The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• V: Speeches In Parliament
• A. 1593 Three Petitions—liberty of Speech, Freedom From Arrest, and Free Access For Parliamentarians; Laws; Coke As Speaker
• B. 1621 Petition of Grievances; Privileges of Parliament; Impeachments
• C. 1625 Subsidies
• D. 1628 Petition of Right
• VI: Appendix I: Official Acts Related to Sir Edward Coke’s Career
• A. the High Commission (coke Refuses to Appear), 1611
• B. Commendams and the King’s Displeasure
• C. Coke’s Hearing, June 26, 1616.
• D. Coke’s Arrest After Parliament, 1621.
• E. Sir Edward Coke’s Case the Sheriff’s Oath, 1626
• VII: Appendix II: the Epitaph of Sir Edward Coke
• Selected Readings Concerning of the Life, Career, and Legacy of Sir Edward Coke 1
• Table of Regnal Years 1

E. Sir Edward Coke’s Case The Sheriff’s Oath, 1626

Ed.: As Coke became more obstreperous in parliment, Charles had him and four other opposition leaders appointed as sheriffs, who could not attend parliament but had to remain in their counties. This hearing followed. This report was first published in Croke’s Reports of Cases in Charles’s Reign at page 26.

Sir Edward Coke’s Case

Sir Edward Coke, late Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and afterwards of the King’s Bench, and removed from his places, being made Sheriff of the county of Buckingham, had a dedimus potestatem1 to take his oath annexed to a schedule; to which he took exceptions, for that there were more additions to the said oath than were in the ancient oath which is in the register, and afterwards confirmed and appointed by the statute of 18 Edw. 3. c. 4.: he therefore conceived there ought not to be such additions unless by Parliament. The additions were,

First, “that he should seek to suppress all errors and heresies commonly called lollories,2 and should be assistant to the commissaries and Ordinary in church matters:” which part of the oath was added by reason of the statute of 5 Ric. 2. st. 2. c. 5. and 2 Hen. 4. c. 15. whereby it is appointed that the same should be taken by the sheriff, especially for those two causes. But he thereto certified, that those statutes are repealed by the 1 Edw. 6. c. 1. and 1 Eliz. c. 2. and therefore ought not to be taken.

The second addition was, “that he should return reasonable issues:”whereto he excepted, because it is appointed by the statute, and penalties imposed for not performing it; and it ought not to be upon oath.

The third addition was, “that he should return all juries of the nearest and sufficientest persons:” whereto he excepted, because that part of the oath is not appointed by any statute; and it is against common practice that he himself should return juries, it being commonly done by the under sheriff, who is also appointed by the statute to be sworn.

The fourth addition was, “that he should cause the Statute of Winton, and the statutes against rogues and vagabonds, to be put in execution:” whereto he excepted, because the Statute of Winton is altered, and the statutes against rogues and vagabonds are appointed to be executed by the justices of the peace, and not by the sheriff.

Upon these exceptions the Lord Keeper assembled all the justices to confer with them about the same. And as touching.

The first point, they conceived it was fit to be omitted out of the oath, because it is appointed by statutes which are repealed, and were intended against the religion now professed and established, which before was condemned for heresy, and is now held for the true religion.

For the second addition, they conceived it convenient and for the service of the King and subjects, and the greater part of them were of opinion, that an oath in this and the other points may be well enjoined by the King and order of State without Parliament, and it may be well imposed upon the sheriff to take, being for public benefit and execution of the laws.

For the third addition, it is not so strictly to be intended that he himself should return juries, but it ought to be intended according to the construction of law, that he himself, by himself or under-sheriff, should return juries; which is a sufficient performance; for the law saith, qui per alium facit, per seipsum facit.3

For the fourth addition, it rests upon the former reasons, that this oath being appointed and continued divers years by direction of the State, although without the express authority of any statute law, yet may he well be continued for the public benefit in repressing such persons: and although authority be given to the justices of the peace to put those statutes in execution, yet it doth not take away the sheriff’s right, who is the public conservator. And so they delivered their opinions to the Lord Keeper at his house at Reading.

VII

Appendix II:
The Epitaph of Sir Edward Coke

The body of Sir Edward Coke lies entombed where he directed it to be, near his first wife, Bridget. His is a magnificent tomb on the north wall of the chancel within the sanctuary, near the high altar of St. Mary’s Church at Tittleshall, Norfolk, England.

The monument, created by Nicholas Stone, includes a full-size effigy carved by Haydon. Besides the inscription of Coke’s abbreviated motto, on the cornice, below his heraldric achievement, there are three inscribed panels, one in Latin and two in English.

• Deo Optimo Maximo.
• Hæ Exuviæ hvmanæ expectant resvrrectionem
• Piorvm.
• Hic sitvs est.
• Non peritvri nominis, Edvardvs Coke, eqves avrat,
• Legvm anima, interpres, oracvlvm non dvbivm,
• arcanorvm promi-condvs mysteriorvm,
• Cvivs ferè vnivs beneficio,
• Ivrisperiti nostri svnt ivrisperiti.
• Eloqventiæ flvmen, torrens, fvlmen,
• Svadæ sacerdos vnicvs.
• Divinvs heros.
• Pro rostris ita dixit,
• Vt literis insvdasse crederes, non nisi hvmanis
• Ita vixit vt non nisi divinis.
• Sacerrimvs intimæ pietatis indagator.
• Integritas Ipsa
• Veræ semper cavsæ constantissimvs assertor
• Nec favore nec mvneribvs violandvs.
• Eximìe misericors
• Charior erat HVIC revs qvam sibi.
• cv [         ] (miracvli instar est)
• Siccolvs sæpè ille avdiit sententiam in se prolatam
• Nvnqvam HIC nisi madidocvlvs protvlit.
• Scientiæ oceanvs
• QVIqve dvm vixit, bibliotheca viva,
• mortuvs dici mervit bibliotecæ parens.
• Dvodecim liberorvm tredecim librorvm pater.
• Facessant hinc Monvmenta,
• Facessant Marmora,
• (nisi qvòd pios fvisse denotarint posteros)
• IPSE sibi svvm est Monvmentvm,
• Marmore perrennivs,
• IPSE sibi sva est Æternitas.1
• • To God, the Highest and Greatest,
  • These Mortal Remains Await the Resurrection of the Faithful.
  • Here Lies Edward Coke, Knight of Gold, of Imperishable Fame,
  • Spirit, Interpreter, and Inerrant Oracle of the Laws,
  • Discloser of its Secrets—Concealer of its Mysteries,
  • Thanks Almost Alone to Whose Good Office,
  • Our Lawyers Are Learned in the Law.
  • A River, Torrent, and Flood of Eloquence,
  • Singular Priest of Persuasion.
  • Divine Master.
  • In Courts, He Spoke
  • In Such a Way That One Would Believe Him To Have Studied Only the Secular,
  • But He Lived as One Who Had Studied Nothing but the Divine.
  • Most Devoted Investigator of Profound Faithfulness.
  • Integrity Itself,
  • Always the Most Constant Advocate of the Cause of Truth
  • Corrupted Neither by Favor Nor by Gifts
  • Exceptionally Merciful,
  • The Defendant was Dearer to Him than he was to Himself
  • (Which is a Miracle)
  • He Often Heard Sentence Pronounced Against Himself with Dry Eyes
  • Though Sentence Was Never Pronounced by this Man without Tears.
  • An Ocean of Knowledge
  • Who Alive, was a Living Library,
  • Deceased, Deserves the Name of Father of a Library.
  • Father of Twelve Children and Thirteen Books.
  • These Monuments May Crumble,
  • The Marble Decay,
  • (Except that they Show that his Children were Pious)
  • He Is His Own Monument to Himself.
  • More Lasting than Marble
  • He Himself Is His Own Immortality.

• • Dedicated to the
  • Memory of
  • Sr.Edward Coke Knight, a late Reverend
  • Ivdge borne at Mileham in this County of Norf.
  • Excellent in all learning Divine &Hvmane, that for
  • His owne, this for His covntries good, Especially in
  • the knowledge & practise of the mvnicipall lawes
  • of this Kingdome,
• • A famovs pleader, a sovnd Covnseller.
  • In His younger yeares recorder of the Cities of Norwich
  • & London, next Sollicitor generall to Qvene Eliza:
  • and Speaker of the Parliament, in ye xxxv yeare of hir
  • Raigne. Afterwards Attornye generall to the same
  • Qveene, as also to her successor King Iames.
  • To both, a faithfull servant, for their MA:^ts for theire
  • safetyes. By Kinge Iames constituted Cheife Iustice of
  • both Benches successiuely. In both A ivst, in both An
  • Exemplary Ivdge. One of his MA:^ties Most Honorable Privie
  • Covnsell. As also of Covncell to Qvene Anne &Cheife
  • Ivstice In Eire of all Hir Forrests, Chases, and Parkes.
  • Recorder of ye Cittie of Coventrye, & High Steward of
  • the Vniversity of Cambridge, whereof he was sometime
• • A Member in Trinitye Colledge.
  • He had two Wives,
  • By Bridget, His first Wife (one of the Daughters &
  • Coheires of Iohn Paston esq.) He had Issue sevean
  • Sonnes and three Daughters.
  • And by the Lady Elizabeth His second Wife (one
  • of the Daughters of the R:^tHon:^bleThomas late Earle
  • of Exeter) He had Issue two Daughters.
• • A chast Hvsband: a provident Father.
  • He Crowned HIS PIOVS LIFE, with as PIOVS and
  • Christian departvre at STOKE POGES in the
  • Covnty of BVCKINGHAM on WEDNESDAYE
  • the third day of SEPTEMBER in ye year of ovr
  • LORD MDCXXXIIII.
• • And of HIS AGE LXXXIII.
  • His last wordes
  • Thy kingdome come, thy will be done
  • Learne READER to live so,
  • that thov may’st so dye.

>Photograph courtesy of Brian and Marjorie Gill

>Photographs courtesy of Brian and Marjorie Gill

Selected Readings Concerning of the Life, Career, and Legacy of Sir Edward Coke 1

I. Coke’s Life and Career

• Alward, Silas. “Coke: The Great Oracle of the Common Law.” The Canadian Law Times 32 (1912): 929.

• Aubrey, John. “Sir Edward Coke.” In “Brief Lives,” Chiefly of Contemporaries, set down by John Aubrey, between the Years 1669 & 1696, edited by Andrew Clark. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1898. (Three lines relating to the false allegations of Lady Hatton’s pregnancy at the time of her marriage to Coke have been suppressed in this edition.)

• Birkenhead, Earl of [Frederick E. Smith]. “Sir Edward Coke.” In Fourteen English Judges. New York: Cassell, 1926.

• Barnes, Thomas G. “Notes from the Editors.” Two Companion Pamphlets to The First Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England. Delran, N.J.: Legal Classics, 1995. (A facsimile reprint of the 18th edition of 1823.)

• Bowen, Catherine Drinker. “Coke and the Carson Collection.” In Four Talks for Bibliophiles. Philadelphia: Free Library of Philadelphia, 1958.

• ———. “Five against the Odds: How do Great Men Cope with Old Age? By Starting Over.” 16 Horizons (1974): 78

• ———. The Lion and the Throne: The Life and Times of Sir Edward Coke (1552–1634). Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1957.

• ———. “The Lord of the Law.” American Heritage 8 (1957): 4.

• Boyer, Allen D. Law, Liberty, and Parliament: Selected Essays on the Writings of Sir Edward Coke. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2004.

• Burke, Edmund Plunkett, Sir Edward Coke. London: Baldwin and Cradock, 1833.

• Campbell, Lord John. “Life of Sir Edward Coke.” In The Lives of the Chief Justices of England: From the Norman Conquest till the Death of Lord Mansfield. London: John Murray, 1849–57.

• Clark, Walter, Coke, Blackstone, and the Common Law. Rochester, N.Y.: The Lawyers Co-operative Publishing Co., 1918.

• Coke, Edward. Vade Mecum. In Collectanea Topographica et Geneologica. London: J. B. Nichols and Son, 1834–43. Taken by John Bruce from Coke’s introductory leaves in his private manual. (The reader is cautioned to ignore dates Anno Domini in this edition which may have been mistakenly converted from regnal years. The manuscript is in the British Museum, Harleian MS. 6687, and is admirably described in John Baker’s article “Coke’s Note-Books,” listed below in section H. 1. Further autobiographical notes by Coke are in the Holkham mss.)

• Foss, Edward. “Edward Coke.” In The Judges of England: With Sketches of Their Lives, and Miscellaneous Notices Connected with the Courts at Westminster, from the Time of the Conquest. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1848–64.

• Hahn, Edgar Aaron. Edward Coke. Rowfantia, no. 14. Cleveland: The Rowfant Club, 1949. Hill, Christopher. “Sir Edward Coke-Myth-Maker.” In Intellectual Origins of the English Revolution. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

• Holdsworth, Sir William. “The Influence of Sir Edward Coke on the Development of English Law.” In Essays in Legal History Read before the International Congress Held in London in 1913, edited by Paul Vinogradoff. London, New York: Oxford University Press, 1913; In A History of English Law. 2d ed. Boston: Little, Brown, 1937.

• ———. “Sir Edward Coke.” Cambridge Law Journal 5 (1935): 332.

• ———. Some Makers of English Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966.

• Hostettler, John. Sir Edward Coke: A Force for Freedom. Chichester: Barry Rose, 1998.

• James, Charles Warburton. Chief Justice Coke, His Family & Descendants at Holkham. London: Country Life Ltd.; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1929.

• Johnson, Cuthbert William. The Life of Sir Edward Coke, Lord Chief Justice of England, with Memoirs of His Contemporaries. London: Henry Colburn, 1837.

• Jones, Martin David. “Sir Edward Coke and the Interpretation of Lawful Allegiance in Seventeenth Century England.” History of Political Thought 7 (1986): 321.

• Kippis, Andrew. Biographia Britannica; Or, the Lives of the Most Eminent Persons Who Have Flourished in Great Britain and Ireland, from the Earliest Ages, Down to the Present Times: Collected from the Best Authorities, Printed and Manuscript, and Digested in the Manner of Mr. Bayle’s Historical and Critical Dictionary. London: W. and A. Strahan, for C. Bathurst, W. Strahan, etc., 1778–93.

• “Letter . . . to sir Thomas Lake, relating to the proceedings of sir Edward Coke at Oatland and ii. Documents relating to sir Walter Raleigh’s last voyage. Communicated to the Camden miscellany by S.R. Gardiner.” Camden Miscellany. 5 (1864).

• Lyon, Walter Hastings, and Herman Block. Edward Coke, Oracle of the Law: Containing the Story of His Long Rivalry with Francis Bacon; Some Account of Their Times and Contemporaries; Famous Trials in Which Coke Participated; His Stand Against King James I to Maintain the Supremacy of the Common Law. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1929.

• MacKinnon, Sir Frank Douglas. Record of a Tercentenary Commemoration of Sir Edward Coke (1551–1634). London, 1934. Reprinted in “Sir Edward Coke: I. Inner Temple.” Law Quarterly Review 51 (1935): 289; Inner Temple Papers. London: Stevens, 1948.

• McDonnell, George P. “Sir Edward Coke.” In Dictionary of National Biography: From the Earliest Times to 1900. Edited by Sir Leslie Stephen and Sir Sidney Lee. London: Oxford University Press, 1921–1922.

• Record of Honor and Virtue: The Noble Memorial of the Right Honorable Sir Edward Coke, Knight, Sometimes Lord Chief Justice of England and Attorney General to Queen Elizabeth, Who Departed This Transitory Life at His Manor of Stoke in Buckinghamshire This September 1634. (Eulogy, dedicatedtohisdaughter,Mrs. Anne Sadlier) (HLS MS 4125, Harvard Law School Library.)

• Roscoe, Henry. Eminent British Lawyers. London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green, 1830.

• Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge. Lives of Eminent Persons, Consisting of Galileo, Kepler, Newton, Mahomet, Wolsey, Sir E. Coke, Lord Somers, Caxton,Blake, Adam Smith, Niebuhr, Sir C. Wren, and Michael Angelo. London: R. Baldwin, 1833.

• Thorne, Samuel E. Sir Edward Coke, 1552–1952. The Selden Society Lecture, 1952. London: Brenard Quaritch, 1957.

• ——— Essays in Legal History. London: Hambledon Press, 1985.

• Usher, Ronald G. “Sir Edward Coke.” St. Louis Law Review 15 (1930): 325.

• Windeyer, W. J. V. “Sir Edward Coke.” In Lectures on Legal History. Sydney: Law Book of Australasia Pt. Ltd., 1949.

• Woolrych, Humphry W. The Life of the Right Honourable Sir Edward Coke, Knt., Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench. London: J. & W. T. Clarke, 1826.

• Wrangham, Francis. “Sir Edward Coke.” In The British Plutarch Containing the Lives of the Most Eminent Divines, Patriots, Statesmen, Warriors, Philosophers, Poets, and Artists, of Great Britain and Ireland from the Accession of Henry VIII to the Present Time. 6 vols. London: J. Mawman, and Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy, 1816.

II. Topical Commentaries

A. Coke’s Tools

B. Judges and the Common Law

• Baker, J. H. “The Structure of a Court.” In The Legal Profession and the Common Law: Historical Essays. London: Hambledon Press, 1986.

• Berman, Harold. “The Origins of Historical Jurisprudence: Coke, Selden, and Hale.” Yale Law Journal 103 (1994): 1651.

• Cantor, Norman F. Imagining the Law. New York: Harper Collins, 1997.

• Clark, Walter. “Coke, Blackstone, and the Common Law.” Case and Comment 24 (1918): 861.

• Coquillette, Daniel R. The Anglo-American Legal Heritage: Introductory Materials. Durham, North Carolina: Carolina Academic Press, 1999.

• Francis, Clinton W. “The Structure of Judicial Administration and the Development of Contract Law in Seventeenth-Century England.” Columbia Law Review 83 (1983): 35.

• Glen, Garrard. “Edward Coke and Law Restatement.” Virginia Law Review 17 (1931): 447.

• Goedecke, W. Robert. “Edward Coke, Francis Bacon, and the Foundations of Law.” In Change and the Law. Tallahassee: Florida State University Press, 1969.

• Goldberg, Ronnie Lee. “Sir Edward Coke and the Common Law.” Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1978.

• Gray, Charles. “Reason, Authority, and Imagination: The Jurisprudence of Sir Edward Coke.” In Culture and Politics from Puritanism to the Enlightenment, edited by Perez Zagorin. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.

• Hale, Sir Matthew. Introduction to The History of the Common Law of England, by Charles M. Gray. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971.

• Holdsworth, William S. “The Influence of Coke on the Development of English Law.” In Essays in Legal History, edited by Paul Vinogradoff. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1914.

• Ives, E. W. “Social Change and the Law.” In The English Revolution, 1600–1660. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1969.

• Kenyon, J. P. “The Judiciary.” In The Stuart Constitution, 1603–1688: Documents and Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966.

• Lewis, John Underwood. “Sir Edward Coke (1552–1633): His Theory of ‘Artificial Reason’ as a Context for Modern Basic Legal Theory.” Law Quarterly Review 84 (1968): 330.

• Milsom, S. F. C. Historical Foundations of the Common Law. London: Butterworths, 1969.

• Powell, Jim. “An Independent Judiciary.” In The Triumph of Liberty: A 2,000-year History Told Through the Lives of Freedom’s Greatest Champions. New York: Free Press, 2000.

• Prest, Wilfrid R. The Inns of Court under Elizabeth I and the Early Stuarts, 1590–1640. London: Longman, 1972.

• ———. The Rise of the Barristers: A Social History of the English Bar, 1590–1640. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991.

• Simpson, A. W. B. The History of the Common Law of Contract: The Rise of the Action of Assumpsit. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975.

• ———. A History of the Land Law. 2d ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986.

• Stumpf, Samuel Enoch. “Sir Edward Coke: Advocate of the Supremacy of the Law.” Vanderbilt Studies in the Humanities 1 (1951): 34.

• Thorne, Samuel E. “Tudor Social Transformation and Legal Change.” New York University Law Review 26 (1951): 10.

• ———. Essays in Legal History. London: Hambledon Press, 1985.

C. Competition with Other Benches

• Baker, John H. “The Common Lawyers and the Chancery: 1616.” Irish Jurist, n.s. 4 (1969): 368.

• ———. The Legal Profession and the Common Law: Historical Essays. London: Hambledon Press, 1986.

• Cumming, Charles S. “The English High Court of Admiralty.” The Maritime Lawyer 17 (1992): 209.

• De Smith, S. A. “The Prerogative Writs.” Cambridge Law Journal 11 (1951): 40.

• Fortier, Mark. “Equity and Ideas: Coke, Ellesmere, and James I.” Renaissance Quarterly 51 (1998): 1255.

• Gray, Charles M. “The Boundaries of the Equitable Function.” American Journal of Legal History 20 (1976): 192.

• ———. “Prohibitions and the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination.” In Tudor Rule and Revolution: Essays for G. R. Elton from His American Friends, edited by DeLloyd J. Guth and John W. McKenna. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

• ———. The Writ of Prohibition: Jurisdiction in Early Modern English Law. New York: Oceana Publications, 1994.

• Greene, Douglas G. “The Court of the Marshalsea in Late Tudor and Stuart England.” American Journal of Legal History (1976): 267.

• Harrington, Matthew P. “The Legacy of the Colonial Vice-Admiralty Courts (Part I).” Journal of Maritime Law & Commerce 26 (1995): 581.

• Jones, W. J. The Elizabethan Court of Chancery. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967.

• Levy, Leonard W. “Origins of the Fifth Amendment and Its Critics.” Cardozo Law Review 19 (1997): 821.

• MaGuire, M. H. “The Attack of the Common Lawyers on the Oath Ex Officio.” In Essays in Honor of C. H. McIlwaind. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1936.

• Usher, Roland G. The Rise and Fall of the High Commission. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968.

D. Administrative Law and Management of the Bench and Bar

• Cohen, Maxwell. “Some Considerations on the Origins of Habeas Corpus.” Canadian Bar Review 16 (1938): 92.

• ———. “Habeas Corpus cum Causa—The Emergence of the Modern Writ.” Canadian Bar Review 18 (1940): 10.

• De Smith, S. A. “Wrongs and Remedies in Administrative Law.” Modern Law Review 15 (1952): 189.

• Henderson, Edith G. Foundations of English Administrative Law: Certiorari and Mandamus in the Seventeenth Century. Cambridge: Ames Foundations, 1963.

• Milsom, S. F. C. “The Origins and Early History of Judicial Review in England.” Ph.D. diss. University of Cambridge, 1957.

• Pollack, Malla. “Purveyance and Power, or Over-Priced Free Lunch: The Intellectual Property Clause as an Ally of the Takings Clause in the Public’s Control of Government.” Southwestern University Law Review 30 (2000): 1.

• Rose, Jonathan. “The Legal Profession in Medieval England: A History of Regulation.” Syracuse Law Review 48 (1998): 1.

• Schwartz Bernard. Lions over the Throne: The Judicial Revolution in English Administrative Law. New York: New York University Press, 1987.

• Winfield, Percy Henry. The History of Conspiracy and Abuse of Legal Procedure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1921.

E. Judicial Review

• Boudin, Louis B. “Lord Coke and the American Doctrine of Judicial Power.” New York University Law Review 6 (1928–29): 233.

• Boyer, Allen Dillard. “Undersanding, Authority, and Will: Sir Edward Coke and the Elizabethan Origins of Judicial Review.” Boston College Law Review 39 (1997): 43. Easterbrook Frank. “Substance and Due Process.” Supreme Court Review (1982): 85.

• Hamburger, Philip A. “Revolution and Judicial Review: Chief Justice Holt’s Opinion in City of London v. Wood.” Columbia Law Review 94 (1994): 2091.

• Jaffe Louis L., and Edith G. Henderson. “Judicial Review and the Rule of Law: Historical Origins.” Law Quarterly Review 72 (1956): 345.

• Lloyd, Aaron. “Lord Cooke’s Fundamental Rights, and the Institution of Substantive Judicial Review.” Auckland University Law Review 8 (1999): 1172.

• Nelson, William E. Marbury v. Madison: The Origins and Legacy of Judicial Review. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2000.

• Orth, John V. “Did Sir Edward Coke Mean What He Said?” Constitutional Commentary 33 (1999): 16.

F. Judicial Independence

• Black, Barbara A. “Massachusetts and the Judges: Judicial Independence in Perspective.” Law & History Review 3 (1985): 101.

• Cox, Archibald. “The Independence of the Judiciary: History And Purposes.” University of Dayton Law Review 21 (1996): 565.

• Hoffman, Jonathan M. “By the Course of the Law: The Origins of the Open Courts Clause of State Constitutions.” Oregon Law Review 74 (1995): 1279.

• Lederman, William R. “The Independence of the Judiciary.” Parts 1, 2. Canadian Bar, Review 34 (1956): 769, 1139.

• Lemmings, David. “The Independence of the Judiciary in Eighteenth-Century England.” In The Life of the Law: Proceedings of the Tenth British Legal History Conference, edited by Peter Birks, 126. London: Hambledon Press, 1993.

• Noonan, John T. “The John Dewey Memorial Lecture: Education, Intelligence, and Character in Judges.” Minnesota Law Review 71 (1987): 1119.

• Redish, Martin H., and Lawrence C. Marshall. “Adjudicatory Independence and the Values of Procedural Due Process.” Yale Law Journal 95 (1986): 455.

• Riggs, Burkeley N., and Tamera D. Westerberg. “Judicial Independence: An Historical Perspective.” Denver University Law Review 74 (1997): 337.

• Roth, Philip J. “The Dangerous Erosion of Judicial Immunity.” Brief 18 (1989): 26.

• Ziskind, Martha A. “Judicial Tenure in the American Constitution: English and American Precedents.” Supreme Court Review (1969): 135.

G. The English Constitution

• Allen, J. W. English Political Thought, 1603–1660. 2 vols. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1938.

• Beaute, Jean. Un Grand Juriste Anglais, Sir Edward Coke, 1552–1634: Ses Idées Politiques et Constitutionnelles: Ou, Aux Origines De La Democratie Occidentale Moderne. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1975.

• Burgess, Glenn. The Politics of the Ancient Constitution: An Introduction to English Political Thought, 1603–1642. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1992.

• ———. “The Political Thought of Edward Coke.” In Absolute Monarchy and the Stuart Constitution. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996.

• Eusden, John Dykstra. Puritans, Lawyers, and Politics. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958.

• Freidrich, Carl J. “Common Law against Natural Law: James I, Edward Coke, and Francis Bacon.” In The Philosophy of Law in Historical Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957.

• Hill, Christopher. The Century of Revolution, 1603–1714. Edinburgh: T. Nelson, 1961.

• Jones, William J. “The Crown and the Courts in England, 1603–1625.” In The Reign of James VI and I, edited by Alan G. R. Smith. London: St. Martin’s Press, 1973.

• Kelley, Donald R. “Elizabethan Political Thought.” In The Varieties of British Political Thought, 1500–1800, edited by J. G. A. Pocock. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

• Klein, William. “The Ancient Constitution Revisited.” In Political Discourse in Early Modern Britain, edited by Nicholas Phillipson and Quentin Skinner. Cambridge: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

• Maitland, Frederic William. The Constitutional History of England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1908.

• Montague, F. C. The Political History of England from the Accession of James I to the Restoration (1603–1660). 2d ed. New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1911.

• Ogilvie, Sir Charles. King’s Government and the Common Law, 1471–1641. Oxford: Blackwell, 1958.

• Pocock, J. G. A. The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law: A Study of English Historical Thought in the Seventeenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1957 (new ed. 1987).

• Russell, Conrad. “Divine Rights in the Early Seventeenth Century.” In Public Duty and Private Conscience in Seventeenth Century England: Essays Presented to G. E. Aylmer, edited by John Morrill, Paul Slack, and Daniel Woolf. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.

• Sourzh, Gerald. “Constitution: Changing Meanings of the Term from the Early Seventeenth to the Late Eighteenth Century.” In Conceptual Change and the Constitution, edited by Terence Ball and J. G. A. Pocock. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1988.

• Tanner, J. R. “Constitutional Questions in the Parliaments of James I.” In English Constitutional Conflicts of the Seventeenth Century, 1603–1689. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1928.

• Wormuth, Francis D. The Royal Prerogative, 1603–1649: A Study in English Political and Constitutional Ideas. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1939.

H. Coke’s Writings and Cases

• Bridgman, Richard Whalley. A Short View of Legal Bibliography: Containing Some Critical Observations on the Authority of the Reporters and Other Law Writers; Collected from the Best Authorities . . . London: W. Reed, 1807.

• Gest, John Marshall. “The Writings of Sir Edward Coke.” Yale Law Journal 18 (1909): 504.

• ———. The Lawyer in Literature. Boston: Boston Book Co., 1913.

• Gray, Charles M. Copyhold, Equity, and the Common Law. Harvard Historical Monographs, vol. 53. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1963.

• Hicks, Frederick Charles. Men and Books Famous in the Law. Rochester, N.Y.: The Lawyers Co-operative Publishing Co., 1921.

• Holdsworth, W. S. Sources and Literature of English Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1928.

• Ross, Richard J. “The Commoning of the Common Law: The Renaissance Debate over Printing English Law, 1520–1640.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 146 (1998): 323.

• Siegel, Stephen A. “The Aristotelian Basis of English Law, 1450–1800.” New York University Law Review 56 (1981): 18.

I. Coke’s Service in Parliament

• Christianson, Paul. “Political Thought in Early Stuart England.” Historical Journal 30 (1987): 960.

• Cust, Richard. “Charles I, the Privy Council, and the Forced Loan.” Journal of British Studies 24 (1985): 208.

• ———. The Forced Loan and English Politics, 1626–1628. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.

• Flemion, J. S. “The Struggle for the Petition of Right in the House of Lords: The Study of an Opposition Victory.” Journal of Modern History 45 (1973): 193.

• Foster, Elizabeth Read. “The Procedure of the House of Commons Against Patents and Monopolies, 1621–1624.” In Conflict in Stuart England: Essays in Honor of Wallace Notestein, edited by A. W. Aiken and B. D. Henning. New York: Archon Books, 1960.

• ———, ed. Proceedings in Parliament 1610. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966.

• Hexter, J. H. “Power Struggle, Parliament, and Liberty in Early Stuart England.” Journal of Modern History 50 (1978): 1.

• Hinton, R. W. K. “The Decline of Parliamentary Government under Elizabeth I and the Early Stuarts.” Cambridge Historical Journal 13 (1957): 116.

• Hirst, Derek. “Elections and the Privileges of the House of Commons in the Early Seventeenth Century: Confrontation or Compromise?” Historical Journal 18 (1975): 851.

• ———. The Representative of the People?: Voters and Voting in England Under the Early Stuarts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975.

• Hulme, Harold. “The Winning of Freedom of Speech by the House of Commons.” The American Historical Review 61 (1956): 825.

• Jansson, Maija, and William B. Bidwell. Proceedings in Parliament 1625. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987.

• Johnson, Robert C., Mary Frear Keeler, Maija Jansson Cole, and William B. Bidwell, eds. Commons Debates 1628. Yale Center for Parliamentary History. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977.

• Judson, Margaret Atwood. The Crisis of the Constitution: An Essay in Constitutional and Political Thought in England, 1603–1645. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1949.

• Lake, Peter. “Anti-Popery: The Structure of a Prejudice.” In Conflict in Early Stuart England: Studies in Religion and Politics, 1603–1642, edited by Richard Cust and Ann Hughes. London: Longman, 1989.

• Merz, Ruth. “Sir Edward Coke in the Parliament of 1621.” Master’s thesis,Washington University, 1942.

• Mitchell, Williams M. The Rise of the Revolutionary Party in the English House of Commons, 1603–1629. New York: Columbia University Press, 1957.

• Notestein, Wallace, Frances Helen Relf, and Hartley Simpson. Commons Debates, 1621. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1935.

• Pocock, J. G. A. “The Commons Debates of 1628.” Journal of the History of Ideas 39 (1978): 329.

• Ruigh, Robert E. The Parliament of 1624: Politics and Foreign Policy. Harvard Historical Studies, vol. 87. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971.

• Russell, Conrad. Parliaments and English Politics, 1621–1629. Oxford: ClarendonPress, 1979.

• ———. “Parliamentary History in Perspective, 1604–1629.” In Unrevolutionary England, 1603–1642. London: Hambledon Press, 1990.

• White, Steven D. Sir Edward Coke and “The Grievances of the Commonwealth,” 1621- 1628. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1979.

• Willson, David Harris. The Privy Councillors in the House of Commons, 1604–1629. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1940.

• Zaller, Robert. The Parliament of 1621: A Study in Constitutional Conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971.

J. Coke’s Views on Parliament and Statutes

• Baade, Hans W. “The Casus Omissus: A Pre-History of Statutory Analogy.” Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 20 (1994): 45.

• McIlwain, Charles H. The High Court of Parliament and Its Supremacy. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1910.

• McKay, R. A. “Coke—Parliamentary Supremacy or the Supremacy of the Law?” Michigan Law Review 22 (1924): 215.

K. Impeachments

• Cecil, Henry. Tipping the Scales. London: Hutchinson, 1964.

• Hurstfield, Joel. Freedom, Corruption and Government in Elizabethan England. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973.

• Marcus, Richard L. “English Common Law: Studies in the Sources: The Tudor Treason Trials: Some Observations on the Emergence of Forensic Themes.” University of Illinois Law Review (1984): 675.

• Noonan, John T. Bribes: The Intellectual History of a Moral Idea. New York: Macmillan, 1984.

• Powell, Damian X. “Why Was Sir Francis Bacon Impeached? The Common Lawyers and the Chancery Revisited: 1621.” History 81 (1996): 511.

• Roberts, Clayton. The Growth of Responsible Government in Stuart England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966.

• Smith, Lacey Baldwin. Treason in Tudor England: Politics and Paranoia. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986.

• Snapp, Harry F. “The Impeachment of Roger Maynwaring.” Huntington Library Quarterly 30 (1966–67): 217.

• Tite, Colin G. C. Impeachment and Parliamentary Judicature in Early Stuart England. London: Athlone Press, 1974.

L. Magna Carta

• Ashley, Maurice. Magna Carta in the Seventeenth Century. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1965.

• Blackstone, William. The Great Charter and Charter of the Forest, with Other Authentic Instruments, to Which Is Affixed an Introductory Discourse Containing the History of the Charters. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1759. Reprinted in—.Tracts, Chiefly Relating to the Antiquities and Laws of England. 3d ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1781.

• Butterfield, Sir Herbert. The Englishman and His History. Cambridge: The University Press, 1944.

• ———. Magna Carta in the Historiography of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. Reading: University of Reading, 1969.

• ———. The Whig Interpretation of History. New York: W. W. Norton, 1965.

• Ely, James W., Jr. “The Oxymoron Reconsidered: Myth and Reality in the Origins of Substantive Due Process.” Constitutional Commentary 16 (1999): 315.

• Goodhart, Arthur L. Law of the Land. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1966.

• Hazeltine, H. D. “The Influence of Magna Carta on American Constitutional Development.” In Magna Carta Commemoration Essays, edited by Henry Elliot Malden. London: Royal Historical Society, 1917.

• Helmholz, R. H. “Magna Carta and the ius commune.” University of Chicago Law Review 66 (1999): 297.

• Holt, J. C. Magna Carta. 2d ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

• Howard, A. E. Dick. The Road from Runnymede: Magna Carta and Constitutionalism in America. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1968.

• Jennings, Sir Ivor. Magna Carta and Its Influence in the World Today. London: Central Office of Information, 1965.

• Johnson, Samuel. A History and Defence of Magna Charta: Containing a Copy of the Original Charter at Large, with an English Translation; the Manner of Its Being Obtained from King John, with Its Preservation and Final Establishment in the Succeeding Reigns. With an Introductory Discourse, Containing a Short Account of the Rise and Progress of National Freedom, from the Invasion of Caesar to the Present Times. London: J. Bell, 1769.

• McKencie, W. S. Magna Carta. Glasgow: Malehose & Sons, 1914.

• Pallister, Anne. Magna Carta: The Heritage of Liberty. New York: Oxford University Press, 1971.

• Radin, Max. “The Myth of Magna Carta.” Harvard Law Review 60 (1947): 1060.

• Sandoz, Ellis, ed. The Roots of Liberty: Magna Carta, the Ancient Constitution, and the Anglo-American Tradition of Rule of Law. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1993. (Including essays by Ellis Sandoz, J. C.

• Holt, Christopher W.

• Brooks, Paul Christianson, John Phillip Reid, and Corrine Comstock Weston.)

• Swindler, William F. Magna Carta. New York: Grosset and Dunlap, 1968.

• Thompson, Faith. Magna Carta: Its Role in the Making of the English Constitution, 1300–1629. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1948.

• Thorne, Samuel, William H. Dunham, Philip B. Kurland, and Sir Ivor Jennings. The Great Charter: Four Essays on Magna Carta and the History of Our Liberty. New York: Pantheon, 1965.

M. The Petition of Right

• Boynton, Lindsay. “Martial Law and the Petition of Right.” English Historical Review 74 (1959): 23.

• Creasy, Sir Edward Shepherd. The Textbook of the Constitution: Magna Charta, the Petition of Right, and the Bill of Rights. London: Richard Bentley, 1848.

• Forster, John. Sir John Eliot: A Biography 1590–1632. London: Longman, Roberts, & Green, 1864.

• Foster, Elizabeth Read. “Printing the Petition of Right.” Huntington Library Quarterly 28 (1974): 81.

• Guy, J. A. “The Origins of the Petition of Right Reconsidered.” Historical Journal 25 (1982): 289.

• Mosse, George Lachmann. The Struggle for Sovereignty in England, from the Reign of Queen Elizabeth to the Petition of Right. East Lansing: Michigan State College Press, 1950.

• Popofsky, Linda. “Habeas Corpus and ‘Liberty of the Subject’: Legal Arguments for the Petition of Right in the Parliament of 1628.” The Historian 41 (1979): 257.

• Reeve, L. J. “The Legal Status of the Petition of Right.” Historical Journal 29 (1986): 257.

• Relf, Frances Helen. “The Petition of Right: Bibliographical Notes for the Parliament of 1628.” Ph.D. diss., University of Minnesota, 1917.

• Schnapper, Eric. “The Parliament of Wonders (Review essay of Johnson, Kealer, Cole, and Bidwell, eds., Commons Debates 1628 ).” Columbia Law Review 84 (1984): 1665.

• Thompson, Christopher. “The Origins of the Politics of the Parliamentary Middle Group, 1625–1629.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 22 (1972).

• Young, Michael B. “The Origins of the Petition of Right Reconsidered Further.” Historical Journal 27 (1984): 449.

N. Economics

• Anderson, Gary M., and Robert D. Tollison. “Barristers and Barriers: Sir Edward Coke and the Regulation of Trade.” Cato Journal 13 (1993): 49.

• McCormack, Wayne. “Economic Substantive Due Process and the Right of Livelihood.” Kentucky Law Journal 82 (1994): 397.

• MacPherson, C. B. The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962.

• Malamet, Barbara. “The ‘Economic Liberalism’ of Sir Edward Coke.” Yale Law Journal 76 (1967): 1321.

• Reid, Charles J. “The Seventeenth-Century Revolution in the English Land Law.” Cleveland State Law Review 43 (1995): 221.

• Siegan, Bernard H. “Propter Honoris Respectum: Separation of Powers & Economic Liberties.” Notre Dame Law Review 70 (1995): 415.

• Wagner, Donald O. “Coke and the Rise of Economic Liberalism.” Economic History Review 6 (1935): 30.

• ———. “The Common Law and Free Enterprise: An Early Case of Monopoly.” Economic History Review 7, no. 1 (1937): 217.

O. Liberty

• Carlyle, Alexander James. Political Liberty. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1941.

• Hayek, Friedrich. The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.

• Hinton, R. W. K. “Government and Liberty under James I.” Cambridge Historical Journal 11 (1955): 48.

• Palmer, Ben W. “Edward Coke: Champion of Liberty.” American Bar Association Journal 32 (1946): 135.

P. Legacy in England

• Berman, Harold J., and Charles J. Reid. “The Transformation of English Legal Science: From Hale to Blackstone.†Emory Law Journal 45 (1996): 437.

• Care, Henry. English Liberties: Or, The Free-born Subject’s Inheritance. London: G. Larkin, 1680(?).

• Coquillette, Daniel R. “Ideology and Incorporation III: Reason Regulated—The Post-Restoration English Civilians, 1653–1735.†Boston University Law Review 67 (1987): 289.

• Gough, J. W. “Sir Edward Coke.†In Fundamental Law in English History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1955.

• Hale, Sir Matthew. The History and Analysis of the Common Law of England: Written by a Learned Hand. London: J. Nutt, 1713.

• Haller, William. Liberty and Reformation in the Puritan Revolution. New York: Columbia University Press, 1955.

• Hanson, Donald W. From Kingdom to Commonwealth: The Development of Civic Consciousness in English Political Thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970.

• Jones, William J. Politics and the Bench: The Judges and the Origins of the English Civil War. London: Allen and Unwin, 1971.

• Keeton, George W. Shakespeare’s Legal and Political Background. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1968. (See chapter four.)

• Landon, Michael. The Triumph of the Lawyers: 1678–1689. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1970.

• Levack, Brian P. “Possession, Witchcraft, and the Law in Jacobean England.†Washington and Lee Law Review 52 (1995): 1613.

• Malcolm, Joyce Lee. “Introduction.†In The Struggle for Sovereignty: Eighteenth- Century English Political Tracts. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1999. (See also entries throughout.)

• Pocock, J. G. A. “Burke and the Ancient Constitution: A Problem in the History of Ideas†in Pocock, Politics, Language and Time: Essays on Political Thought and History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989.

• Pollard, A. F. The Evolution of Parliament. London: Longman, Green & Co., 1920.

• Pollock, Sir Frederic. The Expansion of the Common Law. London: Stevens and Sons, 1904.

• Stephenson, Carl, and Frederick George Marcham. Sources of English Constitutional History: A Selection of Documents froma.d.600 to the Present. New York: Harper & Row, 1937.

• Stone, Lawrence. The Causes of the English Revolution, 1529–1642. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.

• Taswell, Langmead, and Thomas Pitt. English Constitutional History from the Teutonic Conquest to the Present Time. 10th ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1946.

• Wood, Thomas. Institutes of the Laws of England. London: E. and R. Nutt and R. Gosling, 1720.

• ———. “Some Thoughts Concerning the Study of the Laws of England in the Two Universities.†In Michael H.

• Hoeflich, ed., The Gladsome Light of Jurisprudence: Learning the Law in England and the United States in the 18th and 19th Centuries. New York: Greenwood Press, 1988.

Q. Legacy in the United States

Baade, Hans W. “‘Original Intention’: Raoul Berger’s Fake Antique.” North Carolina Law Review 70 (1992): 1523.

• Baker, Fred A. The Fundamental Law of American Constitutions. Washington, D.C.: J. Byrne & Co., 1916.

• Berger, Raoul. “The Founders’ Views—According to Jefferson Powell.” Texas Law Review 67 (1989): 1033. (See “Powell” under the Countess of Rutland’s Case, 11.H.2, above.)

• ———. “Perspectives on Natural Law: Natural Law and Judicial Review: Reflections of an Earthbound Lawyer.” University of Cincinnati Law Review 61 (1992): 5.

• ———. “Response: Original Intent: The Rage of Hans Baade.” North Carolina Law Review 71 (1993): 1151.

• Bilder, Mary Sarah, “The Lost Lawyers: Early American Legal Literates and Transatlantic Culture.” Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities 11 (1999): 47.

• ———. “The Origin of the Appeal in America.” Hastings Law Journal 48 (1997): 913.

• Billings, Warren M. “Justices, Books, Laws, and Courts in Seventeenth-Century Virginia.” Law Library Journal 85 (1993): 277.

• Black, Barbara Aronstein. “The Constitution of the Empire: The Case for the Colonists.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 124 (1975–76): 1157.

• ———. “A Bicentennial Celebration of the Constitution: The Third Circuit Judicial Conference in Philadelphia: Retrospective View. An Astonishing Political Innovation: The Origins of Judicial Review.” University of Pittsburgh Law Review 49 (1988): 691.

• Clark, J. C. D. The Language of Liberty 1660–1732: Political Discourse and Social Dynamics in the Anglo-American World. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress,1994.

• Colburn, Trevor. The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the Intellectual Origins of the American Revolution. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1998.

• Coquillette, Daniel R. “First Flower—The Earliest American Law Reports and the Extraordinary Josiah Quincy Jr. (1744–1775).” Suffolk University Law Review 30 (1996): 1.

• ———. “Legal Ideology and Incorporation IV: The Nature of Civilian Influence on Modern Anglo-American Commercial Law.” Boston University Law Review 67 (1987): 877.

• Corwin, Edward S. The Doctrine of Judicial Review: Its Legal and Historical Basis and Other Essays. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1914.

• ———. “The Establishment of Judicial Review, I.” Michigan Law Review 11 (1910): 102.

• ———. “The Establishment of Judicial Review, II.” Michigan Law Review 9 (1911): 283.

• ———. “The ‘Higher Law’ Background of American Constitutional Law.” Parts 1, 2. Harvard Law Review 42 (1928): 149, 365.

• ———. The “Higher Law” Background of American Constitutional Law. Ithaca, N.Y.: Great Seal Books, 1955.

• ———. Liberty Against Government: The Rise, Flowering and Decline of a Famous Juridical Concept. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1948.

• Curtis, Michael Kent. “Historical Linguistics, Inkblots, and Life after Death: The Privileges or Immunities of Citizens of the United States.” North Carolina Law Review 78 (2000): 1071.

• Dalzell, George W. Benefit of Clergy in America and Related Matters. Winston-Salem, N. C.: John F. Blair, 1955.

• Ely, James W. Jr. “Comment: Comments on Clinton: Reconsidering the Role of Natural Law in John Marshall’s Jurisprudence.” John Marshall Law Review 33 (2000): 1141.

• Flint, George Lee, Jr. “Secured Transactions History: The Fraudulent Myth.” New Mexico Law Review 29 (1999): 363.

• Geller, Lawrence D., and Peter J. Gomes. The Books of the Pilgrims. New York:Garland Publishing, 1975.

• Greene, Jack P. Peripheries and Center: Constitutional Development in the Extended Polities of the British Empire and the United States 1607–1788. New York: W. W. Norton, 1986.

• Grey, Thomas C. “Origins of the Unwritten Constitution: Fundamental Law and American Revolutionary Thought.” Stanford Law Review 30 (1978): 843.

• Haines, Charles G. The Revival of Natural Law Concepts: A Study of the Establishment and of the Interpretation of Limits on Legislatures with Special Reference to the Development of Certain Phases of American Constitutional Law. Harvard Studies in Jurisprudence, vol. 4. New York: Russell & Russell, 1965.

• Haskins, George Lee. Law and Authority in Early Massachusetts; A Study in Tradition and Design. New York, Macmillian, 1960.

• Healy, Michael P. “Communis Opinio and the Methods of Statutory Interpretation: Interpreting Law or Changing Law.” William and Mary Law Review 43 (2001) 539.

• Hill, Alfred. “The Political Dimension of Constitutional Adjudication.” Southern California Law Review 63 (1990): 1237.

• Koch, William C. “Reopening Tennessee’s Open Courts Clause: A Historical Reconsideration of Article I, Section 17 of the Tennessee Constitution.” Memphis State University Law Review 27 (1997): 333.

• Kurland, Philip B. “Magna Carta and Constitutionalism in the United States: The Myth and the Noble Lie.” In The Great Charter: Four Essays on Magna Carta and the History of Our Liberty, edited by Samuel Thorne, William H. Dunham, Philip B. Kurland, and Sir Ivor Jennings. New York: Pantheon, 1965.

• Lawson, Gary, and Guy Seidman. “Downsizing the Right to Petition.” Northwestern University Law Review 93 (1999): 739.

• Lovejoy, David. The Glorious Revolution in America. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1974.

• McCarthy, Finbarr. “Participatory Government and Communal Property: Two Radicbibll Concepts in the Virginia Charter of 1606.” University of Richmond Law Review 29 (1995): 327

• McConnell, Michael W. “Tradition and Constitutionalism Before the Constitution.” University of Illinois Law Review (1998): 173.

• McDowell, Gary L. “Coke, Corwin, and the Constitution: The ‘Higher Law Background’ Reconsidered.” The Review of Politics 55 (1993): 393.

• McIlwain, Charles H. The American Revolution. New York: Macmillan Co., 1923.

• McManus, Edgar J. Law and Liberty in Early New England: Criminal Justice and Due Process, 1620–1692. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1993.

• Mandell, Joshua R. “Comment: Trees That Fall in the Forest: the Precedential Effect of Unpublished Opinions.” Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 34 (2000): 1255.

• Manning, John F. “Textualism and the Equity of the Statute.” Columbia Law Review 101 (2001): 1.

• Massey, Calvin R. “Symposium: Perspective on Natural Law: The Natural Law Component of The Ninth Amendment,” University of Cincinnati Law Review 61 (1992): 49.

• Morris, Richard B. “Massachusetts and the Common Law.” American Historical Review 31 (1926): 443.

• Mullett, Charles F. “Coke and the American Revolution.” Economica 12 (1932): 457.

• ———. Fundamental Law and the American Revolution, 1760–1776. New York: Columbia University Press, 1933.

• ———. “The Eighteenth-Century Background of John Marshall’s Constitutional Jurisprudence.” Michigan Law Review 76 (1978): 893.

• Notestein, Wallace. The English People on the Eve of Colonization, 1603–1630. New York: Harper, 1954.

• Penn, William. English Liberties: Or, The Freeborn Subject’s Inheritance. London: G. Larkin or J. Howe, 1682. (Sometimes attributed to Henry Care.)

• ———. The Excellent Priviledge of Liberty & Property Being the Birth-Right of the Free- Born Subjects of England. Philadelphia: William Bradford, 1687.

• Pope, Herbert. “The Fundamental Law and the Power of the Courts.” Harvard Law Review 27 (1913): 45.

• Pound, Roscoe. “Common Law and Legislation.” Harvard Law Review 21 (1907): 386.

• ———. The Formative Era of American Law. Boston: Little, Brown, 1938.

• Reid, John Philip. The Briefs of the American Revolution: Constitutional Arguments Between Thomas Hutchinson, Governor of Massachusetts Bay, and James Bowdoin for the Council and John Adams for the House of Representatives. New York: New York University Press, 1981.

• ———. The Concept of Liberty in the Age of the American Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.

• ———. Constitutional History of the American Revolution. 4 vols. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1986–1995. (1 vol. abridgment, 1995.)

• Reinsch, Paul S. “The English Common Law in the Early American Colonies.” In Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, edited by American Association of Law Schools. Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1907.

• Riggs, Robert E. “Substantive Due Process in 1791.” Wisconsin Law Review (1990): 941.

• Roesler, Shannon M. “Comment: The Kansas Remedy by Due Course of Law Provision: Defining a Right to a Remedy.” Kansas Law Review 47 (1999): 655.

• Rossiter, Clinton. Seedtime of the Republic: The Origin of the American Tradition of Political Liberty. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1953.

• Schwartz, Paul, Barbara Kern, and R. B. Bernstein. Thomas Jefferson and Bolling v. Bolling: Law and Legal Profession in Pre-Revolutionary America. San Marino, Calif.: Huntington Library, 1999.

• Schweber, Howard. “The ‘Science’ of Legal Science: The Model of the Natural Sciences in Nineteenth-Century American Legal Education.” Law and History Review 17 (1999): 421.

• Scott, Arthur P. “The Constitutional Aspects of the ‘Parson’s Cause.’” Political Science Quarterly 31 (1916): 558.

• Sheppard, Steve, ed. The History of Legal Education in the United States: Commentaries and Primary Sources. Pasadena: Salem Press, 1998.

• Sherry, Suzanna. “The Founders’ Unwritten Constitution.” University of Chicago Law Review 54 (1987): 1127.

• ———. “Symposium: Perspective on Natural Law: Natural Law in the States.” University of Cincinnati Law Review 61 (1992): 171.

• Stoner, James R. Common Law and Liberal Theory: Coke, Hobbes, and the Origins of American Constitutionalism. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1992.

• Whitman, James Q. “Why Did the Revolutionary Lawyers Confuse Custom and Reason?” University of Chicago Law Review 58 (1991): 1321.

• Wright, Benjamin Fletcher. American Interpretations of Natural Law: A Study in the History of Political Thought. London: Russell & Russell, 1962.

• Zweiben, Beverly. How Blackstone Lost the Colonies: English Law, Colonial Lawyers and the American Revolution. New York: Garland Publishing, 1990.

• Anastasoff v. U. S., 223 F. 3d 898 (8th Cir., 2000) (Arnold, C. J.).

R. Legacy Elsewhere.

• Aja Espil, Jorge A. En Los Orígenes De La Tratadística Constitucional. Buenos Aires: Abeledo-Perrot, 1968.

• Clark, David. “Legal History: The Icon of Liberty: The Status and Role of Magbibla Carta in Australian and New Zealand Law.” Melbourne University Law Review 24 (2000): 866.

• Parent, Hugues. “Histoire de l’acte Volontaire En Droit Penal Anglais et Canadien.” McGill Law Journal 45 (2000): 975.

III. Selected Commentaries on Related Matters

IV. Noteworthy Mentions

• Allen, Carleton Kemp. Law in the Making. 7th ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964.

• Baker, J. H. An Introduction to English Legal History. 3d ed. London: Butterworths, 1990.

• Bendix, Reinhard. Kings or People: Power and the Mandate to Rule. Berkeley:University of California Press, 1978.

• Friedrich, Carl Joachim. The Philosophy of Law in Historical Perspective. 2d. ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958.

• Gardiner, Samuel R. History of England from the Accession of James I to the Outbreak of the Civil War, 1603–1642. 10 vols. London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1884.

• Helgerson, Richard. Forms of Nationhood: Elizabethan Writings of England. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.

• Hill, Christopher. Society and Puritanism in Pre-Revolutionary England. New York: Schocken Books, 1964.

• Hirst, Derek. Authority and Conflict: England, 1603–1625. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.

• Kantorowicz, Ernst H. The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957.

• McWhirter, Darien A. The Legal 100: A Ranking of the Individuals Who Have Most Influenced the Law. Secaucus, N.J.: The Citadel Press, 1998.

• Plucknett, Theodore F. T. A Concise History of the Common Law. Rochester, N.Y.: Lawyers Co-operative Publishing Company, 1929.

• Pound, Roscoe, and Theodore F. T. Plucknett. Readings on the History and System of the Common Law. Rochester: Lawyers Co-operative Publishing Company, 1927.

• Radin, Max. Handbook of Anglo-American Legal History. St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1936.

• Schwartz, Bernard. The American Heritage History of Law in America. New York: McGraw Hill, 1974.

• Smith, Alan G. R. The Emergence of a Nation State: The Commonwealth of England 1529–1660. London: Longman Group, 1984.

• Sommerville, J. P. Politics and Ideology in England, 1603–1640. Harlow: Longmans, 1986.

• Thatcher, Rt. Hon. Baroness Margaret. The Rule of Law in a Dangerous World. Washington, D.C.: National Legal Center for the Public Interest, 1994.

• Turner, Edward Raymond. The Privy Council of England in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, 1603–1784. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1927.

• Wootton, David, ed. Divine Right and Democracy: An Anthology of Political Writing in Stuart England. London: Penguin, 1986.

• Wormser, Rene A. The Story of the Law and the Men Who Made It—From the Earliest Times to the Present. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1962.

Table of Regnal Years1

Rulers in England Prior to the Conquest

A Note on Arthur, King of the Britons

Coke believed some of the legends of King Arthur as the historical truth, as did his contemporaries such as Camden. In the ninth Reports, he notes Arthur’s reign as in 516, describing the scope of The Mirrour but perhaps relying on histories of William of Malmesbury or Geoffrey de Monmouth, which he owned. Malory’s Le Morte D’Arthur had been printed by Caxton in 1485, but Coke did not list it in his library. For more on the origins of the Arthurian legends, see Thomas Malory, Le Morte Darthur: The Winchester Manuscript, Helen Cooper, ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Regnal Years, from the Conquest to 1154

Regnal Years, from their Regularization, Commencing 1154, to 1648

This book is set in Adobe Garamond, a modern adaptation by Robert Slimbach of the typeface originally cut around 1540 by the French typographer and printer Claude Garamond. The Garamond face, with its small lowercase height and restrained contrast between thick and thin strokes, is a classic “old-style” face and has long been one of the most influential and widely used typefaces.

Printed on paper that is acid free and meets the requirements of the American National Standard for Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, z39.48–1992. (archival)

Book design by Erin Kirk New, Watkinsville, Georgia Typography by Impressions Book and Journal Services, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin Printed and bound by Worzalla Publishing Company, Stevens Point, Wisconsin

[1. ][Ed.: Writ granting a privilege to one before court, such as the right of nonappearance.]

[2. ][Ed.: “Lollories,” a corruption of “Lollardries,” was an anti-clerical heresy popular in Richard’s time, and which became the basis of English Protestantism.]

[3. ][Ed.: he who does something through another, does it himself.]

[1. ][Ed.:

[1. ]N.B.: Works are not repeated in each of the various categories to which they pertain.

[1. ]Dates are drawn from C. R. Cheney, A Handbook of Dates For Students of British History, (rev. M. Jones) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000; E. B. Fryde etal.,eds. HandbookofBritish Chronology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.