sion of public concern, were printed in pamphlet form and circulated amongst the people.

In 1647, the Governor and Assistants of Massachusetts ordered the importation of two copies of Coke on Little117] ton; two copies of Dalton's Jus. *Peace; two copies of Coke's Reports, and two copies of Coke on Magna Carta.' The 5th ed. of Care's book, entitled "English Liberties; or the Free-born Subject's Inheritance," containing Magna Carta, the Habeas Corpus Act and other statutes, with comments on each of them, was published in Boston in 1721.2

As the time for revolution drew nigh, the colonists fully comprehend the magnitude of the questions at state. Gage, writing from Boston to the British secretary in 1768, discourages measures of oppression towards a "country where every man studies law."

This addiction of the colonists to study and discuss their political rights, and the effects of such habits, were pressed upon the attention of the House of Commons by Burke in 1774, in his celebrated speech on Taxation of America, in the following terms:

"Permit me, Sir, to add another circumstance in our colonies, which contributes no mean part towards the growth and effect of this untractable spirit. I mean their education. In no country perhaps in the world is the law so general a study. The profession itself is numerous and powerful; and in most provinces it takes the lead. The greater number of the deputies sent to the congress were lawyers. But all who read, and most do read, endeavor to obtain some smattering of that science. I have been told by an eminent bookseller, that in no branch of his business, after tracts of popular de118] votion, were so many books as those on the law exported to the plantations. The colonies have now fallen into the way of printing them for their own use.

1 Sullivan's Address, 23 Law Intel. 229.

2 Marvin's Legal Bibliography, tit. Care, Henry.

I hear they have sold nearly as many of Blackstone's Commentaries in America as in England. General Gage marks out this disposition very particularly in a letter on your table. He states that all the people in his government are lawyers, or smatterers in law; and that in Boston they have been enabled, by successful chicane, wholly to evade many parts of your capital penal constitutions. The smartness of debate will say, that this knowledge ought to teach them more clearly the rights of legislature, their obligations to obedience, and the penalties of rebellion. All this is mighty well. But my honorable and learned friend (the Attorney-General) on the floor, who descended to mark what I say for animadversion, will disdain that ground. He has heard, as well as I, that when great honors and great emoluments do not win over this knowledge to the service of the state, it is a formidable adversary to government.

"If the spirit be not tamed and broken by these happy methods, it is stubborn and litigious. Abeunt studia in mores. This study renders men acute, inquisitive, dexterous, prompt in attack, ready in defence, full of resources. In other countries, the people, more simple and of a less mercurial cast, judge of an ill principle in government only by an actual grievance; here they anticipate the evil, and judge of the pressure of the grievance by the badness of the principle. They augur misgovernment from *a distance, and snuff the ap- [119 proach of tyranny in every tainted breeze."

The last observation was verified in the sudden and general alarm which was excited in the colonies in 1774 by the passage of the "Quebec Bill," which "decreed an arbitrary rule over the vast region which included, besides Canada, the area of the present states of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin."""

The acquisitions of Quebec and Florida, by the treaty of peace concluded at Paris, February 10, 1763, had

1 2 Burke's Works, 38.

26 Bancroft, 527.

been from the 7th October, 1763, governed under the proclamation of the King, which promised that "all persons inhabiting in or resorting to our said colonies, may confide in our royal protection for the enjoyment of the benefit of the laws of our realm of England."

The bill entitled "An act making more effectual provision for the government of the Province of Quebec in North America," was presented to the House of Lords on 2d May, 1774. It passed that House on the 17th, and was read the first time on the next day in the House of Commons.

It was opposed in the House of Commons because it left the inhabitants under the civil law of France, denying them the right of Trial by Jury, the Writ of Habeas Corpus, and, also, left them exposed to the French pro cess, Lettre de cachet, more odious than general searchi warrants. The opposition was vain. The proposition to extend to the inhabitants the benefit of the English law of habeas corpus was defeated by a vote of 76 to 21; 120] and the bill was soon *passed by a large majority.'

The passage of the bill was an augury of misgovernment to the other colonies. The writ of habeas corpus was regarded as one of the "dearest birthrights of Britons." They called the habeas corpus act the "great bulwark and palladium of English liberty;" and the denial of the benefit of it to a sister colony indicated to them the sure approach of tyranny towards the rest.

The act was immediately denounced in the journals of the colonies, and was made a special ground of complaint by the Continental Congress which assembled in September of the same year, 1774.' And it was finally regarded as manifesting so clearly the general spirit of tyranny of the British government towards the colonies, that it was included in that short catalogue of insupportable wrongs which was embodied in the Declaration of Independence.

1 Am. Archives, 4th series, 170.

* 1 Am. Archives, 4th ed. 920, 931.

SECTION II.

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY GUARANTEES IN THE UNITED

STATES.

1. The provisions in the constitution of the United States.

2. The provisions in the constitutions of the several states.

3. Suspension of the privilege of the writ.

4. Statutory enactments relating to the writ of habeas corpus.

1. The provisions in the constitution of the United States. -The essential principles of civil liberty for which the colonists waged the war of independence, are declared in the Constitution of the United States, *and effectually [121 secured by that instrument to the people, against the power of the federal government.

Those provisions relating more particularly to the right of personal liberty are contained in the fourth, fifth, sixth and eighth articles of the Amendments, and in the second clause of the ninth section of the first article of the Constitution, and are as follows:

"ART. IV. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

"ART. V. No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall he be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property

without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

"ART. VI. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.

122] *"ART. VIII. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

"ART. I., sec. 9, clause 2. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."

There will be occasion hereafter to notice particularly the provisions in Articles IV., V., VI. and VIII. of the Amendments. The clause in sec. 9, of art. I., relating to the writ of habeas corpus, deserves attention here.

There was no provision relating to the writ of habeas corpus in the Articles of Confederation. The article which was introduced into the Constitution of the United States demonstrates how highly the privilege of the writ was valued, and how thoroughly it was supposed to be incorporated in the jurisprudence of the colonies. It assumes the existence of the privilege, and provides against its infringement, even by the highest power in the state.

The Articles of Confederation having been found inadequate to secure the objects anticipated, a convention was finally convened at Philadelphia for the purpose of revising them. The result of the labor of that convention was our present Constitution. It assembled on the second Monday of May, 1787.