why may not the officers of the old companies call the old associators together, with such others in the district of each company, as incline to be concerned, and proceed immediately to a new choice by virtue of the act? Other new companies may in other places be formed, as the associated companies were.

Z. You say right. And if this were all the objection to the act, no doubt they would do so immediately. But it is said, there are other faults in it. X. What are they?

Z. The act is so loose, that persons who never intended to engage in the militia, even Quakers, may meet and vote in the choice of the officers.

X. Possibly;-but was any such thing observed in the association elections?

Z. Not that I remember.

X. Why should it be more apprehended now, than it was at that time? Can they have any motives to such a conduct now, which they had not then?

Z. I cannot say.

X. Nor can I. If a militia be necessary for the safety of the province, I hope we shall not boggle at this little difficulty. What else is objected?

Z. I have heard this objected, That it were better the governor should appoint the officers; for, the choice being in the people, a man very unworthy to be an officer may happen to be popular enough to get himself chosen by the undiscerning mob.

X. It is possible. And if all officers appointed by governors were always men of merit, and fully qualified for their posts, it would be wrong ever to hazard a popular election. It is reasonable, I allow, that the commander-in-chief should not have officers absolutely forced upon him, in whom, from his knowledge of their incapacity, he can place no confidence. And, on

the other hand, it seems likely that the people will engage more readily in the service, and face danger with more intrepidity, when they are commanded by a man they know and esteem, and on whose prudence and courage, as well as good-will and integrity, they can have reliance, than they would under a man they either did not know, or did not like. For, supposing governors ever so judicious and upright in the distribution of commissions, they cannot know everybody, in every part of the province, and are liable to be imposed on by partial recommendations; but the people generally know their neighbours. And, to me, the act in question seems to have hit a proper medium between the two modes of appointing. The people choose, and if the governor approves, he grants the commission; if not, they are to choose a second, and even a third time. Out of three choices, it is probable one may be right; and where an officer is approved both by superiors and inferiors, there is the greatest prospect of those advantages that attend a good agreement in the service. This mode of choice is moreover agreeable to the liberty and genius of our constitution. It is similar to the manner in which by our laws sheriffs and coroners are chosen and approved. And yet it has more regard to the prerogative than the mode of choice in some colonies, where the military officers are either chosen absolutely by the companies themselves, or by the House of Representatives, without any negative on that choice, or any approbation necessary from the governor.

Y. But is that agreeable to the English constitution? X. Considered in this light, I think it is; British subjects, by removing into America, cultivating a wilderness, extending the dominion, and increasing the wealth, ccmmerce, and power of their mother country,

1

at the hazard of their lives and fortunes, ought not, and in fact do not thereby lose their native rights. There is a power in the crown to grant a continuance of those rights to such subjects, in any part of the world, and to their posterity born in such new country; and, for the farther encouragement and reward of such merit, to grant additional liberties and privileges, not used in England, but suited to the different circumstances of different colonies. If then the grants of those additional liberties and privileges may be regularly made under an English constitution, they may be enjoyed agreeably to that constitution.

Y. But the act is very short; there are numberless circumstances and occasions pertaining to a body of armed men, which are not, as they ought to have been, expressly provided for in the act.

X. It is true, there are not express provisions in the act for all circumstances; but there is a power lodged by the act in the governor and field-officers of the regiments, to make all such provisions, in the articles of war which they may form and establish.

Y. But can it be right in the legislature, by any act, to delegate their power of making laws to others?

X. I believe not, generally; but certainly in particular cases it may. Legislatures may, and frequently do, give to corporations power to make by-laws for their own government. And, in this case, the act of Parliament gives the power of making articles of war for the government of the army to the King alone, and there is no doubt but the Parliament understands the rights of government.

Y. Are you sure the act of Parliament gives such power?

X. This is the act. The power I mention is here in the 55th section. "Provided always, that it shall and

may be lawful to and for his Majesty, to form, make, and establish articles of war for the better government of his Majesty's forces, and for bringing offenders against the same to justice; and to erect and constitute courts-martial, with power to try, hear, and determine any crimes or offences by such articles of war, and inflict penalties by sentence or judgment of the same." And here you see, bound up with the act, the articles of war, made by his Majesty in pursuance of the act, and providing for every circum

stance.

Z. It is, sure enough. I had been told that our act of Assembly was impertinently singular in this particular.

X. The governor himself, in a message to the House, expressly recommended this act of Parliament for their imitation, in forming the militia bill.

Z. I never heard that before.

X. But it is true. The Assembly, however, considering that this militia would consist chiefly of freeholders, have varied a little from that part of the act of Parliament, in favor of liberty; they have not given. the sole power of making those articles of war to the governor, as that act does to the King; but have joined with the governor, for that purpose, a number of officers to be chosen by the people. The articles, moreover, are not to be general laws, binding on all the province, nor on any man who has not first approved of them, and voluntarily engaged to observe them.

Z. Is there no danger that the governor and officers may make those articles too severe ?

X. Not without you can suppose them enemies to the service, and to their country; for, if they should make such as are unfit for freemen and Englishmen

to be subjected to, they will get no soldiers; nobody will engage. In some cases, however, if you and I were in actual service, I believe we should both think it necessary for our own safety, that the articles should be pretty severe.

Z. What cases are they?

X. Suppose a sentinel should betray his trust, give intelligence to the enemy, or conduct them into our quarters.

Z. To be sure there should be severe punishments for such crimes, or we might all be ruined.

X. Choose reasonable men for your officers, and you need not fear their making reasonable laws; and if they make such, I hope reasonable men will not refuse to engage under them.

Y. But here is a thing I do not like. By this act of Assembly, the Quakers are neither compelled to muster, nor to pay a fine if they do not.

X. It is true; nor could they be compelled either to muster or pay a fine of that kind, by any militia law made here. They are exempted by the charter and fundamental laws of the province.

Y. How so?

X. See here; it is the first clause in the charter. I will read it. "Because no people can be truly happy, though under the greatest enjoyment of civil liberties, if abridged of the freedom of their consciences as to their religious profession and worship; and Almighty God being the only lord of conscience, father of lights and spirits, and the author as well as object of all divine knowledge, faith, and worship, who only doth enlighten the minds, and persuade and convince the understandings of people; I do hereby grant and declare, That no person or persons inhabiting in this province or territories, who shall confess and acknowl