Stuarts: The Glorious Revolution
What was the division between Whigs and Tories in political opinion?
- 22nd January 1689 Convention parliament met to decide how to deal with James' flight. Political opinion deeply divided. Whigs: - Developed revolutionary ideas on on nature of kingship - Claimed contract existed between king and his people which both had to uphold - James had broken this by trying to establish catholicism in England and therefore he had lost his right to rule and the throne was thus vacant - Many Whig MPs shared the view of Locke that enforcing religious uniformity would lead to social disorder and that imposing single religion was impossible as humans are incapable of judging what religious standpoints are most legitimate Tories: - Believed in hereditary succession and divine right - Had sworn oath of allegiance to James and felt they could not break this oath while King lived - Needed some justification to replace James with William.
How did William and Mary ascend to the throne?
- December 1688 James II fled country faced with overwhelming opposition - Group of about 60 tories and 300 former MPs, Whigs as well as Tories, asked William of Orange to take over the government - Flight of James removed main obstacle for William and Mary, and many had still been willing to support James had little choice but to move to invader's side. - Some believed that William should act as regent in James' absence or a consort to Mary who was legitimate heir while some believed William should be made king - Decision was soon made when Mary refused to rule without William and then William threatened to leave country if he was not proclaimed King. - Faced with potential power vacuum or return of James, parliament made William of Orange King William III. - William and Mary were joint monarchs, even though after Mary's death in 1694 he ruled alone as King.
What was the nature of William and Mary's coronation?
- Declaration of Rights read out - Different coronation oath from that sworn by previous monarchs: 'to govern the people of this kingdom...according to the statutes in Parliament agreed on' as opposed to the previous oath: 'confirm to the people of England the laws and customs to them granted by the Kings of England' - Clear that both William and Mary had been placed on the throne based on terms put forward by the elected representatives of the people - Declaration of Rights modified and many of its terms placed on statute book as Bill of Rights
How did Anglican supremacy end?
- It was now accepted that the Church of England could not enforce complete uniformity and that some allowances had to be made for dissenters. Dissenters flourished and made up nearly 8% of the population by 1714 - Catholics enjoyed a reasonable degree of freedom despite being excluded from the provisions of the Toleration Act. Contemporaries reported that many Catholics were able to participate in mass without any trouble - William used his royal authority to influence judges and curb Church interference in the lives of Catholics and dissenting sects not covered by the Act - The power of Church Courts were severely restricted by the Toleration Act - Between 1689-1701 CofE saw broadening of acceptance of range of protestants. - Can be argued that acceptance came slowly, not from legislation but more from the development of other ways of thinking - Increased focus on science and reason marked shift away from dominance of religious - While after 1689 religious diversity replaced religious uniformity, religion was still central life and in shaping political attitudes. - By 1701, number and size of protestant denominations grew considerably - Growing religious diversity, with Catholicism remaining strong in northern counties. - For most of 17th century, CofE could claim to be sole religious authority in England, but by 1701 this had come to an end.
Religious Settlement: Toleration Act
- March 1689, King asked Commons to abandon religious tests which kept dissenters out of public office - Keen to maintain political supremacy of CofE, predominantly Anglican parliament passed Toleration Act which meant most dissenters were: - Exempt from penal laws if they took oath of allegiance and declared against transubstantiation - Could worship freely in licensed meeting houses which had to keep their doors open - Could set up their own schools to educate their children - However they could not hold political office or attend university and were thus not fully equal to Anglicans - Act was also not extended to Catholics, Jews or Unitarians.
Did it establish a constitutional monarchy? Was growth in parliamentarian power revolutionary?
- Parliament had more control over the policies of monarchy and they were expected to gain the agreement of the parliament for their actions. Declaration of Rights + Bill of Rights. - Idea of divine right to rule practically eradicated - difference in oaths. - Bill of Rights: call for elections to be both regular and free (reflected resentment of MPs at attempts by the Crown to tamper with elections) - Execution of laws by regal authority declared illegal - Freedom of speech/debates/proceedings in parliament not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place outside of parliament - Rather than revolution, more of reformation. Once James had fled, key aim was t establish stability which was accomplished by changing position of monarch. - Glorious rev was way of political elite confirming power through parliament. - It was William's need to finance his wars and consequent financial rev after 1688 that led to gradual increase in power of parliament over monarchy.
What was finally agreed?
- Political change resulted from James resigning his throne voluntarily which was necessary for revolution to take place as Lords would have probably rejected any proposals of opposition against James' reign from Commons - James had broken contract between King and people (Whig) - He had violated the country's fundamental laws (Whig) - His flight meant that he had abdicated the throne (Tory) - Tories in the lords objected to the statement which led to anti-Tory crowds demonstrating outside parliament - Feb 1689, William warned that he would go back to Holland unless he were made King - William and political elite agreed that William and Mary would share the title of monarchs, but Mary without the power - If Mary died and William married again, any children from this second marriage would follow Anne in the line of succession.
What were the changes in catholicism?
- Position of catholics remained source of tension from 1689 and indeed after. - While it slowly became easier for catholics to worship without interference, remained small religious minority + often subject to religious prejudice. - Anti-catholisicm and threat of Louis XIV remained theme in English politics through to 1701 and Act of Settlement. - Act of Settlement, 57 potential catholic heirs to the throne were excluded, the monarch had to be an active member of the Protestant Church of England, attending services. - The granddaughter of James I, the Protestant Sophia of Hanover was made next in line to the throne. Was triumph for Whigs who had previously failed in Exclusion Crisis.
How far was there a financial revolution?
- Public Accounts Act 1690 - Examined state of public finances + limited power of crown - Nov 1691 report was critical of waste in spending - Led to tightening of parliamentary control in finances (money was allocated for specific spending) - Over 70,000 troops were involved in Nine Years War and cost over £5.4 million a year - In order to meet this, many changes made. Ways in which taxation system and government raising of public lands changed has been described by many as historians as 'financial revolution' - However these changes also had long-term implications and marked profound shift in power from monarch to parliament. - 1692 Parliament agreed to spend £4 million on war - As war dragged on strategy was criticised and suspicion grew war was helping Dutch more than English - Resulted in pressure on William to change his ministers to leaders of Whig Junto = loss of independance - Led to civil list and reduction of army Changes in taxation: - Customs and excise duties were extended to wider range of goods, and rates of taxation were very high. These duties could not be avoided and provided up to 25% of crown's income. - Land tax was introduced in early 1690s and quickly became a permanent and lucrative source of income. Rate set up at 20% of profits which landowners made from their land. By 1700, land tax alone accounted for half of income raised from taxation and, like custom and excise duties, was very difficult to avoid. Provided a third of all required funds for war. - Revolutionary because they established permanent and very efficient ways of raising money which continued long after William III's wars had ended. - Crown income in 1690s = £3.64 million per annum = double amount of Charles || and James || - Royal income doubled after 1688 - Civil List Act 1698: King given estimated income of £700,000 per year with any surplus granted by consent of parliament - King and parliament had to meet regularly to renew the civil list - Public Accounts Act 1690: parliamentary commissions set up to investigate government expenditure which would be published reports and could expose corruption or waste at William's court. - William was actually first to suggest he opened up his accounts to inspection Changes in government borrowing: - British crown had reputation for failing to honour its debts. - 1672, Charles II issued the Stop of Exchequer when he was unable to repay debts totally £1 million. His default ruined many bankers and made it harder for him to raise loans for the rest of his reign. - However 1688-1702 gap between royal income and expenditure was about £11.3 million. William's ministers introduced two important innovations in order to raise money: 1693, Million Loan Act was intended to raise loan of £1 million and repayment was guaranteed out of income from excise duties. 1694, investors were invited to raise loan of £1.2 million to pay for war. In return, investors were allowed to establish Bank of England, which provided banking services as well as raising further crown loans - Confidence in bank of England increased significantly after William's death when more emphasis was placed on long-term investment and government borrowing was increased to over 2.5 million per year in the decade after 1701 - Enabled Crown to borrow money on scale never seen before. 1697-1720 public debt rose from £16.7 million to £50 million. - Because King's debt became national debt, regular parliaments became necessary to service the debt. - As result of these measures, prestige of London money markets rose and soon London challenged Amsterdam as major financial centre. Impact: - Financial position of the crown improved dramatically. - By 1700, around 9% of nation's wealth went towards taxation - Growing confidence in the reliability of the state and its ability to repay its debts. - Crown's ability to raise funds for the war defended on an annual vote in parliament to supply funds. As a result, parliament became a permanent and vital feature of the system of government. - Parliamentary control of finance meant that King had no choice but to meet with parliament regularly thus increasing authority - Parliament controlled military expenditure and if desired, it could withhold supply and effectively hold the Crown to ransom - Parliament was able to audit government expenditure. This was unprecedented and fact that the commission into public accounts was paid by and accountable to parliament rather than the monarch gave it a degree of independence. - From 1698, the Crown's day-to-day spending was controlled through a grant, the civil list. The monarch would never again be able to use their prerogative to avoid working with parliament.
How did Anglican supremacy remain?
- The status enforcing uniformity (Test Act + Act of Uniformity) that had been passed under earlier Stuart monarchs were no repealed, which meant that public officials were duty-bound to swear allegiance to the Church - To gain public employment or join parliament there was no choice but to swear allegiance to the Crown and take Anglican Communion - There was no great theological debate between MPs and peers before the Toleration Act was passed. It can be thus seen as a reactionary attempt to maintain order and preserve the Anglican Church - Further Toleration Acts were passed in Scotland and Ireland and these did not give dissenters the opportunity to participate in national or local government
Was the growth in Parliamentary power revolutionary or evolutionary?
Evolutionary: - William was independent and determined ruler, and before Act of Settlement 1701, he inclined to govern through his chosen advisors and reluctant to consult parliament on many issues. - Judges Bill vetoed by William 1691/92 - Would have created independent judiciary and William wanted power over the courts - First session of the 1690 parliament saw a strengthening in the position of the Privy Council over parliament and an opposition attempt to establish a parliamentary commission to investigate government accounts was rejected -William was extremely rich (As of 1792 if William borrowed money the state would pay back debt) - William ran foreign policy - The assertion that parliament was to meet frequently and for elections to be 'free' in Bill of Rights was vague and provided no provision for ensuring it. This was not dealt with until Triennial Act of 1694 - Triennial Act didn't necessarily give parliament power. Just because they met more often didn't mean they had control over King. In some ways by parliament never being dissolved, there was a risk that overtime parliament would become subservient to the royal will. - William could also still choose his own advisers (until Act of Settlement 1701) and used his prerogative powers immediately after becoming King in order to form a Privy Council of his own choosing - The war also influenced the composition of parliament. Royal powers of patronage increased considerably as the King increased the number of MPs who also served as military officers. Many saw this as increasing royal power over the Commons allowing for the possible corruption of individual members. - Monarch still pre-eminent within political system, parliament still represented only the richest 2% of the population and the electorate was still small - Not until 1760 that the 'crown estate' was created and most of the monarch's property was placed under control of parl. Revolutionary: - Declaration of Rights 1688 (Laws could not be suspended without parliament consent, parliament had to approve all forms of taxation, parliament should meet frequently) List of what parliament wanted which was read at coronation. Implies parliament hold most authority. William and Mary also were not referred to 'rightful' or 'lawful' heirs. - Bill of Rights 1689 (Parliament get most of Declaration) No longer possible for monarchs to claim power came from God as authority was approved by parl. King's power to suspend law or dispense individual from its effect declared unconstitutional. No taxes, no standing army without parl. consent. Meant that ultimately no monarch had 'claim' to throne, which is quite revolutionary idea. King could no longer interfere with matters of law. King dependant on parliament financially and for an army (which he desperately needed and wanted). The Bill of Rights is where parliament got most of their power (finance and army) - Triennial Act 1694. Elections every three years, and parliament had to sit for a minimum of one year. This made it difficult for William to establish a partying house of commons, leading him to become more reliant on securing support from MPs. Parliament could not be dissolved without parliament's consent. This was a big deal (William vetoed it twice and forced him to cooperate with parliament) - Bill of Rights said that William couldn't veto, but fact he did and parliament let him show an uncertainty of where true power lies. - Act of Settlement 1701. In order to bypass potential catholic heirs succession would be vested in House of Hanover after reign of Anne (daughter of James II) Catholics and those married to catholics were barred from succession. Essentially what they tried to do in exclusion crisis, but then they failed as the dissolving of parliament was still in place and strong belief in divine right. King also couldn't choose his own advisors nor enter England into war to defend home country without consent of parl. The denial to let the King choose his own religion indicated shift in power. King no longer controlled religion of people, but rather people controlled the religion of their King. - Judges could no longer be dismissed without the consent of parliament - No foreign-born man was allowed to join the Privy Council, sit in either House of Parliament, have a military command, or be granted lands of titles - Mutiny Act ensured that King could not court martial at will without the consent of parliament . Each Act only valid for year, the King had no choice but to turn to parliament regularly for approval - Political necessity forced William to appoint men he loathed and he was forced to reduce the size of the army as a result of parliamentary decision.
How revolutionary was the Toleration Act (1689)? Religious Settlement in general?
Wasn't because: - It just confirmed status quo that had been growing over long time. Accepted the inevitable rather than genuine sudden acceptance of dissenters. - Dissenters still weren't equal to Anglicans. Those who didn't swear oath of allegiance couldn't go to university, work in the legal profession nor practise medicine. - Non-Anglicans could not sit in parliament or hold public office - It was only passed as a compromise to prevent more extreme act from being passed (Comprehension Bill) - It was also passed quickly and without much debate, suggesting that it wasn't particularly controversial and was only accepting formally something that had been happening over period. - Distrust of dissenters was still present (Had to leave doors in religious meetings) - Ireland and Scotland not as accepting - abolition of bishops and anti-dissent feeling in church. - Dissenters could not enter public employment without swearing loyalty to the Anglican Church - Still had to pay tithes to Church they did not belong to nor attend Was because: - It undermined the legal basis for enforcing religious uniformity - Made it easier for dissenters to worship freely. In 1714, there were 400,000 dissenters in England. - The Act made special dispensations for certain groups (Quakers could declare oath of allegiance rather than swear, as Quakers did not take oaths) - Number of denominations (types of churches) tolerated was greater than ever before - While non-attendance at Anglican communion was still supposed to be reported, many became increasingly reluctant to do so as those who did not attend could have been attending one of the alternative protestant churches. - While Catholics weren't accepted, they weren't actively prosecuted. - Dissenters not expected to attend Anglican Church - William was the first truly protestant King that England had had for some time - This was main reason he was invited to take throne. If James had not pushed for Catholicism, he probably would have been tolerated. - Suggests religion was still very important. - Main difference was acceptance of dissent, but intolerance of Catholics was perhaps even stronger (Act of Settlement) - Only reason William pushed for Toleration Act was for his own ends (fighting Catholicism) rather than genuine desire for religious toleration because of his own opinions about religion.
