the Adamses, and John Harvard. In descent by far the greater part of us are of English blood or of blood akin to it.1 We owe to England - that is, to the British Isles and to the different races which have met and mingled there — much of our language, literature, law, legislative forms of government, and the essential features of our civilization. In fact, without a knowledge of her history, we cannot rightly understand our own.

Standing on her soil, we possess practically the same personal rights that we do in America; we speak the same tongue, we meet with the same familiar names. We feel that whatever is glorious in her past is ours also; that Westminster Abbey belongs as much to us as to her, for our ancestors helped to build its walls and their dust is gathered in its tombs; that Shakespeare and Milton belong to us in like manner, for they wrote in the language we speak, for the instruction and delight of our fathers' fathers, who beat back the Spanish Armada and gave their lives for liberty on the fields of Marston Moor and Naseby.

Let it be granted that grave issues have arisen in the past to separate us; yet, after all, our interests and our sympathies, like our national histories, have more in common than they have apart. The progress of each country now reacts for good on the other.2

1 In 1840 the population of the United States, in round numbers, was 17,000,000, of whom the greater part were probably of English descent. Since then there has been an enormous immigration, 40 per cent of which was from the British Isles; but it is perhaps safe to say that three quarters of our present population are those who were living here in 1840, with their descendants. Of the immigrants (up to 1890) coming from non-English-speaking races, the Germans and Scandinavians predominated, and it is to them, as we have seen, that the English, in large measure, owe their origin (§§ 37-39,.126). It should be noted here that the word "English is used so as to include the people of the United Kingdom and their descendants on both sides of the Atlantic.

2 In this connection the testimony of Captain Alfred T. Mahan, in his recent work, "The Problem of Asia," is worth quoting here. He says (p. 187), speaking of our late war with Spain: "The writer has been assured, by an authority in which he entirely trusts, that to a proposition made to Great Britain to enter into a combination to constrain the use of our [United States] power,- -as Japan was five years ago constrained by the joint action of Russia, France, and Germany, — the reply [of Great Britain] was not only a positive refusal to enter into such a combination [against the United States], but an assurance of active resistance to it if attempted. . . . Call such an attitude [on the part of England toward the United States] friendship, or policy, as you will, the name is immaterial; the fact is the essential thing and will endure, because it rests upon solid interest."

449-1914]

UNITY OF THE RACE

449

If we consider the total combined population of the United States and of the British Empire, we find that to-day upwards of 150,000,000 people speak the English tongue and are governed by the fundamental principles of that Common Law which has its root in English soil. This population holds possession of more than 15,000,000 square miles of the earth's surface, much larger than that of the united continents of North America and Europe. By far the greater part of the wealth and power of the globe is theirs.

an area

They have expanded by their territorial and colonial growth as no other people have. They have absorbed and assimilated the multitudes of emigrants from every quarter of the globe that have poured into their dominions.

The result is that the inhabitants of the British Isles, of Australia, of New Zealand, of a part of South Africa, of the United States, and of Canada practically form one great Anglo-Saxon race,1 diverse in origin, separated by distance, but everywhere exhibiting the same spirit of intelligent enterprise and of steady, resistless growth. Thus considered, America and England are necessary one to the other. Their interests now and in the future are essentially the same. Both countries are virtually pledged to make every effort to maintain liberty and self-government, and also to maintain mutual peace by arbitration. The crisis of the great European War of 1914 gives still greater emphasis to these vitally important principles.

2

In view of these facts let us say, with an eminent thinker 2 whose intellectual home was on both sides of the Atlantic: "Whatever there be between the two nations to forget and forgive, is forgotten and forgiven. If the two peoples, which are one, be true to their duty, who can doubt that the destinies of the world must be in large measure committed to their hands?"

1 Such apparent exceptions as the Dutch in South Africa, the French in Canada, and the Negroes in the United States do not essentially affect the truth of this statement, since in practice the people of these races uphold the great fundamental principles on which all Anglo-Saxon government rests.

2 Dean Farrar, Address on General Grant, Westminster Abbey, 1885.

GENERAL SUMMARY OF ENGLISH CONSTITU

TIONAL HISTORY 1

1. Origin and Primitive Government of the English People. The main body of the English people did not originate in Britain, but in Northwestern Germany. The Jutes, Saxons, and Angles were independent, kindred tribes living on the banks of the Elbe and its vicinity.

They had no written laws, but obeyed time-honored customs which had all the force of laws. All matters of public importance were decided by each tribe at meetings held in the open air. There every freeman had an equal voice in the decision. There the people chose their rulers and military leaders; they discussed questions of peace and war; finally, acting as a high court of justice, they tried criminals and settled disputes about property.

In these rude methods we see the beginning of the English Constitution. Its growth has been the slow work of centuries, but the great principles underlying it have never changed. At every stage of their progress the English people and their descendants throughout the globe have claimed the right of self-government; and, if we except the period of the Norman Conquest, whenever that right has been persistently withheld or denied, the people have risen in arms and regained it.

2. Conquest of Britain; Origin and Power of the King. After the Romans abandoned Britain the English invaded the island 449(?), and in the course of a hundred and fifty years conquered it and established a number of rival settlements. The native Britons were, in great part, killed off or driven to take refuge in Wales and Cornwall.

The conquerors brought to their new home the methods of government and modes of life to which they had been accustomed in Germany. A cluster of towns - that is, a small number of enclosed habitations (§ 103) formed a hundred (a district having either a hundred families or able to furnish a hundred warriors); a cluster of hundreds formed a shire or county. Each of these divisions had its public meeting, composed of all its freemen or their representatives, for the management of

-

1 This Summary is inserted for the benefit of those who desire a compact, connected view of the development of the English Constitution, such as may be conveniently used either for reference, for a general review of the subject, or for purposes of special study. D. H. M. For authorities, see Stubbs (449-1485); Hallam (1485-1760); May (1760-1870); Amos (1870-1880); see also Hansard and Cobbett's "Parliamentary History," the works of Freeman, Taswell-Langmead (the best one-volume Constitutional History), Feilden's Manual, and A. L. Lowell's "The Government of England," 2 vols., in the CLASSIFIED LIST OF BOOKS beginning on page xxxvi.

The references inserted in parentheses are to sections in the body of the history.

its own affairs. But a state of war for the English tribes fought each other as well as fought the Britons - made a strong central government necessary. For this reason the leader of each tribe was made king. At first he was chosen, at large, by the entire tribe; later, unless there was some good reason for a different choice, the King's eldest son was selected as his successor. Thus the right to rule was practically fixed in the line of a certain family descent.

The ruler of each of these petty kingdoms acted as commander-inchief in war, and as supreme judge in law.

3. The Witenagemot, or General Council. In all other respects the King's authority was limited—except when he was strong enough to get his own way-by the Witenagemot, or General Council. This body consisted of the chief men of each kingdom acting in behalf of its people.1 It exercised the following powers: (1) It elected the King, and if the people confirmed the choice, he was crowned. (2) If the King proved unsatisfactory, the Council might depose him and choose a successor. (3) The King, with the consent of the Council, made the laws, that is, he declared the customs of the tribe. (4) The King, with the Council, appointed the chief officers of the kingdom (after the introduction of Christianity this included the bishops); but the King alone appointed the sheriff, to represent him and collect the revenue in each shire. (5) The Council confirmed or denied grants of portions of the public lands made by the King to private persons. (6) The Council acted as the high court of justice, the King sitting as supreme judge. (7) The Council, with the King, discussed all questions of importance, — such as the levying of taxes, and the making of treaties; smaller matters were left to the towns, hundreds, and shires to settle for themselves. After the consolidation of the different English kingdoms into one, the Witenagemot expanded into the National Council. In it we see "the true beginning of the Parliament of England."

4. How England became a United Kingdom; Influence of the Church and of the Danish Invasions. For a number of centuries Britain consisted of a number of little rival kingdoms, almost constantly at war with each other. Meanwhile missionaries from Rome had introduced Christianity, 597. Through the influence of Theodore of Tarsus, Archbishop of Canterbury (668), the clergy of the different hostile kingdoms met in general Church councils.2 This religious unity of action prepared the way for political unity. The Catholic Church the only Christian Church (except the Greek Church) then existing — made men feel that their highest interests were one; it "created the nation " (§ 48).

-

This was the first cause of the union of the kingdoms. The second was the invasion of the Danes. These fierce marauders forced the people

1 The Witenagemot (i.e. the Meeting of the Witan, or Wise Men, § 80), says Stubbs ("Select Charters"), represented the people, although it was not a collection of representatives. 2 This movement began several years earlier (§ 48), but Theodore of Tarsus was its first great organizer.