INTELLECTUAL CREED SOCIETY - BRANCH OF ROSICRUCIAN ORDER

 

INTELLECTUAL CREED SOCIETY "De Vir doctus" - BRANCH OF ROSICRUCIAN ORDER

THE CONSTITUTION

 

                                                                                                              Reviewed and Edited By :

Emmanuel Tweneboah Senzu, DBA, PhD., SJD.

Professor of Constitutional Law and Economic Criminology

                                                                                       The Supreme General

                                                                    Badge No (BN): ICS-CA05USA-1985114ETS-20210101001

[1] QUALIFICATION:

I. Upholding superior authority in the field of study and specialty.

[2] BELIEF:

I. We engage in tripartite fellowship of Knowledge, Wisdom and Power till death.

[3] ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

I. Purity of Soul and Mind

II. Holding Good Social Standing of Integrity and Reputation

III. Exercising a philosophical character, as an object of principles to deeds and works

IV. Sound of moral character in relation to sexual conducts

a) Not taken for granted sexual relations

b) Avoid Promiscuity

c) Avoid Incest

d) Avoid sexual rituals or initiations, unless, undertaken at strict instructional guidelines for intended purpose, for the common good. 

[4] RITUALS:

I.    A day fasting and meditation in the first week of every months (12hrs in duration), any change of this procedure to the adept, shall be under strict instructional guide by the Generals, of the various Planes, under a prophetic guidance, and approval of the 'Supreme General' of the Council of Seraphim.

II. (3) Days of fasting and meditation prayer, in special festive moment of the year, for the society, which is programmed within May/June and December/January of every year.

III. In such occasion, consecrated charity and arms are offered, to the less privilege (Orphans), Vulnerables of society, as in (qualified widows, and the oppressed), the marginalized, as in those (in poverty class, or at the base of the social ladder)

IV.  Any additional elementary ritual requirement, in admission to the lower planes initiations, for the society, shall be prescribed, by the General, that Preside on the Court Business of that Plane, subject to the approval, of the 'Supreme General' of the Court of Seraphim.

[5] TENENTS:

I. We are the head, not the tail.

II. We are lenders to nations, not borrowers.

 

[6] PLANES:

I. Seraphim – 7^th Plane

II. Cherubim – 6^th Plane

III. Thrones – 5^th Plane

IV. Dominions – 4^th Plane

V. Archangels – 3^rd Plane

VI. Virtues – 2^nd Plane

VII. Principalities – 1^st Plane

 

[7A] INITIATION:

For an admission into the fraternity, the requirement, is to accept the procedure of ritual initiation of the soul and mind purification, as outlined below;

“3 Days fasting of (24hrs period for each day), with each day fasting, closed with fruits and water, under special administered prayers and psalmists readings, within certain hours of the day and night, under supervision, guidance and Prophetic Instructions, with abstinence from any form of sexual engagement, and alcoholic beverages, in the period of initiation. 

[7B] THE PREPARATORY STAGE:

I.                   ICS-1^st Degree; The Mental orientation, Spiritual 'Faculty' preparations and Laws.

II.                ICS -2^nd Degree; The Power of Execution, Ethics, and Sui generis in Professional service discharge.

III.             ICS-3^rd Degree;  The Final Initiation rites, Vows and Induction.

[7C] RULES GOVERNING THE INITIATED:

I. No initiated member, is accessible to opposing initiated order.

II.  Members expressing interest into a new order, will always consult the ‘Supreme General’ for approval, in the interest of their spiritual protection.

III. A spiritual undertaken by a member, outside the order, puzzled with ramifications, could engage the Supreme General, for clarity, prior to, in avoiding unexpected consequence. 

[7D] PERMANENT RELIEVE AS AN INITIATED MEMBER OF THE SOCIETY

 Any initiated member of the order, is granted access to personal Psalmist number, unique to thy soul, as a code for Private Prayers and meditation, which the 'Supreme General', has it documented on his data-base, hence, member seeking for a permanent relieve from the society, the initiated member, therein, pray with it, under a (12) hours dry fasting, and the request, shall be granted.

[8] PLANE TRANSITIONS:

I. For, the initiated and the adept of the society, to rise from the 1^st Plane to the 2^nd Plane, shall depend largely on the quality of one service to his/her family (if any), herein constituted marriage, the community of volunteering service, and by extension to the society as a whole; and commitment to follow, the body of philosophy and principles of the order, which may take not less than (24) months of supervision, under the Council of Virtues.

II. To transition from the 2^nd Plane to the other Higher Planes, shall be based on, one quality of scholarly works, and moral discipline. Which, such promotions shall never take less than (12) months, of indirect performance assessment, and a recommendation of a fellow, from a succeeding Higher Plane, under a formal application, with majority supporting vote of that Plane, which the adept aspire to be, and finally, under the approval of the 'Supreme General', who superintend over all the operations of the Society.

[9] EXERCISING OF POWER:

       I.  A Plane, as a chapter, shall only be constituted, only if, it has not less than (5) qualified members.

[10] FRATERNITY PHILOSOPHY:

 I. The Journey of Intellectualism, is a process that requires time for maturity, passion for resilience, and curiosity for innovation, in favour of human civilization, hence, we are the altar upon which, the selected few, are nurtured into Ancient wisdom.

[11] SUPREME GENERAL:

In the  existence of the Society, the Presiding Supreme General of all the Planes, shall be a single qualified, and a Seraphim Court crowned ‘Lord’ of Life-time, with the title ‘Supreme General’, who oversee the entire management of the Intellectual Creed Society, until, his demise or subject to reasons, sought to be relieved and replaced.

[12] QUALIFICATION TO THE COUNCIL OF DOMINIONS   

I.    In admission to the Council of Dominion, one should be a doctoral fellow, with a specialized field of study, and publication(s) that attest the depth of knowledge, and significant impact to the society, for the advancement of human civilization.

II. One should meet all the basic initiation and ritual requirements of the Council of Archangels.

III. One should have a historic records of being with the Society, for at least two (2) years, committed to it body of philosophical principles and traditions.

 

 [13A] QUALIFICATION TO THE COUNCIL OF THRONES :

 [A] Acknowledging the strength of the fraternity at the Council of Thrones, to be qualified and conferred upon, the fellowship of Thrones, and it powers. The following shall be the qualification criteria;

I. The adept, should be among the leading scholars of his/her field, with at least one (1) outstanding book published.

II. Not less than (5) academic impacts papers published, in the field of study. 

III. A lead Intellectual advocate, and consultant, in the field of study.

IV. A man or a woman of high moral standard, and spirit of nobility

V. One should be a professorial fellow 

[14A] QUALIFICATION TO THE COURT OF CHERUBIN:

 [A] The highest and the sixth Plane of the fraternity, shall be, the Court of Cherubins, and to be admitted, is to meet the following criteria;

I. One should have been in a good standing at the Council of Thrones, not less than (5) years of services.

II. One should have not less than (3) quality books published, in thy field of expertise.

III. Not less than (10) quality academic papers, published to thy credit.

IV. A person of high Social standing of nobility, and an intellectual advocate of thy field.

V. And recommended by a fellow at the Court of Cherubins and endorsed, accordingly.

[15A]  QUALIFICATION TO THE COURT OF SERAPHIM:

[A] Shall be the final Plane of the fraternity, and it admission, will require a properly constituted ‘Supreme General’, to that office, which shall always be by revelation or prophecy, attested by seven other fellows of Cherubin Court, who swear an oath, to the sincerity of their 'staff of office', with the Heaven and Earth bearing witness, such that, contrary to their oath of attestation, shall  pave a consequence of death, as atonement, to the sanctity of that office, including the 'Supreme General' himself, in committing a sin, to conspire in desecrating the office. Whenceforth, under the covenant, becomes the Trustees of the office, for it sanctity of administration.

[15B] When the ‘Supreme General’ is rightfully constituted to his office, the Seraphim Court, he, shall in a minimum period of (70) days, and a maximum of (140) days, constitute five member committee, to set-up the Seraphim Court, in administering the Business of the Planes, in accordance to the constitution, and traditions of the Society.

[15C] The Altar of the Court of the ‘Supreme General’, is required to have four cardinal poles, as in the North, South, East and West. And, any qualified ‘Supreme General’, worthy of that office, with his loyalty to the Higher Order of Most Reverence names of the Heavens, twelve of those names as outlined, and manifested to him, to design and constitute the Altar, as follows; The God of Elohim, The God of Adonai, The God of Mekaddishkem,  The God of Immanuel, The God of  Rohi, The God of Ropheka, The God of Yireh, The God of Nissi, The God of Tetragrammaton, The God of Shalom, The God of Tsidkenu. Subsequently, the General shall experience the manifestation of the authorized Angles, that rule over the North Pole, The South Pole, The East Pole and the West Pole, herein,  Angle Uriel- Tetragramaton,  Angle Sariel- Ropheka, Angle Haniel-Adonai, Angle Raphael-Yireh, Angle Raguel-Elohim in that order; and Angle Gabriel, the superintending ark-lord of the Court of Tsidkenu, in conformity to the rules governing their space and services to humanity, to advance civilization within the light years, of a given dispensation, with the Altar of the General, serving as a point of covenant engagement. Having their allegiance fixed to the Central Throne of the heavens, in all of their undertakings with the General. When successful at that stage of engagement, they shall then manifest themselves, by the authority of their names and 'rod', staffs’ or 'snipers', as well, spiritans in their constituted host of Angelic Courts, which they preside upon, and their ministry, to complement the office of the ‘Supreme General’ in serving humanity, and advancing civilization.

[16A] CEREMONIAL CONVOCATION:

 [A] As an order, we shall publicly congregate for our works, in accorded festive programs, to promote the contribution of our scholarly body of works, as impact to humanity, and society as a whole. Which will be a festive, accessible to all initiated members, appearing under the following costume colours;

I. The ‘Supreme General’ and his Seraphim Court- Convocate with a Blue-Black Gown and white scarlet robe

II. Cherubin Court - Red-Black Gowns with white scarlet robe

III. Throne Council - Yellow-Black Gowns with white scarlet robe

IV. Dominion Council - Pale Ash Gowns with white scarlet robe

[16B] The rest of the Ranking members shall be required to put-on, a formal dressing code, in a corporate colour of the fraternity, in accordance to the agreed material texture designs, and colours as follows;

V. Archangels Council - Corporate Dress in Pale (Light) Blue Colour

VI. Virtues Council- Corporate Dress in Pale (Light) Red Colour

VII.  Principalities Council - Corporate Dress in (Deep) Red Colour

[17] BENEFIT OF THE ORDER AND TO THE OPEN SOCIETY:

 I. The effort, is to defend and protect membership welfare, in the open society, in all works of life, predominantly, in the area of Socio-economic, Law, Politics and Business.

II. We nurture the ‘selected’ to become great leaders, in their field of study, and practices to the open society, to advance civilization.

III. Grants support, are offered to members qualified, worthy to attain, the superior course of the creed.

IV. We recruit where necessary, University graduates, with exceptional intellectual talents, having discipline and moral conducts, to be sponsored, and nurtured, to the higher order of the fraternity, to advance the course of human civilization.

V.  Members are entitled to their political interest and affinity in the open society, but the Intellectual Creed Society is apolitical in practice, and in principle.

[18A] THE DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL

[A] This Unit, is assigned with a special duty, to discharge all punishments, in accordance to the rules, procedures, and spiritual guidance of the creed, against fellows, who engages in acts, considered as, sin or desecration to the fellowship of the order, adjudicated under the staff of justice, principle and fairness.

I.  Any actions, and deeds of a fellow, that brings disrepute and public dishonour to the order.

II. Upholding a questionable moral character, that bring disrespect to the candidate(s), and the society as a whole.

III. An allegation(s), and indictment(s) against a fellow, shall be subjected to, rigour investigation(s), to be presided, and adjudicated by a tribunal, and pass verdict, to determine the disciplinary punishment, within the order. Beyond the Order, shall such cases, be tried by appropriate governmental Institutions of mandate; which, the Order shall conform, in accordance, to the constitutional requirement, of the Jurisdiction.

 

SIR. EDWARD COKE, MAGNA CARTA AND JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

 The English history circa 10^th to 14^th Century AD, is culminated with series of civil wars, and knight crusaders. The inquiry into the era of Norman-Angevin to Plantagenet dynasty, gave birth to the signing of the Magna carta. The refinement of text to the Magna carta, for certain right and liberties, through series of negotiations, with then existing English Monarch, the Subject, and the Roman Church, from the year (1215) to (1225); formulated a charter that will become a symbol, and a defense, during a battle of oppression, between the governed and the governor. And, in the year (1628), the rivalry that was emerging between the English Monarch and the Subject, set-out the doctrinal tone of the Magna carta, to give birth to the ‘Habeas Corpus’ Act, and the ‘Petition of Right’ in the English Common law, as an initiated efforts of Sir. Edward Coke.

Thou, is the rise of an ardent advocate, for the right of Englishmen, and Judicial Independence, under a ferocious Monarchy, with strings of conspired attacks, on the grounds of Royal prerogative, against the efforts of Sir. Edward Coke. And in the detest of King James I of England, recognized him, as the father of the 'Common law'.

Who then is Edward Coke? He was born in 1^st February 1552 in Mileham, Mid Norfolk, to a prosperous Barrister, and a Bencher of Lincoln’s inn, Mr. Robert Coke, and to a Mother, Winifred Knightley. Edward Coke, early Education at the age of 8years, started at Norwich Free Grammar School, established by Herbert de Losinga, Bishop of Norwich. In his 15^th birthday, in the year 1567, he was successfully admitted to Trinity College, Cambridge. And spent 3years of his academic study there. Onwards, in the year 1571, out of Trinity College, got himself admitted to Clifford’s inn and Inns of Chancery, to learn the basics of the law, as initial legal education, before transfer to the inns of Court.  And finally, on the 24^th April 1572, at the age of 20 years, having completed his basic legal education, was further transferred to the Inner Temple, which initiated his second phase of legal education for the next 6 to 7years, and called to bar as a barrister at law, in the year 1579 at his 28^th birthday.

His legal talent in handling notable cases, earned him a political favour, to be elected and serve as Solicitor General, which was later followed with another promotion to the office of Attorney General, under the appointment of Queen Elizabeth I, at the year 1594 in his 42^nd birthday. His prosecutorial skill and success, resulted, in his further promotion by the succeeding King of England, after the death of Queen Elizabeth the first, King James I, to the office of Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, in the year 1606, at his 54^th birthday, as well knighted by the King. In assumption to that office, he uphold the pledge of exalting and protecting the Right of the Englishmen, and importantly, the wrong application of the law at the Ecclesiastical Court, established by the Monarch, with nearly unlimited power, used in a form of coercion, persecution, and forcible self-incrimination in religious trials, during his era. Barrister Nicholas Fuller, a victim, was in the custody for contempt of that Ecclesiastical Court, of English realm, as the Court of High Commission, which Edward Coke defined the suits running in that Court, as Notorious suits, and went ahead to issue a writs of Prohibition against the Bishop Richard Bancroft, who was leading that Court, and summoned them before the Court of King’s Bench, with Coke arguing that Ecclesiastical Courts jurisdiction, was limited to cases of Church Administrative breaches, beyond, was to be left for Common law Judges, carefully trained, to interpret the law.

 In his brief for the case of Prohibition, reminded the King James I, in his own person, cannot adjudge any case, either criminal or civil, but ought to be determined, and adjudged in a Court of Justice, accorded to the law and custom of England. And the Monarch, was not subject to any individual, but to the laws of the land.

In the year 1613 at the age of 61years, Sir. Edward Coke, the Chief Justice for the Court of Common Pleas, dedicating all his efforts and services, in protecting the Rights of the people in England, was transferred to the Court of King’s Bench, in this instance, with the expectation of loyalty to the Monarch, than to the Common law, but the stance, of Sir. Edward Coke was an entrenched principle, and went ahead to remind King James the first, and I quote him ‘With all pleading cases before me, I shall do what be fit a Judge to do.’

Onwards, necessitated an unrest fume between Sir. Edward Coke, and the Royal Court, until the demise of King James I, in the year 1625, and the successor, was his son, King Charles I of England. In his reign, were series of Monarchy repressions, through the raising of taxes without Parliament approval or sanctions, and imprisonment without trials, which the Judges of the Court of Common pleas, and the King’s Bench declared, the actions of the King, as illegal, as a result went ahead to dismiss his appointed Chief Justice Sir. Rannlph Crewe of the Court of Common Pleas. And proceeded, to use the Martial law, for the continual imprisonment, against those who disregard the King’s order, for tax payment, thereby, relying on the soldiers of his realm, to intimidate the citizens.

Therein, the emergence of Sir. Edward Coke, in his famous declaration through a writs, and I quote, ‘In the house of an Englishman, is to him a Castle’. And went ahead in a spirit of the House of Commons, to respond to the actions of King Charles I, insisting the validity of the Magna carta, which expressly forbade the Imprisonment of freemen, without a trial, and in the clause 39 of the 1215 Charter of the Magna carta, subjecting the sovereign to the law. And went ahead to prepare the Resolutions, which led to the Habeas Corpus Act 1679, with a section of the Resolutions captured as follows;

‘No freeman, is to be remanded or detained in prison, or otherwise restrained by command of the King or Privy Council, or any other, unless some lawful cause be shown.’ And went ahead to argue,

‘the writ of habeas corpus cannot be denied, but should be granted to every man, who is remanded or detained in prison or otherwise restrained by the command of the King, the Privy Council or any other…Any freeman, so remanded or detained in prison, without cause being stated, should be entitled to bail or be freed.’

Sir. Edward Coke, reminded the King, Imprisonment in law, is a civil death, and a prison without a prefixed time, is a kind of hell.

King Charles the first, recalcitrant to the Resolutions from Sir. Edward Coke, through the House of Commons, resulted in the initiating of the ‘Petition of Right’ in a writ, for the Rights and Liberties of Royal Subjects, which became codified as Parliamentary privilege, with a section captured as follows, and I quote ‘the ultimate sovereign, lay with the common-law, not merely, was this superior to the civil or cannon law, but both the Parliament and the King, were subject to it authority’.

Furthermore, in reiteration to Sir. Edward Coke dissent, as then, the Chief Justice of the Court of Common pleas in England, during a declaration by the Court on Dr. Bonham’s case in the year 1610, Which, I quote, ‘When an Act of Parliament is against Common Right and Reason, or Repugnant, or impossible to be performed, the Common law will control it, and adjudge such Act to be void’.

And became a tradition uphold by the Court, and carefully expounded by Sir. William Blackstone, in pursuit of the law as a shield, to protect the Right and Freedom of the Englishmen, and I quote him ‘Parliament was a sovereign law-maker, preventing the Common law Courts from not only throwing aside her mandatory works, rather, to review the statutes in a fashion Edward Coke suggested.’

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sir. Edward Coke Photo © Gilbert Jackson 1615, Guildhall Art Gallery, UK.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emmanuel Tweneboah Senzu, DBA, Ph.D., SJD.

Professor of Constitutional Law and Economic Criminology, fellow, University of Sierra Leone. Fulbright Research Fellow, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, USA.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JEREMY BENTHAM: THE FATHER OF UTILITARIANISM IN ENGLISH JURISPRUDENCE

When the name Jeremy Bentham, is exemplified in the English law and practice, he is acknowledged, as a theoretical jurist, and in sharp contrast to Sir William Blackstone, who was his former lecturer, and known of his careful philosophical review, as commentaries on the English common law, during the 17^th and 18^th Century AD. Bentham became an arch-developer of the Utilitarian doctrine of the English law, and therefore, was accorded, the status, as the father of Utilitarianism.

Utilitarian, in the normative ethics of the law, from it inception within the 18^th Century AD, had examined ‘Actions’ as either ‘Right’ or ‘Wrong’, and the effects, either creating happiness /pleasure or unhappiness /pain, which goes beyond the performer of the action, to it community.

In the writings of Bentham, on censorial jurisprudence, of what the law ought to be, as an analysis to the existing English legal system of the 17^th Century AD, and the development of utilitarian pannomiom, he argued; in the theory of language, words, ideas and propositions, must represent or describe real entities, in a form of perception or substance.

For detail discussion, and elaboration of the theory of utility, in the English law, demand knowing who is Jeremy Bentham? The young boy Bentham Jeremy, was born in the year 15^th February 1748 at the Spitalfields, London, England; to a father, who was an Attorney, Mr. Jeremiah Bentham Jr., and mother, Alicia Woodward. He is noted to have spent much of his early days with the Grand mother, Rebecca Tabor, and got himself admitted to Westminister School; a School noted of it early inception, as a charity school founded by Benedictine monks, in the year (1179), which became a secular school through King Henry VIII, in the year (1540), and got refounded by Queen Elizabeth I, in the year (1560), as a distinguished public school. In his graduation from Westminister School, Bentham got admission to the Queen’s College, Oxford University, in the year (1760) at the age of 12 years old. In his three years of study at Oxford University, got him admitted to Lincoln’s Inn, to study law at the King’s Bench division of the High Court in the year (1764). At the age of 16 years, he was under the tutelage of the Chief Justice Lord Mansfield, and Sir. William Blackstone. And went further with his studies, until the year (1767) to obtain his Master of Arts degree in Law at Oxford University, during his 19^th birth day.

And was called to the bar in the year (1769) as a trained Barrister at law, at age of 21 years, but never practice, rather, spent the greater part of the remaining years of his life, developing the utilitarian theory and penal code, within the framework of the English legal system.

The tenet of  Bentham’s argument was, ‘Utility’ as a principle of ethics, should be rooted in empirical and verifiable facts, felt in the experience of pains and pleasures. He sought to dismiss concept used by advocates, in analyzing ‘Utility principles’, as ‘moral sense’, ‘common sense’, ‘law of reason’, ‘natural justice’ and ‘natural equity’. He considered those choices of words, as merely empty phrases, that lacks, verifiable reality. The theoretical focus of Bentham work, was how do legislators, influence individual actions, to stimulate conformity to a common decision?

He, therefore, delineated four sanctions, as either a source of pain or pleasure, serving as control mechanism of behaviour. These sanctions were labeled as Physical, Political, Moral and Religious, as a tool for self-interested individuals, to be encouraged, in other to perform actions that promote, the greatest happiness of both themselves and others. With doctrinal view, that utility of an action, is independent of its originating motives, the act , is determined solely by its consequence. Thereby, the performer of the act, should be responsible to calculate, reasonably, how to handle the pain, and the pleasure, for oneself and the community, so should the legislator, be guided by similar calculation, in formulating laws.

Thou, the above assertion, constituted the implicit of consequentialism in utilitarian theory, the bedrock to Bentham theory of Punishment. Arguing that, punishment prescribed by law, should be in proportion to the mischief, produced by the crime, and sufficient to deter others, from committing the same offence, hence, his postulation, has been the fundamental doctrine of modern penal code, in the English legal system.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Photo of Jeremy Bentham © H. W. Pickersgill 1829. National Portrait Gallery, London.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emmanuel Tweneboah Senzu, DBA, Ph.D., SJD.

Professor of Constitutional Law and Economic Criminology, fellow, University of Sierra Leone. Fulbright Research Fellow, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, USA.

 

SIR. WILLIAM BLACKSTONE AND THE COMMON LAW

 

                         SIR. WILLIAM BLACKSTONE AND THE COMMON LAW

Among the English Jurists, and the doctrinal development of the English Law, Sir. William Blackstone name, is eminent, though, not touted as extraordinary advocate before the English Court, in the midst of colleagues, yet, his compendium of commentaries, had a significant influence in the development of the Common law doctrine, and did cast eternal light, as shield against tyranny of Sovereignty. Hence, is the subject of discuss.

The English common law, in it early birth, consisted of procedural remedies to ‘rights’, in the early middle ages, for the King’s Court. The continual working out of these procedural remedies, produced a modern system, in which, ‘rights’ were seen as a primary request, over the procedures, as a practice that became a substantive rules creation, after the Norman Conquest, in replace of the Anglo-Saxons succession, as a colonial rule in the year (1066) of our Common era.

The newly centralized government of the Anglo-Norman, centralized their Judiciary, to uphold a practice of outlawry, where actions and deeds of a person, is confined within the law. Thou, in the reign of King Henry II, the administration of Justice, became preeminent, where the Church and the Kingdom, had separate laws and Court systems, with centuries of rivalry over jurisdiction, with the appeals of the Church Court, taken to Rome, because of it Canon law development by the Rome University, in the 12^th Century, for the English Church Courts, while the customs of the Anglo-Norman, largely on Feudal Land laws, Compensation for exercising wardship and marriage, Successions, Tenancy, Impact of inflation's, Inheritance,etc... in it improved remedies, held at the King’s Court, in the same era. Hence, led to the elaboration, and standardization of both the Church rules, and the customs of the Kingdom, forged together, to serve as the foundation, and the origin of the common law.

Therein, a young boy, William Blackstone, born on the 10^th July 1723 at Cheapside, London; as the fourth born son of Mr. Charles Blackstone and Mrs. Mary Blackstone. William, got admitted to Charter House School, in the year (1730), at the age of (7)year. A school founded by Mr. Thomas Sutton in the year (1611) in Godalming, Surrey, England.

On the 1^st of October 1738, William Blackstone was offered a Scholarship, based on academic excellence, at the Charter House School, towards his admission at Pembroke College, Oxford University, at the age of (15)years. After a year and half study of Bachelor of Arts, he got re-admitted to the study of the programme, Bachelor of Civil Law degree, which was the only recognized legal programme of the Oxford University, as at 9^th July 1740; and required seven years of completion, and got admitted to the middle Temple, as a Barrister in the year (1748), and follow-up with his election, as a fellow to All Souls College, Oxford, at the age of (25)years. He went ahead to pursue his Doctor of Civil Law degree, and graduated in the year (1751), at the age of (28)years, and got admitted to convocation, by the governing body of Oxford University, in his 29^th birth day. And did personally announced his intent, as a resident scholar for Oxford University, on the 3^rd July 1753. Afterwards, got appointed as the Chief legal officer of the Chancellor’s Court.

On the 20^th October 1759,  Dr. William Blackstone was appointed, as the first vinerian professor of English Law, for Oxford University, at the age of (36)years. And later became, a Justice of the Common Pleas, and Serjeant-at-law, on the 9^th February 1770 at the age of (47)years. As earlier alluded to, the eminence of the name William Blackstone in English Law, significantly depends on his commentaries of the laws of England as at then, which served as the best known description, for the doctrines of the English common law. These commentaries, were compartmentalized into four books, as follows;

I. Of the Rights of Persons, a book, which dealt with the family and public law.

II. Of the Rights of Things, a book, which outline real-property law.

III. Of Private Wrongs, a book, which discussed Civil liability, Courts and Procedures.

IV. Of Public Wrongs, a book, which dealt excellently with criminal law.

Even though, there were criticism on his work by few proponent, who believed his work, was full of superficiality, and lack of historical sense; largely, his works were acknowledged by  many, as a style and intelligibility, especially, with majority of the English lawyers, and regarded it, as authoritative exposition of the common law. His work grew more famous, after the American declaration of Independence, in the year (1776).

The Blackstone commentaries of the English law, became the chief source of knowledge, in the American new World, hence, his efforts has been recognized, as an extraordinary influence, in the development of the common law doctrine.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Photo of Sir. William Blackstone ©  Thomas Hamilton Crawford (1860 -1948), Digital Collection of British Library

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emmanuel Tweneboah Senzu, DBA., Ph.D., SJD.

Professor of Constitutional Law and Economic Criminology, fellow, University of Sierra Leone.

Fulbright Research Fellow, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, USA.