receperunt simili modo Henricum Regem Angliae in Dominum Regem Hiberniae sui devenerunt ei Heredibus suis Fidelitatem contra omnes Iuraverunt Matthew Paris likewise in his History speaking of King Hen. II. being in Ireland saith Archiepiscopi Episcopi ipsum in Regem Dominum receperunt ei Fidelitatem Homagium Iuraverunt Iohn Brampton Abbot of Iornaâ—… in his Historia Iornalensi pag. 1070. speaking of Hen. II. hath these words Recepit ab unoquoque Archiepiscopo Episcopo Hiberniae Literas cum Sigillis suis in modum Chartae pendentibus Regnum Hiberniae sibi Haeredibus suis Confirmantes Testimonium perhibentes ipsos in Hibernia eum Heredes suos sibi in Reges Dominos in perpetuum Constituisse All the Archbishops Bishops and Abbots of Ireland came to the King of England and Received him for King and Lord of Ireland swearing Fealty to him and his Heirs for ever The Kings also and Princes of Ireland did in like manner Receive Henry King of England for Lord of Ireland and became his Men and did him Homage and swore Fealty to him and his Heirs against all Men. And he received Letters from them with their Seals pendent in manner of Charters confirming the Kingdom of Ireland to him and his Heirs and Testifying that they in Ireland had Ordain'd him and his Heirs to be their King and Lord of Ireland for ever After which he return'd into England in April following vizt April 1173. I come now to Enquire into our Second Particular proposed Viz. Whether Ireland might be properly said to be Conquer'd by King Henry the Second or by any other Prince in any succeeding Rebellion And here we are to understand by Conquest an Acquisition of a Kingdom by Force of Arms to which Force likewise has been Opposed if we are to understand Conquest in any other sense I see not of what Use it can be made against Irelands being a Free Country I know Conquestus signifies a Peaceable Acquisition as well as an Hostile Subjugating of an Enemy Vid. Spelman's Glos. And in this sense William the First is call'd the Conquerour and many of our Kings have used the Epocha post Conquestum And so likewise Henry the Second stiled himself Conquestor Dominus Hiberniae but that His Conquest was no violent Subjugation of this Kingdom is manifest from what foregoes For here we have an Intire and Voluntary Submission of all the Ecclesiastical and Civil States of Ireland to King Henry II. without the least Hostile Stroke on any side We hear not in any of the Chronicles of any Violence on either Part all was Transacted with the greatest Quiet Tranquility and Freedom imaginable I doubt not but the Barbarous People of the Island at that time were struck with Fear and Terror of King Hen. Il's Powerful Force which he brought with him but still their Easie and Voluntary Submissions Exempts them from the Consequents of an Hostile Conquest whatever they are where there is no Opposition such a Conquest can take no place I have before taken Notice of Henry the Il's using the Stile of Conquestor Hiberniae I presume no Argument can be drawn from hence for Ireland's being a Conquer'd Country for we find that many of the Kings of England have used the Aera of post Conquestum Edward the Third was the first that used it in England and we frequently meet with Henricus post Conquestum Quartus c. as taking the Norman Invasion of William the First for a Conquest But I believe the People of England would take it very ill to be thought a Conquer'd Nation in the sense that some impose it on Ireland And yet we find the same Reason in one Case as in t'other if the Argument from the King's Stile of Conquestor prevail Nay England may be said much more properly to be Conquer'd by William the First than Ireland by Henry the Second For we all know with what Violence and Opposition from Harrold K. William obtain'd the Kingdom after a Bloody Battel nigh Hastings Whereas Henry the Second receiv'd not the least Opposition in Ireland all came in Peaceably and had large Concessions made them of the like Laws and Liberties with the People of England which they gladly Accepted as we shall see hereafter But I am fully satisfy'd that neither King William the First in his Acquisition of England or Henry II. in his Acquest of Ireland obtain'd the least Title to what some would give to Conquerours Tho' for my own part were they Conquerours in a sense never so strict I should enlarge their Prerogative very little or nothing thereby as shall appear more fully in the Sequel of this Discourse Another Argument for Henry the Second's Hostile Conquest of Ireland is taken from the Opposition which the Natives of Ireland gave to the first Adventurers Fitz-Stephens Fitzgerald and Earl Strongbow and the Battles they sought in assisting Mac-Morogb Prince of Leinster in the Recovery of his Principality 'T is certain there were some Conflicts between them and the Irish in which the Latter were constantly beaten but certainly the Conquests obtain'd by those Adventurers who came over only by the King's License and Permission and not at all by his particular Command as is manifest from the words of the Letters Patents of License recited by Giraldus Cambrensis Hib. Expug pag. 760. Edit Francof 1603. Angl. Norm Hiber Camd. can never be call'd the Conquest of Henry the Second especially considering that Henry the Second himself does not appear to have any Design of Coming into Ireland or Obtaining the Dominion thereof when he gave to his Subjects of England this License of Assisting Mac-Morrogh But I conceive rather the contrary appears by the Stipulations between Mac-Morrogh and the Adventurers and especially between him and Strongbow who was to succeed him in his Principality From what foregoes I presume it Appears that Ireland cannot properly be said so to be Conquer'd by Henry the Second as to give the Parliament of England any Jurisdiction over us it will much more easily Appear that the English Victories in any succeeding Rebellions in that Kingdom give no Pretence to a Conquest If every Suppression of a Rebellion may be call'd a Conquest I know not what Country will be excepted The Rebellions in England have been frequent in the Contests between the Houses of York and Lancaster one side or other must needs be Rebellious I am sure the Commotions in King Charles the First 's time are stiled so by most Historians This Pretence therefore of Conquest from Rebellions has so little Colour in it that I shall not insist longer on it I know Conquest is an hateful word to English Ears and we have lately seen a Book undergo a seuere Censure for offering to broach the Doctrine of Conquest in the Free Kingdom of England But to take off all Pretence from this Title by Conquest
under the three first Kings of Ireland of the Norman Race the Laws and Liberties of the People of England were granted to the People of Ireland And that neither of these three Kings Established those Laws in Ireland by any Power of the Parliament of England but by the free Consent Allowance and Acceptance of the People of Ireland Hen. II. first introduced the Laws of England into Ireland in a Publick Assembly of the Irish at Lismore and Allowed them the Freedom of Parliaments to be held in Ireland as they were held in England King John at the Request and by the Consent of the Irish did appoint the Laws of England to be of Force in Ireland and tho' he did not this till the Twelfth year of his Reign of England yet he did it not as King of England but as Lord of Ireland For the Crown of England came to him by Descent from his Brother Richard who had no Regal Power in Ireland and what his Brother had not could not descend to him Henry the Third in the first year of his Reign gave Ireland a Magna Charta and in the Twelfth year of his Reign did provide That all the Laws of England should be observ'd in Ireland and that the Charter granted to the Irish by his Father King Iohn under his Seal when he was in that Kingdom should be kept inviolably And from the Days of these Three Kings have England and Ireland been both Govern'd by the like Forms of Government under one and the same Supreme Head the King of England yet so as both Kingdoms remain'd Separate and Distinct in their several Jurisdictions under that One Head as are the Kingdoms of England and Scotland at this day without any Subordination of the One to the Other It were endless to mention all Records and Precedents that might be quoted for the Establishment of the Laws of England in Ireland I shall therefore enter no farther into that Matter but therein refer to Lord Chief Justice Cook Pryn Reyly c. If now we Enquire What were those Laws of England that became thus Established in Ireland Surely we must first reckon the Great Law of Parliaments which England so justly Challenges and all Mankind have a Right to By the Law of Parliament I mean that Law where by all Laws receive their Sanction The Free Debates and Consent of the People by Themselves or their Chosen Representatives That this was a main Branch of the English Law Established in this Kingdom and the very Foundation of our Future Legislature appears manifest from Parliaments being so early convok'd in Ireland as the fore-mention'd Precedents express Mr. Pryn acknowledges one in Hen. II's time pag. 259. against the 4th Instit. but makes a very false Conclusion that there appears no Footsteps of a Parliament afterwards till the third year of Edward the Second because the Acts of that Parliament are the first that are Printed in our Irish Statute-Book For so we may argue the Parliaments of England to be of later Date than pretended when we find the first Printed Acts in Keeble to be no older than the 9th of Hen. III. Whereas 't is most certain that Parliaments have been held in England some Ages before that After this Great Law of Parliaments we may reckon the Common Law of England whether it relates to Regulating and Setling of Property and Estates in Goods or Land or to the Iudiciary and Executive parts of the Law and the Ministers and Process thereof or to Criminal Cases These surely were all Establish'd in this Country by the three first Kings of Ireland of the Norman Race Let us now consider the state of the Statute Laws of England under these three Kings and their Predecessors For by the Irish Voluntary Submission to and Acceptance of the Laws and Government of England we must repute them to have submitted themselves to these likewise till a Regular Legislature was Establish'd amongst them in pursuance of that Submismission and Voluntary Acceptance And here we shall find that in those Times viz. from the Norman Conquest to Henry the Third's time inclusive the Statute-Laws of England were very few and slender 'T is true that before the 12th of Hen. III. we find amongst the English Historians frequent mention of the Laws of Edward the Confessor William the Conquerour Hen. I. Hen. II. King Iohn and Hen. III. All which are only Charters or several Grants of Liberties from the King which nevertheless had the force of Acts of Parliament and laid as great Obligations both upon Prince and People as Acts of Parliament do at this day Whereof we may read several Proofs in the Princes Case Cook 's 8th Report But these were only so many Confirmations of each other and all of them Sanctions of the Common Laws and Liberties of the People of England ab Antiquo Usitatae comprohatae per totam terram in quibus ipsi eorum Patres nati nutriti sunt as the words of the Manuscript Chronicle of Litchfield express it The Laws of Edward the Confessor held in so great Veneration in Antient Times per universum Regnum corroboratae confirmatae prius inventae Constitutae fuerunt Tempore Regis Edgari Avi sui Verum tamen post mortem ipsius Regis Edgari usque ad Coronationem Sancti Regis Edwardi which was 67 years praedictae Leges Sopitae sunt penitus intermissae Sed postquam Rex Edwardus in Regno sublimatus fuit Consilio Baronum Angliae Legem illam sopitam Excitavit Excitam Reparavit Reparatam Decoravit Decoratam Confirmavit confirmatae vocantur Lex Sancti Regis Edwardi non quod ipse primus eam ad invenisset sed quod Reparavit Restituitque as the said Litchfield Chronicle has it These Laws of Edward the Confessor were transcribed by Ingulphus Abbot of Croy land under William the Conqueror and are annexed to his History The Laws of William the Conqueror are but a Confirmation of the Laws of Edward the Confessor with some small alterations as the very Letter of those Laws themselves express it Hoc quoque praecipimus ut omnes habeant teneant Leges Edwardi Regis in omnibus Rebus adauctis his quas constituimus ad Utilitatem Anglorum The Laws of Henry I. which are in the Red Book of the Exchequer in the custody of the Kings Remembrancer in England are but a summary confirmation both of the Laws of Edward the Confessor and William the First as the Charter it self expresses it Lagam Regis Edwardi vobis Reddo cum illis emendationibus quibus Pater meus emendavit Consilio Baronum suorum The Laws of Henry II. called Constitutiones Clarendoniae and the Assize of Clarendon in the 2d part of Cooks Inst. p. 6. are all but confirmations and vindications of the King 's just Prerogative against the Usurpations of the Pope and
Subordination proceeded in those days it did not arise from the Parliament of England it self For we have not one single Instance of an English Act of Parliament Expresly Claiming this Right of Binding us But we have several Instances of Irish Acts of Parliament Expresly Denying this Subordination as appears by what foregoes Afterwards by a Statute made in Ireland the 18th of Hen. VI. Cap. 1. All the Statutes made in England against the Extortions and Oppressions of Purveyors are Enacted to be holden and kept in all Points and put in Execution in this Land of Ireland And in the 32d year of Henry the Sixth Cap. 1. by a Parliament in Ireland 't is Enacted That all the Statutes made against Provisors to the Court of Rome as well in England as in Ireland be had and kept in force After this in a Parliament at Drogheda the 8th of Edward IV. cap. 1. it was Ratify'd That the English Statute against Rape made the 6th of Richard the Second should be of Force in Ireland from the 6th day of March last past And that from henceforth the said Act and all other Statutes and Acts made by Authority of Parliament within the Realm of England be Ratify'd and Confirm'd and Adjudged by the Authority of this Parliament in their Force and Strength from the said sixth day of March We shall hereafter have occasion of taking farther Notice of this Statute upon another Account Lastly In a Parliament held at Drogheda the 10th of Henry the Seventh cap. 22. it is Enacted That all Statutes late that is as the Learned in the Laws expound it before that time made in England concerning the Common and Publique Weal of the same from henceforth be Deem'd effectual in Law and be Accepted Used and Executed within this Land of Ireland in all Points c. And in the 14th year of the same Kings Reign in a Parliament held at Tristle-Dermot it was Enacted That all Acts of Parliament made in England for Punishing Customers Controulers and Searchers for their Misdemeanors or for Punishment of Merchants or Factors be of Force here in Ireland Provided they be first Proclaim'd at Dublin Drogheda and other Market-Towns Thus we see by what Steps and Degrees all the Statutes which were made in England from the time of Magna Charta to the 10th of Henry the Seventh which did concern the Common Publick Weal were Receiv'd Confirm'd Allow'd and Authoriz'd to be of Force in Ireland all which was done by Assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons in the Parliament of Ireland Assembled and no Otherwise We shall next Enquire Whether there are not other Acts of the English Parliament both before and since the 10th of Henry the Seventh which were and are of Force in Ireland tho' not Allow'd of by Parliament in this Kingdom And we shall find That by the Opinion on of our best Lawyers there are divers such but then they are only such as are Declaratory of the Antient Common Law of England and not introductive of any New Law For these become of Force by the first General Establishment of the Common Laws of England in this Kingdom under Henry the Second King Iohn and Henry the Third and need no particular Act of Ireland for their Sanction As to those English Statutes since the 10th of Henry the Seventh that are Introductive of a New Law it was never made a Question whether they should Bind Ireland without being Allow'd in Parliament here till of very late years this Doubt began to be moved and how it has been Carried on and Promoted shall Appear more fully hereafter I say Till of very late years for the Antient Precedents which we have to the contrary are very numerous Amongst many we shall mention the following Particulars In the 21th of Henry the 8th an Act was made in England making it Felony in a Servant that runneth away with his Masters or Mistresses Goods This Act was not receiv'd in Ireland till it was Enacted by a Parliament held here in the 33d of Henry the 8th c. 5. Ses. 1. In the 21th of Henry VIII c. 19. there was a Law made in England That all Lords might Distrain on the Lands of them holden and make their Avowry not naming the Tenant but the Land But this was not of force in Ireland till Enacted here in the 33d of Henry VIII C. 1. Ses. 1. An Act was made in England anno 31. Henry VIII That Joint-Tenents and Tenents in Common should be compelled to make Partition as Coparceners were compellable at Common Law But this Act was not Receiv'd in Ireland till Enacted here An. 33. Henry VIII c. 10. Anno 27. Henry VIII c. 10. The Statute for Transferring Uses into Possession was made in England but not admitted in Ireland till 10. Car. 1. Ses. 2. In like manner the English Statute 33. Henry VIII c. 1. directing how Lands and Tenements may be dispos'd by Will c. was not of force in Ireland till 10. Car. 2. Ses. 2. The Act of Uniformity of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments was made in England the 1st of Eliz. c. 2. but was not establish'd in Ireland till the 2d of Eliz. c. 2. And so that of England 14. Car. 2. c. 14. was not receiv'd in Ireland till 17. 18. Car. 2 c. 6. The Statute against Wilful Perjury made in England 5. Eliz. c. 9. was not Enacted in Ireland till 28 Eliz. c. 1. So the English Act against Witchcraft and Sorcery made 5 Eliz. c. 16. And another Act against Forgery 5 Eliz. c. 14. were neither of them in force in Ireland till the 28th of Her Reign Cap. 3 and 4. The English Statutes against Pirates was made the 28th of Hen. 8. c. 15. but not in Ireland till the 12th of King Iames c. 2. In England an Act was made the 27th of Eliz. c. 4 against Fraudulent Conveyances but it was not in force in Ireland till Enacted here the 10th of Charles c. 3. Ses. 2. In the 15th year of King Charles the 1st in a Parliament held at Dublin there were Six English Statutes made Laws of this Kingdom with such Alterations as best fitted them to the State thereof viz. 21 Iac. c. 14. For pleading the General Issue in Intrusions brought by the King by Chap. 1. of the Irish Statutes 31 Eliz. c. 2. For Abridging of Proclamations on Fines by Chap. 2. 2 and 3 Edw. 6. c. 8. Concerning Offices before the Escheator by Chap. 4. 31 Eliz. c. 1. Discontinuance of Writs of Error in the Exchequer Chamber by Chap. 5. 8 Eliz. c. 4. and 18 Eliz. c. 7. concerning Clergy by Chap. 7. 24 Hen. 8. c. 5. Concerning Killing a Robber by Chap. 9. There are Six English Statutes likewise passed in the time of King Charles the 2d upon and soon after the Restoration some of which were not passed into Laws in Ireland till a year two or three afterwards As will appear
by consulting the Statute Books And in the First year of William and Mary Ses. 2. c. 9. an Act passed in England declaring all Attainders and other Acts made in the late pretended Parliament under King James at Dublin void But was not Enacted here in Ireland till the 7th year of K. William c. 3. And this was thought requisite to be done upon mature consideration thereon before the King and Council of England notwithstanding that the English Act does particularly name Ireland and was wholly design'd for and relates thereto The like may we find in several other Statutes of England passed since his present Majesties Accession to the Throne which have afterwards been passed here in Ireland with such Alterations as make them practicable and agreeable to this Kingdom Such as are amongst others the Act for Disarming Papists The Act of Recognition The Act for taking away Clergie from some Offenders The Act for taking Special Bail in the Country c. The Act against Clandestine Mortgages The Act against Cursing and Swearing These with many more are to to be found in our Statute Books in the several Reigns of Henry the 8th Edward the 6th Queen Elizabeth King Iames King Charles the 1st and 2d and King William But it is not to be found in any Records in Ireland that ever any Act of Parliament introductive of a new Law made in England since the time of King Iohn was by the judgment of any Court received for Law or put in Execution in the Realm of Ireland before the same was Confirmed and Assented to by Parliament in Ireland And thus I presume we have pretty clearly made out our Fourth Enquiry forementioned and shewn plainly the several steps by which the English form of Government and the English Statute Laws were received in this Kingdom and that this was wholly by the Peoples consent in Parliament to which we have had a very antient Right and as full a Right as our next Neighbours can pretend to or challenge I shall now consider the Objections and Difficulties that are moved on this Head drawn from Precedents and Passages in our Law-Books that may seem to prove the contrary First 't is urg'd That in the Irish Act concerning Rape passed anno 8 Edward 4 c. 1. 't is expressed That a Doubt was conceiv'd whether the English Statute of the 6th of Richard the 2d c. 6. ought to be of force in Ireland without a Confirmation thereof in the Parliament of Ireland Which shews as some alledg that even in those days it was held by some That an Act of of Parliament in England might bind Ireland before it be consented to in Parliament here But I concieve this Gloss is rais'd meerly for want of Expressing the Reason of the said Doubt in the Irish Statute of the 8th of Edward the 4th c. 1. which we may reasonably judge was this By the Statute of Westminster the 2d c. 34. a Woman that eloped from her Husband and lived with the Adulterer or a Wife that being first Ravish'd did afterwards consent and lived with the Ravisher she should loose her Dower This Statute of Westminster the 2d was made of force in Ireland by an Act passed here the 13th of Edward the 2d as we have seen before pag. 68 69. Afterwards by the English Statute of the 6th of Rich. the 2d c. 6. there was a farther addition made to the said Statute of Westminster the 2d to this effect That a Maiden or Wife being Ravished and afterwards consenting to the Ravishers as well the Ravisher as she that was Ravished shall be disabled to claim all Inheritance or Dower after the death of her Husband or Ancestor On this account the Doubt was here raised in Ireland in the 8th of Edward the 4th c. 1. Whether this latter English Statute of the 6th of Richard the 2d c. 6. were not in force in Ireland by virtue of the Irish Statute of the 13th of Edward the 2d which confirmed the Statute of Westminster the 2d c. 34. And for setling this Doubt the said Statute of the 8th of Edward the 4th c. 1. was passed in Ireland and we find very good reason for the said Doubt For the English Statute of the 6th of Richard the 2d c. 6. contained but a small addition to the Statute of Westminster the 2d c. 34. and we see that even this ad dition it self was judged not to be of force in Ireland till Enacted here For the said Irish Statute of the 8th of Edward the 4th c. 1. makes the said Statute of the 6th of Rich. 2d c. 6. of Force in Ireland only from the 6th of March then last past 'T is urg'd secondly That tho' perhaps such Acts of Parliament in England which do not Name Ireland shall not be construed to Bind Ireland yet all such English Statutes as mention Ireland either by the General Words of all his Majesty's Dominions or by particularly Naming of Ireland are and shall be of Force in this Kingdom This being a Doctrine first broach'd Directly as I conceive by Will. Hussey Lord Chief Justice of the Kings Bench in England in the first year of Henry the Seventh and of late Revived by the Lord Chief Justice Cook and strongly urged and much rely'd upon iâ—… these latter Days I shall take thâ—… Liberty of Enlarging thereon tho I venture thereby to swell this Pamphlet to a size greater than I desire or design'd First therefore As to such English Statutes as seem to comprehend Ireland and to Bind it under the General Words of all his Majesty's Dominions or Subjects whatever has been the Opinion of Private and Particular Lawyers in this Point I am sure the Opinions of the Kings of England and their Privy Council have been otherwise 'T is well known since Poyning's Act in Ireland the 10th of Henry the Seventh no Act can pass in our Parliament here till it be first Assented to by the King and Privy Council of England and Transmitted hither under the Broad Seal of England Now the King and his Privy Council there have been so far from surmising that an Act of Parliament of England mentioning only in General All the Kings Dominions or Subjects should Bind Ireland that they have clearly shewn the contrary by frequently Transmitting to Ireland to be pass'd into Laws here English Statutes wherein the General Words of all the Kings Dominions or Subjects were contain'd which would have been to no purpose but meerly Actum Agere had Ireland been Bound before by those English Statutes Of this I shall give the following Examples amongst many others The Act of Parliament in England against Appeals to Rome 24 Hen. 8. c. 12. by express words extends to all his Majesties Dominions yet the same was not in force nor receiv'd in Ireland till it was Enacted by Parliament there the 28th of Hen. 8. c. 6. In like manner the Statutes made in England concerning First Fruits
Bench of Ireland to the Kings Bench of England But to this I answer 1. That 't is the Opinion of several Learned in the Laws of Ireland That this Removal of a Judgment from the Kings Bench of Ireland by Writ of Error into the Kings Bench of England is founded on an Act of Parliament in Ireland which is lost amongst a great number of other Acts which we want for the space of 130 years at one time and of 120 at another time as we have noted before pag. 65. But it being only a General Tradition that there was such an Act of our Parliament we only offer it as a Surmise the Statute it self does not appear 2. Where a Judgment in Ireland is Removed to be Revers'd in England the Judges in England ought and always do judge according to the Laws and Customs of Ireland and not according to the Laws and Customs of England any otherwise than as these may be of Force in Ireland but if in any thing the two Laws differ the Law of Ireland must prevail and guide their Judgment And therefore in the Case of one Kelly Removed to the Kings Bench in England in the beginning of King Charles the First one Error was assigned that the Praecipe was of Woods and Underwoods which is a manifest Error if brought in England but the Judges finding the Use to be Otherwise in Ireland judged it No Error So in Crook Charles fol. 511. Mulcarry vers Eyres Error was assigned for that the Declaration was of one hundred Acres of Bogg which is a word not known in England but 't was said It was well enough understood in Ireland and so adjudged No Error From whence I conceive 't is manifest that the Jurisdiction of the Kings Bench in England over a Judgment in the Kings Bench of Ireland does not proceed from any Subordination of one Kingdom to the other but from some other Reason which we shall endeavour to make out 3. We have before observed That in the Reign of K. Henry the Third Gerald Fitz-Maurice Lord Justice of Ireland sent four Knights to know what was held for Law in England in the Case of Coparceners The Occasion of which Message as before we have noted out of the Kings Rescript was because the Kings Justice of Ireland was ignorant what the Law was We may reasonably imagine that there were many Messages of this kind for in the Infancy of the English Government it may well be supposed that the Judges in Ireland were not so deeply versed in the Laws of England This occasioned Messages to England Before Judgment given in Ireland to be inform'd of the Law And After Decrees made Persons who thought themselves aggrieved by Erroneous Judgments apply'd themselves to the King in England for Redress Thus it must be that Writs of Error unless they had their Sanction in Parliament became in use Complaints to the King by those that thought themselves injur'd increased and at last grew into Custom and obtain'd the Force of Law Perhaps it may be Objected That if the Judges of the Kings Bench in England ought to Regulate their Judgment by the Customs of Ireland and not of England it will follow that this Original which we assign of Writs of Error to England is not right I Answer That this may be the Primary Original and yet consist well enough with what we have before laid down For tho' the Common Law of England was to be the Common Law of Ireland and Ireland at the beginning of its English Government might frequently send into England to be inform'd about it yet this does not hinder but Ireland in a long Process of Time may have some smaller Customs and Laws of its own gradually but insensibly crept into Practice that may in some measure differ from the Customs and Practice of England and where there is any such the Judges of England must regulate their Sentence accordingly tho' the first Rise of Writs of Error to England may be as we have here suggested In like manner where the Statute-Law of Ireland differs from that of England the Judges of England will regulate their Judgments by the Statute-law of Ireland This is the constant Practice and notoriously known in Westminster-Hall From which it appears that removing a Judgment from the Kings Bench of Ireland to the Kings Bench of England is but an Appeal to the King in his Bench of England for his Sense Judgement or Exposition of the Laws of Ireland But of this more hereafter 4. When a Writ of Error is Returned into the Kings Bench of England Suit is made to the King only The Matter lies altogether before Him and the Party complaining applies to No Part of the Political Government of England for Redress but to the King of Ireland only who is in England That the King only is sued to our Law-Books make Plain This Court is call'd Curia Domini Regis and Aula Regia because the King used to sit there in Person as Lambard tells us And every Cause brought there is said to be coram Domino Rege even at this very day Cooke 4 Inst. p. 72. Therefore if a Writ be returnable coram nobis ubicunque fuerimus 't is to be Return'd to the Kings Bench. But if it be Returnable coram Iusticiariis nostris apud Westm. 't is to be Return'd into the Common Pleas. This Court as Glavnil and other Antients tells us used to Travel with the King where-ever he went And Fleta in describing this Court says Habet Rex Curiam suam Iusticiarios suos coram quibus non alibi nisi coram semet ipso c. falsa Iudicia Errores revertuntur Corriguntur The King then as Britton says having Supream Jurisdiction in his Realm to judge in all Causes whatsoever therefore it is that Erroneous Iudgments were brought to him out of Ireland But this does not argue that Ireland is therefore Subordinate to England for the People of Ireland are the Subjects of the King to whom they Appeal And 't is not from the Country where the Court is held but from the Presence and Authority of the King to whom the People of Ireland have as good a Title as the People of England that the Praeeminence of the Iurisdiction does flow And I question not but in former times when these Courts were first Erected and when the King Exerted a greater Power in Judicature than he does now and he used to sit in his own Court that if he had Travell'd into Ireland and the Court had follow'd him thither Erroncous Judgments might have been removed from England before him into his Court in Ireland for so certainly it must be since the Court Travell'd with the King From hence it appears that all the Jurisdiction that the Kings Bench in England has over the Kings Bench in Ireland arises only from the Kings Presence in the former And the same may be said of the Chancery in England if it will assume
shall be Taken or Levy'd by Us or Our Heirs in Our Realm without the Good Will and Assent of Archbishops Bishops Earls Barons Knights Burgesses and other Freemen of the Land The like Liberties are specially Confirm'd to the Clergy the 14th of Edward the 3d. And were these Statutes and all other Statutes and Acts of the Parliament of England Ratified Confirmed and Adjudged by several Parliaments of Ireland to be of Force within this Realm And shall the People of Ireland receive no Benefit by those Acts Are those Statutes of Force in England only And can they add no Immunity or Priviledge to the Kingdom of Ireland when they are received there Can the King and Parliament make Acts in England to Bind his Subjects of Ireland without their Consent And can he make no Acts in Ireland with their Consent whereby they may receive any Priviledge or Immunity This were to make the Parliaments of Ireland wholly Illusory and of no Effect If this be Reasonable Doctrine To what end was Poyning's Law in Ireland that makes all the Statutes of England before that in Force in this Kingdom This might as well have been done and again undone when they please by a single Act of the English Parliament But let us not make thus light of Constitutions of Kingdoms 't is Dangerous to those who do it 't is Grievous to those that suffer it Moreover Had the King or his Council of England in the 10th year of Hen. VII in the least dreamt of this Doctrine to what end was all that strict Provision made by Poyning's Act Irish Stat. cap. 4. That no Act of Parliament should pass in Ireland before it was first Certified by the Chief Governour and Privy Council here under the Broad Seal of this Kingdom to the King and his Privy Council in England and received their Approbation and by them be remitted hither under the Broad Seal of England here to be pass'd into a Law The design of this Act seems to be the Prevention of any thing passing in the Parliament of Ireland Surreptitiously to the Prejudice of the King or the English Interest of Ireland But this was a needless Caution if the King and Parliament of England had Power at any time to revoke or annul any such Proceedings Upon this Act of Poynings many and various Acts have pass'd in Ireland relating to the Explanation Suspension or farther Corroboration thereof in divers Parliaments both in Henry the Eighth's Phil. Mary's and Q. Eliz. Reigns for which see the Irish Statutes All which shew that this Doctrine was hardly so much as Surmised in those Days however we come to have it raised in these Latter Times Fourthly 'T is against several Charters of Liberties Granted unto the Kingdom of Ireland This likewise is clearly made out by what foregoes I shall only add in this place That in the Patent-Roll of the 17 Rich. 2. m. 34. de Confirmatione There is a Confirmation of several Liberties and Immunities granted unto the Kingdom and People of Ireland by Edw. III. The Patent is somewhat long but so much as concerns this Particular I shall render verbatim as I have it Transcribed from the Roll by Sir William Doâ—…vile Attorny General in Ireland during the whole Reign of King Charles II. Rex omnibus c. Salutem Inspeximus Literas Patentes Domini Edwardi nuper Regis Angliae Avi nostri fact in haec verba Edwardus Dei Gra. Rex Angliae Franciae Dominus Hiberniae Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus Prioribus Ministris nostris tam Majoribus quam Minoribus quibuscunque aliis de Terra nostra Hiberniae fidelibus nostris ad quos Praesentes Literae pervenerint Salutem Quia c. Nos haec quae sequuntur Ordinanda Duximus firmiter observanda c. Imprimis vizt Volumus Praecipimus quod Sancta Hibernicana Ecclesia suas Libertates Liberas Consuetudines illesas habeat eis Libere gaudeat Utatur Item volumus praecipimus quod nostra ipsius Terrae Negotia presertim Majora Ardua in Consiliis per Peritos Consiliaros nostros ac Praelatos Magnates quosdam de Discretioribus Probioribus Hominibus de partibus vicinis ubi ipsa Concilia teneri Contigerit propter hoc evocandos in Parliamentis vero per ipsos Conciliaros nostros ac Praelatos Proceres aliosque de terra predicta prout Mos Exegit secundum Iusticiam Legem Consuetudinem Rationem tractentur deducantur fideliter timore favore odio aut praetio post positis discutiantur ac etiam terminentur c. In Cujus Rei Testimonium has Literas nostras fieri fecimus Patentes Teste meipso Apud Westminst 25 die Octob. Anno Regni nostris Angliae 31 Regni vero Franciae 18. Nos autem Ordinationes Voluntates Praecepta Praedicta ac omnia alia singula in Litteris praedictis Contenta Rata Habentes Grata Ea pro nobis Haeredibus nostris quantum in nobis est Acceptamus Approbamus Ratificamus Confirmamus prout Literae praedictae rationabiliter testanter In Cujus c. Test. Reg. apud Westminst 26 die Iunii Fifthly It is inconsistent with the Royalties and Praeeminence of a Separate and Distinct Kingdom That we are thus a Distinct Kingdom has been clearly made out before 'T is plain the Nobility of Ireland are an Order of Peers clearly Distinct from the Peerage of England the Priviledges of the one extend not into the other Kingdom a Lord of Ireland may be Arrested by his Body in England and so may a Lord of England in Ireland whilst their Persons remain Sacred in their respective Kingdoms A Voyage Royal may be made into Ireland as the Year-Book 11 Hen. 4. 17. fol. 7. and Lord Cook tells us and King Iohn in the 12th year of his Reign of England made a Voyage Royal into Ireland and all his Tenants in Chief which did not attend him in that Voyage did pay him Escuage at the Rate of Two Marks for every Knights Fee which was imposed super Praelatis Baronibus pro Passagio Regis in Hibernia as appears by the Pipe-Roll Scutag 12 Iohannis Regis in Scaccario Angl. Which shews that we are a Compleat Kingdom within our selves and not little better than a Province as some are so Extravagant as to Assert none of the Properties of a Roman Province agreeing in the least with our Constitution 'T is Resolved in Sir Richard Pembrough's Cafe in the 44th of Edw. III. That Sir Richard might lawfully refuse the King to serve him as his Deputy in Ireland and that the King could not Compel him thereto for that were to Banish him into another Kingdom which is against Magna Charta Chap. 29. Nay even tho Sir Richard had great Tenures from the King pro servitio Impenso Impendendo for that was said must be understood within the Realm of England Cooks 2d Inst.
Parliament held at Oxford Soon after King Iohn being then about Twelve Years of Age came into Ireland from Milford to Waterford as his Father had formerly done The Irish Nobility and Gentry immediately repaired to him but being Received by him and his Retinue with some Scorn and Derision by reason of their long rude Beards quas more Patrio grandes habebant prolixas says Giraldus Cambrensis Hib. Expug Cap. 35. they took such Offence thereat that they departed in much Discontent which was the occasion of the young Kings staying so short a time in Ireland as he did this his first time of being here And here before we proceed any farther we shall observe That by this Donation of the Kingdom of Ireland to King Iohn Ireland was most eminently set apart again as a Separate and Distinct Kingdom by it self from the Kingdom of England and did so continue until the Kingdom of England Descended and came unto King Iohn after the Death of his Brother Richard the First King of England which was about Twenty two years after his being made King of Ireland during which space of Twenty two years both whilst his Father Henry the Second and his Brother Richard the First were living and Reigning King Iohn made divers Grants and Charters to his Subjects of Ireland which are yet in being in this Kingdom wherein he stiles himself Dominus Hiberniae the constant Stile till Henry the Eighth's time and in others Dominus Hiberniae Comes Meritoniae By which Charters both the City of Dublin and divers other Corporations enjoy many Priviledges and Franchises to this day But after the said Grant of the Kingdom of Ireland to King Iohn neither his Father Henry II. nor his Brother King Richard I. Kings of England ever stiled themselves during their Lives King or Lord of Ireland for the Dominion and Regality of Ireland was wholly and separately vested in K. Iohn being absolutely Granted unto him without any Reservation And he being Created King in the Parliament at Oxford under the Stile and Title of Lord of Ireland Enjoy'd all manner of Kingly Iurisdiction Preheminence and Authority Royal belonging unto the Imperial State and Majesty of a King as are the Express words of the Irish Statute 33 Hen. VIII c. 1. by which Statute the Stile of Dominus was changed to that of Rex Hiberniae Let us then suppose that Richard the First King Iohn's Elder Brother had not died without Issue but that his Progeny had sat on the Throne of England in a Continued Succession to this Day Let us suppose likewise the same of King Iohn's Progeny in relation to the Throne of Ireland where then had been the Subordination of Ireland to the Parliament or even to the King of England Certainly no such thing could have been then pretended Therefore if any such Subordination there be it must arise from something that followed after the Descent of England to King Iohn for by that Descent England might as properly be Subordinate to Ireland as the converse Ireland being vested in the Royal Person of King Iohn Two and Twenty years before his Accession to the Crown of England and being a more Ancient Kingdom than the Kingdom of England As the English Orators in the Council of Constance An. 1417 confess'd and alledged as an Argument in the Contest between Henry the Fifth's Legates and those of Charles the Sixth King of France for Precedence Satis Constat say they secundum Albertum Magnum Bartholomeum de Proprietatibus Rerum quod toto Mundo in tres partes Diviso scilicet in Europam Asiam Africam for America was not then Discovered Europa in quatuor Dividitur Regna scilicet Primum Romanum Secundum Constantinopolitanum Tertium Regnum Hiberniae quod jam translatum est in Anglos Quartum Regnum Hispaniae Ex quo patet quod Rex Angliae Regnum suum sunt de Eminentioribus Antiquioribus Regibus Regnis totius Europae The Antiquity and Precedence of the King of England was allo'wd him wholly on the Account of his Kingdom of Ireland Perhaps it will be said That this Subordination of the Kingdom of Ireland to the Kingdom of England proceeds from Ireland's being Annex'd to and as it were united with the Imperial Crown of England by several Acts of Parliament both in England and Ireland since King Iohns time But how farr this Operates I shall Enquire more fully hereafter I shall only at present Observe that I conceive little more is Effected by these Statutes Than that Ireland shall not be Alien'd or Separated from the King of England who cannot hereby dispose of it otherwise than in Legal Succession along with England and that whoever is King of England is ipso facto King of Ireland and the Subjects of Ireland are oblig'd to Obey him as their Liege Lord. To proceed therefore After both Crowns were united on the Death of Richard the First without Issue in the Royal Person of King Iohn He about the Twelfth Year of his Reign of England went again into Ireland viz. the Twenty Eight day of Iune 1210. and Math. Paris tells us pag. 220. Cum Venisset ad Dublinensem Civitatem Occurrerunt ei ibidem plus quam 20 Reguli illius Regionis qui omnes Timore maximo preterriti homagium ei Fidelitatem fecerunt Fecit quoque Rex ibidem Construere Leges Consuetudines Anglicanas ponens Vicecomites aliosque Ministros qui populum Regni illius juxta Leges Anglicanas Judicarent His Son King Henry the Third came to the Crown the Nineteenth of October 1216. and in November following he Granted to Ireland a Magna Charta Dated at Bristol 12 November the First Year of his Reign 'T is Prefaced that for the Honour of God and Advancement of Holy Church by the Advice of his Council of England whose names are particularly recited He makes the following Grant to Ireland And then goes on Exactly Agreeable to the Magna Charta which he granted to England only in ours we have Civitas Dublin Avenliffee instead of Civitas London and Thamesis with other Alterations of the like kind where Needful But ours is Eight years older than that which he granted to England it not being till the Ninth Year of his Reign and ours is the First Year This Magna Charta of Ireland Concludes thus Quia vero sigillum nondum Habuimus presentem Cartam Sigillis Venerabilis Patris nostri Domini Gualt Apost Sedis Legati Willelmi Mar eschalli Comitis Pembrooke Rectoris nostri Regni nostri secimus Sigillari Testibus omnibus praenominatis alijs Multis Dâ—…t per Manus Praedictorum Domini Legati Willelmi Marescalli Apud Bristol Duodecimo die Novembr Regni nostri Anno Primo An Antient Coppy of this Magna Charta of Ireland is to be found in the Red Book of the Exchequer Dublin In February following in the First Year like wise of his Reign
by Advice of all his Faithful Counsellors in England to gratify the Irish says Pryn for their eminent Loyalty to his Father and Him he granted them out of his Special Grace that they and their Heirs for ever should enjoy the Liberties granted by his Father and Himself to the Realm of England which he Reduced into Writing and sent Seal'd thither under the Seal of the Popes Legat and W. Earl Marshal his Governour because he had then no Seal of his own This as I conceive Refers to the foremention'd Magna Charta Hiberniae The Record as Recited by Mr. Pryn here follows Rex Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus Comitibus Baronibus Militibus Libere Tenentibus omnibus Fidelibus suis per Hiberniam Constitutis Salutem Fidelitatem vestram in Domino Commendantes quam Domino Patri nostro semper Exhibuistis nobis estis diebus nostris Exhibituri Volumus quod in signum Fidelitatis vestrae tam praeclarae tam Insignis Libertatibus Regno nostro Angliae a Patre nostro nobis Concessis de gratia nostra Dono in Regno nostro Hiberniae guadeatis vos vestri Haeredes in perpetuum Quas Distincte in Scriptum Reductas de Communi Consilio omnium Fidelium nostrorum vobis Mittimus Signatas Sigillis Domini nostri G. Apostolicae Sedis Legati Fidelis nostri Com. W. Maresc Rectoris nostri Regni nostri quia Sigillum nondum habuimus easdem processu temporis de Majori Consilio proprio Sigillo Signaturi Teste apud Glouc. 6 Februar Here we have a free Grant of all the Liberties of England to the People of Ireland But we know the Liberties of Englishmen are Founded on that Universal Law of Nature that ought to prevail throughout the whole World of being Govern'd only by such Laws to which they give their own Consent by their Representatives in Parliament And here before I proceed farther I shall take Notice That in the late Raised Controversie Whether the House of Commons were an Essential part of Parliament before the 49th year of Henry the Third The Learned Mr. Petyt Keeper of the Records in the Tower in his Book on that Subject pag. 71. Deduces his 9th Argument From the Comparison of the Antient Generale Concilium or Parliament of Ireland instanced An. 38 Hen. III. with the Parliament in England wherein the Citizens and Burgesses were which was Eleven years before the pretended beginning of the Commons in England For thus we find it in that Author As great a Right and Privilege surely was and ought to be allow'd to the English Subjects as to the Irish before the 49th of Hen. III. And if that be admitted and that their the Irish Commune Concilium or Parliament had its Platform from ours the English as I think will not be Deny'd by any that have consider'd the History and Records touching that Land Ireland we shall find the ensuing Records Ann. 38 Hen. III. clearly evince that the Citizens and Burgesses were then a part of their the Irish Great Council or Parliament That King being in partibus Transmarinis and the Queen being left Regent she sends Writs or a Letter in the Kings Name directed Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus Prioribus Comitibus Baronibus Militibus Liberis Hominibus Civibus Burgensibus Terrae suae Hiberniae telling them that Mittimus Fratrem Nicholaum de Sancto Neoto Fratrem Hospitii Sancti Iohannis Ierusalem in Anglia ad partes Hiberniae ad exponendum vobis together with I. Fitz-Geoffery the Kings Justice the State of his Land of Vascony endanger'd by the Hostile Invasion of the King of Castile qui nullo Iure sed potentia sua Confisus Terram nostram Vasconiae per ipsius Fortitudinem a manibus nostris Auferre a Dominio Regni Angliae segregare Proponit And therefore universitatem Vestram Quanta possumus Affectione Rogantes quatenus noâ—… jura nostra totaliter indefensâ—… non deserentes nobis in tanto periculo quantumcunque poteritis dâ—… Gente Pecunia subveniatis which would turn to their Everlasting Honour concluding His nostris Augustiis taliter Compâ—…tientes quod nos Heraedes nostri vobis Haeredibus vestris sumus non immerito Obligati Teste Regina R. Comite Cornubiae apud Windesor 17 die Februar Per Reginam Thus far Mr. Petyt Here we have a Letter from the Queen Regent to the Parliament in Ireland in an humble manner beseeching them for an Aid of Men and Money against the King of Castiles Hostile Invasion of Gascony from whence we may perceive that in those days no more than at present Men and Money could not be Rais'd but by Consent of Parliament I have been the more particular in Transcribing this Passage out of Mr. Petyt to shew that we have as Antient and Express an Authority for our present Constitution of Parliaments in Ireland as can be shewn in England And I believe it will not be thought Adviseable in these latter Days to break in upon Old Settled Constitutions No one knows how fatal the Consequents of that may be To return therefore where we Digress'd Henry the Third about the Twelfth year of his Reign did specially Impower Richard de Burgh then Iustice of Ireland at a certain day and place to summon all the Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors Earls Barons Knights Freeholders and Sheriffs of each County and before them to cause to be Read the Charter of his Father King Iohn whereunto his Seal was Appendant whereby he had granted unto them the Laws and Customs of England and unto which they swore Obedience And that he should cause the same Laws to be observed and Proclaimed in the several Counties of Ireland that so none presume to do contrary to the Kings Command The Record I have taken out of Mr. a Pryn in these words Rex Dilecto Fideli suo Richardo de Burgo Justie ' suo Hibern Salutem Mandamus vobis firmiter praecipientes quatenus certo die Loco faciatis venire coram vobis Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Priores Comites Barones Milites libere Tenentes Ballivos singulorum Comitatum coram eis Publice legi faciatis Chartam Domini J. Regis Patris nostri cui Sigillum suum appensum est quam fieri fecit jurari a Magnatibus Hibern de Legibus Consuetudinis Angliae Observandis in Hibernia Et praecipiatis eis ex parte nostra quod Leges illas Consuctudines in Charta praedicta contentas de caetero firmiter teneant observent hoc idem per singulos Commitatus Hiberniae clamari faciatis teneri prohibentes firmiter ex parte nostra super foris facturam nostram nequis contra hoc Mandatum nostrum venire praesumat c. Teste Me ipso Apud Westm ' 8 die Maii An. Reg. nostri 12. By what foregoes I presume it plainly appears that by three several Establishments
Clergy As we find at large in Chron. Gervasii Doroborn p. 1387. Edit Lond. an 1652. The Laws of King John called The Great Charter of King John granted in the 17th Year of his Reign upon the Agreement made between him and his Barons at Running-Mead between Staines and Windsor was but a Confirmation of the Laws of Edward the Confessor and Henry the First as Mat. Paris relates it Anno Regis Johannis 17. venientes ad Regem magnates petierunt quasdam Libertates Leges Regis Edwardi cum aliis libertatibus sibi Regno Angliae Ecclesiae Anglicanae concessis confirmari prout in Charta Regis Hen I. ascriptae continentur The same Historian gives us also at large both Charta Libertatum and Charta de Foresta which are not extant in the Rolls of those times nor to be found in any till the 28th of Edward I. and that but by inspeximus The Laws of Henry III. contain'd in Magna Charta and Charta de Forresta both which are called Magnae Chartae Libertatis Angliae and were establish'd about the 9th Year of Henry III. are for the most part but declaratory of the common municipal Laws of England and that too no new declaration thereof for King Iohn in the 17th year of his Reign had granted the like before which was also call'd Magna Charta And by the English Statute 25 Ed. 1. c. 1. it is Enacted That the Great Charter and the Charter of the Forrest be taken as the Common Law of England By what foregoes I conceive it is very clear That all the Charters and Grants of Liberties from Edward the Confessor's time down to the 9th of Henry the Third were but Confirmations one of another and all of them Declarations and Confirmations of the Common Law of England And by the several Establishments which we have formerly mention'd of the Laws of England to be of force in Ireland First in the 13th of Henry II. Secondly in the 12th of King Iohn Thirdly in the 12th of Henry III. All those Laws and Customs of England which by those several Charters were Declared and Confirmed to be the Laws of England were establish'd to be of force in Ireland And thus Ireland came to be govern'd by one and the same Common Law with England and those Laws continue as part of the municipal and fundamental Laws of both Kingdoms to this day It now remains that we enquire How the Statute Laws and Acts of Parliament made in England since the 9th of Henry the Third came to be of force in Ireland And whether all or any of them and which are in force here and when and how they came to be so And the first Precedent that occurs in our Books of Acts of Parliament in Ireland particularly mentioning and confirming special Acts of Parliament in England is found in a Marginal Note of Sir Richard Bolton's formerly Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer in Ireland affixed in his Edition of the Irish Statutes to Stat. 10 Hen. 7. Cap. 22. to this purport That in 13 Edw. II. by Parliament in this Realm of Ireland the Statutes of Merton made the 20th of Hen. II. and the Statutes of Marlbridge made the 52 of Henry the Third The Statute of Westminster the First made the 3d of Edward the First The Statute of Gloucester made the 6th of Edward the First And the Statute of Westminster the Second made the 13th of Edward the First were all confirm'd in this Kingdom and all other Statutes which were of force in England were referr'd to be Examin'd in the next Parliament and so many as were then Allow'd and Publish'd to stand likewise for Laws in this Kingdom And in the 10th of Henry the Fourth it was Enacted in this Kingdom of Ireland That the Statutes made in England should not be of force in this Kingdom unless they were Allow'd and Publish'd in this Kingdom by Parliament And the like Statute was made again in the 29th of Henry the Sixth These Statutes are not to be found in the Rolls nor any Parliament Roll of that time but he Sir Richard Bolton had seen the same Exemplisy'd under the Great Seal and the Exemplification remaineth in the Treasury of the City of Waterford Thus far the Note If we consider the frequent Troubles and Distractions in Ireland we shall not wonder that these and many other Rolls and Records have been lost in this Kingdom For from the third year of Edward the Second which was Anno 1310. through the whole Reigns of Edward III. Richard II. Henry IV. and Henry V. and so to the Seventh year of Henry the Sixth Anno 1428. which is about 118 years there are not any Parliament Rolls to be found yet certain it is that divers Parliaments were held in Ireland in those times The same may be said from Henry the Second's coming into Ireland Anno 1172. to the third year of Edward the Second Anno 1310. about 138 years Perhaps it may be said That if here were such Statutes of Ireland as the said Acts of the 10th of Henry the Fourth and the 29th of Henry the Sixth As they shew that the Parliaments of Ireland did think that English Acts of Parliament could not bind Ireland yet they shew likewise that even in those days the Parliaments of England did claim this Superiority or else to what purpose were the said Acts made unless in denial of that Claim All which I hope may be readily granted without any prejudice to the Right of the Irish Parliaments There is nothing so common as to have one Man claim another Mans Right And if bare Pretence will give a Title no Man is secure And it will be yet worse if when another so Pretends and I insist on my Right my Just Claim shall be turn'd to my Prejudice and to the Disparagement of my Title We know very well that many of the Judges of our Four Courts have been from time to time sent us out of England and some of them may easily be supposed to come over hither Prepossess'd with an Opinion of our Parliaments being subordinate to that of England Or at least some of them may be Scrupulous and desirous of full Security in this Point and on their Account and for their Satisfaction such Acts as aforesaid may be devised and Enacted in Ireland But then God forbid that these Acts should afterwards be laid hold of to a clear other intent than what they were framed for and instead of Declaring and Securing our Rights should give an Handle of Contest by shewing that our Rights have been question'd of Antient Time In conclusion of all If this Superiority of the Parliament of England have been Doubted a great while ago so it has been as great a while ago Strenuously Opposed and Absolutely Denied by the Parliaments of Ireland And by the way I shall take Notice That from whencesoever this Antient Pretence of Ireland's
26 Hen. 8. c. 3. and the Act of Faculties 25 Hen. 8. c. 21. though each of them by express words comprize All his Majesties Subjects and Dominions were not receiv'd as Laws in Ireland till the former was Enacted there 28 H. 8. c. 4. and the latter the 28 Hen. 8. c. 19. and so the Stature Restoring to the Crown all Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical made in England Anno 1 Eliz. c. 1. and therein giving Power to Erect an Ecclesiastical High-Commission-Court in England and Ireland yet was not of Force in Ireland till Enacted there Anno 2 Eliz. c. 1. And tho the said English Act in relation to Erecting such an High-Commission Court was Repeal'd 17 Car. 1. c. 11 and the Repeal confirm'd the 13 Car. 2. c. 12 And the late Bill of Rights 1 W. and M. Ses. 2. c. 2. in England has damn'd all such Courts Yet the Act in Ireland 2 Eliz. c. 1. remains still in force here and so it was lately declar'd here by the Lord High-Chancellour Porter Lord Chief Justice Reynel Lord Chief Baron Hely Mr. Justice Cox Mr. Justice Ieffreyson in the Case of Dr. Thomas Hacket late Bishop of Down who was depriv'd of the said Bishoprick by such a Commission for great Enormities the Commissioners being Dr. Dopping late Bishop of Meath Dr. King the present Bishop of London-Derry and Dr. Wiseman late Bishop of Dromore And truly I see no more Reason for Binding Ireland by the English Laws under the General Words of all his Majesties Dominions or Subjects than there is for Binding Scotland by the same for Scotland is as much his Dominion and Scots-men as much his Subjects as Ireland and Irish-men If it be said That Scotland is an Antient Separate and Distinct Kingdom from England I say So is Ireland The Difference is Scotland continued separate from the Kings of England till of late years and Ireland continued separate from England but a very little while in the Person of King Iohn before the Death of his Father and of his Brother Richard the First without issue But then 't is to be considered that there was a Possibility or even a Probability that Ireland might have continued separate from the Crown of England even to this very day if Richard the First had left behind him a Numerous Progeny Secondly As to such English Statutes as particularly Name Ireland and are therefore said to be of Force in this Kingdom tho' never Enacted here I shall consider only the more Antient Precedents that are offered in Confirmation of this Doctrine For as to those of later Date 't is these we complain of as bearing hard on the Liberties of this Country and the Rights of our Parliaments and therefore these ought not to be produced as Arguments against us I presume if I can shew that the Antient Precedents that are produced do not conclude against us it will follow that the Modern Instances given ought not to conclude against us that is to say plainly These ought not to have been made as they are as wanting Foundation both from Authority and Reason The Antient Precedents of English Statutes particularly Naming Ireland and said to be made in England with a Design of Binding Ireland are chiefly these three 1. Statutum Hiberniae 14 H. 3. 2. Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae 17 Edw. 1. 3. And the Act that all Staple Commodities passing out of England or Ireland shall be carried to Callis as long as the Staple is at Callis 2 Hen. 6. c. 4. on which Hussey delivered his Opinion as we shall see more fully hereafter These Statutes especially the two first being made for Ireland as their Titles import have given occasion to think that the Parliament of England have a Right to make Laws for Ireland without the Consent of their Chosen Representatives But if we Enquire farther into this matter we shall find this Conclusion not fairly Deduced First The Statutum Hiberniae 14 Hen. 3. as 't is to be found in the Collection of English Statutes is plainly thus The Judges in Ireland conceiving a Doubt concerning Inheritances devolved to Sisters or Coheirs viz. Whether the younger Sisters ought to hold of the Eldest Sister and do Homage unto her for their Portions or of the Chief Lord and do Homage unto him therefore Girald Fitz Maurice the then Lord Justice of Ireland dispatcht four Knights to the King in England to bring a Certificate from thence of the Practice there used and what was the Common-Law of England in that Case Whereupon Hen. 3. in this his Certificate or Rescript which is called Statutum Hiberniae meerly informs the Justice what the Law and Custom was in England viz. That the Sisters ought to hold of the Chief Lord and not of the Eldest Sister And the close of it commands that the foresaid Customs that be used within our Realm of England in this Case be Proclaimed throughout our Dominion of Ireland and be there observ'd Teste meipso apud Westminst 9. Feb. An. Reg. 14. From whence 't is manifest that this Statutum Hiberniae was no more than a Certificate of what the common Law of England was in that Case which Ireland by the Original Compact was to be governed by And shews no more that therefore the Parliament of England may bind Ireland than it would have proved that the Common Wealth of Rome was subject to Greece if after Rome had received the Law of the Twelve Tables they had sent to Greece to know what the Law was in some Special Case The Statute call'd Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae made at Notingham the 17th of Edward the First and to be found in Pultons Collection pag. 76. Edit Lond. 1670. was certainly never Received or of Force in Ireland This is Manifest from the very first Article of that Ordnance which Prohibits the Iustice of Ireland or others the Kings Officers there to Purchase Land in that Kingdom or within their respective Balliwicks without the Kings Licence on pain of Forfeitures But that this has ever been Otherwise and that the Lords Justices and other Officers here have Purchas'd Lands in Ireland at their own Will and Pleasure needs no Proof to those who have the least knowledge of this Country Nor does it appear by any Inquisition Office or other Record that any one ever Forfeited on that Account Moreover this Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae is really in it self No Act of Parliament but meerly an Ordinance of the King and his Privy Council in England which appears as well from the Preamble to the said Ordinance as from this Observation likewise That King Edward the First held no Parliament in the 17th year of his Reign Or if this were a Parliament this Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae is the only Act thereof that is Extant But 't is very improbable that only this single Ordinance should Appear if any such Parliament were call'd together Thirdly As to the Staple-Act 2
Hen. 6. c. 4. which expresly names Ireland and Hussey's Opinion thereon The Case as we find it in the Year-Books of Mich. 2 Rich. 3. fol. 11. and Mich. 1 Hen. 7. fol. 3. is in short thus The Merchants of Waterford having Ship'd off some Wooll and consign'd it to Sluice in Flanders the Ship by stress of Weather was put in at Callis where Sir Thomas Thwaits Treasurer of Callis seized the said Wooll as forfeited half to himself and half to the King by the said Statute hereupon a Suit was commenced between the said Merchants and the said Treasurer which was brought before all the Judges of England into the Exchequer Chamber The Merchants pleaded the King's License to the Citizens of Waterford and their Successors for carrying Wooll where they pleased and the Questions before the Judges were two Viz. Whether this Staple-Act Binds Ireland And Secondly Whether the King could grant his License contrary to the Statute and especially where the Statute gives half the Forfeiture to the Discoverer The first Point only relates to our present purpose and herein we find the foresaid Year-Book of 2 Rich. 3. fol. 12. to Report it thus Et ibi in the Exchequer Chamber quoad Primam Questionem Dicebant quod Terr Hibern inter se habent Parliament omnimodo Curprout in Angl. per Idem Parliamentum faciunt Leges Mutant Leges non Obligantur per Statuta in Anglia quia non hic habent Milites Parliamenti and is not that an unanswerable Reason sed hoc intelligitur de terris rebus in terris illis tantum efficiendo sed Personae eorum sunt Subject Regis tanquam Subjecti erunt Obligati ad aliquam rem extra Terram illam faciend contra Statut. sicut habitantes in Calesia Gascoignie Guien c. dum fuere Subjecti Obedientes erunt sub Admiral Angl. de re fact super Altum Mare similit Brev. de Errore de Iudicio reddit in Hibern in Banco Reg. hic in Angl. I have verbatim transcribed this Passage out of the foresaid Year-Book that I might be sure to omit nothing that may give the Objection its full weight And all that I can answer to it is this 1. That when the foresaid Case came a second time under the Consideration of the Judges in the Exchequer Chamber in Mich. 1 Hen. 7. fol. 3. we find it Reported thus Hussey the Chief Iustice said That the Statutes made in England shall bind those of Ireland which was not much gain-said by the other Iudges notwithstanding that some of them were of a contrary Opinion the last Term in his Absence How the Presence and Opinion of the Chief Justice came to influence them now I leave the Reader to judge 2. That Brook in Abridging this Case of the first of Hen. 7. fol. 3. Title Parliament Sec. 90. adds Tamen Nota That Ireland is a Kingdom by it self and hath Parliaments of its own intimating thereby That therefore Hussey's Opinion herein was Unreasonable 3. That 't is manifest if Hussey mean by his words That All Acts of Parliament in England shall bind Ireland it is directly contrary to the Judges Opinion in the second of Richard the Third before recited for within the Land of Ireland they are all positive That the Authority of the Parliament of England will not Affect us They seem at the utmost reach to extend the Jurisdiction of the English Parliament over the Subjects of Ireland only in relation to their Actions beyond Seas out of the Realm of Ireland as they are the King of England's Subjects but even This will Appear Unreasonable when we consider that by the same Argumentation Scotland it self may be bound by English Laws in relation to their Foreign Trade as they are the King of Englands Subjects The Question is Whether England and Ireland be two Distinct Kingdoms and whether they have each their Respective Parliaments neither of which will be deny'd by any Man And if so there can be no Subordination on either side each is compleat in its own Jurisdiction and ought not to interfere with t'other in any thing If being the King of England's Subjects be a Reason why we ought to submit to Laws in relation to our Trade abroad in places where the Parliament of England has no Jurisdiction which have not receiv'd our Assent the People of England will consider whether they also are not the King's Subjects and may therefore by this way of Reasoning be bound by Laws which the King may Assign them without their Assent in relation to their Actions Abroad or Foreign Trade Or whether they had not been Subjects to the King of France had our Kings continu'd their Possession of that Country and there kept the Seat of the Monarchy and then had France been stronger than England it might seem that the Subjects of these Kingdoms might have been bound by Laws made at Paris without their own Consent But let this Doctrine never be mention'd amongst the Free-born Subjects of these Nations Thus I have done with the Three Principal Instances that are usually brought against us on the Stress that is laid on English Acts of Parliament particularly Naming Ireland There have been other Statutes or Ordinances made in England for Ireland which may reasonably be of force here because they were made and Assented to by our own Representatives Thus we find in the White Book of the Exchequer in Dublin in the 9th year of Edward the First a Writ sent to his Chancellour of Ireland wherein he mentions Quaedam Statuta per nos de Assensu Prelatorum Comitum Baronum Communitates Regni nostri Hiberniae nuper apud Lincoln quaedam alia Statuta postmodum apud Eborum facta These we may suppose were either Statutes made at the Request of the States of Ireland to Explain to them the Common Law of England or if they were introductive of New Laws yet they might well be of force in Ireland being Enacted by the Assent of our own Representatives The Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons of Ireland as the Words afore-mention'd do shew And indeed these are Instances so far from making against our Claim that I think nothing can be more plainly for us for it manifestly shews that the King and Parliament of England would not Enact Laws to Bind Ireland without the Concurrence of the Representatives of this Kingdom Formerly When Ireland was but thinly Peopled and the English Laws not fully currant in all parts of the Kingdom 't is probable that then they could not frequently Assemble with conveniency or safety to make Laws in their own Parliaments at home and therefore during the Heats of Rebellions oâ—… Confusion of the Times they were forced to Enact Laws in England But then this was always by their proper Representatives For we find that in the Reign of Edward the Third and by what foregoes 't is plain 't was so in Edward the First
's Time Knights of the Shire Citizens and Burgesses were Elected in the Shires Cities and Burroughs of Ireland to serve in Parliament in England and have so served accordingly For amongst the Records of the Tower of London Rot. Claus. 50. Edw. 3. Parl. 2. Membr 23. We find a Writ from the King at Westminster directed to Iames Butler Lord Justice of Ireland and to R. Archbishop of Dublin his Chancellour requiring them to issue Writs under the Great Seal of Ireland to the several Counties Cities and Burroughs for satisfying the Expences of the Men of that Land who last came over to serve in Parliament in England And in another Roll the 50th of Edw. III. Membr 19. On Complaint to the King by Iohn Draper who was Chosen Burgess of Cork by Writ and served in the Parliament of England and yet was deny'd his Expences by some of the Citizens Care was taken to re-imburse him If from these last mention'd Records it be concluded that the Parliament of England may Bind Ireland it must also be Allow'd that the People of Ireland ought to have their Representatives in the Parliament of England And this I believe we should be willing enough to embrace but this is an Happiness we can hardly hope for This sending of Representatives out of Ireland to the Parliament in England on some occasions was found in process of time to be very Troublesome and Inconvenient and this we may presume was the Reason that afterwards when Times were more settled we fell again into our old Track and regular course of Parliaments in our own Country and hereupon the Laws afore-noted pag. 64. were Enacted Establishing that no Law made in the Parliament of England should be of force in Ireland till it was Allow'd and Publish'd in Parliament here I have said before pag. 85. that I would only consider the more Antient Precedents that are offered to prove That Acts of England particularly Naming Ireland should bind us in this Kingdom and indeed it were sufficient to stop here for the Reason above alledged However I shall venture to come down lower and to enquire into the Modern Precedents of English Acts of Parliament alledged against us But still with this Observation That 't is these we Complain against as Innovations and therefore they ought not to be brought in Argument against us I do therefore again assert that before the Year 1641. there was no Statute made in England introductory of a New Law that interfered with the Right which the People of Ireland have to make Laws for themselves except only those which we have before mentioned and which we have discuss'd at large and submit to the Readers â—…udgment But in the Year 1641. and afterwards in Cromwel's time and since that in King Charles II. and again very lately in King William's Reign some Laws have been made in England to be of Force in Ireland But how this came to pass we shall now Enquire In the 17th Year of K. Charles I. which was in the Year 1642. there were three or four Acts of Parliament made in England for incouraging Adventurers to raise Money for the speedy suppression of the Horrid Rebellion which broke out in Ireland the 23d of October 1641 The Titles of these Acts we have in Pulton's Collection of Statutes But with this Remark That they are made of no Force by the Acts of Setlement and Explanation passed in King Charles Il's time in the Kingdom of Ireland So that in these we are so far from finding Precedents for England's Parliament binding Ireland that they plainly shew that the Parliament of Ireland may Reâ—… an Act passed in England in relation to the Affairs of Ireland For 't is very well known that Persons who were to have Interests and Titles in Ireland by virtue of those Acts passed in England are cut off by the Acts of Settlement and Explanation And indeed there is all the Reason in the World that it should be so and that Acts made in a Kingdom by the Legal Representatives of the People should take place of those made in another Kingdom But however it will be said that by those Acts 't is manifest that England did presume they had such a Right to pass Acts binding Ireland or else they had ne'er done it To which I answer That considering the condition Ireland was in at that time viz. under an horrid Intestine Rebellion flaming in every corner of the Kingdom 't was impossible to have a Parliament of our own yet it was absolutely necessary that something should be done towards suppressing the Violences then raging amongst us And the only means could then be practised was for the Parliament of England to interpose and do something for our Relief and Safety these were the best Assurances could be had at that juncture But when the Storm was over and the Kingdom quieted we see new Measures were taken in a Legal Parliament of our own As to what was done for Ireland in the Parliament of England in Cromwel's time besides the Confusion and Irregularity of all Proceeding in those days which hinders any of them to be brought into Precedent in these times We shall find also that then there were Representatives sent out of this Kingdom who sate in the Parliament of England which then was only the House of Commons We cannot therefore argue from hence that England may bind us for we see they allow'd us Representatives without which they rightly concluded they could not make Laws Obligatory to us I come now to King Charles the 2ds time And in it we shall find the following English Statutes made in which the Kingdom of Ireland is concerned The first is an Act against Importing Cattle from Ireland or other Parts beyond Seas It was only temporary by 18 Ch. 2. c. 2. but made perpetual 20 Ch. 2. c. 7. and 32 Ch. 2. c. 2. This Act however prejudicial to the Trade that was then carried on between Ireland and England does not properly Bind us more than it does any other Country of the World When any thing is Imported and Landed in England it becomes immediately subject to the Laws thereof so that herein we cannot be said properly to be bound Secondly The Acts against Planting Tobacco in England and Ireland 12 Ch. 2. c. 34. and 15 Ch. 2. c. 7. and 22 and 23 Ch. 2. c. 26 c. do positively Bind Ireland But there has never been an Occasion of Executing it here for I have not heard that a Rood of Tobacco was ever Planted in this Kingdom But however that takes not off the Obligation of the Law 'T is only want of our Consent that I urge against that I see no more Reason for sending a Force to Trample down an Acre of Tobacco in Ireland by these Statutes than there would be for Cutting down the Woods of Shelela were there an Act made in England against our Planting or Having Timber Thirdly The Act for
Encouraging Shipping and Navigation by express name Mentions and Binds Ireland and by the last Clause in the Act Obliges all Ships belonging thereto importing any Goods from our Foreign Plantations to touch first at England Fourthly The Acts Prohibiting the Exportation of Wooll from Ireland to any Country except to England do likewise strongly Bind us and by the 12 Car. 2. c. 32. it was made highly penal on us and by the 14th of Car. 2. c. 18. 't is made Felony To these three last Acts I must confess I have nothing to urge to take off their Efficacy Name us they do most certainly and Bind us so as we do not transgress them But how Rightfully they do this is the matter in Question This I am sure of that before these Acts in King Charles the Second's Time the Eldest of which is not over Thirty-Seven years there is not one positive full Precedent to be met with in all the Statute-Book of an English Act Binding the Kingdom of Ireland And on this Account we may venture to assert That these are at least Innovations on us as not being warranted by any former Precedents And shall Proceedings only of Thirty-Seven Years standing be urg'd against a Nation to Deprive them of the Rights and Liberties which they Enjoy'd for Five Hundred Years before and which were Invaded without and against their Consent and from that day to this have been constantly complain'd of Let any English Heart that stands so Iustly in Vindication of his own Rights and Liberties answer this Question and I have done I am now arriv'd at our Present Days under the Happy Government of His Majesty King WILLIAM the Third and I am sorry to reflect That since the late Revolution in these Kingdoms when the Subjects of England have more strenuously than ever Asserted their own Rights and the Liberty of Parliaments it has pleased them to bear harder on their Poor Neighbours than has ever yet been done in many Ages foregoing I am sure what was then done by that Wise and Just Body of Senators was perfectly out of Good Will and Kindness to us under those Miseries which our Afflicted Country of Ireland then suffered But I fear some Men have since that made use of what was then done to other Purposes than at first intended Let us now see what that was and consider the Circumstances under which it was done In the year 1689. when most oâ—… the Protestant Nobility Gentry and Clergy of Ireland were driven out of that Kingdom by the Insolencies and Barbarities of the Irish Papists who were then it Arms throughout the Kingdom and in all Places of Authority under King Iames newly Return'd to them out of France the only Refuge we had to fly to was in England where Multitudes continued for many Months destitute of all manner of Relief but such as the Charity of England afforded which indeed was very Munificent and never to be forgotten The Protestant Clergy of Ireland being thus Banish'd from their Benefices many of them Accepted such small Ecclesiastical Promotions in England as the Benevolence of well dispos'd Persons presented them with But this being directly contrary to a Statute in this Kingdom in the 17 and 18 of Charles the Second Cap. 10. Intituled An Act for Disabling of Spiritual Persons from holding Benefices or other Ecclesiastical Dignities in England or Wales and in Ireland at the same time The Protestant Irish Clergy thought they could not be too secure in avoiding the Penalty of the last mention'd Act and therefore Apply'd themselves to the Parliament of England and obtain'd an Act in the first year of King William and Queen Mary c. 29. Intituled An Act for the Relief of the Protestant Irish Clergy And this was the first Attempt that was made for Binding Ireland by an Act in England since his Majesty's Happy Accession to the Throne of these Kingdoms Afterwards in the same year and same Session Chap. 34. there pass'd an Act in England Prohibiting all Trade and Commerce with France both from England and Ireland This also binds Ireland but was during the Heat of the War in that Kingdom when 't was impossible to have a regular Parliament therein all being in the hands of the Irish Papists Neither do we complain of it as hindring us from corresponding with the King's Enemies for 't is the Duty of all Good Subjects to abstain from that But as Scotland tho' the King's Subjects Claims an Exemption from all Laws but what they Assent to in Parliament so we think this our Right also When the Banish'd Laity of Ireland observ'd the Clergy thus careful to secure their Properties and provide for the worst as well as they could in that Juncture when no other means could be taken by a Regular Parliament in Ireland they thought it likewise adviseable for them to do something in relation to their Concerns And accordingly they obtain'd the Act for the better Security and Relief of their Majesties Protestant Subjects of Ireland 1 W. and M. Ses. 2. c. 9. Wherein King Iames's Irish Parliament at Dublin and all Acts and Attainders done by them are declared void 'T is likewise thereby Enacted that no Protestant shall suffer any Prejudice in his Estate or Office by reason of his absence out of Ireland since December 25. 1685. and that there should be a Remittal of the Kings Quit-Rent from 25 December 1688. to the end of the War Thus the Laity thought themselves secure And we cannot wonder that during the Heat of a Bloody War in this Kingdom when it was impossible to Secure our Estates and Properties by a Regular Parliament of our own we should have recourse to this Means as the only which then could be had We concluded with our selves that when we had obtained these Acts from the Parliament in England we had gon a great way in securing the like Acts to be passed in a regular Parliament in Ireland whenever it should please God to re-establish us in our own Country For we well knew our own Constitution under Poynings Law That no Act could Pass in the Parliament of Ireland till approved of by the King and Privy Council of England And we knew likewise That all the Lords and others of his Majesties Privy Council in England are Members of the Lords or Commons House of Parliament there And that by obtaining their Assent to Acts of Parliament in Favour of the Irish Protestants they had in a manner pre-engaged their Assent to the like Bills when they should hereafter come before them as Privy Councellors in order to be regularly Transmitted to the Parliament of Ireland there to be passed into Laws of that Kingdom But instead of all this to meet with another Construction of what was done herein and to have it pleaded against us as a Precedent of our Submission and absolute Acquiescence in the Jurisdiction of the Parliaments of England over this Kingdom is what we complain
of as an Invasion we humbly conceive of that Legislative Right which our Parliament of Ireland claims within this Kingdom The next Act pass'd in the Parliament of England Binding Ireland is that for Abrogating the Oath of Supremacy in Ireland and Appointing other Oaths 3 and 4 William and Mary c. 2. To this the Parliament convened at Dublin Anno 1692. under Lord Sydney and that likewise Anno 1695. under Lord Capel paid an intire Obedience And by this 't is alledged we have given up our Right if any we had and have for ever acknowledged our Subordination to the Parliament of England But let us a little consider the force of this Argument I readily grant that this and the other fore-mentioned Acts in England since the Revolution when they were made were look'd upon highly in our Favour and for our Benefit and to them as such we have conform'd our Selves But then in all Justice and Equity our Submission herein is to be deem'd purely voluntary and not at all proceeding from the Right we conclude thereby in the Legislators If a Man who has no Iurisdiction over me command me to do a thing that is pleasing to me and I do it it will not thence follow that thereby he obtains an Authority over me and that ever hereafter I must Obey him of Duty If I voluntarily give my Money to a Man when I please and think it convenient for me this does not Authorize him at any time to command my Money from me when he pleases If it be said this allows Subjects to Obey only whilest 't is convenient for them I pray it may be considered whether any Men Obey longer unless they be forced to it and whether they will not free themselves from this Force as soon as they can 'T is impossible to hinder Men from desiring to free themselves from Uneasiness 't is a Principle of Nature and cannot be eradicated If Submitting to an Inconvenience be a less Evil than endeavouring to Throw it off Men will Submit But if the Inconvenience grow upon them and bâ—… greater than the hazard of getting rid of it Men will Offer at puting it by let the Statesman or Divine say what they can But I shall yet go a little further and venture to Assert That the Right of being subject Only to such Laws to which Men give their own Consent is so inherent to all Mankind and founded on such Immutable Laws of Nature and Reason that 't is not to be Alien'd or Given up by any Body of Men whatsoever For the End of all Government and Laws being the Publick Good of the Commonwealth in the Peace Tranquility and Ease of every Member therein whatsoever Act is contrary to this End is in it self void and of no effect And therefore for a Company of Men to say Let us Unite our selves into a Society and let us be absolutely Govern'd by such Laws as such a Legisâ—…ator without ever Consulting us shall devise for us 't is always to be understood Provided we find them for our Benefit For to say We will be Govern'd by those Laws whether they be Good or Hurtful to us is absurd in it self For to what End do Men joyn in Society but to avoid Hurt and the Inconveniencies of the State of Nature Moreover I desire it may be considered whether the General Application of the Chief part of the Irish Protestants that were at that time in London to the Parliament at Westminster for obtaining these Laws may not be taken for their Consent and on that Account and no other these Acts may acquire their Binding Force I know very well this cannot be look'd upon as a Regular and Formal Consent such as might be requisite at another more favourable Juncture But yet it may be taken talis qualis as far as their Circumstances at that time would allow till a more convenient Opportunity might present it self I am sure if some such Considerations as these may not plead for us we are of all his Majesties Subjects the most Unfortunate The Rights and Liberties of the Parliament of England have received the greatest Corroborations since his Majesties Accession to the Throne and so have the Rights of Scotland but the Rights of the People of Ireland on the other hand have received the greatest Weakening under his Reign by our Submission as 't is alledg'd to these Laws that have been made for us This certainly was not the Design of his Majesty's Glorious Expedition into these Kingdoms That we are told by Himself whom we cannot possibly mistrust was to Assert the Rights and Liberties of these Nations and we do humbly presume that his Majesty will be graciously pleased to permit us to Enjoy the Benefits thereof And thus I have done with the Fourth Article proposed As to the Fifth viz. The Opinions of the Learned in the Laws relating to this Matter 't is in a great measure dispatch'd by what I have offered on the Fourth Head I shall therefore be the more brief thereon And I think indeed the only Person of Note that remains to be considered by us is the Lord Chief Justice Cook a Name of great Veneration with the Gentlemen of the Long Robe and therefore to be treated with all Respect and Deference In his Seventh Report in Calvin's Case he is proving that Ireland is a Dominion Separate and Divided from England for this he quotes many Authorities out of the Year-Books and Reports and amongst others he has that which I have before mention'd pag. 91. 2 R. 3. f. 12. which he Transcribes in this manner Hibernia habet Parliamentum faciunt Leges nostra Statuta non ligant eos quia non mittunt Milites ad Parliamentum and then adds in a Parenthesis which is to be understood unless they be specially named sed Personae eorum sunt subjecti Regis sicut inhabitantes in Calesia Gasconia Guyan The first thing I shall observe hereon is the very unfaithful and broken Citation of this Passage as will manifestly appear by comparing it with the true Transcript I have given thereof before pag. 91. Were this all 't were in some measure pardonable But what cannot be excused is the Unwarrantable Position in his Parenthesis without the least colour or ground for it in his Text. Herein he concludes down right Magisterially So it must be this is my Definitive Sentence as if his Plain Assertion without any other Reason ought to prevail nay even point blank against the irrefragable Reason of the Book he quotes I confess in another place of Calvin's Case viz. fol. 17. b. he gives this Assertion a Colour of Reason by saying That tho' Ireland be a Distinct Dominion from England yet the Title thereof being by Conquest the same by Iudgment of Law might by Express Words be bound by the Parliaments of England How far Conquest gives a Title we have Enquired before But I would fain know what Lord Cook means by
Iudgment of Law Whether he means the Law of Nature and Reason or of Nations or the Civil Laws of our Commonwealths in none of which Senses I conceive will he or any Man be ever able to make out his Position Is the Reason of England's Parliament not Binding Ireland Because we do not send thither Representatives And is the Efficacy of this Reason taken off by our being Named in an English Act Why should sending Representatives to Parliament Bind those that send them Meerly because thereby the Consent of those that are Bound is obtain'd as far as those sort of Meetings can possibly permit which is the very Foundation of the Obligation of all Laws And is Ireland's being Named in an English Act of Parliament the least step towards obtaining the Consent of the People of Ireland If it be not then certainly my Lord Cook 's Parenthesis is to no purpose And 't is a wonder to me that so many Men have run upon this vain Imagination meerly from the Assertion of this Judge For I challenge any Man to shew me that any one before him or any one since but from him has vended this Doctrine And if the bare Assertion of a Judge shall Bind a whole Nation and Dissolve the Rights and Liberties thereof We shall make their Tongues very powerful and constitute them greater Lawgivers than the greatest Senates I do not see why my Denying it should not be as Authentick as his Affirming it 'T is true He was a great Lawyer and a powerful Judge but had no more Authority to make a Law than I or any Man else But some will say He was a Learned Judge and may be supposed to have Reason for his Position Why then does he not give it us And then what he Asserts would Prevail not from the Authority of the Person but from the Force of the Reason The most Learned in the Laws have no more power to make or alter a Constitution than any other Man And their Decisions shall no farther prevail than supported by Reason and Equity I conceive my Ld. Ch. Justice Cooke apply'd himself so wholly to the Study of the Common Laws of England that he did not enquire far into the Laws of Nature and Nations if he had certainly he could never have been Guilty of such an Erroneous Slip He would have seen demonstrably that Consent only gives Humane Laws their Force and that therefore the Reason in the Case he quotes is unanswerable Quia non mittunt Milites ad Parliamentum Moreover the Assertion of Cooke in this point is directly contrary to the whole tenour of the Case which he cites For the very Act of Parliament on which the Debate of the Judges did arise and which they deemed not to be of Force in Ireland particularly names Ireland So that here again Ld. Cooke's Error appears most plainly For this I refer to the Report as I have exactly delivered it before pag. 90 91. By which it appears clearly to be the unanimous Opinion of all the Judges then in the Exchequer Chamber That within the Land of Ireland the Parliaments of England have no Jurisdiction whatever they may have over the Subjects of Ireland on the open Seas And the reason is given Quia Hibernia non mittit Milites ad Parliamentum in Angliâ This Assertion likewise is inconsistent with himself in other parts of his Works He tells us in his 4th Inst. pag. 349. That 't is plain that not only King John as all Men allow but Henry the Second also the Father of King John did Ordain and Command at the Instance of the Irish That such Laws as had been in England should be Observ'd and of Force in Ireland Hereby Ireland being of it self a distinct Dominion and no part of the Kingdom of England was to have Parliaments holden there as in England And in pag. 12. he tells us That Henry the Second sent a Modus into Ireland directing them how to hold their Parliaments But to what end was all this if Ireland nevertheless were subject to the Parliament of England The King and Parliaments of these Kingdoms are the supream Legislators If Ireland be subject to Two its Own and that of England it has Two Supreams 't is not impossible but they may Enact different or contrary Sanctions which of these shall the People Obey He tells us in Calvin's Case fol. 17. b. That if a King hath a Christian Kingdom by Conquest as Henry the Second had Ireland after King John had given to them being under his Obedience and Subjection the Laws of England for the Government of that Country no succeeding King could alter the same without Parliament Which by the way seems directly contradictory to what he says concerning Ireland six lines below this last cited passage So that we may observe my Lord Cook enormously stumbling at every turn in this Point Thus I have done with this Reverend Judge and in him with the only Positive Opinion against us I shall now consider what our Law-Books offer in our Favour on this Point To this purpose we meet a Case fully apposite reported in the Year-Book of the 20th of Henry the 6th fol. 8. between one Iohn Pilkington and one A. Pilkington brought a Scire Facias against A. to shew Cause why Letters Patents whereby the King had granted an Office in Ireland to the said A. should not be repeal'd since the said Pilkington had the same Office granted to him by former Letters Patents of the same King to be occupied by himself or his Deputy Whereupon A. pleaded That the Land of Ireland time out of Memory hath been a Land separated and distinct from the Land of England and Ruled and Governed by the Customs of the same Land of Ireland That the Lords of the same Land which are of the King's Council have used from time to time in the absence of the King to Elect a Iustice who hath Power to Pardon and Punish all Felons c. and to call a Parliament and by the Advice of the Lords and Commonalty to make Statutes He alledged further That a Parliament was Assembled and that it was Ordain'd by the said Parliament That every Man who had an Office within the said Land before a certain day shall occupy the said Office by himself otherwise he should forfeit He shew'd that Pilkington Occupied by a Deputy and that therefore his Office was void and that the King had granted the said Office to him the said A. Hereupon Pilkington Demurr'd in Law and it was debated by the Judges Yelverton Fortescue Portington Markham and Ascough whether the said Prescription in relation to the State and Government of Ireland be good oâ—… void in Law Yelverton and Portington held the Prescription void But Fortescue Markham and Ascough held the Prescription good and that the Letters Patents made to A were good and ought not to be Repeal'd And in this it was agreed by Fortescue and Portington That if
a Tenth or Fifteenth be granted by Parliament in England that shall not Bind Ireland although the King should send the same Statute into Ireland under his Great Seal Except they in Ireland will in their Parliament Approve it Because they have not any Commandment by Writ to come to the Parliament of England And this was not Denied by Markham Yelverton or Ascough The Merchants of Waterford's Case which I have observed before pag. 90. as Reported in the Year Book of the 2d of Richard the 3d. fol. 11 12 is notorious on our behalf but needs not be here repeated The Case of the Prior of Lanthony in Wales mentioned by Mr. Pryn against the 4th Inst. ch 76. p. 313. is usually cited against us But I conceive 't is so far from proving this that 't is very much in our Behalf The Case was briefly thus The Prior of Lanthony brought an Action in the Com. Pleas of Ireland against the of Prior Mollingar for an Arrear of an Annuity and Judgment went against the Prior of Mollingar hereon the Prior of Mollingar brought a Writ of Error in the King's Bench of Ireland and the Judgment was affirmed Then the Prior of Mollingar Appeal'd to the Parliament in Ireland held 5 Hen. 6. before Iames Butler Earl of Ormond and the Parliament Revers'd both Judgments The Prior of Lanthony removed all into the King's Bench in England but the King's Bench refused to intermeddle as having no Power over what had pass'd in the Parliament of Ireland Hereupon the Prior of Lanthony Appeal'd to the Parliament of England And it does not appear by the Parliament Roll that any thing was done on this Appeal all that is Entred being only the Petition it self at the end of the Roll. Vid. Pryn against the 4th Instit. chap. 76. p. 313. Now whether this be a Precedent proving the Subordination of our Irish Parliament to that of England I leave the Reader to judge To me it seems the clear contrary For first we may observe the King's Bench in England absolutely disclaiming any Cognisance of what had passed in the Parliament of Ireland And next we may observe That nothing at all was done therein upon the Appeal to the Parliament of England Certainly if the Parliament of England had thought themselves to have a Right to Enquire into this Matter they had so done one way or t'other and not left the Matter Undetermin'd It has ever been acknowledged that the Kingdom of Ireland is inseparably annex'd to the Imperial Crown of England The Obligation that our Legislature lies under by Poyning's Act 10 H. 7. c. 4. makes this Tye between the two Kingdoms indissoluble And we must ever own it our Happiness to be thus Annex'd to England And that the Kings and Queens of England are by undoubted Right ipso facto Kings and Queens of Ireland And from hence we may reasonably conclude that if any Acts of Parliament made in England should be of force in Ireland before they are Received there in Parliament they should be more especially such Acts as relate to the Succession and Settlement of the Crown and Recognition of the Kings Title thereto and the Power and Iurisdiction of the King And yet we find in the Irish Statutes 28 Hen. VIII c. 2. An Act for the Succession of the King and Queen Ann and another Chap. 5. declaring the King to be Supream Head of the Church of Ireland both which Acts had formerly pass'd in the Parliament of England So likewise we find amongst the Irish Statutes Acts of Recognition of the Kings Title to Ireland in the Reigns of Henry the Eighth Queen Elizabeth King Iames King Charles the Second King William and Queen Mary By which it appears that Ireland tho' Annex'd to the Crown of England has always been look'd upon to be a Kingdom Compleat within it self and to have all Jurisdiction to an Absolute Kingdom belonging and Subordinate to no Legislative Authority on Earth Tho' 't is to be Noted these English Acts relating to the Succession and Recognition of the Kings Title do particularly Name Ireland As the Civil State of Ireland is thus Absolute within it self so likewise is our State Ecclesiastical This is manifest by the Canons and Constitutions and even by the Articles of the Church of Ireland which differ in some things from those of the Church of England And in all the Charters and Grant of Liberties and Immunities to Ireland we still find this That Holy Church shall be Free c. I would fain know what is meant here by the word Free Certainly if our Church be Free and Absolute within it self our State must be so likewise for how our Civil and Ecclesiastical Government is now interwoven every body knows But I will not enlarge on this head it suffices only to hint it I shall detain my self to our Civil Government Another Argument against the Parliament of England's Jurisdiction over Ireland I take from a Record in Reyley's Placita Parliamentaria pag. 569. to this effect In the 14th of Edward the Second the King sent his Letters Patents to the Lord Justice of Ireland leting him know That he had been moved by his Parliament at Westminster that he would give Order that the Irish Natives of Ireland might enjoy the Laws of England concerning Life and Member in as large and ample manner as the English of Ireland enjoy'd the same This therefore the King gives in Commandment and orders accordingly by these his Letters Patents From hence I say we may gather That the Parliament of England did not then take upon them to have any Iurisdiction in Ireland for then they would have made a Law for Ireland to this Effect but instead thereof they Apply to the King that he would interpose his Commands and give Directions that this great Branch of the Common Law of England should be put in Execution in Ireland indifferently to all the Kings Subjects there pursuant to the Original Compact made with them on their first Submission to the Crown of England Let us now consider the great Objection drawn from a Writ of Error 's lying from the Kings Bench of England on a Judgment given in the Kings Bench in Ireland which proves as 't is insisted on that there is a Subordination of Ireland to England and that if an Inferiour Court of Judicature in England can thus take cognizance of and over-rule the Proceedings in the like Court of Ireland it will follow that the Supream Court of Parliament in England may do the same in relation to the Proceedings of the Court of Parliament in Ireland It must be confess'd that this has been the constant Practice and it seems to be the great thing that induced my Lord Cook to believe that an Act of Parliament in England and mentioning or Including Ireland should Bind here The Subordination of Ireland to England he seems to infer from the Subordination of the Kings
any Power to Controul the Chancery in Ireland because as Lambard says p. 69 70. The Chancery did follow the King as the Kings Bench did and that as he tells us out of the Lord Chief Justice Scroope the Chancery and the Kings Bench were once but one Place But if this be the ground of the Jurisdiction of the Kings Bench in England over the Kings Bench in Ireland as I am fully perswaded it is the Parliament in England cannot from hence claim any Right of Jurisdiction in Ireland because they claim a Iurisdiction of their own and their Court is not the Kings Court in that proper and strict sence that the Kings Bench is But granting that the Subordination of the Kings Bench in Ireland to the Kings â—…ch in England be rightly concluded from a Writ of Error out of the latter â—…ying on a Judgment in the former I see no Reason from thence to conclude that therefore the Parliament of Ireland is Subordinate to the Parliament in England unless we make any one sort of Subordination or in any one part of Jurisdiction to be a Subordination in all Points and all parts of Jurisdiction The Subjects of Ireland may Appeal to the King in his Bench in England for the Expounding of the Old common and Statute-Law of Ireland will it therefore follow that the Parliament of England shall make New Laws to bind the Subjects in Ireland I see no manner of Consequence in it unless we take Expounding Old Laws or Laws already made in the-Kings Bench and making New Laws in Parliament to be one and the same thing I believe the best Logician in Europe will hardly make a Chain of Syllogisms that from such Premises will regularly induce such a Conclusion To close this Point We find that a Judgment of the Kings Bench in Ireland may be Removed by a Writ of Error to the Parliament in Ireland But the Judgment of the Parliament of Ireland was never question'd in the Parliament of England This Appears from the Prior of Lanthony's Case aforegoing I shall conclude this our Fifth Article with a memorable Passage out of our Irish Statutes which seems to strengthen what we have delivered on the Business of a Writ of Error as well as the chief Doctrine I drive at and that is 28 H. VIII Chap. 19. The Act of Faculties This Statute is a Recital at large of the English Act of the 25 Hen. VIII c. 21. In the Preamble of which English Act 't is Declared That this Your Graces Realm Recognizing no Superiour but Your Grace hath been and yet is free from any Subjection to any Mans Laws but only such as have been Devised within this Realm for the Wealth of the same or to such others as by Sufferance of Your Grace and Your Progenitors the People of the Realm have taken at their Free Liberties by their own Consent and have bound themselves by long Use and Custom to the Observance of c. This Declaration with the other Clauses of the said English Act is verbatim recited in the Irish Act of Faculties and in the said Irish Act it is Enacted That the said English Act and every thing and things therein contained shall be Established Affirmed Taken Obey'd and Accepted within this Land of Ireland as a good and perfect Law and shall be within the said Land of the same Force Effect Quality Condition Strength and Vertue to all Purposes and Intents as it is within the Realm of England if so then the said Clause declares our Right of being bound only by Laws to which we Consent as it does the Right of the People of England And that all Subjects within the said Land of Ireland shall enjoy the Profit and Commodity thereof in like manner as the Kings Subjects of the Realm of England I am now Arrived at our Sixth and Last Article Proposed viz. The Reasons and Arguments that may be be farther Offered on one side and t'other in this Debate I have before taken notice of the Title England pretends over us from Conquest I have likewise enquired into the Precedents on one side and t'other from Acts of Parliament from Records and from Reports of the Learned in the Laws There remains another Pretence or two for this Subordination to be Considered and one is founded on Purchase 'T is said That vast Quantity of Treasure that from time to time has been spent by England in Reducing the Rebellions and carrying on the Wars of Ireland has given them a just Title at least to the Lands and Inheritances of the Rebels and to the absolute Disposal thereof in their Parliament And as particular Examples of this we are told of the great Sums Advanced by England for suppressing the Rebellion of the Irish Papists in 41. and Opposing the late Rebellion since King WILLIAM's Accession to the Throne To this I Answer That in a War there is all Reason imaginable that the Estates of the Unjust Opposers should go to repair the the Damage that is done This I have briefly hinted before But if we consider the Wars of Ireland we shall perceive they do not resemble the common Case of Wars between two Foreign Enemies Ours are rather Rebellions or Intestine Commotions that is The Irish Papists rising against the King and Protestants of Ireland and then 't is plain that if these Latter by the Assistance of their Brethren of England and their Purse do prove Victorious the People of England ought to be fully Repaid But then the manner of their Payment and in what way it shall be Levied ought to be left to the People of Ireland in Parliament Assembled And so it was after the Rebellion of 41. The Adventurers then were at vast Charges and there were several Acts of Parliament in England made for their Re-imbursing by disposing to them the Rebels Lands But after all it was thought Reasonable that the Parliament of Ireland should do this in their own way and therefore the Acts of Settlement and Explanation made all the former English Acts of No Force or at least did very much Alter them in many Particulars as we have Noted before In like manner we allow that England ought to be repaid all their Expences in supressing this late Rebellion All we defire is That in Preservation of our own Rights and Liberties we may do it in our own Methods regularly in our own Parliament And if the Re-imbursement be all that England stands upon what availeth it whether it be done this way or that way so it be done We have an Example of this in Point between England and Holland in the Glorious Revolution under His Present Majesty Holland in Assisting England Expended 600000 Pounds and the English Parliament fairly repay'd them It would have look'd oddly for Holland to have insisted on Disposing of Lord Powis's and other Estates by their own Laws to re-imburse themselves 'T is an Ungenerous thing to villifie good Offices I am far from doing
Multitudes of Men therefore utterly without our Consent we could in such sort be at no Mans Commandment living And to be commanded we do consent when that Society whereof we are part hath at any time before consented without revoking the same after by the like Universal Agreement Wherefore as any Mans Deed past is good as long as himself continueth so the Act of a Publick Society of Men done five hundred years sithence standeth as theirs who presently are of the same Societies because Corporations are Immortal we were then alive in our Predecessors and they in their Successors do still live Laws therefore Humane of what kind soever are available by Consent c. And again But what matter the Law of Nations doth contain I omit to search the strength and vertue of that Law is such that no particular Nation can lawfully prejudice the same by any their several Laws and Ordinances more then a Man by his Private Resolutions the Law of the whole Commonwealth or State wherein he liveth for as Civil Law being the Act of a whole Body Politick doth therefore over-rule each Civil part of the same Body so there is no Reason that any one Commonwealth of it self should to the Prejudice of another annihilate that whereupon the whole World hath Agreed To the same purpose may we find the Universal Agreement of all Civilians Grotius Puffendorf Lock 's Treat Government c. No one or more Men can by Nature challenge any Right Liberty or Freedom or any Ease in his Property Estate or Conscience which all other Men have not an Equally Iust Claim to Is England a Free People So ought France to be Is Poland so Turky likewise and all the Eastern Dominions ought to be so And the same runs throughout the whole Race of Mankind Secondly 'T is against the Common Laws of England which are of Force both in England and Ireland by the Original Compact before hinted It is Declared by both Houses of the Parliament of England 1 Iac. cap. 1. That in the High Court of Parliament all the whole Body of the Realm and every particular Member thereof either in Person or by Representation upon their own Free Elections are by the Laws of this Realm deem'd to be Personally present Is this then the common Law of England and the Birth-right of every Free-born English Subject And shall we of this Kingdom be deny'd it by having Laws imposed on us where we are neither Personally nor Representatively present My Lord Cooke in his 4th Inst. cap. 1. saith That all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and all the Commons of the whole Realm ought ex Debito Justiciae to be Summon'd to Parliament and none of them ought to be Omitted Hence it is call'd Generale Concilium in the Stat. of Westminst 1. and Commune Concilium because it is to comprehend all Persons and Estates in the whole Kingdom And this is the very Reason given in the Case of the Merchants of Waterford foregoing why Statutes made in England should not bind them in Ireland Quia non habent Milites hic in Parliamento Because they have no Representatives in the Parliament of England My Lord Hobbard in the Case of Savage and Day pronounced it for Law That whatever is against Natural Equity and Reason is against Law Nay if an Act of Parliament were made against Natural Equity and Reason that Act was void Whether it be not against Equity and Reason that a Kingdom regulated within it self and having its own Parliament should be Bound without their Consent by the Parliament of another Kingdom I leave the Reader to consider My Lord Cooke likewise in the first Part of his Institutes fol. 97. b. saith Nihil quod est contra Rationem est Licitum And in the old Modus Tenendi Parliamenta of England said to be writ about Edward the Confessor's time and to have been Confirmed and Approved by William the Conqueror It is expresly declared That all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Knights Citizens and Burgesses ought to be summoned to Parliament The very same is in the Modus sent into Ireland by Henry the 2d And in King Iohn's Great Charter dated 17. Iohannis 't is granted in these words Et ad habend Commune Concilium Regni de Auxiliis Scutagiis Assidendis Submoneri faciemus Arâ—…hiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Comites Majores Barones Regni Sigillatim per Literas Nostras faciemus submoneri in generali per Vicecomites omnes alios c. Math. Paris ad An. 17. Iohann All are to be Summoned to Parliament the Nobility by special Writts the Commons by general Writts to the Sheriffs And is this the Common Law of England Is this part of those Liberae Consuetudines that were contained in the Great Charter of the Liberties of the People of England And were so solemnly granted by Henry II. King Iohn and Henry the 3d to the People of Ireland that they shou'd Enjoy and be Governd by and unto which they were Sworn to be Obedient And shall they be of Force only in England and not in Ireland Shall Ireland Receive these Charters of Liberties and be no Partakers of the Freedoms therein contained Or do these words signifie in England one thing and in Ireland no such thing This is so repugnant to all Natural Reason and Equity that I hope no Rational Man will Contest it I am sure if it be so there 's an end of all Speech amongst Men All Compacts Agreements and Societies are to no purpose 3. It is against the Statute Laws both of England and Ireland this has been pretty fully disuss'd before however I shall here again take notice That in the 10. of Henry the 4th it was Enacted in Ireland that Statutes made in England should not be of Force in Ireland unless they were Allowed and Published by the Parliament of Ireland And the like Statute was made the 29th of Henry the 6th And in the 10th Year of Henry the 7th Chap. 23 Irish Statutes The Parliameâ—… which was held at Drogheda beforâ—… Sir Christopher Preston Deputy to Iaspar Duke of Bedford Lieutâ—… nant of Ireland was declared Void for this Reason amongst others That there was no General Summons of the said Parliament to all the Shires but only to Four And if Acts of Parliament made in Irelanâ—… shall not Bind that People because some Counties were omitted how much less shall either their Persons or Estates be Bound by those Acts made in England whereat no one County or Person of that Kingdom is present In the 25tâ—… of Edward the 1st Cap. 6. It was Enacted by the Parliament of England in these Words Moreover from henceforth we shall take no manner of Aid Taxes or Prizes but by the Common Assent of the Realm And again in the Statute of Liber ties by the same King Cap. 1. Dâ—… Tallag non Concedend it is Enacted in these Words No Tallage or Aid
pag. 47. And in Pilkington's Case aforemention'd Fortescue declared That the Land of Ireland is and at all times hath been a Dominion Separate and Divided from England How then can the Realms of England and Ireland being Distinct Kingdoms and Separate Dominions be imagin'd to have any Superiority or Iurisdiction the one over the other 'T is absurd to fancy that Kingdoms are Separate and Distinct meerly from the Geographical Distinction of Territories Kingdoms become Distinct by Distinct Iurisdictions and Authorities Legislative and Executive and as Rex est qui Regem non habet so Regnum est quod alio non Subjicitur Regno A Kingdom can have no Supream 't is in it self Supream within it self and must have all Jurisdictions Authorities and Praeeminencies to the Royal State of a Kingdom belonging or else 't is none And that Ireland has all these is declared in the Irish Stat. 33 Hen. VIII c. 1. The chief of these most certainly is the Power of Making and Abrogating its own Laws and being bound only by such to which the Community have given their Consent Sixthly It is against the Kings Prerogative that the Parliament of England should have any Co-ordinate Power with Him to introduce New Laws or Repeal Old Laws Established in Ireland By the Constitution of Ireland under Poyning's Act the King's Prerogative in the Legislature is advanced to a much higher Pitch than ever was Challenged by the Kings in England and the Parliament of Ireland stands almost on the same bottom as the King does in England I say almost on the same Bottom for the Irish Parliament have not only a Negative Vote as the King has in England to whatever Laws the King and his Privy Councils of both or either Kingdom shall lay before them but have also a Liberty of Proposing to the King and his Privy Council here such Laws as the Parliament of Ireland think expedient to be pass'd Which Laws being thus Proposed to the King and put into form and Transmitted to the Parliament here according to Poyning's Act must be Pass'd or Rejected in the very Words even to a Tittle as they are said before our Parliament we cannot alter the least Iota If therefore the Legislature of Ireland stand on this Foot in relation to the King and to the Parliament of Ireland and the Parliament of England do Remove it from this Bottom and Assume it to themselves where the Kings Prerogative is much Narrower and as it were Reversed for there the King has only a Negative Vote I humbly conceive 't is an Incroachment on the Kings Prerogative But this I am sure the Parliament of England will be always very Tender of and His Majesty will be very loth to have such a Precious Jewel of his Crown handled rufly The Happiness of our Constitutions depending on a Right Temperament between the Kings and the Peoples Rights Seventhly It is against the Practice of all former Ages Wherein can it appear that any Statute made in England was at any time since the Reign of Henry the Third allowed and put in practice in the Realm of Ireland without the Authority of the Parliament of Ireland Is it not manifest by what foregoes that from the Twentieth of King Henry the Third to the Thirteenth of Edward the Second and from thence to the Eighteenth of Henry the Sixth and from thence to the Thirty-Second of Henry the Sixth and from thence to the Eighth of Edward the Fourth and from thence to the Tenth of Henry the seventh there was special care taken to Introduce the Statutes of England such of them as were necessary or convenient for this Kingdom by degrees and always with Allowance and Consent of the Parliament and People of Ireland And since the General Allowance of all the English Acts and Statutes in the Tenth of Henry the Seventh there have several Acts of Parliament which were made in England in the Reigns of all the Kings from that Time Successively to this very Day been particularly Receiv'd by Parliament in Ireland and so they become of force here and not by reason of any General Comprehensive words as some Men have lately fancied For if by General Comprehensive Words the Kingdom of Ireland could be bound by the Acts of Parliament of England what needed all the former Receptions in the Parliament of Ireland or what use will there be of the Parliament of Ireland at any time If the Religion Lives Liberties Fortunes and Estates of the Clergy Nobility and Gentry of Ireland may be dispos'd of without their Privity and Consent what Benefit have they of any Laws Liberties or Priviledges granted unto them by the Crown of England I am loth to give their Condition an hard Name but I have no other Notion of Slavery but being Bound by a Law to which I do not Consent Eighthly 'T is against several Resolutions of the Learned Iudges of former times in the very Point in Question This is manifest from what foregoes in the Case of the Merchants of Waterford Pilkington's Case Prior of Lanthony's Case c. But I shall not here inlarge farther thereon Ninthly The Obligation of all Laws having the same Foundation if One Law may be Imposed without Consent any Other Law whatever may be Imposed on us Without our Consent This will naturally introduce Taxing us without our Consent and this as necessarily destroys our Property I have no other Notion of Property but a Power of Disposing my Good as I please and not as anotheâ—… shall Command Whatever another may Rightfully take from me without my Consent I have certainly no Property in To Tax me without Consent is little better if at all than down-right Robbing me I am sure the Great Patriots of Liberty and Property the Free Peo Ple of England cannot think of such a thing but with Abhorrence Lastly The People of Ireland are left by this Doctrine in the Greatest Confusion and Uncertainty Imaginable We are certainly bound to Obey the Supream Authority over us and yet hereby we are not permitted to know Who or What the same is whether the Parliament of England or that of Ireland or Both And in what Cases the One and in what the Other Which Uncertainty is or may be made a Pretence at any time for Disobedience It is not impossible but the Different Legislatures we are subject to may Enact Different or Contrary Sanctions Which of these must we obey To conclude all I think it highly Inconvenient for England to Assume this Authority over the Kingdom of Ireland I believe there will need no great Arguments to convince the Wise Assembly of English Senators how inconvenient it may be to England to do that which may make the Lords and People of Ireland think that they are not Well Used and may drive them into Discontent The Laws and Liberties of England were granted above five hundred years ago to the People of Ireland upon their Submissions to the
Crown of England with a Design to make them Easie to England and to keep them in the Allegiance of the King of England How Consistent it may be with True Policy to do that which the People of Ireland may think is an Invasion of their Rights and Liberties I do most humbly submit to the Parliament of England to Consider They are Men of Great Wisdom Honour and Iustice and know how to prevent all future Inconveniencies We have heard Great Out-cries and deservedly on Breaking the Edict of Nantes and other Stipulations How far the Breaking our Constitution which has been of Five Hundred years standing exceeds that I leave the World to judge It may perhaps be urg'd That 't is convenient for the State of England that the Supream Council thereof should make their Jurisdiction as Large as they can But with Submission I conceive that if this Assumed Power be not Iust it cannot be convenient for the State What Cicero says in his Offices Nihil est Utile nisi idem sit Honestum is most certainly true Nor do I think that 't is any wise necessary to the Good of England to Assert this High Jurisdiction over Ireland For since the Statutes of this Kingdom are made with such Caution and in such Form as is prescribed by Poyning's Act 10 H. 7. and by the 3d and 4th of Phil. and Mar. and whilest Ireland is in English hands I do not see how 't is possible for the Parliament of Ireland to do any thing that can be in the least prejudicial to England But on the other hand If England assume a Iurisdiction over Ireland whereby they think their Rights and Liberties are taken away That their Parliaments are rendred meerly nugatory and that their Lives and Fortunes Depend on the Will of a Legislature wherein they are not Parties there may be ill Consequences of this Advancing the Power of the Parliament of England by breaking the Rights of another may in time have ill Effects The Rights of Parliament should be preserved Sacred and Inviolable wherever they are found This kind of Government once so Universal all over Europe is now almost Vanished from amongst the Nations thereof Our Kings Dominions are the only Supporters of this noble Gothick Constitution save only what little remains may be found thereof in Poland We should not therefore make so light of that sort of Legislature and as it were Abolish it in One Kingdom of the Three wherein it appears but rather Cherish and Encourage it wherever we meet it FINIS Introduction and Occasion of this Disquisition * Bishop of Derry in the House of Lords and Prohibiting Exportation of our Woollen Manufacture in the House of Commons Subject of this Enquiry Britain's first Expedition into Ireland * Giraldus Cambr. Hib. Expug Lib. I. C. 1 Hen. II. comes into Ireland Irish submit to him Ireland whether ever Conquer'd * Mr. Selden will not allow that ever H. 2. used this Stile Tit. Hon. Par. 2. G. 5. Sect. 26. Suppressing Rebellions whether a Conquest * Bishop of Salisbury's Pastoral Letter What Title is obtain'd by Conquest No Title gain'd by an Unjust Conquest What Title by a Just Conquest None over the Assisters in the Conquest None over the Non-Opposers Just Conquerour intitled to the Lives of the Opposers Just Conquerour how far impower'd over the Posterity of the Opposers How far over their Estates Practise of Conquerors otherwise Concessions granted by a Conquerour whether Obligatory What Concessions have been made from the Crown of England to the Kingdom of Ireland By Henry II. Irish Modus Tenendi Parliamentum a Tit. Hon. Par. 2. C. 5. Sect. 26. Edit Lond. An. 1672 b Against Cook 's 4th Instit C. 76. Parliaments very early in Ireland a Against the 4th Inst. c. 76. p. 249. a Togograph Hibern l 3. c. 18 Hib. Expug l. 11. c. 33 34. b Hoveden Annal parspost p. 302. Brampton Chr. Col. 1071. Knighton de Even Angl. l. c. c. 10 col 2394 2395. Pol. Virg. Hist. Angl. l. 13. Radul de Diceto Walsingbam c. Original Compact for Ireland King Iohn made King of Ireland By this Ireland made an Absolute separate Kingdom a Seldens Tit. Hon. Par. 1. C. 8 Sect. 5. Usher Archbibishop of Armagh of the Religion of the Antient Irish Cap. 11. b Act. Concil Constant. Ses. 28. MS. in Bib. Reg. not in the Printed Acts. Ireland in what sense Annex'd to England King Iohn comes a second time into Ireland The People submit to him Concessâ—… from Hen. III. a Pryn against the 4th Inst. c. 76. p. 250. Pa. 1 H. III. m. 13. intus Record out of Mr. Petyt of the Antiquity of Parliaments in Ireland Rot. 38 H. III in 4. Hibernta Farther Concessions from Hen. III b Against Cook 's 4th Instit p. 252. Claus. 12 H. III in 8 de Legibus Consuetudinibus Observandis in Hibern Recapitula tion a Fourth Instit b Against the 4th Instit. c Placita Parliamentaria English Laws Established in Ireland Law of Parliament Common Law Statute Law Statute-Law of England from the Norman Conquest to Hen. III. Law of Edward the Confessor a Selden 〈◊〉 speciâ—… ad eadmerum pag 17â—… Of Wil. Conq. b Leges W. 1. Cap. 63. apud Selden in notâ—…â—…d eadmerum p. 192. Of Hen. I. c Vid. Selden ut supra Of Hen II. Of K. John d Mat. Paris ad an 1215. pag. 253. c. Of Hen. III. a Cook 's Pref. to the 2d Inst. Engl. Statutes since the 9th Hen. III. introduced in Ireland Statutes of Merton Marlebr Westm. Gloucest Vid. Lib. Rubr. Scaccar Dubl a Annals of Ireland at the End of Camden's Britan. Edit 1637. page 196 197 c. b Ibid. p. 160. Pryn against the 4th Instit. Chap 76. All English Statutes before the 10th of Hen. VII in force in Ireland a Cook 's 4th Instit. Cap. 76. P. 351. b Vid. Irish Stat. English Statutes Declaratory of the Common Law in force in Ireland English Acts introductive of a New Law not of force in Ireland a Irish Stat. 13 C. 2. c. 2. 13 C. 2. c. 3. 14 15 C. 2. c. 1. 14 15 C. 2. c. 19. 17 18 C. 2. c. 3. 17. 18 C. 2. c. 11. English Stat. 12 C. 2. c. 12. 12 C. 2. c. 3. 12 C. 2. c. 14 12 C. 2. c. 24. 12 C. 2. c. 33. 16 17 C. 2. c. 5. * For we had two several Acts transmitted to us at different times to this very purpose One we rejected in the Lord Sydâ—…eys Government t'other we pass'd under the Lord Capell Objections Answer'd Objection from the Stat. of Rape Object English Statutes comprehending Ireland by general Words Act against Appeals to Rome Acts of First Fruits and Faculties a Title in the English Statutes is No Imposition shall be paid to the Bishop of Rome High-Commission-Court By the same Reason Scotland may be bound English Statutes naming Ireland Or dinatio pre Statu Hiberniae Staple-Act Merchants of Waterford's Case Members from Ireland in the Parliament of England Modern Acts of the Parliament of England naming Ireland Acts in favour of Adventurers in 1641. Acts in Cromwels time Cattle Act. Tobacco Act. Navigation Act. Note Exporting Wooll from Ireland is made penal by the Irish. Stat. 13 Hen. 8. c. 2. 28 Hen. 8. c. 17. But both these Statutes are obsolete The like may we observe of the 11 Eliz. c. 10. 13 El. c. 4. English Acts Binding Ireland since King William's Reign Act for the Protestant Irish Clergy Act against Commerce with France Act for Security of the Protestants of Ireland Act appointing New Oaths The Opinions of the Lawyers thereon Lord Chief Justice Cook 's Opinion Discuss'd a 20 H. 6. 8. Pilkington ' s Case 32 H. 6. 25. 20 Eliz. Dyer 360. Flowd Com. 360. Opinions of other Judges in Favour of Ireland Pilkiâ—…s Case a This Statute we may reckon amongst the number of those that are lost during the long Intervals of our Irish Acts noted before page 65. to be aboue 118 Years Merchants of Waterfords Case Prior of Lanthonys Case a Rot. Parl. An. 8. H. 6. in ult Argument from Acts of Succession and Recognition pass'd in Ireland Ireland's State Ecclesiastical Independent Argument from a Record in Reyley a 14 Ed. 2. Par. 2. Memb 21 Int. Objection drawn from a Writ of Error Declaration in the Irish Act of Faculties Farther Reasons offered in behalf of Ireland England's Title to Ireland by Purchase Object Ireland prejudicial to England's Trade therefore to be Bound Object Ireland a Colony Against the Rights of Mankind Consent only gives Law force Against the Common Law of England Against the Statute Law both of England and Ireland a See before pag. 65. b Pultons Col. Eng. Stats Edit 1670. pag. 63. c ibid. page 75. d ibid. page 113. e 10 H. 7. c. 22 a 28 H 8. c. 4. 28 H. 8. c. 20. 3 4 Ph. M. c. 4. 11 Eliz. Ses. 2. c. 1. 11 Eliz. Ses. 3. c. 8. Against several Concessions made to Ireland Inconsistent with the Royalties of a Kingdom Against the Kings Prerogative Against the Practice of former Ages Against the Resolution of Judges Destroys Property Greates Confusion Inconvenient to England to Assume this Power