vim vel per liberationem marescalli. Hoc etiam concessimus quod omnes cives Lincolniae sint quieti de theloneo et lestagio per totam Angliam et per portus maris, et quod nullus de misericordia pecuniae judicetur nisi secundum legem quam habent cives nostri Lundoniarum ; et quod in civitate illa in nullo placito sit miskenninga; et quod burwäremot semel tantum in hebdomada teneatur; et quod terras et tenuras et vadia sua et debita sua omnia juste habeant, quicunque eis debeat. Et de terris suis et tenuris quae infra civitatem sint, rectum eis teneatur secundum consuetudinem civitatis ; et de omnibus debitis suis quae accommodata fuerint apud Lincolniam, et de vadiis ibidem factis, placita apud Lincolniam teneantur. Et si quis in tota Anglia theloneum vel consuetudinem ab hominibus Lincolniae ceperit, postquam ipse a recto defecerit, praepositus Lincolniae namium apud Lincolniam capiat. Insuper etiam ad emendationem illius civitatis illis concessimus, quod sint quieti de bridtol, et de childwite, et de gieresgieve, et de scothale, ita quod praepositus nec alius ballivus scothalam faciat. Has praedictas consuetudines eis concessimus et omnes alias libertates et liberas consuetudines, quas habuerunt vel habent cives nostri Lundoniarum quando meliores vel liberiores habuerint, secundum libertates Lundoniarum et leges civitatis Lincolniae.

Quare volumus et firmiter praecipimus quod ipsi et haeredes eorum haec omnia praedicta habeant et teneant haereditarie de nobis et haeredibus nostris, reddendo per annum novies viginti libras numero de Lincolnia cum omnibus pertinentiis ad scaccarium nostrum, duobus terminis, ad Pascham scilicet et ad festum Sancti Michaelis per manum praepositi Lincolniae. Et cives Lincolniae faciant praepositum quem voluerint de se per annum, qui sit idoneus nobis et eis. Testibus hiis; H. Cantuariensi archiepiscopo; Willelmo Marescallo; Gaufrido filio Petri; Hugone Bardulfi. Datum per manum Willelmi Eliensis episcopi cancellarii nostri apud Wintoniam, etc.-(Foedera, i. 52.)

A.D. 1199-1216. JOHN.

Archbishops of Canterbury. Hubert Walter, 1193-1205; Stephen Langton, 1207-1216.

Chief Justices. Geoffrey Fitz-Peter, 1199-1213; Peter des Roches, Bishop of Winchester, 1214-1215; Hubert de Burgh, 1215-1216.

Chancellors. Hubert Walter, 1199-1205; Walter Grey, 1205-1213; Peter des Roches, 1213-1214; Walter Grey, 1214; Richard de Marisco, 1214-1216.

WHETHER the account given by Matthew Paris of the election of John be true or false, it is certain that he succeeded to his brother's throne without any threat of opposition. The claim which he derived from Richard's final disposition of his states was strengthened by the support of the queen mother, and the adherence of a numerous party which he had propitiated during the late reign; and the absence of any feeling in favour of Arthur left the great ministers, and the baronage generally, no other course than to accept him as king. He, like Richard, issued no coronation charter, but took the usual oaths.

The administration of the country was managed by Archbishop Hubert and Geoffrey Fitz-Peter the Justiciar, during John's early years, on the same principles as it had been during Richard's reign: it is to them that we must ascribe the maintenance of such constitutional forms as continued to exist, and of the peace of England. The amount of restraint which they exercised on John may be calculated, if we consider that immediately on the death of Hubert his quarrel with the Church broke out, whilst the death of the Justiciar in 1213 coincides with the beginning of the national struggle for liberty under the barons. But these ministers were not able to control altogether the tyrannical instincts of the king. His constant presence in England and his interference with the machinery of administration prevented them from combining, as they had done in

Richard's reign, heavy taxation with the use and development of principles of self-government; and from standing between the people and the king, at the cost of their own popularity. Close acquaintance with John disgusted the English, who had not realized the more distant faults of Richard.

Independently, however, of personal considerations, the reign was a critical one. That of Richard had witnessed the separation of the royal interest from that of the people; that of John brought the interest of the people into the closest harmony with that of the baronage. The baronage was now composed, to a very great extent, of men whose fortunes had been made under the influence of Henry II, whose traditions were opposed to feudalism, and whose relations with Normandy were much less close than those of the older nobility. The first signs of the working of these causes are to be found in the default of any attempt to recover Normandy after its forfeiture and loss. The English barons were either averse to such an attempt, as involving foreign service, a fact which shows that their own stake in the duchy was but small; or incredulous of John's intention to make the effort, as they might justly be, when he was so ready to commute their service for money; or they saw no hope of success under a sovereign whose ability they underrated, whilst they estimated his sincerity at its true value. It would appear that the families which still had possessions on both sides the Channel either divided their estates, or, balancing their conflicting interests as well as they could, chose to forfeit a part rather than to fight for John.

In the ecclesiastical disputes, which are the next feature of the reign, John had to contend with the greatest of all the successors of S. Peter, and with a spirit in the national Church which was unquestionably maintained by the knowledge of the great power and success of the Pope in other parts of Christendom. The barons refrained from taking advantage of these peculiar difficulties, nor did their overt opposition to the king begin until his relations with the papacy had changed. As soon as the papal authority begins to back the royal tyranny, the barons determine to resist; and the Church having recovered,

in Archbishop Langton, its natural leader, resumes its ordinary attitude as the supporter of freedom.

The country saw that the submission of John to Innocent placed its liberty, temporally and spiritually, at his mercy; and immediately demanded safeguards. These demands were drawn up on the ancient plan of a request for the restoration of good customs, and on the model of the charter of Henry I. The crisis, delayed by John's expedition to France in 1214, and by his attempts to dissolve the alliance made against him on his return, occurred early in the following year. Friends and enemies contributed their counsel and consent to the granting of the great Charter. The king's attempts to rid himself of the new obligation, and the support given to them by the Pope in opposition to the rights of the Church and nation, resulted in a determined attempt to dethrone him by foreign aid: a scheme which owed its only prospect of success to the personal hatreds which John had inspired, but which was so strong in that respect that, had it not been for the king's death, England would have most probably carried out a change in dynasty, the possible issues of which, both for herself and the world in general, are incalculable.

It seems paradoxical to state that neither John's tyranny nor its overthrow could have taken the form they took without the reforms of Henry II, but such seems to have been really the case. The technical principle on which here, as so often elsewhere, so much that owes its existence to very different causes seems to turn, is the freedom of the vassals from service abroad: a point which comes into prominence during the thirteenth century in a way that would have been impossible but for the decay of feudalism, begun and carried on under Henry II, and precipitated by the separation of Normandy from England under John.

EXCERPTS.

A.D. 1199. MATT. PARIS (ed. Wats), p. 197. Dux Normanniae Johannes transfretavit in Angliam et apud Sorham applicuit octavo kalendas Junii; et in crastino, in vigilia

6

;

videlicet 'Dominicae Ascensionis, Londonias venit ibidem coronandus. Congregatis itaque in adventu ejus archiepiscopis, episcopis, comitibus et baronibus atque aliis omnibus qui ejus coronationi interesse debuerant; archiepiscopus stans in medio omnium dixit, Audite universi. Noverit discretio vestra quod, nullus praevia ratione alii succedere habet in regnum, nisi ab universitate regni unanimiter invocata Sancti Spiritus gratia electus, et secundum morum suorum eminentiam praeelectus, ad exemplum et similitudinem Saul primi regis inuncti, quem praeposuit Dominus populo Suo, non regis filium nec de regali stirpe procreatum; similiter post eum David Jessae filium hunc quia strenuum et aptum dignitati regiae, illum quia sanctum et humilem; ut sic qui cunctos in regno supereminet strenuitate, omnibus praesit et potestate et regimine. Verum si quis ex stirpe regis defuncti aliis praepolleret, pronius et promptius in electionem ejus est consentiendum. Haec idcirco diximus pro inclyto comite Johanne, qui praesens est frater illustrissimi regis nostri Ricardi jam defuncti, qui haerede caruit ab eo egrediente, qui providus et strenuus et manifeste nobilis, quem nos, invocata Spiritus Sancti gratia, ratione tam meritorum quam sanguinis regii unanimiter elegimus universi.' Erat autem archiepiscopus vir profundi pectoris et in regno singularis columna stabilitatis et sapientiae incomparabilis ; nec ausi sunt alii super his adhuc ambigere, scientes quod sine causa hoc non sic diffiniverat. Verum comes Johannes et omnes hoc acceptabant, ipsumque comitem in regem eligentes et assumentes exclamant dicentes 'Vivat rex.' Interrogatus autem postea archiepiscopus Hubertus quare haec dixisset, respondit se praesaga mente conjecturare et quibusdam oraculis edoctum et certificatum fuisse, quod ipse Johannes regnum et coronam Angliae foret aliquando corrupturus et in magnam confusionem praecipitaturus; et ne haberet liberas habenas hoc faciendi, ipsum electione non successione haereditaria eligi debere affirmabat. Archiepiscopus autem imponens capiti ejus coronam unxit eum in regem apud Westmonasterium, scilicet in ecclesia principis apostolorum, Dominicae Ascensionis die, sexto kalendas Junii, Philippo Dunelmensi episcopo appellante sed non obtinente, ne coronatio illa fieret in absentia Gaufridi archiepiscopi Eboracensis. In hac coronatione rex Johannes triplici involutus est sacra-› mento; quod videlicet sanctam ecclesiam et ejus ordinatos diligeret et eam ab incursione malignantium indemnem conservaret, et quod perversis legibus destructis, bonas substitueret, et rectam justitiam in regno Angliae exerceret. Deinde adjuratus est ab eodem archiepiscopo ex parte Dei et districte pro