case; county of house to the validity of the election of Alexander Nowell, a prebendary Nowell's of Westminster. The committee charged with the inquiry reported that as Nowell had a voice in the convocation house, he "cannot be a member of this house, and the queen's writ to be directed for another burgess in his place." 1 That assertion of the right of the house to pass upon such questions, without the intervention of the judges, was followed in Elizabeth's reign by the action taken in regard to an irregular election held in the county of Norfolk, in reference to which case of the the committee reported that they had not inquired into the Norfolk; action taken by the lord chancellor, "because they thought it prejudicial to the privilege of the house to have the same determined by others than such as were members thereof." 2 (2) The right of the house to punish members for violations right of the of its rules of order was emphasized in the reign of Edward punish its VI. by the imprisonment of John Storie, a burgess, who was members; committed to the Tower until he made a full submission for case; some offence committed against the king and council; 3 and in the next reign Thomas Copley was given in custody to the Copley's sergeant of the house for disrespectful words spoken of her case; majesty. In the reign of Elizabeth the house, probably for the first time, asserted its right to expel a member in the case right of exof Arthur Hall5 (1581), whose expulsion was followed a few cases of pulsion years later (1585) by that of Dr. Parry. In the next year it Hall and was that the house reasserted its right to punish a person not right to a member by bringing one Bland to its bar and fining him for punish a having spoken contemptuously of it. (3) The right of the a member; commons to release a member or his servants from custody by release by the authority of the mace alone, first maintained in the reign the authorof Henry VIII. in the case of Ferrers, was reasserted in that mace alone; 1 Commons' Journals, 1 Mary, p. 27. Another prebendary (Dr. Tregonwell) was returned at the same time, but being a layman was, on consideration, permitted to retain his seat. See Froude, Hist. Eng., vol. v. p. 283. 2 As to the final settlement of the whole question, see vol. i. pp. 530, 531. The proceedings are recorded in the Commons' Journals of the first parliament of Edward VI., 21st of January, 20th of February, and 2d of March, 1547-48. 4 Commons' Journals, 5th and 7th of 6 D'Ewes, p. 291; Hatsell, p. 93. 7 D'Ewes, p. 366; Hallam, Const. 8 The commons refused a writ of privilege offered by the lord chancellor, "being of a clear opinion that all commandments and other acts proceeding Storie's Parry; person not right to ity of the of Elizabeth in the cases of Smalley, Fitzherbert, and Neal.1 (4) In the reign of Elizabeth was also asserted for the first right to time the right of the house to punish bribery at elections by punish bribery at the fine imposed in 1571 upon the borough of Westbury for elections; having received a bribe of four pounds from Thomas Long, a sitting member.2 (5) The spirit which thus prompted the right of the house to maintain its lesser privileges did not fail to fully ashouse to sert itself when its vital and exclusive right to originate money money bills bills was unsuccessfully assailed in 1593 by the house of lords.3 (6) While the right to freedom of speech in parliament, frankly conceded by Henry VIII., was challenged persistently by Elizdefined at a abeth, the precedents by which it was finally established belong to a later time, a circumstance that may be explained by the fact that in all such conflicts the queen, in spite of her prejudices, generally gave way.1 originate assailed in 1593; freedom of speech later day. Crown claimed the right to legislation touching the succession and the church; Whenever the statement is made that the Tudor sovereigns claimed the right to deal with all questions touching the sucinitiate all cession and the church with the advice of the council only, it must be understood to mean that in reference to such matters of state the crown claimed the exclusive right to initiate all necessary legislation, which the parliament was expected to ratify when called upon to do so. When, in Elizabeth's reign, that body attempted to reverse the rule by assuming the initiative, the crown resented its attempt to so legislate as an right of assault upon the prerogative. The history of the conflicts thus parliament to deliber brought about clearly illustrates how the earlier right of delibate upon all eration as to all matters touching the commonwealth 5 was narrowed and modified by the Tudor system of government, of which the council was the embodiment. From the time of questions of state denied; from the nether house were to be done 1 Hatsell, vol. i. p. 107; D'Ewes, 2 Commons' Journals, p. 88. 8 D'Ewes, p. 486. For the earlier history of that right, see vol. i. pp. 525, 526. In 1671 the commons successfully disputed the right of the lords to amend money-bills, a contention which the upper house has admitted since that time. For a full statement, see May, Const. Hist., vol. i. pp. 104 112. 4 The history of this right down to and including the reign of Henry VIII. has heretofore been stated, vol. i. pp. 522-524. Its later history will be considered hereafter. 5 Vol. i. pp. 498–502. ventured to marriage of Elizabeth; of the that of Elizabeth's half-promise to her first parliament to marry, the question of the succession grew more and more urgent, until in 1563 it became the subject of serious debate,2 and in 1566 the cause of a serious conflict between the crown and the commons, in the course of which the queen expressed her displeasure "that the succession question should have been raised in that house without her consent," and the commons their inten- commons tion not only to debate it fully, but also, if the queen should discuss the persist in her refusal to marry, to name a successor against her will. On that occasion the protestant element then dominant in the commons, fearful of the accession of Mary of Scotland, first linked the question of the succession with that question of supply, and then called upon the lords to join them in an succession address, prepared by committees of the two houses, to which linked with the queen replied with a vague promise to marry, coupled supply; with a positive order that the subject should be discussed no further on pain of her displeasure. Aroused by this assault upon the right of deliberation, Paul Wentworth moved to know whether such order "was not against the liberties" of parliament.5 In the course of the discussion that ensued, Dalton, Mr. Dalton, who ventured to touch upon the forbidden subject of the Scottish title, was arrested by royal order and ex- discuss the amined before the star chamber. In the midst of the crisis title, thus brought about, in which the question of the succession royal order; was lost in that of privilege, Elizabeth was forced to yield Elizabeth by releasing the prisoner, and by relieving "the house of the to yield burden of her commandment." In spite, however, of this for the apparent concession, the queen was careful, in her reply to the usual demand of freedom of speech made in the next parliament of 1571, to reassert her pretensions by reminding the serted her pretensions house that they would "do well to meddle with no matters in 1571; 1 See D'Ewes, p. 46; Commons' Journals, p. 54. 2 The queen had been near death, and the suspense of the nation was becoming intolerable. The pretensions of the different claimants were discussed with a decided bias against the Queen of Scots, whose claims it was said were "barred" by the will of Henry VIII. D'Ewes, pp. 82, 85; Strype, vol. i. p. 258. For speech in favor of Lady Catherine Grey, see Do- 8 Froude has given a graphic ac- 4 D'Ewes, p. 124. 5 Commons' Journals, 8 Eliz. • See Report of his speech, Domestic MSS., Elizabeth, vol. xli. 7 D'Ewes, p. 117; Domestic MSS., Elizabeth, vol. xli. who ventured to Scottish arrested by forced moment; but reas and in 1593; of state but such as should be propounded unto them, and to occupy themselves in other matters concerning the commonwealth," a warning which was restated in a more positive form in the answer given to a like request made by the speaker, Sir Edward Coke, at the opening of parliament in 1593: "Privilege of speech is granted, but you must know what privilege ye have; not to speak every one what he listeth, or what cometh into his brain to utter; your privilege is imprison- 'aye' or 'no.'" 2 Regardless of the warning, Peter Wentworth Wentworth and Sir Henry Bromley, on the first day of the session, venand tured to reopen the question of the succession by the presentation of a petition and bill upon the subject, for which presumption they were promptly taken in hand by the council and imprisoned.3 ment of Bromley. Henry VIII.'s assumptions siastical he drafted proposed and The break with Rome, and the almost entire suspension of the functions of convocation as a legislative body which folas to eccle- lowed the submission of the clergy, cast upon the king as the legislation; supreme head a set of new ecclesiastical duties, as to whose discharge there were no precedents. In order to definitely settle all such difficulties, Henry VIII. assumed that as the real government of the church belonged to the crown, it was its exclusive right to draft and submit to parliament for its ratification all necessary ecclesiastical legislation. In that way was the Refor- proposed and ratified the famous series of statutes enacted by the Reformation Parliament. That Elizabeth firmly adhered parliament to her father's theory was put beyond all question when in ratified; 1571 the commons, who were then entirely under the control of the Puritan element, attempted to assume the initiative in resisted the church affairs by the enactment of a number of bills for the modification of the religious compromise, which at the queen's suggestion had passed into law. In the course of the conflict that ensued, the speaker was directed to say, after a bill the ritual; touching church rules and ceremonies had been read a third mation statutes which Elizabeth attempt of the commons to pass bills concerning 1 D'Ewes, p. 141. 2 Parl. Hist., vol. iv. p. 349. "Free speech in parliament had been one of the privileges which Henry VIII. had not attempted to interfere with. Elizabeth could never bring herself to regard it as anything but an intolerable impertinence." Froude, vol. ix. p. 8 Parl. Hist., vol. iv. p. 365. For summary of these acts, see above, p. 83. 5"No fewer than seven bills, for a further reformation, were introduced into the lower house."- Lingard, vol. vi. p. 248. land's yielded to a new book forced to bill and book; time, that "No bills concerning religion shall be proposed or received into this house, unless the same be first considered by the clergy;" and Mr. Strickland, "a grave and ancient Strickman," who seems to have been the main author of the obnox- reprimand; ious measures, was summoned before the council, reprimanded, and ordered not to appear again in the house, for the reason that the part he had taken was a direct assault upon the royal prerogative. In the midst, however, of the cry of privi- the queen lege which at once arose, the queen gave way to the extent the cry of of withdrawing her inhibition against Strickland's return to privilege; his place in the house.1 In 1588 another attempt to initiate fate of Mr. ecclesiastical reform was made by Mr. Cope, who introduced to introduce Cope's bill a sweeping measure for the abolition of the existing system, of common which he proposed to supersede by a new form of common prayer; prayer contained in a book annexed to his bill. Under a command from the queen the speaker attempted to stop the reading of the bill, and after discussion of the matter he was forced the speaker to deliver up both bill and book to her majesty. As a counter- deliver up blast to this assault upon the right of parliament to legislate of its own motion upon all subjects touching the interests of the commonwealth, Peter Wentworth insisted that a series of Wentworth questions should be read to the house by the speaker, of the propounded following import: "Whether this council was not a place for as to parany member of the same, freely and without control, by bill unlimited or speech, to utter any of the griefs of this commonwealth? liberation, Whether there be any council that can make, add, or diminish from the law of the realm, but only this council of parliament? Whether it be not against the orders of this council to make secret or matter of weight, which is here on hand, known to the prince or any other without consent of the house? Whether the speaker may overrule the house in any matter or cause in question? Whether the prince and state can continue and stand and be maintained, without this council of parliament, except by altering the government of the state?" For propounding these mighty questions, which outlined the for which entire attack to be made by parliament in the next age upon others were the conciliar system, Wentworth and his supporters, including impris Cope, were committed to the Tower, where they were permitted to remain until the dissolution of parliament, which 1 D'Ewes, pp. 156, 175, 176. questions liament's right of de he and oned; |