and the subjects of Rome enjoyed in the churchthe privilege which they had lost in the repub-lic, of choosing the magistrates whom theywere bound to obey. As soon as a bishop hadclosed his eyes, the metropolitan issued a com-mission to one of his suffragans to administerthe vacant see, and prepare, within a limitedtime, the future election. The right of votingwas vested in the inferior clergy, who were bestqualified to judge of the merit of the candi-dates ; in the senators or nobles of the city, allthose w ho were distinguished by their rank orproperty; and finally in the whole body of thepeople, who, on the appointed day, flocked inmultitudes from the most remote parts of thediocese," and sometimes silenced, by their tu-multuous acclamations, the voice of reason andthe laws of discipline. These acclamationsmight accidentally fix on the head of the mostdeserving competitor, of some ancient presby-ter, some holy monk, or some layman, conspi-cuous for his zeal and piety. But the episcopalchair was solicited, especially in the great andopulent cities of the empire, as a temporal, ra-ther than as a spiritual dignity. The interestedview's, the selfish and angry passions, the arts
has copiously treated of the election of bishops, during the five firstcenturies, both in the East and in the West; but he shews a very par-tial bias in favour of the episcopal aristocracy. Bingham (1. iv, c. 2)is moderate 5 and Chardon (Hist- des Satrcmcns, tom. v, p. 108-128)is very clear and concise.
u Inertdibilis muilitucfo, non solum ex eo oppido ('Tours) i sed etiarnex vieinis urbibus ad suftragia fereuda convenerat, <Src. Sulpieius Se-vern**, in Vit. Martin, c. 7. The council of Laodicea (canon xiii) pro-hibits mobs and tumults ; and Justinian confines the right of election tothe nobility. Novel , cxxiii, 1
283
CHAP.
XX.