Catholics are admitted to seats in the House of Commons, and to other offices.

34. The numbers, both of Lords and Commons, are unsettled, but are generally on the increase. Within fifteen or twenty years past, the House of Lords has consisted of 426 members. Among these have been reckoned 2 English archbishops, 24 bishops, and 4 representative Irish bishops. One of these last is probably an archbishop. There were also 25 dukes, 4 of whom were of royal blood; 19 marquises; 109 earls; 18 viscounts; 181 barons; and 16 Scottish and 28 Irish peers. In the House of Commons, at the same time, were 471 members from England, of whom 324 were chosen by boroughs, 143 by counties, and 4 by the two universities of Oxford and Cambridge; 29 from Wales, 14 chosen by boroughs, and 15 by counties; 105 from Ireland, 39 chosen by boroughs, 64 by counties, and 2 by the university of Dublin; and 53 from Scotland, 23 chosen by cities and boroughs, and 30 by counties; total in the Commons, 658. The constituency is about 1,200,000, or one twentieth of the population. Total in Parliament, 1,084.

II. Executive Department.

1. The Executive power is vested in a single person, the king or queen. The crown is hereditary, or descendible to the next heir, according to a fixed rule of succession. This rule it is not important to state here particularly; but we may observe that males and females alike succeed to the throne, although males have the preference; for a son succeeds in preference to his elder sister. Still, regard is had to the direct

What is said of the numbers of members in the British parliament? In what is the executive power vested? State the rule of succession.

line, for a daughter in that succeeds in preference to a son in a collateral branch. It is only when the line becomes extinct that heirs are sought in the families of brothers or sisters of any past monarch.

2. The Parliament also has a degree of authority over this matter. An instance or two will be sufficient to be noticed. When James II became a papist, and departed out of the kingdom, the throne became vacant. On this occasion Parliament settled the succession upon William and Mary, and the survivor of them. William was a descendant of Charles I, and Mary was the oldest daughter of James II, the papist. They ordained that the crown should descend to the heirs of the said Mary, or in default thereof, to Anne, the second daughter of James II, and her heirs; and in default of such issue, to the heirs of William. The princes William, Mary, and Anne all dying without issue, Parliament again interposed, and fixed the succession on Sophia, the grand-daughter of James II; but as she died before Anne, her son, George I, succeeded to that princess.

3. King Egbert came to the throne about the year 800. Under him was formed the union known as the Saxon heptarchy. From him the Saxon princes regularly inherited the throne for over two hundred years, to Edmund Ironside. From him Canute, of Denmark, seized the kingdom, in whose family the regal power continued for three reigns, when Edward the Confessor, a brother of Edmund Ironside, was placed on the throne. This was partly owing to the disturbance of the times, for Edmund had a son Edward, the true Saxon heir, in exile. On the death of Edward the Confessor, without issue, William the Norman, claiming under a grant from Edward, and Harold, another

What authority has parliament over this matter? When was it ever exercised?

Give some account of the succession from the time of Egbert.

aspirant to the throne, contended for the government. The fate of battle gave the throne to William. After various and some violent changes, and alliances by marriage, the Saxon line was partially restored in Henry II, and still farther in James I. So that the present royal family are lineal descendants both of king Edmund Ironside, and of William the Norman, otherwise called the Conqueror.

4. The king alone has the power to convene the Parliament. It is true that regard must be had to the necessity of the case; as was shown by the parliament that restored Charles II, which met a month before his return; also of that which met and disposed of the crown and kingdom on the abdication of James II, in 1688,

5. The law ascribes sovereignty to the king; i. e. it places him in subjection to no power on earth; but makes him the head, both civil and ecclesiastical. Hence no suit or action can be brought against the king, as both his person and property are sacred, let his measures be what they may. The remedy for the subject is, in a civil case, to petition the king for redress; which it is understood that his chancellor will give as a matter of grace. And in a case of public oppression or crime, as the king does nothing without his counsellors, they may be impeached and punished; and parliament has a right to address the king, and to know by whose advice any measure is pursued. But until the constitution is attacked, the maxim is that the king can do no wrong. If, however, the fundamental, or organic law, should be violated by the king, the precedent supplied in the history of James II, would seem to apply to the case.

What power has the king alone? What regard to necessity must be had?

What does the law ascribe to the king? Who is responsible if he does wrong?

6. The king not only cannot do wrong, but he cannot mean wrong; and not only so, but he is above the common frailties, weaknesses, and follies of mankind. If he acts unadvisedly, weakly, or foolishly, the law presumes that he was deceived; and, if necessary, the courts set aside such acts as void on account of the deception. In the same strain, no claim of the king can be outlawed, and he is never a minor, or under age. In cases of need, however, a protector, or regent, may be appointed for a limited time.

7. The law also considers the king immortal. There is no interregnum on the death of the reigning prince, but the kingship passes to his heir.

8. The law considers the king as absolute. In the rejection or approval of bills, the making of treaties, the coining of money, the creation of peers, the pardon of offences, etc., he can do as he pleases, subject only to express constitutional limitations, which owe all their binding force to his approval. Within the forms of the constitution, he is irresistible and absolute. It is he that sends and receives ambassadors, forms treaties, leagues, alliances, etc.; declares war, makes peace, administers justice; is the fountain of all authority; and, in fine," whatever is done, he is the doer of it.” Something like an exception may be found in the authority of ministers to grant letters of marque and reprisal, where a nation refuses justice, and the king refuses to declare war for just cause.

9. We have already seen that the king is considered as one branch of the National Legislature. His power is never exercised in Parliament by presiding over, or joining in their deliberations, but in bringing business before the Legislature, and approving or rejecting bills that have passed both houses. It is remarkable, how

Give some farther account of the manner in which the law views the king.

How is the king's power exercised in parliament? How long since he has rejected a bill that has passed both houses?

ever, that if, after all that the king can effect against a bill by his influence, by the creation of new peers, or by chartering new corporations to be represented in Parliament, it still passes, he considers the current in its favor too strong for him safely to resist; so that there has not been an instance of the king's vetoing, or rejecting a bill which has passed both houses of Parliament, since the year 1692.

10. The king is commander-in-chief of all the land and naval forces of the kingdom. He only has power to declare war, to build fleets, and to raise armies. It is he that establishes forts, arsenals, and places of strength, and of all such places he has supreme command. It is he that appoints ports, havens, and all places for the ingress and egress of merchandize. He erects beacons, light-houses, and other sea-marks, necessary for the safety of ships.

11. The king is the fountain of justice. All writs are issued in his name; especially in criminal cases, he is the prosecutor. Hence it is necessary to consider the king, or rather the regal office, as every where present in his dominions. He only issues proclamations; he is the fountain of honor, office, and privilege, and erects and disposes of them. He appoints and receives foreign ministers; he establishes public markets, fairs, and places of buying and selling; he fixes the standard of weights and measures; and he alone coins money, and regulates the value of it.

12. Finally, the king is the head of the church. It is he that convenes, prorogues, regulates, and dissolves, all ecclesiastical convocations. Of course, he must be a protestant himself, and in his coronation oath he swears not only to "govern the people of England and its dominions according to law; to cause, as far as

Of what is he commander-in-chief? As such what does he do? Of what is he the fountain? What does he do in such capacity? What relation does the king sustain to the church? What of course must he be? What does he swear in his coronation oath?