Mission Statement
The John Lilburne Research Institute (JLRI) in its present form emerged after the year 2000 as a result of a working partnership between Dr. Eric Gilder and Mervyn Hagger, and it is now about to enter into a new phase of its development by expanding its research and media activities. JLRI traces its origins back to both a meeting of Hagger with Alan Crawford, who was the pioneer of offshore commercial radio broadcasting in Europe during 1963, and a lasting friendship and working arrangement with Don Pierson of Texas who transported a cloned version of Texas commercial radio to the British Isles one year later. In 1983 JLRI emerged from another broadcasting venture inspired by Don Pierson who shortly afterwards donated his archives to Mervyn Hagger. During this same period of time Eric Gilder had also become acquainted Don Pierson and performed his own research for a thesis about offshore broadcasting in Europe.
Right: Don Pierson in 1966. Throughout those years the research and publishing activities of Gilder and Hagger followed a theme of investigating the practical use of copyright control by governments and commercial entities whose ultimate intention appeared to be the suppression of freedom of expression. It was during that same time period that Gilder and Hagger were introduced to the person of Freeborn John Lilburne (c.1615-1657) through the writings of the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo L. Black. Obsessed with Lilburne and his influence upon the U.S. Constitution and ‘Bill of Rights’, Black began incorporating references to him in both his written legal Opinions; his private life; in publications, while influencing fellow Justice William O. Douglas and Chief Justice Earl Warren and their own legal interpretations of U.S. constitutional history. During the period from 1985 to 1990, Gilder, Hagger and other associates continued parallel research to that begun by Hugo Black, and while Black had stimulated a flurry of interest by a number of influential authors, this soon died down. Ironically both the left and right wings of American political thought began to claim inspiration from Lilburne during this period, but the mainstream was unaffected. This was primarily due to the influence that the adoption of school textbooks played in the matter.
Left: Dr. Eric Gilder in 2001. These textbooks all followed a traditional Anglo-monarchy-history theme, and this was in major part due to the fact that the lucrative U.S. school textbook publishing industry was centered companies with ties to England. It was also due to the way in which these textbooks were then marketed in the USA. Because the states of Texas, California and New York accounted for huge sales of these books which other states then followed, the influence of a few people, especially within Texas, upon the state approval of their adoption, swayed the purchasing departments to accept and adopt the books they recommended. Although these books often contained glaring errors of non-controversial and undisputed fact, they were still accepted for use, after some modifications. Most of the objections sprang from a conservative Christian right wing fiercely opposed to communism and socialism. These same textbooks omitted any clear references to John Lilburne, and in those years his name became fused by writers and artists in England with two political groups of the Seventeenth Century: the Levellers and the ‘True Levellers’ who were also known as the ‘Diggers’.
Ironically, during the period of the Nineteen Sixties when Black was making his media and legal splash by championing Lilburne in Washington, D.C.; in San Francisco one noisy element of the hodge-podge and ad hoc brand of youth known as the ‘hippies’ had stumble across a history book at their local library. This book introduced them to the Seventeenth Century ‘Diggers’ who had followed a form of Christian communism based upon the Book of Acts (4:32), and as a result this faction of hippies adopted that name for their own use. Consequently the original Diggers who had commandeered public land to grow crops for communal use in 1649, morphed into an arrangement with a motorcycle gang in 1967 who stole food and other consumer goods for distribution under a variety of banners proclaiming ‘free food’, ‘free clothes’ and the slogan was even extended to ‘free radio’. In its latter context, this slogan ran into its doppelgänger usage as a means of differentiating commercial radio provided free of charge to listeners, verses the British model of charging listeners (at that time) by providing a service without commercials. The San Francisco 'Digger' version was based upon unlicensed 'pirate radio' broadcasting.
In the intervening years, several politicians, bands and authors began to mention John Lilburne by associating him with a variety of left-wing causes, or, conversely, by laissez faire economic undertakings touting less governmental control. Unfortunately the work of Black is still overlooked, but more importantly, the fact that John Lilburne is now clearly footnoted into U.S. constitutional law, is also overlooked.
Part of this problem derives from the person of Thomas Jefferson who was related to John Lilburne, but who did his best not to draw attention to this fact, even though there are traces of association with Lilburne scattered all over the Jefferson family record. This denial of continuity has in itself created a problem for devotees of Jefferson’s work, because he pointed everyone away from Lilburne. Even in the case of Tom Paine who later followed in Lilburne’s footsteps and was extremely influential in the cause of what became the American Revolutionary War for Independence from Great Britain, Paine was shoved aside and he died as a ignominious pauper in New York.
Right: 'Freeborn John' Lilburne. Therefore, in order to clear off the dust and to sweep away the academic and political obfuscation from the real significance of John Lilburne and the part that he has played in the establishment of the United States, and in order to show his relevance during the 21st Century in the land of his birth, the John Lilburne Research Institute for constitutional studies is now broadening its scope once more. For the past several years since JLRI was reconstituted in 2000, it has operated as a small research body privately funded in order to concentrate upon a few academic publications each year. Those publications have (more by chance than design) all followed a theme as though they were linked by an invisible thread, even though the scope of the articles has been wide indeed.
Given pronouncements of recent times that the Euro may be swept away, or even that the present European Union may fall apart in its present form, and with the United Kingdom entering a period of crisis that has not been seen in years, JLRI will be increasing its research and publishing activities in order to offer some new solutions based upon some old ideas. First, John Lilburne is a native hero of what is presently the United Kingdom. Second, John Lilburne came to be championed in his day as ‘Freeborn John’ because of his advocacy of freeborn (organic) rights, rather than governmental privileges. Third, John Lilburne opposed the dictatorships of monarchy, militarism and man-made theocracy, while he clearly accepted the premise that is now expressed in the U.S Declaration of Independence, that life and liberty flow from ‘Nature’s God’ and not from privileges bestowed by man. At this time with so many basic concepts being called into question, there is always the danger of a strong leader arising from somewhere in the political void that is developing, who will see subservience and militarism cloaked in religion, as being the answer to the problems that are looming ever larger.
To counter this possibility, JLRI is advancing a platform of individualism in this sea of collectivism. This is individualism where every human being is recognized as having equal, freeborn rights, rather than a few having overwhelming dictatorial powers by inheritance or political favor. In order to achieve this non-partisan agenda, JLRI will be increasing the scope and number of its research and media activities by inviting others to join with us on any of several levels: quietly financing JLRI activities; joining in research and authorship of publications, or by joining a broad based membership organization that will focus upon its own general interest publication that we hope will gain wide distribution.
As indicated above, JLRI is non-partisan, non-sectarian and non-personal, meaning that it has no interest in the individual behavior of human beings, providing that such behavior does not deny the individual behavior of any other human being. Above all, JLRI advocates equal freeborn rights as a matter of inheritance by all independent living human beings. Unlike some organizations with formally similar remits, however, this stance is one that embraces no particular variant of libertarian thought.
Preface
Although this story centers upon the Seventeenth Century person of John Lilburne of England, it actually begins with Don Pierson of Texas in the Twentieth Century, because it was due to his activities in England that this anthology came to be written.Don Pierson was both a car dealer and a banker who also became a 'pirate radio' broadcasting entrepreneur in England. It is in this latter regard that his activities and those of John Lilburne interlock through the passage of time. John Lilburne was a 'pirate publisher' who challenged by the means of the printed word, the same theory of law that was enforced by the forerunner of the same authoritarian body that Don Pierson later challenged by means of the broadcast word. Consequently this story begins with a record of the activities of Don Pierson in England between the years 1964 and 1967, while the biographical link between Lilburne and Pierson begins with Mervyn Hagger.
Left: Mervyn Hagger in 1966. In the 1960s Hagger was a British Union of Journalists freelancer who was writing feature articles for various regional newspapers in England and working full time as both a technical writer and editor of a newspaper for a corporate group. It was as a British radio listener that his interests became attracted to the broadcasting activities of Don Pierson, and as a freelance journalist that he began documenting the political storm that Pierson was causing in Parliament and at BBC Broadcasting House. Continued on page 2