Lord and the three Estates of this Parliament,
That nane of his subjects presume to
take upon hand to marry with any English
woman dwelling in the opposite marches,
without his Highness's express license had
and obtained to that effect, under the Great
Seal, under the pain of death, and confiscation
of all his goods moveable; and that this be a
special point of duty in all time coming."
King James knew nothing then of what you
call the "good time coming," which would
break down in a lawless manner all these
wholesome institutions. People now scarcely
condescend to know where the Scotch border
is: they call it a geographical term, a practical
nullity, except as it concerns Gretna
marriages, and other matters equally indifferent.

I believe it is, in the present day, a common
thing to ridicule the Cockney sportsmen who
discharge their guns, through inexpertness,
into unoffending bodies of donkeys, game-
keepers, and others. But how much more
practical and sensible it would be if we put
the Cockneys down! By the first of James
the Sixth, no man could shoot with or carry
guns, under the pain of cutting off the right
hand. Pastime within one's own court was
permitted, however, and mariners at sea, men-of-
war in actual pay, parties going to or coming
back from musters, or in pursuit of thieves,
might bear arms and be exempt from penalty.

We grumble at the overcharge habitually
made by cabmen; yet we go on paying. Ferry-
men were the cabmen necessary in many places
to our forefathers, and they also took advantage
of their power over fares. Did our ancestors
content themselves with joking and squabbling
on the subject? No, indeed, they were
practical men. Under an Act of Mary's reign, it
was decreed that a single person could cross
the Forth or Tay for fourpence, a horse should
cost fourpence extra, and so forth—over-
charges being made, there was no timid
compromise, no shilly-shally. The offender was
punished out of hand, himself with death, and
his heirs and assigns with confiscation of his
property. Be assured, sir, that is the true law
for cabmen. Kill them, and confiscate their
property.

We make a common talk, and nothing
more—a common care, a common worry, over
negligence in servants. Under James the
First, in case of accidental fire, servants were
liable. Fine, corporal punishment, and banishment
for three or seven years, made it their
interest to mind where they (or their masters
and mistresses) put the candles.

Paternal oversight protected the amusements
of our ancestors. Persons convicted of
drunkenness, or haunting of taverns and alehouses
after ten o'clock at night, or any time of day,
except the time of travel or for refreshment,
paid for the first offence three pounds, or were
fastened to a wall for six hours, in an iron
necklace, or had the six hours in gaol; for the
second fault, five pounds, or double allowance
of necklace or of gaol; for the next fault,
double the last punishment, and after that,
confinement, till they gave security for good
behaviour. Robin Hood, Little John, Queens
of the May, and Abbots of Unreason, were
thundered against to good purpose, with a
penalty of five years' gaol if they attempted
any of their nonsense. As for those nuisances
called Jack-in-the-Green, and such like, I will
for once give you a bit of an Act in the fine
old vernacular. "And gif onie women or
uthers about Summer Trees sing and makis
perturbation to the Queen's lieges in the
passage through towns, the women perterbatoures
for skufrie of money or utherwise, sall
be taken, handled, and put upon the cuck-
stules of everie burgh." Oh, that we had our
ancestors to legislate for organ-boys and
Ethiopian serenaders!

Under James the Sixth, filial tenderness
was promoted by an Act of Parliament, under
which children beating or cursing parents,
were to be put to death "without mercie."
But if the offender should be younger than
sixteen, his punishment should be left to the
discretion of the judge.

To select the dresses of the children is of
course a parent's duty, and in this respect the
kings, in the good time that is gone by, were
not remiss. Minute details of the dress legal
in each rank are converted into Acts of
Parliament. Under James the Second it is at
last ordained that the king make a pattern of
each habit which shall be thereafter in each
rank the standard dress. Just as an imperial
quart is made to be a standard measure.

Parents know also how much it is good for
little boys to eat; so a paternal Government
controlled the dinners of its subjects. Under
Queen Mary it was ordained that "no bishop
or earl have more than eight dishes at his
table; a lord, abbot, or dean, six; a baron,
four; a burgess, three. Only one kind of
meat to be in each dish." Penalties
considerable. Marriages and public banquets were
excepted. James the Sixth prohibited the
dishing up of "foreign drugs or confections;"
forbade banquets after baptisms, and ordered
that at all dinner parties "doors be left open
for the free ingress of spies." Spies are not
unwelcome to a well-regulated people. Why
should children shrink from encountering the
ever-present eyes of an attentive father?

It evidently irks you that the Wisdom of
our Ancestors should be a Household Word.
That is the result of inexperience on your part.
I have taken down simply one folio of the
Statutes, which breaks off with Charles the
Second, and with a few blows from that volume
I have laid you prostrate. You perceive now
clearly that you have not a leg to stand upon,
in prosecution of your course of argument.
After the previous exposition of the care
exercised over the comfort of the people by our
forefathers, you may well lament with me the
folly of the age. Lament also for me, drifting
unwillingly on your wild sea of license,—
liberty you call it,—compelled, while cherishing