[15.] The house, by message, after remarking upon the mutiny or billeting act, answered, “As we cannot consistently with our own honor or interest, much less with the duty we owe to our constituents, so we never shall make any provision of funds for the purposes in your several messages.” Upon that the governor prorogued them to the tenth of January, to meet at Boston. _South-Carolina_ assembly, no less than the _Massachusetts_, ventured to disobey the mutiny act, and adopted similar resolutions to those of _Virginia_. The _Maryland_ lower house entered partly into similar ones, but the last was omitted, and the first more strongly expressed. The _Delaware_ counties early followed the lead of _Virginia_, and adopted their last resolve _verbatim_; and toward the close of the year, the _New-York_ assembly concurred in their resolves with Virginia. The proposal of parliament for transporting persons from America in order to trial in _Great-Britain_, pursuant to the statute of _Henry_ VIII. excited a general alarm through the continent. The procedure they recommended was not wholly without precedent. The case of Culpeper has been already related. Under queen Anne, in 1710, the ringleaders of an unnatural contention in _Antigua_, wherein the governor was murdered, were brought to Great-Britain, tried, and many of them convicted and executed upon this statute. Precedents, however, will never reconcile sensible men to practices which, though legal, are fraught with cruelty, and liable to the most horrid abuses. Beside, the statute was become obsolete.