270 THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT [PART In 
by the common law, as acts which are necessary for the 
maintenance of order and peace. The common law is not 
loath to recognize such acts: it knows that the safety of 
the law at times requires that its ordinary prescriptions 
must yield ; for example, there can be no doubt that even 
in England in the case of actual hostilities there is a right 
which may be called a common-law right to disregard the 
rights of individuals in the cause of the State, e.g. to enter 
private houses, to seize private property for martial uses, and 
soon. Whether such seizure ought not to be paid for is matter 
of equity not of legal obligation, and in any case the essential 
thing is that in taking goods in this way the taker would not 
be acting as a robber, who might be killed if necessary for suc- 
cessful resistance, but would only be acting in accordance with 
the law. The common law of England is the common law of 
most of the self-governing Colonies, and in any case the Roman 
Dutch law and the French law of Quebec admit as clearly 
as the English law the doctrine salus respublicae suprema lex: 
But it must be at once admitted that this common-law 
right has not sufficient definition to be a trustworthy guide 
in cases of action in emergencies. At the best it may extend, 
as Sir F. Pollock * has argued, to cover acts done in good faith 
for the purpose of quelling revolt, but it is not certain that 
it does extend so far, and it may be well that the view taken 
by Professor Dicey, which restricts it to necessary acts, is 
more sound. And in any case, whether the criterion be 
reason or necessity, the criterion will be applied in cold 
blood long after the events by a judge sitting in a eourt far 
removed from all the circumstances which make reason or 
necessity obvious in one’s actions. It is therefore clear that, 
in the interest of those who act under martial law, they will 
be well advised not to fail to secure for themselves acts of 
indemnity. As a matter of fact, it will be found that acts 
of indemnity are invariably adopted after the exercise of 
martial law in the Colonies, and that such acts will bar civil 
proceedings in this country is proved by the case of Phillips 
t Law Quarterly Review, xviii, 152-8; xix, 230. 
* Law of the Constitution,” p. 533.