James II inherited the throne from his elder brother Charles only because there was not any male heir. Even the Parliament wanted to exclude him from succession, that was the exclusion crisis of 1679-1681. The Tory propaganda published Sir Robert Filmer’s Patriarcha to argue for the primogeniture principle, i.e. for the James’s title to the throne. That work introduced patriarchalism in which overlap the concepts of family and society and the authority of a father and the monarch. Therefore the monarch as the father of the nation ruled over the society that was considered to be a great family. He demanded unconditional obedience from the society just as the father demands it from the members of his family. Since Sir Robert Filmer’s name was connected to James’s right to the throne and to the conservative royalist Tory propaganda, my incentive was to examine whether James himself applied patriarchalism and the Filmer’s concepts in his political writings. This is the law (norms) in books if we apply the terms of the law in effect to the past. However, the aim of this article is to compare these norms with the practice found in the James’s declarations, proclamations, and deeds. The result of this comparison would be the law in action. Thus, the aim of this comparison is to reveal patriarchalism in James’s writings and after that to examine whether any characteristics of it can be found in his deeds and decrees of his administration. I mean especially three deeds: his coronation, the cure of the King’s evil (scrofula), and the practice of giving mercy to victims. Among the decrees I mean particularly the decrees issued during putting out the revolts against his reign. In the first two cases he was successful, however, he lost the throne to William of Orange and was expelled from it.