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.
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
If not let me ask you Why should the Laws made by the Parliament of England have more force in Ireland than those made in Scotland There can be no other reason given for it but this That Ireland is subject to the Jurisdiction of the Parliament of England but is not subject to the Jurisdiction of the Parliament of Scotland Had you told us what Acts of Parliament these were we might have judged whether they were Declaratory or no but since you have omitted that I think the Answer I have given sufficient P. 77. You proceed to consider the Objections and Difficulties that are moved against this your Proposition that the English Laws become passable in Ireland only by the Consent of the People and Parliament thereof these you say arise from Precedents and Passages in your own Law Books that seem to prove the contrary which shews that as Cocksure as you are in this Particular it hath been disputed and doubted by your own Lawyers and in your own Parliaments too if I take the matter right The first you mention is in p. 78. you say That in the Irish Act concerning Rape passed Anno 8 Edvardi 4. 't is expressed that a doubt was conceived whether the English Statute of the Sixth of Richard the Second Chap. 6. ought to be of Force in Ireland without the Confirmation thereof in the Parliament of Ireland all the use I shall make of this is that your Parliaments then doubted this thing Your second Objection is p. 80. That though 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 his Majesty's Dominions or by particularly naming of Ireland are and shall be of force in this Kingdom These are your Words and This you say was a Doctrine first broached directly by William Hussy Lord Chief Justice of the King's-Bench in England in the First Year of Henry VIIth and of late revived by the Lord Chief Justice Cooke Pray Sir do you speak in earnest Was this Doctrine never broach'd before the Reign of Henry the VIIth What think you of the several Acts of Parliament made in the several Kings Reigns since Henry the Third down to Henry the Seventh in some whereof they mention Ireland in others they do not do you not believe those several Parliaments thought there was some difference in those Acts But when the Lord Chief Justice Hussy and Sir Edward Cook after him both Persons of great Station in the Law broach'd this Opinion what was done in the Parliament of Ireland thereon Did they ever by any publick Act declare these Oracles of the Law to be in the wrong I do not find by any thing you say that they did and do believe you would not have let such an Argument have lain asleep if you could have brought it therefore I conclude they did not but on the contrary it doth appear that all Laws of that Nature have ever since been observed and obeyed in Ireland and many of them of much later Dates and now I wonder you should come to dispute it by your private Opinion One hundred and fifty Years after the Death of Hussy when in all this time the Body of Ireland hath not undertaken it But I will examine your Arguments against this The first is That the King and his Privy-Council in England have often transmitted into Ireland to be passed into Laws there English Statutes wherein the general Words Of all His Majesty's Dominions or Subjects were comprehended from whence you conclude that they were of a contrary Opinion p. 81 82. Suppose this to be so the most you can conclude from it is that it obliquely shews the King and Privy-Councils Opinion and doth not the Parliaments passing such Acts as well shew the Opinion of the Legislative Power of England But what if the King and Privy-Council of England do as you say actum agere shall this make the Parliaments Intentions in making those Laws void No certainly no more than the Parliament of Ireland's confirming them shall prove they were not binding before for whither the Parliament of Ireland accept or refuse those Laws that are made by the Parliament of England with intention to bind Ireland they are never the more or less binding there P. 84. You proceed and tell us You see no more reason for binding Ireland by the English Laws under the general Words Of all His Majesty's Dominions or Subjects than there is for binding Scotland by the same Truly Sir I believe you else I should wonder to have seen you taking so much Pains But because I am of a different Opinion let me consider this Matter with you Ireland is by several Laws made both in this Kingdom and in that annexed and joined to the Imperial Crown of England but Scotland tho' it has been often sought for never yet obtained that favour Ireland you confess submitted it self to King Henry the Second and thereby became at first annexed to the Crown of England one of the Terms of which Submission was That it should be govern'd by the English Laws whereas Scotland was united to it in the Person of King James and since that by its voluntary Recognition of King William and Queen Mary still keeping its own Laws and leaving a possibility of its becoming a separate Kingdom again which Ireland never can be The People of Ireland I mean the English and Britains which you say p. 20. are a Thousand for One of the antient Irish were once subject to the Legislative Power of England which the People of Scotland never were but always a separate Kingdom The People in Ireland have all the Privileges of English Men and thereby under the easiest Government in Europe which the People in Scotland have not whilst they remain in that Kingdom The People in Ireland are governed by the Common Laws of England one part whereof is That thore Laws may be inlarged abridged or altered by the Parliament of England but the People in Scotland are and ever were governed by their own Laws Ireland is mentioned in several of our Statutes as part of the Kingdom of England and joined with Wales as a dependant thereon which Scotland never was thought to be viz. 27 Edward III. Sess 2. in the Preamble of that Statute are these Words Sect. 2. For the Damage which hath notoriously come as well to us and the Great Men as to the People of our Realm of England and of our Lands of Wales and Ireland Cap. 1. it goes on First that the Staple of Wools c. within our said Realm and Lands Cap. 2. Item to replenish the said Realm and Lands with Money and Plate c. Cap. 3. Item we Will and Grant that all Merchants c. through our Realm and Lands Cap. 4. Item for as much as no Staple can be profitable for us and for our Realm and Lands Cap. 7.
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
did not you set it forth in your Petition to the Parliament of England and endeavour with them to have got it mentioned in their Act which might also have been a salvo to the Priviledge of the Parliament of Ireland hereafter But I cannot think it was so because you very well knew by a long Experience that Acts of Parliament made in England wanted not the Authority of the Parliament of Ireland to confirm them and consequently you needed it not in this Nor was there any reason to fear this Act 's being pleaded against you as a Precedent of your Submission and absolute acquiescence in the Jurisdiction of the Parliaments of England over the Kingdom of Ireland which you complain of p. 110. for I should take the Authority of the Parliament of England to be very young if it depended thereon But now you have done with this Act give me leave to take it up You say That therein King James his Irish Parliament at Dublin and all Acts and Attainders done by them are declared void p. 109. I find then that King James had a Parliament in Ireland which Parliament must be lawfully Assembled if Ireland is a separate Kingdom and not subject to the Statute-Laws of England For though he had abdicated the Kingdom of England and that it was so declared by the Parliament here who had settled the Crown on King William and Queen Mary yet supposing Ireland to be a separate Kingdom that Declaration would no more have reached it than it did Scotland till the same was done by the Parliament there Hence then it follows either that you did tacitely confess Ireland to be no separate Kingdom or that the Parliament of England had Power to declare void an Irish Parliament and all Acts and Attainders done by them for you say That you obtained this Act for your better Security and Relief Please to consider whether I am not in the right as to this Matter The next Act you mention is p. 111. viz. An Act for Abrogating the Oath of Supremacy in Ireland and appointing other Oaths 3. 4. Gul. Mar. This you say binds Ireland and to this and the forementioned Acts you say you conformed your selves because they were in your Favour and you hope that a voluntary Submission to the Commands of another who hath no Jurisdiction over you as you suppose the Parliament of England hath not because they are pleasing to you shall give him no Authority to command you ever after as he pleases p. 112. If this were the Case I confess you have reason on your side but seeing it is not but that the Parliament of England hath made Laws to bind Ireland ever since it was united to the Imperial Crown thereof I hope the Obedience you paid to these Statutes shall not be called a Voluntary Submission which you have Power to throw off when you please except you are of Opinion with what follows viz. That Subjects ought not to obey longer than they see it convenient for them unless they be forced to it which Force they are to free themselves from as soon as they can I am apt to think the Parliament of England will not like this Principle and I do not see how the Parliament of Ireland can neither for if this be allowed pari ratione you may throw off their Jurisdiction also when you please But I will return to this last Act which you say p. 111. was made 3 4 Gul. Mar. It hath slipt my Collection so I can observe nothing from it save what you say your self viz. That the Parliament convened at Dublin Anno 1692. under Lord Sidney and that likewise Anno 1695 under Lord Caple paid an entire Obedience to it From whence I conclude that those two Parliaments thought it their Duty so to do else it would seem very imprudent in them because they could not but conclude that it would be interpreted an Acknowledgment of the Jurisdiction of the Parliament of England over them not that I urge it against them for a Precedent in favour of the Parliament of England 't will imply a weakness in their Authority if they wanted it which they do not by your own Confession for you say p. 64. That several English Acts of Parliament were allowed in the Parliament of Ireland held 10 Hen. 7. tho' I think that allowance utterly unnecessary and rather an Incroachment on the Jurisdiction of the Parliament of England But why did the Parliament of England Anno 3 4 Gul. Mar. make this Law at a time when the Parliament of Ireland was so near sitting which you say was Anno 1692 Truly though I cannot give their Reasons for it and it will not be good Manners for me to ask them yet I will adventure my Thought which is That they knew they had Power to make it and that the Parliament of Ireland whenever they met was bound to pay Obedience to it And now it comes into my mind let me ask you Gentlemen of Ireland this Question Did you think King William and Queen Mary King and Queen of Ireland before the Calling of that Parliament or did you not if you did not how came that Parliament to meet by Vertue of their Writs For if Ireland be an Independant Kingdom the Declaration of the Parliament of England as I said before was nothing to you but if you did it must be by Vertue of the Act of Recognition made in the Parliament of England if so then that Act also reached Ireland though you do not mention it and then it follows that here is a New Original Compact whereby Ireland is become a Dependant on the Kingdom of England and your Parliament on the Parliament thereof I do not see how you will get over this Argument though there is no need to make use of it in favour of the Parliament of England yet I may with much more Reason draw this Conclusion from hence then you can from the supposed Donation of King Henry II. to his Son John that Ireland was then made a separate Kingdom But I go forwards p. 113. you come to your Arguments drawn from the Liberty of the People and tell us That the Right of being subject only to such Laws to which Men give their own Consent is so inherent to all Mankind and founded on such immutable Laws of Nature and Reason that 't is not to be alienated or given up by any Body of Men whatsoever I confess my self intirely of this Opinion and I cannot think the People of Ireland ought to be deprived of that which I would not lose my self much less can I Argue for it So that you see I am no Friend to Slavery or any thing that looks like it when I cannot defend my Argument without subjecting Ireland to this State I will give up the Gantlet But let us rightly distinguish in this Matter and since we agree in the main let us consider what you mean by giving Consent
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
Civil and Ecclesiastical State were setled there Regiae sublimatis authoritate Solely by the King's Authority and their own good Wills as the Irish Statute 11 Eliz. Cap. 1. expresses it What the Irish Statutes express I think hath no great Weight in this Debate the Question is by what Power the People of Ireland for so I will now call them threw off that Subjection they once owed to the Legislative Power of England If they think their bare Denial is enough to warrant them free from such a Subjection the People of England may expect the like on the same Argument if because they are not present at our Elections I will answer that in the following Discourse We proceed now to pag. 39. To see â—â— what farther Degrees the Government of Ireland grew up conformable to that of England which are your own Words you say that about the twenty third year of Henry II. which was within five years after his return from Ireland he created his younger Son John King of Ireland at a Parliament held at Oxford and from this you would infer Page 40. That by this Donation of the Kingdom of Ireland to King John Ireland was most eminently set apart again as a separate and distinct Kingdom by it self from the Kingdom of England but you do not set forth that Grant and our Statute-Books are not so old this had been necessary for many reasons you say Page 40. That by this Donation King John made divers Grants and Chartes to his Subjects of Ireland does this alone shew a Regal Authority and might it not have been done by a Lord-Deputy still subject to the Crown of England Pray let me ask you was he at his return to England which you say was a little after his first going over received here by his Father as a Brother-King and did he take Precedence of his elder Brother Richard 'T is much this young King had not punished his Subjects of Ireland for being angry at his deriding their long Beards at which you say they took such Offence that they departed in much Discontent I say 't is much he had not punished their Undutifulness but rather chose to come away in a Pet and thereby to abdicate his new Kingdom for you do not shew that he left the Administration of the Government with any one else All that can be said in his Defence is that he was young about Twelve Years old pag. 39 and perhaps the obstinate Humour which the Barons of England afterwards found in him might grow up with him and become an Infirmity of Age and during King John's being in England did the Kingdom of Ireland govern its self For if his Father King Henry the Second sent over any other to succeed him all your Argument is lost But after all I find his granting Charters is not of such moment as to prove him a King for this he did to the City of Bristol whilst he was Earl of Moreton which I believe was long after the time you mention and I find by the exemplification of that Charter that his Son King Henry the Third in his Inspeximus confirms it as granted by his Father King John when he was Earl of Moreton without mentioning that he was then also King of Ireland and Princes do not use to abate any thing of their Titles especially when they are of so great Importance as this No body doth believe that King John whilst Earl of Moreton had such a Royal Authority in Bristol as to discharge it from an obediential Subjection to the Legislative Power of England The Statute Primo G. M. Cap. 9. ss 2. saith Ireland is annexed and united to the Imperial Crown of England as well by the Laws of this Kingdom as those of Ireland and I am sure there is a great deal of difference between being part of the Imperial Crown of England as Wales is and a separate Kingdom as Scotland is I find likewise that Henry the Third never wrote himself more than Lord of Ireland and 't is strange if Ireland was established a separate Kingdom in John Earl of Moreton and his Heirs that the Title had not been continued in his Son and how comes it to pass that we have ever since been at the Charge of supporting that Kingdom with our Treasure without keeping a separate Account of our Expences laid out on it which doubtless we should have done had we thought it a separate Kingdom But to proceed on searching Sir Richard Baker's Chronicle I cannot find that he takes any Notice of King Henry IId's sending over his Son John about the Twenty Third Year of his Reign as you say Page 39. which 't is much he should omit seeing it was on so memorable an Occasion as his being made King of a separate Kingdom by his Father in a Parliament at Oxford but he saith that in the Thirty First Year of his Reign he sent his Son John over to Ireland to be Governour there and afterwards in the Reign of Richard I. Son to Henry II. and Brother to this John he speaking of the great Kindnesses shewed by the said King Richard I. to his Brother John hath these Words To whom he made appear how much the Bounty of a Brother was better than the Hardnesses of a Father and afterwards he names the several Earldoms which he conferred on him viz. Cornwall Dorset Somerset Nottingham Darby and Lancaster then treating of Affairs in England during the King's Absence on his Voyage to the Holy Land saith he left William Longshamp Bishop of Ely in chief Place of Authority at which his Brother was disgusted whom he calls there Duke John and in another Place he says that the King after his Return from the Holy Land took from him all the great Possessions he had given him and afterwards the said John submitted himself to the King his Brother Now does this agree with the Honour and Dignity of a King who had a separate Kingdom or were the Grants of those several Earldoms from his Brother which you see were liable to be taken away again at the King's Pleasure to be accounted a greater Largess than the Bounty of his Father if he had made him King of a separate Kingdom and setled it in Parliament as you affirm Besides if any such thing was done by Henry II. in the Twenty Third Year of his Reign it appears if Baker be in the right that that Grant was recalled for he saith plainly that he sent him over in his One and Thirtieth Year to be Governor of Ireland How indeed saith to be Lord of Ireland but neither of them mention any thing of what was done in the Parliament at Oxford Well suppose it to be Dominus Hiberniae on which Word you seem to build so much pag. 40 41. Is this Title any thing greater than Lord Lieutenant or Lord Justice which hath for ought I can perceive been used ever since Does a Title granted in a Patent from the King
by the same Argumentation Scotland it self may be bound by English Laws I confess I would gladly pay a great Respect to your Person but I would not willingly be drawn aside by your Opinion which I should be if I were thereby perswaded that the Parliament of England have no more Power to make Laws to bind Ireland than they have to bind Scotland since it does appear that they have done it from the first time of our Statutes being extant and long before it can be rationally concluded there was a Parliament there And yet I do not think they can make Laws to bind Scotland because they themselves never pretended to any such Power save in the Case aforementioned that ever I heard of England and Ireland are not two distinct Kingdoms as England and Scotland are Ireland is a Kingdom dependant on and annexed to the Imperial Crown of England and the Parliament of Ireland is likewise subordinate to the Parliament of England therefore the Laws made by the latter will bind the former This I hope I have prov'd notwithstanding what you say That the contrary will be denied by no Man As to what you say in relation to France pag. 94. Whether on this way of reasoning the People of England had not been subject to the King of France had our Kings continued the Possession of that Country and there kept the Seat of the Monarchy I answer No for those two Kingdoms had not been united as England and Ireland are but as England and Scotland However you will find That it was provided against by a Statute made 14 Edw. 3. Anno 1340. All I find of it in Keeble is this not being printed at large By a Statute it was ordained That the Realm of England and the People thereof shall not be subject to the King or Kingdom of France But you say pag. 94. That the Statute Laws of England have not received your Assent and you argue thence That 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 c. I shall have occasion to speak to this hereafter so I shall for the present wave it here And now I find you have done with your three Ancient Precedents the last of which was in the Second of Henry VI. and I have cited to you several other Statutes made before that time which do undoubtedly bind Ireland being intended by the Parliament so to do which I suppose you never saw or would not cite because you had nothing to say against them I shall next follow you to your Modern Instances which you likewise call Modern Precedents pag. 98 99. And here you 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 you have before-mentioned Is this really so What think you of those I have before cited I am very unwilling to swell this Answer but I find my self obliged to follow wherever you will lead even to 41. Well then besides them What think you of these several Statutes under-mentioned viz. 32 Hen. 8. cap. 24. Whereby the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem in Ireland were dissolved 1 Edw. 6. cap. 1. Whereby the Sacrament is directed to be administred in both Kinds unto the People in Ireland 1 Edw. 6. cap. 2. Entituled an Act for Election of Bishops wherein Ireland is named 1 Eliz. cap. 1. Whereby the Queen hath power given her to assign over to any Person power to exercise Ecclesiastical Authority in Ireland 8 Eliz. cap. 3. Against exporting of Sheep from Ireland I think all these Laws bound Ireland But what you mean by Introductory of a new Law or Interfering with the Right which the People of Ireland have to make Laws for themselves I shall not labour to understand these seem to be nice Quibbles All I proposed was That the Parliament of England have and always had power to bind Ireland by their Statutes which you have denied and I hope I have proved And now I am come with you to 41 where you end your Assertion and acknowledge That in that Year and since some Laws have been made in England to be of force in Ireland I take your own words p. 99. These Acts you say are of 17 Car. 1. you do not name the Chapters but they are 33 34 35 37. which being expired are not to be found in the Statute-Book any more save the Titles therefore I must apply my self to what you say of them p. 100. The Titles say you 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 Settlemement and Explanation passed in King Charles the Second's time in the Kingdom of Ireland And having gained this Advantage against the Parliament of England you make use of it to the utmost and presently conclude That they plainly shew that the Parliament of Ireland may Repeal an Act passed in England in relation to the Affairs of Ireland Sure I cannot think so for if the Parliament of Ireland can Repeal any one Act made by the Parliament of England they may Repeal all they make which cannot be except they have a Jurisdiction above them For the Power which any one Body or Society of Men hath to Repeal Laws made by another Body or Society must proceed from a Superiority that Body or Society hath over the other whose Laws it doth Repeal So that then if what you say be true it follows That the Parliament of Ireland is Superiour to the Parliament of England and then we have brought our Hogs to a fair Market instead of the Parliament of England's making Laws to bind Ireland the Parliament of Ireland may make Laws to bind England and likewise Repeal those Laws they have already made You Gentlemen of Ireland are angry That we will not give you leave to carry away our Trade and therefore you now undertake to prove That your Parliament can Repeal the Laws our Parliament makes 'T is very pretty truly but I hope you will not put this your Power in Execution and Repeal our Act of Navigation or our Plantation Acts and particularly that Act wherein is the Clause against landing Tobacco in Ireland This I am fond of for a certain reason therefore I beg your favour for it We will part with our Woollen Bill provided you will spare us the Acts already made It will be a great loss to the Kingdom of England if you should Repeal the Acts against planting Tabacco in Ireland 't would very much prejudice our Settlements in Virginia a Trade which besides the great Revenues it brings to the Crown whereof you pay a part does likewise encourage our Navigation expends our Manufactures and employs our
Poor so that all Persons from the King to the Beggar reap advantage by it I hope I say you will spare us these Acts tho' I can't believe you would did it lye in your power to take them from us therefore I will pull up my Spirits and enquire whether you have this Power you pretend to The quotation you make is from Pulton I have perused him but he goes no farther then 4 Car. 1. and I can meet with no Body who hath seen any later Edition therefore I suppose you must mean Keeble if so you have left out a great part of the Remark For there I find it to be thus An Act for reducing the Rebels in Ireland to their Obedience to his Majesty and the Crown of England EXP. See an Act for the Settlement of Ireland passed in that Kingdom Anno 14 Car. 2. 1662. by which this and the following Acts concerning Ireland are besides their Expiration of no force Methinks I find my Spirits revived it is not so bad as you represented it Keeble saith the Act is expired and then that is the reason why 't is of no force Every Body that understands Parliaments knows that none of their Acts can remain in force longer then they intended them But now I think of it I was to blame to be so much disturbed For what if Pulton had said so Hath Pulton liberty to bound the Power of the Parliaments of England by Notes he shall print in his Statute Book 'T was my extraordinary love for Parliaments not the weight of your Argument that cast me down at first Perhaps Sir you may think this way of arguing savours of Levity I confess it does but you may please likewise to consider That some People are not to be beat out of their groundless Fancies but by ridiculing them Would any prudent Man have thus wrested the Sence of this Note and then brought it as an Argument against the Authority of the Parliament of England Surely by leaving out EXP you expected to have catcht Butterflies I suspect your candidness in those other Quotations wherewith your Book abounds tho' many of them to little purpose by your insincerity in this And having thus got over this Goliah Argument of yours against the Power of our English Parliaments I am the less careful to give Answer to the Objection you raise your self pag. 101. viz. It will be said That by those Acts 't is manifest that England did presume they had such a right to pass Acts binding to Ireland or else they had never done it I confess I am of that opinion only I will not call it a Presumption I think it the just right of the Parliament of England to exercise a Legislative Power over the Kingdom of Ireland And what Answer do you give to this Objection of your own framing why truly The deplorable Condition of Ireland at that time made it impossible for them to have a Parliament of their own and it being absolutely necessary that something should be done toward the suppressing the Violences then raging among them the only means could then be practised was for the Parliament of England to interpose and do something for their Relief and Safety Was this the true Reason Pray what could you expect from the Parliament of England if Ireland was a separate Kingdom and they had not Power to make Laws to bind it The Laws they made could then be of no more Service to them then if they had been framed in the Parliament of Scotland besides the danger of such a Precedent But now I think of it you were not afraid of that danger the Parliament of England had made Laws for you five hundred years before and therefore what they did at that time was not as you say to Interpose but to put in execution a Legislative Authority they had over you As to what past in Cromwel's days p. 101 102. I shall say little to it 't is not of much moment one way or the other And now I am come with you to King Charles the Second's days and in it you say there were several Statutes made to bind Ireland pag. 102. The first you mention is An Act against importing Cattle from Ireland or other Parts beyond the Seas 18 Car. 2. cap. 2. made perpetual by two Acts in the same Reign These you say do not bind Ireland and I say so too therefore I wonder you mention them The next you quote are The Acts against planting Tobacco in England and Ireland 12 Car. 2. cap. 34. 15 Car. 2. cap. 7. 22 23 Car. 2. cap. 26. these you say do positively bind Ireland pag. 103. But you suggest That as there was no need of making them because no Tobacco was ever planted in Ireland which perhaps there might have been if those Laws had not been made so you imply they are of no force in Ireland now made for you see no more reason for sending of Force to trample down an Acre of Tobacco in Ireland by those Statutes then there would be for cutting down the Woods of Shelela were there an Act made in England against your planting or having Timber Truly Sir I am of the same opinion for if the Parliament of England had made a Law against planting and having Timber in Ireland I do not see how you could have avoided putting it in execution any more then you could this And here we are once more agreed The next you mention is the Navigation Act pag. 103. by which I suppose you mean the before-mentioned Act 22 23 Car. 2. also the two Acts against exporting of Wool 12 Car. 2. cap. 32. and 14 Car. 2. cap. 18. pag. 104. These you confess do bind Ireland and have received due obedience but what right the Parliament of England had to make these Statutes you very much question you take them to be Innovations on you as not being warranted by former Precedents for that you say before these Acts 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 Books of an English Act binding the Kingdom of Ireland pag. 104. Thence you argue p. 105. Shall Proceedings only of Thirty seven years standing be urged against a Nation to deprive them of their Rights and Liberties which they enjoyed for Five hundred years before and which were invaded without and against their Consent and from that day to this have been constantly complained of Let any English Heart that stands so justly in vindication of his own Rights and Liberties answer this Question and I have done Well Sir I think now we are like to bring the Matter to a short Issue provided you will stand to what you say for I confess I must agree with you in this so reasonable a Challenge viz. That if no positive full Precedent can be produced of above Thirty seven years standing whereby the Parliament of England have made Laws to bind