Simon Healy
Search for other papers by Simon Healy in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
The significance (and insignificance) of precedent in early Stuart parliaments
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

Precedents were frequently invoked in early modern parliaments, particularly by lawyers, whose profession used ‘artificial reason’ to elucidate legal precedents, and who attempted to impose this paradigm upon constitutional debates. If laws and precedents were straightforwardly bastions of the subject’s liberties (as lawyers claimed), then they might have been deployed only in specific contexts. However, many invocations of precedent occurred along the ill-defined borderlands between the common law and the prerogative. This essay considers the role of precedent in four important parliamentary debates of the early Stuart period: over the proposed union of England and Scotland, over impositions, over impeachment, and over the liberty of the subject in relation to the Five Knights’ Case and the Petition of Right. It stresses how ineffectual precedents proved in resolving political disputes, and argues that more pragmatic considerations were paramount.

  • Collapse
  • Expand

All of MUP's digital content including Open Access books and journals is now available on manchesterhive.

 

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 207 61 6
Full Text Views 59 29 0
PDF Downloads 50 17 0