DEPARTMENT OF ADAPTABLE PRINCIPLES |
| DIRECTOR Tarhunz Southgate |
ABOUT
It has already been remarked, that it is of great importance to the wellbeing of a nation to maintain the principle of Unity. This is no less important for its internal than for its foreign relations. As the world is at present constituted, this end is certainly best practically attained, by embodying the idea of unity in the person of one man ; it being clearly understood that such person acts in that character for and on behalf of the nation only, and not for himself or on his own behalf, or as any matter of personal right; and therefore that he is bound to submit all his acts to the opinion and approval of the nation. The only question is, whether the choice of such person shall be perpetually recurring, or shall, as by a parliamentary act of settlement, be provided for in anticipation. Men will never agree probably on this point. It may certainly be maintained by very strong" argument, that the institution of the Crown, as existing in England for instance, is even more compatible with true free institutions than many forms of what have been, in modern times, called, by way of distinction, a " republic," or a " commonwealth." But this is too large a question to discuss here. It is sufficient to say, that when Sir Thomas Smith, [Secretary of State to Edward VI. and Queen Elizabeth] three centuries ago, wrote his book on " The English Republic," he had no idea of upsetting kings, nor of denouncing their existence as inconsistent with a true republic. He, very properly, makes the true distinction to lie, as above indicated, between the king and the tyrant. If the idea of a king is once allowed to be supplanted by that of a dynasty, or by any notion of Hereditary Right, the existence of a Constitutional Crown is, of course, at an end. The difficulty is, to provide sufficient checks to prevent this danger, at the same time that the advantages of an anticipatory nomination are secured. Acts of Settlement, of Regency, and other measures of Parliamentary control,—which are constantly recurring in England,—have this end. There appears no sufficient reason why they should not continue to attain it.—