The Difference between an Absolute and a Limited Monarchy

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.