Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-01-11
For the National Era.
THE ARIST0CRACY OF ENGLAND.
fcoNcLupED.l
NO. II.

AT the conquest the crown had two main
SOURCES Of reyenue-the crown lands and the
feudal dues; these latter being in the nature Of
rent paid by the baronial aristocracy for the
estates they held. The old peerage was therefore,
strictly territorial, and 90 ii continued to be
down to the reign Of Richard the Second, for
the FIRST creation Of q peer by patent was made
by that monarch in the person of John De
Beauchamp, Of Holt Castle who was raised to
the dignity Of Baron Kidderminster, in Wilt
shire, with remainder TO his heirs male, in the
eleventh year Of that king. This was great
innovation in the ancient order of things as
before that time peers of the realm were sum-
moned TO Parliament by writ for their lands
and baronies, but the introduction Of peerages
by patent changed territorial into personal
dignity. It was decided blow ut feudalism,
which had attached Legislative power exclusive
ly 10 the possession Of land; at the same time
il enlarged the prerogative Of the crown.
All the feudal estates, held in capite from the
crown, were originally conditional and revo-
cable; for the barbarian tribes Of the north, who
subverted the throne of the Caesars and estab-
Iished the various kingdoms Of Europe on the
ruins Of the Western Empire, enjoyed very
considerable degree of liberty. Hereditary
right was unknown, and kings were no more
than the chiefs of military leaders, primus inter
procsrss who united their troops under one
command for special enterprise. The we'll
known anecdote Of Clovis and the soldier suf-
foes 10 prove the very limited nature Of royalty
in the early ages. A sacred vase belonging to
the cathedral at Rheims had been seized with
other plumber after battle. Before the spoil
was divided, Clovis ordered the vase TO be set
aside, he wishing 10 return IL 10 St Rcmigius,
or Remi, bishop Of Rheims. A Frank warrior,
indignant at this novel claim, struck the vase
fercely with his battle axe exclaiming, aPrince,
you can pretend TO nothing here but what may
fall TO your LOTT This incident clearly shows
that liberty and equality had real existence
ct this era, and that the chief Of the nation did
not command subjects, as king, but soldiers
~ general. But this relation ceased under
the Merosingan princes. Sovereignty became
hereditary and lands were carved out Of the
royal domains and given 10 the mobiles, but
with this important limitation-that the sover-
eigp could resume thcm at pleasure. These
estates were called bsnsfces which must not be
COMPOUNDED with fefs, the institution Of which
belongs 70 later date. Once granted, the
holders Of the benefccs disired 70 make them
hereditary the bishops were in the same po-
sition, and were Influenced by the same motives
the two glasses combined. and compelled the
king 10 abandon his right Of revocation. This
took place partially In 5s7, and defnitively in
6l5, in assemblies held in Paris, when Clotairc
ooofirmcd the hereditary character Of bcnefccs
and established fsudalim proper and Il was
this system that William the Conqueror i'm.
ported into England
However, IL must not be Inferred that the
baronial estates were held unconditonally.
fsf IVES concession Of lands, made on condi-
ton Of recognising him who conceded them AZ
lord paramount, Of owing him fidelity, and
serving him in war. There were also many
fsndni incidents which continued down 10 the
rsstors&;on Of Charles the Second, the surrender
Of which was the condition on which he was
permitted 70 occupy the throne Of his ancestors,
on which revolutionary event We shall enlarge
hereafter. AZ present, We shall only notice
two of tho most important rcstraints on the old
ayistocracy 81 England, 10 which little alton
ton has besn paid by historians, and also be-
csoss thoss restraints show that the modern
dootsine, that property has duties 10 perform,
- welI as rights % enforce Il really ancient.
The Peeraee, and tho rights Of hereditary
leeisla1ion attached 10 the Poerage were for
feiled either through poverty or absentecism.
n ~ reign Of Edward tho Fourth, George
Nsyfn Duke of Bedford, was deprived his peer
- beoause Nc had fallen into psuperism,
vIII6h sntehce d Deposition vas the wecedent
oitsd q future period when the claims Of
hspeditary lsxialstion were brought before Par
linmout The case Of George Nevill was de-
of16d by ~ act passed on tho 18th Of June in
~ csx;ntsenth year Of the reign Of Edward
- Ecor>h, and the reasons for his degradation
veso okus expressed