We are not disposd to dispute the Understanding, Integrity, Familys & Estates of the Council in 1728. We believe them to have been such, that if they were now upon the Stage, they would see so many additional & more weighty Reasons against proceeding to Business out of Boston, that they would fully approve of the Resolution of this House; as well as of what has been lately advancd by their Successors, who are also Gentlemen of Understanding, Integrity, Fortune and Family, in the following Words; "Governor Burnets Conduct in convening the General Court out of Boston, cannot be deemd an acknowlegd or constitutional Precedent, because, it was not founded on the only Reason on which the Prerogative of the Crown can be justly founded, The Good of the Community." We shall only add, that the Rights of the province having been of late years most severely attackd, has inducd Gentlemen to examine the Constitution more thorowly, & has increasd their Zeal in its Defence. You are pleasd to adduce an Instance in 1754 in Addition to that in 1747, which you say "makes it probable, that the House of Representatives rather chose that the Court should sit elsewhere, when a Comittee was chosen to consider of and report a proper place for a Court House at a Distance from Boston". We beg Leave here to observe, that both these are Instances of the House's interresting themselves in this Affair, which your Honor now claims as a Prerogative: If the House were in no Case to have a Voice, or be regarded, in chusing a place to hold the Court, how could they think of building a House in a place, to which they never had been, and probably, never would be called.--