2- DID PARLIAMENT ACT AS A PROP OR A CURB TO ROYAL POWER? Flashcards
Parliamentary representation and local relations with the crown
English parliament had been made up of representatives from both towns and the countryside (sometimes
referred to as the ‘shires). These representatives could be
summoned by the king whenever he chose.
The lords consisted of two groups
1) Lay noblemen with a hereditary
right to a seat in parliament
because of their landholdings and
family background. 2) Bishops, who had an automatic right to a seat as representatives of the Church. Members of the Upper House were summoned personaly to parlament by writ from the menarch.
The Commons consisted of two groups
1) Town representalives usually
merchants and lawyers). 2) knights of the shire- gentry representatives of the countryside. All members of parliament in the Commons were chosen by the wealthier male members of their local communities
Representatives to the Commons were chosen by
a small
electorate, composed entirely of adult males who owned fairly
substantial property in the county In 1376, the Commons had for
the first time chosen a leader from among themselves, to speak
to the king and Upper House on their behalf, and from then on
this role became traditional and formalised as the ‘Speaker of
the Commons’,
What happened to the role of parliament
During the reign of Richard Il and under the
Lancastrian kings, parliament’s role developed substantially
and it is notable that, while the language used by the Commons
towards the king was usually deferential, in reality there were often
significant challenges from the Lower House to the monarch’s
autonomy.
Throughout the late medieval period, parliament had
two primary roles:
to assent to the king’s requests for taxation and as a legislative body
Parliament and legislation
In terms of law making, parliament had a more innovative role
than it did in terms of taxation. Instead of simply agreeing to
what the king had already decided, the Commons were expected
both to listen to the king’s ideas about legislation and also to put
forward their own suggestions about which laws should be passed.
As part of this, they were expected to inform the king via petitions
of particular problems currently being experienced by people in
different regions of the kingdom.
Parliamentary petitions took two
forms- a personal petition
A personal petition was a formal request from an individual,
farily, group or area for assistance from the crown to remedy
a particular problem. For example, a town might request
parliamentary permission to take measures to combat
vagrancy or illegal trading in the area. These petitions can be
particularly illuminating evidence in relation to areas that were
experiencing a breakdown in law and order.
Parliamentary petitions took two
forms- A Commons petition
A Commons petition was a formal request from the Lower
House to the crown to deal with a particular problem affecting
the kingdom as a whole, or a region within the kingdom. This
type of petitioning began in the early 14th century and by the
end of the century had become firmly establishod.
Potitions were important as
The king’s response to these documents became law, thus giving the Commons a significant role in shaping the legislative process. However, the king had the right to refuse to grant what was requested which was commonplace. He could also organise his own bill to be presented, thus allowing the crown to steer the law-making process as well
Parliament and taxation
From the.13th century onwards, the crown’s traditional sources
of revenue were gradually reduced and there were fairly frequent
financial demands on the country’s income because of war At
the same time, it became an established custom that parliament
had to agree to taxes being collected and this included the consent of both the lords and the Commons. This increased the importance of the Lower House
substantially.
Taxes were only levied by parliament if
It was conventional that taxes
were only levied by parliament in the case of urgent necessity for
the common good and usually defence of the realm was cited
as the reason why money was required.
The level of control the
Commons had over taxation was limited, however, as
they did not
have the right to refuse the crown money if the king demonstrated
genuine need, particularly in relation to defence. Nonetheless, thev
could use the request as an opportunity to negotiate regarding the
amount of taxation granted and also to voice concern regarding
Ine management of the kingdom.
Examples of kings/ events where taxes misused or criticised by parliament
This most dramatically occurred during the 1376 Wonderful
Parliament’ of Richard Il, when the chancellor, Michael de la
Pole, was forcibly removed from office, but other governments
were criticised by parliament. In 1450, for example, charges were
brought against William de la Pole, duke of Suffolk, who was the
English military commander in France at the time of the loss of
Normandy In their complaints, parliament included almost all of
its typical criticisms of unpopular government ministers, including
corruption, financial mismanagement, military incompetence,
oppression, misuse ol laxes and poor appointments, Statements
of grievance against ministers were perhaps particularly inclined
To be so comprehensive because il was considered important that
The king himself was not criticised. ‘Evil councillors’
It is evident that the Commons, in particular, valued the
opportunity offered by parliament to discuss key concerns
affecting the realm, as evidenced by
the frequent petitions that
it should become customary for the king to summon parliament
at least annually. In reality, however, as historian J.S. Roskell
has pointed out, the frequency of meetings of parliament was
primarily dictated by the king’s financial needs.
