Mr. Skyn ner. direct us. the finger of Nature pointing out law, is to me an absurdity; Mr. SKYNNER--We are got now upon the most important question that can come on. I think the caufe does not want advocates; and therefore it might be improper for me to give my opinion; but, Sir, it is no unnatural thing, that the death of a relation fhould be attempted to be redreffed, and that the friends of the deceafed fhould feek for juftice. The appeal for murder, Sir, is confidered as a civil action, and to go on hand in hand with the criminal profecution; and furely, Sir, there is nothing then fo exceedingly favage or barbarous in it, if it may be compenfated by civil action. But let us confider how this will operate in the Colonies; let us confider in what manner this action can be brought; the Americans cannot make use of it unless their conftitution allows it a writ muft firft iffue out of the Court of Chancery; but as they have no fuch Court in that country, it cannot take its rife there. A writ of this kind can only iffue when the perfon is in the actual cuftody of the Marshal. In the procefs which you have laid down in the Bill before us, bail is allowed to be taken for the offence; fo that he never can be actually in the custody of the Marshal. Therefore, at prefent, as their conftitution stands, I look upon the writ of an execution of appeal to be impoflible there. The Americans will think that we are breaking into their civil rights; and I think it highly improper to introduce the appeal for murder in this inftance, as it is not neceffary. But, Sir, I cannot fit down without faying a few words in defence of that able perfon alluded to, now a great magiftrate, who has thought there is fomething in our conftitution worth preferving. And forry I am to hear that great and able writer has received any reproach or admonition in this fenate; and I believe the Honorable Gentleman (Captain Phipps) is fingular in his opinion upon this head; and I am glad to find there there are no ftrangers in the gallery, for his own fake, to hear SIR RICHARD SUTTON--Sir, I do not think that the Sir Richard appeal for murder ought to be partially taken away; if you Sutton. take it away from any part of the dominions, you should take it from the whole. I am much against the measure, because I think it vindictive and cruel. Mr. C. FOX---I am for taking away the appeal for murder Mr. C. Fox. entirely, but I am not for taking it away in part. If the appeal is allowed, you take away the power of pardoning in the Crown. I look upon the power of pardon as much a right in the subject to claim, as part of the trial. Suppofe a criminal fhould be tried and convicted, and he should appear to be out of his fenfes, in this cafe he is certainly not to be hanged, the pardon being the only mode of faving his life. Appeal for murder is the only inftance in our laws in which fatisfaction is allowed to the injured by the blood of another, as it may be compenfated for by a fum of money. I fhall vote against this claufe, because I think the Americans have a right to the fame laws as we have. CAPTAIN PHIPPS arofe to explain himfelf with regard Captain to Mr. Blackstone, and faid, however he may have represented Phipps. his performance, he was glad to find it was fo well defended by the warmth of friendship; that he had heard, and was forry to hear, that book had undergone fome regulations with regard to its eligibility, which he hoped was not true. He fat down rather chagrined to find his opinion with regard to that book was fingular. Saville. : SIR GEORGE SAVILLE-Sir, the appetite of revenge is, Sir George like that of hunger, never to be fatisfied. There are certain rights which we bring into fociety which we give up for the good of the whole; that paffion of revenge feems to be under that defcription; and in this inftance only the blood of another may be compenfated by civil action. But I will not contend that to be a civil fuit which ends in hanging, which the appeal for murder does when not compenfated for; but it is neceffary that men fhould give up certain rights which they enjoy for the good of fociety at large. I would with a fair and VOL. VII. Ꮋ Ꮒ impar Mr. Skyn ner. Mr. R. Fuller. Mr. Dun ning. impartial trial to be fecured, which I think is already done in the Colonies without meddling with the appeal for murder. Mr. SKYNNER--Sir, I only rife to explain, that the appeal for murder may be reduced to a civil action; that there alfo lies an appeal in robbery and rape; and if the woman who had been injured, when the man was under the gallows to be hanged, fhould marry him, he would, by the ancient law be faved, becaufe all her civil right would be vefted in her husband by that act, and therefore compenfated for as fuch; by that act fhe vests thofe civil rights, which he had deprived her of, in him as her husband. Mr. WALLACE withdrew the claufe for the appeal for murder. Mr. R. FULLER--Sir, I am the more convinced by what I have heard to-day, that the whole law relative to the appeal for murder, ought to be repealed. I will therefore give notice, on fome future day, when I fhall make the motion. Mr. DUNNING defired to know, whether his Learned Friend (Mr. Wallace) had made any provision against a faulty indictment. Mr. Wallace. Mr. WALLACE faid, he had not, as he did not think it neceffary; that if the prifoner returned, he might there be indicted again. Mr. Dunning. Mr. DUNNING faid, fo then it is intended that the pri foner may go over again if he chufes. Mr. WALLACE then brought up a claufe for continuing that Act for three years, to commence from the end of June next, and to the end of the next feflion of Parliament after the three years. The Bill was then ordered to be engroffed. May 2. Sir GEORGE SAVILLE moved for "Leave to bring up a petition from feveral natives of America, complaining against the two Bills relative to Maffachufet's Bay, alledging, that the destroying of the charter rights, without hearing the parties, was a dangerous fyftem of judicial tyranny." The petition was brought up, and ordered to lie on the table; after which the Bill for regulating the Civil Government of the Province of Maffachufet's Bay was moved to be read a third time. 3. The following is a Copy of the Petition. "THAT the Petitioners are again constrained to complain to the House of two Bills, which, if carried into execution, will be fatal to the rights, liberties, and peace of all America; and that the Petitioners have already feen, with equal astonish ment ment and grief, proceedings adopted against them, which, in violation of the first principles of justice, and of the laws of the land, inflict the fevereft punishinents, without hearing the accufed. Upon the fame principle of injuftice, a Bill is now brought in, which, under the profeffion of better regulating the government of the Maffachufet's Bay, is calculated to deprive a whole province, without any form of trial, of its chartered rights, folemnly fecured to it by mutual compact between the Crown and the people. The Petitioners are well informed, that a charter fo granted, was never before altered, or refumed, but upon a full and fair hearing; that therefore the prefent proceeding is totally unconftitutional, and fets an example which renders every charter in Great Britain and Ame-, rica utterly infecure. The appointment and removal of the Judges at the pleasure of a Governor, with falaries payable by the Crown, puts the property, liberty, and life of the fubject, depending upon judicial integrity, in his power. The Petitioners perceive a fyftem of judicial tyranny deliberately at this day impofed upon them, which, from the bitter experience of its intolerable injuries, has been abolifhed in this country of the fame unexampled and alarming nature is the Bill, which, under the title of a more impartial Administration of Justice in the Province of Maffachufet's Bay, empowers the Governor to withdraw offenders from juftice in the faid. province, holding out to the foldiery an exemption from legal profecution for murder, and, in effect, fubjecting that colony. to military execution: the Petitioners entreat the House to confider what must be the confequence of fending troops, not really under the controul of the civil power, and unamenable to the law, among a people whom they have been industriously taught, by the incendiary arts of wicked men, to regard as deferving every fpecies of infult and abufe; the infults and injuries of a lawlefs foldiery are fuch as no free people can long endure; and the Petitioners apprehend, in the confequences of this Bill, the horrid outrages of military oppreffion, followed by the defolation of civil commotions; the difpenfing power which this Bill intends to give to the Governor, advanced as he is already above the law, and not liable to any impeachment from the people he may opprefs, muft conftitute him an abfolute tyrant; that the Petitioners would be utterly unworthy of the English ancestry which is their claim and pride, if they did not feel a virtuous indignation at the reproach of difaffection and rebellion, with which they have been cruelly afperfed; they can with confidence fay, no imputation was ever lefs deferved; they appeal to the experience of a century, in which the glory, the honor, the profperity Hh 2 of of England, has been, in their eftimation, their own; in which they have not only borne the burden of provincial wars, but have fhared with this country in the dangers and expences of every national war; their zeal for the fervice of the Crown, and the defence of the general empire, has prompted them, whenever it was required, to vote fupplies of men and money, to the utmost exertion of their abilities; the Journals of the House will bear witness to their extraordinary zeal and fervices during the laft war, and that but a very short time before it was refolved here to take from them the right of giving and granting their own money. If difturbances have happened in the Colonies, they entreat the Houfe to confider the caufes which have produced them, among a people hitherto remarkable for their loyalty to the Crown, and affection for this kingdom; no hiftory can fhew, nor will human nature admit of, an inftance of general discontent, but from a general fenfe of oppreffion: the Petitioners conceived, that when they had acquired property, under all the restraints this country thought neceffary to impofe upon their commerce, trade, and manufactures, that property was facred and fecure; they felt a very material difference between being restrained in the acquifition of property, and holding it, when acquired under those restraints, at the difpofal of others; they understand fubordination in the one, and flavery in the other. The Petitioners with they could poffibly perceive any difference between the most abject flavery, and fuch entire fubjection to a Legiflature, in the conftitution of which they have not a fingle voice, nor the least influence, and in which no one is present on their behalf; they regard the giving their property by their own confent alone, as the unalienable right of the subject, and the laft facred bulwark of conftitutional liberty; if they are wrong in this, they have been mifled by the love of liberty, which is their dearest birth-right, by the most folemn ftatutes, and the refolves of this Houfe itself, declaratory of the inherent right of the subject; by the authority of all great conftitutional writers, and by the uninterrupted practice of Ireland and America, who have ever voted their own fupplies to the Crown, all which combine to prove that the property of an English fubject, being a freeman or freeholder, cannot be taken from him but by his own confent: to deprive the Colonies, therefore, of this right, is to reduce them to a state of vaffalage, leaving them nothing they can call their own, nor ca◄ pable of any acquifition but for the benefit of others. It is with infinite and inexpreffible concern, that the Petitioners fee in thefe Bills, and in the principles of them, a direct tendency to reduce their countrymen to the dreadful alternative of being totally |