The Court of the Exchequer held that Bates had to pay the duty. The Crown could impose the duty as he pleased to regulate trade. The Court could not go behind the King’s statement that the duty was indeed imposed for the purpose of regulating trade.
|“||The power of the king is both ordinary and absolute. Ordinary power, which exists for the purpose of civil justice, is unalterable save by consent of Parliament. Absolute power, existing for the nation's safety, varies with the royal wisdom.||”|
In the long run, if the Crown could levy taxes without resorting to Parliament, one of the main reasons for that body's existence might disappear, thus perhaps allowing the King to dispense with Parliaments altogether, although this did not really become apparent until the reign of Charles I.
Chief Baron Fleming, who came from a family of merchants, displayed a notable contempt for the business community in his opinion. To the argument that the common good requires merchants to have unrestricted access to foreign markets, he made the scathing reply that "the end of every private merchant is not the common good but his particular profit".
- Dalzell Chalmers, Sir Cyril Asquith, Owen Hood Phillips, Chalmers and Hood Phillips' Constitutional laws of Great Britain (Sweet & Maxwell, 1946), p. 178
- Chalmers, Asquith, & Phillips, p. 170
- Sharp, David (2000). "2 James I's reign 1603 - 25". The Coming of the Civil War, 1603 - 49. Heinemann Advanced History. Heinemann. p. 30. ISBN 0-435-32713-5.
- Kenyon, J.P. The Stuart Constitution 2nd Ed. Cambridge University Press 1986 pp.47-8
- D. A. Orr, 'Lane, Sir Richard (bap. 1584, d. 1650)', in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004; online edition (subscription required), accessed 27 January 2011