OCR Text |
Show ( ‘22 " " " " " ( 23 l ) " of long duration, which, by the original " formation of its confiitution, is not frequent- fee no abfiraé‘c reafon, which can be given, why the fame power that made and repealed the high-commifiion court and the flat» chamber might not revive them again: but the madnefs would be as unquei'tionable as " pies," fo whenever this happens to us, as it often has done, and, I truf'r, is again not afar " the competence * of that parliament which off from us, thefe precedents, like f0 many " {hould make fuch attempts." clouds difperferd, only ferve to fhew, that although they may darken the face of the coni'titution, they can never extinguifh its light. Furthermore: " The king's negative to bills is one of the mod " indifputed of the royal prerogatives, and it " extends to all cafes whatfoever; but the ex- " ly renewed or drawn back to its firit princi- But a word or two more particularly of thefe " ercife is wifely foreborne." Moreover: " We " know that the convocation of the clergy had precedents. " formerly been called, and fat with nearly as alterations that have been made in the ef'tablifh- " much regularity to bufmefs as parliament it~ ed religion, in order to fhew the right of Par- " felf. It is now called for form only." Thefe then are what Icall precedents without authority, but upholding error: for diftinguifhing, as muf'c be done, between rig/3t and power, parliament cannot exercife a power without a right Much firefs has been laid on the liament to omnipotency : it is the doctrine of Sir William Blackitone*: but as the moft able chymiit cannot extract that from any given thing, who}: does not exift in its nature, fo is this precedent, for this reafon, by no means a to that power; or if it does, it is an zgfurpatz‘on cafe in point. In the firft place, religion has ofpower, which fooner or later never fails of redrefs. Precedents therefore of aéts of parlia- ment, repugnant to the fundamental principles nothing to do with the civil rights of the State. It is fet apart from them, and belongs to the Church I. The civil rights of the State of the conf'titution, are no proofs of the fupre- are of a temporal nature; they are pafitz‘va, they macy or omnipotency of parliament, but in- ftances only of the abufe of parliament ; " and " as no government," fays Machiavel, " can be ‘ ' n I I It Is prefumed that znrompetence as here meant, and that rompe"tome is an error of the prefs. u Of " Wide his Commentaries, vol. i. p. 161. I I am aware how much I here differ from the very able Prelate, who is for hameifing Church and State together, like coach and horfes, that He as one of the drivers may enjoy the fmack of the whip; a {mack which he cannot forget, and which he gave me reafon to remember when I was atWeRminRer {choc} : B 4 but |