Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 3.djvu/149

This page has been validated.
a.d. 1628.]
THE PETITION OF RIGHT PRESENTED.
135

old as he was, by his powerful and undaunted speeches. He called upon the members to stand by the ancient laws, and was stoutly seconded by other members, who narrated the infringement of those laws by the abuses of raising money by loans, by benevolences, and privy seals; by billeting soldiers, and imprisonment of men for refusing these illegal demands, and their refusal of the benefit of the habeas corpus. In vain were the speakers warned by the court party to beware of distrusting the king, who had been driven to these measures by necessity, and by others, who declared that such was the king's goodness that it was next only to that of God. But Coke cried out, "Let us work whilst we have time! I am absolutely for giving supply to his majesty, but yet with some caution. Let us not flatter ourselves. Who will give subsidies if the king may impose what he will? I know he is a religious king, free from personal vices, but he deals with other men's hands, and sees with other men's eyes."

This was approaching the subject of the favourite, which even the boldest were afraid of touching, but which Coke soon after entered upon plainly, and with all courage.

On the 8th of May the house passed the four following resolutions, without a dissentient voice even from the courtiers—1st, That no freeman ought to be restrained or imprisoned, unless some lawful cause of such restraint or imprisonment be expressed. 2nd, That the writ of habeas corpus ought to be granted to every man imprisoned or restrained, though it be at the command of the king or privy council, if he pray for the same. 3rd, That when the return expresses no cause of commitment or restraint, the party ought to be delivered or bailed. 4th. That it is the ancient and undoubted right of every free man, that he hath a full and absolute property in his goods and estates, and that no tax, loan, or benevolence ought to be levied by the king or his ministers, without common consent by act of parliament.

It was clear from these resolutions, that unless Charles chose to forego his illegal practices of raising money without consent of parliament, and imprisoning the subjects without any warrant but his own will, he must abandon all idea of the five subsidies; but his necessities were too great, and the difficulties in the way of continuing to plunder people at his pleasure too formidable to allow him lightly to give up the tempting offer. The loans were less determined than the commons, and this gave him some encouragement. The subject was argued in the commons on his behalf by the attorney-general and the king's counsel, but they found the leading members of the house too strong in their knowledge of constitutional law to be moved from their grand propositions. In the course of the debate the interference of Buckingham was felt, and the brave Sir John Elliot did not let that pass without criticism. "I know not," he said, "by what fatality or importunity it has crept in, but I observe in the close of Mr. Secretary's relation, mention made of another in addition to his majesty, and that which hath been formerly a matter of complaint, I find here still,—a mixture with his majesty, not only in business, but in name. Let me beseech you, sir, let no man hereafter within these walls, take this boldness to introduce it."

On the 28th of May the commons presented to his majesty their celebrated petition of right; a document destined to become celebrated, a confirmation of Magna Charta, and the origin of our Bill of Right secured in 1688, on which rests all the fabric of our present liberties. This petition was based on the four resolutions. It commenced by reminding the monarch of the great statutes passed by some of the most celebrated of his ancestors, which he had been so long and pertinaciously outraging. That the statute De Tallagio non concedendo, made in the reign of Edward I., provided that no tallage nor aid could be levied by the king without consent of parliament. That by another statute of the 25th year of Edward III., no person could be compelled to make any loan to the king without such sanction; such loans being against reason and the charters of the land. There could be no dispute here—the king stood palpably convicted, and had he acted in ignorance, could do so no longer. It then went on:—"And by other laws of this realm, it is provided that none shall be charged by any charge or imposition called a benevolence, nor by such like charge; by which statutes before mentioned, and the other good laws and statutes of the realm, your subjects have inherited this freedom, that they should not be compelled to contribute to any tax, tallage, aid, or other like charge, not set by common consent in parliament: yet, nevertheless, of late, divers commissions, directed to sundry commissioners, in several counties, with instructions, have issued, by pretext whereof your people have been in divers places assembled, and required to lend certain sums of money unto your majesty; and many of them, upon their refusal to do so, have had an unlawful oath administered unto them, not warrantable by the laws and statutes of this realm, and have been constrained to become bound to make appearance and give attendance before your privy council in other places; and others of them have therefore been imprisoned, confined, and sundry other ways molested and disquieted; and divers other charges have been laid and levied upon your people in several counties, by lords-lieutenant, commissioners for musters, justices of peace, and others, by command or direction from your majesty or your privy council, against the laws and free customs of this realm."

The petition next set forth that divers persons refusing to pay these impositions had been imprisoned without cause shown, and on being brought up by habeas corpus to have their cause examined, had been sent back to prison without such fair trial and examination. From this it proceeded to the fact that numbers of soldiers had been billeted in private houses, contrary to the laws, and persons tried by martial law, in cases where they were only amenable to the common law of the land; and moreover, officers and ministers of the king had screened soldiers and sailors who had committed robberies, murders, and other felonies, on the plea that they were only responsible to military tribunals. All these breaches of the statutes, the petition prayed the king to cause to cease, as being contrary to the rights and liberties of the subject, as secured by the laws of the land.

The petition was so clear, and the statutes quoted were so undeniable, that Charles was puzzled what to do. To refuse the prayer of the commons was to forfeit the five tempting subsidies; to admit it simply and fully was to confess that