The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Boston [Mass.]) 1770-1772, 1771-07-04

never took the power Of puniihment into
their own hands. -, They either fought re-
dreis by petition to the King, or, ~haf i,
more remarkable, applied for juifice to the
t1ouie OF LordsS and when Gtisfaeiion was
denied them, orfdelayed, their only remedy
was TO refuie proceeding upon the King )
bulinels. So little conception had our an
cettofs osthe monftrous doctrines now MAIN
tanned concerning privilege, thar in the reign
It Elizabeth, even liberty Of fpeech, the vital
principle of adelibeiatye afrmbly, was .s=
framed, BY the Queens authority, to a
fmp'e oysor 20, and this refrielion, though
mpoied upon three fucccfive parliamsnts
gn the years r5q3---Iso7--.and I6oII " as
never once dIiputed by the Houie of
Commons.
know there are many precedents of ar
biHary commitments for contempt; but,
beiides that they are of too modern a date TO
warrant prciumpticn that fuch power was
originally vcHed in the Houle of Commons.
Fad alone Joss not confitute yiebt. Ifit
does, general warrants are lawful. An
ordinance of the two houGes has a force
equal to law; and the criminal juriidiSion
| I'll med by the Commons in I62I, in the
c.ie Of Edward Lloyd, is a good precedent
10 warrant the like proceedings aeainff any
man, who fha!l unadvifedly mention the
siy of "a King, or the ambition Of a Pin
cels.--- Ihetruth is, Sir, tba. the elealelt and
mott excePtionable part of the privileges now
commended for, were introduced and sHeted
by Houfc of Commons which aboifhed
both monarchy and Peerage, and whole pro-
ceedlngs, although they ended in one glo-
rous aa of ubitantial juaice, could no way
be reconcied to the forms of the contribution.
lhelrduccehofs pro6ted by the example, and
confirmed their power BY making moderate
or popular uie of it. I bus il grew by de-
grees, from notorious innovation a, one
period, to be tacitly admitted as the privilege
Of parliament at another.
If however il could be proved, from con :
alterations of necefity or convenience, that
an unlimited power of commitment ought to
be intruAed to the Houfe of Commons, and
thai in fG3 they have exercifed it without
oPpoiitlon, fill in contemplation of law, the
Prefumption is firongy againR them. Il is
a leading maxim OF the laws of England
(and, without it, all laws are nugatory) that
there is no wrong without remedy, nor any
legal power without legal courfe to carry
it into efea. Let the power, now in quef-
ton, be tried BY this rule. The Speaker
illues his warrant of attachment. The party
attached either rehAs force with force, or
appeals to msgifrate, who declares the
warrant illegal, and dicharges the prifoner.
Does the law provide no legal means for in
forcing legal variant Is there no regular
proceeding pointed out m our law books to
aAen and vindicsic the authority of 70 high
court as the Houfe of Commons The
queRion is anf@ered Directly by the fact.
Their unswful commands are Teiiifcd, and
they have no remedy. The imprisonment
of their own members is revenge indeed,
but i; is no aleulon Of the privilege they con-
tend for. Their whole proceeding fops, and
,here they flznd, ATTAINED 70 retreat and n1-
able to advance. Sir, thefe ignorant men
lhould be informed, thar The execution ct
The laws OF England is not left in this uncer-
tain, 6efenceleis condition. If the Ptocels q
the courts of WeRminficr- Hall be Ieiiited,
they have direct coUr6e, iuficient TO infoTce
fubmifiion. The court OF Kings Bench
commands the Sheriff to raIle the pfc e.m-
ssi;GsEs. The Courts Of Chancery snG Tx