derived from civil accomplishments; from the refined politics of the statesman; or the literary efforts of genius and erudition. These bestow, and within certain bounds, ought to bestow, eminence and distinction on men. They discover talents which in themselves are shining; and which become highly valuable, when employed in advancing the good of mankind. Hence, they frequently give rise to fame. But a distinction is to be made between fame and true honour. The former is the loud and noisy applause ; the latter, a more silent and internal homage. Fame floats on the breath of the multitude; honour rests on the judgment of the thinking. Fame may give praise, while it witholds esteem. True honour implies esteem mingled with respect. The one regards particular distinguished talents; the other looks up to the whole character. Hence, the statesman, the orator, or the poet, may be famous; while yet the man himself is far from being honoured. We envy his abilities. We wish to rival them. But we would not choose to be classed with him who possesses them. Instances of this sort are too often found in every record of ancient or modern history. "From all this it follows, that, in order to discern where man's true honour lies, we must look, not to any adventitious circumstances of fortune; not to any single sparkling quality; but to the whole of what forms a man; what entitles him, as such, to rank high among that class of beings to which he belongs; in a word, we must look to the mind and the soul. A mind superior to fear, to selfish interest and corruption; a mind governed by the principles of uniform rectitude and integrity; the same in prosperity and adversity; which no bribe can seduce, nor terror overawe; neither by pleasure melted into effeminacy, nor by distress sunk into dejection: such is the mind which forms the distinction and eminence of man.-One, who in no situation of life, is either ashamed or afraid of discharging his duty, and acting his proper part with firmness and constancy; true to the God whom he worships, and true to the faith in which he professes to believe; full of affection to his brethren of mankind; faithful to his friends, generous to his enemies, warm with compassion to the unfortunate; self-denying to little private interests and pleasures, but zealous for public interest and happiness; magnanimous, without being proud; humble, without being mean; just, without being harsh; simple in his manners, but manly in his feelings; on whose word we can entirely rely; whose countenance never deceives us; whose professions of kindness are the effusions of his heart; one, in fine, whom, independently of any views of advantage, we should choose for a superior, could trust in as a friend, and could love as a brother-this is the man, whom in our heart, above all others, we do, we must honour." A noble instance of the true honour of a soldier, is recorded of Norby, Grand Admiral of Denmark. When his king and commander, Christian II. ordered him to assassinate Christine, "No," replied Norby, "this employment is not suited to me; I am a soldier, not an executioner. I have learnt to obey you, but without shame, and without crime. Command me, and, if it be necessary, I will brave a thousand deaths; spare neither my property nor my life, for they belong to my King.-MY HONOUR ALONE BE LONGS TO MYSELF." The king is called the fountain of honour, because he has the privilege of bestowing titles and dignities, which raise some men above others; but the truest honour depends upon merit; and it is supposed that sovereigns bestow their favours on such as deserve them; but if the contrary should happen, the rank or precedence may be given, though the real honour be wanting. This is, however, too nice a point for discussion; and, therefore, taking honour in the common acceptation, it is due to all persons in authority, as princes, generals, prelates, officers of state, &c. &c. OF THE KING. THIS is the most universal of all titles, and is derived from the Saxon word kaning, and that from can, intimating power; or ken, knowledge, wherewith every sovereign should especially be invested; he having ever been of great reverence, being by law esteemed God's vicegerant on earth, ascribing various perfections to him, not belonging to any other man. It has been the custom of some of the principal monarchs of Europe to add some distinguishing epithet to the title of King; thus, the King of Persia had, anciently, the appellation of Great King; the King of France has that of The Most Christian King; and the King of Spain, The Most Catholic King. The Kings of England had, by the Lateran council, under Pope Julius II. the title of Christiauissimus conferred on them; and that of Defender of the Faith was added by Pope Leo X. The title of Grace was first given to our kings about the reign of Henry IV.; in Henry VI.'s time, it was altered to Excellent Grace; Henry VII. was addressed by that of Highness; and Henry VIII. by that of Majesty. This afterwards became Sacred Majesty; and is now Most Sacred Majesty. The king's title is, "By the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and of Hanover, King, Defender of the Faith." In all public instruments and letters, the King styles himself "We;" though, till the time of King John, he spoke in the singular number. The successors of Charlemagne, in the empire of the west, were accustomed to associate with themselves in the government, the person whose election they wished to secure to succeed themselves, by crowning him King of the Romans. This power of conferring royalty has been claimed by the emperor, in modern times; and was exercised by Leopold, in the case of the Elector of Brandenburg, whom he raised to the dignity of King of Prussia. The other European princes refused to acknowledge this title for some time; but, at the Treaty of Utrecht, they all agreed to admit it. The late Emperor of France, who wished to restore the dignity of the Western Emperors in his own person, exercised several of the privileges of that office. He created his son King of the Romaus; and elevated to the rank of Kings, the Electors of Saxony and Wirtemburg; the title of the latter has since been recognised, and Holland and Hanover have been added to the regal governments of Europe. The Hungarians formerly gave the name of King to their Queen Mary, to avoid the infamy which the laws of that country cast upon those who are governed by women; accordingly, she bore the title of King Mary, till her marriage with Sigismund, at which time she took the title of Queen. The supreme executive power of the British dominions is vested, by the English laws, in a single person, the king or queen; for it matters not to which sex the crown descends, The grand fundamental maxim upon which the jus coronæ, or right of succession to the throne of Britain depends, Sir William Blackstone takes to be this: that the crown is, by common law, and constitutional custom, hereditary; and this in a manner peculiar to itself; but that the right of inheritance may, from time to time, be changed or limited by act of parliament; under which limitations the crown still continues hereditary, and descendible to the next heir, on the death of the last king. All regal governments must be either hereditary or elective; and as there is no instance, wherein the crown of England has ever been asserted to be elective (except the short interval, when Cromwell usurped, the authority under a different name, between the reigns of Charles I. and II.) it must of consequence be hereditary. Yet, in asserting this right, a jure-divino title to the throne is by no means intended. Such a title may be allowed to have subsisted under the theocratic establishments of Israel, in Palestine, but it never yet subsisted in any other country; save only so far as kingdoms, like other human fabrics, are subjected to the general and ordinary dispensations of Providence. Nor indeed have a jure-divino and hereditary right any necessary connexion with each other, as some nave very weakly imagined. for the person entitled to it, whether male or female, is imme- | domestic kind, as of the great community of the public, diately invested with all the ensigns, rights, and prerogatives which regulates and includes the rest. But, in the former, of sovereign power, by the general consent of the people; there is this advantage, that such suspicions, if false, prothe evidence of which general consent is, long and imme- ceed no further than jealousies and murmurs, which time morial usage. It became necessary to the freedom and will effectually suppress; or justice may remedy it by legal peace of the state, that a rule should be laid down, uniform means, by an appeal to those tribunals, to which every and permanent, in order to mark out, with precision, who member of society has virtually engaged to submit. Whereas, is that single person, to whom is committed, in subservience in the great and independent society, which every nation to the law of the land, the care and protection of the com- composes, there is no superior to resort to, but the law of munity; and to whom, in return, the duty and allegiance nature: no method to redress the infringement of that law, of every individual is due. but the actual exertion of force. As, therefore, between two nations complaining of mutual injuries, the quarrel can only be decided by the law of arms; so in one and the same nation, when the fundamental principles of their common union are supposed to be invaded, and more especially when the appointment of the chief magistrate is alleged to be unduly made, the only appeal that can be made, is to the sword; and the only process by which the appeal can be carried on, is that of a civil and intestine war. A hereditary succession to the crown is, therefore, now established in this, and most other countries, to prevent the periodical bloodshed and misery, which the history of ancient imperial Rome, and the modern experience of Poland, show us to be the consequence of elective kingdoms. The doctrine of hereditary right does by no means imply an indefeisible right to the throne. It is unquestionably in the power of the supreme legislative authority of this kingdom, the king and both houses of parliament, to defeat this hereditary right; and by particular entails, limitations, and provisions, to exclude the immediate heir, and vest the inheritance in any one else. This is strictly consonant to our laws and constitution; as may be gathered from the expressions so frequently used in our statute book, of "the king's majesty, his heirs, and successors." In which we may observe, that, as the word heirs necessarily implies an inheritance, or hereditary right generally subsisting in the royal person; so the word successors, distinctly taken, must imply," that this inheritance may sometimes be broken through, or that there may be a successor, without being the heir of the king. And this is extremely reasonable; for without such a power lodged somewhere, our polity would be very defective. Let us barely suppose so melancholy a case, as that the heir apparent should be a lunatic, an idiot, or otherwise incapable of reigning; how miserable would the condition of the nation be, if he were also incapable of being set aside! It is therefore necessary that this power be lodged somewhere; and it can be placed nowhere so properly, as in the two houses of parliament, by and with the consent of the reigning king; who, it is supposed, will not agree to any thing prejudicial to the rights of his own descendants. And, therefore, in the king, lords, and commons, in parliament assembled, our laws have expressly lodged it. The hereditary right which the laws of Britain acknowledge, owes its origin to the founders of our constitution, and to them only. This has been acquiesced in, by general consent; and ripened by degrees into common law: it is the very same title that every private man has to his own estate, for lands are not naturally descendible, any more than thrones; but the law has, for the benefit and peace of the public, established hereditary succession in the one, as well as in the other. It must be owned, an elective monarchy seems to be the most obvious and best suited of any, to the national principles of government, and the freedom of human nature; and accordingly we find from history, that, in the infancy and first rudiments of almost every state, the leader, chief magistrate, or prince, has usually been elective; and if the individuals who compose that state, could always continue true to first principles, uninfluenced by passion or prejudice, unassailed by corruption, and unawed by violence, elective succession would be as desirable in a kingdom, as it is in other inferior communities. The best, the wisest, and the bravest man would then be sure of receiving that crown which his endowments merited; and the sense of an unbiassed majority would be dutifully acquiesced by the few, who were of different opinions. But history and observation inform us, that elections of every kind are too often brought about by influence, partiality, and artifice; and even where the case is otherwise, these practices will be often suspected, and as constantly charged upon the successful, by a disappointed minority. This is an evil, to which all societies are liable, as well those of a private and However the crown may be limited or transferred, it still retains its descendible quality, and becomes hereditary in the wearer of it. Hence, in our law, the king is said never to die in his political capacity; though in common with other men, he is subject to mortality in his natural. On this principle, that the king commences his reign from the death of his predecessor, it hath been held, that compassing his death before coronation, or even before proclamation (he being king presently, and the proclamation and coronation only honourable ceremonies for the future notification thereof) is treason. 12 The principal duty of the king is, to govern the people according to law. The king ought not to be subject to man, but to God and the law; for the law maketh the king. Let the king therefore render to the law, what the law has invested in him with regard to others-dominion and power; for he is not truly a king, where will and pleasure rules, and not the law. The laws of England are the birthright of the people thereof; and all the kings and queens, who shall ascend the throne of this realm, ought to administer the government of the same according to the said laws; and all their officers and ministers ought to serve them respectively, according to the same. And therefore all the other laws and statutes of this realm, for securing the established religion, and the rights and liberties of the people thereof; and all other laws and statutes of the same now in force, are, by his majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons, and by the authority of the same, ratified and confirmed. The terms of the original contract between the king and people, are couched in the coronation oath, which is to be administered to every king and queen, who shall succeed to the crown of these realms, in the presence of all the people; who, on their parts, do reciprocally take the oath of allegiance to the crown. This splendid ceremony is, in magnificence, equal to its importance, and superior to any other. The oath is as follows. Archbishop or Bishop. Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the people of this kingdom of England, and the dominions thereunto belonging, according to the statutes of parliament agreed on, and the laws and customs of the same? King or Queen. I solemnly promise so to do. Archbishop or Bishop. Will you to your power cause law and justice, in mercy, to be executed in all your judgments? King or Queen. I will. Archbishop or Bishop. Will you, to the utmost of your power, maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel, and the Protestant reformed religion established by law? And will you preserve unto the bishops and clergy of this realm, and to the churches committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges as by law do or shall appertain unto them, or any of them? King or Queen. All this I promise to do. After this the king or queen, laying his or her hand upon the holy Gospels, says, "The things which I have here before promised I will perform and keep: so help me, God." And then kisses the book. There are many religious ceremonies attending the coronation: one of which is, the anointing with oil, a very ancient custom, of which Thomas á Becket has remarked: "Kings are anointed with oil on the head, breast, and arms; the first to signify their glory; the next, their sanctity; and the last, their power." The king is crowned with an imperial crown, which is put on his head by the Archbishop of Canterbury, who claims the office as a prerogative of his See. The most universal ensign of royalty is the sceptre, with which our sovereign is invested at his coronation, as a symbol of justice; and also a ring, to signify faithfulness; a bracelet, for good works; and a sword, for vengeance. See these respective terms in the Glossary. The above is the form of the coronation oath, as it is now prescribed by our law, which is indisputably a fundamental and express contract; though, doubtless, the duty of protection is impliedly as much incumbent on the sovereign before coronation as after; in the same manner as allegiance to the king becomes the duty of the subject, immediately on the descent of the crown, before he has taken the oath of allegiance, or whether he ever took it at all. And here we might observe, that the oath expresses all the duties which a monarch can owe to his people, viz. to govern according to law; to execute justice in mercy; and to maintain the established religion. And, with respect to the latter of these three branches, we may further remark, that, by the Act of Union, 5th Anne, c. 8, two preceding statutes are recited and confirmed; the one in the parliament of Scotland, and the other in the parliament of England; which enact, the former, that every king, at his accession, shall take and subscribe an oath, to preserve the protestant religion, and presbyterian church government, in Scotland; the latter, that, at his coronation, he shall take and subscribe a similar oath, to preserve the settlement of the church of England, within England, Ireland, Wales, and Berwick, and the territories thereunto belonging. In order to assist the king in the discharge of his duties, the maintenance of his dignity, and the execution of his prerogative, the law hath assigned him a diversity of councils to advise with. These are, his parliament, his peers, his privy council, and the judges. That the king may be enabled to maintain the executive government in due independence and vigour, and to discharge, with honour to himself, and benefit to his subjects, the duties of his high station, the constitution and laws have invested him with a variety of prerogatives. And here we may make this preliminary observation, that there cannot be a stronger proof of that genuine freedom which is the boast of this age and country, than the power of discussing and examining, with decency and respect, the limits of the king's prerogative. This was formerly considered as a high contempt in a subject; even the glorious Queen Elizabeth herself directed her parliament to abstain from judging of her prerogative, or meddling therewith. The nature of our constitution is, that of a limited monarchy, in which the legislative power is lodged in the king, lords, and commous; but the king is intrusted with the executive part, and from him all justice is said to flow: hence, he is styled the head of the commonwealth, supreme governor, parens patriæ, &c. But still he is to make the law of the land the rule of his government; that being the measure, as well of his power, as of the subject's obedience; for as the law asserts, maintains, and provides for, the safety of the king's royal person, crown, and dignity, and all his just rights, revenues, powers, and prerogatives; so it likewise declares and asserts the rights and liberties of the subject. Hence, it hath been established as a rule, that all prerogatives must be for the advantage of the people; otherwise, they ought not to be allowed by law. Although the king is the fountain of justice, and intrusted with the whole executive power of the law; yet he hath no power to alter the laws which have been established, and are the birthright of every subject; for by those very laws he is to govern; and as they prescribe the extent and bounds of his prerogative, so, in like manner, they declare and ascertain the rights and liberties of the people; and, therefore, admit of no innovation or change, but by act of parliament. By the word prerogative is understood, that special pre-other; but that king sealed with a seal of two lions; King eminence which the king hath over and above all other John was the first that bore three lions: and afterwards, persons, and out of the ordinary course of common law, in Edward III. quartered the arms of France, which were right of his royal diguity; such as, no costs shall be reco- continued till the Irish Union, 1st of January, 1801. vered against the king; that he can never be a joint-tenant; that his debt shall be preferred to that of a subject; that when the title of the king and that of a common person concur, the king's title shall be preferred. No distress can be made upon the king's possession; but he may distrain out of his fee in other lands, &c. and may take distresses in the highway. The meaning of the legislature, in using the terms empire and imperial, and applying them to the realm and crown of England, is only to assert that our king is equally sovereign aud independent, within these his dominions, as any emperor in his empire, and owes no kind of subjection to any other potentate upon earth. Hence it is, that no suit or action can be brought against the king, even in civil matters, because no court can have jurisdiction over him. Hence it is, likewise, that, by law, the person of the king is sacred, even though the measures pursued in his reign be completely tyrannical and arbitrary; for no way, much less to condemn him to punishment. If any foreign jurisdiction had this power, as was formerly claimed by the Pope, the independence of the kingdom would be no more; and if such a power were vested in any domestic tribunal, there would soon be an end of the constitution, by destroying the free agency of one of the constituent parts of the sovereign legislative power. An heir shall pay the king's debt, though he be not named in the bond; and the king's debt shall be satisfied before that of a subject, for which there is a prerogativewrit. But this is where the debt is in equal degree with that of the subject. Goods and chattels may go in succes-jurisdiction upon earth has power to try him in a criminal sion to the king, though they may not to any other sole corporation. In the hands of whomsoever the goods of the king come, their lands are chargeable, and may be seized for the same; and the king is not bound by sale of his goods in open market. No entry will bar the king; and no judgment is final against him, but with a salvo jure regis. The king may plead several matters, without being guilty of double pleading; and the party shall answer them all. In his pleading, he need not plead an act of parliament, as a subject is bound to do. He is not bound to join in demurrer on evidence, and the court may direct the jury to find the matter specially. The king's own testimony of any thing done in his presence, is of as high a nature and credit as any record; whence, in all original writs or precepts, he useth no other witness than himself. Debts due to the king are always to be satisfied in the first place, in case of executorship, &c.; and till his debt be discharged, he may protect the creditor from the arrests of others. He may distrain for the whole debt on a tenant that holds but a part of the land; may sue in what court he pleases, and distrain where he lists. In all cases where the king is plaintiff, his officers may enter with an arrest; and, if entrance be denied, break open a house, and seize the party; though, in other cases, a man's house is his castle, and has a privilege to protect him against all arrests. Moreover, no costs shall be recovered against the king; and the king can remove a joint-tenant. It is also held, that the king is, by his prerogative, universal occupant, as all property is presumed to have been originally in the crown; and that he partitioned it out, in large districts, to the great men who deserved well of him in the wars, and were able to advise him in time of peace. Hence, the king hath the direct dominion; and all lands are holden, mediately or immediately, from the crown. The law ascribes to the king, the attribute of sovereignty, or pre-eminence. He is said to have imperial dignity; and, in charters before the Conquest, is frequently styled Basileus, and Imperator; the titles respectively assumed by the emperors of the east and west. His realm is declared to be an empire, and his crown imperial, by many acts of parliament; which, at the same time, declare the king to be the supreme head of the realm, in matters both civil and ecclesiastical; and, of consequence, inferior to no man upon earth, dependent ou no man, accountable to no man. No king of England used any seal of arms, till the reign of Richard I. Before that time, the seal was, the king sitting in a chair of state on one side, and on horseback on the Are then, it may be asked, the subjects of England totally destitute of remedy, in case the crown should invade their rights, either by private injuries, or public oppressions? To this it may be answered, that the law has provided a remedy in both cases. As to private injuries, if any person has, in point of property, a just demand upon the king, he must petition him in his court of chancery, where his chancellor will administer right as a matter of grace, though not upon compulsion. As to cases of ordinary public oppression, where the vitals of the constitution are not attacked, the law has also assigned a remedy; for as the king cannot misuse his power without the advice of evil councellors, and the assistance of wicked ministers, these men may be examined and punished. The constitution has therefore provided, by means of indictment and parliamentary impeachment, that no man shall dare to assist the crown in contradiction to the law of the land. But, at the same time, it is a maxim in those laws, that the king himself can do no wrong; since it would be a great weakness and absurdity in any system of positive law, to define any possible wrong without any possible redress. Besides the attributes of sovereignty, the law also ascribes to the king, in his political capacity, absolute perfection. The king can do no wrong. This ancient and fundamental maxim is not to be understood as if every thing done by the government was of course just and lawful, but means only two things. First, that whatever is exceptionable in the conduct of public affairs is not to be imputed to the king, nor is he answerable for it personally to his people. Secondly, it means, that the prerogative of the crown extends not to do any injury: it is created for the benefit of the people, and therefore connot be exerted to their prejudice; or, perhaps, it means, that, although the king is subject to the passions and infirmities of other men, the constitution has prescribed no mode by which he can be made personally amenable for any wrong that he may actually commit. The law will, therefore, presume no wrong, where it has provided no remedy. The inviolability of the king is essentially necessary to the free exercise of those high prerogatives which are vested in him, not for his own private splendour and gratification, as the vulgar and ignorant are too apt to imagine, but for the security and preservation of the real happiness and liberty of his subjects. The king, moreover, is not only incapable of doing wrong, but also of thinking wrong; he can never mean to do an improper thing: in him is no folly or weakness. If, therefore, the crown should be induced to grant any franchise or privilege to a subject, contrary to reason, or any way prejudicial to the commonwealth, or a private person, the law will not suppose the king to have meant either an unwise or an injurious action; but declares that the king was deceived in his grant; and, therefore, such grant is rendered void, merely upon the foundation of fraud and deception, either by or upon those agents whom the crown has thought proper to employ. To the king, also, can be no stain or corruption of blood; for it the heir to the crown were attainted of treason or felony, and afterwards the crown should descend to him, thee would purge the attainder yw facto, Neither Can the king, in judgment of law, as king, ever be a mou, or wader age; and therefore his royal grants and asacute to act of parliament are good, though he has mut to be watural capacity attained the age of twenty-one. Au the exciene of these bouches of the royal prerogative, which meat this our sovereign lord, thus all perfect and immortal in his kingly capacity, with a number of authoritics and powers, consists the executive part of the governШень This is, by the constitution, wisely placed in a single hirl, for the sake of unanimity, strength, and despatch. The king of England is, therefore, not only the chief, but, properly, the sole magistrate of the nation; all others acting by commission from, and in due subordination to him. In the exertion of lawful prerogative, the king is, and ought to be absolute; that is, so far absolute that there is no legal authority that can either delay or resist him. He may reject what bills, make what treaties, create what peers, and pardon what offences he pleases; unless where the constitution hath expressly, or by evident consequence, laid down some exception or boundary, declaring that thus far the prerogative shall go, and no further. With regard to foreign concerns, the king is the delegate, or representative of his people; and as such, has the sole power of sending ambassadors to foreign states. It is also the king's pierogative to make treaties, leagues, and alliances with foreign states and princes; and to make war and peace. The king is considered, in the next place, as the generalissimo, or the first in military command in the kingdom; and, in this capacity, has the sole power of raising and regulating fleets and armies; building forts, and other places of strength; appointing ports and havens; erecting beacons and lighthouses within this realm; prohibiting the exportation of arms or ammunition out of this kingdom, under severe penalties; and, also, of confining his subjects to stay within the realm, or of recalling them when beyond the seas. In domestic affairs, the king is considered as the fountain of justice, and general conservator of the peace of the kingdom. However, by the fountain of justice, the law does not mean the author, or original, but only the distributor. Justice is not derived from the king, as from his free gift; but he is the steward of the public, to dispense it to whom it is due. In this capacity, the king alone has the right of erecting courts of judicature; and all jurisdictions of courts are, either mediately or immediately, derived from the crown. Thus, proceedings run generally in the king's uame; they pass under his seal, and are executed by his officers. The prerogative of issuing proclamations is vested in him alone. The king is likewise the fountain of honour, of office, and of privilege. Accordingly, he is intrusted with the sole power of conferring dignities and honours; so that all degrees of nobility, knighthood, and other titles, are received by immediate grants from the crown, either expressed in writing, by writs or letters patent, as in the creation of peers and baronets; or by corporeal investiture, as in the creation of a simple knight. And, as the king may create new titles, so he may create new offices; but with this restriction, that he cannot create new offices with new fees annexed to them, nor annex new fees to old offices; for this would be a tax upon the subject, which cannot be imposed, but by act of parliament. The king has also the prerogative of conferring privileges on private persons; such as granting place or precedence to any of his subjects; also the power to enfranchise an alien, and make him a denizen; and likewise the prerogative of erecting corporations. The king is also the arbiter of commerce. He can establish public marts, such as markets and fairs, and the tolls belonging to them; regulate weights and measures; and give to money, which is the medium of commerce, authority, or make it current. The coining of money is also the act of sovereign power; and the settling of the denomination or value, for which the coin is to pass current. The king may also, at any time, decry, or cry down, any coin of the kingdom, and make it no longer current. He has also custody of the persons and estates of idiots and lunatics; and to him revert all estates, when no heir appears. All treasure trove, (i. e. money, plate, or bullion, found, and the owners not known) belong to him; so alí waifs, estrays, wrecks, lands recovered from the sea, gol and silver mines, royal fishes, &c. belong to him. By the laws of England, the king is considered as the head and supreme governor of the national church. In virtue of this authority, he convenes, prorogues, restrains, regulates, and dissolves all ecclesiastical synods or convocations. He has the supreme right of patronage, called patronage paramount, over all the ecclesiastical benefices in England. From this prerogative, of being the head of the church, arises the king's right of nomination to vacant bishoprics, and certain other ecclesiastical preferments. The king can unite, separate, enlarge, or control the limits of bishoprics, or ecclesiastical benefices; and, by his letters, erect new bishoprics, colleges, &c. He can moderate the rigour of the law, according to equity, to pardon a man condemned by law, except in appeals of murder, and in cases of impeachment by the house of commons; and to interpret by his judges, in statutes and cases not defined by law. From the foregoing, it will appear, that the power of the king is subject to great limitations; but they are the limitations of wisdom, and the sources of dignity; being so far from diminishing his honour, that they add a particular glory to his crown; for while he is restrained from acting inconsistently with his own happiness, and that of the people, he has great prerogatives, and an almost boundless power of doing good. |