lect05-第1节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！








Lecture　V













The　Chief　and　His　Order













　　　　Nothing　seems　to　me　to　have　been　more　clearly　shown　by　recent






researches　than　the　necessity　of　keeping　apart　the　Tribe　and　the






Tribal　Chief　as　distinct　sources　of　positive　institutions。　The






lines　of　descent　are　constantly　entwined；　but　each　of　them　is






found　to　run　up　in　the　end　to　an　independent　origin。　If　I　were　to






apply　this　assertion　to　political　history；　I　should　be　only






repeating　much　of　what　has　been　said　by　Mr　Freeman　in　his






excellent　work　on　'Comparative　Politics。'　Confining　myself　to　the






history　of　private　institutions；　let　me　observe　that　the






distinction　which　I　have　drawn　should　be　carefully　borne　in　mind






by　those　who　desire　to　penetrate　to　the　beginnings　of　Property　in






Land。　The　subject　has　been　greatly　obscured　by　the　practice；　now






brought　home　to　the　early　writers　on　feudal　law；　of






systematically　passing　over　or　misconstruing　all　forms　of






proprietary　enjoyment　which　they　could　not　explain　on　their　own






principles；　and　hitherto　the　truth　has　only　been　directly　seen






through　some　of　the　rules　of　tenure。　It　may　now；　however；　be　laid






down　without　rashness　that　Property　in　Land；　as　known　to






communities　of　the　Aryan　race；　has　had　a　twofold　origin。　It　has






arisen　partly　from　the　disentanglement　of　the　individual　rights






of　the　kindred　or　tribesmen　from　the　collective　rights　of　the






Family　or　Tribe；　and　partly　from　the　growth　and　transmutation　of






the　sovereignty　of　the　Tribal　Chief。　The　phenomena　attributable






to　the　double　process　seem　to　me　easily　distinguishable　from　one






another。　Both　the　sovereignty　of　the　Chief　and　the　ownership　of






land　by　the　Family　or　Tribe　were　in　most　of　Western　Europe　passed






through　the　crucible　of　feudalism；　but　the　first　reappeared　in






some　well…marked　characteristics　of　military　or　knightly　tenures；






and　the　last　in　the　principal　rules　of　non…noble　holdings；　and






among　them　of　Socage；　the　distinctive　tenure　of　the　free　farmer。






The　status　of　the　Chief　has　thus　left　us　one　bequest　in　the　rule






of　Primogeniture；　which；　however；　has　long　lost　its　most　ancient






form；　another　in　the　right　to　receive　certain　dues　and　to　enforce






certain　monopolies；　and　a　third　in　a　specially　absolute　form　of






property　which　was　once　exclusively　enjoyed　by　the　Chief；　and






after　him　by　the　Lord；　in　the　portion　of　the　tribal　territory






which　formed　his　own　domain。　On　the　other　hand；　several　systems






of　succession　after　death；　and　among　them　the　equal　division　of






the　land　between　the　children；　have　sprung　out　of　tribal






ownership　in　various　stages　of　decay；　and　it　has　left　another　set






of　traces　（not　quite　so　widely　extended）；　in　a　number　of　minute






customary　rules　which　govern　tillage　and　occasionally　regulate






the　distribution　of　the　produce。






　　　　The　fate　of　this　double　set　of　institutions　in　England　and　in






France　appears　to　me　most　instructive。　I　have　frequently　dwelt　in






this　place　on　the　erroneousness　of　the　vulgar　opinion　which　dates






the　extreme　subdivision　of　the　soil　of　France　from　the　first






French　Revolution；　and　from　the　sale　of　the　Church　lands　and　of






the　estates　of　the　emigrant　nobility。　A　writer　　I　was　going　to






say　as　commonly　read　as　Arthur　Young；　but　certainly　as　often






mentioned　as　if　he　were　commonly　read　　notices　this






morcellement；　on　the　very　eve　of　the　French　Revolution；　and






immediately　after　it；　as　the　great　feature　which　distinguished






France　from　England。　'From　what　we　see　in　England；'　he　says；






（'Travels　in　1787；　'88；　and；　'89'　p。　407）　'　we　cannot　form　an






idea　of　the　abundance　in　France　of　small　properties；　that　is；






little　farms　belonging　to　those　who　cultivate　them。'　He　estimates






that　more　than　a　third　of　the　kingdom　was　occupied　by　them　　a






very　large　proportion；　when　the　extent　of　Church　land　in　France






is　taken　into　account；　but　recent　French　investigations　have






shown　reasons　for　thinking　that　the　true　proportion　was　still






larger；　and　that　it　was　rather　growing　than　diminishing；　through






that　extravagance　of　the　nobles　which　Court　life　fostered；　and






which　compelled　them　to　sell　their　domains　to　peasants　in　small






parcels。　Young　clearly　saw　that　this　subdivision　of　the　soil　was






the　result　of　some　legal　rule；　and　strongly　dissenting　from　the






Revolutionary　leaders　who　wished　to　carry　it　farther；　he　declared






that　'a　law　ought　to　be　passed　to　render　all　division　below　a






certain　number　of　arpents　illegal。'






　　　　It　seems　to　have　very　generally　escaped　notice　that　the　law






of　equal　or　nearly　equal　division　after　death　was　the　general　law






of　France。　The　rule　of　primogeniture　was　of　exceptional






application；　and　was　for　the　most　part　confined　to　lands　held　by






knightly　tenure；　indeed；　in　the　South　of　France；　where　the　custom






of　equal　division　was　strengthened　by　the　identical　rule　of　the






Roman　jurisprudence；　the　privileges　of　the　eldest　son　were　only






secured　by　calling　in　the　exceptional　rules　of　which　the　Roman






Law　gives　the　benefit　to　milites　（or　soldiers　on　service）　when






making　their　wills　or　regulating　their　successions；　and　by　laying






down　that　every　chevalier；　and　every　noble　of　higher　degree；　was






a　miles　within　the　meaning　of　the　Roman　juridical　writers。　The






two　systems　of　succession　and　the　two　forms　of　property　lay　side






by　side；　and　there　were　men　alive　quite　recently　who　could






remember　the　bitter　animosities　caused　by　their　co…existence　and






antagonism。　A　very　great　part　of　the　land　held　by　laymen　belonged






to　the　peasantry；　and　descended　according　to　the　rule　of　equal






division；　but　eldest　son　after　eldest　son　succeeded　to　the






signory。　Yet　it　was　not　the　rule　of　primogeniture　followed　in






noble　descents　which　was　the　true　grievance；　at　most　it　became　a






grievance　under　the　influence　of　the　peculiar　vein　of　sentiment






introduced　by　Rousseau。　The　legacy　from　tribal　sovereignty　to






signorial　privilege；　which　was　really　resented；　was　that　which　I






placed　second　in　order。　The　right　to　receive　feudal　dues　and　to






enforce　petty　monopolies；　now　almost　extinguished　in　England　by






the　measures　to　which　the　Copyhold　Commission　has　given　effect；






had　ceased　long　before　the　end　of　the　last　century　to　be　of　any






considerable　importance　to　the　class　which　was　invested　with　it；






but　M。　de　Tocqueville　has　explained；　in　his　'Ancien　R間ime'　（i。






18）；　that　it　made　up　almost　the　entire　means　of　living　which　the






majority　of　the　French　nobility　possessed。　A　certain　number　of






noblemen；　besides　their　feudal　rights；　had　their　terres；　or






domain；　belonging　to　them　in　absolute　property；　and　sometimes　of






enormous　extent；　and　the　wealthiest　members　of　this　limited






class；　the　grands；　who　so　frequently　appear　in　French　Court






history；　but　who；　away　from　the　Court；　were　much　the　most






respected　and　beloved　of　their　order；　formed　the　counterpart；






from　the　legal　point　of　view；　of　the　English　landed　proprietary。






The　rest　of　the　nobles　lived　mainly；　not　on　rent；　but　on　their






feudal　dues；　and　eked　out　a　meagre　subsistence　by　serving　the






King　in　arms。　The　sense　of　property　in　the　soil　was　thus　not　in






the　lord　but　in　the　peasantry；　and　the　peasantry　viewed　the






exercise　of　signorial　rights　with　a　feeling　closely　akin　to　that






which　is　inspired　by　a　highly　oppressive　tax。　The　condition　of






sentiment　produced　by　it　is　even　now　a　political　force　of　some






moment　in　France；　and　a　similar；　though　a　far　weaker；　repulsion






is　known　to　have　been　caused　in　this　country　by　the　taking　of






tithes　in　kind。　It　is　a　significant　fact　that；　where　the






ownership　is　acknowledged　to　reside　in　the　superior　holder；　the






exaction　of　even　an　extreme　rent　from　the　tenants　below　has　very






rarely　been　regarded　with　the　same　bitterness　of　resentment。






　　　　The　change；　therefore；　which　took　place　in　France　at　the






first　Revolution　was　this：　the　land…law　of　the　people　superseded