[18:1] "Law of the Constitution," 355. [19:1] The statement is made with this limitation because the Crown has always had inherent authority to legislate directly for Crown colonies acquired by conquest; but if the Crown once grants a representative legislature to such a colony without reserving its own legislative authority, it surrenders that authority over the colony forever. See Jenkyns, "British Rule and Jurisdiction Beyond the Seas," 4-6, 95; Campbell _vs._ Hall, Cowp., 204. [19:2] Coke's Reports, XII., 76. [20:1] Or more strictly to the Crown in Council. [21:1] Such as the hereditary Earl Marshal and Grand Falconer. [21:2] On the power of removal from an office held during good behaviour, and on the effect of the provision that the three classes of officers mentioned above may be removed upon the address of both Houses of Parliament, see Anson, "Law and Custom of the Constitution," II., 213-15. The references to Anson are to the 3 Ed. of Vol. I. (1897); the 2 Ed. of Vol. II. (1896). [22:1] Todd, "Parl. Govt. in England," 2 Ed. (1887), Ch. xiv. [22:2] See the later chapter on The Church. [22:3] _Cf._ Anson, "Law and Custom," II., 297-99; Dicey, "Law of the Constitution," 393. Heligoland was ceded to Germany by treaty in 1890, subject to the assent of Parliament, which was given by 53-54 Vic., c. 32. [24:1] "English Constitution," 2 Ed. (Amer.), Introd., 31. [24:2] Todd, "Parl. Govt. in England," I., 570. [25:1] "Const. Hist. of England," 4 Ed., I., 647. [25:2] 16 Car. I., c. 10. [25:3] It may be maintained that the right, if not already lost by disuse, was by implication, though not expressly, taken away by the Reform Acts of 1832, 1867 and 1885, which created new boroughs and disfranchised old ones. [25:4] See the debate in the Lords on the Wensleydale case. Hans., 3 Ser., CXL., _passim_. [26:1] The Victoria Station and Pimlico Railway Bill, Hans., 3 Ser., CLI., 586-89, 691-93, 797-98. See Todd, II., 392. CHAPTER II THE CROWN AND THE CABINET It is not within the province of this book to trace the process whereby the King became irresponsible both at law and before the nation, while the responsibility for his acts became transferred to his ministers. The story has been told by others far better than the writer could tell it, and the object here is only to note the results of that process in the existing constitution. [Sidenote: The King can do no Wrong at Law;]