DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.47347#0050
34
HISTORICAL ESSAY ON
Whatever may be the opinion entertained concerning this
dispute, which has no similarity to that relative to the pre-
sent succession in Spain, so much is certain, that it makes
no alteration either in the principle, or in the generality of
the right of cognatic succession, which is the great point at
this moment. On the contrary, this question of heritage,
which has become so celebrated, proves that the right of
cognatic succession has never been disputed either by the
kings of Spain, or by the crown of France, or by the house
of Austria. The point merely was to decide which of the
cognatic claimants had the first right. Austria could not,
and durst not appeal to her right of cognatic succession, for
then she would have been forced to give the preference to
the hereditary prince of Bavaria and to the French princes,
as cognates of the nearest line, agreeably to the funda-
mental law of succession expressly sanctioned by Charles I.
(V.) and Philip II., both of the house of Habsburg.
Charles II., the last king of Spain of the house of Austria,
decided himself in his will the question that we have started
but one of the clauses of the act of marriage, which depended on the execution
of other clauses of that same act; and, indeed, it cannot be denied that Spain
had failed to fulfil several important promises made in the Act of Marriage : he
added that she could not. be forced to perform them, since she was incapable of
doing so, for example, of paying the immense sum in ready money stipulated
for the dowry. Louis XIV. therefore insisted without intermission, through the
medium of the Archbishop of Embrun, his ambassador to the court of Spain,
that Spain should publicly declare the nullity of the renunciation of the throne
made by his wife. But Charles IL still hesitated, and continually made fresh
offers and fresh proposals, till he received intelligence of the second partition
treaty, secretly concluded between France, England, and Holland. Enraged,
he listened to the proposal of France, to declare null the clause of renunciation
of the Infanta Maria Theresa, contained in the Act of marriage, and he made
this declaration in his will, dated the 2nd of October, 1700. As this clause had
been stipulated between Spain and France alone, every one was necessarily
obliged to admit that it belonged to those two great powers only to interpret, to
annul, or to uphold the renunciation.
HISTORICAL ESSAY ON
Whatever may be the opinion entertained concerning this
dispute, which has no similarity to that relative to the pre-
sent succession in Spain, so much is certain, that it makes
no alteration either in the principle, or in the generality of
the right of cognatic succession, which is the great point at
this moment. On the contrary, this question of heritage,
which has become so celebrated, proves that the right of
cognatic succession has never been disputed either by the
kings of Spain, or by the crown of France, or by the house
of Austria. The point merely was to decide which of the
cognatic claimants had the first right. Austria could not,
and durst not appeal to her right of cognatic succession, for
then she would have been forced to give the preference to
the hereditary prince of Bavaria and to the French princes,
as cognates of the nearest line, agreeably to the funda-
mental law of succession expressly sanctioned by Charles I.
(V.) and Philip II., both of the house of Habsburg.
Charles II., the last king of Spain of the house of Austria,
decided himself in his will the question that we have started
but one of the clauses of the act of marriage, which depended on the execution
of other clauses of that same act; and, indeed, it cannot be denied that Spain
had failed to fulfil several important promises made in the Act of Marriage : he
added that she could not. be forced to perform them, since she was incapable of
doing so, for example, of paying the immense sum in ready money stipulated
for the dowry. Louis XIV. therefore insisted without intermission, through the
medium of the Archbishop of Embrun, his ambassador to the court of Spain,
that Spain should publicly declare the nullity of the renunciation of the throne
made by his wife. But Charles IL still hesitated, and continually made fresh
offers and fresh proposals, till he received intelligence of the second partition
treaty, secretly concluded between France, England, and Holland. Enraged,
he listened to the proposal of France, to declare null the clause of renunciation
of the Infanta Maria Theresa, contained in the Act of marriage, and he made
this declaration in his will, dated the 2nd of October, 1700. As this clause had
been stipulated between Spain and France alone, every one was necessarily
obliged to admit that it belonged to those two great powers only to interpret, to
annul, or to uphold the renunciation.