DOCSLIB.ORG

Government and International Relations. Resouce Unit VI, Grade 5

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Government and International Relations. Resouce Unit VI, Grade 5 DOCUMENT RESTIME ED 048 177 SP 007 064 TITLE Government and International Relations. Resouce Unit VI, Grade 5. Providence Social Studies Curriculum Project. INSTIIUTICN Providence Public Schools, R.I.; Rhode Island Coll., Providence. SPONS AGENCY Office of Education (9HEW), Washington, D.C. Cooperative Research Program. REPORT NO CRP-6-1195 PUB DATE 68 NOTE 22p.; Part of a set of resource units and curriculum overviews for K-12 social itudies EDRS PRICE .DRS Price MF-$0.65 HC-$3.29 DESCRIPTORS *Curriculum Guides, Foreign Relations, Governmental Structure, *Grade 5, *Social Studisi.s, *Urban Tea.,hing IDENTIFIERS Canada, United States ABSTRACT GRADES OR AGES: Grade 5. SUBJECT MATTER: Social studies; government and international relations of the United States and Canada. ORGANIZATION AND PHYSICAL APL'EARANCE: The central part of the guide is divided into 4 subunits, each of which is laid out in three columns, one ?ach for topics, activities, and materials. Other sections are in list form. The guide is mimeographed and staple bound with a paper cover. OBJECTIVES AND ACT:VITIES: General objectives for the unit are listed on the fi.:st page. Each group of activities in the second column is related to a topic in the first column. A separate section lists several supplemental activities. INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS: Each group of materials listed in the third column is related to cne or more activities. In addition several appendixem contain curriculum materials and a list of related books. STUDENT ASSESSMENT: A one-page section entitled "Evaluation lists ideas students should understand by the end of the unit. OPTIONS: The guide is prescriptive as to cour::ie content and timing. Activities and materials listed are optional. (RT) 14 CO 5 -1- PROVIDENCE ca SOCIAL STUDIES I CURRICULUM PROJECT GOVERNMENTAND U.S, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION.6 WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCAT.ON INTERNATIONALRELATION; THIS DOCUMENT HAS SEEN REPRO- DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVEDFROM THE PERSON OR DI.,ANIZATIONORIG- RESOURCE UN IT VI INATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR0;14. IONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY /iPRESENT OFF CIAL OFFILE OFECU CATION P0557,0110R POLICY GRADE 5 RI-Wf/E ISLAND COLLEGE 1 PROVIOENCF PUBLIC SCI.1001.6 RU,VI - Gr. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Und2rstanding 1 II. Aims 1 IIT. Vocabulary 2 1.V. The Iroquois League - A Type Study 3 Colonial Governments 5 VI. Development of Goveriment in the United States and Canada 6 VII. International Relations of Canada and the United States 13 VIII. Supplementaty Activities 15 IX. Evaluation 16 X. Appendix A. Suggested Library Books for Children 17 B. Government Chart 18 C. Supplementary Information 20 D. Supplementary Information 21 2 RU, VI - Gr. 5 1 GO VERN AilENT AND IN TERNAT I ONAL RELAT IONS SUGGESTED TIME:ABOUT 8 WEEKS I. UNDERSTANDINGS All peoples, down through the ages, have experimented with some form of political organization to serve their needs. Democracy, autocracy, and monarchy in various forms and manifeutetions have been tried.None could guarantee life and liberty to succeeding generations. In the U. S. our forefathers molded a free government to preserve the rights of men. II. IbiiS To dewlap an understanding of the following: 1, It takes time to develop effective government. 2. A government has responsibilities to the people it governs. 3. A citizen has responsibilities to his government as well as rights.Hot al) citizens recognize their responsibilities to their government. 4. The Iroquois experiment in government is an example of a political organ- ization that served the needs of the people. .S. Both the government systems of Canada and the United States are democratic and representative. 6.The government of the United States is a republic with a congressional form. 7. The government of Canada is a constitutional monarchy with a parDementary form. 8. Increasing interdependence among nations has necessitated membership by the United States and Canada in international organizations. 3 RU,VI - Gr. 5 2 VOCABULARY Articles of Confederation judicial charter colony legislature clan local confederacy Mayflower Compact constitution nation (in the sense of the Iroquois) constitutional monarchy parliament convention proprietary colony Declaration -f Independence responsibilities democracy rights executive royal colony federalism function international Iroquois 4 Me NMI .110111, RU,VI -Gr. 5 3 THE 1RO,,UOIS LEAGUE-A TYPE STUDY QUESTIONS SUGGESTED ACTIVITIES MATERIALS What is goverment? Discuss the meaning of the term Teacher reference: "government." McIver: The Wpb of Why do people find Covernmeat (Library) it necessary to set Discuss the reasons why some up a government? form of government is needed by any society. As an introduction to the study Grade 5 Resource of government examine the polii.- Unit III cal organization of a North Aflaerican Indian group, the Iroquois. Why did the Iroquois Make a study of the Iroquois Macmillan:Great establish the Con- Confederation Tree and Longhouse federation? Culture of the Iroquois by Hertzberg How effective was Have a group do research and (i') Chapter 7,8 this Iroquois organ- prepare a report to present to ization? the class. Prepare a set of questions as a Macmillan: Living in study guide such as: the Americas p. 5 Who were the Iroquois? In what part of North America Holt, Rinehart & did they live? Winston: In the U[, S. What Iroquois nations were and Canada p. 91 members of the Confederation? What was the Confederation? Library books Why was it formed? What was the structure of the Encyclopedias goverment, both local and central? (Be sure the children understand the definition of a clan, a village, and a nation as used in this study.) Was the control of the government civil or military? RU,VI - Cr. 5 4 The Iroquois League - A Type SLudy (contid,) QUESTIONS SUGGESTED ACTIVITIES MATERIALS How does this compare with the control of the government of the U. b.? How were the leaders chosen? Where were the meetings held? How often were they held? What 'part was played by women in selecting leaders? Is this organization in use today by the Iroquois? Have another group describe a Confederation meeting, Prepare a diagram to show the seating arrangement of each Iroquois Nation at the meeting. (See Great Tree and Loogbcuse by Hertzberg) p:amatfze a Confederation Meet- ing, Divide the class to represent the Iroquois Nations and seat them according to the diagram. have them choo.,e a problem that the Iroquois might nave had and let them act upon it in the man- ner of the League. sweggIos: '..tense plans against an enemy A trading expedition Reallocation of lands Planning for a festival or a ritual RU,VI - Gr. 5 5 COLONIAL GOVERNiviEN TS QUESTIONS SUGGESTED ACTIVITIES MATERIALS What type of govern: . Review with the class tb co- Pupil texts: went existed in the lonization of Anglo-America. colonies in taricaa Holt, Rinehart, & U:Ated States? As a background for understanding Winston: In the the development of government in and Canada :=LL ;lc U. S., tokparL the pp. US 93, 101; 103; uenner in thich France, Spain, "an 109; 115-117; 120- Englan:: rulet: their colonica ih 122; 129-130; 133 the Mt: WoAd. Examiaa the three types of Eng- Reath: In these lish colonial goverment: U. S. and Canada Royal Colonies pp, 82; 102-103 Proprietary Colonies Charter Colonies Benefic: How our Find examples of each type. government Began PP. 37-39 Explain to the class that the English settlers came with a Macmillan: Living strong tradition of the natural in the. AniWcaSyp rights of man-life, liberty, FJ, '9,Lic and property. Scott, Foresman: In the Americas p. 65 Encyclopedias Library Books What documents in Examine briefly the fundamental Filmstrip SS-M-3-e English history were principles of the following: Rise of Democracy in the basis for the The Magna Carta (1215 A.D.) England English tradition of Petition of Right (1628 A.D,) Teacher Reference the "rights of man?" The Bill of Rights (1689 A.D.) (See the first eight amendaments Mussatti: Csamat-L- to the U. S. Constitution to tution discover the influence these (Library) documents mentioned above had Filmstrips upon them.) SS-D-9-a Study examples of the beginning Charters of Freedom of self-government in the English SS-G-13-b Magna Carta colonies. SS-G-13-e Bill of Suggestions: Rights The Mayflower Compact SS-0-24-d Our The Massachusetts Bay Colony Heritage of Freedom Jamestown rl RU,VI - Or. 5 6 DEVELOF'thEill OF' GOVERNI:'INT IN £HE U. S. AND CANADA QUESTIONS SUGGESTED ACTIVITIES MATZRIALS What has been the (Examine the events that led to Films historical 'evelop- Independence from England.) D-202 Declaration ment of government As a background for an under- of_indenendence in the U. S.? standing of present day govern-- S-13 Servant of went in the United States. thg_Peiale (Making U. S. Constitution.) Study briefly an account of the Revolutionary War and its re- FilmstrIPs sults. SS-0-7-b Articles of Confederation What problems in- Read about the quarrels be- SS-0-7-c Adoption dicated a need for tween the states over trade of Constitution stronger government and boundaries. SS-M-3-e Founding after independence? Find out what problems faced of American De- the agricultural economy. mocracy Find out about problems of Pupil Texts taxation. B. What were the ArticlesHave a group read about the Scott, Foresman: of Confederation? Articles of Confederation to It the Americas find out what they were and pp. 72-79 Why did they fail? what powers this Confederation had. Find out why this Con- Macmillan: Living in federation taa so weak. Report the Americas pp.172- these findings to the class. 174 C.Why was a Con- Have another group study the Heath: In there stitutional Con- Constitution Convention.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Parliamentary Privilege
    Patterns of change – parliamentary privilege How do the privilege provisions applying to Australia’s national parliament compare internationally? Has the curtailment of traditional provisions weakened the Parliament’s position? Bernard Wright Deputy Clerk, House of Representatives December 2007 PATTERNS OF CHANGE – PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE 2 1. Summary 1.1 The law of parliamentary privilege applying to Australia’s national parliament has undergone significant change, as has the way matters of privilege and contempt are dealt with. This paper examines the law in Australia in comparison to the provisions in other parliaments. It does so by summarising three key provisions and commenting on the law of privilege in the wider legal context. It refers to two models for the privileges and immunities which apply in contemporary parliaments, and notes the way key provisions are dealt with in each model. The paper refers to adaptations in this area of law in other parliaments and to assessments that have been made of the needs of modern legislatures. It suggests that, paradoxically, the processes that involved significant reductions in traditional provisions applying to Australia’s national parliament have strengthened the parliament. The paper ends by speculating about some of the issues that may arise in this area in the future1. 1 I am most grateful to Professor Geoff Lindell, who read through a draft of this paper and made very helpful suggestions for improvement - BW PATTERNS OF CHANGE – PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE 3 2. Privilege in the national Parliament – three key features Freedom of speech 2.1 Members of the national Parliament enjoy the privilege of freedom of speech2.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Privilege, Article 9 of the Bill of Rights and Admissibility: What Use Can Be Made of Parliamentary Materials in Litigation?
    Parliamentary privilege, Article 9 of the Bill of Rights and admissibility: What use can be made of Parliamentary materials in litigation? I. INTRODUCTION 1. As the Court of Appeal observed recently, “…it has become relatively commonplace in public law proceedings for every last word spoken or written in Parliament to be placed before the court. In particular, debates are relied upon extensively when they should not be and, furthermore, the conclusions of select committees are prayed in aid with the court being asked to “approve” them. For the reasons summarised by Stanley Burnton J in his judgment in Office of Government Commerce v Information Comr (Attorney General intervening) [2010] QB 98, paras 46–48, that should not happen”: R (Reilly) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2017] QB 657 at ¶109. 2. The reason that Parliamentary materials should not be used in this way is, of course, Parliamentary privilege. There are two distinct aspects to this: Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689; and a wider principle known as the “exclusive cognisance” privilege. The former is statutory, whereas the latter is a feature of the common law. Article 9 cannot be waived even by Parliamentary resolution, but the exclusive cognisance principle can be: R v Chaytor [2011] 1 AC 684 at ¶¶61, 63, 68 per Lord Phillips and ¶130-131 per Lord Clarke. 3. This paper summarises the law in relation to both aspects of Parliamentary privilege (Sections II and III), and then discusses the resulting practical constraints in relying upon Parliamentary material in judicial review and other public law proceedings (Section IV).
    [Show full text]
  • 19 03 BR Tomkins.Pdf
    THE REPUBLICAN MONARCHY REVISITED THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION. By Walter Bagehot.1 Edited by Paul Smith.2 Cambridge University Press. 2001. Pp. xxxii, 253. $21.00 Adam Tomkins3 Of all the works of nineteenth-century British constitutional scholarship that have come down to us, two stand out. Among lawyers it is Dicel that continues to be revered above all others. But among communities of political scientists and journalists it is Bagehot who has that honor. The centenary of Bagehot's English Constitution was marked in 1967 with the publication of a new edition, edited by Richard Crossman. Crossman was a leading minister in the gov­ ernment of Harold Wilson, who was Prime Minister from 1964- 1970 and again from 1974-1976. Crossman's famous introduction to his edition of Bagehot was a masterpiece of reading the politi­ cal concerns and preoccupations of 1960s government into the work that Bagehot had written a century earlier, and as a result his introduction now looks very dated-indeed, it has withstood the test of time rather less impressively than have the far older words it introduced.5 Now the brilliant Cambridge University Press series of Texts in the History of Political Thought6 has added a new edition of Bagehot to its formidable list, this new edition edited and introduced by historian Paul Smith.7 To have the new scholarly edition alongside Crossman's more familiar one is welcome. A professional and historical (as opposed to popular and political) appraisal of Bagehot has been long com­ ing. It has been worth the wait. I. 1826-1877; English essayist, economist and journalist; editor of The Economist, 1860-1877.
    [Show full text]
  • Magna Carta and the Development of the British Constitution
    Magna Carta and the development of the British constitution Robert Blackburn explains why, 800 years on, Magna Carta still has relevance and meaning to us in Britain today. agna Carta established the crucial idea that our rulers may not do whatever they like, but are subject to the law as agreed with the society over which Mthey govern. In establishing this point, the Charter laid the foundations for modern constitutionalism and provided the core principles on which all forms of governments should be based, whether monarchies, republics or democracies. Above all, the Charter affirmed some of the most important fundamental freedoms which were later to be embodied in written constitutions and international treaties all over the world. In a sense the Charter may be seen as ‘the first great act’ of the nation, by its guarantee of liberties ‘to all free men of the realm’ pointing the direction of travel towards the development of our representative institutions today. The content and intention of the Charter were naturally the product of time and circumstance. Included in the 63 clauses of the original 1215 version were a number that dealt with immediate political grievances, among them the release of hostages (clause 49) and the removal of King John’s foreign- born officials (clause 50). A primary concern of the Charter’s draftsmen was to remedy the king’s abuse of his feudal rights, by regulating, for example, payments in lieu of military service and control over the property of widows, minorities and intestate estates. At the same time, however, the Charter asserted some fundamental liberties, for example the freedom of the Church (clause 1: the English church shall be free ..) and freedom of movement abroad (clause 42: it shall be lawful for An illustration from the Wriothesley Garter Book of any man to leave and return to our kingdom unharmed and the Parliament of England assembled at Blackfriars in without fear, by land or water, preserving his allegiance to us, the year 1523.
    [Show full text]
  • Judiciary Rising: Constitutional Change in the United Kingdom
    Copyright 2014 by Erin F. Delaney Printed in U.S.A. Vol. 108, No. 2 JUDICIARY RISING: CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM Erin F. Delaney ABSTRACT—Britain is experiencing a period of dramatic change that challenges centuries-old understandings of British constitutionalism. In the past fifteen years, the British Parliament enacted a quasi-constitutional bill of rights; devolved legislative power to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland; and created a new Supreme Court. British academics debate how each element of this transformation can be best understood: is it consistent with political constitutionalism and historic notions of parliamentary sovereignty, or does it usher in a new regime that places external, rule-of- law-based limits on Parliament? Much of this commentary examines these changes in a piecemeal fashion, failing to account for the systemic factors at play in the British system. This Article assesses the cumulative force of the many recent constitutional changes, shedding new light on the changing nature of the British constitution. Drawing on the U.S. literature on federalism and judicial power, the Article illuminates the role of human rights and devolution in the growing influence of the U.K. Supreme Court. Whether a rising judiciary will truly challenge British notions of parliamentary sovereignty is as yet unknown, but scholars and politicians should pay close attention to the groundwork being laid. AUTHOR—Assistant Professor, Northwestern University School of Law. For helpful conversations during a transatlantic visit at a very early stage of this project, I am grateful to Trevor Allan, Lord Hope, Charlie Jeffery, Lord Collins, and Stephen Tierney.
    [Show full text]
  • Unenumerated Rights
    OKLAHOMA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 62 WINTER 2010 NUMBER 2 BLACKSTONE’S NINTH AMENDMENT: A HISTORICAL COMMON LAW BASELINE FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF UNENUMERATED RIGHTS JEFFREY D. JACKSON* Table of Contents Introduction .............................................. 167 I. Historically Construing the Ninth Amendment: Whose Views Are Important? ............................................ 172 II. The Ninth Amendment in Context: Whose Rights? . 175 A. The English Constitution and the Rule of Law . 176 B. The Influence of Natural Law ............................ 179 C. The Framing ......................................... 185 D. The Ratification....................................... 188 III. Whose Common Law? ................................... 200 IV. What Does It Mean?..................................... 212 A. Some Conclusions..................................... 214 B. And Some Criticisms................................ 220 Conclusion ............................................... 222 Introduction The Ninth Amendment explicitly states that “[t]he enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”1 This seems to clearly indicate that there are * Associate Professor of Law, Washburn University School of Law. I would like to thank Bill Rich, Bill Merkel, John Bickers, Linda Elrod, Aida Alaka, and Joe McKinney for their helpful comments and input on this article. Thanks also to Washburn University School of Law for its research support, and to Angela Carlon, J.D., 2009, and Karl Wenger, J.D., 2008, for their research and input. 1. U.S. CONST. amend. IX. 167 168 OKLAHOMA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 62:167 rights other than those in the text of the Constitution that should be recognized as constitutional. Further, the United States Supreme Court has recognized a number of unenumerated rights under a variety of rationales.2 Nevertheless, the question of how to identify and give form to these rights still continues to pose problems for judges, lawyers, and legal scholars alike.
    [Show full text]
  • PRIMARY SOURCE from the English Bill of Rights
    wh10a-IDR-0521_P13 11/25/2003 10:24 AM Page 13 Name Date CHAPTER PRIMARY SOURCE from the English Bill of Rights 21 After the Glorious Revolution in 1688 in which James II was overthrown, England’s absolute monarchy became a constitutional monarchy where laws lim- Section 5 ited royal power. In 1689, Parliament drafted a Bill of Rights, stating the rights of Parliament and of individuals. As you read a portion of the English Bill of Rights, think about what England’s monarchs could not do. The English Bill of Rights, 1689 of parliament, for longer time or in other man- ner than the same is or shall be granted, is illegal. hereas the said late King James II having 5. That it is the right of the subjects to petition Wabdicated the government, and the throne the king, and all commitments and prosecutions being thereby vacant, his Highness the prince of for such petitioning are illegal. Orange (whom it hath pleased Almighty God to 6. That the raising or keeping a standing army make the glorious instrument of delivering this within the kingdom in time of peace, unless it kingdom from popery and arbitrary power) did (by be with consent of parliament, is against law. the advice of the lords spiritual and temporal, and 7. That the subjects which are Protestants may diverse principal persons of the Commons) caused have arms for their defense suitable to their letters to be written to the lords spiritual and tem- conditions, and as allowed by law. poral, being Protestants . to meet and sit at 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Bill C-53: Succession to the Throne Act, 2013
    Bill C-53: Succession to the Throne Act, 2013 Publication No. 41-1-C53-E 30 August 2013 Michel Bédard Legal and Social Affairs Division Parliamentary Information and Research Service Library of Parliament Legislative Summaries summarize government bills currently before Parliament and provide background about them in an objective and impartial manner. They are prepared by the Parliamentary Information and Research Service, which carries out research for and provides information and analysis to parliamentarians and Senate and House of Commons committees and parliamentary associations. Legislative Summaries are revised as needed to reflect amendments made to bills as they move through the legislative process. Notice: For clarity of exposition, the legislative proposals set out in the bill described in this Legislative Summary are stated as if they had already been adopted or were in force. It is important to note, however, that bills may be amended during their consideration by the House of Commons and Senate, and have no force or effect unless and until they are passed by both houses of Parliament, receive Royal Assent, and come into force. Any substantive changes in this Legislative Summary that have been made since the preceding issue are indicated in bold print. © Library of Parliament, Ottawa, Canada, 2013 Legislative Summary of Bill C-53 (Legislative Summary) Publication No. 41-1-C53-E Ce document est également publié en français. CONTENTS 1 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Matter of Privilege: a Discussion Paper on Canadian Parliamentary Privilege in the 21St Century
    A MATTER OF PRIVILEGE: A DISCUSSION PAPER ON CANADIAN PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE IN THE 21ST CENTURY Interim report of the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures, and the Rights of Parliament Chair The Honourable Vernon White Deputy Chair The Honourable David P. Smith, PC. June 2015 MEMBERSHIP The Honourable Vernon White, Chair The Honourable David P. Smith, P.C., Deputy Chair The Honourable Denise Batters The Honourable Claude Carignan, P.C.* The Honourable Anne C. Cools The Honourable James S. Cowan* The Honourable Norman E. Doyle The Honourable Joan Fraser* The Honourable Linda Frum The Honourable George Furey The Honourable Leo Housakos The Honourable Mobina S.B. Jaffer The Honourable Serge Joyal, P.C. The Honourable Yonah Martin The Honourable Elaine McCoy The Honourable Paul E. McIntyre The Honourable David Tkachuk The Honourable David M. Wells *Ex officio members In addition, the Honourable Senators Selma Ataullahjan, Douglas Black, Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis, Nancy Ruth, Richard Neufeld and Pierre Claude Nolin were members of the committee or participated in its work on this report. Clerk of the Committee: Charles Robert Analyst from the Library of Parliament: Dara Lithwick TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION: AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND RENEW PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE IN CANADA ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 A. Development of the Interim Report ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Book Reviews
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 86 Article 14 Issue 1 Fall Fall 1995 Book Reviews Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Book Reviews, 86 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 231 (1995-1996) This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091.4169/95/8601-0231 THJouPNAL OF CimiNmAL LAW & CRImINOLOGY Vol. 86, No. 1 Copyright @ 1995 by Northwestem University, School of Law Pinted in USA. BOOK REVIEWS Constitutional Firepower: New Light on the Meaning of the Second Amendment JEREMY RABKIN* To KEEP AND BEAR ARMs,THE ORIGINS OF AN ANGLO-AMERICAN RIGHT. By Joyce L. Malcolm. Harvard University Press 1994. Pp. 246. A well regulatedMilitia, being ncessay to the security of afree State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed. U.S. CONST. amend. II That the Subjects which are Protestantsmay have Armes for their defence Suitable to their Condition and as allowed by Law. - Section 7, English Bill of Rights, 1689 (1 W.&M., 2d Sess., c.2) Joyce Malcolm's careful historical study attempts to shed light on the original understanding of the Second Amendment by presenting the full background of its forerunner, the arms provision in the Eng- lish Bill of Rights.1 It is a very timely undertaking.
    [Show full text]
  • English Bill of Rights of 1689
    English Bill of Rights of 1689 History of the 13 Colonies and the laws & taxes that sparked rebellion against the British combines all of the items we’ve borrowed from history! Wrapped up in this combination of ideas is the English Bill of Rights of 1689. This document shows inspiration from Greece, Rome, religion, the Scientific Revolution, and the Enlightenment. In turn, it influenced the American colonies and the Constitution of the United States. Definition of the English Bill of Rights of 1689 The Meaning and Definition of the English Bill of Rights: The 1689 English Bill of Rights was a British Law, passed by the Parliament of Great Britain in 1689 that declared the rights and liberties of the people and settling the succession in William and Mary following the Glorious Revolution of 1688 when James II was overthrown. Summary of the English Bill of Rights The 1689 English Bill of Rights had a massive influence on the colonies in North America and the Constitution of the United States. The most important Articles of the 1689 English Bill of Rights are as follows: ° A frequently summoned Parliament and free elections ° Members should have freedom of speech in Parliament ° No armies should be raised in peacetime ° No taxes could be levied, without the authority of parliament ° Laws should not be dispensed with, or suspended, without the consent of parliament ° No excessive fines should imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted Are the Articles of the English Bill of Rights sounding familiar? The English Bill of Rights The English Bill of Rights established a limited constitutional monarchy in Great Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • Britain's Case for Federation. the Contemporary Debate on Devolution
    Britain’s case for federation. The contemporary debate on devolution and modern challenges to the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty in the light of Dicey’s views on Irish Home Rule. Kacper Zajac Introduction 1.1 Aim of the paper The aim of this article is to present a legal case for the federalisation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (“the United Kingdom”)1 under a written constitution which would restrict the powers of Parliament in accordance with the Lockean concept of limited government. It will be proven, with reference to the relevant historical context, that such a constitutional change is the most appropriate response to the challenges that the Constitution of the United Kingdom faces today. AV Dicey is the highest authority on the constitutional law of the United Kingdom, therefore any discussion surrounding this subject cannot be conducted without touching upon his work. His interpretation of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty remains the underlying principle of the British Constitution. This article is not interested in challenging this principle on the basis of political practice but rather to show Dicey’s reasoning as outdated or otherwise unsuitable for the 21st century. Consequently, by refuting Dicey, one removes the main obstacle that stands in the way of major constitutional reform. The reform that would clarify grey areas of contemporary British 1 Interpretation Act 1978, schedule 1 1 constitutional law: such as the position of the law of the European Union, the effectiveness of the Human Rights Act 1998, and the question of progressing devolution. In the face of those developments it is necessary to reconsider the validity of the doctrine of the sovereignty of Parliament.
    [Show full text]