A History and Defence of Magna Charta

Front matter

A

and

at large,

Introductory Discourse

.

Though it is very difficult to trace the firſt rudiments of the policy and laws eſtabliſhed in England, yet we have the greateſt reaſon to believe, that the natives, even in the earlieſt ages, were divided into ſmall communities, in which a kind of democracy had the aſcendant. Cæsar, on his invaſion of this iſland, ſeems to confirm this opinion in ſeveral paſſages of his commentaries, and expreſsly tells us, “The chief command and adminiſtration of the war was, by the common council, beſtowed on Cassivelan.” In emerging from a ſtate of rudeneſs and ſimplicity, men generally act from that ſpirit of independance to which they have been accuſtomed. It is probable, therefore, that the old inhabitants had no monarch; but, upon any extraordinary occaſion, ſummoned a national meeting and choſe a chief from among thoſe who were the moſt diſtinguiſhed for their abilities.

After the Romans had withdrawn their protection, and the Britons were expoſed to the inſults of the Picts and Scots, they invited over the Anglo

who ſoon after became their tyrants, and formed ſeven Saxon kingdoms upon the ruins of the conquered country. In conſequence of this, the antient inhabitants were exterminated; or forced to ſeek an aſylum in the inacceſſible mountains. Their laws, manners, and language were aboliſhed, and thoſe of the Saxons were eſtabliſhed in their ſtead. To the characters of conquerors theſe people were ambitious to add that of legiſlators: and there is very good reaſon to believe that many of the laws which remain in force even at this day, are the ſame which were brought from the northern parts of Germany by the Saxon invaders. Though the title of King was not uſed amongſt them, their chiefs aſſumed it, ſoon after their arrival in this iſland. In Saxony their governors were appointed by an aſſembly general of the nation, which was called Witennagemot, which, in the Saxon language, ſignifies the meeting of the wiſe men, and which regulated all the important affairs of the ſtate. When the Saxon conqueſts in England were divided into ſeven kingdoms, the monarchs being under a neceſſity of retaining great numbers of their own countrymen among their ſubjects, were cautious of exerciſing a deſpotic power, and therefore continued to hold the Witennagemot wherever the common intereſt of the people was concerned. From

hence in ſome degree we are enabled to determine the nature of their conſtitution; as each kingdom of the Heptarchy had its ſovereign, it was partly monarchical; as the King could not make laws without the conſent of the principal men of the nation, it was, it ſome degree, ariſtocratical; and as the people, who held their lands of the nobles, were ſummoned to the general aſſembly, we have reaſon to ſuppoſe it was, in ſome meaſure, democratical. That the crown was elective ſeems probable from the diſtant branches of the royal family, often ſucceeding to the throne before thoſe who were the neareſt relations of the monarch.

During the dominion of theſe people, which laſted above ſix hundred years, the celebrated Alfred formed a code of laws, that will, for ever, do the greateſt honour to the memory of that amiable prince. Convinced that oppreſſion naturally follows power, to ſcreen the humble from the tyranny of the great, he inſtituted trials by jury; by which, in all criminal caſes it was ordained, that twelve men ſhould decide whether the accuſed perſon was guilty of the offence laid to his charge or not, and that the judge ſhould pronounce ſentence agreeably to their verdict. Theſe twelve jurymen were choſen from amongſt the peers of the delinquent. It is neceſſary to obſerve in this place, that in England there are but two degrees or orders of men; viz. the peers of the realm and commoners. All dukes, marquiſſes, earls, viſcounts, and barons are not only peers of the realm, but peers amongſt themſelves; ſo that the moſt inferior baron is the peer of the greateſt duke. The reſt of the people are called the commoners, without diſtinction, by which the pooreſt labourer is the peer of every one under the degree of a baron. The peers of the realm from this noble privilege, eſtabliſhed or revived by King Alfred, are judged by thoſe of their own rank; that is, by the reſt of the lords; and the commoners by their equals alſo. The only difference between the lords and commons in this matter, is, that every peer has a right to give his voice at the trial of any culprit, of the former denomination; and that twelve men only, are to acquit or condemn any perſon that is claſſed amongſt the latter.

After various revolutions, the ſeven kingdoms were reduced to one, the ſceptre of the Saxons paſſed into the hands of the Danes; and returned, in proceſs of time, into the poſſeſſion of the Saxons again.

During theſe affairs the Engliſh conſtitution, from the beſt accounts, appears to have ſuffered no little alteration; the nobles, by degrees, uſurped an authority which the laws had not entitled them to; they limited the prerogative of the King; and invaded the rights of the people, ſo that the government in England continually approached towards an Ariſtocracy. The inſolence of earl Goodwin to Edward the Confeſſor probably occaſioned that cautious monarch, who had good reaſon to ſuſpect that the earl had intentions of aſpiring to his crown, to invite over to his court William of Normandy. This viſit, furniſhed that enterprizing nobleman ſome years after with a pretence to inherit the throne, for on Harold’s being nominated ſucceſſor to King Edward, William inſiſted that he had been promiſed the crown by the late King, and that Harold himſelf had taken an oath to aſſiſt him in obtaining it; and ſubmitting his cauſe to the judgment of Pope Alexander II. Harold was declared an uſurper by that pontiff.

In conſequence of this deciſion, William invaded England with a powerful army, and ſlew Harold in the memorable battle of Haſtings; and, by that act, ended the government of the Saxons in England, two hundred and thirty ſeven years after the union of the Heptarchy, and ſix hunded and ſeventeen after the landing of Hengist.

William was ſo far from founding his title to the crown upon a right of conqueſt, that he took every method in his power to eſtabliſh the opinion of his being heir to King Edward, from the particular appointment of that monarch, and when he was crowned, ſome time afterwards, the people’s conſent was obtained before he aſcended the throne, and he even made a compact to inſure the liberties of his ſubjects, by ſwearing the ſame coronation oath which had uſually been taken by the Saxon monarchs. Though he violated this engagement afterwards, and greatly oppreſſed and impoveriſhed the people, yet the conſtitution, as an eminent writer obſerves, was not an abſolute monarchy, but an engraftment of the feudal tenures and other Norman cuſtoms upon the antient Saxon laws of Edward the Confeſſor, which King William not only ſwore to maintain, but confirmed afterwards in parliament.

Though it muſt be allowed, that theſe laws were greatly altered, and produced a conſiderable change in power and property, yet they were agreed to, by the whole legiſlature, and the liberty of the ſubject was, in ſome reſpects, preſerved; The freemen, ſays one of the ſtatutes enacted in this reign, ſhall hold and enjoy their land and poſſeſſions, free from all unjuſt exaction and tallage; and nothing ſhall be exacted from them, but their free ſervice, which they, by right, owe to the crown. This, by ſome learned writers, as it was confirmed to the people by the common council of the kingdom, is called the firſt Magna Charta of the Normans.

After the death of the conqueror, who bequeathed the crown to his ſecond ſon William Rufus, the whole nation felt, in the ſevereſt manner, what heavy burthens the feudal laws by arbitrary conſtructions could impoſe upon the ſubject; and how the rights of the King and liberties of the people were infringed by the power of the nobility.

It was from the reign of Henry I. that we ought to derive the firſt regular ſettlement of the Anglo-Norman conſtitution; though the commons, till long after this time, were greatly overbalanced in power and property by the clergy and nobles, who, while they interpoſed between the crown and the people, incroached upon the rights of the latter ſo much, that deſpotiſm itſelf could not be more oppreſſive, and the commonalty ſuffered all the evils of ſlavery under the appearance of freedom.

The feudal government having degenerated into a ſyſtem of tyranny in moſt parts of Europe, and the uſurpations of the nobles having become unbounded and intolerable; the cities of Italy became impatient to ſhake off the yoke of their inſolent lords; and about the beginning of the eleventh century, they united together, boldly aſſumed new privileges, and were rouzed by ſuch a ſpirit of independance, that they formed themſelves into corporate bodies; and, under pretence of recovering their antient property, took poſſeſſion of the caſtles of the barons, and obliged thoſe haughty lords to ſwear an oath of fidelity to them, and even become members of their community, and ſubject their eſtates to all taxes and fines impoſed by the common conſent of the people.

This revolution ſoon made its way into France, where Louis le Gros, in order to take away from the power of the nobility, conferred new privileges upon the inhabitants of that nation, and formed them into corporations, which relieved them from thoſe arbitrary and grievous impoſitions, to which they had formerly been ſubjected, and they were governed by known and equal laws.

Even in the feudal ſyſtem of policy no freeman could be governed or taxed, but by his own con . It was natural, therefore, for the towns, who formerly depended for protection on the lords of whom they held, as ſoon as they were infranchiſed, to be ambitious of acquiring all the rights eſſential to independency. In conſequence of this, as they gained any degree of credit and influence, they inſiſted on the privilege of a deciſive voice in enacting laws and granting ſubſidies.

The happy effects of admitting the repreſentatives of cities into the great council of the nation, were ſoon very apparent. An intermediate power between the King and nobles was eſtabliſhed; which, on ſome occaſions, checked the uſurpations of the one, and at other times oppoſed the encroachment of the other. It was not long before theſe new inſtitutions were introduced into England. Henry I. perceiving that the ſureſt method to obtain the crown and ſet aſide the pretenſions of his elder brother Robert, would be to eſtabliſh himſelf in the favour of the people, by procuring them ſuch national benefits, as would make his intereſt that of the public; took every method to alleviate the heavy burthens which had become ſo inſupportable to the lower rank of his ſubjects; he granted, to give liberty a more ſolid and laſting foundation, the outlines of that celebrated Charter which is the ſubject of the follow ſheets. A Charter in which the Saxon laws in uſe under Edward the Confeſſor, were reſtored to the people, and which annulled all evil cuſtoms, illegal exactions and unjuſt oppreſſions. The King and his ſubjects thus united together by this great inſtrument of mutual obligation; the conduct of that monarch, for ſome time, entirely agreed with the engagements he had made; he remitted a number of debts that were due to the crown, and redreſſed ſeveral grievances which the people complained of, by mitigating the moſt oppreſſive of the feudal laws, and puniſhing ſuch perſons as were enemies to the people, and had made themſelves odious by an abuſe of their power.

On the acceſſion of King Stephen, he acknowledged his being elected by the conſent of the people: he granted them a Charter, in which he confirmed all their liberties, privileges, and immunities; and aboliſhed all the laws relating to hunting and forfeits which had been enacted ſince the conqueſt; and when he broke his compact, afterwards he involved himſelf in troubles that laſted during the greateſt part of his reign.

We ſhall fay nothing here of the grant of the Great Charter, which was obtained in the year one thouſand two hundred and fifteen, from King John, as that intereſting circumſtance is fully treated of in the following hiſtory. It would exceed the limits we have been obliged to preſcribe to ourſelves in this introductory eſſay to particularize the eſtabliſhment of the parliament under Edward I. and the various changes it underwent, from the fraud of ſome, and the violence of others, till the reign of that unfortunate monarch, Charles; whoſe unhappy diſputes with his commons in the year 1628, produced that ſpirited remonſtrance; intitled the petition of rights, which was ſo called, becauſe the drift of it was, not ta deſire of the King any grace or favour, but only the maintenance of the tights of the people.

This celebrated paper was preſented by the commons, the ſecond of June, 1628. and was drawn up in the following words:

“To the King’s moſt excellent Majeſty,

“Humbly ſhew unto our ſovereign lord the King, the lords ſpiritual and temporal, and commons in parliament aſſembled, that whereas, it is declared and enacted by a ſtatute, made in the time of the reign of King Edward I. commonly called Statutum de Tallagio non concedendo, that no tallage or aid ſhould be laid or levied, by the King or his heirs, in this realm, without the good will and aſſent of the archbiſhops, biſhops, earls, barons, knights, burgeſſes, and other freemen of the commonalty of this realm: and by authority of parliament holden in the five and twentieth year of the reign of King Edward III. it is declared and enacted, that from henceforth, no perſon ſhall be compelled to make any loans to the King againſt his will, becauſe ſuch loans were againſt reaſon, and the franchiſe of the land; and by other laws of this realm it is provided, that none ſhall be charged by any charge or impoſition, called a benevolence, nor by ſuch like charge, by which the ſtatutes beforementioned, and other good laws and ſtatutes of this realm, your ſubjects have inherited this freedom, that they ſhould not be compelled to contribute to any tax, tallage, aid, or other like charge, not ſet by common conſent in parliament.

“Yet nevertheleſs, of late, divers commiſſions, directed to ſundry commiſſioners in ſeveral counties with inſtructions, have been iſſued, by means whereof, your people have been, in divers Places, aſſembled, and required to lend certain ſums of money unto your majeſty, and many of them, upon their refuſal ſo to do, have had an oath adminiſtered unto them, not warrantable by the laws and ſtatutes of this realm, and have been conſtrained to become bound to make appearance, and give attendance before your privy-council and in other places, and others of them have been therefore impriſoned, confined, and ſundry other ways moleſted and diſquieted: and divers other charges have been laid and levied upon your people in ſeveral counties, by lord lieutenants, deputy lieutenants, commiſſioners for muſters, Juſtices of peace, and others, by command or direction from your majeſty, or your privy-council, againſt the laws and free cuſtoms of the realm. And where, alſo, by the ſtatute called, The Great Charter of the liberties of England; it is declared and enacted, That no freeman may be taken or impriſoned, or be diſſeized of his freehold of liberties, or his free cuſtoms, or be outlawed or exiled, or in any manner deſtroyed, but by lawful judgement of his Peers, or by the law of the land.

“And in the eight and twentieth year of the reign of King Edward III. it was declared and enacted by authority of parliament, That no man, of what eſtate or condition that he be, ſhould be put out of his lands or tenements, nor taken nor impriſoned, nor diſinherited, nor put to death without being brought to anſwer by due proceſs of law.

“Nevertheless, againſt the tenour of the ſaid ſtatutes, and other, the good laws and ſtatutes of your realm, to that end provided divers of your ſubjects have of late been impriſoned, without any juſt cauſe ſhewed; and when for their deliverance they were brought before your juſtices, by your majeſty’s writs of Habeas Corpus, there to undergo and receive as the court ſhould order, and their keepers commanded to certify the cauſes of their detainer; no cauſe was certified, but that they were detained by your majeſty’s ſpecial command, ſignified by the lords of your privy council, and yet were returned back to ſeveral priſons without being charged with any thing to which they might anſwer according to law.

“And whereas of late great companies of ſoldiers and mariners have been diſperſed into divers counties of the realm, and the inhabitants againſt their wills have been compelled to receive them into their houſes, and there to ſuffer them to ſojourn, againſt the laws and cuſtoms of this realm, and to the great grievance and vexation of the people.

“And whereas alſo by authority of parliament in the twenty fifth year of the reign of King Edward III. it is declared and enacted, that no man ſhould be fore-judged of life or limb, againſt the form of the Great Charter, and the laws of the land, and by the ſaid Great Charter, and other the laws and ſtatutes of this your realm, no man ought to be adjudged to death, but by the laws eſtabliſhed in this your realm, either by the cuſtoms of the ſame realm or by acts of parliament: and whereas no offender of what kind ſoever is exempted from the proceedings to be uſed, and puniſhments to be inflicted by the laws and ſtatutes of this your realm; nevertheleſs of late time, divers commiſſions under your majeſty’s great ſeal have iſſued forth, by which certain perſons have been aſſigned and appointed commiſſioners, with power and authority to proceed within the land, according to the juſtice of martial law againſt ſuch ſoldiers, and mariners, or other diſſolute perſons joining with them, as ſhould commit any murder, robbery, felony, mutiny, or other outrage or miſdemeanor, whatſoever; and by ſuch ſummary courſe and order as is agreeable to martial law, and as is uſed in armies in time of war, to proceed to the trial and condemenation of ſuch offenders, and them to cauſe to be executed and put to death according to the law martial.

“By pretext whereof ſome of your majeſty’s ſubjects have been by ſome of the ſaid commiſſioners put to death; when and where, if by the laws and ſtatutes of the land, they had deſerved death, by the ſame laws and ſtatutes alſo they might, and by no other ought, to have been judged and executed.

“And alſo ſundry grievous offenders by colour thereof, claiming an exemption, have eſcaped the puniſhments due to them by the laws and ſtatutes of this your realm, by reaſon that divers of your officers and miniſters of juſtice have unjuſtly refuſed or foreborne to proceed againſt ſuch offenders according to the ſame laws and ſtatutes, upon pretence that the ſaid offenders were puniſhable only by martial laws and by authority of ſuch commiſſion as aforeſaid; which commiſſion and all others of like nature, are wholly and directly contrary to the ſaid laws and ſtatutes of this your realm.

“They do therefore humbly pray your moſt excellent majeſty that no man hereafter be compelled to make or yield any gift, loan, benevolence, tax, or ſuch like charge, without common conſent by act of parliament; and that none be called to make anſwer, or take ſuch oath, or to give attendance, or be confined, or otherwiſe moleſted or diſquieted concerning the ſame, or for refuſal thereof: and that no freeman in any ſuch manner, as is before mentioned, be impriſoned or detained: and that your majeſty would be pleaſed to remove the ſaid ſoldiers and mariners, and that your people may not be ſo burthened in the time to come: and that the aforeſaid commiſſions for proceeding by martial law, may be revoked, and annulled; and that hereafter, no commiſſions of like nature, may iſſue forth to any perſon or perſons whatſoever, to be executed as aforeſaid, left by colour of them, any of your majeſty’s ſubjects be deſtroyed or put to death, contrary to the laws and franchiſes of the land.

“All which they moſt humbly pray of your moſt excellent majeſty, as their rights and liberties, according to the laws and ſtatutes of this realm: and that your majeſty would alſo vouchſafe to declare, that the awards, doings, and proceedings to the prejudice of your people in any of the premiſes, ſhall not be drawn hereafter into conſequence or example: and that your majeſty would be alſo graciouſly pleaſed, for the further comfort and ſafety of your people, to declare your royal will and pleaſure, that in the things aforeſaid, all your officers and miniſters ſhall ſerve you according to the laws and ſtatutes of this realm, as they tender the honour of your majeſty and the proſperity of this kingdom.”

Though this petition had for its foundation, Magna Charta, ſix other ſtatutes, and a great number of precedents, yet the king endeavoured to evade the paſſing of it into a law, and when it was carried, he was ſo offended with the attempts of his people for an effectual redreſs of their grievances, that he abruptly diſſolved the parliament, and never called another for twelve years afterwards.

In 1640, after the people had made various applications to the monarch, in conſequence of the principles of arbitrary power aſſerted by the court, having bred a general diſcontent, he ſummoned a parliament, which paſſed the celebrated triennial bill providing that a parliament ſhould be held every third year.

On the debate upon this bill, lord Digby, obſerved, that it had been a maxim among the wiſeſt legiſlators, that whoever means to ſettle good laws muſt proceed in them, with a ſiniſter opinion of all mankind; and ſuppoſe that whoever is not wicked, it is for want only of the opportunity. It is that opportunity of being ill, Mr. Speaker, ſaid he, that we muſt take away, if ever we mean to be happy, which can never be done, but by the frequency of parliaments. No ſtate can wiſely be confident of any public miniſter’s continuing good, longer than the rod is over him. Surely therefore there is no man but will conclude with me, that as the deficiency of parliaments, hath been the cauſa cauſarum of all the miſchiefs and diſtempers of the preſent times; ſo the frequency of them is the ſole catholic antidote that can preſerve and ſecure the future from the like.

The unhappy diviſions between this prince and his people, it is well known, at laſt terminated in a civil war, ſoon after which the King loſt his life, the parliament ſeized upon the whole ſovereign authority, and entirely ſubverted the conſtitution.

Upon the re-eſtabliſhment of the government at the reſtoration, the power of the crown was greatly increaſed by the ſervility of the members of the houſe of commons, till the lords, joining with the King, in an attempt to annex the taking and ſettling the public accounts to the prerogative, they met with great oppoſition from the repreſentatives of the people, who thought they had ſubmitted to be fleeced in a moſt unmerciful manner, were not quite ſo tractable as to give up all their rights, but ſpiritedly voted the King’s guards to be unconſtitutional and paſſed the Habeas Corpus bill, which will always make their memory held in eſtimation by every lover of his country.

About this period, the houſe was divided into two parties, one of which was diſtinguiſhed by the name of the Court, and the other by the title of the Country; the former, ſays ſir William Temple, were grown numerous by a practice introduced about five years before this time, by the lord treaſurer, Clifford, of downright buying off one man after another, as they could make the bargain. The country party ſtill continued the majority, and retained more credit upon the corruption of the others, and their profeſſion of adherence to the true intereſts of the nation, eſpecially in the points of France, and popery. Where theſe came in queſtion, many of the court party voted with thoſe of the country, who then carried all before them; but whenever the court appeared to fall in with the true intereſts of the nation, eſpecially in thoſe two points, then many of the country party meaning fairly, fell in with the court and carried the votes; as they ſoon did upon the King’s pretence to grow bold with France, and reſolve upon a war, if the peace was refuſed.

The parliaments held afterwards in the reign of King Charles II. behaved with great ſpirit in paſſing the celebrated excluſion bill; and though the only parliament ſummored by King James, acted with rather too much ſubmiſſion, in granting him the revenues enjoyed by his brother, and depending upon his word for the ſecurity of the church of England, they never gave up the true intereſt of their country, ſince they ſtedfaſtly refuſed ſome time after to coincide with his arbirtrary meaſures.

At the glorious revolution the Bill of Rights further contributed to preſerve the liberties of the people. The contents of this noble inſtrument are as follow:

“I. That the pretended power of ſuſpending of laws, or execution of laws, by regal authority, without conſent of parliament, is illegal.

“II. That the pretended power of diſpenſing with laws or the execution of laws, by regal authority, as it hath been aſſumed and exerciſed of late, is illegal.

“III. That the commiſſion for erecting the late court of commiſſioners for eccleſiaſtical cauſes and all other commiſſioners and courts of the like nature, are illegal and pernicious.

“IV. That the levying of money for or to the uſe of the crown, by pretence of prerogative, without grant of parliament, for longer time, or in any other manner than the ſame is, or ſhall be granted, is illegal.

“V. That it is the right of the ſubjects to petition the King, and all commitments and proſecutions for ſuch petitioning are illegal.

“VI. That the raiſing or keeping a ſtanding army within the kingdom in time of peace, unleſs it be with conſent of parliament, is againſt law.

“VII. That the ſubjects, which are proteſtants, may have arms for their defence, ſuitable to their condition, and as allowed by law.

“VIII. That election of members of parliament ought to be free.

“IX. That the freedom of ſpeech, and debates or proceedings in parliament, ought not to be impeached or queſtioned, in any court or place out of parliament.

“X. That exceſſive bail ought not to be required, nor exceſſive fines impoſed, nor cruel and unuſual puniſhments inflicted.

“XI. That jurors ought to be duly empannelled and returned; and jurors, which paſs upon men in trial for high-treaſon, ought to be freeholders.

“XII. That all grants and promiſes, of fines and forfeitures of particular perſons, before conviction, are illegal and void.

“XIII. And that for redreſs of all grievances, and for the amending, ſtrengthening, and preſerving of the laws, parliaments ought to be held frequently.”

Another popular bill, which paſſed in this reign, was that for limiting the duration of parlia for three years; as the people had ſuffered extremely during the long ſitting of the houſe of commons in the former reigns, in which the triennal act paſſed by Charles I. had been repealed. To the proceedings of the houſe of commons at this time alſo, we owe our preſent happy ſituation, under the houſe of Hanover, the ſucceſſion of which was eſtabliſhed upon the following excellent conditions:

“I. That all things relating to the well governing of this kingdom, which are properly cognizable in the privy-council, ſhall be tranſacted there, and all reſolutions taken thereupon, ſhall be ſigned by the Privy-council.

“II. That no perſon whatſoever, that is not a native of England, Scotland or Ireland, or the dominions thereunto belonging; or who is not born of Engliſh parents beyond the ſeas, although ſuch perſons be naturalized or made denizens, ſhall be capable of any grant of lands, tenements, or hereditaments from the crown to himſelf, or any other in truſt for him.

“III. That upon the further limitation of the crown, in caſe the ſame ſhall hereafter come to any perſon, not being a native of this kingdom of England, this nation be not obliged to engage in any war for the defence of any dominion, or territories, not belonging to the crown of England, without the conſent of parliament.

“IV. That whoſoever ſhall hereafter come to the poſſeſſion of this crown, ſhall join in communion with the church of England as by law eſtabliſhed.

“V. That no pardon be pleadable to any impeachment in parliament.

“VI. That no perſon who ſhall hereafter come to the poſſeſſion of this crown, ſhall go out of the dominions of England, Scotland, or Ireland, without conſent of parliament.

“VII. That no perſon, who has any office under the King, or receives a penſion from the crown, ſhall be capable of ſerving as a member of the houſe of commons.

“VIII. That further Proviſions be made, for the confirming of all laws and ſtatutes for the ſecuring our religion and the rights and liberties of the people.

“IX. That judges’ commiſſions be made Quamdiu ſe bene geſſerint, and their ſaleries aſcertained and eſtabliſhed; but upon the addreſs of either houſe of parliament, it may be lawful to remove them.

“X. That the princes Sophia, dutcheſs dowager of Hanover, be declared the next in ſucceſſion to the crown of England, in the proteſtant line, after his majeſty and the princeſs, and the heirs of their bodies reſpectively; and that the further limitation of the crown be to the ſaid princeſs Sophia and the heirs of her body, being proteſtants.”