2. They stood substantially on the same footing as Scotland previous to the Union. Like her they were subject to the Navigation Act, and similar regulations touching the _external_ relations of the empire; and like her the ordinary legislation of England did not reach them, nor did the common law any farther than they chose to adopt it. Hence, 3. They held themselves amenable in their internal concerns, not to Parliament, but to the Crown alone. It was to the _King_ in council or to _his_ courts that they made those occasional references and appeals, which Lord Mansfield endeavors to draw into precedents. So “the post tax” spoken of above, did not originate in Parliament, but in a charter to an individual which afterward reverted to the Crown, and it was in this way alone that the post-office in America became connected with that of England. Even the American Declaration of Independence does not once refer to the British Parliament. The colonists held that they owed allegiance to the King only, and hence it was the King’s conduct alone that was regarded as a just reason for their renouncing their allegiance. One of their grievances was, that he confederated with others in “_pretended acts of legislation_.” The Colonists supported their argument by an appeal to “long-continued usage.” Burke acknowledged the force of this position, though he drew from it the conclusion merely that, “to introduce a change now, is both inexpedient and unwise.” The Colonists, on the contrary, held: “You have no right to lay the taxes.” The attitude of the colonies is best studied in the volume of “Prior Documents to Almon’s Remembrancer,” where all the important papers and the resolutions of the several colonies are given. See, also, Pilkin’s “Political History,” Marshall’s “American Colonies,” and vol. i. of Story, “On the Constitution.” There is an excellent summary of the debate in the English Parliament, probably written by Burke, in the _Annual Register_, vol. ix., pp. 35–48; and a still fuller one embracing the examination of Franklin, in Hansard’s “Parliamentary History,” vol. xvi., pp. 90–200. EDMUND BURKE.