LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. GIFT OF Class ^) A STUDY OF TH,. PARLIAMENT OF PARIS, AND THE OTHER PARLIAMENTS OF FRANCE. A STUDY OF THE PARLIAMENT OF PARIS, AND THE OTHER PARLIAMENTS OF FRANCE. A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS OF THE SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, FOR THE ATTAINMENT OF THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, - BY - JANE M. BANCROFT, 'Rakms n OF THE NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY, EVANSTON, ILL. OF THE UNJVERSITY OF f4\jjp*fa A. GUILDS, PKINTEK, EVANSTON. tSS 4 . X .-; , ' Of THE UNIVERSITY OF .&U.IF4 Introductory Note The subject of the Parliaments of France, so far as I am aware, is treated by no one English author. While frequent allusions are made to the Parliaments in all histories of France, somewhat diligent search has failed to find in any English work an adequate explanation of their origin, their organization, and their political history. The collection of materials for even so short a thesis, has therefore been attended with considerable difficulty. The translations of the authorities quoted in the notes, are, in all cases, those of the writer. I desire to acknowledge obligation for valuable assistance rendered in prosecuting my studies, to Miss Florence Gushing, of Boston ; to Mr. John Savary, Assistant Librarian of the Library of Congress; to Mr. Frederick Saunders, Superintendent of the Astor Library, and to Dr. W. F. Poole, of the Library of Chicago. JANE M. BANCROFT. Woman's College of the Northwestern University, Evanston, III. June u, 1884. 207752 4 information and advice concerning matters of state; a council which filled the function of both a political and feudal assembly. 1 A brief re"sum6 of the reasons for the several theories will be given. I. If it could be proved that France had a judicial system extending backward in an unbroken chain, so that the Parlia- ments could be connected with the Champs de Mai, under the Carlovingian rulers, and the Champs de Mars, under the Merovingian faineants, then the right of the people to a voice in government would receive historical corroboration, and the Parliaments would be its still existing monuments. In the troubled state of France preceding the Great Revolution industrious researches were made to sustain this theory, and its best presentation is found in the famous Encyclopaedia edited by Diderot, and d' Alembert. 8 The assemblies of the nation, to which historians have v applied the name parlemens ge"neraux were not of royal institution, but were^brought in by the Franks. Under the first race they were called "Mallum," 8 from the Teutonic mallen to talk; under the second race, they war&known as Mallum, placiturn generale, consiliurn, or colloquium; under the third race, curia regis, judicium Francorum, and subse- quently parlement. At first all freemen were admitted to these assemblies; as the nation became greater, each canton had its own assembly, and only those who held rank or position in the state were admitted. These general assemblies formed the public council of the kings. Furthermore, the kings of the first and second races had their special council or court, and toward 1 Beugnot, Comte de. Documents in^dits sur 1' Hist, de France. Les Oliin, vol. i, preface, p. 29. 8 Encyclopedic Method ique, Jurisprudence, tome vi, Paris 1786. 8 Gibert, Recherch, histr, sur les Cours de Justice, tome 30, p. 592. Le mot Parleinentum avait la meme signification que celui de mallum, qui dans 1'ancienne langue, voulait dire, conference pour parler. the close of the second race, the parlemens gen i The p ar li amen t of Paris was the first Class, and all together constituted a single body, which represented the kingdom of France. If this pretension had been generally admitted, the form of government would have been transferred from an hereditary king to an assembly of hereditary magistrates. The Legislative and Political Rights. Having studied the Parliaments as judicial organizatiuns, there remains the explanation of the legislative and political power, with which time, custom and the tacit consent of both nation and monarch had invested them. There are a number of obvious reasons why this body of magistrates should at length find themselves clothed with an authority to which the judicial history of no other country can furnish a parallel. To a certain extent legislative power had been conferred upon it. Whenever a roval law was defective in any detail, the Parliament could issue an arrest or decision supplying cnsKtive " cr " this dofrct 2 The arrot was provisional only until (he 1 Voltaire, Parl. de Paris, chap. Ixvi. 8 Mtfrilhou, M. F., Les Parl. de France, p. 452. 33 king himself should remedy the fault; still, the right of making such amendments was a legislative privilege of high value, and under more favorable circumstances might have served as the entering wedge to secure for the Parliament of Paris the broader privileges of its namesake across the Channel. We have tried to prove that the Parliament of Paris was a section of the king's council, set aside to consider judicial ques- Heirs of tions. As the clerks and lawyers gradually replaced King's Council. the barons and prelates, they tenaciously held to all the privileges of those who preceded them, one of the most valuable of which was the consideration of questions of state. We have seen how the Parliament gradually laid claim to bring the representative of the States-General, 1 and whatrecogni- iiepresenting tion was given this pretension by the assembly at General. Tours. As such, during the long intervals which separated the sessions of the States-general, it claimed the character of guardian of the rights vested in those assemblies. We have also seen that registration came to be considered as an indispensable ceremony, giving validity to laws, until the Registration principle was admitted without question that no.Par- . liameiit was bound to execute any ordinance until it had first been communicated to it, and entered upon its records. When the ancient kings desired to make important modifications in the general legislation of the kingdom, they had been wont to ask the Parliament to examine the project and report their obser- vations upon it. The first time that these observations took the form of " remonstrances," was in the address sent by the Parlia- ment to Louis XI, touching the Pragmatic Sanction. 8 This right of observation and remonstrance was one of the most essential portions of the political power of Parliament. If a 1 MC-rilhou, M. F., Les Parl. cle France, p. 454. 8 Voltaire, Le Parlement de Paris, chap. 11. "Remontrances toucliant les Privileges de 1' E glise gallicane. 5 34 remonstrance was unheeded the next step was to request the king 1 to withdraw the ordinance. If this was refused, Parliament formally declined to register it among the records. This refusal was only overcome by "lettres de jussion," or a compulsory de- mand. If still registration was withheld a Bed of Justice 1 was called. Then the king appeared in all his majesty, and from the summit of his throne of justice, commanded that the edict should be inscribed in the records. When the court was thus obliged to submit, the decree of registration was preceded by a preamble, stating that the decree was registered " by the king's express command," and this protest was entered upon the records. If the right of resistance did not actually prevail it was asserted, and every new assertion was supposed to add to its strength. The constant opposition of the Parliaments of Paris to the encroachments of the Court of Rome, was the greatest political Registration service it ever rendered. By refusing registration, of Pope's Bull. an( j by remonstrating, Parliament succeeded in es- tablishing a right to intervene in ecclesiastical affairs, and won for itself the name of the bulwark of the liberties of the Galli- can Church. 2 Before the statute of Praernunire was passed in England, forbidding appeals from the king's court to the Court of Rome, 2 an advocate of the Parliament of Paris, Pierre do Cunieres, had in 1329 proposed this remedy against the usurpa- tions of the Church. 1 besmaze G, vol. i, p. 119. " Lit de Justice," signifies the throne upon which the king was seated. It was formed of five cushions, one serving as a seat, another as a back, two as arm supports, and one as a foot-stool. Bastard, Les Parl. de Fr., voi. i, p. 19. It has been said that u Lits de Justice" were so named, because then justice slept; i. e., the king's person united both legislative and judicial power. However, this designation also canie from the arrangement of the throne. 2 Voltaire, Parl. de Paris, 1700, rhnp. 10. 8 Stubbs, Constitutional Hist, of England, vol. ii, p. 410. "The first statute of Praeniunire was an ordinance of 1353." 35 The Parliament also established a right to a voice in diplomatic questions. All treaties with foreign powers, before Registration becoming effective, required registration, and so were of Treaties subject to the observations, remonstrances and refusals of the court. However, this right figures on few occasions which are historically important, and these few clearly prove the real impotence of the proud tribunal, when met by the positive wishes of a strong monarch. When Francis I. desired to be freed from the humiliating engagement of the Treaty of Madrid, he called a meeting of the Parliament of Paris, at which were present deputations from the six other existing Parliaments. He gravely laid before them the provisions of the treaty, which a few days before he had sworn by his royal oath to fulfill. He asked their consideration of it, and their opinion as to registra- tion. They as gravely replied that " neither the treaty, nor the royal oath were binding; the former not having been the act of the king; the latter having been exacted from him when in bondage; that therefore he should neither give up Burgundy, nor return into Spain." * One simple-minded counselor, Bishop Poncher, whodid not understand this little comedy, was so im- prudent as to give it as his opinion, that Francis should go back to Spain. He thereby brought upon himself, a prison afid death. * The peculiar institution of the Ministere Publique and its connection with the Parliament, enabled the latter to prefer . pretensions to political power, which were sometimes Pxjbiique successful. The Procureur general, the chief of the Parquet, had so important and so diverse functions, that his influence was felt in every branch of administration, and as one of the most powerful members of the Parliament, the latter often identified itself with his exercise of power. * 1 Kitchin's Hist, de France, vol. ii, page 201). 2 Tin* account most favorable to Francis I, concerning the treaty of Madrid is found in Duruy, Hist, de France, vol. ii. * Vicointe de Bastard d' Estang. Les Parl. de France, vol. i, p. 297. Political History of the Parliaments. When the Parliament of Paris was consolidated by Philippe le Bel, he had no thought of making it a judge in great affairs of State. The trial of the Knights Templars in 1309, which assuredly would have come before it in later times was held by the commissioners of Pope Cleme,nt V. The first time that the Parliament uttered a formal remonstrance was during the reign of Louis XI, concerning the famous Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges. 1 During the reign of his son, Charles VIII, great weight was evidently attached to the attitude of Parliament on political questions, for the Duke of Orleans, afterward Louis XII, desiring to obtain the regency, and the government of the young king laid his wishes before the assembled counselors and asked them to declare in his favor. The First President responded: " Parliament renders justice for the people; finances, wars, and the care of kings are not within its province." 8 Not always was this body governed by such modest and discreet sentiments. The reign of Louis XII was not marked by the slightest difference between the monarch and his high tribunal. Two O noteworthy ordinances held in esteemed repute, are inseparably associated with his name. The first enacted that no Baillis or. Prevot should be permitted to act as judge, unless he was able to read and had studied law. Voltaire wittily says: " The high officials, all of whom were nobles, preserved their dignity and 1 Voltaire, Le Parlement de Paris, 17G9, p. ir.5. * Quoted by Voltaire in chap. 12. 37 ignorance, and lettered lieutenants of lesser birth judged in their names." 1 The second edict of 1499, goes far to explain the title grate- fully given him, the Father of his Country. " Qu'on suive toujours la loi malgre les ordres contraires a la loi, que 1'impor- tunite pourrait arracher du monarque," During the reign of Francis I, the Parliament of Paris became an important factor in political events. 2 Its first variance Francis i, with the king arose over the Concordat. 8 Francis I, and Parliament. w ho had need of Leo X, abolished the Pragmatic Sanction, which had so far secured to the Church in France, greater liberties than were enjoyed in any country in Europe. He substituted for it the Concordat, by which he gave the pope certain portions of the Church revenue, and appropriated to him- self the right to appoint to benefices; in other words, the king presented the pope with the wealth of the Church, and the pope handed over to the king its independance. "Each gave to the other, what belonged to neither." 4 The struggle over the registration of the Concordat was hard and long. The king indignantly insisted on registration, and at a Bed of Justice protested that no Parliament should make him a Doge of Venice. After twelve years of strife the infamous Du Prat removed ecclesiastical matters from the cognizance of Parliament, and handed them over to the king's council. 5 The other acts of this reign are not so creditable. It broke the treatv of Madrid, attainted the king's enemy and kinsman, Charles of Bourbon, T Voltaire, Le Parl de Paris, chap. 15. 8 M^rilhou, Les Parl. de France, et leur carac^re politique 'depuis Philippe le Bel, jusqu'en, 1789. p p. 135, 224. 8 The text of the Concordat is given in full in the Recueil gen des ane. lois. xii, 75-97. 4 Bastard d' Estang, vol. ii, p. 9. Baird, The Rise of the Huguenots. Vol. i, p. 37. 5 Kitchin, vol. ii, p. 182. sr and sanctioned the persecutions of the Huguenots. The reigns of Henry II, Charles IX, and Henry III, were marked by a constant succession of conflicts between the king and the Parlia- ment, with a monotonous sameness of result. 1 These two powers agreed on only one matter, and this was hatred of the Huguenots. The horrors of St. Bartholomew drew forth from this high judicial body an approving edict, ordering a yearly procession of thanks- giving to celebrate the great victory of the faith. Fortunately the change in public sentiment spared France this disgrace. Henry IV, knew well how to manage this company of magis- trates, and manage them he did, firmly and sensibly. When Henry iv, they refused to register the Edict of Nantes, he and Parliament. summoned to the Louvre deputies from all the Chambers. 8 "What I have done," he said, "is for the good of peace. I speak to you not in royal robe, or with sword and cape, but as a father of his family conversing freely with his childron. I ask you to register the edict I have granted the Protestants. God has chosen to give me this kingdom, which is mine by birth and conquest. You, gentlemen of Parliament, would not be in your seats but for me. If obedience was due to my predecessors, it is much more due to me." * When a father addresses his children in such terms, he is generally obeyed. The edict was speedily registered. With Richelieu and the minority of Louis XIII, came again stormy times. In 1615 the Parliament without the royal order, dared to summon princes, dukes, peers Richelieu and high officials to deliberate upon the needs of the and Parliament. state, and the relief of the people. "We," it said, " hold the place in council of the princes and barons, who, from 1 Baird, The Rise of the Huiruenols. Vol. i, p. 237. " Guizot, Hist, de France, vol. v, p. 112. M^rilhou, M. F., Les Paul, de France, p. 303. "Cette manifestation d' une autorit nouvelle clut faire unojjerfonde impression sur les magis- trats." 39 time immemorial were near the person of the king." 1 This assumption Richelieu constantly fought against. He would not allow the pretension of magistrates to meddle in affairs of State. There was constant altercation between the king and Richelieu on the one side, and Parliament on the other, whether about points of jurisdiction or the registration of edicts respecting finances. On one of these occasions 8 the entire Parliament was ordered to the Louvre, and there with bare heads and on bended knees was compelled to supplicate the king's forgiveness. This humiliating experience was not sufficient to restrain their assertions of right and authority and the struggles continued for ten years longer, when in 1641 the king issued an edict prohibiting the Parliament from any interference in affairs of State and administration, the preamble of which is as formal a declaration of absolute power as any ever promulgated by Louis XIV. The Cardinal had at last gained the victory. The attempts of Parliament at independence during the wars of the Fronde, only demonstrated how futile was its authority, and how completely was it the tool of the upper- most faction. Guizot gays: 8 " The pretensions of the magistrates were often foundation leas; the restless and meddlesome character of their assemblies did harm to their remonstrances; but for a long while they maintained in the teeth of more and more absolute kingly power, the country's rights in the government, and they had perceived the dangers of that sovereign monarchy which certainly sometime raises States to the highest pinnacle of their glory, but only to let them sink before long to a condition of the most grievous abasement." Louis XIV never forgot the part that Parliament played during the stormy scenes of the Louis xiv, Fronde, in the early years of his boyhood. He had that and Parliament, instinctive apprehension of the existence of latent 1 Guizot, Mist, de France, vol. ii, p. 195. 2 Voltaire, Hist, du Parl. de Paris, vol. v, chap. 49, May 12, 1631. 8 Guizot, Hist, de France, vol. v, p. 220. 40 power that led him to give an effectual check to the aspirations of this assembly at the very outset of his kindly career. In the year 1615 the Parliament had refused to register cer- tain financial edicts. The king (a boy not yet eighteen years of age) presented himself before the assembly in hunting attire, booted and spurred and, as is commonly added, with riding- whip in his hand. He haughtily commanded the Parliament to address no more remonstrances to him, but to confine themselves to the strict discharge of their duties. In 1 j?3 he issued an ordinance declaring that all royal edicts should be registered within eight days from their date by the Parliament of Paris, and within six weeks by the other Parliaments of France. 1 We hear no more of the political role of Parliament during this long reign. In the period of struggle between Bousset and Louis XIV on one side, and Rome and Innocent XI on the other, the Parliaments VUM! emulously in the support of the king's policy. Louis, satisfied with the apparent submission of the supreme court, placed his last will and testament in their custody, where it was deposited in a small room built expressly for its safe keeping. He seems to have argued that a body so submissive during his life-time would continue to be so after his death. But how quickly they took their revenge for the contumely of long silence. While his body was still lying in state at Versailles, the Parliament assem- bled without having been convoked, 8 and measures were at om;n taken to break the will of the dead king. A few words from Orleans to the Parliament sufficed. The Duke received from the Parliament the regency during the king's minority, and the Par- liament received from this imprudent depository of royal authori- ty the political power of which it had been deprived for sixty 1 Sir J. Stephens, Lect. on Hist, of France, p. 225. 8 Guizot, Hist, tie France, vol. vi, p. 54. Mi'inoires do Saint-Simon, Derniers mom nts de Louis XIV. llachette edition. 41 The Missis years. The part which the Parliament took in resist- sippi Com- pany, ing the chimerical projects of the Scotchman Law reflect great credit upon it. The opposition was probably due more to the repugnance which this body ever showed to novel ideas, than to its comprehension of the pernicious results of Law's system. It had forbidden the introduction of printing under Louis XT, it had condemned the philosophy of Descartes in 1624, it had opposed the establishment of the French Academy by Richelieu, *and from similar motives it now remon- strated against the financial innovations of Law. The two great questions with which the Parliaments are identified during the 18th century, are the controversies concern- ing the papal bull " Unigenitus" and the expulsion of the Jesuits. The long quarrel between the Jansenists and the Jesuits 'was fanned into fresh flame by the final publication of the Pope's The Bull Uni- bull, which quoted one hundred and one propositions from the work of Pere Quesnel and condemned them as heretical. The bull Unigenitus appeared Sept. 8, 1713, and was registered by the express wish of Louis XIV, Feb. 14, 1714. The dying king, troubled and alarmed by discussions he deemed hurtful to true religion, desired to see the kingdom at peace before his death; but for fifty years the bull Unigenitus was a fruitful cause of dispute and resistance between Parliament and the Church, while the court party veered from one side to another as selfish interest dictated. During the first years of the regency the Duke of Orleans abandoned the Jesuits to the indignation of the people, and the bull was practically a dead letter, but in 1720 the unprincipled Dubois desired to become a cardinal, and so offered his good services to the Papal court. Voltaire says, with scornful disdain, both for the question at issue and the conduct of the Archbishop: "The greater part of these proposi- 1 Voltarire, Hist, du Parl. De Paris, chap. 51. 6 42 tions condemned by the bull Unigenitus concerned metaphysical questions about free-will, which the Jansenists no more under- stood than the Jesuits. The Archbishop had more contempt for the bull than all the Parliaments of the kingdom, but he would have tried to force the Koran upon the Church if the Koran could have advanced his interests." 1 Therefore, Dec. 4, 1720, after stormy resistance on the part of the Parliament, and a threat from the Regent to replace it by another tribunal, the bull was again registered. The controversy was by no means extinguished. The middle classes throughout the country sided strongly with the Jansen- The Contest ^ sts > anc * ear g er ly seized every opportunity to testify Continued. their opinion> Jn 1?30 Louis X y heM ft Bed Q f j ug _ tice, and enforced a third registration of the papal edict. The next day the Parliament met and drew up protests and petitions, and for two vears the judicial business was neglected, while the counselors passed their time in agitating and framing new remonstrances. The people became excited to a degree of extravagant fanaticism. Miracles were produced in abundance to witness to the truths of Jansenius. The tomb of one of the Jansenist saints in the cemetery of St. Medard became noted as the seat of miraculous cures, and so disturbing were the scenes enacted there that government was compelled to interfere and shut out the public. Then it was some profane wit wrote over the gate: " De pur le Roi, defense A Dieu, De faire miracle en ce lieu." A final struggle was brought about by the order of the Archbishop of Paris in 1749, in which he commanded his priests to require each dying person to affirm belief in the bull Unigen- itus, before receiving the last sacraments of the Church; other- wise Christian burial was denied. 1 Voltaire, Hist, du Parl. de Paris, chap. 61. 43 Now, indeed, all orders and parties were embroiled, and the very foundations of society were shaken. The Bishops through- out the country issued pastoral letters against the Parliaments, and the Parliaments ordered the letters to be publicly burned. These were dangerous times for the Parliaments and the Church to be indulging in open and bitter controversy. The attention of the people was called as never before to the rights of government and the relations of Church and State, and the writings of Rous- seau 1 just now appearing, were awakening passionate^ enthusiasm. In 1753, the members of the Parliament of Paris were ban- ished, and a Provisional Court was formed, but such determined opposition was awakened that the king recalled them. Again, the magistracy were exiled, and again recalled, but in the sympathy aroused by the attack of an assassin upon the king, the Parliament only returned by giving a pledge to desist from further attacks upon the bull. Outward hostility ceased, but discontent and anger smouldered beneath the surface. They finally found expression in the blow aimed against the Order of Jesuits. The accumulated hatred of the magistracy and Expulsion the popular party throughout the country, aided by of the Jesuits. the attacks of the sceptical Encyclopaedists led by Voltaire and Diderot, brought about the measures, which termi- nated in the ordinance of August 2, 1762. This decree abolished the Society of Jesus in France, secularized its members, and confiscated its property. 1 Rousseau "that remarkable man who, without learning, with few virtues, and no strength of character, has nevertheless stamped himself ineffaceably on history by the force of a vivid imagination, and by the help of a genuine and burning love for his fellowuien, Tor which much will always have to be forgiven him." For the effect of the writings of Rousseau on the history of his time, see Sir Henry Maine, Ancient Law, p. 83. De Tocqueville, The Ancient Regime, chap. 13. Demogeot, Hist, de La Lit. Fran., p. 506. Van Laun, H., Hist, of French Lit., vol. iii, pp. 90-111. Saintsbury, G., Hist, of French Lit., Clarendon Press, 1882, p. 484. 44 Fruitless altercation had too familiarized the magistracy to a system of obstruction. More than forty years * of the reign of Louis XV. had passed in a ceaseless struggle between the judicial power and the crown. l The needs of the Treasury, increased by war, constantly compelled new financial edicts, and refusals of registration were met by frequent Beds of Justice. This anarchy could not endure; either the crown must resume its authority, or the Parliament would control the State. Louis aroused himself from his lethargy, and for once acted vigorously and expeditiously. Further compromise was no Suppression longer considered. By the advice of ' Chancellor of the Parliaments Maupeou, the king took the extreme step of sup- pressing altogether the ancient Parliaments of the realm, both in the capital and the provinces. To take their place six new tribunals were instituted Feb. 23, 1771, under the name of con- seils-superieurs, in the towns of Arras, Blois, Chfilons-sur-Marne, Clermont, Lyons, and Poitiers, the central court of justice being still maintained at Paris! This great organic change was not accomplished without obstinate resistance on the part of the Parliaments and expostulations even from the princes of the blood; but the great mass of the people looked on indifferently. The privileges and immunities of the Parliaments had lost them their hold upon the third estate, and their later contentions with the crown were regarded as so many selfish struggles for their own aggrandizement. To recommend the new courts to public fa'vor, Maupeou an- nounced that justice would now be administered free of expense, and the sale of offices was forbidden. When the new king ascended the throne he re-established the Parliaments; but they had learned no wisdom from their exile. After fourteen years, Louis XVI found himself in the 1 Bastard, Les Parl. de France, vol. ii, p. 406. 45 same situation as the king, his grandsire, facing refractory coun- selors. They continued to make angry remonstrances about register- ing money loans, and the king was obliged to use the despotic measure of a Bed of Justice. The Parliament doubtless thought it was conciliating public opinion, which was averse to new taxes, but the needs of the Treasury were urgent and its de- mands continued. Finally the Parliament of Paris declared that according to the ancient constitution of France, the establish- ment of new imposts belonged only to the States- General. It little anticipated that this cry meant its own destruction. The States-General, transformed into the Constituent Assembly, had scarcely existed four months when the great Dissolution tribunals ceased to be. 1 Nov. 3, 1789, Alexander Parliaments Lameth moved the abolition of the Parliaments. " They are now in vacation," objected some one. " So much the better," shouted Mirabeau, "Let them remain there; they will pass from sleep to death, and there will be no return." The de- cree, voted with cries of joy by the majority, declared that the Parliaments should be in perpetual vacation. Temporary courts were at once organized, and iu September, 1791, new judicial organizations were framed. Thus the Parliaments of France passed out. of history. 1 Bastard, Les Parl. de France, vol. ii, p. 642. Martin, H., Hist, de France, vol. vi, chap. 4. 46 Parliamentary Development in Franco and England. A final question now remains: Why did the Curia Regis of France, the King's Council of Philippe Auguste, eventuate solely in a judicial body, dependant for its existence upon the king's favor, and hampered by its lack of legal inundation, while the Curia Regis of England of the 1 same century, the King's Council of Henry II advanced steadily toward the parliamentary system of the fifteenth, 8 the seventeenth and the nineteenth centuries? The answer rests partly upon racial characteristics that are real elements in historical development. Freeman says: 8 "The institutions of a people are the natural growth of the Difference m Race. circumstances under which it finds itself." Surely, the distinguishing attribute of race is a potential circumstance. These qualities, which each generation receives from its predecessors, and transmits to the generation following, form the most s table portion of our physical, mental and moral being and.beneath every political variation, they must be sought for and will be found. For over fifteen centuries 4 Great Britain was peopled and governed exclusively by members of the great Teutonic family; there was an undisturbed development of German habits of thought and mind. In France throughout the same period, there 1 Stubbs, Const. Hist, of England, vol. i, p. 388. * Stubbs, Const. Hist, of England, vol. ii, p. 161. 8 Freeman, E. A., Comparative Politics, p. 30. This is Montesquieu's theory, although he underrates the strength of inherited qualities. Cf. Chapters 14, 15, 23 and 29, of "Esprit des Lois." * Greene's Making of England. Introduction, note 15. "The first recorded appearance of the Saxons off the coast of Gaul, and in the Chan- nel was in A. D. 287." 47 was a vast preponderance of the Gallic, or Roman-Gallic over the Teutonic element of society. After the German invasion of the fifth century, the country remained divided among half savage tribes that took on no distinctive aspect of nationality, until the strong hand of Chariemague held them in his grasp. Then followed the slow and imperfect fusion of different races that were not welded into one nation of Frenchmen, until the Hundred Year's War was completed. 1 Sir James Stephen says: * England has so long successfully maintained her free institu- tions, because she is still as she has always been, German; because her national franchises are the spontaneous and legitimate fruit of her national character; of that character dutiful, serious, persever- ing, reverential and hopeful, which has been transmitted to us from our Anglo-Saxon ancestors." England has ever been governed by English law, " a body of opinions, maxims, and moral sentiments, which it would be Difference difficult to define," and that has largely grown out f Law. o f j uc ]i c i a i decisions, and early German and English customs. 2 Roman law has affected English law 8 in so far as it has stimulated a judicial and legal spirit, produced activity in legisla- tion and incited an orderly and systematic arrangement of laws, and of methods of legal procedure; but the body of English legislation has remained essentially the same from the ninth to the nineteenth century. Never has the law been wrested by any one class to be used as a tool to manipulate its own interest; 1 Sir J. Stephens, Lectures on the Hist, of France. Lect. xxiv, p. 710. 8 Prof. E. Robertson, Art. on Law, Enc. Brit. ed. 1882, "Sir Henry Maine has associated its rise with the activity of modern legislatures, which is, of course, a characteristic of the societies in which English laws prevail." 3 Sir Henry Maine, Early Hist, of Institutions, p. 21. "The Roman Law introduced or immensely stimulated the habit of legislation, and this is one of the ways in which it has influenced the stubborn body of Germanic customs prevailing in Great Baitain." 48 the commons, the lords and the king have all had limits set to their authority by the common law. France has had no one law acting as the interpreter of a national spirit. "It has been smitten with the curse of an anom- alous and dissonant jurisprudence beyond every other country in Europe." * Before 1789 it was divided into two great di visions; the provinces in which the Droit E crit^ or Written Law prevailed, and those in which the D>roit Coutunwer or Customary Law, pravailed. The former, as the basis of their jurisprudence, accepted the written Roman law; the latter only admitted it in so far as it was conformable to their local usages, and then it mainly supplied judicial expressions and forms of legal reason- ing. There was still further division. Where the Customary Law was in force, each commune, city, 8 and province 3 had its own customs, and where the Written Law was observed, the feu- dal usages that formed a part of it were of a miscellaneous and arbitrary nature. 4 The different customs and usages tended to a disintegration of national thought; each man had more interest in his village or province than in the nation. The arbitrary maxims of Rome made the law itself subservient to the absolute power of the crown. It needed the French Revolution to wipe out this anonalous mass of jurisprudence, and to furnish one law 1 Sir Henry Maine, Ancient Law, p. 80. 8 Ain. Law Rev. vol. xii, p. 262, Parliaments in France. "A man's rights, his responsibilities, and his mode of enforcing them, might vary as he passed from one village to another. He could breakfast at Nismes without fear of the terrors of the law, only to find himself when he reached Aries subject to its direct penalties. 8 Kitchin's Hist, of France, vol. ii, p. 457. "In the reign of Henry IV, Dauphiny struggled hard to get the tax shifted from personal to real property, a boon so needful for a poor and hilly country. Languedoc, her wealthy neighbor, was actually under the other system, and had her tax- ation based on real property."' 4 De Tocqueville, The Old Regime and the Revolution; Appendix, note on Feudal Rights. Hallam, H., The Middle Ages, vol. i, chap. 2, part ii. 49 for every Frenchman and every locality. Certainly, the law ad- ministered in the courts of France before 1789 was not fitted to make the great chartered corporations of justice, so much the guardians of the liberties of a nation, as the protectors of the privileges of a province, and of the prerogatives of a king. Another consequence follows from the difference in law. Guizot lays down as a primary truth, that 1 " the true principle Division of ^ re P resen ^ ve government is the radical illegitimacy of all absolute powor, whatever may be its name or place; that absolute power as a right inheres in none of the powers, which concur to form the government." Therefore, the first great external characteristic of representative government is division of powers In England for more than a thousand years the law has always interposed to prevent the encroachment of one order of the State upon another, and to vindicate the rights of all. Although the king has at times asserted, he has never established the claim to inscribe among the laws of the land, edicts issued upon the sole authority of his prerogative, and no king, since the time of earliest king-making, has sat upon the throne, without the recognition of his title, either by his Council of Barons, or later, his Parliament. The sovereignty of the king has always been limited, 2 and the power of the government has been shared among the different orders of the State, in other words, the law has defined with a degree of clearness the functions and the limits of the legislative, judicial and executive division of government. In France we find no such division resulting from the feudal and Roman law. The feudal lord combined in himself the legislative, judicial and executive government of his domain. Public opinion exercised slight control over him, and his vassal 1 Guizot, Essays upon Representative Gov. in England. Lect. 1. 8 llallam, H., Constitutional Hist, of England, vol. i, chap. 1. 50 had no right, which it was dangerous for him to disrespect. These two sentences sum up the three contraries to the charac- teristics of representative government, as Guizot defines them. 1 The Roman law held that every ordinance pronounced in the King's Court was binding throughout his kingdom, thus making the king a legislator; and it furnished the doctrine familiar to every student of modern history, that, " the sovereign is the fountain of all justice," thus making him a judge. These were the features of the law with which the Parlia- ment of Paris was profoundly familiar, to whose study and practice the counselors had devoted their lives, and by which their habits of thought were determined. No evolution from such an institution could produce the deliberative body of a representative government. There were certain minor features, peculiar to the French judicial system, that furnish a further answer to the question of Certain minor P ar li am ^ntary development. The sale and hereditary tenure of judicial offices; the privileges of the magistrates, and their exemptions from taxation; the multiplica- tion and dispersion of the Parliaments, which prevented them from acting with the unity of a single body; these facts were real agencies that removed the Parliaments from the sympathies of the people, and did away with the idea of representative connection between them. In truth, the Old Regime and the Parliaments were in- dissolubly bound together; the weakness and the strength of both inhered in the common foundation of kingly absolutism. The opening of the States-General, May 5, 17b9, that was the portent of the destruction of old-time royalty, was likewise the presage of the dissolution of the Parliaments of France. 1 Guizot, Essays upon Representative Government in England. Lect, 1. " The three external characteristics of the principle of representative government, are: 1. division of powers; 2. election of officers; :}. publicity of discussion. THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE STAMPED BELOW AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON TH-E FOURTH DAY AND TO $1.OO ON THE SEVENTH DAY OVERDUE. NOV 6 1940 }? /L ' 1 ~~~ / FF'^ gn> ro4L 2 T - c: LD 21-100m-7,'40( 6936s) Rot