The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-09-26
might seize the crowni IL II were not offered

might seize the Crown II II were not offered
to him, the Lords gave way, and, ~ a ma
jority Of Just fifteen, decided that the
throne was vacant and that the Primo
and Princess of ORANGE should be de-
clared King and Queen Of England.
Now, II the act of an illegal convention
could not make WILLIAMS lawful King,
neither could the Parliament Of 1901 be q
lawful Parliament, since, to make a Parlia-
ment lawful, there must be a King, as well
as a House of Lords and a House Of Com
mons. Yet Queen VICToR1A's title to rule
rests on the so-called Act Of Settlement,
passed by Parliament in 1901, whereby
the succession to the Crown was settled on
the Electress SOPHIA OF Hanover (the
daughter Of ELIZABETH, the Electress Pal
atine, who was a daughter Of JAMES ~ and
her heirs, to the exclusion Of all the de-
scendants of CHARLES 1. So far was this
Act of Settlement. from being popular, that
1t was only passed in the Commons by a ma
jority of one. The ADMIRATION Act Of the same
year.. requiring all persons holding office to
abjure the pretended Prince of WALES
was, also, violently opposed, and only car
ried in the Commons by a majority OF one.
These facts undoubtedly bring home the
truth that the Parliamentary vote, by
which, alone, the title Of the Hanoyerian
dynasty was obtained, was, in no sense, q
vote Individually representative Of the will
Of the people. IN all hands 1t Is admitted
that the Hanoverian dynasty has no title
on the ground Of heredity, but 1t rests it's
claim upon the Parliamentary majority OF
one, just mentioned, affirming that the
voice of the people, although uttered with
80 much hesitation, Is, nevertheless, the
voice of God. 1t Is evident that modern
British governments do not discover
any divine warrant in a majority of one,
for they are wont to resign when their ma
jority even approaches such a point. The
surviving English Legitimists contend
that the Parliamentary majority In 17o1,
even had 1t been more substantial, would
not have represented popular sentiment,
which was still strongly Tory; that q
plebiscite would have then recalled and
reinstated JAMES IL. and that, In fine,
the majority of one by which the Act
Of Settlement was passed is q sufficient
justification for all and any Jacobite
risings. Not only, in q word, has the
Hanoverian dynasty no divine right to
rule, but 1t has no Parliamentary right
worth considering.
1t will hardly be denied by any student
of history that the views of the English
Legitimists, as here set forth, are theoreti-
cally plausible, AND that, from an abstract
point of view, their advocates should not
be denounced as Idiots" or "~lunatics."
Impracticable persons, on the other hand,
they certainly must be deemed, for the rea-
son that they seem unable to recognize
facts as they are. Granted that the Act of
Settlement was only carried by a majority
of one; granted hat even this majority did
not represent the will OF the people at
the time; the fact remains that the act was
carried, and has been law for 196 years.
Tho house Of STUART has gone forever. and
the house Of HANOVER has CONF to stay.
This fact, although a few English Legiti-
mists shut their eyes to it, seems to be
obvious enough to the rightful heir by
right of birth, the Archduchess MARY, for
this very year her son, Prince RUPERT OF
Bavaria, the alleged representative of the
de jure sovereign Of the United Kingdom,
visited the Court of st. James to con.
graduate the de Jdcto sovereign on having
reigned so long.