Thomas
Sutcliffe, “The paths are open, the way is plain”:
Political and Constitutional Theory in Jacobean England, 1603-1625
Excerpts
[see
Tom's commentary here]
In 1607, the Commons debated
whether or not a jury had the right to dismiss a witness before
hearing his testimony. Anthony Cope objected to such a proposal,
arguing that "wee must search before wee judge." Cope may not
have been responding to a significant constitutional question,
but with a single phrase he epitomized the philosophy upon which
Jacobean constitutional and theoretical debate was based. For
whenever Jacobean politicians approached a new constitutional
question, they placed a heavy emphasis on examination and information
gathering. Jacobeans political culture viewed debate as a very
open-minded exploration process, one which was free of any preliminary
conclusions or prejudices. For instance, in 1614, Gwynn argued
that they "may first understand, and then judge."
[…]
In their minds, debate was
ideally unencumbered by preconceived conclusions. […] Indeed,
a close examination of the language used at the opening of constitutional
debates further illustrates the tentative and open-ended nature
of debate in Jacobean political culture. For instance, when
the Commons petitioned the king on May 23rd, 1610, they repeatedly
stressed that their intent was to "examine" the king's right
to lay impositions on trade. The Commons were not arguing from
a position of ideological conviction, rather, they openly acknowledged
that they had no ready answer to the question. As the petition
states, "[i]t may farther please your most excellent Majesty
to understand, that we have no Mind to impugn, but a Desire
to inform ourselves of, your Highness' Prerogative in that Point."
[View
the actual document here.]
[…]
The act of debating was in
and of itself a tool for theoretical exploration. It was a means
through which Jacobeans enhanced their understanding and formulated
new ideas. […] Although the royal administration may not have
engaged in formal debates as did the House of Commons, the king's
councilors also placed a heavy emphasis on cautious exploration
and examination unencumbered by preconceived ideological principles.
They too inhabited a political environment which saw debate
and discussion as the beginning of a long road to a solution
that would eventually manifest itself. For instance, while it
was their decision to begin laying impositions on trade, it
was not a decision that they had made in haste. Much like the
Commons, they approached the issue very cautiously, gradually
exploring and testing the constitutionality of a questionable
prerogative. For instance, in November 1604, Lord Salisbury,
the King's Lord Treasurer, noted that they were seeking for
a way to "not only free this doubt upon this particular of impositions
and corinths: but upon all impositions of the like nature."
Salisbury did not immediately offer a conclusion, but rather
respected the complexity of the issue and viewed it as one in
need of further examination.
[…]
Ultimately, these men valued
discussion and debate as a means of approaching constitutional
questions, and discouraged prompt conclusions which impeded
these debates.
