LET us next take a view of a few of the principal incidents attending

the nobility, exclusive of their capacity as members of parliament,

and as hereditary counsellors of the crown; both of which we have

before considered. And first we must observe, that in criminal cases,

a nobleman shall be tried by his peers. The great are always obnoxious

to popular envy: were they to be judged by the people, they might be

in danger from the prejudice of their judges; and would moreover be

deprived of the privilege of the meanest subjects, that of being tried

by their equals, which is secured to all the realm by _magna carta_,

c. 29. It is said, that this does not extend to bishops; who, though

they are lords of parliament, and sit there by virtue of their

baronies which they hold _jure ecclesiae_, yet are not ennobled in

blood, and consequently not peers with the nobility[s]. As to

peeresses, no provision was made for their trial when accused of

treason or felony, till after Eleanor dutchess of Gloucester, wife to

the lord protector, had been accused of treason and found guilty of

witchcraft, in an ecclesiastical synod, through the intrigues of

cardinal Beaufort. This very extraordinary trial gave occasion to a

special statute, 20 Hen. VI. c. 9. which enacts that peeresses either

in their own right, or by marriage, shall be tried before the same

judicature as peers of the realm. If a woman, noble in her own right,

marries a commoner, she still remains noble, and shall be tried by her

peers: but if she be only noble by marriage, then by a second

marriage, with a commoner, she loses her dignity; for as by marriage

it is gained, by marriage it is also lost. Yet if a duchess dowager

marries a baron, she continues a duchess still; for all the nobility

are _pares_, and therefore it is no degradation[t]. A peer, or peeress

(either in her own right or by marriage) cannot be arrested in civil

cases[u]: and they have also many peculiar privileges annexed to their

peerage in the course of judicial proceedings. A peer, sitting in

judgment, gives not his verdict upon oath, like an ordinary juryman,

but upon his honour[w]: he answers also to bills in chancery upon his

honour, and not upon his oath[x]; but, when he is examined as a

witness either in civil or criminal cases, he must be sworn[y]: for

the respect, which the law shews to the honour of a peer, does not

extend so far as to overturn a settled maxim, that _in judicio non

creditur nisi juratis_[z]. The honour of peers is however so highly

tendered by the law, that it is much more penal to spread false

reports of them, and certain other great officers of the realm, than

of other men: scandal against them being called by the peculiar name

of _scandalum magnatum_; and subjected to peculiar punishment by

divers antient statutes[a].

[Footnote s: 3 Inst. 30, 31.]

[Footnote t: 2 Inst. 50.]

[Footnote u: Finch. L. 355. 1 Ventr. 298.]

[Footnote w: 2 Inst 49.]

[Footnote x: 1 P. Wms. 146.]

[Footnote y: Salk. 512.]

[Footnote z: Cro. Car. 64.]

[Footnote a: 3 Edw. I. c. 34. 2 Ric. II. st. 1. c. 5. 12 Ric. II. c.

11.]

A PEER cannot lose his nobility, but by death or attainder; hough

[Transcriber's Note: though] there was an instance, in the reign of

Edward the fourth, of the degradation of George Nevile duke of

Bedford by act of parliament[b], on account of his poverty, which

rendered him unable to support his dignity[c]. But this is a singular

instance: which serves at the same time, by having happened, to shew

the power of parliament; and, by having happened but once, to shew how

tender the parliament hath been, in exerting so high a power. It hath

been said indeed[d], that if a baron waste his estate, so that he is

not able to support the degree, the _king_ may degrade him: but it is

expressly held by later authorities[e], that a peer cannot be degraded

but by act of _parliament_.

[Footnote b: 4 Inst. 355.]

[Footnote c: The preamble to the act is remarkable: "forasmuch as

oftentimes it is seen, that when any lord is called to high estate,

and hath not convenient livelyhood to support the same dignity, it

induceth great poverty and indigence, and causeth oftentimes great

extortion, embracery, and maintenance to be had; to the great trouble

of all such countries where such estate shall happen to be: therefore,

&c."]

[Footnote d: By lord chancellor Ellesmere. Moor. 678.]

[Footnote e: 12 Rep. 107. 12 Mod. 56.]

THE commonalty, like the nobility, are divided into several degrees;

and, as the lords, though different in rank, yet all of them are peers

in respect of their nobility, so the commoners, though some are

greatly superior to others, yet all are in law peers, in respect of

their want of nobility[f].

[Footnote f: 2 Inst. 29.]

THE first name of dignity, next beneath a peer, was anciently that of

_vidames_, _vice domini_, or _valvasors_[g]: who are mentioned by our

antient lawyers[h] as _viri magnae dignitatis_; and sir Edward Coke[i]

speaks highly of them. Yet they are now quite out of use; and our

legal antiquarians are not so much as agreed upon their original or

ancient office.

[Footnote g: Camden. _ibid._]

[Footnote h: Bracton. _l._ 1. _c._ 8.]

[Footnote i: 2 Inst. 667.]

NOW therefore the first dignity after the nobility, is a _knight_ of

the order of St. George, or _of the garter_; first instituted by

Edward III, _A.D._ 1344[k]. Next follows a _knight banneret_; who

indeed by statutes 5 Ric. II. st. 2. c. 4. and 14 Ric. II. c. 11. is

ranked next after barons: and that precedence was confirmed to him by

order of king James I, in the tenth year of his reign[l]. But, in

order to intitle himself to this rank, he must have been created by

the king in person, in the field, under the royal banners, in time of

open war[m]. Else he ranks after _baronets_; who are the next order:

which title is a dignity of inheritance, created by letters patent,

and usually descendible to the issue male. It was first instituted by

king James the first, _A.D._ 1611. in order to raise a competent sum

for the reduction of the province of Ulster in Ireland; for which

reason all baronets have the arms of Ulster superadded to their family

coat. Next follow _knights of the bath_; an order instituted by king

Henry IV, and revived by king George the first. They are so called

from the ceremony of bathing, the night before their creation. The

last of these inferior nobility are _knights bachelors_; the most

antient, though the lowest, order of knighthood amongst us: for we

have an instance[n] of king Alfred's conferring this order on his son

Athelstan. The custom of the antient Germans was to give their young

men a shield and a lance in the great council: this was equivalent to

the _toga virilis_ of the Romans: before this they were not permitted

to bear arms, but were accounted as part of the father's houshold;

after it, as part of the public[o]. Hence some derive the usage of

knighting, which has prevailed all over the western world, since it's

reduction by colonies from those northern heroes. Knights are called

in Latin _equites aurati_; _aurati_, from the gilt spurs they wore;

and _equites_, because they always served on horseback: for it is

observable[p], that almost all nations call their knights by some

appellation derived from an horse. They are also called in our law

_milites_, because they formed a part, or indeed the whole of the

royal army, in virtue of their feodal tenures; one condition of which

was, that every one who held a knights fee (which in Henry the

second's time[q] amounted to 20_l._ _per annum_) was obliged to be

knighted, and attend the king in his wars, or fine for his

non-compliance. The exertion of this prerogative, as an expedient to

raise money in the reign of Charles the first, gave great offence;

though warranted by law, and the recent example of queen Elizabeth:

but it was, at the restoration, together with all other military

branches of the feodal law, abolished; and this kind of knighthood

has, since that time, fallen into great disregard.

[Footnote k: Seld. tit. of hon. 2. 5. 41.]

[Footnote l: Seld. tit. hon. 2. 11. 3.]

[Footnote m: 4 Inst. 6.]

[Footnote n: Will. Malmsb. _lib._ 2.]

[Footnote o: Tac. _de morib. Germ._ 13.]

[Footnote p: Camden. _ibid._ Co. Litt. 74.]

[Footnote q: Glanvil. _l._ 9. _c._ 4.]

THESE, sir Edward Coke says[r], are all the names of _dignity_ in this

kingdom, esquires and gentlemen being only names of _worship_. But

before these last the heralds rank all colonels, serjeants at law, and

doctors in the three learned professions.

[Footnote r: 2 Inst. 667.]

ESQUIRES and gentlemen are confounded together by sir Edward Coke, who

observes[s], that every esquire is a gentleman, and a gentleman is

defined to be one _qui arma gerit_, who bears coat armour, the grant

of which adds gentility to a man's family: in like manner as civil

nobility, among the Romans, was founded in the _jus imaginum_, or

having the image of one ancestor at least, who had borne some curule

office. It is indeed a matter somewhat unsettled, what constitutes the

distinction, or who is a real _esquire_: for it is not an estate,

however large, that confers this rank upon it's owner. Camden, who was

himself a herald, distinguishes them the most accurately; and he

reckons up four sorts of them[t]: 1. The eldest sons of knights, and

their eldest sons, in perpetual succession[u]. 2. The younger sons of

peers, and their eldest sons, in like perpetual succession: both which

species of esquires sir H. Spelman entitles _armigeri natalitii_[w].

3. Esquires created by the king's letters patent, or other

investiture; and their eldest sons. 4. Esquires by virtue of their

offices; as justices of the peace, and others who bear any office of

trust under the crown. To these may be added the esquires of knights

of the bath, each of whom constitutes three at his installation; and

all foreign, nay, Irish peers; and the eldest sons of peers of Great

Britain, who, though generally titular lords, are only esquires in the

law, and must so be named in all legal proceedings[x]. As for

_gentlemen_, says sir Thomas Smith[y], they be made good cheap in this

kingdom: for whosoever studieth the laws of the realm, who studieth in

the universities, who professeth liberal sciences, and (to be short)

who can live idly, and without manual labour, and will bear the port,

charge, and countenance of a gentleman, he shall be called master, and

shall be taken for a gentleman. A _yeoman_ is he that hath free land

of forty shillings by the year; who is thereby qualified to serve on

juries, vote for knights of the shire, and do any other act, where the

law requires one that is _probus et legalis homo_[z].

[Footnote s: 2 Inst. 668.]

[Footnote t: _Ibid._]

[Footnote u: 2 Inst. 667.]

[Footnote w: Gloss. 43.]

[Footnote x: 3 Inst. 30. 2 Inst. 667.]

[Footnote y: Commonw. of Eng. book 1. c. 20.]

[Footnote z: 2 Inst. 668.]

THE rest of the commonalty are _tradesmen_, _artificers_, and

_labourers_; who (as well as all others) must in pursuance of the

statute 1 Hen. V. c. 5. be stiled by the name and addition of their

estate, degree, or mystery, in all actions and other legal

proceedings.

CHAPTER THE THIRTEENTH.

OF THE MILITARY AND MARITIME STATES.

THE military state includes the whole of the soldiery; or, such

persons as are peculiarly appointed among the rest of the people, for

the safeguard and defence of the realm.

IN a land of liberty it is extremely dangerous to make a distinct

order of the profession of arms. In absolute monarchies this is

necessary for the safety of the prince, and arises from the main

principle of their constitution, which is that of governing by fear:

but in free states the profession of a soldier, taken singly and

merely as a profession, is justly an object of jealousy. In these no

man should take up arms, but with a view to defend his country and

it's laws: he puts not off the citizen when he enters the camp; but it

is because he is a citizen, and would wish to continue so, that he

makes himself for a while a soldier. The laws therefore and

constitution of these kingdoms know no such state as that of a

perpetual standing soldier, bred up to no other profession than that

of war: and it was not till the reign of Henry VII, that the kings of

England had so much as a guard about their persons.

IN the time of our Saxon ancestors, as appears from Edward the

confessor's laws[a], the military force of this kingdom was in the

hands of the dukes or heretochs, who were constituted through every

province and county in the kingdom; being taken out of the principal

nobility, and such as were most remarkable for being "_sapientes,

fideles, et animosi_." Their duty was to lead and regulate the English

armies, with a very unlimited power; "_prout eis visum fuerit, ad

honorem coronae et utilitatem regni_." And because of this great power

they were elected by the people in their full assembly, or folkmote,

in the same manner as sheriffs were elected: following still that old

fundamental maxim of the Saxon constitution, that where any officer

was entrusted with such power, as if abused might tend to the

oppression of the people, that power was delegated to him by the vote

of the people themselves[b]. So too, among the antient Germans, the

ancestors of our Saxon forefathers, they had their dukes, as well as

kings, with an independent power over the military, as the kings had

over the civil state. The dukes were elective, the kings hereditary:

for so only can be consistently understood that passage of Tacitus[c],

"_reges ex nobilitate, duces ex virtute sumunt_;" in constituting

their kings, the family, or blood royal, was regarded, in chusing

their dukes or leaders, warlike merit: just as Caesar relates of their

ancestors in his time, that whenever they went to war, by way either

of attack or defence, they _elected_ leaders to command them[d]. This

large share of power, thus conferred by the people, though intended to

preserve the liberty of the subject, was perhaps unreasonably

detrimental to the prerogative of the crown: and accordingly we find a

very ill use made of it by Edric duke of Mercia, in the reign of king

Edmond Ironside; who, by his office of duke or heretoch, was entitled

to a large command in the king's army, and by his repeated

treacheries at last transferred the crown to Canute the Dane.

[Footnote a: _c. de heretochiis._]

[Footnote b: "_Isti vero viri eliguntur per commune consilium, pro

communi utilitate regni, per provincias et patrias universas, et per

singulos comitatus, in pleno folkmote, sicut et vice-comites

provinciarum et comitatuum eligi debent._" _LL. Edw. Confess._ _ibid._

See also Bede, _eccl. hist._ _l._ 5. _c._ 10.]

[Footnote c: _De morib. German._ 7.]

[Footnote d: "_Quum bellum civitas aut illatum defendit, aut infert,

magistratus qui ei bello praesint deliguntur._" _De bell. Gall._ _l._

6. _c._ 22.]

IT seems universally agreed by all historians, that king Alfred first

settled a national militia in this kingdom, and by his prudent

discipline made all the subjects of his dominion soldiers: but we are

unfortunately left in the dark as to the particulars of this his so

celebrated regulation; though, from what was last observed, the dukes

seem to have been left in possession of too large and independent a

power: which enabled duke Harold on the death of Edward the confessor,

though a stranger to the royal blood, to mount for a short space the

throne of this kingdom, in prejudice of Edgar Atheling, the rightful

heir.

UPON the Norman conquest the feodal law was introduced here in all

it's rigor, the whole of which is built on a military plan. I shall

not now enter into the particulars of that constitution, which belongs

more properly to the next part of our commentaries: but shall only

observe, that, in consequence thereof, all the lands in the kingdom

were divided into what were called knight's fees, in number above

sixty thousand; and for every knight's fee a knight or soldier,

_miles_, was bound to attend the king in his wars, for forty days in a

year; in which space of time, before war was reduced to a science, the

campaign was generally finished, and a kingdom either conquered or

victorious[e]. By this means the king had, without any expense, an

army of sixty thousand men always ready at his command. And

accordingly we find one, among the laws of William the conqueror[f],

which in the king's name commands and firmly enjoins the personal

attendance of all knights and others; "_quod habeant et teneant se

semper in armis et equis, ut decet et oportet; et quod semper sint

prompti et parati ad servitium suum integrum nobis explendum et

peragendum, cum opus adfuerit, secundum quod debent de feodis et

tenementis suis de jure nobis facere_." This personal service in

process of time degenerated into pecuniary commutations or aids, and

at last the military part of the feodal system was abolished at the

restoration, by statute 12 Car. II. c. 24.

[Footnote e: The Poles are, even at this day, so tenacious of their

antient constitution, that their pospolite, or militia, cannot be

compelled to serve above six weeks, or forty days, in a year. Mod.

Univ. Hist. xxxiv. 12.]

[Footnote f: c. 58. See Co. Litt. 75, 76.]

IN the mean time we are not to imagine that the kingdom was left

wholly without defence, in case of domestic insurrections, or the

prospect of foreign invasions. Besides those, who by their military

tenures were bound to perform forty days service in the field, the

statute of Winchester[g] obliged every man, according to his estate

and degree, to provide a determinate quantity of such arms as were

then in use, in order to keep the peace: and constables were appointed

in all hundreds to see that such arms were provided. These weapons

were changed, by the statute 4 & 5 Ph. & M. c. 2. into others of more

modern service; but both this and the former provision were repealed

in the reign of James I[h]. While these continued in force, it was

usual from time to time for our princes to to [Transcriber's Note:

duplicate word] issue commissions of array, and send into every county

officers in whom they could confide, to muster and array (or set in

military order) the inhabitants of every district: and the form of the

commission of array was settled in parliament in the 5 Hen. IV[i]. But

at the same time it was provided[k], that no man should be compelled

to go out of the kingdom at any rate, nor out of his shire but in

cases of urgent necessity; nor should provide soldiers unless by

consent of parliament. About the reign of king Henry the eighth, and

his children, lord lieutenants began to be introduced, as standing

representatives of the crown, to keep the counties in military order;

for we find them mentioned as known officers in the statute 4 & 5 Ph.

& M. c. 3. though they had not been then long in use, for Camden

speaks of them[l], in the time of queen Elizabeth, as extraordinary

magistrates constituted only in times of difficulty and danger.

[Footnote g: 13 Edw. I. c. 6.]

[Footnote h: Stat. 1 Jac. I. c. 25. 21 Jac. I. c. 28.]

[Footnote i: Rushworth. part 3. pag. 667.]

[Footnote k: Stat. 1 Edw III. st. 2. c. 5 & 7. 25 Edw. III. st. 5. c.

8.]

[Footnote l: Brit. 103. Edit. 1594.]

IN this state things continued, till the repeal of the statutes of

armour in the reign of king James the first: after which, when king

Charles the first had, during his northern expeditions, issued

commissions of lieutenancy and exerted some military powers which,

having been long exercised, were thought to belong to the crown, it

became a question in the long parliament, how far the power of the

militia did inherently reside in the king; being now unsupported by

any statute, and founded only upon immemorial usage. This question,

long agitated with great heat and resentment on both sides, became at

length the immediate cause of the fatal rupture between the king and

his parliament: the two houses not only denying this prerogative of

the crown, the legality of which right perhaps might be somewhat

doubtful; but also seizing into their own hands the intire power of

the militia, the illegality of which step could never be any doubt at

all.

SOON after the restoration of king Charles the second, when the

military tenures were abolished, it was thought proper to ascertain

the power of the militia, to recognize the sole right of the crown to

govern and command them, and to put the whole into a more regular

method of military subordination[m]: and the order, in which the

militia now stands by law, is principally built upon the statutes

which were then enacted. It is true the two last of them are

apparently repealed; but many of their provisions are re-enacted, with

the addition of some new regulations, by the present militia laws: the

general scheme of which is to discipline a certain number of the

inhabitants of every county, chosen by lot for three years, and

officered by the lord lieutenant, the deputy lieutenants, and other

principal landholders, under a commission from the crown. They are not

compellable to march out of their counties, unless in case of invasion

or actual rebellion, nor in any case compellable to march out of the

kingdom. They are to be exercised at stated times: and their

discipline in general is liberal and [Transcriber's Note: 'and'

missing here but is in printer's mark on previous page] easy; but,

when drawn out into actual service, they are subject to the rigours of

martial law, as necessary to keep them in order. This is the

constitutional security, which our laws have provided for the public

peace, and for protecting the realm against foreign or domestic

violence; and which the statutes[n] declare is essentially necessary

to the safety and prosperity of the kingdom.

[Footnote m: 13 Car. II. c. 6. 14 Car. II. c. 3. 15 Car. II. c. 4.]

[Footnote n: 30 Geo. II. c. 25, &c.]

WHEN the nation is engaged in a foreign war, more veteran troops and

more regular discipline may perhaps be necessary, than can be expected

from a mere militia. And therefore at such times particular provisions

have been usually made for the raising of armies and the due

regulation and discipline of the soldiery: which are to be looked upon

only as temporary excrescences bred out of the distemper of the state,

and not as any part of the permanent and perpetual laws of the

kingdom. For martial law, which is built upon no settled principles,

but is entirely arbitrary in it's decisions, is, as sir Matthew Hale

observes[o], in truth and reality no law, but something indulged,

rather than allowed as a law: the necessity of order and discipline in

an army is the only thing which can give it countenance; and therefore

it ought not to be permitted in time of peace, when the king's courts

are open for all persons to receive justice according to the laws of

the land. Wherefore Edmond earl of Kent being taken at Pontefract, 15

Edw. II. and condemned by martial law, his attainder was reversed 1

Edw. III. because it was done in time of peace. And it is laid

down[p], that if a lieutenant, or other, that hath commission of

martial authority, doth in time of peace hang or otherwise execute any

man by colour of martial law, this is murder; for it is against _magna

carta_[q]. And the petition of right[r] enacts, that no soldier shall

be quartered on the subject without his own consent[s]; and that no

commission shall issue to proceed within this land according to

martial law. And whereas, after the restoration, king Charles the

second kept up about five thousand regular troops, by his own

authority, for guards and garrisons; which king James the second by

degrees increased to no less than thirty thousand, all paid from his

own civil list; it was made one of the articles of the bill of

rights[t], that the raising or keeping a standing army within the

kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with consent of parliament, is

against law.

[Footnote o: Hist. C.L. c. 2.]

[Footnote p: 3 Inst. 52.]

[Footnote q: _cap._ 29.]

[Footnote r: 3 Car. I. See also stat. 31 Car. II. c. 1.]

[Footnote s: Thus, in Poland, no soldier can be quartered upon the

gentry, the only freemen in that republic. Mod. Univ. Hist. xxxiv.

23.]

[Footnote t: Stat. 1 W. & M. st. 2. c. 2.]

BUT, as the fashion of keeping standing armies has universally

prevailed over all Europe of late years (though some of it's

potentates, being unable themselves to maintain them, are obliged to

have recourse to richer powers, and receive subsidiary pensions for

that purpose) it has also for many years past been annually judged

necessary by our legislature, for the safety of the kingdom, the

defence of the possessions of the crown of Great Britain, and the

preservation of the balance of power in Europe, to maintain even in

time of peace a standing body of troops, under the command of the

crown; who are however _ipso facto_ disbanded at the expiration of

every year, unless continued by parliament.

Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book the First · 第 34 / 41 段