4θ6 Constitutional History. [chap.
be approved by all1 ; or when that great king and his suc-
cessors from time to time explain that the enemy is bent on
destroying the English tongue from off the face of the eartha.
The barest matter of fact is touched when the form becomes
‘quia de advisamento consilii nostri pro quibusdam arduis et
Urgentibus negotiis, nos statum et defensionem regni nostri
Angliae et ecclesiae Anglicanae Contingentibus, quoddam parlia-
mentum nostrum tenere ordinavimus.’ The changes however
are not essential and touch no constitutional point.
Tho position The second point is important : the king’s intention is to
Oftheword 1 1., . ,i, , , ’ ° „ , ,. .
ceteris. deliberate with the other prelates and magnates of the kingdom,
‘ cum ceteris praelatis, Inagnatibus et proceribus ; ’ the writ of
the temporal lords runs ‘ cum praelatis, et ceteris magnatibus
et proceribus/ and that of the judges or additional counsellors
omits the word ‘ ceteris ’ and frequently inserts the clause t cum
Jndgesnot ceteris de consilio nostro.’ The omission of the word ‘ceteris’
lords or par-
liament. has the great legal force of excluding the judges from claiming
the position of peers of parliament. The difference of its posi-
tion in the writs of the lords spiritual may be construed as
placing their right as members of the lords’ house upon a
different footing from that of the temporal lords, but this ⅛ not
a necessary or probable inference.
The third point of importance is the regular use of the words
t fide et dilectione, in the writs of the prelates3 ; the corre-
ɪ See vol. ii. p. 133 ; Select Charters, p. 485.
2 See the writs of 23 Edw. I, 7 Eich, ɪɪ ; Lords’ Report, iv. 67, 706;
cf. Rot. Parl. ii. 150.
3 On the importance of the expression i fide et dilectione’ see Prynne,
Reg. i. 194, 195, 206-208. It is difficult to draw any distinct inference
from the use of the words t dilectione ’ and l hoɪnagio ’ under Edward I ;
for occasionally both terms are used in writs of the same character ; it
seems, however, clear that after the great quarrel with the earla in 1297
the king never summoned the temporal lords to parliament Hn fide et
dilectione,’ but always ‘in fide et homagio:’ in 1295, 1296, and 1297,
he uses the former expression ; in ï 298 he omits the adjuration altogether,
and in 1299 and onwards uses the sterner form. See the writs of those
years in the Lords’ Report and the Parliamentary Writs. ‘Fide et
homagio’ thus became the regular form; and in 1317 the difference is
specially noted in the Clo⅛e Rolls, where the two sets of writs are de-
scribed as indentical so far ; ‘ cxcepto hoc quod ubi dicitur in fide et dilec-
tione, ibi dicetur in fide et homagio;’ ParL Writs, IL i. 171. It is ju-t
possible to draw from the military writs a further inference; in 1294
XX.]
Writs of the Lords.
407
spending form in the writ of the lords temporal is ‘ fide et The words
homagio,’ or t homagio et Iigeantia.' The former expression is djiectionβ,
sometimes used in the lay writs, but the latter is never used of the writs
to ecclesiastics : the force of the distinction lying in the fact °ates. ɪ"''"
that the bishops as bishops did not do homage, and the abbots
shared the benefit of the immunity1. This point has some
further importance in relation to the writs of the lords tem-
poral.
The fourth point, the use of the words ‘ tractaturi et con- The f∏uc-
x . ., 111 . .. p tiθ∏ ex^
silium vestrum 1mpensur1 marks the theoretical position of pressed ⅛
. tractaturi,
the upper house and its attendant judges : they are counsellors
preeminently; no such words occur in the writs under which
the representative members are elected.
Lastly the praemunientes clause, which of course occurs only Thepw-
• . 1 τ τ v munien⅛s
in the writs of the bishops, directs the attendance of the bene- clause,
ficed clergy, and defines their function : from the twenty-eighth
year of Edward I to the year 1340, they are generally, but not
invariably, summoned like the commons ‘ ad faciendum et con-
sentiendum;’ from 1340 generally, and from the first year of
Richard II invariably, ‘ ad Consentiendum ’ only2 ; the meaning
of the word ‘faciendum’ here must be ruled by its interpreta-
tion in the writs to the sheriffs for the election of knights of
the shire. It would seem that the summons ‘ ad faciendum ’
was withdrawn from the moment that the king despaired of
prevailing on the clergy to vote money in parliament instead
of convocation. When a bishopric was vacant the writ which Wrfts totho
would ordinarily be directed to the bishop was frequently ad- of spirituals,
dressed to the guardian of the spiritualities of the see, or, if a elect?18'101’3
bishop had been elected and not completely invested or con-
John BallioI is cited ‘in fide et homagio’ to send his service of armed
men to Portsmouth, June 25 ; on June 29 he is desired tin fide et dilec-
tione ’ to send some of them with the king to France ; here the former
expression may imply the feudal duty, and the latter the general bond of
fealty: but this will not apply in all cases ; Parl. Writs, i. 261.
1 See above, vol. i. p. 386 ; ii. 211 ; iii. 302.
2 In 1371 they are summoned ‘ad Consulendum et Consentiendum-'
Lords’ Report, iv. 647. It is certainly a significant coincidence that the
word ‘faciendum’should be withdrawn just when the king ceased to send
his second letter to the archbishops ordering the enforcement of the sum-
ɪnons. See above, p. 330.