see brought into action. Not that these opinions were wholly new, even the most advanced of them. To say nothing of the ancients, the great Aquinas, in his treatise "De Regimine Principum," had said, as far back as the middle of the thirteenth century, that "Rex datur propter regnum, et non regnum propter regem, "1 and had declared the constitutional or limited form of monarchy to be superior to the absolute form. But the class to which literature appealed in the thirteenth century was both too small, and too much absorbed in professional interests, to admit of such views becoming fruitful. After the invention of printing, and the revival of learning, they were taken up by many thinkers in different parts of Europe, and rapidly circulated through the educated portion of society. In 1579 the stern old George Buchanan, James I.'s pedagogue, crowned a long and adventurous life in which his liberal opinions had brought on him more than one imprisonment, besides innumerable minor persecutions and troubles, by the publication, in his seventy-fourth year, of the work, "De Jure Regni apud Scotos." This treatise, which is in Latin, is in the form of a dialogue between the author and Thomas Maitland, upon the origin and nature of royal authority in general, and of the authority of the Scottish crown in particular. In either case, he derives the authority, so far as lawful, entirely from the consent of the governed; and argues that its abuse-inasmuch as its possessor is thereby constituted a tyrant-exposes him justly even to capital punishment at the hands of his people, and that not by public sentence only, but by the act of any private person. Views so extreme led

2

1 “The king exists for the sake of the kingdom, not the kingdom for the sake of the king."

2 "Upon Scotch Monarchical Law."

to the condemnation and prohibition of the work by the Scottish parliament in 1584. It may be granted that Buchanan's close connection with the party of the regent Murray, whose interest it was to create an opinion of the lawfulness of any proceedings, to whatever lengths they might be carried, against the person and authority of the unhappy queen, then in confinement in England, was likely to impart an extraordinary. keenness and stringency to the anti-monarchical theories supported in the book. Nevertheless similar views were supported in the sixteenth century, in the most unexpected quarters. The Jesuit Mariana, for instance, openly advocates regicide in certain contingencies; and it was quite in character with the daring temper of the age to demolish the awe surrounding any power, however venerable, which thwarted the projects of either the majority or the most active and influential party in a state.

Among the political writings of this period there is none more remarkable than Spenser's "View of the State of Ireland," which, though written and presented to Elizabeth about the year 1596, was not published till 1633. This is the work of an eye-witness, who was at once a shrewd observer and a profound thinker, upon the difficulties of the Irish question, that problem. which pressed for solution in the sixteenth century, and is still unsolved in the nineteenth. Spenser traces the evils afflicting Ireland to three sources, connected respectively with its laws, its customs, and its religion; examines each source in turn; suggests specific remedial measures, and finally sketches out a general plan of government calculated to prevent the growth of similar mischiefs for the future.

In England, the active and penetrating mind of Raleigh was employed in this direction among others.

It is very interesting to find him, in his "Observations on Trade and Commerce," advocating the system of low duties on imports, and explaining the immense advantages which the Dutch, in the few years that had elapsed since they conquered their independence from Spain, had derived from free trade and open ports. The treatise on "The Prerogative of Parliament," written in the Tower, and addressed to the king, was designed to induce James to summon a parliament as the most certain and satisfactory mode of paying the crown debts. It is true, he adapts the reasoning in some places to the base and tyrannical mind which he was attempting to influence; saying, for example, that, although the king might be obliged to promise reforms to his parliament in return for subsidies, he need not keep his word when parliament was broken up. But this Machiavelian suggestion may be explained as the desperate expedient of an unhappy prisoner, who saw no hope either for himself or for his country except in the justice of a free parliament, and, since the king alone could call parliament together, endeavored to make the measure as little unpalatable as possible to the contemptible and unprincipled person who then occupied the throne. Much of the historical inquiry which he institutes into the relations between former parliaments and English kings is extremely acute and valuable. In "The Maxims of State," a short treatise, not written, like the one last mentioned, to serve an immediate purpose, Raleigh's naturally honest and noble nature asserts itself. In this, he explicitly rejects all the immoral suggestions of Machiavel, and lays down none but sound and enlightened principles for the conduct of governments. Thus, among the maxims to be observed by an hereditary sovereign, we read the following:

"15. To observe the laws of his country, and not to encounter them with his prerogative, nor to use it at all where there is a law, for that it maketh a secret and just grudge in the people's hearts, especially if it tend to take from them their commodities, and to bestow them upon other of his courtiers and ministers."

It would have been well for Charles I., if he had laid this maxim to heart before attempting to levy shipmoney. Again:

"17. To be moderate in his taxes and impositions; and, when need doth require to use the subjects' purse, to do it by parliament, and with their consents, making the cause apparent to them, and showing his unwillingness in charging them; finally, so to use it that it may seem rather an offer from his subjects than an exaction by him."

A political essay, entitled "The Cabinet Council," was left by Raleigh in manuscript at his death, and came into the hands of Milton, by whom it was published with a short preface. Though acute and shrewd, like all that came from the same hand, this treatise is less interesting than those already mentioned, because it enters little into the consideration of general causes, but consists mainly of practical maxims, suited to that age, for the use of statesmen and commanders.

A political treatise, which was overlooked in its proper place, may be noticed here. This is the "Governour" of Sir Thomas Elyot, a courtier in the time of Henry VIII. The book is dedicated to the king, and was first published in 1531. Experience, and reading of the ancients, he tells us, have qualified him, and inclination incited him, to write of "the form of a juste publike weale." Such an opening makes us think of Plato's "Republic," or More's "Utopia;" or, at the least, Fortescue's "Absolute and Limited Monarchy." But the promise was not kept, nor could it well have been kept; for who that had any regard for his life, and was not hopelessly servile in nature, could have written freely and fully on political questions under the horrible despotism of Henry VIII.? After the first few pages, the author slides into the subject of education for the remainder of the first book; the second and third books, again with the exception of a few pages, form an ethical treatise on virtues and vices, with but slight reference to the bearing of these on the work of govern

ment. In the brief portion which is political, Elyot argues on behalf of ranks and degrees among men from the examples of subordination afforded in the kingdoms of nature. Superior knowledge he deems to be, in itself, the best and most legitimate title to superior honor. Monarchy, as a form of government, he sets above aristocracy and democracy. He draws an argument from a beehive:

"In a little beaste, whiche of all other is most to be mervailed at, I mean the Bee, is lefte to man by nature a perpetual figure of a just governaunce or rule; who have among them one principall bee for their governour, which excelleth all other in greatnesse, yet hath he no pricke or stinge, but in him is more knowledge than in the residewe."