original Contract for he saith that the King caused them to receive and swear to be governed by the Laws of England But in your next Precedent you seem to qualify the Severity of that King's Orders by what Sir Edward Cook says viz. That he settled the Laws of England in Ireland by the voluntary Acceptance and Allowance of the Nobility and Clergy pag. 29. And he did likewise allow them the Freedom of holding Parliaments in Ireland as a separate and distinct Kingdom from England Please to note that Sir Edward Cook wrote about Five Hundred Years after King Henry II. went into Ireland and about Four Hundred and Fifty after Matt. Paris wrote and you would now bring his Opinion against the constant Practice of the Parliaments of England for Five Hundred Years Besides you say p. 80 and 116. That Sir Edward Cooke was of Opinion that Ireland was to be governed by the Statute Laws made in England where it was specially named therein and in the last of these Pages you exclaim against him for this his Opinion I shall not examine your Quotations whether they agree with the Originals or no my Profession being not the Law I am not furnish'd with those Books nor do I think it much to the purpose what Sir Edward Cook saith in this matter yet I must take notice that you pen the Words Holding of Parliaments in Ireland in a different Character from the following Sentence As a separate and distinct Kingdom from England which gives me reason to suppose the last was vour to find out the Original did the Decision of this Controversy depend upon Sir Edward Cook 's Opinion Sir Edward Cook in this Case should have given a Transcript of that Grant and you should have transcribed it as you do afterwards the Modus how to hold their Parliaments pag. 29. and yet then there would have arose this Question Whether the Kings of England can legally exempt their English and British Subjects for so you call the People of Ireland pag. 20. from their Obedience to the Legislative Power of this Kingdom by any Charters or Grants whatsoever I am sure I never heard of any such Precedent but on the contrary it is charged as a Crime on the late King James in an Act made Primo G. M. Cap. 2. That he assumed and exercised a Power of dispencing with and suspending of Laws and the Execution of Laws without Consent of Parliament But here I see you will raise this Objection against my manner of expressing my self and say That when Grants are made by a King to any Country that doth submit it self to his Authority all Persons who shall afterwards settle themselves therein though before subject to other Laws are now â—o try therefore the People of England when they setled Ireland were to be governed by the Laws granted to Ireland to this I answer That the Constitution of the Government to which this Submission is made ought specially to be considered and then there will arise this 2d Question Whether a Submission made to the K. of England doth not include a Submission to the Legislative Authority of England I am apt to think it does and I believe it will appear by what follows in this Discourse that the Parliaments of England have ever been of the same Opinion But be this how it will Ireland you allow submitted it self on the Terms of being governed by the Laws of England so this Objection seems rather to be formal than material as to the Subject we are upon This Modus you say pag. 30. For the most part agrees with the Modus tenendi Parl ' in England which is a loose Argument for you know that one Word in a Grant may alter the whole Sence and we both agree that the Parliament of Ireland may make Laws but the Question is whether Ireland is not bound by the Statute Laws of England as all our Plantations are Yet after all you confess pag. 30. That this very Modus though strenuously asserted by Sir Edward Cook is disputed by Mr. Selden and Mr. Pryn two learned Antiquaries will you then bring it as an Argument against the constant Practice of the Parliament of England for Five Hundred Years past But grant it had not been disputed at all I do not see what it will make for your purpose One Reason you say why Mr. Pryn doubts this Modus to be sent over by King Henry the Second is because there were no Sheriffs established in Ireland in Henry the Second's Time pag. 31. Yet the Word Vicecomes is in it all you answer is pag. 32. That perhaps the King intended to constitute Sheriffs and yet the first you find establish'd there were in the Days of King John which was about Fifty Years after and you say pag. 30. That where this Form was altered from the Modus tenendi Parl ' in England 't is only to fit it the better for the Kingdom of Ireland if so 't is strange the Word Vice-comes had not been left out seeing there was then no such Officer in Ireland But pag. 36. you are pleased to allow that there is reason to doubt the certainty of this Record unless we will depend on the Credit of the Bishop of Meath therefore you return to your former Argument viz. that there were Parliaments early in the Kingdom of Ireland which may be probable but whether the Parliament of England then lost their Power there is the thing I dispute and you do not prove You say pag. 36 37. That Henry the Second held a General Council of the Clergy at Cashall wherein he rectifyed many Abuses in the Church and established sundry Ecclesiastical Laws agreeable to those in the Church of England this in England we call a Convocation not a Parliament You say pag. 37. Pari desiderio Regis Imperio se subjiciunt omnibus igitur hoc modo consummatis in Consilio habito apud Lismore Leges Anglicae ab omnibus sunt gratantur receptae juratoriâ cautione praestitâ confirmatae saith Matth. Paris from hence you infer pag. 38. That they should enjoy the like Liberties and Immunities and be governed by the same mild Laws both Civil and Ecclesiastical as the People of England and I see no Reason to the contrary all we differ in is whether they were thereby discharged from being subject to the Statute Laws made in England this seems contrary to the Judgment of the Parliament in Henry the Third's Days to whom Matth. Paris was Historiographer else certainly they would not have made Laws to bind Ireland as I shall by and by show they did You proceed pag. 38. thus From all which it is manifest that there were no Laws imposed upon the People of Ireland by any Authority of the Parliament of England nor any Laws introduced into that Kingdom by King Henry the Second but by the Consent and Allowance of the People of Ireland and the Reason you give for it is this For both the
Item We Will and Grant that no Licence or Priviledge to make Passage by English-men Irish-men or Welch-men of Wools c. out of the same Realm and Lands c. Cap. 10. Sect. 2. We Will and Establish that one Weight one Measure and one Yard be through all the Land c. Here Ireland is comprehended under these words throughout all the Land which I suppose will without Objection be admitted to be the Kingdom of England if Ireland is not comprehended under those general Words then Wales is not and then one Weight and Measure was appointed for England and another permitted to be in Wales but if Wales is comprehended under them then Ireland is also And this you may know by considering what Weights and Measures are settled in Ireland and when Cap. 11. Item We have Ordained and Established That all Merchants c. that do bring Wines c. to the Staples Cities c. within our said Realm and Lands Cap. 12. Item no Merchant c. shall carry out of our Realm of England Wools Leather c. Here Ireland is again comprehended under the general Words our Realm of England or else Wales is not and the purport of the Act shows that for can it be thought that the People of Wales and Ireland had Liberty to export Wools Leather c. into Foreign Parts when this was denied to the People of England Cap. 13. Item We Will and Grant That if any Merchant Privy or Stranger be Robbed of his Goods upon the Sea and the Goods so Robbed come into any Parts within our Realm or Lands Cap. 14. Item We have Ordained That all Merchants Privy or Strangers may safely carry and bring within our said Realm and Lands Plate of Silver c. and in the next Sect. Provided always that no Money have common course within our said Realm and Lands but the Money of Gold and Silver of our Coin So in Cap. 17. the Words Realm and Lands are thrice expressed as comprehending England Wales and Ireland By all which it appears to me That in those Days there was no thoughts of Ireland's being a separate Kingdom or making Laws for themselves any other than By-Laws But they were supposed to be part of the Kingdom of England and under the Jurisdiction of the Legislative Power thereof and yet this was long after the pretended Grant of Henry II. to his Son John to be King of Ireland as a separate Kingdom which does confirm me in what I have said before that what is now call'd the Parliament of Ireland was formerly no more than a Summoning the Great Men of the Kingdom together and commanding them to obey the Laws made in England as you have it in the Writ sent over by King Henry the Third to Richard du Burgh mentioned before which is transcribed by you P. 53. Coram eis publice legi faciatis c. The Parliament of England in those days was very careful of their Power and did not easily part with their Jurisdiction they presently put in their Claim so soon as the Kings of England got any footing either by Conquest or Submission In the Statutes made at Westminster 27 September the 11th of Edward III. Anno 1337. I find Laws made to bind Scotland cap. 1 2 4. are repealed so I cannot see their Contents But cap. 3. runs thus Item It is accorded and established That no Merchant c. shall bring c. into the said Lands of England Ireland Wales and Scotland within the King's Power And cap. 5. runs thus Item it is accorded That all the Clothworkers of strange Lands c. which will come into England Ireland Wales or Scotland I do not find any Acts of this nature made either before that time or after which put me upon perusing the Histories and Chronicles of England about that time How saith That Anno Regni 5 Ed. 3. 1331. Edward Baliol who was Son to John Baliol sometime King of Scotland was by the Assistance of the said King Edward crowned King of Scots but afterward he resigned it to the said King Edward of England and remained under his Protection many years after Baker saith That to hold a good Correspondence with the King of England hereafter he doth him homage for his Realm of Scotland And no doubt had Scotland still continued so the guilded flourishes of a separate Kingdom would not have tempted the Parliament of England to have parted with their Authority of making Laws to govern it and can it be thought they should so easily let Ireland slip it doth not appear so by any Act of their own and for the Acts of others they can be no Precedents against them But to proceed There are yet other Reasons why Ireland should be more bound by the Statute-Laws of England then Scotland Ireland hath been always accounted so much a part of the Imperial Crown of this Kingdom that on the late Revolution when the Crown of England was settled on the then Prince and Princess of Orange Stat. primo Guil. Mar. cap. 2. They are declared King and Queen of Ireland as well as England and by that Recognition they had been so though the Parliament of Ireland had opposed it whereas the Case was not the same with Scotland The Rights and Priviledges of the People of Ireland were also settled by the same Statute equal to those of the People of England But the Rights and Priviledges of the People of Scotland were not Nor was this Recognition made in their Names they took their own time to do it and to settle the Rights and Priviledges of their own Kingdom as they pleased being a separate Kingdom without dependance on the Kingdom of England I wonder you hang so much in this Paragraph on Ireland's being a separate Kingdom in the Person of King John no Man of Sence who had examined that matter would make any dependance thereon and such I take you to be therefore it looks as if you had a mind to betray and give up the Cause did I not think you a Gentleman of greater sincerity you had certainly found a better Argument in your original Contract could you have made it out Page 85. You proceed to take into consideration such English Statutes as particularly name Ireland and these you divide into Ancient Precedents and Modern Instances and conclude That if the former do not make against you the latter are only Usurpations made upon you I think this fully answer'd before But I will take your own way and follow the Thred of your own Arguments though I think you spin it too long The Ancient Precedents of English Statutes designing to bind Ireland you say are first Statutum Hiberniae 14 Hen. 3. Secondly Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae 17 Edw. 1. Thirdly An Act concerning Staples 2 Hen. 6. pag. 85 86. And are these all What think you of the Statute of Merchants made at Westminster 13 Edw. 1. Anno 1258 wherein are these words Sect.
all was well in Ireland p. 44. you say That on the Death of King Richard I. King John in the Twelfth Year of his Reign went again into Ireland Anno 1210 and then it was that Mat. Paris saith the 20 Reguli came to him to Dublin and did him Homage p. 45. you say That Henry III. came to the Crown Anno 1216 and the same Year sent over the Charter from Bristol the 12th of November And in p. 46. you say He sent them another in the February following from Gloucester p. 52. you say That Henry III. in the Twelfth Year of his Reign sent over a Writ to Hugo de Burgh to Summon the States of Ireland In all this time we hear nothing of Wars Tumults Heats or Rebellions but quite contrary For p. 49 and 50. you set forth a Writ which you have from Mr. Petit or rather a Letter written by King Henry III's Queen Anno 38. of his Reign wherein she desires his Subjects of Ireland to assist the King with Men and Money to defend his Land of Vascony which was then Invaded by the King of Castile Thus far I quote you from your own Book and now you tell us p. 96. That the People of Ireland could not Assemble with conveniency to make Laws at Home by reason of Heats of Rebellions or Confusion of Times and that this caused them to come to England to do it as appears by the Writ you mention p. 95. which was in the Ninth Year of Edward I. who succeeded his Father Henry III. Really Sir you have given me so much trouble to run over your Book again to shew how inconsistent you are in your Discourse about this Matter that I could almost be angry with you But I am willing to take this pains not to convince you that you are in an Error I imagine that will be labour lost a Gentleman of your Parts must needs know it already but to make it plain lest any Body else should be drawn aside by what you write Well then on the Credit of this Writ I will grant you that Ireland came to England for Laws in the Ninth of Edward I. And then I hope you will not oppose this Ancient Precedent because it is of your own producing But to get clear of this you tell us p. 96. That these Laws were made by your own Representatives And to prove that this was so in the Reign of Edward III. for you say its plain 't was so in Edward I.'s time you tell us There were Knights Citizens and Burgesses elected in the Shires Cities and Buroughs of Ireland to serve in Parliament in England and so served accordingly And to prove this you tell us p. 97. That 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 James Butler Lord Justice of Ireland and to R. Archbishop of Dublin his Chancellor requiring them to issue Writs under the Great Seal of Ireland to the several Counties Cities and Boroughs 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 50 Edw. 3. Memb. 19. on complaint to the King by John Draper who was chosen Burgess of Cork by Writ and served in the Parliament of England and yet was denied his Expences by some of the Citizens care was taken to reimburse him Pray what use will you make of these Records to prove that the Kingdom of Ireland is not subject to the Legislative Power of the Parliament of England I think you have brought the Matter home and have mistaken the side for instead of proving that it is not you have proved positively that it is and particularly that from the Ninth of Edward the First to the Fiftieth of Edward the Third the Representatives of Ireland came over to sit in the Parliament of England and how long before or how long after they did so I cannot tell The Writ you mention of Edward I. hath reference to Statutes made before that time at Lincoln and York which I judge must be in the Days of Henry II. Richard I. or King John because I do not find that any Parliament was held in either of these Places from the beginning of our Statute-Books and then where is your separate Kingdom of Ireland under King John And why have you so often asserted That there was never any Law made in England to bind Ireland till the Modern Instances you mention Pray what means all the Clamour you have made against our late Kings and the Parliaments of England for infringing your Liberties and breaking through the very design of setling Communities and putting you in a worse Condition than you were in the state of Nature You are very much beholding to the ingenious Mr. Lock for the fineness of your Argument about the State of Conquest c. in the former part of your Book which I do not at all blame you for because I think no Man can handle a Subject smoothly whereon he hath treated that doth not follow his Copy but I blame you for not applying those excellent Arguments more fitly But to return to the Matter P. 58. You confessed there was no Parliament in Ireland before King Henry III.'s time and you have not any where shewn that it was settled there during his Reign and now you acknowledge that Ireland sent Representatives to sit in the Parliament of England in the Reigns of Edward I. Edw. II. and Edward III. his Successors where Laws were made to bind it Pray then why do you exclaim against their putting this Power in Execution still To this you say p. 97. It must be allowed that the People of Ireland ought to have their Representatives in the Parliament of England And this you believe they would be willing enough to embrace but this is a Happiness you cannot hope for I have before told you that you are represented there already but you are willing some Representatives should come over from Ireland to sit there you say they did so once and you are willing they should do it again pray why did you not continue that great Happiness you now so much prize To this you Answer p. 98. 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 I cannot but observe what a Hodge-podge you would make by the wrong Inferences you endeavour to draw from every thing only because you would cloud the Truth you allow you once sent Representatives to the Parliament here but you would now have this to be only upon some occasions I hope it was not on occasion of Wars and Tumults during the prosperous Reigns of Edw. I. and Edw. III. if it was you do not tell us what Wars and Tumults they were 'T is much that Edward III. who extended his Arms to
before in Ireland by a Statute in that Kingdom 17 18 Car. 2. To free themselves from the Penalty of this Act they thought it necessary to procure the fore-mentioned Statute which the Parliament of England I perceive kindly granted them and they thought it sufficient to continue them their Rights to their Promotions in Ireland notwithstanding that Irish Act. So that here you see in Fact the Opinion of the Clergy of Ireland touching the Powers in dispute between us notwithstanding any Gloss you may think fit to put on it But now the Act is before me let us see what were the Thoughts of the Parliament of England when they made that Law whether they thought it would be so precarious as to be in the discretion of the Parliament of Ireland to allow it because you seem to infer that it was so pag. 107. when you say The Protestant Irish Clergy thought they could not be too secure in avoiding the Penalty of the Irish Act and therefore applyed themselves to the Parliament of England and obtained this Act. No sure the Parliament thought it binding else it had argued Levity in them to make a Law which they thought they wanted Power to see put in Execution But let the Law it self speak the Sence of the Legislators I must be forced to transcribe the words of the Statute which are these That no Ecclesiastical Person of what dignity or degree soever promoted or beneficed in the Kingdom of Ireland and who hath been enforced to forsake the said Kingdom or hath so done for fear of the Irish Rebels and being of the Protestant Religion who are or shall be presented promoted collated instituted or inducted to any Church or Benefice with Cure or without Cure or to any Ecclesiastical Promotion whatsoever in the Kingdom of England shall thereby or by acceptance thereof lose any Ecclesiastical Benefice or Promotion in the said Kingdom of Ireland but that he and every of them be continued and enabled still to hold and enjoy his Benefice and Promotion in the said Kingdom of Ireland of what dignity or degree soever the same was You see here the Parliament takes no notice of any Law made in Ireland and consequently of no Parliament there at least which should stand in the way of their Authority 'T is true there follows these words Any Law Statute or Canon notwithstanding I hope you do not take this to be meant of Laws Statutes and Canons made in Ireland 't is not probable it should but if you will have it so then you see that the Parliament of England thought this Law strong enough to command Obedience in Ireland although contradictory to the Laws made by the Parliament there The next Statute you mention is pag. 108. cap. 34. of the same Sessions intituled An Act for prohibiting all Trade and Commerce with France By this you say Ireland is bound However you have found a Salvo for this also 'T was say you 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 What then should the Parliament of England therefore assume a Power which did not belong to them why did they not make Laws to bind Flanders where the War was hotter then in Ireland and the Subjects of the King of Spain under the Irregular Oppression of the French King But had not the Parliament of England exercised this Power before you your self say they had in Charles the Second's days p. 102. So then this was not the Reason though you are pleased to shadow it over with this Vail it was because they thought Ireland to be under their Jurisdiction and that this Act would be necessary for the Publick Weal of the Kingdom of England and the Lands belonging to it But mistrusting the weight of this Reason you proceed and say pag. 108. Neither do we complain of it as hindring us from corresponding with the King's Enemies for it is the duty of all good Subjects to abstain from that What then are Statute Laws such Cobweb things as to be binding only when no Complaints are made against them This is a worse Reason then the other I admit the Protestant Gentlemen of Ireland to be good Subjects but what if some ill Men amongst you should have complained of this Law and broke through it for their private advantage had it not force enough to have caused it's Penalties to be put in Execution against them Surely the Parliament thought it had else they did ill to name Ireland in the Body of that Statute and their Reason for it doubtless was That they thought Ireland subject to their Authority as a Kingdom depending on England which they did not take Scotland to be else in all probability they would have extended that Act thither also 'T was not out of love to the French King that they left Scotland out Please to note That this Law likewise binds Jersey Garnsey Alderney Sark and Isle of Man the last was once a Kingdom of it self separate from England and in the hands of the Scots and of the Norwegians The next you mention is pag. 109. An Act made 1 Gul. Mar. Sess 2. cap. 9. intituled An Act for the better Security and Relief of his Majesty's Protestant Subjects of Ireland And what say you to this Why pag. 108. you tell us That the banished Laity of Ireland observing 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 advisable for them to do something in Relation to their Concerns And accordingly they obtained this Act. Very careful indeed they were to apply themselves for Paper Laws to the Parliament of England if they thought they had no Power to make them A Man would have supposed that the Parliament of Ireland in their first Sessions after the Reduction of that Kingdom would have deprived the Clergy-men concerned in procuring the other Act of all their Ecclesiastical Preferments in Ireland for the wrong step they made because 't was they began the Dance for the Laity who only followed their Example And here you have the Opinion of the Laity of Ireland as you had before that of the Clergy and by your Writing I suppose you were one of them But you still harp on the same String 't was because you could have no Regular Parliament in Ireland though I perceive you had a farther drift in obtaining this Act then the Clergy had in procuring the other for you proceed p. 109. We concluded with our selves that when we had obtain'd these Acts from the Parliament in England we had gone 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 Was this really your Reason Why then