How is it that the Declaration of Independence is lionised and yet our version of the same is hardly known? How is it that we all know to some degree or other the US constitution and yet know little of our own? Why is it that when people speak of the Bill of Rights, they think of America rather than the English original, written 100 years prior to its American sibling?
How is it that John Somers is not standing beside Oliver Cromwell outside the House of Commons? Surely the man who resolved the problem with government that confounded Cromwell to his dying breath is as worthy as Cromwell’s elevation as opposed to staring down from his perch in St Stephens Hall?
So what that the Declaration of Independence asserts the need to dissolve political bands when those bands suffocate rather than liberate, our Bill of Rights declares the same. The ends, asserting our ancient rights and liberties, vindicates the means, the coup against James II.
The Subject’s Rights.
And thereupon the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons pursuant to their respective Letters and Elections being now assembled in a full and free Representative of this Nation takeing into their most serious Consideration the best meanes for attaining the Ends aforesaid Doe in the first place (as their Auncestors in like Case have usually done) for the Vindicating and Asserting their auntient Rights and Liberties, Declare
So what that the Declaration of Independence contains its litany of abuses long tolerated by the American people in justification for that most serious consideration, the throwing of, of Government when it no longer serves, our Bill of Rights does the same.
The Heads of Declaration of Lords and Commons, recited.
Whereas the late King James the Second by the Assistance of diverse evill Councellors Judges and Ministers imployed by him did endeavour to subvert and extirpate the Protestant Religion and the Lawes and Liberties of this Kingdome.
For the Declaration of Independence, read your Bill of Rights, they amount to the same thing.
So what then the constitution of the United States?
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
So clearly, the opening statement of the US constitution establishes the supremacy of the people in the first instance, followed by justice and then the purpose of governance is iterated, which may be simply understood as improving the commonwealth. The rest of the document simply describes the manner by which this, good governance, is to be achieved. Namely, a presidency (executive), a congress (legislative) and a supreme court which exercises judicial power over all.
So what then of our constitution?
The Opening sentence of the Bill of Rights expresses the supremacy of the people. It is our version of ‘We the People’.
Whereas the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Comons assembled at Westminster lawfully fully and freely representing all the Estates of the People
Whereby we establish government under contract (the Bill of Rights is the contract to govern) so as to ensure that our ‘Religion Lawes and Liberties might not againe be in danger of being Subverted’, where government (the executive) is subject to the consent of parliament (the legislative) and the whole edifice is subject to justice under the Monarchs Oath to ‘cause Law and Justice in Mercy to be Executed in all Your Judgements’, where the Coronation Oath forms a part of the Bill of Rights and where Law is the birth right of the people as defined in the Act of Settlement 1700. In short, we the people, own it.
For the constitution of the United States, read your Bill of Rights, they amount to the same thing.
So finally, what then the US Bill of Rights?
Reaching agreement between the various states to the US constitution was battle enough, the first convention failed, so the constitution was a hatchet job of that which they could agree upon and that is forgivable insomuch as they had to iterate an entire system, whereas all we had to achieve a hundred years prior was its perfection. The US Bill of Rights constitutes the first ten amendments to the constitution (there are currently 27 ratified). They deal with items such as freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, unreasonable search and seizure of property, the right not to implicate yourself, the right to jury trial, the barring of excessive bail and fines and cruel and unusual punishment. To name a few.
So what then of our Bill of Rights.
The first two articles subordinate the government to parliament, it means that HM Government is subject to Parliament. It should be clearly understood that parliament is only master over HM Government, not you or I as they themselves declare, representing the people, not commanding them.
The Fourth article explains why the government present a budget every year and asks Parliament to approve their desire to tax us (the ability to levy tax is renewed annually.) ‘That levying Money for or to the Use of the Crowne by pretence of Prerogative without Grant of Parlyament for longer time or in other manner then the same is or shall be granted is Illegall’. The Crowne is HM Government.
The Fifth, our unqualified right to protest, ‘it is the Right of the Subjects to petition the King and all Commitments and Prosecutions for such Petitioning are Illegall’.
The right to bear arms, 7th Article; Freedom of Speech, 9th Article; the barring of excessive bail and fines and cruel and unusual punishment 10th Article; Juries, 11th Article.
12th Article, as Betty Boothroyd noted in the debate over PCN’s; ‘That all Grants and Promises of Fines and Forfeitures of particular persons before Conviction are illegall and void.’
And finally, the most crucial of all the articles, the 13th. The job description.
Frequent Parliaments.
And that for Redresse of all Grievances and for the amending strengthening and preserveing of the Lawes Parlyaments ought to be held frequently.
And herein lies the sheer brilliance of John Somers. Parliament is Apolitical. Parliament exists, as its existence is a function of the Bill of Rights itself, which it cannot undo without undoing itself, to resolve grievances.
And what then of the second part of the job description, the amending strengthening and preserving of the Law? Where the American constitution annunciates, our Bill of Rights expresses power in what it doesn’t state. Parliament is to amend, strengthen and preserve Law, but it cannot create it, only we, the people, do that.
