Civil Government in the United States Considered with Some Reference to Its Origins Part 6

What important change in the parish idea does this fact indicate? Is it a change for the better?

24. Are women who do not vote represented in town government?

25. Are boys and girls represented in town government?

26. Is there anybody in a town who is not represented in its government?

27. How are citizens of a town represented in state government?

28. How are citizens of a town represented in the national government?

29. Imagine a situation in which the ballot of a single voter in a town might affect the action of the national government.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE.

Section 1. THE NEW ENGLAND TOWNs.h.i.+P. There is a good account in Martin's _Text Book on Civil Government in the United States_. N.

T. & Chicago, 1875.

Section 2. ORIGIN OF THE TOWNs.h.i.+P. Here the _Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science_, edited by Dr. Herbert Adams, are of great value. Note especially series I, no. i, E. A.

Freeman, _Introduction to American Inst.i.tutional History_; I., ii. iv.

viii. ix.-x. H. B. Adams, _The Germanic Origin of New England Towns, Saxon t.i.thing-Men in America, Norman Constables in America, Village Communities of Cape Ann and Salem_; II., x. Edward Channing, _Town and County Government in the English Colonies of North America_; IV., xi.-xii. Melville Egleston, _The Land System of the New England Colonies_; VII., vii.-ix. C. M. Andrews, _The River Towns of Connecticut_.

See also Howard's _Local Const.i.tutional History of the United States_, vol. i. "Towns.h.i.+p, Hundred, and s.h.i.+re," Baltimore, 1889, a work of extraordinary merit.

The great book on local self-government in England is Toulmin Smith's _The Parish_, 2d ed., London, 1859. For the ancient history of the towns.h.i.+p, see Gomme's _Primitive Folk-Moots_, London, 1880; Gomme's _Village Community_, London, 1890; Seebohm's _English Village Community_, London, 1883; Na.s.se's _Agricultural Community of the Middle Ages_, London, 1872; Laveleye's _Primitive Property_, London, 1878; Phear's _Aryan Village in India and Ceylon_, London, 1880; Hearn (of the University of Melbourne, Australia), _The Aryan Household_, London & Melbourne, 1879; and the following works of Sir Henry Maine: _Ancient Law_, London, 1861; _Village Communities in the East and West_, London, 1871; _Early History of Inst.i.tutions_, London, 1875; _Early Law and Custom_, London, 1883. All of Maine's works are republished in New York.

See also my _American Political Ideas_, N. Y., 1885.

Gomme's _Literature of Local Inst.i.tutions_, London, 1886, contains an extensive bibliography of the subject, with valuable critical notes and comments.

CHAPTER III.

THE COUNTY.

Section 1. _The County in its Beginnings._

It is now time for us to treat of the county, and we may as well begin by considering its origin. In treating of the towns.h.i.+p we began by sketching it in its fullest development, as seen in New England. With.

the county we shall find it helpful to pursue a different method and start at the beginning.

If we look at the maps of the states which make up our Union, we see that they are all divided into counties (except that in Louisiana the corresponding divisions are named parishes). The map of England shows that country as similarly divided into counties.

[Sidenote: Why do we have counties?]

If we ask why this is so, some people will tell us that it is convenient, for purposes of administration, to have a state, or a kingdom, divided into areas that are larger than single towns. There is much truth in this. It is convenient. If it were not so, counties would not have survived, so as to make a part of our modern maps.

Nevertheless, this is not the historic reason why we have the particular kind of subdivisions known as counties. We have them because our fathers and grandfathers had them; and thus, if we would find out the true reason, we may as well go back to the ancient times when our forefathers were establis.h.i.+ng themselves in England.

[Sidenote: Clans and tribes.]

We have seen how the clan of our barbarous ancestors, when it became stationary, was established as the town or towns.h.i.+p. But in those early times _clans_ were generally united more or less closely into _tribes_.

Among all primitive or barbarous races of men, so far as we can make out, society is organized in tribes, and each tribe is made up of a number of clans or family groups. Now when our English forefathers conquered Britain they settled there as clans and also as tribes. The clans became towns.h.i.+ps, and the tribes became s.h.i.+res or counties; that is to say, the names were applied first to the people and afterwards to the land they occupied. A few of the oldest county names in England still show this plainly. _Ess.e.x_, _Middles.e.x_, and _Suss.e.x_ were originally "East Saxons," "Middle Saxons," and "South Saxons;" and on the eastern coast two tribes of Angles were distinguished as "North folk" and "South folk," or _Norfolk_ and _Suffolk_. When you look on the map and see the town of _Icklinghiam_ in the county of _Suffolk_, it means that this place was once known as the "home" of the "Icklings" or "children of Ickel," a clan which formed part of the tribe of "South folk."

[Sidenote: The English nation, like the American, grew out of the union of small states.]

In those days there was no such thing as a Kingdom of England; there were only these groups of tribes living side by side. Each tribe had its leader, whose t.i.tle was _ealdorman_ or "elder man." [1] After a while, as some tribes increased in size and power, their ealdormen took the t.i.tle of kings. The little kingdoms coincided sometimes with a single s.h.i.+re, sometimes with two or more s.h.i.+res. Thus there was a kingdom of Kent, and the North and South Folk were combined in a kingdom of East Anglia. In course of time numbers of s.h.i.+res combined into larger kingdoms, such as Northumbria, Mercia, and the West Saxons; and finally the king of the West Saxons became king of all England, and the several _s.h.i.+res_ became subordinate parts or "shares" of the kingdom. In England, therefore, the s.h.i.+res are older than the nation. The s.h.i.+res were not made by dividing the nation, but the nation was made by uniting the s.h.i.+res. The English nation, like the American, grew out of the union of little states that had once been independent of one another, but had many interests in common. For not less than three hundred years after all England had been united under one king, these s.h.i.+res retained their self-government almost as completely as the several states of the American Union.[2] A few words about their government will not be wasted, for they will help to throw light upon some things that still form a part of our political and social life.

[Footnote 1: The p.r.o.nunciation, was probably something like yawl-dor-man.]

[Footnote 2: Chalmers, _Local Government_, p. 90.]

[Sidenote: s.h.i.+re-mote, ealdorman, and sheriff.]

The s.h.i.+re was governed by the _s.h.i.+re-mote_ (i.e. "meeting"), which was a representative body. Lords of lands, including abbots and priors, attended it, as well as the reeve and four selected men from each towns.h.i.+p. There were thus the germs of both the kind of representation that is seen in the House of Lords and the much more perfect kind that is seen in the House of Commons. After a while, as cities and boroughs grew in importance, they sent representative burghers to the s.h.i.+re-mote. There were two presiding officers; one was the _ealdorman_, who was now appointed by the king; the other was the _s.h.i.+re-reeve_ (i.e. "sheriff"), who was still elected by the people and generally held office for life.

[Sidenote: The county court.]

This s.h.i.+re-mote was both a legislative body and a court of justice. It not only made laws for the s.h.i.+re, but it tried civil and criminal causes. After the Norman Conquest some changes occurred. The s.h.i.+re now began to be called by the French name "county," because of its a.n.a.logy to the small pieces of territory on the Continent that were governed by "counts." [3] The s.h.i.+re-mote became known as the county court, but cases coming before it were tried by the king's _justices in eyre_, or circuit judges, who went about from county to county to preside over the judicial work. The office of ealdorman became extinct. The sheriff was no longer elected by the people for life, but appointed by the king for the term of one year. This kept him strictly responsible to the king. It was the sheriff's duty to see that the county's share of the national taxes was duly collected and paid over to the national treasury. The sheriff also summoned juries and enforced the judgments of the courts, and if he met with resistance in so doing he was authorized to call out a force of men, known as the _posse comitatus_ (i.e. power of the county), and overcome all opposition. Another county officer was the _coroner_, or crowner_,[4] so called because originally (in Alfred's time) he was appointed by the king, and was especially the crown officer in the county. Since the time of Edward I., however, coroners have been elected by the people. Originally coroners held small courts of inquiry upon cases of wreckage, destructive fires, or sudden death, but in course of time their jurisdiction became confined to the last-named cla.s.s of cases. If a death occurred under circ.u.mstances in any way mysterious or likely to awaken suspicion, it was the business of the coroner, a.s.sisted by not less than twelve _jurors_ (i. e, "sworn men"), to hold an _inquest_ for the purpose of ascertaining the cause of death.

The coroner could compel the attendance of witnesses and order a medical examination of the body, and if there were sufficient evidence to charge any person with murder or manslaughter, the coroner could have such person arrested and committed for trial.

[Footnote 3: Originally _comites_, or "companions" of the king.]

[Footnote 4: This form of the word, sometimes supposed to be a vulgarism, is as correct as the other. See Skeat, _Etym_. Dict., s.v.]

[Sidenote: Justices of the peace.]

[Sidenote: The Quarter sessions.]

[Sidenote: The lord-lieutenant.]

Another important county officer was the _justice of the peace_.

Originally six were appointed by the crown in each county, but in later times any number might be appointed. The office was created by a series of statutes in the reign of Edward III., in order to put a stop to the brigandage which still flourished in England; it was a common practice for robbers to seize persons and hold them for ransom.[5] By the last of these statutes, in 1362, the justices of the peace in each county were to hold a court four times in the year. The powers of this court, which came to be known as the Quarter Sessions, were from time to time increased by act of parliament, until it quite supplanted the old county court. In modern times the Quarter Sessions has become an administrative body quite as much as a court. The justices, who receive no salary, hold office for life, or during good behaviour.

They appoint the chief constable of the county, who appoints the police. They also take part in the supervision of highways and bridges, asylums and prisons. Since the reign of Henry VIII., the English county has had an officer known as the lord-lieutenant, who was once leader of the county militia, but whose functions to-day are those of keeper of the records and princ.i.p.al justice of the peace.

[Footnote 5: Longman's _Life and Times of Edward III._, vol. i.

p. 301.]

[Sidenote: Beginnings of Ma.s.sachusetts counties.]

During the past five hundred years the English county has gradually sunk from a self-governing community into an administrative district; and in recent times its boundaries have been so crossed and crisscrossed with those of other administrative areas, such as those of school-boards, sanitary boards, etc., that very little of the old county is left in recognizable shape. Most of this change has been effected since the Tudor period. The first English settlers in America were familiar with the county as a district for the administration of justice, and they brought with them coroners, sheriffs, and quarter sessions. In 1635 the General Court of Ma.s.sachusetts appointed four towns--Boston, Cambridge, Salem, and Ipswich--as places where courts should be held quarterly. In 1643 the colony, which then included as much of New Hamps.h.i.+re as was settled, was divided into four "s.h.i.+res,"--Suffolk, Ess.e.x, Middles.e.x, and Norfolk, the latter lying then to the northward and including the New Hamps.h.i.+re towns. The militia was then organized, perhaps without consciousness of the a.n.a.logy, after a very old English fas.h.i.+on; the militia of each town formed a company, and the companies of the s.h.i.+re formed a regiment.

The county was organized from the beginning as a judicial district, with its court-house, jail, and sheriff. After 1697 the court, held by the justices of the peace, was called the Court of General Sessions.

It could try criminal causes not involving the penalty of death or banishment, and civil causes in which the value at stake was less than forty s.h.i.+llings. It also had control over highways going from town to town; and it apportioned the county taxes among the several towns.

The justices and sheriff were appointed by the governor, as in England by the king.

QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT.

1. Why do we have counties in the United States? Contrast the popular reason with the historic.

2. What relation did the tribe hold to the clan among our ancestors?

3. In time what did the clans and the tribes severally become?