A History and Defence of Magna Charta/Chapter 4
CHAP. IV.
Of the kalends of May.
At laſt I am come to ſearch after the head of Nile, and the true old land-mark of the Engliſh Conſtitution. How parliaments ſtood in the Britiſh times I am not certain; but that there were parliaments then I am certain. I have it from the wiſe Gildas, that Vortigern and his fooliſh thaynes ſent to the Saxons for help againſt the Picts and Scots, and took into their boſoms a warlike and fierce nation, whom at a diſtance they were afraid of. And they indeed of courſe beat thoſe that infeſted Severus’s wall, but they made mine hoſts that invited them in, hewers of wood and drawers of water. And thoſe of the Britons that oppoſed them, the Saxons drove out of their country, whereby as Gildas ſays, all their records were loſt. But out of that venerable author we plainly ſee, that the lamentable letter, which was ſent ſome few years before to the ſenate of Rome, was written by a Britiſh parliament. For whoſe ſake I beg of all nations not to let in legions of foreign nations to be their maſters; for when they want them and their protection moſt, they ſhall go without it. For when the Roman legions were drawn out of Britain (which cauſed our enemies to make an inſult) and the Britiſh parliament begged hard to have them return, the Roman ſenate’s anſwer was, that they were otherwiſe engaged; and they muſt help themſelves as they could, which made them betake themſelves to the Saxons. A very fair anſwer to a nation that was diſabled and diſarmed, after their Kings and parliaments had been only tax-gatherers to the Romans for ſeveral hundreds of years; as, if you have no true Lord Mayor, you muſt fill have pageants, and ſomewhat that keeps up the ſhow.
But after theſe early times, we have ſomewhat in King Edward the Confeſſor’s laws, which all ſucceeding Kings have been ſworn to, which I will try what to make of. It is a yearly folkmote upon the kalends of May. I do not know readily what that yearly folkmote is, becauſe thoſe laws of Edward the Confeſſor ſay that King Arthur invented it; Quod Arthurus Rex inclytus Britonum invenit. Then I am ſure the original name of it was not folkmote. So we will mind the name no more, but come to the thing.
Sir Henry Spelman, in the moſt learned gloſſary that ever was written, I will not except Mr. Somner’s, ſays thus under the word Gemotum[1]; “A wittenagemote was the ſame thing amongſt the Engliſh Saxons, as now at this day a parliament is amongſt us, and a wittenagemote differed little from a folkmote, only that this laſt was annual, and chiefly ſat about the ſtanding affairs of the nation.” The other was called at the King’s pleaſure upon emergencies of the ſtate, and for the ſake of making laws.
Now let us ſee what the learned antiquary ſays concerning folkmotes by themſelves in the ſame place, p. 315.[2] “In a folkmote once every year at the beginning of the kalends of May (as in a yearly parliament) there met together the princes of the realm, as well biſhops as magiftrates, and the freemen. All the laymen are ſworn in the preſence of the biſhops into a mutual covenant with one another, into their fealty to the Kiing, and to preſerve the rights of the kingdom. They conſult of the common ſafety, of peace, of war, and of promoting the public profit.”
It follows in the next words[3], “Beſides, a Folkmote is uſed in every ſudden danger, and likewiſe if neceſſity require it, under the alderman (that is, the earl) of every county.”
This laſt is plainly a provincial Folkmote in time of neceſſity; but the former part of the ſentence ſeems to intimate, that upon a ſurprize, when the King had not time to call a parliament, the laſt Folkmote met; as the laſt Weſtminſter parliament did, to give the prince of Orange the adminiſtration, before it was poſſible to have a parliament elected.
Though the former deſcription of the general and not the provincial Folkmote is our preſent buſineſs. And at firſt ſight it looks like a full parliament, for it conſiſts of the princes, as well biſhops as magiſtrates, and the freemen; that is to ſay, the chiefs of the whole nation. And they are employed in parliament work, for they conſult of the common ſafety, of peace, of war, and promoting the public profit. And did not the general title of our laws every ſeſſion run thus; To the high honour of God, and to the profit of the common-wealth? If ever there were wites in parliament, ſure they were princes, as well biſhops as magiſtrates, and the freemen. Why then does this learned knight diſtinguiſh betwixt a Wittenagemote and a Folkmote, ſeeing they were both made up of wites? I am governed by things and not by words, and am thoroughly ſatisfied that an aſſembly which does parliament buſineſs is a parliament. And no doubt the Folkmote made laws; for it is not to be ſuppoſed that an aſſembly of the whole nation ſhould ſit conſulting forty days of peace and war, of armies and fleets (which in thoſe days were three thouſand ships, and were able to make out the dominion of the seas) of the grievances of the nation, and the redreſs of thoſe grievances; and of providing for the common profit of the realm; and after all not to be able to enact their own concluſions. That is juſt as if our preſent parliament ſhould ſpend forty days in finding out ways and means for the raiſing money, and afterwards were not able to put them into a law: or as we private men uſe to conſult, and debate, and ſettle the nation over a diſh of coffee, without being able to oblige one ſingle man to obey our orders.
The thing which miſled the great antiquary (as I conjecture) to make this mark of difference betwixt a Folkmote and a Wittenagemote, as if a Wittenagemote made laws and a Folkmote not, is this; That when the Saxon Kings iſſued out their laws, they ſaid they had paſſed in their Wittenagemote, concilio ſapientum, or council of wiſe men: and it was proper for the King to call his Folkmote by that name, though not for them themſelves. As for inſtance, the writs of election at this day call for ſome of the diſcreeteſt to be choſen to parliament, though the members do not aſſume that title; and I know ſo much of the old Engliſh genius, that they would no more have called themſelves a Wittenagemote, than this preſent parliament would call their votes, which come out day by day, Journal des Scavans.
But I will wave conjectures, even in antiquities, (though we are there oftentimes forced to go in the dark, to tread upon ruins, and to feel out our way;) becauſe I have direct proof that the Folkmote made all the laws we ever had. And for this I will go no further than to the third branch of the uſual and accuſtomed coronation-oath, taken by the former Kings of England, and taken twice by Richard II[4].
“Do you grant that the juſt laws and cuſtoms, which are of the Folks chuſing, ſhall be kept, and do you promiſe that they ſhall be protected, and, to the honour of God, receive affirmance by you, to the utmoſt of your power? The King ſhall anſwer, I grant and promiſe.”
Now I would fain know how a Folkmote can be otherwiſe expreſſed in Latin than by the word Vulgus, which is a collective word: or how the Vulgus or Folk could chuſe laws any otherwiſe than in a Folkmote?
I will not enter into the ſtiff diſpute which exerciſed K. Charles I. and his parliaments for a long time, whether the word was præter tenſe, or future, and whether the word was beſt rendered in the French tranſlations, the laws which the Folk auront eſleu, ſhall have choſen; or which the Folk eſlieront ſhall hereafter chuſe; whereupon they ſaid, that he was bound to ſign and affirm all the laws they ſhould hereafter preſent to him, and that he could not make uſe of a negative without perjury. I ſay, that that whole diſpute was not worth a farthing. For if the Folk choſe the laws all along down to King Richard the ſecond’s time, and the Kings were ſworn to affirm them, then we know how the laws antiently were made, and who cares whether eſlieront; or chuſing for the future, be the ſenſe of the word or no? For if the Folks chuſing was the conſtitution in King Richard the ſecond’s time, then I would fain know in what King’s reign it was afterwards, that the conſtitution was altered.
In ſhort, the Folk choſe the laws; and I believe the Engliſh Folkmote and Wittenagemote will be found to be old Homer’s river,
Ὃν Ξάνθον καλέυσι Θεοὶ, Θνητοί δε Σκαμάνδρον,
which the gods call Xanthus, but mortal men call Scamander. Now, though Scamander be the homelier name, yet it is the ſame river.
I cannot but ſay there was ſome difference betwixt the Folkmote upon the kalends of May, and the Folkmotes which the King always called for his ardua contingentia, or contingencies of ſtate: but the difference lay only in this, that the Folkmote of the kalends of May was a parliament de more, and of courſe, who aſſembled themſelves, ſub initio kalendarum Maii, ſays Spelman, and were bound to do ſo, in capite kal. Maii, ſay the laws of Edward the confeſſor, cap. xxxv. de greve; (and out of that chapter has Sir Henry Spelman extracted his true account of a general Folkmote, which was anniverſary:) whereas, a Wittenagemote or extraordinary parliament or Folkmote was ſummoned at the King’s pleaſure, and was ever at his call both for time and place. Other difference I can find none. For as for the conſtituent parts of a Folkmote, if the princes of the realm, as well biſhops as magiſtrates, and the freemen, cannot denominate a Wittenagemote, I know not where the King will find his wits, or wiſe-men. I have ſpoken to that point already. I have likewiſe ſpoken to the point of the Folkmotes making laws. We find, indeed, the Saxon Kings in the preface to their laws which were made in extraordinary parliaments, decreeing with their wites, (mid minan ƿitenan) ſome at Greatanlage, and at Midwinter, afterwards at Eaxceſter, as King Athelstan, ſome at Lundenbrig, at the holy Eaſterly tide, as King Edmund; others at Wodeſtock in Mercialand, and others at Wincheſter. Whereby it appears that the Kings of England had a power to ſummon parliaments when and where their weighty affairs required them, in all places of the realm, and at all ſeaſons of the year. This is an undoubted prerogative lodged in the King for the ſake of the ardua contingentia; and no man would govern a kingdom that could not command the advice and aſſiſtance of his ſubjects to be forth-coming, when the occaſions of the kingdom required it. And for the ſake of theſe ardua negotia, the knights, citizens, and burgeſſes are to be impowered to act in parliament-buſineſs by thoſe that ſent them; leſt, for want of a full and ſufficient power, or by means of an improvident election, theſe arduous and weighty affairs of the kingdom ſhould, in any wiſe, remain infecta, or be left undone. This is contained in the preſent writ of eletions directed to every ſheriff of a county at every election of parliament-men.
But that is not my preſent buſineſs; for I am in a further ſearch after the annual, or rather the anniverſary Folkmote.
- ↑ Wittenagemot idem apud Angloſaxones quod apud nos hodie parliamentum, paramque a Folcmoto differebat, niſi quod hoc annuum eſſet & e certis plerumque cauſis, illud ex arduis contingentibus & legum condendarum gratia, ad arbitrium principis indictium.
- ↑ In Folcmoto ſemel quotannis ſub initio kalendarum Maii (tanquam in annuo parliamento) convenere Regni principes, tam epiſcopi quam magiſtratus liberique homines. Jurantur laici omnes coram epiſcopis in mutuum fœdus, in fidelitatem Regis, & in jura regni conſervanda. Conſulitur de communi ſalute, de pace, de bello, & de utilitate publica promovenda.
- ↑ Adhibetur practerea Folcmotum in repentino omni diſcrimine, exigente etiam neceſſitate, ſub aldermanno (hoc eſt, comite) cujuſſibet comitatus.
- ↑ I Hen. IV. membr. 20 inter Decem Scriptores, p. 2746. in theſe words, ſpoken to the King by way of queſtion. Concedis juſtas leges & conſuetudines eſſe tenendas; & promittis per te eſſe protegendas & ad honerem Dei corroborandas quas Vulgus elegerit ſecundum vires tuas? Reſpondebit, Concede & promitto.