Student Paper F99-1-6
Fall 1999, Section I
Reviewer Comments
Checking on the Changing Balance of Power
Human society in Europe progressed during the 17th and 18th centuries because of the new use of checks and balances in government. Prior to the use of checks and balances, the monarch possessed the sole ability to make laws, to collect money, and was himself or herself above the law. Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, in their philosophizing, had all alluded to the need for checks and balances. In practice, checks and balances were applied to the appointing of officials, government dealings of subjects' money, and the introducing and changing laws. The introduction and use of checks and balances was a major step forward for human society.
Before cheeks and balances came to be used, the monarchy enjoyed far too much control. King James of England is a prime example of a monarch possessing too much power. He did away with laws, suspended laws, and made new laws all without the consent of Parliament. Re obtained money for his personal use without going through Parliament. He quartered soldiers in violation of the law.1 Also, Parliament was unable to make any laws without the approval of the monarch.2 James was, no doubt, using his position of power to do unfair things, that were beneficial strictly to himself He was no conducting government matters for the good of the country, but for the good of himself. Surely, after putting up with such actions, the ruled people would tire of such a rule and demand change. While these monarchs enjoyed taking their authority to the limit, it turned out to be their downfall. Had they not abused the power they possessed, the may not have lost it.
The great philosophizing trio of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau all saw that the current form of government was flawed. They had suggestions as to how to make it better. Hobbes, feeling that humans were, by nature, power hungry, knew there was a need to put a check on the use of power. Locke felt that law was based on consent, an idea that would keep a ruler from becoming dictatorial. Rousseau thought that the strong would dominate the weak, and to the weak needed to be protected. Each of the three had different views, and none had systems of law based solely on their ides, but they did recognize a problem, as well as a way to solve it. Their ideas would have worked in a world as they saw it, but the fact is that each of them had a different view of the people of the world. The world was not made up of an entire people having the same ideas, morals, and ethics, but was, and still is, a mixture of all types of different people. Certain ideas that they had were taken and applied. The result was the progression of human society.
In practice, checks and balances worked very effectively. The appointing of government officials came to be conducted in a more honest and representative manner. In England, officials in every town were required to inform the public of the time and place of choosing officials for Parliament. The officials also made sure that these procedures were followed.3 This made sure that every eligible voter, no matter his political stance, was aware and able to attend the election. The officials conducting the voting would be given a hefty fine if they interfered with the voting process.4 This made sure that corruption among officials would not happen. The officials were there to see that the people were heard, and that no matter the money of an individual, the official could not be bribed. Should any official in Parliament die, there would be a long nomination process of appointing a successor.5 All these actions took away from the ruler the power to chose his own people to back him. The officials so elected would not simply be figure heads or puppets controlled by the monarch. Bach official would have his own views, and would be more concerned with the good of the country rather than the good of the ruler. For Parliament officials having to go through an elective process, there was a certain amount of accountability created. People in positions of power had to consider those who put them there, and not simply themselves.
Through checks and balances, it was seen to that the government did not abuse the use of the people's money. In France's Declaration of the Rights of Man, it was made clear that the citizens were to choose if to give, when to give, and how much money to give.6 With this, it gave citizens power over their government. If the government wanted monetary support, it would have to do right by the people. If it did not, it would receive no money. Being that money was essential in the operation of any government, the people gained a huge say in their government. In England's The Petition of Right, it was stated that the monarch could not tax his or her subjects without the consent of others below him.7 This made sure that Parliament was not just a technicality of law, but rather a barrier that the monarch must go through. If the need of funds was not there, Parliament would refuse the monarch's request. This prevented the monarch from taxing unfairly and for things that would not benefit the country as a whole. With these checks in place, the government would receive only the money that was needed, and frivolous spending would be eliminated, and accountability instilled.
All of the reforms stated previously, though, would not have been effective if not for the ability of laws to back them up. Article six of the Commonwealth Instrument of Government states that the laws may not be changed or made, nor any tax put on the people, but by the consent of Parliament.8 With this, the ruler couldn't bypass the rules and regulations, nor make his own or change the present ones. He had to go through a certain process. The ruler could no longer do what he wanted to his people as suited him at the time. There was a process to go through which made sure that the ruler's power would not and could not override that of the people and of Parliament. This was very much a key to preventing any future dictatorial government.
The use of checks and balances in government produced a huge gain in human society. With this, the monarch no longer had absolute control. His power was reigned in and kept in cheek by Parliament, which was then kept in check by the people. The majority of the people living in France and England in the 17th and 18th centuries, and even now, are not high ranking government officials. They are regular people. The majority gained the ability to control itself The great gain of human society by checks and balances in France and England has had an impact not just on those two countries in the 17th and 18th centuries, but also on many other subsequent governments, most notably that of the United States, and will continue to have an effect in the future as governments are reformed all over the world
1JH. Robinson, "The Declaration of Right," http://history.hanover.edu/early/decright.htm (Oct. 5, 1999).
2 Modern History Sourcebook, "James VI an I. True Law of Free Monarchies, 1598," http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/james1-trew2.html (Oct. 5, 1999).
3 Modern History Sourcebook, "Commonwealth Instrument of Government, 1653," http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1653instrumentgovt.html (Oct. 5, 1999).
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid.
6 The Avalon Project, "Declaration of the Rights of Man," http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/rightsof.htm (Oct. 5, 1999).
7 The American Revolution, "The Petition of Right (1628)," http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/D/1601-1605/england/por.htm (Oct. 5, 1999).
8 Modern History Sourcebook, "Commonwealth Instrument of Government, 1653," http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1653instrumentgovt.html (Oct. 5, 1999).
Bibliography
The American Revolution, "The Petition of Right (1628)," http://odur.ley.rug.nl/~usa/D/1601-1605/england/por.htm (Oct. 5, 1999).
The Avalon Project, "Declaration of the Rights of Man," http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/rightsof.htm (Oct. 5, 1999).
Modern History Sourcebook, "Commonwealth Instrument of Government, 1653," http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1653instrumentgovt.html (Oct. 5, 1999).
Modern History Sourcebook, "James VI and I: Tree Law of Free Monarchies, 1598," http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/james1-trew2.html (Oct. 5, 1999).
Robinson, J. H. "The Declaration of Right," http://history.hanover.edu/early/decright.htm (Oct. 5, 1999).