the beginning to the end none ever improved their lands and possessions to better advantage than the monks, by building, cultivation, and all other methods. Of this Croyland is to this day a manifest instance. And when they leased them out to others, it was the interest of the nation to have such easy tenures continued to great numbers of persons who enjoyed them. To this it may be added that they contributed to the public charges of the nation equally with the other clergy; and the clergy did always contribute in proportion above the laity. So that we cannot find to what better uses these possessions have been since put," etc.

Froude himself, of the Charterhouse monks and of their prior who was put to death in Edward's reign because he would not acknowledge the royal supremacy in spirituals, thus writes: "The hospitality of the Carthusian fathers was well sustained; the charities were profuse. The monks were true to their vows, and true to their duty as far as they comprehended what duty meant. Amongst many good monks the prior, John Houghton, was the best. He was of an old English family, and had been educated at Cambridge, where he must have been a contemporary of Hugh Latimer. At the age of eight and twenty he took the vows of a monk, and had been twenty years a Carthusian at the opening of the troubles of the Reformation. John Houghton is described as small in stature, in figure graceful, in countenance dignified. In manner he was modest, in eloquence most sweet, in chastity without a stain. We may readily imagine his appearance, with that feminine austerity of expression which, it has been well said, belongs so peculiarly to the features of the mediæval ecclesiastics."

However true it be, as it is true, that characters such as here described were still to be found, and were even numerous in the monasteries, nevertheless it must be admitted, as Montalembert shows, that many abuses had crept into, or rather been forced upon, those of England as well as of France and Italy. Every human institution has within it a germ of decay, or this is of parasitical growth and is planted by the avarice and ambition of men. It is no reproach to monasticism, which ever and again springs up with renewed and purified life when relieved of its sinful embarrassments, but it is its fate, as of the Church herself, to become entangled with individuals, families, and the state. They cannot long let her alone. She is always the same, and she is immortal. She appeals to the highest motives in the heart of man, and as she is catholic in respect to providing for all his needs, her influence must ever grow, her means for doing good always extend. It is especially difficult for her to avoid becoming rich, and riches are the bane of churchmen. In their poverty lies their strength. But the ambitious and avaricious of the world cannot see with indifference the power and wealth of the Church, and desire to possess and use for their own base, selfish purposes what should be used for that of the poor and the oppressed. Hence they try to enter the ecclesiastical career, and the worst state of things is reached when the crozier is in the hands of the worldling. The same tendency may be predicated of monasticism. The jealous nobles did not care to embrace the cowl and sandals, the abstinence and obedience themselves, so they began to assume the title without the reality, and to warp the power, riches and influence of the monasteries to their own private ends. There were other reasons also why this interference took place, which will be plain from the conclusion of the frank and eloquent author of the "Monks of the West." We give the substance of his words:

"On account of the multitude of nobles who became monks and brought their estates with them, of childless knights who left them their possessions, of the great populations which grew up in the rich and fertile surroundings of the monastery, it came to pass that too large a part of the people was exempt from military service, and from all imposts except those of war, bridges and fortresses. The Venerable Bede complains already in the first century of their existence, that this was going too far, especially as some actually obtained grants and built monasteries which they filled with unfrocked monks, and, laymen as they were, married and living in luxury, called themselves Abbots and obtained exemption from military service and ordinary taxes, and these they handed down to their heirs. Afterwards kings began to give the title and revenues of monasteries to their own sons, to those of their favorites and other knaves who were mere laymen and often profligates. Thus early was begun that horrible abuse which was afterwards carried to such excess that we read of one noble youth who was Commendatory Abbot of twelve monasteries. The legitimate monks themselves also began to put on superfluous ornament, to relax discipline in various ways, as we know from the Councils of the Church in their decrees against these excesses. The very giving of alms was carried to excess, and did harm sometimes to the recipient-as well as to the donor, who seemed to imagine that he had bought liberty to sin by his generosity to the monks.

"The vast possessions of the monks, too, awakened covetousness. The heirs at law of the Abbot sometimes seized the lands after his death, under pretence that it was his property, and that they had a right to its inheritance on the sole condition of supporting the monks. Kings, too, sometimes installed themselves in a monastery for rest and recreation with a vast retinue of nobles and huntsmen, eating the fat of the land and bringing ruin to quiet, prayer, study and discipline. Often they fell in love with the place and sequestered it, an example frequently followed by the powerful nobles. Even the prelates themselves were carried away now and then by avarice, and made over to their relatives portions of the conventual domain. The frequent wars of civil strife and foreign conquest caused various fluctuations in the fortunes of these institutions, which, being always the best cultivated and the most populous, offered a more attractive prey. The perseverance of the monks, however, their laborious and economical system, their paternal care of the agricultural population, were almost always sufficient to restore their fortunes, and their influence and usefulness continued, more or less impaired, until the time when Henry VIII. and his immediate successors suppressed them and seized all their property. Voluntary poverty has always been the unfailing source of the influence and power of the monks. In their weakness lies their strength. Had the ecclesiastical rulers of England been careful to prevent increase of wealth, though it is impossible for a never dying society like the Church or those institutions which draw their vitality from her to avoid the occasion thereof, a vast amount of scandal, heresy and sin would have been spared Christendom."

Though often and ever suppressed and even destroyed, monasteries rise again always and speedily. The Church, like nature, soon heals her wounds and reappears after a brief winter or two as young, vigorous and fruitful as ever. Monastic institutions invariably spring up where the Church is founded. Forty years after the Revolution of '93, hundreds of them were again founded in France, to be again destroyed, to revive again. Our own young country contains several hundreds of convents of various orders already, having the same spirit as of old, but working according to the needs of the times. The advanced civilization of the nineteenth century does not need the same assistance as the rude periods which required Benedict and Francis, but in every age there is work for the monks, and every generation needs the brilliant example of the gospel virtues as shown forth in their profession and practice, their faith and works.

EDWARD HYDE AND HIS DAUGHTER.

1. Life and Administration of Edward, First Earl of Clarendon, with Original Correspondence and Authentic Papers. London: Thomas H. Lister.

2. An Account of his Life, written by himself. London.

3. An Historical Inquiry Respecting the Character of Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon. By the Hon. Agar Ellis. London.

"THIS I consider to be the principal use of annals, that instances of virtue may be recorded, and that by the dread of future infamy and the censures of posterity men may be deterred from depravity in word and deed. But such was the pestilential character of those times, so contaminated with adulation, that not only the first nobles, whose obnoxious splendor found protection only in obsequiousness, but all who had been consuls, a great part of such as had been prætors, and even many of the inferior senators strove for priority in the fulsomeness and extravagance of their votes. There is a tradition that Tiberius, as often as he went out of the Senate, was wont to cry out in Greek, How fitted for slavery are these men!" Yes, even Tiberius, the enemy of public liberty, nauseated the crouching tameness of his slaves."

T

HIS lesson, taught by the virtuous Tacitus in his "Annals," has often been neglected. Not always do men, even those most gifted with foresight, profit by the experiences of others even when following on the very lines that led to disaster. With the vicious it is easier to hope for impunity than to turn themselves from evil ways. That Tiberius and his minions should have cared not enough for the judgment of posterity was unfortunate, notwithstanding the doubts of that age regarding a future life. For good men, even of heathen nations, have ever been found to hope that their names and memories would live in the favorable speeches of survivors.

But what shall we think of such disregard among Christian peoples, among a people who were not only Christian, but who had taken upon themselves to reform the whole Christian Church with allegations that it had dishonored its Founder; among a people who had been unmolested in their work of reformation for one hundred and fifty years, in the last twenty of which those who had been most pronounced in their denunciations of Christian conduct of every kind, in high places after the attainment of power, had slain a wicked king, and in the commonwealth built upon his ruin made laws for the suppression of every species of iniquity, and then, as if fatigued with their own work and responsibilities, called back the exiled son of their deceased ruler with invocations of the blessings of God?

The period of the Restoration is in some respects the most interesting in British history. Indeed, in all history can hardly be found more rapid and eventful changes in some of the most important elements of a nation's being. Recalled because the people had been made sick nigh unto death under Puritan rule, without genius for empire, incapable, apparently not desirous to become a warrior or a statesman, Charles II. took the crown that had been offered to him, and entered upon a career that was singularly eventful. There was an opportunity for a most beneficent ruler if he could have been surrounded by ministers wise, patriotic, and courageous, who would have led him to endeavors to avoid the mistakes of his ancestors. With a monarch not more inclined to shed blood for the violence done to the dynasty of his family, it seems curious that obsequiousness in courtiers was as base as ever it had been under the rule of the worst Roman emperors. The House of Commons, composed mainly of Presbyterians and Independents, in a body must make haste to prostrate themselves before their gracious master, declare that words were inadequate to express their sense of the heinousness of the sins that had been committed against sacred majesty, and after obtaining forgiveness for themselves clamor for a more condign punishment than he seemed inclined to inflict upon others who had been as guilty, but less abject.

The Prime Minister was a man formed by nature for a noble work. In different circumstances he might have achieved what would have made him be numbered among the greatest statesmen. First an opposer of the most arbitrary measures of Charles I., having joined in the impeachment of the Earl of Strafford, he turned at length from the violent party of the people, followed into exile the son, was his chief counsellor during that period, returned with him when called back to his father's throne, and led the administration until his ungrateful master gave him up to the clamors of new favorites and drove him into a second exile wherein he was to die. During this last period he got what solace was possible in writing his "History of the Great Rebellion" and the "Account of His Own Life." The latter work we propose now to consider briefly, particularly the part referring to the marriage of his daughter Anne.

Behavior like that of which Edward Hyde, then Lord Clarendon, wrote with his own hand it would not be easy to find in the biography of any parent, at least one approximating his rank. Whoever reads of this, as well in the father's own "Account," as in the concurrent memoirs of those times, must have, we should suppose, opinions concerning King James II. somewhat different from those generally held. If the father of Anne Hyde was not sincere