A state of contempt is not a state for a prince: better get rid of him at once.
Edmund Burke: “A state of contempt is not a state for a prince: better get rid of him at once.”
On the recordJanuary 1, 1790
Said by
Edmund Burke
Source
gutenberg.orgEditor's note · Context
From his critique of the French Revolution, Burke argues that a prince stripped of dignity and held in contempt serves no purpose.
Share
More from Edmund Burke
Jan 1, 1790
Those who are servants in name, as well as in effect, do not like to be told of their situation, their duty, and their obligations.
Jan 1, 1790
By adhering in this manner and on those principles to our forefathers, we are guided, not by the superstition of antiquarians, but by the spirit of philosophic analogy.
Jan 1, 1790
But the course of succession is the healthy habit of the British Constitution.
Jan 1, 1790
As he is not to obey us, but we are to obey the law in him, our Constitution has made no sort of provision towards rendering him, as a servant, in any degree responsible.





