will, but one who as wife and mother has shown herself possessed of the highest qualities of womanhood. The rejoicings which take place throughout the Empire on the Queen's birthday are no idle ceremony. They indicate a depth of national sentiment which requires only the touch of suitable occasion to burst into flame. The veneration which attaches to Her Majesty has added a new bulwark to the institution of monarchy, and will strengthen the likelihood of the Crown remaining the strongest visible link of Imperial unity. In the outlying portions of the Empire we are inclined to make the Sovereign the symbol of the race, and this feeling receives additional force when the position is filled by one who unites so many claims to honour. The Premier of New South Wales recently gave eloquent utterance to this view when he declared that behind every accent of 'God save the Queen' is an earnest petition to our Divine Father that He may always bless the kindred millions who inhabit the British Empire.

Turning to the Conservative Australasian, its commentary is as follows:

Every lover of his country must be gratified by the enthusiasm which has welled up spontaneously in the Jubilee celebrations, and we venture to say that it will have its effect also on other nations who are looking on. There are two aspects in which the Jubilee may be regarded-one, as a tribute to Her Majesty, whose character as Queen and woman compels the highest admiration and affection; the other, as an outburst of patriotic feeling towards the Empire of which the colonies are proud to form a part. These two aspects, fortunately, cannot be wholly severed. The Queen stands as a sign or symbol of the Empire over which she presides, and the most intimate narratives of her life must always bear reference to this high function. Her personal character fitly symbolises the character of the nation. We may trace in both the desire to adhere to the rule of justice and of right; the industry which does not shirk the daily task; the practical insight which works its way through the most difficult circumstances; and the undoubting faith in the greatness and the permanence of British rule. And the Queen's desire for the welfare of her people has been repeated in the growing sympathies and humanitarian tendencies of the present day. The whole Empire, therefore, from North to South and from East to West, has gladly united in a celebration such as has not been witnessed before. But beyond loyalty to the Queen is the feeling of loyalty to the Empire itself. To superficial observers it has seemed that the colonies were becoming more and more remote from the mother country in proportion as they developed new interests and associations of their own. And when they acquired the right of self-government, and insisted on exercising it—often with slight regard to the interests of Great Britain-even acute intellects were sometimes tempted to ask how much was lacking to a complete severance. But beneath the differences lay a hidden unity. The evolution of the Empire has shown itself both in differentiation and integration. Any attempt to restrict the liberty of the colonies would have led to contention, and finally to separation; but the freedom which has been encouraged has confirmed a union which is all the stronger because it is wholly voluntary. The ties of mutual interest, which might alone suffice to bind us to the mother country, are not greatly considered. The bond of union consists rather in the sympathy with Imperial aims, and the pride of forming one great nation.

The Weekly Times, issued from the office of the Herald, expressed the same glowing sentiments of loyalty to the Throne and the same resolve to remain united to the Empire.

The Diamond Jubilee of the great and good Queen has been right loyally and most joyously celebrated by her people. Throughout her world-wide dominions

there have been whole-hearted rejoicings that Victoria has been spared to complete her sixtieth year of wise and beneficent rule.

It is in these searching days of a critical democracy no mean achievement for a monarch to endure successfully the crucial test of sixty years of rule, under the close and constant observation of a world quick and eager to be censorious concerning the aims and actions of those in high places. It is a magnificent tribute to Queen Victoria's nobility of character, spotless purity of life, wholesome moral influence, high abilities, and patriotic wisdom, that at the celebration of her Diamond Jubilee the constitutional ruler of the greatest Empire the world has ever known is most affectionately and enthusiastically acclaimed by her own people, as well as honoured and eulogised by the rulers and races of foreign lands. All the world's judgment is not at fault, and the British nation, looking back over the history of the last sixty years, realises that in Victoria they have had the best of Sovereigns, one who has admirably fulfilled her high and responsible duties, and who has wrought her people lasting good.

In celebrating the Diamond Jubilee, divisions have been overcome, differences have been forgotten, and distances, no matter how great, have been as though they were not. The British have been united as one people the wide world over: all classes, all parties, and all denominations being borne together by a mighty impulse of patriotic sentiment. From Great Britain in the North to the Greater Britain in the South, from the magnificent Dominion in the West to the mighty Empire of the East, and from among Britain's countless islands of the seas, there has been made manifest to the world a people self-impelled to unity by the common sentiment of personal loyalty and national feeling. The full import of this great event history can only tell in the coming years.

It will be seen that the impressions which have been made by the imposing incidents of the Diamond Jubilee have been the same in Victoria as at home. The event has proved the wisdom and the tact exhibited by the Imperial Government, and in an eminent degree by the Secretary of State under whose fostering care it is the privilege of the colonies to have been placed. The invitation to the premiers and to the detachments representing the colonial troops, and, above all, the popular welcome which the representatives of the colonies have received in the Old Country, have cemented for all time the union of hearts between the mother country and her daughter States. That union of hearts is the bed-rock upon which any formal engagements for mutual succour and support, whether in peace or war, must rest. If the foundation is sound, the security and permanence of the superstructure are assured.

To have been permitted to take some part in the proceedings of the past week, in a colony brimming over with loyalty to the Queen and warm affection for the Motherland, is a consolation-I could not say an inadequate consolation-for separation from home and country in the service of the Empire.

MELBOURNE: July 6, 1897.

BRASSEY.

'LEGITIMISM' IN ENGLAND

THE visit this year of H.R.H. Prince Rupert of Bavaria to the Court of St. James's is an historical event that has much of the picturesque about it, for he comes as the representative of the de jure sovereign of these realms to congratulate the de facto sovereign on having reigned so long.

Without wishing to moralise upon the irony of fate displayed by such a circumstance, we may perhaps make the event serve as a pretext for a brief examination of Legitimism in England and of the views and objects of those who profess this political faith. In France and in Spain the Legitimist is at any rate taken seriously.

In England, according to the man in the street, and according to others in other places, the Legitimist is simply an idiot who is not worth further consideration. Yet among English Legitimists are many men of whose sanity there can be no question, whose integrity is beyond dispute, and whose loyalty to Queen Victoria is unimpeachable. What they are doing in this galley it is the object of this short article to show.

In the first place, perhaps, it may be suggested that the use of the word Jacobite' in connection with Legitimism in this country is not very happy. It is employed because of the historical associations which appeal so strongly to the English as a nation. But it does not necessarily imply, as is too commonly supposed, that the Legitimists in this country aim solely at the restoration of the House of Stuart. But for the peculiar local associations of the term 'Jacobite,' the Legitimist in England might, with more propriety, style himself a Carlist, and thereby identify himself more closely with his brother in France or Spain. The point, which in fairness ought not to be lost sight of, is that the Jacobite is simply an Englishman who professes the faith of Legitimism; a member, it might be otherwise expressed, of the English branch of a catholic or universal party.

The Legitimist in England is an upholder of the monarchical principle because he believes it to be one divinely appointed for certain social conditions, and also because in the particular social conditions which this country has evolved it has been found to work

satisfactorily. He also, and for similar reasons, believes in the principle of primogeniture, and linking the two together, as any man of ordinary intelligence would link them, he believes that their combination has the best possible results, while their severance the one from the other, as they are now severed in England, is an illogical state of affairs which must ultimately end in confusion.

From the Legitimist's point of view, either principle may be accepted by itself and independently of the other. Social systems may, and do, exist where the monarchical principle is accepted, but where the sovereign is elected. Social systems may, and do, exist where the principle of primogeniture is accepted, but where the monarchical principle is rejected altogether. But a social system where the monarchical principle and the principle of primogeniture are both accepted, but where the sovereign is yet not the one entitled by the laws of primogeniture to occupy the throne, is an anomaly the justification of which must be sought outside logical reason. From this aspect the Legitimist in England appears more sane than they who call him mad. The law of gavelkind and the law 'regulating' the succession to the throne are the only two exceptions to the rule by which the eldest son succeeds his father, and, failing issue, the succession is vested in the elder female line. Questions of fact only are involved, and fortunately these are plain enough. By the law of primogeniture the sovereign of these realms should be Mary the Fourth and Third, née Mary Theresa Henrietta Dorothea, Archduchess of Austria-Este-Modena, and wife of H.R.H. Prince Louis of Bavaria. Of her genealogical right to the throne as representative of the senior female line of the Royal House of Stuart, the male line having become extinct on the death of the Cardinal King Henry the Ninth, there is no dispute. The facts are stated every year in Whitaker's Almanack for all who run to read. The Hanoverian dynasty, being derived from a daughter of James the First, has no right to the throne until the whole issue of Charles the First is exhausted, which is not yet the case.

The title, therefore, of the present dynasty is a parliamentary title only; and making for the moment the very large assumption that in the conduct of human affairs expediency is a doctrine to be preached to the vulgar, we will merely direct attention to the proceedings in the Convention Parliament of 1688 which made this title worth as much as it is. Since this part of the investigation resolves itself only into a recapitulation of facts, we will quote verbatim from the Legitimist Kalendar of 1895, pp. 98 sqq., as the figures given there are correct, and the story is plainly told without any show of advocacy or special pleading:

The Prince of Orange, having assumed the government (December 26, 1688), summoned a Convention Parliament to meet at Westminster on January 22 following. When it assembled it was found that about two-thirds of the Lower

House were Whigs, and after a long debate the Commons resolved (January 28)— 'That King James II., having endeavoured to subvert the constitution of this kingdom, by breaking the original compact between the King and the people, and by the advice of Jesuits and other wicked persons having violated the fundamental laws, and having withdrawn himself out of the kingdom, has abdicated the government, and that the throne is thereby vacant.' This was carried with only three negatives, the Royalists offering very little opposition, being naturally discouraged by the flight of the King, and probably considerably overawed by the Dutch Guards stationed in and around Westminster, and the Lords' concurrence was desired. The next day (29th) the Whigs had a further triumph in the Commons, when it was resolved unanimously-That it hath been found by experience inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant Kingdom to be governed by a Popish prince.'

In the Upper House there was much less unanimity, the Tories there being much more numerous in proportion than in the Commons. They agreed to accept the second resolution of the Lower House, but this, as it was pointed out, was only an abstract proposition;' and then, before debating the first resolution, they decided to discuss whether if the throne were vacant, 'a regency, with the administration of royal power under the style of King James II., during the life of the said King James, be the best and safest way to preserve the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this Kingdom.' This was supported by Archbishop Sancroft, by Lords Nottingham, Clarendon, &c., and by all those who really wished for James's return, as well as by those who, while wishing to exclude him from the government, did not consider that Parliament had power to depose him; and was opposed by Halifax and Danby, and was only lost by a majority of two-51 to 49.

The question of a regency having been settled, the Lords returned to the original resolution of the Commons, and resolved by a majority of seven, 53 to 46, that there was an original compact between the King and the people. They concurred without much debate on the rest of the Commons' vote until they came to the clause that King James had 'abdicated' the government, for which they substituted 'deserted.' They next omitted by a majority of fourteen, 55 to 41, the final and most important clause in the Commons' resolution--namely that 'the throne was thereby vacant.'

The Tories in the Lower House now recovered their courage on perceiving that the action of the Lords was favourably received in the country, and also by observing that the King's party out of doors had become much stronger than it had hitherto appeared; and they mustered 151 against 282 in favour of agreeing with the Lords in omitting the clause about the vacancy of the throne.

Such was the position of affairs, when William, seeing that the crown was about to slip from his grasp, sent for Halifax, Danby, and the other political chiefs, and explained to them that he would not consent to be regent, neither would he agree to share the government with his wife for her lifetime; and he requested them to come to some decision at once. This explicit declaration immediately brought about a change. Some professed fear of a civil war; others that William would seize the crown if it were not granted to him. Accordingly at the conference which followed between the two Houses the Lords gave way to force of circumstances, and agreed not to insist on their original vote. By a majority of fifteen, 62 to 47, they now decided that the throne was vacant, and followed this up by a resolution that the Prince and Princess of Orange should be declared King and Queen of England and all the dominions thereunto belonging. Forty peers, including twelve bishops out of seventeen present, formally protested. On February 13 the Commons, having made William accept a Bill of Rights, agreed to this, and William and Mary were proclaimed King and Queen.

'And yet,' says Hallam in his Constitutional History, 'only eight years before,