The Statesman.
London, England, 1813-06-14 00:00:00

• 6

rrillosof the House of Hanover, to wham it give a
Crown. Daroa sale—
" Whew Kemp the .curd wig tire do lay duwa.
The), are ne Km s. Weak they acne steatra Crowe."
But I leste, in .a former bitter, quoted the whole
Tonne ; shall, therefore, give the Reader no
more of his verses, in order that I may be,ahle to
cite to him no less than five precedents on eases where
this doctrine bath been coral' med by practice. The
first imbrue" after the conquest, or, to speak more
Properly, Norman accession (for I do not think it
worth while to cite those before that epoch), was
King Jones, who w;s lawfully deposed by the peas
pie in Parlinment, as he had been lawfully elected by
tlAm ; of both which events, namely, his election
and deposition, MATTIOtw PARIS, a cotemporary
historian, loth gives us a circumstantial detail. The
rause of hoax's deposition, he says, was" pro mut.
fIo homicidlis et alit* snalf:ficiis." So, King Joulti
you see, was punished as a molefadoe, althetagh
our modern Tories pretend that Kings Can do no
wrong. In the name of common sense, of what
!Ise is it to make a man tuk* an oath, and then tell
him that he mar do what he pleases, aye, even break
that oath, and et he shall do no worse This never
wee the Constitution of our ancestors;., no, they
were neither a nation of lunatics. nor of idiots,
whereas they who avow such politic., must be the
one or the other. Tate second Kitt; deposed was
Eowano H.; the wrong he did is 41 forth in the
Articles of his Impeachment, of whiCh shall copy
the ,An
gles
only, from HANN'S History,iii folio,
vol. I. p. 402:—" Sth, Also, whereas he was bound
by his oath to do right to all, he would net do it, for
his own profit, and the covetoesness of him and
his evil Counsellors ; neither ;clouded he • the other
points of the Oath which.4te made c his Coronation."
Now, if the Reader wishes to see this same oath
which this very King Eewese 11. took•at his Coro-
ration, he may ludit in ROO ; there he will see
that EDWARD swore to keep this very Swum la*
from which I hive quoted the.paisage below out of
Wmeirts • so that confermabielo his own Oath, was
he convicted, and lawfully deposed ; since by virtue
Of that law he was only King whilst he adminis-
tered justice' conformable to law, and when he
ceased to do so (as by .the above article .it ap-
pears he , did), then was the law Nulled, which
says stollen- Regis non i.e to constubit, et stamen
Regis perdis.—goe below (*)Of ell this F.nnAtte
was very sensible he. ackupwledged he had done
wrong, and that Ms punishment was just, and he
thanked the people for taking his son in 'his stead.—
The third instance afforded in DU history since the
conquest, was Hunan!) It, The tildes exhibited
against this Prince are no less than thirty.three in
number; he was, indeed, a great malefactor, as that
list proves; several of these articled end thus,
" whereby the said King did damnably incur the guilt.
of perjury." Is not this quite sufficient to convince
oar 'l'ories, if words can convince them, that it is a
wrong thing for a King to break his oath, and
withhold that. justice which he prothises at his,
coronation to administer to his people? balm
these gentlemen the effrontery to tell us, that what
our ancestors thus !minded with terms of ignominy,
what they Called " the damnable guilt of perjury," is
in teality, no wrong ? No wrong, according to their
notions of. the Constitution! Bravo! Messieurs the
• Titries.--The 'fourth King. I mean to cite' was
Cuirass-I. Though it is. iot my intention to ap-
prove dap:tent of his punishment, yet • I must say
that he owed its severity to "the doctrines' which he
had learnt from the Tories.‘. There is no doubt that
Cumtuts broke his coronation Oath, and cone.
quently had forfeited the kiegly office - but the
Tories told him, that this office he he!fl front GOD.
and was not answerable for the abuse of it : and
though he could not show his celestial patent for
doing torts:, or, in other wrells, for oath breaking
mid perjury, yet was he foolish enough, and matte.
tenateenough,to believe them. Parliament might have
deposedtim, as they afterwards did his son JAMES,
for breach of the covenant with his people; but they
had no right to put lam to death. The ancient law
says, Rex aria slum !Jew Regis. You shall be King
giehilst you govern according to law, bat when you
do not, Rosen Regis perdis, you shall lose the name
of King : but they went further ; iestead of. taking
from him the name of King, they took from hits his
bead. This was what Mr. WINDHAK used to tall
a vigour beyond the law. On the other hand, this
unlawful rigour kilo proof that CnattLite was undo.
serving of punishment. It is to be lamented that
the tribunal which tried him was not coustitutional •
but if we attend to the objections which he 'urged
against it, we shall find, that he very well knew
what the duty of an English King was, though be
wished to be King, jure divino, rather than King
according to the Constitution.. He said, '6 For
to acknowledge a new Court that I never heard al'
before, I, who am your
.Eing., who should .b•-an
example to all the people of England for to "UM;
intim, And maintain the old laws, indeled I cannot
au it." -This, on( of the mouth of salt 'n Titres ;
as Quinn', was, to be sure, very good, but the
following is still better:—" I am sworn to keep the I
peace, and by the duty I ours to God and my country,.
I will do it to the last breath of, my body. Satisfy
me in that (meaning the legality of the Court), and I
will answer • otherwise I betray nqj trust and the
li&erties of the people S." Here we find, that eves
Kin; CHARLES himself could, to answer his purpose,
admit that he was king upon oath,. and upon trust;
and that the condition of this tend end obligation 1,
was to maintain justice and the people's liberties.
Respecting the fifth King punished for violating
oath and trust, JAMES the Second, I shall say little;
the vote of the 28th January, 1688, the Bill of
nights, &c. proving so clearly that hiadeposition was
in consequence of his breach of this sacred contract
between King and People ' • and now for a word or
Iwo by way of applying the facts here stated to the
present case.
According to this contract which the vote of
January 28, 1688, very property • styles origiaait
because it-was thus that our Government originated,

,
• " Debet edam bins Loges et csassetiadiareepprobalne eft- i
pry. Debetjsrliel on reetenis,regoo fame et 3 William per ens- 1
etzromi
anus pa:semis r psi Imre. lila vets Relief ereela Res
is pr 0.7.2:. .et tools trierrrimpetie Ersaititils
Corms repo
•re lib A.loepile et ejsebipis
regoi X-11ad oipsio. " Rex siollowbooe regkr44.17.4
N aiu Nevis woes retth ass is to eseetabilst Mon reel to
•
—4lfitarres, p. p. 200 met 101.
* Ses Names Trlid of Dor* rah 'Pe $ ENI $l.

• s

tfsltce,
ao It." 1
as CUAIr.
following
2eace, an(
I will do
me in thai
will ans
liberties c
Cu,
admit dm
and that
was to in
Itespectic
oath and
the vote
Rights, .3
,ti 4
conseg
between
two by v
present c
Acton
January
because i
; • ic Del
ClEit's pre
is probes
COfilla rep
ti regoi vim
p 01.*4 Nevis
*