soever you read it under the Liberties and free Customs will be comprehended their whole Interest in the Legislature whereas otherwise according to this Charter of all their Liberties the King 's Great Council had then only Power to raise Taxes though we find that all along they advis'd de arduis negotiis regni and consented to what passed into a Law Wherefore Against Jan. c. p. 13. ' t is strange there should not have been the same care taken that they might have thier Rights in Council setled as well as their Summons to it but if this Charter setled no other Right than this of granting Taxes Quere What other power the Great Councils have now by our Author's Principles For admit that by the New Government which he says was fram'd and set up in the 49th of Hen. 3. a Right of coming to the Great Council was giv'n to a body of men who before that had none yet there was no additional power given to the Council it self that he or any man can shew Because I would encounter the whole Force which they raise by colour of this Charter I address'd my self chiefly to the proving that admitting that Et ad habendum commune consilium Regni aliter quam ought to be joyn'd as of the same period with de Scutagiis assidendis 't will not make for the purpose of them that urge it being upon strict Inquiry it cannot be thought to extend farther than to such matters as concern'd Tenants in Chief only That this must be thus confin'd is prov'd I. Because there were Majores Barones not excluded by this Charter and so their ancient Right continued tho they are not within the meaning of that part he insists upon for this is only of Tenants in Capite that is such as were subject to the Feudal Law The Earl of Chester for instance was not under it as Earl of Chester Wardship was a necessary Appendix to that Tenure but even the Tenants within that County though holding other Lands of the King by Knights Service were however out of the King's Wardship much more the Count Palatine And surely no body before the Dr. ever took him for a Feudal Tenant by reason of the County of Chester though he might be oblig'd to attend in the Wars and pay Escuage in case of Failure for other Lands held in Chief in other Counties 2. There were others came and upon other occasions than what are here mentioned as Falcatius de Brent who was to come even without forty days notice which was required in the Case here and whereas giving Advice in great Affairs and the making of Laws were transacted in the Great Councils no such thing is mention'd in this 3. We have the Resolution of a whole Parliament the 40th of Ed. 3. That the Common Council of the Kingdom of Tenants in Chief was not the Great Council of the Kingdom for that King John resigned his Crown in the first Council but as they declare not in the last and this the very Circumstances attending the Resignation evince 4. If the opposite Doctrine be true then all the dignified and inferiour Clergy which did not hold in Capite Abbots Priors c. were excluded 5. This must needs be no more than a Common Council of the Kingdom for assessing Escuage and such other Aid as lay upon Tenants in Capite only because Tenants only stood in need of Relief from this Charter they only being concerned in the three things reserved to the King or in the Additions to them none other being charged in that kind without more general Consent and more than Tenants being Parties to the Grant Besides not only the advances upon Tenants Services but the ordinary Incidents were called Auxilia as well as those others which according to Bracton were not called Services nor came from Custom but were only in case of Necessity or when the King met his People as Hydage Corage and Carvage and many other things brought in by the common Consent of the whole Kingdom Now where the King reserves Incidents to Tenure only 't is to be supposed that the Reservation is out of the thing before mentioned and so that must be Services because of Tenure none but Tenants being named whereas when others are named we may well suppose the Aids given by others too to be intended 6. We may here divide the benefit to each sort of Tenant in particular I. As the Tenants by Socage Tenure only were talliable and that us'd to be without their own Consent here they have a Consent given them 2. As Tenants by Knights Service though not talliable yet had hardship in the Obligation to sudden Attendance convenient Notice is given and it should seem that the want of this for the assessing of Escuage was their only grievance proper to be redrest for their Attendance in the Wars was to be govern'd by Necessity and as a Court of Justice there was no need of them 7. There is a Difference to be observed all along between the Great Council and such an one as is mentioned in this Charter I. For the Persons composing the one and the other 2. The matters of which they treated And 3. the times of holding them For the Great Councils by his own way of arguing there was at least one Great Council in the Reign of William the First where were more than Tenants in Chief The Tenants in Chief he supposes to have been only the Normans and Foreigners who were Enemies to the English Laws and the only great men by his Rule wherefore if the English Laws were retained at the Petition of any great body of men here they must be populus Jani Anglorum facies nova p. 55. inferiour People of England This was Ad preces Communitatis Anglorum Universi compatriotae regni petition'd as appears in the very Body of the Laws then received but these as despicable as they were had got together a numerous and mighty Army of which they made Edgar Etheling General these are all called Primates mitius coepit agere cum primatibus regni To shew that 't was matter of Council 't was argued Pro and Con at Berkhamsted Selden ad ead fo 171. where post multas disceptationes after many Disputes the English Laws were setled I need urge no more in this Reign except that which he hath yielded to my hand in effect viz. that all the Free-holders of the several Counties of England met this King in a Great Council at Salisbury For he himself tells us that all the Free-men of the Kingdom held by Knights Service and here were all the Knights so more than Tenants in Capite and all the Free-holders too as they were Knights all holding by Military Service But if there were other Freemen such as held in Free and common Socage qui militare servitium debebant who ow'd Military Service for the defence of the Kingdom though they held not by it why were
Statute of the Great men The Law made à Rege ib. p. 11. Baronibus Populo had the like Legislators and I do affirm Against Mr. Petyt p. 13. that the word Populus is not to be found in any of these Thus I have wonderfully discovered the unsoundness of Mr. Petit's Assertions ib. p. 2. though it will be objected I have jumpt over several Arguments and they material ones concerning Great Councils before the Conquest Upon which it follows that if the Populus were admitted after it must be by the bounty of the Conquerour who might at pleasure revoke his Concessions For the Story of Edwin of Sharnborn b. p. 24. supposed to have enjoyed his Lands by a Prior Title 't is a famous Legend and trite Fable though he had the King's mandat for Recovering his Estate Sir Edward Coke ib. p. 30. who to avoid the evidence that our English Laws were the Norman Laws Against Jan◠c. p. 89. said The Laws of England are Leges non scriptae said it precatiously without any Foundation or Authority Besides 't was ridiculous as if they were known by Revelation divinely cast into the hearts of men Though some may impertinently ask me Whether there were not Laws before Writing and that without Revelation or divinely casting into the hearts of men But that Against Mr. Petyt p. 167. if affirmed is a palpable and gross Error What though that Clergy-man-Lawyer Bracton agree with Coke yet he spoke out of Ignorance or Design when he said Absurdum non erit leges Anglicanas licet non scriptas leges appellare Bracton l. 1. fol. 1. William the Conquerour brought in a New Law Against Mr. Petyt p. 29. and imposed it upon the People The greatest part of the Antient Law as it was brought hither by the Normans was exacted and observed by ib. p. 43. and upon only the Normans For the English they had no Property or Rights left And so were all Outlaws This Domesday-Book in every County shews though 't is said several English-men are there mentioned holding by Titles not derived from the Conquerour p. 176. And for a farther proof of this King William ' s Law to all the Freemen of the whole Kingdom was made only to Tenants in Military Service ib. p. 39. which were French p. 35. Flemings Anjovins Britains Poictovins and People of other Nations When this King in the 4th of his Reign summon'd Anglos Nobiles Sapientes suâ lege eruditos to give an account of their Laws 't was a Sham Summons for no English were Nobles nay none were so much as Free-men but the Foreigners amongst whom William divided the Kingdom and therefore Strangers that had their Estates came in their steads and gave an Account upon Oath of the Laws before their own time as they us'd to do of matter of Fact p. 39. when sworn upon common Juries William the Second and Henry the First were Usurpers and Traitors p. 51. notwithstanding the People's Elections Clerus and Populus are to be understood onely of Tenants in Capite p. 56. never of the inferiour sort of People Wherefore they dote who say that the inferiour Clergy nay the dignified not Tenants in Capite came to Great Councils before 49 H. 3. It 's very true Against Jan. c. p. 70. that in our Ancient Parliament-Rolls the Knights of Shires are sometimes called Grantz des Counties or Great men of the Counties and well they might for without doubt they were most commonly the greatest Tenants in Capite under the degree of Barons in each County Against Mr. Petyt p. 116. 117. And for evidence of this the Great Tenants in Capite that were no Barons and perhaps the least Tenants in Capite in the times of Ed. 3. and Ric. 2. are call'd autres grantz or Grandes autres Nobles which were Barons Peers called by the King 's Writ into the Lords House at pleasure and omitted at pleasure Wherefore 't is to be observed that the Knight for the Shires might well be Noble or Grantz since they were call'd sometimes to sit in the Lords House And whether they that were chose for the Counties and did not sit in the Lords House as Barons Peers were Grantz or Nobles perhaps may be a Question As a choice piece of Learning I must acquaint you that though sometimes Fideles signifie qui in Principis alicujus potestate Glos. p. 15. ditione sunt qui vulgo subjecti appellantur Subjects in general yet unless there be special matter to shew the contrary 't is meant of Uassals who having received Fees are in the Retinue of some Patron or Lord if in the King's Retinue they are Tenants in Capite So when we find Writs directed Omnibus Christi Fidelibus Glos. p. 17. Here when there is no more Subject matter to determine it than when 't is omnibus Fidelibus Regni they must be our Saviour's Tenants in Capite When the Form of Peace Against Mr. Petyt p. 125. in the 48th of H. 3. was by the Assent of the King the Bishops and the whole Community of the Kingdom can any man say the Earls and Great Barons these Tenants in Capite gave not their Consents They must be included in and were a part of the whole Community of the Kingdom And indeed to speak the truth it is not denied against me Against Jani p. 71. but proves their Notion to those Vnwary Readers whom they seduce to have some good opinion of their Fancies Though that Form of peace is said in the Record to be Actum in Parliamento London Against Mr. Petyt p. 208. yet the Prelates and Barons were such as sided with Montfort p. 120. and the Community was the Body of his Army and the Citizens and other of the Faction they were not the Community of the Prelates and Barons onely as at other times Nay here were the Citizens and others besides the Army And yet the Community or Body of the Army took in all besides the Prelates and Barons And this must needs have been the Army Mat. Westm. p. 394. Posted convenientibus Londini Praelatis c. partis illius quae Regem suum tam seditio è tenuit captivatum because 't was after their work was over that the Assembly at London was And the Army it must be though as 't is idely objected it is far from appearing that all the Bishops Earls and Barons which consented had been in Arms. Though they that were of the Faction as is usual caball'd together and as some will say onely resolved upon what they would press the King to they hereby Statuebant c. made Laws before the consent of the King and all the Bishops Earls and Barons and it should seem before all were assembled or could be a Parliament And which such as never intended to understand will make a wondring
Term. Pasc. 7. 8. Jâ—hannis 9. dorso claims against William Scoteny the Capital Messuage which he ought to have in Steinton with the Appurtenances as that which belongs to his elder share of the Barony which was Lambert Scoteny's These surely were Brothers not Sisters Sons being of the same Name and the Claim being immediately from the seizin of Scoteny and this Claim was allowed as the Record shews Besides tho 't is generally believed that Wardship was in use before the Reign of H. 3. And Mr. Sylas Taylor in his History of Gavelkind Hist. of Gavelkind p. 104. thinks he proves it to have been before the supposed Conquest Yet we have good Authority that there was no express Law for this before 4. H. 3. Kâ—ighton fo 2430. Aâ— 1219. 4 H. 3. Magnates Angliae concesserunt Regi Henrico Wardas hoeredum terrarum suarum quod fuit initium multorum malorum in Angliâ The great men of England granted King Henry the Wardships of their Heirs and Lands which was the beginning of many Evils in England 2. We find Custom prevailing beyond what was the foreign Feudal Law at least of some places for which I may instance in Relief paid by the Heir male after the Death of his Ancestors Whereas I find it in Cujacius payable only by the Heir female Cujaâ—iâ—s fo 498. Siquis sine filio Masculo mortuus fuerit reliquerit filiam filia non habeat beneficium patris nisi à domino redimerit If any one dye without Heir male and leaves a Daughter let her not have her Fathers Benefice unless she redeem it of the Lord. That Relief was called Redemption appears by the Law of H. 1. Leges fo 1. cap. 1. Haeres non redimet terram suam sicut faciebat tempore fratris mei sed legitimâ justâ relevatione relevabit eam It seems in King Rufus his time this payment was so unreasonable that 't was a Redemption in a strict sense and a kind of Purchase of the Land but now 't was to be a lawful and just Relief 2. The jus feodale mentioned in the Glossary if it be not the Law generally received where Feuds were must be the Law of England in particular But 't is to be observed that Choppinus knocks this down who tells us that amongst the French Juridica potestas was not imply'd by a Feud Against Petyt p. 31. in margin But our Apollo teacheth us that our ancient Tenures were from Normandy and that was govern'd by the French Feudal Law being of the French King's Feud Wherefore the Juridica Potestas or jus dicere was not here Ex ipso jure feodali nay in the same place the French Feudist tells us Choppinus de Jurisdict Andeg fo 455. Interdum certè Baro Castellanum observat superiorem 'T is certain sometimes a Baron is under a Castellan's Feud And he gives the Reason why it may be so which is that a Feud carries not with it ib. so 450. the Potestas juridica which reason is very apparent in that a Castellan is of a degree lower than a Baron Take Juridica potestas in the same Sense with jus dicere in the Glossary a Baron was to take Laws from his Inferiour Leges H. 1. cap. and to have his Lands taken from him without Forfeiture as it appears by the Law of Hen. 1. that being one of the Judges in the County Court was not upon the Account of Resiance but the having Free land there so it must have been in the great County Court of Cheshire though they had an extraordinary Power there Admit therefore that a Lord of another County were Feudal Tenant to a Commoner there as 't is not to be doubted but he might have been should this Lord have been represented by his Capital Lord there Glos. 2 part Consentire quisque vid. Or admit a Lord there had no Land but what he held of a Commoner as of such an one as Thomas de Furnival Jani Angl. facies nova p. Sed vide the Record more at large who had several very considerable Mannors might Thomas de Furnival represent the Lord in the Lord's House But farther taking the Jus Feodale to be as in force with us unless the positive Law giving so large a Power be shewn 't is a begging the Question for 't is to prove the Right which our wise Antagonist would exclude from the Question as being indisputable I suppose by the Fact whereas the fancied Right is used in his Hotch-potch Glossary to induce us to the belief of the Fact But from what Sourse is this Right deriv'd SECT 5. An Improvement of the Notion of Jus Feodale THat I may make our mighty man of Letters out of Love with his darling Glossaries 2 Part of the Glos. and his own I shall observe to him That according to that for the Credit of which he pawns his own Truth or his Friends All the Lord 's Right of Representing their Tenants in the Great Councils Against Mr. Petyt p. 31. is meerly Feudal ex ipso jure feodali But all Feuds were enjoy'd under several Military Conditions or Services Being then these were the onely Feudal Tenures and yet as appears by Domesday-Book and all manner of Authority there were Freemen who held in free or else in common Socage though the Dr. sayes all the Freemen of the Kingdom were Tenants by Military Service These Socagers were not chargeable by any without their own consent But like men of another Government and it seems he will afford them nothing here they though called were not obliged to come to the Great Council which was the Curia of the King 's Feudal Tenants onely Nay they were never at it And therefore no wonder if the Laws were obsâ—rved by and exacted upon Against Mr. Petyt p. 43. onely the Normans themselves For the others could not be bound and if they consented to any Charge for Defence of the Government it could be onely in what way they pleased to consent either in a Body by themselves or united with the Vassals or else severally at home as a meer Benevolence And there being free and common Socage Tenants before the Norman's Entrance and since continually thus it must alwayes have been CHAP. III. That Domesday-Book to which he appeals manifestly destroyes the Foundation of his Pernicious Principles SECT 1. SInce our Tenures and the manner of holding our Estates Against Mr. Petyt p. 31. in every respect with the Customes incident to those Estates are said to be brought in by the Conquest and not onely most but all free Estates must have been feudal as Knights Service which is made the onely feudal was in the time of William the First the onely free Service ib. p. 39. What I have said of Feuds in the last Chapter doth directly reach the Controversie between us though our Author who has an excellent faculty of overthrowing his own Arguments
would have the Discourse about these ib. nay and the Conquest it self to be out of the Question and then pray what is the Question It cannot be whether Tenants in Capite represented p. 2. or by their Votes concluded all that held by any other Tenure Nay whether these and their Tenants could do it because this Tenure and manner of holding Estates came in with the Conquerour I hope I shall not seem tedious though I am long upon this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a Conquest that Corner-stone on which if he knows what he do's which I cannot but doubt of sometimes he Erects a fanciful Scheme of Government And thus the lofty Fabrick rises one Story upon another William having made an actual Conquest Against Mr. Petyt thereby had the absolute Disposal of all the Lands of the Kingdom p. 35. and did p. 176. according to his lawful Power give all away to his Followers who though French p. 35. Flemmings Anjovins Britains Poictovins were all metamorphos'd into Normans p. 43. upon whom onely the Feudal Law was executed and observed The King's Grantees though ordinarily a Tenement or Possession neither added to Glos. p. 10. or detracted from the Person of any man if free or bound according to his Blood or Extraction might well be all the Free-men of the Kingdom because the Conquest had made all the English Slaves and the King granted onely to his Great Followers which were Free before But when these Grantees granted out to others p. 176. the Subfeudataries made part of the Freemen of the Kingdom as holding by Knights Service these were the men ib. p. 39. the onely Legal men that named and chose Juries and served on Juries themselves Carta H. 1. both in the County and Hundred Courts Barones Comitat. qui liberas habent terras in which Courts they were the onely Suitors Alas no body else had any free Lands in the Counties Therefore p. 42. these must have been the men that at first Elected two Knights in every County out of their own number and onely they were Electors when first the Body of them began to be represented And unless others are impower'd by the 8th of H. 6. c. 7. which restrains the numerous Electors to Free-holders of 40 s. per ann As the Tenants in Capite came before the 49th in their own Persons and represented the Body of the Commons of England and when first the Body of them that is the Tenants in Capite began to be represented they onely as was proper chose their own Representatives so it ought to be at this day And thus the Tenants in Capite that is they alone and yet they and their Tenants by Knights Service have ever been and still ought to be the onely Members of the Great Council I know he will venture hard but he will make all this good in his next if he can there being a narrow Interest in some for which they would sacrifice the Publick But I shall think our Government will have been finely brought to Bed by his Midwifry when such a monstrous brat is own'd by it Vid. Letter to the Earl of S. But if King William the Master-builder refus'd what this Author would make the Head of the Corner and was not so absolute a Conquerour as to leave the English neither Estates nor Fortunes Against Mr. P. p. 43. ib. p. 179. what becomes of his Airy Ambuscade He has the Confidence to refer to Dooms-day Book in every County for this Fiction and that will satisfie a man wilfully blind p. 176. that William the Conquerour divided all the Land in England amongst his great Followers Now what if I shew out of himself and this book of Judgments concerning Lands and Services that he divided very little of the Lands in England to his Followers to be sure that he was far from distributing all Our Author spared the particular Proof I 'll warrant it to make us believe it would require a Transcript of the whole Book but I think I shall impose upon no body by affirming without transcribing the greatest part of it that even where Lands were enjoyed by other Owners than such as held them in the time of King Edward and upon other Titles yet the Lands continued for the most part to hold in the same Manner as before Whereas William according to him brought in a new Manner and none were so much as Free-men who held not by Knights Service which he setled over all jure haereditario We generally shall find that there was no change of the Manner or Quality of the Service but only of the Quantity Tunc geldavit modo geldat for so much either more or less according to the Improvement or Fall of the Land and frequently that which before paid for a certain number of Hides paid nothing at the making of the Survey The Rent I conceive was in proportion to the value of the Land that being seldom named but only how many Hides Acres Roods c. there were and these Tenants seem to have held in free or common Socage Sometimes they were such as potuerunt ire cum terrâ quo voluerunt which I doubt not Doomsday Ties Taiâ—i tenuerunt non potuerunt ire quolibet uâ— flet tenuiâ— de Tofti sed non fuit alodiâ—m were the Alodiarii sometimes they were not so free but held by Villain Services though themselves were free and these were Tenants in common Socage Sometimes Milites are named but rarely so that 't is certain he can have but small Assistance from Dooms-day book and being there sometimes descent sometimes purchase and now and then the King's Grant is mentioned who can tell by that whether generally the Lands were enjoyed by the one or the other Title since especially 't is most usual only to name the Persons that held formerly who did then and by what Services I take it there are as many and as often English names there as others and though the 〈…〉 of names different from the former 〈◊〉 Vid. Caâ—den's Remains of Sir names from p. 136. to p. 141. that the Christian 〈…〉 which 〈…〉 from their Fathers are more us'd there than Sir-names But I thank him he has given me an easie Task to shew that in spite of his Conjecture this great Survey demonstrates that there were Proprietors of English-men who held Free-lands upon Titles paramount to what he insists upon If notwithstanding our Author's Quotation out of Tilburiensis But they should not claim any thing from the time the Nation was conquer'd under the Title of Succession or Descent Tilburiensis an Officer of the Exchequer who was for bringing Grist to the Mill I produce a List of Free-holders who enjoyed their Lands of the Seizin of their Ancestors Against Mr. P. their own p. 34. or theirs of whom they purchas'd Against Jan. c. p. 1. from before the counterfeit
Rex Comitatum totum absque morâ considere homines Comitatûs omnes Francigenas praecipuè Anglos in antiquis legibus consuetudinibus peritos in unum convenire But of this more when I come to shew at large that others besides Tenants by Knights Service served on Juries c. It farther appears that by Degrees the English were much more considerable than the Normans or other Strangers for that they were all lost and swallow'd up in the great body of the English and therefore they only are named upon all occasions And I believe as far back as Henry the Second's time the French eo nomine will not be found distinguish'd but if however the Tenants in Capite or such as were their Tenants by Knights Service which was laid upon only the Normans themselves Against Mr. Petyt p. 43. were the only governing part and the only Members of the Great Council the Justiciaries Chancellors Lawyers the Ministerial Officers Against Mr. Petyt p. 30. 39. and Under-Judges Earls Sheriffs Bailiffs Hundredaries the legal man and Jurors The Government must needs have been too weak to support it's self when the Ballance of Strength and Property was in other hands and therefore 't was morally impossible that only Tenants in Capite should have been allowed to be of the Great Council when the Nation made Terms for it self upon the Success of their Arms 16 of King John CHAP. VII The Charters of William the First and King John considered with a Confirmation of the Notion of the ordinary Curia distinct from the great or general Councils SECT 1. I know but of two Mediums used by the Dr. which look like Arguments to prove that the Tenants in Capite by Military Service were the only Nobility or the only persons which composed the Great Councils 1. The Grand Charter of William the First 2. That of King John 1. He insists upon two Branches of the first Charter Volumus etiam ac firmiter praecipimus concedimus Vid. Jani Anglorum facies nova p. 22. ut omnes liberi homines totius Monarchiae regni nostri praedicti habeant teneant terras suas possessiones suas bene in pace liberè ab omni exactione injusta Against Mr. Petyt p. 37. ab omni tallagio ita quod nihil ab eis exigatur vel capiatur nisi servitium suum liberum quod de jure nobis facere debent facere tenentur prout statutum est eis illis à nobis concessum jure haereditario in perpetuum per commune concilium totius regni nostri praedicti The second Branch is Statuimus etiam firmiter praecipimus p. 39. ut omnes liberi homines totius regni sint fratres conjurati ad Monarchiam nostram regnum nostrum pro viribus suis facultatibus contra inimicos pro posse suo defendendum viriliter servandum pacem dignitatem Coronae nostrae integram observandam ad judicium rectum justum constanter omnibus modis pro posse suo sine dolo sine dilatione faciendum This Author would gather from hence Against Mr. Petyt p. 39. that all Free-men were Tenants in Military Service that these were the only legal men c. Whereas if the Division had not made a Difference in his partial Judgment he might have found all this to have been fully contained in one of the Laws of the Confessor where they receive another kind of Explanation Et ut verum fatear habent etiam Aldermanni in Civitatibus regni hujus Leg. Ed. de Grâ—ve in Ballivis suis in Burgis clausis muro Vallatis in Castellis eandem dignitatem potestatem modum qualem habent praepositi Hundredorum Wapentachiorum in Ballivis suis sub Vicecomite Regis per universum regnum Debent enim Leges Libertates Jura pacem Regis justas consuetudines regni antiquas à bonis praedecessoribus approbaâ—â—s inviolabiliter sine dolo sine dilatione modis omnibus pro posse suo servare cum aliquid verò inopinatum vel dubium vel malum contra regnum vel contra Coronam Domini Regis forte in Ballivis suis subitò emerserit statim pulsatis campanis quod Anglicè vocant MOTBEL convocare omnes universos quod Anglicè dicunt Folcmote Vocatio Congregatio populorum gentium omnium qui ibi omnes convenire debent universi qui sub protectione pace Domini Regis degunt consistunt in regno predicto ibi providere debent indemnitatibus Coronae regni hujus per Commune Concilium ibi providendum est ad insolentiam malefactorum reprimendam ad utilitatem regni Statutum est enim quod ibi debent populi omnes gentes universae singulis annis semel in anno convenire scilicet in Capite Kal. Maii se fide Sacramento non fracto ibi in unum simul confederare consolidare So William's Law sicut conjurati fratres ad defendendum regnum contra alienigenas contra inimicos una cum Domino suo rege terras honores illius omni fidelitate cum eo servare quod illi ut Domino suo regi intra extra regnum universum Britanniae fideles esse volunt Ita debent facere omnes Principes Comites simul jurare coram Episcopis regni in Folcmote similiter omnes Proceres regni Milites liberi homines universi totius regni Britanniae facere debent in pleno Folcmote fidelitatem Domino Regi ut praedictum est coram Episcopis regni c. Debent etiam universi liberi homines totius regni juxta facultates suas possessiones juxta Catalla sua secundum feodum suum secundum tenementa sua arma habere illa semper prompta conservare ad tuitionem regni servitium Dominorum suorum juxta praeceptum Regis explendum peragendum And to speak the Truth the Aldermen have also in the Cities of this Kingdom within their Bailiwicks and in Burroughs inclosed and walled about and in Castles the same Dignity Power and Manner under the King's Sheriff throughout the Realm for they ought inviolably and without Fraud or Delay by all means to their Power to keep the Laws Liberties Rights Peace of the King and the just and ancient Customs of the Kingdom approved of by their good Predecessors But when any thing unexpected or doubtful happens to fall out of a sudden within their Bailiwicks against the Kingdom or against the Crown of our Lord the King they ought presently by ringing of the Bells which in English they call MOTBEL to call together all the People which in English is called the Folkmote that is the calling together and Assembly of all the People and Countries because all ought to meet there and all who live under the Protection and Peace of
who have not read this Charter from falling upon this easie way of answering the Doctor 's whole Book and therefore they castrate the Charter and leave out all the provision for the Liberties and free Customs of the several integral parts of the Kingdom as if their imaginary General Council had swallowed up the Liberties and Freedoms of all them who held not of the King Nota A Tenure in Capite is when the Land is not holden of the King as of any Honor Castle or Mannor c. But of the King as of the Crown as of his Crown or in Chief and this some would rather have effected than that the Commons of England should be thought to have had any Right affirm'd by so ancient a Law Spelman's 2 part of the Glossary Tit. Parliamentum and that this was apprehended when the marvellous Discoveries worthy to be inquired into under Title Parliament Bless'd the World may well be gather'd from the printing only as much of that part of the Charter which is now in Debate If but one had an hand in it as in the Publisher's own Judgment he thought would fit his Purpose concealing the rest In that Glossary there is no more than this Spelm. Gloss. Col. 452. Nullum Scutagium vel Auxilium ponam in regno nostro nisi per Commune Concilium Regni nostri 1. Nisi ad corpus nostrum redimendum 2. Ad primogenitum filium nostrum Militem faciendum 3. ad primogenitam filiam nostram semel maritandam ad hoc non fiat nisi rationabile auxilium Nota the Omission here Et ad habendum Commune Consilium Regni de auxiliis assidendis aliter quam in tribus Casibus praedictis et de Scutagiis assidendis summoneri faciemus Archiepiscopos Abbates Comites Majores Barones sigillatim per literas nostras praeterea faciemus summoneri in generali per Vicecomites Ballivos nostros omnes alios qui in Capite tenent de nobis ad certum diem sâ—ilicet ad terminum quadraginta dierum ad minus ad certum locum in omnibus literis submonitionis illius causam summonitionis illius exponemus Et sic factâ summonitione negotium procedat ad diem assignatum secundum Concilium eorum qui praesentes fuerint quamvis non omnes summoniti venerint By the partial citation of this shred or end of the Charter 't is a clear case that Et ad habendum Commune Concilium Regni is there in express words appropriated to Tenants in Capite whatever may have been reserv'd to others in the general provision for all their Liberties and free Customes and the Publisher hath so dexterously and effectually patched the Fragments together that the Reader must be forced according to those curious Appearances to assent to the Publisher and Doctor 's fallacious Assertions that none but the Tenants in Capite made the Commune Concilium Regni the City of London and all other Cities Burroughs Ports and Towns or Parishes whose Rights are there reserved being clearly left out in the Glossary whereas 't will be very difficult to one that reads the whole together not to think that admitting ad habendum Commune Consilium Regni be there appropriated to the Kings Tenants in Chief yet the Aid and Escuage they are impower'd to assess must be such as concern'd them onely A reservation for the Liberties and free Customs of all the parts of the Kingdom following immediately upon mention of the Common Council of the Kingdom which undoubtedly had of Right and Custom a larger Power than barely the granting of Taxes But if Et ad habendum Commune Concilium Regni de auxiliis assidendis aliter quam in tribus casibus praedictis ought to be joyn'd to the Liberties and free Customs of the whole Nation reserved by King John's Charter then that darling Notion of a Parliament of the King's Tenants only no more to be prov'd than that we had Parliaments of Women as well as others falls to the ground Vid. Jan. p. 239. And by the Dr's good favour there was no need of proving that amongst the other Customs of the Cities Burroughs Against Jan. p. 4. c. this of enjoying a Right of being of or constituting the Common Council of the Kingdom was one of them any otherwise than from the express words of the Charter nor could I justly be blam'd for not going first to prove that such were Members before my saying that if they were so before and at the making of the Charter their Right is preserv'd to them by it and is confirm'd by the Charter of H. 3. c. 9. Since in all mens Logick but the Dr's the Argument is to be laid down before it can be made good and the thing to be prov'd here is but the minor of a Syllogism Which Argument being founded upon Fact which the Dr. would have to be the onely Controversie between us p. 1. I may wave for a while and yet there 's no doubt but I prove a Right if I shew that amongst other Liberties and free Customs all parts of the Kingdom here enumerated were by the Words of King John's Charter to enjoy a Right ad habendum Commune Concilium Regni The Dr. agrees So Matth. Paris Against Jan. c. p. 62. that King John's Charter and that which H. 3. granted in the 9th of his Reign were alike in all things Wherefore if I can shew the likeness I hope 't will qualifie and abate our Author 's great Wrath for my proving from thence a provision for a more General Council than one made up of Tenants onely For p. 63. being like 't is not necessary that the Words should be the very same but the Sense and if we are sure by Record that we have the right words we are certain if Records may explain Matthew Paris that the likeness he meant consisted in the Sense Since therefore in the Great Charter granted 9 H. 3. as I find also one in Secundo there is in a Chapter intire by it self The hand-writing of E MS. peues Dom. Petyt as the Lord Cook cites it Scutagium de caetero capiatur sicut capi consuevit tempore H. avi nostri and no other provision is in any part of the Charter made for the Great Council of the Nation than what is contain'd under the Liberties and free Customs of every particular Place and yet this wholly agrees with and expresses the Sense of King John's Et de Scutagiis assidendis must be disjoyned from ad habendum Commune Concilium Regni aliter quam in tribus casibus praedictis And if so then the Tenants in Capite who are under that Division have no express provision there made for their Summons to the Great Council of the Nation but are with others left for that to the antient Law as it was in the time of H. 2. whose Laws both Charters that were in
Auxilium which is there meant of voluntary aid not due upon the account of their Houses being oâ— of the Kings Demeasn though indeed 't is then shewn that they had severalâ— times before been talliated Quid a new Paragraph Quid esâ— quod in hâc Causâ defensionis egeat must needs say I take all this to be sâ— plain that I know not which part ought to add any light to Is the difference between Tallage and a Voluntarâ— Aid obscure Or is it not well known that the Kings Demeasns only were talâ—â—liated and that the City having beeâ— talliated 't was in vain to urge thaâ— they paid only voluntary Aid But perhaps in the two next the oâ—scurity may lye and yet by the Doctorâ— Art of multiplying faults they maâ— make three obscure Paragraphs 2. This explains that part of the Charter He adds such to Cases to render it obscure Jani c. p. 26. Simili modo fiat de Civitate London that is as in all Cases besides those excepted Escuage or Tallage should not be raised but by a Common-Council of the Kingdom that is of all the persons concerned to pay so for the City of London unless the Aid was ordered in Common-Council wherein they and all other Tenants in chief were assembled none should be laid upon any Citizens but by the consent of their own Common-Council Na. So if a sum in gross were laid upon them and if the Ordinance were only in general Terms that all the Kings Demeasns should be talliated the proportions payable there should be agreed by the Common-Council of the City This consists of two parts First That where there was not the consent of a Common-Council of all the Tenents in chief the Citizens might of themselves give a Tallage which is not in dispute between us but is with admirable ingenuity turned into an assertion Viz. To such payment as Tâ—â—lage that Cities and Burroughs were not taxed or assessed towards any payments but by their own Common-Councils which is not to be inferred from the priviledge of one City suppose it were so for London nor can be gathered from my words which yield that even London might be Taxt or Assessed by the consent of the Common-Council of Tenents or that they Against Jani c. p. 113. as part of the Common-Council of the Land taxed themselves which is true but no man of sense can understand that to be the meaning of this part of the Obscure Paragraph but that something farther was intended 2. The second I need not explain since he understands for all his affected ignorance Indeed he would take in more places that after a Tax was imposed upon the City of London the Inhabitants or those who composed its Council met to proportion it so as it might be paid with as much equality as could be Na. the King did perhaps require a certain sum after a general Ordinance made by the Council of Tenents for a Rationabile auxilium Jani c. p. 26. This he yields to my hand that they always did if they would it seems convinced by that Record which shews that when the Council of the City would not agree to the Sum demanded by the King 't was de voluntate omnium Baronum nostrorum Civitatis ejusdem that the King talliated his Tenents per se or per Capita so much upon every head 3. This clears the last Paragraph which I need not recite it having no meaning differing from the Record but if my Record give not sufficient light and strength he I thank him according to his usual Curtesie cites one clear enough Dr. p. 115. Et cum praedicti Cives noluissent intrare finem praedict ' trium mille marcarum praedicti Thes. alii voluerint assidere illud Tal. per Capita So that till the Citizens refused the the Sum in gross the King did not Talliate each man in particular But I am told that this is nothing to my purpose 't is strange that he who blames me in other places for not quoting more than is for my purpose when nothing behind makes against me should now tax me for not skipping over any part of that Clause which 't was needful to take and explain entire To clear up his understanding if possible though I thought to have left this Task I will obviate an objection which such as our Answerer may make that 't is obscure how the Record of the Common-Council of London's concerning its self about the Charge laid upon the City should explain that part of the Charter which sayes Simili modo fiat de Civitate London but surely practice is a good Interpreter of a Law and there is this further evidence that here is provision for the power of the Common-Council of the City because that holding in Capite and being mentioned distinct from all the other Tenents there named in general it must be for something else besides that for which 't is joyned with the other Tenents But Excedimus tenebris in crepusculum from this obscurity and darkness to be felt by the Doctors groaping hand we come to broad day light When in the 39th H. 3. Against Jani p. 115. 117. Provisum fuit per Consilium Regis apud Merton that he should talliate his Demeasns though this was after King John's Charter which was intended to restrain the King from levying publick Taxes without publick consent yet it seems to be plain by the Record that the King by the advice of his Privy Council taxed the City of London even without the consent of the Common Council of his immediate Tenents whom he makes the Common-Council for all manner of Aid and Escuage But it may be said a Tallage was no publick Tax though the Tax here spoke of is made no more publick than the consent required to charge it Which consent according to him was from immediate Tenents only so that Tallage might be a publick Tax as well as any other And to be sure Scutagium concerning the Kings Tenents only and the Cases in which the King reserv'd to himself power of taxing without publick consent in his sense relating only to them the Tax because of tenure must be provided for as well as other if any other were there meant by Auxilium vel Scutagium Nay he owns expresly that according to the Law in King John ' s Charter London and other Cities and Burghs were to be Assessed and Taxed by the Common-Council of the Kingdom p. 117. 118. And he makes a reason of that provision to be the usage in the time of H. 2. for the King to Talliate or Tax them without such a Council The Doctor has doubtless the most particular convincing way of reasoning of any man he says that Law in King John ' s Charter intended to restrain the King from levying of publick Taxes without publick consent And the reason of this Artice in King John ' s Charter
yields these Rights to be more than precarious For according to him the Tenents in Capite were the only Members of the Great Council before 49 H. 3. and if others were after 't was by Usurping upon the Rights of Tenents in Capite ib. p. 210. ib. 42. who and not others when the 〈◊〉 Government was set up How were Cities and Burroughs holding in Capite Represented according to this And how came they ever to be Represented began to be Represented by two Knights for every County out of their own number and they at first that is then Elected their own Representatives and yet these Tenents in Capite might be set aside if the King and his Council pleased nor was any power given to others to chuse till â—0 H. 6. c. 2. which gave no new power ib. p. 79. and the Lords depend upon the Kings pleasure ib. p. 42. Therefore what the design is ib. p. 227. 228. and at whose door the crime of it lies the thing it self speaks tho I should be silent But for fear he should seduce unwary Readers I must observe his Artifice in imposing upon them the belief that as it has ever since 49 H. 3. been at the Kings pleasure that any Lords came to the Great Council so the King could of right name to the Sheriff what Representatives for the Counties Against Mr. Petyt p 249. Cities and Burroughs he pleas'd as he observes in the Margent upon a Record 31 E. 3. but he is not so Candid to observe that though indeed at that time there was such a nomination yet that was noâ— to any Parliament or to make any new Law or lay any kind of Charge upon the Nation or particular men but was a Summons of a Council to advise how what was granted by full Parliament legally Summon'd might be best answered juxta intentionem concessionis praedictae and in such Cases the Judges only who are but Assistants in Parliament might well be consulted but pro magnis urgentibus negotiis as when King Charles the First called the Magnum Concilium or Great Council of Peers to York An. 164â— upon the Scotch Rebellion the King call'd more to Advise with and the Counsellors might well be of his own Choice 'T will be urg'd that when the King appointed but one for every County p. 242. 26 E. 3. they were impowr'd to consent to what de Communi Consilio contigerit ordinari p. 246. 27 E. 3. and that such a Council made Laws as the Statute of the Staple made the 21 of E. 3. to which the answer is very obvious that they made only Ordinances not Laws and that these were Magna Consilia taken in a sense totally different from the Generalia Concilia or Parliaments and all this appears above the power and subtilty of our learned Doctors Evasions in that the Record cited by himself in the 26 E. 3. calls the Assembly they are Summon'd to Concilium only and an Act of Parliament in the twenty eight of that King calls what was done in the twenty seven Ordinances 28 E. 3. c. 13. and that meeting a Great Council Magnum Concilium but such a Council it was and its Resolutions such meer Ordinances the distinction of which from Acts is well known that that very next Parliament finds it needful to confirm and give them the force of a Law Agreeably to this the Earl Marshal in that grand Case in the 3 H. 6. pleads that though a determination hadde be made against the said Earl Marshall in great Council Rot. Par. 3. H. 6. n. 12. though he hadde be of full age that might not disherit him without Authority of Parliament these are uncontrollable evidences and proofs against him let him to save the great Credit of his Learning answer them if he can But who is the new Government-Maker and new Parliament-Maker perhaps one might know from himself when he has considered a little better and then he may think the Government as 't is now establisht â—ighly concern'd in his Errors Perhaps 't will be said I injure this good man in imputing to him a design in relation to the present Government Since he owns that the most excellent great Council Against Mr. Petyt p. 229. and goes to prove it evidently from Records received its perfection from the Kings Authority and time But 't is obvious that its Perfection must be meant of such its Perfection as his Book allows and he would make evident but what is that That Lords should to the time of his excellent discoveries be Summon'd to Parliament ib. p. 227. 228. or past by at the Kings pleasure and that if the King pleas'd he might Summon one Knight for a County ib. p. 249. one Citizen for a City one Burgess for a Burgh and those nam'd to the Sheriff And this design will be very evident if we observe his aery ambuscade to return his own phrase and meer juggle in joyning the Kings Authority and time together we think we have something but by an Hocus Pocus Trick 't is gone for admit that its Perfection were such as we say it has at this day viz. for Lords to come of Right in their own Persons and that the Commons should send Representatives of their free Choice Yet let us see what setlement he gives this Great Council for which purpose we must divide the two Authorities which sometimes may differ And 1. Suppose that though time would preserve that power which the Great Council exercises a King would hereafter take it all to himself and make Laws by a Council of his own chusing or without any If the Doctor allows this power doubtless the next Parliament will thank him 2. Suppose that without or against the Kings Authority time only would establish this Great Council can this be done He that affirms it surely will be no great friend to Prerogative nor understands he that Maxim Nullum tempus occurrit Regi And one of these must be clos'd with 'T will be objected that I am as injurious to Prerogative in arguing that some Lords may have a Right of Prescription to come to the Upper-House But I think no sober man will deny that there is a right either from Writs alone or from Writs as prescribed to and 't is strange that it should not be against Prerogative to urge a right from one Royal Concession and yet it should be to urge it from many but farther if they who had no right to come in Person or be Represented in Parliament should by colour of Prescription put themselves upon the King for Counsellors this were derogatory to the Prerogative But if there be a natural right for Proprietors of Land with whom some say is the ballance of power within this Nation to be interested in the Legislature which I 〈◊〉 not affirm Or if there be such a positive right not only from the Laws for frequent Parliaments which suppose such to be Members as had been but more particularly from the Law received in the 4th of William the First Rex debet omnia rite facere in Regno per judicium procerum Regni and by positive Law or Custom the King us'd to send special Writs for some general for others the Prescribing to special Writs which is not of Substance as to the Legislative Interest is no diminution of Prerogative because no more in effect is out of the King than was before which is that this man should one way or other have a share in the Legislature If this Solution of mine will not pass I cannot help it I am sure the Law for a right grounded upon one or more Special Writs of Summons stands fast though the reason of it should be above my reach Having run through a Book so ill-natur'd to the Government and so impotent in its setled anger as that which some may think to have no other design Above all vid. Title page Against Mr. Petyt p. 81. than that of exposing Mr. Petyt and me the one for Artifice â—â—nhandsom dealing with and false application of Records c. the other amongst other things for Ignorance Confidence and Cheating his Readers I may hope notwithstanding the disparity of years and the dignity of his place to be very excusable in using our Answerer with no more respect When a man renders himself cheap by his folly and yet meers with many so weak that they are discipled by him to notions of dangerous and pernicious consequence to the State Ridentem dicere verum Quis vetat In summing up the Product of his many years labours which my Preface charges him with perhaps it may be thought that I omitted one considerable Head however I leave to others if they think fit to add for a seventh That both Lords and Commons may be depriv'd of all Shares or Votes in making of Laws for the Government of the Kingdom when ever any future King shall please to resume the Regality Some perhaps may add an eighth That the Parliaments are nothing but Magna Concilia such as are called only to Advise upon what shall be given in direction but no consent of theirs required to make the Kings determination a binding Law And Vice Versâ every Great Council such as that call'd to York 〈◊〉 1640. is a Parliament FINIS ERRATA PAge 12. l. 6. add Drs. before interdicts p. 15. in marg add p. 239. p. 16. l. 11. read vicinata p. 18. l. 10. r. 25. p. 28. l. 12. r. in Chief p. 39. l. 5. r. had p. 47. l. 21. r. induere l. 23. r. deposceret p. 82. in marg dele Shire after Cambridg p. 100. l. 17. r. Sharnborn p. 110. in marg towards the bottom add Domesday p. 124. l. 6. r. paragio p. 133. l. 24. add and according to their Chattels p. 139. add of before a title p. 151. l. 13. r. conticuissent p. 156. in marg r. Lords for Knights p. 163. l. 2. r. â—it l. 10. r. integra p. 201. l. 8. r. title In the Additions Page 8. l. 5. r. article p. 23. in marg Leges Sancti Ed. p. 25. l. 12. r. of King John's Charter viz. Tenants c. ib. l. 25. r. Nocton
Jus Anglorum ab Antiquo OR A CONFUTATION OF AN Impotent LIBEL Against the Government BY King Lords and Commons Under pretence of Answering Mr. PETYT and the Author of Jani Anglorum Facies Nova WITH A SPEECH according to the Answerer's Principles made for the PARLIAMENT at OXFORD Ne Sutor ultra crepidam LONDON Printed for Edward Berry in Holborn-Court in Grayes-Inn 1681. THE PREFACE THere was a Book lately publish'd against Mr. Petyt and my Self which not only treats us with Pedantick Scorn like those that are to Cap the Author within his Colledge but its seems to trample on the best Constitution our Government it self under Colour of its being New in the 49th of Hen. 3. Against Mr. Petyt p. 110. when it arose out of the indigested Matter of Tumults and Rebellion and so not having a Legitimate Birth as not born in Wedlock between the King and his People it may be turn'd out of Doors by the Help of that Maxim Quod initio non valet tractu temporis non convalescit How can a Bastard become a Mulier The Treatise which was to prove the Fact Against Jan. c. p. 1. Matter of Fact only was cried up for unanswerable and perhaps 't was imagined that there was no possibility left for a Reply since the Writer who has render'd himself famous in his Generation as if he knew better how to manage a Design than an Argument pass'd it about only to such Hands as were obliged by Promise if not by Principle to conceal it But Mr. Petyt and my Self having by Accident seen bis Book and observed some Heads which we intended to expose to the World At last out comes the happy Birth yet 't was hoped that by that time there might be Proselytes enough to defend it with Noise and Acclamations and Contempt of all Opposers Records Ancient Historians and our Ancient or Modern Lawyers Though generally in a Matter of Argument we ought to leave to the Reader the Censure of what we think we confute without remarking how absurd or criminal it is yet when such Reflections are almost the only Arguments on the other side and they when pronounc'd tanquamè Cathedrâ must have some Authority 't is fit that even these trifles should have their due provided they be answered with Decency of Expression And we know in what manner the Wise Man advises us to answer some People I should have been glad if this Author'â— Civility had obliged me to treat him at another Rate than I do since I delight not iâ— this way nor think thereby to please such Readers as I would court to be Judges between us But why should I Apologize for the managing of this Controversie in a way wholly New to me Since the severest Expressions are but retorted and transcrib'd from our Answerer's Original and indeed it may well be an Original for 't is without Example If in any thing I seem intemperate I may say with an Author well known Excess of Truth has made me so Our Author 's very Notions are Satyrs upon themselves nor can any thing more expose a Man than a seemingly Gigantick Endeavour to remove the fix'd Stars the Lords from the Firmament where each shines in his setled Station and to take from the Commons of England that Spot of Earth which they enjoy and tread on While the Sons of Titan lay Pelion upon Ossa one Mountainous Fiction upon another the Mountains have a quick Delivery and bring forth Confusion to the Giants What has been the Product of his many Years Labours I think may be shewn in Miniature under these Heads 1. That the Norman Prince against his reiterated Promises and against the great Obligation of Gratitude to those of the English who assisted him Against Mr. Petyt p. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 so p. 176. took away all their Lands and Properties and left them no Right or Law 2. That from the Reputed Conquest and long before under the British and Saxon Governments to the 49th of Henry the Third None came to the Parliaments or great Councils of the Nation where Life and Fortune were disposed of but the King 's immediate Tenants in Chief ib. p. 39. by Knights Service 3. That even they came at the Discretion of the King and his Council ib. p. 79. 228. ever after the 49th 4. That the House of Commons began by Rebellion in that very year ib. p. 210. 228. 229. nay and the House of Lords too 5. That the Constitution of the Lord's House ib. p. 227. 228. 229. consists at this very day in the King 's calling or leaving out from special Summons to Parliament such Earls and Barons as he pleases 6. That by vertue of the New Law imposed upon the People p. 29. by the Conquerour p. 39. none within the Kingdom were Free-men or Legal men but Forreigners who came in with him being such as nam'd and chose Juries and serv'd on Juries themselves both in the County and Hundred Courts who were all Tenants in Military Service None surely but such as read without observing any thing whose Books can't beat into their dull Brains common Reason and who never were acquainted with that excellent Comentator'â— practise will think that I need set my self to argue against every one of these ' Tâ—â—ll be enough if under those Heads which I go upon to destroy his ill laid Foundations I prove them upon him for most of them confute themselves Truly I cannot but think Mr. Petyt and my self to have gone upon very good Grounds since they who oppose them are forc'd to substitute in their Rooms such pernicious ones as would render the Foundation both of Lords and Commons very tottering and unstable Not to mix Lords and Commons together I will endeavour to do right to the dignity of that Noble Order and their Interest in Parliament apart from the other The Constitution of the House of Lords our Antagonist as I shall shew will not allow to have been setled till after the time of E. 1. if it be yet Whereas for a short Answer to his new Conceit the Earl of Norfolk Rot. Parl. 3. H. 6. n. 12. p. 228. in the third of H. 6. lays his Claim to and has allowed him the same Seat in Parliament that Roger Bigod his Ancestor had in that great Court in the time of H. 3. And though on the side of the Earl of Warwick his Competitor 't is urged that the Earl of Warwick had the Precedency by King H. 4◠〈◊〉 Commandment 'T is answered Yat Commandement yave no Title ne chaungeth not the Enheritaunce of the Erle Mareschal but if or unless hit hadde be done by Auctorite of Parlement And if Precedency were a setled Inheritance which could not be alter'd but by Act of Parliament how can a fixt Right of coming to Parliament be taken away otherwise Though our Author supposes it to be at the meer Will and Pleasure
of Summons and deny their Rights in legal Practice tho a Parliament was to be held In fine the Kings of England de facto used to suffer Tenants in Capite to come to their great Councils but the Right is deny'd even them who only had that Permission But Against Jan. c. p. 66. and 67. does he not own the Fact with us expressly in the 48. of H. 3. and yet goeth to set aside the Right by giving an Account of the History and Occasion of it Our Champion not only denies that the Commons had any Share or Votes c. in making of Laws for the Government of the Kingdom c. unless they were represented by the Tenants in Capite but vouches the name of Sir Henry Spelman to prove that 't is of Right Ex ipso jure â—eodali that the Tenants in Capite should represent the rest In this Case â—e may admit us all the Fact of coming to the great Councils and yet the Right would have been against us as long as the Feud remained that is till the twelfth year of his present Majesty when the Feudal-Right as set forth by our Opponent ceast So that not only the Fact within the Compass of our dispute would have been insignificant but no Fact since to this very day could prove any Right the Right of sitting in Parliament having been according to him wholly Feudal if any no Statute giving a new Right to any 〈◊〉 elect as I shall shew since the time when he places in the King's Tenants in Chief by Knights Service all that Right of Elections which was suffered between Subject and Subject Where then is the Right at this day Vid. Pref. in any Commoners to come to Parliament Nay in any Lords upon the Grounds which I have already expos'd But what if in our Dispute about ancient Testimonies we have granted us those very words which we contend for Against Mr. Petyt The Commons c. were not introduced c. before â—â— H. 3. That is not once if the Question be only of Fast. as Evidences oâ— the Fact nay and our own Sense too to be on Record admitting that Right may arise from one Fact well proâ—ed what Question then remains Why then 't is purely of Right Vid. infra fideles and that â—s whether our Delian Apollo has not Right in his floating Island to set up Matthew Paris above Record if it were only for this Reason that he speaks â—ore oracularly and doubtfully than the Records Is it not granted that the Fact is on our side by such Authority as he would advance above Records and that in reâ—ation to his belaboured Conquest when â—e says that the mistaken Notions that â—s those which are contrary to his of the Conqueror's Title Laws and Government Against Mr. Petyt p. 43. were devised by the Monks and Clergy-men-Lawyers Nay is not the Right of Conquest it self as merely such made a Question by himself For he asks whether any man can forfeit that is justly loose his Lands to a Stranger a Conqueror that could not pretend Title but by Violence and Conquest Justly to loose and to forfeit must here be reciprocal to vest a Right in a Conqueror for if the Vanquish'd loose not their Right of Reprisal when 't is in their Power 't is not forfeited and if 't is not forfeited forisfacta made anâ— ther 's by Right 't is not justly lost nay 't is not lost at all only forcibly with held Is it not in effect yielded us that the Commons have ever of Right been Aâ—senters as well as Petitioners and thaâ— from before the 49. of H. 3. For hâ— yields the Word Ever to be in the Parliament Roll nor does he tax the Cleâ—â— with any designing Addition to the Record but which serves not his Turâ— he says Against Mr. Petyt p. 134. 't was ever since they were a third Estate or a Member of Parliament A goodly Discovery that they werâ— a Member ever since they were a Member but do they not plead that they were ever a Member that is immemorially If they had prescribed to this ever since the 49. of H. 3. he might have triumph'd but even in his Sense neither Fact nor Right is controverted because for ought he says here they might ever have been a third Estate And if Burgesses whom though Tenants in Capite I shall take for Commons which to be sure with him had as great if not greater Right than any not so holding could not make that Claim matter of Right in the 8. of E. 2. but at at least it might be overthrown for â—eason of State how came it to pass â—â—at the whole Body of Commons did it â—â—en without Check from the King or â—â—s Council whom he makes very ignoâ—â—nt of the Prerogative or so fearful of â—â—eming to assert it that they durst not â—â—me it though perhaps the Lords â—ere all likely then to have joyned in â—â—e throwing them out and this at a â—â—me when we are told the Commons â—ere little inconsiderable Fellows and â—ore the Lords Livery Coats That more than Tenants in Capite â—ere present at the great Council when King John's Charter was made I do not â—â—nd that he controverts and indeed â—ow can he There having been that â—rmy which was too powerful for their â—nhappy King and the Londoners in great Numbers who I take it used â—o come more contracted but he denies that more than Tenants in Capite were Parties to the Laws whether they were de facto is to be proved by Reason And he urgeth that the Laws were made only to Tenants in chief which indeed would be a Demonstration that none but they were Parties but that moâ—â— were I shall prove under a distinct heâ— of his Contradictions SECT 2. His Contradictions 2. MR. Petyt whom I cannot bâ— call judicious notwithstanâ—ing the Interdict had asserted that tâ—â— Commons such as are now representâ— by Knights Citizens and Burgesseâ— were always of Right an essential paâ—â— of the great Council I joyn my Suffragâ— and for Proof alledge that King John Charter does not constitute the Tenanâ— in Capite the only Members but leavinâ— to all the Villae their Liberties and frâ—â—â— Customs If the Inhabitants even Parishes came to the great Councilâ— without Consideration of this Tenuâ— in Capite their Right was sufficiently secured under the word Villae Now what if all this is oppos'd onlâ— out of a Spirit of Contradiction and ouâ— of the same Spirit he contradicts himself and answers the Character which the inimitable Cowley gave of Envy which begun Davidâ—â— â—nvy at the Praise her self had won â—he Villae I say signifies Towns and â—â—shes too as distinct from the Burâ—â—s to be sure not the Habitations â—â—nants in Chief only whom our Opâ—â—nt argues to have been the only â—â—sentatives of the Commons if they â—any till the 49 of H. 3. But to deâ—â— my Notion of the Villae he cites
required or what was therein contained Upon this Habilo Concâ—â—io mature Advice being taken and that of the great Council for that at least consented â—n not opposing the King sent his Precepts to the Sheriffs throughout the Kingdom to cause an Inquest of twelve Knights or else of twelve lawful men â—hat is Free-holders to be return'd 12 Milites vel legales homines out of every County respectively concernâ—ng the Liberties which were in Engâ—and in the time of King Henry that King's Grand-father The Charter mentioned by our Adversary was 9. H. 3. And so after this Tryal the Precept for which was 〈◊〉 indeed the actual Confirmation of what they found or Judgment upon it was not till two years after â—ut then the Clerus Populus cum Magnatibus where by the way the Populus could not be the Magnates â—he Inferiour Clergy and Laity with the great ones go on upon their former Issue and would give no Supply to the King's Wants till he would grant Petitas Libertates the Liberties they had before sued for or demanded not barely as a Confirmation of King John's Charter M. Par. Supra p. 305. but indeed these very Liberties which they pleaded to have been such in the time of H. 2. The Denial of which occasioned the fighting for them against King John were in Substance no way different from the Grant made by King John in Affirmance of the Common Law And so the Charter of H. 3. was in nullo dissimilis to King John's and if there were any Difference the Clause by which the great Priviledge of Tenants in Capite is argued for being omitted 't is a Sign that admit it constituted them a full Parliament this was not their Right in the time of H. 2. nor return'd so to have been but was the only thing extorted by Force and fell with it This were enough to set aside all his Arguments nay and that Language too which serves instead of them but I cannot deny my Reader and my self the Pleasure of observing him more particularly and if it may be of knowing him intus incute His two main Designs if he be steady to any but to contradict right or wrong are 1. To prove that William the First took away from the English their Estates â—nd as he imposed the Tenures and Manâ—er of holding our Estates in every respect so he did all the Customs incident to those Estates The Customs I thought had been within the Manner but let that go Des Cart. Principiae Phil. p. 17. Per modos planè idem intelligimus quod aliâ—i per attributa vel qualitates c. the Manner implies the Quality as he might have been taught long since â—y Des Cartes this extended to all the Estates derived or come to any now â—nd yet in the very same page 't is but most of them being feudal not all I have already shew'd his Denyal of the Conâ—ueror's Right to take any and thus â—his Mountain is finely brought to Bed by the Dr. 2. As a Consequent upon William's dividing the Land amongst his Followâ—rs he would shew that this King's Grantees and that in Capite by Knights Service were the only Members of the Great Councils Against Mr. Petyt p. 2. and that no others had any Communication in State Affairs unless they were represented by the Tenants iâ— Capite Against Jan. c. p. 12. In another place No doubt but the Tenants in Capite were the General Council of the Nation If therefore he own that there were Councils more general than such as were compos'd of Tenants in Capite only does he not yield the Cause Not to repeat his Concession for Towns incorporate not holding in Capite he yields it for single Persons who still held not by that Tenure In many places he grants As p. 112. That all the Nobility of England met to treat with the King Against Mr. Petyt p. 131. or to the like purpose Farther that the Baronage or Nobility included the Tenants in Capite and sucâ— great men as held of them by Military Tenure So that in effect if the Tenure or as he expresses himself A Tenemenâ— or Possession Glos. p. 10. neither added to or detracted from the Person of any if free oâ— bound according to his Blood or Extraction An ordinary Free-holder in free or common Socage might as well have been provided for as to a Right in coming to Parliament as a Tenant by Knights Service of the King's Tenant in Chief But he tells us then theâ— must be great men holding by these Services But to shew that he insists not upon this finding a vast number of men at the passing of King John's Charter which was Inter Regem liberos homines totius regni Glos. p. 26. he yields that the Retiâ—ue and Tenants in Military Service were Members of the Council though upon second Thoughts he tells me these liberi homines were the same which â—he King calls in his Charter Liberi homines nostri Against Jan. c. p. 9. These Liberi homines nostri were Tenants in Capite So that the Tenants of Tenants in Capite were Tenants in Capite and this suppose explains that Passage where â—e says Against Mr. Petyt p. 176. Whoever held of the Tenants in Capite by mean Tenure in Military Service held of those Barons or Tenants in Capite by the same or like Tenure that themselves held of the King That is every Tenant by Knight's Service of the King's Tenant by Knight's Service held in Knight's Service which â—dentical Proposition I heartily thank â—im for or else every such Tenant of â—he King's Tenant in Capite held of the King in Capite that is immediately and â—ot immediately in the same respect But these Tenants of Subjects such as were Members of the great Council were however concluded by the Acts of their Lords Against Mr. Petyt P. 113. They that held of the Tenants in Capite by Knights Service were bound by their Acts viz. The Acts of the Tenants in Capite that is These Tenants were Members of the great Council and no Members as their Lords represented them and yet did not represent them but they came themselves But to be sure none but Tenants by Knights Service who were Homagers and sworn to obey their Lords as the ordinary Free-holders were to keep the Laws and defend the Monarchy Jurati fratres-franck-pledges and the Peace of the Kingdom were in his Sense bound by the Acts of their Lords So that there was a necessity for the Bull and Multitude of Free-men or small Free-holders Glos. p. 31. to be bound with Sureties to their good Behaviour in such manner as the Law had requir'd amongst themselves otherwise the Government could not secure it self against their Violations of the Laws they neither meeting in the Great Councils nor being bound by the Acts of such as met any more than the Tenants in
acquir'd the Crown by Election these things shew it to have been as factious as those which are condemned But we must have Recourse to the History to know how he became King here England since it had been reduced to a Monarchy by the Conduct and Magnanimity of the great King Alfred found that benefit of being under One Head that before Succession was setled when a King dyed the People voluntarily pitch'd upon some One to whom they might pay their Allegiance and from whom they might expect Protection when a King quitted his mortal Dominion to be Assessor with the Principaâ—ities and Powers in the highest Orb. The Question was not whether they should have a King or no but who should be the man The Confessor through some foolish Vow which was void in it's self having denyed Marriage-rights to his Queen they had none of his Issue to set their Hopes upon and perhaps they were loth to fall again before a Family which they had formerly disobliged and therefore would not think upon Edgar Etheling who was Heir to him that wore the Crown next before the Confessor But that Monarch of their Choice and as 't was believ'd the Elect of Heaven was in such esteem with them that the greatest Worth and the clearest Stream of Royal Blood would have signified little in respect of the Deference they paid to his sanctified Judgment and therefore his Recommendation in such a superstitious Age was to them a kind of Divine Revelation The Norman Prince Abrev. Chron. Rad. de diceto fo 479. Subregulus Haroldus Godwini filius quem Rex ante suum decessum elegerat à t tius Angliae Primatibus ad regale culmen electus William pretended a direct Gift of the Crown from him but there is Authority which tells us That upon his Nomination the chiefâ— men of all England chose Harold Whether this illustrious Son of the great Earl Godwin was design'd by the Confessor or no is left in Dispute but that he arriv'd to his high Trust by a general Election of those who were able to keep under M. S. ex bib Domini Wild defuncti or satisfie the rest is certain and yet an ancient Author calls him Conqueror Heraldus Strenius Dux Conquestor Angliae If Harold has made an absolute Conquest which no man pretends that I find and William had conquer'd him perhaps there would have been a Devolution of a Conquerours Right upon him who subdued Harold but there was only a Competition between these two Princes for that Dignity and Authority which Election had vested in Harold 'T was this that William fought for not for the Lives Liberties and Fortunes of the People And William himself upon his Death-bed being ask'd to whom he would devise his Kingdom makes Answer that he would not pretend to dispose of it and gives this Reason which argues that he thought he had no Right so to do Non enim tantum decus haereditario jure possedi For Comb. Brit. f. 104. I possess'd not this Honour as a Right of Inheritance which here must be meant as what I had an absolute Property in and Disposal of Sed diro inflictu multâ effusione sanguinis humani perjuro Regi Haroldo abstuli interfectis vel fugatis fautoribus ejus dominatui meo subegi But by a direful Conflict and much effusion of humane Blood I took it from perjur'd King Harold and brought it under my Dominion through the Deaths or Flight of his Abettors With this agrees Lex Noricorum in the Confirmation of St. Edwards Laws William the Bastard through God's Permission subduing Harold Regnum Anglorum victoriosè adeptus est Got the Kingdom of England by his Victory but the Victory was over Harold not the whole Kingdom I wonder our Antagonist brought not this to prove that William the Bastard got all the Lands of the Kingdom as he granted all the Lands of whole Counties under the word Comitatus but as 't will appear that the Proceedings of this Prince to his being crowned prove his Election so his Transactions with Harold shew that he laboured only to have that Power which he said Harold maintain'd by Perjury Suppose therefore Harold had not oppos'd and without more Turmoils William had been crown'd had he in this Case been a Conquerour in the Sense contended for And what makes the Difference between his having it of Harold freely or by Force in relation to the whole Kingdom Surely he would never have endeavoured to come in by Treaty to a limited Dominion when with those Advantages that were on his side he might expect by turning â—ut Harold to jump into the absolute Disposal of the whole Land But immediately after St. Edward's Death he sent an Ambassador to demand a Resignation from Harold to which he urged his Obligation by Oath the Gift of his Kinsman the Confessor was likewise pretended But Harold argued for the Invalidity both of his own Oath and the others Bequest because they were Selden's Review of the History of Tithes p. 439. absque generali Senaâ—s populi conventu edicto That â—s no Act of the Common-Council of the Kingdom which Council is represented by this Author under the Form of the Roman Councils at those times when besides the Senator's Votes there was the Jussus populi And this is in other words of the same Import exprest by Matthew Paris Sine Baronagii sui Communi assensu Upon Harold's denying the Normanâ— demand Appeal is made to the Popeâ— and there was one then in the Papal Seâ—â— whose Ambition made him court all occasions of becoming the Vmpire of thâ— Affairs of Christendom Vid. Dr. Stillingfleet's Answer to Cressy's Apol. p. 347. ad 353. and this was thaâ— great Asserter of Clerical Exemptionâ— from the Civil Power Gregory the Seventh The Pope like God himself who by his Prophets often anointed and designed Kings sends one of his Ministring Spirits a Nuncio I take it with a consecrated Banner as an Evidence oâ— Right and an Earnest of Victory and encouraged him to fight the Lord's Battels not expecting that commendable Ingratitude in the religious maintaining those ancient Rights of the Crown oâ— England for which he afterwards upbraided his Royal Son Whether Superstition or the hopes oâ— engaging the Pope's secular Influence and Interest to his side occasion'd William to refer his Pretence of Right to the Pope's Decision I shall not judge but with these Colours of a Title he lands â—n England and some say committed no Acts of Hostility till his Claim was again deny'd by the daring but unhappy Harold who was a man of Spirit fit for Empire and was likely to have kept â—t much longer had not Fortune raised up against him three great Enemies at once his Brother Tosto Norwegian Harold and the aspiring William against whom possibly his arm was weakened with the Reflection upon his own Vow to William to assist him in his ambitious Design and what he
Rich. 2. tells us out of Sprot and others though some would have us think that he took it only out of Sprot He himself tells us that even where he follows Sprot Quaedam superflua à compilatione dicti Thomae resecans quaedam notabilia suis in locis eidem addens ib. he not only cut off many things but added many remarkable Passages Thorne gives us a particular Account of Stigand's raising the men of Kent to â—ight for their old Laws and Liberties Thorne fol. 1786. which many others not being Kentish â—en would not mention lest their Magnanimity should upbraid the sudâ—en yielding of the rest This I take to have been between October and Christmas when he was â—rowned and that having entred into Treaty and concluded on Terms at London which however they tell us that â—e broke he went towards Dover Vt â—llam cum caeteris partibus comitatûs suae â—ubjiceret potestati It seems Dover was then the Strength of Kent and he thought by the getâ—ing of that he should be able to keep all that Country under Upon this Arch-bishop Stigand and Abbot Egelsine and all the great men of Kent perceiving that an ill Fate lay upon the whole Kingdom and that whereas before none of the English were Servants now Nobles as well as Plebeians were brought under the Yoke of Slavery represented to the People assembled together the misery of their Neighbours the Insolence of the Normans and the hardship of a servile Condition and animated them all as one man to a resolution of dying or maintaining their Liberties I know many learned men look upon this part as suspicious taking the Sense to be that there were no Villains in England Sylas Taylor of Gavel p. 167. in Kent especially before that time which they are at pains to shew that there were But I conceive the meaning of the words is no more than that there had ever been in England a Distinction between Free-men and Slaves and therefore that none of the English that is the People of the Land which the Law has ever confin'd to Free-holders they that depend upon the Will of others Villains or Servants being no Cives any part of the Nation in that sense ought to bear that Slavery which the Violence of the Normans threatned to all in common Nor wants there Authority for the Freedom of all the Kentish-men in the largest Extent for in an ancient Roll of the Customs of Kent Lambert's Perambulation of Kent 21 Ed. 1. 't is said to have been allowed in Eire before John of Berwick and his Companions the Justices in Eire in Kent the 21 of King Edward the Son of Henry that is to say that all the Bodies of Kentish men be free as well as the other free-bodies of England Lambert's Perambulation p. 632. And this confess'd to be true 30. Ed. 1. in the Title of Villenage 46 in Fitzherbert where it is holden sufficient for a man to avoid the Subjection of Bondage to say that his Father was born in the Shire of Kent The just value of this Freedom Thorne made all the Free-holders of Kent with all that depended upon them resolve to put a stop to William's Depredations At Swanscomb was their general Randezvouz and their numbers were so great that as the Norman Prince advanc'd he found himself hem'd in with an armed Wood for that they might secure themselves of his making no Escape so confident were they of Victory or forcing their own Terms every man by Agreement took a Bough in his hand to block up the way The Arch-bishop and the Abbot in the name of the rest told him that the whole People of Kent were come out to meet him and to acknowledge him their Leige Lord if they might enjoy their Liberties and Laws otherwise they denounc'd War and bid him Defiance Upon this William calls a Council of War and he finds it expedient to give them their Terms they knowing how he had used those who trusted to his Generosity or Justice took Hostages as well as gave and then in full Assurance of his Performance yielded him their County or the Government of it not all the Land and Property there and as what would secure the Government there to him resigned up the Castle of Dover To this Relation Perambulation of Kent p. 25. the great and faithful Antiquary Mr. Lambart gives sufficient Reputation Mr. Camden says Camden ' s Brit. Ut verè quamvis minùs purè in antiquo libro sit scriptum that no man before Sprot has told these Circumstances but he cites an ancient Authority which was a Plea not oppos'd and which could not be taken from Sprot in which he confesses the Substance of this to be contained and though not elegantly writ yet with Truth So that Mr. Camden is on our side being convinc'd by the truth of his own quotation Dicit Cantii Comitatus quod in Comitatu ipso de jure debet de ejusmodi gravamine esse liber quia dicit quod Comitatus iste ut residuum Angliae nunquam fuit conquestus sed pace facta se reddidit Conquestoris dominatui salvis sibi omnibus libertatibus liberis consuetudinibus primò habitis usitatis The County of Kent says that in that County of right it ought to be free from such a Grievance because it sayes that that County was never conquered like the rest of England But having made a Peace yielded its self to the Conquerour's Dominion saving to themselves all their Liberties and free Customes at first had and from that time us'd It seems in standing up for their own Rights they reflected upon the rest as an humble conquer'd People And indeed whereas it has past into a Maxim Nemo miser nisi comparatus No man's condition is unhappy thought But when into the Scales with happier men he 's brought On the other side men are apt to think their Happiness incompleat without comparing themselves with those whom they look upon as deprived of the Advantages which they enjoy Thus our late Author enhances the value he puts upon himself by the Contempt which he thinks his Adversaries deserve though in truth how low soever they lye he rises no higher but it may be disgraces his Mastership by the comparison But to return to the Men of Kent the generality of which how free soever they were Against Mr. Petyt p. 39. were by his Rule no Freemen of the Kingdom for all the Freemen of the Kingdom were Tenants in Military Service Feudalibus Legibus non 〈…〉 Spel. Glos. tit Gavel kind Which was of the Feudal Law whereas their Gavel-kind was exempt from it I can imagine no other Reason why they above others constantly maintained their old Laws and Customes than that they were a sturdy People more than ordinary tenacious of their Rights and sensible of the least Violation And possibly for a long time they retained the Power of taking Satisfaction upon
he was Leige-man to and received Laws from the French Monarch Though the Crown of England has always been imperial subject to none upon Earth yet he that wore it unless he were so free that he could go with his Land Potuit ire cum terrâ quo voluit whither he would which to be sure is inconsistent with this Feudal Law he could not quit his Dependance SECT 4. The Notion of the Feudal Right considered and the Right of Tenants in free and common Socage to come in theâ—â— own Persons to the great Councils shewn from thence BUT since the mention of Jus feodale as advanc'd in the second part of the Glos. ascribed to Sir H. Spelman occasions a little Consideration of the Feudal Law I out of a Zeal to clear his Reputation from the Charge of things false or frivolous and having at present no other Authority for his being the Author of it than ones who has an excellent Faculty of Storying except against what is there said to be ex ipso jure feodali as none of his 'T is there taken for granted to be the very Right of Feuds deriv'd from the Feudal Law that the Superiour Lord of the Feud should give Law jus dicere to them that are under him and 't is evident this is not meant of an ordinary Jurisdiction because by virtue of this 't is fancy'd that the Lords represented their Tenants in the Extraordinary at the great Councils and by the same reason the Assertion of a Judge censur'd in Parliament is justifiable viz. That the King is the only Representative But I must observe that this must be from Either 1. The general Law which guides the Feuds in all places where Feudal Law is received Or 2. The particular Feudal Law of England 1. Our Author evidently takes this in the first Sense being to prove what was the Feudal Law here New Glos p. 4. he cites the foreign Feudists who acquaint us with the Law of Feuds amongst them but this first Sense is not supposable in that this Law upon that account would be as much the Law of Nations as the Law for the Advantage of Embassadors wherever they come And this could not generally prevail but from the Authority of Catholick Reason that should require it but that I do not find since the Lord may have the Vtile Dominium which the Feudists speak of as incident to Feuds without the despotick Power and the end or nature of them being answer'd from whence will the Argument be brought that it ought to be so I will grant that it is not a Feud unless there be Utile Dominium for that distinguishes it from an Alodium which sometimes may yield no profit to any Superiour But those who well knew the Nature of Feuds teach us that 't was the Infancy of Feuds when they wholly depended on the Lord and could not stand without being supported by his pleasure then indeed which was before Feuds were spread into many Nations cragius de Feudis fol. 20. Nec servientibus aliud jus erat in his proediis quam precarium quod qui habet non tam diu quam ipse vult sed quamdiu is qui concedit patitur eo frui This indeed agrees with that Law which is supposed to have obtained even till the 49 H. 3. Whereas from hence Feudal Tenure advanc'd to an Estate for Life Solet usus fructus constitui in personam tantum Cujacius de feudis Tom. 4. fo 464. and all this before the year 650 from which time to Charles the Great who began to reign in the Year 800 unless one were particularly assigned by the Gift the Lands descended Craglus fol. 21. by right of Inheritance to all the Sons It s state of Maturity was when it descended to one but still there was an Inheritance by the Law of Feuds before the time of William the First and above 450 years before the 49th of H. 3. And I would rather believe Cujacius for the Jus Feodale or the Nature of it than what we find under the Title Parliament in the Glossary Cujacius defines a Feud Cujacius de feudis fo 464. Tom. 4. Jus praedio alieno in perpetuum utendi fruendi quod pro beneficio Dominus dat eâ lege ut qui accipit sibi fidem militiae munus aliudve servitium exhibeat An Usufructuary Right in another's Land which the Lord gives for a Benefice upon condition that the Grantee should be faithful and true to him and perform Military or other Service This is a perpetual Right therefore not to be disposed of by the Lord's Will or the Law which he should give 'T is indeed Vsufructuary because the Lord has the Forfeiture and Escheat according to the Laws setled in any particular place For I take it that in one place they differ'd from another And in Confutation of this Conjecture that ex ipso jure Feodali the Lord jus dicit take this as the general Law of Feuds 't is enough that in any place where the Feudal Law was received 't was otherwise Choppinus de Juridic Andeg Choppinus sayes that amongst the French a Feud implies not juridica potestas nil commune cum juridica potestate Which if as Jurisdiction is often used to signifie a Power inferious to Jus dicere it is but a Judicial Power it follows that the Lord could not have the greater where he had not so much as the less And farther Feuds have in all Countries been guided by the Law of Property their Common Law Thus sayes Cujacius Nos quoque jus feudorum quo Italia utitur sequimur non inviti nisi siqua in re pugnet cum legibus aut moribus nostris We also willingly follow the Law of Feuds which Italy uses unless in any thing it fights with our Laws or Customes And this is to be observed that the end of raising Feuds has often prevailed to introduce a Custome without any express Law and beyond the Foreign Law of Feuds 1. Without express Law and thus to preserve the Head of a Barony that was never to be divided whereas any other part was often so in which the Common Law prevail'd from the end of raising the Feud which requir'd the Preservation of that entire though the other part of the Barony might be divided Bracton and Fleta suppose the Barony to descend to several as well Males as Females Bracton lib. 2. fo 76. Primogenitus vel primogenita habeat electionem propter suam Eisneciam says Bracton Fleta lib. 5. fo 313. whose words only I repeat Let the first born Male or Female have Election by reason of the elder Share And with this agrees a Record in King John's Reign Thomas de Scoteney petit versus Willielm Scoteney Capitale Mesuag quod habere debet in Steinton cum pertinentiis sicut illud quod pertinet ad Eisneciam suam de Baronia quae fuit Lamberti Scoteny Thomas de Scoteny
of the Rent of Serjanties assest by Robert Passelewe you do not distrain Jacob de Archaungere for two Marks and an half for the Tenement which he holds of us by Serjanty in Archamgere in the County of Southampton by the Charter of the Blessed King Edward to the Ancestors of this Jacob but for ever free the said Jacob from the foresaid two Marks and an half because we have confirmed the Charter of the forenamed St. Edward and will have it inviolably observed Here is an inspeximus in effect of the Confessor's Charter and the Confirmation lies in the Judgment that this was that King's Charter Whether the Serjanty here mention'd were the greater In Kenulph the Mercian King's Charter a discharge of all Services but the Expedition of 12 men with Shields Burgâ—ote c. White 's Sacred Law p. 149. which was Military Tenure for such there was before William's Entrance Mr. Selden indeed opposes this and contends that what lay upon Lands then was no Tenure from any Reservation but onely what the Law of the Kingdom had made incident to all Lands Yet I see not how that will solve a special Reservation of a certain number of men Or whether the Serjanty were the Little or Petit Serjanty is not within our Dispute because either way here is sufficient Evidence that there was a Property left in the English notwithstanding the Clamour of a Conquest And that we did not receive our Tenures Against Petit. p. 31. and the manner of holding our Estates in every respect from Normandy brought in by the Conquerour For this man held in the same manner as his Ancestors did in the time of St. Edward And with this agree good Authors Gulielm Pictaviensis p. 208. Nulli Gallo datum quod Anglo cuiquam injuste fuerit ablatum There was not given to any French-man what was unjustly taken from any English-man Now this was a Poictovin Against Petyt p. 35. many of which came in with Duke William and is more to be credited in this matter than the English Monks who since he reduc'd the Bishopricks and great Abbies to Baronies thought this Injury done to the Church as they took it was no way to be accounted for unless he were represented as taking from the Laity their Property which they thought a much lower instance of his Power than giving this Law to the Clergy God's special Lot and Portion But on the other side this Poictovin was more likely for the Glory of William's and his Country-mens Arms to represent them as great as might be in the number of their Slaves and to have a whole Nation of them is doubtless a glorious thing in the Doctor 's eye And with this Poictovin may be joyned honest Knighton Knighton p. 2343. lib. 2. cap. 2. who sayes Quidam possessiones habentes de dicto Willielmo seu ab aliis Dominis quidam vero ex emptione habentes sive in Officiis sub spe habendi remanserunt There were some who had Possessions of the said William but some who had them by Purchase or else who remain'd in Offices under the hope of having some as their Offices might enable them to purchase Here some of the Normans were forc'd to purchase otherwise they had gone without Possessions And this must have been of the English otherwise they would have divided the Land amongst themselves with their Prince's consent and need not have made other payment than the Venture of their Lives CHAP. V. The Socmen enjoyed Estates of Titles prior to the suppos'd Conquest BUT besides the uncontroulable Authority of Domesday-book and the Testimony of Authors well back'd with a plain Record with the Doctor 's good leave I shall add another Argument to prove the continuance of the English Rights or that William govern'd not as a Conquerour He may know that there were such men as Sokemanni whose Lands were partible and who held not by Knights Service Whereas King William granted out the whole Kingdom as the Doctor fondly imagines by Knights Service and the Lands of such Tenants descended to the eldest Son wherefore the Sokemanni must needs enjoy their Estates upon Titles prior to King William's not deriving under his Grant since their Lands to obtain that Tenure must have been anciently divided before the time of H. 2. But Glaâ—vil lib. 7. cap. 2. infra if there were any Evidence to the contrary there could have been no Prescription to the Tenure And surely if it was no ancienter than King William's Title the Evidences of the contrary could not be lost Suppose Lands holden in Free-socage were forfeited to the King in which Case Lambert's Peramb of Kent Mr. Lambert yields that the Tenure may be alter'd and he granted it out to hold by Knights Service how could a Custom prevail to alter this Tenure contrary to the very Grant If they could produce their Deeds they shew'd themselves to be Tenants by Knights Service And there were so many Sockemanni even in one County that of Kent that though some Grantees might lose their Deeds yet not so many as there were distinct Estates in Socage For Proof of the Premisses to my Conclusion 1. That there were Sokemanni before William nay that for the most part at least Land-owners were such appears from St. Edward's Law This obliged all men to bear Arms Leges Sancti Edwardi de Heretochiis habeant Haeredes ejus pecuniam terram ejus sine aliquâ diminutione rectè divident inter se. proportionably to their real or personal Estate which last together with the Land of him that dyed in the Wars was to be divided among his Heirs And surely the Law does not suppose that they must always be female Heirs Such as dy'd in the Wars who were Tenants by Knights Service according to our Authors Sense of Qui militare servitium debebant were Sokemanni holding in free Socage Glanvil lib. 7. cap. 2. as Glanvil explains it Si fuerit liber Sokemannus tunc quidem dividetur haereditas inter omnes filios quotquot sunt per partes equales si fuerit Socagium id antiquitus divisum If a man be a free Sokeman then indeed his Inheritance shall be divided amongst all the Sons if it be Socage and that anciently divided It was not improper to say if it be Socage because a Sokeman in respect of some Lands might have others not held in free Socage This is sufficient Evidence that such there were after the Noise of Conquest and that the Lands were to be anciently divided 2. The Estates deriv'd from the Conquest Glos. Tit. Parl. Terram totam ita disposuit ut suum quisque patrimonium de Rege teneret in Capite were according to our bulky Author held by Knights Service Nay the second part of the Glossary which the Dr. invidiously imputes to Sir Henry Spelman tells us that though William was no Conquerour yet he divided out and disposed of all the Land to his great
men Against Jan. c. p. 99. so that even the Normans Estates were taken away too And this that erroneous Glossary makes under the Feudal Law too for from thence 't is inferr'd that the great Tenants in Capite had Right to impose Laws upon them that held of them and to exclude the whole Kingdom besides from the Great Councils This though no Conquerour the Dr. left out either as being ashamed of it being 't is little less than a Contradiction to say a man was no Conquerour and yet seized upon all the Lands of the Kingdom and forc'd them to submit to such Seizure so that he conquer'd the Land or because it contradicts his Notion of William's being a Conquerour so that he himself had as much reason to exeept against this Book as others but it seems Against Mr. Petyt p. 35. out of a stark Love and Kindness to Truth he left only what was against him but took what was for his Purpose And for the Support of it's Credit tells us a formal Story the Attestation to which from outward Circumstances I never thought it worth the while to examine since I have so much Reason from within it self to believe it to be spurious Against Petyt p. 13. and so ought he For if he have any respect to that great man's Memory he will not suffer him to say that William divided out the whole Kingdom to hold under the Feudal Law when before he had observ'd of Gavelkind the general Tenure of the Lands in Kent Feudalibus legibus non coercetur 3. The Lands of all these Grantees of King William the First descended to the eldest being held in Knights Service Si miles fuerit vel per militiam tenens tunc secundum jus regni Angliae primogenitus filius patri succedit in totum Glanvil lib. 7. c. 2. If a man be a Knight or holding by military Service then according to the Law of the Kingdom the Eldest shall succeed his Father to the whole But for the greatest Authority we have an Act of Parliament which having full Power to alter the Tenure 31 H. 8. c. 3. enacts that certain Lands in Kent shall descend as Lands at Common Law and as other Lands in the said County which never were holden by Knights Service us'd to descend Here the Descent of Knights Service is the same with Descent at the Common Law which was to the Eldest and this is oppos'd to the Descent of Lands in Gavelkind which was Socage And thus have I proved every thing which upon this Head was needful to vindicate the Right of the English and to prove that their Rights were own'd in Practice notwithstanding the vain Flourish of a Conquest It may be objected perhaps that the Feudal Law which was exacted and observed by and upon only the Normans might have related only to such as held immediately of the King for that his Grantees might and did often grant out to others and their Heirs for ever to hold in free Socage Yet this will not do because such Grantees would have been Free-men but all the Free-men of the Kingdom were Tenants by military Service though by their Tenure any of them were only to pay a Rose a Spur a Sum of Money or any other thing Therefore hereby is my Argument inforc'd if William had been a Conquerour in the Sense strove for as disseizing all the English and making Grants of their Lands to the Normans and that to hold by Knights Service and all the Normans both they who were here before William's Entrance if any such had any shares allow'd them and they that came in with him or followed for the spoil were under the Feudal Law requiring Knights Service and these were the only Free-men How came there to be such a Race of lawless Free-men as the Sokemanni p. 31. And how is it possible that the manner of holding our Estates in every Respect with all the Customs incident thereto should be brought in by the Conquerour p. 29. Whoever reflects upon these things will as he says of a reverend Judge acknowledge the Dr. to be very ignorant in the History of this Nation or that he spoke out of Design the words which I fairly cite from him in relation to the Conquest and the Great Council suppos'd to have been establish'd thereby CHAP. VI. Proved from the Beginnings of Charters and Writs that the English were not disseized of all by William the First THough even the former Head of the Socmen such as I find holding in parigio was a needless Addition to the particular Consideration of Domesday book Domesday which might serve instead of a thousand proofs that William the first did not divide all the Land of the Kingdom to his Followers and consequently did not impose upon the people such a Representative as is fondly conjectured Yet I cannot omit the mention of those numerous Writs and Charters Vid. numbers in the Monasticon which are directed Omnibus Baronibus hominibus suis Francis Anglis Or as one of the Charters of William the First Carta W. 1. Monasticon vol. 1. f. 397. into one County and so on occasion into all Archiepisc. Justiciariis Vicecomitibus Baronibus fidelibus suis Francis Anglis Eborascire Admit that Fideles signified Feudal Tenants this shews that the English had shares as well as others but here being the Vicecomites before Barones I should vehemently suspect That the Free-holders of the County were meant At least Carta Antiqua n. 11. we find the ordinary Free-holders and they English as well as French Vid. his Glos. complemented by Matildis as persons of some Quality and Interest in the Nation Matildis Dei gratia Anglorum Regina Episcopo London Justiciariis Vicecomitibus Baronibus Ministris omnibus fidelibus Francis Anglis Here being Ministri between Barones fideles the Ministry must be such as by their Tenures were bound to attend in the Wars and the Fideles the King 's ordinary Subjects there being no Mat. Paris to explain fideles here and help us out of this Difficulty which is made greater by King Stephen's Charter Archiepis Episcopis Abbatibus Comitibus Justiciariis Baronibus Vicecomitibus Ministris omnibus fidelibus suis Francis Anglis totius Angliae Nay to perplex the Cause the more we find under Subjects Free-holders English as well as French and these were such as were the Curia Baronum where Tenants in free and common Socage were Suitors as well as such as held by Knights Service Willielmus Comes Gloucestriae omnibus Baronibus hominibus suis Francis Anglis atque Walensibus 'T is not improbable that the Welsh Vid. Taylors Hist. of Gavelkind Jani Angl. p. 41. which were some of his Tenants were then all Socagers but then the Codex Roffensis shews how greatly the English were interested in the Counties in the time of William the First Praecepit
our Lord the King and live in the said Kingdom And there they ought to take 〈◊〉 for the Indemnity of the Crown of this Kingdom by Common-Council And there Provision is to be made to repress the Insolence of Malefactors for the good of the Kingdom For it was enacted that there all People and Counties should meet every year once a year to wit in the beginning of the Kalends of May and there to confederate and consolidate themselves Sicut Conjurati fratres with an inviolable Oath and Faith as sworn Brethren to defend the Kingdom against Foreigners and against Enemies together with their Lord the King and to keep his Lands and Honours with all Faithfulness and that they will be faithful to him as to their Lord both within and without the Realm of Britain So ought all the Princes and Earls to do and also to swear before the Bishops of the Kingdom in the Folkmote and also all the Peers of the Kingdom and the Knights and all the Freemen of the whole Kingdom of Britain ought as is aforesaid to swear Fealty to their Lord the King in full Folkmote before the Bishops of the Kingdom 〈…〉 Free-men of the whole 〈◊〉 ought according to their Faculties and â—ossessions and according to their Fee and according to their Tenements to have Arms and to keep them always in Readiness for the Defence of the Kingdom and the Service of their Lords to be performed and fulfilled according to the precept of their Lord the King Here is not that Provision against Exactions which was afterwards necessary but every other point of William's Grand Charter is fully express'd They were to be sworn Brethren for the preservation of the Rights of the Crown for the keeping the Peace and the Laws and Customs of the Kingdom which secured the Interests of private-men to the Liberi homines totius Monarchiae there answers the Folkmote or Vocatio Congregatio populorum gentium omnium or universi qui sub protectione pace Domini Reges degunt These surely were more than Tenants by Knights Service for they are distinguish'd into Principes Comites Proceres Milites liberi homines universi totius regni And 't is not to be argued that they were Tenants by Knights Service because they were to defend the Kingdom with Arms according to their real and personal Estates For I take it none ever heard of a Tenant by Knights Service of a Chatell If our Disputant were as conversant in Antiquity as he pretends or as faithful as he ought to be and have left off his Designs he would have taken notice of the Assize of Arms in Henry the Second's time which confirms my Sense of the former Laws Quicunque habet foedum unius militis habeat loricam cassidem clypeum lanceam omnis miles habeat tot loricas cassides Hoveden clypeos et lanceas quot habuerit foeda Militum in Dominico suo quicunque liber laicus habuerit in Catallo vel in redditu ad valentiam 16 Marcarum habeat loricam et cassidem et clypeum et lanceam quicunque liber laicus habuerit in Catallo ad valentiam 10 Marcarum habeat halbergellum et capelet ferri et lanceam Et omnes Burgenses et tota communia liberorum hominum habeant Wanbais et capelet ferri et lanceam et unusquisque juret quod infra festum Sancti Hillarii haec arma habebit et domino Regi scilicet Henrico filio Matildis Imperatricis fidem portabit et haec Arma in suo servitio tenebit secundum praeceptum suum et ad fidem Domini Regis et Regni sui Whoever has one Knights Fee let him have an Habergeon and Buckler and Lance and let every Knight have so many Habergeons and Bucklers and Lances as he has Knights Fees in his Demeasn or under him Whatever Free Lay-man has in Chatells to the value of fifteen Marks let him have an Habergeon and Buckler and Lance. Whatever Free Lay-man has in Chatells to the value of 10 Marks let him have an Halbert and Capelet of Iron and let all Inhabitants of Towns Cities Burroughs and all the Commonalty of Free-men have a Wanbais and Capelet of Iron and a Lance and let every one swear that within the Feast of St. Hillary he will have these Arms and will bear Faith to their Leige King to wit to Henry the Son of Matildis the Empress and will hold these Arms in his Service according to his Precept and for the Defence of their Lord the King and his Kingdom Good Mr. Dr. Were all those who were to bear Arms in the King's Service his Tenants by Knights Service Agreeable to this one of the Enquirers upon the Statute of Winchester 34 Ed. 1. is If they have Weapons in their Houses according to the Quality of their Lands and Goods for maintenance of the Peace according to the Statute Our Author p. 1. who has an admirable Faculty of rescuing these sacred things from groundless and designing Interpretations would make the solemn Assembly in the Folkmote In Folcmoto semel quotannis sub initio Kalendarum Maii tanquam in annuo Parliamento convenere Regni Principes tam Episcopi quam Magistratus Liberi homines no more than an ordinary County Court and is pleased to put a Slight upon the Authority of the true Sir Henry Spelman who rightly takes it for a Great Council And the new convincing Reason for the former Sense Glos. tit Geniotum is because the Court where Causes were determined before the King's Provost or Officer New Glos. p. 19. is called Folkmote too but pray why is not this the great Folkmote And why may we not from hence take the Platform of the Great Councils in these Times and consequently of such as King William confirmed together with the Laws of the Confessor Was an ordinary County Court in time of War or Danger to act as a Council in providing for the Safety of the Crown and other things for the profit of the Kingdom And were the Bishops of such a spiritual Nature that they could animate the whole Kingdom as the Soul does the Body and be all at the same time in each distinct County of England Jani Angl. facies nova p. 34. This clears beyond Exception the Charter of Henry the First which provides for the Assembly of the Counties and Hundreds If he had look'd but a little farther de Heretoc he would have found a Folkmote that was held twice a year when this was but once and the Sciremote distinct from that The first was the Sheriffs Tourn the other the County Court and that observed by him might have been either the monthly Sciremote or that Folkmote that was held twice a year Ita vero bis Folkmote singulis annis semper celebrari debet per universos Comitatus c. But to convince him more fully of the Absurdity of his Confidence He
ought to remember that the very Law whereby he would prove all the Free-men of the Kingdom to have been Tenants by Knights Service was in Confirmation of the Confessor's Laws and that granted to those who had lived under them and knew the Benefit of defending themselves and their Properties in the Great Councils and the Nation too there or by their Arms elsewhere without out trusting the manage of all to such Thayns as held immediately of the King Nor were they then likely to quit their former Advantages when as appears by the Story they were in a probable Condition of gaining more if they would for the English had got together by the Encouragement of Abbot Fretherick Exercitum numerosum fortissimum a numerous and most potent Army and in their Head was he who was the only Heir to the Crown and that a Title above the Confessor Upon this Prudentiâ feliciter eruditus having the Happiness to follow his Interest and comply with the Occasion he granted St. Edward's Laws with some Additions indeed but not with such as would defeat the whole And I affirm it that though in his Additions he provides about the Tenures or other matters of his then or future Tenants yet there is not any thing which creates a feud over the whole Kingdom Indeed the Dr. who understands not for it was beyond his Sphere that Service laid either by Common or Statute Law upon all free Lands such as before the Conquest and since the Burgh-bote the Bridge-bote and the Expeditio the last of which we have been disputing of under the Law of Arms is a Service but no Tenure Tit. Hon. as Mr. Selden has rightly shewn would infer that because the Conquerour in Affirmance of St. Edward's Laws enacts That they shall for ever or Jure haereditario enjoy their Lands free from all Manner of Charge but their free Services which indeed tho it implies not his raising Tenures universally does not exclude such as himself had raised that therefore all were made Feudal Tenants Quod restat probandum SECT 2. FOR King John's Charter If he thinks fit to read over the Book that treats of it Against Jan. c. p. 47. once more and to observe it well and compare it with what he hath said he will find it anticipated and answered and if he hath not a mighty strong Fancy of his own Abilities must be ashamed of his impertinent Rhapsodies Since 't is there abundantly proved that though that King's Charter seems to some Understandings to make express provision for the summoning the Great Council of the Nation yet it expressly provided for the summoning the lesser Council the more ordinary Curia Regis only the Tenants which were Members of it standing in need of a Law to relieve them from some Hardships they were under Whereas the constant practise from the Reign of William the First inclusively downwards evinces that they who composed the Great Council had maintain'd their Right ad habendum commune Concilium regni uninterrupted for a general proof of which the Authority of Bracton was us'd which shews that besides such Payments as lay upon the Kings Tenants in Capite or had their Rise from Custom there were other introduc'd by the Common Consent of the whole Kingdom whence 't is easie to conclude that King John's Charter does not exhibit that is prrticularly set forth the full form of our English great and most general Councils in those days Jani c. p 1. Though there is a general Reference to all the constituent parts of those August Assemblies and to be sure nothing to prove that Tenants in Capite were the only Members of them yet what others have thereby Right ad habendum Commune Consilium Regni is not exprest how strongly soever it may be imply'd from the words even without the Interpretation of practise That others had Right is undeniable from the words and 't is as clear from practise who those others were and whether or no all the Members of the great Councils of the Kingdom or even all such as were Tenants in Capite came to Council in Person either upon general or special Summons as such Tenants did to the Conventions for matters of their Tenure is not mentioned but left to that ancient Course and Right which the Practice or Fact explains Tho this last be barely of the manner of Summons yet it shews that the manner is mentioned only in Relation to the form of an ordinary Curia Regis as I shew the Council of Tenants to have been The words upon which our Dispute is are these Nullum Scutagium vel auxilium Mat. Paris fol. 257. ponam in Regno nostro nisi per Commune Consilium regni nostri nisi ad Corpus nostrum redimendum ad primogenitum filium nostrum militem faciendum ad primogenitam filiam nostram semel maritandam Et ad hoc non fiet nisi rationabile auxilium Simili modo fiat de auxiliis de Civitate Londinensi Civitas Londoniensis habeat omnes antiquas Libertates Liberas consuetudines suas tam per terras quum per aquas Praeterea volumus concedimus quod omnes aliae Civitates Burgi Villae Barones de quinque portubus omnes portus habeant omnes Libertates omnes liberas consuetudines suas ad habendum Commune Concilium Regni de auxiliis assidendis aliter quam in Tribus casibus praedictis de Scutagiis assidendis submoneri faciemus Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Comites majores Barones Regni sigillatim per literas nostras praeterea faciemus submoneri in generali per Vicecomites Ballivos nostros omnes alios qui in Capite tenent de nobis ad certum diem scilicet ad terminum quadraginta dierum ad minus ad certum locum in omnibus literis submonitionis illius causam submonitionis illius exponemus sic factâ submonitione negotium procedat ad diem assignatum secundum Consilium eorum qui praesentes fuerint quamvis non omnes submoniti venerint My Inference from hence as I find Et de Scutagiis assidendis divided in a distinct period from what went before the Dr. how foul soever his Reflection of New-face-Maker is Against Jani c. p. 3. has render'd not unfairly viz. That the City of London all Cities Burgs Parishes or Townships that is the Uillani their Inhabitants the Baroons of Free-men of the five Ports and all Ports should amongst other free Customs enjoy their Right of being of or constituting the Common Council of the Kingdom And that this reading and my Deductions from it are not so far remote from Reason and Sense Against Jani c. p. 60. that no man but my self could ever have thought of them appears in that he or they who Midwiv'd into the World the spurious Glossary 2 part of the Glos. use some Artifice to keep them
Council of the Nation p. 13. 'T is strange there should not have been the same Care taken that they might be summoned as well as the Tenants in Capite Certainly they came not to them by instinct nor is it scarce probable that they would leave their Ploughs and Country Business to travel from one remote part of England to another to these great Councils which seldome continued above three or four days if they had had Right so to do This is as trifling as the rest for if the Common Law took care for their Coming and for their general Summons nor had their Right been denied them there was no need of special Provision by that Charter Upon my seventh Head of the Distinction between the Great Council and the Curia pro more he attacks me very vigorously and having before tax'd me with new modelling the Government wild p. 1. extravagant and confus'd Notions unintelligible Vagaries p. 47. impertinent Rhapsodies p. 32. 41. 53. 62. 63. perverse Interpretations Ignorance and Confidence to say no more monstrous abusing of History cheating and abusing my Readers and wresting Records and Histories with a long Et caetera out comes this gentle Rebuke And indeed as he deals with Sir Henry Spelman's Glossary p. 96. in saying the second part was not his own so doth he shuffle off all Records and Histories which are directly against him by saying the Curia or Great Councils there mention'd were but an ordinary Curia or Council and such as in his own Judgment contain any thing that makes for him The Councils there spoken of are Great and General Councils to be sure 'T is doubtless an hainous thing to call that a Great or General Council which is so in my own Judgment But if I prove and that out of himself too that there came more to the King 's Great Councils than his Tenants in Chief and Officers such as compos'd the Curia held pro more thrice a year surely it lies upon him to shew that at any one Council where more than Tenants were charged Tenants only were present And I affirm that he neither has nor can produce one Authority which upon Examination can signifie any thing And to retort his last Charge as he deals with Sir Henry Spelman in putting upon him his own or his Friends Sense So he doth shuffle over Records which are directly against him and supplants them by History seemingly for him And if the last contain any thing which in his own Judgment makes for him the Council there spoken of is a Great and General Council of Tenants in Chief only to be sure though the Record mention more Our Author says of the Curia which I contend to have been pro more or ordinary If he can make the Court holden coram Rege Consilio before the King and Councel which he hath made his Instance for his ordinary Court and be the same with the Common Council of the Kingdom establish'd by that Charter meaning King John ' s he gains the point but if it cannot be done he may very well blush at his own Confidence to say no more Truely I should rather blush at the want of Sense in that Paragraph if it were mine for I cannot well answer for making the Court and be the same But since he has informed me where the point lies I can easily gain it by proving that the Court holden coram Rege Consilio became the Court of which our Dispute is as it had the same Power whether held by the same persons or at the same times is not material so that it be the Kings Curia or Magnum Concilium as the Court held pro more was In Order to the clearing this he may please to understand that the King's Court had the only Cognizance of the Kings Grants or Charters agreeable to which Bracton lib. 2. cap. 16. p. 34. Bracton says De chartis verò regiis factis regum non debent nec possunt justiciarii nec privatae personae disputare nec etiam si in illâ Dubitatio oriatur possunt eam interpretari et in dubiis et obscuris vel si aliqua dictio duos contineat intellectus Domini Regis erit expectanda interpretatio et voluntas cum ejus sit interpretari cujus est concedere et etiam si omnino sit falsa propter rasuram vel quia fortè signum appositum est adulterinum melius et tutius est quod coram ipso Rege procedatur ad judicium Curia coram Rege Cons. But of the King's Charters and of the Deeds of Kings the Justices or private Persons neither ought nor can dispute nor if any doubt arises therein can they interpret it and in doubtful and obscure things or if any word contain two meanings the King's Interpretation and Will is to be expected since it belongs to him to interpret who made the Grant and also if it be wholly false by reason of Rasure or because perhaps a counterfeit Seal is put to it 't is best and safest that Judgment should be proceeded to before the King himself Here was a 〈…〉 Court for these matters held before the King that is before him and his Council And thus 18 Ed. 1. The Bishop of Carlisle produces the Charter of Richard the First Ryley placita Parl. f. 20. about the Advowson of the Church of Burgh this was before Thomas de Weyland and his Companions Justices of the King's Bench but because they did not do them Right he Petitions that the King would do him Remedy and Grace upon it because none but Kings themselves ought to judge of Kings Charters This is received before the King and his Counsel in Parliament and because there was need of a Certificate to be made in the Case 't is referred to the next Parliament that is when it relates to any Judgment to be given Counsel then to sit But the Business as I find many of the like kind upon the Parliament Rolls was properly brought before the Kings Counsel in Parliament who Jani Anglorum facies nova p. 190. as I before observed succeeded into the places of the Tenants in the Curia and indeed I see not what other Account can be given of the Lords Jurisdiction As this Counsel acted in Parliament with the same Power which the Tenants had exercised before so we find them sometimes acting like the Tenants in the Curia in the Intervals of Parliament as in the 33. of Ed. 1. after the Parliament was dissolved and all sent home Ryley f. 241. f. 256. but the Bishops Earls and Barons Justices and others of the Kings Counsel Several things are transacted coram toto Consilio and Judgments given secundum consuetudinem Curiae Indeed we often find that when Matters of Publick Concern or which as they say concern'd the Treaty came before them they never undertook to determine upon them but left them to the next
could bring many Arguments from the Doctor Against Mr. Petyt p. 183. 192. as besides others that the Vniversitas Militiae or 〈◊〉 militare servitium debebant that 〈◊〉 as Record explains Ma. P. aris the â—â—ideles besides Milites were Members 〈◊〉 Parliament but I may spare farther â—â—oof till he gives me fresh occasion 14. And possibly then amongst his other marvellous discoveries I may have time to animadvert a little more largely upon his fancy Against Jani c. p. 34. that the Suitors in the County Court were all Tenents in Military Service except Barons both in the Saxon and Norman times Yet this tenure came in with Will 1st by the way you must understand that the Barons were not Tenents in Military Service Against Mr. Petyt p. 31. though they held in Capite by Knights Service And that William the the First made no alteration of the Government for Tenents by Military Service were the only legal men and the only Members of the Great Counciâ— before But as Tenents in Capite Glos. p. 26. and their Tenents in Military Service were 〈◊〉 the Great Councils in Person all the Suitors at the County Court who werâ— according to the Charter of H. 1. qâ—â—liberas habent terras in each Countâ—â— respectively were there in Person aâ— Members Though not relating to the foundation of my Essay Against Mr. Petyt p. 43. according to him who makes the Question about the Conquest not directly to reach the Controuersy between us Against Jani p. 15. I may make a little â—port with his Arguing that William 1st gave whole Counties to his Followers Against Mr. Petyt p. 29. â—nder the word Comitatus that is as â—he renders it all the Lands in the Counties and yet that besides whole Counties Glos. p. 8. he gave a great proportion of Lands in them But since he taxes what I lay for the foundation of my Essay for precarious â—et's see a little whether he does not â—ender his own so where it opposes â—ine His whole Book in that respect resolves its self into these three Heads 1. That King John's Charter in affirâ—ance of the Law imposed by William â—r in force before declares that the Tenents in Capite were the only Members of the General Council of the Kingdom 2. That from thence to the 49 H. 3. the practice or fact was for Tenents only 〈◊〉 compose the Great or General Council 3. That none but Tenents in Capite were Nobles 1. If he himself yields that tiâ— King John's Charter there was no such Council as one made up only of Tenent in Capite he thereby renders all undeâ— this head precarious but this he does iâ— two places at least One where hâ— urges that if the Curia Regis Ordinaria which I say was the Court of the King Tenents Against Jani p. 46. 47. and Officers exclusive of others went off by reason of the Clause iâ— King John's Charter it certainly wenâ— off before it began that is such a Courâ— began not before and agreeable to this he says that after the granting of thiâ— Charter by King John there were man General and Great Councils or Colloâ—quiums summon'd by Edict according tâ— the form there prescribed that is aâ—â— he will have it after that the Tenent in Capite only were summon'd to thâ— Great Council but not before for the began this form In another place though he chargeâ— upon me what are his own words hâ— says King John resigned his Crown the 15â— ib. p. 22. 23. of May in the 14th of his Reign Thus p. 48. 49. he charges Mr. Petyt and me for averring that even Servants who are not in a legal sense people of the Kingdom were Members of the Great Council and he granted the great Charter of the Liberties three years after on the 15. of June in the 17. of his Reign and therefore could not resign it in such a Council as was Constituted three years after his Resignation And 't is a question whether he asserts not this in a third place where he affirms that before this Charter the Kingdom had been Taxt by our ancient Kings and their Privy-Council only 2. But in truth he not only yields that the Tenents in Chief were first made the General Council by King John's Charter My words are in such a Council as this here but that after that more than such were Members Jani p. 15. which is as much as to say that there was such a Council as this before p. 118. not only the Tenents in Military Service of Tenents in Chief but other ordinary Freeholders So that he submits himself to be goard by both the horns of that Dilemma inforc't in my former Treatise viz. that King John's Charter was either declarative of the Law as 't was before Against Jani p. 66. Jani p. 236. or introductive of a new Law And yields the precariousness of his own vagaries 3. But does he not own that the Notion that Tenents in Capite only were Noble is precarious Since he yields that no kind of tenure does nobilitate or so much as make a man free who was not so before according to his Blood or Extraction Glos. p. 10. Though according to this one that held of the King in Chief might have been a Subjects Villain yet none that held a certain Estate of Freehold could be a Villain because 't is contrary to the nature of a Freehold that it should be so no longer than another pleas'd that is only an Estate at will He will have it that Mr. Petyt is guilty of some horrible Design Against Mr. Petyt p. 1. from the effects of which it seems this mighty Champion is to rescue the Government And for me I am a Seducer one who would seduce unwary Readers Against Jani p. 71. a malicious insinuation as if I would wheedle to my side a party against Truth and the Government but whether he who would set aside the evidences for the Rights of the Lords and Commons or they who produce them fair and would render them unquestioned is guilty of the worst design the World will judge and I doubt not but he has at home a thousand Witnesses Conscientia millâ— testes who if he will hear their unbyast Testimonies will inform him whose are the groundless and designing interpretations Against Mr. Petyt p. 1. But I must confess they are so weak that these sacred things need very little help to rescue them ib. especially since their Enemies are so far from agreeing amongst themselves that 't is more easie to conquer than to reconcile them As on Mr. Petyts and my side the design can be no other than to shew how deeply rooted the Parliamentary Rights are So the Doctors in opposition to ours must be to shew the contrary a design worthy of a Member of Parliament and 't is a Question whether he