Not many months later, Parliament embodied the Declaration of Right
(S494), with some slight changes, in the Bill of Rights, 1689,[2]
which received the signature of the King and became law. It
constitutes the third and last great step which England has taken in
making anything like a formal WRITTEN Constitution,[3]--the first
being Magna Carta, or the Great Charter (S199), and the second the
Petition of Right (S432). The Habeas Corpus Act (S482) was contained,
in germ at least, in Magna Carta (S199 (2)); hence these three
measures, namely, Magna Carta, 1215; the Petition of Right, 1628; and
the Bill of Rights, 1689 (including the Act of Settlement to be
mentioned presently), sum up the written safeguards of the nation, and
constitute, as Lord Chatham said, "The Bible of English Liberty."
[2] See Summary of Constitutional History in the Appendix, p. xxii,
S25, and p. xxxi.
[3] It should be borne in mind that a large part of the English
Constitution is based on ancient customs or unwritten laws, and
another part on acts of Parliament passed for specific purposes.
With the passage of the Bill of Rights,[4] the doctrine of the Divine
Right of Kings to govern without being accountable to their subjects
(SS419, 429), which James I and his descendants had tried so hard to
reduce to practice, came to an end forever.
[4] For summary of the bill, see Constitutional Documents in the
Appendix, p. xxxi. For the complete text, see Taswell-Langmead's
"Constitutional History of England" or Lee's "Source Book of English
History."
The chief provisions of the Bill of Rights were:
(1) That the King should not maintain a standing army in time of
peace, except by consent of Parliament.
(2) That no money should be taken from the people save by the
consent of Parliament.
(3) That every subject has the right to petition the Crown for the
redress of any grievance.
(4) That the election of members of Parliament ought to be free from
interference.
(5) That Parliament should frequently assemble and enjoy entire
freedom of debate.
(6) That the King be debarred from interfering in any way with the
proper execution of the laws.
(7) That a Roman Catholic or a person marrying a Roman Catholic be
henceforth incapable of receiving the crown of England.
Late in the reign (1701) Parliament reaffirmed and still further
extended the provisions of the Bill of Rightss by the Act of
Settlement, which established a new royal line of sovereigns confined
exclusively to Protestants.[1] This Act with the preceding one may be
said to have introduced that principle of the British Constitution
which has been called "The Reign of Law." It practically abolished
the principle of a fixed hereditary succession and reestablished in
the clearest and most decided manner the right of the nation to choose
its own rulers.
[1] Compare S349, note 2. The Act of Settlement (see p. xxxii of
Appendix) provided that after Princess Anne (in default of issue by
William or Anne) the crown should descend to the Electress Sophia of
Hanover, Hermany, and her PROTESTANT DESCENDANTS. The Electress
Sophia was the granddaughter of James I. She married Ernest Augustus,
Elector (or ruler) of Hanover. As Hallam says, she was "very far
removed from any hereditary title," as, aside from James II's son
(S490), whose legitimacy no one now doubted, there were several who
stood nearer in right of succession.
According to that measure, "an English sovereign is now as much the
creature of an act of Parliament as the pettiest taxgatherer in his
realm";[2] and he is dependent for his office and power on the will of
the people as really, though of course not as directly as the
President of the United States.
[2] Green's "Short History of the English People" and Bryce's
"American Commonwealth."
Finally, the Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement, by restricting
the royal succession to Protestants, made it henceforth
unconstitutional for the Crown to permit or invite the Papal Power to
take any recognized part in the government of England. The enactment
of these two measures, therefore, effectually put an end to that great
conflict between England and Rome which had been going on, in some
form, for more than six hundred years (S349, note 2).
To-day entire harmony exists. Catholics and Protestants "work
together for good" in Parliament, in the Cabinet, in the Courts of
Justice, in the Universities, in the Army and Navy, in the service of
the Press, and in private life.[1]
[1] The names of many eminent Catholics might be cited, such as
Professor Lingard, the historian (1851), the late Lord Chief Justice
Russell, the late Lord Acton, Professor of History at Cambridge, and
the late Sir Francis Burnand, editor of _Punch._