I <
- 4
/
A N
INQUIRY
INTO THE
JilSE AND PROGRESS OF PARLIAMENT,
CHIEFLY IN SCOTLAND;
AND
A Completes Y STEM of tiieLaw concerning the
Elections of the Representatives from Scot-
land TO THE Parliament of Great Britain.
TO WHICH IS ADDED
AN APPENDIX,
CONTAINING SEVERAL CURIOUS PAPERS AND INSTRUMENTS,
AND FULL COPIES OF THE ELECTION STATUTES.
By A L E X A N D E R WIGHT, Esquire, Advocate,
S. S. A. Scot.
EDINBURGH:
Printkdfor WILLIAM CREECH;
AND SOLD BY
T. C A D E L L, IN THE Strand, Londok,
M,DCC,I.XXXIV.
TO THE MOST NOBLE
iij
t^ WILLIAM HENRY CAVENDISH E,
.J
<
CO
cn
4
DUKE OF PORTLAND, &c. &c.
THE FOLLOWING SHEETS ARE,
WITH THE GREATEST RESPECT,
INSCRIBED,
BY HIS GRACE'S MUCH OBLIGED,
AND MOST OBEDIENT SERVANT,
ALEXANDER WIGHT.
;i£B3G05
ADVERTISEMENT.
SO M E years ago the Author puhliflied, in Oclavo, a " Trcatife
"on the Laws concerning the Elcdion of tlie different Rcpre-
" fentatives fcnt from Scotland to the Parliament of Great Britain,
" with a Preliminary View of the Conftitution of the Parliaments
" of England and Scotland before the Union of the two kingdoms."
Since that time, many new cafes have occurred, which have -been
the fubjea: of decifion in the Court of SefTion, and in Committees
of the Eloufe of Commons.
•
On that account, and in order to corred fome miftakes, the
Author intended to publifli a Second Edition. But the additions
which he found it neceflTary to make in almoft every page, foon con-
vinced him that his Publication would form a new work rather than-
another edition of a former one ; efpecially as, from his refearches,
he thought himfelf enabled to throw confiderablc additional light
upon the Ancient Conftitution of the Parliament of Scotland, a fub-
jed which has been but little attended to by the Hiftorians of that
part of the united kingdom.
The prefent Volume appears, therefore, under a different title.
It has been confiderably augmented, by inferting in the Appendix
the Ads of the Parliaments of Scotland and Great Britain relative
to the fubjed. The Autlior, however, flatters himfelf that the work
will be more complete and ufeful by this addition, which was fug-
gefted by a friend, to whom, and to fome others whofe names it
would do him honour to mention, he lay under great obligations in
the profecution of this undertaking.
C O N-
C O N T E N T S.
INTRODUCTION . . . . Page i
Book I. Of the Rife and Progrefs of Parliament in Great Bri-
tain . . . . . . . . 5
Chap. I. Of the Parliament of England .... 5
Chap. II. Of the P arliantent of Scotland . . . 17
Sect. I. Of the Origin and Ancient Confitution of the Parlia-
ment of Scotland
I
/
Sect. II. Of the Alterations in the Confitution of the Parliament
of Scotland, from the Introdu^ion of Reprcfentatives of Bo-
roughs, doivn to the Ufiion of the tijoo Kingdoms . 49
Sect. III. Of the mofl Remarkable Differences betzveen the tijuo
Parliaments of England and Scotland . . . 82
Chap. III. Of the EJlabli/ljmcnt of the Parliament of Great Bri-
tain by the Treaty of Union ; a7id of the Reprefentation alloiv-
ed to Scotland . . . . . . 105
Book II. Of the Eledion of the Sixteen Peers of Scotland 113
Chap. I. Of the ^lalif cations neccffary to entitle a pcrfon to Vote
in the Election of the Sixteen Peers of Scotland . . 113
Chap. II. Of the Manner of El e cling the Sixteen Peers of Scot-
land . . . . . . . 123
Book III. Of the Eledion of the CommifTioncrs from the Shires
of Scotland . . . . . . .131
Chap.
vlii CONTENTS.
Page
Chap. I. Of the Freeholders Roll . . . . 131
Chap. U. Of the ^lalijications necejjary to entitle a ferfon to he
enrolled a Freeholder . . . . • 158
Chap. III. Of certain Circumfances, independent of the Title^
ivhich d fable perfons from being admitted upon the Freehol-
ders Roll, or from Voting in the Eletlion of Commifftoners
from Shires ... . . . 267
Chap. IV. Of the Alterations in the Circumjiances of a Free-
holder fufficient to frike him off the Roll . . . 279
Chap. V. Of the Perfons entitled to be eleded Commifjioners to
Parliatnent from Shires or Steiixirtries in Scotland . 289
Caap. VI. Of the Mode of Procedure in the Flexion of Commif-
ftoners to Parliament from Shires in Scotland . . 302
Chap. VII. Of Returns by Clerks a?id Sheriffs . . 318
Book IV, Of the Eledion of the Rcprefentatives of the Royal
Boroughs of Scotland . . . . . 329
Chap. I. Of the Conjlittition of Royal Boroughs in Scotland; and
of the Annual Eleflion of Magijlrates and Counfellors . 330
Chap. II. Of the Manner of Eletling the Rcprefentatives of the
Boroughs . . . . . . 361
Chap, III. Of the ^lalif cations neccffary to entitle a perfon to
be elected a Burgefs to ferve in Parliament . , 400
APPENDIX . . . . . 405
No. I, Indenture betiveen Robert Bruce and the Earls, Barons,
Freeholders, and Commmiities of Boroughs . . 405
No. II. Charter by James III. to the Borough of Invernefs 408
No. III. AH of William and Mary refpetling the Borough of
Anjlruther Wejier . . . . . 4^5
No.
CONTENTS. Ix
Page
No. IV. Litem A^ornatus ad Farliamentum . . 416
1^0. Y. Ad of the Parliament I s^ 5 • • . 418
No. VI. yld of the Parliament 1681 . . . . 420
No. VII. Part of a Letter from Thomas Randolph to Sir Wil-
liam Cecil . . . . ... 42 1
No. VIII. Petition of the leffer Barons to the Parliament held
in Aitgufl 1560 . . . ... 423
No. IX. Roll of the Parliament 1479 . . . 425
No. X. Roll of the Parliament 1524 . . . 426
No. XI. T'he names of the Lords and Burgejfes of the Parlia-
ment held in Scotland in Augiifl 1560 . . . 427
No. XII. Original draught of the Minute of the firfl Meeting
of the Parliament 1579 . . . . 431
No. XIII. Commifjion from the Freeholders of a Shire to their
Reprefentatinjes in the Parliament of Scotland . . 440
No. XIV. Minute of Parliament Oflober 26. 1669 . 441
No. XV. Order to the DireSlor of the Chancery to iffue Writs
or Precepts . . . . . . 442
No. XVI. Precept from the Chancery to a Sheriff or Bailie 443
No. XVII. Special Precept to a Prelate . . , a a a
No. XVIII. Special Precept to an Earl or Lord of Parliament 444
No. XIX. Proclamation for calling a Parliament in Scotland 445
No. XX. Warrants for New Eledions during the fitting of
Parliament . . . - . . . 446
No. XXI. KeitJjs Account of an Afl in 1542-3, allo'iving the
Bible to he read in the 'vulgar tongue .. . 447
No. XXI. Ad of the Parliament 1663, cap. i. . 450
No. XXII. State of the Reprefentatives from England to the
Houfe of Commons . . . . . 4^^
No. XXIII. Lif of all the Royal Boroughs in Scotland, as di-
vided into their feveral di/lrids, in ivhich the precedence of
b the-
.s: 'CONTENTS.
Page
the Boroughs in each diJir'iB is ohferved, according to the or-
der in ivhich they ivere called in the rolls of the Parliament
of Scotland . . . . . , 453
No. XXIV. Proclamation for Eleiling and Summoning the Six-
teen Peers of Scotland . . ... 454
No. XXV. Fortn of a Proxy by a Peer . . . 456
No, XXVI. Form of a Signed Lifl by a Peer . . 457
No. XXVII, Certificate by a Sheriff of a Peers having quali-
fied himfelf to grant a, proxy ^ or fend a figned lifi . 458
No, XXVIII. Roll of the Peers that nvas daily called in the
lafi Parliament of Scotland . . . . 459
No. XXIX. Certificate or Return by the Clerk Regi/ler^ or
Clerks of Seffion, of the Sixteen Peers chofen . 461
No. XXX. Warrant by ^ceen Mary to the Sheriff of ^berdeen^
in 1548, for extending or retouring all the lands of that comi-
ty .... . . • . 4^2
No. XXXI. Retour of the Mill and Mill Lands of Carridden 464
No. XXXII. Ad of the Parliament 1681 . . 467
No. XXXIII. Minuteof Parliament of the \Zth of Augjfl 16^1 468
No. XXXIV. Form of the Writ to the Sheriffs upon the calling
of a Parliament . . . • . . 469
No. XXXV. Form of a Sheriff'' s intimation of a Writ . 471
No. XXXVI. Form of the Execution of the intimation . 473
No. XXXVII. Form of the Sheriff's amiexmg to the Writ the
Return made by the Clerk to the Freeholders . . 474
No. XXXVIII. Charter of EreSlion of the Borough of Ayr 475
No. XXXIX. Judgment of the Privy Council of Scotland re-
fpecling the Borough of Stirling . . . 478
No. XL. Warrant for a Poll Election in the Borough of An-
fi rut her Wefier . . . . . .486
No. XLI. Precept from a Sheriff to a Borough . . 488
No.
CONTENTS. xi
Page
No. XLII, Cou'.mijfion from a Borough to a Commifftoner or De^
legate^ to vote for a Burgefs toferve in Parliament . 489
No. XLII. Indenture hetiveen a Sheriff and a Clerk of a prefi-
ding Borough . . . . . . 491-
No. XL II I. Commiff ton front a Borough to the Parliament of
Scotland . . . . . . .493
No. XLIV. Letter by Ki?ig Charles II. to the Royal Boroughs^
dated July 2i' 1674 ... . . . 494
No. XLV. Acl of the Convention of Royal Boroughs in fuly
i^ys . . . . . . .495
No. XL VI. Proclamation for dijolving a Parliament of Great
Britain^ and declaring the calling another . . 49.8
No. XL VII. Warrant for iffuing Parliamentary Writs . 499
No. XLV II I. IVrit of Summons to a Peer . . 500
No. XLIX. Proxy by a Peer to another Peer, to a^ and vote.
for him in the Houfe of Lords . . . .501
No. L. Letter of Proxy frofn a I'emporal Lord, in the reign of
Henry VIII. . . . . . . 502
No. LI. Letter of Proxy from a Spiritual Lord in the reign of
Henry VUL . . . . . . 503
No. LII. Deputation by the Lord Steit'ard of his Majeflys
Haife hold, for ad?nini/lering the Oaths to the Members of
the Houfe of Commons . . . . . ^■04
No. LIII. Lijl of the Shires in Scotland, according to the order
in ivhich they ivere called in the ScottifJj Parliament 506
A£i of James L parliament Hi. 142J, cap. ^2. , , 507
Acl of James L pari. vii. 1427, cap. 101. . . 508
AS} of James //. pari. xiv. 1457, ^^P' 75* • • 5^9
ASl of James IV. pari. vi. 1503, cap. 78. , 509
Acl of James VI, pari, xi. 1587, cap. 114. . . 510
ASl of James VI, pari, xv, 1597, cap, 276. , . 513
b 2. Aa
xii CONTENTS.
• Page
yici of Charles IF. pari. i. 1661, cap. ^^. . , 513
AH of Charles 11. pari. Hi. 1681, cap. ii. . . 515
jiH of S^ueen Anne, pari. i. feff. 4. 1707, cap. 8. . .519
Ad 6(0 Annae, cap. 6. . . ... 524
Ad 6to Annae, cap. 23. . , . . 526
Ad i2mo Antiae, cap. 6. . . . . . 537
Ad into Georgii I. cap. 13. . . . . 540
Ad ido Georgii II. cap. 24. . . ... 542
Ad jmo Georgii II. cap. 16. . . . . 548
Ad 1 6to Georgii II. cap. 11. . . . . 554
Ad i/^to Georgii III. cap. 81. . . . . 580
Ad 22do Georgii III. cap. 41. . . . .582
Ad 22 do Georgii III. cap. 45. . . . . 585
ERRATA.
E R R A
Page 7. line 14, for Monarch read Monarchs.
23. 13. after poteftate add comma.
90. penult,ycr nth read loth.
121. 23 . for oath read oaths.
157. 1 8. for ftatutory read ftatutable.
163. 23. for returned read retoured.
191. 19. after this dele was.
205. 9. for him read them.
238. II. for Anne read Annae.
253. 29. for an read the.
256. 7. for oath read oaths.
276. 6. for ftatutory read ftatutable.
296. 12. after it add to.
332. penult, y«r ponte rfj(/ parte.
345. 25. y^y exclude ;rrt include.
INTRODUCTION.
REAT BRITAIN is the only monarchical ftate now ex-
~-X ifting, where the rights and privileges of the fubje£l are, by
the conftitution, pevfeo/)?Jm/, which was not meant
to denote any particular rank or order of the legiflature, but the
Laity in oppofition to the clergy ; ' clero etiam, adquiefcenteque po-
' pulo;' for in that fenfe it muft always be underflood, whenfoever
we find it, as here, joined to the clcnu, or clergy. Of this many
inftances might be given from public inftruments. Several are taken
notice of by Dodor Brady in his anfwer to Mr Petit, page 70. et
The term communitas regni, which frequently occurs in the old
ftatutes, is alfo reforted to in aid of this favourite fyftem, but affords
it no fupport. The ' tota communitas rcgni,' mentioned in the 7th
chapter of the Stattita Willielmi, which begins thus, ' Aflifa regis
' Willielmi, fadta apud Perth, quam Epifcopi, Abbates, Comites, Bar
' rones, Thani, et tota communitas regni, tenere firmiter juraverunt,'
is either merely exegetic, or applicable to the fmall barons only, the
' probi
Chap. U. OF S C O T L A N D. 25
* probi homines terrac,' taken notice of in the preamble or title, and
the ' libere tenentes' of the 32(1 chapter. In the like manner,
the fourth chapter of the ftatutes of Alexander II. where it is faid,
' Statult Rex, per confilium et afTenfiim totiiis coramunitatis fuae,'
proves only that the particular regulation then promulgated, was
enaQed with the advice and confent of the whole flate, or com-
munity, as reprefented by the great council, but affords no pre-
tence for the introdudlion of burgefles. Were we indeed to apply
the ' tota communitas' to them, we muft exclude all the other mem-
bers of that aflembly from' having had any hand in the enad-
ment of that ftatute. This will alfo ferve as an anfwer to an
argument attempted to be inferred from the fame expreflion be-
ing ufed iii the preamble to the laws of Robert I, We know, in-
deed, that, even in later times, the word communitas was frequently
ufed to denote the whole colledive body of the parliament. Thus,
in the ftatutes of David II. cap. 28. and 29. we find, ' Statutum fuit
* per Regem et communitatera Scociae,' and ' ordinatum fuit coram
* Rege in pleno parliamento apud Sconam, et per Regem et com-
' munitatem Scotiae ;' and we are not at liberty to apply this term,
of generality to burgefles in particular, unlefs when, as in the in-
denture between Robert Bruce and his fubjedhsj the word burgoriim.
is added.
We fhall pay ftill lefs regard to any argument drawn from thefe.
words, when we confider in what fenfe they are ufed in a variety of
public inftruments to be found in Rymer's Foedera. A few inftances
fhall be given.
The letter from the Scottifh nation, or, as it is called, Litera com-
munitatis Scotiae^ to Edward I. of England, counfelling a marriage
between Margaret of Norway and his eldeft fon. \vi? vrrirten in the
D- r^^.:^,r-
26 OF THE PARLIAMENT Book I.
names of the four Guardians of the kingdom, ten Bifhops, twelve
Earls, twenty Abbots, eleven Priors, and forty-eight Barons. No
notice whatever is taken in it of the boroughs ; yet it bears, that
they ' avaundyt Gardeyns, Evefques, Countes, Abbes, Priurs, et
* Barons,' were to fend ambafladors to London to treat on that mat-
ter, and others touching the ftate of the kingdom of Scotland, ' pur
' nus ct pur eus, et pur tote la commune de Efcoce *.'
Another inftrument of certain ambafladors from England, relative
to a treaty concluded between them and the Scottifli nation, bears,
' Cum inter caetera contingunt negotium et tradtatum, habltum inter
' excellentiffimum principem dominum noftrum fupra didum ex
' parte una, et venerabiles patres, Cufl;odes, et ceteros Epifcopos, Ab-
' bates, et totum clericam, nobiles viros, Comites, et Barones, totam-
* que conwmnitatem regni Scotlae ex altera,' &c. "}".
\n like manner, the letter from Edward L to Eric King of Nor-
way, refpefting the marriage of the Princefs Margaret, after men-
tioning his having obtained the Pope's difpenfation, proceeds thus :
* Ad quod utique cuftodes, magnates, praelati, ac tota cointminitas
' praedidli regni Scotiae unanimi et exprefla voluntate fua praebue-
' runt jam confenfum if.'
We are by no means at liberty to fuppofe, that, by the expreflion
tota communitas, or tote la commune, in thefe writings, boroughs, or
reprefentatives of them, were alluded to, but muft confider it mere-
ly as exegetic, and ufed, in order to denote more clearly, that the
meafures agreed to by the ranks and orders of men particularly
mentioned,
* Foed. vol. 2. pag. 471,
f Ibid. vol. 2. pag. 482.
X Ibid. vol. 2. pag. 474.
Chap. IL O F S C O T L A N I>. 27
mentioned, were to be underftood the meafures of the whole nation.
It is indeed a ftrange interpretation of the wovd, communitcu to make
it fignlfy the con:mons, a term never ufed in the parliamentary lan-
guage of Scotland in thofe days.
In England, the fame general term was much ufed, even when
totally unneceiTary. The writ iHued to the fheriff of Noithampton-
fliirc, in the twenty-third of Edward I. after ordering him to return
two knights from the county, and two citizens, or burgcflcs, from
each city or borough within it, proceeds as follows: ' Ita quod didti
* milites plenam et fufBcientem poteftatem pro fe et commumtate
' comitatus praedidi, et didi cives et burgenfes pro fe ct communitate-
* civitatum et burgorum praedidorum, divifim ab ipfis, hinc ibidem
' habcant.' In like manner, a commijfllon for colleding an aid
granted in the firft of Edward II. begins thus: 'Rex militibus, libe-
* ris hominibus, et toll communitati comitatus de Middlefcx, tarn in-
' fra libertates quam extra, falutem ; cum Comites, Barones, milites,
* liberi homines ac commiinitates comitatuum regni noftri, vicefimum
* omnium bonorum fuorum mobilium, civefque et burgenfes, ac cotn-
* munitates omnium civitatum et burgorum ejufdem regni,' Sec. This
was indeed a matter of common ftile, and fhews the impropriety of
laying fo much ftrefs upon the word communitas^ and of fuppofing,.
that, when it is added to a more particular enumeration of the con-
ftituent members of the parliament, or great council of the nation,
the commons^ or reprefentatives of cities and boroughs, muft be un-
derftood to be thereby denoted. The conmunitates hiirgonim are
well known ; They properly fignlfy the feled bodies to whom the
guardianfliip and the management of the boroughs were committed,
whether they confifted of a mayor and aldermen, or jurats, or of
provoft, bailies, and counfcllors. AVhen, therefore, we hear of the
commun'itas civitatis de A, or hirgi de B. we arc thereby to under-
ftand the rulers of fuch city or borough;, but to fuppofe that the-
D 2 commiinitai
zS OF THE PARLIAMENT Book I,
comuiunltas regni is applicable to burgefles in particular, feems the
play of a lively imagination, rather than an opinion formed on ma-
ture refledion. Even in the indenture between Robert Bruce and
liis fubjcds, vvc find, after the Co mites, Barones, lil)ere tenentes, and
ihe comminiitates biirgoruw, the following unneceflary and fuperflu-
ous addition, ' ;ic univerfam communitatem totius regni,'
A more plaufible argument in favour of this hypothefis, of a
very ancient reprefentation of the boroughs, has been drawn from
the following, paffage of Fordun : ' Hoc anno (1211) Rex Scotiae
* Willielmiis magnum tenuit concilium apud Strivelyn, ubi interfuit
' frater ejus Comes David de Huntyndon, paulo port feftum Sandti
' Michaelis, ubi petito ab optimatibus auxilio, pro pecunia regi
' Anp^liac folvenda, promiferunt fe daturos decern mille marcas, prae-
* ter burgenfes regni qui fex millia marcarum promiferunt, praeter
* ecclefias, fuper quas nihil imj)onere praefumpferunr.' But, even
allowing the moft implicit credit to this author, with refped to the
fadl related by him, yet it is by no means a neceflary conclufion,
that, in thofe days, the burgeifes were underftood to piake a part of
the great council of the nation, or that they were bound to give fuit
and prefence there. There was no general tax then impofed. Had
that been the motive for calling this council, the clergy, who, in
later times, bore the burden of one half of all taxes upon landed
property, would not have been fpared, how prefumptuous foever it
might appear to the monk Fordun for laics to prefcribe to then in
fuch matters, Befides, Fordun does not (ay that the burgefTes were
prefcnt at that council, or that it was there they had promifed fix
thoufand merks. Taking his words literally, it was from the opti-
viates only the aid was afked by the King. It is however needlefs
to go lo critically to work; for although, upon an occafion of this
kind, the boroughs may have been induced to contribute a confide-
rable fum towards payment of the debt due to England, we are not
at
CiiAP. II. O F S G O T L A N D. 29
at liberty thence to infer, that they were then become a regular and
conRitution.yl branch of the great council of the nation, or that any
fhare of the legiflative power had been committed to them. Even
tlie famous indenture !)etvveen Robert liruce and the Earls, Barons,
freeholders, and communities of boroughs, in 1,326, goes no farther
than to prove, tliat, when aii extraordinary aid was to be advanced
by any particular order or rank of men in the ftate, their own con-
fent was neceflary ; and affords no evidence that the boroughs were,
at that time, become a nccclTary part of the parliament in other re-
Jpedts, tliough they undoubtedly were fo in the reign of David 11.
In thofe times it was feldom neceifary to impofe taxes upon the
fubjedls, or to require money from them. The royal demefnes, and
the feudal incidents, and other accuPtomed duties, were fuflTicient to
anfvver the ordinary expence of government; and the military force
rcquifitc either for defending the kingdom, or for making incurfions
into England, was not compofed of ftipcndiary troops, and needed
no extraordinary fupplies. It was only upon very prefTing occa-
fions that any thing of that fort became neceflary, and, on thefe oc-
cafions, the different orders of the ftate contributed according to
their inclinations and abilities. Although, therefore, we read of the
King calling a council, and demanding an extraordinary aid, we are
not thence to prefume, that all the different orders of men who pro-
mifed fuch aid, were neceflary or conftitutional parts of the parlia-
ment, whofe deliberations were feldom turned towards fuch objedls,
but whofe concurrence was an eflential requifite in the enading of
laws, and in every thing of moment that related to the general wel-
fare of the ftate. It is believed, that, in England, the burgefles, for
fome time after their introduiftion to parliament, feparated after they
had confented to the taxes required of them, although the other
branches of that afl'embly continued to fit, and to deliberate upon
the bufmefs of the nation *. The reprefentatives of cities and bp-
rouirhs,
* Hume, vol. 2. page 91.
30 OFTHEPARLIAMENT Book I.
roughs, who were fummoned ,to parliament in 1283, appear alfo to
have met at the village of A£ton Burnet, while the reft fat at Shrewf-
bury *.
Itiias been farther obferved, that, in the league concluded be-
tween John Baliol and Philip of France, the towns and boroughs
of Scotland appear as a branch of the parliament, under the defcrip-
tion of uni'verfi tales et communitates civitatum et 'uillarum regtii Sco-
tiae. But the only ground for this obfervation is, its being mention-
ed by Philip in his inftrument, that the ambafladors of the King of
Scotland had promiied the concurrence of all the different orders of
men in that kingdom in a war againft England, and to fend their
letters to the King of France, to that effedt, under their feals: ' Pro-
* miferunt infuper pariter procuratores praefati procuratorio nomine
' memorati Regis Scotiae, eundem regem curaturum et effetlturum,
* quod tam Praelati, (quatenus eis de jure licebit), quam Comites,
' Barones, et alii nobiles, nee non univerfitates et communitates vil-
* larum regnl Scotiae, erga nos et fuccefTores noftros, in guerra prae-
* dida, pari modo in omnibus (fieut di£lum eft fuperius) fe habe-
' bunt, didoque Regi Angliae fimili modo totis fuis viribus guerram
* facient, ficut fuperius eft expreffum : Quodque tam praelati, quam
' Comvtes, Barones, ac alii nobiles, ac univerfitates coramunitatefque
* notabiks didi regni Scotiae, fuas nobis fuper hoc patentes literas
* fuis munitas figillis, quam citius fieri poterit deftinabunt t*' This,
no doubt, fhews, that Baliol, and his ambafladors, anxious to pro-
cure the French King's alliance, wllhed to convince him of the hear-
ty inclination of the whole Scottifli nation to join in a war againft
England ; but it affords no evidence that the boroughs made a con-
ftituent part of the parliament at that period.
The
* Doftor Henry, voK 4. page 358.
j J'oed. vol. 2. pag. 695.
Chap. II. O V SCOTLAND. 31
The fiimous letter to the Pope has likewife been appealed to as
a piece of evidence in favour of this hypothcfis ; but it is equally
indecifive. It v^'as written in the names, iji^oi {cvcrs.\Comites ; 2dly,
of the Senefcallus and the Buttelarius Scotiac ; ylly, of Jacobus
Dominus de Douglas, Rogerus de Moubray, David Dominus de
Brechin, David de Graham, and a number of other individuals;
and, lajlly, of ' ceterique Barones, ct libere tenentes, ac tota com-
* iminitas regni Scotiae.' But the obfcrvations already made up-
on the import of the words tota commtmitas^ will not permit us to
applv that expreffion in this letter to burgelTes in particular. Had
they been concerned in this bufinefs, or had it been thought necef-
fary to hold them forth as concerned in it, a very different term
would have been ufed ; and, inftead of ' ceterique libere tenentes, ac
* tota communitas regni Scotiae,' we fhould probably have feen,
* ceterique libere tenentes ac communitates civitatum et burgo-
* rum regni Scotiae.' This letter feems rather to oppofe, than
to favour, the fyftem in fupport of which it has been appealed to ;
and, at any rate, muft be of little confequence in the controverfy,
as it is an agreed point, that, in a few years after its date, repre-
fentatives from boroughs were fent to the parliament, and compofed
the third eftatc. '
Another ground has alfo been taken up in fiipport of this fyftem.
It has been obferved that the burgefles, being the King's freeholders,
and as fuch liable to give fuit and prefence in his courts, it is not to
be prefumed that they would be relieved of that burden in more
ancient times, or would have fubmitted to it afterwards, unlefs they
had been bound to do do fo by their mode of tenure *. It muft be
admitted that this argument bears a fpecious appearance ; but, when
thoroughly confidered, it will not be found more decifive than the
others. To examine it properly, we muft diftinguifh periods, and
take
* Eflays on Britllli Antiquities, Eilay 2.
32 O F T H E P A R L I A M E N T Book I.
take .under our view, as far as we have fails, or probable conjediures,
to.allift us ill the. inquiry, tlie ftate and condition of boroughs In
different ages.
In thofe empires which owed their origin to the migration of a few
individuals feeklng a new habitation, cities or towns rauft foon have
become confpicuous and important. For fome time, tlie limits of
the rlfing nation would indeed be confined tO' th^ walls or ramparts
,of the lirfl: fettlement, and a fmall territory in its neighbourhood.
.Such is. the .picture given of old Rornej.and fuch, probably, was the
cafe of all the ancient ftates in Greece and Italy, Other cities, fuch
as Tyre and Carthage, owed their fplendour to commerce. But, in
rude and uncultivated nations, (whether confifting of aboriginal in-
habitants, or of the defcendants of numerous fwarms of barbarians
iffuing from their native woods), whi;h have no intercourfe, either
in the way of commerce or of alliance, with foreign and more en-
lightened Hates, towns of any extent or confequence are not to be
cxpeded. Tacitus informs us *, that the Germans did not live in
towns, and could not even endure to have their houfes contiguous;
and, through the whole extenfive continent of America, two nations
only had attained to that degree of cultivation and refinement as to
have built large and populous cities before it was difcovered by the
Europeans.
England was too long under the adminiftration of the Romans
not to have emerged from its original favage ftate. Cultivation, arts,
refinement,, and luxury, had made wide advances; and, although the
next
* Nullas Germanorum populis urbe."; habitari fatis notum eft; ne pati quidem inter fc
jun6las fedes. Colunt difcreti ac diverfi, ut fons, ut campus, ut ncnius placuit. Vicos
locant, non in noftrum morem connexis et coliaerentibus aedificiis; fuum quifque do-
roum fpatia circumdat, five adverfus cafus ignis remedium, five infcitia aedificandi.
Chap. ir. O F S G O T L A N D. 33
next invaders threw every thing back into ancient barbarity, we are
told, that, during the Roman dominion, the Britons had built twen-
ty-eight confidcrablc cities within the province *. But in Scotland,
where no regular government can be traced beyond the reign of
Malcolm Canmoic, where arts and commerce were little attended to,
and where a ftrong degree of barbarifin, and ferocity of manners,
fuhfifted in much later ages, it is moft likely that towns, and even
villages, chiefly arofe from men among the lower clafs of inhabi-
tants, wifliing to take fhelter under the walls of the King's caftles,
or thofe of great Lords, or churchmen, to fecure themfelves in part,
at leaft, from reciprocal injuries, and from the opprcfiion of power-
ful individuals. We accordingly find our oldeft boroughs fituated
in the neighbourhood of fuch caftles, and may reafonably conclude,
that their territories formerly made part of the caftle domains.
Thofe who took up their refidence In fuch places, found it necef-
fary, for their farther fecurity, to furround them with walls or fen-
ces, and to vratch and ward them in a kind of military ft:ile. Hence
the towns or villages were termed Burgs, and their inhabitants Bur^
getifes, long before the pradlice of incorporating, and forming them
into communities, by charter, was introduced either in this ifland or
on the continent of Europe. Thefe Burge?ifes were of two forts.
Some towns were within the royal domains of Sovereigns, others
within the territories of great Lords, Barons, or churchmen. The
inhabitants of the former were ftiled the Burgeti/es Regis, while
thofe who lived and carried on their occupations in the latter were
the Burgenfes of the Lord of the territory. That this diftindion
was well known in England, is manifeft from Domefday book ;
whence we likewife learn, that, in fome towns, the burgenfes were
partly the King's, and partly thofe of a fubjed ; and that, in
E others,
• Gildas, Bede, lib. r.
34 OF THE PARLIAMENT Book I.
others, there Avere burgefles belonging to a number of different fub-
jeds *. The fame diftin£tion took place in Scotland; and we ac-
cordingly meet with it in the 15th chapter of the Leges Burgorum^
which runs thus: ' Bnrgenfis Domini Regis poteft habere duellum
' de Burgenfibus, Abbatis, Comitis, Prioris, vel Baronis ; et non e
* converfo.'
In thofe days, each burgefs paid a certain fum yearly to the King,
or Lord, in whofe town he lived, or had his burgagium "f. Certain
cuftoms were alfo exadled by thefe fuperiors, or patrons, upon the
fale of different commodities. : But, in return, the burgefles were in-
dulged, from time to time, with fundry privileges, which put them
upon a very different footing from the tenants, or rujiici^ whofe oc-
cupation was entirely confined to agriculture, and who were not al-
lowed to betake themfelves to any kind of traffic, or mechanic em-
ployment. This was a wife meafure, well calculated to incite the
burgeffes to purfue with fpirit their proper callings as tradefmen,
manufadiurers, lliop-keepers, or merchants. And, in order to en-
courage refort to the towns, we find in the Leges Burgoriim, cap. i j.
the following political regulation : * Si homo Comitis vel Baronis,
' feu cujufcunque fervus fuerit, venerit in burgo et emerit fibi bur-
' gagium, et manferit in eodem burgagio per unum annum et unam
' diem, fine calumnia Domini fui, vel ejus balivi, femper erit liber, et
' libeitate burgi gaudebit ficut burgenfis, nifi fit fervus Domini Regis.'
Thefe
* See Brady's Treafife of Boroughs, page 3. 4. 7. 8.
t The very firft chapter of the Leges Burgorum is as follows : ' Imprimis quUibet
* burgenfis debet Domino Regi burgagio quod defendit, pro paiticata terrae quinque
' denarios annuatim.'
The extent of a pnrticata terrae, which Skene tranflates a rood of land, is thus de-
flribed in the 1 19th chapter of the fame laws; 'Particata terrae In baronia debet men-
' furari per fcx ulnas quae faciunt oftodecem pedes mediocres, hoc eft, neque de ma-
' joribus^i^ neqiie de minoribus ; particata terrae in burgo continet viginti pedes,'
Chap. II. O F S G O T L A N D. 35
Tliefe privileges were, however, found infufficient to protect even
the King's burgefles againft the tyranny and opprefTion of the great
Lords, or Barons, in their neighbourhood. To check, therefore,
this evil, and, at the fame time, to preferve ftill more efFedtualiy
peace and quiet among the burgefles themfelvcs, a new policy was
introduced, of eftabliihing them into corporations or communities,
by royal charters, granting them a certain territory for payment of
a yearly fum, and appointing officers, to be chofen by themfelves, for
determining their private difputes, and managing their common
affairs.
This was an important revolution in the ftate of the towns or
boroughs. It is, however, an agreed point, that, even in France, it
was only introduced in the time of Lewis the Grofs, who began to
reign in the year 1 108 *. In that kingdom, the bulk of vvhich was
in the poffefTion of a few great Lords, who, though they held their
dukedoms, or counties, of the King, were, in effect, fovereigns
within their own territories, it was underflood that the King could
grant fuch eftablifhments only to the towns within his own proper
domains. The example was, however, foon followed by the great
Lords, who, fond of imitating their Sovereign, or glad of a pre-
tence for fqueczing money from the inhabitants, alfo granted com-
munes to their principal towns. The Count of Champagne granted
one to the inhabitants of Meaux in 1 179 f.
E 2 Notwiihflanding
* Nos auteurs conviennent que Louis h-Gros eft le premier de nos Rois qui ait ac-
cordc des communes aux villes. II le fit dans la vue de trouver par la le moyen d'ap-
paifer les feditions qui y etoient pour lors tres frequentes, et furtout pour mcttre les ha-
bitans de ces villes, en les uniflant ainii d'interet entr'eux, en etat de fes maintenir cen-
tre les grand fcigneurs qui les vexoient fortement ; BruJJil^ vol. i. png. 178.
t" BrulTel, vol. i. pag. 183.
36 OF THE PARLIAiMENT Book I.
Notwithftanding all that has been faid by Tome writers with re-
fpe£l to the confequence and importance of the inhabitants of towns
in England m more early ages, we have no juft ground to believe
that any eftablifhmcnt of this fort took place there till a confiderable
time after the Norman conqueft. The fo much boafted charter of
the Conqtieror to the city of London is, in truth, only a letter of
protedion, declaring, that the citizens fhould be treated as law wor-
thy, not as flaves.
It is not natural to fuppofe that the boroughs fhould advance more
rapidly in point of fecuricy and importance in Scotland than they
did in France or England. Confiderable privileges would no doubt
be conferred upon the inhabitants of towns in Scotland, as well as
in other kingdoms; but it is highly improbable that the eftablifh-
mcnt of corporations, or communities, had been introduced there, at
a period when they were unknown in other ftates far more culti-
vated and commercial.
At what precife time the eredlion of fuch corporations firft took
place in Scotland, cannot, indeed, be difcovered with certainty. The
oldeft charters to boroughs novv extant,^ or of which we have any
knowledge from later inftruments, were given by William the Lion;
and the moft, if not all of thefe, are rather to be confidered as
grants of particular privileges to the inhabitants, than as charters
erecting them into communities, or bodies corporate, with power to
choofe their own magiftrates *. An unprinted ftatute, in 1661, in
favour of the borough of Rutherglen, does indeed mention a fuppli-
catlon then made to parliameat by that borough, bearing, that it
had
* The truth of tliis remark feems to be juftified by a charter of James III. to the
town of Invernefs, which recites, verbatim, four different charters by William the Lion,
■md Come others by later Princes. It is to be found in the Appendix, No. 2.
Chap. II. OF SCOTLAND. 37
had been eretled a free borough by King David in the year 1 12O;
but upon what authority that averment was made does not appear.
Thefc obfervations being kept in view, our firft obje£t of inquiry
murt; be, Whether or not the burgenfes Regis made part of the great
council of the nation before the towns or boroughs in which they
refided had been ereded into communities? And here the mind na-
turally revolts at the idea of its being* either the duty of the privi-
lege of every weaver, taylor, fhoemaker, or other mechanic, pofTcf-
fed of a. particata terrae, or other fmall property, in a paltry town
or village, to give fuit and prefence in the King's great council, and
to fit with high fpirited nobles and dignified churchmen, and take a
joint concern in all matters of importance refpeding the ftate and
government of the kingdom. Had fuch been the conftitution, their
fuperiority in point of numbers might at leaft have enabled them
to afTume the whole government, fo far as it depended upon the re-
folutions of the national council, had they inclined to exert their
power.
It may indeed be faid, that, in thofe days, as well as in later times,
reprefentatives might be chofen by the King's burgefles, to a6t for
them in the great council ; but it is by no means probable that fuch
an idea fhould then occur. Reprefentation is a refinement in poli-
tics little fuited with the manners of the age now under confidera-
tion. It is even natural only where a number of individuals are
previoufly formed, by a political operation, into one body. But this
could not be the cafe of the inhabitants of towns in Scotland before
their being incorporated; for, till that happened, the individuals
were no more connected with each other than the pofleflbrs of lands
ih the country, except in this fingle particular, that their properties
being confined within fmaller bounds, they lived in a clofer neigh-
bourhood.
^<3'Uk\3^Ji3
38 OF THE PARLIAMENT Book L
bourhood, and took a joint concern in watching and defending the
place of their abode. They enjoyed the immunities or privileges
that were conferred on them from time to time as individuals re-
nding in a particular place, not as members of an aggregate body.
We are not, however, under the neceffity of trufting to conjecture,
or even to probability alone. From fails that cannot be controver-
ted, we obtain fatlsfacflory evidence, that, while the Burgenfes Regis
remained unincorporated, they gave no attendance in parliament.
The royal boroughs in Scotland were not all ere3 D. 55
" volentes quod idem Joannes, tt Tiaeredes mafculi dc corporc fuo
■* exeuntes, ftatuni Baronis obtincant, ac Dommi dc Beauchamp,
' ct Barones de Kiderminftor nuncupcntur. In cujus,' &:c
The firfl: certain iniflancc we -can difcovcr of an Earl created iu
•this manner i-n Scotland, is in the beginning of the r6th century,
-when Gilbert, Lord Kennedy, was made Earl of CafFilis *. Lords
of Parliament had, however, been created in the fame way, at leaf!;
;as early, if not before, as the reign of James I t- And, although pa-
tents
■* In the recorcis of the Lords of Coancil we find David Lord Kennedy appeaning as
procurator for the Laird of Bergeny upon the 7th of Auguft 1509; and upon tlie i7tk
^of November, in the fame year, mention is made of an aftion at the fuit of 13aviJ Lord
■Kennedy, no-rn Earl of Cafilis, fcfr. Hence it appears that lie was created an Earl in
the interval between thefe two periods-, and that his title was merely perfonal, and not
the confequence of his eftate being eredted into an Earldom, is evident from the fabfe-
quent charters of the family down to the year 1642, in which the lands of Caffilis are
always denominated a Barony. It was in that year, and not fooner, that this barony
was erefted into an Earldom.
f Robert III. died in 1405, when his fon, James I. was both a minor, and a prifoner
in England, where he was detained till the year 1424 ; and within three years after his
return to Scotland, the a£i: of parliament, difpenfing with the attendance of the fmall
Barons, was pafled. But, by this act, it was appointed, that Bifhops, Abbots, Priors,
Dukes, Earls, Lords of Parliament^ andBanrents, (Knights Bannerets, created by the King,
in the field of battle, under the royal banner), fliould be fummoned to parliament by
fpecial precept. This affords fome ground for believing that, the prafliice of conferring
perfonal honours had been introduced before that time ; and although, through the
careleffnefs of our hiftorians, and the want of regular records, we cannot fix the precife
period when this innovation firfl: took place, we know, that, before the year 1459,
Gilbert Kennedy had been created Lord Kennedy; and that, in 1473, •'■^ Alexander
Home was created Lord Home in parliament, although neither of their eftates had been
then erefled into Dominia, or Lordfliips, but remained ftill mere Baronies.
Mr Wallace, in his Thoughts on tlie Origin of Feudal Tenures, and the Defcent of
Ancient Peerages in Scotland, would have us to believe, that, till the year 1587, when
tUc
S6 GF.T HE PARLIAMENT Book I.
tents were at length introduced, it is highly probable, that, for fome
time, no other form was ufed in beftowing that perfonal dignity
but what is contained in the records of parliament, bearing, that the
King, in full parliament, created fuch a man (and his heirs general,
or limited, as there mentioned) a Lord of Parliament, and ordained
him to be filled Lord A. of B. or fo forth ; the ordinary mode being
to prefix Lord to the firnarae, and to add the name of a certain
land or territory, fuch as Lord Lindfay of Byres, or Lord Stewart
of Ochiltree.
The poffeiTors of thefe honours, in whatever way created, were
the Peers, or Great Barons j and, in contradiftindion to them, all the
other owners of lands, who held of the King in capita, were deno-
minated Small Barons, or Freeholders.
It is not improbable, that, at the time of palling this a£l of par-
liament, 1427, cap. loi. James I. who had received his education in
England, intended to put the parliament of Scotland upon the fame
footing with the Engliih parliament, and to render the Commons a
feparate houfe. But if fuch was his intention, it did not take effedt.
On
the rcprefentation of the fmall barons was eftabliflied, no perfonal honours conferred a
right to fit in parliament indeptiwient of landed property, every owner whereof, when
it held of the crown, had already an ineleclive feat. This, however, may be doubted. If
it was not effential to the creation of Peers of Parliament that they fhould be previoufly
pofleffed of land, it is not eafy to figure why the Sovereign might not beflow a perfonal
dignity of that fort upon.thofe, who, on account of their merit, or other caufes,
might appear worthy of it, although poflefTed of no land whatever. I camiot, how-
ever, difcover any realbn in the nature of the thing, and far lefs any proof that it was
neceffary for a perfon who was to be created a Lord of Parliament to be a land-owner,
or that his heirs were to be deprived either of the title, or of any of the privileges
attending it, upon their difpofing of the efiate which their anceftor held when he was
ennobled. They muft therefore have been entitled to fit in parliament ii> virtue of their
perfonal honours, independent of their lands altogether.
CiiAP. II. O F S C O T L A N D. 57
On the contrary, no part of this ftatute feems to liave been much
regarded. The fmall barons negieiSled to elc£t commiffioncrs, and
were, of courfe, flill bound to give pcrfon;il attendance, that being
the condition under which they were to be relieved of the biiidcn.
We accordingly find a new adt pafled about thirty years after, by
which it was enaded, ' That no freeholder under L. 20 fliould be
' conftnilncd to come to parliament, as for prefence, except he were
' a baron *, or were fpecially called by the King's officer, or by
' writ t.' And In the reign of James IV. another a£t paffed, re-
lieving all barons and freeholders whofe eftates were within 100
nierks of new extent :}:, unlefs fpecially written for by the King;
but enjoining all thofe of a higher extent § to come to the parlia-
ment under the pain of the old fine. It was, however, made a con-
dition of the difpenfation granted by thefe ftatutes to particular
freeholders, that they fhould fend proxies or attornies to anfwer for
them. The a(fl of James II. went no farther than to declare that
they fhould not be conflrained to come to parliament, as for prefence.
And, by the adt of James IV. they were to be relieved of the fines
ufually impofed upon abfentees, only on condition of their fending
procurators to anfwer for them. The words of the adt are, ' and fa
* not to be imlawed for their prefence, and || they fend their procu-
* ratores to anfwer for them, with the Baronnes of the fchire, or
* the maift famous perfons.'
H Notwithftanding
* The appellation of Baron, in this ftatute, has no relation to Peerage. Thofe whofe
lands were, by their charters, eredted into a free barony, had a conliderable jurifdiftion
within their bounds, which ordinary freeholders did not enjoy.
f 1457, cap. 75. In England, in the time of Edward II. a knight's fee was, by fta-
tute, L. 20 Sterling per ajinum; and, according to Sir Edward Coke, 480 acres of land.
X I503>cap. 78.
§ The meaning of this term will be explained in the fequel.
•'i The word and is here ufed for if.
sB OFTHEPARLIAMENT Book I.
Notwithftanding thefe a£ts, the fmall Barons continued very re-
mifs in tlieir attendance. Few of them went to parliament, except
upon particular occafions *, fo that, at laft, a doubt arofe of their
being entitled to a feat t ; and it was not till the reign of James VI.
that their reprefentation by commiffioners was fully eftablifhed.
This was done by the ad 1587, cap. 114. which, proceeding up-
on a recital of the old ftatute of James I. and of its propriety and
expediency, renewed and confirmed that part of it which related to
the choofmg of commiflioners, and regulated the manner in which
they were to be eleQed and warned to parliament J.
The
* During the reign of James III. the number of thofe who attended never amounted
to thirty, and was often much lefs. In the reign of James TV. twelve was the higheft
number ; and, in fome of the parliaments of that Prince, not one appeared. In the
time of James V. we find only two or three ; and the cafe was the fame during the firft
period of the reign of Mary.
-{• This we learn from a letter written by Thomas Randolph to Sir "William Cecil, of
the icth of Auguft 1560, in which he tranfmitted a copy of a petition from the fmall
Barons, or freeholders, praying to be admitted to the parliament that was then held, and:
defiring that all former acts concerning their place and eftate, and in their favour, fliould
be confirmed. The original letter is in the paper office in the Tower of London ; and a
part of it is to bs found in the Appendix, No. 7. A copy of the petition from the
fmall Barons, which Mr Randolph tranfmitted to. Sir William Cecil, is likewife to be
found. in the Appendix, No. o.
In order to give the reader a better idea of the parliament of Scotland at different
periods, before tlie reprefentation of the fmall Barons took cfFeft, there are inferted in
the Appendix, No.'s 9, 10. and 11. lifts of fome of the thinneft parliaments, and of
thofe which were befl attended. There is alfo to be found in the Appendix, No. 12.
a copy of an original minute of the firfl: federunt of the parliament 1579, with which I
was favoured by the under keepers of the reccrdss
^; In procuring this aft, James has been fuppofed to have had it in view to ac-
ifairc a balance agaiuft the ovcrgrovjn power of the nobility, much increafcd fince
the
Chap. II. O F S C O T L A N D. 59
The ad of James 1. allowed every freeholder a voice In the elec-
tion of commiiTioncrs ; hut, hy the llatute now under confideration,
thofe only who were poflcifed of a forty fhilling hind in free tenan-
dry, and had their aduai dwelling and refidence within the Ihire,
were permitted to vote.
The qualification of the commiffioners required hy this ftatute
was, that they (hould be the King's freeholders, refident iadwellers
(inhabitants) within the (hire, of good rent, and well efleemed.
But what the amount of their rent or eftate fliould be is not men-
tioned. It is probable that the rent which entitled a freeholder to
eleft, would alfo entitle him to be eledled a commifTioner.
With regard to the mode of eledion, the freeholders vyere ap-
pointed to meet yearly at the firft head court after Michaelmas *,
or at any other time when they fhould pleafc to aflemble for that
purpofe, or be required to do fo by his Majefty; and, after choofing
their commiflioners, they were to notify their names in writing to
the Diredtpr of the Chancery. This ad farther ordered the com-
H 2 miflions
ihe reformation, and by the abolition of the abbacies. Great oppofition was according-
ly made to it on the part of the nobility, fome of whom £vcn protefted againft it, but
in vain. See Ejpn's on Brkijh Antiquities, page 42.
* Of old, the fherifls of the feveral counties were bound to hold three head courts
in the year for the due adminiftration of juftice, at which all the freeholders were obliged
to attend ; ^lon'. Attach, cap. 32. J 3. and 5. Thofe who owed fuit and prefence were
to attend perfonally, but thofe who owed fuit only were allowed to fend their fuitors
or proxies, provided fuch proxies were qualified to pafs upon an ailize or jury, 1540,
cap. 71. j but at prefent there is only one head court held in the year, upon a fixed
day, either Michaelmas day, or near about that time. There the freeholders aflemble
to adiuft their rolls, in the manner to be afterwards taken notice of. No freeholder,
however, can now be fubjcfted to any fine for abfence from a IherifF-court, unlefs
he be fummoned to fcrve as a juryman, or for fome othsr lawful purpofe; 20th Geo. II.
cap, 50.
6o O F T H E P A R L I A M E N T Book I.
miflions to be fealed and fuhfcribed by at leaft fix of the barons
and freeholders; and, by a fubfequent aft of the fame Prnice *, none
were to be received as cominlflioners for fhires in parliament, with-
out producing fufficient commiffions granted to them in a full con-
vention of all the barons of the ihire, and authorifed (authenticated)
by the fubfcriptions of a great number of the barons then prefent,
and of the clerk of the meeting t-
The commifFioners for fliires being thus to be yearly ele£led, the
ftatute directed that they fhould be warned to any parliament or
convention to be afterwards held, by precepts iffuing from the Chan-
cery, the form of fummoning to parliament that was in ufe before
the lefs troublcfome mode of a general proclamation took place.
It was farther appointed by this ad, that an equal number of com-
miffioners from fliires fliould be upon the committee of articles J
with thofe put upon that committee from amongft the commiffioners
of boroughs, and that their appearance in parliament fliould relieve
all the remaining fmall barons and freeholders from the neceffity of
perfonal attendance.
But, as this ftatute did not exprefily exclude the other fmall ba-
rons, it may be afked, Whether they might ftill have attended, in-
perfon, notwithftanding their fending commiffioners to parliament ?
I apprehend, however, that this queftion muft be anfwered in the
negative. To attend both perfonally, and by reprefentatives, would
have
* 1597, cap. 276.
f A copy of a commiflion from a {Imx to its reprefentatives is to be found in the
Appendix, No. 13.
% The nature of this committee, which was named at the beginning of each parlia-
ment, will be fully explained in the fec^uel-
Chap. II. OF SCOTLAND. Ci
have been inconfiRent ; and, although our flatutes are not always
very accurately exprefied, we may lafely conclude that it was the
intention of the legidature to exclude them. We accordingly find
no inflance of their ever after J^ppearing in parliament but by their
commiffioncrs.
It may alfo be afked, Whether, after the paffing of this ad, the
King might call any particular baron to attend in parliament, though
not chofen by his county? Sir George M'Kenzie, ever a mofl: zea-
lous ftickler for tlic prerogative of the crown, thought it jull that
the King fhould have that power; adding as a rcafon, that he might
make any man a Lord of Parliament. See his Obfervations, pa'>-e
114. Of this, however, he gives no inflance ; and thence we may
conclude that no fuch prerogative was underftood to be in the crown.
As long as the fmall barons were bound to attend perfonally, whh
the exception only of thofe who were not poffeffed ot\an eftate tirfl;
of L. 20, and afterwards of 100 merks of new extent, it might be
fafe to permit the King to require the attendance even- of perfons
falling under the exception ; and he was accordingly allowed to do
fo by the ads 1457, cap. 75. and 1503, cap. 78. But it would have
been inconfiftent, and even dangerous, to continue a prerogative of
that fort, after a regular reprefentation of the fmall barons had been
introduced. The King might indeed ennoble whom he pleafed, and
by that means increafe the number of great barons, . or Lords of
Parliament. But he certainly had it not in his power to increafe
the number of reprefentatives from counties, or to give feats in par-
liament to the eledors, as well as to the eleded. It is accordingly ad-
mitted, even by Sir George IVi'Kenzic, in a fupplement to his work,
*' that, by the conftant courfe of pofterior ads of parliament con-
^ cerning eledions, and reprefentatives of fliires in parJiament, and
' by the conftant cuftom acknowledged both by King and parlia-
* raenr,,
€2 OF THE PARLIAMENT Book I.
* ment, none can reprefent fhlres in parliament but fuch as are ac-
' tually chofen by the fhlres whom they reprefent.'
How plain and fimple foever the plan of eledling commiffioners
from fliires, that was laid down by this ftatute, might then appear,
it fhould feem that feveral queftions arofe with regard to the right
of voting in thefe elecftions. To prevent fuch queftions in time to
come, it was declared by the a£t 1661, cap. ;^^. that, befides all he-
ritors who held a forty {hilling land of the King in capite, all heri-
tors, liferenters, and wadfetters, holding of the King, and whofe
yearly rent amounted to ten chalders of vidual, or L. 1000, all feu-
duties being dedu<3:cd, {hould be capable of eledling, or being elec-
ted.
To difcover whether a perfon was truly pofTefl'ed of ten chalders
of victual, or L, 1000 Scots of free rent, might, however, often be
a matter of fome difRculty ; of courfe, many queftions would ftill
arife with regard to the right of voting, and much time would be
confumed in parliament by trying the merits of controverted elec-
tions. A new ftatute was therefore made about twenty years after,
168 1, cap. 21. by which a variety of rules were laid down for re-
gulating the eledions of commiffioners from (hires.
By this a£t, it was, in th.e.jirji place, declared, that none fliould
have a right to vote but thofe who, at the time, ftood publicly in-
feft in property or fuperiority, and were in pofleffion of a forty
{hilling land of old extent, holding of the King or of the Prince,
diftinflions were tried in the p.irliament
itfelf, without being fent to the committee. The difference betwixt a parliament and a
convention will be explained in the fequel.
f That is, expeditioufly, and without abiding the courfe of the ufual forms of court.
X This had been previoufly fixed by a refolution of the parliament, upon the 2(5th of^
Qftober 1669, which is to be found in the Appendix, No. 14. .
•66 OF THE PARLIAMENT Book I.
againfl; Popery, and aflertingtlie King's fupremacy, appointed by the
6th a€t of the fame fcffion), fhould be fufficient to difqualify from
voting.
From this a£t, down to the time of the Union, tlie law fufFered
no alteration with regard to the election of commifTioners from
fliires, except one, which was introduced by a ftatute of King Wil-
liam, 1698, cap. 22. declaring, that no perfon, during the currency
of a protection from diligence *, fhould be capable to choofe, or to
be chofen, a member of parliament, without previoufly renouncing
the benefit of fuch protedion.
It is, however, to be obferved, that, befides the reprefentatives of
counties and boroughs, the great officers of ftate were members of
the Scottifli parliament ex officio. When this was. firft introduced is
•unknown; but, in the parliament 1617, as fhall be more particular-
ly mentioned in the fequel, it was fixed, that, from that time, eight
of thefe officers only fhould be entitled to a feat, viz. the High Trea-
furer, the Treafurer Depute, the Secretary, the Privy Seal, the Mafler
of Requefts, the Clerk Regifter, the Juft;ice Clerk, and the Advocate.
Holding their feats in virtue of their offices alone, it was underilood
that they neither could eledt nor be eleded: And the Juftice Clerk
and the King's Advocate having voted in an eledion for the county
of Mid Lothian in 1675, Fountainhall obferves f, ' that they fhould
' not have voted, becaufe, being officers of ftate, they were not
' capable to be eleded ; and to ele£l, and be eledted, funt correlata
' quorum uno fublato tollitur et alterum.' In the year 1703, when
Sir James Murray of Philiphaugh, one of the commiffioners for the
ihire of Selkirk, was appointed Lord Clerk Regifter, a writ iffijed
for
* A proteftion againft being arrefted and imprifoncd at the fult of creditors.
+ Vol. I. jjage 352.
Chap. II. O F S C O T L A N D. dj
for ele£ting a new reprefentative in his room. Many fimilar inftan-
ces might be given. When any of thefe offices were put in com-
miffion, one of the commilhoners was named by the King to fit in
parliament.
Having now exhaufted what feemcd neceflary to be here men-
tioned, with refpe(ft to the temporal cftates, I proceed to confider
the alterations which took place in the parliament of Scotland with
regard to the fpiritual eftate.
It has been already obferved, that the reformation, and the aboli-
tion of monafteries, occafioncd a confiderable alteration in the fp.iri-
tual eftate of the Englilh parliament. The Archbifliops, however,
and the Bifhops, ftill remained members of the Houfe of Lords :
But, in Scotland, religion produced at lail a more violent effedt, by
entirely loping off the ecclefiailical eftate in parliament. How thati.
alteration was brought about Ihall now be explained.
The Proteftant Church began to affume a regular form in Scot-
land about the year 1560. But although the genius of the firft re-
formers tended ftrongly towards that fyftem which has fmce pre-
vailed under th€ name of Pre/byter'mii, it was not thoroughly efta-
blifhed till after many ftruggles. Approaching to the Democratical
form of civil government, it was notto be, favourably received by
Monarchs even the moft limited, far lefs by thofe who ardently
wiftied to extend their prerogative.
Very early attacks- were made in the affemblies of the Church
upon the order of Bilhops *. In 158 1, an act of the affembly paf-
I2 fed,
* There were in Scotland twelve Bifhops under the two Archbiihops of St Andrews .
and
68 OF THE PARLIAMENT Book I.
fed, declaring the office of Bifhop, as then exercifed, to have no
foundation or warrant in the word of God. This, however, did
nor prevent a nomination being made the very next year to the See
of Glafgow, then become vacant. And in 1584, Mr Andrew Mel-
vil, one of the ableft enemies of the hierarchy, was fummoned be-
fore the privy council, on account of his having complained loudly
of the grievances of the nation, in a fermon he preached at St An-
drews, and was obliged to fly to England in order to avoid pu-
nifliment *. Severe laws were likewife made in the fame year,
with a view to reftrain the leaders of the Church, and all thofe who
aimed at the abolition of Epifcopacy. The attempting to diminifh
the rights and privileges of any of the three eftates, was declared
high trcafonf; and the holding councils, conventions, or affemblies,
to treat, confult, and determine, in any matter of ftate, civil or eccle-
fiallical, without the King's fpecial command or permiffion, was for-
bid under the moft fevere fandion X-
Thefe laws did not, however, fubdue the fpirit and zeal of the
Prefbyterian leaders. In 1586, the provincial fynod of Fife fum-
moned Adamfon, the Archbifliop of St Andrews, to appear before
them, and anfwer for his contempt of the decrees of former general
affemblies, in exercifing the funftion of a Bifhop ; and, notwithftand-
ing his refufmg to acknowledge the jurifdidtion of the court, and
his appealing to the King, a fentence of excommunication was pro-
nounced
and Glafgow. St Andrews had for fufFragans the Biihops of Edinburgh, Dumblain,
Dunkeld, Brechin, Aberdeen, Murray, Rofs, Caithnefs, and Orkney ; and Glafgow
thofe of Galloway, Argyle, and thelfles. There were likewife twenty-feven abbacies,
and thirteen priories } Balfour, page 34.
* Spottif%vood's Hiftory, page 330.
t 1584, cap. 130.
% I584> cap. 131.
Chap. II. O F S C O T L A N D. 69
nounced againft him. A general afiembly, held foon after, entered
warmly into the views of this fynod ; and it was with difficulty the
King obtained an a£l permitting the name and ofTicc of a Bifliop.
The power of the order was greatly reduced. They became little
better than perpetual moderators of prefbyt^iles. They were de-
clared to he fubjed, like other paflors, to the jurifdidion of the ge-
neral aireinbly ; and Adanifon, the Primate, renounced all claim to
fupremacy over the Churcli, and promifcd to demean himfelf fuit-
ably to the charader of a Bifliop, as defcribed by St Paul *.
In 1587, James VI. came of age ; and, in the Parliament which
was then fummoned, a law paffed that threatened a deadly blow to
the ecclefiaftical ftate. The public revenue being inconfiderable, and
the adminillration of government growing daily more cxpenfive, it
became necefliiry to provide fome new fund to anfvver the exigen-
cies of a Prince who was naturally profufe, and a bad oeconomlft.
The ancient patrimony of the Church had fufFered greatly by the
depredations of the laity fince the Reformation ; but what ftill re-
mained was very confiderable, and was either held by the Bifhops
who poflefled benefices, or by laymen, in confequence of grants du-
ring pleafure. It feems to have occurred to the King and his mini-
fters, that, from this fource, a fupply might be drawn, without im-
pofing any tax upon the people ; and the temper of the nation at
the time aflured them, that the meafure would be nowife unpopular.
An ad, therefore, pafled in the parliament of that year t, by which
the lands that then belonged to any archbifhop, bifliop, abbot, prior,
priorefs, or any prelate whatfoever, or to any abbay, convent, or
cloifter of friars, nuns, monks, or canons, prebendary or chaplainry,
or chapters of cathedral churches, or chantry colleges, were annex-
ed
• Doftor Robertfon's Hiftory of Scotland, vol. 2. pa^e 1 19.
t iS^h cap- 29.
70 OF THE PARLIAMENT Book I.
ed to the Crown, ami the King was impowered to apply the rents
to his own ufe ; with an exception, however, of the tythes belong-
ing to parfonages or vicarages, which were to remain with the per-
fons ferving the cure, together with the manfion-houfes, and a few
acres of land by way of glebe ; and alfo referving to all Archbifhops,
Bifhops, Priors, Commendators, and other pofleflbrs of great benefi-
ces of the eftate of Prelates who had a vote in parliament, their prin-
cipal caflles and nianfion-houfes, with the buildings and yards there-
of, lying within the precincts and inclofures of their places, which
were to remain with them and their fucceffors, for their refidence
and habitation.
In 1592, the Prefbyterian government by general aflemblies, fy-
nods, prefbyteries, and feflions, was approved of in parliament *;
the ads that had paffed againft the Church in 1584 were refcinded
or explained ; and all prefentations to benefices were ordered to be
direded to the particular prefbyteries, for the giving of collation.
Thefe ads did not, however, totally annihilate the Prelates, or put
an end to that branch of the three eftates. They ftill enjoyed the right
to fit in parliament ; but, deprived of their revenues, they became
not a little contemptible, and were unable to bear the expence of theit
rank, or of attending the great council of the nation. This James
did not relifh. Befides his natural repugnance to a fyftem that
was little fuited to his exalted notions of royal prerogative, he could
not fail to fee that the influence of the crown would be greatly di-
minift?ed by the total abolition of the ecclefiaftical eftate. He
therefore ardently wifhed to fupport Epifcopacy ; but the prejudices
which the nation, in general, had conceived againft the name and
charader of Biihops were fo violent, that he durft not for fome
time
* 1592, cap. iiC.
Chap. II. O F S C O T L A N D. 71
time avow his intentions. He went therefore to work in a more
cautious manner. In 1597 he prevailed with the commiffion * that
had been appointed by the lad general aflembly, to complain to par-
liament that the Church was the only body in tlic kingdom deftitute
of rcprefentatives, and to crave that a competent number of the
clergy might be admitted to a feai, according to ancient cuftom f-
In confequence of this application an ad: pafled |, ordaining that
the paftors and minifters, on whom his Majefty fliould at any time
confer the office, place, title, and dignity of a Billiop, Abbot, or
other Prelate, fhould have a vote in pailiament, and that all the
biflioprics then vacant, or to become vacant, fhould be beftowcd on-
ly upon adlual preachers and minifters of the Church. But, in order
to prevent jealoufy, it was, by the fame adt, remitted to the King to
advife and agree with the general aflembly, what authority ihofe
upon whom bifhoprics might be beftowed, fliould have in the fpiri-
tual policy and government of the Church.
This a£l was far from giving general fatlsfadion to the clergy.
Though calculated to refledt luftre upon their order, they were
willing to facrifice every confideration of intereft and ambition to
their abhorrence of Epifcopacy. The general aflembly was, how-
ever, at laft prevailed with, after much debate and cppofition, to
declare, in March 1598, that it was lawful for minifters to accept of
a feat in parliament; that it would be beneficial to the Church to
have its rcprefentatives in that body ; and that fifty-one perfons (a
number
' *■ The commifflon Is a committee named by the general aflembly to fmifli tlie bufi-
nefs they cannot overtake during their own fitting, and to attend to the intereft of tlie
Church.
f Spottifwood, 450.
t 1597. cap- 235.
72 OFTHEPARLIAMENT Book I.
number nearly equal to that of the old fpiritual eftate) fhould be
chofen from among the clergy for that purpofe *.
The manner of eledling thefe reprefentatlves, and the authority
they were to enjoy, were not fixed till the beginning of the year
1600, when a general aflembly was held at Montrofe, in which,
notwithftanding all the addrefs the King employed to acquire a ma-
jority, he with difficulty got the following regulations agreed to :
That the general aflembly fhould recommend fix perfons to every
vacant benefice that gave a title to a feat in parliament, out of whom
the King fhould name one : That the perfon to be fo named fhould
neither propofe nor confent to any thing in parliament that might
afFed the intereft of the Church, without fpecial inftrudions to that
efletl : That he fhould be anfwerable for his condud to the general
aflembly, and fubmit to its cenfure, under the pain of excommuni-
cation : That he fhould difcharge the duties of a paftor in a particu-
lar congregation, and ufurp no ecclefiaftical jurifdi£tion over his
brethren: That, if the Church infiided on him a fentence of de-
privation, he fhould thereby forfeit his feat in parliament : And that
he fliould annually refign his coinmifl[ion to the general afl'embly, to
be reftored or not, as the aflembly, with the approbation of the
King, fliould think moft for the good of the Church f.
Thefe regulations, howe^'er, did not take place. James fucceeded
in a few years to the crown of England, which added much to his
authority and influence in Scotland; and, in 1606, he found himfelf
enabled to obtain the fandion of parliament to the reflitution of the
order of Bifhops, and to a repeal of the ad of annexation, in fo fat
as
*■ tjpottifwood, 450, Caklenvood's manufcript Hifbory of Scotland, vo]. 5. pag. 278.
h Spottlfwood, 453- 457. Calderwood, vol. 5. pag. 368.
Chap. IF. OF S C O T L A N D. 73
as it related to their benefices *. Nor did lie flop there; another a(St
paffed in 1609 f, reftoring to Archbilhops and Bifhops their former
jurildidlion, efpecially the jurifdidtionof commiflaiiots, and the power
of adminiflering juflicc, by comminiirics, within their refpedive dio-
cefes. Their powers were (Vill farther enlarged by an a£t in 16 12 J ;
and, in 1617 (|, all the deans, and other members of the chapters of
cathedrals, were reftored to their manfes, glebes, rents, and other
patrimony.
In this manner did James bring about his fcheme of reftoring
Epifcopacy. He indeed wanted to go ftill farther, and to reduce
the Church of Scotland to the fame form, in every refpect, with the
church of England. That, however, he lived not to accoinplifli;
and his fucceflbr, Charles I. treading too precipitately in his father's
footfteps, and preffing too eagerly the reception of the liturgy, and
the obfervance of ceremonies, to which the Scottifh nation was in
general averfe, he thereby kindled the flames of civil war, the con-
fcquences of which were fatal to his defigns, and obliged him, in
1640, to confent to fcveral adls of parliament entirely abolifliing
the Epifcopal form of Church government, and excluding all Arch-
bifliops, Bifhops, and other prelates, from a feat in parliament, which
was then declared to confiil of the nobility, barons, and burgefles.
This alteration upon the conftitution of parliament, by lopping
off one of the three eftates, was not, however, at that time of long
continuance. Epifcopacy returned upon the reftoration of the mo-
narchy ; and, by an acl of the fecond feflion of the firfl: parliament
K of
* \6o6, cap. 2.
■[ 1609, cap. 6.
X 1612, cap. I.
II 1617, cap. I. ;.
74 OF THE PARLIAMENT Book L
of Charles II. *, fetting forth, in ftrong terms, that it was an inhe-
rent right of the crown, by virtue of the King's prerogative and
fupremacy in -caufes ecclefiaftical, to order and difpofe -of the exter-
nal government and polity of the Church ; the archbilhops anJ
bifhops were reftored to their ancient place and privilege i-n parlia-
ment, and to the full exercife of their Epifcopal fundlions, prece-
dence in the Church, power of ordination and infliding of ccnfures,
and all other adts of Church difcipline f .
The-'natldnal averiion from Fpifcopacy was, however, too deepiv
Tooted, and too violent, to be eafily deftroyed. It was the caufe of
many commotions during the reign of Charles II. and was foftered
b}Mhe arbitrary proceedings of his fucceflbr, and the eager defirc
that fuperfthious Prince difcovered to introduce Popery. No fooner,
therefore, was a period put to his government, than an abhorrence
of Prelacy was publicly avowed, and the Epifcopal form of Church
government declared to be a great and unfupportable grievance. This
was
* 1662, cap. I.
f It may here be obfervcJ, that the archbilhops and bllhops were brought h^ito par-
liament before tlie ftatute reftoring them to their feats had paffed. The parhament met
upon the 8th of May 1662, and they were that day received ; but the ar not ; but it was ordered,
bylhe a£t 1427, cap. loi. that all bifliops, abbots, priors, Dukes,
Earls, Lords of Parliament, and banrenta, fliould be fummoned by
•the King's fpecial precepts ; and as, by the fame ftatute, James I.
intended to introduce a reprefentation of the fmall barons, it is to
be fuppofed that they were to be fummoned edidally, in confe-
quence of brieves, or writs, iflued from the Chancery to the fheriffs
of the feveral counties: And, although this intended alteration upon
the conftitution of parliament did not then take place, wc know
that it was the pradtice to ifTue general writs to fheriffs and bailiffs
to fummon prelates, peers, freeholders, and commiflioncrs from
boroughs, and likewife to fend fpecial precepts to each of the pre-
lates and peers, or great barons. This we learn from an order of
James HI. entered in the records of parliament on the 21ft of Fe-
bruary 1487, in the following wo'rds: ' We do you to wit, that our
* Sovereign
-Chap.TI. O T S C O T L a N D,, 77
' Sovereign Lord, by the advice of his council, has, for certain rea-
' fonabie and great c.-iufcs, deferted and diflblvcd his parliament
' that was continued of before to the jth of iMay next to come, and
' has ordained a new general parliament to be fet and proclaimed
' to be holden at Edinburgh th^ 12th day of May next to come,
'with continuation of days; and general precepts, to pafs to all
' Lords, prelates, barons, freeholders, and commiflaries'j and witli
' fpccial letters under his fignet to all the prelates and great Lord.;
' of his realm, to flicw and declare to them the caufe of the fitting of
' his faid parliament.' Copies of the order to Chancery to ifllic
writs, or precepts, to the fhenfTs, &c. ; and of thefe precepts, and
likewife of the fpecial precepts to the prelates and peers, are infcrted
in the Appendix, No.'s 15. 16. 17. and 18.
The author of the Eflays on Briiifh Antiquities fuppofes, that the
fpecial letters to the prelates and great Lords had gone into difufe
before 1587, becaufe, by the adt of that year, eftablifliing the repre-
fentation of the fmall barons, it was enadted, ' That the faid com-
*«miffioners be warned at the firll be virtue of precepts furth of the
* Chancellary, or be his hienelTe miffive letters or charges, and in all
* times thereafter be precepts of the Chancellary, as fall be direded
' to the other eftaites.' But this does not feem to be a neceflary con-
vlufion. It does, however, appear, that, at laft, even the general
precepts from the Chancery had been diopped, and that parliaments
came to be called only by proclamation*.
When, through a negie£l to elc£t commiflioners at Michaelmas,
or from any other caufe, it became neceflary to choofe them upon
the approach of a parliament, the diet for eleflion appears to have
been fixed by the fheriff. Upon the 7th of July 1681, the privy
council,
'■ A copy of fiich proclamation is inferted in the Appendix, No. ip.
78 OF THE PARLIAMENT Book I.
council, in confequence of a coniplaint from fome of the freeholders
of Berwickiliire, that the fherihf intended to furprifethem in eleding
tlieir coinmiffioners, by giving only one d.iy's notice, found that the
iheriffonly, and not the council, could fix the diet of e!e£tion ; but
they, at the fame time, ordered the llierifF to give at lead fix days no-
tice, that the freeholders might have tinie and leifure to aflenible ; and
that the notice fhould be given at the head borough of the fliire, by
proclamation over the market crofs, and by tuck of drum through
the town *. The ad 1681, cap. 21. had not then pafled : but it
was theieby enaded as follows: ' And to the cfFe£t that fufncient
' advertifement may be given to all parties having vote in elecftions,
' who are to ele<£t at the calling of a parliament or convention, the
* fherifFs and ftewarts are hereby ordained to make publication of
' the call and diet of the faid parliament and convention, and of the
' diet appointed for eledion, and that at the head borough of the
' fhire or ftewartry, upon a market day, betwixt ten and twelve in
' the forenoon : And alfo, fliall make the like intimation at each
* parifh kirk on Sunday immediately thereafter ; which diets for
* eledion fhall at leaft be twelve days before the meeting of parlia-
* ment, or eight days before the meeting of a convention, that the
' commiffioners elected may have fufficiency of time to keep the diet
' of the parliament or convention.'
When a vacancy happened during the fitting of parliament, an
order for a new election iffued in the name of the Sovereign, or his
commiffioner, and of the cHates of parliament. It was cuftomary
to name the diet of eledion in this order f.
Till the reign of Charles I. the parliaments in Scotland, though
exceedingly frequent, were never of long endurance. To ufe the
prefent
* Fountainhall, vol. i. page 140.
f Copies of fuch orders arc inferted in the Appendix, No. 20.
Chap. II. OF S C O T L A N I\ • 79
prefent pailiarncntary lanj^uagc, tliey lallcJ only one fefllon. We
indeed meet with a few inllanccs of their heing coHtinued (adjourn-
ed) to a diftant day in the reign of James 1. hut t!)cy did not alwajs
.meet again at the appointed time, llicy were to be fiimmoned a
certain number of days preceding thofe to which tliey were adjourn-
ed ; and if that ly^s neglev^ed, tlie adjournment became equal to a
(lifToIution *. It was even an ohjecl to fliorten, as much as poflihle,
ihe period of the fitting of parliament ; and, on that account, it was
not infrequent to remit bulinefs of the, grcated importance to feleft
committees, and to decL i"e the determinations or refolutions of fuch
committees to he equally binding as if pafled in full parliament.
One remarkable inftance in the time of James III. has already been
taken notice of, and many more might be given ; but the following
will fuffice. In the feventh parliament of James VI. anno 1581, cer-
tain pcrfons were named to confider fuch articles as could not be o-
vertaken during its fitting, and to pafs a£ts concerning them, which
were to he equally valid aiid obligatoiy as if palTed in parliament.
In the eleventh parliament of the fame Prince, aimo isSj, power
was given to certain perfons of each eftaie ' to treat, confult, tlclibe-
' xate, and conclude, upon fuch taxation as fhall be thought expe-
*dicnt
'* In 1683, the parliament flioulJ htive met upon the 17th of July, but no meeting
was then held, nor was there any previous prorogation. It was, however, afterwards
prorogued, by a letter from the King, to the 6ih of December ; upon which Fountain-
hall has made the following remark, vol. i. page 238. ' It was doubted if it was not
* extin