bill was to alter the conflitution of that province as it flood upon the charter of King William; to take the whole executive power out of the hands of the democratic part, and to veft the nomination of counsellors, judges, and magistrates of all kinds, including fheriffs, in the crown, and in fome cafes, in the King's governor, and all to be removeable at the pleasure of the crown.

In fupport of this bill, the minifter who brought it in alledged, that the diforders in the province of Maffachufet's bay not only diffracted that province with in itself, but fet an ill example to all the colonies. An executive power was wanting in the country. The force of the civil power confifts in the Poff commitatus; but the Poffe are the very people who commit the riots. That there was a total defest in the conflitutional power throughout. If the democratic part fhew a contempt of the laws, how is the governor to enforce them? Magiftrates he cannot appoint: He cannot give an order without feven of the council affenting: And let the military be ever fo numerous and active, they cannot move in fupport of the civil magistracy, when no civil magiftrate will call upon them for support. It is in vain, faid they, that you make laws and regulations here, when there are none found to execute them in that country. It therefore became abfolutely necesary to alter the whole frame of the Maffachufet's-government, fo far as related to the executive and judicial powers. That the juries were also improperly chofen. Some immediate and permanent remedy must be adopted. The minifier therefore propofed the prefent bill, which he hoped would give ftrength and ipirit to the civil magiftracy, and energy to the executive power.

The oppofition to this bill was much more active and united than upon the Bofton port-act. The minority alledged, that this carried the principle of injuice much further. That to take away the civil conftitution of a whole people, fecured by a charter, the validity of which was not fo much as queftioned at law, upon mere loofe allegations of delinquencies and defects, was a proceeding of a molt arbitrary and dangerous nature. They faid that this was worse than the proceedings against the American and Englith corporations in the reigns of King Charles and King James the Second, which were however thought the worst rets of thofe arbitrary reigns. There the arge was regularly made; the colonies corporations cilled to anfver; time

given; and the rules of juftice, at leaft in appearance, observed. But here, they faid, there was nothing of the kind, nothing even of the colour of justice; not one evidence has been examined at the bar, a thing done on the moft trivial regulation affecting any franchife of the fubject. That the pretences for taking away this charter, in order to give ftrength to government, will never anfwer. The miniftry was asked, whether the colonies, which are already regulated nearly in the manner propofed by the bill, were more fubmiffive to our right of taxation than this of Matfachufet'sbay? If not, what is got by this bill, that can be fo very material to the authority of parliament, as to risk all the credit of parliamentary juftice by fo strong and irregular a proceeding? That the part of the act which affected juries was made without fo much as a fingle complaint of abuse pretended. Nay, they faid, that the cafe of the late captain Preston, Mr. Otis, and many others, fhewed with what juflice the juries there acted. They denied that the juries were improperly chofen; that they were appointed by a better method than ours, by a fort of ballot, in which no partiality could take place. That by this new regulation the fieriff is appointed, without any qualification, by the governor, and to hold the office at his pleasure. This is a power, faid they, given to the governor, greater than that given by the conflitution to the crown itself. And this they infifted was a great abufe, inftead of a reformation; and tended to put the lives and properties of the people abfolutely into the hands of the go

vernors.

The minority argued, that the diforder lay much deeper than the forms of government. That the people throughout the continent were univerfally diffatisfied, and that their uneafinefs and refiftance was no lefs in the royal governments than in any other. That the remedy could only be in the removal of the caufe of the diftemper, and in quieting the minds of the people. That the act had a direct contrary tendency; and they feared, inflead of giving ftrength to government, it would deftroy the little remains of English authority which was left in the colonies.

April 28.

Mr. Bollan the agent of the Maffachufet's council, again made an effort in favour of his province, and attempted to petition for time to receive an answer from the province to the account he had fent of the proceedings

againft

against them. But the houfe refused to receive the petition, by a majority of 95

to 32.

The fame natives of America who had petitioned against the Bolton port bill, alfo renewed their endeavours by a petition against this. It was pointed with an uncommon energy and fpirit. They petitioned for time until advices fhould arrive from the colony, ftating in ftrong terms a great variety of objections againft the bill, and ending with a moft pathetic prayer to the houfe," to confider that the reftraints which fuch acts of feverity impofe, are ever attended with the moft dangerous hatred: In a diftrefs of mind which cannot be defcribed, the petitioners conjure the houfe, not to convert that zeal and affection 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 houfe, not to attempt reducing them to a flate 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 thefe bills reduce their countrymen to the most abject ftate of mifery and humiliation; or drive them to the last resources of defpair."

The petition from the Americans refident in London, very ftrongly indicated the effect which the bill would have in the place where it was intended to operate. This petition had leave to lie upon the table, but had no other notice taken of it. The bill paffed by a May 2d. prodigious majority, after a debate which lafted with uncommon fpirit for many hours.

Equally warm debates attended the bill in the house of lords. The objections were nearly the fame with thofe made in the house of commons, with particular reflexions upon the greater rapidity with which it was hurried through the house of lords; and the peculiar impropriety in a court of justice, of condemning the .colony, and taking away its charter, without any form of procefs. The lords in oppofition cried out against a bill altering the conftitution of a colony without having fo much as the charter containing the constitution fo altered, laid before them. That the bill had alfo altered the courts and the mode of judicial proceedings in the colony, without any offer of the flighteft evidence to prove any one of the inconveniencies, which were ftated in general terms in the preamble, as arifing from the prefent mode of trial in the province.

The abfolute neceffity of a powerful and fpeedy remedy for the cure of a government, which was nothing but diforder, was, in fubftance, the principal reafon alledged for the omiffion of enquiry and evidence, and the fuperfeding the ordinary rules of judicial proceeding. Befides, the minifterial lords denied, that the procefs was of a penal nature; they infifted that it was beneficial and remedial, and a great improvement of their conftitution, as it brought it nearer to the English model. This was again denied by the lords of the minority, who faid that the taking away of franchises granted by charter had ever been confidered as penal, and all proceedings for that purpofe conducted criminally. Otherwife, it was faid, nothing could be fafe in any man's hands, the taking away of which another man might confider as beneficial. That a council holding their places at the pleasure of the crown did not refemble the house of lords; nor approach in any thing to the perfection of the British conftitution. The debate on May 11th. the third reading was long, but the divifion only 20 to 92.

The difpofition fo prevalent in both houses to ftrong measures, was highly tavourable to the whole ministerial plan for reducing America to obedience. The good reception of the propofal for changing the charter government of Maffachufet's Bay, encouraged them to propofe very foon after another bill, without which, it was faid, that the scheme would be entirely defective. In the committee on American papers it was ordered, that the chairman fhould move for leave to bring in " a bill for the impartial adminiftration of justice in the 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 Maffachufet's Bay in New England."

This bill provides, that in cafe any perfon is indicted in that province for murder, or any other capital offence, and that it fhall appear to the governor, that the fact was committed in the exercife or aid of magiftracy in fupprefling tumults and riots, and that it fall ap pear to the governor, that a fair trial cannot be had in the province, he fhall fend the perfon fo indicted, &c. to any other colony, or to Great Britain, there to be tried. The charges on both files to be borne out of the cultoms. This act to continue for four years.

The minifter ftated, that this bill was nec flary to the effect of the two formne: Y y y y 2

It was in vain to appoint a magistracy that would act, if none could be found hardy enough to put their orders in execution. Thefe orders would moft probably be refifted by force; this force would neceffitate force alfo to execute the laws. In this cafe, blood would probably be fpilled. Who would rifk the event, though in the execution of his cleareft duty, if the rioters themselves, or their abettors were to fit as his judges How can any man defend himself on the plea of executing of your laws, before thofe perfons who deny your right to make any laws to bind them? He alledged, that such an act was not without precedent at home. Where fmuggling was found to be notorioufly countenanced in one county, the trial for offences of that kind has been directed in another. The rebels of Scotland in the year 1746 were tried in England. All particular privileges give way to the public fafety; when that is endangered, even the habeas corpus act, the great palladium of public liberty, has been fufpended. That the act he propofed did not eftablish a military government, but a civil one, by which the former was greatly improved. They gave to the province a council, magistrates, and juftices, when in effect they had none before. You do not, faid he, fcreen guilt, you only protect innocence. That we muft fhew the Americans we will no longer fit quietly under their infults; and that even when roufed, our measures are not cruel and vindictive, but neceffary and efficacious: This is the last act he had to propofe in order to perfect the plan. That the reft depended on the vigilance of his majefty's fervants in the execution of their duty; which he affured them fhould not be wanting. That the ufual relief of four regiments for America, had been all ordered to Bolon. That General Gage, in whofe abilities he placed great reliance, was fent as governor and commander in chief. That le proper precautions were taken for the fupport of magiftracy, the fame fpirit was fhown for the punifhment of offenders; and that profecutions had been ordered againft thofe who were the ringleaders in fedition. That every thing thould be done firmly, yet legally and prudently, as he had the advantage of being aided by the ableft lawyers, That he made no doubt, that by the fteady execution of the meafures now taken, obedience and the bleflings of peace would be reftored. The event, he predicted, would be advantageous and happy to this country.

The minority opposed this bill with the fame vehemence with which they combated the former. At first, they denied the foundation of the whole bill," That it could tend to the procuring of an impartial trial." For if a party fpirit againft the authority of Great-Britain would condemn an active officer there as a murderer, the fame party spirit for preferving the authority of Great-Britain, might acquit a murderer here, as a spirited performer of his duty. There is no abfolute fecurity against the effect of party fpirit in judicial proceedings, when mens minds are inflamed with public contefts. But before the people there are judged unworthy of the exercife of the rights which the conftitution has given them, fome abuse ought to be proved. But has, faid they, any proof been given or attempted of fuch an abuse? The cafe of Captain Prefton was recent. This officer and fome foldiers had been indicted at Bofton for murder, for killing fome perfons in the fuppreffion of a riot. This is the very cafe the act fuppofes. How

did the trial turn out? He was honoura

bly acquitted. Therefore the bill is not only unfupported but contradicted by fact. They infifted, that, having no fort of reafon for impeaching the tribunals of America, the real intention was to fet up a military government; and to provide a virtual indemnity for all the murders and other capital outrages which might be committed by that barbarous kind of authority. For they afked, how the relations of a murdered man could poffibly profecute, if they must come three thoufand miles from their families and occupations to do it? The charges of the witnefles were to be borne out of the cuftoms, but the governor was to judge how much ought to be allowed; and they could not conceive, that any man would voluntarily offer himself as a witness, when by that means, upon a mere pay ment of charges, he was to be removed fo far from his native country. Every man of common fenfe would fly from fuch an office. But if the charges of the witneffes were to be borne by government, who was to bear the charges of the profecution, and the expence of fuch voyages, and of the delays in England, which might be poffibly for years? For this the act makes no provifion. A poor man, who could eafily carry on fuch a profecution at his door in Bolton, mu give it up when the caufe is removed to Middlefex. They therefore strenuously maintained, that this was holding out an encouragement for all kinds of lawless

violence.

violence. They denied that the cafes of trials for fmuggling, and of treason in the laft rebellion, did at all apply to the prefent; because the inconvenience of profecution or defence was comparatively infignificant on account of the little diftance to which the trials were removed. In fine, they denied the neceffity of this act, even if no juftice were ever to be expected in New England, because the prerogative of the crown might ftep in, and the governor might always reprieve a perfon, who fhould happen to be convicted notoricufly against law and reafon. They apprehended, that the courfe of juftice being stopped by this act, would give rife to affailinations and dark revenge among individuals; and mott probably to open rebellion in the whole body.

The debate on this bill was even more warm than on the former, and the publications of the time quote an old member who is rarely in oppofition, as haying ended his fpeech with thefe remark able words: I will now take my leave of the whole plan-you will commence your ruin from this day. I am forry to fay, that not only the house has fallen into this error, but the people approve of the measure. The people, I am forry to say it, are misled. But a fhort time will prove the evil tendency of this bill. If ever there was a nation running headlong to its ruin, it is this."

The bill paffed the house on the fixth of May, and being carried to the houfe of peers, occafioned warm debates upon the principles upon which it was difculled in the house of commons. The lords of the minority entered on this, as on the former bill, a very strong proteft. Neither houte was full during the debates on this bill, as the arguments on the two latter bills had been all along very much blended; and the parties had tried their ftrength by divifion on the bill for altering the Maffachufet's charter. On both questions, however, the numbers of the minority had all along continued very low and difproportioned.

The feffion was drawing near to the ufual time of recefs; and the greatest number of the members, fatigued with a long attendance on the American bills, were retired into the country. In this fituation, a bill which has engaged a great deal of the public attention was brought into the house of lords: "The bill for making more effectual provifion for the government of Quebec in North America.

This paled through that houfe with

very little if any obfervation. But when it came down to the house of commons it met with a very different reception. A difpofition immediately appeared in that houfe to criticife it with unufual feverity. The party for miniftry feemed to be a little alarmed at this fpirit, partly becaufe, from its eafy pailage through the houfe of lords,, it was not fo much expected; but principally, because they apprehended it would create more unealnefs among the people out of doors than any of the former bills. In this cafe the paffions which had been excited by the diforders in America, did not operate in their favour. And as the act had for a part of its objects establishments touching religion, it was far more likely to give occafion for popular complaint. The minitry therefore found it neceffary not to carry things with fo high an hand as in the preceding bills. They admitted that this bill came down to the house of commons in a very imperfect flate; and that they would be open to any reafonable alterations and amendments. This plan might be difcuffed more at leifure than that for regulating Massachuset's Bay; in that cafe it was neceffary to fhow a degree of vigour and decifion, or all government might be lott, and all order confounded. But here they were not fo much preffed; for though that government wanted regulation extremely, yet the people were disposed to peace and obedience. A good deal of time was spent in going through this affair; great altercations arofe in the committee; many witneffes were examined. Among thefe were general Carleton, governor of Canada; Mr. Hay, chief juftice of that province; Mr. Mazeres, curfitor baron of the Exchequer, late attorney general there, and agent to the English inhabitants of Canada; Dr. Marriot, the king's advocate general in England; Monf. Lolbiniere, a French gentleman of confiderable property in Canada.

The principal objects of the Quebec bill were to afcertain the limits of that province, which were extended far beyond what had been fettled as fuch by the King's proclamation of 1763. To form a legiflative council for all the affairs of that province, except taxation, which council fhould be appointed by the crown, the office to be held during pleasure; and his majesty's Canadian Roman catholic fubjects were entitled to a place in it. To eftablifh the French laws, and a trial without jury, in civil cafes, and the English laws, with a trial by jury, in criminal. To fecure to the Roman catholic

clergy