Such is the history of kingly
power, from the beginning to the end of the world--with this
difference, that the object of war formerly, when the people adhered
to their allegiance, was to depose kings; the object latterly, since
the people swerved from their allegiance, has been to restore kings,
and to make common cause against mankind. The object of our late
invasion and conquest of France was to restore the legitimate
monarch, the descendant of Hugh Capet, to the throne: Henry V in his
time made war on and deposed the descendant of this very Hugh Capet,
on the plea that he was a usurper and illegitimate. What would the
great modern catspaw of legitimacy and restorer of divine right have
said to the claim of Henry and the title of the descendants of Hugh
Capet? Henry V, it is true, was a hero, a king of England, and the
conqueror of the king of France. Yet we feel little love or
admiration for him. He was a hero, that is, he was ready to
sacrifice his own life for the pleasure of destroying thousands of
other lives: he was a king of England, but not a constitutional one,
and we only like kings according to the law; lastly, he was a
conqueror of the French king, and for this we dislike him less than
if he had conquered the French people. How then do we like him? We
like him in the play. There he is a very amiable monster, a very
splendid pageant.
Pages:
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229