James I: “True Law of Free Monarchies” and “A Speech to

Parliament”

How does each understand the rights and obligations of government? Of the
monarch?

In his “True Law of Free Monarchies”, James I asserts that a king is above the law but
should follow it in order to set a good example for his subjects. He states, “a good king, though
he be above the law, will subject and frame his actions thereto, for example’s sake to his subjects,
and of his own free will, but not as subject or bound thereto...”. In his speech to parliament
(1610), James I also declares that kings are “God’s lieutenants upon earth and sit upon God’s
throne”, and therefore have divine and absolute power. He believes that because kings are called
gods in Scripture, their powers are related to the Divine power. James I also compares kings to
the “fathers of families”, parents of countries, and “the politic father(s) of [the] people. He states
that parliament (or government) should not “meddle with the main points of government”
because James I believes that that is his own responsibility. In conclusion, James I believes that
kings have the right to divine power and is above the law while the parliament is secondary and
supportive of the monarch.

What is the basis of power each assumes and appeals to? How does the
status of “the law” change?

The basis of power of the monarch as stated by James I is that the king should have
absolute and divine power. James argues for the divine right of the king (absolutism) in part II.
He states that the king is above the law, but again should follow it to set an example for his
people. James I believes that parliament’s power is secondary to the king’s and the parliament
itself should not overstep its boundaries (e.g. see above question/quote about meddling with
government.)

“The Charge Against the King”

How does each understand the rights and obligations of government? Of the
monarch?

This document stated that the monarch was obligated to protect and uphold the personal
liberties and freedom of the people he ruled over. However, in the case of Charles I, he was
accused of acting out of his own interests and beliefs instead of those of his people. Charles I
was also accused of “traitorously and maliciously” levying war against Parliament. (Also see last
2 paragraphs).

What is the basis of power each assumes and appeals to? How does the
status of “the law” change?

The primary sources states that the king has limited power but still is responsible for
fulfilling and respecting the need of his subjects. (Charles I “carried on for the advancement and
upholding of a personal interest of will, power, and pretended prerogative to himself and his
family, against the public interest, common right, liberty, justice, and peace of the people of this
nation, by and from whom he was entrusted as aforesaid”.)

Bill of Rights (1689)

How does each understand the rights and obligations of government? Of the
monarch?

This document states that the power of the monarch and of the parliament/government
should be balanced. For example, a monarch cannot suspend or execute laws (1) without the
consent of Parliament.

What is the basis of power each assumes and appeals to? How does the
status of “the law” change?

The 1689 Bill of Rights emphasizes the balance of power between the monarch and
government. In this way, a tyranny could be prevented, as many of the monarch’s actions must
be approved/given consent by the parliament. This document makes many things that would
originally be the “king’s right” illegal and “against the law”. In conclusion, the Bill of RIghts
limits the power of the monarch to a greater extent.