:h: Welcome
to Team Law’s Forum!

We hold a Free Conference Call every: Monday, Wednesday & Friday morning from:
8:00 – 9:00 AM (Mountain Time).

Call: (857) 232-0158; use the Conference Access Code: 110045.

Join us on, and invite your friends to, our next Conference Call!

Use this Forum to contact Team Law;
use this link for more: contact information.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:

After reading this announcement, you may remove it by clicking the “X” in the upper right corner of the announcement's green background.

First Charter of Massachusetts

This forum is for topics not listed below.

Moderators: Tnias, Jus

tomhibbard
Registered
Posts: 1
Joined: Friday January 26th, 2007 11:14 pm MST

First Charter of Massachusetts

Postby tomhibbard » Friday November 30th, 2007 4:57 pm MST

I've been trying to study the First Charter of Massachusetts in 1629 and am amazed at the language concerning land patents. It has become obvious to me that Team Law's information about land patents and the founding of our nation's history based on land patent rights is very accurate. It's been exciting to see the evidence that supports what Team Law has been saying all along.

I have one question. Did the early settlers that were mentioned in the First Charter of Massachusetts consider themselves Englishmen or men who were founding their own separate country? It seems that they still considered themselves English as they expected to be protected as free English men entitled to the rights in the Magna Carta. It also seems they considered themselves Englishmen based upon the Charter itself which says:
In the 1st Massachusetts Charter, the people wrote:"shall have and enjoy all liberties and Immunities of free and naturall Subjects within any of the Domynions of Us, our Heires or Successors, to all Intents, Constructions, and Purposes whatsoever, as if they and everie of them were borne within the Realme of England."
It seems this charter has given them complete and full rights to their land, that cannot be taken away even mentioning their right to establish their own government. Yet there seems to be a tax that they will have to pay:
In the 1st Massachusetts Charter, the people wrote:"Yeildinge and paying therefore to the saide late Kinge, his heires and Successors, the fifte Parte of the Oare of Gould and Silver, which should from tyme to tyme, and at all Tymes then after happen to be found, gotten, had, and obteyed in, att, or within any of the saide Landes..."
Their right to self-govern seems limited too, as the charter states that their laws cannot be repugnant to the laws in England. I'm obviously a little confused still.

Thank you ahead of time for any light you can shed on the subject.
Serving Christ,
Tom

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1574
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: First Charter of Massachusetts

Postby Admin » Tuesday December 4th, 2007 10:28 pm MST

:h: Tomhibbard:
The answer to your inquiry is — ‘That depends.’
The people who came with land patent secured land rights did acknowledge that they were Englishmen of English decent; however, they also recognized that they had the absolute right to self-government. Still, they had significant debts owed to Great Britain and when they formed their respective states, those states started right off securing their futures with more debts owed to Great Britain. Those debts gave the British king a strong hand of influence over government, its governors and its judges. History makes it quite clear that they knew they were forming their own country. Some of the people that came and settled were not land patent secured landowners. Their opinion of their status would depend on many more issues some of which could certainly make them acknowledge their nature as British subjects.

No subject of Great Britain ever had any rights secured to him or her under the Magna Charta. The Magna Charta only secures rights of sovereigns and those that have a potential claim to the throne; it does not secure any rights to the common people. Thus, anyone that relates to the Magna Charta as an instrument that secures rights to them must acknowledge such rights are their sovereign rights. The Magna Charta never had any real effect on the people of Great Britain. In fact, king James had all of the participants in its construction killed for their treasonous act in generating that instrument and coercing his mark and seal upon it. Such coercion can never be considered a means of securing a lawful signature. King James continued business as usual, but when the people started to settle this continent with their sovereign Land rights, they were truly sovereign; thus, the Magna Charta would have applied to them if it were a lawful instrument, which it was not. Still, it stood as a good description of basic inherent rights so described and upon which the people here could base their understanding of law.

The first quote you presented does not describe the people as subjects of the Realm of England, rather it shows the people here had sovereign rights and every right any Englishman would have as well, even within Great Britain.

The tax you referred to was not a tax so much as it was the obligation to pay off their debt obligations to the king.

The only English laws that rightfully controlled them the laws that secured their debt obligations to Great Britain.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.


Return to “Miscellaneous Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest