of the fact that this decision did in fact settle the difficulty between England and Scotland, the Case of the Postnati had the dignity of an international adjudication and illustrated the possibility of Courts having jurisdiction over States.

Incidentally, the judges in their opinions in these cases, stated the principles which in the past had governed the relationship between England and the countries subordinately connected with her; thereby in fact establishing the principles upon which the relationship between England and the American Colonies was to rest. The King in Council was recognized as having a superintending legislative power and jurisdiction over all countries subordinately connected with England, to be exercised by orders in council or by writs. The Parliament was recognized as having a superintending legislative power over such countries above that exercised by the King in Council, this power being exercised by means of Acts of Parliament in which the colonies were specially named. A special Act relating to a country outside the realm of England-which was necessarily not represented in the Parliament-could be intelligently framed only after investigation of the facts and hearing of the parties concerned. In passing such special Acts, therefore, the Parliament, if it acted reasonably and conscientiously, necessarily acted both as a tribunal having jurisdiction over such countries and as a legislature.

When, therefore, the English colonization of America began, in 1606, not only were the minds of the people of England habituated to the idea of government through councils of experts sitting as tribunals as well as legislatures, but they had just had an object lesson in international adjudication. The English colonists of America had moreover special cause to be familiar

with the Case of the Postnati and Calvin's Case, for the principles laid down in them in fact formed the unwritten constitution governing the relations between England and the American Colonies. A permanent tribunal in England exercising jurisdiction in disputes between England and the Colonies, or between one colony and another, determining their rights against each other according to sound political, legal, social, and economic principles, was probably regarded by all as an appropriate means for maintaining proper relations between them. It was of course impossible at that time for the Colonies to be united with England by representation in Parliament, and such a tribunal was the only practicable bond of union between them. Such a tribunal was not inconsistent with a system of local self-government in the Colonies; indeed it depended for its success upon a recognition of their selfgoverning statehood, and of their power and duty to execute the judgments of the tribunal in so far as they appealed to the reason and conscience of the people of the Colonies as reasonably necessary and just.

By the Charter of 1606, James I claimed all North America between 34° and 45°,—that is, all the region between what is now South Carolina and what is now Canada, calling it "Virginia"; and divided it into two districts overlapping between 38° and 41°, one of which was probably intended to be a northern and the other a southern viceroyalty, the middle line falling very close to what was later on "Mason and Dixon's Line" between the Northern and Southern States. In each of the grand divisions provision was made for an English Colony with specified boundaries. The local government of each Colony was placed in charge of a local Council, called the "Council of the First (or Second) Colony," to be appointed by, and to act under the instructions of the King

in Council. The Charter also provided for a Council in England, to be "Council of Virginia." The ultimate and supreme power over the Colonies was recognized as vested in the whole State and Government of England, and this power was to be executed, so far as the Charter shows, by the King in Council. The "Council of Virginia" was given jurisdiction, subject to final decision of the King in Council, to determine disputes between the Colonies, and advise the King concerning the general social and economic situation; the Charter providing that this Council was to have the "superior managing and direction only of and for all matters that may concern the government, as well of the several Colonies, as of and for any other part or place within the aforesaid precincts of four and thirty and five and forty degrees."

The likeness between the system of government established by this Charter, and the Spanish system, is apparent. The Council of Virginia corresponded to the Council of the Indies and the Council of each Colony to the local Audiencia in each of the Spanish colonies which conducted the local government. The Charter made no provision for representative Assemblies in the Colonies in this respect also conforming to the Spanish system. Some basis is to be found for a belief that this Charter shows Spanish influence in the fact that England and Spain were then in close relationship under Treaty of 1604, and that Spanish ideas were prevalent at the English Court. As, however, the Charter was drawn by the most eminent English lawyers, and as the English scheme of colonization of America was strongly opposed by Spain, it seems more reasonable to believe that the Council of Virginia was a development of the ideas underlying the English Privy Council than that it was based on any foreign model.

The Charter of 1606 proved ineffective, because it did not induce sufficient emigration. There was no precious metal to produce quick returns to the colonists. They could only hope for the slow return from agriculture and trade; and this necessitated the use of large amounts of capital and systematic operations for colonizing the country and protecting and supplying the colonists until they could become self-supporting. In 1609, the "First Colony" referred to in the Charter of 1606 was organized as a colonizing and trading jointstock corporation called the Virginia Company, which was authorized to colonize and govern the region at present included within Virginia and the country to the westward. The Company was given the privilege of the general and local government of the country granted, and the monopoly of its trade. The governing board of the Company in England was constituted by the Charter the "Council of Virginia" and was subordinate to the King in Council. By an amendment in 1611, the adventurers were allowed to sit with the Councillors, and the meetings were called "Courts" of the Company. Four "Great and General Courts" in each year were required to be held "for the handling, ordering, and disposing of matters and affairs of greater weight and importance, and such as shall or may in any sort, concern the weal public and general good of the said Company and Plantation."

This Charter was unsatisfactory. By the people of England it was objected to as giving to the Company a monopoly; the King regarded it as too democratic and republican, and as likely to lead to too radical ideas in the Colonies; the nobility found fault with it because it allowed merchants to sit in one of the King's councils.

The admission of merchants to membership in this

council was, it would seem, due to the economic necessities of the situation. The opening of the sea-route to India and America, the closing of the Mediterranean to the Oriental trade by the Mohammedan invasion of what is now Turkey, the consequent ruin of Venice, and the decline of Spain and Portugal through extravagance and bad government, had made the English Channel the Mediterranean of the world, and London, as the most secure port on the Channel, was becoming the metropolis. England required a permanent economic connection with America, in order that raw material might be secured and an increased market for English manufacturers might be provided. The tribunal in England having jurisdiction over the relations of the American Colonies, in order to be efficient, had to be so organized as to be able to cope with economic as well as with social and political questions. The system was perfected half a century later, by the institution of a Council of Trade, subordinate to the King in Council, having charge of these economic relations.

Under the Charter of 1609, the local government of Virginia took on a democratic and republican aspect. To the Governor and Council appointed by the King in Council was added in 1621, by consent of the King in Council, a representative "House of Burgesses," all together constituting the General Assembly of Virginia. In the Ordinance of the Company establishing this system occurred the remarkable provision that no orders of the General Courts of the Company should bind the Colony unless ratified by the General Assembly of Virginia, a provision which left to the General Courts of the Company what was essentially a power of adjudication, and gave Virginia the power of executing the judgments of the Courts of the Company according as these judgments were approved by the public sentiment