In the early annals of England, the feudal system prevented the creation of a national debt. The Saxon serf was compelled to follow the banner of his Norman master. The Norman baron, at the command of his sovereign, called his followers to the field, and having, if successful, enriched himself, retraced his path to his mountain fastness and his island home. In these rude ages the art of levying money was unknown; and victorious armies were often dispersed for want of funds. The conqueror of Pavia was compelled to disband 24,000 men because he could not raise taxes to support them; and it is a suggestive fact, that when, during the reign of the third Henry, it was necessary to procure £50,000, and a tax of £1 2_s._ 4_d._ was levied on each parish in England, it only produced about £9,500, there being but 8,500 parishes; so ignorant were the authorities of the very machinery of the state they governed. From a very early period, the mercantile capacity of England has been developed; and her insular position, which at once suggested and favored commerce, was taken advantage of by laymen and churchmen. Bishops entered into speculations in herrings, and abbots did not disdain to unite the smuggling with a more saintly calling. But there were other and more legitimate followers of that pursuit which has since made the name of an English merchant a symbol of English greatness. Among these, William de la Pole stands prominently forward; and the founder of the House of Suffolk is familiar to the student of commercial history. William Canyng—that name so intimately connected with the fortunes of “the marvellous boy who perished in his pride”—and Richard Whittington—dear to household memories, and the founder of many princely charities—were others whose munificence was only surpassed by their wealth.