Re: Personal Guns Not Accepted For Militia Duty: Maryland State Archives 1704



the heekster <heekster@xxxxxxxx> said:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 21:14:57 -0500, The Lone Weasel
<loneweasel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

the heekster <heekster@xxxxxxxx> said:
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:53:41 -0500, The Lone Weasel
<loneweasel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
the heekster <heekster@xxxxxxxx> said:


Who were the authorities mentioned in that 1704 Maryland
militia statute? It wasn't just the queen.

Go back and read the first paragraph of that statute - I
gave you the url - you have two more sources of authority
to learn; and then I'll stop annoying you with these
disturbing facts of history and law...

Laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh.

<What the Lone Imbecile doesn't understand, is that the
council acted as a kind of "privy" council to the governor,
advising him in matters, in which turn, he then advised the
colonial proprietor, who had the actual power.

And the Governor was a different source of authority from the
Queen - yes or no Mr. Eek?

When
Baltimore was disfranchised by the king, and his colony
declared a royal colony, the British Army colonel who
became the colonial governer still answered to the Crown,
who was now the de facto "proprietor". The General
Assembly had some years before, been reduced to just the
Upper House, which was in fact, the aforementioned
"council".>

The Assembly was the third source of authority.

Try to stay on topic Mr. Eek. You were baffled by a simple
division of authority. Guess you missed "advice and consent".
Does that remind you of anything?


--

Yours truly,

The Lone Weasel

.