HISTORY OF ENGLAND,

• and trochees each of Iris lines consists. As eloquence existsbefore syntax, and song before prosody, so government mayexist in a high degree of excellence long before the limits oflegislative, executive, and judicial power have been traced withprecision.

It was thus in our country. The line which bounded theroyal prerogative, though in general sufficiently clear, had noteverywhere been drawn with accuracy and distinctness. Therewas, therefore, near the border some debatable ground onwhich incursions and reprisals continued to take place, till,after ages of strife, plain and durable landmarks were at lengthset up. It may be instructive to note in what way, and to whatextent, our ancient sovereigns were in the habit of violatingthe three great principles by which the liberties of the nationwere protected.

No English King has ever laid claim to the general legis-lative power. The most violent and imperious Plantagenetnever fancied himself competent to enact, without the consentof his great council, that a jury should consist of ten personsinstead of twelve, that a widow’s dower should be a fourthpart instead of a third, that perjury should be a felony, or thatthe custom of gavelkind should be introduced into Yorkshire.*But the King had the power of pardoning offenders; and thereis one point at which the power of pardoning and the power oflegislating seem to fade into each other, and may easily, at leastin a simple age, be confounded. A penal statute is virtuallyannulled if the penalties which it imposes are regularly re-mitted as often as they are incurred. The sovereign was un-doubtedly competent to remit penalties without limit. He wastherefore competent to annul virtually a penal statute. It mightseem that there could be no serious objection to his doing for-mally what he might do virtually. Thus, with the help of

* This is excellently put, by Mr. Ilallam in the first chapter of hisConstitutional History.