下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
The Petition of Right，1627
The Petition exhibited to his Majesty by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal，and Commons，in this present Parliament assembled，concerning divers Rights and Liberties of the Subjects，with the King’s Majesty’s royal answer thereunto in full Parliament.
Humbly show unto our Sovereign Lord the King，the Lords Spiritual and Temporal，and Commons in Parliament assembles，that whereas it is declared and enacted by a statute made in the time of the reign of King Edward I，commonly called Stratutum de Tellagio non Concedendo，that no tallage or aid shall be laid or levied by the king or his heirs in this realm，without the good will and assent of the archbishops，bishops，earls，barons，knights，burgesses，and other the freemen of the commonalty of this realm；and by authority of parliament holden in the five-and-twentieth year of the reign of King Edward III，it is declared and enacted，that from thenceforth no person should be compelled to make any loans to the king against his will，because such loans were against reason and the franchise of the land；and by other laws of this realm it is provided，that none should be charged by any charge or imposition called a benevolence，nor by such like charge；by which statutes before mentioned，and other the good laws and statutes of this realm，your subjects have inherited this freedom，that they should not be compelled to contribute to any tax，tallage，aid，or other like charge not set by common consent，in parliament.
Yet nevertheless of late divers commissions directed to sundry commissioners in several counties，with instructions，have issued；by means whereof your people have been in divers places assembled，and required to lend certain sums of money unto your Majesty，and many of them，upon their refusal so to do，have had an oath administered unto them not warrantable by the laws or statutes of this realm，and have been constrained to become bound and make appearance and give utterance before your Privy Council and in other places，and others of them have been therefore imprisoned，confined，and sundry other ways molested and disquieted；and divers other charges have been laid and levied upon your people in several counties by lord lieutenants，deputy lieutenants，commissioners for musters，justices of peace and others，by command or direction from your Majesty，or your Privy Council，against the laws and free custom of the realm.
And whereas also by the statute called “The Great Charter of the Liberties of England”，it is declared and enacted，that no freeman may be taken or imprisoned or be disseized of his freehold or liberties，or his free customs，or be outlawed or exiled，or in any manner destroyed，but by the lawful judgment of his peers，or by the law of the land.
And in the eight-and-twentieth year of the reign of King Edward III，it was declared and enacted by authority of parliament，that no man，of what estate or condition that he be，should be put out of his land or tenements，nor taken，nor imprisoned，nor disinherited nor put to death without being brought to answer by due process of law.
Nevertheless，against the tenor of the said statutes，and other the good laws and statutes of your realm to that end provided，divers of your subjects have of late been imprisoned without any cause showed；and when for their deliverance they were brought before your justices by your Majesty’s writs of habeas corpus，there to undergo and receive as the court should order，and their keepers commanded to certify the causes of their detainer，no cause was certified，but that they were detained by your Majesty’s special command，signified by the lords of your Privy Council，and yet were returned back to several prisons，without being charged with anything to which they might make answer according to the law.
And whereas of late great companies of soldiers and mariners have been dispersed into divers counties of the realm，and the inhabitants against their wills have been compelled to receive them into their houses，and there to suffer them to sojourn against the laws and customs of this realm，and to the great grievance and vexation of the people.
And whereas also by authority of parliament，in the five-and-twentieth year of the reign of King Edward III，it is declared and enacted，that no man shall be forejudged of life or limb against the form of the Great Charter and the law of the land；and by the said Great Charter and other the laws and statutes of this your realm，no man ought to be adjudged to death but by the laws established in this your realm，either by the customs of the same realm，or by acts of parliament：and whereas no offender of what kind soever is exempted from the proceedings to be used，and punishments to be inflicted by the laws and statutes of this your realm；nevertheless of late time divers commissions under your Majesty’s great seal have issued forth，by which certain persons have been assigned and appointed commissioners with power and authority to proceed within the land，according to the justice of martial law，against such soldiers or mariners，or other dissolute persons joining with them，as should commit any murder，robbery，felony，mutiny，or other outrage or misdemeanor whatsoever，and by such summary course and order as is agreeable to martial law，and is used in armies in time of war，to proceed to the trial and condemnation of such offenders，and them to cause to be executed and put to death according to the law martial.
By pretext whereof some of your Majesty’s subjects have been by some of the said commissioners put to death，when and where，if by the laws and statutes of the land they had deserved death，by the same laws and statutes also they might，and by no other ought to have been judged and executed.
And also sundry grievous offenders，by color thereof claiming an exemption，have escaped the punishments due to them by the laws and statutes of this your realm，by reason that divers of your officers and ministers of justice have unjustly refused or forborne to proceed against such offenders according to the same laws and statutes，upon pretense that the said offenders were punishable only by martial law，and by authority of such commissions as aforesaid；which commissions，and all other of like nature，are wholly and directly contrary to the said laws and statutes of this your realm.
They do therefore humbly pray your most excellent Majesty，that no man hereafter be compelled to make or yield any gift，loan，benevolence，tax，or such like charge，without common consent by act of parliament；and that none be called to make answer，or take such oath，or to give attendance，or be confined，or otherwise molested or disquieted concerning the same or for refusal thereof；and that no freeman，in any such manner as is before mentioned，be imprisoned or detained；and that your Majesty would be pleased to remove the said soldiers and mariners，and that your people may not be so burdened in time to come；and that the aforesaid commissions，for proceeding by martial law，may be revoked and annulled；and that hereafter no commissions of like nature may issue forth to any person or persons whatsoever to be executed as aforesaid，lest by color of them any of your Majesty’s subjects be destroyed or put to death contrary to the laws and franchise of the land.
All which they most humbly pray of your most excellent Majesty as their rights and liberties，according to the laws and statutes of this realm；and that your Majesty would also vouchsafe to declare，that the awards，doings，and proceedings，to the prejudice of your people in any of the premises，shall not be drawn hereafter into consequence or example；and that your Majesty would be also graciously pleased，for the further comfort and safety of your people，to declare your royal will and pleasure，that in the things aforesaid all your officers and ministers shall serve you according to the laws and statutes of this realm，as they tender the honor of your Majesty，and the prosperity of this kingdom.
Statutes of the Realm ，Volume 5：1628-1680，London，1819，pp. 23-24.
1627年英国《权利请愿书》是查理一世在位时通过的一项宪法文件，规定了君主不能侵犯的臣民的一系列自由。《权利请愿书》的核心精神是国王非经议会同意不得征税和法律至上的原则。
英国自古建立的就是一种有限王权。君主的权力要受到教会和贵族的制约。国王只不过是贵族中的第一人，因此形成了“王在法下”和“王在议会”的传统。1603年，都铎王朝伊丽莎白女王去世且无子嗣，王位由统治苏格兰的詹姆士继承，史称詹姆士一世，英国进入了斯图亚特王朝统治时期。
詹姆士一世及其子查理一世一改伊丽莎白女王时期诸多政策，极力宣扬“君权神授”，主张君主的绝对权力，认为君主只对上帝负责，不受外界的干预和臣民的约束，不接受法律的约束，甚至可以干预法律的效力。这种要求加强封建君主专制的思想，不仅违背了英国的历史，也与当时英国资本主义不断发展、资产阶级要求自由的主张背道而驰。这些要求与英国自古就形成的有限王权的思想相抵触。君权神授思想引发了新兴资产阶级的不满。
同时，由于詹姆士一世父子的奢侈和不善理财，以及对外战争需要庞大的军费开支，王室债台高筑，于是乎国王开始滥封贵族，增加税收。这两项举措虽满足一时的需求，实际上却是饮鸩止渴。随着贵族数量的急剧增加，各级贵族身份降低，引发贵族对国王的不满。而增加税收也激发了渴望降低税率发展资本主义的新兴资产阶级的不满，同时国王增加税收却不通过议会，极大地恶化了国王与议会的关系。英国议会自产生起就是作为制约王权的力量而存在的，议会拥有批准税收的权力，只有经过议会同意，国王方能增加税收。然而，詹姆士一世不经议会同意肆意征税，开罪议会，国王和议会的矛盾开始不断升级和恶化，至查理一世时期达到顶峰。国王授予他的宠臣专卖权、特许状的做法，更是破坏经济，引起人们反感。
1625年，詹姆士一世去世，其子查理一世即位。查理一世上台以后，滥用监禁和征税的权力，强制推行借债政策，导致国内关系紧张。为了满足王室无止境的挥霍，查理一世即位后不久，便下令向富人借贷，并逮捕拒绝借贷的人。议会也不甘示弱，为了抵制借贷，于1627年通过了《权利请愿书》。同时，议会开出了35万英镑的价码，换取国王批准《权利请愿书》。债台高筑、急需用钱的查理一世为获取35万英镑，迫于压力，勉强接受了议员们提出的《权利请愿书》。请愿书主要是下院议员起草的，起草人包括爱德华·库克爵士、约翰·皮姆爵士、约翰·塞尔登爵士、约翰·埃利奥特爵士。
《权利请愿书》总共有六条：
第一条列举了国王滥用权力的行为；重申了过去限制国王征税权力的法律；强调非经议会同意，国王不得强行征税和借债。
第二条规定，“凡自由人除经其同侪之合法裁判，或依国法外，皆不得加以拘捕、监禁，或剥夺其管业权、各项自由及自由习惯，或置诸法外，或加以放逐，亦不得以任何方式加以毁伤。任何人除经依法律正当程序之审判，不论其身份与环境状况如何，均不得将其驱逐出国，或强使离开所居住之采邑，亦不得予以逮捕、拘禁，或取消其继承权，或剥夺其生存之权利”。重申了《大宪章》中有关保护公民自由和权利的内容，规定非经同级贵族的依法审判，任何人不得被逮捕、监禁、流放和剥夺财产及受到其他损害，这是对英国臣民人身自由和权利的一种保障，防止人权遭到侵犯。
第三条规定海陆军队不得驻扎在居民住宅，不得根据戒严令任意逮捕自由人。
第四条规定不许随便对任何人判处死刑。
第五条规定非经议会法案同意，不能强迫任何人缴付任何贡金、贷款、献金、租税或此类负担。
第六条规定不利于臣民的裁决、行为和措施不能作为先例。
《权利请愿书》是议会争取自由和权利而与国王进行斗争所取得的胜利成果，是英国历史上最早的人权法案之一。但在事实上，国王查理一世之所以当时接受它，仅仅只是以此换来议会批准的补助金，并不准备真正实行这一文件。因此，当议会批准了补助金后，而在关于征收吨税和磅税等方面仍坚持国王享有征税权的期限为一年并提出抗议时，查理一世一怒之下，下令解散了议会，英国也进入了无议会统治的时期，《权利请愿书》也被国王抛弃。
《权利请愿书》是英国重要的限制王权的法典之一，是英国自由保障的四大宪章之一。它明确了议会在英国政府中的作用，从而在许多条款中闲置王室特权，是议会争取自由和权利而与国王进行斗争取得的胜利果实。《权利请愿书》为英国最终确立起君主立宪制的资产阶级政体做出了重要贡献。
《权利请愿书》是一份用来保卫人民基本权利和自由的伟大的宪法性文件，它限制了国王的权力，确认了臣民的权利。它宣告任意监禁的违法性，强调人身保护法令的作用，符合英国资产阶级革命的宪政要求。它申明在没有确实理由表明某人依据法律对某事件负责的情况下，任何自由人都不应被监禁或拘留，它涉及、确认并保护了个人的人身自由权，促进了英国资产阶级民主制度的发展和完善。
当斯图亚特王朝君权神授理论挑战有限王权时，实际上又为限制王权提供了契机。《权利请愿书》的起草者们认为他们只是在重申《大宪章》中有关保护公民自由和权利的内容，而实际上他们增加、扩大了公民的权利。《权利请愿书》是限制王权和扩大资产阶级政治权利的宪法性法律。正是由于斯图亚特王朝的君主蔑视臣民的权利，并对有限王权原则发起挑战，才直接导致了英国17世纪的内战。内战结束后，议会对《权利请愿书》重新解释，赋予其新的内涵，并把它认定为英国宪法的渊源之一。它与《人身保护法》和《王位继承法》等这些宪法性法律，连同政治惯例、司法判例一起构成了最早的资产阶级不成文宪法。
Cust，Richard，“Charles I，the Privy Council and the Parliament of 1628”， Transactions of the Royal Historical Society ，Sixth Series，Vol. 2，1992，pp. 25-50.
Foster，Elizabeth Read，“Petitions and the Petition of Right”， The Journal of British Studies ，Vol. 14，No. 1，1974，pp. 21-45.
Guy，J. A.，“The Origins of the Petition of Right Reconsidered”， The Historical Journal ，Vol. 25，No. 2，1982，pp. 289-312.
Hulme，Harold，“Opinion in the House of Commons on the Proposal for a Petition of Right，6 May，1628”， The English Historical Review ，Vol. 50，No. 198，1935，pp. 302-306.
Reeve，L. J.，“The Legal Status of the Petition of Right”， The Historical Journal ，Vol. 29，No. 2，1986，pp. 257-277.
Smuts，R. M.，“Parliament，the Petition of Right and Politics”， The Journal of Modern History ，Vol. 50，No. 4，1978，pp. 712-719.
Young，Michael B.，“The Origins of the Petition of Right Reconsidered Further”， The Historical Journal ，Vol. 27，No. 2，1984，pp. 449-452.