the ordinary transactions of life the boldest and the most litigious must bow. Those who beheld constantly before their eyes "the gigantic image of prerogative in the full play of its hundred arms,"* could not fail, whether they were judges or private subjects, to entertain a vivid perception of its might, and a profound awe of that monarchy of which so vast a power formed but a part. When therefore the points of collision between the King and the subject were diminished or removed, when there was no longer compulsory military service, or wardship, or purveyance, or any other of their kindred grievances, when the Crown lands and escheats and other surviving rights of the Crown were managed no longer as the main supports of a failing income, but with the fortunate carelessness and magnanimous neglect of a public department, little remained on which these invidious Royal privileges could operate. Their present exercise, when they are called into action, is generally for the benefit and not for the oppression of the individual. We have, in the reign of Henry the Eighth, a curious instance of the way in which the Crown could use its lawful prerogative to vex and harass those refractory subjects who dared to dispute its unlawful claims. The King was in 1545 engaged in a war with France. The exigency was great; the ordinary mode of obtaining a Parliamentary supply was slow both in its enactment and in its collection, and a grant for war purposes had recently been made. It was therefore determined to raise money by a benevolence or compulsory free loan from the wealthier classes. An alderman of London, Richard Reed, refused to pay what he regarded as an unlawful exaction. Such disobedience could not be overlooked. The feudal duties of his office,† although by long usage * Hallam, Middle Ages, iii. 153; and see Const. Hist., ii. 3. they had been commuted for money payments, bound the alderman to render military service for a fixed period at the call of the Crown. Reed was accordingly sent to join the English army, which was then on active service on the Scottish border. Instructions were at the same time given to the general* to employ this unwilling recruit on the hardest and most perilous duty, and to subject him when in garrison to the greatest privations, that he might feel the smart of his folly and sturdy disobedience; and finally to use him in all things according to the "sharpe disciplyne militar of the Northern wars." Malicious courtiers record that the unfortunate alderman was taken by the Scotch; and was obliged to pay for his ransom a much larger sum than the amount of benevolence which he had been expected to contribute. § 4. It is needless to point out the influence which the Crown must have obtained from its power of granting Effect of its hereditary demesnes, or its casual revenues. regulation of The courtiers then formed a distinct profession. Crown expenditure. Like other professions, although more extensively and with more injurious effects, courtiership acted as a lottery. It contained some brilliant prizes and many blanks; but it kept dependent upon Court favour all who hoped to draw either some prize, or some prize better than that which they had already obtained. These prizes were many and various. Sometimes the grant of an estate was sought. Sometimes the gift was concealed under the thin disguise of a sale for an almost nominal consideration. Sometimes a license to do a prohibited act was granted. Sometimes a patent of monopoly was conferred. Although these and many similar grants were illegal, there were *Hallam, Const. Hist., i. 25. many sources of Royal bounty to which no such exception could be taken. Forfeitures might be remitted to a loyal subject, or enforced against a troublesome one. The lands and goods of a convicted felon were in much request; and grants of forfeitures were frequently, although illegally, made without waiting for the formality of a conviction. Pardons were granted without scruple by all our earlier Kings either for money or as a means by which the holder might obtain money. Even in the time of James the Second such grants were saleable commodities. Besides these and many other modes of gratification, the King possessed his legitimate patronage and his power of bestowing titular distinctions. In such circumstances we may readily conceive the predominating influence of the Crown. It was indeed three or even two centuries ago the fountain of wealth, no less than the fountain of honour. In the limited range of English industry there were then few opportunities for making a fortune. The country was too poor to admit of those great industrial and professional successes with which we now are familiar. For a younger brother of a noble house, for an aspiring man without connections, the most advantageous opening was the public service; and successful public service meant the favour of the Court. In any other sense, indeed, the public service afforded but a small field in comparison with that which it at present presents. The expense to the Tudors and the Stuarts of the navy, of the ordnance, of the diplomatic service, seems to us absurdly small. But the King's personal favourites, his ministers or his favoured courtiers, made enormous gains. It is probable that in the time of Charles the Second the income of the principal minister during his * Hallam, Middle Ages, iii. 168, note. tenure of office far exceeded that of any other subject. The place of Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland* was worth twice the income of the richest duke in England. Clarendon, the members of the Cabal, Danby, each in their turn accumulated immense wealth. At the same time the average income of a peer was about three thousand, and of a baronet about nine hundred, pounds a year; and the barristers who were at the head of their profession never made in any year, unless they were in the service of the Crown, two thousand pounds. It was plain, therefore, what was the shortest road to riches. "This," as Lord Macaulay observes, "is the true explanation of the unscrupulous violence with which the statesmen of that day struggled for office, of the tenacity with which, in spite of vexatious humiliations and dangers, they clung to it, and of the scandalous compliances to which they stooped in order to retain it." Yet this influence, enormous as it undoubtedly was, tended to work its own limitation. A great class of wealthy proprietors was thus formed which became both able and willing to resist the advance of prerogative. Political gratitude is proverbially weak. When even at the present day the steady adherent of a ministry is raised to the Upper House, he often gives but a hesitating support, and still oftener is habitually absent.† It does not always follow that he will continue even to sit with his former friends. There is not the least security that his successor will maintain the old political connection. In like manner very many of the most considerable families in England, whether within or without the limits of the peerage, owe their position to the bounty of the Tudor Kings. Yet although the spoils of the monasteries increased indefinitely the power of Henry the Eighth, his i. 253. * Macaulay, Hist. of Eng., i. 309. + See May, Const. Hist., Hallam, Const. Hist., i. 79. very profusion served to raise a class of men which supplied the leaders of the Opposition in the coming struggle with the Crown. The latest instance in which the proprietary powers of the Crown were used at once to punish a political opponent and to reward a political supporter occurred in the reign of George the Third.* The old rule of law in relation to a possession adverse to the Crown was "Nullum tempus occurrit regi." By an Act of James the First all titles were protected from claims of the Crown after a quiet possession of sixty years. But this enactment was only retrospective, and the Crown was consequently not barred as to any claim that it might raise to any land that was not enjoyed for sixty years prior to 19th February, 1623. The Duke of Portland, by a grant to his ancestor Bentinck from William the Third, held the Manor of Penrith, which comprised the forest of Inglewood in the County of Cumberland. This estate brought with it great political influence in the Counties of Cumberland and Westmoreland. The Duke of Portland was a Whig; the other great territorial magnate in those counties, Sir James Lowther, was a Tory, and was in peculiar favour at Court. Grounds were found for disputing the Duke of Portland's title; and a lease of the estate, on the understanding that he should litigate the Duke's claim, was granted to Sir James Lowther. To remedy this grievance an Act,+ which generally bears the name of its chief promoter, Sir George Saville, was passed, but not until the general election was over, by which all claims of the Crown, at whatever period they may have arisen, are barred after an adverse possession of sixty years. A clause, however, was inserted, saving any claims which might be + 21 James I. c. 2. * See Massey's Hist. of Eng., i. 322. 9 Geo. III. c. 16. |