At the ceremony transforming Mr Neil Kinnock, a well-known unelected Brussels busybody, into Baron Kinnock of Bedwellty, unelected Westminster busybody*, the Garter bowed to the Cloth of Estate and entered the House on the Temporal side, then handed the Kinnock of Bedwellty's letters patent to the Reading Clerk and moved to the Spiritual side to stand next to Black Rod. The Reading Clerk then proceeded to the Floor dividing the Temporal from the Spiritual and proclaimed the following from the Despatch Box:
Elizabeth the Second by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other Realms and Territories Queen Head of the Commonwealth Defender of the Faith To all Lords Spiritual and Temporal and all other Our Subjects whatsoever to whom these Presents shall come Greeting Know Ye that We of Our especial grace certain knowledge and mere motion do by these Presents advance create and prefer Our right trusty and well-beloved Neil Gordon Kinnock to the state degree style dignity title and honour of Baron Kinnock of Bedwellty ...

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si1992/Uksi 19921730 en 2.htm

(Why no punctuation?)
As I understand it, 'mere motion' is an English version of 'ex mero muto', a legal phrase meaning that something is the 'free and voluntary act of a party himself, done without the suggestion or influence of another person' (Black's Law Dictionary, 5th ed.).

This means that the Kinnock of Bedwellty's letters patent include a patent untruth (as do those of many other members of the peerage, most likely). The Queen is too well-mannered to have ennobled such a vocal opponent of unelected privilege without 'the suggestion or influence of another person' - of Mr Blair, perhaps, or Glynis, or maybe even the Kinnock himself.
Does this mean that the letters patent are invalid, that the Kinnock of Bedwellty is, in fact, still plain Mr Kinnock?
*In 1977, the Welsh Windbag denounced the House of Lords as 'a bunch of unelected busybodies'.

Mickwick
Smiert Spam
1 2 3 4
Elizabeth the Second by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other Realms

The UK has its own God?

Tony Cooper
Orlando FL
Elizabeth the Second by the Grace of God of the UnitedKingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our otherRealms

The UK has its own God?

You didn't know? How else could you explain the Established Church?

Mike.
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
At the ceremony transforming Mr Neil Kinnock, a well-knownunelected Brussels busybody, into Baron Kinnock of Bedwellty, unelected Westminster busybody*, the ... fact, still plain Mr Kinnock? *In 1977, the Welsh Windbag denounced the House of Lords as 'abunch of unelected busybodies'.

Nice solo, but the "mere motion" surely just represents a marker for the Sovereign's not having to have a reason, not that she mustn't be influenced by anybody else.

Mike.
As I understand it, 'mere motion' is an English version ... or influence of another person' (Black's Law Dictionary, 5th ed.).

Nice solo,

Thanks, but what about that Princess Anne and her sousaphone?
but the "mere motion" surely just represents a marker for the Sovereign's not having to have a reason, not that she mustn't be influenced by anybody else.

'Mere motion' is, I think, more than a marker - or it should be.

According to the Web, 'by mere motion' and 'ex mero motu' appear to have been used to mean several slightly different things: 'voluntarily', 'through one's own initiative', and 'just because I say so'. I reckon their literal meaning is something like 'undiluted instigation', which could be fairly close to the Black's explanation (which I found in a Usenet post, so it might not be correct: the spelling of 'motu' certainly wasn't) or it could be total gibberish. Legal glossaries available online say that 'ex mero motu' just means 'of one's own free will'; 'mere motion' is unexplained, even when it forms part of the Latin phrase's definition and even though it clearly does not mean what it would mean if it were modern English, which it clearly ain't.

So I dunno. My serious dislike of the Kinnock of Bedwettly perhaps led me too far in one direction; your sock-and-sandal reasonableness has perhaps led you too far in the other. (Ingrowing toe nail? That's what Gerber multi-tools were invented for. Bight the bullet, old son, and snip deeply. Or if it's a whitlow, cut the whole toe off. You know it makes sense.)

Mickwick
Smiert Spam
According to the Web, 'by mere motion' and 'ex mero motu' appear to[/nq]^ both (i.e. they mean the same thing but there
isn't a same thing, if you see what I mean)
have been used to mean several slightly different things:

Mickwick
Smiert Spam
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Kingdom Realms

The UK has its own God?

You didn't know? How else could you explain the Established Church?

Mind you, it's only established in England. Bzzzt, does not compute!

Andrew Gwilliam
To email me, replace "bottomless pit" with "silverhelm"
At the ceremony transforming Mr Neil Kinnock, a well-known unelected Brussels busybody, into Baron Kinnock of Bedwellty, unelected Westminster busybody*, ... state degree style dignity title and honour of Baron Kinnock of Bedwellty ... http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si1992/Uksi 19921730 en 2.htm (Why no punctuation?)

Assuming you didn't know, there's no punctuation because it's a legal document. The better class of modern-day lawyer has discovered punctuation, however old habits die hard.

Andrew Gwilliam
To email me, replace "bottomless pit" with "silverhelm"

Nice solo,

Thanks, but what about that Princess Anne and her sousaphone?

Ah, and who can forget General de Gaulle on accordeon ("It's a great honour, Sir") and the memorable Adolf hitler on vibes?

But, hell, everything about the constitutional monarchy is a legal fiction. Ask that one-man Hotbed of Sedition, John Dean, even if he is wearing his culottes this evening (awfully comfortable, I understand). Nay, rather or further, consider Balfour's 1927 Introduction to the 1928 Bagehot: "...the Monarchy...provides the disguise which happily prevents the ordinary Englishman from discovering that he is not living under a Monarchy but under a Republic; for (says Bagehot) 'it is only a disguised Republic which is suited to such a being as the Englishman in such a century as the nineteenth'." I daresay Martin Ambuhl knows the entire text by heart, and, by all the holy crows, if it's good enough for Martin, it's good enough for you and me. Or perhaps he and we are the Less Deceived.
(I recommend Bagehot: rather a hoot. I fear the daughter who's just done Politics and International Affairs at Warwick missed out there. I bet they'd have made her digest him if she'd done PPE at Oxford, as read by the other Future Humphreys: who's to say which team will come out on top? I'd be inclined to put a sporting bet on Warwick, even without Bagehot.)

Mike.
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Show more