He commenced with a review of the royal prerogatives, and with a definition of the words "to reign." Referring to the dictionary of the academy, he showed triumphantly, that to reign, was no other than to "govern as a sovereign"; while to govern, in the familiar signification, was no more than to govern in the name of a prince, or as a deputy.

Having successfully established this point, he laid down the position, that the greater might contain the less, but that the less could not possibly contain the greater.

That the right to reign, or to govern, in the generic signification of the term, must include all the lawful attributes of him who only governed, in the secondary signification; and that, consequently, the king not only reigned, but governed.

He then proceeded to show that memory was indispensable to him who governed, since, without one he could neither recollect the laws, make a suitable disposition of rewards and punishments, nor, in fact, do any other intelligent or necessary act.

Again, it was contended that by the law of the land the king's conscience was in the keeping of his first-cousin.