members; otherwise privilege in such cases as treason, felony, and other serious offences would be a manifest interference with justice; but that in minor cases a member arrested was allowed to make his attorney and attend in Parliament. On this opinion the Lords determined that Thorpe should remain in prison, and the Commons were commanded to elect another Speaker.

Petition against a Judge.-In 1434 (13 Henry VI.) a petition was presented to the Commons of England against Sir William Paston, knight, a judge of the Court of Common Pleas, by William Dalling. The fact that the Commons were appealed to on such a matter, at this early era in our records, is worth notice. The petition is thus given in Sir John Fenn's "Paston Letters":"Please it to the right sage and wise Commons of this present Parliament, that where(as) every justice of the King is sworn that he should not take no fees or rewards for to be of counsel with no man, but only with our sovereign lord the King, and thereto they be sworn. Please it to (the) Commons of the present Parliament that William Paston, one of the justices of our sovereign lord (the) King, taketh divers fees and rewards of divers persons within the shires of Norfolk and Suffolk, and is withhold with every matter in the said counties; that is to say-Of the town of Yarmouth, 1s. yearly; of the Abbot of St. Benet's, 26s. 8d. [several more are here instanced]; and of Katherine Shelton, 10 marks (£6 13s. 4d.), against the King, for to be of her counsel for to destroy the right of the King and of his ward-that is for to say, Ralph, son and heir of John Shelton." In a note prefixed to this petition, it is mentioned that Sir William Paston was born in 1378, became a judge of the Common Pleas in 1430, and from the propriety of his conduct was called "the Good Judge."

Henry VIII.'s Method with the Commons.-The Ministers of Henry VIII., says Oldfield, "moved in 1536 that a bill be brought in to dissolve such monasteries as had not above £200 per annum in land. The bill remained so long in the House that the King, who was impatient to have it passed, took upon himself to expedite its progress. He sent for the members to attend him in his gallery, when, having kept them waiting for a considerable time, he told them fiercely that if the bill did not pass it would cost many of them their heads." It is also related that while the opposition of the Commons to the imposition lasted, Henry sent for a Mr. Edward Montague, who had considerable influence in the House, and said, "Ho, man! will they not suffer my bill to pass ?" and, laying his hand on Montague's head, who was then on his knees before him, "Get my bill passed by to-morrow, or else to-morrow this head of yours will be off." The bill was passed, and Mr. Montague's head was permitted to remain upon his shoulders.

Oriental Adulation.-In 1537 an insult was put upon the House of Commons, which shows (says Lord Campbell) the degraded state to which Parliament was reduced in the reign of Henry VIII. On the recommendation of the Court, Rich, whose bad character was notorious, and who was hardly free from any vice except hypocrisy, was elected Speaker. He repaid this promotion by comparing the King, on the first day of the

session, for prudence to Solomon, for strength to Samson, and for beauty to Absalom; and on the last to the sun, that warms, enlightens, and invigorates the universe.

"Render unto Cæsar," &c.-Speaker Crooke told Queen Elizabeth (when he was presented to her in the House of Lords, on the occasion of his election to the chair) that England had been defended against the Spanish Armada by her mighty arm; to which she answered from the throne, "No; but by the mighty hand of God, Mr. Speaker."D'Ewes' Journal.

Bribing Members with Foreign Money.-In 1544 (writes Gurdon), the Londoners not liking the intended marriage of Mary with the Prince of Spain, the Parliament was summoned to meet at Oxford. Against the calling a new Parliament great sums of money were remitted by the Emperor (Charles V.) to Gardiner, to soften the leading nobility, and carry elections for commoners that would comply with the designs of the Court. Lord Chancellor Gardiner having granted pensions to many of the leading members of the House of Commons, thereby softened them. Commencement of the Journals of the Commons. A Parliament was called to meet at Westminster on the 4th of November, 1547, in the first year of the reign of Edward VI. The "Parliamentary History" says, "We are now come to a period from which the Journals of the House of Commons are extant. The first volume, which begins with the reign, contains little more than a diurnal succinct account of proceedings in reading bills, &c. The Journals of the Lords are more explicit in the reign before us than those of the Commons."

66

-

Secession of Members from the Commons. In the Parliament which assembled 11th November, 1554, the first of Philip and Mary, the legislative enactments of the three previous reigns against Roman Catholicism were repealed. "A circumstance occurred of a very extraordinary nature in this Parliament" (says the "Parliamentary History"), "and the like of which we have not before met with. This was a voluntary secession of some members of the Commons, who actually left the House when they saw the majority inclined to sacrifice everything to the ministry. Lord Coke, who, in order to do honour to their memories, has preserved their names in his 'Institutes,' states that the Court resented this separation of the members, and ordered the Queen's Attorney-General to indict them in the Court of Queen's Bench. Six of them were so timorous as to submit to the mercy of the Court, and paid their fines. All the rest, amongst whom was that famous lawyer Plowden, traversed; but judgment against them was prevented by the Queen's death."

The Commons and the Suppressed Monasteries.-In 1557 it was stated (writes Oldfield) that Queen Mary intended to rebuild the monasteries and restore the lands which had been alienated. The knowledge of this intention created such warmth of debate in the Commons

For later instances see "Parliamentary Secession," in the Miscellaneous

section.

that several of the members laid their hands on their swords, saying, "They knew how to defend their own properties." This put a stop to the intentions of the court.

The "Meddlesome" Commons.-A Parliament met in April, 1571, when the Lord Keeper Bacon, in answer to the Speaker's customary request for freedom of speech in the Commons, said that Queen Elizabeth, "having experience of late of some disorder and certain offences, which, though they were not punished, yet were they offences still, and so must be accounted, they would, therefore, do well to meddle with no matter of state but such as should be propounded unto them, and to occupy themselves in other matters concerning the commonwealth." A member having rather prematurely suggested the offer of a subsidy, several complaints were made of irregular and oppressive practices, and Mr. Bell said that licences granted by the Crown and other abuses galled the people, intimating also that the subsidy should be accompanied by a redress of grievances. This occasion of introducing the subject, though strictly constitutional, was likely to cause displeasure. The Speaker informed them, a few days after, of a message from the Queen to spend little time in motions, and make no long speeches. And Bell, it appears, having been sent for by the Council, came into the House "with such an amazed countenance that it daunted all the rest," who for many days durst not enter on any matter of importance. It became the common whisper that no one must speak against licences, lest the Queen and Council should be angry. And at the close of the session the Lord Keeper severely reprimanded those audacious, arrogant, and presumptuous members who had called her Majesty's grants and prerogatives in question, meddling with matters neither pertaining to them nor within the capacity of their understanding.-Hallam's Constitutional History."

66

Frequent Committals to the Tower.-At the meeting of Parliament in February, 1575-6, Peter Wentworth broke out, in a speech of uncommon boldness, against Queen Elizabeth's arbitrary encroachments on their privileges. The liberty of free speech, he said, had in the last two sessions been so many ways infringed, that they were in danger, while they contented themselves with the name, of losing and foregoing the thing. It was common for a rumour to spread through that House, "the Queen likes or dislikes such a matter; beware what you do." Messages were even sometimes brought down either commanding or inhibiting, very injurious to the liberty of debate. After surprising the House by the bold words, "None is without fault, no, not our noble Queen, but has committed great and dangerous faults to herself," he went on to tax her with ingratitude and unkindness to her subjects, in a strain perfectly free indeed from disaffection, but of more rude censure than any kings would put up with. . . Wentworth had gone to a length which alarmed the House of Commons. They judged it expedient to prevent an unpleasant interference by sequestering their member, and appointing a committee of all the Privy Councillors in the House to examine him. Wentworth declined their authority, till they assured him

that they sat as members of the Commons and not as Councillors. After a long examination, in which he not only behaved with intrepidity, but, according to his own statement, reduced them to confess the truth of all he advanced, they made a report to the House, who committed him to the Tower. He had lain there a month when the Queen sent word that she remitted her displeasure towards him, and referred his enlargement to the House, who released him upon a reprimand from the Speaker, and an acknowledgment of his fault, upon his knees. In the session of 1587-8, Wentworth insisted that some questions of his proposing should be read to the House. These queries were to the following purport: "Whether this council was not a place for any member of the same, freely and without control, by bill or speech, to utter any of the griefs of this commonwealth? Whether there be any council that can make, add, or diminish from the laws of the realm, but only this council of parliament? Whether it be not against the orders of this council to make any secret or matter of weight, which is here in hand, known to the prince or any other, without consent of the House?" with others to similar effect. These questions Serjeant Pickering, the Speaker, instead of reading them to the House, showed to a courtier, through whose means Wentworth was committed to the Tower. Others who had spoken in favour of his motion underwent the same fate. Again, in 1593, on the very first day of the session, the unconquerable Peter Wentworth, with another member, presented a petition to the Lord Keeper, desiring "the Lords of the Upper House to join with them of the Lower in imploring her Majesty to entail the succession of the crown, for which they had already prepared a bill." This step drew down, as must have been expected, the Queen's indignation. They were summoned before the Council, and committed to different prisons.-Ibid.

An Undaunted Patriot.-A bill for reforming the abuses of ecclesiastical courts was presented by Morice, attorney of the court of wards, and underwent some discussion in the House (1593). But the Queen sent for the Speaker, and expressly commanded that no bill touching matters of state or reformation of causes ecclesiastical should be exhibited; and, if any such should be offered, enjoining him on his allegiance not to read it. It was the custom at that time for the Speaker to read and expound to the house all the bills that any member offered. Morice himself was committed to safe custody, from which he wrote a spirited letter to Lord Burleigh, expressing his sorrow for having offended the Queen, but at the same time his resolution " to strive," he says, "while his life should last, for freedom of conscience, public justice, and the liberties of his country."-Hallam.

66

A "Pope-like" Speech.-Wentworth, the most distinguished assertor of civil liberty in Elizabeth's reign, related in the House a conversation he had held with Archbishop Parker. "I was," he says, among others, the last Parliament (1574), sent for unto the Archbishop of Canterbury, for the Articles of Religion that then passed this House. He asked us Why we did put out of the book the articles for the homilies, consecration of bishops, and such like?' 'Surely, sir,' said I,

'because we were so occupied in other matters that we had no time to examine them how they agreed with the Word of God.' 'What!' said he; surely you mistake the matter; you will refer yourselves wholly to us therein!' 'No; by the faith I bear to God,' said I, 'we will pass nothing before we know what it is; for that were but to make you popes. Make you popes who list,' said I, 'for we will make you none.' And sure, Mr. Speaker, the speech seemed to me to be a Pope-like speech; and I fear lest our bishops do attribute this of the Pope's canons unto themselves-Papa non potest errare.”—Ibid.

Elizabeth and the Bishops.-Elizabeth, in her speech to Parliament on closing the session of 1584, when many complaints against the rulers of the Church had rung in her ears, told the bishops that if they did not amend what was wrong, she meant to depose them. Her power to do so was unquestioned, and her readiness to carry it into effect on minor occasions was shown by her well-known letter to Cox, Bishop of Ely, when he resisted the sacrifice of his garden in Holborn to the Queen's favourite, Hatton: "Proud prelate,-You know what you were before I made you what you are: if you do not immediately comply with my request, by G- I will unfrock you.-ELIZABETH.”

A Member of Parliament Pilloried.-In Grafton's "Abridg ment of the Chronicles of England" there is the following account of a member who fell into great disgrace in the Parliament which sat in 1571: -"An undiscrete Burgeoys of the Parliament.-And it fortuned that in the said Parliament one very indiscrete and unmete man was returned a Burgeoys for the borough of Westbury, in Wiltshire, who being instructed by such as delighted to abuse his simplicitie to evil purposes, as he himselfe in the Parliament Hous (beyng sober) openly declared, or els caryed by excesse of drink, or both, did spreade abroade lewde and sedicions rumours against the Queenes Majesties person. And being thereof detected to the Parliament House, and the offence by hym confessed, and his defectes and insufficiency well considered, hee was from the House committed to ward. And for that there was confessed corruption in receaving of money for his election, and also a band taken of him by certein of the town of Westbury, to save them harmless of the said corrupt retorne (as hee confessed), the towne was amerced by the Parliament House at twentie pounds. And it was ordered that hee should have his said bande redelyvered. And afterward the sayd person, for the spreading of his sedicious rumour, he was, by order of the Quenes Majesties most honorable Council, sett on the pillory in Chepesyde in London." This case, remarks Hallam, is the earliest precedent on record for the punishment of bribery in elections.

"Hemming" a Member Down.-Serjeant Heale, addressing the House in 1601, said, "The Queen hath as much right to all our lands and goods as to the revenue of her crown;" at which all the House hemmed, and laughed, and talked. "Well," quoth Serjeant Heale, "all your hemming shall not put me out of countenance." So Mr. Speaker stood up and said, "It is a great disorder that this should be used, for it is the ancient use of every man to be silent when any one speaketh; and