RS 27

marie seong-hak kim objections in the registers by describing the constraints to which it had been submitted. Thelit de justice has commonly been understood as the occasion of the invocation of the principle of the king’s retained justice (justice retenue). It has recently been argued, however, that the concept of “retained justice”, along with its accompanying concept of delegated justice (justice déléguée), did not exist in the sixteenth century. According to Jacques Krynen, the idea that was actually in use was that the authority of the king was communicated (communiquée) to the Parlement.39 Bodin observed that those who have sovereignty “communicated [to the judge] the authority, force, and power to command.”40 Krynen has thus concluded that sovereign justice, inseparable from the crown, was not subject to delegation. It was on this ground that the royal council practicedévocations, recalling cases from the parlements to theConseil privé and quashing their decisions. Its power of cassationwas officially confirmed by theOrdinance of Blois in 1579.41 Repeated remonstrances could entail crippling effects on royal policy. The Parlement based its refusal to register promptly pacification edicts on its obligation to promote the common good (intérêt communor intérêt public) by preserving religious unity in the kingdom.42 The law court was harnessing constitutional restraints upon the monarch by equating religious unity to fundamental law.43 Chancellor L’Hôpital, the main architect of royal pacification policy, forcefully rejected the judges’ claim that their right of remonstrance could restrain the crown. L’Hôpital was one of the most articulate advocates of royal sovereignty in the ancien régime France. In 1560, immediately after his elevation to 39 Krynen, Jacques 2000 p. 357-358. 40 Bodin, Jean 1577, liv. 3, ch. 4 p. 497. According to Krynen, the Parlement was the mouth of the king who spoke in the judicial arrêts; in other words, it was the king who spoke, not the judges. Krynen, Jacques 2000 p. 362. 41 Krynen, Jacques 2000 p. 364. Evocation of cases to theConseil privé was not frequent, even during the reign of Louis XIV. Hamscher, Albert 1987 p. 147-48. 42 Saint Bonnet, François 2007 p. 9-21. 43 Doucet, Les Institutions de la France, vol. 1, p. 66-67. 143 Religious Crises and Constitutional Clashes

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=