FORTESCUE'S "GOVERNANCE OF ENGLAND."

29

he essentially owes his place in the history of English literature, belongs to the period following the restoration. of the York dynasty; this is the treatise On the Governance of England, better known under the less appropriate title of the "Difference between Absolute and Limited Monarchy." Although a work of smaller compass, and less full of the details which bear upon the history of civilization, than his Latin work "De Laudibus Legum Angliæ," the English treatise shows a greater degree of strict unity of purpose and a considerably wider range of practical deduction. The praise bestowed upon Fortescue for having been the first writer during the Middle Ages to bring the science of politics down from the clouds to earth, finds its justification more especially in his "Governance of England." The introductory chapters of this smaller work are merely a reproduction of the corresponding parts of his "De Laudibus." The difference between the absolute and limited monarchy is again discussed, and the various sources of the two forms of government inquired into ; after which, from the examples of France and England, the effects of the one and the other are described "ut ex fructibus eorum cognoscatis eos." All this, however, serves only to pave the author's way to his actual subject; and this subject consists of the question how the English form of administration, conducted by such admirable laws, and so prosperous compared with other administrations, can be freed from the worst evils that were attached to it at the time. And the chief of these evils, Fortescue considers, are: the poverty and consequent weakness of the sovereign, the undue power of individual members of the aristocracy, and the influence of factions with aristocratic proclivities in the Councils of the Crown, with all of which evils-together with their attendant dangers-he himself had become sufficiently well acquainted during the reign of Henry VI. The danger that arises from the poverty of the Crown and from the existence of too much wealth and power among the subjects, Fortescue depicts in bold strokes, but with perfect clearness and force. To meet these evils, it seems to him above all necessary to increase the revenues of the Crown, to check extravagance, and to forbid mortgages in the future. Of the already alienated Crown lands, a portion

ought by parliamentary decree to be returned to the Crown, the present owner to receive compensation; that in future, however, no king should be permitted to dispose of any further land, unless in peculiar cases, and then only for the lifetime of the recipient. Hereupon follow excellent remarks on the conferring of posts and granting annuities and pensions. Important above all, however, is the fact that while Fortescue would restrict the monarch in the free disposal of all these matters, and more especially as regards the Crown lands, and would compel him to follow the advice of his Council-all this is done purely in the interest of the king's own authority. And in his propositions for the formation of the King's Council, Fortescue's endeavour to check the power of the aristocracy is most prominently brought forward. The King's Council should, he thinks, be constituted somewhat after the manner of the Judicial Benches: twelve spiritual and twelve temporal members, selected from the best and wisest men of the kingdom, and bound by oath to the king, should be permanent members of the Council, and receive their fees, clothing, and rewards from no one but the king. In addition to these, there should be appointed annually by the king four spiritual and four secular lords. The right to attend the meetings of this Assembly, of joining in the discussions and divisions, should rest with the Chancellor, the Treasurer, and the Keeper of the Privy Seal, by virtue of their offices; other dignitaries and lords only at the request of the Council. The Council should have a permanent leader or head, chosen by the king from the four and twenty members; but the Chancellor may act as President of the meetings which he attends. A king, who should far outstrip every one of his subjects in landed property and in wealth, with an independent and enlightened body of councillors by his side to assist him in maintaining his power, and in wisely and judiciously appointing his officers and in granting pardons-this was the form of government with which Fortescue hoped most effectually to combat the weakness of the sovereign, the arrogance of the aristocracy, the unbridled proceedings of the various factions, and the general state of insecurity. Fortescue rejects with indignation and horror the idea

FORTESCUE'S NATIONAL PRIDE.

31

which had been raised in another quarter, that the king, while strengthening his own power, should see that his people were kept in poverty. To impoverish the commons, he maintains, would cripple the kingdom's power of selfdefence in its most vital part, would weaken the king's power of controlling his unruly vassals, would give rise to disturbances and insurrections, and also be a blot on the honour of the sovereign; it would deprive the king himself, in times of need, of the subsidies which the Commons otherwise willingly and fully provided him with, and would place the country in the hands of thieves and robbers. If the French people were easier to govern than the English, if they did not rise against their rulers even under the worst oppression, the reason of this was not because they were poorer, but merely because they were more cowardly than the English. Fortescue adds, "It hath ben offten tymes sene in Englande that iij. or iiij. theves ffor pouerte have sett upon vj. or vij. trewe men and robbed hem all. But it hath not bene sene in Ffrance that vi. or vij. theves haue be hardy to robbe iij. or iiij. trewe men. Wherfore it is right selde that Ffrenchmen be hanged ffor robbery, ffor thai haue no hartes to do so terable an acte. Ther bith therfore mo men hanged in Englande in a yere ffor robbery and manslaughter, then they be hanged in France ffor such manner of crime in vij. yeres. There is no man hanged in Scotlande in vij. yere togedur ffor robbery. And yet thai ben often tymes hanged ffor larceny, and stelynge off good in the absence off the owner theroff. But ther hartes serue hem not to take a manys gode while he is present, and woll defende it; wich manner off takynge is called robbery. But ye English man is off another corage. Ffor iff he be pouere, and see another man havynge rychesse, wich mey be taken ffrom him be myght, he will not spare to do so, but yff that pouere man be right trewe. Wherfore it is not pouerte, but it is lakke off harte and cowardisse, that kepith the Ffrenchmen ffro rysynge.'

In his works Fortescue proves himself an Englishman whose expressions of patriotism at times surpass the bounds of absurdity, a warm friend of his nation, a man clear in thought and humane in feeling, a zealous advocate of

* The Governance of England, ed. Plummer, ch. xiii. p. 141, f.

freedom as well as of political order, a learned lawyer and devoted to his profession. And although of a strictly ecclesiastical turn of mind—in other words, with a leaning towards ultramontanism-he was a man of upright and sincere piety, as is evident from his beautiful Dialogue between Understanding and Faith, which discusses, from the point of view of a faithful and devout Christian, the difficult problem of the sovereignty of a merciful and just Providence amid the perplexed and often most sorrowful form assumed by our life here on earth.

Fortescue was an exceedingly well-read man for the age in which he lived. Apart from strictly legal works and the Bible, with which he was intimately acquainted, his reading included a variety of different subjects—historical works, mainly medieval Chronicles, but also Poggio's translation of Diodorus of Sicily, "The Consolations of Philosophy" of Boethius, and St. Augustine's "De Civitate Dei;" further, the works of Thomas Acquinas, Ezidius Romanus, and above all, the "Compendium morale" of Roger of Waltham, which was written towards the close of the thirteenth century. Many other authors for instance, Aristotle-he knew at second hand, either through such writers as Roger of Waltham, or from collections of extracts. Where Fortescue gives an account of his own political principles, he, of course, draws from his predecessors; but even here his independence of thought betrays itself, and it is often difficult, or even impossible, to discover his attitude in the works he quotes. What constitutes the actual value of his writings, Fortescue owes more to his vast experience, clear perception, and well-balanced judgment, than to literature ; and, in fact, his "Governance of England" opened up a new path to political literature.

While he is clear and convincing in the development of his thoughts-which are not, indeed, presented altogether methodically, yet in synoptical order and happy in the selection of his explanatory illustrations and detail, he is further distinguished by the choice of his expressions, by the formation and combination of his sentences in their simple appropriateness and definiteness. Besides this, he manages to produce increased effect, within modest limits, by gradation, repetition, and antithesis; at times also he

brings his periods to a full-sounding close by making use of a greater flow of language. The Renaissance did not quite reach him, and yet his earnest inquiry into the actualities of his own domain, gives him an attitude in some measure connected with the Renaissance.

About the time when we lose all authentic trace of Fortescue, we again, on English ground, meet with the traces of a man who had lived abroad for a much longer time, and who was now about permanently to take up his abode and his work in his native country. William Caxton, who had returned to England from Flanders in 1476, is but little fitted to be compared with Sir John Fortescue. He was neither a lawyer nor a politician, even though-as the result of the prominent position he had occupied abroad -he may have at times been entrusted with diplomatic work connected with his vocation. Still less was Caxton a political agitator, and, in fact, from the outset had been a warm friend and staunch adherent of the Yorkists. Neither was he a scholar nor a profound thinker, but a practical man of business-undoubtedly of unusual cleverness, thoroughness, and conscientiousness. A business man to start with, he never tried to disguise his mercantile turn of mind, even when he subsequently devoted his energies to the service of literature. Intent, above all things, upon what was useful and practical, ever anxious to satisfy the demands of the moment, and satisfactorily to arrange the relation between supply and demand, as unweariedly industrious as he was circumspect, advancing carefully step by step-such was Caxton's method of attaining success. And it was precisely by this mode of procedure that he has rendered English literature inestimable service. He made his mark mainly by the skilful and industrious manner in which he united the activity of a writer with that of a printer-and, above all, as the first printer of English.

It is worthy of note that Caxton did not set up this business-which must be allowed to have been his chief vocation-till he had reached the age of mature manhood. When he settled in his native land in 1476, he was already fifty years of age, and had written only two, at most three, works-an extremely small number in proportion to the

D