SCALE OF DIAMETERS OF PILE TO EXPLAIN THE CLASSIFICATION OF MANKIND BY THE HAIR AND WOOL OF THEIR HEADS. MODERN. REFERENCES : A.-Cylindrical ; both diameters the same. Pile which exceed the cylindrical by less than 16, may be called cylindroidal. Those which exceed 3-6, but do not reach 4-6, are eccentrically elliptoidal. of their heads, and the above scale of diameters, based upon actual measure- 1st Class, including the cylindrical and cylindroidal, i. o., A, and from A to a. 1st Variety, cylindrical, A. Ist. The hair of the head of a Choctaw N. Am. Indian, (Mobile) diameter 1-277 of an inch, shape cylindrical. 2d. Big-water, an Indian chief, killed in Texas, D. 250,-......cylindrical. 3d. A Calapoos N. Am. Indian,.. D. 281, D. 364, D. 312, 6th. From Arica, D. 338, 7th. From Pisco, D. 416, 8th. Aztec. (Mexican,) from Mexico, D. 364, 9th. D. 364, D. 281, D. 364 by 390, D. 297 by 312, D. 297 by 364, the lesser ovoidal from ä" to B, and the great- ANCIENT. 18t Variety, Oval :- lency Gen. G. Washington,..... D. 312 by 500,.......oval." D. 242 by 364, 3d. William F. Van Amringe, Esquire, D. 250 by 364, 2d Variety, lesser ovoidal, from ä" to B :Ist. The hair of the Hon. Jn. B. Gibson, C. J. of Penn.... D. 237 by 312, less. ovoidal. 2d. The hair of the Hon. Jn. Sergeant, D. 297 by 364, 3d. . Prof. Samuel S. Halderman,.. D. 364 437, 3d Variety, greater ovoidal from B to b:- 1st. The hair of Prof. B. Silliman,'(Am.) D. 273 by 364, greater " 2d. Count Wass, (Hungarian,)... D. 281 by 416, 3d. Napoleon Bonaparte, (Corsican,)... D. 338 by 458, 3d Class, eccentrically elliptical c, and eccen trically fit. The wool of the head of the Bush-{ D. 312 by 356, { elliptical. 66 man boy, (Hottentot,). D. 312 by 970, lesser ovoidal. 416–562, oval. 266-625,- eccentrically elliptical. HYBRIDS. 2d. A mongrel, Penobscot Indian and -cylindrical. 225 by 312, oval. 3d. Indian River mongrel, originally Indian and white, but bred towards the D. 312 by 458, greater white. A and B, plus B... ovoidal. D. 281 by 461, ..cylindroidal. cylindrical. D. 212 by 312,... 6th. Quadroon of Louisiana, white and mulatto, B and B and C..... D. 231 by 377, elliptical. 7th. Quadroon of Philadelphia, father white, mother mulatto. some filaments, D. 437 by 625, D. 364 by 500,8th. Double hybrid, Hinton, father white, -greater ovoidal. } { greater ovoidal. mother the issue of an Indian and cylindrical. greater ovoidal. THE FEUDAL SYSTEM IN THE MIDDLE AGES. The Middle Ages properly embrace the heroic period of European history. Its dusty pages are written over with the bold deeds of men-atarms, with the gallant exploits of steel-clad knights, and with the establishment of some of the most powerful governments of our time. It was the first period that followed the dismemberment and downfall of the Roman Empire, and the invasion and settlement of barbarian men in western and central Europe. But its early was its unfinished state. And as much may be safely affirmed of it, down to the close of the eighth century, and the days and dynasty of Charlemagne. Then, its position became more permanent. Under his rule, those irregular waves of barbaric incursion, became steady and calm; the rough manners of northern life were moulded into the smoothness and symmetry of a more southern form; and the roving habits of nomadic hordes were supplanted by fixed habitations and steadfast homes. Thus the transition state of society was passed ; thus the early features of a new era appeared. It was not the revival of Roman spirit and Roman patriotism on the one hand, nor the successful introduction and culture of barbarian men and manners on the other, but the obvious blending and union of both; and from the combination thus formed, came forth the morning of a new creation in the history of the nations. Such was the era, when consolidated and complete, which presents us the form and outline of the Feudal System. Historians differ widely about the time this system arose and came to maturity; and were we to follow them in their rancorous contentions, it would be to little profit. It may be said in few words, that the period of its greatest power extends from the coronation of Charlemagne through several succeeding centuries, till it was shaken off from its want of adaptation to a progressive race, or silently lost in the dust of its distant course. Accordingly, it is the purpose of this paper to classify and develop the character of the Feudal System ; then to consider its consequences upon social and civil affairs. The only worth that such a work can possibly possess, may appear upon a moment's thought. In itself, all profane history is destitute of any intrinsic importance; and whatever of interest or excellence it can have for man, must arise from the character or consequences of the actions which that history may delineate and describe. In this way, the past becomes our great teacher; thus, too, we gather some lessons of profit for the present time, from the dim and distant eras of the past. With these ends in view, we open the pages of the Feudal System, and turning to the chapter on its character, proceed to speak of men and things as we find them there. About the beginning of the ninth century, Charlemagne was acknowledged empefor over almost all that territory which subsequently felt the influence of the feudal laws and customs. The immediate consequences of his accession to power, were the onset of civil innovations, the organization of an empire from a crude multitude of tribes and tongues ; and the establishment of a fixed national polity. By this polity, not the feudal, but the allodial laws and customs, came into existence and employment. By this system, the duke, or baron, was the free and full owner of the lands he occupied ; and he owed nothing to the common sovereign, with the exception of aid and assistance in the public defence. These free proprietors were dispersed throughout the empire, and the duties of military service fell most heavily upon them. In consideration of their exemption from all other burdens, they were required to bring forth their numerous tenantry into the field of battle, and to do it at their own cost. These lands, which they possessed in full right, were the spoils of barbaric conquests; they were seized by the victorious warrior as a rightful recompense for the perils and privations of war; and the possession 80 required, was held by him as the independent freehold of an independent freeman. So he was free, excepting the tribute of military service; he was at liberty to enjoy his possessions during life, and bequeath them at death according to his own pleasure. It was this entire right to the estate, that gave to the system the name of allodial, and released the possessor from all obligations of honor or homage to any superior; and when he came into the field, as the same system compelled him to come, it was at his own expense and at the head of his own men; while the part he was to act there, was equally at his own pleasure. Like Achilles be. fore the walls of Troy, he might contend manfully in the common cause; but like him, he could withdraw from the contest on the first idle caprice. Such were the laws of the state, and the position of property under Charlemagne; but after his day, arose new lords and new laws. Hugh Capet was among the first of any note who succeeded to the empire. His state policy took a more centralizing turn; and under him the allodial gradually gave place to the Feudal System. It was his pleasure to build a capital and draw around him a court ;-it was his will, to strengthen the king and at the same time to enervate the landed lords. And it was this temptation of a regal court, that broke up, under a succession of monarchs, the freedom of allodial power, and brought all things under the sway of feudal vassalage. The character of this system here presents itself under several striking qualities. But first, and as the foundation of all, was the principle by which, in the end, the king became the actual owner of all the feudal lands in his kingdom. By some short process of justice, these lands were claimed and controlled by the sovereign, and as an equivalent for them, the former owners were compensated with gifts and favors from the hands of royalty. Having these lands in possession, the king enfeoffed, or granted them back again to the original owners, to be held by them, not in fee simple, but in fief only. These owners resided on the estates thus granted, and they, in their turns, enfeoffed the same to a still more subordinate class; and these last conveyed them, by a similar process, to the serfs or villeins who cultivated the soil. Here the circle of dominion and dependence became complete. These relations were established in systematic order. On the one hand, the superior obligated himself to protect the inferior; on the other, the inferior bound himself, in peace or war, to render service and honor to those in the rank above him. Thus the kings of France or England, or the em. perors of Germany, were always entitled to the service and homage of the minor princes or lords. Upon them they could call, by virtue of the same right, for men and treasures to meet any real or fancied emer gency of the state. The princes too, were approached with deference and respect by the vassals; they were to be served with the same facilities of action for any expeditions of peace or war they might choose to undertake, be the same far or near, great or small. And the vassals, in their turn, commanded the homage, the wealth, and the service of the serfs, who thus stood at the very foot of the ascent. Originally, these grants from one class to another, were given only as a life-estate, when they reverted to the former possessor. But in France, at an early time, and subsequently in England and Germany, they beeame steadfast and hereditary in one family, from generation to generation. This systematic relation of the classes to one another, still had its limits marked and its powers definitely defined. The lords and barons were first in consequence; and among their privileges, Mr. Hallam names the following, as the most prominent, viz. :-1st. The right to coin money. 2d. That of waging war. 3d. That of exemption from all tributes, except the feudal aids. 4th. That of freedom from legislative control; and 5th. That of the exclusive exercise of original judicature in their own dominions. All these powers were held by the feudal barons of France, and within their sphere of jurisdiction neither kings nor princes had the power to interfere. Possessed of such prerogatives, we are prepared to find each of these worthy dignitaries surrounded by all the ensigns of royalty; to see each of them a king in himself. He controlled the currency of his realm; he had the advantages of peace or war at pleasure; he paid no taxes, except with his sword; and he was both the legislator and executor of law in his dominions. Such an amount of authority, however it may have affected its possessor, must have greatly diminished the abilities of the king. In fact, the lord or the baron stood up by the side of his sovereign,-and, with the exception of rank and honor, he was his peer in power. Next to the lord came the vassal, with more limited powers and more onerous duties. He took the oath of fealty to his liege-lord; he paid homage in person, and in war he attached himself to the standard of his master, and followed his fortunes for a specified portion of the year, even if it were in rebellion against his sovereign. In this service the lord appeared in the full dress and armor of a knight; the vassal in inferior dress and armor, while in battle his duty demanded of him every possible assistance to his superior; and the serf, or villein, formed the last and lowest of the feudal classes. He was mostly without honor from men or privilege from law; he was confined by legal provision to the same landed estate, and in case of flight or removal, he could, by the same authority, be claimed and recovered as property. Such was the subservience of the lower classes to the higher-such their dependence upon them; and so far were they stripped of all powers and honors; so far were they shorn of the privileges and rights that belong to our race. In these brief sketches of the several classes of society, we have the main features in the laws of state and the relations of property; of the system of justice and the relations of man with man, as they existed under the Feudal System. The origin of this system is a dark point in the annals of the dark ages. It probably arose out of the military system of the Cids, the Goths, the Huns, the Franks, and the Lombards, who extended their conquests and emigrations over the western portion of Europe after the fall of the Ro |