ials. On the
constitutional side the life grant of subsidies, made in accordance with
Tudor usage to James, was temporarily withheld from Charles, a
restriction which his own overbearing policy led the parliament to
maintain. Practically, the whole customs revenue between 1628 and 1640
was raised by the use of the prerogative without any parliamentary
sanction. The Tunnage and Poundage Act of 1641 pronounced definitely
against the legality of any extra parliamentary customs and thus closed
another of the constitutional problems of finance.

In the progress from the Conquest to the crisis of the Great Rebellion
there is noticeable a practically complete shifting of the classes of
revenue. The king had ceased "to live of his own"; the royal demesne and
the prerogative rights included in feudalism had become very
subordinate. The direct taxation of property and income, and the
indirect taxation on imported or exported commodities became the
principal forms of receipt.

In the long course of English financial history the nearest approach to
the new departure and an abandonment of old devices is found at the time
of the Civil War and Commonwealth. The actual outlines of the now
existing system made their appearances, while the older portions of the
revenue--particularly the survivals of feudalism--are eliminated. Thus
the Civil War and the Interregnum (1642-60) may be regarded as marking a
watershed in the financial history of the country. At the beginning of
the struggle both sides had to rely on voluntary contributions. Plate
and ornaments were melted down and useful commodities were furnished by
the adherents of the king and by those of the parliament. As holding
possession of London and the central organization the parliament voted
subsidies and a poll tax. Such imports could hardly be levied with
success and new forms became necessary. The direct taxation took the
shape of a "monthly assessment" which was fixed from time to time, and
which was collected under strict regulations, in marked contrast to the
lax management of the former subsidies. As the amount for each district
was fixed, the systematic collection secured "the more equitable
adjustment of the burden of the tax as regards the various taxpayers"
without hardship to the community. In spite of its origin, the
"assessment" was the model for later taxation of property. The yield of
this tax--exceeding for the whole period L32,000,000--is a proof of its
importa