Recently, I was having a fascinating discussion about the issue of reparations for the slave trade. What moral responsibility and financial duty exists in respect of actions taken by an individual's ancestors or nation? Is it right that, in effect, the sins of the fathers should be visited upon the sons?
This is not a new problem for society to deal with, and was especially acute in Norman England, when land holdings were disturbed by the conquest, and then by the civil war between supporters of Stephen and Matilda, in the period known as the Anarchy. An effort was made to settle such disputes by declaring that land was to be owned as it was at the end of a certain reign, initially the reign of Henry I; later this was settled at 1189, the year of the death of Henry II and the accession of Richard the Lionheart.
This date is still known as ‘time immemorial’, and was the last time such action was necessary. It remains the backstop of legal land ownership in England. However, this approach was used to deal with the immediate problem of conquest and war, which had invalidated the normal legal structures. This is not the case for transgressions committed centuries ago.
Listen to this episode with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Letters from an Englishman by Jacob Rees-Mogg to listen to this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.
