will appear in those instances wherein parliament has exercised the right of altering the succession.

The first instance is the famous Bill of Exclusion, which in the end of the reign of Charles II. passed the commons, but was rejected by the lords; the king having declared beforehand, that he never would consent to it. And from this transaction we may collect: 1. That the crown was acknowledged to be hereditary; and the inheritance indefeasible unless by parliament: 2. That parliament had power to defeat the inheritance: else such a bill had been ineffectual. James II. succeeded and might have enjoyed the throne during the remainder of his life, .but for the Revolution in 1688.

The true principle upon which that event proceeded, was a new case in politics. It was not a defeasance of the right of succession, and a new limitation of the crown, by the king and both houses of parliament; it was the act of the nation alone, upon a conviction that there was no king in being. For in a full assembly of the lords and commons, both houses came to the resolution that the throne was vacant. Thus ended the old line of succession. The facts appealed to, the king's endeavour to subvert the constitution by breaking the original contract, his violation of the fundamental laws, and his withdrawing himself out of the kingdom, were notorious; and the consequence drawn from these facts, it belonged to our ancestors to determine, they alone having a competent jurisdiction to decide this important question.

The vacancy of the throne being once established, the rest followed almost of course. For, if the throne be vacant, the right of disposing of this vacancy seems naturally to result to the lords and commons, as trustees and representatives of the people. For there are no other hands in which it can properly be intrusted; and there is a necessity for its being intrusted somewhere, else the whole frame of government must be dissolved. The lords and commons having therefore determined that there was a vacancy of the throne, they proceeded to fill up that vacancy in such a manner as they judged most proper.

Upon the principles before established, the convention might no doubt have vested the regal dignity in an entirely new family, but they knew too well the benefits of hereditary

succession, and the influence which it has over the minds of the people, to depart further from the ancient line than temporary necessity required. They therefore settled the crown, first on William and Mary, James's eldest daughter, for their joint lives : then on the survivor of them, and then on the issue of Mary : upon failure of such issue, it was limited to the Princess Anne, James's second daughter, and her issue; and lastly, on failure of that, to the issue of William, who was the grandson of Charles I., and nephew as well as son-in-law of James II., being the son of Mary his eldest sister. This settlement included all the Protestant posterity of Charles I., except such other issue as James might at any time have, which was totally omitted, through fear of a popish successor. And this order took effect accordingly. These three princes, William, Mary, and Anne, did not take the crown by hereditary right or descent, but by way of donation or purchase, as the lawyers call it; by which they mean any method of acquiring an estate otherwise than by descent.

Towards the end of William's reign, when all hopes of issue died with the Duke of Gloucester, the king and parliament thought it necessary again to limit the succession, in order to prevent another vacancy of the throne. Parliament had previously excluded from the crown every person who should be reconciled to, or hold communion with, the see of Rome. To act consistently, and pay as much regard to the old hereditary line as their former resolutions would admit, they turned their eyes on the Princess Sophia, electress and Duchess Dowager of Hanover, the youngest daughter of Elizabeth Queen of Bohemia, daughter of James I., nearest of the ancient blood royal who was not incapacitated by being in communion with the Church of Rome. On her therefore, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants, the remainder of the crown, expectant on the death of William and Anne, without issue, was settled; and at the same time it was enacted that whosoever should hereafter come to the possession of the crown should join in the communion of the Church of England as by law established.

This is the last limitation of the crown that has been made by parliament. The Princess Sophia dying before Queen Anne, the inheritance descended on her son and heir George I.; from him to George II.; and from him to his grandson and heir, George III. From him it descended to his eldest son, George IV., who dying

without issue was succceded by William IV., the third son of George III.; the second son Frederick, Duke of York, having previously died without issue. On the death of William IV., the inheritance descended to the only child of Edward Duke of Kent, the fourth son of George III., our present sovereign Queen Victoria.

Hence it is easy to collect, that the title to the crown is at present hereditary, though not so absolutely hereditary as formerly. For formerly the crown went to the next heir without any restriction; now the inheritance is conditional, being limited to such heirs only of the Princess Sophia as are members of the Church of England, and are married to none but Protestants. In this due medium consists the true constitutional notion of the right of succession to the imperial crown of these kingdoms.

CHAPTER IV.

OF THE ROYAL FAMILY.

THE first person of the royal family, regarded by the laws of England, supposing the sovereign to be a king, is the queen; who is either regent, consort, or dowager. The queen regent, or sovereign, holds the crown in her own right; and has the same powers, prerogatives, and duties as a king.

The queen consort is the wife of the reigning king; and is participant of divers prerogatives above other women. She is a public person, distinct from the king; and may purchase and convey lands, and do other acts of ownership, without his concurrence. She may take a grant from the king, which no other wife can from her husband. She has separate courts and offices not only in matters of ceremony, but even of law; and her attorney and solicitor general are entitled to a place within the bar. She may sue and be sued alone; and may have a separate property in goods as well as lands, and has a right to dispose of them by will. She had formerly a separate revenue, consisting of certain rents out of the demesne lands of the crown; and certain ancient perquisites such as this: that on the taking of a

whale on the coast, which is a royal fish, it should be divided between the king and queen: the head only being the king's property, and the tail of it the queen's; the reason alleged being to furnish the queen's wardrobe with whale-bone!

The queen consort is a subject, yet, in point of the security of her life and person, she is on the same footing with the king. It is equally treason to compass or imagine her death; and to violate or defile her amounts to the same high crime; as well in the person committing the fact, as in the queen herself if consenting. And if she be accused of any species of treason, she shall be tried by the peers of parliament, as Ann Boleyn was in 28 Henry VIII.

The husband of a queen regnant is her subject; and may be guilty of high treason; but in the case of conjugal infidelity, he is, for obvious reasons, not subjected to the same penalties.

A queen dowager is the widow of the king, and enjoys some of the privileges belonging to a queen consort. It is not high treason however to conspire her death, or to violate her chastity, because the succession is not thereby endangered. But no man can marry her without special licence from the sovereign, on pain of forfeiting his lands and goods; and a queen dowager, when married again to a subject, does not lose her regal dignity as peeresses dowager, when commoners by birth, do their peerage, when they marry commoners.

The Prince of Wales, and his consort, and the princess royal or eldest daughter of the king, are likewise peculiarly regarded by the laws. To compass the death of the former, or to violate the chastity of either of the latter, are as much high treason as to conspire the death of the king, or violate the chastity of the queen. The heir apparent to the crown is usually made Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester, by special creation and investiture; but as the king's eldest son, he is by inheritance Duke of Cornwall.

The rest of the royal family may be considered in two different lights, according to the sense in which the term is used. The larger sense includes all who are by any possibility inheritable to the crown; which, since the Act of Settlement, means the issue of the Princess Sophia. The more confined sense includes only

those in near propinquity to the reigning prince, and to whom, therefore, the law pays an extraordinary respect.

Their education while minors, and the approbation of their marriages, when grown up, belong of right to the king; a rule applying to grandchildren as well as children of the sovereign. And no descendant of George II., other than the issue of princesses married into foreign families, is capable of contracting matrimony, without the consent of the sovereign under the great seal; and any marriage contracted without such consent is void. But lest this consent be arbitrarily withheld, any of these descendants, above the age of twenty-five, may, after twelve months' notice to the privy council, contract marriage without the consent of the crown, unless both houses of parliament shall expressly declare their disapprobation thereof.

CHAPTER V.

OF THE ROYAL COUNCILS.

To assist the sovereign in the discharge of his duties, the maintenance of his dignity, and the exertion of his prerogative, the law has assigned him several councils to advise with.

1. The first of these is the high court of parliament.

2. Secondly, the peers of the realm are by birth hereditary councillors of the crown, being created: 1. Ad consulendum; 2. Ad defendendum, regem: on which account the law gives them certain high privileges; such as freedom from arrest, &c., even when no parliament is sitting; because it intends that they are alway assisting the sovereign with their counsel for the commonwealth, or keeping the realm in safety by their valour.

Conventions of the peers, to advise the crown, in former times frequent, have now fallen into disuse. Indeed, the convoking of them had been so long left off, that when Charles I., in 1640, issued writs to call a council of peers, at York, the Earl of Clarendon mentions it as a thing not before heard of. A peer is said, however, to have a right to demand an audience, and to lay before the king such matters as he shall judge of importance to the public weal. Thus, in the reign of Edward II., it was an