'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
Mankind and on whatsoever Ground any one Nation can Challenge it to themselves on the same Reason may the Rest of Adam's Children Expect it If what I Offer herein seems to carry any Weight in relation to my own Poor Country I shall be abundantly happy in the Attempt But if after all the Great Council of England Resolve the contrary 〈◊〉 shall then believe my self to be â—…n an Error and with the lowest Submission ask Pardon for my Assurance However I humbly presume I shall not be hardly Censur'd by them for offering to lay before them a fair State of our Case by such Information as I can procure especially when at the same time I declare my Intention of a Submissive Acquiescence in whatever they Resolve for or against what I Offer The Subject therefore of our present Disquisition shall be How far the Parliament of England may think it Reasonable to intermeddle with the Affairs of Ireland and Bind us up by Laws made in their House And seeing the Right which England may pretend to for Binding us by their Acts of Parliament can be founded only on the Imaginary Title of Conquest or Purchase or on Precedents and Matters of Record We shall Enquire into the following Particulars 1. First How Ireland became a Kingdom Annex'd to the Crown of England And here we shall at large give a faithful Narrative of the First Expedition of the Britains into this Country and King Henry the Second's Arrival here such as our best Historians give us 2. Secondly We shall Enquire Whether this Expedition and the English Settlement that afterwards follow'd thereon can properly be call'd a Conquest Or whether any Victories obtain'd by the English in any succeeding Ages in this Kingdom upon any Rebellion may be call'd a Conquest thereof 3. Thirdly Granting that it were a Conquest we shall Enquire what Title a Conquest gives 4. Fourthly We shall Enquire what Concessions have been from time to time made to Ireland to take off what even the most Rigorous Assertors of a Conquerour's Title do pretend to And herein we shall shew by what Degrees the English Form of Government and the English Statute-Laws came to be received among us And this shall appear to be wholly by the Consent of the People and Parliament of Ireland 5. Fifthly We shall Enquire into the Precedents and Opinions of the Learned in the Laws relating to this Matter with Observations thereon 6. Sixthly We shall Consider the Reasons and Arguments that may be farther Offered on one side and t'other and shall Draw some General Conclusions from the Whole As to the First We shall find the History of the First Expedition of the English into Ireland to be briefly thus In the Reign of King Henry the Second Dermot Fitzmurchard commonly called Mac-Morrogh Prince of Leinster who was a Man Cruel and Oppressive after many Battels with other Princes of Ireland and being Beaten and put to Flight by them Apply'd for Relief to King Henry the Second who was then busied in Aquitain the King was not then in such Circumstances as to afford him much Help However thus much he did for him By Letters Patents he granted License to all his Subjects throughout his Dominions to Assist the said Prince to Recover his Dominions These Letters Patents are to be seen in Giraldus Cambrensis who was Historiographer and Secretary to King Hen. II. and Accompanied him in his Expedition into Ireland and from him it is that we have this Relation The Irish Prince brought these Letters into England and caused them to be Read in the Audience of many People Beating up as it were for Voluntiers and free Adventurers into Ireland At length Richard Earl of Strigul now Chepstow in Monmouthshire Son of Earl Gilbert call'd Strongbow Agreed with him to Assist him in the Recovery of his Country on Condition that Dermot should give him his Eldest Daughter in Marriage and his Kingdom of Leinster after his Death About the same time Robert Fitz-Stephen Governour of Aberlefie in Wales Agreed likewise with Dermot to help him on Condition that he would grant to him and Maurice Fitzgerald in Fee the City of Wexford with two Cantreds or Hundreds of Land near adjoyning These Adventurers afterwards went over and were successful in Treating with the Irish and Taking Wexford Waterford Dublin and other Places Whereupon Earl Richard Strongbow married Dermot's Daughter and according to Compact succeeded him in his Kingdom A little after the Descent of these Adventurers King Henry II. himself went into Ireland with an Army in November 1172. and finding that his Subjects of England had made a very good hand of their Expedition he obtain'd from Earl Richard Strongbow a Surrender of Dublin with the Cantreds adjoyning and all the Maritine Towns and Castles But Strongbow and his Heirs were to Enjoy the Residue of Dermot's Principality King Hen. II. Landed at Waterford from Milford in Pembrookshire and staying there some few days says Giraldus Cambrensis Rex Corcagiensis Dormitius advenit ei tam Subjectionis vinculo quam fidelitatis Sacramento Regi Anglorum se sponte submisit He freely swore Fealty and Subjection to the King of England From thence he went to Lismore and thence to Cashel where Dunaldus King of Lymerick se quoque fidelem Regi exhibuit The like did all the Nobility and Princes in the South of Ireland Afterwards he marched to Dublin and there the Princes of the Adjacent Countries came to him sub Fidelitatis Subjectionis obtentu a Rege Pacem impetrabant Thus Cambrensis in his Hibernia Expugnata and there he mentions the several Princes that came in vizt Macshaghlin King of Ophaly O Carrol King of Uriel now Lowth O Rourk King of Meath Rotherick O Connor King of Connaught and Monarch as it were of the whole Island with divers others qui firmissimis fidelitatis subjectionis vinculis Domino Regi innodarunt in singulari Rotherico Conactiae Principe tanquam Insulae Monarchâ subditi redduntur universi nec alicujus fere in Insula vel nominis vel ominis erat qui Regiae Majestati Debitam Domino Reverentiam non exhiberet The same Relation we have from Roger Hoveden Annal. parsposter fol. 301. About the Kalends of November 1172. saith he King Henry II. of England took Shipping for Ireland at Milford and Landed at Waterford ibi venerunt ad eum Rex Corcagiensis Rex de Lymerick Rex de Oxenie Rex Midiae fere omnes Hiberniae Potentes And a little afterwards in the same place speaking of King Henry the Second's being at Waterford ibidem venerunt ad Regem Angliae omnes Archiepiscopi Episcopi Abbates totius Hiberniae receperunt eum in Regem Dominum Hiberniae jurantes ei heredibus suis Fidelitatem Regnandi super eos Potestatem in perpetuum inde Dederunt ei Chartas suas Exemplo autem Clericorum predicti Reges Principes Hiberniae
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
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