The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Boston [Mass.]) 1770-1772, 1771-05-23
NDO N, April 2, 1871.

ND N, April 2, 1871.
alderman SAWBRIDGE's SPEECH, in de-
fence of the LORD. MAYOR, in the
HspE Of Commons.
Mr.. SPEAKER,
before you come to the determi" alton
ID of araigning fuch high magiitrate as
the Lord Mayor, think it would not be
amifs to enquire into the aate of The aw, and
fee whether he has really been guilty of ar
offence. You fay that he has violated your
privileges. But has he violated the law Of
the land, which is the fandard of mag-
fifaie's condu6i ] defy you to prove fuch an
aHertion. He has Gliefly adhered to the letter
of the law, and the fpirit of the contribution.
I do not therefore rife 70 much to defend him
and his brother aldermen, as to return them
my hncerelf acknowled gmen!s for their up
rightnefs and intrepidity. Had ! been in
their place, truif fbould have had the vir-
tue to act with equal hrmnes. Entertaining
thefc fentiments, how can i hell exclaimlng
againf the propoied motion1 The magiftratss
of the city have walked on legal and con-
ftitu,ional ground do you follow their ex-
ample. If you have already erred, do not
aggravate your guilt by a frelh ueipafs. 1t is
enough that your warrant was illegal; an
other illegal aa will not mend the matter.
You fare, and look aaonifhed, that lhouId
call your warrant illegal. But have faid
nothing which | am not ready to prove. Nor
Ihall ufe my own words that what affirm
may have the more weight, will uGe the
words of Lord Coke. -Four things (fays that
oracle of the law are eflentiay neceilary in
warrant. He who flues it in any particular
cafe, muf have lawful authority; it mulf be
: under bis hand and zeal there muif be law
full cauie of commitment; and it mutt have
a lawful conclulion that is, the warrant
muff declare that !! e culprt is to be fafely
kept, ill he be discharged by due courfe of
law. Now are all theie ingredients TO be
found in the warrant, which was brought
before the Lord Mayori No, not one. For
by what law is the Speaker Of the Houfe of
Commons authorized to apprshend any de-
lirquent in the CITY of London No law for
that purpoie exits. But there is a law for
the reverfc. The city has from time imme
mortal enjoyed the right of executing and re-
turning all writs, precepts, commandments,
and warrants by its officers. No prefs- war
rant is valid within the city, except it is
backed by the Lord Mayor. Where is the
particular fatute, that exempts the warrant
of the Speaker of the Houie of Commons
from this rule : ! defy you to point it out.
But preicription alone, which in this cafe
would be luficient, is not for the city. Ii has
40 poGtive aes of the whole Legislature in its
favour. Magma Charta fays, let London
poileis all its antent franchifes and cuffoms.
The chatter granted by Edward the third,
with the content of parliament, in 227, de-
elares, that no luminous, attachments, or ex-
ecutions lhall be made, but by the minifters
of the faid city. The charter granted BY Ed
ward the fourth, in I46o, renews the fame
aGurance, and declares, that the right of ex
ecuting and returning all forts Of wrts and
warrants ihsll be in the city. The act of
William and Mary, in 900, is, ifit be poi,