I believe, that in ordinary times, if a banditti of men of violence had been seen, with guns loaded and bayonets fix'd, trembling with rage, and ready to fire upon a multitude in the street, it would have been counted meritorious, in any man or number of men, at all events to have disarm'd them; and if death had ensued in the attempt, perhaps it would not have been adjudg'd excuseable homicide or manslaughter. I am sensible it is said by some, that it was the duty of the soldiers to maintain their post: It was sworn by a military officer in court, that "the centinel at the custom-house, was station'd and appointed by the commanding officer, Lieut. Colonel Dalrymple; that they could not stir from their post, and it was at their peril if they did"; and Capt. Preston in his state of the case says, "He sent a party to protect the centinel": But this is military language; to be used in camps and garrison'd towns, not in free cities; in courts martial, and not in courts of common law: It is dangerous to adopt military maxims, however pleasing they may be to some men, and to bring them into use in civil societies: If the centinel had been in danger, as was pretended, the law of the land, to which the most distinguish'd officer in the King's army is subjected, would have protected that centinel: Or, if there had indeed been a dangerous mob, the law would have suppress'd it; and no soldier should have dared to have interfered, as a soldier, without the command of a civil magistrate. Capt. Preston in his state has said, "The mob still increas'd, and was more outrageous": And what did he say the mob did after they became more outrageous? Why, "they struck their clubs or bludgeons one against another: and called out, come on you rascals, bloody backs, lobster scoundrels, fire if you dare, we know you dare not fire, and much more such language": But surely it will not be said, that all this would justify or excuse their firing: This was after the soldiers had insulted and wounded the people, and had loaded their guns and threatned to fire, as appears by the current evidence; and yet hitherto, by his own account, we find no violence nor even threat offer'd to the soldiers; nothing but hard names and daring them to fire. He adds, "while I was parleying and endeavoring all in my power to perswade them to retire peaceably - they advanced to the points of the bayonets, struck some of them, and even the muzzels of the peices"; which corresponds with the testimonies of some of the witnesses in court before mentioned, who said that while they were loading, the people struck their guns; very probably, however indiscrete it might be, to prevent their firing. He further says "they seem'd to be endeavoring to close in with the soldiers" : This was not mention'd by any witness in court, nor does it seem to be likely: Indeed, I cannot see how Capt. Preston could imagine, that they seem'd to be endeavoring to close in with the soldiers: He says, "he was