Zoepfl, Heinrich: Historical Essay Upon the Spanish Succession (London: Whittaker, 1840)

APPENDIX.

125

arguments, we have but little to say concerning the argu-
ments themselves, which naturally fall with their premises.
The deduction of our adversary turns essentially on the
following points :—
1. That Philip V., as founder of a new dynasty, had a
right to establish a new order of succession to the throne.
2. That Charles IV., as the descendant of the founder of
the new dynasty, had not a right to modify this order of
succession and to prejudice the acquired rights of Don
Carlos.
3. That Philip V. established the new order of succes-
sion with the legal formalities and with the consent of the
Cortes.
4. That Charles IV. in 1789 did not observe the required
formalities in the abolition of the auto acordaclo.
As for the first and second arguments, they fall of them-
selves with the false allegation that Philip V. was the
founder of a new dynasty. We conceive that we have
treated of this point in our work in so complete a manner,
that we need say nothing more wdien facts and laws speak
for themselves.
With respect to the third and fourth argument, the author
admits with us the principle, that in Spain no modification
can take place in the order of succession to the throne but
by the will of the king with the concurrence of the Cortes.
This principle has been recognized at all periods, not only
by Spain \ but also by France, by England, by the Nether-
lands, in short by all the powers that took part in the treaty
of Utrecht, Austria included1 2 3. The powers which treated
1 For this reason, the approbation of the Cortes was asked for the renuncia¬
tion of the Infanta Anne, wife of Louis XIII., and for that of the Infanta
Maria Theresa. For this reason, too, Philip V. himself sent his auto acordaclo
to the Cortes in 1713.
3 Treaty of peace of Vienna, of April 30, 1725, Art. 3.
7