proach to law was found in the justiciary who levied the taxes, the only idea of freedom in charters which rested on the mere wills of successive sovereigns, which seem sometimes to have been forgotten nearly as soon as made,' and which often granted privileges which only made 'confusion worse confounded.'

The

The first step was perhaps the easiest. expulsion of oppressive mercenaries was a measure which can hardly have been seriously opposed, even by those who brought them in; certainly it seems to have been accomplished with all the vigour which one would expect from the united energies of Henry and his Chancellor.2 The next blow was aimed against the more powerful and permanent disturbers of the peace. 'The castles which in the days of his grandfather had existed for no purpose, he ordered speedily to be levelled to the ground, with the exception of a few which, since they had been built by peaceful men, he desired to retain for the defence of the kingdom.' 3

1 See above, note 63.

2 Steph. Vit. S. Thomæ, Script. Hist. Angl., ed. Sparke, p.13. Bromton, p. 1043 (ed. and vol. as above). See also Roger of Hoveden, vol. i. p. 215, ed. Stubbs (Master of Rolls Series). A second suppression of the castles seems to have been necessary after

Thus far Henry's course had been simple, and, had this been all, useful as his measures would have been as a reversal of the policy of the Normans,' they could not have secured for him a

reputation for genius in ruling.

But his real work

was to restore and to construct, not merely to sweep away passing evils.

The great want of the day was a permanent centre of law, which should be a rallying-point for true patriots, and which should bring some sense of justice into the country. Since the time of the Conquest, there had been little trace of an appeal to law. William I. had held his curia three times a year, and Henry I. had in some degree followed the precedent. But the first had found in his lords but little check on his tyranny, and both Rufus and Henry had merely used the name of lawyers to forward their own ends. Neither in the Constitutions of William the Conqueror nor in the Charter of Henry I., does there appear the least hint of a Court of Appeal, which should be bound

the rebellion of young Henry, and to have extended to Normandy, Contin. Florent. Wigorn., p. 154.

1 See Ang.-Sax. Chron., vol. ii. p. 187. 'Castles he' (William) 'caused to be made, and poor men to be greatly oppressed.'

to act according to known laws. This, then, was the first want which Henry II. supplied. At first sight, indeed, the Scaccarium,' or, as we now call it, the Court of Exchequer, might appear a mere elaborate machinery for taxation, a sort of perpetual application of the principle of Domesday Book, and this under Henry I. it probably had been. Yet, had it still been limited to questions of taxation, the boon which Henry II. now conferred on the country by bringing it into working order must have been immense.

Hitherto, the people had been liable to sudden outbursts of taxation, for which they saw no reason, and which generally had no limit or principle except the will of the sovereign. Now the taxation was reduced to fixed principles, and levied in accordance with laws, by men accustomed to interpret laws. Mark the difference pointed out by the chronicler of this institution, even in this part of its work:

Although the duties of those who sit at the Greater Exchequer may seem on some peculiar points to be distinct from each other, yet there is one duty and object for all, to take care of the interest of the King, saving the justice which is in

accordance with the constituted laws of the Exchequer.' It must be remarked, too, that there was an important reform connected with this taxation which was terribly needed, and which is specially important as a testimony to the increased power gained by this court during Henry's reign. William, with all his centralization in matters of land and government, seems to have been unable to cope with local prejudices when they tended to disorder and confusion. Thus, till the reign of Henry II., the men of Northumberland and Cumberland did not employ the coinage of the realm.2 Henry succeeded in producing not only uniformity, but, by a vigorous system of examination, even purity in the coinage. But while I mention this fact to illustrate the power which this Court now assumed, I am clearly alive to the objections of those who may still imagine this a scheme of bene

1 Dialogus de Scaccario, Book I.; p. 167 of Mr. Stubbs' Documents Illustrative of English History.

2 Ibid., pp. 165, 184, 185.

Ibid. This seems to have been begun early in his reign, for Roger of Hoveden (vol. i. p. 215) speaks of Henry's striking a new coinage in 1156, after the pulling down of the castles. The continuator of Florence of Worcester (p. 155) puts this event in 1180. An attempt of Henry I. to suppress corrupt coinage is mentioned by Ralph of Coggeshale (vol. v. of Martene and Durand, p. 804).

volent despotism; which objections are likely to be stronger rather than weaker when the objectors know that the jurisdiction of this Court was gradually extended to all questions of civil and criminal law.

Of the checks, then, which were provided by Henry on such an use of this institution, the first, and, in some ways, the most important, was the compilation of the laws made under his orders by the distinguished lawyer Ralph Glanville. These laws seem partly to have been collected from the old laws and customs of England, partly adapted from them to the wants of the time.1 When we think of the storms of anarchy which had been sweeping over England during the preceding century, and when we find that the very source and origin of the Court for which these laws were mainly composed seems to have been lost in obscurity, anyone who studies them will hesitate whether most to admire the genius of the King who could think of acting upon it, or the lawyer who could drag out of the past and adapt

1 In alluding to this compilation, I am anticipating events, as it was not made till 1180. (Roger of Hoveden, vol. ii. p. 215). My reason for this anachronism I shall explain afterwards.

2 Dialogus de Scaccario, Book I., pp. 167, 168.