British freewomen : $b Their historical privilege — John Shaqi
British freewomen : $b Their historical privilegeStopes, C. C. (Charlotte Carmichael)
History
British freewomen : $b Their historical privilege
Stopes, C. C. (Charlotte Carmichael)
Women -- Great Britain; Women -- History
“In general women cannot be corporators, although in some hospitals they
may be so, and there is one instance in the books of a Corporation
consisting of Brethren and Sisters and invested with municipal powers to
a certain extent, in The Pontenarii of Maidenhead (vid Rep. 30).
(Palmer’s “Cases,” p. 77, 17 Jac., B.R.) Quo Warranto vers Corporation
de Maydenhead in Berkshire, pur claymer de certaine Franchises and
Liberties, un Market, chescun Lundie, Pickage, Stallage, Toll, etc.”
(Rot. Cor. 106.) They pleaded that the Bridge had been repaired by a
Fraternitie, time out of mind, which was dissolved, and that the King by
Letters Patent, on condition that they repaired the Bridge, granted them
a market every Monday with all Liberties.... “Et le veritie fuit que
Hen. 6 ad incorporate un Corporation la per nomen Gardianorum Fratrum et
Sororum Pontenariorum, and concessit al eux and leur Successors quod
ipsi and Successores sui haberent mercatum quolibet die lunae prout ante
habuissent simul cum Tolneto, Pickagio, Stallagio, etc.” The opinion of
three Judges were “que Toll fuit bien grant non obstant que le quantitie
de Argent d’estre pay pur Toll pur chescun chose ne fuit expresse, Mes
Montague Ch. Justice fuit cont. Mes que le Corporation enjoyera les
Privileges non obstant cest action port.” In page 626 of Grant’s
Treatise, we see “A Corporation Sole is a Body Politic having perpetual
succession, and being constituted in a single person.... Corporations
Sole are chiefly Ecclesiastical, one or two instances only of Lay
Corporations Sole occurring in the Books.... The most important
Corporation of this nature that claims attention is the King.... It is
as a Body Corporate that the King is said to be immortal (Howell’s
“State Trials,” 598).... A Queen Regnant is precisely and in the same
way and to all intents a Corporation, and, indeed, there is nothing
inconsistent with the principles of the old Law in this; it was
everyday’s experience before the Reformation to find female subjects as
Corporations Sole, as Lady Abbesses, etc., but since that era it is
superfluous to observe, females cannot be invested with this description
of incorporation, though, as we have seen, they may be Corporators of
Hospitals, Railways, and other trading bodies.” (Note. _See_ “Abbess of
Brinham’s Case.” Yearbook, Ed. III., vol. xxiii.; 2 Rol. Abr. 348, l.
33; and Colt _v._ Bishop of Coventry, Hob. 148, 149.)
=They could vote for Members of Parliament.=—To their Municipal Rights
were added, in the reign of Henry III., their Parliamentary Rights.
In 25 Edward II., De tallagio non concedendo, “It was there declared
that no tallage or aid shall be levied by us, or by our heirs in the
realm, without the goodwill and assent of ... Knights, Burgesses, and
other Freemen of the Land.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account