that he has no authority over the King’s troops in the province,2 it was absurd to suppose he COULD have the command of a fort, thus unreservedly surrendered to, and in full possession of such troops”: Which appears to be a just conclusion; for can any one believe that Col. Dalrymple will hold himself oblig’d to march the King’s troops under his command out of that fort, in obedience to the orders of one who has no authority over them? Think not, Mess. Printers, that I am now finding fault: For if his Honor has “in this instance divested himself of a power of governing which is vested in him by the Charter FOR THE SAFETY of the province”, as wiser heads than mine have determin’d, who WILL DARE to find fault? It was done by virtue of instructions; and we are told that instructions from a minister of state come MEDIATELY from the K-----, and his Honor knows that instructions, whatever “coarse epithet” may have been bestow’d upon them, are “founded in very wise reasons”, and ought not to be treated with contempt--HOLT, SOMERS and others, who near eighty years ago laid their heads together to form our Charter, were certainly wise and great men; and King William who gave it was as certainly a wise and good King: But does not the wisdom of my Lord of H-----h far exceed theirs? Pray, does not every measure which he has advis’d, fully evince this to the conviction of all but a few factious fellows here and there. The FRIENDS OF GOVERNMENT are willing to submit WHAT JUDGEMENT THEY HAVE to such profound wisdom; and what if our OLD FASHION Charter should be pared down by INSTRUCTIONS, and a power or two of the G-----r, vested in him FOR THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE, should even be annihilated by them, we are only to BELIEVE there are very wise reasons for it, and we shall find that all is for the best.