1688-9. Your Lordfhips fay, You are under great Difficulties upon this Anno 4 Jac. TÏ¿ Subject. But, my Lords, till you have declared the Throne vacant, I muft prefume to fay, I do not fee how it is poffible for any of us to make one Step towards a Settlement. If there be any Claims to the Crown, that Confideration will be next, and how to determine them: I conceive we are in the fame Capacity as our Predeceffors were, to provide for all Exigencies as fhall emerge, and for the fupplying all Defects in the Government. It is true, by the Acts of Queen Elizabeth and King James I. we have the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance that are to be, and have been taken by all Perfons. But, my Lords, there is an old Oath of Fidelity, that ufeth to be required in Leets, and that by the ancient Law of England every Man ought to take who is fixteen Years of Age; and this was as much obliging to the King, his Heirs and Succeffors, as any of thofe later Oaths are; for they feem only to be made to exclude foreign Authorities, and not to infer any new Obedience or Subjection: Therefore I am only faying, we are in as natural a Capacity as any of our Predeceffors were, to provide for a Remedy in fuch Exigencies as this. I do not intend to trouble your Lordships any farther than the Words of the Vote lead me. If the Throne were full, what do we do here; nay, how came we hither? I would fain know, Whether all that is mentioned in one of our Reafons of the Administration being committed to the Prince, and thofe other Acts, do not all imply, at leaft, that we are in fuch-a Cafe as wherein the Throne is vacant? otherwife, if it had been full, I appeal to any one, Whether we could have affembled or acted in any other Name, or by any other Authority, than his that filled it? Then do not all thefe Things declare, that there is a Vacancy? My Lords, I have done, having faid this, that it is a fubfequent Confideration, how the Throne fhall be filled, and all the Particulars that relate to it remain entire, after this Refolution taken. But, I think, we are at prefent to go no farther. No Man, I hope, thinks there is a juft Ground for any Apprehenfion of an Intention to change the Government; I am fure there is no Ground for any fuch Apprehenfion: So that we have all the Reafon in the World to infift, that your Lordships fhould agree with us, that the Throne is vacant, or we fhall not be able to move one Step farther towards a Settlement." My Lords, fo much has been faid in this Matter already, Sir Thomas that very little is to be added. But give me leave to fay unto your Lordships, That thofe Amendments your Lordships have made to the Com mons Lee. Anno 4 Jac. II. mons Vote are not agreeing with your other Votes, nor any 1688-9. of the Acts done fince the Abdication. Had it been in the common, ordinary Cafe of a Vacancy by the King's Death, your Lordships in December laft would fure have let us known as much: But it is plain you were fenfible we were without a Government, by your defiring the Prince to take the Administration, and to iffue out his Letters for this Convention. Sir George Fut, my Lords, I would ask this question, Whether upon the Original Contract there were not a Power preserved' in the Nation, to provide for itself in fuch Exigencies? That Contract was to fettle the Conftitution as to the Legislature, which a noble Lord in the beginning spoke of; fo we take it to be: And it is true, that it is a Part of the Contract, the making of Laws, and that thofe Laws fhould oblige all fides when made; but yet fo as not to exclude this Original Conftitution in all Governments that commence by Compact, that there fhould be a Power in the States to make Provifion in all Times, and upon all Occafions, for extraordinary Cafes and Neceffities, fuch as ours now is. I fay nothing now as to the hereditary Succeffion; our Government has been always taken to be hereditary, and fo declared when there has been occafion to make Provision otherwife than in the direct Line. But our Matter is fingly upon a Point of Fact, Whether the Throne be vacant (as the Commons say it is) by the Abdication of King James the Second. The prefent Vacancy is neareft that of Richard the Second, of any that we meet with in our Records; and the Phrafe being there used, we infift upon it as very proper. And when that is agreed unto, the Houfe will, no doubt, declare their Minds in another confequential queftion that Thall arife in a proper Way. But this is all we can speak to now.' To difcourfe, whether the Crown of England, would by this means become elective, is altogether unneceffary; and, I think, your Lordships have given no Reasons that are fufficient to make the Objection out, neither any Anfwers to the Commons Reafons for their Vote. It feems to me an odd Way of reafoning, firft to miftake the Meaning, and then give Reasons against that miftaken Meaning, The question is only here, Whether we can make good this Propofition, That the Throne is vacant by the Abdication of the late King I confefs, it is a melancholy Thing to discourse of the Mifcarriages of Governments, but it is much more afflictive to talk of unhinging all the Monarchy, by a breach upon the direct Line of the Succeffion; as, if the Crown of England 1688-9. did actually defcend to Lewis the fourteenth, it would not Anno 4 Jae, II, be in the Power of the States of this Kingdom to devolve it upon another Head. A noble Lord put an Inftance of two Men in one Room, one of whom was really fuch a one: But though a Standerby could not directly tell which was he, yet it could not be faid by him, that fuch a one was not there. But, if you pleafe, I will put this Case: Suppose there were two Men in one Room, that no one alive could tell which was which; as fuppofe this to be the Cafe of the two Children of Edward the Fourth, that they had been kept close Prifoners by their Uncle Richard the third fo long, that there were no living Witnesses able to tell which was the eldest of the two, that would occafion a Difficulty much as intricate as ours here. One of them must be eldest, but by reafon of the Uncertainty, muft not an Election be made of them? And could any thing else do but an Election? But, I fay, the proper fingle question here is, Whether we have well affirmed upon the Premises that are mentioned in the former Part of the Vote, that he has abdicated, and that the Throne is thereby vacant. Your Lordships in part agree; for you say, he has deferted the Government; then you fay, he is not in it And it is as much as to fay, he has left the Kingdom destitute of a Government? Now if there be any Senfe in which our Propofition is true, will you deny the whole Propofition, because it may be taken in a Senfe that is dubious and uncertain, as to the Confequences? You cannot fay the Throne is full: If then there be a Doubt with you, to be fure it is not like to be evident to us, efpecially in this Cafe, confidering who your Lordships are. You are the Perfons that ufually are, or ought to be prefent at the Delivery of our Queens, and the proper Witneffes to the Birth of our Princes. If then your Lordfhips had known who was on the Throne, we should certainly have heard his Name from you, and that had been the best Reafon against the Vacancy that could have been given. My Lords, we fay no more than our Ancestors have faid before us, as you fee by the Parliament-Roll, 1 Henry IV; and I must maintain the Record to this purpose, that the Government is vacant, and it is there declared, as it is expreffed in our Vote: So that we have not invented or coined a Word for our Turn, neither is the Notion new, it is a Word that has been used before in a Cafe as near this as any can be. • But Anno 4 Jac. II; 1688-9. But it is objected, That that fhould be no Frecedent, because of what followed upon that Vacancy of the Throne. I defire that your Lordships would read the Record. The next Thing there, is, Henry the Fourth cometh himself, and says, He claimed the Crown as defcended from Henry the Third, and the Lords and Commons affented. It is true, the Archbishop did propofe him (as was usual at Coronations) and he did there actually ask them, Whether they did chufe him for their King? They agreed to it, and the Archbishop makes a Difcourfe upon the Virtues of a Man to govern the Nation better than a Child; and then he is placed on the Throne. And this I take to be a proper, plain, applicable Precedent in our Cafe. Heart But that noble Lord's Objection strikes at the very of it, if the Objection be rightly made, That all these Proceedings, and fo confequently the Words and Phrases there ufed, are all repealed, I Edward IV. My Lords, it is very well known, and readily agreed by us, that Edward the Fourth came in, in difaffirmance of the Title of the Houfe of Lancaster. As thofe Times went, whenever there was any Turn in Government, (as there were feveral) there were new and contrary Declarations, about the Title to the Crown made conftantly in Parliament; and what one Parliament had fettled, another undid. But then this Advantage we have on our fide, that as we have this firft Precedent for us, fo we have the last; for I need go no farther, than the Parliament-Roll of 1 Henry VII, 12. 16. where the Record is fet right again. The Act for depofing Richard the Second is indeed by 1Edw.IV. repealed, and faith, that Henry the Fourth ufurped the Crown, and murdered Richard the Second; and thereupon it proceeds to attaint Henry VI. But then comes in Henry the Seventh, and 1 Henry VII, there is an A& made, that fets afide all the Acts and Attainders made against his Line, and confequently repealed I Edw. IV. which repealed Henry IV. And I would obferve one thing, by the way, concerning Henry the Seventh: He was of the Line of Lancafter, and when he came to the Crown, would not endure to have his Crown reckoned only matrimonial, or fuffer the Stile to go in the Names of Henry and Elizabeth, as he must have done if he had ftuck to the Title of the right Line of Succeffion; no, he always ftood up for his own Title, though he had the Heiress of the House of York in his Bosom. Therefore, my Lords, his Act for reftoring the Record of 1 Henry IV. again, is as good an Authority as it was was before, and fomewhat better; for it hath the laft A&t on Anno 4 Jac. II. its fide, which is unrepeal'd to this Day.'. 1688-9. Henry the Seventh had a good Right and Title by Marriage to the Crown, in re Uxoris. No one can question Earl of Pembut his own Title, as defcended from Henry the Fourth, was broke. an Ufurpation; and he would not fuffer any one to prescribe which Title was beft, as long as it was acknowledged he had one good one. That this Kingdom is hereditary, we are not to prove by Precedent in the Lift of our Kings and Queens; for we fhall fcarce find above three in any direct Line, without fome Interruption: and therefore we are not to fetch our Precedents or Proofs, fo far as thofe Days. And this I speak for the Reafon which was hinted before. The Laws made are certainly Part of the Original Con traft; and by the Laws made, which establish the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy, we are tied up to keep in the hereditary Line, being fworn to be true and faithful to the King, his Heirs and Succeffors; whereas the old Oath was, only to bear true Allegiance to the King. There (I take it) lies the Reason why we cannot (of ourselves) without breaking that Contract, break the Succeffion, which is fettled by, Law, and cannot be altered but by another, which we ourfelves cannot make.' Your Lordship is pleased to fay, Henry the Seventh's Sir George Title by Defcent was an Ufurpation. I think it is pretty hard Treby. to determine what Title he did govern by, fince, though his Wife was the lineal Heir, yet fhe had no part, or fo much as a Name in the Adminiftration. And if it were too great an Iffue to be tried then, it will be harder to do it now. And it has been faid, it was his Mother's Council to him, not to declare particularly upon what foot his Title ftood. But, my Lords, if we fhould allow none for Acts of ParTiament but those that were made in the Reigns of Hereditary Kings, and in the right Line, I doubt we fhould want the greatest part of thofe Laws that compofe the Volume of Stature Books, and the Records by which we enjoy a great part of our Inheritances and Poffeffions.' "If we look but into the Law of Nature (that is above Mr. Serjeant all human Laws) we have enough to juftify us in what we Maynard. are now a doing, to provide for ourselves and the public Weal in fuch an exigency as this' • If Laws made about the Succeffion be fo obliging, what Sir Richard then fhall we fay to the Succeffion of Queen Elizabeth, Temple. who had an Act of Parliament (to the keeping of which an Oath was required) against both her and her Sifter.' But to fhew what Opinion fhe herself and the wife Men Earl of Pemof her Times had, and were of, in this point, there is an broke. TOME II. Act K k |
