those fundamental laws be abolished, the character of the Constitution would be changed, and the compact of the Revolution be at an end! SECTION VII. THE REASON OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE OATH. HOWEVER indisputable it might have been, that every prince succeeding to the Crown by virtue of these Acts of Settlement, would be bound, by the conditions upon which they were made, the wisdom of the Legislature of 1688 was evinced, in not resting the maintenance of the Constitution upon an implied obligation. It was on all hands admitted, that James the Second had violated his contract with his people;-but the precise nature and extent of that contract we know to have been a matter of great dispute at the Revolution. The most obvious course, therefore, was to reduce the contract of the King with his people to certain terms, sufficiently comprehensive to express the principles upon which every future sovereign should exercise the powers vested in him by the Constitution.* * Vide Note E. Previous to this period, no one form of oath had been uniformly used at the Coronation of the sovereign, nor had the Coronation Oaths received the sanction of the Legislature. The terms, however, of all, were very similar, and as neither the prerogatives nor the duties of the sovereign had been well defined or understood, no inconvenience was probably experienced from the general terms in which they were expressed. There is no doubt, however, that the oath was regarded centuries before the Revolution, as more than a matter of ceremony. In the Fortieth of Edward the Third, it was agreed in Parliament, that King John's donation of his kingdom to the Pope, was null and void, being without the concurrence of Parliament, and contrary to his Coronation Oath.* Bracton (who wrote in the time of Henry the Third) says of the King, "Debet in coronatione sua in nomine Jesu Christi præstito sacramento hæc tria promittere populo sibi subdito. Imprimis se esse præcepturum et pro viribus opem impensurum ut ecclesiæ Dei et omni populo Christiano vera pax omni suo tempore observetur. Secundo, ut rapacitates et omnes iniquitates omnibus gradibus interdicat. Tertio, , ut in omnibus judiciis æquitatem præcipiat et misericordiam, ut indulgeat ei suam misericordiam, clemens et misericors Deus, et ut per 4 Blackstone's Commentaries, 111. justitiam suam firma gaudeant pace universi."* The following form is stated, in a modern publication, to be taken from an old manuscript account of the coronation. It nearly corresponds with that of Richard the Second, given by Prynne, from the Liber Regalis, for some notice of which the reader is referred to the Note. Archbishop'. "Pleaseth it you to confirm and observe the laws and customs of ancient times, granted from God by just and devout princes, unto the English nation, by oath, unto the said people, especially the laws, customs, and liberties, granted unto the clergy and laity, by the famous King Edward?" "The King answering, that he will perform and observe all the premises; then shall the Archbishop read unto him the articles whereunto he shall swear; thus saying; "Thou shalt procure unto the church of God, and unto the clergy and people, firm peace, and unity in God, according to thy power.' "He shall answer;"-" I will perform it." "Art thou pleased to be administered in all * Bracton de Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliæ, lib. 3. cap. 9. + Banks's Historical and Critical Enquiry into the Nature of the Kingly Office. + Prynne's Signal Loyalty. Vide Note F. thy judgments, indifferent and upright justice, and to use discretion with mercy and verity?" "He shall answer;"-" I will do it." "Art thou pleased that our upright laws and customs be observed, and dost thou promise that those shall be protected and maintained by thee to the honour of God, according to thy strength?" "He shall answer; "I grant and pro mise." Whatever opinion may be formed as to the extent of this obligation, no doubt, it is conceived, can be entertained, that it applied expressly to (at least) the King's executive character. If, therefore, the use of the Coronation Oath be simply to bind the sovereign to observe and execute the laws to be from time to time enacted; if to preserve to the church its rights and property, be all that is necessary to maintain the established religion, what need could there be, at the Revolution, of a new Coronation Oath? or how could the duties of the sovereign be more distinctly expressed, than in the simple language of the ancient oath? We will go farther. Not only would a new oath, affecting the King in his executive character merely, have no greater effect than the ancient, and be therefore nugatory; but it would have a less extensive operation, and be therefore destructive of the object of its institution-the binding of the sovereign more effectually. Without wearying the reader with the full recital of quaint and obsolete forms, we will notice so much of several ancient oaths as will completely establish this position. - That they did expressly affect the sovereign in the exercise of all his functions, legislative as well as executive. In the laws ascribed to Edward the Confessor, is given the substance of the Oath to be taken by the sovereign at his Coronation. In which he was to swear, "bonas leges et consuetudines approbatas erigere; pravas autem delere, et omnes a regno deponere." * William the Conqueror swore to "defend Holy Church and the rulers of the same; to govern the people committed to his care in justice, and with royal providence; to ordain righteous laws, and keep the same." ↑ Richard the First swore to "abolish bad laws and customs if any existed in his kingdom, and observe good laws.”‡ John swore to "destroy bad laws, and substitute good laws." Henry the Third swore to " destroy bad laws and unjust customs, if any existed in the kingdom."|| * Lambard. + Roger de Hoveden. Matt. Paris. § Ibid. |