Page:Englishhistorica36londuoft.djvu/373

1921 WRITS OF ASSISTANCE, 1558-1700 365 of commons, of which, after 1660, he might be a member. 1 But from 1600 to 1660 there was one very important difference between these two officials : while not a word was said to imply that the solicitor -general ought not to sit in the house of commons, the attorney-general, ' by special order of the House of Commons . . . is not eligible to be a member 2 The question first arose in the case of Sir Henry Hobart, the member for Norwich, who was appointed attorney-general in July 1606 ; when parliament reassembled in November, it at once began to discuss with considerable vigour whether Hobart should retain his seat or not : ' The House upon this grew to Division, and by Division to Confusion ; for they were not numbered.' Ultimately it was decided that the matter should be dropped, and Hobart therefore retained his seat. 3 Exactly the same difficulty arose in the parliament of 1614 ; Sir Francis Bacon had become attorney- general in October 1613, but he allowed himself to be elected for Cambridge University in the following year. Once again the commons discussed the matter, and, though Bacon was allowed to retain his seat, an order was passed making the attorney-general ineligible for the future ; 4 consequently, when Sir Thomas Coventry was made attorney-general five days before the opening of the parliament of 1621, he was ordered to vacate his seat, as were also Heath in 1626 and Herbert in 1641. 5 After the Restoration, however, this order seems to have lapsed, and Sir Heneage Finch and his successors appear to have sat in the house of commons without any question being raised. Why this objection was taken to the attorney-general it is difficult to say, but, if Coke is to be trusted, neither the attorney nor the solicitor nor even the Serjeants were welcomed in the lower house, for he says : Further he wished that none of the King's learned counsel should be of the lower house for two respects : one, that their presence there was not well taken ; the other, that there was great use of them above in the higher house. 6 It was probably the latter reason that influenced the commons, and, if we may judge by an incident in 1589, there was some 1 e. g. 27 June 1661 {Lords' Journals, xi. 290) ; 24 November 1680 (ibid. xiii. 686), where he is allowed to go down to the commons ' for this Morning only '. 2 Coke, Institutes, iv. 47-8. 3 Commons' Journals, i. 324, 22 November 1606. 4 Ibid. i. 459, 11 April 1614. Though the order passed is not mentioned here, its existence can be seen from the reference to it on 8 February 1621 [ibid., p. 513). 8 Ibid., pp. 513, 817 ; ii. 75. a From Coke's opinion given in the meeting of the privy council called to consider the preparations necessary for the proposed parliament of 1615. Printed in Spedding, Life and Letters of Bacon, v. 200.