"Nor must we imagine that the Saxon, any more than the German
monarchs, succeeded each other in a lineal descent,[35] or that they
disposed of the crown at their pleasure. In both countries, the free
election of the people filled the throne; and their choice was the
only rule by which princes reigned. The succession, accordingly, of
their kings was often broken and interrupted, and their depositions
were frequent and groundless. The will of a prince whom they had long
respected, and the favor they naturally transferred to his
descendant, made them often advance him to the royal dignity; but the
crown of his ancestor he considered as the gift of the people, and
neither expected nor claimed it as a right."--_Ditto_, p. 151-3.
In Germany "It was the business of the great to command in war, and in
peace they distributed justice. * *
"The _princes_ in Germany were _earls_ in England. The great
contended in both countries in the number of their retainers, and in
that splendor and magnificence which are so alluring to a rude
people; and though they joined to set bounds to regal power, they
were often animated against each other with the fiercest hatred. To a
proud and impatient nobility it seemed little and unsuiting to give
or accept compositions for the injuries they committed or received;
and their vassals adopting their resentment and passions, war and
bloodshed alone could terminate their quarrels. What necessarily
resulted from their situation in society, was continued as a
_privilege_; and the great, in both countries, made war, of their
private authority, on their enemies. The Saxon earls even carried
their arms against their sovereigns; and, surrounded with retainers,
or secure in fortresses and castles, they despised their resentment,
and defied their power.
"The judges of the people, they presided in both countries in courts
of law.[36] The particular districts over which they exerted their
authority were marked out in Germany by the council of the state; and
in England their jurisdiction extended over the fiefs and other
territories they possessed. All causes, both civil and criminal, were
tried before them; and they judged, except in cases of the utmost
importance, without appeal. They were even allowed to grant pardon to
criminals, and to correct by their clemency the rigors of justice.
Nor did the sovereign exercise any authority in their lands. In these
his officers formed no courts, and his _writ_ was disregarded. * *
"They had officers, as well as the king, who collected their
revenues, and added to their greatness; and the inhabitants of their
lands they distinguished by the name of _subjects_.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account