The Rise of the Hanover Dynasty and the Formation of the Parliamentary Regime

Queen Anne I, like her sister Mary I, also died without heirs, making her closest relative, the Elector of Hanover, another Protestant prince, the king: George I of England (1714-1727).

The change of dynasty was because of the aforementioned 1701 Act of Settlement, which forbade a Catholic from becoming His Gracious Majesty. George I was succeeded by George II (1727-1760) and George III (17601820). This dynastical change would have crucial consequences for British constitutional history.

11.6.1 Robert Walpole and the Linguistic Origins

of the Parliamentary Regime

When they ascended to the British throne, neither George I nor George II spoke English, which prevented them from presiding over meetings with their ministers. The result was that for 46 years English monarchs did not attend the deliberations of their governments, leaving this task to their ministers. Thus arose the custom of one of the ministers informing the kings (in French or Latin) about affairs discussed at the ministerial cabinet’s meetings and, reciprocally, conveying to his colleagues the sovereign’s point of view (Maitland and Fisher 2001, 394-400).

This state of things was facilitated by the circumstance that for over 20 years (between 1721 and 1742), this role of intermediary was played by Sir Robert Walpole, Earl of Oxford (1676-1745), then the leader of the Whig party. Such longevity in office proved to be crucial, as it ended up ingraining Walpole’s character and political ideas into English political practice. With a naturally authoritarian disposition, he gradually managed to have the king remove all those ministers who did not share his ideas, thereby coming to head up a homogeneous cabinet. As he presided over the government, he became the “Prime Minister”.^{^[548]}

Walpole believed that ministers ought to enjoy not only the king’s confidence but also—and this was profoundly novel—that of the Parliament.

Thus, when most of the Westminster representatives reproached him for his policy of peace with France, he resigned, even though he enjoyed George II’s confidence (Pearce 2008, 418). Thus did Parliamentary government arise by way of “constitutional tradition” in what can be called the power shift from Monarch to Prime Minister (Wicks 2006, 59-62).

11.6.2 The Consolidation of the “Parliamentary System”

11.6.2.1 The Case of William Pitt the Elder and the Emergence of “Public Opinion”

Walpole’s resignation proved pivotal to the consolidation of the parliamentary system, as thereafter kings considered the opinion of Parliament’s two chambers about government affairs. Not only that of the representatives in Parliament, but also “public opinion”, which would begin to acquire political clout as a result of the diffusion of England’s first newspapers (Harris 1993).^{^[549]} This, for instance, was the case in 1757, when British public opinion, after a war in which England had been resoundingly defeated by France, in an outburst of patriotic fervor, forced George II to appoint the Whig leader William Pitt “the Elder”, also known as Lord Chatham (1708-1778), as Prime Minister (Black 1990, 172-173).^{^[550]}

11.6.2.2 George III Seeks to Tame Parliament

With the arrival to the throne of George III (1760-1820), the Crown’s attitude towards Parliament radically changed. The new king was of an authoritarian bent, and immediately locked horns with William Pitt, who the monarch forced to resign in 1761 (Watson 2001, 74). One must keep in mind that, unlike his predecessors, George III had been born in England and spoke English perfectly. Thus, he strove to rule by himself and to impose his royal will upon his ministers.^{^[551]} Initially, however, he was unable to do so in his dealings with the Westminster Parliament, and had to readmit Pitt as Prime Minister between 1766 and 1768 (Thomas 2002, 180-196). After devoting himself to unabashedly buying off electors and representatives, George III ended up achieving a docile Parliament over which he was able to place Lord North as Prime Minister.^{^[552]} This attempt to fully restore royal prerogative, however, would fail for two reasons: the Wilkes Affair and the War of Independence against the American colonies (1776-1783).

11.6.2.3 The Wilkes Affair and the Consolidation of Public Opinion as a Political Force (1770)

The Wilkes Affair marked the emergence of public opinion as a political force in England. John Wilkes (1727-1797) was a member of the House of Commons who began to attack the king’s policies in his newspaper The North Briton (Melton 2001, 31). George III reacted by ordering his arrest. British public opinion, however, found the king’s response unfair, a violation of Parliamentary immunity and the freedom of the press. In 1768, Wilkes was reelected as a representative but, by order of the King, Parliament invalidated his election. Elected again, his appointment was again overruled by the Houses. This time, however, the public was incensed and there appeared a large number of pamphlets vehemently reproaching the king and the House of Commons for their disrespect for the rights of voters to freely choose a candidate.^{^[553]} The pressure was effective. As a result of it, Parliament adopted a law allowing the press to publish the contents of its sessions.^{^[554]}

11.6.2.4 The Independence of the American Colonies and the End of Absolutism in England (1783)

George III’s authority, quite undermined by the Wilkes Affair, was further weakened when the English colonies in North America achieved independence from the British Crown after a rebellion which began in 1776 (McConville 2006). Public opinion blamed the monarch for defeat in a conflict which had been brought about by the king’s intransigence, as he had refused to make any concessions to the American colonists (Thomas 1985, 16-31). Thus, when in 1782, George III was forced to recognize the independence of the 13 colonies, the general discontent forced him to accept as prime minister one of the leaders of the opposition, who dared to form his government without consulting the monarch regarding its composition.^{^[555]}

11.6.2.5 King George’s Madness and Its Constitutional Implications

To make matters worse, at the end of his reign George III went insane.

Exhibiting the first symptoms of madness in 1788, he was definitively deranged by 1811.^{^[556]} This situation provoked a constitutional crisis in 1788, in which the question arose as to whether the heir to the throne, the Prince of Wales, could unilaterally declare himself regent, or if it was Parliament’s prerogative to appoint one (Derry 1963, 67119). In 1811, the Parliamentary option prevailed and the Prince of Wales, the future George IV, was invited by Parliament to exercise the regency by virtue of a law that was not sanctioned by the king—who was incapacitated—but by a commission named by the Parliament.^{^[557]} This would prove to be a crucial precedent.

11.6.2.6 Victoria: The Queen Who Did Not Govern

Beginning with the reign of Victoria I (1837-1901), the English monarchy ceased to assert a political role and began to limit itself to functions of institutional representation. In fact, the exercise of royal prerogative ever since has been defined by the constitutional precept that “the king reigns but does not govern” (Arnstein 1990, 178-194). The long Victorian period allowed for the normalization of the alternation between the two major parties, thanks in large part to the liberal Gladstone and the conservative Disraeli, the era’s political giants, especially after the election reform of 1867, which helped to establish a tradition of political debate (Matthew 1979, 615-643). In large part, this explains why the Victorian Age marked the zenith of British power and prestige.

11.6.3 The Democratization of the Parliamentary System

(1832-1928)

While the Parliamentary system established since the first half of the eighteenth century did curtail royal prerogative, it did not turn the British political system into a democratic regime per se. In fact, until the essential Lord Grey’s electoral reform of 1832, Parliament was controlled by a very small oligarchy: the gentry.^{^[558]} Only thereafter was the electoral map reorganized, with the elimination of 143 “rotten” or “pocket” boroughs: areas that had elected representatives ever since the Middle Ages even though they were practically devoid of any population.

Rotten boroughs had survived because they made it possible to control elections through patronage, the purchasing of votes and electoral fraud. Moreover, the reform created electoral districts with their corresponding parliamentary representatives in the new industrial cities such as Manchester and Liverpool, which until then had no MPs in Westminster (Wicks 2006, 76-81).^{^[559]} The “democratization” of the English electoral system took shape by expanding the system of censitary suffrage, requiring increasing incomes for one to vote or be elected through the successive reforms of 1867, 1873 and 1884 (Smith 2004, 156-173.)^{^[560]}

The British parliamentary system would not be fully democratized until after the First World War, when the requirement of being a property owner, or at least a lessee in one’s own name, was lifted to vote. Then, the only requisite was to meet certain age requirements: 21 for males and 30 for women. Though unfair, this nevertheless marked a great victory for women, as it came after more than half a century of struggle for women’s suffrage (Kent 2005, 191-228)^{^[561]} ^{^[562]} in a movement that started with the Parliamentary debates that led to the approval of the Second Reform Act of 1867 (Bolt 2000, 34),^{^[563]} and required the brave determination of courageous women like Emmeline Pankhurst (1858-1928)^{^[564]} to succeed. British women finally achieved voting equality in 1928, when the age at which they could vote was made the same as that of men (van Wingerden 2002, 172-180).^{^[565]}

11.6.4 The Consolidation of the Legislative Superiority of the House of Commons: The Parliament Act (1911)

Another important step towards the democratization of the British Parliamentary regime was the approval of the Parliament Act on August 18, 1911, a consequence of the constitutional crisis provoked by the rejection of the Budget Law in November 1909 by the Conservative-dominated House of Lords.

After two ensuing general elections (January and December 1910), the Liberal Government of Herbert Henry Asquith approved a Bill that deprived the House of Lords of its ability to reject funding bills, and replaced their veto power over other public bills, with a power to delay them for up to 2 years.^{^[566]} The result of the 1909-1911 conflict between the two Houses, left the House of Commons in a dominant position within Parliament, which meant that the legislative authority of Parliament came to be based on the electorate’s political support, as holding a majority of seats in the Commons became the source of true political power (Bradley and Ewing 2007, 54).

11.6.5 The Legislative Recognition of the Prime Minister

(1937)

The figure of the “prime minister”, and even of the Cabinet itself, however, retained an unofficial status for much longer, as it would not be until 1937 that a law officially created the position: the Ministers of the Crown Act (1937), which also assigned the office remuneration (Brazier 1997, 90).

TIMELINE

Roman Period

43-409 ad Roman occupation of Great Britain.

Anglo-Saxon Period

577 Battle of Dyrham. Decisive victory of Angles and Saxons. Beginning

of Anglo-Saxon rule. England is divided into several kingdoms (Heptarchy).

590-616 Reign of Aethelbert, King of Kent (c. 600 Aethelbert Code).

871-899 Reign of Alfred the Great, first king of the Anglo-Saxons.

1017-1035 Reign of Cnut II the Great, king of England, Denmark and Norway.

1042-1066 Reign of Edward the Confessor, the last Anglo-Saxon king.

Late Middle Ages

1066	Battle of Hastings. End of the Anglo-Saxon period, beginning of the Norman period.
1086	Completion of the “Domesday Book” ordered by William I the Conqueror (1066-1087).
1154-1189 1166 1170 1180	Reign of Henry II Plantagenet. Expansion of Royal justice. Assize of Clarendon Assassination of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury. Henry II appoints Ranulf of Glanville Chief Justiciar of England. Author of the first treatise on English Law (Tractatus de legibus et consuetudinibus regni Angliae), he was decisive in consolidating Henry II's judicial reforms, which led to the establishment of a “Common Law” for the realm.
1215	John I Lackland is forced by nobles to sign the Magna Carta Libertatum.
1259	“Provisions of Oxford”. An in-law of the weak and unpopular Henry III (1217-1272) rebels against the king and imposes a council of 15 nobles, assigned all powers.
1264	Simon de Montfort defeats Henry III at Lewes and summons a Parliament in which, together with two nobles per county, for the first time sit two representatives of the bourgeoisie for each city.
1272	Beginning of the reign of Edward I (1272-1307), who renders the presence of the bourgeoisie in the Westminster Parliament permanent.
1327	Parliament demands the abdication of Edward II in favor of his son Edward III (1327-1377).
1346	Overwhelming English victory over the French at Crecy. Start of the Hundred Years War. Growing financial requirements imposed by the war force Edward III to convoke Parliament often, which features two chambers: the House of Commons and the House of Lords.
1399	The English Parliament removes Henry II and grants the throne to Henry IV, which marks the first reign of the Lancaster Dynasty.
1455	The War of the Roses begins (1455-1485).

Sixteenth Century

1507 Beginning of the reign of Henry VIII (1507-1547).

1534 Henry VIII breaks with Rome (Act of Supremacy).

1558 Beginning of the reign of Elizabeth I of England (1558-1603).

Seventeenth Century

1649 Execution of Charles I. Oliver Cromwell comes to power (1649-1658). In 1653 he dissolves Parliament and declares himself “Lord Protector of the Republic”.

1660 Restoration of the Stuarts on the English throne in the person of Charles II (1660 1685). Under his reign Parliament unilaterally adopts a law preventing Catholics from holding public office (Bill of Test, 1673) and prohibiting illegal arrests (Habeas corpus, 1679).

1688 Second English Revolution (“Glorious Revolution”). King James II’s flight from England (crowned in 1685). His daughter Mary’s husband, William of Orange, takes the throne as William III (1688-1702).

1689 Parliament approves a Bill of Rights.

Eighteenth Century

1701 Parliament approves a law preventing Catholics from reigning in England (Establishment Act, 1701).

1707 Queen Anne (1702-1714) sanctions the law creating the United Kingdom (Union Act), made up of England, Wales and Scotland.

1714 George I (1714-1727) takes the throne as the first king of the Hanover Dynasty.

1721 Robert Walpole begins his period of government (1721-1742). He will serve as the United Kingdom’s de facto prime minister, the first in its history. He lays the foundations of a “parliamentary system” that will be built on tradition and custom.

1757 George II (1727-1760) appoints William Pitt the Elder as prime minister, forced by public opinion.

1783 England’s defeat in the War of Independence against the American colonies forces George III (1760-1820) to accept the head of the opposition as his prime minister.

Nineteenth Century

1801 Integration of Ireland into the UK.

1815 King George III goes definitively insane.

Parliament is the power which designates the Prince of Wales as regent, making it clear that this is not a right which he possesses through dynastic inheritance.

1832 Major English electoral reform. The first step towards the “democratization” of the parliamentary system. “Censitary suffrage” would be expanded with reform introduced in 1867 and 1882.

1837 Victoria rises to the throne I (1837-1901). During her reign the alternation between the two major parties takes root, and the principle that the king “reigns but does not govern” is accepted.

Twentieth Century

1900 Foundation of the Labour Party.

1911 Parliament Act: consolidation of the Legislative superiority of the

House of Commons.

1918 After the end of First World War “universal suffrage” is granted in

England.

1919-1921 Irish War of independence.

1922 Independence of the Irish Republic. Northern Ireland (Ulster) remains in the UK.

1928 Women achieve the same voting rights as men.

1937 The position of prime minister is placed into law for the first time

(Ministers of the Crown Act).

1998 The UK Parliament approves the Scotland Act, which establishes a

Scottish Parliament.

Twenty-First Century

2012 The UK Parliament approves amendments devolving further powers to Scotland.

References

Arnstein, W. L. (1990). Queen Victoria opens parliament: The disinvention of tradition. Historical Research, 63(151), 178-194.

Ashe, L. (2007). The Bayeux Tapestry: Performative texts. In Fiction and history in England 1066-1200 (pp. 35-49). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Aurell, M. (2007). The Plantagenet Empire 1154-1224. Harlow, UK: Pearson.

Bachrach, B. S. (1984). Henry II and the Angevin tradition of family hostility. Albion: A Quarterly Journal Concerned with British Studies, 16(2), 111-130.

Bagehot, W. (2009). The English Constitution (2nd ed., London: Hapman and Hall, 1873). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Baker, J. H. (1990). An introduction to English legal history (3rd ed.). London: Butterworths.

Baker, K. M. (1994). The idea of a Declaration of Rights. In D. Van Kley (Ed.), The French idea of freedom: The old regime and the Declaration of Rights of 1789 (pp. 154-199). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Barker, A. (2003). Newspapers, politics, and public opinion in late eighteenth-century England (Reprinted). Oxford: Clarendon.

Bartley, P. (2002). Emmeline Pankhurst. London: Routledge.

Bernard, G. W. (2007). The King's reformation: Henry VIII and the remaking of English Church. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Biancalana, J. (1988). For want of justice: Legal reforms of Henry II. Columbia Law Review, 88 (3), 433-536.

Black, J. (1990). British politics and society from Walpole to Pitt, 1742-1789. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Black, J. (2006). George III: America's last king. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Black, J. (2011). The English press in the eighteenth century (Reprint). London: Routledge.

Blackstone, W. (1979). Commentaries on the laws of England (4 Vols) (A Facsimile of the First Edition of 1765-1769). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Bolt, C. (2000). The ideas of British Suffragism. In S. S. Holton & J. Purvis (Eds.), Votes for women (pp. 34-56). London: Routledge.

Boutmy, E. (1902). La Declaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen et M. Jellinek. Annales des sciences politiques, 17, 415-443.

Bradley, A. W., & Ewing, K. D. (2007). Constitutional and administrative law (14th ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited.

Bradshaw, B. (1979). The Tudor commonwealth: Reform and revision. The Historical Journal, 22 (2), 455-476.

Brand, P. (2007). Henry II and the creation of the English common law. In C. Harper-Bill & N. Vincent (Eds.), Henry II: New interpretations (pp. 215-241). Woodbridge, UK: Boydell Press.

Brazier, R. (1997). Ministers of the crown. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brock, M. (1993). The Great Reform Act. Aldershot, UK: Gregg Revivals.

Caenegem, R. C. (1988). The birth of the English common law (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Cash, A. H. (2006). John Wilkes: The scandalous father of civil liberty. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Cavill, P. (2009). The English parliaments of Henry VII: 1485-1504. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chrimes, S. B. (1970). English constitutional history (4th ed., Reprinted). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Clifton, R. (1971). The popular fear of catholics during the English Revolution. Past and Present, 52, 23-55.

Coby, P. (2006). Henry VIII and the reformation parliament. New York: Pearson Longman.

Coleman, C., & Starkey, D. (Eds.). (1986). Revolution reassessed: Revisions in the history of Tudor government & administration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cowdrey, H. E. J. (2005). King Harold II and the Bayeux Tapestry: A critical introduction. In G. R. Owen-Crocker (Ed.), King Harold II and the Bayeux Tapestry (pp. 1-15). Woodbridge, UK: The Boydell Press.

Crossman, R. H. S. (1969). Government and the governed: A history of political ideas and political practice. London: Chatto and Windus.

Crouch, D. (2007). The Normans: The history of a Dinasty. London: Hambledon Continuum.

David, S. (1999). Prince of pleasure: The Prince of Wales and the making of the regency. New York, NY: Grove.

Dean, A. C. (2006). Court culture and political news in London’s eighteenth-century newspapers. English Literary History, 73(3), 631-649.

Dean, D. M. (2002). Law-making and society in late Elizabethan England: The parliament of England, 1584-1601. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Derry, J. W. (1963). The regency crisis and the Whigs: 1788-1789. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Dicey, A. V. (2013). The law of the constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Based on the first edition (1885) of Dicey’s Lectures Introductory to the Study of Law of the Constitution. London: Macmillan and Co. Since its third edition (1889) it was called simply Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution)

Dodd, G. (2007). Justice and grace: Private petitioning and the English parliament in the late Middle Ages. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Doelman, J. (1994). A king of Thine own heart: The English reception of King James VI and I’s Basilikon Doron. Seventeenth Century, 9(1), 1-9.

Edwards, J. (2011). Mary I: England's Catholic queen. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Elton, G. R. (1964). The Tudor revolution: A reply. Past & Present, 29, 26-49.

Elton, G. R. (1969). The body of the whole realm: Parliament and representation in medieval and Tudor England. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia.

Elton, G. R. (1979). English law in the sixteenth century: Reform in an age of change. London: Seldon Society.

Evans, E. J. (1983). The Great Reform Act of 1832. London: Methuen and Co.

Evans, E. J. (2008). Britain before the Reform Act: 1815-1832 (2nd ed.). New York: Pearson Longman.

Everard, J. A. (2006). Brittany and the Angevins: Province and empire 1158-1203 (4th ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Fajardo, M. I. (2012). In tanta Luce Seculi: Una reflexion sobre elpensamiento penal y el Derecho del Occidente ilustrado. Granada, Spain: University of Granada [Faculty of Law (Ph. Thesis)].

Fischling, D., & Fortier, M. (Eds.). (1996). The true law of free monarchies and Basilikon Doron. Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies.

Fitzpatrick, M. (1990). Heretical religion and radical political ideas in late eighteenth-century England. In E. Hellmuth (Ed.), The transformation of political culture: England and Germany in the late eighteenth century (pp. 339-372). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Gneist, R. (2005). The history of the English constitution. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing. Graves, M. A. R. (2014). Elizabethan parliaments: 1559-1601 (2nd ed., rev.). London: Routledge. Gregg, E. (2001). Queen Anne (New ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Griffith, J. A. G. (2001). The common law and the political constitution. Law Quarterly Review, 117, 42-67.

Guy, J. (2000). Politics, law and counsel in Tudor and early Stuart England. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.

Harris, I. (2011). Some origins of a Tudor revolution. English Historical Review, CXXVI(523), 1355-1385.

Harris, R. (1993). A patriot press: National politics and the London press in the 1740s. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Harris, T. (2006). Restoration: Charles II and his kingdoms. London: Penguin.

Harriss, G. L. (1965). A revolution in Tudor history? Past and Present, 31, 87-96.

Harriss, G. L. (1975). King, parliament and public finance in medieval England to 1369. Oxford: Clarendon.

Harriss, G. L. (2006). Shaping the nation: England 1360-1461 (Reprint). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Henderson, E. F. (Ed.). (2004). Select historical documents of the Middle Ages (Reprint from the 1912 edition). Honolulu, HI: University Press of the Pacific.

Hicks, M. (2003). The wars of the roses: 1455-1485. Oxford: Oxprey.

Hill, B. W. (1985). British parliamentary parties, 1742-1832: From the fall ofWalpole to the first Reform Act. London: Allen & Unwin.

Holt, J. C. (2003). Magna Carta (Reprint). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Irvine of Lairg, A. A. M. I. B. (2003). Sovereignty in comparative perspective: Constitutionalism in Britain and America. In Human rights, constitutional law and the development of the English legal system: Selected essays (pp. 227-250). Portland, OR: Hart.

James I, King of England. (2010). The political works of James I. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing. (Reprinted from the edition of 1616, with an introduction by Charles Howard McIlwain.)

Janin, H. (2004). Medieval justice: Cases and laws in France, England and Germany, 500-1500. Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company.

Jellinek, G. (1901). The Declaration of the Rights of man and the citizen: A contribution to modern constitutional history. New York: Henry Holt.

Jellinek, G. (1902). La Declaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen: Reponse de M. Jellinek a M. Boutmy. Revue du Droit Public et de la Science Politique en France et a l'etranger, 18, 385-400. (1995, reedition in Revue franpaise d’Histoire des Idees Rolitiques, 1, 167-178.)

Jenkins, C. D. (2003). From unwritten to written: Transformation in the British common-law constitution. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 36, 863-960.

Kaufman, R. (1998). The madness of George III, by Mary Wollstonecraft. Studies in Romanticism, 37(1), 17-25.

Kennedy, D. E. (2000). The English Revolution: 1642-1649. London: Macmillan.

Kent, S. K. (2005). Sex and Suffrage in Britain: 1860-1914. London: Routledge.

Klippel, D. (1995). La polemique entre Jellinek et Boutmy: une controverse scientifique ou un conflit de nationalismes? Revue francaise d'histoire des ideespolitiques, 1, 79-94.

Lee, S. J. (2007). The reign of Elizabeth I: 1558-1603: (Questions and analysis in history). London: Routledge.

Lehmberg, S. E. (2009). The reformation parliament 1529-1536. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Letteron, R. (2001). L’universalite des droits de l’homme: apparences et realites L’ideologie des droits de l’homme en France et aux Etats-Unis. Annuaire Frangais de Relations Internationales, 2, 145-164.

Loades, D. M. (1991). The reign of Mary Tudor. Politics, government and religion in England, 1553-58 (2nd ed.). London: Longman.

Lyon, B. D. (1980). A constitutional and legal history of medieval England (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.

MacCaffrey, W. T. (2008). Parliament: The Elizabethan experience. In D. J. Guth & J. McKenna (Eds.), Tudor rule and revolution: Essays for G R Elton from his American friends (pp. 127148). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Macinnes, A. I. (2007). Union and empire: The making of the United Kingdom in 1707. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Maddicott, J. R. (2001). Simon de Monfort (Reprinted). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Maddicott, J. R. (2012). The origins of the English parliament: 924-1327. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Maitland, F. W., & Fisher, H. A. L. (2001). The constitutional history of England: A course of lectures delivered. Union, NJ: The Lawbook Exchange. (Originally published: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1908.)

Maitland, F. W., & Montague, F. C. (2005). A sketch of English legal history. New York: Elibron Classics. (Facsimile of the 1915 edition: New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons.)

Masschaele, J. (2009). Jury, state, and society in medieval England. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Matthew, H. C. G. (1979). Disraeli Gladstone and the politics of mid-Victorian budgets. The Historical Journal, 22(3), 615-643.

McConville, B. (2006). The king's three faces: The rise & fall of royal America, 1688-1776. Williamsburg, VA: The University of North Carolina Press.

McLean, I. (2012). What's wrong with the British constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Melton, J. V. H. (2001). The rise of the public in enlightenment Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Mill, J. S. (2012). On liberty. Toronto: Dover. (Unabridged, unaltered republication of the 1859 2nd standard edition: London: John W. Parker & Son.)

Minor, R. H. (1933). The convention parliament, 1689-1690. Athens, GA: University of Georgia.

Morris, M. (2008). A great and terrible king: Edward I and the forging of Britain (Updated ed.). London: Hutchinson.

Namier, L. Sir (1988). The structure of politics at the accession of George III (2nd ed.). Hampshire, UK: Macmillan Press.

Nenner, H. (2003). Pretense and pragmatism: The response to uncertainty in the succession crisis of 1689. In L. G. Schwoerer (Ed.), The revolution of1688-89: Changing perspectives (pp. 8394). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Nutting, H. A. (1963). The most Wholesome law - The Habeas Corpus Act of 1679. The American Historical Review, 65(3), 527-543.

O’Gorman, F. (1989). Voters, patrons, and parties: The unreformed electoral system of Hanoverian England, 1734-1832. Oxford: Clarendon.

Oleson, T. J. (1955). The Witenagemot in the reign of Edward the confessor: A study in the constitutional history of eleventh-century England. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Ormrod, W. M. (2011). Edward III. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Pankhurst, E. (1979). My own story. London: Virago Ltd.

Pearce, E. (2004). Reform!: The fight for the 1832 Reform Act. London: Pimlico.

Pearce, E. (2008). The great man: Sir Robert Walpole: Scoundrel, genius and Britain's first prime minister. London: Pimlico.

Perrin, W. G. (2012). British flags: Their early history and their development at sea: With an account of the origin of the flag as a national device (Reprint). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Philp, M. (1985). Rational religion and political radicalism in the 1790s. Enlightenment and Dissent, 4, 35-46.

Philips, J. A. (1982). Electoral behaviour in unreformed England: Plumpers, splitters and straights. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Pincus, S. (2009). 1688: The First Modern Revolution. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Plant of Highfield, Raymond, Baron. (2009). Foreword. In A. V. Dicey (Ed.), General characteristics of English constitutionalism: Six unpublished lectures (pp. 9-35). Oxford: Peter Lang.

Plucknett, T. F. T. (1970). Legislation of Edward I. Oxford: Clarendon.

Pollock, F., & Maitland, F. W. (2010). The history of English law before the time of Edward I (2nd ed., 2 Vols). Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.

Prescott, H. F. M. (2003). Mary Tudor: The Spanish Tudor (Repr.). London: Phoenix.

Purvis, J. (2002). Emmeline Pankhurst: A biography. London: Routledge.

Raban, S. (2000). England under Edward I and Edward II: 1259-1327. Oxford: Blackwell.

Riley, P. J. W. (1969). The union of 1707 as an episode in English politics. The English Historical Review, 84(332), 498-527.

Rovang, D. (2006). When reason reigns: Madness, passion and sovereignty in late 18th-century England. History of Psychiatry, 17(1), 23-44.

Rude, G. (1962). Wilkes and liberty: A social study of 1763 to 1774. Oxford: Clarendon.

Rushton, A. R. (2008). Royal Maladies: Inherited diseases in the ruling houses of Europe. Victoria, BC, Canada: Trafford publishing.

Ryan, K. (2005). Lex et ratio: Coke, the rule of law, and executive power. Vermont bar Journal & Law Digest, 31(1), 9-16.

Sadler, J. (2008). The second Barons' war: Simon de Montfort and the battles of Lewes and Evesham. Barnsley: Pen & Sword Military.

Schwoerer, L. G. (1981). The Declaration of Rights, 1689. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Seaward, P. (2009). The house of commons 1660-1707. In C. Jones (Ed.), A short history of parliament (pp. 126-147). Woodbridge, UK: Boydell Press.

Seel, G. E. (1999). The English wars and republic: 1637-1660. London: Routledge.

Sharpe, R. J. (2008). Historical aspects of Habeas Corpus. In The law of Habeas corpus (3rd ed., pp. 1-16). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Smith, E. A. (1999). George IV. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Smith, M. S. (2004). Parliamentary reform and the electorate. In C. Williams (Ed.), A companion to 19th-century Britain (pp. 156-173). Oxford: Blackwell.

Somerset, A. (2012). Queen Anne: The politics of passion. London: Harper Press.

Stanley, E. G. (2000). Imagining the Anglo-Saxon past: The search for Anglo-Saxon paganism and Anglo-Saxon trial by jury. Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer.

Stanton, E. C. (2002). Eighty years and more: Reminiscences, 1815-1897. Auckland: Humanity Books.

Stubbs, W. (Ed.). (1960). Select charters and other illustrations of English constitutional history from the earliest times to the reign of Edward the first (9th ed.). Oxford: Clarendon.

Tarkow, N. (1943). The significance of the act of settlement in the evolution of English democracy. Political Science Quarterly, 58(4), 537-561.

Thomas, P. D. G. (1985). George III and the American Revolution. History, 70(228), 16-31.

Thomas, P. D. G. (1996). John Wilkes: A friend to liberty. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

Thomas, P. D. G. (2002). George III: King and politicians, 1760-1770. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.

Troost, W. (2005). William III, the stadholder king: A political biography. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.

Valente, C. (2005). The provisions of Oxford: Assessing/assigning authority in time of unrest. In R. F. Berkhofer, et al. (Eds.), The experience of power in medieval Europe: 950-1350 (pp. 2542). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.

Vallance, E. (2006). The glorious revolution: 1688 - Britain's fight for liberty. London: Abacus. van Wingerden, S. A. (2002). The women's suffrage movement in Britain: 1866-1928. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Warham, D. (1995). Imagining the middle class: The political representation of class in Britain, c. 1780-1840. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Watson, J. S. (2001). The reign of George III: 1760-1815 (Reprint). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Werckmeister, O. K. (1976). The political ideology of the Bayeux Tapestry: Estratto dagli Studi Medievali. Studi Medievali (3rd series), 17(2), 535-595.

Western, J. R. (1972). Monarchy and revolution: The English state in the 1680s. London: Blandford.

Whiteley, P. (1996). Lord North: The prime minister who lost America. London: The Hambledon Press.

Wicks, E. (2006). The evolution of a constitution: Eight key moments in British constitutional history. Portland, OR: Hart.

Wilkinson, B. (1972). The creation of medieval parliaments. New York: Wiley.

Williams, P. (1963). A revolution in Tudor history?: Dr. Elton’s interpretation of the age. Past & Present, 25, 3-8.

Williams, P. (2006). The later Tudors: England, 1547-1603 (Repr.). Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

Wintertorn, G. (1976). The British Grundnorm: Parliamentary supremacy reexamined. Law Quarterly Review, 92, 591-617.

Wissolik, R. D. (1979). The Saxon statement: Code in the Bayeux Tapestry. Annuale Mediaevale, 19, 69-97.

Wittmayer Helms, M. E. (1963). The convention parliament of1660. Bryn Mawr, PA: Bryn Mawr College.

Wollstonecraft, M. (2010). A vindication of the rights of men in a letter to the right honourable Edmund Burke; Occasioned by his reflections on the revolution in France. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Facsimile edition of 1790: London: Joseph Johnson.)

Woolrych, A. (2003). The Cromwellian protectorate: A military dictatorship? In D. L. Smith (Ed.), Cromwell and the interregnum (pp. 61-90). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

The Rise of the Hanover Dynasty and the Formation of the Parliamentary Regime

More on the topic The Rise of the Hanover Dynasty and the Formation of the Parliamentary Regime: