The Governments of Europe | Page 4

to be rendered easier and
more inviting if made by way of a body of institutions which lies at the
root of much that is both American and continental. There are, it is true,
not a few respects in which the governmental system of the United
States to-day bears closer resemblance to that of France, Germany,
Switzerland, or even Italy than to that of Great Britain. The relation,
however, between the British and the American is one, in the main, of
historical continuity, while that between the French or German and the
American is one which arises largely from mere imitation or from
accidental resemblance.
*2. The Continuity of Institutional History.*--No government can be
studied adequately apart from the historical development which has
(p. 002) made it what it is; and this ordinarily means the tracing of
origins and of changes which stretch through a prolonged period of
time. Men have sometimes imagined that they were creating a
governmental system de novo, and it occasionally happens, as in France
in 1791 and in Portugal in 1911, that a régime is instituted which has
little apparent connection with the past. History demonstrates, however,
in the first place, that such a régime is apt to perpetuate more of the old
than is at the time supposed and, in the second place, that unless it is
connected vitally with the old, the chances of its achieving stability or

permanence are inconsiderable. In Germany, for example, if the
institutions of the Empire were essentially new in 1871, the
governmental systems of the several federated states, and of the towns
and local districts, exhibited numerous elements which in origin were
mediæval. In France, if central institutions, and even the political
arrangements of the department and of the arrondissement, do not
antedate the Revolution, the commune, in which the everyday political
activity of the average citizen runs its course, stands essentially as it
was in the age of Louis XIV.
If the element of continuity is thus important in the political system of
Germany, France, or Switzerland, in that of England it is fundamental.
It is not too much to say that the most striking aspect of English
constitutional history is the continual preservation, in the teeth of
inevitable changes, of a preponderating proportion of institutions that
reach far into the past. "The great difficulty which presses on the
student of the English constitution, regarded as a set of legal rules,"
observes a learned commentator, "is that he can never dissociate
himself from history. There is hardly a rule which has not a long past,
or which can be understood without some consideration of the
circumstances under which it first came into being."[1] It is the purpose
of the present volume to describe European governments as they to-day
exist and operate. It will be necessary in all cases, however, to accord
some consideration to the origins and growth of the political organs and
practices which may be described. In respect to Great Britain this can
mean nothing less than a survey, brief as may be, of a thousand years of
history.
[Footnote 1: W. R. Anson, The Law and Custom of the Constitution
(3d ed., Oxford, 1897), I., 13.]
II. ANGLO-SAXON BEGINNINGS
The earliest form of the English constitution was that which existed
during the centuries prior to the Norman Conquest. Political
organization among the Germanic invaders of Britain was of the
(p. 003) most rudimentary sort, but the circumstances of the conquest
and settlement of the island were such as to stimulate a considerable

elaboration of governmental machinery and powers. From the point of
view of subsequent institutional history the most important features of
the Anglo-Saxon governmental system were kingship, the witenagemot,
and the units of local administration--shire, hundred, borough, and
township.[2]
[Footnote 2: See G. B. Adams, The Origin of the English Constitution
(New Haven, 1912), Chap. 1. That the essentials of the English
constitution of modern times, in respect to forms and machinery, are
products of the feudalization of England which resulted from the
Norman Conquest, and not survivals of Anglo-Saxon governmental
arrangements, is the well-sustained thesis of this able study. That many
important elements, however, were contributed by Anglo-Saxon
statecraft is beyond dispute.]
*3. Kingship.*--The origins of Anglo-Saxon kingship are shrouded in
obscurity, but it is certain that the king of later days was originally
nothing more than the chieftain of a victorious war-band. During the
course of the occupation of the conquered island many chieftains
attained the dignity of kingship, but with the progress of political
consolidation one after another of the royal lines was blotted out, old
tribal kingdoms became mere administrative districts of larger
kingdoms, and, eventually, in the ninth century, the whole of the
occupied portions of the country were brought under the control of a
single sovereign. Saxon kingship