Magna Carta: A Commentary on the Great Charter of King John: With an Historical Introduction — John Shaqi
Magna Carta: A Commentary on the Great Charter of King John: With an Historical IntroductionMcKechnie, William Sharp
History
Magna Carta: A Commentary on the Great Charter of King John: With an Historical Introduction
McKechnie, William Sharp
Constitutional history -- England -- Sources; Law -- England -- History; Law -- England -- Sources; Magna Carta
The central scrutiny conducted within the two chambers of the Exchequer
was supplemented by occasional inspections conducted in each county. The
King’s representatives, including among them usually some of the
officers whose duty it was to preside over the half-yearly audit,
visited, at intervals still irregular, the various shires. These Eyres,
as they were called, were at first chiefly undertaken for financial
purposes. The main object was to check, on the scene of their labours,
the statements made at Westminster by the various sheriffs. From the
first, such financial investigations necessarily involved the trial of
pleas. Complaints of oppression at the hands of the local tyrant of the
county were naturally made and determined on the spot; gradually, but
not until a later reign, the judicial business became equally important
with the financial, and ultimately even more important.
Henry at his death in 1135 seemed to have carried nearly to completion
his congenial task of building a strong monarchy on the foundations laid
by William I. Much of his work was, however, for a time undone, while
all of it seemed in imminent danger of perishing for ever, because he
left no male heir of his body to succeed him on the throne. His
daughter’s claims were set aside by Stephen, the son of the Conqueror’s
daughter, and a cadet of the House of Blois, to whom Henry had played
the indulgent uncle, and who repaid his benefactor’s generosity by
constituting himself his heir. From the first moment of his reign,
Stephen proved unequal to the task of preserving the monarchy intact
from the wild forces that beat around the throne. His failure is
attributed by some to his personal characteristics, and by others to the
defective nature of his title, combined with the presence of a rival in
the field in the person of his cousin, Henry’s daughter, the ex-Empress
Matilda. The nineteen years of anarchy which nominally formed his reign
did nothing—and worse than nothing—to continue the work of his great
ancestors. The power of the Crown was humbled, and England was almost
torn in fragments by the selfish claims of rival feudal magnates to
local independence.
With the accession of Henry II. (1154) the tide quickly turned, and
turned for good.
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