in all his right, and through which his service and allegiance must be derived to the crown, and from which no ap· peal lies in criminal causes, so as that such subject may become amenable to a jurisdiction foreign to his natural and legal resiancy; to which he may be thereby transported, and under which he may be brought to trial and receive judgment, contrary to the rights and privileges of the subject, as declared by the spirit and intent and especially by the 16th of the habeas corpus act. And if the person of any subject within the said colonies and plantations should be seized or detained by any power issuing from any court, without the jurisdiction of the colony where he then had his legal resiancy, it would become the duty of the courts of justice within such colony (it is undoubtedly of their jurisdiction so to do) to issue the writ of habeas corpus.

Hence also it is, that in like manner as "the command and disposition of the militia, and of all forces by sea and land, and of all forts and places of strength, is, and by the laws of England ever was, the undoubted right of his

those provincial courts'do not extend. In the case of treasons committed within the jurisdiction of the colonies and plantations, there are courts competent to try such crimes and to give judgment thereupon, where the trials of such are regulated by laws to which the king hath given his consent: from which there lies no appeal, and wherein the king hath given power and instruction to his governor as to execution or respite of judgment. The said act of Henry VIII. which provides remedy for a case which supposes the want of due legal jurisdiction, cannot be any way, or by any rule, applied to a case where there is due legal and competent jurisdiction. B. F.

r The-referring to an old act made for the trial of treasons committed out of the realm, by such persons as had no legal resiancy but within the realm, and who were of the realm, applying the purview of that statute, which was made to bringsubjects of the realm who had committed treason out of the realm (where there was no criminal jurisdiction to which they could be amenable) to trial within the realm, under that criminal jurisdiction to which alone by their legal resi ancy and allegiance they were amenable; and applying this to the case of subjects whose legal "resiancy" is without the realm, and who are by that "resiancy" and their allegiance amenable to a jurisdiction authorised and empowered to try and give judgment upon all capital offences whatsoever without appeal; thus applying this statute so as to take up a proceeding, for where there is no legal process either by common or statute law as now established, but in defiance of which there is a legal process established by the habeas corpus act ;-would be, to disfranchise the subject in America of those rights and liberties which by statute and common law he is now entitled to. B. F.

majesty and his royal predecessors, kings and queens of England, within all his majesty's realms and dominions "," in like manner as the supreme military power and command (so far as the constitution knows of and will justify its establishment) is inseparably annexed to, and forms an essential part of the office of supreme civil magistrate, the office of king: in like manner, in all governments under the king, where the constituents are British subjects, and of full and perfect right entitled to the British laws and constitution, the supreme military command within the precincts of such jurisdictions must be inseparably annexed to the office of supreme civil magistrate, (his majesty's regent vice-gerent, lieutenant, or locum tenens, in what form soever established) so that the king cannot, by any commission of regency, by any commission or charter of government, separate or withdraw the supreme command of the military from the office of supreme civil magistrateeither by reserving this command in his own hands, to be exercised and executed independent of the civil power; or by granting a distinct commission to any military commander in chief, so to be exercised and executed; but more especially not within such jurisdictions where such supreme military power (so far as the constitution knows and will justify the same) is already annexed and granted to the office of supreme civil magistrate.-And hence it is, that the king cannot erect or establish any law martial or military command, by any commission which may supersede and not be subject to the supreme civil magistrate,

s 13th and 14th Car. II c. 2.

t If the king was to absent himself for a time from the realm, and did as usual leave a regency in his place, his locum tenens, as supreme civil magistrate, could he authorise and commission any military commander in chief to command the militia, forts, and forces, independent of such regency? Could he do this in Ireland? Could he do this in the colonies and plantations, where the governor is already, by commission, or charter or both under the great seal, military commander in chief, as part of (and inseparably annexed to) the office of supreme civil magistrate, his majesty's locum tenens within said jurisdictions? If he could, then, while openly, by patent according to law, he appeared to esta blish a free British constitution, he might by a fallacy establish a military power and governm. nt. B. F.

Z z

within the respective precincts of the civil jurisdictions of said colonies and plantations, otherwise than in such manner as the said law martial and military commissions are annexed or subject to the supreme civil jurisdiction within his majesty's realms and dominions of Great Britain and Ireland; and hence it is, that the establishment and exercise of such commands and commissions would be illegal".

Rem. The king has the command of all military force in his dominions: but in every distinct state of his dominions there should be the consent of the parliament or assembly (the representative body) to the raising and keeping up such military force. He cannot even raise troops and quarter them in another, without the consent of that other. He cannot of right bring troops raised in Ireland and quarter them in Britain, but with the consent of the parliament of Britain: nor carry to Ireland and quarter there, soldiers raised in Britain, without the consent of the Irish parliament, unless in time of war and cases of extreme exigency.-In 1756, when the speaker went up to present the money-bills, he said among other things, that " England was capable of fighting her own battles and defending herself; and although ever attached to your majesty's person, ever at ease under your just government, they cannot forbear taking notice of some circumstances in the present situation of affairs, which nothing but the confidence in your justice could hinder from alarming their most serious apprehensions. Subsidies to foreign princes when already burthened with a debt scarce to be borne, cannot but be severely felt. An army of foreign troops, a thing unprecedented, unheard of, unknown,

u Governor Pownall, accompanied this paper to Dr. Franklin with a sort of prophetic remark. After stating, that these theorems, and their application to - existing cases, were intended to remedy the prejudice, indigestion, indecision, and errors, then prevailing either in opinions or conduct; he adds, "the very attention to the investigation may lead to the discovery of some truths respecting the whole British empire, then little thought of and scarce even suspected, and which perhaps it would not be prudent at this time to mark and point out."The minister however judged the discussion of dubious rights over growing states, a better policy than possess:on, discretion, and silence: he turned civilian, for which he was not qualified, and lost an empire, which he was not worthy to govern.

brought into England, cannot but alarm, &c. (See the Speech.)

N. B. These foreign troops were part of the king's subjects, Hanoverians, and all in his service, which was the same thing as if he were to transport troops from England into the American colonies without the consent of their legisla ture. B. F.

TO MR. DUBOURG.

Concerning the Dissentions between England and America.* London, October 2, 1770. I SEE with pleasure that we think pretty much alike on the subjects of English America. We of the colonies have never insisted, that we ought to be exempt from contributing to the common expences necessary to support the prosperity of the empire. We only assert, that having parlia ments of our own, and not having representatives in that of Great Britain, our parliaments are the only judges of what we can and what we ought to contribute in this case; and that the English parliament has no right to take our money without our consent. In fact, the British em

pire is not a single state; it comprehends many; and though the parliament of Great Britain has arrogated to itself the power of taxing the colonies, it has no more right to do so, than it has to tax Hanover. We have the same king, but not the same legislatures.

The dispute between the two countries has already cost England many millions sterling, which it has lost in, its commerce, and America has in this respect been a proportionable gainer. This commerce consisted principally of superfluities; objects of luxury and fashion, which we can well do without; and the resolution we have formed, of importing no more till our grievances are redressed, has enabled many of our infant manufactures to take root; and it will not be easy to make our people abandon them in future, even should a connection more cordial than ever suc

x Re-translated from a French edition of Dr. Franklin's works.

ceed the present troubles. I have indeed no doubt, that the parliament of England will finally abandon its present pretensions, and leave us to the peaceable enjoyment of our rights and privileges.

B. FRANKLIN,

THE TEA TAX.

Preface by the British Editor [Dr. Franklin] to "the Votes and Proceedings of the Freeholders, and other Inhabitants of the Town of Boston, in Town-Meeting assembled according to Law (published by Order of the Town), &cy.”

Z

ALL accounts of the discontent, so general in our colonies, have of late years been industriously smothered and concealed here, it seeming to suit the views of the American minister to have it understood, that by his great abilities, all faction was subdued, all opposition suppressed, and the whole country quieted. That the true state of affairs there may be known, and the true causes of that discontent well understood, the following piece (not the production of a private writer, but the unanimous act of a large American city) lately printed in New England, is republished here. This nation, and the other nations of Europe, may thereby learn, with more certainty, the grounds of

y "Boston printed : London reprinted, and sold by J. Wilkie, in St. Paul's Church-yard. 1773."--The preface only is given, as that alone properly belongs to this work.

This little piece very much irritated the English ministry. It was their determination, that the Americans should receive teas only from Great Britain. And accordingly the East India company sent out large cargoes under their protection. The colonists every where refused, either entrance, or else permission of sale, except at Boston, where, the force of government preventing more moderate measures, certain persons in disguise threw it into the sea.

The preamble of the stamp act produced the tea act; the tea act produced violence; violence, acts of parliament; acts of parliament, a revolt." A little neglect," says poor Richard, " may breed great mischief: for want of a nail the shoe was lost; for want of a shoe the horse was lost; for want of a horse the rider was lost; being overtaken and slain by the enemy; all for want of a little care about a horse-shoe nail."

z Lord Hillsborough.-This nobleman, before this time first lord of trade, was introduced in 1768 into the new-titled office of secretary of state for the colonies.