unnecessary; that the remedy by habeas corpus at common law was ample in all such cases.

Horace Walpole says, "he spoke two hours and a half," and according to a report of his speech by Dr. Birch, he said, "that people supported it from the groundless imagination that liberty was concerned in it; whereas it had as little to do with liberty as the navigation laws, or the act for the encouragement of madder; that ignorance on subjects of this nature was extremely pardonable, since the knowledge of laws required a particular study of them; that the greatest genius, without such study, could no more become master of them than of Japanese literature, without understanding the language of the country; and that the writ of habeas corpus at common law was a sufficient remedy against all those abuses this bill was supposed to rectify." 2 Campbell's Lives Ch. Jus., 453.

The "examination of the judges" during the pendency of the bill in the House of Lords, consisted in propounding to them ten questions which will be noticed hereafter. They relate to interesting questions of practice under the writ of habeas corpus. A majority of the judges declared in favor of the exercise of the powers which had been doubted.

We have now glanced at those famous laws of England, constitutional and statutory, which have been said to procure and complete to every individual that sense of independence which is the noblest advantage attending liberty. To the lover of liberty, the "Bible of the English Constitution" will ever

appear a volume above all price. History, indeed, shows us that for many centuries, while as yet only the first chapter, Magna Carta, was written, political irreligion was wofully prevalent in the land; but the vital principles which were proclaimed in that chapter were indestructible. Steadily, though slowly, they worked their silent way to the very heart of English jurisprudence. In process of time, new chapters were added, expounding, applying and extending the principles of the first, until at last a consistent and comprehensive creed was given to civil liberty in England.

But this political bible, as well as THE BIBLE from which it drew its inspiration, was to shed the light of its pages upon another land and to nourish the spirit of liberty in the hearts of another people.

CHAPTER V.

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY GUARANTEES OF THE RIGHT OF PERSONAL LIBERTY IN AMERICA.

1. Magna Carta. The American colonists always claimed to possess "all the rights, liberties and immunities of free and natural-born subjects within the realm of England." This claim was not founded so much upon their charters as upon the fact that they were Englishmen, and as such, inherited the laws of their country.

This idea of a birth-right in the laws, was always a favorite one in England. "In Edw. VI., fol. 36, the laws are called the great inheritance of every subject, and the inheritance of inheritances, without which inheritance we have no inheritance," 8 St. Tr., 117; and it is very justly observed by Chalmers, 1 Annals, 677, that "the customs of a free people are a part of their liberty."

It was, indeed, expressly declared in all the charters under which the colonies were settled, except that to

.

William Penn, that all subjects and their children inhabiting the colonies, should be deemed naturalborn subjects, and entitled to all the liberties and immunities thereof.

The omission, however, in the charter to Penn, was never supposed to deprive the Pennsylvania colonist of his rights as an Englishman. On the contrary, it seems to have been thought "that the clause was wholly unnecessary, as the allegiance to the crown was reserved; and the common law thence inferred, that all the inhabitants were subjects, and of course were entitled to all the privileges of Englishmen." 1 Chal. Annals, 639, 658; 1 Story's Const., § 122.

"It was," says Story, "under the consciousness of the full possession of the rights, liberties and immunities of British subjects, that the colonists in almost all the early legislation of their respective assemblies, insisted upon a declaratory act, acknowledging and confirming them." 1 Story Const., § 165. Some of them were content with reaffirming the Great Charter; others added to its provisions.

In Maryland, in 1638, by the 4th sec. of the "Act ordaining certain laws for the government of this province," it was provided that "The inhabitants shall have their rights and liberties according to the Great Charter of England."

In Connecticut, in 1650, it was enacted that "No man's life shall be taken away, no man's honor or good name shall be stained, no man's person shall be arrested, restrained, banished, dismembered nor any ways punished; no man shall be deprived of his wife or children, no man's goods or estate shall be

taken away from him, nor any ways indamaged under color of law or countenance of authority, unless it be by virtue or equity of some express law of the country, warranting the same, established by a general court and sufficiently published, or in case of the defect of a law in any particular case, by the word of God." 1 Col. Rec. of Conn., 509.

In later times, when those rights and liberties were threatened, they were reasserted from time to time, by the colonies severally, and, as the danger increased, collectively.

The Congress of the Nine Colonies, in 1765, assembled at New York, declared that the colonists were "entitled to all the inherent right and liberties of his (the King's) natural-born subjects, within the kingdom of Great Britain." Hutch. Hist. Mass. Bay, Appendix F.

And the Continental Congress of 1774, composed of delegates from twelve colonies (Georgia did not unite with them until the next year), in their Declaration of Rights, amongst other things declared:

"That the inhabitants of the English colonies in North America, by the immutable laws of nature, the principles of the English Constitution, and the several charters or compacts, have the following RIGHTS.

"Resolved, 1. That they are entitled to life, liberty and property; and that they have never ceded to any sovereign power whatever a right to dispose of either without their

consent.

"Resolved, 2. That our ancestors, who first settled these colonies, were, at the time of their emigration from the mother county, entitled to all the rights, liberties and immunities of free and natural-born subjects within the realm of England.