Modern uses of Magna Carta: 1914–1981

Enquiry question

Investigate the sources

These original documents reflect 20th-century attitudes towards Magna Carta, both as a document and a symbol.

Discover more original documents in our related themed collections Magna Carta 1214–1225 and Magna Carta 1259–1306.

1. Source 1: British Empire, 1914

   Parliamentary question, proposing that the rights set out in Magna Carta should apply throughout the British Empire.

   1. 

      2. Mr. Goldstone, – British Citizens’ Rights, – To call attention to the Rights of British Citizens within the Empire ; and to move, That, in the opinion of this House, the rights of British Citizens set forth in Magna carta, the Petition of Right, and the Habeas Corpus Act, and declared and recognised by the Common Law of England, should be common to the whole Empire, and their inviolability should be assured in every self-governing dominion.

2. Source 2: King John assents to Magna Carta, 1925–1927

   Charles H Sims, 'King John Assents to the Magna Carta, 1215'. Painted between 1925 and 1927. Photo courtesy: UK Parliament, accession number: WOA 2602, heritagecollections.parliament.uk

   1. 

3. Source 3: Proposed gift to the USA, 1941

   Foreign Office document with annotations by Winston Churchill, proposing that the Lincoln copy of the 1215 Magna Carta should be granted to the USA. It was hoped that such a gift would increase American support for the British cause in the Second World War. The proposal was eventually rejected.

   1. 

      Lincoln copy of Magna Carta

      On the 11th March the Government of the United States passed an Act which has as its wider purpose the furtherance of personal and national freedom throughout the world. Based on enlightened self-interest, this Act none the less represents a landmark in the history of liberty, and under its provisions the British Empire stands to be the principal beneficiary.

      It would be peculiarly fitting if at this juncture we were to offer the Lincoln copy of Magna Carta to the American nation as a token of the history and traditions which the two countries have in common.

      Magna Carta has been in American for about two years and for the last two summers it has been on view in the British Pavilion of the New York World Fair. Many thousands of Americans have waited daily in long queues to view it with a reverence and pride scarcely believable to those who have not visited the Pavilion. Magna Carta is a part of American, as well as of English, history and both peoples equally trace their personal liberties from the signing of that document. In some respects Magna Carta has a more vivid appeal for the average American than for the average Englishman. For one thing, Americans are more conscious of their national origins than are we. England emerged out of a cloud of myth lost in antiquity. America was created in 1776 by a document; the most previous national relic they possess. That document is an affirmation of personal and national liberty and it is, in American thinking, an 18th century child of Magna Carta. Owing to comparative youth and rapid expansion, American contains few monuments of the past. The architecture of the country is almost uniformly modern; its historical documents are extremely few and not very ancient; its society lacks the customs and ceremonies of former epochs. Most Americans live for years on end without a single sight to remind them that they have a past. In effect the New World lacks the dimension of time; its inhabitants live almost entirely in the present and they crave tangible evidence of their early European background much as the nouveau riche crave ancestors.

      The gift of Magna Carta would be at once the most precious of gifts and the most gracious of acts in American eyes; it would represent the only really adequate gesture which it is in our power to make in return for the means to preserve our country.

      The immediate effect of such an action would be greatly to heighten the emotional interest of Americans in this country, which would thereby assist the President in his task of carrying public opinion with him in giving us increasingly greater assistance. [it will be remembered that the Lease-Lend Act does not actually give us anything; it empowers the President to assist us within the practical limits set by public opinion]. At any time previously to the passage of this Act such a gift might well have been interpreted as a form of propaganda. However, the passing of the Act is widely regarded by Americans as a final decision to support our Cause and therefore, if Magna Carta were to be given now, our motives would not be taken amiss.

      The long time benefit of the proposed gift is likely to be even more important than its immediate effect, for we have (possibly not quite fairly) acquired a reputation for a lack of generosity in our national, as distinct from personal, dealings; which the debt controversy has done nothing to improve. This reputation has a tendency to make Americans suspicious and “tough” in their dealings with us. But after the war the future of the world will greatly depend on the cordiality of Anglo-American relations and a really good example of unsolicited generosity on our part would go far towards assisting us in this respect.

4. Source 4: Magna Carta has no ‘intrinsic value’, 1941

   Foreign Office document proposing that Magna Carta be gifted to the USA during the Second World War. The document notes that Magna Carta holds no ‘intrinsic value’. The proposal was eventually rejected.

   1. 

      Proposed Gift of Magna Carta to America

      The Lincoln copy of Magna Carta has been in America for about two years and has been on view in the British Pavilion of the New York World Fair. Many thousands of Americans have waited daily in long queues to view it with a reverence and a pride scarcely believable to those who have not visited the Pavilion.

      Magna Carta is part of American, as well as of English, history. Both peoples equally trace their liberties from the signing of that document. Every American child is taught to think of Magna Carta as the foundation of American liberty. In some respects Magna Carta has a more vivid appeal for the average American than for the average Englishman. For one thing, Americans are more conscious of their national origins than are we. England emerged out of a cloud of myth lost in antiquity. American was created in 1776 by a document; the most precious national relic she possesses. That document is an affirmation personal and national liberty, and it is, in American thinking, an eighteenth century child of Magna Carta.

      Owing to comparative youth and to rapid expansion, America contains few monuments to the past. The architecture of the country of the country is almost uniformly modern; its historical documents are extremely few, and not very ancient; its society lacks the customs and ceremonies of former epochs. Most Americans life for years on end without a single sight to remind them that they are the heirs of an ancient civilisation. In effect, the New World lacks the dimension of time and its inhabitants crave for tangible evidence of their European background. This, quite as much as a love of art, explains their passion for collecting the artistic treasures of Europe.

      The Americans take a keen pleasure in driving a hard bargain, they like to think of themselves as “tough guys”, but they are impulsive and warm hearted to a degree. A friendly act, graciously performed, evokes a tremendous response; and when an American has had his emotions stirred, his generosity is quite unbounded. He will give his shirt off his back for friendship.

      Now that the Americans have passed the Lease and Lend Act we should say to them; “You are giving us aid on a scale which makes it almost impossible for us materially to repay. Any material repayment we could offer can only look insignificant. We shall owe you a debt which can never be discharged. May we give you – at least as a token of our feelings – something of no intrinsic value whatever: a bit of parchment, more than seven hundred years old, rather the worse for wear. You know what it means to us; we believe it means as much to you. Will you accept it as a symbol and a seal of our compact to fight to the last in the service of liberty and of law? Without your promised aid your and our liberty, which sprang from Magna Carta and which found a fuller expression in the Declaration of Independence, might be lost for ever; but with your strength to support us the cause of liberty will surely prevail.”

      We are regarded as a cold-blooded, calculating people, and our failure to show warmth – to “say it with flowers” – is perhaps the main reason why American respect for us never quite ripens into warm, uncalculating friendship – such as they have felt for the French. If we could, for once in our lives, shed our caution and offer our most precious possession to our best friends, then the effect would be incalculable, both to-day and in the future. American hearts would be stirred and resistance to full participation in the present struggle would be greatly reduced. To put it at its lowest, our financial relations would become easier to handle, and we would be likely to receive vital help at sea sooner than we may otherwise get it. In post war years, when the day of reckoning comes, it will always be remembered to our credit that, though we may be unable to face our debts, nevertheless we freely gave the most sacred of our national emblems.

      And, after all, we possess four copies of Magna Carta.

      FOREIGN OFFICE,

      18th March, 1941.

5. Source 5: Rejection of Magna Carta day, 1947

   Foreign Office document outlining the reasons for the rejection of the proposal that schools in the USA and throughout the British Empire should celebrate Magna Carta day on 15 June.

   1. 

      4th February, 1947

      Dear Wilson Young,

      Thank you for the copy of your letter to Dixon about the proposal to celebrate Magna Carta Day in the schools of the British Empire and the U.S.A. Your letter and the accompanying memorandum by Cowell have been read with interest, and I am writing to give you our views on the matter.

      It seems to us doubtful whether Magna Carta can be properly regarded as a “resounding vindication of the doctrine that political power must be subject to the Rule of Law.” As far as we are aware, the present standard interpretation of Magna Carta is that it was a political attempt to restrain the power of the King undertaken by the barons who, to quote from McKechnie’s authoritative study of the subject, “were goaded into opposition by their own personal and class wrongs not by any altruistic promptings of sacrificing themselves for the common good.” It is true that it suited the leaders of the Parliament against Charles I to put forward Magna Carta as a rallying cry but their view of it was unhistorical. If this interpretation of Magna Carta is correct, it would hardly serve as an appropriate symbol of the political ideals which are now shared by the peoples of the United States and the British Empire.

      Furthermore, there is a possibility that the celebration of Magna Carta Day in the Colonial Empire might be used for purposes very different from those which we desire. In some Colonies where ill-disposed politicians are ever on the lookout for opportunities to misrepresent our good intentions, its celebration might well cause embarrassment and in general there is a danger that the Colonial peoples might be led into an uncritical enthusiasm for a document which they had not read but which they presumed to contain guarantees of every so-called “right” they might be interested at the moment in claiming.

      For these reasons we do not feel disposed to favour the proposal to celebrate Magna Carta Day. If, however, the preponderance of opinion among other Departments is in favour of it, we should of course be prepared to consider it further in light of their views, though we could not in any way commit Colonial Governments without first consulting them.

      In conclusion, we should like to make the point that it might provoke adverse criticism in the U.S.A. if Magna Carta Day were celebrated without the Colonies participating and that we assume that we assume that the idea of celebrating it without their participation would not be entertained.

      A copy of his letter is being sent to the Dominions Office and Ministry of Education, and also India Office and Burma Office, which would seem also to be concerned.

      Yours sincerely,

      KW Blaxlen

6. Source 6: Brixton riots, 1981

   Submission by an anti-immigration campaign group to the Home Office following the Brixton riots in 1981. The group had appropriated the name Magna Carta as a representation of a traditional British way of life.

   1. 

      MAGNA CARTA CAMPAIGN FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE ETHOS OF BRITAIN

      16th May, 1981,

      Sir,

      BRIXTON INQUIRY REF: L81/1953/RDM.

      CONSIDERATION OF UNDERLYING CAUSES.

      I wish to submit evidence under Part 2 as follows:

      1. Like members of the forces who have served in various parts of the world, the Police are faced with “THE NECESSITY OF HAVING TO DEAL OR WORK WITH PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT RACES WHOSE MENTAL OUTLOOK AND METHODS OF RATIOCINATION AND WAYS OF DOING THINGS ARE OFTEN UTTERLY DIFFERENT FROM OR DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED TO OUR OWN”. (Please see page 180 of ‘Tropical and Sub-Tropical Diseases, Oxford War Manuals, facsimile copy enclosed herewith.)
      2. Anti-British factions have infiltrated into our country under the cloak of ‘Commonwealth Immigration’. Their avowed aim, which has been made quite clear at demonstrations and in ‘underground’ publications, is the total destruction of our way of life. Since the war, evil subversive propaganda has been disseminated by Underground Press Syndicates, the target being the hearts and minds of our younger generations. This is aided by the activities of anarchists, drug pedlars, revolutionaries, alien ideologists, sexual pedlars, revolutionaries, alien ideologists, sexual deviants, arsonists, and above all the ‘spiritual assassin’ who seeks to destroy the very bed-rock of our national life and character (A list of some ‘underground’ publications is enclosed herewith.)
      3. Agitators amongst the immigrants have defamed the Police in Press reports and in B.B.C. broadcasts. (A facsimile report by James B. Alexander, published in ‘The Christian Science Monitor’ 22nd October, 1969, is enclosed herewith. Also an extract transcription of a B.B.C. Radio Broadcast “FILE ON 4” 25 February, 1981).
      4. Regarding the use of Molotov Cocktails at Brixton, I would draw attention to the frontispiece of ‘NEW REVOLUTIONARIES’ edited by the Pakistani revolutionary, Tariq Ali, published in 1969, a facsimile copy of which is enclosed herewith.

      I remain, Sir;

      Your obedient servant

      1. K. Hamblin

      Hon. Director of the Campaign

      Retired Architect

      Wartime Captain R.E., S.E.A.C.

Background information

King John and Magna Carta

By adding his seal to Magna Carta on 15 June 1215, King John forever changed the nature of kingship in England. No longer could a king be seen as acting on the impulse of his own convictions. His exercise of power was to be regulated by an established set of rules. In 1215, however, Magna Carta failed. King John quickly worked to undo Magna Carta, which he thought of as a peace treaty rather than as a collection of laws, and he convinced the Pope to condemn Magna Carta. Yet, as this document selection shows, time and time again throughout the thirteenth century, English kings were held to account by their barons and forced to accept the restraints that Magna Carta placed upon their kingship.

Terms of Magna Carta

Magna Carta meant a new way of doing things. This is because Magna Carta encouraged the barons to seek new political concessions whenever they felt the king was ruling unwisely. In practice, this usually meant that the barons felt they were not been consulted enough by the king. Also, when the king needed money to fight wars in France, he often found himself compelled to reaffirm his commitment to Magna Carta and find solutions to new complaints put forward by his barons. The exchange of taxation for political concessions became the main topic of discussion in medieval parliament, and contributed to the growing importance of parliament in medieval England.

Simon de Montfort and Magna Carta

In the century after Magna Carta, parliament became a fundamental part of political life. An important part in this development was played by Simon de Montfort, who led a baronial rebellion against Henry III. Following the battle of Lewes in 1264, where Montfort took Henry III captive, Montfort summoned knights and burgesses (representatives from English towns) to parliament in order to discuss the terms of the king’s release. Although knights and burgesses had been summoned to parliament on previous occasions, Simon de Montfort needed broad political support for his plan to establish a new form of government that would significantly reduce the power of the king. Therefore, Montfort encouraged the knights and burgesses (the ‘commons’) to participate directly in the political discussions, and this established a trend that would continue throughout the Middle Ages. By the end of the thirteenth century, it was no longer acceptable for a king to tax his people without consulting parliament first, and when King Edward I attempted to do so, he faced rebellion.

Magna Carta timeline of key events

6 February 1214

King John sails for La Rochelle to begin a military campaign against the French. Many of his barons refuse to accompany him, or send knights to serve in his army.

June–July 1214

John’s barons from Poitou (France) desert his army. With his path blocked by the French Prince Louis, John is unable to join his allies in Flanders, and is forced to retreat to La Rochelle.

27 July 1214

King John’s allies, the Flemings, Germans and an English contingent led by the earl of Salisbury, are defeated by the French at the Battle of Bouvines (Northern France).

October 1214

John returns to England following the failure of his military campaign in France that he had spent years planning.

4 March 1215

Facing baronial revolt, John declares his intention to go on crusade to the Holy Land. It is hoped that this will secure support from the Pope against his rebellious barons.

5 May 1215

The barons renounce their fealty (allegiance) to John, and name Robert fitz Walter as their leader.

17 May 1215

The city of London welcomes the rebel barons, dashing John’s hopes for a quick victory and end to the civil war.

10 June 1215

John meets the rebel leaders at Runnymede meadow by the River Thames near Staines.

15 June 1215

King John sets his seal to a draft of Magna Carta, thereby accepting its terms.

19 June 1215

The rebel barons formally make peace with King John, and renew their allegiance.

7 July 1215

The pope excommunicates the barons who have rebelled against their king.

24–25 August 1215

Papal bulls (letters) declare Magna Carta null and void.

September 1215

Civil war breaks out between King John and the rebel barons.

16 October 1216

King John dies at Newark.

28 October 1216

Henry III is crowned king of England at Gloucester.

12 November 1216

Magna Carta is reissued, with some changes to its contents, by royal government on behalf of the young Henry III.

6 November 1217

A third version of Magna Carta is issued. All laws relating to the administration of royal forests (which cover around a third of all land in England), are issued in a separate charter: the Charter of the Forest.

Summer 1224

The French King invades the territories of Henry III in Poitou and Gascony (France).

11 February 1225

Henry III ‘confirms’ Magna Carta and the Charter of the Forest. This means that he reaffirms his intention to govern England in accordance with the laws contained in the charters.

1254

Henry III arranges with the pope that his son, Edmund, should become king of Sicily. He agrees to pay £90,000 to the pope, but parliament refuses to raise the sum.

1258

The pope threatens to excommunicate Henry III if he does not pay £90,000 to the papacy. Henry III had promised this sum so that his son could become king of Sicily.

June 1258

Henry III desperately seeks advice from his barons concerning the £90,000 he owes to the pope. Henry’s barons agree to help their king, if he agrees to accept major political reforms. Discussions take place at the ‘Mad Parliament’ held at Oxford.

June–July 1258

Henry agrees to the Provisions of Oxford. The king is forced to rule with the advice of a council. It is also decided that parliament should meet three times a year to review political developments.

October 1259

Henry agrees to the Provision of Westminster, a series of twenty-four major legal reforms similar to Magna Carta in their scope and importance.

29 April 1261

The pope condemns the reforms that have been forced upon Henry III. All barons in England are absolved from any oaths they have taken to ensure that the reforms are upheld.

14 May 1264

Simon de Montfort and the rebel barons defeat a royal army at the battle of Lewes, taking King Henry III captive. Simon de Montfort is now the unofficial ruler of England.

January 1265

Simon de Montfort calls a parliament to discuss the terms for the king’s release. He orders knights from each of England’s shires, and representatives from England’s towns, to attend.

4 August 1265

King Henry III defeats Simon de Montfort and the rebels at the battle of Evesham. Simon de Montfort is killed, marking an end to the reform movement that had begun in 1258.

30 October 1266

Dictum of Kenilworth marks the royalist recovery, but in a manner of reconciliation. Many of the reforms issued since 1258 are now issued in the name of the king.

16 November 1272

Henry III dies, and is succeeded by his son, King Edward I.

1294

King Philip IV of France declares Edward I’s territories in Gascony forfeit, because Edward refused to attend the French court up following a summons by Philip. War breaks out between England and France.

7 July 1297

Two important barons, Roger Bigod and Humphrey de Bohun, refused Edward I’s order to draw up a muster list – those summoned by the king for military service. The king was forced to offer wages for military service, instead of relying on feudal obligations.

30 July 1297

Royal writs (instructions) order the collection of tax set at a very high rate. The king falsely claimed that the tax had been granted with the assent of the whole laity of the realm. In reality, the king ordered the collection of a tax without the assent of parliament.

22 August 1297

Roger Bigod and Humphrey de Bohun appeared at the exchequer – which managed the kingdoms finances – and stated that the people of England would not pay the tax.

October 1297

The king’s ‘bad’ tax was cancelled, and replaced with a new tax, which was set at a lower rate and properly granted by parliament.

March 1300

Edward I confirmed Magna Carta, and agreed to a new set of political reforms put forward by the rebel barons in a document known as ‘Articuli super cartas’, which means ‘Articles in addition to Magna Carta and the Charter of the Forest’. This document set out in detail how Magna Carta could be enforced to prevent the king from breaking its laws.

1 January 1306

The pope condemns the ‘Articuli super cartas’, releasing Edward I from his obligation to follow the rules set out in this new document.

Related resources

Teaching resource

Magna Carta 1214–1225

This set of documents relates to King John’s acceptance of Magna Carta in 1215 and King Henry III’s agreement to a revised version of Magna Carta in 1225.

Teaching resource

Magna Carta 1259–1306

This set of documents relates to the baron's reform movement that began in 1258 and the opposition faced by Edward I when he attempted to raise taxes in 1297.