414

HISTORY OF ENGLAND.

chap, country of one bad prince, without promulgating any doctrine- 1688 — which might be abused for the purpose of weakening the justand salutary authority of future monarchs. The former classdwelt chiefly on the King’s misgovernment; the latter on hisflight. The former class considered him as having forfeitedhis crown; the latter as having resigned it. It was not easy todraw up any form of words which would please all whoseassent it was important to obtain; but at length, out of manysuggestions offered from different quarters, a resolution wasResoiu- framed which gave general satisfaction. It was moved thatdaring" King James the Second, having endeavoured to subvert theDie throne constitution of the kingdom by breaking the original contractbetween King and people, and, by the advice of Jesuits andother wicked persons, having violated the fundamental laws,and having withdrawn himself out of the kingdom, had ab-dicated the government, and that the throne had therebybecome vacant.

This resolution has been many times subjected to cri-ticism as minute and severe as was ever applied to any sen-tence written by man: and perhaps there never was a sentencewritten by man which would bear such criticism less. That aKing by grossly abusing his power may forfeit it is true. Thata King, who absconds without making any provision for theadministration, and leaves his people in a state of anarchy,may, without any violent straining of language, be said tohave abdicated his functions is also true. But no accuratewriter would affirm that long continued misgovernment anddesertion, added together, make up an act of abdication. Itis evident too that the mention of the Jesuits and other eviladvisers of James weakens, instead of strengthening, the caseagainst him. For surely more indulgence is due to a manmisled by pernicious counsel than to a man who goes wrongfrom the mere impulse of his own mind. It is idle, however,to examine these memorable words as we should examine achapter of Aristotle or of Hobbes. Such words are to be con-sidered, not as words, but as deeds. If they effect that whichthey are intended to effect, they are rational, though theymay be contradictory. If they fail of attaining their end, they