Page 2018 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 3 June 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
son, the young Henry III, reissued the document in 1216. It was at that stage a little watered down. This was an unsuccessful bid to gain support for the cause of the young king. At the end of the war in 1217, it formed part of the peace.
Henry reissued the Magna Carta in 1225 in exchange for a grant of new taxes because he was running short of money, as was the wont of the English kings at the time. His son, Edward I, repeated the exercise in 1297. The 1297 version of the Magna Carta is the one which is housed in the commonwealth parliament. From that time, 1297, it was incorporated into England’s statute laws.
It is quite clear from this brief history that the Magna Carta was not initially a roaring success. But after 1297 the charter became part of English political life. It was usually renewed by each monarch in turn, although as time went by, and as parliament became less fledgling and passed more laws, it lost some of its practical significance.
By the end of the 16th century and into the 17th century there was an upsurge in interest in the Magna Carta. Of course, there was an upsurge in interest in the Magna Carta because there was a prevailing doctrine that became somewhat unpopular, which was called the divine right of kings. Both James I and his son Charles I attempted to suppress any discussion of the Magna Carta, but this attempt was curtailed by the English civil war and the eventual execution of Charles I.
What followed was what is called the interregnum. The republic, under the Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell, did not have any truck with the notion of Magna Carta because Cromwell, after all, attempted to make himself a monarch in absolute terms. He referred to the Magna Carta as the “magna farta”, which is unparliamentary. I apologise, but it is a historic fact.
That having been said, the Magna Carta with its protection of ancient personal liberties was used as the basis of the agreement to install William and Mary. It formed the basis of the act of succession and laid the foundation of what is called the glorious revolution of 1688 and the bill of rights of 1689.
I do not want to be accused of having a Whig view of history—that everything is a continuous improvement and a continuous success. Although there is much to be said about the 1689 bill of rights and the establishment of rights in the United Kingdom, the act of succession was not necessarily an unalloyed good because it was, after all, a document that was founded on religious intolerance.
Since then, the Magna Carta has gained considerable significance not only in the United Kingdom but across the world. It influenced early American colonists in the 13 colonies and in the formation of the American constitution. The fifth amendment to the American constitution almost completely replicates the wording of the right to liberty, which is found in clause 29 of the Magna Carta.
Over time there has been considerable discussion about the importance of the Magna Carta. With the arrival of the 800th anniversary this year, there is again a discussion about whether Magna Carta is an insignificant document or whether it is a significant document. I would contend that, although there are no provisions of the Magna Carta in our law here today, its importance cannot be overstated.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video