The Governor up to this time had said nothing on the subject, but in his Speech dissolving the Assembly on Nov. 25,[3] he breaks his silence and argues the matter at length. He begins by saying that their action has a very dangerous likeness to a desire to grasp the executive power, a result which would be destructive of their dependency on Great Britain, and of which the people of Great Britain might become jealous. He then goes on to show that their conduct is not only wanting in respect to their Sovereign, since the Governor is his representative, but even wanting in ordinary manliness and honesty, since they are striking at one who, (on account of his position,) cannot retaliate. The question as to whether the paper is not a false, scandalous and malicious libel he left to his superiors in England. He ends his statement of the matter, “As to the popular Out-cry you endeavor to raise, of the Liberty of the Press, I shall only say, that certainly this Liberty, as well as any other may be abused, to the injury of others; if an injury is done, a proper Remedy ought to be applied; and such a Remedy can never be thought a Restraint of any just Liberty. I am persuaded that no considerate man can think, that I offered any Obstruction to the Liberty of the Press, by forbidding the Printer to publish that one Paper at his Peril; if no Peril in doing it, neither the author nor Publishers of it can suffer by the Order; the proper Judges may in Time show, whether I did a Service or a Disservice to any, by such Warning.” The Twenty-fifth Assembly came together in the Spring of 1748 and the old quarrel was resumed. On reassembling for the second Session in September an Address was drawn up in which former complaints were reiterated, and which the Governor refused to receive.[4] The Address was then printed in the Votes and Proceedings of the Assembly, and on Nov. 12th the Governor, in proroguing the Assembly, took occasion to complain of their method of procedure. “In whatever your Governor and you differ, there is a legal Method for Redress. In my Message to you, I told you that I would do the Justice, to send a Copy of that Paper, which you call an Address, to his Majesty’s Ministers; which is sending it to the proper Tribunal for Redress, if I have done you any injury, by my refusing to receive it; but you seem to decline this legal Method; and by your publishing that Paper, under the name of an Address, in your Votes, and afterwards in a publick News Paper, published by the Printer of your Votes; you seem to place the dernier Resort in all Disputes between you and your Governor, in the Populace; how his Majesty may take this, or how a Parliament of Great Britain, may take your claiming, not only the Privileges of Parliament, but Privileges far beyond what any House of Commons ever claimed, deserves your most serious consideration.”[5]