In Scotland the Revolution of 1688 - 1689 has received little academic attention - considered little more than an adjunct of events in England. Traditionally, the political elite have been seen as reluctant to rebel, the resulting Convention Parliament containing few committed protagonists - the reaction of most determined by inherent conservatism and the overwhelming desire to preserve their own interest and status. Motivated essentially by self-interest and personal gain, the predominance of noble faction crippled Parliament - a constitutionally underdeveloped institution - which became nothing more than a platform for the rivalry and ambition of the landed elite. However, this interpretation is based on the dated notion that Scottish history can be considered as simply a protracted power struggle between a dominant territorial nobility and a weak monarch, intent on centralising authority. Nonetheless, the aim of the thesis is not to rewrite the political history of the Revolution or to chart the constitutional development of Parliament - although both aspects form part of the general analysis. Instead, this is principally a thematic study of the membership of the Convention Parliament and what they achieved, in terms of legislation and procedure. Taking into account the European context, including a thorough membership analysis, and revising the practical aspects of the Revolution settlement, it is possible to offer a fresh account of contemporary politics. Introducing the extensive contest that characterised the general election of 1689, and the emergence and progress of court and country politics through 1698 - 1702, study reveals the continuing development of an inclusive party political system similar to that evident in England. In this respect, the objective of the thesis is to address the main themes associated with the Revolution and Convention Parliament, providing an alternative, more accurate interpretation of the Scottish Revolution experience.

No description available.

The royal supremacy established by Henry VIII was never fully defined or resolved. Was it an imperial kingship or a mixed polity - the king-in-parliament? Professor G.R Elton's theory of parliamentary supremacy has been accepted for many years, but more recently this theory has come under attack from Professors Peter Lake, John Guy, and Patrick Collinson. They have shown that it was not strictly the case that either the royal supremacy or the ecclesiastical polity of the Tudors was a settled issue; there was a tension and an uncertainty that underlay both the Henrician break with Rome in 1534 and the Elizabethan Settlement of 1559, yet this tension was not brought to surface of Tudor political debate until the latter part of Elizabeth I's reign. What brought the issue to the fore was the controversy between the puritans who opposed Archbishop John Whitgift's subscription campaign and the 'conformists' who sided with Whitgift's demand for order and congruity in the young Church of England. Part of this controversy was carried out in a literary battle between one of Whitgift's proteges, civil lawyer and high commissioner Richard Cosin, and puritan common lawyer James Morice. The debate focused on the legality of the High Commission's use of the ex officio oath and eventually came to hinge on the question of Elizabeth's authority to empower that commission to exact the oath by virtue of her letters patent. If the ex officio oath was strictly against the statutes and common laws of the realm, was the queen authorised to direct the commission to exact the oath anyway - over and above the law? To answer yes, as Cosin did, was to declare that the queen's royal supremacy was imperial and that her ecclesiastical polity was essentially theocratic. To answer no, as did Morice, was to assert that there were certain things that the queen could not do - namely that she was not empowered to direct the High Commission to contravene statute law, even in the name of ordering and reforming the church. Cosin's legal arguments for the imperial supremacy of the monarch were powerful, but his writings were steeped in a form of political rhetoric that was quickly coming into fashion in the late sixteenth century: the 'language of state'. The language of state was essentially an abandonment of the classical-humanist vocabulary of 'counseling the prince' for the sake of 'virtuous government' in pursuit of a 'happy republic'. This new political language used by Cosin and other conformists justified itself on the premise that the state was so thoroughly endangered by sedition and instability that an urgent corrective was needed: not wise or virtuous counsel but strict obedience to the laws that preserved civil and religious authority. With the threat of presbyterianism at the doorstep of the English Church, Cosin - protected and encouraged by the powerful Whitgift - was free to employ both his legal and his rhetorical skills in an effort to reinvigorate the English clergy by enhancing their jurisdictional status over the laity. By the time James VI and I began his systematic revitalisation of the clerical estate in 1604, the vocabulary that would justify it had already been created. The influence of Cosin demonstrably permeated the early years of the Stuart Church suggesting that Cosin might provide a link between the vague uncertainties of the Elizabethan Settlement and the stark realities of the Caroline Church.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis examines the political role of the three estates in the Scottish parliament and general council between 1424 and 1488. Previous histories of the Scottish parliament have judged it to be weak and constitutionally defective. By placing each meeting of the estates within the context of political events, examining the frequency of meetings, identifying previously unknown parliaments, and studying those who attended and sat on its committees, a more detailed picture of parliament's role and influence has been created. A broadly chronological approach has been used in order to place parliaments in the context of the time in which they sat. Chapters 1 and 2 examine parliament between the return of James I from England in 1424 and 1435 and show the opposition he faced regarding taxation and the developing noble and clerical resentment to attempts to extend royal authority in the secular and ecclesiastical spheres. Chapters 3 and 4 discuss the crisis in parliament and general council between 1436 and James I's death, its role in the establishment of a new minority government, and the interaction between the Crichton, Livingston and Douglas families between 1437 and 1449. Chapter 5 examines James II's use of parliament as a tool against the Black Douglases between 1450 and 1455, while Chapter 6 shows parliament's ability to exert influence over royal lands and possessions and to criticise royal behaviour from 1455 to 1460. Chapter 7 shows the role of factions in parliament in the minority of James III, and their ability to undermine the government. Chapters 8, 9 and 10 discuss the campaign of criticism against James III in the 1470s, the parliamentary crisis that faced him in 1479-82, and the greater royal control exerted in the 1480s. Chapter 11 examines the lords of the articles between 1424 and 1485 and concludes that the committee was not, as has formerly been suggested, a royal board of control. In conclusion the Scottish parliament is judged to have played a leading role in political affairs, providing a forum in which the estates were able to criticise, oppose and defeat the crown over a broad range of issues.

No description available.

South Africa has had a free mandate theory of representation up to 1994. From 1994 to 2002 an imperative theory applied and in 2003 a limited hybrid free mandate was introduced. The origin of parliament, the development of representation as a concept in Public Law and the birth of political parties are studied. It is shown that parliament and representation were natural developments that occurred at the same time, not by grand design, but by chance. It is also shown that political parties appeared first as informal intra-parliamentary groupings that developed into extra-parliamentary organisations, organised to achieve and exercise power in the political system as the franchise became more liberal. The factors that influence a member's mandate and floor-crossing as such are discussed. Finally it is concluded that from a legal historical perspective, a free mandate of representation is the preferred theory of representation in public law. / Jurisprudence / LL.M. (Public Law)

South Africa has had a free mandate theory of representation up to 1994. From 1994 to 2002 an imperative theory applied and in 2003 a limited hybrid free mandate was introduced. The origin of parliament, the development of representation as a concept in Public Law and the birth of political parties are studied. It is shown that parliament and representation were natural developments that occurred at the same time, not by grand design, but by chance. It is also shown that political parties appeared first as informal intra-parliamentary groupings that developed into extra-parliamentary organisations, organised to achieve and exercise power in the political system as the franchise became more liberal. The factors that influence a member's mandate and floor-crossing as such are discussed. Finally it is concluded that from a legal historical perspective, a free mandate of representation is the preferred theory of representation in public law. / Jurisprudence / LL.M. (Public Law)