388 Assembly Proceedings, May 1-June 12, 1739.

L. H. J.
Lib. No. 45

the Legislators to be perpetual but was continued by another law
passed in the year 1699 which Act of 1699 continued till the year
1704 at which time an Act passed Entituled An Act for settlement
of An Annual Revenue upon her Majestys Governor for the time
being which Act of 1704 you wou'd have to be no more perpetual
than that of 1692 pray take notice of the very words of the Report.
Your Committee humbly Observe that by the frequent Continu-
ance and Re-enacting of the said Act of 1692 during the time when
the Government and protection of this Province was in the Crown
that the Legislators did not deem the same or any of them perpetual,
but to have a Duration only with such Governor or Government
In answer to which I may think I may say that the said Act of
1692 appears to A Demonstration to have been looked upon as a
perpetual Law, that it not only Continued in force without any
Reenacting during Govern^t Copleys time Governor Nicholsons time
and Governor Blackistons Time but likewise during the Internal
betwixt the Government of the two last mentioned Gentlemen and
Governor Seymours Arrival in 1704 when a repealing Law that then
passed might make the Government think it necessary to have the
Law of 1692 re-enacted another perpetual One made to the same
purpose, which was done accordingly, and which is the Law by
which the Governm^t is at present supported as to the Law you men-
tion of 1699, to continue that of 1692, I must Confess, I can find
no such Law, nor could your Committee that made the Report
point out to me such a one on the Contrary I find that An Act passed
in the year 1699 for repealing several Laws then in force, the Law
of 1692 for the support of Government is expressly excepted out of
the said Repealing Act, and is again excepted out of a repealing Act
passed in the year 1700 Entituled An Act for repealing certain
laws in this Province and confirming others which makes it manifest
bevond Contradiction that it was looked upon as a perpetual Law
and accordingly it continued without any new force being added to
it by any Act passed in 1699 till the repealing Act in 1704 as above-
mentioned
It would be too tedious to enter into a detail of all your other
Arguments which I flatter myself you your selves will see the
Insufficiency of upon a more attentive and deliberate Consideration
but I can very truly say that however Fallacious they may appear
to me, and however well Satisfied I may be of the Validity of the
Law by which the Government is at present Supported I shall always
be very willing to do any thing in my power to put a final end to all
disputes of this nature consistent with my duty to his Majesty and the
Lord Proprietary, which obliges me not to weaken in any manner
that Support which the Government is at present by Law entituled
to, and I would willingly perswade my self that there is no difference
of Opinion amongst us upon this head but what may be easily
reconciled by a little cool and impartial Deliberation