Friesland, they secured for themselves very considerable rights in the ninth century. These rights consisted in the freedom of every order of citizens, the possession of property, the privilege of trial by their own judges, a narrow limitation of military service, and an hereditary title to feudal estates, in direct line, on payment of certain dues. These rights formed the Magna Charta of the Frieslanders, and gave them a proud distinction among their neighbours.

With regard to the cities of France, Mr. Hallam remarks: "Every town, except within the royal domain, was subject to some lord. In episcopal cities, the bishop possessed a considerable authority, and in many there was a class of resident nobility. It is probable that the proportion of freemen was always greater than in the country; some sort of retail trade and even of manufacture, must have existed in the rudest of the middle ages; and, consequently, some little capital was required for their exercise. Nor is it so easy to oppress a collected body as the dispersed and dispirited cultivators of the soil: probably, therefore, the condition of the towns was, at all times, by far the more tolerable servitude, and they might enjoy several immunities by usage before the date of those charters which gave them sanction. In Provence, where the feudal star shone with a less powerful ray, the cities, though not independently governed, were more flourishing than the French. Marseilles, in the beginning

of the twelfth age, was able to equip powerful navies, and to share in the wars of Genoa and Pisa against the Saracens of Sardinia."

If Paris is to be taken as a sample of the towns of France, before the twelfth century, they must have been in a deplorable condition of filth and wretchedness. The swine were accustomed to wallow in the streets of this metropolis, until a prince of the blood was thrown from his horse, in consequence of a sow running between the legs of the animal. To prevent the recurrence of such accidents, an order was issued to prohibit the swinish multitude from infesting the public thoroughfares of the city. But the monks of St. Antony remonstrated at this the pigs of their monastery having had, from time immemorial, the privilege of frequenting, at liberty, every part of the towns, of feeding on such scraps and offal as they could find, and of reposing on the choice beds of mire which covered certain spots in the great highway. The monks were not to be resisted; and, at length, there was granted to the swine of their convent, the exclusive privilege of roaming about the Parisian streets without molestation, provided, only, that the said swine went forth on their peregrinations with bells tied about their necks.

SECTION IV.

ANGLO-SAXON BOROUGHS.

THE boroughs of our Anglo-Saxon fathers claim our notice. When the Romans conquered

this island, they founded in different parts of the country their civitates, or cities. Twentyeight of these are enumerated by Gildas, an historian of the sixth century, as existing in his time, which was about a hundred years after the Roman conquerors had relinquished their dominion in Britain. Beside these cities, the Romans formed a number of military stations, or strongholds. These cities and stations became Saxon towns, after the invasion of Britain by its new masters; the latter receiving the name of boroughs from the Latin burgus, which signifies a fortification. Other towns also sprang up in various directions, where local advantages invited a settlement of population; and long before the Norman conquest our island was thickly studded with townships of various sizes. It is very remarkable, that, with few exceptions, all the towns and villages of England appear to have existed from the Saxon times. Some of these towns, however, must have been extremely small, consisting of some few dwellings and other buildings, around the homestead of the Saxon lord, and not bearing any more resemblance to what they have since become, than some little hamlet bears to an important city,

"We must abandon," says sir Francis Palgrave, "any conjectures as to the government of the boroughs in the earlier periods. We must rest satisfied with the fact that, in the reign of the Confessor, the larger boroughs had assumed the form of communities, which, with

out much impropriety, may be described as territorial corporations. The legal character of the burgess arose from his possessions; it was a real right, arising from the qualifications which he held. The burgess was the owner of a tenement within the walls, and the possession might descend to his heirs, or be freely alienated to a stranger." The same writer considers that, in some instances, the possession of land imparted the right of judicature in the borough mote, or town assembly; but that while such persons were aldermen by tenure, there were other boroughs which possessed an elective magistracy. The nature of the Anglo-Saxon institutions has long been matter of dispute, and considerable doubt surrounds the interesting subject, which the most diligent and learned antiquaries are unable to dispel; but, so far as our municipal history is concerned, probably the twofold view of the organization of the Saxon towns suggested by sir F. Palgrave, is correct. The towns in which the tenure of land gave magisterial authority would most likely be the smaller ones, while elective magistrates would distinguish the larger communities. The following account by M. Thierry is, perhaps, accurate :-"The burgesses of London, like those of most of the larger AngloSaxon towns, composed, under the designation of hause, a municipal corporation, which had the privilege of conducting the government of

The population of London in the fourteenth century did not exceed 35,000. Mr. Hallam thinks that, at the time of the conquest, it was less. York contained about 10,000 inhabitants.

the city, and regulating its police. The presence of the king made no difference in its institutions, and the burgesses might, even without his permission, assemble and deliberate together on the internal administration of their city.' But this account, we apprehend, must be carefully restricted to the large towns of the Anglo-Saxons, or it will mislead the reader. Towns in general we cannot believe had attained to such power and independency. Still, even the existence of a few such towns, tending as they did to leaven the mass of the community with their own free sentiments, indicate the attainment of a no small degree of liberal civilisation by our Saxon ancestors.

Whether the Saxon burghs were represented in the witenagemote, or general assembly of the nation, is another question which has given rise to much controversy. On this point we are also inclined to follow sir Francis Palgrave. He considers that "the elected or virtual representatives of townships, or hundreds, constituted the multitude noticed as the people in the narratives describing the great councils, and other assemblies; for the share taken by the folk in the proceedings, forbids the conjecture that the bystanders were a mere disorderly crowd, brought together only as spectators, and destitute of any constitutional character." Yet he does not consider that they attended as mere deputies, chosen by popular electionbut that they were the municipal authorities,

History of the Norman Conquest.