1761] Writs of Assistance 113 Writs of United States, III, I-12. islands. Pitt ordered the customs officials to do their duty, Reasons for and, by a display of zeal, they endeavored to atone for their the issue of former laxity. It was found to be most difficult to carry Assistance, out Pitt's instructions: it was not easy to seize goods on Channing's which no duty had been paid; it was practically impossible to secure a conviction from a colonial jury. Ordinary search warrants were of little use because they authorized the seizure of specified goods in specified places. The owner of the merchandise was certain to learn that the warrant had been issued and by moving his goods into another warehouse he could save them from seizure. 116. Writs of Assistance, 1761. — These were: general search warrants which authorized the holder to seize any suspected goods anywhere. and to break into houses to search for them. In 1761 the customs officials at Boston applied to the court for new writs of assistance and the merchants employed James: James Otis Otis to oppose their being granted. From the strictly legal standpoint the case seemed to be in favor of the royal side. Otis, therefore, boldly asserted that Parliament could not legalize tyranny and the use of writs of assistance was often tyrannical. Such a law would be contrary to the British constitution and therefore void. Otis's argument, however weak in point of law, was in harmony with the ideas then prevalent in America. Some months later, the writs were granted by the court and were often used not only in Massachusetts but in some other colonies as well. In 1767 their issue in the colonies was declared to be legal by an act of I Otis's speech. American History Leaf lets, No. 33. Political ham's Republic, 168-170. Parliament. The only remedy in the hands of the colonists was resistance by armed force, and for that few colonists as yet were prepared. 117. Otis's Rights of the Colonies, 1764. A few years later Otis embodied his ideas of the rights of the colonists in two essays, entitled: A Vindication of the House of Representatives and The Rights of the Colonies Asserted and Proved. His arguments in these papers are mainly a mere restatement of the ground assumed by Locke in his Essay on Government. Otis asserted that "God made all men naturally equal," and that government was instituted for the benefit of the governed: it followed that if a government were harmful to the people, it should be opposed and destroyed; the colonists were on a footing of complete equality with the subjects of the king living in Great Britain. In conclusion, however, Otis admitted the supremacy of the British Parliament, and thus denied the logical conclusion of his argument. Patrick Henry of Virginia had no such scruples. In his speech on the Parson's Cause he stated the theory of colonial rights in its complete form. 118. The Parson's Cause, 1763.-This celebrated case arose out of the exercise by the king of the power to veto acts of the Virginia Assembly. The salaries of the clergy 1763] The Parson's Cause 115 The Parson's Cause, 1763. Fiske's II, No. 37. men of that province were estimated in tobacco, as was nearly everything else. Sometimes tobacco fell to one penny a pound; at other times it rose to six pence. In Revolution, 1758 foreseeing a small crop of tobacco and consequently a I, 18; Convery high price, the Virginia Assembly passed a law to the temporaries, effect that all payments due in tobacco might be paid in money at the rate of two pence for each pound of tobacco. This law was known as the Two Penny Act and was to be in force for only one year. The clergymen appealed to the British government to annul it and it was vetoed by the king. This was in 1760. Meantime the church authorities in Virginia had paid the parsons' salaries for the year 1758 in money at the rate of two pence for every pound of tobacco due them. The clergymen sued for the difference between what they had received and the full value of New Jersey Currency the tobacco. In one of these cases Patrick Henry was employed to oppose the parsons' claims. He was a most industrious young lawyer and had received a good education especially in English legal history. Tyler's ch. iv. Putting aside the legalities of the case, Henry declared Henry's that government was a conditional compact between the speech. king, stipulating protection on the one hand, and the Patrick people, stipulating obedience and support on the other. Henry, The Two Penny Act was passed for the good of the people of Virginia, and its veto by the king was a violation of the conditional compact and an instance of misrule and neglect, which made it necessary for the people of Virginia to provide for their own safety. The king had "degenerated into a tyrant and forfeited all right to his subjects' obedience." Nevertheless, under the ruling of the court, the jury must award damages to the parson, but they would satisfy the law Pontiac's by the smallest possible award. They assessed the damages at one penny. In this case, and in that of writs of assistance, Henry and Otis merely uttered what many men thought; they had said nothing new, but they had struck a heavy blow at the continuance of a sentiment of loyalty. A heavier blow to that sentiment was inflicted by the British Parliament in the passage of the Stamp Act. 119. Grenville's Policy. - The French and Indian War ended with the capture of Montreal in 1760, although the America, VI, Treaty of Paris was not signed until 1763. The Indians 688-701. The new British colonial policy. Channing's United States, The Stamp Act proposed, 1764; passed, 1763. living in the Northwest found it difficult to believe that their friends, the French, had really been beaten. They captured several forts on the Great Lakes, and under the lead of Pontiac blockaded Detroit for several months. This Indian rebellion, and the maintenance of English authority in Canada, demanded the presence of a large force of regular soldiers in the northern colonies and in Canada. The British government thought that the colonists might well shoulder a large part of the expense of those troops. The Quartering Act obliged them to furnish those soldiers who were stationed in the old thirteen colonies with lodging and some of their food without cost to England. According to the old law the duties on molasses were so high that it was more profitable to import it without payment, even at the risk of losing the goods, than it was to pay the duties. Grenville lowered the rates on sugar and molasses in order to do away with the temptation to evade the law and make them produce revenue. He also made new regulations to enforce the Navigation Acts. He decided in addition to tax the colonists directly by an act of Parliament. This aroused indignation from the Penobscot to the Altamaha. 120. Passage of the Stamp Act, 1765. — In March, 1764, Grenville stated in the House of Commons that it might be thought necessary for the colonists to contribute toward the support of the troops stationed amongst them for their protection. He moved a resolution to this effect, which was passed without debate or opposition. He deferred 1765] The Stamp Act 117 bringing in a bill based on this resolution, in the expectation that the colonial assemblies might propose some other method of taxation by Parliament, or, perhaps, might vote the necessary funds. Grenville did not believe that the colonists would protest against being taxed by Parliament; but this was precisely what they did. Assembly after assembly petitioned in vigorous language against the proposed measure, but these petitions were not even received by the House of Commons. The act levying stamp duties was brought in and passed without serious opposition, and received the royal assent in March, 1765. 121. The Stamp Act. The act in itself was on the same Analysis of lines as a law in force in Britain at that time. Legal docu- the act. ments and official papers were to be written on stamped paper, and a stamp was to be placed on several articles, such as printed books, newspapers, and playing cards. Ordinary business papers and receipts for money paid were not included among the articles to be taxed, and the measure was less severe in its operation than the law then in force in Great Britain. It was not intended to draw the money thus raised to England, but to expend it in America in the purchase of food and other supplies for the soldiers. The evil feature of the act as a law was that persons accused of offenses under it might not enjoy the benefits of trial by jury, at the discretion of the prosecuting officer. The Stamp Act was opposed in America, not on its merits as a piece of legislation, but on the ground that " no taxation without representation" was one of the leading maxims of the Constitution of the British Empire and one of the most important rights of the American colonists as Englishmen. representa tion." 122. Representative Institutions. — The phrase "no tax- "No taxaation without representation" was familiar to all sections of tion without the British people, but it conveyed very different ideas to those living in Great Britain and to their kinsfolk in the colonies. The British Parliament was composed of two: houses, the Peers, comprising hereditary nobles and the bishops, and the House of Commons. The members of the |