changing of the Monarchy from an Hereditary to an Elective E. of N m. After this long Debate pray let us endeavour to come as near as we can to an Agreement We have proposed some Questions about which my Lords desired to be satisfied You Gentlemen have not been pleased to give an Answer to them and we have no great Hopes of getting one from you as this Debate seems to be managed On your part you have declared That you do acknowledge the Monarchy is Hereditary and Successive in the Right Line then I cannot see how such an Acknowledgment consists with the Reasons you give for your Vacancy for I cannot imagine how a Kingdom can be an Hereditary Kingdom and that King who hath Children now in being at the time of his forsaking the Government can have the Throne Vacant both of him and his Children The Course of Inheritance as to the Crown of England is by our Law a great deal better provided for and runs stronger in the right Line of Birth than of any other Inheritance No Attainder of the Heir of the Crown will bar the Succession to the Throne as it doth the Descent to any common person The very Descent by Order of Birth will take away any such Defect And so was the Opinion of the great Lawyers of England in the Case of Henry the seventh Then cannot I apprehend how any Act of the Father's can bar the Right of the Child I do not mean that an Act of Parliament cannot do it I never said so nor thought so but I say no Act of the Father's alone can do it since even the Act of the Son which may endanger an Attainder in him cannot do it so careful is the Law of the Royal Line of Succession This is declar'd by many Acts of Parliament and very fully and particularly by that Statute 25 Henry the Eighth Cap. 22 entituled An Act concerning the King's Succession where the Succession of the Crown is limited to the King's Issue-Male first then Female and the Heirs of their Bodies one after another by course of Inheritance according to their Ages as the Crown of England hath been accustomed and ought to go in such Cases If then the King hath done any thing to divest himself of his own Right it doth not follow thence that That shall exclude the Right of his Issue and then the Throne is not Vacant as long as there are any such Issue for no Act of the Father can Vacant for himself and Children Therefore if you mean no more than but the divesting his own Right I desired you would declare so And then suppose the Right gone as to him yet if it descend to his Lineal Successor it is not Vacant And I told you One Reason my Lord 's did stand upon against agreeing to the Vacancy was Because they thought your Vote might extend a great deal further than the King 's own Person But your all owning it to be a Lineal Inheritance and this Vacancy methinks do not by any means consist You declare you never meant to alter the Constitution then you must preserve the Succession in its ancient course So I did hear a worthy Gentleman conclude it to be your Intention to do But by what methods can it be done in this Case by us I desire to be satisfied in a few things about this very matter I desire first to know Whether the Lords and Commons have Power by themselves to make a binding Act or Law And then I desire to know Whether according to our ancient Legal Constitution every King of England by being seated on the Throne and possessed of the Crown is not thereby King to him and his Heirs And without an Act of Parliament which we alone cannot make I know not what Determination we can make of his Estate It has been urged indeed That we have in Effect already agreed to what is contain'd in this Vote by Voting That it is inconsistent with our Religion and Laws to have a Popish Prince to Rule over us But I would fain know Whether they that urge this think that the Crown of Spain is Legally and Actually excluded from the Succession by this Vote No Man sure will undertake to tell me That Vote of either House or both Houses together can Alter the Law in this or any other point But because I am very desirous that this Vote should have its Effect I desire that every thing of this Nature should be done in the antient usual Method by Act of Parliament GOD forbid that since we are happily deliver'd from the Fears of Popery and Arbitrary Power we should assume any such Power to our selves What Advantage should we then give to those who would quarrel with our Settlement for the Illegality of it Would not this which we thus endeavour to crush break forth into a Viper For that Record of 1. Henry the Fourth I acknowledge the words of the Royal Seat being Vacant are us'd But since you your selves tell us of it That Henry the Fourth did claim by Inheritance from his Grandfather that methinks may come up to what I would have the declared sence of both Houses upon this Question to wit The Throne might be Vacant of Richard the Second but not so Vacant but the claim of the immediate Successor was to take place and not be excluded but entirely preserved And Richard the Second seems to have had the same Opinion by delivering over his Signet to them Our Laws know no Inter regnum but upon the Death of the Predecessor the next Heir is in uno eodem instanti It was so Resolv'd even in Richard the Second's own Case for at his Grandfather's Death it was a Question Whether King Richard the Second or the Eldest Son of his Grandfather then living should succeed and it was Resolved That he ought to have it because of his Right of Inheritance which is the more remarkable because of the contest And when Richard the Third usurped his Crown to make his Claim good to the Right of Inheritance he Bastardized his own Nephews And so it was in all the Instances of the Breaches that were made upon the Line of Succession which were some Seven but all illegal for such was the Force of the Laws that the Usurpers would not take the Crown upon them unless they had some specious pretence of an Hereditary Title to it That which I would have Avoided by all means is the Mischievous Consequences that I fear will ensue upon this Vacancy of the Throne to wit the utter Overthrow of the whole Costitution of our Government For if it be so and the Lords and Commons only remain as parts of it Will not this make the King one of the Three Estates Then is he the Head of the Commonwealth all united in one Body under him And if the Head be taken away and the Throne Vacant by what Laws or Constitutions is it that we retain Lords and Commons For they are
Conference and said That the Lords did insist upon the First Amendment of the Vote of the House of Commons of the 25th of January last instead of the Word Abdicated to have the Word Deserted 1st Because the Lords do not find that the Word Abdicated is a Word known to the Common Law of England and the Lords hope the Commons will agree to make use of such Words only whereof the Meaning may be understood according to Law and not of such as will be liable to doubtful Interpretations 2dly Because in the most common Acceptation of the Civil Law Abdication is a Voluntary Express Act of Renuntiation which is not in this Case and doth not follow from the Premises That King James the Second by having With-drawn himself after having endeavoured to Subvert the Constitution of the Government by Breaking the Original Contract between King and People and having Violated the Fundamental Laws may be more properly said to have Abdicated than Deserted He said the Lords did Insist on the Second Amendment to leave out the Words And that the Throne is Vacant for this Reason For that although the Lords have agreed that the King has Deserted the Government and therefore have made Application to the Prince of Orange To take upon him the Administration of the Government and thereby to Provide for the Peace and Safety of the Kingdom yet there can be no other Inference drawn from thence but only that the Exercise of the Government by King James the Second is Ceased so as the Lords were and are willing to secure the Nation against the Return of the said King into this Kingdom but not that there was either such an Abdication by him or such a Vacancy in the Throne as that the Crown was thereby become Elective which they cannot agree I. Because by the Constitution of the Government the Monarchy is Hereditary and not Elective II. Because no Act of the King alone can Barr or Destroy the Right of his Heirs to the Crown and therefore in Answer to the Third Reason alledg'd by the House of Commons If the Throne be Vacant of King James the Second Allegiance is due to such Person as the Right of Succession doth belong to The Question being put that this House do agree with the Lords in the said First Amendment It passed in the Negative The Question being put that this House do agree with the Lords in the said Second Amendment The House divided The Yea's go forth The Tellers for the Yea's Sir Joseph Tredenham and Mr. Gwyn 151. The Tellers for the No's Mr. Colt and Mr. Herbert 282. And so it was Resolved in the Negative Resolved That a free Conference be desired with the Lords upon the Subject Matter of the last Conference Ordered That it be Referred unto Sr. Robert Howard Mr. Polexfyn Mr. Paul Foley Mr. Serj. Maynard Mr. Serjeant Holt. Lord Faukland Sr. George Treby Mr. Sommers Mr. Garraway Mr. Buscowen Sr. Tho. Littleton Mr. Palmer Mr. Hamden Sr. Henry Capel Sr. Thomas Lee. Mr. Secheveril Major Wildman Collonel Birch Mr. Ayres Sr. Richard Temple Sr. Henry Goodrick Mr. Waller Sr. John Guyes To manage the Conference Ordered That Mr. Dolbin do go up to the Lords and desire a free Conference with the Lords upon the Subject Matter of the last Conference Mr. Dolben Reported That he having according to the Order of this House attended the Lords to desire a Free Conference with their Lordships upon the Subject Matter of the last Conference they had agreed to a Free Conference presently in the Painted Chamber And the Managers went to a Free Conference at the Free Conference in the Painted Chamber Mr. H den MY Lords the Commons have desired this Free Conference from your Lordships upon the Subject Matter of the last Conference that they may make appear unto your Lordships that it is not without suffitient Reason that they are Induced to Maintain their own Vote to which your Lordships have made some Amendments and that they cannot agree to those Amendments made by your Lordships for the same Reasons My Lords the Commons do very readily agree with your Lordships That it is a Matter of the greatest Concernment to the Kingdom in general its future Peace and happy Government and the Protestant Interest both at Home and Abroad that there be a good Issue and Determination of the Business now in Debate between Both Houses and a speedy one as can consist with the Doing of it in the best manner This way of Intercourse between Both Houses by Free Conference where there is full Liberty of Objecting Answering and Replying the Commons think the best Means to attain this End and to Maintain a good Correspondence between Both Houses which is so necessary at all Times but more especially in the present Conjuncture this my Lords will bring Honour and Strength to the Foundation that shall be laid after our late Convulsions and discourage our Enemies from Attempting to Undermyne it It is true my Lords the present Difference between your Lordships and the Commons is only about a few Words but the Commons think their Words so Significant to the Purpose for which they are used and so Proper to the Case unto which they are applyed that in so Weighty a Matter as that now in Debate that they are by no means to be parted with The Word Abdicated the Commons conceive is of larger Signification than the Word your Lordships are pleased to use Desert but not too large to be applyed to all the Recitals in the Begining of the Commons Vote to which they meant it should be applyed Nor ought it to be Restrained to a Voluntary Express Resignation only in Word or Writing overt-Overt-Acts there are that will be significant enough to amount to it My Lords that the Common Law of England is not acquainted with the Word it is from the Modesty of our Law that it is not willing to suppose there should be any Unfortunate Occasion of making use of it And we would have been willing that we should never have had such an Occasion as we have to have Recourse to it Your Lordships next Amendment is that your Lordships have left out the last Words in the Commons Vote And that the Throne is thereby Vacant My Lords the Commons conceive it is a true Proposition and That the Throne is Vacant and they think they make it appear that that is no new Phrase neither is it a Phrase that perhaps some of the old Records may be Strangers to or not well acquainted with But they think it not chargeable with the Consequences that your Lordships have been pleased to draw from it That it will make the Crown of England become Elective If the Throne had been full we know your LordShips would have assigned that as a Reason of your Disagreement by telling us who filled it and it would be known by some Publick Royal Act which might notify to the People in whom the Kingly Government resided
neither of which has been done and yet your Londships will not allow the Throne to be Vacant My Lords I am unwilling to detain your Lordships longer from what may be better said for your Lordships Satisfaction in these Matters by those whose Province it is I am to acquaint your Lordships that the Commons do agree it is an Affair of very great Importance Here are other Gentlemen that are appointed to manage this Conference and will give their Assistance to bring it we hope to a happy Conclusion in the Agreement of Both Houses in this so very a Considerable Point Mr. S rs My Lords what is appointed me to Speak to is your Lordships First Amendment by which the Word Abdicated in the Commons Vote is changed into the Word Deserted and I am to acquaint your Lordships what some of the Grounds are that induced the Commons to insist upon the Word Abdicated and not to agree to your Lordships Amendment 1st The First Reason your Lordships are pleased to deliver as for your Changing the Word is That the Word Abdicated your Lordships do not find is a Word known to the Common Law of England and therefore ought not to be Used And the next is That the common Acceptation of the Word amounts to a Voluntary express Act of Renuntiation which your Lordships say is not in this Case nor will follow from the Premises My Lords as to the First of these Reasons if it be an Objection that the Word Abdicated hath not a known Sence in the Common Law of England there is the same Objection against the Word Deserted for there can be no Authority or Book of Law produced wherein any determined Sence is given to the Word Deserted So that your Lordships first Reason hath the same Force against your own Amendment as it hath against the Term used by the Commons The Words are both Latin Words and used in the best Authors and both of a known Signification their Meaning is very well understood though it be true their Meaning be not the same The Word Abdicate doth naturally and properly signify Entirely to Renounce Throw off Disown Relinquish any thing or Person so as to have no further to do with it and that whether it be done by Express Words or in Writing which is the Sence your Lordships put upon it and which is properly called Resignation or Ceasion or by Doing such Acts as are Inconsistent with the Holding or Retaining of the Thing which the Commons take to be the present Case and therefore made Choice of the Word Abdicate as that which they thought did above all others most properly express that meaning And in this latter Sence it is taken by Others and that it is the true Signification of the Word I shall shew your Lordships out of the best Authors The First I shall mention is Grotius de Jure Belli Pacis L. 2. C. 4. S. 4. Venit enim hoc non ex jure civili ex jure naturali quo quisque suum potest abdicare ex naturali Praesumptione qua voluisse quis creditur quod sufficienter significavit And then he goes on Recusari Haereditas non tantum verbis sed etiam re potest quovis indicio voluntatis Another Instance which I shall mention to shew that for the Abdicateing a thing it is suffitient to do an Act which is inconsistent with the Retaining it though there be nothing of an Express Renuntiation is out of Calvin's Lexicon Juridicum where he says Generum abdicat qui sponsam repudiat He that Divorceth his Wife Abdicates his Son in Law Here is an Abdication without Express Words but is by doing such an Act as doth suffitiently signify his Purpose The next Author that I shall Quote is Brisonius de Verborum significatione who hath this Passage Homo liber qui seipsum vendit abdicat se statu suo that is He who sells himself hath thereby done such an Act as cannot consist with his former Estate of Freedom and is therefore properly said se abdicasse statu suo Budaeus in his Commentaries ad Legem secundam de Origine Juris Expounds the Words in the same Sence Abdicare se Magistratu est idem quod abire poenitus Magistratu He that goes out of his Office of Magistracy let it be in what manner he will has Abdicated the Magistracy And Grotius in his Book de Jure Belli Pacis L. 1. C. 4. S. 9. seems to expound the Word Abdicare by manifeste habere pro derelicto That is That he who hath Abdicated any thing hath so far Relinquished it that he hath no Right of Return to it And that is the Sence the Commons put upon the Word It is an Entire Alienation of the Thing and so stands in Opposition to Dicate Di cat qui proprium aliquod facit abdicat qui alienat so says Pralejus in his Lexicon Juris It is therefore insisted upon as the Proper Word by the Commons But the Word Deserted which is the Word used in the Amendment made by your Lordships hath not only a very doubtful Signification but in the common Acceptance both of the Civil and Cannon Law doth signify only a Bare With-drawing a Temporary Quitting of a Thing and Neglect only which leaveth the Party at Liberty of Returning to it again Desertum pro Neglecto says Spigelius in his Lexicon But the Difference between Disserere and Derelinquire is expresly layd down by Bartolus upon the 8th Law of 58th Title of the 11th Book of the Code and his Words are these Nota diligenter ex hac Lege quod aliud est Agrum disserere aliud derelinquire qui enim derelinquit ipsum ex poenitentia non revocat sed qui deseret intra biennium potest Whereby it appears my Lords that that is called Desertion which is Temporary and Relieveable That is called Dereliction where there is no Power of Right to Return So in the best Latin Authors and in the Civil Law Deserere Exercitum is used to signify Soldiers leaveing their Colours Cod. Lib. 12. S. 1. And in the Cannon Law to Desert a Benefice signifies no more than to be Non-Resident so is Calvin's Lexicon Verb. Desert secund Canones In both Cases the Party hath not only a Right of Returning but is bound to Return again Which my Lords as the Commons do not take to be the present Case so they cannot think that your Lordships do because it is expresly said in One of your Reasons given in Defence of the last Amendment That your Lordships have been and are willing to secure the Nation against the Return of King James which your Lordships would not in Justice do if you did look upon it no more than a Negligent With-drawing which leaveth a Liberty to the Party to Return For which Reasons my Lords the Commons cannot agree to the First Amendment to insert the word Deserted instead of Abdicated because it doth not in any sort come up to
their Sence of the thing So they do apprehend it doth not reach your Lordships meaning as it is expressed in your Reasons whereas they look upon the Word Abdicated to express properly what is to be inferred from that Part of the Vote to which your Lordships have agreed That King James the Second by going about to Subvert the Constitution and by Breaking the Original Contract between King and People and by Violating the Fundamental Laws and With-drawing himself out of the Kingdom hath thereby Renounced to be a King according to the Constitution by avowing to Govern by a Despotick Power unknown to the Constitution and Inconsistent with it he hath Renounced to be a King according to the Law such a King as he Swore to be at the Coronation such a King to whom the Allegiance of an English Subject is due and hath set up anōther kind of Dominion which is to all Intents an Abdication or Abandoning of his Legal Title as fully as if it had been done by express Words And my Lords for these Reasons the Commons do insist upon the Word Abdicated and cannot agree to the Word Deserted Mr. Serjeant H lt My Lords I am commanded by the Commons to assist in the Management of this Conference and am to speak to the same Point that the Gentleman did who spoke last to your Lordships First Amendment As to the First of your Lordships Reasons for that Amendment with Submission to your Lordships I do conceive it not Suffitient to alter the Minds of the Commons or to induce them to change the Word Abdicated for your Lordships Word Deserted Your Lordships Reason is That it is not a Word that is known to the Common Law of England But my Lords the Question is not so much Whether it be a Word as Antient as the Common Law though it may be too for that will be no Objection against the Useing it if it be a Word of a known and certain Signification because that we think will Justify the Commons making use of it according to your Lordships own Expression That it is an Antient Word appears by the Authors that have been Quoted and it s frequently met with in the best of Roman Writers as Cicero c. And by the Derivation from Dico an Antient Latin Word That now it is a known English Word and of a known and certain Signification with us I will Quote to your Lordships an English Authority and that is the Dictionary set forth by our Countryman Minshaw who hath the Word Abdicate as an English Word and says that it signifies to Renounce which is the Signification the Commons would have of it So that I hope your Lordships will not find Fault with their useing a Word that is so Antient in it self and that hath such certain Signification in our own Language Then my Lords for that Part of your Lordships Objection That it is not a Word known to the Common Law of England that cannot prevail for your Lordships very well know we have very few Words in our Tongue that are of equal Antiquity with the common Law your Lordships know the Language of England is altered greatly in the several Successions of Time and the Intermixture of other Nations and if we should be Obliged to make use only of Words then known and in use what we should deliver in such a Dialect would be very Difficult to be Understood Your Lordships Second Reason for your First Amendment in changing the Word Abdicated for the Word Deserted is Because in the most common Acceptation of the Civil Law Abdication is a Voluntary Express Act of Renuntiation That is the general Acceptation of the Word and I think the Commons do so use the Word in this Case because it hath that Signification But I do not know whether your Lordships mean a Voluntary express Act or formal Deed of Renuntiation If you do so I confess I know of none in this Case But my Lords both in the Common Law of England and the Civil Law and in common Understanding there are Express Acts of Renuntiation that are not by Deed for if your Lordships please to observe the Government and Magistracy is under a Trust and any Acting contrary to that Trust is a Renouncing of the Trust though it be not a Renouncing by formal Deed For it is a plain Declaration by Act and Deed though not in Writing that he who hath the Trust Acting contrary is a Disclaimer of the Trust especially my Lords if the Actings be such as are Inconsistent with and Subversive of this Trust For how can a Man in Reason or Sense express a greater Renuntiation of a Trust than by the Constant Declarations of his Actions to be quite contrary to that Trust This my Lords is so plain both in Understanding and Practice that I need do no more but Repeat it again and leave it with your Lordships That the doing an Act inconsistent with the Being and End of a Thing or that shall not Answer the End of that Thing but quite the contrary that shall be Construed an Abbication and Formal Renuntiation of that Thing Earl of N m. Gentlemen you of the Committee of the Commons we differ from you indeed about the Words Abdicated and Deserted but the main Reason of the Change of the Word and Difference is upon the Account of the Consequence drawn in the Conclusion of your Vote That the Throne is thereby Vacant that is What the Commons mean by that Expression whether you mean it is so Vacant as to null the Succession in the Hereditary Line so all the Heirs to be cut off which we say will make the Crown Elective And it may be fit for us to settle that matter first and when we know what the Consequence of The Throne being Vacant means in the Vote as you understand it I believe we shall be much better able to settle the Difference about the Two Words Mr. Serjeant M d. My Lords when there is a present Defect of One to exercise the Administration of the Government I conceive the Declaring a Vacancy and Provision of a Supply for it can never make the Crown Elective The Commons apprehend there is such a Defect now and by consequence a present Necessity for the Supply of the Government and that will be next for your Lordships Consideration and theirs afterwards If the attempting the utter Destruction of the Subject and Subvertion of the Constitution be not as much an Abdication as the attempting of a Father to Cut his Son's Throat I know not what is My Lords the Constitution notwithstanding the Vacancy is the same the Laws that are the Foundations and Rules of that Constitution are the same But if there be in any particular Instance a Breach of that Constitution that will be an Abdication and that Abdication will infer a Vacancy It is not that the Commons do say the Crown of England is alway and perpetually Elective but it is
of our Nation in his time and his Works are very worthily Recommended by the Testimony of King Charles the First He alloweth That Government did Originally begin by Compact and Agreement But I have yet a greater Authority than this to influence this Matter and that is your Lordships own who have agreed to all the Vote but this Word Abdicated and The Vacancy of the Throne And therefore so much enough to be said to that and go back to Debate what is not in Difference is to confound our selves instead of Endeavouring to compose Differences And truly my Lords by what is now Proposed I think we are desired to go as much too far fowards when the Vacancy of the Throne is proposed to be the Question to be first Disputed before the Abdication from which it is â—â—â—â—rred But sure I am it is very much beyond what the Vote before us doth lead us unto To talk of the Right of those in the Succession For that goes farther â—han the very last Part of the Vote and it is still to lead us yet farther to say any thing about makeing the Crown Elective For I hope when we come to answer your Lordships Reasons we shall easily make it out that it is not in this Case neither was there any Occasion given by this Vote to infer any such thing VVe shall therefore keep the Points as they are both in Order of Place in the Vote and of Reason in the thing and as we have done hither to speak to the words Abdicated and Deserted the words to be Disputed about in the First Place Another Lord did give One Reason against the useing the VVord Abdicated Because it is a Word belongs to the Civil Law and said He would by no means exchange our own English Common Law for that I intirely concur with that Noble Lord in that Point but he did agree to us also That there is no such Word in our Common Law as Deserted that is which should signifie by the Stamp the Law puts upon it any Sence applicable to the Matter in Hand Then if we must not use our VVord because unknown to our Common Law neither must we use your Lordships for the same Reason and so shall be at an entire loss what VVord to use and so indeed they may well come to consider the Conclusion first who leave us at Uncertainties on what Terms we are to Discourse and there cannot be a greater Confusion in any Debate than to state a Conclusion without the Premises which we must doe if we cannot agree how to word the Fact we infer from My Lords I shall not much differ from what in general has been said concerning the Sence of the Word Abdicated for it seems to be agreed on all Hands that it is a Renuntiation Neither will I contend for an Involuntary Abdication because I think it means a Voluntary Act But truly what your Lordships mean in your Reason against it by the Word Express I cannot so well understand That a King may Renounce his Kingship I think may be made out both in Law Fact as well as any other Renuntiation and that as far as I can discern by your Lordships Reasons and this Days Debate hitherto is not intended to be denyed by any Indeed some of my Lords have told us That there 't is meant of the Exercise of a Right which may be Renounced without Renouncing that Right Whether that be a true Distinction or no is not very Material but if it be that the very Kingship it self as including a Right to Govern may be Renounced and hath been it will be no Difficulty to make out by Instances in all Countries not only where the Crown is or was Elective but also where it was Hereditary and Successive If a King will Resign or Renounce he may do so as particularly Char. 5th Earl of P k. That was an express Solemn Renuntiation Sir George T by My Lords the particular manner of Doing it is I take it not matter in Debate just now before us till it be settled whether a King can Abdicate at all or Resign or Renounce his Kingship at all this then being granted That a King may Renounce may Resign may Part with his Office as well as the Exercise of it then the Question indeed is Whether this King hath done so or no That he may do it I take it for granted it being an Act of the VVill Then let us now inquire into the Facts as set out in the Vote VVhether this VVill of his be manifest for that you have heard it may be discovered several ways the Discovery may be by VVriting it may be by VVords it may be by Facts Grotius himself and all Authors that treat of this Matter and the Nature of it do agree That if there be any Word or Action that doth suffitiently manifest the Intention of the Mind and Will to part with his Office that will amount to an Abdication or Renouncing Now my Lords I beg leave to put this Case That had King James the II. come here into the Assembly of Lords and Commons and expressed himself in VVriting or VVords to this Purpose I was Born an Heir to the Crown of England which is a Government limited by Laws made in full Parliament by King Nobles and Commonalty and upon the Death of my last Predecessor I am in Possession of the Throne and now I find I cannot make Laws without the Consent of the Lords and Representatives of the Commons in Parliament I cannot suspend Laws that have been so made without the Consent of my People this indeed is the Title of Kingship I hold by Original Contract and the Fundamental Constitutions of the Government and my Succession to and Possession of the Crown on these Terms is Part of that Contract this Part of the Contract I am weary of I do Renounce it I will not be obliged to Observe it nay I am under an invincible Obligation not to comply with it I will not Execute the Laws that have been made nor suffer others to be made as my People shall desire for their Security in Religion Liberty and Property which are the Two main Parts of the Kingly Office in this Nation I say suppose he had so exprest himself doubtless this had been a plain Renouncing of that Legal Regular Title which came to him by Descent If then he by Particular Acts such as are enumerated in the Vote has declared as much or more than these Words can amount to then he hath thereby declared his Will to Renounce the Government He hath by these Acts mentioned manifestly declared that he will not Govern according to the Laws made Nay he cannot so doe for he is under a Strict Obligation yea the strictest and Superior to that of the Original Compact between King and People to Act contrary to the Laws or to Suspend them By the Law he is to administer Justice aand to Execute his Office according to
to the Crown that consideration will be next and how to come at them I conceive we are in the same Capacity as our Predecessors were to provide for all Exigencies as shall emerge and for the supplying all Defects in the Government It is true by the Acts of Queen Elizabeth and King James first we have the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance that are to be and have been taken by all Persons But my Lords there is an old Oath of Fidelity that useth to be required in Leets and that by the ancient Law of England every man ought to take that is Sixteen Years of Age and this was as much obliging to the King his Heirs and Successors as any of those later Oaths are for they seem only to be made to exclude foreign Authorities and not to infer any new Obedience or Subjection therefore I am only saying we are in as natural a capacity as any of our Predecessors were to provide for a Remedy in such 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 mention'd in one of our Reasons of the Administration being committed to the Prince and those other Acts do not all imply at least that we are in such a Case as wherein the Throne is Vacant otherwise if it had been full I appeal to any one whether we could have assembled or acted in any other Name or by an other Authority than his that filled it Then do not all these things declare that there is a Vacancy My Lords I have done having said this That it is a subsequent consideration how the Throne shall be Filled and all the Particulars that relate to it remain entire after this Resolution taken But I think we are at present to go no further No Man I hope thinks there is a just Ground for any Apprehension of an Intention to change the Government I am sure there is no Ground for any such Apprehension So that we have all the reason in the World still to insist That your Lordships should agree with us that the Throne is Vacant or we shall not be able to move one step further towards a settlement Sir T L e. My Lords So much has been said in this matter already that very little is to be added But give me leave to say unto your Lordships That those Amendments your Lordships have made to the Commons Vote are not agreeing with your other Votes nor any of the Acts done since the Abdication Had it been in the common ordinary case of a Vacancy by the King's Death your Lordships in December last would sure have let us know as much But it is plain you were sensible we were without a Government by your desiring the Prince to take the Administration and to issue out his Letters from this Convention But my Lords I would ask this Question whether upon the original Contract there were not a power preserved in the Nation to provide for its self in such Exigencies That contract was to settle the Constitution as to the Legislature which a noble Lord in the beginning spoke of so we take it to be And it is true that it is a part of the Contract the making of the Laws and that those Laws should oblige all sides when made but yet so as not to exclude this original constitution in all Governments that commence by compact that there should be a Power in the States to make provision in all times and upon all occasions for extraordinary Cases and Necessities such as ours now is I say nothing now as to the Hereditary Succession our Government has been always taken to be Hereditary and so declared when there has been occasion to make provision otherwise than in the direct Line But our matter is singly upon a Point of Fact Whether the Throne be Vacant as the Commons say it is by the Abdication of King James the Second This present Vacancy is nearest to that of Richard the Second of any that we meet with in our Records and the Phrase being there used we insist upon it as very proper And when that is agreed unto the House will no doubt declare their Minds in another Consequential Question that shall arise in a Proper way But this is all we can speak to now Sir G T y. To discourse Whether the Crown of England would by this means become Elective is altogether unnecessary and I think your Lordships have given no Reasons that are sufficient to make the Objection out neither any Answers to the Commons Reasons for their Vote It seems to me an odd way of Reasoning first to mistake the meaning and then give Reasons against that mistaken meaning The Question is only here Whether we can make good this Proposition That the Throne is Vacant by the Abdication of tht late King I confess 't is a melancholy thing to discourse of the Miscarriages of Governments but 't is much more afflictive to talk of unhinging all the Monarchy by a breach upon the direct Line of the Succession as if the Crown of England did actually descend to Lewis the Fourteenth it would not be in the power of the States of this Kingdom to divolve it upon another Head A Noble Lord put an Instance of two Men in one Room one of whom was really such a one But though a stander by could not directly tell which was he yet it could not be said by him that such a one was not there But if you please I will put this Case Suppose there were two Men in one Room that no one alive could tell which was which as suppose this to be the Case of the two Children of Edward the Fourth that they had been kept close Prisoner by their Uncle Richard the Third so long that there were no living Witnesses able to tell which was the eldest of the two that would occasion a difficulty much what as intricate as ours here One of them must be Eldest but by reason of the uncertainty must not an Election be made of them And could any thing else do but an Election But I say the proper single Question here is Whether we have well said and well affirmed upon the Premises that are mentioned in the former part of the Vote that he was Abdicated and that the Throne is thereby Vacant Your Lordships in part agree for you say He has Deserted the Government then you say He is not in it And it is as much as to say He has left the Kingdom destitute of a Government Now if there be any sence in which our Proposition is true will you deny the whole Proposition because it may be taken in a sence that is dubious and uncertain as to the Consequences You cannot say the Throne is Full if then there be a Doubt with you to be sure it is not like