There were a few political catechisms published before the year 1700. We have found the following somewhat amusing. "A Political Catechism, concerning the Government of this Land," 1643; "Catechism an nexed to Henry Parker's Portraiture of the Kings of England;" "A Satyricall Catechisme betwixte a Newter and a Roundhead," 1648; "The Soldier's Catechisme, composed for the Parliamentary Army," 1684; and the "Rebel's Catechism" by Peter Heylin.

During the period of the Revolution, and to the year 1700, caricature was not much cultivated in England. Those caricatures, for example, upon Cromwell, and his friends, were of Dutch origin, and executed by Dutch artists. Even those which were extensively circulated in this country a few years after, and which referred to the South Sea Bubble, were from Holland.

We are told, however, by Warton, in his "Life of Pope," that, in the reign of Mary, when England was groaning under the Spanish yoke, the queen's person and government were held up to perpetual ridicule by prints or pictures "representing her majesty naked, meagre, withered, and wrinkled, with every aggravated circumstance of deformity that could disgrace the female figure, seated in a regal chair; a crown on her head, surrounded by M.R. and A. in capitals, accompanied by small letters; Maria Regina Anglica! A number of Spaniards were sucking her to skin and bone, and a specification was added of the money, rings, jewels, and other presents with which she had secretly gratified her husband Philip." There are likewise caricatures in the reigns of Elizabeth and Charles I.*

See Note B, at the end of the volume.

CHAPTER III.

POLITICAL LITERATURE OF FRANCE, FROM THE YEAR 1400, TILL 1700.

Ar an early period of the reform movement in Germany, the political and religious opinions of the French people became influenced, to a considerable extent, by the doctrines of the new creed. But the reform notions which found their way here, were, as in most other countries, more of a religious than a political cast. Still they had a visible reflex effect upon the general ideas of government and law. No small portion of the social and political corruptions of France, at this time, rested upon a religious basis; and when the church began to be stripped of its infallibility, those institutions, unfriendly to liberty and human improvement, naturally felt the shock and became subject to discussions and suggestions of amendment and change. The kings of France were certainly, in the abstract, independent of the Roman see; but in the administration of governmental affairs, both general and municipal, arbitrary rule and priestly domination, prevailed to an unwholesome and ruinous extent.

It is requisite to premise that a knowledge of the external history of the political and civil institutions of France is indispensable to a proper appreciation of its political literature. Unless we have a general idea of

૬

the form of government, the fiscal regulations, the municipal institutions, the religious tenets, and the ecclesiastical regime of the country, it would be impossible to recognise the progress of its political philosophy, and to estimate the value and importance of those successive changes of public opinion which the course of time developes. To guide the judgment we must always be looking from the present to the past. We must compare the opinions and sentiments of one period with those of another, and mark the successive steps of theoretical and practical legislation. It is quite obvious, for example, that English readers and thinkers will often be at fault in estimating the importance of French political treatises, from the sheer want of that portion of knowledge, which, as natives of our own country, we imbibe without almost any labour; but which cannot be obtained on the same easy terms, on foreign topics of speculation and practice. A foreign government is like a foreign language, which can seldom or never be mastered in all its comprehensive fulness, by one who has to learn it only from books or scholastic assistance. It must, therefore, be to the general principles of polity, that we, as strangers, must direct attention. These are the grand land-marks of all scientific knowledge; and it is by steadily keeping them before the mind that real progress is made from one generation to another in that most vital of all sciences -the science of congregated humanity.

It is a curious topic of speculation to contrast the nature and character of British expositions of political science with those of France in corresponding eras of history. Separated only by a narrow strait of twenty miles, how different is the development of general

principles in the two countries! Who would imagine for a moment that such a trifling geographical distinction between two nations, rivals in arts and sciences, would display such a diversity in their aptitudes to deal with the leading maxims of legislation, and to turn them into useful and practical results. Yet what a singular contrast does the abstract social and civil philosophy of France present to our own; and how different the political views and institutions on each side of the channel. Here we have the Saxon customs and principles of Alfred; there our neighbours have the Capitularies of Charlemagne, and the Ordonnances of St. Louis. Yet, amid all this diversity of thought and action, we can distinctly recognise points of affinity, grounded on the sameness and identity of scientific maxims of justice, right, and public expediency.

The university of Paris, from its civil position and privileges, as well as from the learning of its members, took an important part in the public proceedings of France. And this was particularly the case with that great section of it, called the Sorbonne, which, independent of its vigilance over theological questions— constituting its legitimate province-took upon itself the adjudication of all questions affecting the general principles of law, and the political rights and privileges of the citizens. Its eyes were constantly on the watch for every movement of the human mind towards liberty and improvement. In proportion to the weakness or distraction of the governments of the day, in the same ratio were the zeal and activity of this collegiate body invigorated and strengthened. Without possessing an actual independent existence of a civil

character, it, nevertheless, exercised over the mind of France a widely spread political influence and authority.

As a specimen of the sentiments of the University of Paris, in the early part of the fifteenth century, we shall lay before the reader the following carefully drawn up rules or maxims, on the policy and justice of taking away the life of any tyrannical person.

"1st,-It is lawful for every subject, without any command, according to moral, natural, or divine laws, to kill, or cause to be killed, every tyrant, who, through covetousness, or other improper motive, plots againt the corporal safety of his king and sovereign lord, to deprive him of his most noble lordship; and not only lawful, but even honourable and meritorious, even when he is of such high power that justice cannot be well executed by the sovereign.

"2nd,-Natural, moral, and divine laws, authorise each person to kill, or cause to be killed, the said tyrant.

"3rd, It is lawful for each subject to kill, or cause to be killed, the above mentioned tyrant, treacherous and disloyal to his king and sovereign lord, by snares; and it is lawful to dissemble and conceal the intention to do so.

"4th, It is sound reason and justice that every tyrant shall be disgracefully killed by snares, and it is the proper death by which disloyal tyrants ought to die, to kill them disgracefully by wiles and snares.

"5th,-He who kills, or causes to be killed, in such a way, every tyrant, is not to blame in any respect; and the king ought not only to be pleased at it, but