when so formed, became a part of the state equally with its ancient possessions.
[1] It is not, therefore, without strong reason, that it has been said, that "the colonists, continuing as much subjects in the new establishment, where they had freely placed themselves, [with the consent of the crown,] as they had been in the old, carried with them their birthright, the laws of their country; because the customs of a free people are a part of their liberty;" and that "the jurisprudence of England became that of the colonies, so far as it was applicable to the situation, at which they had newly arrived, because they were Englishmen residing within a distant territory of the empire."
[2] And it may be added, that as there were no other laws there to govern them, the territory was necessarily treated, as a deserted and unoccupied country, annexed by discovery to the old empire, and composing a part of it.
[3] Moreover, even if it were possible to consider the case, as a case of conquest from the Indians, it would not follow, if the natives did not remain there, but deserted it, and left it a vacant territory, that the rule as to conquests would continue to apply to it. On the contrary, as soon as the crown should choose to found an English colony in such vacant territory, the general principle of settlements in desert countries would govern it. It would cease to be a conquest, and become a colony; and as such be affected by the British laws. This doctrine is laid down with great
- ↑ Vattel, B. 1, ch. 18, § 209; 1 Chalm. Annals, 676, 677, 678, 679; 8 Wheat. R. 595; Grotius, B. 2, ch. 9, § 10.
- ↑ 1 Chalm. Ann. 677; Id. 14, 15, 658; 2 Wilson's Law Lect. 48, 49; 3 Wilson's Law Lect. 234, 235.
- ↑ Roberdeau v. Rous, 1 Atk. R. 548, 544; Vaughan R. 300, 400; Show. Parl. Cas. 31; 8 Wheat. R. 595; 1 Tuck. Black. Comm. App. 382, 383; Dummer's Defence, 1 American Tracts, 18.
