628 lines
36 KiB
Markdown
628 lines
36 KiB
Markdown
# AUTHORITY OF MAGNA CARTA
|
||
|
||
|
||
Probably no political compact between king and people was ever entered
|
||
into in a manner to settle more authoritatively the fundamental law of a
|
||
nation, than was Magna Carta. Probably no people were ever more united
|
||
and resolute in demanding from their king a definite and unambiguous
|
||
acknowledgment of their rights and liberties, than were the English at
|
||
that time. Probably no king was ever more completely stripped of all
|
||
power to maintain his throne, and at the same time resist the demands of
|
||
his people, than was John on the 15th day of June, 1215. Probably no
|
||
king ever consented, more deliberately or explicitly, to hold his throne
|
||
subject to specific and enumerated limitations upon his power, than did
|
||
John when he put his seal to the Great Charter of the Liberties of
|
||
England. And if any political compact between king and people was ever
|
||
valid to settle the liberties of the people, or to limit the power of
|
||
the crown, that compact is now to be found in Magna Carta. If,
|
||
therefore, the constitutional authority of Magna Carta had rested solely
|
||
upon the compact of John with his people, that authority would have been
|
||
entitled to stand forever as the supreme law of the land, unless revoked
|
||
by the will of the people themselves.
|
||
|
||
But the authority of Magna Carta does not rest alone upon the compact
|
||
with _John_. When, in the next year, (1216,) his son, Henry III., came
|
||
to the throne, the charter was ratified by him, and again in 1217, and
|
||
again in 1225, in substantially the same form, and especially without
|
||
allowing any new powers, legislative, judicial, or executive, to the
|
||
king or his judges, and without detracting in the least from the powers
|
||
of the jury. And from the latter date to this, the charter has remained
|
||
unchanged.
|
||
|
||
In the course of two hundred years the charter was confirmed by Henry
|
||
and his successors more than thirty times. And although they were guilty
|
||
of numerous and almost continual breaches of it, and were constantly
|
||
seeking to evade it, yet such were the spirit, vigilance and courage of
|
||
the nation, that the kings held their thrones only on the condition of
|
||
their renewed and solemn promises of observance. And it was not until
|
||
1429, (as will be more fully shown hereafter,) when a truce between
|
||
themselves, and a formal combination against the mass of the people, had
|
||
been entered into, by the king, the nobility, and the “_forty shilling
|
||
freeholders_,” (a class whom Mackintosh designates as “_a few
|
||
freeholders then accounted wealthy_,”[^106]) by the exclusion of all
|
||
others than such freeholders from all voice in the election of knights
|
||
to represent the counties in the House of Commons, that a repetition of
|
||
these confirmations of Magna Carta ceased to be demanded and
|
||
obtained.[^107]
|
||
|
||
The terms and the formalities of some of these “confirmations” make them
|
||
worthy of insertion at length.
|
||
|
||
Hume thus describes one which took place in the 38th year of Henry III.
|
||
(1253):
|
||
|
||
> “But as they (the barons) had experienced his (the king’s) frequent
|
||
> breach of promise, they required that he should ratify the Great
|
||
> Charter in a manner still more authentic and solemn than any which he
|
||
> had hitherto employed. All the prelates and abbots were assembled.
|
||
> They held burning tapers in their hands. The Great Charter was read
|
||
> before them. They denounced the sentence of excommunication against
|
||
> every one who should thenceforth violate that fundamental law. They
|
||
> threw their tapers on the ground, and exclaimed, _May the soul of
|
||
> every one who incurs this sentence so stink and corrupt in hell!_ The
|
||
> king bore a part in this ceremony, and subjoined, ‘So help me God! I
|
||
> will keep all these articles inviolate, as I am a man, as I am a
|
||
> Christian, as I am a knight, and as I am a king crowned and
|
||
> anointed.’”—_Hume_, ch. 12. See also _Blackstone’s Introd. to the
|
||
> Charters. Black. Law Tracts_, Oxford ed., p. 332. _Mackintosh’s Hist.
|
||
> of Eng._, ch. 3. _Lardner’s Cab. Cyc._, vol. 45, p. 233-4.
|
||
|
||
The following is the form of “the sentence of excommunication” referred
|
||
to by Hume:
|
||
|
||
> “_The Sentence of Curse, Given by the Bishops, against the Breakers
|
||
> of the Charters._
|
||
|
||
> “The year of our Lord a thousand two hundred and fifty-three, the
|
||
> third day of May, in the great Hall of the King at Westminster, _in
|
||
> the presence, and by the assent, of the Lord Henry, by the Grace of
|
||
> God King of England_, and the Lords Richard, Earl of Cornwall, his
|
||
> brother, Roger (Bigot) Earl of Norfolk and Suffolk, marshal of
|
||
> England, Humphrey, Earl of Hereford, Henry, Earl of Oxford, John,
|
||
> Earl of Warwick, and other estates of the Realm of England: We,
|
||
> Boniface, by the mercy of God Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of
|
||
> all England, F. of London, H. of Ely, S. of Worcester, E. of Lincoln,
|
||
> W. of Norwich, P. of Hereford, W. of Salisbury, W. of Durham, R. of
|
||
> Exeter, M. of Carlisle, W. of Bath, E. of Rochester, T. of Saint
|
||
> David’s, Bishops, apparelled in Pontificals, with tapers burning,
|
||
> against the breakers of the Church’s Liberties, and of the Liberties
|
||
> or free customs of the Realm of England, and especially of those
|
||
> which are contained in the Charter of the Common Liberties of the
|
||
> Realm, and the Charter of the Forest, have solemnly denounced the
|
||
> sentence of Excommunication in this form. By the authority of
|
||
> Almighty God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and of the
|
||
> glorious Mother of God, and perpetual Virgin Mary, of the blessed
|
||
> Apostles Peter and Paul, and of all apostles, of the blessed Thomas,
|
||
> Archbishop and Martyr, and of all martyrs, of blessed Edward of
|
||
> England, and of all Confessors and virgins, and of all the saints of
|
||
> heaven: We excommunicate, accurse, and from the thresholds
|
||
> (liminibus) of our Holy Mother the Church, We sequester, all those
|
||
> that hereafter willingly and maliciously deprive or spoil the Church
|
||
> of her right: And all those that by any craft or wiliness do violate,
|
||
> break, diminish, or change the Church’s Liberties, or the ancient
|
||
> approved customs of the Realm, and especially the Liberties and free
|
||
> Customs contained in the Charters of the Common Liberties, and of the
|
||
> Forest, conceded by our Lord the King, to Archbishops, Bishops, and
|
||
> other Prelates of England; and likewise to the Earls, Barons,
|
||
> Knights, and other Freeholders of the Realm: And all that secretly,
|
||
> or openly, by deed, word, or counsel, _do make statutes, or observe
|
||
> them being made_, and that bring in Customs, or keep them when they
|
||
> be brought in, against the said Liberties, or any of them, the
|
||
> Writers and Counsellors of said statutes, and the Executors of them,
|
||
> and all those that shall presume to judge according to them. All and
|
||
> every which persons before mentioned, that wittingly shall commit
|
||
> anything of the premises, let them well know that they incur the
|
||
> aforesaid sentence, _ipso facto_, (i.e., upon the deed being done.)
|
||
> And those that ignorantly do so, and be admonished, except they
|
||
> reform themselves within fifteen days after the time of the
|
||
> admonition, and make full satisfaction for that they have done, at
|
||
> the will of the ordinary, shall be from that time forth included in
|
||
> the same sentence. And with the same sentence we burden all those
|
||
> that presume to perturb the peace of our sovereign Lord the King, and
|
||
> of the Realm. To the perpetual memory of which thing, We, the
|
||
> aforesaid Prelates, have put our seals to these presents.”—_Statutes
|
||
> of the Realm_, vol. 1, p. 6. _Ruffhead’s Statutes_, vol. 1, p. 20.
|
||
|
||
One of the Confirmations of the Charters, by Edward I., was by statute,
|
||
in the 25th year of his reign, (1297,) in the following terms. The
|
||
statute is usually entitled “_Confirmatio Cartarum_,” (Confirmation of
|
||
the Charters.)
|
||
|
||
> _Ch. 1._ “Edward, by the Grace of God, King of England, Lord of
|
||
> Ireland, and Duke of Guyan, To all those that these presents shall
|
||
> hear or see, Greeting. Know ye, that We, to the honor of God, and of
|
||
> Holy Church, and to the profit of our Realm, have granted, for us and
|
||
> our heirs, that the Charter of Liberties, and the Charter of the
|
||
> Forest, which were made by common assent of all the Realm, in the
|
||
> time of King Henry our Father, shall be kept in every point without
|
||
> breach. And we will that the same Charters shall be sent under our
|
||
> seal, as well to our justices of the Forest, as to others, and to all
|
||
> Sheriffs of shires, and to all our other officers, and to all our
|
||
> cities throughout the Realm, together with our writs, in the which it
|
||
> shall be contained, that they cause the aforesaid Charters to be
|
||
> published, and to declare to the people that We have confirmed them
|
||
> at all points; and to our Justices, Sheriffs, Mayors, and other
|
||
> ministers, which under us have the Laws of our Land to guide, that
|
||
> they allow the same Charters, in all their points, in pleas before
|
||
> them, and in judgment; that is, to wit, the Great Charter as the
|
||
> Common Law, and the Charter of the Forest for the wealth of our
|
||
> Realm.
|
||
|
||
> _Ch. 2._ “And we will that if any judgment be given from henceforth
|
||
> contrary to the points of the charters aforesaid by the justices, or
|
||
> by any others our ministers that hold plea before them, against the
|
||
> points of the Charters, it shall be undone and holden for naught.
|
||
|
||
> _Ch. 3._ “And we will, that the same Charters shall be sent, under
|
||
> our seal, to Cathedral Churches throughout our Realm, there to
|
||
> remain, and shall be read before the people two times in the year.
|
||
|
||
> _Ch. 4._ “And that all Archbishops and Bishops shall pronounce the
|
||
> sentence of excommunication against all those that by word, deed, or
|
||
> counsel, do contrary to the foresaid charters, or that in any point
|
||
> break or undo them. And that the said Curses be twice a year
|
||
> denounced and published by the prelates aforesaid. And if the same
|
||
> prelates, or any of them, be remiss in the denunciation of the said
|
||
> sentences, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, for the time
|
||
> being, shall compel and distrain them to make the denunciation in the
|
||
> form aforesaid.”—_St. 25 Edward I._, (1297.) _Statutes of the
|
||
> Realm_, vol. 1, p. 123.
|
||
|
||
It is unnecessary to repeat the terms of the various confirmations, most
|
||
of which were less formal than those that have been given, though of
|
||
course equally authoritative. Most of them are brief, and in the form of
|
||
a simple statute, or promise, to the effect that “The Great Charter, and
|
||
the Charter of the Forest, shall be firmly kept and maintained in all
|
||
points.” They are to be found printed with the other statutes of the
|
||
realm. One of them, after having “again granted, renewed and confirmed”
|
||
the charters, requires as follows:
|
||
|
||
> “That the Charters be delivered to every sheriff of England under the
|
||
> king’s seal, to be read four times in the year before the people in
|
||
> the full county,” (that is, at the county court,) “that is, to wit,
|
||
> the next county (court) after the feast of Saint Michael, and the
|
||
> next county (court) after Christmas, and at the next county (court)
|
||
> after Easter, and at the next county (court) after the feast of Saint
|
||
> John.”—_28 Edward I._, ch. 1, (1300.)
|
||
|
||
> Lingard says, “The Charter was ratified four times by Henry III.,
|
||
> twice by Edward I., fifteen times by Edward III., seven times by
|
||
> Richard II., six times by Henry IV., and once by Henry V.;” making
|
||
> thirty-five times in all.—_3 Lingard_, 50, note, Philad. ed.
|
||
|
||
Coke says Magna Carta was confirmed thirty-two times.—Preface_ to_ 2
|
||
_Inst_., p. 6.
|
||
|
||
> Lingard calls these “thirty-five successive ratifications” of the
|
||
> charter, “a sufficient proof how much its provisions were abhorred
|
||
> by the sovereign, and how highly they were prized by the nation.”—_3
|
||
> Lingard_, 50.
|
||
|
||
> Mackintosh says, “For almost five centuries (that is, until 1688) it
|
||
> (Magna Carta) was appealed to as the decisive authority on behalf of
|
||
> the people, though commonly so far only as the necessities of each
|
||
> case demanded.”—_Mackintosh’s Hist. of Eng._ ch. 3. _45 Lardner’s
|
||
> Cab. Cyc._, 221.
|
||
|
||
Coke, who has labored so hard to overthrow the most vital principles of
|
||
Magna Carta, and who, therefore, ought to be considered good authority
|
||
when he speaks in its favor,[^108] says:
|
||
|
||
> “It is called Magna Carta, not that it is great in quantity, for
|
||
> there be many voluminous charters commonly passed, specially in these
|
||
> later times, longer than this is; nor comparatively in respect that
|
||
> it is greater than _Charta de Foresta_, but in respect of the great
|
||
> importance and weightiness of the matter, as hereafter shall appear;
|
||
> and likewise for the same cause _Charta de Foresta_; and both of them
|
||
> are called _Magnæ Chartæ Libertatum Angliæ_, (The Great Charters of
|
||
> the Liberties of England.) ...
|
||
|
||
> “And it is also called _Charta Libertatum regni_, (Charter of the
|
||
> Liberties of the kingdom;) and upon great reason it is so called of
|
||
> the effect, _quia liberos facit_, (because it makes men free.)
|
||
> Sometime for the same cause (it is called) _communis libertas_,
|
||
> (common liberty,) and _le chartre des franchises_, (the charter of
|
||
> franchises.) ...
|
||
|
||
> “It was for the most part declaratory of the principal grounds of the
|
||
> fundamental laws of England, and for the residue it is additional to
|
||
> supply some defects of the common law....
|
||
|
||
> “Also, by the said act of 25 Edward I., (called _Confirmatio
|
||
> Chartarum_,) it is adjudged in parliament that the Great Charter and
|
||
> the Charter of the Forest shall be taken as the common law....
|
||
|
||
> “They (Magna Carta and Carta de Foresta) were, for the most part, but
|
||
> declarations of the ancient common laws of England, to the
|
||
> observation and keeping whereof, the king was bound and sworn.
|
||
|
||
> “After the making of Magna Charta, and Charta de Foresta, divers
|
||
> learned men in the laws, that I may use the words of the record, kept
|
||
> schools of the law in the city of London, and taught such as resorted
|
||
> to them the laws of the realm, taking their foundation of Magna
|
||
> Charta and Charta de Foresta.
|
||
|
||
> “And the said two charters have been confirmed, established, and
|
||
> commanded to be put in execution by thirty-two several acts of
|
||
> parliament in all.
|
||
|
||
> “This appeareth partly by that which hath been said, for that it hath
|
||
> so often been confirmed by the wise providence of so many acts of
|
||
> parliament.
|
||
|
||
> “And albeit judgments in the king’s courts are of high regard in law,
|
||
> and _judicia_ (judgments) are accounted as _jurisdicta_, (the speech
|
||
> of the law itself,) yet it is provided by act of parliament, that if
|
||
> any judgment be given contrary to any of the points of the Great
|
||
> Charter and Charta de Foresta, by the justices, or by any other of
|
||
> the king’s ministers, &c., it shall be undone, and holden for naught.
|
||
|
||
> “And that both the said charters shall be sent under the great seal
|
||
> to all cathedral churches throughout the realm, there to remain, and
|
||
> shall be read to the people twice every year.
|
||
|
||
> “The highest and most binding laws are the statutes which are
|
||
> established by parliament; and by authority of that highest court it
|
||
> is enacted (only to show their tender care of Magna Carta and Carta
|
||
> de Foresta) that if any statute be made contrary to the Great
|
||
> Charter, or the Charter of the Forest, that shall be holden for none;
|
||
> by which words all former statutes made against either of those
|
||
> charters are now repealed; and the nobles and great officers were to
|
||
> be sworn to the observation of Magna Charta and Charta de Foresta.
|
||
|
||
> “_Magna fuit quondam magnæ reverentia chartæ._” (Great was formerly
|
||
> the reverence for Magna Carta.)—_Coke’s Proem to 2 Inst._, p. 1 to
|
||
> 7.
|
||
|
||
Coke also says, “All pretence of prerogative against Magna Charta is
|
||
taken away.”—_2 Inst._, 36.
|
||
|
||
He also says, “That after this parliament (_52 Henry_ III., in 1267)
|
||
neither Magna Carta nor Carta de Foresta was ever attempted to be
|
||
impugned or questioned.”—_2 Inst._, 102.[^109]
|
||
|
||
To give all the evidence of the authority of Magna Carta, it would be
|
||
necessary to give the constitutional history of England since the year
|
||
1215. This history would show that Magna Carta, although continually
|
||
violated and evaded, was still acknowledged as law by the government,
|
||
and was held up by the people as the great standard and proof of their
|
||
rights and liberties. It would show also that the judicial tribunals,
|
||
_whenever it suited their purposes to do so_, were in the habit of
|
||
referring to Magna Carta as authority, in the same manner, and with the
|
||
same real or pretended veneration, with which American courts now refer
|
||
to the constitution of the United States, or the constitutions of the
|
||
states. And, what is equally to the point, it would show that these same
|
||
tribunals, the mere tools of kings and parliaments, would resort to the
|
||
same artifices of assumption, _precedent_, construction, and false
|
||
interpretation, to evade the requirements of Magna Carta, and to
|
||
emasculate it of all its power for the preservation of liberty, that are
|
||
resorted to by American courts to accomplish the same work on our
|
||
American constitutions.
|
||
|
||
I take it for granted, therefore, that if the authority of Magna Carta
|
||
had rested simply upon its character as a _compact_ between the king and
|
||
the people, it would have been forever binding upon the king, (that is,
|
||
upon the government, for the king was the government,) in his
|
||
legislative, judicial, and executive character; and that there was no
|
||
_constitutional_ possibility of his escaping from its restraints, unless
|
||
the people themselves should freely discharge him from them.
|
||
|
||
But the authority of Magna Carta does not rest, either wholly or mainly,
|
||
upon its character as a compact. For centuries before the charter was
|
||
granted, its main principles constituted “the Law of the Land,”—the
|
||
fundamental and constitutional law of the realm, which the kings were
|
||
sworn to maintain. And the principal benefit of the charter was, that it
|
||
contained a _written_ description and acknowledgment, by the king
|
||
himself, of what the constitutional law of the kingdom was, which his
|
||
coronation oath bound him to observe. Previous to Magna Carta, this
|
||
constitutional law rested mainly in precedents, customs, and the
|
||
memories of the people. And if the king could but make one innovation
|
||
upon this law, without arousing resistance, and being compelled to
|
||
retreat from his usurpation, he would cite that innovation as a
|
||
precedent for another act of the same kind; next, assert a custom; and,
|
||
finally, raise a controversy as to what the Law of the Land really was.
|
||
The great object of the barons and people, in demanding from the king a
|
||
written description and acknowledgment of the Law of the Land, was to
|
||
put an end to all disputes of this kind, and to put it out of the power
|
||
of the king to plead any misunderstanding of the constitutional law of
|
||
the kingdom. And the charter, no doubt, accomplished very much in this
|
||
way. After Magna Carta, it required much more audacity, cunning, or
|
||
strength, on the part of the king, than it had before, to invade the
|
||
people’s liberties with impunity. Still, Magna Carta, like all other
|
||
written constitutions, proved inadequate to the full accomplishment of
|
||
its purpose; for when did a parchment ever have power adequately to
|
||
restrain a government, that had either cunning to evade its
|
||
requirements, or strength to overcome those who attempted its defence?
|
||
The work of usurpation, therefore, though seriously checked, still went
|
||
on, to a great extent, after Magna Carta. Innovations upon the Law of
|
||
the Land are still made by the government. One innovation was cited as a
|
||
precedent; precedents made customs; and customs became laws, so far as
|
||
practice was concerned; until the government, composed of the king, the
|
||
high functionaries of the church, the nobility, a House of Commons
|
||
representing the “forty shilling freeholders,” and a dependent and
|
||
servile judiciary, all acting in conspiracy against the mass of the
|
||
people, became practically absolute, as it is at this day.
|
||
|
||
As proof that Magna Carta embraced little else than what was previously
|
||
recognized as the common law, or Law of the Land, I repeat some
|
||
authorities that have been already cited.
|
||
|
||
> Crabbe says, “It is admitted on all hands that it (Magna Carta)
|
||
> contains nothing but what was confirmatory of the common law and the
|
||
> ancient usages of the realm; and is, properly speaking, only an
|
||
> enlargement of the charter of Henry I. and his
|
||
> successors.”—_Crabbe’s Hist. of the Eng. Law_, p. 127.
|
||
|
||
> Blackstone says, “It is agreed by all our historians that the Great
|
||
> Charter of King John was, for the most part, compiled from the
|
||
> ancient customs of the realm, or the laws of Edward the Confessor; by
|
||
> which they mean the old common law which was established under our
|
||
> Saxon princes.”—_Blackstone’s Introd. to the Charters._ See
|
||
> _Blackstone’s Law Tracts_, Oxford ed., p. 289.
|
||
|
||
> Coke says, “The common law is the most general and ancient law of
|
||
> the realm.... The common law appeareth in the statute of _Magna
|
||
> Carta_, and other ancient statutes, (which for the most part are
|
||
> affirmations of the common law,) in the original writs, in judicial
|
||
> records, and in our books of terms and years.”—_1 Inst._, 115 b.
|
||
|
||
> Coke also says, “It (Magna Carta) was for the most part declaratory
|
||
> of the principal grounds of the fundamental laws of England, and for
|
||
> the residue it was additional to supply some defects of the common
|
||
> law.... They (Magna Carta and Carta de Foresta) were, for the most
|
||
> part, but declarations of the ancient common laws of England, _to the
|
||
> observation and keeping whereof the king was bound and
|
||
> sworn_.”—_Preface to 2 Inst._, p. 3 and 5.
|
||
|
||
> Hume says, “We may now, from the tenor of this charter, (Magna
|
||
> Carta,) conjecture what those laws were of King Edward, (the
|
||
> Confessor,) which the English nation during so many generations still
|
||
> desired, with such an obstinate perseverance, to have recalled and
|
||
> established. They were chiefly these latter articles of Magna Carta;
|
||
> and the barons who, at the beginning of these commotions, demanded
|
||
> the revival of the Saxon laws, undoubtedly thought that they had
|
||
> sufficiently satisfied the people, by procuring them this concession,
|
||
> which comprehended the principal objects to which they had so long
|
||
> aspired.”—_Hume_, ch. 11.
|
||
|
||
Edward the First confessed that the Great Charter was substantially
|
||
identical with the common law, as far as it went, when he commanded his
|
||
justices to allow “the Great Charter as the Common Law,” “in pleas
|
||
before them, and in judgment,” as has been already cited in this
|
||
chapter.—_25 Edward_ I., ch. 1, (1297.)
|
||
|
||
In conclusion of this chapter, it may be safely asserted that the
|
||
veneration, attachment, and pride, which the English nation, for more
|
||
than six centuries, have felt towards Magna Carta, are in their nature
|
||
among the most irrefragable of all proofs that it was the fundamental
|
||
law of the land, and constitutionally binding upon the government; for,
|
||
otherwise, it would have been, in their eyes, an unimportant and
|
||
worthless thing. What those sentiments were I will use the words of
|
||
others to describe,—the words, too, of men, who, like all modern
|
||
authors who have written on the same topic, had utterly inadequate ideas
|
||
of the true character of the instrument on which they lavished their
|
||
eulogiums.
|
||
|
||
Hume, speaking of the Great Charter and the Charter of the Forest, as
|
||
they were confirmed by Henry III., in 1217, says:
|
||
|
||
> “Thus these famous charters were brought nearly to the shape in which
|
||
> they have ever since stood; and they were, during many generations,
|
||
> the peculiar favorites of the English nation, and esteemed the most
|
||
> sacred rampart to national liberty and independence. As they secured
|
||
> the rights of all orders of men, they were anxiously defended by all,
|
||
> and became the basis, in a manner, of the English monarchy, and a
|
||
> kind of original contract, which both limited the authority of the
|
||
> king and ensured the conditional allegiance of his subjects. Though
|
||
> often violated, they were still claimed by the nobility and people;
|
||
> and, as no precedents were supposed valid that infringed them, they
|
||
> rather acquired than lost authority, from the frequent attempts made
|
||
> against them in several ages, by regal and arbitrary power.”—_Hume_,
|
||
> ch. 12.
|
||
|
||
> Mackintosh says, “It was understood by the simplest of the unlettered
|
||
> age for whom it was intended. It was remembered by them.... For
|
||
> almost five centuries it was appealed to as the decisive authority on
|
||
> behalf of the people.... To have produced it, to have preserved it,
|
||
> to have matured it, constitute the immortal claim of England on the
|
||
> esteem of mankind. Her Bacons and Shakspeares, her Miltons and
|
||
> Newtons, with all the truth which they have revealed, and all the
|
||
> generous virtues which they have inspired, are of inferior value when
|
||
> compared with the subjection of men and their rulers to the
|
||
> principles of justice; if, indeed, it be not more true that these
|
||
> mighty spirits could not have been formed except under equal laws,
|
||
> nor roused to full activity without the influence of that spirit
|
||
> which the Great Charter breathed over their
|
||
> forefathers.”—_Mackintosh’s Hist. of Eng._, ch. 3.[^110]
|
||
|
||
Of the Great Charter, the trial by jury is the vital part, and the only
|
||
part that places the liberties of the people in their own keeping. Of
|
||
this Blackstone says:
|
||
|
||
> “The trial by jury, or the country, _per patriam_, is also that trial
|
||
> by the peers of every Englishman, which, as the grand bulwark of his
|
||
> liberties, is secured to him by the Great Charter; _nullus liber homo
|
||
> capiatur, vel imprisonetur, aut exuletur, aut aliquo modo destruatur,
|
||
> nisi per legale judicium parium suorum, vel per legem terrae...._
|
||
|
||
> The liberties of England cannot but subsist so long as this palladium
|
||
> remains sacred and inviolate, not only from all open attacks, which
|
||
> none will be so hardy as to make, but also from all secret
|
||
> machinations which may sap and undermine it.”[^111]
|
||
|
||
> “The trial by jury ever has been, and I trust ever will be, looked
|
||
> upon as the glory of the English law.... It is the most transcendent
|
||
> privilege which any subject can enjoy or wish for, that he cannot be
|
||
> affected in his property, his liberty, or his person, but by the
|
||
> unanimous consent of twelve of his neighbors and equals.”[^112]
|
||
|
||
> Hume calls the trial by jury “An institution admirable in itself, and
|
||
> the best calculated for the preservation of liberty and the
|
||
> administration of justice, that ever was devised by the wit of
|
||
> man.”[^113]
|
||
|
||
An old book, called “English Liberties,” says:
|
||
|
||
> “English Parliaments have all along been most zealous for preserving
|
||
> this great Jewel of Liberty, trials by juries having no less than
|
||
> fifty-eight several times, since the Norman Conquest, been
|
||
> established and confirmed by the legislative power, no one privilege
|
||
> besides having been ever so often remembered in parliament.”[^114]
|
||
|
||
[^106]: _Mackintosh’s Hist. of Eng._, ch. 3. _45 Lardner’s Cab.
|
||
Cyc._, 354.
|
||
|
||
[^107]: “_Forty shilling freeholders_” were those “people
|
||
dwelling and resident in the same counties, whereof every one of them
|
||
shall have free land or tenement to the value of forty shillings by the
|
||
year at the least above all charges.” By statute _8 Henry_ 6, ch. 7,
|
||
(1429,) these freeholders only were allowed to vote for members of
|
||
Parliament from the _counties_.
|
||
|
||
[^108]: He probably speaks in its favor only to blind the eyes of
|
||
the people to the frauds he has attempted upon its true meaning.
|
||
|
||
[^109]: It will be noticed that Coke calls these confirmations of
|
||
the charter “acts of parliament,” instead of acts of the king alone.
|
||
This needs explanation.
|
||
|
||
It was one of Coke’s ridiculous pretences, that laws anciently enacted
|
||
by the king, at the request, or with the consent, or by the advice, of
|
||
his parliament, was “an act of parliament,” instead of the act of the
|
||
king. And in the extracts cited, he carries this idea so far as to
|
||
pretend that the various confirmations of the Great Charter were “acts
|
||
of parliament,” instead of the acts of the kings. He might as well have
|
||
pretended that the original grant of the Charter was an “act of
|
||
parliament;” because it was not only granted at the request, and with
|
||
the consent, and by the advice, but on the compulsion even, of those who
|
||
commonly constituted his parliaments. Yet this did not make the grant of
|
||
the charter “an act of parliament.” It was simply an act of the king.
|
||
|
||
The object of Coke, in this pretence, was to furnish some color for the
|
||
palpable falsehood that the legislative authority, which parliament was
|
||
trying to assume in his own day, and which it finally succeeded in
|
||
obtaining, had a precedent in the ancient constitution of the kingdom.
|
||
|
||
There would be as much reason in saying that, because the ancient kings
|
||
were in the habit of passing laws in special answer to the _petitions_
|
||
of their subjects, therefore those _petitioners_ were a part of the
|
||
legislative power of the kingdom.
|
||
|
||
One great objection to this argument of Coke, for the legislative
|
||
authority of the ancient parliaments, is that a very large—probably
|
||
much the larger—number of legislative acts were done _without_ the
|
||
advice, consent, request, or even presence, of a parliament. Not only
|
||
were many formal statutes passed without any mention of the consent or
|
||
advice of parliament, but a simple order of the king in council, or a
|
||
simple proclamation, writ, or letter under seal, issued by his command,
|
||
had the same force as what Coke calls “an act of parliament.” And this
|
||
practice continued, to a considerable extent at least, down to Coke’s
|
||
own time.
|
||
|
||
The kings were always in the habit of consulting their parliaments, more
|
||
or less, in regard to matters of legislation,—not because their consent
|
||
was constitutionally necessary, but in order to make influence in favor
|
||
of their laws, and thus induce the people to observe them, and the
|
||
juries to enforce them.
|
||
|
||
The general duties of the ancient parliaments were not legislative, but
|
||
judicial, as will be shown more fully hereafter. The _people_ were not
|
||
represented in the parliaments at the time of Magna Carta, but only the
|
||
archbishops, bishops, earls, barons, and knights; so that little or
|
||
nothing would have been gained for liberty by Coke’s idea that
|
||
parliament had a legislative power. He would only have substituted an
|
||
aristocracy for a king. Even after the Commons were represented in
|
||
parliament, they for some centuries appeared only as _petitioners_,
|
||
except in the matter of taxation, when their _consent_ was asked. And
|
||
almost the only source of their influence on legislation was this: that
|
||
they would sometimes refuse their consent to the taxation, unless the
|
||
king would pass such laws as they petitioned for; or, as would seem to
|
||
have been much more frequently the case, unless he would abolish such
|
||
laws and practices as they remonstrated against.
|
||
|
||
The _influence_ or power of parliament, and especially of the Commons,
|
||
in the general legislation of the country, was a thing of slow growth,
|
||
having its origin in a device of the king to get money contrary to law,
|
||
(as will be seen in the next volume,) and not at all a part of the
|
||
constitution of the kingdom, nor having its foundation in the consent of
|
||
the people. The power, _as at present exercised_, was not fully
|
||
established until 1688, (near five hundred years after Magna Carta,)
|
||
when the House of Commons (falsely so called) had acquired such
|
||
influence as the representative, _not of the people, but of the wealth,
|
||
of the nation_, that they compelled the king to discard the oath fixed
|
||
by the constitution of the kingdom; (which oath has been already given
|
||
in a former chapter,(page 101) and was, in substance, to preserve and
|
||
execute the Common Law, the Law of the Land,—or, in the words of the
|
||
oath, “_the just laws and customs which the common people had chosen_;”)
|
||
and to swear that he would “govern the people of this kingdom of
|
||
England, and the dominions thereto belonging, _according to the statutes
|
||
in parliament agreed on_, and the laws and customs of the same.”[^115]
|
||
|
||
The passage and enforcement of this statute, and the assumption of this
|
||
oath by the king, were plain violations of the English constitution,
|
||
inasmuch as they abolished, so far as such an oath could abolish, the
|
||
legislative power of the king, and also “those just laws and customs
|
||
which the common people (through their juries) had chosen,” and
|
||
substituted the will of parliament in their stead.
|
||
|
||
Coke was a great advocate for the legislative power of parliament, as a
|
||
means of restraining the power of the king. As he denied all power to
|
||
_juries_ to decide upon the obligation of laws, and as he held that the
|
||
legislative power was “_so transcendent and absolute as (that) it cannot
|
||
be confined, either for causes or persons, within any bounds_,”[^116] he
|
||
was perhaps honest in holding that it was safer to trust this terrific
|
||
power in the hands of parliament, than in the hands of the king. His
|
||
error consisted in holding that either the king or parliament had any
|
||
such power, or that they had any power at all to pass laws that should
|
||
be binding upon a jury.
|
||
|
||
These declarations of Coke, that the charter was confirmed by thirty-two
|
||
“acts of parliament,” have a mischievous bearing in another respect.
|
||
They tend to weaken the authority of the charter, by conveying the
|
||
impression that the charter itself might be _abolished_ by “act of
|
||
parliament.” Coke himself admits that it could not be revoked or
|
||
rescinded by the _king_; for he says, “All pretence of prerogative
|
||
against Magna Carta is taken away.” (_2 Inst._, 36.)
|
||
|
||
He knew perfectly well, and the whole English nation knew, that the
|
||
_king_ could not lawfully infringe Magna Carta. Magna Carta, therefore,
|
||
made it impossible that absolute power could ever be practically
|
||
established in England, _in the hands of the king_. Hence, as Coke was
|
||
an advocate for absolute power,—that is, for a legislative power “so
|
||
transcendent and absolute as (that) it cannot be confined, either for
|
||
causes or persons, within any bounds,”—there was no alternative for him
|
||
but to vest this absolute power in parliament. Had he not vested it in
|
||
parliament, he would have been obliged to abjure it altogether, and to
|
||
confess that the people, _through their juries_, had the right to judge
|
||
of the obligation of all legislation whatsoever; in other words, that
|
||
they had the right to confine the government within the limits of “those
|
||
just laws and customs which the common people (acting as jurors) had
|
||
chosen.” True to his instincts, as a judge, and as a tyrant, he assumed
|
||
that this absolute power was vested in the hands of parliament.
|
||
|
||
But the truth was that, as by the English constitution parliament had no
|
||
authority at all for _general_ legislation, it could no more confirm,
|
||
than it could abolish, Magna Carta.
|
||
|
||
These thirty-two confirmations of Magna Carta, which Coke speaks of as
|
||
“acts of parliament,” were merely acts of the king. The parliaments,
|
||
indeed, by refusing to grant him money, except on that condition, and
|
||
otherwise, had contributed to oblige him to make the confirmations; just
|
||
as they had helped to oblige him by arms to grant the charter in the
|
||
first place. But the confirmations themselves were nevertheless
|
||
constitutionally, as well as formally, the acts of the king alone.
|
||
|
||
[^110]: Under the head of “_John._”
|
||
|
||
[^111]: _4 Blackstone_, 349-50.
|
||
|
||
[^112]: _3 Blackstone_, 379.
|
||
|
||
[^113]: _Hume_, ch. 2.
|
||
|
||
[^114]: Page 203, 5th edition, 1721.
|
||
|
||
[^115]: St. 1 _William and Mary_, ch. 6, (1688.)
|
||
|
||
[^116]: 4 _Inst._, 36.
|