The Lower House. 375

same shall be Rejected or Not, It was carried in the Affirma-
tive.
John Hall Esq^r from the Upper House delivers M^r Speaker
the Bill relating to Servants that Cannot give Security for
their good Behaviour, with the following Message Viz:

By the Upper House of Assembly

Octo^r the 29^th 1725
Gentlemen.
In your Message of the 28^th Instant by M^r Harrison and
M^r Johnson, Relating to the Disposall of Servants for want
of Security for their good behaviour You tell us you hope
we will not Insist on any thing that looks like depriving you
of preventative Justice, which plainly Implys a Surmise, that
we are going about to do it. We are very well assured that [in]
our former Message Relating to this Bill, we have not used
any Expression that Can be a just foundation for such a
suspicion, and are very Sorry to find our selves often treated
with such unjust Reflections in your Messages Rather as
Enemies to our Country and Subverters of Justice then as an
Upper House of Assembly. May we not differ with you in
Opinion about some things debated between the two Houses,
without being Suspected of having Intentions to deprive
you of Justice, or Invade your priviledges? We desire you
will be pleas'd to Consider that such Measures instead of
Cultivating a good Understanding between us, directly tends
to a Breach of it, and therefore we hope you will forbear such
treatment for the future. It seems Strange to us why you
should give Your Selves the Trouble of Composing so long a
Message Consisting of Repeated Assertions of the Necessity
of preserving the Publick Peace, and that Servants are not
Exempted by the Act for payment of Criminall Servants fees,
from being bound to their good behaviour, things not any
where deny'd in our former Message, for we have as great
Regard to the preservation of the Publick peace as You, and
we have only Referred to that Law as a Sufficient Provision
for the payment of Criminall Servants fees, without Injuring
the Property of their Masters by the Exposing them to Sale,
according to the unreasonable Directions of the Bill now in
Debate, and we now take Leave to observe to you that altho
the Act before Mentioned does not Exempt Servants acquit-
ted of Crimes from being obliged to give Security for their
good behaviour, yet as it directs they shall be Return'd to
their Masters without any Condition expressed Obliging them
to give such Security we may from thence Reasonably Inferr
an Intention in the Law of Excusing them unless in Extraor-

L. H. J.