INSTRUCTIONS to Enter Into L.R.

Sample RM RecDelIn order to stand in “lawful rebellion” (standing under Ch.61 Magna Carta 1215) you MUST adequately demonstrate your intention – in law ‘mens rea’ (intention) is very significant. Crimes are comprised of the physical action (actus reus) and the mental intent (mens rea). If you are going to engage in “civil disobedience” under the guise of lawful rebellion, and claim “lawful excuse” for breaking some laws, you must be able to adequately prove the purpose for which you committed the act.

Until now we have hinted that the most practical method is to sign, witness and post your Oath of Allegiance to one of the Barons that sat on the committee in 2001 when Article 61 was invoked. With a not inconsiderable amount of negative press and social media content criticising the House of Lords and its members, it is not surprising that we have received a great deal of mail filled with consternation from people who want to join the rebellion but have a moral, ethical or idealogical problem with submitting an oath to the barons. So what does Magna Carta say about this?

And let anyone in the land who wishes take an oath to obey the orders of the said twenty-five barons for the execution of all the aforesaid matters, and with them to distress us as much as he can, and we publicly and freely give anyone leave to take the oath who wishes to take it and we will never prohibit anyone from taking it.

So, there is no absolute need to send your oath to a baron. You could in fact send a copy to any “Crown authority” in the land, police Chief Constable, local council, HMRC. The critical element is that you have signed the oath and had it validly witnessed – and preferentially sent that oath by registered post and kept a copy of the oath and the proof of postage. It is imperative that you take a copy of your Oath prior to posting and use Recorded Delivery. It is also highly desirable to obtain a screen clipping of the delivery signature. This is your evidence of intent.

Sample RM RecDel Sig You simply keep the post office receipt which contains a long number which will end with “GB” and put this code into the Royal Mail tracker. At the time of writing a Recorded Delivery of a single-page letter is £1.73.

Below is a picture of the template Oath which you may manually write in your address and the chosen Baron’s address. Below this is a link to a .pdf which you can download, print, fill in and post.

You MUST take a copy of your signed and witnessed Oath before you send it – this is imperative!

 

Picture of Oath of Allegiance

 

Lawful Rebellion Oath Template .pdf (handwritten name & address)

Lawful Rebellion Oath Fillable PDF

Once you have obtained verification of postage of your Oath (better still, verification of delivery), you are now a bona fide inhabitant of Britain and a member of a very exclusive club of people who not only are the only legitimate inhabitants of our country but are also now ‘immunised’ against the ten thousand or so statutes, Acts and regulations published by successive puppet governments since the unlawful removal of the Royal Prerogative from the Monarch in 1911.

You need to keep a permanent record.

For the avoidance of doubt, once you are lawfully standing under Article 61, you have “LAWFUL EXCUSE” to break ANY law of the land (if done with the express intent of disressing or distraining the Crown and its agents), so long as it is not a breach of common law – you MUST not cause harm, injury, loss or fraud to another human and you must not breach the peace – that is it! Under common law there are four laws:-

  1. Cause no harm or injury to another
  2. Cause no loss to another
  3. Commit no fraud against another
  4. Do not breach the peace

Once in lawful rebellion you are obliged to be as disruptive as humanly possible to any government agency and provided you do not break the sanctity of the four rules above, they cannot lawfully prosecute you without committing Treason.

Now go forth and multiply. Disrupt the government at every opportunity. Get all your friends involved and there is a strong probability that we will prevail and can once again set this country straight.

Please come and join our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/practicallawfuldissent/

If you are concerned about the consequences of defying the (non) “authorities” then take a look at David’s post on court hearings.

We have very recently had a member reimbursed all of her HMRC penalties (£3000+) (which she had previously received threats from Bailiffs for collection) simply by asking one question – “Do you, HMRC, have any authority whatsoever since the invocation of A.61.” Of course the correspondence was a little more involved than this but in the end HMRC accepted she did not have to provide tax returns and they refunded her penalties. They described her correspondence as a “complaint” but she had not complained nor had she submitted an appeal, she simply asked the above question and provided the evidence of the invocation of A.61.


 

Since the invocation of Article 61 in March 2001, some of the Barons have become infirm, extremely old or have died (Gaulburn being the latest in the third week of February 2015 and his sone has requested no more Oaths). Because of this we are compiling a more up to date list of Barons to whom you can post your Oath.

 


Here is the complete list of those whom made the quorum for the committee. Some have passed away now, others are no longer accepting Oaths. Please make certain you read any accompanying notes before you select one of the Barons from the list below.


 

THE BARONS WHOM SERVED THE PETITION ARE NOT RECEIVING OATHS. THE OTHERS BELOW ARE WHO WE NOW USE, PICK ANY ITS THE INTENT THAT REALLY COUNTS.

Viscount Massereene-john David Clotworthy Whyte-melville Foster Skeffington

c/o MD Barnard and Co 150 Minories London EC3N 1LS

David Manners-11th Duke of Rutland

Hadden Hall Bakewell,derbyshire DE4 1LA

4th Baron Ashbourne, of Ashbourne in the County of Meath
Colebrook barn, east harting farm, nr petersfield,hampshire, GU31 5LU. (was the head of the barons’ committee but is now unwell with dementia).

Gavin Gaulburn Hamilton, 5th Baron Hamilton of Dalzell (DECEASED circa 20 Feb 2015 , Son not accepting)

Betchworth House,Betchworth, Surrey  RH3 7AE

How to find the rest if required…Thanks to Debbie Longlegs for this good find including the above.

http://www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk/online/content/introduction.htm


The rest of the quorum of 25 barons addresses are as follows:

Earl of Shannon (as Lord Carleton),
Pimm’s Cottage, Man’s Hill, Burghfield Common, Berkshire RG7 3BD
Tel:  01189 832399

Lord Craigmyle [Definitely Accepting]
Scottas House, Knoydart, Invernesshire PH41 4PL

Lord Strathcarron [Definitely Accepting]
12 St Marks Place, London. W11 1NT

Marquis of Aberdeen
House of Formantine, Methlick, Ellon, Aberdeenshire AB41 7EQ
Tel: 01651 806897

Earl of Cromer
6 Sloane Terrace Mansions, London SW1X 9DG
Drayton Court, Drayton, Somerset

Earl of Devon,
Powderham Castle, Exeter, Devon EX6 8JQ
Tel:  01626 890253

Lord Wise
– died 2012  Christopher John Clayton WISE 3rd Baron WIES (has yet to establish his claim to the title and appear on the Roll of the House of Lords) b 19 March 1949, unm.
His brother and hp is the Hon Martin Highfield WISE (b 1950) unm. No others in line of succession to the barony.

Viscount Exmouth,
The Coach House, Canonteign Falls, nr. Exeter, Devon EX6 7NT

Lord Barber of Tewkesbury
still sits in the house of lords but has had a leave of absence since April 2011

Lord Newall
18 Lennox Gardens, London SW1X 0DG
Wotton Underwood, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP18 0RZ
Tel:  01844 238376   Fax:  01844 237153

Lord Milne,
188 Broom Road, Teddington, Middlesex

Lord Oaksey
Hill Farm, Oaksey, Malmesbury, Wiltshire SN16 9HS
Tel:  01666 577303   Fax:  01666 577962

Earl Cathcart,
Gateley Hall, Dereham, Norfolk NR20 5EF
18 Smith Terrace, London SW3 4DL

Lord Sandys
Died feb 2013  On the death of the 7th Baron Sandys the Barony of Sandys passed to his third cousin three times removed, Nicholas Wills [Hill], 9th Marquess of Downshire, a great-great-great-great-great-grandson of Baroness Sandys.
Nicholas Wills [Hill], 9th Marquess of Downshire, no longer accepting
Clifton Castle, Ripon, North Yorkshire HG4 4AB
Tel:  01765 689326

Lord Ailsa,
Cassillis House, Maybole, Ayrshire KA19 7JN
Tel:  0129-256310

Lord Napier of Magdala
The Coach House, Kingsbury Street, Marlborough, Wiltshire SN8 1HU
Tel:  01672 512333   Fax:  01672 512333
E-mail:  rob.napier@clara.net

Earl Kitchener
Died dec 2011  On the death of the 3rd Earl Kitchener of Khartoum and of Broome the Earldom of Kitchener of Khartoum and of Broome became extinct

Earl of Romney [Not Accepting]
Gayton Hall, King’s Lynn, Norfolk

Lord Napier & Ettrick
Gowan Cottage, Westley, Waterless, Newmarket, Suffolk
Down House, Wylye, Wiltshire BA12 0QN
Thirlestane Castle, Ettrick, Selkirkshire

Viscount Norwich
24 Blomfield Road, London W9 1AD
Tel:  020 7286 5050   Fax:  020 7266 2561

Viscount Cowdray
Cowdray Park, Midhurst, West Sussex GU29 0AY
Tel:  01730 812461

Lord Sudeley (Merlin Charles Sainthill, interesting name)
25 Melcombe Court, Dorset Square, London NW1 6EP

24 Comments

  1. Gary Rowlands

    Are three witnesses required or just advised?

    1. Nigel Coleman

      Hi Gary and thanks for visiting the website. Submitting (or taking) the Oath is a requirement of Article 61. In British law, especially criminal law, ‘mens rea’ (“the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty”) = intent, is hugely important. Ordinarily one would be forgiven for thinking that just your signature would be sufficient however with a raft of new powers just proposed by the (non)prime minister which seek to further severely limit our rights and freedoms, proving intent may become the subject of intense scrutiny – especially if you choose to become physically active and assist in the seizing of government buildings.

      In short, we strongly recommend at least two signatures, three being preferable; with this on your copy of your Oath – coupled with your proof of postage, present compelling proof of your intent to remain lawful – and to have lawful excuse. In the end, as always the decision is yours but with the impending draconian laws, we’d say, ‘better be safe, than sorry.’

  2. Cameron Bush

    Hello. It is my understanding America remains a covert British Colony and I wish to stand in LR soon. I am currently filing suit against the County (where I live) and against the elected officials and officers whom violated the civil/constitutional rights of my minor child. I have written an Affidavit of Truth and Declaration of Sovereignty, which I plan to submit first. My question is, will swearing my Oath to one of the Barons include me, an American, in LR as well?
    Thank you for your time.
    Cb

    1. Nigel Coleman

      Well that is an interesting question! The US of A is not a commonwealth country so interpreting the constitution thus, the strict answer has to be no. Unless you can somehow overturn the Treaty of Paris or show it to be fraudulent, I’m not sure there is any mileage in submitting your oath – indeed were word to get out, what might be the consequences for you and your family – submitting an oath my been seen as seditious? These are uncertain times and our respective governments have become paranoid.

      1. Cameron

        Thank you. There are remedies here in the US, however, none as powerful as the Magna Carta. The Treaty of Paris, is what took the control of the the crown from overt to covert; the colonies still owed taxes and loans to the King. America is not independent from and remains a British Colony. (Republica v. Sweers 1 Dallas 43; Treaty of Commerce 8 Stat 116)(Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80; IRS Publication 6209) (Articles of Association October 20, 1774.);A 1040 form is for tribute paid to Britain. (IRS Publication 6209) Source: American Laws Most Americans Don’t Know by: Greg Loucks – December 17, 2008

        1. Nigel Coleman

          It sounds like you are on the case. Keep digging my friend you might just turn up something. Find the weakest point and keep chipping away at it, relentlessly until the truth reveals itself!

  3. Gordon Finnigan

    Ok where do I sign up and why isn’t there a place you can sign the oath of alliegence to the barons online as with many protest groups? Also and this is very important to me I’m ex army and signed the oath of alliegence does one out weigh or nullify the other as I take my oath quite seriously.

    1. Nigel Coleman

      Gordon.

      Thanks for visiting the site. Your questions are indeed very pertinent so let me take them one at a time. We are not a protest group, we are the only people currently standing under the law of Britain at this time; we have the unalienable right to seize crown property until Article 61 is remedied and to break statute laws intentionally. Firstly Article 61 Magna Carta 1215 has no concept of on-line. It is quite clear that the Oath must be taken to the committee of the barons. It is not made clear precisely how this could be done but it is important that there must be a permanent record showing that you have 1) taken the Oath, 2) had it witnessed and 3) proven your intent. Right now the only sure fire way of doing this is to write, witness and post the Oath with Recorded Delivery, keeping a copy so that if or when you run into trouble with quislings (like police, government departments) you can easily prove intent with your copy of the Oath. A colleague of mine, on a website which had similarly ‘controversial’ content had his website closed and no one is willing to tell him who closed it – or provide the website data at the point of closure. We do know it was the establishment that was responsible as no one else would have the motive and his hosting provider being as coy as they are and refusing to tell him, smacks of agenda. This does not bode well for an on-line version of a public oath-taking. We are however quite happy to receive ideas how this might be accomplished; making it easier is in everyone’s interest.

      Your second question is more sensitive and I hope you will be open-minded enough to investigate further and not be offended. Your oath to the Queen is void. She has committed Treason around 2500 times and breached her Coronation Oath the same, thereby voiding her place as monarch. Arguably you could say that your oath was to the Office of Monarch, rather than to the individual who has allegedly committed these crimes however the Oath to the committee of the barons clearly removes one’s allegiance from the Queen and transfers it to the committee of the barons for as long as Article 61 remains in effect (or the committee behaves unlawfully). So to answer your question explicitly, yes the Oath to the committee of the barons takes complete precedence to the oath to the Queen but is limited to the duration of Article 61. Once a constitutional convention revokes A.61, our allegiance immediately transfers back to the office of monarch – whomever that might be when it happens – and we are expected to be loyal subjects once more. Your original Oath then comes back into play.

      The real question is how willing you are to see the authority of parliament and the monarch usurped by European regional ‘councils’ which will be irreversible once implemented, followed by the implementation of UN Agenda 21 which will see us rounded up into ‘human settlement zones’ and our every move surveilled and limited, with state-given ‘human rights’ which have no meaning as they are not rights but rather state-given privileges which can be revoked at any time (this is provable and can be found in the EU small print!) No habeas corpus, guilty until proven innocent, corpus juris and all the other ‘benefits’ that come with being part of the United States of Europe.

      [Edit] I forgot to say, all one needs to know to sign up is on http://lawfulrebellion.info/instructions-to-enter-into-l-r/

  4. lynne

    who do you get to sign your oath do you have to enlist the help of a member of the corrupt legal profession

    1. Nigel Coleman

      Hi Lynne.

      You sign the oath and have witnesses sign & witness your signing of the oath. The witnesses cannot be immediately related to you, i.e. husband/wife/siblings/offspring). The corrupt legal profession are not involved at any stage.

  5. martyn

    Hi, very interesting website that fits right in with my current feelings and frustrations.
    It seems to me on reading the list of barons that people wanting to take the oath are limited to just a few barons to receive their oath.
    What happens if no other barons take up the mantle and all the current ones die off?

    1. Nigel Coleman

      Hi Martyn and thanks for visiting.

      You are quite right, many of the original barons have ‘run away’ following the executive’s “attack” on peerages around the time that a.61 was invoked and a number have since died. Fortunately the invocation of A.61 and its continuing legal effectiveness is not contingent upon the barons’ contribution – A.61 was lawfully invoked and remains in effect until a constitutional convention declares otherwise. It is now up to the sovereign people of this land to continue the fight for justice and against tyranny.

      In the meantime any organisation which derives its authority from the Crown has no authority and is both acting ultra vires and treasonously. This includes the police:

      The lawfulness of the constable’s actions also depends on the whole body of the law and particularly the obligations which The Queen accepted at Her Coronation. Remember that s.63 (2) states that “An individual may act as an enforcement agent…”. There is no compulsion.

      Check Youtube for the following video of the “Coronation of Queen Elizabeth the Second 1953”;

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEDp34MRI20

      It is in black and white, is 9 mins 17 secs long and has the words “British Pathe” at the beginning.

      The first insight which the film gives begins at the 5 min 50 sec point. The prospective Sovereign is presented to the people, she bows to them and then the Archbishops asks the people if they accept her. This election is proof that the people are Sovereign, whatever the present establishment may claim.

      The ceremony moves on to the next video. Youtube should take you there automatically.

      At the 10 sec. mark the Sword of state is presented “For the punishment of evildoers and the protection of the law abiding” .
      At the 20 sec. mark the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster presents the glove symbolising “Gentleness in the levying of taxes”.
      At the 1.30 sec mark the Sceptre signifying “Kingly power and Justice” is presented. Justice means to recognise rights and punish wrongs.
      At the 1.40 sec. Mark the Rod with the dove signifying that “Equity and mercy are never to be forgotten”. Equity is fairness. As a legal system, it is a body of law that addresses concerns that fall outside the jurisdiction of the Common Law.

      There we have it. Those who hold the Office of constable, pre and post 1996, should be fulfilling their lawful and legal obligations better than they have been in well publicised cases.

      Child abusers should be arrested and prosecuted. Debtors should be treated fairly. A constable’s duty does not extend to “Taking control of goods” regardless of the circumstances.

      The Nuremberg defence, “I vos only followink ze orders”, will not be accepted and failure to do these things is clearly the Common Law crime of misconduct in office.

      Time to further educate the Constables.

  6. Robbie

    Hi just a quick thought been doing some research and pledging my oath and falling into legal rebellion, could I reecind my drivers license and exercise my right to travel in a privately owned vehicle?

    1. Nigel Coleman

      Hi Robbie and thanks for visiting.

      At this time we know of no-one that has succeeded in persisting with this type of civil disobedience. Many have tried and there is much rhetoric in the freeman on the land movement that suggests some have been successful. Careful investigation of the claims inevitably leads to an eventual discovery of failure which is much less often reported than the early successes.

      With the vast array of ANPR now deployed across the UK, driving a de-registered vehicle and attempting to rescind one’s driving licence is counter productive. At best it will result in frequent interruptions to one’s journeys, seizing of one’s vehicle, loss of property and amenity of your transport. The driving licence is a contract between the driver and the government to operate a vehicle according to the rules of the highway. So, for example, one cannot drive 100mph down the motorway, get stopped, ticketed and summonsed and then try to rely on Article 61 as a defence. You may dissuade the warrant officer from issuing an arrest warrant under A.61 but you will not dissuade the “court” from taking your licence in absentia – A.61 might save you from jail but it will not save your licence.

      It is for this reason we discourage any freeman on the land tactics, such as de-registration, driving without a licence (which serves as a crude indicator that a person is safe to be on the road around other people – (common law – cause no harm, loss or injury) and instead ask people to concentrate on more practical battles, like council tax, TV licence, water bills (which are charged under Statute, not contract) etc.

      In the end only you can decide how to proceed with your chosen path; things like driving licences and cars can have a profoundly negative effect on one’s quality of life if one elects to fight those battles and loses!

      Beware of freeman on the land and commercial redemption “remedies” they are pseudo-legal and mostly have no legal effect whatsoever.

  7. Eddie

    I am interested in entering into lawful rebellion but I am a bit confused by the term ‘Common Law’. I keep hearing it referenced as though it were a declaration of immunity or impunity to prosecution or persecution, and I have read the four aspects that still apply to free men of the land as described on this site – but when I look it up for definition it describes Common Law as being the findings and judgements of all the courts of the land combined, and a system by which the whole country can expect be governed or judged. A ‘yard stick’ so to speak that any person can expect to be measured by in any court. So which is it? Is it the four basics (that I’m sure can still be broadly interpreted) or is it the combined judgement of myriad courts so one can expect the same tests and standards to be applied from lands end to Newcastle?
    Once I’ve got this clear I think I’m on board!

    1. Nigel Coleman

      Hi Eddy and thanks for visiting.

      The common law is a complex issue and it is fair to say that not all legal practitioners fully understand it or recognise its value. Firstly I must fervently reinforce that this site does not accept or condone freeman on the land philosophies or tactics. FMOTL is pseudo-legal (false legal) and has no legal effect in British courts. Despite there being much material online about FMOTL ‘successes’ these are typically short-lived and we we know of no-one who has had any long-term successes with FMOTL or commercial redemption (birth bonds, cestui que trust or other commercial redemption type ‘remedies’ eg. A4V. All those we are aware of have sooner or later fallen foul of the ‘system’ and failed. Some have lost their homes.

      Historically the common law is the embodiment of the ten commandments – in essence, cause no harm, loss, fraud and do not breach the peace. All true crimes can be defined by these rules, assault, theft, murder, embezzlement, even bullying. The correct definition of the common law is the body of law developed since 9th century – precedent law – the decisions of the British courts since the inception of the rule of law. The legal profession will always refer to this as ‘judge made law’ but this is a serious misnomer – judges do not make law, they report it – only juries and (historically) the King made law.

      The common law is the supreme law of Britian. All Statutes, Acts, Regulations and statutory instruments are created by and construed by the common law. Even the King and parliament are bound by the common law, which can never be repealed. The common law can be ‘improved’ by statute and it can be infringed (temporarily set aside until it is needed) but it cannot be replaced, abrogated or repealed by anyone, despite what the executive might claim with regards to parliamentary sovereignty. To to answer your query directly the common law is both of the things you ask – the fourt simple ‘rules’ and the entire body of historical legal judgements by the people of Britain.

      I will end with a quotation from one of our eminent legal historians – Winston Churchill, writing about Magna Carta (which is also part of the common law).

      “Here is a law which is above the King and Parliament, and which even He and They must not and may not legally break. And in the event they or anyone else were to try to abrogate it, such attempt at abrogation shall have no force nor effect and can be safely ignored with no legal ill effect. In addition, in the event of successful attempts at abrogation of such liberties, customs, or rights, the King has commanded and do hereby compel any and all subjects to swear oath to join the barons to assail the properties and persons and families of those [. . . .] who had successfully completed such abrogation, including but not limited to that of the individual Members of Parliament who had voted in favour of any such successful attempts at abrogation. This reaffirmation of a supreme law and its expression in a general charter is the great work of Magna Carta; and this alone justifies the respect in which men have held it.”
      [Churchill, A History of the English Speaking Peoples (1956)]

  8. Richard Zenon

    and in what form does one present compelling proof of your intent to remain lawful – and to have lawful excuse?

    1. Nigel Coleman

      How does anyone prove they intend to remain lawful (an action which can only exist in the future)? Submitting the oath to a member of the committee of the barons proves your intent to stand under the law of the land as espoused in Magna Carta. ch.61 Magna Carta 1215 spells out quite succinctly that we all have a duty and a right to distress and distrain the Crown until redress of grievance. That is lawful excuse. Magna Carta was a restatement of the common law. The common law cannot be repealed nor abrogated in British law.

      As legal historian Winston Churchill so eloquently puts it in his 1956 book,

      “Here is a law which is above the King and Parliament, and which even He and They must not and may not legally break. And in the event they or anyone else were to try to abrogate it, such attempt at abrogation shall have no force nor effect and can be safely ignored with no legal ill effect. In addition, in the event of successful attempts at abrogation of such liberties, customs, or rights, the King has commanded and do hereby compel any and all subjects to swear oath to join the barons to assail the properties and persons and families of those [. . . .] who had successfully completed such abrogation, including but not limited to that of the individual Members of Parliament who had voted in favour of any such successful attempts at abrogation. This reaffirmation of a supreme law and its expression in a general charter is the great work of Magna Carta; and this alone justifies the respect in which men have held it.”
      [Churchill, A History of the English Speaking Peoples (1956)]

  9. Gem

    Hi, would swearing allegiance to more than one baron be advisable, or is that overkill?.
    Cheers.

    1. Marcus

      Hi Gem and thanks for visiting.

      There would be no harm in doing so however in terms of practicality, the purpose of the exercise is to prove one’s intent to stand under the law of the land. Ch.61 requires all British Subjects to stand under Ch.61 or be compelled to do so until redress of grievance. There is no formally published procedure for taking the oath and so we adopted the principle of sending a witnessed oath to a member of the committee (taking a copy first, of course) to show that we have taken the oath before witnesses and submitted it to the authority declared in Ch.61 – the committee.

      As long as you have signed and had witnessed your oath, and obtained proof of postage (and if possible proof of delivery) you have done all that is necessary to switch your allegiance from the office of sovereign to the current lawful authority – the committee of the barons.

      If you are in any doubt about the validity of Ch.61, we have just added a new page with a citation from Halsbury’s about constitutional Acts which confirms MC1215 is among them.

      http://lawfulrebellion.info/is-a-61-a-law-or-part-of-one/

  10. james

    Once you’ve sent an oath and your part of it do you loose any rights like benifits, residence in Europe, free health care (nhs) ect.. Or is it the same as it is now just only follow common law

    1. Marcus

      It will not make any difference since all you are doing is switching your allegiance from the office of monarch to the committee of the barons.

  11. Tim

    Hello,

    I’m afraid the following info applies:

    Earl of Devon, Hugh Courtenay, unfortunately passed away in August 2015.
    Viscount Exmouth has “Gone away”

  12. Pingback: The common law - Soutersmith blog

Leave a Comment

Nothing on this website is to be construed as legal advice.