10 S. XL MAY 29, 1909.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
439
NOTES ON BOOKS, &0.
The Daicn of the Constitution. By Sir James H. Ramsay. (Sonnenschein & Co.)
THE author has confined the scope of this work to the reigns of Henry III. and Edward I. (1216- 1307). It is no exaggeration to describe the period as one of the most momentous in the national existence of this country. The vicious habits and general wrongheadedness of John, the exasperation of the Barons, with the consequent compulsory subscribing of the monarch to the terms of the Great Charter, occurred at a moment when the whole community was im- pregnated with an atmosphere of change. The social, economic, and religious elements were in a state of apparently inextricable confusion. That national anarchy did not follow on the death of John can only be ascribed to the prompt action of William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke, who, on the death of John, immediately caused the infant Henry of Winchester to be proclaimed king as Henry III., and infused an element of energy and common sense into the Government during the minority of the young king. This vigorous action was the ultimate means of causing the defeat and departure from this country of Louis of France, who had claimed the throne.
The character of Henry III. was the pivot on which the course of public events turned. The stringent measures of William Marshall and the defeat of Louis opened the way to great possi- bilities, had the King possessed the ability and moral stamina to profit thereby. Unhappily for the advance of constitutionalism and the commonweal generally, the natural perverseness of the young monarch was all too evident from the moment he began to interfere actively in public affairs. Moral weakness, meanness, and extra- vagance, together with his incurable predilection for foreign favourites, combined to spoil a career that for an individual of different temperament held all the elements of greatness. Paradoxical as it may seem, however, this same weakness of character on the part of the monarch was eventu- ally a source of incalculable benefit to the con- stitutional ideal, which at first it threatened to extinguish. All sections of the community were roused to a keener view as to what was due to them. The existence of the two Charters, to- gether with the Provisions of Oxford, was in no danger of being forgotten ; and whilst Henry devoted himself to evading his responsibilities his subjects were equally determined that the principles embodied in these documents should be adhered to. As a result, the Charters were confirmed again and again, and as regularly dis- regarded by Henry, until at last the country gave unmistakable signs that the national patience was exhausted. The author thus indicates the anti- dote for Henry's folly :
" It was no doubt a time of great fluctuation in public opinion. But in reality the successive oscillations in the ascendancy of the parties are perfectly intelligible, and due to the struggle between constitutional instinct and a demand for just rights on the one hand, and innate loyalty and regard for Royal authority on the other.
Each party in turn, when in power, fails to make
a successful use of its opportunity, and commits
mistakes that gradually turn the scale in favour
of the opposite side. The final victory of the
Royal cause was due to the energy and ability of
the young Edward. Without him, Henry III.
might have shared the fate of Edward II. or
Richard II."
From the accession of Henry III. until the death of Edward I., the troubled course of events is traced with no uncertain hand. The author relates In detail the rise and fall of Simon de Montfort ; the leadership of what might be called the Reform Party, as opposed to the adherents of monarchic supremacy ; the various confirma- tions of the Charters ; the alternate advantages, and set-backs sustained by the parties engaged in this internecine warfare ; the pretensions of the Papacy ; and in fact the whole miserable story of the reign of Henry III., which pursued its sordid course until the advancing age of the King enabled Edward to interfere actively in the conduct of public affairs.
The author's admirable conception of Edward I. is thus expressed :
" Tall, spare, broad-chested, wide-browed, erect as a palm, and, almost to the last, light- footed as a youth, Edward stands up physically and morally a grand specimen of a man and a King .... His spirit must be pronounced too grasping to be wholly noble. He was essentially an autocrat, one conscious of his fitness to rule, anxious to rule well, but determined to rule .... He appreciated the value of popular institutions,, but always in subordination to his own will. His natural impulses lean towards justice and truth. . . . .His habits are frugal, economical, and in- dustrious ; his domestic life was a model of purity and affection .... With practical talents of a high order, he cared little for literature or art, nor can we trace in him any perception of humour .... The motto inscribed on his tomb by a later age, ' Pactum Serva ' ('keep your word'), was not one which could honestly be claimed on his behalf."
To this monarch must be attributed the great advance in constitutional government. The reasons which led Edward to establish Parliament on a more or less secure basis must be ascribed in large measure to self-interest rather than a whole- hearted desire for reform. The financial pressure induced by the various wars contributed largely to this result. In this connexion it may not be amiss to supplement the author's authorities by quoting Reiss, who in ' Die Ursprung des englischen Unterhauses ' says :
" To attain a genuine and regular control of the local administration, and to carry out the assessment and collection of taxes with the least possible friction, were the most substantial reasons for which Edward I. added to the English Con- stitution, as a perfected and enduring institution,, the system of representation that had earlier been only sporadically connected with it."
In discussing the somewhat complex character of Simon de Montfort, the author, in reference to his qualities as a statesman, happily quotes Stubbs, who in his ' Constitutional History ' says, " He had the genius to interpret the mind of the nation and to anticipate the line which was taken by later progress," adding : " De Montfort with-
