of the question, states the legal import of the chapter as follows:

"No freeman shall be arrested, or imprisoned, or deprived of his freehold, or his liberties, or free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or in any manner destroyed (harmed), nor will we (the King) proceed against him, nor send any one against him, by force or arms, unless according to (that is, in execution of) the sentence of his peers, and (or, or as the case may require) the Common Law of England (as it was at the time of Magna Carta, in 1215). Spooner's Trial by Jury, 49.

To secure the observance of the Charters, the nobles and great officers were required to be sworn to support them. Coke, proem, 2 Inst. And every British sovereign at his coronation is still sworn to maintain them. Wester. Comm., 142.

Earnest efforts were also made to make the Great Charter familiarly known throughout the land by all, as the common birthright of all; and the most stringent measures of law were devised to insure the prompt punishment of any who should dare to violate it. The Great Charter and the Charter of the Forest, were required by law to be kept in every parish-to be sent to all cathedral churches throughout the realm, there to remain, and to be read to the people twice a year-to be sent as well to the justices of the forest as to others, to all sheriffs and other officers, and to all the cities in the realm-to be read by the sheriffs four times a year, before the people of the shire in open county court.

It was also provided in the confirmation of 25 Ed. I., “that all archbishops and bishops shall pronounce

the sentence of excommunication against all those that by word, deed, or council, do contrary to the foresaid Charters, or that in any point break or undo them; and that the said curses be twice a year denounced and published by the prelates aforesaid."

The following is a copy of the famous curse:

"THE CURSE.

"In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, Amen. Whereas our Sovereign Lord, the King, to the honour of God, and of Holy Church, and for the common profit of the realm, hath granted for him and his heirs for ever, these articles above written; Robert, Archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, admonisheth all his province, once, twice, and thrice: Because that shortness will not suffer so much delay, as to give knowledge to all the people of England of these presents in writing : We therefore enjoyn all persons, of what estate soever they may be, that they and every of them, as much as in them is, shall uphold and maintain these articles granted by our Sovereign the King in all points. And all those that in any point do resist or break, or in any manner hereafter procure, counsel, or any ways assent to resist or break those ordinances, or go about it, by word or deed, openly or privily, by any manner of pretence, or color, We the foresaid archbishop by our authority in this writing expressed, do excommunicate and accurse, and from the body of our Lord Jesus Christ, and from all the company of heaven, and from all the sacraments of Holy Church do sequester and exclude."

SECTION II.

THE PETITION OF RIGHT.

After the lapse of four hundred years, during which time the Great Charter not only remained unrepealed, but was more than thirty times solemnly ratified, 2 Hallam's Middle Ages, 343, and its essential principles known to all the people, and recognized in all courts, though sometimes most unjustly evaded by them-the power of the people peaceably to maintain them against the encroachments of an artful, grasping and faithless king was brought to the

test.

In the year 1627, Hampden, Darnel, Corbet, Earl and Heveningham having with others been committed to prison by the Privy Council for refusing obedience to the forced loans demanded of them without authority of Parliament, applied to the court of King's Bench for the writ of habeas corpus.

"The writ was granted; but the warden of the fleet made return that they were detained by a warrant from the Privy Council, informing him of no particular cause of imprisonment, but that they were committed by the special command of his Majesty. This gave rise to a most important question whether such a return was sufficient in law to justify the court in remitting the parties to custody. The fundamental immunity of English subjects from arbitrary detention had never before been so fully canvassed; and it is to the discussion which arose out of the case of these five gentlemen that we owe

its continual assertion by Parliament, and its ultimate establishment in full practical efficacy by the statute of Charles II. It was argued with great ability by Noy, Selden, and other eminent lawyers, on behalf of the claimants, and by the Attorney-General Heath for the crown." 1 Hallam's Const. Hist., 383.

The prisoners based their demand for liberty upon Magna Carta, "the fundamental laws and statutes of the realm." But the court was deaf to their plea. Seizing upon an obscure precedent more than a hundred years old, they held that "the special command of the King or the authority of the Privy Council as a body, was such sufficient warrant for commitment as to require no further cause to be expressed;" and remanded the prisoners to jail.

But the nation could not be diverted from its cardinal faith in its own prescriptive franchises by measures of illegal severity towards the uncompliant. Another Parliament became indispensable.

It assembled in 1628; Coke, Selden, Glanvil, Pynne, Elliott, famous for their sturdy independence and their zeal in the cause of popular rights, were

members.

The decision in the case of Hampden and others was made the subject of special inquiry and animadversion. The judges were summoned to give an account of their judgment. They answered contrary to the record, "that the prisoners were only remanded that the court might be further advised. 7 St. Tr., 183. The investigation proceeded. "What is this," said Coke, speaking of the decision, "but to declare, upon record, that any subject by such absolute command

may be detained in prison forever? What doth this tend to but the utter subversion of the choice, liberty and right belonging to every free born subject in this kingdom?"

Resolutions were proposed and carried.

"I. That no freeman ought to be committed or detained in prison or otherwise restrained by command of the King, or the Privy Council or any other, unless some cause of the commitment, detainer or restraint be expressed, for which by law he ought to be committed, detained or restrained.

"II. That the writ of habeas corpus cannot be denied, but ought to be granted to every man that is committed or detained in prison or otherwise restrained by command of the King, the Privy Council or any other."

Not content with resolutions, they proceeded to the more efficient work of a declaratory statute, commonly called the PETITION OF RIGHT, by which it was designed to subject the King to the power of the law and to bring the right of personal liberty explicitly under its protection. The King, after attempting to evade giving his consent, was at length-but not until after the "auricular taking of the judges' opinions"-compelled to accede to the petition. In the petition it was, amongst other things, recited and declared as follows:

"III. And whereas, also, by the statute called 'The Great Charter of the Liberties of England,' it is declared and enacted, that no freeman may be taken or imprisoned, or be disseized of his freehold or liberties, or his free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or in any manner destroyed, but by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. "IV. And in the eight-and-twentieth year of the reign of King Edward III., it was declared and enacted by