beginning the very life of the relation between the lord and the vassal had now in great part perished. The feeling of gratitude could no more survive than the feeling of dependence on the part of the latter after feuds became hereditary. A species of superstition, indeed, and a sense of honour, which in some degree supplied the place of what was lost, were preserved by oaths and ceremonies, and the influence of habit and old opinion; but these were at the best only extraneous props; the self-sustaining strength of the edifice was gone. Thus it was the tendency of feudalism to decay and fall to pieces under the necessary development of its own principle.

Other causes called into action by the progress of events conspired to bring about the same result. The very military spirit which was fostered by the feudal institutions, and the wars, defensive and aggressive, which they were intended to supply the means of carrying on, led in course of time to the release of the vassal from the chief and most distinguishing of his original obligations, and thereby, it may be said, to the rupture of the strongest bond that had attached him to his lord. The feudal military army was at length found so inconvenient a force that soon after the accession of Henry II. the personal service of vassals was dispensed with, and a pecuniary payment, under the name of Escuage, accepted in its stead. From this time the vassal was no longer really the defender of his lord; he was no longer what he professed to be in his homage and his oath of fealty; and one effect of the change must have been still farther to wear down what remained of the old impressiveness of these solemnities, and to reduce them nearer to mere dead forms. The acquisition by the crown of an army of subservient mercenaries, in exchange for its former inefficient and withal turbulent and unmanageable army of vassals, was in fact the discovery of a substitute for the main purpose of the feudal polity. Whatever nourished a new power in the commonwealth, also took sustenance and strength from this ancient power. Such must in special degree have been the effect of the growth of towns, and of the new

species of wealth, and, it may be added, the new manners and modes of thinking, created by trade and commerce.

The effect of

The progress of sub-infeudation has sometimes been represented as having upon the whole tended to weaken and loosen the fabric of feudalism. It "demolished," observes Blackstone (ii. 4), "the ancient simplicity of feuds; and an inroad being once made upon their constitution, it subjected them in a course of time to great varieties and innovations. Feuds began to be bought and sold, and deviations were made from the old fundamental rules of tenure and succession, which were held no longer sacred when the feuds themselves no longer continued to be purely military." But the practice of sub-infeudation would rather seem to have been calculated to carry out the feudal principle, and to place the whole system on a broader and firmer basis. It would be more correct to ascribe the effects here spoken of to the prohibition against sub-infeudation. this practice, it is true, was to deprive the lord of his forfeitures and escheats and the other advantages of his seigniory, and various attempts therefore were at length made to check or altogether prevent it, in which the crown and the tenants in chief, whose interests were most affected, may be supposed to have joined. One of the clauses of the great charter of Henry III. (the thirty-second) appears to be intended to restrict subinfeudation (although the meaning is not quite clear), and it is expressly forbidden by the statute of Quia Emptores (the 18 | Ed. I. c. 1). Sub-infeudation was originally the only way in which the holder of a fief could alienate any part of his estate without the consent of his lord; and it therefore now became necessary to provide some other mode of effecting that object, for it seems to have been felt that after alienation had been allowed so long to go on under the guise of sub-infeudation, to restrain it altogether would be no longer possible. The consequence was, that, as a compensation for the prohibition of sub-infeudation, the old prohibition against alienation was removed; lands were allowed to be alienated, but the purchaser or grantee did not hold them

UNIVERSU

of the vendor or grantor, but held them exactly as the grantor did; and such is still the legal effect in England when a man parts with his entire interest in his lands. This change was effected by the statute of Quia Emptores with regard to all persons except the immediate tenants of the crown, who were permitted to alienate on paying a fine to the king by the statute 1 Edw. III. c. 12. Thus at the same time that a practice strictly accordant to the spirit of feudalism, and eminently favourable to its conservation and extension, was stopped, another practice, altogether adverse to its fundamental principles, was introduced and established, that of allowing voluntary alienation by persons during their lifetime.

It was a consequence of feudal principles, that a man's lands could not be subjected to the claims of his creditors. This restraint upon what may be called involuntary alienation has been in a great degree removed by the successive enactments which have had for their object to make a man's lands liable for his debts; although, after a lapse of near six hundred years since the statute of Acton Burnell, the lands of a debtor are not yet completely subjected to the just demands of his creditors. This statute of Acton Burnell, passed 11 Ed. I. (1283), made the devisable burgages, or burgh_tenements, of a debtor saleable in discharge of his debts. By the Statute of Merchant, passed 13 Ed. I. (1285), called Statute 3, a debtor's lands might be delivered to his merchant creditor till his debt was wholly paid out of the profits. By the 18th chapter of the Statute of Westminster the Second, passed the same year, a moiety of a debtor's land (not copyhold) was subjected to execution for debts or damages recovered by judgment. But the lands are not sold: the moiety of them is delivered by the sheriff to him who has recovered by judgment, to occupy them till his debt or damages are satisfied. Finally, by the several modern statutes of bankruptcy, the whole of a bankrupt debtor's lands have become absolutely saleable for the payment of his debts. Further, by a recent act (3 & 4 Wm. IV. c. 104), all a deceased person's estate in land, of whatever kind, not charged

FEUDAL SYSTEM.

by his will with the payment of his debts, whether he was a trader within the bankrupt laws or not, constitutes assets, to be.. administered in equity, for the payment of his debts, both those on specially and those on simple contract.

An attempt had early been made to restore in part the old restraints upon voluntary alienation by the statute 13 Ed. I. c. 1, entitled 'De Donis Conditionalibus,' which had for its object to enable any owner of an estate, by his own disposition, to secure its descent in perpetuity in a particular line. So far as the statute went, it was an effort to strengthen the declining power of feudalism. The effect was to create what were called estates tail, and to free the tenant in tail from many liabilities of his ancestor to which he would be subject if he were seised of the same lands in feesimple. [ESTATE.] The power which was thus conferred upon landholders of preventing the alienation of their lands remained in full force for nearly two centuries, till at last, in the reign of Edward IV., by the decision of the courts (A.D. 1472) the practice of barring estates tail by a common recovery was completely established.

The practice of conveying estates by fine, which was of great antiquity in England, and the origin of which is by some referred to the time of Stephen or Henry II., was regulated by various statutes (among others, particularly by the 4 Henry VII.), and contributed materially to facilitate the transfer of lands in general, but more particularly (as regulated by the statute just mentioned) to bar estates tail. By a statute passed in the 32 Henry VIII. c. 28, tenants in tail were enabled to make leases for three lives or twenty-one years, which should bind their issue. The 26 Hen. VIII. c. 13, also had declared all estates of inheritance, in use or possession, to be forfeited to the king upon any conviction of high treason, and thus destroyed one of the strongest inducements to the tying up of estates in tail, which hitherto had only been forfeitable for treason during the life of the tenant in tail.

Another mode by which the feudal restraints upon voluntary alienation came

at length to be extensively evaded was the practice introduced, probably about the end of the reign of Edward III., of granting lands to persons to uses, as it was termed; that is, the new owner of the land received it not for his own use, but on the understanding and confidence that he would hold the land for such persons and for such purposes as the grantor then named or might at any time afterwards name. Thus an estate in land became divided into two parts, one of which was the legal ownership, and the other the right to the profits or the use; and this use could be transferred by a man's last will at a time when the land itself, being still bound in the fetters of feudal restraint, could not be transferred by will, except where it was devisable, as in Kent and some other parts of England, by special custom. The person who thus obtained the use or profits of the estate the Cestui que use, as he is called in law-was finally converted into the actual owner of the land to the same amount of interest as he had in the use (A.D. 1535) by the statute of Uses (the 27 Hen. VIII. c. 10), and thus the power of devising land which had been enjoyed by the mode of uses was taken away. But this important element in the feudal system, the restraint on the disposition of lands by will, could no longer be maintained consistently with the habits and opinions then established, and accordingly, by stat. 32 Hen. VIII. (which was afterwards explained by the stat. 34 Hen. VIII.), all persons were allowed to dispose of their freehold lands held in fee-simple by a will in writing, subject to certain restrictions as to lands held by knight-service either of the king or any other, which restrictions were removed by the stat. 12 Chas. II. c. 24, which abolished military tenures.

Notwithstanding these successive assaults upon certain parts of the ancient feudalism, the main body of the edifice still remained almost entire. It is said that the subject of the abolition of military tenures was brought before the parliament in the 18th of James I., on the king's recommendation, but at that time nothing was done in the matter. When the civil war broke out in 1641.

the profits of marriage, wardship, and of most of the other old feudal prerogatives of the crown, were for some time still collected by the parliament, as they had formerly been by the king. The fabric of the feudal system in England however was eventually shattered by the storm of the Great Rebellion. The Court of Wards was in effect discontinued from 1645. The restoration of the king could not restore what had thus been in practice swept away. By the above-mentioned statute, 12 Car. II. c. 24, it was accordingly enacted that from the year 1645 the Court of Wards and Liveries, and all wardships, liveries, primer-seisins, values, and forfeitures of marriage, &c., by reason of any tenure of the king's majesty, or of any other by knights' tenures, should be taken away and discharged, together with all fines for alienations, tenure by homage, escuage, aids pur filz marrier and pur fair fitz chevalier, &c.; and all tenures of any honours, manors, lands, tenements or hereditaments, or any estate of inheritance at the common law, held either of the king or of any other person or persons, bodies politic or corporate, were turned into free and common soccage, to all intents and purposes. [SocCAGE.] By the same statute every father was empowered by deed or will, executed in the presence of two witnesses, to appoint persons to have the guardianship of his infant and unmarried children, and to have the custody and management of their property. It was not till after the lapse of nearly another century that the tenures and other institutions of feudalism were put an end to in Scotland by the statutes, passed after the Rebellion, of the 20 Geo. II. c. 43, entitled An Act for abolishing Heritable Jurisdictions;' and the 20 Geo. II. c. 50, entitled An Act for taking away the Tenure of Ward-holding in Scotland, for giving to heirs and successors a summary process against superiors, and for ascertaining the services of all tenants, &c.' Nor have estates tail in Scotland yet been relieved from the strictest fetters of a destination in perpetuity, either by the invention of common recoveries, or by levying a fine, or by any legislative

enactment.

bards, &c., have been published by Lindenbrogius in his Codex Legum Antiquarum, fol. Francof., 1613. The best editions of the capitularies are that by Baluze, in 2 vols. fol., Paris, 1677, and that by Chiniac, of which, however, we believe only the two first volumes have appeared, Paris, fol., 1780. Richebourg's Nouveau Coutumier Général, 4 vols. fol., Paris, 1724, is a complete collection of the Coutumiers, all of which however have also been published separately. All these old laws and codes, as well as the Milan text-book, have been made the subject of voluminous commentaries.

FIDEI COMMISSUM. [TRUST.] FIEF. [FEUDAL SYSTEM.] FIELD-MARSHAL, a military dignity conferred on such commanders of armies as are distinguished by their high personal rank or superior talents.

It has been supposed that the term marshal is derived from Martis Seneschallus; but it is more probable that it came from the Saxon words mar, or marach, a horse, and scalck, a servant; and it appears to have designated the person who had the care of a certain number of horses in the royal stables. In the Teutonic laws such a person is called mariscalcus, and the fine for his murder is particularly specified.

The earl-marshal of England had originally the chief command of the army; and history records the names of two noblemen, De Montmorency and Fitzosborne, on whom the title was conferred by William the Conqueror.

The office was by Henry VIII. made hereditary in the family of the Duke of Norfolk; but it is probable that it had before that time ceased to be connected with the military service; for from the Anecdotes of the Howard Family,' we learn that while another person held the post of earl-marshal, Sir Robert Willoughby, Lord Brooke, was appointed by Henry VII. to be marshal of the army.

The title of Maréchal de France appears to have become a military dignity in that country in the time of Philip Augustus; and, according to Père Daniel, the first person who held it was Henry Clement, the commander of the French army at the conquest of Anjou in 1204.

Originally there was only one Maréchal de France, but, in 1270, when the king, Saint Louis, went on his expedition to Africa, a second was appointed. Francis I. added a third, and the number was increased by Napoleon to twelve.

The maréchaux de camp, in the old French service, were charged with the duty of arranging the encampment and providing subsistence for the troops; and in action they had the command of the wings or of the reserve of an army under the general-in-chief. From the title borne by this class of general officers is derived that of feld-marschall in the German armies; and we have adopted the title from the German.

The number of British field-marshals is at present six: the Duke of Wellington, the King of Hanover, the Duke of Čambridge, the King of the Belgians, Prince Albert, and the King of Holland. Fieldmarshals have no pay as such, but they retain their pay as full generals, and the command of two regiments may be given to them instead of one.

FILIATION. [BASTARDY.] FIREBOTE. [COMMON, RIGHTS OF, p. 578.]

FIRM. [PARTNERSHIP.]

FIRST-FRUITS (Primitia), the profits of every spiritual living for one year, according to the valuation thereof in the king's books. They were claimed by the pope throughout Christendom; in England his claim was first asserted in the reign of King John, and then only so far as related to clerks whom he appointed to benefices. Afterwards Pope Clement V. and John XXII., about the beginning of the fourteenth century, demanded and took them from all clerks, by whomsoever presented. By the statutes 25 Henry VIII. c. 20, and 26 Henry VIII. c. 3, first-fruits and tenths [TENTHS] were taken from the pope and given to the king. In the thirty-second year of the same king's reign a court was erected for the management of them, but it was soon after abolished. Ultimately Queen Anne gave up this branch of the royal revenue to be applied towards the augmentation of small livings. [BENEFICE.]

First-fruits arising in Ireland were by the 2 Geo. I. c. 15, directed to be ap