|
|
You signify to us that " if we had made our Objections to either
" of the Bills you would have shewn the utmost Readiness to do every
" thing you could consistent with your Rights and Privileges to have
" brought about the Passage of them, and that we had sufficient
|
U. H. J.
Liber No. 35
April 18
|
|
|
|
" Reason to be satisfied that you would readily have found Means
" to rectify any Inconsistencies Contradictions or Mistakes in any of
" the Bills."
We do not mean to call in Question the Sincerity of this Declara-
tion or to ascribe it to any other Cause than a Disposition to con-
ciliate by a candid and dispassionate Procedure any Diversity of
Opinion which both Houses may have entertained upon the Propriety
or Expediency of these Bills, when we say that we really wish
/since now our Opinion seems to be of some Consequence/ that the
Proposition you have made in the Message under Consideration had
come sooner that we might have been sooner able to communicate
our Sentiments without alarming you in Respect of the Privileges
you have claimed, giving up our own Rights, or subjecting ourselves
to the animadversion of having deviated from the strict Rules of
Intercourse between the two Houses. The Corrections you have
made in the Bill, after you had received it with a Negative from us,
notwithstanding they may not be consistent with parliamentary
Modes of proceeding, we are willing to admit, and in Order to give
you the Satisfaction you desire shall proceed to point out the
material Objections we have to the Bill, not thinking that any Forms
ought to be so religiously observed as to defeat the Duty we owe to
our King and Country which demands at this critical Juncture a
full Exertion of all our Powers, to vindicate the injured Rights of
our most gracious Sovereign, and protect our Fellow Subjects in
their Lives and Properties against the cruel and rapacious Invader
We object to the Preamble because it asserts that only the Delegates
of the People give and grant, Whereas the Bill could not pass into a
Law without the Proprietary's and our Concurrence, and the Sum
of Money to be raised by it is intended to proceed from a Tax upon
his Lordships real Estate and our real and personal Estates as well
as yours. We object to your assuming the sole Nomination of the
Officers mentioned in this Bill, we conceive that by the clear Words
of the Charter the Appointment of all Officers civil and military
belong to Lord Baltimore, and that you may have further Satisfaction
upon this Point than would perhaps arise from a Perusal of the
Charter, we shall add the Opinion of Lord Chief Justice Willes given
|
p. 270
|
|
|
|
when he was Attorney General at a Time when there was some
Dispute about the Right of nominating Treasurers, the Case and
Answers are as follow, viz.t
Q : I. Whether by the Charter of Maryland the Lord Proprietary
has not a Right to the Nomination of all Officers in General Civil
as well as military ?
|
p. 271
|
|
