Page:Cambridge Modern History Volume 7.djvu/212

 180 Grant of the writs. [i76i further ; if the writ was authorised by Act of Parliament, then the Act of Parliament itself was unauthorised it was against the constitution and was void. "An Act of Parliament ... in the very words of this petition... would be void." Otis did not deny the authority of Parliament over the general affairs of the colony. He had no occasion to do so now, even if he believed that Parliament had no such authority, for the question before the Court pertained to external trade, over which the authority of Parliament was not questioned. But even had it not been so, there would have been no difference; Otis held that Parliament had full authority to regulate the internal, as well as the external, affairs of the colonies. His denial here of the constitutionality of any Act of Parlia- ment which really should authorise these writs of assistance, was a denial of the validity of such a statute over America. The justices, four in number, or some of them, had doubts at the first hearing in regard to the practice in England ; but having meantime satisfied themselves on that point, they were on the second hearing unani- mously of opinion that the writ should be granted, and gave judgment accordingly. "The child Independence was born on that occasion," afterwards wrote an eager listener, who lived to be President of the United States. How the matter was looked upon at the time may be seen in the heated columns of the newspapers, in pamphlets, and especially in the action of the legislature of Massachusetts in the February following the decision. At that time a bill was passed "for the better enabling the officers of his Majesty's customs to carry the Acts of trade into execution." After a short preamble, ironically expressing the desire of the colony to assist his Majesty's officers, the bill declared that upon application, on oath, to the Superior Court, or other Courts named, by an officer alleging that he had information of a breach of the revenue laws, and that he verily believed or knew such information to be true, it should be lawful for the Court, upon reducing such oath to writing, with the name of the person informing and the place informed against, and not otherwise, to issue a writ or warrant of assistance ; the form of which followed. The governor rejected the bill ; afterwards, in a letter to the Lords of Trade, saying that "the intention of it was to take away from the officers the writ of assistance granted in pursuance of the Act of William 3," and to substitute for it a writ "wholly inefficacious." The governor adds, that the bill "was very popular," and that he silenced all clamour by the manner in which he rejected it ; that this " reduced the popular cry to a murmur only, which soon ceased," and he believed there was "now a total end to this troublesome altercation about the custom house officers." The business of issuing these writs now went on in Massachusetts, for some years, without effective resistance. Writs of assistance, not before in use elsewhere in the thirteen