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
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
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
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
is the Brutal Force the Aggressor has used that gives his Adversary a Right to take away his Life as a noxious Creature But 't is only Damage sustain'd that gives Title to another Mans Goods It must be confess'd that the Practice of the World is otherwise and we commonly see the Conqueror whether Iust or Unjust by the Force he has over the Conquer'd compels them with a Sword at their Brest to stoop to his Conditions and submit to such a Government as he pleases to Afford them But we Enquire not now what is the Practice but what Right there is to do so If it be said the Conquer'd submit by their own Consent Then this allows Consent necessary to give the Conquerour a Title to Rule over them But then we may Enquire whether Promises Extorted by Force without Right can be thought Consent and how far they are Obligatory And I humbly conceive they Bind not at all He that forces my Horse from me ought presently to Restore him and I have still a Right to retake him So he that has forced a Promise from me ought presently to Restore it that is quit me of the Obligation of it or I may chuse whether I will perform it or not For the Law of Nature obliges us only by the Rules she prescribes and therefore cannot oblige me by the Violation of her Rules such is the Extorting any thing from me by Force From what has been said I presume it pretty clearly appears that an Unjust Conquest gives no Title at all That a Iust Conquest gives Power only over the Lives and Liberties of the Actual Opposers but not over their Posterity or Estates otherwise than as before is mentioned and not at all over those that did not Concur in the Opposition They that desire a more full Disquisition of this Matter may find it at large in an Incomparable Treatise concerning the True Original Extent and End of Civil Government Chap. 16. This Discourse is said to be written by my Excellent Friend IOHN LOCKE Esq Whether it be so or not I know not This I am sure whoever is the Author the Greatest Genius in Christendom need not disown it But granting that all we have said in this Matter is Wrong and granting that a Conquerour whether Iust or Unjust obtains an Absolute Arbitrary Dominion over the Persons Estates Lives Liberties and Fortunes of all those whom he finds in the Nation their Wives Posterity c. so as to make perpetual Slaves of them and their Generations to come Let us next Enquire whether Concessions granted by such a Victorious Hero do not bound the Exorbitancy of his Power and whether he be not Obliged strictly to Observe these Grants And here I believe no Man of Common Sense or Justice will Deny it None that has ever Consider'd the Law of Nature and Nations can possibly hesitate on this matter the very Proposing it strikes the Sense and Common Notions of all Men so forcibly that it needs no farther proof I shall therefore insist no longer on it but hasten to consider how far this is the Case of Ireland And that brings me naturally to the fourth Particular propos'd vizt To shew by Precedents Records and History what Concessions and Grants have been made from time to time to the People of Ireland and by what steps the Laws of England came to be introduced into this Kingdom We are told by Matth. Paris Historiographer to Hen. III. that Henry the Second a little before he left Ireland in a Publick Assembly and Council of the Irish at Lismore did cause the Irish to Receive and swear to be Govern'd by the Laws of England Rex Henricus saith he antequam ex Hibernia Rediret apud Lismore Concilium Congregavit ubi Leges Angliae sunt ab omnibus gratanter receptae Iuratoriâ cautione prestitâ Confirmatae Vid. Matth. Paris ad An. 1172. Vit. H. 2. And not only thus but if we may give Credit to Sir Edward Cook in the 4th Instit. Cap. 1. and 76. and to the Inscription to the Irish Modus Tenendi Parliamentum it will clearly Appear that Henry the Second did not only settle the the Laws of England in Ireland and the Jurisdiction Eclesiastical there by the Voluntary Acceptance and Allowance of the Nobility and Clergy but did likewise Allow them the Freedom of Holding of Parliaments in Ireland as a separate and distinct Kingdom from England and did then send them a Modus to Direct them how to Hold their Parliaments there The Title of which Modus runs thus Henricus Rex Angliae Conquestor Dominus Hiberniae c. Mittit hanc formam Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus Prioribus Comitibus Baronibus Iusticiariis Vicecomitibus Majoribus Praepositis Ministris omnibus Fidelibus suis Terrae Hiberniae Tenendi Parliamentum In primis Summonitio Parliamenti praecedere debet per Quadraginta Dies And so forth This Modus is said to have been sent into Ireland by Hen. II. for a Direction to Hold their Parliaments there And the sense of it agrees for the most part with the Modus Tenendi Parl. in England said to have been Allowed by William the Conquerour when he obtain'd that Kingdom where 't is alter'd 't is only to fit it the better for the Kingdom of Ireland I know very well the Antiquity of this Modus so said to be Transmitted for Ireland by Hen. II. is question'd by some Learned Antiquaries particularly by Mr. Selden and Mr. Pryn who deny also the English Modus as well as this But on the other hand my Lord Chief Justice Cook in the 4th Instit. pag. 12. and 349. does strenuously Assert them both And the late Reverend and Learned Dr. Dopping Bishop of Meath has Published the Irish Modus with a Vindication of its Antiquity and Authority in the Preface There seems to me but two Objections of any Moment raised by Mr. Pryn against these Modi The One relates both to the English and Irish Modus the other chiefly strikes at the Irish. He says the Name Parliament so often found in these Modi was not a name for the great Council of England known so early as these Modi Pretend to I confess I am not prepared to Disprove this Antiquary in this Particular But to me it seems reasonable enough to Imagine that the Name Parliament came in with William the Conqueror 'T is a Word perfectly French and I see no reason to doubt it's Coming in with the Normans The other Objection affects our Irish Modus for he tells us That Sheriffs were not establish'd in Ireland in Henry II's time when this Modus was pretended to be sent hither yet we find the Word Vicecomes therein To this I can only Answer That Hen. II. intending to Establish in Ireland the English form of Government as the first and Chief step thereto he sent them Directions for Holding of Parliaments Designing afterwards by degrees and in
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
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
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
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.
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
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