by which it was holden, and who, and of what age, his heir was; thereby to aſcertain the relief and value of the primer ſeiſin, or the wardſhip and livery accruing to the king thereupon. A manner of proceeding that came in proceſs of time to be greatly abuſed, and at length an intolerable grievance; it being one of the principal accuſations againſt Empſon and Dudley, the wicked engines of Henry VII, that by colour of falſe inquiſitions they compelled many perſons to ſue out livery from the crown, who by no means were tenants thereunto[1]. And, afterwards, a court of wards and liveries was erected[2], for conducting the ſame enquiries in a more ſolemn and legal manner.
When the heir thus came of full age, provided he held a knight's fee, he was to receive the order of knighthood, and was compellable to take it upon him, or elſe pay a fine to the king. For, in thoſe heroical times, no perſon was qualified for deeds of arms and chivalry who had not received this order, which was conferred with much preparation and ſolemnity. We may plainly diſcover the footſteps of a ſimilar cuſtom in what Tacitus relates of the Germans, who in order to qualify their young men to bear arms, preſented them in a full aſſembly with a ſhield and lance; which ceremony, as was formerly hinted[3], is ſuppoſed to have been the original of the feodal knighthood[4]. This prerogative, of compelling the vaſals to be knighted, or to pay a fine, was expreſſly recognized in parliament, by the ſtatute de militibus, 1 Edw. II; was exerted as an expedient of raiſing money by many of our beſt princes, particularly by Edward VI and queen Elizabeth; but yet was the occaſion of heavy murmurs when exerted by Charles I: among whoſe many misfortunes it was, that neither himſelf nor his people ſeemed able to diſtinguiſh between the arbitrary ſtretch, and the legal exertion, of prerogative.
