larger council was very rarely convened.1 But every formal concession on the part of the crown contributed somewhat to the growth and establishment of the great national council upon a firmer basis. And the continual and ever-increasing necessities of the state compelled the Norman sovereigns to yield, however reluctantly, new charters, with extended privileges, to their powerful but insubordinate nobility. Thus the lawless barons won for a down-trodden and spiritless people precious franchises, that in due time should elevate the national character, and "so balance the forces existing in the state as to give to each its opportunity of legitimate development." 2

The sagacious policy of Henry II., during his long and A.D. 1155-1180. eventful reign, did much to prepare the way for The king and these changes in the framework of English governhis council. ment. Though bent upon consolidating the kingly power, Henry II., when not absent from the realm, took frequent occasion to convene the old national assembly, and to ask the counsel of his constitutional advisers upon every possible subject. In fact, many matters were freely discussed at these councils which would be deemed unsuitable for the consideration of Parliament at the present day. But the advice sought for and received, in conformity with ancient usage, did not debar the sovereign from the right to act as his own judgment might dictate upon the particular question.3 From the grant of Magna Carta by King John, confirmed and supplemented by similar concessions obtained June 15, 1215. from later monarchs, may be dated the rise of our representative system, the recognition of the House of Commons as a separate estate of the realm, and the establishment upon a sure foundation of our national liberties.

Rise of our

4

The precise period when the representative system of England originated, and the circumstances that gave representative it birth, are points which, notwithstanding the laborious investigations of constitutional writers, are still involved in great obscurity. The learned authors of

system.

1 Stubbs, v. 1, pp. 358, 369.

2 Professor Stubbs's learned and admirable Preface to the Chronicle of Benedict of Peterborough (Rolls Chronicles, published in 1867), v. 2, p. xxxvii. 3 Stubbs, Const. Hist. v. I, p. 570.

♦ Ib. v. 1, pp. 530-543, 622.

the report of the Lords' Committee, however, arrived at the following conclusions upon this subject. They are of opinion that, from the Conquest until the reign of John, prelates, earls, and barons (who constituted the three estates of the realm)1 generally formed, under the king, the legislative power, for all purposes except the imposition of taxes; although the advice of an inferior class in the community, or of particular individuals not of the privileged orders, would be occasionally asked by the king, in exceptional circumstances, as for the purpose of giving validity to the grant of an extra- Origin of ordinary aid to the crown. But it cannot be shown representation. that, at this time, any commoners, elected by the people, or otherwise, were called to the great councils, or Parliaments, as members thereof.2 The great council of the realm convened by John, at St. Albans in 1213, included certain persons who were summoned thereto by virtue of their holding lands in chief of the crown. Some of these individuals gave their personal attendance, others possibly appeared by representation, inasmuch as the lesser barons, being under no peculiar obligation of personal attendance, would naturally incline to select certain of their richest and most influential brethren to represent them. But, during the reign of Henry III., important changes took place in the constitution of the great council; and, in 1265, through the instrumentality of Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, a great council was January 20, convened, which consisted not only of persons who 1265. were summoned personally, by special writ, according to the charter of John, but of persons who were required to attend, not merely by general summons, according to the same charter, but in consequence of writs directed to the sheriffs of certain counties, and to certain cities and boroughs, commanding the recipients to cause "knights, citizens, and burgesses" to be chosen as representatives of such counties, cities, and boroughs respectively, who should attend the king's council, together with those who had been personally summoned thereto.1 The 1 Stubbs, Const. Hist. v. 2, pp. 168-204; and see Freeman in Int. Rev. v. 3, p. 737; Church Quar. Rev. v. 4, p. 438.

2 See Parry's Parlts. Introd. pp. xii.-xvi. ; Cox, Ant. Parly. Elecs. pp. 64-70; Stubbs, v. 1, p. 368.

3

See Stubbs, v. 1, pp. 527, 564.

See ib. v. 2, pp. 92, 221; Simon de Montfort, the Creator of the H. of Commons, by R. Pauli: translated (and revised by the author) by U.

Early legislative assemblies.

A.D. 1295.

first clear evidence remaining of any subsequent convention of a legislative assembly, in similar circumstances, was the summoning of "a great and model Parliament" in the twenty-third year of Edward I.,1 the constitution of the intervening assemblies being wrapped in uncertainty. Thenceforward, until the fifteenth year of Edward II., the legislative assemblies of England appear to have been generally, but not invariably, A.D. 1322. composed nearly in the manner in which the assembly in the twenty-third of Edward I. was constituted. The declaratory statute of the fifteenth of Edward II. gave the sanction of Parliament to the constitution of the legislature as it then stood, under which the legislative power was declared to be in the king, "by the assent of the prelates, earls, and barons, and commonalty of the realm, according as it had been heretofore accustomed." And after this period, the constitution of the legislative assemblies of England nearly approached the form which it now presents.2

Whilst the appropriate functions of the several orders and estates of the realm were thus being gradually A.D. 1272-1370. developed and matured, the divers elements of which the nation itself was composed were uniting together. From the grant of Magna Carta by John the nation became one, and gradually began to realize its unity. The work of amalgamation, consolidation, and of continuous growth, in progress during the century which succeeded the Norman conquest, was completed under successive monarchs, from John to Edward I. In the reign of Edward I., the protracted Development struggle between Englishmen, of whatever race descended, and the foreigners who had devoured their substance and overthrown their liberties, finally came to an end. By the efforts of this prudent monarch, the English and the Normans were joined together in a common bond of mutual helpfulness, ancient freedom was revived, and the national institutions began to assume "those M. Goodwin, London, 1876; Prothero's Life of Simon de Montfort, London, 1877.

of constitutional forms.

1 Stubbs, v. 2, pp. 128, 223, 253.

First Lords' Report, Lords' Pap. 1829, v. 10, pp. 154, 254, 389-391, 473; and see Freeman's Growth of Eng. Const. c. ii. ; Cox, Ant. Farly. Elecs. pp. 68-85 and 96; Syme, Rep. Govt. c. i.

3 Stubbs, Const. Hist. c. xiii. xiv. xv.

constitutional forms which, with mere changes of detail, they have preserved uninterruptedly ever since."1

The century that followed Magna Carta was likewise a period of growth and development, wherein the three estates became conscious of their distinct identity, and entered upon their separate and appropriate spheres of labour.2

recognize the

burgesses.

It was during the reign of Edward I. that the barons, who had hitherto monopolized the ear of the sovereign, and controlled his policy, realized the existence of a new power which it was needful for them to conciliate. The citizens The barons and burgesses, who had accumulated wealth by forced to honest industry, and who were able and willing rights of the to contribute to the necessities of the state, were altogether excluded from the national councils. Whether or not this was esteemed a grievance, at this period, it is hard to conjecture: this much at any rate is certain, that they stoutly objected to pay any taxes that were levied upon them without their consent. In 1297, after a fruitless endeavour, on the part of the king, to exact the levy of a rate on the communaute "of the kingdom, which they had not agreed to pay, several of the principal peers interposed on their behalf, and obtained a guarantee from the king that no such illegal taxation should be again attempted. Shortly afterwards, the king convened a parliament, wherein this fundamental principle of English liberty was solemnly ratified, by the statute De Tallagio non concedendo, which provides that no tallage or aid shall by us or our heirs be imposed or levied in our kingdom without the will and assent of the archbishops, bishops, barons, milites, burgesses, and the other freemen of our realm."

66

66

And here

3 Cox, Ant. Parly. Elecs. pp. 71, 77; Stubbs, v. 2, p. 142. we may notice a practice which prevailed in the early periods of English constitutional history, and which is followed almost universally in other countries where parliamentary government is now established, namely, the payment of wages to representatives. Peers invariably attended parliaments at their own expense, that being one of the services they were obliged to render for the baronies they held of the crown. But as soon as the smaller tenants of the king in capite, or freeholders, were permitted to appear by representation, they were subjected to pay the expenses or wages of their representatives. This custom of representatives receiving, and their constituents paying, wages began from a principle of equity,

Once they obtained an entrance into the great council, the lesser orders speedily began to acquire influence and authority. The growth of the power of the commons is distinctly traceable under Edward II. In the preceding reign, in conformity with the usages of an earlier period, the functions of the commons were limited to a declaration of the extent of the

A.D. 1307.
Rising power

of the
commons.

grants which they were empowered by their constituents to offer to the crown. But in the time of Edward II. the right of the commons to a share in the making of laws was formally acknowledged ; and, by the latter part of the reign of Edward III., the power of the commons had so greatly increased that we find them strenuously resisting attempts to impose inordinate taxation, and boldly remonstrating with the king upon his choice of unworthy advisers.1

About this period there was a further development of the power of the commons, in relation to the mode of granting aids and supplies to the crown. In the reigns of Edward I., II., and III., it had been customary for the lords, the clergy and the commons, severally and separately, to determine the proportion of their respective grants, on the principle that they each represented distinct and independent portions of the community. Nevertheless, it was obviously desirable that there should be a mutual understanding between the several estates on this subject, as neither would choose to be subjected to a higher rate than the other. It was also expedient that this agreement should be arrived at before any communication upon the matter of supply was made by the commons to the crown. This gave rise to the practice of conferences between committees of the lords and commons preliminary to the grant of supply, upon which occasions each estate counted it

without any positive law; and so continued from 49 Henry III. (A.D. 1265) to 18 Richard II. (A.D. 1394), when a law was passed to regulate and enforce it. The practice prevailed, generally, until the reign of Charles I., and in certain parts of the kingdom to a much later period, when it gradually fell into desuetude (Henry's Hist. of Gt. Britain, 5th ed. v. 10, p. 61; Hats. Prec. v. 2, p. 78, n.).

1

Cox, Ant. Parly. Elecs. pp. 84, 93.

2 Hatsell, Prec. v. 3, p. 95. The three estates of the realm originally sat together in one chamber. When they first began to sit apart is uncertain. Their division into two houses must have been accomplished at any rate not later than 1341 (Stubbs, v. 2, p. 377, n. ; v. 3, p. 430).