[1642 THE necessities of. Charles I. led to innumerable issues of money in various parts of England. A complete list of these is impossible, but coins from Aberystwith, Carlisle, Chester, Colchester, R. HUGHES. The King's Cork, Dublin, Edinburgh, Exeter, Newark, Oxford, Pontefract, Scarborough, Shrewsbury, Worcester, and York, have been identified. There remains, however, a considerable number of unknown provenance. Many coins were made in castles and towns held for the King for the use of the troops on the sole authority of the governors for the time being, and some are believed to have been thus issued after the execution at Whitehall. Most of these, commonly known as siege pieces, are of poor workmanship, and some of extraordinary rudeness. Issues. Coins of the Commonwealth. During the same period the Parliament is supposed temporarily to have coined money in the King's Parliamentary mint, but, as it came from the King's dies, it is not certainly identifiable. This went on till the execution of Charles, after which date the Commonwealth took the coinage regularly in hand. New dies were ordered from the excellent artist Thomas Simon, and his designs were accepted. These coins have the St. George's Cross on one side, with a palm and laurel branch, with the legend, "the Commonwealth of England," and on the other the same cross in a shield leaning against another shield bearing the Irish harp, and the legend, "God with us." The design gave rise to various Cavalier jokes about "God" and "the Commonwealth" being on different sides, while the double shield was entitled "the breeches of the Rump." The gold coins issued were the unite, the double crown, and the Britain crown. In silver there were issued crowns, half-crowns, shillings, sixpences, half-groats, pennies, and halfpence, these last being without date or mint mark. On the 23rd of February, 1657, a proposal was made in Parliament to offer Oliver Cromwell the title of King, and in anticipation of his assumption of that style some twenty-shilling pieces, or, at least, patterns of these, were prepared. They have Cromwell's head on one side, and on the other a crowned shield of arms. The legend on the obverse is "Olivar D. G. R. P., Ang. Sco. et Hib." The Com 1660) monwealth's effort was not, however, confined to the improvement of the design. They tried to introduce the improved process of the mill-and-screw, as worked by Blondeau. They invited him to England, and made an attempt to instal him at the mint, but the jealousy of the native moneyers frustrated the efforts. It should be mentioned that the Protector's coins, which are of considerable beauty, like those of the Commonwealth designed by Simon, never seem to have become the common money of the kingdom. At least, this seems the natural inference from their rarity, and from the fact that what remain are in too excellent preservation to have been circulated. Moreover, when, early in Charles II.'s reign, the Commonwealth coins were denounced, Oliver's are not mentioned, an omission hardly explicable if they had been in general circulation. It is noteworthy that under the Commonwealth a colonial currency was attempted. Silver was coined in New England, and Lord Baltimore, as Lord Proprietor of Maryland, struck silver and copper, with his name and titles. Political Theory. A STRUGGLE like that of the Civil Wars gives at once the occasion and the opportunity for political speculation. The practical questions in dis- T. WHITTAKER. pute suggest an appeal to principles as a means of solving them; and those who have already thought out a political theory see the chance of getting it realised in action. Treatises. Hobbes's political system very well illustrates this interaction between practice on the one side and the ideas of a philosophical thinker on the Hobbes's Political other. It was essentially a doctrine worked out philosophically from a certain view of human nature; but in time of publication and in the special form it took, it was determined by the practical struggle going on around. In 1628, when Hobbes published his translation of Thucydides, his general political bias was already fixed; but the earliest independent expression of his own doctrine was in 1640, when he circulated in manuscript his treatise on "The Elements of Law, Natural and Politic." This treatise was afterwards divided into two parts, which were published [1642 separately in 1650, under the titles of "Human Nature," and "De Corpore Politico." Hobbes's earliest published political work was the "De Cive " (1642). This is a systematic treatise in Latin, the earlier treatise being in English. In general political doctrine there is little difference between the "De Corpore Politico" and the "De Cive," but Hobbes's position with regard to the ecclesiastical power is more developed in the latter work. The "Leviathan," in which Hobbes's political philosophy received its most elaborate expression, was published in 1651. Hobbes's political system is based, as has been said, on his view of human nature. Men are by nature, according to Hobbes, in a state of war-that is, of anarchy, being impelled by their egoistic impulses to contend against each other for all kinds of advantages. To the natural reason of men the advantage there would be to each if certain rules of justice were observed is, indeed, evident; but it is also evident that these can only be observed in a state of peace. The dictate of natural reason accordingly is to escape from the state of war and establish articles of peace. This can only be done by the institution of a Commonwealth or body politic, having a sovereign power entitled to exercise coercive authority over its members. To this sovereign power men give up their natural rights of self-defence in return for protection. They thus contract with one another to obey the sovereign power. This may be either one man, or a few, or the whole people assembled at stated times, the form of government being called monarchy, aristocracy, or democracy as the case may be. The sovereign power in the Commonwealth, wherever it may be situated, is absolute. The dictate at once of natural law and of self-interest is that the sovereign should aim at the safety and good government of the people; under the term “safety” being understood all that distinguishes civilised life from the savagery of the state of nature. Of the possible forms of government, monarchy, according to Hobbes, is to be preferred as being the most efficient in action, the most constant, and, on the whole, the most just. His theory, however, he maintains, is applicable to all forms of government. The sovereign power in the State, being incapable of limitation, is supreme in religious as in civil matters. There is no right in any corporation of ecclesiastics to set up a 1660] "spiritual power" independent of the State. It is the duty of the sovereign power in the State to determine what the religion of the Commonwealth shall be. An ecclesiastical power must not be allowed to rise up to disturb the civil obedience that is necessary for social welfare. The thought of the individual subject is free, since mental assent cannot be commanded. What the sovereign can exact is only outward conformity. This ought always to be given, positively if possible, but in any case negatively-that is, up to the point of abstinence from resistance. Sir Robert Filmer. With Hobbes's political doctrine may be compared and contrasted that of Sir Robert Filmer, who published "Observations upon Mr. Hobbes's 'Leviathan,"" in 1652. The "Patriarcha," his systematic treatise, to which Locke afterwards replied, was not published till 1680, after the author's death. Filmer agrees with Hobbes that the sovereign power is absolute, but contests his view of the basis of sovereign rights. According to Filmer, the rights of the sovereign are in no sense to be derived from a grant of the people. There is always some person who is, by right of hereditary descent, the ruler of the community. The right of the monarch is derived from the right divinely conferred on Adam, the first patriarch, and is at once absolute and inalienable. It can only be limited by the monarch himself, and every limitation is valid only so long as by his sovereign. will he continues to allow it. The difference of Hobbes's political doctrine from Filmer's is obvious: and, in fact, the hostility to Hobbes came not least from the "divine right" royalists. Harrington. Among the Republican speculations of the period is Harrington's "Oceana" (1656). It was seized when passing through the press. Afterwards the copy was restored to the author, and finally it was dedicated to Cromwell. According to Harrington's scheme, the determining element of political power is to be property, especially in land. There is to be an agrarian law limiting the amount of landed property to be held by any particular person. A third part of the executive is to be voted out by ballot every three years, and is not to be capable of being re-elected for three years; a characteristic aim of Harrington's system being to prevent the executive (1642 power from remaining long in the same hands. Harrington, though urging objections against the doctrine of "Leviathan," expresses great admiration for Hobbes, and proclaims himself a follower of the "new lights" of his philosophical treatises. Milton's part in the controversies of the time is dealt with elsewhere (p. 288), but reference can scarcely Milton. be omitted under the present head. Though, he appeals to theological authority on occasion, as well as to Biblical precedent, Milton's doctrine was essentially political republicanism of the classical type. It is not less incompatible with the theocratic ideal of the Presbyterians than with the Church and State doctrine of Anglican divines. The earliest English philosopher of the period is Edward Herbert (1582-1648), created Baron Herbert of Cherbury in 1629. He is generally regarded as the founder of English Deism. In English Cherbury. pure philosophy he is a precursor of the "common-sense school." The two sides of his thought are not unconnected. Knowledge is explained by him as due to Lord Herbert of conformity between mental faculty and object of thought. The possibility of knowledge depends on the possession by the human mind of certain common notions," which are innate and not derived from experience. In his actual investigation of these he deals almost exclusively with the question of religious truth. The essential principles of religion are attainable by the "common notions," and are, according to Herbert (1), that there is a Supreme Being; (2), that this Deity ought to be worshipped; (3), that virtue combined with piety is the chief part of divine worship; (4), that men should repent of their sins and turn from them; (5), that reward and punishment follow from the goodness and justice of God, both in this life and after it. These articles formed the primitive religion before the people "gave ear to the covetous and crafty sacerdotal order." Herbert's principal work, "De Veritate" (Paris, 1624), has been translated into French, but never into English. This contains his general philosophy. The "De Religione Gentilium" (London, 1645) is an essay towards a theory of comparative religion. Beneath all religions Herbert finds that the five great articles |