There was, indeed, as I have already said, what may be called a rebellion; but it was a rebellion against--not the Nabob, but in favor of the lawful prince of the country,--against the usurpers of his authority and the destroyers of his country.
Burke argues that the rebellion was not against the Nabob but in support of the rightful prince, highlighting the complexities of power dynamics.
Share
More from Edmund Burke
The House of Lords, for instance, is not morally competent to dissolve the House of Commons,--no, nor even to dissolve itself, nor to abdicate, if it would, its portion in the legislature of the kingdom.
Unquestionably there was at the Revolution, in the person of King William, a small and a temporary deviation from the strict order of a regular hereditary succession; but it is against all genuine principles of jurisprudence to draw a…
If kings who did not owe their crown to the choice of their people had no title to make laws, what will become of the statute De tallagio non concedendo? of the Petition of Right? of the act of Habeas Corpus?
They look on the frame of their commonwealth, such as it stands, to be of inestimable value; and they conceive the undisturbed succession of the crown to be a pledge of the stability and perpetuity of all the other members of our…
Other voices in this conversation
