It appears incredible, that, if the whole legislative power had, before the reign of Henry III. been al ways placed in the hands of the nobility and the king, they should not have opposed the extension of it to so many persons of inferior rank ; nor is it pro bable, that any new measure of such magnitude and importance, introduced by the Earl of Leicester, while acting at the head of the nobles and the people in a very dangerous contest against the crown, should have been confirmed and perpetuated by Edward I. But among the close rolls of the 24th of that king, there is a writ of summons to Parliament, in which it is asserted, not as an innovation introduced by the Earl of Leicester, " but ai a maxim'grounded on a most equitable law, established by the foresight and wisdom of sacred princes, that what concerns all, should be done with the approbation of all ; and that dangers to the whole community should be, obviated by remedies provided by the whole community," a species of language which could not, with propriety, have been used by Edward I. if the practice of sum moning the commons to Parliament had been a mea sure of recent introduction. It is, moreover, obser ved, that there is not the slightest intimation, in any of the oldest writs for sending up representatives from cities or, boroughs, that such elections were a novelty. Two claims are still extant, made in the reigns of Edward II. and III. which have been held forth as decisive of the antiquity of the custom of send ing citizens and burgesses to Parliament, even from towns that were held under subjects, and not imme diately of the crown. These are the claims of the towns of St Albans and Barnstaple. In the petition of the borough of St Albans, presented to Parliament in the reign of Edward II. the petitioners assert, that though they held in capite of the crown, an& owed only for all other service their attendance in Parlia ment, yet the sheriff had omitted them in his writs; whereas, both in the reign of the king's father, and all his ptcdecessors, they had always sent members.
This expression, it is alleged, could not linc;e been used, it the commencement of the House of Commons • were to be dated only from the reign of Henry III. Reference is also made to a statute of the 5th year of Richard 11. at. 2. which enacts, " that all and singu lar persons and commonalties, which from henceforth shall have the summons of the Parliament, shall come from henceforth to the Parliaments in the manner as they are bound to do, and have been accustomed with in the realm of England, of old times. And if person of the same realm, which from henceforth shall have the said summons (be he archbishop, bi shop, abbot, prior, duke, earl, baron, banneret, knight of the shire, citizen of city, burgess of borough, or other singular person or commonalty,) do absent himself, &c. he.shall be amerced and otherwise pu nished, according as of old times hath been used to be done within the said realm in the said case.'! There is likewise a petition of the Commons in the second Parliament of Henry V. which sets forth, " that as it hath ever been their libertie and freedom, that there should no statute nor law be made, unless they passed thereto their assent, considering that the commune of your land, the which is and ever hath been a mem ber of your Parliament, be as well assenters as peti tioners," &c. This claim was not disallowed either by the lords or the king.
Such is the general train of reasoning by which the advocates of the antiquity of the House of Com. mons have endeavoured to support their cause. They maintain that the people, that is the citizens and bur gesses, always formed a constituent part of the great council ; that the statutes and records to which they refer, are to be considered as merely sanctioning and confirming an ancient privilege, and not as introdu cing any new measure of policy ; and that although in some periods, and in certain instances, the people seem to have for a time discontinued the exercise of this privilege, yet that this discontinuance has been owing to particular circumstances, and ought not to have any effect upon the general argument.
Those, on the other hand, who deny this high an: tiquity of the commons, contend, and, we think, suc cessfully, that in those periods to which their origin is referred, no such class of men as are denominated citizens and burgesses had any political existence. Although Tacitus affirms, that, among the ancient Germans, the consent of all the members of the com munity was required in every important deliberation ; yet he speaks not of representatives ; and this ancient practice, mentioned by the Roman historian, could only have place among small tribes, where every ci tizen might, without inconvenience, be assembled upon any extraordinary emergency. With regard to the Saxon Wittenagemote, it has not been determin ed with any degree of certainty by antiquaries, who were its constituent members. Besides the prelates and aldermen, or nobles, mention is also made of the wiles, or wise men, as a component part of this nh tional council; but who these 'wites were, it is not easy to ascertain from a review of the laws and his tory of that period: Some have supposed that they were the judges, or men learned in the law ; others, that they were the representatives of boroughs, or what we now call the Commons. This latter sup posi?3n, however, appears to be contradicted by the expressions employed by all ancient historians, in mentioning the Wittenagemote., The members are almost alway called the principes, satrapce, op timates, magnates, proceres ; which terms seem to apply only to an aristocracy, and to exclude the commons. Besides, the boroughs, from the low state of commerce, were, in those times, so small and so poor, and the inhabitants lived in such a state of dependence upon the feudal nobility, that it does not appear at all probable- they would be admitted as a part of the national councils. We have already seen how slowly they emerged from this dependent state ; and how gradually they acquired those privileges which entitle them to the rank of free men, and-enabled them to exert an influence on the affairs of government. It may be remarked, too, that the commons are well known to have had no share in the governments established by the Franks, Burgundians, and other northern nations ; and it is by no means probable, that the Saxons, who remained long er barbarous and uncivilized than those other tribes, could have ever thought of conferring such an ho nourable privilege on trade and industry. Indeed, in those rude ages, all who could boast the rank of free men were soldiers, and therefore the military profes sion was alone considered as honourable. The arts of industry were held in little repute, and were chief ly cultivated by persons in a servile condition. Even at the period of the conquest, as appears from Domes day-book, the greatest boroughs were scarcely more than country villages ; and the inhabitants were of a, station little better , than servile. These boroughs were not then so much as incorporated ; they formed no community ; they were not regarded as a body po litic ; and being merely formed of a number of low, dependent mechanics, living in neighbourhood to gether, without ally particular civil tie, they were in capable of being represented in the states of the king dom. The first corporation, even in France, which made more early advances in arts and civilization than England, is sixty years posterior to the conquest ; and in Normandy, the constitution of which was most likely to be William's model in raising his new fabric of English government, the states were entire ly composed of the clergy and nobility ; and the first incorporated boroughs, or communities, of that duchy, were Rouen and Falaise, which enjoyed their privileges by ,a grant of Philip Augustus, in the year 1207. The famous charter, as it is called, of the conqueror, 'to the city of London, although granted at a time when he assumed the appearance of gentleness and lenity, is nothing but a letter of pro tection, and a declaration that the citizens should not be treated as slaves.