act of the crown? He thought that none of their lordships would advocate
such an absurdity. But the subject and the country were in full
possession of all these rights; and if the Queen's right to a coronation
were put upon the same footing, it would be equally clear that she
possessed it, and that the necessity of granting it was as obvious as it
was imperative. He had heard it said that her Majesty could not claim
the honours of a coronation by prescription, because she was not a
corporation. This, however, he denied. Her Majesty certainly could
prescribe, for what business had they to call her Majesty less a
corporation than the King? But still, supposing her not to be a
corporation, she had a right to prescribe as a functionary, holding a
high dignity and situation. This was evident from Baron Comyn's Digest,
who, under the title of _Prescription_, lays it down that such a
functionary can claim by prescription. In conclusion, Mr. Brougham said,
their lordships would sit in dignified judgment on the opinion given by
the great lawyers of the nineteenth century; and, as he firmly believed,
finding they had no difficulties to explain, perceiving that they had no
obscurities to clear up, they would not be under the necessity of
referring to those remote periods of our history, to which he had been
obliged to allude, but would look back to the first decision that ever
had been given on this question, with that decided confidence which the
names of those privy counsellors before whom the case was argued would
in after-times command--a judgment, which he ventured confidently to
pronounce, would not derogate from the high character they had so long
maintained.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account