|
|
U. H. J.
Liber No. 36
Dec. 19
|
the most deliberate Acts of our Legislature ought to take Place,
unless the precedents have been experienced to be inconvenient, or
can be clearly proved to be Oppressive. The Use of Precedents must
be perceived when the Inconveniencies of Contention which flow
from a Disregard of Them are considered, and especially when they
are severely felt. When we reflect that the Intercourse and Privileges
of Members of political Bodies, the Measures of Justice in Contests
of private Property, the Prerogatives of Government, and the Rights
of the People are regulated by them. There is moreover a Reverence
due to antient Establishments, adopted by subsequent uniform
Usage, and a Modesty to be observed in opposing the sentiments of
Those, who have occupied the Stations we are now placed in, with
at least an equal Reputation of Ability, Integrity and Vigilance for
the Public Good."
You do not examine our Reasoning, or expressly deny the Prin-
ciple of it, but you would confront it by the Passage you have quoted,
with how much Propriety or for what Use, we leave to their De-
termination, who may have the Curiosity to make the Collation
To argue from the Abuse of a Thing against all use of it, is a
Method of Reasoning not likely to have much Influence in convincing,
to whatever other Purpose it may subserve, and without entering
into a minute Consideration, by what Means the Resolution, or
the other important Events you have celebrated with it, have been
brought about in Struggles for Justice & Liberty, Subjects on
which there would not be a perfect Coincidence of our Opinion, we
|
|
|
|
p. 284
|
cant help remarking that your Conclusion from such Premisses
against the ridiculous Annual Farthing-Tax, to support the salary
of the Clerk of the Council, is rather too ludicrous. The Terms
Struggles for Liberty you have without Doubt a Right to use, but
when applied to the very little Affair of the Clerk's Salary, Words
expressive of a less important Dispute would be more proper. The
Precedents we cited, were the deliberate & voluntary Acts of Sensible
Honest and Freemen, on a Subject they well understood, and if such
ought to be of no Weight, we confess ourselves to be mistaken. Why
Mr Ross did not make his Claim, or whether the Practice hath or
hath not prevailed of making it as you mention, we are not informed
but by M.r Ross's Declaration, that it never was the Practice, but it
is observable that He did not put in his Claim for making out
Journals as Clerk of the Upper House which hath however been
allowed without Dispute, and as it can't be imagined he intented to
give that up there seemed to be very little Reason for your Inferrence
from his Omission with respect to his Claim as Clerk of the Council.
What you have observed in Reference to our Proposition for
appointing an Agent or Agents for both Houses doth not in this
Place require a particular Answer, because in our Message with
|
|
