(A.D. 1214), and there, upon the high altar, swore to wage war with the king, and to renounce their fealty, until he should confirm the liberties which they demanded. This occurred (as is supposed) on the 20th of November in that year, being St. Edmund's day. In the Easter week, in the following year, the barons assembled in arms at Stamford, and upon the king sending to them to learn an exact account of the liberties which they required him to confirm, they sent him a written schedule containing the whole of their demands, and appealed to the before-mentioned charter of K. Henry the First, as a precedent and authority for the claims upon which they insisted. But the King temporising in the matter, the barons solemnly disclaimed their allegiance to the king, levied war against him, and on Sunday the 24th of May, A.D. 1215, took possession of London without any opposition from the citizens. Deserted by his nobles, and reduced to the last extremity, the king appointed a conference with the discontented barons, which was accordingly held on Trinity Monday the 15th of June, A.D. 1215, at a large meadow between Windsor and Staines, named Runingmede, or Runemede.59 The conference having lasted several days, was brought to a conclusion on Friday, the 19th of June. The articles, which were to be reduced to the form of a charter, were first drawn up, and to them the king affixed his great seal. They are entitled "Articuli magne Carte Libertatum sub sigillo regis Johannis" (articles of the Great Charter of Liberties under the scal of K. John). The articles were next reduced to the form of a charter, of 59 Runingmede, or Runemede, (pratum consilii), so called because great councils of the realm had been frequently held there, probably from the time of the Saxons, as its name is of Saxon derivation. It will immediately occur to our Kentish readers, that Pennenden Heath, near Maidstone, has from the time of the Norman Conquest (and probably from a more remote date) been the "pratum consilii" for this county. which such a number of originals was made, that one was deposited in every county, or at least in every diocese.60 It has been generally, but erroneously, supposed that King John granted a separate charter, “carta de foresta,” containing the immunities of the forest. Although some clauses relating to the forest laws are found in K. John's charter (cap. 47, 48), yet the first "carta de foresta" is that of his son K. Henry the Third. As Magna Carta has been frequently confirmed by parliament, with omissions, additions, and other alterations, we give the following table for the assistance of those who may desire further information upon this interesting feature in English history. MAGNA CARTA, CARTA DE FORESTA, &c. Articuli magne Carte libertatum sub sigilli June, A.D. MCCXV. Regis Johannis, anno regni sui 17o . Magna Carta, ejusdem regis, a. r. s. nono Statutum de Marleberge, 52 Hen. III, cap. 5 Carta Confirmationis, ejusdem regis, a. r. s. vicesimo nono :} XV June, A.D. MCCXV. XII NOV., A.D. MCCXVI. A.D. MCCXVII. XI Feb., A.D. MCCXXIV. XIII Maii, A.D. MCCLIII. XIV Mar., A.D. MCCLXIV. XVIII NOV., A.D. MCCLXVII. v Nov., A.D. MCCXCVII. VI Mar., A.D. MCCXCIX. XIV Feb., A.D. MCCC. We have ventured to remark that Saxon liberty, as recorded in our antient Custumal, is far more valuable than that which is secured by Magna Carta. 60 A beautiful fac-simile of the Magna Carta of K. John has been engraved by Prichard Harrison. Having placed the parallel passages together in juxta-position (ante p. 79) we will now endeavour to justify the remark which we have made. At the period of the grant of Magna Carta the great body of the English people were prædial slaves, in a state of unmitigated servitude; they were bought and sold like beasts of the plough; they were transferred from one lord to another, with the manors and lordships to which they were appendant, and of which they constituted part of the live stock; their children also were born to no inheritance but slavery. Such was at that period the condition of the labouring population of the country, except in the more favoured province of Kent. Such, and so deep was the curse with which our Norman conquerors had polluted the free soil of Anglo-Saxon Britain; and that curse continued to hang over our devoted country for many succeeding centuries. Did Magna Carta unloose their bonds? Did Magna Carta proclaim freedom to the slave, and say to him, Arise, be free? Did Magna Carta hold out to the hereditary bondman a ray of hope, any prospect of enfranchisement? None whatever. Its provisions, its liberties, and its securities were selfishly limited solely and expressly to the free. "Nullus liber homo "-No free man, &c. says the great charter. None therefore could assert the liberties secured by the charter, but those only who were already free. The prædial slave and his children had no inheritance in them; they still remained to drag on their miserable existence without any other prospect of manumission than what might arise from the spontaneous charity of the clergy or from the bounty or benevolence of their lords. Let us now reverse the picture, and contemplate Saxon liberty as recorded in the Kentish Custumal, in words which should be inscribed in characters of gold. "Toutes les cors de Kenteys soient fracz auxi come les autres frauz cors Dengleterre." (All the bodies of Kentish men be free, as well as the other free bodies of Englande.) Whilst the great body of the English people was reduced to a state of slavery by our Norman conquerors, the Kentish men enjoyed the full blessings of liberty. Every Kentish man was free. Liberty was the noble inheritance which he had derived from his Saxon ancestors, and of which not even Norman tyranny was able to deprive him. "The air of Kent is too pure for a slave to breathe." "It appeareth," says Lambard, "by claime made in our auncient treatise, that the bodies of all Kentish persons be of free condition, which also is confessed to be true, 30 Ed. I, in the title of villenage, 46 in Fitzherbert, where it is holden sufficient for a man to avoide the objection of bondage, to say that his father was borne in the shyre of Kent.” 61 And Mr. Robinson, on the subject of the exemption of Kentish men from villenage, says: "The Kentish Custumal claimes that the bodies of all Kentish men be free, as well as the other free bodies of England; which was formerly, while many of the subjects of this kingdom remained under a state of hereditary bondage, a most glorious and valuable birthright. And the claim appears to be well founded by 30 Ed. I, Fitzh. Villenage, 46. In a writ of niefe, the defendant pleaded that she was free; and the jury found that the father of the defendant was born in Kent; whereupon, without further inquiry, the court gave judgment that she was free, for that there were no villeins in Kent. But though it was sufficient for a man, in order to avoid the objection of bondage, to say that his father was born in Kent, yet Mr. Lambard doubts whether it would serve in that case to say only that he himself was born in that county; but that doubt is resolved by 7 H. 6, 33 a, where it is said that in the county of Kent they have a custom, that every one born within the county shall be free, notwithstanding his father was a villein; and Martin Justice answers that this is by parliament, and a statute made for that purpose. And it is the more probable this privilege might have such commencement, because Mr. Somner has shewn beyond contradiction, by several ancient records, &c., that there have been villeins in Kent since the Conquest." 62 61 Lambard, Peramb. Kent, p. 366. 62 Robinson on Gavelkind, p. 351. We cannot better conclude this section of the Custumal than with the following spirited description of Kent, in Drayton's Poly-Olbion,63 "When as the pliant Muse, straight turning her about, To Canterbury then as kindly he resorts, His famous country thus, he gloriously reports: O NOBLE KENT, quoth he, this praise doth thee belong, Who with the Norman first with pride and horror sway'd, And with a high resolve, most brauely didst restore That libertie so long enjoy'd by thee before. Not suffring forraine lawes should thy free customes bind, Then onely show'dst thy selfe of th' ancient Saxon kind. OF ALL THE ENGLISH SHIRES BE THOU SURNAM'D THE FREE SEC. IV. Et que ilz ne duivent le eschetour le Roy elire, ne unkes en nul temps ne fesoint, mes le Roy prengne ou face prendre tiel come luy plerra, de ceo qui soit mistier a luy seruir. The care and precaution with which the Custumal was prepared, and sanctioned by the justices in eyre, appear from this provision and restraint, that the Kentish men, in claiming 63 Drayton's Poly-Olbion, canto xviii, p. 297; ed. Lond. 1622. |