by consulting the Statute Books And in the First year of William and Mary Ses. 2. c. 9. an Act passed in England declaring all Attainders and other Acts made in the late pretended Parliament under King James at Dublin void But was not Enacted here in Ireland till the 7th year of K. William c. 3. And this was thought requisite to be done upon mature consideration thereon before the King and Council of England notwithstanding that the English Act does particularly name Ireland and was wholly design'd for and relates thereto The like may we find in several other Statutes of England passed since his present Majesties Accession to the Throne which have afterwards been passed here in Ireland with such Alterations as make them practicable and agreeable to this Kingdom Such as are amongst others the Act for Disarming Papists The Act of Recognition The Act for taking away Clergie from some Offenders The Act for taking Special Bail in the Country c. The Act against Clandestine Mortgages The Act against Cursing and Swearing These with many more are to to be found in our Statute Books in the several Reigns of Henry the 8th Edward the 6th Queen Elizabeth King Iames King Charles the 1st and 2d and King William But it is not to be found in any Records in Ireland that ever any Act of Parliament introductive of a new Law made in England since the time of King Iohn was by the judgment of any Court received for Law or put in Execution in the Realm of Ireland before the same was Confirmed and Assented to by Parliament in Ireland And thus I presume we have pretty clearly made out our Fourth Enquiry forementioned and shewn plainly the several steps by which the English form of Government and the English Statute Laws were received in this Kingdom and that this was wholly by the Peoples consent in Parliament to which we have had a very antient Right and as full a Right as our next Neighbours can pretend to or challenge I shall now consider the Objections and Difficulties that are moved on this Head drawn from Precedents and Passages in our Law-Books that may seem to prove the contrary First 't is urg'd That in the Irish Act concerning Rape passed anno 8 Edward 4 c. 1. 't is expressed That a Doubt was conceiv'd whether the English Statute of the 6th of Richard the 2d c. 6. ought to be of force in Ireland without a Confirmation thereof in the Parliament of Ireland Which shews as some alledg that even in those days it was held by some That an Act of of Parliament in England might bind Ireland before it be consented to in Parliament here But I concieve this Gloss is rais'd meerly for want of Expressing the Reason of the said Doubt in the Irish Statute of the 8th of Edward the 4th c. 1. which we may reasonably judge was this By the Statute of Westminster the 2d c. 34. a Woman that eloped from her Husband and lived with the Adulterer or a Wife that being first Ravish'd did afterwards consent and lived with the Ravisher she should loose her Dower This Statute of Westminster the 2d was made of force in Ireland by an Act passed here the 13th of Edward the 2d as we have seen before pag. 68 69. Afterwards by the English Statute of the 6th of Rich. the 2d c. 6. there was a farther addition made to the said Statute of Westminster the 2d to this effect That a Maiden or Wife being Ravished and afterwards consenting to the Ravishers as well the Ravisher as she that was Ravished shall be disabled to claim all Inheritance or Dower after the death of her Husband or Ancestor On this account the Doubt was here raised in Ireland in the 8th of Edward the 4th c. 1. Whether this latter English Statute of the 6th of Richard the 2d c. 6. were not in force in Ireland by virtue of the Irish Statute of the 13th of Edward the 2d which confirmed the Statute of Westminster the 2d c. 34. And for setling this Doubt the said Statute of the 8th of Edward the 4th c. 1. was passed in Ireland and we find very good reason for the said Doubt For the English Statute of the 6th of Richard the 2d c. 6. contained but a small addition to the Statute of Westminster the 2d c. 34. and we see that even this ad dition it self was judged not to be of force in Ireland till Enacted here For the said Irish Statute of the 8th of Edward the 4th c. 1. makes the said Statute of the 6th of Rich. 2d c. 6. of Force in Ireland only from the 6th of March then last past 'T is urg'd secondly That tho' perhaps such Acts of Parliament in England which do not Name Ireland shall not be construed to Bind Ireland yet all such English Statutes as mention Ireland either by the General Words of all his Majesty's Dominions or by particularly Naming of Ireland are and shall be of Force in this Kingdom This being a Doctrine first broach'd Directly as I conceive by Will. Hussey Lord Chief Justice of the Kings Bench in England in the first year of Henry the Seventh and of late Revived by the Lord Chief Justice Cook and strongly urged and much rely'd upon iâ—… these latter Days I shall take thâ—… Liberty of Enlarging thereon tho I venture thereby to swell this Pamphlet to a size greater than I desire or design'd First therefore As to such English Statutes as seem to comprehend Ireland and to Bind it under the General Words of all his Majesty's Dominions or Subjects whatever has been the Opinion of Private and Particular Lawyers in this Point I am sure the Opinions of the Kings of England and their Privy Council have been otherwise 'T is well known since Poyning's Act in Ireland the 10th of Henry the Seventh no Act can pass in our Parliament here till it be first Assented to by the King and Privy Council of England and Transmitted hither under the Broad Seal of England Now the King and his Privy Council there have been so far from surmising that an Act of Parliament of England mentioning only in General All the Kings Dominions or Subjects should Bind Ireland that they have clearly shewn the contrary by frequently Transmitting to Ireland to be pass'd into Laws here English Statutes wherein the General Words of all the Kings Dominions or Subjects were contain'd which would have been to no purpose but meerly Actum Agere had Ireland been Bound before by those English Statutes Of this I shall give the following Examples amongst many others The Act of Parliament in England against Appeals to Rome 24 Hen. 8. c. 12. by express words extends to all his Majesties Dominions yet the same was not in force nor receiv'd in Ireland till it was Enacted by Parliament there the 28th of Hen. 8. c. 6. In like manner the Statutes made in England concerning First Fruits
Iudgment of Law Whether he means the Law of Nature and Reason or of Nations or the Civil Laws of our Commonwealths in none of which Senses I conceive will he or any Man be ever able to make out his Position Is the Reason of England's Parliament not Binding Ireland Because we do not send thither Representatives And is the Efficacy of this Reason taken off by our being Named in an English Act Why should sending Representatives to Parliament Bind those that send them Meerly because thereby the Consent of those that are Bound is obtain'd as far as those sort of Meetings can possibly permit which is the very Foundation of the Obligation of all Laws And is Ireland's being Named in an English Act of Parliament the least step towards obtaining the Consent of the People of Ireland If it be not then certainly my Lord Cook 's Parenthesis is to no purpose And 't is a wonder to me that so many Men have run upon this vain Imagination meerly from the Assertion of this Judge For I challenge any Man to shew me that any one before him or any one since but from him has vended this Doctrine And if the bare Assertion of a Judge shall Bind a whole Nation and Dissolve the Rights and Liberties thereof We shall make their Tongues very powerful and constitute them greater Lawgivers than the greatest Senates I do not see why my Denying it should not be as Authentick as his Affirming it 'T is true He was a great Lawyer and a powerful Judge but had no more Authority to make a Law than I or any Man else But some will say He was a Learned Judge and may be supposed to have Reason for his Position Why then does he not give it us And then what he Asserts would Prevail not from the Authority of the Person but from the Force of the Reason The most Learned in the Laws have no more power to make or alter a Constitution than any other Man And their Decisions shall no farther prevail than supported by Reason and Equity I conceive my Ld. Ch. Justice Cooke apply'd himself so wholly to the Study of the Common Laws of England that he did not enquire far into the Laws of Nature and Nations if he had certainly he could never have been Guilty of such an Erroneous Slip He would have seen demonstrably that Consent only gives Humane Laws their Force and that therefore the Reason in the Case he quotes is unanswerable Quia non mittunt Milites ad Parliamentum Moreover the Assertion of Cooke in this point is directly contrary to the whole tenour of the Case which he cites For the very Act of Parliament on which the Debate of the Judges did arise and which they deemed not to be of Force in Ireland particularly names Ireland So that here again Ld. Cooke's Error appears most plainly For this I refer to the Report as I have exactly delivered it before pag. 90 91. By which it appears clearly to be the unanimous Opinion of all the Judges then in the Exchequer Chamber That within the Land of Ireland the Parliaments of England have no Jurisdiction whatever they may have over the Subjects of Ireland on the open Seas And the reason is given Quia Hibernia non mittit Milites ad Parliamentum in Angliâ This Assertion likewise is inconsistent with himself in other parts of his Works He tells us in his 4th Inst. pag. 349. That 't is plain that not only King John as all Men allow but Henry the Second also the Father of King John did Ordain and Command at the Instance of the Irish That such Laws as had been in England should be Observ'd and of Force in Ireland Hereby Ireland being of it self a distinct Dominion and no part of the Kingdom of England was to have Parliaments holden there as in England And in pag. 12. he tells us That Henry the Second sent a Modus into Ireland directing them how to hold their Parliaments But to what end was all this if Ireland nevertheless were subject to the Parliament of England The King and Parliaments of these Kingdoms are the supream Legislators If Ireland be subject to Two its Own and that of England it has Two Supreams 't is not impossible but they may Enact different or contrary Sanctions which of these shall the People Obey He tells us in Calvin's Case fol. 17. b. That if a King hath a Christian Kingdom by Conquest as Henry the Second had Ireland after King John had given to them being under his Obedience and Subjection the Laws of England for the Government of that Country no succeeding King could alter the same without Parliament Which by the way seems directly contradictory to what he says concerning Ireland six lines below this last cited passage So that we may observe my Lord Cook enormously stumbling at every turn in this Point Thus I have done with this Reverend Judge and in him with the only Positive Opinion against us I shall now consider what our Law-Books offer in our Favour on this Point To this purpose we meet a Case fully apposite reported in the Year-Book of the 20th of Henry the 6th fol. 8. between one Iohn Pilkington and one A. Pilkington brought a Scire Facias against A. to shew Cause why Letters Patents whereby the King had granted an Office in Ireland to the said A. should not be repeal'd since the said Pilkington had the same Office granted to him by former Letters Patents of the same King to be occupied by himself or his Deputy Whereupon A. pleaded That the Land of Ireland time out of Memory hath been a Land separated and distinct from the Land of England and Ruled and Governed by the Customs of the same Land of Ireland That the Lords of the same Land which are of the King's Council have used from time to time in the absence of the King to Elect a Iustice who hath Power to Pardon and Punish all Felons c. and to call a Parliament and by the Advice of the Lords and Commonalty to make Statutes He alledged further That a Parliament was Assembled and that it was Ordain'd by the said Parliament That every Man who had an Office within the said Land before a certain day shall occupy the said Office by himself otherwise he should forfeit He shew'd that Pilkington Occupied by a Deputy and that therefore his Office was void and that the King had granted the said Office to him the said A. Hereupon Pilkington Demurr'd in Law and it was debated by the Judges Yelverton Fortescue Portington Markham and Ascough whether the said Prescription in relation to the State and Government of Ireland be good oâ—… void in Law Yelverton and Portington held the Prescription void But Fortescue Markham and Ascough held the Prescription good and that the Letters Patents made to A were good and ought not to be Repeal'd And in this it was agreed by Fortescue and Portington That if
26 Hen. 8. c. 3. and the Act of Faculties 25 Hen. 8. c. 21. though each of them by express words comprize All his Majesties Subjects and Dominions were not receiv'd as Laws in Ireland till the former was Enacted there 28 H. 8. c. 4. and the latter the 28 Hen. 8. c. 19. and so the Stature Restoring to the Crown all Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical made in England Anno 1 Eliz. c. 1. and therein giving Power to Erect an Ecclesiastical High-Commission-Court in England and Ireland yet was not of Force in Ireland till Enacted there Anno 2 Eliz. c. 1. And tho the said English Act in relation to Erecting such an High-Commission Court was Repeal'd 17 Car. 1. c. 11 and the Repeal confirm'd the 13 Car. 2. c. 12 And the late Bill of Rights 1 W. and M. Ses. 2. c. 2. in England has damn'd all such Courts Yet the Act in Ireland 2 Eliz. c. 1. remains still in force here and so it was lately declar'd here by the Lord High-Chancellour Porter Lord Chief Justice Reynel Lord Chief Baron Hely Mr. Justice Cox Mr. Justice Ieffreyson in the Case of Dr. Thomas Hacket late Bishop of Down who was depriv'd of the said Bishoprick by such a Commission for great Enormities the Commissioners being Dr. Dopping late Bishop of Meath Dr. King the present Bishop of London-Derry and Dr. Wiseman late Bishop of Dromore And truly I see no more Reason for Binding Ireland by the English Laws under the General Words of all his Majesties Dominions or Subjects than there is for Binding Scotland by the same for Scotland is as much his Dominion and Scots-men as much his Subjects as Ireland and Irish-men If it be said That Scotland is an Antient Separate and Distinct Kingdom from England I say So is Ireland The Difference is Scotland continued separate from the Kings of England till of late years and Ireland continued separate from England but a very little while in the Person of King Iohn before the Death of his Father and of his Brother Richard the First without issue But then 't is to be considered that there was a Possibility or even a Probability that Ireland might have continued separate from the Crown of England even to this very day if Richard the First had left behind him a Numerous Progeny Secondly As to such English Statutes as particularly Name Ireland and are therefore said to be of Force in this Kingdom tho' never Enacted here I shall consider only the more Antient Precedents that are offered in Confirmation of this Doctrine For as to those of later Date 't is these we complain of as bearing hard on the Liberties of this Country and the Rights of our Parliaments and therefore these ought not to be produced as Arguments against us I presume if I can shew that the Antient Precedents that are produced do not conclude against us it will follow that the Modern Instances given ought not to conclude against us that is to say plainly These ought not to have been made as they are as wanting Foundation both from Authority and Reason The Antient Precedents of English Statutes particularly Naming Ireland and said to be made in England with a Design of Binding Ireland are chiefly these three 1. Statutum Hiberniae 14 H. 3. 2. Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae 17 Edw. 1. 3. And the Act that all Staple Commodities passing out of England or Ireland shall be carried to Callis as long as the Staple is at Callis 2 Hen. 6. c. 4. on which Hussey delivered his Opinion as we shall see more fully hereafter These Statutes especially the two first being made for Ireland as their Titles import have given occasion to think that the Parliament of England have a Right to make Laws for Ireland without the Consent of their Chosen Representatives But if we Enquire farther into this matter we shall find this Conclusion not fairly Deduced First The Statutum Hiberniae 14 Hen. 3. as 't is to be found in the Collection of English Statutes is plainly thus The Judges in Ireland conceiving a Doubt concerning Inheritances devolved to Sisters or Coheirs viz. Whether the younger Sisters ought to hold of the Eldest Sister and do Homage unto her for their Portions or of the Chief Lord and do Homage unto him therefore Girald Fitz Maurice the then Lord Justice of Ireland dispatcht four Knights to the King in England to bring a Certificate from thence of the Practice there used and what was the Common-Law of England in that Case Whereupon Hen. 3. in this his Certificate or Rescript which is called Statutum Hiberniae meerly informs the Justice what the Law and Custom was in England viz. That the Sisters ought to hold of the Chief Lord and not of the Eldest Sister And the close of it commands that the foresaid Customs that be used within our Realm of England in this Case be Proclaimed throughout our Dominion of Ireland and be there observ'd Teste meipso apud Westminst 9. Feb. An. Reg. 14. From whence 't is manifest that this Statutum Hiberniae was no more than a Certificate of what the common Law of England was in that Case which Ireland by the Original Compact was to be governed by And shews no more that therefore the Parliament of England may bind Ireland than it would have proved that the Common Wealth of Rome was subject to Greece if after Rome had received the Law of the Twelve Tables they had sent to Greece to know what the Law was in some Special Case The Statute call'd Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae made at Notingham the 17th of Edward the First and to be found in Pultons Collection pag. 76. Edit Lond. 1670. was certainly never Received or of Force in Ireland This is Manifest from the very first Article of that Ordnance which Prohibits the Iustice of Ireland or others the Kings Officers there to Purchase Land in that Kingdom or within their respective Balliwicks without the Kings Licence on pain of Forfeitures But that this has ever been Otherwise and that the Lords Justices and other Officers here have Purchas'd Lands in Ireland at their own Will and Pleasure needs no Proof to those who have the least knowledge of this Country Nor does it appear by any Inquisition Office or other Record that any one ever Forfeited on that Account Moreover this Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae is really in it self No Act of Parliament but meerly an Ordinance of the King and his Privy Council in England which appears as well from the Preamble to the said Ordinance as from this Observation likewise That King Edward the First held no Parliament in the 17th year of his Reign Or if this were a Parliament this Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae is the only Act thereof that is Extant But 't is very improbable that only this single Ordinance should Appear if any such Parliament were call'd together Thirdly As to the Staple-Act 2
's Time Knights of the Shire Citizens and Burgesses were Elected in the Shires Cities and Burroughs of Ireland to serve in Parliament in England and have so served accordingly For amongst the Records of the Tower of London Rot. Claus. 50. Edw. 3. Parl. 2. Membr 23. We find a Writ from the King at Westminster directed to Iames Butler Lord Justice of Ireland and to R. Archbishop of Dublin his Chancellour requiring them to issue Writs under the Great Seal of Ireland to the several Counties Cities and Burroughs for satisfying the Expences of the Men of that Land who last came over to serve in Parliament in England And in another Roll the 50th of Edw. III. Membr 19. On Complaint to the King by Iohn Draper who was Chosen Burgess of Cork by Writ and served in the Parliament of England and yet was deny'd his Expences by some of the Citizens Care was taken to re-imburse him If from these last mention'd Records it be concluded that the Parliament of England may Bind Ireland it must also be Allow'd that the People of Ireland ought to have their Representatives in the Parliament of England And this I believe we should be willing enough to embrace but this is an Happiness we can hardly hope for This sending of Representatives out of Ireland to the Parliament in England on some occasions was found in process of time to be very Troublesome and Inconvenient and this we may presume was the Reason that afterwards when Times were more settled we fell again into our old Track and regular course of Parliaments in our own Country and hereupon the Laws afore-noted pag. 64. were Enacted Establishing that no Law made in the Parliament of England should be of force in Ireland till it was Allow'd and Publish'd in Parliament here I have said before pag. 85. that I would only consider the more Antient Precedents that are offered to prove That Acts of England particularly Naming Ireland should bind us in this Kingdom and indeed it were sufficient to stop here for the Reason above alledged However I shall venture to come down lower and to enquire into the Modern Precedents of English Acts of Parliament alledged against us But still with this Observation That 't is these we Complain against as Innovations and therefore they ought not to be brought in Argument against us I do therefore again assert that before the Year 1641. there was no Statute made in England introductory of a New Law that interfered with the Right which the People of Ireland have to make Laws for themselves except only those which we have before mentioned and which we have discuss'd at large and submit to the Readers â—…udgment But in the Year 1641. and afterwards in Cromwel's time and since that in King Charles II. and again very lately in King William's Reign some Laws have been made in England to be of Force in Ireland But how this came to pass we shall now Enquire In the 17th Year of K. Charles I. which was in the Year 1642. there were three or four Acts of Parliament made in England for incouraging Adventurers to raise Money for the speedy suppression of the Horrid Rebellion which broke out in Ireland the 23d of October 1641 The Titles of these Acts we have in Pulton's Collection of Statutes But with this Remark That they are made of no Force by the Acts of Setlement and Explanation passed in King Charles Il's time in the Kingdom of Ireland So that in these we are so far from finding Precedents for England's Parliament binding Ireland that they plainly shew that the Parliament of Ireland may Reâ—… an Act passed in England in relation to the Affairs of Ireland For 't is very well known that Persons who were to have Interests and Titles in Ireland by virtue of those Acts passed in England are cut off by the Acts of Settlement and Explanation And indeed there is all the Reason in the World that it should be so and that Acts made in a Kingdom by the Legal Representatives of the People should take place of those made in another Kingdom But however it will be said that by those Acts 't is manifest that England did presume they had such a Right to pass Acts binding Ireland or else they had ne'er done it To which I answer That considering the condition Ireland was in at that time viz. under an horrid Intestine Rebellion flaming in every corner of the Kingdom 't was impossible to have a Parliament of our own yet it was absolutely necessary that something should be done towards suppressing the Violences then raging amongst us And the only means could then be practised was for the Parliament of England to interpose and do something for our Relief and Safety these were the best Assurances could be had at that juncture But when the Storm was over and the Kingdom quieted we see new Measures were taken in a Legal Parliament of our own As to what was done for Ireland in the Parliament of England in Cromwel's time besides the Confusion and Irregularity of all Proceeding in those days which hinders any of them to be brought into Precedent in these times We shall find also that then there were Representatives sent out of this Kingdom who sate in the Parliament of England which then was only the House of Commons We cannot therefore argue from hence that England may bind us for we see they allow'd us Representatives without which they rightly concluded they could not make Laws Obligatory to us I come now to King Charles the 2ds time And in it we shall find the following English Statutes made in which the Kingdom of Ireland is concerned The first is an Act against Importing Cattle from Ireland or other Parts beyond Seas It was only temporary by 18 Ch. 2. c. 2. but made perpetual 20 Ch. 2. c. 7. and 32 Ch. 2. c. 2. This Act however prejudicial to the Trade that was then carried on between Ireland and England does not properly Bind us more than it does any other Country of the World When any thing is Imported and Landed in England it becomes immediately subject to the Laws thereof so that herein we cannot be said properly to be bound Secondly The Acts against Planting Tobacco in England and Ireland 12 Ch. 2. c. 34. and 15 Ch. 2. c. 7. and 22 and 23 Ch. 2. c. 26 c. do positively Bind Ireland But there has never been an Occasion of Executing it here for I have not heard that a Rood of Tobacco was ever Planted in this Kingdom But however that takes not off the Obligation of the Law 'T is only want of our Consent that I urge against that I see no more Reason for sending a Force to Trample down an Acre of Tobacco in Ireland by these Statutes than there would be for Cutting down the Woods of Shelela were there an Act made in England against our Planting or Having Timber Thirdly The Act for
a Tenth or Fifteenth be granted by Parliament in England that shall not Bind Ireland although the King should send the same Statute into Ireland under his Great Seal Except they in Ireland will in their Parliament Approve it Because they have not any Commandment by Writ to come to the Parliament of England And this was not Denied by Markham Yelverton or Ascough The Merchants of Waterford's Case which I have observed before pag. 90. as Reported in the Year Book of the 2d of Richard the 3d. fol. 11 12 is notorious on our behalf but needs not be here repeated The Case of the Prior of Lanthony in Wales mentioned by Mr. Pryn against the 4th Inst. ch 76. p. 313. is usually cited against us But I conceive 't is so far from proving this that 't is very much in our Behalf The Case was briefly thus The Prior of Lanthony brought an Action in the Com. Pleas of Ireland against the of Prior Mollingar for an Arrear of an Annuity and Judgment went against the Prior of Mollingar hereon the Prior of Mollingar brought a Writ of Error in the King's Bench of Ireland and the Judgment was affirmed Then the Prior of Mollingar Appeal'd to the Parliament in Ireland held 5 Hen. 6. before Iames Butler Earl of Ormond and the Parliament Revers'd both Judgments The Prior of Lanthony removed all into the King's Bench in England but the King's Bench refused to intermeddle as having no Power over what had pass'd in the Parliament of Ireland Hereupon the Prior of Lanthony Appeal'd to the Parliament of England And it does not appear by the Parliament Roll that any thing was done on this Appeal all that is Entred being only the Petition it self at the end of the Roll. Vid. Pryn against the 4th Instit. chap. 76. p. 313. Now whether this be a Precedent proving the Subordination of our Irish Parliament to that of England I leave the Reader to judge To me it seems the clear contrary For first we may observe the King's Bench in England absolutely disclaiming any Cognisance of what had passed in the Parliament of Ireland And next we may observe That nothing at all was done therein upon the Appeal to the Parliament of England Certainly if the Parliament of England had thought themselves to have a Right to Enquire into this Matter they had so done one way or t'other and not left the Matter Undetermin'd It has ever been acknowledged that the Kingdom of Ireland is inseparably annex'd to the Imperial Crown of England The Obligation that our Legislature lies under by Poyning's Act 10 H. 7. c. 4. makes this Tye between the two Kingdoms indissoluble And we must ever own it our Happiness to be thus Annex'd to England And that the Kings and Queens of England are by undoubted Right ipso facto Kings and Queens of Ireland And from hence we may reasonably conclude that if any Acts of Parliament made in England should be of force in Ireland before they are Received there in Parliament they should be more especially such Acts as relate to the Succession and Settlement of the Crown and Recognition of the Kings Title thereto and the Power and Iurisdiction of the King And yet we find in the Irish Statutes 28 Hen. VIII c. 2. An Act for the Succession of the King and Queen Ann and another Chap. 5. declaring the King to be Supream Head of the Church of Ireland both which Acts had formerly pass'd in the Parliament of England So likewise we find amongst the Irish Statutes Acts of Recognition of the Kings Title to Ireland in the Reigns of Henry the Eighth Queen Elizabeth King Iames King Charles the Second King William and Queen Mary By which it appears that Ireland tho' Annex'd to the Crown of England has always been look'd upon to be a Kingdom Compleat within it self and to have all Jurisdiction to an Absolute Kingdom belonging and Subordinate to no Legislative Authority on Earth Tho' 't is to be Noted these English Acts relating to the Succession and Recognition of the Kings Title do particularly Name Ireland As the Civil State of Ireland is thus Absolute within it self so likewise is our State Ecclesiastical This is manifest by the Canons and Constitutions and even by the Articles of the Church of Ireland which differ in some things from those of the Church of England And in all the Charters and Grant of Liberties and Immunities to Ireland we still find this That Holy Church shall be Free c. I would fain know what is meant here by the word Free Certainly if our Church be Free and Absolute within it self our State must be so likewise for how our Civil and Ecclesiastical Government is now interwoven every body knows But I will not enlarge on this head it suffices only to hint it I shall detain my self to our Civil Government Another Argument against the Parliament of England's Jurisdiction over Ireland I take from a Record in Reyley's Placita Parliamentaria pag. 569. to this effect In the 14th of Edward the Second the King sent his Letters Patents to the Lord Justice of Ireland leting him know That he had been moved by his Parliament at Westminster that he would give Order that the Irish Natives of Ireland might enjoy the Laws of England concerning Life and Member in as large and ample manner as the English of Ireland enjoy'd the same This therefore the King gives in Commandment and orders accordingly by these his Letters Patents From hence I say we may gather That the Parliament of England did not then take upon them to have any Iurisdiction in Ireland for then they would have made a Law for Ireland to this Effect but instead thereof they Apply to the King that he would interpose his Commands and give Directions that this great Branch of the Common Law of England should be put in Execution in Ireland indifferently to all the Kings Subjects there pursuant to the Original Compact made with them on their first Submission to the Crown of England Let us now consider the great Objection drawn from a Writ of Error 's lying from the Kings Bench of England on a Judgment given in the Kings Bench in Ireland which proves as 't is insisted on that there is a Subordination of Ireland to England and that if an Inferiour Court of Judicature in England can thus take cognizance of and over-rule the Proceedings in the like Court of Ireland it will follow that the Supream Court of Parliament in England may do the same in relation to the Proceedings of the Court of Parliament in Ireland It must be confess'd that this has been the constant Practice and it seems to be the great thing that induced my Lord Cook to believe that an Act of Parliament in England and mentioning or Including Ireland should Bind here The Subordination of Ireland to England he seems to infer from the Subordination of the Kings
Bench of Ireland to the Kings Bench of England But to this I answer 1. That 't is the Opinion of several Learned in the Laws of Ireland That this Removal of a Judgment from the Kings Bench of Ireland by Writ of Error into the Kings Bench of England is founded on an Act of Parliament in Ireland which is lost amongst a great number of other Acts which we want for the space of 130 years at one time and of 120 at another time as we have noted before pag. 65. But it being only a General Tradition that there was such an Act of our Parliament we only offer it as a Surmise the Statute it self does not appear 2. Where a Judgment in Ireland is Removed to be Revers'd in England the Judges in England ought and always do judge according to the Laws and Customs of Ireland and not according to the Laws and Customs of England any otherwise than as these may be of Force in Ireland but if in any thing the two Laws differ the Law of Ireland must prevail and guide their Judgment And therefore in the Case of one Kelly Removed to the Kings Bench in England in the beginning of King Charles the First one Error was assigned that the Praecipe was of Woods and Underwoods which is a manifest Error if brought in England but the Judges finding the Use to be Otherwise in Ireland judged it No Error So in Crook Charles fol. 511. Mulcarry vers Eyres Error was assigned for that the Declaration was of one hundred Acres of Bogg which is a word not known in England but 't was said It was well enough understood in Ireland and so adjudged No Error From whence I conceive 't is manifest that the Jurisdiction of the Kings Bench in England over a Judgment in the Kings Bench of Ireland does not proceed from any Subordination of one Kingdom to the other but from some other Reason which we shall endeavour to make out 3. We have before observed That in the Reign of K. Henry the Third Gerald Fitz-Maurice Lord Justice of Ireland sent four Knights to know what was held for Law in England in the Case of Coparceners The Occasion of which Message as before we have noted out of the Kings Rescript was because the Kings Justice of Ireland was ignorant what the Law was We may reasonably imagine that there were many Messages of this kind for in the Infancy of the English Government it may well be supposed that the Judges in Ireland were not so deeply versed in the Laws of England This occasioned Messages to England Before Judgment given in Ireland to be inform'd of the Law And After Decrees made Persons who thought themselves aggrieved by Erroneous Judgments apply'd themselves to the King in England for Redress Thus it must be that Writs of Error unless they had their Sanction in Parliament became in use Complaints to the King by those that thought themselves injur'd increased and at last grew into Custom and obtain'd the Force of Law Perhaps it may be Objected That if the Judges of the Kings Bench in England ought to Regulate their Judgment by the Customs of Ireland and not of England it will follow that this Original which we assign of Writs of Error to England is not right I Answer That this may be the Primary Original and yet consist well enough with what we have before laid down For tho' the Common Law of England was to be the Common Law of Ireland and Ireland at the beginning of its English Government might frequently send into England to be inform'd about it yet this does not hinder but Ireland in a long Process of Time may have some smaller Customs and Laws of its own gradually but insensibly crept into Practice that may in some measure differ from the Customs and Practice of England and where there is any such the Judges of England must regulate their Sentence accordingly tho' the first Rise of Writs of Error to England may be as we have here suggested In like manner where the Statute-Law of Ireland differs from that of England the Judges of England will regulate their Judgments by the Statute-law of Ireland This is the constant Practice and notoriously known in Westminster-Hall From which it appears that removing a Judgment from the Kings Bench of Ireland to the Kings Bench of England is but an Appeal to the King in his Bench of England for his Sense Judgement or Exposition of the Laws of Ireland But of this more hereafter 4. When a Writ of Error is Returned into the Kings Bench of England Suit is made to the King only The Matter lies altogether before Him and the Party complaining applies to No Part of the Political Government of England for Redress but to the King of Ireland only who is in England That the King only is sued to our Law-Books make Plain This Court is call'd Curia Domini Regis and Aula Regia because the King used to sit there in Person as Lambard tells us And every Cause brought there is said to be coram Domino Rege even at this very day Cooke 4 Inst. p. 72. Therefore if a Writ be returnable coram nobis ubicunque fuerimus 't is to be Return'd to the Kings Bench. But if it be Returnable coram Iusticiariis nostris apud Westm. 't is to be Return'd into the Common Pleas. This Court as Glavnil and other Antients tells us used to Travel with the King where-ever he went And Fleta in describing this Court says Habet Rex Curiam suam Iusticiarios suos coram quibus non alibi nisi coram semet ipso c. falsa Iudicia Errores revertuntur Corriguntur The King then as Britton says having Supream Jurisdiction in his Realm to judge in all Causes whatsoever therefore it is that Erroneous Iudgments were brought to him out of Ireland But this does not argue that Ireland is therefore Subordinate to England for the People of Ireland are the Subjects of the King to whom they Appeal And 't is not from the Country where the Court is held but from the Presence and Authority of the King to whom the People of Ireland have as good a Title as the People of England that the Praeeminence of the Iurisdiction does flow And I question not but in former times when these Courts were first Erected and when the King Exerted a greater Power in Judicature than he does now and he used to sit in his own Court that if he had Travell'd into Ireland and the Court had follow'd him thither Erroncous Judgments might have been removed from England before him into his Court in Ireland for so certainly it must be since the Court Travell'd with the King From hence it appears that all the Jurisdiction that the Kings Bench in England has over the Kings Bench in Ireland arises only from the Kings Presence in the former And the same may be said of the Chancery in England if it will assume
any Power to Controul the Chancery in Ireland because as Lambard says p. 69 70. The Chancery did follow the King as the Kings Bench did and that as he tells us out of the Lord Chief Justice Scroope the Chancery and the Kings Bench were once but one Place But if this be the ground of the Jurisdiction of the Kings Bench in England over the Kings Bench in Ireland as I am fully perswaded it is the Parliament in England cannot from hence claim any Right of Jurisdiction in Ireland because they claim a Iurisdiction of their own and their Court is not the Kings Court in that proper and strict sence that the Kings Bench is But granting that the Subordination of the Kings Bench in Ireland to the Kings â—…ch in England be rightly concluded from a Writ of Error out of the latter â—…ying on a Judgment in the former I see no Reason from thence to conclude that therefore the Parliament of Ireland is Subordinate to the Parliament in England unless we make any one sort of Subordination or in any one part of Jurisdiction to be a Subordination in all Points and all parts of Jurisdiction The Subjects of Ireland may Appeal to the King in his Bench in England for the Expounding of the Old common and Statute-Law of Ireland will it therefore follow that the Parliament of England shall make New Laws to bind the Subjects in Ireland I see no manner of Consequence in it unless we take Expounding Old Laws or Laws already made in the-Kings Bench and making New Laws in Parliament to be one and the same thing I believe the best Logician in Europe will hardly make a Chain of Syllogisms that from such Premises will regularly induce such a Conclusion To close this Point We find that a Judgment of the Kings Bench in Ireland may be Removed by a Writ of Error to the Parliament in Ireland But the Judgment of the Parliament of Ireland was never question'd in the Parliament of England This Appears from the Prior of Lanthony's Case aforegoing I shall conclude this our Fifth Article with a memorable Passage out of our Irish Statutes which seems to strengthen what we have delivered on the Business of a Writ of Error as well as the chief Doctrine I drive at and that is 28 H. VIII Chap. 19. The Act of Faculties This Statute is a Recital at large of the English Act of the 25 Hen. VIII c. 21. In the Preamble of which English Act 't is Declared That this Your Graces Realm Recognizing no Superiour but Your Grace hath been and yet is free from any Subjection to any Mans Laws but only such as have been Devised within this Realm for the Wealth of the same or to such others as by Sufferance of Your Grace and Your Progenitors the People of the Realm have taken at their Free Liberties by their own Consent and have bound themselves by long Use and Custom to the Observance of c. This Declaration with the other Clauses of the said English Act is verbatim recited in the Irish Act of Faculties and in the said Irish Act it is Enacted That the said English Act and every thing and things therein contained shall be Established Affirmed Taken Obey'd and Accepted within this Land of Ireland as a good and perfect Law and shall be within the said Land of the same Force Effect Quality Condition Strength and Vertue to all Purposes and Intents as it is within the Realm of England if so then the said Clause declares our Right of being bound only by Laws to which we Consent as it does the Right of the People of England And that all Subjects within the said Land of Ireland shall enjoy the Profit and Commodity thereof in like manner as the Kings Subjects of the Realm of England I am now Arrived at our Sixth and Last Article Proposed viz. The Reasons and Arguments that may be be farther Offered on one side and t'other in this Debate I have before taken notice of the Title England pretends over us from Conquest I have likewise enquired into the Precedents on one side and t'other from Acts of Parliament from Records and from Reports of the Learned in the Laws There remains another Pretence or two for this Subordination to be Considered and one is founded on Purchase 'T is said That vast Quantity of Treasure that from time to time has been spent by England in Reducing the Rebellions and carrying on the Wars of Ireland has given them a just Title at least to the Lands and Inheritances of the Rebels and to the absolute Disposal thereof in their Parliament And as particular Examples of this we are told of the great Sums Advanced by England for suppressing the Rebellion of the Irish Papists in 41. and Opposing the late Rebellion since King WILLIAM's Accession to the Throne To this I Answer That in a War there is all Reason imaginable that the Estates of the Unjust Opposers should go to repair the the Damage that is done This I have briefly hinted before But if we consider the Wars of Ireland we shall perceive they do not resemble the common Case of Wars between two Foreign Enemies Ours are rather Rebellions or Intestine Commotions that is The Irish Papists rising against the King and Protestants of Ireland and then 't is plain that if these Latter by the Assistance of their Brethren of England and their Purse do prove Victorious the People of England ought to be fully Repaid But then the manner of their Payment and in what way it shall be Levied ought to be left to the People of Ireland in Parliament Assembled And so it was after the Rebellion of 41. The Adventurers then were at vast Charges and there were several Acts of Parliament in England made for their Re-imbursing by disposing to them the Rebels Lands But after all it was thought Reasonable that the Parliament of Ireland should do this in their own way and therefore the Acts of Settlement and Explanation made all the former English Acts of No Force or at least did very much Alter them in many Particulars as we have Noted before In like manner we allow that England ought to be repaid all their Expences in supressing this late Rebellion All we defire is That in Preservation of our own Rights and Liberties we may do it in our own Methods regularly in our own Parliament And if the Re-imbursement be all that England stands upon what availeth it whether it be done this way or that way so it be done We have an Example of this in Point between England and Holland in the Glorious Revolution under His Present Majesty Holland in Assisting England Expended 600000 Pounds and the English Parliament fairly repay'd them It would have look'd oddly for Holland to have insisted on Disposing of Lord Powis's and other Estates by their own Laws to re-imburse themselves 'T is an Ungenerous thing to villifie good Offices I am far from doing
Crown of England with a Design to make them Easie to England and to keep them in the Allegiance of the King of England How Consistent it may be with True Policy to do that which the People of Ireland may think is an Invasion of their Rights and Liberties I do most humbly submit to the Parliament of England to Consider They are Men of Great Wisdom Honour and Iustice and know how to prevent all future Inconveniencies We have heard Great Out-cries and deservedly on Breaking the Edict of Nantes and other Stipulations How far the Breaking our Constitution which has been of Five Hundred years standing exceeds that I leave the World to judge It may perhaps be urg'd That 't is convenient for the State of England that the Supream Council thereof should make their Jurisdiction as Large as they can But with Submission I conceive that if this Assumed Power be not Iust it cannot be convenient for the State What Cicero says in his Offices Nihil est Utile nisi idem sit Honestum is most certainly true Nor do I think that 't is any wise necessary to the Good of England to Assert this High Jurisdiction over Ireland For since the Statutes of this Kingdom are made with such Caution and in such Form as is prescribed by Poyning's Act 10 H. 7. and by the 3d and 4th of Phil. and Mar. and whilest Ireland is in English hands I do not see how 't is possible for the Parliament of Ireland to do any thing that can be in the least prejudicial to England But on the other hand If England assume a Iurisdiction over Ireland whereby they think their Rights and Liberties are taken away That their Parliaments are rendred meerly nugatory and that their Lives and Fortunes Depend on the Will of a Legislature wherein they are not Parties there may be ill Consequences of this Advancing the Power of the Parliament of England by breaking the Rights of another may in time have ill Effects The Rights of Parliament should be preserved Sacred and Inviolable wherever they are found This kind of Government once so Universal all over Europe is now almost Vanished from amongst the Nations thereof Our Kings Dominions are the only Supporters of this noble Gothick Constitution save only what little remains may be found thereof in Poland We should not therefore make so light of that sort of Legislature and as it were Abolish it in One Kingdom of the Three wherein it appears but rather Cherish and Encourage it wherever we meet it FINIS Introduction and Occasion of this Disquisition * Bishop of Derry in the House of Lords and Prohibiting Exportation of our Woollen Manufacture in the House of Commons Subject of this Enquiry Britain's first Expedition into Ireland * Giraldus Cambr. Hib. Expug Lib. I. C. 1 Hen. II. comes into Ireland Irish submit to him Ireland whether ever Conquer'd * Mr. Selden will not allow that ever H. 2. used this Stile Tit. Hon. Par. 2. G. 5. Sect. 26. Suppressing Rebellions whether a Conquest * Bishop of Salisbury's Pastoral Letter What Title is obtain'd by Conquest No Title gain'd by an Unjust Conquest What Title by a Just Conquest None over the Assisters in the Conquest None over the Non-Opposers Just Conquerour intitled to the Lives of the Opposers Just Conquerour how far impower'd over the Posterity of the Opposers How far over their Estates Practise of Conquerors otherwise Concessions granted by a Conquerour whether Obligatory What Concessions have been made from the Crown of England to the Kingdom of Ireland By Henry II. Irish Modus Tenendi Parliamentum a Tit. Hon. Par. 2. C. 5. Sect. 26. Edit Lond. An. 1672 b Against Cook 's 4th Instit C. 76. Parliaments very early in Ireland a Against the 4th Inst. c. 76. p. 249. a Togograph Hibern l 3. c. 18 Hib. Expug l. 11. c. 33 34. b Hoveden Annal parspost p. 302. Brampton Chr. Col. 1071. Knighton de Even Angl. l. c. c. 10 col 2394 2395. Pol. Virg. Hist. Angl. l. 13. Radul de Diceto Walsingbam c. Original Compact for Ireland King Iohn made King of Ireland By this Ireland made an Absolute separate Kingdom a Seldens Tit. Hon. Par. 1. C. 8 Sect. 5. Usher Archbibishop of Armagh of the Religion of the Antient Irish Cap. 11. b Act. Concil Constant. Ses. 28. MS. in Bib. Reg. not in the Printed Acts. Ireland in what sense Annex'd to England King Iohn comes a second time into Ireland The People submit to him Concessâ—… from Hen. III. a Pryn against the 4th Inst. c. 76. p. 250. Pa. 1 H. III. m. 13. intus Record out of Mr. Petyt of the Antiquity of Parliaments in Ireland Rot. 38 H. III in 4. Hibernta Farther Concessions from Hen. III b Against Cook 's 4th Instit p. 252. Claus. 12 H. III in 8 de Legibus Consuetudinibus Observandis in Hibern Recapitula tion a Fourth Instit b Against the 4th Instit. c Placita Parliamentaria English Laws Established in Ireland Law of Parliament Common Law Statute Law Statute-Law of England from the Norman Conquest to Hen. III. Law of Edward the Confessor a Selden 〈◊〉 speciâ—… ad eadmerum pag 17â—… Of Wil. Conq. b Leges W. 1. Cap. 63. apud Selden in notâ—…â—…d eadmerum p. 192. Of Hen. I. c Vid. Selden ut supra Of Hen II. Of K. John d Mat. Paris ad an 1215. pag. 253. c. Of Hen. III. a Cook 's Pref. to the 2d Inst. Engl. Statutes since the 9th Hen. III. introduced in Ireland Statutes of Merton Marlebr Westm. Gloucest Vid. Lib. Rubr. Scaccar Dubl a Annals of Ireland at the End of Camden's Britan. Edit 1637. page 196 197 c. b Ibid. p. 160. Pryn against the 4th Instit. Chap 76. All English Statutes before the 10th of Hen. VII in force in Ireland a Cook 's 4th Instit. Cap. 76. P. 351. b Vid. Irish Stat. English Statutes Declaratory of the Common Law in force in Ireland English Acts introductive of a New Law not of force in Ireland a Irish Stat. 13 C. 2. c. 2. 13 C. 2. c. 3. 14 15 C. 2. c. 1. 14 15 C. 2. c. 19. 17 18 C. 2. c. 3. 17. 18 C. 2. c. 11. English Stat. 12 C. 2. c. 12. 12 C. 2. c. 3. 12 C. 2. c. 14 12 C. 2. c. 24. 12 C. 2. c. 33. 16 17 C. 2. c. 5. * For we had two several Acts transmitted to us at different times to this very purpose One we rejected in the Lord Sydâ—…eys Government t'other we pass'd under the Lord Capell Objections Answer'd Objection from the Stat. of Rape Object English Statutes comprehending Ireland by general Words Act against Appeals to Rome Acts of First Fruits and Faculties a Title in the English Statutes is No Imposition shall be paid to the Bishop of Rome High-Commission-Court By the same Reason Scotland may be bound English Statutes naming Ireland Or dinatio pre Statu Hiberniae Staple-Act Merchants of Waterford's Case Members from Ireland in the Parliament of England Modern Acts of the Parliament of England naming Ireland Acts in favour of Adventurers in 1641. Acts in Cromwels time Cattle Act. Tobacco Act. Navigation Act. Note Exporting Wooll from Ireland is made penal by the Irish. Stat. 13 Hen. 8. c. 2. 28 Hen. 8. c. 17. But both these Statutes are obsolete The like may we observe of the 11 Eliz. c. 10. 13 El. c. 4. English Acts Binding Ireland since King William's Reign Act for the Protestant Irish Clergy Act against Commerce with France Act for Security of the Protestants of Ireland Act appointing New Oaths The Opinions of the Lawyers thereon Lord Chief Justice Cook 's Opinion Discuss'd a 20 H. 6. 8. Pilkington ' s Case 32 H. 6. 25. 20 Eliz. Dyer 360. Flowd Com. 360. Opinions of other Judges in Favour of Ireland Pilkiâ—…s Case a This Statute we may reckon amongst the number of those that are lost during the long Intervals of our Irish Acts noted before page 65. to be aboue 118 Years Merchants of Waterfords Case Prior of Lanthonys Case a Rot. Parl. An. 8. H. 6. in ult Argument from Acts of Succession and Recognition pass'd in Ireland Ireland's State Ecclesiastical Independent Argument from a Record in Reyley a 14 Ed. 2. Par. 2. Memb 21 Int. Objection drawn from a Writ of Error Declaration in the Irish Act of Faculties Farther Reasons offered in behalf of Ireland England's Title to Ireland by Purchase Object Ireland prejudicial to England's Trade therefore to be Bound Object Ireland a Colony Against the Rights of Mankind Consent only gives Law force Against the Common Law of England Against the Statute Law both of England and Ireland a See before pag. 65. b Pultons Col. Eng. Stats Edit 1670. pag. 63. c ibid. page 75. d ibid. page 113. e 10 H. 7. c. 22 a 28 H 8. c. 4. 28 H. 8. c. 20. 3 4 Ph. M. c. 4. 11 Eliz. Ses. 2. c. 1. 11 Eliz. Ses. 3. c. 8. Against several Concessions made to Ireland Inconsistent with the Royalties of a Kingdom Against the Kings Prerogative Against the Practice of former Ages Against the Resolution of Judges Destroys Property Greates Confusion Inconvenient to England to Assume this Power
by Advice of all his Faithful Counsellors in England to gratify the Irish says Pryn for their eminent Loyalty to his Father and Him he granted them out of his Special Grace that they and their Heirs for ever should enjoy the Liberties granted by his Father and Himself to the Realm of England which he Reduced into Writing and sent Seal'd thither under the Seal of the Popes Legat and W. Earl Marshal his Governour because he had then no Seal of his own This as I conceive Refers to the foremention'd Magna Charta Hiberniae The Record as Recited by Mr. Pryn here follows Rex Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus Comitibus Baronibus Militibus Libere Tenentibus omnibus Fidelibus suis per Hiberniam Constitutis Salutem Fidelitatem vestram in Domino Commendantes quam Domino Patri nostro semper Exhibuistis nobis estis diebus nostris Exhibituri Volumus quod in signum Fidelitatis vestrae tam praeclarae tam Insignis Libertatibus Regno nostro Angliae a Patre nostro nobis Concessis de gratia nostra Dono in Regno nostro Hiberniae guadeatis vos vestri Haeredes in perpetuum Quas Distincte in Scriptum Reductas de Communi Consilio omnium Fidelium nostrorum vobis Mittimus Signatas Sigillis Domini nostri G. Apostolicae Sedis Legati Fidelis nostri Com. W. Maresc Rectoris nostri Regni nostri quia Sigillum nondum habuimus easdem processu temporis de Majori Consilio proprio Sigillo Signaturi Teste apud Glouc. 6 Februar Here we have a free Grant of all the Liberties of England to the People of Ireland But we know the Liberties of Englishmen are Founded on that Universal Law of Nature that ought to prevail throughout the whole World of being Govern'd only by such Laws to which they give their own Consent by their Representatives in Parliament And here before I proceed farther I shall take Notice That in the late Raised Controversie Whether the House of Commons were an Essential part of Parliament before the 49th year of Henry the Third The Learned Mr. Petyt Keeper of the Records in the Tower in his Book on that Subject pag. 71. Deduces his 9th Argument From the Comparison of the Antient Generale Concilium or Parliament of Ireland instanced An. 38 Hen. III. with the Parliament in England wherein the Citizens and Burgesses were which was Eleven years before the pretended beginning of the Commons in England For thus we find it in that Author As great a Right and Privilege surely was and ought to be allow'd to the English Subjects as to the Irish before the 49th of Hen. III. And if that be admitted and that their the Irish Commune Concilium or Parliament had its Platform from ours the English as I think will not be Deny'd by any that have consider'd the History and Records touching that Land Ireland we shall find the ensuing Records Ann. 38 Hen. III. clearly evince that the Citizens and Burgesses were then a part of their the Irish Great Council or Parliament That King being in partibus Transmarinis and the Queen being left Regent she sends Writs or a Letter in the Kings Name directed Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus Prioribus Comitibus Baronibus Militibus Liberis Hominibus Civibus Burgensibus Terrae suae Hiberniae telling them that Mittimus Fratrem Nicholaum de Sancto Neoto Fratrem Hospitii Sancti Iohannis Ierusalem in Anglia ad partes Hiberniae ad exponendum vobis together with I. Fitz-Geoffery the Kings Justice the State of his Land of Vascony endanger'd by the Hostile Invasion of the King of Castile qui nullo Iure sed potentia sua Confisus Terram nostram Vasconiae per ipsius Fortitudinem a manibus nostris Auferre a Dominio Regni Angliae segregare Proponit And therefore universitatem Vestram Quanta possumus Affectione Rogantes quatenus noâ—… jura nostra totaliter indefensâ—… non deserentes nobis in tanto periculo quantumcunque poteritis dâ—… Gente Pecunia subveniatis which would turn to their Everlasting Honour concluding His nostris Augustiis taliter Compâ—…tientes quod nos Heraedes nostri vobis Haeredibus vestris sumus non immerito Obligati Teste Regina R. Comite Cornubiae apud Windesor 17 die Februar Per Reginam Thus far Mr. Petyt Here we have a Letter from the Queen Regent to the Parliament in Ireland in an humble manner beseeching them for an Aid of Men and Money against the King of Castiles Hostile Invasion of Gascony from whence we may perceive that in those days no more than at present Men and Money could not be Rais'd but by Consent of Parliament I have been the more particular in Transcribing this Passage out of Mr. Petyt to shew that we have as Antient and Express an Authority for our present Constitution of Parliaments in Ireland as can be shewn in England And I believe it will not be thought Adviseable in these latter Days to break in upon Old Settled Constitutions No one knows how fatal the Consequents of that may be To return therefore where we Digress'd Henry the Third about the Twelfth year of his Reign did specially Impower Richard de Burgh then Iustice of Ireland at a certain day and place to summon all the Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors Earls Barons Knights Freeholders and Sheriffs of each County and before them to cause to be Read the Charter of his Father King Iohn whereunto his Seal was Appendant whereby he had granted unto them the Laws and Customs of England and unto which they swore Obedience And that he should cause the same Laws to be observed and Proclaimed in the several Counties of Ireland that so none presume to do contrary to the Kings Command The Record I have taken out of Mr. a Pryn in these words Rex Dilecto Fideli suo Richardo de Burgo Justie ' suo Hibern Salutem Mandamus vobis firmiter praecipientes quatenus certo die Loco faciatis venire coram vobis Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Priores Comites Barones Milites libere Tenentes Ballivos singulorum Comitatum coram eis Publice legi faciatis Chartam Domini J. Regis Patris nostri cui Sigillum suum appensum est quam fieri fecit jurari a Magnatibus Hibern de Legibus Consuetudinis Angliae Observandis in Hibernia Et praecipiatis eis ex parte nostra quod Leges illas Consuctudines in Charta praedicta contentas de caetero firmiter teneant observent hoc idem per singulos Commitatus Hiberniae clamari faciatis teneri prohibentes firmiter ex parte nostra super foris facturam nostram nequis contra hoc Mandatum nostrum venire praesumat c. Teste Me ipso Apud Westm ' 8 die Maii An. Reg. nostri 12. By what foregoes I presume it plainly appears that by three several Establishments