yeoman, inured to blows, a good archer, clever at sword and stick, is the favourite. There was also redoubtable, armed townsfolk, accustomed to make use of their arms. Here they are at work:

"O that were a shame," said jolly Robin,
"We being three, and thou but one."
The pinder1 leapt back then thirty good foot,
'Twas thirty good foot and one.

'He leaned his back fast unto a thorn,

And his foot against a stone,

And there he fought a long summer's day,

A summer's day so long,

'Till that their swords on their broad bucklers
Were broke fast into their hands.'2 . . .

Often even Robin does not get the advantage:

"I pass not for length," bold Arthur reply'd,
"My staff is of oke so free;

Eight foot and a half, it will knock down a calf,
And I hope it will knock down thee."

"Then Robin could no longer forbear,
He gave him such a knock,

Quickly and soon the blood came down
Before it was ten a clock.

"Then Arthur he soon recovered himself,

And gave him such a knock on the crown,
That from every side of bold Robin Hood's head
The blood came trickling down.

"Then Robin raged like a wild boar,

As soon as he saw his own blood:

Then Bland was in hast, he laid on so fast,
As though he had been cleaving of wood.

And about and about and about they went,
Like two wild bores in a chase,
Striving to aim each other to maim,
Leg, arm, or any other place.

And knock for knock they lustily dealt,
Which held for two hours and more,

Till all the wood rang at every bang,

They ply'd their work so sore.

"Hold thy hand, hold thy hand," said Robin Hood,

"And let thy quarrel fall;

For here we may thrash our bones all to mesh,

And get no coyn at all.

1 A pinder's task was to pin the sheep in the fold, cattle in the penfold or

pound (Richardson).-TR.

2 Ritson, ii. 3, v. 17–26.

"And in the forrest of merry Sherwood,

Hereafter thou shalt be free."

"God a mercy for nought, my freedom I bought,
I may thank my staff, and not thee."''

'Who are you, then?' says Robin:

"I am a tanner," bold Arthur reply'd,

"In Nottingham long I have wrought; And if thou'lt come there, I vow and swear,

I will tan thy hide for nought."

"God a mercy, good fellow," said jolly Robin,
"Since thou art so kind and free;

And if thou wilt tan my hide for nought,

I will do as much for thee."'2

With these generous offers, they embrace; a free exchange of honest blows always prepares the way for friendship. It was so Robin Hood tried Little John, whom he loved all his life after. Little John was seven feet high, and being on a bridge, would not give way. Honest Robin would not use his bow against him, but went and cut a stick seven feet long; and they agreed amicably to fight on the bridge until one should fall into the water. They hit and smite to such a tune that their bones did sound.' In the end Robin falls, and he feels nothing but respect for Little John. Another time, having a sword with him, he was thrashed by a tinker who had only a stick. Full of admiration, he gives him a hundred pounds. One time it was by a potter, who refused him toll; another by a shepherd. They fight for pastime. Even now-a-days boxers give each other a friendly grip before meeting; they knock one another about in this country honourably, without malice, fury, or shame. Broken teeth, black eyes, smashed

ribs, do not call for murderous vengeance; it would seem that the bones are more solid and the nerves less sensitive in England than eisewhere. Blows once exchanged, they take each other by the hand, and dance together on the green grass:

"Then Robin took them both by the hands,

And danc'd round about the oke tree.
"For three merry men, and three merry men,
And three merry men we be."

Observe, moreover, that these people, in each parish, practised the bow every Sunday, and were the best archers in the world,-that from the close of the fourteenth century the general emancipation of the villeins multiplied their number enormously, and you may understand how, amidst all the operations and changes of the great central powers, the liberty of the subject endured. After all, the only permanent and unalterable guarantee, in every country and under every constitution,

1 Ritson, ii. 6, v. 58-89.

2 Ibid. v. 94-101.

I

is this unspoken declaration in the heart of the mass of the people, which is well understood on all sides: 'If any one touches my property, enters my house, obstructs or molests me, let him beware. have patience, but I have also strong arms, good comrades, a good blade, and, on occasion, a firm resolve, happen what may, to plunge my blade up to its hilt in his throat.'

VIII.

Thus thought Sir John Fortescue, Chancellor of England under Henry vI., exiled in France during the Wars of the Roses, one of the oldest prose-writers, and the first who weighed and explained the constitution of his country. He says:

'It is cowardise and lack of hartes and corage that kepeth the Frenchmen from rysyng, and not povertye; which corage no Frenche man hath like to the English man. It hath ben often seen in Englond that iij or iv thefes, for povertie, hath sett upon vij or viij true men, and robbyd them al. But it hath not ben seen in Fraunce, that vij or viij thefes have ben hardy to robbe iij or iv true men. Wherfor it is right seld that Frenchmen be hangyd for robberye, for that they have no hertys to do so terryble an acte. There be therfor mo men hangyd in Englond, in a yere, for robberye and manslaughter, than ther be hangid in Fraunce for such cause of crime in vij yers.'3

This throws a sudden and terrible light on the violent condition of this armed community, where blows are an everyday matter, and where every one, rich and poor, lives with his hand on his sword. There were great bands of malefactors under Edward I., who infested the country, and fought with those who came to seize them. The inhabitants of the towns were obliged to gather together with those of the neighbouring towns, with hue and cry, to pursue and capture them. Under Edward III. there were barons who rode about with armed escorts and archers, seizing the manors, carrying off ladies and girls of high degree, mutilating, killing, extorting ransoms from people in their own houses, as if they were in an enemy's land, and sometimes coming before the judges at the sessions in such guise and in so great force that the judges were afraid and dare not administer justice. Read

1 The Difference between an Absolute and Limited Monarchy-A learned Commendation of the Politic Laws of England (Latin). I frequently quote from the second work, which is complete.

2 The courage which gives utterance here is coarse; the English instincts are combative and independent. The French race, and the Gauls generally, are perhaps the most reckless of life of any.

3 The Difference, etc., 3d ed. 1724, ch. xiii. p. 98. France 42 highway robberies as against 738 in England.

There are now-a-days in

In 1843, there were in

England four times as many accusations of crimes and offences as in France, having regard to the number of inhabitants. (Moreau de Jonnès).

• Statute of Winchester, 1285; Ordinance of 1378.

the letters of the Paston family, under Henry vi. and Edward IV., and you will see how private war was at every door, how it was necessary to defend oneself with men and arms, to be alert for the defence of one's property, to be self-reliant, to depend on one's own strength and courage. It is this excess of vigour and readiness to fight which, after their victories in France, set them against one another in England, in the butcheries of the Wars of the Roses. The strangers who saw them were astonished at their bodily strength and courage of heart, at the great pieces of beef which feed their muscles, at their military habits, their fierce obstinacy, as of savage beasts." They are like their bulldogs, an untameable race, who in their mad courage 'cast themselves with shut eyes into the den of a Russian bear, and get their head broken like a rotten apple.' This strange condition of a military community, so full of danger, and requiring so much effort, does not make them afraid. King Edward having given orders to send disturbers of the peace to prison without legal proceedings, and not to liberate them, on bail or otherwise, the Commons declared the order 'horribly vexatious;' resist it, refuse to be too much protected. Less peace, but more independence. They maintain the guarantees of the subject at the expense of public security, and prefer turbulent liberty to arbitrary order. Better suffer marauders whom one can fight, than provosts under whom they would have to bend.

This proud and persistent notion gives rise to, and fashions, Fortescue's whole work:

"Ther be two kynds of kyngdomys, of the which that one ys a lordship callid in Latyne Dominium regale, and that other is callid Dominium politicum et regale.' The first is established in France, and the second in England.

'And they dyversen in that the first may rule his people by such lawys as he makyth hymself, and therefor, he may set upon them talys, and other impositions, such as he wyl hymself, without their assent. The secund may not rule hys people by other laws than such as they assenten unto; and therfor he may set upon them non impositions without their own assent.'"

In a state like this, the will of the people is the prime element of life. Sir John Fortescue says further:

'A king of England cannot at his pleasure make any alterations in the laws of the land, for the nature of his government is not only regal, but political.'

"In the body politic, the first thing which lives and moves is the intention of the people, having in it the blood, that is, the prudential care and provision for the public good, which it transmits and communicates to the head, as to the principal part, and to all the rest of the members of the said body politic, whereby it subsists and is invigorated. The law under which the people is incorporated may be compared to the nerves or sinews of the body natural. ... And as the

1 Benvenuto Cellini, quoted by Froude, i. 20, Hist. of England. Shakspeare, Henry V.; conversation of French lords before the battle of Agincourt.

The Difference, etc., p. i.

bones and all the other members of the body preserve their functions and discharge their several offices by the nerves, so do the members of the community by the law. And as the head of the body natural cannot change its nerves or sinews, cannot deny to the several parts their proper energy, their due proportion and aliment of blood, neither can a king who is the head of the body politic change the laws thereof, nor take from the people what is theirs by right, against their con. sents. . . . For he is appointed to protect his subjects in their lives, properties, and laws; for this very end and purpose he has the delegation of power from the people.'

Here we have all the ideas of Locke in the fifteenth century; so powerful is practice to suggest theory! so quickly does man discover, in the enjoyment of liberty, the nature of liberty! Fortescue goes. further: he contrasts, step by step, the Roman law, that heritage of all Latin peoples, with the English law, that heritage of all Teutonic peoples: one the work of absolute princes, and tending altogether to the sacrifice of the individual; the other the work of the common will, tending altogether to protect the person. He contrasts the maxims of the imperial jurisconsults, who accord force of law to all which is determined by the prince,' with the statutes of England, which 'are not enacted by the sole will of the prince, . . . but with the concurrent consent of the whole kingdom, by their representatives in Parliament, more than three hundred select persons.' He contrasts the arbitrary nomination of imperial officers with the election of the sheriff, and says:

...

"There is in every county a certain officer, called the king's sheriff, who, amongst other duties of his office, executes within his county all mandates and judgments of the king's courts of justice: he is an annual officer; and it is not lawful for him, after the expiration of his year, to continue to act in his said office, neither shall he be taken in again to execute the said office within two years thence next ensuing. The manner of his election is thus: Every year, on the morrow of All-Souls, there meet in the King's Court of Exchequer all the king's counsellors, as well lords spiritual and temporal, as all other the king's justices, all the barons of the Exchequer, the Master of the Rolls, and certain other officers, when all of them, by common consent, nominate three of every county knights or esquires, persons of distinction, and such as they esteem fittest qualified to bear the office of sheriff of that county for the year ensuing. The king only makes choice of one out of the three so nominated and returned, who, in virtue of the king's letters patent, is constituted High Sheriff of that county.'

He contrasts the Roman procedure, which is satisfied with two witnesses to condemn a man with the jury, the three permitted challenges, the admirable guarantees of justice with which the uprightness, number, repute, and condition of the juries surround the sentence. About the juries he says:

'Twelve good and true men being sworn, as in the manner above related, legally qualified, that is, having, over and besides their moveables, possessions in land sufficient, as was said, wherewith to maintain their rank and station; neither inspected by, nor at variance with either of the parties; all of the neighbourhood;