How did authority the British Monarch decline since the Glorious Revolution?

Michael, your question covers a lengthy period,from the civil war to the present.The change in thinking and public opinion regarding the monarch following the end of the war and the failure of the Commonwealth (of Cromwell)must have been great. Thinking about the era from the Hanoverians to Victoria alone, consider the effect that Walpole had, George 1st as you know requiring an interpreter who over the years laid down the foundations of and acquired to himself the position of Prime Minister,eroding the influence of the monarch.the ever growing empire,with the lifestyle and model of the host nation (Britain) being replicated in the client nations(the empire)required such a beurocracy in the form of the colnonial service which tends to become a government in itself so that one person exercising complete influence is constantly being deminished.Without the acquiescence of the landed aristocracy the powers formerly enjoyed by the crown would not have been allowed to remain in the hands of the House of Commons.The failure of Cromwells Commonwealth had proved that. The landlord class,in return for supporting the supremacy of the Lower House,obtained the right of nominating most of its members.That was the unwritten clause in the Settlement of 1689.Throw into the mix the Industrial Revolution's effect,the French Revolution and Jacobinism, men such as the Pitt's, Fox, Wilkes,Tom Pain etc and the gradual loss of power in the hands of the monarch seems inevetable.By the time of Victoria the monarch leaned heavily on the governmnet minister's and in having to do so sacrificed their influence more and more.Obviously many other events had their aspects also.