Rules and
regulation-»
for the
councilloι-∙.
Object of
these rules.
2,58 Constitutional History. [chap.
reduction of this item of account, to secure a considerable
economy1. The duke of York, when he accepted the protector-
ship in 1455, insisted on the payment of the council2. The
provision for the wages of the permanent council was one of
the particular points of Fortescue’s scheme; but by that time
the parliament had ceased to possess or claim any direct control
over the payment.
It was not so with the rules which were prescribed for the
conduct or management of business, and the oaths and charges
by which those rules were enforced. Several codes of articles,
running back to the days of Edward I, still existed3 ; and
various attempts were made throughout the fifteenth century
to improve upon them. The rolls of parliament for 1406, 1424,
and 1430 contain such regulations, which are constantly illus-
trated by the proceedings of the council. Those of 1406 were
enacted in parliament and enrolled as an act4 ; those of 1424
were contained in a schedule annexed to the act of nomina-
tion5; those of 1430 were drawn up in the council itself, ap-
proved by the lords and read in the presence of the three estates,
afteι∙ which they were subscribed by the councillorsδ. Copies
of these documents are preserved also among the records of the
privy council ; especially one drawn up at Reading in December
14267. The object of these regulations was in general to
prevent the councillors from accepting or sanctioning gifts of
land, from prosecuting or maintaining private suits, from re-
vealing the secrets of the body, or neglecting the king’s
business8. Others prescribe rules for the removal of unworthy
members, and guard against the usurpations of individuals by
fixing a quorum9. The anxiety of the councillors to avoid the
cath and to be released from it after the expiration of their
ɪ Rot. Part. iv. 446 ; above, p. 122. 2 Rot. Part. v. 286.
3 See vol. ii. p. 270; Foed. i. 1009; Fleta, i. c. 17; Coke, 4 Inst. p. 54;
Rot. Parl. i. 2i8, iii. 246, iv. 423; Ordinances (1390), i. ι8.
4 Rot. Park iɪi. 585-589 ; Ordinances, i. 297.
s Rot. Park iv. 201 sq. ; Ordinances, iii. 148-152.
6 Rot. Paik iv. 343, 344; Ordinances, iv. 59-66.
7 Rot. Park v. 407; Ordinances, iii. 213-221. See also one of 1425;
Ordinances, iιi. 175 ; and Lambard, Archeion, pp. 141-147.
b Ordinances, i. 18.
° Rot. Park iv. 343, v. 408.
XMII.]
The Pnvy Council.
259
term of office ɪ, and the strict conditionsi on which they insist Valid exer-
cιse °f imγ*
before accepting office, seem to show that the method adopted Iiamentaiy
rp . . ivjrɪirrii . influence
wa⅛ SUmciently stringent to be e∏ectual. !here can be Iittleoverthe
doubt tlɪat the council thus nominated, regulated, and watched
by the parliament was a substantive and most valuable feature
of the Lancastrian system of government : not new, not uniform
in its composition, powers, or policy at different times, but
always forming a link between the king and the parliament,
responsible to both, and, during at least fifty years, maintaining
the balance of force between the two.
The powers of the council thus formed and guided were very Powers of
ɪ . . ... ι∙∙∣η ∙ the council
great; and the definition which was laid down in 1427, by deflned.
which they claim to have the execution of all the powers of
the crown during the king’s minority, needs perhaps but a
slight alteration to make it applicable to their perpetual func-
tions. Their work was to counsel and assist the king in the
execution of every power of the crown which was not exercised
through the machinery of the common law. It was in the
matter of judicial proceedings only that their action was re-
stricted ; and, as the king had long ceased to act as judge
in person in the courts, his council had no place there. The Objections
. . .. . . . ,. to their
petitions against their assumption of jurisdiction in matters judicial acts,
cognisable at common law, which had been frequent under
Richard II3, did not wholly cease under his successori ; but
few cases, if any, of judicial oppression by the council can be
adduced during the period; and in the year 1453 by an act
of parliament the chancellor was empowered to enforce the
attendance of all persons summoned by writ of privy seal
before the king and his council in all cases not determinable
by common law5. Beyond the region of the common law the
1 Rot. Parl. iv. 176, 423. See also the important articles addressed to
Richard ɪɪ by the council, protesting against his interference ; Ordinances,
i. 84 sq. 2 R°t∙ Parl. iii. 609, 632.
3 See above, vol. ii. pp. 634 sq.
4 Rot. Parl. iii. 471.
5 31 Hen. VI, c. 2 ; Statutes, ii. 361, 362. The court of Star Chamber,
as the judicature of the council in special cases, was organised by the Act
3 Hen. VII, c. i, which appointed the chancellor, treasurer, privy seal,
a bishop, a lord temporal of the council, and the two chief justices, as
judges. The privy councillors however retained their places : hence the
b 2