This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.
THE PILLARS OF PARLIAMENT Struck at by the Hands of A Cambridge Doctor, OR, A SHORT VIEW Of some of his Erroneous POSITIONS, Destructive to the Ancient Laws & Government OF ENGLAND.
To which is added The true State of the Doctor's Error about the Parliament, 49 H. 3.
By William Petyt, of the Inner Temple, Esq;
LONDON, Printed for Tho. Simmons, at the Princes Arms in Ludgate-Street MDCLXXXI.
ABout a Tear and a half since, I did, in a small Treatise, assert the Ancient Right of the Commons of England in Parliament: And therein maintained,
That the Commons of England, represented
pag. 1.by Knights, Citizens and Burgesses in Parliadid not begin to be an Essential part of Parby Rebellion.
To which there lately came out a pretended Full and Clear Answer: wherein the Author thereof affirms,
That the Commons of England, represented
by Knights, Citizens and Burgesses in Parliawere not introduced, nor were one of the three Estates in Parliament before the 49th of H. 3.
The Dignities, Learning and Fame of the supposed Author of the Book being so great, it is but fit that the Use, End and Scope thereof should be better known, and understood, than yet it is. In order whereunto I have, for the Publick Good, (got time) to make a small Abstract, or Compendium, of some of the Principles which the Answerer hath asserted and laid down therein. Which are these following.
THere are no Commons to be found in the
Pag. 20. in the Margin.Great Councils.
Nor any thing that tends towards the Proof of
the Commons of those Times, to have had any Share of making Laws in those Councils.
The Commons as at this Day known, not to
Pag. 130. in the Margin.be found amongst the Community of England in Old Historians.
THat William the Conqueror claimed by
Pag. 35. in the Margin.the Sword, and made an Absolute Conquest.
For, without doubt, there was no English-Men in the Common-Council of the whole Kingdom.
For the English had neither Estates nor Forleft; and therefore it could be no great matter to them, by what Law, Right or Proprieother Men held their Estates.
the Conqueror divided all the Lands
in England amongst his great Followers, to hold of him.
The Free-men of England, being French, Fleand
of other Nations, who came in with the Conqueror, and to whom his Magna Charta was made; not to English-men.
These were the Men the only Legal Men that named, and chose Juries, and served on Juries themselves,
Nota. When be aword of English Law or LanNota. As this is precarious, so it is certainly false and impractiDomes-day-Book, and the Evidence and Testimony of the Historians and Laws of that very time.
both in the County and Hundred Courts, and dispatched all Country business under the Great Officers.
If therefore the Justiciaries, Chancellors, Earls, Sheriffs, Lords of Mannors, such as hear'd Causes, and gave Judgment, were Normans; if the Lawyers and Pleaders were also Northe Pleadings and Judgments in their several Courts must of necessity have been in that Language, and the Law also the Norman-Law; otherwise they had said and done they knew not what, and judged they knew not how: especially when the Controversies were determined by Military-men, Earls, Sheriffs, Lords of Mannors, &c. that understood not the English Tongue or Law: Or when the Chief Justiciary himself was a Military-Man, as, it often happened, and understood only the Norman Language; and 'tis hardly to be believed, these Men would give themselves the trouble of learning and understanding the English-Law and Language.
Gloss. pag. 27. Nota. Let him prove it to save his Credit.
These were the Free-men which made such a Cry, for their Liberties (as appears by Magna
most of which is only an Abatement of the Rigour, and a Relaxation of the Feudal Tenures; Why then may not the like Reason hold against the Inof the Commons to be first a part of Parliaby the Victorious and Numerous Barons after the Battel of Lewes, Anno 49 H. 3. Pag. 210. They send out Writs in the King's Name to summon a Parliament.the rest were but only Followers, and helped to augment the Noise; they were no Law-makers, as this Gentleman (meaning me) fondly imagines. For it is not probable that those Men that had the force of the Nation, would permit Men of Small Reputation to share with them in Law-making. Those that had the Power of this and other Nations De Facto, always did give Laws, and Tax the People.
After Symon Montford Earl of Leicester and the Numerous Barons had taken Hen. 3. and Prince Edward Prisoners at the Battel of Lewes, and a New Government was framed and set up, they (Anno 49 H. 3.) sent out Writs in the King's Name unto divers Bishops, Abbots and Priors, and to such of the Noble-men as were of their own Party; to the Sheriffs of Counand the Cinque-Ports.
P. 224. Dugd. Baron, fol 75
2. The proMontfort to summon this ConvenHow could that be, when the Numerous Barons (as they say) had all things in their Power.And without doubt, as others have Conjectured before Me, the danger that Symon and his Privado's apprehended from the Concourse of the Nobility and their great Retinues, and the Example of his and the Barons Practices at Oxwas the reason why they (Anno 49 H. 3.) altered the Ancient Usage, and of their Sending, Directing, and in the King's Name Commandthe Sheriffs of each County, the Cities and Burroughs, to send Two Knights, Citizens and Burgesses respectively.
Nota. Here we have the Original, and all the Authorities and Proofs that the Commons (as they would have it) began by Rebellion, 49 H. 3. Nota. For no Man ever dream'd of such an Origine before the Doctor and his Author only.Hence he affirms,
That the Commons of England, represented
by Knights, Citizens and Burgesses in Parliawere not introduced, nor were one of the Three Estates in Parliament before the 49th. of H. 3.
For the Commons were not comprehended in
Pag. 163. in the Margin.the Common University.
For the Noble-men of England, and Council of the Baronage were the Community of Eng
Barones Regni called to Parliament at the
Pag. 227. in the Margin.King's Pleasure.
And what King Henry, a little before his
begun; that is, to call such Earls and Barons, Quos Dignatus est, such as he pleased, Edward the First and his Successors constantly observed.
Having had one great Antiquary's Opinion, (meaning Mr. Camden's) joyned with Matter of
Nota. The Original Author of this Fictitious Change is quoted by Camden, folRobert Cotton; but slighted, bafled, and proved eviSelden in his Titles of Honour, f. 589. 590. and contrary to the course of Histories and Records of those Ages.
Fact, upon the Constitution of the House of Lords.
Let us see the Opinion of another concerning the Origin of the House of Commons, back'd also by Matter of Fact. Sir Robert Cotton says, the Victory at Evesham, and the dear Experithe Third himself had made at Oxin the 42d. Year of his Reign, and the memory of the many Streights his Father was driven to, especially at Runnemede, near Stanes, brought this King wisely to
Nota. How came the Doctor to quote Sir Robert Cotton, since he is expresly against him? For if what Sir Robert saith was true, the Commons were first called to Parliament by King Henry, after the Battel of Evesham; and then, not by the Barons, nor in 49 H. 3. And so they began, not by Rebellion as the Doctor and his Author say.begin what his Successors
fortunately finished, in lessening the Strength and Power of his Great Lords. And this was wrought by searching into the Regality they had usurped over their peculiar Soveraigns, and by weakening that Hand of Power which they carried in Parby commanding the Services of many Knights, Citizens and Burgesses to that great Council.
These were the Reasons why those Kings followed Montfort's pattern, Nota. Not a Syllable of Montfort's Patern in any of his Authors cited by him, except his own Contemporary Author.to secure themselves against the Tuand Seditious Practices of the Barons.
And, as according to the Opinions of these great Antiquaries, these new Conof Parliament had their
Nota. All deceived by Camden's Author; not an Historian or any Record mentioning one word of such an Alteration, though several lived and writ in the very time.
from the King's Authority; so from the same Authority and Time it was, that this most excelreceived its PerNota. The Doctor fancies that the present Constitution both of Lords and Commons beAnno 49 H. 3. and after, and was setled by E. 1. and his Successors; but proves not a tittle of the matter of fact.
and became exactly fitted for the Government of these Natias it seems to be very evident from these following Records.
And then the Doctor prints seveNota. The Doctor's maniError in making Writs of Summons to Magna Concilia to be Summons to Parliament.Writs in the Reigns of E. 1. E. 2. and E. 3. for summoning sometimes one, sometimes more Knights, CitiGreat Councils as had no power to make Laws, but were only calParliaments, (a plain, if not a designed Error) with several dangerous Notes or Inferences
Margin, as the Reader may observe, pag. 230, 231, 232, 233, 242, 243, 246, 248, 249.
The King and his Council judges whether and
Pag. 79. in the Margine. Nota. Thus the Doctor insers from this Clause in the Record: Et tunc fiat eis super hoc Justitia vowhen Burgesses ought to come to Parliaments.
The Great Charter, commonly attributed to Hen. 3. and styled his
The Doctor's Jani Anglopag. 63, 64. Nota. The Doctor, to serve his turn, fondly designs to destroy Magna Carta of H. 3. and make E. 1. live before his Father and Grandfather were born. Nota. A convincing Arguthat because the Charter of H. 3. is enrolled by InspexiHenricus, &c. Therefore it was properly his Charter, and not H. 3.was properly the Charter of E. 1. or perhaps rather his Explication or Enlargement of that Charter of King John and H. 3.
For we find not the Great Charter, either of that, or King John's Form, in any of the Rolls, until the 25th of E. 1. And he had a greater sum of Money for confirming this Charter than H. 3. had, as 'tis recorded in the Summons to Parliament for that purpose.
In this Charter then confirmed, there is no promade for any Summons to Great CounAnd the Reason may well be, because the ConstiNota. All this is to prop up a new and mistaken Norton, that Tenants in Capite by Milionly made the Parliament, till 49 H. 3.of Great Councils or Parliawas lately changed from what it was in King John's time, and until the 49th of H. 3. nor perhaps was it so fixed, and peremptorily resolved on at this time (viz. 25 E. 1.) what it should exactly be for the future, as to have it made an Article of the Charter: And to this Conjecture,
Nota. Here the Dorefers to his mistaken Writs of Summons to Great Councils for Parliaments, temporibus E 1. E. 2. E. 3. which he hath printed, and by them would give a colour to his and his Author's marvellous change of the ancient Government of the Kingdom, Anno 49 H. 3. never found out or discovered by any before.
the frequent Variations of Summons to
in those times do give a probable Confirmation.
Thus far our Doctor.
Nullus Erranti Terminus.
But I will not say with him, that here are any Aery Ambuscades, Whimseys, Marvellous Nonsence, Gross Ignorance of Histories and Records, admirable and idle fancies, and a Troop more of such gentile ExAnswerer hath been pleased to give that ingenious Gentleman, Mr. Atwood of Grays-Inn, and my self. All strong
Author of Jahigh Civilities, scarce well beeminent Qualifications.
But to come to
AFter Matthew Paris, and Rishanger his Continuer, had given them an Account of the Wars between H. 3. and his great Barons; and that at the Battel at Lewes, Anno 48. of that King, he and Prince Edward were taSymon Montfort, Earl of Leicester (General for the Barons) In the Year
H. 3. they meet with Schedule affixed to the close Roll; wherein there are Writs of Summons entred for calling Two Knights for each County; Two Citizens, Two Burgesses for every City and Borough, and Two Barons for every of the Cinque-Ports, to meet in a Parliament at London in the Octaves of St Hillary. What to do?
Nobiscum ac cum proedictis Prelatis, & magnatibus
Dugdale's Ofol. 18. col. 1.nostris, quos ibidem vocari fecimus super proemissis tractaturi, atque Consilium impensuri. To treat with him the said King, and with the Prelates and Great Men of the Land, touching the Premisses, and to give their Advice.
Now because this Writ of Summons falls, as the Doctor saith, in the Nick of time with the Historian, when the King and Prince were in custody of Symon Montfort, He and his Author
nick the House of Commons; and have this Summons to be the very First and Original Writ of Summons to Parliament, that ever was of this nature, that in this Critical Tear, at this very time, there beChange, and a marvellous Alteration of the ancient Form of our English Parliaments; and that before the Commons were never any part thereof; but then had their Origine and Beginning to be so by this Rebellion.
When as,
1. If that Roll had been lost, as all the Parliament. Rolls of those times are, it cannot apany Summons to Parliament,
Lords Spiritual, or Temporal,
Dugdale's Ofol. 18. But to point out who they were (viz. Barones Majores) that had their first Rise by Writs of Summons, until 22 E. 1. and afterward, passeth my skill, there being no publick Record that doth make mention of them till then except that of 49 H. 3 Dugdale's Pref. to his Baronagium Angliae, Tom. 1. The Doctor, pag. 225.Commons, till 22 and 23 E. 1. thirty Years afH. 3. though it is evident and certain, both from the printed Books and Records, there were above fourteen Parliaments in the interim. And our Doctor himself and his Author agree, that both Lords and Commons were present and Parties in the Parliament, Anno 52 H. 3. at Marlborough, three Years after 49 H. 3. and alE. 1. (which was eleven Years after 49 H. 3.) at a Parliament at Westminster, though there are no Writs of SumLords or Commons, nor any Rolls yet found out of those Parliaments.
2. Neither do their own Historians whom Nota. According to the Doctor, Mr. Camden and his AuCommons, but only of the Lords and their Peers.
Matthew Westminster, whom the Doctor cites too, who writ in the Reign of E. 1. Son to H. 3. and who particularly gives an Account also of those Wars, nor any Historiographer or Lawyer, nor any Record of that or succeeding Ages, ever mention one Word of any such Change or Revolution in 49 H. 3. as our Doctor, and his single Author by tacking
Nota. The Doctor and his Author having tack'd and patch'd together the HistoriH. 3. is their only Evidence that the Commons begun by Rebellion in that very Year.patching their Historian and Writs together, have inferred and maintained in their Books. BeForm of Acts of Parliament, and Expressions both in Historians and Records, are the same both before and after 49 H. 3. and in the Reigns of E. 1. E. 2. and E. 3.
Nota. These Arguments, Proofs and Reasons, besides many more, the Doctor hath unfairly concealed from his Readers; yet he hath publishfull and clear Answer to my Book, and particularly to the eighth and ninth Arguments, wherein these Authorities are urged: the Doctor gives this Answer in these very words, p. 143. His eighth and ninth Arguments, also his first and second Observations upon the whole matter, have nothing in them worth a serious Consideration.
well knew that the Citizens and Burgesses were a ConPart of the Parliament in Ireland, Anno 38 H. 3. which was eleven Years before 49 H. 3. as I proved in my Book, p. 71. And also by way of Comparison, p. 79. That the Cities, Great Towns and Burroughs, 1. Of France. 2. Spain. 3. Portugal. 4. Denmark. 5. Sweden. And 6. Scotland, have from time immemorable, both de jure and de facto, had their Delegates or Representatives in the General Councils, or, in our present Dialect, Parliaments. So that it might seem very strange,
Northern KingAdamus Bremensis saith, that the Bishops, after the People reChristianity, were rePublick Councils. And Loccenius reckons up, among the several Estates, the Bishops, Nobles, Knights and Deputies of the Country and Cities. The learned Author of The Grand Question, pag. 11.Cities and Burroughs in all the Kingdoms of Europe, were ab antiquis temporibus, even in the time coeval with their Government, an essential part of their Common-Councils, or Parliaments; that England, of all the European World, should not be under the same Constitution before 49 H. 3.
Yet the Doctor and his Author by all their Art and Skill have toiled and laboured to swim against the Stream of so great a Torrent of Reasons and Testimonies.
To which, in convenient time, shall be adAuthorities, which are first to be carefully examined, and cannot be done in so short a time, together with a Civil and
Moderate Reply to the Doctor's Answer; as well on the one hand to acquit my self from the real Passion of our Doctor, to say no worse, though common Prudence might have obliged him to more sober Considerations; as on the other, to vindicate and assert the Honour of our English Nation and Parliaments, against his and his Auill grounded Notions. Which, is true, I must agree that the General Understanding and Judgment, as well of the Kings of England, as of the whole English Nation, and all Foreign Writers for so many Centuries of Years, have been marvellously abused and imposed upon, especially King James and His late Majesty: Who tell us,
1. That not only the Regal Authority, but James's first Speech to his first ParliaEngland. Pulton's Stat. 1 Jac. c. 2. f. 1157.People's Security of Lands, Livings and Privileges were preserved and maintained by the Ancient Fundamental Laws, Privileges and Customs of this Realm: and that by the abolishing or altering of them, it was impossible but that present Confusion will fall upon the whole State and Frame of this Kingdom.
2. The Law is the Inheritance of every Subject,
Charles the First's Dep. 28, 29.only Security he can have for his Life or Estate; and the which being neglectInfelicity, if not an irreparable Confusion, must without doubt fall upon them.
Lastly, I will for the present give but five or six Jnstances, that the Commons of England, as now distinguished from the great Lords, were an Essential Part of the General Councils or Parliaments before 49 H. 3.
Bracton, a Grave and Learned Judge, who flourished in the time Bracton, lib. 1. cap. 1. fol. 1.H. 3. and an Author beyond the Answerer's Exception, after he had declared to Posterity that he had bent his mind ad vetera Judicia perscrutanda diligenter, non sine vigiliis & labore; and whatsoever he found Nota dignum, he reduced In unam summam perpetuoe memoriae commendandam: declares the Rule, how Laws were made, not in his own only, but in Ages before.
Cum Legis vigorem habeat, quicquid de Consilio & de Consensu
Magnatum & Reipublicae communi spontione, Authoritate Regis sive principis precedente juste fuerit difinitum & approbatum.
That that hath the Force and Power of a Law, which shall be justly declared and approved of by the Council and Consent of the Great Men, and by the General Agreement of the Commonwealth, the Authority of the King preceding.
2. The Statute of Magna Charta was made and confirmed in H. 3. sol. 1. 3. Id. 12 E. 4. c. 7. It is called, The Laudable Statute of Magna Charta.Parliament, 9 H. 3. (which was thirty nine Years before 49 H. 3.) as is evident by these Authorities, which say that It was made.