The Magna Carta and English Bill of Rights The Magna Carta was written under the rule of King John of England in 1215. It was meant to establish that everyone was subject to the laws, including people of higher power. The treaty was between the King and the three great estates, which include the church, aristocracy, and merchants. There were 63 grievances that were included in this document. The English Bill of Rights was written in 1689 under the Parliament in England. It establishes the rights of Parliament and the rights of the citizens. Both of these documents are the basics of English law. They helped to establish law and order in England after some unrest during these times. The Magna Carta brought up many important provisions throughout
…show more content…
This says that they cannot form an army without the consent of Parliament, and that they cannot force people to house soldiers. Before this law was enacted, soldiers would stay in people’s homes all the time, whether they wanted them to or not. Now, they would not be able to. Today, soldiers are not allowed to stay in people’s homes almost everywhere. Most countries also require the government to form their own army, unless a rebel group creates their own to fight back. In the Bill of Rights, Amendment 3 states, “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law,” (The Bill of Rights). In America, they specified this too because when the British came over here and were fighting in wars, people were forced to let these soldiers stay in their homes. With this amendment, they were not forced to have random people stay in their house and they got their privacy …show more content…
This ensures that whatever Parliament says during their meetings does not get them in trouble. Before this law was enacted, they were not allowed to speak out against the King. With this law, they may speak freely against the King, and about any new laws that they want to impose without getting in trouble. In the U.S. Bill of Rights, there is an amendment about freedom of speech for all citizens. Even though it is not exactly the same, it still lets people talk out against the government without any repercussions. Across the world, there are countries who would imprison any citizen who spoke out against the
This says that they cannot form an army without the consent of Parliament, and that they cannot force people to house soldiers. Before this law was enacted, soldiers would stay in people’s homes all the time, whether they wanted them to or not. Now, they would not be able to. Today, soldiers are not allowed to stay in people’s homes almost everywhere. Most countries also require the government to form their own army, unless a rebel group creates their own to fight back. In the Bill of Rights, Amendment 3 states, “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law,” (The Bill of Rights). In America, they specified this too because when the British came over here and were fighting in wars, people were forced to let these soldiers stay in their homes. With this amendment, they were not forced to have random people stay in their house and they got their privacy …show more content…
This ensures that whatever Parliament says during their meetings does not get them in trouble. Before this law was enacted, they were not allowed to speak out against the King. With this law, they may speak freely against the King, and about any new laws that they want to impose without getting in trouble. In the U.S. Bill of Rights, there is an amendment about freedom of speech for all citizens. Even though it is not exactly the same, it still lets people talk out against the government without any repercussions. Across the world, there are countries who would imprison any citizen who spoke out against the