CHAP. I.

IF a Man would have an entire View of the English Constitution, he must have recourse to those Able and Approved Authors who have written Purposely on that Subject. For it is a Rule, Parva est Authoritas aliud Agentis; and what is said by the by, is of less Weight, than what is professedly handled; provided it have been Ma­turely considered, by a Competent Judge of that Matter of which he treats. And in this kind we [Page 2] do not find a Man better Qualified than the Learn­ed Lord Chancellor Fortescue, who was an Aged Lawyer, and had been Lord Chief Justice of Eng­land when he wrote his Book de laudibus Legum An­gliae, which was on purpose in a Dialogue with the Prince of Wales, to inform him of the Nature of the English Constitution, and to let him know by what Sort of Laws the Realm, in which he was to Suc­ceed his Father, was to be Governed. And there­fore he adjures him over and over again to Addict himself to the Understanding of the Laws of his Father's Realm, wherein he was to Succeed, Fol. 16. a. and having shewed the Prince the Different nature of Reahns, where a King could Tyrannize, and where he could not, being restrained by Poli­tick Laws, Fol. 26. b. Rejoyce therefore (says he) most Excellent Prince and be glad, That the Law of the Realm in which you are to succeed is Such, for it shall exhibit and minister to You and your People no small Security and Comfort.

But out of that excellent Book which I believe no way Warped, (for then it must lean towards the Court, partly because of the Flattery and Offici­ousness which is too often found in Dialogues with Princes, and partly because the Author was retained on the Crown side by the Greatest Office in Eng­land;) I will confine my Self to those Passages only [Page 3] which relate to the Frequency of Parliaments. And the first I meet with is in his 18th Chap. concerning the Statutes of England in these words. ‘Et si Statuta haec, tantâ solemnitate & prudentiâ edita, efficaciae tantae, quantae conditorum cupiebat in­tentio, non esse contingant: Concitò reformari ipsa possunt, [...] non sine Communitatis & Pro­cerum Regni illius assensu, quali ipsa primitùs emanarunt.’ And if these Statutes fall short of their intended Efficacy, though devised with such great Solemnity and Wisdom of Parliament; they may very Quickly be Reformed, but not with­out the Assent of the Commons and Peers of the Realm, which was their Source from the be­ginning.

Now I only desire that the word Concitò may be taken notice of, which is the quickest Word that can be imagined, and shews that our Parliaments were always at Hand; and the whole Passage shews for what Wise and Just Reasons they were so.

The next Passage is Chap. 53. Fol. 129. a. ‘Ne­que leges Angliae frivolas & infructuosas permit­tunt inducias. Et siquae in Regno illo dilatio­nes in Placitis minùs accommodae fuerint usitatae, in Omni Parliamento amputari illae possunt: etiam & Omnes Leges Aliae in Regno illo usi­tatae, cum in aliquo Claudicaverint, in Omni Par­liamento [Page 4] poterunt Reformari. Quo recte con­cludi potest, quod omnes Leges Regni illius Optimae, sunt in actu vel potentiâ, quo faciliter in actum duci poterunt & in Essentiam realem. Ad quod fa­ciendum, quoties aequitas id poposcerit, singuli Reges ibidem Sacramento astringuntur, solem­niter praestito tempore receptionis Diadematis sui.’ Neither do the Laws of England allow in Law-suits frivolous and fruitless Delays. And if in this Kingdom Delays in Pleas which are not to the purpose should be used, they may in every Parliament be cut off. Yea, and all other Laws used in the Realm, when they Halt or are De­fective in any point, they may in every Parliament be set to Rights. Whereupon it may be rightly, Concluded, that the Laws of England are the Best in the World, either Actually or Potentially, since they can easily be brought into Act or Being. To the performance whereof, as often as Equity so re­quireth, Every King is bound by an Oath solemn­ly taken at the time of receiving his Crown.

Out of this last Passage I will not trouble you with any more Observations than these;

First, That Parliaments are the Remedy against Delays in Law Proceedings: But how if Parlia­ments themselves should be Delayed?

[Page 5] Secondly, That if any or all our Laws should Halt, and our Parliaments at the same time should be Crippled too, and not able to come together; they could not help one another.

In the next and last Chapter of that Book, Fol. 129. b. the Prince immediately replies. ‘Princeps. Leges illas, nedum bonas sed & optimas esse Cancellarie, ex prosecutione tuâ in hoc Dialogo certissimè deprehendi. Et siquae ex illis melio­rari deposcant, id Citissimè fieri posse, Parliamen­torum ibidem Formulae nos erudiunt. Quo re­aliter, potentialiterve, Regnum illud semper praestantissimis Legibus gubernatur. Nec tuas in hâc concionatione doctrinas futuris Angliae Regibus inutiles fore Conjicio; dum non de­lectent regere legibus quae non delectant.’ Says the Prince, My Lord Chancellor by the Tenour of your Discourse in this Dialogue I am throughly satisfied, that the Laws of England are not only Good, but the Best in the World. And in case any of the Laws want to be mended or improved, the Rules of the English Parliaments do instruct us, That that may be done forthwith. Whereupon the Realm of England is always Governed by the very best Laws, either in Reality or in Possibility. And be­sides I conjecture that the Doctrines that have been held forth in this Dialogue will be very useful to [Page 6] the Kings of England that shall come hereafter; since no Body likes to Govern by Laws which they do not like.

After all these Lauds and Praises of the English Laws, which the Chancellor has stuck all over with Stars quite through his Book, and has made their Perfection to Center in this, that they either Are or Soon may be the Best in the World, because in case they labour [...] any defect, that Fault may be Immediately amended by a wise Senate: What if that wise Senate be no where to be found; or is at no Certainty? It is then Impossible to render the Chancellor's Latin into English. For the speedy Perfection of the English Laws which the Prince and he are agreed is Concitò & Citissimè, may be rendred, either at the Four Years end, or the Twelve Years end, or at the World's end. For so I am satisfied it was meant, after a Ten Year's In­terval of Parliaments, if the Herb woman at Edinburgh had not thrown her Cricket-stool at the Arch-Bishop's Head. And so Dr. Heylin I remem­ber does not so much acknowledge that Secret as Justify it. It is in his little Book of Observations upon Hammond L'Estrange's History of the Reign of K. Charles I. Says Hammond, upon the Dissolution of that wise Parliament in 28. (to whom we owe the Petition of Right) All wise Men concluded that [Page 7] there was an end of all Parliaments. Yes, says Heylin, so they might well, the King having been troubled with their Impertinencies, and having an Example in France before his Eyes, where Parlia­ments have been so much discontinued, that it is become a Proverb amongst them, Voyons le Jeu de Trois Estats, as the strangest Sight which can be seen in an Age. I have not the Book now by me, but I will be answerable for the Substance of this Quotation, having retained this Passage in my Head above these Five and Twenty Years.

I can only touch several other Arguments which might be enlarged upon. The High Court of Parliament is the Dernier Resort in this Kingdom; and if that fail, there may be a failure of the Eng­lish Justice.

Bracton says of an Ambiguous or Difficult Cause, Respectuetur ad magnam Curiam; but unless Parlia­ments be Frequent, such a Cause is Adjourned to a long Day.

Every Body that understands the English Con­stitution knows that it is exactly the same as it was laid down in Parliament 8 Ed. 4. by the Lord Chancellour that then was. You have it in Sir Robert Cotton's Abridgment of the Rolls in the Tower, p. 682. in these words. ‘He then declared the three Estates to comprehend the Governance of [Page 8] this Land, the Preheminence whereof was to the King as chief, the second to the Lords and Bishops, and the third to the Commons.’ Now if we are at a loss or uncertainty about our Par­liaments, we are at a loss or uncertainty about two Thirds of our Government.

But I will say no more upon this Head, intend­ing to shew in the following Chapters, how the matter of Parliaments stood in former Ages.

CHAP. II.

I Chuse to begin with this Period of Time in King Alfred's Reign, because we have clear Law and History to shew how Parliaments stood in his Time, and what Law was Ordained concerning them for ever.

It is in the Mirror of Justices, which as my Lord Coke says in his Preface to his Tenth Reports, was written in the Saxon Times, and it appears by the Book it self: But several things were added to it by a Learned and Wise Lawyer Andrew Horne, who [Page 9] lived in the Reign of Ed. 1. and Ed. 2. Antiquity enough for a Book, we desire no more; for we are sure that no Common-wealths Man had the Pen­ning of it.

The words of the Myrror are these, p. 10. ‘Pur le estate del Royalme fist l' Roy Alfred as­sembler les Comitees, [...] pur Usage Derpetuelle, que a deur foits per l' An on pluis-sovent, pur mestier, en tempts de peace se assemblerout a [...] pur Parliamenter sur le guidement del people d' Dieu, coment gents se gar­derent de peche, [...] en quiet, [...] droit per certaine usages [...]. Der cel estate se si­erent plusiours [...] per [...] Royes jesque al [...] Roy; Les quells Dideinances sont disuses per meins sa­ges, [...] put default que [...] ne sont my mise en escript [...] publies en Certeine.’ For the Good Estate of the Realm, King Alfred caused the Counties to Assemble, and Ordained it for a Perpetual Usage, that at Two Times yearly, or oftner if need were, in Time of Peace, they should Assemble at London, to sit in Parliament, for the Guidance of God's People, how the Nation should keep themselves from Sin, live in Quiet, [Page 10] and receive Right by certain Usages and holy Judg­ments. By this Estate were made many Ordinan­ces by several Kings down to the King that is now; (which says the Margin was Edward the First): which Ordinances are disused by some that are not so wise, and for want that they are not put into Writing and published in Certain.

In this Passage the Two Times a Year seem to be Stationary; the Calling a Parliament Oftner than Two Times a Year if need were, is plainly intended for Contingencies of State, and when the Ardua Regni, or Extraordinary Affairs of the Nation re­quire an Extraordinary Parliament. I say, and will make out to all the World, by Laws and Declara­tions of Parliament, that the King has a Power of calling Parliaments within the Law; But I never did, nor never will say to the end of my Life, that the King can hinder Parliaments Appointed by Law. These Frequent Parliaments were to meet at London in Time of Peace. We see then what has inter­rupted our Parliaments both as to Time and Place. For London was after in the hands of the Dane, and Foreigners Wars and Tribulations came on.

But the best way is to let an Author explain himself, which the Mirror does in telling us like­wise the Abusions of the Law, or the Contrarieties and Repugnancies to Right, or as he calls it, the [Page 11] Fraud and Force which is put upon Law. This way of writing Law is the best that can be inven­ted, for it is the way of Preaching by Positive and Negative, which is a two-edged Sword, and cuts both ways. And the Truth of it is, the Negative part of the Law, which lies in a little Compass, of­tentimes teaches us a world of the Positive. For instance the 33 Articles in the Roll, 1 H. 4. m. 20. which K. Richard the 2d. solemnly acknowledged of his own Male-administration, do give us more light into the Constitution, than a Book of six times the bigness could do.

But to come to the Abusions of Law which are in the Mirror, p. 282. He says, that the First and Sovereign Abusion is for the King to be beyond the Law, whereas he ought to be subject: to it, as is contained in his Oath: Though the second is my Business, which is in these words. 2. ‘Abusion est, que ou les Parlaments se duissent faire pur le salvation des Almes de [...], [...] ceo a [...] deur foits per An, la ne se font ils [...] rarement, [...] a la [...] le Roy pur aides [...] cuilets de [...]. Et ou les [...] duissent faire al Common assent del Roy [...] de ses Counties la le se font [...] per le Roy [...] ses Clerks; [...] per aliens [...] autres que no­sent [Page 12] contravener le [...]; eins [...] de luy plaire; [...] de luy Counseller a son [...], tout ne soit my le Counsel Covenable al Commons del People, fans [...] les Counties, [...] fans ensuer les Rules de [...], [...] dount [...] se foundent [...] fur [...], que sur Droit.’ The second Abusion of the Law is, that whereas Parliaments ought to Convene for the Salvation of the Souls of Trespassors, and this at London, and Two Times in the Year, now a days they meet but seldom, and at the Will of the King for Aids and Gatherings of Treasure: And whereas Ordinances ought to be made by the Common As­sent of the King and his Counties, now they are made by the King and his Clerks, and by Aliens and others that dare not Contradict the King, but desire to Please him, and to Counsel him for his own Profit, though it be not Counsel which is Convenient for the Commons of the People; without applying to the Counties, and without fol­lowing the Rules of Right; Whereupon there are several of the present Ordinances that are rather founded upon Will, than upon Right.

From this Passage I shall only observe, that the Place of a Parliament's meeting is Fixed, and still at London; And that the Two Times a Year was stand­ing [Page 13] Law down to King Edward the First, though Abusions and Court-Practices had broken in upon the Law.

Now let us see how the Law stood afterwards; wherein I can only consult the Books I have by me, for I have not Health enough to go and Transcribe the Records in the Tower, but take them upon Con­tent as they lie in Sir Robert Cotton's Abridgment of the Records in the Tower. And there in the very first Page, 5 Ed. [...]. it is Ordained, ‘Que Parlia­ment serra tenus un ou deux foits per An.’ That a Parliament shall be held one Time or Two Times a Year. Here you see the Twice a Year is [...] into Once or Twice.

The next is p. 93. of the same Bock, 36. Ed. 3. ‘The Print touching the Yearly holding of a Par­liament, cap. 10. agreeth with the Record.’ Now the Print is, ‘Item, for Maintenance of the said Articles and Statutes, and Redress of divers Mischiefs which Daily happen, a Parliament shall be holden every Year, as another time was Ordained by Statute.’

Now that Statute, as I find by the Statute-Book, for I cannot find it in Sir Robert Cotton, is thus. 4 Ed. 3. cap. 14. ‘Item, it is accorded, that a Par­liament shall be holden every Year Once, and more Often if need be.’

[Page 14] By the Reason given in the 36 Ed. 3. cap. 10. just now recited for a Yearly Parliament, one would think it should be a Daily Parliament; be­cause it is for the Maintenance of former [...], and Redress of divers Mischiefs which Daily hap­pen: But I believe that a Parliament which Sits but Forty Days in the Year are able to do that Work; Concerning which we will enquire further after­wards.

In the 50 Ed. 3. p. 138. The Parliament's De­mand or Petition is this, ‘That a Parliament may be holden every Year; the Knights of the Par­liament may be chosen by the whole Counties; and that the Sheriff may likewise be without brokage in Court.’

The King's Answer is this. ‘To the Parlia­ment, there are Statutes made therefore; To the Sheriffs there is answer made; To the Knights it is agreed, that they shall be chosen by com­mon Consent of every County.’

After these Three Laws in Ed. 3d's Time, we come to the First of King Richard the Second, p. 163. where the Petition or Demand for a Yearly Parliament is this. ‘That a Parliament may be Yearly holden in convenient place, to re­dress Delays in Suits, and to end such Cases as the Judges doubt of.’

[Page 15] The King's Answer is. ‘It shall be as it hath been used.’

In the 2 R. 2. p. 173. By the King's Com­mandment one Cause of opening the Parliament is Declared to be this. ‘Secondly, for that it was enacted that a Parliament should Yearly be holden.’

Nay, if the Court insist upon a Yearly Parlia­ment, the Country may and ought.

Thus stood the Law of England till the 16 Ca­roli 1. when that King having discontinued Par­liaments for Twelve Years, and created a Distrust of him in the Breasts of his People which was Just; (for if a Prince spoil the Government for Twelve Years together, who shall Trust him in the Thirteenth?) The Nation found a Necessity of having a Cautionary Parliament every Third Year, to secure their Annual Parliaments for the Two Years immediately foregoing. This is the true Reason of the Act for a Triennial Parliament, which was a perfect Innovation both Name and Thing. For I challenge any Antiquary, Lawyer, or Person whatsoever that has turned over Books, to shew me the word Triennial joined to the word Parliament, from the Foundation of this Government till the Year 1640. A Triennial Par­liament therefore is so far from being the Constitu­tion [Page 16] of this Government, that if it were so, a great number of our present Lords and Commo­ners are Older than the Constitution, and were Born before it. But as I said before, that Act was only a Cautionary Act, as a Town or Gate of a City is taken in Caution, for performance of Articles. This appears by the first thing which is Enacted in that Law, namely, That the Laws for a Parliament to be holden at least once a Year, shall here­after be duly Kept and Observed. Scobel's Coll. 16 Car. 1. Cap. 1.

This Act was Gently drawn up, and had more of a Prospect than a Retrospect, and does not look back into those Oppressions which King Charles himself in his large Declaration of August the 12th does acknowledge were Insupportable; which were wholly owing to this long Inter­mission of Parliaments: but it wisely provides, that in case the two first Years Parliaments should fail, then came a Peremptory Parliament, which the King and Keeper might call if they pleased; but if they did not, the Counties and Burroughs of England were forced to send. It is an Act that exe­cutes it self, like our Act for Burying in Woollen; and he that will see the Wisdom of it, may read it where I have quoted it.

[Page 17] After this comes the Act 16 Car. 2. cap. 1. and repeals this Triennial Act, because say they, ‘It is in Derogation of his Majesty's just Rights and Prerogative, inherent to the Imperial Crown of this Realm for the Calling and Assembling of Parliaments; whereupon the Triennial Act is Annulled as if it had never been made.’

I wish it had never been made. But we will stop there first. It is annulled as if it had never been made: There is nothing lost by that; for then our Parliaments are where they were, which was Due Annual.

Well now let us see what Alteration is made by this New Act, 16 Car. 2. which follows in these words, Sect. 3. ‘And because by the Ancient Laws and Statutes of this Realm, made in the Reign of K. Edward the 3d, Parliaments are to 4 E. 3. c. 14. 36 E. 3. c. 10. be held very often, (that is once or twice a Year)’ Therefore they shall not be Discontinued above Three Years at the most. I do not use to Admire Consequences which I do not understand. But under favour, I would be taken right. I say, that the Recital of the Ancient Laws of this Realm does not Repeal them, Disannul them, anneantir, any thing, nothing; when there is not one Re­pealing Word concerning them in that Statute.

[Page 18] I knew what I said when I wished the Triennial Bill of Forty had never been made; and it must be remembred that that Act is as if it had never been made; For it gave occasion to some Men that came in with the Deluge of the Restauration, when it rained Cavaliers, (though I value all Mens Rights more than my own, and Princes most because they are biggest) and it prompted them to think of turning a Cautionary Triennial, into a Discretio­nary. But God be thanked they wanted Words to express themselves; and if they meant it, they have not done it.

But so as they did put the Act together, and as it now stands, there are several things in it worth ob­serving. 1st, That if there be occasion there shall be more and oftner Parliaments, than once in Three Years. Now I ask for whose sake was that Clause Enacted? Not for the King's, for he was always enabled by his Prerogative, for the sake of the Ardua Regni, to call a Parliament every Month in the Year: Well then it was for the sake of his People, that if they judged there was Occasion for more or Oftner Parliaments, they might ask for them. For I appeal to Common Sense, whether it be not Ri­diculous, and wonderfully beneath the Dignity of a Parliament, when a Prince was bound by his Co­ronation Oath to Call a Parliament Once a Year, [Page 19] or oftner if need were, (for so the Law stood, and so this Prince was at that time Bound) to Interpret a Law after such a manner, as to say he was Ena­bled to call a Parliament Oftner than once in Three Years.

So much for that Point; the next is this. The The Upshot of this Act of Parliament, and the Conclusion of the whole Act is in these words. ‘To the end, there may be a frequent Calling, Assembling, and Holding of Parliaments once in Three Years at the least.’ I do say, that if ever we came to Low-water Mark in our Laws about Parliaments, and if ever they run Dregs, it was in the Time of Charles the 2d. And yet it was enacted, and was the End of that Law, that One should be Called, Once in Three Years at the least. Now I leave it to the Lawyers to tell, whe­ther a Proclamation can call a Parliament, or any thing else besides a Writ of Summons and a Writ for Elections?

And thus have I run through the Law of Parlia­ments till t'other Day, and considered what is the Law at present. From King Alfred's Time down to Edward the First, it seems to have been the stand­ing Law to have Parliaments Twice a Year. I know that the Invasions of several Nations both Danes and Normans, and the Revolutions and [Page 20] Disturbances of State which happened, must needs cause frequent Interruptions in the practice of it. But my reason to be of that Opinion is this, be­cause Horne who lived in those Times, says, That Parliaments at that Time ought to meet twice a Year, and that at London, and that the Intermit­ting of Parliaments was the Greatest Abusion of the Law but one. Though I think I have still a Greater Authority than Horn's, (if any thing in this World can be bigger than that of an Able and Honest Man); But it is a King in his Letter to the Pope. It is in the Clause Rolls Anno 3. Ed. 1. m. 9. Cedula. and is to be seen in Prynne's large Book p. 158. I will quote no more of it than is for my purpose. It is concerning the Yearly Tribute of a Thousand Marks which the Popes from K. John's Time claimed, and there were several Years Due. The Pope's Nuncio sollicites the Matter, but the King excuses himself that he had come to no Re­solution in his Easter-Parliament, but by Common Advice he would give him an Answer in his Mi­chaelmass-Parliament next following. At present I only mind the wording and way of expressing these two Parliaments. Concerning the First he says, ‘In Parliamento quod circa [...] Resurressionis [...] celebrati in [...] Consuevit.’ In a Parliament that [Page 21] Used to be held in England about the Octaves of Easter. That word Consuevit amounts to Custom and Usage, and seems to express a Parliament de More. He says, That the Parliament was in Octabis, and by Occasion of his Sickness, (after they had made several good Laws and [...] many Grie­vances, but not all that lay before them) for the Reason aforesaid, That Parliament was Dissolved, and the King could not treat with them about the Pope's Petition of Tribute. But he promises to do the Pope Reason in his Michaelmass-Parliament which he intended.

Now let us see how that is express'd; ‘ [...] firmo scituri, pie Dater et Domine, quod in alio Parliamento nostro quod ad festum Sancti Michaelis prox., futur. in­tendimus, dante Domino, celebrare, ha­bito et communicato consilio cum [...] et [...] memoratis, [...] su­per [...], ipsorum consilio dabimus [...].’ Know for certain, Pious Fa­ther and Lord, That in another Parliament of Ours which we intend to hold at Michaelmass next ensuing, with God's leave; We and the Prelats and Peers aforesaid consulting together, accord­ing to their Advice will give you an Answer upon the Premisses.

[Page 22] But I will say no more upon this Head, being in­tent upon another.

CHAP. III.

THERE are several ways of proving that there was a New Election every Year. They tell me there are Writs extant for New Ele­ctions for Fourscore Years Successively, where there are but about Six wanting. What if they had been all lost, imbezelled or made away? What then, is our Constitution lost, when Bundles of Writs are lost? No, I will go no farther than this last Letter to shew that there is a great Appearance that while there were Two Parliaments in a Year, the Second must be new Called. Though I hate the word New applied to a Parliament; for a Par­liament is a Parliament, and our Ancestors would no more have dream'd of a Stale or Old Parlia­ment, than of an Old Moon cut out into Stars. I will cite the words of King Edward's Letter, da­ted the 19th of June in the third of his Reign, [Page 23] and when that's done, let the Reader make his own Judgment upon them.

It was in the Interval betwixt his [...] and his Michaelmass-Parliament. ‘Set antequam eidem Parliamento propter negotiorum multi­tudinem quae reformatiouis remedio indi­gebant sinem imponere [...], eodem Capellano vestro responsionem debitam sibi fieri instanter poitulante, [...] gravis nos inbasit, sicut Domino pla­cuit, infirmitas Corporalis, quae perfe­ctionem multorum aliorum negotiorum, [...] deliberationem petitionis Census an­nui supradicti, de quo dolemus non mo­dicum, impedivit; sicque cum occasione infirmitatis hujusmodi, a qua per Dei gratiam, cujus est perimere [...] mederi, incepimus convalescere, idem Paliamen­tum fuerit dissolutum, [...] super hoc [...] super petitione Census ejus­dem deliberationem [...] cum Praelatis [...] Proceribus antedictis.’ To this Sense. But before we could put an end to that Parliament, because of the Multitude of Grievances which lay before them, your Nuncio in the mean time dili­gently Solliciting your Business, a great Distemper as it pleased God befel me, which hindered the [Page 24] finishing of many other Matters, and treating about the Petition of the Yearly Tribute, which is a great Grief to me; and so by reason of my said Illness, (from which by the Grace of God, in whose Hands are the Issues of Life and Death, I begin to Recover) That Parliament was Dissol­ved, and hereupon I could not Treat with the Pre­lates and Peers aforesaid about this Tribute.

From this long Quotation I shall only make this Observation at present, That in this Parlia­ment begun in the Octaves of Easter (perhaps up­on May-Day) there was a great deal of Business done, and a great deal of Business left undone; amongst the rest the Pope's, because of the King's Sickness, who thereupon could not give Answers to Bills or Petitions; and that the Nuncio's Peti­tion was Unanswered, went to the King's Heart. But upon Occasion of that Sickness it was that the Parliament was Dissolved, and the Pope's Busi­ness hindred, to the King's great Regret. What, could not the King keep this Parliament alive till the Nineteenth of June, when he himself began to be well again, which is the Date of the Letter? It is no more than Fifty Days from their first sit­ting down to the Date of his Letter, and yet though he set his Heart upon the Business that lay before that Parliament, it was Dissolved; and to stop [Page 25] that Gap he promises to call Another Parliament at Michaelmass. Then it seems they did not un­derstand the Method of Prorogations, and it is unknown to me by what Law it came in. If there be such a Law, I never minded it, for I am speaking of the Constitution, and not of Innova­tions.

But I believe the true Reason of the Abrupt Dis­folution of that Summer Parliament in Conjunction with the King's Sickness, was this, That if they had been held till Michaelmass, though thore was then to be Another Parliament, it must have been at the King's Charge. For I am of Opinion by what I have seen even as low as Richard the 2d's Time, that the Sitting of a Parliament was usually Forty Days and that the Quarantain was not duly kept in this Parliament 3 Ed. 1. of the Octaves of Easter. But there was a Concern in holding a Parliament above Forty Days about the Knights and Burgesses Wages. As appears by that Memo­rable Record which is in [...], p. 2682. being the Message sent by both Houses to K. Rich. 2. [...] Eltham. The words are these. ‘Dicunt [...] quod habent ex antiquo Statuto quod si Rex a Parliamento [...] se [...] sponte, non aliqua [...], set [...] [Page 26] se subtraxerit per absentiam temporis 40. dierum tanquam de vexatione populi sui [...] non Curans, ex­tunc licitum omnibus & singulis eorum abs (que) domigerio Regis redire ad propria & unicui (que) eorum in patriam suam remeare.’ In short, they say they have an Ancient Statute for it, that in case the King wilfully absent himself and will not come to Parliament, As having no Care of vexing his People, nor Regard of their Great Ex­pences, after Forty Days, they are Free to go Home, and the King has no Wrong done him.

Now what is the meaning of these Forty Days, but that they had waited a Just Session? And how should the Parliament-Mens Wages be otherwise adjusted, when at the end of every Parliament in those Times they were dismissed, with desiring them to sue out their Writs for their Wages? And I leave it to the Antiquaries, because I am not now able to Travel in that Point, to consider how the seve­ral Proportions of Land which are allotted for the Knights and Burgesses in several Counties for their Wages, can be adjusted, without a Certainty of the Length of their Sessions.

But not a word of this is my present Business, which was to shew that Parliaments by the Consti­tution are not to be Stale; as I have seen one in [Page 27] my Time retained about Nineteen Years with Pen­sions, and another for fewer Years with Places and turning out of Places: But if a Parliament were corrupted neither of these ways, yet a standing Parliament will always Stagnate, and be like a Country-pond which is over-grown with Ducks­meat. The worst King one of them that ever the Nation had, was so limited by the Constitu­tion, that he did not know how to compass a long Parliament, and therefore he was fain to take other indirect Ways to gain the same Point as if he had one. It was Rich. the 2d. who in the Articles al­ledged against him, and confessed by him, lets us know it was by influencing Elections and false Re­turns. The words as they stand in the Rolls 1 H. 4. m. 20. are these.

‘19. Item, Licet de Statuto, & consuetudi­ne Regni sui in Convocatione cujuslibet Par­liamenti populus suus in singulis comitatibus regni debeat esse liber ad Eligendum & depu­tandum milites pro hujusmodi comitatibus ad interessendum Parliamento, & ad exponendum eorum gravamina, & ad prosequendum pro remediis superinde prout eis videretur expedire; tamen praefatus Rex ut in Parliamentis suis libe­rius consequi valeat suae temerariae Voluntatis effectum, direxit mandata sua frequentius Vice-co­mitibus [Page 28] mitibus suis, ut certas personas per ipsum Regem nominatas ut milites comitatuum venire faciant ad Parliamenta sua, quos quidem milites eidem Regi faventes inducere poterat, prout frequen­tius fecit, quando (que) per minas varias, & terro­res, & quandoque per munera ad consentiendum illis quae regno fuerant praejudicialia, & populo quamplurimum onerosa; & specialiter ad con­cedendum eidem Regi subsidium lanarum ad terminum vitae suae, & aliud subsidium ad certos annos, suum populum nimium opprimendo.’

19. Item, Although by Statute, and the Cu­stom of his Realm in the Calling of Every Par­liament in every the Counties of England, his Peo­ple ought to be free to Choose and depute Knights for the said Counties to be present in Parliament, and to lay open their Grievances, and to prosecute for Remedies thereupon as they think fit, notwith­standing the said King that in his Parliaments he might obtain his Will which was Rash, often di­rected his Mandates to his Sheriffs, that they should Return certain Persons nominated by the King himself as Knights of the Shires, which Knights indeed he could make Plyable to him, and as he very often did, sometimes by various Threats and Terrors, and sometimes by Gifts, to Consent to those Things which were Prejudicial to the Realm, [Page 29] and extreamly Burthensom to the People; and par­ticularly to grant the same King the Subsidy of Wool during his Life, and another Subsidy for cer­tain Years, thereby too much Oppressing his People.

Now if he could have made Long Parliaments, he need not have made use of these mean Shifts. But he could make use of no other way, because Parliaments, as I said, were Fresh and Fresh, and Antiquity knew no other. And if any Man can make out of this Authentick Record, that it was any otherwise, Than so many Parliaments so many Elections, then I have done with Writing and Read­ing.

CHAP. IV.

AT last I am come to search after the Head of Nile, and the true old Land-mark of the English Constitution. How Parliaments stood in the British times I am not so certain; but that there were Parliaments then, I am certain. I have it from the wise Gildas, that Vortigern and his foolish Thaynes sent to the Saxons for help against the Picts [Page 30] and Scots, and took into their Bosoms a Warlike and Fierce Nation, whom at a distance they were afraid of. And they indeed of Course beat those that infested Severus's Wall, but they made mine Hosts that invited them in, Hewers of Wood and Drawers of Water. And those of the Britains that opposed them, the Saxons drove out of their Countrey, whereby as Gildas says all their Records were lost. But out of that Venerable Author we plainly see, that the Lamentable Letter which was sent the Year before to the Senate of Rome, was Written by a British Parliament. For whose sake I beg of all Nations not to let in Legions of Fo­reign Nations to be their Masters, for when they want them and their Protection most, they shall go without it. For when the Roman Legions were withdrawn out of Britany, (which caused our Enemies to make an Insult) and the British Parliament begg'd hard to have them return, the Roman Senate's Answer was, that they were other­wise engaged; and they must help themselves as they could, which made them betake themselves to the Saxons. A very fair Answer to a Nation that was disabled and disarmed, after their Kings and Parliaments had been only Tax-gatherers to the Romans for several Hundreds of Years; as if you have no True Lord Mayor, you must still have [Page 31] Pageants, and somewhat that keeps up the Shew.

But after these Early Times, we have some­what in King Edward the Confessor's Laws, which all succeeding Kings have been Sworn to, which I will try what to make of. It is an Yearly Folk­mote upon the Kalends of May. I do not know readily what that Yearly Folkmote is, because those Laws of Edward the Confessor say that King Arthur Invented it; Quod Arthurus Rex inclytus Britonum in­venit. Then I am sure the Original Name of it was not Folkmote. Then we will mind the Name no more, but come to the Thing.

Sir Henry Spelman in the Learnedest Glossary that ever was Writ, I will not except Mr. Somner's, says thus under the word Gemotum. ‘Wittenagemot idem apud Anglosaxones quod apud nos hodie Parliamentum, parum (que) a Folcmoto differebat, nisi quod Hoc Annuum esset & e certis plerum (que) Cau­sis, illud ex Arduis Contingentibus & Legum con­dendarum gratiâ, ad arbitrium Principis indictum.’ A Wittenagemot was the same thing amongst the English Saxons, as now at this Day a Parliament is amongst us; and a Wittenagemote differed little from a Folkmote, only that this last was Annual, and chiefly sat about the standing Affairs of the Nation: The other was called at the King's Plea­sure [Page 32] upon Emergencies of State and for the sake of making Laws.

Now let us see what the Learned Antiquary says concerning Folkmotes by themselves in the same place, p. 315. ‘In Folcmoto semel quotannis sub initio Kalendarum Maii (tanquam in an­nuo Parliamento) convenere Regni Principes, tam Episcopi quam Magistratus Liberi (que) ho­mines. Jurantur Laici omnes coram Episco­pis in mutuum foedus, in fidelitatem Regis, & in Jura Regni Conservanda. Consulitur de Communi Salute, de Pace, de Bello, & de Utilitate publicâ Promovendâ.’ In a Folk­mote Once every Year at the beginning of the Ka­lends of May (as in an Yearly Parliament) there Met together the Princes of the Realm, as well Bishops as Magistrates, and the Freemen. All the Laymen are sworn in the Presence of the Bi­shops into a Mutual Covenant with one another, into their Fealty to the King, and to Preserve the Rights of the Kingdom. They Consult of the Common Safety, of Peace, of War, and of Pro­moting the Publick Profit.

It follows in the next words, ‘Adhibetur prae­terca Folcmotum in repentino omni discrimine, exigente etiam necessitate, sub Aldermanno (hoc est Comite) cujuslibet Comitatus.’ Besides a [Page 33] Folkmote is used in every suddain Danger, and like­wise if Necessity require it, under the Alderman (that is the Earl) of every County.

This last is plainly a Provincial Folkmote in time of Necessity; but the former part of the Sentence seems to intimate, that upon a Surprize when the King had not time to call a Parliament, the last Folkmote met; as the last Westminster Parliament did, to give the Prince of Orange the Administra­tion, before it was Possible to have a Parliament Elected.

Though the former Description of the General and not the Provincial Folkmote is our present Busi­ness. And at the first sight it looks like a Full Par­liament, for it consists of the Princes, as well Bishops as Magistrates, and the Freemen; that is to say, the Chiefs of the whole Nation. And they are em­ployed in Parliament-work, for they Consult of the Common Safety, of Peace, of War, and promoting the Publick Profit. And did not the General Title of our Laws every Session run thus; To the High Ho­nour of God, and to the Profit of the Common-Wealth? If ever there were Wites in Parliament, sure it was Princes, as well Bishops as Magistrates, and the Freemen. Why then does this Learned Knight distinguish betwixt a Wittenagemote and a Folkmote, seeing they were both made up of Wites? I am go­verned [Page 34] by Things and not by Words, and am throughly satisfied that an Assembly which does Parliament-Business is a Parliament. And no doubt the Folkmote made Laws; for it is not to be supposed that an Assembly of the whole Na­tion should sit Consulting Forty Days of Peace and War, of Armies and Fleets, (which in those Days were Three Thousand Ships, and were able to make out the Dominion of the Seas); of the Grievances of the Nation, and the Redress of those Grievances; and of Providing for the Com­mon Profit of the Realm; and after all not to be able to enact their own Conclusions. That is just as if our present Parliament should spend Forty Days in finding out Ways and Means for the raising Money, and afterwards were not able to put them into a Law: Or as we Private Men use to Consult and Debate, and Settle the Nation over a Dish of Coffee, without being able to oblige one single Man to our Orders.

The Thing which misled this Great Antiquary (as I conjecture) to make this Mark of Difference betwixt a Folkmote and a Wittenagemote, as if a Witte­nagemote made Laws and a Folkmote nor, is this; That when the Saxon Kings issued out their Laws, they said they had passed in their Wittenagemote, Con­cilio Sapientum, or Council of Wise Men: And it [Page 35] was proper for the King to call his Folkmote by that Name, though not for them themselves. As for Instance, the Writs of Election at this Day call for some of the Discreetest to be chosen to Parliament, though the Members do not assume that Title: And I know so much of the Old English Genius, that they would no more have called themselves a Wittenagemote, than this present Parliament would call their Votes which come out Day by Day, Jour­nal de Sqavans.

But I will wave Conjectures even in Antiquities, (though we are there oftentimes forced to go in the Dark, to tread upon Ruins, and to feel out our Way;) because I have direct Proof that the Folk­mote made all the Laws we ever had. And for this I will go no farther than to the third Branch of the Usual and Accustomed Coronation Oath taken by the former Kings of England, and taken twice by Richard the Second, 1 Hen. 4. Membr. 20. in­ter Decem Scriptores, p. 2746. in these words, spo­ken to the King by way of Question. ‘Conce­dis justas Leges & Consuetudines esse tenendas; & promittis per te esse protegendas & ad hono­rem Dei corroborandas quas Vulgus elegerit, se­cundum vires tuas? Respondebit, Concedo & promitto.’ Do you grant that the just Laws and Customs which are of the Folks Chusing shall [Page 36] be kept, and do you promise that they shall be Protected, and to the Honour of God receive Affir­mance by you, to the utmost of your Power? The King shall Answer, I Grant and Promise.

Now I would fain know, How a Folkmote can be otherwise expressed in Latin than by the Word Vulgus, which is a Collective Word: Or how the Vulgus or Folk could chuse Laws any otherwise than in a Folkmote?

I will not enter into the stiff Dispute which ex­ercised King Charles the First and his Parliament for a long time, whether the word was Praeter Tense or Future, and whether the Word was best rendred in the French Translations, the Laws which the Folk auront esleu, shall have chosen, or which the Folk eslieront shall hereafter Chuse; whereupon they said that he was bound to Sign and Affirm all the Laws they should hereafter present to him, and that he could not make use of a Negative without Perjury. I say that that whole Dispute was not worth a Farthing. For if the Folk Chose the Laws all along down to King Richard the Second's Time, and the Kings were sworn to Affirm them, then we know how the Laws antiently were made; And who cares whether Eslieront or Choosing for the fu­ture be the Sense of the Word or no? For if the Folks Choosing was the Constitution in K. Richard [Page 37] the Second's Time, then I would fain know in what King's Reign it was afterwards that the Con­stitution was altered.

In short, the Folk Chose the Laws; and I be­lieve the English Folkmote and Wittenagemote will be found to be old Homer's River,

Which the Gods call Xanthus, but mortal Men call Scamander. Now though Scamander be the home­lier Name, yet it is the same River.

I cannot but say there was some Difference be­twixt the Folkmote upon the Kalends of May, and the Folkmotes which the King always called for his Ardua Contingentia or Contingencies of State: But the Difference lay only in this, that the Folkmote of the Kalends of May was a Parliament de more, and of Course, who Assembled themselves, sub initio Kalendarum Maii, says Spelman, and were bound to do so, in Capite Kal. Maii, say the Laws of Edward the Confessor, cap. 35. de Greve; (and out of that Chapter has Sir H. Spelman extracted his true Account of a Ge­rneral Folkmote, which was Anniversary:) where­as a Wittenagemote or Extraordinary Parliament or Folkmote was Summoned at the King's Pleasure, and was ever at his Call both for Time and Place. Other Difference I can find none. For as for the Constituent Parts of a Folkmote, if the Princes of the [Page 38] Realm, as well Bishops as Magistrates, and the Free­men, cannot denominate a Wittenagemote, I know not where the King will find his Wites, or Wise-men. I have spoke to that Point already. I have like­wise spoken to the Point of the Folkmotes making of Laws. We find indeed the Saxon Kings in the Preface of their Laws which were made in Extra­ordinary Parliaments, Decreeing with their Wites, ( [...]) some at Greatanlage, and at Midwinter afterwards at Eaxcester, as King Athelstan; some at [...] at the Holy Easterly Tide, as King Edmund; others at Wode­stock in Mercialand, and others at Winchester. Where­by it appears that the Kings of England had a Power to Summon Parliaments when and where their Weighty Affairs required them, in all Places of the Realm, and at all Seasons of the Year. This is an undoubted Prerogative lodged in the King for the sake of the Ardua Contingentia; and no Man would Govern a Kingdom that could not Com­mand the Advice and Assistance of his Subjects to be forthcoming, when the Occasions of the King­dom required it. And for the sake of these Ardua Negotia, the Knights, Citizens and Burgesses are to be Impowered to Act in Parliament-Business by those that sent them; lest for want of that full and sufficient Power, or by means of an Improvident [Page 39] Election, these Arduous and Weighty Affairs of the Kingdom should in any wise remain Infecta, or be left Undone. This is contained in the present Writ of Elections directed to every Sheriff of a County at every Election of Parliament-men.

But that is not my present Business, for I am in a further Search after the Annual or rather the An­niversary Folkmote.

CHAP. V.

BEfore I proceed any further I must clear one Point. And that is, that we find the Author and Founder of our Yearly Folkmote mentioned in the Laws of Edward the Confessor, (which were Recited and Confirmed by K. William the First) under the Title De Greve, Chap. 35. which may pos­sibly leave a Suspicion that this Yearly Folkmote of the Kalends of May was a Greve's Court. Now what Court should this be, belonging to a Greve, or any Count or Viscount, or President whatso­ever, for Greve is an Ambiguous Word? It is not [Page 40] a Burghmote, for that is Three times a Year by the Saxon Laws. It is not a County Court, for that by Edward the Senior's Laws, N. 11. was in these words. ‘Ic Wille that aelc Gerefa haebbe Gemot a ymb feower wucan.’ I will that each Greve have a Gemot at about Four Weeks. So that there were Twelve in the Year. It was not the Sheriffs Turn, or le [...] del [...], for that was twice a Year; [...] Scir­gemot on ger, by the Laws of King Edgar, cap. 5. it is not the Gemot for the View of Weapons or Arms, which every Freeman in England was char­ged with, and was bound to shew once every Year, and, as was wisely contrived, all in one Day throughout all England; but that Day was not in our Kalends of May, but the Morrow after Candle­mass, Crastino Purificationis B. M. And therefore I cannot for my Life make any thing else of an Universal Anniversary Full Folkmote, which is but semel in Anno, scilicet in capite Kal. Maii, but a Statio­nary Parliament: Especially considering who they were and what they did.

The next thing to be considered is the Author or Founder of this Ancient Constitution, which we have in the aforesaid Chap. De Greve, Num. 35. amongst the Laws of Good King Edward. ‘Hanc Legem Invenit Arthurus, qui quondam fuit [Page 41] Inclytissimus Rex Brytonum, & ità consolidavit, & confoederavit regnum Britanniae universum semper in unum.’ This Law of the Anniversa­ry Folkmore Arthur Invented, who was heretefore the most Renowned King of the Brytons, and there­by he consolidated, and confederated together the whole Realm of Britany for ever as One Man.

It is good to Honour the Founders of all Useful Constitutions; and I believe that [...] Arthur was the Inventor of this as to this Realm; because these Laws of K. Edward say so: And so was Cadmus the Inventor of Letters in Greece, though we [...] trace them out of Phoenicia; and the Letters speak for themselves. For if it be Aleph, Beth, Gimel, Daleth in one Place, and in the same Order it is Alpha, Be­ta, Gamma, Delta in the other Place, then we are sure there has been an Understanding and Com­munication. For it is impossible to be otherwise when the Alphabets are settled on both Sides, by being their Numeral Letters; as it was plainly in King David's Time by the Octonaries of the 119th Psalm, as it stands in the middle of the Bible; and as it was in Homer's Time in Greece; or else the Old Scholiasts have deceived me, who say that Ho­mer purposely couched the Number of all his Books in the first Word of his Iliads [...]. [Page 42] Which Numerals stand for 48. The Greeks like­wise taught the Welch to tell Twenty, and I be­lieve they taught the Romans too. Now by the same Rule, if there was a very Ancient Folkmote in the Neighbouring Kingdom of France upon every Kalends of May, then perhaps King Arthur bor­rowed from them; and it is good to look upon their Kalends, because it is possible they may give Light to Ours.

The French Kalends of May lie thus in Radul­phus de Diceto, a Famous Dean of Paul's in King John's time, whose History was thought so Authen­tick, that the English Parliament, in Edward the First's time, Relied upon his Testimony, amongst some others, in no less a Point than the Claim of the King of England, to the Supream Dominion of the Realm of Scotland. As to our present business he has these Words, Abbreviat. Chronicorum, pag. 439.

‘Abhinc Francorum Regibus à solita fortitudine An. Dom. 662. & scientia degenerantibus, regni potentia dis­ponebatur per Majores domus, Regibus solo no­mine regnantibus; Quibus moris erat principa­ri quidem secundum genus, & nil agere vel dis­ponere praeterquam irrationabiliter edere & bi­bere domique morari, & Kal. Maii praesidere coram totâ gente & salutari, obsequia & dona [Page 43] accipere & rependere, & sic secum usque ad ali­um Maium permanere.’

I will render the Sense of it into English as near as I can: However the Latin lies before every Man to Translate it for himself. From henceforward the French Kings degenerating from the Valour and Learning which they used to have, the Power of the Kingdom was Administred by the Masters of the Palace, the Kings themselves being upon the Matter only Titular; whose Custom it was to come to the Crown indeed according to their De­scent, and neither to Act nor Order any thing, but to Eat and Drink Unconscionably and to live at Home, and upon the Kalends of May to Preside in an Assembly of the whole Nation, and there to be Addressed, to receive their Allegiances, and Aids or Benevolences, and to Remercie them, and so to retire to the same Life again till another May came.

This French Kalends of May, is so much a Pi­cture of Ours, that I know not which is the Copy, nor which the Original. Their's was an Assem­bly of the whole Nation; so was Our's. Annual and Anniversary; so was Our's. It was [...] Gens L. L. Ed. Cons. cap. 35. de Greve. Kal. Maii, in France. Our Folkmote looks extream­ly like it in those two Strokes. Statutum est enim quod ibi debent populi omnes, & gentes Universae singulis [Page 44] annis, semel in anno scilicet convenire, scilicet in capite Kal. Mati. For it was Appointed by Statute that all the People and Counties Universal should meet together at the Folkmote each Year, namely, Once in the Year, namely, in the Beginnings of the Ka­lends of May. The King used to have fine Speeches made to him in France; so had we. They swore Allegiance to him; so did our Folk. They gave him Gifts (it was not New-Year's tide) Aids, Be­nevolences, call them what you will; and our People at the same time, as Sir H. Spelman said a­bove, Consulted of Peace and War, which cannot be managed without Ways and Means of raising Mo­ney, which is the Sinews of War, as Laws are of Peace. The word rependere at last in the French Kalends looks so like our French form of the Roy­al Assent given to a Money Bill, le [...] Remercie ses Loyals Sujects, that I knew not how to render the word Rependere, any otherwise than I did, by the word Remercie.

I know that the Year 662, was below K. Arthur's Time, but it appears that when the French Govern­ment was utterly spoiled in the Merovingian Family, as to the other Points, still they retained the old Custom of the Kalends of May; so that it was of much greater standing.