How far different from the Parliament large body of persons interested in the matter of taxation, and though it exhibits, in the two modes of summons, the germ of the distinction between Lords and Commons, yet the assembly for which it provides differs obviously in various ways from the later Parliament. It differed, firstly, in that it was not representative. The clergy are not summoned as an estate, nor are the Commons; of Edw. I. the inferior clergy, the towns, and those freeholders of the shires who held of mesne lords have no place in the commune concilium of the Angevin kings. The model It differed, secondly, in the matters to be submitted to it: the commune concilium was not summoned to advise the king generally, but to assent to a special form of taxation. In fact the representative system had already begun, and the provisions of 1215 described an assembly of a type which was already passing away. The constitution of the shire moot or county court had always been representative, and the practice of representation had been applied to the kingdom at large in 1213. For to a council held in that year had been summoned four discreet men' of each county, to be sent up by the shire moot without reference to their tenure. Shire representation, as opposed to representation of the tenants-in-chief, does not recur until 1254, when the regents of the kingdom (Henry III being in Gascony) summoned four knights from each shire, and representatives of the clergy from each diocese. The towns were first represented in the famous Parliament of Simon de Montfort; and then through various assemblies, more or less completely representative of the various interests of the country, we reach 'the great and model Parliament,' summoned by Edward I in 1295 1. This Parliament, both as to causes of summons, and as to ment, and constitution, may be justly regarded as the ideal of a reprewho were sentative assembly for the age in which it existed. It was in fact to the kingdom what the full county court was to the summoned. 1 Stubbs, Const. Hist. ii. 128. shire, an assemblage in which every class and every interest had a place. And so it was intended to be by the great king who had the skill and courage to adapt the organisation of the county court to the requirements of the kingdom. As it was a just rule,' he says, 'that what concerns all should by all be approved, so it is very plain that we should meet common dangers by remedies devised in common.' of estate of To this Parliament were summoned by special writ the Summons archbishops, bishops, and abbots, and to the writ of summons clergy; of the two former was attached the praemunientes clause directing the attendance of the heads of cathedral chapters, of the archdeacons, and of proctors to represent the chapters and the parochial clergy. Special writs of summons were directed baronage; to seven earls and forty-one barons. And writs were ad- commons. dressed to the sheriffs bidding them cause to be elected two knights of each shire, two citizens of each city, two burgesses of each borough. Thus we get a representation of the three estates of the realm, the clergy, baronage, and commons, and their respective duties are defined in the writs which summon them. The clergy and baronage are summoned 'ad tractandum ordinandum et faciendum,' the commons ad faciendum quod tunc de communi concilio ordinabitur.' Parliament, then, was in its origin, and is still in law, a representative assembly of the three estates of the realm; for all three are still summoned to Parliament. But, in fact, the attendance of the clergy was always given The clergy drop out reluctantly; they preferred to meet in their provincial convocations: there they granted taxes for their own estate, and the kings, since they got what they wanted from these assemblies, ceased to press for the attendance of the clergy in Parliament. They attended the Parliament of 1322 by which from legisthe sources of legislative power were defined, and yet they do not fall within the number of persons or bodies in whom that power was declared to reside. There is no evidence of their lation, from taxation. early con ment. attendance from the end of the fourteenth century onward. In 1664 the mode of granting money by subsidies to meet the extraordinary needs of State was abandoned', and the clergy ceased to offer separate subsidies to the Crown. In 1663, for the last time, they granted separate subsidies; in 1664 the Act which imposes the taxation of the year includes the clergy, but saves their right to tax themselves2; and henceforth no distinction is made in taxing clergy and laity, though the clergy are still summoned in the writs addressed to archbishops and bishops at the commencement of every Parliament. The change in the mode of taxing the clergy was not made with any general assent of Convocation; it was the result of an informal agreement between Archbishop Sheldon and Lord Chancellor Clarendon. The clergy acquired in return, by tacit consent, what they had not before enjoyed, the right to vote for knights of the shires, as freeholders, in respect of their glebes 3. It has been necessary to trace the change from the early councils of the magnates and tenants-in-chief to the full representation of the estates of the realm, because it is not easy to understand some parts of our Parliamentary constitution without reference to their history. Survival of The ancient council of the king passed into the House of stitution of Lords, and carried with it certain privileges and duties atParlia tributable to its earlier stage of existence. It is not as a representation of the baronage but as members of the magnum concilium that the Peers are the hereditary counsellors of the Crown, and in their judicial capacity form an ultimate court of appeal. It is because they were once members of the magnum concilium that the judges are now summoned to 3 See as to the right of the clergy to vote, Commons' Journals, 9th May, 1624, The right 3rd November, 1641; Hatsell Precedents, vol. ii. p. 10 and note. advise, though not to sit as Peers of Parliament. The clergy are still summoned as an estate of the realm, though for centuries their summons has been a mere form. And the connection of the representation of the Commons with the county court and the organisation of the shire is still indicated by the part which the sheriff takes in county elections, while, down to the year 1872, such elections still took place in the county court, and the identity of the member and the powers conferred on him were testified by indentures to which the sheriff and the men of the county were parties. We have now glanced as briefly as may be at the historical beginnings of Parliament, so as to learn what a Parliament is. It is an assemblage of the three estates of the realm, which one of the estates persistently declines to attend. It consists, therefore, of the baronage and commons summoned by the Crown. § 3. Objects of Summons. It will be best to consider next for what purposes it is Objects of summoned, and in what manner. summons: middle The king, when he summoned a Parliament at the beginning in the of our Parliamentary history, had two distinct objects in view, neither of which would have been adequately attained without a representation of the estates as complete as was possible at that time. He wanted money, and he wanted to ascertain money; that the nation was with him in matters of general policy. It was for this reason that the writs to the sheriffs desire that the representatives of the commons may have ample power, 'ita quod pro defectu hujusmodi potestatis negotium infectum non remaneat.' Labour would be thrown away if the representatives granted an aid which their constitutents repudiated. It was for this reason, too, that the Commons were consulted opinion. on questions of general administration and of peace and war, though they endeavoured to adopt the position of critics and advisers without incurring the responsibilities of the executive, and wisely declined to advocate a policy which, if followed, might involve pecuniary liabilities to themselves and their representatives 1. At the At the present time the Commons have entire control over present day: the finances of the country; the revenues with which the financial; Crown can deal without the intervention of Parliament are not enough to carry on the business of government for a single day. No doubt there is a considerable revenue derived from taxes which do not depend on annual Acts of Parliament; but little of this revenue can be applied without the consent of Parliament, which appropriates every session the money which is raised to the services for which it is wanted. legislative; And there is another necessity for the meeting of Parliament which is comparatively modern. The machinery of government has become infinitely complex: it requires to be renewed or remodelled by almost continuous legislation. Some Acts of Parliament are temporary, either because they are experimental, or because they confer powers on the executive which it is thought expedient for the legislature to control by annual enactment. Instances of the first of these kinds of legislation are the Ballot Act and the Employer's Liability Act, of the second the Army Discipline Act. Some Acts give power to executive departments to carry their provisions into effect by rules or orders which must. first be laid upon the tables of the two Houses, and so submitted to the criticism of Parliament. And besides these, there are incessant demands upon Parliament for new legislation, to regulate trades, to confer powers upon public bodies or to impose checks upon the use of powers already conferred, to control the exercise of the rights of property or even of contract. Mediaeval legislation, where it was not simply declaratory of custom, was scanty, and, to judge from the preambles of statutes, timid and even apologetic. Modern legislation is restless, bold, and almost inquisitorial in its dealings with the daily concerns of life. 1 Stubbs, Const. Hist. iii. 603. |