1774.

CHAP. drefs for any injuries fustained in that country, as is eviIX. dent from the cafe of captain Preston and his foldiers, who had a fair trial and favourable verdict, in a cafe where every circumstance feemed fo ftrongly to militate against it. While this is the cafe, they apprehend, that the interference of parliamentary power is dangerous and unprecedented. If the perfons who committed this injury are known, the India company have recourse against them by an action at common law; if unknown, the petitioners cannot comprehend by what rule of justice the town can be punished, for a civil injury committed by perfons not known to belong to them. The cafes brought as precedents, viz. of the city of London having been fined, in the time of Charles II. when Dr. Lamb was killed by persons unknown; of the city of Glasgow having part of its revenue fequeftrated, when a mob pulled down Mr. Campbell's house; and of Edinburgh in the affair of captain Porteous, were not to the point. Thefe cities had the full executive power of legiflation within themfelves; but, with Boston, the cafe was very different. There the governor holds that power, and in the prefent inftance, was advised by his majefty's council to carry it into execution. If it has been neglected, he alone is answerable; if it has been executed, perhaps at this inftant, while punishment is inflicting here on thofe that have not been legally tried, the due courfe of law is operating there, to the difcovery and profecution of the real offenders."

To this petition no answer was given, nor was it, indeed, taken into the confideration of the house. Adminiftration infifted, that it was in vain to hear petitions in behalf of a town which would not, in any manner of way, acknowledge their authority. The trade of England called fór immediate protection, and should the town of Boston be allowed to plead their cause on this fide of the Atlantic, it would spin out the affair to an unreasonable length. It was afked, if the house doubted of the exiftence of the offence, or of their own right to punish it? To leave Bofton to the mercy of the crown was doing it a favour, as mercy could no where be better placed than in its legal repofitory, the breast of the fovereign.

The debates now became more violent, and continued for a long time. Oppofition contended, that the act was not for impofing a fine for an offence; and although it had been fo, it would still be liable to the fame objections. It was fimply a profcription of one of the greatest trading towns in the British dominions, by prohibiting the use of their port, and interrupting the commerce, by which up

IX.

m

wards of 20,000 people got their bread. A power was CHAP.
granted to his majefty, by which he might prevent the
port from being ever reinftated, if he fhould think
proper; and this would only be to establish a precedent
for delivering over whole towns and communities
to the arbitrary pleasure of the crown.
This was

not like the cafes where the mercy of the crown
was to take place; for none were at the mercy of the
crown except those whom the law had condemned after
a fair hearing, which had not been done with regard to
Bofton. The tranfaction was altogether without a pre-
cedent thofe which had been brought did not apply..
The towns whofe examples were fet forth, had been fined;
but no example could be brought of a maritime city hav-
ing been deprived of its port. It was impoffible to con-
ceal from the Americans, that the act, under pretence of
indemnifying the Eaft-India company, was to enforce
the taxation which had occafioned fuch a general flame.-
The confequence of this would be, a general combination
of all the colonies in behalf of the diftreffed city. All of
them were as guilty as Boffon; for not one of them had
received the tea, that which was not deftroyed having
been every where returned. It was incredible that all
this violence fhould be for the fake of trade; for not a
fingle trader or manufacturer had made a complaint; not
even the company itself, which was the immediate fuffe-

rer.

Though thefe arguments were vehemently urged by oppofition, the members would not divide on the queftion. The bill was accordingly paffed (March 25, 1774;) and being carried up to the lords, it was warmly debated; but, as in the commons, paffed without a divifion.

From his unexpected fuccefs in this measure, the mirifter was moft probably emboldened to propofe the other penal acts which were paffed during this remarkable feffion. By fome even of those, however, who had voted for fhutting up the harbour of Bofton, it was proposed that fomething of a conciliatory nature should accompany a measure so very harsh and rigorous. As the tea-tax, therefore, was not only univerfally detefted by the Americans, but a matter of little confequence to government, on account of the fmallnefs of its produce, they thought that a repeal of it would be one of the most effectual methods of procuring the good will of the colonifts.— This, however, was rejected, on account of the appearance of inconfiftency which it would give to the tranfactions of adminiltration, and the unhappy opinion that,

March 25

IX.

1774.

Bill for regulating

CHAP. by perfevering in coercive meafures, the obftinacy of the Americans would at laft be overcome. Inftead of this, a new coercive bill was brought in for the better regulat ing the government of Mafiachusetts-Bay." By this the conftitution of the province was altered from the plan on which it ftood according to king William's charter; the democratic part being entirely abolithed, and the nominaMaffachu- tion of councillors, judges, and magiftrates of all kinds, fetta-Bay. lodged in the hands of the crown, or, in fome cafes, of the governor.

the government of

Petitions

against it rejected. April 28,

1774.

The arguments in favour of this bill were, that, by rea fon of the diforders prevailing in that province, the colony was not only diftracted within itself, but an ill-example was fet to the reft. There was a total defect of executive power, by reafon of the vitiated ftate of the democratic part of the conftitution. The governor could not appoint magiftrates, nor even give an order, without the confent of feven of the council; the military could not act without the order of a magiftrate; and, let the tumults be ever so outrageous, no magiftrate would call for their affiftance. It was, therefore, abfolutely neceffary to reform the government of that colony, as far as related to the executive and judicial powers. The juries were alfo improperly chofen, and an inftant remedy was required, which, it was hoped, the prefent bill would speedily afford.

On this occafion, oppofition exerted itself much more than in the case of the port bill; and its voice was feconded by Mr. Bolland, who prefented another petition to the houfe, requefting time to receive an answer from the province, and to inform them of the proceedings carried on against them; but it was refufed by a majority of ninety-five to thirty-two. Another petition was prefented by the fame perfons who had given in the former. The ftile of this petition was animated and nervous. It fet forth, "That the bill in queftion was calculated to deprive a whole province, without any form of trial, of its chartered rights, folemnly fecured to it by a compact between the crown and the people. A charter fo granted was never before altered or refumed, but upon a full and fair hearing; on which account, the prefent proceeding is totally unconftitutional, and fets an example which renders every charter in Great-Britain and America utterly infecure. The appointment and removal of the judges at the pleasure of the governor, with falaries payable by the crown, puts the property, life, and liberty of the fubject, depending upon judicial authority, entirely in his

IX.

1774

power. The petitioners perceive, by this act, a fyftem of CHA P. judicial tyranny impofed upon them, which, from the bit ter experience of its intolerable injuries, has been abolifhed in this country." The petition concluded with conjuring the houfe, in the most pathethic manner, "to confider that the restraints which fuch acts of severity impose, are ever attended with the most dangerous hatred. In a diftrefs of mind, which cannot be conceived, the petitioners conjure the house not to convert that zeal, which has hitherto united every American hand and heart in the interefts of England, into paffions the most painful and pernicious. Moft earnestly they befeech the house, not to attempt reducing them to a ftate of flavery, which the English principles of liberty they inherit from their mother country, will render worse than death: That they will not, by paffing these bills, reduce their countrymen to the molt abject ftate of mifery and humiliation, or drive them to the last resources of defpair."

This petition was ordered to lie upon the table, and the bill foon after paffed by a prodigious majority. It was, May 2. however, warmly debated in the house of lords, where the injuftice of condemning the colony, and taking away its charter without any form of procefs, was particularly infifted on; as alfo the impropriety of making alterations in the charter, without even having it laid before them: The courts and mode of judicial proceeding were likewise altered, without the flightest evidence being produced of any one of the inconveniencies stated in the preamble. To all these objections, administration made one general reply, namely, That there was an abfolute neceffity for a powerful and speedy remedy to a government which was nothing but diforder; and that there was no time for going through the ordinary forms of juftice. It was even said, that this alteration was in may refpects beneficial, and an improvement of their conftitution; which, however, was denied by oppofition. The bill paffed in the up- May 11. per houfe by a majority of ninety-two to twenty.

The minifter having carried thefe two bills with fo much ease, now brought in a third, intitled, A bill for the impartial administration of justice, in cafes of perfons queftioned for any acts done by them in the execution of the laws, or for the fuppreffion of riots and tumults in the province of Maffachusetts Bay in New-England." By this it was provided, that when any perfon is indicted for murder, or any other capital offence, and that it shall appear to the governor, that the fact was committed in the exercise or aid of magiftracy, in fuppreffing tumults or riots, and Vol. V.

V

Bill for the adminiftration of juf

tice.

IX.

CHAP. that a fair trial cannot be had in the province, he fhall fend the perfon fo indicted to any other colony, or to Great-Britain, to be tried. The charges on both fides to be defrayed by the cuftoms. This act to continue in force for four years.

1774.

In favour of this act it was urged, That the bill was neceffary to give efficacy to the former. It was in vain to appoint a magiftracy that would act, if none could be found hardy enough to put their orders in execution. The numerous tumults and riots gave reason to think, that blood would be fhed in the fuppreffing of them; but nobody would risk the event of executing his duty, were the ric ters themselves, or their accomplices, to fit in judgment upon them. The act was not without precedent. When fmuggling has been notorioufly countenanced in one county, trials for it have been directed in another. The rebels in the year 1746, were tried in England, tho’ the offence was committed in Scotland. Particular privileges muft, in all cafes, give way to the public safety; and in cafes of great danger to the ftate, even the Habeas Corpus act has been fufpended. The act did not establish any military government, but a civil one, by which the former was much improved. There was a neceffity for fhewing the Americans, that Britain would not put up with their infults; and that even when exafperated to the utmost, our measures were not cruel and vindictive, but neceflary and efficacious. At the fame time, he acquainted the house, that the ufual relief of four regiments for America had been all ordered to Bofton; and, that general Gage, in whose abilities he had great confidence, was fent out as commander-in-chief of the forces, and governor of Boston: That, while proper precautions were taken for the support of magistracy, the fame spirit was fhewn for the punishment of offenders; and that profecutions had been ordered against those who were ringleaders in fedition. Every thing fhould be conducted with firmnefs, and, at the fame time, legally and prudently, as he had the advantage of being affifted by the ableft lawyers; and he made no doubt, that, by the steady execution of the measures now taken, obedience, and the blessings of peace, would foon be reftored. He concluded with predicting, that the event would be advantageous and happy to this country.

This bill was more violently oppofed than any of the former. It was denied, that it would anfwer the end propofed, namely, the procuring an impartial trial; for if a party-spirit against the authority of Great-Britain would induce the Américans to condemn an active officer as a