uncil of State
the titled councillors should be more numerous than the lawyers. The
latter succeeded in completely carrying the day on account of the services
they rendered, and the influence which their knowledge of the laws of the
country gave them. As for centuries the sword had ruled the gown, so,
since the emancipation of the bourgeois, the lawyers had become masters of
the administrative and judicial world; and, notwithstanding the fact that
they were still kept in a somewhat inferior position to the peers and
barons, their opinion alone predominated, and their decision frequently at
once settled the most important questions.

An edict issued at Val Notre-Dame on the 11th of March, 1344, increased
the number of members of Parliament, which from that time consisted of
three presidents, fifteen clerical councillors, fifteen lay councillors,
twenty-four clergymen and sixteen laymen of the Court of Inquiry, and five
clergymen and sixteen laymen of the Court of Petitions. The King filled up
the vacant seats on the recommendation of the Chancellor and of the
Parliament. The reporters were enjoined to write the decisions and
sentences which were given by the court "in large letters, and far apart,
so that they might be more easily read." The duties of police in the
courts, the keeping of the doors, and the internal arrangements generally
for those attending the courts and the Parliament, were entrusted to the
ushers, "who divided among themselves the gratuities which were given them
by virtue of their office." Before an advocate was admitted to plead he
was required to take oath and to be inscribed on the register.

The Parliament as then established was somewhat similar in its character
to that of the old national representative government under the Germans
and Franks. For centuries it protected the King against the undue
interference of the spiritual power, it defended the people against
despotism, but it often lacked independence and political wisdom, and it
was not always remarkable for its correct appreciation of men and things.
This tribunal, although supreme over all public affairs, sometimes wavered
before the threats of a minister or of a court favourite, succumbed to the
influence of intrigues, and adapted itself to the prejudices of the times.
We see it, in moments of error and of blindness, both condemning eminent
statesmen and leading citizens, such as Jacques Coeur and Robertet, and
handing over to the exec