them to a sense of their duty; that assertion has much the same truth in it as what has been before said, that the Americans had seen their error, and were willing to satisfy the India Company. Sir, there is a ship arrived, I think her name is the Fortune, Captain Goreham; she arrived in Boston harbour the latter end of February, or beginning of March, 1774, I cannot say which; she was loaded with tea; the inhabitants came immediately and unloaded her, and emptied the contents of her cargo into the sea. Is this, Sir, seeing their error? Is this Sir, reforming? Is this making restitution to the India Company? Surely no gentleman will, after this, urge any thing in their defence. The honorable gentleman has said this Bill is a pernicious one; I trust, when gentlemen come to consider it, they will see it is quite otherwise.

Sir Thomas Frankland rose only to acquaint the House, that he, yesterday afternoon, after the House broke up, was shewn a letter which a friend of his received from Boston, dated March, 1774, which mentioned the tea being destroyed, which was the cargo of Captain Goreham, as the noble Lord had mentioned.

Mr. Byng. Sir, I cannot help rising to oppose this Bill. I agree with my worthy friend, that it is a most pernicious Bill, and, I fear, made with no good intention. I really am surprised at the noble Lord, who said, his wish was to make their laws in America as near as possible to our own. Is this Bill any thing like it? No, it is quite the reverse; dragging People from one country to another to give evidence, is such a proposition as I never heard before, nor could have thought of; but, Sir, every person must know, and will allow, that the noble Lord finds his other two Bills are so defective and dangerous, that no person will venture to put them into execution; he is therefore obliged to have recourse to a third, to indemnify such persons as shall be concerned in executing his destructive project. I shall oppose this Bill every time I have an opportunity, and I trust every lover of his country will do the same. He further said, that whatever professions of candour were thrown out, he should trust to them with great caution; that for his part these attacks made abroad, seemed to be intended to prepare men's minds for measures of a similar nature to be enforced at home; and that the conduct and complexion of public measures in general wore the appearance of a systematic design of enslaving the People, as well in Great Britain as the Colonies.

Lord Beauchamp. I really am surprised, Sir, to hear an honorable gentleman say, that every person must know that the two former Bills are defective. Sir, I will venture to say the fact is otherwise; every person must allow they are necessary for the preservation of peace, and restoring the Americans to a sense of their duty. Does the honorable gentleman think the soldiery at Boston will act without they are indemnified? No; they could not. No person would execute the laws half so well, was this Bill not to pass. I think it a necessary Bill; it will make their trials by Juries like ours, which are so much approved of; and I shall give my hearty affirmative to it.

Mr. Sawbridge. Sir, I rise to explain to the noble Lord why I think it a pernicious Bill. I am certain, that however willing I might be to bring an offender to justice, was I to see a murder committed in London, my love of justice might induce me to go to any part of the country to appear as an evidence; but I assure the noble Lord I would not go over to America on any account, nor for any mandate that he could issue; and I believe that the noble Lord will allow, that not any sum would induce him to go over now; therefore we have the same right to imagine, that People in America will not come over here. I make no doubt but Government will take care to bring over evidence in support of their side, but they will not trouble themselves with evidence on the contrary; therefore all your trials will be ex parte, and nothing but a mockery of justice. I do not mention this as an advocate for America, but mention it as an Englishman.

The question on the second reading was then put:

Resolved, That the Bill be read a second time.

Ordered, That the said Bill be printed.

Ordered, That the said Bill be read a second time on Monday morning next.

MONDAY, April 25, 1774.

The order of the day, for the second reading of the Bill, being read,

Mr. Dowdeswell said, he did not mean to oppose the Bill now, but he meant to present a petition from the Agent of America, before the third reading; and he would then confine his debate to the injustice of preventing the parties to be heard at the Bar, on the validity of their charter. To this point only he should direct his opposition, and he meant to do it, and collect all his force against the two Bills; the one for the regulating the civil Government, and the other for the impartial administration of justice, in regard to trials, on the third reading, which was appointed for Monday.

Mr. Dyson desired leave to observe, that neither in one case or the other of the two Bills, did the House proceed as a court of justice, but in their capacity as a legislative body, regulating and controlling the deficiency of charters which had been granted by the Crown.

Lord North said he intended to move for commitment of the present Bill for the 29th, and for the third reading of them both on the 2d of May.

Mr. Cavendish wished to be informed from the House, whether it was the usual custom of Parliament to debate the principle of a Bill, after it had been committed?

Colonel Barré said, he thought the Bill deserved to be opposed in every stage on the principle on which it was framed; but on the third reading, was as proper a stage as any. He had considered with himself, and weighed in his own mind the grounds upon which this Bill was formed; and the result of his deliberation was, that it will be odious to the persons for whose benefit it is intended, by being odious to the People; and that it will be oppressive to America at large.

The Bill was then read the second time, and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

Resolved, That this House will, upon Friday morning next, resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, upon the said Bill.

FRIDAY, April 29, 1774.

The order of the day being read,

The House resolved itself into a Committee of the whole on the Bill, Sir Charles Whitworth in the Chair;

After some time spent therein,

The Speaker resumed the Chair,

And Sir Charles Whitworth reported from the Committee that they had gone through the Bill, and made several amendments thereunto.

Ordered, That the Report be received on Monday morning next.

MONDAY, May 2, 1774.

A Petition from several Natives of America, against this Bill, and the Bill for the better Regulating the Government of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, in North America, was presented by Sir George Savile. [Sec folio 81.]

The order of the day, for receiving the Report of the Committee of the whole House, to whom the Bill was committed, being read,

And it being half an hour after two of the clock, on Tuesday morning,

Ordered, That the Report be received to-morrow morning.

WEDNESDAY, May 4, 1774.

Sir Charles, Whitworth, according to order, reported from the Committee of the whole House, the Bill with the amendments, which the Committee had made; several of which were disagreed to, and the rest were, with amendments to several of them, agreed to by the House.

A clause was offered by Mr. Wallace, to be added to the Bill, for taking away appeals in the Massachusetts Bay, in cases of murder, during the continuance of the Act.

And a motion being made, that the said clause be brought up;

Mr. Moreton desired to know if the appeal for murder did actually exist now in the Colonies?