Presumably, had the United States adopted a monarchical form of government, it would have been a constitutional monarchy.  Exactly how lines of succession are determined would depend on the procedures specified in the constitution.

The English adopted a constitutional monarchy in 1688, as a consequence of the successful coup that put William and Mary on the throne, and displaced James II.  Parliament asserted the right to determine the succession--in order to ensure that the King of England in the future would not be Catholic.

Given the long and rather slender speculative limb we have crept out onto, I am not sure how much we can say about how an American constitutional monarchy might have operated.  Assuredly the constitution would have addressed the question of succession.  Whether or not it would have allowed for the succession of adopted children would be anybody's guess.

But the whole question is moot, in as much as Americans in the founding era pretty much universally rejected the idea of monarchy, constitutional or otherwise.

All best,
Kevin
Kevin R. Hardwick, Ph.D.
Department of History
James Madison University

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html