Part 2, Essay 12, Footnote #04
More on this edict of Louis XIV
It is remarkable, that by the remonstrance of the Duke of Bourbon and the legitimate princes, against this destination of Louis XIV., the doctrine of the original contract is insisted on, even in that absolute government. The French nation, say they, choosing Hugh Capet and his posterity to rule over them, and their posterity, where the former line fails, there is a tacit right reserved to choose a new royal family ; and this right is invaded by calling the bastard princes to the throne, without the consent of the nation. But the Comte de Boulainvilliers, who wrote in defence of the bastard princes, ridicules this notion of an original contract, especially when applied to Hugh Capet, who mounted the throne, says be, by the same arts which have ever been employed by all conquerors and usurpers. He got his title, indeed, recognised by the states after he had put himself in possession: But is this a choice or contract? The Comte de Boulainvilliers, we may observe, was a noted republican; but being a man of learning, and very conversant in history, he knew that the people were never almost consulted in these revolutions and new establishments, and that time alone bestowed right and authority on what was commonly at first founded on force and violence, See Etat de la France, Vol. iii.