Leaders of the People: Studies in Democratic History — John Shaqi
Leaders of the People: Studies in Democratic HistoryClayton, Joseph
History
Leaders of the People: Studies in Democratic History
Clayton, Joseph
Democracy; Great Britain -- History
William the Conqueror and Lanfranc recognizing that the Church,
strong and well ordered, made for national well-being, had set up
ecclesiastical courts wherein all matters affecting church law and
discipline were to be dealt with by the clergy, to the end that the
clergy should not be mixed up in lawsuits and should be excluded from
the lay courts. Henry II. was not satisfied that criminous clerks
were adequately dealt with in these ecclesiastical courts, where no
penalty involving bloodshed might be inflicted, and where the savage
punishments of mutilation had no place. Thomas was as anxious as the
king for the Church to be purged of abuses, but he was resolved not
to hand over offenders to the secular arm. The archbishop was an
ardent reformer. “He plucked up, pulled down, scattered and rooted
out whatever he found amiss in the vineyard of the Lord,” wrote a
contemporary; but he would shelter his flock as far as he could by the
canon law from the hideous cruelties of the King’s Courts.[13] It was
not for the protection of the clergy alone the archbishop was fighting
in the councils summoned by the king at Westminster in 1163, and at
Clarendon in 1164.
“Ecclesiastical privileges were not so exclusively priestly privileges
as we sometimes fancy. They sheltered not only ordained ministers,
but all ecclesiastical officers of every kind; the Church Courts also
claimed jurisdiction in the causes of widows and orphans. In short,
the privileges for which Thomas contended transferred a large part of
the people, and that the most helpless part, from the bloody grasp of
the King’s Courts to the milder jurisdiction of the bishop.” (Freeman,
_Historical Essay_, First Series.)
Before the climax of the dispute between Henry and Thomas was reached
at Clarendon, the archbishop had resisted the king in a matter of
arbitrary taxation--“the earliest recorded instance of resistance to
the royal will in a matter of taxation”[14]--and had fallen still
further in the king’s disfavour.
Henry was at Woodstock, on July 1st, 1163, with the archbishop and the
great men of the land, and among other matters a question was raised
concerning the payment of a two shillings land tax on every hide of
land. This was an old tax dating from Saxon times, which William the
Conqueror had increased. It was paid to the sheriffs, who in return
undertook the defence of the county, and may be compared with the
county rates of our own day. The king declared this tax should in
future be collected for the crown, and added to the royal revenue; and
no one dared to question this decision until Archbishop Thomas arose
and told the king to his face that the tax was not to be exacted as
revenue, but was a voluntary offering to be paid to the sheriffs only
“so long as they shall serve us fitly and maintain and defend our
dependants.” It was not a tax that could be enforced by law.
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