Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 19.djvu/175

 a profound knowledge of English law combined with a strong logical faculty and remarkable power of lucid exposition. His earliest and greatest work, 'La Graunde Abridgement,' first printed in 1514, is a digest of the year-books arranged under appropriate titles in alphabetical order; it is also more than this, as some cases are there mentioned which are not to be found in the year-books, but which have nevertheless been accepted as authorities in the courts. Coke (Rep. Pl. pref.) describes it as 'painfully and elaborately collected,' and it has always borne a very high character for accuracy. It was the principal source from which Sir [q. v.] derived the material for his 'Exposition of the King's Prerogative,' London, 1557, 4to, and is frequently cited by [q. v.] in 'Les Ans du Roy Richard le Second.' Besides the first edition, which seems to have been printed by Pinson, an edition appeared in 1516, of which fine specimens are preserved in the British Museum and Lincoln's Inn. The work is without printer's name or any indication of the place of publication, but is usually ascribed to Wynkyn de Worde, whose frontispiece is found in the second and third volumes. A summary by John Rastell, entitled 'Tabula libri magni abbreviamenti librorum legum Anglorum,'was published in London in 1517, fol.; reprinted under a French title in 1567, 4to. The original work was reprinted by Tottel in 1565, and again in 1573, 1577, and 1786, fol. Though not absolutely the earliest work of the kind, for Statham's abridgment seems to have had slightly the start of it, Fitzherbert's was emphatically the 'grand abridgment,' the first serious attempt to reduce the entire law to systematic shape. As such it served as a model to later writers, such as Sir or Brooke [q. v.], whose 'Graunde Abridgement' is indeed merely a revision of Fitzherbert's with additional cases, and [q. v.], chief justice of the king's bench in 1048, whose 'Abridgement des Plusieurs Cases et Resolutions del commun Ley,' published 1668, was designed rather as a supplement to Fitzherbert and Brooke than as an exhaustive work (Preface, 4). Two works addressed to the landed interest are also attributed to Fitzherbert, viz.: (1) 'The Boke of Husbandrie,' London (Berthelet), 1523, 1532, 1534, 1548, 8vo; (Walle) 1555, 8vo; (Marshe) 1560, 8vo; (Awdeley) 1562, 16mo; (White) 1598, 4to. (2) 'The Boke of Surveyinge and Improvements,' London (Berthelet), 1523, 1539, 1546, 1567, 8vo; (Marshe) 1587, 16mo. 'The Boke of Husbandrie' is a manual for the farmer of the most practical kind. 'The Boke of Surveyinge and Improvements' is an exposition of the law relating to manors as regards the relation of landlord and tenant, with observations on their respective moral rights and duties and the best ways of developing an estate. It purports to be based on the statute 'Extenta Manerii,' now classed as of uncertain date, but formerly referred to the fourth year of Edward I. This is important, because we know that Fitzherbert selected that statute as the subject of his reading at Gray's Inn. This book is therefore in all probability an expansion of the reading. The authenticity of the 'Boke of Husbandrie' has been called in question, and Sir Anthony's brother John has been suggested as its probable author on two grounds: (1) That Fitzherbert's professional engagements would not permit of his acquiring the forty years' experience of agriculture which the author claims to possess; (2) that the author is described in the printer's note, not as Sir Anthony, but as Master Fitzherbarde. The latter argument applies equally to the 'Boke of Surveyinge,' which is also stated to be the work of Master Fitzherbarde. In the prologue to the latter treatise, however, the author distinctly claims the 'Boke of Husbandrie' as his own work. He says that he has 'of late by experience' 'contrived, compiled, and made a treatise' for the benefit of the 'poor farmers and tenants and called it the book of husbandry.' There seems no reason to doubt that this claim was honestly made. The argument from the designation 'Master' is of no real weight. A clause in Archbishop Warham's will (1530) provides that all disputes as to the meaning of any of its provisions shall be referred to the decision of 'Magistri FitzHerbert unius justiciarii, &c.' (Wills from Doctors' Commons, Camd. Soc. p. 25), and Cromwell, writing to Norfolk on 5 July 1535, refers to Fitzherbert as 'Mr. FitzHerberd.' Even less substantial, if possible, is the argument from the claim of forty years' experience put forward by the author. Considering how much of the legal year consists of vacation, and how comparatively light the pressure of legal business was until recent times, there is nothing startling, much less incredible, in the supposition that Fitzherbert during forty years found leisure to exercise such general supervision over his farm-bailiffs as would entitle him to say that he had had practical experience of agriculture during that period.

Other works by Fitzherbert are the following:  'La Novelle Natura Brevium,' a manual of procedure described by Coke (Reports, pt. x. pref.) as an 'exact work exquisitely penned,' London, 1534, 1537; (Tottell), 1553 8vo, 1557 16mo, 1567 8vo, 1576 