St Stephen's Chamber

I'm looking directly at the windows and exterior wall of St Stephen's Chapel as I write this. In some senses it has become a "forgotten" treasure. Today - as some people queue to get a seat in the Visitors' Gallery in the House of Commons - they will wait in what seems like a large waiting room. Others will hurry through as they make their way to meeting their MP in Central Lobby or to visit one of the committees. Yet this was the space occupied by the House of Commons for the longest period of its history. It was here that King Charles I was rebuffed when he (and an accompanying armed band of soldiers) marched on the House to demand that the Speaker tell him where five of his least favourite MPs were. (4th January 1642) At the other end of the chamber, Spencer Perceval became the only British Prime Minister to be assassinated. (11th May 1812) This was where Amern independence was debated - where the struggles to abolish the slave trade and widen the franchise were fought.

If you visit the Palace of Westminster, you may only take photographs here and in Westminster Hall. Currently there is an interactive guide to the history (with pictures of what the chamber looked like at different periods of its history). It's well worth going to use it.

You can also see where the Speaker's Chair stood; where the Table of the House was; Where the Chamber ended and the 'Lobby' began. There are also some fine painting showing scenes from British (and world) history

- and for anyone who participates in pub quizzes: the answer to the question of who the "five members" were is

- John Hampden
- Arthur Haselrig
- Denzil Holles
- John Pym
- William Strode

Aylesbury & Liberty

Since February I have been visiting Aylesbury three times a week to teach law at Aylesbury College. Some of mstudents took their exam on Friday, and the rest of the exams take place this week. So, the number of visits will fall off for a while.

It is appropriate that my final law sessions should occur this week in Aylesbury. The news has been dominated by the issue of 'Freedom of Speech', as a well known TV personality and journalist faces the possibility of jail for Contempt of Court for tweeting the name of a football player who gained an injunction stopping anyone mentioning the fact of his adultery, or even that he had gained such an injunction. A Scottish newspaper published a photo of the player, with his eyes blocked out, but soccer fans (I'm not one) wouldn't have much difficulty in recognising the player. The editor may be liable. Thousands refused to be gagged yesterday by tweeting the name.

What has this to do with Aylesbury? In the 18th Century the MP, and resident of the town was a man called John Wilkes. He went to jail for publishing material which upset the rich, famous and powerful. He was one of the heroes of the struggle for freedom of speech in England (as well as a friend of liberty for America). His former home still stands in Aylesbury.

Another hero of liberty, who found that a majority of Judges were not prepared to support him (The Ship Money case), has his statue in the centre of Aylesbury - John Hampden - who was also the local MP for a short time (he represented nearby Wendover for a longer period).

Sad to say, our judges have not been the protectors and promoters of free speech in England. So it is again. That's why the right to trial by jury needs to be protected. There have been times when juries of ordinary citizens have refused to uphold attempts to enforce laws which do not have the consent of the people. Of course if any action is taken against journalists, tweeters or Twitter itself, there will not be a jury. Contempt of Court cases - which can lead to 2 years in jail - are exclusively dealt with by the judiciary ( the third branch of Government).

English Heroes - John Hampden

Another English hero associated with Aylesbury is John Hampden. He was a leader of the anti-Crown parliamentarians in the House of Commons. It was he who was taken to court over his refusal to pay the Ship Money (on his land in Stoke Mandeville, now part of the town of Aylesbury). The photograph is one I took of his statue in the centre of Aylesbury.

Previous Washminster posts on Hampden can be read via the links below

Who's honoured at Westminster
Constitutional Meat
The Ship Money Case

Hampden is commemorated in America by the naming of the towns of Hampden in Maryland, Connecticut and Maine - and the County of hampden in Massachusetts.

The Ship Money Case

The right of Parliament to approve (or not) taxes has been claimed from the fourteenth century. A statute of 1362 established that Parliament must assent to all lay taxation. Many Kings would have liked to evade this - and some tried - but Charles I was probably the greatest offender. He sought parliamentary approval - but when he failed to get it, attempted to live without calling Parliament. Ship money was a charge sometimes made on coastal towns for their defence. Charles attempted to impose this charge across the country. John Hampden - who had property in Buckinghamshire - a land-locked county, far from the sea (I know, Milton Keynes where I live is a long way from the coast. Hampden's property was in Stoke Mandeville) - refused to pay his assessment of One Pound.

Hampden lost the case - Rex v. Hampden, (3 State Trials, 825) by a vote of 7-5 in the Exchequer Chamber - but the closeness of the result, and the fact that Hampden was prepared to be taken to court for non-payment - encoraged many others to refuse. It was also the subject of many partisan pamphlets prior to the outbreak of the civil war. [If you have acess (possibly through a university library to JSTOR - you can read an article about the use of the case at the time here)]

The English have rightly regarded this case as an important part of the struggle which ultimately led to the Sovereignty of Parliament.

Further information on Parliament and control of taxes can be found here.

Constitutional Meat

The case of R (Binyam Mohamed) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs raises a host of important constitutional issues. There is much in the case meriting reflection upon. The two key issues are –

Firstly, how far should the demands of National Security be allowed to compromise fundamental constitutional principles – such as the Rule of Law; accountability to Parliament and individuals’ rights? This is a very important – perhaps the most important – constitutional issue. By chance I’ve been listening to the audiobook of “Packing the Court” and have reached the point where the conflict between President Lincoln and the Supreme Court over this issue is discussed. To complement that I glanced again through former Chief Justice Rehnquist’s book “All the Laws but One”. (I also came across a very useful article by Lord Bingham - Personal Freedom and the Dilemma of Democracies') I recommend all of these if you are reflecting on the issue.

The deleted paragraph in the draft judgement in the Binyam Mohammed case contains the following criticisms of MI5
• It failed to respect human rights
• It deliberately misled Parliament
• It had a ‘culture of suppression’

National Security – and its oversight by Parliament and Congress is an interesting topic itself. Many of the works of Christopher Andrew deal with the subject. By coincidence yesterday also saw the passing of former Representative Charlie Wilson – and both the film and book about him “Charlie Wilson’s War” are useful primers on Congress and National Security.

The second issue concerns the rule established in the famous “Ship Money” case of the Seventeenth Century involving John Hampden [a case that Washminster will be discussing shortly] that there should be no secret communication between lawyers and the Court in legal proceedings (unless the Court has given specific directions).

The Guardian reports today that the Government’s QC, Jonathan Sumption, sent his comments on the draft judgement to Lord Neuberger, copying in only one of the parties to the case (Binyam Mohamed) - and not the representatives of the Guardian, Washington Post, New York Times, Liberty, Justice, Index on Censorship, who were also parties. Lord Neuberger assumed (as is standard practice) that all parties had seen Sumption's comments and had not felt the need to sumbit comments on Sumption's - and took this into account when he amended the draft.

Hansard contains the statement (and supplementary questions) made in the House of Commons on the case by Foreign Secretary David Miliband.

Your comments on these matters would be appreciated. You can make a comment directly - or send to me here.

Who's honoured at Westminster?

I sometimes take small tours around the Palace of Westminster. The Palace is a fascinating building - but very much a product of its time (as I discovered late last week when I needed to use the bathroom - two sets were out of action so I had to hike to the 1st Floor (which in Westminster's strange pattern is above the Ground Floor, the Principal Floor - and any basements)).

Last Friday was the 175th anniversary of the Great Fire of Westminster - only Westminster Hall survived from the medieval palace. The Palace we know was built in the thirty years after the fire. [trivia facts for the day - its existing buildings containing nearly 1,200 rooms, 100 staircases and well over 3 kilometres (2 miles) of passages.]

On my tours I point out the many statues and paintings which honour some of the characters who played a part in the history of this building and institution. Prime Ministers and Lord Chancellors are well represented - some individuals who are long (and deservedly) forgotten - and some heroes of the struggle for a parliamentary democracy based on the rule of law.

The nobles who forced King John to sign the Magna Carta are honoured in the House of Lords - where their statues look down upon the current Peers. The great men who played a role in the battle against Charles I and his attacks upon Parliament are honoured - John Hampden can be found in St Stephen's Hall. Also in St Stephen's (built on the site where the House of Commons met in the 17th to 19th centuries) are statues of Charles James Fox - a supporter of the American Revolution; and Lord Somers - who presided over the drafting of the Bill of Rights. In the Lower Waiting Room (beyond Central Lobby close to the Members Dining Room) there are statues of John Bright - the campaigner against the Corn Laws; Keir Hardie; Oliver Cromwell and the founder of the National Health Service (actually his bust has been removed for restoration), Nye Bevan.