It is not by Parliamentary discussions that great constitutional questions, in which each party thinks itself in the right, can be decided. Such decisions can only be arrived at in consequence of events which give one side or the other the preponderance. An event of this kind had now come to pass in England. Because James II had overstrained the prerogative to attain an end lying outside its natural province, its opponents had gained the victory over him: he himself was excluded from the throne; they were the masters in the country. Now, however important it was to fill up the vacant throne, this was by no means the only matter affecting the general interest which came under discussion. On the contrary, another matter was connected with it which, in the eyes of many, possessed even more importance, namely, the decision of the questions pending between the Crown and the Parliament, as to the extent of the prerogative. The general desire was not merely to exchange one prince for another, but, as Lord Falkland said, who spoke after Wharton, to secure the country against the return of an arbitrary government, and to remove all doubt as to the extent of the royal power. ‘Before you fill the throne I would resolve what power you will give the King and what not.’ It was Sir Richard Temple, who on this occasion, as on the previous one, decided the course which the debate should take.