nations, anda restless incapacity for peace, in spite of exhaustion whichTheSonth- had begun to show itself even in his own lifetime1. Theamptonplot. llistory of the Southampton plot is characteristic of thehaste with which the Lancastrians sought to stifle anythingwhich raised the dangerous question of their title. Thewhole proceedings were so unconstitutional and irregularthat they had to be specially legalized in the next Parlia-Beginning ment2. Even more noteworthy is the fact that 'this conortheWarsof spiracy was the first spark of the flame which in the courseIhrKores. of time consumed the two houses of Lancaster and York.Richard Earl of Cambridge was the father of KichardDuke of York, and grandfather of Edward IV 3.'IICIIIYVI. But it was not till the house of Lancaster had provedin the person of Henry V1 its entire incapacity to rule thekingdom, that the claims of the house of York were to beIIivisions put forward openly. 'The troublous season of King Henry. the Sixth,' to use once more the words of Hall, may bedivided into three main periods: (I) from 1422 to 1437,the time of the minority proper 4 ; (2) from 1437 to 1450,the time of Henry's own attempt at governing with theaid of those who may from time to time have had theascendancy with him; (3) from Cade's rising in 1450 to1461, the time of civil war. During the first of theseperiods the struggle is directly for preponderance in thecouncil, mainly between the adherents of Glouccster and' That Henry's aggression \\,asdisapproved by some even of hisown subjects, see Gesta HenriciQuinti, p. xxxi ; cf. Pecock, liepressor,p. 516.Rot. Parl. iv. 64 ff. : ' utjudicia . . . pro bonis et legalibusjudiciis Itabere?ztur.'S Ellis,Historical Letters,lI.i.44.Henry did not legally come ofage till 1442, but from 1437 hebegan to influence the course ofgovernment. See Rot. I'arl. v.438-9, which docu~nent may beregarded as marking the transitionfrom the first to the second period.'Beaufort. During the second period the strugae is ratherfor influence with the king, for possession of the royal ear.~t first the contest as before is between Gloucester andBeaufort. Then, when they disappear, it is between Suffolk,Somerset, and Margaret on the one side, and York and hisadherents on the other. Owing to the unhappy weaknessof Henry both in will and intellect, no party could feelsure of maintaining their ascendancy with him, and ofenjoying his support, unless they wholly monopolized hisear, and excluded all other influences1. . Hence all theunconstitutional attempts of Margaret and her partizansto keep first Gloucester and then York from the royalpresence, which contributed largely to make the civil warinevitable. When that war broke out, the struggle forcommand of the king's person still continued; only it wasno longer carried on merely by intrigue and party tactics,but depended for its issue upon the fate of battles.The marriage of Henry to Margaret of Anjou in 144.5 Henly'smar] iagewas a great misfortune not only to England 2, but also to disastlocs.the house of Lancaster. By degrading the crown into aninstrument of party warfare, she involved it in the ruin ofthe party of her choice 3. The death of Gloucester in 1447 Death ofGloucesterwas another event which helped to bring matters to a and I:enucrisis.Little good as he had done the house of Lancaster fort.during his life, his death ~vas a very severe blow to it. Itcast an indelible suspicion on the existing government, and1 'Pour ce que le roy Henry . . .?'a pas este . . . hommne tel que11 convenoit pour gouverner ungtel royaulme, chascun quy en aeu povoir s'est voullu enforchierd'en avoir le gouvernement,' &C.Waurin, ed. Uupont, ii. 282.a Gascoigne is especially strongon this point; e.g. pp. 203 ff.,219 ff.t Coliimynes remarksvery justlyOn the disastrous effect of this par-tizan attitude of Margaret. SheOught, he says, to have acted asmediator bet~een the two parties,alld not to have identified herselfwith either ; Liv. vi. c. 12. Chastellainsays of her : '?'U as estCennemye trop tost et trop alnye hpeu y penser ; et sy te a port6grant gr~ef ton hayr, et ton aimerpeu de profit ;' vii. 129 f. Hemakes her confess that she hasbeen the ruin of England ; ib. 102.Cf. Bacon, Of Sectitions a dTroz~bles : ' When the Authorityof Princes is made but an Accessaryto a Cause, and that there beother Bands that tie faster thanthe Band of Sovereignty, Kingsbegin to be put almost out ofpossession.' Cf. id. Of Faction.

it transferred the position of heir-presumptive and leader ofthe opposition to a man whose abilities were far greaterthan those of Gloucester, while his interests were diametricallyopposed to those of the house of Lancaster, instead ofbeing identical with them. A few weeks later died CardinalBeaufort, and the stage was thus cleared for younger actors.Somerset and York were both absent from England, andMinistry of Suffolk was omnipotent at court. He showed a rigorousdetermination to exclude not merely from power, but evenfrom the king's presence, all but those who were prepared tobe the subservient ministers of his will l. The same policywas pursued with reference to the local administrationz.The reaction caused by this arrogance and partiality, andHis im- the ill-success of his foreign policy 3, proved his ruin. Bypeachment.1450 the popular. indignation could no longer be restrained,and his impeachment was resolved on by the Commons.The ultimate decision of the question is an instance of atendency, which appears more than once in this time ofTendency weakness and decline of true political life; the tendency,to shi~kconstito- namely, to throw the responsibility for questionable actionstional re- upon the crown, and so to shift it from the shoulders of thosesponsibi-Iity. who constitutionally ought to bear it. At the time ofHenry's marriage the Lords protested that the king hadbeen moved to the thought of peace ' onely by oure Lorde,'and not by 'the Lordes, or other of your suggettes4.' Sonow the king, 'by his owue advis, and not reportyng hymto thy advis of his Lordes, nor by wey of judgement,'' Even the sermons preachedbefore the king were subjected to arigorous censorship ; Gascoigne,p. 191 ; cf. Gregory, pp. xxiii, 203.Rot. Parl. v. 181 b, and notesto Chap. xvii, below.SCf. Gascoigne, p. 219 : ' Et sicfacta est alienacio ... predictarumterrarum . . . sine aliqua pacefinali conclusa . .. inter illa duoregna.' Henry's subsequent protestthat the cession of Maine wasonly made in consideration of asecure peace (Rymer, xi. 204,March IS, 1448) was, in the faceof the actual facts, not worth theparchment it was written on. Thesame may be said of the declarationof Suffolk's loyalty ; Rot.Parl. v. 447 b.* Rot. Parl. v. 102 b. The sametendency appears in the PrivyCouncil. See the case of Somerset'sapplication for a grant, citedin the notes to Chap. xix. below.In the challenge which Henry Vsent to the Dauphin in 1415, it isstated that none of his counsellorshad dared to counsel him in sohigh a matter ; Rymer, ix. 313.banished Suffolk for five years, the Lords protesting thatthis ' proceded not by their advis and counsell, but wasdoon by the kynges. - owne demeanaunce and rule l.' In allthese cases the Lords ought, if they approved of what wasdone, to have accepted their share of the responsibility, or,if they disapproved, they should have frankly opposed it.Their actual course was a piece of political cowardice. Thewhole proceedings in the case of Suffolk were most uncon-&utional, a flagrant evasion of the right of the Commonsto bring an accused minister to trial before the House ofLords" The idea of Henry was no doubt to find a compromisewhereby the Commons might be satisfied, and yetSuffolk might be saved. He failed egregiously in both.Suffolk was murdered at sea, and this gave the signal forall the mischief that followed. The Commons of Kent rose Rising orunder Cade, complaining, among other things, that ' the Cade.fals traytur Pole that was as fals as Fortager (Vortigern). . . apechyd by all the h011 comyns of Ingelond, . . .myght not be suffryd to dye as ye law wolde3.'The rising of Cade was but the climax of a processwhich had long been going on. The government hadgradually been losing all hold upon the country, and inthe general paralysis of the central administration localdisorder had increased to a frightful extent4. The causes Causes otgovel n-of these 'troubles and debates5' are precisely those evilsagainst which Fortescue's proposed reforms are mainly weakness.Rot. Parl. v. 183.This right was not in theslightest degree affected by Suffolk'sresignation of his privilegesas a peer.S Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles,p. 95. According to Basin,i. 25 I - 2, Somerset fanned thePopular indignation against Suffolk,in order to divert attentionfroin his own military failures.The year 1443 e.g. seems tohave been specially troublous.rhere were disputes between theEarl of Northumberland andKemp the Archbishop of York,P. P. C. v. 309, cf. ib. 268-9, 273 ;between Lord Grey of Ruthin andthe town of Northampton, ib. 305 ;between S. Mary's Abbey, York,and the Corporation of that city,ib. 225, 232 ; between FountainsAbbey and Sir John Neville, ib.241 : there were rists at Salisbury,ib. 247-8 ; and in London, ib.277-8. In 1437 the whole countrywas so disturbed that copies of theStatute of Winchester were sent toall the sheriffs, with orders for itsenforcement ; ib. 83.See below, Chap. xvii.

directed, and they must therefore be investigated somewhatin detail.Poveit~. One great cause of the weakness of the government wasno doubt its poverty. The revenue both central and local1was hopelessly encumbered, largely by grants of annuitiesand pensions to persons who were in reality much richerthan the crown2. The notes to this work will show indetail how every branch of the public service was constantlyin arrear3. It was seldom if ever possible to waituntil the supplies granted by Parliament were actuallyI,oans. collected. Parliament itself generally gave authority tothe Council to raise loans on the security of the taxes.Where this parliamentary sanction was given, and theloans were punctually repaid, this system was perhapsconstitutionally unobjectionable 4. But the financial resultwas disastrous. Fortescue estimates the loss to the kingat ' the fourth or fifth penny of his revenues ".' Loans wereconstantly asked for from individuals, corporations, andtowns, and sometimes in a way which seems distinctlyunconstitutional^ Beaufort was the chief lender and loanOn the state of the local revenue,see notes to Chap. xv.below.See notes to Chap. vi. below,and cf. Gascoigne, p. 158.S See especially notes to Chaps.vi, and vii.A list of towns and persons,with the sums which they wereexpected to lend under Parliamentaryauthority,is in P.P. C. iv. 316K(1436). There are innumerableentries in the Cal. Rot. Pat. 'delnutuo faciendo per totum regnum;' 273 a, 274 b, 275 b, 276 b,280 b, 284 b, 289 b, 293 b, 295 a,296 a. U7hether all these had parliamentaryauthority I cannot say.The Lords of the Council andothers had frequently to bindthemselves not to allow the assignmentsmade for repayment ofloans to be tampered whh ; P.P. C.iv. 145 ; Rot. Parl. iv. 275 b. Thisprecaution had been taken underHenry V ; ib. 117.That itwas not unnecessary is shown bythe fact that in 1442 Beaufortalone supported the Treasurer inresisting an attempt to assign revenuethat had been already appropriated; P. P. C.V. 216, cf. 220.But in 1443 he agreed to a grantout of the customs of London,' notwithstandyng any assignementmaade before, and notwithstandyngany estatut act or ordenance; ' ib. 227.Chap. v. below.In 1430 the Pope lent Henrymoney ; 1'. P. C. iv. 343. In 1437a special appeal was made to theclergy; ib. v. 42. Dr. Stubbs(C. H. iii. 276 note) has tried tom~n~rni~e the charge of unconstitutionaltaxation brought againstthe Lancastrian kings. One document,he thinks, is wrongly assignedto that period. Other cases' ~nvolke only the sort of loanscol~tractor to the government '. The king's jewels werein pawn '. And the government seem not tohave been above such petty acts of tyranny as exactingthe fines for respite of knighthood twice over 3. Fortescue Exquisitellimself admits that the poverty of the king compels him means.g to fynde exquysite meanes of geyting of good 4.' It ishardly likely that in this he is thinking oidy of the reignof ~dward IV. It is obvious that an administration thusstarved could not be efficient. The remedies which Fortes~ue'bFortescue proposes for this state of things are a largereme'"e"increase in the permanent endowment of the crown, andthe making of that 'livelod ' inalienable, a resumption ofgrants, the limitation of the king's power of giving bymaking the consent of the council necessary, and a systemwhich were sanctioned by Parliament,'though, if they were notactually sanctioned by Parliament,their constitutional characterwould still be doubtful. But thefollowing instance (which Dr.Stubbs does not cite) seems tooclear to be explained away.RIGHT trusty, &c.Howe it bethat . . . . we . . . . charged youeither to have sende . . . . the cc.marE, like as ye aggreed . . . . tolenne us, . . . .or elles to have apperedpersonally before us andoure Counsaille ; . . . . Neverthelesse. . . . ye neyther have sendethe saide money, nor appered . . . .For so moche we write.. . . straitelycharging you, that as ye woleschewe to be noted and taken fora letter and breker of tharmee,whiche is appointed to be sendeunto our saide duchie (of Guye?ne),. . . . ye withoute delay. . . .either sende by the berer heroffhe saide cc. mar?, . . . .or commeIn alle possible haste personellyoure saide Counsaille, . . . .uPoii the paine abovesaide.' (July,'453,) P. P. C. vi. 143, cf. ib. 330.To require a person to sendmoney by the bearer, or to appearbefore the Council under pain ofbeing 'noted' as a disloyal sub-ject, is surely as arbitrary a proceedingas can well be imagined.That the man had promised tolend the money does not affect theconstitutional question, if the promisewas one which the govern-ment had no right to exact. EdwardIV's financial measures wereperhaps only a reduction to systemof the hints furnished by his predecessors.' For Beaufort's loans, seeP. P. C. iv. and v. passim.'e.g. P. P. C.iv.214, vi.106,&c. Cf. notes to Chap. vii.At least a petition of the Commonsthat this might not be donewas refused in 1439 ; Rot. Parl. v.26 b.Chap. v. below. Accordingto De Coussy, c. 42, ed. Buchon,p. 83 b, the poverty of theroyal household was sometimes soextreme, that the king and queenwere in positive want of a dinner.On one occasion the Treasurerhad to redeem a robe which theking had given to St. Alban's,because it was the only decent onewhich he possessed ; Whetham-stede, i. 323. That this povertywas one great cause of the unpopularityof the government ofHenry VI, see Eng. Chron., p. 79.

Powe~ 2ndinsobordiofof ready money payments, whereby a saving of twenty ortwenty-five per cent. on the ordinary expenditure may beeffected '.Another main cause of the paralysis of the governmentwas the overgrown power and insubordination of the nobles.thenobles. ' The two cankers of the time were the total corruption ofthe Church, and the utter lawlessness of the aristocracy 2.'The condition of the English Church and the policy andrelations of the Lancastrian kings towards it are subjcctswhich, however interesting, cannot be discussed here. Theydid not come within the scope of Fortescue's writings, andif they had, his orthodoxy and optimism would probablyhave made him averse to discussing them. But the reductionof the power and influence of the nobles is one ofthe chief objects which he has in view, arid is the end towhich most of his reforms are directed. The danger tothe crown from 'over-mighty subjects' is one that is neverabsent from his mind. This therefore is a question whichmust be carefully discussed.Or~gil~ of For the origin of the evil, in the form in which ittlie e\ilEd- appears during our period, we must go back to the timeward 111. of Edward 111. The evils of the older feudalism had beensternly repressed by William I and Henry I. Henry I1had excluded feudal principles from the framework of thegovernment. Edward I had eliminated them from theworking of the constitution. The reign of Edward I1 isa period of transition during which the lords tried for amoment to recover the ground which they had lost; butthe Despencers met then1 by a combination of the Crownand Commons, and for the first time placed upon theStatute Book a declaration of the principles of parlia-mentary government. The long reign of Edward I11completed the work which the Despencers, from whatevermotives, had begun ; and the Commons steadily won theirway to a legal equality with the elder estate of the' See Chaps. vi-xi, xiv, xix, xx, tion, p. lviii.below, and the notes thereto . See below, Introduction, PartRogers' Gascoigne, Introduc- I I I.baronagc The latter could no longer dream of monopolizingthe government as they had attempted to do under Henry111.The Commons might be led, might be influenced,they could not be ignored. But though the great lordscould not hope for a de jzr!~e monopoly of power, theirinfluence de fact0 was still enormous. And it increasedullder Edward 111, largely owing to the effects of theFrench wars. The old feudal system of military service Change inbeing to a'great extent obsolete, and being besides wholly the of mil~tnry sqsteluunsuited to the carrying on of a prolonged foreign war, service.Edward I11 introduced a new method of raising forces,whereby the Crown contracted, or, as it was called, indentedwith lords and others for the supply of a certainnumber of men at a fixed rate of pay. Thus not only did Itsresults.the lords make profits, often very large, out of theircontracts with the government, and enrich themselveswith prisoners and plunder while the war lasted ; but whenthe war was over, they returned to Eng!and at the headof bands of men accustomed to obey their orders, incapacitatedby long warfare for the pursuits of settled andpeaceful life, and ready to follow their late masters on anyturbulent enterprise. These considerations will largelyaccount for the ease with which under Richard 11 a combinationof a few powerful nobles was able to overbear the -might of the Crown. The reign of Edward 111 was more- Pseudooverthe period of that pseudo-chivalry, which, under agarb of external splendour and a factitious code of honour, feudal~sm.failed to conceal its ingrained lust and cruelty, and itsreckless contempt for the rights and feelings of all whowere not admitted within the charmed circle; and it sawthe beginning of that bastard feudalism, which, in place ofthe primitive relation of a lord to his tenants, surroundedthe great man with a horde of retainers, who wore hislivery and fought his battles, and were, in the most literalSense of the words, in the law courts and elsewhere,' Addicti jurare in verba magistri ; 'while he in turn maintained their quarrels and shielded their

crimes from punishment'. This evil, as we shall see, rcachcdits greatest height during the Lancastrian period.power The independence of the great lords thus fostered bythe tendencies of Edward 111's reign and by the events~~''d~~n*-tcreased by which happened under Richard 11, was still further in-Henry 1V'screased by the accession of Henry 1V. To some of them,the Percies and Arundels especially, Henry largely owedhis crown. It is true that having a great stake in themaintenance of the government which they had set upthe lords contributed considerable sums to the support ofHenryz. But this very feeling that they were necessaryto him increased their sense of independence ; and in 1404they showed how they construed their obligations tothe Crown, refusing to find Northumberland guilty oftreason for his share in the rebellion of the Percies in 1403,and treating the matter as a mere case of private warbetween him and the Earl of Westmoreland. Even ifthis had been a colourable view to take of the affair, thissort of quasi-sanction given to private war, a curse fromwhich England had been alrnost free from the days ofHenry 113, was of evil omen. To a private war betweenthese very families of Percy and Neville the annalistWilliam Worcester traces the origin of the civil war4.Anyhow one cause of that war was this insubordinationof the aristocracy, of which private wars were but onesymptom among many. If, as Mr. Bright thinks 5, theCommons looked to Henry as their champion againstbaronial disorder, they must have been grievously disap-~ h ~ pointed. ~ ~ i l The evil was aggravated by the French wars ofaggravated Henry V. Causes came into operation similar to thoseg;,":h which we have traced under Edward 111 ; only here theyHenry V. acted with worse effect owing to the degeneration incharacter of the French wars themselves. The sternl ' The livery of a great lord was pp. 120 ff.as effective security to a male- ' English in France, ii. [770]:factor as was the benefit of clergy ' Initium fuit maximorum dolorum)c the criminous clerk ; ' S. C. H. in Anglia.'111. 533. ' Bright, English History, i.P.P.C.,I.xxvii,xxxiii, 102ff. 277.8 See Allen on the Prerogative,of Henry V left no room for any of thatgraceful chivalry which had thrown a glamour, howeversuperficial, over the warfare of Edward 111 and his greaterson. And things became worse, when to other debasinginfluences was added the fury which is born of failure.The English lords ousted from France returned to Englandat the head of bands of men brutalized by long warfare,demoralized by the life of camps and garrisons, and readyfor any desperate adventure. Even during Henry V's lifetimethis evil had begun to show itself1, and it did notdiminish under the weak rule of his successor2. Andthese were the men by whom the battles of the civil warswere fought.Many of the lords were moreover enormously rich. RichesofTheir estates were concentrated in fewer hands, and thelands of a man like Warwick represented the accumulationsof two or three wealthy families 3. They engrossedoffices as greedily as lands 4, their pensions andannuities exhausted the revenues of the crown6, theymade large fortunes out of the French wars which drainedthe royal exchequer6, and they were among the chief woolgrowersand sometimes wool-merchants in the kingdom7.And this wealth of the great lords appeared all the more contrastedwith thestriking when contrasted with the poverty of the crowns: povertyofand the contrast comes out strongly in the demand made the C~OW~LbyFortescue, that the king shall have for his extraordinaryexpenditure more than the revenues of any lord", and inthe exultation with which he declares, that if only theking's offices are really given by the king, 'the grettestlordes livelod in Englande mey not suffice to rewarde so' See Political Songs, -. 11. xxvii. for militarv service: Paston Let-112. ters, i. 3 jg ff.Cf. De Coussy, p. 183. Cf. Rot. Parl. iii. 497, v. 13 a,See notes to Chap. ix. below. 274 b ; English in France, ii. 443.See notes to Chap. xvii. 'So pore a kyng was neverbe!ow.seene." See notes to Chap.vi. below. 'Nor richkre lordes all by-Cf; Gascoigne, p. I 58.dene.'Cf. Rogers' Gascoigne, Intro- -Political Songs, ii. 230 ; cf.ductlon, p. xxvi, and the list of Rogers, Work and Wages, p. 20.Fastolf~ claims against the crown Below, Chap. ix.C

many men, though he rvolde departe hit euery deleamonges is seruauntes l.' The riches of the lords enabledthem to maintain their hosts of retainers, while their estatesgave them enormous local influence.Consolida- But besides this increase in the general influence oftlon of thepeerage,s the lords considered as a class, the Lancastrian periodan Estate Saw a sharper definition of their constitutional positionof theRealm. as an Estate of the Realm. The idea of hereditarypeerage now becomes definitely fixed, the numbers ofthe temporal peers become smaller and more regular, andthe power which the kings had formerly exercised ofsummoning persons to the Upper House or omittingthem at pleasure is practically eliminated. The senseof corporate existence in the Lords grows stronger,and the distance between Lords and Commons wider.Property and influence are concentrated in fewer hands;one result of which is that the spiritual Lords now forthe first time acquire a permanent majority in the UpperHouse2. But in interests, and often also in blood3, theywere so closely connected with the temporal Lords, thattheir separate action in parliament is rarely distinguishable.The constitutional functions of the Lords intheir corporate capacity acquired strength and definitenessfrom the events of Henry VI's reign, and they made goodtheir claim to be considered the ultimate depositaries ofpolitical authority during the abeyance of the royalpower, whether from infancy, as at the beginning of thereign, or from incapacity, as towards its close.Dissen- But when the Lords had in these various ways gainedsionsamong the possession of power, they began to quarrel among themlords.selves for the exercise of it. It was much the same,to recur to a former illustration, after the revolution of1688 ; only there the rivalries between the great lordstook the milder form of party government. Here therivalries of Gloucester and Beaufort brought England toBelow, Chap. xvii. infra, p. 26. They were moreoverSee the tables in Gneist, Ver- often guilty of the same abuses,waltungsrecht, i. 382 ff. maintenance, &c. Cf. PastonS S. C. H. iii. 369, and vide Letters, iii. 478.the verge of civil war. Suffolk's nlonopoly of power caused,as we have seen, a popular insurrection, while underSomerset and York the flame finally burst out, thoughhere the personal issue was complicated with dynastic andconstitutional questions, in regard to the last of which,york's position was far more defensible than that ofsomersetl. But the struggle was not confined to the IJrivntegovernment; it was fought out in every shire anddistrict, rising not unfrequently to the height of privatewar" That private war was separated by no very wideinterval from rebellion we have already seen in the case ofthe Percies. But even where matters did not reach thisheight, the evils caused by this struggle for influence werevery serious.One great object of the lords was to acquire Control ofthe control of the local administration, to get into their local administraownhands the nomination of all local officers. Fortescue tion.complains bitterly of the way in which the great lords' engrossed and broked ' the royal offices in their neighbourhoods,in order to distribute them to their servantsand dependants3. But whereas Fortescue thinks only ofthe loss to the crown and gain to the nobles in patronageand influence, the nobles themselves had a furthcr object in' The intensity of the party of Henry VI, see S. C. H. iii.struggle is illustrated by the fact 271-2, and the references. therethat the Queen and Somerset given. The struggle betweenwrote to the Duke of Norfolk Egremont and Neville is the oneto dismiss certain of his depen- to which \Villiam Worcester (U. S.)dants because they were favour- attributes the origin of the civilable to the Duke of York; Paston war. In 1428 it had almost comeLetters, i. 305. In 1454, at the to a pitched battle betwecn thetime of the King's first illness Duke of Norfolk and the Earl ofwhen Somerset was struggling to Huntingdon ; Amundesham, i. 25;maintain his power against York, cf. P. 1'. C. iii. 36-7, 112. Ocweread : ' The Duke hathe espies casionally the monotony of theEoyng in every Lordes hous of proceedings on land was variedthis land ;' ib. 267. In 1459, during by acts of piracy at sea ; Pastortthe I'alliament of Coventry, Henry Letters, i. 268. On the necessitywrote to the University of Oxford of repressing aristocratic dissentodismiss certain Bedels who had sions, cf. Xgid. Rom. De Regim.Spoken disrespectfully of the 111. ii. 15.Quekn and Prince. The corn- "elow, Chap. xvii, and theman& was obeyed ; Munim. Aca- notes thereto. Gascoigne comdem.p 756.plains of an analogous evil in theFor a list of the private wars case of ecclesiastical offices ; pp.which went on during the reign 132-3.C 2

Perversionof justice.Localoffice1 SJuriesYorchnse tiloubtfi~lcininlsview, namely, to pervert to their own enas the administrationof justice, which was so closely connected with thesystem of local government. Justices of the Peace mightbe appointed, who would maintain the quarrels of theparty to which they owed their appointments1 ; sheriffsmight be nominated, who could be trusted to impanel ajury favourable to their patron's views, sometimes consistingof his servants or liveried retainers? Should thesheriff prove less pliable than usual, the lord or his friendsat court for him might obtain royal letters directing thesheriff to irnpanel such a jury? Failing this, the jurymight be intimidated4 or bribed, or at the last resort theproceedings might be broken up by force" unless indeedthe less heroic platl was resorted to of simply ignoring an,r unfavourable decision. In addition to whatever claims theymight have of their own to assert, the lords bought up thedoubtful claims of lesser men, or agreed to maintain themfor a considerationc, or they obtained grants of lands tvhichwere not really in the hands of the crown7. And theseclaims, whether their own or others', were asserted with theIn 1399 the Con~mons com- P. P. C. v. 35-9 ; Paston Letplainedthat 'maintainers ' were ters, i. 212. In 1435 the Duke ofmade Justices of the Peace by Norfolk and the Earl of Suffolk' brocage ;' Rot. Parl. iii. 444 a. had to promise in the CouncilCf. Political Songs, ii. 235-6 : that they would not hinder the investigationand punishment of a' Now mayntenerys be made jus- case of ; p. P. ,-. iv.tys, ... 300-1.' Now brocage ys made off~cer~s-' 6 These and fcofinents to"le Viscount . . . retourna un great personages of lands of doubt-Panel1 des certeins persons, dount ful title, and the forcible entriesascuns furent famuliers, et ascuns which followed them, were forbidtenauntz,et ascuns del fee, et del den by St. 8 Hen. VI, c. 9; cf.vesture de Adversaries le dit Sup- Rot.Par1.i~. 352 b ; ib.iii.497 a, b;pliant ;' Kot. Parl. iv. 288 a. St. 4 Hen. IV. c. 8 ; Paston Letters,S Paston Letters, I. lxiu. 208, ii. 80. cf. ib. 187, 'the Duclc of214-5. It was said that such Suffolk hath boght . . . . the ryjtletters could be obtained for a that on Bryghtylhed hath in Haynoble(6s. Sd.).lesdon,' &c. . . Cf. Whethamstede,In one case the intimidation i. 96, where the holder of landspractised on the jury was so no- which were claimed by St. Alban'storious and 'horrible,' that even threatens to enfeoff certain lordsthe sufferers 'for pyte and remorce with them ; ib. 203. This was. . . wcr lothe ' to proceed against also one of the subjects of Cade's?hem for perjury ; I'aston Letters, complaints ; Stowe, p. 389 a.i. 205 ; cf. ib. 2.41. Paston Letters, ii. 331.high hand. Forcible entry and disseisin with violence Forciblewere everyday occurrences, and were almost restored tothe position of legal processes which they had held beforethe invention of the grand assize l. Houses were regularlygarrisoned as for a siege, and small armies were broughtinto the field to attack them2. If the aggrieved personappealed to the law, he might find that no counsel wouldventure to act for him 3, and that no one inthe county woulddare to say a good word for a man who \\?as known to beout of favour in high quarters4. In the numerous petitionswhich besought the intervention of the council or of parliament,the allegation that there was ' too great might 'on the other side for the suppliant to be able to sue at thecommon law was often true enough. It is idle to worship Impotencethe form and neglect the substance. Against offenders of ~ ' ~this stamp the jury system was powerless to secure justice.Its partial and temporary supersession by the jurisdictionof the council, especially as organized in the later Court ofBefore the invention of the 3,000 men to the siege of Caistergrand assize forcible disseisin was Castle, which he claimed againstoften the only process by which Sir John Paston ; ib. 1. ff.a tenant could be forced by a Justice Paston advises afriendclaimant to show his title to the not to go into court against alands he held. John Paston dependant of the Duke of Norfolk:writes to his wife in 1465 : 'As ' 3yf thu do, thu xalte hafe thefor that it is desyrid I should s11ow werse, be thi case never so trewe,my tytill and evydens to the Dewk, . . . and also, thu canste [get ?] nome thynkyth he had evyll cown- man of lawe . . . to be with thecell to entre in opon me, trusting a3ens hym ;' ib. i. 42 ; cf. p. 18.I shuld shew hym evydens. . . . Cf. ib. 60, where there is apetitionIt is not profitabllle . . . that to the Chancellor that he wouldany jentilman shuld be compellid 'assigne and streytly comaund'be an entre of a lorcl to shew his certain persons to act as cotns:l. . . tytill to his lond, ner I will for the petitioner. That thenot begine that exsample ne thrall- intimidation practised on lawyersdain of gentilmen ;' Paston Let- was no idle threatening is shownters, ii. 209 f. For instances of by the fact, that in 1455 a partyforcible entry, cf. Rot. Parl. iii. of men headed by the son of the488, 512 b, 514 a, etc., and Paston Earl of Devonshire attacked andLetters, I. 12 K, ii. 248 ff., 253. murdered an old man named Rad-"he force with which Lord ford, ' whiche was of counseil withMolynes attacked John Paston's my Lord Bonvyle,' the Earl'smanor of Gresham was ' to the great enemy; ib. 350-2.nombre of a thowsand persones' ' ilere dare no man seyn a. . arrayd in maner of werre ;' gode wurd for ju in this cuntre,ib. i. 106 ; cf. ii. xxvi. ff., xlc. f. Godde amend it.' Margaret Pas-The Duke of Norfolk brorght ton to her husband ; ib. 1x3,

Cornlptionof thejl,dges.Arbitntion.Star Chamber, 'to bridle such stout noblemen or gentlemen,'as Sir Thomas Smith quaintly expresses it1, was a nationalblessing.Even the judges were not always above suspicion.They accepted solicitations and presents, and gave extrajudicialadvice on matters which might very possiblycome before them in their judicial capacity, in a waywhich was in direct contravention of the terms of theiroath. Even if this did not affect their conduct onthe bench, it was bad enough in itself; but they seemsometimes to have acted with the grossest partiality2.Occasionally royal letters were sent to justices as tosheriffs ordering them to show favour to a particularperson3. Often too the issue of a cause would dependin various ways on the question which party had at themoment the upper hand at Court. In the light of theseabuses we can better understand the vigorous words ofCade's proclamation :-' the law servyth of nowght ellysin thes days but for to do wrong, for nothing is spedalmost but . . . . for mede, drede, and favor, and so noremedy is had . . . . in eny wyse4.'Amid this general breakdown of law, arbitration wassometimes resorted to, but more often the best hope ofan aggrieved person lay either in buying off the oppositionDe Republic2 Anglorum, bk.iii. c. 4.Cf. Paston Letters, i. 419 f. ;ii. 201, 252-3. ' God reformesuch parcialte.' writes Sir Thomas~owys to ~astolf after detailingthe behaviour of Chief JusticePrisot ; ib. i. 211-2 ; Amundesham,ii. 127, 143, 256. WhenFortescue says of the judges (DeLaudibus, c. S I), 'Nec unqualncornpertum est eorum aliquemdonis aut lnuneribus fuisse corruptum,'he must have knownthat he was vriting what wasuntrue. Egidius Romanus (111.ii. 20) saps, on the other hand,' Judex de facili obliquatur.' Cf.Rot. Parl. iii. 626 b ; Gascoigne,pp. 43, 188 ; and notes to chaps.vi. xv. below. In one case we finda justice, Robert Tirwhit, guiltyof the grossest turbulence andbreach of the peace ; Rot. Parl.iv. 649 f.; and cf. the case of Fortescue'sown brother ; FamilyHistory, pp. 46-7.Paston Letters, iii. 428. Thejudges were sworn to do justice toall, ' etiarnsi res per literas suas,aut ore tenus, contrarium jusserit ;'De Laudibus, c. 51 ; cf. Rot.Parl. iii. 471 a, where this abuseis complained of, and reference ismade to St. 20 Edw. 111. c. I.' Three Fifteenth CenturyChronicles, p. 96.of the great man who supported his advcrsary, or in l~ootigettingsome equally powerful nobleman to maintain his ~ ,","~~,"C~'down cause1. And for these services the greatest personageswere not above receiving the most vulgar considerations.The transaction might be veiled under thename of a horse for my lord2, or a kerchief for mylady3, or a book for a prince of a literary turn likeGloucester4. But in reality, if not in name, money wasgiven for money's worth; for, as Sir John Pastoncynically remarked, 'men do not lure hawks with emptyhands5.' Nothing added more to a man's importancethan the diffusion of a belief that he 'stood well in conceit,'as the phrase went, with men of influence in his neighbourhoodor at courtG ; no greater disservice could be doneto a man, than to prejudice a great man's mind against him,or, to use another contemporary phrase, to ' make himhis heavy lord '.' ' Spende sum what of jour good now,'writes an anonymous friend to John Paston, 'and getjow lordshep, . . . . pia ibi pefzdet tota lex et prop/rctceWilliam Paston gives his brother similar advice, adding :-' omnia pro pecuniA facta sunt t.' That great lords shouldl ' Sondery folks have seyd tome that they thynk veryly, but ifye haue my Lord of Suffolks godelorchyp(good-lordship), qhyll thewerd (world) is as itt is, ye kannever leven in pese ;' PastonLetters, ii. 132. 'The frere thatcleym~thOxned . . . seyd pleynly. . . that he xal have Oxnede,and that . . . my lord of Suffolke. . wol be his good lord in thatmater ; ' ib. i. 81 ; cf. i. 96-8,233, 323 ; ii. 206, 344-5, 392, &c.This Interference with the cours:of law by ' pursuit to a great lordis complained of in the petitioncited above ; Rot. Parl. iii. 471 a.a Cf. Paston Letters, ii. 97.S ' I praye yow fynd the menysthat my Lord have some reasonablemeane profyrd, so that heand my Lady may undyrstandthat ye desyr to have hys goodlordshep;' ib, ii. 348-9. 'MyLady musthave somwhat tobye hyr kovercheff besyd myLord ; ' ib. iii. 55 ; cf. ib. 64-5,295.* Amundesham, 11. lxv. 295.Paston Letters, iii. 65.' To th'entente that the cuntreshall thinke . . . that he hathegrete favour amonge the Lordesof the Counsell, and cause men tofere hym the more ; ' ib. i. 229 ;cf. ii. 97.'The seyd Walter by hesesotill and ungoodly enformacioncaused the sevd Duke to be hevvlord to the seyd William ; ' ib. i.I 6.Ib. i. 156 ; cf. i~. 72 ; and Gascoigne,p. 109.Ib. 1. 516-7. The party opposedto the Pastons in Norfolkoffered Sir William Oldhall f;a,ooo(about f;30,000 in our money) forhis good lordship ; ib. i. I 51.

Influence use their local power to influence the parliamentaryon parliaelectionsin favour of their own party was natural enough1.elections. But this again, apart from any political result, reacted onthe local administration. The collectors of the tenths andfifteenths granted in parliament were nominated by theknights of the shire, and it is clear that the impartialityof these appointments and of the persons thus appointedwas not above suspicion2.And this example of lawlessness and insubordinationspread downwards through all ranks of society. Theprovisions of the Livery Statutes against companiesmaintained at their own charges would seem to showthat this curse of continental life was not unknown incornpanies.England3. Bands of armed men, often commanded bysome person of good birth, and favoured secretly perhapsby still greater men, terrorized whole districts, levyingblack-mail, and conlmitting every kind of outrage withOutrages. impunity 4.No age or sex or place was respected., OldBut this was in Oct. 1450, justbefore the meeting of the YorkistParliament of which Oldhall wasSpeaker, and the favour of soinfluential a Yorkist was wellworth paying for. Norfolk seemshowever to have been Wnmickistrather than strictly Yorkist ; ib.i. 532: 536 ; iii. 478. The Pastonswere In high favour during HenryVI's restoration ; ii. 412. TheCorninons of Norfolk resisted anattempt of Edwnrd IV to landthere in 1471 ; Warkworth, p. 13.l Paston Letters, i. 160-1. In1455 the Duchess of Norfolkwrites that it is 'necessarie . . .that my Lord have . . . in theParlement suche persones as longeunto him, and be of his menyallservaunts ;' ib. 337 ; cf. 339 ff. ;iii. 53, 55, 431, Yet the Duke ofNorfolk complained in 1454 thatthe election in Suffolk had notbeen fairly conducted ; P. P. C.v:. 183. In 1455 the Sheriff ofKent was ordered to see that theelections were free, because of the'besy labour made . . . by certainepersones;'ib. 246. Five yearsbefore Cade had con~plained thatthe elections in Kent were notfree ; Stowe, p. 389 b.Paston Letters, I. li. ; Gascoigne,p. xxu111. In one instancewe find the Knights of the Shirenonlinating certain persons ascollectors of the tenth and fifteenth,and then falling upon them and at-tempting to rob them ; Rot. Parl.iv. 30-1. Cade complained thatthese nominations were regularlybouxht and sold ; Stowe, p.,389 b.Rot. Parl. iii. 600 b, 662 b ; St.7 and 8 Hen. IV. c. 14 ..; 13 - Hen.IV. c. 3.Rot. Parl. iii. 445 b. For accountsof the doings of particularPands of ruffians, see ib. 630-2 ;IV. 32, 254a. In Derbyshire cer-tain lawless persons took to thewoods, ' like as it hadde be Robynhodeand his mevne :' ib. v. 16 b :Paston Letters, 1: lxxxiii. ff., 231 ff.;276 ff.men and old women of fourscore years were fallen upon andbrutally ill-treated or killed1 ; heiresses of tender age wereforcibly abducted2; widows who had any property were fromtheir unprotected condition specially exposed to molestation3.The priest was attacked in the chancel, the monk inhis cloister4, and murders were attempted, Italian fashion,during ' the using of the mass5.' Conversely, we findpriests and monks engaged in some of the worst ofthese transactions6. Outrage provoked retaliation, andcruel reprisals were taken, often not on those who haddone the original harm, but on their innocent tenants anddependants7. And these things were done many timesin broad daylight and in public places, without anyattempt at concealment ; the perpetrators calculating,generally correctly, that either by violence or chicanerythey would be able to evade the consequences of theirmisdeeds. So in the same way that system of corrupt Hierarchyinfluence or ' brokage ' which I have described descended ~~~~~~tfrom rank to rank of society.The object of every manwas to curry favour with those above him, to win influenceover those below; so that by a sort of ignoble caricatureof the feudal system the whole structure of society fromthe apex to the base was knit together in a hierarchyof corruption.Nor w2s the influence of the great confined to the spheres Ecclesiasofpolitics and law. They interfered in the private affairs 22:; zti,of familiess, in the inner economy of monasteries" in the great lords.' e.g. Rot. Parl. iii. 564 a ; PastonLetters, i. 239.e.g. Rot. Parl. iii. 564 b : achild of nine years carried off.And this was done by the Sheriff,'under colour of his office,' Inorder to marry her to his son. In1454 complaint was made that theforcible abduction of women whohad any property was becomingcommon ; Rot. Parl. v. 270 b.On this petition was founded St.,31 and 32 Hen. VI. c. 9 ; cf. PastonLetters, i. 551-3.e.g. Rot. Parl. iii. 520 b, 565-6 ;iv. 92 b.Paston Letters, i. 238-9, 279."b. 237; cf. ii. 81, 251. Onthe frequency of robberies fromChurches, cf. Rot. Parl. v. 632 b ;Gregory, PP. 234-5.Rot. Parl. 111. 518 a, 564 a.Gascoigne, pp. 133-4.* Paston Letters, i. 129f., 258,294-6.Whethamstede, i. 112. Onthe relations between the aristocracyand the monasteries, cf. alsoPecock, Repressor, pp. 549 ff.

granting of academical degrees1 ; they influenced churchappointments from the lowest to the highest 2; ecclesiasticalpatrons were glad enough to gratify them with grants ofnext presentations for their clerical dependants3, who oftenwere their men of business4, and men were made bishops,not for any knowledge or virtue which they possessed, but' because of the great blood they were of5.' The generalcondition of the English Church lies, as I have said, outsidemy subject. But it may here at least be recorded howheavily the days of aristocratic ascendancy told against itspurity and independence, and how seriously the one greatevil of the time, the lawlessness of the nobility, intensifiedthe other, the corruption of the Church.Semi-legal But besides all the illegal violence which undoubtedlyviolence.existed, there was an immense deal of legal or semi-legalforce called into play. Forcible ejectments were followedby equally forcible recoveries. Violent distraints gave riseto no less violent replevins, and the line which separateslegality from illegality was very easily passed \ Often toomen were brutally attacked, merely because they hadventured to assert their rights by law7. Ambushes werelaid for John Paston during the time that he had his variouslawsuits on hand8, even in London he was not secure fromattack" while if his wife's fears were not exaggerated, it' Munimenta Academica, pp.206-8, 332.On this see Gascoigne, pp.14, I91 22, 25, 32, 55, 72, 132, 166,180-1, 222.* Amundesham, ii. 370-1 ;Whethamstede, 11. xxv. ff., andthe references there given.* e.g. Thomas Howys for Fastolf,James Gloys for the Pastons,both priests ; v. Paston Letterspassim, and cf. ib. i. 299.This phrase occurs with referenceto the promotion to the seeof Canterbul y of Thomas Bourchier; P. P. C. vi. 168 ; cf. Rymer,X. 640 ; P. P. C. vi. 266 (withreference to George Neville, thebrother of the King-maker) ; Rot.Parl. iii. 456, 460 a ; Gascoigne,pp. 16, 22-3. On the increase inthe number of noble prelates, seeS. C. H. ii. 402, 449 ; iii. 368-9.Cf. e.g. Paston Letters, 11.xxv. K., 183 ff.Ib. i. 73-4.One plot was to waylay hilnand carry him off to some lord inthe North ; ib. i. 544 ; cf. ii. 26, 37. .391 53.'Thow je ben at London 3exul ben met with ther as wele asthow je were her ; and ther forI pray ju hertyly . . . have agode felaschep with 3u qhan jexul walk owt ; ib. i. 112.would seem that his enemies were capable even of attemptingto poison him1.These various abuses were the subject of frequent com- statutesplaints and enactments in Parliament2. In the very first E:;,,Parliament of Henry IV a statute was passed against maintenliveryand maintenance3. In 1401 another statute was ance'made on the same subject4. In 1406 the Commons complainedthat bannerets, knights, and esquires gave liveries ofcloth to as many as three hundred men or more to upholdtheir unjust quarrels, for maintenance, and in order to beable to oppress others at their pleasure. And no remedycould be had against them because of their confederacyand maintenance 5. On this complaint a fresh statute wasfounded, and another was passed in 1411~. In 1414 astatute was passed against embracery, champerty, andmaintenancei. In I427 the Commons complained of thenon-observance of the livery statutess. In 1429 fresh provisionswere made on the subject because the existing onescould not be carried out owing to maintenance0. In 1433the plan was tried of exacting from the members of both' For Goddys sake be war themselves by keepingup agreaterwhat medesyns ye take of any retinue than their means wouldfysissyans of London ;' ib. i~. 160 ; allow : ' That is the gyse of yowrcf. iii. 474.contre men, to spend alle theOn the earlier legislation on goode they have on men andthe subject of livery and main- lewery gownys . . . and at thetenance, see S. C. H. ii. 485, 608 ; laste they arn but beggars ;' ib. i.iii. 530-6. 297.St. I Hen. 1V.c. 7 ; Rot. Parl. P, St. 13 Hen. IV. c. 3; Rot.iii. 428 b. P$. iii. 662 a.St. 2 Hen. IV. c. 21 : Rot. ' St. z Hen. V. c. 3 -.; Rot. Parl.Parl. iii. 477 b. iv. 52 a.Rot. Parl. iii. 600; St. 7 and 8 Rot. Parl. iv. 329 b.Hen. 1V.c. 14. If the retinues of St. 8 Hen. VI. c. 4 ; Rot.simple knights and esquires were Parl. iv. 348 a. At the same timeSO numero;~, we can imagine what a statutewas passed against thethose of the greater lords would prevalent murders, homicides,be. An adherent of the young riots, &c. ; ib. 356 a ; St. 8 Hen.Duke of Suffolk boasted that his VI. c. 14. But it was one thing tolord was able to keep daily in his pass statutes, another to get themhouse more men than h~s adver- observed. Cf. Pol~tical Songs,-,ii.sary had hairs on his head ; Pas- 252 :ton Letters, ii. 184. According Many lawys, and lytylle ryght ;tp Justice (afterwards Chief Jus-Many actes of parlament,tlce) Billing, men often ruined ' And few kept wyth tru entent.'

houses of Parliament an oath against maintenance andother kindred evils, which oath was subsequently extendedto the whole country1. But this measure proved no moreeffective than the others : and in 1459 the Commons complainedthat the most notorious evil-doers were maintainedby men of great might2. The same story is continuedunder Edward IV. Articles against livery, maintenance,etc. were issued by the king in his first Parliament" In1468 the previous legislation on the subject of liveries wasconfirmed4. Yet none the less the Commons in I472complained that murders, robberies, forcible entries, maintenance,etc. were still rampant5.Iaegisla- The legislation and petitions on the subject of oppressiveand partial sheriffs and corrupt juries are equally volusheiiffsandminous6. For the latter evil a remedy was often sought injuries. raislng the qualification of the jurors, either for a particularcase, or for a particular class of offences7. How littleeffectual such measures were likely to be is proved by thefact alleged by an anonymous correspondent of Sir JohnRot. Parl. iv. 421 b, 455 b.In 1426 and 1430 a similar pledgehad been exacted from the lordsof the council ; P. P. C. iii. 217 ;iv. 64. The Lords were not toreceive or maintain evil-doers,nor by occasion of gift or feoffmentsupport other men's quarrelsby word, deed, or by message, orwriting to judge, jury or party;or by taking the party into theirservice, or giving him their livery,nor were they to conceive indignationagainst any judge or officerfor executing his office accordingto law.Parl. iv. 262.Rot. Parl. v. 367 b.S Ib. 487 b.Ib. 663 a ; St. 8 Edw. IV. c. 2.Cf. ib. vi. 319 f. ; Rot.Rot. Parl. vi. 8 a. For concreteinstances, cf. ib. 35 a, 38 a..Cf. Rot. Parl. iii. 513 b ; IV.I I a, 306, 328 a, 380 b, 403 a,408 b, 448 b ; v. 29 a, I 10 a, 493 b ;St 4 Hen. VI. c. I ; 6 Hen. VI.c. 2 ; g Hen. VI. c. 7 ; I I Hen.VI. c. 4 ; 18 Hen. VI. c. 14 ; 23Hen. VI. c. 9 ; I Edw. IV. c. 2 ;I Ric. 111. c. 4. In 1426 theCouncil ordered that no lord'ssteward should be appointedsheriff, nor any 'man of lawe, forever it is to suppose pat pai haveoone parties matiere or oper inhande ;' P. P. C. iii. 219-221. Cf.as to other local officers not beinglawyers, Rot. Parl. iii. 504 b ; St.4 Hen. IV. c. 19. On the oppressionsof sheriffs, see also notes toChap. xv. below. As long as thejurors were really witnesses, it wasfair enough to leave to the localauthorities the power of choosingthose persons who were mostlikely to be acquainted with thefacts ; but when the jury changedits character, this power becamethe source of those evils which Ihave been describing ; cf. Palgrave,Essay on the King's Council,Q xxii.e.g. Rot. Parl. iii. 488 f., 597b;iv. 501 b ; St. IS Hen. VI. C. S.Paston's, that there were m-en worth £100 per annurn whohad been induced to swear falsely against him l. And theseevils were sometimes so serious and notorious as to call forspecial notice in those curious discourses with which it wasthen customary to open Parliament 2.But even more clearly than in the Rolls of Parliament Picturedo we see the state of the country and the ideas of thepeople mirrored in the Paston Correspondence, from which Colrespocde~~ceso many illustrations have been already taken3. Nothingis more curious than the way in which it is assumed thatit is idle to indict a criminal who is maintained by apowerful person4; that it is useless to institute legal proceedingsunless the sheriff and jury can be secured beforehand5; nothing can be more naive than the con~plaints as tothe difficulty of being sure of jurymen" because either theyare ' ambidexter,' i. e. take bribes from both sides7, or theyfear ' a turning world,' i. e. some sudden change in the relationsof parties8. Very quaint too is the astonishrilcntexpressed by John Paston rzot at being attacked in anunprovoked manner at the door of Norwich Cathedral, so. niuch as at being attacked by a dependant of the Duke ofNorfolk who was his ' good lord3 ;' for it is evidentlyPaston Letters, ii. 325. WhenFortescue (De Laudibus, c. 29)talks of the impossibility of corruptingan English jury, he issaying what, with his judicial experience,he must have known tobe untrue. See a curious case inP. P. C. iii. 313, where the judgesadvised the Council not to send aculprit before a jury, as it wasprobable that he would find meansto corrupt them.L For example in 1431, 1432,1433, and 1442 ; Rot. Parl. IV.367 a, 368 a, 419 a ; v. 35 b.S Many ot the most str~king incidentsare summari~ed in Mr.Gairdner's valuable introductions.But no summary honever able cangive the effect which is producedon the mind by a perusal of theCorrespondence itself.'Ther kan no man indytehym for Sir T. .Todenham maynteynythhym ;' I. 190.'But of these and of manymo wers it is a pet foly to laborenin as for any indytements, but ifye be ryght seker of the sherefesoffice ; for if he .lyst, he may returnemen,' &c. ; I. 191 ; cf. ii. 217.' Ye truste the jury of Suffclk ;remembre what prolnyse Daubenyhade of the jury and what itavaylid ;' ii. 182.i. 192.i. 198.' Whech was to me stralvngecas, thinking in my conseyth thatI \\'as my Lords man and hishomagier,or Charlis [the assailant]knew hys Lordschipe, that myLord was my god Lord,' &c. ;i. 232.

egarded as a great scandal to a lord, that two of hisdependants should be at feud1. Bribes are offered andlooked for as a matter of course2, it is assumed that anofficer will use his official position in favour of his friendsand the only hope of redressing evils is considered to lie inthe influence of the great. The issue of a lawsuit is boundup with the fate of parties4; and the aim of all is to beupon the stronger side5. We see here the almost royalstyle in which the great lords addressed and were addressedby their inferiors" and we know from othersources that they occasionally imitated some of the worstabuses of the royal power, purveyance7, and the forestlawsRemedies The measures which Fortescue would take for reducingproposed by Fortes- the overgrown power of the great lords are,-first, to wrestcue.from their hands the revenues of the crown by an act ofresumption, and the patronage of the crown by restoringin all cases direct appointment to offices by the king; hel ' Dysworschep to my Lordthat tweyn of hys ,men scholddebat so ner hym ;' 11. 245.' I proferid hym [i.e. thesheriff] if he wold make yow pro-mys . . . ye wold geff hym inhande as he wold des~re, . . . buthe lokyth aftyr a gret brybe,' &C.;i. 215-6, cf. 207, 247, 311-2. ' Ihad founde the meane for to haveben quytte, for I whas throughwith the scheryff and panel madeaftyr myn avice ; ' ii. 60. Amos(De Laudibus, pp. 81 ff.) says thata charge ' pro amicitib vicecomitis'was a regular item inattorneys' bills at this time. Forefforts made to secure the appointmentof a favourable sheriff, cf.Paston Letters, i. I 58, 165-6, 171,521 ; ii. 59, &c.S'The hleyr. . . wull do any-thyng.,that he may for hym andhis ;' 11. 249.Ib. i. 335.Ib. 66.The Duke of Norfolk e. g. isalways addressed and spoken ofas 'right high P and myghtyprynce,' or 'his hyghnes ;' I. 15,f43, 233, ?c. He addresses his~nfer~ors, r~ght trusti and well-belovid . . . we consayled be theLordes . . . and oder of our Consayle,'&c. ; i. 337; ii. 247, &c.In 1445 the Commons complainedof the ' Purveiours orAchatours of the Duk of Gloucestr',and of other Lordes andEstates of the Roialme,' contraryto the Stat. 36 Edw. 111. c. 2 ;Rot. Parl. v. 115 a. On thiscomplaint a new statute wasfounded ; 23 Hen. VI. c. 14.'I he way in which the Earls ofArundel had extended their rightsof chace and warren had in 1415thrown a great part of the Rape ofLewes out of cultivation. Andtrespassers on these alleged rightshad been cruelly imprisoned andeven tortured. The Earl of Arundel,against whom these chargeswere brought, was at that timeTreasurer of England ; Rot. Parl.iv. 78, cf. ib. 92 a.~7ould prevent the accumulation of estates by using theveto which the feudal system gave the king on the marriageof heiresses; and the accumulation of offices byenacting that no one should hold more than one office atthe same time, or two at the very most. And last andmost important of all, he would eliminate the influence ofthe nobles from the government, by excluding them almostentirely from the Privy Council, and transfxming thatCouncil on a purely official basis l.The fact that so much of the prevalent injustice was Litigious-committed under, or indeed by means of, the forms of law nes"ftheage.is connected with another characteristic of the age, namely,its extreme litigiousness. Legal chicane was one of themost regular weapons of offence and defence, and to trumpup charges however frivolous against an adversary one ofthe most effectual means of parrying inconvenient chargesagainst oneself 2. The prevalence of false indictments andnlalicious suits is a frequent subject of complaint in Parliament3.Forgery of documents seems to have beencommon; and when statutes were passed against thispractice, advantage was taken of these statutes to throwsuspicion on genuine title-deeds4. False allegations of villenagewere made in order to bar actions at law broughtby those against whom the allegation was made5. Disseisinswere followed by fraudulent feoffments, in order thatthe person disseised might not know against whom hisSee below, Chaps. X, xi, xiv, Cf. Paston Letters, i. 107, 119,xv, xvii, and the notes thereto. On 240, 242, 244.the condition of the English aris- Rot. Parl. iii. 505 a, 511 a ; iv.tocracy, cf. also Pecock, Repres- 120 a, 147 a, 305 b, 327 a ( = St. 6sor, p.429; Whethamstede, i. 222 ; Hen. VI. c. I) ; v. 109 h, 325 b ; St.Gasco~gne, pp. 62, 218. The 33 Hen. VI. c. 6 ; cf. P. P. C: v. 215.aristocratic theory of society is Rot. Parl. iii. 543 b ; IV. 10 a,stated quite nakedly in the reply I 19, 121 b, 378 a ; St. 5 Hen. IV.of ' Daw Topias ' to the Lollard c. 14 ; I Hen. V. c. 3 ; 7 Hen. V.controversialist, 'Jack Upland.' c. 2. Cf. Paston Letters, i. 553 ;Just as in the body the hands iii. 474, where we hear of titlemustserve the head,deeds 'the seals of which were' R~ght so the comounpeple God not yet cold.'hath disposid, Rot. Parl. iii. 499 a ; iv. 58 b.' To laboren for holi chirche and For a case of horrible ill-treatmentlordshipis also.'of an alleged villein by HumphreyPolitical Songs, ii. 45. Duke of Gloucester, see ib. v. 448.

Tumber of action lay1. One cause of these evils was thought to belawyers.the excessive number of attorneys, who stirred up litigationin order to make business ,for themselves. More thanone statute was passed to reduce their number2. TheD~ftustoi~of legalledgefifteenth century must have been indeed a golden age forlawyers. This litigiousness of the time comes out strongly,as might be expected, in the Paston Correspondence,especially in the letters of Sir John Fastolf, who, like hisyounger contemporary Commynes 3, not only lived in aworld of litigation himself, but left a handsome legacy oflegal troubles to his successors. ' Every sentence in themrefers to lawsuits and title-deeds, extortions and injuriesreceived from others, forged processes affecting property,writs of one kind or another to be issued against his adversaries,libels uttered against himself, and matters of thelike description '.' And Mr. Gairdner remarks very justlyon the evidence which the Correspondence affords of thewide diff~~sion of legal knowledge among all classes, notonly the men but even the women showing themselvesperfectly familiar vith the processes and lerminology ofthe law" And indeed in such an age some knowledge ofthe law was most necessary, and any one who had morethan an average acquaintance with it might render veryimportant services to himsell and his neighbours6.Rot. Parl. iii. 497 a ; cf. iv. 596 : 'Every man was to some39 a ; vi. I 10 a. This abuse was extent a soldier, and every manforbidden by St. I Ric. 111. c. I, was to some extent a lawyer.''Against privy and unknown ' Thynkk onis of the daie offeoffments!youre fadris counseyle to lerne theRot. Parl. iii. 503 a, 642 b (cf. lawe, for he seyde manie tymis666 a); v. 326; St. 4 Hen. IV. c. 18 ; that ho so ever schuld dwelle at33 Hen. VI. c. 7 ; cf. Paston Paston, schulde have nede toLetters, iii. 478. On this multi- conne defende hym selfe ;' Agnesplication of lawyers, and lawsuits, Paston, widow of Justice Paston,cf. Gascoigne, pp. log, 202. Basin to her son Edmund, i. 58. In onemakes the same complaint of Nor- of the Appendices to Amundes-111andy ; ii. 32-3. ham there is mention of a clergy-W n Commynes' lawsuits, see man who had begun life as anthe Introduction to Mdlle. Du- apprentice at law. ' Hujus scientiapont's edition ; De Lettenhove, et doctrina plurimos in necessita-Lettres et NCgociations ; Fierville, tibus ~t juris periculis eruebat aDocun~ents Inidits.rulna ; i. 444. The legal acuinen' I'aston Letters, I. lxxxvii. manifested by Clercnce and Glou-Ib. lxxxvii. f. Cf. S. C. H. iii. cester in their dispute about theTo return to the constitutional summary of the period Constituwhichwe quitted at the death of Suffolk. The disappear- tio~ial historyafterance of Suffolk worked no improvement in the situation. the death'To pull down one bad man like Suffolk was merely to of SNKO~~.make room for another bad man like Somerset l.'I have Position ofsaid ' that in regard to the constitutional questions that ~ ~ ~were involved in the struggle between York and Somersetthe constitutional position of the former was more defensiblethan that of the latter. And this I must maintain inspite of the opinion of Dr. Stubbs to the contrary? It isquite true that the right of appointing ministers belongedtechnically to the crown. But Henry IV had promised torule with the ' common advice, counsel, and consent ' of thenation; and therefore on a broader view the maintenanceof Suffolk and Somerset in spite of universal distrust anddetestation, and the exclusion of York in spite of thegeneral desire for his admission to power, was a breach ofthe original compact by which the house of Lancasterruled, and reduced Suffolk and Somerset to the level ofmere royal favourites. It is true again that the kingdomdid not 'need a deliverer like Henry IV4,' but a ministerlike York, who was both a capable general and a firmadministrator5, was precisely what it did need. ThatYork's pedigree and popularity made him an object ofsuspicion to the court was no justification for his exclusionfrom power, for York's claims would probably haveremained dormant if he had not been forced almost inself-defence to assert themG. It is true that, owing to the YOAunconstitutional conduct of his enemies, York was forced ~ ~ ~ ~ s ! - t Ointo courses for which the constitution furnished no justifi- tutionalcation. But seeing that the court did not pay the slightest me"suies.heed todthe remonstrances of the nation constitutionallyexpressed in^ Parliament, he may well have thought thatonly by force could the country be rescued from the in-Warwick inheritance astonished Const. Hist. iii. I 56.even professional lawyers ; Cont. Ib. 155.Croyl. p. 557.The one sound administrator' Gascoigne, Introduction,p.Iviii. left ;' ih.Above, p. 19. G Cf. Eng. Chron. p. 99.D

competent hands which ruled it. Had he been allowed toattain to power in the ordinary way, he would probablyhave been the means of conferring great advantages onEngland. This seems proved by the beneficial results ofhis rule when, as during his first Protectorate, he had arecognized constitutional position. His second Protectoratewas too short to enable him to effect anything. But onboth occasions he showed an anxious desire that hisauthority should be strictly defined and precisely limited,which was in striking contrast with the way in whichGloucester on a similar occasion grasped at an extensionHis claim of his powers. For the final step taken by York in laying'O crown the in- claim to the crown there is absolutely no justification ondefensible. constitutional grounds, except in the eyes of those whohold a theory of royalty according to which there does notexist probably a single legitimate sovereign in the world.The right of the house of Lancaster as resting on prescriptionwas far too strong to be set aside for a mere defect ofgenealogy1. Rut York was forced into this step, partlygecause he had learned by experience that from the rancourof Margaret he could be safe only on the throne,partly because she had so thoroughly identified the dynastywith the misgovernment of a party, that a change ofThe acces- government implied a change of dynasty also. And thoughlv the agreement made with York as to the, succession, andin form the subsequent acceptance in Parliament of Edward IV,only alegitimist wore the guise of a legitimist restoration, that was ooly therestoration outward aspect of the change. The real grounds of it laymuch deeper. It was made possible. not by,the goodnessof the Yorkist pedigree, but by the hadnmof the Lancastriangovernment. And the Speaker of the Houseof Commons, in his address to the crown on the latteroccasion, showed that the Commons were aware that' This prescriptive right was Blakman, pp. 303, 305 (see themwell stated by the Lords in their cited, S. C. H. iii. 201). It is wellreply to York's claim ; Rot. Parl. stated also by Hallam, M. A. iii.v. 376 b. Better still, perhaps, by 195. Cf. Fortescue, De TituloHenry himself in the touching Edwardi, etc., cc. g, 10, 13.words preserved by his panegyristthere were reasons for the change other than genealogicall.Nor can it be said that it was only by weakness that LsterLanthehouse of Lancaster fell. From the death of Cardinal ~ ~ ~ ~Beaufort in 14-17 the rule of Henry VI, or rather of stitutional.Margaret and her ministers, was not merely weak butflagrantly unconstitutional. It violated in the most essentialpoints the compact by which the house of Lancaster cameto the throne. By its steady maintenance of ministerswhom the nation distrusted and abhorred, by its disregardto the wishes of the nation constitutionally expressed, byits attempts to tamper with the independence and libertiesof Parliament2, that house destroyed its own best title tothe throne; and its fate, however melancholy, cannot becalled undeserved. Dr. Stubbs has said from his ownpoint of view that 'the acquittal of the house of Lancasterdoes not imply the condemnation of the house of York3.'From the point of view here taken it would be equally trueto say, that the condemnation of the house of Lancasterdoes not imply the acquittal of the house of York. Andyet the latter has been very unfortunate, in that it hasSome extractsfrom this speechare given in the notes to Chap.xix.The imprisonment of Youngin 1451 for proposing in Parliamentthat York should be declaredheir to the crown was a flagrantattack on what Hallarn justly callsone of the ramparts of the Constitution,freedom of debate. Therewas nothing illegal or unconstitu-tional in Young's proposal. Thecausing Parliament to meet in outof-the-wayplaces, and proroguingit frequently, till the members, outof very weariness, passed the courtmeasures, is distinctly complainedof by Gascoigne. At the Parliamentof Leicester in 1450, ' dictumfuit in public0 quod nisi cornmunitasAnglia articulis propositisconsentiret, parliamentum nonfiniretur, et plures minas et a regeet a suis juvenibus consiliariissustinuit communitas istius parliamenti;' p. 189. But the climaxwas reached at the Parliament ofCoventry In 1459, where theYorkists were attainted, when ' notime was given for the [Yorkist]earls to pack the House of Commons; the knights of the shirewere chosen on the nonzination of@c Lancastrian leaders ;' S. C. H.111. 179. (The italics are mine.)The petition of the sheriffs for indemnitywas not merely, as Dr.Stubbs says, on account of thehaste with which the electionswere held, but because they hadbeen made in virtue of letters ofprivy seal instead of writs underthe great seal. The parliamentwas illegally summoned ab inifio,and could not legalize itself; Rot.Parl. Chron. v. p. 367 83. ; cf. ib. 374 ; End.Const. Hist. iii. 286.

The House been judged in history for the most part not by Richardof Yorkunfo,tun- Duke of York, but by Richard Duke of Gloucester, andhte in his- worse still by Edward Earl of arch. The defeats oftory.Wakefield and St. Alban's did no lasting injury to theYorkist cause, but they caused iilcalculable harm to Eng-Compari- land. They gave her as king, instead of a tried and exsonofE ~ ~ perienced ~ ~ ~ statesman, I v who, whatever his ambition, or evenwith his (if the reader should so determine) unscrupulousness, alwaysfather incharacterand position.manifested ability and circumspection, a showy and selfindulgentyouth, whose undoubted abilities .were balancedby no corresponding sense of duty; but who might underhis father's training have developed into something muchbetter than what he ultimately became. The personalcharacter of Richard Duke of York, his actual governmentin France1, in Ireland2, and in England during his firstProtectorate, warrant us in believing that he would haveruled very differently from Edward IV. But further, hewould have reigned under very different circumstances.Had the civil war been terminated by a conscientiousadherence to the agreement made in the Parliament of1460, there would not have been that weakening of the oldnobility" that weariness of anarchy on the part of thepeople, which gave Edward IV and the Tudors the oppor-Edward IV tunity they enjoyed of establishing a despotism. Edwardobliged to,i, the himself after his father's death had no choice but to gothrone. forward. Margaret's proceedings had made it plain thatonly as king could he be safe. He must either succeed inthat, or perish as his father had perished. It was absurd tol S. C. H. iii. 153 ; English inFrance, 11. xxix. ff.S. C. H. iii. 153. Accordingto Hall (p. 219), it was openly saidthat if he who ' had brought thatrude and savage nation to ciuilefashion . . . once ruled in Eng-land, [he] wolde depose euilcounsaillers, correct euil judges,and reforme all matters amisse,and unamended.'S The Croyland Continuatorspeaks of the civil war as ' omniuinpene procerum regni luendamorticinis,' p. 529; and modernhistorians have repeated the state-ment. Mr. Oliphant has howeverproved that the Tudor axe hadmore to do with the extinction ofthe old nobility than Plantagenetdissensions ; Duke and Scholar,pp. I 39 - 1f9. Fortescue himselfsays, per bella intestinanon paucis extinctis proceribus ;'Works, p. 63*.suppose that he could be bound by a compromise, whichhis opponents had been the first to break. And no onecan therefore blame him for seating himself on the throne.The reign of Edward IV is divided into two nearly Divisionsequal periods by his exile and the brief restoration of his Ofhis"i~~deposed rival (Oct. 1470-April 1471). The former periodis marked by many of the characteristics of the latereign, whereas it is in the latter that we must chieflyseek for those indications of a newer state of thingswhich led a brilliant modern writer1 to break throughthe old-fashioned divisions of English history, and datethe beginning of personal monarchy from the accession ofEdward IV.At first Edward seems to have been sincerely anxious Desireofthat justice should be done I. But partly because the evils Edward to do jus- IVwere too deeply seated to yield at once to treatment, tice.partly because Edward either did not possess, or wouldnot exert himself to show, that administrative capacityfor which his father had been so distinguished, the old badstate of things in the main continued % There are the Continuanceol thesame local disorders, the same complaints of defective ad- old evils.ministration of justice, the same rivalries between thegreat lords, the same tendency to make use of personalinfluence to defeat the ends for which government oughtto exist. The number of the great lords was somewhatdiminished, but for the present their power was ratherincreased than lessened by being concentrated in fewerhands. Warwick's possessions are said by a contemporaryto have been more than double those of any subject beforehis time4. The power of the Nevilles was in fact very Poweroppressive to Edward. They were to him what the Percies :et,hyles.had been to Henry IV, what Buckingham afterwards wasto Richard 111. Up to the time of the declaration of' Mr. Green.See notes to Chap. xix. Cf.Waurin, ii. 299 : ' il y sema raisonet justice en lieu de rapine et desordonnance.'S Many of the examples givenin the notes above (pp. 20-1,23? 25, 29-30, 32) are from therelgn of Edward IV. Cf. ThreeF~fteenth Cent. Chron. p. 181 :' Abundabant tunc in An-lia furt.1,homicidia et mala multa.'Hearne's Fragment, pp. 299 f.Cf. notes to Chaps. ix. and xv11.

Lancastrimrestorationdue toEd ward'sfailure.Edward's marriage in 1464 he was mainly in their hands ;after that date he attempted to free himself from them byraising up his wife's relations as a counterpoise to them ;a policy which led to the renewal of the former troubles,and ultimately to his own expulsion from the kingdom.We have the express testimony of Warkworth that therestoration of Henry V1 was rendered possible by thedisappointment felt at the performances of Edward IV1.Of the action of the new government we can form noestimate. Its duration was too short, and most of thedocuments relating to it have perished 2. Fortescue, as weshall see, drew up for it a programme of reform which isclosely connected with our present work3.After the restoration of Edward IV a distinct change forthe worse takes place in his character and government.Change inEdward'sgo,e,-mentarter His administration was no doubt firmer, but also morehis return.cruel and suspicious. He was determined 'to indulge hislove of ease and pleasure without disturbance, and he remorselesslycrushed everything which threatened to becomedangerous. The parties at the court continued and ranhigh, the Wydvilles on the one side, the other nobles onthe other. It is possible that it was Edward's deliberatepolicy to secure his own independence by balancing oneparty against the other ; but the ultimate outcome of thispolicy was the deposition of his son and the ruin of hisCompari- dynasty. In all this Edward showed how inferior he wasson of~ d ~ ~ in , real d statesmanship to Henry VII, whom Mr. Green haslvwith put down as a mere imitator of Edward IV. It would not1Ienry VII. be far from the truth to say that Edward's governmenthad all the faults of that of Henry without any of itsmerits. Common to both kings were the desire to befinancially independent of parliament5, and many of themeans which they took to secure that object. Both kings,See notes to Chap. xix. this among the 'cautelre' of aChastellain, v. 489 f., says that tyrant : ' Kex autem non procuratWarwick used his power with divisiones et partes in regno ;' Degreat tyranny and cruelty. Regimine, 111. ii. 10 ; cf. Bacon'sS Below ; pp. 70,89.Essay, ' Of Faction.'Egidius Romanus reckons See notes to Chaps. v, xix.to use Lord Bacon's words, made money out of their Financialsubjects for war, and out of their -enemies for peace. Other "'eaSUreS'sources of income which they had in common were theconfiscated goods of opponents, benevolences, the finesresulting from the enforcement of obsolete statutes andrights of the crown, and the profits arising from mercantilespeculations. These sources of income together with thegrants of the clergy made Edward to some extent independentof his lay subjects, and the people so far attainedthe wish they had so often expressed, that the king shouldlive of his own; with the result which might have beenexpected, that the voice of the nation was silenced, andthe king did very much what he pleased.Common again to both monarchs was the system of Repressiverepression and espionage which they adopted. This wasnecessitated in Edward's case by the disgraceful treatywith France, which caused so much discontent, that theCroyland Continuator believes that the people would haverisen, if only they could have found a leader l. The meansand position of his humblest subjects were known toEdward in a way which reminds us not only of HenryVII, but of Burleigh and Walsingham 2. And besidesthese evils which were common to both systems, the ruleof Edward IV had demerits which were all its own. Butthe simplest test of the relative merits of Edward IV andHenry V11 is to compare the state in which they respectivelyleft the kingdom at their death. Henry left aunited kingdom, an assured succession, a crown independentand secure from foreign interference. Edwardleft two bitter factions which he had fostered in life andidly fancied he could reconcile upon his death-bed, arevolution and a change of dynasty, and a crown the prizeof the first pretender who could gain some foreign help. Ihave saidqhat the condemnation of the house of Lancasterl P. 559.be knowne the disposition of thelb. 562, 564. The Liber countries ;' Ordinances, &C., p. 45.Niger of Edward IV curiously This again is a ' cautela tyranillustratesthis point. The forty nica ;' Kg. Rom. U. S.squires of the household are to be Above, p. 35.'of sundry sheres, by whom it illay

does not involve the acquittal of the house of York.Edward IV was probably the worst king, and certainlythe worst man, who had occupied the English throne sinceThe 1Tonse John. And yet it is by him that the house of York isof Yorklnainly mainly judged in history. His father never had a fairg:~zF chance; the reign of Edward V is merely the history of aIV. revolution; while the government of Richard 111, until itdegenerated into a mere spasmodic attempt to maintainhimself, was a conscious and somewhat theatrical reactionagainst Yorkist rule, rather than a specimen of it. Dr.Stubbs has truly and beautifully said, 'We cannot looktvithout pity and sorrow on that generation of our fathers,whose virtues were exemplified in Henry of Lancaster, andits strength in Edward of York1.'SUCIIPART 11.LIFE OF SIR JOHN FORTESCUE.nlrthofwas the character of the period into which ourFottescue. author was born. Neither the place nor the date of hisbirth are known, but he belonged to a Devonshire family ;and his descendant and latest biographer, Lord Clermont,combining a statement made by Fortescue himself in thethat no one could be made a sergeant-at-Dc Lnz~di6zts~,law till he had studied the law for sixteen years, withthe fact that Fortescue became a sergeant in I429 or 1430,places his birth about the middle of the last decade of thefourteenth century3. Mr. Foss on similar grounds placesit ' about the close of the fourteenth century '.' His father,Const. Hist, iii. 286.which seem to conflict with theC. 50. passage in the De Lazidibzcs. In'$ Family History, 2nd ed., p. 51. i. c. 43 Fortescue says S eaking of' Judges of England, iv. 309. the laws of England, P' quarunlUnfortunately there are passages peritiam studentes vir viginti aninthe Uc N(zfui-(z Lcgis Natuve norum lucubrationibus adeo ad-Sir John Fortescue, the second son of William Fortescueof Wimstone, Devon, fought at Agincourt under Henry V,and was made Governor of RiIeaux, the capital of La Brie,upon its capture in 1422. He seems to have died about1435'. He had by his wife, who was the heiress of thefamily of Norreis, three sons. Sir Henry Fortescue, theeldest, was for a short time (June 1426-November 1427)Chief Justice of the Common Pleas in Ireland2; thesecond, Sir John Fortescue, is the subject of the presentmemoir ; the youngest, Sir Richard Fortescue, was killedat the first battle of St. Alban's in 1455, fighting on theLancastrian side3. According to Tanner, the future ChiefJustice of England was educated at Exeter College,Oxford. He certainly was a member of Lincoln's Inn, Governorof which institution he was made a Governor in 1425, of Lincoln'sInn.1426, and 1429'. Fortescue's description of the modeof life and study in the Inns of Court5 has been sofrequently quoted that I willingly refrain from repeatingit here. It is tinged, like the whole of the work fromwhich it is taken, with a very rosy colour.Equally well known is the description of the ceremony Sergeantofmaking a sergeant-at-law6, a degree which Fortescue '"law.quirunt ut ad infimum graduin inlegibus illis . . . eligi mereantur ;'Works, p. 108. The 'infimusgradus' must be that of apprentice-at-law,and would of courseprecede that of sergeant-at-law.(On Apprentices. see Foss, U. S.p. 24.) Again, in ii. c. 10 he says :HEC satis novit scriptor horum,qui plusquam quadraginta annisstuduit ac se erercuit in LecibusKegni illius, et tandem Judiciarioofficio ejusdein term suppremodiu functus est ;' Works, pp. 124-5. If by this Fortescue meansthat he had studied and practisedthe English law for over forty yearsbefore his elevation to the benchin Jan. I442 (and such certainlyseems to be implied by the use ofthe word tandent), his birth wouldhave to be thrown back at least asfar as 1385. If, on the other hand,the forty years of study and practiceinclude the nineteen years ofFortescue's judgeship, he cannothave been born earlier than 1400.And this of the two is the moreprobable date.Family History, p. 45.Ib. 44.S Ib. 235.Ib. 51.De Laudibus, c. 49.De Laudibus, c. 50. The dresswhich Fortescue describes seemsnot to have been peculiar to sergeants-at-law,butcommon to themwith other sergeants.The ser-geants of the Counting-house wereto wear ' hoodes furred with whytelambe and a coyfe of sylk,whyte ;'Ordinances, p. 65.

Marriage.took, as we have seen, in 1429 or ~430~. It was anextremely costly process2, but it had its compensation inthe increased amount of practice which it brought. Thisseems to have held good in Fortescue's own case. It isonly after he became a sergeant that his name beginsto appear in the Year Books3. As a barrister he seemsto have gone the Western circuit, which would perhapsbe the natural one for a Devonshire man to choose. Atleast in the De Lnudibus4 he mentions having been presenton two occasions at the gaol delivery at Salisbury, onthe first of which a woman was condemned to be burntfor the murder of her husband, while on the second occasiona servant of the murdered man confessed that healone had been guilty of the crime. The judge, who wasthe same on both occasions, often declared to Fortescuethat he could never overcome the remorse which he felt forthe unjust condemnation of the woman. Fortescue characteristicallyuses the incident to prove that 'the law's delays'are not always prejudicial to the cause of justice.He married before September, 14365 Isabella or Elizabeth6,heiress of John Jamyss, Esquire, of Philip's Norton,near Bath, where in 1441 he acquired certain landsand messuages by grant of the prior and convent ofHinton-Charterhouse to him and his wife and the heirsThe former is the date givenby Mr. Foss, U. S. p. 309, the latterby Lord Clermont ; U. S. p. 52.The expense had perhapssomething to do with the unwillingnessof apprentices to take thedegree of sergeant. Cf. the oftquotedcase, Rot. Parl. iv. 107 b,where certain apprentices weresummoned before Parliament becausethey had not obeyed theKing's writ to that effect.S Foss, U. S.' c. 53:HIS wife is mentioned in adeed of 14 Hen. VI, cited in theBiogr. Brit. iii. 1986. This regnalyear extended from Sept. I, 1435,to Aug. 31, 1436.In the deed just mentioned,and also in that to be cited in thenext note, Fortescue's wife is calledIsabella. But she is called Elizabethin the letters of fraternityganted to her and her husbandby Christ Church, Canterbury, in1447 ; below, p. 48. The twonames were used as identical inthe Middle Ages. This may havehelped to cause the mistake (whichhtr. Foss has not escaped) of confoundingthe wife of the Chief Justicewith Elizabeth daughter ofSir Miles Stapleton, the secondwife of Sir John Fortescue ofPunsbourne; Family History, p.53.male of their bodies for ever, for a reserved rent ofone mark annually. As one of these tenements was Property.then occupied by his wife's mother, it may perhaps beconjectured that this was merely a re-grant to Fortescueand his wife of lands formerly held by the father of thelatter. The grant was confirmed by the crown in 1443'.He had previously acquired part of his father's propertyin Devonshire by grant of his elder brother Henry in1435-62. In October, 1452, he acquired the manor ofGeddynghalle and other lands in Suffolk3. In 1456 hepgchased the reversion of the manor of Ebrington, inGloucestershire, of Sir Robert Corbet for £151. He hadnot come into possession of this estate at the time of hisattainder in November, 1461 *. He had also before that datel This confirmation embodyingthe original grant is printed in fullby Lord Clennont, U. S., pp. 102-3.Ib. 50, note 3. Of theselands Fortescue divested hiinselfin favour of his son, soon after themarriage of the latter in 1454.Rot. Claus. 31 Hen. VI, memb.32,dorso. This purchase was madefrom the same person, Sir RobertCorbet, and vested in the samebody of feoffees as the reversionof the manor of Ebrington to bementioned next. This was probablythe saine Sir Robert Corbetwhose son married Fortescue'sdaughter Maud in 1455, but afterwardsdeserted her; Fam~ly History,P. 54.' In Rot. Claus. 35 Hen. VI.memb. g, dorso, there is a releasein Latin by Sir Robert Corbet ofthe reversion of the manor ofEbrington to John Fortescue andcertain CO-feoffees, dated the Feastof St. hlargaret, 34 Hen. VI, i.e.July, 20, 1456. This documentis evidently alluded to in one givenby Lord Clermont froin Campbell'sChancellors, i. 373, and dated Dec.5, 35 Hen. VI, i.e. 1456. The inquisitiontaken at Cirencester Nov.4, 1467 (Inq. p.m. 7 Edw. IV, No.SO), records the grant of the manorof Ebrington to John Grevill, Esq.,and his wife Jocosa for their lives,with remainder to Guy Corbet, ofthe county of Suffolk,and his heirs.John Grevill was dead, but his wifewas still alive. By the death ofGuy Corbet the right of reversiondescended to Sir Robert Corbet,his son and heir, who had bya fine levied before Prisot andother Justices on the morrow of thePurification, 34 Hen. VI, i.e. Feb.3, 1456, granted it to John Fortescue,Kt., and the CO-feoffeesmentioned above ; the grant being,as the jury affirmed, to theuse of the said John Fortescue.On June 28, 1468, Edward 1Vgranted to John Lord Wenlokcertain lands which had belongedto Fortescue in the counties ofMiddlesex, Hertford (not Hereford,as stated in Cal. Rot. Pat.p. 314 a), Somerset, and Wilts,and the reversion of the manor ofEbrington after the death of JocosaGrevill (not the manor itself, asstated in Cal. Rot. Pat. U. S.) ;Rot. Pat.8 Edw. IV. Pat. i. memb.4. I cannot therefore understandthe statement in Atkyns' Gloucestershire,p. 425 (copied by Rudder,p. 434, and Lord Clermont, p: 59),for which no authority is giren,

life as ahnrrister.become possessed of property in Wilts, Herts, and Middlesex'.In May, 1457, in conjunction with his son Martinand the latter's wife Elizabeth, he acquired land at Efford,in the parish of Holbeton, in Devonshire2. So that atthe time of his attainder Fortescue must have been aconsiderable landowner.If we may transfer to the case of Fortescue what welearn from the Paston Correspondence as to the mode oflife of a barrister in those days, we may imagine himduring this period of his life residing on one of hiscountry estates, perhaps at Philip's Norton, going up totown for the law-terms3, where he may have had chambersin Lincoln's Inn4, and receiving perhaps, as opportunitythat in 7 Edw. IV the manor ofEbrington was granted to Sir JohnBurg or Brug, who died seised ofit in 11 Edw. IV. The lands inSomerset would be Fortescue'swife's estate st Philip's Norton.How or when the property inHerts, Wilts, and bliddlesex wasacquired I do not know.See last note. The inquisitiontaken before the Escheator ofWilts (Inq. p. m., U. S.) is printedby Lord Clern~ont ; U. S., p. 105.It mentions lands &c. at KingstonDeverill, Trowbridge, Hilperton,and Bradford-on-Avon. InRot. Pat. 5 Edw. IV. Pat. i. memb.g, there is a grant dated April 20,1464, of certaln lands late belongingto Sir John Fortescne at GreatLinford, Bucks. But from Rot.Claus. 33 Hen. VI. memb. 15,dorso; ib. memb. 21, dorso, ~t ISclear that this was a trust estate,and did not belong to Fortescuehimself. Other instances in whichI have found Fortescue's nameas trustee or CO-feoffee are Rot.Clause, 7 Hen. VI. menlb. 6,dorso ; ib. 13 Hen. ,VI. memb.12, dorso ; ib. 24 Hen. VI. memb.20, dorso ; ib. 38 Hen.IV. memb.9,dorso ; ib. 2 Edw. IV. memb. 21,dorso. (The document, thoughenrolled in 1462, is dated June 8,1449.) On May 20, 1457, Fortescueand Thomas Yong. as executorsof the will of John Burton,late of Bristol, merchant, obtainedlicence to endow a chantry at thealtar of St. John the Baptist in thechurch of St. Thomas the Martyrin Bristol, with lands &c. held ofthe king in free burgage in Bristol.The inquisition ndqzrodda?r~nuszwas taken on the Mondaybefore St. Gregory the Martyr, 38Hen. V1 ; Inq. a. q. d. 38 Hen.VI, No. 7. In Oct. 1441 Fortescuehad become a CO-feoffee ofJohn Burton in certain lands &C.in Bristol ; Rot. Claus. 20 Hen.VI. memb. 20, dorso. Anotherinstance in which we find Fortescueacting as executor of a will isin Inq. a. q. d. 36 Hen. VI, No. I.Rot. Claus. 35 Hen.VI. memb.g, dorso.S Unless the law-courts happenedto be suspended on accountof the plague, as was the case inMichaelmas Term, 1434 ; P. P. C.iv. 282.John Paston resided duringterm tlme in the Inner Temple,which in Paston Letters (i. 41) iscalled 'your college the InnerTemple.' IJerhaps after Fortescuebecame a sergeant, and almostcertainly after he became a judgeoffered, supplies of provisions from his wife in the country1.And when the chief industry of the country was agriculture,everything had to give way to the exigenciesof harvest. The legal and academical long vacations, theparliamentary recess, all owed their origin to this consideration2.In I440 and I441 Fortescue acted as Judge of Assize FortescueJudge ofon the Norfolk circuit, and in Easter Term, 1441, he was Assize.appointed a King's Sergeant3.In January, 1442, he was made, without any intermediatein 1442, he would have chambersin Sergeants' Inn. Mr. Foss is ofopinion that the judges and sergeantsfirst had an inn in corrzntonabout 1440-1 ; U. S. p. 247.l ' I have do purveyed in thiswareyn xjXx rabets and sent upbe the berer herof ; ' MargaretPaston to her husband, ii. 21.See Chap. xv. below, and thenotes thereto.See S. C. H. i. 379. Cf. PastonLetters, i. 399 : ' I suppose lernedmen (i. e. counsel) wyll not beeasy for to gete be cause of thisbesy time of hervest ; ' cf. ib. 243.In Aug. 1433 the king proroguedParliament because autumn wasapproaching, 'in quo Magnatibuscirca suos Recreationes et Deductus,ipsisque Communibuscirca suarum messium congregationemintendere competebat similiter; ' Rot. Parl. iv. 420 b, (andso frequently). For the effect ofthe harvest on the meetings ofthe Privy Council, see notes toChap. xv. A glance at the Syllabusto Rymer's Foedera will showthat the documents dated duringthe long vacation are very sparse.S On Sergeants-at -law andKing's Sergeants, cf. Foss, iii. 46-8 ; iv. 21-2, 195-8, 240-4. Cokesays that in a general sense allSergeants are King's Sergeants,as being called by the king's writ,and at first perhaps all Sergeantswere called King's Sergeants.But at this time certainly therewere King's Sergeants who receivedtheir offices by patent.One of their duties was to assistpoor suitors to the Council, whichthey were bound to do gratuitously; P. P. C. iii. 150, 217; iv.63. They might also, like thejudges, be summoned when theCouncil required advice on legalpoints ; ib. iii. 117; v. 35, 44 ; cf.77. They might similarly becalled upon to assist the triersof petitions in Parliament ; Rot.Parl. iii. 455 a, and passim. Inone case we find a petition referredto them for consideration,and the matter adjourned to thenext Parliament ; ib. iv. 17 b ; cf.v. 42 a, where the Lords, by theadvice of the King's Sergeants,made an unauthorized addition tothe answer to a petition in Parlia-ment.The decision of the Lordsin the case of Thorpe was communicatedto the Commons byone of the King's Sergeants, 'foras moche as they were materesin lawe ; ' ib. 240 a. The Dukeof York's claim to the throne in1460 was referred to the King'sSergeants and Attorney, who triedto excuse themselves, but weretold by the Lords, 'that theymyght not so be excused, for theywere the kynges particuler counseillers,and therefore they hadtheir fees and wages ;' ib. 376.In one case we find a King'sSergeant appointed ' hac vicetantum ; ' Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 296 a.

Chief Justiceof theKing'sBench.Sits on aspecialcommissioninNorfolk.step, Chief Justice of the King's Bench, in succession toSir John Hody, with a salary of £120 and allowances ofL8 13s. 6d. for robes at Christmas and Whitsuntide. InFebruary, 1442, and May, 1443, he received grants of anannual tun of wine. In March, 1447, he received anannual addition of £40 to his salary1. Sometime afterhis appointment as Chief Justice, and before May, 1443,he was knighted2.In October, 1442, he was required to certify the King'sCouncil of the tenor of certain indictments brought maliciously,as was alleged, against Robert Wells, abbot 'ofTourhille beside London,' and others" About the sametime he and the other Judges of the King's Bench wereordered to ' committe to baille' 140 of the adherents ofSir William Boneville4. Early in 1443 he was sent withothers on a special commission into Norfolk with referenceto disturbances which had broken out in Norwich,in consequence of the attempt of the Prior of Christchurch,Norwich, to impose certain new ecclesiastical dues5. OnMarch 4th, 1443, a special letter of thanks for 'his gretelaboures' was ordered by the council to be sent to himin the king's name6. On the 14th he and the Chief Justiceof the Common Pleas were ordered to send to the council' the names of indifferent persones suche [as] may bemaade justices of the pees and sherriefs,' in Norfolk7. Onthe 23rd, he and his colleague Westbury attended themeeting of the Privy Council and ' declareden alle theire' The patents of Fortescue'sappointments and grants areprinted in full by Lord Clermont ;U. S. pp. 103-4. In the Res'umptionAct of 1455 exception wasmade in favour of 'the Graunte. . . . to John Fortescu Knyght,of 11 Tunne of Wyne to be takenyerely in the Porte of London forterme of his lif ;' Rot. Parl. v.317 a. According to the LiberNiger the Chief Justice of theCommon Pleas received two tunsof wine regularly in return for thelegal assistance which he gave tothe royal household, of which hewas reckoned ' a grete membre ; 'Ordinances, &C., p. 29.a I find him mentioned as SirJohn Fortescue first on May 8,1443 ; P. P. C. v. 268. He seemsnot to have been a knight on Oct.11, I442 ; ib. 215. Some interveningnotices of him in therecords of the Privy Council areinconclusive on the point.,S Ib. 215.* Ib. 221.Ib. cxxiii &Ib. 231-2. ' Ib. 243.demenyng at Norwiche and in Norffolkel.' Fortescuewas present in the council on April 3rd and May 3rd,144s2, and on May 8th the council ordered a warrantto be made out for the payment of fifty marks to himfor his labours and expenses in Norfolk3. TWO days 1n.Yorklaterthe two Chief Justices were summoned to the shire'council with reference to certain riotous attacks whichhad been made on Cardinal Kemp's estates in Yorkshire*,arising out of the manner in which he had exercisedhis spiritual jurisdiction as Archbishop of York ;they were ordered to make their report to the councilon the following day6. This they did in the presence ofa very full meeting of the council and of ' alle the remenantof the Juges6.' In consequence of their advice LordsDorset and Willoughby and the two Chief Justices themselveswere a week later ' assigned to go and sitte inYorkshire upon an oier and terminer7.' On July I ~ thFortescue again attended the council, perhaps withreference to the termination of this matter8.In January, 1444, we learn that Fortescue had for some 111 oftime been suffering from sciatica, and his colleague WilliamPaston being also unwell, the assizes at East Grinstead hadto ' discontynue $ 2 4 ~~zoz~a v~nw d~z Justicez"' In the Trier ofParliament of February, 1445, Fortescue was appointed one petitions inof the triers of petitions ; and was reappointed in everyment.subsequent Parliament up to that of 1455 inclu~ive'~. The Refuses tonext fact that we learn about Fortescue is his refusalto obey the king's command to deliver out of Walling-P. P. C. v. 247-9. Lord Clermont does; U. S. p. 56.Ib. 256, 266.He merely attended in his capa-S Ib. 268. city as Judge to give legal advice* Writs to the Sheriff and to the Council ; cf. Chap. xv.Keepers of the Peace in York- below, and the notes thereto.shire, dated May 12, are in Paston Letters, i. 50.Rymer, xi. 27-8. l0 See the Rolls of ParliamentP. P. C. v. 269. during those years. Fortescue'sIb. 270-1.Summonses to Parliament may beIb. 273. found in the Lords' Report, i.Ib. 304. These attendances at App. i. Part ii. gog, 914, 919, -924,the Privy Council do not,I think, 928, 933, 937,942, 946. They exwarrantus in speaking of For- tend from 1445 to 1460.tescue as a Privy Councillor, as

ford Castle a prisoner named Thomas Kerver, who hadbeen found guilty of high treason; the ground of hisrefusal being that what was demanded of him exceededhis powers. We know too little of the circumstances ofthe case to pass a judgement on Fortescue's conduct inthe matter. But the evident desire of the king that thefact of the pardon should be kept secret is calculated toawakcn suspicion1. In the same year Fortescue and hiswife received the privileges of fraternity from the conventof Christ Church, Canterbury2. In 1447-8 he was concernedas arbitrator with the Chancellor and Chief Justicel Excerpta Historica, pp. 390,280.Archiv. Ecclesie Xpi Cantuar.Reg. S. fol. 172 a : ' Littera fraternitatisJohannis Fortescu CapitalisJusticiarii Dfii Regis ad~lacita coram Rege et Diie Elizabetheuxoris ejus.'devotissima domina, DominaElizabet conthoralis ejusdem matrimonialisibi federe copulata,propter Deum et singularem devocionemquam habent et diuciushabuisse dinoscnntur ad perinclitumet preciosum martyrem, Bea-I owe my tum Thomam, cujus corpus inknowledge of the existence of this dicta sacrosancta ecclesia jacetdocument to Dr. Sheppard's re- tumulatum, nobis humillime supporton the Canterbury MSS. in plicaverunt quatinus ipsos nostrlsthe appendix to the ninth volume oracionibus ceterisque piis meriofthe Historical Manuscripts' toruin operibus communicato suf-Con~mission, while for a transcript fragio misericordissime uniremus.of it I am indebted to Dr. Shep- Unde devotis eorum precibuspard's liberality through the kind unanimiter inclinati, ac in Xpimediation of the Rev. Professor gratia ejusque sanctissime matrisRawlinson, Canon of Canterbury. et Virginis Marie, Beati ThomeAfter an exordium on the efficacy Martyris gloriosi ceterorulnqueof prayer, which Dr. Sheppard prefate ecclesie patronorum meinformsme is common with slight ritis patrociniisque confisi, provariations to all the Canterbury immensis beneficiis nobis et eclettersof confraternity, the do- clesie nostre predicte hactenus im-cument proceeds as follows : 'eapropter tam salutaribus monitispia ac sincera devocione pen-pensis ipsos Dominuln Fortescu etDominam Elizabet conjugem suamad plenum perpetue frarernitatissatis devoti ac supplices in XO. nostre consorcium . . . . admittihujusmodicarismatum emulatores mus . . . . per presentes. . . . . Dat.magnifice nobilitatis vir et miles in domo nostro Capitulari-dieegregius D%. Johannes Fortescu Mensis Octobris Anno DominiCapitalis Justiciarius Diii. Regis Millesimo ccccm0 XLVII~".' Thead placita coram ipso Dfio. Kege, character given of Fortescue isvir equidem justus quem omnes of great interest. The 'immensediserti justum discernunt obse- benetits ' which he had conferredquuntur venerantur et diligunt, upon the monastery may havecum et omnibus velit prodesse been in the way of legal advicesed obesse nulli, nemini nocens and assistance.sed nocentes prohibens, ac eciamof the Con~mon Pleas in a dispute which had arisenbetween the Cathedral and Corporation of Exeter as totheir relative jurisdictions. Fortescue seems to haveshown himself very friendly to the city, the capital ofhis native shire'.In 1450 Fortescue was brought by his official positionFortescue'sinto connexion with the trial of the Duke of Suffolk. The connexionwith theDuke having admitted the existence of injurious reports trial ofagainst him 'almoost in every Commons mouth,' the Com- Suffolk.mons petitioned the King that he might be committed toward. This was on the 26th of January. The followingday the Lords consulted the judges as to whether commonrumour was a legal ground of commitment. Fortescue inthe name of his colleagues drew a distinction between misprisionsand trespasses on the one hand, and felonies andtreasons on the other. In the case of the former rumourwas not a sufficient ground of commitment ; implying apparentlythat in the case of the latter it was. Upon thisthe Lords resolved almost unanimously that, as no definitecharge had been made, Suffolk should not be arrested.The next day the definite charges followed, and Suffolkwas sent to the Tower. On Saturday, March 14, Fortescuewas sent by the King to ask the Lords what advice theywould give the King in the matter. The Lords deferredtheir answer till the following Monday, when nothing wasdone ; and on Tuesday the 17th took place that unconstitutionalarrangement which has been already commentedupon2. In the Resumption Act ~vhich was passedthis year Fortescue is twice specially exempted from itsoperation 3.From a letter written Aug, 19, 1450, we learn that ForteqcurFortescue and all the judges were then out of town, with sits special on athe exception of Danvcrs who had just been raised to the colnmis- ,bench, and that Fortescue had acconlpanied the Lordsir~n inKent.Chancellor and the Duke of Ruckingllan~, who had beenl See Letters of John Shilling- preface ; cf. Family History, pp.ford, Mayor of Exeter (Caind. 57;g.Soc.), esp. pp. g, 37. A sketch of Above, pp. 10-1 ; Rot. Pnrl. v.the controversy is given in the 176, 182-3. "11. 187 b, rgg a.

sent into Kent to hold a special commission of oyer andterminer on those who had been concerned in the rising ofIndanger Cadel. On June 2, 1451, another correspondent writesof assault.that Fortescue had been expectillg every night for a week tohave been assaulted in his house, but nothing had come of it;' the more pity ' adds the unfeeling writer 2. Mr. Gairdnerthinks that this was 'probably for no other reason thanhis high impartiality 3.' Lord Clermont attributes theanimus of the writer to Yorkist sympathies4, and wemust attribute the threatened assaults to the same cause.Whatever may have been Fortescue's impartiality in purelylegal matters, and there is no reason to doubt it, it iscertain that in politics he was, as he himself confesses, ' aIIC sl~nres partial man"' or, as we might say, a party-man. And therethe ur~populnrityof is concl~sive evidence that about this time he had unfortheCourt tunately identified hinlself so closely with the party ofparty.Suffolk and Somerset, as to become involved, whetherjustly or unjustly, in their unpopularity. In the proclamationissued by Cade in the name of the Commonsof Kent at the time of their rising the King is requestedto send 'some trcw Justyce wyth certeyll trew lords andknyghts' into Icent, to enquire of all 'traytors and brybors.'And it is addcd : ' to syt upon this enqwerye we refuseno juge except iij chefe juges, the which ben fals to beleveG.'' Paston Letters, i. 139. The imply that Fortescue hzd at thissentence is obscurely worded, but time a private house in London?the above seems to be the sense We have seen that he had proofit. ' The Chief Justice is not perty in Middlesex ; above, p. 44.here, ne noon other Justice, except Ib. lvii.Danvers is now made Juge of the ' U. S. p. 59.Colnune Place, and is forth into Works, p. 532.Kent with the Lords! The words G Three Fifteenth Century' is forth ' &c. must, I think, refer Chronicles, p. .98. The otherto Fortescue. Mr. Gairdner has two ' Chief Judges ' were Sir Johnhere copied a strange mis-state- Prisot, Chief Justice of the Commentof Fenn's that Hody was at mon Pleas, and Peter Arderne,this time Chief Justice. We habe Chief Baron of the Exchequer.seen that Fortescue succeeded The fact that I'risot was, with theHody as early as January 1442. exception of Fortescue, the only' The Chief Yistice hathwaited one of Henry VI's judges whoto ben assauted all this sevenyght was not re-appointed on the acnyghtlyin hes house, but nothing cession of Edward IV, seems tocome as yett, the more pite ;' ib. confirm the idea that he was R185-6. Do the words ' hes house' strong Lancastrianpartizan. WhatIn the satirical dirge upon the death of Suffolk composedabout the same time Fortescue is introduced along withothers of the court party as taking part in this parodyof a funeral service1. And his name occurs again in alist of unpopular persons indicted bcforc the Chancellor(Kemp) and the Duke of Buckingham in August, 1451~.In February, 1454, the Lords consulted the judgcs with ConsuItetIreference to the case of Thorpe. Thc answer givcn by :,";!'Orl'e'iFortescue in the name of all his colleagucs is \\ell kno~vn.They refused to say anything which could be construedas a claim on their part to determine the privilcgcs ofParliament, but they stated what the custom had beenin previous cases ".In May of the following year took place the first battle Death ofof St. Alban's, in which, as WC have seen, Fortescue's younger his poungcrrbrother.brother Sir Kichard Fortescue was killed *, an event whichis not likely to have made him more favourably inclinedtowards the Yorkists. In June we hcar that Sir WilliamOldhall the well-known Yorkist, who had becn attaintcd inParliament in June 1453, was waiting in sanctuary for thereturn of Fortcscue to London, in order that he might sucin the King's Hcnch for the reversal of his outla~vry. Thishe succeeded in effecting a few days later 5.In February, 1456, we find a dispute bctween Sir PhilipArderne had done to make him- Wot. Parl. v. 239 b. On theself unpopular I do not know. question of privilege involved in' 'Bc:ccttus qzri iizt~1'Cigit and Thorpe's case, cf. S.C.H.iii. 491-2 ;dredit also,Iiogers, gas coigne,.^. uxxvi ; Ilat-Seyth John Fortescw, all this sell's Precedents, I. 28-35. Acfalstreson.'cording to the precedents laidThree Fifteenth Cent. Chron., p. down by Fortescue, it would seem102. In the shorter version of that the imprisonment of Thorpethe same song printed by Mr. was not a breach of privilege, andWright, Political Songs, ii. 232 such is Mr. Rogers' opinion. Hutff., the name of Fortescue does not even on the most unfavourableoccur.view the hreach was trifling com-This list is printed by Mr. pared with that of which the othcrWright, Political Songs, 11. hi. f. side had bernguilty in the case ofIt is worth while to compare it Young, for Thorpe's imprisonwiththe song quoted in the last ment did not arise, as Young's did,note. Very many of the names out of his conduct in Parliament.are the same in both. This list is ' SeeStowe,p.399 b ; above,p.qr.dated August, 29 Hen. VI., i.e. Paston Letters, i. 336 ; cf. ib.1451. 343-4.E 2

Anarbitra- Wentworth and Sir John Fastolf which had been sublioncasesubmitted ~nitted to arbitration referred by the arbitrators, by an'O him. arrangement not uncommon in those days, to the extrajudicialdecision of Fortescue and Yelverton '. It wouldseem from a later notice that Fortescue brought the mattersummpned before the House of Lords2. In March, 1456, the judgesto adv~sethe coun- were summoned to advise the council in regard to acil. difficulty which had arisen about the sheriffdom of Lin-colnshire. Fortescue and Prisot for the rest declared, thatthe King had done wrong in appointing as Sheriff any butone of the three who had been nominated in the Exchequerin accordance with the Statute, and that any one thusillegally appointed could not be punished for refusing toserve. They advised compliance with the terms of theStatute, at once if possible, but at any rate at the nextappointment of Sheriffs3. In May, John Paston was informedby a correspondent that some legal business of SirJohn Fastolfs could not be proceeded with because Fortescueand almost all the judges were engaged at theGuildhall 4.Pacifica- The terms of the peace which Henry in 1458 succeededlion ofin patching up betwccn the Lancastrians and Yorl

John Fortescuc the Chief Justice afterwards wrote a treatiseon thc subject, the judges were not now prepared to answer l.'But it is vcry curious that the short tract now first printed2in its entirety from the thirty-fifth volume of the Yelvertonmanuscripts, is placed in that volume after 'The title andclayme of the crowne by Richard duc of York"' and isentitled 'The replication made agenste the title and claymeby the Duc of Yorke to the Crownes and Reaumes ofEngland and Fraunce.' The contents of the tract sufficientlysllo~v that it was written at a later period, especially theaffecting allusion nears the beginning to the author himselfas 'the olde knighte exiled.' Still the fact that the tractis so placed, and so entitled, may perhaps be taken asindicating that Fortescue wished it to be regarded asembodying the reply which he would have made, if hehad becn able to open his mouth on that occasion.Was For- Thc fact however that there is no record of Fortescue'stescue presentin having presided in the Court of King's Bench after Easterparliament Term 1460 raises the question whether he may not havcof r 460 ?withdrawn with Margaret of Anjou to Wales and theNorth5 after the battle of Northampton ; in ~vhich casenoted that Fortescue is not herementioned as the spokesman ofthe judges, as is generally the casewhen the judges are consulted intheir corporate capacity either byParliament or the Council. Itcannot therefore be positivelyaffirlned that he nras present onthe occasion. He was lio\\~evercertainly summoned to this Parlia-~nent ; Lords' Report, U. S., p.946. And the assertion of thejudges that ' the mater nasso high,and touched the I

The Lancastriansretirenorthwards.Agreementwith theScots.contradictory notices of the chronicles and correspondenceof the time will permit.After Towton the defeated Lancastrians retired northwards.A letter which reached London five days after thebattle states that Henry, Margaret, and their son Edwardwith their adherents had fled to Scotland, but were beingpursued'. A fortnight later the news in London was thatHenry, and perhaps also Margaret, Edward, and the Dukeof Somerset, were bcsieged at a place the exact name ofwhich the writer confesses liimself unable to give, and thelocality of which he has possibly mistaken, but which wasperhaps Carham, on the borders of England and Scotland'.From this place, xvherever it was, the royal f~igitivcs musthave soon made their escape, for a week after the date ofthis lettcr the agreement was signed whereby Berwick wassurrendercd to the Scots, the Scots in return promising toassist in an invasion of England in the Lancastrian interest3.Accordingly, iron1 another letter written about the beginningof May \VC learn that Rer\vicli was fill1 of Scots, with\rhom anothcr battle was expected shortly 4. Carlisle wouldhave shared the fate of Berwick only it was better defended5.\ire may trust that Fortescuc had nothing to do with acl-Paston Letters, ii. 5. Accord- estent the account given in theing to \Yaurin (ii. 289 f.), Ed- Paston Letters ; Liv. iv. ch. ssivward remained eight days at York, (Cd. Reiffenberg, iii. 119 f.). Cf.when it mas agreed that as Henry RIonstrelet, iii. f. S4 d.and hIargaret were already out S This is from the Act of Atofthe kingdom, it was useless to tainder, Rot. Parl. v. 478 a. Hardpursuethem.yng (p. 406) speaks of Fortescue'sPaston Letters, ii. 7. ' I herd . . rettrement into Scotland.that Herry the Sert is in a place Paston Letters, ii. 9.in York schire is calle Coroumbr ; Rot. Parl. v. 478 b. Accordingsuchca name it hath,ormuche lyke. to Edward IV, blargaret had pro-And tliere is sege leyde abowte, mised to give up seven 'sherif-&C... . Sum say the Q~ven, Somer- wicks' of England to the Scots,set and the Prince schuld be there.' who with the French were to in-Aimost all the authorities seem vade the kingdom, of which herto represent the Lancastrians as uncle Charles ofAnjou was to havetaking refilge in Scotland immedi- the 'governance;' Halliwell's Letatelyafter Towton. It seems there- ters, i. 123-130. This is of caul-sefore hardly likely that three weeks an cx jarfe statement. Philip ofafter the battle they would be still Burgundy tried to break off thcin \'orkshire. See especially alliance of the Scots with hIar-U'aurin quoted in the last note. garet,but invain; \Vaurin,ii.301-5;Lluclerq however confir~ns to some hlonstrelet, U. S. ; Duclerq, U. S.vising this disgraceful compact1. In the Act of Attainder,Henry and others, among whom Fortescue is expresslynamed, are charged with 'rearing war' against Edward IVat Ryton and Rrancepeth on June 26th, 1461 '. This mayhave been an inroad assisted by the Scots in fulfilment ofthe agreement of April 125th. It was probably about this Embassyto France.time that Somerset, Lord Hungerford, and Sir RobertWhitingham were sent to France to solicit aid for the Lancastriancause. Their movements were disconcerted by thedeath of Charles VII, which occurred on July zznd, 1461 ;and as the sale-conduct which Somerset held was madeout in a fictitious name, he was arrested and imprisoned3.From a letter written by his colleagues on August 30thwe learn that they were detained in Normandy, but wereexpecting to have an interview with the new king in a fewappointment of achancellor wouldnot be altogether devoid of reality.The question is not very important.Fortescue can never havebeen Chancellor in any effectivesense. He cannot have had possessionof the great seal in Eng-Parl. U. S. Lord Cler~nont land. The seal which the Lancastriansused in exile must havebeen fabricated later. On thel He is not named in the Act ofAttainder aniong those who advisedthe giving up of Berwick andCarlisle ; though Hardyng (U. S.)says that the surrender was made' by \vhole*,assent of his [IHenry's]silnple counsaill.'"ot.regards this fighting at Brancepethand Ryton as part of the skirmishingdone by the retiring Lancastriansontheir retreat to theborder.I am inclined, for the reasons givenabove, to regard it as marking anew inroad. If this sur~nise iscorrect, it diminishes very muchthe period during which Fortescuecould have been appointed Chancellorby I-Ienry V1 on Englishsoil. The only period during \vhichsuch an appointment could havebeen legally effective was the shortinterval between the battle of St.Alban's on February 17, and theproclamation of Edward IV onhIarch 4. Still Lord Clermont,prolonging as he does the sojournof Henry V1 on the English sideof the border till the end of June,thinks that there was a period offour months during which he wasmaster of at least a part of hisdominions, and during which hiswhole I am inclined to think thatFortescue was only Chancellor ' in Lpartibus infidelium.' Selden's comparisonof the case of Clarendonunder Charles I1 before the re-storation is estre~nely apt. It issome slight confir~nation of thisview that in the De i\>rtt~rci LE@Aiztur~ Fortescue, though as wehave seen he mentions the fact ofhis having been Chief Justice,never alludes to himself as Chancellor,a claim ahich appears firstin the De Ln~~dibzrs. Selden hasled hlr. Foss into error by assertingthat in the ' Declaration uponcertain Writings ' Fortescue is addressedas ' Chief Chancellor' ofthe late king. The very phraseshould have a\val;ened suspicion.The true reading is ' Chief Counceller;' Works, p. jz3.3 Chastellain, I\.. 65-6.

days1. A month later the Lancastrian envoys were stilldetained in Normandy2. Afterwards their prospects improved.Somerset was released at the special intercessjonof Charles the Bold, who, in opposition to his father,favoured the Lancastrian cause. He was present at theinterview of Charles and Louis XI at Tours, Nov.-Dec.1461, and received some help in money from the latter.Thence he had intended to return to Scotland, but hearingthat Edward was on the look-out for him, he retired toRruges3.I,nncas- Early in the following year the air was full of rumours oftrian Plots. intended invasions of England in the Lancastrian interest4.It was in connexion with these plots that the Earl ofOxford and his son lost their heads in Feb. 1462. Thismust have disconcerted the arrangements. In March,Somerset and Hungerford returned to Scotland instead ofinvading England ; the idea of an invasion was not howevergiven up, and a fleet of French, Breton, and Spanishships was assembling in the SeineG.The Idan- On their arrival in Scotland the royal fugitives had beencnstrians inScotland. received first in the palace of Linlithgow; thence they proceededto Edinburgh, where they were lodged in theconvent of the Dominican Friars. They seem to havebeen in great poverty. We find Margaret borrowingmoney of the Queen Dowager of Scotland, and pledgingto her a gold cup7; while from a subsequent letter ofPaston Letters, ii. 45-7.lb. 52.S Chastellain, U. S., pp. 66-9 ;hlonstrelet, U. S., f. 91 a.In Feb. 1462 secret intelligencehad been received in Norfolk ofan intended threefold invasion ofEngland ; Paston Letters, ii. 91.1 am inclined to think that thisis the same conspiracy as the onementioned in Three Fifteenth Cent.Chron. p. I 58 ; but the chronologythere is very confused ; cf. ib. 17 j ;and the account has been grosslyexaggerated either by Yorkist fearsor Lancastrian hopes. Nine powersare represented as engaged in thescheme, and the continental forcesto be employed amount to over300,000 men. Fortescue is expresslynamed as one of the partywhich was to land at Sandwich.Somerset was to be accompaniedby Henry (read joktz) of Calabria,Margaret's brother, which is notimprobable."aston Letters, ii. 93 ; Will.Worcester, p. 779.g Paston Letters, ii. 93-4.' Burnett, Exchequer Rolls ofScotland, VII. xxxvi f., and the referencesthere given. ChastellainHenry V1 it would seem as if Fortescue hinlself hadministered to the necessities of his master at his ownexpense1. Later in the year 1461 Henry seems to havegone to Kirkcudbright, leaving Margaret and her son withFortescue and others at Edinburgh2; .while early in 1462the prince paid a visit to the Queen Dowager at Falkland5.In April, Margzret with her son and others set out for the XrargaretShe PCStotheContinelit.Continent, in order to plead her cause in person.embarked at Kirkcudbright, and landed in Brittany, whereshe was well received by the Duke, who gave her 12,000crowns4. Thence she went to her father Rene in Anjou,and from him to the court of Louis at Chinon5. Here a Treat),\\rithtreaty was negotiated between Louis and Margaret, whichwas signed at Tours, June 28th, 1462~. In July Louis andMargaret seem to have had another meeting at Rouen7.By this time Margaret had got together a ,considerableforce, intending to return to Scotland and invade Englandfrom thence.Rut meanwhile things were going badly there. A Affairs inparty among the Scotch lords, strongly opposed to the Scotland.Lancastrian policy of Bishop Kennedy of St. Andrew's,makes hlargaret say : ' Donc . . . dated Edinburgh, April 10.me suis fu~e en Escoche, lh oh Whether Fortescue went to Francevivant d'emprunt et resue soubs nithRlargaret,or remained in Scotpromessede secours, portant land with Henry, I have not beenlnainte estroite povretC honteuse, able to- determine with certainty.Escochois en fin m'ont laidement If Mdlle. Dupont is correct indCq~e,' &c. ; VII. I03 ; of. ib. iv. assigning Henry's letter of cre-297. dence for Fortescue to Louis XI,'A ses despens nous a tou- cited above, to the year 1462, thejours entretenu notre estat.' In question 11ould be settled in favourWaurin, 6d. Dupont, iii. 169 f. of the former view. But it isPrinted imperfectly and with a against this that his name doesdifferent date in Family History, not occur among the negotia-P. p . tors or signataries of the treatyPaston Letters, ii. 46. I do uith Louis XI, though less imnotkno\v \thy hlr. Burnett (U. S.) portant men are mentioned. Forshould doubt this.other schemes of hfargaret at this"xch. Rolls, U. S. p. 85. tlme, see an interesting paper in' Vid. Commynes, Cd. Lenglet- Uupont's CVaurin, iii. 178-181.I)ufresnoy, ii. 372.It is there said that many in WalesWill. Worcester, pp. 779 f. ; and in the South and West ofcf. Chastellain, vii. 10;.England were ready to rise in"ee Commynes, U. S., ii. 367- Henry's favour.373. Xlargaret's commission is Commynes, U. S., ii. 12.

which they said was ruining the country to please the kingof France, entered into negotiations with Edward IV. Amarriage was even talked of between him and the widowedQueen of Scots. It was said that Henry and his adherentswere to be given up. In fear of this Henry withdrew withBishop Kennedy, first to St. Andrew's, and then to anotherof his places on the sea, whence he ultimately sailed to joinMargaret in Northumberland l.1.06s of the The negotiations between England and Scotland lcdXorthernhowever to no great result2. Another blow which befellthe Lancastrians at this time was the loss of Alnwick andthe other Northern castles, which they had hitherto held3.Margaret however continued her preparations. A fleet ofFrench, Spanish, and Breton ships, the same probablywhich had begun to assemble in the Seine in March, tookthe Channel in September. Margaret was at Boulogne,perhaps awaiting the issue of a naval battle, and hoping tobe admitted into Calais, where the soldiers were on thcExpected verge of mutiny for want of pay. The alarm in Englandinvasion ofEngland, was considerable ; all men between the ages of sixteen andsixty were ordered to be ready to follow the king at nmoment's notice. But fortune again declared for Edward.The foreign fleet was defeated with great loss by \Varwick,and Calais did not opcn its gates to Margaret4. Had itdone so, it would very likely have shared the fate of Berwick,for the 20,000 livres which blargaret had borrowed ofLouis XI wcre to be repaid within a year of the recoveryof Calais, or in default Calais was to be ceded to France5.In October Margaret set out from France with her FrenchOn all this compare PastonLetters, ii. I I ~ I with , the interestingremonstrance addressed byBp. Icennedy to Louis XI, in whichhe enumerates all that he haddone for the Lancastrian cause;Waurin, U. S., 111. 164-175 ; alsoWilliam Worcester, p. 779 ; Cont.Croyl. p. 551. According to EdwardIV, Margaret had pronlisedKennedy the see of Canterbury ;Halliwell's Letters, i. 123-4.Exchequer Rolls, VII. xli f.Their failure was mainly due toKennedy ; Waurin, iii. 167, 172."V. Worcester, U. S.On all this see Paston Letters,ii. I 12-3, I I 7-9.Printed in Waurin, iii. 176-7.The date is Chinon, June 23, 1462.According to Chastellain, iv. 226,Louis had thoughts of besiegingCalais on his own account.troops under the command of Pierre de BrizP, afld recovered Northerncastles re-Alnwick, Bamburgh, and thc other Northern castles. Here ,o,,,,d~she seems to have been joined by Henry1, but on the approachof Warwick and Edward in November they retiredto Scotland with De BrPzP, leaving Somerset in Bamburghand Hungerford in Alnwick2. On December 10th sicgewas laid to the castles in regular form3. On Christmas Lost again.Eve Bamburgh and Dunstanburgh surrendered, and Somersetand Sir Ralph Percy submitted to Edward4. Alnwickfell on Jan. 6th, 1463. A relieving force under De Brizedid not venture to do more than bring off the garrison,though more than one contemporary is of opinion thatwith a little boldness a decisive blow might have beenstruck 5.Early howevcr in 1463 Bamburgh and two other castles Recovered.were recovered by the Lancastrians with a mixed Frenchand Scottish force. And in May Sir Ralph Grey, who hadbeen jealous that the custody of Alnwick had been committedby Edward IV to Sir John Ashley and not tohimself, expelled the latter from the castle, and with itwent over to the Lancastrian side. Ashley was capturedby Sir Ralph Percy, who returned to the allegiance ofHenry V1 about the same timeG. Newcastle might haveSee above, p. 60.W. Worcester, p. 780. Warwickset out for the North Oct.30th ; Paslon Letters, ii. I20 : Edwardfour days later ; Worcester,U. S. ; cf. Three Chron. pp. I 56,I 76.On the siege of these castles,see Excerpta Hist. p. 365 ; PastonLetters, ii. 120-3 ; ThreeChron. pp. I 58-9.' Worcester, pp. 780-1 ; Gregoiy,pp. xxvii, 219. Somerset'spardon IS dated March 10, 1463 ;Rot. Pat. 3 Ed~v. IV, memb. IS.As early as Sept. 1462 Somersetwas said to be corresponding withWarwickwithreference to achangeof sides ; Paston Letters, ii. I 12-3.Worcester, U. S. ; Warkworth,p. z ; Three Chronicles, p. 176.Hardyng, on the other hand,thinks that they acted wisely toattempt no more ; pp. 407-8.These are the last events narratedby him. He strongly urges Edwardto come to terms with theexiled Lancastrians, by grantingHenry V1 the Duchy of Lancaster.If they pass into France they willcause endless mischief ; a prognosticationwhich was amply verified ;pp. 410-2. According to Chastellain,iv. 220-1, Louis XI didtry to mediate an arrangementbetween the rival kings.G W. Worcester, pp. 781-2 ;Three Chron. p. 176. The latterChronicle places the recovery ofBamburgh before the meeting ofParliament, April zgth, 1463 ; thedate of the defection of Grey is

Lancastriansuccesses.shared the fate of Alnwick but for the promptness withwhich Warwick sent his brother RIontague to defend it. InJune, Henry, Margaret, and De BrCzC were together inBamburgh1. But in that very month Warwick himselfwas again sent to the North2; the Lancastrians dispersedonce more, and Margaret retired to Scotland, closely pursuedby Warwick3. About Christmas Somerset returnedto his allegiance4. Early in 1464 the castles of Norhamand Skipton in Craven were captured by the Lancastrians5,and a rising took place in Lancashire and Cheshire,Fatal over always a stronghold of the partyG. But all their hopesthrow.were overthrown by the crushing defeats inflicted on themby Warwick's brother Montague in the battles of HedgeleyMoor, April qth, and Hexham, May 8th, 14647. Somcrset,Hungerford, and other prominent Lancastrians weretaken and beheaded. Henry, who seems to have beellawaiting the issue of the field in Bywell Castle, escapedthence, no one knew how or whither, but ultimately toScotland S. In June Alnwick and Dunstanburgh surrenderedto Warwick, and Barnburgh was taken by assaultq.fixed by a letter printed in Dupont's wick was in great force at New-Waurin, iii. 159-161, which shows castle, and intending to go forthatthe news of it reached London wards to Scotland ; that De Brkzk,on May 31, 1463. Dr. Stubbs Grey, and others had been besieg-(C. H. iii. 199) places the recovery ing a castle near Alnwick, but hadof the castles in 1464 ; but though retired on the approach of Monta-Worcester seems to place the gue ; that Edward had left Lonrecoveryof Alnwick immediately don on the pretious Thursdaybefore the battle of Hexham, a week (July 7th), intending to follomwhole leaf of the MS. is missing War~vick in force ; Waurin,~. S.,between the two occurrences. The iii. 162-4.letter cited above is quite conclu- Waurin, ii.319-321. This theresive.fore would be in July ; see last note.l On all this see Waurin, U. S. ' Gregory, p. 223 ; Three Chron.'After Pentecost,' says Three p. 177. Warlzworth (p. 3) placesChron.pp. 176-7. Whit-Sunday in Somerset's return 'half a year1463 was on May 29th. In Rymer, after his original defection.xi. 501, there is a commission, "Three Chron. p. 178.dated June 2, to Warwick and Paston Letters, ii. 152.others to array the men cf West- 'Cf. Rot. Parl. v. 51 I f.moreland against the king's foreign Three Chron. p. 179. Manyenemies who have been stirred up thought that he was dead ; ChasbyHenry, late king d. ftrcto. A tellain, v. 22.letter written on Saturday, July Three Chron. p. 179 ; Wor-15th, 1463 (?!6th, July I 5th in 1463 cester, pp. 782-3 ; notes to Warkwason a Friday), says that War- worth, pp. 36-9.But almost a year before the final blow fell, Margaret Marbaretand her son, with De BrCzC, Fortescue, and others in her ;idt:yg"train, had quitted Britain for the Continent. It must Continent.have been just after the dispersal of the Lancastrians inthe summer of 1463 that they set forth l, for it was in thelast days of July that they landed at Sluys. They were inextreme poverty, and dependent on the liberality of DeBrCzC for the very bread they ate2. From Sluys RIargaretdespatched a messenger to the Duke of Burgundy, whowas superintending the negotiations which were going onat St. Omer between the French and English, to beg for apersonal interview with him. From this the Duke triedto excuse himself, but ultimately, with the magnificentcourtesy which characterized him, yielded to Margaret'simportunity. On her way to join him she was met byCharles the RoId at Bruges, who lent her money to supplyher wants. Here she left her son and all her household,Fortesc~e no doubt among them, and proceeded on herl TheEnglishauthoritiesareveryobscure as to the timeofMargaret'sdeparture for Flanders. It seemscommonly assumed that it was aconsequenceofthedefeats ofHedgeleyand Hexham. But the briefLatin Chronicle (Three Chron. pp.1 79 f.) clearly places it before thoseevents,forafterrelatingthern it says:' Margareta has procellas prrcave?zs,incolaelegitfieri transmarina.'And it may well have been thoughtdesirable to place the heir of Lancasterin safety before the die wascast. All the foreign authorities,Chastellain, Waurin, Monstrelet,Duclerq, place Margaret's arrivalin Flanders in 1463, and so doesWorcester (p. 781), though themonth he gives, April, is too early.Dr. Stubbs, citing Worcester,represents Margaret as goingabroad early in 1463 and returningtowards the end of that year.But Worcester clearly refers to thefinal departure of Margaret, for hespeaks of her settling in her father'sdominions, ' ut ibi expectareteventus mundi.' Worcester moreovermakes her embark at Bamburgh.We have seen that Henry,Margaret, and De Br6zC werethere in June 1463, but the foreignauthorities, especially Waurin, ii.319 ff., clearly represent them asretiring to Scotland, where theirpresence seems to have been nolonger welcome ; cf. Basin, ii. 50 ;Chastellain, iv. 279 ; vii. 103. Itwould seem that it is to this periodthat we must refer the romanticstory of hlargaret's adventure withthe robber, which she told theDuchess of Bourbon at St.Pol; seebelow,, p. 64. From this point tothearnval ofPrlargaret at St.Mighe1in Barrois, I follow almost exclusivelythe authority of Chastellain,whose narrative is most minute,and whose position enabled himto obtain the most exact information.Compare also Monstrelet,iii. f. 96 a ; Duclerq, Liv. v. ch. I ;Basin, ii. 50. Gregory, pp. 220-1,is very confused.Vhastellain, iv. 279.

Illterview way alone. At Bdthune the English made an attempt tow~th Philip8- capture her ; but they were too late, and on August 31stSU~~Y. she reached St. Pol in safety, where she was to await theDuke, who arrived the following day, and entertained hermagnificently and gave her many comfortable words1.The next day, September znd, the Duke departed, leavinghis guest to the care of his sister the Duchess of Bourbon,whom Margaret entertained with the recital of her adventures.After his departure the Dcllte sent back a knightwith a present of 2,000 gold crowns and a rich diamond forMargaret, and other presents for her attendants2. Thefollowing morning, September grd, Margaret departed fromSt. Pol and returned to Bruges, escorted by a body-guardof the Duke's archers, to prevent her falling into the handsof the English. At Brugcs she found not only Charles theBold, but also the Bastard of Burgundy and Philip deCrhvecceur and others. And in the entertainments thatfollowed there was much stately conflict on points ofetiquette, Charles insisting with somewhat ostentatiouschivalry on treating his guests in accordance with theirformer rank, and not according to their present condition 3.The Lan- From Rruges Margaret and her followers were conveyedcaqt~ian,,- under Burgundian protection to the borders of Bar, wheretlreto they were received by an escort sent by Margaret's father4,St. Mighel. who assigned them as their residence the little town ofSt. Mighel in Barrois. Here they lived the usual life ofexiles, in great poverty 5, carrying on a feeble agitation atsuch foreign courts as they had access to, but sometimes insuch straits for money that they could hardly pay aNegotia- messenger to go on their errands \ Louis XI was constantlyapplied to. In 1464~, and again in the summer ofChastellain, iv. 280-6, 293-4. Here highnesse may do no moreIb. 298-9, 307 ; cf. Com- to us thanne she dothe ;' Fortescuemynes, 6d. Lenglet-Dufresnoy, ii. to the Earl of Ormond. FalnllyI 78. History, p. 72.S Chastellain, iv. 309-314.'The berer hereof had of us' Ib. 332 ; vii. 105.but iij scutes for alle his costes' We buthe alle in grete towardes you, by cause we haddepoverte, but yet the quene sustey- no more money ;' ib.nethe us in mete and drlnke, so as In the same letter Fortescuewe buthe not in extreme necessite. speaks of having been at Paris ;146j, Fortescue himself went to Paris. On the latter occasionhe was accompanied by the Earl of Pembroke, HenryVI's half-brother, and was the bearer of a letter fromHenry V1 to Louis XI, dated Edinburgh, March 28th(? 1 ~6~)~. Their chief hope however was in the kings ofPortugal and Castile and in Charles the Bold, because oftheir connexion with the house of Lancaster. It washoped that the first-named king would influence theEmperor Frederick I11 who had married his sister, andthat the Emperor would bring pressure to bear on thePope2. The (titular) Earl of Ormonde, who had fled toPortugal after Towton, was now acting as Lancastrianambassador at that court. It is from a letter of Fortescueto him, enclosing instructions from the Queen and lettersfrom the Prince, that we learn most of the particulars givenabove 3. This letter was written in December 1464. In Fate~fthe instructions it is stated that Henry is well and out of Henryv1-the hands of his rebels, and we have seen that in thefollowing March he perhaps dated a letter from Edinburgh.But soon after this he must have left Scotland, which inthe previous year had concluded a truce for fifteen yearswith Edward ; and early in July *, while wandering inLancashire atnong his secret friends, he was betrayed andib. 71. In the De Lazm'i6z~s, c. 53, VII. xxxvii ; Maitland's History ofFortescue alludes to a recent so- Edinburgh, p: 8. In March 1464journinParis,butwhetheritwasthis he was certainly at Bamburgh ;oralater one cannotbe determined. Waurin, iii. 183. After Hexhaml Printed by Lord Clermont, he probably returned to Scotland,U. S. p. 78. More correctly by and if we may accept Lord Cler-Dupont, U. S. iii. 169 f., who how- mont's date for this letter he wasever assigns it to the year 1462, at Edinburgh in March 1465.v. S. p. 59, zotes. Henry's move- Instructions to Ormond, U. S.ments at this time are wrapped in p. 74.mystery. We have seen (p. 62) These documents are giventhat in July 1463 he retired to by Lord Clermont, U. S. pp. 69-75,Scotland, where Margaret left him. but he is mistaken in thinking thatMonstrelet and Duclerq (U. S.) re- none of them have been printedpresent him as being in a strong before. The letters of Princeplace, 'ou pays de Galles' (?Gal- Edward and of Fortescue are inloway), during her visit toFlanders. the Arch~ological Journal, vii. I 70;Chastellain, iv. 279, merely says cf. Foss, Judges, iv. 313.that she left him in a secure place. " The date given by most au-In Jan. 1464 he seems to have thorities is 'about the feast of SS.been at Edinburgh ; Exch. Rolls, Peter and Paul,' i. e. June zg.F

captured, and committed to the Tower, where he remaineduntil his brief restoration. He does not seem to have beenharshly treated, and full provision was made for the satisfactionof his religious wants l. His life was valuable toRelations Edward as long as his son remained at large. Of all thewith Burgundyand princely relatives of the house of Lancaster Charles theFrance. Bold seems to have been the one who took the mostinterest in its fate2. And about this very time Edwardfound it impossible to come to a permanent agreementwith Burgundy because of Charles's influence in favour ofMargaret3. It is not therefore surprising that in thissummer Louis XI and Edward IV rnade a truce foreighteen months, of which the terms were that Louis wasnot to assist Margaret, and Edward was not to assistWar of the Burgundy or Brittany 4. For this year was the year ofPublicWeal. the War of the Public Weal in France, in which not onlyBrittany, but also John of Calabria the brother of Margaretof Anjou, and Edmund Beaufort the titular Duke ofSomerset 5, were among the confederates of Charles ofBurgundy. And this may have had something to do withCharles's tenderness for the concerns of Margaret. Thesefacts moreover lend an additional interest to Fortescue'sreference to that war in the ninth Chapter of the presentwork, where, speaking of the perils of over-mighty subjects,he says : 'and in owre dayes we have sene a subgett offthe Ffsench kynges in such myght pat he hath gyvenbataiil to the same kyng and putt hym to flight, and aftirwardbesegett hym beyng in Paris is grettest cete, and sokeppid thair vnto ye tyme his said kyng hade made suchende with hym, his adherentes and fauctours as he desired.'But at the time no doubt the humiliation of Louis was amatter of jubilation in the Lancastrian camp. In June1467 Charles the Bold became, by his father's death, Dukel Issues of the Exchequer, pp. it necessary to make for his in-489 f. termarrying with the house ofa That Charles really felt his York.connexion uith the house of Lan- W. Worcester, p. 784.caster is shown by the excuses ' Ib. 785 ; Rymer, XI. 452 Kwhich Chastellain (v. 22) thinks Hearne's Fragment, p. 295.of Burgundy; and in the following year he married Mar- Alliance ofgaret the sister of Edward IVCharles thel. The Duke of Somerset Bold withwas at the Burgundian court while the preparations for the "dwaidIV.marriage were going forward, and only left Bruges the daybefore the arrival of the bride, and having nothing more tohope for in that quarter retired to Queen Margaret 2. Thischange in Charles's attitude must have seemed at the timea great blow to the Lancastrians, but it had its compensations.The close alliance of England and Burgundy led Louis X Jnns toLouis XI to look with greater favour on the cause of the theexiles, and it occasioned the final breach betwecn Edward :?,C+and the Nevilles 3. Even before this time the hopes of theLancastrians had been raised by the attitude of Warwiclc'and the general discontent with Edward's government.And now in the summer of 1468 Jasper Tudor was sentinto Wales, where he exercised jurisdiction in King Henry'sname? A little later, Margaret, having been allowed tocollect some forces in France, was waiting at Harfleurhoping for an opportunity of passing into England G. Butthe threat of invasion came to nothing, and Jasper Tudorwas defeated by Lord Herbert, to whom his title of Earlof Pembroke was given. We do not know with what' As early as May, 1467, thequestion of this marriage hadformed the subject of wagers inEngland ; Paston Letters, ii. 305.Vaston Letters, ii. 319. Heseems however to have entered intoconlmunication with some of theEnglish who came over for thewedding. Two gentlemen of theretinue of the Duchess of Norfolkwere executed for this; Hearne'sFra,ment, p. 297 ; Plumpton Correspondence,pp. 19-20 ; Gregory,P. 217.- Tont. Croyl. p. 551.S. C. H. iii. 205. In Dupont'sWaurin, iii. 186-196, there is amost interesting document datedJan. 16,1467 (0. S.), which throwsgreat light on the attitude of Louisand U'arwick at this time. It isfrom Louis's ambassador in Eng-Fland, who says, the report thatbuis is about to marry one of hisdaughters to Prince Edward ofLancaster has caused the utmostdismay in England. On Jan. 7thEdward sent for Warwick, whorefused to come unless his mortalenemies Herbert, Scales,and Wyd-ville [Kivers] were removed. InSuffolk 300 men had risen andchosen a captain, 'Robin,' but ontheir sending to Warwick he toldthem that it was not yet time tomove (' besoigner '). Warwick isloyal to Louis, and though timidcannot dissemble much longer.He is going northwards to meethis brother Northumberland, andif the king pursues him he will defendhimself.~re~ory, p. 237 ; Worcester, p.791. Ib. 792.

feelings the exiles received the news that in August 1469Edward was a prisoner in the hands of the Nevilles, andthat the King-maker had thus two captive kings in hiscustody. Rut if they augured from it a speedy restorationof Henry VI, they were destined to be disappointed for awhile. Warwick was not yet prepared for a Lancastriani\lliance restoration, and Edward was allowed to go free. It wasI~etweennfargaret not till after the expulsion of Warwick and Clarence fromand England in March I470 that the alliance between Margaretwick.and the former was brought about by Louis XI1.Louis's policy in the matter was very simple. Aslong as England did not interfere with his plans, itwas a matter of great indifference to him who wasking there. If Warwick had succeeded in carryingEdward with him in his policy of friendship with France,he would have been quite content. That having failed,he was resolved to use Warwiclc as an instrument tooverturn Edward 2. The negotiations between Margaretand Warwick took place at Angers under the personalsuperintendence of Louis, and lasted from the 15th ofJuly till the 4th of August, I470 3. It was with theutmost difficulty that Margaret was brought to con-Fortescue's sent to the unnatural alliance4. Fortescue, on thezeal for thealliance. other hand, seems to have thrown himself into the newcombination with ardour. He plied Louis XI &ithmemorandums and state-papers5, on the claims of EdwardIV to the crowns of England and France, on theimpossibility of peace with Edward, on the certainty ofl Louis sent to summon Mar- daughter as already arranged ; MS.garet in May I470 ; Commynes, Cotton. Vesp. F. iii. f. 32 ; cf. ' Theed. Lenglet-Dufresnoy, iii. 124 ; cf. maner and guyding of Quene Mar-Basin, ii. 223.garet and the Earle of Warrewick,'!A Kirk, Charles the Bold, i. 419. in Ellis's Letters, 11. i. 132-5, orS An agreement had however White Rose, pp. 229 ff.been practically come to by July Chastella~n, v. 467-8 ; Basin,25. See Louis's letter of that date ii. 223.in Duclos, iii. 294. The treaty None of these documents havein which Louis's brother the Duke been as yet discovered, but a paperof Guienne promised to espouse containing an abstract of them isthe Lancastrian cause, dated July printed by Lord Clermont, U. S.3oth, speaks of the marriage of pp. 80-2. The original is in thePrince Edward and Warwick's National Library at Paris.peace with Henry; on the threats of invasion uttered inthe last English Parliament, and the means of stirringup troubles in England which would oblige Edward toremain at home until he should be unseated altogether.Finally, with more particular reference to the meetingat Angers, he submitted a memorandum embodying thefollowing points : the desirability of the marriage betweenPrince Edward of Lancaster and the daughter of theEarl of Warwick, and of entrusting the government ofEngland to the Earl ; the means of reconciling Edwardto the revolution, the establishment of the Staple ofEnglish wools in France at Calais1 or Rouen, the extensionof English trading privileges in Guienne, andthe means of providing for the necessary expenses.Events moved rapidly after the conclusion of the agreement2.In the middle of September Warwick landed in Lancas-England 3, on the 3rd of October Edward fled to Flanders,on the 5th Henry V1 was taken from the Tower4, andthe machinery of government went on once more in hisname, the real pourer being in the hands of Warwick,who styled himself his lieutenant5. Archbishop Neville,Warwick's brother, was made Chancellor, no regard beingpaid to Fortescue's claims to that officeG. Parliament' Does this mean that Calaiswas to be given up to Louis? Ifnot, it is difficult to see why anynew agreement was necessary.The Staple of English Wools hadlong been at Calais. We haveseen (p.60) that Margaret had oncebefore signed an agreement whichcame perilously near to an agree-ment to give up Calais. It is notuncommon for exiles to think thatthe first duty which they owe theircountry is their own restoration.Warwick however mas not likelyto consent to the surrender of thisstronghold of his own power. Itis also somewhat strange thatF'ortescue, \vho in the presentwork insists so strongly on thenecessity of reducing the po\\erof the nobles, should have 11cenwilling to surrenderthegovernmentto Warwick.For this summary of eventssee S. C. H. iii. 204 ff.W e had been expected earlier ;Paston Letters, ii. 406.Warwick's letter announcingthis to Louis, dated October 8th,is in Waurin, iii. 43-4.Arrival of Edward IV, p. I.The editor (Mr. Bruce) has questionedthis on the authority of I'olydoreVergil. Ijut \Varwick so styleshimself in a document preservedin &IS. Yelverton, So. 35, f. 127, ro,andcopiedhy Stowe, hlS. Narl. 543,f. I 71, v0 : ' IZichard Erlc of \\'arwikeand Salisbury.. . lievetenauntto. . . Kpnge Ilenry the sext.'A lay Chancellor \\.as howeverstill at this time a rare exception.

met in November ; it settled the crown on Henly and hisson with remainder to Clarence', and reversed the Lancastrianattainders, thus enabling the Dukes of Somersetand Exeter, and the Earls of Pembroke and Richmond,Margaret to return to England early in 1471. Meanwhile Margaretdetainedin France. and her son, with Fortescue and others in their train,were still detained in France2. Mr. Kirk has suggestedthat the delay was due to Louis, who wished to give hisespecial ally Warwick time to establish himself firmlybefore allowing the genuine Lancastrians to depart3.If this was his object, his astuteness, not for the firstSchclneof time, over-reached itself. The delay was fatal. It mustreformhave been during this interval that Fortescue drew upby For- the state-paper now printed for the first time4, andtescne.entitled 'Articles sent from the Prince to the Earl ofWarwick his father-in-law.' That it is by Fortescuecannot be doubted by any one who compares it withthe present work, its precise relation to which will bediscussed later6. In it he advised hat all claims forreward and compensation should be reserved for theconsideration of the Council, and that the King shouldforbear for the first year to keep the usual royal household.The other points are all embodied in the present workand are discussed in the notes. Whether the paper hadany influence on Warwick's policy cannot be determined.Ianding of At length, on Easter-Day, April 14th, Margaret withMnrgaret. her son and FortescueG landed at Weymouth, only tolearn on the morrow that on the very day of their landingWarwick had been overthrown and slain by Edward atBarnet, and that Henry was once more a prisoner. To Fortescue,who had done so much to bring about the alliancel This can hardly have been,as Lord Clermont suggests (U. S.p. so), Fortescue's means forreconciling Edward IV to therevolution. To him the successionof Clarence would ha\e heen avery poor consolation.B In November-December I470they seem to have been withLouis at Ainboise; Waurin,iii.qx-6.Thence they went to Paris ; Coinmynes,U. S. ii. 88. In FebruaryHenry sent to fetch his wife andson, but in vain ; Rymer, xi. 693.Charles the Bold, ii. 85.' Below, Appendix B.' Below, pp. 89, 95.They were proclaimed traitorsApril 27th ; Rymer, xi. 709.with Warwick, the blow must have been particularly severe.Somerset however, and others who joined them at Cernet\bbas after their arrival, maintained that the removal ofWarwick was a source of strength rather than of wcaknessto their party'. It was resolved to persevere, and if theyhad been able to carry out their plan and gain the strongholdsof their party in the North, the issue might yet havebeen doubtful. But the rapidity of Edward's movements Rattle Tewkes- ofmade this impossible, and at Tewkesbury, on the 4th of bury.May, the Lancastrian cause was finally overthrown.Prince Edward, the hope of the house, was slain. Margaret,now childless and soon to be a widow, was reservedto grace the conqueror's triumph2. She remained aprisoner till 1475" when she was ransomed, and she diedin 1482, too soon to see the downfall of the houseagainst which she had striven so long. Within three Death orweeks of the battle of Tewkesbury perished Henry VI. Hen'yVr.His life was no longer valuable, and he died. His virtuesand his misfortunes had deeply touched the heartof England, and his death gave them the final consecration.Much as England had suffered undcr him, sheheld him guiltless4, and the voice of the people decreedto him a canonization more real than any which Popesor Churches have it in thcir power to bestow5. Fortescue Fate ofwas among the prisoners of ~elikesbur~, and his life was Fortescue.spared0. Now that his cause was expired and his master'For that los, theyr partye wasnevarthefebler,butrather strongar.'Arrival of Edward IV, p. 23.' Servata incolumis, ut anteRegem triumphantem curru vehereturLondonias ; quod et facturnest ;' Cont. Croyl. p. 555. OnDec. 16, 1470, she had also losther brother, John of Calabria.' The articles for her delivery,signed ' Loys,' are in MS. Cott.Vesp. F. iii, f. 30.'And alle bycause of his falslordes and nevere of hym ;' Warkworth,p. 12. 'The kyng knonethnot alle ;' Political Songs, ii. 230.It must be confessed however thatforeigners speak with much lessreserve of Henry's incapacity as aruler; cf. e. g. Chastellain andWaurin.3 Unde et agens tyranni, patiensqueglorios~ inartyris titulummereatur,' says the Yorkist CroylandContinuator, p. 566 ; cf. thehymn toHenry in Warkworth,p.xxi.G In Paston Letters, iii. g, Fortescue(under the name of 'LordFoskew ') is mentioned amongthose beheaded after Te\vkesbury,though a note is added to say thathe and SirWillialn Grymesby werest~ll alive. The latter was executed; Warkworth, p. 18. It

Requiredto write infavour ofthe Yorkisttitle.Date ofhis deathunknown.dead1, Fortescue cannot be blamed for accepting theclemency of the conqueror. There was in fact nothingleft to fight for. In October, 1471, his pardon passedthe Great Seal, and soon after he was made one 'ofthe King's Councell 2.' But before obtaining the reversalof his attainder and the restoration of his estates, he wasrequired to write in favour of the king's title, and refutethe arguments which he had formerly brought against it 3.How he executed this task will be told later 4. In October,1473, he petitioned the king in Parliament for his restorationon the ground that this had been done. Hispetition was granted 5. An exemplification of this petitionand the answer to it passed the Great Seal in February,1475. The restoration of his estates was no doubt facilitatedby the fact that the bulk of them had been grantedto Lord Wenlok, who joined Warwick against Edward,and fell at the battle of Tewkesbury 6. Fortescue residedat Ebrington after his restoration to his estates, and isburied in the church of that parish. The last notice ofhim which has been discovered belongs to February, 1476,when he delivered into the E.ucknauer an Assize which hadbeen taken before him when he was Chief Justice7. Heis said to have lived to the age of ninety, but even if thistradition could be relied on, the uncertainty which as we havewould seem therefore that Fortescue'sexecution was considered acertainty at the time. Fortescueis called ' Lorde Foscheme ' alsoby Gregory, p. 217.l These are Fortescue's own espressionsin the ' Declaration oncertain IVritings,' Works, p. 532.Ib. 533.There is no ebidence for thestory told by Lord Campbell andrepeated by Lord Cler~nont thatthe iinposition of this conditionwas due to Fortescue's successorChief Justice Billing. See Foss,Judges, iv. 417-8. That Fortescueshould under the circulnstanceshave complied \I it11 this conditioninerits no particular blame. Butwe certainly cannot make it amatter of special praise as Cokedoes. (Cited, Fainily Hist. p.49.) Fortescue himself evidentlythought it savoured of 'doubleness'and required an apology; Works,- -..P. 532.Below, pp. 78-9.Rot. Parl. vi. 69 a.As early as 1468 Wenlok wascharged wiih cor;esponding withXIargaret ; W. Worcester, p. 790 ;cf. IVaurin, iii. 189 f. For the grantof Fortescue's lands to Wenlok, seeabove, p. 43, 7zofe; cf. Rot. Parl.v. 581 b. Between the grant toWenlok and Fortescue's restorationthe reversion of Ebringtonmust have fallen in ; v. S. p. 43.Knl. Exch. iii. 8, in Foss, U. S.P. 314.seen hangs over the date of his birth1 would make itfor the determination of the date of his death.~ u on t any computation his days must have exceededthe allotted threescore years and ten. Of his wife I have His wifeand family.found only one notice after 1447, and from this it appearsthat she was alive in September, 1455, and died before May,14722; nor have I discovered whether she or any of hisfamily accon~panied him in his wanderings. He had oneson and two daughters, all of whom had married beforethe time of their father's exiIe3. His only son Martinhowever died before him, Nov. I lth, 1471 4, at a timewhen political disappointments must have rendered thisheavy private bereavement additionally hard to bear.In favour of this son Fortescue had in 34 Henry VI, bymeans of a fine levied in the Court of Common Fleas,divested himself of the estates in Devonshire, which aswe have seen he had himself received from his brotherHenry5. Martin Fortescue left two sons, of whom theelder bore his grandsire's name of John, while the youngerwas named William. From the former is descended the His depresentEarl Fortescue, the latter is the ancestor of Lord scendants.Clermont and his brother Lord Carlingford. To theelder line belonged Lord Fortescue of Credan, who actedas judge in all three Courts of Common Law, and wasthe first editor of the present work; to the younger linebelonged William Fortescue, the friend of Pope, who aftersitting in the Exchequer and Common Pleas, becameultimately Master of the Rolls G. So that in Fortescue'scase his own remark has been amply verified, that fromthe families of judges often descend nobles and greatmen of the realm7.' Above, pp. 40-1.This is the ~nquisition takenafter the death of her son Xlartin :from which it appears that she wasalive in 34 Hen. VI, but dead onMay 12th, 12 Edw. IV. Printed byLord Clermont, Faillily History,PP. 144-6-' lb. 53-1.Not Nov. ~zth, 1472, as LordClermont says ; ib. 94, 127-8.See the docuinent cited in the lastnote but one.Above, p. 43.G See Loid Clerinont's FamilyHistory, and the pedigrees thcregiven.De Laudibus, c. 51.

PART 111.WRITINGS, OPINIONS, AND CHARACTER OF SIR JOHNFORTESCUE.Fortescue WE must now turn from Fortescue tlie lawyer, the judge,as a writer. the ardent and faithful adherent of the Lancastrian cause,to Fortescue the publicist and writer. But the politicaland the literary activity of Fortescue are closely connected.It was in the service of the house of Lancaster that he firstIlivisions wielded both sword and pen. His writings may be dividedof his writings.according to their subject into three classes :-l. Works onthe dynastic question of the rival claims of the houses ofLancaster and York. 2. Constitutional Treatises. 3. Miscellaneouswritings.The first class comprises several short tracts on theSuccession question, and the second book of the treatiseDe Natzird Legis Natzi~.~~. The second class comprises tbefirst book of that treatise, the De Latldib~is Legzinz A~zglic,and the present work. The third class comprises onegenuine tract and some others 'L, which the authenticity is,I think, extremely doubtful.Tracts 011 The class which I have placed first is also in the main thethe Sncces- first in order of composition. In it the first place belongsto the short tracts which Fortescue wrote in favour of theLancastrian Title. Of these there have come down to us,either in whole or in part, the following :-I. De Titzilo Edwardi Cognitis Marchiczl. (Latin. Complete.)2. Of the Title of the House of York2. (English.Fragmentary.)3. Defensio Yt'lrris Donztts Lancasl'Yicz3. (Latin. Fragmentary.)4. A Defence of the House of Lancaster: otherwisel Works, pp. 63"-74". MS. Cotton. Vesp. F. ix. f. 122.lb. 497-502. In Appendix D The tract is still however incom-I have printed what I believe to be plete.tlie beginning of this tract from Works, pp. 505-510.called, A replication to the claim of the Duke of York1.(English. Complete.)In the tract which he afterwards wrote to refute his own Otherwritingsarguments, Fortescue says that there were many writingsmade in Scotland by other men which were fathered upon Successionquestion.him without his consent and knowledge; others were drawnup by Henry's council, and passed by a majority of votes,though to some of them he himself was ' not well willing.'Others were his own composition2. Among the workswhich Fortescue denies to have been his was one embodyingthe absurd story, first set about at the time when Johnof Gaunt was thought to be aiming at the succession,that Edmund Crouchback was really the elder brother ofEdward 13. It is to Fortescue's credit that he rejects thisfable. But, on the other hand, he had no motive for acceptingit. Any claim derived from Edmund Crouchback musthave come through Blanche of Lancaster, the wife of Johnof Gaunt, and the whole of Fortescue's argument rests onthe exclusion of all claims derived through females4. Thereis however no reason to doubt the authenticity of any ofthe four tracts enumerated above. They are consistentwith one another, and with what we know from othersources to have been Fortescue's views, and the argumentswhich they contain are those which are refuted in his subse-quent recantation. Rut the fact that they and also thesecond part of the De Nntzrvd Lcgis Natzlre have only' Works, pp. 517-8, under the again (p. 4) says that there wasformer title ; below, Appendix C, an idea of marrying Edward IV'sunder the latter. This tract seems eldest daughter to the son ofclearly referred to in the ' De- Warwick's brother Montague ;claration,' &C., Works, p. 536. 'whiche, by possibylite, shuld belb. 523-4. kynge of Englonde.' Fortescue'sS Capgrave however accepted views are however confirmed byit. See Illustr. Henr., pp. xv, an entry on the Close Roll of 13107. Hen. 111, memb. I 5, dorso : ' non* That the idea of female suc- est consuetudo vel lex in terracession was not wholly strange nostra Angli~, quod filia fratrisin England at this time is proved alicujus primogeniti fratrem jubythe charges against Suffolk niorem patri sbo succedentemof intending to marry his son to hzreditarie super haereditate suaMargaret Beaufort with a view possit vel debeat impetere ;' citedto the succession to the crown; by Hardy, Preface to Close Rolls,Rot. Parl. v. 177 b. Warkworth p. xxxvi.

Other come down to us for the most part in single copies', makestracts ofFortescue it extremely probable that Fortescue wrote other fugitiveprobably pieces on the same subject which have perished2. Underlost.the repressive and inquisitorial system which Edward IVestablished after his restoration it was no doubt dangerousl The only known copy of both We are not left wholly to conpartsof the De Naturd Legis jecture on this point. In theNatzwe is the Lambeth MS. 262. De TituZo Edwardi, &C., For-A copy of the first part, which tescue speaks of 'codicem illumdoes not trench upon the Suc- ariginalem qui de hiis latiu;cession question, is among the continet in vulgari scriptum ;Laud MSS., No. 585. There was Works, p. 63". This might bea copy of this work among the the English tract on the TitleWorsley MSS. (see Catalogus of the House of York (No. 2,Librorum Manuscriptorum, ii. above), but I have given reasons213 a), but whether this con- lower down for thinking that thattained both parts or not I cannot is later, not earlier, than the Desay. Of the other tracts mentioned Titulo Edw. Again, at the endin the text, No. I exists only in of the latter Fortescue announcesthe Yelverton MS., vol. 69. The his intention of compiling anotherfragments of No. 3 come from work on the subject, \vhich wastwo sources, but both are derived to embody certain documents ;from the one copy which perished Works, pp. 73" f. This workin the Cottonian fire. Nos. 2 and also, if it was ever written, has4 are partial exceptions to the rule. not been found. Of the cause ofNo. z was prrnted by Lord Cler- this scarcity there can be no doubt,mont from MS. Cotton, Julius F. when we compare the numerousvi. There is another copy in copies which exist of the oneMS. Lansdowne 205, f. 137. A fact which Fortescue wrote inpreliminary note, dated 1581, I iour of the House of York.states that it was copied from hesides the five MSS. enumerated' certayne leves of a booke . . . . by Lord Clermont (Works, p. ~zo),found in a bookbynder's shoppe, I have come across the following :wheras the said book ignorantly two copies in the Yelverton MSS.,had been putt to profane uses.' vols. 21 and 86 ; a second copyThis copy corlesponds exactly (besides the one cited by Lordwith the Cottonian MS., so that Clermont) in MS. Harleian, 1757 ;either the latter contains the and MS. Digby? 198, which last' leves ' in question, or both MSS. is the most ancrent of all, but iscopied the same ' leves.' Of unfortunately incomplete. HowNo. 4 I have found one complete much the insecurity of the timecopy among the Yelverton MSS., contributed to the destruction ofand there 1s an incomplete copy papers &c. may be seen from thein the Phiuips collection. Not frequent requests made by corhavingseen the latter I cannot respondents that their letters ]naysay whether it is derived from the be destroyed as soon as read ;former. It is the one which Lord cf. Rymer, ix. 680 ; Paston Let-Clermont has printed. Stone ters, i. 229, 346, 396, 433 ; iii. 487 ;has made two transcripts of the Uekynton, i. 268. Another symp-Yeherton copy : Harl. 543, f. 163, tom of the time is the numberand Harl. 545, f. 136. But all these of anonymous letters ; see Pastonhave escaped Lord Clermont. Letters, iii. 515.to be found in possession of tracts which favoured theclaims of the house of Lancaster. Of these four tracts the Characterlast is only a short piece intended to prove the illegitimacyof Philippa the reputed daughter of Lionel Duke of tracts.Clarence, through whom the line of York derived theirclaim, a point which is also discussed, though more briefly,in the first two pieces. The first three all cover much thesame ground, and by tabulating their contents and comparingthe refutation of them in the 'Declaration uponcertain Writings' we could restore with an approach tocertainty the missing parts of Nos. 2 and 3. These lastare practically identical with one another, one being inLatin and the other in English. It is impossible to saywhether the English or the Latin version was composedfirst. But there can be little doubt that No. I is the earliestof the group, both because the arguments there broughtforward are much less elaborated than in the correspondingportions of the other tracts, and also because it containsinaccuracies which are corrected in the latter l. To the The secondsame class belongs, as I have said, the second part of the g2di,hkDe Nattrrd. Legis Natzwa. The difference between it and Legis Nuthepreceding tracts consists, not only in its greater length '"m'(it occupies seventy large quarto pages in Lord Clermont'sedition), but in the fact that while they deal openly andavowedly with the concrete case of the English Successionas disputed between the houses of York and Lancaster, thisis in form purely abstract. It is cast into the shape ofan argument, conducted before Justice as judge, between' Thus in the Dc: Titulo Ed- through whose marriage withwar&, c. 3, Fortescue makes hlortimer's sister Ann the claimsPvZargaret, wife of Malcolm Can- of the Mortimers passed to themore, the daughter of Edrnund House of York. This on~issionIronside. In the nefensio he (it is not a mistake) is suppljedmakes her rightly 111s grand- in the 'Title of the House ofdaughter ; Works, p. 506. Again, York,' Works, p. 500; and in thein the Be TituZo, c. 13, Fortescue Defensio ; ib. 509. The date offrom Edmund Mortimer Earl of the De TituZo is approximately.March passes immediately to fixed by the mention ,of LouisRichard Duke of York, omitting XI as 'nuper unctus ; ib. 74*.all notice of the latter's father, Louis XI was crowned August I 5,Richard Earl of Cambridge, 1461.

The 'Declarationcer-:gS.Ft-three claimants of a kingdom, viz. the brother of the deceasedmonarch, who is described as ' King of -the Assyrians andMonarch of the whole of Greater Asia1,' his daughter, andthe daughter's son. The grandson maintains that thougha woman cannot reign she can transmit a claim to thekingdom, the brother denies that she can do either, thedaughter affirms that she can do both. It is needless tosay that the judgement is in favour of the late king's brother.The arguments are of great subtlety and of interminablelength. Men were more patient of length and dulness inthe Middle Ages than we are now; still one is inclined topronounce that, considered as a political pamphlet, thework lacks the primary condition of success, namely readableness.All these works were written in Scotland duringthe time of the author's exile there, that is between April1461 and July 1463. Lastly, to this class must be assignedthe tract which Fortescue wrote to refute the foregoingworks, in order to obtain the reversal of his attainder. Itmust therefore have been written between October 1471and, October 1473, and is conseqq ntly, with the possibleexception of a portion of the Mo?zarchia, the latest of Fortescue'sworks; and we may therefore say, without verymuch risk of serious error, that his literary activity beginsand ends with the question of the Succession. This piece isentitled ' The Declaracion made by John Fortescu, knyght,upon certayn Wrytinges sent oute of Scotteland, ayenst theIcinges Title to the Roialme of England2.' In it he refutesmany of the historical arguments which he had used in hisprevious writings, by saying with sufficient plausibility thatsince his return to England he has had the opportunityFortescue's of informing himself better by consulting documents andchange offro,ltonthe chronicles to which he had no access in exile. But hisSl~cce:sion ingenuity is chiefly displayed in getting over the force ofquest~on. the text, ' Eris sub potestate viri, et ipse dominabitur tui3,'on which he had based so much of his argument againstfemale succession. This, he now says, does not mean thatI Works, p. I 16. Ib. 523-541.S Genesis iii. 16.a woman must be under the power of every man, but onlythat she must be under the power of some man. Nowevery woman is under the power of the Pope. Thereforethe text in question does not prove that a woman maynot reign, and is no bar to the king's title either to Englandor France1. It was fortunate for Fortescue thathe had not to write his recantation in the days of QueenElizabeth 2.I shall speak next of the miscellaneous writings of For- Miscellatescue,leaving the constitutional works, as the most neOL1sw'it' ings ofimportant, to be dealt with last. In this class the most Fortescue.important tract is the 'Dialogue between Understanding 'UnderandFaith3.' It is moreover the only one the authenticity :,"$",h!of which is tolerably certain. It is a touching and beautifullittle tract, and deals with the old question which hasperplexed men's hearts ever since the days of Job; theprosperity of the ungodly and the affliction of the righteous,with special reference however to the revolutions of kingdoms.Understanding, like David, is 'grieved at thewicked.' ' Alas !' she cries, ' howe many just and peasiblecreatures have borne the payne and angwissh of this werre !Also howe many men of honest livyng have suffred dethe!' Works, PP.. 533-4.Lord Carhngford (Works,pp. 366" f.) is able to illustrateseveral of Fortescue's argumentsfrom John Knox's writings againstthe 'regiment of women,' which,though primarily directed againstILIary Tudor, gave scarcely lessoffence to Queen Elizabeth. Itis fair to add that there are somepassages in the De Noturn* LegisNatt~rce which prepare the wayfor this change of front, and somewhatlessen the amount of incon-sistency. Thus in ii. c. 46 hesays, Non talnen omnis aut ali-qua mulier sub omnis viri potestatevivere jubetur, . . . . sed indiffinite[Dominus] ait, "Eris subpotestate viri," quo si sub alicujusviri po~estate ipsa fuerit, judiciiillius censuraln illa non declinat ;proposicio namque indiffinita veraest, si in uno supposito ipsa sitvera ;' Works, p. 164. This passageseems clearly alluded to inthe ' Declaration,' U. S. ; cf. alsoii. c. 23. These passages howeverrefer to the case of women whoaye under some temporal dominlon.The idea that the necessitiesof the case were satisfied bysubjection to the spiritual authorityof the Pope had not then occurredto Fortescue. Fortescue's ownsubmission to Edward IV isamply justified by the principlewhich he lays down in the Befensio,that on the failure of themale line one who is connectedwith the royalfamily only throughfemales may be elected 'per Domlnoset comunitatem regni,'rather than a complete stranger;Works, p. 508 ; cf. ib. I 53.Ib. 483-490.

And moche good truly gotyn hath been wikkedly ravisshedand taken away. I se the naughty and reprovable peoplehelped with richesses, and the good honest people beggarsand nedy. Also chastite that hath be kept in worshipe,nowe is constra~ned and brought into myschevous vylanye.So then thorowe myscheve, necessite, and outrage, mancan nat have that is his ; nor no good dede may receive thereward after the vertu therof; but strength maykyth rightafter his owne opynyoun, and overpride usurpeth to haveworship without any desert. Where is then the DivyneJustice, or to what tyme is she reserved, when she may nathelpe us nor amende our myscheves when we have moostneede unto her l ?' For Understanding too, as for David,the problem is ' too hard,' and the solution is sought in the'sanctuary of God,' in the higher sphere of faith and religion.Dnte. There is nothing in the work which can fix its date with anyprecision. All we can say is that it was written at a time ofdepression and discouragement, and the references to thetriumph of wrong, and to the fact that God somet.imespunishes the sins of men by raising up yet greater sinners,seem to prove that it was written after the triumph ofEdward IV, though whether after Towton or Tewkesburycannot be decided. If the latter were the period of itscomposition, private bereavement may have combined withpolitical disappointment to throw Fortescue for comfort onthe consolations of religionZ.6TheCom. There is, as far as I can find, no evidence for attributingmod~ties ofEngland.* the tract on 'the Commodities of Englandv to Fortescuebeyond the fact that it is found in the Laud MS. whichcontains the oldest copy of the Monarchia. But as thelatter is mutilated at the end, there is nothing to prove any

value of land, which in the former version is calculated atfiftecn, and in the latter at ten ears'Constitu- The second class of Fortescue's works is the most imtionalportant, and it is to these works that he owes the permanentworks ofFortescue. place which he has earned among constitutional writers.The works of previous English lawyers like Glanville andBracton were legal rather than constitutional, while thepolitical treatises of other medi~val writers have littleUnplacti- reference to any eqisting state of things. Dr. Riezler hascal characterof,e-remarked that in none of them is there any attempt todi=lral give a theoretical analysis of feudalism, the political systempolitical,,hiloso- under which the h4iddle Ages actually lived. The writersphy. are content for the most part to borrow from or commentupon Aristotle, and except when they touch upon the greatquestion of tl,e relation between the secular and ecclesiasticalpower, whether in its abstract form or 'in reference tothe concrete instances which from time to time arose,they have little to say that bears upon practical politics 2,Mediaeval political thcorizing is too much in the air, andthis gives a certain character of unreality to even the mostFortescue ingenious and interesting speculations. Fortescue first ofthe first tobase his medixval writers brings down political philosophy frompolitical the clouds to earth by basing his theoretical analysis upontheories onot,serva- observation of existing constitutions. He borrows some oftion and his terminology and many of his illustrations from previouspractice.writers, but the most valuable part of his speculations isderived from his own experience of the government ofEngland ; and on the basis of that experience he analysesthe nature of constitutional monarchy. The earliest workin which hc attempted this task was the former part of theDC N~tlt~(e Lcgis N(rf2lr~. Setting out from the propositionRiezler, Die literarischen \ZTidersacherder I'ipste, p. 131."he Italian I\ riters form perhapsa partial exception to thisrule. The feudal systcln neverhad much hold on Italy, ant1 thecircumstances of the Italian Kepublicsof tlie XIiddle Ages sufficientlyreseml~led those of theGreek cities to make the applica-tion of argument's derived fromthe latter less of an unreality intheir case than in that of mostrnedireval governments. Andsome of the greatest publicistsof the Middle Ages were Italians ;e. g. St. Thomns Aquinas andhlarsiglio of Padua..' For the proof of this statement,see the notes to Chap. i.that it is by the Law of Nature that the question of the The DeNalztrtfright succession to kingdoms must be determined, he pro- Legisceeds to discuss the nature of that law, and in the course flature.Part I.of his argument he is led, by not very obvious links of connexion,to dilate upon the origin of government and itsvarious kinds. These are three in number :-Domi?zizrm Divisions~eg~lc,republican government : and the mixture of the two, DbnlinizrvrPoliticunz et Regale, which is constitutional monarchy.The difference between the first and the third class ofgovernments is, that in the latter the subjects are notbound to obey any laws, or pay any taxes, to which theyhave not given their consent1. To this distinction Fortescueremains faithful throughout all his political writings. Thereis however in the De Nafzrrh a passage2 not found in thelater works, in which Fortescue admits that even a politicor constitutional king may sometimes be obliged to ruleabsolutely (regaliter). All cases cannot be determined bystatutes and customs, and something must be left to theking's discretion (arbitrium); especially the mitigation orremission of pains and penalties, when not contrary to lawor the well-being of his subjects 3. . So too a sudden out-or absolute monarchy ; Domirziz~l.rz Politicant, or 2 2 ~ -c. 16 ; Works, pp. 77-8. These exemptions were oftenCC. 24 sq. ; Works, pp. 85-7. granted in the Privy Council.S As this passage is rather Im- Among the statutes dispensed withportantas bearingonthequestionof most frequently are the Statutesthe dispensing power of the crown, of the Staple ; P. P. C. iii. I 15, v.I give Fortescue's exact words :'ad280,316, vi. I 17-8 ; Rot. Parl. iii.libitum etiam tuum tu semper re- 661 a, &c. [These exenlptionsgis omnia criminalia, et paenas were often complained of in Parcunctasmoderaris vel remittis : liament ; e. g. Rot. Parl. iii. 661 a,dummodo sic facere poteris sine and were forbidden by Stat. 14subditorum jactura, et offensa con- Hen. VI, c. 2 ; cf. Rot. Parl. iv.suetudinum et statutorum regni 332 b, 490 a1 ; the Statute oftui ;' U. S. p. 85. On the dis- Mortma~n ; P. P. C. iii. 37, 53,pensing power of the crown 124, 130, iv. r 54-5, v. 274 ; theduring the Middle Ages, see Statutes forbidd~ng the export ofS. C. H. ii. 573, 579-582. The coin, &c. ; ib. iv. 118-9, 120-1,exercise of this power was more 152-4, &C.; those placing refrequentin the Middle Ages than strictions on the royal power ofwe should consider consistent making grants ; ib. ii. 305, 308 ;with constitutional government, Rymer, ix. zr 7, X. 802, xi. 529, &C.;but it was often rendered ne- cf. notes to Chap. xix. below ;cessary by the unwise minute- and that forbidding the practiceness of many medireval statutes. of alchemy; ib. xi. 128, 240, 637,G 2

Date.The DeI.arrcfi6usLegurnA ugliiz.Origin ofGovern-Iuents.break of foreign war or domestic rebellion may oblige theking to act despotically, simply because there is not timeto observe the usual legal and constitutional formalities ;and then, says Fortescue, in language which recalls thewords of Edward 11, the king may be forced to seize thegoods of his subjects, and cxpose some of them to dangerfor the sake of the safety of the whole; but, he adds, theking is bound to expose himself to danger for the sake ofhis kingdom most of all. The De Nabrd was written, aswe have seen, in Scotland, i.e. between 1461 and 1464. Itwas intended specially for Prince Edward of Lancaster, aswe learn from the Dc Lnmiihzrs 2.In the last-named work Fortescue maintains the distinctionbetween absolute and limited monarchy laid down inthe De Naturd; but he adds an account of the differentorigin of the two forms of government which is new, and isprobably derived from Vincent of Beauvais 3. The origin ofthe former kind of monarchy he traces to conquest ; that ofthe latter to the consent and election of a body of mendesiring to form themselves into a state 4. Thus in a constitutionalmonarchy the royal power is derived from thcpeoplc \ The travels of Fortescue havc moreover enabled&c. (For the Statute itself, cf. Select Charters, p. 442.St. 5 Hen. IV, c. 4 ; Rot. Parl. iii. " Opusculu~n, quod tui con-540 a.) In the case of the Sta- templatione de Arutzrrt2 Lqis Nututesof Provisors the dispensing tz~~ci? exaravi ;' De Laud. c. 9.power was sometimes specially It should be noted that the titleconferred upon the crown by Par- De Natzrr(i' &c. applies in strictnessliament ; e. g. Rot. Parl. iii. 428 b, only to the first part of the work ;458 b ; cf. 460 b, 595 a. Henry that of the second part being IlcIV made a most l~beral use of ]lire Succeti%nrii in Sz~$$rej~zisthis power, granting to all gra- Regnis (see Works, pp. 64, I I 5) ;duates of Oxford and Cambridge while the full title of the wholeper~nission to sue for Papal Pro- work is ' Ile NaturS Legis N;tvisions; Kymer, viii. 339. I'er- turx, et de ejus Censura in Suchapsin consequence of this, the cessione Regnorum Suppren~a ;'power was withdrawn from the ib. p. 65.crown by St. 9 Hen. IV, C. 8 ; De Morali Principis Institu-Rot. I'arl. iii. 621 a. But in 3 tione, cc. 2-4. See notes to Chap.Hen. V the Commons complainedthat the Universities were ruinedby the enforcement of the Statuteof I'rovisors ; cf. Lenz, KbnigSigis~nund. pp. 147 f.hlatt. Westm. p. 430 ; Stubbs,ii. below.CC. 11-13.Ex populo erumpit regnuin ;'' Potestatem a populo effluaalnipse (rex) habet ;' c. I 3.llim to add Scotland to the number of constitutionall, and to give a striking picture of the state ofFrance under Louis XI ', which now becomes for him thetype of an absolute government. The part of the DPLaudihzfs which is not directly constitutional consists ofexhortations to Prince Edward of Lancaster, to whom thework is addressed, to study the laws of the country whichhe will one day have to rule, of discussions of some pointsin which the English and the civil law are at variance, andof descriptions of English social life, of the mode of life inthe Inns of Court, the ceremonies customary on the appointmentof a Serjeant-at-Law, a Judge, etc. All these havebeen so frequently quoted that there is no need to analysethem minutely here. The De Lat~cEiBus is in fact by far T ~ ~t Cthe best known of Fortescue's works. It was first printed the Lazrdi6nsmostin 1537, and has been reprinted more than a dozen times popular ofsince 3. Until 1714 it was the only one of Fortescue's worksin print. Selden was acquainted with the ~Vorznrchia, andthe ' Declaration upon Certain Writings,' &c.4 The De Date.Laudibzrs was written, as the author himself informs us,c. 13.L C. 35.Lord Clermont has given alist of the editions ; Works, pp.335-q. He does not howeverlnentlon the curious Commentarieson the ne Lar~dibus by Waterhous(folio, London, 1663). They arehowever noticed by Gregor in thePreface to his edition, who callsthem 'very jejune and tedious,110th as to matter and style.'Tedious they certainly are, andthey are written in the mostacutely latinized style of the seventeenthcentury. But amid allthe pedantry and prolixity thereis much genuine learning. Theauthor is however continuallyhampered by his attempt to makeFortescue talk the language of theCaroline restoration. Thus, onthe passage cited above on thepopular origin of constitutionalmonarchy he says : ' I shall vindicateour Chancellour from allyintendment here to approve popularGovernments or the insolenciesof them . . . (He) is not to beunderstood asapplying thesewordsin their strictness to the Governmentof England, which is anImperial Crown, and is not alloyedby the politique admissions intoit ;' pp. ~g? f.' Selden S Preface to the DeLaudihus. Selden must also haveknown the Be Naturd, +c. TheLambeth MS. 262 which containsall three tracts formerly belongedto him ; below, pp. 90-1. Butthough Fortescue in the De Laudibuscites the De Nuturd fivetimes, Selden in his notes to theformer work never once shows hisknowledge of the latter. But, asGregor has remarked, Selden'snotes seem to have been writtenhastily, ' to gratify the importunityof a book-sclier, and therebyto recommend a new edition ;'Preface, p. iii.Fortescue's

during the stay of the Lancastrian exiles at St. Mighel inRarrois, and the evident reference in the twenty-secondchapter to the case of Sir Thomas Coke in the eighth yearof Edward IV1 fixes the date of its composition to theyears 1468-1470.The MO- The remaining work of Fortescue in this division is therrarrhia, itsinterest. one now presented to the reader. Apart from the intrinsicvalue of the work, it has a special interest as being theearliest constitutional treatise written in the English language.The theoretical portion of the work is little morethan a translation and recasting of the corresponding portionsof the Be Lnzddibus. Strictly speaking, it is only tothis first part of the work that the title adopted by its firsteditor, 'The Difference between an Absolute and LimitedIts scope. Monarchy,' can be said to apply. The remainder of thework travels far beyond this purely speculative question, anddealing with the actual evils of the time, attempts to find apractical remedy for them. The scope of the work is muchbetter described by the title which it bears in the YelvertonMS., 'Sir John Fortescue on the Governance of England ;'while its contents are well summarized in the preface whichthe scribe of the Cambridge MS. has prefixed to it, 'ATreatise intituled ?us RegnL and Ytts Politiczr7~z et Regale,comprehending for good Example memorable Councells ofEstate Affaires : Namelie as touchinge the King's chargesordinary and extraordinary, Enlarginge of the Revenewesof the Crowne, disposeinge of Offices and Rewardes forService, Ellecting of Councelloures, and the disposeingeand orderinge of all other affaires of the Kinge, Kingdomeand Court.'Thus though the Monarchin" is much less known andread than the Be Laztdibus, its historical interest is in someways very much greater. The subjects discussed in thetreatise and their relation to the history of the time are sol On this see Gairdner, Collec- notes to Chap. i. below.tions of a London Citizen, pp. S I cite the present treatise underxxxiii. ff. ; Biog. Brit. iii. 1992. this title for the sake of short-CC. 1-3; or perhaps 1-4. See ness.fully discussed in the notes and in the first part of thisIntroduction, that it is unnecessary to recapitulate themhere.A reference to the notes will show that many of the Fortescue'sproposed by Fortescue had been already sug- s:",y-rrested or tried in Parliament, though Fortescue no doubt how farboriginal.extends and systematizes these suggestions. The point inwhich he shows the most boldness and originality is in hisscheme for the re-organization of the Privy Council. In He prethis,and in his proposals for pcrmanently endowing the ~yz:,,~crown and reducing the power of the nobles, he certainly narchy.New MOpreparesthe way, however unconsciously, for what it is thefashion to call the New Monarchy. I am therefore unableto regard Fortescue's scheme of reform, as Dr. Stubbsapparently does1, as being in the main an exhortation toEdward IV to revert to the Lancastrian system of govern-ment. I would rather say that Fortescue, while remainingtrue to the great constitutional principles which he hadpreviously enunciated, urges the king to avoid the mainweaknesses of Lancastrian rule, its unsound finance, its subserviencyto aristocratic influence, its lack of 'governance'and justice.But was the king to whom the Morrnrchin was addressed To whomwas thecertainly Edward IV? The answer to this question de- nl'o,,avrhiapends mainly on the reading to bc adopted in a passage at addressed:'the end of Chapter xix. It is therefore necessary, as a The MSS.preliminary, to give some account of the manuscripts inwhich the Morznrchin is preserved. These, as far as I know,are ten in number % 1 have collated them all.I. Laud 593. (Cited as L.) This is the MS. on which Land.the text of the present edition is based. It is dated byMr. Macray about 1480-1490. It is a small thin folio, andcontains besides the Mo7zn1,chin only the tract ' On theCommodities of England ' noticed above, and a list of ' thewardis of the townshippe of Stebyn hithe' (Stepney).Const. Hist. iii. 243-6. 542 ; one at Lambeth, 262 ; oneFour in the Bodleian, viz. in Lord Calthorpe's possession,Laud 593? Digby 198, Digby Yelverton MSS. vol. 35 ; and145, Rawl~nson U. 384 ; three in one in the Cambridge Universitythe British Museum, Cott. Claud. Llbrary, 11. 3. XI.A. viii, Harleian 1759, Harleian

The RIS. is well and correctly written. Here and thcre ithas been rctouched by a later hand with different colouredink. But the changes made are for the most part onlyorthographical; and the original rcading is nearly alwaysrecovcrable. The most frequent alterations are of ?L into v,i into y, and vice versri ; the changes being generally inthe direction opposed to modern usage. This h!.!? seemsto have belonged to a family of the name of Redingfield,who wcre merchants; and the namcs of various membersof the family, Francis, Mary, Edmund, Henry Bedingfieldare scrawled on the margins of several leaves. It cameinto the possession of Archbishop Laud in 1633. ThisRIS. seems to stand quite alone among the MSS. of theiWo~zorchia. It has peculiaritics, especially in the divisiotlof the chapters, which are not reproduced in any of theother MSS. It is not howcvcr Fortescue's autograph, forit has some small omissions and mistakes, which couldhardly be made by a man writing down his own thoughts,though quite possible to a copyist. Unfortunatcly it ismutilated at the middle of Chapter xix, so that on themost intcresting problem raised by the text this MS. is forus silent.CV~~OII. 2. Cotton MS. Claudius R. viii. (Cited as C.) This isa miscellaneous volume relating to English history. It isin quarto, and the Alolzm-chin occupies ff. I 72-194 accordingto the old foliation. The handwriting according to Mr.Maunde Thompson, the head of the MS. department of theBritish bIuseun~, is of the reign of Henry VII, about theend of the fifteenth century. This is also a very correctand well-written MS., and might perhaps dispute with L theclaim to be made the basis of the text of an edition. Ofthe orthographical and other peculiarities of this MS. thereader will be able to judge for himself, as the concludingportion of the work which is wanting in L is here suppliedfrom C. Unfortunately it has been a good deal croppedby the binder, and thus many of the titles of the chapters,which in this MS. are written in the margin, have beenmufilated. At the top of the first page is the following:&[This discourse] was wrighten to King Henry the Sixt bySr John Fortescue, Lord Chancelor.'3. Yelverton MSS. vol. 35. (Cited as Y.) This is a Yelverton.volume consisting mainly of documents relating to Englishhistory. It is in small folio. Some additional leaves havebeen inserted at the beginning, middle, and end of thevolume. With the exception of these additions the wholeof the volume is in the same small and neat hand. Owingto the fact of this MS. being in a private collection I wasunable to obtain the judgement of an expert as to the ageof the handwriting. I should be inclined to assign it to thefirst half of the sixteenth century. But whatever the exactdate of it may be, the volume is of very great interest. Inthe first place it is certainly the source from which thechronicler Stowe derived not only his transcript of theMo~znrr/lin, but also many other documents which he hasinserted in his Annals, or which others have publishedfrom his MSS. The Mo~znrcltia occupies ff. 130-145, accordingto the old foliation, which has been deranged bythe insertions alluded to above. It is preceded by thechapter entitled ' Example what good counseill helpith '&C., and followed by the '.Twenty-two Righteousnessesof a King.' The latter of these is as we have seen probablynot byaFortescue, the former looks like an alternativeversion of Chapter xvi. of the present work'. But this ThecArticlessentMS. contains another document no less closely connected from thewith the Monnrrhia ; viz. ' The Articles sent from the Prince Prince.'to the Earl of Warwick ' in I470 2. No one who compares Drawn nythem with the A~olmrc/ria can doubt that they were drawn :ieF-up by Fortescue, and the evidence which they afford mustbe taken into account in attempting to determine theoccasion and date of the composition of the Morawcltin.The text of the latter work in MS. Y presents very many Relation ~fresemblances to that of C" so that I am inclined to think ~ ~ ~that either Y is taken from C, or that both are derived 115s.See it printed in Appendix A. similar statements, the reader isSee it printed in Appendix B. teferred to the Critical Notes.For the proof of this and

from a common source, probably the latter. Rut thedifferences are even more striking than the resemblances ;for while C has reproduced the original with great fidelity,Y has dealt extremely freely with it, sometimes compressing,more often expanding and amplifying expressions, andin especial dividing and naming some of the chapters in away wholly peculiar to itself and the MSS. derived from it.. Moreover, in Chapter xix. the name of Henry V1 occurswhere the other MSS, have Edward IV. The significanceof this will be discussed later. Of the orthographical andother peculiarities of this MS. the reader may form ajudgement from the Appendices A and B, which areprinted from it.Harleian I. 4. Harleian MS. 542. (Cited as H'.) This is a smallquarto volume containing part of Stowe's historical collections.The Mo~zn7~chin occupies ff. 125-140, and isentirely in the handwriting of Stowe himself. I placethis MS. next to Y because it is unquestionably copiedfrom it. It agrees with Y i ~ all r tjle$oi?zts which have beenenumerated above as distinguishing Y from other MSS.The only differences are those due to Stowe's peculiarorthography, and to the occasional modernization of aphrase. Except where the contrary is stated, it may beassumed that the readings of H1 agree with those of Y,and therefore they are not separately given.5, 6, 7. We now come to a group of three MSS., whichagree so closely in many minute points that the concl~~sionis irresistibly forced upon us that they have some commonsource. On the other hand no one of them is copied fromeither of the other two, for each of the three has importantlacunae which do not occur in the remaining pair. Thethree MSS. are as follows :-1-ambeth. 5. Lambeth 262. (Cited as Lb.) This is a folio volumeconsisting entirely of Fortescue's works. It contains theDC NntztrA L~gis Nntz~~~z, the A4onm,chia, and the ' Declarationupon Certain Writings,' &C., the first-named workbeing, I think, in a different hand from the two last. Thevolume formerly belonged to Selden; on the top marginof the first folio is written: 'mpl ?razlr& T$V 'EA~utIc~ia~~. J.Selden.' The Mofznrchin occupies ff. 106-128. It is Ithink all in the same hand, though the character of thehand changes slightly about half way through, becomingrather less formal. The handwriting is assigned to the sixteenthcentury, and I should be inclined to place it ratherearly in that century. The MS. is well and clearly written,and the scribe has I think followed his original more closelythan those of the two next MSS. have done. In one caseat least he has preserved a defective reading which theothers have corrected each in his own way. For thisreason I place this MS. at the head of the group, though itis probably not earlier than the MS. to be mentioned next.6. Digby 198. (Cited as D'.) This is a small thin Digby 1.folio. It consists, like the last, entirely of Fortescue'swritings, and contains the Dc Lnzldibzrs, the Jlonlzrchin,and the ' Declaration upon Certain Writings,' &C., thelast being incomplete. The whole volume is in the samehand. The ~llonnrchin occupies ff. 48-75. On palzogral~hicalgrounds Mr. Macray was inclined to assign theMS. to about the year 1500. For historical reasons I The scribea Protestthinkthat the date must be put a little later, because ,,t,of the evident protestantism of the author. In two outIIof the four passages in which the Pope is mentioned D'alters the expression into the Bishop of ~omel in onepassage the phrase has been omitted altogether, in theremaining one it has been allowed to pass. The writing isbold and vigorous, but exceedingly careless. Lacunze,caused generally by the recurrence of aword or phrase, arefrequent; on the other hand, words and phrases are repeatedtwice, and in one instance even three times, andmistakes are frequent and palpable.7. Harleian MS. 1757. (Cited at H'.) This is a mis- Harleiancellaneous volume in folio, relating mainly to English 'I.history. It contains of Fortescue's works (besides theMotznrchin) the De LnzrlZibzls, and two copies of the ' Declaration,'&C., one perfect, the other imperfeci?. TheMonarchia occupies ff. 196-203. The handwriting, ac-

cording to Mr. Thompson, is of the middle of the sixteentllcentury. According to Lord Clermont, the copy of theDe Laadibus in this volume is 'in the handwriting ofGlover, who lived in the reign of Elizabeth1.' If thisrefers to the first portion of the DE Lazldibz~s (for thelatter part is in a. different hand), then the Monarrhiais also in Glover's hand. It ends abruptly in the middleof a sentence in Chapter xv. This however is not theresult of mutilation, as nearly half of the last page is leftblank. For some reason the scribe left his work in anunfinished state. It is further to be noticed that Lb. andD1 conclude with Chapter xviii. This is neither dueto mutilation, as in the case of L, nor to incompleteness,as in the case of H2 ; for at the end of Chapter xviiiboth MSS. add the word Fi~zis. So that we must supposeeither that the scribes deliberately abstained from copyingthe last two chapters, or that this group of MSS. representsan earlier edition of the work, and that the last twochapters were added afterwards.8,9,1o. In the last place we have another group of threeMSS., also closely related, but in a different way fromthose of the preceding group. For here the first MS. isalmost certainly the original, mediately or immediately, ofthe other two. The three MSS. are as follows :-% h ~ 11. 8. Digby 145. (Cited as D'.) This MS. has a patheticinterest, for it is in the handwriting of Sir Adrian Fortescue,the grandson of the author's younger brotherSir Richard Fortescue, who was attainted and beheadedin 1539, probably for no other crime than fidelity to thefaith of his fathers2. The volume is a small folio, andcontains, besides the Monarchia, a copy of Piers the Plowman3,also in Sir Adrian's hand, and at the end of thevolume some proverbs which I differ from Lord Clermoi1t4in thinking to be by a different hand. The Molzarchiaoccupies ff. 131-159, and the date of the writing is fixedl Works, p.,366.the 'A Text' of Piers the Plow-Family History, p. 272. man, p. xxiv. But he has cer-S Described by Professor Skeat tainly dated the MS. too early.in the Preface to his Edition of ' Fainily History, pp. 263-5.by the entry at the end: 'Explicit Liber . . . scriptusmanu propria mei Adriani Fortescue Militis, 1532.' ThisMS. was made the basis of his text by the first editor,Lord Fortescue of Credanl, and his text has been reprintedpractically without alteration by Lord Clermont ;so that the characteristics of this MS. can be easilystudied by any one desirous of doing so.9. Rawlinson B. 384. (Cited as R.) This is a small l:n\vlins~~~l.thin folio containing miscellaneous collections on Englishhistory. The Akfo~zarc/lin occupies ff. 42-68. It is writtenin two different hands, both of about the middle of the seventeenthcentury. It follows closely the text of D" though,for reasons which will presently appear, I incline to thinkthat it was copied not immediately from D" but fromsome MS. which copied D? The writer or his modclhas modernized the language a good deal, and in oncinstance in an absurdly mechanical way. Having in thefirst Chapter altered the word ' tayles ' (=tallia, tallagium),not incorrectly, into ' taxes,' he applies the same interpretationto the word in Chapter xi, where it means' entails.'10, Cambridge University Library, 11. 3. I I. (Citcd Cam-1)rillge.as Cb.) This is a folio volume containing collections relatingmainly to English history in the seventeenth century,and in hands of that period. The Moonarchia occupies ff.214-241. The text closely follows D? Where it differsfrom D" it generally agrees with R, and these coincidencesare I think too frequent to be accounted for by the theoryof two scribes independently modernizing the same original.On the other hand, neither R nor Cb. copied from thcother, for each has lacunx which the other has not.Hence we must suppose that both are copied from a textwhich was taken from D2. But besides a text of the type' In the margin he gives various altogether overlooked Digby 198,readings from Laud and Digby in spite of his predecessor's fre-198. He says that he also col- quent references to it. For prooflated a Cotton MS. ; but as he of this omission see especiallygives no variants it is impossible Works, pp. 336, 346.to control this statement. It is And therefore ~ ts readings arecurious that Lord Clennont has very seldom cited.

of D2, the writer of Cb. must have also had before hima text of the Y type. For he has taken from it not onlythe ' Example what good Councell helpithe,' &C.', whichis only found in MSS. of that type; but also the titlesof Chapters viii, xii, and xiii, which are wanting inK; probably because they are crossed out in D2. Alsoin Chapter xi he has given the peculiar title whichappears in Y, though he has afterwards crossed it out andsubstituted the ordinary one. Moreover, on his ownmotion he has not merely altered, like D1, but whollyomitted all the passages in which the Pope is mentioned.Epitome. Besides these ten MSS. of the Monarchin, there exists anEpitome of it in Latin, under the title 'Epitome singulariscujusdam Politici Discursus Edwardi 4 temporibusscripti,' &c. Hearne scems to have thought of publishingthis, for in Rawlinson Miscell. 326 there is a copy in hishandwriting headed 'Sir John Fortescue prepared for thepress. Thursday, Jan. 19, 1726.' The original from whichHearne copied was formerly in the possession of BeauprkBell, Esq., Jun., by whom it was left to Trinity College,Cambridge! The Epitome seems to have been made froma MS. of the type of D? It is occasionally cited as ' Epit.'The handwriting is of the reign of James I.Occasion After this review of the history of the text we mayof the compositionof return to the consideration of the question before us; viz..the m- the occasion of the composition of the Mof~n?*chin. Thenarrltia.passage on which most turns is one at the end of Chapterxix, beginning : ' I blissed be oure Lord God for that hehath sent King Edward the iiijth to reigne vpon us,' &c. Thispassage is mutilated in L; Lb., D', and H%top shortof this chapter ; Y and H' read ' Henry VI' for ' EdwardIV '; while C, though reading ' Edward IV ' here, assertsThis he regards as the first was very ignorant of Latin.chapter of the Monarchin, for he Almost all the Latin quotationssays of it: 'The first chapter of are wrong.which Treatise ys thus verba[lly] a It is numbered R. 5. 18. Iout of an old Manuscript written have conlpared Hearne's copyand copied.' The 'old manu- with the original, and found it veryscr~pt' would be the MS. of the correct.Y type. The scribe of this MS.that the treatise was 'wrighten to King Henry the Sixtl.'Lord Clermont' has summarily rejected the idea that theMonm-chin can have been composed for Henry VI, pointingout that the references in Chaptcr ix to the war of thePublic Wcal in 1465 and to the death of James I1 of Scotlandin 1460 make it impossible that it should have beenwritten under Henry VI. But he has not remarked that \\.a,itwritten folneither of these arguments precludes the possibility of its the Lawnshavingbeen composed for the Lancastrian restoration of trim storntion re- ?1470. And the fact that some of the most importantrecon~mendations afterwards cmbodied in the fiIoum-chincertainly were drawn up by Fortescue for the governmentof the restoration3 entitles that idea to more serious consideration.Much more weighty is Lord Clermont'scontcntion that the expression ' this land ' used of Englandin Chapter X implies that Fortescue wrote the work inEngland, and therefore aftcr 1471. There would seemthen to be two main theories possible.I. We may suppose that the JIo~~nrchin was written in Twothedes.the first instance for the Lancastrian restoration of 1470,and that it was afterwards recast by Fortescuc and adaptedto Edward IV. In this case the reading of Y and H' andthe heading of C would rcpresent the original form of thework.2. The Mounrchin may have been written originally forEdward IV, and the scribe of Y writing under the Tudorsmay have altered the reading to avoid shocking Tudorsusceptibilities. This nineteenth chapter may have beenmutilated in L and omitted in the original of D', Lb., andH' for the same reason4.' This discrepancy struck the Rich were erased acd Edw writmakerof the Index to C ; for he ten in their place, but the numberobjects ' verum rn fine laudat ' thred' (third) was not altered.Edw. 4.'This has escaped the editor (hIr.Works, p. 446.Stevenson), who assumes that Ed-See Appendix B.ward IV is the monarch addressed.* There is a curious parallel to But Edward IV is expressly spokenthis in the Prologue to \V. Wor- of as 'your most nobille brodyrcester's Collections. It was evi- and predecessoure.' Moreover,dently first addressed to Richard after each mention of Henry V1111. But afterwards the letters there is an erasure in the MS. ;

I'robably On the whole, the second theory seems best to accountwrittenunder E,J- for all the facts. In any case the Mo~~nrckiand thewad1V. ' Declaration upon Certain Writings,' &c. are the two latestof Fortescue's extant works. And with this discussion wemay bring to a close our consideration of those works.Of works now lost which were attributed to Fortescue,Lord Clermontx mentions three ; a genealogy of the houseof Lancaster, a genealogy of the Scottish kings, and a book ofdevotion. Stowe makcs a quotation from Fortescue which,as far as I know, is not in any of his existing writings2.Fofiescue's I shall next say a few words on Fortescue's literaryliteraryi n attainments, the extent of his reading, &C. In the DrLnudihz~s, c. 49, he tells us that on festival days thestudents in the Inns of Court and Chancery occupiedthemselves with the reading of Chronicles and Scripture3.Both these lines of study have left their mark on Fornihllcaltescue's works. His knowledge of the Bible was evidentlyand histoncalhnow- extensive, and comes out most strongly in the DC Nnt?n.tPlwlge. LP@ Nntzn~~, where in two chapters out of every threethe arguments are supported by texts of Scripture. Riblicalquotations are also fairly numerous in the DL. Lnzddibzrs.In the study of history Fortescue was evidently muchinterestcd. I have not bcen ablc to determine with anycertainty whence he derived his knowledge of foreign history.He quotes the Chronicles of Francc, Spain, andprobably some such phrase as' ncznzctl Kyng ' or ' Kyng in deedbut not in right'h;ls beencancelled ;see English in France, ii. [S"] ff.On the other hand, if Fortescuehimself altered the irnork to suitEdward lV, \be may colnpnre thesimilar adaptation of Lydgate'spoem on the Kings of England;see Warkworth's Chronicle, pp.xxii, 67-8 ; Greqory, p. 54 ; andthe still more vlolent change oftone in Capgrave ; see De Illustr.Henr. pp. xiii f.' Works, p. 556.a Stowe, Annals,~. 325 b: ' KingRichard was imprisoned in PomfraitCastle, where xv. dayes andnights they vexed him with cotitliluallhunger, thirst and cold, andfinally bereft hirn of his life, w~tlisuch a kinde of death as neverbefore that time \\as knowne inEny1;incl (saith Sir John Fortiscute).'.' ?'he ' talkyng of cronycles 'was one of the occupntions of thesquires of the household ; Ordinances,&C., p. 46. Henry V1 wasa great reader of Chronicles andScripture ; I

most important question in this relation is that of Fortescue'sAristotelian quotations, which will therefore bereserved till the last.Yo*escue's As to the extent of Fortescue's acquaintance with theacquaintancewith Civil Law I must leave others, more qualified, to speak. Ilhe have noticed elsewhere the terms of high respect in whichand CanonLaw. he speaks of that system of jurisprudence1. Even higherare the terms in which he speaks of the Canon Law, whichhe regards as positively inspired" In regard to this pointLord Carlingford says: 'The Corpus Juris Canonici comprisesfive Codices : the first being the Decretuln Gratiani,which is divided into three parts. Fortescue refers to theDecretum only, and to the trvo first of its parts. . . . Hequotes from the Corpus Glossis Diversorum Illustratumpublished by order of Pope Gregory XII13.'1 - Of the relation of Fortescue to St. Thomas Aquinas,tion toAsuinas Egidius Romanus, and the Co~zfe~tdiz/f~z dfomle of Rogerandotllers. of LValtham, I have spoken at length elsewhere4. Of hisobligations to Vincent of Beauvais something has also beensaid" That he knew the latter's De Morali Pri~tcz$isI~~sfifzsfione at first-hand I regard as certain, because thereis a copy of it in thc Rakvlinson hTS. which once belongedto Fortescuec. For the same reason the citation of Williamof Auvergne's CUY Delss Houzo7 is probably genuine. Ihave shown that Fortescue was well acquainted with Poggio'stranslation of Diodorus Siculuss, and from thenumeroas quotations which he makes from St. Augustine'sDe Ciziitate Dei I am inclined to think that he was acquainted' Notes to Chap. ii. below. ' DieGeschichte des Kamischen Rechtsin England. . . . bleibt noch zuschreiben,' says Dr. Giiterbock ;Bracton, p. 2. He gives howeversome references. See also S. C. H.ii. 190.a ' Canones Spiritu Sancto afflati;' N. I. N. i. c. 31 ; Works, p.94.S Works, p. 355*.Notes to Chao. i. below.Notes to chap. ii. below.Ib. This work is cited DeLaudibus, c. 54 ; N. L. N. i. cc. S,18. Fortescue probably also knewthe Ertrditio Puevorztilt Rega-ZiUnz; the verse in De Laud., c. 6,comes from the Prologue of thatwork ; a quotation in N. L. N., i. 5,comes from its third chapter. Inone case (N. L. N. ii. c. 18)Fortescue quotes the Sjeculunl,but I think not at first-hand.' Cited De Laudibus, c. 4.Notes to Chap. ii. below.: with it, although in one instance he confesses that he borrowshis citation from the Conlpemiiuwz Morale1. But in other cases Secondwecan be pretty sure that his quotations are taken at :tn:."('-second-hand from other works ; thus the reference toVegetius in the De Laz~dih~s comes from the De Rcgi~ni7zeof Aquinas2, that to Helynandus either from the Conlpezdiz~mor Vincent of Beauvais3. And this may be the casewith regard to other isolated quotations from particularauthors or works4. 'But besides the plan of borrowingfrom preceding writers, there were other means open tothe medizval author of decking out his work with an appearanceof extensive learning without any very greatexpenditure of labour. Numerous commonplace books Medizvrlwere in existence consisting of striking passages fromclassical and ecclesiastical authors. Of these the best books.known is a collection of philosophical maxims extractedfrom the works of Aristotle (genuine and spurious), Seneca,Boethius, Porphyrius, &C., and going under the name ofAzrcto~itates Aristotelis, &C. This collection appears invarious forms, but a certain amount of matter is commonto them all5. Of Fortescue's quotations from Seneca andBoethius, the latter of which are fairly numerous, I canonly trace one or two to this source. Boethius' Coi.tsolatiohe may have known at first-hand. The remaining quotationsmay come from the Co?n$erzdizlnz Morale, which is aperfect mine of such materials. But when we come to the Aristotequotationsfrom Aristotle the case is altered. Of these liantations.qnothirty-oneare from the Attctoritates, eight come fromWorks, p. 69*.On the origin ofthe Auctoritntes,De Laudibus, c. 54. This and the various forms which theyquotation occurs three times in assume, see the interesting monotheDe Regimine, iii. c. 21 ; iv. graph of Prantl, Sitzungsbericht d.cc. 7, 10. Lord Carlingford's list bayer. Akad. d. Wissenschaften,of quotations and his notes will July 6, 1867, for a knowledge ofsupply some other instances of which I am indebted to Mr. Inborrowing.gram Bywater, Fellaw of ExeterDe Laudibus, c. I ; cf. Vincent, College, Oxford. Theedition whichDe Mor. Princ. Inst., c. 15 ; Com- I have used is a small 4to., printedpendium, f. 32 a.by Gerard Leeu, Antwerp, 1488. I' Another source from which have also used s MS. copy in theFortescue borrows quotations is Canonici MSS. Pat. Lat. 62. (BodtheCanon Law.leian Library.)H 2

Aquinas, six I have failed to trace; but with the abovefacts before us we may safely assume that they do notcome direct from Aristotle l ; and enough has been saidgenerally to show how rash is the assumption that thenumber of works cited by a medizeval writer is any test ofthe real extent of his reading.Fortescne's But it was not from books alone or chiefly that Fortescueobservationofforeign derived his inspiration. We have seen how on his obsercountries.vation and experience of English political life he based bothhis constitutional theories and his suggestions of reform.And there are many indications in his works that duringhis enforced absence from England he attentively studiedthe institutions and social condition of the countries whichhe visited, especially France. And all that he saw thereonly deepened his affection for the institutions of his nativeCompari- land. France is for him the type of a despotism as opsonofFrance and posed to the constitutional monarchy of England2; andEngland. from this fundamental difference he deduces many otherswhich he observes in the condition of the two countries ;the misery of the French peasant, as compared with thecomfort of the English yeoman3 ; the readiness with whichtaxes are granted in England, as compared with the' grudging ' which they call forth in France4. He contraststhe French and English financial systems, and notes thegreater value of the domains of the king and the dowry ofthe queen in his own country5. He rejects indignantlythe suggestion that the English Commons would be moresubmissive if they were made poor like the French" andhe positively exults in the greater prevalence of robbery inEngland as compared with France and Scotland as a proofof the high spirit of the people, 'which no Frenchmanhas like unto an English man 7.' Coming to social and ad-Lord Carlingford's list is onthis point a little misleading, forhe sometimes refers to the Auctoritates,somerilrles to the originaltext of Aristotle, which creates theimpression that Fortescue was acquaintedwith the latter.'The French Kynge reynithupon his People Do~~ti~zio Regnli; 'inf. Chap. iii.S Infra, Chap. iii ; De Laudibus,cc. 29, 35, 36.Infra, Chaps, iv, xii."b. Chap. X.Ib. Chap. xii.Ib. Chap. xiii.ministrative points, he contrasts the English custom ofprimogeniture with the equal division prescribed by thecivil law1, and the numerous small properties in Englandwith the Zntz~uulzdia of the French nobles!He comparesthe English county with the French bailliage3, and illustratesthe scale of payment of the members of his proposednew council by reference to the salaries of the councillorsin the Parliament of Paris4. So too in matters which concernhis own profession, he compares the English andFrench law of succession to entailed estates5; and thcEnglish Inns of Court with the Universities of France 5 thelength of training of French and English judges7, andthe comparative duration of the ' law's delays' in the twocountriess. He seems too to have found that his legal Frenchdid not help him much in his intercourse with natives, forhe says that the French spoken now-a-days is not like thatused by lawyers, but is deformed by barbarisnls!'.' ' Infra regnum Angliz . . . . coigne, p. 109 ; Cont. Croyl. pp.filius senior solus succedit in here- 501-3, 513.ditate paterna, .... qux jure civili Vulgariter quadam ruditateinter masculos dividenda est ;' Ile corrupta;' DeLaud.c.48 ; cf.Amos,Laud. c. 40. 'In regno Francix ad loc. The use of French in theviri et feminz passim dividunt public administration was at thishereditates paternas, et in regno time declining, and its place wasAnglire . . . . filius senior olnne being taken either by English orobtinet jus parentum ;' N. L. N. ii. Latin. The Proceedings of thec. 4 ; Works, p. I 18. In a document Council and the Rolls of ParliainRymer, xi. 81, it is expressly ment alike furnish evidence on thisnoted, that the prevalence of this point. But the nlost striking proofcustom of subdi\ ision in Aquitaine is the fact that Henry V had tohas caused the decay of many refuse to negotiate with France innotable estates, and loss of services French, because his ambassadorsto the crown. were ignorant of that language ;' Raro ibidem aliqui prreter Ryrncr, is. 656-9. Trevisa's renobilesreperiuntur possessores marks on the decline of French inagrorum . . . extra civitates ;' L)e schools and in society are wellLaud. c. 29. Ib. C. 24. kno~vn ; Higden, ii. 16-1. ThcInf. Chap. xv ; cf. App. U. same seems to have been true ofN. L. N. ii. cc. 10, 38. the universities. At Oxford in theh De Laud. c. 49. fiftecnth century there were no' N. L. N. i. 43.lectures in French ; 3lunim. Acad.De Laud. c. 53. \Vaterhous p.303. They seem however to have(p. 583) says that he had pcrson- existed at an earlier date ; ib. Ixx,ally known Inany \vho had bccn 43s. Fortescue, De Laudibus,c.48,ruined by the delays of the Par- gives this absence of instruction inlianlent of I'aris. On the length French as a reason why Law couldof lawsuits in England, cf. Gas- not be studied at the universities.

Illustra- From the writings of Fortescue we may gather some intionsofF~~~~~~~~~~ teresting illustrations of his character and opinions ; and thecharacter picture is on the whole a very pleasing one. I have alreadyto be foundin his writ- drawn attention to the piety and resignation which inspire'"gs. his little tract on Understanding and Faith,' and it is thePiety.same spirit which lies at the root of his belief in theultimate triumph of right and justice. It is on religious, aswell as, like St. Thomas, on historical grounds that he isconvinced that tyranny must always be short-lived' ; andhe applies to the case of the evil ruler the words of thePsalmist : ' I myself have seen the ungodly in great power,and flourishing like a green bay tree. I went by, and 10, hewas gone ; I sought him, but his place could nowhere bezeal for foundg.' He is as earnest for personal as for constitutionalliberty.liberty, and where there is any possibility of doubt the de-Humanity. cision should always be in favour of freedom3. He is fulltoo of the spirit of humanity. His pen refuses to dwell onthe horrors of the torture-chamber4, he would rather thattwenty guilty persons should escape than that one guiltlessperson should be condemned unjustly5, and he pictures tollimself the remorse of a brother-judge who had sentencedPride in his an innocent woman to be burned" He has an honourableprofession. pride in the judicial profession to which he belongs, whichlie truly remarks has furnished many illustrious names tothe roll of England's worthies7. He is not above a littleharmlcss vanity in the matter. He hopes that PrinceEdward, when he comes into his ponrer, will make thejudges' dress a little more ornate, for the honour of thelegal profcs~ion, and the worship of the realms. And itcannot be denied that his desire to exalt the character andinstitutions of his native land has led him sometimes into' N. L. N. i.c.7; Works, p. 70;cf. Aquinas, De Regim. i. c. 10.' ' Understanding and Faith,'Works, p. 489.De Laud. cc. 42,47 ; cf. Pecoc!,Itepressor, p. 401 : ' Jugement ISlb. c. 27.fi lb. c. 53.1b.c. 51.lb. On the other hand, Gascoigneseems to have thought thatthe judges' dress was already tooever to be 3ouun for fredo~nys ornate. Formerly he saps theparti.'judges of England were content'Fastidit calamus ea literis with lanlbskin instead of miueber :designare ;' De Laud. c. 22. p. 202.exaggerations'.It is to his credit, however, that he shares Confidenceto the full that confidence in the apacities of parliamentary !,P,$governmentwhich, as Mr. Iiogers has remarked, is charac- gokernteristicof the best statesmen of the period2. The laws ofEngland he says are most excellent, if not actually yetpotentially, because any defect in them can be amended inParliament3. Another point which is worthy of notice in OrtIlodoxy.Fortescue is his extreme orthodoxy. He revokes by anticipationanything savouring of heresy which he may havewritten, and submits in all things to the judgement of theChurch4. Unlike most secular lawyers" he is a strong Hierarchl-votary of the doctrine of the supremacy of the ecclesiasticalover the civil power. He rcpeats the well-worn argumentthat the law which dirccts men to the ultimate end, happiness,is higher than that which points only to the nearerend, virtueG. Christ is King of all the world, and the Popeis His vicar upon earth to whom all carthly powers aresubject, even to the ltissing of his feet7. He expressly esplainsthat this is not to be understood of mere spiritualsupremacy. Kings are subject to the Pope not only in theirpersons, but in their ten~poralities. He may compel themto rule their subjects justly, and punish them if they do not,as Popes have done both to Kings and Emperors beforecal kiews.now. Christ the Lord of all the world has placed in thehands of the Pope His vicar both swords, and he is Re.r etSnccrdos? It is evident that Fortescue was strol~gly influencedby the papal reaction which followed the Councilof Constance. That he alloived llinlself to be drawn further Pnrtllanalongthe path of political partizanship than we can alto- 'hip.gether approve in the casc of a man holding judicial position,I have already hinted9. 13ut if he errcd in this way he nobly F~delityatonecl for his crror by thc sacrifices which he made for his :l,"riFLf:cause. Had hc chosen to side less actively with Henry, heAbove, pp. 22, 29, ltolcs. X. L. K. i. c. 46 ; \\'arks, p.' Gascoigne, Introduction, p. lis. 113.VI>e 1-aud. c. 5 3. ' lb. ii. c. I I ; Works, p. 126.".L. N. i. c.47; \Vorks, p. I 14. S ' Declaration upon Writings,'e.g. Uracton ; cf. Guterbock, BC., Works, p. 535.Henricus de Bracton, p. 40. "Above, pp. 50-1.

Fortescue'scontemporaries.Littleton.I'ecock.might no doubt have retained his position under Edward, asdid most of his colleagues'. But he not only gave upposition and property to follo~v his master into exile aridpoverty, but out of his own means he helped to support hismaster in his time of need2.It is interestirtg, in conclusion, to notice briefly one or twowriters who were contemporary with Fortescue. The interestof Littleton is too exclusively legal to come underconsideration here. But Pecock and Gascoigne were alsoFortescuc's contemporaries. And just as Fortescue preparedthe way for changes in the political world, so did Pecock inthe ecclesiastical and intellectual world. With Gascoigncthe case is different. He does little more than bewail withquerulous iteration the prevalence of errors and abuses, andhas no constructive force whatever. He is as pessimistic asFortescue is optimistic. And he deals mainly with ecclesiasticalmatters, whereas Fortescue confines himself almostwholly to the political world. But they find a commonground of complaint in the corruption and violence of thearistocracy, to which both of them trace many of the evilsof the time. More interesting still is the comparison betweenFortescue and his younger contcrnporary Co~nmynes. Comrnynesentered the service of Charles of Burgundy in 1464:'.Between that date and 1470 Fortescue was on the Continent,and the Lancastrian exiles were in constant communicationwith the Court of Burgundy. Did the aged lawyer and theyouthful squirc ever meet? Was it in any degree fromFortescue that Comn~ynes imbibed his admiration for theEnglish Constitution, and for those liberal principles ofgovernmellt on which it is based4? These are questionswhich it is worth while to ask, though it is unlikely thatthey will ever be anmered.I havc said' that the interest of the Lancastrian period islargely prospective, and in this character of the period Importa~lceof Fortes-Fortescue undoubtedly shares. In all the literature of the ,,, inperiod which I have read, I have found no single reference seventeentll century.to any of his works. But in the seventeenth century he wasconstantly appealed to as an authority by the constitutionalparty; and his writings played a part not altogether inconsiderablein the preservation of English liberties'.See De Laudibus, ed. Amos, pp. 23, 28, 60, 74, 94-5, I 14.All Henry's judges were re- ed. Dupont, iii. 169 f., quoted above,appointed by Edward except the Part 11. p. 59.trio Chief Justices, Fortescue and hlCin. Liv. i. ch. i.Prisot. See Foss, Judges, IV. ' For Commynes' views on the390-3 ; above, ,p. 50, tzofe. English Constitution, see Liv. iv.L See Henly S !etter in \lTaurin, ch. I ; v. ch. 19. Abo\e, p. 3.

CHAPTER I.THE DEFERENCE B1 TWENE DOhZINIUM REGALE ANDDOMINIUM POLITICUhI ET REGALE.THER bit11 ij kyndes off kyngdomes, of the wichthat on is a lordship callid in laten bominium regale,and that other is callid bominium politicum et regale.And thai diuersen in that the first kynge mey rulehis peple bi suche lawes as he makyth hym self.And therfore he mey sett vppon thaim tayles andother imposicions, such as he wol hym self, with o~vtthair assent. The secounde kynge may not rule hispeple bi other lawes than such as thai assenten unto.And therfore he mey sett vpon thaim non imposicionswith owt thair owne assent. This diuevsite iswe1 taught bi Seynt Thomas, in his boke wich hewrote ab regem G@ri be regelnine principum. But yet itis more openly tredid in a boke callid compenbitimatoraIis pfjlosopBie, and sumwhat bi Giles in his bokebe regemine principum. The childeryn of Israell, assaith Seynt Thomas, aftir that God hade chosenthaim in poyulum pec~tliure~~t et regnum sacerbotnle, wereruled bi hym vndir Juges regaliter et yolitite, in to thetyme that thai desired to haue a kynge, as tho hadea1 the gentiles, wich we cal peynymes, that hade nokynge but a man that reigned vppon thaim regaIitertanturn. With wich desire God was gretly offendyd,as wele for thair folie, as for thair vnkyndnes ; that

sithpn thai had a kynge, wich was God, that reignedvppon thaim ~olitekil~ and roialy, and yet woldchaunge hyrn for a kynge, a verray man, that woldereigne vpon hem only roialy. And therfore Godmanassynge hem made them to be ferde bi thondresand opcr gasteful thynges fro111 the hevene. Andtvhan thai wolde not therby lefe thair folissh desire,he charged profet Samuel to declafe vnto themthe lawe of such a kynge as thai askyd; wichamonge oper thynges said that he wolde take fromthaim thair lande and gyf it to his servantes, andsett thair childeryn in his cartis, and do .to thaimsuch oper many harmeful thinges, as in the viijtllchapiter of the first boke of kynges it rney apere.Wher as bi fore that tyme, while thai were ruled biGod roialy and politikely vndir Juges, it was notlefull to any man for to take from thaim any ofthaire godis, or to greve thair childeren pat hade notoffendid. Wereby it rney appere that in tho dayisregimen politicum et regale was distyngued a regeminetantum regale; and that it was bettir to the peple tobe ruled politekely and roialy, than to be ruled onlyroialy. Seynt Thomas also in his said boke prasithbominiurn politicum et regale, bi cause the prince thatreigneth bi such lordshipje rney not frely falle intotyrannye, as rney the prince that reigneth regalitertantum. And yet thai both bith egall in estate and inpoiar, as it rney lightly be shewed and provid byinfallyble reason.CHAPTER 11.RH1 OON KING IiEGNETH REGALITER, AND ANOTHElZPOLITICE ET REGALITER.HIT rney peraventzw be mervellid be some men,whi on reaume is a lordeshipje only roialle, and theprince therof rulith it bi his lawe callid 335 regale ;and a nother kyngdome is a lordshippe roiall andpolitike, and the prince therof rulith hit bi a lawecallid %us polliticttnt et regale ; sithin thes ij princesbith ,of egal estate. To this doute it rney be answerdein this maner. The first institucion of thesij realmes vppon the incorperacion of thaim is causeof this diuersite. Whan Nembroth be myght forhis owne glorie made and incorperate the firstrealme, and subdued it to hymself bi tyrannye, hewolde not have it gouernyd bi any obey rule or lawe,but bi his owne wille ; bi wich and for the accomplisshmentperof he made it. And therfore thoughhe hade thus made hyrn a realme, holy scripturedisdeyned to call hyrn a kynge, qttfa rex bicitur a regenbo;wich thynge he did not, but oppressyd the peple bimyght, and therfore he was a tirraufzt and callidprimus tirrannorum. But holy write callith hyrn robustttsbenator coram Bomino. Ffor as the hunter takyth thewilde beste for to sle and ete hym, so Nembrothsubdued to hyrn the peple with myght, to haue peerseruice and thair godis, vsing vppon thaim the lordshippethat is callid benlinittm regal^ tantum. AftilhyrnBelus that was first callid a kynge, aftir hyrn is

sone Ninus, and aftir hym other paynemes, pat biensample of Nembroth made hem realmes, wolclenot haue thaim ruled bi oper lawes then be therowne wylles. With lawes ben right gode vndirgode princes, and thair kyngdomes bethe than mostresembled to the kyngdome of God, wich reignethvpon man rulynge hym bi his owne will. SVherforemony cristen princes vsen the same lawe ; and therforeit is that pe lawes seyn, quoB principi placuit, IcgisBabet bigorem. And thus I suppose first began inRealmes Bominium tantum regale. But aftirwarde,whan mankynde was more mansuete, and bettir disposidto vertu, grete comunaltes, as was the felowshippethat came in to this lande with Brute, willyngt.to be vnite and made a body pollitike callid areawme, hauynge an hed to gouerne it ;-as aftir thesaynge of the philisopher, euery comunalte vnyed ofmony parties must nedis haue an hed ;-than theychese the same Brute to be per hed and kynge. Andthai and he vpon this incorpe?facion, institucion, andonynge of hem self into a reaume, ordenyd the samereaume to be ruled and justified by suche lawes asthai all wolde assent vnto; wich lawe therfore iscallid poIIiticum, and bi cause it is ministrid bi a kynge,it is callid regale. PoZicia dicitz~r a poles, quod estpdures, et gcos, scientia; 9210 ~c,ginze~z $oZiticzrm cGiciturregimen pluriu~n scientin siue cottsilio ntinistratum. Thekynge of Scottis reignith vppon is peple bi thislawe, nidelicet, rcgemine politico et regali. And as DiodorusSiculus saith in is boke be priscis bistoriis, thereawme of Egipte is ruled bi the same lawe, andtherfore the kynge therof chaungith not his laweswith owt the assent of his peple. And in like fourmeas he saith is ruled the kyngdome of Saba in FeliriAmbin, and the londe of Libie; and also the moreparte of all the reawmes of Affrike. With manerrule and lordship@ the said Diodorus in that bokepraisith gretly; ffor it is not only good for theprince, that mey therby pe more surely do justicethan bi is owne arbitrment ; but it is also good forhis peple pat resseyue thairbi such justice as thaidesire thaim self. Now as me semyth it is shewidopenly ynough, whi on kynge reignith vpon is pepleBominio tantun1 regali, and that other reignith bominiupolitico et regali; ffor that on kyngdome be ganne ofand bi the might of the prince, and that opcr beganne bi the desire and institucion of the peple ofthe same prince.CHAPTER 111.HERE BIEN SHELVED THE FRUYTES OF JUS REGALE ANDTIIE FRUYTES OF JUS POLITICUbI ET REGALE.AND how so be it that Fe Ffrenche kyngc reignithvppon is peple Botninio regali, yet Seynt Lowes sometyme kyngc ther, nor eny of his progenitors setteneuer tayles or okcr imposicion vppon the peple ofpat lande with owt the assent of pe iij estates, wichwhan thai bith assembled bit11 like to the courte ofthe pnrlement in Ingelonde. And this orclre keptemany of his successours in to late clayis, thatIngelonde men made suche warre in Ffraunce, thatthe iij estates durst not come to gedre. And than forI

that cause and for gret necessite wich the Ffrenchkynge hade of goode for the defence of pat lande,he toke vpon hyw to sett tayles and obey irnposicionsvpon the commons with owt the assent of the iijestates ; but yet he wolde not sett any such charges,nor hath sette, vppon the nobles for fere of rebillion.And bi cause the conzmons per, though thai hauegrucched, haue not rebellid or beth hardy to rebelle,the Ffrench kynges haue yerely sithyn sette suchcharges vpon them, and so augmented the samecharges, as the same commons be so impouerysshidand distroyed, pat thai' mowe vnneth leve. Thaidrinken water, thai eyten apples, with brede rightbrowne made of rye ; thai eyten no flesshe but yf itbe right seldon a litle larde, or of the entrales andheydes of bestis slayn for the nobles and marchauntesof the lande. Thai weren no wolen, but yf it be apouere cote vndir thair vttermest garnement, madeof grete caztnuas, and callid a frokke. Thair hausynbet11 of lyke cazknuas, and passyn not thair kne, wherfore thai beth gartered and ther theis bare. Thairwyfes and childeren gone bare fote; thai rr.owe innon oper wyse leve. For sofame of thaim pat werewont to pay to his lorde for his tenement, wich hehiryth by the yere, a scute, payith nowe to the kyngeouev pat scute .v. scutes. Wher thurgh thai bearted bi necessite so to wacch, labour, and grubbe inthe ground for thair sustenance, that thair nature iswasted, and the kynde of hem broght to noght. Thaivon crokyd, and ben feble, not able to fight, nor tobdefende Fe realme ; nor thai haue wepen, nor moneyto bie thaim wepen with all. But verely thai livenin the most extreme pouertie and miserie, and yetdwellyn thai in on the most fertile reaume of theworlde. Werthurgh the Ffrench kynge hath notmen of his owne reaume able to defende it, excepthis nobles, wich beyren non such irnposicions, andther fore thai ben right likely of thair bodies ; biwich cause the said kynge is compellid to make hisarmeys and retenues for the defence of his lande ofstraungers, as Scottes, Spaynardw, Arrogoners, menof Almeyn, and of oper nacions, or ellis all hisenymes myght ouerrenne hym; for he hath nodefence of his owne except is castels and fortresses.Lo this is the frute of his sus regale. Yf the reaumeof Englonde, wich is an Ile, and therfor mey notlyghtly geyte soucore of other landes, were rulidvndir such a lawe, and vndir such a prince, it woldebe than a pray to all oper nacions pat wolde conqwer,robbe, or deuouir it; wich was well p~yovid in thetyme of the Bretons, when the Scottes and thePyctes so bete and oppressid this lande, pat thepeple therof sought helpe of the Romayns, to whomthai hade be tributori. And when thai coude not bedefende be thaym, thai sought helpe of the Duke ofBretayn tho called litle Bretayn, and grauntid therforeto make his brother Costantyne per kynge.And so he was made kynge here, and reigned manyyeres, and his childirren aftir hym, of wich gretArtour was one of thair issue. But blessyd be God,this lande is rulid vndir a bettir lawe ; and therforethe peple therof be not in such peynurie, nor therbyhurt in thair persons, but thai bith welthe, and haueall thinges nescessarie to the sustenance of nature.Wherfore thai ben myghty, and able to resiste theaduersaries of this reaume, and to beete oper reaumesthat do, or wolde do them wronge. Lo this is thefruyt of %US polIiticurn et regale, vndre wich we live.I2

Sumwhat now I haue shewid the frutes of both lawes,ttt ex fructibttpl eorum rognoscetis eos.CHAPTER IV.tIERE IS SHEWED HOW THE RBUENUES OFFFRAUNCE BYN MADE GRETE.SITHT~J our kynge reignith vpon vs be lawes morefauerable and good to vs, @n be the lawes by thewhiche be Ffrench kynge rulith his peple, hit isreason pat we be to hym more good and moreprofitable than be the sugettes of the Ffrench kyngevnto hym; wich it wolde seme that we be not, consideryngepat his subiecttes yelden to hynz more ina yere, than we do to owre soferayn lorde in ijyeres, how so be it pat thai do so ayenst thar willes.Neucr the lesse when it is considerid, how a kyngesoffice stondith in ij thynges, on to defende hisreaume ayen pair enemyes outwarde bi the swerde ;ail other that he defende his peple ayenst wrongedoers inwarde bi justice, as hit apperith bi the saidfirst boke of kynges; wich be Ffrench kynge dothenit, though he kepe Justice be twene subiet andsubget ; sithin he oppressith thaim more hyrn self,than wolde haue done all the wronge doers of pereaume, lough thai hade no kynge. And sithyn itis a synne to gyve no meyte, drynke, clothynge orother almes to hem that haue nede, as shal be declaredin the day off dome; how muche a gretersynne is it to take from the pore man is meyte, isdrinlte, his clothynge, and all that he hath nede off.Wich werely doth the Ffrench kynge to mony athowsande of his subiectes, as it is be fore openlydeclared. Wich thynge Pough it be nowe colouridper fus regale,. yet it is tyranne. Ffor, as SeyntThomas saith, whan a kynge rulith his reaume onlyto his owne profite, and not to the good off issubiectes, he is a tyrant. Kynge Heroude reignidvppon pe Jues bominio rrgali ; yet when he slowe thechilderen off Israell, he was in that a tyrant, thoughthe lawes seen, qnob principi placuit, Iegis ljabet bigorem.Wherfore Acab, wich reigned vppon the childerenof Israell bi like lawe, and desired to haue hadeNabothe his subgectes vyne yerde, wolde not bythat lawe take it ffrom hym, but proferid hy??~ thevalue thereof. Ffor theys wordes seid to the profete,prebic eipl fus regis, beth not ellis to say but,prebic eb potestatem regis. Wher fore as ofte as sucha kynge dothe any thynge ayenst the lawe of God,or ayenst pe lawe off nature, he dothe wronge,not with stondynge the said lawe declared by theprophete. And it is so, that the lawe off naturewoll in this case, pat the kynge shulde do to hissubgettes, has he wolde benrdone to hym self, yff hewere a subget; wich mey not be that he wolde bealmost distroied as bith be commons off Ffraunce.Wherfore, a1 be it that the Ffrench kynges reuenuesben by suche meanes moche gratter than be therevenues wich pe kynge owre souerayn lorde hathoff vs, yet thai ben not goodly taken, and the myghtof his reaume is nerehande distroyed ther by. Bywich consideracion I wolde nat that the kyngesrevenues of this reaume were made grette by any

such meane. And yet of necessite thai muste begratter than thai bith at this day. And trewly it isveray necessarie that thay be alwey grete ; and thatthe kynge haue habundantly wherewith his estatemey be honorably kepte ffor ryght mony causes, offwech some shall nowe be remenbred.CHAPTER VTHE HARME THAT COMTTH OFF A KYNGESPOVERTE.FFIRST, yff a kynge be pore, he shall bi nescessitemake his expences, and by all pat is necessarie tohis estate, by creaunce and borowynge ; wher throughhis creauncers wolle wynne vpon hym the iiijth orthe vth pene of all that he dispendith. And sohe shall lese whan he payith, the iiijth or the vthpene of his revenues, and thus be ther by alwayporer and porer, as vser and chevisaunce encressiththe pouerte off hym that borowith. His creauncersshul alway grucche ffor lake of thair paymente, anddefame his highnes off mysgouernance, and defauteof kepynge of days; wich yf he kepe, he mostborowe also much at the dayis, as he didd firste;ffor he shalbe than pouerer than he was by thevalue of the iiijth or vth parte of his first expences,and so be alway pouerer and pouerer, vnto thetyme he be the pouerest lorde of his lande. Fforsuch maner of borowynge makith the grete lordis tobe pouever than thair tenantes. What dishonouris this, and abatynge of the glorie of a kynge. Butyet it is most to his vnsuyrte. For his subgetteswoll rather goo with a lorde pat is riche, and meypay thair wages and expenses, then with thair kyngepat hath noght in his purse, but thai most semehym, yf thai wil do so, at thair owne dispenses.Htem, yf the kynge be pouere, he shall of necessitemake his giftes and rewardes by asseignementes, forwich he shall haue but litle thanke. For the pouereman hade leuer an c. marke in hande, then an c. fi.bi asseignement, wich perauentur shall cost hymright miche or he can gete his and perauenturbe neuer paid therof. And often tymes forlake of money the kynge shall be fayne to gyf aweyhis lande to such as wolde haue ben feyner of a c. fiin hand, than of xl. -ki worth lande yerely, to thegrete abatynge of his revenues and depopolacion ofhis reaume. But the grettest harme that comythof a kynges pouerte is, that he shal bi necessite bearted to fynde exquysite meanes of geytinge ofgood; as to putt defaute in some of his subgettespat bith innocentes, and vpon the riche men moreken the pore, by cause that he mey bettir pay; andto shew rigoure per as fauour awght to be shewid,and fauour per as rigour shuld be shewid, to perversionof Justice, and perturbacion of the peas andquiete of the reaume. For, as the philosepher saithin his Eytikes, %mposr;ibiIe est inbigentem operari boita.Hit nedith not now to specifie mo of the harmeswich comyth to a reaume bi the pouerte of pevkynge, how be it thai bith mony mo than we haueshewid yet; for euery wise man mey se ham openlyi now. But we most holde it for v-ndouted, pat ther

ney no reaume prospere, or be worshipfull, vndir apoure kynge.CHAPTER V1ORDINANCE FFOR THE KYNGES ORDINAKIE CHARGES.AND sithyn it is necessarie that the kynge bealway riche, wich may not be with owt he hauerevenues sufficiant for the yerely nlayntenance ofhis estate; it is behouefull that we furst esteme,what his erly charges and expences bith likely todrawe vnto. Ffor aftir that nedith his reuenuesto be proporcioned; but yet thai nedun to begretter than uloll be the charges, for doute of sodencases, with mey falle to hyrn and to his reaume.Ffor Seynt Bernarde saith, pat yf a mannes expensesbe egall to his livelode, a soden chauncerney distro)e his estate. The kynges yerely expensesstonden in charges ordinarie, and in chargesextra ordinarie. His charges ordinary rney not beeschewed, and therfore it nedith pat therbe lyvelodeasseigned ffor the payment therof; wich lyvelode bein no wyse putte to no other vse. And yff it happenthat any patent be made of any pnrte therof to opervse, pat thanne pat patent be voide and of noneffect. Wich thynge yff hit be ffermely estableshed,the kynges ordinarie charges rney alway be paid inhande, and the pro vision ffor hem rney alway bemade in seson ; wich shalbe worth to the kynge theiiijtll or the vtll parte of the quantite of his expensesfor ordinarie charges. This may in nothinge restranethe kyngis pover. Ffor it is no poiar to mowe alieneand put away; but it is power to mowe haue andkepe to hyrn self. As it is no poiar to mowe synne,and to do ylle, or to mowe to be seke, wex olde, orthat a man may hurte hyrn self. Ffor all thespoiars comen of impotencie. And therfore thayrney properly by callid nown poiars. Wherfore theholy sprites and angels, pat rney not synne, wex old,be seke, or hurte ham selff, haue more poiar thanwe, that rney harme owre selff W& all thes defautes.So is the kynges power more, in that he may notput ffrom hyrn possescions necessaries for his ownesustenance, than yff he myght put ham ffrom hym,and aliene the same to his owne hurte and harme.Nor this is ayen the kynges pyerogatiff, be wich heis exaltid above his subgettes; but rather this is tohyrn a prerogatiff. Ffor no man saue he rney haueayen the lande pat he hath onis aliened. Thislivelode asseigned ffor the ordinarie charges shallaftirwarde be neuer askid off the kyng, nor hishighnes shall thynke ffor pat, that he hath pe morelivelode to be given awey; but be reason hereoffhe will pe more restrayn his yeftis off oper off hislivelod, considerynge pat than it woll not be grette,and therfore he shall haue more nede off it thenthai that will aske it. The ordenarie charges, wichFe writer hereoff can nowe remenbr, be thies; thekynges housholde, his warderobe. And how so beit pat the kynge liste now, or will hereaftir, makehis howshold lesse than it was wonned to be; yethis highnes shall part haue therfore a bouute hispersone, ffor his honour and suyrte, lordes, knyghtes,

and sqviers, and oper, in also grete nombr, or gretterthan his howsolde was wonned to be, to his chargesperaduentz~r also gretly, as his houshold well ruledwas wonned to stonde hym inne. Wher fore hereinneit nedith not to considre or to purvey, but onlyffor the kynges house, wich he may resume orchaunge in to his new maner, or other fourme athis pleasur, and as it shalbe thought aftir the seasonsmost expedient. The expenses off wich housholderney sone be estemed by the wich off olde tymehaue be officers therin, and bi the clerkys offtheschekquer. The secounde ordinarie charge isthe payment off the wages and ffees off the kyngesgrete officers, his courtes, and his counsell. Wichcharge woll alwey be grete, and thies men nedun tobe alway redely payid. Ffor indigens in ham isnot only vnworshipfull, but it rney do the mostharme pat rney falle of eny nede in any estate ofthe lande, aftir the kynges most grete estate. Pethirde charge ordinarie is the payment of the kepyngof the marches, wher in we beyre moch grettercharges yerely than done the Scottis, wich oftentymes is for the ffauour pat we do to the personespat kepe ham, wich ffauoure pe Scottis do not. Theiiijth charge is the kepyng off Caleis, wich charge iswelynoghe knowen. pe 17th charge is ffor the kyngeswerkes, off wich )X yerely expenses rney not be estemede,but yet pe accoumptes off the clerkes offthe werkes wollyn shewe be likenes peroff, wile bekynge makith no new werkes. The kepynge off thesee I reken not amonge the ordinarie charges, howbe it the charge peroff is yerely borne, bi cause itis not estimable, and the. kynge hath therfore Fesubsidie off pondage and tonnage. Nor the lessebe that reason pondage and tonnage rney not berekenned as parcel1 off the revenues wich the kyngehath ffor the mayntenance off his estate, bi cause itaught to be applied only to pe kepynge off the see.And though we haue not alwey werre vppon thesee, yet it shalbe nescessarie pnt the kynge hauealway some ffloute apon the see, ffor the repressyngeoff rovers, sauynge off owre marchauntes, owreffishers, and the dwellers vppon owre costes; andpat the kynge kepe alway some grete and myghtyvessels, ffor the brekynge off an armye when anyshall be made ayen hym apon pe see. Ffor thanneit shall be to late to'do make such vessailles. Andyet with owt thaym all the kynges navey shallnotsuffice to borde with carrikkes and opev grete vessailles,nor yet to mowe breke a myghty ffloutegadered off purpose. Now, as I suppose, we hauerekened he grettest parte off the kynges ordinariecharges. \Vlierfore we woll considre next his extraordinarie charges, also ferre as rney be possibleto vs.CHAPTER VII.THE KYNGES EXTRAORDINARIE CHARGES.THE kynges extraordinarie charges bith so casuelle,bat no man rney knowe hem in certaynte. But yethe may esteme what somme thai bith not like toexcede, but yff per ffall a case ouer moch exorbitant;

and than it shalbe reasone, and also necessarie, patall the reaume beyre ffor pat case a synguler charge.Such off the said extraordinarie charges as thewriter hereoff can now remenbr be theis. Ffirst pekyng shall often tyrnes sende owt off this lande hisambassatours, as well to the pope, as to diuersekynges, prynces, and nacions; and ojler while heshall sende his procuratours and messengers to thecounselles generalles. Wich ambassatours, procuratours,and messengers shall nede to be hollerablyaccompanyed, and well be sene, alsowell ffor theworshippe off pe reaume, as ffor the avaunsynge offpe maters ffor wich thai shalbe sende, to pe kyngesright grete charge, wich shalbe more or lesse, aftirthair longe or shorte demure in thair viage. ftem,the kynge shall beyre yerely charges vnknowen inre ceyvinge off ligates and messengers sende ffromthe pope, and off ambassatours sende ffrom kyngesand oper princes, and also ffrom grete communaltiesbi yonde pe see, wich will putt pe kyng to greteexpenses while thai bith here, and at thair departyngethai most nedis haue grete giftes and rewardes;ffor pat be sitith j;e kynges magnificence and liberalite,also it is necessarie ffor the worship off his reaume.%tern, sithen it is not gode pat he rewarde such as do,and shall do to hym seruice, or oper maner offpleasures, with Fe possescions and revenues of hiscrovne, nor with other possescions off his inheritance;-fforthai be moch more necessarie for thesustenance off his grete estate ;-hit shall ther forebe necessarie, pat the kynge make such rewardeswith money owt off his cofers, and pat somme offhem haue so largely Perdff, as thai mey bie thainllande with all, yff thai will. Ffor be this meane peCCbe dobernance of QEnglanD, 125kynges estate shall alwey be kept vnblemyshed. Andoff somme man is, highnes shall haue more thankeffor money then ffor lande; and also money is themost convenient rewarde to hyrn pat hath not longeserued. This charge woll all wey be grete, and soinestimable grete, pat in somlne yere a grete lordeslyvelod shalnot suffice to beyre it, though he woldeselle grete parte pevof. And trewly, when pe kyngrewardith is servantes in this maner, he shewithgrete ffauour to all his reaume. It~m, it shall nedepat the kyng haue such tresour, as he mey makenew bildynges whan he woll, ffor his pleasure andmagnificence ; and as he mey bie hym riche clothes,riche furres, oper than be wonned to fall vndre peyerely charges off his warderober, rich stones, serpes,bauderikes, and opcr juels and ornamentes conuenyentto his estate roiall. And often tymes he wollbie riche hangynges and other apparel1 ffor hishowses; vessaill, vestmentes, and o],er ornamentesfor his chapell; bie also horses off grete price,trappers, and do other suche nobell and grete costes,as bi sitith is roiall mageste, off wich it is not nowpossible to the writer hereof to remenbr the especialliteis.Ffor yff a kyng did not so, nor myght do, helyved then not like his estate, but rather in miserie.and in more subgeccion than doth a priuate person.Item, the kynge shall often tymes sende his comissionersin gret myght, and also his juges, to represseand punysh riatours and risers; ffor wich cause heshall odre whiles ride in his owne person myghtelyaccompanyed. Wich thynge wolnot be done withowt grete costes; ffor no man is bounde to seruehym in suche cases at his owne dyspenses. Item, yffther come a sodayne armye vpon this londe by see

or by lande, pe kyng most encomptre them with alyke armye, or a gretter; ffor pe-expenses wheroffhe shall not so sadanly haue any eyde off his peple.Wherfore he most than do the expences with moneyowt off his cofers, or put all is lande in jopardie. Loonow we haue remenbred grete parte off the kyngesextraordinarie charges ; and be ffore we haue shewidgrete parte off his ordinarie charges. Wherfore nowit is tyme bat it be shewid, how the kynge rney hauerevenues and livelode sufficient to beyre theis ijcharges.CHAPTER VIII.YFF THE KYNGES LIVELODE SUFFICE NOT, HISSUBGETTES AUGHT TO MAKE HIT SUFFICIENT.HIT is shewid beffore, how necessarie it is patlivelod sufficient be asseigned ffor the kynges ordinariecharges, and that the same livelod be onlyapplied therto, and not aliened in tyme comynge.Ffor that asseignement rney in no wise hurte be kyng,considerynge pat yff any parte off Fe revenues woffremayne ouer the paiement of the same ordynariechargis, that so remaynynge is the kynges ownemoney, wich he rney than imploye to oper vse at isowne pleasur. And it is vndouted that the kyngehath livelode sufficient wich rney be soo asseignedfor his ordinarie charges. Wherfore we haue nowno thyng ellis to be sercched, but what lyvelod pekyng hath ffor the payment off his charges extraordinarie,ouer so moche livelod as shalbe asseignedffor his charges ordinarie ; and yff he haue not livelodsufficient perto, how than his livelod rney bemade sufficient. Ffor his reaume is bounde byright to susteyne hym in euery thyng necessarie tohis estate. Ffor, as Seynt Thomas saith, %ex baturpropter regnum, et non regnttm propter regem. Wherfore allthat he dothe owith to be referred to his kyngdome.Ffor though his estate be Fe highest estate temporal1in pe erthe, yet it is an office, in wich he mynestrithto his reaume defence and justice. And therfore herney say off hyrn selff and off his reaume, as the popesaith off hym selff and off the churche, in pat hewritithe, seruus sernorum 3ei. By wich reason, ryghtas euery seruant owith to haue is sustenance off hympat he serueth, so aught Fe pope to be susteyned bythe chirche, and the kyng by his reaume. Ffornemo bebet propriie oxpensis militare. And owre lordesaith, bignus ~ s t opernrius cibo suo. Wherfore peappostill saith, tommbnitet b qui cute7ijutur berbo, ei qttise cateji;lat, in omnibus bonis. Wherfore sithen eueryreaume is bounde to susteyn is kyng, yet moch morebe we bounde ther to, vppon whom owre kyngreignith by so ffauerable lawes as is beffore declared.CHAPTER IX.HERE HE SHEWITH THE PERELLIS THAT MEY COME TOTHE KYNG BY OUER MYGHTYE SUBGETTES.BUT sithyn the said extraordinarie charges bithso vncertayne pat thai be not estymable, hit is not

possible to putt in certayne, what lyvelod will yerelysuffice to beyre ham. Wherfore we nede in thiscase to vse coniecture and ymaginacion, as to thynkthat per is no lordis livelod in Englond sufficient tobeyre the ' kynges extraordinare charges. Thennedith it pat the kynges livelod, aboff such reuenuesas shalbe asseigned for his ordinare charges, begretter -than the livelod off the grettest lorde inEnglande. And perauenture, whan livelod sufficientffor the kynges ordinzrie charges is lemitted andasseigned therto, hit shall apere, that diuerse lordisoff Englande haue also moch livelode off thair owne,as than shall remayne in the kynges handes ffor hisextraordinarie charges ; wich were inconvenient, andwold be to the kynge right dredefull. For than sucha lord mey dispende more then the kynge, consideringepat he is charged with no such chargesextraordinarie or ordinarie as is the kyng, except anhoushold, wich is but litle in compnrison off thekynges house. Wherfore yff it be thus, it shalbenecessarie, pat ther be purveyid ffor the kyng mochgretter livelod than he hath yet. For manis corageis so noble, pat naturally he aspirith to high thingw,and to be exaltid, and perfore enforsith hym selff tobe alway gretter and grettcr. Ffor wych the philosophersaith, o~nnin amuulus seb griitcipnri tnnitts. Wherofit hath comyn pat oftyn tymes, when a subget hathhade also gret livelod as his prince, he hath anonaspired to Fe estate of his p~ince, wich by such aman mey sone be gote. Ffor the remenante off thesubgettes off such a prince, seyng pat yff so myghtya subget myght opteyne pe estate off thair prince,thai shulde than be vndir a prince double so myghtyas was thair old p~ince ;-wich encrease any subgetdesirith, ffor his owne discharge off pat he beyrith tothe sustenance off his prince ;-and therfore wolberight gladde to help such a subgett in his rebillion.And also such an enterprise is the more ffeseable,when such a rebel1 hath more riches than his soueraynelorde. Ffor the peple will go with hym patbest mey susteyne and rewarde ham. This mancroff doynge hath be so ofte practised nerehande ineuery reaume, pat thair cronicles be full off it. Inthe reaume off Ffraunce was neuer chaunge off $hairkynge, sithyn it was ffirst inabyted by Ffrench men,but by pe rebillion off such myghty subgettes; asH~ldericus kyng off Ffraunce, dissended off Clodone,wich was ffirst Cristen kyng off Ffraunce, was puttdoune by Pepyne son to Carollus Marcellus, wichwas the most myghty subget pat into that tyme waseuer sene in ke reaume off Ffraunce. And aftirwardeCharles, discended off Carolus Magnus, sonne to thesaid Pepyne by ix. or by X. gene?~acions, was put ffromthe kyngdome of Ffraunce by Hugh Capite, sonneto Hugo Magnus, Erle of Paris, wich tho was themyghtieste subgett off Ffraunce, and therfore createand hallid Dux $frfr~ncia. And in olvre dayis we hauesene a subgett off the Ffrench kl-nges in such myght,pat he hath gyven bataill to the same kyng, and putthym to flight, and aftirwad be segett hpm beyng inParis is grettest cete, and soo keppid thair, vnto j;etyme his said kyng hade made such ende with hym,his adherentes, and fauctours, as he desired. Wehaue also sene late in owre reaume, som7~ze off thekyngcs subgettes gyff hym bataill, by occasion patthair livelod and offices were pe grettest off he lande,and ellis thai wolde not haue done soo.The Erlis of Lecestir and Glocestre, wich were keR

grettest lordes off Englond, rose ayenest thair kyngeHerre the iijde, and toke hym and his sonne prisonersin the ffelde. Wich maner off demeynynge the kyngoff Scottis pat last dyed dredyng to be practysed inhis lande, putt owt off the same lande pe ErleDouglas whos livelod and myght was nere handeequivalent to his owne, moved perto be no othercause, saue only drede off his rebyllion. The cronyclesoff euery reaume, and in especial1 off Spayne andDenmarke, bith full off such ensamples; and sobith also the bokis off kynges in holy scripture;wherfore it nedith not to write mor herein. Andalso it mey not be eschewid, but pat the grete lordisoff pe lande by reason off nev dissentes ffallyng vntoham, by reason also off mariages, purchasses, andoper titles, shall often tymes growe to be grettev thanthai be now, and pevauentzrr somme off hem to beoff livelod and poiar like a kyng ; wich shalbe rightgod ffor the lande while thai aspire to non hygherestate. Ffor such was pe Duke of Lancastre, Patwarred be kynge off Spayne, on off the myghtiestkynges off Cristendome, in his owne reaume. Butthis is writun only to the entent pat it be well vnderstande,how necessarie it is pat the kynge haue gretepossescions, and peculier livelod ffor his owne suirte;namely, whan any of his lordis shull happen to be soexcessyuely grete, as ther mought therby groueperell to his estate. For certanly ther mey nogrettir perell growe to a prince, than to haue asubgett equepolent to hym selff.Ebe dobernance of QEngiand,CHAPTER X.HOW THAT THE CROVNE IS BESTE TO BE INDOWED.Now that the lykennes off the kynges chargesordinarie and extraordinarie bith shewid, and oue~?that, how necessarie it is that he haue grete liveloclaboff pe same charges, in wich it nedyth pat heexcede gretly euery man off the lande, wych livelodvndoutedly he hath not at pis day; hyt is therforebyhouefull pat we now serch how the kyng mey hauesuch livelod ; but ffirst, off what comodites it meybest be take. The kyng off Ffraunce myght notsumtyme dyspende off his demaynes, as in lordeshippes,and oper patrimonie peculier, so mich asmyght tho the kynge off England; wich mey wellappere be that the qwene off Ffraunce hath but v.P rnarke yerely to huyr douer, wheras the qweneoff Englond hath X. h marke. Ffor in tho dayisther was but litle more off the reaume off Ffraunce inthe kynges handes, but pat parte wich is callyd theIle off Ffraunce. Ffor all the remenant off thereaume as Burgonye, Normandye, Guyne, Champayne,Langdoke, and Fflaunders, with mony opeevsuch grete lordshippes, were than in the handw offthe Dussepers, and off oper princes and grete lordis.Ffor wych cause the gabell off the salt, and thequatevimes of the wynes were graunted to the kyngeby the iij estates off Ffraunce, wych was no litillsubsidie. Ffor ther is no man in Ffraunce pat meyeyte salt, but yff he bie it off the kyng; and that isnow sett to so grete prise, pat the bushell, wich theK 2'3'

kyng bieth ffor iijd or iiijd, is solde to his peple fforijs and a jd, and other while more. And the iiijthpype off the wynes that be made in Ffraunce meybe no lityll thyng, sithyn the tyllyng off the vynes isthe grettest comodite off the reame ; but pat comoditewe haue not in this lande. Wher fore ther is noparte off tho manevs off subsidie pat myght be godeffor owre souerane lorde, but yff it were that hemyght sell to his subgettes the salte pat comythhyder. In wich thynge he shall haue more grochyngeoff the peple than proffett. Ffor in Ffrauncethe peple salten but lytill mete,'except thair bacon,for thai wolde bie litil salte ; but yet thai be arted tobye more salte than thai wolde. Ffor the kyngesofficers bryngen to thair houses euery yere, alsomoche salte as by thair coniecture is ressnable to thenombre off pe men, women, and childeren thatdwellen therin, ffor wich thai shall pay though thaiwolnot haue so muche. This rule wolde be soreaborred in Englond, as well by the marchaunts patbithe wonned to haue thair ffredome in biynge andsellynge off salte, as by the peple pat vsen moche tosalte thair meytes more than do pe Ffrenchmen ; byoccasion wheroff thai woll than at euery mele grochewith the kynge, pat entreteth hem more rygourslythan his progenitors haue done. And so his hyghnesshall haue peroff, but as hadd pe man pat sherid ishogge, muche crye and litil woll. In Fflaunders,and in oper lordeshippes off the Dukes off Burgoipedownewarde, he takith certayn impositions made byhym selff vppon euery oxe, euery shepe, and vppono p thynges solde ; and also vppon euery vesaill offwyne, euery barrel1 off bere, and oper vitalles soldein his lordeshippes, wich is no litil revenue to hym ;but yet he dothe it maugre the peple, wich Goddefende pat the kynge oure souerayn lorde shulde dovppon is peple, with ourt *hair grauntes or assent.Nertheles with thair assent suche maner off subsidie,yff per couude not be ffounde a better meane off peencressynge off the kynges revenues, were not vnresnoble.Ffor therin and in the gabell off salte.euery man shalbeyre pe charge peroff eyegally. Butyet I wolde not pat suche a newe charge were putapon pe peple in owre souerayn lordis dayis, withwich is progenitours charged hem neuer, yff a betterremedie coude be ffounde. Kynge Salamon chargedis peple with gretter ymposicions than thai werewonned to beyre be ffore his dayis. And by causehis sonne kynge Roboham wolde not ease hemtheroff, the X. parties off the peple, devided in xii.parties, de pnvtide ffrom hym, and chese hem a newkynge, and come neuer aftir pat tyme vndre is subiection.Off wiche departyng God said hym selffaftirwarde, n me farturn rst istub. Wiche is an ensamplepat it is not good a kynge to ouer sore chargehis peple. Wherfore me thinkith, pat yff pe kyngemyght haue is livelod ffor the sustenance off hisestate in grete lordshippes, manwes, ffee ffermys,and such other demaynes, his people not charged, heshulde kepe to hym hollych thair hertes, excede inlordshippes all the lordes off his reaume, and thershulde non off hem growe to be like vnto hym, withthynge is most to be ferecl off all pe worlde. Fforthen with in ifewe yeres PET shulde not remeynelordeshippes in is reaume, by wich ]xi myght groweso grette. Ner thai myght growe soche be mariages,but yff the kyng nrolde hit. Ffor to hyrn fallen allpe grete mariages off his lande, wich he mey dispose

as hynl liste. And by discente per is not like toffalle gretter heritage to any man than to pe kyng.Ffor to hym bith cosens be most and grettest lordesoff Fe reaume. And by escheittes per rney not somuche lande fall to any man as to pe kyng, by causepat no man hath so many tennntes as he; and alsono man rney haue the escheittes off treson buthym selff. And be pzlrchas, yff this be done, pevshall no man so well encresse his livelod as thekyng. Ffor ther shall non off his tenantes alienelivelod withowt is licence, wheryn he rney bestplteferre hym selff. Nor pev shall no livelod be keptso h011 as pe kynges, consideryng pat he rney notonestly selle is lande, as opev men rney doo; andalso his sellyng wolde be the hurte off all his reaume.Soche was be sellynge off Chirke and Chirkes landes,neroff neuer manne see a president, and God defendethat any man see mo soche hereaftir. Ffor sellyngeoff a kynges livelod is pg~opirly callid delapidacion offhis crowne, and therfore is off gret infame. Nowwe haue ffounde vndoutably, what manev revenuezis best ffor the indowment off the crowne. Butsithyn it is said before, pat the kyng hath not atthis day sufficiant therto, it is most convenient thatwe nowe serch, how is hyghnes rney haue sufficiantoff suche revenues, wich we ffounde now best therfore.CHAPTER XI.HERE IS SHEWID, WHAT OFF THE KYNGES LIVELOD GEVENAWEY, MEY BESTE BE TAKEN A GEYN.THE holy patriarke Joseph, while he, vndr Pharahokyng, gouerned ke lande off Egipte, rulid andso entredid Fe peple peroff, Fat thai graunted to pay,and paid to the same kynge, the vth parte of thairgraynes, and off all oper thynge that growed to thaimyerely off Fe erthe ; wich charge thai berun yet, andeuer shall beyre. Wherthro thair plrince, wich nowis the Saudayn off Babilon, is on off the myghtyestprinces off Fe worlde; and that notwithstondyngebe same Egipciens tith the most riche commons patliven vndre any prince. Wherby we bit11 lernedpat it shalnot only be goode to owre prince, butalso to vs selff, that he be well indowed ; ffor ellisthe patriarke wolde not haue made such a trety.The Ffrench kyng in on thynge, pat is to say inwyne, takyth more off is peple than dothe FeSaudan; ffor he takith Fe iiijth peyne peroff. Butyet he takith no thynge off thair graynes, wolles, oroff any other gode pat growith to hem off thairlande. The kynge owre souevayn lorde 1:ade betymes, sithen he reigned vpon vs, livelod in lordshippes,landes, tenementcs, and rentcs, nerehand tothe value off be vtll parte off is reaume, akoff thepossescions off j3e chirche. Off wich livelod, yff hithade abiden still in his handes, he hade ben moremyghty in good revenues than any off be said ijkynges, or any kyng pat now reigneth vppon cristen

men. But this was not possible to haue ben done.Ffor to some parte pevoff the eyres off thaim patsome tyme owed it be restored; some bi reason offtayles, some bi reason off oper titles, wich the kynghath considered and thought hem good and resonable.And some off pe said livelod is god gvasehat11 geuen to such as haue serued hyrn so notably,Pat as thair renounne wolbe eternall, so it besatethe kynges magnyficence to make thair rewardeseuelrlastynge in their heyres, to thair pe~ypetuallmemorie and honour. And also the kyng hathgeven parte off this livelod to his moste worshipful1brotherryn, wich not only haue sevued hyrn in themaner ffor said, but bith also so nygh in blode tohis highnes, that it besatte not is magnificence tohaue done in oper tvyse. Neuevthelesse somnzeme?z haue done hyrn sevuice, ffor wych it was resonablepat his grase hade rewarded hem; and fforlakke off money, the kyng than rewarded pam withlande. And to some men he hath done in lykewyse aboff thair merites, through ymportunite offthair suyttes. And it is supposed pat some off hemhaue goton an c. -f-i. worth lande, Pat wolde haueholde hyrn content with cc. +i. in money, yff thaimyght llaue hade it in hande. Wherfore it isthought, bat yff suche gyftis, and namely tho wichhaue be made inconsideratle, or aboff the meJTytesoff hem that haue thaim, were refourmed; andthai rewarded with money, or offices, and somewith livelode tevme off lyff, wich aftir thair dethiswolde than retorne to the Crowne, pe kyngshulde haue suche livelod as we now seke ffor,sufficiante ffor the mayntennance off his estate.And yff it wolde not than be so gret, I holde it forvndouted, pat the people off his lande woll be wellwyllunge to graunte hyrn a subsidie, vppon suchecomodites off his reaume as bith beffore specified,as shall accomplishe that wich shall lakke hyrn offsuch livelod; so that is highnes woll establyshe Pesame livelod than remaynyge, to abide perpetuellyto his crowne, with owt translatynge peroff to anyoper vse. Ffor ellis whan pat shall happen hereaftirto be gyven awey, it shall nede pat is commons becharged with a newe subsidie, and thus be keptalway in pouerte.CHAPTER XII.HERE IS SHEWID WHAT HARME WOLDE COME TO ENGLAND,YFF THE COMMONS THER OFF WERE POUERE.SOME men haue said pat it were good ffor thekyng, pat the commons off EngIande were madepore, as be the commons off Ffraunce. Ffor thanthai wolde not rebelle, as now thai done oftentymes ;wich the commons off Ffraunce do not, nor meydoo ; ffor thai haue no tvepen, nor armour, nor goodto bie it with all. To theis maner off men mey besaid with the phylosopher, ab pauca respicientes be faciIienunriant. This is to say, thai that see but ffewthynges, woll sone say thair advyses. Ffor soththeis ffolke consideren litill the good off the reaumeoff Englond, wheroff the myght stonditll most vpponarchers, wich be no ryche men. And yff thai weremade more poueve than thai be, thai shulde not

haue wherwith to bie hem bowes, arroes, jakkes, orany oker armour off defence, wherby thai myght beable to resiste owre enymes, when thai liste to comevppon vs; wich thai rney do in euery side, consideryngepat we be a Ilelonde ; and, as it is saidbe fore, we rney not sone haue soucour off any okerreaume. Wherfore we shull be a pray to all owreenymyes, but yff we be myghty off owre selff, wichmyght stondith most vppon owre pouere archers;and therfore thai nedun not only haue suche ablementsas now is spoken off, but also thai nedun tobe much excersised in shotynge, wich rney not bedone withowt ryght grete expenses, as euery manexperte per in knowith ryght well. Wherfore Femakyng pouere of Fe commons, wich is pe makyngpouere off owre archers, shalbe pe distruccion of thegrettest myght off owre reaume. Btem, yff poueyemen rney not lightly rise, as is the openion of thesmen, wich ffor pat cause wolde haue be commonspouere ; how than, yff a myghty man made a rysingeshulde he be repressed, whan all the commons benso pouere, tat aftir such openyon thai rney notffeght, and be pat reason not helpe the kyng withffeghtynge? And whi makith the kynge be commonseuery yere to be mustered ; sithen it were godthai hade non harnes llor were able to ffight?0, howe vnwyse is te oppenyon off thes men; fforit rney not be mayntened be any reason! lir~m,whan any rysinge hath be made in this londe be ffortheis dayis by commons, the pouerest men pe~offhaue be Fe grettest causers and doers ther in. Andthryfty men haue ben loth therto, ffor drede offlesynge off thair gode. But yet oftentymes thaihaue goo with thaym, through manasheynge Fatellis the same pouere men wolde haue toke thairgodes, wher in it semyth pat pouerte hath be pe h011cause off all suche rysynges. The pouere man hathbe sturred perto be occasion off is pouerte, for togete gode and be riche men haue gone with hem,be cause thai wolde not be pouere be lesynge off pergode. What than wolde ffall, yff all the commonswere pouere ? Trewly it is lyke that this landethen shulde be like vnto I;e reaume off Boeme,wher the commons ffor pouerte rose apon the nobles,and made all thair godis to be comune. %tern, hit isthe kyngis honour, and also is office, to make isreaume riche ; and it is dishonour whan he hath buta poue? e reaume, off wich men woll say pat hereigneth but vppon beggers. Yet it were mochgretter dishonour, yff he ffounde is reaume riche,and then made it pouere. And it were also gretlyayenest his conciens, pat awght to defende hem andher godis, yff he toke ffro hem thair godis with owtlafull cause; ffrom the infame wheroff God defendeowre kyng, and gyff hym grase to atigmente isreaume in riches, welth, and prosperite, to his perpetuelllaude . and worshippe. B ttnr, the reaume offFfraunce givith neuer ffrely off thair owne gode willany subsidie to thair prince, because pe commonsperoff be so pouere, as thai meynot give any thyngoff pair owne godis. And the kyng ther askithneuer subsidie off is nobles, ffor drede pat yff hecharged hem so, thai wolde confedre with Fe commons,and pcrauentur putt hym doune. But owrecommons be riche, and perfore thai give to thairkynge, at somme tymes quinsimes and dessimes,and ofte tymes oper grete subsidies, as he hath nedeffor pe gode and defence off his reaume. How gret

a subsidie was it, when the reaume gaff to thairkyng a quinsime and a desime quinqueniale, andthe ixth fflese off thair wolles, and also the ixth shefeoff per graynes, ffor the terme off v. yere. Thismyght thai not haue done, ~ f thai f hade ben impouershedbe thair kyng, as be the commons offFfraunce ; nor such a graunte hath be made by anyreaume off cristendome, off wich any cronicle makithmencion ; nor non oper mey or hath cause to do so.Ffor thai haue not so much ffredome in thair ownegodis, nor be entreted by so ffauerable lawes as webe, except a ffewe regions be ffore specified. Ztem,we se dayly, how men pat haue lost thair godis, andbe ffallen into pouevte, be comme anon robbers andtheves ; wich wolde not haue ben soche, yff pouertehade not brought hem perto. Howe many a theffthen were like to be in this lande, yff all the commonswere pouere. be grettest surete trewly, andalso the most honour pat mey come to the kynge is,pat is reaume be riche in euery estate. Ffor nothyngmey make is people to arise, but lakke off gode, orlakke off justice. But yet sertanly when thay lakkegode thai woll aryse, sayng that thai lakke justice.Neuerpe les yff thai be not pouere, thay will neueraryse, but yff per prince so leve justice, that he givehym selff all to tyranne.CHAPTERONLY LAK OFF HARTE AND COWARDISSE KEPEN THEFFRENCHEMEN FFRO RYSYNGE.POUERTE is not the cause, whi the commons offFfraunce rise not ayen thair souerayn lorde. Fforper were neuer people in pat lande more pouere, thenwere in owre tyme the commons off the contre offCaux, wich was tho almost diserte ffor lakke offtillers; as it now well apperith be the new husbondrypat is done per, namely in grobbyng and stokkyngoff treis, busses, and groves, growen whill we werether lordes off the contray. Ancl yet the saidcommons off Caux made a mevvelous gret rysinge,and toke owre townis, castelles, and ffortresses, andslowe owre capitans and soudiours, at soche a tymeas we hade but ffewe men off werre lyinge in patcontray. Wich provith pat it is not pouerte patkepith Ffrenchmen ffro rysinge, but it is cowardisseand lakke off hartes and corage, wich no Ffrenchmanhath like vnto a Englysh man. It hath ben offtentymes sene in Englande, pat iij. or iiij. theves fforpouerte haue sett apon vj or vij trewe men, androbbed hem all. But it hath not bene sene inFfraunce, pat vj. or vij. theves haue be hardy torobbe iij. or iiij. trewe men. Wherfore it is rightselde Fat Ffrenchmen be hanged ffor robbery, fforthai haue no hartes to do so terable an acte. Therbith therfore mo men hanged in Englande in a yereffor robbery and manslaughter, then per be hangedin Ffraunce ffor such maner of crime in vij yeres.

Ther is no man hanged in Scotlande in vij yere togedur ffor robbery. And yet thai ben often tymeshanged ffor larceny, and stelynge off good in theabsence off pe owner peroff. But per hartes seruehem not to take a manys gode, while he is present,and woll defende it ; wich maner off takynge is callidrobbery. But pe Englysh man is off anoper corage.Ffor yff he be pouere, and see another man havyngerychesse, wich rney be taken ffrom hym be myght, hewill not spare to do so, but yff pat pouere man beright trewe. Wherfore it is not pouerte, but it islakke off harte and cowardisse, that kepith theFfrenchmen ffro rysynge.CHAPTER XIV.HERE HIT IS SHEWID, WHI IT NEDITH PAT THER BE ARESUMPCION, AND A GRAUNT OFF GODE MADE TO THEKYNGE.THIS serche wich we nowe haue made, ffor tovnderstonde how harmefull it wolde be to the kynge,and to his reaume, yff his commons were pouere,hath be a digression ffrom the mater in wich welabour; pat is to say, ffor to vndirstonde howe thekyng rney best haue sufficient and perdurable livelodffor the sustentacion off his estate. Wherfore it behouyth pat we nowe resorte to the poynte in wich welafte, wich, as I remenbr, was this. We ffounde begrete causes, Fat it was nedefull, ]at all suche giftesas haue be made off the kynges livelod in~onsederatl~,as not deseruCt, or aboff the meretes of hym pathaue getun hym, were refourmed; so as thai wichhaue done any seruice, be not vnrewarded. Wichthynge, as me thynkith, rney not perfitly be done,with owt a general1 resumpcion, made be auctorite offparlement; and pat ther be gyven to the kynge bythe same auctorite, a grete subsidie, with wich ishyghnes, be pe advise off his counsell, rney rewardetho pat haue desevued rewardes, and awght not perforeto haue parte off his revenues, by wich is estatemoste nedis be mayntened; or awght not haue somoch off Fe revenues, as thai haue now, or not sogrete astate in the same. Considerynge pat all suchgyvinge awey OK the kynges livelod is harmefull toall is legemen, wich shall perby, as is be ffore shewid,be arted to a newe charge ffor pe sustenance off isestate. But yet, or any suche resumpcion be made,it shalbe gode pat a worshipful1 and a notable counsellbe stableshed, be the advise off wich all newgyftes and rewardes rney be modered and made, asyff no such gyftes or rewardes had be made be fforthis tyme. Provided alway, that no man be harmyd,be reason off such resumpcion, in the arrerages offsuch livelod as he shall pan haue, wich shall renneaftir pat resumpcion, and bi fore 1;e said new giftesand rewardes. And whan such a counsell is ffullycreate and estableshed, hit shalbe gode pat all supplicacionswich shalbe made to ke kynge ffor anygifte or rewarde, be sende to Fe same counsell, andper debatid and delibered ; ffirst whether pe suplianthaue deserued such rewarde as he askith; and yff hehaue deserued hit, yet it nedith /-at it be delibered,whether the kynge rney gyve such rewarde as he

askith off his revenues, savynge to hym selff sufficiantffor the sustenance off his estate. Ffor ellis suchgivinge were no vertu, but a spice of p~odigalite, andas ffor so moch it were delapidacion off his crourne.Wherfore no priuat person woll, be reason off liberalite,or off rewarde, so abate is owne livelod, as herney not kepe such estate as he did be ffore. Andtrewly it were bettir, pat a priuat person lakked isrewarde wich he hath well deserued, then that be hisrewarde Fe gode publike and all the lande werehurte. Wherfore to eschewe theis ij harmes, it rneythen be advised be the counsell, how such a personrney be rewarded with office, money, mariage,ffraunches, priuelage, or such oper thynge, off wichpe crowne hath grete riches. And verely yff thisordre be kept, the kynge shalnot be greved be importuniteof suytours, nor thai shall be importuniteor brocage optayne any vnresonable desires. 0 whatqwiete shall growe to Fe kyng by this ordre ; and inwhat reste shall than his people lyff, hauynge nocolour off grochynge with soche as shall be aboute isperson, as thai were woned to haue, ffor pe gyvyngeawey off his londe, and also ffor the myscounsellyngeoff hym in many opegp cases ; nor off murmor ageynesthe kynges person, fior ]ie mysgouernance off hisreaume ! Ffor in this counsell rney be determynydeuery case off deficulte, or the kyng do any thyngperin. And the wise man saith, bbi muIta consilia, ibisaIus. And trewly such a contenuall counsell rneywe1 be callid, muha consiIia, ffor it is ofte, and euereday counsellith.CHAPTER xv.HOW THE KYNGES COUNSELL hlEY BE CHOSEN ANDESTABLESHED.THE kyngis counsell was wonned to be chosen offgrete princes, and off the gretteste lordes off pelande, both spirituelles and temporellis, and alsooff oper men that were in grete auctorite and offices.Wich lordes and officers had nere hande'also monymaters off thair owne to be treded in the counsell,as hade pe kynge. Wherthrough, when thai cometogedre, thai were so occupied with thair ownematers, and with the maters off thair kynne, seruantes,and tenantes, pat thai entendet but litle, andoper while no thynge, to Fe kynges maters. Andalso per were but ffewe maters off the kynges, butyff pe same maters toucheden also pe said counsellers,thair cosyns, per seruantes, tenantes, or suchoper as thai owed ffauor vnto. And what lowerman was per sytinge in pat counsell, pat durste sayayen the openyon off any off the grete lordis ? Andwhi myght not then men make be meanes off corrupcionsomme off the seruantes and counsellers off.somme off the lordes to moue the lordes to parciallite,and to make hem also ffauorable and parcialas were the same sevuantes, or the parties pat somoved hem ? Then couude no mater treted in thecounsell be kept prive. Ffor the lordes oftentymestolde ther owne counsellours and seruantes, thatbade suyd to hem ffor tho maters, how thai hadsped in ham, and who was ayen ham. How rneyL

e kyng be counsellyd to restrayne gyvinge a weyoff his londe, off gyvinge ~ f offices, f corodeis, orpencions off abbeyis, by suche grete lordes to opermenys seruantes, sithyn thay most desire such giftesffor thaim selff, and thair seruantes ? Wich thyngesconsidered, and also mony oper wech shall be shewidhereaftir, hit is thought gode, that be kynge hada counsell chosen and estableshed in the fourmethat ffolowith, or in some oper ffourme like perto.Ffirst, pat ther were chosen xij spirituell men, andxij tempovell men, off ke wysest and best disposedmen Przt can be ffounde in all the parties off thislande; and that thai be sworne to counsell thekynge aftir a ffourme to be devysed ffor pev owthe.And in especiall, pat thai shall take no ffee, norclothynge, nor no rewardes off any man, except onlyoff pe kynge; like as pe Justices off pe kyngesbenche, and off pe Common place be sworne, whenthai take ther offices. And pat thes xxiiij. be alwaycounsellers, but yff per be any defaute ffounde inhem, or pat hit lyst the kynge, be the advise off Femore parte off hem, chaunge any off hem. Andpat euery yere be chosen be pe kynge iiij. lordesspivituell, and iiij lordes tempovall, to be ffor patyere off pe same counsell, in like ffourme as pe saidxxiiijti shall be. And that thai all haue an hed, ora cheeff to rule pe counsell, on off pe said xxiiijti,and chosen be the kynge, havynge is office at thekynges pleasur ; wich mey thanne be callid, Qapitdisconstlrariuti. It shall not be necessarie, pat the xijspi~ifuell me72 off this covnsell, haue so gret wagesas the xij temporal1 men; be cause thai shull notnede to kepe an houshold in thair contray, whilethai ben absent, as the tenlpovell men moste nede~Btbe bobetnance of $ngIanD,doo, ffor thair wyffes and childeren. By wich consideracionthe spirituell juges in the courte off purlimentoff Parys, taken but cc. ffrankes by pe yere,where as be temporell juges peroff taken by the yereccc. ffranltes. The said ~iij.~e lordes also, wich bereason off per baronyes and estates bith to pe kyng,consiJiari niiti, and pe~fore awghton to counsell hym atall tymes when he woll, nede not to haue gretwages ffor thair attendance to is covnsell, wich shalllast but ffor a yere. Ffor temporell men, wich bereason off per enheritaunce and livelod bit11 madeshyreffes ffor a yere, taken off be kynge litle, andall most nothyng ffor thair seruice off pat yere.And thoughe pat wages off the said xxiiij.t' l counsellersseme a newe and a grete charge to be kynge,yet when hit is considered, how gret wages the gretelordes and other men, wych were off the kyngescounsell in tymes passede, toke ffor thair attendancetherto, wich maner off counsell was nothynge sobehouefull to. the kyng and to his reaume as thiswill be, wich wages shall than forthwarde cesse ; pewages off Fe xxiiij.ti counsellours shall apere no gretcharge to the kynge. 'And I can suppose, pat somekynges be ffor this tyme, haue gyven to some onman pat hat11 serued hym;also moche livelod yerely,as the.said wages wyll com to. And if the samewagis be thought to grete charge vnto Fe kyng, peforsaid counsellours mowe be in lesse nowmbre, asto be xvj counsellours off privatis personis, with ijlorder spivifuell, and ij lordes tempovell; so as thenthai be in all but xx.ti persones. Thies counsellorsmowe co?ztenually, at soche owres as shal be asseignedto thaym, conlnfze and delibre vppon themateris of defeculte that ffallen to the kynge; andL 2I47

then vppon pe materes off pe pollycye off pe reaume;as how pe goyng owt off pe money may be restrayned,how bullyon rney be brought in to pelande, how also plate, juelles, and mony late borneowt, rney be geytun ageyn ; off wich right wyse menmowe sone fynde the meanes. And also how peprises off marchaundise growen in this lande rneybe holde vp and encressed, and the prises off merchandysesbrowght in to this lande abatid. Howowre nauy rney be mayntened and augmented, andvppon suche oher poyntes off police, to the grettestprofyte and encresse, pat euer come to this lande.How also pe lawes rney be amendet in suche thyngesas thay neden reformacion in ; wher through pe parlementesshall mowe do more g~de in a moneth tope mendynge off the lawe, then thai shall mowe doin a yere, yff pe amendynge peroff be not debatyd,and be such counsell ryped to thair handes. perrney be off this covnsell, when thai liste come perto,or pat thai be desired be pe said counsellours, pegrete officers off pe lande, as Chaunceler, tresourer,and prive see11 ; off wich pe chaunceler, when he ispresent, rney be presydent, and haue pe suppremerule off all pe counsell. Also the Juges, the Baronesoff pe exchequier, pe clerke off the rolles, and suchelordes as he forsaid counsellours woll desire to bewith thaym for materes off gret deficulte, rney be offthis counsell when thai be so desyred, and ellis not.All oper materes wich shall conserne this counsell, aswhen a Counsellour dyeth, how a new counsellourshall be chosen, how mony owres off the day thiscounsell shall sytt, when thai shall haue any vacasion,how longe any off hem rney be absent, andhow he shall haue his leue, with all oper artyclesnecessarye ffor the demeynynge and rule off thiscounsell, mowe be conseyued be layser, and putt ina boke, and that boke kept in this counsell as aregistir or a ordinarye, howe thai shall doo in euerythynge.CHAPTER XVI.HOW THE ROMAYNES PROSPERED WHILES THAI HADEA GRETE COUNSELL.THE Romaynes, while thair counsell callid pesenate was gret, gate, through pe wysdome off thatcounsell, the lordshipfe off gret partye of the world.And aftirward Julyus, thair ffirst emperowre, counselledby pe same senate, gate the monarchie nerhandeoff all pe world. Wherthrough Octavian, persecounde emperour, commounded all pe world to bediscribed as subget vnto hym. But aftir this, when)ill dysposed emperours, as Nero, Domician, andoper had slayn grete parte off Fe senatours, anddyspiced the counsell off pe senate, the estate off beRomans and off per empsrours beganne to falldoune, and hath ffallen alwey sythyn, in to suchedecay, pat nowe the lordeshippes off pe efnperour bithnot so gret, as be Fe lordeshippes off some kynge,wich, while pe senate was hole, was subget to teempevour. Be wich ensample it is thought, pat yffthe kyng haue such a Counsel1 as is beffore specified,his lande shall not only be ryche and welthy, as were

pe Romans, but also is hyghnes shalbe myghty, andoff poiar tp subdue his ennemyes, and all oper thathe shall liste to reygne uppon. Off such ensamplesmony of the bolces off cronycles be full; and inespecial1 pe cronycles off pe Lacidemonies, and off FeAuthenences, wich, whill thai prospered, were bestcounselled, and most dyd aftir counsell off any peopleoff pe world, excepte the Romayns. But when thailafte such counsell, thai ffell into nonpoiar andpouerte; as off the Cite off Athenes it rney wellapere, be that it is nowe but a poure vilage, and sometyme was the moste worshipful1 Cyte off Grece.CHAPTER XVII.HERE FOLOIVETIIE ADUERTYSMENTES FOR THE GEUYNGOF TIIE KYNGES OFFVCES.YFF it woll lyke Fe kyng to gyff non office, in tothe tyme p t his entente therin be comened with hiscounsell, and thair opiniyon by his hyghnes vnderstondein the same, he shall mowe so rewarde hisseruantes with offices, as ther shall be lityll nede togyff hem moch off his livelod, and his offices shallthen be geuen to soche as shall only serue hym self.Wher through he shall haue than a greter myght,and a garde off his officers. when he liste to callthayrn, than he hath nowe off his oper ffeed menvndre the astate off lordes. Ffor the myght off kelande, aftir the myght off be gretc lordes Peroff,Stondith most in be kynges officers. Ffor thai mowebest rule pe contreis wheras per offices ben, wich isin euery partie off pe lande. A pouere baylyff meydo more in his bayille, then any man off his degredvvellynge with in his office. Some fforester off pekynges, that hatL4non oper livelod, rney brynge moolnen to pe ffelde well areyed, and namely ffor shotynge,then rney some knyght or Squyer off ryghtgret lpuelod, dwellynge be hym, and hauynge nonoffyce. What than rney gretter officers do, stewardesoff gret lordeshippes, reseyvors, constables off Castels,maystir fforesters, and such oper officers ; be sydisthe hygher offycers, as Justices off fforestes, Justicesand Chambirla~ns off Contreis, be warden off Feportes, and such oper ? Ffor sothe it is not lyghtlyest~mable, what myght pe kynge may haue off isofficers, yff euery off hem hade but on office, andserued non oper man but @ kynge. Nor hit is easeto be estemed, howe iony men rney be rewardedwith offices, and how gretly, yff thai be discretlygeuen. The kynge givyth mo than id' offices, besydes tho pat my lorde Fe prince geuyth, off wich Ireken pe officers, as the kynges officers. Off thesofficers some rney dispende by pe yere, by reason offis office, cc. fi., some g c.fi., some a c. marc, somexl. fi., some l. marc, and so downwarde. So as kelest off hem, Pough he be but a parker, takynge butijd on a dey, yet he hath be pe yere iij. -ki: xd, be sydeshis dwellynge in Fe logge, his cowe ffor is mylke, andsuch oper thynge goynge abowte hym, and the ffeesoff is office, so as pat office is to hym also profitableas wolde be a c.s. off ffee or rente, wich is a feyrelyuynge ffor a yomaTz. How mony men then offeuery estate, and off euery degre, and how gretly,

mey the kynge rewarde with offices, withowt gyuyngeawey off his livelod. Ffor soth the grettest lordeslivelod in Englande mey not suffice to rewarde somany men, though he wolde departe hit euery dellamonges is seruantes ; nor ij. the gretteste lordes offEnglond mey make so gret a myghte as pe kyngemey haue only off his officers, yff thai were hollicheand only is seruantes, and euery off hem had but onoffice. To this sane suche lordes and oper men, suchas axen off ] e kyng offices ffor thair seruantes, thatthai and all thair seruantes shall alwey serue be kynge,and is officers shul do hym the bettir seruyce, byreason thei bith in per seruice ; ffor thai woll helpenhym to do so, and suffre non in thair companye, butsuche as woll do so. Wher to may be said, that it istrewe thai shall do the kyng seruice while thai be inthair companie ; but so shulde thai haue done, thoughthe kynge had neuer made thaym his officers. Wherfore ke kynge skal not be the bettir served, pat hehath yeuen his offices to thair seruantes, but raperworse. Ffor owre lorde said, aemo potest buobusBominb ~ieruire. And so pe kynge shall lese the offices,as ffor any syngular service he shall haue ffor hem,or pat the same officers shulde thynke them selff byhold vnto the kynge ffor per offices, wich is hyghneshath yeuen them at pe contemplacion off per maisters,and ffor no reward off any seruice pat thai haue done,or shul doo vnto hym selff. Be consideracion wheroffper olde maistirs shall be bettir serued be thaymthan thei were be fore ; and so be more myghty inthair contraes to do what them liste ; and the kyngein lasse myght, and haue the ffewer officers torepresse hem when thai do a mysse. And this hathcaus~d mony men to be suche braggers and suytoursto Fe kyng, ffor to haue his offices in per contraes tothaym selff, and to per men, pat almost no man insume contray durste take an office off pe kyng, buthe ffirst had be good will off pe said bragers andengrossers of offices. Ffor yff he dyd not so, heshuld not aftir pat tyme haue pease in his contray;wheroff hath comyn and growen mony gret trowbelsand debates in dyuerse contraes off Englond. Wichmateres thrugly considered, it semyth verely good,pat no man haue any office of be kynges yefte, buthe be ffirst sworne that he is seruant to non operman, or woll serue any oper man, or take is clothyngeor ffee while he seruyth pe kyng. And pat no manhaue mo offices then on, except pat the kyngesbretheryn mowe haue ij offices ; and suche men asserue Fe kyng abouute his person, or in his counsell,mowe haue in per contrays a parkershipje ffor perdisporte when thay come whom, or such an operoffice, as thai mey wele kepe by per deputes.CHAPTER XVIII.PUERTYSMENT HOWE CORODIES AND PENCIONS MEYBEST BE YEVEN.AND yff hit woll lyke the kynge to yeve nocorodie nor pencion, wich he hath be ryght off hiscorowne, off euery abbey priory, and oper howsesfounded vpon hospitalite be any off his progenitours,in to Fe tyme that his entente perin be co-

muned and del~bered with his fforsaid counsell, andpat his hyghnes haue vnderstond per openyon in pesame; than shall men off his howsold be rewardedwith corodyes, and haue honeste sustenance in perolde dayis when thai rney no longer serue; and peclarkes off is chapell pat haue wyfes, or be notavaunsed, be rewarded with pencions with owt greteabatynge off pe kynges revenues, ffor per rewardesor sustenance. Ffor such corodes and pencionswere ffirst geven to pe kyng ffor the same entent.But nowe off late tyme, oper men then pe kyngesservauntes haue askyd )em, and be importune sutehaue geyten gret parte off thaym, to pe kynges gretharme and hurt off his said seruantes; wich be pecause peroff lyuen in pe gretter penurie, and in nonsuyrte off per sustenance in tyme comyng, when thaishall not mowe do pe kyng seruice.CHAPTER XIX.HOWE GRET GODE WOLL GROWE OFF THE FFERMEENDOU'YNGE OFF PE CROWNE.AND when pe kyng, be pe meanes aforsaid oroper wyse, hath gotyn ayen his lyuelod, yff then itwolde lyke is most noble grace to establysh, and aswho sayth, amortyse pe same lyuelod to is crowne,so as it rney neuer he alyened pevfro, withowt peassent off his par-lement, wych than wold be as anewe ffundacion of is crowne, he shall be perby thegrettest ffounder off be world. Ffor per as operkynges haue ffounded byshopriches, abbeys, andoper hotvses off relegyon, pe kyng shall pan haueffounded an h011 reaume, and endowed it withgrettegy possescions, and better then euer was anyreaume in cristendome. This nlaner off ffundacionrney not be ayenste pe kynges prerogatyff, or hisliberte, no more than is pe ffundacion off an abbey,ffro wich he rney take no parte off pe possescionswich he hath onis geve hym, with owt pe assent offper covent. But this maner off endowment off hiscrowne shalbe to pe kyng a gretter prerogatyff, inpat he hat11 then enriched is crowne with such richesand possescions, as neuer kyng shall mowe takefrom it with owt pe assent off is h011 reaume. Northis rney be to pe hurte off pe prerogatyff or poweroff is successours ; ffor, as it is shewid be fore, it isno prerogatyff or power to mowe lese any good, orto mowe wast, or put it awey. Ffor all such thyngescome off impotencie, as doyth power to be syke orwex olde. And trewly, yff pe kyng do thus, heshall do Perby dayly more almes, pan shall be do beall the ffundacions pat euer were made in Englond.Ffor euery man off pe lande shal by this ffundacioneuery day be the meryer, pe surer, ffare pe better inis body and all his godis, as euery wyse man rneywell conseyue. The ffundacion of abbeys, of hospitals,and suche other houses, is nothyng in comparisounherof. For this shalbe a collage, in whicheshul syng and pray for euermore a1 the men ofIngland spig4tuel and temporel. And ther songshalbe suche among other antemes: I blissed beoure lord God, for that he hath sent kyng Edwardthe iiij to reigne vpon vs. He hath don more for

156 Sir 3robn flortescue onvs, than euer dide kyng of Inglond, or myght havedone before hym. The harmes that hath fallen ingetyng of his Realme, beth now bi hym turnedinto our altheyr goode and profite. We shul nowemowe enjoye oure owne goode, and live vndir justice,which we have not don of longt~me, Godknowith. Wherfor of his almesse it is that weehave a1 that is in oure wone.be kept, men wil nat be so hasty to aske rewardis,but if thei be of right goode merites; and manymen wil than be of better gouernaunce, for thekynges counseil shuld deme hem worthy to be rewarded.And they that opteyne nat that theydesire shal have thanne litel coloure of grucche,considryng that they lak it bi the discrecioun of pekynges counseil. And the kyng shal have herbygrete rest, and be wele defended ageyn suche importunesuters. And yit he may leve this ordrewhan that hym list.CHAPTER XX.AUERTISEMENT FOR MAKYNG OF PATENTIS OF GIFTIS.EXPLICIT.IT is nat ment bi the premisses, but that thekyng without the assent of his parlement shal gyveto suche as don hym singuler service, land for termeof theyr lives. For therby his corowne may nat bedisherited ; for that land wil sone come ageyn. Butthan it were goode that the same land be no moregyven; for ellis importune suters wil gape vponsuche reuersiouns, and oftentymes asken hem orthey befall. And whan they bien fal, the kyngshal have no rest with suche suters, vnto the tymehis highnesse have gyven ageyn a1 suche lond as hehath oonys gevyn. Bi contynuaunce perof, that landshal nat serve hym but for giftes, as don offices,corodies, and pensiouns. And triewly it were goodethat of a1 the kynges giftes his patentis maden men-cioun that they were passed, be nuisamonto consilii sui;and namely for a yeere or ij. Ffor if such an ordre

CRITICAL NOTES.CHAPTER I.P. 109. 1. 10. wol] lust C.1. I 7. openly] playnly Y.1. 18. boke] om. L.1. 20. L inserts the said before Synf. For Synf, L has Snc/;i.e. the abbreviation for the Latin Sancfus, and so passim.1. 24. we call were callid L.hade no kynge &C.] hade a kyng, a man that &c. D2.P. 110. 11. 2-4. and yet. . . roialy] om. D', Lb, H2 (homoioteleuton).1. 6. hevene above C, Y.I. 7. folie desire C, Y, D', Lb, H2, De (man. pri,)1. 10. thynges] kynges L.1. I I. land and oper goodis C.1. I 2. do to] to do L.1. 15. ruled onlye by God D', Lb, D'. by God oonly- C, Y,1. 25. into] to L.1. 27. bien even and egall C, Y.CHAPTER 11.p. 111. 11. 2-3. ~itle] The title is from Y, with which C seemsto agree but is mutilated. L has no break here ; D', Lb, H2 makea division but have no new title.1. I I. he] This L.1. 13. this] om. L.1. I 8. though] thought L.P. 112. l. I. Nivus L.1. 9. lawes seyn] lawe seythe C, Y.1. I 8. they] om. L.1. 26. ycos, etc.] ycos, quod est scientia C, Y.1. 27 . regimen] a regimine L.1. 28. re~gnigh L.1. 34. in ~elici] infelici L.

P. 113. 1. I I. L inserts of before be ganne.1. I 2. might and power C, Y.CHAPTER 111.The title is from C. In L alone is there no new title.P. 114. 1. 6. nobles of his lande L.1. I I. empouerisched, kepte under and, as who saithe destroyedY, H', which also add in the margin ' shewing of the grete poverteand misere that ye comunes of Fraunce lyveth inne.'1. 16. of bestis slayn &C.] This is the reading of all the MSS.except L, which reads ' bestis slayn. For the nobles . . . lande etesuch catalle as thai brede. And the commons uTeren &C.' Butapart from the consensus of the MSS. the reading in the text isconfirmed by the parallel passage in the B e Laudibus, c. 35.1. 2 I. theis] knees D'.1. 23. were] was C, Y, Lb, D'.1. 27. arted] compelled D'.1. 28. ground] erthe L.1. 3 I. wepens L.1. 34. the] om. L.P. 115. 1. I 2. and therfore] om. L.1. 16. well] om. L.1. 22. Bretayn tho called] om. L. and thai grauntid L.1. 29. in welthe L man. rec., not seeing that weWe is anadjective.1. 30. to the] to thair L.CHAPTER IV.P. 116. 1. 8. whiche Fe] added in a later hand in L.1. 2 7. a greter] grete L.P. 117. 1. 5. nowe] om. MSS. except L.1. I I. thourgh L.1. I 3. reigned] reignith L.1. 18. but] om. L.1. 33. nat.] added above the line L.CHAPTER V.P. 118. 1. I 2. and] om. L.1. 13. creaunces L, and so in 1. 18.Critical noted,abapa, ii-bi,1. 16. be] om. L.1. 24. parte] peny C, Y.P. 119. 1. 3. his unsuyrte] so L man, sec. ; his olvne suyrteL. man. pri., C, H: Lb; his owne unsuretie Y; leste to his o~vnsewertie D2.1. I I. man] men L.1. 20. shalbe necessite bi arted L.1. 21. exquysite] requysite L, Cb.1. 22. defaute] a faute C, Y.1. 26. shuld be] ought to be C, Y, D', Lb, H2.1. 29. impossible L.1. 30. specife L.1. 31. to a] off a L.CHAPTER VI.P. 120. 1. 7. sufficiantz C, sufficiauntes Lb.1. 13. cases] causes L, courses Cb.1. 15. chaunce] chaunge L.1. 20. wich] with L.1. 21. in no wise may be put C, Y, D', Lb; must be put H2.P. 121. 1. 2. may] om. L. Here Y and H' add in themargin ' Ye diversite of ye kinges power and noon-power.'1. 4. haue] om. L.1. 6. or] ro L.1. I I. more] om. L.1. 30. garderobe C, Y, D', Lb, H: Da.1. 33. haue] om. L.P. 122. l. 10. the] so L, D', Lb; thoo Y ; theym C; thos D'.1. I 4. courtes, his counceil, his garde, and other seruauntes D ,R, Cb.1. 18. of] vpon L.11. 20-1. kepyng of the] om. L.1. 22. the] om. L.1. 27. mey not certenlye D', D2, Lb, HZ.1. 32. is] as L.P. 123. 1. 5. dhalbe alway L.1. 14. suffice] suffre C, Y.1. 15. mowe] om. D', Lb, H2.1. 16. Now, as I suppose] om. L (homoioteleuton).M

Bfbe bobernance of QEnfiian'tr,CHAPTER VII.1. 26. shall fall L.P. 124. 1. 6. pope] bysshope of Rome D'. Cb omits thewhole phrase.1. 8. to] om. L.1. 15. shorte demure] so L, C, D', cf. Epit. 'pro longitudineitineris, aut spatio commorationis ;' shorte abyding and devoure Y ;abode and deuoire D2 ; demeanour H2.1. 19. communalties] counceiles D', R, Cb.l. 25. The whole of this 'i7f~m' is omitted in R.P. 125. 1. 8. parte perof] partie perof L; parte of his lordshippesC, D', Lb, HQ; lordship Da.1. 15. serpes] so L, Lb, D' ; serpis C, Y; serples D2, HP; whileCb cuts the knot by readingpearles.11. 16-1 7. conuenyent] om. L. roiall] roially L.1. 21. trappers] The previous editors without any MS. authorityread traps.1. 26. subgeccion] abiection D', Lb.CHAPTER VIII.P. 126. 1. 18. not] om. L.11. 21-22. ouer . . . remaynynge] This sentence is suppliedfrom C; it is omitted in L, owlng to the recurrence of the word' remain!1. 25. mey be] me be L man. pri. ; cor. may be.1. 26. wher of L.P. 127. 1. g. in] om. L.11. 10 ff. And therfore &C.] From this point to the end of thechapter is omitted in Cb, which simply adds : ' Therefore theRealme )IS bounden to sustaine the Klnge rulinge by soe favourableLawes and Princely Lenitye.'11. 18-20. Wherfore . . . bonis] This sentence is omitted ~ythe previous editors, though it is in every MS.CHAP? dR IX.1. 26. Here he shewith] h. Y, R. Here be shewed C, D',. Lb, HB; Hereafter be D2.Critical note#+ QCbapri, bii-r, 163P. 128. 1. I. certayne] certaynte C, Y, D2.1. 3. thynk] thyng L.1. 4. no lordis] no ijo lordes D'; and so in 1. 8 infra.1. 13. ffor his] ffor pe L.1. 15. wold] wol L.1. 18. an] om. L.1. 34. any] euery C, Y, D', Lb, H2; many subgettes desyren D'.P. 120. l. 4. is] as L.1. 15. Pepyne] Pepeny L.1. 21. wich ij (two) was . . . subgettes L.1. 30. late] om. D2.1. 3 1. given Y ; gevyn D'.P. 130. 1. 2. Herry the thridde C; the iij& L.1. 6. whoa] wich L.1. 20. The previous editors read, without any MS. authority,'Such was the case of a great Duke.'l. 28. for] fo L.CHAPTER X.P. 131. 1. 4. ouer] oper L., 1. 14. tho] om. L, Y, Lb.1. 27. was nor is D2, R. Cb.P. 132. 1. I. Here Y and H' add in the margin, 'Ye excessifsubsidies in Fraunce taken bi the King.'1. 12. mete] but L.1. 2 I. biynge] bryngynge L.1. 25. entreth L.1. 28. litil wol] no wull D', R, Cb; nihil lanae Epit.1. 30. ' Thexcessif impositions used by the Duc of Burgoignein his lordshippes ' Y and (practically) H', margin ; ' esize ' Cb,margin.P. 133. 1. 6. were] om. L.1. 7. therin] the reaume L.1 19. departyng] om. L.1. 21. ouer sore] enforce L.1. 24. fee] om. L, Lb.1. 26. kepe] om. L.1. 3 1. Pail per L.P. 134. 1. 7. no] mony L.1. I 5. also] om. L.M 2

1. I 8. mo] no L.1. 19. a] om. L.1. 20. infame] fame L.CHAPTER XI.P. 135. 11. 2-3. Title] Instead of this heading Y and H'have, 'The Subsidie that the Souldane takith of his Subgiettes.'Cb has the same title; but it is crossed out and the usual-onesubstituted.1. I 7. patriarkes L.1. 18. that is to saying Lb.P. 136. 1. I. ben done] biden Y.1. 5. thought] tough L.1. 8. be sate] besitte C.1. 14. nygh] myghty L.1. 15. his] om. L.1. 16. 'Ye Kyngs rewardis yt he geveth, were bettyr in redemoney than in landis, for both parties' Y, H1, margin.1. 25. on money and in hande C, Y.1. 34. so gret] so goten C.P. 137. 1. 4. that] om. L.1. 7. to] om. L.1. 9. commons] Here and in the next three chapters L has'coles,' the abbreviation for the Latin con~muniiafes.CHAPTER XII.1. 14. POUERE] kepte in p~vertie Y, Cb. The titles of this and ofthe next chapter are crossed out in D2; they are wanting in R,and are supplied in Cb from a MS. of the type of Y.1. 23. this it is to say that L.1. 24. soth] om. L.1. 27. no] not L.P. 138. 1. 7. owre] oper L, D', Lb, D'.1. g. owre] om. L.1. zo. made insurrexpon D'.1. 22. thai] om. L.1. 23. fegth L.L 2 7. harnse] armes D', Lb, H'.Critical flotefl,QCbapa. r-r~,1. 34. through] trough L.manasheyng] manace C, Y, D', Lb, Ha; manasys or W.P. 139. 1. 2. ~ouerte] pouere men L.1. 3. man hath] men haue L.1. 4. for] om. L.1. 20. imfame] L.1. 27. ther] than L.1. 29. confedre] so Y, D', D2; considre L, Lb, C, Ha.1. 34. ffor pe gode] so Lb, H2, and (practically) D'; ffor jxrgode L; of theyr goode for the defence C, Y, D8.P. 140. 1. 3. shefe] fflese L.1. 14. and] om. L.CHAPTER XIII.P. 141. 1. 9. tilliers C, Y.1. 1 5. slowe] solve L.1. 29. ffor] off L.P. 142. 1. 5. is] as L.1. I I, not] om. L.l. I 2. cowardisse] cowardnes Ha.P. 144. 1. 10. pulike L.1. I g. in] om. L.I. 24. many] any L.1. 26. determyd L.1. 30 is] om. D', Lb, H2, D'.1. 3 I. day] om. L.CHAPTER XIV.CHAPTER XV.P. 145. 11. 2-3. Title] in estableshed L. Y and H', ~\hichdivide this chapter into two (v. inf.), give as the heading of theformer part : ' Shewing in maner the guiding of the Iiinges counselloursof late yeres.' Cb has both titles, but malies the titlegiven by Y, H1 into the last sentence of the preceding chapter.l. g. treded] entreated Y.1. I 2. thair] om. L.1. I 8. owed] ought C.l. 19, per] tho C, Y, Lb, D', H2; than D2.

1. 24. parcial] parcialite L (from above).1. 25. or the] L omits the.1. 30. and] om. L.P. 146. 1. 2. ofEces] office L.1, 7. hit ie thought] Here, in the middle of a sentence, Y andH' begin a new chapter with the heading; 'How the kingescounsaill may be electe and establisshed, for wele of the king andhis reaume.' Cb inserts this title in the margin a little lower down..H2 begins a new sentence with ' Hit is thought.'1. 10. chosen] om. L.1. I 2. this] so L ; the rest, the.1. 15. And] om. L.1. 17. Justice L.1. I 8. ~ommon] c6e L (v. S.)1. 24. pat] pe L.1. 30. consiliarius] consilarius L; cancellarius D', Lb; JustitiariusR.1. 33. an] om. L.P. 147. 11. 1-2. coneideracion] Here ends Ha. It is not arase of mutilation, for more than a third of the page is left blank.1. 2. the courte] L omits the.1. 14. pat] the C.1. 19. therto] wherto L.l. 2 I. forthwarde] forthwith D2.11. 25-6. v11 . . . wagis] om. L (homoioteleuton). The lacunais supplied from C.1. 29. be] om. L. with] wech L.1. 34. dececulte L.P. 148. 11. 4-5. late borne owt] om. C, Y.1. 34. haue] am. L.P. 149. 1. I. ffor] ffro L.1. 4. ordinarye] oidynal C, Y, D2.1. 14. folowethe] folwen C ; folowen Y, Dq.1. 16. woll] so L; the other MSS. wold1. rg. mowe] more L, Lb, D' ; om. D'.1. 23. greter] gret L.P. 151. 1. 2. ie] om. L.1. 4. bayille] bailywik C, Y, D'; balyeshepe D'.1. 10. than mey] mey than L.1. I 2. maystir off L.1. 15. and] om. L.1. 16. estimably L.1. 2 7. a] om. L.1. 30. hym] om. L.1. 33. lyuynge] thynge L.P. 152. 1. I 2. shul] shuld L.1. 20. officers L.1. 30. before] aforn C.1. 34. causyd] casyd L.P. 153. 1. I. haue] om. L.1. I I. he is] L omits he.1. I 7. contray L.CHAPTER XVIII.1. 27. tyme] om. L.P. 154. 1. 2. vnderstondyng L.1. I 2. importunyte L.1. 14. hurt and harme L.1. 17. Here at the end of Chap. xviii end D' and Lb. Both put' Ffinis ' at the end, so that there is no question of mutilation.CHAPTER XIX.CHAPTER XVI.1. I 2. L inserts wherthrotgh before and.CHAPTER XVII.P. 150. 11. 14-15. ~itle] This heading is from D'.no division of chapters here. In C the title is mutilated.L makes1. 23. as] om. L.P. 155. 1. 10. with owt] with L.1. 27. ffundacion] Here, in the middle of a sentence, and at thebottom of a page, ends hlS. Laud. It is clear therefore that thelast leaf of the tract has been torn off. See Introduction, Part 111,p. 88, above. The remainder of the text is taken from the CottonMS,

11. 33-34. Edwaril the iiij] So C, D2, Cb, R; Y and H' have' Henry the cjthe.' See Introduction, Part 111, pp. 94-5, above.P. 156. 11. 4-5. none om. C. mowe om. D2.1. 8. in oure wone] So C ; the other MSS. read oure owrze. Afterthis D2, Cb, and R add: 'And therfore God contenewe his graceand persone in long lyffe increse, in honour and magnificence,to his hartes desyer, and welth of this his realme.'1. I I. ment] om. C.P. 167. 1. I I. list] D2, Cb, R add: 'And God save theKyng.'GENERAL NOTES.CHAPTER I.Title.] In MS. L. the first three chapters of this work form Titleoitheonly a single chapter with the above title. Though L. is the MS, onwhich I have based my text, I have not thought it worth while todisturb the ordinary arrangement and numbering of the chapters.But for reasons stated in the Introduction, Part 111. (above, p.86), I have been unable to follow the first editor in extending thistitle to the whole work. These first three chapters are little morethan a translaticn and recasting of portions of the author's earlierLatin treatise De Laudibus Legum Anglia; cc. I, 2 here=cc. 9-1 3there ; c. 3 here=cc. 35, 36 there.Ther bith ij kyndes off kyngdomes, etc.] Fortescue is here Monarchy,speaking of the two kinds of monarchy, absolute and limited ; or, ~ ~~lL1teas he calls them, dominiurn regale and dominiurn politicurn ef regale. limited.Elsewhere (N. L. N. i. c. 16 ; Works, p. 77), speaking of the differentforms of government, ' diversa dominandi genera,' he divides theminto domi7ziurn regale, do?~ziniurn politt'cunz, and dominlinz polilicumet regale. In the ' Declaration upon certayn Wrytinges ' (Works,p. 533) Fortescue divides 'lordshippes' into three classes, domhiumregale, donziniurn politicurn, and donzinzim dispoticunz ; where bydom2izium rqale he probably means a limited, and by donziniumdispoficum an absolute monarchy.Of the various attributes of sovereignty Fortescue selects two as TWO specialattrlspeciallycharacteristic of it : viz. legislative and taxative power. butes ofWhere these powers are exclusively in the hands of the monarch, sovereignthemonarchy is an absolute one; where they are shared by the ~ ~ ~subject, the monarchy is a limited one. It would appear from taxation.Fortescue's language th?t he regards the taxative as derived fromthe legislative power. This view may have been suggested to himby the practice of the English Constitution, in which the machinery

for granting taxes was the same as that for making laws. But thatthere is in reality no necessary connexion between them is shown bythe fact that they may be, and as a matter of history have been, inthe hands of different bodies. In England, e.g., the Commonshad established their right to be consulted on questions of taxation,some time before they won a similar position in regard tolegislation.Question It is noteworthy that Fortescue never raises the question whothefranchise are the persons entitled to share in these powers of legislation andnot raised taxation ; in other words, what is the qualification for full citizencue.ship. It cannot be said that this question lay wholly outside thesphere of his enquiries. It is substantially the question betweenaristocracy and democracy, which had great interest for Aristotleand his medizeval followers; while in the history of the EnglishConstitution it appears as the question of the franchise. Ferhapshe regarded the question as sufficiently settled by the practice ofthe English Constitution. But that practice was itself the subject oflegislative interference during the Lancastrian period (vid. S. C. H.iii. 256-9). The Statute of 1430 (8 Hen. VI. c. v), which limited thecounty franchise to the forty-shilling freeholder, is one of the mostimportant land-marks in the history of representative government inEngland during the Middle Ages. Dr. Stubbs indeed (U. S. p. 258)thinks that the Act can have had little practical effect, because thesame class of persons were returned to Parliament after the passingof the Act as had been returned previously. But this does notprove that the Act may not represent a successful attempt on thepart of the ruling classes to maintain a hold upon the representationof the country, which they felt that they were in danger oflosing (of. Rogers, Work and Wages, p. 369).~o~ititic It shows how thoroughly Fortescue's doctrine as to the limitedcharacterof English or politic' character of English royalty had penetrated theroyalty. national consciousness, that we find it turning up in the most unexpectedquarters. Thus Morley Bishop of Worcester, in his sermonpreached at the coronation of Charles 11, says : 'A PoliticalMonarch governs his Subjects, as a Father doth his Children, byequal and just laws, made by their own consent to them. DespotzcadGovernment is that of the Turks, and Jfuscovite; but Political is,and ought to be the Government of all Christian Kings; Ian~ sureif is of ours ' (Waterhous, p. 20).This diuersite is we1 taught bi Seynt Thomas in hisboke &C.] St. Thomas Aquinas, the greatest theologian of the s.~h~masRoman Church, was born at Aquino about I z 25, and died in I 2 74, ~~~~o~on his way to the Council of Lyons. Fifty years after his death ance in(1323) he was canonized, and in 1567 Fius V solemnly proclaimedhim as the fifth doctor of the Church in addition to SS. Augustine,Ambrose, Jerome, and Gregory the Great; but in the imaginationof the Middle Ages he filled a far greater space than any of them.M. Janet truly and eloquently says : 'La philosophie de SaintThomas est l'image fidkle de son temps : c'est le nceud du moyenbge, c'est le moyen dge lui-meme; c'est l& qu'il a rassembld, enapparence pour I'dternitC, tout ce qu'il a su, pens4 et aim6 ' (Hist.de la Science Politique, i. 399). The book alluded to in the text is The Dethe De Regimine Principun, the most popular, and, next to the Re@""e Prznci-Politz'cs of Aristotle, the most authoritative political handbook ofpurtz.the Middle Ages. Of this however only the first book and thefirst four chapters of the second are by St. Thomas ; the remainderis the work of one or other of his disciples, probably of Ptolemyof Lucca (vid. Baumann, Staatslehre des h. Thomas von Aquino,pp. 5-6; Janet, i. 414-5; S. C. H. iii. 240). In the genuineportion of the work there is nothing that really bears on the differencebetween absolute and limited monarchy. St. Thomas is therecontent to follow Aristotle (Politics, Bk. vi) in his division ofgovernments into three right forms : monarchy, aristocracy, andrepublic (aoXc~cl'a), with their corresponding perversions (aapc~-Bhcrcu), tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy. But the differencebetween the right and the perverted forms of government dependsentirely, according to St. Thomas, on their respective aims, and noton their constitution, and does not therefore affect the questionhere discussed.In ii. c. 8 a distinction is drawn between the principatuspolitz'cus Principaandthe grincipotus despoficus, the difference being that in the.zfiyformer the citizens are governed by one or more persons ' secun- Princ@ntusDespotdumipsorum statuta,' whereas in the latter the monarch governs ic,' per earn (legem) quz est in pectore principis.' In the firstchapter of the fourth book it is said still more emphatically :' legibus astringuntur rectores politici, nec ultra possunt procedere,. . . . quod de regibus et aliis &Ionarchis principibus non convenit,quia in ipsorum pectore sunt leges reconditx, prout casus occurrunt'(cp. also iii. c. 16). In iv. c. 8 the principafus regalis isexpressly included under the princlpafus despoficus ; while in iv. C. I

the essence of ' politic ' rule is made to consist in the electivecharacter of the ruler or rulers : ' modus autem assumendi in hocgradu electivus est in quocunque. hominis genere ; non per natureoriginem ut de regibus accidit.' Thus not only (iv. c. 8) is aristocracyincluded under the head of ( politic ' rule, but also the Empireand the Roman Dictatorship come to some extent under the samehead because of their elective character, in spite of the legislativeauthority and arbitrary power ('institutio legum et arbitraria potestas') which emperors have in common with kings (iii. c. 20;iv. c. I). Politic government is best for a state of innocence, orwhere men by wisdom and virtue approach that state, as was thecase with the ancient Romans (ii. c. g ; cf. Fortescue, N. L. N. i.c. 22). But there are certain regions, like Sardinia and Corsica,which ' propter malitiam gentis ' can only be governed ' tyrannicoPortescue's regimine' (iii. c. 22). Seeing then that monarchical rule is essenlimitedtially absolute, and politic rule essentially elective, it is very difficultmonarchy1101 really to find in the Be Regimine Princ2;aurn any place for Fortescue's'Obe found limited monarchy or dominiurn politicurn ef regale; and we arein the De/\'egimi~ze driven to conclude with Lord Carlingford, that ' Fortescue,OfAquinas. while endeavouring to support his doctrines of ConstitutionalMonarchy by the authority of St. Thomas, really derived themfrom his own liberal sentiments, and the happy experience ofhis own country' (Fortescue, Works, p. 360*).Qtlestion It is true that St. Thomas himself, unlike his continuator, adofelectivemonarchy. mits the possibility of an elective monarchy; and where suchis the case the king may be deposed or his power !imited('rex potest destitui [al. destrui], vel refrznari ejus potestas ') if hefall into tyranny (i. c. 6). It is possible that this is the passagewhich Fortescue has in his mind. But there is nothing hereabout 'politic' government, nor does the De Reginzine say howa tyrannical king is to be dealt with where the monarchy isnot elective. Fortescue himself admits the right of subjectsto elect their king only at the first ' incorperacion' of kingdoms(infra Chap. ii, ad init.), or 'quotiens eorum rex sineherede aliquo moriatur' (N. L. N. ii. c. 35 ; Works, p. 153 ;cf. ib. 508).Political Of the other works of St. Thomas Fortescue only quotes thedoctrinesofSunzma Theologica (Works, pp. 68, 97, 107, 132, 159, ~ ~2). WithStrrrrnm of his commentary on Aristotle's Politics he does not seem to be acbt.Thomns.quainted, though it contains a passage which approaches morenearly than any other which I have met with to the views of Fortescue(vid. Baumann, U. s. p. I 35). But even from the former workhe might have quoted passages far more pertinent to his purposethan any to be found in the De Regzinine; e. g. Prima Secunde,Quest. CV. Art. I : L Circa bonam ordinationem principum in aliquacivitate vel gente duo sunt attendenda: quorum unum est, ut onznestzlipuam partem habeanf in princ2;natu.' Then he enumerates afterAristotle the three right forms of government, and concludes thatthe best constitution is that in which all three forms are combined: ' Talis enim est optima politia bene commixta ex regno,in quantum unus preest ; et aristocratia, in quantum multi principantursecundum virtutem; et ex democratia, id est, potestatepopuli, in quantum ex popularibus possunt eligi principes; et adpopulum pertinet electio principum' (i. e. the election of themulti puiprincipantur). This theory of a mixed or balanced con- Theory ofastitution, invented by Polybius, and adopted by Cicero in his ~~~~~o~Republic (whence probably St. Thomas borrowed it), has foundconsiderable favour with more modern writers. And just as Polybiusand Cicero saw the realization of this idea in the RomanState, so did St. Thomas (U. S.) find the same idea underlying thenfosaic system ; while later writers have discovered in it the mostleading characteristic and the most signal merit of the EnglishConstitution (vid. Janet, i. 2 71-2 8 I, 4 I 7 -8 ; Bagehot, The EnglishConstitution, pp. 2-3).ad regem Cipri.] It is doubtful whether this was Hugh I1the last of the Lusignans, who succeeded as a mere infant in 1253and died in 1267, or his successor Hugh 111, who died in 1284.The former is the opinion of Prof. Baumann (Staatslehre, BC., p.22), the latter of Dr. Stubbs (hIedizeva1 Kingdoms of Cyprus andArmenia, p. 24): who adds, 'it is certainly very curious that thecomposition both of the great Feudal Code of the Assizes, and ofLhe manual of medizval politics, should have a direct relation tothis remote little island.'a boke callid Compendium moralis philosophise.] The The Com-PEIZ~~Z~NLwork alluded to here is the ' Compendium AIorale Rogeri de nIo,lt ofWaltham.' Of this work there are two 11ISS. in the Bodleian, Roger ofLaud. hlisc. 616, and RISS. Bodl. 805. The former is the one Waltham.which I have used. It is a well-written MS. in double columnsof the fifteenth century, and formerly belonged to the BenedictineMonks of Oxford. The work is not in any real sense a treatise on

moral philosophy, but consists of a series of moral disquisitions,especially on the virtues and duties of princes, illustrated by historicalexamples, and enforced by numberless quotations, especiallyfrom Seneca, which amply bear out the testimony of Leland(Commentarii de Scrl;btoribm Brifannicis, ed. A. Hall, 1709, pp.264-5 ; cf. Bale, Cafalogus Scrz$tonrm, Cent. IV. xvi) as to theauthor's wide reading and retentive memory. According to a tableappended to the work, 135 authors are quoted in the body of it.Leland (U. S.) aptly describes the work as opus de memorabilibusdictis et factis.' Roger of Waltham also wrote a work calledImagines Oraforum, which I have not seen. Leland saw the MS.of it at St. Paul's. But I do not find it mentioned in the Catalogueof the St. Paul's MSS. in the 9th Report of the Historical MSS.His date. Commission,'Part I. Bale, followed by Pits and others, places hisfloruif in 1250. This is certainly too early. He was alive in1332 (see Report, U. S. p. 2 a; and for other notices of him,ib. 28 b, 40 a, 45 a, 54 b, 69 a). Moreover, at fol. 42 a of theCompendium occurs the following allusion to himself: g De quodameciam rege Northwagiz magno re et nomine (i. e. Magnus theLaw-betterer, 1262-IZ~O), viro virtuoso, litterato, sapiente, et justo,audivi quemdam clericum suum secretarium domini mei Antoniiepiscopi Dunolmensis et patriarchs Ierosalem familiarem hocreferre.' Antony de Bek, who is here meant, did not becomeBishop of Durham till I 283, (ob. 13 I I). Roger of Waltham appearstherefore to have been in his service at some time of his life.He subsequently became Canon of St. Paul's; and, if this be thesame person, Keeper of the Wardrobe to Edward 11. In MSS.Dodsworth, vol. 35. fol. 112, there are some transcripts from hisbook of accounts in the keeping of the King's Remembrancer,which extends from May I, 15 Edw. 11, to Oct. 19, 17 Edw. 11.And in a memorandum on the same page it is stated that thisaccount was delivered at the Exchequer by Roger de Waltham inHis ten- person on May 22, 3 Edw. 111. His employment in the king'sdenciesstronglyclerical.service did not prevent him from being a vehement supporter ofthe spiritual power, and he was evidently much alarmed at EdwardI's encroachments on the independence of the clergy. At fol. 105 doccurs the following interesting passage : ' Et de tali resistenciadicit Boecius primo de consolacione, hoc consciencie libertas habetpro tuendo jure spreta potencium semper offensione. Sic nostratesnominatissimi sancti pontifices Cantuarienses de quibusrecens habetur memoria, Thomas, Dunstanus, Edmundus . . . .quorum laudabilibus exemplis ad relevamen et defencionem juriumecclesiz et cleri prelati nostri temporis divina opitulante gratiapoterunt animari. Ipsorum vero vestiqia . . . non sequentes solovocabulo prelati dicti, sed pocii~s Pilati et Cayphe.' And at fol. 28 aoccurs a still more curious account of the way in which the Frenchcrown influenced the elections of abbots in the Cluniac monasteries.At fol. 38 d may be found an account of one of Edward I's judges, Curioaswhich supplies some details beyond those given by Foss, and anecdote of Chieftherefore I venture to quote it here : 'Et hec legis equitas completa Jnsticefuit nostris temporibus in domino Thoma Weylond, summo Justici- Wey'ond.ario; qui cum primus legem condidisset, ut, si minister regius inarestando aliquem preciperet arestato ne locum virga sua limitatumexcederet, et si locum illum transiret arestatus, fractor carceris regiihaberetur ; idem Thomas primus in legem illam incidit, et ob id adecclesiam confugiens exul regnum tanquam reus criminis abjuravit!Fortescue quotes the Comperzdium not only here, but also inthe hc:ld~ng to the tenth chapter of the treatise De titulo EdwardiConzitis Jlnrch2h (Works, p. 69*); where he acknowledges thathe borrowed from it a reference to St. Augustine. It is possiblethat a closer comparison than I have thought it worth while tomake, might reveal other instances in which Fortescue has takenhis references at second-hand from this work (see above, p. 99).Here again Fortescue claims for his theories a literary sanction Fortescue'swhich does not really belong to them. Roger of Waltham has ;g?-indeed a section (fol. 50 a), of which the heading is ' De temperato theoriesregimine prefectorum.' But it is rather the moral than the constitu- :,~kr;:t,',~tional sense of the word femperafum that he is concerned with. in the Cot/rendsumwhat bi Giles in his boke de regemine principum.] pendiunz'The author here intended is Bgidius Colonna, or, as he is more -dinscommonly called from his birth-place, Bgidius Romanus. The Romanus.date of his birth appears not to be known. He was a pupil ofSS. Thomas Aquiaas and Bonaventura, and was appointed byPhilip 111 of France tutor to his son, afterwards Philip IV. Hebecame archbishop of Bourges in 1296, and died in 1316 atAvignon. It was his employment as tutor to a royal prince which His ~egave him occasion to write his De Reg2inhe Princzjlum. That this $52also was a very popular manual is shown by the translations of it;aum.which exist. 111 the Digby MSS. 233 there is a copy of the Englishtranslation of this work. This translation has been attributed to

Trevisa, the translator of Higden's Polychronicon, but Mr. Ilfacrayhas shown (Gtalogue of Digby MSS.) that the name of the translatorwas Cliftoun or Cleftoun. This RIS., which I shall occasionallyquote, is a large folio in double columns of the fifteenth century.It contains also a translation by the same hand of Vegetius,Be Re MiZifari. Among the books of Edward IV (WardrobeAccounts, p. 152) is one, ' Of the Gouvernal of Kinges and Princes,'which Sir H. Nicolas believes to be this very translation of Bgidius.Xgidius' Be Regimine was one of the three works on whichOccleve based his metrical treatise with the same title :' Of Gyles ofRegement I Of Prynces plotmele thynke I to translate '(Occleve, BeRegimine Princt)z~m, p. 74, ed. T. Wright, for the Roxburghe Club ;cf. ib. xiii). What is probably a French translation of the same workoccurs among the goods of Charlotte of Savoy, queen of Louis XI,under the title ' Le livre du Gouvernement des roys et princes ' (Inventairedes Biens de C. de S. par A. Tuetey, p. 23). A work called' Le regyme des Princes ' is among the books of Charles Count ofAngoultme, father of Francis I (Excerpta Historica, p. 348).Whether either of these was the translation of Bgidius intoFrench verse by Henri de GauchC, mentioned by Sir H. Nicolas(U. S. pp. 237-g), I cannot say. The work was translated also intoHebrew, while a Spanish translation appeared at Seville in 1494(Riezler, Die literarischen Widersacher der Papste, p. 299). Acopy of the original work was among the books given by HumphreyDuke of Gloucester to the University of Oxford (Munim.Acad. p. 772).Fortescne's But here again it is impossible to find anything to justifyFortescue's appeal to Bgidius as an authority on the subject ofriot takenfrom &i- constitutional monarchy. The portion of the Be Regimine whichdius. deals with the different forms of government is the second part ofthe third book. But this is little more than an expansion of Aristotle'svie~vs as to the three right forms of government, and theirrespective perversions. There is the polity in which the people issovereign, ' totius est [populi] statuta condere' (111. ii. z), but herethere is no king. And there is plenty about the difference betweenthe king and the tyrant; but even in the best monarchy there isno trace of any popular element.In the fifth chapter of the same book Egidius, while admittingthat theoretically there is much to be said in favour of electivemonarchy, declares in favour of hereditary royalty on grounds ofexperience (experimentaliter). Like Fortescue he prefers successionthrough males, 'quia masculus est ratione femina przestantior!But he had not, like Fortescue, any political interest inmaintaining this thesis, for the question of female succession didnot come up for decision in France till the death of Louis Xin 1316, the year of Bgidius's own death. Fortescue quotesAgidius in N. L. N. i. c. 16 (Works, p. 77); where the contextis the same as here ; and there, as here, he ignores the fact thatBgidius's politic government is not a monarchy at all. He quoteshim also in N. L. N. i. c. 24 (Works, p. 85).the childeryn of Israel1 as saith Seynt Thomas &C.] Govern-This is from the Be Reginline, ii. cc. 8, 9, which are not by ~ : i the , ~ ~St. Thomas. The author asserts more than once that the judgesgoverned politic?, while the kings ruled regalifer; but the idea oftaking the politic rule of the Judges over the Israelites in suchclose connexion with God's government of His chosen people, asto find in that combination an instance of do7ninlitm politicurn etregale, is, as far as I can see, Fortescue's own. It occurs again,N.L.N.i.c. 16; cp.ib.c. 21.in populum peculiarem &C.] This is a combination ofDeut. xiv. 2, ' Te elegit ut sis ei in populum peculiarem,' withExod. xix. 6, 'Vos eritis mihi in regnum sacerdotale; ' cf. alsoI Pet. ii. 9.in to the tyme that thai desired to haue a kynge &C.] 0 ';r~wn andThis question as to the origin of monarchy among the Jews is : ~ ~discussed by Fortescue at great length in N. I,. N. i. cc. 11-16, among the18, z I. He is there dealing with two difficulties : (I) since the Jews.Israelites sinned in asking for a king, royalty must be sinful;(2) How could God institute a tyrannical mode of governmentiike that described by Samuel ? This latter question is raisedalso by St. Thomas, Sunlna, Prijoa Secunde, Quzst. CV. Art. I,and is resolved by him in much the same way as by Fortescue,viz. that God was not instituting tyranny in what He said toSamuel, but only foretelling the abuses of the kingly power. Tothe former objection Fortescue answers : A. The sin of the Israelitesconsisted not in asking for a king, but (a) in the motive oftheir request, viz. that they might be like the heathen; (b) indeserting the Icing which they had already, viz. God, Who hnddone such great things for them (cp. \\.hat Fortescue says a littlelower down about ' thair folie and vnkyndnes '). B. Things whichN

are brought about by the sin of man are not therefore bad in.themselves ; e. g. the death of Christ. Fortescue refers to thesubject also in his 'Dialogue between Understanding and Faith'(Works, p. 487). There is a curious passage in Josephus (Ant.Jud. lib. vi. c. 41, in which that writer attributes the grief ofSamuel at the request of the Israelites to his hatred of monarchyand preference for aristocracy as a form of government. (Inlib. iv. c. 8 he attributes similar sentiments to Moses.) Fortescuewas not likely to share Josephus's aristocratic sympathies. Thesubject of Saul's appointment is discussed by the Pseudo-Aquinas,Dr Reginline, ii. c. 9 ; iii. c. I I. And it has been a favourite topicwith political -writers. Lord Carlingford instances the discussionof it by PvIilton against Salmasius in the second chapter of the' Defen~e of the People of England,' and by Algernon Sidney inthe second chapter of his ' Discourses concerning Government '(Fortescue, Works, p. 358"). In one point Milton agrees withFortescue : ' He (Samuel) tells not the people what their kingsought to do, but what they would do.' In another he differs wideiy. from him: .To what purpose should they cry to God becauseof the king that they had chosen, if it were not because a KinglyGovernment is an evil thing; not in itself, but because it mostcommonly does. . . .degenerate into Pride and Tyranny? ' Butthen Milton had seen those barriers give way, which Fortescuehoped had been permanently established between kingship andtyranny in England.wich amonge oper thynges said &C.] Sallust, in a fragmentpreserved in St. Augustine, Be Civ. Dei, iii. c. 1'7, describesthe oppression of the plebeians by the patricians in very similarterms : ' Dein servifi illlperrb patres plebem exercere, de vita atquefergo reglb more consu/ere, agro pellere, et czeteris- expertibus soliin imperio agere ' (Fragmenta, I 2).the viijth chapiter of the first boke of kynges.] i. e. theeighth chapter of the first hook of Samuel, according to ourreckoning. See especially vv. 9-21 in the Vulgate.Seynt.?IBomas also in his said boke prasith dominiumpoliticurn et regale &C.] As I have stated above that I cannotfind in the said buke' anything about dominium poli/t'cum et rcgalz,it follows that I cannot find there any passage in which that formKinphip of government is praised It is true that St. Thomas urges stronglyandtyranny. upon kings the danger and wickedness of falling into tyranny ;e.g. i. c. 10 (ad init.), ' diligenti cura se ipsos (reg-S) observaredebent, ne in tyrannidem convertantur; ' cf. ib. c. 11 (ad finem),' vehementer srudendum est hiis qui regendi officium suscipiunt, utreges se subditis przbeant, non tyrannos.' Compare also Bgidius,Be Regimine, 111. ii. I 2, ' Probare volumus reges summa diligentiacavere debere ne convertantur in tirannos ;' and his translator: ' We wollen preue pat kynges and princes sholde be mostbesiliche ware pat pei become not tirauntes' (RIS. Digby 233,f. 140 a). But how this danger is to be obviated neither of themvery clearly states. In N. L. N. i. c. 26 (ad finem) Fortescue infersSt. ~homas's approval of limited monarchy from his dread oftyranny, and does not, as here, state it as a fact. But in the DeLnudibus, c. 37, ad fin., he says, 'Sanctus Thomas . . . optarecensetur ut omnia mundi regna politice regerentur; ' a passagewhich I have not found. According to Bgidius, however, tyrannyis a lesser evil than insubordination : 'Nam magis est tollerabilisaliqualis tirannides principantis quam sit malum quod consurgit exinobedentia principis et ex prevaricatione mandatorum eius ' (111. ii.34); ' Ffor som what of tyranndise may be bettre i suffred, panpe harm pat comep jif men ben vnobedient to pe prince, andbreken his law' (XIS. Digby 233, f. 160 b).and yet thai both bith egall . . . as it mey . . . be . . .provid by infallyble reason.] This proof 'by infallyble reason'of the equality in power and dignity of the absolute and limitedmonarch is to be found in the N. L. N. i. cc. 22, 26. In theearlier chapter Fortescue maintains that both kings are equallylike God, for though the law of an absolute monarchy is morelike the law by which God governs the world, yet the lam of apolitic monarchy is Inore like that by nhich He rules the saints inbliss. In the later chapter he argues (as he does in Chapter ~i.of the present treatise), that any limitation which prevents us fromdoing wrong is an increase rather than a diminution of power.Fortescue was evidently very proud of this demonstration, as isshown by the fact that in the De Laz~diJus he refers to it noless than four times (cc. 11, 14, 34, 37 ; cf. especially C. 11,'in tractatu de Natura Legis Naturze, horum duorum regum2equalem esse potentiam doctli rafzbnibus ostendlsti '). For adiscussion of its value see the notes to Chapter vi. infra, p. 218.

motel. QLbap, ff,CHAPTER 11.Title]. See Critical Notes.Origin of The first institution, &C.] In N. L. N. i. c. 18 (Works, pp.kingship.80-1) Fortescue discusses the questio~l of the origin of kingship.He there says that it is due to the Law of Nature; (I) becauseevery complex body naturally requires a regulative principle orhead (cf. p. 188, below); (2) because man is naturally a socialand political animal. And this result is not affected by the fact,that individual kingdoms have been founded on tyranny andoppression. Here Fortescue is discussi~lg the modes in which amonarchy may arise. These, he says, are two : (a) by conquest;(6) by compact or election. As examples of the former kind ofmonarch he quotes Nimrod (Nembroth) the 'founder of Babylon,and Belus and Ninus kings of Assyria; as an example of thelatter kind, Brutus the mythical eponymous hero of the Britons.This analysis is probably taken from Vincent of Beauvais. Seethe folio\ving notes.Nembroth.] Cf. Gen. X. 8 ff. Fortescue discusses the caseof Nimrod in N. L. N. i. c. 7, and mentions him again, ib. ii. c.46 ; refell-ing in both instances to St. Augustine. In the formerxirrirod a chapler he speaks of hiin very much as he does here. Nimrodplacehas in fact served political writers as the type of the tyrant whosewithl>olitical dominion is founded on conquest, from the days of St. Augustine. clown to Sidney and Harrington : cf. Sidney's ' Discourses concerningGovernment,' chap, i. $ 8, and Harrington's Works, p. 10.St. Augustine (De Civ. Dei, xvi. cc. 3, 4) translating the Septuagintversion, which is okos $v y;yao ~vvqybs c'vavri~v KvP[uv 7017 ~FO;, calls\Tincent of Nimrod 'gigas iste venator contra Dominum.' Another worklkanvai3, which Fortescue probably had in his mind was the De ilforaliand hisDe nfovali Princlj?is Insfifufione of Vincent of Beauvais; for in N. L. N. i."yi72C@is c, 8 (Works, p. '/I) he quotes from it with reference to Ninus,J~?.~fit2ltionr.and the passage is no less applicable to Nimrod.Among the Rawlinson RISS. there is a small folio of thefifteenth century (Rawl. C. 398), which originally belonged to Sirlohn Fortescue, as is proved by the armorial bearings displayed atthebeginning of several of the treatises which it contains. Amongthese are the De illor. Pt-2izc. Insf. of Vincent of Ueau\.ais, further aChronicle of England by Richard Rede (on which see below, 1.185), and copies of two treatises of William of Auvergne (GulielmusAlvernus), Bishop of Paris 1228-1248, one of which is cited byI'ortescue in the Be Laudibus, c. 4, under the title Parisz>n.cii :Cur Beus Homo. [On William of Auvergne see Jourdain, Traductionsd'Aristote, pp. 288-9.1Dr. Stubhs, who sent Lord Carlingford some extracts fromVincent of Beauvais' Be Mor. Pri'c. Inst., toolc them from athirteenth-century MS. belonging to Nerton College (RISS. Merton.cxi), and does not mention the Rawlinson &IS., though it has ofcourse a special interest for students of Fortescue. It is the onewhich I have used throughout. Vincent of Beauvais was readerto Louis IX of France, and to him and to his son-in-law Thibault,Count of Champagne and King of Navarre, the De Mar. Princ.Inst. is addressed. In the Prologue the author states that thistreatise is only the first instalment of a larger work which hecontemplates. He seems however never to have carried out hisintention. The passage bearing on Nimrod and Ninus is in thesecond Chapter (f. go, vo) : ' Cum enim omnes natura essentpares, Nembroth . . . primus regnum super homines usurpavit. . . .Unde legitur . . . quod . . . erat robustus venator coram domino ;i.e. exactor et oppressor hominum amore dominandi fuit. . . .bldrtuo Be10 ~embrbthide Ninus ejusdem filius,' &c.[On Vincent of Beauvais and his great encyclopzedic work, theSpeculum Jfundz; see Jourdain, Traductions d'hristote, pp. 360 ff.,and Lord Carlingford's note, Fortescue, Works, pp. 356* f. Thereis another educational treatise by Vincent, De Erudifione Filiorz~nrRtgalium, which I have not read. It was printed at Bdle in 148r.The De Illor. Princ. Inst. is said to have been printed, but nocopy can be found. The Sp~r~lum also contains a system ofpolitical philosophy; vid. Riezler, U. S., p. 137.1So Higden, Polychronicon, ii. 250, quoting Petrus Comestor,says, Nemphrot robustus venator hominum, id est, oppressor.'Isidore, Etym. vii. c. 6, says, ' Nembroth interpretatur tyrannus,'(cf. ' primus tirrannorum ' here).rex dicitur a regendo.] This is a favourite conlmonplace of amedizeval publicists. The earliest work in which I have found it isSt. Augustine's De Civ. Dei, V. C. 12 : reges . . . a regendo dicti.'From this it was taken by St. Isidore, who says (Etym. ix. c. 3),' Reges a regendo : sicut enim sacerdos a sanctiiicando, ita et rex a

note$+ QLbap. ii,regendo: non autem regit qui non corrigit. Recte igitur faciendoregis nomen tenetur, peccando amittitur.' In the Senfenfie, iii.c. 48, Isidore gives a slightly different derivation: 'reges a recteagendo vocati sunt,' &c. [St. Isidore, 'lumen Hispank,' was Bishopof Seville 599-636 A.D. His work called ' Origines sive Etymologie'was one of the chief manuals of the Middle Ages. Fortescuequotes it once or twice in the N. L. N., but only at second-hand.]From Isidore, mediately or immediately, the derivation was borrowedby later writers. I find it next in Hincmar [Archbishopof Rheims 845-882 A.D. On his political theories see Janet, i.355-9, to whom I owe the following reference] : ' Rex a regendodicitur, et si se ipsum secundum voluntatem Dei regit, et bonos inviam rectam dirigit, malos autem de via prava ad rectam corrigit,tunc rex est, et nullorum legibus vel judiciis nisi solius Dei subjacet: quoniam arbitria possunt dici, Ieges autem non sunt nisi illaquae Dei sunt,' &c. De Divorfio Loth. ef Tefb., Questio vi. Hincmaruses the supposed derivation, as Fortescue does, to discriminatethe king from the tyrant. Bracton uses it in the same way, lib. iii.c, 9. 3. It is found without any such ulterior motive in Bgidius,De Regimine, 111. ii. 29 : 'nomen regis a regendo sumptum est.'Cf. Aquinas, De Reginline, i. c. I 3 : ' a gubernationis regirnine regisnomen accipitur.' Papias, the Italian Grammarian of the eleventhcentury, gives the following definition in his Lexicon : ' Rex dictuseo quod regere debeat rem populi et salutem. Inter regem et tyrannumnalla prius erat differentia. Nunc in usu accidit reges vocaremodestos et temperatos : tyrannos vero impios. . .'. Rex a recteregendo - dicitur : quod nomen peccando amittit.' The CompendtumMorale, ff. 29a, 32b, besides citing Papias (U. S.) and theCanon Law (Decreti, Pars i. Dist. 21. Cap. i. Cleros), which, l~ltePapias, is evidently derived from Isidore, U. S., gives a metricalversion of the sentiment :-' Cum rex a regere nomen dicatur habere,h'olnen habet sine re, studeat nisi recta docere.'For this the authority cited seems to be Isidore, Etym. lib. vii:but I have searched that book in vain for it. Cf. Political Songs, ii.231 :-' 0 rex, si rex es, rege tc vel eris sine re rex;Nornen habes sine re, nisi te recte regas.'In N. L. N. i. c. 7 (Works, p. 70) Fortescue applies the distinctionas he does here, to the case of Nimrod.robustus venator.] In spite of the devotion of the Middle Exil asso-Ages to the mimic war of the chase, an evil association seems tohave clung to the name of hunter, partly arising perhaps from this with thevery passage of Genesis. Thus Fortescue's contemporary Gascoigne,in his Libcr Verifafum (ed. Rogers, p. 224), after quotingSt. Jerome's interpretation of Bethsaida as meaning ' domus venatorum,'continues : 'In domo enim venatorurn et in ipsis venatoribussunt plura sape peccata sanguinaria, sc. voluptas, qua delectanturvidendo effusionem sanguinis et pcenam animalis morientis, et eciamin vanis et in turpibus sape inord~nate delectantur ; et rebus suiset tempore sepe abutuntur, inferendo mala et nociva rebus etpasturis aliorum. Quantum possum in mea recolere memoria,nunquam, sc. in scriptura, venatorem in bonam partem legi.' Itis one of the many beautiful traits in Henry Vl's saintly characterthat he had a strong aversion to the cruelty of field sports: 'necczdi innocui quadrupedis aliquando voluit interesse ' (Blakman, inHearne's Otterbourne, p. 302). In Rot. Parl. iii. 489 a there is acurious petition presented by the Commons on behalf of the Abbotof Newnham in Devonshire against Sir Philip Courtenay : one ofthe charges against him being that he had detained two of theINewnham monks and forced them to hunt and hawk 'againsttheir order*' To Chaucer's Monk this would have been no greathardship ; for he was, we read,-' An out-rydere, that lovede venerye ;He 3af nat of that text a pulled henThat seith, that hunters been noon holy men.'Canterbury Tales, Prologue, 11. 165 ff.The other side of the question is given by the Pseudo-Aquinas, DeR~~inzine, ii. c. 6 : ' Yenatura . . . valet ad robur acquirendum corporis,et conservandam sanitatem, et cordis vigorandam virtutem, sitemperate utamur.' For a vehement tirade against hunting, cf. Johnof Salisbury, Polz'crai~cu~~, i. c. 4.Belus that was first callid a kynge, aftir hym is soneNinus.] The authority for this is St. Augustrne, De Ciz,. BPI; XVI.c. 17, as Fortescue himself points out, N. L. N. i. c. 8 (LVo~ks,p. 71 ; cf. ib. 163 ; N. L. N. ii. c. 46), where also he notes thediscrepancy between the' statement of Genesis X. I I, followed bySt. Augustine, that Asshur founded Nineveh, and the view adopted(among others) by Aquinas, De Rcg. Prirzc. i. c. I 3, that Ninus was

the founder of it. Other passages in which St. Augustine mentionsBelus and Ninus are De Civ. Del; iv. c. 6, xvi. c. 3, xviii. c. 2.[For the early history of Assyria according to the medizeval authorities,see Higden, Polychronicon, 11. xxix, 274 ff.] Belus was thefirst king because, as Fortescue says, N. L. N. i. c. 8, ' aliud esthabere regnum, ut habuit Nembroth primus tyrannorum, et aliudest regnare, velut utcutnque fecerat Relus primus regum.'thair kyngdomes bethe than most resembled to thekyngedome of God.] Compare notes to Chapter i. (above, p.'79).Foitewie pe lawes seyn.] i. e. the Civil Laws. For Fortescue's respect"lefor the Civil Laws see N. L. N. i. c. 32 (Worlts, p. 95), MCn~lhere he1.n~.calls them ' nobilissimze Leges ill% Civiles, qus quasi totius mundicuram tamdiu egerunt.' And in the De Laudibus, cc. 7, 9, he speaksof them as (Leges), ' quae per orbem percelebres sunt :' (quas)'supra humanas cunctas leges alias fama per orbem extollatgloriosa.' Thi's did not however prevent him from writing a work(the De Laudibz~s Lepzrrrz Azgllre) expressly to prove the superiorityof English to Roman Law in the points 011 which they differ. ProfessorPollock has recently said, ' Had English Law been in itsinfancy drawn within the masterful attraction of Rome, . . . it ishardly too much to say that the possibility of comparative jurisp~ u-dence would have been destroyed. . . . English law . . . furnishesa holding-ground for criticism. In its absence nothing but somesurpassing effort of genius could have enabled us to view theCorpus Juris from the outside ' (Inaugural Lecture, pp. I 3 f.). It ismuch to Fortescue's cre4t that he began this work of criticism andcomparison.Q - quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.] This is fromc+i pfaruifgtc,, the Institutes of Justinian, lib. i. tit. ii. $ 6 : ' Sed et quod prinprincipleof cipi placuit, legis habet vigorem ; cum lege regia quae de ejusautocracy.imperio lata est, populus ei et in eum omne imperium suum etpotestatem concessit. Quodcumque ergo imperator per epistolamconstituit, vel cognoscens decrevit, vel edicto przcepit, legem esseconstat.' The authority for this is Ulpian in Digest, i. 4. I. Gaius(i. 5) says, 'Nec unquam dubitaturn est quin principis constitutiolegis vicem obtineat ' (Sandars' Jus~inian, pp. 82-3). So Dante ofthe mediseval emperor: ' Quello che egli dice, a tutti & legge'(Convito, iv. 4). Fortescue quotes this maxim no less than th~eetimes in the De LaudiLtis, cc. 9, 34, 35; ancl there, as here, heregards it, rightly, as embodying the very principle of autocracy. Inthe last-named chapter he gives it a special reference to the arbitrarygovernment of Louis XI. It has been aptly contrasted with theprinciple of that limited Germanic kingship from which Englishroyalty is derived, as embodied in the words of Tacitus (Germ. c. 7):G Nec regtbus infinita aut libera potestas.' But Bracton, followed byFleta and Thornton, gives a very different interpretation to thepassage, whereby he almost makes it the foundation of constitutionalgovernment; Bracton, lib. iii. c. g. 8 3; cf. Fleta, lib. i.c. xvii. 8 7 ; and Thornton, quoted by Selden, Dissertnfio adFhtam, cap. 3. $ ii. Well may Selden (ut supra) say that he readthis explanation 'non sine stupore; ' and he quotes against it thequite unequivocal words of the Greek lawyer Harmenopulus,o"nfp 6pdu~~ 73 BauiXc;, vdpos E)uT~v.but aftirwarde whan mankynde was more mansuete, &C.]Note that Fortescue considers the institution of monarchy by electionor compact, as a distinct advance in civilization as comparedwith the monarchy based on conquest.the felowshippe that came in to this lande wit4 Brute.] Story ofThis mythical history of Brutus, the great-grandson of Bneas, E;t;-","e~,'who was made to do duty as the eponymous hero of the Blitons, of Moncomesdirectly or indirectly from the Nzsforia Regum Britnnrrie Rede'sof Geoffrey of RIonmouth. It is possible that Fortescue derived chronicle.it from the A70va Chronica de Gesf2i Xegum Anglorum of RichardRede, of which the earlier chapters are little more than an abridgementof Geoffrey, often preserving his very words, and of which, aswe know, Fortescue possessed a copy. (See above, p. 180.) [Theauthority on which this chronicle is assigned to Richard Rede isFoxe, Martyrology, ed. 1583, p. '783. The chronicle itself, as faras I can judge, is a mere compilation, and contains nothing whichmay not be found better elsewhere.] The fortunes of Brutusoccupy the first boolr of Geoffrey's work. I do not find thereanything about Brutus's election as king of Britain, though he issaid to have been elected as leader by the enslaved Trojans beforethey quitted Greece (i. c. 4, ad init.). The first editor of thepresent treatise, Lord Fortescue of Credan, maintains that 'ourAuthor does not affirm the Story of Brute to be true! But nothingis less likely than that he should have disbelieved it. The way in Popularityof thewhich the fables of Geoffrey carried everything before them is one fables ofof the most curious facts in literary history. We fi~lrl them turning Geoffre~.

note$+ CCbap, ii,up in the most unexpected quarters: thus Henry IV founds hisclaim to the Scotch homage on the ground of the rights exercisedover Scotland by Locrinus the son of Brutus (Aug. 1400; Rymer,viii. 155) ; the compilers of the Black Book of the household ofEdward IV base their ordinances on the precedents of the householdsof Lud and Cassivelaunus (Ordinances of the Household,p. I 7) ; while Cade in his proclamation characterizes Pole (Suffolk)as being ' as fals as Fortager ' (i.e. Vortigern ; Three Fifteenth CenturyChronicles, p. 95). The University of Oxford owes its existence,at least indirectly, to the coming of Brutus (Anstey, AIunimentaAcademica, pp. xxvii, 3673. William of Newburgh indeed characterizesGeoffrey as he deserves as an impudent impostor, 'impudenterfere per omnia mentitur ' (ed. Hamilton, i. 5) ; and Higden(vide infra, p. 201) ventures to question his account of Arthur.But these are exceptions. And Higden himself repeats the stotyof Brute without any misgivings (Polychronicon, ii. 442 ff.)..Vincent of Beauvais, De Mor. Princ. Inst. c. 2, traces the riseof the British Empire from Brutus (f. 91, ro). Nore interestingis the fact that he agrees with Fortescue in regarding Englandas one of the realms where monarchy arose by compact (U. S.c. 4. f. 93, vo) : ' Si qui tamen eciam infidelium de consensupopulorum in reges assumuntur, et fines proprios non excedunt,illorum regna jure stabilita sunt. Sic autem arbitrandurll estde regno vel imperio Romanorum, . . . sic etiam existimandumest de regno Francorum, et etiam Anglicorum. . . . In omnibusenim hujusmodi plurimum valet ipsius auctoritas et consensuspopuli.'Aristotle, the philisopher.] This is Aristotle, who is always so called'hephizo- in medizval writings, at least from the twelfth century onwards.sopher.'I'hus John of Salisbury (I I 10-1 180) says of him : ' Tractavitquidem omnes philosophis partes, . . . sed prae ceteris sic ratio-nalem (i.e. logic) redegit in jus suum 'ut a possessione illiusvideatur omnes alios exclusisse. Ita tamen in aliis viguil ut communenomen omnium philosophorum antonomastice, id est, excellentersibi proprium esse meruerit. Sicut enim urbs Romam,Maronem Poeta exprimit, sic et Philosophi nomen circa Aristotelemutentium placito contractum est' (Policraticus, vii. c. 6).This passage has been appropriated by Higden, iii. 358. I giveTrevisa's translation of the last sentence : Pis is i cleped pephilosofre, as it were he pat berep pe prise 'of philosofres : soRome is i cleped pe citie, SO Mar0 pe poete, and so Aristotle Fephilosofre.'&'I. Jourdain in his admirable work, Recherches sur r&ge et l'originedes hadz~ctions laiines d'ArisLofe (pp. 3, 23, 28, 31, &C.), hasshown that up to the end of the twelfth century only the logicalworks of Aristotle were known, and that-on them his fame wasbased. But how effectually his reputation as a logician preparedthe way for his reception as the monarch, not to say the tyrant, ofthe intellectual world, is shown by the above-quoted passage fromJohn of Salisbury, who evid&tly regards Aristotle mainly as alogician, and who certainly was unacquainted with any but hislogical works. With the thirteenth century began what &I. Jourdain Infatuaiio~r(U. S. p. 120) justly calls ' l'esphce de delire dont on se prit pourAristote.' As his other works became known he came to be re- fur Alisgardedmore and more as representing the perfection of human '"le.reason, and his works as marking the utmost l~mito which uninspiredwisdom could attain. And what gave St. Thomas his greatsignificance and value for the Middle Ages was the fact that hefirst effected a systematic conciliation and fusion of this highestproduct of purely human reason with the doctrines of the Church.Dante, who embodies no less thoroughly than St. Thomas himselfthe spirit of the Middle Ages, calls Aristotle 'the master of thosewho know' ('il Maestro di color che sanno,' Inferno, cant. iv.v. 131). And in the Connifo he calls him 'that master of Philosophers' ('quello hlaestro de' Filosofi,' iv. c. 8); 'the master ofhuman reason' (' il Maestro della umana ragione,' iv. c. a, cf. ib. 6) ;'the glorious philosopher to whom Nature most revealed hersecrets ' (' quello glorioso Filosofo, a1 quale la Natura pia aperse lisuoi segreti,' iii. c. 5; cp. the phrase of Waterhous, who callsAristotle the Secretary, i.e. confidant of Nature ; p. 407). ' Hisopinion is dinine' (' la divina sentenzia d'Aristotile,' iv. c. 17).He holds the same position in the intellectual world that theemperor holds in the world of politics (iv. c. 6), and for ordinarypeople his authority, without his arguments, suffices (iii. c. 5).Bishop Pecock in this, as in other points, had the courage to Pecockrevolt against the prevailing opinions of his day : 'Aristotel was ventureddispute hisnot other than an encercher for to fynde out trouthis, as othere authority.men were11 in his dayes and now after his daies jit hidirto ben.And he failide in ful many poyntis both in natural philosophieand in moral philosophie, as shal be maad open in other placis,

mote#+ QLbap, ii,and as ech large encercher of trouthis into this present day hathfailid' ('Follower to the Donet,' quoted in Pecock's Repressor, ed.Babington, p. xxxvii). And this was one of the points whichPecock's adversary John Bury brought up against him : ' No11mittis . . ..ad Platonem, non ad Aristotelem qui principes in doctrinamorum ab hominibus computantur. . . . Moralis igitur philosophia. . . in solo tui pectoris domicilio quiescit' (ib. 604).On the general question of Fortescue's Aristotelian quotationssomething will be found in the Introduction, Part 111, above, pp. g9 f.Source of every comunalte unyed of mony parties must nedisthe quota- htion. ave an hed.] This saying of Aristotle is quoted by Fortescuein N. L. N. ii. c. 42 : ' in hiis qug sunt ad invicem ordinata oportetsemper esse aliquod primum et dirigens, ut Philosophus tradit inprimo Politicorum ' (Works, p. 159). In this form he probablytook it from the Pseudo-Aquinas, Be Xegin~ine, iii. c. g, and not (asLord Carlingford thinks) from the Summa, Prima Pars, Quzst. xcvi.Art. iv, for Fortescue's language tallies much more exactly with theformer than with the latter passage. In the De Laudibus, c. 3, thesame sentence is given in a different form : ' Quo primo Politicorumdicit Philosophus quod quandocunque ex pluribus constituiturunum, inter illa unum erit regens, et alia erunt recta.' In this formthe quotation comes from the Aucforifafes (see Introduction, Part111, U. S.) of the first book of the Politics. The original is : &a yhp/K RXS~&UOV UVUCUT~KE ~a1 ylv~ra~ & ri KOLY~Y, . .. h &auiu ;p$alvcra~ r1)+,you ~ n rb i dpXdptvov (Pol. I. ii. g). Dante quotes the samepassage in the Convifo (iv. c. 4) in support of his theory of theI'arallels necessity of a universal empire. For the sentiment compareitAquinas, De Xegin~int, i. c. I : 'Necesse est in hominibus esseper quod multitude regatur.' ' Oportet esse in omni multitudinealiquod regitivum.' So in the Black Book of Edward IV's household: ' In quolibet toto necesse est unam partem formalem etpredominantem [esse], a qua totum unitatem habet ' (Ordinancesof the Household, p. 55). It was one of the common chargesagainst the Lollards that they wanted to set up an anarchic andheadless system. In a pardon granted to one John Wykham,a Lollard, in 2 Hen. V (Nov. 6, 14r4), it is alleged that it was thcintention of the Lollards ' quamplura Regimina, secundum eorumvoluntatem, infra Regnum praedictum, quasi Gens sine capite, . . .ordinare ' (Rymer, ix. I 7 I). And Whethamstede repeats thecharge in some of his insupportable verses :-' Regnorum culmen, regnandi despicit omen,Retrogradum regnum optat et acephalnm.'Amundesham, i. 230.Policia dicitur a poles. . . . et COS &C.]This n~arvellous Ihrivationderivation is found almost verbatim in N. L. N., i. c. 23 (Works, Ofpo'icia.p. 85) : 'policia namque a polos dicitur quod est pluralifas, et yconndnzinisfrai2b, quasi regimen phrium consilio ministrafunz.' LordC:arlingford pays Fortescue the compliment of Greek type, printingBOXVS and irov. But, as I do not believe that Fortescue knewa word of Greek, I have given the passage as it stands in theOxford illS. of the first part of the N. L. N. (MSS. Laud. Misc.585, p. 37). Lord Fortescue of Credan (or Hearne who transcribedthe work for him), not understanding the passage, givesit without any ills. authority, as follows : ' Dominium politicurndicitur quasi Regimen, plurium Scientia, sive Consilio ministratum.'In this he is followed by Lord Clermont. 'I'here is a similar,though less violent, derivation of ' politia ' in Pseudo-Aquinas, DeRghine, iv. c. I : 'Tale regimen polilz'am appellant, a polis, quodest pluralitas, sive civitas, quia hoc regimen proprie ad civitatespertinet, ut in partibus Italiae maxime videmus.' Whence Fortescue Isidore thegot this derivation I do not know. The source of many medigval ~~~~~~etymologies is to be found in Isidore ; and very marvellous they diacval etyareas a general rule.mologies.The kynge of Scottis, &C.] In this reference to the Constitu- Constitutionof Scotland we may perhaps trace the influence of Fortescue's ~,","t~~'d.\vanderings in exile. For his residence in Scotland, see his life inthe Introduction, Part 11, above pp. 56-62. On the state ofScotland at this time something will be said in the notes toChapter ix. below. On the mediaeval Constitution of Scotland, seeHallam, Const. Hist. chap. I 7, and the Lords' Reports on theDignity of a Peer, No. I, Division 5.In its main features the Scotch Constitution followed the lines of ComparitheEnglish, but differed in some important particulars. I. The 'On withthat ofParliament was composed entirely of tenants-in-chief. No land- England.owners attended, either in person or by their representatives, exceptthose who held their lands immediately of the Crown ; no boroughswere represented except the royal burghs. 2. The smaller tenantsin-chief,or lesser barons, attended in person, as they did in Englandup to Henry III's time. In 1427 they were allowed to send representatives(or commissaries as they were called) for each sheriffdom.

Later statutes fixed the limit of landed property below which a,baron or tenant-in-chief was not to be obliged to attend Parliamentin person. But whether attending in person or by their commissaries,these lesser barons ranked among the second, and not (as inEngland) among the third estate. This lasted till the revolution of1688, after which, on the abolition of episcopacy, the commissariesof shires were made into a separate estate in place of the prelates.j. Consequently the third estate consisted only of the commissariesof the boroughs. 4. The three estates or communities ('tres communitates')voted promiscuously, and not (as in England) in twoseparate houses or chambers. Thus we see that in Scotlandthe parliamentary constitution was based entirely on tenure-inchief,whereas in England the reforms of Edward I. had excludedthe influence of tenure from that constitution. And, partly inconsequence of this, the Scotch Parliament was wanting in twomain elements of strength which the English Parliament possessed,viz. the close union which existed between all classes of landownersbelow the rank of baron, irrespective of tenure; andsecondly, the combination in the popular branch of the legislatureof the two str6ngest interests in the cauntry, land and commerce.But in truth the limitations of the royal power inScotland were always rather practical than legal, and consistedmuch more in the power of the great lords than in the constitutionalaction of the parliaments. Still Fortescue is no doubtright in classing the Scotch king, as he does here, among limitedmonarchs.IJiodoru'; Diodorus Siculus saith in his boke De priscis historiis,&C.] Diodorus Siculus, the Greek historian, finished his greathistorical work, which he himself callcd Bibliotheca Hisforica, inI1oggio's the year 8 B.C. Poggio (1380-145~) 111ade a Latin translation of1'1 n nsiathefirst five books, which was printed at Bologna in 1472, and retion.printed several times at ~enice. That this was the translation usedby Fortescue may be seen hy any one who will compare the extractsfrom the transldtioi~ given below with the extracts fromDiodorus given by Fortescue in Be Laudibi~s, c. 13. This is confirmedalso by the title under which Fortescue quotes the work ofDiodorus, Depriscis hi~forz'zs. The headlng in the edition of 1472is, Diodori Siculi historiarum priscarum a Poggio in Latinumtrnducti liber primus incipit.' [It should be noted that the firstbook of Diodorus is divided into two sections, uhich by Poggio andFortescue are reckoned as separate books.In the early editionsand translations of Diodorus there are no divisions of chapters.These I have taken from the edition of Miiller, Paris, 1842.1 The The Egyppassageabout the Egyptian kings is in Lib. i. (ii.) cc. 69, sqq. tianKings.Poggio's translation runs as follows : ' Asserunt Egyptii . . . fuisse. . . optimasab se institutas leges. Quorum maximum ferunt esseargumentum : annis amplius tribus milibus et septingentis indigitesreges Egypto imperasse : Eamque provinciam cseterarum orbisesse fcelicissimam : qua nullo potuissent pacto fieri nisi optimismoribus ac legibus vixissent, eruditique omni doctrinarum generefuissent. . . . Primum Egyptii reges vitarn, non aliorum regnantiumquibus voluntas pro lege est, traducebant licentia; . . . Sedveluti privati tenebantur legibus : neque id egre ferebant, existi-mantes parendo legibus se beatos fore. . . . Hac usi erga subditosjustitia omnium benevolentiam . . . assecuti sunt.'Among the Ethiopia.' reawmes of Affrike ' may be mentioned Ethiopia, which Fortescuein the De Laudibus specially quotes. Diodorus' account of theEthiopian Constitution is to be found in Lib. iii. (iv.) cc. 5, sqq.Poggio tlanslates : ' Xthiopum leges quadam non parum ab~.eliquarcm gentium legibus maxime vero circa regum electionemdifferunt. Nam sacerdotes optimos ex se ipsis seligunt. Quem veroex eis deus more quodam bacchant'ium circumdelatus cepit, huncregem populus creat. . . . Assumptus in regem vitam ducit statutamlegibus, ornniaque agit juxta patrios mores; neque premio nequepcena afficiens quenquam preter traditam a superioribus legem.'About the constitution of the ' londe of Libie ' I do not find much TheLibyans.Iil Diodorus. What there is, is in Lib. iii. (iv.) c. 49. Diodorusthere divides the Libyaps into four tribes, and into three classes,viz. the nomad or pastoral, the agricultural, and the predatory1,ibyans. The two former classes 'regibus parent, vitam nonomnino agrestem agentes, neque ab humanitate alienam. Tertiineque ullis subsunt regib'us neque ullam latrociniis semper ir~tentijustitiam norunt.' In regard to the Sabeans Fortescue has either Themisunde!-stood or misquoted his author. This is the account ofthe Sabean Constitution given by Diodorus, iii. (iv.) cc. 46-7 :' Sabei, gens Arabum populosissima, . . . felicem Arabiam incolunt. . . Reges habet (gens) ex generis successione . . . Beatam,. .vitam habere videntur, quod reliquis imperantes rationem ab segestorum mlnime coguntur reddere. Infelicem vero, quocl nunquamregiam exire queunt. Nam si palam prcdirent, a turba

hominum lapid~bus veteri quodam deorum responso obruerentur.'This so far from being a limited monarchy, seems to be an absolutemonarchy tempered only by perpetual confinement as an alternativeto stoning. Fortescue quotes Diodorus also in N. L. N. i. C. 7,ii. c. 22 (Works, pp. 70, 137).wich maner ... lordshippe ... Diodorus praisith.] Thisprobably refers to those praises of the Egyptian Constitution givenabove; which however represent the views, not of Dlodorus, butof the Egyptians themselves.it is not only good for the prince, &C.] On the benefitswhich the ruler, according to Fortescue, derives from the limitationof his power, see notes to Chapter vi. below, pp. 2 I 7-9.the people . . . resseyue thair bi such justice as thaiFortescue'sWuments desire thaim self.] Fortescue here lays his finger on what mustin favour ofConstitu- always be a main argument in favour of popular government. Intiona' Go- N. L. N. i. c. 25 (ad finem) he gives another excellent reason for\emment.his preference of limited to absolute monarchy, namely that therisk from a bad king is so very much less in the one case than inthe other : ' Vos subditi Regis regaliter et politice preessentis consolaminiquod, si rex vester taliter insolescat, liberis ad hoc, utalius, ipse non gaudet habenis' (Works, p. 87 ; cp. also De Laudibus,C. g, quoted in notes to Chap. vi. below, p. 218). The Pseudo-Aquinas points out the advantage of self-government with specialreference to the administration of justice : ' non est materia scandalipuniendo, quia tales leges ab ipsa n~ultitudi~ie sunt institutz.' IlcRcgimlj~e, iv. C. 8.CHAPTER 111.Title.] I., is the only MS. which does not begin a newchapter here.Fe Ffrenche kynge reignith vppon is peple dominio regali.]For the frequency with which Fortescue institutes conlparisonsbetween things English and French, see Introduction, Part 111,above pp. 100-1. In the De Laudibsrs and in the present work,which were both written either during or subsequent to Fortescue'~exile on the Continent, tlie author evidently regards the FrenchBotCQ. QLbap. iii,king as the tjpe of the absolute monarch. The strongest passage F,,,,,,on the tyrannical government of Louis XI occurs in DCtype of anc. 35 (ad finem), where after enumerating various odious features of absolute monarchy.that government, the oppressions of the standing army, the arbitraryfinancial exactions, the extra-judicial condemnations, the secretexecutions, he continues thus in his address to Prince Edward ofLancaster : 'Etiam et alia enormia, hiis similia, ac quedam hiisdeteriora, dum in Francia et prope legnum illud conversatus es,audisti, non alio quam legis illius colore, detestabiliter, damnahil~terqueperpetrata.' The Zex iZZa under colour of which these thingsare done is the maxim that ' quod principi placuit legis habetvigorem.'As ea~ly as 1280 thcs maxim had been enunciated bythe French jurist Beaumanoir in the words, ' Qui lui plait h faire,doit &re tenu pour loi' (cited by Martin, Hist. de France, iv. 568).Seynt Lowes . . . . nor eny of his progenitors &C.] In Arbitrarytaxation ofthis passage Fortescue certainly underestimates the amount of the Frencllarbitrary rule which the French kings prior to Charles V11 allowed Kings.themselves in the matter of taxation, though he is right in regardingthe reign of the latter king as the period of a decisive constitutionalchange. With ' Saint Louis and his progenitors' we are not inreality concerned; they cannot have imposed taxes with the consentof the Three Estates, for the Estates-General did not then exist,though Saint Louis seems occasionally to have admitted representativesof the towns to his councils (Picot, Histoire des gtats GCn6-raux, i. 19). Fortescue is right as to Louis IX, in so far as he, unlikemost of his successors, was scrupulously conscientious in theuse which he made of his taxative powers (cf. Martin, Hist. deFrance, iv. 295). But the first monarch to appeal to an assembly Firstof the Three Estates was Philip IV (the Fair). It has generally Estates-General.been assumed that the first assembly of Estates was that whichPhilip summoned in 1302 to support him in his struggle againstBoniface VIII, and that the first Estates summoned for financialpurposes were those of 1314. RI. de Studler however (quoted byMartin, v. 123) thinks that he has discovered instances of assembliesof the Estates for financial purposes going back to 1295.[This if correct would afford a curious coincidence nith Englishparliamentary history, for that is the year of Edward 1's greatmodel Parliament.] Anyhow, these applications to the Estates didnot prevent Philip 1V from imposing taxes by his own arbitraryill. As ill. Martin says (v. 122), the French kings as a rule only0

&be bobernanre of QEngIanD*applied to the Estates for what they could not take in other ways.A tax, imposed in 1292, and continued apparently through thereign, gained from its special odiousness the name of maltolt(Martin, iv. 399, 502, 510-1). It is said that Louis X promisedto levy 1ko taxes without the consent of the Three Estates, and thatthis concession was confirmed by Philip V1 in 1338. But forneither fact is the authority as good as could be wished (Picot, U. S.,pp. 29 f. ; Hallam, Middle Ages, i. 227 f.). Anyhow the promises,if made, were indifferently kept. Under John the Estates played agreat part in financial as in other matters. But their constitutionalefforts ~erished in the reaction which followed the murder ofhlarcel; and after the peace of Bretigni the arbitrary exactions reappear(Hallam, U. S., p. 232 ; Martin, v. 231). The taxesoriginally imposed for the ransom of King John were prolongedand augmented to Charles V by the Estates of 1367 and 1369, butafter the expiration of the last term of one year for which they hadbeen granted, the king continued to raise and even increased themby his sole prerogative (Picot, U. S., pp. r 86-8, 200-207, 227 ;Martin, v. 277, 303-5; Hallam, U. S.). M. Martin justly regardsthis fiscal despotism as a terrible set-off against the inestimableservices which Charles the Wise rendered to his country. 'Herestored national independence, but destroyed liberty both thenand for the future ' (U. S., p. 305). On his death-bed he abolishedthe taxes which he had imposed without the consent of the Estates,Iqui moult me grbvent et me poisent en courage' (ib. 332).And so great was the popular excitement caused by the report ofthis abolition, that the government of Charles V1 in an assemblyof notables (not of Estates, as Hallam, p. 232, appears to think)was forced to confirm it. But to carry on the government withoutthese taxes, or at least a considerable proportion of them, was impossible.Unfortunately neither the rulers nor the people of Franceat this juncture saw any middle course between the total abolitionof these taxes and their unconstitutional imposition. And thepeople must share with their rulers the responsibility for whatfollowed. In 1382 the taxes were re-imposed by a simple act ofpower, for thirty years they were levied without any vote of theEstates; and arbitrary taxation combined with almost every otherform of public evil to make the reign of Charles V1 what Sullycalled it, 'the grave of good laws and good morals to the French '(Picot, U. S., pp, 237-250, 316). From this rapid survey it will beseen that it is impossible to agree with Fortescue that 'many ofSt. Louis' successors ' observed the rule of not imposing taxes withoutthe assent of the three estates.'pe iij estates wich . . . bith like to the courte of theparlement in Ingelonde.] Commynes from the French sidemakes the same comparison. Speaking of England he says:les choses y sont longues : car le Roy ne peult entreprendre unetelle ceuvre sans assembler son parlement, qui vault autant commeles trois Estatz' (Liv. iv. c. I). Roughly speaking the comparisonis a just one. But to point out all the differences between themin composition, procedure, history and ultimate fate would requirea much longer note than can be attempted here.in to late dayes that . . . the iij estates durst not come to Establishgedre,etc.] This refers to the establishment of the standingarmy and of the permanent faille at the Estates-general of Orleans army andin 1439. Fortescue is however wrong in attributing the cessation 2:7h,enrofthe meetings of the Three Estates to fear of the English. In the taille inearlier years of Charles VIIi reign the Estates met frequently ; Ti:73and their patriotic self-sacrifice combined with the enthusiasmcreated by Joan of Arc to effect the regeneration of France. Itwas rather the exhaustion which followed these efforts, the wearinessinduced by these frequent meetings, together with the desireto put a term to the external and internal evils from which Francewas suffering, which led the Estates to surrender to the Crown thetwo most essential safeguards of liberty, control of the purse, andcontrol of the army. Fortescue is therefore wrong further inregarding, as apparently he does regard, the imposition of ihepermanent laiZZe as an act of royal usurpation. It was thedeliberate act of the Estates themselves, whereby they committedpolitical suicide, laid the foundation of the despotism of Louis X1and his successors, and sacrificed the whole constitutional future ofFrance to the conveniences and animosities of the hour. Thetruth was not long in coming out. In February, 1442, an assembly Remonofthe nobles ventured to represent to the king ' comment telles ~ ~ ~ ~ ~tailles et impositions se doivent mettre sus, et imposer ; et appeller Feb. 1442.les seigneuries, et les estats du Royaume;' and received foranswer, ' Quant aux tailles le Roy . . . de son auctoritd Royal . . .les peut mettre sus, . . . et n'est j'a nu1 besoing d'assembler lestrois estats pour mettre sus les dictes tailles, car ce n'est quecharge, et despence au pauvre peuple ' (Monstrelet, ed. 1595, vol.0 2

CLtjap, iif,ii. f. 194). Fortescue does not dwell here, as in the correspondingchapter of the Be Laudidus (c. 35), on the evils caused by theother great measure of 1439, viz. the establishmellt of the stand-Testimony ing army. But on both these points his judgement is confirmedof Corn-nlynes and by that of men so opposed to one another as Commynes theBasin. panegyrist, and Basin the denigrator of Louis XI; the formerof whom says with reference to these measures, 'Le roy CharlesV11 fut le premier . . . qui gaigna ce point d'imposer tailles Bson plaisir, sans le consentement des Estatz de son royaulme; . . .mais ad ce qui est advenu depuis et adviendra, il ... mist unecruelle plaie sur son royaulme, qui -1onguement seignera ' (Liv. vi.c. 6); while Basin says, 'in hanc miseriam tributorum atqueexactionum extremam servitutem regnum Francic .. . sub pretextunecessitatis . . . devoluturn est, ut omnes regni incole adnutum regis ... talliabiles publice praedicentur, de factoque im-manissime tallientur ' (i. r 71-2). The authorities for this note willbe found in Picot, U: S. pp. 316-340 ; Martin, vi. 421-3.wolde not sett any suche charges . . . uppon the nobles.]Exemption$2:~~ The exemption of the French nobility from taxation was due tonoblesfrom the fact, that the military service which they discharged in persontaxation.was originally considered as exonerating them from any furthercontributions to the necessities of the state. Philip Augustusonce ventured to break through this rule, but the experimentseems not to have been repeated (Hallam, hIidfile Ages, i.212). The exemption continued long after any rational groundfor it had ceased to exist; and the discontent which it occasionedwas one cause among many of the French Revolution.Parallel Something of the same kind, though in a mitigated form, existedfor a time in England. During the whole of the Middle Ages theHistory. barons and knights of the shire taxed themselves at a lower ratethan did the representatives of the boroughs and cities. (Seethe table in Gneist, Verwaltungsrecht, i. 410.) The fact that thebarons and knights always taxed themselves in the same proportionshows that in England the tendency existed which as wehave seen (supra, p. 190) prevailed in Scotland, and generally onthe Continent, for the representatives of the lesser landowners torank themselves with the second, rather than with the third Estate.Happily in England this tendency was defeated ; and the impositionof taxation became the act not of separate classes, but of the wholenation.so augmented the same charges.] At the death of Charles I,,,,,V11 the taih'e stood at 1,800,000 livres per annum, while the the failkstanding army consisted only of I 700 men-at-arms ; the infantry and ing a,y, standbeingsupplied by thefrancs-archers, of whom each parish was ~ h ~ f ~ ~ #bound to furnish one. In Louis XI'S time this number seems to archers.have been raised to two, for in the De Laudidus, c. 35, Fortescuesays: 'quelibet villa sernper sustinet sagittarios duos ad minus, etalique plures in omni apparatu, et habilmentis sufficientibus adserviendum regi in guerris suis, quociens sibi libet eos summonere,quod et crebro facit.' They were freed from payment of allimposts; hence their name, and this was the only expense whichthey occasioned to the state in time of peace. In time of war theyreceived pay at the rate of four ltilres tournois a month. At thedeath of Louis XI the taille stood at 4,~oo,ooo livres per annum,the number of men-at-arms had been raised to 5000, while inplace of the francs-archers, abolished by Louis XI after the battleof Guinegate in 1479, there was a permanent force of infantryconsisting of 25,000 men. (See Martin, vi. 381, 430-1 ; vii. 31,139, 143 ; Commynes, Liv. v. c. rg; Liv. vi. c. 6.)the same commons be SO impouerysshid, &C.] On the Conditionstate of the French peasantry, cf. De Laudlails, c. 35. The contrastwhich Fortescue here draws between the natural advantages peasantly.of France and t'he misery of the peasantry is one which struck allobservers from his time down to the French Revolution. Heylin(1600-1662) says : ' The soil is extraordinary fruitful and haththree loadstones to draw riches out of other countries : corn, wine,and salt. . . . Notwithstanding the fruitfulness of the soil, miserableis the condition of the peasant by reason of the intolerable taxesand the great and uncertain rents which are set upon them by thelandlords. There are many among them who farm thirt~: fortyacres of wheat and vines, who never drink wine or eat good breadthroughout the year' (Cosmography, ed. 1652, p. 147). But thelo~vest depth both of misery and despotism was reached when aFrench minister (Foulon), on its being ' objected to some financeschemeof his, " What will the people do?" made answer, in thefire of discussion, " The people may eat grass:" hasty words which flyabroad irrevocable, and will bring back tidings ! ' (Carlyle, FrenchRevolution, Part i. Bk. iii. ch. g ; cf. ib., Bk. v. ch. ix.) See alsonotes to Chap. X. pp. 267-8, below, and the references there given.made of grete caunuas.] Among the estimated yearly expenses Can-

of the household of George Duke of Clarence in 1469 occurs thefollowing item : ' Canvas zoo elles at xl. E.-% 4 ;' i.e. the price ofcanvas was rather less than qd. per yard (Ordinances of theHousehold, p. 103). In an inventory of an Oxford scholar's goodsin 1448 occur the following items : ' Item, unus " canveys" pretiumvj.d.' ' Item, canveise l' pretium iij,d.' (Muniments Academica,p. 579). In Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 237 a, is a grant for life to oneRobert Sherwynde of officium mensurarum pannorum laneorumac canves' infra civitatem London'.' Waterhous, speaking of thissame canvas, says : ' This I myself have seen the peasants of Francein, God knows, with wooden shoes and pitiful1 other accoutrements'(p. 442). Cf. De laudibus, ed. Amos, p. 132, note.French Scute.] The French scute, or crown, was worth 3s. 4d., or halfScute. an English noble, which was 6s, 8d. Thus in the English versionof the Treaty of Troyes, given in Rymer, ix. 916, occurs the followingarticle : ' The forsayd Katerine shall take and have Douer inour Roiaulme of Englond, as Quenes of Englond hedir toward werewont for to take and have; That is to saye, to the Somme of fortybIill. Scutes be Yere; of the ~vhiche Tweyne algates shall be wortha Noble Englyshe.' And in the confirmation of this article in thefirst Parliament of Hen. V1 : 'a1 somme de XI. &'I. Escutes, desqueux deux toutdys serroient del value d'un noble Engleterre.'Rot. Parl. iv. 183 b.Inability of not able to fight, &C.] Macchiavelli in the sixteenth, andBacon in the seventeenth century made the same observation : cf.easants to&ht . the former's Ritraffi delle Case della Fliiancia, written after hislast legation in France in I 5 I o ; and Bacon's essay, ' Of the trueGreatness of Kingdoms.'except his nobles, &C.] And the nobles had proved but apoor defence at Crecy, Poitiers, and Agincourt. Added to which,it was Louis XI'S policy to dispense as much as possible with themilitary service of the nobles, whom he allowed to compound for itby payment of a sum of money (Martin, vi. 139, 143). We haveseen already how Louis XI. abolished the free archers and sub-Foreign stituted for them a standing body of infantry. The nucleus of this.new army was a band of 6000 Swiss, who were lent to Louis byries.the Cantons (Martin, U. S.). Xgidius Romanus, De Regimine, 111. ii.6, makes it one of the points in which the tyrant differs from thetrue king, quod tirannus non curat custodiri a civibus sed abextraneis.' A tyraunt wol not haue to warde of his bodye citeseynsnoteff. Ebap. iii,i bore in his owne reigne, but he takej, to straungers a1 Fe war&and kepyng of his body ' (MS. Digby, 233, f. I 35 d) Cf. St.Thomas, quoted by Baumann, Staatslehre, &C., p. 133.Scottes.] All readers of Quentin Durward will remember the ~h~ scotsScots Guard of Louis XI, in which Quentin was enrolled under Guard.the auspices of his uncle. So great became the fame of this celebratedguard that in later times its original institution was attributedto Charles the Fat, and even to Charles the Great. Its real origin ~ torigin.sis probably to be traced to the reign of Charles VII, and it is saidto have been first formed out of those Scotch auxiliaries who survivedthe battle of Verneuil (Aug. 17, 1424)~ in which Bedfordinflicted such a crushing defeat on a mixed force of French andScots. Before this however, viz. in 1401-2, Louis of Anjou hadtaker1 into his pay a small Scotch guard under the command ofthe Earl of Crawford, with a view to fortifying himself against hisrival the Duke of Burgu~dy. Commynes mentions the ScotchGuards as attending Louis XI to the siege of Libge, where theyshowed themselves ' bien bonnes gens; ' Liv. ii. c. 12 (see F.Michel, Les l?cossais en France, i. 29f., 101-2; Burton, Hist.of Scotland, ii. 398). In Appendix D to Rymer, pp. 167-9,there is a list of letters of naturalization granted to members of theScotch Guard from March I 452 to Feb. I 474.Spaynardes, ~rrogoners.] The Arragonese seem thereforenot to be included under the term Spaniards, the Castilians beingregarded as Spaniards par excellence. Cf. infra, Chapter ix, whereFortescue speaks of the king of Castile as king of Spain; andnote ad loc., pp. 261, 264, below.men of Almeyn.] This term includes, if it does not principally The Swiss.refer to, the Swiss. The Swiss cantons were legally included inthe German Empire till the peace of Westphalia in 1648. Theexact title of the league of the Forest Cantons which became thebasis of the later Swiss Confederation was ' The Old League ofHigh Germany.' Commynes, Liv. v. c. I, speaks of ' ces viellesligues d'hlemagne, qu'on appelle Suisses.' The name Swiss is infact simply an extension to the whole confederation of the name ofthe Canton of Schwytz; an extension due to the fact that it wasSchwytz which led the Confederacy in the struggle against Ziirich,allied with the ancient enemy Austria, 1436-1450 (Weber, Weltgeschichte,ix. 72 ff.; Dandliker, Hist. du peuple Suisse, pp. 86 ff.).Englonde, wich is an Ile, . . . mey not lyghtly geyte

Indar sOUCOT8, &C.] From this passage we see that the feeling of ourposition ofxnglnnd a forefathers towards the ' silver streak ' was very diferent from oursource of own. Cp. Rot. Parl. v. 214 a, vi. 4 a, where the fact that 'thisdanger.Lande is environed with ennemyes' is given as the motive forgrants of liberal subsidies. The insular position of England, so farfrom being regarded as a source of strength, was considered agreat element of weakness. The other point of view is howeversometimes found. In the ' Libel of English Policy ' it is said :' Kepe than the see, that is the walle of Englond' (Political Songs,ii. 202). Capgrave uses the same metaphor, but he says that England'senemies have scaled this wall (De Illustr. Henr. pp. 134-5).Of the unprotected state of the English coasts during the Lancastrianperiod something will be said in the notes to Chap. vi.below, pp. 234, 237. But, apart from the experience of his owntimes, Fortescue need hardly have gone back to the days of the PictsAttacks on and Scots to prove the liability of England to external attack. Tothecoasts. say nothing of the Danish and Norman invasions, the French hadmade numerous attacks on the English coasts at the end of Edward111's reign, and at the beginning of the reign of Richard I1 (Nicolas,Hist. of Royal Navy, ii. 125, 132, 134, 260-2). In 1385-6 aformal invasion of England was projected, which caused the utmostalarm, though ultimately it came to nothing (ib. 296 ff.). It wasthe fortifications erected by Henry V111 out of the funds derivedfrom the dissolution of the monasteries which first secured theEnglish coasts from insult (Froude, Hist. of England, iii. 69-72);though RIr. Rogers denies that what Henry did was of any value(kkrork and Wages, p. 325).wich was well provid in the tyme of the Bretons.1 Allthis pretended history is, lilie the story of Brutus.in Chapter ii,derived mediately or immediately from Geoffrey of Rlonmouth,Hist. Brit. vi. cc. 1-5. In Fortescue's copy of Rede's Chroniclethe corresponding portion of history occupies folios I I, 12.litle ~retayn.] The origin of this name is thus given by Rede :Jlaximus (Geoffrey calls him Maximianus) . . . Armoricun~regnum expulsis incolis sibi subjugavit, quod et dedit Conano.. . . Hic omnem electam juventutem milicie Britanice posuit inArmorica, quam minorem Britanniam appellavit.' f. 11, ro; cf.Geoff. Mon. v. c. I 4 : ' fecitque alteram Britanniam.' The Libelof English Policy ' calls Brittany both ' Lytell Bretayne' and Pet?Bretayne' (Political Songs, ii. 164, 169).note$, Clbap, ib,gret Artour was one of thair issue.] Arthur, according to Arthur.Geoffrey, was the son of Uther Pendragon, the youngest of thethree sons of Constantinus. His birth is told in Geoff. Rlon. viii.CC. 19, 20, his accession in ix. C. I ; cf. Rede, ff. 16 ff. I have Higden'salready mentioned (above, p. 186) Higden's wholesome scepticisn~ Scepticism.as to Geoffrey's accounts of the exploits of Arthur. Higdengrounds his doubts upon the silence of Gildas and Bede; Polychron.v. 336. Higden's translator Trevisa is much scandalized Trevisa'sat this scepticism. A similar argument would prove that many $fyg$,,n,things related by St. John were untrue, because they are not relatedby any of the other Evangelists; and ' he were of false byleve pattrowede pat pat argument were worp a bene.' Trevisa admits howeverthat 'it may we1 be pat Arthur is ofte over preysed, and sobeep meny oper.'and therfore the peple therof be not in such peynurie, &C.]011 the condition of the English commons at this time see thenotes to Chapter xii. infra. Here Illay be noted that Fortescueattributes the greater prosperity of the English commons, as comparedwith the French, to the greater amount of constitutionalliberty which they enjoyed.ut ex fructibus eorum, &C.] Matth. vii. 16, 20. Fortescuehas prefixed an ut to the quotation which is not in the original,thus throwing the construction out of gear. Accordingly severalRISS. read cognoscafis.CHAPTER IV.a kynges office stondith in thynges, &C.] Both Glanville Twofoldand Bracton begin their respective works with a very similar senti- :~!'~."'"ment. The former's words, repeated almost verbatim by the Testimorryauthor of Fleta, are : ' Regiam potestatem non solum armis contra of medin.-val writers ;rebelles insurgentes oportet esse decoratam, sed et legibus, adsubditos et populos pacifice regendos, decet esse ornatam.' Brac- Eracton.ton says : 'In Rege qui recte regit, necessaria sunt duo hzc, armavidelicet et leges, quibus utrumque tempus, bellorum et pacis, red&possit gubernari.' Aquinas, De Regimine, says : ' Triplex cura immi- Aquinas.net regi.Primo quidem de successione hominum, . . . qui diversisofficiis praesunt. . . . Secundo autem ut suis legibus et praeceptis

RgidiusRumanus.. . . homines sibi subjectos ab iniquitate coerceat. . . . Tertio . . .ut multitudo sibi sllbjecta contra hostes tuta reddatur' (i. C. 15).And Bgidius Romanus, in a passage which is closely modelled onthe above chapter of Aquinas, says that there are three mainobstacles to peace, which arise 'unum . . . ex naturb; . . . aliud . .ex perversitate civium ; tercium . . ex malevolencia hostium ' (DeRegimine, 111. ii. 8). Or, as his translator expresses it, 'On perofspringep as it were of kynde, pe oper of shrewednesse of men,Roger of pe Pridde of euel wille of enemyes;' f. 137 b. And the authorWaltham.of the Conzpendium Morale quotes to the same effect, InnocentiusExtravag., Be supplicio neglzgenlium pralaforum, cap. Grandi: ' Notajustas causas dandi curatorem regibus, videlicet si regnum suumnesciunt defendere, vel in eo justiciam et pacem servare;' f. 38 C.'Testimonyot publicThe same doctrine is frequently laid down in Parliament, anddocuments. in public documents. In the Parliament of 142 7 Archbishop Kemp,the Chancellor, in his opening discourse, 'asseruit . . . debitumSuperiorum tria specialiter continere, videlicet, suos Subditos abInimicorum insultibus exterius protegere et defensare ; pacem ettranquillitatem inter eos interius conservare; ac tertio, debitumJusticie complementurn eis equanimiter ministrare ' (Rot. Parl. iv.316 a). And in a document of the year 1458 Henry V1 acknowledgesthe duty which he owes to his dominions 'non tantum indefensione exterius, sed ad providendum pro sanis directione etregimine eorundem interius ' (Whethamstede, i. 298 ; cf. ib. I 79,and P. P. C. vi. 174). And in appointing York Protector in 1454,'the Lordes . . . devysed to the seid Duke . . . the seid name ofProtectour and Defensour, the whiche emporteth a personell dueteof entendaunce to the actuell defence of this land, as well ayenstth' enemyes outward, if case require, as ayenst Rebelles inward, ifThese eny happe to be ' (Rot. Parl. v. 242 b). It cannot be said thatduties notdischarged under Henry V1 either of these duties was adequately discharged ;by HenryVI.and the first Parliament of Edward IV hardly overstated the casewhen they said that 'in his tyme . . . unrest, inward werre andtrouble, . . . abusion of the Lawes, partialite, riotte, extortion . . .have been the gyders and leders of the noble Reame of Englond inauncien tyme . . . reputed of grete honoure . . . (but under him)fallen from that renommee unto miserie, . . . shamefull and soroufulldecline' (Rot. Parl. v. 464 a). And in the Parliament of 1467-8,Edward declared through his Chancellor Robert Stillington, Bishopof Bath and Wells, 'that his entent fynall was to ministre Lauefiote$,QLBap* ib,and Justice, and to plante, fixe, and sette peas thorough all this hisReame, . . . and also entended to provyde an outward pease forthe defence and suerte of this Reame ' (ib. 622 b). For the wholeof this passage cf. De Laudzbus, c. 37.rts hit apperith bi the said flrst boke of kynges.] Thepassage meant is probably I Sam. viii. 20, ' Judicabit nos rexnoster, et egredietur ante nos, et pugnabit bella nostra pro nobis '(Vulgate).sithin he oppressith thaim more hym self, &c,] Onthe poverty and oppression of the French commons see notes toChap. iii. p. 197, above. Here Fortescue can hardly be acquittedof exaggeration. It was largely the oppressions of the feudallords which made possible the development of the royal despotismin France. One tyrant was at least better than many, and so thepeople felt.as Seynt Thomas saith, whan a kynge, &C.] This is from King andthe Be Regimine, i. c. I : Si regimen injustum per unum tantum Tyrant.fiat, qui sua commoda ex regimine querat, non autem bonummultitudinis sibi subjecta ; talis rector brannus vocatur, nomine afortitudine derivato ; quia scilicet per potentiam opprimit, non perjustitiam regit ;' cp. ib. c. 3, iii. c. 11. Fortescue alludes to thispassage again in N. L. N. i. c. 28, where he repeats St. Thomas'sderivation of 9rannus, with additions derived from the Cafholiconof John Balbi of Genoa (Januensis). [On the derivation see LordCarlingford's note, ad loc., and for Balbi cf. Hallam, Lit. Eur. i. 82.The Cafholicon was written about 1286.1 &gidius Romanusdiscusses the difference between the king and the tyrant in BeReginzzite, 111. ii. 6 ff., while the Con2pendium Jlorclle tracesthe growth of tyranny to the general corruption of the humanrace: ' surrepentibus viciis in tirannidem regna conversa sunt;'fol. 30 a. Pecock, Fortescue's contemporary, defines tyrannyin exactly the same way : ' In two maners ouerers mowenholde and vse her ouerte vpon her vndirlingis. Oon maner is bitiranrie, which is forto in alle deedis of ouerte awaite and performeher owne profit oonli and not the profit of her vndirlingis. . . . Another maner of ouerte . . . is for to . . . awaite and performe theprofit of the vndirlingis in hem wee1 reuling bi doom of resoun '(Repressor, pp. 299 f.). The original source of the distinction is Origin ofAristotle, Politics, 111. vii. But the distinction has an interestinghistory during the Middle Ages. It was eagerly seized upon by

fl0te8.QLhap, ib,C'sc madec>€ it by the~le~icalImty doringtheMiddleAges.kiincmar.GregoryVII.John ofSalisbury.medizval ecclesiastics in order to justify their opposition to thesecular power. I have already (notes to Chap. ii. p. 182, above)quoted Hincmar's use of the etymology ' rex a regendo dicitur.'And in the same passage he continues : ' Quicumque rex veraciterrex est legi non subjacet quia lex non est posita justo, sed injustis ;. . . alioquin (rex) adulter, homicida, injustus, raptor, et aliorumvitiorum obnoxius quilibet, vel secretk, vel publick judicabitur asacerdotibus, qui sunt throni Dei, in quibus Deus sedet, et per quossua decernit judicia' (De Divoriio Loth. et Tetb., Quastio vi).Gregory V11 is, as might be expected, one of the most forcibleexponents of these ideas. In a letter addressed to Hermannbishop of Netz in 1080 A.D. he says, ' Quis nesciat reges et ducesab iis habuisse principium, qui, Deunl ignorantes, superbia, rapinis,perfidia, homicidiis, postremo universis pene sceleribus, mundiprincipe diabolo agitante, super pares, scilicet homines, dominari caecacupiditate et intolerabili prasumptione affectaverunt? . . . Omnibusnempe regibus et principibus terrs qui religiose non vivuntet in actibus suis, Deum, ut oportet, non metuunt, dzmones dominanturet misera servitute confundunt. . . . Quis igitur vel tenuitersciolus sacerdotes dubitet regibus anteferri? Quod si reges propeccatis suis a sacerdotibus sunt judicandi, a quo rectius quam aRomano pontifice judicari debent ? ' (Epist. Lib. viii. Ep. 21).And compare an earlier epistle to the same prelate (Epist. Lib. i.Ep. 2, 1076 A.D.), where princes, 'qui honorem suum et lucra tem-poralia justicis Dei przponunt,' are roundly described as limbsof Antichrist. One of the most pertinent passages however thatI have found relating to this subject is contained in a letterof Becket's to Pope Alexander I11 with reference to his ownquarrel with Henry I1 : 'At, inquiet, reddenda erant Czsari quseCasaris erant. Sed etsi in pluribus obtemperandum Regi, inillis talnen obtemperandum non est, in quibus efficitur ne Rexsit. Non essenf illa Cmaris sed Qr~nni' (Epistola, ed.Brussels, 410. 1682, Lib. i. Ep. 30). But the writer in whomthis combination of hierarchic and democratic ideas appears in themost striking form is John of Salisbury, the strenuous adherent ofBecliet. The tyrant, with him, is distinguished from the prince bythe violent origin of his power, (with him too Nimrod is thz firsttyrant,) and by the fact that he does not rule according to law.The prince is the image of God, the tyrant of Lucifer. The princereceives the sword of his power from the Church; the tyrant is' plerumque occidendus.' Nor is this a mere casual remark. Johnof Salisbury formally justifies tyrannicide (Policraticus, i. c. 4,iv. CC. 1-3, vii. c. I 7, viii. cc. 17, 18, 20). Dr. Stubbs (C. H. i. The medi-146) has justly protested against t5e views of Allen, that the wa'not supmedievalclergy were the great upholders of the doctrine of polters ofthe divine right of kings, as 'shallow and unfair.' But they are thedoctrineof divinemore than shallow and unfair, they are often the exact reverse rightof the truth. The clergy were the great opponents of that doctrine,the chief advocates for the imposition of limitations on the royalpower, in opposition to the lawyers who carried on the absolutisttradition of the Roman Law; and the doctrine of the lawfulnessof popular opposition to that power under hierarchical sanctimwas no invention of Scotch Reformers, or of French Leaguers, (onwhom see Ranlre, Hist. of Engl., book 4. chap. 6) ; but had alreadybeen developed in the Middle Ages. There is, as M. Janet observes,a touch of tribunician eloquence in the passage, quoted above, inwhich Gregory V11 traces the origin of monarchies to a sourcethe reverse of divine; while the worst doctrines of the politicalJesuits are anticipated by John of Salisbury. St. Thomas declares Aquinnsemphatically against tyrannicide, Be' Rqbine, i. c. 6 :' Hoc and IiortescueonApostolics doctrina non congruit. . . . Esset hoc multitudini Tyrannipericulosumet ejus rectoribus, si privata prssumptione aliqui tideattentarent prasidentium necem, etiam tyrannorum. . . . Nagis. . . immineret periculum multitudini de amissione regis, quamremedium de substractione tyranni. Videtur autem magis contratyrannorum savitiam non prasumptione privata aliquorum, sedauthoritate publica procedendum.' And in this he is followed byFortescue ; though as a lawyer Fortescue grounds his argumentrather on the legal principle that no one may be put to deathwithout trial : ' nec sine judicio aliquem occidi permittit lex ;'N. L. N. i. c. 7 (Works, p. 70). On the lawfulness of resistance Aqninas onto a tyrant St. Thomas has a fine passage in the Summa, SlrundaSecunde, Quast, xlii. Art. z, where he is discussing the subject ofsedition : ' Regimen tyrannicum non est justum : quia non ordinaturad bonum commune, sed ad bonum privatum regentis. . . . Et ideoperturbatio hujus regiminis non habet rationem seditionis : nisi fortequando . . . multitudo subjecta majus detrimenturn patitur ex per-turbatione consequenti, quam ex tyranni regimine. ~I.1u.i~ aufembrannus sedifiosus est, qui in populo sibi subject0 discordias et seditionesnutrit, ut citius dominari possit.' On the whole subject of this

note see Janet, i. 35 1-373, 396,42 1-2 ; to whom I am indebted forsome of the above references.Kynge Heroude, BC.] Matth. ii. 16-8. Fortescue uses thisillustration of Herod in exactly the same way in N. L. N. i. c. 28(Works, p. go).Ahab. Acab.] I Kings xxi. On this compare N. L. N. i. c. 27(Works, pp. 89 f.) : ' Achab quondam rex Israel jus regium habuit,quod proclamavit Propheta. . . . Ac licet predictus Achab visussit erga Naboth predictum non regaliter sed politice quodammodoprocessisse, dum non potestate regiP voluit auferre vineam ejus, sedsibi optulit vinese pretium, et, cum nec sic illam nancisci poterat,processu legis per testes productos et sententiam judicialiter inNaboth latam vineam optinuit, tamen quia factum illud contra legisnaturz decretum, quod nulli permittit alteri facere quod sibi fierinolit, efficiebatur, rex ipse acerbissima comminatione predictaDomini mandato perterritus est.' The case of Ahab is quotedalso by Pseudo-Aquinas, De Regimine, iii. c. 11.ffor theys wordes seid to the profete, BC.] I Sam. viii.g; cp. N. L. N. i. C. 27 (lITorks, p. 89) : ' Idem fuit dicere,predic populo jus regis," et, " predic eis potestatem quam exercerepoterit rex, cum fuerit super eos constitutus." ' Compare the notesto Chap. i. above, pp. 177-8.as ofte as such a kynge, &C.] For the sentiment comparethe latter part of the passage given in the last note but one;from which it appears that this is no less true of acts done' politically.'Fortescue Pe lawe off nature.] Fortescue's views on the law of nature$h",'tIf;,"w are contained in the first part of the De NafudLegis Nafur~. Hethere says that the golden rule, though contained in the Law andthe Gospel, is really a part of the Law of Nature, as the Canon Lawsays: ' Jus naturale est quod in lege et Evangelio continetur, quoquisque jubetur alio facere quod sibi vult fieri,' &c. (c. 4). Fortescue'sanalysis of the Law of Nature is derived partly from theCanon Law, but mainly from St. Thomas, Summa, Prinza Secundre,Quest. xc-cviii. See especially Quaest. xciv, xcv ; cp. also Bgidius,De Regimint, 111. ii. 24 ff. Pecock in the first eight chaptersof the ' Repressor ' argues in much the' same way as Fortescue,though his object is different, being in fact identical with thatof Hooker in the second book of the ' Ecclesiastical Polity,' viz. torefute those who hold 'that Scripture is the only rule of all thingswhich in this life may be done by men' (Hooker, Heading toBook ii). But Pecock argues like Fortescue, that the Law ofNature, or, as he calls it, ' lawe of kinde, which is doom of resounand moral philosophic,' is not abrogated either by the Old or NewTestament, and is in fact the ultimate ground of many of thethings which they enjoin, though the confirmation given by theirauthority is not to be despised (Repressor, U. S. See esp. pp. 6,18-20, 29-32, 34, 37-40) Nor were these speculations confinedto the study. Stillington in his speech to the Parliament of 1467-8,already quoted, divides 'all the Lawes of the world . . . in thre;that is to sey, the Lawe of God, Lawe of nature, and posityfeLawe ' (Rot. Parl. v. 62213) ; while according to the first Parliamentof Edward IV it was 'using the benefice of the Lawe ofNature' that Richard Duke of York returned to assert his claimto the crown, after his attainder in the Parliament of Coventry(Rot. Parl. v. 465 b).the lawe off nature woll in this case, &C.] For the go1 lenrule as part of the law of nature compare the extract given in thelast note from N. L. N. i. c. 4 ; and for the particular applicationof it to the case of monarchs, compare the story of Trajan quotedin the Conzpend2unz Morale, fol. 39 d : ' amicis eum culpantibus quodnimium esset omnibus comis, respondit talem debere imperatoremesse privatis, quales esse imperatores privatus optasset.' The originalauthority is Eutropius, Lib. viii, c. 5.yet of necessite thai muste be gratter, BC.] On Lancastrianpoverty see the notes to the following chapters; and compareIntroduction, Part I, above, pp 5-6, 12-14, 17.CHAPTER V.creaunce and borowynge.] This was a very common featureof Lancastrian finance. See Introduction, Part I, U. S.such maner of borowynge makith the grete lordis, &C.] Inthe Paston Letters, i. 249, is a bond given by the Duke of York toSir John Fastolf for the sum of L4g7, which is secured on certainjewels which are pledged by the noble borrower. In Ellis's Letters,11. i. 143-4, is a pressing request from Richard Duke of Gloucester

for the loan of £100. Ready money was one of the scarcestarticles in the ilIiddle Ages, and any one who could command asupply of it had enormous power.what dishonour is this, &C.] Compare Pseudo-Aquinas, DeReginzine, i, c. 7: 'Turpe est enim, et multum regali reverentiaderogat, a suis subditis mutuare pro sumptibus regis vel regni.'SO Vincent of Beauvais, Be morali Insfi/ufione, c. r 4 : ' Hec deprudenti rerum domesticarum administratione, ad quam pertineteciam cautela super vitanda debitorum obligacione ; de qua sicloquitur Ambrosius in tractatu de Sancto Thobia : "Paupertas crimennon habet, sed debere verecundum, non reddere verecundius est" '(f. 104, vo) ; with many other good and sensible counsels againstrunning into debt.his subgettes woll rather goo with a lorde Pat is riche,&C.] On this danger, which from the circumstances of his times isconstantly present to Fortescue's mind, see the notes to Chapter ix.below.by asseignementes.] This again was a prominent feature ofLancastrian finance. Every source of revenue, imperial and local,was anticipated before it fell due by assignments made on it forvarious purposes, pensions granted to individuals for real or pretendedservices being one of the heaviest items. (See notes toChaps. vi. xiv. below).wich . . . shall cost hym right miche, &C.] The difficulty,which Fortescue here alludes to, of getting payment of royal grantsmade by assignment or otherwise is forcibly illustrated by twoletters of Nargaret of Anjou, in one of which she writes to thecollectors of the customs in the port of Boston urging them to payto John Wenham and his wife an annuity of ten marks, which theking has granted them out of the customs of that port ; while inthe other she positively writes to the Duchess of Somerset, beggingher to use her influence with her husband (Edmund Beaufort) inorder that one Robert Edmund, a squire of the Queen's, may receivepayment of the sum of 360 ' franks,' which has been grantedhim by the king (Letters of M. of A. pp. 118, 142).a c. fi in hand . . . xl. 3i. worth lande yerely.] In theproclamations issued by Edward IV, March 23, I 470, against theDuke of Clarence and the Earl of Warwick after the overthrow ofSir Robert Welles in the battle of Stamford, it was announced that'he that taketh and bringeth the said Duc or Erle shall have for hisreward to him and his heires, an C li. worth of his lond of yerelyvalue, or M'. li. in redy money at his election ; and for a knyghtxx. li. worth of his lond, or C. marc in money; and for a squyerX. li. worth of his lond or xl. li. in money,' Warkworth's Chronicle,p. 55; of. Rymer, xi. 654. On the history of the attempts to preventthe alienation of the royal domain see notes to chap. xix.pp. 341-2, below.the grettest harme that comyth of a kynges pouerte, &c,] Bad effectsAccording to Whethamstede, i. 249, the resumption act of 1456 was :L:tgieoccasioned by the consideration forced upon the 'probi, providi, Crown.politicique viri, ac maturi, in Parliament0 apud Westmonasteriumcongregati, . . . quomodo pauperiem Regis subsequitur spoliatioplebis, qualiterque ibi oportebit,omnino multam, seu taxam, crescere,ubi res deficiunt necessariae pro regia sustentatione.'So in themanifesto issued by the Yorkivt Lords before the battle of Northampton,which was fought July 10, 1460, they complain infer ariaof 'the pouerte and mysery that . . . oure souerayne lorde standethinne, nat hauyng any lyuelode of the croune of Englond whereofhe may kepe hys honorable housholde, whyche causethe thespyllynge of his lyegemenne' (Engl. Chron. p. 86). In theessay 'Of a King,' wrongly attributed to Bacon, it is pithily.said, 'Want supplieth itself of what is next, and many timesthe next way.'exquysite meanes of geytinge of good.] For some of the Financialfinancial shifts to which the Lancastrian kings were reduced by shifts Lancas- of thetheir poverty see Introduction, U. S. Edward IV with much less trian andexcuse was not above resorting to similar ' exquysite meanes,' in YOrkistorder to render himself independent of Parliamentary grants. ThisKings.object, and the means which Edward took to attain it, are statedmost clearly by the Cont. Croyl., p. 559, cf. ib. 535, 539. Fore- Henevomostanlong these means would come his invention of benevo- lence'.lenccs : ' ut per benevolentiam quilibet daret id quod vellet, immoverius quod nollet ' (Ib. 558, cf. Three Fifteenth Cent. Chron., p.175, on the large sums raised by Edward IV by means of PrivySeals). Next to this would come the system which Fortescue sxxctiollcharacterizes as 'putting defaute in his subgettes;' in other words Of fines.that rigorous and inequitable enforcement of penal statutes, manyof them obsolete, which was a favourite financial device both ofEdward IV and of Henry V11 (see Stowe, p. 431 a; S. C. H. iii.2 I 7). The treason laws, as might be expected, were pre-eminentlyP

'Ordinaryand extraordinaryexpenditure.adapted to this kind of extortion. In 7 Edward IV various aldermenof London 'were arested, and treasonne surmysed upponethem, whereof thei were acquyte, but thei lost grete goodes to thekynge' (Warkworth, p. 5, cf. Cont. Croyl., p. 539). SO of theKentish adherents of the Bastard Falconbridge in his attempt onLondon in May, I 47 I, it is said, ' some manne payed cc. marke,some a c. pownde, and some more and some lesse, so that it costethe porest manne vijs. whiche was noit rorthe so myche, but wasfayne to selle suche clothinge as thei hade, and borrowede theremanent, and laborede for it aftyrwarde; and so the Kynge hadeout of Kent myche goode and lytelle luff. Lo, what myschef groysafter insurreccion ! &C.'(Warkworth, pp. 2 1-2). This latter passageis curiously like Fortescue in style. Similar charges were madeagainst Richard 11.impossibile est indigentem, &C.] This is an Avc/orifas fromthe first Book of the Ethics. The original is d8;varov -y&p 4 oh p{Grov7h ~aXh ~p&rrcrv dX~P~Y~~ov ha. I. viii. 8 I 5.CHAPTER VI.I do not think I can better illustrate the general subject treatedof in this and the following chapter, viz. the royal expenditureunder the two heads of ordinary and extraordinary charges, thanby giving an abstract of the financial statements of the threeyears I 41 I, I 42 I, and I 433 ; one from each of the three Lancastrianreigns. The first two are to be found in P. P. C, ii. 7-14, 312-5 (=Rymer, X. I 13), and represent the estimates for the year asprepared by the Council. The third is /n the Rolls of Parliament(v. r3z--9), and contains the statement drawn up by Lord Cromwellon undertaking the office of treasurer in 1433, and laid beforethe Parliament of that year. It is by far the most elaborate andinteresting of the three. An earlier statement of the year 1401 isin P. P. C, i. 154, ii. 56, but it is too fragmentary to be of muchuse.1411.ESTIMATED REVENUE.Subsidy on Wool . . . . . . .Half-tenth of the Province of Canterbury . . .Tunnage and Poundage Proceeds of the Hanaper .Aulnage and Pannage Escheats . . . . . . . .Great Custom df Wool Wards and Marriages . Ferms of the Sheriffs . . . . .Tenth of the Province of ~ orkLittle Custom . . Ferms of Alien Priories . . . . . .ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE.Calais . . ScotchMarches Ireland . . .Castle of Frounsak . . . . . ,Duchy of Aquitaine. . . . King's Household . . .King's Chamber and waidrobe . . .Annuity to Hartonk Van Clncx . . .Treasurer, Privy Seal, Justices, etc. . . .Parchment, etc., for Exchequer, Privy Seal, etc.Arresting Ships, Messengers, Proclamations Liveries of S. George, to Justices, etc. Officers of the Great Wardrobe . . .King's Works (Repair of Castles and Manors) .To the men of Prussia . . . . .Keeping the King's Lions . . . .--Total L48366 1.3 4Total l64406 13 IThe deficit on the estimates is therefore b16,040.It is expresslynoted that no provision is made for the keeping of the sea,nor for any embassies that might be necessary; nor for the wagesof the King's Council, nor for the debts on the household andwardrobe, &c.; nor for any annuities payable at the Exchequer, asopposed, that is, to those which were charged on the revenues ofcounties, the customs of particular ports, &c. With reference tothese last, precepts had already been sent in the August of theprevious year (I 4 10) to the Sheriffs, Collectors of the Customs,Keeper of the Hanaper, &C., ordering them to suspend payment ofall annuities till the king and the council had deliberated uponthem, (Rymer, viii. 651). Parliament when it met granted, besidesP 2Budget of

Budget of1421.the subsidy on Wool and Tunnage and Poundage, a tax of sixand eight-pence on every £20 of income derived from land.ESTIMATED REVENUE.£ S. d.3976 I zGreat Custom of wool . Subsidy on Wool 26035 18 8:Little custom . 2438 9 l!Tuunage and Poundage 8226 10 9;. . . . . . . . .Casual Revenues 15066 1 I 1Total L55743 10 101ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE.f S. I{.. . . . . Marches of Scotland [time of war],, Ireland . . .. Castle of Frounsake . . . . . . . . . .officers of the King's Courts . . . . .,, Collectors and Co~ltrollers of Customs, payable atthe Exchequer . . . . . . .1) ,, Chargeable on the Customs . .others-. . . . . . . ,, chargeable on the Customs . .1)Total £52235 16 103-Keeping of EnglandCalais and the Marches [time of war]Salaries of Treasurer, Privy Seal, Justices, Barons, and otherAnnuities payable at the Exchequer to various Lords andThe surplus on the estimates is therefore £3,507, but out ofthis provision has to be made for the chamber of the king andqueen, for their household, their wardrobe; for the king's works,for the construction of a new tower at Portsmouth ; for the officeof the clerk of the king's ships; for the keeping of the king'slions, and the salary of the Constable of the Tower; for theArtillery and other ordnance for the war ; for the keeping of theking's prisoners ; for embassies, messengers, parchment, &C.; forthe expenses of the Duchess of Holland. It is further noted thatno provision has been made for paying off the various debts of thelate reign, or the debts contracted by the king himself when hewas Prince. Parliament, when it met in Bray 1421, empoweredthe Council to give security for any sums that might be lent to theking; and in December 1421 a tenth and fifteenth were granted;but this, I imagine, would come into a new financial year, theaccounts apparently being made up to IbIichaeImas. There is avery elaborate statement of accounts for the year 1415-6 in P.P.C.i~. 172, ff. But as the items of expenditure are calculated, notfor a year, but for various fractions of a year, they are too complicatedto be abstracted. The estimate of revenue, amounting to£56,966 13s. 4d., may however be studied with advantage, as it ismuch more detailed than that given above, and is for the yearJune 1415-June 1416.1433.ESTIMATED REVENUE.Net proceeds of the Ferms of Counties, etc., andof the Green \Vax, less deductions for ex-penses, Fees, Annuities, etc. ' 1903 8 3lcscheats, Wardships, Marriages . . . 500 o oPee-Ferms of Tofinships and Manors, less deductions21t sz~pra . . . . . 634 10 8Ferm of Lands, etc., in the Icing's hands, lessU. S. . . . . . .Budget ofS. d. L S. d. 1433.3835 10 82Yerm of Subsidy and Aulnage of Cloth, less U. S. I 78 4 ICustom of Wines paid by Foreigners, less U. S.76 17 o.. .Proceeds of the Hanaper, less n. S. . 137 I 2 75Coinage, less u.s. 87 8,, Exchanges, less U. S. , . 79 13 4, Office ' Coronatoris, Marescal,Hospic' Regis ' . . 1 8 5 0Proceeds of Alien Priories, less U. S. , . 205 5 oNet Revenues of Duchy of Aquitaine, less n. S.Net Revenues of Duchy of Cornwall, less U. S..6873 9 73ajj I I323 19 382 l 2 28, 5 8;151 o3, South \%'ales, less u. S. . 470 5 4~L 9, North Wales,' less u,s. . ggo 18 4 1EarIdom of Chester? less U. S. 11 4 0632 10 13I ,I Duchy of Lancaster,$ less U. S. . . . 2408 8 6$]Fines, Amerciaments, Reliefs, etc. .loo o oTotal of ordinary RevenueShirk (Chirk) and Shirklandes . o o oTemporalities of Vacant Bishoprics . o o oProceeds of the Scrut~ny . o o oReliefs and Fines . o o oCustoms and Subsidy of Wools, Tunnage, and Poundage.Averageofl'hreeYears . . .8466 5 logNot Estimated.26966 210:Total L35432 18 g+' Not included in Total, because assigned to John Radclyff in part paymentof L7,629 7s. ')d. due to him; cf. P. P. C. iv. 199.Further reduced from L44 10s. 8d. by the grant of the Manor of Shoteswyk(Shotwick) to Wm. Porter. - .-..~.Not iicluded in the Total.

p----p---3723ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE.L S. d. S. d.DeficitonIreland. 1817 53. . . . .,, Calais . .go64156,, Windsor~astie . . . . 72 8 5.109781zII,, Chamber 666 13 4,, Wardrobe 1300 0 0,, \170rks. . . 666 13 4. . . .King'sHoasehold. . . . .9156 1 41Repair of Windsor Castle66 I3 13618 12 11Pensions, etc., payable at the Exchequer tothe Dowager Queens, and various greatLords, etc. . . .;j56z11\jTages of Collectors ar;d Controllers of theCustoms . . . . . 582 6 8,, Constable of the Tower. . . IOO o o,, Treasnrer, PrivySeal, Justices, Baronsof the Exchequer, and necessaries for theirCoults . . . . . . . 2914 2 j- 11152 ra oKeeping of Ireland. . 2666 13 4,, Scotch Marches1 4816 13 4,, Aquitaine . . . . 273913 4,, Castle of Frounsake . 666 13 410889 13 4Wages of Duke of Gloucester and Council 5133 6 8,, Earl of \Tarwick, the King's Tutor . 166 13 4Pension to Giles of Britanny Custody of the King's Lions .166 13 436 10 oRepair of the King's Ship . . . .-IOO o o5503 3 4Custody of Dukes of Orleans and Bourbon, andthe Count of En . 670 . o oGrooms and Pages of the Household andChamber . . . . . . 126 13 4Embassies to and from the King 2626 13 4hlessengers, etc. . . . . . . zoo o o6To be provided for : Kingdom of France. Aquitaine. Keepingof the Sea. ' Nywenham Brigge.l2Not estimated.Though I have gone over these last accounts several timesin different ways, I cannot wake the totals agree with thosegiven by Lord Cromwell himself. Some items I cannot be surethat I have calculated rightly. But these points are of theless importance, because my object in the present note is not toestimate the condition of the revenue in any given year, butl Double in time of War.Cf. P. P. C. iii. 30 Jmoteb.QCbap, bi,merely to illustrate the various heads of expenditure enumeratedby Fortescue. For the same reason I have not given any particularsof the debt, which amounted to nearly £165,000. On theside of income I have only given the net revenue. The grossordinary revenue is nearly three times as much. The fixed Fixedchargescharges by which it is so much reduced are ' solutiones, vadia, on thefeoda, annuitates;' i. e. expenses, wages, fees or salaries, and ordinarypensions, whether perpetual (in feodo), or for life (ad terminum re'enuevitze). Some of these charges are fair enough ; e. g. the salaries ofthe Chancellor and all his staff are charged against the profits of theHanaper. But many of them were probably of that indefensiblekind which caused so much popular irritation in the fifteenthcentury, and which Fortescue himself is so anxious to abolish. (Seenotes to Chap. xiv. pp. 292-3, below). It should be noticed that inthe accounts for the year 1421 the item of annuities, &c. makes upnearly a fourth of the whole estimated expenditure. It is curiousthat Fortescue nowhere mentions Ireland, which figures prominentlyin all the above accounts. Perhaps he considered that itought to pay its own expenses. How far this was from being the Ireland.case may be seen from the fact that Ireland was constantly one ofthe objects for which supplies were asked in Parliament (Rot. Parl.iii. 425, 454, &C.). In 1406 the Commons complained that 'grandesomme et excessive est ore donez pur la saufe-garde de la Terred'Irlande, ... et nient meyns la dite Terre est en voie de perdicion '(Rot. Parl. iii. 577; cf. 573. The author of the 'Libel of EnglishPolicy' is also evidently in great alarm about Ireland. And thematter lay so near his heart that he proposed to write a separatetreatise on the subject. He says that the Earl of Ormond haddeclared that a year's expenses of the war in France would sufficeto reduce Ireland permanently to order. Political Songs, ii. 185,E). In 1408 the sum of 7000 marks allowed to the Lieutenant ofIreland is secured mainly on English sources of revenue (P. P. C.i. 313, ff.). In 1423 the Earl of March as Lieutenant is allowed5000 marks, to be paid as far as possible out of the Irish revenues,the balance to be paid by England (ib. iii. 68). In 1433 theLieutenant of Ireland was ordered to propose a Resumption Actin the Irish Parliament, ' considered the great need that the kynghath to good' (ib. v. 297).thai nedun to be gretter than woll be the charges, &C.]Compare Bacon's Essay Of Expense: 'Certainly, if a man will

l30teri. QCbap, bi, 217baint IbrnardDe refat~riltari.Assip-~uents forordinaryexpenditure.keep but of even hand, his ordhaly expenses ought to be but to thehalf of his receipts ; and if he think to wax rich, but to the thirdpart.'Seynt Bernarde saith, &C.]This is from 'Bernardus decura rei familiaris,' or 'Epistola Sancti Bernardi . . . ad RaymundumDominum Castri Ambruosii,' printed in opera S. Bernardi(Paris, 1640), col. 1926, and re-edited from a MS. in the LaurentianLibrary by J. C. Amadutius in 'Anecdota Litteraria' (Rome,4 voll. 8v0., 1773-1783), iv. 229, ff. It seems to have beenpopular in the Middle Ages. Mr. Lumby has published a metri-cal paraphrase of it in the Scottish dialect, E. E. T. S. 1870.It was published in German at Tlrittemberg in 1552 under thetitle, 'Die Epistel Sanct Bernards von der Haussorge . . . ver-deudscht durch Johan Spang. [enberg, l].' The passage alludedto by Fortescue is as follows:-' Quod si in tua domo sumptuset reditus sunt aequales, casus inopinatus poterit destruere statumejus.' In the paraphrase this passage runs thus :-'And first provide with werteu pat $i rentTo pi expensis be equiaolenteFor foly expense but temporance is noy,And of his house pe stat it may destroy!-p. z.charges ordinarie.] On the king's ordinary charges, the needfor an ' asseignment of lyvelode' to bear them, the advantages whichwould follow from such assignment, and the means to be taken toprevent the alienation of any part of the revenues so assigned,compare Appendix B, $S 4, 5. The manifesto put forth by Robinof Redesdale in 1469 against Edward 1V contains the followingarticles, which might have been drawn up by Fortescue :-'We, the Kyngis true and feithfulle Commons and subjettes ofthis lond, mekely besechen. . . that hit well lyke hym for the gretwele of hymself, his heires, and the common-wele of us his truesubjettes and Commons, . . . to . . . stablish for evyr to be haddesuche a sufficiente of lyvelode and possescions, by the whichehe and alle his heires aftir llym may mayntene and kepe theire mosthonorable estate, withe alle other ordinarie charges necessarye tobe hadde in this lond. So that he nor noon of his heires, hereafter,of necessite, nede to charge and ley uppon his true Comnlons andsubjettes suche gret impositions as before is expressid; Unlessethat it were for the gret and urgent causes concernynge as well thewellthe of us, as of oure seid sovereyne lord.'Also to be enstablisshid be the seid auctorite, that yf anypersone . . . presume or take uppon them to aske or take possessionsof any of the lyvelod so appoyntyd, that, . . . he betaken and reputyd as he that wold mynysshe and apeire theroyal1 estate of his sovereyn lord, and the commonwele of thislond. And went (without) pardon so to be punysshed.' (Warkworth,pp. 50-1.)wich shalbe worth to the kynge, &C.] v. S. chap. v. adinit. and Appendix B. U. S.This may in nothinge restrane the kynge3s pover, &C.] Arplmentthat con-This argument, which is here introduced with special reference to stitut,onallimitations on the king's power of alienating his property, is in limitation>do notN. L. N. i. c. 26, and in the passage from the De Lnudz'bas cited thein the next note, applied to the subject of constitutional restraints royalon the royal power in general. Lord Carlingford (note,.ad loc.)thinks that the object of Fortescue, in that and other passages, wasto reconcile Prince Edward of Lancaster to the difference betweenthe constitutional monarchy of England, and the despotic governmentwhich he saw during his exile on the Continent. But this style ofargument, by which it is sought to prove that restrictions are norestrictions, is very much older than the circumstances of Fortescue'stime. It forms the burden of a considerable portion ofthe celebrated song on the battle of Lewes ; e.g. :-' Non omnis arctatio privat libertatem,Nec omnis districtio tollit potestatem.Et hnc coarctatio non est servitutis,Sed est ampliatio regia viitntis.Sed et sic angelici spiritus arctantur,Qui quod apostatici non sint confirmantur.Nam qnod Auctor omnium non potest errare,Omnium Principium non potest peccare,Non est impotentia, sed summa potestas,Magna Dei gloria magnaque majestas,' etc.(Political Songs, Camd. Soc., pp. 1~5-7).And Bracton says : ' Potestas injuriae diaboli et non Dei est '(Lib. iii. c, 9. in S. C. H. ii. 301 note); while Whethamstede (i. 353)quotes from Seneca the sentiment : ' vis ad nocendum vis est

pestifera.' Very possibly Fortescue had in his mind the passagein Diodorus about the Egyptian kings, part of which has beenquoted in the, notes to Chap. ii. p. 191, above. ' Veluti privatitenebantur legibus, neque id egre ferebant, existimantes parendolegibus se beatos fore. Nam ab his, qui suis indulgerent cupiditatibus,multa censebant fieri quibus damna periculaque subirent.Scientes enim ssepius se peccare, tamen aut amore, aut odio, autalio animi morbo victi, nihiiominus aberrant.' (Diod. Sic. i. (ii.)7 I, Poggio's Transl.)Soilhistry As to the value of the argument in itself, it seems to rest on aof thearg,,,nent. confusion between the inability to do wrong which comes from thestate of the will, as in the case of God and the Angels, and thatwhich is the result of mere external limitations. To say thatthe latter are in any real sense an increase of power seemsabsurd. Bacon takes much higher ground in distinguishing betweenthem. ' In Place there is license to do good and evil ;whereof the latter is a curse; for in evil the best condition is notto will ; the second not to can. But power to do good is the trueand lawful end of aspiring.' (Essay Of Great Place.) And can itbe said that constitutional limitations only prevent bad kings andministers from going wrong, and have never hindered good kingsand ministers from doing what would be desirable? ProfessorBeesly says of the elder Pitt : 'Pitt was the most toweringstatesman that England has produced. . . . But . . . he workedin the gyves of a constitution. He had to play a game of whichothers had invented the rules.' (Essays on International Policy,p. 169.) But as we cannot ensure a succession of Chathams,we may still believe with Fortescue in the desirability of constitutionalrestrictions. And Fortescue himself gives this very reason(De Laudibus, c. g). After admitting with Aristotle that the ruleof the best man is better than the rule of the best law, he adds:' sed non semper contingit presidentem populo hujusmodi essevirum.'the holy sprites and angels.] Compare the extract givenabove from the song on the battle of Lewes, and De Laudibus, c. I 4(ad finem): ' Potestas, qua eorum alter perperam agere liber est,libertate hujusmodi non augetur, ut posse languescere morive, potentianon est, sed propter privationes in adjecto, impotentia potiusdenominandum. Quia, ut dicit Boetius, " Potentia non est nisi adBonum;" quod posse male agere, ut potest rex regaliter regnansliberius quam rex politice dominans populo suo, potius ejus potestatemminuit, quam augmentat. Nam sancti spiritus, jam confirmatiin gloria, qui peccare nequeunt, potentiores nobis sunt, quiad omne facinus liberis gaudemus habenis.'the kynges housh'olde.] For some account of the royal The royalhousehold.household and its expenses prior to the Lancastrian period, seeS. C. H. ii. 553-8. It is there shown how unpopular an institutionit was, and what a favourite topic of attack it formed; notperhaps because the mal-administration there was worse than inother departments, but because it was more obvious. Other abuses of Abuses it.might require special knowledge for their detection; the extravaganceand selfish rapacity of the household were plain to every one,and, when the court was on progress, were brought to the verydoors of the people's homes. With it too were associated all the Pun~eygrievancesthat gathered round the hated system of purveyance ;a system so hateful that it was attempted to abolish the very name(ib. i. 537). Nor was it very different during the Lancastrian andYorkist period. Complaints as to the state of the household Approyriationofappear frequently on the Rolls of Parliament, and it is with referenceto the household that the plan was most often proposed themaintenanceofwhich Fortescue wished to see applied to the whole of the ordinary the houseexpensesof the crown, of appropriating certain revenues to its hold.maintenance, and making those revenues inalienable. In theParliament of Jan. 1404, revenues to the amount of £1 2,000were appropriated to the household, and all grants made therefromwerk to be $so facio void (Rot. Parl. iii. 528). In 1406the increasing expense and decreasing efficiency of the householdwere the subject of bitter complaint in Parliament, andstringent measures were passed to remedy this state of things,but they were only to remain in force till the end of the nextParliament (ib. 576, 579, 586 b, 587 b, 589 a). In May, 1413, itwas agreed, on the request of the common^, that in all paymentsof annuities the king should be preferred to the extentof £ ~o,ooo annually for the maintenance of his household,chamber and wardrobe (ib. iv. 5). In Nov. 1439, the king' havyng knoweliche of grete murmour and clamour that sholdbe in his Roialme of Englond, for non paiment of the dispensisof his Houshold,' with the assent of the Lords spiritual andtemporal and the Commons, appropriated thereto the net revenuesof the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, and a quarter of

the tenth and fifteenth granted in that Parliament; and authoritywas given to the council to make all necessary regulations forthe household (ib. v. 7, 8, 32). In June, 1442, the Commonspetitioned that these arrangements might be prolonged and mademore stringent, but the king gave an evasive answer (ib. 62-3).In April, 1454, new assignments were made for the householdto the amount of 65,186 6s. 8d (ib. 246-7). In 1455 thesewere reduced below A4,ooo (ib. 320-1); while in 1482 theyrose to nearly AI 1,000, and it was ordered that these assignmentsshould take precedence of all others (ib. ri. 198-9). Forassignments made by the council to the household, cf. Rymer, viii.610; P. P. C. vi. 311-2. The Resumption Acts of 1450 and1455 were both prefaced by a reference to the state of the householdas proof of their necessity. On the former occasion it was declaredthat the annual expense of the household alone was nearly fivetimes the amount of the whole ordinary revenue (Rot. Parl. v.Casual 183, 300). But all these measures were ineffectual; and the debtsre'enues of the household formed a yawning gulf, into which every casualtie! oted tothe house- source of income was thrown without having the effect of causingI", it to close. Thus the rents of forfeited lands were appropriatedto this object (Rot. Parl. iii. 625 ; Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 244 a; P. P. C.i. 108). The goods of felons and outlaws went the same way(Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 246 b, 248 a ; Rymer, viii. 442). Alien priories,temporalities of vacant bishoprics, wardships, marriages, etc., wereutilized for the same purpose (Rymer, viii. 205, 510; Cal. Rot. Pat.h~heinesof p. 265 b; cf. ib. 297 a). Of the various schemes of reform, one atleform.least has been preserved to us. This was drawn up by the GreatCouncil in Nov. 1454, during the incapacity of Henry VI, in fulfilmentof an intention formed by him before his malady attackedhim. This reformed household is modelled on that of Henry V ;and it is stated that by recurring to that model, a great reductionwill be effected. But even SO the household consists of 610regular and 13 occasional officers and servants (P. P. C. vi. 220ff., and, less correctly, in ' Ordinances of the Royal Household ').f.16cr Of the household of Edwartl IV we have an interesting account inA-ig

i the clerkys off theschekquer.] Because the accounts ofthe Treasurer of the household were delivered into the exchequer(Ordinances, etc., p. 64).Salaries the kynges grete officers, his courtes.] From the abofgreat and stracts of accounts given above, it will be seen that the salaries ofJudges. the great officers and of the Judges are classed together there, asthey are by Fortescue here. The Chancellor was paid partly byfees, partly by an annual salary (Foss, Judges of England, ii. 2 I,149). The Treasurer and Privy Seal had each a salary of 6 I perdiem (Rymer, xi. 58 ; Rot. Parl. iv. 437 ; P. P. C. iii. 8). UnderHenry V1 'the nominal salaries of the Judges remained the sameas in former reigns : viz., £40 to the chief, and forty marks to thepuisne Justices of each court. But . . . there were always addi-tional grants . . . to the Chief Justice of the King's Bench of 180marks ; to the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas 140 marks ; andto each of the other Judges IIO marks; and all who acted asJustices of Assize received £20 a year. These sums were payablehalf-yearly at Easter and Michaelmas ; but it is evident they wereFrequently frequently allowed to get into arrear' (Foss, U. S. iv. 227).It wasin arrear.indeed very difficult under Henry V1 to secure to the Judges thatG ready payment ' of their salaries which was, as Fortescue trulysays, so necessary for their efficiency. In 1432 the Commons representedthat, whereas formerly the Justices, Serjeants, and King'sAttorney had always received their salaries half-yearly in readymoney, William Kynwolmershe, late Treasurer of England, hadintroduced the plan of paying them by means of assignments of theKing's debtors ; and it was prayed that in view of the great abuseswhich this system gave rise to, ready-money payments might beresumed (Rot. Parl. iv. 394). The petition was granted; butnone the less in the budget of the next year the debts to Justices,Serjeants, &c. for arrears of salary amounted to £805 (ib. 437).In 1439 the Justices, Serjeants, and Attorney complain that owingto the non-payment of their salaries there was no Justice, exceptthe two chief Justices, who had not lost £ roo per annum by reasonof his office ; and that if remedy were not provided they would haveto resign, to the king's great dishonour; they prayed that certainrevenues might be assigned for their payment (ib. v. 14). Theirprayer was granted, and in 1451 this statute was confirmed (ib.214). On the accession of Edward IV the Commons petitionedthat these acts, among others of the Lancastrian period, might bemote$+ Cfjap, bi,confirmed, but the King replied : ' hit is thought necessary that theybe truly payed, but not to afferme their assignement of paymentand contentation by auctorite of Parlement, but that it be at thekynges pleasure' (ib. 490). Edward seems to have been determinedto maintain, and if possible to increase, the dependence ofthe Judges on the Crown (cf. ib. 492 b, ad pedem). Ultimately,under Edward IV and Henry V11 the salaries of the Judges werepartly secured on the subsidy on wool (ib. vi. 55, IOI, 395, 524).On this point of payment of the Judges, as on so many others,Burke is at one with Fortescue. In introducing his plan of econo- Burke onmica1 reform he said : ' In the first class (of payments) I place the ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $Judges, as of the first importance. It is the publick justice thatholds the community together ; the ease, therefore, and independenceof the Judges ought to supersede all other considerations, andthey ought to be the very last to feel the necessities of the State.'The great evil of ill or irregularly paid Judges was their consequent Danger ofliability to corruption, and this was one great cause of the whole- co'Tul'tionsale judicial scandals of Edward 1's reign. (See Foss, U. S. iii. 44.)Compare Vincent of Beauvais, Be Mor. h i . Prhc. c. 13 :' Ceterum ad liberalitatem principis maxime pertinet, ut et consiliariis,et ministris, et ballivis, et officialibus stipendia q u ~ advictum sufficiant prestet : . . . quin ita decet magnificentiamprincipalem, . . . ut non indigeant, ne aliena jmmoderate con-cupiscant vel rapiant! As Burke says in the same speech : 'Anhonourable and fair profit is the best security against avarice and Liveries ofrapacity.' Besides their salaries, the Judges had liveries of robes. the Judges'Under Edward 111 these were given three times a year, but bythe time of Henry V1 their number had been reduced to two annually(Foss, U. S., iv. 226 ; and see above, p. 22 I). But these, like theirsalaries, were often in arrear (Rot. Parl. v. 14).his counsell.] The question of the payment of the Councillorswill be discussed later in connexion with Chapter xv, wherethe whole subject of the Council is dealt with systematically. After Bodythewords 'his counsell' DZ, followed by previous editors, inserts thewords, 'his Garde, and other servants.' If they were genuine, they IV.would definitely fix the composition of the present treatise to thereign of Edward IV (see Introduction, Part 1II.pp. 94-6, above). ForEdward IV was the first English king to establish that which to theGreeks was one of the chief marks of a tyranny, viz., a body-guard(ri 64 rvpavvt~bv a!rqPa rb I~oAu~~;X~TOV. aipov +iha&s rrvas. . airciv ~ bv

TO; uhparo~. Plato, Repub. p. 566 B. ; comp. Arist. Rhet. I. ii. $ 19,6 e'ri/3ovX~;ov TV~CIIIVL'~~ +vXa~jv alrci). This was in 1467, and wasdue to his suspicions of Warwick. See William Worcester'sAnnals, sub hoc anno : 'Dominus Rex ordinavit sibi cc. valettohprobos et valentissimos sagittarios Angliz, ordinando quod quilibeteorum, haberet viij. d. per diem, equitando et attendendo superpersonam suam propriam' (in Stevenson, Wars, etc., ii. 788).These were the ordinary wages of mounted archers (P. P. C. v.26). Those of an unmounted archer during the fifteenth centurywere sixpence a day (ib. i. 174 ; ii. 158; iv. 72. Rot. Parl. V.4 b). In 1412, for some reason, the wages of an archer arereckoned at ninepence (P. P. C. ii. 33).Scotch payment of the marches.] Of this tendency to an undueMarches.favouring of the wardens of the marches we seem to have a tracein P. P. C. i. I 2b ff., where the Privy Council refuse to sanctionthe indentures which Richard I1 wished to be drawn up betweenhimself and the Earl Marshal for the custody of Berwick and theEast March of Scotland, according to which the Earl was to receive54,000 in time of peace and 6 I 2,000 in time of war. The motivesof the Council were : 'Ut in primo parliamento non possit eisimputari quod gratis et voluntarie onerabant Regem et regnum suu~nin majori summa pecunie quam foret necessarium vel honestum.Ac eciam ut videatur in eodem parliamento subsidium a populoconcedendum et per statum Regis qualiter hujusmodi majus onusabsque injuria regni sui et populi sui dampno vel gravamine poteritsupportari!'Ordinary The sums suggested were certainly excessive. The ordinaryestimatesfor their estimates were, in time of peace, for the East March and Berwickcustody. £2,500, for the West March and Carlisle £ 1,250, for the castle ofRoxburgh £ 1,000. In time of war these sums were doubled.These were the estimates in 1421 (P. P. C. ii. 313), and in 1434 (ib.iv. 268-9). Except as to Roxburgh the same is true of 141 I (ib.ii. 8). In 1410 the East March and Berwick on the war footingare estimated at £4,830 for half a year (ib. i. 333) ; while in thesame year the two marches of Scotland and the castles there intime of truce are reckoned at £17,126 for two years (lb. 352).In 1436 hIarmaduke Lumley, bishop of Carlisle, undertook thecustody of Carlisle and the West March for £ 1,500 in peace andwar alike; although, as is expressly stated, former wardens hat1been accustomed to receive the sums named above (Rotuli Scotia,ii. 296 b). These payments, like most others, were during the Lan- Paymentscastrian period constantly in arrear. The rebellion of the Percies f'equentlyin arrear.in 1403 was largely due to the enormous sums, over £20,000 asthey alleged, due to them as wardens of the Marches (P. P. C., I.xl-xlii, xlvii-li). Hotspur was warden of the East March, Berwick,and Roxburgh ; while his father, the Earl of Northumberland,was warden of Carlisle and the West March (Rot. Scot. ii. 151 a).In Aug. 1403, John, the king's son, afterwards Duke of Bedford,became warden of the East March and Berwick (ib. 164 a). InMay, 1414, he reported to his brother I-Ienry V that the town ofBerwick was in a very dangerous condition, that there was due toli~m from the crown £13,1oo, that he had exhausted all hisfortune and all his credit in raising money to pay his soldiers,and that for all the ten years during which he had been warden hehad not received one farthing salary (P. P. C. ii. 136-8). In 14 19the debt on Roxburgh alone was £g,joo (Rot. Parl. v. 20; b),while in 1459 it amounted to £4,000 (Rot Scot. ii. 392). From Divisionsof thewhat has been said already it will have been seen that there weregenerally two wardens (custodes, gardiani,) of the Marches : one of East orthe East or, as it was sometimes called, the North March (La EstRlarche, hIarchiz Orientales, Marchiz Boreales); and one of theWest March (La West Marche, Marchix Occidentales). To the March.former was generally attached the command of Berwick, to the latterthat of Carlisle. Sometimes both Marches were entrusted to a singlewarden, or body of wardens. The Earl of Northumberland andthree others were thus appointed in 1377 'Custodes Marchiarum. . . versus partes tam orientales quam occidentales;' whilt in1384 the earl was appointed sole warden (Rot. Scot. ii. 5 a, 65 b ;cf. ib. i. 857, 972). Richard, Earl of Salisbury, was similarly ap-~ointed in 1434. Aniong the minutes of the Privy Council occursa L memorandum for commissions to be maade to perle of Sarumof hope wardeneryes ' (P. P. C. iv. 270 ; at p. 273 the commisslonsthemselves are found). In 1461 (I Edward IV) Salisbury'sson, Warwick the King-maker, was appointed sole warden andcommissary general 'tam in partibus de la Est March, quam inpartibus de la West March ' (Rot. Scot. ii. 402). In 1463 the EasthIarch was made over to Warwick's brother Montague (ib. 407 b).In Aug. 1470, after his open breach with Warwick, Edward appointedhis brother, Richard Duke of Gloucester, warden of theWest March (ib. 423 b); while in 1483 an Act of Parliament, afterQ

eciting how 'the seid Duc . . . late by his manyfold and diligent12ichardof labours and devoirs, hath subdued grete part of the West borduresGloucesterhtreditary of Scotlande . . . by the space of xxx miles and more,' enactsof that the seid Due shall have 10 hym and to his heires masles ofhisthe WestMarch. Wy co,iyng, the seid Wardeynship of the seid Westmerches ' (Rot.Parl. vi. 204). The course of histoty prevented this unprecedentedstep from having any consequences. ,But it map readily beimagined that when the Marches were entrusted to such powerfulnoblemen as Warwick, Montague, and Gloucester, that tendencywhich Fortescue deprecates, to ' do ffauour to the persones thatkepe ham,' might easily become unduly strong. The CroylandContinuator evidently considers the recovery of Berwick by EdwardIV a very doubtful benefit, on account of the expense which itscustody entailed (p. 563). From these and many other passageswhich might be quoted, it would seem as if the division of theMiddle marches into East and West were an exhaustive one. But we findMarch.traces of a third or Middle March (La Middel marche, Marchiamedia), of which the boundaries were 'alta via que se extenditdirecte de villa Novi Castri Super Tinam usque Rokesburgh ex unaparte et bunda de West March ex alter2 parte.' In a paper of theyear 1598 we find the following: 'A breife of the Bounderes,Wayes, and Passages of the Illidle March, all a longe the Border ofScotland beginning at Cheveat Hill being the lemyet of the EasteMarche, and ending at Kirsop, the bounder of the Weste Marche ofEngland.' Egerton Papers, Camd. Soc. p. 278. (I owe this referenceto T. W. Jackson, Esq., Fc!low of Worcester College, Oxford.)Separate bodies of wardens for all three RIarches are appointed in1382 (Rot. Scot. ii. 41 a, 43 b). After 1382 I find no specific referencein the Rolls to the Middle March till I 470. From that time onwardto 151 2 it is frequently mentioned, but is ahays found unitedwith the East March (Rot. Scot. ii. 422-3, 428, 442, 463, 470 &C.,576-7). In 1495 Henry V11 appointed his second son (afterwardsHenry VIII) ' custos generalis Xlarchiarum . . . viz., in partibus Estmarchiarum, West marchiarunl, et Middel marchiarum' (ib. 5 r 7). Iam inclined to think that, in the interval between 1382 and 1470, thewarden of the Xliddle March is represented by the keeper of Rox-First war- burgh Castle. The first trace of a warden of the Marches, eo non~inc,den Marches. of the which I have found in the Rotuli Scotia: (which however onlybegin in I 9 Edw. I) is in I 309, when Robert de Clyfford is appointed'Custos Marchie Scotie in parfibus Karliol ' (i. 76 b). But accordingto Nicholson and Burn's History of Westmorland and Cumberland(I. viii.), his first appointment was in I 296. In 1315 we have a' Custos Karlioli et illarchis in Cumbria,' and a ' Custos NoviCastri super Tynam et Marchis in Northumbria,' which correspondpretty exactly with the later West and East Marches (Rot.Scot. i. 140-1). Nich~lson and Burn (U. S.) trace the first regula-tion of the borders by distinct laws to the time of Edward I, andto the inveterate hostilities which resulted from his claim to thesovereignty over Scotland. The keeping of the Marches is frequentlymentioned in Parliament as one of the objects for whichsupplies are required (e.g. Rot. Parl. iii. 608 b ; iv. 4 h, &C.). Burton(Hist. Scotl. iv. 163 ; sub anno 1566) says: ' On each side of theborder there usually were three wardens. . . . The rule waspunctiliously observed on the English side, but on the side of ScotlandBothwell was sole warden. It is said by one with good opportunitiesfor knowing that the three wardenships were neverbefore held by one person.' Whatever may have been the case onthe Scotch side, we have already seen that this ' rule of three ' wasby no means always ' punctiliously observed on the English side ;'and I have found one instance in which, on the Scotch side also,two of the three Marches are united in the hands of the same man(Rymer, xi. 537). For the divisions and wardens of the Marches onthe Scotch side, see R. B. Armstrong, History of Liddesdale,Eskdale, etc., chap. i.). The district over which the authority ofthe wardens extended comprised the three shires of Northumberland,Cumberland, and Westmorland. In 1453 the Commonscomplained that ' the wardens of the Marches joyning to Scotlandcalled the Estmarche and the Westmarche . . . sumtyme for thairesinguler lucre, and sumtyme for malice,' have endeavoured to extendtheir jurisdiction beyond those limits. The king agreed to thepassing of a measure to abate the grievance (Rot. Parl. v. 267 ; cf.St. 31 Hen. VI, c. 3).Caleis, wich charge is welynoghe knowen.] If Fortescue Cala~s.means by this that it was ' well enough known ' by sad experience ,"f"z,?1'?what a terrible drain upon the resources of England the mainten- tenance.ance of Calais was, he is no doubt correct. And the position ofCalais was one great motive among others for maintaining goodrelations with the Low Countries (cf. P. P. C. i. 306; S. C. H. iii.65). But I cannot observe any general rule as to the expense'ofCalais, such as we observed in the case of the Scotch Marches.Q

InpThe following table shows the financial position of Calais duringthe first half of the fifteenth century so far as I have been able tocollect it from the Rolls of Parliament, the Proceedings of the PrivyCouncil, and elsewhere. (Shillings and pence are omitted).ForYear,I 401I4041410' 14111415142 I'433I419Annual Expense.In Peace.£6,301£13,626£10,022£11,930In War.213,320£10,509£za,joo£19,119Amountof Debt.£1 1,423£28,718£45,100£19,395Authorities.P. P. C. i. 154.Rot. Parl. iii. 534.P. P. C. i. 3jz.Ih. ii. 8.Excerpta Hist. pp. 26 ff.P. P. C. ii. 8; Rot. Parl. iv. 159.Rot. Parl. iv. 434, 438.Ib. v. 206; cf. Wars of the Englishin France, i. 49a.Arrears. p 1450 £19,395 was due to the Dulie of Buckingham asCaptain of Calais, while in 1454 £21,648 was owing to his successorthe Duke of Somerset, besides a balance still due to Buckingham,the amount of which is not stated (Rot. Parl. v. 207, 233).Under Edward IV and Henry V11 the sum allotted to Calais seemsto have been regularly £10,022 per annum (ib. vi. 55, 101, 395,523). The writer of the Epiio~ne estimates the annual expense ofCalais at £9,807. Ferhaps me may say roughly that the cost ofCalais was £10,000 in time of peace and ~20,000 in time of war.The revenues of Calais and the ATarclies amounted in 1433 toA~proF'ria- £2,866 (Rot. Parl. iv. 434). During the fifteenth century it wastion of 'revenue to generally attempted to meet the charges of Calais by appropriatingCalais. to it a portion of the subsidy on wools, &C.-sometimes one half(Rymer, viii. 488); sometimes three-quarters (Rot. Parl. iii. 627,648); sometimes so many shillings on every sack of \vool, ant1every 240 wookfells (P. P. C. ii. 2 18 ; iii. 50 ; Rot. Parl. v. 146).In 1429 the assignments thus made had to be increased, becauseof the scarcily of wool owing to the recent murrain among thesheep (Rot. Parl. iv. 340). And in 1437 Gloucester, then Captainof Calais, reported that the 'utterance and sale ' of wool was likelyto he 'so escarse and symple,' that parlianlent gave authority for otherfunds to be applied to the maintenance of Calais if it should beAmsrs. necessary (ib. 499). But all these and many other lesser measuresdid not prevent heavy arrears from ,accumuIating, even underHenry V (Ellis's Letters, 11. i. 75). On one occasion at least, in142 I, the garrison addressed themselves direct to Parliament, prayingfor payment of their wages (Rot. Pad. iv. 159). Consideringmhat the arrears were in 1433 (see table), it is not surprising tofind that there was a mutiny in Calais in that year (P. P. C., IV. xlvi ;cf. Rot. Parl. iv. 473). Money was frequently borrowed on behalfof Calais. In 1436 commissioners were sent into the different Loans.counties systematically to raise a loan for this purpose. Theywere bidden to remind the people 'mhat a preciouse jeuelle thesaide towne of Calais is to this reame' (P. P. C. iv. 352b ff, Thatthis appeal was very liberally responded to appears from ThreeFifteenth Century Chronicles, pp. 61-2). The merchants of thestaple of Calais !vere frequent lenders (e. g. Rot. Parl. v. 295 ;P. P. C. v. 26; Cal. Rot. Pat. zg3b), and at length under EdnardIV and Henry V11 the system was adopted of making over tothein the customs on all wools and woolfells shipped from Englandto the staple at Calais for periods of sixteen years ; they undertakingthe payment of £10,022 to the Treasurer of Calais, andcertain other smaller payments (Rot. Parl. vi. 55, 101, 395,523 ; cf.St. 19 Hen. VII. c. 27). Besides these financial measures there was Victuallinga curious system of appropriating certain towns for supplying Calais ca'al'.with victuals. In 1415 Henry V issued an ordinance, which afterreciting that the town of Gosseford in Suffolk, which had receivedvarious franchises from his ancestors on condition of supplyingCalais with beer and other victuals, was unable to supply therequisite amount, granted to the towns of Sandwich, Feversham,Dover, Deal, and Nungeham, a share in the duties and privilegeswhich had formerly belonged exclusively to Gosseford (Rymer, ix.224). 'The officers of Calais were-(I) the Deputy or Captain; oficers.(2) the High Marshal1 ; (3) the Comptroller ; (4) the Lieutenant ofthe Castle; (5) the High Treasurer; (6) The Vice-Treasurer; eachhaving his suite of soldiers and attendants' (Ellis's Letters,11. i. 124). Besides these there were the Viiellnrius or Victualler,an officer called the Purveyer or Provzsor fill@ Calesia, thehIaster or Warden of the hlint, &c. (Carte's French and GasconRolls, ii. 332, 180, 245). There was the ordinary municipal bodyconsisting of the AIayor, Aldermen, and Burghers (ib. 17~); andthere were the Mayor, Constables, and hIerchants of the Staple(ib. 178, 209). The system of account to be observed at Calais

was defined by Parliament in 4 Edward IV (Rot. Parl. v. 510). InHenry VIII's time Calais seems to have been governed, likeIreland, by a 'Deputy and Council ' (P. P. C., VII. xx. 5, 79, &C.).Estimates John of Gaunt is said to have declared that ' Caleis greued moreof thevalue ofEngelond, and dede more hurt therto than profit, for the greteCalms to expensis aboute the keping therof' (Engl. Chron. p. 7; cf. ib. 127).England.But this was by no means the common view. The words used bythe government in 1436 represented the general feeling of thepeople. In 1429 the Commons asserted that ' every trwe Englyshmanought to have (Caleys) in full grete chierte and tendernesse '(Rot. Parl. iv. 360).The author of the ' Libel of English Policy ' is very strong onthe imperative necessity of keeping Calais, the whole of England'scommercial well-being depending, according to him, on the commandof the strait which the possession of Calais gives. He quotesthe opinion of Sigismund, who urged Henry V to guard Dover andCalais as the two eyes of England. He devotes a special sectionof his work to this subjekt, beginning :-' And for the love of God and of his blisse,Cherishe ye Caleise better than it is.'(Political Songs, i. I 58, 192).Carrying this idea still further, the Commons in 1420, excited bythe marvellous successes of Henry V, petitioned that as he wasnow master of both sides of the channel he would impose a toll onall vessels passing the straits, to be applied to the keeping of thesea. The king naturally rejected a suggestion, the adoption ofwhich would have united against England every maritime power inEurope (Rot. Par]. v. I zGb).It is unnecessary here to do more than allude to the importantadvantages which the possession of the Captaincy of Calais gaveto Warwick in his machinations both against Henry V1 andEdward IV. According to V7aurin (ed. Dupont ii. 187) Warwickgreatly improved the government of Calais. On the attempts ofthe Lancastrians to get po~session of Calais during the reign ofEdward IV, see Introduction, Part 11, above, p. 60.the kynges werkes.] In the accounts of 141 I the sum ' proreparatione castrorum ac aliorum maneriorum Regis infra regnumAnglia: ' is set do\vn as A~ooo (l'. P. C. ii. I I). In 1433 theking's no1 ks (' pro operibus Regis ') are estimated at 1000 marks(Rot. Parl. iv. 435). Fortescue excludes here the ' making of newworks ' because he reckons them among extraordinary charges inthe next chapter.clerkea off the werkes.1 ' Clericus operationum regis.' The Clerks offunctions of this officer are thus negatively described in the LGer 'heworksNzker of Edward IV: 'CLERICE OF WORKES, called by thenoble Edward (111) "clerke des cevres du Roy, preignaunt sagages, fees, et lautre choises appurtenaunte a son office par l'assignementdu Thesaurere d'Angleterre et hors le charge de l'oistiel duRoy." This clerke hath no duetie longing to him in this houshold,by vertue of this office outward ; but if he be appoynted by thesoveraynes of housholde to take wages and cloathinge with thehoushold, it mought cause hym to be the more attendaunt fornecessary byldynges in offices in this house ; and so he may takelyverey as a Squier of houshold' (Ordinances of the Household,p. 53). In the wardrobe accounts of 1423 the Clerk of the Worksreceives his livery with the Chancellor, Treasurer, Privy Seal,Justices, &c. (English in France, i. 386). Edmund Blake andThomas Stratton, ' Clerk of oure Werkes' in 1455 and 1461 respectively,are exempted as to their office from the Resumption PaymentsActs passed in those years (Rot. Parl. v. 319a, 473 b). This office, ln amear'like everything else, suffered from the 'eternal want of pence' whichcharacterized the Lancastrian period. In 1433 the debts on theoffice of the clerk of the works were £215 (Rot. Parl. iv. 435), whilein 1445 we have a plaintive petition from the then clerk of theworks, William Cleve, to the effect that he had already made 'atyour Tour of London a kechen with al other maner of oficcs 'without payment, and now he was required to make at Eltham 'anew halle with squillery, saucery, and surveyng place ' and diversother works for the Queen's coronation, and he prayed that hemight have an assignment of L~ooo. This person was a cleric,as he calls himseJf ' youre pouer chapeleyn' (P. P. C. vi. 31). Therewere inferior clerks of the works in various of the king's manors ;thus we hear of the 'Clerk of oure Werkys, of our Rlanoir and Parkof Claryngdon' (Rot. Parl. v. 544b). So William of Wykehamwas ' Clerk of all the King's works in his Manors of Henle andYeshampsted' (Lowfh's Life, p. 19). This may account for Fortescueusing the plural clerkes in this place.the kynge hath therfore . . . pondage and tonnage.] Tunnageand Pound.an the origin of tunnage and poundage, see S. C. H. ii. 525.

:\ppropri- After this form of impost had become the subject of parliamenitedto thekeepingof tary concession, the grant of it was early connected with thethe sea. keeping of the sea, the defence of the coast, &C. Indeed theunauthorized imposition of it'by Lionel of Antwerp, in 1347,was ' pur gages des Niefs de guerre ' (Rot. Parl. ii. 166 a).In the Parliament of 1372 it was granted by the citizens andburgesses alone 'for the safe and sure conduct of ships andmerchandise ' (ib. 310 b). From 1373 it was granted in theproper manner. In 1379 and 1383 it was appropriated to thesafeguard-of the sea (ib. iii. 63; cf. 391, 151 b). During thefifteenth century this became the regular rule, e.g., in I41 I, 1414,1425, 1429, 1432, &C. (Rot. Parl. iii. 648 b; iv. 16 b, 276 a,337 b, 390 a, &C.). And when in 1415, 1453, and 1463 tunnageand poundage were granted to Henryp V, Henry VI, andEd~i-ard IV respectively for life, it was to the keeping of theAppropri- sea that they were appropriated. That this appropriation wdsation notobserved. very loosely observed, if at all, is clear. It was one. of thecharges against Suffolk, that he had diverted to other uses subsidiesgranted for the defence of the realm, and the safe-keepingof the sea (Rot. Pad. v. 180 b). In the manifesto of Robinof Redesdale in 1469, among the many sources of revenue~vliich Edward IV is charged with having alienated to the Wydvillesand their aflinity, occurs the mention of 'Tunage andPoundage of alle this londe, graunted only to the kepynge of thesee.' And among the demands of the insurgents is one, thatthe revenues of Tounage and Poundage may be employed in thekepyng of the see, as it was graunted, and too non other use.'(Warkworth, pp. 48, 51).Prevalence ffor the repressynge off rovers.] The accession of Henryof piracy.IV seems to have been followed by a great development ofpilacy, largely owing to the uncertain relations in which thenew dynasty stood to foreign powers, especially France ant1Scotland ; so that ' after a short time acts of piracy and rapinebecame so common that the seas were no longer safe, and thecarrying out of legitimate commerce became an impossibility.'(Royal Letters of Henry IV, I. xlviii). In this work theEnglish no doubt took their share. In 1401 the districts of' Estergo and Westergo ' in Frisia (=Ostrachia and Restrachiaill Spruner's Atlas, Sew Edit., L)eutschland, No. IX,) complainedto Henry IV that the Captain of Calais notoriously kept in hispay 'publicos Dei et omnium Mercatorum bonorum Inimicos,Pyratas, alio Vocabulo LIICEDELERS nominatos ' (Rymer, viii.193). The name no doubt came from their 'dealing alike'with the ships of all nations, their own included. Just as thecontemporary Vitalian Brothers called themselves ' God's friendsand the world's foes ' (Weber, Weltgesch. viii. 461). In thediplomatic correspondence of the time are found allusions to theinterruption of communications, the capture of despatches, &C., bypirates, (Royal Letters, U. S., Bekynton's Correspondence, i. 220-1,238. According to the ' Libel of English Policy' Brittany was agreat home for piracy; Political Songs, ii. 164. For the doingsof a Cornish pirate of good birth, Henry Bodrugan, Esquire, underEd~vard IV, see Rot. Parl. vi. 138 b, and for those of a privateer ofWinchelsea under Henry VI, ib. iv. 489 a.) In 1454 we find anaccount of the capture of an English wine-ship by a body of pirateswho, from their names, were evidently English. The booty wasshared with the owners and victuallers of the pirate-ships, one ofwhom was a clergyman (Rymer, xi. 350). Henry V had made Attemptsan honourable attempt to put an end to this state of things bymaking all attacks on friendly vessels treason (Rot. Parl. iv. 23 ;St. 2 Hen. V, I. c. 6). The restriction was evidently found very irksome,and the Commons more than once petitioned for its removal(Rot. Parl. iv. 350 b, 376 b). Andat length in 1435 the statute wassuspended for seven years (ib. 493). But attacks on Englishvessels were not included under this statute; and when the Cornmonsin 1429 and 1431 complained of the injuries done by certainpeople called ' roveres sur le mere,' and prayed that such doingsmight be made felony, they were refused (Rot. Parl. iv. 350 b,376 b). In 26 Henry V1 an enquiry into the subject of piracywas ordered (Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 292 a) ; and in 1449 we find RobertWynnyngton retained 'to do us service in the sea, for the clensingof the same and rebukying of the robbeurs and pirates therof,lvhiche dayly do alle the noysance thay canne' (Engl. in France,i. 489). In the ' Brief Latin Chronicle ' published by Mr. Gairdner,we find under the year 1457 the following entry, ' spoliata est villa deFowe in Cornubia per piratas ; et eodem anno in mense Augustispoliata est villa de Sandwiche per piratas, et naves, et pene omniabona mobilia in utrisque villis abducta sunt' (Three FifteenthCentury Chronicles, p. 166). In the commission of the Earl ofKent as admiral in 1462 he is ordered to capture, arrest: and

punish ' piratas et spoliatores mercatorum et piscatorum tam Angli-Fishers corum quam extraheorurn ' (Rymer, xi. 490). In illustration ofthis last point, viz., ' the saving of our fishers,' which Fortescuealso insists on, compare Paston Letters, iii. 81, (1~7~) : ' Wehave here no tidings but a few Frenchmen whyrlyng on the coasts,so that there dare no fishers go out but under safe conducts.'Insecurity the dwellers vppon owre costes.] It has been shown in theof thecoasts. notes to Chapter iii, p. 200, above, how liable to attack the Englishcoasts were before the middle of the sixteenth century. The insecurityof the coasts formed more than once the subject of remonstrancein parliament. Thus in 1442 the commons complained thatnot only were merchants robbed upon the sea, and even in the portsand estuaries of the kingdom, but the king's poor lieges living nearthe sea coast were carried off out of their own houses with theirchattels and children by the enemy (Rot. Parl. v. 52). In theNavy.following year we find this order of the privy council : 'Also beper maade commissions by alle the costes of pe see withinneInglonde to putte hem in array' (P. P. C. v. 236). The measurestaken for the keeping of the sea in 1454 are prefaced by therecital, that ' diverse the kynges liegemen , . . enhabitaunteznygh the costes of the see, . . . have been often tymes grevouslyemprysoned, distrussed, put to grete fynaunces and raunsomps'(Rot. Parl. v. 244 b). This insecurity of the coasts is often al-luded to in the Paston Letters, e.g., No. 393 : ' Also I said Idwelled uppon the cost of the see here, and . . . hit weremore necessare to with hold men here than take from hit'(1461). No. 467 : ' As for tidyngs here, . . . we have noonbut that ther be many Frenchemen upon the see and do mocheanswer upon the coosts' (1463). To those who blamedJohn Paston for keeping his eldest son so much at home, itwas a plausible answer to give that he was ' at home for thesafe gard of the costs' (No. 478, 1473 ; cf. ib. I. cxxix. f.; 11.xiii). The author of the ' Libel of English Policy ' also mentionsthe coast of Norfolli as specially exposed to attack (PoliticalSongs, ii. 164). For instances of attacks on the English coast,see Stowe, pp. 329 b, 330 a, 401 b, 402 a.pat the kynge kepe alway some grete and myghtyvessels.] For the early history of the navy see S. C. H. i. 592-4 ;ii. 286-9, 380. The number of royal ships was however neververy large. They served at the most as a sort of nucleus round$!2OteS.Chap, bi,which the ships furnished by the different ports might gather.Thus in the list of Edward IIl's fleet given in the ' Ordinances ofthe Household,' pp. 6-7, out of a fleet of seven hundred sail, onlytwenty-five are royal ships, a number not greater than that furnishedby the port of London alone. It took in fact very little to convert Merchanta merchantman into an effective man-of-war. Owing to that used forprevalence of piracy already noticed, the ships of the period had war.to be equally adapted for defence as for commerce. It wasin this way that the Hansa, originally a mere commercial league,became the most formidable power in the North of Europe. Thiswas one reason too why the presence of foreign merchants in theirdominions was encouraged by sovereigns, especially in England;in the event of war their ships could be seized for belligerentpurposes (cf. Sartorius, Gesch. d. Hans. Bundes, i. 138, 289).And where, as in the case of the English wine-trade with the Merchantsouth of.France, the nature of the commerce made it possible i:zs&rfor the merchantmen to sail in large fleets, they were generally self-deableto take very good care of themselves. In August I 413 fence.Henry V ordered that no ship should go to Aquitaine duringthat vintage except in this way (Rymer, ix. 47). On suchoccasions it was usual for the fleet to elect one of their numberas their Admiral to whom they swore obedience. The Rolls ofParliament for I 4 I 5 contain an interesting petition with referenceto John Tutbery, owner of a ship called the Christopher, of Hull,which had been thus elected admiral for the return voyage fromBordeaux, but was deserted by her companions, and so fell intothe enemy's hands (iv. 85-6). Bekynton and Roos in theirreport to Henry V1 on the state of Aquitaine in 1442, gave it astheir opinion that if only the merchant fleet 'had be souffred topasse hider for he vintaige in suche tyme as they have beaccustumed in yers before,' it mould have prevented the loss ofmuch of the English possessions (Bekynton's Journal, p. 51).The arresting of merchant shipping for the king's service washowever a great interruption to commerce and a source of muchoppression. More than one petition occurs on the Rolls of Parliamentwith reference to the compensation to be made to ownersfor the time during which their ships were employed in theroyal service (Rot. Parl. iii. 554; iv. 79 a).In 1406 a curious plan was tried of entrusting to the merchantsthemselves the safeguard of the sea for a year and five months.

aoteB, Qap, bi,hfepchants Tunnage, poundage, and a quarter of the subsidy of wool wereentrustedthe made over to them for this purpose. They were allowed to nameke-ping of their own collectors in the various ports; the king appointed thethe sea.admirals on their nomination, ordering all the chief towns of thekingdom to execute the arrangement. But the plan did notanswer, and before the end of this Parliament Henry signified hisintention of discharging the merchants (November); he had alreadyin the previous month forbidden the collectors of the subsidies tomake any further payments to them. In December their admiralswere superseded, and in the next Parliament of 1407 the arrangementwas formally wound up (Rot. Parl. iii. 569-571, 602-3,610; Rymer, viii. 437, 439, 449, 455; cf. Nicolas, Royal Navy,ii. 393). The experiment was not repeated. We find Henry Vhowever consulting the merchants as to the best mode of keepingthe sea (P. P. C. ii. 131); and no doubt the town and boroughmembers, as representatives of the mercantile interest in Parliament,would have plenty to say on the subject.Henry V Henry V paid great attention to the royal navy. In Februaryand Navy. the 1417 we have a list of his fleet consisting of twenty-four ships : sixgreat ships (under which head are included carraks), eight barges,and ten balingers (P. P. C. ii. 202). Another list later in thesame year makes the number twenty-seven. (Nicolas, Agincourt,App. p. 22 ; or Ellis's Letters, 111. i. 72 ; compare also onHenry V's ships the 'Libel of English Policy,' Political Songs,ii. 199). Henry V's dispositions for keepin$ the sea from PlymouthEastward and Northward to Berwick during his first invasion ofFrance in 1415 are in P. P. C. ii. 145. The ships employed areonly twelve : two ships, five barges, and five balingers.A more elaborate scheme for the year I442 is in Rot. Parl. v.59 f., where the ships enumerated are eight ships 'with forstages'(forecastles), eight barges, eight balingers, and four spynes (pinnace~).From this it appears moreover that the time during whichit was usual to keep the sea was from Candlemas to Martinmas(February 2-November I I); that a mariner's pay was 2s. a month,and his rations 14d. a week. The ports from which the ships areKeeping of to be drawn are also mentioned. In 1453 a measure somewhatthe sea ensimilarto that of 1406 was adopted: that is to say the keeping oftrusted tocertain the sea was entrusted for three years to five lords, and tunnagelords'and poundage were made over to them for that period, theybeing allowed to appoint a collector in every port. In 1455however they resigned (Rot. Parl. v. 244 b, 283 a; PastonLetters, i. 293 ; cf. Engl. in France, ii. 493-4 ; Carte's FrenchRolls, ii. 332, where other persons in addition to those enumeratedin the Parliament Rolls are mentioned as keeping the sea). In1457 Warwick was appointed keeper of the sea for three years(Rymer, xi. 406, not for five years as Whethamstede says, i. 330),and in addition to ' all the Tonnage and Pondage' 61000 perannum was assigned to him for this purpose (Rot. Parl. v. 347 b;cf. P. P. C. vi. 294). His rebellion must have terminated thisappointment; and, in March 1460, the Duke of Exeter wasappointed in his place (Rymer, xi. 448-451 ; cf. Engl. inFrance, ii. 512-6). Henry VI's ministers however did not Neglect ofcontinue Henry V's policy of keeping up the royal navy. Just the Navyundersix months after his death a commission was issued to three Henry 1-1.persons to sell off such of the king's great ships as they deemedexpedient (P. P. C. iii. 53). Capgrave, under the year 1441, bitterlylaments the decline of England's maritime prestige. He enumerates,much as Fortescue does, the benefits which would follow from abetter keeping of the sea: 'mercatoribus salvum daret conductum,piscatoribus securum accessum, regni habitatoribus pacificampausationem.' Our enemies, he says, laugh at us and tell us totake the ship off our coins, and replace it by a sheep; the seawas once called the wall of England, but now our enemies haveclimed over the wall; our ships are scanty. our sailors few andunpractised (De Illustr. Henr. pp. 134-5; cf. Paston Letters, i.81). The author of the 'Libel of English Policy' bewails thedownfall of English naval renown in terms so similar to Capgrave'sthat I am inclined to think that the latter must have hadthe ' Libel ' before him (cf. Pol. Songs, ii. I 59 :-'Where bene oure shippes? where bene oure swerdes become?Owre enmyes bid for the shippe sette a shepe.Allas l oure reule halteth, hit is benome;Who dare wee1 say that lordeshyppe shulde take kepe?'cf. ib. 177 ; see above, p. zoo). Indeed during nearly the whole ofthe Lancastrian period complaints as to the insecurity of the sea, theconsequent loss of merchandise and decrease of the customs arefrequent (e.g. Rot. Parl. iii. 523 b, 625 a, 639 a; iv. 127 a; v. 52 a;P. P. C. i. 306). But the most vigorous indictment on this pointis to be found in Cade's proclamation of 1450: 'Owr sovereynlord may understond that his fals. cowncell hath lost his law, his

marchandyse is lost, . . . the see is lost, Fraunce is lost' (ThreeFifteenth Century Chronicles, p. 96 ; another version in Chroniclesof the White Rose, p. 75). Perhaps we may see in this onecause of the downfall of the Lancastrian Dynasty. It had failedto protect 'British Interests.' Edward LV, the merchant king,at least did this, though Warkworth (p. 12) charges him, I knownot on what grounds, with 'hurtynge marchandyse;' and thestatutes of his reign are concerned almost entirely with mattersof trade and commerce, to the exclusion of all higher constitu-Expenseof tional and political subjects (S. C. H. iii. 199, 213). As to thelceepingthe expense of the keeping of the sea I have not found many data.sea.Fortescue himself says that ' it is not estimable.' In 1415 theexpense of keeping the sea for one quarter and thirty-nine daysis put down at £1231 15s. od. (P. P. C. ii. 180), while in 1442for the fleet described above under that year the estimate is ' forvi moneths for this year £4668 ; for viii moneths duryng thegraunte of Tonage and Poundage, £6090 13s. 4d. (Rot. Parl. v.Divisions 59 b). The fleet for the keeping of the sea was generally dividedinto two squadrons, one called the Northern or Eastern, orNorthern and Eastern Fleet; the other called the Southern orWestern, or Southern and Western Fleet. The district fromwhich the former was drawn, and which it was supposed to guard,was from the mouth of the Thames northwald to Berwick; thedistrict of the latter was from the Thames southward and westward.The large fleet of Edward I11 mentioned above wasdivided in this way; though that of course was intended notmerely for the safeguard of the sea but for offensive operationsagainst France. In 1410 we find the sea to be guarded dividedinto the North, the West, and the narrow sea between Dover andCalais (P. P. C. i. 328). There was also a fleet for Ireland, andanother for Aquitaine. The keeping of the Irish Sea which issometimes mentioned may have been performed by the former ofthese (Rot. Parl. iii. 625 a, 639 a; P. P. C. ii. 199, 203 ; Gal.Rot. Pat. pp. 244, 248 a, 305 b). These fleets must always have hadtheir own commanders, and at first these commanders were oftenAdmiral of independent of one another. But ' after 1406 there was always anE"gland. Admiral of England, who commanded in chief all the fleets ofEngland, Ireland, and Aquitaine ' (Nicolas, Royal Navy, ii. 448).Thus Thomas Beaufort in 10 Henry IV is appointed 'Admirallusflotx navium tam versus partes boreales et occidentalesfi0te8, Chap, bif, 239quam versus partes Hibernis Aquitanis et Picardise.' A dRichard Duke of Gloucester in 2 Edward IV is ' Admirallus AngliseHiberniae et Aquitanis ' (Cal. Rot. Pat. pp. 255 b, 305 b).carrikkes and oper grete vessailles.] For the various kinds of Kinds ofship in use at this time, see Sir Harris Nicolas, P. P. C., V. cxxx. ff. ;or more fully, Hist. Royal Navy, ii. 158 ff. Several of these occurin the quotations cited in the last note ; to which may be addedthe following passage from Caxton's continuation of Higden :'In the fourthe yere the duc of Bedford, therle of Marche, andother certayne Lordes . . . foughten on the see ageynst sevencarryks of Gene, and fyfty other vessels, as hulkes, barges, galeysand galyetis ' (Higden, viii. 552). An unconstitutional commissionaddressed by Henry IV to various towns ordering them to buildcertain 'barges and balyngers' was objected to in Parliament2 Hen. IV, and cancelled (Rot. Parl. iii. 458 a).CHAPTER VII.a case ouer moch exorbitant.]See above, pp. 216-7, andnotes to Chapter viii, pp. 250-1, below.Ffirst pe kyng shall . . . sende . . . his ambassatours.] Wages ofThe wages of ambassadors varied with their rank, in accordance ambassadors.with which an allowance of so much a day was made to them.The ordinary payments per diem seem to have been as fo:lows :-B S. d.ForaBishop ............... 3 6 8 P.P.C.iv.109; vi.302.For an Earl ............... 3 6 8 P. P.C.iv. 123 ff.; vi. 302 ; Rymer, X. 271.For an Abbot ............... 2 o o P. P. C. vi. 302.For a Baron ............... 2 o o P. P. C. iv. I 23 ff. ; Rymer, xi. 504.For a Knight Banneret ... z o oP. B. C. iv. 109 ; Engl. in France, 11. lxxvi.ForaKnight ............... I o o P.P.C.iv.123ff.; vi.302.For Doctors of Law, &c. I o o P. P. C. iv. 123 ff., 265 ; vi. gz.Inferior ambassadors sometimes had £I, sometimes a mark perdiem (Rymer, xi. 504; P. P. C. vi. 302). I have not found anyinstances of payments to Archbishops or Dukes on this score. In1432 t'he Archbishop of York (Kemp) was allowed payment at therate of 1000 marks per annum while ambassador at the Council ofBasle, with the proviso that, if during the time of his absence he was

sent on any other mission, he should receive the ordinary wages ofan Archbishop. It is not however stated what these were (Rymer,X. 525-6). As a Bishop or Earl received five marks per diem, anArchbishop or Duke would probably have £5 ; a supposition whichis confirmed by the relative wages of these lords as councillors,an Archbishop or a Duke having £200 per annum, a Bishop oran Earl 200 marks. (See notes to Chapter xv, p. 302, below). £5was the sum allowed to George Neville, Warwick's brother, in 1463,though he was then only Bishop of Exeter, the increased allowancebeing probably owing to his rank as Chancellor, for as Councillorthe Chancellor receives the same wages as an Archbishop or aDuke (Rymer, xi. 504). Besides their wages, ambassadors wereallowed 'reasonable costs for the passage and repassage of thesea' (P. P. C. iv. 140-1). In some cases the sums allowed forthis purpose are given. They vary of course according to theretinue by which the ambassador is accompanied (e.g. Rymer, ix.189, 205; P. P. C. vi. 53). Frequently a sum of money is advanced(' by apprest,' ' par voie d'apprest,' ' per viam praestiti ') toambassadors on setting out (in some cases a quarter's salary), andthen on their return they account with auditors appointed by theexchequer for the sums so advanced, and receive the balance dueto them on their accounts (P. P. C. iii. 201 ; iv. 178; V. 169;Rymer, xi. 53, etc.). Bekynton's account for his mission to Calaisin 1439 is printed in his Correspondence, I. cxxii; that of SirJohn Popham for his embassy to Brittany in 1438 is in WarsLharies of of the Engl. in France, 11. Ixxv, ff. It is perhaps partly toznibaasathissystem of daily allowances that we owe the elaborate diariesclors.kept by some ambassadors. Two of Bekynton's diaries havebeen printed : one, of his embassy to Calais in 1439, may befound in P. P. C., v. 334 ff. ; the other of his embassy to the Countof Armagnac in 1442 is in his Correspondence, ii. 177 ff. Thelatter has also been published in a translation by Sir HarrisNicolas (London, 1828). This was the scale of payment, andthis the system of account whether the embassy was directed toforeign princes, to pope, or to councils, or to the English governmentin the conquered districts of France (Engl. in France, 11.Ixxvii). Conversely, ambassadors from the English governmentin France to the home government were treated as foreignambassadors (ib. i. 389 ff, ; P. P. C. iv. 122; see below).It will be seen Dom what has been said, that the expense undermotes.Jiis head cannot have been light.above, it is put down at £2626.In the budget of 1433 given H~UY ex-It was not without plausible pend1t1'7under tli~sreason that Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, in his celebrated head.manifesto of 1440, protested against the great expense of thefruitless negociations at Arras in 1435, and at Calais in 1439 :' Ther hath ben loste and dispended to notable and to grete agoode by divers ambassiates sent oute of this youre royaume;first to Aras, &c. . . . Item, now late was sent an other alnbasqiateto Calais, &c. . . . The whiche gode, if it had be emploied for thedefence of youre saide royaumes, the merchandize of youre landesmight have had other course, and youre saide landes not stalldenin so grete mischief as they do' (Engl. in France, ii. 444-5.notes to Chap. xv, p. 318, below for the large sums of money exportedto Arras). Nor is it surprising to find that the ambassadors paymentsoften had considerable difficulty in obtaining payment of the sums Indue to them. In rhe minutes of the Privy Council for 1433 it is notedthat 'pere lakketh yit a greet part . . . for paiement of parchebisshopeof York and Fe Lorde Hungerforde pat be appointede toSeethe generalle conceil ' (P. P. C. iv. I 59). And in the commissionsof sevcral of the ambassadors to that council (Basle), a proviso isinserted that if their wages are not paid they may leave the council(Rymer, X. 528, 531, 532).Bekynton, in 1444, complained thatthere was still owing to him £189 on account of his embassy of1442, for which 'he can as yit have no paiement nor assignement,to his grete hurt in pat partie' (P. P. C. vi. 24-5).It illustrates the difference between modern and metlizval diplo- Change inniacy that Fortescue reckons these diplomatic expenses among the it:::"racextraordinary,and not among the ordinary charges of the crown. diplomacy.But already a change was colning over European diplomacy. Theconsolidation of the great monarchies, by the falling in of greatfiefs or the union of smaller kingdoms which had acted in theMiddle Ages as a kind of barrier to keep the nations apart,combined with the growth of that system of internatiotlal jealous)-which is called the Balance of Power, to render tliplomatic relationsbelween states closer and more frequent. But the system of permanentresident ambassadors did not come till later. Commynes,who gives elaborate directions for the sending and receiving ofanibassadors, evidently regards them as only a superior sort of spy,to be sent about their business as soon as conveniently might be(LW. iii. c. 8). The system adopted by Louis XI and others, of

Transition pensiononmg, as it was delicately called, some member or membersstage.of foreign courts, mho were expected in return to support thePensions.interests of those who pensioned them, may be regarded as a sortof transitional experiment. The system of resident ambassadorsEarliest begins in England under the Tudors. But these agents were at-dent first taken from a very inferior class, and were miserably paid.ambassadors.The state papers re-echo with their impecunious wails (v. Brewer,Their Henry VIII, i. 64-8; and compare the conlplaints of De Puebla,character.the Spanish ambassador in England under Henry V11 : Calendarof Spanish Papers, Suppl. to vols i. and ii. pp. 96, 113, 121). Butas the importance of the office increased, so did the dignity of thepersons who filled it; and the diplomatic establishment became arecognised item in the ordinary expenditure of the nation.Projected Henry V111 seems to have had the idea of establishing a regularof school of diplomacy and international law. In Waterhous' Fortesdiplomacyand inter- cutus Illustr. (pp. 539-542) there is a copy of a project drawn upat Henry's command by Thon~as Denton, Nicolas Bacon, andlaw.Itobert Cary for establishing, on the model of the Inns of Courtand of Chancery, a house of students where Law and the pureuse of Latin and French should be taught; whereby the Icingmight be better served, as well in foreign countries as within therealm. A certaiu number of students were to be maintained bythe King, others might be admitted at their own charges. In-struction was to be provided in French and Latin, and legaldiscussions were to be held after supper. Whenever the kingsent an cmbassy abroad, one or two of the king's students wereto accompany it, in order ' That thereby they may be more expertand meet to serve the king's Majesty in such affairs.' Two of thestudents were to keep a history or chronicle of the realm, andwhenever a war took place on the Continent persons were to besent to watch and record its events. [This document is followedby another not less interesting, drawn up by the same persons,and describing the actual customs in use at the Inns of Court ant1Chancery.]Proctorsat to the pope.] These embassies seem not to have been veryfrequent, owing to the fact that the English monarchs always hadearliest a permanent proctor in the court of Rome to look after theirresident interests, \v110 may perhaps be regarded as the earliest instancediplomaticagents. of a resident diplonlatic agent. (For specinlens of these appointmentssee Rjmer, ix. 12 ; X. 266; cf. Devon's Issues of theExchequer, pp. 46~-2). One of the chief functions of the personsso appointed is to secure the promotion of the king's nominees tovacant sees, etc. Owing to the venality of the court of Romethese relations were a source of continual expense. Specimens offormal missions to Rome are the embassies which Henry V1 sentin 1457 and 1459 to offer the profession of his obedience toCalixtus I11 and Pius II respectively (Rymer, xi. 403, 422. Forearlier instances, cf. ib. viii. 446, 479 ; Issues of the Exchequer, pp.308, 3'0, 406).to the counselles generalles.] In his tract De filulo Edze~ardi Councils.Comilis IMarchi~~. Fortescue brings forward as an argument infavour of the Lancastrian title the fact that the ambassadors ofHenry V and Henry V1 had been admitted without question tothe councils of Constance and Basle (c. 10, Works, p. 69*).Only in the fifteenth century probably would a writer have mentionedthe sending of ' messengers and procurators ' to generalcouncils as a special item of expense. The first half of the Vain atfifteenthcentury was the great period of the abortive attempt to tempt toreform thereform the Church by means of councils, and to transform the Church bypapal despotism into a sort of ecclesiastical parliamentary system. 2,":n,.Henry IV sent ambassadors to the council of Pisa in 1408, and pisa,ordered the clergy of his kingdom to send representatives also(Rymer, viii. 567, ff.). In 1409 he acknowledged Alexander Vthe Pope of the Pisan council (ib. 604-S), in this not followingthe policy of his ally, Rupert king of the Romans. The commis- Constance.sions of Henry V to his ambassadors to the council of Constanceare in Rymer, ix. 167, 169. In the former of these Henrydeclares that he would gladly attend in person if he were notothertvise hindered. (For a sketch of the relations of England tothe council of Constance see the admirable monograph of Dr.nIax Lenz, ' lconig Sigismund und Heinrich der Fiinfte'). The Pavia.appointment of certain persons as ambassadors to attend thecouncil of Pavia in 1423 (adjourned to Siena in 1424) was agreedupon in the privy council on Feb. ~2nd of the former year, Itwas also agreed two days later that certain other persons should beauthorized to demand a place in the counc~l, as representatives ofthe infant monarch in his capacity as King of France (P. P. C.iii. 42-4 ; Rymcr, X. 269. The journal of Whethamstede, Abbotof St. Alban's, who went to Pavia as one of the representatives ofthe English clergy, is in Amundesham, i). Ambassadors to the Bade.R 2

council of Basle seem to have been first appointed in July I432 ;perhaps in response to the embassy from Basle which was inEngland at that time (P. P. C. iv. 123-6 ; Rymer, X. 519). Otherswere appointed later. In the following year measures were takenfor the despatch thither of represe~ltatives of the clergy of England,Ireland, and Guienne (P. P. C. iv. 160). In all these cases thedifference is strictly maintained bet~veen royal ambassadors andclerical representatives, though occasionally we find a prelateacting in both capacities (P. P. C. iv. 123 ; Rymer, X. 587).Here also Henry V1 appointed ambassadors for his kingdom ofFrance, and protested in vain against their non-admission (Rymer,X. 605 ; P. P. C. iv. 297-8 ; Bckynton's Correspondence, ii. 268).Nor were embassies the only expense incurred by thc EnglishGovernment in connexion with the council of Basle. In hIay1434 four hundred ducats are entrusted to the ambassadors thensetting out, that they may secure the services of a permanentadvocate in the council to attend to the king's matters ; while inNovember letters of exchange for 1000 marks were sent to theambassadors to be distributed in the council for the honour andprofit of the king-in plain English, for b,ribes (P. P. C. iv. 2 I 7,Ferrara. 289). At the final breach between the Pope and council, Henrysided with the former, acknowledged his rival council of Ferrala,and ordered his prelates to remove thither, 1437, (Bekynton, ii. 80).Among the minutes of the Privy Council occurs the following interestingentry : ' ambassadcurs to be scnde to the general concile,&C., to Ferraire or to I3asil wheder pat pe Grekes wol come,' (P.P. C.Congress of vi. 9 I). It is curious that the congress of RIantua, which washiant''. expressly intended by Pius I1 to take the place of the hatedcouncils, and restore in a new form the overlordship of the Popeover secular princes (Droysen, Gesch. d. preuss. Politik, 11. i. 147 :Palacky, IV. ii. 123 L), is itself called n ' general council' by Whethamstede(i. 334-6), who gives the names of the ambassadorsappointed to attend it. They were honerer prevented from settingout by tlie outbreali of civil war in England (cf. P. P. C. vi. 298,302).Reception the kynge shall beyre ... charges vnknowen in re ceyofsmbassadors.vinge off ligates, &C.] The charges on this account fall, asFortescue says, under two heads; payment of the ambassadors'expenses during tlieir stay in the kingdom, and presents given tothem at their departure. Two or three examples will suffice tonotes'. $bap. bii.illustrate this point. In 1414 £24 14s. 3d. are allowed for the expensesof certain French ambassadors from May 17 to June 2 ;and 6644 I 2s. IO~. for those of the Burbwndian anlbassadors fromApril 19 to June 17 (Rymer, ix. 189). In "27 £40 and 20marks respectively are given to two ambassadors from the Icing ofthe Romans (P. P. C. iii. 280). In I432 envoys from the councilof Basle receive sums varying from £40 to £20. In the samepear 50 marks are given to a Papal ambassador (P. P. C. iv.I 20-1 ; Rymer, X. ~'~-5). In 1478 £40, are given to each oftwo Spanish ambassadors (Rymer, xii. 92). It was perhaps in thehope of such rewards that in 1426 an impostor, calling himselfthe Baron of Blakamore, gave himself out as an ambassador fromthe Emperor. He WAS however detected, and promptly executed(Amundesham, i. 7). By ' grete communalties ' are meant independentrepublics, such as Flofience, Genoa, or Venice (cf. Rymer,viii. 420; ix. 120; P.P. C. ii. 256 K.; Engl. in France, i. 472).The expenses of Bedford as Regent of France, in receivingambassadors there during one year, are set down at 20,000 franks(Engl. in France, ii. [538]).reward6 such as do . . . to hym seruice.]On rewards inmoney as opposed to grants of land see notes to Chap. v. pp.208-9, above. On the inalienabil~ty of the royal revenues see notesto Chap. xix, pp. 341-2, below.new bildynges.] See the notes to the last Chapter, above,p. 230. One item of expenditure under this head which I havediscovered is of some interest.' In 141 3 Henry V granted 1000marks annually during pleasure for the completion anci repair ofthe nave of Westminster Abbey (Rymer, ix. 78).riche clothes, &C.] A taste for splendid dress was eminently Splendourcharacteristic of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and reached P~,"&:Bits climax perhaps at the Field of the Cloth of Gold in 1520, and sixwheremany of the English nobility and gentry ' broke their backs : ~~~'enwithlaying manors on 'em,' (Henry VIII, Act I. Sc. i.), and where'the medixval age gathered up its departing energies for a lastdisplay' (Brewer, Henry VIII, i. 350). On the Continent thelead in this respect was taken by the Burgundian Court. (See]

@Lbap+ bii,commiscomissioners in gret myght . . . to represse . . . riatours,dons. &C.] On the aristocratic turbulence and local disorder whichcharacterized the Lancastrian period, see Introduction, Part I, pp.I I R., and Paston Letters, passim. As instances of these specialcommissions on important occasions the following may be cited. InDecember 1450, after the rising of Cade, a commission of yer andfeyminer for Kent and Sussex was issued to the Duke of York, LordBourchier, Sir John Fastolf and others (Paston Letters, i. 186).In 1453 Sir William Lucy was sent with others into the North ascommissioners to put down the disturbances between Lord Egremontand Sir John Nevllle (P. P. C. vi. 147-151). In December,1455, York, then Protector for the second time, was, at the requestof the Commons, sent as commissioner into Devonshire, ' notablyaccompanied,' to put an end to the ' heynous inconveniences 'occasioned by the Earl of Devonshire; and various other lordswere joined in the commissian with him (ib. 267-271). In147 I, after the attempt of the bastard Falconbridge, ' the LordeDenharn and Sere Jhon Fog and dpverse othere (were) madecommyssioners, that satt uppon alle Kente, Sussex, and Essex, thatwere at the Blakhethe,' &c. (U'arkworth, p. 21). On the natureand origin of these commissions of yer and fernzirzer, see Palgrave,Essay on the King's Council, $$ xii. xiii.Royalpro- he shall . . . ride in his own8 person, &C.] Henry V1g"SSes to appears to have done so after the rising of Cade, etc. in 1450 :put downdisorder.'This yere the Kynge went into Kent . . . and sate and did gretejustice upon tlio that rose with the capteyne ; . . . and so Fe Kyngewentt . . . westwards .to Salisbery, and ther as the Bysshoppe ofSalysbery was slayne ' (Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles, pp. 68-9,cf. Gregory p. 196). He announced his intention of doing so inthe Parliament of 1453 : ' Quod in persona sua propria ad diversnsRegni partg laborare fuit dispositus, ad illam intentionem et finemquod blanutenentia, Extorsio, Oppressio, Riote, et alia malefacta atamdiu infra Regnum suum Anglie usitata destruerentur, et factores. . . punirentur' (Rot. Parl. V. 236 b). With this may be comparedib. 382 b, where it is announced that Richard Duke ofYork, ' vraj and lightfull heire of the Reaumes of Englond andPrauncc,' has been appointed 'to ride into the parties of theRealme of Englond and Wales, where rebellions, murdres, riottes,spoilyng, extorsions and oppressions be used, . . . to represse. . . and appese them.' In May, 1470, Earl Rivers was sent bythe advice of the council with thirty men-at-arms and forty footsoldiersinto Kent, ' to suppress divers rebels there assembled'(Issues of the Exchequer, p. 494). So Edward IV, at the request ofthe Commons in the Parliament of 1472-5, sent -our Sovereignand Liege Lady the Quene, and the right excellent Prynce yourfirst begoten son, Prynce of Wales, accompayned with many greteLordes spiriiuelx and temporelx, and many other notable persones,as well your Juges, as other . . . your commyssioners,' to putdown disorders on the marches of Wales. An unusually vigorousprotest against the partial proceedings of this commission is inRot. Parl. vi. 159 f. The Croyland Continuator remarks that afterEdward IV's return from his French exped~tion ' coactus est ipsemetdominus Rex Regnum suum una cum Justitiis suis perlustrare,nemini . . . parcens, . . . si in furto aut homicidio deprehensusQua rigorosa justitia . . . publica latrocinia jam diuexisteret.postea quieverunt ' (p. 559).no man is bounde to serue hym, &C.] If this refers to the Right ofquestion of the king's right to claim the assistance of his subjects :$;'C;in putting down by force internal disturbances of the peace, it is servicean impoitant enunciation of a constitutional principle. On thequestion of the right of the Crown to exact military service, whichis a very intricate one, see S. C. H. ii. 283-6, 353, 396, 539-543.Much however that is there said refers to foreign service, theexaction of which without payment was unquestionably unconsti-tutional.The law was fixed by I Edw. 111, st. 2, c. 5 ; I 8 Etlw.111, c. 7, whereby no one was to be called up011 to serve outsidethe limits of his own county, except in case of sudden invasion ;and payment by the king was to commence from the time that anyforce quitted the limits of its own shire. In the Parliament of Sept.1402 the Commons complained of the frequent breach of thesestatutes, especially with reference to the troubles in Wales, and theywere accord~ngly re-enacted (Rot. Parl. iii. 501 a; cf. St. 4,IIenry IV, c. 13). In 1410 the Commons declared that 'personesdefensable de lour corps n'eient en biens dont ils purront . . .defendre de Roiallne sans gages ' (Rot. Parl. iii. 645 a). Similarabuses were alleged against Henry V1 by the Yorkist Lords in 1460 :that ys to say, every tounshyp to fynde men for the Kynges garde '(Eng. Chron. p. 87). And it was one of the complaints againstEdward 1V that he caused men ' at every batell to come ferre outethere countries at ther awne coste ' (Warkwortll, p. I 2).

mote$+ abap, biii.CHAPTER VIII.Title.] Cf. St. Thomas quoted by Baumann, Staatslehre, pp.98-9.Hit is shewid be ffore.] See Chapter vi above, ad init.the kynge hath livelode . . . sufficient . . . for his ordin-arie charges.] All, therefore, that was needed, according toFortescue, was that this revenue should be made inalienable, or, asThe King he calls it in Chap. xix, ' amortised.' In this may Fortescue would10 live ofhis own. endeavour to satisfy the demand which we so frequently meetwith throughout the whole of the mediaval history of England,' that the king should live of his own;' which meant that theordinary expenditure should be covered by the ordinary revenue,which is ' what was meant by the king's own ' (S. C. H. ii. 551).How far this ideal was realized as a general rule it is very difficultto say, owing to the fact that no distinction is made in theaccounts between ordinary and extraordinary expenditure (ib. 54'51In 1404 and again in 1410 the Commons petitioned Henry IVthat he would 'live of his own! The answer in both cases wnssubstantially the same : ' the Kyng thanketh hem of here godedesire, willyng put it in execution als sone as he we1 may' (Rot. Parl.iii. 549 a, 624 a). The demand was one which was constantlymade in the various risings which characterized the period (cf. e.g.Engl. Chron. ed. Davies, pp. 86-7). In 1467 Edward IV himselfannounced to the Commons : ' Y purpose to lyve uppon my nowne ;and not to charge my Subgettes but in grete and urgent causes,concernyng more the wele of theym self, . . . than my nownepleasir' (Rot. Parl. v. 572 a). With this object a resumption actwas passed. Before the prorogation the Commons found it expedientto remind the king of the promise which he had made (ib.618 b) ; cf. also notes to Chap. v above, pp. 209-2 10. It wasone of Henry V's arguments in favour of the French war, that theincrease of his patrimony would enable him to diminish the chargesupon his subjects (Rot. Parl. iv. 34 b).what lyvelod pe kyng hath for . . . his charges extra-rropos~lsof Fortescuefor the ordinarie.] In Chapter X below, Fortescue discusses the questionendowment 'how that the crowne is beste to be indowed,' and comes to thetheconclusion that it would be best 'yff pe kynge myght haue isCrown.livelod , . . in grete lordshippes, maneres, ffee fermys and suchother demaynes, his people not charged,' (p. 133). From whichit would appear, that he desired, that not only the ordinary expenditure,but also the average extraordinary expenditure should beprovided for by permanent endc~vments of the crown. Thusresort to the popular grant would only be necessary (to use Fortescue'sown words) ' yff per shall ffall a case ouer moch exorbitant,'Chap. vii, p. 123; cf. preceding note). It is unnecessary to dwell Their canuponthe constitutional importance of this proposal. This is just ?&'2r1one of the points in which Fortescue prepares the way for the NewMonarchy. Under Edward IV, and still more under the Tudors,this ideal was to a great extent realized, with the result that mighthave been foreseen; viz. that the national voice was reduced tocomparative silence. The experience of the Lancastrian reignsseems to have convinced Fortescue of the necessity of a moreliberal and more regular provision for the wants of the State. Inthis he was undoubtedly right. But it is to be regretted that heand others found the solution of the problem in the practical emancipationof the crown from parliamentary control in financialmatters. We have seen (above, p. 195), how a mistake, similar inkind though greater in degree, on the part of the Three Estates inFrance laid the foundation of the despotism of the French kings.The English Parliament in granting Tunnage and Poundage and Revenuelife.the Subsidy on wool to Henry V and Henry V1 for life had alreadytaken a serious step in the same direction. The idea that it waspossible to have a perfectly regular public revenue, and yet tomaintain the proper constitutional control by granting it onlyannually, had not yet been developed. It seems to have beenassumed that an administration must necessarily be precariouswhich should depend for its existence on supplies voted annually.And yet the annual grant required would not have been very great.Even when the national finances were at their worst in 1433 'asingle annual grant of a fifteenth would,' as Dr. Stubbs points out,h be sufficient to balance revenue and expenditure, and would leavesomething to pay off the debt ' (C. H. iii. r I 8). And in bettertimes less would probably have sufficed. It is a little hard to seewhy this sum should not have been granted annually or for shortperiods, just as was done ~.g. in the case of Tunnage and Poundage,until the plan was introduced of granting them for life. Hadthis system, which seems to us so simple, been adopted, Englandmight, humanly speaking, have been spared much bitter conflict.

ap1-0,Bterc,cjzt4IjAnd on the other hand, had Henry V111 been as economical of theresources at his disposal as were Henry V11 and Elizabeth, hemight have established in England a permanent despotism of theFrench type. But it is idle to speculate on what might have been.Pecock has a passage in which he insists on the impolicy of making~.ulers dependent for their livelihood on the grants of the governed(Repressor, p. 394). But Pecock is there speaking of the endowment,not of the Crown, but of the clergy.S. Thomas saith, Rex datur, &C.] This is from the Pseudo-Aquinas, Be Rgz'ftli~zr, iii. c. I I, where the writer is discussing thedifference between the king and the tyrant : ' Regnum non estpropter regem, sed rex propter regnum, quia ad hoc Deus providittle eis, ut regnum regant et gubernent, et unumquemque in suojure conservent: et hic est finis regiminis : quod si ad aliudfaciunt, in se ipsos commodum retorquendo, non sunt reges sedtyranni.' Fortescue quotes this passage again in N. L. N. i. c. 25(ii70rks p. 86), and in Be Lnudz'bzis, c. 37 ad init. In the instructionsto the anlbassadors sent to France in 1439, it is argued inFavour of peace that 'the princes of bothe partis owe to considere,that God made not his people in the said to remes, ner in other,for the princes; but he made the princes for his service, and forthe wele and behove of his people' (P. P. C. v. 357). IVaterhous(p. 12) quotes from Blius Spartianus, Life of Hadrian (c. g), theremark of that emperor : ' Ita se rempublicam gesturum ut sciretpopuli rem esse, non propriam,' (cf. next note but two).pe highest estate temporall.] But all temporal estates are, accordingto Fortescue, subject to the Pope (see Introduction, Par1 111,p. 103.defence and justice.] See notes to Chap. iv. above, pp. 201-3,on the two duties of a king.I'rpalstyle. servus servorum Dei.] Gregory the Great was the firstPope to assume this title as a rebuke to the pride of the Patriarchof Constantinople, who had taken the title of Universal Bishop(Weber, Allgem. Weltgesch. iv. 816; cf. Higd. Polychr. v. 390).Letters of Gregory with this supersci-iption are in Bede, Hist.Eccl., i. cc. 23-24. But he does not seem to have used it by anymeans universally. I have glanced through his letters in the fifthvolume of Labbe's Concilia without finding a single instance of itsuse. On this servitude of ~ulers compare the words of Antigonusto his son, cited by Waterl~ous (p. I~I), from Xlianus I'rznes-tinus, Hist. Var., Lib. ii. c. 20 : O ~ K oluOa, B 1ra6 ~ i pa~ncr~~~i~~vh8oEov clvac GovXciav;' Dr. Richard Price, in his sermon 'On theLove of our Country,' which is discussed by Burke at the beginningof his ' Reflections,' proposed that the monarch should be told ' onoccasions of congratulation that he is to consider himself moreproperly the servant than the sovereign of the people.' On whichBurke, citing this very parallel of the Papal style, remarks : ' Theproudest domination that ever was endured on earth took atitle of still greater humility than that which is now proposed forsovereigns by the Apostle of Liberty. Kings and nations weretrampled upon by the foot of one calling himself the "servantof servants," and mandates for deposing sovereigns were sealedwith the signet of "the Fisherman."' The basis of the title is ofcourse Matth. xx. 27, ' Qui voluerit inter ros primus esse, eritvester servus;' cf. Mark X. 44 ; cf. also St. Augustine, De Civ. Dei,xix. c. 14 (ad finem): 'Sed in domo justi viventis ex fide, etadhuc ab illa ccelesti Civitate peregrinantis, etiam qui imperant,serviunt eis, quibus videntur imperare. Neque enim dominandicupiditate imperant, sed officio consulendi; nec principandi superbia,sed providendi misericordia.'nemo debet, &C.] This is from I Cor. ix. 7 : ' Quis militatsuis stipendiis umquam ? ' Fortescue possibly took the quotationfrom Pseudo-Aquinas, Be Reginzzke, iii. c. I I, as it there followsclose on the passage which Fortescue has just cited : 'rex propterregnum,' &c. The writer however keeps closer to the original thanFortescue : ' nemo militat stipendiis suis unquam.'dignus est operarius, &C.] This is verbatim from Matth.X. 10.wherfore Jw appostill saith . . . bonis.] The whole ofthis passage is omitted by Lord Fortescue of Credan, who is followedby Lord Clermont. It is howeqer in every MS. that I haveexamined. The omission was probably due to the recurrence ofthe word ' wherfore.' The quotation is verbatim from Gal. vi. 6.moch more be we bounde ther to.] Cp. Burke, ' On Conciliationwith America :' ' But what (says the financier) is peace tous without money ? Your plan gives us no revenue. NO ! but itdoes-for it secures to the subject the power of REFUSAL ; thefirst of all revenues. Experience is a cheat, and fact a liar, ifthis power in the subject of proportioning his grant or of notgranting at all, has not been found the richest mine of revenue

ever discovered by the skill or by the fortune of man ' (of. noteto Chap. xii, p. 289, below).CHAPTER IX.Need for a then nedith it pat the kynges livelod . .. be gretterbetter endowmentof than the livelod off the grettest lorde, &C.] This strikes usthe crown. as being a very moderate demand, even if we adopt the readlng ofMS. D2 and the previous editors ' ij the grettest lordes.' But, whenFortescue goes on to say a little lower down that, in order torealize this ideal, ' it shalbe necessarie pat ther be purveyid ffor thekyng moch gretter livelod than he hath yet,' we have a strikingcommentary both on the poverty of the crown and on the wealthof the nobles ; on both which subjects some remarks will befound elsewhere (see notes to Chap. xiv, p. 295, below; Introduction,Part I, pp. I 2-4, I 7-8). Still this forms no arggment againstwhat was urged in the notes to the last chapter in favour of grantingannually whatever sum might be necessary for the properendowment of the crown.wich . . . wold be to the kynge right dredefull.] Because.as Fortescue said in Chap. v. above, p. 119, ' his subgettes wollrather goo with a lorde pat is riche and mey pay thair wages andexpenses then with thair kynge pat hath noght in his purse.' Or,as he puts it a little lower down in the present chapter, ' the peplewill go with hym pat best mey susteyne and rewarde ham.'mey dispende more.] i.e. has a larger income.House- except an houshold.] The LiJer Nker of Ed~rard IV gives:irds. the composition and estimated expense per annum of the respectivehouseholds of a king, duke, marquess, earl, viscount, baron,banneret, knight, squire. These figures have been tabulated byDr. Stubbs in a note to his Const. Hist. (iii. 538), and need nottherefore be reproduced here. That even a duke's household costsless than one-third of the king's illustrates Fortescue's remark thata lord's expenses under that head are 'litle in comparison off theliynges.'the philosopher saith : omnia amamus sed principarimaius.] Fortescue cites this quotation also in N. L. N. i. c. r :' H=c questio [of the succession] . . . sermone non minimocreditur posse absolvi: cum de jure interroget . . . summs POtentie,et rei quam maxime in terris desiderat mens humana, dicentePhilosopho, Onznia amamus scdprincz;bari magis' (Works, p. 65).On which Lord Carlingford remarks : ' This has not been iden- Source oftified in Aristotle, but there are passages like it to which Fortescue ::?'nyuotamayallude ; as Rhet. i. 38, TA 6' SPx~tv ?"8~crsov; and Pol. vii. 14, I 7,tlur~~ oi rXci(r~ot ~liv ~U~~&TTOV ~ T O ~ TGV ~ U voXXliw L ~Eu~TMc~v. It isnot in the Auctoritates.' I believe, on the other hand, that Fortescuehas simply misquoted an Auctoritas from the seventh book of thePolitics, which, in the printed edition of I 488, runs thus : ' omniaamamus magis in principio' ; and which the RIS. Canonici,Pat. Lat. 62, gives thus, ' omnia amamus, premia magis;' thislast being probably a scribal error for the version of the VeniceLatin Aristotle of 1483, ' omnia amamus prima magis.' Theoriginal is Pol. vii. I 7, 13, sdv~ayhP cr~;~yo~sw ~h nplira pirXXov. Theinstances in which Fortescue's Aristotelian quotations ditnnot betraced to the ductoritafes or some other second-hand source, are sofew that T am exceedingly sceptical as to the likelihood of his havinghad any such general references in his mind as Lord Carlingfordsupposes, which would imply on his part a tolerable first-handacquaintance with the works of Aristotle. The Pseudo-Aquinasquotes a similar sentiment from Valerius IlIaximus : ' Appetitushonoris hest homini. Unde Valerius Maximus dicit, quod nullaest tanta humilitas, q u hac ~ dulcedine non tangatur.' Be Rcgin~zrzr,iv. c. 7 ; cf. ib. c. 20.Hyldericus . . . dissended off Clodone, &C.] By Clodor/e Clovis.is meant Clovis or Chlodw*, of which name he more modernforms are Ludwzg, Louis, and Lewis. He was grandson ofMeroveus, from whom the Merovingiall dynasty derive their name.Higden in Polychron. i. 276 calls h~rn Clodonetrs ; but in v. 290 hecalls him Clodonius qzri et Lodowicus, which his translator Trevisagives as CZodonezrs Lowtys. It is possible that Clodoneus may havearisen simply from a mis-reading of Clodoueus. It is however avery common form. The conversion of Clovis I. to Christianitywas due to his victory over the Alemanni at Ziilpich in 496 A.D.,(cf. Pseudo-Aquinas, De Regin~i~ze, ii. c. 16). By Hyldericus is Childer~cmeant Childeric 111, deposed by Pippin the Short in 7'52 A.D. The lll.story of his deposition is given both in the Compendium iVoraal f.34 b, and by Vincent of Beauvais, Dt. Mor. I?zsf. Princ. C. 4.It is alluded to by Pseudo-Aquinas, De Regimlize, iii. C. 10.

Charleshlartel.Fall of theCarolingiandynasty.Though the Merovingian dynasty was not finally set aside till 752,the real power had long been in the hands of Pippin's predecessors,the mayors of the palace (cf. Eginhard, Vita Caroli Magni, c. I).As to the share of the Pope in the revolution, French politicalwriters are careful to show, in the interest of the independence ofthe French monarchy, that Zacharias did not depose Childeric, butonly gave his consent to his deposition (Riezler, LiterarischeWidersacher &C., pp. I 42-3, 151). Marcellus is due to a misreadingor miswriting of fifarkllus; c and f being constantlyconfused in mediaeval MSS. The origin of the name is thus givenby William of Malmesbury, i. 98, who is copied by Higden, i. 278 :' Filius Pipini [of Heristal,] fuit ICarolus Tudites, quem illi Martellurnvocant, quod tyrannos per totam Franciam emergentescontuderit, Saracenos Gallias in festantes egregie depulerit.' It waswith special reference to this victory over the Saracens in 732 thatthe name was given. A poem on the death of Henry V says thathe was-'Carolus in quastu, Clodoveus et in moderatu.'(Political Songs, ii. I 29).Charles discended off Carolus Magnus . . . was put fromthe kyngdome . . . by Hugh Capite.] There is some con-fusion here ; but Fortescue may be excused if he has not succeededin unravelling the history of the last Carolingian kings of theWestern Franks. The last king of that line was Lewis TT. Hedied in 987, under suspicious circumstances it is true ; and on hisdeath Hugh Capet was chosen king. The crown was howeverclaimed by Charles Duke of Lower Lotharingia, uncle of Lewis V,who came into the hands of Hugh Capet 990, and died in plison994 This is probably the Charles intended by Fortescue. But hecan hardly be said to have been ' put from the kyngdome,' becausehe never possessed it. It is possible, though I think less likely,that Fortescue's memory was confused by the earlier struggles ofthe Capetian house under Hugh Capet's great uncle Odo (orEudes), Count of Paris, his grandfather Robert, and his fatherHugh the Great (Fortescue's Hugo Rfagnus), against Charles theSimple. The relation of the Capetian house to the later Carolingswas not unlike the relation of the Carolingian hcuse to the laterhIerovings : i.e., they enjoyed the reality before they finally assumedthe external garb of power. Fortescue's 'nine or ten generations 'are too many, if we are to understand bj ' generations ' steps in thepedigree from father to son. On the other hand, if descents of thecrown are meant, they are too few. (See the Carolingian Pedigree,e.g., in Kitchin, History of France, i. 97). Fortescue speaks as ifHugh Capet had been the first ' Dux Francis! But according toL'Art de vei-$er les Dates (ii. 245, ed. 1783-7, fol.), Charles theBald in 861 conferred 'the Duchy and Marquisate of France' onRobert the Strong, great-grandfather of Hugh Capet (cf. Martin,Hist. de France, ii. 448). On the Duchy of France and the wayin which, from 888 to 987, the crown of the Western kingdomoscillated between the Dukes of the French at Paris and theCarolings at Laon, see Freeman, Hist. Geography, pp. 146-7.and in owre dayis we haue sene a subgett of the Ffrenchkynges, &C.] This refers to Charles the Bold, then only Count ofCharolais, to the War of the Public Weal, the battle of &Iontlh6ry,the siege of Paris, and the treqty of Conflans, 1465; on all whichsee Commynes, Liv. i. ch. 2-14, For the special interest of thisreference, see Introduction, Part 11. p. 66, above. For the treatyof Conflans, see Commynes, ed. Lenglet-Dufresnoy, ii. 500 ff.We haue also sene late in owre reaume, &C.] This mightrefer either to the risings of the Duke of York, the Earls of Salisburyand Warwick, etc., against Henry VI, which ended in theestablishment of Edward IV on the throne ; or to the rebellion ofClarence and Warwick against Edward himself, which led to hisexpulsion and the brief restoration of Henry VI. If the latter ismeant, this chapter must have been written after Fortescue's reconciliationwith Edward IV; if the former, it may have been written,as some of the later chapters were in substance written, with aview to the Lancastrian restoration of 1470 (see Introduction,Part 111. pp. 94-6, above). On Warwick's offices, see a note onthis Chapter below, pp. 262-3, and notes to Chapter xvii; onClarence's offices and grants see notes to Chapter xi, p. 2 79, below.The Erlis of Lecestir and Glocestre, &C.] 2; e., Simon deRlontfort and Gilbert de Clare at the battle of Lewes, May 14,1264, where Henry I11 and his son Edward were taken prisoners.the kyng off Scottis pat last dyed . . . Erle ~ouglas.] Relations' The King of Scots that last died' is James 11, who was killed in1460 by the bursting of a cannon at the siege of Roxburgh Castle. las withThe most recent account of the relations of the Douglases with the the Crownof Scotcrownof Scotland during his reign is contained in the prefaces to land.the 5th and 6th volumes of the Exchequer Rolls of Scotland, edited

Murder of by George Burnett, Esq., Lyon King of Arms (1882-3).TheEarl Douglasand his first act of the tragedy had been played in the previous reign, whenbrother, William, the sixth Earl of Douglas, and his only brother David1440. were treacherously executed by the orders of Crichton the Chan-cellor, who at that time shared the powers of the government withSir Alexander Livingston, the governor of Stirling Castle (1440).Power and The motive for this crime was the overgrown power and ostentaindependofthetious independence of the young earl. ' Galloway, Annandale, andUouglases. other extensive territories in Scotland, the duchy of Touraine andcounty of Longueville, in France, yielded revenues perhapsequivalent to those of the Scotish monarch ' (Douglas' Peerage, byWood, i. 428). The duchy of Touraine reverted to the FrenchCrown; but the government of Scotland did not venture to confiscatehis Scotch estates. Those which were not male fiefs passed tohis sister Margaret, 'the fair maid of Galloway;' the remainder, withthe title of Earl of Douglas, to his great-uncle James. The latter'sson W'illianl (succeeded 1443) re-constituted the power of his houseby marrying his cousin the 'fair maid of Galloway.' Besides this,his brother Archibald was Earl of Moray, and his brother HughEarl of Ormond. This overgrown power of the house of Douglas,the lawless conduct of the earl, his leagues offensive and defensivewith other powerful noblemen, from which the king himself wasnot excepted ; the intrigues of himself and his next brother James,with the English (see their safe-conducts in Rymer, xi. 277, 283-4,306), alarmed and irritated the king, who summoned him to hisMurder of presence under a safe-conduct. In the personal altercation thatlas"3r1D0u6- follomed, the king stabbed the earl with his own hands (Feb. 1452).by theKing, James Douglas, his brother and heir, defied the king, and offered'45'- his homage to the King of England. (Henry's commission for re-Its conseq,e,ceiving his homage, dated June 3, 1452, is in Rymer, xi. 310 ; andtroubles on the borders caused by ' suche as belong to the rewleand governance of th' Erle of Duglas ' are alluded to in May, 1452 ;P. P. C. vi. 125). But in August, 1452, the earl submitted, andreturned to his allegiance ; the king not only receiving him backinto favour, but consenting to his marriage with his brother'swidow, for which a dispensation was obtained, her previous marriagenever having been consummated. But in May 1453 hereceived a safe-conduct from the English king (Rymer, xi. 326),and in 1454 he rebelled again. Some have supposed that he wasaiming at the Scottish Crown. But, says Mr. Burnett, 'he onlynotes, QCbap. fr. 259aimed at the sovereignty of Scotland in the sense of being the mostpowerful person in the realm. The allegiance of the Earl ofDouglas and of some of the other chief magnates who had rightsof regality was hardly more than nominal. They had their baronswho held of them, their heralds and pursuivants, their councils ofretainers analogous to the Parliament of the nation; and theychafed at any interference with their acts by the king, whose authoritythey were on all occasions disposed to weaken' (u.s. V. CV.).There can, besides, have been little confidence between the Earl ofDouglas and the royal assassin of his brother. The distrust was diligentlyfostered from England, where the earl was in 1453. The revoltbroke out, as I have said, in 1454, how is not exactly known. Fortes- Fresh rrcueseems almost to imply that the initiative was taken by the king. "'lt, '454-The earl was unsuccessful, and had to fly to England ; his brotherthe Earl of Moray fell in battle; his brother the Earl of Ormondwas taken and beheaded (1455). The earl's reception in England Earl Donpis mentioned by the English Chronicle (pp. 70-1). From this time Eriewe have to foilow his history inEnglish documents. In August 1455he received an annuity of L500 from the English Government(Engl. in France, ii 503 ; cf. Rymer, xi. 381,421). He was exemptedby name from the operation of the Resumption Acts of 1455, 1463,1467. and 1473 (Rot. Parl. v. 310 a, 525 b, 581 b; vi. 76 b), retaininghis annuity not only under Edward IV (Rymer, xi. 487 ; Rot. Parl. utsup. ; Cal. Rot. Pat. 310 a), but also during the brief restoration ofHenry V1 (Cal. Rot. Pat. 315 b). Under Richard I11 his annuitywas increased by £200 (Rymer, xii. 213, 226). His original connexionsin England seem to have been with the Yorkists, but in1459 he is mentioned as having assisted in their suppression(Rymer, xi. 437). This did not make him less active in assistingEdward 1V in his operations against the Lancastrians in the North ofEngland (cf. Three Fifteenth Cent. Cl~ronicles, p. 159 : ' Thes beenthe tydynges sent owt of Scotland that the Er1 Dowglas hath donenow late in the begynnyng of March, anno Domini MO. cccc. Ixijo.The worthy Erle Dowglas hath takyn of the Scottys the Erle ofCreyl'orth, the Lord Lyle of Crayle, Lord RIaxon', nardeyn of theItrest Rlerchen, &c. . . . numbgr of xvij lordes.') In spite of this,however, he was expressly excluded from the negotiations intowhich Edward entered with Scotland in the summer of 1462 (seeIntroduction, Part 11. pp. 59-60, above). He was recalled fromthe borders, 'and as a sorwef~~ll and a sore rebuked man lyth inS 2

the Abbey of S. Albons' (July: Paston Letters, ii. 110-1). InOct. 1462 Edward promised that he and any Scots who mightadhere to him should be expressly included in any truce (Rymer,xi. 492). He seems accordingly to have been active on theborders in 1463, to have gained some successes, but to have beenultimately defeated (Waurin, ed. Dupont, iii. 163, 172-3). InDec. 1463 he was made Warden of Carrickfergus Castle, in Ireland(Rymer, xi. 510). Edward IV also made him a Knight ofthe Garter (Paston Letters, ii. I I I, note). In 1474 a portion of thegrants made to him was secured for three years to his executors, inorder that he might ' make summe chevesaunce,' i. e. raise moneyon them with a view to accompanying the king to France (Rot.Parl. vi. 132 a). In 1475 he receives a quarter's wages for himselfand four men-at-arms on account of the French expedition (Rymer,xi. 844). In 1480 he seems to have been sent to the borders tonegotiate with the Scots (Issues of the Exch. p. 500). At thebeginning of his reign, Edward IV had a scheme on foot forpartitioning Scotland between him and the Earl of Ross, Lord ofthe Isles. The latter was to have the district north of theScottishe See' (i, e. the Forth), the former the district south of thatboundary; and both were to hold their dominions in strict feudaldependence on the Crown of England (Rymer, xi. 474, 484).Towards the close of his reign, Edward had another scheme onfoot; which was to set up the Duke of Albany, the exiled brotherof James 111, as King of Scotland in feudal dependence on theEnglish Crown. In this plot plso the Earl of Douglas was concerned.His restoration is stipulated for in the agreements betweenEdward and Albany, and the last document of Edward's reigngiven by Rymer is a letter of protection for the Earl of Douglas,about to proceed to Scotland on the king's service (Rymer, xii. I 56,His cap 172-7). In 1484 he and Albany crossed the border, but with'me the insufficient forces. Albany escaped, but Douglas was takenScots.prisoner. He was brought before James 111, and condemned toperpetual retirement in the Abbey of Lindores, whe~e he died in1488. For the subject of the above note, see, besides the authoritiesalready cited, Burton, Hist. of Scotland, Chapters 28, 29.Various documents relating to Douglas' annuities are in Rymer'sMS. Collectanea, Edward IV, vol. i.Spayne.] There is a certain fitness in the mention of Spainimmediately after Scotland. The history of the three chief king-doms of the Pyreneean peninsuIa, Castile, Aragon, and Portugal. Character.constantly reminds us of that of the northern portion of our own E:?:'island, being filled with the accounts of the violent deeds of history.kings, of divisions in the royal houses, of long minorities, ofaristocratic rebellions and feuds. The following remarks on the Predomlpowerof the nobility in Castile and Aragon are abridged from nance ofthe aristheIntroductory Chapter of Prescott's 'Ferdinand and Isabella.' tocracy.In Castile ' the higher nobility (ricos hombres) were exempt Castile.from general taxation. They had the right of private war, ofrenouncing allegiance to, and formally combining in armed confederacyagainst the crown, whenever they considered themselvesaggrieved. They monopolized all the higher offices of state,and secured to themselves the grand masterships of the militaryorders, which placed at their disposal an immense amount ofrevenue and patronage. They had vast estates, often won withtheir own swords from the hIoors, on which they ruled likepetty monarchs over thousands of vassals. By the middle of thefifteenth century they over-shadowed the throne, and threatenedthe liberties of the people. The long minorities, from whichCastile suffered more perhaps than any country in Europe,threw the government into their hands, and they made use ofit to usurp the possessions and invade the prerogatives of thecrown.' In Aragon ' the great barons were fewer and less Aragon.wealthy than those of Castile, but they enjoyed similar privileges.Private war lingered there longer than in any other country ofChristendom, and opposition to the crown was even morehighly organized than in Castile.' See also Hallam, MiddleAges, Chap. iv. ' In Portugal also the divisions in the royal Portugal.house, in which were merged the party-struggles of the nobles,make up the larger part of the history' (Weber, Allgem. Weltgesch.viii. 78). The acquaintance which Fortescue here showswith the chronicles of Spain is worth noting, because it provesthat it is not so 'far-fetched' as Dr. Stubbs (in a note quotedby Lord Carlingford on N. L. N. i. c. I) thinks, to look to thatcountry for illustrations of Fortescue's words. It should benoted howeveg that if Fortescue uses the term Spain here inthe same sense in which it is used a little lower down in thischapter, it would include only the kingdom of Castile. Pseudo-Aquinas also mentions the frequency of rebelliol~s in Spain andHungary, but ascribes them to the violation of the constitu-

tion by the kings : ' si jura regni transcendant,' De R~ginrine,iv. c. I.Scandina- Denmarke.] Perhaps under the name of Denmark Fortescuevian historymeans to include all the three Scandinavian kingdoms, whichat the time he wrote were nominally united in the hands ofChristian I. Of the three kingdoms perhaps Sweden sufferedmost from internal divisions and aristocratic turbulence. ' Formore than two centuries, from 1060 onwards, there were civilwars and bloody contests for the crown waged between differentfamilies.' Magnus I (+1290) brought a brief improvement. Butunder his grandson, Magnus I1 (deposed 1363), 'the power of themagnates increased to such an extent that for the next centurySweden was mainly governed by aristocratic unions.' ' With theelection of Albert of Necklenburg begins a wretched period, duringwhich the cromn was worn by foreign puppet-kings, while all thereal power was in the hand of the magnates' (Weber, U. S. viii.452-8). But things were often little better in Denmark. Indeedthe whole of Scandinavia's mediaval history seems, to any one whohas not made a special study of it, a hopeless tangle. (See a summaryof it in Weber, U. s. pp. 423-481).'Jewish his- the bokis off kynges in holy scripture.] This title wouldtory.include for Fortescue not only the two books which we still socall, but also I and 11 Samuel, which are named in the VulgateI and 11 Kings : a designation which still survives in the alternativeheadings in our bibles. So that it is possible that Fortescuemeans to include the revolts of Absalom (11 Sam. xv), and Sheba(ib. xx), as well as the rebellions mentioned in I and II Kings.These were mainly in the kingdoth of Israel, which having originatedin the rebellion of Jeroboam against Rehoboam (I Kings xii),continued in the same course to the end of its existence. ThusNadab was dethroned by Baasha (ib. xv. 27), Elah by Zimri, Zimriby Omri, who was in turn opposed by Tibni (ib. xvi. 15-22).Jehoram was supplanted by Jehu (11 Kings ix), Zachariah byShallum, Shallum by Menahem, Pekahiah by Pekah, Pekah byHoshea, the last king of the kingdom of Israel (ib. xv).Accnmula- nev dissentes . . . mariages, purchasses, &C.] Of thetion es- accumulation of property by various titles, Warwick the king-tates bygreat maker, the most dangerous subject both of Henry V1 and Edwardnohles:c g- IV, was a signal example, and Fortescue has this example in hisWarwlcli.mind here. With reference to Warwick's estates and offices, thefragmentary English chronicle printed at the end of Hearne'sedition of Sprott says : 'his insatiable mynde cowde no3t becontent: and yitt bifore him was there none in Englond of thehalf possessions that he hadde. For first he hadde all the erledomof Warwick hole, with all the Spensers landis : the erledome ofSalisbury: grete chamberlayne of Englond, cheff admyrall andcapitayne of Calais, and lieutenant of Ireland: the which possessionsamountid to the sum of xx. M. marke : and yitt he desiridmore' (pp. 299 f.). The earldom of Warwick came to himthrough his wife (a Beauchamp), the earldom of Salisbury throughhis mother (a Montacute). His father was third son of RalphNeville, first Earl of Westmoreland. The chronicler howeverseems to be wrong in saying that Warwick had inherited all theDespensers' lands (see Nicolas' Peerage, S. v. Deqencer). On Territorialstrength ofthe territorial strength of the English nobility generally, see S. C. H. the alisiii.525-530. 'It is difficult,' he says, 'to over-rate the quantity of tocracy.land which during the middle ages remained in the hands of thegreat nobles . . . Taken in the aggregate the landedpossessionsof the baronage were more than a counterpoise to the wholeinfluence of the cromn and the other two estates of the realm.'agidius Romanus also advises that excessive accumulations ofproperty should be prevented, Be Rcgzinzize, 111. ii. 32. But theobject with him is rather social than, as with Fortescue, political.He is urging (after Aristotle) the importance of creating a strongmiddle-class. (Compare also Introduction, Part I. pp. I 7, 37, above).The term purchase is here used in its strictly legal sense, as Meaning ofmeaning any mode of acquiring property, other than by d e s ~ e n t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~or hereditary succession. It is used in this sense by Shakespeare,11 Henry IV. Act 4, Sc. 4, 200 :-'What in me was purchasedFalls upon thee in a more fairer sort;So thou the garland wear'st successively.'(i.e. by hereditary succession). So also Ant. and Cleop., Act I.Sc. 4, I2 :-'His faults in him seem as the sports of heaten,More fiery by night's blackness; hereditaryRather than purchased.'Ffor such was pe Duke of Lancastre, &C.] On legal Claim ofgrounds however Fortescue is decidedly opposed to John of JG",","n:kGaunt's claim to Castile, because it rested on the basis of female the crownsuccession. John of Gaunt and his brother Edmund, Duke of ofCast'le+

York, married Constance and Isabella, the daughters of Pedro theCruel by hlaria de Padilla, whose legitimacy was, to say the least,highly doubtful. See On the Title of the House of York '(Works,p. 497) : 'And in like forme the Duke of Lancaster, and the Duke ofYorke, which had wedded two daughters of the house of Spaine,shuld have had that realme, if the crowne therof had been descendableto heires females, as it was not. 14'herfore they had neverthat realme.' Cf. also Be Titulo Edwardi Comitis Marcht, cap.vi. (Works, p. 66*). Notice that here again the term S'ai?z isapplied to the kingdom of Castile, (cf. notes to Chap, iii. p. 199,supra).CHAPTER X.myght not . . . dyspende . . . so mich.]i.e. had not solarge an income.Dowry of the qwene off Ffraunce, &C.] Note here again Fortescue'sthe Frenchq,,en, fondness for comparing together French and English institutions.As to the dowry of the French queen I have not found any particulars.In the treaty between Edward IV and Louis XI for themarriage of the daughter of the former to the Dauphin (afterwardsCharles VIII) it is stipulated that Louis shall give her a dowry 'adsexaginta millia librarum redditus annui in assieta, secundum consuetudinemregni Francia ' (Rymer, xii. 20), i.e. 60,000 lz'zlres. Butwhat ~vould be the value of the livres here intended I do not know.Dowry of the qwene off Englond hath X. M. marke.] This was thethe 'dish amount of dowry granted to Joanna the queen of Henry IV, in thequeen.fourth year of his reign (Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 247 a). A petition of thisqueen with reference to her dowry is in Rot. Parl. iii. 532 b (Jan.1404). And in the October Parliament of the same year a resumptionwas ordered in her favour of all lands which had formedpart of the dowry of Anne of Bohemia, the Queen of Richard 11.By the treaty of Troyes the same amount of dowry was settledupon Icatharine of France, the wife of Henry V: 'as Quenes ofEnglond hedir toward wer wont for to take and have ; That isto saye to the somme of forty nIiI1. Scutes be yere; of thewhiche Tweyne algates shall be worth a noble Englyssh.' (Anoble = 6s. 8d. = half a mark). Assignments to this amountwere made in the Parliament of November, 1422 (Rot. Parl. iv.183). The assignments for Nargaret of Anjou's dowry are inRot. Parl. v. 118 : they also amount to 10,ooo marks. Out ofthis allowance she had to pay £7 per diem towards her shareof the expenses of the royal household (Letters of Royal andIllustrious Ladies, i. 98). In the Liber Nzger of Edward IVthe queen is rated for the same daily contribution, which isthus made up; for herseif £2 per diem; for IOO servants atIS. per diem, 55 : total 57 (Ordinances of the Household, pp.23-4). According to William Worcester : ' Mense Decembris[1464] rex tenuit magnum concilium Westmonasterii, ubi assignatasunt regina Elizabetha, assensu dominorum, terrse etdominia ad valorem iiij. m, marcarurn, et quod ipsa viveret cumfamilia sua ad expensas domini regis' (Engl. in France, ii. 783).Whether this arrangement was prior or subsequent to the drawingup of the Liber Nzger I cannot say. In 1406 it had been orderedthat the queen should contribute to the household of the king asPhilippa, Queen of Edward 111, had done ; but the amount is notstated (Rot. Parl. iii. 588 a). For the management of her extensive Queen'sbusiness the queen had her own council, clerk of the council. ","f;:,":jiac.chancellor, attorney, &c. (Letters, U. S. pp. 97-8 ; Rymer, xi. 160 ;Ordinances, U. S. p. 24 ; Privy Purse Expenses of Elizabeth ofYork, pp. 100-1). In Dec. 1404 Henry IV grants to his wife' Novam Turrim ad introitum Ostii hlagnz Aula nostrz, infraPalatium nostrum Westmonasteriense . . . pro Consiliis etKegotiis ejusdem Consortis nostra ibidem tractandis ac Compotissuis audiendis, necnon pro Cartis, Scriptis, Munimentiset aliis evidentiis . . . in eadem custodiendis' (Rymer, viii. 380).all the remenant off the reaume, &C.] See the very Absorptionuseful tables in Kitchin's History of France, i. 178-185, showing ~ ~ ~ ~ f i e f sthe gradual growth of the French monarchy by the absorption in France.of the great fiefs or 'lordships,' as Fortescue calls them. Thelater province of Languedoc was practically identical with theinheritance of Raymond of Toulouse, which was itself made upof the county of Toulouse and the earlier Duchy of Gothia orNarbonne. Part of this was ceded to the French Crown by thetreaty of 3Ieaux in I 229, on the conclusion of the Albigensianwars. The remainder fell in in 1271 on the death withoutchildren of Alphonso the brother of Louis IX, to whom, underthe same treaty, the heiress of Raymond had been married(Martin, Hist, de France, iv. 148-151, 348 ; cf. v. 70, note).

At the time when Fortescue wrote, no part of Flanders hadcome to the French Crown. Part of it was conquered byLouis XIV in 1667.Thethe Dussepers.] This word is a corruption of douze pairs,peers ofFrance. and refers to the institution of the twelve peers of France.The first occasion on which these twelve peers figured inFrench history is said to have been the coronation of PhilipAugustus in I I 79. But Du Cange (S. v. par) asserts that thenumber of the peers had not then been defined, and refers theorigin of the institution to Louis IX. The twelve peers wereoriginally the Archbishop of Rheims (premier peer), the Bishops ofLaon, Langres, Beauvais, Chllons, Noyon; the Dukes of Normandy,Burgundy, Aquitaine ; the Counts of Toulouse, Flanders,and Champagne : i.e. six spiritual and six temporal peers. Of theformer the three first-named prelates ranked as dukes, the remainderas counts ; so that, according to another classification, thehfythical peers would consist of six dukes and six counts. But whateverorqn ofthe insti- the origin of the institution, there can be no doubt that the developtntion.ment of it was much helped by the diffusion of the chanso?zs degestes which attributed to Charlemagne, and even it would seem toAlexander, the institution of a body of twelve peers. A coupletcited by Du Cange from the Roman d'dlixandre runs thus :-' Eslizez douze Pers qui soient compagnonQui menent vos batailles par grant devotion.'The duties of the peerage are thus set forth in a document of theyear 1359, also quoted by Du Cange: 'duodecim Pares, quiregi Francie in arduis consiliis et judiciis assisterent, et in factisarmorum . . . Regem . . . comitarent.' It has also been suggestedthat the expression dussepers, or duvpers, is a corruption of' ducs et pairs,' but the whole history of the institution is in favourof the other view, which is favoured also by the spelling of severalMSS., dousepiers, dusepiers, &c. And as a matter of fact the peerswere not all dukes, though no doubt, the expression ' duc et pair 'became current in later French. The Epifome has a ' a duodecimParibus.' The word occurs again in the ' Declaracion uponCertayne Wrytinges,' where Fortescue says that the treaty of Troyeswas passed ' by thassent and counsel1 of the more partie of theDoseperes ' (Works, p. 529).the gabeU off the salt, &C.] This tax seems to have beenfirst imposed by Philip V1 in the year I331 to meet the expenses The caofthe war with England, and it was more regularly organized in be''e.I 342. It produced however in France all the discontent which Its unpo-Fortescue foretells any attempt to impose it urould cause in Eng- pula"'y.land. John, Abbot of Laudun (cited by Du Cange, S. v. gabella),says : 'En ce meismes an (1~~2) mist le Roi une exaction ausel, laquelle est appell6e Gabelle, dont le Roi aquist l'indignation etmalegrace tant des grans comme des petits, et de tout le peuple.'In 1345 the king was obliged to promise that the tax shouldnot be perpetual. It was re-imposed by the Estates General of1355. But again it proved so unpopular that the same Estateshad to repeal it a few months later. It was among the taxes imposedin 1360 for the ransom of King John. From this point itshistory is the same as that of the other taxes, which has been alreadytraced in the notes to Chap. iii, above, pp. 193-5. It becamepermanent, and tended to become attached to the royal domain.Waterhous, commenting on the parallel passage in the Be Laudibus,C. 35, says that the revenue derived from this source was ;roo,ooocrowns per annum, 'yet time hath made this Gabell natural to theFrench Subjects, as Tunnage and Poundage is here ' (pp. 432-3).The name gabelle, which in its original signification was applicable Royalto any tax, became restricted in France to this particular impost. mOnopO'yThe institution of royal granaries of salt, at which alone salt mightbe purchased, is attributed also to Philip VI. The compulsory Compulsaleto every family according to its supposed needs, which For- sory chase. P""tescue describes a little lower down, was first begun by Charles V(see on all this Picot, gtats Gbneraux, i. 138-141 ; Martin, v.I 38-143, 303-4 ; Du Cange, U. S.). In May 1418, Henry V, witha view to conciliate his new subjects 'who had been oppressedby grievous gabelles and forced to buy salt against their will athalf or two-thirds as much again as it was worth,' abolishedthe gabelle and system of compulsory purchase, substituting a' custom' of 25 per cent. on the value of the salt, leaving thetrade in other respects free (Rymer, ix. 583-5). But the oldsystem was soon reverted to; in March 1420 the king orderedthat 'the impost on the salt and the quartage of all beveragesshould be levied as had been accustomed previously' (ib. 864).Both the gabelle of salt and the quarterismes or quartage ofwine appear frequently in the accounts of Normandy and ofFrance under the administration of the Regent Bedford (Engl. in.

Taxon France, ii. 526, 533-4, 547, 550). The tax on wine seems towme.have been first established in this form under Charles V. Itconsisted of a tax of one-thirteenth on wine sold wholesale, andone-fourth on wine sold by retail. A tax of one-thirteenth on allwines entering any town had been levied for the ransom of KingJohn (Picot, U. S. pp. 186, 212 ; Martin, v. 305). According tohlonstrelet (iii. f. 86 a) the tax on wine rose gradually from I percent. to 2, 5, IZ+, and finally to 25 per cent., where it remained;whence the name of quartage. Louis XI reduced it, at least for atime, to 12; per cent. (Cont. Monst. f. g a). For some very interestingremarks on French finance in the seventeenth century, withspecial reference to the ga6eZZe and the laille, see an article in theQuarfer& Revim for October, 1884, pp. 379-384, based in parton the Vicomte d'hvenel's 'Richelieu et la Monarchie absolue.'The amount of the gabelle had been progressively raised, till theprice of the article was increased 'to the incredible extent of 6000per cent. on the original cost.' The quantity which every familywas compelled to buy was seven pounds per annum per head,children included.the tyllyng off the vynes is the grettest comodite, &C.]See the notes to Chapter iii. p. 197, supra.pat comodite we haue not.] In the tract on the Commoditiesof England, ascribed to Fortescue, it is said : ' Of all othercomodyteys that are in all crysten londys Godd hathe sentt us partin thys reame growynge for the moost substaunce; save only wyneand oylle, for the whyche God hathe sent us agenwarde ryghtgoode ale and myghty drynke for the comune people ' (Works, p.Consump- 552). With reference to the consumption of wine in England, Mr.tion of,vine in Thorold Rogers says: 'The political severance of Guienne fromEngland. England involved a doubled price of French wine. As long asEngland held Guienne, wine was procured at prices so low that it\rras within the reach of persons who had moderate incomes. Whenthe French king regained it, or rather usurped it, the produce ofthe country was accessible only to the comparatively wealthy'(Rogers' Gascoigne, p. xxix).Import- the peple . . . vsen moche to salte thair meytes.] Iance of saltin medire- quote Mr. Rogers once more on this point; here again he isval econo- speaking of the effects of the loss of Guienne : ' A more seriousmy. difficulty was the loss of a cheap market for salt. . . . The importanceof salt in the economy of mediaeval life was very great. PromNovember to May the mass of the English people lived on saltedprovisions. On every fast day salted fish was the customary dietof those who had anything more than bread to eat. . . . Salt wasthe principal means of preserving food in winter, and was the firstcondiment at all times. It was . . . derived entirely from solarevaporation. A wet summer raised the price of salt far more thanit did that of wheat. . . . It could be procured abundantly andcheaply from the salterns of Western France.Long after theseverance of Guienne . . . English monarchs, in their treaties withFrance, demanded the free export of Gascon salt as a condition oftheir negotiations ' (ut supra, pp. xxix. f; see also Work andWages, PP. 95-6).thai woll than at euery mele groche with the kynge, &C.]Contrast the noble words of Sir Robert Peel on quitting office inI 846, after carrying the repeal of the Corn Laws : ' It may be thatI shall leave a name sometimes remembered with expressions ofgood-will in the abodes of those whose lot it is to labour, and toearn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow, when they shallrecruit their exhausted strength with abundant and untaxed food,the sweeter because it is no longer leavened with a sense ofinjustice.'moche cry, &C.] Cf. Warkworth, p. 22 : ' And so the Kyngehade out of Kent myche goode and lytelle luff. Lo, what myschefgroys after insurreccion ! &C.'Salamon . . . Roboham.] Cf. I Kings xii. Here Fortescue Rehoboam,puts forward Rehoboam as a warning against financial oppression. iz:y-In the dialogue between Understanding and Faith, his case is cited mediwalas showing that kings may forfeit by misgovernment the Divineconimission entrusted to them, and also as an example of the harmwhich comes from following evil counsel (Works, p. 483). Thislast is the view taken also in N. L. N. i. c. 23 ; and it is the stockapplication throughout the Middle Ages. Not to go beyondEnglish History, Edwy, Edward 11, Edward 111, Richard 11,are in turn compared to Rehoboam by candid chroniclers (v.S. C. H. ii. 365, 505). Bacon, in his essay Of Counsel, raises theillustration above the usual level of common-place : ' The belovedkingdom of God was first rent and broken by ill Counsel; uponwhich Counsel there are set for our Instruction the two Markswhereby Bad Counsel is for ever best discerned : that it was youngCounsel for the Persons, and violent Counsel for the Matter.'

a me factum est istud.] In the Vulgate, I (IIF) Kings xii.24, this saying runs : ' a me enim factum est verbum hoc.' In theparallel passage, 11 Chron. xi. 4, it stands thus: 'quia mea hocgestum est voluntate.'yff pe kynge myght haue is livelod. . . in grete lord-shippes, &C.] On the importance of this passage, see notes toChapter viii. above, pp. 250-2.per shulde not remeyne lordeshippes, &C.] Fortescue'sidea seems to be that the Crown should gradually absorb the greatlordships, as was being done on a larger scale by Louis XI inFrance. A considerable number of earldoms had become concentratedin the house of Lancaster. Henry IV, at his accession,is styled ' Henricus Dux Lancastri~, Comes Derbiz, Lincolnis,Leicestris, Herefordi~, Northamptoni~, Senescallus Angliz '(Rymer, vi~i. go). Whether he had a right to all these titles seemsto be doubted by genealogists (e.g. Sir H. Nicolas). Those ofLancaster, Leicester, Lincoln, Derby, were claimed through hismother, Blanche of Lancaster; those of Hereford and Northamptonthrough his first wife, h'Iary de Bohun (cf. S. C. H. iii. 511-2).Lord's to hym fallen all pe grete mariages, &C.] The feudalr~ght of,,z,yyi,g, system, at any rate in England, gave the lord a right to be consultedunder the on the marriage of the daughters and other near female relations offeudal systel,,his tenants in chivalry (' mecum inde loquatur ;' Cart. Hen. I, c. 3).IVillianl I had, on the strength of this right, forbidden the marriageof Ralph Guader with the sister of Roger of Hereford, out ofwhich arose the rebell~on of the earls in 1074. William I1 interpretedthis right as meaning a right to exact money as the price ofhis consent; while heiresses and widows were simply sold to thehighest bidder. Henry I (U, S.) promises that he will not exactanything for his consent, nor withhold it, 'except0 si eam velletjungere inimico meo.' Heiresses are to be disposed of by thecounsel of the barons, and widows are not to be forced to re-marryagainst their will. Nothing is said as to any obligation of the latterto obtain the lord's consent to their re-marriage. By the time ofGlanvill, the lord's right of interference seems to have beenrestricted to the case of heiresses ; ' sine dominorum dispositionevel assensu nulla mulier, hares terra, maritari potest.' The motiveis still the reasonable one alleged by Henry I : ' ne [dominus] deinimico suo . . . homagium de feodo suo cogatur recipere.' Ifthe lord refuses his consent, ' teiietur . . . justam causam ostenderequare consentire non debeat.' Widows must obtain their lord'sconsent on re-marriage (Glanvill, Lib. vii. C. 12). Magna Cartaprovides against the disparagement of heirs (heredes) in marriage :disparagement being defined by Stat. Mert. cap. 6 as meaningmarriage with ' villanis, vel aliis, sicuf burgensibur.' Widows areprotected against compulsory re-marriage, but are required to findsecurity that they will not marry without their lord's consent(M. C. [IZI~] CC. 6, 7). Blackstone thought that advantage wastaken of the ambiguity of the word ' heredes ' in M. C. to extendthe lord's right of marriage to the case of male heirs under age,where there was no justification for it; but Sir T. D. Hardyhas shown that instances of this occur even before the issue ofJohn's Magna Carta (Fine Rolls, pp. xxxvi. f. On the wholesubject of marriage fines, see ib. xxix-xli). Anyhow the system,which had originally rested on the reasonable basis of military precaution,was developed as a mere source of profit to the lord. ByStat. Mert. cc. 6, 7, penalties were imposed for any breach of thelord's rights, either by the heir or the heir's relations (cf. Bracton,Lib. ii. c. 38. 5 r). These rights continued till the abolition ofMilitary Tenures by the Long Parliament in 1645, confirmed inI 656, and by the Convention Parliament in 1660 (cf. Blackstone,ii. 70-1 ; Digby, Real Property, pp. 33, 69, 92-4, 314ff.; S.C.H.i. 300-1). During our present period these rights generally took Fines forlicence tothe form of the exaction of a fine for licence to marry, or impositionof a fine as penalty for having married without the lord's permission.One or two instances may be given : ' Nicolas Thorley,Esq., interrogated before the Privy Council whether he had marriedthe Countess of Oxford, answered Yes. Interrogated further,whether he or the countess had obtained the Icing's licence,answered No. All lands of the countess, held of the Crown, seizedinto the king's hands till she shall have paid a fine at the king'spleasure ' (P. P. C. ii. 303, S. a. 142 I). ' Lady de Roos, the kzkg'szuidow, having married so far beneath her (tarn inhorifice), to pay afine of at least £ 1000 (ib. iii. 49, S. a. I 423). ' Thomas Lord deRo3s to have licence to marry (maritagium) on payment of 1000marks ' (ib. I 30) ' Marriage of Ralph Earl of Westmorelandgranted to Sir John Radclyff in payment of the sum of zooo marks(ib. 204, S. a. 1~26). Jacquetta of Luxemburg, widow of JohnDuke of Bedford, was fined 61oo0, and the Earl of Oxforddzooo, for marrying without the king's licence (Rot. Parl. iv. 498 a,

499 b). And no less than ~o,ooo marks seems to have beenexacted from the Earl of XIarch for licence to marry (ib. 465).In 1410 the Commons complained that the age of heirs in chivalrywas often returned by the escheators as being less than it reallywas, with a view to prolonging fraudulently the rights of theCrown to marriage and wardship (ib. iii. 637 ; cf. iv. 285).Connex- to him bith oosens, &C.] Fully to illustrate this statementIons of thearistocracy would require a book by itself, and far more genealogicalwith the knowledge than I can pretend to. I give only a very few illusroyaltrations. Besides the two rival lines of York and Lancaster,the following families may be mentioned as connected with theroyal house :-The Beauforts through John of Gaunt. The lastmale Beaufort perished in 1471 ; through the marriage of Joan,d. of John of Gaunt, with Ralph Neville, first Earl of Westmoreland,the royal blood descended to her son Richard, Earl of Salisbury,father of the King-maker. The Percies (Northumberland) wereconnected with the royal house by the marriage of Elizabethhlortimer, grand-daughter of Lionel of Clarence, with Henry Hotspur.The Staffords (Buckingham) by the marriage of Edmund,Earl of Stafford (+ 1403), with Anne, dau. and heiress of Thomasof Woodstock; the same Anne married subsequently WilliamBourchier, Count of Eu, whose son Henry became Earl of Essex,and his son Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury. The XIowbrays(Norfolk, Nottingham) were descended from Thomas of Brotherton,son of Edward I (see the pedigree in Rot. Parl. iv. 263, ff,).Orlglrl of The modern custom is for the Crown to address all peers, ofthe modemmode of or above the rank of Earl, as 'trusty and well-beloved cousin.'addressing Mr. Pottinger informs me that this is said to have originated in thepeers.reign of Henry IV, and to be due to the s-ide connexionswith the peerage which the house of Lancaster brought to theCrown. Certainly during Richard 11's reign the title is onlygiven to those peers who were really related to the king, andin the lists of peers summoned to Parliament the distinctionis often expressly mentioned (see e.g. Lords' Report, App.i. p. 0). After that reign I do not find any such distinctionnoted in the lists. But that the title ' consanguineus 'or cousin' had not become a mere formality, seems provedby a writ of I Henry V, in which the Earl of Devon is notso designated (Report, U. S. p. 847). As the first writ on therolls, the only one given in full, is almost always addressed tothe son, brother, or uncle of the king, they furnish little helptowards solving the question). Conversely the title is occasionallygiven to peers below the rank of earl. In P. P. C. vi. 269 isa list of peers of the year 1455, who are divided into twoclasses, 'cosins,' and 'not cosins.' Among the former areLords Fitzwarine and St. Amand, who were only barons. Fitzwarinewas a Bourchier (v. S.). What St. Amand's connexionwith the royal family was, I do not know.no man hath so many tenantes as he.] On the import- The kingance of the king as a landowner, see the interesting remarks as landowner.of Dr. Stubbs, C. H. iii. 511-2. This importance would ofcourse be greatly increased under Fortescue's system, whichcontemplated, as we have seen, a very much larger territorialendowment of the crown.no man may haue the escheittes of treson but hym EscheatsofselK] ' Conviction for treason or felony corrupted the blood ;the effect was the same as if the tenant had died without heirs ;the land at once escheated to the lord. This escheat was howeversubject to the paramount right of the crown, based on otherthan feudal principles, to forfeiture of the land, in case of convictionfor felony, for a year and a day; in the case of c2nvictionfor treason, for ever' (Digby, U. S. p. 344). Where the lands wereheld in chief of the Crown, the king's feudal right to escheat aslord, and his non-feudal right to forfeiture as king, would, as Blackstoneremarks, tend to become confused (Blackstone, ii. 251-2).ther shall non off his tenantes aliene livelod with owt Fines foris licence.] The origin of the king's right to a fine for a licenceon alienation of lands held in chief is obscure. The first and onlyrestriction on the right of alienation ever made in the interest ofthe lord, is in the Great Charter of 1217, c. 39, which providesthat no tenant shall alienate his land to such an extent as to beunable to discharge the service due to the lord of the fee. ' Butabout this time [t: e. 12171 it was established . . . that the landsheld immediately of the king could not be alienated without incurringliability to a fine for a licence of alienation. It continuedfor a long time to be a question whether such an alienation oflands without licence was a cause of forfeiture to the crown, orwhether the king could only distrain for the fine. This doubtwas set at rest by I Edw. 111, st. 2, c. 12, by which it wasprovided that such alienation . . . should not be a cause of

forfeiture, but a reasonable fine should be taken in the Chanceryby due process . . . These fines were abolished by 12Car. 11, c. 24' (Digby, U. S. p. 113; cf. Blackstone, ii. 71-2 ;Hardy, Fine Rolls, p. xiii). In 1423 we find that certain landsbelonging to the late Duke of Clarence were in the king'shands because he had alienated them without licence. Thealienees were allowed to recover possession on the payment ofrooo marks (P. P. C. iii. 45). In 1431 John, Earl of Huntingdon,petitioned to be allowed to alienate certain manors, &c.without payment of any fine, because he had been taken prisonerin the king's wars and had had to pay a ransom of 20,000 marks(Rot. Parl. iv. 384-5). In 1426 the commons complained thatrecent chancellors had restricted the issue of licences of alienationto the king's tenants, and of licences of marriage to 'the king'swidows.' Their complaint was not listened to (ib. 306); but inthe next Parliament it was agreed that the chancellor should grantlicences of alienation for a reasonable fine (ib. 329 a).he mey not onestly selle is lande.] On the attemptsmade at various times to prevent the king from alienating hislanded property, see the notes to Chap. xix. below.Chirk pe sellynge of Chirke and Chirkes landes.] The castleand lordship of Chirk in Denbighshire belonged originally to theMortimers. On the execution of Roger Nortimer in 1330 theywere united to the Crown (Cal. Rot. Pat 110 b). But in 1337they were granted in fee to Richard Fitzalan, Earl of Arundel(ib. 131). On the execution of his son Richard, Earl of Arundel,in 1397, ' 1e Chastel de Chirk'ove le Seignurie de Chirkeslonda dit Chastel regardantz ' were incorporated in the Earldomof Chester, which was erected into a principality, and inalienablyappropriated to the eldest son of the king for the timebeing (Rot. Parl. iii. 353-4 ; St. 2 I Ric. 11, c. g). During thegreater part of Henry VI's reign, the Earldom of Chester was,owing to the absence of any heir, in the hands of the Crown.In 1433 all the profits arising 'de dominio de Chirk et Chirkelandes'were assigned to Sir John Radclyff (P. P. C. iv. 155 ; cf.ib. 199, 298-300; Rot. Pall. v. 440-1). Among the minutes ofthe Council for February, 1438, we find the following entry:' Remembre to speke unto pe IC what losse he hathe had by pegraunte pat he maad to Inglefelde of fie constableship and stewardshipof pe Caste1 and lordship of Chirke to pe losse of ml.marc' (P. P. C. v. 89 f.). Not long afterwards the king sold sold to'castrum dominium et maneria de Chyrke et Chyrkelande,' withsome other manors in Somerset, Dorset, and Wilts, to Cardinal Beanfort.Beaufort for the sum of £8,900 (Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 280 b). On hisdeath it descended to his nephew Edmund, Earl of Somerset,whose rights to it are expressly saved in the Resumption Act of1450. It is there stated that 'the Castell and Lordship of Chirkand Kirkland . . . were late purchased by Henry, late Cardinall ofEnglond, of us by our owen desire, and also by the advice of oureCounseill, and paied therefore to us the uttermost value therof'(Rot. Parl. v. 187). The evidently defensive character of thisstatement should be noted. This purchase is one of the pointsobjected to Beaufort in the celebrated manifesto which Humphreyof Gloucester put forth in 1440 on the release of the Duke ofOrleans : ' the saide cardinal, being of youre counsaille . , . hathlate pourchaced . . . certaine gret landes and lyvelode, as the caste1and the lordship of Chirk.' He goes on to say that being summonedsuddenly to the council, he had assented to this sale againsthis will in order not to hinder the expedition to Guyenne. It mayperhaps a little modify the ordinary view of Gloucester's oppositionto Beaufort, when we find that on this point at least Fortescue emphaticallysupports him. For there can be no doubt, I think, thathe is referring to the same transaction. The grant to Beaufort isenrolled under 19 Henry V1 (i. e. Sept. I 440-Aug. I 441, Cal. Rot.Pat. U. S.), but must have been made earlier, as the exemplificationof Gloucester's protest is dated June 2, 1440 (Rymer, X. 764-7).On the attainder of the Beauforts in 1464 (Rot. Parl. v. 511-z), thiswith their other landed property would be forfeited to the Crown.In 15 Edward IV, that monarch granted the castle, lordship, andmanor of ' Chirke and Chirkelandes ' to Sir William Stanley and hisheirs male, in exchange for certain manors in Craven, Yorkshire(Cal. Rot Pat. 320 a). Lord Fortescue of Credan very absurdlysupposes that Fortescue is here referring to the sale of church-lands(note ad loc.).CHAPTER XI.The holy patriarke Joseph . . . vth parte of thairgrapes, BC.] See Genesis xlvii. 18-26 ; cp. especially v. 26,

which was probably in Fortescue's mind : ' Ex eo tempore usquein przsentem diem, in universa Terra Bgypti, regibus quinta parssolvitur, et factum est quasi in legem absque terra sacerdotali quzelibera ab hac conditione fuit.' Joseph's ' land settlement ' is quotedalso by Pseudo-Aquinas but with a different object, viz. to provethe inalienability of ecclesiastical property. De Reginline, iv.C. 12.the Saudayn of ~abilon.] Egypt, at the time that Fortescue%?,"rtthesecondwrote, was under the second or Circassian Dynasty of i\lemlookMemlook Sultans ; the reigning monarch being Quayt-Bay (I 467-1 495), aDynasty.good and able ruler, who successfully resisted the Turks, anddelayed for some time the Turkish conquest of Egypt, which tookplace ultimately in 1517. These are the rulers whom FortescueBabylon or calls ' Sultans of Bab~lon.' Babylon of Egypt occupied the site'ldCair0. which is now called Old Cairo, a little to the S.W. of the latercity. 'The name Babylon of Egypt, or Babylon simply, is frequentlyemployed in mediaeval writings as synonymous with Cairo.or as denoting the successive Mahometan dynasties of Egypt.This use may have been influenced by the association of the otherBabylon, as represented by Baghdad, with the power of Islam ;but at the same time it was a real survival of the ancient name '(Encycl. Brit. S. v. Cairo). I must leave it to Eygptologists todecide how far the financial system of Joseph had descendedintact, as Fortescue asserts, to the fifteenth century of our era.(perhaps the assertion rests only on the words of Genesis, ' usquein przesentem diem:' v. S.) ; how far also his statement is true thatthe Egyptian commons were then ' the richest commons of theworld.' If so, their position must have sadly changed for the worsein the interval. In Whethamstede, i. 269 ff., are letters said to havebeen sent by the Sultan of Egypt to Pope Calixtus I11 and bythe Pope to the Sultan in reply. At the end of the 'Letters ofhlargaret of Anjou ' there is an extraordinary parody of a nIahometanmanifesto, purporting to come from the ' Sowdane of Surrey(Syria), Emperour of Babilon! A document which purports to bea letter of the Sultan of Babylon to Charles V11 of France is inDe Coussy, ch. xxi. (ed. Buchon, pp. 32-3); another from thesame potentate to Pope Innocent VIII is in Arnold's Chronicle,PP. '59 ff.The Ffrench kyng . . . m wpne, &C.] See notes to lastChapter, p. 268 above.the kynge . . . hade . . . livelod . . . nerehand to . . . The KillgFe vth parte off is reaume.] See notes to last Chapter, p. 273 as owner. landabove,on the importance of the king as landowner. The landedpossessions of the Crown must have been largely increased underEdward IV by the Lancastrian forfeitures, especially after the finaldefeat of the Lancastrians at Tewkesbury. And it is probablethat it is to this that Fortescue is referring here. This was thecase to a still greater extent under the Tudors. Besides the union ofnumerous confiscations which followed the various rebellions, the under theunion of York and Lancaster in the person of Henry V11 was, TU~O~.as Mr. Brewer remarks, not merely a union of claims, but alsoof estates (Henry VIII. i. 70).aboff the possescions off pe chirche.] z: e. not counting thepossessions of the church. The Epifome translates : ' possessionibusecclesiz demptis.'to some parte peroff the eyres . . . be restored.] ' The Restoralandownerhad a stake in the country, a material security for his tion Of forfeitedgood behaviour; if he offended against the law or the govern- Estates.ment, he might forfeit his land; but the land was not lost sightof, and the moral and social claims of the family which hadpossessed it were not barred by forfeiture. The restoration ofthe heirs of the dispossessed was an invariable result or conditionof every political pacification; and very few estates werealienated from the direct line of inheritance by one forfeiture only'(S. C. H. iii. 610). Compare in further illustration of the statement,the petitions for reversal of attainder granted in I 472, which occupymore than sixteen folio pages (Rot. Parl. vi. 16-33).some bi reason off tayles.] i.e. entails. Estates titfie fail or Entailst.s/ates furl were the creation of the Statute De Donis Condifionalibus. gI%,"yThe history of that Statute, and of the attempts of the lawyers to donis ~ 0,~ditionaii-evade it, may be read in Blackstone, ii. 109-119 ; Digby, U. S. pp. bus.153-9, 176384. 'By allowing the donor to limit the descent ofthe lands which he granted to the donee and a particular classof heirs (e.g. heirs male of his body), and protecting strictly thedonor's right to the reversion of the land in case of failure ofsuch heirs, this Statute created a new species of estates of inheritance,which . . . could not be alienated so as to defeat theexpectant interest of the heir, or postpone the reversion of thelord ' (Digby, p. 155). In other words, the tenant in fee tail hadonly a life interest in his estate. He could not therefore forfeit a

Entailed greater interest than he possessed. Consequently lands held inestates fee tail could only be forfeited, even for treason, during the lifecouldnotbe perma- time of the tenant who committed the treason. On his death,nentlyfeited.for- they reverted to the heir, or, if there were no heir, to the lordof the fee, the representative of the original donor. 'As thenobility were always fond of this Statute, because it preserved theirestates from forfeiture, there was little hope of procuring a repealfrom the legislature; and therefore . . . Edward IV, observing. . . how little effect attainders for treason had on families, whoseestates were protected by . . . entails, gave his countenance to theapplication of common recoveries to evade it ' (Blackstone, U. S. pp.Illnstra- 116-7). Several illustrations of this point may be found on theRolls of Parliament. In 1423 it was declared in Parliament thatHenry V on his death-bed had been greatly troubled in conscience,because he had granted away certain forfeitures of Henry Lord LeScrope of Masham, which were asserted to be entailed. Thegrantees were willing to give them up if the fact were so; butthis was hotly contested. It was decided that the question of factshould be tried at Common Law (Rot. Parl. iv. 21 2-13). In 1425the question was settled in favour of John Le Scrope, brother andheir of Henry (ib. 287 ; cf. v. 41). So in the Parliament of 1439it was declared afresh that the Percy forfeitures of Henry IV's reigndid not apply to (I) lands in which the Percies were enfeoffed tothe use of others only; (2) to lands held in fee tail (ib. v. 11). Inthe case of Sir William Oldhall, this provision was expressly introducedinto the Act of Attainder (ib. 265). Cp. the similar provisoin St. g Hen. VI, c. 3, which confirms the proceedings againstOwen Glendower.Principleof it Be sate the kynges mapyiicence to make thair rewardesperrrlanent everlastynge in their heyres.] Edward IV in his will exendowmentsfor pressly charges his son not to disturb the grants which he hadpublic made to those who ' have faithfully and lovingly assisted us, andvices.put thaim in the extreme jeopardie of thair lyves, losses of thairlands and goods, in assisting us, as well aboute the recoverie ofoure Corone and Reame of England, as other diverses seasons andtymes of jeopardie' (Excerpta Hist. p. 377). In Rymer, xi. 727, isa warm testimony from Edward IV to his brother-in-law, EarlRivers, for his fidelity in this respect. The principle here laiddown, though discredited in modern times, has the high authorityof Burke in its favour, who, in his speech on the EconomicalReform, speaks of 'the constitutional policy of furnishing a per- Approvedmanent reward to publick service ; of making that reward the origin by Barkemof families, and the foundation of wealth as well as of honours.'the kyng hath geven parte . . . to hia . . . brotherryn]If the king here mentioned be Henry VI, the persons intended mustbe his half-brothers, Edmund Tudor, Earl of Richmond, and Jasper.Earl of Pembroke. And this is the view taken by Mr. Francis Hargrave,the well-known legal writer, in a marginal note on this passagein his copy of Fortescue's Monarchy, now in the British ICEuseum.But as (among other reasons) Edmund Tudor died in 1456, itis much more probable that Fortescue is referring to George,Duke of Clarence, and Richard, Duke of Gloucester, the brothersof Edward IV. Innumerable grants to Clarence and Gloucesterwill be found scattered up and down the Calendar of Patent Rolls,pp. 303-8, 31 I, 314-325. The mere catalogue of them wouldfill several pages.Neuerthelesse sf,-me men haue done hym seruice, &C.]On all this, cf. App. B. $ I, and notes to Chap. v. pp. 208-9above ; cf. also Chap. vii.yff suche gyftis . . . were refourmed.] Reformed, i. e. re- Resumpsumed. In proposing an act of resumption Fortescue was notproposing anything new in English history. The surrender ofroyal demesnes was insisted on by Henry 11, after the troublesof Stephen's reign; 'charters were produced and services pleadedin vain.' It was again enforced by Hubert de Burgh during theminority of Henry 111, and by the baronial government of 1258(S. C. H. i. 451-2 ; ii. 32, 78, 554-6). In the very first Parliamentof Henry IV the Commons demanded that all lands which hadformed part of the royal demesnes under Edward I11 or RichardI1 should be resumed. Real services to the crown might berewarded with grants for term of life (Rot. Parl. iii. 433). Thiswas refused. Henry could not afford to offend the great lordsto whom he largely owed his throne. But in 1404 he agreedto a scheme which was drawn very much on the lines whichFortescue here lays down. The Commons prayed that all grantsmade since 40 Edward 111 might be resumed. Grants madeprior to that date were to be confirmed, but if they reverted tothe crown they were not to be re-granted. Grants of lands orannuities for term of years or life are not to be resumed, butthe grantees are to surrender one year's profits to the king. AllActs.

holders of such grants are however to bring in their patents forexamination. Those who have done good service are to keeptheir grants, those who have not so deserved are to forfeit them,those who have received more than they deserve are to havetheir grants moderated by the king in council. The king inhis reply, which, it is expressly noted, was made 'en Engleis,'promised ' to assigne certeyn Lordes spirituell, and certeyn Lordestemporell, and alle his Justices and Sergeantz,' &c. to carry outthis scheme as far as was consistent with the law of the landand the royal prerogative (Rot. Parl. iii. 547-9). But apparentlythis was merely a mode of shelving the question. For accordingto Stowe (p. 331), the resumption was defeated by a combinationof the prelates with the secular lords, in return for the aid given bythe latter in resisting the demand made in the same Parliament forthe secularization of ecclesiastical property. In 1443 the Lieutenantof Ireland was ordered to summon ' pe iij estatz of his saidelande,' and try and obtain a resumption act, 'considerede pe gretneede pat pe Kyng hathe to goode' (P. P. C. v. 297). h resump-tion act was passed in 1450 on account of the 'grete and grevouse'debts of the crown (Rot. Parl. v. 183 ff. ; cf. ib. 267, and Gascoigne,p. 190: ' Parliamentum . . . dixit, quod nunquam concederettaxam regi, nisi prius rex . . . auctoritate parliamenti . . . resumeretomnia . . . quse prius . . . alienaverat a sua corona ').Another resumption act was passed in 1455, because the king was' indetted in such outragious sommez, as be not easy to be paied '(Rot. Parl. v. 300 ff.). An act for resuming grants made out ofthe local revenues of the counties was thrown out by the lords(ib. 328). The original act of resumption is in English; Whet-Exemp- hamstede (i. 250 ff.) gives a version of it in Latin. And thentions from follows an interesting account of how the Abbey of St. Alban'stheir operatiou.obtained exemption from the operation of the act. The Abbot(Whethamstede) sent the Prior up to London, who obtained acopy of the bill, and succeeded in procuring the insertion in it ofa proviso excepting the Abbey from its operation (ib. 259 f.; Rot.Parl. v. 307). But when this proviso WAS examined in the court ofexchequer it was found to be insufficient, and was cancelled.Then the Abbot, by means of a member of the king's councilwho was also a high official in the exchequer, got letters of ex-emption passed under the great seal, though somewhat less inextent, ' ob pauperiem regis ' (Whet. U. S. pp. 258-268). Undernote$+ QEbap, rii,Edward IV four resumption acts were passed, viz. in 1461, 1~67,I 473, and I 483. The object of that in 1467 is stated by Williamof Worcester to have been ' ut rex haberet unde viveret, et quadjustitia plus solito fieret ' (Annales, p. 786). The exemptions fromit cover forty folio pages. And the numerous exceptions alwaysmade must have rendered these acts comparatively ineffectual(Rot. Parl. v. 462 ff., 572 ff. ; vi. 71 ff., 198 ff. ; cf. Cont. Croyl.559). It is true that Hardyng says of the act of 1450,(ed. Ellis, p. 401).'Then taxe ceased and dymes eke also,In all Englande tEen raysed were no mo,'But this is a very ideal statement.CHAPTER XII.it were good . . . pat the commons . . . Were made pore, Tyranny&C.] Here again Burke is at one with Fortescue : ' When I imp0verishesitsconsider, that we have colonies for no purpose but to be serviceable subjects.to us, it seems to my poor understanding a little preposterous, tomake them unserviceable in order to keep them obedient. It is,in truth, nothing more than the old, and as I thought, explodedproblem of tyranny, which proposes to beggar its subjects intosubmission. But remember . . . that discontent will increasewith misery ; and that there are critical moments in the fortunesof all states, when they who are too weak to contribute to yourprosperity, may be strong enough to complete your ruin. Spolialtjarnza supersunl' (On Conciliation with America). And Aristotlesays : 7b ~;qras TOLB;V TO& (~~XO~E'VOUS, rupavv~~(iv (Pol. V. I I. 8 8 ; cf.St. Thomas on this passage in Baumann, Staatslehre, &C., p. 139).And Bgidius Romanus, following Aristotle, enumerates among thecaufeke of tyrants, ' ut sint (subditi) adeo depauperati et afflicti, utcontra eos non possint insurgere.' Be Reginztize, 111. ii. I I.'pat pei ben so pore, and so ouersette, pat thei mowe not riseajenst tirauntes ' (MS. Digb. 223, f. 139 d).as be the commons off Ffraunce.] See notes to Chapter iii.p. 197 above.as now thai done oftentymes.] On the frequency of localrisings and disturbances under the Lancastrian kings, and during

the first period of Edward IV's reign, see Introduction, Part I. pp.I I ff. Even in the second half of that reign the Croyland Continuatorsays that the people would have risen if they could only have founda leader, so great was the discontent at the inglorious result ofEdward's expedition to France (p. 559).ad pauca respicientes de facili enunciant.] This is anaucfort'tas from the first book of the Be Generatzbne et Corruptione.It agrees with the printed edition, except that the latter omits thepreposition ad. The original runs thus: 'npb~ dAlya &ie'+aurcr,ci?ro+aiuovrac The reference is i. z, 10. Amundesham (i.371) has a phrase which seems to be a reminiscence of thisaucforitas :' quasi vir ad pauca respiciens et de facili plura pronuncians.'Dante speaks of persons (' che sono come quasi tutti ') who' tosto veggiono tutto cib che possono, e giudicano secondo la loroveduta' (Convito, i. c. 4).Import- wheroff the myght stondith most vppon archers.] Thisofarchery. was a lesson which had been impressed upon the English by theevents of the Anglo-French wars, and similar sentiments are oftenembodied in the preambles to the various petitions and Statutes~tspractice which deal with the subject of archery, &c. The Statute of 12enjoinedby Ric. 11. c. 6, had enacted that all servants and labourers shouldStatute.have bows and arrows, and practise shooting on Sundays andfestivals, and leave ' les jeues as pelotes si bien a meyn come a piee,et les autres jeues appellez Coytes, dyces, gettre de pere, keyles,et autres tielx jeues importunes.' This Statute was, on the petitionof the Commons, amended by I I Hen. IV. c. 4 (cf. Rot. Parl. iii.643), and made still more stringent by 17 Edw. IV. c. 3. Thepetition of the Commons on which this last-named Statute wasbased recites, almost in Fortescue's words, that 'the defense ofBOW-this Lond stondeth moche by Archers.'The unlawful games thereenumerated, besides ' Dise, Coyte, Fote-ball, and such like Pleys,'are ' dyvers newe ymagyned Pleys, called Closhe, Keyles, half-Bowle, Handyn and Handowte, and Quekeborde' (Rot. Parl. vi.188). This tendency to play unlawful games instead of shooting,'which shotyng . . . hath bee grete defense to this your Reamebothe inward and outward,' is in the Parliament of 1472-5 ascribedto the ' outragious price ' of bow-staves ; and measures were takenthen and in the Parliament of 1482 to remedy this by making theimport of bow-staves compulsory, and by fixing their price (Rot.Parl. vi. 156, 223 ; St. 12 Edw. IV, c. 2 ; 22 Edw. IV, c. 4; cf.St. IRic. 111, c. 11). In 1406 a Statute was passed against Arrowsandarrow-smiths who make faulty arrow-heads (St. 7 Hen IV, c. 7 ; 2,";:cf. Rot. Parl. iii. 594 b). By 4 Hen. V, St. 2, c. 3, Paten-makersare forbidden to make clogs or patens of 'aspe,' because it isrequired for making arrows. But this Statute was repealed bySt. 4 Edw. IV, c. 9. In 1418 Henry V orders the sheriffs oftwenty-eight counties to furnish him with 1,190,000 feathers formaking arrows (Rymer, ix. 653; cf. ib. 436, where the feathersare ordered to be goose-wing feathers, six from each goose). Anelaborate Statute enforcing the practice of archery was passed in33 Henry V111 (c. g.), by which time new unlawful games hadbeen invented. The price of bow-staves was regulated as late as21 Jac. I. c. 28), which seems to be the last Statute on the subject.From the Issues of the Exchequer (p. 318), it appears that in1412 the price of a bow was IS. 3d.; of a sheaf of arrows, IS. gd. ;of a gross of bow-strings, 6s. We hear of a keeper of the king'sbows within the Tower of London (Cal. Rot. Pat. 318 a). Ac- .cording to Blonde1 (Reductio Normanniz, p. 48), the institution ofthe francs-archers in France (see notes to Chap. iii. p. 197 above)was established partly because it was 'in rusticos Angli~ sagittariosnecessarium.' According to Cont. Croyl. (p. 555), the chief suppliesof archers came from Lancashire and Cheshire, and this wasone reason for the anxiety of the Lancastrians to gain those parts,when they were overtaken and defeated at the battle of Tewkesbury.thai shulde not haue wherwith to bie hem . . . armour,Lc.] The obligation of the citizen to provide himself with armsoffensive and defensive in proportion to his means, for the defenceof the land and the maintenance of the peace, forms the subject ofa series of measures which commence with the Assize of Armsunder Henry 11, and culminate in the Statute of Winchester underEdward I. That the latter Statute was in full working at this timeis shown by the fact, that in 1437 copies of it were sent to all thesheriffs, with orders to enforce it against the 'greet routes anddivers conventicules of mysgoeverned men assembled in diverseplaces ' (P. P. C. v. 83 f.).considerynge Pat we be 8 Ilelonde, &a.] See notes toChapter iii. p. 200, above.how than yff a myghty man made a rysinge, &C.] Thisis the great danger perpetually recurring to Fortescue's mind. Seeabove, Chapter ix.

286 Cbe Booernance of Qngianb.exterioribus '-' panne kynges and princes shulde rewle citees andregnes so pat here sogettes haue i now of outward thinges' (f.1 37 a). Cp. also the eloquent address of the Bishop of Bayeux toHumphrey, Duke of Gloucester, on the state of Normandy : ' Quaresummb ope omni principi enitendum est, ut subjectam multitudinempraeservet et foveat ; nec minus de utilitate publica quam de privatacogitet : quoniam populi fundamenta sunt ex quibus omnia promi-nent imperia; nec ulli ambigendum est tam magna fore dominia,quam dives subest populi multitudo' (Bekynton, i. 291). Gregor(p. 85) quotes from Coke the maxim that a king is never rich whenhis subjects are poor; while Waterhous (p. 166) cites from aspeech of James I the saying, 'that king is miserable how richsoever he be that reigns over a poor People.'ayenst his conciens.] Cf. Chap. iv. pp. I 16-7, above ; and onthe poverty of the French commons and the exemption of theFrench nobles from taxation, see notes to Chap. iii. pp. 196-7,above.Condition our commons be riche.] On the condition of the variousof theEnglish classes of English society below the rank of barons, from theCo~nnlons. knight to the yeoman, artisan, and villein, see S. C. H. iii. 544-558, 598-607. Mr. Thorold Rogers says (Introduction toGascoigne, pp. xxxiv. f.) : ' There was, the times considered,abundance of wealth in England at the period immediately precedingthe outbreak of civil war. The fifteenth century was aperiod of singularly unbroken agricultural prosperity, of plentifulharvests, of high wages, of accumulated opulence. Land which acentury before yielded in rent a return of ten per cent. on thepurchase money, now yielded five or less. Farmers were graduallyacquiring freehold estates, and becoming yeomen were the progenitorsof the small gentry who played so conspicuous a part inEnglish History two centuries later.In the universal passion foracquiring land commons were enclosed, often by usurpation, andmen of free estate became the purchasers of copyhold, thus givingstability and a higher position to those estates which the law booksstill affected to call base or precarious. The tenants of these basefees resisted even the payment of customary rents, and successfullydemanding arbitration between themselves and their lords, succeededin reducing and permanently fixing their liabilities. . . .The record of prices in England, especially those of wheat andbarley, gives no indication whatever that war produced scarcity.During the whole of the fifteenth century, the harvest was a failurein only one year, 1438-9. When the strife was at the hottest,bread and beer were abundant and cheap, for the cost of alabourer's maintenance was from 8d. to gd. per week. In thereign of Elizabeth, contracts for the board of the men in heremploy were as high as 4s. 6d. to 5s. for the same time.'In the ' Comodytes of Englond ' Fortescue (if it be Fortescue)says : c the comune peple of thys londe are the beste fedde andalso the beste cledde of any natyon, crystyn or hethen ' (Works p.552). The riches and self-sufficiency (a6sap~cia)'of England are a Testimonyfrequent theme with the nledisval writers. Thus the author of the' Dialogus de Scaccario ' says-Insula nostra suis contenta bonis peregrinisNon eget. Hanc igitur merito dixere prioresDivitiisque sinum, deliciisque larem.'Higden has a chapter (Lib. i. c. 41) 'De przerogativis insulsattollendis,' made up of quotations from older authors, and endingwith some verses of Heniy of Huntingdon, which begin-' Anglia, terra ferax et fertilis angalus orbis,. . . . . . . . .Est contenta sui fertilitate boni;'and some of Ailred of Rievaulx, two of which run thus-'Insula prsedives, quae toto non eget orbe,Et cujus totus indiget orbis ape.'This derivation of Anglia from Angulus, which is as old as Bede(Hist. Eccl. i. c. 15, ' illa patria quze Angulus dicitur,' v. Higden11. vii.), gave a great impulse to this strain of reflection. ArchbishopArundel, at Henry IV's accession, discoursed in Parliamenton the theme, that ' cest honorable Roialme d1Engleterre q'estla pluis habundant Angle de Richesse parmy tout le monde,' hadbeen ruined by the government of children (Rot. Parl. iii. 415).In a letter to Eric, king of the Scandinavian kingdoms, written in1439 (the very year of famine mentioned by Mr. Rogers above),Henry V1 says that England, though now suffering from the badeffects of a very wet season, is yet in average years (communibusannis) extremely fertile (Rymer, X. 7 17). One point in which Number ofFortescue contrasts England favourably with the Continent is the smallownerslandinnumber of small landowners in the former; De Laudibus, c. 29. England.

?.axes onlnoveable property.288 Kfie doroernance of QEngIanD,And his commentator, Waterhous, speaks in the same strain ofhis own day: ' The Yeoman and Country Corydon is a greatProprietor of Land' (p. 373). 'Only with us are men of thePlough men of Estate' (p. 391) 'Abroad in the Continent, greatmen, as it were, live alone in the earth' (p. 394) NOW the sidesof this comparison are exactly reversed.quinsimes and dessimes.] i. e. fifteenths and tenths. The firstdirect tax on moveable property in English history was the SaladinTithe of 1188. But as the wealth of the country increased, a taxVariouson moveables became one of the most frequent resources.proportions were granted from time to time, twentieths, thirtieths,eighteenths, &c. (v. S. C. H. Index, S. v. Taxes). But from about1332 onwards the tenth and fifteenth became the unit of taxationShires and for moveables (ib. ii. 376-8). And from that time the usual grantboroughs On moveables was either a tenth and fifteenth, or some multiple ortaxed indifferent fraction of a tenth and fifteenth, the tenth representing the contri-JN0Por- bution of the towns, and the fifteenth that of the shires.The reasontions.for this difference has been explained in the notes to Chapter iii.p. 196, above. The last occasion on which 1 have found this distinctionexpressly mentioned in the terms of the grant is in 1380,when the Lords and Commons granted to the king ' une Quinszismeet demy par dehors Citees et Burghs, et une Disme et demy pardedeinz mesmes les Citees et Burghs' (Rot. Parl. iii. 75 a). Butin subsequent grants it is nearly always mentioned that this tau isto be levied in the manner accustomed, so that the distinction maybe presumed to have lasted throughout the middle ages. The' defence of the reaume ' is frequently mentioned in the preambleto parliamentary grants as an object, if not the object, for whichthe grant is made.a quinsime and a desime quinqueniale, &C.] In I 337.1348, 1352, a tenth and fifteenth for three years were granted(S. C.H. ii. 378, 398, 405). In 1355, the subsidy on ~ools, BC.was granted for six years (ib. 405). But I have not found anygrant of 'a quinsime and a desime quinqueniale,' such asFortescue mentions. There may, however, have been such a grantbetween I 356 and I 362, as the Rolls of Parliament for those yearsare lost (ib.) The same holds true of the next grant which Fortescuementions. In 1340 the lords and knights of the shire granted theninth sheaf, fleece, and lamb for fwo years (Rot. Parl. ii. I I 2 b ; cf.ib. 450 b). But I know of no occasion on which such a grant nasmade for five years. Mr. Rogers, in his examigation of mediaevalaccounts, found 'many more taxes than the Rolls of Parliamentgrant ' (Work and Wages, p. 208). ' The largest sum ever offeredby the Commons in one year during the Middle Ages ' was in 1453(ib. 314).ffor thai haue not so much ffredome, &C.] Cf. St. Thomas, 'TyrannyDe Rcgiminr, i. c. ro : 'Experiment0 etiam magis apparet, quod reges er^per justitiam magis adipiscuntur divitias quam per rapinam tyranni.. . . In necessitatibus plura regibus sponte donant quam tyrannidiripere possint.' Bgidius Romanus follows him, De Regimine,111. ii. 12: ' Veris regibus donatur plus ex amore quam tirannisperveniat ex predatione populi! 'Verrey kynges ben Iordes byloue and hauen more good by loue pan tyrauntes hauen by spoylyngeof puple' (f. 14od). In rqor the Commons declared toHenry IV, ' qe la pluis greindre tresor et richesse du monde, est,a chescun Roi d'avoir le coer de son poeple ; Qar par consequences'il ait 1e coer, il est verraisemblable q'il auera ceo qe luy bosoignede leur biens' (Rot. Parl. iii. 456 a). Compare the passage fromBurke quoted at the end of the notes to Chapter viii. pp. 253-4,above; and add to it the following from his speech on AmericanTaxation :' Sir William Temple says: that Holland has loaded itselfwith ten times the impositions which it revolted from Spain ratherthan submit to. He says true. Tyranny is a poor provider. Itknows neither how to accumulate, nor how to extract.'a ffewe regions be ffore specifled.] See Chapter ii. above,and notes.we se dayly, &C.] Here no doubt Fortescue is speakingpartly out of his experience as a judge. Compare More's Utopia,Book I, near the beginning. More similarly attributes theprevalence of thieving to poverty; and traces poverty to variouscauses :-disbanded soldiers, rack-renting, sheep-farming, luxury,drunkenness, ' ingrossers and forestallers ' (= corner-men), defectiveeducation, &c.lakke off gode or lakke off justice.] On the former of these Insurreotwo causes of insurrection, see above, p. 284.As to the latter, cf.' Understanding and Faith :' 'Art thou nat remembred howe it is injustice. bywriten that lakke of Justice and untreure dedys maken Reamesredy to be chaunged ?' (Works, p. 485). Aristotle says : X ~ O W ~ Lpdhiu~a a; TC lroXrrriat r d ai ~prlrro~pa~ht 8th T$U h air; rjj lrohrrcia T&St~aiov nop;~Paurv (Pol. viii. 7. 8 5). On ' lack of justice,' as charac-

teristic of the Lancastrian times, see Introduction, Part I. pp. 19-22,above, and the forcible words of Cade there quoted. In 1450 theDuke of York invited Henry V1 ' tendirly to consider the grettgrutchyng and romer'that is universaly in this your reame of thatjustice is nouth dewly ministred' (Paston Letters, i. 153). SO in1460 the Yorkist lords declared that ' alle rightwysnesse and justiceys exyled of the lond ' (English Chronicle, p. 86). The same subjectis a frequent theme of the opening speeches in Parliament, e.g. in1429, 1431, 1433 al. (Rot. Parl. iv. 335, 367, 419, &C.). Burke(Present Discontents) quotes the following from Sully : 'Pour lapopulace, ce n'est jamais par envie d'attaquer qu'elle re soulkve,mais par impatience de souffrir.' Conversely: ' felicite or peas inevery Reame is evermore cauwd of Justice, as it appereth byprobabill persuacions of Philosofers' (speech of Edward IV to theParliament of 1467-8, Rot. Parl. v. 622 b).CHAPTER XIII..,sings in the commons off the contre off Caux.] The 'pays de Caux '\MS part of the duchyof Normandy,situated on the north of the Seine.de Csux.The rising to which Fortescue alludes was probably the one whichtook place towards the end of 1435, after the Congress of Arras. Thesignal was given by the capture of Dieppe by the French. 'A ce signall' le conznzzrn peuplt. " du pays de Caux se souleva sous la conduited3un paysan nommt! Le Carnier, et vingt mille hommes des bourgaderet des villages se joignirent'h Rieux sous l'ktendard de France.... Fbcamp, Montivilliers, Lillebonne, Tancarville, Saint-Valeri-en-Caux, Harfleur . . . se donnkrent ou furent pris de vive force ; toutle pays de Caux, hors Caudebec et Arques, fut, en peu de jours,affranchi des Anglais.' [Dec. 1435-Jm. 1436.1 (Martin, Hist. deFrance, vi. 341-2 ; cf. Barante, Ducs de Bourgogne, ed. Gachard,i. 57 2 ; Eng. in France, ii. 2 79, 761). There had been a risingprevious to this in the summer of 1434, provoked by the disorders ofthe English troops (Martin, U. S. pp. 325-6). But from the mentionof the number of towns captured, it would seem almost certainthat it is to the second rising that Fortescue refers. Hall mentio~sboth (pp. 171-2, I 79), but he describes the former in languagemore appropriate to the later rising. The national character of theJl;)otel. abap. riii, 29 =rising, which Hall lays stress upon, deprives it of any applicabilityto Fortescue's argument. The English recovered the country inthe course of 1436 owing to the misconduct of the French troops,who, says Sismondi, had reduced it to the state of a horrible desert(Hist. des Eranpis, xiii. 264). Naturally the district was extremelyfertile (Martin, U. S. p. 342). But it suffered severely during theEnglish wars. Basin says : Vidirnus ipsi . . . agros . . . Calet-ensium (i.e. Caux) . . . prorsus desertos, incultos, squalidos etcolonis nudatos, dumetis et rubis oppletos, atque illic in plerisqueterris, qua: ad proferendas arbores feraciores exsistunt, arbores inmorem densissimarum silvarum excrevisse ' (i. 45). In I 42 2Henry V appoints a louvetkr for the Bailliage of Caux, because,owing to the war, wolves have so increased in the district that theyeven devour men (Rymer, X. 224 ; cf. ib. 56 ; ix. 755, 862). In1440 the King's Council confessed that 'the Kynges cuntre there,namely the Duchie of Normandie . . . is nowe broughte to thatmyschief and extreme miserye, that unneth thoo that ben lefttherinne may pourly lye ' (Engl. in France, ii. 456)corage wich no Ffrenchman hath like vnto a Englyshman.] This was a belief which the experience of Crecy, Poitiers,Agincourt, &C., had not unreasonably produced, and which even thedownfall of the English porver in France had not been able to impair.ther bith . . . mo men hanged in Englande, &C.] Cf. More's Frequencyprotest against the severity of the Criminal Law of England, quoted g:$!a1in the notes to the last Chapter. He says that twenty men mere ment inoften hanged on one gallows. The evil against which More protestedwent on increasing for three hundred years. Not till 1820 didshoplifting to the value of five shillings cease to be punishable withdeath (see hlartineau, History of the Peace, i. 98-104, 232, 352).Here again we may trace the influence of Fortescue's judicial experience,and, in the comparison of England with France and Scot-land, the fruit of his ob:ervations in exile. It is however a Scotchmotto which says, ' Thou shalt want ere I want,' which is theprinciple on which Fortescue supposes the English robber to act.111 the Be Laudibus, c. 46, Fortescue contrasts the English and theCivil Law in regard to the punishment of theft, and seems rather toexult in the greater severity of the English law ; and his successor,Lord Chief Justice Ellenborough, was one of the chief opponentsof Sir Samuel Romilly in his efforts to secure some mitigation ofthat severity.U 2

292 &fie Qobernance of QEt~oiand,CHAPTER XIV.a generdl resurnpcion, &C.] On this, see notes to Chapterxi. pp. 279-281, above.be be advise off his counsel1 mey rewarde, &C.] See below,notes to Chaps. xvii, xx.or not so grete astate in the same.] e.g. they might havebeen given a life-estate instead of an estate in fee-simple; or anestate for term of years instead of for term of life, &C.aa is be ffore shewid.] Vid. Chapter xi. ad finem, p. I 37, above.a worshipfull and a notable counsell.] On all this, v. Ap-pendix B. $ I.such givinge were no vertu but . . . prodigalite.] This isvery like one of the Flores of Sr. Bernard, ' Dispensatio sinenecessitate et utilitate non fidelis dispensatio sed crudelis dissipatioest.' (Migne, Bibl. Lat. tom. 183, col. I I 99).brocage.] On this, see notes to Chapter xvii. below.Cam- as thai were woned to haue.] Complaints against the royalplaints councillors for ' miscounseling ' the King, and especially for misaga~nsthemyal coun- management and misappropriation of the property and revenues ofcillors- the crown, are among the most constantly recurring subjects in thedocuments and histories of the fifteenth century. In almost everyrising this complaint is put forward among the articles of theinsurgents. One of the objects of the Percies in 1403 was: ' ut. . . possent . . . corrigere publicas gubernationes, et constitueresapientes consiliarios ad commodum regis et regni.Scripseruntinsuper quod census et tallagia . . . non sunt conversa in ususdebitos, sed devorata nimis inutiliter, atque consumpta' (Ann. Henr.pp. 361-2, in S. C. H. iii. 40; cp. the very similar article of 1405,Gascoigne, pp. 230-1). This formed the subject of several of theTheirmis- charges against Suffolk in 1450 (Rot. Parl. v. 179 ff.).Cade'sapprolJria- proclamation of the same year is one long indictment of thosetion of theKing'sabout the king, who ' dayly enforme hym that good is evyll andevyll is good ;' and, in regard to this special point, 'they sey that itwere gret reproffe to the kynge to take ageyne that he hath gevyn,so that they woll not sufere hym to have his owne good, ne londe,ne forfeture, ne eny othar good but they aske it from hym, or ellsthey take bribes of othar to gett it for them ' (Three Chronicles, p.gg; cf. ib. 98). One of the demands of the Yorkist lords in1460 was 'that it wolle please his sayde good grace to lyveupponne his owne lyuelode, . . . and nat to sufre the destroyersof the sayde londe and of his trewe sligettes to lyve theroponne,(English Chronicle, p. 86 ; cf. Warkworth, pp. I 1-2). Gascoigneheartily endorses these complaints (ed. Rogers, pp. 158, 220-1).The author of a political song, written about 1450, says :'So pore a king was never seene,Nor richere lordes all bydene.'And again :' Ffor ye have made the kyng so poreThat now he beggeth fro dare to dare.'CPolitical Songs, ii. 229 f.)And Whethamstede (i. 249) laments the indiscriminate liberality ofthe king. Fortescue, in Appendix B. Q$ I, 2, not only admits, as Councilhere,that the people have had cause of 'grudging' against the king death. lors put toand those about him, but says that they 'have oftyn tymes slayne 'the latter 'for the myscounceling of theire soueraigne lorde ;' wherehe is no doubt thinking of the fate of Bishops Moleyns and Ayscough;Suffolk, and Lord Say and Sele. The murder of ArchbishopSudbury, in 1381, is an earlier case in point. So in 1469 theCommons, under Robin of Redesdale, complain of the Wydvilles' and other of thayre myschevous assent and oppinion, whiche haveadvised and causid oure seid sovereigne lord to geve of the seydlyvelode and possessions to them above their disertis and degrees '(Warkworth, p. 48). And in 1475, after Edward's inglorious expeditionto France, the Croyland Continuator says that ' tantuscrevisset numerus populorum conquerentium super male dispensatisregni divitiis, . . . ut nesciretur quorum consiliariorum capita in-columia remanerent' (p. 559). It is therefore not without reasonthat Fortescue (U. S.) says, that the abatement of these evils by aproperly constituted council would be a great security to the councillorsthemselves.nor off murmor ageynes the kynges person, &C.] Fortescuewishes that the council should act as a shield to the throne, muchin the same way as the Cabinet, under the doctrine of ministerialresponsibility does in modern times. This lesson had perhapsbeen impressed upon him by the events of Henry VI's reign. SeeIntroduction, Part I. pp. g, 34, above.and the wise man saith.] Prov. xi. 14: 'Ubi non est gubernator,populus corruet : salus autem, ubi multa consilia.'

such a contenuall counsell.] ' The king's permanent, orwhat would now be termed, the Privy Council, was called in therecords of Parliament, his " Continual or Permanent Council," incontradistinction to the " Great Councils," which met only in consequenceof special writs of summons; whereas the "ContinualCouncil " sat daily for the dispatch of business ' (P. P. C., I. iii ; cf.Dicey, Privy Council, p. 5).CHAPTER XV.How the kynges counsell mey be chosen, &C.] Onall this compare Appendix B. $8 2, 3, which is often verballyidentical with the present chapter.The Privy The kyngis counsell was wonned to be chosen, &C.]For the earlier history of the council, which is an extremelyobscure subject, see S. C. H. ii. 255-266; and Dicey, Essay on thePrivy Council, pp. 1-13. And for the history of the councilduring the Lancastrian and Yorkist period, see S. C. H. iii. 247-256; and Dicey, U.S. pp. 14 ff. In the present note I propose totreat consecutively, in the light of the illustrations furnished by contemporarydocuments, the chief points raised by Fortescue inconnexion with his scheme for re-organizing the privy council ;leaving the minor points to be dealt with in the separate noteswhich follow. I shall take the points as far as possible in theorder in which they are mentioned by Fortescue.Its compo- i. Conlposition of the Council. c The kyngis counsell,' sayssition.Fortescue, 'was wonned to be chosen off grete princes and off thegretteste lordes off pe lande both spirituelles and temporellis, andalso off oper men that were in grete auctorite and offices.' By the'grete princes' Fortescue means, no doubt, the immediate membersof the royal family, the king's uncles under Richard I1 andHenry VI, the king's sons under Henry IV, the king's brothersunder Henry V and Edward IV. By the ' men in grete auctoriteand offices' are meant the great officers, of whom the chancellor,the treasurer, the privy seal, the chamberlain, and the steward ofPredomi- the household were ex oj'icio members of the council. These,mnce ofthe great with the great lords spiritual and temporal, were the elements outlolds. of which the council was composed during most of the Lancastrianperiod. In the early years of Henry IV we find several commoners Commonadmittedto the council. In 5 and 6 Henry IV as many as seven ers.commoners are found in the lists of councillors (Rot. Parl. iii. 530 ;1). P. C. i. 237). At the beginning of Henry VI's reign the numbersinks to four (P. P. C. iii. 16, 148). After that date I have notfound more than one, or at the most two unofficial commoners inthe lists of the council. Mr. Dicey (u.s. p. 15) was inclined to attributethis difference to the less vigorous administration of Henry VI,which allowed the great lords to monopolize the government. Iam inclined rather to trace it to the gradual cessation of that Parliamentarypressure on the composition of the council, which is somarked a feature of the reign of Henry IV. Never were Parliamentsmore determined than under Henry IV, and they, like thebaronial Parliaments of Henry 111, were anxious to force representativesof their own upon the king as his advisers. ArnoldSavage, the most uncompromising Speaker in his addresses to theCrown that the Commons probably ever had, found his way in thismanner into the royal council. Anyhow, it will be seen how great Officialis the change contemplated by Fortescue, when he urges the for- :2:tz-1mation of an official council, composed almost entirely of persons mended bychosen on the sole ground of their capacity for business: 'xijspirituell men and xij temporell men off pe wysest and best disposedmen pat can be ffounde.' For it is obvious that the four spiritualand four temporal lords whom Fortescue, chiefly it would seem forappearance sake, adds to the council would have little influence ascompared with the twenty-four ; especially as the former hold officeonly for a year, whereas the latter are to L be alway counsellers, butyff per be any defaute ffounde in hem, or pat hit lyste the kynge bethe advise off pe more parte off hem chaunge any off hem.' But His progreatas the change may be which Fortescue proposes, it is the :?'change which as a matter of history came about in the composition actual deandcharacter of the council; and in this as in other points $':itFortescue forms the transition from the old to the modern system. council.Of the character of the council under Edward IV we know, owingto the absence of documents, hardly anything; and therefore wecannot say how far he acted on Fortescue's advice. The introductionof the Wydvilles and their adherents into the council(S. C. H. iii. 250) was but a very imperfect compliance; sinceinstead of destroying, as Fortescue wished, the influence of aristocraticfactions on the government, he merely created new factions

in place of the old ones ; and on the ruins of the rivalry of theCorre- Roses arose the rivalry of the old and new nobility. It is when wesponds withcome to Tudor times that we see Fortescue's system in full workingTudorpractice. order, though not of course in the exact mathematical detail whichhe lays down. Of the forty councillors appointed in 1553 twentytwoare commoners. ' England was governed, not through peersof ancient lineage, but through the Cromwells, the Sadlers, thePetres, and the Cecils, who constitute the glory of the Tudors'rule. The promotion of such men was a national blessing; but itincreased immensely the po\t7er of the crown, by underminingthe independence of the council' (Dicey, p. 42 ; cf. P. P. C., VII. iii.iv). The presence of 'base blood' about the king or queen was aIncreaseof frequent theme of complaint in Tudor times. The increase ofthe powerof the the power of the Crown was precisely the result which FortescueCrown. most probably intended. The size of the council proposed byFortescue seems to us unnecessarily large, and we should be inclinedto prefer the alternative council suggested by him onNumber economical grounds, consisting only of twenty members. Butof coun-, , the council of Edmard V1 was, as we have seen, even larger.During the Lancastrian period the numbers of the council vary. from nearly forty (P. P. C. vi. 292; cf. ib. 167, 169, 171) to nine in1410 (Rot. Parl. iii. 632, 634 b), when, owing to the embarrassmentsof the government, it was extremely difficult to get any one toserve. The average number was from fifteen to twenty. But itwas probably only on important occasions, such as the incapacityof Henry VI, that the council met in its fullest form. The factthat 'six or at the least four' is constantly fixed as a quorum in theregulations of the council, shows that the average attendance wasnot expected to be very large; a view which is entirely confirmedby the records of attendances in the Proceedings of the PrivyCouncil; though in 1422 it was ordered that 'in alle gretemateres pat schal passe by conseil, alle be present or ellis the moreCommit- partie' (P. P. C. iii. 18). The work of the council was still furtherexpedited by appointing committees for certain purposes (e.g. ib.i. 127; V. 15 al.), a practice which was reduced to a system inTudor times (Dicey, pp. 39 f.). The attendance of the greatofficers is allowed, but evidently not encouraged by Fortescue.The judges, barons of the exchequer, master of the rolls, andothers are only to attend when specially requested 'for materes offgret deficulte,' in the same way as the Triers of Petitions inParliament are allowed to summon the great officers and sergeantsof the king if they require their assistance (S. C. H. iii. 452, andRot. Parl. passim). In the actual records of the privy council it Attendanceis a constantly recurring regulation that the judges are to be con- Judges.sulted in all matters touching the king's prerogatives or freeholds(P. P. C. iii. 151, 2 17 ; iv. 63). Many instances of the presenceof the judges are recorded in the Proceedings of the Council;Fortescue himself being present on several occasions (see Introduction,Part 11. pp. 46-7, 52, above).ii. Appozkfnzenf and removal of CounciZZors. The appointment of Appointcouncillors,like the choice of ministers, is an undoubted prerogative ment ofconncillorsof the Crown. But during the early part of the Lancastrian vested inperiod this right was exercised under considerable limitations. In the Control ex-1404, 1406, and 1410 Henry IV had to yield to the request that ercised bythe council might be nominated in Parliament, which implied Parliathenomination of a council acceptable to Parliament. Under the ment'popular rule of Henry V no question of this kind could arise. Butduring the minority of Henry V1 the council was appointed notonly in, but by Parliament. So that from 1404 to 1437 the Analogy ofcouncil may be regarded as occupying very much the position modemcabinetof a modern cabinet or ministry : i.e. as a committee of that govempartywhich commanded the confidence of Parliament and thenation. In 1406 and 1411 Parliament passed what we shouldcall votes of confidence in the ministry (Rot. Parl. iii. 568 a, 649 a).And indications are not wanting that there was a tendency to giveto the council something of the unity and joint responsibility of amodern cabinet. In 1406 the king agreed that if any of thecouncil were impeded in the performance of the king's service(profit), or in the execution of the laws, they might resign (eredepart+, without incurring the king's indignation. Still morecharacteristic is the regulation made in the same Parliament thatno councillor should excuse himself, or accuse any of his colleaguesin regard to any decision come to in the council (ib. 572 b, 587 b);for without mutual loyalty joint responsibility cannot exist. After Cessation1437 Henry V1 resumed the right of appointing absolutely, perhaps,as Dr. Stubbs has suggested, because after the cessation of control.the functions of the council as a government of regency, theParliament forgot or did not care to control the composition of thecouncil in its more normal capacity (C. H. iii. 249). The factiouspolicy of llIargaret of Anjou finally destroyed any representative

character which the council might previously have had. Men \\.eremaintained in office whom the nation abhorred, others wereexcluded whom the nation desired, simply because it was theResponsi- pleasure of the court. Further attempts to secure the responsibilityofbility of councillors are to be seen in the regulation that the clerk101s. of the council is to keep an exact record of attendances 'to seewhat, howe, and by whom enything passethe' (P. P. C. iii. 18);and in the still more stringent order, thrice repeated, that every'bill' passed in the council is to be signed by those councillorswho have assented to it (P. P. C. iii. 150, 2 16 ; iv. 62 ; many ofthese 'bills' signed by councillors may be seen in the P. P. C.);provisions which remind us of the unworkable clause in the Act ofSettlement that 'all resolutions taken [in the privy council] shall besigned by such of the privy council as shall advise and consent tothe same' (Hallam, C. H. iii. 181). The advice given by thejudges under the circumstances mentioned above is also to becarefully recorded. If a majority cannot be obtained for anyopinion, the various opi'nions put forward and the names of thepersons who held them are to be registered (P. P. C. iii. 149.For actual instances of this, cf. ib. i. 126, 144; v. 76-7, 223, 274).But the most striking instance in which the council showed theirsense of their accountability to Parliament was in 1389, when theyrefused to agree to a proposal of Richard 11, lest they should becharged in Parliament with having unnecessarily burdened therevenue (P. P. C. i. I 2 c). Fortescue gives no hint of this parlirtmentarycontrol over the composition and measures of the council.Removalof councillors.Very likely he considered it undesirable. But he limits verymaterially the king's power of dismissing councillors, by requiringthat, except for some definite offence, councillors shall only beremoved with the consent of a majority of their colleagues. Forthis too there is historical authority. In 1426 and in 1430 (duringthe minority of Henry VI) it was prescribed, 'pat pe correctionpunicion or remoevyng of any consailler or greet officer of pekynges procede of passent and advis of the more part of alle p00pat beene appoyntede of pe kinges counsail' (P. P. C. iii. 216 ; iv.62. Cf. the complaint of Lord Cromwell in 1432 that he had beellremoved contrary to these regulations, and for no fault on his part,Rot. Parl. iv. 392). As to their tenure of office, the appointment ofcouncillors under Richard I1 and Henry IV was annual; later,subjectof course to resignation or dismissal, it was for life (Dicey, p. 15).jii. The oath ofthe Councillors. The councillors, says Fortescue, Oath talienare to 'be sworne to counsell the kynge aftir a ffourme to be de- bycillors.vysed ffor per owthe, and in especial1 pat thai shall take no fee norclothynge nor no rewardes off any man except only off pe kynge.'There are among the records of the Privy Council several entriesof the swearing in of councillors. And the allusions which theseentries contain to the 'usual form' of the oath show that that formwas perfectly well known. For example, on February 28th, 1424,Johannes dominus de Scroope juratus fuit ad sancta evangelia informa consueta de fideliter consulendo pro comrnodo Regis etregni, et assumptus fuit in consilium Regis' (P. P. C. iii. 147).In 1437, 'The keper of pe prive seel, etc., have sworene andmaade feythe unto pe K' to counsaille him we1 and trewly, . . .to kepe pe K' consailx secree, and shortly pei shal consail anddoo alle pat goode consaillers sholde' (ib. v. 72). This is thenearest approach that I have found to a record of the actual formof oath on an historical occasion. But two forms of oath occur(P. P. C. iii. I 76, 188) : the former was drawn up in the councilin 1425, to be taken by the council, while the latter was passedin the Parliament of 1426, and was taken by all members of theupper house. The chief points in the former, which is too longto quote at length, are: that the councillors shall give impartialcounsel; that they shall observe strict secrecy; take no giftsintended to influence their conduct as councillors; and generallyassist to their utmost 'during the Kynges tendre eage,' whichshows that this formula was drawn up with special reference to themino~ity of Henry VI. Sometimes the councillors were sworn toobserve the special articles,drawn up from time to time for theirregulation, e.g. Rot. Parl. iii. 585 b. For earlier forms of thecouncillor's oath, see S. C. H. ii. 258, and the references theregiven. The special point insisted on by Fortescue is illustratedby a regulation of the year 1426, 'pat no man be of pe kingescounsail but suche as be barely of his counsail, and entendyngupone noon opers counsail in especiale ' (P. P. C. iii. 2 'g), and bya minute of the year 1437, 'pat noon of hem take anny fee of anyoper persone pen of pe kyng ' (ib. vi. 3 15).iv. The President offhe Council. The councillors, says Fortescue, Presidentmust c haue an hed or a cheeff to rule pe counsell, on off pe said $:,"cCil.xxiiijti, and chosen be the kynge, havynge is office at the kyngespleasur, with mey thanne be callid Capitalis consiZia~ius.' It is

characteristic of Fortescue's point of view, that the President ofthe Council is to be taken from among the permanent officialmembers of the council, and not from among the annual aristocraticmembers. But though this point is new, the institution of achief councillor is old. Of the ancient Curia Regis, out of whichthe council, like the Law Courts, arose by a gradual differentiationand specialization of functions, the king himself was the naturalPresident. In his absence his place was taken by the Justiciar(Capitalis Justiciarius). When the Justiciar lost his politicalcharacter, and became merely the head of the Court of King'sBench, much of his importance was inherited by the chancellor;and this is perhaps the historical basis of Fortescue's suggestionthat 'pe Chaunceler when he is present mey be presydent andhaue pe suppreme rule off all pe counsell.' This suggestion doesnot occur in the almost identical scheme for the constitution ofthe council drawn up by Fortescue with reference to the Lancastrianrestoration of 1470 (Appendix B). Otherwise we mightperhaps have suspected that a (no wise blameable) regard to hisown dignity had dictated the proposal. For, as we know, Fortescuewas appointed chancellor to Henry V1 at the time of his expulsionfrom the throne; and it is in this character that he introduceshimself in his dialogue on the Laws of England. Very frequentlyhowever some definite person was appointed chief councillor.Under Henry 111, William Bishop-elect of Valence, ' factus est cons~liariusregis principalis;' under Edmard I1 the Earl of Lancasterwas made ' de consilio regis capitalis,' ' principalis consiliariusregis ;' Archbishop Stratford was ' consiliarius principalis ' toEdward 111, and the same office was held later in that reign byWilliam of Wykeham, with the title of ' Capitalis Secreti Consiliiac Gubernatoris hlagni Consilii' (S. C. H. ii. 257, 339, 402 ;P. P. C., I. iv). Henry V, as Prince of Wales, and after him hisbrother Thornas, held the chief place in their father's council,though I have not found any special title assigned to them (S. C. H.iii. 65, 68). ' Principalis Consiliarius ' was one of the titles borneby Bedford, and in his absence by Gloucester during the minorityof Henry VI, and was continued to them after the coronation ofthe king had put an end to the title of 'Protector et DefensorRegni' which they had previously borne in conjunction with it.These titles are also those given to York during both his Protectoratesin 1454 and 1455 (Rot. Parl. v. 243 b, 288 a). During hisexile Fortescue himself held the post of chief councillor (Introduction,Part 11. p. 5.1 nole, above)'. When the king was present in The kingcouncil the words in pre~en~i~ Re@ are added at the head of the $s':~ll~minutes (e.g. P. P. C. v. 6-11, 273). But that this was not the rule ~ ~ ~is shown by the various regulations made with a view to securing cation beregularchannels of con~munication between the king and thetweenking andthecouncil, and the correlative and even more important measures for thecouncil.preventing the king from acting on advice coming through otherthan the regular channels. Under Richard I1 it was prayed thatthe king would give audience to his council whenever they mightrequest it, and that the chamberlain, steward of the household, andthe keeper of, the Privy Seal might be ' reporters' between the kingand council (P. P. C. i. 85). On Henry IV's accession it wasresolved that it was expedient that a ' convenable person ' shouldbe appointed to report to the king the advice of his council, andthis not only for the advantage of the king, but as a security tohonest councillors (ib. 110). In 1406 it was ordered that thosecouncillors who were continually about the king (in virtue of theiroffices) should act as intermediaries (Rot. Parl. iii. 585 b). In Cal.Rot. Pat. p. 296 a (32 Hen. VI) there is a notice of a regulation concerningthe councillors and their access to the king; while numerousare the requests that the king would give his full confidence (creance)to his council, govern wholly by their advice, and not act on anysuggestion or information coming from any other source withoutfirst referring it to them (P. P. C. i. 84; Rot. Parl. iii. 585-6).The 'influence behind the throne' was for centuries one of the 'Influencegreat obstacles to constitutional government. And this point behind thethrone.'comes out more clearly in Fortescue's paper of 1470 than in thepresent work. 'And thanne,' he says, ' shall the king not becounseled by men of his Chambre, of his housholde, nor ctherl In a moie general sense the Archbishop of Canterbury was in old daysconstitutionally the first adviser of the Crown (cf. S. C. H. i. 359; SelectCharters, pp. 92, 102). That this somewhat vague right was still in some so~trecognised is shown by Gloucester's manifesto of 1440: 'Of right the archebisshopof Caunterbury shulde be 3oure chi6f counsaillier, the whiche is alsoestranged and sette aside.' English in France, ii. 442. 'In 10 Ric. 11. theArchbishop of Canterbury delivered to Parliament a solemn protest claimingfor himself and his successors the right of being present at all the King'sCouncils, whether General, or Special, or Secret (P. P. C., I. iii, from Rot.Parl. iii. 223 b). Compare Rot. Parl. iii. 417 b : 'Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi. . . competit primam vocem habere inter ceteros Prelatos et Proceres Hegni.'

which can not counsele hym' (Appendix B. 4 2).While in histract on ' Good Counseill' (Appendix A) he traces all the misfortunesof England to the fact that 'our kinges have bene reuledby private counselloures, such as have offered their service andcounseile and were not chosen therto.'Ll'ages of v. Wnges of Counci//ors. Fortescue evidently expects greatobjections to be made to his scheme on the score of expense.councillors.He is afraid lest the wages off the said xxiiij counsellers seme anewe and a grete charge to pe kynge.' But he replies very justlythat the expense will be small compared with that of the oldaristocratic council which ' was nothynge so behouefull ' as thenew council will be. For the aristocratic members of the newcouncil are to be as much reduced in salary, as in influence andSale of importance. The following table exhibits the scale of annualpayment.payments made to councillors according to their hereditary orofficial rank during the present period ; together with the fines perdiem imposed on them for absence from the council during termtimewithout reasonable cause.lAn Archbishop . .A Duke ............The Chancellor.. Henry Beaufort.. .Other Bishops ...An Earl ............The Treasurer . .I A Baron ............A Banneret An Esquire . . ..£ 2 ~ 0£200£200£200zoo markszoo markszoo marks£100'£100'£40£1$2 l£1'£1I markI markI markI a.10s.4s.Authorities.p. P. C. iii. 155-6, 266.P. P. C. iv. 101-3.P. P. C. iii. 212-3.P. P. C. iii. 155-6.P. P. C. iii. 155-6.P. P. C. iii. 155-6.P. P. C. iii. 212-3 ; iv. 187.P. P. C. iii. 155-6., p. P. C. iii. 222, 266.1 P. P. C. iii. 156-6.The higher scale of payment made to Henry Beaufort, as comparedwith other bishops, is probably due to his connexion with theroyal family. The authorities here quoted range over a period often years, from 1424 to 1434. In several of these records it isstated that this scale of payment dates from the reigns of Richard11 and Henry IV (cf. e.g. iii. 155; iv. 262). In 1437 salaries aregranted to councillors for life ; and in another minute of the sameyear it is expressly stated that ' in cas pat anny of Fe seide lordesor conseillers falle to suche unweldenesse or impotence pat he shalnot mowe entende unto pe kynges saide Counseil, yit neverpelees penoteB. @bap, jb,303Kyng wol pat he shal have and rej~ise be seide fee for terme of hisIyf' (ib. v. 72 ; vi. 31 g). Considering the relative value of money,these salaries are certainly liberal. But the expensiveness of the Special al-Icing's Council comes out much more clearly when we consider lowances.the special salaries granted to councillors like Bedford, Gloucester,and Beaufort, under Henry VI. Thus Bedford, or Gloucester, as thecase might be, was to receive 8000 marks a year as Protector andchief councillor (P. P. C. iii. 26, 197 ; Rymer, x. 268). In 1426,during Bedford's presence in England, Gloucester was allowed 3000marks as chief councillor next after his brother (P. P. C. iii. 210,228).In 1429 it was agreed that he should receive 2000 marks as councillor,and 4000 marks when Lieutenant of the Kingdom duringHenry VI's absence (ib, iv. 12). But in 1431 he succeeded ingetting the council to raise these sums to 5000 and 6000 marksrespectively (ib. 104-6). In 1434 Bedford and Gloucester agreedto accept salaries of £1000 (ib. 218 ff., 185). And certain othercouncillors agreed to give their attendance during term time gratis(Rot. Parl. iv. 446 b). But in 1437 we find Gloucester receiving hisold salary of zooo marks (P. P. C. vi. 314). In addition to the cost Englishof the English council, there was, during a considerable portion of ~$1.the period, the further expense of the council of the EnglishGovernment in France, the scale of payment for which seems tohave been considerably higher than for the English council (cf,e.g. P. P.C. iv. 29, 34, 36, 78, 82; Rymer, X. 472).vi. Times of meetkg offhe Counci/, &c. 1 do not propose to enter Times ofupon the very difficult legal subject of the jurisdiction of the meeting.cotlncil, as Fortescue does not mention it. He may very possiblyhave shared the jealousy towards it which prevailed among thecommon lawyers. But the character of the council, as in some Analogiessense a court of law, so far affected its proceedings, that, like other ~~~'~.lawlawcourts, it only sat during term time, except in special emergencies.The phrase 'in pleno termino curiis Regis sedentibus'occurs in connexion with the meetings of the council (e.g. P. P. C.iii. 156). The records of the council's proceedings are dated likelaw reports, ' de termino Pasche,' &c. (ib. 53). In 1426 it wasspecially ordered, 'pat out of terme tyme no thing be sped in pecounsail but suche thing as for pe goode of pe kyng and of hislande askethe necessaire and hastye spede and may not goodely beabiden unto Fe terme tyme ' (ib. 2 16) ; and we find business expresslydeferred because ' the lordes ~f the kynges blode and

Ebe bobernance of @ngianD,counsail . . . alle the tyme of pe last hervest sesone have ben andas yet bethe in peire contrees at peire leisier and desportes, as pe. . . usage of pis lande . . . is' (ib. vi. 338). It was expectedthat the councillors should attend regularly during term time, unlessthey had a reasonable ground for absenting themselves, and, as weSpecial have seen, they were liable to be fined for non-attendance. Butsummons.special summonses were also issued when the business to betransacted was exceptionally weighty. Both these points, the regularattendance and the special summons, are illustrated by the followingmissive of the year 1458: 'Reverent fader in God, How beit . . . alle the lordes and othir persones suche as be of owreCounsail owen in the terme tyme to geve attendaunce to the same,yit for suche matiers as concerne specially . . . the welfare ofthis awrre lande and subgittes, we write unto you that be of ourCounsail . . . praying and also charging you that withoute anyfaille ye wol be atte our paleys of Westminster the xj day ofOctobre next comying &C.'(ib. vi. 297 ; cf. ib. 175 ; i. 242). Fortescuealso assumes that the council will meet every day, for hesays: ' trewly such a contenuall counsel1 mey we1 be callid mulfacornilia ffor it is ofte and euere day cdunsellith ' (Chap. xiv. ad finem).The question of the hours at which the council should sit, thelength of their vacation, &C., are among the details which Fortescueleaves to 'be conseyued be layser.' But even on these points someinformation is to be found. Thus, under Richard 11, the council isordered to meet between eight and nine a.m., at the latest (P. P. C.i. 18~). Various rules were from time to time made with a viewFreedom to expediting business, which need not be detailed here. Absolutedebate. freedom of debate was enjoined, ' alway due reverence kept toevery estat and persone' (ib. iii. 215; iv. 60). But it is likelyenough that Fortescue's complaint is well founded, that no 'lowerSecrecy.Place ofman . . . durste say ayen the openyon off any off the grete lordis!To preserve the necessary secrecy, a point on which Fortescue alsolays great stress, none but sworn councillors are to be present, unlessspecially summoned (ib.). The provisions that Lords of the Councilare not to harbour or maintain evil-doers, accept lands of doubtfultitle, &C., illustrate the disorder of the time rather than the procedureof the council, and are dealt with elsewhere. (Introduction, Part I. pp.27-8, above). As to the council's place of meeting, the most usualwas 'the Sterred Charnbre at Westminster.' But it met in otherplaces, both in London and elsewhere, according to circumstances.In 20 Edward IV we find the council 'in attendance for the king'sad-vantage at the Cardinal's hat without Newgate,' apparently atavern (Issues of the Exchequer, p. 499). It is one of Gloucester'scharges against Beaufort that he ' takyth upon hym youre estateroyal in cleping divers tymes youre counsaille to his owen hous'(English in France, ii. 449). Gloucester had however done thesame (cf. P. P. C. iii. 65). But perhaps, as Protector, he had moreright to do so.vii. Sudjecfs of Deliberalion. Fortescue gives a long list of Subjects ofvarious subjects on which he would have the council 'commune.'Some of these mill be illustrated in the separate notes which follow.But he divides the general sphere of the council's deliberationsunder two heads, viz. (I) ' materis of defeculte that fallen to thekynge;' and (2) ' materes off f7e pollyce off pe reaume.' In moremodern language we might say-questions of administration, andquestions of general policy. And this describes well enough thewide extent of ground covered by the council's deliberations. Likethose of a modern cabinet, they ranged over the whole field ofgovernment. The proofs of this assertion must be sought in theproceedings of the council; but Dr. Pauli is certainly right whenhe says that in those proceedings may be seen better than anywhereelse the way in which the Lancastrian kings ruled (Gesch. v. Engl.v. 705). An interesting illustration of the deliberations of thecouncil may be found in P. P. C. i. 319 f., where we have preservedan agenda paper of the council, on the back of which are endorsedthe decisions actually come to on some of the points. RIr. Diceyclassifies the functions of the council under certain heads, of whichthe three most important are, ( I) finance; (2) dealings with aliensand with trade ; (3) preservation of the peace ; which last is closelyconnected with the jurisdiction of the council as a court of law. In Tracle.relation to the second point, it should be noted how many of thespecific subjects of deliberation mentioned by Fortescue are questionsconnected with trade. Here, again, the authorities are far toonumerous for citation, and may be found in every volun~e of thecouncil's proceedings. With regard to the first point, ne have already Finance.seen in the notes to Chap. vi. p. 210, above, how the estimates ofrevenue and expenditure were prepared in the council (cf. alsoP. P.C.i. 85). Another very important point mentioned by Fortescue, in Probouleuwhichthe council resembles a modern cabinet, is the \Tray in which ~~,~~;,,it acted in preparing measures for the consideration of Parliament ; council.X

306 &be bobernance of QEnglanD.'wher through,' says Fortescue, 'pe parlementes shall mowe domore gode in a moneth to pe mendynge off the lawe, then thaishall mowe do in a yere yff pe amendynge per off be not debatydand be such counsel1 ryped to thair handes.' In this he is certainlyright. The Parliaments of England have always been quick enoughto discover grievances ; but they have often been no less helpless in.devising effectual remedies, unless led by men more speciallytrained in the work of government. The share of the councilin grants of lands and offices will be dealt with in the notes toStatutory Chapters xvii-xx. Then, as now, the council often actedconferredon theunder special powers conferred upon it by Parliament, in regarde.g. to the answering of petitions which were not dealt with inParliament, to the relaxation of certain statutes, to matters qf tradeand finance, &c. (cf. Rot. Parl. iii. 457 b, 497 a, 506 b ; iv. I 18 a,I 74 a, 506 b, &C.; S. C. H. iii. 253-4). Sometimes they weredirected to take the advice of the judges (cf. e.g. Rot. Parl. iii.505 b; iv. 506 b; v. 7 b, g a, 105, Cc.). Sometimes, if the questionsat issue were too serious to be decided by the council on theirown responsibility, a great council was summoned at their request,which either settled the matter, or in turn recommended the summoningof a Parliament (cf. P. P. C, i. 179; iii. 332 ; iv. 67; vi.Great 185). These councils consisted of the great lords spiritual andcouncils.temporal, the judges, privy councillors, &C., with whom were frequentlyassociated ' certain notable knights and enquires,' summonedby name from each county, so that these councils resembled almostParliaments of nominees, or, to borrow a ter~from Frencb constitutionalhistory which is fairly suggested by the phrase quotedabove, they were ' assemblies of notables.' Thus the education andcoronation of the king, the ordinances for the household of 1454,&C., were discussed in great councils (cf. P. P. C. iii. 271, 297 ; vi.220). Curiously enough, too, those financial functions which rehave attributed to, and seen exercised by, the Privy Council, werein 1437 expressly claimed for the great council: ' pe kynges progenitouresand predecessoures hade of ladable coustumes andusages at pe begynnyng of pe yer to purveie by passent of his greetcounsail for alle necessaires and charges longyng unto him and tohis lordship that were lykly to falle and sue all pe yer after' (P. P. C.v. 65). ' It is probable,' says Dr. Stubbs, ' that the theory whichgives to all the peers of the realm the right of approaching theking with advice was thus reduced to practice ' (S. C. H. iii. 255 ;notea+ abap. xt~+ 307cf. ib. 498 ; ii. 347,479). It is curious that Fortescue says nothing fit menofthese great councils, though they are a great feature of Lan- tioned bycastrian rule. Perhaps he disliked them as giving too much in- Fortescue.fluence to the nobility. He admits that all the peers are 'consiiiariinati ' of the Crown; but it is rather to enforce the view thatthe Crown has the right to ask their advice whenever it pleases,than the converse doctrine that they have the right of tendering itwhenever they please. We hear little of great councils underEdward IV; they reappear, however, under Henry VII, in connexionwith which may be read Mr. Spedding's note in the Appendix toBacon's History of Henry VII. In P. P. C. i. 155 ff., vi. 340 ff.,we have lists of the knights who were to be summoned from eachcounty to a great council. It is interesting to find that one of theknights summoned for Buckinghamshire on the latter occasion wasJohn Hampden, of Hampden.thai were so occupied with thair owne maters, &C.] Predomi-Similar complaints were sometimes made of the Parliaments.Inopening the Parliament of 1401 Thirning, Chief Justice of the terests inCommon Pleas, complained ' cornent devaunt ces heures pluseursdes Seigneurs et Communes Venus par Sommons au Parlementont este pluis entendantz pur leur singulers et especialx besoignesque pur la commune profit et aide du Roialme.' In 1402 similarcomplaints were made by the Chancellor in his opening speech(Rot. Parl. iii. 454 b, 4S5 b). It was perhaps to check this evilthat it was ordered in 1426 and 1430 that if 'eny matere to bespede in Fe counsail' concerned any of the councillors 'he whomthe saide matere touchethe be not present whiles pat pe saidematiere . . . is in comunyng' (P. P. C. iii. 214 ; iv. 60). In 1406Lord Love1 was excused from serving on the council because hehad certain pleas pending in the king's courts 'par quoy il nepourroit honnestement occupier celle charge' (Rot. Parl. iii. 573 a).The following are perhaps instances of lords of the councilusing their position as councillors to obtain privileges, &c. forpersons in whom they were interested (Feb. 26, 1443): 'AtPinstance of my Lorde pe Bisshope of Norwiche the Kyng grauntedto William Chartesey his letres patentes of exempcion puod nonPo7zaiur in assisis,' etc. (March 30, 1443) : 'At pinstance of myLorde of Somerset and Rlaistre Adam RIoleyns pe Kynge grantedto Th. Vaghan Walsheman boren to be denszein,' etc. (P. P. C. V.255, 256). To check this evil again it was ordered (ut supra) thatX 2

no councillor was to promise his influence beforehand in favourof any suitor, but should simply answer to all solicitations that thematter would be considered by the council.Private corrupcion . . . off the seruantes and counsellers off. . .councils oflords the lordes.] Just as the King had his Privy Council in whichothers. were debated, as we have seen, all matters affecting the administrationand general policy of his kingdom, so the great lords spiritualand temporal, and other persons of importance, had their separatecouncils for the management of their estates, the discussion of theirpolitical affairs and line of conduct, the maintenance of theirinterest and influence, the support of their adherents and partizans,&c. Thus in 1401 Henry Spencer, Bishop of Norwich, is ordered,if he cannot appear in person, to send ' quatre trois ou deux personessuffisantz et discretz de vostre conseil' (P. P. C. i. 16;).Lord Love1 writes ' y by th' avise of my counceill,' &c. (PastonLetters, i. 442). The Duke of Norfolk writes, 'consayled be theLordes of our Consayle and oder of owr Consayle ' (ib. ii. 247) ;the Earl of Oxford, 'I . . . with my Counceyle, shall take a directionfor the suretie of all that cuntre' (ib. 421). We hear of thecouncil of Humphrey duke of Gloucester (Bekynton's Correspond-ence, i. 281); and Bekynton himself was Gloucester's Chancellor(ib. ii. 361). The Abbot of St. Alban's consults ' viros solidos suitemporalis concilii' (Amundesham, i. 314) ; and Pecock has aninteresting passage on the sums spent by the monasteries 'upon~vorthi gentil men leerned in lawe for mentenance of her rijtis, andupon kny3tis and squyers . . . into her honest chering and wee1fare, and into nurisching of frendschip and of loue' (Repressor,pp. 370-1;-a passage which gives us some insight into thevarious interests which were harassed by the dissolution of themonasteries. Cf. Whethamstede, 11. xxv-xxxii). The Earl ofNorthumberland appoints the Prior of Tynemouth 'to be ofmy Councelle,' with 'an annuyte of X, li. by yer . . . duringmy plesure ' (Whethamstede, ii. 2 I 8) ; and the wages of the ' consiliasiidomi ' are among the expenses of a Viscount's householdTheir de- enumerated in the Lihr N@er (Ordinances, &c. p. 30). Thevelopment annIogons development of these lesser councils was analogous to that of theto that of royal council. At first they were purely feudal in their compositheKing's tion.cooncil. Thus Archbishop Thurstan grants a charter to Beverley' consilio meorum baronum' (Select Charters, p. 109). But in thecourse of time they too assumed a more oficial character. Theextensive and scattered estates of the nobility, their various rights ofpatronage, &C., the litigiousness of the age, and perhaps in somecases, as Pecock hints (Repressor, p. 306), their olvn aristocraticignorance, necessitated the employment of a vast number of menof business, and of men learned both in the common and canonlaw. And it is not always easy to determine whether, in any givencase, by the phrase 'of hys councell' is meant councillors in thegeneral sense, or ' counsel ' in the legal sense. Often of course thetwo would be coincident. The latter however are generally termed'councell lerned, both spirituell as temporell;' and so thoroughlywas their relation to their employer recognised, that they are alwaysexempted from the operation of the numerous statutes which forbidthe giving of liveries. From the Paston Letters (i. 16, I 74) it 'vouldappear that lords often had persons 'of their councell' speciallyretained in the separate counties to look after their interests in thatparticular quarter. In the former passage SVilliam Paston, afterwardsJudge, complains that his salary had long been allo~ved to fall intoarrears by the Duke of Norfolk. But the councils of great lordswere not composed entirely of lawyers and men of business. Sirehave seen how the Duke of Norfolk speaks in almost royal style of' the lords and others of our council; ' and Lord Scales writes of himselfas being one of the same nobleman's council (Paston Letters, ii.344). This relation was at once the symbol and the cement of politicaland family connexion. In Waurin (ed. Dupont. iii. 186 E.) isa very interesting letter from Louis XI'S ambassador describing theinterview \\hich he had with Warwick and his council. (On theQueen's council and officers, see notes to Chap. X. p. 265, above).And in these lesser councils evils prevailed, as Fortescue here hints,similar to those which existed in higher quarters ; corruption, main- tion.tenance, and ' brocage ' or undue influence. Of this the annals ofSt. Alban's furnish us with a good example. In 1435 the abbotwished to obtain from Lord Grey of Ruthin a surrender of certainrights nhich he had over the Priory of Beaulieu, a cell belonging toSt. Alban's, as the representative of the original founder of the cell.The manner in which the surrender was obtained shall be told inthe annalist's own words : ' Cum didicisset [abbas] quomodo fundatordictus, ad insfar aliorum proccrunz, quosdam habebat secumpeculiares consiliarios, per quos in talibus arduis negotiis beiligniusregi vellet, mox per niedia pecuniaria ipsorum notitiam conquaesierat,propositaque materia, eos penes dominum mediare procurabat.

Sicque horum mediis concessit tandem dominus relaxationem facere,relaxavitque,' &c. (Amundesham, ii. 106. The sums actually paidon this score are given in the accounts of the Abbey, ib. 267.They amount to £97 6s. 8d.). The corruption of the King'scouncil by bribes was one of the things complained of by Cade(Stowe, p. 389 a).no mater . . . kept prive.] Cf. Bgidius Romanus, Be Regi-mhe, 111. ii. 17, who derives the word ronsiIium from con andsilere ; i.e. a place where many are silent together. Cf. Bacon'sEssay Of Counsel.how thai had sped, &c,] In the articles drawn up in theParliament of 1406 for the regulation of the council it is laiddown that no councillor or officer is to promise his support beforehandto any applicant, nor to give him any information until thematter has been finally decided on by the council (Rot. Parl. iii.587 b; cf. sup. p. 308).How mey pe kyng be counsellyd to restrayne gyvinge,&C.] See notes to the last Chapter, pp. 292-3, above.corodeis or pencions off abbeyis.] On these see notes toChap. xviii, pp. 337-9, below.like as pe Justices . . . be sworne.] The oath to be takenOath of theJudges.by the Judges is prescribed by a statute of 20 Edw. I11 called 'theOrdinance for the Justices.' The part of it which illustrates thepresent passage runs as follows : 'That ye take not . . . gift norreward . . . of any man that shall have any plea or process hangingbefore you; . . . and that ye take no fee as long as ye shall bejustice, nor robes of any man, great or small, but of the king him-self; and that ye give none advice or counsel to no man, great orsmall, in no case where the king is party,' etc. A petition againstWilliam Paston for alleged systematic violation of this oath is inPaston Letters, i. 36. On the corruption of Judges, see Introduction,Part I, p. 22, and notes to Chap. vi. p. 223, above; and on the Judges'oath, cf. De Laudibus, c. 51: ' Jurabit etiam, quod . . . non recipiet. . . ab aliquo, preterquam a rege feodum, aut pencionem aliquam, seuliberatam, neque donum capiet ab habente placitum coram eo,' &c.It shall not be necessarie pat the xij spirituell men . . .haue so gret wages, &C.] This passage illustrates a point in whichthe mode of life in the middle ages differed from that of the presentday (cf. Introduction, Part 11, pp. 44-5, above). Persons whoseoccupation as lawyers, government officials, &C., obliged them to bein London during a portion of the year did r~ot as a rule reside Residerxetheir work rendered necessary. A letter in the Paston collection z::e(i. 186) hints that this absence was not always unwelcome, andthat pretexts were sought for extending it. 'Ulveston is stywardof the AIydill Inne, a d Isley of the Inner Inne, because theiweld have officz for excuse for dwellyng this tyme from herwyves.' Thus John Paston resided in the Inner Temple (ib. 41)during term time, while his wife managed his property andfamily in Norfolk ; sending her husband from time to time rabbitsand other country produce to help his housekeeping (ii. 21).Sir Thomas More complains in the same strain of the miseriesof lay ambassadors who had while on duty to keep two house-there with their wives and families, but made their homes in the ~~s~~~'country, going themselves alone to London for such periods as rnon in theholds : 'I never liked the office' of an ambassador.We laymenand you priests are not on equal terms on such occasions . . .When a priest starts on his mission he can take his whole familywith him . . . but whenever I am absent I have two familiesto keep, one at home and one abroad . . . And I cannot prevailon my wife, children, and servants . . . to stop eatinguntil I return' (cited by Brewer, Henry VIII, i. 65). Another Clericalreason, not mentioned here by Fortescue, why the salaries of $p:tclerical officials were not so high as those of their temporal of churchcolleagues was that the former could be supplemented out of'even"es.the revenues of the church. Thus in 1437 Henry V1 granted toLouis of Luxemburgh, Archbishop of Rouen and Chancellor ofFrance, the temporalities of the See of Ely in part payment of anannuity of 1000 marks which had been previously granted him(Rymer, X. 671, 666 ; cf. Bekynton's Correspondence, i. 4-8 ;Rot. Parl. v. 11). Gascoigne says roundly : 'jam ecclesiz etepiscopatus sunt pensiones et mercedes servorum regum et dominorummundanorum' (p. 181). It was in fact part of thetacit compact which existed between the Crown and the Churchduring the later middle ages, that the former should be allowedto make use of the revenues of the latter in this way; (cf.Creighton, Hist. of the Papacy, i. 45 : c Gradually the kingand the pope arrived at a practical understanding as to thedivision of spoil. If the offices of the church were to furnishsalaries for the king's ministers, they must also supply revenuesto the head of the church'; In the memorial of 1470 (App.

B. 6) Fortescue does however mention this point: 'it isnot like but that he woll avaunce the spirituell menne of hiscounseill with benefices as they shalbe tvorthy.' So in the LlaerNzger, if any of the King's chaplains 'be benefysed to xl. li. hetaketh no wages in this courte' (Ordinances, &C., p. 35).Parliament the spirituell juges in the courte off parliment off Parys,of Paris.&C.] Among the expenses of the English administration in Francefor the year 1428 is set down the following :' liem, dominis judicibusprincipalibus regni Franci~, viz., prasidentibus, doctoribus legiscivilis et consiliariis in parliament0 apud Parys ' (English in France,ii. 536). And in 1431 the king's council in France asked the advice ofthe council in England upon this among other points :' Ifem, for pepaiement of pestates of pe parlement, of chambre of ]7accomptes, andof oper officers of be reaume of France. Considering pat of patlande arrisethe noo commoditee to paie hem withe' (P. P. C. iv. 94).But in neither case is the distinction mentioned which Fortescuehere draws between the lay and clerical members of the court.The remark may however be noted as another instance of the carewith which Fortescue while abroad compared French and Englishinstitutions. In his memorial of 1470 (App. B. $ 3) Fortescuesets down 300 and 400 scutes as the salary of the clerical and layjudges respectively. The scute as we have seen (notes to Chap.iii. p. 198, above) was worth 3s. qd. In P. P. C. iii. 63, the frankis estimated at 2s. 6d., i.e. eight to the pound sterling; in Worcester'scollections (English in France, ii. 534) it is reckoned atthe rate of three franks to the noble, i.e. nine to the pound. Eitherestimate causes a considerable discrepancy between the two statementsof Fortescue. But perhaps some other frank is intended. InAppendix D. to Rymer (p. 317) we have a frank which is equal toeight gold scutes. In Rymer, xii. I I 5, there is an ordinance fixingthe relative value of certain English and French coins.consiliarii nati.] v. S. p. 307.Sheriffs temporell men wich . . . bith made shyreffes for aanoual.yere.] For the earlier history of the office of sheriff see S. C. H.i. and ii. The first establishment of annual sheriffs was due tothe baronial government of 1258 (ib, ii. 78, 206 E.; Select Charters,p. 391). This limitation was finally fixed by statute (14 Edw.111. St. I. c. g; re-enacted 28 Edw. 111. c. 7 ; 42 Edw. 111. c. g);while by I Ric. 11. c. 11, three years were to intervene before anyperson was re-appointed sheriff. The reason for this policyis clearly given in the first of these statutes, viz. that by continuancein offise sheriffs are 'encouraged to do many oppressions tothe people.' By St. I Henry V, C. 4, the same limitations wereextended to their officers, and for a similar reason, viz. thatowing to the continuance of these officers in their situations, theking's lieges 'dare not pursue or complain of their extorsions andoppressions' (cf. Rot. Parl. iv. 10 a; P. P. C. iii. 220). In 1421however the Statute of Edward TIC had to be suspended for fouryears, because, owing to 'pestilences within the realme, andwars without,' there was no longer a sufficiency of good andsubstantial persons to undertake the office of sheriff (g Hen. V.St. I. c. 5; cf. Rot. Parl. iv. 148 b). In the very next year thecommons petitioned for the revocation of this Statute of Henry V,though without effect (Rot. Parl. iv. 191 a). In 1445 a petition tothe commons sets forth that in 'divers shires in Englond ' sheriffshave remained in office 'sum X yere, and sum xii yere, and more,'which is ' lykly in tyme comyng to be importable hurt, open disheritaunce,and supportation of manslagter, perjure, and greteoppression to many of the liege people of oure Soveraigne Lord '(ib. v. 108); in consequence of which a statute (23 Hen. VI. c.7) was passed, whereby an annual penalty of £ 2 ~ 0 was imposedon all who should occupy the office of sheriff for more than ayear. In 1459 the commons complained of he ' grete extortionsand mesprisions' of sheriffs and .their officers in Chester and Walesowing to the fact that they ' hav estate terme of her lyves in thesaid offices,' and prayed that their patents might be cancelled,which was granted with certain reservations (ib. 366 b. Thecomplaint is illustrated by a grant in P. P. C. v. 224, of the sheriffdomof Cheshire to a man and his son for the terme of their jointlives. In Westmoreland the office seems to have been hereditary.ib. vi. 194). My St. 8 Edw. TV. c. 4, an indemnity was given tosheriffs who had remained in office for more than a year during thefirst three years of the reign, such continuance having been renderednecessary by the disturbed state of the country (cf. Rot. Parl. v.631 a). By 12 Edw. IV. c. I, and I 7 Edw. IV. c. 7. the law \I-asslightly relaxed to obviate the inconvenience caused by the intervalnhich often elapsed between the expiration of one sheriff's term ofofice, and the entry of his successor on his duties (cf. ib. vi. 154 a,I 91 a). The IT ords ' be reason of per enheritaunce and livelod' :::*are illustrated by numerous statutes requiring the sheriffs to have a tion.

Ebe bobernance of QEngland.qualification in land within their county. The earliest enactmenton this subject is in the Provisions of Oxford (Select Charters,p. 391) The reason given in many of the statutes is, in orderthat they may have Lwhereof to answer the king and his people,in case that any man complain against them' (4 Edw. 111. c, g).And in a petition already alluded to it is stated that the appointmentof unsubstantial persons to the office has been a cause of greatloss to the king,and of oppression to his subjects (Rot. Parl. iv. 148b).On the partiality and corruption of sheriffs and other local officers,Extortion. see Introduction, Part I, pp. 20, 28-30, above. One cause of theirextortions may have been the fact mentioned by Fortescue, that theyhad no regular salary, and were therefore driven to indemnifythemselves in irregular ways. Thus we hear of an illegal exactionintroduced by the sheriffs of Northumberland, called head-pence,which consisted in extorting from the county every third and fourthyear A51 (i.e. £ 102 every seven years), so that when those yearscame round there was great competition for the office (Rot. Parl.iv. 291 a). Another device was to raise from the county morethan was required for the wages of the knights of the shire, andappropriate the balance (ib. v. IIO b; St. 23 Hen. VI. C. 10).Embarrass- Another cause of extortion was the embarrassed state of the locallocalofretherevenue, which was also one reason vhy it was so difficult to findvenne. reputable people willing to undertake the office. Thus in 1455Sir John Tempest refused to undertake the office of sheriff ofLincolnshire, unless security were given 'that he take noo losse inpe saide ofice' (P. P. C. vi. 263). In the same year I-IughLouther, Esq., was threatened with a fine of £2000 if he refused toexecute the office of sheriff of Cumberland (ib. 2 7 I), while the latesheriff of Nottingham and Derby complained, that he and his predecessorswere held accountable for revenues and profits 'thewhiche of mony yerez a goon were not levable ne paieable' (ib.272). This embarrassment of the local revenue was partly due tothe decline of various towns and districts owing to war, pestilence,floods, incursions of the Scots, loss of trade, &c. The rolls ofparliament are full of petitions from towns and counties, asking fora reduction of the terms at which they were assessed, on one ormore of these grounds (e.g. Rot. Parl. iii. 438, 447, 514-8, &c.This cause affected the central exchequer also, because it diminishedthe quota which the towns were able to pay to the tenths and fifteenths,which were levied on the basis of a valuation made in the reign ofEdmard 111, cf. S. C. H. iii. 61 I). Sometimes the local revenuecould not be collected, because of the disturbed state of thecountry (Rot. Parl. vi. 63 b). But the chief cause of the declineof the local revenue was that it, like the central exchequer, was burdenedwith grants, annuities, pensions, &c. Throughout the wholeof this period the rolls of parliament are full of petitions complainingthat, in spite of these burdens, sheriffs were expected toraise the old amount of revenue from their shires (e.g. Rot. Parl.iii. 434 b, 469 a, &C.; vi. 64 a). In 1449 the Master of theBuckhounds complained that he could not obtain payment of hissalary, which was charged on the revenues of Surrey and Sussex,because, as the sheriff asserted, the revenues of these counties were' soo charged of othir wages and annuytees graunted by your letrespatentes to othir divers personys' (Rot. Parl. v. 167). In Nov.1446 the Master of the Hakiers had been in a similar plight for asimilar reason (Issues of the Exchequer, p. 456); while in 1455the commons petitioned that all these local grants might be resumed,because owing to the deficit on the local revenue ' noo persone ofgood wille dar take upon him to be sherref in any shire for themost partie in this lande' (ib. 328 a). A third cause of the op- Exactionspressions complained of was the exactions made by the'oficers of :~:~,~the exchequer from the sheriffs, escheators, &C., which obliged thelatter to indemnify themselves by means of similar exactions fromtheir districts (Rot. Parl. v. 323 b ; St. 33 Hen. VI. c. 3).Cade, inone of his proclamations, traces the extortion of .sheriffs, &c. totheir habit of letting their offices out to farm (Stowe, p. 389). InDe Laudibus, c. 24, Fortescue gives an account of the office andmode of appointment of sheriffs.materes off pe pollycye off pe reaume; as how, &C.] Amongthe causes of summons of the Parliament of 1455 are enumeratedsome of the subjects of deliberation which Fortescue here mentions :'to provide and ordeine meanes to sette aside the beryng out ofGold and Silver of this Reaume; . . . to purveie and ordeine forthe seure kepyng of the See,' &C.; and special committees wereappointed to deal with these and other points (Rot. Parl. v. 279 f.).On Committees of Council something has been said ; above, p. 296. Commit-Bacon in his Essay . Of Counsel ' recommends that these committeesshould be permanent for certain subjects; which was in fact thesystem in vogue under the Tudors : 'I commend also, sfalzdi~commissions; as for Trade, for Treasure, for War, for Suits, for

Importandof theprecioussome Provinces.' Bgidius Romanus enumerates five chief subjectson which a king's councillors should deliberate : (I) the revenue;'(2) food, the prices of which they must fix if sellers sell at toohigh a rate; (3) the safeguard of the state from seditions, &c.;(4) peace and war ; (5) legislation ; De Regzinine, 111. ii. I I.how pe goyng owt off pe money may be restrayned, &C.]Seeing that it was the accepted doctrine during the middle ages,and till the time of Adam Smith, that money alone was wealth, itis not surprising to find that a large part of the commercial legislationof the middle ages is directed towards stimulating artificiallythe importation of the precious metals into England, and preventingtheir exportation. Some illustrations of these two points may begiven from the statutes and other documents of the period. In20 Ric. I1 it was enacted that every merchant exporting wools,&c. from England should bring to the king's Bullion in the towerof London within half a year an ounce of gold for every sack ofwool, half last of hides, or 240 wool-fells (Rot. Parl. iii. 340 a,429 a; cf. St. 8 Hen. V. c. 2). The rules at the Staple of Calaiswith reference to the payment for wools seem to have been verystrict. In 1437 the commons in vain petitioned for a relaxationof them, on the ground that they drove foreign merchants away(Rot. Parl. iv. 508). In 1442 in answer to a renewed petitionthey obtained a statute, by which it was ordered that only onethird of the value of the \i,ool sold was to be paid for in silverbullion, which was to be brought to the mint at Calais to be coined(ib. v. 64; St. zo Hen. VI. c. 12). But even this was foundunworliable, and before the year was out Henry V1 had to grantdispensations for the non-observance of the statute. One mainreason of this was, that the Duke of Burgundy had established sostrict a search on his frontiers to prevent the passing of bullion,&c. to Calais, that merchants from the Low Countries, who werethe chief customers of the English staple at Calais, were unableto comply with the regulations in question. The RIayor of thestaple stated at the time, that they had often been obliged todispense with these regulations on their own authority (P. P. C. v.2 16-222 ; cf. Rymer, X. 605). By St. 3 Edw. IV. c. I it wasenacted, that half of the price of all wools sold at Calais should bepaid ,in lawfull money of Englond, Plate or Bullion of Sylver orGold' (Rot. Parl. v. 503 ; cf. ib. 27 j b).The regulations against the exportation of bullion, plate, or coinwere equally stringent. Foreign merchants were required to exportin exchange for the wares which they imported only Englishmerchandise, and not money. Thus the double object was served,as it was thought, of preventing the outflow of the precious metals,and stimulating the market for English goods. Very complicatedregulations were made with a view to effecting these objects, andthe frequency with which they were re-enacted shows that it wasnot found easy to enforce their observance. The earliest statute onthe subject of which the date is certain is 27 Edw. I, Be FalsaMonefa. The follorving are the chief statutes during our presentperiod: St.zHen.1V.c. 5; 4 Hen. IV. cc. 15, 16; 5 Hen.IV. c.9; z Hen.VI.c.6; 8 Hen.VI.c. 24; 27 Hen. V1.c. 3; 17 Edw.IV. c. I ; all of which are founded onepetitions to be found in theParliament Rolls for those years. The French wars, the expenses Drain ofof the English government in France, the ransoming of prisoners; :Hng-&C., caused a great drain of money from England to the Continent land to the(cf. Rot. Parl. iv. 252). In rq19 Parliament empowered thecouncil to take measures to stop this outflow, and ordered thatthe supplies for the army should be forwarded as far as possible inkind and not in money. In this very year jo,ooo marks hadbeen sent to Normandy to the king's treasurer at war at one time(Issues of the' Exchequer, p. 360; cf. ib. 422). In the Parliamentof the following year the scarcity of money was alluded to inthe Chancellor's opening speech (Rot. Parl. iv. I I 8 a, I 23 a ; cf.ib. iii. 658 b). In 1429 commissioners were appointed to enquireinto jewels, money, plate and bullion exported to Picardy withoutlicence, contrary to the statute (P. P. C. iii. 329). In 1455, as wehave seen, a committee was appointed by Parliament to discuss thewhole subject (Rot. Parl. v. 279 b). One great reason given forresisting the papal exactions, provisions, first-fruits, &C., was theway in which they drained the country of money (ib. iii. 490 a,557 a, 621 a; St. 6 Hen. IV. c. I ; 9 Hen. IV. c. 8). The permanentannexation of the alien priories to the Crown was petitioned for onthe same ground (Rot. Parl. iv. 22 ; cf. Rymer, ix. 280). The firstof the three Fifteenth Century Chronicles printed by Mr. Gairdnernotices under the year 3 Edw. IV the prevalence of low pricesand great scarcity of money, but it does not seem to strike thewriter that the two facts were connected (p. 80). Among the Licencesdocuments of the period are numerous licences to export money, ~ o ~ ~ ~plate, &c. These are for persons going abroad on military service,

Controlof the exchanges.Jealousyof foreignmerchants,&c.for prisoners sending for their ransoms, for foreign ambassadorsand papal collectors leaving the country, for English ambassadorsstarting on their missions, &c. For the council of Basle alone licencesamounting to over £33,000 may be found in Rymer, X. 525ff.For the congress of Arras in 1435 licences are found amountingto over £22,000. If the relative value of money be borne inmind it will be seen that these sums are very considerable (cf.ib. 61off. and P. P. C. iv. 302). On the first patent roll of 36Hen. V1 there is a memorandum ' de mediis licitis et honestis perbonam policiam pract~candis concern' aurum et argentum' (Cal.Rot. Pat. p. 298 a). In the same way it was attempted to controland limit the foreign exchanges, especially that to the court ofRome: or, as they were called, the temporal and spiritual exchanges(Rot. Parl. iii. 543 a, 626 b ; St. I I Hen. IV. c. 8. Anearlier statute on the subject is 14 Ric. 11. c. 2 ; cf. Cal. Rot. Pat.p. 266 a. Gascoigne, p. 52, complains of the way in which theforeign exchanges impoverished the realm). The king received2d. on every noble, i.e. 6d. in the pound or 24 per cent. on allmoney sent abroad by way of exchange (Issues of the Exchequer,pp. 41 I, 42 I ; cp. the accounts for the year 1433 printed in the notesto Chapter vi, p. 213, above, where the proceeds of tkiis tax are setdown at £79 13s. 4d.). In the Patent Roll of 18 Hen. V1 wefind the following notice, ' Incorporatio pro cambiatoribus ac aliisoperariis cambiorum London' et Cantuar' ac ampl' libert'.' (Cal.Rot. Pat. p. 282 a).how pe prises off marchaundise growen in this lande,&C.] The endeavour of the foreign merchant was naturally theexact converse, viz. to enhance the price of the goods which heimported, and to beat down the price of English merchandise.There are many bitter complaints in the Rolls of Parliament againstforeign merchants, brokers, &c. On this score the honest Englishmanwas firmly persuaded that he was constantly being cheated bythe knavish foreigner ; or, as the author of the ' Libel of EnglishPolicy ' puts it, foreigners' Wypen our nose with our owne sleve.'(Political Songs, ii. I 76.)Thus, in 1422 and 1433, the commons were petitioned to enactthat no alien might occupy the office of broker, because the foreignbrokers always favoured the foreign merchants, and by means ofthe information which they supplied, enabled the latter to ' enhaunceye prises of her merchandises, yat is to sey, spicerye, wynes, andother, and abaten the prises of owre merchandise, as wolle andclothe, and other' (Rot. Parl. iv. 193 b, 449 b). The petition was. -on both occasions refused by the king. It was however renewedin 1442, when appeal was made to a statute of 50 Edw. I11 (ib. ii.332), which, it was alleged, had been put in execution as recentlyas 9 Hen. V.The king promised to inspect the statute and pro-vide a remedy, but no new statute was enacted (ib. v. 56). Similarcomplaints were made in 1429 against certain inhabitants of Calais,who 'with Merchauntz straungiers of her affinite . . . bryngdowne ye pris of ye commodite of yis Roiaume.' At the sametime it was declared that foreign merchants, by a system of buyingon credit, 'have ful gretely encresed and avaunced her Merchandises,and broght doune to noght ye pris of ye commodite of yisRoiaume,' and very interesting statistics are given to prove thispoint (ib. iv. 360-1 ; St. 8 Hen. VI. cc. 20, 24, founded on thesepetitions; cf. Rot. Parl. iv. 509 a ; v. 334 b). Very elaboratemeasures of supervision for foreign merchants were enacted witha view oi preventing these evils (ib. v. 24 b; St. 18 Hen. VI.c. 4 ; cf I Ric. 111. c. One way of ' abating' the price of im- Prices fixedported merchandise which was sometimes adopted, was to fix the by Statute.price of it by Statute. Thus in 1411, pepper, L q'est le pluis usuelspicerie a tout le Commune de Roialme,' the price of which hadbeen artificially enhanced by the 'grocers and Lombards,' wasordered to be sold at IS. 8d. the pound, and no more (Rot. Parl.iii. 662 a). The statutes compelling the import of bow-staves, andfixing their price, may also be remembered here (above, notes toChap. xii. pp. 282-3). And one way of ' holding up ' the price ofnative products which then, as later, was frequently resorted to, wasto forbid the importation of similar articles. This protective policy Protectionseems to have been pursued with special vigour under Edward IV,and the legislation of the merchant king is mainly occupied withthe regulation of trade and manufactures. Thus the importationof foreign cloth was forbidden (St. 4 Edw. IV. c. I ; Rot. Parl. v.502 b, 563 a). No wrought silk was to be imported, but only theraw material (St. 3 Ed. IV. c. 3 ; Rot. Parl. v. 506 a ; vi. z z 2 b.'This was merely a re-enactment of St. 33 Hen. VI. c. 5,which had expired.Cf. Rot. Parl. v. 325 a). No foreign corn was to be importedexcept when wheat was above 6s. ad., rye above 4s., and barley above3s. the qualter (St. 3 Edw. IV. c. 2 ; Rot. Parl. v. 504 a. When the

price of corn fell below these figures, it might be exported ; ib. iv.500 a ; v. 31 a ; St. I 5 Hen. VI. c. 2). While in St. 3 Edw. 1V. c.4 (cf. Rot. Parl. v. 506 b), there is a long and interesting list ofarticles the importation of which is forbidden. Similarly the ex-portation of unwrought horns was forbidden, lest foreign workersin horn should rival the English, who had an admitted superiority(St. 4 Edw. IV. c. 8; Rot. Parl. v. 567 a). In the tract on 'theComodytes of England,' Fortescue (if it be by him) enumerates asthe chief products of England, wool, cloth, tin, lead, and coalI , ~ ~ (Works, ~ ~ p. - 551). Of these the first was by far the most important,anceofthe and we have seen how in some of the extracts given above it iswool trade. spoken of simply as ' the commodity of England.' Coke (2 Inst. c.25, quoted by Waterhous, p. 382) says : ' Divide our Native Com-modities exported into ten parts, and that which comes from thesheep's back is nine parts in value of the ten.' This importance iswell brought out by Mr. Thorold Rogers in the Preface toGascoigneJs ' Liber Veritatum,' p. xxv : ' It is the only produce whichI have been able to find, in the long range of my enquiries into thehistory of finance, which was, in the middle ages, so absolute anecessity and so absolute a monopoly that an export duty could belevied on it, without diminishing the demand for it in the foreignmarket. Financiers have always desired to find some product onwhich they could levy such a tax as the foreign consumer would beconstrained to pay. Except in the case of English wool, from thethirteenth to the end of the sixteenth century, the search has beenas profitless and as disappointing as that for the philosopher's stoneor the quadrature of the circle. But during the fourteenth andfifteenth centuries, English wool satisfied every condition of thatfinancial problem which is seeking to impose an import duty that isto be paid by the consumer. It was a necessity. There was nosubstitute for it. It could hardly be economised. There was noother source of supply. The hundred years' war \vas carried onout of the taxation of wool, and the tax was paid by those uponwhom war was made.' To the same effect, 'Work and Wages,'P. 79.owre nauy.] On this, cf. the notes to Chap. vi. pp. 231-9, above.how also pe lawes mey be amendet.] On this probouleuticfunction of the council, cf. pp. 305-6, above. In the De Laudibus,c. 35, Fortescue declares that all the laws of England are ' very good,'either actually or potentially, because if they are defective in anyI2oteb. etbap, lb. 321point they can always be reformed in Parliament. Cf. Fortescue,Legal Opinions and Judgments, p. 80.pe clerke off the rolles.] This is the officer whom we now Clerk orcall Master of the Rolls. Clerk of the Rolls was at this time his Master ofmost usual official title ; but the Paston Letters show that the more the Rolls.modern phrase was even then becoming the prevailing one infamiliar language. Out of six places in which this officer is mentioned,he is in one only (i. 393) called ' Clerke of the Rolles: inone instance (iii. 99) the term ' Master off the ~011~s'' is usedabsolutely; in the remaining four he is called ' my Maistr of theRolles' (e.g. i. 430). This last phrase possibly guides us to theorigin of the modern title, the full style probably being that givenby Foss under the reign of Henry V1 (Judges of England, iv. zz~),'my Mayster the Clerke of the Rolls.' The title master is foundalso in formal documents (e.g. P. P. C. v. 126; Rymer, xii. 14 ;Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 322 b). He is also called Keeper (Custos) of theRolls (e.g. P. P. C. vi. 336; Rot. Parl. v. 447 a; Rymer, viii. 181,&C.) Sometimes two of these titles are used in combination. Thuswe find (Rot. Parl. v. 505 b), Maister or Keper of youre Rolles ;'and ' Clerk or Keper of oure Rolles ' (ib. 528 a, 578 a) ;' Clericusef Custos Rotulorum ' (Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 294 a). This officer derivedhis name from the fact that he was charged with the custody andarrangement of the Rolls of Chancery. He is first mentioned inthe reign of Edward I, under the title of ' Custos Rotulorum Cancellariaedomini Regis ;' but the office must have existed previously.He was at first merely one of the senior clerks, or, as they afterwardsbecame, Masters of the Chancery. And even after he hadbecome an independent officer, he was generally appointed fromamong their number. From the time of Edward 111, the office The DOwaspermanently combined with that of 'Custos domus Con- &"-versorum,' an institution founded by Henry 111 for the reception of ve~so~t~7~.converted Jews. The expulsion of the Jews under Edward Ihaving much diminished the need for such an institution, the housewas annexed as a residence to the office of Master of the Rolls;cf. Rot. Parl. v. 447 a : Domus nostra Conversorum, prefatoofficio per progenitores nostros quondam Reges Angliae ab antiquojisposita et annexa.' In Issues of the Exchequer, p. 471, ThomasKyrkeby is called Clerk of the Rolls, and master of the house of:onverted Jews (29 Hen. VI). The grant of the office was some-:imes for life, sometimes during the king's pleasure, sometimesY

during good behaviour. The Master of the Rolls was nearlyalways one of the persons charged with the custody of the GreatSeal, and with the transaction of the business of the Chancery inthe absence of the Chancellor (see, for the history of the office,Foss, u.s. iii. 12 ff., 326ff.; iv. gff., 187, 221, 387f).putt in a boke.] We hear occasionally of the 'Book of theCouncil ;' but it was rather a record of actual proceedings than acollection of rules of procedure, which is what Fortescue seemshere to have in view; though, no doubt, the proceedings of thepast would serve as precedents for the future (cf. P. P. C., 11. xxvi. f. ;V. i-vii ; VII. i-ii ; Rot. Parl. v. 283).CHAPTER XVI.How the Romaynes prospered . . . counsell.]On thewhole of this chapter compare the tract in Appendix A, ' Examplewhat good counseill helpith and avantageth and of the contrare whatfolowith ;' which almost reads like an alternative (earlier) versionof the present chapter.Need of The need and advantage of good counsel is a subject naturallygoodcoUn- sel. much dwelt upon in the opening addresses of the Chancellor toParliament. Thus Henry Beaufort in 1404, taking for his textthe words Mulfifudo Sapienturn, ' molt discretement et clergialmentmonstra et declara, Coment par bone et sage Conseil chescunRoialme serroit de droit governez ' (Rot. Parl. iii. 5zz ; cf. ib.567 a; iv. 3 a, 261). So John Stafford, Archbishop of Canterbury,in a memorandum written about 1443-6, urging the king to summona council, reminded him that 'every reame and lordshippewe1 ruled is goeverned by grete forsighte and goode and sadepolicye and advisinesse of Counsail' (P. P. C. vi. 339). And in theact which committed the government to the Privy Council duringthe second illness of Henry VI, it is stated ' that every Prince mustof verray necessitee have Counsaillers to helpe hym in his charges,to whome he muste trust and leene' (Rot. Parl. v, zgo a). Gower,in his address to Henry IV, says :Abonte a kyng good counseil is to preise,Above alle othre thinges most vailable.'(Political Songs, YL 8.)And the CorngendzLm Morale quotes on this subject Cic. de OEciis,' qui agunt cuncta consilio reguntur sapientia' (f. 55 b). And, aswe have seen, Rehoboam with his young counsellors is a regularcommonplace of all historians and political writers (above, notes toChap. X. p. 269). Vincent of Beauvais (De Morali Inst. Princ.)has a chapter (c. 12) on the choice of counsellors, which is againa favourite theme with these writers. He remarks further (c. 15)that for an unlettered king especially lettered counsellors are necessary.Cp. Commynes, i. 10; ii. 2, 3 ; iii. 5.The Romaynes, while thair counsell, &C.] For Fortescue'sviews on the Roman constitution, cp. N. L. N. i. c. 16. And withspecial reference to the government of the Senate, cf. ib. c. 23 :' Romanorum regnum cccxx. Senatorurn consultu diu regulatuma minimo in maximum mundi crevit imperium.' And this lastpassage shows whence Fortescue derived some of his ideas ofthe greatness of Rome under Senatorial government, viz. fromI Maccabees viii. 1-1 7 ; cp. especially v. 15 : ' Quotidie consulebanttrecentos viginti, consilium agentes semper de multitudine, ut quaedigna sunt gerant.' This passage is quoted by the Pseudo-Aquinas,De Regimine, iv. c. 25. He however, follo~ving St. Augustine,attributes the greatness of Rome to three causes: 'Una sumiturex amore patria:, alia vero ex zelo justitiae, tertia autem ex zelocivilis benevolentia: ' (iii. c. 4).monarchie . . . off all Fe world.] On this, cf. Janet, Hisfoire Imperialistde la Science Polifipue, i. 388 : ' Les doctrines impdrialistes, comme theories ofthe Middleles doctrines theocratiques, reposaient les unes et les autres sur des Ages.fictions et des mensonges historiques. Tandis que les partisans dupouvoir ecclCsiastique invoquaient deux faits complhtement fictifs :la donation de Constantin et la translation de I'empire des Grecsaux Germains, hypothhse fondCe sur le serment d'Othon, . . .les jurisconsultes impiriaux n'dtaient pas de leur cBtC en rested'inventions historiques et juridiques. Aux fictions thdocratiquesils opposaient deux fictions du m&me genre: 10 la perpdtuitdde l'empire romain; 20 la monarchie universelle.' Fortescue,though in some ways a strong papalist (cf. Introduction, Part 111,p. 103, above), shows here that he is a thorough believer in boththese imperialist fictions, which indeed dominated more or lessthe whole of the Middle Ages. The former will be dealt with Universalin a later note; we are concerned here with the theory of a Empi"'universal empire. On this cp. De Laudibus, C. I 4 : ' Lex Civilis,

qua sacrum regulatur imperium, Sufficiens arbitratur ad orbisregimen universi.' N. L. N. i. c. 32 : ' Nobilissima Leges ill=Civiles qua quasi totius mundi curam tamdiu egerunt.' Ib. iic. 53 : In~perator etiam, cui totus olim mundus obtemperaverat'(Works, pp. 95, 171). SO too Pecock, after describing in anascending series the various gradations of authority, concludes,L til we come vnto oon highest emperour, bi whos hijest oon heedschal reste and pees be mad thoruj alle peple ' (Repressor, p. 449).These views had of course their most glorious votary in Dante.They appear in all his works, but he reduced them to system inthe De Monarchia. They came out strongly in the controversiesbetween Lewis of Bavaria and the Popes, but that contest had littleinfluence on England (S. C. H. iii. 293).Octavian . . . commounded all pe world to be discribed,&C.] Luke ii. I : 'Exiit edictum a Cesare Augusto ut describereturuniversus orbis.' Cp. the account of Domesday given byFlorence of Worcester : ' Willelmus rex fecit describi omnem Angliam.'Higden represents Octavian as the national hero of theRomans (Polychr. v. 336). In a poem addressed to Henry V1 onhis coronation the poet wishes (somewhat inconsistently) that hemay haveConquest, victorye, with Cesar Julius,'and yet be*Peace preferryng as Octovyan'(Political Songs, ii. 43.)It may be remarked that both of Julius and Augustus the MiddleAges created extremely ideal characters very wide of the historicalFictitious reality. Nothing in fact is more curious than the way in which theMiddle Ages, out of the fragments of historical knowledge whichcreated bytheMiddle came down to them, fantastically re-constructed the fabric of the*ges.past, so that in reading the medizeval version of earlier history weseem to be moving in a wholly unreal world. The Alexander,Julius, Augustus, Virgil, and Charles the Great of medizeval literatureare as different from the historical realities as can well beimagined. But it is not easy for us to appreciate the enormousdifficulties in the way of acquiring a correct knowledge of the pastwhich then existed. (On this cf. Riezler, Die literarischen Widersacherder Papste, $ g). One of the first persons to study historyin a really critical spirit was our own Pecock. His disproof of theDonation of Cohstantine (Repressor, pp. 352-366) is a veryabap, rbi,notable piece of work, and worthy to rank with Valla's famoustract on the same subject.but aftir this . . . the estate off pe Romau . . . be Causes ofganne to fall doune, &C.] n his opening speech to the ~ " f ' ~ ~ 'Parliament of 1402, Bishop Stafford, the Chancellor, gave adifferent theory of the decline of the Roman power. 'Et monstraoutre mesme le Chanceller, coment pur importune etinsaciable Covetise et Averice des Communes, et auxint desautres grandz, la Cite de Rome feust destrute' (Rot. Parl. iii.485 a). Much the same theory is put forward as a warningto England by the author of the satirical verses on BishopBoothe :-'These were the same that Rome overthrewe;JVittenes of writing alle this is trewe.'(Political Songs, ii. 227.)In the earlier form into which Fortescue cast his thoughts onthese subjects, he speaks of the civil wars of Rome, and comparesthem to those which had desolated England, tracing both to theinfluence of ' private counselloures ' (App. A). But perhaps sucha reference was avoided as ill-omencd after Fortescue's reconciliationwith Edmard IV. Aquinas also speaks of the civil wars ofthe Romans ; De Xghine, i. c. 4. And Agidius (111. ii. 15)attributes their origin to the cessation of external wars. See thepassage quoted in Introduction, Part I, above, p. 7, note.nowe the lordeshippes off pe emperour, &C.] We seehere Fortescue's unquestioning belief in the unbroken continuityof the Roman Empire, on which see Professor Bryce's admirableEssay on the Holy Roman Empire. The Emperor at this timewas Frederick 111, who was in truth a very sorry representativeof the great Julius.be wich ensample, &C.] This is very pretty logic. But awriter who has a theory to maintain cannot afford to be hamperedby such considerations as the possibility of a plurality of causes.to subdue . . . all . . . that he shall liste to reygneuppon.] Cp. Cade's Proclamation: ' Thes defawtes thus dewlyreinedyd . . . olvr sovereyn lord . . . shall have so gret love ofhis people that he shall . . . conqwere where he wyll' (ThreeChron. pp. 98-9). In the 'Declaration upon Certayn Wrytinges'which was written between 1471 and 1473, and by which Fortescueearned the reversal of his attainder in the latter year, he

Cbe Qiobernance of QEngIand,says: ' 0 howe good lorde is Godde to the Kynge oure Soueraynelorde that now hathe yeven him thies bothe titles wherethorow hissubgettes may fight for hym in his title for his roialme of Fraunce\+ith oute any doute or scrople of counscience ;' a passage whichFrenchex- seeins clearly to have been penned with a view to Edward IV'sof proposed expedition to France, which seems to have been broachedIv to Parliament in 1472 (Rot. Parl. vi. 4 a) but did not take placetill 1475, though it had been planned in 1468, before Edward'sexpulsion from England (ib. v. 622-3), and was expected in Franceboth in 1466 and in 1470 (Commynes, ed. Lenglet Dufresnoy,ii. 57, 83). It is possible that the passage under consideration hasa similar reference. If so, it forms an additional proof thatthis chapter in its present form was written after the restorationof Edward IV.and in especial1 pe cronycles, &C.] I have not yet discoveredfrom \$hat source Fortescue derived his knowledge of thepast history and then condition of Athens and Sparta.CHAPTER XVII.ON the whole of this chapter see App. B. §S 4 and 6.offices In iYitl1 regard to offices in the gift of the Crown and of the greatthe gift ofC'row1,. officers of the Cronn, the commons in 1406 successfully insistedthat they should henceforth be granted not for term of life or years,but only at the king's pleasure (Rot. Parl. iii. 587, 589 a). Thispolicy, if it was ever carried out, seems to have been formallyreversed by the council on the accession of Henry VI, for we findan Order in Council of Jan. 28, I 423, that all persons nho hadgrants of offices from the late king during good behaviour were tohave those grants confirmed to them as for term of life (' acsihabuissent statum ad terminum vitze in officiis predictis '); unlessthey were notoriously inefficient and undeserving (P. P. C. iii. 23).Henry 1V Henry IV seems to have concentrated the great offices as much asconcell- possible in the hands of his 011-11 family, partly perhaps because hetrates thegreat could rely better on the fidelity of those whose fortunes wereothces 111necessn~ily bound up nith his own; partly perhaps because theyfamily. could be kept waiting for their salaries with less danger thanother great nobles, such as the Percies; for \ire know that im-pecuniousness was the chief ' note' of the first Lancastrian reign(cf. Introduction, Part I, pp. 5-6, above). Thus Henry, Prince ofWales, besides his special employment in the field and in thecouncil, as lieutenant of the king in Wales, &C., was Warden ofthe Cinque Ports and Constable of Dover Castle, and Captain ofCalais in succession to his uncle Somerset (Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 254 b;Rpmer, viii. 629 ; cf. P. P. C. ii. 4). Thomas, the king's secondson, was Steward or Seneschal of England, Lieutenant of Irelandand of Aquitaine, and Captain of Guisnes (Cal. Rot. Pat.pp. 243 b, 246 b; Rymer, viii. 758 ; P. P. C. i. 340). John, the thirdson, was Constable of England, Warden of the East March, andKeeper of the King's Falcons (Cal. Rot. Pat. pp. 247 a, 250 a,245 b). Humphrey, the fourth son, does not seem to haveheld any office, he was probably too young. Somerset, theking's half-brother, was Chamberlain of England and Captainof Calais (ib. 237 a, 239 a ; P. P. C. ii. 4); while ThomasBeaufort, another half-brother, was Admiral of the North andWest, of Ireland, Aquitaine, and Picardy, and, for a time, Chancellor(Cal. Rot. Pat. pp. 255 b, 256 b). During the minority Modeof Henry V1 it was agreed that all foresters, parkers, and warrenersshould be appointed by the Protector, who was also to ing Henrypresent to all livings in the gift of the Crown the annual value of z:bl;,m'-which was between 20 and 30 marks, and to all prebends in theroyal chapels except the deaneries; these last and the beneficesabove 30 marks, and all other offices, were to be given by theProtector and council (Roi. Parl. iv. 175. The king resumed thepower of appointing to benefices and offices in Nov. 1437 ; ib. v.439). Exactly the same regulations were made for the two protectorshipsof York in 1454 and 1455 (ib. v. 243 b, 289 a).Just as the places at the council board were almost exclusively Monopolyoccupied by the great lords, so almost all the great offices g i~f''were monopolized by them. The aristocratic principle of ap- great lords.pointing to offices is expressly laid down in the Proceedingsof the Privy Council for 1436 : ' To advertise pe K' pat heyeve offices to suche persones as poffices were convenient to,not to hieghe. estat a smal office, neper to lowe estat a greteoffice' (v. 3). As illustrations of the way in which offices wereaccumulated by great personages I will give two instances :Gloucester under Henry VI, and Warwick under Edward IV.Gloucester was Chamberlain of England, Constable of Gloucester Gloucester.

Castle, Justice of Chester and of North and South Wales, Constableof Dover Castle and Warden of the Cinque Ports, Justice,Chamberlain, and Custos of all Forests South of Trent, Captain ofGuisnes, and Captain of Calais (Cal. Rot. Pat. pp. 269 a, b, 283 a;P. P. C. iii. 69, 77, 267 ; v. 138; vi. 25; Rot. Parl. iv. 174, 483 a).Warwick. Warwick under Edward IV was Steward or Seneschal of England,Great Chamberlain of England, Constable of Dover Castle andWarden of the Cinque Ports; Custos, Justiciar, and Justice in Eyreof all Forests South of Trent; Warden of the East and WestMarches, Chief Justice of South Wales, Constable of CardiganCastle, and Steward of the Courts of Cardigan and Carmarthen ;Admiral, Captain of Calais, and Lieutenant of Ireland ; Seneschalof the Manor, Master Forester, and Keeper of the Park of Ffekenham;blaster of the King's Mutes and Falcons, with the Manorcalled the 'Mewehouse' near Charing (Cal. Rot. Pat. pp. 300 a,312 a; Hearne's Fragment, pp. 299 f.; Rymer, xi. 475, 488, 641,647 ; Rymer's MS. Collectanea, Edw. IV, Vol. I. Nos. 15, 16).These lists are probably incomplete. But at least they aresufficient to show what an immense reduction in the power ofthe great lords ~vould have been effected if the rule whichFortescue lays down at the end of this chapter had been adopted :'pat no man haue mo offices then on.' On the way in whichgreat men engrossed offices in order to distribute them to theirfollowers, see a later note, pp. 334-7. On the offices connected withthe administration of Calais, see notes to Chap. vi. p. 229, above.ther shall be lityll nede to gyff hem moch off his livelod.]Cf. Chap. v. above. A list of the offices which the king inEdward III's time had at his disposal for rewarding his householdservants is given in the Liber Nzker (Ordinances, &c. p. 19) :' This king appoynted of offices outward to rewarde his householdservices after theyre desertes to be parkers, some foresters,waryners, kepers of manors, baylywicks, constableshippes, portershippes,receivours, corrodyes, wardes, marriages, and manyother thinges of value, in portes and townes, citees, &c. and forhis chapelmen, chyrches, prebendes, free chapelles, and pensions,&c. when any suche fell in his gifte, or elles by his lettres ofcontemplation, to gette suche benyfece of any other lord for hishousehold-man.'when he liste to call thaym.] For writs summoning theking's ' fee'd men ' cf. Rymer, ix. 355 : ' Rex vicecomitibus, &c.Qap.rbii,. . . Przcipimus vobis . . . quad omnes et singuli milites, armigeri,et valetti, qui aliqua feoda sive annuitates de Nobis . . .habent . . . sub forisfactura eorumdem, sint . . . apud Villamnostram Suthamptoniz,' &C.: cf. ib. 216 ; Camden, Misc. i. Rebellionin Lincolnshire, p. 25 ; Paston Letters, i. 157 ; ii. 145, 406 :' The Kynge hathe sent for hys ffeeodmen to koom to hym.'Some fforester off pe kynges, BC.] On the appointment of Militaryforesters, parkers, and warreners, see above, p. 327. On the military f?rce furn~shedbypower which, as Fortescue remarks, the royal forests were capable of the royalfurnishing, compare an interesting passage from Mr. Brewer's Henry forests.V111 : ' The king had at his own immediate disposal the stewardshipsof forests, manors, chaces, castles, fisheries, and mines; thecollectorships of customs in various ports. . . . The forests andchaces maintained a numerous and hardy race of men, trained toarms, and ready for the king's service at any time he should deem ' .fit to employ them. They formed a standing army without itsobnoxious features. . . . No minister dispenses or even shares thepatronage of the crown; he may recommend, but evidently thatrecommendation is confined within the narrow circle of those whoare already known to the sovereign. . . . All this has changed theKing's position, and vastly augmented his power ' (i. 70-2). i. e.in Henry the VIII's time the system which Fortescue wished to Appoint-see established of direct appointment to all offices by the Crown ~ ~ , " ~ ~ ohad become a reality. Mr. Brewer's words also illustrate the officesremark of Fortescue a little lower down : ' the liynge givyth mo than g:,:yM* offices.' We hear of 'a ridership within the Forest of Delamare VIII.. . . with iii. d. by day for wagez' (Rot. Parl, v. 192 a), and of a' raungership within oure Forest of Westbere . . . with the wages ofii.d. by the day' (ib. 594 b) ; and of ' iiii. d. by day, for . . . fees andaages of exercising th' office of keper of oure Forest or Chace of.Boryngwode ' (ib. vi. 94 a).some knyght or squyer, &C.] In the Lder Arker the incomeof a knight is set down at £200, that of an esquire (armiger) at £50per annum (Ordinances, &c. pp. 34,46). And on the knights andsquires of England as a class, cf. S. C. H. iii. 544-9.Stewardes off gret lordeshippes.] For a list of some of the Stewards'gret lordeshippes' in the hands of the Crown, see S. C. H. iii. 512. ~ ~ ~We find a steward and receiver-general of the Duchy of Cornwall(P. P. C. iii. 24) ; a steward of the liberty of Ulster in Ireland (ib.229), &c. In 1402 an ordinance was made tbat 'no Welshman

should be Justice, Chamberlain, Chancellor, Steward, Receiver,Master Forester, Sheriff, Escheator, Constable of a Castle or Keeperof the Rolls or Records in Wales' (Rymer, viii. 184 ; cf. P. P. C. i.149). See also next note but one. It was a dispute about thestewardship of the Duchy of Cornwall which caused the private warbetween the Earl of Devonshire and Sir William Bonville (P. P. C.v. 165, 173-5).Receivers. ~eseyvors.1 Receptor Cornubis ' (P. P. C. ii. a91) ; ' Receptor- generalis - ducatus Lancastrie ' (ib. iii. 51) ; Receiver of theHonour of Tutbury ' (ib. ii. I 71). The receivers seem to havedischarged in these great lordships much the same financial functionsthat the sheriffs did in the counties, collecting the revenuesdue to the Crown, and paying the various sums with which thoserevenues were charged (cf. ib. i. 277-8). See also last note. Inthe case of Wales and Chester the corresponding officers seem tohave been the Chamberlains (cf. Ordinances, &c. p. 3 I * ; P. P. C.iv. 199 f).Constables Constables of Castels.] These were of course very numerous.Of Cast'es' We have seen how Gloucester and Warwick in turn were Constablesof Dover Castle. In one page of the Proceedings of the PrivyCouncil (i. 2 I I) we have five constables of castles mentioned. Foran interesting entry with reference to the constableship and stewardshipof the castle and lordship of Chirk, see notes to Chap. X.p. 274, above. Under Nov. 21, 1436, we read :.'Md pat Conestablesin Wales goo hom to peire offices' (ib. v. 3). See also lastnote but one.maystir fforesters.] See the last note but two. We hear ofa chief forester of Snowdon (P. P. C. ii. 65). On the position of theniaster forester under the Norman kings, see S. C. H. i. 403.Justices off fforestes.] We have seen this office held by menlike Gloucester and Warwick. (See first note of this Chapter.)Justices and Chambirlayns off Contries.] We find Chamberlainsof North Wales, South Wales, and Chester appointed(P. P. C. iii. 4, et szepe); and we have seen that Gloucester wasJustices Justice of all those three 'countries.' Strictly however these offices::;,"P$- would come under the head of ' tho pat my lorde pe prince geuyth.'\Vales and Cf. ib. ii. 65, where we have a table of 'the wages and fees of theChester.Justice, Chamberlain, Constables and other ministers of the Princewithin the parts of North Wales.' In Nov. 1436, after the memorandumquoted above that all the Constables in Wales were to gohome to their offices comes the following note :' The Chambreleinsto be at hom' (ib. v. 3). See last note but three.pe warden off pe portes.] i. e. the Cinque Ports. The Cinque Warden ofPorts held their liberties by furnishing a certain number of ships to 'p":rpqnethe King's service, and the Warden of the Ports was responsible forseeing that these ships were forthcoming when required ; and tohim the writs were addressed which summoned the Cinque Ports todischarge their obligations (e.g. Rymer, ix. 339, 384 ; cf. S. C. H.i. 593 ; ii. 289). The constableship of Dover Castle seems alwaysto have gone along with this office, as it still does. In 29 Hen. V1these offices were granted to Humphrey Duke of Buckingham, andhis heirs male (Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 294 b).be sydes tho pat my lorde pe prince geuyth.] i.e. as Offices inPrince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall, and Earl of Chester.We ikzhave already made acquaintance with some of these officers, suchas the Justices and the Chamberlains of North and South Wales,Chester, etc. And I have already alluded to the list of the officersof the Prince for North Wales contained in P. P. C. ii. 65. Thelist comprises Justice, Chamberlain, Sheriffs, Escheators, Constables,Sergeant, etc. We hear also of the Exchequer of Carnarvon,and of that of Chester (P. P. C. iii. 199; iv. 50). It is to be noted Thethat during the whole of Richard 11% reign, almost the whole ofHenry V's, two-thirds of Henry VI's, and half of Edward IV's in thereign there was no heir apparent to the Crown, so that these lord- hands ofthe Crown.ships were de jure in the hands of the Icing, while during theremainder of Henry V's, Henry VI's, and Edward IV's reigns,they must have been practically in his hands, owing to the youthof the prince; so that Fortescue is justified in 'reckoning' theprince's 'officers as the king's officers.' Accordingly we find in1425 a petition to the King for the grant of an advowson, 'q'estde vostre Patronage come de vostre Principalte de Gales' (Rot.Parl. iv. 31 I b). And so the Commons under Robin of Redesdale,in their manifesto of 1469, reckon the revenues of Wales, Cornwall,and Chester among those which Edward IV had enjoyed andwasted (Warkworth, p. 48; cf. the accounts for the year 1433quoted in the notes to Chap. vi. above, p. 213, and Issues of theExchequer, pp. 402, 427). Thus the only reign of our periodduring which these lordships were really governed by the princewas that of Henry IV. We find Prince Henry appointing to theoffice of ' raglore ' (=Welsh rhaglam, i. e. deputy or lieutenant) in

the ' Commotes of Generglyn and Hannynyolr ' (Rymer, viii, 547).But apparently the appointment required the confirmation of theCrown, for the document is endorsed 'fiat inde Warrantum proSpecialar- Confirmatione Regis.' With reference to the minority of PrincerangementsEdward of Lancaster special provisions were made in the ParliaforEdward of ment of 1455. The Prince and his attendants were to be 'atLancaster. diettez' in the Icing's househord till he was fourteen years of age,the Icing receiving the net revenues of the Principality, Duchy, andCounty, and paying to the Prince a fixed allowance. The balanceremaining in the Icing's hands was to be applied to the expensesof the royal household (Rot. Parl. v. 293). In an order 'for theCreation of a Prince ' (temp. Hen. VII, Ordinances, etc. p. I 28) itis said: 'first the King to putt on the sworde . . . because hee isDuke of Cornewall as soone as hee is borne; and then the King tosett the cappe with the coronell on his head, etc. . . . Because hee isDuke without creation the sword is first sett on him; the imposi-tion of the cappe of estate and coronell is for the creation of thePrince.' This distinction holds good as far as I have observed.Difference The heir apparent is always creafed Prince of Wales and Earl ofbetweenthe Chester; he is coilsidered as being Duke of Cornwall from hisand the birth (cf. e.g. Rot. Parl. v. 293 a). The only exception is in theEarldom.case of Henry, the eldest son of Henry IV, who, not having beenborn in the purple, was created Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall,and Earl of Chester in the same Parliament in which his iather wasacknowledged King (ib. iii. 426 ; cf. ib. 667 f., from which jtappears that the Duchy of Cornwall had estates in twenty-threecounties, besides the city of London). Henry V1 seems never tohave been created Prince of Wales during the nine months thathis father survived his birth ; perhaps because no Parliament wassummoned after that event, though one was sitting at the time thathe was born. Prince Edward of Lancaster. who was born October13, 1453, was created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester in theParliament of I 454 during the first incapacity of his father, and thiswas confirmed formally in the Parliament of 1455, during thesecond incapacity of Henry V1 (Rot. Parl. v. 249, 290 ff., 356 ff. ;These cf. Cal. Rot. Pat. p. 296 h). On the agreement with the Duke ofappanagestransferred York in 1460, Wales, Chester, and Cornwall were transferred toto the him as being now the recognised heir apparent (Rot. Parl, v. 380).Duke ofYork.The creation of Edward IV's son as Prince of Wales and Earl ofChester is in Rot. Parl. vi. 9 ff. The right of the heir apparent to'the Duchy of Cornwall rested on the grant made by Edward I11 inParliament in the eleventh year of his reign (cited Rot. Parl. iii.526 ; Rymer, viii. 148) ; his right to the County Palatine of Chesterrested on St. 21 Ric. 11. c. g). In 1404 the Commons prayed thatall alienations made from the Duchy might be revoked (Rot. Parl.iii. 526). The Prince had a council to assist him in his govern- Council ofment. In 1401, with reference to a petition of the Commons theprince.relating to Wales, the King promised ' qu'il voet charger son Conseil,ensemblement ove le Conseil Monsieur le Prince pur l'interessequ'il ad celle partie,' to attend to the matter (ib. 457 a). This wasespecially necessary when the Prince was of tender age. In 1457Henry V1 appointed a council of eleven persons for his son (Rymer,xi. 385). So Edward IV appointed a council for his son, of whichthe Bishop of Rochester was president, while Earl Rivers was governourof the Prince's household (Cal. Rot. Pat. pp. 316a, 3 I 7, 3 I 8a).The rules for the government of the Prince's household, addressedto these two lords, are in Ordinances, etc. pp. 2 f*-3 I *. For theearly history of the County Palatine of Chester, v. S. C. H. i. 363-4 ;ii. 46-7. And on the administrative confusion which these ' imperiain imperio' caused at a later time, cf. Burke, On the EconomicalReform.some mey dispende.] 2: e. some have an income; cf. sup.,Chap. X. p. 264.a parker takynge but ijd. on a day.] In Rot. Parl. v. Parkers.536 b is mentioned 'the Parkership . . . of oure Parke ofHadlegh (Essex) . . . with the fee and wages therto belongyng:That is to say, iii.d. by the day.' Parkerships were sometimeshowever held by the great lords: thus in 1459 the king grantsto Edmund Bolton the parkership of Raskell (Yorks.) recentlyforfeited by Richard, Earl of Salisbury (Rymer, xi. 437); parkershipsin North Wales are granted to Owen Tudor (ib. 439). Inboth cases the offices are to be exercised by the grantees or asufficient deputy. Sir Philip Courtenay was surveyor of parks inCornwall, and Lord Cromlr-ell was surveyor of Lyfeld Forest(Rutland), with a 'looge' (lodge) there for himself or his deputy(P. P. C. iv. 284 ; v. 1~3). This illustrates what Fortescue saysat the end of this Chapter, that 'suche men as serue pe kyngabouute his person or in his counsel1 mowe haue in per contray aparkershippe for per disporte when thay come whom, (home,) orsuch an oper office as thai mey wele kepe by per deputes.' The

Offices per- system of executing offices by deputy was in the middle agesformed bydeputy. carried to an extent very prejudicial to the public service, andwas to a great extent the result of that pernicious accumulationof offices in a few hands, which has been already animadvertedAttempts upon. Some attempts to check this evil were made during ourperiod. In the first Parliament of Henry IV, the Commons comtern.plained that the king lost ~o,ooo marks yearly through the nonresidenceof the collectors and controllers of customs at the ports,who discharged their offices by insufficient deputies, and a statutewas made obliging them to reside under a penalty of £100(Rot. Parl. iii. 439 b; St. I Hen. IV. c. 13). But fresh complaintswere made in 1402, and a fresh statute was enacted on the subject(Rot. Parl. iii. 506 b ; St. 4 Hen. IV. c. 20). So in 1406 it wasordered that these officers should occupy their offices in personc sans depute ou substitut faire' (Rot. Parl. iii. 587 a). Thesestatutes were, on petition, confirmed in 141 I (ib. 665 a ; St. 13Hen. IV. c. 5). In 1433 the treasurer was ordered to appoint noone to these offices except such as were willing to reside personally(P. P. C. iv. 175).iij.L x.d.1 The first edition has 'XI. S. x.d.,' which is anobvious misprint for 'lx, S, x.d.' the reading of D2, the MS. anwhich the first edition was based. Lord Clermont not only tranquillyfollows suit, regardless of arithmetic, but prints in full 'fortyshillings and tenpence.' Three hundred and sixty-five days attwo-pence per diem are exactly ' 1x.s. x.d.,' or ' iij. t x.d.'a c.s. off fee or rente wich is s feyre lyuynge ffor ayomm.] On the yeoman class in England during the middleages, see S. C. H. iii. 551-8.nor ij the gretteste lordes, &C.] This is for Fortescue a greatpoint gained towards establishing the security and independence ofthe Crown, at a time when the government of the day was soliable to be overborne by a combination of a few of the greatervassals in arms. Compare the requirement laid down in Chap.ix. above, on ' the perellis that mey come to the kyng by ouermyghtye subgettes,' that the kyng should have for his extraordinarycharges revenues 'gretter than the livelod off thegrettest lorde in Englande' (or ' ij the grettest lordes' accordingto MS. D2); cf. also Chap. X. p. 133, above.To this sane suche lordes, &C.] The ad~ice whichFortescue gives in this Chapter, that all offices in the gift ofaotes.CCbap, xbii.the Crown should be given directly by the Crown, would havehighly commended itself to George 111. Cp. the reply of Buteto Anson, What, my Lord, the King's Admiralty boroughs full,and the King not acquainted with it !' (cited in Mahon's England,iv. 215). But it is one thing to resist the distribution of offices byunauthorized persons, which is what Fortescue recommends, andanother to impede their distribution through established constitutionalchannels, which is what George 111 attempted. Even in offices Inthe fifteenth century however there were certain offices, the ap- E:,$''pointment to which was either by custom or statute vested in ministers.the hands of certain ministers. Thus the revenue officers were bySt. 17 Ric. 11. c. 5, I Hen. IV. c. 13, appointed by the treasurerwith advice of the council, and then as now, the chancellorpresented to certain of the crown livings (cf. Rot. Parl. iii. 587 a;P. P. C. iii. 16; iv. 175). Offices and benefices of less than f f;per ann. or zd. per diem within the Duchy of Lancaster were inthe gift of the Chancellor of the Duchy (ib. 105). Certain oficesagain were in the gift of the Marshal of England (Rymer, viii."5). But all these offices, whether given immediately by theCrown, or mediately through the intervention of some greatofficial, were made the subject of that ignoble traffic whichFortescue here describes. The object of the great men was, as Royalhe says, to engross all the offices in their districts which were ::g:$in the gift of the Crown, and to intimidate those who received by theany office direct from the king, so that they might be the only lords.agents or, as Fortescue terms it, 'brokers ' of royal patronage intheir districts, and so to make the offices of the Crown subservientto their own local influence, by distributing them totheir ourn adherents, or to persons who could in those officesadvance their interests. It was one of the charges againstSuffolk in 1450 that he had made his own partizans sheriffs, so' that they that wold not be of his affinite in their contreys were oversette,and every mater true or fals that he favoured was furtheredand spedde' (Rot. Parl. v. 181 b; cf. Warkworth, pp. 47-8). Andthus, as Fortescue complains, the patronage of the Crown was usedto undermine the influence of the Crown, and increase that of itsmost dangerous rivals. And just as the great'lords acted asbrokers of royal patronage, so lesser men in turn acted as brokersof the favours of the great lords, and so on ad infinitum. ThusJohn Russe, hearing that Lord Worcester was likely to be treasurer,

336 Ebe bobernance of QEnglanD*' with whom I truste ye stonde right we1 in conseit,' writes tosuggest that John Paston should ' desyre the nomynacion . .. .eythyr of the countroller or serchorship of Jernemuth (Yarmouth),for a servant of yowrez ' (i.e. himself), ' and yeerly as longe as Imyght have the officez . . . I shal geve my maister youre sonev. marke toward an haukeney.' In another letter he runs downhis competitor as 'an evyl disposyd man alwey ayens you,' but his'supporters is Blakeney, clerk of the sygnet, and Avery Cornburght,yoman of the kynges chaumbre ' (Paston Letters, ii. 96-7,107). During the restoration of Henry VI, John Paston theyounger writes to his mother, 'I tryst we shall be sped of . . .ofyseys metly for us, for my mastyr the Erle of Oxynforthe bydethOfficesdis- me axe and have' (ib. 412). There is a curious passage in theposed OfLz'bey N&Y where the author enumerates the means which Dukesby greatlords.and Marquesses have of rewarding their servants (Ordinances,&C., p. 27) : ' These lordes rewarde theire knyghts, chapeleyns,esquiers, yomen, and other of theyre servaunts, after theyre deserts.Some of his chapleyns with officyalshippes, deaneries, prebendes,freechapels, parsonages, pensions, or suche other; and for theseculer men, stewardshippes, receivours, counstables, portershippes,baylywikes, wardenshippes. forresters, raungers, verders,vergers, shreves, eschetours, corouners, custumers, countrollers,serchers, surveyours, beryngs of yeres-gifts, wards, marriages,corrodies, parkers, and warenners. And this causeth lordes torule at neede.' Some of these offices are no doubt offices onthe lord's own estates or in his gift, but it is plain that manyof them are crown offices, and merely given by the lord's influence.If the charges against Somerset contain any truth,great lords were sometimes not above jobbing for money theposts which they had to dispose of (Paston Letters, I. lxxvii).A similar charge had been made against Cardinal Beaufort byGloucester in 1440 (English in France, ii. 450), and against Suf-Attempts folk in 1450 (Rot. Parl. v. 180 a). Various attempts were made:,"$ to check this evil. In 1386 a commission was issued to enquireinto ' officers et ministres faitz par brogage et de leur brogours '(P. P. C. i. 5): In the first Parliament of Henry IV the Com-mons complained that 'Justices de Pees . . . sont faitz parbrocage ' (Rot. Parl., iii. 444 a). In the rules laid down forthe guidance of the council in 1406 it was ordered that officesshould be filled up in accordance with the statutes, 'et nemypar mediation et instance a part ' (ib. 586 a).In 1410 the Commonsdeclared that the decrease in the amount of the customs waslargely due to the fact, that the revenue officers ' sovent ont estefaitz par brocage' (ib. 625 b). And SO in this way ' brokage ' Brokage.came to be simply a euphemism for corrupt influence or bribery,as when it is ordered that no great officer or other person aboutthe king is to be 'si hardy de prendre de nully des liges nostresieur le Roy Brogage, Presantes, ne Dounes quelconques' (ib.433 b ; cf. ib. 537 a, 626 b ' doune ou brocage,' 637 a ; iv. I I a,23 a, etc.).Nemo potest, &C.] Matth. vi. 24.but he be ffirst sworne, &C.] See notes to Chap. xv. pp.299, 310, above, for the similar oath to be taken by councillors andjudges. So Henry V confirms the grant of an annuity made byhis father to Nicholas Merbury, on condition that he is not tobe retained in the service of any one except the king (Rymer,ix. 25-6). Henry V1 grants certain manors to John, baslardof Clarence, on a like condition (ib. X. 406). The Duke of York,as Protector, was empowered by the council 'to geve the king'sliverey of colers to iiijxx gentillmen after his discretion, they andeverich of thaim to be sworn to be afeed with no man but withthe king withoute his special1 licence' (P. P. C. vi. 209). Cp.Henry VIII's saying, ' that he would none of his seruauntes shouldhang on another manne3 sleue' (Hall, p. 599; cited by Brewer,Henry VIII, i. 344).CHAPTER XVIII.corodie nor pencion, &C.] Corrodium = conredium ; Colrodies.originally the right of free quarters due from the vassal to the lordon his circuit; but later applied especially to certain contributionsof food, provisions, etc., paid annually by religious houses, either ofright, as here, to persons nominated by the representative of theoriginal founder ; or out of policy, to conciliate great men andtheir followers; or as a matter of bargain and sale. Sometimesthe contribution might be commuted, and then it would be practicallyundistinguishable from an annuity or pension; and corrodyand pension are accordingly sometimes used as convertible terms

Defined by (e.g. Rot. Parl. v. 2 73 a). Fortescue himself gives a definition ofcorrody in the stricter sense in his legal judgments : L Si un ad uncorody deins un Meason de Religion, scavoir, d'aver certeinesmesses de chair, pain, servois, fuel, chambre, et un estable pur seschevals7 (p. 36). This definition agrees well enough with thedescription of an actual corrody confirmed by the Abbey of St.Alban's in 1468 : 'quoddam corrodium panis, cervisie, carnium,piscium, et hujusmodi, cum quadam mansione et gardino, cum suisIn the gift pertinentiis ' (Whethamstede, ii. 80 ;' cf. S. C. H. iii. 531). Thethe right of the Crown to appoint to corrodies and pensions in religiousCrown.houses which were royal foundations, probably rested on specialcustoms in each particular case. Thus at Cropland, on the installationof a new abbot, one of the king's clerks had to be providedwith a corrody of 40s. per ann.: ' donec sibi de beneficio competentialias poterit provideri ' (Cont. Croyl. p. 513). A similar ruleexisted at St. Alban's, though the value of the pension is not statedGiven to (Whethamstede, ii. 340). AS far as I have observed, these corrodiesthe King'sand pensions Mere generally given, as Fortescue recommends, toservants and officers of the Crown. Thus a pension out of Selby(Yorks.) is granted to a clerk of the Exchequer, one out of Southwick(Hants) to a clerk in the Privy Seal Office, and a corrody inMalmesbury to a yeomanof the cellar (P. P. C. iii. 25, 152 ; iv. 67).The reversion of an annuity of fifty marks from St. Augustine's,Canterbury, is granted to the king's physician (Rymer, xi. 416. Itappears from this document, that the annuity in question was acommutation for the sum originally payable by the convent on eachvacancy in the Abbacy). Several corrodies are mentioned in Rot.Parl. v. 473 b. The holders, where their condition is given, areecclesiastical members of the royal household, one being 'JohnICxemption Plummer, Clerk of oure honorable Chapell.' Exemption from thefrom pay- payment of corrodies, pensions, etc., was sometimes granted toment ofcorrodies. religious houses as a favour: e.g. to Eton; to the hospital of 'St.Thomas the hlartir of Acres,' originally founded by Agnes, thesister of St. Thomas, and her husband, on land that formerlybelonged to Gilbert Bekkettis,' the father of St. Thomas ; and inthe same way the Abbey of Bermondsey was exempted from ' anyCorrodie or Sustentation, to be graunted at the prayour, desire,denomination or writyng of the kyng, or of any of his heireskynges of Englond hereafter' (~ek~nto?s Correspondence, ii. 284 ;Rot. Parl. v. 74 f ; vi. I 24 b). These exemptions were among thegrants, the resumption of which was demanded by the Commonsin 1450 and 1455 (ib. v. 184 a, 301 b). Edmard IV, in 1461,refused to annul the grants of corrodies which had been made onthe recommendation of the Lancastrian kings (ib. 492 a). Religious Exemphousesthat were not royal foundations owed similar dues to the :$;'';b,;,-representatives of their founders; and it is a subject of repeated der falsecomplaint in Parliament that such houses, by representing them- pretences.selves falsely as royal foundations, obtained letters of protection,whereby they evaded payment of the annuities, pensions, andcorrodies which they owed to various persons, and for which insome cases they had received payment (ib. iii. 469 b, 520 a ;ir. 104 a). The sale of corrodies is further illustrated by theaccounts of St. Alban's. In two instances the accountant manifestsgreat glee, because estates were made over to the monastery inreturn for grants of corrodies, and then the grantees only survivedthe transaction tlvo or three y-ars (Amundesham, ii. 265).Sometimes the revenues of a monastery were so dilapidated bythese grants that they had to apply to the king in Parliament forrelief (Rot. Parl. v. 206). One of the points which the Abbot ofSt. Alban's inquired into in visiting the cells of the monastery in1425-6, was whether there had been any sale of corrodies, oralienation of revenues, without the licence of the Abbot andConvent (Amundesham, i. 208). Another right which the king had Otherroyalin connexion with certain religious houses, was that of nominatinga fit person to be admitted as a nun at the time of his coronation.Nominations of this kind to Shaftesbury, Wilton, and Barking,occur, Rymer, ix. 11 ; X. 438, 445, 448.pe clarkes off is chapell pat haue wyfes, &C.]i.e. lay Clerks ofclerks or singing men.Cf. Liber N@er (Ordinances, &C., p. 50) : :,";pp1' Chapleynes and Clerkes of the Chapell, xxvi., by the King'schoyce, or by the deane his election or denomination, of men ofworshipp, endowed with vertuuse, morall, and speculatiff, as oftheyre musike, shewing in descant clene voysed, well releesed andpronouncynge, eloquent in reding, suficiaunt in organes pleyyng,and modestiall in all other manner of behaving. . . . The King'sgrace avaunceth these preests and clerks by prebends, churches ofhis patrymony, or by his lettres recommendatory, free chappells,corrodies, hospitalles, or pensions. . . . The statutes of nobleEdward the Third, appoynted the numbyr of six cunnyng preests,tyll they were advaunced, to take viid. ob. and all other gentylmen

Beneficcsclerkes syngers, four pence half penny by the daye.' For instancesof clerks in the royal service being advanced to benefices, cf.Ellis's Letters, 111. i. 7 I, 75.hurt of his said seruauntes, &C.] In the regulations of theand offices council, drawn up in 1426 and 1430, it is ordered ' pat in beneficesin theKing's gift and offices longyng unto pe kinges disposicion . . . poo pat hathetotobehisgiven be servantes to pe kinges fadre, or his graunde sire or be to pe kingservants. pat nowe is, be preferred perto ;' and one of the versions adds :' sopat pei have no cause to complaine as it is seide pei do daily forlak of ferperyng,' which seems to show that the charges whichFortescue here makes were not unfounded (P. P. C. iii. 2 16 ; iv.38, 62). One of the reasons urged upon the king in 1455 infavour of revoking all grants that might have been made of theright to present to offices, benefices, etc., was 'to th'entent that ofsuch offices and othir the premisses it mowe please yow to rewardeyour servauntes meniall' (Rot. Parl. v. 301 b).The grant of thehospital ' called the Mallardri,' outside Lincoln, to the 'ordreof Burton of Seint Lazar of Jerusalem in Englond . . . forto fynde and susteyne therof yerely for ever, certeyn Lepres ofoure meniall servauntez, and of oure heires and successours, yf anysuch be founde' (ib. 472 a), is interesting as showing that thisgreat scourge of the middle ages did not always spare king'shouses. We find prebends granted to a clerk of the kitchen, andto the king's physician (Rymer, ix. 875 ; X. 263). Edward IV, inhis will, directs that 'oure servants and such as were servants tomy said Lord and Fader' should be preferred in the elections tothe charitable foundation which he there establishes (ExcerptaHist. p. 374).CHAPTER XIX.hath gotyn ayen his lyuelod.] On acts of Resumption, seenotes to Chap. xi. pp. 279-281, above.as who sayth.] For the phrase cf. 'Arrival of King Edward IV,'p. 18 : 'The Kyng and his hoste kept passinge greate silencealnyght, and made, as who saythe no noyse.' Cf. ;b. 15.amortyse.] i.e. To alien lands in mortmain: i.e. 'to anyguild, corporation, or fraternity, and their successors, as bishops,parsons, vicars, etc.' And 'of corporations some are sole, someaggregate : sole, when in one single person, as the king, a bishop,dean, etc.' Tomlins' Law Dictionary, ed. Granger, S. vv. Mortmain,Corporation.so as it mey neuer be alyened.] With a view to realizingthe much desired object that the King should 'live of his own' (seeabove, notes to Chap. viii. p. 250), there were two obvious measureswhich might be suggested, and which frequently were suggested byreformers during the middle ages. One was the resumption of Attemptsthe grants which had been made out of the royal revenues in thepast ; the other was the limitation of the King's pourer to alienate power ofthem in the future. On the former point something has already E:t-tingbeen said. So important was the latter point considered that it venues.appears in one of the versions of the English Coronation Oath(S. C. H. ii. 105). Had the domains of the Crown remained whatthey were under the first three Norman kings it is possible thatEngland might have found by dire experience what the constitutionalresult was of having kings who could 'live of their own.'But the process of dilapidation begun by Stephen was continuedunder kings like Henry 111 and Edward 11, and this formed thesubject of one of the charges exhibited against Richard I1 in thefirst Parliament of Henry IV (Rot. Parl. iii. 419 b; cf. S. C. H, ii.329, 353, 554-6). Various measures were attempted during thepresent period with a view to making it less easy for the King to 'grant away the possessions of the Crown. In the first Parliamentof Henry IV it was enacted that all who should in future petitionthe King for any grant'were to state the exact value of the thingasked for, and also the value of any previous grants which they hadreceived fro-m the King or his predecessor (St. I Hen. IV. c. 6;Rot. Parl. iii. 433 a). This statute was somewhat relaxed in thenext Parliament (St. 2 Hen. IV. c. 2 ; Rot. Parl. iii. 458 b) ; but atthe same time the King was obliged to revoke all annuities glantedout of the subsidy on wools (ib. 457 b. The subject of annuitiesprovoked fresh remonstrances in the Parliament of 1404; ib.423 b; 424 a). But these measures were of very slight efficacy. These at-We constantly find grants made ' non obstante,' that the terms ofthe statutes have not been complied with in one point or another(e.g. P. P. C. ii. 305; Rymer, ix. 217; X. 583, 802 ; xi. 512, 529.In some grants however the rules are complied with, e.g. Rymer,X. 678). The measures taken in 1404 with reference to past grants

have been detailed in the notes to Chap. xi. pp. 279-280, above.With reference to the future, the Commons demanded that anyofficer who should execute any grant made out of the ancientinheritance of the Crown, should lose his office, forfeit everythingthat he could forfeit to the Crown, and be imprisoned for threeyears; and that any one who should accept such a grant, shouldforfeit that grant, and be imprisoned for three years (Rot. Parl.iii. 548 a; cf. Chap. vi. p. 120, above); while in 1406 it wasordered that no grant should be made out of any of the 'commoditiesof the realm' till the end of the next Parliament (ib.587 a. The draft of this measure drawn up by the Council is inP. P. C. i. 285-6. In 1400 the Council had begged the King tokeep all forfeitures in his own hands, since otherwise Parliament\vould have plausible grounds for refusing to grant an aid; ib. 108).In 1410 the King promised at the request of the Commons not tomake grants of any escheats which might come into his hands, butto apply them to his household, etc. (Rot. Parl. iii. 625). In 1443we find Somerset asking the King for ' a m1 marc of lande,' but thelords of the Council ' durst not avise the Kyng to depart from suchelivelode ne to opon peir mouthes in suche nlatiers;' finally, the Kingordered the Chancellor to reply that he should have 'vjc marc ofland ' (1'. e. land of that annual value, P. P. C. v. 253). The way inwhich officers and courtiers thus obtained grants for themselvesfrom the Crown is, as we have seen, one of the most constantthemes of complaint in all the popular risings of the period (seenotes to Chap. xiv. pp. 292-3, above). Edward IV seems to havelearned the lesson: ' Jactavit omnem cogitatum suum, quomodo depropria substantia propriaque industria sua, thesauros Regio Statudignos in futurum recolligat. Statuto igitur Parliamento, omneferme patrimonium Regale, cuicunque ante collatum fuisset, ipseresumens, supportandis Coronae oneribus id totum applicat ' (Cont.Croyl. p. ,559). In his will he charges his son Edward and hisheirs not to alienate certain possessions from the Crown, ' as he andthay ~vil answere afore God at the day of Dome, and as thay lovethe wele of thaim silf and of the Reame' (Excerpta Hist. p. 377).It is curious that Fortescue, who is so fond of comparing Englishand French institutions, does not here allude to the inalienability ofthe domain of the French Cro~\n.as it is shewid be fore.] See above, Chap. vi, and the notesthere, pp. 2 I 7-9.this shalbe a, collage.] The first edition reads by an absurdmistake cotage, which is however corrected by Lord Clermont.antemes.] A poem, composed soon after the accession ofEdward IV, concludes with the wish that ' Edward of Rouen ' andhis lords may be enabled'To make peas in Engeland, that riche and pouerMay joyfully synge at the conclusyonWelcom everlastyng joye, and farewal langoure.'(Political Songs, ii. 270.)Compare also the curious address at the end of the Parliament of1401, in which the Speaker compared Parliament to the Mass because,among other points, at the conclusion of the office was said' Deo Gratias ; ' ' et q'ils et tout le Roialme, feurent especialmenttenuz de dire cel parol, Deo gratias: . . . de ceo que Dieu de sabenigne grace leur avoit ottroiez un Roi gracious' (Rot. Parl. iii.466).I blissed be oure lord God . . . kyng Edward the iiijth,&C.] On the interesting historical and literary questions raised bythe reading of MS. Y, which has ' Henry the vjthe' instead of' Edward the iiijth,' see Introduction, Part 111, pp. 87, 94-6, above.For the sentiment compare Capgrave, Chronicle, p. 4 : ' We trewloveres of this lond desire this of oure Lord God, that a1 the errourewhech was browte in be Herry the Fourte may be redressed beEdward the Fourte. This is the desire of many good men here inerde, and, as I suppose, it is the desire of the everlasting hillis thatdwelle above.' Cp. also Caxton's address to Edward IV at the endof his continuation of the Polychronicon (in Higden, viii. 587).we shul now mowe enjoye ... God knowith.] If this HO~CS exrefersto Edward IV, we may compare the words of the Commons :,",k:/111 Edward's first Parliament cited p. 902, above, notes to Chap. iv. of EdwardAnd they continue: 'We hold for certayne and undoubted, that it IV.wol please youre seid good grace, to preferre all thinges that mayserve to the said commyn wele to the exercice of Justice and rightwisnes' (Rot. Parl. v. 463-4). And compare Edward's own wordsto the Parliament in 1468, where he contrasts his own reign aitlithat of his predecessor : ' At that tyme this Londe was full nakedand bareyn of Justice, the Peas not kepte, nor Lawes duely mynystredwithin the same, . . . and howe it was then, he reported hymunto theym, they understode it well ynowe, for it apperith at iye,and shewed it self, thanked be all myghty God' (ib. 622 b).

Lydgate expresses the hopes that Edward's accession gave riseto :-'Edward the Fourth the old wronges to amendIs wele disposed in wille, and to defend?His lond and peple in dede with kynne and myght;Good lyf and longe I pray to God hym send,And that Seynt George be with hym in his ryght.'(Gregory, P. 54 :The author of a poem already quoted exhorts all people to pray forEdward,-'That he kepe justice and make wedis clere.'(Political Songs, ii. 269.)Edwad at Cf. Whethamstede's verses, ib. 263, 265; Hardyng, p. 412 ; Cont.first really Cdesirous to royl. p. 533. That Edward was at the beginning of his reigndo justicet'sincerely anxious to improve the administration and do equal justiceto all, seems to be proved by several indications in the PastonLetters. To Lord Essex, who spoke to the King on behalf of JohnPaston, he replied that 'he wold be your (i. e. Paston's) good Lordtherein as he wold be to the porest man in Inglond. He wold holdwith yowe in yowr rygth; and as for favor, he wyll nogth be understandthat he schal schewe favor mor to one man then to anothyr,He disap- nowgth to on in Inglond' (ii. 40 ; cf. ib. 76, 95, 356-7). But inpointed spite of his words in 1468, there can be no doubt that he disapthehopesformed of pointed the hopes that had been formed of him, and that it was thishim. which made possible the restoration of Henry VI. Warkworth'stestimony is decisive on this point. Speaking of the restoration, hesays: ' Whereof alle his goode lovers were fulle gladde, and themore parte of peple. Nevere the lattere, before that, at he was puttoute of his reame by Kynge Edwarde, alle Englonde for the morepartye hatyd hym, and mere fulle gladde to have a chounge ; . . . andalle bycause of his fals lordes, and nevere of hym; and the comonpeple seyde, yf thei myghte have another Kynge, he schulde gettalle ageyne and amende alle manere of thynges that was amysse,and brynge the reame of Englond in grete prosperite and reste.Nevere the lattere, whenne Kynge Edwarde iiijth regnede, the peplelooked after alle the forseide prosperytes and peece, but it camenot' (Warkworth, pp. I 1-2 ; cf. also Cont. Croyl, p. 554 ; Basin,ii. 221-2; S. C. H. iii. 205, 209, 273). It is therefore not by anymeans impossible that these words might refer to the restoration ofHenry VI, if it should be decided that the reading of MS. Y representsa genuine tradition.and therfore God contenewe, &C.] (See Critical Notes.) Ifthese words are genuine we may compare the words of the Commonsin I 46 I, ' to whome (God) we bisech to contynue and prosperyoure noble reigne longe uppon US youre true and louly Subgetts,in honoure, joy and felicite ' (Rot. Parl. v. 463 a).CHAPTER XX.land for terme of theyr lives . . . but . . . that the same Grants forland be no more gyven.] The Commons in 1399, while peti- lifetioning for a revocation of all grants of the possessions of theCrown made without the assent of Parliament, made an exceptionin favour of grants for term of life made to any one who ' pur sontravaille duement disservy eit' (Rot. Parl. iii. 433 b). In 1402 theCommons petitioned that any grants which should escheat to theCrown might not be re-granted. The King promiqed that no suchgrants should be made, ' sinon a ceux que les deservont come meulxy semblera au Roy et son Counseill' (ib. 495 a). A similar requestwas made in 1404 (ib. 548 b). A petition for a grant of reversionof lands is in P. P. C. ii. 304-5.shall net serue hym but for giftes, as done offices, BC.]Cf. Rot. Parl. iii. 587 a: 'Offices, corrodes, benefices voidez defait, ou autere chose ou profit que nostre dit Sieur le Roy ne puissereteiner a soun oeps demesne.'passed de auisamento consilii sui.] Here, as often, the re- Grantsform proposed by Fortescue is merely a recurrence to what had with theadv~ce offormerly been the custom. 'During the reign of Richard I1 the thecouncil.commands of the King on the petitions submitted to him weregenerally said to be " with the advice of his Council "' (P. P. C.,I. xxv; cf. ib. 77, 87, 89, etc.). In the Resumption Act of 1450it was provided, that all re-grants of the lands, etc. so resumedshould be void, 'but if it so be that thoose Letters Patentes passeby advyse and assent of youre Chaunceller, and youre Tresorer ofEnglond, Pryve Seal), and vi Lordes of youre grete Counseill forthe tyme beyng; and that they and ich of theym subscribe in suchLetters Patentes theire names : And that the seide letters Patentesso subscribed with the names, be enrolled in youre Chauncerie ofrecord ' (Rot. Parl. v. 218 a; cf. P. P. C., VI. cxciv, and the remarks

of Sir Harris Nicolas there). This is the only regulation I have foundrequiring the advice of the Council to be stated in Patents of grants.It is frequently enacted that the advice of the Council shall betaken before any grant is made. Thus in 1390 we find the rulemade 'que nu1 doun ou graunt que purra tournir a disencrees duprofit du Roi passe saunz avys du Consail' (P. P. C. i. 18b). In1401 it was agreed that all grants of annual profits should only bemade with the advice of the Council (Rot. Parl. iii. 479) ; and in1406 that all warrants to the Chancellor, Treasurer, Privy Seal, andother officers should be endorsed or drawn up by the advice of theCouncil (ib. 572 b). Cf. also Appendix B, 4 ad fin.and namely for a yere or d.] If this refers to the restorationof Henry VI, we may compare Appendix B, 7, where Fortescuesuggests a similarly temporary arrangement with reference to theroyal household.APPENDIX A.THIS piece, which was printed by Lord Clermont (Works, pp.475-6) from Stowe's transcript of it in MS. Harl. 542, is heregiven from the Yelverton MS. No. 35, from which Stowe copiedit. It reads like an alternative version of Chapter xvi. of theMonarchia. It clearly refers to something which is supposed'tohave gone before, and cannot be an independent work.' 0 what good welthe and prosperite shulde growe to the Reaumeof Englande, yif suche a. counsell be oones perfitely stablisshed, andthe King guided therby. The Romaynes, whiche by wisdome andmanhed gate the lordship and monarchie of the worlde, wer firstegouerned by kinges ; but whenne thoo kingis throughe insolence,folowing thair passions, lafte the counsell of the Senate, theRomaynes roose uppon theyme, and put away their kinges forevermor. And thane thei wer re[u]led by the Senatours and byConsuls politikly many yeres. By whos wisdome thei gate thelordship of grete partie of the worlde. But after their grete welthe,by division that fille betwene the consuls for lakke of an hed, theyhadde amonges them civile battailles, wherinne at sornme oonedebate were slayne and exiled of hemselfe more thanne iiijxx Cnl.And after that they wer governed by oon hed called an Emperour,whiche using in all his reule the counsell of the Senate, gate themonarchie of the worlde. So as at Cristis birthe themperour commaundedthe hoole worlde to be discribed as subgiettes vnto hp..Whiche lordship and monarchie themperour kepte all the while theiwere reuled bi the counsele of the Senate. But after that, whanthemperour lafte the counseill of the Senate, and somme of theime l,MS. inserts had.

as Nero, Doinmacion, and other, had slayne grette partey of theSenatours, and were reuled by their privat counsellours, thastate ofthemperour fill in dekeye, and their lordship woxe alwey sythenlasse and lasse ; so as now themperour is not of such mighte as isoone of the kinges whiche sumtyme were his subgiettes. We alsoEnglishemen, whos kinges som tyme were counseled by sadde andmele chosen counseilloures, bete the mightieste kinges of the worlde.But sithen our kinges have been reuled by private Counselloures,suche as have offered their seruice and counseile and were not chosentherto, me haue not be able to kepe our owne lyvelode, nor towiren hem that have take it from us. And that hathe bene moostefor pouertie and lak of good. But we haue had by that occasionciuile werrys amonges us selfe, as had the Romaynes whenne theihad not oone hed but many governoures. And our Reaume isfallen thereby in dekeye and povertie, as was the Empire whannethemperour lafte the counsel1 of the Senate. But it may nat bedoubted, that yif oure kinges be counseled by suche a wise stablisshedcounseile as is before deuised, and do there after as didthe firste emperour that gate the monarchie of the worlde, weeshulde firste haue unite and peax withinne oure lande, riches andprosperite, and be mightieste and moste'welthe reaume of theworlde.'APPENDIX B.THE occasion of the composition of the following piece has beendiscussed in the Introduction, Parts 11. and 111. (above, pp. 70, Sg,95). It has never been printed before, though a short extract from it isgiven in Ellis's Letters, 11. i. 139, from Stowe's transcript, MS. Harl.543. Nor has any one before recognised the author of it. It is'here printed entire from the Yelverton MS. No. 35. In the marginof the sections I have placed a reference to the chapters of thepresent work, which they chiefly illustrate.Here folowen in articles certeyne aduertisementes senteby my lorde prince to therle of Warrewic his fadir in lawe,for to be shewed and comuned by hym to king Henry hisfader and his counseile, to thentente that the same aduertisementes,or suche of theyme as may be thoughte ex-pediente for the good publique of the Reaume, mow bepractised and put in use.I. Firste, forasmoche as many of the lordes and other menne in Thirticlessente frolower estate, whiche in this tyme of the kinges grete trouble haue the princedone hym good service to theire grete charges and costis, and other to therle ofof his feithefull subgiettes, whiche for his sake and their trewe Warrewlcfadir-in-acquitaill have suffered grete harmes in theire persones, and loste lawe as foloftheire goodes, wol now seme to his highenesse as wele for with, an0M.CCCC.Rewardis, as for Recompense of their harmes, as Reason, liberalite, Lxx".and namely Roiall Munificence wolde thei shulde so have ; yet yifthe king by suche consideracion geve to somme manne and not toanother, mhiche by lyke reason oughte to be rewarded, ther shallgrowe therof grete grugge amonges his peopull. And also sommeman, with Importunite of Sute, and by parciall meanes, shal momeobtayne gretter rewardis than thei have disserved, and yit grugge,seying they haue to litill. Alld somme menne for laltke of meanestoward his highenesse shulde haue to litill, or righte noughte. Hit Cf. ch. xiv.is thoughLe therfor good that alle suche Rewardes and Recompences PP. 143-4.be deferred, vnto the tyme that ther be a counseill stablisshed; andthanne the supplicacions of alle suche persones mow be sende bythe kyng to the seide counseile, where as every man his merite[s]may be indifferently examyned. And thanne the counsele mayfirste consider, what lyvelod the king hath for the sustentacion ofhis estate, and how of the Remenaunte Distribucion may be madeamonges suche as haue weele deserued, so as the king by reasonof liberalite and rewardis amenisshe [not] nor lasse so his lyvelode,as be necessite he be compelled to lyve upon Hi6 Comunes andupon the Chirche, to his enfamye and the withdrawing from hym ofthe hertes of his subgiettes, whiche Gode wolde not. And thanne,whanne the king upon all such supplication is fully aduertised byhis counseile, he may so rewarde euery man as he hathe deserued,and as the kinges lyvelode woll extende to hit. For yif this orderbe kepte, no man may grugge with the kinges highenesse nor withthe lordis nor with any other manne aboute his personne as theywere wonned to doo.2. It is thoughte good that it shulde please the king testablysshe Cf. ch. XV.a counseill of Spirituel men xij, and of temporel men xij, of themooste wise and indifferente that can be chosen in alle the londe.And that ther be chosen to theime yerly iiij. lordis spirituelx, and

iiij. lordis temporelx, or in lasse numbre. And that the king do nogrete thing towching the rewle of his reaume, nor geve lande, ffee,ofice, or benefice, but that firste his intente therinne be communedand disputed in that counseill, and that he haue herde theiradvises ther upon; wvhiche may in no thing restreyne his power,libertee, or prerogatiff. And thanne shall the king not be counseledby menn of his Chambre, of his housholde, nor other which cannot counsele hym; but the good publique shal by wise men be1condute to the prosperite and honoure of the land, to the suretie andwelfare of the kyng, and to the suretie of alle theyme that shal beaboute his persone, wvhome the peopull haue oftyn tymes slayne forthe n~yscounceling of theire Soueraigne lorde. But the forsaidexxiiijti counseyllours may take noo fee, clothing, nor rewardis, orbe in any manes seruice, otherwyse thanne as the Justices of thelawe may doo. Many other articles neden to be addid heretowhiche now were to longe to be remembred hereinne. Neverthelesseit is thoughte that the grete officeres, as Chaunceller, Thresorer,and prive seale, the Juges, baron[s] of theschequer, and the Clerkeof the Rolles, may be of this counseill whanne they wil cometherto, or whan the seyde xxiiijti and viijte lordis will desire them tobe with theyme.cf. ch m. 3. And for asmoche as it may be thoughte that thestablisshementeof suche a counsele shalbe a newe and a grete charge tothe kyng, hit is to be considered, how that the olde counsellin Englonde, which was mooste of grete lordis that more attendedto their omne matieres thanne to the good universal1profute, and therfore procured hemselfe to be of the counsell,whiche was nere hand of as grette charge to the king as thiscounsell shalbe and no thing of suche profute. Ffor thiscounsell shall almost contynuelly studye and labour upon thegood politike wele of the londe, as to prouide that the moneybe not borne oute of the reaume, and how bolyon may bebroughte inne, how merchandizes and comoditees of the londemay kepe theire prices and valiwe, how estraungeres caste notdowne the price of the commodites growing in the londe, andsuche other poyntys of policee. And also how the lawe may befourmely kepte and refourmed ther as it is defectife, to the grettestgood and surete of the welthe of the londe that hathe benesene in any lande. And trewly ther hath bene gevun in latedaies to somme oon lorde temporell much mor lyuelode in yerIyvalue than woll paye the wages of alle the newe counseill. Andalso the spirituell menne of this newe counsele shal not nede tohave so grete wages as the temporell menne, whiche whannethey come to the counseill muste leve in their cuntrees oon housholdefor their wyfes, children, and servauntes, or ellis carye theimwith hem; whiche the spirituel men nede no[t] to do. By whichconsideracion the spirituel men in the court of parliament of Paryshave but iij C. scutes, wher as the temporell men have iiij C.4. It is necessarie that befor any grauntes be made by the king Cf. ch. vi.of any parte of his livelode, ther be first assignid particulerly certeynelyuelode for the kinges house, for his chapell, and for hisgarderobe. And other lyueloode for the paymente of his courtes,his counsele, and all other ordinary charges; soo as no partetherof be restreyned tany other use, into the tyme that alle thecharges be yerly payde. And yif any patente be made tany otheruse of any partie of that lyuelode, That that patente be voideand of noon effecte. And also that no patente be made inInheritaunce of any partie of the kinges lyveloode, by what titleso ever that it be comen to hym, withoute thassente of hisparliamente, nor for terme of lyfe, or yeres countervailing termeof lyffe, withoute thaduice of his counsale, excepte suche patentesas shalbe made of fermes by the thresour[er] of Englonde,bailliffes, and other officeres having powere taprowe thekinges lyuelode. And the Chaunceller whiche shall fortune tensealeany patente contrarye hereto, leese his office and forfaite tothe king all his liveloode temporell. And that the same patente bevoyde. And over this that every Chaunceller have like peyne yif heenseale any patente for any other matier, or that matier be communedin the kinges counsell, and he certified of the maner andconclusion of theire deliberacion upon the same. And yif thesame matier haue bene thoughte to the counsell good, theChaunceller may write in the patente whiche he shall make therof,that it is passid bi thauyse and assente of the counsell, and ellis heshal leaue l these wordis, and wryte in the patente oonly that thematier hathe bene communed in the kynges counsell.5. Item : whenne ther is lyveloode sufficiante for the paymente Cf. ch. V.1 by and be, reversed in MS. l MS. iiaue.

of the kinges hous, the expences therof may be alwey paide inhande, which expences shulbe thanne forthewarde of so resonableprice as the iiijth parte of tholde expences of the same ho\vsoldesholde be yerly saved. And the king shall haue therby alway themarket at his gate to his grete profute, but to moche more profuteof the pore peopull. And to the synguler pleasure of God, thathathe no prince excused of paying of his dettys, and namely forhis vitaylles. Wherfore alle other kingis payen alway in handefor their vytaylles.Cf. ch.xvii. 6. Item : it is thoughte good that the king geve noone of hisoffices, though it be but of parkirship, tany manne saue only to hisowne seruauntes, and that euery of his officeres be sworne that heis with no man in seruice, nor hathe nor wil take of any man whilehe serueth the king, pencion, fee, or clothing, except oonle of theking. For thanne the king shall haue holiche the mighte of his lande,whiche is most rewlyd by his officeres as they haue bene beforethese daies. And the king shal mow thenne rewarde with offices,suche as oughte to be rewarded, without amenuisshing of the'revenues of his croune. And yit shalbe good that no manne haueij offices, excepte the seruauntes and officers of the kynges how[s]e,whiche may haue, whanne they deserve it, a parkirship or suchea nother office as they may wele kepe be a suffisante depute.Whiche depute thanne shalbe sworne to serue noon other man sauehis master that serueth the king. And in like fourme the king mayrewarde his counseillours temporelx with suche offices whanne hewoll. Ffor it is not like but that he woll avaunce the spirituellmenne of his counseill with benefices, as they shalbe worthy.7. Item: forasmoche as the king is now in grete pouertie, andmay not yit susteyne thexpences of so grete an housolde as hekepte somtyme, nor he is yit purveyed of vessel1 and other hostilmentisof housolde honorable and conveniente for hym ; And alsohis Costis now upon thestablishementes of his Reaume wol begretter thanne any manne can certaynly esteme ; hit is thoughtegood that it woll please his highenesse to forbere all this firste yerethe keping of his worshipfull and grete housolde ; And be in allethat tyme in suche a sure place or places as his mooste2 noble gracecan thinke beste for his helthe and plesaunce, with lytill peopull,and withoute reasumyng and taking ageyne in all that yere of theMS. his.MS. nzostee.seruauntes of his olde housolde, but suche as necessite shall causehym. Ffor yif he take withinne that tyme ony of hemme, theremenaunte woll grugge for theire absence. And also thoo thatbethe thus takyn wol not leve importune sute to haue vnto theymeall theire olde felaship, whiche shalbe noyfull and grete noye tohymselfe, and to all thoo that shalbe abowte hym for that yere.APPENDIX C.THIS piece 1i7as printed by Lord Clermont (Works, pp. 517-8)from an incomplete copy in the Phillipps collection; and is heregiven in full from the Yelverton MS. No. 35. It was twice transcribedby Stowe: MS. Harl. 545, f. 136; Harl. 543, f. 163 b. Onits character and date see Introduction, Part 111, pp. 74-7, above.Here folo~vith the Replicacion made agenste the title and The Re-ciayme by the Duc of Yorke to the Crownes and Reaumes plicaciontheof Eingland and Fraunce, whiche that the said d u c ~ ~claymeth bi the righte and title of Sir Leonell, the thirde Yorke dnc off forsone of King Edwarde the iijde, and by Philip doughter thecro\vne:and heire to the said S' Leonell ; whiche clayme and title ~ ~~"so made may be no trewe nor rightwis clayme nor title Fra~ce.'during the lyfe of King Henry the vjthe and his heiresleving aftir hym, as here aftir folowing ys more openlyshewed and plainle declared.Be it knowen tall wele disposed people having mill to understandethe trewthe, that thoughe it so were the Righte of theCrownes of Englande and of Fraunce mighte discentle vnto awymman, as it may not, whiche is sufficiently proued in the tretetherof, made by the olde knighte exiled', and elles it shuldepartene to the kyng of Scottes, ~vhiche discended of an elder stok1)~' a wymman callid Seint Margarete, doughter of the king ofEnglande, thenne any man now claymyng the crowne of Englande.But yet for the mere Declaracion of trouthe hit is to behad in mynde, that Edward now occupying the Crowne of Englande' Against this passage in the MS. is written in a later hand 'Sr JohnFortescue, Ld Chief Justice of England.'Aa

y a pretensed title, saying he ys discended therunto by therighte of a wymman called Dame Philip, doughter as he seithe toSr Leonell of Andewerpe, elder brother to S* John of Gante, ofwhom ys lynyally descended the verrey trewe Cristen prince kingHenry the vjthe. The whiche Edwarde hathe no righte to theseide Crowne bi thaboveseid Dame Philip, ffor it is playnly foundein the Cronicles of Fraunce and of Seelande, that the seide damePhilip was consayved in advoutrye, and goten vpon the wyfe ofthe aboueseid Sir Leonell by oon Sir Jarnys of Audeley knighte,whiche was steward uf the housolde of the aboueseid wyfe of S*Leonell, The whiche S* Leonell beyng absente by the space of ooyere and halfe from his wyfe before the byrthe of the seide DamePhilip. Whiche Sr Jamys Awdlay aftirward for that offence wasbeheded; And S' Leonell duc of Clarence devorsed by the lawefrom the seid dame Philip his wyfe, and afterwarde wedded to thedoughter of the duc of Milayne, and in that Cuntrie dyed, and inPavy is buryed not ferre from Milayne, and sawe nevur his firstewyfe Dame Philip after with his eyen. And also she was exiledinto Irelande with here seide doughter Philip. Whiche Philip hadnevur foote of lande of the duchie of Clarence nor bare the armesof Englande, ne noon that discended from here be their Righte, asthei shulde have doone yif shee had bene the doughter of the seideS' Leonell. Whiche Sr Leonell whan he was ded, and the writtiscalled Diem clausit exfremum were sente oute into all the shires ofEnglande, they were alle retourned that the seid S* Leonell diedwithoute heire or issue of his body lawfully begoten. WherforeKing Edward the iijde toke all the landes of Sir Leonell into hisowne handis; And att a parliament not longe aftir declared thiscaas above seyde vnto all his peopull. In the whiche parliamentehe entayled the Crowne to his heires Malis. And for a perpetuellwitnesse that his doughters were agreed vnto the same, they camealle into the open parliament in their mantelles of estate enbrowdedwith tharmes of Englande, arid ther openly disclaymed and renouncedfrom theim and their heires all the right and title that theihad or mighte of possibilite haue to the crownes of England and ofFraunce. In recorde wherof they lete falle their mantelles there anddeparted oute of the parliament in thir gites. Lo this is a suffisentdeclaracion that thaboue remembred Edward that now occupieththe crowne hath no Righte therto.APPENDIX D.THE following fragment is taken from MS. Cotton, Vespasian F.ix. f. 122. I believe it to be the beginning of Fortescue's tract' On the Title of the House of York.' A comparison of the fragmentof that tract, printed by Lord Clermont (Worlrs, pp. 497-50~)from MS. Cotton, Julius F. vi., with the De Tzfulo Edwardi ComiftiMarchii, shows that they covered much the same ground, and thefragment here printed corresponds very exactly with the beginningof the latter work. The plan here commenced is carried on inLord Clermont's fragment. Between the two fragments wouldcome the discussion of Stephen's and Henry 11's title to thethrone, and of the claim of the Scottish kings to the Englishsuccession, as descended from Margaret, sister of Edgar Athelingand wife of &ialcolm Canmore. This missing portion may bepractically restored from the 'Declaracion upon Certayn Writings,'Works, pp. 525, 537, where this tract seems clearly to be citedfor the purpose of being refuted. The words enclosed in bracketsare my own conjectural restoration of the lacuna of the MS. Ihave added in the margin references to the pages of Lord Clermont'sedition of Fortescue's works, where passages may be foundmore or less parallel to those here printed.A simple maid of the Realm [of Englonde now] in exile within cf. Works,the Realm of [Scottis, knowyng the] Title by the which Edwarde 1'. 63*.late [erle of Marche clajnleth the] forsaid Realme of Englonde to[be pretensed and fals,] and dredyng that therby the noble [realme ofEnglonde and the] most noble Christian prynce Henry [the vjth \vhohath] peasibly raigned xxxviij yeres.[vpon the said Realme] mightbe defamed or hurte ; and al[beit the \vorshipful] councell of thesaid kynge, wole not [by aduyse of the] prynces and other greatelordes of [the said councell] take upon theym to putte in writy [ngthe said kynges] title which is vndoubted to all the [world] ; Thesaid simple persone not presumy[ng to declare the said] title,which nedeth no declaration, [yet that he may shewe] and declarethe Insufficiencye of the [forsaide clayme] hath furst putte inwrityng the forsaide pre[tensed title, and then] aunswered to thesame, as in articles hereaftyr fo[lowyng may] appier.Aa2

Here foloweth the title which Edwarde Erle of Marche pretendethto the Crow[ne] of Englond and the Realme.cf.Works, The saide Edwarde sayth that he is son to Richard, son top. 6 j*.Anne, doughter to Roger, son to Philip, doughter to Lyonelle,eldest brother to Edward, somtyme prynce of Walys ffadr toKyng Richard the second, which dyed withoute issue; and hesayth that kynge Henry vjth is son to kyng Henry the vth, son tokyng Henry the iiijth, son to John, somtyme Duke of Lancaster,ijd brother to the said prynce, ffadr to the said kyng Richard. Andsoo bicause he is comon of the older brother of the said lateprynce, and the [said kyng Henrly the vjth is comon of the ijdbrother of the same prynce, [he sayth that] he hath right to therealm and Crowne of Englond, [as next heyr] to the said kyngRichard, and therfor he is entred [now late] vpon the said kyngHenry the vjth and hath [putte hym] oute therof, and also hathcrowned hymself kyng [of the said] Realme of Englond.The Aunswer to the forsaid title made after the custom and laweof the realme of Englond.Cf.Works, [Yt is shewed] openly by the forsaid title that the said KyngPP 505 'j4*'Henry [the vjth is nexlt heyr masle to the said kyng Richard, andcf. Works, also [next to hym of his] blode ; and that the said late erle con-1'. 5'. nexeth his [discent and succession] by meanes of ij women, that is tosaye Philip and Anne [ther as n]o woman by the lawe and customof that londe maye [or can enherlite the crowne therof; for yt isdescendable only to heyres masles, and by such heyres only thatlonde hath ben enherited, and neuer by ffemasles, sithen the conquesttherof; nor bifor, sithen the kynges theroff have ben anoynted,as by example of some of the discent and succession of the saidcrowne, fallen as well sithen the conquest as bifor, specified in ijarticles next folowyng yt may openly appier.Cf. Works, Kyng Henry the furst, which was son to the conquerour of thePP' 65*'5053 537said londe, had no issue masle, but he had a doughter calledfaPIIawde, which was Empresse of Almaigne, and after the deathe ofthe Emperour her husband she was wedded to Geffrey Plantagenette,erle of Angeoye, by whom she had a son called HenryFitz Empresse. The said erle of Angeoye dyed, and also theforsaid Kyng Henry the furst dyed seased as well of the Realme ofEnglond as of theal MS. prefended.The last eight words are crossed out in the MS.ablements, habiliments, 138. 10 ;abillementis,C ; abylymentes, D'.advoutrye, adultery, 354. 8.Affrike, Africa, Avfrak, C. ; Awfrik,Y.almes, alms, charity, 155. 22;almesse, 156. 7 : A.S. zlmesse.Almeyn, Germany, 115. 8 ; 81-maigne, 356. 31.also, as, 145. 8, and fq.: A.S. ealswP.alsowell, as well, I 24. I I.altheyr, gen. pl. of ' all ' ; ouraltheyr good'=the good of usall, I 56.4 ; althere, Y. H ' ; aller,D2.amenisshe,diminish, 349.26 ; amenuisshing,352. 18 : Fr. amenuiser.amortyse, to amortise, tie up landsin mortmain, I 54. 24 ; v. note a. l.Andewerpe, Antwerp, 354. 3.Angeoye, Anjou, 356.33.apon, upon, 123. 7, 12, and fq.aprowe, improve, 351. 25.arbitrment, discretion, absolutepower, I 13. 6.arrerages, arrears, 143. 24.Arrogoners, men of Arragon, I I 5.7 ; Arragoners, C, Y.arted, obliged, compelled, I 14. 27 ;I 19. 21 : Lat. artare, artatus.aught, awght, ought, 127. I 5 ; I 39.18 ; pl. awghton, 147. 7.Authenences, Athenians, I 50. 6 ;Athenenses, C, Y, D2; Athenes,Lb ; Athenyes, D'.ayen (adv.), again, 121. 20.ayen, ayenest, ayenste (prep.),against, 121. 17; 130. I ; 155. 7.bauderike, baldrick, belt, 125. 16.bayille, district of a bailiff, bailiwick,151. 4 ; bayllye, Lb : v.critical notes, a. 1.baylfl, bailiff, 1 51. 3 ; baylly, Lb,DZ ; baily, C, H' ; bayle, Y.be, by, 141. g.be, ben, been, 138. 31 ; 136. I.ben, byn, pres. pl. of 'to be,' I 16.5 : A.S. beon.be sene, beseen, furnished, equipped,124. 11.be sit, bi sit, to become, befit, I 24.23 ; 125. 22 ; pt. t. be sate, 136.8 ; besatte, 136. 15.bie, to buy, 124. 33 ; 125. 13;biynge, buying, 132. 21.bien, "3. 16 ; v. ben.bith, pres. pl. of 'to be,' 110. 27,and fq. ; beth, I 56.3 : A.S. beoS;.Boeme, Bohemia, 139. g ; Ueame,C, Y, D2.braggers, bragers, brokers, I 52.34; 153. 4; broggers, D', HI.Though ' brogger' is only a corruptform of broker ' they cameXo be regarded as distinct words :

'every broker, brogger, andhuckster.' Hist. Charters ofLondon, p. 200.Bretons, Britons, I I 5. 17; Brutons,D' ; Brytons, D2; Britons, C.brocage, bl oke~ age: management,influence, . 144. .. 18 ; v. note, a. 1. ;brochage, D'.brotherryn, brethren, I 36. I 3 ;brethern, C, Lb; brotherne, D] ;britharne, H' ; bretheryn, 153.bullyon, bullion, 178. 3 ; bolyne,D' ; bolyon, Lb ; bolion, Y.busses, bushes, 141. 11 ; busshes,C, Y.but yff, unless, 138. 8, and fq.by, bye, to buy, 118. 11; 132. 14.by hold, beholden, 152. 24; beholdyng, C, D'.V.carrikke, a kind of ship, I 23. I 5 :Low Lat. carrica, a ship of burden.cete, city, 129. 1-7.chese, chose, 112. 19.chevisaunce, agreement, composition; especially a compositionby xvhich money is obtained, aloan, I 18. 17 : 0. Fr. chevissance.childeryn, children, 1°9. 19 ; IIO.12 ; chlldir, chlldyr, Lb ; chield-~en, C ; childirren, 115. 25 ;childeren, I I 7. I I.come, came, 133. 18: A.S. c61n.comened, cOmnluned, delibelated,150. 17.Cominon Place, Common Pleas,146. 18.comunalte, community, I 12. 13,17; 124. 19 : 0. Fr. communalti..confedre, confederate, conspire,'39. 29.contre, contray, country, district,out of monasteries, I 53. 24 ; pl.corodeis, 146. 2 : v. note a. 1.couude, could, 133. 5, and fq. ;cowde, C, Y ; couth, Lb.covent, convent, monastery, 155.I I.creaunce, credit, 118. 12 : Fr.creance.Creauncers, creditors, 118, 18 :Fr. cr6ancier.crokyd, crooked, 114. 30.defende, to forbid, 133. 2 : cf. Fr.defendre.defende, defended, I I5 21.delibre, deliberate, 147. 35 ; delibered,143. 31.dell, deal, part, 152. 4 ; deale, U' ;dele, Da.demeynynge, behaviour, course ofaction, 130. 3.demure (sb.), stay, sojourn, 124. I 5 .0. Fr. delnore.desime. dessime, a tenth, 140. ;139 3" disme's, C, Y, D' ; dyames,D' ; diemes, H' ; dyeme,U' ; dieme, Lb ; deisme, Y : Fr.dixisme.discribed, enrolled, r4g. I6 : ,llote a, 1.dispend, to expend, I 18. 14.dispenses, expenses, I 19. 7.I distmgued, distinguished, I 10. 20 ;distincted, C.diuersen (vb.), to differ, 109. 7.do, pt. p.=done, 155. 22.dussepers, 131. 24 : v. note a. 1.E.egall, equal, 110. 27 ; I I I. 10 :Fr. 6gal.ellis, otherwise, else, 117. IS ; 126.27.enbrowded, embroidered, 354. 33.encresse, increase, 134. 9; encres-141. 7, 12. 1 synge, 133. 6.cWodie, an allo\vance of food, etc., entendet, attended, 145. 13.entredid, treated, dealt with, 135.6 ; cf. tredid ; entreted, 140. 11.equepolent, equally powerful, 130.30.erly, yearly, 120. g ; written yerely114. g, where D' has erly. So in116. 13; 138. 25, D' has erefor 'year.'eschekquer, exchequier, exchequer,122. 12; 148. 25 ; escheker,D', D2 ; eschequer, C.especialiteis, particulars, details,125. 23.euery, subst. = every one, 15 1. I7 ;everyche, Y.exorbitant, out-of-the-way, extraordinary,extravagant, 123. 26 :0. Fr. exorbitant.exquisite, sought out, refined, extraordinary,119. 21.eyde, aid, 126. 3.eyegally, equally, 133. 8 ; cf. egal.eyen, eyes, 354. 18.eyres, heirs, 136. 2; heyres, 136.10.eytikes, ethics, 119. 29; ethyks,D' ; etikes, C, Y, Da; etykes,Lb.fauctours, favourers, supporters,129.29 : Lat. fautor.ffeed, paid, salaried, I 50. 25 ; feodid,C.ferde, terrified, p. pt. of ' to fear,'used actively, 110. 5; aferd, C,Y, H2.ferre, far, 123. 19.ffloute, fleet, 123. 7, 16; floote, C,Y : flode, D' ; flote, D2.fille, fell, 347. 2 I.forthwarde, ' thanthence forward, 147. 21.fourmely, firmly, 350. 37.forthwarde,'gabell, originally the name of anytax, but appropriated specially tothe tax on salt in France, 131.25.gasteful, frightful, I 10. 6 ; cf.ghastly.getun, p.p. of 'to get,' 143. 3;goten, C, Y ; goton, 136. 23 ;geyten, I 54.13 ; gotyn, 154.22.gite, a gown, 354. 37.goo, gone, 138. 34.grobbyng, grubbing, 141. 10.groche, to grudge, 132. 24, and fq.;written also grucch, 114. 8;grugge, 349.13.Guyne, Guienne, 131. 21.ham, them, 129. 7, and fq.hande, 'paid in hande,' = paidwith ready money, I 20. 25 ;' hadeit in hande,' 136. 25.has, as, I 17. 15.hausyn, hosen, pl. of hose, I 14. 19.hem, them, I 10.4, and fq.; hemme,353. 2.Heroude, Herod. 117. 9 ; Eroode,Y ; ~riaud, ~ b D' ,;- ~araulde;D2 ; Herowd, C.hit, it, 127.29.holl, hole, whole, 134. 13 ; 149. 24.hollych, holliche, wholly, 133. 26;152. 7.hostilmentis, household furniture,utensils, 352. 30.huyr, her, 131. 16.hym, them, 143. 2,3.i now, enough, (also writtenynough, ynoghe, qv.), I 19. 34 :cA. S. gen6h.is, his, 129. 27, and fq.jakke, jack, coat of mail, 138. 1 ;yackes, D'.jopardie, jeopardy, I25 6 ; jupartie,C : 0. Fr. jeu parti.

juelles, juels, jewels, 148. 4 ; 125.16 ; yuelles, D' ; iouelx, Lb ;iuelx, jeuelx, Y.justified, administered, governed,112. 22.L.Lacedemonies, Lacedzmonians,150. 5 ; Lacedemons, D' ; Lacedemeneys,D2 ; Lacedemonees,Lb ; Lacedemonyes, C, Y.lafte, left, 142. 26.lafull, lefull, lawful, 139. 20 ; I 10.17.lake, lack, I I g. I 5.lasse (vb.), lessen, 349. 26.lemitted, settled, fixed, appointed,128. 10; lymyte, Lb ; lymyted,Y, D'.lerned, taught, 135. 14.lese, lose, 155. 18 ; lesynge, 138. 6.leuer, liefer, rather, I 19. I I.ligates, 124. 17. So L, Lb; legates,al.like, lyke, likely, 134. I ; 139. 8.likely, well-favoured, personable,strong, 115. 4.likenes, lykennes, likelihood, 122.29; 131. 3.maid, 35 5. 20 ; seems to be masculine= man : ?cf. Icel. mogr.manasheynge, menacing, 138.34 ;manassynge, I 10. 5.maneres, manors, 133. 24.mal?suete, refined, civilized, I 12.12 : Lat. mansuetus.maugre, in spite of, 133. I : O.Fr.malgre, maugre.meryer, merrier, 155. 25; myrrier,C.mich, moch, moche, much, 131.I3 ; 139. 15 ; 147. 25.mo, more (of number), I 19.30, andfq.modered, moderated, 143. 21.mowe, to be able to, I 21.4, and fq. ;Mod. Eng. may ; pt. t. mought,130. 27 ; Mod. Eng. might. In133. 32 we have myght, where Chas mowght.namely, especially, 130. 26, and fq.ner, nor, 133. 32.nere hande, nearly, almost, 117.32 ; 129. 8.nev, i.e. neu - new, 130. 14.non suyrte, insecurity, I 54. 15 ;cf. nown poiars.nor the lesse, 122.34 ; nathe lesse,Lb ; neuer the les, C, Y.nown poiars, non-powers, I 21. g.Cf. such compounds as non-age,non-suit, etc. non-poiar, 150. g ;noun powers, C ; noon poweres,Y.noye, trouble, annoyance, 353. 5.noyfull, troublesome,353. 5.annoying,odre, other, 125. 30.on, one, 130. 21, and fq. ; oo, 354.I I ; oon, 347. 24.onis, once, 12 I. 20, and fq.oonle, only, 352. 14.oonys, once, I 56. 22.onynge, uniting, I 12. 21.or, ere, before, 144. 27.ordenyd, ordained, I 12. 21.ordinarye, a book of rules, precedents,&C., 149. 4. (Three MSS.read ortlynnl.)owed, onned, 136. 3.owith, ought, 127. 7, 14 (in thelatter passage it alternate; wit%aught).owthe, oath, 146. 14.parcell, part ; strictly a small part,123. 2 : Fr. parcelle.partene, pertain, belong, 353. 27.partye, part, 149. I I ; parte, 155.9 ; pl. parties, 133. 16, 17.Peas, pease, peace, 119. 27 ; 153.6 ; peax, 348.19.pene, penny, 118. 14, 16 ; peyne,135. 20.perdurable, lasting, 142. 23.place, v. Common Place.poiar, power, I 10. 28, and fq. ; cf.pover.police, policy, 148. I I ; pollycye,148. I.pondage, poundage, 122.34 : LowLat. pondagium.pouere, pouerer, pouerest, poor,etc., 151. 3 ; I 18. 25, 26 ; poure,120. 2 ; pore, 137. 17.pover, power, 121. 3 ; cf. poiar ;also written power, 121. 4.president, prece'tlent, 134. 17.purvey, to provide, 122. 5 ; 128.21 : Fr. pourvoir.quaterimes, a tax of 25 per cent.on wine, hence the name, 131.26 ; V. note a. 1.quinqueniale, lasting for five years,140. z ; quinquinall, D2.quinsime, a fifteenth, 139.32 ; 140.z : Fr. quinziPme.redely, readily, promptly, 122. 15.remenante, remainder, remnant,128. 30.resorte, revert, return, 142. 25.ressnable, reasonable, 132. 16 ;cf. vnresnoble, 133. 6; but,resonable, 136. 5 ; reason, 138.28.rychesse, riches, 142. g. In 144.15 we have riches, whereLb, D', have richesse, and C,richesses : Fr. richesse.rygoursly, rigorously, 132. 25.ryped, ripened, 148. 18.S.sadanly, suddenly, 126. 3 ; cf.soden.sadde, serious, discreet, 348, 5.sane, = sayen, pres. pl. of 'to say,'152. 9 ; sayn, D' ; sayen, C, Y,Lb, D2.saudan, saudayn, sultan, 135. 11,20 : 0. Fr. soudan.acute, a crown (coin), I 14. 25, 26.seen, =sayen, pres. pl. of 'to say,'117. 12.selde, seldon, seldom, 141. 26 ;I 14. 15 ; sielde, C ; sylden, D' ;selden, Y, Lb, DZ ; sielden, Y.sende, sent, 143. 30.serpes, cypress, i. e. fine linen, 125.15 (see note a. l.). So L, DC,Lb; serpis, C, Y; serples, D'.sertanly, certainly, 140. 22.shotynge, shooting, 138. 12 ; 151.7 ; sutyng, suetyng, D' ; sheetyng,c.sithyn, since, I 10. I, and fq. : A.S.si55an.sle, to slay, III. 25 ; scle, D' ;pt. t. slowe, 117. 10 ; slough, C ;sclewe, DL : A. S. slegn.soche, such, 140. 15.soden, sudden, 120. 12, 15 ; alsowritten sodayne, 125. 33 ; cf.sadanly.spice, species, kind, 144. 3 : 0. Fr.espice.sprites, spirits, 121. 10.stokk, to root up, 141. 10.sturred, stirred, 139. 4 ; stired, C ;stered, Y.subget, I 16. 22 ; subgett, 130. 30 ;subiet, 116. 21 ; subgectes, 117.15 ; subgettes, 117.25 ; sugettes,I 16. 10 ; subiectes, 117. 9 ; subiecttes,I 16. 12 ; subgiettes,348. 4. It will be observed thatwith two exceptions these variousspellings occur within the limitsof two pages.

suffre, suffer, 152. 14 ; soeffre, C.suirte, security, 130. 25 ; cf. unsuyrte; surete, 140. 18.syngular, aynguler, special, I 52.23 ; 124. 2.T.take, taken, 131. 1 I.tayles, entails, 136. 4.tayles, taxes, 109. 9 ; 113. 21 : cf.Low Lat. tallia, tallagium.terable, terrible, 141. 27.thai, thaim, thair, = they, them,their, fq. ; pam, 136. 19 ; theyme,353. 4.than, then, 124. 1, and fq.; 'lsowritten then, 125. 25. SO whan=when, I 30. 26.the, them, those, 122. 10 (perhapsa mistake for tho, q.v.).theis, thighs, 114. 21 ; thies, Lb ;; thighes, C,theis, these, 124. 4; thes, 138. 27;cf. thies.then, than, 144. 9 ; but than,129. 5.ther, their, 114. 21.thies, these, 121. 29, and fq.; cf.theis.tho, then, 109. 23, and fq.th0, those, 110. 19, and fq. ; th00,353. 3.thrugly, throughly,153. 9.togedur, togedre, together, 142.I ; 145. I r ; to guyder, Y ; togiders, Lb ; to gethers, D' ; togydre, C.toke, taken, 139. I.trappers, horse-trappings, 125. 21.tredid, treded, treated, 109. I g ;145. 9 ; but treted, 145. 26.treis, trees, 141. I I.vessail, plate, gold or silver, 125.19. (viage, journey, voyage, 124. 15.understande, understand, p.p.understood, 130. 23 ; 154. 2.undoubtably, indubitably, 134. a I.unite, unyed, united, I 12. 15, 17.vnneth, scarcely, with difficulty,114. 12 ; unnethes, Lb. : A.S.unea5e.vnsuyrte, insecurity, 119. 3; cf.suirte.vser, usury, 118. 27 : Fr. usure.vttermest, outermost, I I4 18.W.warr, vb. act. to make war upon,130. 21. C, Y, D1, Da, insertvarious prepositions, ' upon,''ayenst,' 'with,' after the verb:cf.welthe, wealthy, I I 5. 29 ; 348. 20 ;welthy, 149. 27.werely, verily, 117. 3 ; verely,I53 9.werre, war, 123. 5 ; pl. werrys,348. 12.whom, home, 153. 18.wiren, to make war upon, 348 10 :A.S. werrien ; see warr.with, against, 144. 21 : A.S. wiv.wone, dwelling, home, possessions,I 56. 8.wonned, woned, wont, 121. 32.woxe, waxed, grew, 348. 2.yefte, gift, 153. 10 ; yeftis, gifts,121. 25. In 119. 9 we havegiftes, where D' has yftes. ryeve, to give, 153. 23 ; yeden,given, 152. 20.yif, if, 347. 12.yit, it, 352. 19.yit, yet, 352. 29.ynoghe, ynough, 122.26 ; 113.9 :cf. i now.NOTE.-T~~ jfgtc~es printed in large lfype refeer to the actual text of Fortescuc ;those in small type to the Introduction and Notes.A.Abduction, forcible, of women, p.25.Admiral, see Nazy.Egidius Romanus, p. 175 ; his DeRegipnine, pp. 175-176; translationsof, ib. ; obligations ofFortescue to, pp. 98, 176 ; citedby him, pp. 109, 177 ; preferstyranny to insubordinat~on, p.179.Africa, constitutions of, p. 113.Ahab, pp. 117, 206.Albany, Alexander Stuart, Dukeof, p. 260.Albert of Mecklenburg, King ofSweden, p. 262.Alchemy, Statute against, p. 84. note ; dispensed with, pp. 83-84note.Xlcock, John, Bishop of Rochester,P. 333.Alexander I I I, p. 204.- v, P. 243.Aleyn, Dr., p. 53 note.Alienation of land, restrictions on,PP. 273-274.- of royal revenues, v. Crown.Alienations, licences for, pp. 134,273-274.Alnwlck, lost by the Lancastrians,p. 60';. recoGered, p. 61 ; lostagaln, lb. ; recovered, ib. ; finallylost, p. 62.Alphonso, brother of Louis IX ofFrance, p. 265.Ambassadors, expense of sendingand receiving, pp. 124, 211-212,214, 24-24 I, 244-245 ; scale ofpayment of, pp. 239-240 ; earliestresident, p. 242 ; their character,ib.' Ambidexter ' jurors, p. 29.Anglia, see England.AngoulCme, see Charles.Anjou, Geoffrey Plantagenet, Countof, p 356. See also Charles,Louts.Anne of Bohemia, pp. I, 264.Annuities, v. Pensions.Anonymous letters, p. 76 note.Anson, George, Lord, p. 335.Antigonus, p. 252.Apprentice-at-law, pp. 41 fzofe, 42note.Aquinas, St. Thomas, obligationsof Fortescue to, pp. 98, 172-173 ; cited by him, pp. 109,110,117, 183 ; his importance in medizvalhistory, p. 171 ; popularityof his Ue Regi71zine, ib. ;his theory of the best constitution,p: 173 ; effects the fusion ofthe Aristotelian philosophy withthe doctrines of the Church,p. 187 ;, condemns tyrannicide,but just~fies resistance to tyrants,pp. 205-206.Aquitaine, division of estates in, p.I01 note ; expense of, pp. 211,2!4 ; revenues of, p. 213 : lossOf, p. 235-Arbitration, p. 22.Arc, Joan ofip. 195.Archers, the strength of England,pp. 137-138, 282 ; need of, topractise, p. 138 ; payillent of, p.224 ; excellence of Cheshire andLancashire in, p. 283.

Archery, Statutes enforcing thepractice of, pp. 282-283.Arderne, Peter, Chief Baron Exch.,pp. 50-5 I note.Aristocracy, state of the English,p. 3 I note ; see also No6les.Aristocratic theory of society, statementof, p. 31 note.Aristotle. infatuation of the MiddleAges for, pp. I 86-188 ; influenceof, on medizval political philosdphy,p. 82 ; ~ortescue's- quotationsfrom, pp. 99-100, 255 ;cited by Fortescue, pp. 112, 119,128. 137.~rmagnac, Count of, embassy to,p. 240.Armour, view of, p. 284.Arms, Assize of, p. 283.Army, Standing, see France.Arras, Congress of, p. 241 ; exportof monev to. D. 118.Arrows, nianifictire of, regulatedby Statute, p. 283 ; price of, ib. ;feathers for, lb.Arthur, King, pp. 115, 186, 201.Ari~ndel, John Fitz-Alan, 15th Earlof, p. 30 note.- Richard Fitzalan, 12th Earl of.p. 274.-- 13th Earl of, p. 274.- Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury,his address to Parliamenton the accession of Henry IV,p. 287.Arundels, obligations of Henry IVto, p. 16.Ashley, Sir John, governor of Alnwickfor Edward IV, p. 61 ;captured by Sir Kalph Percy, ib.Assignments of revenue, for paymentof debt, p. In note; for rewards,pp. 119, 208 ; difficulty ofobtaining payment of, ib.Assvria. historv of. D. 184.~thkniins, cause df their greatness,p. 150.~Gorne~, Kings, p. 45 note ; paymentof, p. 222.Attorneys, numbers of, reduced byStatute, p. 32.Auctoritntes Aristotelis, p. 99.Audeley, Sir James, p. 354.Augustine, St., cited by Fortescue,PP. 98-9~9180, 183.Augustus, v. Ociavzan.Auvergne, William of, Bishop ofParis (Parisiensis), p. 181 ; hisCur Beus Ho7no cited by Fortescue,pp. 98, 181.Ayscough, William, Bishop of Salisbury,his murder, pp. 248, 293.B.Babylon (i.e. Old Cairo), Sultanof,. pp. 135, 276.Balbl, John, of Genoa (Januensis),p. 203.Barnburgh. recovered bv the Lan- -~--castrik;, p. 61; lost 'again, ib. ;recovered, ib. ; finally lost, p. 62.Barnet, battle of, p. 70.Basin, Thomas, Bishop of Lisieux,his constitutional views, p. 196.Basle, Council of, pp. 239,241,243-244 ; export of money to, p.318.Bath and Wells, Bishops of, seeBekynton, Stillington.Bayeux, Bishop of, see Castiglione.Beaufort, Henry, Cardinal, Bishopof Winchester, said to have incitedHenryV to claim the regencyduring his father's life, p. 7 note ;rivalry with Gloucester, pp. 8-9,18 ; his death,,^. 10; resists anattempt to asslgn appropriatedrevenue, p. 12 note ; consents,ib.; acts as loan contractor to thegovernment, pp. 12-13 ; purchasesChirk, p. 275 ; connexionwith the fourth Crusade againstthe Hussites, p. 285 ; payment ascouncillor, pp. 302-303 ; addressto the Parliament of 1404, p.322.- Margaret, p. 75 note.- Thomas, Admiral, p. 238 ; officesheld by him, p. 327. 'Beaumanoir, the French Jurist, p.193.Beauvais, Vincent of, see Vincentof Beauvais.Becket, Agnes, p. 338.- Gilbert, p. 338.- Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury,pp. 175, 338 ; his politicaltheories, p. 204.Bedford, Jacquetta of Luxernburg,Duchess of, p. 271.Bedford, John Dukeof,p.z39; gainsthe battle of Verneull, p. 199 ;Warden of the East March, p.225 ; Chief Councillor, p. 300;payment as ditto, p. 303 ; officesheld by, under Henry IV, p. 327.Bedingfield, family of, owners ofMS. Laud. 593, p. 88.Bek, Anthony de, Bishop of Durham,p. I 74.Bekynton, Thomas, Bishop of BathandWells,embassy of, to the Countof Armagnac, p. 240 ; to Calais,ib. ; report on the state of Aquitaine,p. 235 ; his salary unpaid,p. 241 ; Chancellor to HumphreyDuke of Gloucester, p. 308.Belus, the first king, pp. 111, 18-181, 183-184.Benefices, how to be given, pp.3 39-34'3.Benevolences, pp. 39, 209.Bernard, St., cited,. pp. 120, 292 ;his De Re Familzari, p. 216.Berwick, danger of, in 1414, p.225 ; expense of, p. 226 ; Surrenderof to the Scots, agreedon, p. 55 note ; effected, pp. 56-57 note.Billing, Sir Thomas, Chief JusticeK. B., pp. 27 note, 72 note.Blakamore, Baron of, an impostorcalling himself, p. 245.Blake, Edmund, Clerk of the King'sWorks, p. 231.Blakeney, Clerk of the Signet, p: 336.Bodrugan, Henry, Esq., a plrate,P. 233.Boethius, cited by Fortescue, p.99.Bohemia (Boeme), risings in, dueto poverty, p. 139 ; causes ofHussite wars, pp. 284-285.Bohan, Mary de, first wife ofHenry IV, p. 270.Bolton, Edmund, p. 333.Bonaventura, St., p. 175.Boneville, Sir Willialn (afterwardsLord), pp. 21 note, 46, 330.Boniface VIII, p. 193.Boothe, \fTilliam, Archbishop of~ork; p. 325. 'Bourbon, Duchess of, pp. 63 note,64.Bourchier, Henry, Viscount, p.248 ;see also Essex.Bourchier, Thomas, Archbishopof Canterbury, pp. 26 note, 220,272.- William, Count of Eu, p. 272.Bow-staves, importation and priceof, regulated by Statute, pp. 282-281.dBow-strings, price of, p. 283.Bows, price of, p. 283; keeper ofthe king's, ih.Bracton, character of his works,p. 82 ; anti-papal views, p. 103note; his interpretation of themaxim. Quod$rinci'i placuit, p.185 ; Selden's refutation of it, ib.Brkzk, Pierre de, p. 53 note; sentto assist Margaret of Anjou, pp.61-62 ; retires with her to theContinent, p. 63 ; maintains herand her followers, ib.!.Brittany, origin of the name. D.zoo ; a ha;nt of pirates, p. 233.- Francis 11, Duke of, assists Margaretof Anjou, p. 59.Brokage, pp. 20 note, 25, 336-337.Brotherton, Thomas of, son ofEdward I, p. 272.Brown, Thomas, Bishop of Norwich,p. 307.Brug, or Burg, Sir John, p. 44note.Brutus (Brute). his election asking, pp. 112; 185-186.Buckhounds, Master of the, P. 315.Buckingham, Humphrey ~taffGrd,Duke of,, pp. 49-50, 51 ; Captainof Calals, p. 228 ; hereditaryWarden of the Cinaue Portsand constable of ~o;er Castle,P. 331.Budget, of 1411, p. 211 ; of 1421,P. 212 ; of 1433, pp. 213-214.Bullion, export of &C., v. Money.Burgundian Court, splendour of,p 245.Burgundy, Bastard of, p. 64.- Dukes of, arbitrary taxation by,pp. 132-133 ; see also Charlesthe Bold, Philip the Good.Burke, see Fortesctre, and Price.Burning, punishment of, pp. 42,102.Burton, John, p. 44 note.Bury, John, the adversary of Pecock,p. 188.Bute, John Earl of, p. 335.

Cade, rising of, pp. 11, 284; hiscomplaints, pp, 20 note, 22, 24notes, 50, 237, 292, 310, 325 ;trial of his adherents, pp. 50,248.~aiio, v. Rabylon.Calabria. Tohn of, pp. 58 note, 66.Calais, dkger of under Henry IV,p. 5 ; under Edward IV, pp. 60,69 ; expense of, pp. 122, 211-212,214,227-229; revenues of, p.228: victualling of, p. 229; officersof, i'b. ; value of, p. 230 ; negotiationsat, p. 241 ; rules of theStaple of, p. 316 ; petition againstthe inhabitants of, p. 319.Calixtines, the, p. 285.Calixtus 111, pp. 243, 276.Cambridge, Richard, Earl of, pp.8, 77 note.Canon Law, respect of Fortescuefor. P. 99 ; borrows quotationsfro'm; note.Canterbury, Archbishop of, first adviserof the Crown, p. 301 note.- Archbisho~s of, see Artrndel,~ecket, Bourchier, Dunstan,Kenzp, Morton, Rich, Staflord,Styafford, Sudbury.Canvas, pp. 114, 197-198.Capetian dynasty, pp. 256-257.Capgrave, John, his lamentationson the maritime decline of England,pp, zoo, 237 ; change offront on the dynastic question,PP. 96 note, 343.Carlingford, Ch~chester Fortescue,Lqrd, P. 73.Carlisle, In danger of being givenup to the Scots, p. 56.- Bishop of, see Lzrli~ley.Carnarvon, Exchequer of, p. 331.Cassivelaunus, p. 186.Castiglione, Zanone di, Bishop ofBayeux, his appeal to HumphreyDuke of Gloucester, p.286.Castles, Constables of, pp. 330-331.Caux, Country of, a desert, pp. 141,291 ; rising in, pp. 141, 290-291.Caxton, William, his address toEdward IV, p. 343.Chamberlains, v. Countries.Champerty, p. 27.Chancellor, increase in his power,p. 300 ; his salary, p. 215 ; dittoas Councillor, p. 240.Chancery, Inns of, see Inns.Chapels royal, expenditure on, pp.125, 247, 351 ; clerks and chap.lains of, pp. 339-340.Charles, Count of AngoulCme, p.176.- of Anjou, p. 56 note.- the Bald, p. 257.--the Bold, Duke of Burgundy,pp. 55 note, 257; favours theLancastrian cause, pp. 58, 66;iqterview with Louis XI atTours,. p. 58 ; entertains Margaretof Anjou and her followers atBruges, pp. 63-64 ; marries Margaretof York, p. 67.- V of France, pp. 194, 267-*A2bX.- V1 of France, p. 194.- V11 of France, p. 276 ; hisdeath, p. 57 ; constitutional importanceof his reign, pp. 193,195-196.-V111 of France, as dauphincontracted to Elizabeth of England,p. 264.- of France, Duke of Guienne,supports Lancastrian cause, p.68 note.- the Great, pp. 129, 266.- Duke of Lower Lotharingia (?),pp. 129, 256.- hlartel (Marcellus), pp. 129,256.- the Simple, p. 256.Charlotte of Savoy,wlfe of Louis XI,p. 176.Chartesey, William, p. 307.Chastellain, his judgement on Mar-garet of Anjou, p. g note.Chatham, William P~tt, Earl of, p.218.Chester, Earldom of, pp. 330-333 ;erected into a principal~ty, pp.274, 333 ; revenues of, p. 213.- Exchequer of, p. 331.Chichester, Bishops of, see MOleyns,Pecock.Childeric, deposition of, pp. 1299255-256.Chirk, castle and lordship of, pp.134, 213, 274-2753 330.Chivalry, character of, p. 15.Christian I, king of the Scandinaviankingdoms, p. 262.Church, corruption of, pp. 14, 26;revenues of, used to supplementofficial salaries, pp. 311-312 ; cf.pp. 328, 352.Churches, robberies from, p. 25note.Cinque Ports, Warden of the, pp.151, 331.Civil Law, respect of Fortescuefor, pp. 98, 184.- wars, English, causes of, accordingto Fortescue, p. 348.-- , Roman, see Rovzans.Clarence, George Duke of, pp. 32-33 note, 198, 220 ; expelled fromEngland, p. 68 ; reversion ofcrown secured to, p. 70; proclamationagainst, p. 208 ; grantsto, P. 279.- John, Bastard of, p. 337.- Lionel Duke of, pp. 77, 231,272,353-354,356.- Thomas Duke of, p. 274;chief of his father's council, p.300 ; offices held by him underHenry IV, p. 327.Clergy, appealed to for loans, p.I znote--Clermont, Thomas Fortescue, Lord,P. 73.Cleve, William, clerk of the king'sworks, p. 231.Cliftoun, translator of Egidius Romanusand Vegetius, p. 176.Clodone, Clodoneus, v. Clovzs.Cloth, import of foreign, -. forbidden,P. 3x9.Clovis. first Christian King. of--0 --France, pp. 129, 255.~.Clvfford, Robert de. first Wardenof the'~arches, p.'226.Coasts, protection of, pp. 123, 234.Coin, export of, &C., v. Money.Collectors, &c. of Custon~s, nonresidenceof, p. 334 ; corruptappointment of, p. 337 ; salariesof, pp. 212, 214.Collectors of Tenths and Fifteenths.abuses connected with, p. 24.Colonna, Egidio, v. Kgzdius Romanus.Commerce, disturbance of, underHenry IV, p. 6 ; Edward IV'scare for, see Edward IV. Seealso Protective policy.Commissions, special, pp. 123,248.Common-place books, medizval,P. 99.Common Pleas, Chief Justice of,a member of the Royal Household,p. 46 note.Commons, English, condition of,v. England.- power of, under Henry IV,p. 4 ; growth of, under Edward111, pp. 14-15.Commynes, Philippe de, his lawsuits,p. 32 ; judgement on Margaretof Anjou, p. 9 note ; comparisonand possible relationswith Fortescue, p. 104; his constitutionalviews, pp. 104, 196 ;his views on the subject ofambassadors, p. 241.Companies, p. 24.Cunzpendizrm Morale, v. WaWam,Roger of:Confiscations, p. 39.Conflans, treaty of, p. 257.Consiliunz, derivation of, accordingto Egidius Romanus, p. 310.Constables, v. Castles, Dover, andTower.Constance, Council of, p. 243.Constantine, donation of, pp. 323,324-325.- Britain, of Unttany, p. 115. elected King ofConstantinus, p. 201.Constitution, theory of a mixed orbalanced, p. 173.Constitutional limitations, how fara lessening of the royal power,pp. 217-219.Corbet. Guy, p. 43 note.- Sir Robert, p. 43.Corn, export and Import of, regulatedby Statute, pp. 319-320.Cornburght, Avery, yeoman of theKing's chamber, p. 336.Cornwall, Duchy of, pp. 329-333 ;revenues of, p. 2 I 3:Corodies, definition of, pp. 337-338 ; how to be given, pp. 153-154 ; origin of, ib. ; exemptionsfrom, granted, pp. 338-339 ; saleof, P. 339.Coronation Oath, p. 341.

Corporation sole, p. 341.' Corser,' the King's, p. 247.Council of the English Governmentin France, pp. 303, 312.Council of the Prince of Wales, p.333.- Great, not noticed by Fortescue.,.. DD. 4. .,-.. 707 ; compositionL ,., .-303-304; committees of; pp.296, 315 ; jurisdiction of, beneficial,pp. 21-22 ; place of meeting,pp. 304-305 ; Fortescue'sscheme for reorganizing, pp. 4,31, 146-149, 295, 349-352;anticipates the actual develop-ment of, pp. 295-296 ; paymentof, pp. 122, 146-147, 21 I,2 I 4,302 - 303,350-351 ; fines forabsence from, p. 302 ; to advise onallgifts and rewards, pp.143-144,150,153-154,156-157,345-346,349, 351, 352 ; subjects of deliberation,pp. 147-148, 305-306,315-316,350 ; has its originin the Curia Regis, p. 300 ; itscomposition, pp. 145, 294-297,349-350 ; controlled by Parliament,p. 297 ; predominanceof great lords in, pp. 145-146,294-297 ; expense of, pp. 147,350-351 ; prepares the budget,D. TO

~ .-.~--hopes entertained of him, pp.343-344; his desire to do justice,pp. 37, 203, 344 ; his marriage,p. 38 ; reaction against him,pp. 38, 344 ; balances the Wydvillesagainst the older nobility, p.38, cf. pp. 295-296 ; deteriorationin his character and governmentafter 147 I, p. 38 ; compared withHenry V1 I, pp. 38-39, 209 ; repressivepolicy, pp. 38-39, cf. pp.76-77; his character,p.40 ; his negotiationswith Scotland, pp. 60,66,259 ; scheme for marrying, tothe Dowager Queen of Scots! p.60 ; besieges the Lancastriancastles in the north, p 61 ; goestowardsthe north agaln,p.6z?zote ;makes a truce with Louis XI, p.66 ; breaks with the Nevilles, p.67 ; a prisoner in their hands, p.68 ; issues proclamations againstClarence and Warwick, p. 208 ;-household of, pp. 220-221 ; ward- Irobe accounts of, pp. 221, 246 ;endeavours to increase the depeildenceof the judges upon theCrown, p. 223 ; establishes abody-guard, pp. 223-224; hiscare for trade and commerce,pp. 238, 319 ; his love of dress,pp. 245-246; of plate, &C., p.247 ; administers justlce in person,p. 249 ; purposes to 'live ofhis own,' pp. 250, 340 ; his designson Scotland, p. 260 ; sanctionsthe evasion of the statuteDe Donis, p. 278 ; his will, pp.278, 340, 342 ; his speech to theParliament of 1467-8, pp. 290,343 ; discontent caused by hisfutile invasion .of France, pp. 39,293 ; preparatlons for that expedition,p.326;appointsacouncilfor his son, p. 333 ; refuses toannul grants of corodies, p. 339.Edward VI, his council, p. 296.Edward, Prince of Wales, (theBlack Prince,) p. 356.-- son of Henry VI, retires toWales after battle of Northampton,p. 54 ; to Scotland, ib. note ;schemes for marrying, to PrincessMargaret of Scotland, p. 55note ; retires to Scotland afterTowton, pp. 56, 58 ; at Edin-burgh, p. 59 ; visits the Queenof Scots at Falkland, ib. ; accompanieshis mother to the Continent,1462, ib. ; ditto, 1463, pp.63-64 ; letter to Ormonde, p. 65 ;said to be going to marry LouisXI'S daughter, p. 67 note ; marriagearranged with Warwick'sdaughter, pp. 68 note, 69 ; landsat Weymouth, p. 70 ; killed atTewkesbury, p. 71 ; the De NaturdLegis Natzrr~ written forhim, p. 84 ; the De Laurli6us addressedto him, p. 85 ; provisionsfor his minority, p. 332 ; createdPrince of Wales and Earl ofChester, ib. ; articles sent by himto Warwick, pp. 348 ff.Edward, Prince of Wales, son ofEdward IV,p. 249 ; createdprinceof Wales and Earl of Chester,p. 33" his household, p. 333.Egremond, Thomas Percy, Lord,p. 248.Egypt, nature of royalty in, pp. 112,191 ; Joseph's settlement of, pp.135,275-276 ; riches of the commonsof, pp. 135, 276 ; medi~valdynasties of, p. 276; Turkishconquest of, ib.Elizabeth, Queen, her economy, p.252.El~zabeth Wydville, wife of EdwardIV, p. 249 ; her household,p. 265.Elizabeth, daughter of EdwardIV, wife of Henry VII, wardrobeaccounts of, p. 221 ; contractedto the Dauphin (=Charles VIII),p. 264.Ellenborough, Lord Chief Justice,p. 291.Embassies, see Anzbassczdors.Embracery, p. 27.Empire, theory of the mediaeval,pp. 323-325.England, invasions of Scots andPicts, p. 115 ; prosperity of theCommons, pp.115,139-140,286-287.; their poverty would be anatlonal disaster, pp. 137-139 ;large supplies granted by, PP.139-140 ; exposed to attack, PP.115, 138, zoo ; ai7np~tia of, P.287 ; derivation of the nameAittgZia from Aizgubs, p. 287 ;number of small landowners in,pp. 287-288 ; laws of, potentiallyperfect, pp. 320-321 ; amount ofQueen's dowry, pp. 131,198,264 ;Queen's council, officers, &C., p.265. See also France, ScotlandEnglish royalty, politic character- -, -07, .p. 170.Entailed lands not permanentlyforfeited, pp. 136, 277-278.Entails, origin of, pp. 277-278.Eric, king of the Scandinaviankingdoms, p. 287.Escheats, pp. 134, 273.Esquire, income of an: p. 329.Essex, Henry Bourchier, Earl of,pp. 272,344. See also Bourchier.Estates-General, see France.Ethiopia, constitution of, p. 191..Eudes, v. Odo.Exchanges, foreign, attempts toregulate, p. 318 ; tax on, ib.Exchequer, exactions at, p. 315.Exeter, dispute between Corporationand Cathedral of, p. 49.- Bishop of, see Staford.- Henry Holland, Duke of, pp. 55note, 70 ; keeper of the sea, p. 237.Expenditure, ordinary and extraordinary,see Crown.Fines, p. 213 ; inequitable, pp. 39,119, 209-210.- for licence to marry, pp.. 271-272, 274; for licence to allenateland, pp. 273-274 ; see alsoKnighthood.Fishers, protection of, pp. 123,233-- -234.Fitzwarine, William Bourchier,Lord, p. 273.Fogg, Sir John, p. 248.Forcible entries, pp. 20 note, 21, 28.Foreigners, jealousy of, in England,PP 318-319.Foresters, master, pp. 151, 330.Foresters, &C., royal,' pp. 151, 329.Forests, royal, military force furnishedby, pp. 151, 329 ; justicesof, PP. 151? 330.Forfeiture, right of the Crown to,P. 273.Forfeltures, reversal of, p. 277.Forgery of documents, p. 31.Fortager, see Vortigern.Fortescue, Sir Adrian, his death,p. 92 ; writer of MS. Digby 145,PP. 92-93.- Sir Henry, brother of the ChiefJustice, pp.22 note, 43; Chief JusticeC. P. in Ireland, p. 41.Hugh, Earl, p. 73.- Sir. John, father of the ChiefJustlce, p. 41.-- scheme for the - better endow-~ -ment of the Crown, pp. 13-14?Falconbridge, the Bastard, punish- 250-251 ; for reducing the powerment of his adherents, pp. 210, of the nobles, pp. 14, 19, 3-31 ;248.draws up a programme for theFastolf, Sir John, pp. 207, 248; Lancastrian restoration, pp. 38,claims for military service, p. I7 42, 70, 89, 95, 348 K. ; his birthnote; his lawsuits, pp. 32, 52. and parentage, pp. 40-41 ; be-' Fee'd men,' the Icing's, pp. 328- comes a sergeant, p. 40 ; edn-329.cated at Exeter College, Oxford,Female succession, .question of, in and Lincoln's Inn,p.41; governorEngland, p. 75 ; in France, see of Lincoln's Inn,ib.; presentat theFrance.gaol-delivery at Salisbury, p. 42 ;Feoffments, fraudulent, pp. 20 note, his marriage, ib. ; his landed28 note, 30-31.property, pp. 42-44, 50 note, 72-Ferrara, council of, p. 244.73 ; acts as trustee, and executorFeudalism, repression of, p. 14 ; of wills, p. 44 note ; his life as aspurious variety of, p. 15.barrister, pp. 44-45 ; Judge ofFifteenth Century, character of, p. Assize, p.45; I

XrlD er,Boneville's adherents to bail, ib. ;sent on a special commission intoNorfolk, pp. 46-47 ; into Yorkshire,p. 47 ; ill of sciatica, ib. ;trier of petitions, ib.; refuses todeliver a prisoner at the king'scommand, pp. 47-48 ; recelvesletters of fraternity from ChristChurch, Canterbury, p. 48 ; actsas arbitrator between Cathedraland Corporation of Exeter, pp.48-49 ; his optimistic views andstatements, pp. 14, 22 nok, 29note ; his connexion with thetrial of Suffolk,, p. 49 ; exemptedfrom Resumpt~on Act of 1450,ib. ; sits on a special commissionin Kent, pp. 49-50 ; in danger ofassault, p. 50 ; his political partizanship,ib. ; shares the unpopularityof the Court party, ib. ;objected to by Cade as partial,ib. ; figures in the satirical dirgeupon the death of Suffolk, p. 51 ;in list of unpopular persons, ib. ;consulted on Thorpe's Case, ib. ;arbitrates between Wentworthand Fastolf, p. 52; advises theCouncil in reference to the sheriffdomof Lincolnshire, ib. ; sitson a special commission at theGuildhall, ib. ; probably consultedon the pacification of 1458,ib. ; activity at the Parliamentof Coventry, pp. 52-53,; feoffeefor carrying out the king's will,p. 53 note ; his subsequent replyto the Duke of York's claim, p.54; summoned to the Parliamentof 1460, p. 54 note ; but notrecorded to have been present,p. j4; presides in the King'sBench for the last time, ib.; presentat Towton, but probably notat Wakefield or St. Alban's, p. 55;withdraws to the North after St.Alban's, ib.; to ScotlandafterTowton,p. 56; charged with 'rearingwar' against Edward IV, p. 57 ;question of his right to the t~tle ofChancellor, pp. 57 note, 300 ;compared with Clarendon bySelden, p. 57 note ; alleged connexionwith scheme for invadingEngland, p. 58 nok; at Edinburgh,p. 59; helps to maintainHenry VI, ib. ; probably did notaccompany Margaret of Anjouto the Continent in 1462, ib.note ; accompanies Margaret tothe Continent, 1463,. p. 63 ; leftat Bruges, ib. ; retlres to St.Mighel in Barrois, p. 64; POverty,ib.; letter to Ormonde, pp.64-65 notes; goes to Paris, pp.64-65 ; favours the alliance ofthe Lancastrians with Warwick,pp. 68-69 ; memorials addressedby him to Louis XI, ib. ; landsat Weymouth, p. 70 ; takenprisoner at Tewkesbury, p. 71 ;his execution expected, ib. note ;submits to Edward IV, p. ;jz, cf.p. 79 note ; required to wrlte 111favour of Edward's title, p. 72;reversal of his attainder and restorationof his estates, ib. ; madea Privy Councillor, ib. : residesat Ebrington, ib. ; buried there,ib. ; date of his death unknown,ib. ; his wife, family, and descendants,p. 73 ; the first politicalphilosopher of the Middle Agesto base his theories on observationand practice, pp. 82, IOO ;his suggestions for reform, howfar origical, p. 87 ; prepares theway for the New Monarchy, pp.87, 251 ; his knowledge of theBible, p. 96 ; his interest in history,pp. 96-97 ; authors quotedby him not a safe test of theextent of his reading, pp.,97-IOO ;his respect fo- the CIVI~ andCanon Law, pp. 98, 184 ; his observationof foreign countries, p.IOO ; his comparison of Englandand France, pp. 100-101 ; hischaracter, pp. 102-104 ; his piety,p. 102 ; zeal for liberty, ib. ;humanity, ib. ; pride in his profession,ib. ; confidence in parliamentarygovernment, p. 103 ;orthodoxy, ib. ; strong h~erarchicalviews, ib. ; partizanship, ib. ;fidelity and self-sacrifice,pp. 103-104 ; compared with Pecock, p.104; Gascoigne, ib. ; Commynes,ib.; Burke! pp. 223, 2j3-254,278,281,289 ; importance of hls writingsin the seventeenth century,p. 105 ; formerly owned MS. Raw-linson C. 398, p. 180 ; possiblyassisted in drawing up the LiberNiger Dosnus Regis, pp. 220-221 ; compares English andRoman law, p. 184; his theoryof the cause of the Hussite wars,p. .285 ; wishes the Council tosh~eld the throne, p. 293 ; chiefcouncillor to Henry V1 In exile,pp. 57 note, 300; exults in theseverity of the English law,p. 291;his experience as a judge,pp. 289,291 ; his theory of the causes ofthe English civil wars, p. 348;' the old knight exiled,' p. 353.Fortescue's Works, class~fied, p.74 :-De Titulo Edwardi ComitisMarchie, pp. 74,77 ; MS. of,p. 76 note.Of the Title of the House ofYork, PP- 74976 not~9779355-356; MSS. of, pp. 74 note,76 note.De fensio jwis Domm Lancmtrire,pp. 74, 77 ; no existingMS. of, p. 76 note.A Defence of the House ofLancaster, PP. 54, 74-75,77, 353-354; MSS. of, P. 76note.De Natwd Legis Nature, pp.74, 77-78, 82-84 ; MSS. of,p. 76 note.Declaration upon Certain Writlngs,pp. 78-79 ; MSS. of, p.76 note.Dialogue between Understandingand Faith, pp. 79-80.De Laudibus Legunz Anglicz,pp. 84-86 ; MSS. of, p. 91.The Monarchia, pp. 86-96 ;its interest, p. 86 ; its scope,ib.; occasion of its composition,pp. 87, 94-96, 223-224, 2797 325-3269 343-3443346 ; MSS. of, PP. 87-94 3the Epttome, p. 94.Lost works, pp. 68 note, 76 note,96.Spurious works, p. 7.5.On the Commod~t~es of England,pp. 80-81 ; MS. of,p. 80.The Twenty-two Righteous-nesses belonging to a King,p. 81 ; MSS. of, ib.Advice to purchasers of Land,pp. 81-82 ; MSS. of, ib.Fortescue, John, grandson of theChief Justice, p. 73.-- Lord, of Credan, pp. 73, 93.- Martin, son of the Ch~ef Tust~ce.PP 44, 73.Maud, h ~s daughter, p. 43 note.- Sir Richard, his brother, killedat the battle of St. Alban's, pp.- -41,.5!.- Wllham, his grandson, p. 73.-- Master of the Rolls, p. 73; seealso Carlingford, Clermont.Foulon, p. 197.Fountains Abbey, p. I I Izote.Fowey, pillaged by pirates, p. 233.France, an absolute monarchy, pp.85, 100, 113, 185,192-193 ; royaloppression, pp. 116-117 ; taxat~on,pp. 131-132,135 ; see also Salt,~abelZe on; Wines, quartage on;taxes granted unwillingly, p. 139 ;taxation, arbitrary, pp. 113-114,193-195, 266-268; exemption ofthe nobles from taxation, pp. 113-114,139,196, cf. p. 261 ;establishmentof thestandingarmy andperlnanenttaille, pp. 195-196 ; theirincrease,^. 197; mercenary troops,p. 115 ; influence of Crown onelections of abbots, p. 175; fertilityof France, pp. 114, 197 ;misery of the Commons, pp. 113-114, 140, 197-198 ; submissivenessdue to cowardice rather thanpoverty, pp. 141-142, 291 ; Inabilityof the peasants to fight,p. 198 ; frequency of aristocraticrebellions, p. 129; absorption ofthe great fiefs, pp. 265-266, 270 ;the twelve peers of, pp. 131, 266 ;question of female succession,. p.177; compared by Fortescue w~thEngland in condition and institutions,pp. 100-101, 201; domainsof the Crown smaller thanin England, p. 131 ; inalienable,p. 342 ; queen'sdowry less thanin England, pp. 131,264; the EstatesGeneral, pp. 193-195; comparedto the English Parliament,pp. 113, 195. See also Thieves.- Dukes of, p. 257.

Franchise, question of, in medizvalEngland, p. 170; not touched uponby Fortescue, ib.Francs-archers, pp. 197, 283.Frank, value of, p. 312. -Frederick 111, p. 325 ; hopes of TheLancastrians from,,p. 65'; passionfor collecting precious stones, p.246.French language, decline of, inEngland, p. IOI note.- wars, constitutional effects of,pp. 8, 15, 16-17.Gabelle, v. Salt.Games, unlawful, pp. 282-283.Gascoigne, Thomas, compared withFortescue, p. 104; his theory ofthe Hussite wars, pp. 284-285.Gauchd, Henri de, translator ofEgidius Romanus' De Regintine,p. 176.Gaunt, John of, pp. 75, 354, 356 ;his war on Spain, p. 130 ; hisopinion about Calais, pp 229-230;his claim to the Castillan Crowndisapproved by Fortescue, pp.261-264.~eoge 1i1, p. 335.Gel veis, William, the king's ' corser,'p. 247.Giles Colonna, see Egidius Ronzanus.Glanville, character of his works,p. 82.Glendower, Owen, p. 278.Gloucester, Gilbert de Clare, Earlof, rebels against Henry 111, pp.129-130, 257.- Humphrey Duke of, p. 34 ;his rivalry with Beaufort, pp.8-9, 18 ; his death a blow to thehouse of Lancaster, pp. 9- 10 ;possible motive of his war policy,p. 7 note; purveyors of, p. 30note ; ill-treatment of an allegedvillein by, p. 31 note; recelvespresents of books, p. 23 ; presentsbooks to the University of Oxford,p. 176 ; Captain of Calais, p. 228 ;his manifesto against Beaufort,PP: 241, 275,. 301 note, 305, 336 ;Chlef Councillor, p. 300; paymentas ditto, pp. 214, 303 ; his counciland chancellor, p. 308 ; officesheld by him, pp. 327-328.Gloucester, Richard, Duke of(= Richard 111, q. v.), pp. 32-33note, 207-208, 220 ; hereditaryWarden of the West March, pp.225-226; Admiral, p. 238 ; grantsto, P. 279.Gloys, Sir Jarnes, p. 26 note.Good-lordship ' purchased, p. 23.Governments, divisions of, accordingto Fortescue, see Dominiunz ;according to Aristotle, p. 171 ;according to St. Tholnas and thePseudo-Aquinas, pp. 171-173 ;according to Xgidius Romanus,PP. 176-177.~ower,. ~ohn,' his address to HenryIv, p. 322.Grants, royal, restrained by statute,pp. 341-342 ; statutes dispensedwith, pp. 83 ~eote, 341 ; for termof life, p. 345.Gregory the Great, the first toadopt the title Servu seriomndDei, p. 252.Gregory VII, his political theories,pp: 204-205.Grevill, Jocosa, p. 43 note.-John, Esq., p. 43 note.Grey, Sir Ralph, goes over to theLancastrian side, p. 61, cf. p. 62note.Grey of Ruthin, Edmund, 4th Lord,p. I I note.-- Keginald, 3rd Lord, p. 309.Grymesby, Sir William, p. 71 note.Guienne, Duke of, see Charles ofFrance.Hadrian, p. 252.Hampden, John, of Hampden, p.307.Hanseatic League, power of, p.235-Hardyng, John, the Chronicler,urges Edward IV to come toterms with Henry VI, p. 61note.Harmenopulus, a Greek Jurist, p.185.Harriers, Master of the, p. 315.Harvest, importance of, p. 45.Head-pence, an illegal exaction inNorthumberland, p. 314.Hedgeley Moor, battle of, p. 62.Helynandus, cited by Fortescue,P. 99.Henry I, pp. 14, 270,356.11, Pp. 14, 204, 279, 355, 356.111, PP. 130, 257,341.- IV, p. 356 ; h~s accession,pp. 1-2 ; hopes entertained ofhim, pp. 5 note, 343 ; a Saviourof Soclety, pp. 4-5 ; his struggleto maintain himself, p. 5 ; hispoverty, pp. 5, 327 ; reactlonagainst him, p. 5 ; his troubledreign, death, and burial, p. 6 ;his obligations to the great lords,p. 16; unconstitutional commissionissued by, p. 239; sendsambassadors to Pisa, p. 243 ;acknowledges Alexander V, ib. ;concentration of earldoms in hishands, p. 270 ; concentrates thegreat offices In the hands of hisfamily, pp. 326-327.Henry V, p. 356 ; his command ofsupplies, p. 6 ; his activity duringhis father's reign, p. 7; claimsthe regency, ib.; adopts a conciliatorypolicy, ib. ; his reignconstitutionally unimportant, p.8 ; challenges the Dauphin, p.10 note ; his wars with France,their character and results, pp 2,7-8, 16-17 ; refuses to negot~atewith France in French, p. IOInote ; his household, p. 220; triesto repress plracy, p. 233 ; consultsthe merchants as to thekeeping of the sea,.^. 236; hiscare for the navy, lb. ; numberof his ships, ib. ; sends ambassadorsto Constance, p. 243 ;grants money for the completionof Westminster Abbey, p. 245;his arguments for the Frenchwar, p. 250 ; abolishes certaintaxes in France, but has to reimposethem, p. 267 ; his deathbed,p 278 ; chief of his father's .council, p. 300 ; offices held byhim as Prince of Wales, p. 327;appointments made by him, ditto,pp. 331-332; creation as Princeof Wales, Duke of Cornwall, andEarl of Chester, p. 332.Henry VI, pp. 863-356 ; his incapacityto rule, pp. 8-9; divisions.of his reign, p. 8 ; hismarriage, pp. 9-10 ; creates feoffeesfor executing his will, p. 53note; report of his restprationin 1463, p. 55 note ; retires toScotland after Towton,, pp. 56,58 ; charged with ' rearlng war 'against Edward IV, p. 57; goesto Kirkcudbright, p. 59 ; letterof credence for Fortescue, pp. 59note, 65 ; readiness to rise in hisfavour, p. 59 note; in danger ofbeing surrendered to Edward IV,p. 60; retires to St. Andrew's,ib. ; to Northumberland, pp. 60,61 ; returns to Scotland, p. 61 ;at Bamburgh, p. 62; returns toScotland, pp. 62, 63 note; atBywell, p. 62 ; escapes to Scotland,ib. ; thought to be dead,ib. note ; his movements between1463 and 1465, p. 65 ; betrayedand imprisoned, pp. 65-66 ; hisrestoration, pp. 38, 69 ; madepossible by Edward IV's misgovernment,p. 344; sends tofetch his wife and son, p. 70 note ;re-imprisoned after Barnet, p.70;his death and popular canonlzation,p. 71 ; a great reader ofChronicles, p. 96 note ; his aversionto field sports, p. 183 ;his household, pp. 219-220 ;proffers his obedience to CalixtusI11 and Pius 11, p. 243 ;sends ambassadors to Basle, pp.243-244; acknowledges the councilof Ferrara, p. 244; does justicein person on Cade's adherents,p. 248 ; letter to Eric,King of the Scandinavian kingdoms,p. 287 ; minority, p. 327 ;appoints a council for hls son,p. 333 ; weariness of his rule, p.344.Henry VII, compared with EdwardIV, pp. 38-39? 209 ; passlonfor collecting preclous stones, p.246 ; his economy, p. 252 ; unlonof estates in his person, p. 277 ;see also Rich?rzond, Earl 03- VIII, fortifies the Englishcoasts, p. 200; as ~rince madeWarden of the Marches, p. 226 ;

proposes to establish a schoolof diplomacy, p. 242 ; purchaseof jewels by, p. 246 ; his opporfunitiesfor establishing a despot-Ism, p. 252 ; will not allow his servantsto serve any one else, p. 337.Herbert, William, Lord, defeatsJasper Tudor,. p. 67 ; made Earlof Pembroke, lb.Hereford, Roger, Earl of, p. 270.Hermann, Bishop of Metz, p. 204.Herod, King, pp. 117, 206.Hexham, battle of, p. 62.Heydon, John, p. , ~ note. yHigden, h ~s scepticism on the sribjectof Arthur, p. 201 ; refuted byTrevisa, ib. See also Po&chrorzicon.Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims,his political theories, pp. 182,204.Hody, Sir John, Chief Justice K. B.,pp. 46, 50 note.Holland, Jacqueline, Duchess of, p.212.Hooker, Richard, see Pecock.Horn, export of unwrought, forbidden,p. 320.Household, royal, pp. 121-122,351-353: Dovertv of. and mea-, . . ,sures for reforming, pp. 13 note,219-221, 342.Howys, Sir Thomas, p. 22 note.Hugh Capet, pp. 128, 256-257.- 11, King of Cyprus, p. 173.- 111, King of Cyprus, p. 173.- the Great, pp. 129, 256.Hungerford, Robert, 3rd Lord, senton an embassy to France, p. 57 ;detained there, pp. 57-58 ; returnsto Scotland, p. 58; commandsin Alnwick, p. 61 ; capturedand beheaded, p. 62.= Molyfies, Lord, q. v.- Walter, 1st Lord, ambassador tothe council of Basle, p. 241.Hunting, medizval views on, p. 183.Huntingdon, John Holland, Earlof, pp. 19 note, 274.Huss, connexion with Wiclif, p. 285.Hussite wars, v. Bohemia.Hyldericus, v. Childeric.Impeachment, right of, by the Commons,p. rx.Indictments, false, p. 31.Inglefelde, Steward of Chirk, p. 274.Innocent VIII, p. 276.Inns of Court and Chancery, pp.41, 43 note, 103, 242.Insurrect~ons, v. Rtots and Risiqp.Ireland, bad state of, under HenryIV, p. 5 ; good government of, byRichard, Duke of York, p. 36 ;expense of, pp. 211-212, 214-215.Isldore, St., p. 182 ; cited by Fortescue,ib. ; popularity of his- - , .Etymol'ogrgra, ib.; the source ofmany medizval etymologies, p.r Ro.7.I&;, Steward of the Inner Temple,p. 311.Israel, children of, their governmentunder judges, and desirefor a king, pp. 109-110, 177-178; rebellions in the kingdomof, p. 262.Italians in London, attack on, p.52 note.James 11, of England, his theory ofroyalty, pp. 2-3.-- of Scotland, besieges Roxburghin the Lancastrian interest,p. 55 ; killed there, p. 257 ;murders William Earl of Douglas,p. 258 ; expels James Earl ofDouglas from Scotland, pp. 130,259.Jamyss, Elizabeth or Isabella, wifeof Chief Justice Fortescue, p. 42.Januensis, v. Balbi.Jewels, export of, v. Money.- roya1,p. 245; in pawn,pp. 13, 246.Jews, v. Israel; Children of; Jews InEngland, p. 321.Joanna, Queen of Henry IV, herdowry, p. 264.John of France, pp. 194, 267-268.- of Salisburv, see Salisburv.Joseph, his Gtlement of kgypt,pp. 136,275-276.Josephus, his aristocratic views,p. 178.Judges, corruption of, pp. 22, 223 ;dress of, p. 102 ; oath of, pp..22note, 146, 310 ; attend the PnvYCouncil, pp. 29 note, 46-47,148,296-298, 306, 350 ; payment of,pp. 211-212, 214, 222-223; liveriesof, pp. 211, 221, 223 ; seealso Courts Edward IV.Julius Czsar, pp. 149, 324..Jurles, bribery and Intimidationof, pp. 20, 29 note; legislationagalnst, pp. 28-29.Jury, change in the character of,p. 28 note.Jury system, break-down of, p. 21.Justices of the Peace, partiality of,p. 20.Tusticiar, change in character of,Katharine of France, Queen ofHenry V, her dowry, pp. 198,264.Kemp, John, Archbishop of Yorkand afterwards of Canterbury,p. I I note ; attacks on hisestates, p. 47 ; Chancellor, pp.49-50, 5 I, .202 ; ambassador tothe Council of Basle, pp. 239,241 ; address to the Parliamentof 1429, p.. 285.Kennedy, Blshop of St. Andrew's,favours the cause of Henry VI,p. 60 ; addresses a remonstranceto Louis XI, ib. note; promisedthe see of Canterbury by Margaretof Anjou, ib.Kent, William Nevill, Earl of,admiral, p. 233.Kerver, Thomas, p. 48.King, the, as landowner, pp. 273,277 ; to ' live of his own,' pp. 250,341.- a, his two-fold office, pp. 118,201-203 ; his office to makehis realm rich, pp. 139, 285-286;see also Tyrant.Kingship, origin of, p. 180.Knight, income of a, p. 329.Kni~hthood. fines for res~ite of,- 0Kyrkeby, Thomas, Master of theRolls, &C., p. 321.Lacedzmonians,cause of theirgreatness, p. 150.Lancaster, Blanche of, pp. 75, 270.- Duchy of1 PP. 213, 330, 335.- Duke of, see Crouchback, Gaunt.- house of, right of, fo the Crownas resting on prescrlptlon, p. 34 ;misgovernment of, pp. 34-35 ;com~ared with that of York, . -pp.-( 34-is, 39-40.- Thomas, Earl of, Chief Coun-( cillor, p. 300.Lancastrian constitutional policy,PP. 3-4.- period, its significance, p. 3 ;supplied weapons to the seventeenthcentury, ib.- plots against Edward IV, p.c 8J -.Lawyers, not to be Sheriffs, &C.,p. 28 note ; see also Attorneys;Counsel, legal.Le Carnier, leader of the ;,sing inthe Pays de Caux, p. 290.Legal knowledge, diffusion of, p.32.Leicester, Simon de Montfort, Earlof, rebels against Henry 111, pp.129-130, 257.Leicester, Parliament of, p. 35 note.Leprosy, medi~val, pp. 7 note, 340 ;a bar to descents, p. 7 note.Lewes, battle of, p. 257 ; song onthe battle of, p. 217.Lewis of Bavaria, his contest withthe Pope; P. 324.- v, p. 250.Libya, constitution of, pp. 113, 191.Lihge, siege of, p. 199.' Likedealers,' name of a 'class ofpirates, p. 232.Lincoln, Bishop of, see Repingdon.Lisieux, Bishop of, see Basin.Litigiousness of the fifteenth cen-P 13- I tury, pp. 31-32.Knox, Tohn, on the Regiment of Livery, p. 15 ; statutes against, pp.~o&en, p. 79 n?te. -27-28.Ky~wolmershe, Willlam, Treasurer Livingston, Sir Alexander, goverofEngland, - . his financial mea- nor of Stirling, orders th_e murdersures, p. 222. ' of the Douglases, p. 258.

Loans raised by the government,pp. 12-13.Local administration, abuses of,p. 10; control of, by the greatlords, pp. I 9-20.- disorder, pp. I I, 281-282.- revenue, embarrassment of, pp.12, 280, 314-31 5 ; assignmentson? PP. 208, 3 15.Locrlnus, son of Brutus, p. 186.Lollards, pp. 4-5, 31 note, 188-I 89.London, residence in, not commonin the Middle Ages, pp. 310-31 I ; riots in, p. I I note.Lordshios.' stewards of areat, PP.7 a -151, 3;91330.Louis of Anjou, p. 199.- IX (St.), of France, pp. 113,181,193.- X, of France, pp. ~ n,194.- XI, of France, interview withCharles the Bold at Tours, p.58 ; gives help to Somerset, ib; ;makes a treaty with Margaretof Anjou, ib.; thinks of besiegingCalais, p. 60 note ; tries tomediate between Henry V1 andEdward IV, p. 61 note ; appliedto by the Lancastrian exiles, p.64; makes truce with EdwardIV, p. 66 ; takes up the cause ofthe Lancastrians, p. 67 ; relationswith Warwick, p. 67 note ; saidto be going to marry his daughterto Prince Edward of Lancaster,ib. ; brings about alliance ofWarwick with Margaret ofAnjou,p. 68 ; date of his coronation, p.77 note ; odious features of hisgovernment, p. 193 ; abolishesthe Francs-archers, pp. 197, 198 ;increases the faille and standlngarmy, p. 197 ; his policy to dispensewith the military serviceof the nobles, p. 198; pensionsmembers of foreign courts, pp.241-242 ; his contempt for personalsplendour, p. 245 ; reducesthe tax on wine, p. 268.Louther, Hugh, Esq., p. 314.Lovel, John, 7th Lord, p. 307.- - 12th Lord, p. 308.Lucca, Ptolemy of, see Ptolemy.Lucy, Sir William, p. 248.Lud, p. 186.Ludlow, dispersal of the Yorkistlords at, p. 52.Lumley, Marmaduke, Bishop ofCarlisle, undertakes the custodyof the West March, p. 224.Luxemburgh, Louis of, Archbishopof Rouen and Chancellor ofFrance, p. 31 I.Lydgate, John, change of front onthe succession question, pp. 96note, 344.Lyle, Lord, of Crayle, p. 259.Macchiavelli,on thestate of France.p. 198.Magnus the Law-betterer, King ofNorway, p. 174.- I, King of Sweden, p. 262.- 11, King of Sweden, p. 262.Maine, cession of, p. 10 nofe.Maintenance, pp. 15, 20; statutesagainst, pp. 27-28.Mantua, congress of, p. 244.Marcel, Etienne, his death, p. 194.March, Edmund Mortimer, 3rdEarl of, Lieutenant of Ireland, p.215.-- 5th Earl of, pp. 239, 272.- Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of, p.35%;Marches, keeping of the, pp. 122,21 1-212, 214, 224-226 ; divisionsof, pp. 225-227 ; laws of, p. 227 ;wardens of, p. 225 ; endeavour toextend their jurisdiction,.^. 227.Margaret ofAnjou, her partlzansh~p,PP. 9, 19 note, 34-35, 297-298 ;stlrs up the French agalnst theEnglish, p. 53 nofe; retires toWales after the battle of Northampton,p. 54; to Scotland, lb.note; makestreaty withthescotchQueen, p. 55 note; retires to Scotlandafter Towton,pp. 56,58; poverty,pp. 58-59; at Edinburgh, p.59; goes to Brittany, Anjou, andthe French Court, ib.; negotiatesa treaty with Louis XI, ib.; herschemes, ib. note; at Boulogne,p. 60 ; agrees to surrender Calaisto Louis XI, ib. ; recovers theNorthern castles, p. 61 ; retiresto Scotland, ib. ; at amb burgh,p. 62 ; returns to Scotland, pp. 62,63 note; goes to the Continent,p. 63 ; meet~ng with Charlesthe Bold at Bruges, ib.; withPhilip the Good at St. Pal, p. 64 ;her adventure with the robber, p.63 note ; narrates her adventuresto the Duchess of Bourboo, pp. 63note, 64 ; returns to Bruges, p. 64 ;retires to St. Mighel in Barrois,pp. 63 note, 64; poverty, p. 64; attemptsto invade England, p. 67 ;alliance with Warwick, p. 68 ; detainedby Louis XI, p. 70; landsat Weyn~outh, ib. ; imprisonedafter Tewkesbury, p. 71 ; ransoined,ib. ; death, ib. ; tries toobtain payment of assignmentsfor her followers, p. 208; herdowry, p. 265.Margaret, wife of MaIcolm Canmore,pp. 77 note, 353, 355.- of Scotland, schemes for marrying,to Prince Edward of Lancaster,p. 55 note.- of York, marries Charles ofBurgundy, p. 67.Mariners, wages of, p. 236.' Marriage,'lord's rights of, pp. 270-272 ; proceeds of, pp. 211, 213.Marshal, see Oflcers.Marshal, Earl, p. 224.Marshalsey, separation of, from theHousehold, p. 221.Maud, the Empress, p. 366.Maxwell (Maxon'), Lord, Wardenof the West Marches for Scotland,p. 259.Memlooks, v. Egypt.Merbury, Nichoias, p. 337.Mercenary troops, see France.Merchant fleets organized for selfdefence,p. 235.- shipping used for war, p. 235.Merston, John, keeper of the king'sjewels, p. 246.Metz, Bishop of, see Her~nann.Middle Ages, difficulty of acquiringhistorical knowledge during, p.324.M~l~tary service, right of the crownto, P. 249.- system, change in, under Edward111, p. 15.- tenures, abolition of, p. 271.Milton, compared with Fortescue,p. 178.Ministers, appointment of, belongsto the Crown, pp. 33, 297.Moleyns, Adam de, Bishop ofChichester, p. 307 ; his death,p. 293.Molynes, Robert Hungerford, Lord,p. 21 note ; see Hzdngerford.Monarchs, absolute and limited,equal in power, pp, 110,111, 179 ;advantages of lim~ted monarchy,p. 192.Monarchy, elective and hereditary,pp. 172? 176~177.Monasteries, lnterests affected bytheir dissolution, p. 308.Money, &C., attempts to regulateexport and import of, by Statute,pp. 148, 316-318; statutes dispensedwith, pp. 83 note, 317-318.~Monmouth, Geoffrey of, popularityof his fables, pp. 185-186.Montague, John Neville, Marquessof, p. 67 note; sent to defendNewcastle, p. 62 ; wins the battlesof Hedgeley Moor and Hexham,ib.; idea of marrying hisson to Edward IV's daughter, p.75 note ; Warden of the EastMarch, p. 225.Montlhery, battle of, p. 257; cf. p.66.Moray, Archibald Douglas, Earl of,PP. 258-259.More, Sir Thomas, on the causesof theft and poverty, p. 289 ;protests against the severity ofthe English Criminal Law, p.291 ; complains of the life of anambassador, p. 31 I.Mortimer, Anne, wife of RichardEarl of Cambridge, p. 356.- Roger, Lord, p. 274.Mortin~ers, their claim to the crown,pp. 77 note, 356 ; owners ofChirk, p. 274 ; see also March.Mortmain, pp. 340-341.- Statute of, dispensed with, p. 83note.Morton, Dr. (afterwards Archbishopof Canterbury and Cardinal), p.53 note.N.Naboth, p. 117.Nature, law of, pp. 117,2o6-207.

Navy, pp. 123, 234-239; fosteredby Henry V, p. 236; neglectedunder Henry VI, p. 237 ; divisionsof, p. 238.Nero, pp. 149, 347.Neville, George, Archbishop ofYork, p. 26 note ; Chancellor, pp.69, 240 ; ambassador, p. 240.- Sir John, pp. I I note, 248.Newburgh, William of, his opinionof Geoffrey of Monmouth, p. 186.Newnham (Devon), Abbot of, hispetition against Sir Philip Courtenay,p. 183.Newton, Sir Kichard, Chief Justicec. P., pp. 46-47,48-49.Nimrod (Nembroth), the first tyrant,pp. 111, 180-181, 204.Ninus, pp. 112, 180-181.Nobles, power and insubordinationof, pp. 14-16,37,128 ; riches andestates, pp. 17, 37, 130, 262-263 ; wool-growers, &C., p. 17 ;dissensions among, pp. 18-19 ;influence on Parliamentary elections?p. 24 ; on ecclesiasticalappomtments, p. 26 ; in miscellaneousaffairs, pp. 25-26.; styleassumed by, p. 30 ; extlnctlonof the old, p. 36; enriched bythe French wars, pp. 15, 17;intermarriages of, pp. 133, 262-263 ; related to the king, pp.134, 272 ; indebtedness of someof the, pp. 207-208 ; householdsof, p. 254; territorial strength of,p. 263 ; their councils, pp. 308-3 10. ; see Aristocracy; Counczl,Prtvy ; Local Administration ;O@ces ; Peerage ; Purveyance;Retainers; Spiritual Lords.Norfolk, county of, Warwickist,p. 24 note ; coasts of, opposedto attack, p. 234.-John Mowbray, 2nd Duke of,pp. 19 note 2, 309.- - 3rd Duke of, pp. 19 note I,20 note, 21 note, 24 note, 29,30 note.-- 4th Duke of, p. 308.- Duchess of, pp. 24 note, 67 note.- Kalph Guader, Earl of, p. 270.Norham Castle, captured by the-Lancastrians, p. 62.Northampton, p. I I note.- battle of, p. 53 ; proclamationissued by the Yorkist lords beforethe, p. 209.Northumberland, John Neville, I 5thEarl of, v. Montugz~e.- Henry Percy, 12th Earl of, p.16 ; Warden of the West March,p. 225 ; of both Marches, ib.-- I 7th Earl of. D. I I note.-- 18th Earl of; p. 308.Norwich, disturbances in, p. 46.- Bishops of, v. Brown, Sjencer.Occleve, his De Regimnine, p. 176.Octavian, pp. 149, 324.Odo, (or Eudes,) Count of Paris,p. 256.Officers, great, payment of, pp. 122,211-212, 214, 222 ; attend theprivy council, pp. 148,. 294, 296,350 ; appoint to certaln offices,P. 335.Offices, engrossed and broked bygreat men. pp. 17, 152-153, 327-328, 335-336 ; how to be given,PP. 150-153, 326-327, 329, 335,340 ; numbers of, pp. 151, 328 ;no one to hold more than one,pp. 153,328 ; oath to be taken bythe holders of, pp. 153, 337,352 ; in the gift of certain greatofficers, p. 335 ; frequently dischargedby deputies, p. 334 ; seealso Henry ZI/:- ecclesiastical, traffic in,.p. - 19note.Officials, clerical, paid out of therevenues of the Church, pp. 31 I-312, cf. pp. 328. 352.Oldhall, Sir William, pp. 23-24nbte, 51, 278.Orleans, Duke of, released, p. 275 ;expense of keeping, p. 214.Ormond, Hugh Douglas, Earl of,PP 258-259.Ormonde, James, 4th Earl of, hisopinion about Ireland, p. 213.-John, 6th Earl of, ~ancastrianambassador in Portugal, p. 65 ;letter of Fortescue to, pp. 64-65 notes.' Orphans,' the, see Zizka.Outrages, prevalence of, pp. 24-25.Oxford, dowager Countess of, p. 27 1.Oxford, John de Vere, 12th Earl of,p. 271 ; executed, p. 58.-- 13th Earl of, pp. 308, 336- University of, p. Ignofe ; teachingof French at, p. 101 note ;mythical origin of, p. 186.P.papal exactions, drain the countryof money, p. 317.Papias, p. 182.Paris, Count of, see Oa'o.- Parliament of,payment of membersof, pp. 101, 147, 312, 351 ;length of lawsuits in, p. IOI note.- siege of, pp. 129, 257.Parisiensis, v. Auvergne, Williamof:Parkerships, pp. 151, 333.Parliament, increased power of,under the Lancastrians, p.4 ; electionsto, p. 24 ; independence of,tampered with, p. 35 ; privilegeof, pp. 35, 51 note ; knights andburghers tax themselves in differentproportions, p. 196 ; comparedwith the French Estates-General, pp. 113, 195 ; comparedto the Mass, p. 343.Parliaments, better at discoveringgrievances than devising remedies,p. 306 ; predominance ofprivate interests in, p. 307.Paston Correspondence, pictureafforded by, pp. 29-30,32,44-45.- family, pp. 21 notes, 23, 26-27,28-29, 32, 47, 52, 234, 309, jrc,311, 336, 344.Paten-makers, statute relating to,p. 283.pivia, Council of, p. 243.Pecock, Reginald, Bishop of Chichester,compared with Fortescue,p,. 104 ; with Hooker, .p.206; h~s theory of the Hussltewars, p. 285 ; disputes theauthority of Aristotle, pp. 187-188 ; views on the Empire,, p.324 ; disproof of the Donat~onof Constantine, pp. 324-325.Pedro the Cruel, his daughtersmarried to the Dukes of Lancasterand York, p. 264.Peera~e,consolidat~onof,infifteenthcentury, p. 18 ; constitutionalfunctions of, pp. 18,147,306-307.Pembroke, Jasper Tudor, Earl of,p. 279 ; accompanies Fortescueto Paris, p. 65 ; sent into Wales,p. 67 ; defeated, ib.; returns toEngland, p. 70.- Earl of, see Herbert.Pensions, pp. 17, 211, 2x3, 341 ;how to be given, pp. 153-154.- granted to members of foreigncourts, pp. 241-242.Pepper, consumption of, p. 319.Percies, rebellion of the, pp. 5, 16,225,292; forfeitures of the, p. 278;obligations of Henry IV to, p.16.Percy, Henry (Hotspur), p. 272 ;Warden of East March, p. 225.-Sir Ralph, submits to Edward IV,p. 61 ; returns to his Lancastrianallegiance, ib. ; captures Sir JohnAshley, ib.Petrus Pictavensis, quoted by Fortescue,p. 97.Pharaoh, p. 135.Philip Augustus, of France, pp. 196,266.- 111, of France, p. 175.IV, of France, pp. 175, 193.- VI, of France, pp. 194, 267.-the Good, Duke of Burgundy,opposes the surrender of Guisnesby Somerset, p.. 55 note ; tries tobreak up the allrance of Margaretof Anjou and the Scots, p. 56note ; wishes to a\ oid an Interviewwith hlargaret, p. 63 ; butyields the point, ib. ; interview atSt. Pol, p. 64; his courtesy andliberality, pp. 63-64 ; forbids thepassage of bullion to Calais, p.316.Philippa, wife of Edward 111, p.265.Philippa, daughter of Lionel ofClarence, p. 356; question ofher legitimacy, pp. 77 353-354.Philosopher, the, i.e. Aristotle, q. v.I'ictavensis, see Z-%hrzts.Picts, invasions of, see E~zglund.Pippin of Heristal, p. 256.- the Short, pp. 129, 255.Piracy, p. 19 note; prebalence of.pp. 232-233 ; attempts to suppress,p. 233.

Pisa, Council of, p. 243. .Pitt, see Chathaoz.Pius 11, pp. 243, 244.- V, p. 171.Plate, export of, v. Monev.plumme;, ~ohn,' Clerk oithe King'sChapel,, p. 338.Pogg~o, h~s translation of DiodorusSiculus, pp: 98? 190-191.PoCicin, der~vat~on of, pp. 112,I 89.Pol~tical philosophy, unpracticalcharacter of medixval, p. 82 ; influenceof Aristotle on, ib.Polychronicon, quoted by Fortescue,P. 97.Pope, embassies to, pp. 124, 242-243; tacit agreement with theCrown to plunder the Church,p. 311.- loan from, to Henry VI, p. 12note.Popham, Sir John, ambassador toBrittany, p. 240.Porter, Willlam, p. 213 note.Ports, Warden of the, see CinpuePorts.Portugal, hopes of the Lancastriansfrom, p. 65 ; characteristics ofPortuguese history, p. 261.Price, Dr. Richard, p. 253.Prices, attempts to regulate, pp.148, 282, 316, 318-319.Primogeniture, the rule In England,p. 101.Priories, alien, annexation of, tothe Crown, p. 3 I 7 ; ferms of, pp.211, 213, 220.Prisot, Sir John, Chief Justice C. P.,pp. 22 not@, 43 note, 52, 103 note ;h~s political partizanship, p. 50noLe.Private war, pp. 16, 19, 261.Privy Seal, office of, separated fromthe Household, p. 221 ; salary of,see OBcers.Protective policy, pp. 319-320.Provisors, Statutes against, dispensedwith, p. 84 note. See alsoU~th~ersities.Ptolemy of Lucca, Continuator ofSt. Thomas' De Regir~zine, p. 17 I.Public Weal, War of, pp. 66, 129,257.Puebla, de, Spanish ambassador,p. 242.' Purchase,' technical meaning ofthe term, p. 263.Purveyance by great lords, p. 30.- royal, p. 219.Quayt-Bay, Sultan of Egypt, p.""L&/U.Queen, v. England.Quentin Durward, p. 199.~uodprincz@ plnczlit, &C., pp. 112,117, 184-185, 193.Radclyff, Sir John, pp. 213 note,271, '274.Radford, Nicolas, p. 21 note.' Raglore,' office of, p. 331.Receivers, pp. 151, 330.Rede, Richard, his chronicle usedby Fortescue, pp. 97, 180, 185 ;,royalty,character of ~t, p. 185; MS. ofit, pp. 180-181.Rehoboam (Roboham), division ofthe kingdoms under, p. 133; atype of evil counsel, pp. 269, 323.Repingdon, Philip, Bishop of Llncoln,his letter to Henry IV, p. 5note.Resumption, Acts of, pp. 136, 140,209, 215, 220, 250, 279-281, 341,342.Retainers, lords', pp. I g, 18, 20.Revolution of 1688 compared withthat of 1399, pp. 1-3.Rewards, how to be given, pp. 119,124-125, 136, 143-144, 208-209, 340.Rex dicitur a repado, pp. 111, I 8 I-182.Rheims, Archbishop of, see Hinc-?tzar.Rich, Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury,p. 175.Richard 11, pp. 224, 356 ; his .deposition,p. I ; charges againsthim, pp. 210, 341 ; his theory ofpp. 2-3 ; not favourableto the propertied classes, .p. 5 ;overborne by a combinat~on of1 nobles, p. I 5.I - 111, character of his go\ern-Scales.- Richard Wydville, Earl, p. 67?tote.Robert the Strong, Duke of France,P. 257.' Robin,'captain of rising in Suffolk,p. 67 note.Robin Hood, p. 24 note.Robin of Redesdale, his manifesto,pp. 232, 331.Rochester, Bishop of, see Alcock.Rolls, Clerk, Keeper, or Master ofthe, pp. 148, 321-322, 350.Romans, caases of their civil wars,pp. 7 note, 325, 347 ; cause oftheir success and decline, pp.149-150, 323, 325, 347-348.Rome, Court of, resident agents at,p. 242 ; venality of, p. 243.Romllly, Sir Samuel, p. 291.Roos, Sir Robert, report on thestate of Aquitaine, p. 235.Roos, Thomas, Lord de, p. 271.- dowager Lady de, p. 271.Ross, John, Earl of, p. 260.Rouen, Archbishop of, see Luxettz6ztrgCt.Roxburgh, siege of, by James I1 ofScotland, p. 55 note.Rupert, King of the Romans, p.243.Russe, John, p. 335.45eneraI 3nbe1, 3 ~ 3ment, p. 40. See also Glozlcester, 1 St. Andrew's, Bishop-of,.see Kelz-D2lkk c;;f.nedy.Richmond, Edmund Tudor, Earl Saladin Tithe, p. 288.of, P. 279.Salisbury, riots at, p. I r note.- Henrv Tudor. Earl of ( = HenryBishop of, v. Ayscoug?~.VII, q. V.)? P. 70. - Richard Neville, Earl of, pp.Riots and rislngs, suppression of, 272, 333 ; sole Warden of theD. 125 : due to ~overtv and lack Marches, p. 225.bf justice, pp. 138-140,284,289- - Earldom of, p. 263.290.-John of, his views on hunting,Rivers, Anthony Wydville, Earl, p. 183 ; his opinion of Aristotle,pp. 248, 278, 333. See also p. 186 ; his political views, anddefence of tyrannicide, . pp. --204-205.Salt, gabelle on, in France, pp.131-132, 266-268.- importance of, in medixvaleconomy, pp. 132, 268-269.Samuel, his exposition of the natureof royalty, pp. 110, 177-178.Savage, Arnold, Speaker of theHouse of Commons and PrivyCouncillor, p. 295.Savoy, William of, Bishop elect ofValence, Chief Councillor, p. 300.Say and Sele, James Fienes, Lord,his death, p. 293.Scales, Antony W~dville, Lord, pp.67 note, 309. See also Rivers,EarLScotch Guard of the French Kings,P. 199.Scotland, independence of thenobles. pp. 190, 258-259; constitutionof, compared with thatof England, pp. 189-190; alimited monarchy,. pp. 85, 112,190. See also Thzeves.Scotland, Dowager Queen of, negotiationswith Margaret of Anjou,pp. 54-55 note; advancesmoney to her, pp. 58-59; marriagewith Edward IV proposed,p. 6%Scots, Invasions of, see Endand.Scrope, Henry, Lord le, of Masham,p. 278.-John, Lord le, of Masham, pp.Saba, kingdom of, pp. 112,191-192. 278, 299.St. Alban's, Abbot of, see Wlzetham- Scute, value of the French, pp.steak198, 264:- first battle of, pp. 41,51 ; second Sea, keeplng of the, pp. 122-123,battle of, pp. 36, 55.232, 235-237 ; entrusted to the- chronicles of, quoted by For- merchants, pp. 235-237 ; to certescue,p. 97.tain lords, p. 236 ; expense of, pp.St. Amand, Lord, p. 273. / 211,238.

Ulster, liberty of, p. 329.Ulveston, Steward of the MiddleTemp!e, P. 311.Un~verslt~es, interest of, in PapalProvisions, p. 84 note; law nottaught at, p. IOI note. See alsoOxford.Uther Pendragon, p. 201.Vaghan, Thoinas, p. 307.Valence, Bishop of, v. Savoy, IVil-Zininaz of.Valla. on the Donation of Constantine,p. 325.Vegetius, cited by Fortescue, p.99 ; translation of, by Cliftoun,P 176.Verneull, battle of, p. 199.Villenage, false allegations of, p. 31.Vincent of Beauvaid, p. 181 ; histheory of the originA of go'verilments,pp. 84, 186 ; obligationsof Fortescue to, pp. 98, 180;his De MOY. Prilzc. Iftsf., p. 181 ;MSS. of ditto, ib.Violence, semilegal, p. 26.Vitalian Brothers, p. 233.Voitigern, Suffolk compared to, pp.11, 186.Wakefield, battle of, pp. 36, 5;.Wales, Prince of, creation of, p. 332;Council of, p. 333; offices givenby,pp.151,330-332. See also Edwat-(l,Prilzce of Wales, Henry V.- (North and South), revenues of,I,. 21-3.~'althak, ~oger of,pp. I 74-1 75 ; hisCo7~lpe7za'izmz Ilforale, pp. 173-174 ; obligations of Fortescue to,pp. 98-99, 175 ; cited by him,PP. 109, '75.Wardrobe, royal, pp. 121, 211-212,214, 221, 351.Wardship, rights of the Crown to,p. 272 ; proceeds of, pp. 211,213.Warwick,Richard Beauchnmp, Earlof, his salary as tutor to Henry VI,p. 214.Warwick, Richard Neville, Earl of,character of his governmentduring the Lancastrian restoration,p. 38 note; gains a navalvictory, p. 60 ; besieges the Lancastriancastles in the North,p. 61 ; sent to the North again,p. 62 ; captures Alnwick andDunstanburgh, ib. ; at Newcastle,p. 62 note; attitude towardsEdward IV, p. 67; relationswith Louis XI, ib. aote;Edward a prisoner in his hands,p. 68 ; releases him, ib. ; expelledfrom England, ib. ; allies himselfwith Margaret of Anjou, ib. ; restoresHenry VI, p. 69 ; madehis lieutenant, ib. ; killed atBarnet, pp. 70-71 ; proclan~ationagainst, p. 208 ; his estates andoffices, pp. 17,262-263, 327-328 ;sole Warden of the Marches, p.225 ; Captain of Calais, p. 230 :Improves the governillent ofCalais, p. 230 ; keeper of the sea,p. 237 ; his council, p. 309.Warwick, Earldom of, p. 263:Waterhous, his conlmentarles onthe Ue Ltrudibus, p. 85 ~ote.Welles, Sir Robert, defeated atStamford, p. 208.Wells. Robert. Abbot of Tower~ili, p. 46. 'Wenham, John, p. 208.Wenlok, John, Lord, receives agrant of Fortescue's lands, pp.43 note, 72 ; J01llS Warwickagainst Edward IV, p. 72 ; killedat Tewkesbury, ib.\Ventworth, Sir iihilip, pp. 51-52.\Venzel, Icing of Bohemia and ofthe Romans, compared withRichard 11, p. I.RTestburv, ..\Villiain, Justice l

The Difference between an Absolute and a Limited Monarchy

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?