to trace the progress of these respective systems, to exhibit the circumstances under which they were developed, and the leading features by which they are characterized; and, by contrasting their practical operation upon society, to satisfy the reader that the motive which has led to the creation of both is essentially one and the same. To the proper understanding of the feudal system, it will be necessary to refer to the circumstances of its growth; we shall therefore briefly trace it from the period of its rise down to its final development immediately after the period of the Norman conquest. The rude original of this singular structure is to be found in the state of society, handed down to us by Tacitus, of those nomadic German tribes, who were subdued by the arms of the victorious Romans, and who, in their turn, subjugated, and finally gave laws and customs to their more polished conquer ors. The overthrow of the Roman empire by these northern barbarians forms a singular exception to the general consequence resulting from the conquest of a highly civilized nation by a rude and barbarous people. In nearly every similar instance, the conquerors, as in the conquest of Greece by the earlier Romans, have imbibed the arts of the conquered, and have insensibly sunk under the dominion of their alluring civilisation. But the terrible irruption which effected the downfall of the Roman empire, swept away the whole structure of ancient civilisation in Europe, and left little behind it but the rude organization of the warlike barbarians by which the task of destruction had been accomplished. From the re-organization of society which followed this mighty irruption, the feudal system took its rise. As this new order of men turned to possess themselves of the countries they had devastated, they introduced the laws, customs, and manners with which they were familiar in the wilds of Germany. And as they gradually began to combine the scattered elements of social existence, and weave out of their detached and irregular confederacies the more settled plans of national organization, they slowly perfected a political fabric of massive grandeur, which, from the compactness of its structure, the harmony of its parts and the comprehensiveness of its design, is entirely without a parallel in the history of mankind. Among the early Germans, the existence of separate landed property, or privileged classes in society, was utterly unknown. They lived in separate communities, governed by chiefs who were elected with exclusive reference to their merits. Their king was but the presiding officer of their annual council, where everything pertaining to the interest of the state was submitted to the free voice of a popular assembly. All landed property was vested in the community at large; and at the end of every year, distributed in the annual council to the chiefs, and by them redistributed in their respective communities. Every member of the community thus changed his habitation yearly, and migratory; and unsettled as this custom rendered them, it answered the purposes of a people whose pursuits were limited to the exercise of war, and to the rudest forms of agriculture. The Germans retained at first in their new possessions the outlines of their primitive organization. They retained their kings, among most of them their annual council, their origi nal mode of distributing lands, and yearly change of habitation. Being scattered, however, over a large extent of country, their general assemblies became less frequent; and in proportion as they declined, the power of their kings and chiefs increased. With the decline of the general assemblies, the kings appropriated to themselves the exclusive power of distributing lands, which they granted to the chiefs, who, learning the value of permanent possessions, gradually assumed the ownership of them; and, as a consequence of that ownership, established the hereditary right to their possession in their descendants. Immediately after the conquest, large portions of lands were allotted to the more prominent of their warlike leaders, who were followed to their new possessions by large bodies of their subordinates, naturally desirous of adhering in their new condition to those leaders to whom they had become attached by a long companionship in arms. The chiefs parcelled out their lands to their followers, in grants for life or at will, which, in the feudal law, were denominated beneficiary estates; and from this disposi tion sprang up the feudal relation of lord and vassal, which eventually spread itself over the whole structure of society. These feudal lords or barons increasing in wealth and influence by the gradual improvement and extension of their estates, their protection and influence were sought by the minor landed proprietors, as a security against the depredations and oppressions to which they were exposed in a lawless military age; and the more effectually to secure it, they granted their lands to the barons in fee, and held them thereafter as their tenants or vassals. From these and other causes, these feudal barons became possessed of immense landed estates, cultivated and improved by a host of dependent vassals. As the warlike propensities of their age involved them in continual quarrels with their neighbors, their first attention was directed to the efficient military organization of their vassals, and the general cultivation of the law of arms; to effect which object, the lands which were formerly held at gift or at will, were granted to the tenants upon the tenure of military service. Where the primitive institution of things was not retained with the gradual increase of estates, new states or kingdoms were formed, by the combination of estates, either through conquest, alliances by marriage, or by union for mutual protection, until from this primitive organization nations sprang up, governed by kings, overshadowed by nobles, and compactly knit together in that dependent relation which pervaded every part of the feudal system. From customs peculiar to the original Germans, many of them were reduced to a state of servitude, and formed a considerable body at the period of the conquest of the Roman empire. After that period great numbers of the conquered Romans were reduced to a similar condition; and as it was the custom of the feudal barons to reduce to slavery the captives taken in their wars, this inferior class, who were known by the appellation of serfs and villains, became in the progress of time a body of prodigious extent. As the tenants or vassals, in conformity with the requirement of their tenures, and in the indulgence of the ruling passion of their age, devoted themselves almost exclusively to the pursuit of arms, upon those serfs or villains devolved the duty of cultivating the earth and the performance of the labor necessary for the support of their privileged superiors. They were, in fact, the producing classes of their age, the really valuable members of the coinmunity, the foundation of society, which in our age and in our country, is dignified by the honored appellation of the people. From an utter disregard of the value of labor, and a total insensibility to the rights of humanity, they were crushed to the earth, under the iron dominion of a most despicable servitude. Fixed as bondmen to the soil, they were sold and transmitted with it. Their lives, like their liberties, were equally subject to the caprice of their lords. They were prevented from acquiring property-all political rights denied them-from self-elevation and individual advancement for ever shut out by their condition, so eloquently expressed by their name of "villain," which, surviving the causes that gave rise to it, has descended to our age, as a characteristic appellation for all that is despicable and vile. The feudal barons reigned with des potic power over their possessions. They made war, or entered into alliances of peace at pleasure, coined money, and administered supreme judicial power within their baronies. In their earlier condition, most of them were independent of their kings, and made war upon them, with the same indifference as upon each other; but as the system became more compact, and the neces sity of the dependant feudal relation more apparent, they assumed a subordinate position; and, in the feudal institution of vassalage, occupied about the same position to their sovereign that the inferior vassals occupied to them. The feudal system was based upon the predominant influence of landed property, and the necessity of efficient military organization. It was the organization of a people, whose pursuits were confined to war and agriculture, and in which land, the most valuable quality in an agricultural state, was converted into a means for effectually establishing a powerful and permanent military organization. Through the whole feudal relation, the performance of military service was the condition by which land was possessed and enjoyed. By the principles of the feudal law the king was the supreme lord and owner of the soil, and all who possessed it held mediately or immediately from him. The barons held it upon the tenure of military service, and the tenants held from the barons by the same tenure. The tenants were bound to the performance of military service whenever required by their lords, and the barons, at the head of their vassals, were bound to the performance of the same, whenever required by their sovereign. "My castles are my king's alone From turret to foundation stone," is the exclamation that Scott puts in the mouth of Douglas, and in this declaration the fiery old baron but frankly expresses the ruling sentiment of his age. The king, from uniting in himself the supreme control of the military power with the general ownership of the land, concentrated in his own person a control over the two great leading elements of the state, and distributed its exercise through the dependent parts of the whole feudal relation. A structure was thus reared, presenting the same aspect in civil society that the Egyptian pyramid presents in architecture, massive and deeply laid in its foundations, each layer of the structure supporting and supported by another, diminishing as it rose, gradation upon gradation, to its topmost stone, which, as the crowning point, to the elevation of which every part was subservient, filled the mind of the observer, when contrasted with the mass beneath it, with an overwhelming sense of its utter insignifi cance. The great object of this structure is embraced in one word-power. It presents us with one of the most striking examples that history has afforded of the successful labor of the few, in establishing a permanent control over the interests and welfare of the many. The history of the ancient world furnishes many examples of the overthrow of a people's liberties by some vigorous despot, and the successful establishment of himself and descendants in the permanent exercise of power. But the growth of the feudal system exhibits, on the grandest scale, the silent workings of one of the strongest principles of human action, the tendency of the few to encroach upon the rights of the many. In its growth, we observe the gradual development of this principle, toiling upwards, through the slow progress of centuries, without revolution or social dismemberment, to a state of more perfect organization, until the whole machinery of society was effectually constructed for the concentration of power at one unnatural point, which, radiating from this common centre, was felt through every part of the structure which secured it. From the king downward, it presented one common feature of political inequality, more unequal as it approached the great mass of society, until a total deprivation of political rights was realized in the person of the down-trodden serf. What in this age is regarded as the common heritage of man, was enjoyed in the feudal only as the gift of the sovereign. The laws were the king's laws, graciously vouchsafed to the people; the courts, the king's courts; the peace of the community, the king's peace; the people, the king's subjects. Even a holy religion, bestowed upon the world for the common benefit of man, lent its sanction to establish the divine right of a political ruler; and the presuming mortal, thus placed above his race, rioted in authority as "the Lord's Anointed." In the causes which contributed to the decline of the feudal system, we discover the germs of a new and entirely different state of society. Europe, in slowly emerging from the ignorance and superstition of the middle ages, was operated upon by a variety of influences, eminently calculated to shake the stability of the feudal fabric. The pure spirit of Christianity, though faintly struggling, was slowly advancing upon the mere physical propensities of the age; and even the institution of chivalry, though warlike in its objects, cast an elevating influence over the face of society. The domestic feelings which civilisation engenders, inspired the tenants with a love of home; and as, stimulated by this genial influence, they turned their attention to the assiduous cultivation of their lands, personal military service became an onerous and oppressive exaction. To relieve themselves from the burdens imposed by their tenures, they began at first by the employment of military substitutes, and finally commuted for the service altogether, by the payment to their lords of a stipulated rent for their lands. The haughty arrogance of the nobles brought them into constant collision with the sovereign; and the sovereign, to check their growing power, courted the alliance and extended the privileges of the people. The long and distant wars, connected with the crusades, gave rise to the institution of mercenary armies, in place of the uncertain service of military vassals; and the tenants, shaking off the more onerous restrictions imposed upon their lands, gradually assumed the more elevated position of independent proprietors. To these causes, together with the institution of free burghs or towns, the growing importance of the class of merchants and traders, and the gradual increase of the commercial upon the agricultural interests of the people, is the decline of this system mainly to be attributed. The rise of the free burghs or towns exhibits the best practical workings of the causes which contributed to its overthrow. The burgher enjoyed privileges unknown to the feudal tenant of the country. He was governed by the by-laws of his own corporation, enjoyed property in his own right, and was unfettered in the exercise of his skill and industry, by the grasping avarice of a feudal proprietor. The oppressed villain, if he could escape from his master's estate to the protecting limits of a free burgh, and conceal himself from pursuit for a year and a day, was released from his servitude for ever, and took his rank among his fellow townsmen as a freeman and an equal. Causes so congenial operated powerfully upon these thriving little burghs, and speedily raised them to the condition of active democracies, illustrating, in the heart of the feudal system, the unfailing tendency of the principles of political equality. The spirit of maritime adventure in the fifteenth century, and the migratory influence it exercised upon society, gave a new impulse to the political condition of Europe. With it arose the commercial age, and the restraints which the feudal system had imposed upon society insensibly yielded to the silent and equalizing influence of traffic. The more frequent communica tion it established between nations, enlarged the field of individual enterprise, and broke up that local exclusiveness by which the feudal system was mainly sustained. The wants and luxuries resulting from a more extended intercourse, and an advancing civilisation, increased the mutual dependence of the different parts of society; and the more equal distribution of wealth, a greater individuality, and the gradual enjoyment of political liberty, followed the new impulse thus stimulated through the active channels of trade. The possession of wealth, as the fruits of individual exertion, will eventually make itself felt, whatever may be the condition of society, and the dignity of labor be gradually acknowledged, from the influence its exercise commands. This elevating result the commercial spirit has gradually effected in the condition of society; and through its instrumentality, the haughty baron with his host of dependent vassals has sunk into political insignificance before the independent tiller of the soil, the industrious artizan, the merchant, and the trader. Personal property, which might scarcely be said to have had a legal existence in the feudal ages, has become, through the instrumentality of commerce, the available capital of the larger portion of mankind, and the more equal possession and independent control of property in general the distinguishing mark of a more improved condition, of a more advanced civilisation. In the change which the spirit of commercial enterprise has wrought in the political condition of the world, we discover the gradual development of new means of power, growing out of the altered pursuits and changed condition of society. One of the principal of these is the superior influence effected through the powerful instrumentality of money. From the nature of the feudal organization, the paramount influence of money was unfelt. The feudal baron, when unoccupied by war, dwelt among his retainers and dependents; and whatever was produced by the community which he governed was required for its own immediate consumption. When engaged in war he was attended by an unpaid soldiery; and whatever became necessary for the support of his troops was obtained from the bountiful hospitality of his allies, or plundered from the defenceless fields of his enemies. But the first development of the trading spirit in Europe called into active exercise this potent agent of modern civilisation; and the revolution which commerce has effected in the condition of mankind has given to it, as an element of wealth and power, a vigorous vitality. What was accomplished in the middle ages through the possession of land, is now effected through the instrumentality of money, As the exchanging product of all other commodities, and the universally recognized standard of value, it has become the great engine of society, and its subtle representative, Credit, the means through which its influence is disseminated, for the welfare or misery of millions. The former distinctions of society, and even the purposes of government, yield to the potency of its combined and directed energies; the antagonist principles, passions, and prejudices of men, meet and fraternize at its common altar, and even the inspiration of genius and the far-soaring spirit of philosophic abstraction stoop to acknowledge the supremacy of its sway: "The age of bargaining hath come, And noble name and cultured land, Of Rothschilds and the Barings." For the rise of the system, by which this controlling element of modern times has been rendered an instrument of power in the hands of the few, we must turn our attention to those Italian states which, from the tenth to the fifteenth century, maintained the limited commerce then known to Europe. To them are we indebted for the origin of many of the facilities by which the present commercial intercourse of the world is regulated, and, among others, to the origin of banking. The word bank is derived from the Italian word banco, or bench, and owes its present signification to the stalls, or benches, in the market-places of the principal Italian cities, where the Jews, in the infancy of European commerce, sat for the purpose of loaning money. The first institution of the kind was the Bank of Venice. It was established in the year 1157, during the Crusades, and for the purpose of rendering assist ance to these expeditions. It was exclusively a bank of deposit, and continued in existence as such for more than six hundred years. The next bank was established in Genoa. It was founded in 1345, and effectually established in 1407, after this enterprising republic had destroyed the commercial superiority of its rival, Pisa, and superseded Venice in the trade of the eastern archipelago. It originated in loans furnished by the wealthy citizens to the State, which it continued to supply, deriving its interest from imposts pledged to it by government, to the period of the destruction of the republic by Napoleon. Genoa, of all the Italian States, dealt most extensively in the business of money and exchange; and the bank, taking its character from the prevailing pursuits of the people, enlarged upon the sphere of its predecessor of Venice, by uniting the business of granting loans to that of receiving deposites. The next in the order of succession was established at Barcelona, in Spain. It was founded in 1350, by an ordinance of the King of Arragon, granting banking privileges to the cloth merchants of that city, which they continued to exercise for about fifty years, when the control of the bank was assumed by the city, and it was conducted thereafter as a municipal institution. The commercial superiority of the Italian states having yielded to the vigorous enterprise and indomitable perseverance of the Dutch, Holland, in the fulness of commercial prosperity, became flooded with the coin of other nations. This coin, from being clipped and otherwise debased below its standard, became of uncertain value, and the commercial transactions conducted through a medium so uncertain became exceedingly complicated and difficult. To remedy this defect, the Bank of Amsterdam was established in the year 1609. The bank received this irregu lar coin upon deposit, ascertained its proper weight and fineness, and issued its own bills for the actual standard value of the coin it received. These bills rose into high repute, and became exceedingly valuable instruments for carrying on the extensive commerce of this prosperous and enterprising people. This bank was followed by the establishment of the Bank of Hamburgh, upon the same principle, in 1619; by |