In giving this decision, the judges announced their opinion upon the rights of assignment in general, as regulated by the 9th Geo. iv. cap. 83. The Act required the consent of the governor in the assignment of a prisoner, and authorised the revocation of that assignment: this power to revoke, was however, to enable the governor to grant remission--to change the civil condition of the servant; and thus, by his restoration to liberty, to extinguish the rights of the assignee. The law officers, on the part of government, alleged that the discretion was absolute, and authorised a summary disposal of the services of the prisoner; whether under, or independent of, a magisterial decision. The chief justice, however, maintained that such a right in the executive might be ruin to the people. He asserted, that the duty and right of the governor was limited to the execution of a public trust, as between the crown on one side and the prisoner on the other; to minister to a covenant, subject only to those stipulations, the neglect of which might, by the common rights of humanity, dissolve the engagement. "If," he remarked, "the governor, at discretion, may revoke the assignment of prisoners, as a consequence he may render the estates of landholders of no value; nor does it appear that this power of revocation is sustainable under any circumstances in the large and discretionary form claimed by the law officers of the crown."[164] The government endeavoured to contest this right (1829), in the instance of Mr. Hall, publisher of the _Monitor_, whose strictures had provoked official hostility. His men were recalled by the superintendent; he, however, paid no attention to the notice, and continued to employ them: for this he was summoned before the bench of magistrates, who, influenced by the known opinions of the government, fined him, under the act against harbouring. Mr. Wentworth moved for a criminal information against Messrs. Berry, Wollstoncraft, and others, for contempt: a rule was granted, but afterwards dismissed; the judges expressing the strongest indignation that the magistrates had dared to set aside the solemn decision of the court on a point of law, and in reference to the most important rights of the colonists; and to mark their displeasure, they saddled them with all the costs. Mr. Hayes, of the _Australian_, was involved in a similar contest; but to break the bond, the governor granted a ticket-of-leave--thus releasing the prisoner from his assignment. The printer, notwithstanding, brought his action against the superintendent for abduction, and gained damages; the judges holding, that the sudden deprivation of the master, by an arbitrary and unusual indulgence--granted only to deprive him of his rights as assignee--was not contemplated in the law, which modified those rights by the prerogative of mercy. The following are the chief provisions of the Parliamentary Acts on the subject of assignment:--