legem apparentem se purgare nisi prius convictus fuerit vel confessus in curia and therefore no man ought to be urged upon such difficulties unless by the express Law of the Land. The old way of Trial was first to bring in a Complaint and Witnesses ready to maintain the same and therefore both Appeals and Actions then used to conclude their pleas with the names of Witnesses subjoyned which at this day is implied in those general words in their conclusions Et inde producit sectam suam that is he brings his sect or suit or such as do follow or affirm his complaint as another part also is implied in those words Et hoc paratus est verificare For if the Plaintiffs sect or suit of Witnesses did not fully prove the matter in fact the Defendant's Averment was made good by his own Oath and the Oaths of Twelve men and so the Trial was concluded No Free-man shall be imprisoned or disseised of his Freehold or Liberties outlawed or banished or invaded but by the Law of the Land and judgement of his Peers Nor shall Justice be sold delayed or denied This is a comprehensive Law and made up of many Saxon Laws or rather an enforcement of all Laws and a remedy against oppression past present and to come And concerneth first the person then his livelihood as touching the person his life and his liberty his life shall be under the protection of the Law and his liberty likewise so as he shall be shut into no place by Imprisonment nor out of any place by Banishment but shall have liberty of ingress and egress His Estate both real and personal shall also be under the protection of the Law and the Law also shall be free neither denied nor delayed I think it needless to shew how this was no new Law but a confirmation of the old and reparation added thereto being much impaired by stormy times for the sum of all the foregoing discourse tendeth thereto Merchants shall have free and safe passage and trade without unjust Taxes as by ancient custome they ought In time of War such as are of the Enemies Countries shall be secured till it appear how the English Merchants are used in their Countries That this was an ancient Law the words thereof shew besides what may be observed out of the Laws of Aetheldred and other Saxon Laws So as it appeareth that not onely the English Free-men and Natives had their liberties asserted by the Law but also Forreiners if Merchants had the like liberties for their persons and goods concerning Trade and maintenance of the same and were hereby enabled to enjoy their own under the protection of the Law as the Free-men had And unto this Law the Charter of King John added this ensuing It shall be lawful for every Freeman to pass freely to and from this Kingdom saving Fealty to the King unless in time of War and then also for a short space as may be for the common good excepting Prisoners Outlaws and those Country-men that are in enmity and Merchants who shall be dealt with as aforesaid And it seemeth that this Law of free passage out of the Kingdom was not anciently fundamental but onely grounded upon reason of State although the Freemen have liberty of free passage within the Kingdom according to that original Law Sit pax publica per communes vias and for that cause as I suppose it was wholly omitted in the Charter of Henry the Third as was also another Law concerning the Jews which because it left an influence behind it after the Jews were extinct in this Nation and which continueth even unto this day I shall insert it in this short sum After death of the Jew's debtor no usury shall be paid during the minority of the Heir though the debt shall come into the King's hand And the debt shall be paid saving to the Wife her Dower and maintenance for the Children according to the quantity of the Debtors Land and saving the Lord's service and in like manner of debts to others The whole doctrine of Vsury fell under the Title of Jews for it seemeth it was their Trade and their proper Trade hitherto It was first that I met with forbidden at a Legatine Council nigh 300 years before the Normans times but by the Confessor's Law it was made penal to Christians to the forfeiture of Estate and Banishment and therefore the Jews and all their substance were holden to be in nature of the King Villains as touching their Estate for they could get nothing but was at his mercy And Kings did suffer them to continue this Trade for their own benefit yet they did regulate it as touching Infants as by this Law of King John and the Statute at Merton doth appear But Henry the Third did not put it into his Charter as I think because it was no liberty of the Subjects but rather a prejudice thereto and therefore Edward the First wholly took it away by a Statute made in his time and thereby abolished the Jews Tenants Lands holden of Lands escheated to the King shall hold by the same services as formerly In all alienations of Lands sufficient shall be left for the Lords distress Submitting to the judgement of the learned I conceive that as well in the Saxon times as until this Law any Tenant might alien onely part of his Lands and reserve the services to the alienor because he could not reserve service upon such alienation unto the Lord Paramount other than was formerly due to him without the Lord's consent and for the same reason could they not alien the whole Tenancy to bind the Lord without his express license saving the opinion in the book of Assizes because no Tenant could be enforced upon any Lord lest he might be his Enemy Nevertheless it seemeth that de facto Tenants did usually alien their whole Tenancy and although they could not thereby bar the Lord's right yet because the Lord could not in such cases have the distress of his own Tenant this Law saved so much from alienation as might serve for security of the Lord's distress But Tenants were not thus satisfied the Lords would not part with their Tenants although the Tenants necessity was never so urgent upon them to sell their Lands and therefore at length they prevailed by the Statute of Quia emptores to have power to sell all saving to the Lords their services formerly due and thus the Lords were necessitated to grant Licenses of alienation to such as the Tenants could provide to buy their Lands Nor was this so prejudicial to the Lords in those days when the publick quiet was setled as it would have been in former times of War whenas the Lord's right was maintained more by might and the aid of his Tenants than by Law which then was of little power The 35th Chapter I have formerly mentioned in the Chapter concerning
are to be ordered by Tutors than Children and therefore this may be annexed to the rest of the Liberties as well as the other Nevertheless it seemeth that the Laws took them into their regard in respect of their Estates which might be abused to the prejudice of the Publick rather than out of any respect had to their persons Now because there is a difference between the disability of these persons the one being perpetual the other temporary therefore is there also by these Laws a difference in the disposal of their Estates for the Tutor had a right in the disposing of the one and but a bare authority or power in providing for the other Secondly the person of the Tutor is to be considered Anciently it was the next kindred grounded as I conceive upon the natural affection going along with the blood and this so continued in custom until these times for though the Mirrour of Justice saith that Henry the First brought in that course of giving the custody of these disabled persons to the King as hath been formerly observed yet Bracton that wrote long after the time of Henry the First speaking of these kind of persons saith Talibus de necessitate dandus est tutor vel curator not so much as mentioning the King in the case And in another place speaking of such as are alieni juris saith that some are under the custody of their Lords and others under their Parents and friends But let the time of the entrance of this Law be never so uncertain it is now a declared Law that the King in such cases is the common Curator or Tutor of all such persons as he is a Chief Justice rendring to every one his right The King shall have the Wrecks of the Sea. What shall be called a Wreck the Statute at West 1. declareth viz. Where the Ship so perisheth that nothing therein escapeth alive and these are rather in their original committed to the King as a Curator than given him as a Proprietor although that Custom hath since setled a kind of right which may perhaps be accounted rather a Title by Estoppel For the fundamental ground is that the right owner cannot be manifested and therefore the King shall hold it and if the right owner can be manifested the King shall hold it till the owner doth appear The Heir in Socage-tenure shall have an Action of Waste and an account against his Guardian for the profits of the Lands and Marriage The Heir in Socage being under age shall also be under custody of such Guardian of the next kinred who cannot challenge right of Inheritance in such Lands so holden as if the Lands descended from the Father's side the Mother or next of the kinred of the Mothers side shall have the custody and so if the Lands descend from the Mother the Father or next kinred of the Father's side shall have the custody And this custody bringeth with it an Authority or Power onely and no Right as in case of the Heir in Knight-service and therefore cannot be granted over as the Wardship in Knight-service might but the Guardian in Socage remaineth accomptant to the Heir for all profits both of Land and Marriage The full age of Tenant in Socage is such age wherein he is able to do that service which is Fourteen years for at such age he may be able by common repute to aid in Tillage of the ground which is his proper service But the Son of a Burgess hath no set time of full Age but at such time as he can tell Money and measure Cloath and such work as concerns that calling Widows deforced of their Dower of Quarentine shall by Action recover damages till they recover their Dower They shall also have power to devise their crop arising from her Dower It was used that the Heir should have the crop with the Land but this Statute altered that former usage and yet saved the Lord's liberty to distrain if any services were due Writs de consimili casu granted in cases that fall under the same Law and need the same remedy and such Writs shall be made by agreement of the Clerks in the Chancery and advice of such as are skilful in the Law. It was none of the meanest Liberties of the Freemen of England that no Writs did issue forth against them but such as were anciently in use and agreed upon in Parliament And it was no less a grievance and just cause of complaint that Kings used to send Writs of new impression to execute the dictates of their own wills and not of the Laws of the Kingdom as the complaints of the Clergy in the times of Henry the Third do witness Nevertheless because many mens cases befel not directly within the Letter of any Law for remedy and yet were very burthensome for want of remedy it is provided by this Law that such emergent cases that do fall within the inconvenience shall be comprehended within the remedy of that Law. Aid to make the Son of the Lord a Knight and to marry his eldest Daughter shall be assessed after the rate of twenty shillings for a Knights Fee and twenty shillings for twenty pounds in yearly value of Socage-tenure The uncertainties of Aids are by this Law reduced and setled as touching the sum and thereby delivered the people from much oppression which they suffered formerly Nor was onely the particular sum hereby but also the age of the Son when he was to be made a Knight viz. at the age of Fifteen years too soon for him to perform Knight-service but not too soon for the Lord to get his money And the Daughter likewise was allowed to be fit for Marriage at Seven years of age or at least to give her consent thereto albeit that in truth she was neither fit for the one or other and therefore it must be the Lords gain that made the Law and it was not amiss to have the aid beforehand though the marriage succeeded not for many years after and if the Lord died in the interim the Executors having Assets paid it or otherwise his Heir CHAP. LXVIII Of Courts and their Proceedings BEsides the Courts of Justices itinerant which were ancient as hath been said other Courts have been raised of later birth albeit even they also have been of ancient constitutions and divers of them itinerant also and some of them setled in one place The work of the Justices itinerant was universal comprehending both the matters of the Crown and Common-pleas That of Oyer and Terminer is onely of Crown-pleas originally commenced and enquired of by themselves and granted forth upon emergent crimes of important consequence that require speedy regard and reformation Justices of Gaol-delivery have a more large work that is to deliver the Gaols of all criminal offenders formerly indicted or before themselves Justices of Assize and Nisi prius are to have cognizance of Common-pleas onely and
Issue or Demurrer and then to the Common-Law where upon Trial if the Defendant make default the Plaintiff shall have Judgement and Execution And if the Heir be in Ward to the King the Mother shall sue and recover her Dower in the Chancery And they tell us that it had power to prohibit Spiritual Courts and Courts of Common-Law yea to over-rule or reverse Judgements and yet the Common-Law held it's ground when it was concerned for neither were all suits there by Bill as in cases of Equity nor determined according to such rules nor did the power of Judicature rest in the breast of one Chancellor but in him joyntly with other Council of the King which were also learned Judges of the Law. For the Report informeth that Edward the Second had granted a Rent in Tail to the Earl of Kent who dying his Son under age and Ward to the King Edward the Third seised amongst other Lands the Rent and granted it to Sir John Molins Upon Petition the King refers the matter to the Arch-bishop and others of the Council calling to them the Chancellor A Scire Facias goes forth to Sir John Molins he upon appearance pleaded to the jurisdiction as a case belonging to the Common-law but it would not be allowed because it was to repeal the King's Charter And whereas it was objected that the reference was to the Archbishop and others and therefore the cause ought not to be determined in the Chancery it was resolved that it did properly belong to the Chancery by the Law And in the argument of the case it appears clearly that the King's Council there were learned in the Law. And the same is yet more evident by the Title of Bills in those days exhibited in the Chancery which was directed to the Chancellor and the King's Council and the Rule given Per tout les Justices Which I rather note for the shortness of the form of Bills in those days far different from these times wherein the substance of the complaint however small in it self is oftentimes blown out into so great a bubble that it breaks to nothing And the Statutes formerly mentioned do assert the same thing as touching the King's Council For though they speak of the Council or Chancery in the English Tongue yet in the original the words are Conceil en Chancery Having thus touched upon the matters under the Judicatory of the Chancery and Judges in the same In the next place the manner of proceedings comes to consideration For it seems they had been formerly very irregular and that contrary to the Grand Charter upon a bare suggestion in the Chancery the party complained of was imprisoned and no proceedings made thereupon For remedy whereof it was ordained That upon suggestions so made the Complainant was to find Sureties to pursue the Suggestions and that the Process of Law should issue forth against the party without imprisoning him and that if the Suggestions were not proved true the Complainant should incur the like penalty that the Defendant should have done in case he had been found Guilty But afterwards this later Clause was altered by another Statute because it was full of uncertainty and it was ordained that in such case the Complainant shall be imprisoned until he shall satisfie the Defendant of his Damages and furthermore shall make Fine and Ransom to the King. But because that the Defendant many times held his advantage even to extremity this course lasted not long but a new Law was made which put the power of awarding Damages in such cases into the Chancellour to do according to his discretion And thus the Chancery obtained power to award Damages which they never had formely and the Chancellour a Precedency both in the Chancery and of the Council in the Court of Star-chamber and in many cases in the Exchequer By the first he had a power in matters of Meum and Tuum by the last in matters Mei and Regis and by the other in matters Mei and Regni A considerable man certainly he was in the motions of Government but how much more if he be made Arch-bishop of Canterbury Cardinal and Legate à Latere or Arch-bishop Lord Treasurer and Legate à Latere as these days had divers times seen Extraordinary advancements bestowed upon the Nobility brings Honour to the Throne but if they be not men of noted Worth and Uprightness they make the Scepter stoop by stirring up envy in the Nobility and indignation from the people For seldom is it seen that Advancements are fed from the Crown though they be bred from thence but either maintained by new supplies from the peoples Purses or the ruine or decay of some Officers more ancient than themselves or both And such was the condition of the Chancellour he sucked fat from beneath and Bloud and Spirits from the Grand Chief Justiciar of England and so reduced that Honourable Potentate unto the degree of Chief Justice of the King's Bench leaving scarcely unto him the Name or Title of Lord. One thing more remaineth touching the election or nomination of this Great man. At the first he was no better than a Register or the King's Remembrancer or Secretary having also the Honour to advise the King in such matters as came within the circuit of the Writings in his custody and questionless Eo usque it is suitable to all the reason in the World that he should be of the King 's sole Nomination and Election But when it befals that instead of advising the King his word is taken to be the Rule and a Judicatory power put upon that and unto this is superadded that honourable trust of keeping and governing the Great Seal of the Kingdom with the continual growing power occasionally conferred upon him by the Parliament He is now become no more the King's Remembrancer but the Lord Chancellor of England and Supream Officer of State. And it seems but reasonable that he should hold his place by publick Election as well as the Grand Justiciar whose Plumes he borrowed and other Grand Officers of State did before him For he that will have his Servant to work for another must give the other that Honour of Electing him thereto nor was this laid aside nor forgotten by these times but a claim was put in for the Election or allowance of this principal Officer amongst others the Parliament obtaining a Judgement in the case by the King's Confession and so the thing is left to the judgement of future ages Viz. Whether a King that can do no man wrong can dissemble the Royal Assent in Parliament or declare himself legally in that manner by Proclamation CHAP. V. Of Admirals Courts THis is a third Court that maintained the King's Judicatory power in a different way from that which is commonly called the Common-Law and by many is therefore supposed to advance the King's Prerogative but upon mistaken grounds It is very true that the
constant supply for the Church-men out of their Estates as well real as personal especially in the particulars ensuing The most ancient of all the rest was the first-fruits which was by way of eminency called Cyrick-sceate or in more plain English Church free which was always payable upon St. Martins day unto the Bishop out of that house where the party did inhabit upon the day or Feast of the Nativity It was first granted by Parliament in the time of King Ina and in case of neglect of payment or denial it was penal eleven-fold to the Bishop besides a fine to the King as was afterwards ordered by Canutus After the first-fruits cometh to consideration the Revenue of Tythes the which I find no publick Act of State to warrant till the Legatine Council under Offa Although the Canon was more ancient The Bishop at the first was the general Receiver as well of these as of the former and by him they were divided into Three parts and imployed one to the poor another for the maintenance of the Church and a Third part for the maintenance of the Presbyter But in future times many Acts of State succeeded concerning this amongst which that grant of Athelwolfe must be a little paused upon Some Writers say that he gave the tenth Mansion and the tenth of all his goods but Malmsbury saith the tenth of the hides of Land but in the Donation it self as it is by him recited it is the Tenth Mansion But Matth. Westm. understands that he gave the Tenth part of his Kingdom but in the Donation by him published it is decimam partem terrae meae In my opinion all this being by Tradition little can be grounded thereupon The form of the Donation it self is uncertain and various the inference or relation more uncertain and unadvised for if the King had granted that which was not his own it could neither be accounted pious or rational Nor do we find in the Donation that the King in precise words gave the Land or the Tenth part of the Land of his Kingdom but the Tenth of his Land in the Kingdom And the exemplification published by Matth. Westm. countenanceth the same albeit the Historian observed it not But suppose that the Kingdom joyned with the King in the concession and that it was the course to pass it onely in the Kings name yet could not the Tenth Hide Tenth Mansion or Tenth part of the Kingdom be granted without confusion in the possessions of the people For either some particular persons must part with all their possessions or else out of every mans possession must have issued a proportionable supply or lastly a Tenth part of every mans possession or House and Land must be set forth from the rest or some must lose all and become beggars to save others all which are to me equally improbable Nevertheless I do not take the thing to be wholly fabulous but may rather suppose that either a Tenth was given out of the Kings own Demesnes which is most probable or else the Tenth of the profits of the Lands throughout the Kingdom and that it was by publick Act of State and that clause forgotten by Historians And thus might a good president be led to Alfred Athelstan and other Kings who setled Tythes under payment of penalties and appointed the times of payment viz. The small Ttihes at Whitsontide and the great Tithes at Alhollantide Another Tribute was that of Luminaries which by Alfred and Gunthrum was first setled by Law although it had been before claimed by Canon It was payable thrice a year viz. Hollantide Candlemas and Easter at each time half a penny upon every Hide of Land and this was under a penalty also Another Income arose from the Plough and under the name of Plough-Alms At the first it was granted by Edward the Elder generally and the value was a penny upon every plough and in after-times it was ordained to be paid Fifteen days after Easter Next comes a Fee at the death of the party which was commonly called Soul shot and paid before the dead body was buried unto that Church where the dead parties dwelling was So as they never left paying and asking so long as the body was above ground and this it 's probable turned into that fee which was afterward called a Mortuary The incumbent also of every Church had Glebe laid to the Church besides oblations and other casual profits as well arising from houses bordering upon the Church as otherwise All these four last were payable to the Priest of that particular Congregation and had not their beginning till Parishes came to be setled Lastly the zeal of the charity of England was not so cold as to contain it self within it's own bounds They were a dependent Church upon Rome and their old Mother must not be forgotten An alms is granted for under that lowly title it passed first but afterwards called Romscot or Romesfeogh or Heord-penny for it was a penny upon every hearth or chimney payable at the Feast of St. Peter ad vincula and therefore also called Peter-pence it was for the Popes use and was setled under great penalties upon the defaulters It arose by degrees and parcels For first Ina the Saxon King granted a penny out of every house in his Kingdom After him Offa granted it out of every dwelling house that had ground thereto occupied to the yearly value of Thirty pence excepting the Lands which he had purposed for the Monastery at St. Albans This Offa had a much larger Dominion than Ina and was King over Three and twenty Shires After whom Aethelwolf passed a new grant thereof out of his whole Kingdom which was well-nigh all that part which was called Saxony with this proviso nevertheless that where a man had divers dwelling houses he was to pay onely for that house wherein he dwelt at the time of payment Afterward Edward the Confessor confirmed that Donation out of such Tenements as had Thirty pence vivae pecuniae If then it be granted that the Saxon Subjects had any property in their Lands or Tenements as no man ever questioned then could not this charge be imposed without the publick consent of the people and then the assertions of Polydore and the Monks who tell us that Ina and Offa had made the whole Kingdom tributary to Rome must needs be a mistake both in the person and the nature of the gift seeing there is a much more difference between an Alms and a Tribute than between the King and the People Now that it was an Alms and not a Tribute may apear for that the original was a suddain pang of Zeal conceived and born in one breath while the King was at Rome and therefore not imposed as a Tribute Secondly it was ex regali munificentia and therefore free Thirdly it was expresly
the antiquity hereof that I have met with than the name it self which importeth that it sprang up whiles as yet the names of Angles and Saxons held in common cognizance and might arise first from the grant of the Lords to their Tenants and so by continuance become usual And by this means also might arise the custom of Copy-holds of this nature so frequent especially in those Eastern parts of this Island where the Angles setled and from whom that part had the name of the East Angles Another custom of descent remaineth and that is to the Children indifferently and it is called Gavel-kind or Gave-all kind and by the very name seemeth at the first to arise rather from the donation of the Parent or other Ancestor contrary to common custom than by common Law otherwise no need had been of an especial name In the Original it seems it equally concerned all both Sons and Daughters as partners and for want of such the Brothers and Sisters It seemeth to be first the Law of the Goths or Jutes for it remaineth in use in these parts of the Eastern Countries But in latter times this estate was also tailed or cut out sometimes to the Sons and Daughters severally that is the Sons or Brothers to have two parts and the Daughters or Sisters one part othertimes to all the Sons and for want of such to all the Daughters And thus these courses of estates passed over Seas to the Southern part of this Island where that people most setled in a double stream the first from the Athenians that loved the stateliness of their Families the other from the Lacedemonians who desired rather the continuance of their Families than their greatness The manner of conveying of Estates between party and party was either by act of the party executed in his life-time or after his death Such as were executed in the life-time of the owner and were such as for the most part were in matters of great moment were Estates passing by deed of Conveyance in writing And for this way the Saxons were beholding to the Latines who taught them that course both for form and language And Alfred enforced by a particular Law viz. That all such as hold Lands by Deed in Writing should hold them according to the intent thereof and not alien the same contrary thereunto the intent thereof being proved by the Witnesses The nature of the Conveyances in these ancient times may appear by a Deed of one of the Kings of this Island about 400 years before the Conquest whereby he granted Four plough-Plough-lands in the Isle of Thanet unto an Abbess wherein instead of that which we now call the habendum the words are contulimus possidendum c. and after that followeth the uses of the Deed tuo usui c. and then concludes with a Warranty in these words tu vero successoresque tui defendant in perpetuum nunquam me haeredesque meos contra hanc chartulam aliquando esse venturos the effect of which last clause may appear by the Law of the sale of Goods which in those times was that if the sale of Goods warranted did not hold the loss should light upon the sellers The Deeds were usually subscribed with the name of him that made the Conveyance or passed the Estate and if he could not write his name as it befel often then the Deed was under-signed with his mark For Withered King of Kent used the sign of the Cross in subscribing his Grants pro ignorantia literarum They used also in those days to seal their Deeds for so much the conclusion of King Ina's Charter to the Abbey of Glastenbury importeth in words to this effect in English I Ina the King do confirm this Grant and Liberty by subscription of my own hand and under the seal of the holy Cross. True it is Ingulphus tells us that Seals to Deeds were of Norman original I believe his intent is concerning Seals of Wax annexed or affixed unto Deeds Lastly in those days also they used to attest their Deeds by subscribing the names of such as were present who being of greater or meaner rank rendred the credit of the Deed accordingly more or less valuable and upon this ground did the acknowledging or proving of Deeds before the King Bishop County or Hundred first arise That was the Roman fashion but the more ancient German way of Conveyance was by Livery and Seisin as most suitable to their ignorance who had Learning in as slight account as the Lacedemonians had and cared for no more than would serve the turn of natural necessity A property they had both in Lands and Goods and where that resteth no man can deny them the natural way of giving and receiving by delivery And therefore though matters of ordinary use seldom come into the observation of story and this petty ceremony might very well pass sub silentio yet we are not altogether left destitute of the footsteeps thereof in antiquity For Aethbald the Mercian King above Eight hundred years ago gave the Monastery of Cutham with all the Lands thereunto appertaining to Christ-Church in Canterbury and for the confirmation thereof commanded a clod of earth with all the Writings to be laid upon the Altar Another monument hereof more ancient by the space of above an hundred years we find in that Grant of Withered King of Kent of four Plough-lands in the Isle of Thanet the latter part whereof this Clause concludes thus Ad cujus cumulum affirmationis cespitem hujus supradictae terrae super sanctum altare posui Every man had liberty to execute the Law of his Inheritance in his life-time but some were surprized with sudden occasions and unexpected issues and ends and in such cases they did what they could to declare their intents by last Will which by common intendment being in writing hath occasioned some to think that the Saxons in their original had no use thereof being as they conceived so illiterate as not to have the use of writing But the Character remaining to this day evinceth the contrary nor can those words of Tacitus Et nullum est testamentum in any rational way be expounded in this sence if we consider the Context which runneth thus Haeredes successores cuique liberi nullum est testamentum Which in my opinion founds in this sence The Heirs and Successours to every one are his Children and there is no testamentary power to disherit or alter the course of Descent which by Custom or Law is setled Otherwise to deny them the use of all testamentary power was a matter quite abhorring the custom of all the Grecians from whom they learned all that they had Nevertheless the Saxons had not been long acquainted with the Romanists but they had gotten that trick of theirs also of disheriting by last Will as by the testament of Aethelwolf and others
they had in bodies aggregate may appear as followeth The Free-men of England were such as either joyned in the War with Harold against the Normans or such as absented themselves from the way of opposition or enmity and were either waiting upon their own affairs or siding with the Normans And questionless all the sadness of the War befel the first sort of the English whose persons and Estates to make the ways of the first Norman William regular and of one piece never fell so low as to come under the Law or rather the Will of Conquest but in their worst condition were in truth within the directory of the Law of forfeiture for Treason against their Soveraign Lord whose claim was by Title as hath been already noted The other sort either did appear to be the Normans friends or for ought appeared so were and so never offending the Law never suffered any penalty but held their persons and possessions still under the patronage of Law as anciently they and their Ancestors had done And that this was the Normans meaning they publish the same to the World in a Fundamental Law whereby is granted That all the Free-men of the whole Kingdom shall have and hold their Lands and Possessions in hereditary right for ever And by this being secured against forfeiture they are further saved from all wrong by the same Law which provideth That they shall hold them well or quietly and in peace free from all unjust Tax and from all Tallage so as nothing shall be exacted nor taken but their free service which by right they are bound to perform This is expounded in the Laws of H. 1. cap. 4. That no Tribute or Tax shall be taken but what was due in the Confessor's time Under the word Tax is understood monetagium commune per civitates or comitatus so as aids and escuage are not included for they are not charged upon Counties and Cities but upon Tenures in Knight-service nor was Dane gelt hereby taken away for that was a Tax in the Confessor's time and granted by Parliament So then the Norman Kings claimed no other right in the Lands and possessions of any of their Subjects than under and by the Law or common right and they conclude the Law with a sicut which I thus English As it is enacted to them or agreed by them and unto them by us given and granted by the Common-council of our whole Kingdom I leave the words to be criticized upon as the Reader shall please being well assured that the most strained sence can reach no further than to make it sound as an Estoppel or Conclusion to the King and his Successors to make any further claim unto the Estates of his Subjects than by Law or Right is warrantable under which notion Conquest never did nor can come as shall more fully be manifested hereafter But the right genius of this Law will also more evidently appear by the practice of those times which even when Justice it self did most importune so tenderly regarded the liberty of mens Estates that no Distress could issue without publick Warrant obtained and upon three Complaints first made and right not done And when Rape and Plunder was in the heat and men might seem to have no more right than they had power to maintain yet even then this Law was refuge sufficient for such as were oppressed and was pleaded in bar against all usurpations and intrusions under pretext of the Conquerour's right whatsoever as by the Case of Edwyn of Sharneburn may appear Secondly the Freemen of England had vote in the making of Laws by which meum and tuum was bounded and maintained as may appear by what hath been already said nor shall I endeavour further therein Thirdly they had an influence upon the judicatory power For first the matter in fact was determined by the votes of the Freemen as the laws of the Conquerour and of Henry the first do sufficiently manifest Secondly they had an influence in the making of the Sheriff who as well as the Bishop was by Election of the people Thirdly they had an influence upon all Judges by setting a penal Law upon them in case of corruption which if not so penal as to take away life was nevertheless penal enough to make an unjust Judge to be a living pattern and example of misery to teach others to beware Two things more must be added though somewhat collateral to this purpose Concerning the right of the Freemen in the common Mint and in their Villains Concerning the Mint that the Saxons having made it as parcel of the demesues of the Kingdom and leaving to the King onely an overseership reserved the controul and chief survey thereof to the Grand Council of the Kingdom who had slated the same in the Confessour's time But after him the Normans changed the current according to their own liking till by Henry the first it was reduced into the ancient course allowing no money but such as was currant in the days of the Confessour whose Laws also with some alterations by the Conquerour with common advice he also established Concerning the Lords right to their Villains it is observable first that liberty of infranchisement was allowed which could never have been had not the Liberty of the Subject been saved Secondly that Infranchisement properly is the work of the people or the body and the Lord was to deliver his villain by his right hand unto the Sheriff in full County-court and pronounce him free from his Service and shall make room for him by free passage and open doors and deliver him free Arms viz. a Lance and a Sword and then he is made a Freeman as I conceive to all intents and purposes Otherwise there might be manumission as if the villain remained in a City Borough walled Town or Castle by a space of a year and a day and no claim made to his service by his Lord he shall be thenceforth free from the service of his Lord for ever and yet this manumission could not conclude any but the Lord and his Heirs or Assignes nor could it enforce the body to allow that for a Member which was none before Thirdly that notwithstanding they allowed the Lords liberty of infranchisement yet would they not allow them free liberty of disposing them as other Chattels nor by the Law of the Conquerour might they sell their Villains out of the Countrey or beyond Sea for the King had right to the mediate service of every Villain though the Lord had the immediate and therefore that Law might hold in force nevertheless the Ordinance that Anselm made that no Lord should sell his Villain they would never allow for a Law nor did it hold in force CHAP. L. A recollection of certain Norman Laws concerning the Crown in relation to those of the Saxons formerly mentioned I Call them Norman Laws because they were allowed by them or continued
marry at their own will without paying Fine or Composition to the Lord and yet must have the liking of the Lord so far as to declare whether the man intended were his Enemy or not and fit to perform Knight-service This Law was therefore grounded upon the present distress of affairs wherein the Nation was unsetled and common right having established a mutual trust between Lord and Tenant found out this means to preserve the same for if the marriages of those that are related to the Tenant in such manner as may inherit part of all his Lands or have joynture therein should be left altogether at the liberty of the Tenant or his Widow it must needs follow that the mutual trust between Lord and Tenant must fail and the publick receive damage And therefore if this custom were of Norman birth it was begotten upon a Saxon Law and might the rather be owned by the English. The Widow of the King's Tenant having Children shall have her Dower and Portion so long as she keeps unmarried The portion here is in the Latine word maritagium which I take to be the Marriage portion given by the Husband according to the Saxon custom whenas the Dower in Land was not in use whereof is spoken formerly in that Chapter of Dower And the Normans were necessitated to introduce this custom of theirs with themselves partly because it was a priviledge which was their own by birth and it could not be waved without an evident wrong done to the Wives of these men who had ventured their lives in that service but principally because it would not consist with the work in hand to disclaim that custom which must needs be of infinite consequence in the effecting of what was principally sought after viz. the union of the two peoples Normans and Saxons into one I say it was principally sought after by the Norman Conquerour if not led thereto by his own genius yet necessitated thereto by force of reason of State as shall appear hereafter And what could be imagined a more ready way to stay the effusion of bloud and all other unhappy events of enmity than by taking away enmity it self or a more speedy and certain course for union than to reduce the Men and Women of each people to mutual society and to seal up all by a lasting bond of Marriage or greater encouragement for the comfortable proceedings therein than the setling of the constant maintenance of the Wife in case of survivorship by the Law of Dower of the Lands and Tenements of the Husband which was so full of contingencies and uncertainties in the portion of Goods that was by the Saxon Law appointed to the Wife in such case Nor was this all for by Marriage thus made to the Normans they had a great hold not so much over the English as in the English and that not onely during coverture but by reason of this title of Dower the Women became Tenants and under the Lords wing so as they durst not willingly and illegally offend their Lord in their Widowhood nor by Law nor reason match themselves and their Dowry to any other that was not first allowed by the Lord to be in friendship with him and thus became the Tenants Widows to be at the liking of the Lord for their marriage And the like hereto may be said concerning the Husband in case of Tenant by the courtesie and however by the Norman former practice it was much disturbed yet by Henry the first it was again reduced to its former right rather than original arising from his grant as some hold and proved advantageous for the ends aforesaid Now as touching their marriage-portion of Goods because the Saxon Law had already endowed them thereof they could not be induced to lay down their known ancient right till they found the new Law of Dower to settle and so for some time both Laws were in force until the more ancient Saxon law had an honourable burial Nevertheless for the present the Law abridged that right so far as to limit it to the Widow during Widowhood according to the former Saxon-law Upon consideration of all which it may well be conceived that the power of the Lords in consenting or dissenting to the marriages of their Tenants Widows and Wards was not so much an usurpation upon the Common right of the English Subjects as a custom rationally and with great wisdom as the course of affairs then stood upholden and allowed amongst them principally for the speedy setling of a peaceable Government and consolidating of two Nations into one and wherein England was then so happy as to come to a conclusion in seven years which cost their Ancestors night Two hundred years experience with the Britains besides a world of bloud-shed that might have been spared e're they could find out the right way to a desired peace by mutual marriages had between them Such Widow shall have the custody of the Lands of such Children or otherwise such other person as by right ought to have the same This is the first news of Wardships that passed abroad cum privilegio of a received Law which together with the former declare the right custom of the Normans and thereby the injustas consuetudines quibus Anglioe regnum opprimebatur viz. Arbitrary Relief taken of the Tenant's Estate arbitrary Marriages made of their Peersons and arbitrary Grants of Guardianship of their Lands For as yet oppression was not so high-flown as to cast the government of the persons of their Wards out of the view of the Lords provisionary care upon adventure of the next in Law whether man or woman wise or unwise under pretence to train him up in military service fit for the Lord 's own safety and the Kingdoms lifeguard But it was the proper ground of the Lord 's own seisure and right of Wardship he being looked upon by the eye of common reason as the onely meet man that both could and would effect that work so as might be most advantageous to the publick which seemed to be chiefly concerned herein And upon the same general ground the survey of fools accompanied the former albeit it was not in practice till Henry the First brought it in as the Mirror of Justice saith fol. 258. yet it came upon an ancient foundation laid in the time of the Danes For my own part I will not dispute the point whether this custom of Wardship was purely Norman or whether it was derived from the Saxons anciently who possibly might have some respect to Orphans in such cases to train them up for the publick service in point of War especially being possessors of a known right of Relief as well as Alfred the Saxon King did undertake the work for the training of some such particular persons in Learning for the service of the Publick in time of peace and civil Government Yet thus much appeareth that Guardianship of Lands was a known Custom
shew a kind of rage and some rashness it might be imputed to the common infirmity of great men for as Oppression upon those that are inferiour makes them mad so doth Treachery against them that are superiour make them little other especially if they be overtaken with a fit of passion in the instant or their minds wrapped into a whirlpool of affairs But the change of Laws makes the greater noise wherein what change they suffered may appear from the premises if Writers have dealt uprightly otherwise general imputations without particular instances will never sway Opinion contrary to the current of the Laws that are published especially seeing we have observed the errour of the best Historian of those times in calling those things new which were anciently used in England before Normandy was in a condition of a State. Yet if this should be granted and that there were such change of Laws as is pretended it makes nothing to the point of Conquest so long as the new Laws are made by advice of Common-council and for the common good and so long as they are established to be Rules for Government I remember it is affirmed by some of those ancient Writers That the Duke or King would have brought in the Customs of Norway but the earnest Mediation of the English prevailed against it and this evinceth two things to my opinion First that there was question made what Law should be established Secondly that notwithstanding the interest that the Normans had in the Kingdom they could not prevail to bring in the whole body of their Law or of the Customs of Norway which were not onely the prima materia of their Law but also in kind had a setling at that very time in those places of this Kingdom where the Danes had their principal seat and therefore not altogether strange to the Saxons themselves The sum of which will be this That upon debate a Law must be setled and that not the Law of the Conquerour's own Will nor the Law that suits with his Desire but the ancient Law of the Kingdom And therefore if at any time the unquietness of some of the English brought the King to some thoughts of Arbitrary Rule and to shake off the clog of the Saxon Law it was long e're it stirred and sprang up too late to raise the Title of Conquest and withered too soon to settle it As touching the change of Customs for that also is imputed to the Conquerour it cannot be denied but some alteration might be in matters of smaller consideration yet are the Writers not without mistake in the particular instances For whereas they tell us that the Conquerour took away the custom of Gavel-kind and brought the custom of discent to the eldest Son and that Kent saved their Liberties and continued this custom of Gavel-kind I shall not contend about the Liberties of Kent but must till I see better reason hold the opinion of the change of Inheritance to be a meer conceit For besides what hath been already said concerning that custom of Gavel kind if we believe Glanvil the difference was between Lands holden by Knight's-service and in Socage the first of which in his time by ancient custom always descended to the eldest and those Lands that were holden in Socage if not partible by custom in which case they went equally to all the Sons went by custom in some places to the eldest in other places to the youngest so as the Rule of Inheritance in the Norman times was custom as well as in former times And furthermore if the custom of Gavel-kind had been the general custom of this Nation the King by his change had contradicted his own Prerogative and granted as great a Liberty to his Subjects as could have been invented For had the custom of Gavel-kind happened upon the Lands in Knight-service it had brought all the Sons under the Law of Wardship and had made a ready way to enthral all men of Worth and undo all Husbandry the first whereof had been as advantageous to the King 's private interest as both destructive to the publick Nor is it clear from any Author of credit that the Normans changed the Tenures of Lands albeit that it cannot be denied but such Lands as he had by forfeiture or otherwise were in his own power to dispose upon what Tenure he pleased for as well before the Normans time as long after Tenures were like as the Services were all at the Will of the Donor and were of as many Individuals almost as the minds of the Owners Some being of more general regard and publick use are recorded amongst the grounds of English Laws none of which appear to me to be of Norman original although they received their names according to that Dialect The next thing objected is the change of Language which thing some Writers tell us the King endeavoured or which is worse to be so absolute as to be absolute Tyrant and to publish Laws in a foreign Language that the people through ignorance might the rather transgress and thereby forfeit their Estates This if true so sar differed from the nature of a Conquerour as rather proveth that he was put to his shifts Nevertheless the thing tasteth so much of Spleen as it might occasion distrust of other relations concerning this subject For besides that it is nonsence for a Conqueror to entitle himself by a cheat where he hath an elder Title by Conquest I shall in full answer to that calumny insert a passage of an Historian that was in the continual view of publick affairs in those times who speaking of the Conqueror saith That he commended the Confessor's Laws to his Justices in the same Language wherein they were wont formerly to be written lest through ignorance the people might rashly offend And another Author saith That the King had a desire to learn the English Tongue that he might the better know their Law and judge according thereto It is probable nevertheless that the Laws were in the Norman Tongue and it is no less likely that the Pleadings in real Actions especially were also in the same Language else must the Normans be put to School to learn English upon peril of loss of their Estates But that either the written Laws were wholly concluded into the Norman Tongue or that the publick pleading of Causes by word of mouth in all Actions where the issue was left to the Country were in any other Language than English no advised Reader will conceive seeing it had been a madness for an English Jury to pass their Verdict in any case wherein it is likely many of them understood scarce a syllable of the Norman Language much less ought of the matter upon which their Verdict should be grounded Adde hereunto that it is not likely but the Conquerour inhibited the use of the English Language in all matters of publick Record inasmuch as the Charters made by him to corporate Towns and
Circuit had six Justices which the King made Justices of the Common pleas throughout the Kingdom Neither yet did the first Commission continue so long as four years for within that time Richard Lucy one of the Justices had renounced his Office and betaken himself to a Cloister and yet was neither named in the first Commission nor in the latter nor did the last Commission continue five years for within that time Ralph Glanvil removed from the Northern Circuit to that of Worcester as by the story of Sir Gilbert Plumpton may appear though little to the honour of the justice of the Kingdom or of that Judge however his book commended him to posterity I take it upon the credit of the reporter that this itinerary judicature was setled to hold every Seven years but I find no monument thereof before these days As touching their power certainly it was in point of judicature as large as that of the Court of Lords though not so high It was as large because they had cognizance of all Causes both concerning the Crown and Common-pleas And amongst those of the Crown this onely I shall note that all manner of falshood was inquirable by those Judges which after came to be much invaded by the Clergie I shall say no more of this but that in their original these Iters were little other than visitations of the Country by the grand Council of Lords Nor shall I adde any thing concerning the Vicontiel Courts and other inferiour but what I find in Glanvil that though Robbery belonged to the King's Court yet Thefts belonged to the Sheriff's Court and if the Lords Court intercepts not all batteries and woundings unless in the complaint they be charged to be done contra pacem Domini Regis the like also of inferiour Trespasses besides Common-pleas whereof more shall follow in the next Chapter as occasion shall be CHAP. LXII Of certain Laws of Judicature in the time of Henry the second ANd hereof I shall note onely a few as well touching matter of the Crown as of property being desirous to observe the changes of Law with the times and the manner of the growth thereof to that pitch which in these times it hath attained We cannot find in any story that the Saxon Church was infested with any Heresie from their first entrance till this present Generation The first and last Heresie that ever troubled this Island was imbred by Pelagius but that was amongst the Britains and was first battered by the Council or Synod under Germanus but afterwards suppressed by the Zeal of the Saxons who liked nothing of the British breed and for whose sake it suffered more haply than for the foulness of the opinion The Saxon Church leavened from Rome for the space of above five hundred years held on its course without any intermission by cross Doctrine springing up till the time of Henry the second Then entred a Sect whom they called Publicans but were the Albigences as may appear by the decree of Pope Alexander whose opinions I shall not trouble my course with but it seems they were such as crossed their way and Henry the second made the first president of punishing Heresie in the Kingdom under the name of this Sect whom he caused to be brought before a Council of Bishops who endeavoured to convince them of their errour but failing therein they pronounced them Hereticks and delivered them over to the Lay power by which means they were branded in the fore-head whipped and exposed to extremity of the cold according to the decree of the Church died This was the manner and punishment of Hereticks in this Kingdom in those days albeit in seemeth they were then decreed to be burnt in other Countries if that Relation of Cog shall be true which Picardus noteth upon the 13th Chapter of the History of William of Newberry out of which I have inserted this Relation Another Case we meet with in Henry the second 's time concerning Apostacy which was a Crime that as it seems died as soon as it was born for besides that one we find no second thereto in all the file of English story The particular was that a Clerk had renounced his Baptism and turned Jew and for this was convicted by a Council of Bishops at Oxford and was burned So as we have Apostacy punished with death and Heresie with a punishment that proved mortal and the manner of conviction of both by a Council of the Clergie and delivered over to the Lay-power who certainly proceeded according to the direction of the Canon or advice of the Council These if no more were sufficient to demonstrate the growing power of the Clergie however brave the King was against all his Enemies in the field Treason was anciently used onely as a Crime of breach of Trust or Fealty as hath been already noted now it grows into a sadder temper and is made all one with that of laesa Majestas and that Majesty that now-a-days is wrapped up wholly in the person of the King was in Henry the second 's time imparted to the King and Kingdom as in the first times it was more related to the Kingdom And therefore Glanvil in his book of Laws speaking of the Wound of Majesty exemplifies Sedition and destruction of the Kingdom to be in equal degree a Wound of Majesty with the destruction of the person of the King and then he nameth Sedition in the Army and fraudulent conversion of Treasure-trove which properly belongs to the King. All which he saith are punished with Death and forfeiture of Estate and corruption of Bloud for so I take the meaning of the words in relation to what ensueth Felonies of Manslaughter Burning Robbery Ravishment and Fausonry are to be punished with loss of Member and Estate This was the Law derived from the Normans and accordingly was the direction in the Charge given to the Justices itinerant in Henry the second 's time as appeareth in Hoveden But Treason or Treachery against the Oath Fealty or Bond of Allegiance as of the Servants against the Lord was punished with certain and with painful deaths And therefore though the murther of the King was Treason yet the murther of his Son was no other than as of another man unless it arose from those of his own Servants The penalty of loss of Estate was common both to Treason and Felony it reached even unto Thefts in which case the forfeiture as to the Moveables was to the Sheriff of the County unto whose cognizance the case did belong and the Land went to the Lord immediately and not to the King. But in all cases of Felony and of a higher nature the party though not the King's Tenant lost his personal Estate to the King for ever his Free-holds also for a year and a day after which they returned to the Lord of the Soil by way of Escheat
saith That he will set down frequentius usitata and it is past question but that the tryal by twelve men was much more ancient as hath been already noted One thing more yet remaineth concerning the Widow of the Tenant whose Dower is not onely provided for but her reasonable part of her Husband 's personal Estate The original hereof was from the Normans and it was as popular as that of Wardships was Regal and so they made the English women as sure to them as they were sure of their Children The Justices shall by Assize try Disseisins done since the King 's coming over Sea next after the peace made between him and his Son. This is called the Assize of Novel disseisin or of disseisins lately made It seems that the limitation was set for the Justices sake who now were appointed to that work which formerly belonged to the County-courts and to prevent intrenchments of Courts a limitation was determined although the copy seemeth to be mistaken for the limitation in the Writ is from the King 's last Voyage or going into Normandy Justices shall do right upon the King 's Writ for half a Knights Fee and under unless in cases of difficulty which are to be referred to the King. The Justices itinerant ended the smaller matters in their Circuits the other were reserved to the King in his Bench. Justices shall enquire of Escheats Lands Churches and Women in the King's gift And of Castle-guard who how much and where So as the Judges itinerant had the work of Escheators and made their Circuits serve as well for the King's profit as justice to the Subjects They used also to take Fealty of the people to the King at one certain time of the year and to demand Homage also These matters of the King's Exchequer made the presence of the Judges less acceptable and it may be occasioned some kind of oppression And as touching Castle-guard it was a Tenure in great use in these bloody times and yet it seemeth they used to take Rent instead of the personal service else had that enquiry how much been improper Of a Tenants holding and of several Lords That one man may hold several Lands of several Lords and so owe service to them all is so common as nothing can be more nevertheless it will not be altogether out of the way to touch somewhat upon the nature of this mutual relation between Lord and Tenant in general that the true nature of the diversity may more fully appear The foundation or subject of service was a piece of Land or other Tenement at the first given by the Lord to the Tenant in affirmance of a stipulation between them presupposed by the giving and receiving whereof the Tenant undertook to peform service to the Lord and the Lord undertook protection of the Tenant in his right to that Tenement The service was first by service solemnly bound either by Oath which the Lord or his Deputy by the Common-Law hath power to administer as in the case of Fealty in which the Tenant bound himself to be true to the honour and safety of his Lords person and to perform the service due to the Lord for the Tenement so given or otherwise by the Tenants humble acknowledgment and promise not only to perform the services due but even to be devoted to the Lords service to honour him and to adventure limb and life and be true and faithful to the Lord. This is called Homage from those words I become your man Sir and yet promiseth upon the matter no more but fealty in a deeper complement albeit there be difference in the adjuncts belonging to eách For though it be true that by promise of being the Lord's man a general service may seem to be implied yet in regard that it is upon occasion only of that present Tenure it seemeth to me that it is to be restrained only to those particular services which belong to that Tenement and therefore if that Tenement be holden in Socage although the Tenant be bound to homage yet that homage ties not the Tenant to the service of a Knight nor contrarily doth the homage of a Tenant in Knight-service tie him to that of Socage upon the command of his Lord though he professeth himself to be his man. Nor doth the Tenant's homage bind him against all men nor ad semper for in case he holdeth of two or divers Lords by homage for several Tenements and these two Lords be in War one against the other the Tenant must serve his chief Lord of whom the Capital house is holden or that Lord which was his by priority who may be called the chief Lord because having first received homage he received it absolutely from his Tenant with a saving of the Tenant's Faith made to other Lords and to the King who in order to the publick had power to command a Tenant into War against his own Lord. If therefore he be commanded by the King in such cases unto War he need not question the point of forfeiture but if he be commanded by a chief of his other Lords into War against a party in which another of his Lords is engaged his safest way is to enter upon the work because of his Allegiance to that Lord yet with a salvo of his fealty to that other Lord. But in all ordinary cases Tenants and Lords must have regard to their stipulation for otherwise if either break the other is discharged for ever and if the fault be in the Tenant his Tenement escheats to his Lord and if the Lord fail he loses his Tenure and the Tenant might thenceforth disclaim and hold over for ever Nevertheless the Lords had two Priviledges by common custom belonging to their Tenures which although not mentioned in the stipulation were yet more valuable than all the rest the one concerning matter of profit the other of power That of profit consisted in aids and relief The aids were of three kinds one to make the Lords eldest Son Knight the other to marry his eldest Daughter the third to help him to pay a relief to his Lord Paramount which in my opinion sounds as much as if the Tenants were bound by their Tenures to aid their Lord in all cases of extraordinary charge saving that the Lord could not distrain his Tenant for aid to his War and this according to the Lords discretion for Glanvil saith that the Law determined nothing concerning the quantity or value of these aids These were the Norman ways and savoured so much of Lordship that within that age they were regulated But that of reliefs was an ancient sacrifice as of first-fruits of the Tenement to the Lord in memorial of the first Lords favour in conferring that Tenement and it was first setled in the Saxons time The Lords Priviledge of power extended so far as to distrain his Tenants into his own Court to answer to himself in all causes that concerned his
to the degree of Laws if the Parliament liked them Nevertheless National Synods in England undertook the quarrel of general Councils for Arch-bishop Peckham in a Synod 1280. enjoyned the Constitutions made in the Council at Lyons to be observed under a curse without consultation first had with the Parliament or before he knew whether they would be right or wrong And before him Boniface made Constitutions in opposition to the customs of the Kingdom so as the matter was now come to a kind of contest whether Synods or Parliaments should hold supremacy in doubtful cases concerning the limits of the Ecclesiastical and Temporal power For henceforth Kings must bid adieu to the Synods and sit no more amongst them and Synods now think themselves free to consult and determine what they please without speaking under correction nor was there other remedy left to Kings but threats by Writs directed to the Bishops firmiter inhibendo quod sicut Baronias quas de Rege tenent diligunt nullo modo praesumant concilium tenere de aliquibus quae ad coronam Regis attinent vel quae ad personam Regis vel statum suum vel statum concilii sui contingunt quod si fecerint Rex inde se capiat ad Baronias suas And this prevailed so effectually that the Bishops durst not adventure too far lest they should go beyond their guard and therefore they come and ask leave of the Parliament in cases that trenched upon the Law of the Kingdom as they did in the case of Bastardy wherein they would have had their consent That Children born before Marriage might be made legitimate by the Marriage subsequent And yet they could not prevail for they were answered Nolumus leges Angliae mutari notwithstanding that the Canon-law and the Laws of the Normans sided with them And so they obtained not their desire although they still retained the Tryal of general Bastardy unto themselves Nevertheless the times were such as Kings being too weakly assisted by the people and the Clergie strongly seconded by the Pope they took advantage of those times of distraction so as to hold themselves no farther obliged to the King than the Pope and their own covetousness would allow them and to make all sure they had setled it so far as they were able by a Constitution that the Clergie were not bound to aid the King Papa inconsulto and they put it in practice in a Synod under Arch-bishop Winchelsie Anno 1295. in the time of Edward the First and although the King prevailed in the conclusion at that time yet from the times of Henry the Third the Clergie for future times granted their aids to the King by themselves and apart from the rest of the body of the Kingdom and held themselves not bound by any aid granted by the Parliament albeit that their own aids granted in their Synods were not obligatory unto the body of the Clergie in this Kingdom unless first allowed and confirmed by the Parliament And thus is England become like a two-bodied monster supported with one pair of Legs CHAP. LXVII Of the condition of the Free-men of England of the Grand Charter and other Statutes during the Reigns of these Kings SHattered asunder by broyls of Civil Wars the Freemen having laid aside that regard of the ancient mutual covenant and bond of Decenners are now become weak and almost enthralled to the lust of Kings Lords Pope and English Clergie and therefore it is no wonder if Taxes and Tributes were many and new although most of them deserved not to march under any banner but the colours of oppression nor did any thing save them from the worst Tenure of all but the several interests of those superiour powers which oftentimes did justle with one another and thereby gave the Commons liberty to take breath so as though for the present they lost ground and hunted upon a cool scent yet they still retained the prey within their view Sometimes they were cast far behind other times they recovered themselves a Truce is cried and Laws are made to moderate all and determine the bounds of every one and thus comes the Grand Charter upon the publick Theatre The Historian saith it was the same with that of King John's framing and yet by comparing them together we find them disagreeing both in words and sence and therefore shall sum the same up as shortly as I can observing the difference of the two Charters as I pass along The First Chapter concerned the Church of which sufficient hath been spoken The Freemen shall enjoy these Liberties to them and their Heirs for ever The Heir in Knight-service shall pay the ancient relief That Reliefs were setled by the Saxons hath been already shewed and also that they were continued and confirmed by Henry the First onely in those times they were paid in Horses Arms c. But in after-times all was turned into money which was more beneficial for all Lords shall have their Wards bodies and Lands after homage received until the full age though the Ward be formerly Knighted The Law of Wardship may seem more anciently seated in this Kingdom than the Normans times for if the Statutes of Scotland bear any credit that Law was in Scotland before those times The Lords were not to have the Wardship before they were possessed of the Tenure because it was theirs as a fruit of the Tenure according to the Saxon Law concerning distress that it could not be in the power of the Lord to distrain till he was possessed of the service And if by fraudulent conveyance the Heir did hold the Lord out of possession a Writ of Ward did lie against him and if he did not appear the Lord might seize the Lands unless in case of Wardship per cause de guard And in case the Lord would hold the Wardship longer than the full age of the Heir an Assize did lie against the Lord for the Heir could not enter without Livery But if the Heir were of full age at the time of the Ancestor's death the Lord could not enter the Lands and yet he should have a Relief and the primer seisin And if the Heir entred the Lands before Homage done he gained no Free hold though he were Knighted before as this Law provideth For it may seem that these times of Civil War brought forth a trick of Knighting betimes as an honourable encouragement for young sparks to enter the field before they were compleat men of discretion to know whether the cause of War was good or evil And yet reason might induce a conceit that he that was thought meet to do Knight-service in his own person might expect the maintenance fit for the ability of the person and honour of the service Grantees or their Assigns or Committees of Wardships shall preserve the Land c. from Waste and the Tenants from extortion They shall yield up the same stocked
if they receive them stocked The first of these is the Law of common reason for it is contrary to Guardianship to destroy that which by their office they ought to preserve As touching the words of the Law the Grantees are omitted in the Charter of King John and also their Assignees albeit that doubtless they were within the intent and meaning of the Law. The matter declares plainly not onely the oppression of Lords upon their Wards but also the corruption even of the Law itself that at the first aimed at the good of the Publick and honour of Knight-service but now was degenerated into the base desire of profit by making market of the Wards Estates and Marriages that brought in strip and waste of Estates and niggardly neglect of the education and training up of the persons of the Wards and an imbasing of the generation of mankind and spoil of times Nor did these times ever espy or provide against the worst of these but onely endeavoured to save the estate by punishing the wasters in damages by this Law and by forfeiture of the Wardship by a Law made in the time of Edward the First and this as well for Waste done during the time of the custody as in the life-time of his Ancestors by another Law in Edward the First 's time And because the Escheators and their under-Officers used to serve themselves out of the Estates of Minors before they certified to the King his right and those were not within the Law of Magna Charta or at least not so reputed It was therefore afterwards provided that these also should render damages in a Writ of Waste to be brought against them The marriage of Wards shall be without disparagement It was an ancient Law among the Germans and the Saxons brought it hither and as a Law setled it that Marriage must be amongst equals but this the Danes and Normans slighted and yet it continued and was revived Now as the Lord had the tuition of the Ward instead of the Ancestor so had he the care of the marriage in such manner as the Ancestor might have had if he had lived For in case the Ward were stoln and married the Delinquent suffered fine and imprisonment Or if the Ward married without the Lord's consent he shall have the double value and hold the Land over till satisfaction But in case the Lord marrieth the Ward within fourteen years of age to its disparagement he shall lose his Wardship thereby And if the Ward refuseth to accept of a marriage tendred by the Lord before her age of sixteen years the Lord shall hold the Lands till he have received the full value and in case where one Tenant holdeth of divers Lords the Lords by priority shall have the marriage These Laws were in use during the Reigns of those Kings although it cannot be certainly concluded hereby that the Wives portion properly belonged to the Lord as for his own benefit partly because the Female-Wards should have no advancement if it belonged to the Lords and partly because this forfeiture was given to the Lords in nature of a penalty as appeareth by the frame of the Statute of Merton Widows shall have their Dower inheritance their inheritance which they have joyntly with their Husbands their marriage freely and their Quarentine With due regard of the opinion of others I shall propound my own It seemeth to me that the King is within this Law as well as within the former Laws of the Normans and those of Henry the Second that are of this kind and as he is within the compass of every Law of this Charter and that it is called the Grand Charter as most immediately coming from the King to the people and not from the Lords Nor is there any ground that the Law should intend to give liberty to Widows of Wards belonging to inferiour Lords to marry whom they will and that onely the Kings Widows shall be bound Nor did this suit with the contest between the Barons and the King that their Widows should be bound unto the King and the Widows of their Tenants discharged from their tuition and therefore I conceive by the word maritagium is not meant liberty of Marriage but her Marriage-portion or rationabilis pars according to the foregoing Laws of Henry the First and Henry the Second and the Saxon Customs But as touching the liberty of Marriage it is defined and expressed that the Widows shall not be compelled to marry nevertheless if they shall marry they must marry with the Lord's liking otherwise he might have an enemy to be his Tenant that might instead of homage and service prove Traitor and be his ruine Lastly touching the Widows dwelling the Law thought it unreasonable that she should immediately after the death of her Husband be exposed to be harbourless and therefore ordained that she might continue in her Husband's house Forty days if it were not a Castle and then she was to have another dwelling assigned to her because by common intendment she is not supposed to be a person meet to defend a Castle and this was called her Quarentine which I meet not with amongst the Saxon Laws and therefore suppose it to be of Norman original No Man's Land shall be seized for Debt to the King so long as the Personal Estate will satisfie Nor shall his pledge be troubled so long as the Principal is sufficient unless he refuse to satisfie and then the pledge shall recover in value The first part hereof was the issue of the Law concerning elegit formerly observed in the Saxon times for the regard of Law principally extended unto the person next unto the Free-hold and lastly unto the goods The latter part of this Law was the Law of Pledges or Decenners in the same times unto which the Reader may resort for further light herein The City of London and other Cities Burroughs and Towns and the Cinque-ports and other Ports shall enjoy their ancient Liberties The whole Kingdom and the Members thereof herein expressed had all their Liberties saved from the dint of Conquest by the Law of William the first upon which although some of the succeeding Kings did invade yet none of them made any absolute disseisin although disturbance in some particulars But King John did not only confirm them by his grand Charters but by particular Charters to each Corporation with some enlargements and in his grand Charter inserted one clause which in the grand Charter of Henry the Third appeareth not which thus ensueth Et ad habendum commune concilium Regni de auxiliis assidendis aliter quam in tribus casibus praedictis which if the barbarism of the Latine mislead me not is thus in English And to have right of Common-Council or to be of the Common-Council of the Kingdom for the assessing of aids other than in three cases aforesaid viz. for
the Church saving to every one their proper debts And thus since the Conquest the Church-men encroached by degrees unto a great power in matters Testamentary I say by degrees for as yet by this Law it appeareth that they were but Overseers or Eye-witnesses for as yet right of ordering or disposing they had none as may appear in that case of a Bastard dying without Issue and intestate the Lord shall have his personal Estate And in all cases the Executor had then nothing but bare Assets and the overplus was assigned between the Wife and Children according to their reasonable part Or if the party died intestate the next friends did administer paying the Debts and making Dividend of the overplus into the reasonable parts according to the ancient Saxon custom still continued Nor doth the testimony cited out of Bracton prove any other than that the Ancestor hath free power to order his Estate as he pleaseth and that the Children shall have no more than is left unto them by their Ancestor either in his Will or in case of dying intestate by the custom or Law which is and ever was the rationabilis pars No purveyance for any Castle out of the same Town where the Castle is but present satisfaction must be made and if in the same Town satisfaction must be made within forty days Purveyance was ancient provision for the necessities of the publick and so far was commendable seeing it is not the common case of all men to regard the publick above their own private interest therefore the publick must provide for it self by their means in whom the publick is most concerned And this was in those elder times but in two cases viz. of Kings and Castles in the one of which the Government is principally concerned in the other the publick defence For it may be well conjectured that Castles were either first made in places commodious for habitation and great Towns gathered to them for their better safety or that the Towns were first gathered in places of commodious habitation and then Castles were made for their better defence Or if they were imposed upon them by the Victor to keep them in awe they were nevertheless by continuance together become tractable and conspired for the mutual defence of each other But as touching such Cittadels or Castles that were set in solitary places they may seem rather first intended for the particular defence of some particular Man and his Family and neighbouring Tenants and therefore in the purveyance for Castles it seems the proper Town wherein it is principally liable to that duty because their safety is more principally interested and therefore Prizes there taken may be paid at a day to come but in all other places immediately Nevertheless this lasted not long for the Souldiers found out a trick of favouring their own Quarters and preserving them in heart against a back Winter knowing that at such times it is better to seek for provision nigh than to be compelled to seek far off But this Stratagem was cut off by the next King who inhibited all manner of purveyance in any other Town than in the same Town wherein the Castle is seated This was a charge that was but Temporary and occasional That which was more lasting and burthensome upon the Subjects was purveyance for the King which nevertheless cannot be avoided by reason of the greatness of his Retinue especially in those days and if they should have their resort to the Market the same could not be free to the people for that the first service must be for the Kings Houshold and so what scraps will be left for the Commons no man can tell It was therefore necessary for the Kings Family to be maintained by purveyance and to avoid the many inconveniencies which might and did arise in those spoiling times It was ordained 1. That it should be Felony for any Purveyor to purvey without Warrant 2. That none but the Kings Purveyor must purvey for the Kings house and that he must purvey onely for the Kings house and to purvey no more than is necessary and to pay for the things they take And because Kings were oftentimes necessitated for removal from place to place purveyance of carriage was also allowed And in case the Subjects were grieved either by more purveyance than was necessary or by non-payment for the Commodities so taken or with composition for the Kings debts for such purveyance the Offenders were liable to fine and imprisonment Or if they were grieved by Purveyors without Warrant the Offender was to be proceeded against as in case of Felony He that serveth in Castle-guard is not liable to payment of Rent for that service nor is be compellable to either so long as be is in the service in the Army By the ancient custom none but a Knight might be charged with the guard of a Castle belonging to the King for the letter of this Law mentioneth onely such and therefore to hold by Castle-guard is a Tenure in Knight-service And it seemeth that Rent for Castle-guard originally was consistent with Knight-service and that it was not annual but promiscuously Knights might either perform the service or pay Rent in lieu thereof and upon occasion did neither if the King sent them into the field And lastly that a Knight might either do the service in his own person or by his Esquire or another appointed by him thereto No Knights nor Lords nor Church-mens Carriages nor no mans Wood shall be taken against the Owners consent nor shall any mans Carriages be taken if he will pay the Hire limited by the Law. Church-men were exempted from charge to the Kings Carriages meerly in favour to the Canon which exempted the Goods of the Clergy from such Lay-service nevertheless the complaints of the Clergie formerly mentioned shew that this was not duly observed Knights and Lords were discharged not onely for the maintenance of their Port but more principally because they were publick servants for the defence of the Kingdom in time of War and the Kingdom was then equally served by themselves and their equipage and their carriages as a necessary assistant thereunto The King shall have no more profit of Felons Lands than the year and a day and the Lord is to have the remainder Anciently the Lords had all the Estate of Felons being their Tenants and the King had onely a Prerogative to waste them as a penalty or part thereof but afterwards the Lords by agreement yielded unto the King the year and a days profit to save the Lands from spoil and in continuance of time the King had both the year and day and waste Fugitives also were in the same case viz. such as deserted their Country either in time of need or such as fled from the Tryal of Law in criminal cases for in both cases the Saxons accounted them as common Felons Nevertheless the two customs of Gloucester
espyed the danger and how necessary it was for the people to be well armed in these times of general broil and upon that ground allowed this Law to pass That all such as had Lands worth 20 l. yearly besides Reprizals should be ready not to be Knights nor under the favour of others is there any ancient precedent to warrant it but to find or to enter into the field with the Arms of a Knight or to provide some able person to serve in their stead unless they were under 21 years of age and so not grown up to full strength of body nor their Lands in their own possession but in custody of their Lords or Guardians Nevertheless of such as were grown to full age yet were maimed impotent or of mean estate and Tenants by service of a Knight it was had into a way of moderation and ordered that such should pay a reasonable fine for respit of such service nor further as concerning 〈◊〉 persons were they bound But as touching such that were under present onely and not perpetual disabilities of body upon them incumbent as often as occasion called they served by their deputies or servants all which was grounded not onely upon the Law of Henry the Second but also upon common right of Tenure The Arms that these men were to finde are said to be those belonging to a Knight which were partly for defence and partly for offence Of the first sort were the Shield the Helmet the Hauberk or Breast-plate or Coat of Mail of the second sort were the Sword and Lance and unto all a Horse must be provided These Arms especially the defensive have been formerly under alteration for the Breast-plate could not be worn with the Coat of Mail and therefore must be used as occasion was provided of either and for this cause the service of a Knight is called by several names sometimes from the Horse sometimes from the Lance sometimes from the Helmet and not seldom from the Coat of Mail. The power of immediate command or calling forth the Knights to their service in its own nature was but ministerial and subservient to that power that ordered War to be levied and therefore as in the first Saxon Government under their Princes in Germany so after under their Kings War was never resolved upon but if it were defensive it was by the Council of Lords if offensive by the general Vote of the Grand Council of the Kingdom So by vertue of such Order either from the Council of Lords or Grand Council the Knights were called forth to War and others as the case required summoned to a rendezvouze and this instrumental power regularly rested in the Lords to whom such service was due and the Lords were summoned by the Lord Paramount as chief of the Fee of which their Tenants were holden and not as King or chief Captain in the Field for they were not raised by Proclamation but by Summons 〈◊〉 forth to the Sheriff with distress and this onely against such as were within his own Fee and held of the Crown The King therefore might have many Knights at his command but the Lords more and if those Lords failed in their due correspondency with the King all those of the inferiour Orb were carried away after them so the King is left to shift for himself as well as he can And this might be occasioned not onely from their Tenures by which they stood obliged to the inferiour Lords but probably much more by their popularity which was more prevalent by how much Kings looked upon the Commons at a further distance in those days than in after-times when the Commons interposed intentively in the publick Government And thus the Horse-men of England becoming less constant in adhering to their Soveraign in the Field occasioned Kings to betake themselves to their Foot and to form the strength of their Battels wholly in them and themselves on foot to engage with them One point of liberty these Souldiers by Tenure had which made their service not altogether servile and that was that their service in the Field was neither indefinite nor infinite but circumscribed by place time and end The time of their service for the continuance of it was for a set time if it were at their own charges and although some had a shorter time yet the general sort were restained to forty days For the Courage of those times consisted not in wearying and wasting the Souldier in the Field by delays and long work in wheeling about and retiring but in playing their prizes like two Combatants of resolution to get Victory by Valour or to die If upon extraordinary occasions the War continued longer then the Tenant served upon the pay of the common Purse The end of the service of the Tenant viz. their Lord's defence in the defence of the Kingdom stinted their work within certain bounds of place beyond which they were not to be drawn unless of their own accord And these were the borders of the Dominion of the Crown of England which in those days extended into Scotland on the North and into a great part of France on the South And therefore the Earl-Marshal of England being by Edward the first commanded by vertue of his Tenure to attend in person upon the Standart under his Lieutenant that then was to be sent into Flanders which was no part of the Dominion of England refused and notwithstanding the King's threats to hang him yet he persisted saying He would neither go nor hang. Not onely because the Tenants by Knight-service are bound to the defence of their Lord's persons and not of their Lieutenants but principally because they are to serve for the safety and defence of the Kingdom and therefore ought not to be drawn into foreign Countries Nor did the Earl-Marshal onely this but many others also both Knights and Knights fellows having twenty pounds per Annum for all these with their Arms were summoned to serve under the King's pay in Flanders I say multitudes of them refused to serve and afterwards joyned with the rest of the Commons in a Petition to the King and complained of that Summons as of a common Grievance because that neither they nor their Ancestors were bound to serve the King in that Country and they obtained the King's discharge under his broad Seal accordingly The like whereunto may be warranted out of the very words of the Statute of Mortmain which was made within the compass of these times by which it was provided That in case Lands be aliened contrary to that Statute and the immediate Lords do not seize the same 〈◊〉 King shall seize them and dispose them for the defence of the Kingdom viz. upon such services reserved as shall suit therewith as if all the service of a Knight must conduce thereto and that he is no further bound to any service of his Lord than will consist with the safety of the Kingdom This was the Doctrine that the
way is different from the common Road both in it's original and in the course of proceedings nor could it otherwise be considering the condition of the Nations and the people of the same interested in common Traffique The people thus interested as much differed from the other sort of Dry men if they may be so called as Sea from Land and are in nature but as March-men of several Nations that must concentre in some third way for the maintenance of Commerce for peace-sake and to the end that no Nation may be under any other Law than its own The condition of the Nations in the times when civilized Government began to settle amongst them was to be under the Roman Emperours who having setled one Law in the general grounds throughout all Nations made the Sea likewise to serve under one rule which should float up and down with it that men might know upon what terms they held their own wheresoever they went and upon what terms to part with it for their best advantage In its original therefore this Law may be called Imperial and likewise in the Process because it was directed in one way of Trial and by one Law which had its first birth from the Imperial power and probably it had not been for the common benefit of Europe to have been otherwise at other time or by other directories formed Nevertheless this became no Gem of Prerogative to the English Crown for if England did comply with forrein Natives for its own benefit it being an Island full of the Sea and in the common Road from the most parts of Europe that border upon the Sea and of delight in Merchandise it is but suitable to its self and it did so comply as it saved the main Stake by voluntary entertaining those Laws without being imposed upon by Imperial power For the Saxons came into this Kingdom a free people and so for ought yet appeareth to me continueth to this day I say that in those first times they did take into the consideration of Parliament the regulating of the fluctuating motions of Sea-laws nor were they then or after properly imposed by the King's Edict For though it were granted that Richard the First reduced the Sea-Laws in the Isle of Oleron yet that the same should be done without advice of Parliament in his return from the Holy land is to me a Riddle considering what Histories do hold forth concerning his return through Germany nor can that be good evidence to entitle Kings of England to a power to make and alter Laws according to their private pleasure and interest Nor doth that Record mentioned in the Institutes warrant any such matter but rather on the contrary groundeth the complaint upon Laws Statutes Franchises and Customs established and that this Establishment was by the King and the Council This Law was of a double nature according to the Law of the Land one part concerning the pleas of the Crown and the other between party and party for properly the King's Authority in the Admiralty is but an Authority of Judicature according to Laws established which both for process and sentence are different from the Common-Law as much as the two Elements do differ yet not different in the power that made them I shall leave the particulars to be enquired into by them that shall mind it elsewhere and only touch so much as shall reflect upon the main Government This power was executed by Deputies diversly according as the times and opportunities were for War or Peace and either transitu or portu What was done in time of War or whilst the Ship is out of the English Seas comes not to our purpose and therefore I shall not meddle with that further than this that in the first times Kings were wont to divide the work of Judicature and of War into several hands The power of War and Peace they committed unto men of approved Courage and Skill in that service and therefore generally not to the men of highest rank who had neither Mind nor Skill for a work of such labour dyet and danger This power passed under divers names sometimes by grant of the custody of the Sea-coasts sometimes of the parts and Sea coasts sometimes by being made Captain of the Sea-men and Mariners and sometimes Admiral of the Ships It was a great power and had been much greater but that it suffered a double diminution the one in the time for three or four years commonly made an end of the command of one man and at the best it was quam diu Regi placuerit the other diminution was in circuit of the power for all the Maritine Coasts were not ordinarily under the power of one man but of many each having his proper precinct upon the South or North East or Western shores and under the Title of Admiral in the times of Edward the First and forwards who brought that Title from the Holy Land. Nevertheless about the end of the times whereof we now Treat the custody of the whole Sea began to settle in one hand under the Title of Admiral of the English Seas and the place was conferred upon men of the greatest rank and so continued ever afterward The power of Jurisdiction or Judicature all this while remained distinct and it seems was setled in part in the power of the Sheriff and Justices For by the Law the Sheriff and Justices had cognizance of matters between the high water and the low water mark and what was done Super altum mare was within the directory of the Admiral these were but few things and of small consideration the principal of them being concerning War or Peace and those only within the English Seas But after Edward the Third had beaten both the French and Spaniards at Sea the people grew much more towards the Sea and became so famous that the greatest Lords thought the Regiment of Sea-affairs worthy of the best of their Rank and were pleased with the Title of Admiral whilst they left the work to others and so the Admiral became a person of more honour and less work than he had been formerly The greatness of the honour of this place thus growing soon also began to contract greatness of power beyond what it had formerly and this was principally in matter of Jurisdiction For not contented with the power of a chief Justice of War and Peace within the Seas which was his proper dominion the Lord Admiral gained the same within the low water mark and in the main streams below the next Bridge to the Sea and in all places where Ridels were set and yet these places were within the body of the County Nor did he endeavour less to gain in matters of distributive Justice for although he had a legal Jurisdiction in things done upon the Sea so far as to defend order determine and cause restitution to be made in cases of damage done unjustly yet was it no less difficult to keep
any Man he must go whither the King shall please to send him which is not onely destructive to the opinion of Thirning concerning the Plea but also though granted is destructive to the Reporter's Judgement in the main point For if an English man may refuse to go without Wages then is he not bound to go by any natural absolute Legiance as the Reporter would have it And as touching the second Case which is Bigot's and Bohun's Case it cleareth the same thing for it was resolved that they ought to go but in manner and form according to the Statutes then is not the ground in the absolute Legiance for that is not qualified but in the positive Statute-law which tieth onely in manner and form and that by voluntary consent in Parliament The rest of the Cases do neither conclude the main point nor the particular thing that the Reporter intendeth For he would imply to the Reader that English men were anciently used to be imprested for the Wars in France and hereunto he voucheth one Authority out of ancient Reports of Law in Edward the Third's time one Anthority in the time of Henry the Fourth and three in the time of Henry the Sixth none of all which do speak one word concerning Impresting And that in Edward the Third doth imply the contrary for the Case is that in a Praecipe quod reddat a Protection was offered by the Defendant as appointed to go beyond the Sea with the Duke of Lancaster and the Plaintiffs Counsel alledged That the Defendant had been beyond Sea with the Duke and was returned To this the Defendant's Counset answered That the Duke was ready to return again and for this cause the Protection was not allowed Yet a Quere is made upon this ground that it might be that the Defendant would not go over with him nor was it proved that he would which sheweth plainly the party was not imprested for then the thing had not been in his power to will or nill The last instance that the Reporter produceth is that of Forinsecum Servitium or Foreign Service and that seemeth to be Knight-service to be performed abroad But this falleth short of the Reporter's intention in three respects First Though it belongeth to the King yet not to him onely but to other chief Lords so saith Bracton Secondly It is not due from every English man. And lastly It is a Service due by vertue of Tenure and then the Conclusion will be That which is due by Tenure of Lands is not due by natural and absolute Legiance and so this Foreign Service arising meerly by compact and agreement between Lord and Tenant and not by the natural duty of an English-born Subject which is the thing that the Reporter drives at in all his discourse will be so far from maintaining the Reporters opinion as it will evidently destroy the same And thus the posture of this Nation in the Field remaineth regular in the rule whatever hath been said against it notwithstanding that in the very instant of Action there may be some irregularity which no doubt both was and ever will be in stormy times Nor did it conquer the Law For though War may seem to be but a sickness of the State yet being in Truth as the Vltimum refugium and onely reserve unto Law beaten to a retreat by opression it is no wonder if this motion or rather commotion that brings on the Law of Peace in the Rear be still and ever subject to rule of Law how unruly soever it self seemeth to be Now because Law imports execution and that presupposes a Trial and it a Court therefore did our Ancestors amongst other Courts not regulated by the Common Law form a Court for the service of War called the Court-Marshal or the Constables Court according as the Office of one or the other had the preheminence The proceedings herein were ordered as I said not accordiag to the Common Law for that is like the Land much distant from all other Nations and the Negotiation of this Island with other Nations as in time of Peace so of War requires a rule common to all those Nations or otherwise no Negotiation can be maintained And for this cause the proceedings in this Court were ever according to the rule of the Civil Law. The work of this Court is principally Judicial and in some cases Ministerial The first reflects upon cause Foreign and Domestick and both of those are either Criminal and such as concern the common Peace of the place of War or more civil relating onely unto private interest As touching the first of these I suppose it is no Bull to speak of a common Peace in the place of War. For a common Peace must be in each party within it self or otherwise no party at private variance can subsist within it self much less make War with the other and therefore in order unto War there must be a Law of Peace for the Trial of Offenders and punishing them for offences committed against the good Government of the War Such as are breaking of Ranks deserting the Standard running away from the Colours Mutinies Murthers Rapes Plundering-private Quarrels disobedience to command and such-like all which do bear the shew of crimes against the common Peace of the Army and the Country Of the second sort are matters concerning Quarter and Contracts in order to the government of the War saving such as are made before either part be inrolled for the War. For if a man doth covenant to serve in the War and keepth not his day at the first Rendezvouz he is to be attached by Writ at the Common Law. Causes Domestical likewise fall under the like division for whatsoever cause may be Forein may also be Domestick because the Army is ever embodied within the Kingdom and must be under the Directory of the Martial law upon the first forming thereof Now though the particular Laws of the Army for the government thereof be ordinarily according to the prudence of the General yet certain Fundamentals have been ab Antiquo made by Custom and the Parliament against which the course of Judicature must not go And as the Parliament saw need it set also particular directions as for the payment of Souldiers Wages for remedy of wastings and plunderings in their own Country and other such emergencies But the execution of all these Laws Originally was in the Marshal of the Army And because that the Army was generally dissolved or such persons engaged in such matters of controversie departed from the Army before the same were concluded therefore the Marshals Court continued in order to the determining of these matters And in continuance of time other matters also crowded into that Society although sometimes under the Directory of the Constable of England as well as at other times under the Marshal more particularly that power of determining matters concerning Torniament a sport that like a Sarcasm tickles the fancy but
otherwise than in especial Cases And then the conclusion will be that if the King may not give Liveries to the prejudice of the Peace then may he much less break the Peace at his pleasure or levie Men Arms and War when he shall think most meet Take then away from the King absolute power to compel men to take up Arms otherwise than in case of Foreign Invasion power to compel men to go out of their Counties to War power to charge men for maintenance of the Wars power to make them find Arms at his pleasure and lastly power to break the Peace or do ought that may tend thereto and certainly the power of the Militia that remaineth though never so surely setled in the Kings hand can never bite this Nation Nor can the noise of the Commission of Array entitle the King unto any such vast power as is pretended For though it be granted that the Commission of Array was amended by the Parliament in these times and secondly that being so amended it was to serve for a Precedent or Rule for the future yet will it not follow that Henry the Fourth had or any Successor of his hath any power of Array originally from themselves absolutely in themselves or determinatively to such ends as he or they shall think meet First As touching the amendment of the Commission it was done upon complaint made by the Commons as a grievance that such Commissions had issued forth as had been grievous hurtful and dangerous And the King agrees to the amendments upon advice had with the Lords and Judges And if it be true that the amendments were in the material clauses as it is granted then it seemeth that formerly a greater power was exercised than by Law ought to have been and then hath not the King an absolute power of Array for the just power of a King can be no grievance to the Subject Secondly If the Commission of Array thus mended was to serve as a rule of Array for the future then there is a rule beyond which Henry the Fourth and his Successors may not go and then it will also follow that the power of Array is not originally nor absolutely in the King but from and under the Rule and Law of the Parliament which rule was not made by the Kings own directions but as we are told beyond expectation alterations were made in material parts of the Commission and the powers in execution there whereof no complaint of grievance had been made The issue then is If the King had an Universal power in the Array the Parliament likewise had a general liberty without any restriction to correct that power Lastly Suppose that this power of the Parliament is executed and concluded by the Commission thus amended and that thereby the Kings power is established yet can it not be concluded that this power is originally or absolutely in the King. It is not absolutely in him because it is limited in these particulars First It is not continual because it is onely in case of eminent danger Secondly It is not general upon all occasions but onely in cases of a Foreign and sudden Invasion and attempts Thirdly The powers are not undefined but circumscribed 1. To Array such as are armed so as they cannot assess Arms upon such 2. To compel those of able Bodies and Estates to be armed and those of able Estates and not able Bodies to arm such as are of able Bodies and not Estates but this must be Juxta facultates and salvo Statu 3. Whereas they strain themselves to make the Statute of Henry the Fourth and the Commission of Array to consist with the Statutes of 13 E. 1. 1 E. 3. and 25 E. 3. thereby they affirm so many more restrictions unto this power of Array as those Statutes are remedial in particular cases yet do I not agree to their Glosses but leave them to the debate already published concerning the same Secondly As this power was not absolutely in the Kings so was it not originally from themselves because they had not the Legislative power concerning the same but the same was ever and yet is in the Parliament Hereof I shall note onely three particular instances First The Militia is a posture that extendeth as well to Sea as Land That which concerneth the Sea is the Law of Marque and Reprizal granted to such of the people of this Nation as are pillaged by Sea by such as have the King's Conduct or publick Truce And by this Law the party pillaged had power to recompence himself upon that man that had pillaged him or upon any other Subject of that Nation in case upon request made of the Magistrate in that Nation satisfaction be not given him for his wrong it was a Law made by the Parliament whereby the Chancellour had power to grant such Letters or Commission upon complaint to him made This was grounded upon the Statute of Magna Charta concerning Free Trade which had been prejudiced by the rigour of the Conservators of the Truce against the Kings Subjects although what was by them done was done in their own defence And by which means the Foreigners were become bold to transgress and the English fearful in their own Charge and many laid aside their Trade by Sea and thereby the strength of the Kingdom was much impaired Nor is the equity of this Law to be questioned for if the Magistrate upon complaint made grants not relief the offence becomes publick and the Nation chargeable in nature of an Accessory after the Fact and so the next man liable to give satisfaction and to seek for relief at home The King then hath a power to grant Letters of Marque by Sea or Land and this power is granted by Parliament and this power is a limited power onely in particular cases in regard that many times these prove in nature of the first light skirmishes of a general War. Two other instances yet remain concerning the Order and Government of the Souldiers in the Army the one concerning the Souldiers pay Viz. That Captains shall not abate the Souldiers Wages but for their Clothing under peril of Fine to the King. The other concerning the Souldiers service That they shall not depart from their Colours without leave before the time of their service be expired unless in case of sickness or other good cause testified and allowed by the Captain and such as shall do otherwise shall suffer as Felons Which Laws could not have holden in force had they not been made by Parliament in respect that the penalties concern the Estates and Lives of men which are not to be invaded but by the Law of the Land. So as both Captains and Souldiers as touching the Legislative power are not under the King in his personal capacity but under the Law of the Parliament Lastly As the rule of War was under the Legislative power of the Parliament so was the rule of