Слике страница
PDF
ePub

But the power of the nobles was reduced, without increasing that of the people; the extortion practised with impunity on the great, was tamely submitted to by the commons; and the nation, during the greater part of this reign, exhibited only the spectacle of one individual grasping at all the property of the rest, while they were anxiously striving to evade his pursuit.

In the reign of Henry VIII., whose lavish expenditure formed a strong contrast to the penuriousness of his father, no material alteration is represented to have taken place in the Constitution. When money was wanted, and the commons refused to comply, to their full extent, with the requisitions of the Court, recourse was had to other means; and influence, artifice, or terror, seldom failed to succeed.

In the notice taken of the power granted by Parliament in 1536, to regulate the succession, it is observed, that such a provision not only tended to annihilate the authority of a regency, and to expose the kingdom to confusion, but seemed to prepare the way for a more absolute power of abrogating all Acts of the legislature. The author finds, however, some consolation in a finely spun remark; that to impair a right is to prove its existence; that if a people forges fetters for itself, it is a proof that it has the power to forge them. Lest we should be suspected of misrepresenting the argument, we shall give the author's own words:-

"Three years afterwards, it was enacted that proclamations made by the king and council under penalty of fine and imprisonment, should have the force of statutes, so that they should not be prejudicial to any person's inheritance, offices, liberties, goods, and chattels, or infringe the established laws. This has been often noticed as an instance of servile compliance. It is, however, a striking testimony to the free constitution it infringed, and demonstrates that the prerogative could not soar to the heights it aimed at, till thus imped by the perfidious hand of parliament. It is also to be observed, that the power given to the king's proclamations is considerably limited."

Our readers will turn to their dictionaries for the meaning of the obsolete word "imped."

The repeal of this statute, and of those relative to high treason, in the first year of the young Edward, "operated," says Mr. Hallam, "like an elastic recoil of the Constitution, after the extraordinary pressure of that despotic reign."

Yet, in the next page, he tells us, that the wily courtiers of Edward's councils deemed it less obnoxious to violate, than to new mould the Constitution: for although proclamations had no longer the legal character of statutes, we find several, during Edward's reign, enforced by fine and imprisonment. Some of these he enumerates; and concludes by observing, that one would imagine the late statute had been repealed, as rather too far restraining the royal power, than as giving it an unconstitutional extension. In all this there is much incongruity. If the "elastic recoil of the Constitution" signifies its return to its an

cient principles, the inference must be, that, according to those ancient principles, such proclamations were illegal, and should not be obeyed. To renew the practice after the repealing statute, was, therefore, not to commit any new violation of the Constitution, nor yet to new mould it, but to restore a pristine disease, which menaced its very vitals.

Of Elizabeth's continuance of the same practice, he gives the following account :

"It was a natural consequence, not more of the high notions entertained of prerogative, than of the very irregular and infrequent meeting of parliament, that an extensive and somewhat indefinite authority should be arrogated to proclamations of the king in council. Temporary ordinances, bordering at least on legislative authority, grow out of the varying exigencies of civil society, and will by very necessity be put up with in silence, wherever the constitution of the commonwealth does not, directly or in effect, provide for frequent assemblies of the body in whom the right of making or consenting to laws has been vested. Since the English constitution has reached its zenith, we have endeavoured to provide a remedy by statute for every possible mischief or inconvenience; and if this has swollen our code to an enormous redundance, till, in the labyrinth of written law, we almost feel again the uncertainties of arbitrary power, it has at least put an end to such exertions of prerogative as fell at once on the persons and properties of whole classes. It seems by the proclamations issued under Elizabeth, that the crown claimed a sort of supplemental right of legislation, to perfect and carry into effect what the spirit of existing laws might require, as well as a paramount supremacy, called sometimes the king's absolute or sovereign power, which sanctioned commands beyond the legal prerogative for the sake of public safety, whenever the council might judge that to be in hazard. Thus we find anabaptists, without distinction of natives or aliens, banished the realm; Irishmen commanded to depart into Ireland; the culture of woad, and the exportation of corn, money, and various commodities prohibited; the exeess of apparel restrained. A proclamation in 1580 forbids the erection of houses within three miles of London, on account of the too great increase of the city, under the penalty of imprisonment and forfeiture of the materials. This is repeated at other times, and lastly, (I mean during her reign) in 1602 with additional restrictions. Some proclamations in this reign hold out menaces, which the common law could never have executed on the disobedient. To trade with the French king's rebels, or to export victuals into the Spanish dominions, (the latter of which might possibly be construed into assisting the queen's enemies) incurred the penalty of treason. And persons having in their possession goods taken on the high seas, which had not paid custom, are enjoined to give them up, on pain of being punished as felons and pirates. Notwithstanding these instances, it cannot perhaps be said, on the whole, that Elizabeth stretched her authority very outrageously in this respect. Many of her proclamations, which may at first sight appear illegal, are warrantable by statutes then in force, or by ancient precedents. Thus the council is empowered by an act 28 H. 8. c. 14, to fix the prices of wines; and abstinence from flesh in Lent, as well as on Fridays and Saturdays, a common subject of Elizabeth's proclamations, is enjoined by several statutes of Edward VI. and of her own. And it has been argued by some not at all inclined to diminish any popular rights, that the king did possess a prerogative by common law of restraining the export of corn and other commodities."

The author observes, that the children of Henry VIII. did not preserve his "dominion over Parliament," yet he attributes the rejection, by the House of Commons, of a bill, creating some new treasons, and substituting another with the "memorable clause" of requiring two witnesses to be produced in open

[blocks in formation]

court, and rejecting a bill of attainder against the bishop of Durham, to the indignation that was generally felt at the usurpation of Northumberland, and the untimely fate of Somerset, and not to any general principles.

Although she dissolved her two first Parliaments, the third was far from obsequious, and rejected several of her favourite bills. And he subsequently ascribes the spirit and temper of the House, to a general aversion to the introduction of the Papal supremacy, and still more to an almost universal repugnance to the Queen's Spanish connexion.

The increased weight of the commons, notwithstanding the lordly ascendancy of the crown in the reign of her father, was felt and feared by Mary. In hopes of increasing her influence, by conferring on different places the favour of sending representatives, she created fourteen new boroughs. This has always been considered a branch of the royal prerogative, although certainly inconsistent with every sound view of the nature of popular representation. If an insignificant town can, at any time, be authorized to send a number of members equal to a large and populous city, it would always be in the power of the crown, by making choice of places where it possessed influence, to secure a number of pliant votes. Yet the practice is unquestionable, and it did not originate with Mary.

Mr. Hallam considers that great part of the irregularity which now exists in this respect, is owing less to changes wrought by time, than to this deliberate, and "not very constitutional policy." Why it is not constitutional, is not explained. No statute has ever been passed, affecting the rights of the crown in this respect. Locke, in his treatise on civil governments, is quoted, as recognising this power, not only as a prerogative, but to use his own words, a just prerogative; Whitelock, whose political character is well known, in his Commentary on the writ for choosing members of Parliament, expressly says, "doubtless the King may grant to as many places as he pleases, the privilege of sending members to Parliament;" and we believe, that Sir Edward Coke somewhere concurs in this opinion.

It has ceased, for many years, to be exercised; but we know not why it may not, at any time, be resumed. We recollect no statute that deprives the crown of the power.

With so great a control over the exercise of the principle of representation, it degenerates into mere machinery. The people become the artificial engines, by which the House of Commons is made up. The Court dictates the places from which members are to be sent; the aristocracy co-operates, to distribute the choice; and, with rare exceptions, the people yield to the influence of both. In the valuable treatise of Cicero, lately discovered in the Vatican, there is a passage so prophetically descriptive

of the constitutional predicament of England, in this respect, that we cannot forbear to give it to our readers. It bears, however, a stronger analogy to England in its present state, than to its condition in the reign of Henry VIII.

Sed in ipsis civitatibus in quibus verbo sunt liberi omnes; ferunt enim suffragia, mandant imperia magistratus ambiuntur rogantur; sed ea dant magis, quæ etiamsi nolint, danda sunt, et quæ ipsi non habent unde alii petunt: sunt enim expertes imperii, consilii publici, judicii delectorum judicum quæ familiarum vetustatibus aut pecuniis ponderantur. In libero autem populo ut Rhodi, ut Athenis nemo est civium qui-here there is a break in the MS., which Mr. Tillemain has perhaps properly filled up with, qui ne puisse parvenir

à tout.

The creation of new boroughs, did not, however, accomplish all that was desired; and it was necessary to interfere with elections at other places. What is now done secretly and successfully, was in those days effected, or attempted, in a manner the most open and offensive:

"A circular letter of Edward to all the sheriffs commands them to give notice to the freeholders, citizens, and burgesses within their respective counties, 'that our pleasure and commandment is, that they shall choose and appoint, as nigh as they possibly may, men of knowledge and experience within the counties, cities, and boroughs;' but nevertheless, that where the privy council should recom mend men of learning and wisdom, in such case their directions be regarded and followed.' Several persons accordingly were recommended by letters to the sheriffs, and elected as knights for different shires; all of whom belonged to the court, or were in places of trust about the king. It appears probable that persons in office formed at all times a very considerable portion of the house of commons. Another circular of Mary before the parliament of 1554, directing the sheriffs to admonish the electors to choose good catholics and inhabitants as the old laws require,' is much less unconstitutional; but the earl of Sussex, one of her most active counsellors, wrote to the gentlemen of Norfolk, and to the burgesses of Yarmouth, requesting them to reserve their voices for the person he should name."

Such recommendations would, in these days, be received by British electors with indignation, or contempt.

The original formation of the Court, which, from the place of its session, was generally denominated the Court of the Star Chamber, is justly related; but in this place, without the addition of any facts unknown to the general reader.

The second chapter of this volume, is devoted to the History of the Reformation, and the religious dissensions that ensued. Passing from Henry VIII. to his son, Mr. Hallam observes, that, of the executors of Henry's will

"The greater part, as their subsequent conduct evinces, were nearly indifferent to the two systems, except so far as more might be gained by innovation. But Somerset, the new protector, appears to have inclined sincerely towards the reformation, though not wholly uninfluenced by similar motives. His authority readily overcame all opposition in the council: and it was soon perceived, that Edward, whose singular precocity gave his opinions in childhood an import

ance not wholly ridiculous, had imbibed a steady and ardent attachment to the new religion, which probably, had he lived longer, would have led him both to diverge farther from what he thought an idolatrous superstition, and to have treated its adherents with severity."

We have been long accustomed to contemplate, and admire, the amiable and humane character of this young prince; but the following note, at page 91, may excite different sentiments:

"I can hardly avoid doubting, whether Edward VI.'s Journal, published in the second volume of Burnet, be altogether his own, because it is strange for a boy of ten years old to write with the precise brevity of a man of business. Yet it is hard to say how far an intercourse with able men on serious subjects may force a royal plant of such natural vigour; and his letters to his young friend Barnaby Fitzpatrick, published by H. Walpole in 1774, are quite unlike the style of a boy. One could wish this journal not to be genuine; for the manner in which he speaks of both his uncles' executions does not show a good heart. Unfortunately, however, there is a letter extant, of the king to Fitzpatrick, which must be genuine, and is in the same strain. He treated his sister Mary harshly about her religion, and had, I suspect, too much Tudor blood in his veins. It is certain that he was a very extraordinary boy, or, as Cardon calls him, monstrificus puellus; and the reluctance with which he yielded, on the solicitations of Cranmer, to sign the warrant for burning Joan Boucher, is as much to his ho nour, as it is against the archbishop's."

It was with reluctance, that Edward permitted his sister still to enjoy her own faith, and to worship God in her own manner; but his reign was short. Mary contrived to exercise her religious duties in private; and we may, without a breach of charity, suppose that she waited with impatience, for the approaching dissolution of her brother.

The accession to the crown, was sweetened to her by more than the ordinary feelings, which proceed from the attainment of great power; she suppressed the flagitious attempts of Northumberland; she was not only liberated from all restraint in the enjoyment of her own religious opinions, but at liberty to enforce upon her subjects, in some degree, a conformity to what she seems to have conscientiously believed, was the only road to their salvation. Our author asserts, that the re-establishment of Popery, on Mary's accession, must have been acceptable to a large part, or perhaps the majority, of the nation; yet, he admits, that the reformed doctrine had made a real progress in the few years of her brother's reign. "The higher classes, however," in his opinion, "partook less than their inferiors, in the religious zeal of that age." There is something obscure and inconsistent, in the residue of this passage; he observes, that the larger proportion of the nobility and gentry, appear to have preferred the Catholic religion;-yet, he tells us, that not a few persons of family emigrated in this reign, on account of their religious opinions. Of these, the most illustrious was the Dutchess of Suffolk, first cousin of the Queen. In the Parliament of 1555, a bill, sequestering the property of "the Dutchess of Suf

« ПретходнаНастави »