242
Coudiliitwnal Uistory.
[chap.
Complies- tiens of allegiance and fealty, broken faith and stained honour ;
sɔnal and allegations and denials of incapacity and misgovernment ; a
questions, national voice possessing strength that makes it decisive for
the moment, but not enough to enable it to resist the dictation
of the stronger ; giving an uncertain sound from year to year ;
attainting and rehabilitating in alternate parliaments ; claim-
ing a cogency and infallibility which every change of policy
Relations ot belies. The baronage is divided so narrowly that the summons
estates. or exclusion of half a dozen members changes the fate of a
ministry or of a dynasty ; the representation of the commons
is liable to the manipulation of local agencies with which con-
stitutional right weighs little in comparison with territorial
partisanship : the clergy are either, like the baronage, narrowly
divided, or, in the earnest desire of peace, ready to acquiesce
in the supremacy of the party which is for the moment the
Local stronger. Even the great mass of the nation does not know
parties. .*s θwn ɪɪɪɪɪɪd. ∣jιe 110l.f-}lerll counties are strong on one side,
the southern on the other : a weak government can bring a
great force into the field, and a strong government cannot be
secured against a bewildering surprise : the weakness of HenryVI
and the strength of Richard III alike succumb to a single
defeat : the people are weary of both, and yet fight for either.
Domestic The history contains paradoxes which confused the steadiest
divisions. ,
heads of the time, and strained the strongest consciences.
Hence every house was divided against itself, and few except
the chief actors in the drama sustained their part with honesty
and consistency. Oaths too were taken only to be broken ;
reconciliations concluded only that time might be gained to
prepare for new battles. The older laws of religion and honour
are waning away before the newer laws are strong enough to
еъъ and take their place. Even the material prosperity and growth of
national life, the nation are complicated in the same way ; rapid exhaustion
and rapid development seem to go on side by side ; the old
order changes, the inherent forces of national life renew them-
selves in divers ways ; and the man who chooses to place him-
self in the position of a judge must, under the confusion of
testimony, and the impossibility of comparing incommensurable
win.] Constitutional Comparison. 1∆ta,
influences, allow that on many, perhaps most, of the disputed,
points, no absolute decision can be attempted.
AVithout then trying to estimate the exact debt which Eng- Proposed
land owes to either, it will be enough, as it is perhaps indis- tɪæ^ætfon.
pensable, to compare the two dynasties on the level ground of
constitutional practice, and to collect the points on which is
based the conclusion, already more than sufficiently indicated,
that the rule of the house of Lancaster was in the main con-
stitutional, and that of the house of York in the main un-
constitutional. It might be sufficient to say that the rule of
the house of Lancaster was most constitutional when it was
strongest; and that of the house of York when it was weakest;
that the former contravened the constitution only when it was
itself in its decrepitude, the latter did so when in its fullest
vigour. Such a generalisation may be misconstrued ; the Possible
administration of Henry V may l'e regarded as constitutional Sw
because he was strong enough to use the constitutional
machinery in his own way, and that of Edward IV as uncon-
stitutional because he was strong enough to dispense with it.
If however it be granted, as for our purpose and from our Dynastie
point of view it must, that the decision of the quarrel was not ci<ie the
directly affected by constitutional questions at all,—if it be sju°sle'
admitted, that is, that the claim of York and the Nevilles to
deliver the king and kingdom from evil counsellors was neither
raised nor prosecuted in a constitutional way, and was in
reality both raised and resisted on grounds of dynastic right,—■
there is no great difficulty in forming a general conclusion.
Nor need any misgivings be suggested by the mere forensic
difficulty that the claim of the house of York, based on heredi-
tary right of succession, is in itself incompatible with the claim
of the baronage, or of the nation which it represented, to use
force in order to compel the king to dismiss his unpopular
advisers.
364. The first point upon which a comparison can be taken The three
is that of parliamentary action. The reign of Henry IV is one k⅛gT⅛’
long struggle on points of administrative difference between twɪɪθparθ
a king and a parliament that on all vital points are at one : hamente∙