438 POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS. 



a smaller formed of the greater personages deliberating on 

 more special affairs. 



&quot; If the weather was fine, all this passed in the open air ; if not, in 

 distinct buildings . . . When the lay and ecclesiastical lords w r ere 

 . . . separated from the multitude, it remained in their option to sit 

 together, or separately, according to the affairs of which they had to 

 treat,&quot; 



And that unlikeness of functions is a cause of separation 

 we find evidence in other places and times. Describing the 

 armed national assemblies of the Hungarians, originally 

 mixed, Levy writes : &quot; La derniere reunion de ce genre cut 

 lieu quelque temps avant la bataille de Moliacs ; mais bientot 

 apres, la diete se divisa en deux chambres : la table des 

 ma-gnats et la table des deputes.&quot; In Scotland, again, in 

 1367 8, the three estates having met, and wishing, for 

 reasons of economy and convenience, to be excused from 

 their functions as soon as possible, &quot; elected certain persons to 

 hold Parliament, who were divided into two bodies, one for 

 the general affairs of the king and kingdom, and another, a 

 smaller division, for acting as judges upon appeals.&quot; In the 

 case of England we find that though, in the writs calling 

 together Simon of Montfort s Parliament, no distinction was 

 made between magnates and deputies, yet when, a generation 

 after, Parliament became established, the writs made a dis 

 tinction : &quot; counsel is deliberately mentioned in the invitation 

 to the magnates, action and consent in the invitation to 

 representatives.&quot; Indeed it is clear that since the earlier- 

 formed body of magnates was habitually summoned for 

 consultative purposes, especially military, while the represen 

 tatives afterwards added were summoned only to grant 

 money, there existed from the outset a cause for separation. 

 Sundry influences conspired to produce it. Difference of 

 language, still to a considerable extent persisting and imped 

 ing joint debate, furnished a reason. Then there was the 

 effect of class-feeling, of which we have definite proof. 

 Though they were in the same assembly, the deputies from 

 boroughs &quot; sat apart both from the barons and knights, who 



