Add MS 72412

Trumbull Papers.

In 1610 the House of Commons was very concerned with the issue of impositions - that is, new customs duties imposed by the Crown without parliamentary sanction - as an arbitrary exaction against the property rights of the subject and the authority of Parliament. This manuscript, although apparently written as one text, combines two elements in the opposition to impositions: the remonstrance or petition made to the King on 23/24 May, and (although he is not named as its author) the historical and legal case made by James Whitelocke to the Commons in a speech on 2 July of which the text here is a version.

On 21 May the King made a speech to the Commons in which he promised not to issue any more impositions without consulting Parliament, but refused to bind the Crown's prerogative right to do so, and "commanded us not to call his power or prerogative in that poyntei n question or to debate these". "This speech", one MP recorded, "was so distastfull in some parts thereof to the Howse. as that, the next morning after, they entred into debate thearof, and made choyse of a Committee to devise upon some course to be taken to informe His Majesty how much the liberties of the subjects and the privileges of the parliament was impeached by his inhibition to debate his prerogative" (Gardiner, 36, from BL, Add MS 4210, f. 27v). The resulting remonstrance or petition was entered into the Journal of the House of Commons on 23 May and delivered to the King on 24 May.

ff. 1r-3r here are the text of this petition. Other versions are "House of Commons Journal Volume 1: 23 May 1610", in Journal of the House of Commons: Volume 1, 1547-1629 (London, 1802), pp. 431-32. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/commons-jrnl/vol1/pp431-432 [accessed 26 March 2019]; The National Archives, SP 14/54, ff. 159r-v; Longleat House, Whitelocke Papers, Volume 1, ff. 90r-91v.

James Whitelocke (1570-1632) was MP for Woodstock, in 1610, and later Justice of the King's Bench. On 1 May he was selected to a committee of nine to search the historical records about impositions; on 12 June the lawyers of the House were ordered to inspect the copies taken by the committee from the records in the Tower of London and Exchequer. On 22 May Whitelocke had spoken strongly in the debates on the King's speech, arguing for Parliament as the storehouse where the laws of the land and the rights and properties of the subject were preserved.

On 2 July Whitelocke made the first, and longest, speech in a debate on impositions. The text of ff. 3r-51r is that speech, or rather a version of it (it can be compared with the detailed notes of that speech made by one MP, Gardiner, 103-109, from BL, Add MS 4210, ff. 78v-82v). Whitelocke later described it as "my treatise" and "my argument of the impositions" (Liber Famelicus of James Whitelocke, ed. by John Bruce, Camden Society, Old Series, vol. 70 [1858], 24-5).

The yoking together of the May remonstrance and Whitelocke's arguments seems to have been durable. This is one of five manuscript copies in the British Library, in all of which the two are placed together (the others are Stowe MS 297, ff. 86r-140v; Stowe MS 298, ff. 82r-140v; Add MS 36082, ff. 100r-174v; Lansdowne MS 253, ff. 255r-337v). The texts were published together in 1641, as A learned and necessary argument to prove that each subject hath a propriety in his goods. Shewing also the extent of the kings prerogative in impositions upon the goods of merchants exported and imported, out of and into this kingdome. Together with a remonstrance presented to the Kings Most Excellent Majesty, by the Honourable House of Commons, in the Parliament holden anno dom. 1610. annoq[ue] regis Jacobi, 7 (STC: Wing 1995A; ESTC: R232927), and so continued when the pamphlet was republished in 1658 and 1679. In all the manuscript and printed versions the text of the arguments has its title but no author given, though title-pages do sometimes offer an author - the 1641 edition spoke of the "a late learned judge of this kingdom", whilst the author was misidentified the as Sir Henry Yelverton in the 1679 edition and as Sir Roger Owen in Lansdowne MS 253 as Sir Roger Owen. Add Ms 72412 is perhaps more unusual in that other versions of the texts often linked them with a third - the section on imposition on the Commons' petition of secular grievances which had followed the debate of 2 July five days later.

The scribe of Add MS 72412 is unknown, but can be identified as a professional scribe linked to a number of texts from the early 17th century (see Add MS 72390).

Contents:

ff. 1r-3r: "A Remonstrance, delivered to his Majestie in writinge, after the Inhibicion given by him to the Lower House of Parliament, aswell by word of mouth, as by Letters, not to proceede in examininge his Right to Impose without assent of Parliament", n.d. [23/24 May 1610].

ff. 3r-51r: [James Whitelocke,] "The Question is. Whether the King without assent of Parliament, may sett Imposicions upon the Wares and Goods of Merchantes exported and imported out of and into this Realme", n.d. [c 2 July 1610].