New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1860-04-10

Far away be the time when Great Britain shall
know another Queen than she whose very name
seems to have heralded a succession of victories
to British arms British policy and British COM
merce-victories all the more brilliant for the sore
trials through which they have been won. We
are sure that all our readers whether subjects of
her most Gracious Majesty or not will join heartily
with us in this wish and yet we have noticed in
various quarters an uneasy curiosity as to the per-
sonality of the next Queen. She, of course, will
be merely Queen Consort not q Queen Regnant;
her present most excellent Majesty has taken care
of that. Hence it would seem that the question as
to whom she may be, would have at this time very
little interest but, on the contrary if we may Judge
from some of our English files, that very reason
appears to make the subject matter of curiosity
and discussion in certain circles. Therefore it is
that we depart from our usual custom, and decide
disputed question which has been submitted to
us by some of our readers. We are asked to say,
whether, So If the Prince of Wales now heir to the
British throne, should not marry before he becomes
king, he can then marry subject, or whomsoeyer
he likes, and whether the issue of such marriage
would be the lawful heir to the Crown ?f To the
question, in both parts, we answer-Yes. The
action of any member of the Royal Family, in this
matter is, of course, as independent that of any
other person. except in so far as it is restrained by
Acts of Parliament. Of these there are three
touching the marriages of Princes and Prncesses
of the blood.
The first was passed in 1772 at the special in
stance of George LII. himself. 1t rendered all the
descendants of the monarch's predecessor incapa-
BILE of contracting marriage without the consent
of his Majesty; but such descendants being above
25 years of age on giving the Privy Council twelve
month previous notice, might, after the expiration
of that time, marry without the royal assent, un-
less within that time, both Houses Of Parliament
should declare their disapprobation of the proposed
nuptals. This act originated in the marriage of
two of the then kings brothers the Duke of Cum
berland with Mrs Horton, and the Duke of Glou-
cester with Lady Waldegrave. The other acts
were passed in 1886 and 1887, we believe. They
were amendments of the former, and had special
reference, if we remember right, to the connexions
formed by George ", then Prince Regent, and
William w. when Duke of Clarence. They, how
ever did not deprive tie Hing of the same power
of consenting to his own marriage, which he had
the right to exert in regard to any other member
to marry whom he pleases, has not been restricted
by any ACT that we can remember; and it has
twice. at least, been eXerted in the marriage of
subjects by monarchs upon the English throne, and
without in any manner affecting the validity of the
claim of the issue OF those marriages to the sue
eession. Edward ~. married Lady Grey, the
daughter of one commoner, and the widow of an
other-Sir John Grey; and the title of his eldest
son by her to place the English throne, as Ed
ward v, has never been disputed, although he did
not reign, as he was murdered by the usurping
Richard III. Again. Henry VIII. married Anne
Boleyn, the daughter of commoner; and if any
only issue Of that marriage to the throne Queen
Elizabeth, he would probably have received with
out delay sufficient information upon that snbjec
to last him as long as he lived. So let British
mammas who have daughters approaching mar
riageable years regard them with complaeency an(
| treat them with respect-for who knows Wha
may happen! [Albion