The Saxon polity. Norman polity. The picture of the political constitution of England under her Saxon kings, which we have sketched from the pages of the learned writers who have elaborately investigated the subject, is replete with interest and instruction. In a primitive state of society, and amongst a simple, loyal-hearted people, such a form of government was admirably adapted to their wants. By it freedom was maintained, life and property protected, and the national welfare advanced. But it may be doubted whether a system suited for such a time would have stood the test of stormier days, or sufficed to give adequate protection to the king and to his councillors under less favourable circumstances. Difficult problems in the art of government require the experience of centuries to solve them aright. The proper relations between the sovereign and his immediate advisers, the position which both should occupy towards the national legislature, the true sphere and appropriate functions of Parliament, are all of them questions of the highest importance to the national welfare. And as we proceed with our narrative, we shall find every one of these questions arising, and obtaining, in their turn, a suitable solution. Unconsciously, and ofttimes without apparent sequence, the efforts of each succeeding generation have been overruled to bring about the final issue. vigour with which at one period the authority of the crown has been asserted, and the wider influence and more independent action claimed for the councils of the crown at another, have both alike contributed to the The formation of our present system. And, happily for England, each new development as it arose was a result of the law of growth, and not the effect of revolution, and is clearly traceable to constitutional principles which existed in the germ in the ancient Saxon polity." The special characteristic of the Norman period was • See Stubbs, v. 1, p. 637; Macaulay, Hist. of Eng. v. 1, p. 25. the growth of a new administrative system, deriving its origin and strength from the royal power. The foundation of this system was accomplished in the reigns of William the Conqueror and his three successors— William II., Henry I., and Stephen. During this epoch the kings of England were practically absolute. The Witenagemot still subsisted, under the title of the Great Council of the realm, but it rather resembled an assembly of courtiers, occasionally convened for state purposes, than an organised deliberative body, subordinate only in privilege and importance to the private and continual' council of the king." From the first introduction of royalty into Britain, Advisers the sovereign has always been surrounded by a select of the band of confidential counsellors, appointed by himself, to advise and assist him in the government of the realm." It may be confidently asserted that there is no period of our history when the sovereign could, according to the law and constitution, act without advice in the public concerns of the kingdom. That the institution of the Crown of England has always had a Privy Council inseparable from it, is a fact which ought never to be lost sight of. This council has always been bound to advise the crown in every branch and act of its executive conduct.' And it is, in fact, the only council, combining in itself both deliberative and administrative functions, which is authoritatively recognised by the law and constitution of England. The number of members composing this council has varied at different periods, according to the king's will, but of ancient time there were twelve, or thereabouts.'* At the era of the Norman Conquest there appears Stubbs, c. xi. lb., v. 1, p. 356. Palgrave, v. 1, p. 325; v. 2, p. 348; Stubbs, v. 1, pp. 149, 343. Palgrave on the King's Council, p. 20; Kemble, v. 2, p. 188; Hearn, J Smith, Parl. Remem. (1862), p. 3. A.D. 1066. to have been three separate councils in existence: one, The king's composed of nobles, who were assembled on special councils. occasions by special writs, and who, together with the great officers and ministers of state, formed the magnum concilium; another, styled the commune concilium, or general parliament of the realm. These two councils were mainly identical in their general character and relations towards the sovereign. Their chief distinction seems to have been in the greater care shown in summoning the members of the commune concilium, to advise the king in more general matters, and especially when grants of money were required. The third council was known as the concilium privatum assiduum ordinarium, or, more frequently, the king's council. It comprised certain select persons of the nobility and great officers of state, specially summoned thereunto by the king's command, and sworn, and with whom the king usually adviseth in matters of state and government.' This council-or probably a committee of it, consisting of the judges, presided over by the king, or (in his absence) the chief justiciary-served also as the supreme court of justice, which, under the denomination of the curia regis, commonly assembled three times in Ordinary every year, wherever the king held his court. The king's ordinary' or 'continual' council was equivalent to that which was known in later times as the Privy Council; although, meanwhile, it differed widely in its organisation. council. 6 'It was by a distribution of its business to subordinate committees that the functions of the Privy Council, in all ages, were performed.'m The legal committee, above mentioned, afterwards developed into a separate 'council learned in the law,' of which the only remains left at the present day is in the titular distinction of Queen's Counsel, accorded to leading members of the legal profession," while the functions of this body are now fulfilled by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.° But, apart from the fact that one was temporary and occasional, and the other permanent, there seems at first to have been but little difference between this body and the other principal councils. Leading nobles were members of the continual' council, and at meetings of the great council they naturally occupied a prominent place, either as members or assistants of that august assembly. nent Regis, or The permanent council under the early Norman Permakings consisted of the great officers of state-namely, Council. the chancellor, the great justiciary, the lord treasurer, Curia the lord steward, the chamberlain, the earl marshal, the Aula constable, and any other persons whom the king chose Regia. to appoint. It also included the archbishops of Canterbury and of York, who claimed the right to form part of every royal council, whether public or private. Besides these persons there were occasionally present the comptroller of the household, the chancellor of the exchequer, the judges, the king's serjeant, &c. This body was then known as the curia regis, otherwise styled the aula regia, or court of the king, and its powers were immense and undefinable. Its duty was to assist the king in the exercise of his royal prerogatives, and to give its sanction to acts done by him in virtue of those prerogatives-the members thereby making themselves responsible for the acts of the king." Thus, it was the executive. It acted also as a court of law. It took part in acts of legislation. In fact, the king, who was at once the ruler and judge of the whole nation, exercised the powers which he possessed, either directly (and this he did to a greater extent than modern students are apt to suppose) or indirectly, through the instrumentality of his great officers.' For • See post, vol. 2. 1829, v. 10, p. 21; Stubbs, v. 1, pp. P First Lords' Report, Lords' Pap. 387, 43€. in considering the interchange of advice between the king and his nobles' during this period, we must divest ourselves of modern notions of constitutional authority, and understand that, according to the ideas prevailing in the eleventh century, it was rather the king's privilege than his duty to receive counsel from the great men of his kingdom. Their recommendations were not, like the advice of modern parliaments or ministers, commands veiled under a polite name, but in the strictest sense counsel; ' nevertheless, there were certain things which the king was never able to accomplish by his mere prerogative. Thus, he could neither legislate, nor impose new taxes, without the consent of his Parliament. And he was bound to rule in accordance with the laws of the realm; and if he broke those laws, his agents or advisers were, from a very early period, in some shape or other, held accountable for his misdeeds. to the national assembly. Moreover, it was the right and duty of the king to demand and receive advice from his great council under all circumstances of difficulty ; a safeguard which the nation always jealously maintained, even though the supreme will of the monarch should be afterwards enforced, in accordance with his acknowledged prerogative. Always remembering, however, that the king of England was never an absolute monarch, but was himself subject to the law. Bracton, A.D. 1250. writing in the thirteenth century, says that it is the law by which he is made king, .. so that if he were without a bridle, that is, the law, his great court ought to put a bridle upon him. For though the king is our The Privy Council: the Arnold Prize Essay, 1860. By A. V. Dicey, B.A., pp. 3-6.-This able essay presents, in a popular form, the results of the researches of Sir Harris Nicolas, in his learned prefaces to the Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council of England,' from 10 Rich. II. (1386) to 33 Henry VIII. (1542). I |