CH. XVII.]
GENERAL REVIEW.
163
afterwards surrendered her opposition.[1] But Connecticut continued it to a later period.[2] In a practical sense, however, the appellate jurisdiction of the king in council was in full and undisturbed exercise throughout the colonies at the time of the American Revolution; and was deemed rather a protection, than a grievance.[3]
§ 177. (6.) Though the colonies had a common origin, and owed a common allegiance, and the inhabitants of each were British subjects, they had no direct political connexion with each other. Each was independent of all the others; each, in a limited sense, was sovereign within its own territory. There was neither alliance nor confederacy between them. The assembly of one province could not make laws for another; nor confer privileges, which were to be enjoyed or exercised in another, farther than they could be in any independent foreign state. As colonies, they were also excluded from all connexions with foreign states. They were known only as dependencies; and they followed the fate of the parent country both in peace and war, without having assigned to them, in the intercourse or diplomacy of nations, any distinct or independent existence.[4]- ↑ 2 Doug. Summ. 97; 3 Hutch. Coll. 412, 413.
- ↑ 2 Doug. Summ. 194; 1 Pitk. Hist. 123 to 125.
- ↑ I have in my possession a printed case, Thomas Forsley v. Waddel Cunningham, brought before the governor and council of New-York from the supreme court of that province by appeal, in 1764. The great question was, whether an appeal or writ of error lay; and the judges of the supreme court, and the council held, that no appeal lay, for that would be to re-examine facts settled by the verdict of a jury. The lieutenant governor dissented. It was agreed on all sides, that an appeal in matter of law (by way of writ of error) lay to the king in council from all judgments in the colonies; but not as to matters of fact in suits at common law. It was also held, that in all the colonies the subjects carry with them the laws of England, and therefore as well those, which took place after, as those, which were in force before Magna Charta.
- ↑ 1 Chalm. Annals 686, 689, 690.
