state, the church, every thing takes a feudal form.

Such was feudalism in France, and its leading features are to be traced in the state of things prevalent in other European countriesin Germany, Spain, Italy, and England. The modifications it received, in each of these countries, we have not space to describe; but a brief account of the form which it took in our own land ought not to be omitted.

SECTION III.

MODIFICATION OF THE SYSTEM IN ENGLAND.

Ir was transplanted hither from Normandy, by William the Conqueror. Some customs of a feudal character existed here among our Anglo-Saxon ancestry, but they were not moulded into a system. The strong arm of William bent the English constitution into the feudal shape; but, happily, it had an elasticity as great as that of his own bow, and at length regained its wonted liberty. He took care to employ feudalism so as to make it subservient, as much as possible, to the establishment of his own authority, and so as to avoid the evils by which it beset and limited the French monarchy. In France the barons were almost independent sovereigns, and the king had but little power, save in his own immediate domains. But when William divided the broad lands of England among his followers, he innovated upon the French system. In

France, it was held as a doctrine, that an oath of allegiance was due from the vassal to his immediate lord, and to no other. But William, as sagacious in the cabinet as he was valorous in the field, required that all the land-owners of England, whether sub-tenants, or tenants in chief, should swear fealty to him as their sovereign. In England, then, the vassal was not exclusively dependent on his lord; he was dependent also on his prince; hence, allegiance was divided, and consequently the barons' power was lessened. The judicial institutions of England were also different from those of France. In the latter country, the baron was the chief justice in his own province, and all were bound to submit to his authority; but in England, besides the baron's court, there were the old Saxon county courts, where the freeholders and the barons were required to assist the sheriffs in the administration of justice; and, supreme over the whole, there was the king's court, (whose judges were afterwards made itinerant,) appointed to give sentence even among the barons, and to receive appeals from the courts below; so that all judicial power was gradually drawn from the Anglo-Norman barons, and grasped by the strong hand of royalty. It is further to be observed, that the largest fiefs under the English crown, were far inferior in extent to some held under the crown of France; and that, while the latter were compact, the former were scattered through several counties. The English baronies were consequently

far more feeble than those on the other side the channel, and hence our feudal monarchy under the Normans and the first Plantagenets was in a much more palmy state than the feudal monarchy of our neighbours under the early princes of the house of Capet. Louis VI. and VII. had but the shadow of royalty; the Williams and the early Henries grasped a real sceptre. It may seem inconsistent with this that at the period in question the French monarch ruled without a parliament, while the Norman princes convoked the peers of the realm to aid them in conducting affairs; but this very difference, in fact, arose from the independence of the French and the subjection of the English crown vassals. The barons of France cared not to attend upon the king's council, since no law emanating thence could bind them without their personal consent; but the barons of England were constrained to attend upon the royal summons, for if they remained absent, they were still bound to obey any laws that might be made. Another characteristic of English feudalism remains to be noticed. In addition to the usual feudal incidents, such as reliefs, fines, alienations, and aids, two other customs, which probably had before existed in Normandy, prevailed in England. These were, certain claims connected with wardship and marriage. The lord of the fief was the guardian of the heir during his minority; he had the custody of his person and his lands, without rendering any account

of the use made of the profits. In the case of a male, the guardianship continued till the minor arrived at the age of twenty-one; in the case of a female, it terminated at the age of fourteen, when the young lady could marry, and her husband do suit and service for her. But before she attained that age, her lord could offer her in marriage to whom he pleased, provided it was without disparagement or inequality of rank; and if she refused the alliance, she had to forfeit from her estate just so much as the person to whom her hand had been offered would have given for the match. The penalty was still more severe if she married without the baron's consent; for, in that case, a fine, equal to double what an alliance with her was valued at, was exacted by her ruthless sovereign. In addition to all this, the feudal lord in England extended his authority over the daughters of all his vassals, not allowing any of them to be married but on condition of the payment of a certain sum; so that marriages yielded him an abundant harvest of revenue.

These incidents were, obviously, oppressive to no small degree. They fell with especial weight on the immediate tenants of the crown; and so intolerable were the exactions of royalty, so rapacious and unjust was the whole of the regal administration, from William to John, that, at length, the system could be endured no longer; and though, singly, the English barons might be weak, united, they formed an effectual breakwater against the proud surges of

monarchical oppression, and obtained the grand palladium of English liberty, the great charter. That venerable instrument materially modified the feudal demands, limiting reliefs to a certain sum, restraining the wastes committed by guardians in chivalry, forbidding the disparagement of female wards in matrimony, and securing widows from compulsory marriages. Beside these special provisions, in reference to feudal claims, the principles of our constitution which are there laid down, such as the habeas corpus, trial by jury, and the necessity of the people's consent to their own taxation, tended to modify the working of feudalism; in short, they struck at its vital principle, drained out its very life blood, and left it slowly to expire. The charter was admirably contrived; its principles were slowly developed. "Its effect," says Mackintosh, was not altogether unlike the grand process by which nature employs snows and frosts to cover her delicate germs, and to hinder them from rising above the earth, till the atmosphere has acquired the mild and equal temperature which insures them against blights."

66

Feudalism is a system which has borne a conspicuous part in the civilisation of Europe. It has left a visible impression on the laws and habits of our own country. We find its remains, we feel its lingering power in various directions. The lawyer traces its influence on our jurisprudence; the statesman sees its impress on our constitution; the antiquary recog