ward the clergy."[512:C]

The following paper exhibits the view maintained by Richard Henry Lee on
this mooted topic:--

"_Reasons and Objections to Mr. Camm's Appeal._

"OBJECTED, on the part of Mr. Camm: That the law of 1758, as
it tended to suspend the act of 1748, which had obtained the
royal approbation, and as it was contrary to his majesty's
instructions to his governor, was void _ab initio_, and was so
declared by his majesty's order of disapprobation of 10th of
August, 1759.

"ANSWER.--Whatever might be allowed to be the effect of these
objections, and however they might affect those who made the
law, it would be very hard that they should subject to a heavy
penalty two innocent subjects,[512:D] who have been guilty of
no offence but that of obeying a law passed regularly in
appearance through the several branches of the legislature of
the colony while it had the force of a law upon the spot. It
would be to punish them for a mistake of the assembly. But the
objections do not prove either that the law was a nullity from
the beginning by its tending to suspend the act of 1748, or by
being assented to by the governor, contrary to his majesty's
instructions to him, or that it became void by relation, _ab
initio_, from any retrospective declarations of his majesty.
As to the law in question tending to suspend the act of 1748,
which had received the royal approbation, a power given by the
crown to make laws implies a power to suspend or even repeal
former laws which are become inconvenient or mischievous, as
the law of 1748 was; otherwise a country at the distance of
three thousand miles might be subject to great calamities,
before relief could be obtained, for which reason such power
is lodged in the legislature of the country.

"As to the governor's consent being contrary to his majesty's
instructions to him, it is imagined that his majesty's
instructions to the governor are private directions for his
conduct in his government, liable to be sometimes dispensed
with upon extraordinary emergencies, the propriety of which he
may be called to explain. The instructions are not addressed
to the people nor promulgated among them; they are not public
instruments, nor lodged among the public records of the
province. The people know the