HULL, General William, and the surrender of Detroit. See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-OCTOBER). HULL: Siege by the Royalists. Hull, occupied by the Parliamentary forces under Lord Fairfax, after their defeat at Adwalton Moor, was besieged by the Royalists under the Earl of Newcastle, from September 2 until October 11, 1643, when they were driven off. _C. R. Markham, Life of the Great Lord Fairfax, chapter 12._ See, also, WINCEBY FIGHT. HÜLSEMANN LETTER, The. See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1850-1851. HULST, Battle of (1642). See GERMANY: A. D. 1640-1645. HUMANISM. See RENAISSANCE. HUMAS, OR OUMAS, The. See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY. {1667} HUMAYUN, Moghul Emperor or Padischah of India, A. D. 1530-1556. HUMBERT, King of Italy, A. D. 1878-. HUMBLE PETITION AND ADVICE, The. See ENGLAND: A. D. 1654-1658. HUMBLEDON, Battle of. See HOMILDON HILL, BATTLE OF. HUNDRED, The. "The union of a number of townships for the purpose of judicial administration, peace, and defence, formed what is known as the 'hundred,' or 'wapentake'; a district answering to the 'pagus' of Tacitus, the 'hærred' of Scandinavia, the 'huntari' or 'gau' of Germany. … The name of the hundred, which, like the wapentake, first appears in the laws of Edgar, has its origin far back in the remotest antiquity, but the use of it as a geographical expression is discoverable only in comparatively late evidences. The 'pagus' of the Germania sent its hundred warriors to the host, and appeared by its hundred judges in the court of the 'princeps.' The Lex Salica contains abundant evidence that in the fifth century the administration of the hundred was the chief, if not the only, machinery of the Frank judicial system; and the word in one form or other enters into the constitution of all the German nations. It may be regarded then as a certain vestige of primitive organisation. But the exact relation of the territorial hundred to the hundred of the Germania is a point which is capable of, and has received, much discussion. It has been regarded as denoting simply a division of a hundred hides of land; as the district which furnished a hundred warriors to the host; as representing the original settlement of the hundred warriors; or as composed of a hundred hides, each of which furnished a single warrior. The question is not peculiar to English history, and the same result may have followed from very different causes as probably as from the same causes, here and on the continent. It is very probable, as already stated, that the colonists of Britain arranged themselves in hundreds of warriors; it is not probable that the country was carved into equal districts. The only conclusion that seems reasonable is that, under the name of geographical hundreds,