portant privilege of the subject has since that time been often confirmed* and often broken (e), until it was finally declared by the bill of Rights, that "the levying money "for, or to the use of the Crown, by pretence of "tive, without grant of Parliament, is illegal."

preroga

In the famous indemnity of the Lords and Commons, 9 Henry IV. now about 400 years ago, it is conceded "That "the grant should be the grant of the Commons, assented "to by the Lords, and communicated in manner and form as hath been hitherto accustomed, that is to say-by the "mouth of the Speaker of the House of Commons for the "time being" (ƒ).

66.

Thus we see that the right of the subject to originate, in Parliament, all matters of supply, has been continually acknowledged by the several monarchs who have swayed the destinies of the Empire, from the earliest growth of our Constitution. We see also, that, ever since this right has been firmly established, the originating power of taxation has been conceded to the Commons, as being the representatives of that people upon whom the "aids and scutages't were to be levied.

(e) Dwar. 233.

(f) And see C. J. 12 March 1580.

* See also the Statute De tallagio non concedendo, of the 34 Edw. I. [1306], by which that monarch was compelled to confirm in Parliament that law which had been so often wantonly infringed; it enacts, "That no talliage or aid shall be "taken or levied by us, or our heirs in our Realm, without the goodwill and as66 sent of the Archbishops, Bishops, Earls, Barons, Knights, Burgesses and other freemen of the land."

Aids, or assistance in money, were due from any vassal for the ransom of the lord, for the knighting of his eldest son, and for the marriage of his eldest daughter, but they were often exacted when no such reason could be urged, but such an extension was expressly declared to be illegal by Article 18, of Magua Charta.

Escuage or Scutage was a pecuniary compensation for military service, but as the approach of war was an easy pretext, it was liable to become almost arbitrary. It is supposed to have been first introduced by Henry II.-to raise funds for the employment of a large body of mercenary troops, to assist him in his wars with the French King. Mackintosh's Hist. of England, v. 1, p. 126.

Taillage was an impost assessed upon cities and towns, and upon that class of freemen who owed no military service, according to an estimate of their income. It was, from its nature, very arbitrary.

The Barons, when they submitted to John, in "the Parliament of Runnymede,"

As to amendments made by

Bill.

thought itself competent to do so without the intervention of a Committee.

It appears (y) however, that the appropriation clause may be added to a Bill of Supply in the House, without a re-committal. And on the report by a Committee of Supply of a sum granted to make good deficiencies in the supplies of the last session, it has been amended in the House by appropriating part of that sum to a particular purpose (2). When the Lords have made amendments to Money Lords to a Money Bills to which the Commons consistently with their privilege, cannot agree-and yet it is not desired that the bill should be lost, the further consideration of the Bill, or of the Lords' amendments, is put off for the session; or a new Bill is brought in on motion, founded on the report of the Committee on the original petition, but modified in such a manner as to be satisfactory to both Houses. This Bill passes through the different stages in the same manner as the former one, excepting that the House will sometimes (towards the close of the session) shorten the time required to intervene between the various stages.

Bill abandoned and new one brought in by the Commons.

Conference.

A case occurred of the Lords proposing amendments to a Money Bill, become by delay confessedly necessary. The Commons, however, refused to allow them, as infringing upon their privileges, but offered themselves to add to the bill a proviso to the same effect, which had no coherence with the Lords' amendments, and urged that it was an expedient warranted by precedents, and not unparliamentary in a case become impracticable and irremediable in any other way (a). But the Lords refused, and the bill was lost (b).

A conference is sometimes asked by the Lords on a Money Bill, and allowed by the other House (c).

money by ad

Crown.

It has been a very common custom with the Commons, Practice of voting particularly towards the close of a session, to vote money dress to the by an address to the Crown for the required advance, giving assurances that it shall be repaid at the next session of Parliament. This practice, however, is contrary to the words and spirit of the standing order (d) above alluded to, which not only provides that the consideration of all matters of supply shall originate in Committee of the Whole, but also that such shall not be appointed to meet once, but at a future day, that mature deliberation may be given to a subject so important as that of laying a charge or burthen upon the people. This practice has indeed been principally confined to small sums, and to cases which occur at the end of the session, when the Committee of Supply has closed, and the sum has not been thought of sufficient magnitude to call for its re-opening (e)` —but it is a practice which the Speaker and those members who are desirous to preserve the credit and authority of the House of Commons ought to discourage, and not permit to be wantonly adopted, or without apparent necessity (f).

An irregular one.

Clauses, to Bills

The measure sometimes formerly resorted to, of tacking Tacking Bills, or to Bills of Supply a clause or clauses containing uncon- of Supply. nected matter, with an intention of thereby compelling the Crown or the Lords to give their assent to a bill which they would otherwise disapprove of, or reject, is highly irregular—and a direct breach of the privileges of the Lords (g), and of parliamentary forms in the passing of bills. It takes away the negative voice of the King, debars Highly irregular, the Lords from their privilege of freely debating and Lords privileges. judging what is good for the Kingdom, and tends to confound the separate rights which belong to each House of Parliament respectively.

When a Bill of Supply has received the concurrence of

and a breach of

Manner of returning Supply

the Lords it is returned to the Commons, that it

may be

Bills to the Com- presented by the Speaker to the Throne. The practice mons, to be pre- in this respect has long been, not to send such bills by the

sented for the

Royal assent.

Speaker's speech on presenting.

Royal Assent.

Masters in Chancery, but for the Clerk of the House of
Lords to deliver them privately (h) to one of the Clerks
of the House of Commons; and if there be any doubt which
are, or are not, bills proper for the Speaker to present,
the Clerk of the House of Lords, in delivering a list of the
bills ready for the Royal Assent, desires that the Speaker
would mark in that list which of them appear to him to be
Bills of Supply, and those bills are immediately sent
down to the House of Commons.

When the King is personally present, it has been custo-
mary on the Speaker's presenting the Bills of Supply on
the last day of the session, for him to make a speech at
the Bar of the House of Lords, either immediately arising
out of the subject matter of the bill itself, or recapitulating
the principal objects which have engaged the attention of the
Commons during their sitting (2), in which he should endea-
vor to express, as far as possible, not his own individual
sentiments, but what he conceives to be the opinions of the
majority of the House. This speech is not entered upon
the Journals of the House of Commons, without a special
order of the House (k), though formerly the practice was
different. For, being made at the close of the session,
when the business of that House has finished, they can
have no place on its Journals; but the substance of them
is entered in the Journals of the House of Lords.

The manner of giving the Royal Assent to a Bill of
Supply differs from the manner of assenting to Bills of a

(h) See C. J. 23 July, 1610.

(i) For one of the earliest instances of this latter kind, see Parl. Hist. vol. 4, p. 397. See also precedents of such Speeches in L. J. 24 July, 1540; 1 May & 22 June, 1689; 22 April, 1671; 18 April, 1719; 11 June, 1720; and C. J. 6 Oct. 1715, and 7 May, 1777.

(k) As in C. J, 21 Oct. 1745.

common description; because, being the gift of the subject, the King's approval is implied in his thankful acceptance of it. The form of words is as follows, "Le Roy remercie "ses bons sujets, accepte leur benevolence, et ainsi le veult ;"

the King thanks his good subjects, accepts their bene“volence, and wills it so to be.”