Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

ianvisits.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 158 posts

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#101

Post by [deleted] »

moomin wrote: post #96
bb123 wrote: post #19

Reminds me of the fact that for 500 years everyone graduating with a BA from Oxford had to swear that they would never agree to the reconciliation of Henry Symeonis, despite no one having any idea who he was for most of that time.

Had to look this one up. Apparently the answer is he was a rich *hole who murdered a student, got fined £80 (which might have been a lot of money, but he was rich), stayed away from Oxford a few years and then The Powers That Be told everyone to get over it. I can kind of understand the statute, tbqh.

[deleted]

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#102

Post by w0de0 »

This is treated as a whimsical absurdity, but it has a practical purpose that’s hardly obviated by the antiquity of the law.

I’m a sailor myself - I’d certainly want a warning that a bridge is lower than its charted height. The signal is clearly listed in the relevant Port of London notice to mariners [0]. Moreover, the signal also shows the height of the restriction (and in a neat, safe way - nudge the straw and you’ll know you’re too tall):

“Where the headroom is reduced this will be signalled in accordance with the Port of London Authority Thames Byelaw 36.1 namely:

“By Day – A bundle of straw large enough to be easily visible and displayed at the height of restricted headroom”

0 - https://pla.co.uk/notices/M63-25

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#103

Post by bregma »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #80
davidw wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Supreme Court in the United States has been playing a looooot of "Calvinball" recently. They've never been completely immune from it, but it has gotten a lot more nakedly political.

Off topic but I am now old enough that more than once Calvinball references were lost with my co-workers. I was surprised (and then sad) at the realization that Bill Watterson is fading from the cultural ethos as I age.

Gone are the days when everyone was spammed with Monty Python references. The Gen-Zs in my office haven't even heard of, let alone viewed, the Holy Grail so half the references our boss lays out are lost on them. At least it's not dead yet.

On the other hand, I had to ask them what a Kirby was. I'm still not sure but I know it's pink.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#104

Post by bmacho »

sethammons wrote: post #93
DoingIsLearning wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off topic but I am now old enough that more than once Calvinball references were lost with my co-workers. I was surprised (and then sad) at the realization that Bill Watterson is fading from the cultural ethos as I age.

I've noticed similar. I quote lots of movies, usually one liners as appropriate. Between age and less uniform media exposure, my references more often than not fall flat. And I feel less connected.

> And I feel less connected.

Watch whatever today's kids watch.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#105

Post by pmyteh »

jvvw wrote: post #83
jgrahamc wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes! I was disappointed to learn when I graduated with my BA that this oath was no longer required. However, I continue refuse to reconcile with Henry Symeonis. It's only been 800 years, you never know when it might be important. After all, the Anglo-Portuguese is still in force 650 years on!

Looks like it was removed in 1827. I don't actually remember having to say anything at any of my graduation ceremonies there (BA, MA, DPhil), just walking on to the stage. I do wonder if at matriculation we all had to make some oath together but I think I would have remembered if that had been the case. I have a strong feeling though I might have had to make an oath when I became a scholar - there was definitely a ce…

You'll have collectively said "do fidem". The rest is read by the official at the table, not the graduands.

The question as to whether this constitutes swearing an oath or making a simple promise was an interesting one for me as Quakers traditionally refuse to do the former.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#106

Post by dismalpedigree »

philipwhiuk wrote: post #33
dismalpedigree wrote: post #10

This is why laws should have sunset clauses

[flagged]

Nowhere was it implied that all laws should have sunset clauses. Obviously something like “you can’t murder someone” should not be sunset.

Including sunset clauses in many laws requires legislators to review if those laws are still relevant and modify them accordingly. The law in question here is a perfect example. A bale of straw is not the best way to signal to boats that the bridge height is lower.

Anarchy is not a desired state, but neither is a state where outdated rules hamper activity for no reason other than “we are too lazy to assess the relevance of existing rules”

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#107

Post by mr_toad »

maratc wrote: post #14

That's the British system working as designed. If there's a law, no matter how ancient, the British should comply. If a law needs to be changed, that's the Parliament's job. Even the British courts, in sharp contrast to many other places, "deliver the law as it is, and not as we wish it to be" -- see for example [0] or [1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashford_v_Thornton [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owens_v…

> Even the British courts, in sharp contrast to many other places, "deliver the law as it is, and not as we wish it to be"

The English practically invented the idea of common law. Even today there are still important legal principles based entirely on the decisions of earlier courts.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#108

Post by mrweasel »

bb123 wrote: post #19

Reminds me of the fact that for 500 years everyone graduating with a BA from Oxford had to swear that they would never agree to the reconciliation of Henry Symeonis, despite no one having any idea who he was for most of that time.

I was reading some stories and notes made by my grandfather, they where written sometime in the 1980s. He's recalling stories and people in the area where we lived, out in the country side. Apparently my family has feud with a priest from the late 1700 hundreds. The priest complained that people (my family included) wouldn't travel the 7 - 8 kilometers to the church during the fall and winter. The area is in between would flood and freeze, becoming dangerous to travel. The priests refusal to understand the danger (and long travel time, during the winter), caused the feud, which apparently lasted at least until the 1920s.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#109

Post by ljm »

maratc wrote: post #44
dghf wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what places do courts ignore or modify law to deliver the result they prefer? (To be precise: where is that accepted practice, rather than aberrant behaviour by some judges?)

Usually the judges do not "ignore or modify" the law, but rather "interpret" it in a creative manner. You might use, as an example, the question of "does the US Constitution guarantee the women a right to abortion." Some judges decided that it does, later some other judges decided that it does not. Considering the opposing outcomes to the same question, it's clear some of these were wrong.

Letter of the law vs. spirit of the law.

One could argue that 'a corporation has personhood' is a technical contrivance that tries to manipulate the letter of the law into achieving a particular outcome. Going with the spirit of the law instead, that argument would never hold water.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#110

Post by card_zero »

bmacho wrote: post #104
sethammons wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've noticed similar. I quote lots of movies, usually one liners as appropriate. Between age and less uniform media exposure, my references more often than not fall flat. And I feel less connected.

> And I feel less connected. Watch whatever today's kids watch.

The "less uniform media exposure" phrase invokes the (paranoid?) fear that we might lose common cultural reference points. In short, today's kids watch whatever. Though I'm sure we'd just find a new social script to work around the inability to quote Python.
Post reply on HN