TO M. formerly spilt: But all these dificultys disapear'd, or were

.IV.

1689.

dispised, when the Convention met, who had their work cut out for them by certain proposals printed beforehand, and offer'd to their consideration; wherein was asserted that the Supream power Personal was in the King, Lords, and Commons, which was now dissolved (they Sayd) by the King's submiting to the Church of Rome, his assumeing an arbitrary power, and *withdrawing himself; but that the Supreame Power Real was in the Community or body of the people of England, who might act by their original power, which was not bound up to Laws already made, as every particular person was, that it was this Community of England which first gaue being to its present Constitution, of King, Lords, and Commons, and might either alter it, or renew it as they pleased, but that since the Same forme of government was still judged the best, they could not doe better than take a Person which heaven and earth pointed out to them; That the Lords were in being, and certain places had by custome, or charter, the priviledge of chuseing representatives for the Commons, which might doe the work, that this would assert the power of the Said Community of England; that they could not put the Regal into better hands than the Prince of Orange's in gratitude power

* Lord Henry Clarendon in his Diary (page 144.) relates a Conversation which he had on this subject with Dykevelt: "I answered-, that I went in to the Prince of Orange upon his Declaration, which all honest men heartily concurred in; that, when I went in to him, it was not to be against the King, his Majesty having appointed a Parliament, and Commissioners to treat with the Prince..... Mr. Dykevelt replied, that certainly I must think, the King's going away had totally altered the state of affairs. I said, I could not imagine, why that should alter them, when I looked upon the resolution of the States General of October, the — which I did not doubt was written in great sincerity. At this he seemed a little startled." · Lord Clarendon concluded this Conversation by informing Dykevelt, That their Religion did not allow of the deposing of Kings, that for his part he could not agree to it, nor could he absolve himself from the Oaths he had taken to the King. EDITOR

for their delivery, as well as his personal qualifications; and that if the Voice of the people be the Voice of God, that Voice never spoke lowder than now; that the Princess of Orange would share in the regal dignity which would content her; and that the Princess of Denmark for the publick good, would not * repine at her being postponed; that the exerciseing of this power in the people, would be a caution to succeeding Kings, how they govern'd, and support that noble maxim, That a neiboring Nation may arme to rescue a people oppress'd by tyranny; and then foreign Princes would be apt to look to themselves, when they heard by our Nation's example, that they are no longer safe than while just to their Subjects: Thus did these noble English Patriots erect themselves into reformers, not only of their own, but all other governments that should hear of their fame; a great undertakeing, and which may find them and their posterity work enough, if they think fit to persever in the defence of this doctrine.

TOM.

IV.

1689.

cation meets the 22nd of January, and resolve that

However these shallow and superficial arguments, (which The Convomade governments dissolvable at pleasure, and layd them open to eternall Strifes) being back'd by the presence of an Army, the King had

* Lord Henry Clarendon in his Diary, January 17, gives his Conversation on this subject with her Royal Highness." In the afternoon I was with the Princess of Denmark. I told her of the discourses of the town, that the Prince of Orange and her Sister were to be crowned King and Queen.... and that it was said, she had consented to it, that it should be so: To which she said. . . . she was sure, she had given no occasion to have it said, that she had consented to any thing. and she would never consent to any thing, that should be to the prejudice of herself, or her children. She added, that she knew very well, the Commonwealth Party was very busy; but she hoped, the Honest Party would be most prevalent in the Convention, and would not suffer wrong to be done her.... I asked her, If she thought her Father could justly be deposed? To which she said, "Those were too great points for her to meddle with; that she was very sorry, the King had brought things to the pass they were at; but she was afraid, it would not be safe for him ever to return again. I asked her, what she meant by that? To which she replied nothing." EDITOR.

abdicated, and that the Throne was

vacant.

ΤΟ Μ.

IV.

1689.

The Lords do not agree to the word abdicated,

and the prepossession of the people against reason and justice, served the present purpose; so that when the Convention met on the 22a of January following, the Commons presently came to this resolution, That King James the 2a haveing endeavour'd to subvert the Constitution of the Kingdom, by breaking the original contract betwixt King and people, and by the advice of Jesuits and other wicked persons haveing violated the fundemental Laws, and withdrawne himself out of the Kingdom, had abdicated the government, and that the Throne was vacant. The Lords likewise without much hesitation agreed to this resolve, only tooke exceptions to the word Abdicated, in stead of upon which a which they put Deserted, and would haue the last words, viz: That the Throne is thereby become vacant, to be totally left out; but the Commons stiking to their Vote, a conference was apointed wherein the Managers for the Lower house argued, That the word Abdication, did in effect express no more than what the Lords had already agreed to, in owning the King had broke the original contract and withdraw himself out of the Kingdom, which being, the Throne (they Sayd) must need be vacant: And that their Lordships had in efect sayd as much, in desireing the Prince of Orange to take upon him the administration of the government.

hot debate arrises.

To this the Earle of Notingham answered, that Abdication was a word unknown to the Common Law, and by consequence lyable to doubtfull interpretation, that it express'd a voluntary renunciation, which seem'd not agreeable to this case; that as to the Throne's being vacant, he conceiv'd that a contradiction in termes, where the Monarchy is hereditary, and where no act of the King's can bar the heire to the Crown, and that if King James had deserted the next in remainder was possess'd of it.

These reasons when brought to the Commons, were not to be answer'd by any other argument, than puting it to the Vote

IV.

1689.

(the most expeditious way of faceing down the plainest truthes) TOM. by which means it was carryd, against agreeing to the Lord's amendment, by a majority of at least 120 voices; this begot another conference which was managed with great shew of gravity and formal speeches: M' Hampden open'd it and sayd, That thō their dispute was but about a few words, yet they were of too great consequence to be parted with, that if the Law made not use of the word Abdication, it was its modesty in not supposeing such a case might happen; and that their Lordships not telling them who fill'd the Throne, was a plain indication they thought it vacant. Mr Sommers added, that the word deserted, was as little known to the Law as abdicated, that the latter implyd an entire renunciation, which might be made as well by doing such acts as are inconsistant with houlding a thing, as by a voluntary relinquishing of it, pretending to proue it from Grotius and other Civilians; and that since the word deserted in the explanation of the Lords, implyd a right of returning, it could not be sufficient, since he conceiv'd the Lords and Commons both design'd to secure the Nation against it in this case; and so concluded, that the King by subverting the Constitution and breaking the originall contract betwixt King and people, and by violateing the fundamentall Laws and withdrawing himself out of the Kingdom, had renounced to be King according to the Constitution, by avowing to govern by a dispotick power unknown to the Constitution and inconsistant with it; that he had renounced to be King according to the Law, such a King as he swore to be at the Coronation, such a King to whom the Allegiance of the English Subjects is due, and had set up an other kind of dominion which was to all intents an abandoning or abdication of the legal title as fully as if he had done it by express words. M' Serjent Holt afferm'd, that the Government and Majestracy was under trust, and any acting contrary to that trust, was a

TOM.

IV.

1689.

renounceing of it, thō it were not a renounceing by formal deed.

*

This seem'd a wonderfull doctrine to be sustain'd by such eminent Lawiers, who it seems never consider'd what would become of that so oft repeated maxim, That the King can do no wrong, if the least maladministration divests him of his regal authority; they layd themselves open before to furious attacks, had The Lords been disposed to use those armes, which the antient Laws and true Constitution put into their hands, but they had foreclosed themselves from that, by yeilding in efect at the first onset what was contended for too late; they had heartely concur'd with the Commons in excluding the King, the Bishop of Ely himself allow'd, that a full irremouable perswasion in a false Religion was a moral incapacity, and that thereby the King had forfeited his right, their only care was to preserue a shew of succession in the Monarchy, and that the exercise of the government might devolve on the next heire; nor was that so much for loue of the Constitution, as that the Regal power might rather vest in the Princess, than Prince of Orange, whereby many of those Lords promised themselves a greater share in the government, which render'd the contest in effect, not so much about what was Lawfull, as who should reap most benefit by this breach of the Law: Indeed My Lord Nothingham put them in mind of the afforesaid maxim, That the King can doe no wrong, and that Ministers and Officers

* The Duke of Buckingham, in his Memoir on the Revolution, describes the State of Parties in the House of Lords, and probably on that day, Jan' 29, when, as Kennet remarks, the Lords began to consider of the Commons voting the Throne to be vacant. "The House of Lords," says the Duke, "was extreamly full, scarce one of them was absent, except the Papists; and it was divided into Three Parties: That of the High-Church inclin'd to the two Princesses; those we now call Whiggs, assured of good imployments under the Prince; and a third, very much the smallest, inclin'd to the unfortunate King, some out of conscience, but more out of despair of favour from the Prince." EDITOR.