Absolutely Constitutional
In the seventeenth century when all everyone wanted is peace, security and order. Some people preferred to have a ruler such as a papa bear’s role of being the absolute ruler over the village, and others prefered to have a group of many mama bears to rule over the village with an established constitution. However, in the seventeenth century was a time period in which countries in Europe decided what kind of ruling there would be over the people. England decided that they would be ruled by a constitutionalist government during king James I. England’s government was solidified as a constitutional government when during William and Mary’s reign, and France's King at the time Louis XIV decided to have an absolutist
…show more content…
For example, if the king of France decided that he wants to have a ball next month to celebrate Christmas, he is allowed to send a decree that taxes are due, and his people are not allowed to question it they must pay or be beheaded. Whereas in the constitutionally led country of England the king and queen or parliament are not allowed to tax the people if the king wants a party or to renovate his castle. Through these different forms of government come different forms of leaders.
From these different leaders come different laws. King Louis XIV was able to create arbitrary laws. Which means he can enforce any rule that he wishes at any point in time. On the other hand in England king william and queen Mary are not allowed to enforce laws without going through parliament. The ruling would not be enforced on the people of England until parliament decides if it disagrees with any rights from the Bill of Rights or two if they would want to make it into a real law. How laws are put in place further shows the differences between these two different forms of the monarch