When that political law which has established in the kingdom a certain order of
succession becomes destructive to the body politic for whose sake it was
established, there is not the least room to doubt but another political
law may be made to change this order; and so far would this law be from
opposing the first that it would in the main be entirely conformable to
it, since both would depend on this principle, that the safety of the people
is the supreme law.
I have said
[52]
that a great state becoming accessory to another is
itself weakened, and even weakens the principal. We know that it is for
the interest of the state to have the supreme magistrate within itself,
that the public revenues be well administered, and that its specie be
not sent abroad to enrich another country. It is of importance that he
who is to govern has not imbibed foreign maxims; these are less
agreeable than those already established. Besides, men have an
extravagant fondness for their own laws and customs: these constitute
the happiness of every community; and, as we learn from the histories of
all nations, are rarely changed without violent commotions and a great
effusion of blood.
It follows hence, that if a great state has for its heir the
possessor of a great state, the former may reasonably exclude him,
because a change in the order of succession must be of service to both
countries. Thus a law of Russia, made in the beginning of the reign of
Elizabeth, most wisely excluded from the possession of the crown every
heir who possessed another monarchy; thus the law of Portugal
disqualifies every stranger who lays claim to the crown by right of
blood.
But if a nation may exclude, it may with greater reason be allowed a
right to oblige a prince to renounce. If the people fear that a certain
marriage will be attended with such consequences as shall rob the nation
of its independence, or dismember some of its provinces, it may very
justly oblige the contractors and their descendants to renounce all
right over them; while he who renounces, and those to whose prejudice he
renounces, have the less reason to complain, as the state might
originally have made a law to exclude them.
