prefent poffeffor, fhould deprive his fucceffors of their property, and of the only means they had of fupport. That the Nullum Tempus claimed by the crown, was an engine in the hands of the ftrong to oppress the weak; but that the Nullum Tempus of the church, was a defence to the weak against the strong.

It was replied on the other fide, that most of these objections were guarded against by the provifions of the bill, in which the limitation is confiderably extended in favour of the clergy, and a period of three incumbencies added, to the fixty years which are allowed to the crown in the fame cafe; that the gentleman who moved for the bill, and thofe who fupported it, wished, and were ready, to admit of any further ease or advantage to the poor parochial clergy that could be pointed out, and that did not ftrike at the principles of the bill; and that the first of thefe, had already made this propofal to the two metropolitans, and defired their lordships affiftance in it. But that in fact, the poor clergy were only the mask upon this occafion to screen the rich; that poverty was used as an inftrument to protect riches, and neceffity employ ed, to defend and guard luxury and fuperfluity. The motion was oppofed by the whole force of adniniftration, and it was much complained of, that a bill brought in upon public ground, and apparently for the public benefit, thould not be allowed a reading. The majority however, was not fo great as night have been expected, the numbers being 117, to 141, who oppofed the question.

20th The meflage which gave rife to the Royal Marriage Bill, was a few days after prefented to both houtes. In this meffage it is obferved, that his Majefty being defirous, from paternal affection to his own family, and anxious con

cern for the future welfare of his people, and the honour and dignity of his crown, that the right of approving all marriages in the royal family (which ever has belonged to the Kings of this realm as a matter. of public concern) may be made effectual, recommends to both houfes to take into their serious confideration, whether it may not be wise and expedient to supply the defects of the laws now in being, and by fome new provifion more effectually to guard the defcendants of his late majefty (other than the issue of princeffes who have married, or may hereafter marry, into foreign families) from marrying without the approbation of his majefty, his heirs, or fucceffors, firft had and obtained.

In confequence of this meffage, a bill was brought into the house of lords, which fully answered all the purposes that could have been intended by it. After reciting the King's meffage in the preamble, and acknowledging the legality of the powers claimed therein by the crown, in the declaratory part, this bill proceeds in the enacting, to render all the defcendants of the late King (excepting only thofe that were excepted in the meffage) incapable of contracting marriage without the previous confent of the King, or his fucceffors on the throne, fignified under the great feal, and declared in Council; every fuch marriage, and matrimonial contract, without fuch confent, being declared null and void. It is however granted, that fuch defcendants, being above the age of 25 years, upen then giving the privy council twelve months previous notice of their defign, may, after the expiration of that term, enter into marriage without the royal confent, unless bath houfes of parliament should within that time exprefsly declare their difapprobation of it. All perfons,

who

who should knowingly prefume to folemnize, or to affift at the celebration of fuch illicit marriage, or at any fuch matrimonial contract, are declared to incur all the pains and penalties of the ftatute of premunire. This bill was oppofed with extraordinary vigour in both houses. New motions were continually made, either to expunge or to amend thofe that were thought to be its most exceptionable parts; and every degree of parliamentary skill was ufed, either to obftruct its progrefs or to improve its form. Notwithstanding thefe impediments, it was carried through the house of lords with wonderful difpatch, and though it was brought in late in February, paffed through the last reading on the third of March.

In this courfe of its progrefs, one of the first measures that was taken was to demand the opinion of the judges, how far, by the law of this kingdom, the King is entrusted with the care and approbation of the marriages of the royal family. The opinion returned by the judges, was that the care and approbation of the marriages of the children and grandchildren of the King, and the prefamptive heir to the crown, (other than the iffue of foreign families) do belong to the Kings of this realm; but to what other branch of the royal family fuch care and approbation do extend, the judges did not find precifely determined.

The question was put feparately upon the preamble and moft of the clauses, whether each, in itself, fhould be left totally out; and again, upon the omiffion of particular parts, and for amendments to others. One of the principal amendments propofed was, that the operative powers of the crown should be reftrained to the children and grand children of the reigning king, and the prefumptive heir to the crown; another was, that the restrictive limitation of age

should be placed at twenty one, inftead of twenty five years of age. Thefe queftions, and every other, were over-ruled by a majority of confiderably more than two to one; and, at the third reading, the bill was carried without any amendment, by a still greater majority, the number including proxies, amounting on the one fide to ninety, and only to twenty fix on the other. It was however, attended, on its paffage, by a proteft of great length and force, figned by fourteen lords, and by another, not fo long figned by fix lords only.

This bill met with ftill greater oppofition in the houfe of commons, where every inch of the ground being alfo difputed, and the numbers of both fides more nearly on an equality, the debates were longer continued. As the opinion of the judges feemed to call in question the legality of fome affertions in the meffage, which were notwithstanding repeated and acknowledged in the preamble to the bill, and it was faid, that the manner in which the bill was hurried, looked as if it was intended to take an advantage of the abfence of the gentlemen of the law, who were mostly engaged on the circuits, it was thereMarch 4. fore moved, to have the journals of the lords infpected, that the houfe might receive the best information that it could in that refpect. This being agreed to, a motion was made that the bill might be printed, that the houfe might have it in the most exact manner for their confideration; this was refufed by administration, who said the bill was fo fhort, that every member might have time to read it before the fecond reading came on in the houfe; this refufal, in a matter of fuch a magnitude, and fo remote in its confequences, was reprefented as very indecent, if not unfair; the queftion being however up, it was T 2

rejected

rejected by a great majority, the numbers being 193 againft, to 109, who supported the motion.

Notwithstanding the iffue of this first effay of strength, every part of the bill continued to be controverted and debated with the greatest vigour. The house was generally pretty full, and fate always very late. The greatest numbers, and the clofeft divifion, that appeared up13th. on any question, was upon a motion for omitting those words in the preamble, which acknowledge and confirm the prerogative afferted by the crown in the meffage. Upon this divifion, the numbers were 164 for, and 200 against, the motion.

The arguments on this question, turned principally upon hiftorical facts, our general jurifprudence, the opinion of ten judges in the year 1717, and the late opinion of the judges in the houfe of lords. It was faid on one fide, that our kings always poffeffed this prerogative, and that the foundation of the king's right to the care and approbation of the marriages of the royal family, was their importance to the ftate. The exercife of this prerogative was fhewn in a variety of hiftorical inftances, wherein our kings bad treated with foreign princes for intermarriages, had granted powers by commiffion to treat of the marriage of perfons in their family with foreign princes, and wherein different branches of the royal family had obtained the King's licence to marry. They alfo brought inftances in which the King had compelled noblemen to marry his daughters; others, in which he had confined the perfons of those who had married without his confent, and where the ftarchamber had fined perfons who were privy to fuch marriages.

They faid, that the opinion of ten judges, in the year 1717, was a confirmation of the legality of this prerogative, which admitted the

King's right to the care of the marriage and education of the children of the royal family; and that the late opinion acknowledges, that the King had the care of the royal children, and grand children, and the prefumptive heir to the crown; but could not tell to what other branches it extended; and that this opinion plainly fhewed the preroga. tive of the crown, though the extent of it was not clear.

On the other fide it was infifted, that this prerogative in the extent it was now claimed, was not known to the conftitution, was not founded in law, was not fupported by the opinions of the judges, nor warranted by hiftory. That if it had been originally a part of the conftitution, it muft, in its natural confequences, have long fince become the object of half our ftatute laws, and the subject. of the greater part of our history. That, on the contrary, till the prefent time, this prerogative was unheard of in English jurisprudence; that there was no remedy in law appertaining to fuch pretended right in the crown, nor any court of law in which a profecution could be carried on for fuch pretended offences; as therefore there could be no right without a remedy, it was evident that this prerogative never had any exiftence. act which regulated other marriages, exprefsly excepted the royal family; and it is well known that the common law, until that period left all men to their natural liberty: had it been otherwife, had any provifion been made, or had the paternal authority exercifed in Rome, been a part of our conftitution, fuch a ftatute would have been abfurd and ridiculous, because useless and unneceffary.

That the

As to the inftances brought from history, fome of them, if they proved any thing, proved much more than was intended, and what every

body

body knew before, that in arbitrary times, fome of our kings made an illegal and unjuftifiable ufe of their power; that, with refpect to the oth rs fome of them were not in point, and the remainder were mifftated; that in most of them, the King's interference being confidered as a particular mark of honour, and generally attended with advantage, it was no wonder they should be fubmitted to; and that as to the fines and punishments mentioned, fome of them were for other offences, and not for marriage, and the others were by arbitrary power, and not by law, which was evident from there being no legal record of any one of thein.

That as to the opinion of the judges, in 1717; it was not only extrajudicially obtained, but their deliberations were carried on with fo much fecrecy and the whole conducted in fuch a manner, as leaves room for the most unfavourable fufpicions; but that however they carried this right no farther; than the children, and the late opinion only a degree farther; and that the laft declare exprefsly that they find no authority for extending it far

ther.

Much ftrefs was laid upon the dangerous confequences of this bill with refpect to pofterity. It was fuppofed that there were 30,000 perfons in the kingdom at present, who had fome of the blood royal in their veins, fome of whom were known to be in the loweft conditions of life; that it may therefore be naturally expected, that, in a very few ages, every family of property in the kingdom, will, in confequence of intermarriages, become in a state of wardship to the crown; more especially, as the boafted opinion of the year 1717, on which fo much ftrefs was laid at prefent, fuppofes that the care and approbation of the marriage includes the

education and cuftody of the person; and this matter was the more alarming, as this principle of the opinion had been frequently fupported in the courfe of thefe debates. It was therefore frequently urged with great earneftness in both houses, that, to prevent this obnoxious effeet, the ftrong prerogative, now claimed and given to the crown, fhould be limited to the reign of his prefent majefty; or, if it was determined to make it perpetual with refpect to the royal family, to confine it within its natural bounds, and not to fuffer it to extend, beyond those who stood within a certain degree of the throne. Several motions were accordingly made, which tended only to remedy this particular part of the bill; but which met with the fame fuccels as all the others.

The fubfequent divifions upon this bill were lefs numerous, and the majorities greater. The debates were not however intermitted, every fentence, and almost every particle it contained, became Mar. 24a fubject of difcuffion. Upon the lafting reading after a confiderable debate, in which many of thofe arguments that were already exhaufted were again repeated, the numbers, upon the final divifion, were 115 against, and 165 for pafling the bill. Some trifling aiterations it met with, which neither changed its nature nor fubftance, made it neceffary to fend it back to the lords, where they were agreed to without any difficulty.

Among the great objections made to the general principles of this bill, by thote who were the most violent oppofers of it, were the following: That it militated with every law, human and divine, relative to matrimony; that it was fubverfive of thofe natural rights inherent in mane kind, which are independent of all laws, and fuperior to all legiflatures:

—That,

That, being equally contrary to the canon, the civil, and the common law; and repugnant to the natural rights of mankind, it is in itself null and invalid, and thus, having no legality to fupport it, can be fubmitted to only as the effect of power; that, whenever that power fackens, the injured will naturally appeal to juftice, to the laws of men, and of nature; that it is much to be apprehended therefore, that in its future confequences it may be productive of civil wars, of the most complicated, perverfe, and ruinous kind, equally dangerous to the throne, and destructive to the people, Among the objections to particular parts; the annulling of the marriages, and declaring the children illegitimate, was much complained of; and it was faid, that any other reftraints, terrors, or penalties, would be much more eligible. That it tended evidently to influence the fucceffion to the crown, as the prefumptive heir may be kept unmarried as long as the fovereign lived; and thus the crown might become in a great measure regally elective. It was faid to be indecent to the royal family, to fuppose them in a state of nonage till 26 years of age, when all the rest of mankind were at age. at 21; and they themselves were capable by law, at that age of holding the regency of the kingdom, though they were not to be entrusted with the choice of a wife. And that, notwithstanding the harfhnefs and cruelty of the bill, it is in feveral inftances extremely defective in providing for its own purpofe; but effentially fo, in its having provided no remedy, at any age, against the improvident marriage of the king reigning, the marriage of all others the most important to the public.

On the other fide it was faid, that all thofe evils, dangers, and fuppofed acts of cruelty, were merely chimerical, and could never exift

but in the imagination. That the fevereign was the natural and proper guardian and judge of the honour dignity, and conduct of his family; the rewarder of their virtues, and the only effectual reprover of their follies, or corrector of their vices. That Kings had too many things to demand their attention, to have it fuppofed that they should extend this fuperintendency and care beyond their nearest relations ; or thofe who stood in fuch a degree with refpect to the crown, as to be of the greatest importance to the nation. That if any improper ofe fhould be made of this authority, or any injuftice or oppreffion fuffered in confequence of it, things which are not to be expected, parliament would always be ready to redress the one, and to grant relief in the other cafe, and at the fame time to punish the minifter who dared to advife fuch a measure.

That all power is undoubtedly liable to abufe; but that parliament is a watchful check, and a fevere avenger in fuch cafes. That if any inconveniencies fhould be found to arife from this bill, they may be as easily remedied an hundred years hence as at the prefent moment. That the powers in this bill, to prevent and annut marriages, are not contrary to religion; that the fame powers are ufed in the marriage-act, and in the law to prevent lunatics from marrying; and neither were ever complained of. That the difhonour reflected upon the crown by improper alliances call loudly for an authority of this nature to prevent them; and that the great evils which the nation formerly experienced, in confequence of marriages between the royal family and the subjects, fufficiently fhew it to be a matter of the most public concern. That as the royal family are not in the marriage-act, this, or some other bill to the fame purpose,