[
45]
political questions.
The end of government was de-
dared to be the happiness of the people, and from this maxim the duties of the governor were derived.
But the organization of the judiciary was the subject of longest controversy.
That the tenure of the judicial office should be the will of the people, was claimed as
‘the people's right.’
The rustic legislators insisted
on their right to institute the judiciary, fix the rules of court, define judicial power with precision, and by request displace judges for misbehavior.
Neither would they, even in the highest courts, have English lawyers for judges.
‘Men skilled in the law,’ said they, ‘of good integrity, are very desirable; yet we incline to be
content with the best men the colony affords.’
And
the courts obtained no permanent organization till the accession of the house of
Hanover.
The civil constitution included feudalism and democracy; from this there could be no escape but through the sovereignty of the people.
Twice, indeed, the province had almost become a royal one—once by act of parliament, and once by treaty.
But, in
England, a real regard for the sacrifices and the virtues of
William Penn gained him friends among English statesmen; and the malice of the pestilent English office-seekers, of Quarry, and the men employed in enforcing the revenue laws, valuing a colony only by the harvest it offered of emoluments and jobs, and ever ready to appeal selfishly to the crown, the church, or English trade, was never able to overthrow his influence.
His poverty, consequent on his disinterested labors, created a willingness to surrender his province to the crown; but he insisted on preserving the colonial liberties, and the crown hardly cared to buy a democracy.
If the violent conflicts of the assembly, in their eagerness to engross all
