All posts by root

On Freedom of Speech


“If the speech be injured, XII. shillings”
The Laws of King Aethelbirht, LII.

People often, in error, think of speech as what is expelled by the speech, which is properly considered an organ, as we see definitively in this statute. This law comes in a collection of laws dealing with numerous matters, ranging from the restitution for stolen church property (twelve-times the value) to the injury to various body parts, such as the teeth and collar-bone. Thus we see that the protection that English law affords to speech is absolute; any injury to the speech is illegal and contrary to our ancient law.

According to Wikipedia, the Anglo-Saxon shilling was a coin worth about 1/20th of a pound of silver. Thus, 12 shillings is about 3/5ths of a pound of silver. Today’s spot price for silver is about $19 CAD, so the fine for any instance of injury to speech should be about $136 CAD.

Further, the University relies on students essentially injuring themselves by way of adhesion contracts that students are forced to sign as a condition of admission. If students were required to break their collarbones as a condition of admission, that would obviously be illegal and unreasonable; that students are required to injure their speech as a condition of admission is similarly unreasonable.

It is true that this law might be altered by subsequent Canadian legislation, and it is: in the Criminal Code where certain forms of hate speech are prohibited. Universities, however, have no ability to require students to accept restrictions on speech not contained in the criminal code and to force students to obey them upon pain of expulsion.

Indeed, all case law purporting to establish restrictions on expression which has not been clearly legislated is obviously and clearly unconstitutional. We must abandon the erroneous belief that we are regulating the emission that the speech expresses; regulations on the speech are equivalent to iron fetters around the neck.

Freedom of Expression

Freedom of expression is enshrined in various documents. Consider this:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, s. 19)

Or this:

Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.(Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 2)

Review: Glanvill

Glanvil
A translation of Glanville
By Ranulf de Glanville, John Beames.
A Treatise on the Laws and Customs of The Kingdom of England.
LONDON: 1812.

Fun quote on cover: Multa ignoramus, quae nobis non laterent, si Veterum lectio nobis esset familaris.

This volume contains some cute bits, like:

If he object to put himself upon the Grand Assise, he ought in such case to shew some cause, why the Assise should not proceed between them— such as, that they were of the same blood, and sprung from the same kindred stock from whence the Inheritance itself descended; and if the Demandant take this objection, the Tenant will either admit its validity, or deny it. If he admit it in Court, the Assise itself shall thereby cease, so that the matter shall be verbally pleaded and determined in Court; because it is then a question in Law, which of the parties is the nearer to the original stock, and as such, the Heir most justly entitled to the inheritance (Glanvil, p. 51)

Especially if read with the following:

it being an Established Rule of Law, that God alone, and not Man, can make an Heir. (Glanvil, p. 143)

Another fun bit—at last?

When, at last, both litigating Parties are present in Court, and the Demandant has proceeded to claim the Tenement in question, the Tenant may pray a View of the Land. (Glanvil, p. 125)

Review: The Mirror of Justices

Available at http://www.archive.org/details/mirrorofjustices00hornrich
The Mirror of Justices or Speculum Justitiaorum
Author: Horne, Andrew, d. 1328; Corpus Christi College (University of Cambridge). Library. Manuscript. 258; Whittaker, W. J. (William Joseph), 1868-1931; Maitland, Frederic William, 1850-1906

This volume contains a summary of the Law prepared, so Horn tells us, because he

perceived that divers of those who should govern the law by rules of right had regard to their own earthly profit, and to the pleasing of princes and lords and friends, and to the amassing of lordships and goods, and would never assent that the right usages should be put in writing, whereby would be taken from them the power of arresting some by colour of judgment, and of exiling, imprisoning, or disheriting others, without suffering punishment therefor, and when I saw them cloaking their sin by the exceptions of error and ignorance, and having little or no regard to the salvation of the souls of sinners from damnation by lawful judgments, as their office demands, and having hitherto used to judge folk out of their own heads by abuses and precedents of others erring in the law, and not by the right rules of Holy Writ, to the great hindrance of your endeavour, all ye who build without foundation, and take on yourselves to judge before that ye are learned in jurisdiction, which is the very groundwork of your profession, and hold yourselves out as learned in the law of land before ye have mastered the law of persons (like to those who study the Hberal arts before the parts of speech ) : I, the prosecutor of false judges, and falsely imprisoned by their order, in my sojourn [in gaol] searched out the privileges of the king and the old rolls of his treasury, wherewith my friends solaced me, and there discovered the foundation and the generation of the customs of England which are established as law, and the guerdons of good judges and the punishment of others, and as brieflyas I could I set in remembrance what is essential, for which end my companions aided me in the study of the Old Testament and the New, and the canon and the written law…And we discovered that law is nothing else than the rules laid down by our holy predecessors in Holy Writ for the salvation of souls from everlasting damnation, although it be obscured by false judges. (Mirror, pp. 2-3)

Of particular interest is the straightforward Scriptural analogy by which concepts are related; for example, Jurisdiction is defined clearly to be

the power jus dicere. This power God gave to Moses, and this power have those who now hold His place upon earth, such as the pope and the emperor, and beneath them the king has now this power in his realm. (Mirror, p. 123)

Similarly clear justification is given for the proof of a controverted statement by battle,

for this usage is held for law in England by the warrant of our Lord God in the matter of the battle joined between David on behalf of the people of Israel of the one part, and Goliath on the part of the Philistines of the other part, so that proof in cases of felony and in other cases is made by combat. (Mirror, p. 109)

The Mirror is referred to several times in Blackstone’s Commentaries, for example 1 Bl. Comm. 6 concerning the Coronation Oath, which cites the Mirror, Book I Chapter II:

at his crowning they made him swear that he would maintain the Christian faith with all his power, and would guide his people by law without respect of any person, and would be obedient to holy Church, and would submit to justice and would suffer right like any other of his people. And after this the kingdom became heritable. (Mirror, p. 6)

It is questionable how much value this volume possesses contemporarily, for, on the one hand, it does claim to be justified more or less of the Scripture, or, as it’s called during the contemporary coronation, the most valuable thing this world affords, and, an the other hand, it does have its age going for it, which, if I remember an Aristotle anecdote, has one thing going for it: its age.