Comparing John Locke's Habeas Corpus And Absolutism

436 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: Absolutism vs constitutional monarchy

Habeas Corpus is a law, that throughout history, protected the rights of people to have a fair trial in court. “Habeas Corpus has since the earliest times been employed to order the appearance of a person who is in custody to be brought before a court” (Habeas Corpus Packet). This “ancient common law” then became adopted by the English Representative Democracy, protecting the citizens’ right to a fair trial. “The passage of hundreds of years time has permitted it to evolve into a right initiated by a person restrained, or someone acting rather than by the King or his courts” (Habeas Corpus). The “law of the land”, as it is known, exemplifies why the government of England surpasses that of Absolutism, because the citizens have protection from hidden laws of the king. Arbitrary can be defined as a choice of someone without having reason. Habeas Corpus protects against these decisions, as well as the representation of the citizens through Parliament, as described by John Locke. In his essay, John Locke portrays an English …show more content…

In Absolutism the country is ruled by way of the unjustifiable decisions of the king with the citizens not partaking in the government. “The head alone has the right to deliberate and decide, and the functions of all the other members consist only of carrying out the commands given to them… The more you grant…[to the people] the more they claim...The interest of the state must come first” (Doc. 3). This statement highlights how the king had a majority of the power, and did not believe he should share the wealth. Although Absolutism is the inadequate form of government, it does contain a few positive aspects. For example, without any power amongst the citizens, there is less rebellion and and civil war amongst the people. In addition, if the ruler is good, he can use his power for good without a Parliament to reject

Show More
Related

  • The Influence of Locke and Hobbes on Government

    1741 Words  | 4 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes believes that the optimal form of authority is one that has absolute power over its people, consisting of just one person who will retain the exclusive ability to oversee and decide on all of society’s issues. This Sovereign will be constituted by a social contract with the people. With that, the Sovereign will hold all of the citizens’ rights, and will be permitted to act in whichever way he or she deems necessary. The philosopher comes to this conclusion with deductive reasoning, utilizing a scientific method with straightforward arguments to prove his point.

    Read More

  • Lincoln's Suspension Of Habeas Corpus Analysis

    1451 Words  | 3 Pages

    One of President Lincoln’s most notable infringements was his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. Within months of taking the presidential oath, Lincoln ordered the suspension of habeas corpus, citing “supra-constitutional reasons for taking unilateral executive action.” Attorney General Edward Bates’ defense of Lincoln’s actions regarding habeas corpus in which he refers to it as a privilege rather than a guaranteed civil liberty serves as basis for proving the illegitimacy of this act. If the writ of habeas corpus, which protects citizens from unlawful imprisonment, is viewed in the manner that Bates (and Lincoln for that matter) refers to it, one of the most basic constitutional liberties of a right to trial can easily be deprived and can very well devolve into despotism later

    Read More

  • Absolute Monarchy in Different Empires Throughout History

    1105 Words  | 3 Pages

    Absolute monarchs ruled though the policy of absolutism. Absolutism declared that the king ruled though divine right with a legitimate claim to sole and uncontested authority (French State Building and Louis XIV). On this basis, Louis XIV of France and Suleiman I of the Ottoman Empire were both absolute monarchs. Each ruler believed that his power belonged to him and him alone due to divine right. They showed their absolute power by living lavishly, increased their power by waging wars, and kept their power by ensuring complete loyalty of their subjects.

    Read More

  • Absolutism Dbq Essay

    756 Words  | 2 Pages

    Absolutism is defined as a form of government where the monarch rules their land freely without legal opposition. In modern times, when democracy is the ideal, this form of government seems cruel and tyrannical; however, there was an era when it thrived in European politics. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, absolute rule was justified by the concept of divine right and its improvements to the security and efficiency of a nation.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of John Locke: The Second Treatise Of Government

    2379 Words  | 5 Pages

    In an absolute government, the people are not in a position to question the government on their decisions. Moreover the corruption in those governments can run a muck if not checked. In order to circumvent this Locke suggests creating separate powers to both pass and enforce the law. Locke was one of the first political philosophers to separate powers of the government, which was in direct difference from the absolute monarchies he was living under. According to John Locke the government should consist of a legislative branch and an executive branch (Locke 1681, 335-37). The former makes the laws while the later enforces it. He further gives prerogative power to the executive branch to make decisions must be made by the executive branch can be made by their own discretion as long as it is of the public good ((Locke 1681, 244). The separating the powers is effective because it allows for a type of checks and balances. It means that the ones passing the laws are not fully exempt from being punished by them if the need arises. Secondly because of the prerogative power of the executive branch, it theoretically can allow for the executive branch to step in and prevent any unjust laws from passing, if they choose not to enforce it. The downside of this is depended on the number of people in the community. If the community is too big, then it might be harder to

    Read More

  • Absolutism And Democracy

    526 Words  | 2 Pages

    Absolute monarchy (Absolutism), it is a form of monarchy in which a single ruler has supreme authority and it is not restricted by any written laws or customs. An example of absolutism monarchy is French King Louis XIV, Russian Tsar Peter the Great, or English King Henry VIII. Democracy is a system of government by elected representatives or officials. Example of democracy is the United States. These type of government exist in the 17th and 18th century in Europe. So the question is, which type of government was considered the most effective in Europe? In my opinion, I believe that absolutism was the most effective in Europe.

    Read More

  • Comparing John Locke and Thomas Hobbes

    1242 Words  | 3 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are two political philosophers who are famous for their theories about the formation of the society and discussing man in his natural state.

    Read More

  • The Fourth Amendment

    950 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Fourth Amendment came almost directly from experience of the colonials. But it wasn’t introduced only as a fundamental right, but also as a major part of the English ideals as well. In England, ''Everyman's house is his castle'' was an honored phrase, enforcing the idea that it is not only is it a law, but a right that cannot be delegated by any government idea. There are two major cases where this idea was tried. Semayne’s Case and Entick v. Carrington.

    Read More

  • The End of Absolutism in Europe

    812 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the late 17th and early 18th century, many European nations such as France and Russia were absolute monarchies. Even countries such as England had kings who at least attempted to implement absolutism. Indeed the concept of absolutism, where the monarch is the unquestionably highest authority and absolute ruler of every element in the realm, is certainly appealing to any sovereign. However, this unrestricted power was abused, and by the end of the 18th century, absolutism was gone. Absolutism failed because the monarchs' mistreatment of the population caused the people to revolt against their rule and policies. There are many factors which caused this discontent. For one, there was a great loss of human lives. Louis XIV of France participated in four wars, while Peter of Russia ruthlessly executed anyone who stood against his will. Secondly, monarchs attempted to change religious beliefs. This was notable in England where rulers such as James II desired to convert the Anglican nation into Catholicism. Finally, the burden of taxation was more than the population could support. France was brought into huge foreign debt, English kings constantly attempted to raise money, and Peter of Russia increased taxes by 550 percent. These are some of the key reasons why absolutism failed in Europe.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Absolutism And Constitutionalism

    1140 Words  | 3 Pages

    Under an absolutism based government, the people are ruled by a single dictator. A prime example of a government similar to that of absolutism would be the Soviet Union under control by Joseph Stalin. Another example would be Adolf Hitler when he dominated Nazi Germany. Constitutionalism on the other hand is a form of government where checks and balances come into play. There is not a single individual who is able to control the entire government. Sure there are people who have more control than others. However, these people are not able to make decisions that would shake the government to its core. Why? Other members of the government would veto the individual and ultimately, put a complete stop to the disastrous plans that he/she had in store for the government. Another belief of a constitutionalism-based government is that there is a constitution that has been written and put into play. The constitution is similar to that of a rulebook per say. An absolutism-based government would never carry such a thing or even think about it for that matter. As has been noted, absolutism and constitutionalism are completely different from one

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Ap Euro Dbq Absolutism

    695 Words  | 2 Pages

    Absolutism was a period of tyranny in Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries because monarchs had complete power to do whatever they pleased. Since absolutism is a "monarchical form of government in which the monarch's powers are not limited by a constitution or by the law" essentially there are no boundaries for actions the monarch can and cannot take. The absolutists did not focus on the people under their rule, they ruled by fear and punishment, and believed they were equal to God.

    Read More

  • The Palace of Versailles and the Absolutism of Louis XIV

    1705 Words  | 4 Pages

    Absolutism describes a form of monarchical power that is unrestrained by all other institutions, such as churches, legislatures, or social elites. To achieve absolutism one must first promote oneself as being powerful and authoritative, then the individual must take control of anyone who might stand in the way of absolute power. The Palace of Versailles helped King Louis XIV fulfill both of those objectives. Versailles used propaganda by promoting Louis with its grandiosity and generous portraits that all exuded a sense of supremacy. Versailles also helped Louis take control of the nobility by providing enough space to keep them under his watchful eye. The Palace of Versailles supported absolutism during King Louis XIV’s reign through propaganda, and control of nobility.

    Read More

  • The Absolute Monarchy Of France In The 17th Century

    731 Words  | 2 Pages

    The term ‘absolute” defines the singular power of the monarch to control every aspect of governing without the aid of the aristocracy or parliamentary forms of governance. The example of Louis XIII defines the rise of absolute monarchy in the 17th century, which eliminated agreements, such as the edict of Nantes, which enabled to aristocracy rights and powers in governmental decisions., however, Louis XIII dissolved these laws in order to gain total dominance over governmental affairs through military and financial might. In this example. Louis XIII defines the role of absolute monarch and the individual powers that the king welled over the government in 17th century

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Death Penalty

    580 Words  | 2 Pages

    When a criminal is sentenced to the death penalty they are giving the option of Habeas corpus.

    Read More

  • Parliamentary Sovereignty Or The Rule Of Law Essay

    858 Words  | 2 Pages

    An issue that has remained debatable since the Jackson litigation was what ought to be the ultimate controlling factor in the British constitution: parliamentary sovereignty or the rule of law. This essay sets out to consider the reputedly irreconcilable tension between the two fundamental constitutional principles by analysing the extensive obiter dicta in Jackson and relating it to judicial review which upholds the rule of law. The contention of this essay is that despite the courts' deferential attitude towards the sovereignty of the laws of Parliament, the rule of law may potentially gain dominance and surpass parliamentary sovereignty to become the ultimate controlling factor in the British constitution.

    Read More

More about Comparing John Locke's Habeas Corpus And Absolutism

Open Document