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.
“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.
“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.