[n] Rot. Parl. 28 H. VI. vol. v. p. 176.
[o] If this were to rest upon antiquity of precedent, one might be produced that would challenge all competition. In the laws of Ethelbert, the first Christian king of Kent, at the end of the sixth century, we find this provision: "If the king call his people to him (i.e. in the witenagemot), and any one does an injury to one of them, let him pay a fine." Wilkins, Leges Anglo-Saxon. p. 2.
[p] Hatsell, vol. i. p. 12.
[q] Rot. Parl. 5 H. IV. p. 541.
[r] The clergy had got a little precedence in this. An act passed 8 H. VI. c. 1, granting privilege from arrest for themselves and servants on their way to convocation.
[] Rot. Parl. vol. iv. p. 357.
[t] vol. v. p. 374.
[] Rot. Parl. vol. v. p. 239; Hatsell's Precedents, p. 29.
[x] Upon this subject the reader should have recourse to Hatsell's Precedents, vol. i. chap. 1.
[y] Rot. Parl. vol. v. p. 337; W. Worcester, p. 415. Mr. Hatsell seems to have overlooked this case, for he mentions that of Strickland, in 1571, as the earliest instance of the crown's interference with freedom of speech in parliament. vol. i. p. 85.