Magna Carta presented to King John
I can still remember a hot sunny day as a schoolboy in a class in my school, a few hundred yards from the beach, where my teacher was rambling on about Magna Carta. I, and I’m sure my fellow classmates too, just wanted our old teacher to shut up, we wanted to get to the beach, we were waiting for the bell.
How wrong could I have been, to be so blasée about such a vital piece of our history as Magna Carta. Perhaps many of us feel the same way about an event that happened initially over eight hundred years ago, something that evolved to shape our society today and provided us for centuries with what was once a free and fair society. How dare we be so ungrateful for the actions of our ancestors.
It was only the fear of a bloody rebellion by the leading men and barons of England that led to the introduction of Magna Carta (Great Charter) on 15th June 1215 at Runnymede, a field by the Thames. An agreement hammered out between King John and the barons of England that placed a limitation on the power of the crown and a turning point in British constitutional history.
From parliament.uk:
“What happened after the Magna Carta was issued? A few months after he had issued the charter, John persuaded the Pope to declare Magna Carta illegal because it interfered with the rights of the king. The barons would not accept this and a civil war broke out, in which most of the barons fought for Magna Carta against John”
I thought the above was particularly significant when you consider the Pope’s actions today and his support of the European Union and globalism generally.
Magna Carta lead to the adoption of Common Law and the formation of parliament. The first use of the term Parliament was in 1236 and it referred to the great council, up until then it had been an informal arrangement (see here).
Due to space constraints here, I can’t delve too deeply into this fascinating history. Parliament evolved as a meeting place for the the original stakeholders of Magna Carta: the Crown and the barons that originally negotiated the charter and the common people, that were increasingly empowered by the agreement. Today, as a result Parliament is a meeting place between the Crown, the Lords and the Commons.
It wasn’t until the 14th century that the Commons really rose to power, as detailed here. And there’s more, see this from parliament.uk:
“That the Commons were acting at this time as equal partners with the Lords in making legislation is suggested by a written note on a Bill from that reign, which states that the Commons agreed to the Lords’ amendments to it. By the mid-15th century the Commons was in control of granting supply of money to the King and had gone from petitioners to full partners in the formation of statute, the highest law of the land.”
The important thing to remember is that Parliament was a product of Magna Carta, not vice versa: ‘the tail does not wag the dog.’
Parliament cannot or should not be able to change or alter our sovereign rights either under Magna Carta or Common Law without the consent of we the people, yet since the Common Market referendum of 5th June 1975, this is precisely what has happened.
I haven’t room here for an exhaustive list but here are a few examples, please feel free to add to them.
Since our agreement to join a Common Market in 1975, Parliament has morphed into the European Union, a full-on European superstate in the making, treaty by treaty, and none of these with the consent of we the people.
The imposition of Napoleonic law via EU membership, should not be possible without the consent of the people.
The European Arrest Warrant is a breach of habeas corpus, one of our most important rights under Common Law. This should not be possible without the consent of the people.
The suggestion that Sharia Law be introduced into our legal system, again, not without the consent of the people.
The most important point is however:
Since the Common Market referendum of 1975, we the people were never asked again, until Thursday, June 23rd, 2016, when we voted decisively to leave the European Union.
Our government likes to stress that the above referendum was not legally binding, but, in a country were we the people have ancient sovereign rights that are supposedly the law of the land; how could that referendum be anything other than legally binding?
After many decades, the 2016 Brexit referendum was the first time that we the people were given the chance to exercise our sovereign rights, of course it was legally binding.
The members of the House of Commons are meant to be our representatives, the executives of our Judiciary: could it be that for many decades they have been not fit for purpose, that they have been engaged in lies and subterfuge for their own ends?
It seems that our successive governments have been guilty of betraying the ancient rights of our land and its people. These rights were fought for by our ancestors, a gift from them that has given us our freedoms to this day.
How wrong I was as a schoolboy to dismiss this history as the ramblings of an old man and I’m sure many of us are just as guilty!
When the governments of America, Australia, New Zealand and other ex-colonies formed their own governments and legal systems they looked to Magna Carta as a foundation. Perhaps then, this following quote is particularly pertinent:
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Thomas Jefferson
Perhaps it’s time to ask those politicians and bureaucrats within our very unfit government who would like to keep us illegally tied to the European Union – if they want blood?
It wouldn’t be for the first time, it is nothing new, the precedent was set a long time ago.
We are tricked with cups and balls. The pomp and pageantry, procedure and pretentiousness, patronage and paymasters. We have been tricked like children by con artists in robes and suits; the uniforms both physical and mental of the charlatans.
We do not want class conflict or ideology. We do not want Left or Right. We do not want imposition or imposters.
To my mind.
What you ask for in your article is Freedom, Liberty, Democracy, Accountability, Honesty and Respect.
We cannot get those things with our present system. A big change is coming we will need to lift our feet to the next rung on the ladder of social change. The people and processes that use Parliament, have failed and are failing in their present form, much to our discomfort and the detriment of our society and country. The status quo will not do. We should not be advocating revolution but the boil must be burst whatever way is available.
The factors that contribute to political change must be analysed and understood. The necessary actions must be taken. How efficiently, or even expediently, or indeed whether, action is taken will determine how painful that change will be. But change there must and will be! We cannot go on like this.
When MPs are voted into power, it is loaned to them.
They should give it back INTACT, not frittered away to some foreign power.
I wonder why ‘Flyer’ refers to the 1975 referendum as being the time at which we ‘joined a Common Market’? This is historically inaccurate as we actually joined the said ‘Common Market’ on 1st January 1973 – without any public consultation whatsoever. The 1975 referendum was merely a belated attempt to obtain a mandate from the electorate for something which had already been un-democratically forced upon us. Magna Carta was effectively consigned to the dustbin of history by Prime Minister Heath more than two years before his successor’s half-hearted, token attempt at paying it nothing more than lip-service.
Geoffrey – I stand corrected on that one. I remember being confused about this when I wrote the article, the point is though that we never did vote to give away our sovereignty to a European superstate, we were never asked.
The situation in 1975 then was very similar to the Brexit referendum of 2016 as it was just another attempt to obtain a mandate for past betrayal and treason, this time we weren’t taken in.
Flyer I am a great admirer of your articles and feel you speak for many many of us at least on this platform. But, and I mean no disrespect – can you please tell me how old are you?
Reason for asking – I know almost no-one over 65 (I’m 69) who doesn’t recall crystal clearly that we were NEVER asked – Heath took us in on a HoC vote, majority of 8, in 1972.
I am sure in good faith you didn’t realise this, however I am getting so,so sick of people on platforms such as this blithely assuming that we must have been given a referendum. It comes up in conversation and online postings over and over and over again, and Remainers use it to advantage knowing they are usually unchallenged. They tend to be relatively young and the Establishment has had every reason to let the passage of decades bury that traitorous act being a bunch of Remainers.
This is such an important point and apropos to the current subject, that I really wish someone or some institution would bang on and on about the facts, so that those too young to remember what happened would be educated.
Please don’t take my comment too personally!
Rob – I would have been a child back then and so my memory of events is a bit hazy. The article makes the point though, that we were never given a choice, the 1975 referendum was about a trade deal (where have we heard that before), the Common Market, not a European superstate. Big difference, the lies and subterfuge over the years is beyond belief and it’s still going on.
A Common Market trade deal, if it wasn’t a Trojan Horse, wouldn’t have been so bad but unfortunately it was all smoke and mirrors.
magna carta was written by a padre in Latin to keep the peace between illiterate warlords. Yet it includes the basis of hab corp , taxation and government by consent . All notably absent from Roman law .
these concepts must have been around before magfart..could not have been invented by the bishop of Novichok .
From which comes the ultimate right to resist tyranny .What scritty politty do they read in Brussels ?
Top article flyer as usual, I’m just waiting for some one with a full knowledge of the ‘common law’ to make some headway into the complete disregard for ‘common law’ in favour of what is sometimes call statute law. It would seem that for the last 40 years or so ‘offences’ have been committed that need to be addressed. You should not be able to disregard 1000 years of common law on the whim of a few people who it would seem have more interest in troughing than our country. Is Brenda listening?
Norman – Magna Carta was forced upon the monarchy under duress in order to curd their excesses, I’ve not heard of anything to suggest that anything has changed in the last 800+ years. I wouldn’t be waiting upon Brenda.
John Smith in Dundee is spearheading the action to restore Common Law and Common Law Courts in the UK. See http://www.commonlawcourt.com .
Another man by the name of Kenn d’Oudney has written a masterpiece entitled Democracy Defined – The Manifesto, which explains for all and sundry the apparent mysteries of Magna Carta 1215, Trial by Jury and Annulment by Jury of unjust statutes. http://www.democracydefined.org . I recommend both to your readers. Flyer is on the ball.
We know this. Our Teachers know this,lecturers know this, Our councils know this, our politicians know this , our Civil Servants know this, possibly even our queen knows this. So you would expect our children to know this. So what is their authority to talk or in fact to even think otherwise. Or are they Gods chosen to whom HE speaks. So, what do they actually believe. Is it socialism, red in tooth and claw. Is it the Pope or the Koran, also red in tooth and claw . Or Supra nationalism. Or capitalism, , or have they talked to some superbeing,or what. Or maybe their own super intelligence. OR is it self interest, Or arguably nothing.. Or Theresa. Or do they believe in flawed argument.
Or is it Flat earth.
I am actually baffled.
I have always thought that the “Miller” case took at least some of the ultimate sovereignty that should rest with the people and gave it to Parliament, a first step towards disenfranchising the citizen. The judiciary are a part of the “establishment” and are in the pockets of the EU.
Phillip – as I said, Parliament are the executives of the Judiciary and the corruption runs deep. When you look at some of my references from Parliament UK, one fact that they try and skirt around is that sovereignty lies with the people, the Commons and the Lords are just representatives of either the aristocracy or the common people.
If Parliament, in our case the Commons do not represent we the people, then they are not our representatives, they are dictators if they ignore the will of the people and is why the Brexit referendum was legally binding.
The real reason for the Brexit referendum was to legitamise at least fifty years and probably more of betrayal and treason, by asking for our consent, this consent was very wisely denied by a British people that weren’t a stupid as our government believed. Hence our emperors have been exposed as the criminals that they really are, they have no clothes.
Flyer,
One problem with Parliament is That the commons ( MP s ) is no longer representative of the people in their constitiuncy, and the Lords no longer represents the Aritocracy its . They have now been corrupted to represent the people who got them their jobs. In the first place their party and in the second the PM / party leaders. In other words . Obey your party leader above all else.
Just saying ! It never hurts to repeat things.