Editing Edward Coke (section)

==Return to politics==
[[File:Edward Coke.jpg|thumb|In June 1614, Edward Coke was unanimously elected [[High Steward (academia)|High Steward]] of the [[University of Cambridge]]. Portrait by [[Gilbert Jackson]] in the [[Guildhall Art Gallery]], London.]]

Now out of favour and with no chance of returning to the judiciary, Coke was re-elected to Parliament as an MP, ironically by order of the King, who expected Coke to support his efforts. Elected in 1620, Coke sat for [[Liskeard (UK Parliament constituency)|Liskeard]] in the 1621 Parliament, which was called by the King to raise revenues; other topics of discussion included a proposed marriage between the [[Charles I of England|Prince of Wales]] and [[Maria Anna of Spain]], and possible military support for the King's son-in-law, [[Frederick V, Elector Palatine]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=103}}</ref> Coke became a leading opposition MP, along with [[Robert Phelips]], [[Thomas Wentworth (Recorder of Oxford)|Thomas Wentworth]] and [[John Pym]], campaigning against any military intervention and the marriage of the Prince of Wales and Maria Anna.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=104}}</ref> His position at the head of the opposition was unsurprising given his extensive experience in both local and central government, as well as his ability to speak with authority on matters of economics, parliamentary procedure and the law.<ref>{{Harvnb|White|1979|p=45}}</ref> He subsequently sat as MP for [[Coventry (UK Parliament constituency)|Coventry]] (1624), Norfolk (1625) and [[Buckinghamshire (UK Parliament constituency)|Buckinghamshire]] (1628).<ref name = "Thrush" />

In June 1614, the [[University of Cambridge]] by unanimous vote elected Coke [[High Steward (academia)|High Steward]], an honorary office immediately below Chancellor of the University. Through Cecil, (previously High Steward and then [[List of Chancellors of the University of Cambridge|Chancellor]] of Cambridge), Coke had procured for the university the right to send its own two representatives to Parliament, a matter of much practical benefit.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bowen|1957|p=345}}</ref> A fervent [[Cantabrigian]], Coke had a habit of naming Cambridge first, including in Parliament. When reminded that precedence belonged to Oxford "by vote of the House", Coke persisted in giving Cambridge primacy. A [[Privy Council of the United Kingdom|Privy Counsellor]], [[Thomas Edmondes|Sir Thomas Edmondes]], interrupted with a rebuke. It was reported that Coke suggested Edmondes not bother worrying about the primacy of Oxford or Cambridge, given that he had not attended either university.<ref>{{Harvnb|Bowen|1957|p=440}}</ref>

===Monopolies===
{{see also|Statute of Monopolies}}

Coke used his role in Parliament as a leading opposition MP to attack patents, a system he had already criticised as a judge. Historically, English patent law was based on custom and the [[common law]], not on statute. It began as [[the Crown]] granted patents as a form of economic protection to ensure high industrial production. As gifts from the Crown, there was no judicial review, oversight or consideration, and no actual law concerning patents.<ref>{{Harvnb|Pila|2001|p=210}}</ref> To boost England's economy, [[Edward II of England|Edward II]] began encouraging foreign workmen and inventors to settle in England, offering letters of protection that protected them from guild policy on the condition that they train English apprentices and pass on their knowledge. The letters did not grant a full monopoly; rather they acted as a passport, allowing foreign workers to travel to England and practice their trade.<ref>{{Harvnb|Klitzke|1959|p=624}}</ref> This process continued for three centuries, with formal procedures set out in 1561 to issue letters patent to any new industry, allowing monopolies.<ref>{{Harvnb|Pila|2001|p=212}}</ref> The granting of these patents was highly popular with the monarch because of the potential for raising revenue; a patentee was expected to pay heavily for the patent, and unlike a tax raise (another method of raising Crown money) any public unrest as a result of the patent was normally directed at the patentee, not the monarch.<ref>{{Harvnb|Ramsey|1936|p=7}}</ref>

Over time, this system became more and more problematic; instead of temporary monopolies on specific, imported industries, long-term monopolies came about over more common commodities, including salt and starch. These monopolies led to a showdown between the Crown and Parliament, in which it was agreed in 1601 to turn the power to administer patents over to the common law courts;<ref>{{Harvnb|Pila|2001|p=213}}</ref> at the same time, Elizabeth revoked a number of the more restrictive and damaging monopolies.<ref name=ram8>{{Harvnb|Ramsey|1936|p=8}}</ref> Even given a string of judicial decisions criticising and overruling such monopolies, James I, when he took the throne, continued using patents to create monopolies. Coke used his position in Parliament to attack these patents, which were, according to him, "now grown like hydras' heads; they grow up as fast as they are cut off".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=106}}</ref> Coke succeeded in establishing the [[Committee of Grievances]], a body chaired by him that abolished a large number of monopolies. This was followed by a wave of protest at the patent system. On 27 March 1621, James suggested the House of Commons draw up a list of the three most objectionable patents, and he would remove them, but by this time a statute was already being prepared by Coke.<ref>{{Harvnb|Kyle|1998|p=206}}</ref> After passing on 12 May it was thrown out by the [[House of Lords]], but a [[Statute of Monopolies]] was finally passed by Parliament on 25 May 1624.<ref>{{Harvnb|Klitzke|1959|p=649}}</ref>

In response to both this and Coke's establishment of a sub-committee to establish freedom of speech and discuss the rights of the Commons, James announced that "you usurp upon our prerogative royal and meddle with things far above your reach". He first adjourned Parliament and then forbade the Commons from discussing "matters of state at home or abroad".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=111}}</ref> Ignoring this ban, Parliament issued a "Remonstrance to the King" on 11 December 1621, authored by Coke, in which they restated their liberties and right to discuss matters of state, claiming that such rights were the "ancient and undoubted birthright and inheritance of the subjects of England". After a debate, it was sent to James, who rejected it; the Commons instead resolved to enter it into the ''Journal of the Commons'', which required no royal authorisation. In the presence of Parliament, the king reacted by tearing the offending page from the ''Journal'', declaring that it should be "razed out of all memories and utterly annihilated", and then dissolved Parliament.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=112}}</ref> Coke was then imprisoned in the Tower of London on 27 December, being released nine months later.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=114}}</ref>

===Liberty and the ''Resolutions''===
[[File:John Selden from NPG cleaned.jpg|thumb|right|[[John Selden]], who, along with Coke, presented the ''Resolutions'' to the [[House of Lords]]|alt=A portrait of John Selden. Selden blends into the brown background of the portrait; his face is visible. He has brown eyes and shoulder-length brown hair. He has a serious look on his face]]

James died on 27 March 1625 and was succeeded by his son, who became [[Charles I of England]]. Coke was made [[High Sheriff of Buckinghamshire]] by the king in 1625, which prohibited him from sitting in Parliament until his term expired a year later.<ref>{{Harvnb|White|1979|p=213}}</ref> Following his father's example, Charles raised loans without Parliament's sanction and imprisoned without trial those who would not pay. The judges of the [[Court of Common Pleas (England)|Court of Common Pleas]] and [[Court of King's Bench (England)|King's Bench]] declared this to be illegal, and the Chief Justice [[Ranulph Crewe|Sir Ranulph Crewe]] was dismissed; at this, the remaining judges succumbed to the king's pressure.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=125}}</ref> More and more people refused to pay, leading to ''[[Darnell's Case]]'', in which the courts confirmed that "if no cause was given for the detention&nbsp;... the prisoner could not be freed as the offence was probably too dangerous for public discussion".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=126}}</ref> The result of this was that wealthy landowners refused to pay the loan and the Crown's income fell below Charles's expectations, forcing him to call a fresh Parliament in March 1627. With popular anger at Charles's policies, many MPs were opposed to him, including Pym, Coke and a young [[Oliver Cromwell]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=127}}</ref>

Martial law was then declared, with continued imprisonment for a failure to pay the forced loans and soldiers billeted in the homes of private citizens to intimidate the population – something which led to Coke's famous declaration that "the house of an Englishman is to him as his castle".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=128}}</ref> The Commons responded to these measures by insisting that [[Magna Carta]], which expressly forbade the imprisonment of freemen without trial, was still valid. Coke then prepared the ''Resolutions'', which later led to the [[Habeas Corpus Act 1679]]. These declared that Magna Carta was still in force, and that furthermore: {{blockquote|no freeman is to be committed or detained in prison, or otherwise restrained by command of the King or the Privy Council or any other, unless some lawful cause be shown&nbsp;... the writ of ''habeas corpus'' cannot be denied, but should be granted to every man who is committed or detained in prison or otherwise restrained by the command of the King, the Privy Council or any other&nbsp;... Any freeman so committed or detained in prison without cause being stated should be entitled to bail or be freed.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=129}}</ref>}} In addition, no tax or loan could be levied without Parliament's permission, and no private citizen could be forced into accepting soldiers into his home. Coke, [[John Selden]] and the rest of the Committee for Grievances presented the ''Resolutions'' to the House of Lords, with Coke citing seven statutes and 31&nbsp;cases to support his argument. He told the Lords that "Imprisonment in law is a civil death [and] a prison without a prefixed time is a kind of hell".<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=130}}</ref> The Lords, supportive of the king, were not swayed, and Charles himself eventually rejected the ''Resolutions'', insisting that the Commons trust him.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=132}}</ref>

===Petition of Right===
[[File:Edward Coke1629.jpg|thumb|left|Coke at the time of the Petition of Right's passage|alt=A mono-colour circular portrait of Edward Coke, portraying him dressed in a ruffled collar. He has a black cap on his head and a goatee]]
{{main|Petition of Right}}

Coke undertook the central role in framing and writing the Petition of Right. The ongoing struggles over martial law and civil liberties, along with the rejection of the ''Resolutions'' seriously concerned the Commons. Accordingly, Coke convinced the Lords to meet with the Commons in April 1628 in order to discuss a petition to the King confirming the rights and liberties of royal subjects. The Commons immediately accepted this, and after a struggle, the Lords agreed to allow a committee chaired by Coke to draft the eventual document.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=135}}</ref> Hearing of this, the King sent a message to Parliament forbidding the Commons from discussing matters of state. The resulting debate led to some MPs being unable to speak due to their fear that the King was threatening them with the destruction of Parliament. Coke, despite the fear in Parliament, stood and spoke, citing historical precedents supporting the principle that members of the Commons could, within Parliament, say whatever they wished – something now codified as [[Parliamentary privilege]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=137}}</ref>

The Petition of Right was affirmed by the Commons and sent to the Lords, who approved it on 17 May 1628;<ref>{{Harvnb|Johnson|1865|p=237}}</ref> the document's publication was met with bonfires and the ringing of church bells throughout England.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=139}}</ref> As well as laying out a long list of statutes which had been broken, it proclaimed various "rights and liberties" of free Englishmen, including freedom from taxation without Parliamentary approval, the right of ''habeas corpus'', a prohibition on soldiers being billeted in houses without the owner's will, and a prohibition on imposing martial law on civilians. It was later passed into formal law by the [[Long Parliament]] in 1641 and became one of the three constitutional documents of English civil liberties, along with Magna Carta and the [[Bill of Rights 1689]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Hostettler|1997|p=138}}</ref>