Journal articles on the topic 'England. Parliament. House of Lords'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: England. Parliament. House of Lords.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'England. Parliament. House of Lords.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Cox, Gary W. "The Development of a Party-Orientated Electorate in England, 1832–1918." British Journal of Political Science 16, no. 2 (April 1986): 187–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0007123400003884.
Full textAbstract:
Modern British government is government by party leaders in Cabinet. It is still the ‘Crown in Parliament’ which formally takes or authorizes every legislative or administrative action, but of the three major components of the Crown in Parliament – the Commons, the Lords, and the Sovereign – the first is now virtually unchecked. The House of Lords can only minimally delay acts of the Commons, and both the Lords and the Monarch have long since lost their ability to veto (much less initiate) legislation. Since those in the Cabinet control the agenda of the House of Commons, since the Cabinet almost invariably consists solely of the leaders of the party with a majority of seats in the Commons, and since the influence of party on voting in Parliament is very strong, the Commons itself has in essence only retained a veto over the legislative proposals of the majority party's leaders who sit in the Cabinet. As a recent essay on legislation in Britain notes, ‘today's conventional wisdom is that … Parliament has relinquished any capacity for legislative initiative it may once have possessed to the executive in its midst’.
2
FORD, J. D. "Protestations to Parliament for Remeid of Law." Scottish Historical Review 88, no. 1 (April 2009): 57–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/e0036924109000584.
Full textAbstract:
The Articles of Union approved by the parliaments of Scotland and England in 1707 provided for the preservation of the private law of Scotland and for the determination of disputes arising north of the border in Scottish courts. At the same time, however, the Articles not only allowed for the amendment of the law by legislation enacted at Westminster but also left open the possibility of appeals being made to the British parliament against decisions delivered in Scottish courts. The Articles did not allow explicitly for appeals, but nor did they prohibit them, and dissatisfied litigants, by exercising the privilege asserted in the Claim of Right to protest for remeid of law against decisions of the lords of council and session, enabled the upper house of the new parliament to substitute its decisions for those delivered by the supreme civil court in Scotland. This much has long been understood by historians of Scots law, as has the significant impact the opinions expressed by English judges in the House of Lords came to have on the development of the modern law. Yet what has never been properly understood is the nature of the protestations for remeid of law from which appeals to the British parliament emerged. Detailed study of these protestations in the years before and immediately following the union reveals that they were conceived of in several different ways and that their nature was never clearly defined. Nevertheless, it also tends to confirm that there is some basis for the common suspicion that appeals were not intended to be made to the House of Lords in the way that they have been.
3
Marelja, Miran, and Valentino Kuzelj. "Evolucija fiskalnoga suvereniteta u Engleskoj." Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Rijeci 41, no. 2 (2020): 509–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.30925/zpfsr.41.2.4.
Full textAbstract:
History of parliamentary development is narrowly tied to the development of fiscal prerogatives of the legislature. This is especially pronounced in the origins and development of the English Parliament. Moreover, we can ascertain that the fight of “medieval taxpayers”, i.e. those partaking in the distribution of power in medieval feudal structures, foreshadows the very foundation of the English Parliament and its precursors – the “assemblies of King’s servants”. In that sense, medieval England’s earliest constitutional documents espouse mechanisms limiting Crown’s autocracy. Later on, the invocation of Parliament’s fiscal prerogatives represented the most efficient form of subverting such absolutism, especially regarding the absolutist tendencies of the Stuarts. Upon establishment of Parliament’s supremacy over the Crown, the Victorian era was marked by the struggle between two houses of Parliament, culminating in early 20th century anent the issue of the Lords’ rejection of the budget bill. Parliament Act of 1911 marks the end of a centuries-long development of Parliament’s fiscal sovereignty, affirming the prerogatives of the House of Commons as the holders of democratic electoral legitimacy.
4
Dingle, Lesley, and Bradley Miller. "A summary of recent constitutional reform in the United Kingdom." International Journal of Legal Information 33, no. 1 (2005): 71–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0731126500004650.
Full textAbstract:
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland consists of four countries: England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Legislative competence for the UK resides in the Westminster Parliament, but there are three legal systems (England and Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland) with separate courts and legal professions. These legal systems have a unified final court of appeal in the House of Lords. The Isle of Man, and the two Channel Islands (Guernsey and Jersey) are not part of the UK, but possessions of the crown. Although their citizens are subject to the British Nationality Act 1981, the islands have their own legal systems. They are represented by the UK government for the purposes of international relations, but are not formal members of the European Union.
5
Gill, Sean. "‘In a Peculiar Relation to Christianity’: Anglican Attitudes to Judaism in the Era of Political Emancipation, 1830-1858." Studies in Church History 29 (1992): 399–407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0424208400011438.
Full textAbstract:
Between 1830 and 1858 fourteen attempts were made to remove the words ‘on the true faith of a Christian’ from the oath required of new Members and thereby to allow Jews to gain admission to Parliament. After 1833, when a bill was passed in the Commons, all proposals for reform foundered on opposition in the Lords. Speaking against Jewish emancipation in the Upper House on 1 August 1833, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Howley, made it clear that the issue was not one on which the Church of England could remain indifferent. In contrast to other religions, he argued, Judaism stood ‘in a peculiar relation to Christianity’, for its very existence was ‘not simply a negative but a positive contradiction of Christianity’.
6
Grimley, Matthew. "The Fall and Rise of Church and State? Religious History, Politics and the State in Britain, 1961–2011." Studies in Church History 49 (2013): 491–512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0424208400002308.
Full textAbstract:
In trying to trace the development of church-state relations in Britain since 1961, one encounters the difficulty that conceptions of both ‘church’ and ‘state’ have changed radically in the half-century since then. This is most obviously true of the state. The British state in 1961 was (outside Stormont-governed Northern Ireland) a unitary state governed from London. It still had colonies, and substantial overseas military commitments. One of its Houses of Parliament had until three years before been (a few bishops and law-lords apart) completely hereditary. The prime minister controlled all senior appointments in the established Church of England, and Parliament had the final say on its worship and doctrine. The criminal law still embodied Christian teaching on issues of personal morality.
7
LOFT, PHILIP. "LITIGATION, THE ANGLO-SCOTTISH UNION, AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS AS THE HIGH COURT, 1660–1875." Historical Journal 61, no. 4 (December 4, 2017): 943–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x17000346.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article examines the role of the House of Lords as the high court from the Restoration of 1660 to the passage of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act in 1876. Throughout this period, lay peers and bishops judged appeals on civil law from the central courts of England and Wales, Ireland (aside from between 1783 and 1800), and Scotland after the Union of 1707. It has long been known that the revolution of 1688–9 transformed the ability of parliament to pass legislation, but the increased length and predictability of parliamentary sessions was of equal significance to the judicial functions performed by peers. Unlike the English-dominated profile of eighteenth-century legislation, Scots constituted the largest proportion of appellants between 1740 and 1875. The lack of interaction between Westminster and Scotland is often seen as essential to ensuring the longevity of the Union, but through comparing the subject matter of appeals and mapping the distribution of cases within Scotland, this article demonstrates the extent of Scottish engagement. Echoing the tendency of Scottish interests to pursue local, private, and specific legislation in order to insulate Scottish institutions from English intervention, Scottish litigants primarily sought to maintain and challenge local privileges, legal particularisms, and the power of dominant landowners.
8
Christianson, Paul. "Arguments on billeting and martial law in the parliament of 1628." Historical Journal 37, no. 3 (September 1994): 539–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x00014874.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTDebates over billeting and martial law arose in the parliament of 1628 in conjunction with such other grievances as the forced loan and discretionary imprisonment employed by royal servants from 1626 onward to keep alive the war effort against the monarchs of Spain and France. Both houses dealt with billeting rather quickly, the Lords by resolving a dispute among magistrates and military officers in Banbury, Oxfordshire, and the Commons by hearing general and particular complaints from civilians, expelling a member who signed an order for billeting, and petitioning the king. Attacks upon the employment of military law internally when a state of war did not exist in England originated in the Commons, reawakened fears over the perceived threat of Roman or civil law superiority to the common law, and set off fierce debates in which royal servants and civil lawyers supported and leading common lawyers denounced as illegal the commissions of martial law issued by the privy council. Underlying these debates, as with those over discretionary imprisonment, were conflicting interpretations of England's ancient constitution with practical consequences for the governance of the realm.
9
Edwards, Denis J. "The Treaty of Union: more hints of constitutionalism." Legal Studies 12, no. 1 (March 1992): 34–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.1992.tb00455.x.
Full textAbstract:
The Court of Session decision in Pringle, Petitioner again raises the issue of what constitutional effect, if any, is to be attributed to the Treaty of Union between Scotland and England. Specifically, is it competent for the Court of Session to find that an Act or a provision in an Act of the United Kingdom Parliament is invalid because of an inconsistency with an Article of the Treaty of Union as enacted in Scots law by the former Scottish Parliament in the Union With England Act 1707 (c 7)? This is the first case since MacCormick v Lord Advocate in which the Inner House of the Court of Session has commented on this favourite question of Scottish constitutional lawyers and, although hardly answering the question any more revealingly than it did in that case, the court's latest reservation of opinion on the answer is worthy of some further discussion.
10
Turnbull, Michael T. R. B. "Lord George Gordon: Politics, Religion and Slavery." Journal of Religious History, Literature and Culture 10, no. 1 (June 15, 2024): 103–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.16922/jrhlc.10.1.5.
Full textAbstract:
Lord George Gordon (1751‐1793), was son of Cosmo George, third Duke of Gordon and Katherine Duchess of Gordon. His mother remarried Staats Long Morris, an American soldier and politician, who inculcated in Gordon an admiration of America, particularly during his naval service based in America and a long posting in Jamaica where he experienced the cruelty of slavery under British rule. Gordon left the navy under a cloud and entered parliament in 1774 under demeaning circumstances, voting for the Opposition where he launched a series of attacks on the government of Lord North. In 1780, he marched as president for a Protestant Association on Parliament in protest at the 1778 Catholic Relief Act for England, and the possibility of bringing in a similar bill for Scotland. The ‘Gordon Riots’ outside Westminster followed and Lord George was arrested for treason but in 1781 was exonerated. He was later charged with libel and again imprisoned. By this time he had converted to the Jewish faith and on 26 April 1792 wrote a powerful indictment of slavery to the Speaker of the House of Commons.
11
HAIGH, CHRISTOPHER, and ALISON WALL. "CLERGY JPs IN ENGLAND AND WALES, 1590–1640." Historical Journal 47, no. 2 (May 24, 2004): 233–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x04003693.
Full textAbstract:
In the 1621 parliament members of the House of Commons clashed with the king over the issue of clergy as JPs: there were suggestions that no clergyman should sit as a JP, or that only bishops and deans should be appointed. Why were there complaints at that time, and were they justified? Was the nomination of clergy as justices an element in ‘the rise of clericalism’? This analysis of clergy JPs between 1590 and 1640 shows that they had been increasing slowly in number from 1590, and more rapidly towards 1617 under Lord Chancellor Ellesmere. But the major expansion in their ranks came under his successors Francis Bacon 1617 to 1621, and especially Bishop John Williams 1621 to 1625. However, there was no systematic central policy behind appointments, and local interests and the normal processes of patronage were important. Perhaps precedence among the justices and the exercise of secular authority by clerical JPs were sometimes troublesome issues. But, despite continuing complaints from MPs, the proportion of clergy to lay JPs was always small – at its highest in 1626, with 7·6 per cent. Thereafter Lord Keeper Thomas Coventry allowed the clerical presence to decline, both absolutely and proportionately. If there was a ‘rise of the clergy’ after 1625, clergy JPs were not part of it.
12
Hertzler, James R. "Who Dubbed It “The Glorious Revolution?”." Albion 19, no. 4 (1987): 579–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4049475.
Full textAbstract:
It was not very glorious at first, at least to many English people of the late seventeenth century. With a king of undoubted legitimacy squeezed out and a new, albeit related monarch installed and recognized by Parliament, the transaction shook government, nation and church alike. It left Jacobite and non-juring splinters all round. The Revolution, happening in fulfillment of ideals of exclusionist Whigs, did not entirely satisfy those partisans, who soon learned that they could not control their masterful king, William III. As for the Tories, their consciences ached due to their resistance to a divinely-appointed sovereign. Few highly-placed Englishmen were comfortable with their need to call in a foreigner to help them solve their domestic squabbles. Indeed, one writer, reflecting on the letter inviting the Prince of Orange to invade England, thought it would have been “more glorious … to assist our undoubted Soveraign [sic], then to suffer him to be dethroned, solely because he is a Roman Catholic.”Twentieth-century historians called the Revolution other names than “glorious.” It has been dubbed a “sensible,” a “model,” a “moral,” a “respectable,” a “palace,” and simply the English Revolution. All agreed that it was indeed a Revolution, and they themselves were in agreement with some early writers who were contemporary with the event. The Orange Gazette, at the very end of the year 1688, reported on “the Revolutions that had occurred.” The historian Nicholas Tindal wrote that William of Orange himself, in a speech before the House of Lords, spoke of “this late Revolution.” Considerable discussion ensued in Parliament and in pamphlets as to whether William conquered James, or whether the king had abdicated, or had deserted his kingdom. But little question with contemporaries: there was a Revolution.
13
Kelly, Patrick. "Sir Richard Bolton and the authorship of ‘A declaration setting forth how, and by what means, the laws and statutes of England, from time to time came to be of force in Ireland’, 1644." Irish Historical Studies 35, no. 137 (May 2006): 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021121400004685.
Full textAbstract:
The seventeenth-century tradition that the Irish lord chancellor, Sir Richard Bolton, was the author of the 1644 Declaration asserting the legislative independence of the Irish parliament has long been considered unreliable. Following the arguments of the Declaration’s eighteenth-century editor, Walter Harris, it has been usual to attribute the work to the Catholic lawyer Patrick Darcy, author of An argument delivered … by the express order of the House of Commons … 9. Iunii 1641 (Waterford, 1643).
14
Stępkowski, Aleksander. "KSZTAŁTOWANIE SIĘ MIESZANEGO SYSTEMU SZKOCKIEGO PRAWA PRYWATNEGO W XIX I XX WIEKU." Zeszyty Prawnicze 2, no. 1 (March 19, 2017): 57. http://dx.doi.org/10.21697/zp.2012.2.1.02.
Full textAbstract:
FORMATION OF THE MIXED SYSTEM OF SCOTTISH PRIVATE LAW DURING 19™AND 20™ CENTURIES(Summary) This paper présents development of Scots law as a mixed jurisdiction in 19th and 20th centuries. This spécifie mixture of légal cultures which is Scots law, owes most of its peculiarity to, variable in its character, relationships with England and its precedent based legal culture. English influence on Scottish private law become predominant in 19th century, as an effect of advancement of internal integration within United Kingdome.Scots law - as described in 18th century classical legal treaties - was in general based on continental ius commune, as presented in French and Roman-Dutch legal thought. Political and social consequences of the Union of 1707 allowed extremely intensive influence of English law in Scotland since second quarter of 19th century. This impact had miscellaneous character and was performed in a various ways. The easiest one was legislative activity of British Parliament, whose statutes in 19th century started to be progressively more and more important source of English law. Statutory influence was the easiest as the number of Scots in British Parliament never exceeded ten percent, so there was no problem in ignoring their objections, until the establishment of the Scottish Law Commission in 1965, which started to supervise legislation touching Scotland.Except statutory influence, considerable changes took place in the way of administering justice in Scodand. The most spectacular was decision of the House of Lords which in the beginning of 18th century had recognised its authority to revise judgements of the Court of Session – Scottish supreme court. In effect House of Lords started - regardless differences existing between Scots law and English law - to apply English rules in reviewing judgements of the Court of Session. Further influence of English rules into Scots law was provoked by the reform of the Court of Session, whose organisation and proceedings became considerably anglicised. It provoked that its decisions started to be regarded as a primary source of law by progressive acceptance of English stare decisis rule - which was not the part of Scottish legal system before.A kind of reaction for this process of Anglicisation was the interest of Scottish lawyers in studies of Roman law, as performed on continent in Netherlands and Germany. This interest subsequently was manifested in following ideas of German historical school. In consequence they started to underline the unique - domestic - character of Scots law, independent as well from English law as from continental tradition of civil law.The article is finishing with considerations upon possible consequences for Scots law of the process of devolution in Scodand which took place in 1998. It presents different opinions of Scottish lawyers, as to the future development of Scots law.
15
Lefterova-Stoycheva, Tatyana. ""“The climbing boys” and the English society in the Industrial age: public pressure and legislative changes"." Lyuboslovie 21 (November 22, 2021): 56–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.46687/teuz8225.
Full textAbstract:
The practice of the climbing boys in the business of sweeping chimneys was spread in England during the Industrial Age (18th - 19th c.). The question of boys’ exploitation is part of the problem of child labour, but it precedes and outlives the overall child exploitation in the factories and mines. This is a sphere where the English society demonstrates conservatism and reluctance to change the attitude to the children of the poor families. The needed legislation was postponed and cost several generations of miserable and deprived boys, losing their health, and often their lives in the chimneys of the rich owners of buildings and mansions. The compassion of some citizens was not enough to convince the lawmakers that the life of children was more valuable than their houses. This was the main topic of the discussions between the lords and the reformers in the Parliament. The struggle for the protection of the climbing boys started in the late 18th c. and is considered successfully finished with the Act of 1875.
16
Laws, John. "A Judicial Perspective on The Sacred in Society." Ecclesiastical Law Journal 7, no. 34 (January 2004): 317–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0956618x00005408.
Full textAbstract:
The primary virtue of establishment is the Church's duty under law to minister to anyone at all who may turn to it, including the ungodliest. Establishment does not imply a religious State, that is a State whose law requires subservience by the citizens to the State religion; if it did, it would be barbarous (but contrast the Black Rubric in the Book of Common Prayer). Establishment does not entail State control of the Church. The legal characteristics of establishment are as follows. (1) The law of the Church of England is part of the law of the land. (2) Bishops and some other office-holders are appointed by the Queen on ministerial advice. (3) 26 diocesan bishops sit as legislators in the House of Lords. (4) The Queen as Supreme Governor acts as monarch for the Church as she acts as monarch for the State. The Church of England is not a “congregational” church: its forms of worship are prescribed by law, and are not at the liberty of the community worshipping in any particular church. The bishops' resolution which authorised the use of the 1928 revision of the Book of Common Prayer in face of the will of Parliament (which was the lawful authority in the matter) was a lamentable disobedience to the law which it was their duty to uphold. Such a legal transgression might possibly nowadays be subject to correction by the High Court on judicial review, though that would require departure from earlier high authority. However that may be, it has to be recognised that there is no room, in the practice of an established Church, for the notion that conscience might justify disobedience to the law. The conscience of the believer is worth no more than the conscience of an unbeliever. The established Church possesses two immeasurable virtues: first, that religion is no tyrant: belief is not compulsory; second, that the Church's ministration is available to everyone. Their unified effect is a great force for good.
17
Cox, Noel. "BLACK V. CHRÉTIEN AND THE CONTROL OF THE ROYAL PREROGATIVE." Constitutional Forum / Forum constitutionnel 12, no. 1, 2 & 3 (July 24, 2011): 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.21991/c94m3j.
Full textAbstract:
Conrad Black, a prominent publisher and businessman in both Canada and the United Kingdom, submitted his name for one of the peerages to be created for the new-model House of Lords following the House of Lords Act 1999.1 The rights and duties of peers depend entirely upon custom.2 The principal legal distinction of British peers is — or was — their right to sit and vote in Parliament.3 Not all peers however were Lords of Parliament (principally the Irish peers not also possessing another peerage entitling them to a seat), and some Lords of Parliament, the bishops, are not peers.4 Essentially, Black was seeking, and had been promised, a seat in the upper house of the British Parliament.
18
DeLuna, D. N. "Shaftesbury, Locke, and Their Revolutionary Letter? [Corrigendum]." Locke Studies 18 (December 8, 2018): 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/ls.2018.6177.
Full textAbstract:
A correction of an article originally published in vol 17 (2017).
In 1675, the anonymous Letter to a Person of Quality was condemned in the House of Lords and ordered to be burned by the public hangman. A propagandistic work that has long been attributed to Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, and less certainly to his secretary John Locke, it traduced hard-line Anglican legislation considered in Parliament that year—namely the Test Bill, proposing that office-holders and MPs swear off political militancy and indeed any efforts to reform the Church and State. Careful examination of the text of the Letter, and that of one of its sources in the Reasons against the Bill for the Test, also circulated in 1675, reveals the presence of highly seditious passages of covert historical allegory. Hitherto un-noted by modern scholars, this allegory compared King Charles II to the weak and intermittently mad Henry VI, while agitating for armed revolt against a government made prey to popish and French captors. The discovery compels modification, through chronological revision and also re-assessment of the probability of Locke’s authorship of the Letter, of Richard Ashcraft’s picture of Shaftesbury and Locke as first-time revolutionaries for the cause of religious tolerance in the early 1680s. Even more significantly, it lends support to Ashcraft’s view of the nature and intent of duplicitous published writings from the Shaftesbury circle, whose members included Robert Ferguson, ‘the Plotter’ and pamphleteer at home in the world of skilled biblical hermeneutics. Cultivated for stealthy revolutionary purposes, these writings came with designs of engaging discrete reading networks within England’s culture of Protestant dissent.
19
McCulloch, Derek. "The Musical Oeuvre of Willoughby Bertie, 4th Earl of Abingdon (1740–99)." Royal Musical Association Research Chronicle 33 (2000): 1–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14723808.2000.10540989.
Full textAbstract:
Willoughby Bertie was born in Gainsborough on January 16th 1740. Gainsborough was a family seat on his mother's side. Why his birth should have occurred there, rather than at the paternal family seat at Rycote in Oxfordshire, is not known. In November 1745 a fire destroyed the Great House at Rycote; Willoughby's elder brother James, the heir to the title and the estate, died in the fire and Willoughby became the heir to the earldom. Otherwise very little is known. He attended Westminster School, proceeding to matriculation at Magdalen College Oxford in January 1759, and by the time he had taken his M.A. in January 1761 he had already become the 4th Earl (June 1760). He took his seat in the House of Lords in February 1761. Thereafter biographers have assumed he met up with the infamous radical politician John Wilkes in Geneva, where, in the words of his obituary, ‘he imbibed some of the democratic principles of the unsuccessful part of that republick’. In fact he was for some of the time in Rome, as verified by the Mémoires of André-Ernest-Modeste Grétry, from whom he commissioned a flute concerto. Willoughby's first known music teacher was the flautist and composer Karl Gaspard Weiß, who befriended Grétry and invited him to join them in Geneva. At about this time the exiled Wilkes also joined them in Geneva, and all three together with Boswell may also have met up at the Carnival in Naples in 1765. Like Grétry, Willoughby and Wilkes visited Voltaire at nearby Ferney, staying en route at the monastery of Grande-Chartreuse. Voltaire made reference to him as follows: ‘Pair d'Angleterre/Qui voyageait tout excédé d'ennui/Uniquement pour sortir de chez lui/Lequel avait pour charmer sa tristesse/Trois chiens courants, du punch, et sa maitresse’ (English peer, bored out of him mind, travelling simply to get away from home. To charm away his sadness he had three hunting dogs, punch, and his mistress). In an autobiographical poem the earl also talks disparagingly of his time in Holland. A letter from England to Wilkes in Paris, talking of his ‘tender engagement’, confirms that Willoughby was back in this country by the end of June 1767. In July 1768 he married the daughter of Admiral Sir Peter Warren, an Irish Member of Parliament and deemed the richest commoner in the country, owning a substantial amount of land on Manhattan Island (NY). In that year the earl also wrote to Grétry, by this time in Paris, terminating an allowance in return for flute compositions, a ‘proposition’ entered on in Rome, on the grounds that he was no longer playing the instrument, though more feasibly because the composer had not fulfilled his part of what was probably a very informal contract.
20
Bradley, James E. "The Anglican Pulpit, the Social Order, and the Resurgence of Toryism during the American Revolution." Albion 21, no. 3 (1989): 361–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4050086.
Full textAbstract:
“And now the new system of government came into being. For the first time since the accession of the House of Hanover, the Tory party was in the ascendant.” So wrote Lord Macaulay concerning the early years of George III's reign. In Macaulay's essay on the earl of Chatham one can find all the elements of the Whig myth of the reign of George III. Most of these ideas have been safely laid to rest by Sir Lewis Namier and modern research; we now know that there was neither a new system of government at the accession of the king nor anything resembling a Tory party. George III was not the tyrant depicted in the Declaration of Independence, there was no plot in the imagined cabinet of “king's friends” to overthrow the constitution, and when, with respect to the colonies, the king declared that he would abide by the decision of his Parliament, he was taking a stand on the side of Whig principles and the Revolution Settlement.One element in the putative resurgence of Toryism that Macaulay and other Whig historians emphasized was High-Anglican political theology. G. H. Guttridge, for example, in his English Whiggism and the American Revolution (1942) well understood the differences between the Toryism of the period of the American Revolution and that of the earlier century. Tories had come to accept the Revolution Settlement, the Hanoverian succession, and even “a modicum of religious toleration.” But if they had lost the bloom of monarchical sentiment, they retained the concept of a state unified above sectional and party interests. Guttridge's formulas were admittedly too simplistic and they justly invited criticism, but one of the overlooked merits of his work was that he located the continuity of conservative thought in its religious aspect. He observed that, “Standing for the two great Tory principles, national unity and a religious sanction for the established order, the Church of England was the central institution of Toryism—the state in its religious aspect, and the divine principle in monarchical government.” The demolition of the Whig interpretation, however, has resulted in a thorough-going neglect of political discourse, and several notable examples of this deconstruction bear directly upon Anglican political thought. In his introduction to the History of Parliament John Brooke wrote that during the American Revolution the Anglican clergy in England had no specific attitude toward the war or any other aspect of government policy. When the reprint of G. H. Guttridge's essay appeared in 1963, Ian Christie wrote a vigorous rebuttal to the idea of a revival of Toryism in the early part of George III's reign without a single reference to the Anglican Church.
21
Meggitt, Gary. "A British Bundesrat? The Brown Commission and the Future of the House of Lords." Amicus Curiae 4, no. 3 (June 24, 2023): 523–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.14296/ac.v4i3.5614.
Full textAbstract:
Reform of the House of Lords has occupied the minds of politicians, civil servants and academics for over a century. In late 2022, the Labour Party published a proposal for the replacement of the Lords with a new, democratically elected, Assembly of the Nations and Regions. This proposed Assembly resembles, at least superficially, the German Bundesrat. The author reviews the history of Lords reform, examines Labour’s proposals, compares the envisioned Assembly with the Bundesrat and concludes that the former will be found wanting.
Keywords: United Kingdom; Germany; constitutional law; Parliament; House of Lords; Bundesrat; constitutional reform.
22
Perry, Jen, Paul Lomax, Fiona Taylor, Susan Howson, and Kathleen McCurdy. "The Parliamentary Scholar Scheme: a way to engage doctors in healthcare policy and politics." BJPsych Bulletin 44, no. 3 (November 26, 2019): 103–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2019.76.
Full textAbstract:
SummaryThe Royal College of Psychiatrists’ Parliamentary Scholar Scheme gives higher trainees in psychiatry the opportunity to spend 1 day a week in the House of Lords working alongside a peer with an interest in health. This article describes the work of the House of Lords and Parliament using examples from the experiences of 2017–2018 scholars and outlines ways doctors can get more involved in policy and politics.
23
Ramsbottom, John, William B. Bidwell, and Maija Jansson. "Proceedings in Parliament 1626, Vol. 1: House of Lords." Sixteenth Century Journal 23, no. 3 (1992): 612. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2542529.
Full text
24
Stone, Ian R. "The Franklin search in Parliament." Polar Record 32, no. 182 (July 1996): 209–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0032247400025109.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTThe record of Parliamentary proceedings relating to the Franklin search covers the period 1848–1863. The main subject of discussion was the need for the government to mount search expeditions, while topics such as rewards for successful expeditions and the question of the provision of monuments to Sir John Franklin also occupied Parliamentary time. Interest in the matter among Members of Parliament crossed party boundaries. Most of the activity was in the House of Commons rather than in the House of Lords, because the former House had control of expenditure. A further reason was that the government was more exposed to questioning in the House of Commons, because, for most of the period, the First Lord of the Admiralty was a member of that House. Lady Franklin also had a wider range of acquaintance in the House of Commons and was able to conduct a lobbying campaign using it as a medium.
25
Jaeschke, Andrzej. "Brytyjska Izba Lordów na przełomie XIX i XX wieku... Ewolucja pozycji w systemie politycznym." Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis. Studia Politologica 24, no. 324 (May 15, 2021): 125–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.24917/20813333.24.9.
Full textAbstract:
The paper concerns the evolution of the political position of the House of Lords until the end of the 19thcentury. The author presents the time of stabilisation of the relations of the two parliamentary chambers andidentifies its causes. He also discusses the increasing disruption of relations between the two chambers ofthe British Parliament following from electoral reforms and, consequently, the decomposition of the hithertounified conservative political environment and the emergence of liberal forces. This resulted in increasinglystrong ideological and political rivalry between the conservative House of Lords and the largely liberal Houseof Commons.
26
Holt, T. Geoffrey. "‘A College of Jesuits’ at Holbeck in Nottinghamshire." Recusant History 19, no. 4 (October 1989): 484–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034193200020434.
Full textAbstract:
‘Upon information given to this House that at Holbeck in Nottinghamshire is a settled College of Jesuits and a library of Books belonging to them worth about a Thousand Pounds, which is not fit to remain there: It is Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled that the Lords with White Staves do attend His Majesty humbly to desire him from this House “that His Majesty will be pleased to give Orders that One or more of the Messengers … may be sent to seize and bring away the said Books to be disposed of as His Majesty shall think fit”! (Die Jovis, 27 die Martii, 1679, 31 Car II)’. And a day or two later ‘Ordered by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled that the Messenger appointed by His Majesty to seize and bring away the Books which are secured at Holbeck in Nottinghamshire be, and is hereby, authorized and required to bring away also the Trunks which remain there under seizure and sealed up …’ (Die Sabbati, 29 die Martii).
27
Hayter, P. D. G. "The Parliamentary Monitoring of Science and Technology in Britain." Government and Opposition 26, no. 2 (April 1, 1991): 147–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.1991.tb01130.x.
Full textAbstract:
THROUGHOUT THE TWENTIETH CENTURY THE HOUSE OF Lords has been looking for a role. It lost its original power base with the decline in influence of the landed aristocracy and the growth of the party system. At the same time the composition of the House became increasingly difficult to justify; membership based on the accidents of birth no longer seemed an adequate justification for the right to legislate or to overrule the people's elected representatives.The Parliament Act 1911, which took away the Lords' absolute right to veto legislation, promised reform. But nothing happened. In 1968 the Labour government introduced a reform bill. It failed, the victim of assaults from Left and Right in the House of Commons.
28
Schonhardt-Bailey, Cheryl. "Nonverbal contention and contempt in U.K. parliamentary oversight hearings on fiscal and monetary policy." Politics and the Life Sciences 36, no. 1 (2017): 27–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pls.2017.7.
Full textAbstract:
In parliamentary committee oversight hearings on fiscal policy, monetary policy, and financial stability, where verbal deliberation is the focus, nonverbal communication may be crucial in the acceptance or rejection of arguments proffered by policymakers. Systematic qualitative coding of these hearings in the 2010–15 U.K. Parliament finds the following: (1) facial expressions, particularly in the form of anger and contempt, are more prevalent in fiscal policy hearings, where backbench parliamentarians hold frontbench parliamentarians to account, than in monetary policy or financial stability hearings, where the witnesses being held to account are unelected policy experts; (2) comparing committees across chambers, hearings in the House of Lords committee yield more reassuring facial expressions relative to hearings in the House of Commons committee, suggesting a more relaxed and less adversarial context in the former; and (3) central bank witnesses appearing before both the Lords and Commons committees tend toward expressions of appeasement, suggesting a willingness to defer to Parliament.
29
Shenton, Caroline. "The Historic Records of the Judicial Function of the UK Parliament." Legal Information Management 11, no. 1 (March 2011): 35–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1472669610000964.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article by Caroline Shenton, Clerk of the Records at the Parliamentary Archives, describes the rich legacy of records relating to the judicial function of the House of Lords from the sixteenth century to 2009, when the new Supreme Court was established.
30
Bochel, Hugh, and Andrew Defty. "Power without Representation? The House of Lords and Social Policy." Social Policy and Society 9, no. 3 (June 1, 2010): 367–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1474746410000084.
Full textAbstract:
In the past the House of Lords has generally, and arguably for good reasons, been ignored in discussions of the making and scrutiny of welfare. However, it has always played some role in this field, particularly in the scrutiny and passage of legislation, and since the removal of the bulk of hereditary Peers in 1999, some writers have argued that the House has become more assertive. This article examines the attitudes of Peers, including a comparison with the views of Members of Parliament, and draws a number of conclusions about the role of the upper House in relation to social policy.
31
Susloparova, Elena Alekseevna. "DEBATE “ON SOCIALISM” IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM IN 1935." LOMONOSOV HISTORY JOURNAL, no. 2023, №1 (June 5, 2023): 89–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.55959/msu0130-0083-8-2023-1-89-108.
Full textAbstract:
Th e author focuses on a one-of-a-kind debate “On Socialism”, which took place in the House of Lords of the British Parliament in the spring of 1935. For a long time, the upper chamber served as a barrier to the implementa-tion of bold social and political legislation. Until the beginning of the 20th century socialists had never been represented in the Parliament. As the Labor Party came into political spotlight and gradually strengthened its positions in the 1920s–1930s, the House of Lords was forced to adapt its composition to changing reali-ties. In 1924, the Labor faction was formed here for the fi rst time. A decade later, the Lords were prepared to seriously discuss the merits and demerits of the social-ist system. Th e article analyzes both the main arguments of the Laborites, who promoted transition to a new social system, and the theses put forward by Con-servatives and Liberals, supporters of the capitalist system. Particular emphasis is placed on the coverage and feedback which the discussion held in Westminster received on the pages of the British press of various political stances. Th e author comes to the conclusion that the arguments put forward by both supporters and opponents of socialism were in many respects similar to the theses that appeared in the course of the discussion in the Lower house of the UK Parliament in 1923. Th is discussion had a similar nature and was the fi rst of this kind in the British history. At the same time, the analyzed debate which took place in the House of Lords more than a decade later, bore an unmistakable imprint of a new era. Th e “Great Depression” of 1929–1933 had an important impact on the worldview of the generation, as it strengthened the conviction of left -wing politicians that capitalism was not the subject to improvement. Opponents of socialism, on the contrary, argued that a socialist future for Britain was not only economically un-tenable, but also dangerous, and incompatible with the unique English national character, based on individualism.
32
HARRIS, FRANCES. "Parliament and Blenheim Palace: The House of Lords Appeal of 1721*." Parliamentary History 8, no. 1 (March 17, 2008): 43–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-0206.1989.tb00421.x.
Full text
33
Donnelly, Lois Catrin. "Beetroot soup in the House of Lords: My fellowship at Parliament." Psych-Talk 1, no. 94 (October 2019): 8–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.53841/bpstalk.2019.1.94.8.
Full text
34
Lawrence QC, Sir Ivan. "PUNISHMENT WITHOUT LAW: HOW ENDS JUSTIFY THE MEANS IN MARITAL RAPE." Denning Law Journal 18, no. 1 (November 23, 2012): 37–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.5750/dlj.v18i1.306.
Full textAbstract:
In marital rape cases, the appellate courts have either ignored or dismissed established principles of law: that Parliament is sovereign and alone can make new laws, and that the House of Lords cannot change laws in contradiction to the clear intention of Parliament. Now, the courts are developing a test of forseeability, that not only defeats the rule against retrospectivity but goes further to defy common-sense, thus proving, in this area of the law that, ends justify the means.
35
Hare, Christopher. "FORUM-SHOPPING: FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE." Cambridge Law Journal 59, no. 3 (November 16, 2000): 421–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s000819730034020x.
Full textAbstract:
RECENT years have witnessed considerable controversy over the principles that determine when a court has jurisdiction to hear claims against foreign publishers who circulate defamatory material in several jurisdictions, including England. This is the situation that arose in the recent decision of the House of Lords in Berezovsky v. Michaels [2000] 1 W.L.R. 1004. In 1996 Forbes Magazine, a company incorporated in the United States, published an article about certain activities in Russia of two prominent businessmen, Mr. Berezovsky and Mr. Glouchkov, who were resident in Russia. The magazine containing the article was primarily circulated in the United States, but did have an English circulation accounting for approximately 0.2% of its global circulation. In 1997 Mr. Berezovsky and Mr. Glouchkov issued proceedings in England alleging that the article contained defamatory material. The claimants, however, limited their claims to the damage done to their reputations in England as a result of the magazine’s English publication. The issue before the House of Lords was whether the claimants should be given permission to serve their claim form on the publisher out of the jurisdiction, pursuant to R.S.C. Order 11, rule 1(l)(f), now C.P.R Part 6.20(8). At first instance Popplewell J. had refused such permission, but had subsequently been overturned by the Court of Appeal ([1999] E.M.L.R. 278: judgment of the court delivered by Hirst L.J.). The House of Lords by a majority (Lords Hoffmann and Hope dissenting) dismissed the appeal and held that permission should be given for the trial of the action to proceed in England.
36
Mullen, Tom. "Reflections on Jackson v Attorney General: questioning sovereignty." Legal Studies 27, no. 1 (March 2007): 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.2006.00038.x.
Full textAbstract:
This paper, which is based on a paper given at a seminar held at the University of Glasgow in November 2005, discusses the sovereignty of Parliament in the light of the decision of the House of Lords in Attorney General v Jackson, which considered the question of whether the Parliament Act 1949 and the Hunting Act 2004 were valid Acts of Parliament. The paper begins by explaining the background to the litigation, before going on to summarise the decision. Next, it briefly analyses the preliminary issues of standing and jurisdiction involved in the case, before going on to consider how the political background and political practice affected the decision of the House of Lords on the key questions in the case. The major part of the paper is devoted to a discussion and analysis in the light of constitutional theory of the extensive dicta in the case on the principle of the sovereignty of Parliament, which contrasts positivist and Dworkinian perspectives, and considers the question of whether the orthodox view of sovereignty is likely to be displaced in the foreseeable future by the view that Parliament’s legislative power is subject to legal constraints. The paper concludes that such a change in the rule of recognition is unlikely to come about merely because the judges change their view of the content of fundamental doctrines; changes of this nature require the assent of the other institutions of government.
37
Howarth, David. "Negligence After Murphy: Time to Re-Think." Cambridge Law Journal 50, no. 1 (March 1991): 58–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300099499.
Full textAbstract:
After a decade of adventure, Anns v. Merton Borough Council has been killed off. The case that seemed to many to be the most important statement of the law of negligence in England since Donoghue v. Stevenson has been finally done to death by a specially augmented House of Lords in Murphy v. Brentwood District Council?For the House of Lords openly to overrule one of its own previous decisions is itself an event rare enough to deserve comment. But when the Law Lords, by 7–0, declare unsound a case that has been cited in 189 English cases in only 13 years (and until recently mostly with approval), we know that something extraordinary has happened.
38
Kelsey, Sean. "The Ordinance for the trial of Charles I." Historical Research 76, no. 193 (July 15, 2003): 310–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2281.00178.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract During the English civil wars, parliament passed legislation in the form of ordinances – statute laws not requiring the king's assent. In late December 1648 a rump house of commons drafted an Ordinance for the trial of Charles I. Its rejection by the house of lords prompted the Commons to assume the power to legislate alone. The abortive Ordinance and the more famous Act for the trial of the king differ in ways which lend minor additional insights into the struggles at Westminster which complicated the task of bringing Charles I to justice.
39
Masood, Ali S., and Monica E. Lineberger. "United Kingdom, United Courts? Hierarchical Interactions and Attention to Precedent in the British Judiciary." Political Research Quarterly 73, no. 3 (June 11, 2019): 714–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1065912919853368.
Full textAbstract:
Most empirical examinations of hierarchical interactions among the courts are limited to a single judiciary, the American courts. A significant puzzle that remains is the extent to which lower courts in comparative environments follow the legal pronouncements of their court of last resort. We confront this shortcoming by examining lower court adherence to the precedents of the House of Lords in the United Kingdom. As the Law Lords in the United Kingdom primarily oversee a single lower court, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, this design provides a unique opportunity to assess the factors that influence hierarchical responses to precedent. We offer a framework in which legal, rather than strategic, factors influence the propensity with which lower court judges rely on the precedents of the House of Lords. Using an original data set of over 13,000 lower court responses to the precedents of the House of Lords between 1970 and 2002, our findings challenge the efficacy of principal–agent accounts and shed new light on how horizontal stare decisis influences decision-making behavior within the United Kingdom.
40
Thomson, Murdoch. "PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE IN R V WHITE (LORD HANNINGFIELD) 2016 ALL EQUAL BEFORE THE LAW?" Denning Law Journal 29, no. 1 (August 18, 2017): 131–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.5750/dlj.v29i1.1406.
Full textAbstract:
Enshrined within the Bill of Rights of 1689, parliamentary privilege continues to act as a guarantor of democracy and parliamentary supremacy, by providing a shield from unwarranted interference from the executive, the courts and others. Central to the constitutional arrangement of the United Kingdom, the functions and works of Parliament is of paramount importance. Parliamentarians, including Members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords, when conducting public duties must be safeguarded to ensure the discharge of such parliamentary business is conducted to the highest possible standard without fear or favour but with professional integrity.
41
Knights, Mark. "The History of Parliament: The House of Lords, 1660–1715, ed. Ruth Paley." English Historical Review 134, no. 566 (December 1, 2018): 221–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehr/cey368.
Full text
42
Franks, C. E. S. "Reforming Parliamentary Democracy." Canadian Journal of Political Science 37, no. 4 (December 2004): 1019–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008423904210216.
Full textAbstract:
Reforming Parliamentary Democracy, F. Leslie Seidle and David C. Docherty, eds., Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2003, pp. vii, 246This book derives from a conference held by the Canadian Study of Parliament Group at which distinguished persons discussed the efforts for reform in Westminster style parliamentary democracies. Topics covered include: second chambers (the British House of Lords, South Africa); proportional representation (New Zealand); the role of the Crown (Australia); political rights and representation of aboriginal peoples (New Zealand and Canada); and federalism and devolution (Britain and Canada). An introduction and conclusion by the editors, and a useful chapter by Jennifer Smith on reform of the Canadian Parliament complete the book.
43
Lufi, Simon, and Marsel Nilaj. "The Kosovo War In The British Parliament Talks In 1999." European Scientific Journal, ESJ 12, no. 17 (June 29, 2016): 24. http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n17p24.
Full textAbstract:
The Kosovo War in the 1990s was one among a series of wars in the former Yugoslav federation. It was the final war that ended the dissolution which had started with Slovenia from1990 to 1991, Croatia and Bosnia - Herzegovina from 1992 to 1995 and the Kosovo War from 1998 to 1999. However, the Kosovo war happened during a different situation and period. It was at a time and in a position to cause the domino effect in the Balkans and an outbreak of wars in a large part of the Balkans. This fight could include Albania and Macedonia as nations with an ethnic Albanian population. It could also have a religious or cultural impact that threatened to involve other states such as Bosnia and Turkey on the one hand and Greece on the other. The interest of major countries in Europe, as well as the world, was focused on this war. A country among them was the UK. As one of the founding states of the European Union, United Nations, and NATO, the UK was quite involved in this war. The UK and the US were two countries that became the political and military leadership in this struggle since its beginning, while reaching a peak in 1999. This situation involved talks in the British Parliament in the UK, especially the House of Lords where the decision-making aspect of parliamentary politics is achieved. The war was also a major concern for the parliament. On the one hand, it was important to resolve the situation in Kosovo without worsening it with other massacres. On the other hand, this situation required caution in dealing with the Serbian people. The destiny of Kosovo refugees was important to them. However, the future of the Serbian people in Kosovo had to be guaranteed. The most important thing was to obtain full autonomy for Kosovo, but also to achieve a bilateral cooperation from both countries. The House of Lords and the interest of some lords in this war made the British policy, as a whole, a lot more responsible for accomplishing what it had started since diplomacy regarding weapons and the military intervention used to manage the situation of refugees in Kosovo had a huge impact in Europe. The British parliamentary sessions were very crucial in leading to an international level this whole historical phase for Kosovo.
44
Cranmer, Frank. "Parliamentary Report." Ecclesiastical Law Journal 13, no. 3 (August 11, 2011): 344–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0956618x11000457.
Full textAbstract:
The long-awaited proposals for the final (?) reform of the House of Lords were published on 15 May. Though the draft Bill envisages a House with 240 elected members and 60 appointed members nominated by a statutory Appointments Commission and recommended for appointment by the Prime Minister, the White Paper states explicitly that ‘it is a draft and we will consider options including a wholly elected House’. Probably the key proposal for readers of this Journal is that a maximum of 12 Church of England bishops would sit ex officiis in the reformed House, in addition to the 60 appointed members. Unlike the other members, the bishops will not be paid in respect of their membership, and the provisions of the draft Bill on taxation, suspension and expulsion and the majority of the disqualifying grounds will not apply to them. Over time the number of bishops in the Lords will be reduced from the initial 12 to 7.
45
Kevers, Laetitia. "Re-establishing Class Privilege: The Ideological Uses of Middle and Working-Class Female Characters in Downton Abbey." Anglica. An International Journal of English Studies, no. 26/1 (September 11, 2017): 221–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.7311/0860-5734.26.1.14.
Full textAbstract:
This paper argues that the British period drama Downton Abbey, which aired between 2010 and 2015 and encountered worldwide success, uses working class and middle-class female characters to promote the aristocracy and conservative ideas, while hiding behind historical accuracy and seemingly progressive patterns of behaviour. Through a close reading of four female characters, I will demonstrate how the series’ author, Julian Fellowes, uses the show to endorse his own political agenda, as a Conservative member of the House of Lords in the British Parliament.
46
Loft, Philip. "Involving the Public: Parliament, Petitioning, and the Language of Interest, 1688–1720." Journal of British Studies 55, no. 1 (January 2016): 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jbr.2015.176.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article examines the nature of petitioning to the Westminster Parliament from the beginnings of the “rage of party” to the establishment of the whig oligarchy. It uses the largely unused archive of the House of Lords, which survived the parliamentary fire in 1834, to provide systematic evidence of public subscription to petitions produced in response to legislation. A total of 330 “large responsive petitions,” signed by fifty-six thousand people, were presented to the Lords between 1688 and 1720. This enabled a wide range of social and geographical groups to lobby Parliament. Parliamentarians actively sought to direct the public into voicing opinion through petitioning on matters of policy. The intervention of the language of “interest” from the mid-seventeenth century helped to legitimize and control public involvement in politics in the eyes of elites, and offered an alternative to political mobilization based on party allegiances and conceptions of society organized by ranks or sorts. The participation of the public through a regulated process of petitioning ensured that the whig oligarchy was porous and open to negotiation, despite the passage of the Septennial Act and declining party and electoral strife after 1716.
47
Greg, Taylor. "Upper House Reform in Germany: the Commission for the Modernization of the Federal System." Constitutional Forum / Forum constitutionnel 17, no. 1, 2 & 3 (July 11, 2011): 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.21991/c9p955.
Full textAbstract:
As the debate on a possible new second leg- islative chamber proceeds both in the United Kingdom (U.K.) and Canada, it is useful to note recent amendments to the German Con- stitution (Basic Law) affecting the federal up- per house of Parliament (Bundesrat). Despite all the differences among the House of Lords, the Canadian Senate,1 and the Bundesrat, there are some points on which a comparison is use- ful. Moreover, some of the impetus behind the German reforms — a conviction that there had been too much emphasis on cooperative feder- alism and too little on healthy competition — is reminiscent of debates about such matters in other federations in general, and Canada in particular.
48
Bunting, Kristin. "Estoppel by Convention and Pre-Contractual Understandings: The Position and Practical Consequences." Victoria University of Wellington Law Review 42, no. 3 (October 3, 2011): 511. http://dx.doi.org/10.26686/vuwlr.v42i3.5120.
Full textAbstract:
Recently, the House of Lords held in Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd that an understanding or common assumption reached by contracting parties in the course of their pre-contractual negotiations, including "an assumption that certain words will bear a certain meaning" can provide the basis for an estoppel by convention claim. This was reaffirmed by the New Zealand Supreme Court in Vector Gas Ltd v Bay of Plenty Energy Ltd. Both the House of Lords and the Supreme Court assumed that this was well established. Given that the issue was unsettled in England and with two divergent lines of authority in Australia, the House of Lords and Supreme Court should not have assumed this. In light of this development in the law, it is also argued that where the evidence proves that the parties established an understanding as to the meaning of a term in a proposed contract, then surely that is the meaning of that term, as a matter of interpretation. In addition, allowing consideration of pre-contractual negotiations to prove an estoppel by convention has undermined the rule that pre-contractual negotiations are inadmissible as an aid to interpretation of a contract.
49
Adamson, J. S. A. "The English Nobility and the Projected Settlement of 1647." Historical Journal 30, no. 3 (September 1987): 567–602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x00020896.
Full textAbstract:
On 26 July 1647 Westminster, in the grip of plague and political crisis, exploded with rioting. With the connivance of leading Presbyterian politicians in parliament and the City, a throng of apprentices and demobilized soldiers besieged the two Houses, coercing the imprisoned members to accede to their demands. Many of the rioters had subscribed to an outlawed ‘Solemn Engagement’, calling for the restoration of the king: they demanded the reversal of parliament's declaration against this Engagement, and the return of the City's militia forces to its own strongly ‘Presbyterian’ Militia Committee. As the main body of rioters swarmed into the Court of Requests, through the Painted Chamber and assailed the doors of the house of lords, another smaller party led by one Brace, a grocer, ran down the Water Lane leading from the house to the river, to block this means of escape. Reminded by one of the rioters that ‘not at anie hand [was] this house to be forced’ Brace retorted ‘what they did, they were aduised by a Member of the house of Comons’.6 ‘Keepe them in, keepe them in thises three daies’, shouted their ringleader, the reformado captain, William Musgrave, ‘and if they will not grant your desires, cutt their throates’ ‘Through the barred doors of the Lords’ chamber came cries of ‘Traytors, put them out, hang their guts about their necks and many other like words’.
50
KYLE, CHRIS R. "PRINCE CHARLES IN THE PARLIAMENTS OF 1621 AND 1624." Historical Journal 41, no. 3 (September 1998): 603–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x98007936.
Full textAbstract:
This article explores the actions of Prince Charles in the parliaments of 1621 and 1624. It discusses his role in the electoral process, his activities in parliaments, and the legislation which affected his interests. It begins by exploring the precedents for the heir to the throne being summoned to parliament, before examining his political apprenticeship in 1621, and how his actions in 1624 reveal the difficulties in controlling the reversionary interest. Throughout the two parliaments, Charles was an active participant, taking part in debates in the House of Lords, committee meetings, joint conferences, and in liaising between the king and parliament. The article concludes by suggesting that Charles, although successful in achieving some of his aims, believed that he had been able to manipulate parliament for his own ends when in fact the tide of events ran with him and deluded him. This led to a false assumption that he could control parliament – a notion which had disastrous consequences when he summoned his own parliaments after he had succeeded to the throne in 1625.