The two constituent parts of parliament were generally self-regulating in their behaviour. With the exception of statute law that did stipulate certain ways for parliament to behave, the Commons and the Lords organised the way they undertook their business and how their members should conduct themselves. This meant that parliamentary privilege for the member and the liberties of each house were jealously guarded. These were certain rights to avoid arrest, to be free from civil actions, and also for the house to dominate certain areas, for example appellate oversight of other courts or finance. The author convincingly asserts that while privilege could well be the domain of the petty and self-interested, its fundamental purpose was to preserve the individual roles and promote their smooth running.

This chapter assesses the legal power of wives, midwives and mothers in the legal regimes of Anglo-America. Though under coverture, wives clearly had a right to petition the courts to compel neglectful husbands to provide them with financial maintenance. Husbands had a patriarchal responsibility to provide for their wives and children, and magistrates had an interest in holding men accountable to their obligations to care for their families. Laws regarding divorce and marital separation differed by location. In England and the southern colonies, especially the Chesapeake and South Carolina, authorities granted full divorces in very few instances. In the New England colonies, however, magistrates permitted couples who could not live harmoniously together to divorce, an agreement which negated any obligation of the husband to provide for his wife. Remarkably, in cases of illegitimacy in all areas of the Anglo-American world, a man who fathered children out of wedlock still had a patriarchal responsibility to provide financial support to his family. Mothers of these children, often supported by midwives, could legally claim financial support from the men they named as the father of their children, even if the fathers denied the women’s accusations.

This chapter provides an overview of the major arguments in the book and maps out how women’s relationship to the law changed in England and colonial America under different legal jurisdictions. It presents the argument that the law increasingly replaced patriarchy as the governing ideology of family and social relationships. It discusses the opportunities and limitations of using legal records as a source of historical evidence, and assesses how the work contributes to our understanding of women in the early modern period.

Research on the practice of segregation and sectarianism in Northern Ireland has taken two main forms: anthropological and geographical. The aim of the research was to explore the extent to which people's daily routines were affected by the social divisions within Northern Ireland, by the often extensive segregation of Catholic and Protestant communities, by sectarianism and by the legacy of the conflict. The impact of the Troubles on the research areas in Belfast was very different and had a significant impact on the degree to which segregation and sectarianism were felt to impose themselves on daily routines. Little consideration has been given to exactly how economic regeneration may contribute to breaking down divisions and segregation but there is some indication from this research that economic regeneration can have an impact on a personal level.

This chapter examines how the legal status of female servants and slaves evolved over the course of the seventeenth century, and how women in service challenged the structures of patriarchy that governed familial relationships. Female servants had a relatively wide spectrum of legal rights and routinely filed petitions with the courts for breach of contract. The legal relationship between a master and a female servant was dependent on a contract that stipulated the amount of time to be served, as well as the remuneration the servant would receive for her labour. The legal action taken by female servants shows that although they were at the bottom of the household hierarchy, they exercised a form of subordinate agency in the courts. In contrast, slaves had no legal standing. A master owned the labour of his servants while they were under contract, but not the servant themselves. The legal relationship between a master and a slave, however, was not subject to the terms of a contract. Masters owned not only the labour of their slaves, but also their persons; this made it legally impossible for slaves to bring any grievances against their masters to court.

This chapter explores both the complex and challenging context of historic national antagonism and the degree to which political change has promoted reconciliation. Tragically, the North of Ireland makes visible some of the internal contradictions of the great post-Enlightenment project for freedom in politics which insisted that government requires the consent of the governed. While supporters of independence for Ireland, to be achieved violently if necessary, could claim the support of a majority on the island, they failed to make significant inroads among Protestant voters concentrated largely in the industrialised north-east. But in Ireland there was no international peace treaty to determine new frontiers, only direct confrontation with a British government. The trump card of the peace process has been its ability to render political violence strategically hopeless and to reduce the level of immediate fear.

In a book that deals with procedure and focuses a little less on MPs and politics than other works, a chapter on the officers and servants of parliament brings light onto this sometimes forgotten corner of parliament. While nobody could fail to acknowledge the importance of the speaker of either house, this book brings a sharp concentration of the very important roles of the judges and other legal officers, on the all-important clerk and his juniors, and on the lesser officers of parliament. It discusses the role of the officers, their responsibilities, and the capacity for influence on political and other developments in parliament. It also describes the payment and other rewards they received for their work.