such an interpretation of the law rested, the doctrine that in such a case the military were acting, “not as soldiers, but as citizens; no matter whether their coats were red or brown, they were legally employed in preserving the laws and the constitution;"[72] and Wedderburn, who before the end of the year became Chief-justice of the Common Pleas, repeated the doctrine more elaborately in a charge from the Bench.  It was a lesson of value to the whole community.  It was quite true that the constitution placed the army in a state of dependence on the civil power.  But, when that doctrine was so misunderstood as to be supposed to give temporary immunity to outrage, it was most important that such a misconstruction should be corrected, and that it should be universally known that military discipline does not require the soldier to abstain from the performance of the duty incumbent on every citizen, the prevention of crime.

Notes: 

[Footnote 33:  It is worth while to preserve the amount, if for no other reason, for the contrast that the expenditure and resources of the kingdom a hundred years ago present to those of the present day.  The supply required in 1764 was in round numbers L7,712,000; in 1755, before the war broke out, L4,073,000, and even that included a million for the augmentation of the army and navy.  In 1761, when the war was at its height, the sum voted was L19,616,000.]

[Footnote 34:  The report in the “Parliamentary History,” xvi., 37, says:  “This act (the Stamp Act) passed the Commons almost without debate; two or three members spoke against it, but without force or apparent interest, except a vehement harangue from Colonel Barre (date, March 6, 1765).”]

[Footnote 35:  Lord Stanhope ("History of England,” v., 131) quotes a letter of Dr. Franklin to one of his friends in America, in which, after deploring the impossibility of preventing the act from being passed, he expresses a hope that “frugality and industry will go a great way toward indemnifying us.”  And he complied with Mr. Grenville’s request to select a person to act as Distributor of Stamps in Pennsylvania whom he thought likely to be generally acceptable.]

[Footnote 36:  These statements and arguments of Franklin are taken from different parts of his examination before the House of Commons, as preserved in the “Parliamentary History,” xvi., 137-160.]

[Footnote 37:  In the Assembly of Virginia, one of the members—­Patrick Henry—­after declaiming with bitterness against the supposed arbitrary measures of the present reign, exclaimed, “Caesar had his Brutus, Charles I. his Oliver Cromwell, and George III.—­” A cry of “Treason!” was uttered.  The Speaker called Mr. Henry to order, and declared he would quit the chair unless he were supported by the House in restraining such intemperate speeches.—­Adolphus, History of England, i., 188.]