Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

the sovereign had assumed more formidable dimensions, at variance with the ancient principles of English liberty." But the Saxon Witenagemot appears to have co-operated more harmoniously with the king than similar assemblies of a later date. This may be accounted for by the fact that it was not a body external to the king, but a body of which the king was the head in a much more direct sense than he could be said to be the head of a later mediæval parliament. The king and his Witan acted together; the king could do nothing without the Witan, and the Witan could do nothing without the king; they were no external half hostile body, but his own council surrounding and advising him." Under such circumstances, it is natural that this influential body should have been privileged to interpose, with authority, in the conduct of public affairs.

The mutual interdependence between the sovereign Royal auand his council at this period of our history must not lead thority. us to infer that a Saxon monarch was a mere instrument for carrying out the resolves of his councillors.

The king of England, in those days, was the acknowledged head of his people-the lord to whom all the nobles of the land owed fealty and service. He was the fountain of honour, and the dispenser of the national wealth. He appointed the time and place for meetings of the Witan, and laid before them whatever matters required their advice or consent, exercising over their deliberations the influence which properly belonged to his exalted station and personal character. If weak, vacillating, or unworthy, his powers would necessarily be impaired, and it would be the province of the Witan to restrain him from acts of misgovernment, and to demand security for the due administration of the royal functions. Strictly limited by law in the exercise of his prerogatives, the personal authority of an ancient English

[blocks in formation]

The power of the

Crown.

sovereign, if at all worthy of his position, was wellnigh unbounded.

After the triumph of the Norman arms, on October 16, 1066, at the battle of Hastings, the crown of England was transferred to William the Conqueror by a forced election of the English Witan. During the reign of this sovereign, and of his immediate successors, the character of the monarchy underwent a gradual change, but far more through the spirit in which the government was administered than by any direct action of the legislature. For William I. claimed to be the lawful successor of the Saxon kings. Inheriting their rights, he professed to govern according to their laws.

r

Freeman, vol. i. pp. 123-126, 163; Kemble, vol. ii. p. 232; Palgrave, vol. i. p. 657.

[ocr errors]

Knight, Popular Hist. of Eng. vol. i. p. 185; Freeman, vol. i. p. 163. The form of an election continued to be observed, as a general rule, until the accession of Edward I., when the maxim began to be established, that immediately on the death of the king, the right of the crown is vested in his heir, who commences his reign from that moment (Allen, Royal Prerogative, pp. 44-47). Nevertheless, in the ceremonial observed at the coronation of the successive kings of England, to that of Henry VIII. inclusive, there continued to be used forms wherein the recognition, will, and consent of the people are distinctly asked, and the kings were declared to be elect and chosen' (Chapters on Coronations, London, 1838, pp. 99, 103). But in the reign of Henry VIII. Parliament definitely determined the succession of the crown to be in Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth; and in default of issue from them, even empowered the king to bequeath the crown to whomsoever he would, provided only that his choice should be made known, as well to the lords spiritual and temporal, as to all other his loving and obedient subjects, to the intent that

But with the new

their assent and consent might appear to concur therein' (25 Hen. VIII. c. 22; 28 Hen. VIII. c. 7; 35 Hen. VIII. c. 1). Afterwards, Queen Elizabeth's title to the crown was formally recognised by Parliament (1 Eliz. c. 3). And upon her decease, without issue, Parliament acknowledged that the English crown 'did, by inherent birthright and lawful and undoubted succession,' descend to James I., as the next and sole heir of the blood-royal of this realm' (2 James I. c. 1). Upon the abdication of James II., Parliament conferred the crown upon William and Mary, and afterwards regulated the succession in the Protestant line of the descendants of James I. (1 W. and M. sess. 2, c. 2; 12 & 13 Will. III. c. 2.)

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

dynasty there came in a new nobility devoted to their Norman lord, who gradually displaced the nobles of the land in offices of rule, and obtained possession of their estates. Thus the power of the crown steadily increased, and the authority of the national councils was proportionably impaired. The idea of a nation and its chief, of a king and his councillors, almost died away; the king became half despot, half mere feudal lord. England was never without national assemblies of some kind or other; but, from the Conquest in the eleventh century till the second burst of freedom in the thirteenth, they do not stand out in the same distinct and palpable shape in which they do both in earlier and later times.'" Nevertheless, the liberties of their Saxon forefathers were always fresh in the recollection of successive generations of Englishmen, until, by slow degrees and after many struggles, they succeeded in recovering them-not indeed in their original shape, but in a form better adapted for the altered condition of the commonwealth.

The picture of the political constitution of England The Saxon under her Saxon kings, which we have sketched from the polity. pages of the learned writers who have elaborately investigated the subject, is replete with interest and instruction. In a primitive state of society, and amongst a simple loyalhearted people, such a form of government was admirably adapted to their wants. By it freedom was maintained, life and property protected, and the national welfare advanced. But it may be doubted whether a system suited for such a time would have stood the test of stormier days, or sufficed to give adequate protection to the king and to his councillors under less favourable circumstances. Difficult problems in the art of government require the experience of centuries to solve them aright. The proper relations between the sovereign and his immediate advisers, the position which both should occupy towards the national legislature, the true sphere Freeman, vol. i. p. 122.

u

Advisers of the Crown.

and appropriate functions of Parliament, are all of them questions of the highest importance to the national welfare. And as we proceed with our narrative, we shall find every one of these questions arising, and obtaining, in their turn, a suitable solution. Unconsciously, and ofttimes without apparent sequence, the efforts of each succeeding generation have been overruled to bring about the final issue. The vigour with which at one period the authority of the crown has been asserted, and the wider influence and more independent action claimed for the councils of the crown at another, have both alike contributed to the formation of our present system. And, happily for England, each new development as it arose was a result of the law of growth, and not the effect of revolution, and is clearly traceable to constitutional principles which existed in the germ in the ancient Saxon polity."

X

From the first introduction of monarchical institutions into Britain, the sovereign has always been surrounded by a select band of confidential counsellors, appointed by himself, to advise and assist him in the government of the realm." It may be confidently asserted that there is no period of our history when the sovereign could, according to the law and constitution, act without advice in the public concerns of the kingdom. That the institution of the Crown of England has always had a Privy Council inseparable from it, is a fact which ought never to be lost sight of. This council has always been bound to advise the crown in every branch and act of its excutive conduct." And it is, in fact, the only council, combining in itself both deliberative and administrative functions, which is authoritatively recognised by the law

[blocks in formation]

and constitution of England. The number of members composing this council has varied at different periods, according to the king's will, but of ancient time there were twelve, or thereabouts."

The particular designation of privy councillor belongs to a later age, but the institution itself is coeval with the monarchy. It is evident that the Norman sovereigns, as well as their Anglo-Saxon predecessors, were advised, in the exercise of their prerogative, by a select council, nominated by the king and regularly attendant upon him, which was distinct from the great council of the nation, though included in every assembly thereof.a

councils.

At the era of the Norman Conquest there appears to A.D. 1066. have been three separate councils in existence: one, com- The king's posed of nobles, who were assembled on special occasions, by special writs, and who, together with the great officers and ministers of state, formed the magnum concilium; another, styled the commune concilium, or general parliament of the realm. These two councils were mainly identical in their general character and relations towards the sovereign. Their chief distinction seems to have been in the greater care shown in summoning the members of the commune concilium, to advise the king in more general matters, and especially when grants of money were required. The third council was known as the concilium privatum assiduum ordinarium, or, more frequently, the king's council. It comprised certain select persons of the nobility and great officers of state, specially summoned thereunto by the king's command, and sworn, and 'with whom the king usually adviseth in matters of state and government.' This council-or probably a committee of it, consisting of the judges, presided over by the king, or (in his absence) the chief justiciary-served also as the supreme court of justice, which, under the denomination of the curia regis, commonly assembled

Coke, Fourth Inst., p. 53.

• Palgrave, on the King's Council, p. 20; Kemble, vol. ii. p. 188.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »