When Count Struensee had the fortune, favour, and honour to come to the Danish court and stand well there, he probably took the Danish and Norwegian subjects for such cattle, that they might be called together and led to the shambles by a cabinet resolution of his, without being allowed to murmur, for in no other way can we explain his daring to undertake such an enterprise. Any man who presumes to manage the affairs of a kingdom, and direct them instead of the king, must be acquainted with the duties of the king to his subjects, and the duties of the subjects to the king. He must be a simple doctor who merely knows that there is a heart in the human body, but not where it is seated, and what parts are connected with it or have influence over it. Any man who did not wish merely to play the harlequin, but maintain his honour, ought to be acquainted with the duties of the regent and the people. Struensee could have seen in the Danish and Norwegian code, and in the _Lex Regia_ of Frederick III. of blessed memory, signed on November 14, 1665, that sovereignty, but not despotism, is granted to the king. There is not a subject of his Majesty who would feel offended because the king rules with unlimited power, for that is his right. Any one who asserts that the king can alter the _Lex Regia_ without the assent of the nation, and against the will of all classes, is a traitor, hypocrite, and scoundrel. The royal law, which the kings must obey, and which is a _sine quâ non_ on their part and that of their subjects, cannot be altered by the king, without at once overthrowing and restricting his rule, for it is ordered (as Frederick III. could order his descendants as _primus adquirens_), that the royal law shall not be altered, and the right to the monarchy is solely derived from this supreme royal law, as an immutable fundamental law for both kingdoms. (Wiwet here quotes the two passages of the _Lex Regia_, 3 and 26, referring to this. As I have given them already literally, they may be omitted here.)