APUSH, declaration of Independence?

Question

For protecting them, by a mock trial. from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states.

Can you explain what this means please i wrote that it made the soliders not get in trouble for murder, because the king would protect them! thanks!

Answer 1

Jefferson's charge is NOT a response to clear cases of murder by British soldiers, but rather to the terms of the "Administration of Justice Act" of 1774. This was one of the four "Intolerable Acts" passed in response to the Boston Tea Party.

The idea of this act was basically that the crown feared British officials and soldiers attempting to carry out their duties might not get a fair trial is something happened while they were trying to suppress a riot or collect taxes.

So the law provided that, in cases where a British official was charged with a crime (including murder) under these circumstances, the royal governor COULD, IF he deemed that the person would not be able to get a fair trial, could order a change of venue, including sending the person back to England, if necessary.

It did NOT mean the King wanted to protect soldiers if they DID engage in murder! It was rather to protect accused soldiers from being railroaded or lynched.

Here is an attempt to explain the point of the act in an imaginary newspaper account (as if written at the time):
"Lord North wants to try to secure fair trials for British subjects and wants to try preventing rioting among the colonies. North proposed the Impartial Administration of Justice Act on April 15. This act permits the governor to move trials to other colonies, or to England. He is also being permitted to call upon the British army for aid to put an end to civil disturbances."
http://www.americanrevolution.com/his_events_acts.html

______________

AND, you can look at the act itself !


The act begins with this explanation --
"An act for the impartial administration of justice in the cases of persons questioned for any acts done by them in the execution of the law, or for the suppression of riots and tumults, in the province of the Massachusetts Bay, in New England."

And here is the key part --

"That if any inquisition or indictment shall be found, or if any appeal shall be sued or preferred against any person, for murder, or other capital offence, in the province Of the Massachuset's Bay, and it shall appear, by information given upon oath to the governor, or, in his absence, to the lieutenant-governor of the said province, that the fact was committed by the person against whom such inquisition or indictment shall be found, or against whom such appeal shall be sued or preferred, as aforesaid, either in the execution of his duty as a magistrate, for the suppression of riots, or in the support of the laws of revenue, or in acting in his duty as an officer of revenue, or in acting under the direction and order of any magistrate, for the suppression of riots, or for the carrying into effect the laws of revenue, or in aiding and assisting in any of the cases aforesaid: and if it shall also appear, to the satisfaction of the said governor, or lieutenant-governor respectively, that an indifferent trial cannot be had within the said province, in that case, it shall and may be lawful for the governor, or lieutenant-governor, to direct, with the advice and consent of the council, that the inquisition, indictment, or appeal, shall be tried in some other of his Majesty's colonies, or in Great Britain . . . . "

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/amerrev/parliament/admin_of_justice_act.htm

Answer 2

You are correct--Jefferson was charging the crown with allowing British soldiers to, essentially, get away with murder. Although trials were held, they were "mock" trials (meaning they were shams meant only to look official--the courts would protect the soldiers and assure a "not guilty" verdict).

Answer 3

HISTORY BLOWS