9 comments

[ 0.26 ms ] story [ 30.0 ms ] thread
> How Do You Buy The Magna Carta?

Just like any other precious arts and documents, at an auction. Title does not fit the article well.

It seems strange and wrong to me that the document be housed in America and not in England.
There are multiple copies of the Magna Carta, I've seen one in Lincoln Castle.

But yeah it does seem weird, as some of it is still law. I don't know the technicalities, but if you have a law, but no written record of the law or of it being agreed, is it still law?

There is a written record of it .. it's just not an "original".

(For those who want to read the statutes "with the patches applied", as it were, Blackstones have done the work: https://global.oup.com/academic/content/series/b/blackstones... ; I remember there was something like one sentence of Magna Carta still in effect, but I can't remember which!)

It looks like, in England and Wales at least, there are a few sections that are yet to be repealed:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Edw1cc1929/25/9

Sections I, IX, XXIX as well as some front- and end-matter seem to remain in force.

Of course while the Magna Carta is most famously associated with England, it forms part of the law of many former colonies, for example here:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/conso...

shows section XXIX remains law in Victoria, Australia - I imagine the case is similar in various other places.

"it's just not an "original"."

So how does that work. If we sign a contract and I lose mine, it doesn't cease to be binding, but good luck trying to convince a court of it's contents.

Is it the same here? Could someone turn up with the 'true' Magna Carta and rewrite the law? Or does it exist as a kind of fossil in other laws?

Objects with text on them aren't magic; we have no shortage of records of what it says.

It's very rare that contract disputes involve a serious disagreement over what the contents of a written contract were. Litigants submit their version under penalty of perjury. Mostly questions involve either verbal contracts or questions of whether additional material (specs, advertising copy) is part of the contract.

I think the short answer is "that's why we have judges".

I suspect that whatever version parliament has been reading and amending would be considered official.

It's one of several copies, as benji111 pointed out. But I also really like what they're doing with it, per the last three paragraphs of the article.