Bill of Rights - Revision history

Pankratz at 15:43, 19 November 2013

2013-11-19T15:43:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:43, 19 November 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Passed by Parliament in December 1689, the Bill of Rights gave statutory force to the Declaration of Rights. The Declaration of Rights, drawn up by the Convention Parliament in February 1689, was presented to [[Mary II\|Mary]] and [[William of Orange]] in the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, and consequently after their acceptance, fixed in the Bill of Rights. The Declaration gave an account of the misdeeds of [[James II]], begged Mary and William to accept the crown, and laid down an Oath of Allegiance to the new monarchs.		Passed by Parliament in December 1689, the Bill of Rights gave statutory force to the Declaration of Rights. The Declaration of Rights, drawn up by the Convention Parliament in February 1689, was presented to [[Mary II\|Mary]] and [[William of Orange]] in the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, and consequently after their acceptance, fixed in the Bill of Rights. The Declaration gave an account of the misdeeds of [[James II]], begged Mary and William to accept the crown, and laid down an Oath of Allegiance to the new monarchs. The Bill of Rights itself closely followed the Declaration of Rights in its stipulation of ancient rights, and the recent abuses of the royal prerogatives by James II.

	The Bill of Rights itself closely followed the Declaration of Rights in its stipulation of ancient rights, and the recent abuses of the royal prerogatives by James II.

Pankratz at 12:23, 3 June 2009

2009-06-03T12:23:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:23, 3 June 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Passed by Parliament in December 1689, the Bill of Rights gave statutory force to the Declaration of Rights.		Passed by Parliament in December 1689, the Bill of Rights gave statutory force to the Declaration of Rights. The Declaration of Rights, drawn up by the Convention Parliament in February 1689, was presented to [[Mary II\|Mary]] and [[William of Orange]] in the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, and consequently after their acceptance, fixed in the Bill of Rights. The Declaration gave an account of the misdeeds of [[James II]], begged Mary and William to accept the crown, and laid down an Oath of Allegiance to the new monarchs.

	The Declaration of Rights, drawn up by the Convention Parliament in February 1689, was presented to [[Mary II\|Mary]] and [[William of Orange]] in the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, and consequently fixed in the Bill of Rights. The Declaration gave an account of the misdeeds of [[James II]], begged Mary and William to accept the crown, and laid down an Oath of Allegiance to the new monarchs.

	The Bill of Rights itself closely followed the Declaration of Rights in its stipulation of ancient rights, and the recent abuses of the royal prerogatives by James II.		The Bill of Rights itself closely followed the Declaration of Rights in its stipulation of ancient rights, and the recent abuses of the royal prerogatives by James II.

WikiSysop at 14:39, 27 May 2009

2009-05-27T14:39:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:39, 27 May 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Passed by Parliament in December 1689, the Bill of Rights gave statutory force to the Declaration of Rights		Passed by Parliament in December 1689, the Bill of Rights gave statutory force to the Declaration of Rights.

	The Declaration of Rights, drawn up by the Convention Parliament in February 1689, was presented to Mary and [[William of Orange]] in the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, and consequently fixed in the Bill of Rights. The Declaration gave an account of the misdeeds of [[James II]], begged Mary and William to accept the crown, and laid down an Oath of Allegiance to the new monarchs.		The Declaration of Rights, drawn up by the Convention Parliament in February 1689, was presented to [[Mary II\|Mary]] and [[William of Orange]] in the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, and consequently fixed in the Bill of Rights. The Declaration gave an account of the misdeeds of [[James II]], begged Mary and William to accept the crown, and laid down an Oath of Allegiance to the new monarchs.

	The Bill of Rights itself closely followed the Declaration of Rights in its stipulation of ancient rights, and the recent abuses of the royal prerogatives by James II.		The Bill of Rights itself closely followed the Declaration of Rights in its stipulation of ancient rights, and the recent abuses of the royal prerogatives by James II.


			== Purpose and provisions ==

	The Bill begins by stating that the [[Houses of Parliament]] “assembled at Westminster, lawfully, fully and freely representing all the estates of the people of this realm” (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/england.asp). It then presents the accusations against James II and argues that James's abdication was due to the fact that he had “endeavour[ed] to subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom” (ibd.).		The Bill begins by stating that the [[Houses of Parliament]] “assembled at Westminster, lawfully, fully and freely representing all the estates of the people of this realm” (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/england.asp). It then presents the accusations against James II and argues that James's abdication was due to the fact that he had “endeavour[ed] to subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom” (ibd.).
Line 9:		Line 12:
	This is followed by a declaration of Parliament’s “ancient rights and liberties” (ibd.). Some of these propositions (which also relate directly to the accusations made against James II) are that		This is followed by a declaration of Parliament’s “ancient rights and liberties” (ibd.). Some of these propositions (which also relate directly to the accusations made against James II) are that

	- the suspending and execution of laws without parliamentary consent is illegal		*the suspending and execution of laws without parliamentary consent is illegal

			*levying money (e.g. ship money, customs duties) by the monarch without parliamentary consent is illegal

			*the subjects are entitled to petition the crown

	~~- levying money (e.g. ship money, customs duties) by~~ the ~~monarch~~ without parliamentary consent is illegal		*the existence of a standing army in times of peace without parliamentary consent is illegal

	~~- the~~ subjects ~~are entitled to petition the crown~~		*Protestant subjects may have "arms for their defence"

	~~- the existence of a standing army in times of peace without~~ parliamentary ~~consent is illegal~~		*parliamentary elections should be free (from monarchical interference)

	~~- Protestant subjects may have "arms for their defence"~~		*freedom of speech, debates, and proceedings in Parliament should not be questioned in any court outside Parliament

	~~- parliamentary elections~~ should be ~~free (from monarchical interference)~~		*parliament should be held frequently.

	~~- freedom of speech, debates, and proceedings in Parliament should not be questioned in any court outside Parliament~~

	~~- parliament should be held frequently~~		== Royal succession ==

	It is enacted that, although Mary and William are to be joint rulers after accepting the crown, “his Highness the prince of Orange (whom it hath pleased Almighty God to make the glorious instrument of delivering this kingdom from popery and arbitrary power)” (ibid.) alone is to exercise all royal functions in their joint names.		It is enacted that, although Mary and William are to be joint rulers after accepting the crown, “his Highness the prince of Orange (whom it hath pleased Almighty God to make the glorious instrument of delivering this kingdom from popery and arbitrary power)” (ibid.) alone is to exercise all royal functions in their joint names.

	However, the question of any contractual character the crown might possess is avoided. The succession is stated to lie in the heirs of the Protestant Mary, and then her younger sister Anne. In addition, the Bill stipulates that no papist (i.e. a person of Catholic faith), or person married to one, can become king of England.		However, the question of any contractual character the crown might possess is avoided. The succession is stated to lie in the heirs of the Protestant Mary, and then her younger sister [[Anne I\|Anne]]. In addition, the Bill stipulates that no papist (i.e. a person of Catholic faith), or person married to one, can become king of England.

	The royal prerogative to dispense with law in specific instances is to become subject to statutory sanction; and Parliament claims the right to override a royal pardon. This received statutory recognition through the [[Act of Settlement]] (1701).		The royal prerogative to dispense with law in specific instances is to become subject to statutory sanction; and Parliament claims the right to override a royal pardon. This received statutory recognition through the [[Act of Settlement]] (1701).



			== Sources ==

	Primary source:		Primary source:

Pankratz at 08:15, 25 May 2009

2009-05-25T08:15:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:15, 25 May 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Passed by Parliament in December 1689, the Bill of Rights gave statutory force to the Declaration of Rights		Passed by Parliament in December 1689, the Bill of Rights gave statutory force to the Declaration of Rights

	The Declaration of Rights, drawn up by the Convention in February 1689, was presented to Mary and [[William of Orange]] in the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, and consequently fixed in the Bill of Rights. The Declaration gave an account of the misdeeds of [[James II]], begged Mary and William to accept the crown, and laid down an Oath of Allegiance to the new monarchs.		The Declaration of Rights, drawn up by the Convention Parliament in February 1689, was presented to Mary and [[William of Orange]] in the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, and consequently fixed in the Bill of Rights. The Declaration gave an account of the misdeeds of [[James II]], begged Mary and William to accept the crown, and laid down an Oath of Allegiance to the new monarchs.

	The Bill of Rights itself closely followed the Declaration of Rights in its stipulation of ancient rights, and the recent abuses of the royal prerogatives by James II.		The Bill of Rights itself closely followed the Declaration of Rights in its stipulation of ancient rights, and the recent abuses of the royal prerogatives by James II.
Line 11:		Line 11:
	- the suspending and execution of laws without parliamentary consent is illegal		- the suspending and execution of laws without parliamentary consent is illegal

	- levying money (e.g. ship money) by the monarch without parliamentary consent is illegal		- levying money (e.g. ship money, customs duties) by the monarch without parliamentary consent is illegal

	- the subjects are entitled to petition the crown		- the subjects are entitled to petition the crown
Line 17:		Line 17:
	- the existence of a standing army in times of peace without parliamentary consent is illegal		- the existence of a standing army in times of peace without parliamentary consent is illegal

	- parliamentary elections should be free		- Protestant subjects may have "arms for their defence"

			- parliamentary elections should be free (from monarchical interference)

	- freedom of speech, debates, and proceedings in Parliament should not be questioned in any court outside Parliament		- freedom of speech, debates, and proceedings in Parliament should not be questioned in any court outside Parliament
Line 23:		Line 25:
	- parliament should be held frequently		- parliament should be held frequently

	It is enacted that, although Mary and William are to be joint rulers after accepting the crown, “his Highness the prince of Orange (whom it hath pleased Almighty God to make the glorious instrument of delivering this kingdom from popery and arbitrary power)” (~~ibd~~.) alone ~~ist~~ to exercise all royal functions in their joint names.		It is enacted that, although Mary and William are to be joint rulers after accepting the crown, “his Highness the prince of Orange (whom it hath pleased Almighty God to make the glorious instrument of delivering this kingdom from popery and arbitrary power)” (ibid.) alone is to exercise all royal functions in their joint names.

	However, the question of any contractual character the crown might possess is avoided. The succession is stated to lie in the heirs of the Protestant Mary, and then her younger sister Anne. In addition, the Bill stipulates that no papist (i.e. a person of Catholic faith), or person married to one, can become king of England.		However, the question of any contractual character the crown might possess is avoided. The succession is stated to lie in the heirs of the Protestant Mary, and then her younger sister Anne. In addition, the Bill stipulates that no papist (i.e. a person of Catholic faith), or person married to one, can become king of England.
Line 37:		Line 39:
	Secondary sources:		Secondary sources:

	Arnold-Baker, Charles. The companion to British ~~history~~. Longcross, 1996		Arnold-Baker, Charles. ''The companion to British History''. Longcross, 1996

	Ashley, Maurice. ''England in the seventeenth century''. Penguin Books: Harmondsworth, 1970.		Ashley, Maurice. ''England in the seventeenth century''. Penguin Books: Harmondsworth, 1970.

Nadine W. at 14:19, 22 May 2009

2009-05-22T14:19:37Z

New page

Passed by Parliament in December 1689, the Bill of Rights gave statutory force to the Declaration of Rights

The Declaration of Rights, drawn up by the Convention in February 1689, was presented to Mary and [[William of Orange]] in the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, and consequently fixed in the Bill of Rights. The Declaration gave an account of the misdeeds of [[James II]], begged Mary and William to accept the crown, and laid down an Oath of Allegiance to the new monarchs.

The Bill of Rights itself closely followed the Declaration of Rights in its stipulation of ancient rights, and the recent abuses of the royal prerogatives by James II.

The Bill begins by stating that the [[Houses of Parliament]] “assembled at Westminster, lawfully, fully and freely representing all the estates of the people of this realm” (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/england.asp). It then presents the accusations against James II and argues that James's abdication was due to the fact that he had “endeavour[ed] to subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom” (ibd.).

This is followed by a declaration of Parliament’s “ancient rights and liberties” (ibd.). Some of these propositions (which also relate directly to the accusations made against James II) are that

- the suspending and execution of laws without parliamentary consent is illegal

- levying money (e.g. ship money) by the monarch without parliamentary consent is illegal

- the subjects are entitled to petition the crown

- the existence of a standing army in times of peace without parliamentary consent is illegal

- parliamentary elections should be free

- freedom of speech, debates, and proceedings in Parliament should not be questioned in any court outside Parliament

- parliament should be held frequently

It is enacted that, although Mary and William are to be joint rulers after accepting the crown, “his Highness the prince of Orange (whom it hath pleased Almighty God to make the glorious instrument of delivering this kingdom from popery and arbitrary power)” (ibd.) alone ist to exercise all royal functions in their joint names.

However, the question of any contractual character the crown might possess is avoided. The succession is stated to lie in the heirs of the Protestant Mary, and then her younger sister Anne. In addition, the Bill stipulates that no papist (i.e. a person of Catholic faith), or person married to one, can become king of England.

The royal prerogative to dispense with law in specific instances is to become subject to statutory sanction; and Parliament claims the right to override a royal pardon. This received statutory recognition through the [[Act of Settlement]] (1701).

Primary source:

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/england.asp

Secondary sources:

Arnold-Baker, Charles. The companion to British history. Longcross, 1996

Ashley, Maurice. ''England in the seventeenth century''. Penguin Books: Harmondsworth, 1970.