The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1893-01-01

Edward l.. whose eyactions were small COM
pared with those OF his father. and whose
LEGISLATION. far from being contrary to the
sririt Of the charters. had for the most part
been In harmony with it
final confirmation Of the charters was made
by Edward l. at the Parliament held In Lincoln
in 1901. This assembly. also. was ono Of his
torical Importance. One Henry OF Keighley.
knight of the shire for Lancashire. presented
a bill embodying suspicious Of the Kings sin
cerity. Edward keenly resented the sus-
picions. and ordered the knight wins had pre-
sented the bill to be imprisoned. The incar-
%ceration Of Henry Of KeiGhley is the first act OF
violence we read OF on the part Of sovereisns
against a popular representative when act
ing in his constitutional capacity as a member
OF Parliament The imprisonment. however.
was OF brief duration. and. according to the
Parliamentary writs. the knight soon reap
peared In Parliament and in the public SER
vice. This Parli .ment OF Lincoln is memorable
for its resistance ~ tho assumption Of Pope
B~oniface to deter Il. e whether Edwards claim
to Scotland was valid. The Parliam ant de-
clared that the King should not answer before
tho Pope or undergo judgment touching his
rights to the kingdom Of Scotland or any
other Of his temporal rights: that he should
not allow his rights to be called in question at
Rome. or send agents thither. and that tho
barons would not suffer him to comply with
the Pope's mandate even were he to issue 1t.
1t is noticeable that the Commons who werc
summoned to Parliament by Edward I. mani
tested at the outset n strange reluctance
to attend. They did not dream that the tim
was to come when thoy were to become the
principal power in tho national Parliament.
Among other important changes effected at
this period was the summoning OF Parliament
to Westminster instead Of to various pro-
vincial towns as had frequently been the case
before. This gave to the legislative assemblya
local habitation and invested it with a porma-
nent character. 1t appears from the Parlia-
mentary writs that In the reign Of Edward I.
tho aggregate number Of cities. towns. and bor-
ouGhs summoned to send members was 1875.
They did not. however. all avail themselves
OF the privilege at tho same time. Thus, in
l205 no fewer than ninety four constituencies
returned members: in 1903 there was only one
representative OF the cities and towns In Parlia-
ment. Some OF the poroughs persisted in max
ing no returns to the SheritTs, while others ac-
tually bought charters OF exemption from the
irksome privilege. Out OF the whole 65 con-
'stituencies more than a third ceased to send
representatives after O single compliance with
the royal summons. From the reign OF Ed
% . liz w Shht " t1cuEy VI. tHb oueTlH OF
Lancashire declined to return tho names Of
any boroughs at all within that county ION
account Of their poverty" Not inirequently
legal measures were necessary to compel the
attendance OF members. but in spite Of all
direct and indirect obstruction. borough repre-
sentation in England was continuous from the
Parliament f1295. Mr.. Smith has tried in vain,
he tells us. to tabulate a list OF the censtitu.
encies represented In this model Parliament
OF Edward j. He has collected. however. q
good deal OF interesting Information on the
subject. Some boroughs appear once in Par
liamentary annals and then not again for con-
turtles. Tregony. for instance. sent represent
atives to tho famous Parliament OF Edward
J.. but after his reign it never returned bur-
gesses until the time OF Elizabeth. Yarmouth
and Newport returned two burgesses to Ed
ward LIS great Parliament. but never sent
afterward to any Parliament until 81 Eliza
beth. Evesham also returned to the Parlia-
ment OF 1875 and once to II council held In the
reign OF Edward I'LL. but never afterward
until James l. enfranchised and incorporated
1t. Hartford made twenty returns In the
reigns of Edward l.. Edward H., and Edward
Ill. but then ceased and was not restored
until Fl James I. These examples demon
strate the erratic nature OF borough repre-
sentation. As to the privilege OF Parliament
which. as We have seen. WAS violated In the
person OF Henry OF Keighley. another breach
OF 1t is complained OF in the role Of petit
lions in Parliament in Is Edward I. This
case. which is cited by Coke. related to the
seizure Of the goods o! theMaster OF the Tenn
pie; whence it appears. says Coke. that "a
member Of the Parliament shall have privilege
OF Parliament not only for his servants but for
his horses or other goods distrainabie."
Before leaving the epoch-making reign of
Edward |. Mr.. Smith sums up the constitu-
tional results which had become secured to
the English people. First. to use the language
quoted from Stubbs. the Parliament was now
not only o concentration OF local machinery,
but an assembly OF estates" The Parliament
Of the present day. and still more clearly the
Parliament OF Edward l., is n combination Of
these two theoretically distinct principles.
The House OF ommon now most distinctly
represents the former idea. which is also con-
s%picuous IN the constitution OF Convocation.
The latter principle. exhibited in that
system OF parliamentary representation OF
the clergy which was an integral rart
OF dward' scheme. Is to some extent seen
In the present constitution OF the House
OF Lords in the case Of the representative
peers Of Ireland and Scotland. On the
other hand, the idea embodied In the
House OF Common may be distinguished
by the term local representation as
distinct from class representation. 1t
should be borne in mind that even I'M
der Edward i. tho third estate had
only consultative and not legislative rights.
AS to tho meaning Of the word Com
mons. Stubs is again quoted to demonstrate
that this " Is not in itself an appropriate ex-
| preston for tho third estate: it does not sig