commands of the parliament." The 5th resolution, for making forthwith a new Great Seal, they met with a direct negative. Several conferences upon the subject were held be

[JULY 4.] tween the two Houses to no purpose. At the last of

these the Commons submitted the following reasons for the measure they recommended, divided into two general heads:

I. "

Mischiefs occasioned by conveying away the Great Seal from the Parliament.

1. "It was secretly and unlawfully carried away by the Lord Keeper contrary to the duty of his place; who ought himself to have attended the parliament, and not to have departed without leave; nor should have been suffered to carry away the Great Seal if his intentions had been discovered.

2. “It hath been taken away from him and put into the hands of other dangerous and ill-affected persons; so as the Lord Keeper, being sent unto by the parliament for the sealing of some writs, returned answer, that he could not seal the same because he had not the Seal in his keeping.

3. "Those who have had the managing thereof have employed it to the hurt and destruction of the kingdom sundry ways: by making new Sheriffs in an unusual and unlawful manner, to be as so many generals or commanders of forces raised against the parliament; by issuing out unlawful commissions of array, with other unlawful commissions for the same purpose; by sending forth proclamations against both Houses of parliament and several members thereof, proclaiming them traitors against the privileges of parliament and laws of the land; by sealing commissions of oyer and terminer to proceed against them and other of his Majesty's good subjects adhering to the parliament as traitors; by sending commissions into Ireland to treat a peace with the rebels there contrary to an act of parliament made this session; besides, divers other dangerous and illegal acts have been passed under the Great Seal since it was secretly conveyed away from parliament, whereby great calamities and mischiefs have ensued to the kingdom's prejudice.

II." Mischiefs proceeding through want of the Great Seal. 1. "The terms have been adjourned; the courts of justice obstructed.

2. "

No original writs can be sued forth without going to Oxford; which none who holds with the parliament can do without peril of his life or liberty.

3. "Proclamations in parliament cannot issue out for bringing in delinquents impeached of high treason, or other crimes, under pain of forfeiting their estates, according to the ancient course.

4. "No writs of error can be brought in parliament to reverse erroneous judgments; nor writs of election sued out for choosing

new members upon death or removal of any; whereby the number of the members is much lessened, and the House in time like to be dissolved if speedy supply be not had, contrary to the very act for continuance of this parliament.

5. “Every other court of justice hath a peculiar seal; and the parliament, the supreme court of England, hath no other seal but the Great Seal of England; which, being kept away from it, hath now no seal at all; and therefore a new seal ought to be made.

This Seal is clavis regni, and therefore ought to be resident with the parliament (which is the representative of the whole kingdom) while it continues sitting, the King as well as the kingdom being always legally present in it during its session."

The Lords having sent a message that their Lordships do adhere to their former resolutions concerning the making of a new Great Seal," the Commons the following day resolved, "That a Great Seal of England shall be presently made, and that a committee be appointed for this purpose, and that Sir Robert Harley take care of the speedy and effectual execution of this order."* They meant this by way of a hint, that they might exclusively assume sovereign authority, and they hoped that when the Seal was made the Lords would acquiesce in the use of it.

There seems to have been a difficulty in finding an artist who would undertake the work without the direct order of the House, and about a week afterwards it was resolved, "that Mr. Marten (the regicide) do to-morrow bring hither the man, who will undertake to grave the Great Seal, to receive his directions." Simonds, the eminent medalist, was accordingly introduced, and was fortified with the following warrant, signed by the Speaker: "Ordered that Mr. Simonds be required and enjoined forthwith to make a new Great Seal of England, and that he shall have 100%. for his pains, 407. in hand and three-score pounds as soon as he shall have finished the work."‡

On the 28th of September a Seal engraved on silver, copied from an impression of the King's Great Seal, and in all respects resembling it, was brought into the House, when an order was made "that it should be sealed up and delivered into the custody of Mr. Speaker, not to be made use of until the House take further order."§

The leaders of the Commons were now very much perplexed as to their next move, for they were by no means yet prepared to throw off the authority of the Lords, that House retaining consid

* Lords' Jour. vi. 117. 119. Com. Jour. iii. 154, 155. † Com. Jour. iii. 162.

Ibid. 174. This same artist made the other great seals for the Commonwealth and after the battle of Dunbar was sent to Scotland to take the effigies of Oliver for a medal, to celebrate the victory. Such was his reputation, that he continued to be employed by the government after the Restoration.-Carlyle's Cromwell, vol. ii. 291-293, 2ded.

§ Com. Juor. iii. 257.

erable influence with the public, and the Earl of Essex and other Peers being indispensably necessary for carrying on the war. They resolved to make another effort to obtain the concurrence of the other House. In the meanwhile the battle of Newbury had been fought; the exasperation of the contending parties had considerably increased; and Essex had been recently gratified by the dismissal of his rival, Sir William Waller, who from some temporary successes had been quaintly called William the Conqueror," and had excited the jealousy of the "Lord General." It was likewise hoped that some impression had been made by Prynne's famous treatise, written for this occasion, which the House had ordered to be printed†, entitled,

“THE OPENING OF THE GREAT SEALE OF ENGLAND,

CONTAINING

"Certain brief, historicall, and legall observations touching the original antiquity, use, necessity of Great Seale of the Kings and kingdom of England, in respect of charters, patents, writs, commissions, and other processe. "Together with the King's kingdom's parliament's severall interests in and power over the same, and over the Lord Chancellor, and the Lords and Keepers of it, both in regard of its new making, custody, administration for the better execution of publike justice, the republique necessary safety and utility; "Occasioned by the over rash censures of such who inveigh against the parliament for ordering a new Great Seale to be engraven to supply the wilful absence, defects, abuses of the old, unduely withdrawne and detained from them,

By WILLIAM PRYNNE, utter Barrister of Lincoln's Inne.

Esther, viii. 8. Write ye also for the Jews, as it liketh you, in the King's name, AND SEAL IT WITH THE KING'S RING; for the writing which is written in the King's name, AND SEALED WITH THE KING'S RING, may no man reverse,'

In this treatise, the author of HISTRIOMASTIX having lost his ears, but not his learning or his dulness, nor his perverse ingenuity, by a misapplication of scripture and legal authorities, had attempted to prove that the Great Seal of England was meant to express the will of the King and the other estates of the realm, and that upon the default or deficiency of any one branch of the legislature, it might be lawfully used by the remainder.*

A committee was appointed" to consider what is fit to be done concerning the Great Seal, and the use of it, and of the former votes on both Houses concerning it, and to report their opinions to this House and this business is especially recommended to Mr. Serjeant Wilde, and all the lawyers of the House."

Mr. Serjeant Wilde reported from the committee that another conference on the subject should be demanded from the Lords,— which was agreed to, and he was appointed to manage it. He forcibly recapitulated the former reasons, introducing a little of * Sept. 15. 1643.

† It was pretty much on this reasoning that Mr. Pitt's Regency Bill proceeded in 1789, which was adopted by the Tory party,-the heir apparent, in whom was the hereditary right, being supposed to be adverse to them. A Great Seal was fabricated for the occasion, after the example of the Long Parliament,-as the commission to go through the form of giving the Royal consent was purely the act of the two Houses.

Prynne's argumentation-dwelt upon a proclamation lately put forth by the King for seizing the estates of all parliament men, and any who adhere to the parliament,—and pointed out the absolute necessity for the use of a new Great Seal, to preserve the government of this kingdom, and to provide for the administration of justice.*

The Lords yielded; and “taking into serious consideration the necessity of preserving the government of the kingdom and his Majesty's authority in parliament, and the being thereof, and the due administration of justice, and perceiving, by the mischiefs already experienced, how absolutely indispensable it is to have the Great Seal attending the parliament,—after a mature debate this question was put,-Whether a Great Seal of England shall be forthwith made to attend the parliament for despatch of the affairs of the parliament and of the kingdom?—and it passed affirmatively."+

A message to this effect coming down to the Commons, they resolved, on the motion of Serjeant Wilde, that

"an ordinance should forthwith be framed for [Ocт. 17. 1643.] more effectually invalidating all proceedings under the Great Seal at Oxford, and for vesting the Seal of the parliament in Commissioners, with the powers of Lord Chancellor or Lord Keeper, to be exercised under the directions of both Houses."

An ordinance to this effect speedily passed through the House of Commons; but it seems to have met with some obstruction in the Lords, and not fewer than six messages were sent up from the Commons praying their Lordships to concur with them in putting the new Great Seal in execution, and to expedite their answer concerning the Great Seal,-the messengers from the Commons always being informed that "their Lordships would send an answer by messengers of their own." At last Serjeant Wilde came to the bar of the Lords, and, with his characteristic energy, read them a lecture on their long delays, telling their Lordships "that the ordinance concerning the Great Seal was of such absolute necessity that the Commonwealth suffered great prejudice for want thereof." The difficulties, whatever they might [Nov. 10.]

have been, were now overcome; and, after some con

ferences to fix the names of the Commissioners, the ordinance received the assent of both Houses, and, according to the doctrine then prevailing, became law. Six Commissioners were appointed, -two members of the House of Peers, and four members of the House of Commons, "which said persons, or any three or more of them, whereof one member or more of the Lords' House, also one member or more of the House of Commons, should be present, were authorised to have the keeping, ordering, and disposing of the new Great Seal, as also all such and the like power as any

* Lord's Jour. vi. 252, 253.

‡ Com. Jour. iii. 278.

† Lords' Jour. vi. 254.

Lord Chancellor or Lord Keeper, or Commissioners of the Great Seal ever had, used, or ought to have.”*

After some preliminaries had been settled as to the form of the oath to be taken by the Commissioners, and the place where the Seal was to be kept by them †,-on the 30th of November the Speaker of the Commons, attended by the whole House, appeared at the bar of the Lords, and said,—“My Lords, Whereas the Great Seal of England was, by order of the House of Commons, appointed to be in my custody, without being made use of until it should be settled and disposed of by authority of ordinance of both Houses of parliament, I am now commanded by the House of Commons to deliver the same to the Speaker of your Lordships' House, so that the Commissioners may be sworn, and the Great Seal delivered to them in full parliament." The Speaker of the Lords went down from his place to the bar, and received it from the hands of the Speaker of the Commons and brought it to the woolsack. Thereupon the Earl of Kent and the Earl of Bolingbroke, the two Peers Commissioners, were sworn at the table, the Speaker of the Lords administering the oath of office to them. Next the four Commissioners, members of the House of Commons, viz. Oliver St. John, Solicitor to his Majesty; Mr. Serjeant Wilde, Samuel Brown, Esq., and Edward Prideaux, Esq., took the oath, the Clerk of the Parliament reading it to them. Then the Speaker of the Lords carried the Great Seal to the bar, and delivered it to the Six Commissioners in full parliament, and the Commons and their Speaker returned to their own House.‡

On a subsequent day the Lords Commissioners all took the oath required by the Triennial Act, and the oaths of allegiance and supremacys before both Houses, at the same time that Lenthal was sworn in Master of the Rolls, having been appointed to that office by ordinance, while Colepeper enjoyed the same title at Oxford under the King's patent.||

As soon as the news of these proceedings reached Oxford, a proclamation was issued by the King, under his Great Seal, de

* Lords' Jour. vi. 300, 301. "It must surely excite a smile that men who had raised armies and fought battles against the King, should be perplexed how to get over so technical a difficulty. But the Great Seal in the eyes of English lawyers has a sort of mysterious efficacy, and passes for the depositary of royal authority in a higher degree than the person of the King."-Hall. Const. Hist. ii. 222.

†That this Seal might not be carried off to the King, or applied to any improper purpose, it was to be kept in the office of the clerk of the House of Peers, scaled up with three of the Commissioners' seals, in an iron chest, under three different locks, each Commissioner having one key.-Lord's Jour, vi. 300. 301.

‡ This graphic description is nearly in the very words of the Lords' Journals, vi. 318.

§ These oaths continued to be taken by all persons in employment under the parliament till the end of the civil war.

In the absence of royal authority, great importance seems to have been attached to the allegation that these acts were done" en plien parliament," an expression frequently occurring in the darly rolls respecting the granting of honours and offices.