The body of the people oppressed through the local courts. Henry I. : istrative system. of these new and evil customs touching ecclesiastical fiefs, it is inferred and the charter of Henry I. confirms the inference that he was also the author of the equally oppressive charges imposed about the same time upon lay estates. To the reign of William Rufus is now assigned the formal organization of that system of feudal oppression whose burdens are generally summed up under the heads of relief, wardship, marriage, escheat, and forfeiture. To the reign of Henry I must be traced the origin of the feudal exaction of an aid on the marriage of the king's daughter. The feudatories were not, however, the only subjects of William's exacting financial policy. The body of the people at large were oppressed not only indirectly by the burdens which were imposed upon their feudal masters, but they were also subjected to a direct exaction in the form of the old and hateful tribute of Danegeld, which assumed during the Norman reigns the character of ordinary revenue. By the policy of Flambard the local courts of the shire and the hundred were turned into engines of extortion; in the expressive words of the Chronicler, "He drove and commanded all his gemots over all England." In the midst of his tyrannies William perished by the hand of a hunter or assassin, and thus made way for his younger brother Henry, the one English-born member of the house of the Conqueror. 6 II. At the time of William's sudden death his elder the admin- brother Robert, upon whom he had attempted to bestow the right of succession by treaty, being far away from England, Henry, who was on the spot, promptly embraced the opportunity to seize the kingdom. William "was slain on a Thursday, and buried the next morning; and after he was buried, the witan, who were then near at hand, chose his brother Henry as king." The promises contained in Henry's coronation oath, whose exact words are still preserved, were 1 Henry's charter, art. 2. 2" All are deductions from a single principle, and we can hardly doubt that he who is known to have invented one of them was also the inventor of the others." Freeman, Norm. Conq., vol. v. p. 254. As to the nature of these incidents, see Digby, Law of Real Property, pp. 77-86; Blackstone, vol. ii. pp. 63–72. 9 Henr. Huntingd., Hist., lib. vii.; Chron. Petrib., 1110. 5 Stubbs, Const. Hist., vol. i. p. 301. 6 Chron. Petrib., 1099. 7 As to the terms of the treaty of Caen, see the Chronicle, 1091. 8 Chron. Petrib., 1100. As to the election, see Will. Malmes., G. R., v. § 393 9 See Maskell, Mon. Rit., vol. iii pp. 5, 6; Select Charters, p. 99. charter the Charter. amplified into a comprehensive charter of liberties, which Henry's stands not only as the immediate parent of the Great Charter parent of of John, but as the first limitation imposed upon the des- the Great potism established by the Conqueror and carried to such a height by his sons.1 In this charter,2 which was specially intended to undo the wrongs of the preceding reign, distinct concessions were made to the clergy, to the baronage, and to the people at large. The "evil customs" through which Rufus had plundered and oppressed the church were specially renounced, while to the baronage the guarantee was given that the recent feudal innovations should be limited to the exaction of customary fees. This concession was not made, however, for the exclusive benefit of the tenants-in-chief: they were admonished to extend the same concessions to their own under-tenants, and to renounce all tyrannical exactions. To the people at large were restored the laws of King Eadward, - which symbolized the ancient constitution, with such amendments as the Conqueror had made. The hold which Henry thus acquired upon the English nation, by the accident of birth and by the grant of a charter, he strengthened in a short time by a marriage with Matilda, the daughter of Henry's King Malcolm of Scotland and of Margaret, the sister of Ead- marriage gar Ætheling, the last king of the ancient house of Cerdic and garet. of Woden. Thus intrenched in the affections of his English subjects, Henry found it an easy matter to maintain himself in the face of the disaffection of his nobles, when Robert, upon his return from the Holy Land, came to challenge the English crown as the head of the Norman race. But not until the unfaithful baronage had been trampled under foot, not until Normandy had been made an English dependency, was Henry free to devote himself to the working out of that memorable policy whose central idea seems to have been the organization of the vast powers of the crown, which Rufus with Mar a new min isterial nobility. Bishop had wielded with the caprice of a despot, into a rigorous sysCreation of tem of methodical administration.1 Upon the ruins of the great feudatories whom he had crushed, Henry now raised up a set of lesser nobles, whom he enriched out of the estates which, through forfeiture, had fallen to the crown. Out of this new nobility, upon which the older nobles of the Conquest looked down with scorn, Henry selected the sheriffs and judges who were to aid him in the work of administrative reform.2 Chief among this new ministerial nobility dependent upon royal favor was Bishop Roger of Salisbury, who, as justiciar, became the organizer of the new fiscal and judicial system. It has been heretofore observed that the vast accumulation of powers and duties, which the growth of the royal authority after the Conquest concentrated around the person of the king, made it necessary for the crown to select out of the main body of the great council a smaller body which could be specially charged with the work of administration. This inner council, which soon came to be known by the name of curia regis, and which was composed of the great officers of state and of the household, and of such other advisers as were specially summoned, seems to have been mainly occupied from the beginning with fiscal and judicial business. During the reign of Henry the curia was organized by Bishop Roger into a strong judicial and strong judi- ministerial body, whose methodical procedure imposed upon ministerial the despotic powers of the crown the restraints at least of body, He organ izes the curia into a cial and administrative routine. From the reign of Henry I. the curia can be distinctly traced as a supreme court of justice containing specially appointed judges, and presided over by the king or justiciar, who is occasionally distinguished by the title of "summus" or "capitalis." In this reign the financial department of the curia, now called for the first time the exchequer, was also made a more efficient instrument for the collection of the revenue. Henry's reforms were not limited 1 For the details of the struggle which ended with the battle of Tinchebrai (1106), see Freeman, Norm. Cong., vol. v., pp. 109-118. 2 Green, Hist. of the Eng. People, vol. i. p. 145. 8 "Under his guidance, whether as chancellor or as justiciar, the whole administrative system was remodelled; the jurisdiction of the curia regis and exchequer was carefully organized, and the peace of the country maintained in that theoretical perfection which earned for him the title of the Sword of Righteousness." - Stubbs, Const. Hist., vol. i. p. 349. 4 Upon this whole subject, see above, pp. 245, 246. however, to the central administration. A memorable part and also invigorates of his policy consists of his order for the holding of the the local courts of the shire and the hundred. Under the guidance courts. of Bishop Roger the whole judicial and financial organization of the kingdom, both central and local, was reorganized and remodelled. The death of Henry brought to a close the reign of peace and order, and opened the way for that long period of anarchy which is called the reign of Stephen. the anar 12. After the loss of Henry's only son in the sinking of Stephen : the White Ship, and after he had given up all hopes of chil- chy. dren by a second marriage,2 he resolved to settle the succession in a way which then stood without a parallel either in England or in Normandy. So long as the old Teutonic notion of kingship prevailed, so long as kingship was looked upon, not as an estate but as an office, the idea never gained ground that it could be bestowed upon one who could discharge none of its chief duties. Not until the new feudal conception of kingship arose was it supposed that a kingdom, like any other estate, might, in the absence of a son, pass to a daughter. By the aid of this growing feudal theory Henry hoped to be able to settle the succession to all his dominions upon his widowed daughter Matilda. With this The oath to end in view, at the Christmas gemot of 1126-1127, Henry required all the great men of the land, both clergy and laity, to swear that they would, after his death, receive his daughter as Lady over England and Normandy. Before the end of The the year in which these oaths were taken, Matilda was mar- marriage. ried to Geoffry, called Plantagenet, the son of the one enemy whom Henry feared, Count Fulk of Anjou. But in spite of all his precautions Henry's experiment only paved the way to civil war. The death of the peace-loving king was immediately followed by an outburst of anarchy, during which sence of a son, pass to a daughter.". 4 Chron. Petrib., 1127; Flor. Wig., 5 Upon the Angevin marriage,_see Green's brilliant pages, Hist. of Eng. People, vol. i. pp. 146–150. Matilda. Angevin his char ters. Civil war begins. Election of Stephen, the nephew of Henry and the nearest male heir of Stephen, the Conqueror's blood, hastened over into England and was elected and consecrated king with but little opposition. The first few years of the new reign, which was ushered in by the issuance of a charter,2 were comparatively peaceful. Not until the landing of Matilda in 1139 did the period of general civil war actively begin. In the protracted struggle which ensued the royal authority, which Henry had done so much to consolidate, came to an end; the administrative system, which Bishop Roger had so carefully reorganized. broke down; and England, for the first and last time in her history, sank into that state of feudal anarchy which the Conqueror by his far-sighted policy had striven to prevent. Neither party was strong enough to preserve discipline. The whole land was rent, not only by the struggle between the king and the empress, but by individual strife between the barons, who arrogated to themselves all the powers of petty despots.3 Wail of the From the wail of the Peterborough Chronicler we learn that "they filled the land with castles. They greatly oppressed Chronicler. the wretched people by making them work at these castles, and when the castles were finished they filled them with devils and evil men. .. Many thousands they exhausted with hunger. . . . And this state of things lasted the nineteen years that Stephen was king, and ever grew worse and worse. The land thus lay helpless for a time in the hands of the barons, who even presumed to strike their own coins, and to exercise every other royal right which the feudal history of France suggested. When each of the contending parties had well-nigh reached a state of exhaustion, Henry of Anjou, the son of Geoffry and Matilda, appeared upon the scene as the champion of his own cause. In 1153 Henry came to England, raised a Peter borough Barons ex ercise sovereign rights. ... 1 Gesta Stephani, p. 3; E. Chron., 1135; Will. Malmes., Hist. Nov., i. § 1; Gervase, c. 1340. 2 This first charter, probably issued at the coronation, is both brief and formal. See Statutes of the Realm: Charters of Liberties, p. 4. In 1136 a second charter was issued, however, in which, as in the charter of Henry I., distinct promises are made to each of the three estates. In this charter he describes himself as elected by the native army, and confronted clergy and the people, "Ego Stephanus Dei gratia assensu cleri et populi in regem Anglorum electus." See Select Charters, p. 120. 3 "There were in England as many kings, tyrants rather, as there were lords of castles; each had the power of striking his own coin, and of exercising like a king sovereign jurisdic tion over his dependents." Const. Hist., vol. i. p. 328. 4 R. de Monte, 1153. Stubbs, |