FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63  
64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   >>   >|  
, Constitutional History of England (Cambridge, 1911), 165-236. Books of large value on the period include W. Busch, England under the Tudors, trans. by A. M. Todd (London, 1895), the only volume of which published covers the reign of Henry VII.; A. F. Pollard, Henry VIII. (London, 1902 and 1905), and England under the Protector Somerset (London, 1900); and M. Creighton, Queen Elizabeth (new ed., London, 1899).] VIII. THE STUARTS: CROWN AND PARLIAMENT (p. 026) *27. Absolutism Becomes Impracticable.*--Throughout the larger portion of the seventeenth century the principal interest in English politics centers in the contest which was waged between the nation represented in Parliament and the sovereigns of the Stuart dynasty. The question, as one writer has put it, was "at first whether government should be by the king or by the king in parliament, afterwards whether the king should govern or whether parliament should govern."[22] The Stuart sovereigns brought with them to the English throne no political principles that were new. When James I., in a speech before Parliament March 21, 1610, declared that monarchy "is the supremest thing upon earth," and that, "as to dispute what God may do is blasphemy, ... so is it sedition in subjects to dispute what a King may do in the height of his power,"[23] he was but giving expression to a conception of the royal prerogative which had been lodged in the mind of every Tudor, but which no Tudor had been so tactless as publicly to avow. The first two Stuarts confidently expected to maintain the same measure of absolutism which their Tudor predecessors had maintained--nothing more, nothing less. There were, however, several reasons why, for them, this was an impossibility. The first arose from their own temperament. The bluntness, the lack of perception of the public will, and the disposition perpetually to insist upon the minutest definitions of prerogative, which so pre-eminently characterized the members of the Stuart house must have operated to alienate seventeenth-century Englishmen under even the most favorable of circumstances. A second consideration is the fact, of which the nation was fully cognizant, that under the changed conditions that had arisen there was no longer the nee
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63  
64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

London

 
Stuart
 

England

 
nation
 

govern

 

Parliament

 
English
 

century

 

sovereigns

 

dispute


prerogative

 
parliament
 

seventeenth

 

favorable

 

circumstances

 

consideration

 

conception

 
Englishmen
 

lodged

 

operated


temperament

 

alienate

 

expression

 

conditions

 

sedition

 
changed
 
arisen
 

blasphemy

 
longer
 

subjects


cognizant
 

giving

 

height

 

members

 
characterized
 

perception

 

maintained

 

predecessors

 
public
 

impossibility


reasons

 
disposition
 

absolutism

 

Stuarts

 

eminently

 
confidently
 

tactless

 
bluntness
 

publicly

 

expected