CHAPTER I. HISTORICAL SURVEY. Parliament the Highest Governing Body in the State.-Witenagemote.-Curie Regis.-Increasing Power thereof.—Magna Charta.-The Right to Refuse Taxes. -Deputies of the County.-Of Towns and Boroughs.-Separation into "Upper" and "Lower" House.-Decline of the Feudal Peerage.-Impotence of the Lower House under the Plantagenets.-Money Bills first to be Discussed in the Lower House. The Sovereign's Right of Legislation.-Petitions.-Votes of "Want of Confidence."-The Advisers of the Sovereign removed on Parliamentary Motion. -King and Parliament united against Rome and the Clergy.-Opening of Parliament.- Mandates from Electors.-Liberum veto.-Weakness of Parliament under the Tudors.-Conflicts of the two Houses under Elizabeth.-No Liberty of Speech under Elizabeth.-Taxes not levied under the Tudors without consent of Parliament.-Opposition against Elizabeth.- Bill of Attainder.-James I. and his Parliament.-Charles I.'s Conflict with his Parliaments.-Increased power of Parliament under the Restoration.-"Revolution."-Bill of Rights.-Supremacy of Parliament.-Party Government.-Mutiny and Septennial Acts.-Impotence of the First Two Georges.-Attempt by George III. to strengthen the Prerogative. -Alterations in the Organization of Parliament since the Revolution. THE "Parliament" of England-"the King, Lords, and Commons, assembled at Westminster"-is the highest governmental body of the realm. The Anglo-Saxons possessed a great national council, witenagemote, or "assembly of the wise men," invested with the whole legislative power of the community, consisting of the most distinguished prelates, abbots, the ealdormen of each county, and other noble and wise men of the kingdom. How they were elected is a matter of great obscurity. The king could make no law or impose any taxes without the consent of this great council, which William of Malmesbury defines, "generalis senatus et populi conventus et Edictum." The laws were enacted "Confirmatione populi," "populus terra" having reference, most probably, to the proprietorship of land.* It is questionable whether the smaller "Each county being divided into descriptions of persons, one possessing the land as proprietors, and the other cultivating it as vassals, the privilege of attending the legislative assemblies, as well as having a share in the judiciary courts, was necessarily confined to the landholders. As land was the only original possession of our Saxon ancestors, this species of property alone could entitle them to the right of freemen.”— Strutt's Chron. of Eng., ii. 186, 187. thanes formed part of this council. The towns, as such, were probably not "represented." The Saxons appear mainly to have enjoyed only a personal right of voting, and not to have been acquainted with the system of " delegation."* The witenagemote, as well as the political rights of the Saxons, in great measure disappeared at the Conquest, after which no trace of a legislative assembly is to be met with. The "curia regis" of the Norman kings was a council destitute of legislative authority.† It ordinarily met during the court festivals, and was asked for "advice" touching the more important requirements of state. The king arbitrarily summoned to these court-assemblies whom he thought fit, the administration of justice being there attended to at the same time. These assemblies of the barons were held simultaneously with the spiritual synods. The sovereign assumed a right to summon the prelates in respect of their lay fees alone, and the clergy claimed the right to be taxed as such, only of their own gift and in their separate and distinct conventions. The general council which Stephen summoned in 1136 consisted of the archbishops, fifteen bishops, the chancellor, three earls, two constables, two chamberlains, one dapifer, four butlers, and six barons. The smaller tenentes in capite seldom appeared, though owing suit to the king's court rendered the tenant one of the king's barons; first, because the burthen of personal appearance was deemed very oppressive, next, because the sovereign did not look upon them with favourable eyes, because of their dependence on the great barons. On the disappearance of the powerful Norman princes these court assemblies gradually assumed importance; Henry II. frequently convoked them to deliberate on important concerns of state. By Magna Charta the special right of taxation and legislation on the part of the barons was first recognized, and London was not, without the sanction of the barons, to pay any aids. The barons were to give their assent to all unusual imposts, and to the commutation of feudal services into money payments. The greater barons, bishops, and archbishops were invited to the "curia regis" by writ under the great seal, and the barones minores were summoned in corpore by the sheriffs. A body of twenty-five Lappenberg, i. 577. ✦ Hallam, M. A., ii. 322. Hallam, M. A., iii. 4. § Precedents and Councils of England, Introd, xii. barons, self-elective, among whom was the Lord Mayor of London, were to be "conservators" of the "Magna Charta." The barons made frequent use of their right to refuse subsidies, which were deemed mere voluntary contributions. When King Henry III. (1237) alleged that he had expended a vast sum of money on occasion of the nuptials of his sister with the emperor, he received by way of answer that he had not consulted them about the nuptials, and could not punish them for his imprudence. In 1244 all subsidies were refused, and the king extorted one thousand five hundred marks from the city of London.* Magna Charta was repeatedly violated in regard to the summoning of the barons; in 1255 they complained that many of them had not been summoned, and refused all subsidies. Simon de Montfort in 1265 summoned to his parliament twenty-three temporal peers, passing over the rest. Previous to Magna Charta, the summoning of deputies from the class of the lower nobility antecedently to that of the "curia regis" had often occurred. In 1213 the whole body of knights was ordered to Oxford, but at the same time four knights from each county were specially summoned to confer with the king on certain matters. (Quatuor discretos milites de comitatu tuo (the sheriff's,) ad loquendum nobiscum de negotiis regni nostri.†) This proceeding seems to have been without precedent, and the first example of representation. Henry III. (1226) allowed four knights to be chosen from the class of knights in Lincolnshire to inquire into the complaints directed against the sheriff. (Militibus et probis hominibus. . . . quod quatuor de legalioribus et discretioribus militibus ex seipsis elegerint qui ad diem illumsint apud Lincoln', pro toto comitatu. Rot. Claus. 10 Hen. III. 13.) On 11th February, 1250, two knights were summoned from each county instead of the others. In 1265 Simon de Montfort, besides the twenty-three temporal barons, summoned two knights for some of the counties, four representatives for each of the Cinque Ports, and two citizens for York and Lincoln, and citizens and burgesses of the most legal, "probi," and discreet from the other boroughs of England. How far this was an innovation it is difficult to determine.‡ From this period dates the growth of parliamentary government. In the time of Edward I. it became a standing custom to omit Brit. Com., Pauli, iv. 676. * Hallam, M. A., ii. 330. + Palgrave, Rise and Progress of the Pauli, iv. 476. 1295 the smaller feudal owners, and to have deputies from that class elected from each county. The king might fix at will the number of such deputies. In 1295, Edward I., conformably with Simon de Montfort's precedent, summoned in like manner to parliament deputies from the boroughs and towns, "because there is nothing more just than that what concerns all should be authorized by all."* These deputies were chosen by the town corporations, and held meetings; their number was, however, continually fluctuating.† The lower clergy also were occasionally summoned to parliament for purposes of taxation. In the 23 Edw. I., writs were issued to the prelates and proceres as usual, but those to the archbishops and bishops contain a new clause, called, from its first word, the "prœmunientes" clause, by which they are required to summon to parliament the inferior clergy, the priors, chapters, and archdeacons of their respective dioceses, with variations adapted to the state of the particular churches. The priors and archdeacons were to appear in person, the chapters by one, the other clergy by two fit procurators. The form, "pramunientes" was used in all subsequent writs whenever the king required the attendance of such a convention of the clergy for an aid in respect of their lay fees; but it was not always inserted, and the clergy assembled under this clause proved no necessary part of that assembly in parliament by which laws were to be made affecting the estate of the king, of the realm, and of the people. In the 34 Edw. I., the bishops, abbots, 3 and abbesses were summoned "ad tractandum." But the writs to them, as well as to the earls and barons, admitted attendance by attornies sufficiently authorized instead of personal attendance. The procurators of the prelates were all of the inferior clergy, except in one instance, when a knight was returned as such.‡ It has been a very prevalent opinion that parliament was not divided into two houses at the first admission of the commons. If by this is only meant, that the commons did not occupy a separate chamber till some time in the reign of Edward III., the proposition, true or false, would be of little importance. They *The authenticity of the statute of this king, "De tallagio non concedendo," is questioned by Pauli (iii. 139). It runs thus: -Nullum tallagium vel auxilium per nos vel hæredes nostros, in regno nostro ponatur seu livetur sine voluntate et assensu archiepiscoporum, episcoporum, comitatum, baronum, militum, burgensium et aliorum liberorum. . . . de regno nostro, c. iii. Nihil capiatur de certo nomine vel occasione malatot (maletot) de saccolans. + Crabb, 277. Precedents and Councils of Eng land, Introd. xv. |