Although the authority of the crown had been exercised with very little restraint during the three preceding reigns, the succession to it, or even the principles of the succession, were but ill ascertained: so that a doubt might justly have arisen, whether the crown was not in a great measure elective.
Burke discusses the uncertain nature of the English crown's succession, highlighting its potential for civil unrest.
Share
More from Edmund Burke
When such an unwarrantable maxim is once established, that no throne is lawful but the elective, no one act of the princes who preceded this era of fictitious election can be valid.
Though a king may abdicate for his own person, he cannot abdicate for the monarchy.
Who could conceive that men who are habitually meddling, daring, subtle, active, of litigious dispositions and unquiet minds, would easily fall back into their old condition of obscure contention, and laborious, low, and unprofitable…
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.
Other voices in this conversation
