The Revolution Settlement: The Constitutional Dilemma (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes
The Revolution Settlement: The Constitutional Dilemma
Context of the settlement
The Dutch invasion and William of Orange's successful intervention in 1688 created a profound dilemma for the Tories. They had consistently defended the Anglican Church and opposed James II's policies, yet they remained committed to the constitutional principles of Divine Right monarchy and lawful succession. With James II having fled the country, William of Orange stood as the only practical guarantor of public order and stable government.
By late December 1688, an assembly of 60 peers requested that William organise elections to a new parliament and govern the country until a constitutional settlement could be reached. This marked the beginning of a critical period in English constitutional history.
The Convention Parliament convened on 22 January 1689 and began the complex task of creating a settlement that would resolve the constitutional crisis.
The constitutional dilemma
The succession question
The Convention Parliament faced a difficult problem: how to address the succession when James II had abandoned the throne. MPs confronted several options, none straightforward:
- They could declare James II incapacitated and establish a regency (a period when someone other than the rightful monarch rules on their behalf, typically a close relative such as a parent, sibling or child)
- James clearly was not incapacitated, nor was it obvious whether the regent should be William or Mary
- If James II had forfeited the throne, who should succeed him? Mary was his legitimate heir, but William had made the decisive military intervention and insisted he would not serve merely as the Queen's consort (the spouse of the ruling monarch who does not necessarily hold sovereign power in their own right)
This succession dilemma divided Whig and Tory opinion along constitutional lines, with each party's solution reflecting their fundamental beliefs about the nature of monarchy and sovereignty.
Contrasting interpretations of 1688
The Whig view
Whigs advocated contract theory – the principle that a king derived his authority from conditions established through a social contract. If the monarch violated the terms under which he ruled, the people (specifically parliament) possessed the right to depose him and install a new sovereign. Whigs therefore maintained that James II could be declared lawfully overthrown.
The Tory view
Tories believed in Divine Right monarchy and lawful succession by primogeniture (inheritance by the eldest child). James II was not to be reinstated with restrictions on his power. Parliament would enable Tories to accept William and Mary with a clear conscience, provided they accepted that King James II had not been deposed or overthrown. In no circumstances would they acknowledge that the king had been forcibly removed from power.
The revolution settlement
The Glorious Revolution presented an opportunity, comparable to 1660, to reconsider the political and religious settlement of the kingdom. The decisions taken in the immediate aftermath of William's invasion had lasting consequences.
The succession
Parliament resolved the succession question through the following arrangements:
- James II was declared to have abdicated by fleeing the country, thereby leaving the throne 'vacant'
- The throne was offered to William and Mary as joint sovereigns
- If Mary predeceased William (as happened), William would continue to rule alone until his death, after which either his legitimate heir would succeed or, if there were no children, Mary's sister Anne would become queen
The declaration that James had "abdicated" rather than been "deposed" was a crucial compromise. This wording allowed Tories to accept the settlement without violating their belief in Divine Right, while Whigs achieved their goal of removing James from power.
The Bill of Rights
The Declaration of Rights was presented by Parliament to William and Mary in March 1689, before they were crowned. Parliament restated the Declaration in the form of a parliamentary statute in December 1689 as the Bill of Rights. This attacked James II for attempting to subvert the Protestant religion and the fundamental laws, and decreed that:
Key Constitutional Limitations on Royal Power:
- Maintaining a standing army in peacetime was illegal
- Raising tax money without parliamentary approval was illegal
- The monarch's use of the suspending power was illegal
- The monarch's use of the dispensing power 'as it hath been exercised of late' was illegal
- Parliaments must be held on a regular basis
- Parliamentary elections must be 'free'
- Freedom of speech in Parliament for MPs to be respected
- No excessive bail or fines were to be imposed
- No cruel and unusual punishments were to be imposed
These provisions fundamentally reshaped the relationship between Crown and Parliament, establishing constraints on royal authority that would define British constitutional monarchy.
Finance
The financial settlement placed the Crown in a position of dependence on Parliament for subsidies. This occurred through two steps:
Step 1: The Convention Parliament, 1689
- Existing arrangements for collecting ordinary revenue to continue until 24 June 1689
- Ordinary expenditure estimated at £1.2 million, as in 1660
- Extraordinary revenue to be voted by Parliament for war as and when required
Step 2: The Parliament of 1690
- Excise duties voted for life
- Customs duties voted for four years only
These financial arrangements guaranteed that the Crown required parliamentary approval for additional funding, particularly for military expenditure. By limiting the duration of customs duties grants, Parliament ensured the monarch would need to regularly summon Parliament to renew revenue sources.
Religion
The religious settlement stopped short of full religious toleration for Dissenters. James II had lost his throne because Anglicans opposed the suspension or repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, and they were not prepared to see their victory undermined in the settlement that followed.
Toleration Act
The Toleration Act granted freedom of worship to any Protestant who took the oath of supremacy and allegiance and denounced the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation (the doctrine whereby the wine and bread taken in communion were believed to be transformed miraculously into the blood and body of Christ).
Rejection of comprehension
Parliament rejected a settlement of comprehension which would have opened all public offices to all Protestants. William had delivered a speech on 16 March in which he proposed that the Test and Corporation Acts should be effectively repealed for Protestants.
This led to an Anglican reaction condemning the proposal, which effectively prevented any moves towards a more comprehensive Church settlement. The Anglican establishment was determined to maintain its privileged position and refused to share political power with other Protestant denominations.
The conservative nature of the settlement
The settlement of the Glorious Revolution represented a conservative resolution rather than a radical expansion of liberties. The 'revolutionaries' of 1688–89 were reluctant revolutionaries, conservative in outlook. They believed they were fighting to preserve the ancient liberties of the subject against the innovations of a reforming regime.
Those who called themselves 'True Whigs' felt betrayed by the settlement because they had failed to establish a right of rebellion. They argued the monarch had broken a 'social contract' that existed between the Crown and the people, who therefore had the legal right to remove him or to extend liberty into new areas of public life.
The settlement was essentially conservative, not radical, and may have represented a missed opportunity to resolve persistent problems. Nevertheless, the change of regime that occurred in 1688–89 paved the way for war with France. William's primary motive in 1688 was to bring England into the grand alliance he was building on the continent. The war that followed had profound effects on the economic, financial and political life of the country.
Key Points to Remember:
- The succession question divided Whigs and Tories along constitutional lines: Whigs advocated contract theory allowing parliament to depose the king, while Tories maintained Divine Right principles and insisted James had abdicated rather than been overthrown
- The Bill of Rights 1689 imposed limitations on royal power, including prohibiting standing armies in peacetime, requiring parliamentary approval for taxation, declaring the suspending and dispensing powers illegal, and guaranteeing regular parliaments and free elections
- The financial settlement ensured Crown dependence on Parliament by requiring parliamentary votes for extraordinary revenue and limiting the duration of customs duties grants
- The religious settlement granted limited toleration to Protestant Dissenters through the Toleration Act but rejected comprehension, maintaining the Test and Corporation Acts
- The settlement was conservative rather than radical, preserving traditional liberties rather than expanding them, though it established the constitutional foundation for parliamentary monarchy