« PreviousContinue »
cation of what has since come to pafs. It had leave to lie upon the table, but was no more taken notice of. The bill at last was paffed by a very great majority, after a very spirited and long debate. The debates in the house of Lords were equally warm, and upon the same principles, and in the end issued in the same manner. When this bufiness was finished, the minister proceeded to give the finishing stroke to the liberties of America. It was moved for leave to bring in a bill for the impartial administration of justice, in cases of persons questioned for any acts done by them in the execution of the laws, or for the fuppreflion of riots or tumults in the province of Massachusett's-Bay, in New England. This bill provides that in case that any person is indi&ted for murder, or any other capital offence, and that it shall appear to the governor, that the fad was committed in the exercise or aid of magistracy in fuppressing tumults or riots; and it shall further appear to the governor, thaja fair trial cannot be had in the province, he shall fend the person so indicted, &c. to another colony, or to Great Britain to be tried. The charges on both sides to be paid out of the cuftoms. This act was to continue for four years. .. The arguinents used to inforce this bill were, that magistracy must be inforced by all possible means; for as these orders would probably be resisted by force, it would lay them under a necessity to use force in the executing of them. In this case blood would be probably spilled. Who would risk this event, though in the execution of his duty, if the rioters themselves, or their abertors, were to fit as judges. The minister alledged, that such an act was not without precedent at home. Where smuggling was known to be notorioully countenanced in one county, the trial of offences of that kind had been directed to be in another. The
rebels of Scotland, in the year 1746, were tried in England. All particular privileges gave way to the public safety; when that is endangered, even the Habeas Corpus act, the great palladium of English liberty has been suspended. That the act proposed did not establish a military government, but a civil one; by which the former was greatly improved. It gave to the province a council, magiftrates, and justices, when in effect they had none before. This bill was warmly opposed, and all thefe reasons fully refuted; but a dead majority carried all before them.
It is impoffible not to obferve thc weakness, as well as the absurdity of the ministerial arguments, used on this occasion, as well as the futility of the precedents brought to confirm them. There had been recent instances of the impartiality of juries in the colonies in the case of Captain Preston and others, when ver. diets had been given according to justice, according to the ministers own ideas of that matter, and there could be no reason of fearing justice would not be executed, unless he was designed to promote fome conduct which would give reason for setting aside its usual course. His speech fuggested that he intended that something would be done, which he would call juslice, and which the colonists would have reason to account unjust, and would be obliged in conscience to treat it as it deserved. He was therefore providing against a consequence he forefaw would happen, because he was determined it should happen. In this the old maxim was confirmed,” That the children of this world are wiser than the children of light.” But there was no reason for making provision agoinst an evil that never would have happened, unlefs the minister himself had been the author of it, He appears to have been de. termined that blood thould be thed, and speaks of it
with great coolness and indifference; and what bears the most unfavourable interpretation, he wanted to have those he intended should shed it screened from justice if he possibly could.
The precedents which he mentions, are most unfavourable for his arguments ; for it is only supporting one act of injustice by another. For though many in a county may countenance smuggling, yet it does not prove that all the county are smugglers, and that an honest jury cannot be found in some counties in England. No man would suppose this unless he were a proficient in the practice of deceit himself.
The case of the Scorch rebels is still more unfavourable ; for the case of the colonies and that of the Jacobites are quite different. The colonies were acknowledging the sovereignity of the king, and petitioning most humbly for a redress of grievances; they wanted not to have the government changed, nor the revolution set aside, but to have the old laws continued, and their ancient constitution secured against modern invasions of parliament. They were willing to continue in allegiance to the king, and defired no more than the protection which other subjects of the empire enjoyed; they claimed, and they prayed for no more than what all British subjects claim as their just and legal right to possess. But this was not the case of the Jacobites ; their greatest grievance was the revolution itself, and their greatest eye-fore the Brunfwick family that supported it. They did not come to the throne with petitions, but attacked it with the fword in their hands; they aimed at the destruction of the sovereign, and intended to change the constitution. These Jacobite tribes ¡nost voluntarily, and without any new oppression, or any new reasons of rabellion, but what will always be the same to them,
drew the sword against the King and the laws, and fought the life of his Majesty King George, to place a popish Pretender upon the throne of these king. doms. But the colonists were praying and beseecliing both king and parliament to support the common liberties of the empire, which had been ratified by the revolution settlement, and confirmed by all the fovereigns since that time. The opposition which the Americans made to new statutes is supported by the constitution itself, and without new laws setting aside the old ones, they could not be made rebels.-The violence of the ministry drove them to resistance, which was determined rebellion, to give fanction to the force that was intended to be used to make them fube mit to the new measures of government. In these respects the case of the colonies and the Jacobites were very different, and no arguments drawn from the one to the other can possibly be of any force. The passions and prejudices of interested persons may lead them to pervert the clearest reason; but all dirpassionate and disinterested men, who are under the government of right reason and common sense, will judge in another manner, and determine according to truth. Had the minister spoken the real sentiments of his mind, he would have declared that he wanted to have a military government in the colonies to inforce obedience to all the arbitrary measures that had been pursued; for his words couldiinply nothingless than that he intended to rule by the sword, and therefore wanted to have his agenţsecured against law and juilice.
The last and most remarkable transaction of this. year, was the Quebec bill, which was called a bill for making more effectual provision for the government of the province of Quebec in North America. This bill came down from the House of Lords to the
Commons for their approbation, where it met with strong opposition, and underwent several amendments. The ministry expected that as the bill passed the house of Lords so easily, that it would have met with no opposition froin the Commons; but in this they were mistaken. What embarraffed the minister most in this particular case was, that the bill made a great noise without doors, and was altogether unpopular in its nature. It had an article concerning religion in it, which appeared to have a tendency to inflame the nation ; and provided there had been as much zeal for the protestant religion, as in former times, the minister durit not have proceeded so fast with his favourite bill, nor would it have at all passed. This bill took up a good deal of time, and met with a very warm oppofition. Many witnesses were examined to give as much colour as poslible to the fairness of the proceeding.--Among these were General Carleton, governor Canada ; Mr Hay, Chief Justice of that province ; Mr Mazeres, Cursitor Baron of the Exchequer, late Attorney-General there, and Agent to the English inhabitants of Canada ; Doctor Marriot, the King's Advocate-General in England ; Mons. Lolbiniere, à French gentleman of considerable property in Canada. The principal objects of this bill were to afcera, tain the limits of that province, which were extende ed far beyond what had been settled as such, by the king's proclamation of 1763----To form a legislative council for all the affairs of that province, except taxation, which council should be appointed by the crown, the office to be held during pleafure ? and his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects were entitled to a piace in it. To establish the French laws, and a trial without jury, in civil cases, and the English laws, sith a trial by jury, in cțiminal ones. To secure to