church was gradually extended. The church once established in the
chief city of a district would become in turn the mother church of
other neighbourhoods, and the bishop or priest of the mother church
would come to exercise supervision over them and their parishes.

In France, which may serve as a good illustration, in the 4th century
(Ratzinger, p. 181) the civic organization was utilized for a further
change. The Roman provinces were divided into large areas,
_civitales_, and these were adopted by the church as bishop's parishes
or, as we should call them, dioceses; and the chief city became the
cathedral city. The bishop thus became responsible in Charlemagne's
time both for his own parish--that of the mother church--and for the
supervision of the parishes in the _civitas_, and so for the sick and
needy of the diocese generally. He had to take charge of the poor in
his own parish personally, keep the list of the poor, and houses for
the homeless. The other parishes were at first, or in some measure,
supported from his funds, but they acquired by degrees tithe and
property of their own and were endowed by Charlemagne, who gave one or
more manses or lots of land (cf. Fustel de Coulanges, _Hist, des
institutions politiques de l'ancienne France_, p. 360) for the support
of each parish priest. The priests were required to relieve their own
poor so that they should not stray into other cities (II. Counc.
Tours, 567), and to provide food and lodging for strangers. The method
was indeed elaborated and became, like the Jewish, that contradiction
in terms--a compulsory system of charitable relief. The payment of
tithe was enforced by Charlemagne, and it became a legal due (Counc.
Frankfort, 794; Arelat. 794). At the same time two other conditions
were enforced. Each person (_unusquisque fidelium nostrorum_ or _omnes
cives_) was to keep his own family, i.e. all dependent on him--all,
that is, upon his freehold estate (_allodium_), and no one was to
presume to give relief to able-bodied beggars unless they were set to
work (Charlem. _Capit_. v. 10). Thus we find here the germ of a
poor-law system. As in the times of the _annona civica_, slavery,
feudalism, or statutory serfdom, the burthen of the maintenance of the
poor fell only in part on charity. Only those who could not be
maintained as members of some "family" were properly entitled to
relief, and in th