Declaration of Right, 1689

James

The first Stuart monarch, James VI and I, sought to combine the three separate kingdoms of Scotland, Ireland, and England into a centralised British state, under a monarch whose authority came from God, and the duty of Parliament and his subjects was to obey.[3] Their attempts to enforce this led to the 1638 to 1651 Wars of the Three Kingdoms and execution of Charles I in 1649; the political conflict continued after the 1660 Restoration.[4]

17th century society valued conformity, stability, and predictability. James became king in 1685 with widespread backing from both Tories and Whigs, since the principle of hereditary succession was more important than his personal Catholicism.[5] His religious reforms threatened to re-open the bitter conflicts of the past, and were viewed by Tories in particular as breaking his coronation oath, in which he swore to uphold the primacy of the Church of England. An existential threat in a society based on such oaths, it brought back memories of his predecessors, who continually made commitments they later broke.[lower-alpha 1] [5]

Since religion and politics were interdependent, 'good government' required 'true religion'; alterations in one implied alterations in the other, once again undermining a stable society. Catholicism was also associated with the absolutism of Louis XIV, whose policies threatened Protestant powers, including England, the Dutch Republic, and Denmark-Norway. In October 1685, he revoked tolerance for French Protestants sending an estimated 200,000 to 400,000 into exile, 40,000 of whom settled in London. [6] Combined with the killing of 2,000 Vaudois Protestants in 1686, this led to fears Protestant Europe was threatened by a Catholic counter-reformation.[7]

Historians generally accept James wished to promote Catholicism, not establish an absolutist state, but his inflexible reaction to opposition had the same result. When Parliament refused to repeal the 1678 and 1681 Test Acts, it was dismissed; attempts to rule by decree, and form a 'King's party' of Catholics and English Dissenters, undermined his own supporters. The result was the 1688 Glorious Revolution.[8]

The Stuart doctrine of divine right argued they were not subject to 'interference', whether by Parliament, the courts, or the church.[9] However, while the king might be above the law, his servants were not, and could be prosecuted. In addition, the Anglican doctrine of passive obedience did not mean submission to 'unjust' laws, but accepting punishment for breaking them, as with the Seven Bishops. James' government collapsed when the gentry vital for governing the country withdrew their support, implying the king could rule only with the consent of his subjects.

The differences between Tories and Whigs are often overstated; Tory elements within the Royal Army, like Charles Trelawny, brother of one of the Seven Bishops, were instrumental in helping the invasion succeed. The 1701 Act of Settlement that excluded the Catholic Stuart exiles from the throne was passed by a Tory government. In 1689, both generally agreed the king was bound to observe the law; the real battle in 1688 to 1689 was removing James from the throne, possibly the most radical result of the Revolution.[10]

The Declaration of Right was essentially a conservative document, which contained two main parts: a list of the wrongs, or grievances, committed by James, and 13 clauses establishing limits on Royal power and authority.

Note: In the following, the italic text is the quote from the actual document and the regular text is the paraphrase.

Whereas the late King James the Second, by the assistance of [many] evil counsellors, judges and ministers employed by him, did endeavour to subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom...[11]

1. By dispensing and suspending laws without the consent of Parliament. By assuming and exercising a power of dispensing with and suspending of laws and the execution of laws without consent of Parliament.
2. By prosecuting people for protesting the King's reign. By committing and prosecuting divers worthy prelates for humbly petitioning to be excused from concurring to the said assumed power.
3. By creating and using an organization affiliated with the Catholic Church. By issuing and causing to be executed a commission under the great seal for erecting a court called the Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes.
4. By the use of funds by Crown for other purposes than the funds were originally granted for by Parliament. By levying money for and to the use of the Crown by the pretense of prerogative for other time and in another manner than the same was granted by Parliament.
5. By keeping a standing army in peacetime without the consent of Parliament. By raising and keeping a standing army within this kingdom in time of peace without consent of Parliament, and quartering soldiers contrary to law.
6. By stripping Protestants of arms and, at the same time, arming Catholics. By causing several good subjects being Protestants to be disarmed at the same time when papists were both armed and employed contrary to law.
7. By not allowing for the free elections of Parliament. By violating the freedom of election of members to serve in Parliament.
8. By doing parliament's business and illegally prosecuting those against him. By prosecutions in the Court of King's Bench for matters and causes cognizable only in Parliament, and by divers other arbitrary and illegal courses.
9. By placing corrupt jurors in court to pass judgment and placing jurors without land holdings in courts of high treason. And whereas of late years partial corrupt and unqualified persons have been returned and served on juries in trials, and particularly divers jurors in trials for high treason which were not freeholders.
10. By requiring excessive bail charges. And excessive bail hath been required of persons committed in criminal cases to elude the benefit of the laws made for the liberty of the subjects.
11. By imposing excessive fines. And excessive fines have been imposed.
12. By inflicting cruel and illegal punishments. And illegal and cruel punishments inflicted.
13. By imposing fines and seizing the property of people before their conviction. And several grants and promises made of fines and forfeitures before any conviction or judgment against the persons upon whom the same were to be levied.

All of which are utterly and directly contrary to the known laws and statutes and freedom of this realm.

At their coronation on 11 April 1689, William and Mary swore to govern according to "the statutes in Parliament agreed on" instead of by "the laws and customs ... granted by the Kings of England", thus ending the threat of an absolutist reign.[1] This non-violent overthrow of the monarch is known as the Glorious Revolution.

The Declaration of Right was written into the English Bill of Rights which took statutory effect in December 1689 with the royal assent of the king and queen, and subsequently became part of the English Constitution.[12] The cabinet system of the English government evolved from this point onward. The leading ministers formulated policy and ran the business of the country; they held the legislative and executive power. These ministers had seats, and the majority, in the House of Commons. The cabinet became responsible to the House of Commons under the de facto Prime Minister, Sir Robert Walpole. After George II (r. 1727-1760), the power of the monarchy in the decisions of the House of Commons declined drastically.

Some scholars have argued that the Glorious Revolution strengthened finances: "Douglas North and Barry Weingast's seminal account of the Glorious Revolution argued that specific constitutional reforms enhanced the credibility of the English Crown, leading to much stronger public finances."[13] Other scholars argue that the Glorious Revolution was a turning point in history, starting the age of constitutionalism.

The format of a Declaration enumerating various specific wrongs attributed to a King was followed a century later in the American Declaration of Independence - whose authors were clearly familiar with the 1689 document.

• Crown and Parliament Recognition Act 1689
• Financial Revolution
• Toleration Act 1689

• Onnekink D., The Anglo-Dutch Favourite: The Career of Hans Willem Bentinck, 1st Earl of Portland (1649-1709), Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2007, ISBN 0-7546-5545-8
• Cox, Gary, M. (22 August 2012). "Was the Glorious Revolution a Constitutional Watershed?". Journal of Economic History. 72 (03).
• Harris, Tim (2006). Revolution: The Great Crisis of the British Monarchy, 1685–1720. Allen Lane. ISBN 978-0-7139-9759-0.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
• Harris, Tim; Taylor, Stephen, eds. (2015). The Final Crisis of the Stuart Monarchy. Boydell & Brewer. ISBN 978-1783270446.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
• Harris, Tim (1999). "The People, the Law, and the Constitution in Scotland and England: A Comparative Approach to the Glorious Revolution". Journal of British Studies. 38 (1): 28–30. doi:10.1086/386180.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
• McKay, John, P. (2011). A History of Western Society. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin's.
• Miller, John (1978). James II; A study in kingship. Menthuen. ISBN 978-0413652904.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
• Pincus, Steve (2009). 1688 The First Modern Revolution. Yale University. ISBN 978-0-300-17143-3.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
• Spielvogel, Jackson J (1980). Western Civilization. Wadsworth Publishing. ISBN 1285436407.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
• Stephen, Jeffrey (January 2010). "Scottish Nationalism and Stuart Unionism: The Edinburgh Council, 1745". Journal of British Studies. 49 (1, Scotland Special Issue): 47–72. doi:10.1086/644534. JSTOR 27752690.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
• "English Declaration of Rights". The Avalon Project. Yale University.

• Declaration of the Prince of Orange, October 10, 1688
• Declaration of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, February 13, 1689