Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

ion from being concerned in the administration of these establishments; and their decrees were sanctioned by a rescript of the Pope.2 The colleges were everywhere discountenanced as seminaries for the sons of Catholic parents. The liberal designs of Parliament were so far thwarted; yet, even under these discouragements, the colleges have enjoyed a fair measure of success. A steady increase of pupils of all denominations has been maintained; the education is excellent; and the best friends of Ireland are still hopeful that a people of rare aptitude for learning will not be induced, by religious jealousies, to repudiate the means of intellectual cultivation, which the state has invited them to accept.

1 August, 1850.

2 May 23d, 1851.

[ocr errors]

8 In 1858 the commissioners of inquiry reported: - "The colleges cannot be regarded otherwise than as successful."- Report of Commissioners, 1858, No. [2413]. In 1860, the entrances had increased from 168 to 309; and the numbers attending lectures, from 454 to 752. Of the latter number, 207 were members of the Established Church; 204, Roman Catholics; 247, Presbyterians; and 94 of other persuasions. Report of President for 1860-61, 1862, No. [2999].

CHAPTER XV.

Local Government the Basis of Constitutional Freedom:- -Vestries:Municipal Corporations in England, Scotland, and Ireland: - Local Improvement and Police Acts:- Local Boards constituted under General Acts: Courts of Quarter Sessions.

Local government the

basis of constitutional freedom.

THAT Englishmen have been qualified for the enjoyment of political freedom, is mainly due to those ancient local institutions by which they have been trained to self-government. The affairs of the people have been administered, not in Parliament only, but in the vestry, the town-council, the board-meeting, and the Court of Quarter Sessions. England alone among the nations of the earth has maintained for centuries a constitutional polity; and her liberties may be ascribed, above all things, to her free local institutions. Since the days of their Saxon ancestors,1 her sons have learned, at their own gates, the duties and responsibilities of citizens. Associating for the common good, they have become exercised in public affairs. Thousands of small communities have been separately trained to self-government: taxing themselves, through their representatives, for local objects: meeting for discussion and business; and animated by local rivalries and ambitions. The history of local government affords a striking parallel to the general political history of the country. While the aristocracy was encroaching upon popular power in the government of the state, it was making advances, no less sure, in local institutions. The few were gradually appropriating the franchises which were the birthright of the many; and again,

1 Palgrave's English Commonwealth, i. 628; Allen's Prerog.. 128.

[ocr errors]

as political liberties were enlarged, the rights of self-government were recovered.

[ocr errors]

Every parish is the image and reflection of the state. The land, the church, and the commonalty share in The parish. its government: the aristocratic and democratic elements are combined in its society. The common law, in its grand simplicity, recognized the right of all the rated pa- The vestry. rishioners to assemble in vestry, and administer parochial affairs. But in many parishes this popular principle The select gradually fell into disuse; and a few inhabitants, vestry. self-elected and irresponsible, claimed the right of imposing taxes, administering the parochial funds, and exercising all local authority. This usurpation, long acquiesced in, grew into a custom, which the courts recognized as a legal exception from the common law. The people had forfeited their rights; and select vestries ruled in their behalf. So absolute was their power, that they could assemble without notice, and bind all the inhabitants of the parish by their vote.2

This single abuse was corrected by Mr. Sturges Bourne's Act in 18183 but this same act, while it left Mr. Sturges select vestries otherwise unreformed, made a fur- Bourne's Act, 1818. ther inroad upon the popular constitution of open vestries. Hitherto every person entitled to attend had enjoyed an equal right of voting; but this act multiplied the votes of vestrymen, according to the value of their rated property one man could give six votes: others no more than one. An important breach, however, was made in the exclusive system of local government, by Sir John Hobhouse's Vestry Act, passed during the agitation Hobhouse's for parliamentary reform. The majority of rate

Sir John

Act, 1831.

1 Shaw's Par. Law, c. 17; Steer's Par. Law, 253; Toulmin Smith' Parish, 2d ed., 15-23, 46-52, 288-330.

2 Gibson's Codex, 219; Burn's Eccl. Law, iv. 10, &c.; Steer, 251.

8 58 Geo. III. c. 69, amended by 59 Geo. III. c. 85, 7 Will. IV., and 1 Vict. c. 35; Report on Poor Laws, 1818. Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxvii.

573.

4 1 & 2 Will. IV. c. 60; Oct. 20th, 1831; Toulmin Smith's Parish, 240.

payers, in any parish within a city or town, or any other parish composing 800 householders rated to the poor, were empowered to adopt this act. Under its provisions, vestries were elected by every rated parishioner: the votes of the electors were taken by ballot: every ten pound householder, except in certain cases, was eligible as a vestryman; and no member of the vestry was entitled to more than a single vote. This measure, however democratic in principle, did little more than revert to the policy of the common law. It was adopted in some populous parishes in the metropolis and elsewhere: but otherwise has had a limited operation.2

8

The history of municipal corporations affords another example of encroachments upon popular rights. Municipal corporations, The government of towns, under the Saxons, was England. no less popular than the other local institutions of that race; and the constitution of corporations, at a later period, was founded upon the same principles. All the settled inhabitants and traders of corporate towns, who contributed to the local taxes, had a voice in the management of their own municipal affairs. The community, enjoying corporate rights and privileges, was continually enlarged by the admission of men connected with the town by birth, marriage, apprenticeship, or servitude, and of others, not so connected, by gift or purchase. For some centuries after the conquest, the burgesses assembled in person, for the transaction of business. They elected a mayor, or other chief mag1 In the metropolis, or in any parish having more than 3000 inhabitants a 401. qualification was required. In the metropolis, however, the act wa superseded by the metropolis local management act, 1855. — Infra, 477. 2 In 1842, nine parishes only had adopted it. - Parl. Paper, 1842, No. 564.

8 Palgrave's English Commonwealth, i. 629; Merewether and Stephens's Hist. of Boroughs, Introd. viii.; Kemble's Hist., ii. 262; Lappenberg's England, App.; Hallam's Middle Ages, ii. 153.

4 Report of Commissioners on Municipal Corporations, 1835, p. 16; Merewether and Stephens's Hist., Introd., v. 1, 10, &c.; Hallan's Middle Ages, ii. 155.

istrate but no governing body, or town council, to whom their authority was delegated. The burgesses only were known to the law. But as towns and trade increased, the more convenient practice of representation was introduced for municipal as well as for parliamentary government. The most wealthy and influential inhabitants being chosen gradually encroached upon the privileges of the inferior townsmen, assumed all municipal authority, and substituted selfelection for the suffrages of burgesses and freemen. This encroachment upon popular rights was not submitted to without many struggles; but, at the close of the fifteenth century, it had been successfully accomplished in a large proportion of the corporations of England.

Charters from

to the Rev.

Until the reign of Henry VII., these encroachments had been local and spontaneous. The people had submitted to them; but the law had not enforced Henry VII. them. From this time, however, popular rights olution. were set aside in a new form. The crown began to grant charters to boroughs, — generally conferring or reviving the privilege of returning members to Parliament; and most of these charters vested all the powers of municipal government in the mayor and town-council, - nominated in the first instance by the crown itself, and afterwards self-elected. Nor did the contempt of the Tudors for popular rights stop here. By many of their charters, the same governing body was intrusted with the exclusive right of returning members to Parliament. For national as well as local government, the burgesses were put beyond the pale of the constitution. And in order to bring municipalities under the direct influence of the crown and the nobility, the office of high steward was often created: when the nobleman holding that office became the patron of the borough, and returned its members to Parliament. The power of the crown and aristocracy was increased, at the expense of the liberties of the people. The same policy was pursued by the Stuarts; and the two last of that race violated the liberties of the few corporations

« AnteriorContinuar »