events to the side of the throne, and became allies perfectly irresistible in the final crisis. Meantime the ordinary vices of a rude society, united to the ordinary vices of rank and wealth, retarded the change which was working, and postponed it till a time arrived when all circumstances were ripe for it. With its consummation we have nothing to do; but, being thrown by our subject in the midst of the chaotic and transition period, it is necessary to understand the hidden currents while considering the ostensible events.

In the constant struggle between monarch and barons, the barons had the advantage of precedent, of the remoteness and rudeness of human settlements, of consequent intimate relations with the lower orders, of all previous ideas. The King had on his side the advantage which time was ever strengtheningthe natural tendency of society toward union, civilization, and interchange of trade and opinion. He had, besides, the advantage, in a general conflict, of the support of one faction of nobles who sought the destruction of another. Of course, as society became more and more cultivated, as the public mind be came more conscious of the true position of affairs, monarchy loomed up, feudalism waned. Society has never stood still; its tendency, on a large scale, has been uniformly forward. Up to a certain point, therefore, and for the accomplishment of a certain stage of civilization, the principle of monarchy grew, overcame, became dominant. As the first great medium of union and social improvement, it took its place at the right time, and did its work in the march of humanity. It accomplished a momentous purpose.

During all this time the military system was

changing, receiving suggestions and improvements from actual experience, and modifying itself to the successive calls for its display. The old codes of chivalry, which had suited very well for the Crusades, began to be obsolete, although their principal features still controlled the movements of armies and the policy of wars. The vast inconsistencies with which those codes were enveloped still successfully opposed themselves to natural reason. The unequal justice which they dealt out remained to make the dénouement of every battle a scene of cruelty, revenge, and causeless crime, grotesquely commingled with generosity, self-sacrifice, and zealous respect for the gentler sex. The treasons they encouraged, the strange vows they imposed, the religious hypocrisy they made necessary, the jesuitical means they enjoined, still animated all classes in the career of the Lancasters.

But however much we may deprecate the ar bitrary injustice with which chivalry was enveloped, it is impossible to withhold from the permanent vir tues of that system our respect. In the march of ages its coarser features either totally disappeared, or were transformed into positive good. Its codes of honor were purged, by the process of a constantly growing civilization, of all that could harden the heart and foster ill sentiment, while yet they retained a spirit which emerged with honorable lustre from its crowd of contradictions. The age in which the splendid and romantic pomp of chivalry provoked ambitious rivalry passed gradually away, and took its place in tradition and history. The embattled tower no longer resounded to the clarion blast of the herald, or to the clattering onset of rival hosts. The knightly champion ceased to issue forth from the turreted bas

tion with graceful plume and burnished corslet, and gilded banner and emblazoned shield; but the spirit of honor, which made his valorous breast to heave with proud and passionate emotion, survived his age, and has descended to us of the present. And it will last through every war of word or sword, in spite of martyrdom and factious tumult, in ages of peace and prosperity, proof against false and levelling philosophies, unchanged by every metamorphosis of human progress; and its noble genius will be, as it has been in the past, reflected in honorable deed and unselfish sacrifice. It cannot pass away while man sets a value upon his good name-while there exists a sympathy for distress and helplessness-while the heart feels zeal to suppress wrong, and turns its indignation against oppression. Indeed, the best principles of chivalry cheer the path of an honorable man; they are the protectors of all misfortune; they rekindle dying hope; they are the merciful arbiters of human contention; above all, they are the steadfast allies of the Christian hosts, as they were in the days of old, when Jerusalem was to be reclaimed and infidels were to be expelled from the Sacred Land.

The good effects of these principles are, in truth, almost the only valuable inheritance which the middle ages left to future generations; they are the one bright page in that dark and mournful history; and even they are hardly discernible amid the confused mass of evil with which they were enveloped. Civilization has been the purging process; and thus Providence has ordained that, out of a rude and ignorant era, we have derived elements which have aided and supported an enlightenment which shrinks from its grosser features.

That dawning power which we have said was in the end to ally itself to the Crown, and perfect the downfall of feudalism, is now represented by the third estate of the British Constitution-the lower House of Parliament. Unnoticed and unfeared, the earliest struggles of the popular idea were permitted to proceed without molestation-despised, consented to, and forgotten. The other estates now acknowledge its predominant power; it bends both to its will; it may save or annihilate either or both in a day. It is essentially the post-monarchical development.

The Commons gradually approached, caught up with and joined, and then strode by the throne; and the three stages of English history have been feudalism, monarchy, a popular constitution.

That period in which we are thrown displays the first distinct, regular effort of the people to be heard; the election of Henry of Lancaster by Parliament was its first distinct triumph. In that era they had found the right spring to touch; by the instrument of financial power they extorted concession.

This House of Commons, now the just terrifier of tyrants, had its origin in the necessities of an usurper; its very birth was illegitimate. Montfort of Leices ter, who ruled by force in 1265, in place of Henry the Third, was especially strong in the esteem of the lower classes. He conceived the idea of concentrating that strength by its organized exhibition in the legis lature. Besides, then, the barons, bishops, and abbots, he summoned two knights of good birth from each county, erected and enfranchised the boroughs, and from them he caused to be sent those who should represent the middle and lower class of the community.

It is clear, from his character, that he neither knew nor cared what a revolution he was stirring up. Thus the passing necessity of a tyrant grew to be the permanent civilizer of the State. It gradually became a matter of habit with the sovereign to summon, at the same time with his barons and prelates, representatives of the commonalty; at first giving them but feeble voice in the conduct of affairs, but yielding more and more to their influence as the necessity of obtaining supplies at their instance became more imperative. It was to them that malcontent factions looked for support in treasons against the Crown; it was to them that the King appealed when driven from his hereditary power. Already, in that benighted age, the Commons began to act as the balance between opposing forces. But no thought was yet had of admitting commoners to the councils of State; the great offices, the military commands, the lord lieutenancies were still filled by the ancient aristocracy-occasionally, at wide intervals, by lowborn favorites of royalty.

Edward the First, so complete was his dominion, had but little use for organized popular approval. Edward the Second was too contemptible to obtain it, and vastly too foolish to seek it.

In the time of the third Edward, Parliament came to be distinctly composed of three bodies-the nobles and ecclesiastics, the knights of the shires, and the bur gesses. The two latter subsequently became united; but at present the electors of the people were too weak to assert an equality with the gentry. On the King's return from his deplorable failure in his first attempt to conquer the French, he found his funds low, his people dispirited, his army meagre and ill