OK, so your challenge is, if the Crown of Scotland was merged, transferred or extinguished in 1707, name the clause that did it. Answer: Section I of the Act of Union which says: “the two Kingdoms of Scotland and England shall upon the first day of May next ensuing the date hereof, and for ever after, be united into One Kingdom …” Professor Black told us that that one kingdom which survived 1/5/1707 was England so it follows that Scotland must have been extinguished.
The claim under test is not ours. It is the Dundas persona's, that the Crown of Scotland ended in 1707, and the question does no more than ask for the clause that did it.
Article I, entire: "That the two kingdoms of Scotland and England shall, upon 1 May next ensuing the date hereof, and forever after, be united into one kingdom by the name of Great Britain; and that the ensigns armorial of the said United Kingdom be such as her majesty shall appoint, and the crosses of St Andrew and St George be conjoined in such manner as her majesty shall think fit, and used in all flags, banners, standards and ensigns both at sea and land."
Two kingdoms, a name, arms and flags. A claim that an instrument extinguished a crown falls to be proved by the party advancing it, and every argument offered to date has been read against it and fallen. Until a clause is produced that merges, transfers or extinguishes the Crown of Scotland, the claim remains conjecture.
Art I starts with the premise that there are two kingdoms but says that, after 1/5/1707, there is to be only one. What happened to the other one? Or do you mean that Art I can’t be the clause which merges, transfers or extinguishes the Crown of Scotland because it applied only to *kingdoms* but said nothing about the union or number of *crowns*?
That's not what was asked Neil. What was asked for is the clause that merged, transferred or extinguished the Crown of Scotland. Your offer and framing of Article I does not do that. This is obfuscation. The question is unchanged.
Is your objection to Art I being ‘the clause’ that its operative word is “unite” and that it doesn’t employ any of the words “merge”, “transfer” or “extinguished”?
OK, so your challenge is, if the Crown of Scotland was merged, transferred or extinguished in 1707, name the clause that did it. Answer: Section I of the Act of Union which says: “the two Kingdoms of Scotland and England shall upon the first day of May next ensuing the date hereof, and for ever after, be united into One Kingdom …” Professor Black told us that that one kingdom which survived 1/5/1707 was England so it follows that Scotland must have been extinguished.
The claim under test is not ours. It is the Dundas persona's, that the Crown of Scotland ended in 1707, and the question does no more than ask for the clause that did it.
Article I, entire: "That the two kingdoms of Scotland and England shall, upon 1 May next ensuing the date hereof, and forever after, be united into one kingdom by the name of Great Britain; and that the ensigns armorial of the said United Kingdom be such as her majesty shall appoint, and the crosses of St Andrew and St George be conjoined in such manner as her majesty shall think fit, and used in all flags, banners, standards and ensigns both at sea and land."
Two kingdoms, a name, arms and flags. A claim that an instrument extinguished a crown falls to be proved by the party advancing it, and every argument offered to date has been read against it and fallen. Until a clause is produced that merges, transfers or extinguishes the Crown of Scotland, the claim remains conjecture.
Art I starts with the premise that there are two kingdoms but says that, after 1/5/1707, there is to be only one. What happened to the other one? Or do you mean that Art I can’t be the clause which merges, transfers or extinguishes the Crown of Scotland because it applied only to *kingdoms* but said nothing about the union or number of *crowns*?
That's not what was asked Neil. What was asked for is the clause that merged, transferred or extinguished the Crown of Scotland. Your offer and framing of Article I does not do that. This is obfuscation. The question is unchanged.
Is your objection to Art I being ‘the clause’ that its operative word is “unite” and that it doesn’t employ any of the words “merge”, “transfer” or “extinguished”?
I've lodged no objection. This is the last opportunity that will be granted: produce a valid clause, or the enquiry ends here.