DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.47347#0108
92
HISTORICAL ESSAY ON
immediate heiress of the throne, and queen of Spain at
the death of her father Ferdinand VII.1
Three months afterwards, Ferdinand VII. died, without
adverting' by a single word in his will to the succession to
the throne. The Infanta, princess of Asturias, therefore,
quietly succeeded her father, by the name of Isabella II.
Here ends the history of the right of the cognatic suc-
cession in Spain. We have demonstrated its validity and
shown its application to all the epochs of the monarchy; we
have proved its force, transiently threatened by the auto
acordaclo of 1713, but never really destroyed. We have
also demonstrated that, in the whole course of Spanish his-
tory, there never has been a succession upon the principle
of the auto acordaclo 2. We have seen, on the other hand,
the greatness, the glory, the prosperity, of Spain depend
1 On this subject, M. de Broglie, in his speech to the Chamber of Peers, on
the 9th of January, 1837, remarked as follows:—
“ Everybody may recollect, indeed, that, in the summer of 1833, king Ferdi-
nand assembled the Cortes of the kingdom,—he who, as it is well known, was
not very fond of this kind of assemblies. For what purpose 1 To make them
acknowledge the integrity and the validity of the act of 1789, (to validate that
act, in as far as might be necessary, by their adhesion,) and every body knows,
or may know, that the Cortes cheerfully complied, and took the oath to the
future queen, Isabella II.—Note by the French Translator.
2 It is curious to see how the advocates of the pretensions of Don Carlos,
affecting the appearance of a sort of historical erudition, assert that the auto acor-
dado has already subsisted 126 years. The date is not important for the laws,
unless it can be proved that during the whole of this time they have been in
force and in execution. But when, as in this instance, not a single case can be
mentioned in which the law has been applied, the antiquity of its date merely
proves that it has fallen into desuetude, and that it was impracticable. For the
rest, it is not our intention to attach the least importance to this assertion. We
know well that, from the establishment of the auto acordado to 1833, it has
never been applied, and we will not expose ourselves to the reproach that
we have so often addressed to our adversaries, of defending our opinion by
reasons partially true.
HISTORICAL ESSAY ON
immediate heiress of the throne, and queen of Spain at
the death of her father Ferdinand VII.1
Three months afterwards, Ferdinand VII. died, without
adverting' by a single word in his will to the succession to
the throne. The Infanta, princess of Asturias, therefore,
quietly succeeded her father, by the name of Isabella II.
Here ends the history of the right of the cognatic suc-
cession in Spain. We have demonstrated its validity and
shown its application to all the epochs of the monarchy; we
have proved its force, transiently threatened by the auto
acordaclo of 1713, but never really destroyed. We have
also demonstrated that, in the whole course of Spanish his-
tory, there never has been a succession upon the principle
of the auto acordaclo 2. We have seen, on the other hand,
the greatness, the glory, the prosperity, of Spain depend
1 On this subject, M. de Broglie, in his speech to the Chamber of Peers, on
the 9th of January, 1837, remarked as follows:—
“ Everybody may recollect, indeed, that, in the summer of 1833, king Ferdi-
nand assembled the Cortes of the kingdom,—he who, as it is well known, was
not very fond of this kind of assemblies. For what purpose 1 To make them
acknowledge the integrity and the validity of the act of 1789, (to validate that
act, in as far as might be necessary, by their adhesion,) and every body knows,
or may know, that the Cortes cheerfully complied, and took the oath to the
future queen, Isabella II.—Note by the French Translator.
2 It is curious to see how the advocates of the pretensions of Don Carlos,
affecting the appearance of a sort of historical erudition, assert that the auto acor-
dado has already subsisted 126 years. The date is not important for the laws,
unless it can be proved that during the whole of this time they have been in
force and in execution. But when, as in this instance, not a single case can be
mentioned in which the law has been applied, the antiquity of its date merely
proves that it has fallen into desuetude, and that it was impracticable. For the
rest, it is not our intention to attach the least importance to this assertion. We
know well that, from the establishment of the auto acordado to 1833, it has
never been applied, and we will not expose ourselves to the reproach that
we have so often addressed to our adversaries, of defending our opinion by
reasons partially true.