Britain had not been an absolute monarchy since 1215 and the Battle of Runnymede.

On that occasion, the ruling barons of the various fairly autonomous districts that made up the Briitish island (and collectively ruled by the King, himself something of a super-baron) defeated the king's forces and forced then-King John to sign a number of written guarantees that came to be known as the Magna Carta.

This concession by King John did a great deal to erode the very ancient idea of the god-given divine right of kings to rule over their fellow men.

From that time on, the British people did a lot of talking and a lot of thinking about their "rights" as Englishmen.

This same type of dialogue did not appear with such frequency or with such significant result elsewhere.

In Britain, these new ideas about liberty and the guarantees outlined in the Magna Carta stimulated both a great love and devotion to Britain, and at the same time, a willingness to revolt against some particular monarch while still revering monarchy and all that it implies.

From the time of King Henry VIII (1509) up until the time of King George III (1760), Britain endured repeated crisis' of insurrection, rebellion, protest, and civil disobedience. 

There were contested decisions respecting religion, morals, freedom of speech, Parliament, property rights, the question of succession, taxation, and a host of other issues.  Many of these same protests were occuring elsewhere as well.

Coupled with the growing British belief in the rights of individuals and a limited power of the state, Britain experienced a remarkable stroke of good fortune in 1603 with the crowning of King James I.

Every country occasionally gets rulers who are anything but brilliant.  This is always helpful when it occurs, as more advances toward greater freedom can be detected, and the economy of the country usually benefits.

The introduction of the line of Stuart kings in Britain began an era of largely stupid and incompetent rulers for England.

Keeping in mind that governments tend to intervene in the economy, you will quickly understand that when a king or other ruler appears who is too apathetic to intervene, or who is too dull and stupid to imagine what political advantages might come his way if he did intrude, there occurs a situation that ultimately proves beneficial to the citizens of that country.