JAMES It.

193

be the legitimate heir, he had been carried abroad;he would be educated in principles destructive ofthe constitution and established religion; and hewould probably leave a son , liable to the fameinsuperable objection : That if the whole linewere cut off by law , the people would in timeforget or neglect their claim; an advantage, whichcould not be hoped for, while the administrationwas conducted in their name, and while theywere still acknowledged to possess the legal title:And that a nation, thus perpetually governed byregents or protectors, approached much nearer toa republic than one subject to monarchs, whosehereditary regular succession, as well as present,authority, was fixed anc! appointed by the people.

This question was agitated with great zeal bythe opposite parties in the house of peers. Thechief speakers among the tories were Clarendon,Rochester, and Nottingham; among the whigs,Halifax and Danby. The question was carriedfor a king by two voices only, fifty-one againstforty-nine. All the prelates, except two, thebishops of London and Bristol, voted for a regent*The primate , a disinterested but pusillanimousman, kept at a distance, both from the prince’scourt and from parliament.

The house of peers proceeded next to examinepiece-meal the vote, sent up to them by the com-mons. They debated, “ Whether there were an“ original contract between king and people? "and the affirmative was carried by fifty-threeagainst forty- six; a proof that the tories wereVol XII. 0

CHAP!

LXXI.

16S9.