Sarah Bradford Quotes
I do feel sorry for the Prince of Wales, waiting and waiting, while his mother looks better and better. She's not staying on because of any concern about his abilities as a king. The Queen simply feels she must do her duty, and she's never even contemplated abdication.
Kirka, Danica. "Dutch Queen's Abdication Unlikely to Inspire Elizabeth II." Associated Press, 28 Jan. 2013.
Typical of the times, the king was accountable to no one for anything. 200 years later, most of the world have accepted the principle that no one is above the law and that every leader is accountable to the people.
The statement so offended the Lords—the highest court of England—that he was imprisoned by the Lords and not released until he had recanted the position. The argument goes on today in many countries incuding the United States.
In 1628 Parliament, in response to abuses by King Charles I, was about to pass The Petition of Rights–-a type of Bill of Rights. The King gave assurances that the practices—such as forcing nobles to lend him money—would not continue and didn't want to be embarrassed by passage of a law which he claimed would indicate that the Parliament did not trust him and weaken the dignity of the monarchy. The Petition of Rights passed with Cole’s leadership.
She responded to the Lord Chief Justice and to Lord Cecil and asked them to so inform the Commons and the House of Lords. Cecil needed three drafts to convey the response but tone it down a little, thus performing the duties of a modern press secretary.
The king's son, Prince Albert had dropped some papers and was instructed by the king to pick them up himself rather than allow the servants to do it.
The issues of check and balances in the American constitution were radical by world standards of the day. However, it was by no means an new concept and as this quotation illustrates was discussed and debated in England, but although England was far ahead of almost all other countries with respect to eliminating absolute power, they never took it as far as the Americans did. That took a revolution.
In the early 18th century, the succession to the Scottish and English Crowns was unclear. As a safety valve and check, this clause was adopted by the Scottish Parliament. This was one of the most radical and anti monarchy laws ever passed. It took the unilateral power of making war and peace from the king & established the principle of ratification of ALL treaties. The law did not last long. It was nullified by the Union between England & Scotland (1707), and the English Parliament specifically repealed the clause in the “Repeal of Certain Scotch Acts of 1707”. This clause, which only remained in force for 3 years, had a profound effect on the modern democracies. The American founding fathers were totally familiar with the recent English history & this law. So the American’s at the Constitutional Convention of 1787, built the principle into the new Constitution giving the Congress the power to Declare War and the Senate to ratify treaties as a check against Presidential power.
This Cahier was the consensus of the Clergy of Blois in 1789. There were cahiers of several provinces of France—some by the clergy, some by the nobles. What is fascinating is the emergence of many of the pre-revolutionary French concepts. The example of the American revolution and its principles was known throughout the educated classes of France.
Sarah Mary Malet Bradford is an English author who is best known for her royal biographies.
