IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

i^^

1.0

I.I

1.25

■*«IIIIM ill

1^^
m

fib

iiM mil 2.2

lllMO

2.0

lA II 1.6

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y USffO

(716) 872-4503

0^^ . «^

\ ^0

'"{P^, ^-u^

,<" €P.

.<?

L^.

C/j

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / institut Canadian de microreproductions historiq

ues

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques aa
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modifica'iion dans la m6thode normale de filmage
sont indiquds ci-dessous.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommagee

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e

□ Cover title missing/
Le titre de couverture manque

□ Coloured maps/
Cartes giographiques en couleur

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
ere de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

□ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Pit

[anches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Reli6 avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge int6rieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout6es
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6X6 filmdes.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppl6mentaires;

D
D
□

D
D

Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommag^es

Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul^es

Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages d6color6es, tachet^es ou piqu^es

Pages detached/
Pages d6tach6es

Showthrough/
Transparence

Quality of print varies/
Quality in^gale de {'impression

Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel supplementaire

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6ti film^es 6 nouveau de facon d
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous.

10X 14X 18X 22X

26X

30X

12X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

Nationai Library of Canada

L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grdce d la
g6n6rosit6 de:

Bibliothdque nationale du Canada

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keepiiig with the
filming contract specifications.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol — ^ (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

IVIaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire fiimd, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprim6e sont filmds en commenpant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second
plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont filmds en commengaht par la
premidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la dernidre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

Un des symboles suivants apparattra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbole — ^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le
symbole V signifie "FIN ".

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre
film^s d des taux de reduction diffdrents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir
de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la m6thode.

I 1'

THK

lAiiALISTS OF AMERICA

■;' *!

AiUf

THElJi TIMES

From IC'O to 1816.

liY mmioy md

- « -«■-' It f

IN TWi

TO K') K T f>

■AUKS ■ • ^Kt.^ k ROK ANn

IHfiO

■•■■

irf0^

■J/7 ^-f/- ■? -zv^Zw

;>^

THE

LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

AND

THEIK TIMES:

From 1620 to 1816.

BY EGERTON RYERSON, D.D., LL.D..

Chi^ Superintendent of Education for Upper Canada
fnm 18U to 1876.

IN TWO VOLUMES.

VOL. I.

TORONTO:
ILLIAM BRIGGS, 80 KING STREET
JAMES CAMPBELL & SON, AND
WILLING k WILLIAMSON.

MONTREAL: DAWSON BROTHERS.

EAST;

1880.

43703

Entered, according to the Act t/f the Parliament of Canada, in the
year One thousand eight hundred and eighty, by the Rev. Eoerton
Rterson, D.D., LL.D., in the Office of the Minister of Agriculture.

! i

f ! :

1 1

PEEFACE.

As no Indian pen has ever traced the history of the
aborigines of America, or recorded the deeds of their chieftains,
their " prowess and their wrongs " — their enemies and spoilers
being their historians ; so the history of the Loyalists of
America has never been written except by their enemies and
spoilers, and those English historians who have not troubled
themselves with examining original authorities, but have
adopted the authorities, and in some instances imbibed the
spirit, of American historians, who have never tired in eulogiz-
ing Americans and everything American, and deprecating
everything English, and all who have loyaHy adhered to the
unity of the British Empire.

I have thought that the other side of the story should be
written ; or, in other words, the true history of the relations,
disputes, and contests between Great Britain and her American
colonies and the United States of America.

The United Empire Loyalists were the losing party ; their
history has been written by their adversaries, and strangely
misrepresented. In the vindication of their character, I have
not opposed assertion against assertion ; but, in correction of
unjust and untrue assertions, I have offered the records and
documents of the actors themselves, and in their own words.

ill.

PREFACE.

To do tliia has rendered my history, to a larf^e extent, docu-
mentary, instead of being a mere popular narrative. The many
fictions of American writers will be found corrected and
exposed in the following volumes, by autliorities and facts
which cannot be successfully denied. In thus availing myself
80 largely of tlio proclamations, messages, addresses, letters, and
records of the times when they occurred, I have only followed
the example of some of the best historians and biographers.

I I

No one can be more sensible than myself of the imperfect
manner in which I have performed my task, which I commenced
more than a quarter of a century since, but I have been
prevented from completing it sooner by public duties — pursuing,
as I have done from the beginning, an untrodden path of
historical investigations. From the long delay, many supposed
I would never complete the work, or that I had abandoned it.
On its completion, therefore, I issued a circular, an extract
from which I hereto subjoin, explaining the origin, design, and
scope of the work : —

" I have pleasure in stating tliat I have at length completed the task
which the newspaper press and j)ublic men of different parties urged upon
ine from 1855 to 1860. In submission to what seemed to be public opinion,
I issued, in 1861, a circular addressed to the United Empire Loyalists and
their descendants, of the British Provinces of America, stating the design
and scope of my proposed work, and requesting them to transmit to me, at
my expense, any letters or papers in their possession which would throw
light upon the early history and settlement in these Provinces by our U. E.
Loyalist forefathers. From all the British Provinces I received answers to
my circular ; and I have given, with little abridgment, in one chapter of
my history, these intensely interesting letters and papers — to which I have
been enabled to add considerably from two large quarto manuscript volumes
of papers relating to the U. E. Loyalists in the Dominion Parliamentary
Library at Ottawa, with the use of whicli I have been favoured by the
learned and obliging librarian, Mr. Todd,

" In addition to all the works relating to the subject which I could collect
in Europe and America, I spent, two years since, several months in the
Library of the British Museum, employing the assistance of an amanuensis,
in verifying quotations and making extracts from works not tu be found

PREFACE.

it, docu-
he many
ted and
nd facts
g myself
ters, and
followed
phers,

imperfect
mmonced
ive been
pursuing,
path of
supposed
idoned it.
a extract
sign, and

d the task

irged upon

ic opiniou,

lyalists and

the design

it to me, at

uld throw

our U. E.

answers to

chapter ot

ich I have

t volumes

iamentary

d by the

tlscwherc, in ndation especially to unsettled (iuestions involved in the earlier
part of my history.

" I Imve entirely Nymivithized with the Colonists in their rt'monstmnces,
and even use of arms, in defence of British constitutional rights, from 17tt3
to 1776 ; hut I have been com]>elled to view the proceedings of the Revo-
lutionists and their treatment of the Loyalists in a very different light.

" After having compared the conduct of the two parties during the
Revolution, tlie exile of the Loyalists from their homes after the close of the
War, and their settlement in the British Provinces, I have given a brief
account of the government of each Province, and then traced the alleged
and leal causes of the War of 1812-1815, together with the courage, sacrifice,
and patriotism of Canadians, both English and French, in defending our
country against eleven successive American invasions, when the population
of the two Canadaa was to that of the United States as one to twenty-B<;ven,
and the population of Upper Canada (the chief scene of the War) was as
one to one hundred and six. Our defenders, aided by a few English
regiments, were as handfuls, little Spartan bands, in comparison of the
hosts of the invading armies ; and yet at the end of two years, as well as at
the end of the third and last year of the War, not an invader's foot found a
place on the soil of Canada.

" I undertook this work not self-moved and with no view to profit ; and
if I receive no pecuniary return from this work, on which I have expended
no small labour and means, I shall have the satisfaction of having done all
in my power to erect an historical monument to the character and merits of
the fathers and founders of my native country."

E. RYERSON.

"Toronto, Sept. 24th, 1879."

lid collect

lbs in the

lanuensis,

be found

ill

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

iNTRODUrXION.— Two CLAH8K.S OF P^MIORANTS— Two OOVKIINMKNTS FOR
HKVKNTY YEAI18— The PILGKIM FATHERS, THEIR PlLORIMAOES AND

Settlkmknt.

PAOK

The writer a native Colonist ^

Massachusetts the seed-plot of the American Revoluti *• 1

Two distinct emigrations t'^ New England — the "Pilgrim Fathers' in 1620,
the " Puritan Faiiuio in 1629 ; two separate gf /ernments for seve'^y

years ; characteristics of each 1

Objects and dommentary character of the history, which is not a popular nar-
rative, but a historical discussion (in a note) '2

The " Pilgrim Fathers ; " their pilgrimages and settlement in New England . . i

Origin of Independents 2

Flight to Holland, and twelve years' pilgrimage ; trades and wearisome life

there 3

Long to be under English rule and protection 3

Determine and arrange to emigrate to America 3

Voyage, and intended place of settlement 4

Landing at Cape Cotl ; constitution of government ; Messrs. Bancroft and

Young's remarks upon it 5

Settlement of " New Plymouth " 6

What known of the harbour and coast before the landing of the Pilgrims 7

Inflated and extravagant accounts of the character and voyage of the Pilgrims

(in a note) 7

Results of the first year's experience and labours ; a week's celebration of the first
" harvest home " — such a, first harvest home as no United Empire Loyalists
were ever able to celebrate in Canada 9

)

CHAPTER II.

Government of the " Pilgrim Fathers " at New Plymouth during
seventy years, from 1620 to 1690, as distinct fr".;.' that of the
" Puritan Fathers " of Massachusetts Bay 11-23

Two governments — difference between the government of the Pilgrims and

that of the Puritans 11

Compact, and seven successive governors of the Pilgrims 12

viii CONTENTS.

PAGE

Simple, just, popular and loyal government of the Pilgrims and their descen-
dants 13

Illustrations of their loyalty to successive sovereigns, and the equity and kind-
ness with which Cha;<es the First and Charles the Second treated them. . . 14

Complaints against the unjust and persecuting conduct of the government of
Massachusetts Bay, the cause of Parliamentary and Royal Commissions in
1646, 1664, and 1678 17

Four questions of inquiry by the Commissioners of Charles the Second, in
1665, and satisfactory answers by the Pljrmouth Government 18

Opposition of the Puritan Government of Massachusetts Bay to the Pilgrim
Government in seeking a Royal Charter in 1630 and 1678 21

Absorption of the Plymouth Colony into that of Massachusetts Bay by the
second Royal Charter ; the exclusion of its chief men from public offices. . . 21

Reflections on the melancholy termination of the Plymouth Government ; the
noble and loyal character of the Pilgrim Fathers and their descendants. ... 22

'!'

CHAPTER III.

The Puritans of Massachusetts Bay Company and their Govern-
ment, COMMENCING IN 1629 24-84

PART FIRST.

First settlement — Royal Charter granted 24

Causes, characteristics, and objects of early emigration to New England 25

The Puritan emigrants to Massachusetts Bay professed members of the Estab-
lished Church when they left England 26

Professed objects of the emigration twofold — religious and commercial ; chiefly
religious, for " converting and civilizing the idolatrous and savage Indian

tribes " 26

Endicot ; Royal Charter 27

Second emigration ; Endicot becomes a Congregationalist, and establishes Con-
gregationalism as the only worship of the Company at Massachusetts Bay,
and banishes John and Samuel Brown for adhering (with others) to the old
worship 28

PART SECOND.
The question involving the primary cause of the American Revolution ; the set-
ting up of a new form of worship, and abolishing and proscribing that of
the Church of England, and banishing Episcopalians who adhered to the
old form ot worship ; the facts analysed and discussed ; instructions of the
Company in England, and oaths of allegiance and of ofiice prescribed by it.

PART THIRD.

Complaints of the banished Episcopalians in England ; proceedings by the
Company, denials, proofs, conduct and correspondence of the parties con-
cerned 46

Address of Governor Winthrop, &c., on leaving England, in 1630, to their
" Fathers and Brethren of the Church of England," aflirming their filial
and undying love to the Church of England, as their " dear mother," from
whose breasts they had derived their spiritual nourishment, &c., &c 65

CONTENTS. IX

I'AOK

I Remarks on this address, and absurd interpretations of it 57

I Puritan authorities alone adduced as evidence on the subjects of discussion ;

Puritan letters suppressed ; first seeds of the American Kevolution 59

PART FOURTH.

1 Contest between King Charles the First and the Massachusetts Bay Puritans

during ten years, from 1630 to 1640 61

Professions of the Puritans on leaving England, and their conduct on arriving
at Massachusetts Bay 62

[ In the Church revolution at Massachusetts Bay, none but Congregationalists
could be citizen electors, or eligible for office of any kind ; five-sixths of
the male population disfranchised 63

! This first violation of the Royal Charter and laws of England 65

Complaints to the King in Council in 1632 65

: Imputations upon the complainants, and upon the King and Council for listen-
ing to their complaints 66

[Proceedings of the King and Council in 1632 ; the accused deny the charges,
and convince the King of their innocence and good faith ; further inquiry
to be made ; in the meantime the King dismisses the complaints, assures
the accused that he never intended to impose at Massachusetts Bay the re-
ligious ceremonies to which they had objected in England, and assures
them of his desire to promote the interests of their plantation 66

[The King's kind and indulgent conduct, and how the advocates of the Company

deceived him 67

[Continued oppressions and proscriptions at Massachusetts Bay, and fresh com-
plaints to the King in Council in 163 1 69

iTransfer of the Charter ; kept secret during four years ; remarks upon it ; effect

of the disclosure, and renewed complaints 69

[Issue of a Royal Commission ; proposed armed resistance at Massachusetts Bay
advised by the Congregational ministers ; remarks on Mr. Bancroft's
attacks and statements ; official representations, and conduct of parties
conerned 72

iMassachusetts Bay rulers the aggressors throughout ; review of the controversy 75

[More despotism practised in Massachusetts Bay than was ever practised in Up-
per Canada 82

i I

CHAPTER IV.

jTlIE GoVEIlNMENT OF MASSACHUSF.TTS BAY UNDER THE LoNO PAKLIAMENT,

THE Commonwealth, and Ckom well 85-129

[Commissioners from the Massachusetts Bay rulers to the Long Parliament .... 85

Change of Government in England stops emigration to Massachusetts 86

?irst Address of the Massachusetts Commissioners to the Long Parliament .... 86
)rilinance of the Long Parliament in regard to Mass ichusetts trade, &c., in

1642, and remarks upon it 87

lie Massachusetts Bay Court pass an Act in 1644, '>f persecution of the Bap-
tists ; another Act authorising discussion, &c., in favour of the Parliament,
but pronouncing as a " high offence," to be proceeded ag.ainst " capitally,"

cnything done or said in behalf of the King 87

In 1646, the Long Parliament pass an ordinance appointing a Commission and
Governor-General over Massachusetts and other Colonies, with powers

! i

liH!

X CONTENTS.

PAGK

more extensive than the Commission which had been appointed by Charles

the First in 1634 88

The parliamentary authority declared in this ordinance, and acknowledged by
the Puritans in 1646, the same as that maintained by the United Empire
Loyalists of America one hundred and thirty years afterwards, in the

American Revolution of 1776 (in a note) i 88-92

The Presbyterians in 1646 seek liberty of worship at Massachusetts Bay, but
are punished for their petition to the Massachusetts Bay Government, and
are fined and their papers seized to prevent their appeal to the Puritan Par-
liament 93

How their appeal to England was defeated 98

Further illustrations of the proceedings of the rulers of Massachusetts Bay as
more intolerant and persecuting than anything ever attempted by the High

Church party in Upper Canada 98

Colonial government according to Massachusetts Bay pretentions impossible. . . 99
The order of the Long Parliament to the Massachusetts Bay Government to sur-
render the Charter and receive another ; consternation 99

Means employed to evade the order of Parliament 100

Mr. Bancroft's statements, and remarks upon them (in a note) 100

Mr. Palfrey's statements in regard to what he calls the " Presbyterian Cabal,"

and remarks upon them 103

Petition of the Massachusetts Bay Court to the Long Parliament in 1651 ; two

addresses to Cromwell — the one in 1651, the other in 1654 108

Remarks on these addresses 110

The famous Navigation Act, passed by the Long Parliament in 1651, oppressive
to the Southern Colonies, but regularly evaded in Masachusetts Bay by

collusion with Cromwell Ill

Intolerance and persecutions of Presbyterians, Baptists, &c., by the Massachu-
setts Bay rulers, from 1643 to 166] 112

Letters of remonstrance against these persecutions by the distinguished Pu-
ritans, Sir Henry Vane and Sir Richard Saltonstall 116

Mr. Neal on the same subject (in a note) 120

The Rev. Messrs. Wilson and Norton instigate, and the Rev. Mr. Cotton jus-
tifies, these persecutions of the Baptists 120

Summary of the first thirty years of the Massachusetts Bay Government, and
character of its persecuting laws and spirit, by the celebrated Edmund

Burke 122

The death of Cromwell ; conduct and professions of the rulers of Massachusetts
Bay in regard to Cromwell and Charles the Second at his restoration ;
Scotchmen, fighting on their own soil for their king, taken prisoners at
Dunbar, transported and received as slaves at Massachusetts Bay 124

CHAPTER V.

Government of Massachusetts Bay and other Colonies during twenty

YEARS, UNDER ChARLES THE SECOND, FROM 1660 TO 1680 130-203

Restoration ; the news of it was received with joy in the Colonies, except in
Massachusetts Bay, where false rumours were circulated alone 130

Change of tone and professions at Massachusetts Bay on the confirmation
of the news of the King's restoration and firm establishment on the throne ;
John Eliot, Indian apostle, censured for what he had been praised 131

CONTENTS. XI

FAQE

Iwhen and under what circumstances the Massachusetts Bay Government pro-
claimed the King, and addressed him ; the address (in a note) 132

iBemarks on this address, and its contrariety to the address to Cromwell ten

years before 133

[he King's kind letter addressed to Governor Endicot (in a note) 135

|The Massachusetts Court's " ecstasy of joy " at the King's letter, and reply to

it 135

lie King enjoins ceasing to persecute the Quakers : how answered (in a note) . . 137

jPetitions and representations to the King from Episcopalians, Presbyterians,
Baptists, &c., in Massachusetts Bay, on their persecutions and disfran-
chisement by the local Government 137

iThe King's Puritan Councillors, and kindly feelings for the Colony of Massa-
chusetts Bay 138

lie King's letter of pardon and oblivion, June 28, 1662 (in a note), of the
past misdeeds of the Massachusetts Bay Government, and the six con-
ditions on which he promised to continue the Charter 139

IXhe King's oblivion of the past and promised continuance of the Charter for
the future joyfully proclaimed ; but the publication of the letter withheld,
and when the publication of it could be withheld no longer, all action on
the royal conditions of toleration, &c., prescnbed, was ordered by the local
Government to bt juspended until the order of the Court 141

(Messrs. Bradstreet and Norton, sent as agents to England to answer complaints,
are favourably received ; are first thanked and then censured at Boston ;
Norton dies of grief. 142

|0n account of the complaints and representations made to England, the King
in Council determines upon the appointment of a Commission to inquire
into the matters complained of in the New England Colonies, and to re-
medy what was wrong 145

{Slanderous rumours circulated in Massachusetts against the Commission and

Commissioners 146

|Copy of the Royal Commission (in a note), explaining the reasons and objects

of it 147

lAll the New England Colonies, except Massachusetts Bay, duly receive the
Royal Commissioners ; their report on Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New
Plymouth (in a note) 148

lEeport of the Royal Commissioners on the Colony of Massachusetts Bay (in a
note) ; difference from the other Colonies ; twenty anomalies in its laws
inconsistent with its Charter ; evades the conditions of the promised contin-
uance of the Charter ; denies the King's jurisdiction 149

They address the King, and enclose copies of their address, with letters, to
Lord Chancellor Clarendon, the Earl of Manchester, Lord Say, and the

Honourable Robert Boyle 152

The United Empire Loyalists the true Liberals of that day 162

Dopy of the long and characteristic address of the Massachusetts Bay Court to

the King, October 25, 1664 (with notes) 163

etters of Lord Clarendon and the Honourable Robert Boyle to the Massachu-
setts Bay Court, in reply to their letters, and on their address to the King ;

pretensions and conduct 160

Conduct and pretensions of the Massachusetls Bay Court condemned and ex-
posed by loyalist inhabitants of Boston, Salem, Newbury, and Ipswich, in
a petition 168

l:i

Xll CONTENTS.

I'AdE

The King's reply to the long address or petition of the Massachusetts Bay
Court, dated February 25, 1665, correcting their misstatements, and allow-
ing the groundlessness of their pretended fears and actual pretensions. ... 166

The King's kind and courteous letter without effect upon the Massachusetts
Bay Court, who refuse to acknowledge the Royal Commissioners ; second
and more decisive letter from the King, April, 1666 169

Retrospect of the transactions^ between the two Charleses and the Massachusetts
Bay Court from 1630 to 1666, with extracts of correspondence 171

Royal Charters to Connecticut and Rhode Island, in 1663, with remarks upon
them by Judge Story (in a note) 172

The narrative of the discussion of questions between Charles the Second and the
Massachusetts Bay Court resumed ; summarj' of facts ; questions at issue. . 178

On receiving the report of his Commissioners, who had been rejected by the
Massachusetts Bay Court, the King orders agents to be sent to England to
answer before the King in Council to the complaints made against the
Government of the Colony 179

Meetings and proceedings of the Massachusetts Bay Court on the Royal Mes-
sage ; their address of vindication and entreaty to the King ; and instead
of sending agents, send two large masts, and resolve to send £1,000 to pro-
pitiate the King 180

Loyalists in the Court and among the people, who maintain the Royal au-
thority 182

Complaints a pretext to perpetuate sectarian rule and persecutions 183

Baptists persecuted by fine, imprisonment, &c., as late as 1666 and 1669 (ex-
tract of Court proceedings in a note), several years after the King had for-
bidden such intolerance in Massachusetts 184

Statements of Hutchinson and Neal in regard to such persecutions, and remon-
strances by the Rev. Drs. Owen and T. Goodwin, and other Nonconformist
ministers in England 185 1

Efforts by addresses, gifts, and compliance in some matters, to propitiate the

King's favour 186 1

Why the King desists for some years from further action 18? |

Complaints from neighbouring Colonists and individual citizens, of invasion of
rights, and persecutions and proscriptions by the Massachusetts Bay Gov-
ernment, awaken at last the renewed attention of the King's Government
to their proceedings ; and the King addresses another letter, July, 1679
(copy of the letter in a note) 18?

Seven requirements of this letter just and reasonable, and observed by all Bri-
tish Colonies at this day 188 1

Remarks on the unfair statements and unjust imputations against the British

Government of that day, by Mr. Palfrey and other New England historians. 190 1

Nineteen years' evasions and disregard of the conditions on which the King
promised to perpetuate the Charter ; strong and decisive letter from the
King, September, 1680, to the Massachusetts Bay Court, which caused a
special meeting of the Court, the sending of agents to England, and the
passing of some remedial Acts 193 1

Examples and proofs of the deceptive character of these Acts, with measures to
neutralize or prevent them from being carried into effect — such as the
Navigation Act, Oath of Allegiance, the Franchise, Liberty of Worship,
and Persecution of Baptists and Quakers 1951

CONTENTS. xiii

. PAOE

I Recapitulation ; manner of extending the territory and jurisdiction, so as to in-
clude Maine, part of New Hampshire, &c. (in a note) ; Mr. Bancroft's state-
ment, confirming the positions of this and preceding chapters as to the
j)retension8 and conduct of the Massachusetts Bay Goveninieut 200

CHAPTER VI.

I Massachusetts during the last four years of Charles the Second and

THE THUEE years' REIGN OK JaMKS THE SECOND, FROM 1680 TO 168& ;
THE IMMEDIATE CAUSES AND MANNER OF CANCELLING THE FIRST CHAR-

TKli 204-22a

I Crisis approaching ; the double game of Massachusetts Bay Court played out ;

threat of a writ of quo waiTunto 204

i rrocecdiiigs of Massachusetts Bay Court ; offer a bribe to the King ; bribe clerks

of the Privy Council 205

I The Jlassachusetts Bay Court refuse the proposed conditions of perpetuating
till' Charter ; refuse submission to the King on any conditions ; determine
to contest in a Court of Law ; agents restricted ; the King provoked 206

JThe Governor and a majority of the assistants or magistrates vote in favour of
submitting to the King's decision ; the Ministers advise, and a majority of
the deputies \ ote against it 208

I A wnt oi quo warranto issued and sent, June and July, 1683, summoning the
Corjioration of Massachusetts Bay to defend their acts against the com-
plaints and charges (thirteen in number) made against them, but assuring
the inviolableness of private projjerty, and ottering to stay legal proceed-
ings against the Corporation in case of their submitting to the decision of
the King, on the points heretofore required by his Alajesty as conditions of
perpetuating the Charter 208

I The Colony of Massachusetts Bay divided ; origin of parties ; the Governor and
a majority of the " Upper Branch of the Government " were the moderate
or loyalist party ; the majority of the " House of Deputies," whose " elec-
tions were controlled by the ministers," were the iiidependence party ; .
violent language by Dr. Increase Mather, whose appeal from man to God
was decided against hira (in a note) 209

I Resolutions of the two Houses of the Court on the subject 210

[Notice to the Massachusetts Bay Court of the issue of the writ of quo warranto,
to answer to the complaints against them, received October, 1683 ; judg-
ment given July 1685, nearly two years afterwards 211

[The questions at issue unfairly put to popular vote in Massachusetts ; remarks

on Mr. Palfrey's account of the transactions 211

lEesults of the fall of the Charter ; death of Charles the Second ; jjroclamation
of the accession of James the Second ; appointment of Joseph Dudley as
Governor ; character of his seven months' government 212

lAppointment of Andros as local Governor and Governor-General ; popular be-
ginning of his government ; his tyranny ; seized at Boston and sent pri-
soner to England ; acquitted on account of having obeyed his instructions 215

[Toleration first proclaimed in Massachusetts by James the Second ; thanked by
the Massachusetts Bay Court, and its agent in England, the Rev. Increase
Mather, for the proclamation which lost the King the Crown of England. . 216

{Concluding review of the characteristics of the fifty-four years' gcvernment of
Massachusetts Bay Government under the first Charter 217

^■^

XIV

CONTENTS.

*<*•-

i'!:;.!

:|i

CHAPTER VII.

Second Royal Charter, and the Government of Massachusetts under
IT FROM 1691 TO 1748 ; the close of the First War between England
AND France, and the Peace of Aix-i^a-Chapelle 221-241

PAOB

Retrospect ; reasons assigned by Mr. Palfrey why the Massachusetts Bay Gov-
ernment did not make armed resistance against " the fall of the first Char-
ter," and remarks upon them 221 !

The* Government (5f Massachusetts Bay continued two years after "the fall of
the Charter," as if nothing had happened 226 j

They promptly proclaim King James the Second ; take the oath of allegiance to
him ; send the Rev. Increase Mather as agent to thank his Majesty for his
proclamation of indulgence, to pray for the restoration of the first Charter,
and for the removal of Sir Fdmund Andros ; King James grants several
friendly audiences, but does nothing 226 i

On the dethronement of James the Second, Dr. Increase Mather pays his hom-
age to the new King, with professions (no doubt sincere) of overflowing
loyalty to him (in a note) 226 1

Unsuccessful efforts of Dr. Increase Mather to obtain the restoration of the first
Charter, though aided by the Queen, Archbishop Tillotson, Bishop Burnet,
the Presbyterian clergy, and others 228 !

How the second Charter was prepared and granted ; Dr. Increase Mather first
protests against, and then gratefully accepts the Charter ; nominates the
first Governor, Sir William Phips 1

Nine principal provisions of the new Charter !

Puritan legal opinions on the defects of the first Charter, the constant violation
of it by the Massachusetts Bay Government, and the unwisdom of its re-
storation (in a note) 1

A small party in Boston opposed to accepting the new Charter ; Judge Story on
the salutary influence of the new Charter on the legislation and progress
of the Colony :

Happy influence of the new Charter upon toleration, loyalty, peace and unity
of society in Massachusetts — proofs 23I|

The spirit of the old leaven of bigotry still surviving ; and stung with the facts
of Neal's History of New England on "the persecuting principles and
practices of the first planters, " a remarkable letter from the Rev. Dr. Isaac
Watts, dated February 19, 1720, addressed to the Rev. Dr. Cotton
Mather, explanatory of Neal's History, and urging the formal repeal of the
" cruel and sanguinary statutes " which had been passed by the Massachu-
setts Bay Court under the first Charter (in a note)

Happiness and progress of Massachusetts during seventy years under the second
Charter 2«)|

Debts incurred by the New England Colonies in the Indian Wars ; issue of
paper money ; how Massachusetts was relieved by England, and made
prosperous

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER VIII.

Massachusetts and other Colonies during the Second Wae between
Great Britain and France, from the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle,
1748, TO the Peace of Paris, 1763 242-279

PAGE
Places taken during the war between France and England mutually restored
at the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle ; Louisburg and Cape Breton restored

to France, in return for Madras restored to England 242

Boundaries in America between France and England to be defined by a

joint Commission, which could not agree 242

Encroachments of the French on the British Colonies from 1748 to 1766 ;
complaints of the Colonial Governors to England ; orders to them to
defend their territories ; conflicts between the Colonies, French and

Indians 243

England's best if not only means of protecting the Colonies, to prevent the
French from transporting soldiers and war material to Canada ; naval

preparations 244

Evasive answers and disclaimers of the French Government, with naval and

military preparations 245

Braddock's unfortunate expedition ; capture of French vessels, soldiers, &c.,

(in a note) 247

The King's speech to Parliament on French encroachments ; convention of
Colonies at Albany, and its representatives, a year before war was de-
clared 247

Mr. Bancroft's imputation against the British Government, and reply to it

(in a note) 247

Mr. Bancroft represents this war as merely European ; refuted by himself ;
his noble representations of the Protestant character of the war on the

part of Great Britain and other Powers 248

Contests chiefly between the Colonists, the French, and the Indians, from
1648 to 1654 ; English soldiers under General Braddock sent to America
in 1655 ; campaigns actual and devised that year ; Massachusetts active ;

Sir William Johnson's victory over the French General, Dieskau 250

War formally declared by England and France in 1756 ; French successes in

1755, 1756, and 1757 252

Parliament votes £115,000 sterling to compensate the Colonies for expenses

incurred by them 252

Arrival of the Earl of Loudon from England with troops, as Commander-in-
Chief 262

Capture of Forts Oswego and William Henry by the French General,

Montcalm 253

Dispute between the Earl of Loudon and the Massachusetts Court, in regard

to the Mutiny Act, and quartering the troops upon the citizens 265

Alarming situation of afi'airs at the close of the year 1767 265

Divided counsels and isolated resources and action of the Colonies 267

General Abercrombie arrives with more troops, and forty German officers to
drill and command regiments to be raised in America (which gave ofiience

to the Colonists) , 257

The Governor of Virginia recommends Washingtoii, but his services are not
recognized 267

XVI CONTENTS.

PAOB

Generals Abercrombie and Loudon at Albany hesitate and delay, while the

■ French generals are active and successful 258

The Earl of Loudon's arbitrary conduct in (juartering his officers and troops in

Albany and New York (in a note) 258

Loudon never fought a battle in America ; and in the only battle fought by
Abercrombie, he was disgracefully defeated by Montcalm, though com-
manding the largest army which had ever been assembled in America.
Among the slain in this battle was the brave General, Lord Howe, the

favourite of the army and citizens 259

The Massachusetts Court appropriate £250 sterling to erect a monument in

Westminster Abbey in honour of Lord Howe 260

Abercrombie — the last of the incompetent English Generals — recalled, and
succeeded by Lord Amherst as Commander-in-Chief, assisted by General
Wolfe, when, under the Premiership of the elder Pitt, the whole policy

and fortunes of the war undergo a complete change 260

Colonel Bradstreet's brilliant achievement in taking and destroying Fort

Frontenac 261

Lord Amherst plans three expeditions, all of which were successful 261

Louisburg besieged and taken ; heroism of General Wolfe ; great rejoicings. . 262
Admiral Boscawen returns to England ; Lord Amherst's energetic move-
ments 262

Niagara taken ; Fort du Quesne taken, and called Pittsburg ; Ticonderoga

and Crown Point taken ; Quebec taken 263

Attempt of the French to recover Quebec 266

Parliamentary compensation to Massachusetts (in a note) 267

Montreal besieged and taken, and all Canada surrendered to the King of

Great Britain, ilirough Lord Amherst 267

General Amherst's address to the army (in a note) 268

The war not closed ; conquests in the West Indies ; troubles with the

Indians ; reduction of the Cherokees 269

Treaty of Paris ; general rejoicings 269

Massachusetts benefitted by the war 270

Moneys provided by England for the war abstracted from England and

expended in the Colonies 270

Grateful acknowledgments and avowed loyalty to England by Massachusetts ;
the language and feelings of the other Colonies the same 271

CHAPTEK IX.

Relation of England and the Colonies with each other and with
Foreign Countries 273-279

I. The position of England in respect to the other European Powers after the

Peace of Paris, 1763 273

II. The position of the American Colonies, in regard to England and other
nations, after the Peace of Paris in 1763 274

III. Effects of the change of policy by the English Government in regard to
the Colonies 277

IV. First acts of the British Government which caused dissatisfaction and
alienation in the Colonies 279 I

CONTENTS.

XVll

CHAPTER X.

The Stamp Act ; its effects in America ; Virginia leads the Opposi-
tion TO IT ; RIOTS AND DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY IN BoSTON ;
petitions AGAINST THE StAMP AcT IN ENGLAND ; REPEAL OF THE

Stamp Act ; rejoicings at its repeal in England and America ;
THE Declaratory Act 283-293

APPENDIX " A " TO CHAPTER X.

PAOE
Containing extracts of the celebrated speeches of Mr. Charles Townsend and

Colonel Barr^ on passing the Stamp Act 294

Remarks on the speeches of the Right Honourable Mr. Townsend and Colonel

Barr^ ; Paritau treatment of the Indians 296

APPENDIX " B " TO CHAPTER X.

Containing the speeches of Lords Chatham and Camden on the Stamp Act and

its repeal 802

Dr. Franklin's evidence at the Bar of the House of Commons 808

CHAPTER XI.

Authority of Parliament over the British Colonies 317-322

CHAPTER XII.

Summary of Events from the Repeal of the Stamp Act, March, 1768,
to the end of the year 323-328

CHAPTER XIII.

1767.— A New Parliament ; first Act against -he Province of New
York ; Billettino soldiers on the Colonies 829-836

Raising a revenue by Act of Parliament in the Colonies 330

Three Bills brought in, and passed by Parliament, to raise a revenue in the

Colonies 331

Vice- Admiralty Courts and the Navy employed as custom-house otucors 334

: The effect of these Acts and measures in the Colonies 335

CHAPTER XIV.

Events of 1768. — Protests and Loyal Petitions of the Colonists
against the English Parliamentary Acts for raising revenues
in the Colonies 337-352

[Petition to the King 337

Toble circular of the Massachusetts Legislative Assembly to the Assemblies of
the other Colonies, on the unconstitutional and oppressive Acts of the Bri-
tish Parliament 838

This circular displeasing to the British Ministry, and strongly condemned by it

in a circular from the Earl of Hillsborough 341

Admirable and patriotic reply of the Virginia House of Burgesses to the Massa-
chusetts circiilar 842

xviii contp:nt.s.

J'ACIE

Similar replies from tlic LcgiHlativc Assemblies of other Colonies 343

Kxcelleiit answer of tlic ( Jeneral Assembly of Maryland to a message of the (Jov-

ernor on the same snbjcet 344

The elfeets of Lord llillsborongh's eircular letter to the Colonial Governors 345

Experiment of the newly asserted power of i'nrliament to tax and rule the Co-
lonies, commendi'd at Boston and in JIassaehusetts 348

Three eanses for popular irritation ; seizures ; liotous resistanee ; seven hundred
soldiers landed, and required to be jjrovided for, whieh was refused ; the
Provincial Assendily and its proceedings ; ships of war in IJoston Harbour 348

CHAPTER XV.

Events of 1769.— Unjust imputations of Parliament on thk i,oyai,ty
OF the Colonists, and miskkpuksentations of theiu just and i.oyai.
petitions 353-363

Manly resjwnse to these imputations on the jiart of the Colonists, and their as-
sertion of British constitutional rights, led by the General Assembly of
Virginia 355

Dissolution of Colonial Assemblies ; agreements for the non-importation of Bri-
tish manufactured goods entered into by the Colonists 356

The General Assembly of Massachusetts refuse to legislate under the guns of a
♦ land and naval force ; Governor Barnard's reply 357

Proceedings of the Govei-nor and House of Assembly on quartering troops in
Boston 358

Governor Barnard's recall and character (in a note) 359

Origin of the non-importation agreement in New York ; sanctioned by persons

in the highest stations ; union of the Colonies planned 360

Sons of fiovernors Barnard and Hutchinson refuse to enter into the non-impor-
tation agreement 360

They were at length compelled to yield ; humiliating position of the soldiers in

Boston ; successful resistani^e of the importation of British goods 360

Joy in the Colonies by a despatch from Lord Hillsborough i)romising to repeal
the obnoxious llevenue Acts, and to im})0se no more taxes on the Colonies 361

The duty of threepence per pound on tea excepted 363

CHAPTER XVI.

Events of 1770. — An eventful epoch. — Expeitations of reconcilia-
tion AND union disappointed 364-373

Collisions between the soldiers and inhabitants in Boston 365

The soldiers insulted and abused 365

The Boston Massacre ; the soldiers acquitted by a Boston jury 365

The payment of official salaries indei)endent of the Colonies another cause of

dissatisfaction 366

What had been claimed by the old American Colonies contended for in Canada,

and gi'anted, to the satisfaction and jn-ogress of the country 367

Lord North's Bill to repeal the Colonial Revenue Acts, except the duty on tea,

which he refused to repeal until " America should be prostrate at his feet " 368
Governor Pownall's speech and amendment to repeal the duty on tea, rejected

by a majority of 242 to 204 , 369

plA-

373

365

• f •

365

• • •

365

! of

• « •

366

ida,

• ■ .

367

tea,

368

;ted

369

•JONTENTS. XIX

I'.VOK
Associiitioiis in the CJolonics ngiiiiiHt tln' \\hi> of ten iinportfd from Kiigliiiid 370

The ti'ii iliity Act of Puiliiunciit virttiiilly (Icfciitt'd in Aiiicriia 370

Tlu' controvdi-Hy n-vived ami inteiisificil hy tlu? agnM-meiit l)r't\vooii Lord North

and tlu! East India t'onii)aiiy, to remit thf duty of a sliilliiig in tin- pound

on ail tt'a.s cxjiortctl by it to Ami-riea, when; tlie tlin-i-pcmo duty on the

pound was to be eollceted , 371

Conil)ini'd opposition of English and Ameri(!an merehauts, and the (.'olonists

from New Hampshire to (ieorgia, against this scheme 372

CHAPTER XVII.

Events ok 1771, 1772, 1773. — Thk East India Comtany's tka ukjkctkd in

KVKIIY I'KOVISCK OF AmKUICA ; NOT A THKST OF ITS TKA SOLD ; UKHOLU-
TIONS OF A PUBLIC MKKTINO IN PhILAOKH'HIA ON THK SUBJKCT, THK
MODKI, FOR TIIOSK OF OTHKll COLONIKS 374-387

The Oovernor, Hutchinson, of Masstichusetts, and his sons (the consignees),

alone determined to land the tea at Boston 376

The causes and affair of throwing the East India Company's tea into the Boston

Harbour, as stated on both sides 377

The causes and the disastrous effect of the airangtnnent between the British
Ministry and the East India Company 381

The King the author of the scheme ; His Majesty's condemnation of the pe-
titions and renmnstrances from the Colonies (in a note) 382

Governor Hutchinson's proceedings, and his account of the transactions at Bos-
ton 383

His vuidiaition of himself, and descriiition of his pitiable condition 383

Remarks on the difference between his conduct and that of the Governors of
other provinces 387

CHAPTER XVIII.

Events of 1774. — All clashes in the Colonies discontented ; all

CLASSES and all THE I'UOVINCES UFJECT THE EAST INDIA CoMI'ANY's

TEA 388-402

Opposition to the tea duty represented in England as " rebellion," and the ad-
vocates of colonial rights designated " rebels " and " traitors " 388

Three Acts of Parliament against the inhabitants of Boston and of Massachu-
setts, all infringing and extinguishing the heretofore acknowledged consti-
tutional rights and liberties of the people 389

Debates in Parliament, and misrepresentations of the English press on Ame-
rican affairs 390

Lord North explains the American policy ; the Bill to punish the town of Bos-
ton ; i»etitions against it from the agent of Massiuihusetts and the city of
London ; debates on it in the Commons and Lords 394

Distress of Boston ; addresses of sympathy, and contributions of relief from other
towns and provinces ; generous conduct of the inhabitants of Massachu-
setts and Salem 395

The second penal Bill against Massachusetts, changing the constitution of the
government of the province 396

Third penal Bill for the immunity of governors, magistrates, and other public
officers in Massachusetts 396

I ■

3B CONTENTS.

I'AOK

Tho fourth Act of I'ai'Iiatnciit, lugiili/.iii^ thn ((uurtcriiig of tlii> troops in HoNtoii 397

The offocts of tht'H(! iiu'iiHuri'S in th« Colonics thu reverse of what their nuthors

and advocates had nntieipntod ; all the Colonies protest against them 897

General Gage's arrival in Hoston, and courteous retjeptioii, as successor to (lev-
enior Hutchinson — his character (in a note) 398

Meeting of the Massachusetts Legislature ; adjournment to Salem ; their ro-

siMJctful, loyal, but finn reply to the Governor's speech ; his bitter answer 399

Courteous, loyal, and patriotic answer of tho Assembly to the Ciovernor's 8i)eech 400

The House of Assi-mbly proceetl with closed doors, and adopt, by a majority of
92 to 12, resolutions declaring the necessity of a meeting of all the Colo-
nies to consult together upon the present state of the Colonies 401

Curious dissolution of the last Legislature held in the Province of Massachusetts,
according to the tenor of its Charter (in a note) 401

CHAPTER XIX.

1774, Continued until the Meeting op the Fiust General Conokess in
Septembeu 403-408

Bcsolutions in all the Colonies in favour of a general Convention or Congress,

and election of delegates to it 403

General symjtathy and liberality on behalf of the town of Boston 404

How information on subjects of agitation was rapidly diffused throughout the
Colonies 405

The Act of Parliament changing the Constitution of Massachusetts without its
consent gave rise to the American Revolution ; the authority of that Act
never acknowledged in Massachusetts 407

CHAPTER XX.

General Congress or Convention at Philadelphia, September and
October, 1774 409-421

The word Congress " defined " 409

Each day's proceedings commenced with prayer ; each Province allowed but one

vote 410

The members of the Congress and their constituents throughout the Colonies

thoroughly loyal, while maintaining British constitutional rights 410

The declaration of rights and grievances by this Congress (in a note) 411

The explicit, loyal, and touching address and petition of this Congi-ess to the

King 414

Manly and affectionate appeal to the British nation 416

The address of the members of the Congress to their constituents — a temperate

and lucid exposition of their grievances and sentiments 417

Reasons for giving a summary and extracts of these addresses of the first Gen-
eral Congress 418

General elections in England hastened ; adverse to the Colonies 419

The King's speech at the opening of the new Parliament, the 30th of November,

and answers of both Houses 419

Opposition in both Houses ; protest in the Lords 420

The proceedings of the first American Congress reach England before the ad-

i!M

CONTEN'l'H.

XXI

1"A0E

jounimt'iit of Pailiiuiiciit for tlif niriHtiiia« liolidiiyH, uml iiro<liirt' nn im-
pn'SHion fiivoumldc to the (.'oloriifs ; hopes of ii I'haiigt' of thi- MiiiisttTiul
[lolicy ill regard to the ColoiiieH 420

.. 409

.. 410

.. 411

.. 414

.. 416

.. 417

.. 418

.. 419

.. 420

CHAPTER XXI.

(177S.)

TnK hk-ahhemulino of PAnuAMRsr thk 20Tn of Januahy ; i,f,ttkuh
FHOM Colonial Oovkunoks, UKViCNrK and militauy okfk kuh, aoainst

THK C0LONI8TH OPl-OHEl) TO THE MINI8TKKIAL I'OUCV AND THK 1*AUMA-

MENTAUV Acts ; thk Minihtiiy, huppoutku dy Pauliamknt, deter-
mine ui'oN continuing and htuknutuenino the cokucivk policy
aoainst the C0LONIE8 422-432

The Earl of Chatham's aineiulment and s{)eech in the Lords, against the cot^rcivo
policy of the Ministry and in Ixihulf of Colonial rights, supported by other
Lords and numerous politicians 423

Lord Suffolk in favour of coercion ; T^ord Camden against it, and in favour of
the rights of the Colonies ; Lc J '. hatham and others denounced by the
King (in a note) 424

The amendment negatived by a majority of 68 to 18 ; but the King's own
brother, the Duke of Cumberland, was one of the minority ; yet the King
boasted of the "handsome majority " in support of his coercive policy. . . . 426

The Earl of Chatham's bill " to settle the troubles in America," not allowed a
first reading in the Lords 425

Petitions from various towns in England, Scotland, and Ireland against the
American policy of the ministry 425

Petition to the Commons from Dr. Franklin, Mr, BoUan, and Mr. Lee, Colonial
agents, praying to be heard at the bar of the House in support of the peti-
tion of the American Continei tal Congress, rejected by a majority of 213
to 68 426

Dr. Franklin's dismissal from office ; his success in office ; his sentiments on the
rejection of the petitions of the Colonies and punishment of their agents
(in a note) 426

Lord North's resolution for an address (given entire) to the King, endorsing the
coercive policy, and denouncing complaints and ojjposition to it in America
as " rebellion " 426

Remarks on the gross inaccuracies and injustice and empty promises of this ad-
dress 428

Debates in the Commons on Lord North's address to the King 429

Mr. Fox's amendment to Lord North's address rejected by a majority of 804 to
105 430

Second great debate on Lord North's warlike resolution for an address to the
King, and Lord John Cavendish's amendment to it ; speakers on both sides 480

Lord North's address, made the joint address of both Houses of Parliament,
presented to the King, with His Majesty's reply 431

Remarks on the King's reply, and the proceedings of Parliament in respect to
the Colonies 431

The Ministry and Parliament virtually declare war against the Colonies 482

XXll

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER XXII.

(1775, Continued.)

Parliament proceeds to pass an Act to punish the New England
Colonies fob sympathisino with Massachusetts, by restrictino
their trade to England and DEPaiviNO them of the Newfound-
land Fisheries 433-441

PAGE

Parliament passes a second Act to punish in the same way all the Colonies, for
the same reason as those of the New England Colonies, except New York,

Delaware, North Carolina ; these Provinces decline the exception 433

Much expected from the General Assembly of New York, which had not en-
dorsed the first Continental Congress ; the Assembly meets and adopts a
petition and remonstrances on the grievances of all the Colonies, including
Massachusetts ; this address, adopted as late as May, 1775, a Loyal
United Empire Document ; extracts from this admirable and statesman-
like address 434

Mr. Burke, in a conciliatory speech, proposes to present this memorial to the

House of Commons 437

Lord North opposes it 438

Mr. Fox defends it, and moves against its rejection 438

Governor Johnstone justifies the reception of it by example 439

Lord North's amendment to reject the petition adopted by a majority of 186

to 67 439

The memorial, after debate, rejected by the House of Lords 440

Reflections of the royal historian on the effect upon the public mind in England
from the rejection of the New York Assembly's appeal by both Houses of

Parliament (in a note) 440

The Colonists still persist in hopes of reconciliation and the maintenance of
their constitutional rights, without entertaining a thought of indej)endeiice 441

I j

ill:

CHAPTER XXIII.

(1775, Continued.)
The second Continental Congress in America 442-458

The second Continental Congress meets at Philadelphia, in the month of Sep-
tember 442

Number and character of its members 442

Their credentials and instructions to seek remedies for grievances, but not sepa-
ration from the Mothei Country ; mode of proceeding 443

Noble and affectionate petition to the King 443

This petition read in the House of Commons the 7th of December, 1775, but
rejected 444

Penn, the agent of the Congress, not asked a (piWotion when he presented the
petition, and was refused an interview by the King (in a note) 444

Tlie King's answer a proclamation declaring the petition "rebellion " and the

petitioners " rebels " 445

CONTENTS. XXin

PAGE

Thf effect of this proclamation upon the Continental Congress, anil of the ac-
companying announcement, that the anny and navy were to be greatly
increased, and seventeen thousand mercenary soldiers frupi Hanover and
Hesse were to be engaged to bring the Colonists to absolute submission . . . 448

Refusal of English Generals and soldiers to fight against the Colonists (in a note) 446

Bombardment and burning of Falmouth (now Portland) by Captain Mowat, of
the British navy (two accounts of it, in a note) 446

The large majority of the Congress yet opposed to independencr-, but were unani-
mously in favour of energetic measures for the defence of their constitu-
tional rights 448

Tom Paine's appeal to the Colonists, called Comvwn Sense, the first publication
in America against monarchy 450

But the majority of the Congress opposed to republicanism 450

The exact time when the leading n»en of the Colonies conceived the measure of
independence not certainly known 451

Prompted by the now-known King's own personal acts and hostility to the
American Colonists 451

Deprecated by South Carolina in May, 1775, after the bloody affair of Concord
and Lexington (in a note) 451

Disclaimed by Dr. Franklin in 1773 452

Disclaimed by Washington and Jefferson until after the middle of the year 1775 453

Though urged by President Dwiglit (of Yale), discountenanced by leading New
Englanders in July, 1775 453

Retrospect of events and position of affairs between Great Britain and the Colo-
nies at the close of the year 1775 454

CHAPTER XXIV. '

(The Year 1775 and beginning of 1776.)

An KVENTFUL yeah ; PHEPAUATION in EN(iLANl) TO P.EDUC'E COLON-
ISTS TO ABSOLUTE SUBMISSION ; f KI,F-ASSEKTED AUTIIOUITY OF PAULIA-

MENT 459-478

Oppressive Acts of Parliament enumerated, with the measures of emjiloying
foreign soldiers, Indians, and slaves ; and all with the express sanction of
the King, and while Colonists jjrofessi d loyalty, and asked for nothing but
the redress of grievances and restora'^ion of rights wiiich they had hereto-
fore enjoyed 459

The loyalty and. effective services of the Colonists in the English and French
war, and the experience and skill thiy thereby ai/4uired in military affairs ;
their superiority as marksmen 460

They desire to provide for their own defence, and for the support of their own
civil government, as aforetime, and as is done in the i)rovinces of the Cana-
dian Dominion, but this is opposed by the King and liis ministers 460

ficncral Gage (Governor of Massachusetts, and Commander-in-Chief of the Bri-
tish in America) commences the first attack upon the Colonists, by ordering
soldiers at night to seize Colonial arms and ammunition ; sends 800 soldiers
to Concord for that purpose ; driven back to Lexington with i^pvy loss ;
loss of the Colonists V.y,

r
1 :■

'!!■ ::i'

XXIV

CONTENTS.

PAOB

The affair of Concord and Lexington foll6wed by the Battle of Bunker's Hill ;

numbers engaged on both sides . . 460

In the Battle of Bunker's Hill, as well as the previous conflicts, the first shot
was fired by the British soldiers upon the Colonists, who, by order and
policy, acted strictly on the defensive 461

English account of the Battle of Bunker's Hill, by the royal historian, Dr. An-
drews (in a note) 461

Lord Dunmore, Governor of Virginia, about the same time, committed out-
rages ui)on the inhabitants of Virginia similar to those which General Gage
committed upon the people of Massachusetts 462

Traditional and deep loyalty of the Virginians, and their aversion to revolution,
but resolved to defend their rights 464

Lord Dunmore (by order of the Secretary of State) assembles the Burgesses of
Virginia, to deliberate and decide upon Lord North's so-called "concilia-
tory proposition " to the Colonies ; the proposition rejected ; Mr. Jefferson's
report upon, quoted ; an admirable document, eulogized in the strongest
terms by the Earl of Shelburne ; how viewed by the, French Foreign
Minister, Vergennes (in a note) 464

Lord Dunmore issues a proclamation to free the slaves ; on the night of the
20th of April sends a body of marines to seize and carry off a quantity of
gunpowder, belonging to the Colony, stored in a magazine at Williams-
burg ; excitement of the inhabitants, and their demand for the restoration
of the powder ; Lord Dunmore threatens, but is at length compelled to re-
turn the value of the powder

Lord Dunmore's threat to free the slaves, and letter to the Secretary of State,
as to how, with aid " of a small body of troops and arms," he could raise
an ample force " among the Indians and negroes and other persons "

Horror and alarm in the South at Lord Dunmore's threat to free the slaves, and
preparation for resistance (in a note) 466

Lord Dunmore (moved by his fears) leaves the Government House, and goes on
board of a ship of war at Norfolk, almost twelve miles from Williamsburg,
the seat of government 466

The House of Burgesses remonstrate with Lord Dunmore for leaving the seat of
government ; entreat him to return, and assure him and his family of per-
fect safety ; but he refuses, seizes a private printing establishment and two
printers, and issues proclamations and attempts to govern from a ship of

467

46S

466

war

Lord Dunmore commands the water by a small flotilla of war vessels, and fre-
quently landed forces to seize arms, &c. ; attempt to destroy the town of
Hampton ; is repelled by the inhabitants, and volunteer rifle companies
come to their aid ; the first battle in Virginia ; its success with the Vir-
ginians 467

Account of this affair, and of Lord Dunmore's policy, by the English Annual
Register (in a noti;) 468

In consequence of Lord Dunmore's failure against the town of Hampton, he
issues a proclamation from on board the war ship William, off Norfolk, de-
claring martial law throughout the Colony, " re(iuiring all persons cai)able
of bearing arms to repair to His Maiesty's standard, or be considered as
traitors ;" and declaring all indentured servants, negroes and others,

CONTENTS. XXV

PAGE

appertaining to rebels, who were able and willing to bear arms, and who
joined His Majesty's forces, to be free 468

Remarks of the English Annual Register on this abominable proclamation .... 469

Lord Dunmore's conduct unlawful, as well as unjust and inhuman 470

The men on Lord Dunmore's fleet distressed for want of provisions, which the
inhabitants on land refused to supply : in consequence of which the town
of Norfolk (the first commercial town in Virginia) is reduced to ashes. . . . 471

Account of this barbarous transaction by the Eitqlish Annual Register and Mr.
Bancroft (in a note) ; remarks upon, by the English and American press ;
effect of its announcement upon the mind of Washington 472

The conduct and situation of the Governors of South and North Carolina similar
to that of Lord Dunmore in Virginia (in a note) 472

The loyal Churchmen of Virginia, and the loyal Presbyterians of the two Caro-
linas, receive the same treatment from Dunmore, Campbell, and Martin,
as the " republican " Congregationalists did from General Gage 478

Each of the three Southern Governors betook themselves to ships ; all the Colo-
nists treated with like severity 478

The King's speech at the meeting of Parliament, October 26th, 1775, and dis-
cussion upon it 474

CHAPTER XXV.

Cc-'GRESS OP 1776 : Proceedings preliminary to, and adoption of
THE Declaration of Independence ; a copy of the Declaration
ITSELF 479-491

Meeting of Congress at Philadelphia, the 12th of May, 1776 ; state of the Colo-
iiies 479

Frrmidable preparations in England ; eff'ect of them upon the Colonies dif-
ferent from that expected in England .... 479

The thirteen Colonies a unit for the defence of their constitutional rights and
liberties 479

Separation from England not even yet contemplated ; though resisting the King
they were loyal to the constitution and liberties of the Kingdom, as were
the Barons at Runnymede when they resisted King John to mainl in con-
stitutional rights ; the words of Washington and the New York Provincial
Congress (in a note) 480

I The question of questions with the Congress ; one Republican, but the others
professedly Monarchists ; Samuel Adams, his character and writings 481

1 Independence first moved in Congress, May, 1776 ; how manipulated and pro-
moted ; not the spontaneous uprising of the people 482

I Agitation to prepare the minds of the people for independence 482

[The writings of Tom Peine the chief instrument of creating hatred to monarchy
and a desire for independence (in a note) 483

I Congress itself divided on the question of independence ; what Provinces
opposed to or not prepared for indejMjndence 483

[Resolution for independence ; long debates ; po. ♦^\)oned for three weeks, by a vote
of seven to five Colonies 484

ICommittee to prepare a Declaration appointed 486

JAgitatiou to promote independence 486

I'i

XXVI CONTENTS.

PAGE

Three days' debates on 'i;he question of independence 485

Decision to vote by Colonies, and that the decision on each qmstion should he
reported to the world as unanimous, whatever might be the votes in Con-
gress 486

On the question of independence, six Colonies were in the affirmative and six
in the negative ; how Pennsylvania was brought over to vote for indepen-
dence, by one of its members being induced to absent himself ; and how
the votes of other Colonies were obtained for the affirmative (in a note). . . 486
The Declaration of Independence reported, discussed, amended, and adopted,

but not unanimously, though so reported (in a note).. 487

Remarks on the voting of Congress on the Declaration of Indei)endence 487

Copy of the Declaration of Independence 488

Til

CHAPTER XXVI.

Declakation of Independence Discussed 492-517

The Author's sympathy with the Colonists, and advocacy of their rights as
British subjects, and their right to defend them by force of arms 492

Preliminary remarks on the impolicy and injustice to many thousands on both
sides of the Atlantic of the Declaration of Independence 493

The pure and exalted character of the advocates of Colonial rights, and high
eulogy upon them and their descendants, by the Earls of Chatham and
Shelburne, both of whom were opposed to the separation of the Colonies
from the mother country 494 1

Homage to the motives and patriotism of the fathers of American Indepen-
dence ; the provocation which they had received ; the successes of the
Colonists on the field of battle before the Declaration of Independence,
and their disasters afterwards ; but for having committed themselves to
such Declaration, they would to all appearance have obtained within a
twelvemonth all they had desired, without the shedding of blood, without
the unnatural alliance with France, much less a war of seven years 495 1

I. The Declaration of Independence a renunciation of all the principles on which

the General Congress, Provincial Legislatures and Convention professed to
act from the beginning of the contest ; proofs and illustrations 496 1

II. The Declaration of Independence was a violation of good faith to those

statesmen and numerous other parties in England who had, in and out of
Parliament, defended and supported the rights and character of the
Colonies during the whole contest ; proofs and illustrations 499 1

III. The Declaration of Independence was also a violation, not only of good
faith, but of justice to the numerous Colonists who adhered to connexion
with the mother country ; proofs and illustrations 501 1

IV. The Declaration of the 4th of July, 1776, was the commencement of perse-
cutions and proscriptions and confiscation of property against those who
refused to renounce the oaths which they had taken, as well as the jirinci-
ples and traditions which had until then been professed by their persecutors
and oppressors as well as by themselves ; proofs and illustrations 504 1

The plea of tyranny (in a note) 504 1

CONTENTS. XXVii

PA(!K

Numbers, character, and position of Loyalists at the time, as stated by Ameri-
can writers ; laws passed against them 5d4

The beneficial results of the Congress had it adhered to the former principles
of its members, and acted justly to all parties 507

V. The Declaration of Independence was the commencement of weakness in

the army of its authors, and of defeats in their field of battle ; proofs and
illustrations 503

VI. The Declaration of Independence was the avowed expedient and prelude
for an alliance with France and Spain against the Mother Country ; proofs
and illustrations ; the secret and double game played between the Congress
and France, both before and after the Declaration of Independence 513

t I

i.vtroductio
Seventh
Settle J)

In proce(

Puritanism

not as an E

life-long re;

those equal :

'iient in the

In tracing

I feelings whi

separation of

f to notice the

colonies in \

I an^l grew to

The coloni

[emigrations c

I'listinct govei

jof these emi^

jfled from En

lEngland in ]

pettlement " I^

THK

LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

AND

THEIR TIMES.

CHAPTER I.

Introduction. — Two Classes of Emigrants — Two Governments for
Seventy Years — The " Pilgrim Fathers" — Their Pilgrimages and
Settlement.

In proceeding to trace the development and characteristics of
Puritanism in an English colony, I beg to remark that I write,
not as an Englishman, but as a Canadian colonist by birth and
life-long residence, and as an early and constant advocate of
those equal rights, civil and religious, and that system of govern-
ment in the enjoyment of which Canada is conspicuous.

In tracing the origin and development of those views and
feelings which culminated in the American Revolution, in the
separation of thirteen colonies from Great Britain, it is necessary
to notice the early settlement and progress of those New England
colonies in which the seeds of that revolution were first sown
, apfl grew to maturity.

The colonies of New England resulted from two distinct
[emigrations of English Puritans ; two classes of Puritans ; two
[distinct governments for more than sixty years. The one class
[of these emigrants were called " Pilgrim Fathers," having first
[fled from England to Holland, and thence emigrated to New
[England in 1620, in the Mayflower, and called their place of
settlement " New Plymouth," where they elected seven Governors
1

THE LOVALISTH OF AMERICA

[chap. I.

in succession, and existed under a self-constituted government for
seventy years. The other class were called " Puritan Fathers ; "
the first instalment of their emigration took place in 1029, under
Endicot ; they were known as the Massachusetts Bay Company,
and their final capital was Boston, which afterwards became the
capital of the Province and of the State.

The characteristics of the separate and independent govern-
ment of these two classes of Puritans were widely different,
The one was tolerant and non-persecuting, and loyal to the King
during the whole period of its seventy years' existence ; the
other was an intolerant persecutor of all religionists who did
not adopt its worship, and disloyal from the beginning to the
Government from which it held its Charter.

It is essential to my purpose to compare and contrast the pro-
ceedings of these two governments in relation to religious
liberty and loyalty. I will first give a short account of the
origin and government of the " Pilgrim Fathers " of New
Plymouth, and then the government of the " Puritan Fathers "
of Massachusetts Bay.*

In the later years of Queen Elizabeth, a " fiery young clergy-
man," named Kobert Brown, declared against the lawfulness of
both Episcopal and Presbyterian Church government, or of
fellowship with either Episcopalians or Presbyterians, and in
favour of the absolute independence of each congregation, and
the ordination as well as selection of the minister by it. This
was the origin of the Independents in England. The zeal of
Brown, like that of most violent zealots, soon cooled, and he
returned and obtained a living again in the Church of England,
which he possessed until his death ; but his principles of separa-
tion and independence survived. The first congregation was
formed about the year 1602, near the confines of York, Notting-
ham, and Leicester, and chose for its pastor John Robinson.
They gathered for worship secretly, and were compelled to
change their places of meeting in order to elude the pursuit
of spies and soldiers. After enduring many cruel sufferings,

* From the nature of the facts and quest iou.s discussed, the following
history is largely docwmentanj rather than popular ; and the work being an
historical argument rather than a pojnilar narrative, will account for repeti-
tions in some chapters, that the vital facts of the whole argument may be
kept as constantly as possible before the mind of the reader.

CHAP. I.]

AND THEIR TIMES

Robinson, with the greater part of his congregation, determined
to escape persecution by becoming /n/f/Hwa in a foreign land.
The doctrines of Arminius, and the advocacy and sufferings of
his followers in the cause of religious liberty, together with the
spirit of commerce, had rendered the Government of Holland
the most tolerant in Europe ; and thither Robinson and his
friends fled from their persecuting pursuers in 1G08, and finally
settled at Leyden. Being Independents, they did not form a
connection with any of the Protestant Churches of the country.
Burke remarks that "In Holland, though a country of the
greatest religious freedom in the world, they did not find them-
selves better satisfied than they had been in England. There
they were tolerated, indeed, but watched ; their zeal began to
have dangerous languors for want of opposition; and being
without power or consequence, they grew tired of the indolent
security of their sanctuary ; they chose to remove to a place
where they should see no superic^r, and therefore they sent an
agent to England, who agreed with the Council of Plymouth
for a tract of land in America, within their jurisdiction, to
settle in, and obtained from the King (James) permission to do
so. *

During their twelve years' jiyilgrwiage in Holland they were
good citizens ; not an accusation was brought against any one
of them in the courts ; they were honourable and industrious,
and took to new trades for subsistence. Brewster, a man of
property, and a gentleman in England, learned to be a printer at
the age of forty-five. Bradford, who had been a farmer in
England, became a silk-dyer. Robinson became noted as a
preacher and controversialist against Arminianism.

Bradford, the historian of their colony and its Governor for
eleven years, gives the chief reasons for their dispute in Holland
and of their desire to remove to America.f

As to what particular place these Pilgrims should select for
settlement in America, some were for Guiana, some for Vir-
ginia ; but they at length obtained a patent from the second
or Northern Virginia Company for a settlement on the northern

* Burke's (the celebrated Edmund) Account of European Settlements in
America. Second Edition, London, 1758, Vol. II., p. 143.

t Bradlbrd's History of Plymouth Plantation, pp. 22 — 24. Massachusetts
Historical Collection, 4th Series, Vol. III.

THE LOYALISTS OF AMKUICA

[chap. 1.

■'I-:

part of thoir territory, wliich extended to the fortieth degree of
North latitude — Hutchinson Bay. " The Dutch laboured to per-
suade them to go to the Hudson river, and settle under the
West India Company ; but they had not lost their affection for
the English, and chose to be under their government and protec-
tion."* Bancroft, after ((uoting the statement that "upon their
talking of removing, sundry of the Dutch would have them go
underthem,and made them large offers, remarks: "But the Pilgrims
were attached to their nationality as Englishmen, and to the
language of their times. A secret but <leeply-seated love of
their country led them to the generous purpose of recovQring
the protection of England by enlarging her dominions. They
were restless with the desire to live once more under the gov-
ernment of their native land."f It appears from Bradford's
History, as well as from his Letter Book, and other narratives,
that there were serious disputes and recriminations among the
Pilgrim exiles and their friends in England, before matters could
be arranged for their departure. But only " the minor part [of
Robinson s congregation], with Mr. Brewster, their elder, I'esol ved
to enter upon this great work." They embarked at Delft
Haven, a seaport town on the River Maeser, eight miles from
Delft, fourteen miles from Leyden, and thirty-six miles from
Amsterdam. The last port from which they sailed in England
was Southampton ; and after a tempestuous passage of 65 days,
in the Mayflower, of 181 tons, with 101 passengers, they spied
land, which proved to be Cape God — about 150 miles north of
their intended place of destination. The pilot of the vessel had
been there before and recognised the land as Cape Cod ; " the
which," says Bradford, " being made and certainly known to be
it, they were not a little joyful."^ But though the Pilgrims

♦ History of Massachusetts, Vol. I., pp. 11, 12.

t History of the United States, Vol. I., p. 304.

X Many American writers and orators represent the Pilgrims as first find-
ing themselves on an unknown as well as inhospitahle coast, amidst shoals
and breakers, in danger of shipwreck and death. But this is all fancy ;
there is no foundation for it in the statement of Governor Bradford, who was
one of the passengers, and who says that they were " not a little joyful" when
they found certainly that the land was Cape Cod ; and afterwards, speaking
of their coasting in the neighbourhood, Bradford says, " They hasted to a
place that their pilot (one Willm. C!oppin, who had been tliere before) did
assure them was a good harbour, which he had been in." (History of Ply-

CHAP. I.J

AND TllEIK TIMES.

were " not a little joyful" at safely reaching the American coast,
and at a place ,so well known as C'ape Cod ; yet as that was not
their intended place of .settlement, they, without landing, put
again to .sea for Hudson river (New York), but were driven
hack by .stre.s,s of weather, and, on account of the latene.s.s of the
.season, determined not to venture out to .sea again, but to seek
a place of settlement within the harbour.

As the Pilgrims landed north of the limits of the Company
from which they received their patent, and under which they
expected to become a " body politic," it became to them " void and
u.seless." This being known, some of the emigrants on board
the Mayfloiver began to make " mutinous speeches," .saying
that " when they came a.shore they would use their own liberty,
for none had power to command them." Under these circum-
stances it was thought necessary to " begin with a combination,
which might be as tirm as any patent, and in some respects
more so." Accordingly, an agreement was drawn up and signed
in the cabin of the Mayjluwer by forty-one male passengers,
who with their families eon.stituted the whole colony of one
hundred and one.* Having thus provided against disorder and

nioutli Plantation, p. 86.) Tliey did ncjt even go ashore on their first entrance
into Cape Cod harliour ; hut, a.s Bradford aays, " after some deliberation
among themselves and with the master of the ship, they tucked about and
resolved to stand for the sonfhward, to find some 2>lifce about Hudson river for
thiir habitation" {lb., p. 117.) " After sailing southward half a day, they
found themselves suddenly among shoals and breakers" (a ledge of rocks and
shoals which are a terror to navigators to this day) ; and the wind shifting '
against them, they scud back to Cape Cod, and, as Bradford says, " thought
themselves happy to get out of those dangers before night overtook them,
and the next day they got into the Cii\>ii harbour, where they rode in safety.
Being thus arrived in a good harbour, and brought safe to land, they fell upon
their knees and blessed the God of heaven," &c.

The selection, before leaving England, of the neighbourhood of the Hudson
river as their location, showed a worldly sagacity not to be exceeded by any
emigrants even of the present century. Bancroft designates it "the best
position on the whole coast." (History of the United States, Vol. I., p. 209.)

* The agreement was as follows : — " In the name of God, Amen. We
whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign
Lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France and Ireland,
King, Defender of the Faith, &c., having undertaken, for the glory of God
and advancement of the Christian faith, and honour of our King and country,
a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of [then called]
Virginia, do by these presents, solemnly and mutually, in the presence of

THE LOYALIHTH OF AMERICA

[chap. I,

faction, the Pilgrims proceeded to land, when, as Bradford says,
they " fell upon their knees and blessed the God of heaven who
had brought them over the vast and furious ocean, and delivered
them from all the perils and miseries thereof, again to set their

Qod ftml of one another, covenant iind coniliine ourmjlvoH together into a
civil hody politic, for our better ordering and preHervation, and furtlH^rniore
of the ends aforeHaid ; and Ity virtue hereof to enact, conHtitute, and frame
Buch juHt lawH, ordinances, acts, constitutionH, and offices, from time to time,
ttH sliall be thought most mete and convenient for the general good of tlie
colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness
whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cape Cod, the 11th of
November, in tlie 18th year of tlie reign of our Sovereign Lord King James,
of England, France, and Ireland the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-
fourth. Anno Dom. 1620." Mr. John Carver was cliosen Governor for one
year.

This simple and excellent instrument of union and government, suggested
by apprehensions of disorder and anarchy, in the absence of a patent for
common protection, has been magnified by some Americon writers into an
almost supernatural display of wisdom and foresight, and even the resurrec-
tion of the rights of humanity. Bancroft says, " This was the birth of popular
constitutional liberty. The middle ages had been familiar with charters and
constitutions ; but they had been merely compacfs for immunities, partial
enfranchisements, patents of nobility, concessions of municipal privileges, or
the limitations of sovereign in favour of feudal institutiona In the cabin
of the Mayflower humanity recorded its rights, and instituted a go^cm-
ment on the basis of ' equal laws ' for the * general good.' " (History of the
United States, Vol. I., p. 310.)

Now, any reader of the agreement will see that it says not a word about
" popular constitutional liberty," much less of the "rights of humanity." It
was no Declaration of Independence. Its signers call themselves " loyal
subjects of the King of England," and state one object of their emigration
t« be the "honour of our King and cnuntrj'." The Pilgrim Fathers did, in
the course of time, establish a simple system of popular government ; but
from the written compact signed in the cabin of the Ma/gffower any form
of government might be developed. The good sense of the following remarks
by Dr. Young, in his Chronicles of the Pilgrims of Plyw.'.vV,, contrast favour-
ably with the fenciful hyperboles of Bancroft : " It Becir.& to me that a great
deal more has been discovered in this document than the signers contemplated.
It is evident that when they left Holland they expected to become a body
politic, using among themselves civil government, and- to choose their own
rulers from among themselves. Their purpose in drawing up and signing
this compact was simply, as they state, to restrain certain of their number
who had manifested an unruly and factious disposition. This wos the whole
philosophy of the instrument, whatever may have since been discovered and
deduced from it." (p. 120.)

(MAP. I.]

AND THKIU TIMFX

t't'ct on the firm and staldf oarth, their proper eU^inent."* Of
the manner of tlieir settlement, their t^xposures, .sufferings,
lalwurs, .siicce.sse.s, I leave the many ordinary liistories to narrate,
though they nearly all revel in the marvellou.s.-f

I will tlieret'ore proceed to give a brief account of the
Plymouth government in relation to religiou.s liberty within
its limits and loyalty to the Mother ( 'ountrx'.

* Hrii(Uonl'.>* HiHtory of the Flyiiioutli IMuntJitiou, \>. 78. "The Slst of
Duci'inlier (1(520) hi'in^ Suhluitli, thev attended Divine m'l-vice for the first
time on whore, nnd nunied tlie jdnee Plymouth, pnrtly becnuHe thin harbour
WU8 HO ailU'd in dipt. John Sniith'w map, ])ubliHhed tliree or four yeiii-H before,
and partly in renienibraiice of very kind treatment whicli they hnd received
troni tlie inhabitjxntH of the hint port of their native country from which they
HiiiK'd." (Moore'M Lives of tlie (.lovernorH of Plymouth, jtp. 37) 38.)

Tile original Indian name of the place waa Acconuick ; but at the time tJie
Pilj^riniH Hettled there, an Indian informed them it waw called Patuxet.
Ciipt. John Smith's Description of New England was publishetl in 1616.
He says, " I took the description as well by map as writinj,', nnd called it
New England." He dedicated his work to Prince Charles (afterwards King
Charles II.), begging him to change the "barbarous names." In the list of
mimes changed by Prince Charles, Accmiuick [or Patuxet] was altered to
I'Ujmouth. Mr. Denner, employed by Sir F. (Jorges and others for pur-
piiseH of discovery and trade, visited this place aliout four months before the
arrival of the Pilgrims, and signiticantly said, " I would that Plymouth [in
England] had the like commodities. I would that the first plantation might
lure be seated if there come to the number of fifty jiersons or upwards."

t See following Note : —

Note on the Inflated American Accounts of the Voyaye and Hcttlenient of the
rUyrim Fathers. — Everything relating to the character, voyage, and settle-
ment of the Pilgrims in New England has been invested with the marvellouB,
if not 8Ui)ernatural, by most Ameriam writers. One of them says, " God not
(iidy sifted the tliree kingdoms to get the seed of this enterprise, but sifted that
seed over again. Every person whom He would not have go at that time,
tij plant the first colony of New England, He sent back even from mid-ocean
in the Speedwell. (Rev. Dr. Cheever's Journal of the Pilgrims.)

The simple fact was, that the Mayflower could not carry any more passen-
gci's than she brought, and therefore most of the passengers of the Speed-
well, which was a vessel of 50 tons and proved to be unseaM'orthy, were
compelled to remain until the following year, and came over in the Fortune ;
and among these Robert Cushman, with his family, one of the most dis-
tinguished and honoured of the Pilgrim Fathers. And there was doubtless as
Kood " seed" in " the three kingdoms" after this " sifting" of them for the
New England enterprise as there was before.

In one of his speeches, the late eloquent Governor Everett, of Massachusetts,
describes their voyage as the " long, cold, dreary autumnal passage, in that

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. I.

'1^

one solitary, adventurous vessel, the Mayflower of forlorn hope, freighted
with pros) ects of a future state, and bound across the unknown sea, pursuing,
with a thousand niisj^Vvings, the uncertain, the tedious voyage, suns rise and
set, and winter surprises them on the deep, but brings them not the sight of
the wished-for shore. Tlie awful voice of the- storm howls through the
rigging. The la1)ouring masts seem straining from tlieir base ; the dismal
sound of the pumps is heard ; the ship leaps, as it were, madly from billow to
billow ; the ocean breaks, and settles with engulfing floods over the floating
deck, and beats with deadening, shivering weight against the staggering
vessel."

It is difficult to imagine how " wintei*" covCA surjirise passengers crossing
the ocean between the 6th of September and the 9th of November — a season
of the year much chosen even nowadays for crossing the Atlantic. It is
equally difficult to conceive how that could have been an " unknown sea"
which had 1)een crossed and the New England coasts explored by Gosni Id,
St ith. Dernier and othei-s (all of whom had pu1)lished accounts of their
voyage), besides more than a dozen fishing vessels which had crossed this
very year to obtain fish and furs in the neighbourhood and north of Cape
Cod. Doubtless often the " suns rose and set" upon these vessels without
their seeing the " wished-for shore ;" and probably more than once "the awful
voice of the storm howled through their rigging," and " the dismal sound of
their pumps was heard," and they " madly leaped from billow to billow,"
and "staggered under the deadening, shivering weiglit of the broken ocean,"
and with its " engulfing floods" over their " floating decks." The Mayflower
was a vessel of 180 tons burden — more than twice as large as any of the
vessels in which the early English, French, and Spanish discoverers of
America made their voyages — much largt-r than most of the vessels employed
in carrying emigrants to Vii^nia during the previous ten years — more thaji
three times as large as the ship Fortune, of 53 tons, which crossed the ocean
the following year, and arrived at Plymoutli also the 9th of November, bring-
ing Mr. Cushman and the rest of the passengers left by the Speedwell the year
before. Gosnold had crossed the ocean and explored the eastern coasts of
America in 1602 in a "small bark;" Martin Pring had done the same in
1603 in the liark Discovery, of 26 tons ; Frobisher, in northern and
dangerous coasts, in a vessel of 25 tons burden ; and two of the vessels of
Columbus were from 15 to 30 tons burden, and without decks on which to
"float" the "engulfing floods" under which the Mayflower "staggered" so
marvellously. All these vessels long preceded the Mayflower across the
" unknown ocean ;" but never inspired tiie lofty eloquence which Mr.
Everett and a host of inferior rhapsod ists have bestowed upon the Mayflower
and her voyage. Bancroft fills several pages of his elaborate history to the
same eftect, and in similar style with the passages above quoted. I will give
a single sentence, as follows : — " The Pilgrims having selected for their
settlement the country near the Hudson, the best position on the whole
coast, were conducted to the most baiTen and inhospitable part of Massachu-
setts." (Historj- of the United States, Vol. I., p. 309.)

There was certainly little self-abnegation, but much sound and worldly
wisdom, in the Pilgrims seU cting " the best position on the whole coast" of

CHAP. I.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

America for their settlement ; and there is as littU' tnitli in the statement,
thouj,'h a good antithesis — the deligiit of Mr. Bancroft — that the Pilgrims
were conducted to "the most harren and inhospitable part of Massjxchusetts"
for "actual settlement," as appi^ars from the descriptions given of it hy
Governors Winslow and Bradford and other Pilgrim Fathers, writtt;n after
the first and during the sul)sei[Uont years of tlieir settlement. I will give
hut two illustrations. Mr. Winslow was one of the passengers in the May-
flowcr, and was, by annual election, several yeare Governor of the Plymouth
colony. It has been stated above that the ship Fortune, of 53 tons burden,
brought in the autumn of 1621 the Pilgrim pa.ssengers who had been left in
England the year Ix'fore by the sea-unworthiness of the Speedwell. The
Fortune anchored in Plymouth Bay the 9th of November— just a year fi-om
the day on which the Mayflower .spied the land of Cape Cod. Mr. Winslow
prepared and sent back by the Fortune an elaborate " Relation" of the state
and pros2)ects of the colony, for the information of the merchant adventurers
ami others in England. He describes the climate, soil, an<l all the resources
of the colony's means of sujiport, together with the process and result of the
first year's labour. I will simply give his account of the manner in which
they celebrated what in England would be called a " Han'est Home." He
says : " Our harvest being got in, our Governor sent four men on fowling,
tliat so we might, after a more special manner, rejoice together after we had
gatliered the fniit of our labours. They four in a day killed as much fowl
as, with little help besides, served the company almost a week ; at which
time, amongst other re'^reations, we exercised our arms. Many of the Indians
came amongst us, and amongst the rest their greatest king, Massjisoit, with
some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained an<l feasted ; and
they went out and killed fine deer, which tlsey brought to the Plantation,
and bestowed them on our Governor, an<l "pon the Captain and others ; and
although it be not always so ])lentiful with us, we are so far from want that
we often vnsKyou partakers of our plentij."

Governor Bradford, writing in 1046, twenty-five years after this feast, and
referring to it, says : " Nor has there beeii any gcisftal vant oi food amongst
us since to this day." (Morton's Memorials, p. \\>i).)

Such was the result of the first year's 'X]>t ru nee in this chosen place of
settlement by the first New England eohnv, u stated by the most dis-
tinguished of its founders. During the winter ol t'lis year more than half
tlie pioneer settlers had died of a prevalent uikuess, — not owing to the
climate, but their sea voyage, their want of e vi>eriejiL'e, and to teini)orary
circumstances, for not a death occurred amongst tiiem during the three suc-
ceeding yeaiu As great as Avas the mortality amongst the noble colonists of
New England, it was far less, comparatively, than that which fell upon the
first colonists of Virginia, who were, also, more than o!ice almost annihilated
by the murderous incursions of the Indians, but from whom tiic Fi'gri'u
Fathers did not suffer the h.ss of a life.

In his " true and brief Relation," Mr. Winslow says : " For tfi'. •;( nipt r
of the air here, it agn^eth well with that in England ; and if ''.ere x, tny
(litference at all, this is s^^mewhat hotter in summer. Some taink 'A oli ar
in winter, but I cannot out of exiwrience say so. The air is very tic- 1 a,i(>

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. I.

CHAF IL]

foggy, not as hath been reported. I never in my life reniember a more
eeaeonable year than we have here enjoyed."

Mr. Winslow's doubt as to whether the cold, of his first winter in New
England exceeded that of the ordinary winters which he had passed in
England, refutes the fictitious representations of many writers, who to
magnify the virtues and merits of the Plymouth' colonists, describe them as
braving, with a martyr's courage, the appalling cold of an almost Arctic
winter — a winter which enabled the new settlera to commence their gardens
the 16th of March, and they add in their Journal : " Monday and Tuesday,
March 19th and 20th, proved fair days. We digged our grounds and sovjed
our garden seeds."

Not one of the American United Empire Loyalists — the Pilgrim Fathera
of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick — could tell of a winter in the
countries of their refuge, so mild, and a spring so early and genial, as that
which favoured the Pilgrim Fathers of New England during their first year
of settlement ; nor had any settlement of the Canadian Pilgrim Fathers been
able to command the means of celebrating the first " Harvest Home" by a
week's festivity and amusements, and entertaining, in addition, ninety
Indians for three days.

The Govern
FROM 1620

Tv.- Gov

JEi.j.'ish a'^ u

fact that wit

governments

for seventy y

and LoM'-er C

any two bt i.t

that Araeric

government,

it was a stani

which chey

were separate

distant from (

from each ot

the Pilgrims

hearty recr,;r

Christian fait

rights to all

years, an 1 unt

Charter in 16{

kind to the I

bouring tribes,

half a centui'-

*' rh«! term ]
( 'Young's Ch.'X)mci

CHAF II.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

CHAPTER II.

The Government of the Pilgrim* Fathers during Beventt Years,
PROM 1620 TO 1692, AS distinct from that of the Puritan Fathers.

T'-v^ Governments, — Difference between the Government of
fh yi^'Hrr^ and that of the Puritans. — Most historians, both
Ei,^ )sh a*^ ci Aui-^rican, have scarcely or not at all noticed the
fact that within the Dresent State of Massachusetts two separate
governments of Pnriban emigrants were established and existed
for sbventy years — two governments as distinct as those of Upper
and Lower Camda from 1791 to 1840 — as distinct as those of
any two ot %to'i of i tie American Republic. It is quite natural
that Anierican lilstorians should say nothing of the Pilgrim
government, beyond the voyage and landing of its founders, as
it was a standing condemnation of the Puritan government, on
which chey bestow all their eulogies. The tw^o governments
were separated b;/ • li Bay of Massachusetts, about forty miles
distant from each <"o lui i-y water, but still more widely different
from each oth' ''n -spirit and character. The government of
the Pilgrims ^ 'u.s t i kod from the beginning by a full and
hearty recr^^nition ^'i tVv.;.chise rights to all settlers of the
Christian faith ; the government of the Puritans denied those
rights to all but Congregational Church members for sixty
years, an i until they were compelled to do otherwise by Royal
Charter in 1692. The government of the Pilgrims was just and
kind to the Indians, and early made a treaty with the neigh-
bouring tribes, which remained inviolate on both sides during
half a centur-' from 1621 to 1675 ; the government of the

* ' The term I'lt^'ivMS " 'ongj exclusively to the Plymouth colonistH."
(•foung's Chronicles ox the liigriins, p. 88, note.)

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. II.

Puritans maddened the Indians by the invasion of their rights,
and destroyed them by multitudes, ahnost to entire extermina-
tion. The government of the Pilgrims respected the pi'inciples
of religious liberty (which they had learned and imbibed
in Holland), did not persecute those who differed from it in
religious opinions,* and gave protection to many who fled from
the persecutions of neighbouring Puritans' government, which
was more intolerant and persecuting to those who differed from
it in religious opinions than that of James, and Charles, ami
Laud had ever been to them. The govemiuent of the Pilgrims
was frank and loyal to the Sovereign and people of England ;
the government of the Puritans was deceptive and disloyal to
the Throne and Motbt Country' from the lirst, and sedulously
sowed and cultivated i' . ? of disaffection and hostility to

the Royal government, n;..,"' they grew and ripened into the
harvest of the American revolution.

These statements will be confirmed and illustrated by the
facts of the present and following chapters.

The compact into which the Pilgrims entered before landing
from the Mayjlower, was the substitute for the body politic
which would have been organized by charter had they settled,
as first intended, within the limits of the Northern Virginia
Company. The compact specified no constitution cf govern-
ment beyond that of authority on the one hand, and submission
on the other ; but under it the Governors were elected annually,
and the local laws were, enacted during eighteen years by the
general meetings of the settlers, after which a body of elected
representatives was constituted.

The first ojfficial record of the election of any Governor was
in 1633, thirteen years after their settlement at Plymouth ; but,
according to the early history of the Pilgrims, the Governors |
were elected annually from 1620. The Governors of the colony
were as follows : —

* The only exception was by Prence, when elected Governor in 1657. He |
had imbibed the spirit of tlie Boston Puritans against the Quakei-s, and sought
to infuse his spirit into the minds of his assistants (or executive councillors) |
and the deputies ; but he was stoutly opposed by Josias Winslow and others.
The persecution was short and never unto death, as among the Boston Pxu-itans.
It was the only stain of persecution upon the rule of the Pilgrims during the I
seventy years of their separate government, and was nobly atoned for anJ
effaced by Josias Winslow, when elected Governor in the place of Prence.

CHAP. II.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

1. John Carver, in 1G20, who died a few months afterwards;

2. William Bradford, 1G21 to 1632, 1G35, 1G37, 1G39 to 1G43,
l()45tolGoG;

3. Edward Winslow, 1G33, 1G3G, 1G44 ;

4. Thomas Prince, 1634, 1638, 1657 to 1672 ;

5. Josiah Winslow, 1673 to 1680 ;

6. Thomas Hinckley, 1681 to 1602 ;*

when the colony of Plymouthf (v/hich had never increased
in population beyond 13,000) was incorporated with that of
Massachusetts Bay, under the name of the Province of Massa-
chusetts, by Royal Charter under William and Mary, and hj
wliich religious liberty and the elective franchise were secured
to all freeholders of forty shillings per annum, instead of being
confined to members of the Congregational Churches, as had
l)een the case down to that period under the Puritans of Massa-
chusetts Bay — so that equal civil and religious liberty among all
classes was established in Massachusetts, not by the Puritans,
hut by Royal Charter, against the practice of the Puritans from
1031 to 1692.

The government of the Pilgrims was of the most simple kind.
At first the Governor, with one assistant, was elected annually
hy general suflfrage ; but in 1624, at the request of Governor
Bradford, a Council of five assistants (increased to seven in 1()33)
was annually elected. In this Court, or Executive Council, the
i Governor had a double vote. In the third year, 1623, trial by
I jury was established. During eighteen years, from 1620 to 1638,
the legislative body, called the General Court, or Court of Asso-
ciates, was composed of the whole body of freemen. It was
not until 1639 that they established a House of Representatives.
The qualifications of a freeman were, that he " should be twenty-
one years of age, of sober, peaceable conversation, orthodox in
[religion [which included belief in God and the Holy Scriptures,
jhut did not include any form of Church government], and possess
[rateable estate to the value of twenty pounds."

* Massachusetts Historical Collections, 3rd Series, Vol. II., p. 226.

t " The colony of Plymouth included the present counties of Plymouth,
Sarnstaple, and Bri ttol, and a part of Rhode Island. All the Providence
Plnntiitions were at me time claimed by Plymouth. The boundaries between
Plymouth and Massachusetts were settled in 1640 by commissioners of the
imited colonies." {lb., p. 267.)

\ I

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. II,

In 1G3G — sixteen years after their landing at New Plymouth
— the laws which they had enacted were first collected, prefaced
by a declaration of their right to enact them, in the absence of
a Royal Charter. Their laws were at various times revised and
added to, and finally printed in 1671, under the title of "Their
Great Fundamentals." They recognized the general laws of
England, and adopted local statutes or regulations according to
what they considered their needs.* Of their sense of duty as
British subjects, and of the uniform mutual relations of friend-
ship existing between them and their Sovereigns, their records
and history furnish abundant proofs. The oath required of their
Governors commenced in the following words : ' You shall swear
to be truly loyal to our Sovereign Lord King Charles, his suc-
cessors and heirs." " At the Court held," (says the record,) " at
Plymouth, the 11th of June, 1664, the following was added, and
the Governor took '."■ . oath thereunto: 'You shall also attend
to what is required by His Majesty's Privy Council of the
Governors of the "espe«'^'*vft colonies in reference unto an
Act of Parliament tor the encouraging and increasing of
shipping and navigation, bearing date from the Ist of December,
1660.' "

The oath of a freeman commenced with the same words, as
did the oath of the " Assistants" or Executive Councillors, the
oath of constables and other officers in the colony. It was like-
wise ordered, "That an oath of allegiance to the King and
fidelity to the Government and to the several colonies [settle-
ments] therein, be taken of every person that shall live within
or under the same." This was as follows : '• You shall be truly
loyal to our Sovereign Lord the King and his heirs and huc-

* The laws they intended to be governed by were the laws of England,
the which they were willing to be subject unto, though in a foreign land, and
hp e since that time continued of that niind for the general, adding only some
particular municipal laws of their own, suitable to their constitution, in such
cases where the common laws and statutes of England could not well reach,
or afford them help in emergent difficulties of place." (Hubbard's " General
History of New England, from the Discovery to 1680." Massachusetts His-
torical Collection, 2nd Series, Vol. I., p. 62.)

Palfrey says : " All that is extant of what can properly be called the legis-
lation of the first twelve years of the colony of Plymouth, suffices to cover
in print only two pages of an octavo volume." (History of New England,
Vol. I., pp. 340, 341.)

CHAP. II.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

1.5

cessors : and whereas you make choice at present to reside within
the government of New Plymouth, you shall not do or cause to be
done any act or acts, directly or indirectly, by land or water, that
shall or may tend to the destruction or overthrow of the whole
or any of the several colonies [settlements] within the said gov-
ernment that are or shdll be orderly erected or established ; but
shall, contrariwise, hinder, oppose and discover such intents and
purposes as tend thereunto to the Governor for the time being,
or some one of the assistants, with all convenient speed. You
shall also submit unto and obey such good and wholesome laws,
ordinances and officers as are or shall be established within the
several limits thereof. So help you God, who is the God of
tnith and punisher of falsehood."

The Government of Plymouth prefaced the revised collection
of their laws and ordinances as follows :

"A form to be placed before the records of the several
inheritances granted to all and every of the King's subjects
I inhabiting with the Government of New Plymouth :

" Whereas John Carver, William Bradford, Edward Winslow,
William Brewster, Isaack Alliston and divers others of the sub-
jects of our late Sovereign Lord James, by the Grace of God,
King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, Defender of the
Faith, &c., did in the eighteenth year of his reigne of England,
France and Ireland, and of Scotland the fifty-four, which was
the year of our Lord God 1620, undertake a voyage into that
part of America called Virginia or New England, thereunto
adjoining, there to erect a plantation and colony of English,
intending the glory of God and the enlargement of his Majesty's
doniinions, and the special good of the English nation."

Thus the laws and ordinances of the Plymouth Government,
and the oaths of office from the Governor to the constable, free-
man and transient resident, recognize their duty as British sub-
jects, and breathe a spirit of pure loyalty to their Sovereign.
The only reference I find in their records to the Commonwealth
of England is the following declaration, made in 1658, the last
year of Cromwell's government. It is the preface to the collec-
tion of the General Laws, revised and published Sept. 29, 1658,
and is as follows :

" We, the associates of New Plymouth, coming hither as free-
born subjects of the State of England, endowed with all the

FT"*'

-r

1 \

ii'

THK LOYALISTS OF AMP^RICA

[CHAF. n.

privileges belonging to such, being assembled, do ordain, consti-
tute and enact that no act, imposition, laws or ordinances be
made or imposed on us at present or to come, Imt such as shall
be made and imposed by consent of the body of the associates
or their representatives legally assembled, which is according to
the free libertie of the State of England."

At the first annual meeting of the Plymouth House of
Representatives after the restoration of Charles the Second, the
f ollowintj: declaration and order was made :

" Whereas we are certainly informed that it hath pleased God
to establish our Sovereign Lord King Charles the Second in the
enjoyment of his undoubted rights to the Crowns of England,
Scotland, France and Ireland, and is so declared and owned by
his good subjects of these kingdoms ; We therefore, his Majesty's
loyal subjects, the inhabitants of the jurisdiction of New Ply-
mouth, do hereby declare our free and ready concurrence with
such other of his Majesty's subjects, and to his said Majesty, his
heirs and successors, we do most hiunbly and faithfully submit
and oblige ourselves for ever. God save the King.

"June the' fifth. Anno Dom. 16G1.

"The fifth day of June, 10(31, Charles the Second, King of
England, Scotland, France and Ireland, &c., was solemnly pro-
claimed at Plymouth, in New England, in America." (This the
Puritan Government of Massachusetts Bay refused to do.)

On the accession of James the Second we find the following
entry in the Plymouth records : " The twenty fourth of April,
1G85, James the Second, King of England, Scotland, France and
Ireland, &c., was solemnly proclaimed at Plymouth according to
the form required by his Majesty's most honourable Privy
Council."

After the Revolution of 1688 in England, ther*' is the follow-
ing record of the proceedings of the Legislature of the Plymouth
colony — proceedings in which testimony is borne by the colonists
of the uniformly kind treatment they had received from the
Government of England, except during a short interval under
the three years' reign of James the Second :

" At their Majesties' General Coiurt of Election, held at Ply-
mouth on the first Tuesday in June, 1689.

" Whereas, through the great changes Divine Providence hath
ordered out, both in England and in this country, we the loyal

CHAP. I!.]

AND THEIll TIMKS.

snlijects of the Crown of England arc loft m an unsettled estate,
destitute of government and exposed to the ill consequences
thereof : and havhuj lierctofore enjoyed a quiet settlement of
(jovernment in this the i r M<( jest les coloni/ of New Pbjmoutlt for
more titan threescore and six years, without any interru2)tions ;
having also been by the late kings of England from time to.time,
by their royal letters, graciously owned and acknowledged therein:
whereby, notwithstanding our late unjust interruption and
suspension therefrom by the illegal arbitrary power of Sir
Ediaond Andros, now ceased, the General Court held there in the
name of their present Majesties William and Mary, King and
Qiiee-^ of England, tiirc., together with the encouragement given
by their said Majesties' gracious declarations and in humble
confidence of their said Majesties' good liking: do therefoi'e
hereby resume and declare their reassuming of their said former
way of government, according to such wholesome constitutions,
rules and orders as were here in force in June, lG8f), our title
thereto being warranted by prescription and otherwise as afore-
said ; and expect a ready submission thereunto by all their
Majesties' good subjects of this colony, until their Majesties or
this Court shall otherwise order ; and that all our Courts be
hereafter held and all warrants directed and officers sworn in
the name of their Majesties William and Mary, King and Queen
of England, &c.

" The General Court request the Honourable Governor, Thomas
Hinckley, Esq., in behalf of said Court and Colony of New Ply-
mouth, to make their address to their Majesties the King and
Queen of England, &c., for the re-establishment of their former
enjoyed liberties and privileges, both sacred and civil."

We have thus the testimony of the Plymouth colony itself
that there was no attempt on the part of either Charles the
First or Second to interfere with the fullest exercise of their own
chosen form of worship, or with anything which they themselves
regarded as their civil rights. If another course of proceedings
had to be adopted in regard to the Puritan Government of
Massachusetts Bay, it was occasioned by their own conduct, as
will appear hereafter. Complaints were made by colonists to
England of the persecuting and unjust conduct of the Puritan
Government, and inquiries were ordered in 1G46, 1G64, 1678, and
afterwards. The nature and result of these inquiries will be
2

THE LOYALFHTH OF AMERICA

[chap. II.

noticed hereafter. At present I will notice the first Conimiasion
sent out by Charles the Second, in 1G(J4, and which was made
general to the several colonies, to avoid invidious distinction,
though caused by complaints against the conduct of the Puritan
Government of Massachusetts Bay. The Commissioners pi'oposed
four (questions to the Governments of the several colonies of New
England. I will give the questions, or rather propositions, and
the answers to them on the part of the Pilgrim Government of
Plymouth, as contained in its printed records : —

" The Propositions made by His Majesty's CoTiimissioners to the

General Court of (Neiv Plymouth), held at Plymouth, for the

jurisdiction of New Plymouth, the 22nd of February, Anno

Dom. 1G65.

" 1. That all householders inhabiting in the cokmy take the
oath of allegiance, and the administration of justice be in his
Majesty's name.

" 2. That all men of competent estates and civil conversation,
though of different judgments, may be admitted to be freemen,
and have liberty to choose and to be chosen officers, both civil
and military.

" 3. That all men and women of orthodox opinions, competent
knowledge and civil lives (not scandalous), may be admitted to
the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and their children to
baptism if they desire it ; either by admitting them into the
congregation already gathered, or permitting them to gather
themselves into such congregations, where they may have the
benefit of the sacraments.

" 4. That all laws and expressions in laws derogatory to his
Majesty, if any such have been made in these late troublesome
times, may be repealed, altered, and taken off from the file."

THE court's answer.

"1. To the first we consent, it having been the pi'actice of this
Court, in the first place, to insert in the oath of fidelity required
of every householder, to be truly loyal to our Sovereign Lord the
King, his heirs and successors. Also to administer all acts of
justice in his Majesty's name.

" 2. To the second we also consent, it having been our constant
practice to admit men of competent estates and civil conversa-
tion, though of different judgments, yet being othenvise orthodox.

CHAP. II.]

AND THKIIt TIMES.

to be freenien, and to have liberty to choose and be chosen oj^cers,
both civil and niilitanj.

" 3. To the third, we cannot hut acknowledge it to he a higli
favour from God and from our Sovereign, that we may enjoy
our consciences in point of God's worship, the main end of
transplanting ourselves into these remote corners of the earth,
and should most heartily rejoice that all our neighbours so
qualified as in that proposition would adjoin themselves to our
societies, according to the order of the Gospel, for enjoyment of
the sacraments to themselves and theirs ; but if, through different
persuasions respecting Church government, it cannot be obtained,
we could not deny a liberty to any, according to the proposition,
that are truly conscientious, although diflfering from us, especially
Avhere his Majesty commands it, they maintaining an able preach-
ing ministry for the carrying on of public Sabbath worship,
which we doubt not is his Majesty's intent, and withdrawing
not from paying their ilue proportions of maintenance to such
ministers as are orderly settled in the places where they live,
until they have one of their own, and that in such places as are
capable of maintaining the worship of God in two distinct
congregations, we being greatly encouraged by his Majesty's
gracious expressions in his letter to us, and your Honours' further
assurance of his Royal purpose to continue our liberties, that
where places, by reason of our paucity and poverty, are incapable
of two, it is not intended, that such congregations as are already
in being should be rooted out, but their liberties preserved,
there being other places to accommodate men of different per-
suasions in societies by themselves, which, by our known ex-
perience, tends most to the preservation of peace and charity.

" 4. To the fourth, we consent that all laws and expressions
in laws derogatory to his Majesty, if any sect shall be formed
amongst us, which at present we are not conscious of, shall be
repealed, altered, and taken off from the file.
" By order of the General Court

" For the jurisdiction of New Plymouth,

" Per me, Nathaniel Morton, Secretary."

" The league bet^veen the four colonies was not with any intent,
that ever wc heard of, to cast off our dependence upon England,
a thing which we utterly abhor, intreating your Honours to
believe us, for we speak in the presence of God."

Tin: LOYALISTS OF AMKHK'A

[CIIAI*. II.

il'

" Ni:w Plymouth, May 4tli, !(!()').

"The Court doth order Mr. Constant Southworth, Treasinvr,
to present these to his Majesty's (Joninii.sMioners, at Boston, with
all convenient speed."

The ahove propositions and answers are inserted, with Monio
variations, in Hutchinson's History of Ma.s,sachusetts, Vol. I., p.
214. The remark re.spectin<j[ the union between the colonies is
not on the colony records — it was inserted at t^e close of the
copy delivered to the Connnissioners, in conformity to a letter
from the Commissioners, written to Governor Prince after they
had left Plymouth. The conditions expressed in the answer to
the third proposition appeared so reasonable to the Connnis-
sioners, that when they afterward met the General Assembly
of Connecticut, in April, 1GG5, their third proposition is quali-
fied, in substance, conformably to the Plymouth reply. (Morton's
Memorial, Davis' Ed., p. 417.)

It )' +hv'" seen that there was not the least desire on the part
of King Charles the Second, any more than there had been on
the part of Charles the First, to impose the Episcopal worship
upon the colonists, or to interfere in the least with their full
liberty of worship, according to their own preferences. All that
was desired at any time was toleration and acknowledgment of
the authority of the Crown, such as the Plymouth colony and
that of Connecticut had practised from the beginning, to the
great annoyance of the Puritans of Massachusetts.

Several letters and addresses passed betveen Charles the
Second and the Pilgrim Government of Plymouth, and all of
the most cordial character on both sides ; but what is given
above supersedes the necessity of further quotations.*

It was an object of special ambition with the Government of
Plymouth to have a Royal Charter like those of Massachusetts
Bay, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, instead of holding their
land, acting under a Charter from the Plymouth Council (England)

* " Their residence in Holland had made them acquainted with the various
forms of Christianity ; a wide experience had emancipated them from bigotry ;
and they were never betrayed into the excesses of religious persecution, though
they sometimes permitted a disproportion between punishment and crime."
(Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. I., p. 322.)

"The Plymouth Church is free from blood." (Elliott's History of New
England, Vol. I., p. 133.)

(MAP, II.]

AND THKIIl TIMKS.

and Charles the Second. In Ids last address to Mr.Josiali Winslow,
their (jlovernor ])r()inised it to them in most e.xplicit t»'niis ; hut
there wa.s a case of 7^0 wtin'tu^to pending' in the Court of
Kini'M Bench ajxainst tlie Puritan (Jovenuuent for the violation
of their Charter, which delayed the Issuing of a Royal ('hartt-r
to Plymouth. Charles died scjon after;* tlie (vhaiter of the
Massacluisetts Corporation wa.s forfeited hy the decision of the
'n, and James the Second appointed a Royal Governor and
4^ Royal (^Commissioner, which changed for the time being the
whole face of tilings in New England.

It, however, deserves notice, that the Ma.ssachusetts Puritans,
true to their instinct of encroaching upon the rights of others,
whether of tlie King or of their neighbours, white or tawny,
did all in their power to prevent the Pilgrim.s of Plymouth —
the pioneers of settlement and civilization in New England —
from obtaining a Royal Charter. This they did first in 1030,
again in the early part of Charles the Second's reign, and yet
again towards its end. Finally, after the cancelling of the
Massachusetts Charter, and the English Revolution of Kiss, the
"'■•ents of the more powerful and populous Mas.sachusetts colony
needed in getting the colony of Plymouth absorbed into that
.Massachusetts Bay by the second Royal Charter granted by
William and Mary in 1(592. " The junction of Plymouth witli
Massachusetts," says Moore, " destroyed all the political conse-
([uence of the former. The people of Plymouth shared but few
favours which the new Government had fco bestow, and it was
seldom indeed that any resident of what was termed the old
colony obtained any office of distinction in the Provisional Gov-
ernment, or acquired any influence in its councils.""!"
This .seems a melancholy termination of the Government of the

* " Charles the Second, with a spirit that docs h<inour to his reign, at that
time meditated iinportjvnt plans for the reformation of New England."
(Annals of the Colonies, pp. 88, 89.)

t Moore's Lives of the Governors of New Plymouth, p. 228.

The contest between the Pilgrims of Plymouth and the Puritans of
Massachusetts, in regard to granting a separate charter to the former, was
.severe and bitter. The Plymouth Government, by its tolerance and loyalty,
hotl been an " eyesore" to the other intolerant and disloyal Puritans of
Massachusetts. Perhaps the Imperial Government of the day thought that
tht fusion of the two Governments and populations into one would render
tlie new Government moi-e liberal and loyal ; but the result proved otherwise.

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IL

li li!

Pilgrims — a princely race of men, who voluntarily braved the
sufferings of a double exile for the sake of what they believed
to be the truth and the glory of God; whose courage never
failed, nor their loyalty wavered amidst all their privations and
hardships ; who came to America to enjoy religious liberty and
promote the honour of England, not to establish political inde-
pendence, and granted that liberty to others which they earned
and had suffered so much to enjoy themselves; who were
honourable and faithful to their treaty engagementfj with the
aborigines as they were in their communications with the Throne ;
who never betrayed a friend or fled from an enemy ; who left
imperishable footprints of their piety and industry, as well as
of their love of liberty and law, though their self -originated and
self -sustained polity perished at length, by royal forgetfulness
and credulity, to the plausible representations and ambitious ava-
rice of their ever aggressive Massachusetts Puritan neighbours.

While the last act of the Pilgrims before leaving the May-
Hower, in the harbour of Cape Cod, was to eni:er into a compact
of local self-government for common protection and interests,
and their first act on landing at New Plymouth was, on bended
knees, to commend themselves and their settlement to the Divine
protection and blessing, it is a touching fact that the last official
act of the General Assembly of the colony was to appoint a day
of solemn fasting and humiliation on the extinction of their
separate gavemment and their absorption into that of Massachu-
setts Bay.

It was among the sons and daughters of the Plymouth colony
that almost tho only loyalty in New England during the Ameri-
can Revolution of the following century was found. Most of
the descendants of Edward Winslow, and of his more distin-
guished son, Josiah Winslow, were loyalists during that revolu-
tion.* In the councils of the mother country, the merits of the
posterity of the Pilgrims have been acknowledged ; as in her
service some of them, by their talents and courage, have won
their way to eminence. Among the proudest names in the
British navy are the descendants of the original purchaser of
Mattapoisett, in Swansey (William Brenton, afterwards Governor

* " Most of his (lescendanta were loyalists during the American Revolution.
One of them was the wife of John S. Copley, the celebrated painter, and
father of the late Lord Lyndhurst" (Moore.)

CHAP. 11.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

of Rhode Island) ;* to the distinguished title of one of the
English peerage is attached the name of cne of the early settlers
of Seituate, in the Plymouth colony (William Vassall, who
settled there in 1635.)t

" In one respect," says Moore, " tl.e people of the Old
Colony present a remarkable exception to the rest of America.
They are the purest English race in the world ; there is scarcely
an intermixture even with the Scotch or Irish, and none with
the aboriginals. Almost all the present population are descended
from the original English settlers. Many of them still own the
lands which their early ancestors rescued from the wilderness ;
and although they have spread themselves in every direction
through this wide continent, from the peninsula of Nova Scotia
to the Gulf of Mexico, some one of the family has generally re-
mained to cultivate the soil which was owned by his ancestors.
The fishermen and the navigators of Maine, the children of Ply-
mouth, still continue the industrious a,nd bold pursuits of their
forefathers. In that fine country, beginning at Utica, in the State
of New York, and stretching to Lake Erie, this race may be
found on every hill and in every valley, on the rivers and on
the lakes. The emigrant from the sandbanks of Cape Cod
revels in the profusion of the opulence, of Ohio. In all the
Southern and South- Western States, the natives of the " Old
Colony," like the Arminians of Asia, may be found in every
place where commerce and traffic offer any lure to enterpi ise ;
and in the heart of the peninsula of Michigan, like their ances-
tors they have commenced the cultivation of the wilderness — like
them originally, with savage hearts and savage men, and like them
patient in suffering, despising danger, and animated with hope."+

* Jahleel Brenton, grandson of Governor Wm. Breiiton, had twenty-two
children. His fourth son, bom Oct. 22, 1729, entered the British navy wlxen
a youth, distinguished himself and rose to the rank of Admiral. He died in
1802. His son Jahleel was bred to the sea, rose to be an Admiral, and was
knighted in 1810." (Moore's Livea of the Governors of New Plymouth, p. 229.)

t In 1660 he removed to the West Indies, where he laid the foundation
of several large estates, and where he died, in Barbadoes, in 1665. (Moore, p.
126.) "Thomas Richard, the third Lord Holland, married an heiress by the
name of Vassall, and his son, Henry Richard Fox Vassall, is the present
Lord Holland, Baron Holland in Lincolnshire, and Foxley in Wilts." (Play-
fair's British Family Antiquities, Vol. 11., p. 182.)

t Moore's Lives of thj Governors of New Plymouth, pp. 228 — 230.

.•'&

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

*,-

CHAPTER III.

The Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Company and their
Government, commencing in 1629.

PART I. ■

first settlement — ROYAL CHARTER GRANTED.

English Puritanism, transferred from England to the head of
Massachusetts Bay in 1629, presents the same characteristics
which it developed in England. In Massachusetts it had no com-
petitor ; it developed its principles and spirit without restraint ;
it was absolute in power from 1629 to 1689, and during that
sixty years it assumed independence of the Government to
which it owed its corporate existence ; it made it a penal crime
for any emigrant to appeal to England against a local decision of
Courts or of Government; it permitted no oath of allegiance
to the King, nor the administration of the laws in his name ; it
allowed no elective franchise to any Episcopalian, Presbyterian,
Baptist, Quaker, or Papist. Every non-member of the Con-
gregational Churches was compelled to pay taxes and bear all
other Puritan burdens, but was allowed no representation by
franchise, much less by eligibility for any office.

It has been seen that the " Pilgrim Fathers" commenced their
settlement at New Plymouth in 1620 — nine years before the
" Puritan Fathers" commenced their settlement on the opposite
side of Massachusetts Bay, making Boston their ultimate seat
of government. The Pilgrim Fathers and their descendants
were professedly congregational separatists from the Church of
England ; they had tied by stealth, under severe sufferings, from
persecution in England to Holland, where they had resided
eleven years and upwards, and where they had learned the
principles of religious toleration and liberty — the fruit of Dutch

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

Arminian advocacy and suffering. The Puritans of the Massa-
chusetts Bay Company emigrated directly from England, on
leaving which they professed to be members of the Church of
England; their emigration commenced in 1G28, the very year
that Charles the First, having quarrelled with and dissolved the
last of three Parliaments in less than four years, commenced his
eleven years' rule without a Parliament. During that eleven
years a constant current of emigration flowed from England to
Massachusetts Bay, to the extent of 13,000, including no less
than seventy clergymen of the Church of England, and many
men of rank, and wealth to the amount of some £300,000. All
these emigrants, or "adventurers," as they were called, left
England with a stinging sense of royal and episcopal despotism,
and with a corresponding hatred of royalty and episcopacy, but
with no conception of the principles of religious toleration or
liberty beyond themselves.

During the eight years' interval between the settlement of
the Pilgrims at New Plymouth to that of the Puritans at Salem
and Boston, trade had largely increased between England and
Massachusetts Bay,* and the climate, fisheries, furs, timber, and
other resources of northern New England became well known,
and objects of much interest in England.

King James had divided all that part of North America, 34°
and 4.5° of North latitude, into two grand divisions, bestowing
the southern part upon a London Company, and the northern
part upon a Company formed in Plymouth and Bristol. The
Northern Company resolved to strengthen their interests by
obtaining a fresh grant from the King. A new patent was
issued reorganizing the Company as the Council for the Affairs
of New England, the corporate power of which was to reside
at Plymouth, west of England, under the title of the " Grand
Council of Plymouth," with a grant of three hundred square
miles in New England. The Company formed projects on

* Two years after the Plymouth settlement, " Thirty-five ships si^ilecl tliis
yoar (1622) from the west of England, antl two from London, to fish on tlie
New England coa-sts, and made profital)le voyages." (Holmes' Annals of
America, Vol. I., p. 179.) In a note on the same page it is said : "Where in
Newfoundland they shared six or seven pounds for a common man, in New
England they shared fourteen pounds ; besides, six Dutch and French ships
made wonderful returns in furs."

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

too large a scale, and did not succeed ; but sold that portion of
its territory which constituted the first settlements of the
Massachusetts Bay Company to some merchants in the west
of England, who had successfully fished for cod and bartered
for furs in the region of Massachusetts Bay, and who thought
that a plantation might be formed there. Among the most
active encouragers of this enterprise was the Rev. John White,
a clergyman of Dorchester, a maritime town, which had been
the source of much commercial adventure in America.* One
special object of Mr, White was to provide an asylum for the
ministers who had been deprived and silenced in England for
non-conformity to the canons and ceremonies imposed by Laud
and his associates. Through Mr. White t?e guarantees became
acquainted with several persons of his religious sympathies in
London, who first associated with them, and afterAvards bought
rights in their patent. Among these was Matthew Cradock,
the largest stockholder in the Company, who was appointed its
first president, with eighteen associates, including John Winthrop,
Isaac Johnson, Sir Richard Saltunstall, and other persons of " like
quality." The chief object of these gentlemen in promoting a
settlement in New England was to provide a retreat where their
co-religionists of the Church of England could enjoy liberty in
matters of religious worship and discipline. But the proposed
undertaking could not be prosecuted with success without large
means ; in order to secure subscriptions for which the commercial
aspect of it had to be prominently presented.

The religious aspect of the enterprise was presented under the
idea of connecting and civilizing the idolatrous and savage Indian
tribes of New England. There was no hint, and I think no
intention, of abolishing and proscribing the worship of the
Church of England in New England ; for Mr. White himself,
the projector and animating spirit of the whole enterprise, was

* " The Council of New England, on the 19th of March (1627), sold to Sir
Henry Rowsell, Sir John Young, and four otlier as-sociates, [Thomas South-
Avood, John Humphrey, John Endicot, and Simeon Wliitcombe,] in the vicinity
of Dorchester, in England, a patent for all that part of New England lying
between three miles to the northward of Merrimack River, and three miles
to the southward of Charles River, and in length within the descril)ed breadth
from the Atlantic Ocean to the South Sea." (Holmes' Anntds, Vol. I.,
p. 193.)

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

a conformist clergjrman.* It was professedly a religio-comniereial
undertaking, and combined for its support and advancement the
motives of religion and commerce, togetner with the enlargement
of the Empire.

For greater security and more imposing dignity, the " adven-
turers" determined to apply for a Royal Charter of incorporation.
Their application was seconded by Lord Dorchester and others
near the Throne ; and Charles the First, impressed with the novel
idea of at once extending religion, commerce, and his Empire,
granted a Royal Patent incorporating the Company under the
name of " The Governor and Company of Massachusetts Bay, in
New England." But several months before the Royal Charter
was obtained, or even application for it made, Endicot, one of
the stockholders, was sent out with a ship of one hundred
emigrants, and, in consequence of his favourable report, applica-
tion was made for a Royal Charter.-f*

It was the conduct of Endicot, a few months after his arrival
at Massachusetts Bay — first condemned and afterwards sustained
and justified by the Directors of the Corporation in London —
that laid the foundation of the future Church history of New

■"■ The zeal of White soon found other powerful associates in and oat of
London — kindred 'spirits, men of religious fei-vour, uniting emotions of enthu-
siasm with unl)endinj^ perseverance in action — Winthrop, Dudley, Johnson,
Pynchon, Eaton, Saltunstall, Bellingham, so famous in colonial annals, besides
many others, men of fortune and friends to colonial enterprise. Three of the
original purchasers parted with their rights ; Humphrey and Endicot retained
an equal interest with the original purchasers. (Bancroft's United States,
Vol. I., pp. 368, 369.)

t Bancroft says : " Endicot, a man of dauntless courage, and that cheerful-
ness which accompanies courage, benevolent though austere, firm though
choleric, of a rugged nature, which the sternest forms of Puritanism had not
siTved to mellow, was selected as a fit instrument for this wildeniess work."
(History of the United States, Vol. I., pp. 369, 370.)

"When the news reached London of the safe arrival of the emigrants
[under Endicot], the number of the adventurers had already enlarged. The
Puritans throughout England began to take an interest in the efforts which
invited the imagination to indulge in delightful visions. Interest was also
made to obtain a Royal Charter, with the aid of Bellingham and White, an
tniinent lawyer, who advocated the design. The Earl of Warwick had always
been a friend to the Company ; and Lord Dorchester, then one of the Secre-
taries of State, is said to have exerted a powerful influence in Ijehalf of it.
At last [March 4th, 1629], after much labour and large expenditures, the
patent for the Company of Massachusetts Bay passed the seals." {Ih., p. 379.)

i 1

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

England, and of its disputes with the mother country. Endicot
and his one hundred emigrant adventurers arrived in the summer
of 1G28, and selected Naumkeag, which they called Salem, as
their place of settlement, the Gth of September. Endicot was
sent, with his company, by the Council for New England,
"to supersede Koger Conant at Naumkeag as local mana-
ger."* "The colony, made up of two sources, consisted of
not much above fifty or sixty persons, none of whom were
of special importance except Endicot, who was destined to
act for nearly forty years a conspicuous part in New England
history.""!' The Royal Charter passed the seals the 4th of March,
1G29, with Mr. Cradock as the first Governor of the Company.
"The first step of the new Corporation was to organize a
government for its colony. It determined to place the local
admirtistration in the hands of thirteen councillors, to retain
their oflSce for one year. Of these, seven, besides the Governor
(in which office Endicot was continued), were to be appointed
by the Company at home ; these eight were to choose three
others ; and the whole number was to be made up by the
addition of such as should be designated by the persons on
the spot at the time of Endicot's arrival, described as "old
planters.":}: A second embarkation of planters and servants
was ordered by the Company at a meeting, April 30, 1629,
shortly after its incorporation by Royal Charter. Five ships
were provided for this embarkation ; and four ministers were
provided — Francis Higginson, Samuel Skelton, Francis Bright,

* Tlie precursor of this Company was a Joint Stock Association, established
at Dorcliester under the auspices of the Rev. Mr. Wliite, " patriarch of Dor-
chester," and called the " Dorchester Adventurers," with a \'iew to fishing,
farming, and hunting ; but the undertaking was not successful, and an attempt
was made to retrieve affairs by putting the colony under a different di'-ection.
The Dorchester partners heard of some religious and well-aflected persons
that were lately removed out of New Plymouth, out of dislike of their
principles of rigid separation, of which Mr. Roger Conant was one — a religious,
sober, and prudent gentleman. (Hubbard's History of New England, Chaji.
xviii.) The partners engaged Conant to be their Governor, with the charge
of all their affairs, as well fishing as planting. The change did not produce
success. The Association sold its land, shipping, &c. ; and Mr. Endicot was
appointed under the new regivie. (Palfrey's Hist, of New England, Vol. I.,
pp. 285—8.)

t Palfrey, Vol. I., p. 289.

X Ih., p. 292.

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

and Ralph Smith.* Mr. Higginson says in his journal that he
sailed from the Isle of Wight the 11th of May, and arrived at
Cape Ann the 27th of June, and at Naumkeag (Salem) the
20th. They found at Naumkeag about one hundred planters
ad houses, besides a fair house built for Mr. Endicot. The
old and new planters together were about three hundred, of
whom one hundred removed to Charlestown, where there was a
house built ; the rest remained at Salem.

" Mr. Endicot had corresponded with the settlers at Plymouth,
who satistied him that they were right in their judgments of the
outward form of worship, being much like that of the Reformed
Churches of France, &c. On the 20th of July, Mr. Higginson
and Mr. Skelton, after fasting and prayer, were first elected by
the Company for their ministers — the first, teacher ; the other,
pastor. Each of them, together with three or four grave members,
lay their hands on each and either, with solemn prayer. Nothing
is said of any Church being formed ; but on the Cth of August,
the day appointed for the choice and ordination of elders and
deacons, thirty persons entered into a covenant in writing, which
is said to be the beginning of the Church, and that the ministers
were ordained or instituted anew. The repetition of this form
they probably thought necessary, because the people were not
in a Church state before. It is difiicult to assign any other
reason. Messengers or delegates from the Church of Plymouth
were expected to join with them, but contrary winds hindered
them, so that they did not arrive until the afternoon, but time
enough to give the right hand of fellowship.

" Tw^o of the company, John and Samuel Brown, one a lawyer,
the other a merchant, both men of good estates, and of the first
patentees of the Council, were dissatisfied. They did not like
that the Common Prayer and service of the Church of England

* Mr. Bright, one of these ministers, is said by Hubbard to have been a
Conformist. He went, soon after his arrival, to Charlestown, and tarried
about a year in the country, when he returned to England. Ralph Smith
was required to give a pledge, under his hand, that he would not exercise his
ministry within the limits of the patent, without the express leave of the
Governor on the spot. Mr. Smith seems to hai'e been of the separation in
England, which occasioned the caution to be used with him. He was a little
while in Nantasket, and went from thence to Plymouth, where he was their
minister for sevend years." (Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay,
Vol. I., pp. 10, 11.)

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

should be wholly laid aside, and therefore drew off, with as many
as were of their sentiments, from the rest, and set up a separate
society. This offended the Governor, who caused the two
members of his Council to be brought before him ; and judging
that this practice, together with some speeches they had uttered,
tended to sedition, he sent them back to England. The heads
of the party being removed, the opposition ceased."*

PART II.

THE QUESTION INVOLVING THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF THE AMERICAN REVOLU-
TION, THE BETTING UP OF A NEW FORM OF WORSHIP, AND ABOLISHING
AND PROSCRIBING THAT OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND ; THE FACTS
ANALYZED AND DISCUSSED ; INSTRUCTIONS AND OATHS OF ALLEGIANCE
ORDERED BY THE LONDON COMPANY AND DISREGARDED BY THE GOV-
ERNOR AND COUNCIL AT MASSACHUSETTS BAY.

As the whole question of the future Church-state in Massachu-
setts, and the future relations of the colony to England, is in-
volved in and resulted from this proceeding, it is necessary to
examine it thoroughly in relation both to the state of things in
the mother country and in the colony, as well as the provisions of
the Royal Charter. To do this, several things are to be con-
sidered: 1. With what views was the Royal Charter granted,
and with what professed views did the first Governor and his
associates leave England under the provisions of the Charter, and
carrying it with them to Massachusetts Bay ? 2. What were the
provisions of the Charter itself on the subject of religion? 3,
What were the powers claimed and exercised under it by the
Massachusetts Puritans? 4. How far the proceedings of the
Massachusetts Puritans were consistent with their original pro-
fessions, with good faith towards the Mother Country, and with
the principles of civil and religious liberty in the colony?

A careful recollection of the collateral events in England and
those of the colony, at the time and after granting the Royal
Charter, is requisite to a correct understanding of the question,
and for the refutation of those statements by which it was
misrepresented and misunderstood.

1. The first question is, with what views was the Royal
Charter granted, and with what professed views did the Governor
and his associates leave England under the provisions of the
Charter, and canying it with them to Massachusetts Bay?

* Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 11, 12.

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

The theory of some New England historians is, that Puritan-
ism in England was opposed to the Clmrch of England, and
especially to its Episcopal government — a theory true as respects
the Puritanism of the Long Parliament after the second year of
its existence, and of the Commonwealth and Cromwell, but which
is entirely at variance with facts in respect to the Puritanism
professed in England at the time of granting the Royal Charter
to the Massachusetts Company in 1G29, and for twelve years
afterwards. In the Millenary Petition presented by the Puritan
party in the Church to James the First, on his coming to the
throne, presbytery was expressly disclaimed ; and in the first
three Parliaments of Charles the First, during which all the
grievances complained of by tlie Puritans were stated and dis-
cussed in the Commons, not the slightest objection was made to
Episcopacy, but, on the contrary, reverence and fidelity in regard
to it was professed without exception ; and when the Long
Parliament first met, eleven years after the granting of the
Royal Charter to the Massachusetts Bay Company, every
member but one professed to be an Episcopalian, and the Holy
Communion, according to the order of the Church, was, by an
unanimous vote of the Commons, ordered to be partaken by
each member. In all the Church, as well as judicial and political,
reforms of this Parliament during its first session, Episcopacy
was regarded and treated as inviolate ; and it was not until the
following year, imder the promptingsof the Scotch Commissioners,
that the " root and branch " petition was presented to Parliament
against Episcopacy and the Prayer Book, and the subject was
discussed in the Commons. The theory, therefore, that Puritan-
ism in England was hostile to the Church at the period in
question is contradicted by all the " collateral " facts of English
history, as it is at variance with the professions of the first
^lassachusetts Puritans themselves at the time of their leaving
England.

This is true in respect to Endicot himself, who was appointed
manager of the New England Company, to succeed Roger
Conant, and in charge of one hundred "adventurers" who
reached Naumkeag (which they called Salem) in September, 1628
— seven months before the Royal Charter granted by Charles
the First passed the seals. Within two months after the Royal
Charter was granted, another more numerous party of "adven-

THK LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

i|i

tiirers" embarked for New England, and among these two
gentlemen, original patentees and members of the Council — John
and Samuel Brown, and four ministers — Higginson, Skelton,
Bright, and Smith. During the winter of 1(528-9 much sickness
prevailed among the (^migrants who accompanied Endicot, who
sent for a physician to the Plymouth settlement of the Pilgrim
Fathers. A Doctor Fuller was sent, who, while he prescribed
medicine for the sick of the newly-arrived emigrants, converted
Endicot from Episcopalianism to Congregationalism — at least
from being a professed Churchman to being an avowed Congre-
gationalist. This is distinctly stated by all the historians of the
times.*

It is therefore clear that Endicot had imbibed new views of
Church government and form of worship, and that he deter-
mined not to perpetuate the worship of the Church of England,
to which he had professed to belong when he left England, but
to form a new Church and a new form of worship. He seems to
have brought over some thirty of the new emigrants to his new
scheme ; and among these were the newly-arrived ministers,
Higginson and Skelton. They were both clergymen of the
Puritan school — professing loyalty to the Church, but refusing
to conform to the novel ceremonies imposed by Laud and his
party.-f* But within two months after their arrival, they

* " How much of the Church system thus introduced had already been re-
solved upon before the colonists of the Massachusetts Company left England,
and how long a time, if any, previous to their emigration such an agreement
was made, are questions which we have probably not suificient means to
determine. Thus much is certain — that when Skelton and Higginson
reached Salem, they found Endicot, who was not only their Governor, but
one of the six considerable men who had made the first movement for a
patent, fully jjrepared for the ecclesiastical organization which was presently
instituted. In the month before their arrival, Endicot, in a letter [May 11,
1629] to Bradford thanking him for the visit of Fuller, had said : ' I rejoice
much that I am by him satisfied touching your judgments of the outward
form of God's worship.'" — Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society,
First Series, Vol. III., p. 65.

t Cotton Mather relates that, " taking the last look at his native shore,
Higginson said, 'We will not say, as the Separatists say, "Farewell, Babylon ;
farewell, Rome ;" but we will say, " Farewell, dear England ; farewell. Church
of God in England, and all the Christian friends there. We do not go to New
England as separatists from the Chiirch of England, though we cannot but
separate from the corruptions of it. Biit we go to practise the positive part

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

entered into the nev/ views of Entlicot to found a new C ■Imrch
on the Congregational system. Their manner of procee<ling to
<lo so has been stated above (p. 29.) Mr. Hutchinson remarks —
" The New England Puritans, when at full liberty, went the full
length which the Separatists did in England. It does not follow
that they would have done ho if they had remained in England.
In their form of worship they universally followed the New
Plymouth Church."*

Tlie question is naturally suggested, could King Charles the
First, in granting the Charter, one declared object of which was
converting the Indians, have intended or contemplated the super-
seding the Church for whose episcopacy he perished on the
scaffold, by the establishment of Congregationalism in New
England ? The supposition is absurd, and it is equally imreason-
able to suppose that those who applied for and obtained the
Charter contemplated anything of the kind, as will appear
presently.

It can hardly be conceived that even among the newly-arrived
emigi-ants on the shores of Massachusetts, such a revolution as
the adoption of a new form of worship could be accomplished
without doing violence to the convictions and endeared associa-
tions of some parties. However they might have objected to the
ceremonies and despotic acts of the Laudian school in England,
they could not, without a pang and voice of remonstrance, re-
nounce the worship which had given to England her Protestant-
ism and her liberties, or repudiate the book which embodied that
form of worship, and which was associated with all that had
exalted England, from Cranmer and Ridley to their own day.

of Church refonnation, and propagate the gospel in America.'"" — Magnalia,
Book III., Part II., Chap, i., quoted by Palfrey, Vol. I., p. 297, in a note.

"They were careful to distinguish themselves from the BrowTiist and
other Separatists. Had they remained in England, and the Chiirch been
governed with the wisdom and moderation of the present day, they would
have remained, to use their own expression, 'in the bosom of the Church where
they had received their hopes of salvation.'" — Hutchinson's History of Massa-
chusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 417.

Note by Mr. Hutchinson : " The son of one of the first ministers, in a pre-
face to a sermon preached soon after the Revolution, remarks that * if the
bishops in the reign of King Charles the First had been of the same spirit as
those in the reign of King William, there would have been no New England.'"

* Histoiy of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., Chap, iv., p. 418.
3

TIIK F-OYAMSTS OF AMKHKA

[rilAIV III.

Con<n('';atitmali.sii) had dono nothin'j for tljo Protcstautisin or
lihurtit's of Ku<,'larnl, antl it woiiM liavt^ btuin ,stran<f(! indeiid
had there not htnjii some ainoii^' the eiiiij^'rants wlio wouhl not
consider their ehnti;!,'*' of latitude and I()n^dtu(U! as (U'stroyini"'
their ( 'hiirch nieinher.ship, and .sundering the additional ties wliich
connected them with their forofatliers and the associations of
all their past life. Endicot, therefore, witli all his authority as
local (lovernor, and all his energy and zeal, and canvassing
among the two or three hundred new emigrants for a new
Church, had not heen ahle to get more than thirty of them, with
the aid of tlus two newly-arrived ministers, to unite in the new
Covenant ( 'onfession ; Imt he had got the (if not coerced) majority
of the local ('Ouncillors to join with him, and therefore exercised
ahsolute power over the little connminity, and denounced and
tn^ated as nuitinous and factious all who would not renounce
the Churcli of their fathers and of their own profession d(jwnto
that hour, and adopt the worship of his new community.

As only thirty joined v>-ith Endicot in the creation of his new
C'hureh organization and Covenant, it is ohvious that a majority
of the emigrants either stood aloof from or wore opposed to
this extraordinary proceeding. Among the most noted of the.se
adherents to the old (Jhurch of the Reformation were two l)rothers,
Jolin and Samuel Brown, who refused to be parties to tliis new
and locally -devised Church revolution, and resolved, for them-
selves, families, and such as thought with them, to continue to
worship God according to the custom of th«jir fathers and nation.

It is the fashion of several American historians, as well as
their echoes in England, to employ epithets of contumely in re-
gard to those men, the Browns — both of them men of wealth —
the one a lawyer a'- id the other a private gentleman — both of
them much superior to Endicot himself in social position in
England — both of them among the original patentees and first
founders of the colony — both of them Church reformers, but
neither of them a Church revolutionist. It is not worthy of T^'
Palfrey and Mr. Bancroft to employ the words "faction" t
" factionists" to the protests of John and Samuel Brown.*

* " The Messrs. Brown went out with the second emigration, at the same
time as Messrs. Higginson and Skelton, a few months after Endicot, and
while he was the local Governor, several months before the anival of tlie
third emigration of eleven ships with Governor Winthrop. In the Company's

niAP. in.]

AND TIIKIIl TIMKS.

What is stated by Dr. Palfrey and Mr. Bancroft more than
refutes and condemns the opprohrious epitliets they apply to tlio
Browns. On paj^'es 2!) and .SO I have given, in the words of
Mr. Hutchin.son, the account of the formation of tlie new Church,
and the expulsion of tlie Browns for their refusal to conform to
it. J)r. Palfrey .states the transaction })etween Endicot and the
Browns in the followin<j words:

" The transaction which determined the religious con.stitution
of New England gave offence to two of the Ojuncillors, John
and Samuel Brown. Considering tlie late proceedings, (is well
thi'U iitiijht do, to amount to a HeceHHlmi from the witioiud Kdah-
llshment, they, with some others of th(i same mind, set up a
separate worship, conducted according to tlie Book of Common
Prayer. Endicot and his friends were in no mood to tolerate
this schism. The brothers, brought before the Governor, .said
that tlie ministers ' were Separatists, and would be Anal)apti.stH.'
The ministers replied tliat ' tliey came away from the ('onnnon
Prayer and ceremonies, and had suffered much for their non-
conformity in their native land, and therefore, being placed
where they nught have their liberty, they neitlier could nor would
us(! them, l)ecause they Judged the imposition of tlie.se thing.s
to l)e sinful corruptions of God's worship.' There was no compos-
ing such strife, and ' therefore, finding tliese two brotliers to be
of high spirits, and their .speeches and practice tending to mutiny
and faction, the Governor told them that New England was no
place for such as they, and therefore he sent them both back for
England at the return of the ships the same year.' "*

first letter of instnictions to Endicot, dated the 17th of April, 1629, they
speak of and commend the Messrs. Brown in the following terms :

" ' Through many businesses we had almost forgot to recommend to you
two brethren of our Company, Mr. John and Mr. Samuel Brown, who
though they be no adventurers in the general stock, yet are they men we do
t^spt' t, being fully persuaded of their sincere affections to the good of
our Plantation. The one, Mr. John Brown, is sworn assistant here, and by
us cli "n one of the Council there ; a man <;xperienced in the laws of our
king 1, and such an one as we are persuaded will worthily deserve your
favour and furthermore, which we desire he may have, and that in the first
division of lands there may be allotted to either of them two hundred acres.' "
(Young's Chronicler of the First Plantere of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay,
from 1623 to 1636, ,.. 168.)

* History of New England, Vol. I., p. 298.

Ill ,'

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

Mr. Bancroft says: "The Church was self -constituted. It
did not ask the assent of the King or recognize him as its
head ; its officers were set apart and ordained among themselves ;
it used no Liturgy, and it rejected unnecessary ceremonies ; and
reduced the simplicity of Calvin to a. still plainer standard."
" There existed even in this little company a few individuals to
whom the new system was unexpected ; and in John and Samuel
Brown they found able leaders. Both were members of the
Colonial Council, and they had been favourites of the Corpora-
tion in England ; and one of them, an experienced and merito-
rious lawyer, had' been a member of the Board of Assistants in
London. They declared their dissent from the Church of Higgin-
son ; and at every risk of union and tranquillity, they insisted
upon the use of the English Liturgy." " Finding it to be a vain
attempt to persuade the Browns to relinquish their resolute
opposition, and believing that their speeches tended to produce
disorder and dangerous feuds, Endicot sent them back to
England in the returning ships ; and faction, deprived of its
leaders, died away."*

It is clear from these statements — partial as they are in favour
of Endicot and against the Browns — that Endicot himself
was the innovator, the Church revolutionist and the would-be
founder of a new Church, the real schismatic from the old Church,
and therefore responsible for any discussions which might arise
from his proceedings ; while the Browns and their friends were
tor standing in the old ways and walking in the old paths,
refusing to be of those who were given to change. Mr. Bancroft
says that " the new system was unexpected" to them. Mr.
Pi^lfrey says that "John and Samuel Brown, considering the
late proceedings, as well they might, to amount to a secession
from the nation/il Establishment, they, with some others of the
same mind, set up a separate worship conducted according to the
Book of Common Prayer." Or, more properly, they continued
the worship according to the Book of Common Prayer, which
they and their fathers had practised, as well as Endicot and
Higginson themselves up to that day, refusing to leave the old
Church of the Reformation, and come into a new Church
founded by joining of hands of thirty persons, in a new covenant,

* Bancroft's History of the United Stntt's, Vol. I., p. 379.

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

walking around the place of the old town-pump of Salem. Mr.
Endicot is sent from England as the manager of a trading
Company, and invested with powers as their local temporary
Governor, to manage their business and remove persons that
might disturb or interfere with its operations ; and he becomes
acquainted with a Doctor Fuller, a deacon of a Congregational
Church at New Plymouth, and imbibes his views ; and forth-
with sets himself to abolish the old Church, and found a new
one, and proceeds at length to banish as seditious and mutinous
those who would not forsake the old way of worship and follow
him in his now way of worship.

Some of the above quoted language of Dr. Palfrey and Mr.
Bancroft implies improper conduct on the part of the brothers
Brown, for which they were banished. Even if that were so,
their position of unchangeable loyalty to their post and of
good faith to their Company might be pleaded in justification
of the strongest language on their part. But such was not the
fact ; it was their position, and not their language or tempers.
Mr. Bancroft himself sayt;, in the American edition of his Hi.story,
that " the Browns were banished because they were Ghurchmen.
Thus was Episcopiicy professed in Massachusetts, and thus tvas
it exiled. The blessing,-' of the promised land ivere to be kept
for Puritan dissenters.''* This statement of Mr. Bancroft is
contirmed and the conduct of Endicot moie specifically stated
by earlier New England historians. In the " Ecclesiastical
History of Massachusetts," reprinted by the Ma.ssachusetts
Historical Society, the whole affair is minutely related. The
following passages are sufficient for my purpose :

" An opposition of some consequence arose from several persons
of influence, who had been active in promoting the settlement
of the place. At the head of this were Mr. Samuel Brown and
Mr. John Brown, the one a lawyer and the other a merchant,
who were attached to the form and usage of the Church of
England. The ministers [Higginson and Skelton], assisted by
Mr. Endicot, endeavoured to bring them over to the practice of
the Puritans, but without succes.«." " These gentlemen, with

* History of the United States, Am. Ed. 8vo, Vol. I., p. 350. These three
stnteiices are not found in the British Mus<'i'm (Englisli) Edition ot Mr.
Bancroft's History, Imt ai-e contained in Routlc '.j,-o"8 London i-eprint of the
American Edition.

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

(■

•I

other.s, were conscientioas Churchmen, and de.sired to use the
Liturgy, and for this purpose met in their own houses. The
magistrates, or rather Mr. Endicot, sent to demand a reason for
their separation. They answered, tliat as they were of the Chui'ch
established by law in their native country, it was highly proper
they should woiship God as the Government required, from whom
they had received their Charter. Surely they might be allowed
that liberty of conscience which all conceived to be reasonable
when they were on the other side of the water. But these
arguments were called seditious and mutinous."

" Mr. Bentley imputes the errors of the ministers to the temper
of Endicot, who was determined to execute his own plan of
Church government. Inexperienced in the passions of men, and
unaccustomed to consult even his friends, he was resolved to
suffer no opposition ; and as the Salem Church had disdained
the authority of the Church of England, his feelings were hurt
and his temper raised against those w^ho preferred a Liturgy, and
whose object might be, as he conceived, to cause a schism in the
community."*

The Mr. Bentley referred to above was the historian of the
town of Salem, in a book entitled " Description and History of
Salem, by the Rev. William Bentley," and reprinted in the
" Collection of the Massachusetts Historical Society," Vol. VL,
pp. 212 — 277. Referring to Endicot's conduct to the Browns,
Mr. Bentley says :

"Endicot had been the cause of all the rash proceedings
against the Browns. He was determined to execute his own
plan of Church government. Inexperienced in the passions of
men, and unaccustomed to consult even his friends, he was
resolved to admit of no opposition. They vjho could not be
terrified into silence were not commanded to unthdraw, but
they were seized, and banisfied as criTninals. The fear of injury
to the colony induced its friends in England to give private
satisfaction, and then to write a reproof to him who had been
the cause of the outrages ; and Endicot never recovered his
reputation in England." (p. 245.)

It is thus clear beyond reasonable doubt that the sole offence
of the Browns, and those who remained with them, was that

* " Eccle8iu9ti(uil Hiwtory of MartwiclmwttH," in the Collection of tlio Massji-
chusetts Histoiicwl Society, Vol. IX., ]>p. 3 — 5.

CHAP. III.] AND THEIR TIMKS. 39

the"*" adhered to the worship which they had always practised,
and wliich was professed by all parties when they left England,
and because they refused to follow Mi-. Endicot in the new
Church polity and worship which he adopted from the Congre-
gational Plymouth physician, after his arrival at Salem, and
which he was determined to establish as the only worship in
the new Plantation. It was Endicot. therefore, that connnenced
the change, the innovation, the schism, and the power given him
as Manager of the trading business of the Company he exercised
for the purpose of establishing a Church revolution, and banish-
ing the men who adhered to the old ways of worship professed
by the Company when applying for the Royal Charter, and still
professed by them in England. It is not pretended by any
party that the Browns were not interested in the success of the
Company as originally established, and as professed when they
left England ; it is not insinuated that they opposed in any
way or differed from Endicot in regard to his management of
the general affairs of the Company ; on the contrary, it is mani-
fest by the statement of all parties that tue sole ground and
question of dispute between Endicot and the Browns was the
refusal of the latter to abandon the Episcopal and adopt the
Congregational form of worship set up by Endicot and thirty
others, by joining of hands and subscribing to a covenant and
confession of faith around the well -pump of Naumkeag, then
christened Salem.

The whole dispute, then, narrowed to this one question,, let us
inquire in what manner the Browns and their friends declined
acting with Endicot in establishing a new form of worship
instead of that of the Church of England ?

It does not appear that Endicot even consulted his local
Council, much less the Directors of the Company in England, as
to his setting up a new Church and new form of worship in the
new Plantation at Salem. Having with the new accession of
emigrants received the appointment of Governor, he appears to
have regarded himself as an independent ruler. Suddenly raised
from being a manager and captain to being a Governor, he
assumed more despotic power than did King Charles in England,
and among the new emigrants placed under his control, and
whom he seems to have regarded as his subjects — himself their
absolute sovereign, in both Church ami State. In his con-

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

Hi'

ferences with Fuller, the Congregational doctor from New
Plymouth, he found the Congregational worship to answer to his
aspirations, as in it he could on the one hand gratify his hatred of
King and Church, and on the other hand become the founder of
the new Church in a new Plantation. He paused not to consider
whether the manager of a trading Company of adventurers had
any authority to abolish the worship professed by the Company
under whose authority he was acting; how far fidelity required
him to give effect to the worship of his employers in carrying
out their instructions in regard to the religious instruction of
their servants and the natives; but he forthwith resolved to
adopt a new confession of faith and to set up a new form of
worship. On the arrival of the first three chaplains of the
Company, in June of 1629, several months after his own arrival,
Endicot seems to have imparted his views to them, and two of
them, Higginson and Skelton, fell in with his scheme ; but Mr.
Bright adhered to his Church. It was not unnatural for Messrs.
Higginson and Skelton to prefer becoming the fathers and
founders of a new Church than to remain subordinate ministers
of an old Church. The Company, in its written agreement with
them, or rather in its iastructions accompanying them to
Endicot, allowed them discretion in their new mission field
as to their mode of teaching and worship ; but certainly no
authority to ignore it, much less authority to adopt a new con-
fession of faith and a new form of worship.

Within three months after the arrival of these chaplains of the
Company at Salem, they and Endicot matured the plan of
setting up a new Church, and seemed to have persuaded thirty-
one of the two hundred emigrants to join with them — a minority
of less than one-sixth of the little community; but in that
minority was the absolute Governor, and against whose will a
majority was nothing, even in religious matters, or in liberty of
conscience. Government by majorities and liberty of conscience
are attributes of freedom.

Let it be observed here, once for all, that Endicot and his
friends are not, in my opinion, censurable for changing their
professed religious opinions and worship and adopting others, if
they thought it right to do so. If, on their arrival at Massachu-
setts Bay, they thought and felt themselves in duty bound to
renounce their old and set up a new form of worship and Church

chap.

it was

gagem

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

discipline, it wa.s doubtless their right to do so ; but in doing so
it was unquestionably their dutj' not to violate their previous en-
gagements and the rights of others. They were not the original
owners and occupants of the countiy, and were not absolutely free
to choose their own form of government and worship ; they were
British subjects, and were commencing the settlement of a
territory granted them by their Sovereign ; they were sent there
by a Company existing and acting under Royal Charter ;
Endicot was the chief agent of that Company, and acting under
their instructions. As such, duty required him to consult his
employers before taking the all-important step of setting aside
the worship they professed and establishing a new one, much
less to proscribe and })anish those who had adv^entured as settlers
upon the old professed worship, and declined adopting the new.
And was it not a violation of good faith, as well as liberty of
conscience, to deny to the Browns and their friends the very
worship on the profession of which by all parties they had
embarked as settlers in New England? To come to New
England as Churchmen, and then abolish the worship of the
Church and set up a new form of worship, without even con-
sulting his employers, was what was done by Endicot ; and to
come as Churchmen to settle in New England, and then to be
banished from it for being Churchmen, was what was done to
the Browns by Endicot.

This act of despotism and persecution — apart from its relations
to the King, and the Company chartered by him — is the more
reprehensible from the manner of its execution and the circum-
stances connected with it.

It appears from the foregoing statements and authorities, that
the Browns were not only gentlemen of the highest respecta-
bility, Puritan Churchmen, and friends of the colonial enterprise,
but that when Endicot resolved upon founding a new Church
and worship, they did not interfere with him ; they did not
interrupt, by objection or discussion, his proceedings around the
well-pump of Salem in organizing a new Church and in hereto-
fore professing clergymen of the Church of England, and with
its vows upon them, and coming as chaplains of a Church of
England Corporation, submitting to a new ordination in order
to exercise ecclesiastical functions. The Browns and their
friends seem to have been silent spectators of these proceedings

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. II L

Ibf '

— doubtless with feelings of astonishment if not of grief — Lut
determined to worship in their families and on the Sabhath in
their old way. But in this they were interrupted, and haled
before the new Governor, Endieot, to answer for their n(jt com-
ing to his worship and abandoning that which they and their
fathers, and Endieot himself, had practised; were called "Sepa-
ratists," for not acting as such in regard to their old way of
worship; and were treated as "seditious and mutinous," fo/
justifying their fidelity to the old worship before the new
" Star Chamber " tribunal of Endieot. The early New England
ecclesiastical historian above quoted says : " The magistrates, or
rather Endieot, sent to demand a reamn* for their separation.
They ansivered that as they were of the (Jhurch established by
law in their native country, it was highly proper they should
worship God as the Government required from whom they had
received their Charter. Surely they might be allowed that
liberty of conscience which all conceived to be reasonable when
they were on the other side of the water. But their arguments
were called " seditious and mutinous." The first Congregational
historian of Salem, above quoted, says : " Endieot had been the
cause of all the rash proceedings against the Browns. He was
determined to execute his plan of Church government. Inex-
perienced in the passions of men, and unaccustomed to consult
even his friends, he was resolved to admit of no opposition-
They who could not be terrified into silence were not commanded
to withdraw, but were seized and transported as criminals."f
Such are the facts of the ease itself, as related by the New

* It is tli'iir, iVuin these uiul other con-espoiKliiig wtttteineiits, that tlie
Messrs. Brown hud had no controversy with Endieot ; had not in the U*ast
interfered with his proceed inf^s, but had (juietly and inoffensively pui-sued
their own course in adhering to the ohl worship ; and only stated their
objections to his proceedings by giving the reasons for their own, when
arraigned before his tribunal to answer for their not coming to his worship,
and continuing in that of their own Church. The reasonings and si^eeches thus
drawn from them were deemed "seditious and mutinous," and for which they
were adjudged "criminals'" and banished. Looking at all the facts of the
case — including the want of good faith to the Browns and those who agreed
with them — it exceeds in inquisitorial and desj)otic proscrijjtive persecution
that which drove the Brownists fiom England to Holland in the first yeai-s ot
James the First.

t C'ollection of the Massachusetts Historical Society,

Mr. F. M. Hubbard, in his new edition of Belknap's Ameiican Biography,

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

England Puritan vvriter.s themselves. I will now for a .short
time cross the Atlantic, and see what were the professions and
proceedings of the Council or " Grand Court" of the Company
in England in regard to the chief objects of establishing the
Plantation, their provision for its religious wants, and their
judgment afterwards of Endicot's proceedings. In the Company's
first letter of instructions to Endicot and his Council, dated
the 17th of April, 1029, they remind him that the propagation
of the Gosp'd was the primary object contemplated by them ;
that they had appointed and contracted with three ministers to
promote that work, and instructed him to provide accommoda-
tion and necessaries for them, according to agreement. They
apprise him also of his confirmation as " Governor of our
Plantation," and of the names of the (councillors joined with
him.* In their letter to Endicot, they call the mini.sters .sent
by them " your ministers," and say : " For the manner of exer-

iii. 166, referiiiif^ to Endicot, wiys : " He was of a quick temper, wliich the
liabit of militiiry commivnd had not softened ; of strong religions feeling.s,
moulded on the sternest features of Calvinism ; resolute to uphohl with tlie
sword what he had received as gospel trutli, and fearing no enemy so much
as a gainsaying spirit. Cordially disliking the Engl isli Church, he hanished
the Browns and the Prayer Book ; and averse to all ceremonies and symbols,
the cross on the King's colours was an abomination he could not away with.
He cut down the Maypole on Merry Mount, pul)li.shed liis detestation of long
hair in a formal proclamation, and set in the pillory and on the gallows the
returning Quakers."

* The words of the Company's letter are as follows :

"And for that the propagating of the Gospel is the thing we do profess
above all to be our aim in settling this Plantation, we have been careful to
make plentiful provision of godly ministers, by whose faithful preaching,
godly conversation, and exemplary life, we trust not only those of our own
nation will be built up in the knowledge of God, but also the Indians may,
in God's appointed time, be reduced to the oliedience of the Gosptd of Christ.
One of them, viz., Mr. Skelton, whom we have ratlier desired to bear a part
in this work, for that we have been informed yourself formerly received much
good ])y his ministry. Another is Mr. Higgeson [Higginson], a grave man,
and of worthy commendations. The third is Mr. Bright, sometimes trained
up under Mr. Davenport. We pray you, accommodate them all with neces-
saries OS well as ycm may, and in convenient time let there be houses built
for them, according to the agreement we have made with them, copies whereof,
as of all others we have entertained, shall be sent you by the next ships, time
not permitting now. We doubt not these gentlemen, your ministers, will
agree lovingly together ; and for cherisliing of love betwixt them, we pray
you carry yourself impartially to all. For the manner of exercising their

1 }
I

li!

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

cising their ministiy, and teaching both our own people and the
Indians, we leave that to themselves, hoping they will make
God's Word the I'ule of their actions, and nmtually agree in
the dischai'ge of their duties." Such instructions and directions
have doubtless been given by. the Mana<^ing Boards of many
Missionary Societies to missionaries whom they sent abroad ;
but without the least suspicion that such missionaries could, in
good faith, on arriving at their destination, ignore the Church
and ordination in connection with which they had been employed,
and set up a new Church, and even be parties to banishing from
their new field of labour to which they had been sent, the
members of the Church of which they themselves were pro-
fessed ministers when they received their appointment and
stipulated support.

Six weeks after transmitting to Endicot the letter above
referred to, the Company addressed to him a second general
letter of instructions. This letter is dated the 28th of May,
1029, and encloses the official proceedings of the Council or
" General Court " appointing Endicot as Governor, with the
names of the Councillors joined with him, together with the
form of oaths he and the other local officers of the Company
were to take.* The oath required to be taken by Endicot and

minLstry, and teaching both our own people and the Indians, we leave that
to themselves, hoping they will make God's Word the rule of their actions,
and mutually agree in the discharge of their duties.

" We have, in prosecution of that good opinion we have always had of you,
confirmed you Governor of our Plantation, and joined in commission with
you the three ministers — namely, Mr. Francis Higginson, Mr. Samuel Skelton,
mil Mr. Francis Bright ; also Mr. John and Samuel Brown, Mr. Thomas Groves,
ami Mr. Samuel Sharpe." — The Company's Fii-st General Letter of Instnictions
to Eidicot and his Council, the I7th of April, 1629. (Young's Chronicles
of the First Planters of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, pp. 142 — 144.)

" A form of an oath for a Governor heyond the seas, and of an oath for the
Council there, was drawn and delivered to Mr. Humphrey to show to the
[Privy] Council." (Company's Records, Young, &c., p. 69.)

* The following is an extract of the Company's Second General Letter of
Instructions to Endicot and his Council, dated Lond(jn, 28th May, 1629 :

" We have, and according as we then advised, at a full and ample Court
assembled, elected and established you, Captain John Endicot, to the place
of Governor in our Plantation there, as also some others to l)e of the
Council with you, as more particularly you will perceive by an Act of
Court herewith sent, confirmed by us at a General Court, and sealed with
our common seal, to which Act we refer you, desiring you all punctually

CHAP.

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

each local Governor is very full and explicit.* It is also to be
observed that these two letters of instructions, with forms of
oaths and appointments of his Council, were sent out three
months before Endicot, Higginson, and Skelton proceeded to
ignore and abolish the Church professed by the Company and
themselves, and set up a new Church.

to ohserve the miim, and that the oaths we herewith send you (which have
been penned hy learned counsel, to lie administered to each of you in your
several places) may Ijt administered in sucli manner and ftjmi as in and by
our said order is particularly exjiressed ; and that yourselves do fmme such
other oaths as in your wisdom you shall think tit to ha administered to your
secretary or other officers, according to their several places respectively."
(Young's Chronicles, &c., p. 173.)

* The form of oath, which had been prepared under legal advice, submitted
to and approved of by the King's Privy Council, was as follows :

" Oaths of Office for the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Council in New
England (ordered May 7th, 1629).

" The Oath of the Governor in New England." [The same to the Deputy
Governor.]

"You shall be faithful and loyal unto our Sovereign Lord the King's
Majesty, and to his heirs and successors. You shall support and maintain, to the
best of your power, the Government and Company of Massachusetts Bay, in
New England, in America, and the privileges of the same, having no singular
regard to yourself in derogation or hindrance of the Commonwealth of this
Company ; and to every person under your authority you shall administer
indifferent and equal justice. Statutes and Ordinances shall you none make
without tin; advice and consent of the Council for Government of the Massa-
chusetts Bay in New England. You shall admit none into the freedom of
this Company but such as may claim the same by virtue of the privileges
thereof. You shall not bind yourself to enter into any l)U8ine8s or process
tor or in the name of this Company, without the consent and agreement of
the Council aforesaid, but shall endeavour faithfully and carefHilly to carry
yourself in this place and office of Governor, as long as you shall continue in
it. And likewise you shall do your best endeavour to draw the natives of
this country called New England to the knowledge of the true God, and to con-
serve the planters, and others coming hither, in the same knowledge and fear
of God. And you shall endeavour, by all good unions, to advance the good
of the Plantations of this Company, and you shall endeavour the raising of
such commodities for the benefit and encouragement of the adventurers and
planters as, through God's blessing on your endeavours, may be produced for
the good and service of the kingdom of England, this Company, and the
Plantations. All these premises you shall hold and keep to the uttermost
of your power and skill, so long as you shall continue in the place of Governor
of this fellowship ; so help you God." [The same oath of allegiance was
required of each member of the Council.] (Young's Chronicles of First
Planters of the > Jolony of Massachusetts Bay, from 1623 to 1636, pp. 201, 202.)

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IIL

PART III.

EVASIONS AND DKNIALS OP THE ABOMTION OF EPISCOPAL, AND ESTABLISH-
MENT OK CONdltEGATIONAL WORSHIP AT MASSACHUSETTS BAY ; PHOOF8
OK THE FACTS, THAT THE COMPANY AND FiRST SETTLERS OF MASSA-
CHUSETTS HAY WERE PROFESSED EPISCOPALIANS WHEN THE LATTER
LEFT ENGLAND ; LETTERS OF THE LONDON COMPANY AGAINST THE
INNOVATIONS WHICH ABOLISHED THE EPISCOPAL, AND ESTABLISHED
CONGREGATIONAL WORSHIP BY THE "ADVENTURERS" AFTER CROSSING
THE ATLANTIC ; THIS THE FIRST SEED OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION,
AND OF CRUEL PERSECUTIONS.

When the Browns arrived in England as banished " criminals"
from the Plantation to which they had gone four months before
as members of the Council of Government, and with the highest
commendation of the London General Court itself, they naturally
made their complaints against the conduct of Endicot in super-
seding the Church of England by the estal)lishment of a new
confession of faith and a new form of worship. It is worthy of
remark, that in the Records of the Company the specific sub-
jects of complaint by the Browns are carefully kept out of
sight — only that a " dispute" or " diiference" had arisen between
them and " Governor Endicot ;" but what that diiference was is
nowhere mentioned in the Records of the Company. The
letters of Endicot and the Bi'owns were put into the hands of
Goffe, the Deputy Governor of the Company ; were never pub-
lished ; and they are said to have been " missing" unto this day.
Had the real cause and subject of difference been known in
England, and been duly represented to the Privy Council, the
Royal Charter would undoubtedly have been forthwith forfeited
and cancelled ; but the Puritan-party feeling of the Browns seems
to have been appealed to not to destroy the Company and their
enterprise ; that in. case of not prosecuting their complaints before
a legal tribunal, the matter would be referred to a jointly selected
Committee of the Council to arbitrate on the affair ; and that
in the meantime the conduct of Endicot in making Church
innovations (if he had made them) would be disclaimed by
the Company. To render the Browns powerless to sustain
their complaints, their letters were seized* and their statements
were denied.

* The Company's Records on the M'hole affair are as follows : —

CHAP. III.]

AND THKIU TTMKS.

Nevortlu'losH, tlu? rumours and reports from the n»'W Plantation
of Massaclmsotts produced a stronj^ impressit)ii in Enj^land, and
excited i^reat alarm amon;; the members and friends of the

"Si-pt. 19, 1629.

"At tliifl Court li'lt«'iH* wfiv n-iul from Mr. Endicot and otluTs of Now
Enf^liind. And whcifiiH ii diH'ertoice hatli lallt-n out Ix-twixt tlu' (lovemor
thfri' and Joljn and Saniiud Brown; it was aj^rfcd Ity tlii! Court tlmt, for
the (Utt'rinination of tlnwe diil'i'ronces, John and Sanuud Hrown nii|,'I»t
chooHo out any thrcu of tlic Company on thfir liclialf to hear tlie nuid dilfer-
ences, tho Company choosing,' as many."

From the Records of tlie Company, SeptemlxT 29, 1()29 :

"Tlie next tliinj^ tjiken into con si deration was tlie letters from John
and Samuel Brown to divers of their iirivate friends here in England,
wlu'ther tlie sjime should lie deliven-d or detained, and whether they
sliKuld lie opened and read, or not. And for that it Avas to he douhted
liy proliahle circumstances that tliey liad defamed the country of New
Eni,'laiid, and the Governor and Coveninient there, it was thoii<,dit fit
that some of tht; said letters should he opened and puhlidy read, which was
done acconlingly ; and tlie rest to remain in the Deputy's lioii.se (GoH'e's),
and the parties to whom they are directed to jiave n()ti(;e ; and Mr. Governor
and Mr. Deputy, Mr. Trea.surer, and Mr. Wriffht, or any two of them, are
entreated to he at the openin<{ and rea<lin<,' thereof, to the end that the
Company may have notic(! if aught he inserted prejudicial to t1 ir Govern-
ment or Plantifticm in New England. And it is also thought lii lliat none of
the letters from Mr. Samuel Brown shall he deliveivd, but to he kept for
use against him as occasion shall he offered." (Young's Chronicles, &c., pp. 91,
92.)

" Upon the desire of John and Samuel Brown it is thought fit that
they should have a copy of the accusation against them, to the end they may
he Ijetter prepared to make answer thereto."

Tiie accusation against the Browns seems to have heen simply for sedition
and seditions speeches — a charge brought by persecutors for religion against
the persecuted since the days of our Lord and his Apostles — a charge for
being the victims of which the Puritans in England had loudly complained
in the reigns of James and Charles.

There is but one other record of the Company on the aft'air of Endicot and
the Browns, but the suppression of their lettei-s shows clearly that the
publication of them wouhl have been damaging to the Company.

The intercepting and seizure of private letters, after the example of the
Company in seizing private letters of the Browns and punishing their
authors, was reduced to a system by the Government of Massachusetts Bay,
whose officers were commanded to inspect all letters sent by each vessel
leaving their port, and to seize all suspected letters, which were opened, and,

* Note by the compiler of the Records — " Those letters are unfortunately
missing."

THK I,()YALIH1>» OF AMKKK'A

[{•HAP. III.

(HAP.

I
I

Company, wlio a<lopto«l three methods of securing tliemselves
and their Charter, and of saving tlie Plantation from the conse
(juences of Endicot's alleged innovations and violent conduct.
Firstly — The Governor of the Company, Mr. Cradock, wrote to
Endicot, Higgirwon, and Skelton, professing doubts of the truth
of the charges made again.st them — disclaiming and warning tliem
against the niported innovations — thus protecting themselves in
case of charge horn all participation in or re.sponsibility for such
proceeding.'! Secondly — They positively denied the statements
of the Browns as to Endicot's alleged " innovations," and used
every means to depreciate the trustworthiness and character of
the Browns, notwithstanding their former commendation of
them and their acknowledged respectability. Thirdly — They
prepared and published documents declaring their adherence to
the Church of England, and the calumny of the charges and
rumours put forth against them as being disaffected to it.

1. Their Governor, Mr. Cradock, wrote to Endicot in the name
of the Company. This letter, dated October IG, 1629, is given

if found to conUiin any complaint or statement against the local authorities,
were retained and the autliorH arraigned and punished. Tlius the Government
and public in England were kept in perfect ignorance of what .was transpiring
at Massjiclmsetts Bay, except what the loatl Government chose to conimuni-
OAte ; and aggrieved persons in the Plantations were deprived of all means of
appealing to the higher tribunals in England, and were condemned and
punished for sedition in attempting to do so. This practice continued (as
will be shown hereafter) until the death of King Charles and the usurpation
of the regicides in England.

The following extract from the Company's Records seems to explain the
manner in which the further proceedings of the Browns was stayed. In
order to get some compensation for their losses, they seem to have agreed to
the stipulations of the Company. But previous to this meeting of the
Company, their Governor had written to Endicot, Higginson, and Skelton, in
letters dated Oct. 18, 1629. These letters will be found in a note on a
subsequent page. The extract from the Company's Records, dated Febriiary
10, 1630, is as follows :

" A writing of grievances of Samuel and John Brown was presented to
the Court, wherein they desire recompense for loss and damage sustained
by them in New England ; and which this Assembly taking into considera-
tion, do think fit upon their submitting to stand to the Company's ^noi order
for ending all differences between them (which they are to signify under their
hands). Mr. Wright and Mr. Eaton are to hear their complaint, and to set
down what they in their judgments shall think requisite to be allowed them
for their pretended damage sustained, and so to make a final end with them
accordingly." (Young's Chronicles, &c., p. 123.)

CHAP. III.]

AND TIIEIU TIMKS.

at length in a note.* It will Ix) ween by this k'ttrr how strongly
the Company condenined the innovations charged against
Endicot hy the Browns, and how imperatively they direct him
to correct them, while they profess to douht whether he could
have been a party to any such proceedings. In this letter is also

♦ Tlu' Company's letter to the Oovcnior, divtid October 16, 1629:—
"Sir, — We have written ut thin time to Mr. Skelton und Mr, Hi^ginson
tducliing the nuuours of Jolin ami Samnel Brown, spread hy them upon
tlit'ir arrival here, concerning Home unadviwd ami HcamlalouH speeches uttered
Ky them in their public sennons or jtrayers, so have we thought meet to
advertisi' you of what they have reported against you and tliem, concerning
some rash innovations (a) Iwgun and practised in the civil and ecclesiastical
^(overnment. We do well to consider that the Browns are likely to make
tlie worst of anything they have ol>sia'ved in New England, by reason of your
Mending thenj back, against their wills, for their offensive behainour, exjiressed
in a general letter from the Company theiv ; (/>) yet — for we likewise do consider
tliat you are in a government newly formed, and want that assistance which
the weight of sucii a business doth recjuire — we may have leave to think it is
^lossilile some indiyested cmmsels have too .'nuhhnly heen put in execution, ivhich
iiuiy have ill construction with the State here, and make us obnoxious to any
ndvtrsary. Let it therefore seem good unto you to be very sj)arin(j in intro-
dufinij any laws or commands which may render youmelf or us distasteful to the
State liere, to which we must and will have an obsequious eye. A nd as we make
it our care to have the Plantation so ordered as may he most to the honour of
Hod and of our gracious Sovereign, who hath bestowed many large ^mvileges and
royal favours upon this Company, so we desire that all such as shall by word w
iked do anything to detract from God's glory or his Majesty's honour, may be
ihdy corrected, for their amendment and the terror of others. And to that end,
if you know anything which hath Iwien spoken or done, either by tlie
iiiiuisterB (whom the Browns do seem tacitly to blame for some things
uttered in their sennons or prayers) or any others, we require you, if any
such there be, that you form due process against the offenders, and send il to
us liy the first, that we may, as our duty binds us, use means to ha\e tliem
duly punished.

" So not doubting but we have said enough, we shall repose ourselves upon
your wisdom, and do rest

" Your loving friends.
" To the Governor, Capt. Emlicot."

(f() These innovations, I suppose, had reference principally to the formation
"f the Church at Salem, the adoption of a confession of faith nn<l covenant by
the people, and their election and ordination of the ministers. Endicftt, we
know, sympathized fully with the Separatists of New Plymoutli. — Note by
the Editor of the Records.

(6) Tliis letter ha.s always been missing.

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

the most explicit testimony l»y the Company of the King's
kmihu'ss and generosity to them, as well as a statement of the
cle r im<lerstan(ling Vjetween the King and the Company as to
the intentions and spirit of the Royal Charter, and which the
Company in London expressed their determination to observe in
good faith — a good faith which was invariably and even
indidgently observed by both Charles the First and Second, but
which was as constantly violated by the Government of Massa-
chusetts Bay, as will appear hereafter from the transfer of the
Charter ihvre in 1030, to the cancelling of the Charter under
James the Secoml, in 1 (587. Endicot, confident in his ability to
prevent the transmission of any evidence to England that could
sustain the statements <)f the Browns, paid no heed to the
instructions of the Company, and persisted in his course of
Chiu'ch revolution and proscription.

The letter addressed to Higginson and Skelton was signed
lut only by the Governor, but by the chief members of the
Company, and among others by John Winthrop, who took the
Royal (.^barter to Massach^^setts Bay, and there, as Governor,
administered it by maintaining all that Endicot was alleged to
have done, continued to proscribe the worship of the Church of
England, allowed its memb(^rs no elective franchise as well as no
eligibility for office, and persecuted all who attempted to worship
in any other form than that of the Church of Endicot, Higgin-
son, and Skeltoi\ — a course in which he persevered until his
energies began to fail ; for Mr. Bancroft says: "The elder
Winthrop ha<l, 1 believe, relented before iiis death, and, it is
said, had become weary of banishing heretics ; the soul of the
younger Winthrop [who withdrew from the intolerance of the
Massachusetts Puritans, and was elected Governor of Connec-
ticut] was incapable of harbouring a thought of intolerant
cruelty ; but the rugged Dudley was not mellowed by old ag«."*

The letter addressed to Higginson and Skelton expressed u
hope that the report made in England as to their language and
proceedings were "but shadows," but at the same time apprised
them of their duty to vindicate their innocency or acknowledge
and reform their misdeeds, declaring the favour of the Govern-
ment to their Plantation, and their duty and determination not

* History of the United States, Vol. I., pp. 486, 487.

CHAP. Til.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

to abuse the confidence wliich the State liad reposed in them.
'Thi.s lettei' is given entire in a note.*

Nothing can be nu)re clear, from the letters addressed by the
Company lx)th to Endicot and the ministers Higginson and
Skelton, that renunciation of the worship of the Church of
England was at variance with the intentions and profession of
all parties in granting and receiving the Royal Charter, and
that the only defence set up in England of Endicot, Higginson,
and Skelton was a positive denial that tliey had done so.
Dudley himself, Deputy Governor, who went to Mas.sachusetts
Bay in the same fleet of eleven ships with (Joverno' Winthrop,
wrote to his patroness, the Countess of Lincoln, seveval months
after his arrival, and in his letter, dated March 12, 1630j
explicitly denies the existence of any such changes in their

* Till' Coinprtiiy'H letter to tin* Miiiifti-vs; —

"Reverend Friends,—
"ThiTc are lately ariivi-il luTe, ln-iiig Hi-nt IVdiu tlu- (Joveiuor, Mr. John
Kmliiot, as men of faction and evil-condiiioned, Jolm and Sanuiel Brown,
lieinj,' liivthren who .sinee their arrival have raiwil runioni's (as we hear) of
(livei-s scanilalonH an<l inteniju-rate speechen jiawned from one or l>oth of you
in yuur jjublic sermons and jtrayerw in New En^diU'd, as also of .«ome innova-
tions attempted Ity yon. We have reason to hope that their reports ai-e l)ut
slanders ; jjartly, for your goilly and (jniet conditions are well known to some
of us ; as also, for that these men, your accusers, seem to he embitteri'd
against Captain Endicot for injuries which they have ivceived from some of
you theiv. Yet, for that we all know that the best advised may ovei-shoot
themselves, we have thought good to inform you of what we hear, and if
ynii he innocent you may clear yourselves , or, if otherwise, you may he
intreated to look Iwck upon your mi>''i\ri. k,'e with repentance ; or at least to
notice that we utterly disallow any su^h passages, and must and will take
order for the redress theivof, as t-ha^ " oeconn; us. But hojiing, as we said, of
your unhlamableness herein, wc aesire only that this may testify to you and
others that we are tender of the least asiKTsion which, either directly or
oK..juely, may be cast upon the State here ; to whoni we owe so much diity,
and \rjii\ whom we have received so nuich favour in this Plantation where
yon reside. So with our love and due respect to your callings, we rest,
"Your loving friends,
"R. Saltonstall, "Tno. Adams,

"IsA Johnson, "Svm Whitcomhe,

" Matt. Cradock, Governor, " Wm. Vassai,,

"Tho8. Oorm, Deputy, " Wm. 1*ynchion,

"Geo. Harwood, Treamrer, "John Revell,

"John Winthrop, "Francis Webb.

" Loudon, 16th October, 1629."

THE LOYALfSTS OF AMERICA

[chap. II r.

worship as had been alleged ; that they had become "BrownLsts
[that is, Congregational ists] in religion," etc., and declaring all '
such allegations to be "false and scandalous reports;" appealing
to their friends in England to "not easily believe that we are
so soon turned from the profession we so long have made at
home in our native land;" declaring that he knew "no one
person who came over with us last year to be altered in judg-
ment or affection, either in ecclesiastical or civil respects, since
our coming here ; " acknowledging the obligations of himself
and friends to the King for the royal kindness to them, and
praying his friends in England to "give no credit to such
malicious aspersions, but be more ready to answer for us than
we hear they have been." Dudley's own words are given in
note.* The only escape from the admission of Dudley's state-
ments being utterly untrue is resort to a quibble which i-<
inconsistent with candour and honesty — namely, that th*-
Brownist or Congregational worship had been adopted l>y

* Extmct from Deimty Governor Diulk'y'.s letter to the Countess of
Lincoln, diited November 12th, 1631 :

"To incretise the heiip of our sorrows, we ivceived I'rom our friends in
England, and by the rejioils of tho-se who came hither in this ship [the
Gfutrles] to abide with us (v.lio were about twenty-six), that they who went
disco'; tentedly from us last year, out of their evil affections towards us, havi-
raised many false and scandalous reports against us, atiirming us to b'
Brownibts in religion, and ill affected to our State at home, and thatthes-'
vile reports have won credit with some who formerly wished us well. But
we do desire and cannot but hope that wise and impartial men will at length
c^)usider that such malcontents have ever pui-aued this manner of raeting
dill, to make others seem as foul as themselves, and that our godly frienrlt*.
to whom we have been known, will not easily believe that we an- so soon
turned from the professitju we so long have ma<le in our native country.
And for our further clearing, I truly atliiiu that I know no one person, who
came over with us last year, to be altereil in judgment and affection, either
in ecclesiastical and civil respects, since our coming hither. But we ilo con-
tinue to pray daily for our Sovereign Lord the King, the C^ueen, the Princi',
the Royal lilood, the Couucil and whole State, as duty binds us to do, ami
reason persuades us to believe. For how imgodly and unthankful shouM
we be if we should not do thus, who came hithi-r l)y viilue of his Majesty ■<
lettera patent and under his gracious protection ; under which sheltt-r v.-c
hoiK- to live sjifely, ami from wliose kingdom and subjects we now InU''
received and hereafter exi)ect rebel. Lei uur iVii iids therefore give no creibt
to such malicious aspersi(ms, but lie more rendy to answer for us than W'
hear they have been." (Young's Chronicle,-*, &c., ]ii». ;W1, :j;}2.)

CHAP. TIT.]

AND THEIK TIMES.

Endicot and his party bet'oro tlie arrival of Dudley; but the
scope and evident desij^n of his lettnr was to assure the
Countess of Lincoln and his friends in Kni.jland that no new
Church worship had been established at Massachu.setts Bay,
when the revei.o nnist have V)een known to Dudley, and when
he, in support of the new Brownist or Congregational worship,
became a tierce persecutor, even to old age, of all who would
not conform to it ; for, as Mr. Bancroft says, "the rugged soul of
Dudley was not mellowed by old age."

But while Dudley, in Ma-ssachusetts, was denying to his English
friends the existence of ecclesiastical changes there which all
history now declares to have taken place, the " Patriarch of
Dorchester," the father of the wliole enterprise — the Rev. John
White, a conformist clergyman of tlie Church of England, even
under Archbishop Laud — wrote and published a pamphlet called
The Planters' P'ea,"* in which he denied also that any ecclesi-
astical changes, as alleged, had taken place in the Massa,chusetts
Plantation, and denounces the authors of such allegations in no
iiieasiTYvd terms. This pamphlet contains a " Brief Relation of
tlie Occasion of the Planting of this Colony." After referring
to the third, or "great emigration '.nider Winthrop,"-f- the author
proceeds :

" This is an impartial though brief relation of the occasion of
planting the colony : the particulars whereof, if they could be
entertained, were clear enough to any indifferent judgment, that

* " ' The I'lantem Plea' was printed in Loudon in l(i3(), soon after tlie sailing
lit Winthrop's fleet [with Dndley], It has generally been ascrilied to the
Hev. John White, of Dorchester, England. ' The Planters' Plea' appears to
have been unknown to our hiatorians. Neither Mather, Prince, Hutchinson,
BftUiiMtt, nor Orahani make any allusion to it." (Young's Chronicles of the
First Planters of the Colony of Massjichusetts, from 1623 to 1636, pp. 15, 16,
in ii note.)

t The Jird emigration under the authority of the Massachusetts Company
Wiin that under " Master Endicot, who was sent over Governor, a.S8isted with
a low men, and aniving in safety there in September, 1628, and uniting his
own men with those who were formerly planted there into one body, they
iiiailc up in all not much abovo fifty or sixty persons."

The second emigration was under Higginson, who says : " We brought
with us about two hundred passengers and planters more," arriving in June,
1(129.

The thiiil, or " great emigration," was under Winthrop, arriving in May,

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

the suspicious and scandalous repoi-ts raised upon these gentle-
men and their friends (as if, under the colour of planting a colony,
they intended to raise a seminary of faction and separation), are
nothing than the fruits of jealousy of some distempered mind
or, which is worse, perhaps savour of a desperate malicious plot
of men ill affected to religion, endeavouring, by casting the
undertakers into the jealousy of the State, to shut them out of
those advantages which otherwise they might expect from the
countenance of authority. Such men would be entreated to
forbear that base and unchristian course of traducing persons
under these odious names of Separatists, and enemies of Church
and State, for fear lest their own tongues fall upon themselves
by the justice of His hand who will not fail to clear the inno-
cency of the just, and to cast back into the bosom of every
slanderer the filth that he rakes up to throw into other men's
faces. As for men of more indifferent and better minds, they
would be seriously advised to beware of entertaining or admitting,
much more countenancing and crediting, such uncharitable per-
sons as discover themselves by their carriage, and that in this
particular to be men ill affected towards the work itself, if not
to religion, at which it aims, and consequently unlikely to report
any truths of such r 'i undertake it."*

This language is very severe, not to say scurrilous ; but it is
the style of all Puritan Instorians and writers in regard to those
who complained of the Puritan Government of MassachuH«-tts.
Not even Messrs. Bancroft and Palfrey have thought it unworthy
of their eloquent pages. But imputation of motives and
character is not arifument, is most resorted to for want of ariju-
ment, much less is it a refutation of statements now imiversally
known to be true. The venerable author of this " Planters'
Plea" denied in indignant terms that Endicot and his friends
had become "Separatists" or "enemies of the ('hurch" (he had
doubtless been so assured) ; the very thing in which Endicot
gloried — setting up a "Separatist" worship, forbidding the worship
of "the Church," and banishing its members who resolve<l to
continue the use of its Prayer Book, in public or in private.

This, however, is not all. Not only did the Company, in tlx'h'
letters to Endicot, Higginson, and Skelton, disdain to forbid any-

* Yoxuig's Chn)nicles, &c., pp. 15, Ki.

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

.)•>

thing like abolisliing tlie Cluircli of Englantl and netting up a
new Churcli, and the use of hmgiiage ofFenHive to their Sovereign
and the Established (Church ; not only were there the most
positive denials on both sides of the Atlantic that anything of
the kiufl liad been done by Endicot ; but on the appointment of
Winthrop to supersede En<licot as Governor, and on his departure
with a fleet of eleven ships and three hundred " Adventurers"
and " Planters," as tliey were called, a formal and afl'ectionate
address to their " Fathers and Brethren of the Church of
England" was published by Winthrop from his ship ArahfHo.,
disclaiming any acts of some among them (evidently alluding to
what Endicot had been alleged to have done) hostile to the
Church of England, declaring their obligation and attachment
to it, their prayers for it, and entreating the prayers of its
members for the success of their undertaking. This address is
•yiid to have been written by the Rev. John Whi^e, the " Patri-
arch of Dorcl\ester," an<l prime mover of the whole Plantation
enterprise. It is an imputation upon the integrity of the author,
and upon all parties concerned in the address, and absurd in
itself, to suppose that the prayers of the (Jhurch in England
were .solicited with a view to the abolition of its worship in
Massachusetts, and the establishment there of a " Separatist"
Church. This addre.s.s — not to be found in any modern history
of the Massachusetts Puritans — speaks for itself, and is given
in a note as originally published.* It will be recollected that

* Tliis adtbesrt is called "Tin; humble Re(juenl of his Ma)t^ties h)yall suli-
ject**, tlie OoveriKmr and the Coiiipaiiy hite ^oiie tor New Entrhind : \>- tlie
lest of their Brethren in and of tlie Church of En<,daiid," and is h:^ follows :
" Rkverend Fathkrs and Brkthren, —

"The ^enerall rumor of thi» .sidemne enterprise, wherein oursflvef. »ill«
iitheii*, through the jn-ovidence of the Almightie, are engaged, as it ma\ -pare
us the hihour of imparting our occasion unto you, so it gives us thi- more
incouragement to strengthen ouwelves hy the procurement of the prayers and
lilcssings of the Lord's faithful senants : For which end wee are hoM t^' have
lecourse unto you, as those wiiom God hath placed nearest his thr^nt- of
mercy ; which, as it atfords you the more opportunitie, so it imposetli the
j^reater bond upon you to intercede for his people in all their straights. \V.-
licseedi you, therefore, hy the Tnercies of the Lord Jesus, to c<insi<ler us us
your Brethren, stixnding in very great need (»f your helpe, and earnestly
imploring it. And howsoever your <diaritie may have met with some occasion
of discouragement through the misreport of our intentions, or through the
ilisaffection or indiscretion of some of us, or rather amongst us, for wee are

THE r,OYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

Wintlirop and the other signers of this address had the Royal
Charter with them, and now coastituted the ' principals" of the

Hot of those that dreaiue of iHTfcctioii in thin worhl ; yet we dr are you
would lie |)lt'ased to take notice of tlie principalH aiid hody of (»ur Company,
as those who e.steeiiie it au honour to call the (Jhurcli of Enf,daiid, from
whence we rise, our (h-are Mother, and cannot part from our native countrie,
where she .specially resideth, without much sadness of lieart and many tetirs
in our eyes, ever acknowled},'ing that sudi hope and part as we have ol)taine(l
in the common wdvation, we have received it in her hosome, and suckt it
from her breasts : Wee leave it not, therefore, as loathing the milk wherewith
wee were nourished there ; but blessing God for the parentage and education,
as membeis of the s<»me body shall always rejoice in her good, and unfeign-
edly grieve for any soriow that shall ever betide her ; and, while we have
breath, sincerely desire and endeavour the continuance and abundance of her
welfare, with tht; enlargement of her bounds in the kingdome of Christ Jesus.

" Be pleased, therefore, Reverend Fathers and Brethren, to helpe forward
this worke now in hand ; which, if it jmisper, you shall be the more glorious ;
howsoever, your judgment is with the L<ird, and your reward with your Ood
It is an usuall and laudable exercise of your charity to recommend to the
prayers of your congregations tin- nece.Hsities and straights of your privat-
neighbours. Doe the like for a Cliunli .sjiringing out of your owne bowels.
Wee conceive much hope that this remembrance of us, if it be frequent and
fervent, will bee a most prosperous gale in our sailes, and provide such n
passjige and welcome for us from the God of the whole earth, as both we
which shall finde it, and yoursehes with tlie rest of our friends who .shall
heare of it, shall be much enlarged to biing in such daily returns of thanks-
gi\'ings, a.i the specialties of his Providence and Goodnes may justly challenge
at all our lunuls. You are not ignorant that the Spirit of God stirn-d up the
Apostle Paul to make continuall mention of the Church of Philippi (which
was a colonic of Rome) ; let the same Spirit, we beseech you, put you in mind,
that are the Lord's Remembrancers, to pmy for us nnt.hout ceasing (who are
a weake Colony from yourselve.-*), making continuall request for us to God in
all your prayers.

"What we entreat of yo\i, that are the ministers of God, that we crave at
the hands of ail the rest of our Brethren, that they would at no time forget
us in their j»rivate solicitations at the throne of grace.

"If any there be, who, through want of clear intelligence of our course,
or tendernesses of atfection towards us, cannot conceive so well of our way fts
we could desire, we would entieat such not to despi.se us, nor to desert us in
their jjrayers and alfections ; but to consi<ler rather that they are so much
the more bound to expresse the lH)wels of their compa.s8ion towards us ; remem-
bering alwaies that both Nature and Grace doth binde us to relieve and rescue,
with our utmost and speediest power, such as are deare unto us, when we
conceive them to be running uncomfortable hazards.

"What goodness you shall extend ti us, in this or any other Christian
kindnesse, wee, your Brethre'.i in Christ Jesus, shall labour to repay, in what

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

Company, whose authority in England now cea.sod, and was
henceforth to be exercised at Massachusetts Bay. They beg
that the " disaffection or indiscretion" of some of the Company
— evidently alluding to what Endicot wa.s reported to have done
— might not be imputed to "the principals and V)ody of the
Company." Their words are, addn'ssing their Fathers and
Brethren of the Church of England : " And howsoever your
charity may have met with some occasional discouragement
through the misreport of our intentions, or through the disaffec-
tion or indiscretion of some of us, or rather amongst us (for we
are not of those wh(i dream of perfection in this world) ; yet
we desire you would lo(jk at the pr'nwijKih (ind hofhj of our
Company, <(s thoHC who esteem it an honour to call the Church
(if En(jl(i/n(^, ii'lieitce nr fine, our dear Mother," dr.

It is passing strange that any man who respects himself could
say, in the face of these words and of the whole address, that
Mr. Winthrop and the " principals and body of the (Jompany"
(lid not profess to be members of the Church of England, and did
not assure their " Fathers and Brethren in England'" of their
intention to remain so, and impi(»ve the prayers of their Fathers
aiul Brethren for their success. No darker stigma couhl be
inflicted upon the character of Winthrop and his Company, than
tlie a.ssertion that at the very moment of making and publishing
tliese professi<ms in England they intended to extinguish their
"dear Mother" in Massachusetts, and banish every one from
their Plantation who should use her Prayer Book, ur worship as
the "dear Mother" worshipped. Yet such is the tlu.'ory, or
fallacy, of some Puritan writer.s.

iliuie wee are or slinll be nl>le to ju'itonuf ; jiVdiuiHiii^', so farrc as (Jml sliall
iii.ible us, to give him no rest on your belialt'es, wisliiuf,' our liemls and lieartu
■iii:iy III' as fountains oi" tears for your everlasting welfare, wlien win; shall l)e
in <mr poore cottjiges in the wilderness^, over-shadowed with the spirit ol
"application, through the manifold necessities and trihulations wliich may,
ii"t altogether une.xpectedly nor we liope unprofilahly, hefall us.
" And so commending you to the Gnioe of God in Clirist, we shall ever rest
" Your assured Friends and Brethren."
Sijj^ned hy John Wivthrop, Governor ;

Charles Fines, George Philips, Richard Saltonstal),
Isaac Johnson, Thomas Dudley, William Coddingtou,
&c., and was dated " From Yarmouth, aboard the Arn-
belk, April 7, 1630."

\f,

III

THK LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[CHAl*. lU.

It has also ln;un pretended that there wats no Cliurch of
England in Massachusetis, and therefore the planters were free
to set up what form of worship they pleased. It n»ay l»e asked
in reply, what makes a Church hut the presence of members of
it ? An early (/hristian writer says that " wherever there are
two or three believers there is a Church." But were not Endicot,
and Higf^iiLson, and Skelton as nuich members of the Cliurch of
England on their arrival at Massachusetts Bay as when they left
England i And were not the two latter as much clergymen (»f
the Church of England when they met Endicot at Naumkeag,
or Salem, as when they engaged with the Company in England
to go out as ministers to the new Plantation i Does cros.sing
the sea change or annihilate the churchmanship of the missi(jn-
ary, or the passenger, or the emigrant I There may not be a
place of worship, or a minister, but there are the members of the
Church. Is a missionary or agent of a Committee or Board of a
particular Church in London, no longer a member of that Church
when he reaches the foreign land to which he is sent because he
finds no Church worship there, nmch less if he finds members of
his own Church already there ? Yet such are the pretences on
which some Puritan writers, and even historians, attempt to
justify the conduct of Endicot, Higginson, and Skelton ! But, be
it remembered, I make no objection to their renouncing their
Church, and establishing for themselves and those who chose to
follow them, a new Church confession and worship. The points
of discussion are : 1. Was it honest for them to do so without
consulting those who employed and .settled them there, and prc>-
vided for their i-eligious instruction by clergymen of the Church
of England ^ 2. Was it right or lawful, and was it not contrary
to the laws of England, for them to abolish tlie worship of the
Church of Enijland and bani.sh its members from the Plantation,
as settlers, for continuing to worship according to the Church of
England ? 3. And can they be justified for denying to their
friends in England, and their friends denying to the public and
to the King, on their behalf and on their authority, what they
had done, and what all the world now knows they had done, at
Massachusetts Bay ? 4. And finally, was it not a breach of
faith to their Sovereign, from whom they ha<l received their
Charter, and, as they themselves acknowledged, most kind treat-
ment, to connnence their settlement by abolishing the esta>>li.shetl

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

religion which hotli the King and tliey profasHtMl wlicn tho
Charter was granted, and wlien tht.'y left England, and banish
from tho territory wliich tht; King had granted theui all settlers
who would not renounce tlu^ form of worship established in
England from the Refornmtion, and adopt a new form of worship,
which was not then lawful in England ?

The foregoing pages bear witness that I have not taken a
sentence from any writer adverse to the Puritans. 1 have
adhered to their own statements in their own words, and as
printed in their Records. Their eloquent apologist and defender,
Mr. Bancroft, says : " The Charter confers on the colonists the
rights of English subjects ; it does not confer on them new and
greater rights. On the contrary, they are strictly forbidden to
make laws or ordinances repugnant to the laws or statutes of
the realm of England. The express concession of power to
administer the oath of supremacy demonstrates that universal
toleration was not designed ; an<l the freemen of the ( V:>rporation,
it shouM be remembered, were not at that time Separatist.".
Even Higginson, an<l Hooker, and C'otton were still ministers of
the Church of England."*

From this accumulation of evidence — which might be greatly
increased — I think it is as clear as day that the abolition of the
worship of the Church of England, and the estaV)lishment of a
new form of worship, and a new confession of faith, and a new
ordination to the ministry at Massachusetts Bay in 1G29, was a
violation of the (Jharter, an instilt to the King, and a V>reach of
faith with him, notwithstanding his acknowledged kindness to

* History of the Uiiite<l Stiites, Vol. I., ]>. 273.

In il iioti', Mr. Biincrot't huvh : — " The Editor of Winthrop diil lue tin-
kindni'Hs to reail to inv nnpiihlinlu'd letters which are in hirt poMHeHsion, and
which prove (hit tlw, Puritans i)i Englntul were amazed us v:dl as alarmed at the
hnUlness nf their brethren in Massarhusntts." (Ih.)

Why have these hitters remained unpuldished, when every line from any
opposed to Endicot and liis party, however private and confidential, has heen
puhlished to the world i The very fact that all the letters of Endicot and the
Browns, and of the Puritans who wrote on the suhject, accordinj^ to Mr.
Bancroft, have been snjipressed, affords very strong ground to believe that the
Massachusetts Puritans violated the acknowledged objects of the Charter and
the terms of their settlement, and committed the first breach of faitli to their
Sovereign, ami inculcated that spirit and commenced that series of acts which
resulted in the dismemberment of the British Empire in America.

THE LOYALISTS OF AMKHICA

[chap. in.

thorn, and a renunciation of all the professions which were made
by the Company in Enj^land.

This was the first seed sown, which germinated for one hundred
and thirty years, and then ripene<l in the Am(!rican Revolution ;
it was the opening wedge which shivered the traasatlantic
branches from the parent .stock. It was the con.sciousne.ss (jf
having abused the Royal confidence and broken faith with their
Sovereign, of liaving acted contrary to the laws and statutes of
England, that led the Government of Massachusetts Bay to
resist and evade all iniiuiries into their proceedings — to prevent
all evidence from Vieing transmitted to England as to their pro-
ceedings, and to punish as criminals all who should appeal to
England against any of their proceedings — to claim, in short,
independence and immunity from all responsibility to the Crown
for anything that they did or might do. Had Endicot and his
party not done what they knew to be contrary to the loyal
Charter and the laws of England, they would have courted
inquiry, that the light of their fair and loyal acts might be
manifest to all England, in refutation of all .statements made
against them. Had the Browns and their Church friends been
permitted to worship after the manner of their fathers and of
their childhood, while Endicot and his converts elected to worship
in a new manner, there would have been no cause of collision,
and no .spirit of distrust and hostility between the Massachusetts
settlement and the King, any more than there was between
either Charles the First or Second, and the settlements and
separate Governments of Plymouth, Rhode Island, or Connecticut.
But Endicot, in the spirit of tyranny and intolerance, would
allow no liberty of worship not of his own establishment ; and
to maintain which in the spirit of proscription and persecution,
cau.sed all the disputes with the parent Government and all the
persecutions and bloodshed on account of religion in Massachu-
setts which its Government inflicted in subsequent years, in
contradistinction to the Governments of Plymouth, Rhode Islanil,
Connecticut, and even Maryland.*

* The Geneml Assembly of the Province of Murylaud passeil an Act in
1649 containing the following provision :

" No person whatsoever, in this province, professing to believe in Jesun
Christ, shall from henceforth l)e anywise troubled or molested for liis or her

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIK TIMES.

(il

PAllT IV.

t'ONTEHT HETWKKN KIN(» CHARI.EH ANU THE MAHHACHt'HETTH UAY rUUITAVH,
DUHINd TEN VEAIIH, K1U)M 1()3(> TO 1640 ; rUOKE881()N8 OK THE I'CRITAKB
ON I.EAVINO ENGLAND; THEIR CONDl't'T ON ARRIVING AT MAHHACHUHETT8
BAY ; Hl'I'I'REHSION OK PURITAN CORREHI'ONDENCE ; tOMI'LAINTH TO
ENGLAND Of THEIR CHURCH REVOLUTION AM) INTOLERANCE ; MEMUERH
OF THE NEW CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHE8 ALONE ELKCTOR8 AND ELIGIDLE
TO OFFICE ; FIVE-8IXTH8 OF THE POPULATION DI8FRANCHI8ED ; COM-
PLAINTS OF THE DISFRANCHISED AND PROHCRIUED TO ENGLAND ; SUP-
PRESSION OF CORRESPONDENCE AND THE DENIAL OF FACTS, AND THE
PROFESSIONS OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MASSACHUSETTS PERSE-
CUTORS OF EPISCOPALIANS OUTAIN A FAVOURABLE DECISION OF THE KINO
AND PRIVY COUNCIL, AND THEY ARE ENCOURAGED IN THEIR SETTLEMENT
AND TRADE ; TRANSFER OF THE CHARTER, PLAIN VIOLATIONS OF IT ;
RUMOURS OF THE APPOINTMENT OF A GOVERNOR-GENERAL, AND APPOINT-
MENT OF A ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY AND REGULATION ; PREPARA-
TION TO RESIST THE APPOINTMENT AT MASSACHUSETTS UAY ; ROYAL AND
COLONIAL RESTRICTIONS ON EMIGRATION ; IT CEASES ; COLONIAL PRO-
PERTY AND TRADE DEPRESSED ; REVIEW OP THE TREATMENT OF
MASSACHUSETTS UAY COLONY UY KING CHARLES THE FIRST, AND THEIR
PROFESSIONS AND TREATMENT IN RETURN ; THE REAL AUTHORS AND
PROMOTERS OF RELIGIOUS TOLERATION AND LIBERTY IN ENGLAND.

It is well known that the Puritans in England objected to the
ceremonies enforced by Laud, as " corrupt and superstitious,"
and many ministers were ejected from their benefices for non-
conformity to them ; but none of the nonconformists who
refused compliance with such " corrupt and superstitiou,s"
ceremonies ever profess<id that the polity and worship of tlie
Church was " corrupt and superstitious," and should therefore
he renounced, much less abolished, as did Endicot and his party
at Massachusetts Bay, and that twenty years before the death
of Charles the First and the usurpation of Cromwell.*

religion, (tr in the free exercise thereof, or any way conipelled to the belief or
exercise of any other religion igainat his or her consent."

Mr. Bancroft says : " Christianity was nuule the law of the land [in Marj'-
lanil],aiul no preference was given to any sect, and equality in religious
rights, no less than civil freedom, was assured.

* It appears that the cause of dissatisfaction among the Puritan clergy of
llie Church, ami of the emigmtion of many of them and of their lay friends
to New f)ngland, was not the Prayer Book worship of the Church (abolished
liy Endicot at Massachusetts Bay), but the enforced reading of the Book of
Sports, in connection with " the rigomus proceedings to enforce ceremonies ;"

^'^

%..

^%.

' ','2. /^^ W^^

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

I.I

«F IIIIM

2.2

1.8

1.25

U 1.6

.< 6"

►

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WIf I «TER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

CHAP.

It might be confidently expected that Mr. Winthrop, after an
address of lojalty and affection to his " Fathers and Brethren of
the Church of England," from the very ship on which he left his
native land, would, on his arrival at Massachusetts Bay and
assuming its government, have rectified the wrongs of Endicot
and his party, and have secured at least freedom of worship to
the children of his " dear Mother." But he seems to have done
nothing of the kind ; he seems to have fallen in with the very
proceedings of Endicot which had been disclaimed by him in his
address to his " Fathers and Brethren of the Church of England,"
on embarking at Yarmouth for his new government. American
historians are entirely silent on the subject. It is very clear
that Mr. Winthrop had correspondence with his English friends
on these matters, as intimated by Mr. Bancroft in words quoted
on page 50. If this suppressed correspondence were published, it
would doubtless show how it was that Mr. Winthrop, like
Endicot, and to the astonishment of his Puritan friends in
England, changed from and suppressed the worship of his " dear
Mother" Church, on changing from one side of the Atlantic to
the other. Mr. Hvitchinson, referring to the address of Governor
Winthrop to his " Fathers and Brethren of the Church of
England," to remove suspicions and misconstructions, says:
" This paper has occasioned a dispute, whether the first settlers
in Massachusetts were of the Church of England or not. How-
ever problematical it may be what they were while they remained
in England, they left no room to doubt after they arrived in
America."*

for Rushworth, Vol. II., Second Part, page 460, Anno 1636, quoted by the
American antiquarian, Hazard, Vol. I., p. 440, states as follows :

" The severe censures in the Star Chamber, and the greatness of the fines
and the rigorous proceedings to impose ceremonies, the suspending and
silencing of multitudes of ministers, for not reading in the Church the Book
of Sports to be exercised on the Lord's Day, caused many of the nation, both
ministers and others, to sell their estates, and set sail for New England (a
late Plantation in America), where they held a Plantation by patent from the
Crown."

* History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, Vol I., pp. 19, 20. It
appears, however, that within a month after Mr. Winthrop's arrival at
Massachusetts Bay, both he and the Deputy-Govemoi Dudley joined the
new Endicot and Higginson Church ; for Mr. Holmes in his Annals says :
" A fleet of 14 sail, with men, women and children, and provisions, having
been prepared early in the year to make a firm plantation in New England,

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

But though the Editor of Winthrop has suppressed the letters
which would explain how Mr. Winthrop changed from Episco-
palianism to Congregationalism on his assuming the govern-
ment of Massachusetts Bay, we are at no loss to know the
character of his proceedings, since, in less than a year after his
arrival there, the worship of his "dear Mother" Church not only
continued to be suppressed, but its members were deprived of
the privilege of even becoming "freemen" or electors in the
new "Commonwealth," as it forthwith begun to call itself, and
the privileges of citizenship were restricted to members of the
new established Congregational Churches ; for on May 18th,
1631, the newly organized Legislature, or "General Court," as it
was called, enacted that, "To the end the body of the commons
may be preserved of honest and good men, it was ordered and
agreed that for time to come, no man shall be admitted to the
freedom of this body politic but such as are members of some
of the churches within the limits of the same."

Mr. Bancroft, after quoting this extraordinary and unprece-
dented enactment, remarks — " The principle of universal suf-
frage was the usage of Virginia ; Massachusetts, resting for its
defence on its unity and its enthusiasm, gave all power to the
select band of religious votaries, into which the avenues could
he opened only by the elders [ministers]. The elective franchise
was thus confined to a small proportion of the whole population,
and the Government rested on an essentially aristocratic founda-
tion. But it was not an aristocracy of wealth ; the polity was
a sort of theocracy ; the servant of the bondman, if he were a
member of the Church, might be a freeman of the Company." —
"It was the reign of the Church; it was a commonwealth of
the chosen people in covenant with God."*

\2 of the ships arrived early in July [1630] at Charlestown. In tliia fleet
tame Governor Winthrop, Deputy Governor Dudley, and several other
gentlemen of wealth and (quality. In this fleet came about 840 passengers."
" On the 30th of July, a day of solemn prayer and fasting was kept at Charles-
town ; when Governor Winthrop, Deputy Governor Dudley, and Mr. Wilson
first entered into Church covenant ; and now was laid the foundation of the
Church of Charlestown, and the first Church in Boston. (Vol. I., pp. 202, 203.)

* History of the United States, Vol. I., pp. 390, 391.

Referring to this order, May 18, 1631 — not a year after Mr. Winthrop's
arrival — Mr. Hutchinson says: "None may now be a freeman of that
Company unless he be a Church member among them. None have voice in

\'>

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. hi.

It thus appears that the new Congregationalists of Massacliu-
setts were far behind the old Episcopalians of Virginia in the
first principle of civil liberty ; for while among the latter the
Episcopal Church alone was the recognized Church, the elective
franchise was not restricted to the members of that Church, but
was universal; while in the new Government of Massachusetts,
among the new Puritan Congregationalists, none but a Congrega-
tional Church member could be a citizen elector, and none
could be a Church member without the consent and recommenda-
tion of the minister ; and thus the Commonwealth of Massachu-
setts Bay, at the very beginning, became, in the words of Mr,
Bancroft, "the reign of the Church" — not indeed of the Church
of England, but of the new Congregational Church established
by joining of hands and covenant around the well-pump of
Naumkeag — then christened Salem.

The New England historians assure us that on the settlement
of the Puritans at Massachusetts Bay, the connection between
Church and State ceased. It is true that the connection of the
Church of England with the State ceased there ; it is true that
there was not, in the English sense of the phrase, connection
between the Church and State there ; for there was no State
but the Church; the "Commonwealth " was not the government
of free citizens by universal suffrage, or even of property
citizens, but was "the reign of the Church," the members of
which, according to Mr. Bancroft himself, constituted but "a
small proportion of the whole population " — this great majority
(soon five-sixths) of the population being mere helots, bound to
do the work and pay the taxes imposed upon them by the
"reigning Church," but denied all eligibility to any office in the
"Commonwealth," or even the elective franchise of a citizen ! It
was indeed such a "connection between Church and State " as
had never existed, and has never existed to this day, in any

the election of Governor, or Deputy, or assistants — none are to be magistrates,
officers, or jurymen, grand or petit, but freemen. The ministers give their
Totee in all the elections of magistrates. Now the most of the persons at
New England are not admitted to their Church, and therefore are not free-
men ; and when they come to be tried there, be it for life or limb, name or
estate, or whatsoever, they must be tried and judged too by those of thy
Church, who are, in a sort, their adversaries. How equal that hath been or
may be, some by experience do and others m_ay judge." — In a note, quoted
from the lawyer Lichford, Vol. I., p. 26.

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

Protestant country. "The reign of the Church " — the .small
minority over the great majority of the "Commonwealth ;" and
this system of " the reign of the Church " over the State — of the
government of a Church minority of one-sixth over a whole
population of five-sixths — continued for sixty years (as will
liereafter appear), until suppressed by a second Koyal Charter,
which placed all citizens upon equal footing before the law, and
in respect to the elective franchise. Though the Congregational
Puritans of Massachusetts Bay may have been the fathers of
American independence of England, they were far from being
the fathers or even precursors of American liberty. They
neither understood nor practised the first principles of civil and
religious liberty, or even the rights of British subjects as then
understood and practised in England itself.

It is admitted on all sides, that, according to the express
words of the Royal Charter, the planter emigrants of Massachu-
setts Bay should enjoy all "the privileges of British subjects,"
and that no law or resolution should be enacted there "contrary
to the laws and statutes of England." Was it not, therefore,
perfectly natural that members of the Church of England emi-
j^rating to Massachusetts Bay, and wishing to continue and
worship as such after their arrival there, should complain to
their Sovereign in Council, the supreme authority of the State,
that, on their arrival in Massachusetts, the}' found themselves
deprived of the privilege of worshipping as they had worshipped
in England, and found themselves subject to banishment the
moment they thus worshipped ? And furthermore, when, unless
they actually joined one of the new Congregational Churches,
first established at Massachusetts Bay, August 6th, 1629, five
months after granting the Royal Charter (March 4th, 1620), they
could enjoy none of the rights of British subjects, they must
have been more or less than men had they not complained, and
loudly complained, to the highest authority that could redress
their grievances, of their disappointments, and wrongs as British
subjects emigrating to Massachusetts. And could the King in
(vouncil refuse to listen to such complaints, and authorize inquiry
into their truth or falsehood, without violating rights which,
even at that period of despotic government, were regarded as
sacred to even the humblest British subject ? And the leading
complainants w^ere men of the mo.st respectable position in
5

I .

li :

i :l

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[c;HAP. III.

England, and who had investments in New England — not only
the Messrs. Brown, but Capt. John Mason and Sir Ferdinand
Gorges, who complained tha^ the Massachusetts Company had
encroached upon the territory held by them under Royal
Charter — territory which afterwards constituted portions of New
Hampshire and Maine. Were the King and Privy Council to be
precluded from inquiring into such complaints ? Yet New
England historians assail the complainants for stating their
grievances, and the King and Council for listening to them even
so far as to order an inquiry into them. The petitioners are
held up as slanderers and enemies, and the King and Council
represented as acting tyrannically and as infringing the rights
of the Massachusetts Puritans, and seeking the destruction of
their liberties and enterprise even by inquiring into complaints
made. The actual proceedings of the King in Council prove
the injustice and falsity of such insinuations and statements.

The pretence set up in Massachusetts was that the authority
of the Local Government was sujpreme; that to appeal from it to
the King himself was sedition and treason ;* and the defence
set up in England was that the allegations were untrue, and
that the Massachusetts Corporation was acting loyally according
to the provisions of the Charter and for the interests of the
King. The account of these proceedings before the King's
Privy Council is given in a note from Mr. Palfrey himself.^

to til
plainf
must
long,

* Examples of sucli pretensions and imputations will be given in future
pages.

t The malcontents had actually prevailed to liave their complaints enter-
tained by the Privy Council. "Among many ti-uths misrepeated," writes
Winthrop, "accusing us to intend rebellion, to have cast off our allegiance,
and to be wholly separate from the Church and laws of England, that our
ministers and people did continually rail against the State, Churcli, and
Bishops there, etc." Saltonstall, Humphrey, Cradock (RatclifPs master)
appeared before the Committee of the Council in the Company's behalf, and
had the address or good fortune to vindicate their clients, so that on the termina-
tion of the affair, tlie King said "lie would luive them severely punished who
did abuse his Governor and Plantation ;" and from members of the Council it
was learned, says Winthrop, "that his Majesty did not intend to impose the
ceremonies of the Church of England upon us, for that it was considered that
it was freedom from such things that made the people come over to ««; and it
loas credibly informed to the Council that this counti-y would be beneficial to
England for masts, cordage, etc., if the Sound [the passage to the Baltic]

CHAP. III.]

AND THKIR TIMES.

In regard to these proceedings, the reader's attention is directed
to the following facts: 1. The principal charges of the com-
plainants were denied — resting to be proved by parties that
must be called from that place [Massachusetts], which required
long, expensive time, "and were in due time further to be
inquired into ;" and the Massachusetts Corporation took effectual
precaution against any documentary evidence being brought
thence, or "parties" to come, unless at the expense of their
all, even should the complainants be able and willing to
incur the expense of bringing them to England. The Privy
Council therefore deferred further inquiry into these matters,
and in the meantime gave the accused the benefit of the doubt
and postponement. 2. The nominal Governor of the Company
in England, Mr. Cradock, Sir R. Saltonstall, &c., "appeared
before the Committee of Council on the Company's behalf, and
had the address or good fortune to vindicate their clients," &c.
This they did so effectually as to prejudice the King and Council
against the complainants, and excite their sympathies in favour
of the Company, the King saying " he would have them severely
punished who did abuse his Governor and Plantations." But the
question arises. And by what sort of " address or good fortune"
were Messrs. Cradock and Company able to vindicate their clients

should he debarred" " The reason for dismissing the complaint was uUeged
in the Order adopted by Council to that effect : ^Most of the tk 'ngs informed being
denied, and resting to be proved by parties that must be called from that place,
which required a long expense of time, and at the present their Lordships
finding that the adventurers were upon the despatch of men, victuals, and
merchandise for that place, all which woukl be at a stand if the adventurers
sliould have discouragement, or take suspicion that the State there had no
good opinion of that Plantation, — their Lordships not laying the fault, or
fancies (if any be,) of some particular men upon the general government, or
principal adventurers, which in due time is further to be inquired into, have
thought fit in the meantime to declare that the appearances were so fair, and
the hopes so great, that the country would prove both beneficial to this country arul
to the particular adventurers, as that tlie adventurers had cau^e to go on cheer-
fally loith their undertakings, and rest assured, if things were carried as was
pretended when tlie patents were granted, and accordingly as by the patents
is appointed, his Majesty would not only maintain the liberties and privileges
lieretofore granted, but supply anything further that might tend to the good
government of the place, and prosperity and comfort of his people there." —
Palfrey's History of New England, VoL L, Chap, ix, pp. 364, 365.

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

CHAP.

" to the King's satisfaction and their complete triunipli ?" Must
it not have been by denying the charges which all the world now
knows to have been true ? Must it not have been by appealing
to the address of Mr. Winthrop and Company to their " Fathers
and Brethren of the Church of England," declaring their
undying attachment to their " dear Mother ?" and also by
appealing to the letter of Deputy Governor Dudley to the

Countess of Lincoln, declaring in 1G30 that no such Church
innovations as had been alleged had taken place at Massachu-
setts Bay ? Must it not have been by their assuring the King's
Council that the worship of the Church of England had not been
abolished in Massachusetts, much less had any one been banished
th(mce for continuing to worship according to the Prayer Book
of that Church ? Must it not have been by their declaring that
they were faithfully and loyally carrying out the intentions
and provisions of the Charter, according to the statutes and laws
of England ? 3. Let it be further observed that the King,
according to the statements of the very party who was imposing
upon his confidence in their sincerity, that throughout this pro-
ceeding he evinced the same good- will to the Massachusetts Bay
colony that he had done from the granting of the Charter, and
which they had repeatedly acknowledged in their commimica-
tions with each other, as (juoted above. Yet the Puritan historians
ascribe to Charles jealous hostility to their colony from the com-
mencement, and on that ground endeavour to justify the deceptive
conduct of the Company, both in England and at Massachusetts
Bay. Had Charles or his advisers cherished any hostile feelings
against the Company, there was now a good opportunity of
showing it. Had he been disposed to act the despot towards
them, he might at once, on a less plausible pretext than that
now afforded him, have cancelled his Charter and taken the
affairs of the colony into his own hands.

It is a singular concurrence of circumstances, and on which I
leave the reader to make his own comments, that while the
representatives of the Company were avowing to the King the
good faith in which their clients were carrying out his Majesty's
royal intentions in granting the Charter, they at that very time
were not allowing a single Planter to worship as the King
worshipped, and not one who desired so to worship to enjoy the
privilege of a British subject, either to vote or even to remain

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

of
rds
liat
Ihc

Ihe

in the colony. As Mr. Bancroft says in tlu* American, Imt not
in the English edition of his History, men " were hanishetl
l)ccause they were C^hnrchmen. Thus was Episcopacy first pro-
fessed in Massachusetts, and thus was it exiled. The l»lessini>s
of the promised land were to be kept for Piu'itan dissenters."

But while the King and Privy Council were showering kind-
ness and offers of further help, if needed, to advance the Planta-
tion, believing their statements " that things were carried there
as was pretended when the patents were granted," complaints
cotild not fail to reach England of the persecution of mend)ers
of the Church of England, and of the disfranchisement of all
Planters who would not join the Congregational Church, in spite
of the efforts of the dominant party in Massachusetts to intercept
and stifle them ; and it at length came to the knowledge of the
King and Privy Council that the Charter itself had been, as it
was expressed; " surreptitiously" carried from England to Massa-
chusetts, new councillors appointed, and the whole government
set up at Massachusetts Bay instead of being administered in
England, as had been intended when the Charter was granted.
This had been kept a profound secret for nearly four years ; but
now came to light in 1G34.

It has been contended that this transfer of the Charter was
lawful, and was done in accordance with the legal opinion of an
able lawyer, Mr. John White, one of the party to the transfer.
I enter not into the legal question ; the more important question
is, Was it honourable ? Was it loyal ? Was it according to the
intention of the King in granting it ? Was there any precedent,
and has there ever been one to this day, for such a proceeding ?
And when they conceived the idea of transferring the manage-
ment of the Company from London to Massachusetts, and Mr.
Winthrop and his friends refused to emigrate except on the
condition of such transfer of the Charter, did not fairness and
duty dictate application to the King, who granted the Charter,
for permission to transfer it as the best means of promoting the
original objects of it ? And is there not reason to believe that
their application would have been successful, from the kind
conduct of the King and Privy Council towards them, as stated
above by themselves, when complaints were made against them ?
Was their proceeding straightforward ? Was not the secrecy of
it suspicious, and calculated to excite suspicion, when, after more

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

'imSMEL' t'll

than three years of secrecy, the act became known to the King
and Privy Council ?*

* Till! Congiegationftl Society of Boston has jiuhliHlietl, in 187G, (i new book
ill justiticution of the " liunialinient of Roger Williani.s from tlie MasHudm-
scttH Plantation," l)y tliu Rev. Dr. Henry M. Dexter, of I'xiston. It ia ii Look
of intense bitternesa againat Roger Williams, and indeed everything English ;
hut his account of the origin and ohjecta of the MaasachiiHetta Charter suggests,
atrongerthan language can express, the pre8iim2)ti(Huunl lawlessness of Endicot's
proceedings in establishing a new Church and abolishing an old (me ; and Dr.
De.\ter's account of the removal of the Charter, and its secrecy, is e([ually
.suggeative. It is as follows :

" Let me here repeat and emphasize that it may be remembered by and
l)y that this ' Dorchester Company,' originally founded on the transfer of a
pi.rtion of the patent of Gorges, and afterwards enlarged and re-authorized
by the Charter of Charles the First, as the ' Governor and Company of Massa-
chusetts Bay,' was in its beginning, and in point of fact, neither more nor less
than a private corjioration chartered by the Government for purposes of
fishing, real estate improvement, and general commerce, ibr which it was to
pay the Crown a fifth part of all precious metals which it might unearth. It
was then more than this only in the same sense as the egg, new-laid, ia the
full-grown fowl, or the acorn the oak. It was not yet a State. It was not,
even in the beginning, in the ordinary sense, a colony. It was a plantation
with a strong religious idea behind it, on its way to be a colony and a state.
In the oriijinal intent, the Governor and General Court, and therefore tlie
Government, ivere to he ami abide in Enujland. When, in 1628, Endicot and
his little party had been sent over to Salem, his authority was expressly
declared to be * in subordination to the Company here ' [that is, in London].
And it was only when Cradock [the first Governor of the Company] found
that so many practical difficulties threatened all proceedings upon that basis,
as to make it unlikely that Winthrop, and Saltonstall, and Johnson, and
Dudley, and other men whose co-operation was greatly to be desired, would
not consent to become partners in the enterprise unless a radical change were
made in that respect, that he proposed and the Company consented, * for the
advancement of the Plantation, the inducing and encouraging persons of
worth and quality to transplant themselves and families thither, and for other
weighty reasons therein contained, to transfer the government of the Planta-
tion to those that shall inhabit there,' &c. It was even a grave question of
law whether, under the terms of the Charter, this transfer were possible."
* * " They took the responsibility — so quietly, however, that the Home
Government seem to have remained in ignorance of the fact for more than
four years thereafter." (pp. 12, 13.)

In a note Dr. Dexter says : " I might illustrate by the Hudson Bay
Company, which e:dsted into our time with' its original Charter — strongly
resembling that of the Massachusetts Company — and which has always been
rather a corporation for trade charterers in England than a colony of England
on American soil." (76., p. 12.)

Th
them
l>y th
Mr. C

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES,

The complainants against the Company in 1032, wlio found
themselves so completely overmatched before the Privy Council
])y the denials, professions, and written statements produced l»y
Mr. Cradock, Sir R. Saltonstall, and others, couM not hut feel
exasperated when they knew that their complaints were well-
founded ; and they doubtless determined to vindicate the truth
and justice of them at the first opportunity. That opportunity
was not long delayed. The discovery that the Charter and
government of the Company had been secretly transferred from
London to Massachusetts Bay excited suspicion and curiosity ;
rumors and complaints of the proscriptions and injustice of the
Colonial Government began to be whispered on all sides ; appeal
was again made to the King in Council ; and the further inquiry
indicated in the proceedings of the Privy Council two years
before, was decided upon ; a Royal Commission was appointed
to inquire into these and all other complaints from the colonies,
and redress the wrongs if found to exist ; the appointment of a
Governor-General over all the New England colonies, to see
justice done to all parties, was contemplated.

The complainants against the conduct of the government of
Endicot and Winthrop are represented by their historians as a
few individuals of malicious feelings and more than doubtful
character ; but human nature at Massachusetts Bay must have
been different from itself in all civilized countries, could it
have been contented or silent when the rights of citizenship
were denied, as Mr. Bancroft him.self says, to " by far the larger
proportion of the whole population," and confined to the
members of a particular denomination, when the only form of
worship then legalized in England was proscribed, and its
members banished from the land claimed as the exclusive
possession of Puritan dissenters. The most inquisitorial and
vigilant efforts of the Local Government to suppress the trans-
mission of information to England, and punish complainants.

It is evident from the Charter that the original design of it was to constitute
a corporation in England like that of the East India and other great Com-
panies, with powers to settle plantations within the limits of the territory,
under such forms of government and magistracy as should be fit and necessary.
The first step in sending out Mr. Endicot, and appointing him a Council, and
giving him commission, instructions, etc., was agreeable to this constitution of
the Charter. (Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 12, 13.)

1 1 I

TlIK LOYALISTS OF AMKIUCA

[i'UW. ML

couM not prevent the >^riovancos of tho proscriltorl ami oppivssod
beinir wafted to luiifland, and c(>timiandin<' attention, and
especially in connection with the .startliiij,' fact now first dis-
covered, that the Roval Charter had ])een roinoved from
England, and a government nnder its autliority set up at
Massachusetts Bay.

Mr. Bancroft ascrihes the complaints on these snhjeots as
originating in " revenge," and calls them " th(! clamotu's of tho
nmlignant," and as amounting to nothing but " marriages
celebrated by civil magistrates," and " tluj system of Colonial
Church discipline" confined, as hehiniself says elsewhere, " the
elective franchise to a small proportion of the whole popula-
tion," and "established the reign of tin; [(Congregational] Church."
Mr. Bancroft proceeds: "But the greater apprehensions were
raised l)y a recpiisition that the Letters Patent of tho Company
should be produced in England — a requisition to which tho
emigrants returned no reply."

" Still more menacing," says Mr. Bancroft, " was the appoint-
ment of an arbitrary Special Connnission [April 10, 1G34] for all
the colonies.*

"The news of this Commission soon reached Boston [Sept. 10,
1G.S4 ;] and it was at the same time rumoured that a Governor-
General was on his way. The intelligence awakened the most
intense interest in the whole colony, and led to the boldest
measures. Poor as the new settlements were, six hundred pounds
were raised towards fortifications ; ' and the assistants and the
deputies discovered their minds to one another,' and the fortifica-
tions were hastened. All the ministers assembled in Boston
[Jan. 10, 1G35] ; it marks the age, that their opinions were con-
sulted ; it marks the age still more, that they unanimously
declared against the reception of a General Oovernor. 'We
ought,' said tho fathers of Israel, ' to defend our lawful possessions,
if wo are able ; if not, to avoid and jyrotract' "

The rumour of the appointment of a Governor-General over
all the New England colonies was premature ; but it served
to develop the spirit of the ruling Puritans of Massachusetts
Bay in their determining to resist the appointment of a general
officer to which no other British colony had, or has, ever

* History of the United States, Vol. I., pp. 439, 440.

CHAP. III.]

AND Til KIR TIMKS.

7.S

nltji'i't('(l.* Tlu! (Icci.sion in tliclr bdialf )»y tlit; Kiiii,' in ("oimcil,
in regard to tlu; complaints made aj^'ainst them in HI.S2, dcscrvrd
tla'ir ji^'ratitudt' ; tlic assinviiu't' in tlu' recorded MiniitcN of the
Privy (*onnciI, that the Kin<,' had never intended to iniposo
upon tliein those (^hurdi ceremonies which tliey had ol»jected to
in England, and the lil)erty of not observing whicli they went
to New Knghmd to enjoy, sliould liave pnxhiced correspond in;^
feelinjj^s and con(hict on their part. In their perfect liherty of
worsliip in New Enj^land, tliere was no diffiM'cnce lietween thetn
and their Soverei<,Mi. In the mei'ting of the Irivy (V)uncil
when; the Royal declaration is recorded that lihc rty of worslnp,
without interference or restriction, should he enjoyed l»y all the
settlers in New England, Laud (tlien Bishop ■ iF London) is re-
ported as present. Whatever were the ."ins of F^ing (*harles and
Laud in creating hy their ceremonies, a' < then punisluug, non-
conformists in England, t.'ijy were not justly I'ahli lo the charge
of ■ ' sucli sins in their conduct t(iward.s tlie i'uritans of Now
En'dand. Throujjhont the wl ole reiOT of • ither Charles the
First or Second, there is no act or intimation of Ihoir interfering,
or intending or desiring to interfere, witli the worship wiiich <-ho
Puritans had chosen, or might choose, in New England. In
Plymouth the Congregational worship was adopted in 1020, and
was never molested ; nor would there have been any interference
with its adoption nine yeai's afterwards at Massachusetts Bay,
had the Puritans there gone no further than their brethren at
Plymouth had gone, or their brethren afterwards in Rhode
Island and Connecticut. But the Puritans at Massachn.setts
Bay assumed not merely the liberty of worship for themselves,

* The New England historians represent it as a hi<;h act of tyranny for
tlie Kincj to appoint a Govemor-Gi'neral over the cohmios, and to appoint
Commissioners with powers so extensive as those of tlie Royal Comniission
appointed in 1634. But they forget and ignore the fact that nine years after-
wards, in 1643, when the Massachusetts and neiglibouring colonies were much
more advanced in population and wealth than in 1634, the Parliament, which
was at war with the King and assuming all his powers, passed an Ordinance
appointing a Governor-General and Ccn.missioners, and giving them quite as
extensive powers as the proposed Royai Commission of 1634. This Ordinance
will be given entire when I come to speak of the Massachusetts Bay Puri-
tans, under the Long Parliament and under Cromwell. It will be seen that
tlie Long Parliament, and Cromwell himself, assumed larger powers over the
New England colonies than had King Charles.

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

but the liberty of pvohihiting any other foiirn of worship , and of
proscribing and hanisJting all who would not join in their
worship ; that is, doing in Massachusetts what they complained
so loudly of the King and Laud doing in England. This was
the cause and subject of the whole contest between the Corpora-
tion of Massachusetts Bay and the authorities in England. If
it were intolerance and tyranny for the King and Laud to
impose and enforce one form of worship upon all the people of
England, it was equal intolerance and tyranny for the Govern-
ment of Massachusetts Bay to impose and enforce one form of
worship there upon all the inhabitants, and especially when
their Charter gave them no authority whatever in the matter of
Church organization.* They went to New England avowedly
for liberty of worship ; and on arriving there they claimed tht*
right to persecute and to banish or disfrancliise all those who
adhered to the worship of the Church to which they professed
to belong, as did their persecutors when they left England, and
which was the only Church then tolerated by the laws of
England.

When it could no longer be concealed or successfully denied
that the worship of the Church of England had been forbidden
at Massachusetts Bay and its members disfranchised ; and when
it now came to light that the Charter had been secretly trans-
ferred from England to Massachusetts, and a new Governor and
Council appointed to administer it there ; and when it further
became known that the Governor and Council there had actually
prepared to resist by arms the appointment of a General Governor
and Royal Commission, and had not only refused to produce the
Charter, but had (to " avoid and protract") not even deigned to
acknowledge the Privy Council's letter to produce it, the King
was thrown upon the rights of his Crown, either to maintain
them or to have the Royal authority exiled from a part of his
dominions. And when it transpired that a large and increasing
emigration from England was flowing to the very Plantation
where the Church had been abolished and the King's authority

♦ " Tlie Charter was far from conceding to the patentees the privilege of
freedoni of worship. Not a single line alludes to such a purpose ; nor can it
be implied by a reasonable construction from any clause in the Charter."
(Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. I., pp. 271, 272.)

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

set at defiance,* it became a question of prudence whether such
emigration should not be restricted ; and accordingly a Royal
Order in Council v/as issued forbidding the conveyance of any
persons to New England except those who should have a Royal
license. -

This Order has been stigmatized by New England writers as
most tyrannical and oppressive. I do not dispute it ; but it was
pi'ovided for in the Royal Charter, and the writers who assail
Kins: Charles and his Council for such an Act should remember
that Cromwell himself and his Rump Parliament passed a similar
Act eighteen years later, in 1653, as will hereafter appear ; and it
is a curious coincidence, that the same year, 1637, in which the
King ordered thal^ no person should be conveyed to New England
without first obtaining a certificate that they had taken the
oath of allegiance and supremacy, and conformed to the worship
of the Church of England, the Massachusetts General Court
passed an ordinance of a much more stringent character, and
interfering with emigration and settlement, and even private
hospitality and business to an extent not paralleled in Colonial
history. It was enacted " That none shall entertain a stranger
who should arrive with intent to reside, or shall allow the use
of any habitation, without liberty from the Standing Co\incil."f

The Charter having been transferred to Massachusetts, a new
Council appointed to administer it there, and no notice having
been taken of the Royal order for its production, the Com-
missioners might have advised the King to cancel the Charter
forthwith and take into his own hands the government of the
obstreperous colony ; but instead of exercising such authority
towards the colonists, as he was wont to do in less flagrant cases
in England, he consented to come into Court and submit his
own authority, as well as the acts of the resistant colonists, to

* It haa been seen, p. 45, that the London Company liad tranBniitted
to Endicot in 1630 a form of the oath of allegiance to the King and his suc-
cessors, to be taken by all the officers of the Massacliusetts Bay Government.
This had been set aside and a new oath substituted, leaving out all reference
to the King, and confinirg the oath of allegiance to the local Government.

t Historians ascribe to this circumstance a remarkable change in the
political economy of that colony ; a cow which formerly sold for twenty
pounds now selling for six pounds, and every colonial production in i)rop()r-
ti(. . (Chalmers' Annals, pp. 266, 266. Neal's History of New England,
Vol. I., Chap, ix., pp. 210—218.)

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[CHAP. III.

iiji:

!li!i

judicial investigation and decision. The Grand Council of Ply-
mouth, from which the Massachusetts Company had first pro-
cured their territory, were called upon to answer by what
authority and at whose instigation the Charter had been con-
veyed to New England. They disclaimed any participation in
or knowledge of the transaction, and forthwith surrendered their
own patent to the King. In doing so they referred to the acts
of the new patentees at Massachusetts Bay, "whereby they did
rend in pieces the foundation of the building, and so framed
unto themselves both new laws and new conceits of matter of
religion, forms of ecclesiastical and temporal orders of govern-
ment, and punishing divers that would not approve them," etc.
etc., and expressed their conviction of the necessity of his Majesty
" taking the whole business into his own hands."*

After this surrender of their Charter by the Grand Council
of Plymouth (England), the Attorney-General Bankes brought
a quo warranto in the Court of King's Bench against the
Governor, Deputy-Governor, and Council of the Corporation of
the Massachusetts Bay, to compel the Company to answer to the
complaints made against them for having violated the provisions
of the patent.-f" The patentees residing in England disclaiming
all responsibility for the acts complained of at Massachusetts

* Hazard, Vol. I.

t "At the trial, 'In Michas. T. XT™" Carl Primi,' and the patentees, T.
Eaton, Sir H. Row^ell, Sir John Youns;, Sir Richard Saltonstall, .John Ven,
George Harmood, Richard Perry, Thomas Hutchins, Natlianiel Wriglit,
Samuel Vassall, Thomas Goffe, Thomas Adams, John Brown pleaded a
disclaimer of any knowledge of the matters complaine<l of, and that they
should not 'for the future intermeddle with any the liberties, privileges and
franchises aforesaid, hut shall be for ever excluded from all use and claim of
the same and every of them."

"Matthew Cradock [first Governor of the Company] comes in, having had
time to interplead, etc., and on his defliult judgment was given, that he
should be convicted of the usurpation charged in the information, and that
the said liberties, privileges and franchises should be taken and seized into
the King's hands; the said Matthew not to intermeddle with and be excluded
the use thereof, and the said Matthew to be taken to answer to the King for
the said usurpation."

" The rest of the patentees stood outlawed, and no judgment entered against
them."

Collection of Original Papers relative to the Colony of Massachusetts Bay
(in the British Museum), by T. Hutchinaon, Vol. I., pp. 114—118.

(e>
act
coil
the
chf

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

(except Mr. Cradock), and no defence having been made of those
acts, nor the authors of them appearing either personally or by
counsel, they stood outlawed, and judgment was entered against
the Company in the person of Mr. Cradock for the usurpation
charged in the information.

The Lords Commissioners, in pursuance of this decision of the
Court of King's Bench, sent a peremptory order to the Governor
of Massachusetts Bay, to transmit the Charter to England,
intimating that, in case of " further neglect or contempt," " a
strict course would be taken against them."* They were now
brought face to face with the sovereign authority ; the contempt
of silence; nor did they think it prudent to renew military
preparations of resistance, as they had done in 1034 ; their
policy now was to " avoid and protract," by pleading exile, igno-
rance, innocence, begging pardon and pity, yet denying that they

* The following is a copy of the letter sent by appointment of the Lords of
the Council to Mr. Wintlirop, for the patent of the Plantations to be sent to
them :

"At Whitehall, April 4th, 1638:—

" This day the Lords Commissioners for Foreign Plantations, taking into
consideration the petitions and complaints of his Majesty's subjects, planters
and traders in New England, grew more frequent than heretofore for want of
a settled and orderly government in those parts, and calling to mind that
they had formerly given order about two or tliree years since to Mr. Cradock,
u member of that Plantation (alleged by him to be there remaining in the
hands of Mr. Wintlirop), to be sent over hither, and that notwithstanding the
same, the said letters patent were not as yet brought over ; and their Lord-
ships being now informed by Mr. Attorney-General that a quo warrantohnd been
by him brought, according to former order, against the said patent, and the
same was proceeded to judgment against so man\' as had appeared, and that
they which had not appeared were outlawed : ' Their Lordships, well approv-
ing of Mr. Attorney-General's care and proceeding therein, did now resolve
and order, tliat Mr. Meawtis, clerk of the Council attendant upon the said
Commissioners for Foreign Plantations, sliould, in a letter from himself to Mr
Wintlirop, inclose and convey this order unto him; and their Lordships
hereby, in his Majesty's name and according to his express will and pleasure,
strictly require and enjoin the said Wintlirop, or any other in whose power
and custody the said letters patent are, that they fail not to transmit the said
patent hither by the i-eturn of the ship in which the order is conveyed to
them, it being resolved that in case of any further neglect or contempt by
them shewed therein, their Lordships will cause a strict coui-se to be taken
against them, and will move his Majesty to resume into his hands the whole
Plantation.' " {lb., pp. 118, 119.)

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. hi.

had done anything wrong, and insinuating that if their Charter
should be cancelled, their allegiance would be forfeited and
they would remove, with the greater part of the population, and
set up a new government. I have not met with this very curious
address in any modern history of the United States — only glosses
of it. I give it entire in a note.* They profess a willingness

* "To the Right Honourable the Lords Conmiissioners for Foreign
Plantations.

" The humble Petition of the Inhabitants of the Massachusetts Bay, in New
England, of the Generall Court there assembled, the 6th day of September, in
the 14th year of the Reigne of our Soveraigne Lord King Charles.

" Whereas it hath pleased your Lordships, by order of the 4tli of April last,
to require our patent to be sent unto you, wee do hereby humbly and sincerely
pl-ofesse, that wee are ready to yield all due obedience to our Soveraigne
Lord the King's majesty, and to your Lordships under him, and in this
minde wee left our native countrie, and according thereunto, hath been our
practice ever since, so as wee are much grieved, that your Lordships should
call in our patent, there being no cause knowne to us, nor any delinquency or
fault of ours expressed in the order sent to us for that purpose, our government
being according to his Majestie's patent, and we not answerable for any
defects in other plantations, etc.

" This is that which his Majestie's subjects here doe believe and professe, and
thereupon wee are all humble suitors to your Lordships, that you will be
pleased to take into further consideration our condition, and to afford us
the liberty of subjects, that we may know what is layd to our charge ; and
have leaive and time to answer for ourselves before we be condemned as a
people unworthy of his Majestie's favour or protection. As for the quo warranto
mentioned in the said order, wee doe assure your Lordships wee were never
called to answer it, and if we had, wee doubt not but wee have a sufficient
plea to put in.

" It is not unknowne to your Lordships, that we came into these remote
parts with his Majestie's license and encouragement, under the great scale of
England, and in the confidence wee had of that assurance, wee have trans-
ported our families and estates, and here have wee built and planted, to the
great enlargement and securing of his Majestie's dominions in these parts, so
as if our patent should now be taken from us, we shall be looked up as
renegadoes and outlaws, and shall be enforced, either to remove to some
other place, or to returne into our native country againe ; either of which
will put us to unsupportable extremities ; and these evils (among others)
will necessarily follow. (1.) Many thousand souls will be exposed to mine,
being laid open to the injuries of all men. (2.) If wee be forced -to desert
this place, the rest of the plantations (being too weake to subsist alone) will,
for the most part, dissolve and goe with us, and then will this whole country
fall into the hands of the French or Dutch, who would speedily embrace such
an opportunity. (3.) If we should loose all our labour and costs, and be

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

to " yield all due obedience to their Soveraigne Lord the Kingj's
Majesty," but that they "are much grieved, that your Lordships
sliould call in our patent, there being no cause knowne to us,
nor any delinquency or fault of ours expressed in the order sent
to us for that purpose, our government being according to his
Majestic 's patent, and wee not answerable for any defects in
other plantations. This is that which his Majestie's subjects
here doe believe and professe, and thereupon wee are all humble
suitors to your Lordships, that you will be pleased to take into
further consideration our condition, and to aftbrd us the liberty
of auhjecta, that we may know ivhat is laid to our charge ; and
liave leaive and time to answer for ourselves before we be con-
demned as a people unworthy of his Majestie's favour or pro-
tection."

This profession and these statements are made in presence of
the facts that three years before the Royal Commissioners had
in like manner demanded the production of the patent in
England, giving the reasons for it, and the present " humble
snitors to their Lordships" had " avoided and protracted," by
not even acknowledging the reception of the order, much less

deprived of those liberties which his Majestic hath granted us, and nothing
layd to our charge, nor any fayling to be found in us in point of allegiance
(which all our countrymen doe take notice of, and will justify our faithfulness
in this behalfe), it will discourage all men hereafter from the like undertakings
upon confidence of his Majestie's Royal grant. Lastly, if our patent be taken
from us (whereby wee suppose wee may clayme interest in his Majestie's
lavour and protection) the common people here will conceive that his Majestie
hath cast them off, and that, heereby, they are freed from their allegiance and
sulyc'ction, and, thereupon, will be ready to confederate themselves under a
new Government, for their necessary safety and subsistence, which will be of
dangerous example to other plantations, and perillous to ourselves of incurring
liis Majestie's displeasure, which wee would by all means avoyd.

" Wee dare not question your Lordships' proceedings ; wee only desire to
open our griefs where the remedy is to be expected. If in any thing wee have
offended his Majesty and your Lordships, wee humbly prostrate ourselves at
the footstool of supreme authority ; let us be made the object of his Majestie's
clemency, and not cut off, in our first appeal, from all hope of favour. Thus
with our earnest prayers to the King of kings for long life and prosperity to
his sacred Majesty and his Royall family, and for all honour and welfare to
your Lordships, we humbly take leave.

" Edward Rawson, Secretary."

(Hutchinson's History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. L, Appendix
v., pp. 507, 508, 509.)

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

answering the charges of which they were informed, but rather
preparing military fortifications for resisting a General Governor
and Royal Commissioners of Inquiry, and " for regulating the
Plantations." Yet they profess not to know " what is laid to
their charge," and are " grieved that their Lordships should now
demand the patent," as if the production of it had never before
been demanded. It will be seen by the letter of their Lordships,
given in a note on p. 77, that they refer to this treatment of
their former order, and say, in the event of " further neglect and
contempt" a strict course would be taken against them.

The authors of the Address profess that the cancelling of their
Charter would involve the loss of their labours, their removal
from Massachusetts, the exposure of the country to the invasions
of the French and Dutch, the forfeiture of their allegiance, and
their setting up a new government. It was a mere pretext that
the Plantation becoming a Crown colony, as it would on the
cancelling of the Charter, would not secure to the planters the
protection of the Crown, as in the neighbouring Plymouth
settlement, which had no Royal Charter. They knew that,
under the protection of the King and laws of England, their
liberties and lives and properties would be equally secure as
those of any other of his Majesty's subjects. They twice repeat
the misstatement that " nothing had been laid to their charge,"
and " no fault found upon them ; " they insinuate that they
would be causelessly denied the protection of British subjects,
that their allegiance would be renounced, and they with the
greater part of the population would establish a new govern-
ment, which would be a dangerous precedent for other colonies.
These denials, professions, insinuations, and threats, they call
" opening their grief es," and conclude in the following obsequious,
plaintive, and prayerful words :

" If in any thing wee have offended his Majesty and your
Lordships, wee humbly prostrate ourselves ai the footstool of
supreme authority ; let us be made the objects of his Majesties
clemency, and not cut off, in our first appeal, from all hope of
favour. Thus with our earnest prayers to the King of kings
for long life and pi-osperity to his sacred Majesty and his Royall
family, and for all honour and welfare to your Lordships."

The Lords Commissioners replied to this Address through Mr.
Cradock, pronouncing the jealousies and fears professed in the

CHAP. III.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

Address to be groundless, stating their intentions to be the regu-
lation of all the Colonies, and to continue to the settlers of
Massachusetts Bay the privileges of British subjects. They
repeated their command upon the Corporation to transmit the
Charter to England, at the same time authorising the present Gov-
ernment to continue in office until the issuing of a new Charter.
Mr. (Jradock transmitted this letter to the Governor of Massachu-
setts Bay, the General Court of which decided not to acknow-
ledge the receipt of it, pronouncing it " unofficial" (being ad-
dressed to Mr. Cradock, who, though the Governor men-
tioned in the Charter, and the largest proprietor, was not now
Governor) ; that the Lords Commissioners could not " proceed
upon it," since they could not prove that it had been delivered
to the Governor ; and they directed Mr. Cradock's agent not to
mention Lords Commissioners' letter when he wrote to Mr. C.

At this juncture the whole attention of the King was turned
from Massachusetts to Scotland, his war with which resulted
ultimately in the loss of both his crown and his life.

In view of the facts stated in this and the preceding
chapters, I think it must be admitted that during the nine
years which elapsed between granting the first Charter by
Charles and the resumption of it by quo warranto in the Court
of King's Bench, the aggression and the hostility was on the
side of the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay. Their first act was
one of intolerance, and violation of the laws of England in
abolishing the worship of the Church of England, and banish-
ing its members for adhering to its worship. Their denials of
it were an admission of the unlawfulness of such acts, as they
were also dishonourable to themselves. Their maxim seems to
have been, that the end sanctified the means — at least so far as
the King was concerned ; and that as they distrusted him, they
were exempt from the obligations of loyalty and truth in their
relations to him ; that he and his were predestined reprobates,
while they and theirs were the elected saints to whom, of right,
rule and earth belonged. They were evidently sincere in their
belief that they were the eternally elected heirs of God, and as
such had a right to all they could command and possess, irrespec-
tive of king or savage. Their brotherhood was for themselves
alone — everything for themselves and nothing for others;
their religion partook more of Moses than of Christ — more of law
6

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

i.: -^

than of Gospel — more of hatred than of love — more of antipathy
than of attractiveness — more of severity than of tenderness.
In sentiment and in self-complacent purpose they left England
to convert the savage heathen in New England ; bnt for more
than twelve years after their arrival in Massachusetts they
killed many hundreds of Indians, but converted none, nor
established any missions for their instruction and conversion.

The historians of the United States laud without stint the
Puritans of Massachusetts Bay; and they are entitled to all
praise for their industry, enterprise, morality, independence. But
I question whether there are many, if any, Protestants in the
United States who would wish the views and spirit of those
Puritans to prevail there, either in religion or civil government —
a denial of the liberty of worship to Episcopalians, Presbyterians,
Baptists, or Quakers ; a denial of eligibility to office or of
elective franchise to any other than members of the Congrega-
tional Churches ; compulsory attendance upon Congregational
worship, and the support of that worship by general taxation,
together with the enforcement of its discipline by civil law and
its officers.

Had the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay understood the
principles and cherished the spirit of civil and religious liberty,
and allowed to the Browns and their Episcopalian friends the
continued enjoyment of their old and venerated form of
worship, while they themselves embraced and set up a new
form of worship, and not made conformity to it a test of loyalty
and of citizenship in the Plantation, there would have been no
local dissensions, no persecutions, no complaints to England, no
Royal Commissions of Inquiry or Regulation, no restraints upon
emigration, no jealousies and disputes between England and the
colony ; the feelings of cordiality with which Charles granted
the Charter and encouraged its first four years' operations,
according to the testimony of the Puritans themselves, would
have developed into pride for the success of the enterprise, and
further countenance and aid to advance it ; the religious tolera-
tion in the new colony would have immensely promoted the
cause of religious toleration in England ; and the American
colonies would have long since grown up, as Canada and
Australia are now growing up, into a state of national inde-
pendence, without war or bloodshed, without a single feeling

OHAP. 111.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

bon
Ihe
Ud
Ins,
lid

Ihe

other than that of filial respect and afiection for the Mother
(Country, without any interruption of trade or commerce —
presented an united Protestant and English nationality, under
separate governments, on the great continents of the globe and
islands of the seas.

I know it has been said that, had Episcopal worship been
tolerated at Massachusetts Bay, Laud would have soon planted
the hierarchy there, with all his ceremonies and intolerance.
This objection is mere fancy and pretence. It is fancy — for the
(Corporation, and not Laud, was the chartered authority to pro-
vide for religious instruction as well as settlement and trade in
the new Plantation, as illustrated from the very fact of the
Company having selected and employed the first ministers, as
well as first Governor and other officers, for the two-fold work of
spreading religion and extending the King's dominions in New
England. The objection is mere pretence, for it could not have
l>een dread of the Church of England, which dictated its
abolition and the banishment of its members, since precisely
the same spirit of bigotry, persecution, and proscription pre-
vailed, not only against Roger Williams, Mrs. Hutchinson and
her brother Wright and their friends, but in 1646 against the
Presbyterians, and in 1656 against the Baptists, as will hereafter
appear.

Their iron-bound, shrivelled creed of eternal, exclusive election
produced an iron-hearted population, whose hand was against
every man not of their tri oal faith and tribal independence ;
but at the same time not embodying in their civil or ecclesi-
astical polity a single element of liberty or charity which any
free State or Church would at this day be willing to adopt or
recognize as its distinctive constitution or mission.

It was the utter absence of both the principles and spirit of
true civil and religious liberty in the Puritans of MassachusettvS
Bay, and in their brethren under the Commonwealth and
Cromwell in England, that left Nonconformists without a plea for
toleration under Charles the Second, from the example of their
own party on either side of the Atlantic, and that has to this
day furnished the most effective argument to opponents against
dissenters' pretensions to liberality and liberty, and the strongest
barrier against their political influence in Elngland. They were
prostrate and powerless when the liberal Churchmen, guided by

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. III.

the views of Chillingworth, Burnet, and Tillotson, under William
and Mary, obtained the first Parliamentary enactment for
religious toleration in England. It is to the same influence that
religious liberty in England has been enlarged from time to
time ; and, at this day, it is to the exertions and influence of
liberal Churchmen, both in and out of Parliament, more than
to any independent influence of Puritan dissenters, that civil
and religious liberty are making gradual and great progress in
Great Britain and Ireland — a liberty which, I believe, would
ere this have been complete but for the proscriptive, intolerant
and persecuting spirit and practice of the Puritans of the
seventeenth century.

m:,

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

CHAPTER IV.

The Government of Massachusetts Bay under the Long Parliament,
THE Commonwealth, and Cromwell.

Charles the First ceased to rule after 1G40, though his death
did not take place until January, 1649. The General Court of
Massachusetts Bay, in their address to the King's Commissioners
in September, 1637, professed to offer "earnest prayers for
long life and prosperity to his sacred Majesty and his royal
family, and all honour and welfare to their Lordships;" but as
soon as there was a prospect of a change, and the power of the
King began to decline and that of Parliament began to increase,
the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay transferred all their sym-
pathies and assiduities to the Parliament. In 1641, they sent
over three agents to evoke interest with the Parliamentary
leaders — one layman, Mr. Hibbins, and two ministers, Thomas
Weld and Hugh Peters, the latter of whom was as shrewd and
active in trade and speculations as he was ardent and violent in
the pulpit. He made quite a figure in the civil war in England,
and was Cromwell's favourite war chaplain. Neither he nor
Weld ever returned to New England.

As the persecution of Puritans ceased in England, emigration
to New England ceased; trade became depressed and property
greatly depreciated in value; population became stationary in
New England during the whole Parliamentary and Common-
wealth rule in England, from 1640 to 1660 — more returning
from New England to England than emigrating thither from
England.*

* Neal says: "Certainly never was country more obliged to a man than
New England to Archbishop Laud, who by his cruel and arbitrary proceed-

THE LOYALISTS OF AMKIUCA

[chap. IV.

CHAP

The first hucccsh of this iiuHsion of Hugh Peters and his
colleagues soon appeared. By the Royal dmrter of 1629, the
King encouraged the Massachusetts Company hy remitting all
taxes tipon the property of the Plantations for the space of seven
years, and all customs and duties upon their exports and im-
ports, to or from any British port, for the space of twenty-one
years, except tlie five per cent, due upon their goods and
merchandise, according to the ancient trade of nierchants ; but
the Massachusetts delegates obtained an ordinance of Parliament,
or rather an order of the House of Connnons, complimenting the
colony on its progress and hopeful prospects, and discharging all
the exports of the natural products of the colony and all the
goods imported into it for its own use, from the payment of any
custom or taxation whatever.*

On this resolution of the Commons three remarks may be
made: 1. As in all previous communications between the King
and the Colony, the House of Commons termed the colony a

mon\^
prosp
in th(
sinirK

ings drove thousands of families out of tlie kingdom, and thereby stocked
the Plantations with inhabitants, in the compass of a very few years, whicli
otherwise could not have been done in an age," This was the sense of some
of the greatest men in Parliament in their speeches in 1641. Mr. Tieuns
[afterwards Lord HoUis] said that "a certain number of ceremonies in the
judgment of some men unlawful, and to be rejected of all the churches ; in
the judgment of all other Churches, and in the judgment of our own Churcli,
but indifferent ; yet what difference, yea, what distraction have those indii-
ferent ceremonies raised among us? What has deprived us of so many
thousands of Christians who desired, and in all other respects deserved, to
hold communion with us? I say what has deprived us of them, and
scattered them into I know not what places and comers of the world, but
these indifferent ceremonies." — [Several other speeches to the same effect are
quoted by Neal.]— History of New Englaiid, Vol. I., pp. 210—212.

* "Veneris, 10 March, 1642:

" Whereas the plantations in New England have, by the blessing of the
Almighty, had good and prosperous success, without any public charge to the
State, and are nov/ likely to prove very happy for the propagation of the
gospel in those parts, and very beneficial and commodious to this nation.
The Commons assembled in Parliament do, for the better advancement of
those plantations and the encouragement of the planters to proceed in their
undertaking, ordain that all merchandising goods, that by any person or
persons whatsoever, merchant or other, shall be exported out of the kingdom
of England into New England to be spent or employed there, or being of the
growth of that kingdom [colony], shall be from thence imported thither, or
shall be laden or put on board any ship or vessel for necessaries in passing to

CHAP. IV.]

AND THKIR TIMiiH.

le
le
m.
of
ir
or
tin

"Plantation," and the colonists "Planters." Two years afterwards
the colony of Massachusetts Bay assumed to itself (without
Charter or Act of Parliament) the title and style of " a (Com-
monwealth." 2. While the House of (Jommons speaks of the
prospects bein<^ " very happy for the propa<^fttion of the Gospel
in those parts," the Massachusetts colony had not established a
single mission or employed a single missionary or teacher for the
instruction of the Indians. 3. The House of Commons exempts
the colony from payment of all duties on articles exported from
or imported into the colony, until the House of Commons shall
take farthev order therein to the contrary" — clearly implying
and assuming, as beyond doubt, the right of the House of Com-
mons to impose or abolish such duties at its pleasure. The
colonists of Massachusetts Bay voted hearty thanks to the
House ' ? Commons for this resolution, and ordered it to be
entered ^n their public records as a proof to posterity of the
ijracious favour of Parliament.*

The Massachusetts General Court did not then complain of the
Parliament invading their Charter privileges, in assuming its
right to tax or not tax their imports and exports ; but rebelled
against Great Britain a hundred and thirty years afterwards,
because the Parliament asserted and applied the same principle.

The Puritan Court of Massachusetts Bay were not slow in
reciprccating the kind expressions and acts of the Long Parlia-
ment, and identifying themselves completely with it against
the King. In 1644 they passed an Act, in which they allowed
perfect freedom of opinion, discussion, and action on the side of
Parliament, but none on the side of the King ; the one party
in the colony could say and act as they pleased (and many of
them went to England and joined Cromwell's army or got
places in public departments) ; no one of the other party was
allowed to give expression to his opinions, either " directly or
indirectly," without being " accounted as an otfender of a high

and fro, and all and every the owner or owners thereof shall be freed and
discharged of and from paying and yielding any custom, subsidy, taxation, or
other duty for the same, either inward or outward, either in tliis kingdom or
New England, or in any port, haven, creek or other place whatsoever, until
the House of Commons shall take further order therein to the contrary." —
Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 114, 115.
* Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 114.

I ;

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

nature against this Commonwealth, and to be prosecuted,
capitally or otherwise, according to the quality and degree of
his offence."*

The New England historians have represented the acts of
Charles the First as arbitrary and tyrannical in inquiring into
the affairs of Massachusetts Bay, and in the appointment of a
Governor-General and Commissioners to investigate all their
proceedings and regulate them ; and it might be supposed that
the Puritan Parliament in England and the General Court of
Massachusetts Bay would be at one in regard to local inde-
pendence of the colony of any control or interference on the
part of the Parent State. But the very year after the House
of Commons had adopted so gracious an order to exempt the
exports and imports of the colony from all taxation, both
Houses of Parliament passed an Act for the appointment of a
Governor-General and seventeen Commissioners — five Lords and
twelve Commoners — with unlimited powers over all the American
colonies. Among the members of the House of Commons com-
posing this Commission were Sir Harry Vane and Oliver Crom-
well. The title of this Act, in Hazard, is as follows :

"An Ordinance of the Lords and Commons assembled
in Parliament: whereby Robert Earl of Warwick is made
Govemor-in-Chief and Lord High Admiral of all those Islands
and Plantations inhabited, planted, or belonging to any of his
Majesty the King of England's subjects, within the bounds
and upon the coasts of America, and a Committee appointed to
be assisting unto him, for the better government, strengthening

CHA

and
advj

spre
ther

* The following is the Act itself, passed in 1644 : " Whereas the civil wars
and dissensions in our native country, through the seditious words and
carriages of many evil affected persons, cause divisions in many places of
government in America, some professing themselves for the King, and others
for the Parliament, not considering that the Parliament themselves profess
that they stand for the King and Parliament against the malignant Papists
and delinquents in that kingdom. It is therefore ordered, that what person
whatsoever shall by word, writing, or action endeavour to disturb our peace,
directly or indirectly, by drawing a party under pretence that he is foi the
King of England, and such as join with him against the Parliament, shall hv
accounted as an offender of a high nature against this Commonwealth, and to
be proceeded with, either capitally or othervrise, according to tlie quality and
degree of his offence." (Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol.' I.'
pp. 135, 136.)

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

and preservation of the said Plantations ; but chiefly for the
advancement of the true Protestant religion, and further
spreading of the Gospel of Christ* among those that yet remain
there, in great and miserable blindness and ignorance."-f*

* It was not until three years after this, and tliree years after the facts of
the banished Roger Williams' labours in Rhode Island (see note V. below),
that the first mission among the Indians was established by the Puritans of
Massiichusetts Bay — seventeen years after their settlement there ; for Mr.
Holmes says : " The General Court of Massachusetts passed the first Act
[1646] to encouraging the carrying of the Gospel to the Indians, and recom-
mended it to the ministers to consult on the best means of effecting the design.
By their advice, it is probable, the first Indian Mission was undertaken ; for
on the 28th of October [1646] Mr. John Eliot, minister of Roxbury, com-
menced those pious and indefatigable labours among the natives, which
procured for him the title of The Indian Apostle. His first visit was to the
Indians at Nonantum, whom he had apprised of his intention." (Annals of
America, Vol. I., p. 280.)

t Hazard, Vol. I., pp. 533, 534. The provisions of this remarkable Act are
as follows :
" Governours and Government of Islands in America. — November 2nd,

1643:
" I. That Robert Earl of Warwick be Govemour and Lord High Admirall
of all the Islands and other Plantations inhabited, planted, or belonging unto
any -f his Majestie's the King of England's subjects, or which hereafter may
be inhabited, planted, or belonging to them, within the bounds and upon the
coasts of America. •

" II. That the Lords and others particularly named in the Ordinance shall
be Commissioners to joyne in aid and assistance of the said Earl, Chief
Governour and Admirall of the said Plantations, and shall have power from
Time to Time to provide for, order, and dispose of all things which they
shall think most fit and advantageous for the well governing, securing,
strengthening and preserving of the sayd Plantations, and chiefly for the
advancemer c of the tme Protestant Religion amongst the said Planters and
Inhfibitants, and the further enlarging and spreading of the Gospel of Christ
amongst those that yet remain there in great Blindness and Ignorance.

" III. That the said Govemour and Commissioners, upon all weighty and
important occasions which may concern the good and safety of the Planters,
Owners of I^ands, or Inhabitants of the said Islands, shall have power to send
for, view, and make uae of all Records, Books, and Papers which may concern
the said Plantations.

" IV, That the said Earl, Govemour in Chief, and the said Commissioners,
shall have power to nominate, appoint, and constitute, as such subordinate
Commissioners, Councillors, Commanders, Officers, and Agents, as they shall
think most fit and serviceable for the said Islands and Plantations : and upon
death or other avoidance of the afov£*^id Chief Governour and Admirall, or
other the Commissioners before named, to appc .nt such other Chief Govemour

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

Hill

This Act places all the affairs of the colonies, with the
appointment of Governors and all other local ofQcers, under
the direct control of Parliament, through its general Governor
and Commissioners, and shows beyond doubt that the Puritans
of the Long Parliament held the same views with those of
'Charles the First, and George the Third, and Lord North a
century afterwards, as to the authority of the British Parliament
over the American colonies. Whether those views were right
or wrong, they were the views of all parties in England from
the beginning for more than a century, as to the relations
between the British Parliament and the colonies. The views
on this subject held and maintained by the United Empire
Loyalists, during the American Revolution of 1776, were those
which had been held by all parties in England, whether Puritans
or Churchmen, from the first granting of the Charter to the
Company of Massachusetts Bay in 1629. The assumptions and
statements of American historians to the contrary on this
subject are at variance with all the preceding facts of colonial
history.*

Mr. Bancroft makes no mention of this important ordinance

pass
Hu

or Commissioners in the roome and place of such as shall be void, as also to
remove all such subordinate Governours and Officers as they shall j'idge fit.

" V. That no subordinate Governours, Councillors, Commanders, Otficers,
Agents, Planters, or Inhabitants, which now are resident in or upon the said
Islands 6r Plantations, shall admit or receive any new Governours, Councillors,
Commanders, Officers, or Agents whatsoever, but such as shall be allowed and
approved of under the hands and seals of the aforesaid Chief Govemour and
High Admirall, together with the hands and seals of the said Commissioners,
or six of them, or under the hands of such as they shall authorize thereunto.

" VI. That the Chief Govemour and Commissioners before mentioned, or
the greater number of them, are authorized to assign, ratifie, and confirm so
much of their aforementioned authority and power, and in such manner, to
such persons as they shall judge fit, for the better governing and preserving
the said Plantations and Islands from open violence and private distractions.

" VII. That whosoever shall, in obedience to this Ordinance, do or execute
any thing, shall by virtue hereof be saved harmless and indemnified."

* In 1646 the Parliament passed another ordinance, exempting the colonies
for three years from all tollages, " except the excise," provided their produc-
tions should not be "exported but only in English vessels." While this Act
also asserted the parliamentary right of taxation over the Colonial plantations,
it formed a part of what was extended and executed by the famous Act of
Navigation, first passed by the Puritan Parliament five yeara afterwards, in
1651, as will be seen hereafter.

MBI

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

passed by both Houses of the Long Parliament ;* nor does
Hutchinson, or Graham, or Palfrey. Less sweeping acts of

* Mr. Bancroft must have been aware of tlie existence of this ordinance,
for he makes two allusions to the Commission appointed by it. In connection
with one allusion to it, he states the following interesting facts, illustrative
of Massachusetts exclusiveness on the one record, and on the other tlxe instru-
ments and progress of religious liberty in New England. "The people of
Rhode Island," says Mr. Bancroft, "excluded from the colonial union, would
never have maintained their existence as a separate state, had they not sought
the interference and protection of the Mother Country ; and the founder of
the colony [Roger Williams] was chosen to conduct the important mission.
Embarking at Manhattan [for he was not allowed to go to Boston], he arrived
in England not long after the death of Hampden. The Parliament had
placed the afiairs of the American Colonies under the Earl of Wan'mk, as
Governor-in-Chief, assisted by a Council of five peers and twelve commoners-
Among these commoners was Henry Vane, a man who was ever true in his
affections as he was undeviating in his principles, and who now welcomed
the American envoy as an ancient friend. The favour of Parliament was
won by his [Roger Williams'] incomparable 'printed Indian labours, the
like whereof was not extant from any part of America ; ' and his merits as a
missionary induced both houses of Parliament to grant unto him and friends
with him a free and absolute charterCa} of civil government for those parts of
his abode.' Thus were the places of refuge for 'soul -liberty' on the Narra-
gansett Bay incorporated ' with full power and authority to rule themselves.'
To the Long Parliament, and especially to Sir Harry Vane, Rhode Island
owes its existence as a political State." — History of the United States, Vol. I.,
pp. 460, 461.

The other allusion of Mr. Bancroft to the Parliamentary Act and Commis-
sion of 1643 is in the following words : " The Commissioners appointed by
Parliament, with unlimited authority over the Plantations, found no favour in
Virginia. They promised indeed freedom from English taxation, but this
immunity was already enjoyed, "^hey gave the colony liberty to choose its
own Governor, but it had no dislike to Berkeley ; and though there was a
party for the Parliament, yet the King's authority was maintained. The
sovereignty of Charles had ever been mildly exercised," — lb., p. 222.

(a) This is not quite accurate. The word "absolute ' does not occur in the
patent. The words of the Charter are : "A free Charter of civil incorporation
and government ; that they may order and govern their Plantations in such
a manner as to maintain justice and peace, both among themselves, and to-
wards all men with whom they shall have to do " — " Provided nevertheless
that the said laws, constitutions, and punishments, for the civil government
of said pL stations, be conformable to the laws of England, so far as the
nature and constitution of the place will admit. And always reserving to
the said Earl and Commissioners, and their successors, power and authority
for to dispose the general government of that, as it stands in relation to the

Umi

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

authority over the colonies, by either of the Charters, are por-
trayed by these historians with minuteness and power, if not
in terms of exaggeration. The most absolute and comprehensive
authority as to both appointments and trade in the colonies
ordered by the Long Parliament and Commonwealth are referred
to in brief and vague terms, or not at all noticed, by the histori-
cal eulogist of the Massachusetts Bay Puritans,* who, while
they were asserting their independence of the royal rule of
England, claimed and exercised absolute rule over individual
consciences and religious liberty in Massachusetts, not only
against Episcopalians, but equally against Presbyterians and
Baptists ; for this very year, says Hutchinson, " several persons
came from England in 1643, made a muster to set Presbyterian
government under the authority of the Assembly of West-
minster ; but the New England Assembly, the General Court,
soon put them to the rout.""f- And in the following year, 1644,
these " Fathers of American liberty" adopted measures equally
decisive to " rout " the Baptists. The ordinance passed on this
subject, the "13th of the 9th month, 1644," commences thus:
" Forasmuch as experience hath plentifully and often proved
that since the first arising of the Anabaptists, about one hundred
years since, they have been the incendaries of the Common-
wealths and the infectors of persons in main matters of religion,
and the troubles of chiu*ches in all places where they have been,
and that they who have held the baptizing of infants unlawful,
have usually held other errors or heresies therewith, though they

rest of the Plantations in America, as they shall conceive from time to time
most conducing to the general good of the said Plantations, the honour of his
Majesty, and the service of the State." — (Hazard, Vol. I., pp. 529 — 531, where
the Charter is printed at length.)

• But Mr. Holmes makes explicit mention of the parliamentary ordinance
of 1643 in the following terms : — "The English Parliament passed an
ordinance appointing the Earl of Warwick Govemor-in-Chief and Lord High
Admiral of the American Colonies, with a Council of five Peers and twelve
Commoners. It empowered him, in conjunction with his associates, to
examine the state of affaii-s ; to send for papers and persons, to remove
Governors and officers, and appoints other in their places ; and to assign over
to these such part of the powers that were now granted, as be should think
proper." (Annals of America, Vol. I., p. 273.)

t History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 117 ; Massachusetts Laws, pp.
140—145.

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

have (as other heretics used to do) concealed the same till they
spied out a fit advantage and opportunity to vent them by way
of question or scruple," etc. : " It is ordered and agreed, that if
any person or persons within this jurisdiction shall either openly
condemn or oppose the baptizing of infants, or go about secretly
to seduce others from the approbation or use thereof, or shall
purposely depart the congregation at the ministration of the
ordinance, or shall deny the ordinance of magistracy, or their
lawful right and authority to make war, or to punish the
outward breakers of the first Table, and shall appear to the Court
to continue therein after the due time and means of convic-
tion, shall be sentenced to banishment."*

In the following year, 1646, the Presbyterians, not being
satisfied with having been "put to the rout" in 1643, made a
second attempt to establish their worship within the jurisdic-
tion of Massachusetts Bay. Mr. Palfrey terms this attempt a
" Presbyterian cabal," and calls its leaders " conspirators."
They petitioned the General Court or Legislature of Massachu-
setts Bay, and on the rejection of their petition they proposed
to appeal to the Parliament in England. They were persecuted
for both acts. It was pretended that they were punished, not
for petitioning the local Court, but for the expressions used in
their petition — the same as it had been said seventeen years
before, that the Messrs. Brown were banished, not because they
were Episcopalians, but because, when called before Endicot and
his councillors, they used oflensive expressions in justification of
their conduct in continuing to worship as they had done in
England. In their case, in 1629, the use and worship of the
Prayer Book was forbidden, and the promoters of it banished,
and their papers seized ; in this case, in 1646, the Presbyterian
worship was forbidden, and the promoters of it were imprisoned
and fined, and their papers seized. In both cases the victims of
religious intolerance and civil tyranny were men of the highest
position and intelligence. The statements of the petitioners in
1646 (the truth of which could not be denied, though the
petitioners were punished for telling it) show the state of
bondage and oppression to which all who would not join the

* Hazard, Vol. 1., p. 538 ; MaasachuBetto Records. The working of this Act,
and thft punishments inflicted under it for more than twenty years, will be
seen hereafter.

r?'

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

Congregational Churches — that is, five-sixths of the population
— were reduced under this system of Church government — the
Congregational Church members alone electors, alone eligible to
be elected, alone law-makers and law administrators, alone
imposing taxes, alone providing military stores and commanding
the soldiery ; and then the victims of such a Government were
pronounced and punished as " conspirators" and " traitors"
when they ventured to appeal for redress to the Mother Country.
The most exclusive and irresponsible Government that ever
existed in Canada in its earliest days never approached such a
despotism as this of Massachusetts Bay. I leave the reader to
decide, when he peruses what was petitioned for — first to the
Massachusetts Legislature, and then to the English Parliament —
who were the real " traitors" and who the " conspirators"
against right and liberty : the " Presbyterian cabal," as Mr.
Palfrey terms the petitioners, or those who imprisoned and fined
them, and seized their papers. Mr. Hutchinson, the best in-
formed and most candid of the New England historians, states
the affair of the petitioners, their proceedings and treatment,
and the petition which they presented, as follows :

"A great disturbance was caused in the colony this year
[1646] by a number of persons of figure, but of difierent senti-
ments, both as to civil and ecclesiastical government, from the
people in general. They had laid a scheme for petition of such
as were non-freemen to the courts of both colonies, and upon
the petitions being refused, to apply to the Parliament, pretend-
ing they were subjected to arbitrary power, extra-judicial
proceedings, etc. The principal things complained of by the
petitioners were :

" 1st. That the fundamental laws of England were not owned
by the Colony, as the basis of their government, according to the
patent.

" 2nd. The denial of those civil privileges, which the freemen
of the jnrisdiction enjoyed, to such as were not members of
Churches, and did not take an oath of fidelity devised by the
authority here, although they were freebom Englishmen, of
sober lives and conversation, etc.

" 3rd. That they were debarred from Christian privileges,
viz., the Lord's Supper for themselves, and baptism for their
children, unless they were members of some of the particular

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

Churches in the country, though otherwise sober, righteous, and
godly, and eminent for knowledge, not scandalous in life and
conversation, and members of Churches in England.

" And they prayed that civil liberty and freedom might be
forthwith granted to all truly English, and that all members of
the Church of England or Scotland, not scandalous, might be
admitted to the privileges of the Churches of New England ; or
if these civil and religious liberties were refused, that they
might be freed from the heavy taxes imposed upon them, and
from the impresses made of them or their children or servants
into the war ; and if they failed of redress there, they should be
under the necessity of making application to England, to the
honourable Houses of Parliament, who they hoped would take
their sad condition, etc.

" But if their prayer should be granted, they hoped to see the
then contemned ordinances of God highly prized ; the Gospel,
then dark, break forth as the sun ; Christian charity, then frozen,
wax warm ; jealousy of arbitrary government banished ; strife
and contention abated ; and all business in Church and State,
which for many years had gone backward, successfully thriving,
etc.

"The Court, and great part of the country, were much
offended at this petition. A declaration was drawn up by order
of the Court, in answer to the petition, and in vindication of the
Government — a proceeding which at this day would not appear
for the honour of the supreme authority. The petitioners were
required to attend the Court. They urged their right of
petitioning. They were told they were not accused of petition-
ing, but of contemptuous and seditious expressions, and were
required to find sureties for their good behaviour, etc. A charge
was drawn up against them in form ; notwithstanding which it
was intimated to them, that if they would ingenuously acknow-
ledge their offence, they should be forgiven ; but they refused,
and were fined, some in larger, some in smaller sums, two or
three of the magistrates dissenting, Mr. Bellingham,* in
particular, desiring his dissent might be entered. The petitioners

* " Mr. Winthrop, who was then Deputy-Governor, was active in the
prosecution of the petitioners, but the party in favour of them had so much
interest aa to obtain a vote to require him to answer in public to the complaint
against him. Dr. Mather says : ' He was most irregularly called forth to an

'i ■

THE LOYALISTS Oi AMERICA

[chap. IV.

claimed an appeal to the Commissioners of Plantations in
England ; but it was not allowed. Some of them resolved to
go home with a complaint. Their papers were seized, and
among them was found a petition to the Right Honourable the
Earl of Warwick, etc., Commissioners, from about live and
twenty non-freemen, for themselves and many thousands more,
in which they represent that from the pulpits* they had been
reproached and branded with the names of destroyers of
Churches and Commonwealths, called Hamans, Judases, sons of
Korah, and the Lord entreated to confound them, and the
people and magistrates stirred up against them by those who
were too forward to step out of their callings, so that they had
been sent for to the Court, and some of them committed for
refusing to give two hundred pounds bond to stand to the
sentence of the Court, when all the crime was a petition to the
Court, and they had been publicly used as malefactors, etc.

" Mr. Winslow, who had been chosen agent for the colony to
answer to Gorton's complaint, was now instructed to make
defence against these petitioners ; and by his prudent manage-
ment, and the credit and esteem he was in with many members
of the Parliament and principal persons then in power, he
prevented any prejudice to the colony from either of these
applications."f 1 -

ignominious hearing before a vast assembly, to which, " with a sagacious
humility," he consented, although he showed he might have refused it. The
result of the hearing was that he was honourably acquitted,' etc."

* This refers to a sennon preached by Mr. Cotton on a fast day, an extract
of which is published in the Magnalia, B. III., p. 29, wherein he denounces
the judgments of God upon such of his hearers as were then going to
England with evil intentions against the country.

t Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 145 — 149.

Mr. Palirey, under the head of " Presbyterian Cabal," states the following
facts as to the treatment of Dr. Child, Mr. Dand, and others who proposed to
make their appeal to the English Parliament :

"Child and Dand, two of the remonstrants, were preparing to go to
England with a petition to the Parliament from a number of the non-freemen.
Informed of their intention, the magistrates ordered a seizure of their papers.
The searching officers found in their possession certain memorials to the
Commissioners for Plantations, asking for * settled Churches according to the
[Presbyterian] Reformation in England ; ' for the establishment in the colony
of the laws of the realm ; for the appointment of * a General Governor, or
some honourable Commissioner,' to reform the existing state of things. For

CHAP. IV,]

AND THEIR TIMES.

Mr. (Edward) Winslow, above mentioned by Mr. Hutchinson,
had been one of the founders and Governors of the Plyrtiouth
colony ; but twenty-five years afterwards he imbibed the per-
secuting spirit of the Massachusetts Bay colony, became their
agent and advocate in London, and by the prestige which he
had acquired as the first narrator and afterwards Governor of
the Plymouth colony, had much influence with the leading men
of the Long Parliament. He there joined himself to Cromwell,
and was appointed one of his three Commissioners to the West
Indies, where he died in 1655. Cromwell, as he said when he
first obtained possession of the King, had " the Parliament in
his pocket ;" he had abolished the Prayer Book and its worship ;
he had expurgated the army of Presbyterians, and filled their
places with Congregationalists ; he was repeating the same
process in Parliament ; and through him, therefore (who was
also Commander-in-Chief of all the Parliamentary forces),
Mr. Winslow had little difficulty in stifling the appeal from
Massachusetts Bay for liberty of worship in behalf of both
Presbyterians and Episcopalians.

But was ever a petition to a local Legislature more consti-
tutional, or more open and manly in the manner of its getting
up, more Christian in its sentiments and objects ? Yet the
petitioners were arraigned and punished as " conspirators" and
" disturbers of the public peace," by order of that Legislature,
for openly petitioning to it against some of its own acts. Was
ever appeal to the Imperial Parliament by British subjects more
justifiable than that of Dr. Child, Mr. Dand, Mr. Vassal (pro-
genitor of British Peers), and others, from acts of a local
Government which deprived them of both religious rights of
worship and civil rights of franchise, of all things earthly most
valued by enlightened men, and without which the position
of man is little better than that of goods and chattels ? Yet
the respectable men who appealed to the supreme power of the
realm for the attainment of these attributes of Christian and

the
my

this further offence, such of the prominent conspirators as remained in the
country were punished by additional fines. Child and Dand were mulcted
in the sum of two hundred pounds ; Mauerick, in that of a hundred and
fifty pounds ; and two others of a htmdred pounds each." — Palfrey's History
of New England [Abridged edition], Vol. I., pp. 327, 328.

THE L0YALI8TS OF AMEUICA

[chap. [V.

Britisli citizenship were imprisoned and lioavily fined, and their
private papers seized and se(juestered !

In my own native country of Upper Canada, the Government
for nearly half a century was considered despotic, and held up
by American writers themselves as an unbearable tyranny.
But one Church was alleged to be established in the country,
and the govei'nment was that of a Church party; but never
was the elective franchise thei'e confined to the members of the
one Church ; never were men and women denied, or hailed
before the legal tribunals and fined for exercising the privilege
of Baptism, the Lord's Supper, or public worship for themselves
and families according to the dictates of their own consciences ;
never was the humblest inhabitant denied the right of petition
to the local Legislature on any subject, or against any govern-
mental acts, or the right of appeal to the Imperial Government
or Parliament on the subject of any alleged grievance. The
very suspicion and allegation that the Canadian Government
did counteract, by influences and secret representations, the
statements of complaining parties to England, roused public
indignation as arbitrary and unconstitutional. Even the insur-
rection which took place in both Upper and Lower Canada in
1837 and 1838 Avas professedly against alleged partiality and
injustice by the local Government, as an obstruction to more
liberal policy believed to be desired by the Imperial Government.

But here, in Massachusetts, a colony chartered as a Company
to distribute and settle public lands and carry on trade, in less
than twenty years assumes the pow^ers of a sovereign Connnon-
wealth, denies to five-sixths of the population the freedom of
citizenship, and limits it to the members of one Church, and
denies Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and worship to all who will
not come to the one Church, punishes petitioners to itself for
ciVil and religious freedom from those who were deprived of it,
and punishes as " treason" their appeal for redress to the English
Parliament. Though, for the present, this unprecedented and
unparalleled local despotism was sustained by the ingenious
representations of Mr. Winslow and the power of Cromwell ;
yet in the course of four years the surrender of its Charter was
ordered by the regicide councillors of the Commonwealth, as it
had been ordered by the beheaded King Charles and his Privy
Council thirteen years before. In the meantime tragical events

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

in Enffland diverted attention from the colonies. The Kinsj
was made pri.soner, then put to death ; the Monarch}' wa.s
abolished, as well as the House of Lords ; and the Lon^^ Parlia-
ment became indeed Oomwell's " pocket" instrument.

It was manifest that the government of Massachusetts Bay
as a colony was impossible, with the pretensions which it had
set up, declaring all appeals to England to be " treason," and
punishing complainants as " conspirators" and " traitors." The
appointment by Parliament in 1G43 of a Governor-General and
Commissioners had produced no effect in Massachusetts Bay
Colony ; pretensions to supremacy and persecution were as rife
as ever there. Dr. Child and his friends were punished for
even asking for the administration that appointed the Governor-
General and those Commissioners ; and whether the Government
of England were a monarchy or republic, it was clear that the
pretensions to independence of the Puritans of Massachusetts
Bay must be checked, and their local tyranny restrained. For
this pui-pose the Long Parliament adopted the same policy in
1650 that King Charles had done in 1637; demanded the
surrender of the Charter ; for that Parliament sent a summons
to the local Government ordering it to transmit the Charter to
England, to receive a new patent from the Parliament in all its
acts and processes.

This order of Parliament to Massachusetts Bay Colony to
surrender its Charter was accompanied by a proclamation pro-
hibiting trade with Virginia, Barbadoes, Bermuda, and Antigua,
because these colonies continued to recognize royal authority,
and to administer their laws in the name of the King. This
duplicate order from the Long Parliament was a double blow
to the colony of Massachusetts Bay, and produced general con-
sternation ; but the dexterity and diplomacy of the colony
were equal to the occasion. It showed its devotion to the
cause of the Long Parliament by passing an Act prohibiting
trade with the loyal, but by them termed rebel colonies ;* and

* Mr. Bancroft, referring to the petition of Dr. Child and others, quoted
on page 94, says : " The document was written in the spirit of wanton
insult ;" then refers to the case of Qorton, who had appealed to the Earl of
Warwick and the other Parliamentary Commissioners against a judicial
decision of the Massachusetts Bay Court in regard to land claimed by him.
From Mr. Bancroft's statement, it appears that the claim of Gk)rton, friendless

100

THE LOYALISTS OF AMKHK'A

[chap. IV

it avoided .siirrondcrinj,' ti>e Charter hy repeating its policy of
delay and petition, winch it had ad()pte<l on a Hindlar occasion

aH he wttH, waH ho just us to coiiiinend itMclf to tl(e f'uvoiiralilo judgiiu'iit of uu
iinimi'tiiil ami coiiiputi-nt trihunal of the Farlianiciitary ConimiHHionurB,
whoHo uulhoiity liin opprcsHors KxpresHly diiiied, and tlicii, in tlicir address to
Parliummit in ridVieiice to its order, denied any autliorily of Parliunient over
their jjroceedings. Mr. Hancroft'H words are a.s folIowH ;

" (Jorton had carried hin coniidaintH to tlii^ Mother ('ountry ; and, thouf,'h
unaided by personal influence or by powerful friends, had succeeded in all
his wishes. At this very juncture an order respecting his claims arrived in
Boston ; and was couched in terms whuh involred an assertion of the right of
Parliament to reverse the decisions and control the (ioccrnment of Massachusetts.
The danger was imminent ; it struck at the very life and foundation of the
rising Commonwealth, Had the Lomj Parliament succeeded in revoking the,
patent of MassachusettSf the Stuarts, on their restoration, would have found
not one chaitered government in the colonies ; and tiie tenor of American
history would have been changed. The people («) rallied with great unanimity
in support of their magistrates.

" At length the General Court assembled for the di.scussion of the usurpa-
tions of Parliament and the dangers from domestic treachery. The elders
[ministers] did not fail to attend in the gloomy season. One iaithlesa
deputy was desired to withdraw ; and then, with closed doors, that the con-
sultation might remain in the breast of the Court, the nature of the relation
with England was made the subject of debate. Alter nnich deliberation it
was agreed that Massachusetts owed the same allegiance to England as tlic
free Hanse Towns had rendered to the Empire ; as Normandy, when its
dukes were kings in England, had paid to the monarchs of France. It was
also resolved not to accept a new Charter from Parliament, for that wcjuld
imply a surrender of the old. Besides, Parliament granted none but by way
of ordinance, and always made for itself an express preservation of a supreme
power in all things. The elders [ministers], after a day's consultation,
confirmed the decisions.

"The colony proceeded to exer< ise the independence which it claimed.
The General Court replied to tiiij petition in a State paper, written with
great moderation ; and the di^vUibers of the public security were summoned
into its presence. Robert Cliild and his companions appealed to the Com-
missioners in England. The appeal was not admitted." " To the Parliament
of England the Legislature remonstrated with the noblest frankness against
any assertion of permanent authority of that body." — Hist. U. S., Vol. I., pp.
475—477.

(o) By the " people" here Mr. Bancroft must mean the members of the
Congregational Churches (one-sixth of the whole population), for they alone
were freemen, and had all the united powers of the franchise — the sword, the
legislation — in a word, the whole civil, judicial, ecclesiastical, and military
government.

THAP. IV.]

AND Til KIR TIMKS.

101

in 1088 to Kin^' ('liarlcs; and its profcsHions of loyalty to
(^'hark's, an<l prayers for tho Royal Family, an<l tlie huccoss of
the Privy Coimcil, it now repoatod for tlu^ Lon;; Parliament and
its leaders, snpportin*,' its petition l»y an appeal to its ten years'
services of prayers and of men to the cause of tl»e Long
Parliament against the Kinjif. T will, in the first place;, j^ive in
a note Mr. Bancroft's own account of what was claimed and
ordered by the Lonfj Parliament, and the pretensions and pro-
ceedings nf the L(;gislature of Massachusetts Bay, and then
will give the principal parts of their petition to the Long
Parliament in their own words. Tlie words and statements of
Mr. Bancroft involve several things worthy of notice and
remembrance: 1. The Congregational Church rulers of Massa-
chusetts Bay denied being British subjects, admitting no other
allegiance to England than the Hanse Towns of Northern
(iermany to the Empire of Austria, or the Normandy ducal
kings of England to the King of France ; or, as Mr, Palfrey
says, "the relations which Burgundy and Flanders hold to
France." 2. Mr, Bancroft calls the petitioners "disturbers of
the public security," and Mr. Palfrey calls them " conspirators" —
terms applied to the American remonstrants against the perse-
cuting edicts of the Synod of Dort — terms applied to all the
complainants of the exclusive and persecuting policy of the
Tudor and Stuart kings of England — terms applied to even
the first Christians — terms now applied to pleaders of religious
and civil freedom by the advocates of a Massachusetts Govern-
ment as intolerant and persecuting as ever existed in Europe.
The petition of these impugned parties shows that all they
asked for was equal religious and civil liberty and protection
with their Congregational oppressors. Opprobrious names are
not arguments ; and imputations of motives and character are
not facts, and are usually resorted to for want of them, 3. Mr.
Bancroft designates as " usurpations of Parliament" the proceed-
ings of the Long Parliament in appointing a Governor-General
and Commissioners for the colonies, and in exercising its right
to receive and decide upon appeals from the colonies ; and terms
the support of the Parliament in the colony " domestic treachery ;"
and the one member of the Legislature who had the courage to
maintain the supremacy of the Mother Country is called the
" faithless deputy," who was forthwith turned out of the House,

102

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

which then proceeded, " with closed doors," to discuss in secret
conclaV'C its relations to En<;land, and conchxded bv declarinL^
" against any assertion of paramount authority" on the part of
the English Parliament. This was substantially a " Declaration
of Independence ;" not, invleed, against an arbitrary king, as was
alleged sixteen years before, and a hundred and thirty years
afterwards, but against a Parliament which had dethroned and
beheaded their King, and abolished the House of Lords and the
Episcopal Church ! All this Mr. Bancroft now treats as main-
taining the Charter, of which he himself had declared, in an-
other place, as I have quoted above : " The Charter on which
the freemen of Massachusetts succeeded in erecting a system of
independent representative liberty did not secure to them a
single privilege of self-government, but left them as the
Virginians had been left, without any valuable francliise, at the
mercy of the Corporation within the realm." Who then were
the " usurpers," and had been for twenty years, of power which
had not been conferred on them — the new Church and the
persecuting Government of Massachusetts Bay, or the supreme
authority of England, both under a King and under a professed
republican conmionwealth ? 4. Mr. Bancroft says : " Had the
Long Parliament succeeded in revoking the patent of the
Massachusetts Bay,* the tenor of American history would have
been changed." I agree with him in this opinion, thougli
probably not in his application of it. I believe that the " tenor
of American history' would have led to as perfect an indepen-
dence of the American States as they now enjoy — as free, but a
better system of government, and without their ever having
made war and bloodshed against Great Britain.

The facts thus referred to show that there were E'mpire
Loyalists in America in the seventeenth, as there were after-
wards in the eighteenth century ; they then embraced all
the colonies of New England, except the ruling party of Massa-
chusetts Bay ; they were all advocates of an equal franchise,

* But Mr. Bancroft si'eiiiH to forget that in less than forty years after this
the Charter was revoked, and that very system of government was established
which the General Court of Massachusetts Bay now deprecated, but undei'
which Massachusetts itself was most prosperous and peaceful for more than
half a century, until the old spirit was revived, which rendered friendly
government with England impossible.

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES,

103

and equal religious and civil liberty for all classes — the very
revei'se of the Massachusetts Government, which, while il Jenied
any subordination to England, denied religious and civil liberty
to all classes except members of the Congregational Churches.

It is a curious and significant fact, stated by Mr. Bancroft,
that these intolerant and persecuting proceedings of the Massa-
chusetts Bay Legislature were submitted to the Congregational
ministers for their approval and final endorsement. The Long
Parliament in England checked and ruled the Assembly of
Westminster divines ; but in Massachusetts the divines, after a
day's consideration, " approved the proceedings of the General
Court." No wonder that such divines, supported by taxes
levied by the State and rulers of the State, denounced all tolera-
tion of dissent from their Church and authority.

Before leaving this subject, I nuist notice the remarks of Mr.
Palfrey, — the second, if not first in authority of the historians of
New England.

Mr. Palfrey ascribes what he calls "the Presbyterian Cabal"
to Mr. William Vassal, who was one of the founders and first
Council of tl)e colony of Massachusetts Bay, whose brother
Samuel had shared with Hampden the honour of having refused
to pay ship-money to Charles, and who was now, with the Earl
of Warwick,* one of the Parliamentary Commissioners for the
colonies. It appears that Mr. Vassal opposed from the beginning
the new system of Church and prescriptive civil government
set up at Massachusetts Bay, and therefore came under Mr.
Bancroft's category of "disturbers of the public security," and
Mr. Palfrey's designatior- .f "conspirators;" but was in reality
a liberal and a loyali it, not to King Charles indeed, but to the
Commonwealth wi i*ngland. I give Mr. Palfrey's statements, in
his own words, in a nooe.*!-

* Mr. Hutcliinson sa} s : " The Earl of Warwick had a luitciit tor Mass^icliu-
setts Bay ahout 1623, 'nit the bounds are not known." (Uistorv of Massa-
chusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 7.)

t Mr. Palfrey says : " Whik in Eii^'land the literary ivnr ii>faiust I're.sliytery
w\s in great part conducted hy American 'onibctr.'stH. ♦''eir attention was
presently retiuiivd at home. Will 'am V-iss.iJ, a nan of fortune, was one of
tlie original assistants named in t'-e CJhari'. r of tli.' Massachusetts Company.
He came to Massacliusetts witli Wintli' jp'afi ?( ^ in the great emigration ; hut
f'>r some cause — possMy from dissatinfaciro'i. ''■lit tendencies to Separatism

^^1:

104

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

The spirit and sentiments of Mr. Palfrey are identical witli
those which I have quoted of Mr. Bancroft; but while Mr.
Bancroft speaks contemptuously of the authors of the petition

which he witnessed — he ahnoHt ininu-diiitfly returmd. He crossed tlie sea again
five years after, bixt then it was to the colony of Plymouth. Establishing his
home at Scituate, he there conducted himself so as to come under the reproach
of being *a man of a busy, factious spirit, and always opposite to the civil
government of the country and the way of the Churches.' " (Winthrop, II,, ;
261.) His disaffection occa.sioned the'more uneasiness, because his brother
Samuel, also formerly an assistant of the Massachusetts Company, was now
one of the Parliament's Commissioners for the government of Foreign Planta-
tions.

In the year when the early struggle between the Presbyterians and
Independents in England had disclosed the importance of the is-sno-"
depending upon it, and the obstinate detennination with which it was tt la
carried on. Vassal " practised with " a few persons in Massachusetts " t j ♦ .<■
some course, first l)y petitioning the Courts of Massachusetts and of Plymouth,
and if that succeeded not, then to the Parliament of Eiigland, that the distinc-
tions which were maintained here, both in civil and church state, might be
done away, and that we might be wholly governed by the laws of England. '
In (a) a " Remonstrance and Humble Petition," addressed by them to the
General Court [of Massachusetts], they represented — 1. That they could not
discern in that colony " a settled form of government according to the laws of
England;" 2. That "many thousands in the plantation of the English
nation were debarred from civil employments," and not permitted " so much
as to have any vote in choosing magistrates, captains, or other civil and
military officers ; " and, 3. " That numerous members of the Church of
England, * * not dissenting from the latest reformation in Englauf ,
Scotland, etc., were detained from the seals of the covenant of free grace,
as it was supposed they will not take these Cluirches' covenants." They
prayed for relief from each of these grievances ; and they gave notice that, if
it were denied, they should " be necessitated to apply their humble desires to
the honourable Houses of Parliament, who, they hoped, would take their sad
condition into their serious consideration."

After describing the social position of the rej^resentative petitioners, Mr.
Palfrey proceeds : " But however little import^ince the movement derived froiu

((t) Winthrop, II., 261. "The movement in Plymouth was made at a
General Court in October, 1645, as appears from a letter of Winslow to
Winthrop (Hutch in.son's Collection, 154) ; though the public record contains
nothing respecting it. I infer from Winslow's letter, that half the assistants
(namely, Standish, Hatherly, Brown, and Freeman) were in favour of larger
indulgence to the malcontents." (Note by Mr. Palfrey.)

[The majority of the Geneml C'ourt were clearly in favour of the movertent ;
and knowing this, the Governor, Prince (the only persecuting Governor of the
Plymouth Colony), refused to put the question to vote.]

CHA^

for
meni
Com
fame
ventil
petit!
Mi[
tionel
estalt
force

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

105

t'<jr equal civil and religious rights, Mr. Palfrey traces the move-
ment to Mr. William Vassal, one of the founders and first
Council of the Massachusetts Colony, and progenitor of the
famous Whig family of Holland House. Nor does Mr. Palfrey
venture to question the doctrine or one of the statements of the
petitioners, though he calls them " conspirators."

Mr. Palfrey — very unfairly, I think — imputes to the peti-
tioners a design to subvert the Congregational worship and
establish the Presley terian worship in its place ; and to give
force to his imputations .says that a numerous party in the

the cliaracter or position of the a,t,'i tutors, it was essentially of a nature to create
alarm. It proposed notliiuf^ less tliari an abandonment of institutions, civil
and ecclesiastical, wliicli tlie settlers and owners of Massachusetts had set up,
I'Vir reasons impre-ssinf; their own minds as of the j^^reatest si<^nificance and
I ogency. The diauand was enforced by considerations which were not with-
out phuisil)ility, and were ])resented in a seductive form. It v\<s itself an
I I'lieal to the discontent of the numerical majority, not invested n-ifh a share in

he (jorernwent. And it frankly threatened an appeal to the En<,di8h Parlia-
nunt — an authority always to be dreaded for encroachment on colonial rij,dits,
ill d especially to be dreaded at a moment when the more numerous party
ai long its members were bent on setting up a Presbytery as the established
: ligion of England and its dependencies, determined on a severe 8up])ression
if di.ssent from it, and keenly exasperated against that Independency which
New England had raised up to tonnent them in their own si)here, and which,
fur herself. New England cherished as lier life."

" It being understood that two of the remonstmnts, Fowle and Smith,
'V K -'out to embark for England, to prosecute their business, the Court
^l^.p'^ i them with a summons to appear and 'answer to the matter of the
V' 'itivti.' They replied ' to the Gentlemen Commissioners for Planta-
t ' 1 ; ' and tlie Court committed them to the custody of the Marshal till

I'.y gav security to be responsible to the judgment of the Court. The
whulj seven were next arraigned as authors of divers false and scandalous
statements in a certain paper * * * against the Churches of Christ and the
rivil government here established, derogating from the honour and authority
'if the sixnie, and teiuling to sedition. Eefusing to answei, and ' appealing
from this government, they disclaimed the jurisdiction thereof.' This was
more than Pres))yterian malcontents could be indulged in at the ])resent
critical time in Massachusetts. The Court found them all deeply blamable,
!ind p:;:;ished them by fines, which were to be remitted on their making ' an
•^"^tiiiousind public acknowledgment of their mis<lemeanours ;' a condition
of ii eni.^'ty which they all refused, probably in expectatiori of obtaining
bcitli . lief and a])plau9e in England." — '* Four dejnities opposed the sentence ;
thre.; magistrates — Bellingham, Saltonstall, and Bradstreet — also dissented." —
Palfrey's History of New England, Vol. I., pp. 166—170.

100

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

English Parliament " were bent on .setting up Pre.sbytery as the
establi.shed religion in Englan<l and its depeiideiicieH." There is
not the .slightest ground for asserting that any party in the
Long Parliament, any more than in Ma.s,sachiisetts, designed the
setting up of Presbytery as the established worship in tht-
"dependencies of England." - King Charles the First, on his first
sitting in judgment on complaints again.st the proceedings of
the Massachusetts Bay Ccjiuicil, declared to his Privy Council, in
1632, that he had never intended to impose the Church ceremo-
nies, objected to by the Puritan clergy of the time, upon thf
colonists of Massachusetts. Charles the Second, tliirty years
afterwaii declared the .same and acted upon it during the
quarter of " ■ '' xry of his reign. The Long Parliament acted
upon the saJin ; linciple. There is not an instance, during the
whole sixty jeai.5 of the first Massachusetts Charter, of any
attempt, on the part of either King or Commonwealth, to
suppress or interfere with the Congregational worship in New
England ; all that was asked by the King, or any party in
Massachusetts, was tolerdtlon of other forms of Protestant
worship as well as that of the Congregational The very
petition, whose promoters are represented as movers of sedition,
asked for no exclusive establishment of P'-esbyterianism, but for
the toleration of both the Episcopal and Presbyterian worship,
and the worship of other Protestant Churches existing in England :
and their petition was addressed to a Legislature of Congrega-
tionalists, elected by Congregationalists alone ; and it was only
in the event of their reasonable requests not being granted by
the local Legislature that they proposed to present their
grievances to the Imperial Parliament. The plea of fear for the
safety of Congregational worship in Massachusetts was a mere
pretence to justify the proscription and persecution of all dissent
from the Congregational establishment. The spirit of the local
Government and of the clergy that controlled it was intolerance.
Toleration was denounced by them as the doctrine of devils ; and
the dying lines of Governor Dudley are reported to have been —

" Let men of God, in Court and Cliurch, watch
O'er such as do a toleration liatch."*

There is one other of Mr. Palfrey's statements which is of

CHAP

* HutchinHon's HiHtory ol' Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., Chap, v., p. 75.

TV,

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

107

special importance ; it is the adinisfsion that a majority of the
population of Massachusetts were excluded from all share in the
Government, and were actually opposed to it. Referring to the
petition to the local Legislature, he says : " The demand was
enforced by considerations which were not without plausibility,
and were presented in a seductive f oiin. It was itself an appeal
to the discontent of the numerical majority not invested loith
a share in the (jovernnient"* ^

* History of New England, Vol. II. p. 169. li. another case mentioned by
Mr. Palfrey, it is clear the public feeling was not w'th the local Government,
which pretended to absolute independence of Pai^iament, and called the
entrance of a i>arlianientary war vessel into its harbour, and action there, a
"/orcfV/ji encroachment." A Captain Stagg arrived at Boston from London,
in a vessel carrying twenty-four guns, and found there a merchant vessel
from Bristol (which city was then held for the King), which he seized.
Governor Winthrop wrote to Captain Stagg " to know hj vhat authority he
liad done it in our harbour." Stagg produced his commission from the Earl
of Warwick to captiu'e A'essels from ports in the occupation of the King's
party, as well in harbours and creeks as on the high seas. Winthrop ordered
him to carry the paper to Salem, the place of tlie Governor's residence, there
to he considered at a meeting of the nuigi.strates. Of coume tlie public feeliiig
vas with the Parliament and its officers ; but it was not so lieedless as to forget
its jealousy of foreign encroachment from whatevcjr cpiarter. " Some of the
elders, the la.st Lord's Day, had in their sermons reproved this proceeding,
and exhorted magistrates to maintain the people's liberties, which were, they
said, violated by this act, and that a commission coiild not supersede a patent.
And at this meeting some of the magistrates and some of the elders were of
the same opinion, and that the captain should be forced to restore the ship."
The decision, however, was different ; and the reasons for declining to defy the
Parliament, and allowing its officer to retain possession of his prize, are
recorded. The following are passages of this significant manifesto : " This
cmdd be no precedent to bar us from opposing any commission or other
foreign power that might indeed tend to our hurt or violate our liberty ; for
tlie Parliament had taught us that salus populi is suprema lex." (a) '' If

(a) This maxim, that the safety of the people is tlie supreme law, might, by
a similar perversion, be claimed by any mob or party constituting the
majority of a city, town, or neighbourhood, as well as by the Colony of
Massachusetts, against the Parliament or supreme authority of the nation.
TJiey had no doubt of their own infallibility ; they had no fear that they
" should hereafter be of a malignant spirit ; " but they thought it very possi-
ble that the Parliament might be so, and then it would be for them to fight
if they should have "strengtli sufficient." But after the restoration they
thought it not well to face the armies and fleets of Charles the Second, and
made as humble, 'fts loyal, and as laudator)' professions to him — calling him
" the best of kings " — as they had made to Cromwell.

:ll

108

THE LOYALISTS OF AMPmiCA

[chap. IV.

It is thus admitted, and clear from indubitable facts, that
professing to be republicans, tliey denied to the great majority
of the people any share in the government. Professing hatred
of the persecuting intolerance of King Charles and Laud in
denying liberty of worship to all who differed f romthem,they now
deny liberty of worship to all who differ from themselves, and
punish those by fine and imprisonment who even petition for
equal religious and civil liberty to all classes of citizens. They
justify even armed resistance against the King, and actually
decapitating as well as dethroning him, in order to obtain, pro-
fessedly, a government by the majority of the nation and liberty
of worship ; and they now deny the same principle and right of
civil and religious liberty to the great majority of the people
over v/hom they claimed rule. They claim the right of resist-
ing Pj" oment itself by armed force if they had the power, and
only desist from asserting it, to the last, as the salus popidi did
nut rviuire '^, and for the sake of their " godly friends in
Englanu, ' and to not afford a pretext for the " rebellious course"
of their fellow-colonists in Virginia and the West Indies, who
claimed the same independence of Parliament that the Govern-
ment of Massachusetts claimed, but upon the ground which was
abhorrent to the Congregational Puritans of Massachusetts —
namely, that of loyalty to the king.

I will now give in a note, in their own words, the principal
parts of their petition, entitled " General Court of Massachusetts
Bay, New England, in a Petition to Parliament in 1651,"*

Parliament should hereafter be of a malij^nant spirit, then, if we have strength
sufficient, we may make use of salas populi to withstand any authority from
thence to our liurt." " If we who have so openly declared our affection to
the cause of Parliament hy our prayers, fastings, etc., should now oppose
their authority, or do anything that Avould make such an appearance, it would
be laid hold on by those in Virginia and the West Indies to confiim them in
their rebellious course, and it would grieve all our godly friends in England,
or any other of the Parliament's friends." — Palfrey's History of New England,
Vol. il., pp. 161—163.

Note. — It is phxin from these words, as well as from other words quoted
elsewliere, how entirely and avowedly the Massachusetts Court identified
themselves with the Parliament and Cromwell against the King, though they
denied having done so in their addresses to Charhfs the Second.

* They say : " Receiving information liy Mr. Winslow, our agent, that it
is tlie Parliament's pleasure that we should take a new patent from them,
and keep our Co\irts and issue our warrants in their names, which we have

CHAP.

togetl
enclo.'
Comn
he hf
denyi
as his

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

109

together with extracts of two addresses to Cromwell, the one
enclosing a copy of their petition to Parliament, when he was
Commander-in-Chief of the army, and the other in lGo4, after
he had dismissed the Rump Parliament, and become absolute —
denying to the whole people of England the elective franchise,
as his admiring friends in Massachusetts denied it to the great

;ed
led

not used in the late Kiiif^'s time or Hincc, not Leing able to discern tlie need
of such an injunction, — these things make us doubt and fear what is
int€nded towards us. Let it therefore please you, most honourable, we
humbly entreat, to take notice hereby what were oiir orders, upon what
conditions and with what authority we came hither, and what we have done
since our coming. We were ihe first movers and imdertakers of so great an
attempt, being men able enough to live in England with our neighbours, and
being helpful to others, and not needing the help of any for outward thin;;,s.
About three or four and twenty years since, seeing just cfluse to fear the
persecution of the then Bishops and High Commissioners for i^ot conforming
to the ceremonies then pressed upon the consciences of those under their
power, we thought it our safest course to get to this outside of the M'orld,
out of their view and beyond their reach. Yet before we resolved upon so
great an undertaking, wherein should be hazarded not only all our estates,
but also the lives of ourselves and our posterity, both in the voyage at sea
(wherewith we were unacquainted), and in coming into a wilderness unin-
habited (unless in some few places by heathen, barbarous Indians), we
thought it necessary to procure a patent from the late King, who then ruled
all, to warrant our removal and prevent future inconveniences, and so did.
By which patent liberty and power was granted to us to live under the
government of a Governor, magistrates of our own choosing, and under laws
of our own making (not being repugnant to the laws of England), according
to which patent we have governed ourselves above this twenty years, we
coming hither at our proper charges, without the help of the State, ?.n
acknowledgment of the freedom of our goods from custom," etc. " And for
oxir carriage and demeanour to the honourable Parliament, for these ten
years, since the first beginning of your differences with the late King, and
the war that after ensued, we have constantly adhered to you, not withdrawing
ourselves in your weakest condition and doubtfuUest times, but by our
fasting and prayers for your good success, and our thanksgiving after the
same was attained, in days of solemnity set apart for that purpose, as also ^y
our sejiding over useful men (others also going voluntarily from us to help
you), who have been of good use and done acceptable services to the army,
declaring to the world hereby that such was the duty and love we bear unto
the Parliament, that we were ready to rise and fall with them ; for which
we have suft'ered the hatred and threats of other English colonies now in
rebellion against you, as also the loss of divers of our ships and goods, taken
by the King's party that is dead, by others commissioned by the King of
Scots [Charles II.], and by the Portugalls." "We hope that this most

110

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

majority of tlio people within their jurisdiction. Chahners says
they " outt'awned and outwitted Cromwell." They gained his
support by their first address, and thanked him for it in their
second. Having " the Parliament in his pocket" until he threw
even the rump of it aside altogether, Cromwell caused Parlia-
ment to desist from executing its own order.

It will be seen in the following chapter, that ten years after
these laudatory addresses to Parliament and Cromwell, the same
General Court of Massachusetts addressed Charles the Second
in words truly loyal and equally laudatory, and implored the
continuance of their Charter upon the ground, among otLjr
reasons, that they had never identified themselves with the

honourable Parlitiment will not cast such at have adhered to you and
depended upon you, as we have done, into so deep despair, from the fcar of
which we humbly desire to be speedily freed by a just and gracious answer ;
which will freshly bind us to pray and use all lawful endeavours for the
blessing of God upon you and the present Government." (Appendix viii. to
the first volume of Hutchinson's Historj' of Massachusetts Bay, pp. 516 — 518.

The "General Court" also sent a letter to Oliver Cromwell, enclosing a
copy of the petition to Parliament, to counteract representations which might
be made against them by their enemies, and intreat his interest in their
behalf. This letter concludes as follows :

"We humbly petition your Excellence to be pleased to shew us what
favour God shall be pleased to direct you unto on our behalf, to the moat
honourable Parliament, unto whom we have now presented a petition. The
cojjy of it, verbatim, we are bold to send herewith, that, if God so please, we
be not hindered in our comfortable proceedings in the work of God here in
this wilderness. Wherein, as for other favours, we shall be bound to pray,
that the Captain of the Host of Israel may be with you and your whole
army, in all your great enterprises, to the glory of God, the subduing of hie
and your enemies, and your everlasting peace and comfort in Jesus Chriflt."
(76., Appendix ix., j). 522.)

In August (24th), 1654, the General Court addressed another letter to
Oliver Cromwell, commencing as follows :

" It hath been no small comfort to us poor exiles, in these utmost ends of
the earth (who sometimes felt and often feared the frowns of the mighty), to
have had the exijerience of the good hand of God, in raising up such,
whose endeavours have not been wanting to our welfare : amongst whom we
have good cause to give your Highness the first place : who by a continued
series of favours, have oblidged us, not only while you moved in a lower orb,
but since the Lord hath called your Highness to supreme authority, whereat
we rejoice and shall pray for the continuance of your happy government,
that under your shadow not only ourselves, but all the Churches, may find
rest and peace." {lb., Appendix x., p. 523.)

CHAP. IV.]

AND THKIR TIMKS.

Ill

of
to
ch,
we
ed
»rb,

>nd

Parliament against his Royal father, but had been "passive"
during the whole of that contest. Their act against having
any commerce with the colonies who adheretl to the King
indicated their neutrality ; and the reader, by reading their
addresses to the Parliament and Cromwell, will see whether
they did not thoroughly identify themselves with the Par-
liament and Cromwell against Charles the First. They
praise Cromwell as raised up by the special hand of God, and
crave upon him the success of " the Captain of the Lord's hosts ; "
and they claim the favourable consideration of Parliament to
their request upon the ground that they had identified them-
selves with its fortunes to rise or fall with it ; that they had
aided it by their prayers and fastings, and by men who had
rendered it valuable service. The reader will be able to judge
of the agreement in their professions and statements in their
addresses to Parliament and Cromwell and to King Charles the
Second ten years afterwards. In their addresses to Parliament
and Cromwell they professed their readiness to fall as well as
vise with the cause of the Parliament ; but when that fell, they
I'epadiated all connection with it.

In the year 1G51, and during the very Session of Parliament
to which the General Court addressed its petition and narrated
its sacrifices and doings in the cause of the Parliament, the
latter passed the famous Navigation Act, which was re-enacted
and improved ten years afterwards, under Charles the Second,
and which became the primary pretext of the American Revolu-
tion. The Commonwealth was at this time at war with the
Dutch republic, which had almost destroyed and absorbed the
shipping trade of England. Admiral Blake was just com-
raencinjj that series of naval victories which have immortalized his
name, and placed England from that time to this at the head of
the naval powers of the world. Sir Henry Vane, as the Minister
of the Navy, devised and carried through Parliament the
famous Navigation Act — an Act which the colony of Massachu-
setts, by the connivance of Cromwell (who now identified him-
self with that colony), regularly evaded, at the expense of the
American colonies and the English revenue.* Mr. Palfrey says :

* " 1651. — The Parliament of England passed the famous Act of Naviga-
tion. It had been observed with concern, that the English merchants for
several years past had usually freighted the Hollanders' shipping for bring-

112

THE LOYALISTS OF AMEUICA

[t;HAP. IV.

i l' '.-

" The people of Massachusetts might well be satisfied with their
condition and prospects. Everything was prospering with them.
They had established comfortable liomes, which they felt strong
enough to defentl against any power but the power of tht.'
Mother Country ; and that was friendly. They had always the
good-will of Cromwell. In relation to tltevi, he allowed i\h:
Navigation Law, ■whlc/t jwessed on the Southern colonies, to
become A dead letter, and they received the conunodities of
all nations free of duty, and sent their ships to all the ports of
continental Europe."*

But that in which the ruling spirits of the Massachusetts
General Court — apart from their ceaseless endeavours to mono-
polise trade and extend territory — seemed to revel most was in
searching out and punishing dissent from the Congregational
Establishment, and, at times, with the individual liberty of
citizens in sumptuary matters. No Laud ever equalled them in
this, or excelled them in enforcing uniformity, not only of
doctrine, but of opinions and practice in the minutest particulars.
When a stand against England was to be taken, in worship, or

ing home their own merchandise, because tlieir freight was at a lower rate
than tliat of the Englisli ships. For tlic same reason the Dutdi ships were
made use of even for importing American products from tlic Englisli
colonies into England. The English ships meanwhile lay rotting in the
harbours, and the English mariners, for want of employment, went into the
service of the Hollanders. The Commonwealth now tuined its attention
towards the most effectual mode of retaining the colonies in dependence on
the parent State, and of securing to it the benefits of their increasing
commerce. With these views the Parliament enacted, ' That no merchandise,
either of Asia, Africa, or America, including the English Plantations there,
should be imported into England in any but English-built ships, and
belonging either to English or English Plantation subjects, navigated also by
an English commander, and three-fourths of the sailors to be Englishmen ;
excepting such merchandise as should be imported directly from the original
place of their growth, manufactured in Europe solely : and that no fish
should thenceforward be imported into England or Ireland, nor exported
thence to foreign parts, nor even from one of their own ports, but what
should be caught by their own fishers only." (Holmes' Annals of America,
Anderson, ii., 415, 416 ; Robertson, B. 9, p. 303 ; Janes' edit. Vol. I., p. 294.)
Mr. Holmes adds in a note : " This Act was evaded at first by New England,
which still traded to all parts, and enjoyed a privilege peculiar to themselves
of importing their goods into England free of customs." (History Massachu-
setts Bay, Vol. I., p. 40.)

* Palfrey's History of New England, Vol. II., p. 393.

CHAP. IV.]

AND THKIR TIME.S.

118

jish

liat
lea,

inquisition into ntatters of religious dissent, and woman's apparel,
Endicot became Governor (according to the "advic(; of the
Elders " in such matters), and Winthrop was induced to be Deputy
Governor, altliough the latter was hardly second to the former
in the spirit and acts of religious persecution. He had been
a wealthy man in England, and was well educated and amiable ;
but after his arrival at Massachusetts Bay he seems to have
wanted firnmcss to resist the intolerant spirit and narrow views
of Endicot. He died in 1G49. Mr. Palfrey remarks : " Whether
it was owing to solicitude as to the course of affairs in Eng-
land after the downfall of the Royal power, or to the absence
of the moderating influence of Winthrop, or to sentiments
engendered, on the one liand by the alarm from the Presby-
terians 11 1G46, and on the other by the confidence inspired by
the [Congregational] Synod in 1G4H, or to all these causes in
their degree, the years 1(5.50 and 1G51 appear to have been some
of more than common sensibility in Massachusetts to danger
from Heretics."*

In IGoO, the General Court condemned, and ordered to be
publicly burnt, a book entitled " The Meritorious Price of our
Redemption, Justification, etc.. Clearing of some Common Errors,"
written and published in England, by Mr. Pinchion, " an ancient
and venerable magistrate." This book was deficient in ortho-
doxy, in the estimation of Mr. Endicot and his colleagues, was
condeumed to be burnt, and the author was siunmoned to answer
for it at the bar of the incjuisitorial court. His explanation was
unsatisfactory ; and he was commanded to appear a second
time, under a penalty of one hundred pounds ; but he returned
to England, and left his inquisitors without further remedy.

" About the same time," says Mr. Palfrey, " the General Court
had a difliculty with the Church of Maiden. Mr. ' !;,riaaduke
Matthews having ' given offence to magistrates, elders, and
many brethren, in some unsafe and unsound expressions in his
public teaching,' and the Church of Maiden having proceeded
to ordain him, in disregard of remonstrances from ' both magis-
trates, ministers, and churches,' Matthews was fined ten pounds
for assuming the sacred office, and the Church was summoned to
make its defence " (Massachusetts Records, III., 237) ; which

* Palfrey's History of New England, Vol. II., p. 397, in a note.
8

114

THK LOYALIHTS i)¥ AMEIiICA

[<ilAI»

"failiiio- to do satistactorily, it was punished l>y a fino oi' fifty
pounds — Mr. Hatliorno, Mr. Lrvt'rctt, and srvon otlicr l)»'])utics
rt.'C'ordin^f their votes aj^^ainst the sentence." (Ih'td. 2.')2 ; coinpai-e
27<i, 2H!).)

But these leputed fathers of civil and relij^ious Ul»erty not
only lieid in((uisition over th" reli<,dous writin^^s and ' -hiivj^rs
of nia<,dstrates and ministers, and tlu^ intU'ptmdence of Con-

gre^^ational Churclies, l)ut even over tlie property, the inconu',
and the apparel of individuals ; for in this .same year, l()')l, they
passed a Sumptuary Act. Mr. Holines justly remarks : " This
.sumptuary law, for the matter and style, is a curiosity." The
Court, lamenting tlie ineffi(!acy of former " Declarations and
Orders against excess of apparel, botli of men and women," pro-
ceed to observe : " We cannot but to our grief take notice, that
intolerable excess and 1)ravery liatli crept in upon us, and espe-
cially among people of mean condition, to the di.shonour of God, tlie
scandal of our profession, the consumption of estates, and alto-
gether unsuitable to our poverty. Tlie Court proceed to order,
that no per.son wlio.se visible estate .should not exceed > true
and indifferent sum of £200, .shall wear any gold 'Iver

lace, or gold and silver buttons, or have any lace above two
shillings per yard, or silk hoods or scarves, on the penalty of ten
shillings for every such offence." The select men of every town
were recjuired to take notic(; of the apparel of any of the inhabi-
tants, and to assess .such persons as "they .shall judge to exceed
their ranks and abilities, in the cc.->tline.ss or fashion of their
apparel in any respect, especially in wearing of ribbands and
great boots," at £200 estates, according to the proportion which
some men used to pay to whom such apparel is suitable and
allowed. An exception, however, is made in favour of public
officers and their families, and of those " whose education and
employment have been above the ordinary degree, or whose
estates have been considerable, though now decayed."*

* Hutchinson's History of Masswclmsetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 152 ; Holmes'
Annals, Vol. I., p. 294. Note xxxi., p. 579.

This law was passed in 1651, while Enclicot wa.? Governor. Two years
before, shortly after Governor Winthrop's death. Governor Endicot, with
several other magistrates, issued a declaration against men wearing long hair,
prefaced with the words, " Forasmuch as the wearing of long hair, after the
manner of the ruffians and Ijarbarous Indians, has begun to invade New

CHAP. IV.]

AM) TIIKFIl TFMKS.

It will Im" vccollt't'ttMl l>y tljf rentier tlint in I(i44 the Massa-
chu.setts Hay Court passed an act of Itaiiishnient, etc., a}.;ainst
Baptists; that in l(i4.S it put to "the rout" the Preshyterians,
who nmtle a move for the toleration of tlieir worsliip ; that in
'(i4(), when the Preshyteriaiis and some Kpiscoi>alianM petitioned
the local ('ourt for liherty of worship, and in the event of
refusal expressed their determination to appeal to the P^nj^lish
Parliament, they were punislu'd with fines and imprisonment,
and their papers were seized. The above acts of censor.sliip
over tlie press, and private opinions in the case of Mr. Pincliion,
ami their tyranny over the organization of new Churches and
the ordinaticms of ministers — tininjj both (^hurch and ministers
for exercising what is universally acknowledged to he essential
to viuhpevdent worsliip — are hut furtlier illustrations of tlie
same spirit of intolerance. It was the intolerance of the Ma.s.sa-
chusetts Bay (government that caused the settlement of Connec-
ticut, of New Haven, as well as of 1 'node Island. The nohle
minds of tlie younger Winthrop, of Eaton, no more than that of
Roger Williams, couUl shrivel them.selves into the nutshell little-
ness of the Massachusetts Bay Government — so called, indeed, by
courtesy, or by way of accommodation, rather than as conveying
a proper idea of a Government, as it consisted solely of Congre-
yationali.sts, who alone were eligible to office and eligible as
electors to office, and was therefore more properly a CV)ngrega-
tional A.s.sociation than a civil government ; yet this association
assumed the combined powers of legislation, administration of
government and law, and of the army — absolute censorship of
the press, of worship, of even private opinions — and punished as
criminals those who even expressed their griefs in petitions;
and when punished they had the additional aggravation of being
told that they were not punished for petitioning, but for what
the petitions contained, as if they could petition without using
words, and as if they could express their griefs and wishes
without using words for that purpose. Yet under such pretexts
was a despotism established and maintained for sixty years
without a parallel in the annals of colonial history, ancient or

England," and declaring " their dislike and detestation against wearing of
such long hair as a thing uncivil and unmanly, whereby men do deform
themselves, and offend sober and modest men, and do corrupt good manners,"
etc.— 76.

116

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

I m^

modem ; under which five-sixths of the population had no more
freedom of worship, of opinion, or of franchise, than the slaves
of the Southern States before the recent civil war. It is not
surprising that a Government based on no British principle,
based on the above principle of a one Church membership,
every franchise under which was granted, or cancelled, or
continued at the pleasure of Elders and their Courts — such a
Government, un-British in its foundation and elements, could
not be expected to be loyal to the Royal branch of the con-
stitution.

It is not surprising that even among the Puritan party them-
selves, who were now warring against the King, and who were
soon to bring him to the block, such unmitigated despotism and
persecutions in Massachusetts should call forth, here and there,
a voice of remonstrance, notwithstanding the argus-eyed watch-
fulness and espionage exercised by the Church government at
Massachusetts Bay over all persons and papers destined for
England, and especially in regard to every suspected person or
paper. One of these is from Sir Henry Vane, who went to
Massachusetts in 16.30, and was elected Governor ; but he was
in favour of toleration, and resisted the persecution against
Mrs. Anne Hutchinson and her brother, Mr. Wheelwright. The
persecuting party proved too strong for him, and he resigned
his office before the end of the year. He was succeeded as
Governor by Mr. Winthrop, who ordered him to quit Massa-
chusetts. He was, I think, the purest if not the best statesman
of his time ;* he was too good a man to cherish resentment
against Winthrop or against the colony, but returned good for
evil in regard to both in after years. Sir Henry Vane wrote to
Governor Winthrop, in regard to these persecutions, as follows :
" Honoured Sir, —

" I received yours by your son, and was unwilling to let him
return without telling you as much. The exercise of troubles
which God is pleased to lay upon these kingdoms and the
inhabitants in them, teaches us patience and forbearance one
with another in some measure, though there be no difference in
our opinions, which makes me hope, that from the experience

* Such wjiH the opinion of the late Mr. John Forster, in his beautiful Life
of Sir Henry Vane, in his Lives of the Puritan Statesmen of the Common •
wealth. *

OHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

117

here, it may also be derived to yourselves, lest while the
Congregational way amongst, you is in its freedom, and is
backed with power, it teach its oppugners here to extirpate it
and roote it out, and f''^^ its own principles and practice. I
shall need say no more, knowing your son can acquaint you
particularly with our affairs.

" &c., &c.,

" H. Vane.*
"June 10, 1645."

Another and more elaborate remonstrance of the same kind
was written by Sir Richard Saltonstall, one of the original
founders, and of the first Council of the Company — one who
had appeared before the King in Council in 1632, in defence of
Endicot and his Council, in answer to the charges of Cl«urch
imiovation, of abolishing the worship of the Church of England,
and banishing the Browns on account of their adhering to the
worship which all the emigrants professed on their leaving
England. Sir R. Saltonstall and Mr. Cradock, the Governor of
the Company, could appeal to the address of Winthrop and his
eleven ships of emigrants, which they had delivered to their
"Fathers and Brethren of the Church of England" on their
departure for America, as to their undying love and oneness
with the Church of England, and their taking Church of
England chaplains with them ; they could appeal to the letter
of Deputy Governor Dudley to Lady Lincoln, denying that any
innovations or changes whatever had been introduced ; they
could appeal to the positive statements of the Rev. John White,
" the Patriarch of Dorchester," a Conformist clergyman, and the
first projector of the colony, declaring that the charges of inno-
vations, etc., were calumnies. Doubtless all these parties
believed what they said ; they believed the denials and pro-
fessions made to them ; and they repeated them to the King's
Privy Council with such earnestness as to have quite captivated
the Judges, to have secured even the sympathies of the King,

.ife
ion-

* Hutchinsou'H CoUoction of Original Papers, etc.; Publication of the
Prince Society.

Note by Mr. Hutchinson : " Mr. Winthrop had obliged Mr. Vane to leave
MuHaachusetts and return to Englan<l. Tlie letter was written when Mr.
Vane's interest in Parliament was very great. It shows a good spirit, and
the reproof is decent as well as seasonable."

118

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

who was far from being the enemy of the colony represented
by his enemies. Accordingly, an order was made in Council,
January 19, 1632, "declaring the fair appearances and great
hopes which there then were, that the country would prove
beneficial to the kingdom, as profitable to the particular persons
concerned, and that the adventurers might be assured that if
things should be carried as was pretended when the patents
were granted, and according as by the patent is appointed, his
Majesty would not only maintain the liberties and privileges
heretofore granted, but supply anything further which might
tend to the good government, prosperity, and iifort of the
people there." According to the statement of some of tlie
Privy Council, the King himself said " he would have severely
punished who did abuse his Governor and Plantation."

Mr. Palfrey well observes : " Saltonstall, Humphrey, and
Cradock appeared before a Committee of the Council on the
Company's behalf, and had the address or good fortwoe to
vindicate their clients."* It was certainly owing to their
" address or good fortune," and not to the justice of their east',
that they succeeded in deceiving the King and Council. The
complainants had unwisely mixed the charge of disloyal speeches,
etc., with Church innovations. It was to parry the former, b}-
assuming the statements to be ex parte, and at any rate uttered
by private individuals, who should be called to accoinit for their
conduct, and for whose words the Company could not be justly
held responsible. On the main charge of Church innovations, (jr
Church revolution, and proscription of the worship of the
Church of England, positive denials were opposed — the pro-
fession of Winthrop with his company and chaplains on
leaving England, the positive statement of the " Patriarch of
Dorchester," and that of Deputy Governor Dudley, who went
to Massachusetts with Winthrop, and wrote to the Countess of
Lincoln the year after his arrival, denying that any innovations
had been made. To all this the complainants had only to
oppose their own words — their papers having been seized.
They were overwhelmed by the mass of authority arraye<i
against them. But though they were defeated for the time,
they were not silenced ; and the following two years were pro-

* History of New England, Vol. I., p. 364.

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

119

ductive of such a mass of rumours and statements, all tendino-
to prove the Church revolutionary and Churcl; prescriptive
proceedings of the Massachusetts Corporation, that the King
and Council found it necessary to prosecute those inquiries
which they had deferred in 1032, and to appoint a Royal Com-
mission to proceed to Massachusetts Bay and inquire into the
disputed facts, and correct all abuses, if such should be found,
on the spot. This was what the Massachusetts Bay persecutors
most dreaded. As long as the inquiry should be conducted in
London, they could, by intercepting papers and intimidating
witnesses, and with the aid of powerful friends in England —
one or two of whom managed to retain their place in office
and in the Privy Council, even when Charles ruled without a
Parliament — with such advantages they could laugh to scorn
the complaints of the persecuted, and continue their proscrip-
tions and oppressions with impunity. But with a Royal Com-
mission sitting on the spot, these acts of concealment and
deception would be impossible. They therefore changed their
ground ; they now denied the right of the King to inquire into
their proceedings ; they invoked, as was their wont, the counsel
of their ministers, or " Elders," who preached warlike sermons
and gave warlike advice — "to resist if they were strong
enough ; " but if not strong enough to tight, " to avoid and
delay." For the former purpose they forthwith raised JE800 to
erect a fort to protect the entrance of their harbour, and organ-
ized and armed companies ; and in pursuance of the latter,
they delayed a year even to acknowledge the receipt of the
Royal orders to answer the charges preferred against them, and
then, when a more imperative and threatening Royal demand
was sent, they pleaded for another year to prepare for their
defence, and thus "avoided and delayed" from time to time,
until the King, getting so entangled with his Scottish subjects
and Parliament, became unable to pursue his inquiries into the
proceedings of the Massachusetts Bay Plantation ; and the Con-
gregational Church rulers there had, for more than twenty yearsi
the luxury of absolute rule and unrestricted persecution of all
that dissented from their newly set up Church polity and
worship.

Sir Richard Saltonstall, as well as Sir Henry Vane, and
doubtless many others of the Puritan party in England, could

120

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IV.

not endure in silence the outrageous perversions of the Charter,
and high-lianded persecutions l)y the Congregational ruhirs of
Massachusetts Bay.* Sir R. Saltonstall therefore wrote to
Cotton and Wilson, who, with Norton, were the ablest preachers
among the " Elders," and were the fiercest persecutors. The
letter is without date, but is stated by Mr. Hutchinson, in his
Collection of Massachusetts State Papers, to have been written
" .some time between 1(545 and 1G53." Sir R. Saltonstall's indig-
nant and noble 'remonstrance is as follows :

" Reverend and deare friends, whom I unfaynedly love
and respect :
" It doth not a little rrieve my spirit to heare what sadd
things are reported day by day of your tyranny and persecu-
tions in New England as that you fine, whip and imprison men
for their consciences. First, you compell such to come to your

* Mr. Neal gives the following account of certiiiu Baptists — Clarkis Holmes
and (Jrandall — who " were all apprehended upon the 2()th Julj tliis year,
[1651], at the house of one William Witters, of Lin. As they were
worshipping God in their own way on a Lord's-day morning, the c(«i8tabli'
took them into custody. Next morning they were Itrouglit hefore the
magistrate of the town, who sent them in custody to Boston, where they
remained in prison a fortnight, when they were brought to trial, convicted
and fined : John Clarke, twenty pounds or to be well wliipped ; Jolm
Crandall, five pounds or to be M'hipped ; 01)adiah Holmes, thirty pounds for
several offences." Mr. Neal adds : " The prisoners agreed not to pay tlieir
fines but to abide the cori)oral punishment the Court liad sentenced them to ;
but some of Mr. Chnki-'s friends i)aid the fine without his consent ; and
Crandall was released upon the promise to appear at the ue.\t Court ; but
Holmes received thirty lashes at the wliipi)iug-post. Sevend of his friends
were spectators of his piuiishment ; among the rest John Sjiear and John
Hazell, who, as they were attending the prisoner back to prison, took him by
the hand in the market-place, and, in the face of all the people, praised God
for his courage and constancy ; for which tliey were summoned beforc the
General Court the next day, and were fined eadi of them forty shillings, or to
be whipped. The prisoners refused to pay the money, but some of theii
friends paid it for them."

Mr. Neal adds the following just and imjjressive remarks : " Thus the
Government of New Emjland, for tlis sake of uniformity in divine vmship, broke
in upon the natural rights of mankind, punishing) men, not for disturbing the
State, but for their different sentiments in reli^fion, as appears by the following
Law : " [Then Mr. Neal ipiotes the law j)ass(!d against the Bajitists seven
years before, in 1644, and given on ])age 92.] (Neal's History of New Eng-
land, Vol. I., pp. 299, 300, 302, 303.)

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

121

assemblys as you know will not joy no, and when they show
their dislike thereol or witness against it, then you stirre up
your magistrates to punish them for such (as you conseyve)
their publicke affronts. Truly, friends, this your practice of
compelling any in 'matters of worship to do that whereof they
are not fully persuaded, is to make them sin, for so the apostle
(Rom. xiv. 23) tells, and many are made hypocrites thereby,
conforming in their outward man for feare of punishment. We
pray for you and wish you prosperity every way ; we hoped the
Lord would have given you so much light and love there, that
you might have been eyes to God's people here, and not to
practise those courses in the wilderness, which you went so far
to prevent. These rigid ways have laid you very lowe in the
hearts of the saints. I do assure you I have heard tliem pray
in the public assemblies that the Lord would give you meeke
and humble spirits, not to strive so nmch for uniformity as to
keepe the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace."

Addressed : " For my reverend and worthyly much esteemed
friends, Mr. Cotton and Mr. Wilson, preachers to the Church
which is at Boston, in New England."*

* Hutchmson's Collection of State Papers, etc., ])\\ 401, 402.

Mr. Cotton wrote a lon<^ letter in re])ly to Sir R. Saltonstiil!, denyin}; tliat
he or Mr. Wilson had insti}i;ated the complaints against the Baptists, yet
rejiresenting them as profane hecause they did not attend the established
worship, though they worsjiipped God in their own way. Cotton, assuming
thiit the Baptist worship was no worship, and that the only lawful worship
was the Congregational, proceeds to defend compnlsorj'^ attendance at the
estiiblished woi-shipupon the ground of preventing SaMiath profaneness (which
was a perversion of Sir R. Saltoumtairs letter), the .same as compulsory attend-
ance at the established worshij* was justified in the time of Elizabeth and
James the First, and against which the whole army of Puritan writers had
contended. Some of Cotton's words were as follows: "But (you say) it
doth make men hypocrites to compel men to conforme the outward men for fear
of punishment. If it did so, yet better be hypocrites than profane persons.
Hypocrites give God part of his due, the outward man ; but the profane person
giveth God neither the outward or inward man." — " If the magistrate connive
at his absenting himself from the Sabbath duties, the sin will be greater in
the magistrate than can be the other's coming."

Mr. Hutchinson, referring to Sir R. Saltonstall's letter, says : — " It discovera
a good deal of that catholic spirit which too many of our first settlers wei-e
destitute of, and confirms what I have said of Mr. Dudley's zeal in the first
volume of the Massachusetts History."

122

THK LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap, IV.

It is seen that Sir R. Saltonstall's letter was addressed to the
two principal Congregational ministers of Boston. It has been
shown that the preachers were the counsellors and prompters of
all violent measures against dissenting Baptists, Presbyterians,
Episcopalians, and Quakers — a fact further illustrated and con-
firmed by Mr. Bancroft, who, under the date of IGoO and lOol,
says : " Nor can it be denied, nor should it be concealed, that
the Elders, especially Wilson and Norton, instigated and sustained
the Government in its worst cruelties."*

During this first thirty years of the Massachusetts Bay Go\ -
ernment, it evinced, in contrast with all the other British
American colonies, constant hostility to the authorities in
England, seizing upon every possible occasion for agitation an<l
dispute; perverting and abusing the provisions of the Royal
Charter to suppress the worship of the Church of England, and
banishing its adherents ; setting up a new Cliurch and persecut-
ing, by whipping, banishment and death, those wlio refused
to conform to it ; seeking its own interests at the expense of
the neighbouring colonies ; sacrificing the first principles of
civil and religious liberty in their legislation and government ;
basing eligibility to office, and even the elective franchise, upon
the condition of membership in a Congregational Church — a
condition without a precedent or a parallel in any Protestant
country.

I cannot better conclude this review of the first three decades
of the Massachusetts Bay Puritan Government, than in the
words of the celebrated Edmund Burke, who, in his account of
the European settlements in America, after describing the form
of government established at Massachuset-.^ Bay, remarks that :
" From such a form as this, great religious freedom might, one
would have imagined, be well expected. But the truth is, they

* History of the United States, Vol. I., p. 484.

" I Relieve," says Mr. Bancroft, " that the elder Winthrop had relented
before his death, and, it is said, became weary of banishing heretics. Thi'
soul of the younger Winthrop was incapable of harbouring a thought of
intolerant cruelty ; but the rugged Dudley was not mellowed by old age."
Cotton affirmed : " Better tolerate hypocrites and tares than thorns anti
briers." " Religion," said Norton, from the pulpit, " admits of no eccentric
motions." (76., pp. 486, 487.)

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

123

had no idea at all of such freedom. The very doctrine of any
sort of toleration was so odious to the greater part, that one of
the first persecutions set up here was against a small party
which arose amongst themselves, who were hardy enough to
maintain that the civil magistrate had no lawful power to use
compulsory measures in affairs of religion. After harassing
these people by all the vexatious ways imaginable, they obliged
them to fly out of their jurisdiction." " If men, merely for the
moderation of their sentiments, were exposed to such severe
treatment, it was not to be expected that others should escape
unpunished. The very first colony had hardly set its foot in
America, when, discovering that some amongst them were false
brethren, and ventured to make use of the Common Prayer,
they found means to make the country so uneasy to them, that
they were glad to fly back to England. As soon as they began
to think of making laws, I find no less than five about matters
of religion ; all contrived, and not only contrived, but executed
in some respects with a rigour that the persecution which drove
the Puritans out of England, might be considered lenity and
indulgence in the comparison. For, in the first of these laws,
they deprive every man who does not comnninicate with their
Established Church, of the right to his freedom, or a vote in the
election of their magistrates. In the second, they sentence to
banishment any who should oppose the fourth commandment,
or deny the validity of infant baptism, or the authority of the
magistrates. In the third, they condemn Quakers to banish-
ment, and make it capital for them to return ; and not stopping
at the offenders, they lay heavy fines upon all who should bring
them into the province, or even harbour them for an hour. In
tlie fourth, they provide banishment, and death in case of return,
for Jesuits and Popish priests of every denomination. In the
fifth, they decree death to any who shall worship images.
After they had provided such a complete code of persecution,
they were not long without opportunities of reading bloody
lectures upon it." " In short, this people, who in England could
not bear to be chastised with rods, had no sooner got free from
their fetters than they scourged their fellow-refugees with
scorpions ; though the absurdity as well as injustice of such pro-
ceeding in them might stare them in the face ! "*

* Burke, Vol. II., Second London Edition, 1758, pp. 148—152.

' i
< I

124

THK LOYALISTS OF AM?:RICA

[chap. IV.

Mr. Palt'roy observes, that " the death of the Protector is not
so much as ret'en-ecl to in tlie public records of Massachusetts."
If this silence even as to the fact of Cronnvell's death was
intended to disclaim having had any connection or .sympathy
with the Protector, it was a deception ; if it was intended as
preparatoi'y to renouncing the worsliip of the setting .sun of
(^Vomwell, and worshipping the rising sun of Charles the Second,
it was indeed characteristic of their sidini; with the stronger
party, if they could thereby advance their own interests. But
I think every candid man in this age will admit, that there was
nuich more dignity of sentiment and conduct of those loyal
colonies who adhered to tlieir Sovereign in his adversity as well
as in his prosperity, who submitted to compulsory subjection to
the Cromwell power without acknowledging its legitimacy,
and were the first to recognize and proclaim the restored
king.*

The reader will be better able to appreciate the professioas of
the Massachusetts Bay Government, in regard to the restored
king, after reviewing its professions and relations to the Gov-
ernment of the Long Parliament and of Cromwell.

CM)

coul|

the

resii^

Sepi|

Cole

axitlj

griej

thei

*"In October, 1650, the Commons passed a memorable ordinance,
prohibiting,' trade with Barbadoes, Virginia, Antigua, and the Bermudas,
be'^iuse they had adliered to the fortunes of their late Sovereign. It declared
such persons ' notorious robl)ers and traitors ;' it forbade every one to
confederate with them ; it proliibited all foreign vessels from siiiling thither,
and it empowered the Council of State to compel all opponents to obey the
authority of Parliament. Berkley's defence of Virginia against the fortunate
invaders gained him the ai)probation of his prince and the applause of his
countrymen. When he could no longer fight, he delivered up the gov-
ernment, upon such favourable tenns as the English Commissioners
were willing to grant. He retired to a private station, to wait with
patience for favourable events. Virginia changed the various rulers which
the revolutions of the age imposed on England, with the reluctance that
acknowledged usurpation generally incites. But with the distractions that
succeeded the death of Cromwell, she .seized the opportunity to free herself
from the dominion of her hated masters by recalling Berkley from his
obscurity, and pnxlaiming the exiled king ; and she by this means acquired
the unrivalled honour of being the last dominion of the State which submit-
ted to that unjust exercise of government, and the first which overturned it."
— Chalmers' History of the Revolt of the American Colonies, Vol. I., pp. 74,
75 (Boston Collection).

I V

CHAP. IV.]

AND THEIU TIMES.

125

It has been shown above, that when obstinate silence
could not prevent the inquiry by a Royal Commission into
the oppressive and disloyal proceedings complained of, and that
resistance was fruitless, the Massachusetts Bay Government,
September 1038, transmitted to the Lords Commissioners for the
Colonies a petition in which it professed not to question the
authority of their Lordships' proceedings, but only to open their
griefs ; that if they had offended in anything, they prostrated
themselves at the foot of authority. They begged for time to
answer, before condemnation, professed loyalty to the King and
prayers for his long life, and the happiness of his family, and
for the success of the Lords of his Council. Two years after,
when the King's power began to wane, the Massachusetts Bay
Government sent home a Commission, headed by the notorious
Hugh Peters,* to conciliate the support of the leading members
of the Commons against the King's commission, and to aid the
opposition to the King. In 1G44, the General Court of Massachu-
setts Bay enacted, " that what person so ever shall draw a party
to the King, against the Parliament, shall be accounted a high
offender against this Commonwealth, and shall be punished
capitally." (See this Act, quoted at large in a previous page.)
This proceeding was as decisive as possible against the King
and all who adhered to the monarchy.

Again, in the Massachusetts General Court's address to
Parliament, in 1651, occur the following words :

" And for our carriage and demeanour to the honourable
Parliament, for these ten years, since the first beginning of your
differences with the late king, and the war that after ensued, we
have constantly adhered to you, not withdrawing ourselves in
your weakest condition and doubtfullest times, but by our fa.st-
ing and prayers for your good success, and our thanksgiving
after the same was attained, in days of solemnity set apart for
that purpose, as also by our over-useful men (others going
voluntarily from us to help you), ivho have been of good use and

* It was proved on Hugh Petera' trial, twenty years afterwards, that he
had said his work, out of New England, was, " to promote the interest of the
Reformation, by stirring up the war arul driving it on," He was Cromwell's
favourite chaplain, and preached before the Court that tried King Charles I.,
urging the condemnation and execution of the King.

120

thp: loyalists of ameuica

[chap. IV.

CM A

) .

done good acceptahle service to the army, deehirlmj to the worht
hereby that such was the duty and love we bear unto the
Parliament that we were ready to rise and fall with them ; for
which we have suffered the hatred and threats of other English
colonies, now in rebellion against you, as also the loss of divers
of our ships and goods, taken l)y the King's party that is dead,
by others connnissioned by the King of Scots [Charles II.] and
by the Portugalls."*

An address of the same General Court, in the same year,
1051, and on the same occasion (against the order of Parliament
to recall the old and grant the new Charter), to Oliver Crom-
well, concludes in the following words :

" We liumbly petition your Excellence to be pleased to show

* Hutchinson's History of MasHachusetts Bay, Vol. 1., Appendix viii., pp.
517, 518.

" The * other English Colonies' with which Massachusetts, by her attach-
ment to the new Government, had been brought into unfriendly relations,
were ' Barbadoes, Virginia, Bermudas, and Antigua.' Their persistent loyalty
had been punished by an ordinance of Parliament forbidding Englishmen to
trade with them — u measure wliich the General Court of Massachusetts
seconded by a similar prohibition addressed to masters of vessels belonging
to that jurisdiction. Tlie rule was to remain in force 'luitil the compliance
of the aforesaid places witli the Commonwealth of England, or the further
order of this Court ;' and tlie penalty of disobedience was to be a confiscation
of ship and cargt). In respect to Virginia, it may be presumed that this step
was not the less willingly taken, on account of a grudge of some years' stand-
ing. At an early period of the civil war, that colony had banished non-
conforniist ministers who had gone thither from Massachusetts [1643] ; and
the offence had been repeated five years afterwards." — Palfrey's History of
New England, Vol. II., pp. 402, 403,

But Mr. Palfrey omits to remark that the Act of the Virginia Legislature,
in forbidding the Congregational Ministers of Massachusetts Bay from
propagating their system in Virginia, was but a retaliation upon the Govern-
ment of Massachusetts Bay, which had not only forbidden Episcopal worship,
but denied citizenship to Episcopalians. The Virginia Legislature, wliile it
established the Episcopal Church, had never, like the Legislature of Massachu-
setts Bay, disqualified all except the members of one Church from either
holding office or exercising the elective fi-anchise. The Massachusetts Bay
Government, like that of the Papacy, would tolerate only their own form of
worship ; would allow no Episcopalian, Presbyterian, or Baptist worship
within their jurisdiction ; yet complain of and resent it as unjust and
persecuting when they are not permitted to propagate their system in other
colonies or countries.

us w
l..'ha
now

llOKl

• lere

Who

the

who

the

L ■

■"?*[

CHAP. IV.]

AND THKIU TIMES.

127

us what favour God shall ho plea.s(Ml to direct you unto on our
lit'half, to the most honourahle Parliament, unto whom we have
now presented a petition. The copy of it. rcrhatim, we are
liold to .send lierewitli, that if God plea,se, we may not he hin-
dered in our comfortable work of God here in this wilderness.
Wherein, as for other favours, we shall he Iwjund to pray, that
tlie (Japtain of the host of Israel may l)e with you and your
whole army, in all your great enterprises, to the glory of God,
the subduing of his and your enemies, and your everlasting
peace and comfort in Jesus C.hrist."

Likewise, August 24th, 1()54, after Cromwell had not only
put the King . to death, but aboli.shed the House of Lords,
excluded by his .soldiers 154 members of P irliament, then dis-
missed the remaining " rump " of the Parliament itself and
become .sole despot, the General Court of Massachusetts Bay
concluded an address to him as follows :

"We shall ever pray the Lord, your protector in all your
dangers, that hath crowned you with honour after your long
service, to lengthen your days, that you may long continue
Lord Protector of the three nations, and the Churches of Christ
Jesus."*

* Hutcliinsoii's History of Ma.ssachusetts Bay, Vol. I., Apjjondix ix., \k
.'■)22.

To these e.xtraordinavy a(l(lres.ses may be added u letter t'roni the Rev. .lolm
Cotton, a chiel" Coiifjregational minister in Boston, to " Lord General Crom-
well," dated Boston, N. E., May 5th, 1651.

There are three things in this letter to l)e specially noticed.

The first ia, the terms in which Cromwell is addres.sed and complimented.

The second is, tlie indication here given of the manner in which the Scotch
prisoners taken at the battle of Dunbar (while fighting in their own country
and for their King) were disposed of by Cromwell, and with what com-
placency Mr. Cotton speaks of the slavery into which they were sold not
lieing " perjwtual servitude," but limited to " 6 or 7, or 8 years."

The third thing noteworthy in this letter, in which Mr. Cotton compli-
ments Cromwell for having cashiered from the amiy every one but his own
partizans, thus placing the army beneath his feet, to support his absolutism
in the State, having extinguished the Parliament itself, and with it every
iorm of liberty dear to the hearts of all true Englishmen.

The chief passages of Mr. Cotton's letter are as follows :

" Right Honourable, — For so I muet acknowledge you, not only for the
eminency of place and command to which the God of power and honour hath
called you ; but also for that the Lord hath set you forth as a vessell of

128

TIIK LOYALISTS OF AMKKICA

[chap. IV.

The documentary evidence which 1 have ad(hice<l, shows, 1
think, beyond reasonabU'- doubt, that the rulers of MassacliusottH
Bay (Jolony were disattected to tlie Kin^' from the; b(!<,dnnini(,
and so displayed that feelin<^ on every occasicm exct.'pt (me, in
lO.SH, when they professed humiliation and loyalty in order to
avert the investigati(m whicli they dreaded into tlieir proceed-
ings; that the King, whatever may have been his misdoings
towards his subjects in England, treated his subjects in the
colonies, and especially in Massachusetts Bay, with a kindness
and consideration which should have secured their gratitude ;
that the moment, in the matters of dispute between the King and
his Parliament (and in which the colonies had no concern), the
scale appeared to turn in favour of the Parliament, the rulers of
Massachusetts Bay renounced their allegiance to the King, and
identified themselves as thorough partizans of the war against
the King — that they suppressed, under the severest penalties,
every expression of loyalty to the King within their jurisdiction
— offered prayers for and furnished men in aid of the Parlia-
mentary army — denounced and proscribed all recognition, exce])t
as enemies, the other American colonies who adhered to their

honour to hin imine, iu workiii}.; iiiiuiy luul great (Iflivcraiicc's for liin pfople,
and tor his truth, hy you ; and yi^t hi'lpiiifj; you to rcsi-rvt' all tlic honour to
him, wlio in the God ol' salvation and the. Lord ol' howts, niiglity in liatti'M."

" Tlu! Scots, whom Ciod dt'livered into your liand at Dunham', and
wher(!of sundry were sent liither, we have heen desirous (as we eouhl) to
make their yoke easy. Such as were sick ol" the scurvy or other disiasca
luive nut wanted physick or chyrurgery. They have not been sold for slavcfl
to perpetual servitude, hut for 6 or 7, or 8 years, as we do our owne :
and lie that hought the most of them (I lieare) Imildeth houses for them, for
every 4 an hou.se, layeth some acres of ground thereto, wliich he givetb
them as tlieir owne, requiring tliree <laye8 in the weeke to worke for 'mh (by
turnes), and 4 dayes for themselves, and promiseth, as soon n; vhey tun npay
him the money he hiyed out for them, he will set t' ' ' . rty."

" As for the aspersion of factious men, I hear, b 'osborough's ' ■^r

[Cromwell's brother-in-law], last night, that you ha veil vindicated \ ur-
selfe therefrom hy cashieriny sundry cornipt spirits uiii of tb> army. And
truly. Sir, better a few and faithfuU, than many and iinsou .1. The army
on Christ's side (which he maketh victorious) are called chosen and faithful!,
Rev. 17. 14 — a verse worthy your Lordship's fre(|uent and deepe meditation.
Go on, therefore (good Sir;, to overcome yourselfe (Prov. 16. 32), to overcome
your army (Dent. 29. 9, with v. 14), and to vindicate your orthodox integrity
to the world." (Hutchinson's Collection of Original Papers relative to the
History of Massachusetts Bay, pp. 233 — 235.)

IV.

CHAP. IV.|

AND THEIR TIMKH.

129

i-ll."
iuxl
) to

lives

, for
ivetb
(by
:iay

oaths of allegiance to the King ; that when Cromwell had
obliterated every landmark of the British constitution and of
British lilMjrty — King, Lords, and Commons, tlie freedom of
election and the freedom of the prcvss, with the freed(jm of wor-
ship, and transformed the army itself to his sole purpose — doing
wliat no Tudor or Stuart king had ever presumed to do — even
then the General ( Jourt of Massachusetts Bay bowed in reverence
and praise before him as the called and chosen of the Lord of
hosts.*

But when Cromwell could no longer give them, in contempt
to the law of Parliament, a monopoly of trade against their
fellow-colonists, and sustain them in their persecutions ; when
he ceased to live, they would not condescend to record his
demise, but, after watching for a while the chances of the future,
they turned in adulation to the rising sun of the restored
Charles the Second.

The manner in which they adjusted their denials and profes-
sions to this new state of things, until they prevailed upon the
kind-hearted King not to remember their past transgressions,
and to perpetuate their Charter on certian conditions ; how they
L'vaded those conditions of toleration and administering the
government, and resumed their old policy of hostility to the
Sovereign and of persecution of their Baptist and other brethren
who differed from them in worship, and in proscribing them
from the elective franchise itself, will be treated in the following
chapter.

* In view of the documents which I have quoted, it seeniH extraordinary to
see Mr. Hutchinson, usually so accurate, so far influenced by his personal
prejudices as to say that the government of the Massachusetts Bay Colony
" prudently acknowledged subjection to Parliament, and afterwards to Crom-
well, so far as was necessary to keep upon terms, and avoid exception, and no
farther. The addresses to the Parliament and Cromwell show this to have
been the case." — History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 209.

The addresses to Parliament* and to Cromwell prove the very reverse —
prove that the rulers of the Massachusetts Bay Colony avowedly identified
themselves with the Parliament and afterwards with Cromwell, when he
overthrew the Parliament, and even when he manipulated the army to hia
purpoB*^ of absolutism.

130

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. \

CHAPTER V.

ir-l

Government of Massachusetts Bay and other Colonies, duhino
Twenty Years, under Charles the Second.

The restoration of Charles the Second to the throne of his
ancestors was received in the several American colonies with
very different "feelings ; the loyal colonies, from the Bermudas
to Plymouth , hailed and proclaimed the restored King without
hesitation ; Virginia proclaimed him before he was proclaimed
in England ;* the rulers of the Massachusetts Bay Colony alone
stood in suspense ; hesitated, refused to proclaim him for a year,

* Tin- captain of a ship brought the news from England in July, that the
King had been proclaimed, but a false rumour was circulated that the
Goveinment in England was in a very unsettled state, the body of the peopli'
dissatisfied ; that the Scotch had demanded work ; that Lord Fairfa.x
was at the head of a great army, etc. Such a rumour was so congenial to the
feelings of the men who had been lauding Cromwell, that when it was pro-
posed in the General Court of Massachusetts Bay, in the October following,
to address the King, the majority refused to do so. They awaited to see
which party would prevail in England, so as to pay court to it. On the 30tli
of November a ship arrived from Bristol, bringing news of the utter falsity
of the nimours about the unsettled state of things and popular dissatisfaction
in England, and of the proceedings of Parliament ; and letters were received
from their agent, Mr. Leverett, that petitions and complaints were preferred
against the colony to the King in Council. Then the Governor and P&sistantn
called a meeting of the General Court, December 9th, when a very loyal
address to the King was presently agreed upon, and another to the tw()
Houses of Parliament. Letters were sent to Sir Thomas Temple, to Lord
Manchester, Lord Say and Seal, and to other persons of note, praying them to
intercede in behalf of the colony. A most gracious answer was given to the
atldi-ess by the King's letter, dated February 15, 1660 (1661, new style).
whif.h was the first public act or order concerning them after the restoration.''
(Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. L, pp. 210, 211.)

».HAP. v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

131

until ordered to do so. When it was ascertained that the
restoration of the King, Lords, and Conunons had been enthu-
siastically ratified by the people of England, and was firmly
established, the General Court of Massachusetts Bay adopted a
most loyal address to the King, and another to the two Houses
of Parliament, notwithstanding the same Court had shortly
before lauded the power which had abolished King, Lords, and
Commons. The Court also thought it needful to give practical
proof of the sincerity of their new -bom loyalty to the mo
narchical government by condemning a book published ten years
before, and which had been until now in high repute among
them, written by the Rey. John Eliot, the famous apostle to the
Indians. This book was entitled "The Christian Common-
wealth," and argued that a purely republican government was the
only Christian government, and that all the monarchical govern-
ments of Europe, especially that of England, was anti-Christian.
It appears that this book had been adduced by the complainants
in England against the Massachusetts Bay Government as a
proof of their hostility to the system of government now
restored in England. To purge themselves from this charge,
the Governor and Council of Massachusetts Bay, March 18,
ICGl, took this book into consideration, and declared "they find
it, on perusal, full of seditious principles and notions relative to
all established governments in the Christian world, especially
against the government established in their native country."
Upon consultation with the Elders, their censure was deferred
until the General Court met, " that Mr. Eliot might have the
opportunity in the meantime of public recantation." At the
next sessions, in May, Mr. Eliot gave into the Court the following
acknowledgment under his hand :

" Understanding by an Act of the honoured Council, that there
is offence taken at a book published in England by others,
the copy whereof was sent over by myself about nine or t«n
years since, and that the further consideration thereof is com-
mended to this honoured Court now sitting in Boston : Upon
perusal thereof, I do judge myself to have offended, and in way
of satisfaction not only to the authority of this jurisdiction, but
also to any others t^at shall take notice thereof, I do hereby
acknowledge to this General Court, that such expressions as do
too manifestly scandalize the Govemment of England, by King,

132

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

Lords and Commons, as anti-christian, and justify the lato
innovators, I do sincerely bear testimony against, and acknow-
ledge it to be not only a lawful but eminent form of government.

" 2nd. All forms of civil government, deduced from Scripture,
I acknowledge to be of God, and to be subscribed to for con-
science sake ; and whatsoever is in the whole epistle or book
inconsistent herewith, I do at once and most cordially disown.
• "John Eliot."*

It nmst have been painful and humiliating to John Eliot to
be brought to account for and compelled to recant the senti-
ments of a book which had been in circulation eight or nine
years, and much applauded by those who now arraigned and
made a scapegoat of him, to avert from themselves the conse-
quence and suspicion of sentiments which they had held and
avowed as strongly as Eliot himself. <m^

It has been said that the Government of Massachusetts Bay
had desisted from acknowledging and addressing Charles the
Second as King, until they found that their silence endangered
their interests. Mr. Holmes, in his Annals, speaking under the
date of May, IGGl (a year after Charles liad entered London a.s
King), says : " Charles II., had not yet been proclaimed by the
colony. The Governor (Endicot), on receiving intelligence of
the transactions that were taking place in England to the
prejudice of the colony, judged it inexpedient longer to delay
that solemnity. Calling the Court together, a fonn of proclama-
tion was agreed to, and Charles was acknowledged to be their
sovereign Lord, and proclaimed to be the lawful King of Great
Britain, France and Ireland, and all other territories thereto
belonging." An address to the King was agreed to, and ordered
to be sent to England.-f*

♦ Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 211, 212.

t Holmes* Annals of America, Vol. I., p. 318. Hutchinson, Vol. I., p. 21(3.
Hazard, Vol. II., pp. 593 — 695. The address is a curiosity in its way, and a
strange medley which I must leave the reader to characterize in view of
the facts involved. The following are the principal passages of it :

Extracts from the Massachusetts General Court — Address to the King,
dated 19th December, 1660 :

" To the High and Mighty Prince, Charles the Second, by the grace of God,
King of Grent Britain, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith.
" Most gracious and dread Sovereign :

" May it please your Majesty — In the day wherein you liappily say you know

€HAP. V.l

AND THEIR TIMES.

133

tlu

God,
ith.

In this remarkable address (given in a note) the reader will
be struck with several things which appear hardly reconcilable
with words of sincerity and truth.

First, the reason professed for delaying nearly a year to
recognise and address the King after his restoration. Nearly
thirty years before, they had threatened the King's Royal father
with resistance, since which time they had greatly increased in
wealth and population ; but now they represent themselves as
" poor exiles," and excuse themselves for not acknowledging the
King because of their Mephiboseth lameness of distance — as if
they were more distant from England than the other American
colonies. Their " lameness" and " ineptness" and " impotence"
plainly arose from disinclination alone. It is amusing to hear

you are King over your British Israel, to cast a favourable eye upon your
jKiore Mephiboseth now, and by reason of lameness in respect of distance, not
until now appearing in your presence, we mean upon New England, kneel-
ing with the rest of your subjects before your Majesty as her restored Kiu|;.
AVc forget nf)t our ineptnesa as to those approaches ; we at present owne such
impotence as renders us unable to excuse our impotency of spcraking unto
fiur Lord the King ; yet contemplating such a King, who hath also seen
adversity, that he knoweth the hearts of e.\ili\'<, who himself hath l)een an
ixile, the aspect of Majesty extraordinarily influenced animateth exanimated
outcasts, yet outcasts as we hope for the truth, to make this address unto our
Prince, hoping to find grace in your sight. We present this script, the trans-
crijtt of our loyall hearts, wherein we crave leave to supplicate your Majesty
for your gracious protection of us in the C(mtinunnce both of our civill and
loligious liberties (according to the grantees known, and of suin^^ for the
])atent) conferred on this Plantation by your royal father. This, viz., our
liliertie to walk in the faith of the gospell, was the cause of our transporting
'lursL'lves, with our wives, little ones, and our substances, from that over the
Atlantick ocean, into the vast wilderness, choosing rather the jture Scriptuiv
worship with a good conscience in this remote v/ilderness among the heathen,
than the pleasures of England with submiB.sion to the impositions of the then
so disposed and so far prevailing hierarchy, which we could not do without an
fvil conscience." " Our witness is in heaven that we left not our native
country upon any dissiitisfaction »'.s to the constitution of the civil state. Our
lilt after the good old nonconfonnists hath been only to nc< a passive part
throMjhout these late vicissitudes and successive turnings of States. Our separa-
tion from our brethren in this desert hath been and is a sufficient bringing to
mind the atilictions of Joseph. But providentiall exemption of us hereby
irom the late wRiTes and temptations of either party we account as a favour
Irom Ood ; tlie foimer cloathes us with sackcloth, the latter with innocency.

(Signe<l) "John Endicot, Govtrnor.
" In the name and by oi-der of the Gefneral Court of Massachusetts."

_< '

Ir'

134

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

them speak of themselves as "exanimated outcasts," hopinj,' tn
be animated by the breath of Royal favour. Their " script"
was no douV>t " the transcript of their loyal hearts" when they
supplicated the continuance of the Royal Charter, the first inten-
tions and essential provisions of which they had violated so many
years.

Secondly. But what is most suspicious in this adtlress is their
denial of having taken any part in the civil war in England —
professing that their lot had been the good old nonconformists',*
" only to act a passive 2^(it^ throughout these late vicissitudes,"
and ascribed to the favour of God their " exemption from the
temptations of either party." Now, just ten years before, in
their address to the Long Parliament and to Cromwell, they
said:

"And for our carriage and demeanour to the honourable
Parliament for these ten years, since the first beginning of your
differences with the late King, and the war that after ensued,
we have constantly adhered to you, notwithstanding ourselves
in your weakest condition and doubtfullest times, but by our
fasting and prayers for your good success, and our thanks-
giving after the same was attained, in days of solenmity set
apart for that purpose, as also by our sending over useful men
(others also going voluntarily from us to help you) who have
been of good use and have done good acceptable service to the
army, declaring to the world hereby that such was the duty ami
love we bear unto the Parliament that we were ready to rise ami
fall with them : for which we suffered the hatred and threats
of other English colonies now in rebellion against you," etc.f

Whether this address to Parliament (a copy of it being enclosed
with an address to Cromwell) had ever at that time been made
public, or whether King Charles the Second had then seen it,
does not appear ; but it is not easy to conceive statements and
words more opposite than those addressed by the General Court
of Massachu.setts Bay to the Parliament in 1G51, and to the
King, Charles the Second, in IGOl.

* It is kni)wu Unit the "o/ri tutnciintbrmists" did not tifjiht against tlio
king, denounced his execution, suHi-rt'd tor their " nonconformity" to Crom-
well's despotism, and were anion^ the most active restorei-s of Charles tin'
Second.

t See above, in a previous page.

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

135

On the contrasts of acts thetnselves, the reader will make
his own remarks and inferences. The King received and
answered their address very graciously.* They professed to
receive it gratefully ; but their consciousness of past unfaith-
fulness and transgressions, and their jealous suspicions, appre-
hended evil from the general terms of the King's reply, his
reference to his Royal predecessors and religious liberty, which
above all things they most dreaded, desiring religious liberty
for themselves alone, but not for any Episcopalian, Presbyterian,
Baptist, or Quaker. They seem, however, to have been surprised
at the kindness of the King's answer, considering their former
conduct towards him and his Royal father, and towards the
colonies that loyally adhered to their King; and professed to
have been excited to an ectasy of inexpressible delight and
gratitude at the gracious words of the best of kings.f Their

* Letter from Charles II. to Governor Endicot :
" Charles R.

"Trusty ami well beloved — Wee greet you well. It having pleased
Almighty God, after long trialls both of us and our people, to touch their
liearts at last with a just sense of our right, and by their assistance to
restore us, peaceably and without blood, to the exercise of our legall authority
lor the gooil and welfare of the nations committed to our charge, we have
made it oiu" care to settle our lately distracted kingdom at home, and to
extend our thoughts to increase the trade and advantages of our colonies
iind plantations abroad, amongst which as wee consider New England to
he one of the chiefest, having enjoyed and grown up in a long and orderly
establishment, so wee shall not be behind any of our royal predecessors in a
just encouragement and protection of all our loving .subjects there, whos«:
application unto us, since our late happy restoration, hath l>een very accept-
able, and shall not want its due remembrance upon all seasonable occasions ;
neither shall wee forget to make you and all our good pi'ople in those parts
etjual partakei-s of those promises of liberty and moderation to tender con-
sciences expressed in our gracious declarations ; which, though some inasons
in this kingdom, of desperate, disloyal, and unchristian j)rinciples, have
lately abused to the public difiturliance and their own destruction, yet wee
are conlident our good subjects in New England will make a right use of it,
to the glory of God, their own spiritual comfort ami editi«'ation. And so wee
bid you favewell. Given at our Court of Whitehall, the 16th day of Febru-
ary, 1660 (1661, new style), in the thirt«enth year of our reigne.

(Signed) " Will. Mobhice."

t The following ai-e extracts from the reply of the (.ieneral Court of Massa-
I'luisetts Bay to the foregoing letter of Charles the Second :
" Illustriouh Sir, —

"•llmt majestie and beuiguitie both sate upon the throne whereunto

13G

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

■l !
I ji

address presented a curious mixture of professed self-abase-
ment, weakness, isolation, and affliction, with fulsome adulation
not surpassed by anything that could have been indited by the
most devout loyalist. But this honeymoon of adulation to the

your outcasts made their former adclrense ; witness this second eucliaristical
approach unto th«' best of kinj,'s, who to other titles of royaltie common to
him with other gods amonj^st men, deli>{litetli herein more particularily to
conforine himselfe to the God of K"^*!**? i" that he hath not despised nor
abhorred the affliction of tlie afflicted, neitlier hath lie hid his face from him,
hut when he heard he cried.

"Our petition was the representation of exiles' necessities ; this script,
congi'atulatory and lowly, is the reflection of the gracious rayes of Christian
majestie. There we besought your favour by presenting to a compassionate
eye that botth; full of tears shed by us in this Teshinum : here we acknow-
ledge the efficacie f)f regal inttnence to qualify these salt waters. The mission
of ours was accompanied with these Churches sitting in sack-doth ; the
reception of yours was as the holding forth the .scei)ter of life. The truth
is, such were the impressicms upon our spirits when we received an answer
of peace from our gracifius Sovereigne as transcends the facultie of an
eremitical scribe. Such, as though our expressions of them neede pardon,
yet the suppression of them seemeth unpardonable."
The conclusion of their address was as follows :

"Royal Sir, — • . ,

" Your just Title to the Crown enthronizeth you in our consciences, your
graciousness in our affections : That inspireth us unto Duty, this naturalizetli
unto Loyalty : Thence we call you Lord ; hence a Savior. Mephibosheth,
how prejudicially soever misrepresented, yet i-ejoiceth that the King is c'>me
in Ptyice to his own house. Now the Lortl hath dealt well with our Lord tlie
King. May New England, under your Royal Protection, be permitted still
',0 sing the Lord's song in this strange Land. It shall be no grief of Heait
for the Blessing of a people ready to jierish, daily to come upon your
Majesty, the blessings of your poor people, who (not here to alledge the
innocency of our cftuse, touching which let us live no longer than we subject
ourselves to an orderly trial thereof), though in the particulars of sul)8crii)-
tions and conformity, supposed to be under the hallucinations of weak
Brethren, yet crave leave with all humility to say whether the voluntary'
quitting of our native and dear country be not sufficient to expiate so inno-
cent a mistake (if a mistake) let God Almightie, your Majesty, and all good
men judge.

" Now, he in whose hands the times and trials of the children of men are,
who hath madt; ytnir Majesty remarkably parallel to the most eminent of
kings, both for space and kind of your troubles, so that vere day cannot be
excepted, wherein they drove him from abiding in the inheritance of the
Lord, saying, ' Go, serve other gods ; make you also (which is the crown of
all), more and more like unto him, in being a man after God's own heart, to
do whatsoever he will.' Yea, as the Lord was with David, so let him be With

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

137

restored King was not of long duration ; the order of tlie King,
September 8, 1661, to cease persecuting the Quakers, was
received and submitted to with remoastrance ; and obedience
to it was refused as far as sending the accused Quakers to
England for trial, as that would bring the Government of
Massachusetts Bay before the English tribunals.*

But petitions an<l representations poured in upon the King
and Council from Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Baptists, etc.,
from Massachu.setts Bay, and their friends in England, com-
plaining that they were denied liberty of worship, the ordinance
of Baptism and the Lord's Supper to their fannlies and them-
selves, that they were deprived of even the elective franchise
Vtecause of their not being members of the Congregational
riuirch, and praying for the redress of their grievances.-f-

vinir most excellent Maje.sty, and make the Throne of Kinj^ Charles the
Sicond both gfreater and better than the Throne of Kinj,' David, or than the
Tliroiie of any of your Royal Prof,'enitor8. So shall always pmy,

"Great Sir,
" Your Majesty's most liumble and loyal sultjects.

"John Endicot, Governor."
(Hutchinson's Collection of Orifjinal Papers, etc., pp. 341, 342. Massa-
< hiisetts Records, August 7, 1661.)

* The Government of N»'\v England received a letter from the King,
signifying his pleasure that there should be no further ])rosecution of the
'^lakers who were condemned to suffer death or other corporal punishment,
"F who were imprisoned or obnoxious to such condemnation ; but that they be
I'lrtliwith sent over to England for trial. The Massjichusetts General Court,
lifter due consideration of the King's letter, proceeded to declare that the
iiettssity of preserving religion, order, and i)eace had induced the enactment
<if laws against the Quakers, etc., and concluded by saying, "All this, not-
withstanding their restless spirits, have moved some of them to return, and
"tliers to fill the royal ear of onr Sovereign Lord the King with complaints
cigainst us, and have, by their unwearied solicitations, in our absence, so far
prevailed as to obtain a letter from his Majesty to forbear their corporal
I)uni9hment or death ; although we hope and doubt not but that if his
Majesty were rightly informed, he would be far from giving them such favour,
"r weakening his authority here, so long and orderly settled : Yet that we may
not in the least offend his Majesty, this Court doth hereby order and declare
that the execution of the laws in force against Quakers as such, so far aa they
respect corporal punishment or death, be suspended until this Court take
further order." Upon this order of the Coxirt twenty-eight Quakers were
released from prison and conducted out of the jurisdiction of Massachusetts.
(Holmes' Annals, Vol. I., pp. 318, 319.)

+ " Upon the Restoration, not only Episcopalians, but Baptists, Quakers,

. L:

138

THE LOYALISTS OF AMEllU'A

[chap.

The loaders of tlio colony had, however, warm and influential
advocates in the ('onncil of the King: the Earl of Manchester,
formerly commander of the Parliamentary army against Charles
the First, until supplanted l»y Cromwell ; Lord Say, a chief
founder of C(mnecticut ; and Mr. Morrice, Secretary — all Puri-
tans.* Under these influences the King sent a letter to the colony,

etc., pietViTcil iMtuiplaiuts af.;aiii8t the colony ; uiitl ulthou},'li, !)>• the iiiteiL-nt
of the Earl of Mamhester and Lord 8ay, their ohl friends, and Secretary
Morrice, all Puritans, Kinj^ Charles confirmed their Charter, yet he reciuiivd
a toleration in religion, and an alteration in some civil matters, neithei' of
which were fully complied Avith." (Hutchinson's History of Masmchusett-'
Bay, V<d. II., p. 3.)

* " In the Earl of Manchester and Lord Say ; in Annesley, created Earl ol
Anglesea ; in Denzil Hollis, now Lord HoUis ; andin Ashley Cooper,now Lord
Ashley, the expectant cavaliers saw their old enemies raised to the place ot
honour. Manchester had not taken any part in i)ul)lic affairs since the pass-
ing of the self-denying ordinances. He was still a Presbyterian, hut had
favoured the return of the King. Lord Say, also, had long since withdrawn
from puhliclite, and though of a less pliant temper than Manchester, his new
friends had no reastm to doubt his steady adherence to the new order nt
things. Annesley was an expert lawyer. Hollis had been the leader of tin-
Presbyterians in the Long Parliament, until the crisis which turned t!.e
scale in favour of the Independents.

"Lord A.shley, better known as the Earl of Shaftesbury, had been devotrd
successively to the King, the Parliament, and the Protector. Nichols ami
Morrice were the two Secretaries of State." — Dr. R. Vaughan's Revolutions in
English History, Vol. III., B. 14, Chap, i., pp. 430, 431.

" T(jtally devoid of resentment, as well from natural lenity as carelessness
of his temper, Charles the Second ensured pardcm to the most guilty of his
enemies, and left hopes of favour to his most violent opi)onent8. From the
whole tenor of his actions and discourse, he seemed desirous of losing the
memory wf past animosities, and of making every party in affection to tlieii-
prince and their native country.

" Into his Council he admitted the most eminent men of the nation, with-
out regard to former distinctions ; the Presbyterians equally with tin*
Royalists shared this honour. Annesley was created Earl of Anglesea ;
Ashley Cooper, Lord Ashley ; Denzil Hollis, Lord Hollis ; the Earl ut
Manchester was appointed Lord Chamberlain; and Lord Say, Privy Seal.
Calamy and Baxter, Presbyterian clergymen, were even made chaplains to
the King ; Admiral Montague, created Earl of Sandwich, was entitled fn'iu
his recent services to great favour, and he obtained it. Monk, created Duki
of Albemarle, had performed such signal services that according to a vidgar
and inelegant observation, he ought rather to have expected hatred and
ingiiititude, yet was he ever treated by the King with great marks of distin -
tion. Charles' disposition was free from jealousy ; and the prudent conduct

fJHAP. v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

which had i)een avowedly at war in connection witli (.romwell,
against his royal father and hiniself (and V>y which they had
justly forfeited the ('harter, apart from other violations of it),
panloning the past and assuring them he would not cancel but
restore and establish their ('barter, provided they would fulfil
certain conditions which were specified. They joyously accepted
the pardon of the past, and the promised continuance of the
('barter as if unconditional, without fulfilling the conditions of
it, or even mentioning them ; just as their fathers had claimed
the power given them in the Royal Charter by (Jharles the
First in 1028, to make laws and regulations for order and good
government of the Massachusetts Bay Plantation, concealing the
(charter, claiming absolute power under it, and wholly ignoring
the restrictive condition that such laws and regulations were
not to be " contrary to the laws of England" — not only concealing
the Charter, but not allowing their laws and regulations to be
printed until after the fall of Charles the First, and resisting
all orders for the production of their ptoceedings, and all Com-
missions of Inquiry to ascertain whether they had not made
laws or regulations and performed acts *' contrary to the laws of
England." So now, a generation afterwards, they claimed and
contended that Charles the Second had restored their Charter, as
if done absolutely and unconditionally without their recognising
one of the five conditions included in the proviso of the King's
letter. Nothing could have been more kindly and generously
conceived than the terms of the King's letter, and nothing could
be more reasonable than the conditions contained in its proviso —
conditions with which all the other British colonies of America
readily complied, and which every province o£ the Dominion of
(Janada has assumed and acted upon as a duty and pleasure
from the first establishment of their respective Governments.
Of all the colonies of the British Empire for the last three
centuries, that of Massachusetts Bay is the only one that ever
refused to acknowledge this allegiance to the Government from
which it derived its existence and territory. The conditions

"f the General, who never overrated his merits, prevented all State disgusts
which naturally arise in so delicate a situation. Morrice, liis friend, was
I nated Secretary of State, and was supported more by his patron's credit
than by his own abilities and experience." — Hume's History of England,
Vol. vil., Chap, xlui., pp. 338, 339.

140

THE LOYALISTS OF AMEKICA

[chap. V.

which (/harles the Second announced as tlie proviso of his con-
senting to renew and continue the Charter granted by his Royal
father to tlie CJonipany of Massachusetts Bay, were the following :

" I. That up(jn a review, all such laws and ordinances that
are now, or have l)een during these late troubles, in practice
there, and which are contrary or derogatory to the King's
authority and government, shall l)e repealed.

" 2. That the rules and prescriptions of the said Royal Charter
for administering and taking the oath of allegiance, he hence-
forth duly observed.

" 3. That the administration of justice Ixj in the King's name.

" 4. That since the principle an<l formation of that Charter
was and is the freedom of liberty of con.science, we do hereby
charge and require you that freedom (jf liberty be duly admitted
and allowed, so that they that desire to use the Book of Com-
mon Prayer and perform their devotion in the manner that is
established here, be not denied the exercise thereof, or undergo
any prejudice or disadvantage thereby, they using the liberty
peaceably, without any disturbance to others,

" 5. That all persons of good and honest lives and conversa-
tions be admitted to the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, accord-
ing to the said Book of Common Prayer, and their children to
Baptism."* ^

* Letter of Kinj,' CharU^s the Socond to the General Coiut at Maasachu.'w^tts
(June 28, 1662) :

" Charles Rkx.

" Trusty and well Iteloved, We greete you well :

" Whereas we have lately received an hunihle addrens and petition from
the General Court of mir colony of Ma.ssachu,setts, in New England, presented
to us hy Simon Bradstreet and John Norton : We have thought it agi-eeable
to our princely grace and justice to let you know that the sjime have been
very acceptable unto us, and that .,e are satisfied with your expressions of
loyalty, duty and good affection made to us in the said address, which we
doubt not proceeds from the hearts of good and honest subjects, and We are
therefore willing that all our good subjects of that Plantation do know that
We do receive them into our gmcious protection, and will cherish them
with our best encoui-agement, and that We will preserve and do hereby con-
tinue the patent and charter heretofore granted to them by our royall father
of blessed memory, and that they shall freely enjoy all the priviledgea and
libertys granted to them in and by the same, and that We will be ready to
renew the same charter to them under our great scale of England, whenever
they shall desire it. And because the licence of these late ill times has like-

CHAP, v.]

AND THKIR TIMES.

141

8 of

we
are
^hat
leni
bon-
ther

to
bver
ike-

Nothing could be more kind and assuring than the terms of
the King's letter, notwithstanding the former hostility of the
Massachusetts Bay rulers to him and his Royal father* and

wise had an iiiHiu-iu'e upon our colony, in wliidi tlu;y have swerved from
the rules prescribed, and even from tlie j^overnnient instituted by the charter,
whicli we do graciously impute rather to tlie iniquity of the time than to the
evil intents of the hearts of those wlio exercised tlie j^overnment tliere. And
we do therefore publish and declare our free and gracious pardon to all our
subjects of that our plantation, for all crinies and offences committed against
us during the late troubles, except any jiersons who stand attainted by our
parliament hen; of high treason, if any such jiersons have transported them-
selves into these parts ; the appivhending of whom and delivering them into
the hands of justice, we expect from the dutiful and affectionate obedience
of those of our good subjects in that colony, if they be found within the
jurisdiction thereof. Provided always, and be it our declared expectation,
that upon a review of all such laws and ordinances that are now or have been
(hiring these late troubles in practice there, and which are contrary or
diTogiitory to our authority and government, the same may be annulled and
rt'jH'ule.d, and the rules and ])rescriptions of the said charter for administering
and taking the oath of allegiance W' hen(< I'orth duly observed, and that the
administrations of justice be in our naiue. And since the principle and
foundation of that charter was and is the freedom of liberty of conscience.
We do hereby charge and ri'ipiire you that freedom and liberty l)e duly
adinitt^id and allowed, so that they that desire to use the book of common
l>rayer and perfonne their devotion in that manner that is esUiblished In n*.
be not denied the exercise thei-eof, or undergoe any prejudice or disadvantagt'
thereby, they using their lilierty peaceably without any disturbances to
others ; and that all jjei'sons of good and honest lives and conversations be
admitted to the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, according to the said Book
of Common Prayer, and their children to Ijaptism."

* Indeed, so conscious were they that they had justly forfeited all considera-
tion from the King, that the first aditress extracted from them when they
found the monarchy firmly established, expressed deep humiliation and con-
fession, and implored tiie forgiveness and favour of their Sovereign ; and
being sensible of the many and well-founded complaints made against them
by the victims of their persecuting intolerance, they appointed two of their
ablest and most trusted members — Simon Bradstreet, an old magistrate, and
John Norton, a minister of Boston — to proceed to England to present their
address, to intercede for them, and secure the interest of those of their old
friends who might have influence with the King and his councillors. But
as Bradstreet and Norton had both been persecutors of thiir Episcopalian,
Presbyterian, and Baptist brethren, and were conspicuous in promoting the
bloody persecutions of the Quakei-s (now getting a favourable hearing for
their sufferings at the English Court), they were unwilling to undei-take ho
Jifficult and hazardous a mission without formal provision being made by the
Massachusetts Court for indemnity for all the damage they might incur

142

niK liOYALIHTS OF AMKHICA

[CHAP. V.

nothing couhl h)e more rejusoimlde than the Hve conditions on
whicli lu! ajwured them of the oidivion of the past and the con-
tinuance of the Royal (-harter ; but with not one of these
eon<lition.s did they take a step to comply for fv-'veral numths,
under the pretext of afibrding time, after puhli.shing it, that
"all pcrHon.s might have opportunity to consider what was
necessary to be done," though the " all persons " referred to in-
cluded only one-sixth of the population : for the term " Freeman
of Massachusetts " was at that time, and for thirty years before
and afterwards, synonymous with member of one of the Con-
gregational Churches. And it was against their disloyalty and
intolerance that tlie five conditions of the King's pardon were
chiefly directed. With some of these conditions they never
complied ; with others only as they were compelled, and even
complained of them afterwards as an invasion of their chartered
privileges,* though, in their first order for public thanksgiving

■*

1 :

" At length," miys their historian, " the Committee appointed to do everything
for their dispatch in the recess of tlie Court, ' engaged to make good all
damages they might sustain hy the detention of their persons in England, or
otJierwise.' They dejjarted the 10th of February (1662.)

" Their reception in England was much more favourable than was expected ;
their stay short, returning the next autumn with the King's most gracious
letter, sonie parts of which cheered the hearts of the country ; anil they then
looked upon and afterwards recurred to them as a confirmation of their
charter privileges, and an amnesty of all past errors. The letter was ordered
to be published (as the King had directed), and in an order for public thanks-
giving, particular notice is taken of * the return of the messengers, and the
continuance of the mercies of peace, liberties, and the Gospel.' "

The early New England historian, Hubliard, says : " They returned like
Noah's dove, with an olive branch of peace in their mouths."

" There were some things, however, in the King's letter hard to comply
with ; and though it was ordered to be published, yet it was with this
caution, that ' inasmuch as the letter hath influence upon the Churches as
well as the civil state, all manner of acting in relation thereto shall be
suspended until the next General Court, that all persons may have oppor-
tunity to consider what was necessary to be done, in order to know hia
Majesty's pleasure therein.' " (Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay,
Vol. I., pp. 221, 222.)

* So dissatisfied were these Congregational "freemen" with the conditions
which were intended to put an end to their persecutions of their brethren
and their disloyal practices, that they denounced their old friends and
representatives to England, Messrs. Bradstreet and Norton, for those con-
ditions which they could not prevent, and upon which they might well be

(HAP. v.]

AND THKIH TIMFX

143

tVir the Kin^f's Icttrr, tlncy spoko of it n.s UNsurin^' " tlie ocmtinu-
aiK'*' of pt-nct', lilMTtics and tlu' •jfo.spcl." Tliou^^di tlio a^cnt of
R]i(k1(i I.slninl met the a^'cnts of MitsHaehusetts^Bay (V)lony
Ix'fore tlie Kinjj, ami c]uilU'n;^'»Ml tliein to cite, in hehalf of Massa-
ohiisetts, one act of (hity or loyalty to the kinj^.s of England,
in .support of their present profe.s.sion.s a.s lf)3'al .subjects ; yet the
King was not di.sposed to puni.sh them for the pa.st, V)ut con-
tinue to them their privileges, as they desired and promised they
would act with V^yalty and tolerance in the future.*

thnnkfnl tt) pvfservi' tin- Clinitt'i' an<l olttuin panloii for tlieir past offcnccB.
Tht'ir historitiii sayn : " Tie.' iigi-Jitu inet witli the lute of most ftf^cnts ever
since. The favours thev olttained were supposed to 1»e no more than might
well have heen expected, and their merits were soon forgot ; the evils which
tlitv liad it not in their power to prevent, were attrihnted to tlieir negh'ct or
unnecessary concessions. Mr. Bradstivet was a man of more phlegm and
not so .sensihly touched, hut Mr. Norton was so affected that he grew melan-
rholy ; and died suddenly soon after his return (Ai>ril 5, 1(563)." (Hutchin-
son's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vf»l. I., p. 223.)

In a note the historian tiuotes the remark of Mr. Norton to the Ma.ssac1ui-
wtts Court, that "if they complied not witli the King's h'tter, the blood that
should he spilt would lie at their door."

" Dr. Mather says upon this occasion : ' Such has been the jealous di.sposition
ol' our New Englanders about their dearly bought privileges, and such also
hns been the various interpretations of the people about the extent of their
pnvileges, that of all the agents sent over to tlie Court of England for now
forty years together, I know of not one who did not, at his return, meet with
some froward entertainment among his countrymen.' " {lb., p. 222.)

* Mr. Hildreth gives the following account of this misBion and its results
upon the state of society in Massachusetts Bay Colony and its agents to
England :

" Tlie Massachusetts' agents pi'csently returned, bearers of a royal letter, in
which the King recognized the Charter and promised oblivion of past offences.
But he demanded the repeal of all laws inconsistent with his due authority ;
an oath of allegiance to the royal person, as formerly in use, but dropped
since the commencement of the late civil war ; the administration of justice
in his name ; complete toleration for the Church of England ; the repeal of
the law which restricted the privilege of voting, and tenure of office to Church .
membei-8, and the substitution of property qualification instead ; finally, the
admi.'ision of all persons of honest lives to the sacraments of Baptism and the
Lord's Supper.

"The claimants for toleration, formerly suppressed with such prompt
severity, were now encouraged, by the King's demands in their favour, again
to raise their heads. For the next thirty years the people of Massachusetts
(Bay) were divided into three parties, a very decided, though gradually

«1!

144

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap.

"^ ^j

The King's promised oblivion of the paat and recognition of
the Charter was hailed and assumed as uncimditiunal, while
the King's conditions were ignored and remained a dead letter.
The elective franchise and eligibility for office were still, aa
heretofore, the exclusive prerogative of Congregational Church
members ; the government of the colony was still in the hands
alone of Congregational ministers and magistrates, and which
they cleaved to as ^'or life ; their persecutions of those who did not
worship as they did, continued without abatement ; they per-
sisted in their theocratic independence, and pretended to do
all this under a Royal Charter which forbade their making laws
or regulations contrary to the laws of England, acting also in
the face of the King's conditions of pardoning their past
offences, and perpetuating their Charter privileges.

The King's letter was dated the 28th of June, 1662, and was
presented by Mr. Bradstreet and Mr. Norton to the Governor
and General Court at Boston, 8th of October, 1662 ;* but it was
not until a General Court called in August, 1664, that " the
said letter was communicated to the whole assembly, accordin<f

diminishing niajoiity (of tlie Congregationalists, the only " I'reemen") sus-
taining with ardour the theocratic system, and, as essential to it, entire
independence of external control. At tlie opposite e.vtreiue, a ])arty, small in
nunilters and feeble in influence (among the " freemen"), advocated religious
toleration — at least to a limited e.\tent — and e([U€'il civil rights for all inhabi-
tants. They advocated, also, the supremacy of the Crown, sole means in that
day of curbing the theocrac . and compelling it to yield its monopoly of
power. To this party belonged the Episcopalians, or those inclined to beconii'
so; the Baptists, Presbyterians, the Quakers, and other sectaries who feareii
less the authority of a distant monarch than the present rule of their
watchful and bitter spiritual rivals. In the intermediate was a third party,
weak at first but daily giowiug stronger, and drawing to its ranks, one
after another, some former zealous advocates of the exclusive systeu., coi -
vinced that a tlieocracy, in its stricter form, was no longer tenable, and 8;/iiie
of them, perhaps, Iteginning to be satisfied that it was not desirable. Among
the earliest of these were Norton and Bradstreet, the agents who came back
from England impressed with the necessity of yielding. But the avowal of
such sentiments was fatal to their popularity (among the Congregational
"freemen"), and Norton, accustomed to nothing but reverence and ajjplause,
finding himself now looked at with distrust, soon died of melancholy ami
mortification." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap, xiv.,
pp. 455, 456.)

* Collection of MasaachusettB, etc., Civil Society, Vol. VIII., Second
Series, p. 53.

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

145

to his Majesty's command, and copies thereof spread abroad.*
In the meantime they boasted of their Charter being recognised
by the King, according, of course, to their own interpretation of
it, while for twenty-two months they withheld the King's letter,
against his orders, from being published ; concealing from the
victims of their proscription and persecution the toleration
which the King had announced as the conditions of his per-
petuating the Charter.

It is not surprising that those proscribed and persecuted
parties in Massachusetts Bay Cc»lony should complain to the
King's Government that t^~e local '"«ovemment had denied them
every privilege which his Majesty had assured to them through
their friends in England, and by alleged orders to the Gov-
ernment of Massachusetts Bay, and therefore that the King's
Government should determine to appoint Commissioners to pro-
ceed to the New England colonies to investigate the complaints
made, and to regulate the affairs of the colonies after the
disorders of the then recent civil war, during which the Massachu-
setts Bay Government had wholly identihed itself with Crom-
well, and acted in hostility to those other American colonies
which would not renounce their allegiance to the Throne, and
avow allegiance to the usurper.

It was not till the Government of Massachusetts Bay saw
that their silence could no longer be persisted in with safety,
and that a Royal Commission was inevitable,^ that they
even published the King's lett/cr, and then, as a means of
further procra-sti nation and delay, they appended their order that
the cordiw'm prescribed in the Royal letter, which "had
influemx .. pen the Churches as well as the civil state, should
be suspended until the Court should take action thereon" — thus

• f.

cond

* Collections of Massachutotts, etc., Civil Society, Vol. VIII., Second
.Series, pp. 59, 60.

t From the representations made respecting the state of affairs in the New
England colonies, the appointment of this Commission was deciiled upon after
the restoration of the King, and the cgents of those colonies were informed
uf it. Col. Nichols, the head of the Commission, stated in his introductory
address to the Massacliusetts Bay Court, May 2, 1(565, that " The King him-
self and the Lord Chancellor (Cla" ;ndon) told Mr. Nortim and Mr. Brad.street
of this colony, and Mr. Winthrop of Connecticut, Mr. Clarke of Rhode
Island, and several others no;v in these countries, that he intended shortly to
•icud over Commissioners." {lb., p. 66.)

146

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

subordinating the orders of the King to the action of the Massa-
chusetts Bay Court.

From the Restv^ration, reports were most industriously circu-
lated in the Bay Colony, designed to excite popular suspicion
and hostility against the Royal Government, such as that their
constitution and Church privileges were to bo suppressed, and
superseded by a Royal Governor and the Episcopal hierarchy,
etc. ; and before the arrival of the Royal Commissioners the
object of their appointment was misrepresented and their
character assailed ; it was pretended their commission was a
bogus one. prepared " under an old hedge,"* and all this prepara-
tory to the intended resistance of the Commissioners by the
Governor and Council of Massachusetts Bay.

The five conditions of continuing the Charter, specified in the
King's letter of the 28th of June, 1GG2, the publication of which

* It was in refutation of such reports that Col. Nichols made tlie state-
ments quoted on a previous page ; in the course of wliich, referring to the
shinders circulated by persons higli in office under the Court, he said : " S(>rM;o
of them are these : That the King hath sent us over liere to raise £5,0(X^ /
year out of the colony for his Majesty's use, and 12d. for every acre of im-
proved land besides, and to take from this colony many of their civil liberties
and ecclesiastical privileges, of which particulars we have been asked the
truth in several places, all of which reports we did, and here do, disclaim as
false ; and protest that they are diametrically contrary to the truth, as ere long
we shall make it appear more plainly."

" These personal slanders with which we are calumniated, as private men
we slight ; as Christians we forgive and will not mention ; but as persons
employed by his Sacred Majesty, we cannot fiuffer his honour to be eclipsed by
a cloud of black reproaches, and some seditious speeches, without demanding
justice from you against those who have raised, reported, or made them."
{lb., p. 56.)

These reports were spread by some of the chief officers of the Council, and
the most seditious of the speeches complained of was by the commander of
their forces; but they were too agreeable to the Court for them even to contra-
dict, much less investigate, although Col. Nichols offered to give their
names.

Hubljard, the earliest and most learned of the New England historians,
says :

" The Commissioners were but four in number, the two principal of whom
were Colonel Nichols and Colonel Cartwright, who were both of them
eminently qualified, with abilities fit to manage such a concern, nor yet want-
ing in resolution to carry on any honourable design for the promotion of his
Majesty's interest in any of those Plantations whither they were sent."
(Massachusetts History Collection, Vol. V., Second Series, p. 677.)

CHAP. rr|

AND THEIR TIMES.

147

was suppressed by ihf Massachusetts Bay Court for nearly two
years, and the intolerance and proscription which it was intended
to redress beinyj still ]>ractised, were doubtless among the causes
which led to the appointment of the Royal Commissioners ; but
that Commission had reference to other colonies as well as
Massachusetts Bay, and to other subjects than the intolerant
proscriptions of that colony.*

whom

them

, want-

of his

sent."

* The following is a copy of the Royal Commission, in wliich the reasons
and objects of it are explicitly stated ;

"Copy of a Commission from King Charles the Second to Col. Nichols
and others, in 1664.

"Charles the 2nd, by the Grace of God, King of England, Scotland,
France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc.

" To all to whom these presents shall come. Greeting : Whereas v e have
received several addresses from our subjects of several colonies in New
England, all full of duty and alTection, and expressions of loyalty and
allegiance to us, with their humble desires that we would renew their several
Charters, and receive them into our favourable opinion and protection ; and
several of our colonies there, and other our loving subjects, liave likewise
coni])lained of differences and disputes arisen upon the limits and bounds of
their several Charters and jurisdictions, whereby unneighbourly and un-
brutherly contentions have and may arise, to the danuige and discredit of
the English interest ; and that all our good subjects residing there, and being
Planters within the several colonies, do not enjoy the liberties and privileges
^;riuit('d to them by our several Charters, upon confidence and assurance of
wliich they transported themselves and their estates into those parts ; and
we having received some addresses from the great men and natives of those
countries in which they comi)lain of breach of faith, and acts of violence,
and injustice which they have been forced to undergoe from our subjects,
whereby not only our Government is traduced, but the reputation and credit
of the Christian religion brought into prejudice and reproach with the Gentiles
and inhabitants of those countries who know not God, the reduction of whom
to the true knowledge and feare of God is the most worthy and glorious end
nf all those Plantations : Upon all which motives, and as an evidence and
manifestation of our fatherly affection towards all our subjects in those
Hcveral colonies of New England (that is to say, of the Massachusetts, Con-
necticut, New Plimouth. Road Island, and Providence Plantations, and all
other Plantations within that tract of land known under the appelation of
New England), and to the end we may be truly informed of the state and
condition of our good subjects there, that so we may the better know how
to contribute to the further improvement of their happiness and pro8i)erity ;
Know ye therefore, that we, reposing special trust and confidence in the
fidelity, wisdome and circumspection of our tnisty and well-beloved Colonel
Richard Nichols, Sir Robert Carre, Knt., George Cartwright, Esq., and Samuel
Maverick, Esq., of our special grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion,

148

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

All the New England colonies except that of Massachusetts
Bay respectfully and cordially received the Royal Commissioners,
and gave entire satisfaction in the matters which the Commission-
ers were intended to investigate.* The Congregational rulers of

liave made, ordained, constituted and appointed, and by these piesents do
make, ordain, constitute and appoint the said Colonel Ricliard Nichols, Sir
Robert Carre, George Cartwright, and Samuel Maverick, our Commissionei-s,
and do hereby give and grant unto them, or any three or two of tliem, or of
the survivors of them, of whom we will the said Colonel Richard Nichols,
during his life, shall be alwaies one, and upon eyual divisions of opinions, to
have the casting and decisive voice, in our name to visit all and every the
several colonies aforesaid, and also full power and authority to heare and
receive and to examine and determine all complaints and appeals in all
causes and matters, as well military as criminal and civil, and proceed in all
things for the providing for and settling the peace and security of the said
country, according to their good and sound discretion, and to such instruc-
tions as they or the sui-vivors of them have, or shall from time to time
receive from us in that behalfe, and from time to time, as they shall find
expedient, to certify us or our Privy Council of their actings or proceedings
touching the premises ; and for the doing thereof, or any other matter or
thing relating thereunto, these presents, or the enrolment thereof, shall be
untj them a suthcient warrant and discharge in that behalf. In witness
v,hereof we have caused these our letters to be made patent. Witness our-
seMe at Westminster, the 25th day of April, in the sixteenth y-'-are of our
Ksigne." (Hutchinson's History of Massachu-setts Bay, Vol. I., Appendi.\
XV., pp. 535, 536.)

* The following are extracts from the report of the Commissioners who
were appointed to visit the several colonies of New England in 166G:

" 2'he Colony of Connecticut returned their thanks to his Majesty for his
gracious letters, and for sending Commissioners to them, with promi-ses of
their loyalty and obedience ; and they did submit to have appeals made to
his Majesty's Commissioners, who did hear and determine some differences
among them. All forms of justice pass only in his Majesty's name ; they
admit all that desire to be of their corporation ; they will not hinder any
from enjoying the sacraments and using the Common Prayer Book, provided
that they hinder not the maintenance of the public minister. They will
amend anything that hath been done derogatory to his Majesty's honour, if
there be any such thing, so soon as they shall come to the knowledge of it."

" The Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations returned their
humble thanks to his Majesty for sending Commis.sioners, and made great
demonstration of their loyalty and obedience. They approved as moat
reasonable, that appeals should be made to his Majesty's Commissioners, who,
having heard and determined some cases among Ihem, refeiTed other some
in civility to their General Court, and some to the Governor aiul others ;
some of which cases they again remitted to the Commissioners to determine.
All proceedings are in his Majesty's name ; they admit all to be freemen who

CHAP. V.J

AND THEIR TIMES.

149

wlio

Massachusetts Bay alone rejected the Royal Coinrnissioners,
denied their authority, and assailed their character. In the
early history of Upper Canada, when one Church claimed to

desire it ; they allow liberty of coiiscienoe and worship to all who live
civilly ; and if any can inform of anything; in their laws or practices deroga-
tory to his Majesty's honour, they will amend it."

" The Colony of New Plymouth did submit to have appeals made to the
Commissioners, who have heard but one plaint made to them, which was that
the Oovemor would not let a man enjoy a farm four miles s(iuare, which he
Iiad bought of an Indian. The complainant soon submitted to the Ooveriior
when he understood the unreasonableness of it."

" The Colony of MassachvMtts Bay was the hardest to be persuaded to use
liis Majesty's name in the forms of justice. In this colony, at the first com-
ing of the Commissioners, were many untruths raised and sent into the
colonies, as that the King had to raise ^ir),(XX) yearly for his Majesty's use,
whereupon Major Hawthorne made a seditious speech at the head of his
comj)aiiy, and the late Governor (Bellingham) another at their meeting-
house at Boston, but neither of them were so much as questioned for it by
any of the magistrates." * * " But neither examples nor reasons could
prevail with them to let the Commissioners hear and determine so much as
those particular cases (Mr. Deane's and the Indian Sachems), which the King
liad commanded them to take care of and do justice in ; and though the
Commissioners, who never desired that they should appear as delintpients, but
a.-; defendants, either by thems'^lves or by their attorneys, assured them that
if they had been unjustly complained of to his Majesty, their false accusers
should be severely punished, and their just dealing made known to his
Majesty and all the world ; yet they proclaimed by sound of trumpet that
tlic General Court was the supremest judiciary in all the province ; that the
Commissioners pretending to hear ap|>eals was a breach of the privileges
gianted by the King's roj'al father, an<l confirmed to them by his Majesty's
own letter, and that they would not jK-rmit it ; by which they have for the
jiresent silenced above thirty petitioners which dt*si red justice from them and
were lost at sea.

"To elude his Majesty's desire for admitting men of civil and competent
estates to be freemen, they have an Act whereby hv that is 24 years old, a
lionsekeeper, and brings a certificate of his civil life, another of his being
orthodox in matters of faith, and a third of bis paying t*n shillings l)esideB
head-money, at a single rate, may then have the liberty to make his desires
known to the Court, and then it shall be put to vote. The Commissioners
examined many townships, and found that scarce three in a hundred pay ten
sliilliiigsat a single rate ; yet if this rate were general it would be just ; but
lie that is a church member, though he be a servant, and pay not twopence,
nay he a freeman. They do not admit any who is not a Church member to
communion, nor their children to baptism, yet they will marry their children
tij those whom they will not admit to baptism, if they be rich. They did
imprison and barbarously use Mr. Jourdan for baptising children, as himself

• i

150

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

be established above every other, and the local Government
sustained its pretensions as if authorized by law, it is known
with what tenacity and denunciation the Canadian ecclesiastic-

coniplainiMl in his petition to the Commissioners. Those wliom they will not
admit to the communion, they compel to coiHC to their sermons by forcing;
from them five shillings for every neglect ; yet these men thought their paying
one shilling for not coming to prayers in England was an unsupportahle
tyranny." ■* * " They have made many things in their laws derogatory to his
Majesty's honour, of wliich the Commissioners have made and desired that
they might he altered, but they have done nothing of it (a). Among others,
whoever keei)s Christmas Day is to pay a fine of five pounds."

" They caused at length a map of the territories to be made ; but it was
made in a Chamber by direction and guess ; in it they claim Fort Albany,
and beyond it all the land to the South Sea. By their South Sea line they
entrench uptm the colonies of New Plymouth, Rhode Island and Connecticut ;
and on the east they usuqied Capt. Mason's and Sir Ferdinardo Gorges'
patents, and said that the Commissioners had nothing to do betwixt them
and Mr. Gorges, because his Majesty neither commanded them to deliver
possession to Mr. Gorges or to give his Majesty reason why they did not." * *

"They of this colony say that King Charles the First granted to them a
Charter as a warrant against himself and his successors, and that so long as
they pay the fifth part of the golil and silver ore which they get, they shall
be free to use the privileges granted thum, and that they are not obliged to tlie
King except by civility ; they hope by writing to tire the King, Lord Chan-
cellor, and S'.'cretaries too ; seven yearn they can easily spin out by writing,
and before that time a change may come ; nay, some have dared to say,
who knows what the event of this Dutch war will be ?"

" This colony furnished Cromwell with many instruments out of their
corporation and college; and those that have retreated thither since his
Majesty's hapjiy return, are much respected, and many advanced to be magis-
trates. They did solicit Cromwell by one Mr. Winslow to be declared a i'ree
State, and many times in their laws declaring themselves to be so."

(Hutchinson's Collection of Original Papers relative to the History of Massii-
chusetts Bay, pp. 412—420.)

(a) The Commissioners specify upwards of twenty anomalies in the book
entitled the " Book of the General Liiws and Liberties concerning the Inhabi-
tants of Massachusetts," which should be altered to correspond with the
Charter, and the relations of the colony to England. A few specimens may
be given : That the writs and forms of justice be issued and performed in his
Majesty's name ; that his Majesty s arms be set up in the courts of justice
within the colony, and that the masters of vessels and captains of foot
companies do carry the colours of England, by which they may be known to
be British subjfHits ; that in the 12th capital law, if any conspire against our
Commonwe^ilth, Commonwealth may be expunged, and " against the peace of
his Majesty's colony" be inserted instead of the other ; that at p. 33, "none be

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

151

civil government resisted all appeals, both to the Local Legis-
lature and to England, for a liberal government of equal laws
and equal rights for all classes of the King's subjects in Canada.
But the excluded majority of the Canadians had little to com-
plain of in comparison of the excluded majority of his Majesty's
subjects of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, where the only
avenue to office, or even the elective franchise, was membership
in the Congregational Church, and where no dissenter from
that Church could have his children baptized, or worship God
according to his conscience, except under pain of imprisonment,
fine, banishment, or death itself.

The " Pilgrim Fathers" crossed the Atlantic to Plymouth in
1G20, and the " Puritan Fathers" to Massachusetts Bay in 1G28,
professedly for the same purpose, namely, liberty to worship God
without the imposition of ceremonies of which they disapproved.
The " Pilgrim Fathers," as true and consistent friends of liberty,
exercised full liberty of worship for themselves, and left others
to enjoy the same liberty of worship which they enjoyed ; but
the " Puritan Fathers" exercised tlieir liberty not only by
abandoning the Church and worship which they professed when
they left England, and setting up a Congregational worship,
but by prohibiting every other form of worship, and its adherents
with imprisonment, fine, exile, and death. And under this pre-
text of liberty of worship for themselves, they proscribed and
persecuted all who diflfered from them in religious worship for
fifty years, until their power to do so was taken from them
by the cancelling of the Charter whose provisions they had so
persistently and so cruelly abused, in contradistinction to
the tolerant and liberal conduct of their brethren and neighbours
of the Plymouth, Rhode Island, and Connecticut colonies. In
note on page 148, 1 have given extracts of the Report of tlie Royal
Commissioners relative to these colonies and their conduct and

admitted freemen but members of some of the Cliurches within the limits of
their jurisdiction," be made to comprehend " other than members of the Con-
greKiUional Churches ;" that on the same page, the penalty for keeping
Christmas so directly against the law of England, be repealed ; that page 40,
the law for settling the Indians' title to land, be explained, for it seems as
ii they were dispossessed of their land by Scripture, which is both against the
honctur of God and the justice of the King. In 115th Psalm, 16, " Children
of men" comprehend Indians as well as English ; and no doubt the country
is theirs till they give it up or sell it, though it be not improved."

;

I'll

.r i

152

THE LOYALISTS OB' AMERICA

[chap. V.

treatment of the Commissioners ; and in the lengthened extract
of the report relative to Massachusetts Bay Colony, it is seen
how dittbrent was the spirit and government of the rulers of
that colony, both in respect to their fellow-colonists and their
Sovereign, from that of the rulers of the other New England
colonies, which had, indeed, to seek royal protection against the
oppressions and aggressions of the more powerful domineering
Government of Massachusetts Bay. The rulers of this colony
alone rejected the Royal Commissioners. For nearly two years
the King's letter of the 28th of June, 1CG2 (given in note on page
140), pardoning their acts of disloyalty and assuring them of
the continuance of their Charter on certain conditions, remained
unpublished and unnoticed ; but on the appointment of the
Royal Commissioners, in 1GG4, they proceeded to acknowledge
the kindness of the King's letter of 1GG2, and other Royal
letters ; then changing their tone, they protest against the Royal
Commission. They sent a copy of their address to the King, to
Lord Chancellor Clarendon, who, in connection with the Earl of
Manchester and Lord Say, had befriended them. They also
wrote to others of their friends, and among others to the Hon.
and celebrated Robert Boyle, than whom no man had shown
himself a warmer or more generous friend to their colony. I
will give, not in successive notes, but in the text, their address to
the King, the King's reply. Lord Clarendon's and the Hon.
Robert Boyle's letters to them on the .subject of their address to
the King, and their rejection and treatment of the Royal Com-
mission. I will then give the sentiments of what is called the
"Petition of the minority" of their own community on the
subject, and their own answers to the chief propositions of the
Royal Commissioners. From all this it will appear that the
United Empire Loyalists were the true liberals, the advocates of
universal toleration and of truly liberal government ; while the
rulers of Massachusetts Bay were the advocates of religious
intolerance and persecution of a government by a single religious
denomination, and hostile to the supreme authority of England,
as well as to their more tolerant and loyal fellow-colonists.

I will first give their characteristic address, called " Peti-
tion" or " Supplication," to the King. I do so without abridg-
ment, long as it is, that I may not be chargeable with unfair-
ness. It is as follows : —

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

153

C'jpy of the Address of the Massacliusetts Colony to King
Charles the Second, in 1GG4;

" To the King's Most Excellent Majestic. — The humble Sup-
plication of the General Court of the Massachusetts Colony, in
New England.

" Dread Sovereign,

" Iff your poor subjects, who have removed themselves into a
remote corner of the earth to enjoy peace with God and man,
doe, in this day of their trouble, prostrate themselves at your
Royal feet, and beg your favour, we hope it will be graciously
accepted by your Majestic, and that as the high place you
sustain on earth doth number you here among the gods, for
you well imitate the God of heaven, in being ready to maintain the
cause of the afflicted, and the right of the poor,* and to receive
their cries and addresses to that end. And we huml)ly beseech
your Majestic with patience and clemency to heare and accept
our plain discourse, tho' of somewhat greater length than
would be comely in other or lesser cases. We are remote,"|" and
can speake but seldom, and therefore crave leave to speake
the more at once. Wee shall not largely repeat how that the
first undertakers for this Plantation, having by considerable
summs purchased the right thereof granted to the Council
established at Plimouth by King James, your Royal grand-
father, did after obtain a patent given and confirmed to them-
selves by your Royal father. King Charles the First, wherein
it is granted to them, and their heirs, assigns and associates
for ever, not only the absolute use and propriety of the tract of
land therein mentioned, but also full and absolute power of
governing! ^^^ ^^^ people of this place, by men chosen from
among themselves, and according to such lawes as they shall
from time to time see meet to make and establish, being not

* They were not so poor as when, jiist 30 years before, they, by tlie advice
of their ministers, prepared to make armed resistance against the rumoured
appointment over them of a Governor General of New England.

t They were not more " remote ' than when they wrote to their friends in
Enj,'land as often as they pleased, or than when they addressed the Long
Parliament four yeara before, and twice addressed Cromwell, stating their
services to him in men and prayers against Charles the First, and asking his
favours.

t The words " full and absolute power of governing" are not contained in
the Royal Charter.

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

repugnant to tho laws of England (they paying only the fifth
part of tho ore of gold and silver that shall here be found, for
and in respect of all duties, demands, exactions, and service
whatsoever), as in the said patent is more at large declared.
Under the encouragement and security of which Royal Charter
this people did, at their own charges,* transport themselves,
their wives and families, over the ocean, purchase the lands of
tho natives, and plant this colony, with great labour, hazards,
cost and difficulties, for a long time wrestling with the wants
of a wilderness and tho burdens of a new plantation ; having,
also, now above 30 years enjoyed the aforesaid power and
priviledge of government within themselves, as their un-
doubted right in the sight of God and man,f and having had,
moreover, this further favour from God and from your Majes-
tic, that wee have received several gracious letters from your
Royal selfe, full of expressions tending to confirme us in our
enjoyments, viz., in your Majesties letter bearing date tho 15th
day of February, IGGO, you are pleased to consider New
England as one. of the chief est of your colonies and plantations
abroad, having enjoyed and grown up in a long and orderly
establishment, adding this royal promise : ' Wee shall not come
behind any of our royal predecessors in a just encouragement
and protection of all our loving subjects there.' In your
Majestie's letter of the 28th of June, 1G62, sent us by our
messengers, besides many other gracious expressions, there is
this : ' Wee will preserve and do hereby confirme the patent and
Charter heretofore granted unto them by our Royal father of
blessed memory, and they shall freely enjoy all the privileges
and liberties granted unto them in and by the same.'J As for

• Emigrants generally transport themselves from one country to another,
whether across the ocean or not, at their own charges.

t It is sliown in this volume that they never had the " undoubted right" by
the Charter, or the " undoubted right in the sight of God and man," to abolish
one form of worship and set up another; to imprison, fine, banish, or put to
death all who did not adopt their newly set up form of worship; to deny the
rights of citizenship to four-fifths of their citizens on religious grounds, and
tax them without representation. How far they invaded the " undoubted
right" of others, " in the sight of God and man," and exceeded their own
lawful powers, is shown on the highest legal authority in the 6th and 7th
chapters of this volume.

X These references are acknowledgments on the part of the Massachusetts

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

155

such particulars, of a civil and religious nature, as are suhjoinod
in the said letter, wo have applyed ourselves to the utmost to
satisfy your Majesty, so far as doth consist with conscience, of
our duty toward God and the just lil)erties and privilej^es of
our patent.* Wee are further bound, with humble thankful-
ness, to acknowledge your Majesti«;'s gracious expressions in
your last letter we have received, dated April 23, IG04, as
(besides other instances thereof) that your Majestic hath not
the least intention or thought of violating, or in the least d«;groo
infringing, the Charter heretofore granted by your Royal father
with great wisduni, and upon full deliberation, etc.

" But what affliction of heart must it needs be unto us, that
our sins have provoked God to permit our adversaries to set
themselves against us by their misinformations, complaints and
solicitations (as some of them have made it their worke for
many years), and thereby to procure a commission under the
great seal, wherein four persons (one of them our knowne and
professed enemy) are impowered to hear, receive, examine and
determine all complaints and appeals, in all causes and matters
as well military as criminal and civil, and to proceed in all
things, for settling this country according to their good and
sound discretion, etc., whereby, instead of being governed by
rulers of our owne choosing (which is the fundamental privilege
of our patent), and by lawes of our owne, wee are like to be
subjected to the arbitary power of strangers, proceeding not by
any established law, but by their own discretion. And where-
as our patent gives a sufficient royal warrant and discharge to
all officers and persons for executing the lawes here made and
published, as is therein directed, we shall now not be discharged,
and at rest from further molestation, when wee have so

Bay Court, that they had been kindly and liberally treated by both Charles
the First and Charles the Second.

* They here limit their compliance with the six conditions on which the
King proposed to continue the Charter which they hud violated, to their
"conscience" and "the just liberties and privileges of thtir patent." But
according to their interpretation of these, they could not in " conscience"
grant the " toleration" required by the King, or give up the sectarian basis
of franchise and eligibility to office, or adu it of appeals from their tribunals
to the higher courts or the King himself in England. They seize upon and
claim the promise of the King to continue the Charter, but evade and deny
the fulfilment of the conditions on which he made that promise.

1."^ .^.n^

Sj^^ -^^^^ ^.,v^^

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

Q>.

5r /^/^

1.0

I.I

1.25

IIM 1121

IIIM

m, 12.0

2.2

JA 11.6

//y.

Hiotographic

Sciences
Corporation

33 WeST MAIN STREET

AfSBSTKR, N.Y. 14580

(7i6) 872-4503

X" /ws>

i/x

■S-

MMaMIHittlKMUiUBi

156

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

4 1'

executed and observed our lawes, but be liable to complaints
and appeales, and to the determinations of new judges, whereby
our government and administrations will be made void and of
none effect. And though we have yet had but a little taste of
the words or actings of these gentlemen that are come over
hither in this capacity of Commissioners, yet we have had enough
to confirm us in our feares that their improvement of this
power, in pursuance of their commission (should the same pro-
ceed), will end in the subversion of our all. We should be glad
to hope that your Majesty's instructions (which they have not
been pleased to impart to us) may put such limitations to their
business here as will take off our fear ; but according to the
present appearance of things, we thus speak.

"In this case (dread Sovereign), our refuge under God is
your royal selfe, whom we humbly address ourselves unto, and
are the rather emboldened therein because your Majesty's last
gracious letter doth encourage us to suggest what, upon the
experience we have had, and observations we have made, we
judge necessary or convenient for the good and benefit of this
plantation, and because we are well persuaded that had your
Majestie a full and right information of the state of things here,*
y i would find apparent reason to put a stop to these proceed-
ings, which are certainly discervient to your Majesty's interest
and to the prosperity and welfare of this place.

" If these things go on (according to the present appearance),
your subjects here will either be forced to seek new dwellings,
or sink and faint under burdens that will to them be intolerable.
The rigour of all new endeavours in the several callings and
occupations (either for merchandise abroad or for subduing this
wilderness at home) will be enfeebled, as we perceive it already
begins to be, the good of converting the natives obstructed, the
inhabitants driven to we know not what extremities, and this
hopeful plantation in the issue ruined. But whatever becomes
of us, we are sure the adversary cannot countervail the King's
damages.

" It is indeed a grief to our hearts to see your Majesty put

* But they rejected the King's commission of inquiry, refused the informa-
tion required ; and they modestly pray the King to accept as proof of their
innocence and right doings their own professions and statements against the
complaints made of their proscriptions and oppressions.

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

167

upon this extraordinary charge and cost about a business the
product whereof can never reimburse the one half of what will
be expended upon it. Imposed rulers and officers will have
occasion to expend more than can be raised here, so as nothing
will return to your Majesty's exchequer ; but instead thereof,
the wonted benefit of customs, exported and imported into
England from hence, will be diminished by discouragement
and diminution of men's endeavours in their several occupations ;
or if the aim should be to gratify some particular by livings
and revenues here that will also fail, where nothing is to be
had, the King himself will be loser, and so will the case be
formed here; for such is the poverty and meanness of the
people (by reason of the length and coldness of the winters, the
difficulty of subduing a wilderness, defect of staple commodity,
the want of money, etc.), that if with hard labour men get a
subsistence for their families, 'tis as much as the generality are
able to do, paying but very small rates towards the public
charges ; and yet if all the country hath ordinarily raised by
the year for all the charges of the whole government were put
together and then doubled or trebled, it would not be counted,
for one of these gentlemen, a considerable accommodation.*

" It is true, that the estates men have in conjunction with hard
labour and vigorous endeavours in their several places do bring
in a comfortable subsistence for such a mean people (we do not
diminish our thankfulness to God, that he provides for us in a
wilderness as he doth), yet neither will the former stand or the
latter be discouraged, nor will both ever answer the ends of
those that seek great things.

" We perceive there have been great expectations of what is
to be had here raised by some men's informations. But those
informations will prove fallacious, disappointing them that have

* The threat at the beginning of this, and also in the following paragraph, is
characteristic ; it was tried, but without effect, on other pccasiona. The insinu-
ations and special pleading throughout these paragraphs are amply answered
in the letters of Lord Clarendon and the Hon. R. Boyle, which follow this
extraordinary address, which abounds alternately and successively in affected
helplessness and lofty assumptions, in calumnious statements and professed
charity, in abject flattery and offensive insinuationa and threats, in pretended
poverty amidst known growing wealth, in appeals to heaven and professed
humility and loyalty, to avoid the scrutiny of their acts and to reclaim the
usurpation of absolute power.

158

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

relied upon them ; and if the taking of this course should drive
the people out of the country (for to a coalition therein they
will never come), it will be hard to find another people that will
stay long or stand under any considerable burden in it, seeing it
is not a country where men can subsist without hard labour and
great frugality.

" There have also been high representations of great divisions
and discontents among us, and of a necessity of sending com-
missioners to relieve the aggrieved, etc. ; whereas it plainly
appears that the body of this colony are unanimously satisfied
in the present government, and abhorrent from change, and that
what is now oflPered will, instead of relieving, raise up such
grievances as are intolerable. We suppose there is no govern-
ment under heaven wherein some discontented persons may
not be found ; and if it be a suflRcient accusation against a
government that there are some such, who will be innocent ?
Yet, through the favour of God, there are but few amongst us
that are malcontent, and fewer that have cause to be so.

" Sir, the all-knowing God knows our greatest ambition is to
live a poor and quiet life, in a comer of the world, without
oflfence to God or man. We came not in this wilderness to seek
great things for ourselves ; and if any come after us to seek them
here, they will be disappointed. We keep ourselves within our
line, and meddle not with matters abroad; a just dependence
upon and subjection to your Majesty, according to our Charter,
it is far from our hearts to disacknowledge. We so highly prize
your favourable aspect (though at so great a distance), as we
would gladly do anything that is within our power to purchase
the continuance of it. We are willing to testify our affection
to your Majesty's service, by answering the proposal of your
honourable Commissioners, of which we doubt not but that they
have already given your Majesty an account. We are carefully
studious of all due subjection to your Majesty, and that not
only for wrath, but for conscience sake; and should Divine
Providence ever offer an opportunity wherein we might, in any
righteous way, according to our poor and mean capacity, testify
our dutiful affection to your Majesty, we hope we should most
gladly embrace it. But it is a great unhappiness to be reduced
to so hard a case, as to have no other testimony of our subjec-
tion and loyalty offered us but this, viz., to destroy our own

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

159

being, which nature teacheth ua to preserve ; or to yield up our
liberties, which are far dearer to us than our lives, and which,
had we had any fears of being deprived of, we had never
wandered from our fathers' houses into these ends of the earth,
nor laid our labours or estates therein ; besides engaging in a
most hazardous and difficult war, with the most warlike of the
natives, to our great charge and the loss of some of the lives of
our dear friends. Neither can the deepest invention of man
find out a more certain way of consistence than to obtain a
Royal donation from so great a prince under his great seal,
which is the greatest security that may be had in human
affairs.

" Royal Sir, it is in your power to say of your poor people in
New England, they shall not die. If we have found favour in
the sight of our King, let our life be given us at our petition
(or rather that which is dearer than life, that we have ventured
our lives, and willingly passed through many deaths to obtain),
and our all at our request. Let our government live, our
patent live, our magistrates live, our laws and liberties live, our
religious enjoyments live ; so shall we all yet have further cause
to say from our hearts, let the King live for ever. And the bless-
ing of them that were ready to perish shall come upon your
Majesty ; having delivered the poor that cried, and such as had
none to help them. It was an honour to one of your royal
ancestors that he was called the poor man's king. It was Job's
excellency that he sat as king among his people — that he was a
father to the poor. They are a poor people (destitute of out-
ward favour, wealth and power) who now cry to their lord the
King. May your Majesty please to regard their cause and
maintain their right. It will stand among the marks of lasting
honour to after generations. And we and ours shall have last-
ing cause to rejoice, that we have been numbered among your
Majesty's most humble servants and suppliants.
" 25th October, 1664."
As the Massachusetts Governor and Council had endorsed a
copy of the foregoing petition to the Earl of Clarendon, then
Lord Chancellor (who had dictated, with the Puritan ministers
of the King, his generous letter of the 28th of June, 1662), I
will here insert Lord Clarendon's reply to them, in which he
vindicates the appointment of the Commissioners, and exposes

160

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

the unreasonableness of the statements and conduct of the
Massachusetts Court, The letter is as follows :

Copy of a letter from the Earl of Clarendon to the Massachu-
setts Colony in 16G4 : —

"Mr. Governor and Gentlemen,

" I have received yours of the 7th of November, by the hands
of Mr. Ashurst, a very sober and discreet person, and did (by
his communicating it to me) peruse the petition you had
directed to his Majesty ; and I do confess to you, 1 am so much a
friencl to your colony that if the same had been communicated
to nobody but myself, I should have dissuaded the presenting
the same to his Majesty, who I doubt will not think himself
well treated by it, or the singular care he hath expressed of his
subjects in those parts sufficiently acknowledged ; but since I
found by your letter to my Lord Chamberlaine and Mr. Boyle,
that you expect some effect from your petition, upon conference
with them wee all agreed not to hinder the delivery of it, though
I have read to them and Mr. Ashurst every word of the instruc-
tions the Commissioners have ; and they all confessed that his
Majesty could not expresse more grace and goodness for that
his plantation, nor put it more out of their power in any degree
to invade the liberties and privileges granted to you by your
Charter; and therefore wee were all equally amazed to find
that you demand a revokation of the Commission and Com-
missioners, without laying the least matter to their charge of
crymes or exorbitances. What sense the King hath of your
addresse to him, you will, I presume, heare from himself, or by his
direction. I shall only tell you that as you had long cause to
expect that the King would send Commissioners thither, so
that it was absolutely necessary he should do so, to compose
the differences amongst yourselves of which he received com-
plaint, and to do justice to your neighbours, which they
demand from his royall hands. I know not what you mean by
saying, the Commissioners have power to exercise government
there altogether inconsistent with your Charter and privileges,
since I am sure their commission is to see and provide for the
due and full observation of the Charter, and that all the
privileges granted by that Charter may be equally enjoyed by
all his Majesty's subjects there. I know they are expressly
inhibited from intermeddling with or obstructing the administra-

CHAP. V.l

AND THEIR TIMES.

161

tion of justice, according to the formes observed there ; but if
in truth, in any extraordinary case, the proceedings there have
been irregular, and against the rules of justice, as some particular
cases particularily recommended to them by his Majesty, seeme
to be, it cannot be presumed that his Majesty hath or will leave
his subjects of New England without hope of redresse by any
appeale to him, which his subjects of all his other kingdoms
have free liberty to make. I can say no more to you but that it
is in your owne power to be very happy, and to enjoy all that
hath been granted to you ; but it will be absolutely necessary that
you perform and pay all that reverence and obedience which is
due from subjects to their king, and which his Majesty will
exact from you, and doubts not but to find from the best of that
colony both in quality and in number. I have no more to add
but that I am,

" Gentlemen,

" Your affectionate servant,

"Clarendon, C.

"Worcester House, 15 March, 1666."

To Lord Clarendon's letter I will add the letter of the Hon-
ourable Robert Boyle to Governor Endicot. The Hon. Robert
Boyle was not only distinguished as the first philosopher of his
age, but as the founder of the Royal Society and the President
of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in New
England — the Society which supported John Eliot, the apostle
to the Indians of New England — for the Massachusetts Bay
Government neither established nor supported his mission to
the Indians. New England never had a warmer and more
benevolent friend than the celebrated Robert Boyle, who, in a
letter dated March 17th, 1665, and addressed to the Governor
Endicot and the Massachusetts Court, after acknowledging their
resolution of thanks, through Mr. Winthrop, to him for his
exertions on their behalf, proceeds as follows :

" I dealt very sincerely with Mr. Winthrop in what I in-
formed him concerning the favourable inclinations I had found
both in his Majesty and in my Lord Chancellor toward the
united colonies of New England ; and though his lordship again
repeats and confirms the assurances he had authorized me to give
to your friends in the city, yet I cannot but acquaint you with
this, observing that in your last addresses to his Majesty, and
11

162

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

letters to his lordship, there are some passages that were much
more unexpected than welcome ; insomuch that not only those
who are unconcerned in your afliairs, but the most considerable
persons that favour you in England, have expressed to me their
being unsatisfied in some of the particulars I am speaking of.
And it seems generally unreasonable that when the King had so
graciously remitted all that was past, and upon just and im-
portant inducements, sent Commissioners to promote the welfare
of your colony, you should (in expressions not over manly or
respectfully worded) be importunate with him to do an action
likely to blemish his wisdom or justice, or both, as immediately
to recall public ministers from so remote a part of the world
before they or any of them be so much as accused of any one
crime or miscarriage.

" And since you are pleased I should concern myself in this
business, I must deal so ingenuously with you as to inform
you, that hearing about your affairs, I waited upon my Lord
Chancellor (and finding him, though not satisfied with your
late proceedings, yet neither your enemy, nor indisposed to be
your favourer as before). His lordship was pleased, with a con-
descending and imexpected freedom, to read himself, not only to
me, but to another good friend of yours that I brought along
with me, the whole instructions and all the other papers that were
delivered to the Commissioners, and by the particulars of those
it appeared to us both that they had been so solicitous, viz., in
the things that related to your Charter, and especially to the
liberty of your consciences, that I could not but wonder at it,
and add to the number of those that cannot think it becomes
his Majesty to recall Commissioners sent so far with no other
instructions than those, before they have time to do any part
of the good intended you by themselves, and before they arq
accused of having done any one harmful thing, even in your
private letters either to me or (as far as I know) to any of your
friends here, who will be much discouraged from appearing on
your behalf ; and much disabled to do it successfully so long as
such proceedings as these that relate to the Commissioners
supply others with objections which those that wish you well
are unable to answer.

; " I should not have taken this liberty, which the honour of
your letter ought to have filled with little less than acknow-

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

163

ledgment, if the favourable construction you have made of my
former endeavours to do you good offices did not engage me to
continue them, though in a way which (in my poor apprehension)
tends very directly to serve you, whether I do or no to please
you ; and as I presume you will receive, both from his Majesty
and my Lord Chancellor, express assurances that there is nothing
intended in violation to your Charter, so if the Commissioners
should break their instructions and endeavour to frustrate his
Majesty's just and favourable intentions towards you, you may
find that some of your friends here were not backward to ac-
cuse the Commissioners upon general surmises that may injure
you, than they will be ready to represent your grievances, in
case they shall actually oppress you ; which, that they may
never do, is not more the expectation of them that recommended
them to you than it is the hearty wish of a person who, upon
the account of your faithfulness and care of so good a work as
the conversion of the natives among you, is in a peculiar man-
ner concerned to shew himself, honoured Sir, your most affection-
ate and most humble servant,*

" Ro. Boyle."
But in addition to the benevolent and learned Robert Boyle
and their other friends in England, besides Lord Clarendon and
the King, who disapproved of their pretentious spirit and pro-
ceedings, there were numbers of their own fellow-colonists who
equally condemned the assumptions and conduct of Governor
Endicot and his Council. It has been shown in a previous
chapter that in connection with the complete suppression of the
freedom of the press, petitioners to the Governor and Court
were punished for any expressions in their petitions which com-
plained of the acts or proceedings of the Court. It therefore
required no small degree of independence and courage for any
among them to avow their dissent from the acts of rulers so
despotic and intolerant. Yet, at this juncture of the rejection
of the Royal Commission, and the denial of the King's authority,
there were found United Empire Loyalists and Liberals, even
among the Congregational "freemen" of Massachusetts Bay,
who raised the voice of remonstrance against this incipient
separation movement. A petition was prepared and signed by

♦Collections of the Maaaachusetts Historical Society, Vol. VIII., Second
Series, pp. 49—61.

164

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

I r4«

nearly two hundred of the inliabitants of Boston, Salem, New-
bury, and Ipswich, and presented to the Court. The compiler
of the " Danforth Papers," in the Massachusetts Historical
Collection, says : " Next follows the petition in which the
minority of our forefathers have exhibited so much good sense
and sound policy." The following is an extract of the Boston
petition, addressed " To the Honourable General Court now
assembled in Boston ;"

" May it please the Hon. Court ;

" Your humble petitioners, being informed that letters are
lately sent from his Majesty to the Governor and Council, ex-
pressive of resentment of the proceedings of this colony
with his Commissioners lately sent hither, and requiring also
some principal persons therein, with command upon their
allegiance to attend his Majesty's pleasure in order to a final
determination of such differences and debates as have happened
between his Majesty's Commissioners and the Governor here,
and which declaration of his Majesty, your petitioners, looking
at as a matter of the greatest importance, justly calling for the
most serious consideration, that they might not be wanting,
either to yourselves in withholding any encouragement that
their concurrence might afford in so arduous a matter, nor to
themselves and the country in being involved by their silence
in the dangerous mistakes of (otherwise well united) persons
inclining to disloyal principles, they desire they may have
liberty without offence to propose some of their thoughts and
fears about the matter of your more serious deliberation,

" Your petitioners humbly conceive that those who live in this
age are no less than others concerned in that advice of the wise
man, to keep the King's commandment, because of the oath of
God, and not to be tardy to go out of his sight that doth what-
ever pleaseth him ; wherefore they desire that seeing his
Majesty hath already taken no little displeasure against us, as
if we disowned his Majesty's jurisdiction over us, effectual care
be taken, lest by refusing to attend his Majesty's order for
clearing our pretences unto right and favour in that particular,
we should plunge ourselves into great disfavour and danger.

" The receiving of a Charter from his Majesty's royal pre-
decessor for the planting of this colony, with a confirmation of
the same from his royal person, by our late address, sufficiently

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

165

and

declares this place to be part of his dominions and ourselves
his subjects. In testimony of which, also, the first Governor,
Mr. Matthew Cradock (as we are informed), stands recorded
juratua de jide et obedienfid, before one of the Masters in
Chancery; whence it is evident that if any proceeding's of this
colony have given occasion to his Majesty to say that we believe
he hath no jurisdiction over us, what effectual course had need
be taken to free ourselves from the incurring his Majesty's
future displeasure by continuance in so dangerous an ofience ?
And to give his Majesty all due satisfaction in that point, such
an assertion would be no less destructive to our welfare than
derogatory to his Majesty's honour. The doubtful interpreta-
tions of the words of a patent which there can be no reason
to hope should ever be construed to the divesting of the
sovereign prince of his Royal power over his natural subjects
and liege people, is too frail a foundation to build such tran-
scendent immunity and privilege upon.

" Your petitioners earnestly desire that no part will so
irresistibly carry on any design of so dangerous a consequence
as to necessitate their brethren equally engaged with them in
the same undertaking to make their particular address to his
Majesty, and declaring to the world, to clear themselves from
the least imputation of so scandalous an evil as the appearance
of disaffection or disloyalty to the person and government of
their lawful prince and sovereign would be.

" Wherefore your petitioners do here humbly entreat that if
any occasion hath been given to his Majesty so to resent any
former actings as in his last letter is held forth, that nothing of
that nature be further proceeded in, but contrariwise that appli-
cation be made to his Majesty, immediately to be sent for the
end to clear the transactions of them that govern this colony
from any such construction, lest otherwise that which, if duly
improved, might have been a cloud of the latter rain, be turned
into that which, in the conclusion, may be found more terrible
than the roaring of a lion.

"Thus craving a favourable interpretation of what is here
humbly presented, your petitioners shall ever be obliged to,
etc."*

* Collections of Massachusetts Historical Society, Vol. VIII., Second Series,
pp. 103—105.

166

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

n 1

I ! , "ll

The following ia tlic King's letter, referred to by Lord
Clarendon, evidently written on the advice of the Puritan
Councillors, whom the King retainecl in his government, and
to whom the management of New England affairs seems to have
been chiefly conmntted, with the oversight of the Lord Chancellor
Clarendon. This letter, in addition to a previous letter from
the King of the same kind, together with the letters of Lord
Clarendon and the Hon. Robert Boyle, left them not a shadow
of pretext for the inflanunatory statements they were putting
forth, and the complaints they were making, that their Charter
privileges and rights of conscience were invaded, and was a
reply to the petition of the Massachusetts Bay Governor and
Council (inserted above at length, pages 153 — 159), and shows
the utter groundlessness of their statements; that what they
contended for under the pretext of conscience was the right of
persecuting and proscribing all who did not conform to the
Congregational worship ; and that what they claimed under the
pretence of Charter rights was absolute independence, refusing
to submit even to inquiry as to whether they had not encroached
upon the rights and territories of their white and Indian
neighbours, or made laws and regulations and performed acts
contrary to the laws of England and to the rights of other of
the King's subjects. This letter breathes the spirit of kindness
and forbearance, and contends for toleration, as did all the loyal
colonists of the time, appealing to the King for protection
against the intolerance, persecution and proscription of the
Massachusetts Bay Congregational Government. The letter is
as follows :

Copy of a Letter from Secretary Morrice to the Massachusetts
Colony :

"Sirs,

" His Majesty hath heard this petition* read to him, and hath
well weighed all the expressions therein, and the temper and
spirit of those who framed it, and doth not impute the same
to his colony of Massachusetts, amongst whom he knows the
major part consists of men well affected to his service and

* The petition entire is inserted above, pp. 153 — 159. Mr. Hutchinson
gives this petition in the Appendix to the first volume of his History o
Massachusetts Bay, No. 16, pp. 537 — 539 ; but he does not give the King's
reply.

pi '•<«>'

CHAP, v.]

AND THKIft TIMKS.

ler

obedient to liis government, but ho hath connnandod me to let
you know that he is not pleasod with this petition, and hM)ks
upon it OH the contrivance of a few persons who hav(i liad too
lung authority there, and who use all the artifices they eun to
infuse jealousies into his good subjects there, ami apprehensions-
as if their Charter were in danger, when it is not possihli! for
his Majesty to do more for the securing it, or to give his subjects
there more assurance that it shall not in any degree be in-
fringed, than he hath already done, even by his late Commission
and Commissioners sent thither, who are so far from having the
least authority to infringe any clause in the said Charter, that
it is the principal end of their journey, so chargeable to his
Majesty, to see that the Charter be fully and pur. 1 lally observed.
His Majesty did expect thanks and acknowledgments from that
his colony, of his fatherly care in sendin:.- liis Commi.<'' >ners
thither, and which he doubt' not he shah receive ff a the rest
of tV" ■'< lonies in those parts, and not such ni M'asonable and
groundless complaint as is contained in youi petition, an if he
had thereby intended to take away your privileges and to drive
you from your habitations, without the least mention of any
misdemeanour or miscarriage in any one of the said Commission-
era or in any one particular. Nor can liis Majesty comprehen<l
(except you believe that by granting your Clmrter he hath
parted with his sovereign power over his subjects there) ho^v
he could proceed more graciously, or indeed any other way, upon
so many complaints presented to him by particular persons of
injustice done contrary to the constitution of that government :
from the other colonies, for the oppression they pretend to
undergo by the conduct of Massachusetts, by extending their
bounds and their jurisdiction further than they ought to do,
as they pretend ; from the natives, for the breach of faith and
intolerable pressures laid upon them, as they allege, contrary
to all kind of justice, and even to the dishonour of the English
nation and Christian faith, if all they allege be true. I say, his
Majesty cannot comprehend how he could apply proper remedies
to these evils, if they are real, or how he could satisfy himself
whether they are real or no by any other way or means than by
sending Commissioners thither to examine the truth and grounds
of all the allegations, and for the present to compose the differ-
ences the best they can, until, upon a full and clear representa-

168

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap, V.

tion there*".!* to his Majesty, who cannot but expect the same
from them, his Majesty's own final judgement and determination
may be had. And it hath pleased God so far already to bless
that service that it's no small benefit his Majesty and his English
colonies in those parts have already received by the said
Commissioners in the removal of so inconvenient neighbours as
the Dutch have been for these late years, and which would
have been a more spreading and growing mischief in a short
time if it had not been removed. To conclude, I am commanded
by his Majesty to assure you again of your full and peaceable
enjoyment of all the privileges and liberties granted to you by
his Charter, which he hath heretofore and doth now again offer
to renew to you, if you shall desire it ; and that you may
further promise yourselves all the protection, countenance, and
encouragement that the best subjects ever received from the
most gracious Prince ; in return whereof he doth only expect
that duty and cheerful obedience that is due to him, and that
it may not be in the power of any malicious person to make
you miserable by entertaining any unnecessary and unreasonable
jealousies that there is a purpose to make you so. And since his
Majesty hath too much reason to suspect that Mr. Endicot,*
who hath during all the late revolutions continued the govern-

* Mr. Endicot died before the next election. He was the primary cause of
the disputes between the Massachusetts Bay Colony and the Parent Govern-
ment, and the unrelenting persecutor of all who differed from him in religious
worsliip. He was hostile to monarchy and all English authority from the
beginning ; he got and kept the elective franchise, and eligibility to office, in
the hands of the Congregationalists alone, and became of course their idol.

The King's suggesting the election of a Governor other than Endicot
was a refutation of their statements that he intended to deprive them of their
local self-government. The following is Neal's notice of the death of Mr.
Endicot : " On the 23rd of March, 1665, died Mr. John Endicot, Governor of
the Jurisdiction of Massachusettp. He arrived at Salem in the year 1628, and
had the chief command of those that first settled there, and shared with them
in all their hardships. He continued at Salem till the magistrates desired
him to remove to Boston for the more convenient administration of justice,
as Governor of the Jurisdiction, to which he was frequently elected for many
years together. He was a great enemy of the Sectaries, and was too severe in
executing the penal laws against the Quakers and Anabaptists during the
time of his administration. He lived to a good old age, and was interred at
Boston with great honour and solemnity." — Neal's History of New England,
Vol. II., p. 346.

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

169

ment there, is not a person well affected to his Majesty's person
or his government, his Majesty will take it very well if at the
next election any other person of good reputation be chosen in
the place, and that he may no longer exercise that charge.
This is all I have to signify unto you from his Majesty, and.
remain,

" Your very humble servant,

"Will. Morrice.

" Whitehall, February 25th, 1G65."

But this courteous and explicit letter had no effect upon the
Governor and Council of Massachusetts Bay in allaying op-
position to the Royal Commissioners, whose authority they
refused to acknowledge, nor did it prevent their persecution
of their brethren whom they termed " Sectaries" — the " Dissent-
ing party." The Commissioners having executed the part of
their ct)mmission relative to the Dutch and Indians, and finding
their authority resisted by the Governor and Council of Massa-
chusetts Bay, reported the result to the King's Government,
which determined to order the attendance of representatives of
the Massachusetts Bay Government, to answer in England the
complaints prepared against them, and for their conduct to the
Commissioners. The letter which the King was advised to
address to that pretentious and persecuting Government speaks
in a more decisive but kindly tone, and is as follows :

Copy of a letter from King Charles 11. to the Massachusetts
Colony, April, 1666 :
" Charles R.

"His Majesty having received a full information from his
Commissioners who were sent by him into New England, of their
reception and treatment in the several colonies and provinces of
that plantation, in all which they have received great satis-
faction but only that of Massachusetts; and he having like-
wise been fully informed of the account sent hither by the
Counsell of the Massachusetts, under the hand of the present
Governor, of all the passages and proceedings which have been
there between the said Commissioners and them from the time
of their first coming over; upon all which it is very evident
to his Majesty, notwithstanding many expressions of great
aftection and duty; that those who govern the Colony of Massa-
chusetts do believe that the commission given by his Majesty

■ i i' ^y '

1.1'

170

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

mi
Hw ■

, it?'?'

to those Commissioners, upon so many and weighty reasons,
and after so long deliberation, is an apparent violation of their
Charter, and tending to the dissolution of it, and that in truth
they do, upon the matter, believe that his Majesty hath no
jurisdiction over them, but that all persons must acquiesce in
their judgments and determinations, how unjust soever, and
cannot appeal to his Majesty, which would be a matter of such a
high consequence as every man discemes where it must end. His
Majesty, therefore, upon due consideration of the whole matter,
thinks fit to recall his said Commissioners which he hath at this
present done, to the end he may receive from them a more par-
ticular account of the state and condition of those his planta-
tions, and of the particular differences and debates they have
had with those of the Massachusetts, that so his Majesty may
pass his final judgment and determination thereupon. His
Majesty's express command and charge is, that the Governor
and Counsell of the Massachusetts do forthwith make choice of
five or four persons to attend upon his Majesty, whereof Mr.
Richard Bellingham and Major Hathorn are to be two, both
which his Majesty commands upon their allegiance to attend,
the other three or two to be such as the Counsell shall make
choice of; and if the said Mr. Bellingham be the present
Governor, another fit person is to be deputed to that office till
his return, and his Majesty will then, in person, hear all the
allegations, suggestions, or pretences to right or favour that can
be made on the behalf of the said colony, and will then make
it appear how far he is from the least thought of invading or
infringing, in the least degree, the Royal Charter granted to the
said colony. And his Majesty expects the appearance of the said
persons as soon as they can possibly repair hither after they
have notice of this his Majesty's pleasure. And his further
command is, that there be no alterations with reference to
the government of the Province of Maine till his Majesty
hath heard what is all edged on all sides, but that the
same continue as his Majesty's Commissioners have left the
same, until his Majesty shall further determine. And his
Majesty further expressly charges and commands the Governor
and Counsell there, that they immediately set all such
persons at liberty who have been or are imprisoned only for
petitioning or applying themselves to his Majesty's Commis-

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

171

sioners. And for the better prevention of all differences and
disputes upon the bounds and limits of the several colonies, his
Majesty's pleasure is, that all determinations made by his
Majesty's said Commissioners with reference to the said bounds
and limits may still continue to be observed, till, upon a full
representation of all pretences, his Majesty shall make his own
final determination ; and particularly the present temporary
bounds set by the Commissioners between the colonies of New
Plymouth and Rhode Island, until his Majesty shall fin^, cause
to alter the same. And his Majesty expects that full obedience
be given to this signification of his pleasure in all particulars.

" Given at the Court at Whitehall, the 10th day of April,
1666, in the eighteenth year of his Majesty's reign.

" Will. Morrice."

Before noticing the proceedings of the Massachusetts Bay
Court in reference to this letter of the King, it may be proper to
pause a little and retrospect past transactions between the two
Charleses and the Congregational rulers of Massachusetts Bay,
and the correspondence of the latter with the Royal Commis-
sioners, so prominently referred to in the above letter.

The foregoing documents which I have so largely quoted
evince the Royal indulgence and kindness shown to the Massa-
chusetts Bay Colony after the conduct of its rulers to the King
and his father during the twenty years of the civil war and
Commonwealth ; the utter absence of all intention on the part
of Charles the Second, any more than on the part of Charles
the First, to limit or interfere with the exercise of their own
conscience or taste in their form or manner of worship, only
insisting upon the enjoyment of the same liberty by those who
preferred another form and manner of worship. However in-
tolerant and persecuting the Governments of both Charles the
First and Second were to all who did not conform to the
established worship and its ceremonies in England, they both
disclaimed enforcing them upon the New England colonies ; and
I repeat, that it may be kept in mind, that when the first com-
plaints were preferred to Charles the First and the Privy Coun-
cil, in 1632, against Endicot and his Council, for not only not
conforming to, but abolishing, the worship of the Church of
England, the accused and their friends successfully, though
falsely, denied having abolished the Episcopal worship ; and the

172

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

King alleged to his Council, when Laud was present, that he had
never intended to enforce the Church ceremonies objected to
upon the New England colonists. The declarations of Charles
the Second, in his letters to them, confirmed as they were by the
letters of the Earl of Clarendon and the Honourable Robert
Boyle, show the fullest recognition on the part of the Govern-
ment of the Restoration to maintain their perfect liberty of
worship. Their own address to the King in 1664 bears testi-
mony that for upwards of thirty years liberty of worship had
been maintained inviolate, and that King Charles the Second
had himself invariably shown them the utmost forbearance,
kindness, and indulgence.*

WPS

*The same year, 1662, in which Charles the Second sent so gracious a
letter to the Governor and Council of Massachusetts Bay, he granted Charters
to the colonies of Connecticut and Rhode Island, in both of which perfect
liberty of conscience and religious liberty was encouraged and provided for,
evincing the settled policy of the Government of the Restoration in regard
to the New England colonies. The annalist Holmes says :

" 1662. — The Charter of Connecticut was granted by Charles II. with most
ample privileges, under the great seal of England. It was ordained by the
Charter that all the King's subjects in the colony should enjoy all the privileges
of free and natural born subjects within the realm of England." (Holmes'
Annals, etc., Vol. I., pp. 320, 321.)

So liberal were the provisions of this Charter, that as Judge Story says :
" It continued to be tlie fundamental law of the State of Connecticut until
the year 1818, when a new constitution of government was framed and
adopted by the people." (Commentaries on the Constitution of the United
States, Vol. I., Sec. 88.)

Rhode Island. — Rhode Island had two English Charters, the circum-
stances connected with both of which were very peculiar. Its founder, Roger
Williams, had been banished from the jurisdiction of Massachusetts Bay.

" Rhode Island," says Judge Story, " was originally settled by emigrants
from Massachusetts, fleeing hither to escape from religious persecution, and
it still boasts of Roger Williams as its founder and as the early defender of
religious freedom and the rights of conscience. One body of them purchased
the island which gave name to the State, and another the territory of the
Providence Plantations from the Indians, and began their settlements at the
same period, in 1636 and 1638. They entered into separate associations of
government. But finding their associations not sufficient to protect them
against the encroachments of Massachusetts, and having no title under any
royal patents, they sent Roger Williams to England in 1643 to procure
a surer foundation both of title and government. He succeeded in obtaining
from the Earl of Warwick (in 1643) a Charter of incorporation of Providence
Plantations ; and also in 1644 a Charter from the two Houses of Parliament

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

173

Yet they no sooner felt their Charter secure, and that the
King had exhausted the treasuiy of his favours to them, than
they deny his right to see to their fulfilment of the conditions
on which he had promised to continue the Charter. The Charter
itself, be it remembered, provided that they should not make

(Charles the First being driven from his capital) for the incorporation of the
towns of Providence, Newport, and Portsmouth, for the absolute government
of themselves, but according to the laws of England."

But such was the hostility of the rulers of Massachusetts Bay that they
refused to admit Rhode Island into the confederacy of the New England
colonies formed in 1643 to defend themselves against the Indians, the
Spanish, the Dutch, and the French ; yet they had influence enough with
Cromwell to get the Charter of Rhode Island suspended in 1652, " But,"
says Dr. Holmes, " that colony, taking advantage of the distractions wluch
soon after ensued in England, resumed its government and enjoyed it with-
out further interruption until the Restoration." (Holmes' Annals, etc.. Vol.
I., p. 297.) ^

" The restoration of Charles the Second," says Judge Story, " seems to
have given great satisfaction to these Plantations. They immediately pro-
claimed the King and sent an agent to England ; and in July, 1663, alter
some opposition, they succeeded in obtaining a Charter from the Crown."

" The most remarkable circumstance in the Charter, and that which
exhibits the strong feeling and spirit of the colony, is the provision for
religious freedom. The Charter, after reciting the petition of the inhabitants,
'that it is much in their hearts (if they may be permitted) to hold forth
a lively experiment, that a most flourishing civil state may stand, and be
\>est maintained, and tJiat among English subjects with full liberty in religious
concernments, and that true piety, rightly grounded upon Gospel prin-
ciplef, will give the least and greatest security to sovereignty,' proceeds to
declare :

" ' We being willing to encourage the hopeful undertaking of our said loyal
und loving subjects, and to secure them in the free exercise of all their civil
aud religious rights appertaining to them as our loving subjects, and to preserve
to them that liberty in the true Christian faith and worship of God which they
have sought with so much travail and with peaceful minds and loyal subjection
to our prngenitors and ourselves to enjoy ; and because some of the people
and inhabitants of the same colony cannot, in their private opinion, conform
to the public exercise of religion according to the liturgy, form, and cere-
monies of the Church of England, or take or subscribe to the oaths and
articles made and established in that behalf ; and for that the same, by reason
of the remote distances of these places, will, as we hope, be no breach of the
unity and •uniformity established in this nation, have therefore thought fit,
and do hereby publicly grant and ordain and declare, that our royal will and
pleasure is, that no person within the said colony, at any time hereafter, shall
be any wise molested, punished, disquieted, or called in question for any

174

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

any laws or regulations contrary to the laws of England, and
that all the settlers under the Charter should enjoy all the
rights and privileges of British subjects. The King could not
know whether the provisions of the Royal Charter were observed
or violated, or whether his own prescribed conditions of con-
tinuing the Charter were ignored or fulfilled, without examina-
tion ; and how could such an examination be made except by a
Committee of the Privy Council or special Commissioners ?
This was what the King did, and what the Governor and Court
of Massachusetts Bay resisted. They accepted with a profu-
sion of thanks and of professed loyalty the King's pardon and
favours, but denied his rights and authority. They denied any
other allegiance or responsibility to the King's Government than
the payment of five per cent, of the proceeds of the gold and
silver mines. The absurdity of their pretensions and of their
resistance to the Royal Commission, and the injustice and un-
reasonableness of their attacks and pretended suspicions, are
well exposed in the documents above quoted, and especially in
the petition of the " minority" of their own fellow-colonists. But
all in vain ; where they could not openly deny, they evaded so
as to render nugatory the requirements of the King as the con-
ditions of continuing the Charter, as will appear from their
correspondence with the Royal Commissioners. I will give
two or three examples.

They refused to take the oath of allegiance according to the
form transmitted to them by the King's order, or except with
limitations that neutralized it. The first Governor of their

IIH!

■ Hi

1.11'

Ml/

differences in opinion on matters of religion, but that all and every pereou
and persons may, from time to time, and at all times hereafter, freely and fully
have and enjoy his and their own judgment and conveniences in matters of
religious concernment throughout the tract of land hereafter mentioned, they
behaving themselves peaceably and quietly, and not using this liberty to
licentiousness and profaneness, nor to the civil injury or outward disturbance
of others.' " (Hazard's Collection, p. 613.)

Judge Story, after quoting this declaration of the Royal Charter, justly
remarks, " This is a noble declaration, worthy of any Prince who rules over
a free people. It is lamentable to reflect how little it comports with the
domestic persecutions authorized by the same monarch during his profligate
reign. It is still more lamentable to reflect how little a similar spirit of
toleration was encouraged, either by precept or example, in other of the New
England Colonies." (Commentaries, etc., Vol I., Chap, viii., Section 97.)

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

175

Corporation, Matthew Cradock, took the oath of allegiance as
other officers of the Crown and British subjects, and as pro-
vided in the Royal Charter ; but after the secret conveyance of
the Charter to Massachusetts Bay and the establishment of a
Government there, they, in secret deliberation, decided that they
were not British subjects in the ordinary sense ; that the only
allegiance they owed to the King was such as the homage the
Hanse Towns paid to Austria, or Burgundy to the Kings of
France ; that the only allegiance or obligation they owed to
England was the payment of one-fifth per cent, of the produce
of their gold and silver mines ; that there were no appeals from
their acts or decisions to the King or Courts of England ; and
that the King had no right to see whether their laws or acts
were according to the provisions of the Charter. When the
King, after his restoration, required them to take the oath of
allegiance as the first condition of continuing the Charter, they
evaded it by attaching to the oath the Charter according to
their interpretation of it Any American citizen could at this
day take the oath of allegiance to the Sovereign of England
if it were limited to the Constitution of the United States.
First of all, they required of every freeman the oath of fidelity
to the local Government ; and then, after three years' delay and
debating about the oath of allegiance to the King, the Massachu-
setts Bay Court adopted the following order :

" May 16th, 1665.
" It is ordered by this Court and by the authority thereof,
that the following oath be annexed unto the oaths of every
freeman, and oath of fidelity, and to the Governor, Deputy
Governor and Assistants, and to all other public officers as
followeth. The oaths of freemen and of fidelity to run thus :
' Whereas, I, A. B., an inhabitant within this jurisdiction, con-
sidering how I stand to the King's Majesty, his heirs and suc-
cessors, by our Charter, and the Government established there-
by, do swear accordingly, by the great and dreadful name of
the ever living God, that I will bear faithful and true allegiance
to our Sovereign Lord the King, his heirs and successors ; and so
proceed aa in the printed oaths of freemen and fidelity.' "*

* CoUectiona of the Massachusetts Historical Society, Vol. VIII., Second
Series, p. 74.

h' t^

176

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

On this, Col. Nichols. Chairman of the Royal Commission,
addressing the Court, remarks as follows :

" You profess you highly prize the King's favour, and that
offending him shall never be imputed to you ; and yet you, in
the same paper, refuse to do what the King requires should be
done — that all that come into this colony to dwell should
take the oath of allegiance here. Your Charter commands it ;
yet you make promises not therein expressed, and, in short,
v,*ould curtail the oath, as you do allegiance, refusing to obey
the King. It is your duty to administer justice in the King's
name ; and the King acknowledgeth in his letter, April 23, that
it is his duty to see that justice be administered by you to all
his subjects here, and yet you will not give him leave to examine
by his Commissioners."

Referring to this subject again. Col. Nichols remarks :

" Touching the oath of allegiance, which is exactly prescribed
in your Charter, and no faithful subject will make it less than
according to the law of England. The oath mentioned by you was
taken by Mr. Matthew Cradock, as Governor, which hath a part
of tlie oath of allegiance put into it, and ought to be taken in
that name by all in public oflfice ; also in another part of the
Charter it is expressly spoken of as the oath of allegipnce;
and how any man can make that in fewer words than the law
of England enjoins, I know not how it can be acceptable to
his Majesty."*

As a sect in the Jewish nation made void the law by their
traditions, so the sect of Congregational rulers in Massachusetts
Bay thus made void the national oath of allegiance by their
additions. On the subject of liberty of worship according to
the Church of England, these sectarian rulers express them-
selves thus :

" Concerning the use of the Common Prayer Book and
ecclesiastical privileges, our humble addresses to his Majesty
have fully declared our ends, in our being voluntary exiles
from our dear native country, which we had not chosen at so dear
a rate, could we have seen the word of God warranting us to
perform our devotions in that way ; and to have the same set

* Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society, Vol. VIII., Second
Series, pp. 76 — 78.

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

177

up here, we conceive it is apparent, that it will disturb our
peace in our present enjoyments ; and we have commended to
the ministry and people here the word of the Lord for their
rule therein, as you may find by your perusal of our law book,
title ' Ecclesiastical/ p. 25."

To this the King's Commissioners reply as follows :

" The end of the first Planters coming hither was (as expressed
in your address, 16()0), the enjoyment of the liberty of your own
consciences, which the King is so far from taking away from
you, that by every occasion he hath promised and assured the
full enjoyment of it to you. We therefore advise that you
should not deny the liberty of conscience to any, especially
where the King requires it ; and that upon a vain conceit of
your own that it will disturb your enjoyments, which the King
often hath said it shall not.

" Though you commend to the ministers and people the word
of the Lord for their rvde, yet you did it with a proviso that
they have the approbation of the Court, as appears in the same
page ; and we have great reason both to think and say that the
King and his Council and the Church of England understand
and follow the rules in God's word as much as this Corporation.

" For the use of the Common Prayer Book : His Majesty doth
not impose the use of the Common Prayer Book on any, but he
understands that liberty of conscience comprehends every man's
conscience as well as any particular, and thinks that all his
subjects should have equal rig its ; and in his letter of June 28,
1662, he requires and charges thr^ all his subjects should have
equally an allowance thereof; but why you should put that
restraint on his Majesty's subjects that live under his obedience,,
his Majesty doth not understand that you have any such
privileges.

"Concerning ecclesiastical privileges, we suppose you mean
sacraments, baptisms, etc. You say we have commended the
word of the Lord for our rule therein, referring us to the
perusal of the printed law, page 25. We have perused that law,,
and find that that law doth cut oflf those privileges which his.
Majesty will have, and see that the rest of his subjects have."*

Second

* Collections of the Massstchuaetta Historical Society, Vol. YIII., Second
Series, pp. 76, 78, 79.

torn Wi.

178

THE LOYALISTS OF AMPIRICA

[chap. V.

f^r

I now resume the narrative of questions as affecting the
authority of the Crown and the subjection of the Massachusetts
Bay Colony. That colony was the most populous and wealthy
of all the New England colonies. Its principal founders were
men of wealth and education ; the twelve years' tyranny of
Charles the First and Laud, during the suspension of Parlia-
ment, caused a flow of more than twenty thousand emigrants
to Massachusetts Bay, with a wealth exceeding half a million
sterling, and among them not less than seventy silenced clergy-
men. During the subsequent twenty years of the civil war and
Commonwealth in England, the rulers of that colony actively
sided with the latter, and by the favour and connivance of
Cromwell evaded the Navigation Law passed by the Parliament,
and enriched themselves greatly at the expense of the other
British colonies in America, and in violation of the law of
Parliament. In the meantime, being the stronger party, and
knowing that they were the favourites of Cromwell, they
assumed, on diverse grounds, possession of lands, south, east,
north, and west, within the limits of the neighbouring colonies,
and made their might right, by force of arms, when resisted;
and denied the citizenship of freemen to all except actual
members of the Congregational Churches, and punished Dis-
senters with fine, imprisonment, banishment, and death itself in
many instances.

On the restoration of Charles the Second to the throne of his
ancestors, it was natural that the various oppressed and injured
parties, whether of colonies or individuals, should lay their
grievances before their Sovereign and appeal to his protection ;
and it was not less the duty of the Sovereign to listen to their
complaints, to inquire into them, and to redress them if well
founded. This the King, under the guidance of his Puritan
Councillors, proceeded to do in the most conciliatory and least
offensive way. Though the rulers of Massachusetts Bay did
not, as did the other New England as well as Southern colonies,
recognize and proclaim the King on the announcement of his
restoration, but observed a sullen silence until they saw that the
monarchy was firmly established ; yet the King took no offence
at this, but addressed them in terms the most conciliatory,
assuring them that he would overlook the past and secure to
them the privileges of their Charter, and the continued freedom

CHAP, v.]

AND THKIU TIMES.

179

of their worship, upon the conditions of tlieir taking the oath of
allegiance, administer their laws as British subjects, and grant
to all their fellow-colonists ecjual freedom of worship and of
conscience with themselves. They professed, as well they
might, to receive the King's declaration of oblivion for past
offences and irregularities, and promise of perpetuating their
original Charter, with feelings of inexpressible gratitude and
delight ; but they did not publish the King's letter for nearly
two years, notwithstanding his command to do so ; and when
they did publish it, they appended an order that the conditions
were not to be acted upon until their further order.

The King's proclamation of pardon of the past, and promise
of the future, produced no other effect than" a profusion of
wordy compliments and a vague intimation of doing as the King
required, as far as their Charter and conscience would i>ermit.
Their policy of proscription and ignoring the Royal authority in
their laws and government remaining unchanged, and the com-
plaints of oppressed colonies and individuals multiplying, the
adoption of further measures became necessary on the part of
the Crown ; and it was decided to appoint a Royal Commission,
which should be at once a Court of Inquiry and a Court of
Appeal, at least in the first instance, reporting the results of
their inquiries and their decisions in cases of appeal for the
information and final decision of the highest authority in Eng-
land, to which any dissatisfied party could appeal against the
report or decision of the Commissioners. The address or
"Petition" to the King, dated 1664, and given above, pp.
153 — 9, in all its tedious length and verbiage, shows how
grossly they misrepresented the character and objects of the
Commission, preparatory to resisting and rejecting it, while the
King's letter in reply, also given above at length, p. 166, com-
pletely refutes their misstatements, and duly rebukes their
unjust and offensive insinuations.

On receiving the report of the Commissioners, together with
the statements and pretensions of the Massachusetts Bay Court,
the Bang might have employed ships and soldiers to enforce his
just and reasonable commands, or have cancelled the Charter, as
the conditions of its continuance had not been fulfilled, and
have established Massachusetts Bay Plantation as a Royal
colony ; but he was advised to adopt the milder and more for-

180

THE LOYALISTS OP AMERICA

ti'^

[chap. v.

bearing course of giving them opportunity of answering directly
the coiiiplaints niade against tliein, and of justifying their acts
and laws. Ho therefore, in the Royal letter giv^n above,
dated April G, IGGG, required tliern within six months to send
five of their number to England to answer and to disprove if
they could complaints made against them, and to furnish proof
of the professions and statements they had made in their address
and petition. They could no longer evade or delay ; tliey were
brought face to face with the authority of King and Farlia-
ment ; they could adduce nothing but their own assertions in
their justification ; facts were against their words ; they adopted
their usual resource to evade all inquiry into their laws and acts
by pleading the immunity of their Charter, and refused to send
representatives to England. They wished the King to take
their own words alone as proofs of their loyalty to the Crown
and equity to their fellow-colonists. In place of sending repre-
.sentatives to England to meet their accusers face to face and
vindicate their acts, they sent two large masts, thirty-four yards
long, which they said they desired to accompany with a thousand
pounds sterling as a present to his Majesty, but could get no one
to lend them that sum, for the purpose of thus expressing their
good-will to the King, and of propitiating his favour. Their
language of adulation and profession was most abject, while
they implored the Royal clemency for refusing to obey the
Royal commands. Their records state that " 11, 7mo., IGGG, the
General Court assembled on account of a signification from his
Majesty requiring the Council of this colony to send five able
and meet persons to make answer for refusing jurisdiction to
his Commissioners last year ; whereof Mr. Richard Bellingham
and Mr. Hawthorne to be two of them, whom he requires, on
their allegiance, to come by first opportunity. The Court met
and agreed to spend the forenoon of the next day in prayer.

" 12, 7mo., 1666. The Court met and sundry elders, and
spent the forenoon in prayer.

" 13, 7mo., 1666. The Court met and the elders were present
after lecture and some debate had in Court concerning the
duty we owe to his Majesty in reference to his signification."

On the 14th sundry petitions were presented from the
" minority " in Boston, Salem, Ipswich, and Newbury, in favour
of compliance with the King's requirement ; and the subject

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIK TIMES.

181

was debated in Council some days, when, on the 17th, the Court
a<lopted an answer to the " King's .signification," containing the
following words addressed to the King's Secretary of State,
Mr. Morrice :

" We have, in all humility, given our reasons why we could
not submit to the Commissioners and their mandates the last
year, winch we understand lie before his Majesty, To the
substance thereof we have nothing to a<ld ; and therefore can't
expect that the ablest persons among us could be in a capacity
to declare our case more fully.

" Wo must therefore commit this our great concernment unto
Almighty God, praying and hoping that his Majesty (a prince
of so great clemency) will consider the estate and condition of
his poor and afflicted sulyects at such a time, being in imminent
danger, I » :he public enemies of our nation, by sea and land,
and that in a wilderness far remote from relief ; wherefore we
do in this wise prostrate ourselves before his Majesty, and
beseech him to be graciously pleased to rest assured of our
loyalty and allegiance according jto our former 'professions.
Thus with our humble service to your Honour, and earnest
prayers to God for his Majesty's temporal and eternal happiness,
we remain your Honour's humble servants.

" 17, 7mo., 166(3."*

and

* Danforth Papers, Collections of Massachusetts Historial Society, Vol.
VIII., pp. 98, 108, 109, Second Series.

The following particulars are given of the proceedings of the Court at a
subsequent meeting on the same subject :

" October 10th, 1666. The General Court met again, according to adjourn-
ment in May last. At this Court many express themselves very sensible of
our condition. Several earnest for sending, and some against sending.
Those for sending none spake out fully that they would have the Gover-
nor (Mr. Bellingham) and Major Hawthorne go ; but some will have men go
to plead our cause with his Majesty ; to answer what may be alleged against
us, alleging reason, religion and our own necessity as forcing us thereto.
Others are against it, as being the loss of all, by endangering a quo warranto
to be brought against our patent, and so to be condemned ; a middle sort
would have some go to present the Court's present to his Majesty, of two
large masts and a ship's load of masts : and in case any demand were made
why the Governor, Major Hawthorne, and others did not appear, to crave his
Majesty's favour therein, and to plead with his Majesty, showing how incon-
sistent it is with our being, for any to be forced to appear to answer in a

tl '^

I • *

182

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

But even in their Council, where the " elders " or ministers
and their nominees were supreme, both to rule and to persecute,
and to maintain which they were plotting and struggling with
the intensity of the Papacy of late years against the Govern-
ment of Italy, there were yet among their number men of
distinction, who contended for the rights of the Crown, to
decide questions of appeal from the colony, and to appoint a special
commission for that purpose, such as Mr. Simon Bradstreet, who
had been Governor, and as their Commissioner to England, with
Mr. Norton, had obtained the famous letter of Charles the
Second, dated 10th of June, 1662, which filled the Court of
Massachusetts Bay with inexpressible joy ; and Mr. Dudley, son
of a former Governor, and himself first Governor appointed by
the Crown after the cancelling of the Charter; and Major
Dennison, a man of mark, also in their Council.

In Mr. Danforth's notes of the debate on the answer to the
King's signification, Mr. Bradstreet is reported to have said :
" I grant legal process in a course of law reaches us not in an
ordinary course ; yet I think the King's prerogative gives him
power to command our appearance, which, before God and men,

judicial way in England — to answer either appeals or complaints against the
country.

" The last proposal is obstructed by sundry, as being ruinous to the whole ;
and so nothing can be done, the Governor and some others chiefly opposing
it, so as that no orderly debate can be had to know the mind of the Court.

" The Court agreed to send two large masts aboard Capt. Pierce, 34 yards
long, and the one 36 and the other 37 inches in diameter, and agreed to
levy ^1,000 for the payment of what is needful at present ; but is
obstructed — none will lend money unless men be sent, others because
anything is to be sent ; a return whereof made to the Court, they say they
know not what to do more — in case they that have money will not part with
it, they are at a stand. Some speak of raising by rate immediately. Others
think there is so much dissatisfaction that men are not sent, that it will
provoke and raise a tumult ; and in case that it be raised by loan, it will
be hardly paid — if consent be not given in their sending men with it, and
there be no good effect, which is contingent, and thus we are every way at a
stand ; some fearing these things will precipitate our ruin, and others
apprehending that to act further will necessitate our ruin." — 76., pp. 110, 111.

From these notes, which Mr. Danforth made at the time when the proceed-
ings referred to took place, it is plain there were a large number of loyalists
even among the Congregationalists, as they alone were eligible to be members
of, or to e^ect to the Court, and that the asserters of independence were greatly
perplexed and agitated.

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

isa

we are to obey." Mr. Dudley : " The King's commands pass any-
where — Ireland, Calais, etc. — although ordinary process from
judges and officers pass not. No doubt you may have a trial at
law when you come to England, if you desire it, and you may
insist upon and claim it. Prerogative is as necessary as law, and
it is for the good of the whole that there be always power in
being able to act ; and where there is a right of power, it will
be abused so long as it is in the hands of weak men, and the less
pious the more apt to miscarry ; but right may not be denied
because it may be abused."

After the Court had adopted its answer of refusal to the
King's signification, Mr. Bradstreet said : " I fear we take not a
right course for our safety. It is clear that this signification is
from his Majesty. I do desire to have it remembered that I do
dissent, and desire to have it recorded that I dissent, from that
part of it as is an answer to the King's signification." Major
Dennison declared his dissent from the letter to Mr. Morrice, as
not being proportionate to the end desired, and he hoped,
intended, and desired it might be entered — namely, due satisfac-.
tion to his Majesty, and the preservation of the peace and liberty
of the colony.*

It is clear from the foregoing facts that the alleged invasion
of chartered rights and privileges put forth by the ruling party
of Massachusetts Bay was a mere pretext to cover the long-
cheris'ied pretensions (called by them "dear-bought rights")
to absolute independence ; that is, the domination of the Con-
gregationalist Government, to the exclusion of the Grown, to
proscribe from the elective franchise and eligibility to office
all but Congregationalists, and to persecute all who diffisred
from them in either religious or political opinion, including
their control and suppression of the fredom of the press.f

* Danforth Papers, Collections of Massachusetts Historical Society, "Vol..
VIII., pp. 99, 100, 108, 109.

t " There had been a press for printing at Cambridge for near twenty
years. The Court appointed two persons (Captain Daniel Guekins and Mr.
Jonathan Mitchell, the minister of Cambridge), in October, 1662, licensers
of the press, and prohibited the publishing of any books or papers which
Bhould not be supervised by them ;" and in 1668, the supervisors having
allowed the printing " Thomas k K'^mpis, de Imitatione Christi/' the Court
interposed (it being wrote by a popish mim jter, and containing some things.

it..

'1^$^

184

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

They persisted in the cruel persecution of their Baptist brethren
as well as of the Quakers, notwithstanding the King had es-
tablished the fullest religious liberty by Royal Charter, granted
in 1663 to the Colonies of Connecticut and Rhode Island, and
had by his letters in 1662 and 1664, and subsequently, forbidden
religious persecution and prescribed religious toleration as a
condition of the continuance of the Charter in Massachusetts
Bay Colony.*

I will give in a note, from the records of their own Court, their
persecuting proceedings against certain Baptists in April, 1666,
six years after the Restoration.-f*

less safe to be infused among the people), and therefore they commended to
the licensers a more full revisal, and ordered tlie press to stop in the mean-
time. (Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 257, 258.)

* Even during the Commonwealth in England, the Congregational
Government of Massachusetts Bay was one of unmitigated persecution.
Mr. Hutchinson, under date of 1655, remarks :

" The persecution of Episcopalians by the prevailing powers in England
was evidently from revenge for the persecution they had suffered themselves,
and from political considerations and the prevalence of party, seeing all other
opinions and professions, however absurd, were tolerated ; but in New
England it must be confessed that bigotry and cruel zeal prevailed, and to that
degree that no opinion but their own could be tolerated. They were sincere
but mistaken in their principles ; and absiud as it is, it is too evident, they
believed it to be to the glory of God to take away the lives of his creatures
for maintaining tenets contrary to what they professed themselves. This
occasioned complaints against the colony to the Parliament and Cromwell,
but without success." (History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 189.)

t " Proceedings and sentence of the County Coiut held at Cambridge,
on adjournment, April 17, 1666, against Thomas Qoold, Thomas Osburne,
and John George (a) (being Baptists):

" Thomas Goold, Thomas Osbume, and John George, being presented
by the Grand Jury of this county (Cambridge), for absenting themselves
from the public worship of God on the Lord's dayes for one whole year now
past, alleged respectively as foUoweth, viz. :

"Thomas Osbume answered that the reason of his non-attendance was
that the Lord hath discovered unto him from His Word and Spirit of Tmth,
that the society where he is now in communion is more agreeable to the
will of God ; asserted that they were a Church, and attended the worship of

(a) Note by Mr. Hutchinson. — "Tliese three persons scrupled at Infant
Baptism, separated from the Churches of the country, and with others of the
•same persuasion with themselves, set up a church in Boston. Whilst Con-
gregationalista in England were complaining of the intolerant spirit of
Episcopalians, these Antipaedo Baptists in New England had equal reason to
.complain of tlie same spirit in the Congregationalists there."

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

185

The Puritan historian, Neal, writing under date three years
later, 1669, says: "The displeasure of the Government ran
very high against the Anabaptists and Quakers at this time.
The Anabaptists had gathered one Church at Swanzey, and
another at Boston, but the General Court was very severe in
putting the laws in execution against them, whereby many
honest people were ruined by fines, imprisonment, and banish-
ment, which was the more extraordinary because their brethren
in England were groaning under persecution from the Church
of England at the same time. Sad complaints were sent over
to England every summer of the severity of the Government

God together, and do judge themselves bound to do so, the ground whereof
he said he gave in the General Court.

"Thomas Goold answered that as for coming to public worship, they
did meet in public worship according to the rule of Christ ; the grounds
thereof they had given to the General Court of Assistants ; asserted that they
were a public meeting, according to the order of Christ Jesus, gathered
together.

" John George answered that he did attend the public meetings on the
Lord's dayes where he was a member ; asserted that they were a Church accord-
ing to the order of Christ in the Gospell, and with them he walked and held
communion in the public worship of God on the Lord's dayes."

Sentence of the Court.

" Whereas at the General Court in October last, and at the Court of Assis-
tants in September last, endeavours were used for their conviction. The
order of the General Court declaring the said Goold and Company to be no
orderly Church assembly, and that they stand convicted of high presumption
against the Lord and his holy appoyntments was openly read to them, and is
on file with the records of this Court.

" The Court sentenced the same Thomas Goold, Thomas Osbunie, and
John George, for their absenting themselves from the public worship of God
on the Lord's dayes, to pay four pounds fine, each of them, to the County
order. And whereas, by their own confessions, they stand convicted of per-
sisting in their schismatical assembling themselves together, to the great
dishonour of God and our profession of his holy name, contrary to the Act
of the General Order of the Court of Octolwr last, prohibiting them therein
on the penalty of imprisonment, this Court doth order their giving bond
respectively in ^£20, each of them, for their appearance to answer their
contempt at the next Court of Assistants.

"The above named Thomas Goold, John George, and Thomas Osbume

made their a^^peal to the next Court of Assistants, and refusing to put in

Becurity according to law, were committed to prison.

" Vera Copia."

" Tho. Danfobth, Recorder."

(Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. L, pp. 397—401.)

■l

liii'

186

THE LOYALISTS OP AMERICA

[chap. V.

against the Anabaptists, which obliged the dissenting ministers
in London to appear at length in their favour. A letter was
accordingly sent over to the Governor of Massachusetts, signed
by Dr. Goodwin, Dr. Owen, Mr. Nie, Mr. Caryl, and nine other
ministers, beseeching him to make use of his authority and
interest for restoring such to their liberty as were in prison on
account of religion, and that their sanguinary laws might not
be put in execution in future." [Mr. Neal gives the letter, and
then proceeds.] " But the excellent letter made no impression
upon them ; the prisoners were not released, nor the execution
of the laws suspended ; nay, so far from this, that ten years
after, in the year 1G79, a General Synod being called to inquire
into the evils that provoked the Lord to bring his judgments on
New England, they mention these among the rest, ' Men have
set up their thresholds by God's threshold, and their posts by
God's post ; Quakers are false worshippers, and such Anabaptists
as have risen up among us, in opposition to the Churches of the
Lord Jesus, " etc., etc.

"Wherefore it must needs be provoking to God if these
things be not duly and fully testified against by every one in
their several capacities respectively."*

The present of two large masts and a ship-load of timber;
successive obsequious and evasive addresses; explanations of
agents ; compliance in some particulars with the Royal require-
ments in regard to the oath of allegiance, and administering the
law, so far appeased the King's Government that further action
was suspended for a time in regard to enforcing the granting of
the elective franchise, eligibility to office, and liberty of worship
to other than Congregationalists,"f- especially as the attention of

* Neal's History of New England, Vol. II., Chap, viii., pp. 353, 354, 356.

t "They endeavoured not only by humble addresses and professions of
loyalty to appease his Majesty, but they purchased a ship-load of masts (the
freight whereof cost them sixteen hundred pounds sterling), and presented
them to the King, which he gi-aciously accepted ; and the fleet in the West
Indies being in want of provisions, a subscription and contribution was recom-
mended through the colony for bringing in provisions to be sent to the fleet
for his Majesty's service, (a) but I find no word of the whole amount. Upon

(a) Note by Mr. Hutchinson. — " This was so well received that a letter was
sent to the General Court, under the King's sign warrant, dated 21st ApT^iK
1669, signifying how well it was taken by his Mtgesty. So the letter
expresses it."

(5T

**«'

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

187

Charles was absorbed by exciting questions at home, by his war
with Holland, which he bitterly hated, and his intrigues with
France, on which he became a paid dependant. But the com-
plaints and appeals to the King from neighbouring colonies of
the invasion of individual and territorial rights by the Court of
Massachusetts Bay, and from the persecuted and proscribed
inhabitants of their own colony, awakened at last the renewed
attention of the King's Government to the proceedings of the
Massachusetts Bay rulers. The letter which the King was
advised to address to them is kind and conciliatory in its tone ;
but it shows that while the King, as he had declared in his first
letter, addressed to them seventeen years before, recognized the
" Congregational way of worship," he insisted on toleration of
the worship of Episcopalians, Baptists, etc., and the civil rights
and privileges of their members,* denied by these " fathers of

the news of the great fire in London, a collection was made through the
colony tor the relief of the sufferers. The amount cannot be ascertained."
(Hutchinson's History of Masaachu.setts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 256, 257.)

* The following is a copy of the King's very courteous and reasonable letter :
" Copy of a letter from King Charles II. to the Governor, etc., of the
Massachusetts, dated July 24th, 1679.

"Charles R.
" Trusty and well beloved — We greet you well. These our letters are to
accompany our tnisty and well beloved William Stoughtoa. and Peter
Bulkly, Esqres., your agents, who having manifested to us great necessity in
their domestic concerns to return back into New England, we have
graciously consented thereunto, and the rather because for many months
past our Council hath been taken up in the discovery and prosecution of a
popish plot, and yet there appears little prospect of any speedy leisure for
entering upon such regulation in your affairs as is certainly necessary, not
only in respect of our dignity, but of your own perfect settlement. In the
meantime, we douVjt not but the bearers thereof, who have demeaned them-
selves, during their attendance, with good care and discretion, will, from
their ovm observations, acquaint you with many important things which may
be of such use and advertisement to you, that we might well hope to be pre-
vented, by your applications, in what is expected or desired by us. So much
it is your interest to propose and intercede for the same ; for we are graciously
inclined to have all past errors and mistakes forgotten, and that your con-
dition might be so amended as that neither your settlement, or the nunds of
our good subjects there, should be liable to be shaken and disquieted upon
every complaint. We have heard with satisfaction of the great readiness
wherewith our good subjects there have lately offered themselves to the
taking of the oath of allegiance, which is a clear manifestation to us that the

188

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

American liberty " to the very last ; until then, power of pro-
scription and persecution was wrested from them by the
cancelling of their Charter.

The chief requirements of this letter were, as stated by Mr.
Hutchinson :

" 1. That agents be sent over in six months, fully instructed
to answer and transact what was undetermined at that time.

" 2. That freedom and liberty of conscience be given to such
persons as desire to serve God in the way of the Church of Eng-

wii

* . ' .»'.

•ill

! imm

unanswerable defect in that particular was but the fault of a very few in
power, who for so long a time obstructed what the Charter and our express
commands obliged them unto, as will appear in our gracious letter of the
28th of June (1662), in the foui-teenth year of our reign ; and we shall hence-
forth expect that there will be a suitable obedience in other particulars of
the said letter, as, namely, in respect of freedom and liberty of conscience,
so as those that desire to serve God in the way of the Church of England
be not thereby made obnoxious or discountenanced from their sharing in the
government, much less that they or any other of our good subjects (not being
Papists) who do not agree in the Congregational way, be by law subjected to
fines or forfeitures, or other incapacities for the same, which is a severity to
be the more wondered at, whereas liberty of conscience was made one
principal motive for your first transportation into those parts ; nor do we
think it fit that any other distinction be observed in the making of freemen
than that they be men of competent estates, rateable at ten shillings, (a)
according to the rules of the place, and that such in their turns be also
capable of the magistracy, and all laws made void that obstruct the same.
And because we have not observed any fruits or advantage by the dispensa-
tion granted by us in our said letter of June, in the fourteenth year of our
reign, whereby the number of assistants, settled by our Charter to be eighteen,
might be reduced unto the number of ten, our will and pleasure is that the
ancient number of eighteen be henceforth observed, according to the letter
of the Charter. And our further will and pleasure is, that all persons com-
ing to any privilege, trust, or office in that colony be first enjoined to take the
oath of allegiance, and that all the military commissions as well as the pro-
ceedings of justice may run in our royal name. We are informed that you have
lately made some good provision for observing the acts of trade and naviga-
tion, which is well pleasing unto us (b) ; and as we doubt not and do expect

(a) NoU by the historian, Mr. Hutchinson. — They seem to have held out
till the last in refusing to admit any to be freemen who were not either
Church members, or who did not at least obtain a certificate from the minister
of the town that they were orthodox.

(b) Note by the historian, Mr. Hutchinson. — This is very extraordinary,
for this provision was an act of the colony, declaring that the acts of trade
should be in force there. (Massachusetts History, Vol. I., p. 322.)

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

189

land, so as not to be thereby made obnoxious, or discountenanced
from their sharing in the government, much less that they, or
any other of his Majesty's subjects (not being Papists) who do
not agree in the Congregational way, be by law subject to fines
or forfeitures or other incapacities.

" 3. That no other distinction be observed in making freemen
than that they be men of competent estates, rateable at ten
shillings, according to the rules of the place, and that such
in their turns be capable of the magistracy, and all laws made
void that obstruct the same.

" 4. That the ancient number of eighteen assistants be
observed, as by Charter. (They had been limited to eight or
ten.)

" 5. That all persons coming to any privilege, trust or office,
take the oath of allegiance.

" 6. That all military commissions as well as proceedings of
justice run in his Majesty's name.

" 7. That all laws repugnant to, and inconsistent with, the
laws of England for trade, be abolished."*

There were certain injunctions in regard to complaints from
neighbouring colonies ; but the necessity for such injunctions as
those above enumerated, and stated more at large in the King's
letter, as stated in note on p. 187, given for the third or fourth time
the nineteenth year after the Restoration, shows the disloyal
proscriptions and persecuting character of the Government of
Massachusetts Bay, and the great forbearance of the King's
Government in continuing the Charter while the conditions of
its proposed continuance were constantly violated.

Dr. Palfrey speaks of these requirements, and the whole policy

that you will abolish all laws that are repugnant to and inconsistent with the
laws of trade with us, we have appointed our trusty and well beloved
aubject, Edward Randolph, Esq., to be our collector, surveyor and searcher
not only for the colony, but for all other our colonies in New England,
constituting him, by the broad seal of this our kingdom, to the said eniploy-
nients, and therefore recommending him to your help and assistance in all
things that may be requisite in the discharge of his trust. Qiven at our
palace of Hampton Court, the 24th day of July, 1679, and in the one and
thirtieth year of our reign.

" By his Majesty's Command,

"A. COVBNTRT."

• History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 325, 326.

It ■

190

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

■si 'm:

isSSi:

ii »"'

of the King's Government, as "usurpations" on the chartered
rights of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. But let any reader
say in which of the above seven requirements there is the
slightest " usurpation" on any right of a British subject ; whetlier
there is anything that any loyal British subject would not
freely acknowledge and respond to ; requirements unhesitatingly
obeyed by all the colonies except that of Massachusetts Bay
alone, and which have been observed by every British Province
of America for the last hundred years, and are observed by the
Dominion of Canada at this day.

Dr. Palfrey, referring to this period (167C — 82), says : " Lord
Clarendon's scheme of colonial policy was now ripe," but he
does not adduce a word from Lord Clarendon to show what
that policy Avas only by insinuations and assertions, and assumes
it to have been the subversion of the rights and liberties of the
Massachusetts Bay Colony. Lord Clarendon, in his letter to
the Governor Endicot, given above, pp. 160, 161, explains his
colonial policy, which was not only to maintain the Charter in
its integrity, but to see that its provisions and objects were not
violated but fulfilled, and that while the Congregational worship
should not be interfered with, the Congregational Govemi.ient
should not proscribe from the elective franchise and liberty of
worship the members of other Protestant denominations. The
Hon. Robert Boyle, the philosopher and benefactor of New
England, and President of the New England Society for Propa-
gation of the Gospel among the Indians, expressed the same
views with Lord Clarendon, and there is not a shadow of proof
that Lord Clarendon ever entertained any other policy in regard
to New England than that which he expressed in his letter to
Governor Endicot in 1664.

Dr. Palfrey and other New England historians ccuoy four-
fifths of their pages with accounts of the continental proceed-
ings of the Governments of the Stuarts, and their oppressions
and persecutions of Nonconformists in England, and then
assume that their policy was the same in regard to the New
England Colonies, and that the Massachusetts Bay Colony was
therefore the champion defender of colonial liberties, in deny-
ing responsibility to the Imperial Government for its acts, and
refusing the usual oaths, and acts of allegiance to the Throne ;
whereas their assumptions (for they are nothing else) are un-

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

191

supported by a single fact, and are contradicted, without excep-
tion, by the declarations and acts of the Government of Charles
the Second, as well as by those of his royal father. Language
can hardly exaggerate or reprobate in too strong terms the
cruel persecutions of dissenters from the Established Episcopal
Church in England, by both Charles the First and Charles the
Second ; but the Congregational Government of Massachusetts
Bay exceeded that of the Charleses in proscribing and persecut-
ing dissenters from their Established Congregational Churches
in that colony ; and as well might Messrs. Palfrey, Bancroft, and
other New England historians maintain that, because Congrega-
tionalists contended for liberty of worship for themselves in
England, they practised it in regard to those who did not agree
with them in worship in Massachusetts Bay. The proscription
and persecution of Congregationalists and Baptists by Episco-
palian rulers in England were outrivalled by the Congrega-
tional rulers in their proscriptions and persecutions of Episco-
palians and Baptists in Massachusetts.

It is also assumed by the New England historians referred to
that the King's advisers had intimated the intention of appoint-
ing a Governor-General over the Colonies of New England to
see to the observance of their Charters and of the Navigation
Laws ; but wherein did this infringe the rights or privileges of any
Colonial Charter ? Wherein did it involve any more than right-
ful attention to Imperial authority and interests ? Wherein
has the appointment or office of a Governor-General of British
North America, in addition to the Lieutenant-Governor of each
province, ever been regarded to this day as an infringement
of the rights and privileges of any Legislature or British sub-
ject in the colonies ? Wherein has the right of appeal by any
colony or party to the Supreme Courts or authorities of England,
against the decisions of local Courts or local executive acts, been
regarded as an i7ifringement of colonial rights, or other than a
protection to colonial subjects ? When has the right of appeal
by parties in any of the neighbouring States, to the Supreme
Court at Washington, been held to be an invasion of the rights
of such States ?

The rulers of Massachusetts Bay Colony concealed and
secreted their Charter ; they then represented it as containing

■ I

192

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

provisions which no Royal Charter in the world ever contained ;
they represented the King as having abdicated, and excluded
himself from all authority over them as a colony or as in-
dividuals ; they denied that Parliament itself had any authority
to legislate for any country on the western side of the Atlantic ;
they virtually claimed absolute independence, erasing the oath
of allegiance from their records, proscribing and persecuting
all nonconformists to the Congregational worship, invading
the territories of other colonies and then maintaining their
invasions by military force, denying the authority of Great
Britain or of any power on earth to restrict or interfere with
their acts. The New England historians referred to are com-
pelled to confess that the Royal Charter contained no such
provisions or powers as the rulers of Massachusetts Bay pre-
tended ; yet their narratives and argumentations and imputa-
tions upon the British Government assume the truth of the
fabulous representations of tlfe Charter, and treat not only every
act of the King as royal tyranny, but every suspicion of what
the King might do as a reality, and the hostility of the Massachu-
setts Bay Government as a defence of constitutional rights and
resistance of royal despotism. But in these laboured and
eloquent philippics against the Government of the Restoration,
they seem to forget that the Parliament and Government of the
Commonwealth and Cromwell asserted far larger powers over
the colonies than did the Government and Parliament of Charles
the Second (as is seen by their Act and appointments in their
enactments quoted above, pp. 88 — 90).

The Commonwealth appointed a Governor-General (the Earl
of Warwick), Commissioners with powers to remove and appoint
Colonial Governors and other local officers ; whereas the Com-
missioners appointed by Charles the Second had no authority
to remove or appoint a single local Governor or other officer,
to annul or enact a single law, but to inquire and report ; and
even as a Court of Appeal their proceedings and decisions
were to be reported for final action in England.

The famous Act of Navigation itself, which ultimately became
the chief ground of the American revolutionary war, was passed
by the Commonwealth, though, by a collusion between Crom-
well and the rulers of Massachusetts Bay, its provisions were

i I

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

193

jisions

evaded in that colony, while rigorously enforced in the other
colonies.*

In the first year of Charles the Second this Act was renewed,
with some additional provisions.f

But to return to the correspondence between the King's
Government and the rulers of Massachusetts Bay. It may
be supposed that after the King had promised, in 1GG2, to
forget past offences and continue the justly forfeited Royal
Charter upon certain conditions, and that those conditions were
evaded by various devices during nearly twenty years, the Royal
patience would become exhausted, and that, instead of the gentle
instructions and remonstrances which had characterized his
former letters, the King would adopt more severe and imperative
language. Hence in his next letter, September 30, 1G80, to the
Governor and Council of the Massachusetts, he commences
in the following words :

"Charles R. •

" Trusty and well beloved, we greet you well. When by our
Royal letter, bearing date the 24th day of July, in the one and
thirtieth year of our reign, we signified unto you our gracious

* " The people of Maasachuaetta had alwaya the good- will of Cromwell.
In relation to them he allowed the Navigation Law, which presaed hard on the
Southern colonies, to become a dead letter, and they received the commodities
of all nations free of duty, and sent their ships at will to the ports of con-
tinental Europe." (Palfrey's History of New England, Vol. II., Book ii.,
Chap. X., p. 393.)

t " 1660. — The Parliament passed an Act for the general encouragement
and increase of shipping and navigation, by which the provisions made in
the celebrated Navigation Act of 1651 were continued, with additional
improvements. It enacted that no sugar, tobacco, ginger, indigo, cotton,
fustin, dyeing woods of the growth of English territories in America, Asia,
or Africa, shall be transported to any other country than those belonging to
the Crown of England, under the penalty of forfeiture ; and all vessels
sailing to the Plantations were to give bonds to bring said commodities
to England." (Holmes' American Annals, Vol. I., pp. 314, 315.)

" Tlie oppressive system," says Palfrey, " was further extended by an Act
which confined the import trade of the colonists to a direct commerce with
England, forbidding them to bring from, any other or vn, any other than
English ships, the products not only of England but of any European state."
(History of New England, Vol. II., B. ii., Chap, xi., p. 445.)

Palfrey adds in a note : " Salt for New England fishermen, wines from
Madeira and the Azores, and provisions from Scotland and Ireland, were,
however, exempted." — Ih.

194

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[CIIAI». V.

|: f

' " I

inclination to have all past deedH forgotten, setting Ixjforc you
the means whereby you might deserve our pardon, and com-
manding your ready obedience to several particulars therein
contained, re<iuiring withall a speedy compliance with the
intimations of your duty given to your late agents during
their attendance here, all which we esteem essential to your
([uiet settlement and natural obedience due unto us. We tlusn
little thought that those marks of our grace and favour should
have found no better acceptance among you, but that, before
all things, you should have given preference to the execution
of our commands, when after so many months we come to
understand by a letter from you to one of our principal Secre-
taries of State, dated the 21 at of May last, that very few
of our directions have been pursued by your General Court, the
further consideration of the remaining particulars having been
put off upon insufficient pretences, and even wholly neglecting
your appointment of other agents which were required to be
sent over unto us within six months after the receipt of our
said letters, with full instructions to attend our Royal pleasure
herein in relation to that our Government."

Among other matters, the King " strictly commanded and re-
quired " them, " as they tendered their allegiance," to despatch
such agents within three months after their reception of the
order, and with full powers to satisfy his Majesty on the
subjects of complaint ; and " he ended the letter," says Mr.
Palfrey, " with a very definite injunction : "

" That the due observance of all our commands above men-
tioned may not be any longer protracted, we require you, upon
receipt thereof, forthwith a, call a General Court, and therein
to read these our letters and pi-ovide for our speedy satisfaction,
and in default thereof wc jJall take the most effectual means to
procure the same. And so we bid you farewell."*

Tliis letter led to the calling of a " Special General Court,"
January, 1681, in which very protracted debates ensued on the
revision of the laws, so long delayed, and the election of agents
to England according to the King's command. Samuel Nowell
and John Richards were elected agents to England, but were
restricted by instructions which forbade conceding anything

♦Hutchinson's Collection, etc., pp. 622 — 526.
England, Vol. III., B. iii.. Chap, viii., p. 341.

Palfrey's History of New

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

196

from their original Cliarter pretensions, and therefore rendered
their agency an insult to the (Government and the King, and
luiHtened the catastrophe which they ao much dreaded, the
cancelling of their Charter.

In the meantime, to appease the displeasure of the Crown,
tliey passed several Acts which had the appearance of obedience
to the Royal conmiands, but which they were careful not to
carry into effect.* I will give two or three examples.

They enacted " that the Acts of Trade and Navigation should be
forthwith proclaimed in the market-place of Boston by beat of
drum, and that all clauses in said Acts relating to this Plantation
should be strictly taken notice of and observed." This appears
very plausible, and is so quoted by Dr. Palfrey ; but he does not
add that care was taken that it should not be carried into effect.
And to accomplish their purposes, and to assert the subordina-
tion of the Royal authority to their own local authority, " they
constituted naval ojjicers, one for Boston, the other for ' Salem
and adjacent parts,' to be commissioned by the Governor, and to
exercise powers of a nature to control the Collector appointed
in England."f

After nearly twenty years' delay and evasions, they enacted,
in 1G79, " that the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Magistrates
should take the oath of allegiance ' without any reservation,' in

Court,"
on the
agents
Nowell
it were
lything

of New

* To tliis there were two or three exceptions. Tliey repealed the penal
laws " against keeping Christinas ; " also for punishing with death Quakers
returned from banishment ; and to amend the laws relating to heresy and to
rebellion against the country.

t Palfrey's History of New England, Vol. III., B. iii., Chap. viiL, p. 352.

They usurped authority over New Hampshire and Maine, at the same time
that they prevented the execution of the Acts of Trade and Navigation (the
12th and 15th of Charles the Second). Mr. Hutchinson says : " The Massa-
chusetts Government (1670) governed without opposition the Province of
New Hampshire and the Province of Maine, and were beginning settlements
even further eastward. The French were removed from their neighbourhood
on the one side, and the Dutch and Swedes on the other. Their trade was
as extensive as they could wish. No ciistom-house was established. The Acts
of Parliament of the 12th — 15th of King Charles the Second, for regu
lating the Plantation trade, were in force; but the Governor, whose business it
ivas to carry them into execution, was annuaUy to be elected by the people, whose
interest vxu that they should not be observed t Some of the magistrates and
principal merchants grew very rich." (History of Masaachusetts Bay, Vol
I., p. 269.)

196

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

the words sent them by his Majesty's orders ; but instead of the
' reservation ' in their form of oath in former Acts, they virtually
neutralized the oath by an Act requiring a prior preliminary oath
of fidelity to the local Government,* an Act which the Board of
Colonial Plantations viewed as 'derogatory to his Majesty's
honour, as well as defective in point of their own duty.' "

They instructed their agents in England to represent that
there was no colonial law " prohibiting any such as were of the
persuasion of the Church of England." The design of this state-
ment plainly was to impress upon the mind of the King's
Government that there was no obstruction to the worship and
ordinances of the Church of England, an 1 that the elective
franchise and privilege of worship were as open to Episcopalians
as to Congregationalists — the reverse of fact. After repeated
letters from the King in favour of toleration as one of the con-
ditions of continuing their Charter, notwithstanding their past
violation of it, they professed to comply with the royal injunc-
tions, but their professed compliance amounted practically to
nothing, as they had evidently intended. The King's Com-
missioners had said to the Massachusetts Bay Court on this
subject : " For the use of the Common Prayer Book : His Majesty
doth not impose the use of the Common Prayer Book on any ;
but he understands that liberty of conscience comprehends every
man's conscience, as well as any particular, and thinks that all
his subjects should have equal right." To this the Massachu-
setts Court replied : " Concerning the use of the Common Prayer

* On the very day, October, 1677, that they proposed, in obedience to Lis
Majesty's command, to pass an order that "the Governor and all inferior
magistrates should see to the strict observation of the Acts of Navigation
and Trade," they made an order " that the law requiring all persons, as well
inhabitants as strangers, that have not taken it, to take the oath of fidelity to
the country, be revived and put in practice throughout the jurisdiction"
(Palfrey, Vol. III., pp. 311 — 315) — an order intended to counteract the execu-
tion of the Acts of Navigation and Trade by the King's Collector, and of
which he complained to England.

" The agents of the colony endeavoured to explain this law to the Board
(of Colonial Plantations in England), and to soften their indignation against
it, but without effect." {lb., p. 315.) " All persons who refused to take the
oath of fidelity to the country were not to have the privilege of recovering
their debts in Courts of law, nor to have the protection of the Qovernnient."
(Truth ard Innocency Defended, etc.)

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES,

197

Book and ecclesiastical privileges, our humble addret,:L(es to his
Majesty have fully declared our main ends, in our being volun-
tary exiles from our dear native country, which we had not
chosen at so dear a rate, could we have seen the word of God
warranting us to perform our devotions in that way ; and to
have the same set up here, we Conceive it is apparent that it
will disturb our peace in our present enjoyment,"*

But afterwards they found it dangerous longer to resist the
King's commands, and professed to obey them by providing that
those who were not Congregationalists might exercise the
elective franchise, provided that, in addition to taking the oath
of fidelity to the local Government, and paying a rate which
was not paid by one in a hundred, and obtaining a certificate
from the Congregational minister as to their being blameless in
words and orthodox in religion, they were then approved by the
Court. The right of franchise was possessed by every member
of any Congregational Church, whether he had property or not,
or paid rate or not ; f not so with any other inhabitant, unless
he adduced proof that he had paid rate, produced a certificate
of character and of orthodoxy in religion, signed by a Congrega-
tional minister, and was approved by the Court, No instance
is recorded of any Episcopalian ever having obtained the free-

* (Collections of the Massachusetts Historial Society, Second Series, Vol,
VIII., pp. 73 — 78.) The liberty of worship, which they declared had
been the object of their emigration to Massachusetts, had never been deftied
them ; had been assured to them by both Charles the First and Charles the
Second. The King did i.n^ • lo'Vjse to impose the usa of the prayer book
upon any inhabitant wi the jolony, but insisted upon freedom of worship for
each inhabitant ; win -ras the Massachusetts Bay Court, unler the pretext
of liberty of %\\)<'8hlp lor Congregationalists, denied freedom of worship to
all others not Congre;.' at' jualists.

t " This extraordin -r y law continued in force until the dissolution of the
Government ; it beinf repealed in appearance only, (o) after the restoration
of King Charles the S'jcond. Had they been deprived of tlieir civil privilege*
•n England by Act of Parliament, unless they would Join in communion
with the Churches there, it mif;ht very well have b'-pn the first on the roll
of grievances. But such were the reqinsitrs for Chuvcb membership here,
*iiat the grievance is abundantly ^r.'ater." (Hul chine .m's History of Massa-
chusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 25, 26.)

(a) Note by the historian. — "The ministiT vat to certify that the candi-
•Uites for freedom were of orthodox pTir?oii;)?e;) a^-d of good lives and conver-
sation."

tm-M

198

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[CHAF. V.

dom of the colony under such conditions ; " nor," as Mr. Hutchin-
son says, " was there any Episcopal Church in any part of the
colony until the Charter was vacated."*

The Court of Massachusetts Bay also instructed their agents
in England, in 1682, to represent that "as for Anabaptists, they
were now subject to no othe^- penal statutes than those of the
Congregational way." But as late as the spring of 1680 the
General Court forbade the Baptists to assemble for their worship
in a meeting-house which they had built in Boston.-f- The
statement which they instructed their agents to make in Eng-
land was clearly intended to convey the impression that the
Baptist worship was equally allowed with the Congregational
worship ; but though penalties against individual Baptists may
have been relaxed, their worship was no more tolerateri v m
that of the Episcopalian until the cancelling of the Char*^ i.

The same kind of misleading evasion was practised upon the
Government in England in regard to the Quakers, as m respect
to the Baptists, the Episcopalians, and the elective fr»:achise.
The agents of the colony in England were instructed to >^tate
that the "severe laws to prevent the violent and impetus, us

♦ Hutchinsou's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 431. " The t^st
(that 'no man could have a share in the administration of civil govern-
ment, or give his voice in any election, unless he was a member of one of
the Churches ') went a great way towards producing general uniformity, '"m
that did not conform was deprived of more civil privileges than a jon-
cohformist is deprived of by the Test Act in England. Both the oj.e and
the other must have occasipned much formality and hypocrisy. Tlic
mysteries of our holy religion have been prostituted to mere secular views
and advantages." — lb., p. 432.

t (Palfrey, Vol. III., p. 353, in a note.) Mr. Hildreth states the case a«
follows : " Encouraged by *ha King's demand for toleration, construed as
superseding the ' by-laws ' of the colony, the Baptists ventured to hold a
service in their new meeting-house. For this they were summoned hdoiv.
the magistrates, and when they refused to desist the doors were nailed Uf-
and the following order posted upon them : ' All persons are to take notice
that, by order of the Court, the doors of this house are shut up, and that
they are inhibited to hold any meeting therein, or to open the doors thereof
without licence from authority, till the General Court take further order, as
they will answer the contrary at their peril.* When the General Court nut,
the Baptists pleaded that their house was built before any law was made to
prevent it. This plea was so far allowed that their past offences wer, lorgi vti ;
but they were not allowed to open the house." (History of the United
States, Vol. I., Chap, xiv., p. 601.)

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

19(V

'.n

!'he t^st

a jon-
0).e and
The
ar views

case an
trued as

hold u
bet'oiv
liled ur-
iiotici'
nd tliat

tlieivdf
irdur, as

rt nut,
nade to
)rgiv<ii;

United

intrusions of the Quakers had been suspended ;" but they did not
say that laws les.s severe had been substituted, and that fines and
imprisonments were imposed upon any party who should be
present at a Quakers' meeting. Yet, as late as 1677, the Court
of Massachusetts Bay made a law " That every person found at
a Quakers' meeting shaL^ be apprehended, ex offixiio, hy the con-
stable, and by warrant from a magistrate or commissioner shall
be committed to the House of Correction, and there have the dis-
cipline of the house applied to him, and be kept to work,
with bread and water, for three days, and then released, or else
shall pay five pounds in money as a fine to the country for such
offence ; and all constables neglecting their duty in not faithfully
executing this order, shall incur the penalty of five pounds upon
conviction, one-third thereof to the informer."* -

They likewise instructed their agents in England to give
assurance " That the Acts of Trade, so far as they concerned the
colony, should be strictly observed, and that all due encourage-

* (Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 320.) After quot-
ing this law, the historian remarks : " I know of nothing which can be urged
in anywise tending to increase the severity of this law, unless it be human
infirmity, and the many instances in history of persons of every religion
being fully persuaded that the indulgence of any other was a toleration of
impiety and brought down the judgments of Heaven, and therefore justified
persecution. This law lost the colony many friends." — Ih.

The law punishing attendance at Quaker raeeting.s was accompanied
! , Another containing the following clauses :

' Pride, in men wearing long hair like women's liair ; others wearing
I'orders ol hair, and cutting, curling, and immodest laying out their liair,
'.irincipally in the younger sort. Grand Jurors to present and the Court to
itpini'i'j all offenders by admonition, fine, or correction, at discretion."

" Excess in apparel, strange new fashions, naked breasts and anns, and
pinioned superfluous ribbands on hair and apparel. The Court to fine
offenders at discretion."

" A loose and sinful custom of riding from town to town, men and women
togethei', under pretence of going to lectures, but really to drink and revel
in taverns, tending to debauchery and unchastity. All single persons, being
offenders, to be bound in their good behaviour, with sureties in twenty pounds
fine, or suffer fine and imprisonment." — 76., pp. 320, 321, in a note.

The foregoing pages show the notions and appreciation of the religious

.;}itH tind liberties by the Massachusetts Bay rulers and legislators in regard
I. Ep'scopalians, Baptists, and Quakers. The above quoted clauses of their
law piissed in 1667, nearly fifty years after the establishment of their goveru-
nient, illustrate their ideas of individual liberty.

* 200

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. V.

, t

ment and assistance should be given to his Majesty's officers and
informers that might prosecute the breaches of said Acts of
Trade and Navigation."* But while as a Court they professed
this in their records and through their agents in England,
officers were elected in the colony who would not execute the
law, and so not a farthing of duties was collected under it
at Massachusetts Bay.

Thus for twenty years the rulers of Massachusetts Bay re-
sisted and evaded the six conditions on which King Charles the

* Palfrey, Vol. III., p. 353. Much has been written about these Acts of
Trade and Navif,'ation, as if they were acts of royal despotism and desif^ned
tooppr*' *he colonies for the benefit of England ; whereas they originated
with tho Tnmonv'iulth, and were designed to benefit the colonies as well as
the moth, . " After the decapitation of Charles I.," says Minot, " the

confused siuw a -"if England prevented any particular attention to the colony
until Cromwell's Government. The very qualities which existed in the
character of the inhabitants to render them displeasing to the late King,
operated as much with the Protector in their favour ; and he diverted all
complaints of their enemies against them. Yet he procured the Navigation
Act to be passed by the Parliament, which was a source of future difficulty
to the colony, though it was evaded in New England at first (by Cromwell's
connivance with the rulers of Massachusetts Colony), as they still traded in
all parts and enjoyed a privilege, peculiar to themselves, of iniporting their
goods into England free of all customs." (Minot's Continuation of tlie
History of Massachusetts Bay, published according to Act of Congress,
Vol. I., p. 40.)

Mr. Hildreth, referring to the early part of Charles the Second's restora-
tion, suys : " As yet the Acts of Trade were hardly a subject of controversy.
The Parliament, which had welcomed back the King, had indeed re-enacted
with additional clauses the ordinance of 1651 — an Act which, by restricting
exportations from America to English, Iri*ih, and Colonial vessels, substan-
tially excluded foreign ships from all Anglo-American harbours. To this,
which might be regarded as a benefit to New England ship-owners, a provision
was added still further to isolate the colonies (from foreign countries), the
more valuable colonial staples, mentioned by the name, and hence known as
' enumerated articles,' being required to be shipped exclusively to England
or some English colony. The exportation to the colonies was also prohibited
of any product of Europe, unless in English vessels and from England, except
liorses, servants and provisions from Ireland and Scotland. But of the
' enumerated articles' none were produced in New England ; while salt for
fisheries, and wine from Madeira and the Azores, branches of foreign trade
in which New England was deeply interested, were specially exempted I'rom
the operation of an Act which had chiefly in view the more &outhern
colonies." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap, xiv.'
p. 473.)

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

201

of tlie
Joui^ivss,

Second, after his restoration, proposed to overlook and pardon
their past offences and perpetuate the Charter given to them by
his Royal father ; for twenty years the King, without commit-
ting a single unconstitutional or oppressive act against them, or
without demanding anything which Queen Victoria does not
receive, this day, from every colony of the British Empire,
endured their evasions and denials of his authority and insults
of his Commissioners and officers. In all the despatches of the
King's Government to the rulers of Mjissachusetts Bay, during
these twenty years, as the reader of the preceding pages will
have seen, the spirit of kindness, and a f ill recognition of their
rights in connection with those of the Crown, were predominant.

This they repeatedly acknowledged in their addresses to the
King. They pretended the Royal Charter gave them absolute
independence ; and on that absurd interpretation and lawless
assumption they maintained a continuous contest with the
mother country for more than fifty years. Every party in
England, and the Commonwealth as well as Royalty, maintained
the right of King and Parliament to be the supreme tribunal of
appeal and control in America as well as in England ; while
the rulers of Massachusetts Bay Colony alone, in contradistinc-
tion to all the other British colonies in America, denied in short
the authority of both King and Parliament, though often amidst
wordy professions of personal loyalty to the Throne. Mr. Ban-
croft well sums up the history of Massachusetts pretensions and
intolerance in the sentences : " Massachusetts owned no King
but the King of Heaven." " Mas.sachusetts gave franchises to
the members of the visible Church," but " inexorably disfran-
chised Churchmen, Royalists, and all the world's people." " In
Massachusetts, the songs of Deborah and David were sung
without change ; hostile Algonquins like the Canaanites ^vere
exterminated or enslaved ; and a peevish woman was hanged,
because it was written, ' The witch shall die.' "*

No hostile pen ever presented in so few and expressive
words the character and policy of the Government of Massa-
chusetts Bay during the whole existence of the first Charter, as
is presented in these words of their eulogist Bancroft ; and
these words express the causes of their contests with the Crown

* History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap, xviii., pp. 461, 462.

202

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

m 'f

'f .i-

• 1:

[chap. v.

and Parliament, of their proscription and persecution of the
majority of their fellow-colonists not of their politics or form
of worship, and of their dealing at pleasure with the territories
of their neighbours,* and the lands ^nd lives of the Indian tribes.

* The following is a specimen of the manner in which they interpreted
their Charter to extend their territory. Having intei-preted their Charter to
exempt themselves from all responsibility to the Crown for their legislation
or acts, they devised a new interpretation of their Charter in order to extend
their territory to the north and north-east. The Charter limited their
teri'itories to three miles of the north hank of the Merrimac. At the end of
twenty years they decided that the Charter meant three miles north of the
most northern land or elbow of the Menimac* and then not follow within
three miles of the north bank of the river to its mouth, but a straight line
east and west, which would give to their Planta' ion, Maine and a large part
of New Hampshire, to the exclusion of the original patentees. When the
Royal Commissioners, as directed by the King, came to investigate the com-
plaints this disputed boundary of territory, they decided against the pre-
tensions of the Massachusetts Bay rulers, aud appointed magistrates, etc., to
give effect to their decision ; but the authorities of Massachusetts Bay,
acknow. ^Sin^ -^ superior under heaven, resumed control of the territory in
dispute as soon as the Commissioners had left the country. Mr. Hildreth
says :

" Shortly after the departure of the Royal Commissioners, Leverett, now
Major-General of the Colony, was sent to Maine, with three other magis-
trates and a body of horse, to re-establish the authority of Massachusetts. In
spite of the remonstrances of Col. Nichols at New York (the head of tlie
Royal Commission), the new Government lately set up was obliged to yield.
Several persons were punished for speaking irreverently of the re-established
authority of Massachusetts." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. I.,
Chap, xiv., pp. 473, 474.) For eleven years the Massachusetts Bay Govern-
ment maintained this ascendency against all complaints and appeals to
England, when in 1677, as Mr. Hildreth .says, " After hearing the parties,
the Privy Council decided, in accordance with the opinion of the two Chief
Justices, that the Massachusetts patent did not give any territory more than
three miles distant from the left or north bank of the Merrimac. This con-
stniction, which set aside the pretensions of Massachusetts to the province of
Maine, as well as to that part of New Hampshire east of the Merrimac,
appeared so plain to English lawyers that the agents (of Massachusetts)
hardly attempted a word in defence." (History of the United States, Vol.
II., Chap, xviiL, pp. 496, 497.)

It has been shown that as early as the second year of the civil war in
England, the Massachusetts Bay Court passed an Act, in 1643, declaring it a
capital crime for "any one in their jurisdiction to advocate or support the
cause of the King ; some years afterwards they passed an Act forbidding all
trade with the other American colonies who would not renounce their
allegiance to the King ; in their addresses to the Parliament and Cromwell,

I war in
iring it a
port the
ding all
ce their
romwell,

CHAP, v.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

203

in 1C51 and 1P54, as shown above, they claimed, aa a ground of merit for
peculiar favour, that they had done their utmost, by devotional and material
aid of men and means, in support of the Parliamentary, and afterwards
regicide party, from the beginning to the end of the war — so that loyalists
as well as clmrchmen were treated by them as outcasts and aliens — and now,
after having beggetl, in language of sycophantic subserviency, the Royal par-
don for the past, and obtained it on certain conditions, they claim the boon but
refuse to fulfil the conditions, making all sorts of excuses, promises, and
evasions for twenty years — professing and promising one thing in London,
doing the opposite in Massachusetts, protracting where they dare not resist,
but practically doing to the vacating of the Charter what Mr. Bancroft states
in the pregnant sentences above quoted in the text.

^^1

204

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VI.

'\ ■ i €

CHAPTER VI.

Massachusetts during the Last Four Years of Charles the Second
AND James the Second, from 1680 to 1688 — The Immediate Causes
AND Manner of Cancelling the First Charter.

A CRISIS was now approaching. The state of things shown in
the latter part of the preceding chapter could not be suffered
always to continue. Means must be devised to bring it to an
end.

The Massachusetts Court had sent successive agents to Enjj-
land to explain and to make promises concerning many things
complained of, to crave indulgence and delay in other things
which they could not explain or justify ; but they prohibited
their agents, by private instructions, from conceding anything
which the Charter, as they interpreted it, had given them —
namely, absolute independence. But this double game was
nearly played out. Party struggles in England had absorbed
the attention of the King and Cabinet, and caused a public and
vacillating policy to be pursued in regard to Massachusetts ; but
the King's Government were at length roused to decisive action,
and threatened the colony with a writ of quo warranto in re-
spect to matters so often demanded and as often evaded.

The Massachusetts Court met forthwith, passed an Act to
control the commission of the King's Collector, Edward Ran-
dolph, and another Act charging their own newly-appointed
Collector to look strictly after the enforcement of the Acts
of Trade (but in reality to counteract them) ; repealed another
Act which imposed a penalty for plotting the overthrow of
the Colonial Constitution — an Act levelled against Randolph ;
passed another Act substituting the word "Jurisdiction" for
the word "Commonwealth" in their laws. They authorized

CHAP. VI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

205

their agents merely to luy these concessions before the King,
and humbly hoped they woidd satisfy his Majesty. They also
bribed clerks of the Privy Council to keep them informed of
its proceedings on Massachusetts affairs, and ottered a bribe of
£2,000 ^o King Charles himself. Mr. Hildreth says (1083):
" On the appearance of these agents at Court, with powers so
restricted, a quo warranto was threatened forthwith \inles8
they were furnished with ampler authority. Informed of this
threat, the General Court (of Massachusetts), after great debates,
authorized their agents to consent to the regulation of anything
wherein the Government might ignoranUy, or through ndstake,
have deviated from the Charter ; to accept, indeed, any demands
consistent with the Charter (as they interpreted it), the existing
Government established under it, and the 'main ends of our
predecessors in coming hither,' which main ends were defined
by them to be ' our liberties and privileges in matters of religion
and worship of God, which you are, therefore, in no wise to
consent to any infringement of.' They were authorized to give
up Maine to the King, and even to tender him a private gratuity
of two thousand guineas. Bribes were quite fashionable at
Chailes's Court; the King and his servants were accustomed
to take them. The Massachusetts agents* had expended con-
siderable sums to purchase a favour, or to obtain information,
and by having clerks of the Privy Council in their pay they
were kept well informed of the secret deliberatioas of that
body. But this offer (of a bribe of two thousand guineas to
the King), unskilfully managed, and betrayed by Cranfield, the
lately appointed Royal Governor of New Hampshire, who had
advised the magistrates to make it, exposed the Colony to
blame and ridicule. "•!•

* The Massachusetts Court had applied to Cromwell for permission to use
the word " Commonwealth" instead of the word " Plantation," as expressed
in their Charter, but were refused. They afterwards adopted it of their own
accord.

t Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap, xiv., pp. 505, 506.

Their attempt to bribe the King was not the less bribery, whether Cranfield,
for his own amusement, or otherwise to test their virtue, suggested it to them
or not. But without any suggestion from Cranfield they bribed the King's
clerks from their fidelity in the Privy Council, and bribed othera " to obtain
favour." The whole tenor of Scripture injunction and morality is against
offering as well as taking bribea After authorizing the employment of

20C

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VI.

" If a liberty of appeal to England were insisted on, the ag-jnts
were ' not to include the colony in any act or consent of theirs,
but to crave leave to transmit the same to the General Court
for their further consideration.' They were ' not to make any
alteration of the qualitications that were required by law, as at
present established, respecting the admission of freemen.' "*

It having appeared, on the peru.sal of the commission of the
Massachusetts agents by Sir Lionel Jenkins, Secretary of State,
that they did not possess the powers required to enable them
to act, they were informed by Lord Radnor that " the Council
had unanimously agreed to report to his Majesty, that unless
the agents speedily obtained such powers as might render them
capable to satisfy in all points, a quo ivarranto should proceed."

" Upon receipt of these advices," says Mr. Hutchinson, " it was
made a question, not in the General Court only, but amongst all
the inhabitants, whether to surrender or not. The opinions of
many of the ministers, and their arguments in support of them,
were given in writing, and in general it was thought better to
die by the hands of others than by their own.f The address was

bribery in England to promote their objects, the Court closed their sittings
by appointing "a day lor solemn humiliation throughout the colony, to
implore the mercy and favour of Gcd in respect to their sacred, civil, and
temporal concerns, and more especially those in the hands of their agents
abroad." (Palfrey, Vol. III., B. iii., Chap, ix., pp. 374, 375.)

* Palfrey's History of New England, Vol. III., B. iii., Chap, ix., pp.
372, 373.

" The agents of the colony, Messrs. Dudley and Richards, upon their arrival
in England, found his Majesty greatly provoked at the neglect of the colo-
nists not sending before ; and in their first letters home they acquainted the
Court with the feelings of the King, and desired to know whether it was
best to hazard all by refusing to comply with his demands, intimating that
they ' seriously intended to submit to the substance.' At that time they had
not been heard before the Council ; but soon after, on presenting the address
which had been fonvarded by their hands, they were commanded to sliow
their powers and instructions to Sir Lionel Jenkins, Secretary of State ; and
on their perusal, finding these powers wholly inadequate, they were infonned
by Lord Radnor that the Council had agreed nem. con. to report to liis
Majesty, that unless further powers were speedily obtained, a quo warranto
should proceed in Hilary Term." (Barry's History of Massachusetts, First
Period, Chap, xvii., p. 47L Hutchinson, Vol. I., p. 335.)

t Note by the historian Hutchinson. — " The clergy turned the scale for the
last time. The balance which they had held from the beginning, they were
allowed to retain no longer."

CHAP. VI.J

AND THEIU TIMES.

207

sittings
lony, to

IX., pp.

,te ; and
fonned
to his
varranto
ts, First

agreed upon by the General Court ; another wa.s prepared and
sent through the colony, to be signed by the several inhabitants,
which the agents were to present or not, as they thought
proper ; and they were (privately) to deliver up the deeds of the
Province of Maine, if required, and it would tend to preserve their
Charter, otherwise not ; and they were to make no concessions
of any privileges conferred on the colony by the Charter."*
(That is, according to their interpretation and pretensions.)

" Governor Bradstreet and the moderate party were inclined
to authorise the agents to receive the King's commands. The
magistrates passed a vote to that effect. But all the zeal and
obstinacy of the theocratic party had been roused by the present
crisis — a zeal resulting, as hot zeal often does, in the ultimate
loss of what it was so anxious to save."-f"

The agents of the colony were not willing to undertake the
defence and management of the question upon the Charter in
Westminster Hall. The writ of quo warranto, which summoned
the Corporation of Massachusetts Bay to defend their acts
against the complaints and charges made against them, was
issued the 27th of June, 1G83, and on the 20th of July " It
was ordered by the Privy Council, ' that Mr. Edward Randolph
be sent to New England with the notification of the said qiio
warranto, which he was to deliver to the said Governor and
Company of the Massachusetts Bay, and thereupon to return to
give his Majesty an account of his proceedings therein.' "} This
writ was accompanied by a declaration from the King " that

* Hutcliinaon's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 336, 337.

t Ibid.

X Palfrey's History of New England, Vol. III., B. iii., Chap, ix., p. 374.
Mr. Palfrey, pp. 375, 376, in a note, gives the following abstract of Randolph's
charges presented to the Court : "1. They assume powers that are not
warranted by the Charter, which is executed in another place *lt<\n was
intended. 2. They make laws repugnant to those of Englar :*, They
levy money on subjects not inhabiting the colony (and consequentiy not
npresented in the General Court). 4. They impose an oath of fidelity to
themselves, without regarding the oath of allegiance to the King. 5. They
refuse justice by withholding appeals to the King. 6. They oppose the Acts
of Navigation, and imprison the King's officers for doing their duty. 7.
They have established a Naval Office, with a view to defraud the customs.
8. No verdicts are ever found for the King in relation to customs, and the
Courts impose costs on the prosecutors, in order to discourage trials. 9.
They levy customs on the importation of goods from England. 10. They do

208

THE LOYALISTS OF AMEUK.'A

[cnM\ vr.

"I?

the private interest.s and properties of all persons within the
colony .should be continued and preservetl to tlieni, «-<) that no
man should receive any prejudice in hi.s freehold or estate;"
also, "that in case the said (\)rporation of the Massachusetts
Bay should, before the prosecution had uj)on the said 7(^0
warranto, make a full submission and entire resignation to his
pleasure, ho would then regulate their (,'harter (om stated in
another place, by adding supp.ementary clauses) in ti

manner as shoukl be for Ids service and the good of the colony,
without any other alterations than such as he should find
necessary for the l>etter support of his Government."*

On the issue of the writ of quo warranto, the business of
the colony's agents in London was at an end. They returned
home, and arrived in Boston the 2Jird of < )ctobcr, 1G83 ; and
the same week Randolpli arrived with the quo warranto and
the King's accompanying declaration. The announcement of
this decisive act on the part of the King produced a profovmd
sensation throughout the colony, and gave rise to the question,
" What shall Massachusetts do i " One part of the colony advo-
cated submission ; another party advocated resistance, "he
former were called the " Moderate party," the latter the " 1 t

party " — the connnencement of the two parties which were aici;r-
wards known as United Empire Loyalists and Revolutionists.f
The Moderate party was led by the memorable Governor Brad-
street, Stoughton, and Dudley, and included a majority of the
assistants or magistrates, called the "Upper branch of the
Government." The Independence part} was headed by the
Deputy Governor Danforth, Gookin, and Nowell, and included
a majority of the House of Deputies, over whose elections and
proceedings the elders or ministers exerted a potent influence.^

not administer the oath of supremacy, as required by the Cliarter. 11. They
erected a Court of Admiralty, though not empowered by Charter. 12. They
discountenance the Church of England. 13. They persist in coining money,
though they had asked forgiveness for that offence." (Chalmers' Annals,
p. 462.)

* lb., p. 377.

t "From this period (1683) one may date the origin of two parties— the
Patriots and Prerogative men — between whom controversy scarcely inter-
mitted, and was never ended until the separation of the two countries."
(Minot's History of Massachusetts, etc., VoL I., p. 61.)

t In a Boston town meeting, held January 21, 1684, to consider the King's

CHAP. VI.J

AND THEIU Tmva.

20J)

r}()V«'mor Bradstrcet and a majority of the assistants, or
magistrates, adopted the foll()win<,' resolution:
"Tlie magistrates liave voted tliat an humble address bo sent to

1. They

I2. They

money,

I Annals,

(licliinition, thf Uev. IiicreiiHi' Mather, who wuh then Prefiideiit of liiuvanl
('(illc^'c, (iimI Imd fur twenty years exerted more intliieiiie upon tin |nihlie
iitruiis of MasH4uliusetts than any other man for the Kaiiie h'li^'tli of lime,
d'livered a upuech a^^ainHt HulmiJHHion to the King, which he mixealled " the
aurreiider of tlie Cliarter." He miid, among otlier thiii^H : "I verily l)elieve
we slmil win agaiiiHt the (Jod of heaven if we vote in the atlirmative to it.
The Serijiture teaehetli u.s otherwise. That which the Lord our CJod hatli
j,'iven U8, hIuiU we mtt pos-seHH it I Hod forhid that we .should give nway the
iiiherilaiice of our fathers. Nor woulil it he wisdom for us to comply. If
we niaiie a full and entire resignation to the King's pleasure, we fall into the
IuukU of men immediately ; hut if we do not, we still keep ourselves in tlie
liiiiiils of (Jod ; and who knows what Uod may do for us i " The historian
sax s tliat " the effect of such an appeal was wholly irn-sistihle ; that many of
the people fell into tears, and there was a general acclamation." (IJarry's
Colonial History of Massachusetts, Vol. I., pp. 476, 477.)

It is not easy to scpieeze as much extravagance and nonsense in the same
space as in the ahove quoted words of Increase Matlu VVhere was the Scrip-
tuie which Uiught them not to auhmit complaints ot their fellow-colonists to
their King and his Council, the highest autliority in the empire i Both
Siiipture and profane history furnish us with exami)le8 almost without
mualier of usurpers professing that the usurpation and conquest they had
iichicved was " that which the Lord our C3od hud givi 11 " them, and which
tlipy should " posse.s8 " at all hazards as if it were an '* inheritance of their
lathers." The " inheritance " spoken of by Mr. Mather was what had heen
iLsurpcd hy the rulers of the colony over and ahove the provisions of their
Cliarter against the rights of the Crown, the religious and political liberties
(if lliiir fellow-colonists, and encroaching upon the lands of their white and
Indian neighbours. Then to submit to the King and Council was to "fall
into the hands of men immediately," but to contest with the King in the
Courts of Chancery or King's Bench was to " keep themselves in the hands
of God," who, it seems, according to Increase Mather's own interpretation,
judged him and his adherents unworthy of retaining the " inheritance " of
tiie Charter, the powei-s and objects of which they had so greatly perverted
iiiul abused. The King had expressly declared that the prosecution against
the Cliarter would be abandoned if they would submit to his decision in
regard to what had been matters of complaint and dispute between them
and their fellow-colonists and Sovereign for more than fifty years, and wliich
decision should be added to the Charter as explanatory regulations, and
should embrace nothing affecting their religious liberties or local elective
self-government They refused, and lost their Charter ; Rhode Island and
Coimecticut submitted, and even resigned their Chaiters, and were afterwards
authorized to resume them, with the privileges and powers conferred by them
unimpaired, including the election of their Governors as well as legislators, etc.
14

;v. 1

f :

Hi"

HI;:

210

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VI.

his Majesty by this ship, declaring that, upon a serious considera-
tion of his Majesty's gracious intimations in his former letters, and
more particularly in his late declaration, that his pleasure and
purpose is only to regulate our Charter in such a manner as
shall be for his service and the good of this his colony, and
without any other alteration than what is necessary for the
support of his Government here, we will not presume to contend
with his Majesty in a Court of law, but humbly lay ourselves
at his Majesty's feet, in submission to his pleasure so declared,
and that we have resolved by the next opportunity to send our
agents empowered to receive his Majesty's commands accord-
ingly. And, for saving a default for non-appearance upon the
return of the writ of quo warranto, that some person or persons
be appointed and empowered, by letter of attorney, to appear
and make defence until our agents may make their appearance
and submission as above.

" The magistrates have passed this without reference to the
consent of their brethren the deputies hereto.

(Signed) " Edmund Rawson, Secretary.

" 15th November, 1683."

This resolution was laid before the House of Deputies and
debated by them a fortnight, when the majority of them
adopted the following resolution :

" November 30, 1683. — The deputies consent not, but adhere
to their former bills.

" William Terry, Clerh!"'

" They voted instead," says Mr. Hildreth, " an Address to
the King, praying forbearance ; but they authorized Robert
Humphreys, a London barrister and the legal adviser of the
agents, to enter an appearance and to retain counsel, requesting
him ' to leave no stone untun^pd that may be of service either to
the case itself, or the spinning out of the time as much as possibly
may be.' No less than three letters were written to Humphreys ;
money was remitted ; but all hopes of defence were futile.
Before the letters arrived in London, a default had already
been recorded. That default could not be got off, and judg-
ment was entered the next year pronouncing the Charter void."f

iirfi*.'

* Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 338, 339.

t Hildreth'B History of the United States, Vol. I., Chap, xiv., p. 507. The

CHAP. VI.]

AVD THEIR TIMES.

211

The manner in which the questions at issue were put to a
popular vote in Massachusetts was unfair and misleading ; the
epithets applied to the " Moderate " or loyal party were offensive
and unjust ; and the sta*^ ments of Palfrey, respecting the acts
of the King immediately following the vacation of the Charter,
are very disingenuous, not to say untrue. . '

The King had expressly and repeatedly declared that he
would not proceed to vacate the Charter if they would submit
to his decision on the six grounds mentioned in his first letter
to them, June 28, 16G2, twenty years before, as the conditions
hi continuing the Charter, and which they had persistently
evaded and resisted; that his decision should be in the form
of certain " Regulations " for the future administration of the
Charter, and not the vacation of it. Every reader knows the
(litference between a Royal Charter of incorporation and the
Royal instructions issued twenty years afterwards to remedy
irregularities and abuses which had been shown to have crept in,
and practised in the local administration of the Charter. Yet
the ruling party in Massachusetts Bay did not put the question
as accepting the King's offers, but as of vacating the Charter.
This was raising a false issue, and an avowed imputation and
contempt of the King. It is true that Dr. Palfrey and other
modern Now England historians have said that Charles the
Second had from the beginning intended to abolish the Charter ;
that the " vacation of the Charter was a foregone conclusion."
In reply to which it may be said that this is mere assumption,
unsupported by facts ; that if Charles the Second had wished
or intended to vacate the Charter, he had the amplest oppor-
tunity and reasons to do so, in the zenith of his popularity and
power, when they refused to comply with the conditions on
which he proposed to pardon and obliterate the past and con-
tinue the Charter, and when they resisted his Commissioners,
and employed military force to oppose the exercise of their
powers, and set aside their decisions ; instead of which he re-
monstrated with them for more than twenty years, and then gave
them long notice and choice to retain the Charter with his "Regu-

notice to the Corporation and Company of Masaachusetts to answer to the
writ of qtio warranto was received October, 1683 ; the final judgment of the
(lourt vacating the Charter was given July, 1685, nearly two years afterwards.
(Hutchinson, Vol. I., pp. 337—340.)

l'$x

■it

Pi'

212

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VI.

lations " on the disputed points, or contest the Charter, as to their
observance of it, in a Court of law. Under the impulse and guid-
ance of violent counsels they chose the latter, and lost their Char-
ter. In their very last address to the King, they gratefully
acknowledged his kindness in all his despatches and treatment of
them, contrary to the statements and imputations of modern New
England historians; yet they denied him the authority universally
acknowledged and exercised by Queen Victoria and English Courts
of law over the legislative, judicial, and even administrative
acts of every province of the British Empire. Dr. Palfrey says :
" In the Upper branch of the Government ^>»ere was found at
length a servile majority;" but "the deputi were prepared for
no such suicide, though there were not wanting faint hearts and
grovelling aims among them."* At the head of what Dr.
Palfrey terms the " servile majority " was the venerable Governor
Bradstreet, now more than ninety years of age, the only sur-
vivor of the original founders of the colony, who had been
a magistrate more than fifty years, more than once Governor,
always a faithful and safe counsellor, the agent of the colony
in England, and obtaining in June, 1G62, the King's letter of
pardon — oblivion of the past and promised continuance of the
Charter on certain conditions — a letter which the Colonial
Court said filled them with inexpressible joy and gratitude (see
above, page 141), who then advised them to comply with the
King's requirements, and who, after twenty years' further ex-
perience and knowledge of public affairs and parties, advises them
to pursue the same course for which he is now termed " servile,"
and ranked with cowards and men of " grovelling aims," advising
the colony to commit political "suicide." The result showed
who were the real authors of the "suicide," and Dr. Palfrey
forcibly states the result of their doings in the following words :
"Massachusetts, as a body politic, was now no more. The
elaborate fabric, that had been fifty -four years in building, was
levelled to the dust. The hopes of the fathers were found to
be mere dreams. It seemed that their brave struggles had
brought no result. The honoured ally (Massachusetts) of the
Protector (Cromwell) of England lay under the feet of Charles
the Second. It was on the Charter granted to Roswell and his

asj

♦ History of New England, Vol. III., B. iii., Chap, ix., pp. 380, 381.

CHAP. VI.1

AND THEIR TIMES.

213

associates, Governor and Company of Massachusetts Bay, that
the structure of the cherished institutions of Massachusetts,
religious and civil, had been reared. The abrogation of that
Charter swept the whole away. Massachusetts, in English law,
was again what it had been before James the First made a grant
of it to the Council of New England. It belonged to the King of
England, by virtue of the discovery of the Cabots. No less than
this was the import of the decree in Westminster Hall. Having
secured its great triumph, the Court had no thought of losing
anything by the weakness of compassion. The person se-
lected by the King to govern the people of his newly-acquired
province was Colonel Piercy Kirk. That campaign in the West
of England had not yet taken place w^hich has made the name
of Kirk immortal ; but fame enough had gone abroad of his
brutal character, to make his advent an anticipation of horror
to those whom he was appointed to govern. It was settled that
he was to be called * His Majesty's Lieutenant and Governor-
General,' and that his authority should be unrestricted."*

This quotation from Dr. Palfrey suggests one or two remarks,
and requires correction, as it is as disingenuous in statement as
it is eloquent in diction. He admits and assumes the validity
of the judicial act by which the Charter was declared forfeited ;
though the loyalty of this decision was denied by the opposing
party in Massachusetts, who denied that any English Court, or
that even the King himself, had any authority in Massachu-
setts to disallow any of its acts or decisions, much less to vacate
its Charter, and professed to continue its elections of deputies,
etc., and to pass and administer laws as aforetime. Dr. Palfrey's
language presents all such pretensions and proceedings as baseless
and puerile.

Dr. Palfrey states what is true, that the Massachusetts Gov-
ernment had been the " ally" of Cromwell ; but this they had
denied in their addresses to Charles the Second. (See above,
pp. 153—9.)

It is hardly ingenuous or correct in Dr. Palfrey speaking of
Col. Kirk's appointment of the " newly-acquired Province."
The office extended over New Hampshire, Maine, and Ply-
mouth as well as Massachusetts ; but Kirk never was Governor

Pullrey's History of New England, Vol. III., B. iii., Chap, ix., pp. 394, 398.

214

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VI.

:i|l

of Massachusetts, for before his commission and instructions
were completed, all was annulled by the demise of King Charles,
which took place the 6th of February, 1685. Mr. Hutchinson
says : " Before any new Government was settled, King Charles
died. Mr. Blaithwait wrote to the Governor and recommended
the proclaiming of King James without delay. This was done
with great ceremony in the high street of Boston (April 20th)."*
Mr. Joseph Dudley, a native of the colony, and one of the two
last agents sent to England, was appointed the first Governor
after the annulling of the Charter. Mr. Hutchinson says : " The
15th of May (1686), the Rose frigate arrived from England, with
a commission to Mr. Dudley as President, and divers others,
gentlemen of the Council, to take upon them the administration
of government." Mr. Dudley's short administration was not
very grievous. The House of Deputies, indeed, was laid aside ;
but the people, the time being short, felt little or no eflFect from
the change. Mr. Stoughton was M;:, Dudley's chief confidant.
Mr. Dudley professed as great an attachment to the interest of
the colony as Mr. Stoughton, and was veiy desirous of retaining
their favour. A letter from Mr. Mather, then the minister
of the greatest influence, is a proof of it.f There was no
molestation to the Churches of the colony, but they continued
both worship and discipline as before. The affairs of the towns
were likewise managed in the same manner as formerly. Their
Courts of justice were continued upon the former plan, Mr.
Stoughton being at the head of them. Trials were by juries,
as usual. Dudley considered himself as appointed to preserve
the affairs of the colony from confusion until a Governor

* History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 340.

" The Charter fell. This was the last effective act of Charles the Secoiul
relative to Massachusetts ; for belore a new Government could be settled, the
monarcli was dead. His death and that of the Charter were nearly con-
temporary." (Barry's History of Massachusetts, First Period, Chap, xvii.,
p. 478).

t The conclusion of this letter is as follows : " Sir, for the things of my
Boul, I have these many years liung upon your lips, and ever shall ; and in
civil things am desirous you may know with all plainness my reasons of
procedure, and that they may be satisfactory to you. I am, sir, your servant,

" J. Dudley.
" From your own house,
May 17th, '86."

CHAP. VI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

215

ga of my
I ; and in

easons of
r servant,

>UDLEY.

arrived and a rule of administration should be more fully
settled.*

The administration of Dudley was only of seven montlis'
duration. " Dudley was superseded by Sir Edmund Andros,
who arrived at Boston on the 20th of December (1G86), with a
commission from King James for the government of New
England.f He was instructed to appoint no one of the Council
to any offices but those of the least estates and characters, and
to displace none without sufficient cause ; to continue the former
laws of the country, as far as they were not inconsistent with
his commission or instructions, until other regulations were estab-
lished by the Governor and Council ; to allow no printing press ;
to give universal toleration in religion, but encouragement to
the Church of England ; to execute the laws of trade, and pre-
vent frauds in Customs.| But Andros had other instructions
of a more despotic and stringent character ; and being, like King
James himself, of an arbitrary disposition, he fulfilled his

* History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 350, 351, 352. "Though
eighteen months had elapsed since the Charter was vacated, the Government
was still going on as before. The General Court, though attended thirtly,
was in session when the new commission arrived. Dudley sent a cony of it
to the Court, not as recognizing their authority, but as an aaserablv of prin-
cipal and influential inhabitants. They complained of the commission as
Arbitrary, * there not being the least mention of an Assembly ' in it,
expressed doubts whether it were safe for him or them, and thus gloomily
dissolved, leaving the government in Dudley's hands," (Hildretli's History
of the United States, Vol, II., Chap, xviii,, p, 80,)

t Andros was appointed Captain-General and Vice- Admiral of Massa-
chusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, Plymouth, Pemaquid, and Narraganset
during pleasure,

X (Holmes' Annals, etc., Vol. I,, p. 419). Holmes adds : "To support a
Government that could not be submitted to from choice, a small military
establishment, consisting of two companies of soldiers, was formed, and
military stores were transported. The tyrannical conduct of James towards
tlie colonies did not escape the notice and censure of English historians."
" At the same time that the Commons of England were deprived of tlieir
privileges, a like attempt was made on the colonies. King James recalled
their Charters, by which their liberties were secured ; and he sent over
Governors with absolute power. The arbitrary principles of that monarcli
appear in every part of his administration," (Hume's History of England,
Act James II.)— /6,, pp. 419, 490,

Hutchinson says : " The beginning of Andros' administration gave great
satisfaction, He made high professions as to the public good and the welfare
of the people, both of merchants and planters ; directed the judges to adminia-

li'p

21G

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VI.

instructions to the letter. And when his Koyal master was de-
throned for his unconstitutional and tyrannical conduct, Andres
was seized at Boston and sent prisoner to England, to answer
for his conduct ; but he was acquitted by the new Govern ment,
not for his policy in New England, but because he had acted
according to his instructions, which he pleaded as his justifica-
tion.*

It IS singular that toleration in Massachusetts should have
been proclaimed by the arbitrary James, in a declaration above
and contrary to the law for which he received the thanks of the
ministers in that colony, but which resulted in his loss of his
Crown in England.

" James's Declaration of Indulgence was proclaimed (1G87),
and now, for the first time, Quakers, Baptists, and Episcopalians
enjoyed toleration in Massachusett? That system of religious
tyranny, coeval with the settlement of New England, thus
unexpectedly received its death-blow from a Catholic bigot,
who professed a willingness to allow religious freedom to others
as a means of securing it for himself." * * ♦ « Mather, who
carried with him (1689) an address from the ministers, thank-
ing James, in behalf of themselves and their brethren, for his
Declaration of Indulgence arriving in England while King
James was yet in power, had been graciously received by that
monarch. But, though repeatedly admitted to an audience, his
complaints against the Royal Governor (Andros) had produced
no eflfect. The Revolution intervening, he hastened, with greater
hopes of success, to address himself to the new King, and his
remonstrances prevented, as far as Massachusetts was concerned,
the despatch of a circular letter confirming the authority of all
Colonial oificers holding commission'* from James II. The
letters actually received at Boston authorized those in authority

ter justice according to the custom of the place ; ordered the former established
rules to be observed as to rates and taxes, and that all the colony laws not
inconsistent with his commission should be in force." (History of Massachu-
setts Bay, Vol. I., p. 353).

♦ " The complaints against Andros, coolly received by the Privy Council,
were dismissed by order of the new King, on the ground that nothing was
charged against the late Governor which liis instructions would not fully
justify." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap, xviii.,
p. 94.)

CHAP. VI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

217

Council,
ling was
ot fully
,p. xviii.,

to retain provisionally the administration, and directed that
Andros and the other prisoners should be sent to England.*

I have now traced the proceedings of the founders and rulers
of the Mas.sachusetts Bay Colony during the fifty-four years of
their first Charter, with short notices of some occurrences during
the three years' reign of James the Second, their revenge not
only in his own dethronement, but also on his Governor Andros,
for the tyranny which he practised upon them by imprisoning
him and his helpers, and by Royal command sending them as
prisoners to England, together with the removal of the local
officers appointed by Andros and the restoration of their own
elected authorities until further instruction from the new King.

There can be no question that the founders of that colony
were not only men of wealth, but men of education, of piety,
of the highest respectability, of great energy, enterprize, and
industry, contributing to the rapid progress of their settlements
and increase of their wealth, and stamping the character of
their history ; but after their emigration to Massachusetts Bay,
and during the progress of their settlements and the organiza-
tion and development of their undertakings, their views became
narrowed to the dimensions of their own Plantation in govern-
ment and trade, irrespective of the interests of England, or of
the other neighbour colonies, and their theology and religious
spirit was of the narrowest and most intolerant character. They
assumed to be the chosen Israel of God, subject to no King but
Jehovah, above the rulers of the land, planted there to cast out
the heathen, to smite down every dagon of false worship,
whether Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Baptist, or Quaker, and
responsible to no other power on earth for either their legisla-
tive or administrative acts. I will not here recapitulate those
acts, so fully stated in preceding pages, and established by
evidence of documents and testimony which cannot be success-
fully denied. But there are two features of their pretensions
and government which demand further remark.

I. The first is the character and narrowness of the foundation
on which rested their legislation and government. None but
members of the Congregational Churches were eligible to legis-
late or fill any oflSce in the colony, or even to be an elector. A

* Hildreth's Historj', etc., Vol. II., Chap, xviii., pp. 83, 93, 94.

1 1

■}\

218

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VI.

more narrow-minded and corrupting test of qualification for
civil or political oflfice, or for the elective franchise, can hardly
be conceived.* However rich a man might be, and what-
ever might be his education or social position, if he were not a
member of the Congregational Church he was an " alien in the
Commonwealth " of the Massachusetts Israel, was ineligible for
office, or to be an elector ; while his own servant, if a member of
the Church, though not worth a shilling, or paying a penny to
the public revenue, was an elector, or eligible to be elected to
any public oflSce. The non-members of the Congregational
Church were subject to all military and civil burdens and taxes
of the State, without any voice in its legislation or administra-
tion. Such was the free (?) Government of Massachusetts Bay,
eulogized by New England historians during half a century,
until abolished by judicial and royal authority. What would be
thought at this day of a Government, the eligibility to public
oflSce and the elective franchise under which should be based
on membership in a particular Church ?

II. But, secondly, this Government must be regarded as equally
unjust and odious when we consider not merely the sectarian
basis of its assumptions and acts against the Sovereign on the
one hand, and the rights of citizens of Massachusetts and of
neighbouring colonies on the other, but the small proportion of
the population enfranchised in comparison with the population
which was disfranchised. Even at the beginning it was not
professed that the proportion of Congregational Church
members to the whole population was more than one to three ;
in after years it was alleged, at most, not to have been more than
one to six.

This, however, is of little importance in comparison with the
question, what was the proportion of electors to non-electors in
the colony ? On this point I take as my authority the latest

* " As a matter of course, this Church test of citizenship did not work
well. The moi-e unscnipulous the conscience, the easier it was to join the
Church ; and abandoned men who wanted public preferment could join tlie
Church with loud professions and gain their ends, and make Church member-
ship a byeword. Under the Charter by William and Mary, in 1691, the quali-
fication of electors was then fixed at a * freehold of forty shillings per annum,
or other property of the value of ;£40 sterling.' " (Elliott's New England
History, Vol. I., p. 113.)

ri-

CHAP. VI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

219

ot work
join the
join the

eniher-
le qiiali-

annuin,
England

and most able apologist and defender of the Massachusetts
Government, Dr. Palfrey. He says; "Counting the lists of
persons admitted to the franchise in Massachusetts, and making
what I judge to be reasonable allowance for persons deceased,
I come to the conclusion that the number of freemen in Massa-
chusetts in 1670 may have been between 1,000 and 1,200, or
one freeman to every four or five adult males."*

The whole population of the colony at this time is not
definitely stated, but there was one elector to every " four or
five " of the adult " males." This eleven hundred men, because
they were Congregationalists, influenced and controlled by their
ministers, elected from themselves all the legislators and rulers
of Massachusetts Bay Colony in civil, judicial, and military
matters, who bearded the King and Parliament, per.sccuted all
who dissented from them in religious worship, encroached upon
the property and rights of neighbouring colonies, levied and
imposed all the burdens of the State upon four-fifths of their
fellow (male) colonists who had no voice in the legislation or
administration of the Government. Yet this sectarian Govern-
ment is called by New England historians a free Government ;
and these eleven hundred electors — electors not because they
have property, but because they are Congregationalists — are
called " the people of Massachusetts," while four-fifths of the
male population and more than four-fifths of the property are
utterly ignored, except to pay the taxes or bear the other
burdens of the State, but without a single elective voice, or a
single free press to state their grievances or express their wishes,
much less to advocate their rights and those of the King and
Parliament.

III. Thirdly, from the facts and authorities given in the fore-
going pages, there cannot be a reasonable pretext for the state-
ment that the rulers of Massachusetts Bay had not violated both
the objects and provisions of the Royal Charter, variously and
persistently, during the fifty-four years of its existence ; while
there is not an instance of either Charles the First or Second
claiming a single prerogative inconsistent with the provisions of
the Charter, and which is not freely recognized at this day in

* Palfrey's History of New England, Vol. III., B. iii., Chap, ii., p. 41, in

a note.

220

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VI.

the Crown and Parliament of Great Britain, by the free inhabi-
tants of every Province of the British Empire. The fact that
neither of the Charleses asked for anything more than the tolera-
tion of Episcopal worship, never objected to the perfect freedom
of worship claimed by the Congregationalists of Massachusetts ;
and the fact that Charles the Second corresponded and remon-
strated for twenty years and more to induce the rulers of
Massachusetts Bay to acknowledge those rights of King and
Parliament, and their duties as British subjects, shows that there
could have been no desire to interfere with their freedom of
worship or to abolish the Charter, except as a last resort, after
the failure of all other means to restrain the disloyal and
oppressive acts of the rulers of that one colony. In contradistinc-
tion to the practice of other colonies of New England, and of
every British colony at this day, Charles the First and Second
were bad kings to England and Scotland, but were otherwise to
New England ; and when New England historians narrate at
great length, and paint in the darkest colours, the persecutions
and despotic acts of the Stuart kings over England and Scot-
land, and then infer that they did or sought to do the same in
New England, they make groundless assumptions, contrary to
the express declarations and policy of the two Charleses and the
whole character and tenor of New England history. The
demands of Charles the Second, and the conditions on which he
proposed to continue the first Charter in 1G62, were every one
sanctioned and provided for in the second Royal Charter issued
by William and Mary in 1690, and under which, for seventy
years, the Government was milder and more liberal, the legisla-
tion broader, the social state more happy, and the colony more
loyal and prosperous than it had ever been during the fifty-four
years of the first Charter. All this will be proved and illus-
trated in the following chapter.

CHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

221

CHAPTER VI r.

The Second Royal Charter ; How Obtained — Massachusetts nearly
Sixty Years under the Second Charter, from IG91 to 1748 ;
TO THE Close of the First War bftween England and France,
and the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle.

I HAVE traced the characteristics of the Government of the
Massachusetts Bay Colony during fifty-four years under its first
Charter, in its relations to the Crown, to the citizens of its own
jurisdiction, to the inhabitants of the neighbouring colonies, and
to the Indians ; its denial of Royal authority ; its renunciation
of one form of worship and Church polity, and adoption of
another ; its denial of toleration to any but Congregationalists,
and of the elective franchise, to four-fifths of the male popula-
tion ; its taxing without representation ; its denial of the right
of appeal to the King, or any right on the part of the King or
Parliament to receive appeals, or to the exercise of any super-
vision or means of seeing that " the laws of England were not
contravened " by their acts of legislation or government, while
they were sheltered by the British navy from the actual and
threatened invasion of the Dutch, Spaniards, and French, not
to say the Indians, always prompted and backed by the French,
thus claiming all the attributes of an independent Government,
but resting under the aegis of an Imperial protection to main-
tain an independence which they asserted, but could not them-
selves maintain against foreign enemies.

I will now proceed to note the subsequent corresponding facts
of their history during seventy years under the second Royal
(vharter.

222

THE LOYALISTS OF AMKUICA

[chap. vn.

They averred, and no <loubt brought tliciiiselves to believe,
that with their first Charter, as interpreted by themselves, was
bound up their politictd life, or what they allej,'ed to be dearer
to them than life, and that in its loss was involved their putitical
death ; but they made no martial efi'ort to prolong that life, or
to save themselves from that premature death.

Mr. Palfrey assigns various reasons for this non-resistance to
the cancelling of their Charter ; but he omits or obscurely alludes
to the real ones.

Dr. Palfrey says : " The reader asks how it could be that the
decree by which Massachusetts fell should fail to provoke resist-
ance. He inquires whether nothing was left of the spirit which,
when the colony was nmch poorer, had often defied and baffled
the designs of the father of the reigning King. He must
remember how times were changed. There was no lonjjfer
a great patriot party in England, to which the colonists might
look for sympathy and help, and which it had even hoped might
reinforce them by a new emigration. There was no longer even
a Presbyterian party which, little as it had loved them, a sense
of common insecurity and common interest might enlist in their
behalf. ♦ * * Relatively to her population and wealth, Massa-
chusetts had large capacities for becoming a naval power — capaci-
ties which might have been vigorously developed if an alliance
with the great naval powers of Continental Europe had been
possible. But Holland was now at peace with England ; not to
say that such an arrangement was out of the question for
Massachusetts, while the rest of New England was more or less
inclined to the adverse interest. Unembarrassed by any foreign
war, England was armed with that efficient navy which the
Duke of York had organized, and which had lately distressed
the rich and energetic Netherlanders ; and the dwellinL'^^ "^t"
two-thirds of the inhabitants of Massachusetts st a v, ,.
they could be battered from the water. Th' • ommerce

which might be molested in every sea by o^^*^^ cruisci
Neither befriended nor interfered with, the) i'rht h ve been
able to defend themselves against the corsairs of liarb i y in the
resorts of their most gainful trade ; but England had given
them notice, that if they were stubborn that commerce would
be dismissed from her protection, and in the circumstances such
a notice threatened more than a mere abstinence from aid. The

HHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

22n

nmerc*
ruisei
e been
in the
given
would
■es such
The

Indian war had cinptiod the colonial exchequer. On tlie other
hand, a generation earlier the colonists might have retreated to
the woods, but now they had valuable stationary property to
be kept or sacrificed. To say no more, the ancient unanimity
was broken in upon. Jealousy had risen and grown. ♦ * * Nor
was even public morality altogether of its pristine tone. The
|)roHpect of material prosperity had introduced a tlegrce of
hixury ; and luxury had brought ambition and mean longings.
Venality had become possil)le ; and clever and venal men had
a motive for enlisting the selfish and the stupid, and decrying
the generous and wise."*

These eloquent words of Dr. Palfrey are very suggtistive, and
deserve to be carefully pondered by the reader.

I. In the concluding sentences he tacitly admits that the
Government of Massachusetts Bay liad become, at the end of
fifty-four years, partially at least, a failure in " public morality "
and patriotism ; yet during that period the Government had
been exclusively, in both its legislation and administration, in
the hands of one religious denomination, under the influence of
its ministers, who were supported by taxation on the whole-
population, controlled the elections, and whose counsels ruled
in all conflicts with the King and Parliament of England.
None but a Congregationalist could be a governor, or assistant,
or deputy, or judge, or magistrate, or juror, or officer of the
army, or constable, or elector, or have liberty of worship. The
union of Church and State in Massachusetts was more intimate
and intolerant than it had or ever has been in England ; and
their contests with England in claiming absolute and irrespon-
sible powers under the Charter were at bottom, and in sub-
stance, contests for Congregational supremacy and exclusive
and proscriptive rule in Church and State — facts so overlooked
and misrepresented by New England historians. Yet under
this denominational and virtually hierarchical government, while
wealth was largely accumulated, the "pristine tone of public
morality" declined, and patriotism degenerated into "ambition
and venality."

II. It is also worthy of remark, that, according to Dr. Palfrey,
had not the spirit of the first generation of the rulers of Massa-

398.

Palfrey's History of New England, Vol. III., B. iii, Cliap. ix., pp. 396

224

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[CHAr. VII.

chusetts Bay departed, the war of the American Revolution
would have been anticipated by a century, and the sword would
have been unsheathed, not to maintain the right of represen-
tation co-extensive with subjection, to taxation, but to maintain
a Government which for half a century had taxed four-fifths
of its citizens without allowing them any representation,
supported the ministers of one Church by taxes on the whole
population, and denied liberty of worship to any but the
members of that one denomination,

III. I remark further, that Mr. Palfrey hints at the two real
causes why the disloyal party (calling itself the "patriotic party")
did not take up arms of rebellion against the mother country.
The one was disunion in the colony — " the ancient unanimity
was broken in upon." It has been seen that a majority of the
" Upper branch " of even this denominational Government, and
a large minority of the assembly of deputies, were in favour
of submitting to the conditions which the King had twenty
years before prescribed as the terms of continuing the Charter.
If the defection from disloyalty was so great within the
limits of the denomination, it is natural to infer that it must
have been universal among the four-fifths of the male population
who were denied the rights and privileges of * freemen," yet
subject to all the burdens of the State. Deprived also of all
freedom of the press, and punished by fine and imprisonment
if, even in petitions to the local Legislature for redress of griev-
ances, they complained of the acts of local legislation or govern-
ment, they could only look to the mother country for deliverance
from local oppression, for liberty of worship and freedom of
citizens. The "ministers" had lost their ascendency even within
the enfranchised circle of their own established churches, while
the great body of the disfranchised Nonconformists could only
regard them as had the Nonconformists in England regarded
Bancroft and Laud. They could assume high perogatives,
arrogate to themselves divine favour and protection, threaten
divine judgments on their adversaries, boast of courage and
power ; but they knew that in a trial of strength on the battle-
field their strength would prove weakness, and that they would
be swept from power, and perhaps proscribed and oppressed by
the very victims of their intolerance. The " breaking in upon
anoient unanimity " was but the declining power of a disloyal

VII.

CHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

225

Church and State Government of one denomination. A second
cause hinted at by Dr. Palfrey why the rulers of Massachusetts
Bay did not resort to arms at this time was, that " the rest
of New England was more or less inclined to the adverse
intereM." They could command no rallying watchword to com-
bine the other New England colonies against the King, such as
they were enabled to employ the following century to combine
all the American colonies. " The rest of New England " had
found that in the King and Council was their only efFe^.-
tiial protection against the aggressions and domination of the
rulers of Massachusetts Bay, who denied all right of appeal to
the Crown, and denied the right of the Crown to receive and
decide upon such appeals. These rulers not only encroached
upon the lands of neighbou cing colonies, but interfered with
their ei.ercise of religious toleration.* The extinction of
the pretensions to supremacy and monopoly of power and
trade by the rulers of Massachusetts Bay, was the enfranchise-
ment of the other New England Colonies to protection against

yet

sriev-

* The Plymoutli Colony tolerating the proscribed Baptists of Massachusetts
Bay, tlie Court of Massachusetts Bay admonished them in a letter, in 1649, say ■
ing "that it had come to its knowledge that divers Anabaptists had been con-
nived ot within the Plymouth jurisdiction, and it appeared that the 'patient
bearing ' of the Plymouth authorities had ' encreased ' 1 he same errors ; that
tliirteen or fourteen persons (it was reported) had been re-baptized at Sea
Cunke, under which circumstances * effectual restriction ' was desired, * the
more as the interests of Massachusetts were concerned therein.' Tlu' infection
of such diseases being so near us, are likely to spread into our jurisdiction, and
God eipially requires the suppression of error as the maintenance of truth at
the hands of Christian magistrates." — British (Congregational) Quarterly
Revieiv for January, 1876, pp. 150, 151.

"The Massachusetts did maintain Punham (a petty Sachem in this
province of Rhode Island) twenty years against this colony, and his chief
Sachem, and did by armed soldiers besiege and take prisoners Gorton,
Hamdon, Weeks, Green, and others in this province, and carried them away to
Bostuii, put them in irons, and took eighty head of cattle from them, for all
111 wliich they could never obtain any satisfaction. This colony (of Rhode
lahmd) could never be acknowledged (by Massachusetts) for a colony till his
Majesty's Charter was published (in 1663), though in the year 1643 they
Hent over some in England to procure the King's Jharter ; but finding that
unnatural war begun, and the King gone from London, they took a Charter
from the Lords and Coraiiicris." (Report of the King's Commissioners, in
Hutchiia .n's Collection of Original Papers relative to the History of Massa-
chusetts Bay, pp. 416, 416.)
15

226

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VII.

aggression, and of four-fifths of the male inhabitants of Massachu-
setts itself to the enjoyment of equal civil and religious liberty.

I think therefore that " ambitions and mean longings," and
even " venality," had quite as much to do on the part of those
who wished to perpetuate the government of disloyalty, pro-
scription, and persecution as on the part of those who desired
to " render unto Caesar the things that are Cajsar's," and to place
the Government of Massachusetts, like that of the other New
England Colonies, upon the broad foundation of equal and
general franchise and religious liberty.

But to return from this digresssion. After " the fall of the
Charter," November, 1684, the Congregationalists of Massachu-
setts Bay continued their government for two years, as if no-
thing had happened to their Charter ; they promptly proclaimed
and took the oath of allegiance to James the Second ; and two
years afterwards sent the celebrated Increase Mather as agent
to England, to thank the King for the Proclamation of Indul-
gence, which trampled on English laws, and cost the King his
throne, to pray for the restoration of the Charter, and to accuse and
pray for the removal of the King's obnoxious Governor-General
of New England, Sir Edmund Andros. The King received him
very courteously, and granted him several audiences. It would
have been amusir^g to witness the exchange of compliments be-
tween the potent minister of Massachusetts Congregationalism
and the bigoted Roman Catholic King of England ; but though
James used flattering words, he bestowed no favours, did not
relax the rigour of his policy, and retained his Governor of New
England. On the dethronement of James, Dr. Mather paid his
homage to the rising sun of the new Sovereign — professed over-
flowing loyalty to William and Mary,* and confirmed his pro-
fessions by showing that his constituents, on learning of the revo-
lution in England, seized and sent prisoner to England, Andros,
the hated representative of the dethroned King. But King

1^.^

* In an audience of King William, obtained by the Duke of DevDnsliiiv,
April 28, 1691, Mr. Mather humbly prayed his Majesty's favour to New
England in restoring the old Charter privileges ; adding at the same time
these words : " Sir, — Your subjects there have been willing to venture their
lives to enlarge your dominions ; the expedition to Canada was a givat and
noble undertaking. May it please your Majesty also to consider the circum-
etances of that people, as in your wisdom you have considered tlie ciicum-

iwil

CHAP, vii;]

AND THEIR TIMES.

227

William did not seem to estimate very highly that sort ot*
loyalty, much less to recognize the Massachusetts assumptions
under the old Charter, though he was ready to redress every
just complaint and secure to them all the privileges of British
subjects.* Mr. Hutchinson says : " Soon after the withdrawal

stances of England and Scotland. In New England they differ from other
Plantations ; they are called Congregationalistrt and Presbyterians (a), so
that such a Governor as will not suit with the people of New England,
may be very proper for other English Plantations." (Neal's History of New
England, Vol. II., Chap, xi., pp. 475, 476.)

* " The Rev. Mr. Increase Mather, Rector of Harvard College, had been at
Court in the year 1688, and laid before the King a representation of their
grievances, which the King promised in part to redress, but was prevented
by the revolution. When the Prince and Princess of Orange were settled on
the throne, he, with the rest of the New England agents, addressed their
Majesties for the restoring of their Charter, and applied to the Convention
Parliament, who received a Bill for this purpose and passed it in the
Lower House ; but that Parliament being soon dissolved, the Bill was lost."
(Neal's History of New England, Vol. II., Chap, xi., p. 474.)

Mr. J. G. Barry says : " Anxious for the restoration of the old Charter and
its privileges, under which the colony had prospered so well, the agent
applied himself diligently to that object, advising with the wisest statesmen
for its accomplishment. It was the concurrent judgment of all that the best
course would be to obtain a reversion of the judgment against the Charter
by Act of Parliament, and then apply to the King for such additional
privileges as were necessary. Accordingly in the (Convention) House of
Commons, tohere the whole svAjed of seizing Charters in the reign of Charles the
Second was up, the Charters of New England were inserted with the rest, and
though enemies opposed the measure, it was voted with the rest as a griev-
ance, and that they should be forthwith restored. Thus the popular branch
of the Parliament acted favourably towards the colonies ; but as the Bill
was yet to be submitted to the House of Lords, great pains were taken to
interest that branch of the Parliament in the measure ; and at the same time
letters having arrived giving an account of the proceedings in Boston, another
interview was held with the King, before whom, in ' a most excellent speech,'
Mr. Mather ' laid the state of the people,' and his Majesty was pleased to
signify his acceptance of what had been done in New England, and his
intention to restore the inhabitants to their ancient privileges ; but ' behold,'
adds the narrative, ' while the Charter Bill was depending, the Convention

(«) This was very ingenious on the part of Dr. Increase Mather to my
that the people of New England were called " Presbyterians' as well as " Con-
gregationalists," as the Church of Holland, of which King William as Prince
of Orange was Stadtholder, was " Presbyterian." But Dr. Mather did not
inform the King that the Presbyterian worship was no more tolerated in
Massachusetts than was the Baptist or Episcopalian worship.

228

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VII.

of King James, Dr. Mather was introduced to the Prince of
Orange by Lord Wharton, and presented the circular before
mentioned, for confirming Governors being sent to New England.
The 14th of March, Lord Wharton introduced him again to the
King, when, after humbly congratulating his Majesty on his
accession. Dr. Mather implored his Majesty's favour to New
England. The King promised all the favour in his power, but
hinted at what had been irregular in their former government ;
whereupon Dr. Mather undertook that upon the first word
they would reform any irregularities they should be advised of,
and Lord Wharton offered to be their guarantee. The King
then said that he would give orders that Sir Edmund Andres
should be removed and called to an account for his mal-
administration, and that the King and Queen should be pro-
claimed (in Massachusetts) by the former magistrates. Dr.
Mather was a faithful agent, and was unwearied in securing
friends for his country. Besides several of the nobility and
principal commoners, he had engaged the dissenting ministers,
whose weight at that time was far from inconsiderable.*

Dr. Mather's earnestness, ability, and appeals made a favour-
able impression on the mind of the King, supported as they
were by liberal Churchmen as well as Nonconformists, and also by
the entreaties of the Queen. The King, on the eve of going to
Hf 'iiand, where he was long detained — which delayed the issuing
of the Massachusetts Charter for twelve months — directed the
Chief Justice, Attorney and Solicitor-Generals to prepare the
draft of a new Charter for Massachusetts. They did so, em-
bodying the provisions of the old Charter, with additional pro-
visions to give powers which had not been given but had been

Parliament was unexpectedly prorogued and afterwards dissolved, and tlie
Sisypha^an labour of the whole year came to nothing.' All that was obtained
was an order that the Goveniment of the colony should be continued under
the old Charter until a new one was settled ; and a letter from the King was
forwarded to that effect, signed by the Earl of Nottingham, for the delivery
uf Sir Edmund Andros and the others detained with him, who were to be sent
to England for trial." (Barry's History of Massachusetts, First Period, Clmp.
xviii., pp. 508—510.)

* Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 388, 389. But,
in addition, Mr. Mather had the countenance of Archbishop Tillotson and
Bishop Burnet, who had not only received him kindly, but recommended his
applicationa to the favourable consideration of the King.

CHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

229

usurped in the administration of the old Charter. The majority
of the King's Council disapproved of this draft of Charter, and
directed the preparation of a second draft. Both drafts were
sent over to Holland to the King, with the reasons for and
against each ; his Majesty agreed with the majority of his
Council in disapproving of the first, and approving of the second
draft of Charter.*

But even before the King and his Council decided upon the
provisions of the new Charter, he determined upon appointing a
Governor for Massachusetts, while meeting their wishes as far
as possible in his selection of the Governor ; for, as Mr. Neal says,
" Two days after he had heard Dr. Mather against continuing
the Governor and officers appointed over Massachusetts by
King James the Second, but restoring the old officers, the King
inquired of the Chief Justice and some other Lords of the

* The King, on starting for Holland, " left orders with his Attorney-General
to draw up a dnift of Charter, according as his Majesty expressed in Council,
to be ready for him to sign at his return. The Attorney-General presented
liis draft to the Council Board, June the 8th (I69I), which was rejected, and
a new one ordered to be drawn up, which deprived the people of New
England of several essential privileges contJiined in their former Charter.
Mr. Mather in his great zeal protested against it ; but was told that the agents
of New England were not plenipotentiaries from a foreign State, and there-
fore must submit to the King's pleasure. The agents, having obtained a
copy of this Charter, sent over their objections against it to the King, in
Flanders, praying that certain clauses which they pointed out to his Majesty
iu their petition might be altered. And the Queen herself, with her own
royal liand, wrote to the King that the Charter of New England might pass
as it was drawn up by the Attorney-General at first, or be deferred till his
return. But, after all, it was his Majesty's ileasure that the Charter of New
En^'land should run in the main points according to the second draft ; and
:ill that the agents could do was to get two or three articles which they
appreliended to be for the good of the country added to it. The expectations
of tlie people (of the Congregational ists) of New England were very nmch dis-
appointed, and their agents were censured as men not very well skilled in the
iiilrigues of a Court. It was thought that if they had applied themselves to the
jiroper persons, and in a right way, they might have made l)etter terms for
tlieir country ; but they acted in the uprightness of their hearts, though the
success did not answer their expectations. It was debated among them
whether they should accept of the new Charter or stand a trial at law for
reversing the judgment against the old one ; but, upon the advice of some
of the best politicians and lawyers, the majority resolved to acquiesce in the
King's pleasure and accept what was now offered them." (Neal's History of
New England, Vol. II., Chap, xi., pp. 476, 477.)

( ,.

■L

230

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. vn.

Council whether, without the breach of law, he might appoint a
Governor over New England ? To which they answered that
whatever might be the merits of the cause, inasmuch as tlio
Charter of New England stood vacated by a judgment against
them, it was in the King's power to put them under that form
of government he should think best for them. The King re-
plied, he believed then it would be for the advantage of the
people of that colony to be unuer a Governor appointed by
himself ; nevertheless, because of what Dr. Mather had spoken
to him, he would consent that the agents of New England
should nominate such a person as would be agreeable to the
inclinations of the people there ; but, notwithstanding this, he
would have Charter privileges restored and confirmed to them."*
It seems to me that King William was not actuated by any
theoretical notions of high prerogative, as attributed to him by
Messrs. Bancroft and Palfrey, in regard to Massachusetts, but
was anxious to restore to that colony every just privilege and
power desired, with the exception of the power of the Congre-
gationalists of Massachusetts to prosecute and persecute their
fellow-religionists of other persuasions, and of depriving them
and other colonists of the right of appeal to the protection of
England.*!" This continued possession of usurped powers by the
Congregationalists of Massachusetts, of sole legislation and
government under the first Charter, and which they so merci-

* Neal'a History of New England, Vol. II., Chap, xi., p. 476.

Massachusetts would doubtless have retained the election of their Gover-
nor and their first Charter, as did the colonies of Rhode Island aud Con-
necticut, had her rulers submitted to the conditions on which Charles tlie
Second proposed to continue their Charter. Mr. Hildreth says : " The
Charters of Connc'lcut and Rhode Island never having been formally an-
nulled, and having already been resumed, were pronounced by the English
lawyers to be in full force. * * The English lawyers held that the judgment
which Massachusetts hnd persisted in braving was binding and valid in law,
until renewed by u writ of error, of which there was little or no hope."
(History of the United States, Chap, xviii., pp. 94, 95.)

t " The platform of Church government which they settled was of tlio
Congregational mode, connecting the several Churches together to a certain
degree, and yet exempting each of them from any jurisdiction, by way of
censure or any power extensive to their own. * * * No man could be quali-
fied to elect or be elected to office who was not a Church member, and
no Church could be formed but by a license from a magistrate ; so that tlie
civil and ecclesiastical powers were intimately combined. The clei'gy were

CHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

881

lessly and disloyally exercised for more than half a century,
was manifestly the real ground of their opposition to a new
Charter, and especially to the second and final draft of it. Their
agent in England, Dr. Increase Mather, who had inflamed and
caused the citizens of Boston, and a majority of the popular
Assembly of the Legislature, to reject the conditions insisted
upon by Charles the Second, and contest in a Court of law the
continuance of the first Charter, with their pretensions under it,
said that he would rather die than consent to the pro^^sions of
the second draft of Charter,* and sent his objections to it to King

so merci-

conanlted about the laws, were frequently present at the passing of them,
and hy the necessity of their influence in the origination, demonstrated how
much the (hie execution of thera depended on their power.

" But the error of establishing one rule for all men in ecclesiastical policy
and discipline (which experience has proved cannot be maintained, even in
inattera of indifference) could not fail of discovering itself in very serious
instances as the Society increased. The great body of the English nation-
being of a different persuasion in this respect, numbers belonging to their
Cliurch, who came into the country, necessarily formed an opposition
which, as they had the countenance of the King, could not be crushed like
those other sectaries. It became a constant subject of royal attention,
to allow freedom and liberty of conscience, especially in the use of the
Common Prayer, and the rights of sacrament and baptism as thereby pre-
scribed. The law confining the rights of freemen to Church members was at
length repealed (in pretence) ; and pecuniary qualifications for those who
were not Church members, with good morals and the absurd requisite of
orthodoxy of opinion, certified by a clergyman, were substituted in its place.
But the great ascendency which the Congregationalists had gained over every
other sect made the chance of promotion to office, and the share of influence
in general, very unequal, and was, without doubt, one of the most impoitant
uiuses which conspired to the loss of the Charter." (Miuot's Continuation of
the History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, etc., Vol. I., Chap, i., pp.
29—31.)

* Mr. Mather was so dissatisfied that he declared that he would sooner part
with his life than consent to them. He was told * the agents of Massachu-
setts were not plenipotentiaries from a sovereign State ; if they declared
tliey would not submit to the King's pleasure, his Majesty would settle the
country, and they might take what would follow.' Sir Henry Ai^hurst with
Mr. Mather withdrew, notwithstanding, their objections against the minutes
of CV)uncil. The objections were presented to the Attorney-General (Treby),
and laid before the Council, and a copy sent to the King in Flanders; but all
had no effect. The King approved of the minutes and disliked the objections
to them, and the Charter was drawn up by Mr. Blaithwait according to them."
(Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 409 — 411.)

! I
' I

232

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VII.

& ••■Xj.

•

iM.

■a

Mi ■ "'-

William, who was in Holland. The King disapproved of Dr.
Mather's objections, and approved of the Charter as revised
and as was finally issued, and under which Massachusetts was
governed and prospered for three-fourths of a century, notwith-
standing the continued opposition of a set of separationists
and smugglers in Boston, who had always been the enemies of
loyal and liberal government under the first Charter.* But
when the new Charter passed the Seals, and the nomination
of the first Governor was left to the agent of Massachusetts, Dr.
Mather changed his language of protest into that of gratitude.
He nominated Sir William Phips ; and on being introduced to
the King, at parting, by the Earl of Nottingham, made the
following speech :

" Sir, i do, in behalf of New England, most humbly thank
your Majesty, in that you have been pleased by a Charter to
restore English liberties unto them, to confirm them in their
properties, and to grant them some peculiar privileges. I doubt

* "A people who were of opinion that their Commonwenlth was
established by free consent (a); that the place of their habitation wa.s tlieir
own ; that no man had a right to enter into their society without their per-
mission ; that they had the full and absolute power of governinj.; all the
people by men chosen from among themselves, and according to such laws
as they should see fit to establish, not repugnant to tho.se of England (a
restriction and limitation which they wholly ignored and violated), tliey
paying only the fifth part of the ore of gold and silver that should be thert'
found for all duties, demands, exactions, and services whatsoever; of course,
that they held the keys of their territory, and had a right to prescribe the
terms of naturalization to all noviciates; such a people, I say, whatever
alterations they might make in tlieir polity, from reason and conviction of
their own motion, would not be easily led to comply with the same changes,
when required by a king to whom they held themselves subject, and upon
whose authority they were dependent only according to their Charter ; and
we shall find that their compliance was accordingly slow and occasional, as
necessity compelled them to make it." (Minot's Continuation of the Historj'
of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 42, 43.)

(a) Note by the Author. — The Colony of Plymouth was establisljed in
1620, by free consent, by the Pilgrim Fathers on board of the A/ai^oicer,
without a Charter ; yet that colony was always tolerant and loyal. But the
Colony of Massachusetts Bay was established by the Purittin Fathers in
1629, under the authority of a Royal Charter ; and it was the pretension
to and assumption of independent power and absolute government, tliough
a chartered colony, that resulted in their disloyalty to England and intoler-
ance towards all classes of their fellow-colonists not Congregationalists.

CHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

233

not but your subjects will demean themselves with that dutiful
affection and loyalty to your Majesty, as that you will see cause
to enlarge your Royal favour towards them ; and I do most
humbly thank your Majesty that you have been pleased to
leave to those that are concerned for New England to nominate
their Governor."

" Sir William Phips has been accordingly nominated by us
at the Council Board. He has done good service to the Crown,
by enlarging your dominions and reducing Nova Scotia to your
obedience ; I know that he will faithfully serve your Majesty
to the utmost of his capacity ; and if your Majesty shall think
fit to confirm him in that place, it will be a further obligation
to your subjects there."

"Hereupon Sir William Phips was admitted to kiss his
Majesty's hand ; and was, by commission under the Broad Seal,
appointed Captain-General over the Province of Massachusetts
Bay, in New England."*

In the preamble of the Charter, the dates, objects and pro-
visions of previous Charters are recited, and titles to property, etc.,
acquired under them confirmed ; after which it was provided —

1. That there should be "one Governor, one Lieutenant or
Deputy Governor, one Secretary of the Province, twenty-eight
councillors or members of assembly, to be chosen by popular

* Neal's History of New England, Vol. II., pp. 480, 481.

" Sir William Phips was born, of mean and obscure parents, at a small
plantation in the eastern part of New England, on the banks of the River
Kennebeck, February 2, 1620 ; his father was a gunsmith, and left his
mother a widow, with a large family of small children. William, being one of
the youngest, kept sheep in the wilderness until he was eighteen years of
age, and was then bound apprentice to a ship carpenter. When he was out of
his time he took to the sea, and after several adventures, at last made his
fortune by finding a Spanish wreck near Port de la Plata, which got him a
great deal of reputation at the English Court, and introduced him into the
accjuaintance of the greatest men of the nation. Though King James II.
gave him the honour of knighthood, yet he always opposed his arbitrary
measures, as appears by his refusing the Government of New England when
offered to him by a messenger of the abdicated King. Sir William joined
heartily m the Revolution, and used his interest at the Court of King William
and Queen Mary for obtaining a Charter for his country, in conjunction
with the rest of the agents, for which, and his other great services, they
nomioijted him to the King as the most acceptable and deserving person
they could think of for Governor." — lb., pp. 544, 545.

234

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. vn.

election, and to possess and exercise the general powers of
legislation and government."

2. That there should be " liberty of conscience allowed in the
worship of God to all Christians (except Papists) inhabiting,
or which shall inhabit or be resident within our said province
or territory."

3. That " all our subjects should have liberty to appeal to us,
our heirs and succes.sors, in case either party shall not rest satis-
fied with the judgment or sentence of any judicatories or courts
within our said province or territory, in any personal action
wherein the matter of difference doth exceed the value of three
hundred pounds sterling, provided such appeals be made within
fourteen days after the sentence or judgment given."

4. That the Governor and General Assembly should have
" full power and authority, from time to time, to make, ordain
and establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable orders,
laws, statutes or ordinances, directions, and instructions, either
with penalties or without (so as the .same be not repugnant or
contrary to the laws of this our realm of England), as they .shall
judge to be for the good and welfare of our said province or
territory."

5. That in the framing and passing of all orders, laws, etc.,
the Governor should have " a negative voice, subject also to the
approbation or disallowance of the King within three years
after the passing thereof."

6. That " every freeholder or person holding land within the
province or territory, to the annual value of forty shillings, or
other estate of fifty pounds sterling, should have a vote in the
election of members to serve in the General Court or Assembly."

7. That "the King should appoint, from time to time, the
Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, and Secretary of the Province ;
but that the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Council
or Assistants, from time to time should nominate and appoint
Judges, Commissioners of 0} ^r and Terminer, Sheriffs, Provosts,
Marshals, Justices of the Peace," etc.

8. The usual oath of allegiance and supremacy was required
to be taken by all persons appointed to office, free from the
restrictions and neutralising mutilations introduced into the oath
of allegiance by the ecclesiastico-political oligarchy of the Massa-
chusetts Bay Colony under the first Charter.

CHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

235

9. The new Charter also incorporated " Plymouth and Maine,
and a tract further east in the pn vince of Massachusetts." The
Plymouth Colony of the Pil^im Fathers had existed from 1G20
to IGOO as a separate Colonial Government, first established by
common consent, under seven successive Governors. It now
ceased to exist as a distinct Government, to the great regret of
its inhabitants, after having been administered tolerantly and
loyally for a period of seventy years, as has been narrated above,
in Chap. II.

Such is an abstract of the provisions of the second Massachu-
setts Charter — provisions similar to tho.se which have been
incorporated into the constitution and government of every
British North American Province for the last hundred years.*

It remains to note how the new Charter was received, and
what was the effect of its operation. A faction in Boston op-
posed its reception, and desired to resume the old contests ; but
a large majority of the deputies and the great body of the colony
cordially and thankfully accepted the new Charter as a great
improvement upon the first Charter in terminating their dis-

* Modem historians of New England geiu rally speak nf the Massachusetts
Colony as having been luijustly di-prived of its first Charter, after having
faithfully observinl it for more than half a century, and of having been
treated harshly in not having the Charter restored. While Dr. Mather was
earnestly seeking the restoration of the Charter at the hands of King Williiun,
Mr. Hampden (grandson of the famous John Hampden) consulted Mr.
Hooke, a counsellor of note of the Puritan party, and friend of New England.
Mr. Hooke stated that " a bare restoration of the Charter of Massachusetts
would be of no service at all," as appears both from the Charter itself and the
practice of that colony, who have hardly pursued the terms thereof in any
one instance, which has given colour to evil-minded men to give them
disturbance.

" I. As to the Charter itself, that colony, should thej have their Charter,
would want —

" 1. Power to call a Parliament, or select assembly ; for their many
thousand freemen have, thereby, an equal right to .sit in tluir General
Assembly.

" 2. Power to levy taxes and laise money, especially on inhabitants not
being of the company, and strangers coming to or trading thither.

" 3. They have not any Admiralty.

" 4, Nor have they power to keep a Prerogative Court, prove wills, etc.

" 5. Nor to erect Courts of Judicature, especially Chancery Courts.

"II. The deficiency of their Charter appears from their practice, wherein

236

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VII.

putes and defining their relations with England, in putting an
end to a denominational franchise and tyranny inconsistent
with religious or civil liberty, and in placing the elective fran-
chise, eligibility to office, legislation and government upon the

they httve not had respect thereto ; but liavinj^ useil the at'orcisuid powern
without any grant, tliey have exercised tlieir Clmrter powers, also, otherwise
than the Charter directed :

" 1. They have made hiws contrary to the laws of England.

" 2. Their laws have not been under their seal.

" 3. They have not used their name of coqmration.

" 4. They have not U8(;<1 their wal in their grants.

" 5. They have not kept their General Courts, nor

" 6. Have they observed the number of assistants appointed by the
Charter." (Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, VoL I., pp. 410,
411, in a note.)

It is clear from the legal opinion, as has been shown in the foregoing pages,
that the first Puritans of Massachusetts, though only a chartered company, set
up an independent government, paid no attention whatever to the provisions
of the Charter under which they held their land and had settled the colony,
but acted in entire disregard and defiance of the authority, which had gmnted
their Charter. Mr. Neal very candidly says : " The old Charter was, in the
opinion of persons learned in the law, defective as to several powers which
are absolutely necessary to the subsistence of the Plantation : for exami)le, it
gave the Government no more power than every cori)oration in England has ;
power in capital cases was not expressed in it ; it mentioned no House of
Deputies, or Assembly of Representatives ; the Government had thereby no
legal power to impose taxes on the inhabitants that were not freemen (that
is, on four-fifths of the male population), nor to erect Courts of Admiralty, so
that if the judgment against this Charter should be reversed, yet if the
Government of New England should exercise the same powers as they had
done before the qxio warranto, a, new writ of scire facias might undoubtedly be
issued out against them. Besides, if the old Charter should have been restored
without a grant of some other advantages, the country would have been very
much incommoded, because the provinces of Maine, and New Havipshire would
have been taken from Massachusetts, and Plymouth would have been anTiexed
to New York, whereby the Massachusetts Colony would have been very much
straitened and have made a mean figure both as to its trade and influence.

" The new Charter grants a great many privileges to New England which
it had not before. The colony is now made a province, and the General Court
has, with the King's approbation, as much power in New England as tlie
King and Parliament have in England. Tliey have all English liberties, and
can be touched by no law, by no tax, but of their own making. All the
liberties of their religion are for ever secured, and their titles to their lands,
once, for want of some form of conveyance, contested, are now confirmed for
ever." (History of New England, Vol. II., pp. 478, 479.)

CHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMKS.

237

broad foundation of public freedoni and equal rij^ditH to all
classes of citi/ons.*

Tho influonco of the new Charter upon tlio social state of
Massachusetts, as well as upon its Ic^'islation and goven\nu>nt,
was manifestly beneticial. Jud<^e Story observes: "After the
grant of the provincial Charter, in 101)1, the legislation of the
colony took a wider scope, and became more liberal as well
as more exact.""f*

The improved spirit of loyalty was not less conspicuous.
Mr. Neal, writing more than twenty years (1720) after tho
granting of the new Charter, says: " The people of New England
are a dutiful and loyal people. * * King George is not known
to have a single enemy to his person, family, or government in

New England.":^
The influence of the new state of things upon the spirit of

* Althoiigli u party was Ibnned which opposed 8ul)iiiis.sion to tlie Cliartur,
yet the majority of tlie Court wisely and tliankfully accepted it, and
iil)pointed a day of solemn thanksgiving to Almiglity Ood for "granting
ii siife arrival to His Excellency the Governor and the Rev. Mr. Increase
Mather, who have industriously endeavoured the sei-vice of the peoph',
and liave })rouglit over with them 'a settlement of government, in which
tlieir Majesties have graciously given us distinguishing marks of their Royal
favour and goodness.' " (Hutchinson's Hiatoiy of Massachusetts Ray, V(j1.
I., p. 416.)

Judge Story remarks : "With a view to advance the growth of the province
by encouraging new settlements, it was expresely provided ' that there should
be liberty of conscience allowed in the worship of Qod to all Christians,
except Papists ; ' and that all subjects inhabiting in the province, and their
children born there, or on the seas going and returning, should have all the
liberties and immunities of free and natural subjects, as if they were born
within the realm of England. And in all cases an appeal was allowed from
the judgments of any Courts of the province to the King in the Privy
Council in England, where the matter of difference exceeded tlirce hundred
pounds sterling. And finally there was a reservation of the whole Admiralty
jurisdiction to the Crown, and of the right to all subjects to fish on the
coasts. Considering the spirit of the times, it must be acknowledged that,
on the whole, the Charter contains a liberal grant of authority to the province
and a reasonable reservation of royal perogative. It was hailed with sincere
satisfaction by the colony after the dangers which had so long a time menaced
its liberties and peace." (Story's Commentaries on the Constitution of the
United States, Vol. I., Book i.. Chap, iv., p. 41.)

t lb., Vol. I., Book L, Chap, iv., p. 45.

t History of New England, Vol. II., p. 616.

238

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

If'

[chap. vit.

lit

toleration and of Christian charity among Christians of dif-
ferent denominations, and on society at large, was most re-
markable. In a sermon preached on a public Fast Day, March
22, 1716 (and afterwards published), by the Rev. Mr. Coleman,
one of the ministers of Boston, we have the following words :

" If there be any customs in our Churches, derived from our
ancestors, wherein those terms of Church communion are
imposed which Christ has not imposed in the New Testament,
they ought to be laid aside, for they are justly to be condemned by
us, because we complain of imposing in other communions, and
our fathers fled for the bame. If there ever was a custom among
us, whereby communion in our Churches was made a test for
the enjoyment of civil privileges in the State, we have done
well long since to abolish such corrupt and persecuting maxims,
which are a mischief to any free people, and a scandal to
any communion to retain. If there were of old among our
fathers any laws enacted or judgments given or executions
done according to those laws wliich have carried too much the
face of cruelty and persecution, we ought to be humbled greatly
for such errors of our fathers, and confess them to have
been sinful ; and blessed be God for the more catholic spirit
of charity which now distinguishes us. Or if any of our fathers
have dealt proudly in censuring and judging others who dif-
fered from them in modes of worship, let us their posterity
the rather be clothed with humility, meekness, and charity,
preserving truth and ' -mess with the laudable zeal of our
predecessors" (pp. 20, 21, 22).

The Rev. Dr. Cotton Mather, the distinguished son of the
famous Rev. Dr. Increase Mather, but more tolerant than
his father, has a passage equally signiiicant and suggestive
with that just quoted from Mr. Coleman :

" In this capital city of Boston," says Dr. Cotton Mainer,
" there are ten assemblies of Cliristians of different persua-
sions, who live lovingly and peaceably together, doing all the
offices of good neighbourhood for one another in such manner
as may give a sensible rebuke to all the bigots of uniformity,
and show them how consistent a variety of rites in religion
may be with the tranquillity of human society, and may
demonstrate to the world that such persecution for conscien-
tious dissents in religion is an abomination of desolation —

CHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

239

a thing wliereof all wise and just men will say, cursed be ita
anger, for it is fierce, and its iJbrath,for it is cruel."*

It is not needful that I should trace the legislation and gov-
ernment of the Province of Massachusetts under the second
Charter with the same minuteness with which I have narrated

manner
omiity,
eligion
d may
)nscien-
xtion—

* Fellowship of the Churches : Annexed to the Sermon preaciied on the
Ordination of Mr. Prince, p. 76 ; Boston, 1718 ; quoted in Neal's History of
New England, Vol. II., pp. 6iO, 611.

But the spirit of the old leaven of bigotry and persecution reniuined with
not a few of the old Congregational clei-gy, who were jealous for the honour
of those days when thej' n led both I'liurch and State, silenced and pro-
scribed all dissenters from their own opinions and forms of worship. They
could not endure any statements which reflected upon the justice and policy
of those palmy days of ecclesiastical oligarchy, and were very much stung
l)y some passages in Neal's History of New England. The celebrated
Dr. Isaac Watts seems to have been written to on tlij subject. His letter,
apparently in reply, addressed to the Rev. Dr. Cotton Math'-r, dated
February 19, 1720, is very suggestive. The sweet poet and learred divine
says :

" Another thing I take occasion to mention to you at this time is my
good friend Mr. Neal's History of New England. He has been for many
years pastor of a Congregational Church in London—a man of valuable
talents in the ministry. I could wish indeed that he had communicated his
design to you, but I knew nothing of it till it was almost out of the press.
* * He has taken merely the task of an historian upon him. Considered as
such (as fur as I can jidge), most of the chapters are well written, and in
such a wa}"^ as to be very acceptable to the present age.

" But the freedom he has taken to e.\posc the persecuting principles and
prp.-tices of :'• f.rst Planters, both in the body of his Iii.story and his
abridgment of ti.eir laws, has displeaseJ ?'onie persons here, and perhaps
will be of;''l1si^e there. I nmst confess I sent for him this week, and gave
iiim Ui^ s ise. i'reily on this subject. I could wish he had more modilied
Home of his relations, and had rather left out those laws, or in some page had
iiimexed something to preve' t our eneniies from insulting both us and you
lui that subject. His ansM'i.r was, that 'the fidelity of an historian required
liini to do what he }<ad done; ' and he has, at the end of the first and second
volumes, given such a character of the present ministers and inhabitants of
tlie country as nuiy justly secure this generation from all scandal ; and that
it is a nobler thing to tell the world that you have rectified the errors of your
tiitlicrs, than if mere education had taught you »o huge u charity. He
told me likewise that he had shown in the preface that all such laws as are
inconsistent with the laws of '■'ngland are, ipso facto, repealed by your new
Charter. But njethiiiks it would be better to have such cruel and sangui-
nary statutes as those undor the title of ' Heresy' repealed in form, and by the
public authority of the uatiun ; and if the appearance of this book iti your

240

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VII.

that of Massachusetts Bay under the first Charter. Tlie succes-
sive Governors appointed by England over the province were,
upon the whole, men of good sense, and were .successful in their
administration, notwithstanding the active opposition of a Bos-
ton disaffected party that prevented any salary being granted
to the Judges or Governor for more than one year at a time.
Yet, upon the whole, the new system of government in the
Province of Massachusetts was considered preferable to that of
the neighbouring colonies of Rhode Island and Connecticut,
which retained their old Charters and elected their Governors.
Mr. Hutchinson says : •

" Seventy years' practice under a new Charter, in many re-
spects to be preferred to the old, has taken away not only all
expectation, but all desire, of ever returning to the old Charter.
We do not envy the neighbou^'ing Governments which retained
and have ever since practised upon their ancient Charters.
Many of the most sensible in those Governments would be glad
to be under tlie same Constitution that the Massachusetts
Province happily enjoys.*

But Massachusetts and other New England colonies had
incurred considerable debts in their wars with the Indians,
prompted and aided by the French, who sought the destruction
of the English colonies. But most of these debts were incurred
by loans to individual inhabitants and by the issue of paper
money, which became greatly depreciated and caused much con-
fusion and embarrassment in the local and Transatlantic trade.f

coimtry shall awaken your General Assembly to attempt to fulfil bucIi a
noble pieof of .service to your country, there will be a happy effect of that
part of the history which now makes us blush and l)e ashamed.

" I have taken the freedom to write a line or two to your most excelleiit
Governor on this .subject, which I entreat you to deliver, with my salutation;
and I assure myself lliat Dr. Mather will have a zealous hand in promoting
80 gracious a work if it may be thou{:;ht expedient to attempt it." (Collections
of the Massachusetts Historical Society, First Series, Vol. V.,pp. 2(Xi, 201.)

The " glorious work" advised by Dr. Watts was not " attempted," and the
" cruel and persecuting stiitutcs passed by the Congregational Court of
Ma.ss4ichusetts Bay were never repealed by any " public author) ly" of that
coUmy, but were tacitly annulled and superseded by the provi.sions of
the " new Charter" of King William and Mary in favour of toleration and
civil liberty.

* History of Masfiachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 416.

t The effect of so much paper was to drive all gold and silver out of circti-

CHAP. VII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

241

rollent
lation;
nnotiiig
ecticns
201.)
and tlip
onrt of
ol" thnt
ions of
on and

At the close of the war between England and France by the
peace and treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, 1749, Mr. Hutchinson
thus describes the statt' of Massachusetts :

" The people of Massachusetts Bay were never in a more easy
and happy situation than at the conclusion of the war with
France (1749). By the generous reimbursement of the whole
charge (£183,000) incurred by the expedition against Cape
Breton, the province was set free from a heavy debt in which
it must otherwise have remained involved, and was enabled to
exchange a depreciating paper medium, which had long been the
sole instrument of trade, for a stable medium of silver and gold ;
the advantages whereof to all branches of their commerce was
evident, and excited the envy of other colonies ; in each of
which paper was the principal currency."*

lation, to rrise the nominal prices of all commodities, and to incrca.se the rate
of exchange on England. Great confusion and perple.xity ensued, and the
iiiminunity was divided in opinion, the most being urgent for the issue of
nuiri' paper money. For this purpose a project was started for a Land- Bank,
which was established in Mas',acliusetts, the plan of which was to issue bills
upc.'ii the pledge of lands. All who were in difficulty advocated this, Itecause
they hoped that in the present case they might shift their burdens on to
some one else. It was then resisted, and another plan was devised ar.d
carried (1714), namely, the issuing of £5(),0{X) of bills of credit by Govern-
ment, to be loaned to individuals at 5 per cent, interest, to be secured by
estates, and to be repaid one-fifth part yearly. This quieted the Land-Bank
party for a while. But the habit of issuing bills of credit continued, and
was very seductive.

" In 1741, Rhode Island issued ;£40,000 in paper money, to be loaned to the
inhabitants. In 1717, New Hampshire issued ^15,000 paper money. In
1733, Connecticrt issued £20,000 on the loan system for the first time
Kliode Island made another issue of £100,000." (Elliott's New England
History, Vol. II., Chap, xii., p. 230.)

* History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay from 1749 to 1774, p. 1.

fcircu-

242

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VIII.

CHAPTER VIII.

Massachusetts and other Colonies during the Second War between
Great Britain and France, from the Peace of Aix-la-Chapeli,e,
1748, TO the Peace of Paris in 1763.

By the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, France and England retained
their respective possessions as they existed before the war.
Louisburg, which had been captured from the French in 174o
by the skill of the British Admiral Warren, aided most courage-
oi^sly by the Massachusetts volunteers, was therefore restored
tc the French, much to the regret and mortification of the New
England colonies, by whom the enterprise against that powerful
and troublesome fortress had first been devised and undertaken.
By the treaty between France and England, the boundaries of
their possessions in America were left undefined, and were to
be settled by Commissioners appointed by the two countries.
But the Commissioners, when they met at Paris, could not agree ;
the questions of these boundaries remained unsettled ; and the
French in Canada, with the Indians, nearly all of whom were in
alliance with them, were constantly making aggressions and
committing cruel outrages upon the English colonists in the
back parts of New England, New York, Pennsylvania, and
Virginia, who felt that their only security for life, property,
and liberty was the extinction of French power in America,
and the subjection of the Indians by conquest or conciliation.
The six years which followed the peace of 1748 witnessed
frequent and bloody collisions between the English colonists
and their French and Indian Canadian neighbours, until, in
1756, England formally declared war against France — a war
which continued seven years, and terminated in the extinction
of French power in Canada, and in the enlargement of the

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

243

British possessions from Labrador to Florida and Louisiana,
and from the Atlantic to the Pacific. This war, in its origin
and many scenes of its conflicts and conquests, was an American-
Colonial war, and the American colonies were the gainers by its
results, for which British blood and treasure had been lavishly
expended. In this protracted and eventful conflict, the British
Government were first prompted and committed, and then nobly
seconded by the colonies, Massachusetts acting the most promi-
nent part.

The last act of the British Government, pursuant to the
treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748, was to restore to the French
Government Madras, in return for the strongly fortified fort
of Louisburg, which had been wrested from the French by
the colonists, assisted by Admiral Warren with a few English
ships in 1745 ; and the first act of the French Government,
after the restoration to them of Louisburg, was to prepare
for wresting from Great Britain all her American colonies.*
They dispatched soldiers and all kinds of military stores ;
encroached upon and built fortresses in the British province
of Nova Scotia, and in the provinces of Pennsylvania and
Virginia,-f and erected a chain of forts, and planted garrisons

* " The French, upon recovering Louisburg, had laid the scheme (the par-
ticulars of which shall he exhibited in their due place) for engrossing the
whole empire of North America, and in a manner for extirpating the English
interest there. Notice of this was, soon after the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle,
},'iven to the English Government by thf ir Governors in America, and proper
instructions were dispatched to them u< resist all encroachments attempted
to be made upon the English territories. The Ejirl of Albemarle (British
Aml)assador in Paris) had orders from his Court to remonstrate on this
occ^ision ; but his remonstrances had so little effect that the French seemed
rather encouraged in than deterred from their unurpjitions. The English
Governors in America daily sent over complaints of the French encroach-
ments there, which were too little regarded, in hopes of matters being
compromised." (Rapin's History of England, VoL XXL, p. 418.)

t " But their encroachments went further (than Nova Scotia), and this
year (1754) they began to make settlements upon the River Ohio, within
tlie limits of the British possessions in the western parts of Virginia. They
had likewise committed many hostilities against British subjects in other
parts of America."

" AH the while the French were multiplying their hostilities and strengthen-
ing their usurpations by new recruits of men, money, provisions of all kinds,
and ammunition, and some of the best officers in France."

" When the Government of England complained to the French Court of

244

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VIII.

along the line of the British provinces, from the St. Lawrence
to the Ohio river, and thence to the Mississippi.*

The only means at the command of Great Britain to counter-
act and defeat these designs of France to extinguish the Englisli
colonies in America was to prevent them from carrying i' en,
cannon, and other munitions of war hither, by capturing f lieir

lluwc encroaclnnenta, the Ministry gave evasive answers, and j)ronnse(l tliat
everything shouhl be amicably ailjustctl ; but without desisting from tluir
usurpations, which became every day more and more intolerabh;. 'J'lic
English, i)erceiving this, sent general orders to all their Governors in Anieiica
to repel force by force, and to drive them from all the settlements wliicli
they had made contrary to the faitli of treaties, and especially along tlio
Ohio." (Rapin's History of England, Vol. XXL, pp. 478—491.)

*"They had been incessantly making settlements upon the Englisii
property since the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, and at last they made a H(;ttlt'-
ment on the western part of Virginia, upon the River Ohio. Mr. Dinwiddin
(Governor of V^ivginia) having intelligence of this, sent an officer. Major
Washington, with a letter to the French commandant there, requiring liiiii to
desist, and with orders, if possible, to bring tiie Indians over to the Lritisli
interest. Washington had but inditl'erent success with the Indians ; ami
when he arrived with some of the Indians at the French settlements, lie
found the French by no means inclin(;d to give over their undertaking, and
that the Indians, notwithstiinding all their fair promises, were much more in
their interest than in that of England. Upon further inquiry it was foiiml
that the Indians called the Si.\ Nations, w'' o, by the treaty of Utrecht, weif
acknowledged to be subject to Great Britain, had been entirely debauched liy
the French, who had likewise found moans to bring over to their interest
those vast tracts that lie along the great lakes and rivers to the west of the
Apalachian (or Allegany) mountains.

"Having thus got the friendship of those Indians, they next cimtrived how
they could cut them off from all comnumication with the English, and for
that ])urpose they seized the persons and effects of all the English whom tliev
found trading with the Indians ; and they erected a chain of fort.i from
Canada to Mississippi, to prevent all future communication between the
Englisli and those Indians ; at the same time destroying such of the ludians
as discovered any affection or regard for the British subjects : so that in a
very few years all the eastern as well as the western colonies of Great Britain
were in danger of being ruined." — lb., pp. 290, 291.)

" Though the several provinces belonging to Great Britain, in the
neighbourhood of the French encroachments, raised both men and money
against them, yet ihe forms of their legal proceedings in their asseri))lii.s
were so dilatory that the French always had the start of them, and tliey
surprised a plare called Log's Town, belonging to the Virginians, on the Ohio.
This was a place of great importance, and the French made theniselvcH
masters of the block-house and the truck-house, with skins and other com-

[AP. Vlll.
jawrence

counter-
j English
ing r.en,
ing t'leir

nuHetl that
from tlicir
ll)l(^ Tlic
ill Ainuiii'ii
eiits which
• aloii},' the

he Eiii^'lish
vie a .s(;ltli'-
, Uiiiwi<hHi:
licer, Major
iriri}^ liiin to
i the I'.ritisli
.tlians ; ami
lenunit:^, lie
■taking,', and
Lich more in
t was foiinil
tret'ht, Wile
bauchi'd hy
leir interest
west 1)1 the

ntrived how
ish, and for
whom tliey
iorU from
v'tween the
the Indians
io that in a
•cat Britain

^\\n, in the
and niimey
V assemhliis
m, an<l tliey
on the Ohio.
thcmselveH
I other oom-

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

.ships thus laden and employed ; but the French Government
thought that the British Government would not proceed to
such extremities, for fear that the former would make war
upon the German possessions of the latter, the King of Eng-
land being the Elector of Hanover. Besides, the proceedings
of the French in America were remote and concealed undei'
various pretexts ; the French Government could oppose a
general denial to the complaints made as to its encroachments
on British territory and settlements in the distant wilderness
of America ; while any attack by England upon French ships
at sea would be known at once to all Europe, and excite
prejudice against England for such an act in time of peace
against a neighbouring nation. The designs and dishonesty
of the French Government in these proceedings are thus stated
hy Rapin :

"Though the French in all their seaports were making the
greatest preparations for supporting their encroachments in
America, yet the strongest assurances came to England from
that Ministry that no such preparations were making, and that
no hostility was intended by France again.st Great Britain
or her dependencies. These assurances were generally com-
iiiuuicated to the British Ministry by the Duke of Mirepoix,
the French Ambassador to London, who was himself so far
imposed upon that he believed them to be sincere, and did
all in his power to prevent a rupture between the two nations.
The preparations, however, were so notorious that they could
he no longer concealed, and Mireppix was upbraided at St
James's with being insincere, and the proofs of his Court's

modities to the amount of £20,000, besides cutting off all the English traders
in those parts but two, who found means to escape. About the same time,
near 1,000 Freneh, under the command of Monsieur de Carstreca-ur, and 18
pieces of cfuinon, came in 300 canoes from Venango, a fort tliat they liad
usurped upon the banks of the Ohio, and surprised an Englisli fort on the
forks of the Monongahella. After tliis, a great many skirmishes liappened
hetween the English and the French with various success.

" In the meanwhile, orders came from England to the Governors of the
British settlements in America to form a kind of political confedenicy, to
which every province was to contribute a quota. Though the scheme of
political confedemcy was the best measure tliat could be pursued in the
situation of the British settlements, yet it had not all the effect that was
expected from it." (Rapin's History of England, Vol. XXL, pp. 491, 492.)

24G

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VIII.

double-dealing were laid before him. He appeared to be struck
with them ; and complaining bitterly of his being imposed upon,
he went in person over to France, where he reproached tho
Ministry for having made him their tool. They referred him
to their King, who ordered him to return to England with
fresh assurances of friendship ; but he had scarcely delivered
them when undoubted intelligence came that a French fleet from
Brest and Rochefort was ready to sail, with a great number
of land forces on board. The French fleet, which consisted
of twenty-five ships of the line, besides frigates and transporta,
with a vast number of warlike stores, and between three and four
thousand land forces, under Baron Dieskau, were ready to sail
from Brest, under Admiral Macnamara. Upon this intelligence,
Admiral Holbourne was ordered to reinforce Boscawen with six
ships of the line and one frigate ; and a great number of capital
ships were put into commission. It was the 6th May (175.'))
before Macnamara sailed ; but he soon returned with nine of
his capital ships, and ordered the rest to proceed under the
command of M. Bois de la Mothe.

" When news of so strong a squadron sailing from Brest was
confirmed, the people of England grew extremely uneasy for the
fate of the squadron under Boscawen and Holbourne ; and it
was undoubtedly owing to the bad management of the French
that one or both of those squadrons were not destroyed.*

The King, in proroguing Parliament, the 27th of May, 1755,
among other things said :

" That he had religiously adhered to the stipulations of the
treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, and made it his care not to injure or

* Rftpin'a History of England, Vol. XXL, pp. 520, 521. Rapin adds :—
" While all Europe was in suspense about the fate of the English and Frencli
squadrons, the preparations for a vigorous sea war were going on in Englaiul
with unparalleled spirit and .success. Notwithstanding, the French Court
still ilattered itself that Great Britain, out of tenderness to his Majesty's
German dominions, would abstain from liostilities. Mirepoix (the Freiiili
Ambassador at London^ continued to have frequent conferences with tlic
British Ministry, who made no secret that their admirals, particularly
Boscawen, had orders to attack the French ships wherever they should moot
them ; on the other hand, Mons. de Mirepoix declared that his master wouUl
consider the first gun fired at sea, in a hostile manner, aa a declaration
of war. This menace, far from intimidating the English, animated them to
redouble their preparations for war." — lb., p. 521.

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

247

offend ary Power whatsoever ; but never could he entertain the
thoughts of purchasing the name of peace at the expense of
suffering encroachments upon, or yielding up, what justly
belongs to Great Britain, either by ancient possession or
solemn treaties. That the vigour and firnmess of his Parlia-
ment on this important occasion have enabled him to bo
prepared for such contingencies as may happen. That, if
reasonable and honourable terms of accommodation can be
agreed upon, he will be satisfied, and in all events rely on
the justice of his cause, the effectual support of his people,
and the protection of Divine Providence.*

* l^tnin, Vol. XXL, p. 521. It was during this interval tliat the im-
fortunate expedition, death, and defeat of General Braddock took place,
on the banks of the Ohio river, at Fort du Quesne, afterwards called
Pittsburg. " Tiie naval expedition, under Admiral Boscawen, was some-
what more fortunate (than that of Braddock), though far from answering
the expectations of the public. He made a prosperous voyage till he came
to tlie banks of Newfoundland, where his rendezv(jus was ; and in a few
days the French fleet, under De la Mothe, came to the same station. But
the thick fogs which prevail on those coasts, especially at that time of the
year, kept the two squadrons from seeing one another ; and part of the
French sciuadron escaped up the River St. Lawrence, while some of them
went round and got into the same river by the Straits of Belleisle, by a way
which had never been attempted before by sliips of war. While Boscawen'a
fleet, however, lay before Cape Race, on the banks of Newfoundland, wliich
was thought to be the proper station for intercepting the enemy, two French
aliips — the Alcide, of 60 guns and 480 men ; and the Lys, pierced for G4 guns,
but mounting only 22, and having eight companies of land forces on board —
fell in with the Dunkirk, Captain Howe, and the Defiance, Captain Andrews,
two ()0-gun ships of the English s([uadron, and were, both of them, after
a smart engagement, in which Captain (afterwards Lord) Howe behaved
witli the greatest skill and intrepidity, taken, with about £8,(KX) on board.
Tliough this action was far from answering the grand destination of the
fleet, yet when the news reached England it was of infinite service to the
public credit of every kind ; as the manner in whicli it was conducted
was a plain proof that the English Government was resolved to observe
no further measures with the French, but to take or destroy their ships
wherever they could be met with." — Ih., pp. 525, 526.

Yet, in the face of these facts, that the French Government liad been
encroaching upon the colonies for six years — ever since the treaty of Aik-la-
Chapelle ; had been transporting soldiers and all the munitions of war to
America to exterminate the English colonies; had put to death British sub-
jects ; and that complaints of these outrages had been made to England year
after year by the Governors and representatives of the Colonies, and that the
French Government had at this time, by fair words and false pretences, deceived

248

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[CIIAP. VIII.

This speech to Parliament was delivered a year before war
was formally declared between England and France ; and a
year before that, in 1754, by royal instructitms, a conventi(m of
<lelegate.s from the Assemblies of the several (JoJonies was held
at Albany, in the Province of New York. Amon<^ other thing's
relative to the union and defence of the Colonies which cn<'a''o(l
the attention of this Convention, " a representation was a^'reed
upon in which were set forth the unquestionable desij^ns of
the French to prevent the colonies from extending their settle-
ments, a line of forts having been erected for this purpose, ami
many troops transported from France ; and the danger tlu'
colonics were in of being driven by the French into the sea,
was urged." The representation of the imminent danger to
the colonies from the French encroachments probably accele-
rated the measures in England which brought on the war witli
France.*

Mr. Bancroft endeavours again and again to convey the

III

tlie Government of England, which liad warned the French (lovernnienl that
tlie EngliHh udniirals had ordera to attack and take all tht; Frencli sliijw,
public and private, that should be met with at sea; yet, in the face of such
facta, Mr. Bancroft, with his habitual hostility to England and endleaa piirver-
sions of hiatorical facta, says in I7r>r) : " France and England were still ut
peace, and tlieir commerce was mutually protected by the sanctity of treaties.
Of a sudden, hostile orders were issued to all British vessels of war to take
all French vessels, private as well as public," and " eight thousand French
seamen were held in captivity. All France resented the perfidy. ' Never,'
said Louis the Fifteenth, ' will I forgive the piracies of tliis insolent
nation.' And in a letter to George the Second he demanded ample reparation
for the insult to the flag of France by Boscawen, and for the piracies of tlic
English men-of-war, committed in defiance of international law, the faith of
treaties, the usages of civilized nations, and the reciprocal duties of kin^s."
i(Hi.story of the United States, Vol. IV., pp. 217, 218.)

Among the eight thousand French seamen held in captivity were tlie
soldiers destined for America, to invade tlie British colonies in time of i)ro-
■tracted peace and against " the faith of treaties." Mr. Bancroft also ignores
the fact that a year before this the Commissioners from the Legislative
Assemblies of the several colonies, assembled at Albany, had represented to
the British Government the alarming encroachments of the French, anil
imploring aid, and that the French authorities in America had ottered the
Indians bounties on English scalps.

* Hutchinson'e History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. III., pp. 21 — 23.

" While the Convention was sitting, and attending principally to the
d'rontiera of the colonies, in the western parts, Mr. Shirly (Governor of Massa-

criAP. VHI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

240

tlie

impression that this seven years' war l)etween England and
France was a European war, and that the American cohjnies
were called upon, controlled, and attempted to he taxed to aid
Great Britain in the contest ; yet he himself, in one place,
admits the very reverse, and that (Jreat Britain hccame involved
in the war in defence of the Anuiriean Colonies, as the facts
al)ove stated show, and as will appear more fully hereafter.
Mr. Bancroft states the whole character and objects of the war,
in hoth America and Europe, in the following words :

"The contest, which had now (17')7) spread into both hemi-
.sphcres, hegan in Anier'mt. The hJtujlish Cohmlcs, dratjijing
Eiujldnd into their strife, claimed to advance their frontier, and
to include the great central valley of the continent in their
system. The American question therefore was, shall the con-
tinued colonization of North America be made under the
auspices of English Protestantism and popular liberty, or shall
the tottering legitimacy of France, in its connection with Roman
Catholic Christianity, win for itself a new empire in that henii-
.sphero ? The question of the European continent was, shall a
Protestant revolutionary kingdom, like Prussia, be permitted to
rise up and grow strong within its heart ? Considered in its
unity as interesting mankind, the question was, .shall the
Reformation, developed to the fulness of Free Inquiry, succeed
in its protest against the Middle Age ?

" The war that closed in 1748 had been a mere scramble for
advantages, and was .sterile of re.sults ; the present conflict,
which was to prove a seven years' war, was against the unre-
formed ; and this was so profoundly true, that all the predic-
tions or personal antipathies of Sovereign and Ministers could
not prevent the alliances, collisions, and results necessary to
make it so.*

clmsctts) was diligently employed in the east, prosecuting a plan for securing
tlie I'rontiiTs of Massachusetts Bay." — Ih., p. 2.5.

"In the beginning of this year (1755) the Assembly of Massac) lusetts
Bay, in New England, passed an Act prohibiting all correspondence with the
Frinrli at Louisbnrg ; and early in the spring they raised a body of troops,
which was transported to Nova Scotia, to assist Lieutenant-Governor
Lawrence in driving the French from the enci achments they had made
upon that province." (Hume and Smollett's History of England, Vol.
VII., p. 7.)

• History of the United States, Vol. IV., pp. 276, 277.

sTVJ

%..

<>
>

%.^

^%.

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

I.I

1.25

2.5

J 5 ■==

f ■- III M

c ''iii£

12.0

U nil 1.6

Photographic

Sciences

Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, NY. 14580

(716)873-4503

^^.

'^^

f*>^

&?/

i/.A

6"^

250

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. VIII.

The object and character of such a man for Protestantism
and liberty, as forcibly stated by Mr. Bancroft himself, was not
honourable to England, as the results of it have been beneficial
to posterity and to the civilization of mankind ; yet Mr. Ban-
croft's sympathies throughout his brilliant but often inconsis-
tent pages are clearly with France against England, the policy
and character of whose statesmen he taxes his utmost ingenuity
and researches to depreciate and traduce, while he admits they
are engaged in the noblest struggle recorded in history.

From 1748 to 1754, the contests in America were chiefly
between the colonists and the French and their Indian allies
(except at sea) , and were for the most part unsuccessful on the
part of the colonists, who lost their forts at Oswego and Niagara,
and suflfered other defeats and losses. " But in the year 1755,"
says Dr. Minot, " the war in America being now no longer left
to colonial efforts alone, the plan of operations consisted of three
parts. The first was an attack on Fort du Quesne, conducted
by troops from England under General Braddock ; the second
was upon the fort at Niagara, which was carried on by American
regulars and Indians (of the Six Nations) ; and the third was
an expedition against Crown Point, which was supported by
militia from the northern colonies, enlisted merely for that
service,"* /

The expedition against Fort du Quesne ended in the dis-
graceful defeat and death of Braddock and one-third of
his men, himdreds of whom were shot down by ambushed
foes whom they never saw. The contemplated attack upon
Niagara was never prosecuted; the expedition against Crown
Point was a failure, and exhaustive of the resources of Massa-

♦ Minot's Hiatory of Massachusetts Bay, Vol, I., p. 228, Dr. Minot adds :
" The whole number assigned for this expedition against Crown Point was
3,700, of which Massachusetts voted to raise 1,560, besides 500 by way of
reinforcement, if judged necessary by the Commander-in-Chief, with the
advice of the Council ; and to these 300 more were added after the defeat of
General Braddock. The General Court also voted ;£600 to be applied
towards engaging the Indians of the Six Nations in the enterprise, and
supporting their families. In short, this became a favourite enterprise both
with the General Court and the people of Massachusetts Bay, not only
because it originated with them, but because it was directed against a
quarter (considering the French in Nova Scotia were subdued and dispersed)
whence they had the most to fear." — lb., pp. 229, 230.

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

2.51

inconsis-

chusetts ; but, as a compensation, Colonel Johnson defeated and
took prisoner the French general, Baron Dieskau, for which
the King made him a baronet, and the House of Commons
voted him a grant of j£5,000 sterling.*

The most was made in England as well as the colonies of
this decisive victory over a famous French general and his
troops, as the year otherwise was disastrous to the English,
and "the French, with the assistance of their Indian allies,
continued their murders, scalping, capturing, and laying waste
the western frontiers of Virginia and Pennsylvania during the
whole winter."-|-

* Before Johnson could attack Crown Point, he was himself attacked
in liis own quarters, at what was called Carrying Place, near Lake George,
by Dieskau, at the head of 200 regular troops, 600 Canadians, and 600
savages. Johnson's force consisted of 3,400 provincial soldiers and 300
Indians, "regularly enlisted under the English flag and paid from the
English treasury." Among the New England men was Israel Putman,
of Connecticut, then a private soldier, afterwards famous. Mr. Bancroft,
as might be expected, depreciates the services of Sir William Johnson in
this important and successful battle. But he cannot deny that Johnson
selected the most advantageous position for his camp; sent out scouts on
all sides, and obtained timely information of the approach of the enemy,
and was fully prepared for it; directed the order of battle, in the early
part of which he was wounded, causing his removal from the field, when
for five hours the provincial soldiers, good marksmen, under their own
officers, "kept up the most violent fire that had yet been known in
America." The House of Lords, in an address to the King, praised the
colonists as " brave and faithful," and Johnson was honoured with a title
and money. " But," says Mr. Bancroft, " he did little to gain the victory,
which was due to the enthusiasm of the New England men. ' Our all,'
they cried, * depends on the success of this expedition.' ' Come,* said
Pomeroy, of Massachusetts, to his friends at home, * Come to the help
of the Lord against the mighty ; you that value our holy religion and our
liberties will spare nothing, even to the one-half of your estate.' And in
all the villages ' the prayers of God's people ' went iip that ' they might be
crowned with victory, to the glory of God ;' for the war vnth France seemed
a war for Protestantism and freedom." (History of the United States,
Vol. IV., p. 212.) Dr. Minot justly observes: "Such a successful defence
made by the forces of the British colonists against a respectable army, with
which the regular troops of France were incorporated, was an honourable
instance of firmness, deliberation, and spirit." (History of Massachusetts
Bay, Vol. I., p. 254.)
t Hume and Smollett's History of England, Vol. XII.., p. 25.
"Thus," says Minot, "ended the transactions of the year 1755 — 'a year,'

252

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. VIII.

• i

Nor were the years 1756 and 1757 more successful on the
part of the English than the year 1755, Some of the principal
events are as follows : War was formally declared by England
against France in May, and declared by France against England
in August. The expenses incurred by Massachusetts and other
colonies in the unfortunate Crown Point expedition were com-
pensated by a parliamentary grant of £115,000 sterling.*

The Earl of Loudoun arrived from England as Governor of
Virginia, to take command of the British troops in America :

says a well-informed writer of that time, ' never to be forgotten in America.'
It opened with the fairest prospects to these distant possessions of the Britisli
empire. Four armies were on foot to remove the encroachments of a perfidious
neighbour, and our coasts honoured with a fleet for their security, under the
command of the brave and vigilant Boscawen. We had everything to hope
— nothing to fear. The enemy was dispersed ; and we only desired a procla-
mation of war for the final destruction of the whole country of New France.
But how unlooked-for was the event ! General Winslow (great-grandson ot
Edward Winslow, one of the patriarchs of the Plymouth Colony), indeed suc-
ceeded in Nova Scotia ; but Braddock was defeated ; Niagara and Crown
Point remained unreduced ; the savages were let loose from the wilderness ;
many thousand farms were abandoned ; the King's subjects inhumanly
butchered or reduced to beggary. To all which might be added an im-
poverishment of finances to a desperate state, the Crown Point expedition
having cost, on the part of Massachusetts Bay alone, .£76,618 8s. 9|<1.,
besides unliquidated accounts to a large amount for the charge of the sick
and wounded, the garrisons at the two forts of William Henry and Edward,
and the great stock of provisions laid in for their support." (History of
Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 259 — 261.)

* " Mr. Fox, on the 28th of January, presented to the House of Commons
a message from the King, desiring them to take into consideration the faithful
services of the people of New England and some other parts of North
America ; upon which £115,000 were voted, and .£5,000 as a reward to Sir
William Johnson in particular," (Hume and Smollett's History of England,
Vol. XII., p. 42.)

"The sum granted by Parliament was £115,000 sterling, which was
apportioned in the following manner : Massachusetts Bay, .£54,000 ; Connec-
ticut, £26,000 ; New York, £15,000 ; New Hampshire, .£8,000 ; Rhode
Island, £7,000 ; New Jersey, £5,000. This money arriving in New York
with the troops from England, enabled the Government (of Massachusetts) to
pay off by anticipation the sums borrowed of the Commander-in-Chief, and
to replenish the public treasury. They had also the satisfaction to find tliat
the Province had not only anticipated the King's expectations in raising men,
but had furnished them with provisions, which he had ordered to be found
at the national expense." (Minot's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I.,
p. 288,)

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

253

ere corn-

but did little more than consult with the Governors of the
several provinces as to military operations for the ensuing year,
the relations of provincial and regular officers, the amount of
men and means to be contributed by each province for common
defence. He gave much offence by his haughty and imperious
demands for the quartering of the troops in New York and in
Massachusetts. Additional troops were sent from England,
under Major-General Abercrombie, who superseded the Earl of
Loudoun as Commander-in-Chief. The fortress at Oswego was
taken and destroyed by the French.*

* " The loss of the two small Torts, called Ontario and Oswego, was a con-
siderable national misfortune. They were erected on the south side of the
great Lake Ontario, standing on the opposite sides, at the mouth of Onondaga
river, that discharges itself into the lake, and constituted a port of great
importance, where vessels had been built to cruise upon the lake, which is a
kind of inland sea, and interrupt the commerce as well as the motions and
designs of the enemy. The garrison consisted of 1,400 men, chiefly militia
and new-raised recruits, under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Mercer,
an officer of courage and experience ; but the situation of the forts was very ill-
cliosen ; the materials mostly timber or logs of wood ; the defences wretchedly
contrived and unfurnished ; and, in a word, the place altogether untenable
against any regular api)roach. Such were the forts which the enemy wisely
resolved to reduce. They assembled a body of troops, consisting of 1,300
regulars, 1,700 Canadians, and a considerable number of Indian auxiliaries,
under the command of the Marquis de Montcalm, a vigilant and enterprising
officer, to whom the conduct of the siege had been entrusted by the Marquis
de Vaudreuil, Governor and Lieutenant-General of New France. The
garrison having tired away all their shells and ammunition from Fort Ontario,
spiked up the cannon, and, deserting the fort, retired next day across the
river into Fort Oswego, which was even more exposed than the other,
especially when the enemy had taken possession of Fort Ontario, from whence
they immediately began to fire without intermission. Colonel Mercer being
on the 13th killed by a cannon ball, the fort destitute of all cover, the officers
divided in opinion and the garrison in confusion, they next day demanded
capitulation, and suraendered themselves prisoners of war, on condition that
they should be exempted from plunder, conducted to Montreal, and treated
with humanity. These conditions, however, the Marquis did not punctually
observe. The British officers were insulted by the savage Indians, who
robbed them of their clothes and baggage, massacred several of them as they
stood defenceless on parade, and barbarously scalped all the sick people in the
hospital. Finally, Montcalm, in direct violation of the articles as well as
in contempt of common humanity, delivered up above twenty men of the
garrison to the Indiana in lieu of the same number they had lost during the
siege ; and in all probability these miserable captives were put to death by

254 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. VIII.

The French, led by Montcalm, took Fort William Henry,*

those barbarians, with the most excruciating tortures, according to the
execrable custom of the country.

" The prisoners taken at Oswego, after having been thus barbarously
treated, were conveyed in batteaux to Montreal, where they had no reason to
complain of their reception ; and before the end of the year they wen-
exchanged. The victors immediately demolished the two forts (if tliey
deserved that denomination), in which they found one hundred and twenty-
one pieces of artillery, fourteen mortars, with a rreat quantity of ammuni-
tion, warlike stores and provisions, besides two ships and two hundred
batteaux, which likewise fell into their hands." (Hume and Smollett's
History of England, Vol. XII., pp. 92—94.)

" The policy of the French was no less conspicuous than the superiority
of their arms. Instead of continuing the fort at Oswego, they demolished it
in presence of the Indians of the Five Nations, to whom they represented
that the French aimed only at enabling them to preserve their neutrality,
and therefore destroyed the fortress which the English had erected in their
country to overawe them, disdaining themselves to take the same advantage,
although put in their hands by the right of conquest." (Minot's History of
Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 285, 286.)

* Fort William Henry was situated on the southern coast of Lake George,
and was built with a view to protect the frontiers of the English colonies—
especially New York and Massachusetts. The fortifications were good,
defended by a garrison of three thousand men, and covered by an army of
four thousand, under the commmand of General Webb, posted at no great
distance at Fort Edward. The Marquis de Montcalm had, early in the
season, made three different attacks upon Fort William Henry, in each of
which he was repulsed by the resolute and courageous garrison. But
Montcalm at length assembled all his forces from Crown Point, Ticonderaga,
and other parts, amounting to nearly 10,000, including a considerable
body of Canadians and Indians ; attacked and invested the fort, which sus-
tained the siege from the 3rd to the 9th of August, when, having burst most
of their cannon, and expended their own ammunition, and receiving no relief
or assistance from General Webb, at Fort Edward, fourteen miles distant,
with 4,000 men. Col. Monro surrendered upon the conditions that the
garrison should march out with arms, the baggage of the officers and men,
and all the usual necessaries of war, escorted by a detachment of French
troops to Fort Edward, and interpreters attached to the savages. But, as in
the case of the surrender of Oswego, the articles of capitulation were not ob-
served, but were perfidiously broken ; the savages fell upon the British troops
as they were marched out, despoiled them of their few remaining effects,
dragged the Indians in the English service out of their ranks, and assassinated
them under circumstances of unheard-of barbarity. Some soldiers with their
wives and children are said to have been savagely murdered by these brutal
Indians. The greater part of the garrison, however, arrived at Fort
Edward under the protection of the French eecort. The enemy demolished

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

255

The Massachusetts Assembly refused to allow British troops
to be quartered upon the inhabitants.*

At the close of the year 1757, the situation of the colonies was
alarming and the prospects of the war gloomy. The strong

the fort, carried off the effects, provisions, and everything else left by the
garrison, together with the vessels preserved in the lake, and departed with-
out pursuing their success by any other attempt. " Thus ended," continues
the historian, "the third campaign in America (1757), where, with an
evident superiority over the enemy, an army of 20,000 regular troops, a
great number of provincial forces, and a prodigious naval power — not less
than twenty ships of the line — we abandoned our allies, exposed our people,
suffered them to be cruelly massacred in sight of our troops, and relinquished
a large and valuable tract of country, to the eternal reproach and disgrace of
the British name." (Hume and Smollett's History of England, Vol. XII.,
pp 207—211.)

Mr. Hildreth remarks : " In America, after three campaigns, and extra-
ordinary efforts on the part of the English, the French still held possession of
almost all the territory in dispute. They had been expelled indeed from the
Bay of Fundy, but they held Louisburg, commanding the entrance to the St.
Lawrence, Crown Point, and Ticonderaga, on Lake Champlain ; Frontenac
and Niagara, on Lake Ontario; Presque Isle, on Lake Erie; and the chains of
forts thence to the head of the Ohio were still in their hands. They had
expelled the English from their ancient fort at Oswego, had driven
them from Lake George, and compelled the Six Nations to a treaty of
neutrality. A devastating Indian war was raging along the whole north-
western frontier of the British colonies, and Indian scalping parties pone
trated into the very centre of Massachusetts, approached within a short distance
of Philadelphia, and kept Maryland and Virginia in constant alarm."
(History of the United States, Vol. II., p. 479.)

* " The Massachusetts General Court had provided barracks at the castle
for such British troops as might be sent to the province. But some officers
(from Nova Scotia) on a recruiting service, finding the distance (three miles)
inconvenient, demanded 1o be quartered in the town. They insisted on the
provisions of the Mutiny Act ; but the magistrates to whom they applied
denied that Act to be in force in the colonies. Loudoun warmly espoused
the cause of his officers ; he declared ' that in time of war the rules and
customs must go, and threatened to send troops to Boston to enforce the
demand if not granted within 48 hours. To avoid this extremity, the
General Court passed a law of their own, enacting some of the principal
provisions of the Mutiny Act ; and Loudoun, through Governor Pownall's
persuasions, consented to accept this partial concession. The General Court
did not deny the power of Parliament to quarter troops in America. Thek
ground was, that the Act, in its terms, did not extend to the colonies. A
similar dispute occurred in South Carolina, where great difficulty was
encountered in finding winter quarters for the Royal Americans." (Hil-
dreth'8 History of the United States, Vol. II., pp. 476, 477.)

256

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [cHAP, VIII.

statements of Mr. Bancroft are justified by the facts. Ho
says : " The English had been driven from every cabin in
the basin of the Ohio ; Montcahn had destroyed every vestige
of their power within the St. Lawrence. France had her forts
on each side of the lakes, and at Detroit, at Mackinaw, at
Kaskaskia, and at New Orleans. The two great valleys of
the Mississippi and the St. Lawrence were connected chiefly
by three well-known routes — by way of Waterford to Fort
du Quesne, by way of Maumee to the Wabash, and by
way of Chicago to the Illinois. Of the North American
continent, the French claimed and seemed to possess twenty
parts in twenty-five, leaving four only to Spain, and but
one to Britain. Their territory exceeded that of the English
twenty-fold. As the men composing the garrison at Fort
Loudoun, in Tennessee, were but so many hostages in the hands
of the Cherokees, the claims of France to the valleys of
the Mississippi and the St. Lawrence seemed established by
possession. America and England were humiliated."*

The colonies had shown, by their divided and often antago-
nistic counsels, their divided resources and isolated efforts,
how unable they were to defend themselves even when assisted
at some points by English soldiers, commanded by unskilful
generals, against a strong and united enemy, directed by gene-
rals of consummate skill and courage. The colonies despaired
of future success, if not of their own existence, after incurring
so heavy expenditures of men and money, and wished England
to assume the whole management and expenses of the war.-f*

* Bancroft's History, Vol. IV., p. 267. **

t " As the General Court of Massachusetts Bay had been foremost in
promoting the Crown Point expedition, and become proportionally ex-
hausted of money, so they lost no time in making such use of the success
of the troops in beating off the French as their necessities dictated. They
drew up an address to his Majesty, in which they stated their services, and
prayed to be relieved from the burden incurred by means of them. They
pleaded the precedent of the Cape Breton expedition (for the expenses of wliich
Parliament had compensated them), and prayed that his Majesty would give
orders for the support of such forts and garrisons as they hoped to establish,
and aid them in the further execution of their designs.

"When the Commander-in-Chief urged upon them to join in the plan
of the Assembly of New Jersey, who proposed a meeting of Commissioners
from all his Majesty's colonies at New York, to consult what might further

AP. VIll.

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

257

jts. H.'
labin in
f vestige
her forts
inaw, at
illeys of
i cliit'Hy
to Fort
and by
^.merican
3 twenty
and but
; English
at Fort
bhe hands
alleys of
iished by

a antago-
sd efforts,
n assisted
unskilful
by gene-
despaired
incurring
England
\ war.f

foremost in
ionally ex-
the success
ted. They
ervices, and
lem. They
ses of wliich
would give
establish,

the plan
nmissioners
ght further

The colonies had done much for tlieir own defence, but they
acted as so many petty independent Governments, and could
not be brought to combine their resources of men and money
in any systematical method, under some central authority
as the same colonies did twenty years later in the American
Revolution ; and the first proceedings of Abercrombie and
Loudoun rendered them powerless to command the confidence
and united action of the colonies. General Abercrombie was
appointed Commander-in-Chief, to supersede General Shirley,
until the arrival of the Earl of Loudoun. Abercrombie landed
in New York the 12th of June, with two regiments, and forty
German officers, who were to raise and train recruits for
Loudoun's Royal American regiment of four thousand — a most
impolitic proceeding, which offended and discouraged the colo-
nists. On his arrival at New York he received letters from
the shrewd and able Governor of Virginia, Dinwiddle, recom-
mending Washington as "a very able and deserving gentleman,"
who "has from the beginning commanded the forces of this
Dominion. He is much beloved, has gone through many hard-
ships in the service, has great merit, and can raise more men
here than any one," and urged his promotion in the British
army. But Washington's services and rank were never recog-
nized in the British army. A week after Abercrombie's arrival
in New York, he wrote (June 19, 1756) a letter to Governor
Golden: "I find you never will be able to carry on anything
to any purpose in America, till you have a viceroy or super-
intendent over all the provinces." He stated that Lord Loudoun's
arrival would produce " a great change in affairs."

The 25th of Jun^ Abercrombie arrived at Albany, and
forthwith insisted that the regular officers should take
precedence of the provincial officers, and that the troops should
be quartered in private houses, which he accomplished two

be done for the security of his Majesty's territories against the invasion
of the French, the same impoverishment constrained the General Court
to reply, that the design of securing those territories was what his Majesty
alone was equal to project and execute and the nation to support, and that un-
less they could obtain the relief which they were soliciting of the royal bounty,
they should be aa far from being able to remove encroachments as to be
unable to defend themslevea." (Minot'a History of Massachusetts Bay,
Vol I., pp. 256, 257.)

iJ:. ■

258

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. VIII.

; ■

}

days aftcrwai'ds ; for on the 27th, " in spite of every subterfu^fo,
the soldiers were at last billeted upon the town," to the pjrcat
indignation of the Mayor, who wished all the soldiers hack
again, " for " said he, " we can defend our frontiers ourselves."

■The next day after Abercronihie's arrival, Shirley (now re-
lin(}uishing the office of Coniinander-in-Chief) informed Gcneial
Abercronibie of the exposed and unsafe state of Oswego, ail-
vising that two battalions be sent forward for its protection;
that 200 boats were ready, and every magazine along the passH<,'e
plentifully supplied. But Abercrombie decided to wait the
arrival of Loudoun, who at length reached Albany the 2!)th
of July, and joined Abercrombie in the policy of hesitation
and delay, though having 10,000 men at his disposal — the jSew
England regiments, with the provincials from New York and
New Jersey, amounting to more than 7,000 men, besides 3,000
soldiers of British regular regiments.

In the meantime the French generals were more active and
energetic, taking places of defence between Albany and Oswego,
strengthening the defences and garrison of Ticonderaga (then
in possession of the French, and called by them Fort Carillon),
making a palisaded camp near the mouth of Sandy Creek, close
to Oswego, and at length attacking Oswego itself, the enterpris-
ing Montcalm making forced marches day and night, marching
on foot, living and sleeping like his soldiers, and taking the fort
the 9th of August, after a week's siege, capturing 1,600 prisoners,
120 cannon, six vessels of war, 300 boats, stores of ammunition
and provisions, and three chests of money.

Loudoun had sufficient forces and time to penetrate to the
heart of Canada, had he possessed the qualities of Montcalm ;
but he preferred to place obstacles to prevent the enemy from
attacking him ; and after having spent some weeks in busy
inactivity at Albany, he dismissed the provincials to their
homes, and the regulars to winter quarters,*

* A thousand of the regulars were sent to New York, where free quarters
for the officers were demanded of the city. Upon its being objected to l)y
the authorities of the city, as contrary to the laws of England and the
liberties of America, the Viceroy, Loudoun, replied to the Mayor with an oath,
" If you do not billet my officers upon free quarters this day, I'll order here
all the troops in North America under my command, and billet them myself
upon the city." " So," says Bancroft, " the magistrates got up a Bubscription,

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

259

Loudoun never fought a 1 tattle in America ; and the only 1 tattle
in which Aborcronibio connnanded lie kept out of reach of
personal danger, was defeated, and retreated* after losing 1,!)42
men, among whom was General Lord Howe, who hatl been
selected by Pitt to be Commander-in-C'hief in America, ha<l not
succeeded to it, but had become a favourite with the army and
colonists of all classes.

nud tlu; officers, who had done nothing for the (•(Hiiitry hut wiisti! itH
resources, wen; supported at free quarters duriiij,' tlu; winter."

Tlie same threats were used, with the same results, to the uuigistrates of
Boston and Philadeljihia, to obtain free quarters for the officers.

Bancroft remarks somewhat bitterly : *' The arbitrary invasion of private
rights and the sanctity of domestic life Ity the illegal and usjiqted autliority
of a military chief, was the great result of the campaign. The frontiers had
l)een left open to the French ; but the tempting examjtle had been given, so
dangerous in times of peace, of quartering troops in the principal towns, at
the expense of the inhabitants." (History of United States, Vol. IV., pp.
240, 241.)

• The ai-my consisted of between nine and ten thousand j)rovincials — seven
thousand raised by Massachusetts — and between six and seven thousand
regulars and rangers in the King's pay, where Abercrombie in person was in
connnand. Lord Howe arrived in Boston from England after the forccis had
left the Province, and immediately upon his landing began his journey, and
joined the army before any action took place.

" This body, the greatest which had ever assembled in arms in America
since it was settled by the English, embarked on Lake George the 5th of
July, for the French fortress at Ticonderaga (called Carillon by the French),
and arrived next day at a cove and landing-place, from whence a way led to
tlie advance guaid of the enemy. Seven thousand men, in four columns,
then began a march tl^irough a thick wood. The columns were necessarily
broken ; their guides were unskilful ; the men were bewildered and lost ;
and parties fell in one upon another. Lord Howe, the life of the army, at
the head of a column, which was supported by light infantry, being advanced,
fell in with a party of the enemy, consisting of about four hundred regulars
and some Indians. Many of them were killed, and one hundred and forty-
eight taken prisoners. This, however, was a dearly purchased victory, for
Lord Howe was the first who fell on the English side. The report of his
death caused consternation as well as grief through the army, which had
p'aced much confidence in him.

" About five hundred regulars were killed upon the spot, and about one
thousand two hundred wounded. Of the provincials, one hundred were
killed, and two hundred and fifty wounded.

" The army still consisted of thirteen or fourteen thousand. The enemy
was much inferior in number. The retreat, nevertheless, was precipitate.
Early in the morning of the 9th the whole army embarked in their boats,

2G0

THK LOYALISTS OF AMKIUCA [("HAP. VIII.

The General A.s.seiubly of Massacliusctts appropriated out of
the public trea.sury the sum of £*2')0 for en-eting a inonunieiit
io his memory in WeHtminster Abbey, as a testimony to the
sense whicli the Province ha<l of the services and military
virtues of the late Lord Viscount Howe, who fell in the last
campaijjjn fighting in the cause of the colonies, and also to
express the atl'ection which their otiicers and soldiers have to
his command.

After the disgraceful defeat and still more di.sgraceful retreat
of Abercrombie, the last of the incompetent English generals,
General Andier.st was appointed Connnander-in-Chief, assisted
by General Wolfe, and the fortunes of war turned in favour of
England and lier colonies, and the French power began to warn;
in America.

This change in the colonics from defeat to victory, from dis-
grace to honour, from distrust to confidence, from fear to
triumph, was owing to a change of councillors and councils in
England, and the rousing of the colonies from the shame and
defeat of the past to a supreme and combined effort with the
English armies for the expulsion of the French from America,
and the consequent subjugation and alliance of the Indian tribes,
whose ho.stilities had been all along and everywhere prompted
and aided by the French, who paid the Indians largo bounties
for English scalps.*

Ii1l

^yMT

BgBBr

and arrived at the other end of the lake in the evening (no enemy piu-auiiif,').
Provisions, entrenching tools, and many stores of various kinds, fell into tlib
hands of the enemy. The English arms have rarely sufl'ered greater disgrace.

" The ill success of General Abercr(>nd)ie at Ticonderaga caused his recall.
He seemed to expect and desire it. He was succeeded by General Andierst."
(Hutchinson's History of Maa.sachuaetts Bay, Vol. III.., pp. 70 — 75.)

* "The successes of the French the last year (1757) left the colonies in a
gloomy state. By the acquisition of Fort William Henry, they obtained lull
possession of the Lakes Champlain and George ; and by the destruction ol
Oswego, they had acquired the dominion of those other lakes which connect
the St. Lawrence with the Mississippi. The first aflforded the easiest admis-
sion from the northern colonies into Canada, or from Canada into those
colonies ; the last united Canada to Louisiana. By the continual possession
of Fort du Quesne, they preserved their ascendency over the Indians, and
held undisturbed possession of all the country west of the Allegany mountains.

" In this adverse state of things, the spirit of Britain rose in full proportion
to the occasion ; and her colonies, instead of yielding to despondency, resumed
fresh courage, and cheerfully made the preparations for the coming campaign.

cnAP. VITT.]

AND THKIR TIMES.

201

" But," says Hutchinson, " in the interval l)etwoon the repulse
at Ticondcraga aii<l the arrival of General Amherst, (Vilonel
Hradstreet (a provincial officer of New York), with .S.OOO pro-
vincials and l'>0 regulars, stole a march upon Montcalm and
hefore he could send a dtitachment from his army to Lake
Ontario l>y way of the St. Lawrence, went up the Mohawk
river. Ahout the 2oth of August they arrived at Fort Fronte-
nac ; surprised the garrison, who were made prisoners of war ;
took and destroyed niro small vesstjls and nuich merchandise ;
but having intelligences of a large body of the enemy near, they
made haste back to Albany. The men coinplained of undergo-
ing greater hardship than they had ever undergone before, and
many sickeneil and died from the fi.i"; ue of the march.*

After the arrival of Lord AndiersL three expeditions were
proposed for the year 17-')H — the fiist against Louisl)iirg, the
.second against Ticondcraga, ar the third .gainst Fort du
Quesne — all of which were successful.

Mr. Pitt had, the hist autmnn, heen placed nt the head of a new Administra-
tion, wlucli conciliated tlie contending; inton'<<ts in Parliament ; and wlule
the wisdom f)t' that e.\traordinary Hlate.snmn devised <,'n'at anii judifiivisjilana,
his active spirit infu.sed new life into ail, \vheth( r at h();u«' or ahroad, w hose
province it was to execute them. In .i circular to the Colonial Governors, he
assured them of the determination to send ;i lar;,'e f(jrce to Am<'rica, to
oi)jrate 1»y sea and laud a<,'ainst the Frencli ; and cuIIlmI upon them to raise
us liirj,'e bodies of men as the numher of the inhabitants would allow. The
northern colonies were promi)t and liberal in furnishing,' re(inisite supplies.
The Legii-lature of Massachu-setts voted to furnish 7,IMH) men ; (.'onnecticut,
r),(K)0 ; New Hampshire, 3,001). These troops were ready to take the field
Very early in May, previous to which time Admiral Boscawen had arrived in
Halifax with a formidable fleet, and about )2,(MK) British troops under the
command of General Amherst. The I^arl of Loudoun had returned to Eng-
land, and General Abercrombie, on whom the chief connnaml of the entire
forces of the American war had devolved (until the arrival of Lord
Amherst), was now at the head of 50,000 men, the most powerful army ever
seen in America." (Holmes' Annals of America, Vol. IL, pp. 79, 80.)

* History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. IL, p. 74. Holmes rrives the follow-
ing account of this brilliant achievement ; " On the proposition of Col.
Bradstreet, for an expedition against Fort Frontenac, relinquishing for the
present his designs against TiOL-ndevaga and Crown Point, Abercrombie sent
that able and gallant officer on this service, with a detachment of 3,000
men, chiefly provincials, and two mortars. Bradstreet having marched to
Oswego, embarked on Lake Ontario, and on the evening of the 25th of August
landed within a mile of the fort. Witlun two days his batteries were opened

262

THE LOYALISTS Or AMERICA [CHAP. VIII.

3
1% i.

On the first expedition against Louisburg, Admiral Boscawen
sailerl from Halifax the 28th of May, with a fleet of 20 ships
of the line and 18 frigates, and an army of 14,000 men, under
the command of General Amherst, assisted by General Wolfe,
and arrived before Louisburg the 2nd of June. The garrison
was composed of 2,500 regulars, aided by 600 militia, com-
manded by the Chevalier de Drucourt, an officer of courage and
experience. The harbour was secured by five ships of the line,
one 50-gun ship, and five frigates ; three of which were sunk
across the mouth of the basin. The landing of the troops,
artillery, and stores had therefore to be effected some distance
from the town, and was extremely difficult and hazardous ; but
General Wolfe, who led the 2,000 men detached for that pur-
pose, was equal to the occasion, and displayed qualities which
designated him as the future conqueror of Quebec. After an
obstinate siege from the 8th of June to the 26th of July, the
fortress was surrendered at discretion, and the whole of Cape
Breton, including St. John Island (since Prince Edward Island),
came into possession of Great Britain. The loss on the part of
the English was about 400 killed and wounded ; the garrison
lost upwards of 1,500 men, and the town was reduced to a heap
of ruins. The conquerors took 221 pieces of cannon, 16 mortars,
and an immense quantity of stores and ammunition, and 5,637
prisoners, including naval officers, sailors, and marines.*

Admiral Boscawen, after taking possession of the Island of St.
John, included in the capitulation of Louisburg, sailed with the
fleet for England, with General Wolfe, conveying the French
prisoners to England, and the trophies of victory. General

within so short a distance that almost every shell took effect ; and the
French commandant, finding the place untenable, surrendered at discretion.
The Indians having previously deserted, the prisoners were but 110. The
captors found in the fort 60 pieces of cannon, 16 small mortars, a large
number of small arms, p vast (quantity of provisions, milittiry stores and
merchandise ; and nine armed vessels fell into their hands. Col. Bradstreet
having destroyed the fort and vessels, and such stores as could not be brought
off, returned to the main army." (Annals, Vol. II., p. 83.)

* " The extraordinary rejoicings in England at this victory seemed to
revive the Jiouour of the northern British colonies as the former compierora
of Cape Breton. The trophies taken were brought in procession from
Kensington to St. Paul's, and a form of thanksgiving was ordered to be used
in all the churches." (Minot's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. II., p. 38.)

lAP. VIII.

CHAP. VIII.]

ANC THEIR TIMES.

263

Amherst embarked, with about thirty transports filled with the
victorious troops, and encamped on the common at Boston near
the end of August, on his march, which he pursued after three
days' rest, to the western forts ; for a part of the plan of opera-
tions was, after the conquest of Cape Breton, for General
Amherst, with 12,000 men, to destroy the enemy's fort at
Ticonderaga (so unsuccessfully attacked by Abercrombie the
year before), in order to open a way into Canada by the Lakes
George and Champlain, and the River Sorell down to Quebec,
the capture of which, by advancing up the St. Lawrence, was
assigned to the fleet under Admiral Saunders, and to General
Wolfe, in command of 9,000 men. It was intended that the
armies under Generals Amherst and Wolfe should meet and
join in the taking of Quebec ; but the junction was not effected,
and the two armies operated separately and successfully. The
taking of the fortress of Niagara, which was regarded as
"the throat of the north-western division of the American
continent," was assigned to Brigadier-General Prideaux, aided
by Sir William Johnson, who commanded the Provincials and
Indians. General Prideaux conducted the expedition and
planned the mode of attack ; but on the 19th of July, while
walking in his trenches, he was killed by the carelessness of his
own gunner in firing a cannon.

" Luckily," says Hutchinson, " for Sir William Johnson, who,
as next officer, took the command on Prideaux's death, a body
of 1,200 men from Detroit, etc., making an attempt, on the 24th
of July, to throw themselves into the fort as a reinforcement,
were intercepted and killed, taken, or dispersed, and the next
day the garrison capitulated." (History of Massachusetts Bay,
Vol. III., p. 77.)

The expedition against the French Fort du Quesne, on the
Ohio river, so fatal to General Braddock, was entrusted to
Genei'al Forbes, with Washington, colonel of the Virginia
regulars, as second in command. Forbes, though wasting under
the disease of consumption, heroically superintended and
endured for three months the difficulties and fatigues of the
same line of march pursued by Braddock three years before,
leaving Philadelphia in command of 8,000 men early in July,
but not reaching Fort du Quesne until late in November. On
the evening preceding his arrival, the French garrison, desiir<^ed

264

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. VIII.

i--

■

Mil

■hHI

by their Indians, abandoned the fort, and escaped in boats dowTi
the Ohio. Hutchinson says : " The expedition for dispossess-
ing the French of Fort du Quesne, near the Ohio, had at lirst a
very unfavourable prospect. The English forces met with a
variety of obstructions and discouragements ; and when they had
advanced to within thirty or forty miles of the fort, they were
at a stand deliberating whether they should go forward or not.
Receiving intelligence that the garrison was in a weak condition,
they pushed on. Upon their arrival at the fort they met with
no opposition. The enemy had deserted it, for want of provi-
sions, as was generally believed ; and it was added that the pro-
visions intended to supply that fort were destroyed by Brad-
street at Fort Frontenac* Thus the gallant and laborious
exploit of Bradstreet in demolishing Fort Frontenac contributed
to the reduction of Fort du Quesne without firing a shot."
" The English now took possession of that important fortress,
and, in compliment to the popular Minister, called it Pittsburg.
No sooner was the English flag erected on it, than the numerous
tribes of the Ohio Indians came in and made their submission
to the English. General Forbes having concluded treaties with
the natives, left a garrison of provincials in the fort and built a
block-house near Loyal Hannah, but, worn out with fatigue, he
died before he could reach Philadelphia.-f* In the same month
of July that Sir William Johnson dispossessed the French of
Niagara, General Amherst took possession of the enemy's lines
at Ticonderaga, which the French abandoned after having set
fire to the fort. A few days afterwards, in the beginning of
August, General Amherst obtained possession of the fort at
Crown Point, it having also been abandoned by the French.
About the middle of the month General Amherst received infor-
mation at Crown Point that General Bourlamarque was encamped
at Isle aux Noix with 3,500 men and 100 cannon, and that the
French had four vessels on the lake under the command of the
captain of a man-of-war. He therefore judged it necessary to
build a brigantine, a radeau, and a sloop of 16 guns. Such a
fleet could not be got ready before the beginning of October ;
on the 11th of which month General Amherst embarked in
batteaux, under the convoy of armed vessels, and proceeded down

* History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. III., p. 75.
t Holmes' Annals, Vol. XL, p. 84.

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES,

265

the lake ; but encountering cold and stormy weather and
contrary winds, he resolved, on the 19th, to return to Crown
Point and go into winter quarters. No communications covild
bo opened between the armies of Amherst and Wolfe ; but the
withdrawal of a great part of the French force from Quebec, to
watch and counteract the movements of General Amherst,
doubtless contributed to General Wolfe's success. The fleet
under Sir Charles Saunders, and the army of five thousand men
under General Wolfe, arrived before Quebec the latter part of
June, and from that time to the 13th of September a series of
daring but unsuccessful attempts were made to get possession
of the city. How unyielding perseverance and heroic courage,
against apparently insurmountable obstacles, effected the cap-
ture of that Gibraltar of America, with the fall of the leaders
of both armies in the bloody struggle, has often been vividly
described and variously illustrated, which I need not here repeat.

The British and colonial arms were completely successful
this year.* Bradstreet destroyed Fort Frontenac ; Sir William
Johnson captured Niagara; Forbes, aided by Washington, re-
took Fort du Quesne, and named it Pittsburg ; Lord Amherst
took possession of Ticonderaga and Crown Point ; and Wolfe
became the conqueror of Quebec. In each of these expeditions
the provincial troops rendered essential service. The several
provinces were prompted to put forth their utmost efforts from
their impending perils by the successive victories of the French
and Indians the previous year, and encouraged by the appeal of
the Prime Minister, Pitt, who assured them of the strong forces
by sea and land from England, and that they would be com-
pensated for the expense they might incur.

The heart of Massachusetts had for many years been set
upon the conquest of Canada, both for her own security and
for the extension of her northern limits, and she had sacrificed

* " The distant and important operations in Canada almost wholly relieved
the suffering inhabitants of the frontiers of the Province ; and, indeed, by a
train of successes, gave a pledge of the future ease and security which was
about to spread over all the British colonies. The fall of Crown Point,
Ticonderaga, Niagara, and, above all, the capture of Quebec, closed the
year with universal rejoicing and well-founded hope that the toils of war
would shortly cease throughout the land." (Miuot's History of Massachu-
setts Bay, Vol. XL, p. 56.)

266

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. VIII.

II K

much treasure and many lives for that purpose, but had failed
in each attempt. The taking of Quebec did not complete the
conquest of Canada. On the fall of that city, Montreal became
the seat of the French Government ; the inhabitants of Canada
remained subjects of the King of France ; the French military
forces within the province, were still very considerable ;* and
M. de Levi, who succeeded Montcalm as Commander-in-Chief of
the army, made a very formidable attempt to recover Quebec.f
On the reduction of that city, the fleet under Sir Charles
Saunders returned to England, and General Murray was left in

* " The main body of the French army, Avhich, after the battle of the Plains
of Abraham, retired to Montreal, and which still consisted of ten battalions of
regulara, had been reinforced by 6,000 Canadian militia and a body of
Indians. Here the Mar(j[uis de Vaudreuil, Governor-General of Canada, had
fixed his liead-quarters and determined to make his last stand. For tliis
purpose (after the unsuccessful attempt of M. de Levi to retake Quebec) ];e
called in all his detachments, and collected around him the whole force of
the colony." (Holmes' Annals, Vol. II., pp. 98, 99.)

t " In the month of April, when the Upper St. Lawrence was so open as to
admit of transportation by water, his artillery, military stores and heavy
baggage were embarked at Montreal and fell down the river, under convoy
of six frigates ; and M. de Levi, after a march of ten days, arrived with his
army at Point aux Tremble, within a few miles of Quebec, General Murray,
to whom the care of maintaining the English conquest had been entrusted,
had taken every precaution to preserve it, but his soldiers had suffered so by
the extreme cold of winter, and by the want of vegetables and fresh pro-
visions, that instead of 5,000, the original number of the garrison, there wore
not at this time above 3,000 men fit for service. With this small but valiant
body he resolved to meet him in the field ; and on the 28th of April marolied
out to the Heights of Abraham, where, near Sillery, he attacked the Frencli
under M. de Levi with great impetuosity. He was received with firmness ;
and after a fierce encounter, finding himself outflanked and in danger of
being surrounded by superior numbers, he called off his troops and retired
into the city. In this action the loss of the English was near 1,000 men,
and that of the French still greater. The French general lost no time in
improving his victory. On the very evening of the battle he opened trendies
before the town ; but it was the 11th of May before he could mount his
batteries and bring his guns to bear upon the fortifications. By that time
General Murray, who had been indefatigable, had completed some outworks,
and planted so immense an artillery on its ramparts, that the fire was very
superior to that of the besiegers, and in a manner silenced their batteries. A
British "fleet most opportunely arriving a few days after, M. de Levi imme-
diately raised the siege and precipitately retired to Montreal." (Holmes'
Annals, Vol. II., pp. 98, 99.)

;hap. VIII.

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

267

command at Quebec with a garrison of 5.000 men, which, during
the ensuing winter, owing to the extreme cold, and the want of
vegetables and fresh provisions, was reduced to 3,000 men fit for
service, when in April M, de Levi, with a superior force, attacked
the city, drove General Murray's little army from the Plains of
Abraham within the walls, and closely besieged the city, which
was relieved, and M. de Levi compelled to raise the siege, by the
opportune arrival of the English fleet.

In the meantime, General Amherst was energetically pur-
suing the most effective measures for the complete extinction
of French power in Canada. At the commencement of the
year 1760, he applied to the northern colonies for men and
means equal to what they had provided for 1759,* and during
the winter he made arrangements to bring the armies from
Quebec, Lake Champlain, and Lake Ontario, to act against
Montreal. Colonel Haviland, by his orders, sailed early in the

• " General Amherst made application to Massachusetts for the same
number of men for the service of the next year as they had raised the last
(1759). The reduction of Canada was still the object. This alone was found
to be a sufficient stimulus to the Assembly, and they needed no other arguments
from the Governor. The generous compensations which had been every year made
by Parliament not only alleviated the burden of taxes, which otherwise would
have been heavy, but by the importation of such large sums of specie increased
commerce, and it was the opinion of some that the loar added to the wealth of
the province, though the compensation did not amount to one-half the charges
of government.

"Tlie Assembly, at the session in January, 1760, first granted a large
bounty to the men in garrison at Louisburg and Nova Scotia, to encourage
them to continue in the service. A vote was then passed for raising 5,000
men more, upon the same encouragement as those of the last year had
received. Soon after the Governor received letters from Mr. Pitt making
the like requests aa had been made by him the last year, and giving the same
assurance of compensation. At the beginning of the year the English
interest in Canada was in a precarious state. Quebec had been besieged in
the spring, after a battle in which General Murray had lost a considerable
part of his garrison. Fortunately, Lord Coh-ille (with the English fleet)
arrived at a critical time and caused the siege to be raised.

" The danger being over, and there being no probability of any French
force from Europe, it seemed agreed that all Canada must fall in the
course of the summer. The Massachusetts enlistments went on but slowly.
Only 3,300 of the proposed 5,000 men enlisted, and 700 only remained in
garrison at Louisburg and Nova Scotia." (Hutchinson's History of Massa-
chusetts Bay, Vol. III., pp. 79, 80.)

2G8

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. VIII.

spring with a detachment from Crown Point, took possession of
the Isle aiix Noix, which he found abandoned by the enemy, and
proceeded thence to Montreal ; while Lord Amherst, with his
own division, consisting of about 10,000 regulars and provincials,
left the frontier of New York and advanced to Oswego, where
he was joined by 1,000 Indians of the Six Nations, under Hir
William Johnson. Embarking with his entire army on Lake
Ontario, and taking the fort of Isle Royale in his way, he arrived
at Montreal, after a diificult and dangerous passage, on the
same day that General Murray landed near the place from
Quebec. The two generals met^ with no opposition in disem-
barking their troops ; and by a happy concurrence in the execu-
tion of a well -concerted plan. Colonel Haviland joined them
with his detachment the next day. The strength of these
combined armies, and the masterly disposition made by the
commanders, convinced M. de Vaudreuil that resistance would
be ineffectual, and he demanded a capitulation ; and on the 8th
of September, 17C0, Montreal, Detroit, Michili-Mackinac, and
all other places within the government of Canada, were surren-
dered to his Britannic Majesty. The destruction of an armament
ordered out from France in aid of Canada completed the
annihilation of French power on the continent of America.*

But though the conquest of Canada was thus completed, and
the American colonies thus secured from the encroachments
and dangers which had disturbed their peace and caused

* Holmes' Annals, Vol. II., pp. 99, 100. Russell's Europe, Vol. V., Letter 34.

General Amherst, in his orders to the anny, dated " Camp before Montreal,
8th SeptemVjer, 1760," announces this great event in the following words :

" The general sees with infinite pleasure the successes which have crowned
the indefatigable efforts of his Majesty's troops and faithful subjects in Nortli
America. The Marquis Vaudreuil has capitulated the troops of France in
Canada ; they have laid down their arms, and are to serve no more during
the war. The whole country submits to the dominion of Great Britain,
The three armies are entitled to the general's thanks on this occasion, and
he assures them that he will take the first opportunity of acquainting,' \m
Majesty with the zeal and bravery which have always been exerted by the
officers and soldiers of the regular and provincial troops, and also by his
faithful Indian allies. The general is confident that when the troop? are
informed that the country is the King's, tliey will not disgrace themselves
by the least appearance of inhumanity or unsolderlike behaviour by taking
any plunder ; but that the Canadians, now become British subjects, may feel
the good effects of his Majesty's protection."

:hap. VIII.

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMICS.

2G9

much sacrifice of life for one hundred and thirty years, yet
the war between England and France was not ended, and in
1702 Spain joined France in the war against the former ; but
the actual scene of the war was chiefly the West Indies, and the
series of naval and other battles fought there were successive
victories on the part of England. " The progress of the British
conquests, which threatened all the distant possessions of the
enemy, was arrested by preliminary articles of peace, which
were signed and interchanged at Fontainebleau between the
Ministers of Great Britain, France, Spain, and Portugal, on the
3rd day of November. On the 10th of February, 1703, a
definite treaty was signed at Paris, and 30on after ratified."*

The joy was general and intense throughout England and
North America at such a conclusion of a seven years' open war,
preceded by several years of hostile land bloody encroachments
on the settlements of the English provinces by the French and
Indians. It was a war prompted and commenced by the
colonies, and in which their very existence as well as liberties
were involved. No one of the American colonies had a deeper,
if as deep a stake in the results of this protracted struggle as
the province of Massachusetts ; no one had more suppliantly and
importunately solicited the aid of money and men from England ;
and no colony had benefitted so largely in its commerce and re-
sources during the successive years of the contest, as Massachu-
setts. As early as 1755 (the year before war was formally
declared between England and France), the Legislature of Massa-
chusetts adopted an address to the King, in which, after refer-
ring to their large expenditure in their unsuccessful expedition

* Holmes' Annals, Vol. II., p. 113.

There were still troubles on the borders of some of the provinces with
tribes of Indians, but none to excite serious alarm, and hostile Indians were
80011 brought to submission. The majority of the high-spirited and powerful
Cherokee nation spumed every offer of peace ; but Lieutenant-Colonel James
Grant, in command of the Highlanders and a provincial regiment raised in
South Carolina, to act in conjunction with the regular forces, with the addi-
tion of some Indian allies — in all about 2,600 men — defeated them, destroyed
their towns, magazines and cornfields, and drove them for shelter and sub-
sistence to the mountains, when their chieftains solicited peace.

" This reduction of the Cherokees was among the last humbling strokes
given to the power ot France in North America." (Heevatt, II., 244 — 264 ;
quoted in Holmes' Annals, Vol II., p. 108).

^mm

270

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [cHAP. VIII.

J*'

against Crown Point, they stated their services and prayed to
be relieved from the burden incurred by means of them. They
pleaded the precedent of the Cape Breton invasion (for expenses
incurred in which, in 1745, the British Parliament had granted
them compensation), and prayed that his Majesty would give
orders for the support of such forts and garrisons as they hoped
to establish, and aid them in the further execution of their
designs. And in another address, adopted in October of the same
year, the Massachusetts (Jourt said that the design of securing
his Majesty's territories against the invasions of the French
was what his Majesty alone was equal to project and execute,
and the nation to support ; and that unless they could obtain
the relief which they were soliciting from the royal bounty,
they should be so far from being able to remove encroachments
that they would be unable to defend themselves.*

Massachusetts having succeeded, with the other colonies, to
" drag," as Mr. Bancroft expresses it, " England into a war
with France," was thus importunate in soliciting aid and com-
pensation from England for her self-originated expenses, and
was so successful in her applications as to make the war a
pecuniary benefit as well as a means of securing and enlarging
her boundaries ; for, in the words of the historian quoted above,
in a previous page, " The generous compensations which had
been made every year by Parliament not only alleviated the
burden of taxes, which otherwise would have been heavy, but,
by the importation of such large sums of specie, increased com-
merce ; and it was the opinion of some that the war added to
the wealth of the province, though the compensation did not
amount to half the charges of the government."+

The monies raised by the colonies were expended in them and
upon their own citizens — monies passing from hand to hand, and
for provisions provided and works done in the colonies ; but the
large sums appropriated by Parliament for the war in the
colonies was so much money abstracted from England, sent
across the Atlantic, and added to the resources and wealth of
the colonies.

After the close of the war, in 1763, Massachusetts acknow-

♦ Minot's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp. 256, 257.
t Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. III., p. 79.

HAP. VIII.

CHAP. VIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

ledged her obligations to England for her protection and safety.
In an address of both Houses of her Legislature to the Governor
that year, tliey acknowledge that " the evident design of the
French to surround the colonies was the immediate and just
cause of the war ; that without the protection aftbrded them
during the war, they must have been a prey to the power
of France ; that without the compensation made them by
Parliament, the burden of the expense of the war must have
been insupportable." In their address to the King they make
the same acknowledgments, and at the conclusion promise to
evidence their gratitude by every expression of duty and loyalty
in their power.*

Mr. Otis, afterwards the most eloquent agitator against Eng-
land, and advocate of independence, at the first town meeting of
Boston after the peace, having been chosen chairman, addressed
the inhabitants in the following words, which he caused to be
printed in the newspapers :

" We in America have certainly abundant reasons to rejoice.
The heathen are not only driven out, but the Canadians, much
more formidable enemies, are conquered and become our fellow-
subjects. The British dominion and power may be said literally
to extend from sea to sea, and from the great river to the ends
of the earth. And we may safely conclude, from his Majesty's
wise administration hitherto, that liberty and knowledge, civil
and religious, will be co-extended, improved, and preserved to
the latest posterity. No other constitution of civil government
has yet appeared in .he world so admirably adapted to these
great purposes as that of Great Britain. Every British subject
in America is of common right, by Act of Parliament, and by
the laws of God and nature, entitled to all the essential privi-
leges of Britons. By particular Charters, there are peculiar
privileges granted, as in justice they might and ought, in con-
sideration of the arduous undertaking to begin so glorious an
empire as British America is rising to. Those jealousies that
some weak and wicked minds have endeavoured to infuse with
regard to the colonies, had their birth in the blackness of dark-
ness, and it is a great pity they had not remained there for ever.
The true interests of Great Britain and her plantations are

* Hutchinson's History of Massacliusetts Bay, VoL III., p. 101.

^■1

■: 3

liii

272

THE LOYALISTS OF AMEIIICA [CHAP. VIII.

mutual ; and what God in His providence lias united, let no man
dare attempt to pull asunder."*

Such were the official acknowledgments and professed feel-
ings of Massachusetts herself in regard to the conduct of
England towards her at the close of the seven years' war with
France, which was ratified by the Peace of Paris, 17G3, an<l
which secured the American colonies from the hostilities of the
French and their Indian allies for more than a hundred years.
The language of Massachusetts was but the language of all the
American colonies in regard to Great Britain at this period —
the language of gratitude and affection.

Down, therefore, to within thirteen years of the American
Declaration of Independence, the conduct of England to her
American colonies is acknowledged upon the highest authoritj-
to have been just and generous.

* Hutcliinsou'b History of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. III., pp. 101, 102.

■ i

■•i

AP. VIII.
b no man

CHAP. IX.]

AND THEIB TIMES.

273

ised feol-
nduct of
war with
708, and
es of tlio
ed years.
of all tlio
period —

American
id to licr
authority

[)1, 102.

CHAPTER IX.

Relations of England and the Colonies with bach other and with

Foreign CouNTRiBa

I. The position of England in respect to the other European
Powers after the Peace of Paris, 17G3.

Mr. Bancroft remarks : " At the peace of 1763, the fame of
England was exalted throughout Europe above that of all
other nations. She had triumphed over those whom she called
her hereditary enemies, and retained half a continent as the
monument of her victories. Her American dominions stretched
without dispute from the Atlantic to the Mississippi, from the
Gulf of Mexico to Hudson's Bay ; and in her older possessions
that dominion was rooted firmly in the affections of the colonists
as in their institutions and laws."*

The envy and fears of Europe were excited at this vast
extension of British territory and power, which they regarded
as the foundation of her still more formidable future greatness.
" Her navy, her commerce, and her manufactures had greatly
increased when she held but a part of the continent, and when
she was bounded by the formidable powers of France and Spain.
Her probable future greatness, when without a rival, with a
growing vent for her manufactures and increasing employment
for her marine, threatened to destroy that balance of power

♦ History of the United States, Vol. V., Chap, v., p. 78.

" The Spaniards having taken part in the war, were, at the termination'
uf it, induced to relinquish to the same Power both East and West Florida
(in exchange for Cuba). This peace gave Qreat Britain possession of an
extent of country equal in dimensions to several of the kingdoms of Europe."'
(Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol I., Chap. liL, p. 391.)
18

274

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IX.

which European sovereigns have for a long time endeavoured
to preserve. Kings are republicans with respect to each other,
and behold with democratic jealousy any one of their order
towering above the rest. The aggrandizement of one tends to
excite a combination, or at least the wishes of many, to reduce
him to the common level. From motives of this kind, the
naval superiority of Great Britain was received with jealousy
by her neighbours. They were in general disposed to favour
any convulsion which promised a diminution of her overgrown
power,"*

This great increase of the naval and territorial power of
Great Britain excited apprehension at home as well as jcalousiea
abroad. Some of her own statesmen and philanthropists
entertained doubts as to whether the extent and diversity of
her vast territorial acquisitions would add to the strength or
happiness of the mother country ; and the policy of centrali-
zation and uniformity decided upon, created the discord and
hastened the disintegration which reflective minds had appre-
hended.

II. The position of the American Colonies in regard to
England and other nations clearly signalized a system of
government which the English statesmen of the times failed
to appreciate. The maxim of the King was not merely to
reign, but to rule ; and the policy of his Ministers, of succes-
sive Administrations, was to enfeeble what was colonial and to
strengthen what was imperial ; whereas the extension of colonial
territory had brought a large accession of colonial experience
and intelligence, which required to be entwined around the
throne by the silken cords of kindness and interest, instead
of being bandaged to England by 29 Acts of Parliament, every
one of which indicated the loss of some sacred birthright
or privilege of Englishmen and their posterity as soon as they
emigrated from the eastern to the western shores of the Atlantic.
Those who emigrated to or were bom in America were no less
Englishmen than those who remained or were bom in England,
and were entitled to all the rights and privileges of English-
men ; among which is the election of representatives who make
laws and provide means for their government. The original

♦ Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. V., Chap, v., pp. 321, 322.

[chap. IX.

loavoured
sach other,
Keir order
3 ten<ls to

to reduce

kind, the
h jealousy

to favour
overgrown

i power of
s jealousies
anthropists
livcrsity of
strength or
of centrali-
iiscord and
had appre-

I regard to
system of
times failed
merely to
is, of succes-
onial and to
|n of colonial
experience
around the
•est, iastead
,ment, every
birthright
>on as they
,he Atlantic.
Iwere no less
in England,
of English-
!S who make
'he original

., pp. 321, 322.

CHAP. IX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

276

design of colonization by the British Government was doubtlesB
the extension of its power ; the design of English merchants
and manufacturers in promoting colonization was obviously the
extension of their trade, and therefore their own enrichment ;
while the design of the colonists themselves, in leaving their
native land and becoming adventurers and settlers in new
countries, was as manifestly the improvement of their own
condition and that of their posterity. As long as the threefold
design of these three parties to colonization harmonized, there
could bo no cau.so or occasion of collision between them, and
they would cordially co-operate in advancing the one great
object of growing national greatness by enlarging the commerce
and dominions of Great Britain. This was the cn-so in the
earlier stages of American colonization. The colonists needed
1 c naval and diplomatic protection of England against foreign
.nvasion, and the manufactures of England for their own
wants and conveniences, while England needed the productions
of the colonial forests and waters. The colonial trade became
a monopoly of England, and its transportation to and from
the colonies was confined to English ships and sailors. Even
manufactures in the colonies were forbidden, or restricted, as
well as their trade with foreign countries, except by way of
England ; so that the colonies became so many trading ports
for English merchandise, and the American traders were little
other than factors of English merchants.

However this system of monopoly and restriction might
answer the purposes of English merchants and manufacturers,
might contribute to build up the mercantile navy of England,
and even be politic on the part of Government in colonial
infancy, it could not fail ere long to cause friction with the
colonies, and was utterly unsuitable to their circumstances as
they advanced to manhood.* As the colonies increased in

* " From the first settlement of English America till the close of the war
of 1755, the general conduct of Great Britain towards her colonics affords a
useful lesson to those who are disposed to colonization. From that era, it is
equally worthy of the attention of those who wish for the reduction of great
empires to small ones. In the first period, Great Britain regarded the
provinces as instruments of commerce. Without the care of their internal
police, or seeking a revenue from them, she contented herself with the
monopoly of their trade. She treated them as a judicious mother doea her

276

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IX.

wealth and population, their commerce increased with each
other and with the mother country, and overflowed to the
French and Spanish colonies in the West Indies. Even before
the termination of the war of 1755, a considerable commerce
had been carried on between the British and Spanish colonies ;
the latter needed many of the productions and importations of
the former, and the former needed the gold and silver, molasses
and sugar, of the latter. The British colonies sent lumber, fish,
and large quantities of goods imported from England, to the
Spanish colonies, and received chiefly in payment gold and
silver, with which they made remittances to England for the
goods purchased there.* Such was the position of the colonies

dutiful children. They shared in every privilege belonging to her native
sons, and but slightly felt the inconveniences of subordination. Small waa
the catalogue of grievances with which even democratic jealousy charged
the parent state, antecedent to the period before mentioned. Till the year
1764, the colonial regulations seemed to have no other object but the conimoa
good of the whole empire. Exceptions to the contrary were few, and had no
appearance of system. When the approach of the colonies to manhood made
them more capable of resisting impositions, Great Britain changed her
ancient system, under which her colonies had long flourished. When policy
would rather have dictated a relaxation of authority, she rose in her demands
and multiplied her restraints" (Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I.,
Chap, iii., page 323).

* " This trade, though it did not clash with the spirit of the British navi-
gation laws, was forbidden by their letter. On account of the advantages
which all parties, and particularly Great Britain, reaped from this inter-
course, it had long been winked at by persons iix power (o); but at the period

(a) Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson, in a letter to Richard Jackson,
Grenville's Secretary in the Exchequer, September, 1763, says, " The real
cause of the illicit trade in this Province (Massachusetts) has been the indul-
gence of the officers of the Customs ; and we are told that the cause of this
indulgence has been that they are quartered upon for more than their legal
fees, and that without bribery and corruption they must starve."

As a specimen of this " bribery and corruption," the deposition on oath of
the Deputy Collector of his Majesty's Customs at the port of Salem is given,
to the effect that every time he had been in the office it had been customary
for the Collector to receive of the masters of the vessels entering from Lisbon
casks of wine, boxes of fruit, etc., which was a gratuity for suffering their
vessels to be entered with salt or ballast only, and passing over unnoticed
Buch cargoes of wine, fruit, etc., which were prohibited to be imported into
his Majesty's plantations ; part of whi';h wine, fruit, etc, the Collector used
to share with Governor Barnard. (Bancroft's History of the United States,
VoL v., Chap. ix.,p. 168, in a note.)

CHAP. IX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

277

in respect to Great Britain and other European Powers at the
peace of Paris in 1763 ; and such the friendly and affectionate
feelings of the colonies towards the mother country down to
that period.

III. The treaty of Paris was ratified in February, 1703 ; and
on the 17th of March following, the Chancellor of the Exchequer
submitted among the estimates the following item, which was
adopted by the Commons :

" Upon account, to enable his Majesty to give a proper com-
pensation to the respective provinces in North America, for the
expenses incurred by them in the levying, clothing, and paying
of the troops raised by the same, according to the active vigour

before mentioned (1764), some ne\v regulations were adopted by which it
was almost destroyed, (a) This was effected by cutters whose commanders
were enjoined to take the usual custom-house oaths, and to act in the capacity
of revenue oflScers. So sudden .a stoppage of an accustomed and beneficial
commerce, by an unusually rigid execution of old laws, was a serious blow ]to
the northern colonies. It was their misfortune that, though they stood in
need of vast quantities of British maniifactures, their countrj' produced very
little that afforded a direct remittance to pay for them. They were there-
fore under the nece^-dity of seeking elsewhere a market for their produce,
and. by a circuitous route, acquiring the means of supporting their credit
with the mother country. This they had found by trading with the Spanish
and French colonies in their neighbourhood. From them they acquired gold,
silver, and valuable commodities, the ultimate profits of which centred in
Great Britain. This intercourse gave life to business of every denomination,
aud established a reciprocal circulation of money and merchandise, to the
benefit of iiJl parties concerned. Why a trade essential to the colonies, and
which, so far from being detrimental, was indirectly advantageous to Great
Britain, should be so narrowly watched, so severely restrained, was not
obvi us to the Americans. Instead of \iewing the parent state, as formerly,
in the light of an affectionate mother, they conceived her as beginning to be
influenced by the narrow views of an illiberal stepdame." — /6.,pp. 324, 325.

{%) "The sad story of colonial oppression commenced in 1764. Great
Britain then adopted regulations respecting her colonies which, after disturb-
ing the ancient harmony of the two countries for about twelve years, termi-
nated in the dismemberment of the empire. These consisted in restricting
their fonner commerce, but more especially in subjecting them to taxation by
the British Parliament. By adhering to the spirit of her Navigation Act, in
the course of a century the trade of Great Britain had increased far beyond
the expectation of her most sanguine sons ; but by rigidly enforcing the
strict letter of the same i.i a different situation of public affairs, effects
directly the reverse were produced." — /'^., p. 324

278

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IX.

[!■

and strenuous efforts of the respective provinces shall be thought
by his Majesty to merit, £133,333 6s. M."

The several provinces gratefully acknowledged the compensa-
tion granted them ; of which Massachusetts received the largest
share.

This was the last practical recognition on the part of the
British Government of the loyal co-operation of the colonies in
the war which established the supremacy of Great Britain in
North America. From that time forward the instructions,
regulations, and measures of the British Government seem to
have been dictated by a jealousy of the growing wealth and
power of the colonies, and to have been designed to weaken the
colonies in order to strengthen the parent state. The policy
of the British Administration wa" undoubtedly to extinguish all
military spirit in the colonies, by creating a standing army which
the colonies were to support, but wholly independent of them ;
to discountenance and forbid colonial manufactures, so as to
render the colonies entirely dependent upon Great Britain for
manufactured goods, hardware, and tools of every description ;
to destroy their trade with foreign countries by virtually
prohibitory duties, so as to compel the colonies to go to the
English market for everj' article of grocery or luxury, in what-
ever climate or country produced ; to restrict the colonial ship-
ping, as well as productions, to British ports alone, and even to
tax the trade of the colonies with each other. All the monies
arising from the various duties thus imposed were to be paid,
not into the provincial treasuries, as heretofore, but into the
English exchequer, and to be at the disposal of the British
Parliament.

Had the British Government regarded the colonists as
Englishmen in their rights and privileges as well as in their
duties and obligations ; had the British policy been to develop
the manufactures and resources of the American colonies
equally with those of England, and to leave to their local Legis-
latures (the only Parliaments in which the colonists had repre-
sentation by their own election) to legislate on all purely
domestic matters, to dispose of all colonial revenues, and to
provide for their own protection, as before the war with France,
and as is done in the provinces and Dominion of Canada, I
doubt not but the American colonies would have remained in

CHAP. IX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

279

le monies

heart and policy an integral portion of the British empire, and
become the strong right arm of Great Britain in regard to both
national resources and national strength. I cannot, therefore,
but regard the mistaken policy of the King and his Ministers
as the primary cause of the alienation and severance of the
American colonies from the mother country.

IV. The proceedings after the peace of Paris, 1763, which
caused the alienation of the colonies from Great Britain, com-
menced on the part of the mother country, towards which, at
that time, the language of the colonies was most affectionate
and grateful. The first act of the British Government which
caused disquiet in the colonies was the rigorous enforcement
of the Navigation Act — an Act first passed by tho Common-
wealth Parliament more than a century before, which had
been amended and extended by successive Acts under Charles
the Second, which had been beneficial both to the mother
country and the colonies, which had given to the naval and
mercantile marine of Great Britain their superiority, but
which had, in the application of its provisions to the trade
between the English, Spanish, and French colonies of America,
become almost obsolete by the common consent and practice of
colonial governors, custom-house officers, and merchants. But
shortly after the treaty of Paris instructions were sent to the
colonies, directing the strict enforcement of the Navigation
Act. "On the 10th of March, 1764, the House of Commons
agreed to a number of resolutions respecting the American
trade ; upon which a Bill was brought in, and passed into a law,
lajdng heavy duties op the articles imported into the colonies
from the French and other islands of the West Indies, and
ordered these duties to be paid in specie into the exchequer of
Great Britain. The Americans complained much of this new
law, and of the unexampled hardship of being first deprived of
obtaining specie, and next being ordered to pay the new duties
in specie into the treasury at London, which they said must
speedily drain them of all the specie they had. But what
seemed particularly hard upon them was a Bill brought in
the same session, and passed into a law, ' to restrain the currency
of j^aper money in the colonies.'

" At the end of the session the King thanked the House oi
Commons for the ' wise regulations which had been established

280

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IX.

to augment the public revenues, to unite the interests of the
most distant possessions of his Crown, and to encourage and
secure their commerce with Great Britain.' "*

Though the Bill and regulations referred to legalized in a
manner the heretofore illicit trade between the colonies and the
French and Spanish West India islands, they practically ruined
the trade by the burden of duties imposed, and thus distressed'and
ruined many who were engaged in it.-f- It is not surprising that

* Prior Documents ; or a Collection of Interesting Authentic Papers relat-
ing to the Dispute between Great Britain and America, showing the causes
and progress of that misunderstanding from 1764 to 1775, pp. 1, 2
London, 1777.

" Four great wars within seventy years had overwhelmed Great Britain
with heavy dehts and excessive taxation. Her recent conquests, so far from
relieving her embarrassments, had greatly increased that debt, which
amounted now to .£140,000,000, near $700,000,000. Even in the midat of
the struggle, in the success of which they had so direct an interest, the
military contributions of the colonial assemblies had been sometimes reluc-
tant and capricious, and always irregular and unequal. They might, perhaps,
refuse to contribute at all towards a standing army in time of peace, of which
they would naturally soon become jealous. It seemed necessary, therefore,
by some exertion of metropolitan authority, to extract from the colonies for
this purpose a regular and certain revenue." (Hildreth's History of the
United States, Vol. II. Chap, xxviii., p. 516.)

This was avowed by the great commoner, Pitt himself, the special friend
of America. " In the course of the war between France and England, some
of the colonies made exertions so far beyond their equitable quota as to
merit a reimbursement from the national treasury ; but this was not univer-
sally the case. In consequence of internal discord, together with their
greater domestic security, the necessary supplies had not been raised in due
time by others of the provincial assemblies. That a British Minister should
depend on the colonial assemblies for the execution of his plans, did not well
accord with the decisive genius of Pitt ; but it was not prudent, by any
innovation, to irritate the colonies during a war in which, from local circum-
stances, their exertions were peculiarly beneficial. The advantages that
would result from an ability to draw forth the resources of the colonies, by
the same authority which commanded the wealth of the mother country,
might, in these circumstances, have suggested the idea of taxing the colonies
by authority of the British Parliament. Mr. Pitt is said to have told Dr.
Franklin that * when the war closed, if he should be in the Ministry, he
would take measures to prevent the colonies from having a power to refuse or
delay the supplies that might be wanted for national purposes,' but he did
not mention what those measures should be." (Ramsay's Colonial History,
Vol. I., Chap, iii., pp. 320, 321.)

t In the work mentioned in last note, " Prior Documents," etc., extracts

CHAP. IX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

281

such a policy of restricting both the import and export trade
of the colonies to England, apart from the methods of enforcing
it, should produce general dissatisfaction in the colonies, and
prompt to combinations against such extortion, and for the
supply of their own wants, as far as possible independent of
English manufactures. Popular meetings were held, and associa-
tions were formed in several provinces, pledging their members
against purchasing or wearing clothing of English manufacture,
and to set about manufacturing woollens, cottons, etc., for them-
selves, the materials for which they had in great abundance of
their own production. Ladies and gentlemen of the wealthiest
and most fashionable classes of society appeared in homespun ;
and merchants pledged themselves to order no more goods from
England, and to countermand the orders they had previously
given.*

of letters are given, showing the effects of the acts and regulations of com-
merce, even in the West Indies. I give one of these extracts as a specimen :

Extract of a letter from Kingston, in Jamaica, to a merchant in London,
dated Jamutry 27th, 1765.

" Kingston, which used to be a place of great trade and hurry, is become
as still as a desert since we were so wise as to banish our best friends, the
Spaniards ; and now the current of that valuable commerce is turned in
favour of the French and the Dutch, who have made their ports free, and,
taking the advantage of our misconduct, have promised them safety, and so
deal with them for all the European goods, upon the same terms as the English
did. Were I to depend upon the sale of goods I had from you, I should
not be able to remit the money these two or three years."

Extract of a letter from Jamaica, to a friend in London, dated May 12th,

1763:

" We are in the most deplorable state ever known in the island ; the
channel through which all the money we had came among us, is entirely
stopped up." — lb., p. 4.

* Prior Documents, etc., pp. 4, 5. Annual Register, Vol VII., Chap. vi.

" The Act which gave rise to these movements and combinations against
importing goods from England, passed in the spring of 1764, was known aa
the 'Sugar Act,' reducing by one-half the duties imposed by the old
' Molasses Act ' on foreign sugar and molasses imported into the colonies ;
levying duties on coffee, pimento, French and East India goods, and wines
from Madeira and the Azores, which hitherto had been free ; and adding
iron and lumber to the * enumerated articles ' which could not be exported
except to England. This Act was the first Act ever passed by Parliament
which avowed the purpose, as it did in its preamble, of ' raising a revenue for
defraying the expenses of defending, protecting and securing his Majesty's

282

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. IX.

dominions in America.' This Act gave increased jurisdiction to the Admiralty
Courts, and provided new and more efficient means for enforcing the collection
of the revenue." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap,
xxviii., pp. 520, 521.)

" In order to remedy the deficiency of British goods, the colonists betook
themselves to a variety of domestic manufactures. In a little time large
quantities of common cloths were brought to market ; and these, though
dearer and of worse quality, were cheerfully preferred to similar articles
imported from Britain. That wool might not be wanting, they entered into
resolutions to abstain from eating lambs. Foreign elegancies were laid
aside. The women were as exemplary as the men in various instances of
self-denial. With great readiness they refused every article of decoration for
their persons, and of luxury for their tables. These restrictions, which the
colonists had voluntarily imposed on themselves, were so well observed, that
multitudes of artificers in England were reduced to great distress, and some
of their most flourishing manufactories were in a great measure at a stand-
still." (Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., Chap, iii., p. 346.)

" This economy became so general at Boston, that the consumption of
British merchandise was diminished this year (1764) upwards of ;£10,000
sterling." (Holmes' Annals, Vol. II., p. 128.)

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

283

CHAPTER X.

Stamp Act — Its Effects in America — Virginia Leads the Opposition
TO IT — Riots and Destruction of Property in Boston — Petitions
Against the Stamp Act in England — Rejoicings at its Repeal
in England and America — The Declaratory Act.

The intensity of the flame of colonial dissatisfaction, and
which caused it to burst forth into a conflagration of complaint
and resistance in all the colonies, was the announcement of a
measure to raise a revemue in the colonies, by Act of Parliament,
on the very day, March 10th, 1764, that the Bills which bore
so hard on the trade currency of the colonies were passed. Mr.
Granville, Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced sundry reso-
lutions relative to the imposition of stamp duty in America.
These resolutions affirmed the right, the equity, the policy, and
even the necessity of taxing the colonies.*

♦ " An American revenue was, in England, a very popular measure. The
cry in favour of it was so strong as to silence the voice of petitions to the
contrary. The equity of compelling the Americans to contribute to the
common expenses of the empire satisfied many, who, without inquiring
into the policy or justice of taxing their unrepresented fellow-subjects,
readily assented to the measures adopted by Parliament for that purpose.
The prospect of easing their own burdens at the expense of the colonists,
dazzled the eyes of gentlemen of landed interest, so as to keep out of their
view the probable consequences of the innovation."

" The disposition to tax the colonies was also strengthened by exaggerated
accounts of their wealth. It was said that the American planters lived in afiSu-
ence and with inconsiderable taxes ; while the inhabitants of Great Britain
were borne down by such aggressive burdens as to make a bare existence a
matter of extreme difficulty. The officers who had served in America during
the late war contributed to this delusion. Their observations were founded
on what they had seen in the cities, and at a time when large sums were spent

m ■w.K

?!■ ri

284

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

" The resolutions wore not followed this year by any Bill,
being only to be held out as an intention for next year. They
were proposed and agreed to, in a thin House, late at night, and
just at the rising, without any, debate."* A year from that
date, March 10th, 17C5, Mr. Grenville introduced his long-
expected measure for raising a revenue in the colonies by a
duty on stamps — a measure prepared by fifty-five resolutions
(in Committee of Ways and Means), on which were based the
provisions of the Stamp Act, which provided among other
things that a tax should be paid on all newspapers, all law
papers, all ships' papers, property transfers, college diplomas,
and marriage licenses. A fine of £10 was imposed for each
non-compliance with the Act, the enforcement of which was
not left to the ordinary courts and juries, but to Courts of

by Government in support of fleets and armies, and when American com-
modities were in great demand. To treat with attention those who came
to fight for them, and also to gratify their own pride, the colonists had made
a parade of their riches, by frequently and sumptuously entertaining tlie
gentlemen of the British army. These, judging from what they saw, without
considering the general state of the country, concurred in representing the
colonists as very able to contribute largely towards defrayirg the common
expenses of the empire." (Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., Chap, iii.,
pp. 332—335.)

♦ Prior Documents, etc., p. 5.

" The taxes of Great Britain exceeded by £3,000,000 what they were in
1764, before the war ; yet the present object was only to make the colonies
maintain their own anny. Besides the taxes on trade, which were immedi-
ately to be imposed, Mr. Grenville gave notice in the House that it was his in-
tention, in the next session, to bring in a Bill imposing stamp duties in America ;
and the reasons for giving such notice were, because he understood some people
entertained doubts of the power of Parliament to impose internal taxes on
the colonies, and because that, of all the schemes vhich had fallen
under his consideration, he thought a Stamp Act was the > ist But he was
not so wedded to it as to be unwilling to give it up for any one that might
appear more eligible ; or if the colonies themselves thought any other mode
would be more expedient, he should have no objection to come to it by Act
of Parliament. At that time the merits of the question were opened at
large. The opponents of the Government were publicly called upon to
deny, if they thought it fitting, the right of the Legislature to impose any
tax, internal or external, on the colonies ; and not a single member ventured
to controvert the right. Upon a solemn question asked in a full House,
there was not one negative." (Bancroft's History of the United States,
Vol. v., Chap, ix., pp. 186, 187.)

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

285

Admiralty without juries, the officers of which were appointed
by the Crown, and paid fees out of the fines which they
imposed — the informer receiving one-half. The year's notice*
of this Bill had given the opportunity of discussing the merits
of it on both sides of the Atlantic. The King, at the opening
of the session, had presented the colonial question as one of
" obedience to the laws and respect for the legislative authority
of the kingdom ;" and the Lords and Commons, in reply, de-
clared their intention to pursue every plan calculated for the
public advantage, and to proceed therein " with that temper
and firmness which will best conciliate and ensure due submis-
sion to the laws and reverence for the legislative authority of
Great Britain." As it was a money Bill, no petitions were
allowed to be presented to the Commons against it. Several
members spoke against it, of whom General Conway and
Colonel Barr6 were the principal, both of whom had served in
America ;f but the Bill was passed by a majority of five to
one. In America, the old, loyal Church of England colony of
Virginia led the way in opposition to the Bill, the General
Assembly of Burgesses being in session when the news of its
having been passed by the British Parliament reached America ;
and the resolutions which that Assembly passed covered the

* Mr. Grenville gave the year's notice apparently from motives of kind-
ness and courtesy to the colonies, " in order that the colonies might have
time to offer a compensation for the revenues which such a tax might produce.
Accordingly, when the agents of these colonies waited upon him to thank
him for this mark of his consideration, he told them that he was ready
to receive proposals from the colonies for any other tax that might
be equivalent in its produce to the stamp tax, hinting withal that
their principals would now have it in their power, by agreeing to this tax,
to establish a precedent for their being consulted (by the Ministry, we
suppose) before any tax was imposed upon them by Parliament.

" Many persons at this side of the water, and perhaps the agents them-
selves, locked upon this as a humane and generous proceeding. But the
colonies seemed to consider it as an affront rather than a compliment. At
least not one of them authorized its agent to consent to the stamp duty,
or to offer any compensation for it ; and some of them went so far as to send
over petitions, to be presented to the King, Lords, and Commons, positively
and directly questioning the authority and jurisdiction of Parliament over
their propertiea" (Annual Register, Vol VIII., Chap, ix., p. 33.)

t See Appendix to this chapter for a summary and review of the speeches
of Mr. Charles Townsend and Colonel Barr^.

286

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

wholo ground of colonial opposition to the Stamp Act.* The
Assembly of Virginia sent copies of its resolutions to the
other colonies, and several of their Legislatures adopted the
same or similar resolutions. Two days after adopting the
resolutions, the Governor dismissed the Legislature and ordered
new elections ; but at the new elections all who voted for the
resolutions were re-elected, and all who opposed them were
rejected ; so that the newly-elected Assembly was even more
unanimous against the Stamp Act than the Assembly which
had been dismissed. It was said " the fire began in Virginia ; "

* " The province of Virginia took the lead. On the 29th May, 1765, the
House of Burgesses of Virginia adopted the following resolutions :

"Whereas the honourable House of Commons in England have of late
drawn into question how far the General Assembly of this province liath
power to enact laws for levying taxes and imposing duties payable by the
people of this his Majesty's most ancient colony; for settling and ascertaining
the same to all future times, the House of Burgesses of this present General
Assembly have come to the following resolutions :

1. " Resolved, — That the first adventurers and settlers of this his Majesty's
colony and dominion of Virginia brought with them, and transmitted to
their posterity, and all other his Majesty's subjects since inhabiting his
Majesty's colony, all the privileges and immunities that have at any time
been held, enjoyed, and possessed by the people of Great Britain.

2. " Resolved, — That by the two Royal Charters granted by King James the
First, the colonies aforesaid are declared entitled to all privileges of faithful
liege and natural-bom subject,?, to all intents and purposes as if they had
been abiding and born within the realm of England.

3. " Resolved, — That his Majesty's liege people of this most ancient colony
have enjoyed the right of having been thus far governed by their own
Assembly in the article of taxes and internal police ; and that the same
have never been forleited, or in any other way yielded up, but have been
constantly recognized by the King and people of Great Britain.

4. "Resolved, therefore, — That the General Assembly of this colony, to-
gether with his Majesty or his substitute, have, in their representative
capacity, the only exclusive right and power to levy taxes and impositions
upon the inhabitants of this colony ; and that every attempt to vest such
power in any person or persons whatsoever other than the General Assembly
aforesaid, is illegal, unconstitutional, and unjust, and has a manifest ten-
dency to destroy British as well as American freedom." (Prior Documents,
etc., pp. 6, 7.)

These resolutions were introduced by Patrick Henry, in an eloquent and
animated speech, in the course of which the following extraordinary scene
occurred : In an exciting tone he exclaimed, " Caesar had his Brutus !
Charles the FLrst had his Cromwell ! and Qeoige the Third " The

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

287

" Virginia rang the alarm bell ; " " Virginia gave the signal for
the continent." The petition from the Assembly of New York
was stronger than that from Virginia — " so bold that when it
reached London no one would present it to Parliament." The
remonstrance of Massachusetts was feebler, it having been
modified by the Lieutenant-Governor, Hutchinson, and the
Governor, Barnard. Rhode Island followed New York and
Virginia. The Legislature of Connecticut protested at once
against the stamp tax, and sent decided instructions to their
agent in London to insist firmly upon their rights of taxation
and trial by jury. When the news of these things reached
England, and the colonial agents made their remonstrances,
it was asked, " Will the colonies resist ?" That was not believed
to be possible even by Franklin ; but though no physical
resistance was thought of in any part of America, yet the
opposition to the Stamp Act became increasingly intense among
all classes, from the first announcement of it in May to the
prescribed time of its going into operation, the 1st of November ;
and armed resistance seems to have been viewed as a possible
alternative in the future. It was as yet looked upon as a
contest between the colonists and the Parliament and advisers of
the King, and not with the King himself, to whom ardent
loyalty was professed and no doubt felt. It was at length pro-
posed that a general Congress of representatives of all the
colonies should be held to confer on the measures necessary to
be taken.

The Massachusetts Legislature met the latter part of May,
and recommended, on the 6th of Jxme, the calling of a Con-
gress, to be composed of " Committees from the Houses of
Representatives or Burgesses in the several colonies," to meet
at New York on the first Tuesday of October following, there

Speaker, greatly excited, cried out " Treason ! treaeon ! " which was re-echoed
from all sides. Then Henry, fixing his eye on the Speaker, and pointing his
finger towards him, raised his voice above the confusion and concluded,
"And George the Third may profit by their example. If this be treason,
make the most of it." (Elliott's History, etc., Vol. II., p. 252.)

Mr Bancroft says : " The resolutions were published in the newspapers
throughout America, and by men of all parties — by Royalists in ofiice not less
than by the public bodies in the colonies — were received without dispute as
the avowed sentiments of the * Old Dominion.' " (History of the United
States, Vol. V., Chap. xuL, p. 278.)

Ill 1 ¥••

288

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

fy*

" h

i' ■'

i { '

> ;

' '^H

[chap. X.

to consult " on the difficulties in which the colonies were and
must be placed by the late Acts of Parliament levyinj^ duties
and taxes upon them, and to consider of a general and humble
address to his Majesty and the Parliament to implore relief."
A circular letter was prepared and sent to the Speakers of the
Legislative Assemblies of other colonies ; and a Committee was
chosen for Massachusetts. On the 7th of October a Congress
met at New York, consisting of 28 delegates from the Assem-
blies of Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations,
Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the Delaware
counties, Maryland, and South Carolina. The session of this con-
vention or congress lasted three weeks ; the members were found
to be of one opinion on the principal subjects discussed. A decla-
ration of the rights and grievances of the colonies was agreed
to, in which all the privileges of Englishmen were claimed as the
birthright of the colonists, including the right of being taxed
only by their own consent. A petition to the King and memo-
rials to each House of Parliament were prepared and adopted.
The Assemblies of Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia were
prevented by their Governors from sending representatives to
the Congress ; but they forwarded petitions to England similar
to those adopted by the Congress.* It is worthy of remark,
that, with the exception of Boston, the proceedings of the
populace, as well as of the Conventions and Legislative Assem-
blies, against the Stamp Act, were conducted in a legal and
orderly manner, such as to command respect in England as well
as in America. But in Boston there had always been a mob,
which, under the direction and auspices of men behind the scenes,
and opposed to British rule in any form, was ready to come
forth as opportarity offered in lawless violence against the
authority of the Crown and its officers. In England, eighty
years before, mobs were employed to intimidate the Court,
Lords, and Commons in passing the Bill of Attainder against
Strafford, and against Bishops and Episcopacy. The Rev. Dr.
Burgess, the most popular Puritan minister in London at that
time, called them his " band-dogs," to be let loose or restrained
as occasion required.-f* Such men as the " band-dogs" of Boston,

* Holmes' Annala, Vol. II., page 136. Hildreth's History of the United
States, Vol. II., pp. 630, 531.
t Cornelius Burgess, a Puritan minister, used to say of the rabble :

CHAP. X.

criAP. X.]

AND Til KIR TIMES.

289

who found a good opportunity for tho exercise of their voca-
tion (hiring the discu.s.sion.s of tlie local Legislature and puhlic
meetings against the Stamp Act, not content with tho harmless
acts of patriotism of hanging Lord Bute and Mr. Andrew
Oliver (tlie proposed distributors of of the stamps) in efhgy and
then makin;jf bonfires of them.-they levelled Mr. Oliver's oflice
buildings to the ground, and broke the windows and destroyed
most of the furniture of his house. Some days afterwards they
proceeded to the house of William Story, Deputy Registrar of the
Court of Admiralty, and destroyed his private papers, as well
as the records and files of the Court. They next entered and
purloined the house of Benjamin Hallowell, jr., Comptroller of
the Customs, and regaled themselves to intoxication with the
liquors which they found in his cellar. They then, as Mr.
Hildrcth says, " proceeded to the mansion of Governor Hutchin-
son, in North Square. The Lieutenant-Governor and his family
Hed for their lives.* The house was completely gutted, and the

" These are my 1)anil-(lng8. I can set tliem on ; I can fetch tliem off aj,'ain."
(Rajnu's History of Enghind, Vol. IX., p. 410, in a note.)

* " On Sunday, 25th August (the day before these riots were rentiwcd),
Dr. Mayliew preached in the west meeting house, from the te.\t, (Jalatians,
chap. V. verse 12 : 'I would they were even cut off which trouble you.'
Although the sermon was regular enough, the text then seemed significant,
and Hutchinson (History) states that som«! were excited by it. (Doubtless
tlie ' Band-dogs' of Dr. Mayhew.) At any rate, in the night the bonfires
brought together their crowds, who, grown bold by success, proceeded to
express their hatred against the Admiralty Courts and the Custom-houses
by attacking and damaging the houses of two officers, Story and Hallowell
In these they found good wines, which served to inflame their blood ; and
then their shout was, ' Hutchinson ! Hutchinson !' A friend hastened to
his house to warn him of his danger. He barred his windows, determined to
resist their fury; but his family dragged him away with them in their flight.
The mob rushed on, and beating down his windows, sacked the house (one
of the finest in Boston) and destroyed everything, even a valuable collection
of books and manuscripts.

"This excess shocked the wise friends of liberty, and in a public meeting
tlie citizens discovered the destruction, and set their faces against any
further demonstrations of the sort. Rewards were offered for the rioters, and
Mackintosh and some others were apprehended, but were rescued by their
friends ; and it was found impossible to proceed against them." (Elliott's
New England History, Vol. II., pp. 254, 255.)

" Mayhew sent the next day a special apology and disclaimer to Hutchinson.
The inhabitants of Boston, at a town meeting, unanimously expressed their
19

290

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

contents burned in bonfires kindled in the square. Along with
Hutchinson's public and private papers perished many invalu-
able manuscripts relating to the history of the province, which
Hutchinson had been thirty years in collecting, and which it
was impossible to replace."* The universal and intense opposi-

iH.illh:

abhorrence of these proceedings, and a civil guard was organized to pnivent
their repetition. Yet the rioters, tliough well known, went unpunished — a
sure sign of the secret concurrence of the mass of the community. Those
now committed were revolutionary acts, designed to intimidate — melanclioly
forerunners of civil war." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol.
II., Chap, xxviii., p. 528.)
♦ lb., p. 527.

1. Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson, whose house was thus sacked and his
valuable papers destroyed, was the historian of his native province of Massa-
chusetts Bay, whom I have quoted so frequently in the present volume of
this history. Of his history, Mr. Bancroft, a bitter enemy of Hutchinson's,
says :

" At the opening of the year 1765, the people of ^^'ew England were read-
ing the liistory of the first sixty years of the Colony of Massachusetts, by
Hutchinson. This work is so ably executed that as yet it remains witliout
a rival ; and his knowledge was so extensive that, with' the exception of a few
concealments, it exhausts the subject. Nothing so much revived the ancestral
spirit which a weaving of the gloomy superstitions, mixed with Puritanism,
had for a long time overshadowed." (History of the United States, Vol. V.,
Chap, xi., p. 228.)

2. But though mob violence distinguished Boston on this as well as on
other occasions, the opposition was such throughout the colonies, from New
Hampshire to Ceorgia, that all those who had been appointed to receive and
distribute the stamps were compelled, by the remonstrances and often tlnvats
of their fellow-colonists, to resign the office; and the stamped paper sent
from England to the ports of the various provinces was either returned back
by the vessel that brought it, or put into a i)lace of safe keeping. " Though
the Stamp Act was to have operated from the 1st of November, yet the legal
proceedings in Courts were carried on as before. Vessels entered and de-
parted without stamped papers. The printers boldly printed and circulated
their newspapers, and found a sufficient number of readers, though they used
common piiper, in defiance of the Act of Parliament. In most departmenta,
by common consent, business was carried on as though no stamp law existed.
This was accompanied by spirited resolutions to risk all consequences rather
than submit to use the paper required by tho Stamp Act. While these
matters vere in agitation, the colonists entered into associations against
importing British manufactures till tlie Stamp Act should be repealed.
Agreeably to the free constitution of Great Britain, the subject was at liberty
to buy, or not to buy, as he pleased. By suspending their future purchases
until the repeal of the Stamp Act, the colonists made it the interest of

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

291

tion of all ranks in all the colonies (except n few of the office-
holders) was re-echoed and strengthened by opposition and
remonstrances from the merchants and manufacturers in England
and Scotland connected with the American trade.* Parliament
met the 17th December, 1765, when one reason assigned in the

merchants and manufacturers in England to solicit its repeal. They had
usually taken so great a proportion of British nianu'.actures, amounting
annually to two or three millions sterling, that they threw some thousands in
the mother country out of employment, and induced them, from a regard to
their own interest, to advocate the measures wished for by America." (llam-
say's Colonial History, Vol. I., pp. 345,346).

* " Petitions were received by Parliament from the merchants of London,
Bristol, Lancaster, Liverpool, Hull, Glasgow, etc., and indeed from most of
the trading and manufacturing towns and boroughs in the kingdom. In
these petitions they set forth the great decay of their trade,owing to the laws
uiul regulations made for America ; the vast quantities of our manufactures
(besides those articles imported from abroad, which were enclosed either with
our own manufactures or with the produce of our colonies) which the Ameri-
can trade formerly took off our hands ; by all which many thousand manu-
facturers, seamen, and labourers had been employed, to the very great
and increasing benefit of the nation. That in return for these exports the
petitioners had received from the colonies rice, indigo, tobacco, naval stores
oil, whale-firs, furs, and lately potash, with other staple commodities, besides
u large balance of remittances by bills of exchange and bullion obtained by
the colonists for articles of their produce, not required for the British market,
and therefore exported to other places.

" That from the natuie of this trade, consisting of British manufactures
exported, and of the import of raw material from America, many of them
used in our manufactures, and all of them tending to lessen our dependence
on neighbouring stn^es, i' must be deemed of the highest importance in the
commercial system oi ' i uation. That this commerce, so beneficial to the
state, and so aeccssaxy to the support of multitudes, then lay under such
tUfficulties ar I discouragements, that nothing less thai its utter ruin was
apprehended without the immediate interposition >f Purliament.

"That the coloiits were then indebted to the mei>.....jus of Great Britain
to the sum of se cral millions sterling ; and that when pressed for payment,
they appeal to pa it experience in proof of their willir.gness; but declare it is
not in their pow 't at present to make good their engagements, alleging that
the taxes and restrictions laid upon thtm, and the; e? tension of the jurisdic-
tion of the Vice-Aduiirnlty Courts, established by tome late Acta of Parlia-
ment, particularly by an Act passed in the ^Ui yvai- v)f his present Majesty,
tor granting certain duties in *';•? Britis'.i Colonies ;n.l Plantations in America,
and by an Act passed in the 3thyeP->-ji Ms Majesty, for granting and applying
certain stamp duties, etc., in saiil lolonitr ets., with several regulations and
lestraints, which, if founded in Act« o.*' ;'ar ia> ^ent for defined purposes, they

ffit

292

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

Royal speech for calling Parliament together earlier than usual
was the importance of matters which had occurred in America,
all papers connected with which would be laid before them.
After the Christmas recess, the . Parliament met the 17th of
January, 1766, when American affairs were again commended
in a speech from the Throne as a principal object of parliamentary
deliberations. Both Houses, in their replies to the King, showed
that they regarded American affairs in the same important light
as his Majesty ; and for more than two months those atiairs con-
stituted the principal subject of parliamentary debate, and the
leading topics of conversation among all classes. The applica-
tion of the Commons was unwearied ; their sittings continued
until after midnight, and sometimes even until mornmg ; the
number of petitions they received, the multitude -ji papers
and the witnesses they had to examine, occupier ^'ncL '■'ine,
accompanied by continual debates. The authors of tiiC Si imp
Act were now in opposition, and made most strenuo:^s efforts in
its justification. The debates turned chiefly on two questions:
1. Whether the Legislature of Great Britain had, or had rot,
a right of taxation over the colonies ; 2. Whether the lath laws,

represent to have been extended in such a manner as to disturb legal com-
merce and harass the fair trader, and to have so far interrupted the usual,
former and most useful branches of their commerce, restrained the sale of
their produce, thrown the state of the several provinces into confuf on, and
brought on so great a number of actual bankruptcies that the forr. ,r opportu-
nities and means of remittances and payments were utterly losi and taken
from them.

" That the petitioners were, by these unhappy events, reduced to tin;
necessity of applying to the House, in order to secure themselves and the'.
families from impending ruin ; to prevent a multitude cf manufacturers froni
becoming a burden to the community, or else seeking their bread in her
countries, to the irretrievable loss of the kingdom ; and to preserve the
strength of this nation entire, its commerce flourishing, the revenuei increas-
ing, our navigation the bulwark of the kingdom, in a state of grov.th and
extension, and the colonies, from inclination, duty, and interest, attached to
the mother country."

" Such a number of petitions from every part of the kingdom, pregnant
with 8o many interesting facts, stated and attested by such numbers of people ,
whose lives had been entirely devoted to trade, and who must be natural';
supposed to be competent judges of a subject which they had so long and 'n
closely attended to (besides that it showed the general ser^jd of il'e nation;,
could not foil of having great weight with the H Jiise." (Annual Kegisfcjr
for 1766, Vol IX., Chap, vii., pp. 36, 36.)

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

293

especially the Stamp Act, were just and expedient. In the
ultimate decision of the first question both parties agreed,
and the House affirmed, without a division, " That the Parlia-
ment of Great Britain had a right to bind the colonies in all
cases whatsoever," without any distinction in regard to taxation.
As to the second question. Parliament decided, after very warm
and protracted debates, in favour of the total repeal of the
Stamp Act. Accordingly two Bills were brought in, pursuant
to these resolutions : the one, a declaratory Bill, entitled " An
Act for securing the defence of the American colonies of
Great Britain," and asserting the right of Parliament to bind the
colonies in all cases whatsoever ; the other, for the total repeal
of the Stamp Act. ,

[Colonel Barre's celebrated reply to Charles Townsend, and
review of it, on the passing of the Stamp Act, will be found in
Appendix A. to this chapter ; and Lord Chancellor Camden's
opinion, and the great commoner Pitt's memorable sayings in
the discussion on the repeal of the Stamp Act, will be found in
Appendix B.]

The Declaratory Act, though avowing the absolute power of
Parliament to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever, and
rescinding, as far as an Act of Parliament could, all the declara-
tions and resolutions which had been adopted by the Colonial
Assemblies and public meetings against the authority of Parlia-
iDent, attracted very little attention amid the absorbing interest
centred in the Stamp Act, and the universal rejoicings on both
side? of the Atlantic at its repeal. The Declaratory Act, as it
was called, passed the Commons the beginning of February;
and on the 18th of the month, after a vehement discussion,
closed by the speeches of Messrs. Grenville and Pitt, the House
of Commons, at three o'clock in the morning, repealed the
Stamp Act by a majority of 275 to 167. The House of Lords,
after warm and protracted discussions, voted for its repeal by a
majority of 100 to 71 ; and three days afterwards, the 18th of
March, the royal assent was given to the Act — " An event," says
the Annual Register for 17G6, " that caused more universal joy
throughout the British dominions than perhaps any other that
can be remembered."

"Ships in the River Thames displayed their colours, and
houses were illuminated all over the city. It was no sooner

294

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

known in America, than the colonists rescinded their resolu-
tions, and recommenced their mercantile intercourse with the
mother country. They presented their homespun clothes to
the poor, and imported more largely than ever. The churches
resounded with thanksgivings ; and their public and private
rejoicings knew no bounds. By letters, addresses, and other
means, almost all the colonies showed unequivocal marks of
acknowledgment and gratitude. So sudden a calm after so
violent a storm is without a parallel in history. By the judi-
cious sacrifice of one law, Great Britain procured an acquiescence
in all that remained."*

APPENDIX A. TO CHAPTER X.

Discussion between Charles Townsend and Colonel Barre in the
Debate on passing the Stamp Act, referred to on page 293.

It was during the discussion on this Bill that Colonel Bane
made the famous retort to Mr. Charles Townsend, head of the
Board of Trade. Mr. Townsend made an able -ipeech in support
of the Bill and the equity of the taxation, and insisted that the
colonies had borne but a small proportion of the expenses of the
last war, and had yet obtained by it immense advantages at a
vast expense to the mother country. He concluded in the
following words :

" And now will these American children, planted by our care,

* Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., p. 348.

" At the same time that the Stamp Act was repealed, the absolute and
unlimited supremacy of Parliament was, in words, asserted. The opposers of
repeal contended for this as es.sential. The friends of that measure acquiesced
in it, to strengthen their party and make sure of their object. Many of both
sides thought that the dignity of Great Britain required something of the
kind to counterbalance the loss of authority that might result from her
yielding to the clamours of the colonists. The Act for this purpose was
called the Declaratory Act, and was, in principle, more hostile to America's
rights than the Stamp Act ; for it annulled those resolutions and acts of tl'u
Provincial Assemblies in which they had asserted their right to exempti m
from all taxes not imposed by their own representatives ; and also enactt.'
that the King and Parliament had, and of right ought to have, power to
bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever." — lb., p. 349.

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

295

nourished by our indulgence to a degree of strength and
opulence, and protected by our arms, grudge to contribute their
mite to relieve us from the heavy burden under which we lie ? "

As he sat down, Colonel Barre rose and replied with great
energy, and, under the influence of intense excitement, uttered
the following impassioned retort to the concluding words of
Charles Townsend's speech :

" They planted hy your care ! No ; your oppressions planted
them in America. They fled fiom your tyranny to a then
uncultivated, inhospitable country, where they exposed them-
selves to almost all the hardships to which human nature is
liable, and among others to the cruelties of a savage foe — the
most subtle, and I will take upon me to say the most formid-
able of any people upon the face of God's earth ; and yet,
actuated by principles of true English liberty, they met all
hardships with pleasure, compared with those they suffered in
their own country from the hands of those who should have
been their friends.

" They nourished by your indulgence ! They grew by your
neglect of them. As soon as you began to care about them, that
care was exercised in sending persons to rule over them, in one
department and another, who were perhaps the deputies of
deputies to some members of this House, sent to spy out their
liberties, to misrepresent their actions, and to prey upon them ;
men whose behaviour, on many occasions, has caused the blood
of those sons of liberty to recoil within them ; men promoted to
the highest seats of justice — some who, to my knowledge, were
glad, by going to a foreign country, to escape being brought to
the bar of a Court of justice in their own.

" They protected by your arms ! They have nobly taken up
arms in your defence ; have exerted a valour amidst oheir con-
stant and laborious industry, for the defence of a country whose
frontier was drenched in blood, while its interior parts yielded
all its little savings to your emolument. And, believe me
— remember, I this day told you so — the same spirit of freedom
which actuated that people at first will accompany them still.
But prudence forbids me to explain myself further. God knows,
I do not at this time speak from motives of party heat ; what I
deliver are the genuine sentiments of my heart. However
superior to me in general knowledge and experience the

296

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

respectable body of this House may be, yet I claim to know
more of America than most of you, having seen and been con-
versant in that country. The people, I believe, are as truly
loyal as any subjects the King has ; but a people jealous of their
liberties, and who will vindicate them if ever they should be
violated. But the subject is too delicate ; I will say no more."

Remarks on the Speeches of Mr. Charles Townsend and

Colonel Barre.

Perhaps the English language does nol present a more elo-
quent and touching appeal than these words of Colonel Barre,
the utterances of a sincere and patriotic heart. They were
taken down by a friend at the time of delivery, sent across the
Atlantic, published and circulated in every form throughout
America, and probably produced more effect upon the minds of
,ae colonists than anything ever uttered or written. Very
likely not one out of a thousand of those who have read them,
cani^d away by their eloquence and fervour, has ever thought
of .iiialysing them to ascertain how far they are just or true ;
yet I am bound to say that their misstatements are such as to
render their argument fallacious from beginning to end, with
the exception of their jucit tribute to the character of the
American colonists.

The words of Charles Townsend were insulting to the
colonists to the last degree, and were open to the severest
rebuke. He assumed that because the settlements in America
were infant settlements, in comparison with those of the mother
country, the settlers themselves were but children, and should
be treated as such ; whereas the fathers of new settlements and
their commerce, the guiding spirits in their advancement, are
the most advanced men of their nation and age, the pioneers of
enterprise and civilization; and as such they are entitled to
peculiar respect and consideration, instead of their being referred
to as children, and taxed without their consent by men who,
whatever their rank in the society and public affairs of England,
could not compare with them in what constituted real manhood
greatness. But though Charles Townsend's insulting haughti-
ness to the American colonists, and his proposa 1 to treat them
as minors, destitute of the feelings and rights of grown-up
Englishmen, merited the severest rebuke, yet that did not
justify the statements and counter-pretensions on which Colonel

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

297

Barr6 founded that rebuke. Let us briefly examine some of his
statements.

1. He says that the oppressions of England planted the
settlers in America, who fled from English tyranny to a then
uncultivated, inhospitable country.

In reply it may be aflftrmed, as a notorious fact, that the
southern and middle colonies, even to Pennsylvania, were
nationalized by the kings of England from their commence-
ment, and were frequently assisted by both King and Parlia-
ment. The Dutch and the Swedes were the fathers of the
settlements of New York and New Jersey. The " Pilgrim
Fathers," the founders of the Plymouth colony, did, however,
flee from persecution in England in the first years wf King
James, but found their eleven years' residence in Holland less
agreeable than settlement under English rule, or rather English
indulgence, in America. The founders of the Massachusetts Bay
settlement were a Puritan section of the Church of England, of
which they professed to be devoted members after they
embarked for America. A wealthy company of them deter-
mined to found a settlement in America, where they could
enjoy the pure worship of the Church of England without the
ceremonies enjoined by Archbishop Laud — where they could
convert the savage Indians, and pursue the fur and fish trade,
and agriculture ; but they were no more driven to America by
the " tyranny " of England, than the hundreds of thousands of
Puritans who remained in England, overthrew the monarchy,
beheaded the king, abolished the Church of England, first
established Presbyterianisra and then abolished it, and deter-
mined upon the establishment of Congregationalism at the
moment of Cromwell's death. But those " Puritan Fathers "
who came to Massachusetts Bay, actually came under the
auspices of a " Royal Charter," which they cherished as the
greatest boon conferred upon any people. But among their first
acts after their arrival at Massachusetts Bay was that ' o abolish
the Church of England worship itself, and set up the Congrega-
tional worship in its place ; to proscribe the Common Prayer
Book, and forbid its use even in private families, and to banish
those who persisted in its use. And instead of converting and
christianizing the savage heathen — ^the chief professed object of
their emigration, and so expressed in their Royal Charter of

/<''•

298

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

incorporation — they never sent a missionary or established a
school among them for more than twelve years ; and then the
first and long the only missionary among the Indians was
John Elliott, self-appointed, and supported by contributions
from England. But during those twelve years, and afterwards,
they slew the Indians by thousands, as the Canaanites and
Amalekites, to be rooted out of the land which God had given
to " the saints " (that is, to themselves), to be possessed and
enjoyed by them. The savage foe, whose arms were bows and
arrows,* were made " formidable " in defence of their homes,
which they had inherited from their forefathers and if, in
defence and attempted recovery of their homes when driven
from them, they inflicted, after their own mode of warfare,
cruelties " upon their invadf^rs, yet they themselves were
the greatest sufferers, almost to annihilation.*!*

' * " Tlie aborif^inea were never formidable in bottle until they became
supplied with the weapons of European invention, " (Bancroft's History of
the United States, Vol. I., p. 401.)

t The treatment of the Indians by the early New England Puritans is one
of the darkest pages in English colonial history. I have slightly alluded
to it in the preceding pages of this volume. Many passages might be selected
from the early divines of New England, referring to the Indians as the
heathen whom they were to drive out of the land which God had given to
this Israel. I will confine myself to the quotation of a few words from
the late Rev. F. B. Marsden, A.M., noted for his Puritan partialities, in the
two volumes of his History of the Early and Later Puritans. But his sense
of Christian justice, tolerance, and humanity revolted at the New England
Puritans' intolerance to each other, and their cruel treatment of the Indian?.
Mr. Marsden says :

" The New England Puritans were revered beyond the Atlantic as the
Pilgrim Fathers, the founders of great cities, and of States renowned through the
wide world for wealth, intelligence, and liberty. Their memory is cherished
in England with feelings of silent respect rather than of unmixed admiration ;
for their inconsistencies were almost equal to their virtues ; and here, while
we respect their integrity, we are not blinded to their faults. A persecuted
band themselves, they soon learned to persecute each other. The disciples
of liberty, they confined its blessings to themselves. The loud champions
of the freedom of conscience, they allowed no freedom which interfered with
their narrow views. Professing a mission of Gospel holiness, they fulfilled it
but in part. When opposed, they were revengeful ; when irritated, fanatical
and cruel. In them a great experiment was to be tried, under conditions
the most favourable to its success ; and it failed in its most important point.
The question to be solved was this : How would the Puritans, the hunted,

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES,

299

2. "The colonies being nourished by the indulgence" of
England, assumed by Charles Townsend, is the second ground of
Colonel Barry's retort, who affirmed that the colonies grew by
England's neglect of them, and that as soon as she began to
care for them, that care was exercised in sending persons to
rule over them in one department or another, etc.

persecuted Puritans behave, were they but once free, once at liberty to
carry their principles into full effect 1 The answer was returned from the
shores of another world. It was distinct and unequivocal. And it was this:
they were prepared to copy the worst vices of their English persecutors, and,
untaught by experience, to imitate their worst mistakes. The severities of
Whitgift seemed to be justified when it was made apparent on the plains of
North America, that they had been inflicted upon men who wanted only tlie
opportunity to inflict them again, and inflict them on one another." (Marsden's
History of the Early Puritans, Chap, xi., pp. 305, 306.)

After referring to early conflicts between the Puritans and Indians, Mr.
Marsden remarks as follows in regard to the manner in which the Puritans
deslroyed the Pequod nation ;

" If there be a justifiable cause of war, it surely must be this, when
our territory is invaded and our -means of existence threatened. That
the Indians fell upon their enemies by the most nefarious stratagems, or
exposed them, when taken in war, to cruel torments (though such ferocity
is not alleged in this instance), does not much afl'ect the question. They
were savages, and fought white men as they and their fathers had always
fought each other. How then should a community of Christian men have
dealt with them 1 Were they to contend as savages or civilized men ] As
civilized men, or rather as men who had forsaken a land of civilization for
purer abodes of piety and peace 1 The Pequod war shows how little their
piety could be tnistcd when their passions were aroused."

" After a week's marching, they came at day-break on the Indian wigwams
and immediately assaulted them. The ' massacre ' (so their own chronicler,
Mr. Bancroft, has termed it) spread from one hut to another ; for the Indians
were asleep and unarmed. But the work of slaughter was too slow. ' We
must burn them,' exclaimed the fanatic chieftain of the Puritans ; and he
cast the first firebrand to windward among their wigwams. In an instant
the encampment was in a blaze. Not a soul escaped. Six hundred Indians,
men, women, and children, perished by the steady hand of the marksman,
by the unresisted broadsword, and by the hideous conflagration.

" The work of revenge was not yet accomplished. In a few days a fresh body
of troops arrived from Massachusetts, accompanied by their minister, Wilson.
The remnants of the proscribed race were now hunted down in their hiding
places ; every wigwam was burned ; every settlement broken up ; every com-
fteld laid waste. There remained, says their exulting historian, not a man or a
woman, not a warrior or child of the Pequod name. A nation had disappeared
from the family of men." " History records many deeds of blood equal in

300

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[CHAP. X.

In reply, let it be remembered that three out of the four New
England colonies — Plymouth, Rhode Island, and Connecticut —
elected their own governors and officers from the beginning to
the end of their colonial cxisteuce, as did Massachusetts during
the first half century of her first Charter, which she forfeited hy
her usurpations, persecutions, and encroachments upon the rights

ferocity to this ; but wc shall seek in vain for a parallel to the massacre of tlit
Pequod Indians. It brouf^ht out the worst points in the Puritan chanictur,
and di.splayed it in the strongest liglit. When their passions were mice
inflamed, their religion itself was cruelty. A dark, fanatical spirit of reveng(!
took possession, not, as in other men, by first expelling every religious and every
human consideration, but, what was infinitely more terrible, by cjvUing to
its aid every stimulant, every motive that religion, jaundiced and perverted,
could supply. It is terrible to read, when c.ities are stormed, of diildren
thrown into the flames, and shrieking women butchered by infuriated men
who have burst the restraints of discipline. It is a dreadful licence ; and
true and gallant soldiers, occur when it may, feel that their profe.^sion is
disgraced. But this was worse. Here all was deliberately calm ; all waa
sanctioned by religion. It was no outbreak of mere brutalit} . The fast
was kept ; the Sabbath was observed ; the staff of office, as a sacred ensign,
was conaecrated by one Christian minister, while another attended upon the
marching of soldiery, and cheered them in the murderous design with
his presence and his prayers. Piety was supposed not to abhor, but to exult
in the exploit. This was true fanaticism. God's word and ordinances were
made subservient to the greatest crimes. They were rudely forced and vio-
lated, and made the ministers of sin. When the assailants, reeking from the
slaughter and blackened with the smoke, returned home, they were every-
where received with a pious ovation. God was devoutly praised, because tlie
first principles of justice, nay, the stinted humanities of war, had been out-
raged, and unresisting savages, with their wives and children, had l)een
ferociously destroyed." (Marsden's History of the Early Puritans, Cliap. xi.,
pp. 305—311.)

Such was the early Puritan method of fulfilling the Royal Charter to the
Massachusetts Company of "Christianizing and civilizing the idolatrous
Indians ;" and such is a practical comment upon Colonel Barry's statement as
to Indian cruelties.

But the intolerance of the Puritans to each other was as conspicuous as
their cruel treatment of the Indians. On this point Mr. Marsden adds :

" The intolerance with which the Puritans had been treated at home
might at least have taught them a lesson of forbearance to each other. B it
it had no such effect. It would almost seem as if, true disciples in the scli )ol
of the High Commission and Star Chamber, their ambition was to excel
their former tyrants in the art of persecution. They imitated, with a perti-
nacious accuracy, the bad examples of their worst oppressors ; and with far
less to excuse them, repeated in America the self-same crimes from which

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

301

of others, as I have shown in Chapter VI. of tliis history ; and
it has been shown in Chapter VII., on the autliority of Puritan
ministers, jurists, and liistorians, that (hirinj^ tlie seventy years
that Massaclujsetts was ruled under the second Royal Charter, her
governors being appointed by the Crown, she advanced in social
unity, in breadth and dignity of legislation, and in ecjuity of gov-
ernment, commerce, and prosperity, beyond anything slie had
enjoyed and manifested under the first Charter — so much so,
that the neighbouring colonies would have gladly been favoured
with her system of government. It is possible there may have
been individual instances of inefficiency, and even failure of
character, in some officers of the Government during a period of
seventy years, as is the case in all Governments, but such
instances were few, if they occurred at all, and sucli as to atibrd
no just pretext for the rhajisody and insinuations of Colonel
Barre on the subject.

3. In the third place, Colonel Barr6 denied that the colonies
had been defended by the arms of England, and said, on the
contrary, " they have nobly taken arms in your defence." It is
true the colonists carried on their own local contests with the
Indians. The northern colonies conceived the idea of driving
the French out of America, and twice attacked Quebec for that
purpose, but they failed ; and the French and Indians made
such encroachments upon them that they implored aid from
England " to prevent their being driven into the sea." It was
not until England " nobly took up arms" in their behalf, and
sent navies and armies for their " defence," that the progress of
French arms and Indian depredations were arrested in America,
and the colonists were delivered from enemies who had disturbed
their peace and endangered their safety for more than a century.

they and tlieir fathers had suffered so much in Eiiglan ^ No political con-
siderations of real importance, no ancient prejudic*' - • ' rwoven with the
framework of society, could be pleaded here. Their institutions were new,
their course was hampered by no precedents. Imagination cannot suggest
a state ol' things more favourable to the easy, safe, and sure development of
their Adews. Had they cherished a catholic spirit, there was nothing to
prevent the exorcise of the most enlarged beneficence. Their choice was
made freely, and they decided in favour of intolerance ; and their fault was
aggravated by the consideration that the experiment had been tried, and that
they themselves were the living witnesses of its folly." (Marsden's History
of the Early Puritons, p. 311.)

302

THE LOYALISTS OF AMKRICA

[chap. X.

At the close of the last French war, the colonies themselves,
through their LegislatureH, gratefully acknowledged their
indebtedness to the mother country for their deliverance and
safety, which, without her aid, they said they never could have
secured.

APPENDIX B.

Opinions of Mr. Ouenville, Mr. Pitt, and Lord Camden (foumerlt
Chief JubTicE Pratt) on the Stamp Act and its Repeal.

The great commoner, Pitt, was not present in the Commons
when the Declaratory and Stamp Acts were passed in 17G5 ;
but he was present at one sitting when an address to the King,
in reply to a .speech from the Throne, relating to opposition in
America to the Stamp Act, was discussed, and in which the
propriety of repealing that Act was mooted and partially argued.
Mr. Pitt held the right of Parliament to impose external taxes
on the colonies by imposing duties on goods ir"r>ortcd into them,
but not to impose internal taxes, such he Stamp Act

imposed. In the course of his speech Mr. F .Id :

" It is a long time since I have attended in Parliament.
When the resolution was taken in the House to tax America,
I was ill in bed. If I could have endured to have been carried
in my bed, so grtat was the agitation of my mind for the con-
sequences, I would have solicited some kind hand to have laid
me down on this floor, to have borne my testimony against it.
It is now an Act that has been passed. I would speak with
decency of every act of this House ; but I must beg the indul-
gence to speak of it with freedom.

"As my health and life are so very infirm and precarious,
that I may not be able to attend on the day that may be fixed
by this House for the consideration of America, I must now,
though somewhat unseasonably, leaving the expediency of the
Stamp Act to some other time, speak to a point of infinite
moment — I mean the right. On a question that may mortally
wound the freedom of three millions of virtuous and brave sub-
jects beyond the Atlantic Ocean, I cannot be silent. America
being neither really nor virtually represented in Westminster,
cajinot be held legally, or constitutionally, or reasonably subject

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

SOS

to obedience to any money bill of tliis kingdom. The colonioH
arc, ecjually with yourselves, entitled to all the natural rights of
mankind, and the peculiar privileges of Englishmen, equally
bound by the laws, and equally participating in the constitu-
tion of this free country. The Americans are the sons, not
the bastards, of England. As subjects, they are entitled to tho
connnon right of representation, and cannot be bound to pay
taxes without their consent. * *

" Tho Connnons of America, represented in their several
Assemblies, have ever been in possessicm of the exercise of this
their constitutional right, of giving and granting; their own
money. They would have been slaves if they had not enjoyed
it. * *

" If this House suft'ers the Stamp Act to continue in force,
France will gain more by your colonies than she ever could
have done if her arms in the last war had been victorious.

" 1 never .shall own the justice of taxing America internally

until she enjoys the right of representation. In every other

point of legislation the authority of Parliament is like the

north star, fixed for the reciprocal benefit of the parent country

and her colonies. The British Parliament, as the supreme

gathering and legislative power, has always bound them by her

laws, by her regulations of their trade and manufactures, and

even in the more absolute interdiction of both. The power of

Parliament, like the circulation from the human heart, active,

vigorous, and perfect in the smallest fibre of the arterial system,

may be known in the colonies by the prohibition of their

carrying a hat to market over the line of one province into

another; or by breaking down the loom in the most distant

comer of the British empire in America; and if this power

were denied, I would not permit them to manufacture a lock of

wool, or form a horse-shoe or hob-nail. But I repeat the House

has no right to lay an internal tax upon America, that country

not being represented."

After Pitt ceased, a pause ensued, when General Conway rose
and said :

" I not only adopt all that has just been said, but believe it
expresses the sentiments of most if not all the King's servants
and wish it may be the unanimous opinion of this House."
Mr. Grenville, author of the Stamp Act, now leader of the

H' Nil'

304

THE LOYALISTS OP AMERICA

[chap. X.

opposition, recovering by this time his self-possession, replied
at length to Mr. Pitt. Among other things he said :

" The disturbances in America began in July, and now we
are in the middle of January ; latply they were only occurrences ;
they are now grown to tumults and riots ; they border on open
rebellion ; and if the doctrine I have heard this day be con-
firmed, nothing can tend more directly to produce revolution.
The government over them being dissolved, a revolution will
take place in America. '

" External and internal taxation arc the same in effect, and
only differ in name. That the sovereign has the supreme legis-
lative power over America cannot be denied ; and taxation is a
part of sovereign power. It is one branch of the legislation.
It has been and it is exercised over those who are not and
were never represented. It is exercised over the India
Company, the merchants of London, the proprietors of the
fitocks, and over many great manufacturing towns." * *

" To hold that the King, by the concession of a Charter, can
exempt a family or a colony from taxation by Parliament,
degrades the constitution of England. If the colonies, instead
of throwing off entirely the authority of Parliament, had pre-
sented a petition to send to it deputies elected among them-
selves, this step would have evoked their attachment to the
Crown and their affection for the mother country, and would
have merited attention.

"The Stamp Act is bvt a pretext of which they make use to
arrive at independence. (French report.) It was thoroughly
considered, and not hurried at the end of the session. It passed
through the different stages in full Houses, with only one
division. When I proposed to tax America, I asked the House
if any gentleman would object to the right ; I repeatedly asked
it, and no man would attempt to deny it. Protection and
obedience are reciprocal. Great Britain protects America;
America is bound to yield obedience. If not, tell us when they
were emancipated ? When they wanted the protection of this
kingdom, they were always ready to ask it. That protection
has always been afforded them in the most full and ample
manner. The nation has run itself into an immense debt to
give it to them ; and now that they are called upon to contribute
a small share towards an expense arising from themselves,

BAP. X.
replied

low we
rrences ;
on open
• be con-
^'olution.
iion will

Feet, and
me legis-
btion is a
■gislation.
e not and
he India
•s of the

arter, can
arliament,
IS, instead
had pre-
>ng theui-
snt to the
,nd would

ike nse to
thoroughly
It passed
only one
Ithe House
ledly asked
},ection and
America ;
[when they
\on of this
protection
md ample
36 debt to
contribute
Lhemselves,

CHAP. X.J

AND THEIR TIMES,

305

they renounce your authority, insult your officers, and break
out, I might almost say, into open rebellion.

" The seditious spirit of the colonists owes its birth to the
factions in this House. We were told we tread on tender
ground; we were told to expect disobedience. What was this
but telling the Americans to stand out against the law, to
encourage their obstinacy, with the expectation of support from
hence ? Let us only hold back a little, they would say ; our
friends will soon be in power.

" Ungrateful people of America ! When I had the honour to
serve the Crown, while you yourselves were loaded with an
enormous debt of one hundred and forty millions sterling, and
paid a revenue of ten millions sterling, you have given bounties
on their timber, on their iron, their hemp, and many other
articles. You have restored in their favour the Act of Naviga-
tion, that palladium of British commerce. I offered to do every-
thing in my power to advance the trade of America. I dis-
couraged no trade but what was prohibited by Act of Parlia-
ment. I was above giving an answer to anonymous calumnies ;
but in this place it becomes me to wipe off the aspersion."

When Grenville sat down, several members got up ; but the
House clamoured for Pitt, who seemed to rise. A point of order
was decided in favour of his speaking, and the cry of "Go on»
go ou !" resounded from all parts of the House. Pitt, addressing
the Speaker, said : •

" Sir, I have been charged with giving birth to sedition in
America. They have spoken their sentiments with freedom
against this unhappy Act, and that freedom has become their
crime. Sorry I am to hear the liberty of speech in this House
imputed as a crime. But the imputation shall not discourage
me. It is a liberty I mean to exercise ; no gentleman ought to
be afraid to exercise it. It is a liberty by which the gentleman
who calumniates it might and ought to have profited. He
ought to have desisted from his project. The gentleman tells us
America is obstinate ; America is almost in open rebellion. I
rejoice that America has resisted." (At this word the members
of the House were startled as though an electric spark had darted
through them all.) " I rejoice that America has resisted. If its
millions of inhabitants had submitted, taxes would soon have
been laid on Ireland ; and if ever this nation should have a
20

pi ^

306

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

tyrant for its king, six millions of freemen, so dead to all the
feelings of liberty as voluntarily to submit to be slaves, would
be fit instruments to make slaves of the rest." * *

" The gentleman tells us of many who are taxed and are not
represented — the East India Company, merchants, stockholders,
manufacturers. Surely many of these are represented in other
capacities. It is a misfortune that more are not actuany repre-
sented. But they are all inhabitants of Great Britain, and as
such are virtually represented. They have connection with
those that elect, and they have influence over them,

" Not one of the Ministers who have taken the lead of gov-
ernment since the accession of King W .m ever recommended
a tax like this of the Stamp Act. Loid Halifax, educated in
the House of Commons ; Lord Oxford, Lord Orford, a great
revenue minister (Walpole), never thought of ^.his. None of
these ever dreamed of robbing the colonies of their constitu-
tional rights. This was reserved to mark the era of the late
Administration.

" The gentleman boasts of his bounties to America. Are not
these bounties intended finally for the benefit of this kingdom ?
If so, where is the peculiar merit to America ? If they are not,
he has misapplied the national treasures.

" If the gentleman cannot understand the difference between
internal and external taxes, I cannot help it. But there is a
plain distinction between taxes levied for purposes of raising
revenue and duties imposed for the regulation of trade, for the
accommodation of the subject, although in the consequences
some revenue may incidentally arise for the latter.

" The gentleman asks when were the colonies emancipated ?
I desire to know when they were made slaves ? But I do not
dwell upon words. The profits to Great Britain from the trade
of the colonies through all its branches is two millions a year.
This is the fund that carried you triumphantly through the last
war. The estates that were rented at two thousand pounds a
year threescore years ago, are at three thousand pounds at
present. You owe this to America. This is the price that
America pays for your protection;* and shall a miserable

♦ It was but just to have added that the trade between England and
America was as profitable to America as it was to England, and that the value
of property and rents advanced more rapidly in America than in England.

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

307

financier come with a boast that he can fetch a peppercorn into
the exchequer to the loss of millions to the nation ?* I dare
not say how much higher these profits may be augmented.
Omitting the immense increase of people in the northern colonies
by natural population, and the emigration from every part of
Europe, I am convinced the whole commercial system may be
altered to advantage." * *

" Upon the whole, I will beg leave to tell the House what is
really my opinion. It is that the Stamp Act be repealed
absolutely, totally, and immediately ; that the reason for the
repeal be assigned, because it was founded on an erroneous
principle. A.t the same time, let the sovereign authority of this
country over the colonies be asserted in as strong terms as can
be devised, and be made to extend to every point of legislation,
that we may bind their trade, confine their manufactures, and
exercise every power whatsoever except that of taking their
money out of their pockets without their consent.

" Let us be content with the advantage which Providence has
bestowed upon us. We have attained the highest glory and
greatness. Let us strive long to preserve them for our own
liappiness and that of our posterity."+

The effect of Pitt's speech was prodigious, combining cogency
of argument with fervour of feeling, splendour of eloquence,
and matchless oratorical power. The very next day the Duke of
Grafton advised the King to send for Pitt ; but the King declined,
though in a state of " extreme agitation." Nevertheless, the
Duke of Grafton himself sought an interview with Pitt, who
showed every disposition to unite with certain members and
friends of the liberal Rockingham Administration to promote
tlie repeal of the Stamp Act and the pacification of America ;
but it was found that many of the friends and advocates of
America did not agree with Pitt in denying the right of Parlia-
ment to tax America, though they deemed it inexpedient and

* This is a withering rebuke to a conceited though clever young statesman,
Lord Nugent, who, in a previous part of the debate, insisted that the honour
and dignity of the kingdom obligated them to compel the execution of the
Stamp Act, " unless the right was acknowledged and the repeal solicited as a
I'avour," concluding mth the remark that " a peppercorn, in acknowledg-
ment of the right, is of more value than millions without."

t Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. Y., Chap, xzi

I!il'^'

308

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

unjust. Pitt could not therefore accept office. Mr. Bancroft
remarks : " The principle of giving up all taxation over the
colonies, on which the union was to have rested, had implacable
opponents in the family of Hardwicke, and in the person of
Rockingham's own private secretary (Edmund Burke). 'If
ever one man lived more zealous than another for the supremacy
of Parliament, and the rights of the imperial crown, it was
Edmund Burke.' He was the advocate of * an unlimited legis-
lative power over the colonies.' ' He saw not how the power of
taxation could be given up, without giving up the rest.' ' If
Pitt was able to see it, Pitt saw further than he could.' His
wishes were very earnest ' to keep the whole body of this
authority perfetc and entire.' He was jealous of it; he was
honestly of that opinion ; and Rockingham, after proceeding so
far, and finding in Pitt all the encouragement that he expected,
let the negotiation drop. Conway and Grafton were compelled
to disregard their own avowals on the question of the right of
taxation; the Ministry conformed to the opinion, which was
that of Charles Yorke, the Attorney-General, and still more of
Edmund Burke."*

While the repeal of the Stamp Act was under discussion in
the Commons, Dr. Franklin — then Deputy Postmaster-General
for America — was summoned to give evidence at the bar of the
House. His examination was long and minute. His thorough
knowledge of all the subjects, his independence and candour
made a deep impression, but he was dismissed from office the
day after giving his evidence. Some of the questions and
answers are as follows :

Question. — What is your name and place of abode 1

Answer. — Franklin, of Philadelphia.

Q. — Do the Americans pay any considerable taxes among themselves 1

A. — Certainly; many and very heavy taxes.

Q. — What are the present taxes in Pennsylvania levied by the laws of the
colony ?

A. — There are taxes on all estates, real and personal; a poll-tax; a tax on
all ofl&ces, professions, trades, and businesses, according to their profits ; an
excise on all wine, rum, and other spirits; and a duty of ^10 per head on all
negroes imported; with some other duties.

Q. — For what purpose are those taxes levied 1

A. — For the support of the civil and military establishment of the country,
and to discharge the heavy debt contracted in the last war.

♦ History of the United Stages, Vol. V., Chap, xxi., pp. 397, 398.

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

309

Q. — Are not you concerned in the management of the post-office in
America 1

A. — Yes. I am Deputy Postmaster-General of North America..

Q. — Don't you think the distribution of stamps, by post, to all the inhabi-
tants, very practicable, if there was no opposition ?

A. — The posts only go along the sea coasts ; they do not, except in a few
instances, go back into the country ; and if they did, sending for stamps by
post would occasion an expense of postage amounting, in many cases, to
much more than that of the stamps themselves.

Q. — Are not the colonies, from their circumstances, very able to pay the
stamp duty ?

A. — In my opinion, there is not gold and silver enough in the colonies to
pay the stamp duty for one year.

Q. — Don't you know that the money arising from the stamps was all to be
laid out in America ?

A. — I know it is appropriated by the Act to the American service ; but it
will be spent in the conquered colonies, where the soldiers are, not in the
colonies that pay it.

Q. — Is there not a balance of trade due from the colonies where the troopa
are posted, that will bring back the money to the old colonies 1

A. — I think not. I believe very little would come back. I know of no
trade likely to bring it back. I think it would come from the colonies where
it was spent, directly to England ; for I have always observed that in every
colony the more plenty the means of remittance to England, the more goods
are sent for, and the more trade with England carried on,

Q. — What may be the amount of one year's imports into Pennsylvania
from Britain ?

A. — I have been informed that our merchants compute the imports from
Britain to be above i500,00a

Q. — Wliat may be the amount of the produce of your province exported to
Britain ?

A. — It must be small, as we produce little that is wanted in Britain. I
suppose it cannot exceed .£40,000.

Q. — How then do you pay the balance ?

A. — The balance is paid by our produce carried to the West Indies, and
sold in our own island, or to the French, Spaniards, Danes and Dutch ; by
the same carried to other colonies in North America, as to New England,
Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, Carolina and Georgia ; by the same carried to
different parts of Europe, as Spain, Portugal and Italy. In all which places
we receive either money, bills of exchange, or commodities that suit for re-
mittance to Britain ; which together with all the profits on the industry of
our merchants and mariners, arising in those circuitous voyages, and the freights
made by their ships, centre finally in Britain to dischai^^e the balance, and
pay for British manufactures continually used in the province, or sold to
foreigners by our traders.

Q. — Do you think it right that America should be protected by this country
and pay no part of the expense 1

iS"

m^-

310

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

R i^

A. — That is not the case. The colonies raised, clothed, and paid,
during tlie last war, nearly 25,(X)0 men, and spent many millions.

Q. — Were not you reimbursed by Parliament ?

A. — We were only reimbursed what, in your opinion, we had advanced
beyond our proportion, or beyond what might reasonably ' e expected from
us ; and it was a very small part of what we spent. Pennsylvania, in paiticu-
lar, disbursed about ^£500,000, and the reimbursements in the whole did not
exceed ;f 60,000.

Q. — You have said that you pay heavy taxes in Pennsylvania ; what do
they amount to in the pound ]

A. — The tax on all estates, real and personal, to eighteen-pence in the
pound, fully rated ; and the tax on the profits of trades and professions,
with other taxes, do, I suppose, make full half-a-crown in the pound.

Q. — Do you not think the people of America would submit to pay the
stamp duty if it were moderated ]

A. — No, never, unless compelled by the force of arms.

Q. — What was the temper of America towards Great Britain before the
year 1763 ?

A. — The best in the world. They submitted willingly to the government
of the Crown, and paid, in all their courts, obedience to Acts of Parliament.
Numerous as the people are in the several old provinces, they cost you noth-
ing in forts, citadels, garrisons, or armies, to keep them in subjection. They
were governed by this country at the expense only of a little pen, ink and
paper. They were led by a thread. They had not only a respect, but an
affection for Great Britain, for its laws, its customs and manners, and even a
fondness for its fashions, that greatly increased the commerce. Natives of
Britain were alwaiys treated with particular regard ; to be an Old-England-
man was of itself a character of some respect, and gave a kind of rank
among us.

Q. — And what is their temper now 1 .

A. — Oh ! very much altered.

Q. — Did you ever hear the authority of Parliament to make laws for
America questioned till lately ?

A. — The authority of Parliament was allowed to be valid in all laws,
except such as should levy internal taxes. It was never disputed in levying
duties to regulate commerce.

Q. — In what light did the people of America use to consider the Parlia-
ment of Great Britain 1

A. — They considered the Parliament as the great bulwark and security of
their liberties and privileges, and always spoke of it with the utmost respect
and veneration. Arbitrary ministers, they thought, might possibly at times
attempt to oppress them ; but they relied on it, that the Parliament on
application would always give redress. They remembered with gratitude a
strong instance of this, when a Bill was brought into Parliament, with a
clause to make royal instructions laws in the colonies, which the House of
Commons would not pass, and it was thrown out.

Q. — And iave they not still the same respect for Parliament ?

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

311

A. — No ; it is greiitly lessened.

Q. — To what causes is that owing 1

A. — To a concurrence of causes ; the restraints lately laid on their trade
by which the bringing of foreign gold and silver into the colonies was pre-
vented ; the prohibition of making paper money among themselves, and
then demanding u new and heavy tax by stamps ; taking away at the same
time trial by juries, and refusing to see and hear their humble petitions.

Q. — Don't you think they would submit to the Stamp Act if it was modi-
fied, the obnoxious parts taken out, and the duty reduced to some particulars
of small moment 'i

A. — No ; they will never submit to it.

Q. — What is your opinion of a future tax, imposed on the same principle
of tliat of the Stamp Act ; how would the Americans receive it ?

A. — Just as they do this. They would not pay it.

Q. — Have not you heard of the resolutions of this House, and of the House
of Lords, asserting the right of Parliament relating to America, including a
power to tax the people there 1

A. — Yes ; I have heard of such resolutions.

Q. — What will be the opinion of the Americans on those resolutions ]

A. — They will think them unconstitutional and unjust.

Q. — Was it an opinion in America before 1763, that the Parliament had nO'
right to levy taxes and duties there ?

A. — I never heard any objection to the right of levying duties to regulate
commerce ; but a right to levy internal taxes was never supposed to be in
Parliament, as we are not represented there.

Q. — You say the colonies have always submitted to external taxes, and
object to the right of Parliament only in levying internal taxes ; now, can you
show that there is any kind of diflerence between the two taxes to the colony
on which they may be laid 1

A. — I think the difference is very great. An external tax is a duty levied on
commodities imported ; that duty is added to the first cost, and other charges
on the commodity, and when it is offered for sale, makes a part of the price.
If the people do not like it at that price, they refuse it ; they are not obliged
to pay it. But an internal tax is forced from the people without their con-
sent, if not levied by their own representatives. The Stamp Act says we
shall have no commerce, make no exchange of property witli each other ;
neither purchase, nor grant, nor recover debts ; we shall neither marry nor
make our wills unless we pay such and such sums, and thus it is intended to-
extort our money from us, or ruin us by the consequences of refusing to pay it.

Q. — But supposing the internal tax or duty to be levied on the necessaries
of life imported into your colony, will not that be the same thing in its
effects as an internal tax ?

A. — I do not know a single article imported into the northern colonies,
but what they can either do without or make themselves.

Q. — Don't you think cloth from England absolutely necessary to them ?

A. — No, by no means absolutely necessary ; with industry and goodl
management, they may very well supply themselves with all they want.

312

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

m !i

I ^

Q. — Considering the resolution of Parliament as to the right, do you think,
if the Stamp Act is repealed, that the North Americans will be satisfied I

A. — I believe they will.

Q. — Why do you think so ?

A. — I think the resolutions of right will give them very little concern, if
they are never attempted to be carried into practice. The colonies will
probably consider themselves in the same situation in that respect with
Ireland ; they know you claim the same right with regard to Ireland, but
you never exercise it. And they may believe you never will exercise it in
the colonies, any more than in Ireland, unless on some very extraordinary
occasion.

Q. — But who are to be the judges of that extraordinary occasion ? Is not
the Farliament 1

A. — Though the Parliament may judge of the occasion, the people will
think it can never exercise such right till representatives from the colonies
are admitted into Parliament, and that, whenever the occasion arises, repre-
sentatives will be ordered.

Q. — Did the Americans ever dispute the controlling power of Parliament to
regulate the commerce I

A.— No.

Q. — Can anything less than a military force carry the Stamp Act into
execution ?

A. — I do not see how a military force can be applied to that purpose.

Q- — Why may it not 1

A. — Suppose a military force sent into America, they will find nobody in
iirms ; what are they then to do 1 They cannot force a man to take stamps,
who refuses to do without them. They will not find a rebellion ; they may
indeed make one.

Q. — If the Act is not repealed, what do you think will be the consequences ?

A. — A total loss of the respect and affection the people of America
bear to this country, and of all the commerce that depends on that respect
jond aflfection.

Q. — How can the commerce be affected ?

A. — You will find that, if the Act is not repealed, they will take very
little of your manufactures in a short time.

Q. — Is it in their power to do without them ?

A. — I think they may very well do without them.

Q. — Is it their interest not to take them ?

A. —The goods they take from Britain are either necessaries, mere con-
veniences, or superfluities. The first, as cloth, etc., with a little industry they
can make at home ; the second they can do without, till they are able to
provide them among themselves ; and the last, which are much the greatest
j)art, they will strike off immediately. They are mere articles of fashion,
piTchased and consumed because the fashion in a respected country, but
will now be detested and rejected. The people have already struck off, by
general agreement, the use of all goods fashionable in mournings, and many
thousand pounds worth are sent b6u:k«8 unsaleable.

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

313

Q. — Suppose an Act of internal regulations connected with a lax, how
would they receive it 1

A. — I think it would be objected to.

Q. — Then no regulation with a tax would be submitted to 1

A. — Their opinion is, that when aids to the CrowTi are wanted, they are to
be asked of the several Assemblies, according to tlie old-established usage, who
will, as they always have done, grant them freely ; and that their money
ought not to be given away without their consent by persons at a distance,
unacquainted with their circunisttuices and abilities. The granting aids to
the Crown is the only means they have of recommending themselves to their
Sovereign, and they think it extremely hard and unjust that a body of men,
in which they have no representation, should make a merit to itself of giving
and granting what is not its own, but theirs, and deprive them of a right
they esteem of the utmost value and importance, as it ia the security of all
their other rights.

Q. — But is not the post-office, which tliey have long received, a tax as well
as a regulation ?

A. — No ; the money paid for the postage of a letter is not of the nature of
a tax ; it is merely a quantum meruit for a service done ; no person is com-
pellable to pay the money if he does not choose to receive the service. A
man may still, as before the Act, send his letter by a servant, a special
messenger, or a friend, if he thinks it cheaper and safer.

Q. — But do they not consider the regulations of the post-office, by the Act
of last year, as a tax ?

A. — By the regulations of last year, the rate of postage was generally
abated near thirty per cent, through all Aitierica ; they cei-tainly cannot con-
sider such abatement as a tax.

Q. — If an excise was laid by Parliament, which they might likewise avoid
paying, by not consuming the articles excised, would they then object to it ?

A. — They would certainly object to it, as an excise is unconnected with
any service done, and is merely an aid which they think ought to be asked
of them, and granted by them if they are to pay it, and can be granted for
them by no others whatsoever, whom they have not empowered for that
pui-pose.

Q. — You say they do not object to the right of Parliament in levying duties
on goods to be paid on their importation ; now, is there any kind of difference
between a duty on the importation of goods and an excise on their con-
sumption 1

A. — Yes, a very material one ; an excise, for the reasons I have just men-
tioned, they think you can have no right to levy within their country. But
the sea is yours ; you maintain by your fleets the safety of navigation in it,
and keep it clear of pirates ; you may have therefore a natural and equitable
right to some toll or duty on merchandise carried through that part of your
dominions, towards defraying the expense you are at in ships to maintain the
safety of that carriage.

Q. — Supposing the Stamp Act continued and was enforced, do you ima-
gine that ill-humour will induce the Americans to give as much for worse

314

THE LOYALISTS OP AMERICA

[chap. X.

U'm

manufactures of their own, and use them preferably to better ones of
yours 1

A. — Yes, I think so. People will pay as freely to gratify one passion as
another — their resentment as their pride.

Q. — What do you think asutKcient military force to protect the distribu-
tion of the stamps in every part of America ?

A. — A very great force ; I can't say what, if the disposition of America is
for a general resistance.

Q. — If the Stamp Act should be repealed, would not the Americans think
they could oblige the Parliament to repeal every external tax law now
in force 1

A. — It is hard to answer questions of what people at such a distance will
think.

Q. — But what do you imagine they will think were the motives of repeal-
ing the Act ?

A. — I suppose they will think that it was repealed from a conviction of its
inexpediency ; and they will rely upon it that, while the same expediency
subsists, you will never attempt to make such another.

Q. — What do you mean by its inexpediency ?

A. — I mean its inexpediency on several accounts : the poverty and in-
ability of those who were to pay the tax, the general discontent it has
occasioned, and the impracticability of enforcing it.

Q. — If the Act should be repealed, and the Legislature should show its
resentment to the opposers of the Stamp Act, would the colonies acquiesce
in the authority of the Legislature 1 What is your opinion they would do ?

A. — I don't doubt at all that if the Legislature repeal the Stamp Act, the
colonies will acquiesce in the authority.

Q. — But if the Legislature should think fit to ascertain its right to levy
taxes, by any Act levying a small tax, contrary to their opinion, would they
submit to pay the tax 1

A. — The proceedings of the people in America have been considered too much
together. The procedings of the Assemblies have been very different from
those of the mobs, and should be distinguished, as having no connection with
each other. The Assemblies have only peaceably resolved what they take
to be their rights ; they have taken no measures for opposition by force ;
they have not built a fort, raised a man, or provided a grain of ammunition
in order to such opposition. The ringleaders of riots they think ought to be
punished ; they would punish them themselves if they could. Every sober,
sensible man would wish to see rioters punished, as otherwise peaceable
people have no security of person or estate. But as to an internal tux, how
small soever, levied by the Legislature here on the people there, while they
have no representatives in this Legislature, I think it will never be submitted
to. They will oppose it to the last. They do not consider it as at all neces-
sary for you to raise money on them by your taxes, because they are, and
always have been, ready to raise money by taxes among themselves, and to
grant large sums, equal to their abilities, upon requisition from the Crown.
They have not only granted equal to their abilities, but during all the last

[chap. X.

ter ones of

i posHiou 08

he dislrilju-

' Americu is

■icans think
IX law now

iistance will
28 of repeal-
friction of its
J expediency

erty and in-
>ntent it has

uld show its
lies acquiesce
sy would do ?
imp Act, the

:i^lit to levy
I, would they

Ted too much
ifferent irom
inection with
at they take
)n Tt»y force ;
ammunition
c ought to be
Every sober,
.se peaceable
nal tax, how
e, while they
be submitted

at all neces-
they are, and
Helves, and to

the Crown.

ig all the last

CHAP. X.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

315

war they granted far beyond their abilities, and beyond their proportion
with this country, you yourselves being judges, to the amount of many
hundred thousand pounds ; and this they did freely and readily, only on a
sort of promise from the Secretary of Stjite that it should be recommended
to Parliament to make them compensation. It was accordingly recom-
mended to Parliament, in the most honourable manner, for them. America
has been greatly misrepresented and abused here, in papers and pamphlets
and speeches, as ungrateful, unreasonable, ami unjust in having put this
nation to immense expense for their defence, and refusing to bear any part of
that expense. The colonies raised, paid, and clothed near 25,(H)0 men during
the last war — a number equal to those sent from Britain, and far beyond their
proportion ; they went deeply into debt in doing this, and all their taxes and
estates are mortgaged, for many years to come, for discharging that debt.
The Government here was at that time very sensible of this. The colonies
were recommended to Parliament. Every year the King sent down to the
House a written message to this purport : That his Majesty, being highly
sensible of the zeal and vigour with which his faithful subjects in North
America had exerted themselves in defence of his Majesty's just rights and
possessions, recommended it to the House to take the same into consideration,
and enable him to give them a proper compensation. You will find those mes-
sages on your journals'every year of the war to the very last, and you did accord-
ingly give ^200,000 annually to the Crown, to be distributed in such compensa-
tion to the colonies. This is the strongest of all proofs that the colonies, far
from being unwilling to bear a share of the burden, did exceed their pro-
portion ; for if they had done less, or had only equalled their proportion,
there would have been no room or reason for compensation. Indeed, the
sums reimbursed them were by no means adequate to the expense they
incurred beyond their proportion ; but they never murmured at that : they
esteemed their Sovereign's approbation of their zeal and fidelity, and the
approbation of this House, far beyond any other kind of compensation ;
therefore there was no occasion for this Act to force money from an unwilling
people. They had not refused giving money for the purposes of the Act ;
no requisition had been made ; they were always willing and ready to do
what could reasonably be expected from them, and in this light they wish
to be considered.

Q. — But suppose Great Britain should be engaged in a war in Europe,
would North America contribute to the support of it ?

A. — I do think they would, as far as their circumstances would permit.
They consider themselves as a part of the British empire, and as having one
common interest with it ; they may be looked on here as foreigners, but they
do not consider themselves as such. They are zealous for the honour and
prosperity of this nation, and, while they are well used, will always be ready
to support it, aa far as their little power goes.

Q. — Do you think the Assemblies have a right to levy money on the
subject there, to grant to the Crown ?

A. — I certainly think so ; they have always done it

m
hi

I -

816

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. X.

Q. — Would tliey do this Ibr u Britiflh concern ; a», suppoHC, a wur in some
part of Europe tliat did not afreet them ?

A. — Y»!s, for iinytliin^ tliiit concerned the general interest. They consider
themselvcfl aa u part of tiie whole.

Q. — What in the uhuuI coUHtitutional manner of culling on the colunicn
for aids ?

A. — A letter from the Secretary of State.

Q. — Is this all you mean — a letter from the SecreUiry of State 1

A. — I mean the usual way of requisition — in a circular letter from tlu!
Secretary of State, by his Majesty's command, reciting the occasion, and
recommending it to the cohmies to grant such aids as became their royalty
and were suitable to their abilities.

Q.— Did the Secretary of State ever write for money for the Crown I

A. — The requisitions have been to raise, clothe, and pay men, which can-
not be done without money.

Q. — Would they grant money alone if called on ?

A. — In my opinion they would, money as well as men, when they Iiave
money or can make it.

Q. — What used to be the pride of the Americans ?

A. — To indulge in the fashions and manufactures of Great Britain.

Q. — What is now their pride ?

A. — To wear their old clothes over again, till they can make new ones.*

* Prior Documents, pp. 64 — 81.

CHAP. XI,]

AND THEIR TIM Fa.

817

CHAPTER XI.

Authority of Parliament ovkr the Britibh Colonies.

Before proceeding with a summary statement of events which
followed the repeal of the Stamp Act, I think it proper to state
the nature and extent of the authority of Parliament over the
colonies, as interpreted by legislative bodies and statesmen on
both sides of the Atlantic. Mr. Bancroft well remarks :

" It is the glory of England that the rightfulness of the
Stamp Act was in England itself a subject of dispute. It could
have been so nowhere else. The King of France taxed the
French colonies as a matter of course ; the King of Spain col-
lected a revenue by his own will in Mexico and Peru, in Cuba
and Porto Rico, and wherever he ruled. The States-General of
the Netherlands had no constitutional doubt about imposing
duties on their outlying colonies. To England exclusively
belongs the honour that between her and her colonies the
question of right could arise ; it is still more to her glory, as
well as to her happiness and freedom, that in that contest her
success was not possible. Her principles, her traditions, her
liberty, her constitution, all forbade that arbitrary rule should
become her characteristic. The shaft aimed at her new colonial
policy was tipped with a feather from her own wing."*

In the dispute which took place in 1757 between the Legis-
lative Assembly of Massachusetts and the Earl of Loudoun as
to the extension of the Mutiny Act to the colonies, and the
passing of an Act by the local Legislature for the billeting of
the troops, as similar in its provisions as possible to those of the
Mutiny Act — so that it was accepted by the Earl of Loudoun —
the Massachusetts Assembly vindicated their motives for deny-

* History of the United States, Vol. V., Chap, xx., pp. 366, 367.

318

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XI.

ing the application of the Mutiny Act to the colonies, and for
providing quarters for the military by an Act of their own,
yet recognizing the legitimate authority of Parliament, in a
message to Governor Barnard containing the following words :

" We wish to stand perfectly right with his lordship (the
Earl of Loudoun), and it will be a great satisfaction to us if
we may be able to remove his misapprehension of the spring
and motives of our proceedings. His lordship is pleased to
say that we seem willing to enter into a dispute upon the
necessity of a provincial law to enforce a British Act of Parlia-
ment.

" We are utterly ignorant as to what part of our conduct
could give occasion for this expression. The point in which
we were obliged to differ from his lordship was the extent of
the provision made by Act of Parliament for regulating quarters,
We thought it did not reach the colonies. Had we thought it
did reach ua, and yet made an Act of our own to enforce it,
there would have been good grounds for his lordship's exception;
but being fully persuaded that the provision was never in-
tended for us, what better step could we take than, agreeable to
the twentieth section of the Articles of War, to regulate
quarters as the circumstances of the province require, but still
as similar to the provisions made in England as possible ? And
liow can it be inferred from thence that we suppose a pro-
vincial Act necessary to enforce an Act of Parliament ?

" We are willing, by a due exercise of the powers of civil gov-
ernment (and we have the pleasure of seeing your Excellency
concur with us), to remove, as much as may be, all pretenco
of necessity of military government. Such measures, we are
sure, will never be disapproved by the Parliament of Great
Britain, our dependence upon which we never had a desire or
thought of lessening. From the knowledge your Excellency
has acquired of us, you will be able to do us justice in this
regard.

" In our message to your Excellency, which you transmitted
to his lordship, we declared that the Act of Parliament, the
extent of which was then in dispute, as far as it related to the
Plantations, had always been observed by us.

" The authority of all Acts of Parliament which concern the
colonies, and extend to them, is ever achnowledged in all the

[chap. XI.

8, and for
heir own,
lent, in a
ig words:
iship (the
a to us if
the spring
pleased to
upon the
of Parlia-

ir conduct

in which

extent of

g quarters,

thought it

enforce it,

exception;

never in-

rreeable to

regulate

but still

Die ? And

[>se a pro-

civil gov-
Sxcellency
1 pretenc3
}s, we are
of Great
desire or
Excellency
ce in this

•ansmitted
ment, the
,ed to the

CHAP. XI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

319

Courts of laiv, and made the rule in all judicial pi'oceed-
ings in the province. There is not a member of the General
Court, we know no inhabitant within the bounds of the Govern-
ment, that ever questioned this authority.

" To p^^event any ill consequences which may arise from an
opinion of our holding such principles, we now utterly disavow
them, as ive should readily have done at any time past if there
had been occasion for it ; and we pray that his lordship may
be acquainted therewith, that we may appear in a true light,
and that no impressions may remain to our disadvantage."*

This is a full and indefinite recognition of the supreme au-
thority of Parliament, even to the providing of accommodation
for the soldiers ; and such was the recognition of the authority
of Parliament throughout the colonies. " It was generally
allowed," says Dr. Karasay, "that as the planting of colonies
was not designed to erect an independent Government, but to
extend an old one, the parent state had a right to restrain their
trade in every way which conduced to the common emolument.
They for the most part considered the mother country as
authorized to name ports and nations to which alone their
merchandise should be carried, and with which alone they
should trade ; but the novel claim of taxing them without
their consent was universally reprobated as contrary to their
natural, chartered, and constitutional rights. In opposition to
it, they not only alleged the general principles of liberty, but
ancient usage. During the first hundred and fifty years of
their existence they had been left to tax themselves and in
their own way." "In the war of 1755, the events of which
were fresh in the recollection of every one, the Parliament had
in no instance attempted to raise either men or money in the
colonies by its own authority. As the claim of taxation on one
side and the refusal on the other were the very hinges on which
the revolution turned they merit a particular discussion."^

The only exception to the authority of Parliament over the
colonies was levying internal taxes. A marked distinction was
made between external and internal taxes. It was admitted
upon all hands that the Parliament had the constitutional right

yncem the
in all the

* Hutching la's History of MasaachusetU. Bay, Vol. III., Chap, i., pp. 65, 66.
t Colonial History, Vol. I., pp. 327, 3S18.

T-T

■'}\

320

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XI.

tit

to impose the former, but not the latter. The Tory opposition
in the British Parliament denied the distinction between external
and internal taxes, and maintained that if Parliament had the
right to impose the one they had equally the right to impose
the other ; but the advocates of American rights maintained
the distinction between external and internal taxation ; and
also Dr. Franklin, in his evidence at the bar of the House of
Commons, in February, 1766, which I have quoted at length
above, as the best exposition of the colonial side of the ques-
tions at issue between England and America. I will here
reproduce two questions and answers on the subject now under
consideration:

Q. — " You say they do not object to the right of Parliament,
in levying duties on goods, to be paid on their importation ;
now, is there any kind of difference between a duty on the
importation of goods and an excise on their consumption ?"

A. — " Yes, a very material one ; an excise, for the reasons
I have just mentioned, they think you can have no right to
levy within their country. But the sea is yours ; you maintain
by your fleets the safety of navigation in it, and keep it clear
of pirates ; you may have therefore a natural and equitable
right to some toll or duty on merchandise carried through that
part of your dominions, towards defraying the expense you are
at in ships to maintain the safety of that carriage."

Q. — " Does this reasoning hold in the case of a duty laid
on the produce of their lands exported ? And would they not
then object to make a duty ?"

A. — " If it tended to make the produce so much dearer abroad
as to lessen the demand for it, to be sure they would object to
such a duty ; not to your right of levying it, but they would
complain of it as a burden, and petition you to lighten it."

It will be observed that in these words of Dr. Franklin there
is the fullest recognition of the right of Parliament to impose
duties on all articles imported into, or exported from, the
colonies ; the only exception was the levying direct or internal
taxes for the purposes of revenue, the right to impose which
was held, and we think justly held, to belong to the represen-
tative Legislatures elected by the colonists themselves. Such
also were the views of the two great statesmen, Pitt and Burke,
who with such matchless eloquence advocated the rights of

HAP. XI.

iposition
external
had the
3 impose
intained
Dn ; and
louse of
t length
he ques-
vrill here
w under

rliament,
ortation ;
Y on the
on ?

i reasons
right to
maintain
p it clear
[equitable
•ugh that
you are

uty laid
they not

CHAP. XL]

AND THEIR TIMES.

321

abroad

bject to

would

in there
impose
rom, the
internal
e which
■epresen-
Such
Burke,
ights of

the colonies — whose speeches have become household words in
America, and are found in all their school books. Mr. Pitt, in
a speech which I have quoted at length in a previous chapter,
said expressly :

" Let the sovereign authority of this country over the colonies
be asserted in as strong terms as can be devised, and be made
to extend to every point of legislation whatsoever, that we
may bind their trade, confine their manufactures, and exercise
every power except that of taking their money out of their
pockets without their consent."

Mr. Pitt therefore advocated the repeal of the Stamp Act
with all his fiery eloquence and energy, saying that he rejoiced
that the colonists had resisted that Act — not by riots or force of
arms, but by every constitutional mode of resistance, in the
expression of public opinion against an unjust and oppressive
measure. Mr. Pitt's speech has been quoted by American
writers, and inserted in American school books, to justify the
resistance of Americi to England in the revolution which was
declared in 1776 ; but his speech was delivered, and the Act
against which it was delivered was repealed, ten years before.
The United Empire Loyalists were as much opposed to the
Stamp Act as any other colonists, and rejoiced as heartily at its
repeal.

Edmund Burke was the appointed agent of the province of
New York, and no member of the House of Commons equalled
him in the eloquent and elaborate advocacy of the popular
rights of the colonies. Extracts from his speeches have been
circulated in every form, and in unnumbered repetition in
American periodicals and school books ; but what he said as to
the authority of Parliament over the colonies has not found so
wide a circulation in America. In advocating the repeal of the
Stamp Act, in his celebrated speech on American taxation,
Mr. Burke said :

" What is to become of the Declaratory Act, asserting the
entireness of British legislative authority, if we abandon the
practice of taxation ? For my part, I look upon the rights
stated in that Act exactly in the manner in which I viewed
them on its very first proposition, and which I have often taken
the liberty, with great humility, to lay before you. I look, I say,
on the imperial rights of Qreat Britan, and the privileges which

322

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap, XI.

the colonists ought to enjoy under those rights, to be just the
most reconcilable things in the world. The Parliament of Great
Britain sits at the head of her extensive empire in two cupacities :
one, as the local Legislature of this island, providing for all things
at home, immediately, and by no other instrument than the
executive power ; the other, and I think her nobler capacity, is
what I call her imperial character, in which, as from the throne
of heaven, she superintends all the several inferior Legislatures,
and guides and controls them all, without annihilating any. As
all these Provincial Legislatures are only co-ordinate with each
other, they ought all to be subordinate to her, else they can
neither preserve mutual peace, nor hope for mutual justice, nor
effectually afford mutual assistance. It is necessary to coerce
the negligent, to restrain the violent, and to aid the weak and
deficient, by the overruling plenitude of its power. She is never
to intrude into the place of the others while they are equal to
the common ends of their institution. But in order to enable
Parliament to answer all these ends of provident and beneficent
superintendence, her powers must be boundless. The gentlemen
who think the powers of Parliament limited, may please them-
selves to talk of requisitions. But suppose the requisitions are
not obeyed ? What ! Shall there be no reserved power in the
empire to supply a deficiency which may weaken, divide, and
dissipate the whole ? We are engaged in war ; the Secretary of
State calls upon the colonies to contribute ; some would do it ;
I think most would cheerfully furnish whatever is demanded.
One or two, suppose, hang back, and, eavsing themselves, let the
stress of the draft be on the others — surely it is proper that
some authority might legally say, ' Tax yourselves for the
common supply, or Parliament will do it for you.' This back-
wardness was, as I am told, actually the case of Pennsylvania,
for some short time towards the beginning of the last war,
owing to some internal dissensions in the colony. But whether
the act were so, or otherwise, the case is equally to be provided
for by a competent sovereign power. But then this ought to be
no ordinary power, nor ever used in the first instance. This is
what I meant when I have said at various times that I con-
sider the power of taxing in Parliament as an instrument of
empire, and not as a means of supply."*

* Speech on American taxation.

[chap. XI.

)e just the
nt of Great
capacities :
ir all things
b than the
capacity, is
the throne
legislatures,
g any. As
! with each
e they can
justice, nor
•y to coerce
le weak and
She is never
are equal to
er to enable
d beneficent
le gentlemen
)lease them-
uisitions are
)ower in the
divide, and
Secretary of
8\rould do it ;
s demanded,
lives, let the
proper that
ves for the
This hack-
ennsylvania,
\e last war,
But whether
be provided
ought to be
lice. This is
that I con-
strument of

CHAP. XII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

323

CHAPTER XII.

Summary op Events from the Repeal of the Stamp Act, March,
1766, to the End of the Year.

The universal joy caused in both Great Britain and America
by the repeal of the Stamp Act foreshadowed a new era of
unity and co-operation between the mother country and the
colonies. But though trade and commerce resumed their activity,
and mutual expressions of respect and affection characterized the
correspondence, private and official, between England and
America, the rejoicings of re-union were soon silenced, and
nmtual confidence, if restored at all, soon yielded to mutual
suspicion. The King regretted the repeal of the Stamp Act as
" a fatal compliance" which had " wounded the majesty" of
England, and planted " thorns under his own pillow." He soon
found a pretext for ridding himself of the Ministers who had
influenced the Parliament, and compelled himself to adopt and
sanction that measure, and to surround himself with Ministers,
some of whom sympathized with the King in his regrets, and all
of whom were prepared to compensate for the humiliation to
America in the repeal of the Stamp Act, by imposing obligations
and taxes on the colonies in other forms, under the absolute
authority of Parliament affirmed in the Declaratory Act, and
which the Americans had fondly regarded as a mere salvo to
English pride, and not intended for any practical purpose. Mr.
Pitt had rested his opposition to the Stamp Act upon the
distinction between external and internal taxes, as did Dr.
Franklin in his evidence at the bar of the House of Commons ;
the opposition and the protesting Lords denied the distinction ;
and when Dr. Franklin was asked —

" Does the distinction between internal and external taxes

324

THE LOYALTSTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XII.

I If"

exist in the Charter ?" he answered : " No, I believe not ;" and
being asked, " Then may they not, by the same interpretation,
object to the Parliament's right of external taxation ?" ho
answered : " They never have hitherto. Many arguments have
been lately used here to show them that there is no difference,
and that if you have no right to tax them internally, you
have no right to tax them externally, or make any other law
to bind them. At present they do not reason so, but in time
they may possibly be convinced by these arguments."*

I now proceed to give a summary statement of the events
between Great Britain and the colonies which followed the
repeal of the Stamp Act, March 19th, 1766.

Within ten days of its passing, the Act repealing the Stamp
Act was officially transmitted to America by General Conway ,f

* In i—e House of Lords, Lord Mansfield, replying to Lord Camden, said :
" The noble lord who quoted so much law, and denied the right of the Parlia-
ment of Great Britain to levy internal taxes upon the colonies, allowed at the
same time that restrictions upon trade and duties upon the ports were legal. But
I cannot see any real difference in this distinction ; for I hold it to be true,
that a tax laid in any place is like a pebble falling into and making a circle
in a lake, till one circle produces and gives motion to another, and the whole
circumference is agitated from the centre. A tax on tobacco, either in the
ports of Vii^nia or London, is a duty laid upon the inland Plantations of
Virginia, a hundred miles from the sea, wherever the tobacco grows."
(Quoted in Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. V., p. 411.)

Mr. Grenville argued in the eame strain in the House of Commons ; and
the Americans, as apt pupils, soon learned by such arguments to resist external
as they had successfully resisted internal taxes.

t General Conway, as leader of the Ho\ise of Commons, moved the resolu-
tion for the repeal of the Stamp Act, and also moved the resolution for the
Declaratory Bill. Colonel Barre moved an amendment to strike out from
the resolution the words " in all cases whatsoever." He was seconded by
Pitt, and sustained by Beckford. " Only three men, or rather Pitt alone,
'debated strenuously the rights of America' against more than as many
hundred ; and yet the House of Commons, half-conscious of the fatality of
its decision, was so awed by the overhanging shadow of coming events that
it seemed to shrink from pronouncing its opinion. Edmund Burke, eager to
add glory as an orator to his just renown as an author, argued for England's
right in such a manner that the strongest friends of power declared his speech
to have been 'far superior to that of every other speaker;' while Grenville,
Yorke, and all the lawyers; the temperate Richard Hussey, who yet was
practically for humanity and justice; Blackstone, the commentator on the
laws of England, who still disliked internal taxation of America by Parlia-
ment, filled many hours with solemn arguments for England's unlimited

!HAP. XII.

CHAP. XII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

325

then Secretary of State for America, who accompanied them
with a circular to the several Governors, in which, while he
firmly insisted upon a proper reverence for the King's Govern-
ment, endeavoured affectionately to allay the discontents of the
colonists. When the Governor of Virginia communicated this
letter to the House of Burgesses, they unanimously voted a
statue to the King, and the Assembly of Massachusetts voted a
letter of thanks to Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Grafton.

But in addition to the circular letter to the several Governors,
counselling forgetfulness and oblivion as to the disorders and
contentions of the past, General Conway wrote a separate
letter to Governor Barnard, of Massachusetts, in which he said :
" Nothing will tend more effectually to every conciliating pur-
pose, and there is nothing, therefore, I have in command more
earnestly to require of you, than that you should exert yourself
in recommending it strongly to the Assembly, that full and
ample compensation be made to those who, from the madness
of the people, have suffered for their acts in deference to
the British Legislature." This letter was but a recamriunda-
tion, not a command or requisition, to the Legislature, and
seems to have been intended as an instruction to Governor
Barnard alone ; but he, now indulging his personal resentments
as well as haughty spirit, represented the letter of General
Conway as & command and requisition ionnded on "justice and
humanity," and that the authority from which it came ought to
preclude all doubts about complying with it, adding, " Both the
business and the time are most critical — let me entreat you to
recollect yourselves, and to consider well what you are about.
Shall the private interests, passions, or resentments of a few

supremacy. They persuaded one another, and the House, that the Charters
wliich kings had granted were, by the unbroken opinions of lawyers, from
1689, subordinate to the good- will of the Houses of Parliament ; that Parlia-
ment, for a stronger reason, had power to tax — a power which it had beea
proposed to exert in 1713, while Hailey was at the head of the Treasury, and
again at the opening of the Seven Years' War." * *

" So the watches of the long winter's night wore away, and at about four
o'clock in the morning, when the question was called, less than ten voices, some
say five, or four, some said but three, spoke out in the minority ; and the
resolution passed for England's right to do what the Treasury pleased with
three millions of freemen in America." (Bancroft's History of the United
States., Vol. V., pp. 416—417.)

II 111

326

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XII.

men deprive the whole people of the great and manifold
advantages which the favour and indulgence of their King and
his Parliament are now preparing for them ? Surely after
his Majesty's commaTids are known, the very persons who have
created the prejudices and prepossessions I now endeavour to
combat will be the first to remove them."

The opposition to the Stamp Act, which the Governor inter-
preted as " prejudices and prepossessions which he now en-
deavoured to combat," had been justified by the King and Par-
liament themselves in rejecting it ; and he thus continued to
make enemies of those whom he might have easily conciliated
and made friends. The Assembly answered him in an indig-
nant and sarcastic tone, and charged him with having exceeded
the authority given in Secretary Conway's letter ; concluding in
the following words :

" If this recommendation, which your Excellency terms a
requisition, be founded on so much justice and humanity that it
cannot be controverted — if the autkoi^ty with which it is intro-
duced should preclude all disputation about complying with it,
we should be glad to know what freedom we have in the case ?

" In answer to the questions which your Excellency has
proposed with seeming emotion, we beg leave to declare, that we
will not suffer ourselves to be in the least influenced ^ v party
animosities or domestic feuds, let them exist where they may ;
that if we can possibly prevent it, this fine country shall never
be ruined by any person ; that it shall be through no default of
ours should this people be deprived of the great and manifest
advantages which the favour and indulgence of our most
gracious Sovereign and his Parliament are even now providing
for them. On the contrary, that it shall ever be our highest
ambition, as it is our duty, so to demean ourselves in public and
in private life as shall most clearly demonstrate our loyalty and
gratitude to the best of kings, and thereby recommend his peo-
ple to further gracious marks of the royal clemency and favour.

" With regard to the rest of your Excellency's speech, we are
constrained to observe, that the general air and style of it
savom-s more of an act of grace and pardon than of a parlia-
mentary address to the two Houses of Assembly; and we
most sincerely wish your Excellency had been pleased to reserve
it, if needful, for a proclamation."

HAP. XII.

CHAP. XII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

327

It was thus that fresh seed of animosity and hostility was
sown between Governor Barnard and the Massachusetts Assem-
bly, and sown by the Governor himself, and the growth of
which he further promoted by refusing to confirm the choice
of Mr. Hancock, whom the Assembly had elected as their
Speaker, and refused to sanction six of their twenty-eight nomi-
nations to the Council, because they had not nominated the
four judges of the Supreme Court and the Crown officers.
Hence the animosity of their reply to his speech above quoted.
But as the Governor had, by the Charter, a veto on the election
of Speaker and Councillors, the Legislature submitted without
a murmur.

But in the course of the session (six montha after the Gover-
nor's speech upon the subject), the Assembly passed an Act
granting compensation to the sufferers by the late riots, the
principal of whom were the Lieutenant-Governor, the Collector
of Customs, and the appointed Distributor of Stamps. The Act
was accompanied by a declaration that it was a free gift of the
Province, and not an acknowledgment of the justice of their
claim ; it also contained a provision of amnesty to the rioters.
The Act was agreed to by the Council and assented to by the
Governor ; but it was disallowed by the King on the advice of
the English Attorney and Solicitor General, because, as alleged,
it assumed an act of grace which it belonged to the King to
bestow, through an act of oblivion of the evils of those who had
acted unlawfully in endeavouring to enforce the Stamp Act,
which had been passed by the British Parliament the same year.
The Massachusetts Assembly ordered that their debates should
henceforth be open to the public.

The Legislature of New York also passed an Act granting
compensation to those who had suffered a loss of property for
their adherence to the Stamp Act, but stated it to be a free gift.

Before the close of 176G, dissatisfaction and distrust were
manifest in several colonies, and apprehensions of other encroach-
ments by the British Parliament upon what they held to be
their constitutional rights. Even the General Assembly of
Virginia, which had in the spring session voted a statue to the
King, and an obelisk to Mr. Pitt and several other members of
Parliament, postponed, in the December following, the final con-
sideration of the resolution imtil the next session. The Virginia

ppfpp

328

THE LOYALISTS OP AMERICA

[chap. XII.

11:1

press said : " The Americans are hasty in expressing their grati-
tude, if the repeal of the Stamp Act is not, at least, a tacit
compact that Great Britain will never again tax us ; " and
advised the different Assemblies, without mentioning the pro-
ceedings of Parliament, to enter upon their journals as strong
declarations of their own rights as words could express.*

The Assembly of New York met early in 1766, in the best
spirit ; voted to raise on Bowling Qreen an equestrian statue to
the King, and a statue of William Pitt — " twice the preserver
of his country."

" But the clause of the Mutiny or Billeting Act (passed in
1765, in the same .session in which the Stamp Act was passed),
directing Colonial Legislatures to make specific contributions
towards the support of the army, placed New York, where the
head-quarters were established, in the dilemma of submitting
immediately and unconditionally to the authority of Parlia-
ment, or taking the lead in a new career of resistance. The
rescript was in theory worse than the Stamp Act. For how
could one legislative body command what another legislative
body should enact ? And viewed as a tax it was unjust, for it
threw all the burden of the colony where the troops chanced to
be collected. The requisition of the General, made through the
Governor, ' agreeably to the Act of Parliament,' was therefore
declared to be unprecedented in its character and unreasonable
in its amount ; yet in the exercise of the right of free delibera-
tion, everything asked for was voted, except such articles as
were not provided in Europe for British troops which were in
barracka."-f-

* Allen's History of the American Revolution, Vol. I., Chap, v., p. 101.
Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. VI., Chap, xxv., p. 6.

t Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. VI., Chap, xxv., pp. 15, 16.

" The colonies were required, at their own expense, to furnish the troops
quartered upon them by Parliament with fuel, bedding, utensils for cooking,
and various articles of food and drink. To take off the edge from this bill,
bounties were granted on the importation of lumber and timber from the
plantations ; coffee of domestic growth was exempted from additional duty ;
and iron was permitted to be carried to Ireland." (Barry's History of Massa-
chusetts, Second Period, Chap, x., p. 296.)

,1 ^1

CHAP. XIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

329

CHAPTER XIII.

were in

Events or 1767— A New Parliament— First Act against the Pro-
vince OF New York — Billeting Soldiers on the Colonies.

A NEW House of Commons was elected in 1766, less favour-
able to the colonies than the preceding one ; and one of the
first acts of the new Parliament was founded on the intelligence
received from New York, that the Assembly had refused to
comply with all the requirements of the Billeting Act in pro-
viding for his Majesty's troops which had been quartered upon
that province.*

A Bill was introduced by Mr. Grenville, the object of which
was to restrain the Assembly and Council of New York from
passing any Act until they had complied with the requi-
sitions of the Billeting Act. Though the Bill was intro-
duced by the leader of the opposition, it received the
countenance and support of Ministers (Pitt being Premier,
though absent through illness), " who regarded it as a measure
at once dignified and forbearing." The Bill passed with little
opposition ; the Legislature of New York was at once frightened
into immediate compliance, though the feeling with which it
was done may be easily conceived. The effect, however, in other

* " This affair being brought before the House occasioned many debates, and
some vigorous measures were proposed. June 15tli, a Bill was passed by
which the Governor, Council, and Assembly of New York were prohibited
i'rom passing or assenting to any Act of Assembly for any purpose what-
soever, till they had in every respect complied with all the terms of the Act
of Parliament. This restriction, thnu-rh limited to one colony, was a leKson
to them all, and showed their comparative inferiority, when brought in (jues-
tion with the supreme legislative power." (Annual Register for 1767, VoL
X,, p. 48.)

TUP

330

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XIII.

IttJI

1?^
I>>

l'<

colonies, was not only to excito fears and dissatisfaction, but to
call forth public expressions of hostile sentiment, regexding the
Act as an infringement of their chartered privileges ; and they
argued tliat if the legislative powers of so loyal a colony as
Now York could be thus suspended, thoy had little security for
their own privileges guaranteed to them by Charter.*

On the 2Cth of January, while the House of Commons, in
Committee of Supply, was considering the estimate for the
garrison and land forces in the colonies, Mr. Grenville took the
opportunity of expressing his dissatisfaction with the repeal
of the Stamp Act, and insisted upon the necessity of relieving
England fr.^a. 'the burden, which should be borne by the
colonies, and which, with contingencies, exceeded £400,000. Mr.
Charles Townshend, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, replied
that " the Administration has given its attention to give relief
to Great Britain from bearing the whole expense of securing,
defending, and protecting America and the West India islands.
I shall bring into the House some propositions that I hope may
tend, in time, to ease the people of England upon this head,

* The carrying into effect of the Billeting Act in Boston is thus stated by
Mr. Holmes :

"An Act Jiad been passed by Parliament, the same session in which the
Stamp Act was passed, that obliged the Colonial Assemblies to provide
quarters for the soldiers, and furnish them with fire, beds, candles, and other
articles at the expense of the colonies. The jealousy of Massachusetts was
awakened by the attempt of the Governor to execute this law. In June an
addition was made to the British troops at the castle, in the harbour of
Boston, and the Governor requested that provision be made by the As-
sembly for their support. After due deliberation, the House resolved that
such provision be made for them while they remain here, as has been here-
tofore usually made for his Majesty's regular troops when occasionally
in the province. The caution with which this resolution was drawn shows
how reluctant the Assembly were to have a military force placed in the
province ; and how careful neither to yield any portion of their legislative
rights, nor to furnish a precedent for the repetition of a measure equally
obnoxious and dangerous to the colonists. The suspension of the power of
legislation in New York justly excited alarm throughout all the colonies ;
for it was perceived^that every Colonial Assembly would, by parity of reasoning,
be put on their trial for good behaviour, of which the British Ministry would
be the judge. Bichard Henry Lee, of Virginia, aaid, * An Act for suspend-
ing the Legislature of that province hangs, like a flaming sword, over all
our heads, and requires by all means to be removed.' " (Annals^ etc., Vol.
IL, p. 149.)

fAP. XIII.

CHAP. XIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

331

and yet not be heavy in any manner upon the people in the
colonies. / know tfie mode by whicli a revenue nuiy he drawn
from America without offence." He was applauded from all
sides of the House, and continued : " I am still a firm advocate
for the Stamp Act, for its principle, and for the duty itself ; only
the heats which prevailed made it an improper time to press it.
I laugh at the absurd distinction between internal and external
taxes. I know of no such distinction. It is a distinction with-
out a difference. It is perfect nonsense. If we have a right to
in^pose the one, we have a right to impose the other. The
distinction is ridiculous in the opinion of everybody except the
Americans."* In conclusion, laying his hand on the table in
front of him, he declared to the House, " England is undone if
this taxation of America is given up."f Grenville demanded
Townsend to pledge himself to his declaration of obtaining
a revenue from the colonies ; and did so promptly amid the
applause of the House. In June, Townshend proceeded to
redeem his pledge, and for that purpose brought successively
three Bills into the House, all of which were paased by nearly
unanimous votes.

" The first of these Bills, in the preamble, declared an Ameri-
can revenue expedient, and promised to raise it by granting

* The Americans took the Chancellor of the Exchequer at hia word, the
plain and logical inference from wliich was, that if it was unlawful to impose
internal taxes, it was equally unlawful to impose external taxes. The
colonies had unanimously denied the lawfulness of internal taxes imposed
by Parliament, and in that denial had been sustained by the opinions of
Lord Camden, Pitt, and other English statesmen, and virtually by the repeal
of the Stamp Act itself. Henceforth they resisted the imposition by Parlia-
ment of external as well as internal taxes.

+ Referring to the applause of the Commons which greeted Townwliend's
utterances of his intention to draw a revenue from the colonies, Mr. Bancroft
says : " The loud burst of rapture dismayed Conway, who sat in silent
astonishment at the unauthorized but premeditated rashness of his pre-
sumptuous colleague. The next night the Cabinet questioned the insubor-
dinate Minister ' how he had ventured to depart on so essential a point from
the profession of the whole Ministry ; ' and he browbeat them all. ' I ap-
peal to you,* said he, turning to Conway, ' whether the House is not bent
on obtaining a revenue of some sort from the colonies?' Not one of the
Ministry then in London (Pitt being absent and ill) had sufficient authority
to advise his dismission, and nothing less could have stopped his measures."
(History of the United States, Vol. VI., Chap, xxvii, pp. 47—49.)

--^. Vl

1 :

[1 f

332

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XIII,

duties on glass, red and white lead, painters' oil and paper, and
threepence a pound on tea — all English productions except the
last — all objects of taxation in the colonies. The exportation
of tea to America was encouraged by another Act which
allowed a drawback for five years of the whole duty payable
on importation into England."* The preamble of the Bill stated
that the duties are laid for the better support of the govern-
ment and the administration of the colonies. One clause of
the Act enabled the King, by sign manual, to establish a general
civil list for each province of North America, with any
salaries, pensions, or appointments his Majesty might think
proper. The Act also provided, after all such ministerial
warrants under the sign manual " as are thought proper and
necessary " shall be satisfied, the residue of the revenue shall
be at the disposal of the Parliament."!* ^

* " The colonists had been previously restrained from manufacturing certain
articles for their own consumption. Other Acts confined them to the ex-
clusive use of British merchandise. The addition of duties put them wholly
in the power and discretion of Great Britain. ' We are not,' said they,
' permitted to import from any nation other than our own parent state, and
have been, in some cases, restrained by her from manufacturing for our-
selves ; and she claims a right to do so in every instance which is incom-
patible with her interest. To these restrictions we have hitherto submitted ;
but she now rises in her demands, and imposes duties on those commodities,
the purchasing of which elsewhere than in her own market her laws forbid,
and the manufacture "<3 of which for her own use she may, at any moment
she pleases, restraii Nothing is left for us to do but to complain and pay.' "
(Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., Chap, iii., pp. 351, 352.)

t " Townshend opened the debate with professions of candour, and the air
of a man of business. Exculpating alike Pennsylvania and Connecticut,
he named as the delinquent colonies — Massachusetts, which had invaded the
King's perogative by a general amnesty, and in a messag'" to i's Governor
had used expressions derogatory to tli" authority of Parliampat ; Rhode
Island, which had postponed but not refused to indemnify the sufferers by
the Stamp Act ; and New Jersey, which had evaded the Billeting Act, but
had yet furnished the King's troops with every essential thing to their
perfect satisfaction. Against these colonies it was uot necessary to institute
severe proceedings. But New York, in the month of June last, besides
appointing its own Commissary, had limited its supplies to two regiments,
and to those articles only which were provided in the rest of the King's
dominions, and in December had refused to dj more.

"It became Parliament not to engage in controversy with its colonies,
but to assert its sovereignty without uniting them in a common cause. For

JAP. XIII

CHAP. XIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

333

2. The second Bill, intended to ensure the execution of the
first, authorized his Majesty to appoint a Board of Com-
missioners of Customs to reside in the colonies, to give them
such orders and instructions from time to time as his Majesty
might think proper. This Board of Customs had its seat at
Boston; its duty was to see to the strict enforcement of the
revenue laws in America, and it was authorized to make as
many appointments as the Comnnssioners might think fit, and
to pay the appointees what sums they pleased, and were not
accountable for their malconduct, though they were authorized
to seize vessels suspected of having goods which had not been
duly entered.*

this end he proposed to proceed against New York, and against New York
alone. To levy a local tax would be to accept a penalty in lieu of obedience.
He should, therefore, move that New York, having disobeyed Parliament,
should be restrained from any legislative act of its own till it should comply.

" He then proceeded to advocate the establishment of p. Board of Com-
niiasonera of the Customs, to be stationed in America.

" ' Our right of taxation,' he continued, * is indubitable ; yet, to prevent
mischief, I was myself in favour of repealing the Stamp Act. But there
can be no objection to port duties on wine, oil, and fruits, if allowed to be
carried to America directly from Spain and Portugal ; on glass, paper, lead,
and colours ; and especially on tea. Owing to the b^;^h charges in England,
America has supplied itself with tea by smuggling it from the Dutch pos-
sessions ; to remedy this, duties hitherto levied upon it in England are to be
given up, and a specific duty collected in America itself.'"

" The American revenue, it was further explained, was to be placed at the
disposal of tha King for the payment of his civil officers.

•' Thii speech, pronounced with gravity and an air of moderation by an
orator who was the delight of the House, implied a revolution in favour of
ai'Miority. The Minister was to have the irresponsible power of establishing,
bj sign manual, a general civil list in every American province, and at his
pleasure to grant salaries and pensions, limited only by the amount of the
American revenue. The proposition bore on its face the mark of owing its
parentage to the holders and patrcns of American offices ; and yet it was
received in the House with general favour. Richard Jackson was not
regarded when he spoke against the duties themselves, and foretold the
mischief that would ensue." (Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol.
VI., Chap, xxix., pp. 75— V7.)

" The Commissioners, from the first moment of their institution, had been
an eyesore to the people of Boston. This, though partly owing to their
active zeal in detecting .smugglers, principally arose from the association which
existed in the nu'nds of the inhabitant9 between the Board of Customs and an
American revenue. The Declaratory Act of 1766, the Revenue Act of 1767,

m- 1

334

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XIII

3. A third Bill, in Mr. Charles Townshend's scheme for the
taxation of the colonies, was for the establishment in America
of Courts of Vice-Ad?hniralty — at Halifax, Boston, Philadelphia,
and Charleston — Courts in which the colonists were deprived of
the right of trial by jury, which were invested with authority
to seize and transport accused persons to England to be tried
there — Courts of which the officers and informers were paid out
of the proceeds of sales of confiscated goods, and in proportion
to their amounts, and were therefore personally interested in
confiscating as many goods as possible, and from their decisioas
there was no appeal except to England — a process not only
tedious, but ruinously expensive, even if successful, of which
there could be little hope.

In connection with these three Acts (the operations and
effects of which Charles Townshend did not live to see),* the
navy and military in America were commanded, not as a defence
against foreign or even Indian invasions, but 'as Custom-house
guards and officers, to enforce the payment of taxes on the

together with the pomp and expense of this Board, so dispropoit ,<;'. .-te to the
suull income of the present duties, conspired to convince not only the few
who were benefitted by smuggling, but the great body of enlightened free-
men, that further and greater impositions of parliamentary taxes were in-
tended. In proportion as this opinion gained ground, the inhabitants became
more disrespectful to the ex'jcutive officers of the revenue, and more disposed,
in the frenzy of patriotism, to commit outrages on their persons and property,
The constant bickering that existed between them and the inhabitants,
together with the steady opposition given by the latter to the discharge of tlie
official duties of the former, induced the Commissioners and friends of an
American revenue to solicit the protection of a regular force at Boston. In
c()nii)liance with their wishes, his Majesty ordered two regiments and some
armed vessels to repair thither for supporting and assisting the otticers of
Customs in the execution of their duty." (Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. 1.,
Chap, iii., pp. 355, 356.)

♦ His Revenue Act, and the two subsequent Acts to give it effect, pro-
duced an excitement throughout the American colonies that will be noticed
hereafter. Mr. Bancroft remarks : " They would nidlify Townshend's
Revenue Act by consuming nothing on which he had laid a duty, and
avenge themselves on England by importing no more British goods. At ilie
beginning of this excitement (Septeniber, 1767), Charles Townshend was
seized with fever, and after a short illness, during which he met danger with
the unconcerned levity that had marked his conduct of the most serious
aftairs, he died at the age of forty-one, famed alike for incomparable taleiits
and extreme instability." (History of the United States, Vol. VI., p. 98.)

CHAP. XIII

CHAP. XIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

335

colonists. T^^« very next day after the King had given the
royal sanction to the system of Courts of Admiralty in America,
"orders were i.ssucd directly to the Commander-in-Chief in
America, that the troops under his command should give their
assistance to the officers of the revenue for the effectual suppres-
sion of the contraband trade. Nor was there delay in follow-
ing up the new law, to employ the navy to enforce the Naviga-
tion Acts. To this end Admiral Colville, the naval Commander-
in-Chief on the coasts of North America, from the River St.
Lawrence to Cape Florida and the Bahama Islands, became the
head of a new corps of revenue officers. Each captain of his
squadron had Custom-house commissions, and a set of instruc-
tions from the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty for his
guidance ; and other instructions were given them by the
Admiral, to enter into the harljours or lie off the coasts of
America ; to qualify themselves, by taking the usual Custom-
house oaths, to do the office of Custom-house officers ; to seize
such persons as were suspected by them to be engaged in illicit
trade."*

The effect of these acts and measures was to create universal
dissatisfaction throughout the colonies, as they were not even in
pretence for the regulation of trade, but for the purpose of
raising a parliamentary revenue in America, and therefore
differed not in principle from the tax imposed by the Stamp
Act. " The colonists contended that there was no real difference
1)etween the principle of these new duties and the Stamp Act.
They were both designed to raise a revenue in America, and in
the same manner. The payment of the duties imposed by the
Stamp Act might have been evaded by the total disuse of
stamped paper, and so might the payment of these duties by

* Bancroft's Histoi-y of tlie Uniti'd States, Vol. V., Cliai)ter ix.,i>p. 161,
162. Mr. Bancroft adds :

" The promise of large emoluments in case of forfeiture stimulated their
natural and irregular vivacity to enforce laws whicli had lieconie obsolete,
and they pounced upon American property as they would have gone to war
in quest of prize-money. Even at first their acts were etpiivocal, and they
soon came to he as illegal as they were oppressive. There was no redress.
An apptial to the Privy Council was costly and difficult; and besides, when
it so happened, before the end of the year, that an otticei- had to defend
himself on an appeal, the suffering colonists were exhausted by the delay and
expense, while the Treasury took care to indemnify their agent." — 76., p. 162.

'Ill

I .'•

336

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XIII.

the total disuse of those articles on which they were laid ; but
in neither case without great difficulty. The Revenue Act of
1767 produced resolves, petitions, addresses, remonstrances,
similar to those with which the colonists opposed the Stamp
Act. It also gave rise to a second association for su.spendinj,'
further importations of British manufactures till those offensive
duties should be taken off."*

The year 1767 closed with enlarging and multiplying associa-
tions to dispense with the use of goods of British manufacture,
the appointment of Lord North to succeed Charles Townshend
as Chancellor of the Exchequer, and of the Earl of Hillsborough
to succeed the Earl of Shelbume as Secretary of State for the
Colonies. Lord North had voted for the Stamp Act and against
its repeal; and Lord Hillsborough was less indulgent to the
colonies than Lord Shelbume.

* Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., Chapter iii., pp. 35:2, 353.

" Towards the last of October, the iuhabitants of Boston, * ever sensitive
to the sound of liberty,' assembled in a town meeting, and voted to dispt^nse
with a large number of articles of British manufact\ire, which were
particularly specified ; to adhere to former agreements respecting funerals;
and to purchase no new clothing for mourning. Committees were appointed
to obtain subscribers to this agreement, and the resolves were sent in to all
the towns of the province and abroad to otlier colonies. The 20th of the
ensuing month (20th of November, the time whtai the Acts went into
operation) passed without tumult. Placiirds were exhibited and etiigies
were set up, but the people in general were quiet. Otis (the most popular
man in Boston), at a town meeting held to discountenance riot, delivered a
speech in .which he recommended caution, and advised that no opposition
should be made to the new duties. ' The King has a right,' said he, ' to appoint
officers of the Customs in what manner he pleases and by what denominations;
and to resist his authority will but provoke his displeasure.' Such counsel
was displeasing to the zealous, but it was followed." (Barry's History of
Massachusetts, Vol. II., Chapter xi., pp. 340, 341.)

lAP. XIII.

CHAP. XIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

337

CHAPTER XIV.

Events of 1768 — Protests and Loyal Petitions op the Colonists

AGAINST the ENGLISH PARLIAMENTARY ACTS FOR RAISING REVENUE

IN THE Colonies.

The meetings and protests against the Revenue Acts and
petitions for their repeal, which began in the autumn of 1767,
increased throughout the colonies in 1768. In January, the
General Assembly of Massachusetts voted a temperate and
loyal petition to the King,* and letters urging the rights of the
province, addressed to Lord Shelbume, General Conway, the
Marquis of Rockingham, Lord Camden, and the Earl of Chat-
ham. The petition and these letters were all to the same effect.
The petition to the King was enclosed to Denis de Berdt, &
London merchant (who was appointed agent for the colony),
with a long letter of instructions. All these papers are per-
vaded with a spirit of loyalty, and ask for nothing more than
the enjoyment of the rights and privileges which they had
ever possessed and enjoyed down to the year after the peace of
Paris in 1763.

* The following are the concluding paragraphs of this petition to the King,
dated 20th January, 1768:

" With great sincerity permit us to assure your Majesty, that your subjects
of tluH province ever have and will continue to acknowledge your Majesty's
High Court of Parliament as the supreme legislative power of the whole
empire, the superintending authority of which is clearly admitted in all
cases that can consist with the fundamental rights of nature and the constitu-
tion, to which your Majesty's happy subjects in all parts of your empire con-
ceive they have a just and equitable claim.

"It is with the deepest concern that your humble suppliants would
represent to your Majesty, that your Parliament, the rectitude of whose.

338

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XIV.

In addition to these representations and letters sent to England,
the Massachusetts General Assembly adopted, on the 11th of
February, and sent a circular letter to the Speakers of the
respective Houses of Burgesses of the other American provinces.
In this ably-written letter there is no dictation or assumption
of authority, but a statement of their representations to Eng-
land, and a desire for mutual consultation and harmonious
action. They say : " This House hope that this letter will be
candidly considered in no other light than as expressing a di.s-
position freely to communicate their mind to a sister colony,
upon a common concern, in the same manner as they would be
glad to receive the sentiments of your or any other House >!'
Assembly on the continent."

As this letter was the first step to the union of the American
colonies, and was followed by results that culminated in the War
of Independence, it may be proper to give such extracts from it
as will show its character and design ; in neither of which do I

inti'Titions is never to be questioned, has thouglit proper to pass divci-s Acts
imposing taxes on your Majesty's subjects in Ainericti, witli the sole and
express purpose of raising a revenue. If your Majesty's subjects here slmll
be ill prived of the honour and privilege of voluntarily contributing their aid
to your Majesty in supporting your government and authority in tlie pro-
vince, and defending and securing your riglits and territories in Aincrica,
wliich they have always hitherto done with tlie utmost cheerfulness : if lliese
Acts of Parliament shall remain in force, and your Majesty's Commons in
Great Britain shall continue to exercise the power of granting tlie pniporty
of their fellow-subjects in this province, your people must then regret tlicir
unhappy fate in having only the name left of free subjects.

" With all humility we conceive that a representation of your Majesty's
subjects of this province in the Parliament, considering their local oireuin-
stances, is utterly impracticable. Your Majesty has heretofore been graiioU'ly
pleaiwid to order your requisitions to be laid before the representatives of your
people in the General Assembly, who have never failed to afford the nece!*siir}-
aid io the extent of their ability, and sometimes beyond it ; and it wovild be
ever grievous to your Majesty's faithful subjects to be called upon in a Wiiv
that should appear to them to imply a distrust of their most ready and wil-
ling compliance.

" Under the most sensible impressions of your Majesty's wise and paliinf.l
care for the remotest of your faithful subjects, and in full dependence on thi-
roval declarations in the Charter of this province, we most humbly beseech
J =<ur Majesty to take our present unhappy circumstances under your Ki»yal
consideration, and afford us i-elief in such manner as in your MajiNsty's ^'leat
wisdom and clemency shall seem meet." (Prior Documents, etc., pp. 175—7.)

HAP. XIV.

CHAP. XIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

339

find anything which I think is inconsistent with the principles
and spirit of a loyal subject. The general principles on which
they rested their claims to the rights and privileges of British
subjects are stated as follows :

" The House have humbly represented to the Ministry hheir
own sentiments : That his Majesty's High Court of Parliament
is the supreme legislative power over the whole empire. That
in all free States the constitution is fixed ; and as the supreme
legislative derives its power and authority from the constitu-
tion, it cannot overleap the bounds of it without destroying
its foundation. That the constitution ascertains and limits both
sovereignty and allegiance ; and therefore his Majesty's Ameri-
can subjects, who acknowledge themselves bound by the ties
of allegiance, have an equitable claim to the full enjoyment of
the fundamental rules of the British constitution. That it is
an essential, unalterable right in nature, ingrafted into the
British constitution as a fundamental law, and ever held sacred
and irrevocable by the subjects within the realm, that what a
man hath honestly acquired is absolutely his own, which he
may freely give, but cannot be taken from him without his
consent. That the American subjects may, therefore, exclusive
of any consideration of Charter rights, with a decent firmness
adapted to the character of freemen and subjects, assert this
natural constitutional right.

"It is moreover their humble opinion, which they express
with the greatest deference to the wisdom of the Parliament,
that the Acts made there, imposing duties on the people of this
Province, with the sole and express purpose of raisiiu/ a revenive,
are infringements of their natural and constitutional rights;
because, as they are not represented in the British Parliament,
his Majesty's Commons in Great Britain by those Acts grant
their property without their consent."

Then, after showing the impracticability, on various grounds,
of the representation of the colonies in the British Parliament,
on which account local subordinate Legislatures were established,
that the colonists might enjoy the inalienable right of repre-
sentation, the circular letter proceeds :

" Upon these principles, and also considering that were the
right in the Parliament ever so clear, yet for obvious reasons it
would be beyond the rule of equity, that their constituents

340

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XIV

should be taxed on the manufactures of Great Britain hero, in
addition to the duties they pay for them in England, and otiur
advantages arising to Great Britain from the Acts of Trade,
this House have preferred a, humble, dutiful, and loyal petition
to our most gracious Sovereign, and made such representation
to his Majesty's Ministers as they apprehend would tend to
obtain redress.

" They have also submitted to consideration, whether any
people can be said to enjoy any degree of freedom if the
Crown, in addition to its undoubted authority of constituting
a Governor, should appoint him such a stipend as it shall judge
proper, without the consent of the people, and at their expense ;
and whether, while the judges of the land and other civil
officers hold not their commissions during good behaviour,
their having salaries appointed for them by the Crown, inde-
pendent of the people, hath not a tendency to subvert the prin-
ciples of equity and endanger the happiness and security of the
subjects.

" In addition to these measures, the House have wrote a letter
to their agent, Mr. De Berdt, the sentiments of which ho is
directed to lay before the Ministry, wherein they take notice of
the hardship of the Act for Preventing Mutiny and Desertion,
which requires the Governor and Council to provide enumerated
articles for the King's marching troops, and the people to pay
the expense ; and also the commission of the gentlemen appointed
Commissioners of Customs to reside in America, which authorizes
them to make as many appointments as they think fit, and to
pay the appointees what sums they please, for whose malconduct
they are not accountable." * *

"These are the sentiments and proceedings of this House;
and as they have too much reason to believe that the enemies
of the colonies have represented them to his Majesty's Ministers
and the Parliament as factious, disloyal, and having a disposi-
tion to make themselves independent of the mother country,
they have taken occasion, in the most humble terms, to assure
his Majesty and his Ministers that, with regard to the people of
this province, and, as they doubt not, of all the colonies, the
charge is unjust.

"The House is fully satisfied that your Assembly is too
generous and enlarged in sentiment to believe that this letter

CHAP. XIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

341

proceeds from an ambition of taking the lead, or dictating to
other Assemblies ; they freely submit their opinion to the judg-
ment of others, and shall take it kind in your House to point
out to them anything further that may be thought necessai'y.
" This House cannot conclude without expressing their firm
confidence in the King, our common Head and Father, that the
united and dutiful supplications of his distressed American
subjects will meet with his Royal and favourable acceptance.

" Signed by the Speaker."

This circular letter of the Massachusetts Assembly was ex-
ceedingly displeasing to the British Ministry, and called forth
two letters from the Earl of Hillsborough, who had succeeded
the Earl of Shelburne as Principal Secretary of State for the
Colonies.

One of these letters was a circular addressed through the
Governor to the General Assemblies of each of the several
colonies. This letter is dated "Whitehall, April 21, 17G8."
The first paragraph is as follows ;

"Gentlemen, — I have his Majesty's commands to transmit
to you the enclosed copy of a letter from the Speaker of the
House of Representatives of the colony of Massachusetts Bay,
addressed by order of that House to the Speaker of the Assembly
of each colony upon the continent of North America; as his
Majesty considers this measure to be of a most dangerous and
factious tendency, calculated to inflame the minds of his good
subjects in the colonies, to promote an unwarrantable combi-
nation, and to excite and encourage an open opposition to and
denial of the authority of Parliament, and to subvert the true
principles of the constitution, it is his Majesty's pleasure that
you should, immediately upon the receipt hereof, exert your
utmost influence to defeat this flagitious attempt to disturb the
public peace, by prevailing upon the Assembly of your province
to take no notice of it, which will be treating it with the con-
tempt it deserves."

This most ill-advised letter of Lord Hillsborough had the very
opposite effect from that which he had hoped and intended. It
increased the importance of the Massachusetts House of Repre-
sentatives in the estimation of other colonies, and produced
responses of approval from most of their General Assemblies.

The Speaker of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, in a

^ 'i

) i

342

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAF. XIV.

letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives of
Massachusetts, dated Virginia, May 9, 1708, says:

"The House of Burgesses of this colony proceeded, verj-soon
after they met, to the consideration of your important letter df
the 11th of February, 1708, writkn in the name and by the ordtr
of the House of Representatives of your province ; and 1 liavt;
received their particular direction to desire you to inform tliat
honourable House that they applaud them for their attention
to American liberty, and that the steps they have taken thereon
will convince them of their opinion of the fatal tendency of
the Acts of Parliament complained of, and of their fixed reso-
lution to concur with the other colonies in their application for
redress.

"After the most deliberate consultation, they thought it
their duty to represent to the Parliament of Great Britain that
they are truly sensible of the happiness and security they derive
from their connection with and dependence upon Great Britain,
and are under the greatest concern that any unlucky incident
should interrupt that salutary harmony which they wish ever
to subsist. They lament that the remoteness of their situation
often exposes them to such misrepresentations as are apt to
involve them in censures of disloyalty to their Sovereign, and
the want of proper respect to the British Parliament ; whereas
they have indulged themselves in the agreeable persuasion, that
they ought to be considered as inferior to none of their fellow-
subjects in loyalty and affection.

" They do not affect an independency of their parent kingdom,
the prosperity of which they are bound to the utmost of their
abilities to promote, but cheerfully acquiesce in the authority of
Parliament to make laws for preserving a necessary dependence
and for regulating the trade of the colonies. Yet they cannot
conceive, and humbly insist it is not essential to support a proper
relation between the mother country and colonies transplanted
from her, that she should have a right to raise money from
them without their consent, and presume they do not aspire to
more than the natural rights of British subjects when they
assert that no power on earth has a right to impose taxes on
the people, or take the smallest portion of their property, with-
out their consent given by their representatives in Parliament.
This has ever been considered as the chief pillar of the constitu-

CHAP. XIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

343

tion. Without this support no man can be said to Imvo the least
sliadow of liberty, since they can have no property in that
which another can by right take from them when he pleases,
without their consent."

After referring to the antiquity and grounds of their rights
as British subjects, and to the fact of their not Imng represented
in Parliament, of the impracticability of being so, and "the
oppressive Stamp Act, confessedly imposing internal taxes, and
the late Acts of Parliament giving and granting certain <lutios
in the British colonies, mainly tending to the same end," the
Virginia House of Burgesses proceed as follows :

" The Act suspending the legislative power of New York,
they consider as still more alarming to the colonists, though it
has that single province in view. If the Parliament can compel
them to furnish a single article to the troops sent over, they
may by the .same rule oblige them to furni.sh clothes, arm.s^
and every other necessary, even the pay of the officers and
soldiers — a doctrine replete with every mischief, and utterly
subversive of all that is dear and valuable. For wliat advantage
can the people of the colonies derive from their right of choos-
ing their own representative.s, if tho.se representatives, when
chosen, were not permitted to exercise their own judgments —
were under a necessity (on pain of being deprived of their
legislative authority) of enforcing the mandates of the British
Parliament ?

" They trust they have expressed themselves with a firmness
that becomes freemen pleading for essential rights, and with a
decency that will take off every imputation of faction or dis-
loyalty. They repose entire confidence in his Majesty, who is
ever attentive to the complaints of his subjects, and is ever
ready to relieve their distreas ; and they are not without hopes
that the colonies, united in a decent and regular opposition, may
prevail on the new House of Commons to put a stop to measures
so directly repugnant to the interests both of tli« mother
country and her colonies."

The day after these proceedings by the House of Burgesses,
the Governor of Virginia dissolved them.

The House of Representatives of New Jersey, after gi-atefully
acknowledging the receipt of the Massachusetts circular, observe r

" The freedom with which the House of Representatives o£

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

I.I

1.25

3.2

(5b

f m
^ m

\M
1.8

U IIIIII.6

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

23 WEST U,Mfi j'rJEET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

^.*

<!*

344

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XIV.

the Massachusetts Bay have communicated their sentiments
upon a matter of so great concern to all the colonies, hath been
received by this House with that candour the spirit and design
of your letter merits. And at the same time that they acknow-
ledge themselves obliged to you for communicating your
sentiments to them, they have directed me to assure you that
they are desirous to keep up a correspondence with you, and to
unite with the colonies, if necessary, in further supplications to
his Majesty to relieve his distressed American subjects."

Answers to the Massachusetts circular from the Houses of
Representatives of Connecticut, of Georgia, and of Maryland, were
given to the same effect. The Maryland House of Representa-
tives, in addition to the answer to the Speaker of the House of
Representatives, presented an address to Governor Sharpe, of
Maryland, in reply to the letter of Lord Hillsborough. Their
address is dated June 23rd, 1768, and contains the following
words :

" In answer to your Excellency's message of the 20th, we
must observe, that if the letter from the Speaker of the House
of Representatives of the colony of Massachusetts Bay, addressed
to and communicated by our Speaker to this House, be the
same with the letter, a copy of which you are pleased to
intimate hath been communicated to the King's Ministers, it is
very alarming to find, at a time when the people of America
think themselves aggrieved by the late Acts of Parliament
imposing taxes on them for the sole and express purpose of
raising a revenue, and in the most dutiful manner are seeking
redress from the Throne, any endeavours to unite in laying
before their Sovereign what is apprehended to be their just
complaint, should be looked upon ' as a measure of most danger-
ous and factious tendency, calculated to inflame the minds of his
Majesty's good subjects in the colonies, and to promote an
unwarrantable combination, to excite and encourage an open
opposition to and denial of the authority of Parliament, and to
subvert the true principles of the constitution.'

" We cannot but view this as an attempt in some of his
Majesty's Ministers to suppress all communication of senti-
ments between the colonies, and to prevent the united supplica-
tions of America from reaching the royal ear. We hope the
conduct of this House will ever evince their reverence and

HAP. XIV.

CHAP. XIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

345

respect for the laws, and faithful attachment to the constitu-
tion ; but we cannot be brought to resent an exertion of the
most undoubted constitutional right of petitioning the Throne,
or any endeavours to procure and preserve a union of the
colonies, as an unjustifiable attempt to revive those distractions
which it is said have operated so fatally to the prejudice of
both the colonies and the mother country. We have the warm-
est and most affectionate attachment to our most gracious
Sovereign, and shall ever pay the readiest and most respectful
regard to the just and constitutional power of the British
Parliament ; but we shall not be intimidated by a few sounding
expressions from doing what we think is right."*

Thus the unconstitutional assumptions and despotic instruc-
tions of Lord Hillsborough to the Legislative Assemblies of the
several colonies were manfully and in a moderate and loyal
spirit repelled by them, in the clear knowledge of the constitu-
tional rights of Englishmen, whether resident in America or
England. But while Lord Hillsborough foolishly and vainly
dictated to the several colonies to treat the colony of Massachu-
setts with contempt, he advanced a step further in his would-be
domination over Massachusetts itself by directing Governor
Barnard to order the House of Representatives, under a threat
of dissolution, to rescind the resolution which thej' had adopted
to send the circular to the representative Assemblies of other
colonies. Lord Hillsborough, in a letter to the Governor of
Massachusetts Bay, dated April 22nd, 1768, said :

" It is the King's pleasure, that so soon as the General Court
is again assembled, at the time prescribed by the Charter, you
should require of the House of Representatives, in his Majesty's
name, to rescind the resolution which gave birth to the circular
letter from the Speaker, and to declare their disapprobation
thereof, and dissent to that rash and hasty proceeding." " But if,
notwithstanding the apprehensions which may justly be enter-
tained of the ill-consequences of a continuance of this factious
spirit, which seems to have influenced the resolutions of the
Assembly at the conclusion of the last session, the new Assembly
should refuse to comply with his Majesty's reasonable expecta-
tion, it is the King's pleasure that you should immediately

* Prior Documents, etc., p. 219.

'-' I

346

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XIV.

dissolve them, and transmit to me, to be laid before his Majesty,
an account of their proceedings thereupon, to the end that his
Majesty may, if he thinks fit, lay the whole matter before his
Parliament, that such provisions as shall be found necessary
may be made to prevent for the future a conduct of so extra-
ordinary and unconstitutional a nature."*

If it was unwise for Lord Hillsborough to write letters to the
Governors of the several colonies to induce their Assemblies to
treat with silent contempt the circular letter of the Massachu-
setts Assembly, it was absurd for him to order that Assembly
to rescind its resolution to send a letter which had been sent,
and acted upon, and answered — a resolution and letter, indeed,
of a preceding House of Assembly. But the new House of
Assembly, after long deliberation and discussion, refused, by a
majority of 92 to 17, to rescind the obnoxious resolution of the
late House of Assembly, and at the same time prepared and
addressed to Lord Hillsborough an elaborate letter in vindica-
tion of their proceedings. The House was, of course, forthwith
dissolved.

Lord Hillsborough's letter produced discontent not only in
Massachusetts, but in all the American provinces. It, in effect,
denied the right of consultation and petition to the colonists ;
for, as was said by Dr. Franklin, " a demand attended with a
penalty of dissolution seemed a command, not a requisition,
leaving no deliberative or discretionary power in the Assembly ;
and the ground of its being a petition to the King, guarded
with a most explicit declaration of the supreme legislative
power of Parliament, it wore the severe and dreadful appear-
ance of a penal prohibition against petitioning. It was, in
effect, saying you shall not even presume to complain, and
reducing them below the common state of slavery, in which, if
men complain with decency, they are heard imless their masters
happen to be monsters. It warmed moderation into zeal, and
inflamed zeal into rage. Yet still there appeared a disposition
to express their grievances in humble petitions. All the
Assemblies on the continent, in answer to a requisition of
similar import to that already mentioned, asserted the right of
the subject to petition for redress of grievances. They joined

* Prior Documents, etc

- jnrrr.jJ^j- T' ..

CHAP. XIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

347

in petitions stating the imposition of taxes upon them with-
out their consent, and the abolition of juries in revenue cases,
as intolerable grievances, from which they prayed relief."*

It is singular and proper to observe that the Massachusetts
Assembly were now complaining, and justly complaining, of
the denial of their right of petition, and of being taxed with-
out their own consent, when more than a century before their
forefathers had not only denied the right of religious worship
according to their conscience to Baptists, Presbyterians, and
Episcopalians, but the right of petition for the redress of
grievances to both the local Legislature and the King and
Parliament, and seized their private 4japers and fined and im-
prisoned them for attempting thus to petition ; denied to four-
fifths of the inhabitants of Massachusetts Bay the right of
franchise itself, because they were not certified members of the
Congregational Church ; taxed them for half a century with-
out allowing them any representation in the Legislature that
taxed them, and then fined and imprisoned those of them who
complained by petition of thus being taxed without representa-
tion, as well as being denied^ the freedom of religious worship

But though the General Assembly of Massachusetts Bay were
now receiving a part of the measure which their preceding
General Assemblies had meted out in full measure to four-fifths
of their own fellow-citizens during more than half of the
previous century, yet that does not make Lord Hillsborough's
letter the less uncoastitutional and tyrannical, nor the conduct
and vindication of the House of Representatives of Massachu-
setts Bay less manly and justifiable. The Governor of the
colony and his abettors had represented constitutional opposi-
tion and remonstrances against single Acts of Parliament, and
of the Ministers of the day, as disloyalty to the King and
treasonable resistance to lawful authority, and had already
pursued such a course of action as to create a pretext for
bringing soldiers and ships of war to the city, and conse-
quent hostility and collisions between citizens and the soldiery,
so as apparently to justify the suspension of the constituted
legislative authorities in Massachusetts Bay, and enable the
governors, judges, and executive officers to obtain large salaries

* Prior Dociunents, etc., p. 262.

348

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XIV.

and perquisites out of the colonists for present gratification and
future residence and expenditure in England.

Massachusetts was at that time the most populous and the
most wealthy colony in America, and Boston was the port
of the largest trade ; and though the House of Representatives
there had not used stronger language in its remonstrances to
Parliament and petitions to the King than the House of
Representatives of Virginia (the next most populous colony),
or Pennsylvania, or New York, or Maryland, or New Jei ^ey, or
Connecticut, or Rhode Island, yet the British Ministry deter-
mined to establish the newly-asserted parliamentary power in
America by making an example of Massachusetts and of the
port of Boston. There was the appointed seat of the English
Board of Commissioners of Customs, attended by a j^osse of
ofiicers whose haughtiness and taunts and threats contributed
not a little to irritate those with whom they had intercourse.

Three circumstances occurred which tended to increase the
popular irritation, and hasten the approaching crisis — the
seizure and detention of a sloop, the stationing of soldiers in
the city, and pressing of seamen contrary to law.

As to the seizure of the vessel, accounts differ. Dr. Holmes,
in his Armals, says :

"The laws of trade had been hitherto greatly eluded, but
the Commissioners of the Customs were now determined that
they should be executed. On the arrival of the sloop Liberty,
laden with wines from Madeira, belonging to Mr. John Hancock,
an eminent merchant of Boston, the tidesman, Thomas Kirk, went
on board, and was followed by Captain Marshall, who was in
Mr. Hancock's employ. On Kirk's refusing several proposals
made to him, Marshall with five or six others confined him
below three hours, during which time the wine was taken out.
The master entered some pipes next morning ; but the sloop
was seized for a false entry, and removed from the wharf under
the guns of the Romney man-of-war. The removal of the
sloop was highly resented, as implying apprehension of a
rescue, and every method was taken to interrupt the ofiicers
in the execution of their business ; and many persons deter-
mined to be revenged. A mob was soon collected; and Mr.
Harrison, the collector, Mr. Hallowell, the comptroller, Mr.
Irving, the inspector of imports and exports, and a son of the

CHAP. XIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

349

collector, very narrowly escaped with their lives. The mob
proceeded to the houses of the collector and comptroller, and
having broken their windows, and those of the inspector-
general, they next took and dragged the collector's (pleasure)
boat through the town and burned it on the common. These
outrages induced the Custom-house officers to take refuge, first
on board the Romney uian-of-war and afterwards in Castle
William."*

On the other hand, Dr. Franklin states the affair as follows :

" On the 10th of June a seizure was made of a sloop fastened
to the wharf, by an armed force, and the seizure carried by
violence to the man-of-war. That this seizure was made with
every circumstance of violence and insult which could irritate a
mob, is proved by the oaths of thirteen eye-witnesses whose credi-
bility has never been impeached. Unhappily, the irritation suc-
ceeded but too well. The collector and comptroller who made the
seizure in that manner were treated with great indignity and
personal injury by the mob."f

Another circumstance, productive of moi'e intense and general
excitement, if possible, and which transpired very shortly after
the seizure and detention of the sloop Liberty, v/as the impress-
ment of some seamen belonging to the town by the captain of
the man-of-war Bomney. This was done, as alleged, in violation
of an Act of Parliament for the encouragement of trade to
America — 6 Anne, chap, xxvii., section 9 — which says :

" No mariner or other person who shall serve on board, or
be retained to serve on board, any privateer or trading ship or
vessel that shall be employed in any port of America, nor any
mariner or person being on shore in any port thereof, shall be

* American Annals, etc., Vol II., pp. 157, 168 ; the authority given is
Gordon, VoL I., pp. 168 — 172. Dr. Ramsay gives a similar account of the affair
in his Colonial History, Vol. I., Chap, iii., p. 355.

t Prior Documents, pp. 262, 263.

Dr. Franklin adds in a note : " That the seizure was unjust, is plain from
this, that they were obliged to restore the vessel, after detaining her a long
time, not being able to find any evidence to support a prosecution. The
suits for enormous sums against a number of persons, brought in the Court
of Admiralty, being found insupportable, were, after long continuance, to the
great expense and trouble of these persons, dropt by a declaration of the
King's advocate that his Majesty would prosecutfi no further ; but the
prosecuted could obtain no costs or damages, for so is the law." — lb., p. 263.

H I

in!

350

THE LOYALISTS OF iMERICA

[chap. XIV.

liable to be impressed or taken away by any officer or officers
belonging to her Majesty's ships of war." To prevent the
tumults which were feared from such a flagrant and dangerous
infraction of the law, a legal town-meeting was called, in which
the inhabitants assembled petitioned the Governor to interpose
and prevent such outrages upon the rights and liberties of the
people ; but the Governor declined to interfere — stated that he
had no control over his Majesty's ships of war — that he would,
however, use his utmost endeavours to get the impressing of
men for the King's ships of war so regulated as to avoid all
the inconveniences to the town which the petitioners appre-
hended.

In the midst of these excitements and discontents, so threat-
ening and dangerous without some form of expression, many
of the peace-loving and respectable inhabitants of Boston
urged the Governor to convene the Legislature, but he refused
without a command from the King. The select men of Boston
then proposed to the several towns and townships of the
colony the election of a Convention, to meet in Boston the
22n^ of September, " to deliberate on constitutional measures
to obtain redress of their grievances." Ninety-six towns and
eight districts elected delegates to the Convention, which sat
four days ; " disclaimed any legislative authority, petitioned the
Governor, made loyal professions, expressed their aversion to
standing armies, to tumults and disorders, their readiness to
assist in suppressing riots and preserving the peace ; recom-
mended patience and good order ; and after a short session
dissolved."*

The day before the close of this Convention, it was announced
that three men-of-war and transports had arrived at Boston
harbour with about 900 troops, and the fleet next day came to
anchor near Castle William. The Commissioners of Customs
and their friends had solicited the stationing of a regular force
in the town.

"The ships having taken a station which commanded the
town, the troops, under cover of the cannon ol the ships, landed
without molestation, and to the number of 700 men marched,
with muskets charged and bayonets fixed, martial music, and

* Holmes' Annals, etc., VoL II., p. 168.

CHAP. XIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

351

the usual military parade, into the common. In the evening
the Select Men of Boston were required to quarter the regiments
in the town ; but they absolutely refused. A temporary shelter,
however, in Faneuil Hall was permitted to one regiment that
was without camp equipage. The next day the State House, by
the order of the Governor, was opened for the reception of the
ooldiers ; and after the quarters were settled, two field pieces
with the main guard were stationed just in its front. Everything
was calculated to excite the indignation of the inhabitants.
The lower floor of the State House, which had been used by
gentlemen and merchants as an exchange ; the representatives'
chamber, the Court-house, Faneuil Hall — places with which
were associated ideas of justice and freedom, as well as of con-
venience and utility — were now filled with regular soldiers.
Guards were placed at the doors of the State House, through
which the Council must pass in going to their own chamber.
The common was covered with tents. The soldiers were con-
stantly marching and countermarching to relieve the guards.
The sentinels challenged the inhabitants as they passed. The
Lord's day was profaned, and the devotion of the sanctuary
was disturbed by the sound of drums and other military music.
There was every appearance of a garrisoned town. The colonists
felt disgusted and injured, but not overawed, by the obtruded
soldiery. After the troops had obtained quarters, the Council
were required to provide barracks for them, agreeably to Act of
Parliament, but they resolutely declined any measure which
might be construed into submission to that Act. Several large
transports arrived at Boston from Cork, having on board part
of the 64th and 65th British regiments, under Colonels MacKay
and Pomeroy ; the object of which was to protect the revenue
oflBcers in the collection of duties.*

* Holmes' Annals, etc., Vol. II., pp. 158, 159.

The Boston American Gazette, under the head of " A Journal of Transac-
tions in Boston," says, September 30th, 1768 : " Early this morning a number
of boats were observed round the town, making soundings, etc. At three
o'clock in the afternoon, the Launceaton, of 40 guns ; the Mermaid, of 28 ;
the Glasgow, 20 ; the Beaver, 14 ; Senegal, 14 ; Bonetta, 10, and several armed
schooners, which, together with the Romney, of 60 guns, and the other ships
of war before in the harbour, all commanded by Captain Smith, came up to
town, bringing with them the 14th Regiment, Colonel Dalrymple, and the
29th Regiment, Colonel Carr, none having been disembarked at Castle

352

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XIV.

•

Such was the state of things in Massachusetts and in other
colonies at the close of the year 1768.

IhIuikI ; BO that we now behold Boston surronntled, in a time of profound
peace, with about fourteen ships of war, with springs on their cables, and
their broadsides to the town. If the people of England could but look into
the town, they would smile to see the utmost good order and observance of tlie
laws, and that this mighty armament has no other rebellion to subdue than

what has existed in the brain and letters of the inveterate G r B d

(Governor Barnard), and the detested Commiss (Commissioners) of the Board
of Gust — s (Customs). What advantage the Court of Versailles may take of
the present policy of the British Ministry can be better determined hereafter."
(pp. 177, 178.)

■iW^M

f ;

p! 1

||;;

CHAP. XV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

353

CHAPTER XV.

Events of 1769 — Unjust Imputations of Parliament on the Loyalty
OF THE Colonists, and Misrepresentations of their Just and
Loyal Petitions.

The earliest proceedings of this year in regard to the American
colonies took place in the British Parliament. In all the resolu-
tions, protests, addresses, and petitions which had been adopted
by American Assemblies and at town meetings, asserting the
exclusive right of the colonists to tax themselves, and against
taxation without representation by the British Parliament, they
professed heartfelt loyalty to the King, and disclaimed all views
of independence ; while in England the Parliament asserted
unlimited supremacy in and over the colonies, and the Royal
speeches, as well as the resolutions and addresses adopted by
the Lords and Commons, represented the colonies as being in a
state of disobedience to law and government, adopting measures
subversive of the constitution, and manifesting a disposition to
throw oflf all allegiance to the mother country. The House of
Lords passed resolutions censuring the resolutions and proceed-
ings of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, pronounc-
ing the election of deputies to sit in Convention, and the
meeting of that Convention at Boston, daring insults to his
Majesty's authority, and audacious usurpations of the powers of
Government ; yet, as has been seen, that Convention expressly
disclaimed any assumption of government, and simply expressed
the grievances complained of, prayed for their redress, declared
their loyalty to the King, and recognition of the supreme
authority of Parliament according to the constitution, and
quietly dissolved. But the House of Commons declared con-
23

354

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XV,

curronce in the resolutions of the Lords ; and both Houses, in
their address to the King, endorsed the measures of his Min-
isters, declared their readiness to give effectual support to such
further measures as might be fo\ind necessary to execute the
laws in Massachusetts Bay, and prayed his Majesty " to direct
the Governor (Barnard) to take the most effectual methods for
procuring the fullest information touching all treason or mis-
prision of treason within the Government since the 30th day
of December, 1767, and to transmit the same, together with the
names of the persons who were most active in the conmiission
of such offences, to one of the Secretaries of State, in order that
his Majesty might issue a special commission for inquiring,
hearing and determining the said offences, ivithin the realm of
Great Britain, pursuant to the provision of the statute of the
35th of Henry the Eighth."

The holding of town-meetings and their election of deputies,
etc., were as much provided for in the provincial laws as the
meeting and proceedings of the House of Representatives, or
as are the meetings and proceedings of town, and township, and
county municipal councils in Canada The wholesale denunci-
ations of disloyalty and treason against the people of a country
was calculated to exasperate and produce the very feelings
imputed ; and the proposal of the two Houses of Parliament
to make the Governor of Massachusetts Bay a detective and
informer-general against persons opposed to his administration
and the measures of the British Ministry, and the proposition
to have them arrested and brought 3,000 miles over the ocean
to England, for trial before a special commission, for treason or
misprision of treason, show what unjust, unconstitutional, and
foolish things Parliaments as well as individuals may some-
times perpetrate. Nothing has more impressed the writer, in
going through i/his protracted war of words, preliminary to the
unhappy war of swords, than the great superiority, even as
literary compositions, much more as State documents, of the
addresses and petitions of the Colonial Assemblies, and even
public meetings, and the letters of their representatives, when
compared with the dispatches of the British Ministry of that
day and the writings of their partizans.

The resolutions and joint address of the Houses of Parlia-
ment, which were adopted in February, reached America in

ill

lAl'. XV.

CHAP. XV.]

AND TIIKIU TIMKS.

So.-i

luscs, in
Ills M in-
to such
cute tlic
to direct
hods for
. or niis-
JOth day
with the
niniission
irder that
nquiring,
realm of
,te of the

deputies,
ws as the
iatives, or
nship, and
J denunci-
a country
y feelings
i*arliament
jctive and
inistration
)roposition
the ocean
treason or
tional, and
coay some-
writer, in
lary to the
y, even as
nts, of the
i, and even
tives, when
try of that

of Parlia-
America in

April, and gave great offence to the colonists generally instead
of exciting terror, especially th«» part of the address which
proposed bringing alleged ott'cnders from Massachusetts to bo
tried at a tribunal in Great Britain. Massachusetts had no
Genera) Assembly at that time, as Governor Barnard had dis-
solved the last Assembly, and the time prescribetl by the Charter
for calling one had not arrived ; but the House of Burgesses of
the old, loyal CJhurch of England colony of Virginia took the
state of all the colonies into serious consideration, passed several
resolutions, and directed their Speaker to transmit them with-
out delay to the Speakers of the Assemblies of all the colonies
on the continent for their concurrence. In these resolutions
the House of Burgesses declare — " That the sole '.Hrht of im-
posing taxes on the inhabitants of this colony is ;ow, and
ever hath been, legally and constitutionally vested 'n the House
of Burgesses, with consent of the Council, and < l." the King j.
his Governor for the time being ; that it is the privil'gcor the
inhabitants iv> petition their Sovereign for redress ci grievances,
an(^ ♦hat it is lawful to procure the concurrence jf hi i Majesty's
other colonies in dutiful addresses, praying the Royal liiterposi-
tion in favour of the violated rights of America ; that all trials
for treason, misprision of treason, or for p,ny felony or crime
whatsoever, committed by any persons residing in any colony,
ought to be in his Majesty's courts within said colony, and that
the seizing of any person residing in the colony, suspected of
any crime whatsoever committed therein, and sending such
person to places beyond the sea to be tried, is highly derogatory
of the rights of British subjects, as thereby the inestimable
privilege of being tried by jury from the vicinage, as well as
the liberty of producing witnesses on such trial, will be taken
away from the accused."

The House agreed also to an address to his Majesty, which
stated, in the style of loyalty 'and real attachment to the Crown,
a deep conviction that the complaints of the colonists were well
founded. The next day Lord Botetourt, the Governor of Vir-
ginia, dissolved the House in the following words : " Mr.
Speaker and Gentlemen of the House of Burgesses, I have
heard of your resolves, and augur ill of their effects. You have
made it my duty to dissolve you ; and you are dissolved accord-
ingly."

356

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XV.

The Assembly of South Carolina adopted resolutions similar
to those of Virginia, as did the Lower House of Maryland and
the Delaware counties, and the Assembly of North Carolina,
and was on that account dissolved by Governor Tyron. To-
wards the close of the year, the Assembly of New York passed
resolutions in concurrence with those of Virginia. The mem-
bers of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, and of the Assembly
of North Carolina, after their dissolution, met as private gentle-
men, chose for moderators their late Speakers, and adopted
resolutions against importing British goods. This was followed
by other colonies, and the non-importation agreement became
general. Boston had entered into the non-importation agree-
ment as early as August, 1768, which was soon after adopted
in Salem, the city of New York, and the province of Conn^icti-
cut ; but the agreement was not generally entered into until
after the Virginia resolutions. " The meetings of non-importa-
tion associations were regularly held in the various provinces.
Committees were appointed to examine all vessels arriving from
Britain. Censures were freely passed on such as refused to
concur in these associations, and their names were published in
the newspapers as enemies of their country. The regular Acts
of the Provincial Assemblies were not so much respected and
obeyed as the decrees of these Committees."*

Governor Barnard could not delay calling the General Assem-
bly of Massachusetts beyond the time prescribed by the Charter
for its meeting in May ; and when it met, its first act was to

* Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., Chapter iii.,p, 359.
The following are the resolutions subscribed by the merchants and traders
of New York, dated 27th August, 1768 : >

I. That we will not send for from Great Britain, either upon our own
account or on commission, this fall, any other goods than what we have
already ordered.

II. That we will not import any Vind of merchandise from Great Britain,
either on our own account or on commission, or any otherwise, nor purchase
from any factor or others, any kind of goods imported from Great Britain
directly, or by way of any of the other colonies, or by way of the West
Indies, that shall be shipped from Great Britain after the first day of Novem-
ber, until the forementioned Acts of Parliament, imposing duties on paper,
glass, etc., be repealed; except only the articles of coals, salt, sailcloth,
wool, card-wool, grindstones, chalk, lead, tin, sheet-copper, and German steel.

III. We further agree not to import any kind of merchandise from

': I

HAP. XV.

s similar
land and
Carolina,
on. To-
'k passed
he mem-
^ssembly
;e gentle-
adopted
followed
t became
on agree-
' adopted
Jonnocti-
ntc until
-importa-
>rovinces.
dng from
jfused to
lished in
alar Acts
icted and

il Assem-
3 Charter
was to

ind traders

n our own
it we have

at Britain,
ir purchase
eat Britain
' the West
of Noveni-
1 on paper,
sailcloth,
rman steel,
iidise from

CHAP. XV.J

AND THEIR TIMES.

357

appoint a Committee to wait on the Governor, and represent to
him " that an armament by sea and land investing this metropo-
lis, and a military guard with cannon pointed at the door of
the State House, where the Assembly is held, are inconsistent
with the dignity and freedom with which they have a right
to deliberate, consult, and determine," and added, " They expect
that your Excellency will, as his Majesty's representative, give
effectual orders for the removal of the above-mentioned forces
by sea and land out of this port, and the gates of this city,
during the session of the said Assembly." The Governor
answered : " Gentlemen, I have no authority over his Majesty's
ships in this port, or his troops within this town, nor can I give
any orders for the removal of the same," The House persisted
in declining to do business while surrounded with an armed
force, and the Governor at length adjourned it to Cambridge.

On the 6th of July the Governor sent a message to the
House with accounts of expenditures already incurred in quar-
tering his Majesty's troops, desiring funds for their payment,
and requiring a provision for the quartering of the troops in the
town and on Castle Island, " according to Act of Parliament."
The next day, among other things, the House passed the follow-
ing resolutions :

" That a general discontent on account of the Revenue Acts,
an expectation of the sudden arrival of a military power to
enforce said Acts, an apprehension of the troops being quartered
upon the inhabitants, the General Court (or Assembly) dissolved,
the Governor refusing to call a new one, and the people almost

Hamburg and Holland, directly from thence, nor by any other way what-
soever, more than we have already ordered, except tiles and bricks.

IV. We also promise to countermand all orders given from Great Britain,
or since the 16th instant, by the first conveyance; ordering those goods not
to be sent, unless the foreraentioned duties are taken off.

V. And we further agree, that if any person or persons subscribing
hereto shall take any advantage, by importing any kind of goods that are
herein restricted, directly or indirectly, contrary to the true intent and
meaning of this agreement, such person or persons shall by us be deemed
enemies to their country.

VI. Lastly, we agree, that if any goods shall be consigned or sent over
to ue, contrary to our agreement in this subscription, such goods so imported
shall bf lodged in some public warehouse, there to be kept under confine-
ment until the forementioned Acts be repealed.

358

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XV.

ri i

reduced to a state of despair, rendered it highly expedient and
necessary for the people to convene their (town) committees to
associate (in convention), consult, and advise the best means to
promote peace and good order ; to present their united com-
plaints to the Throne, and jointly to pray for the Royal interpo-
sition in favour of their violated rights ; nor can this procedure
possibly be illegal, as they expressly disclaim all governmental
acts.

" That the establishment of a standing army in this colony,
in time of peace, is an invasion of national rights.

" That a standing army is not known as a part of the British
constitution.

" That sending an armed force into the colony, under pretence
of assisting the civil authority, is highly dangerous to the people,
unprecedented and unconstitutional."

On the 12th of July the Governor sent a message to the
House requesting an explicit answer to his message of the 6th,
as to whether the House would or would not make provision
for quartering the troops. After anxious deliberation, the
unusually full House of 107 members present unanimously
answered :

" As representatives, by the Royal Charter and the nature of
our trust, we are only empowered to grant such aids as are
reasonable, of which we are free and independent judges, at
liberty to follow the dictates of our own understanding, with-
out regard to the mandates of another. Your Excellency must,
therefore, excuse us in this express declaration that as we
cannot, consistently with our honour or interest, and much less
with the duty we owe to our constituents, so we shall never
make provision for the purposes mentioned in your messages."

Governor Barnard rejoined, in his last words to the Assembly,
" To his Majesty, and if he pleases to his Parliament, must be
referred your invasion of the rights of the Imperial sovereignty.
By your own acts you will be judged. Your publications are
plain and explicit, and need no comment." And he prorogued
the Assembly until the 10th day of January, 1770. He wrote
to Lord Hillsborough : " Their last message exceeds everything."
Three weeks afterwards, the 1st of August, unexpectedly to
himself, Barnard was recalled. He had expected to be appointed
Governor of Virginia ; but on his arrival in England he found

CHAP. XV.

sdient and
tnittees to
means to
ited com-
il interpo-
procedure
ernmental

lis colony,

he British

r pretence
he people,

ige to the
>f the 6th,
provision
ation, the
mimously

nature of
ids as are
judges, at
ng, with-
sncy must,
at as we
much less
lall never
nessages."
A.ssembly,

must be
i^ereignty.
itions are
prorogued
He wrote
jrything."
ctedly to
appointed

he found

CHAP. XV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

359

that the British Ministers had promised the London- American
merchants that they would never employ him again in America.*
He answered the purposes of the corrupt Ministerial oligarchy
in England, to mislead the Sovereign on one hand and oppress
the colonists on the other. But for him there would have been
no ships of war or military sent to Boston ; no conflicts between
the citizens and soldiers ; probably no revolutionary war.
Barnard's departure from Boston was signalized by the ringing
of bells, and firing of cannon, and bonfires at night. He was
succeeded in the government by Lieutenant-Governor Hutchin-
son, a man who had rendered great service to his native
country by his History, and his labours in the Legislature for ten
years, but who had become extremely unpopular by his secret
support of the English Revenue Acts and duplicate policy of
Barnard, whom he at length equalled in avarice and decep-
tion, and greatly excelled in ability.

One of the most effective and least objectionable means of
obtaining the repeal of the Revenue Acts was the agreement
not to purchase or import goods of British manufacture or goods
imported from British ports. At best the revenues arising from
the operation of these Acts would not amount to £20,000
a year. They were maintained in England as a badge of the
absolute authority of Parliament ; they were resisted in America
as a badge of colonial independence of taxation — without repre-

* The following is the portrait which Mr. Bancroft haa drawn of the
character of Barnard, and I cannot deny its accuracy :

" Trained as a wrangling proctor in an Ecclesiastical Court, he had been a
quarrelsome disputant rather than a statesman. His parsimony went to the
extreme of meanness; his avarice was insatiable and restless. So long as he
connived at smuggling, he reaped a harvest in that way ; when Grenville's
sternness inspired alarm, it was his study to make the most money out of
forfeitures and penalties. Professing to respect the Charter, he was un-
wearied in zeal for its subversion; declaring his opposition to taxation by
Parliament, he urged it with all his power. Asserting most solemnly that
he had never asked for troops, his letters reveal his perpetual importunity
for ships of war and an armed force. His reports were often false — partly
with design, partly from the credulity of panic. He placed everything in
the most unlavourable light, and was ready to tell every tale and magnify
trivial rumours into acts of treason. He was despondent when conciliation
prevailed in England. The officers of the army and navy despised him for
his cowardice and duplicity, and did not conceal their contempt." (History
of the United States, Vol. VI., Chap. xU., p. 291.)

S^lf

P!,j

360

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XV.

sentation. There was no crime, political or moral, in refusing
to buy goods of any kind, much less goods burdened with what
they considered unlawful duties. Mr. Bancroft remarks :

" The agreement of non-importation originated in New York,
where it was rigidly carried into effect. No acrimony ap-
peared; every one, without so much as a single dissentient,
approved of the combination as wise and legal ; persons in the
highest stations declared against the Revenue Acts, and the Gov-
ernor wished their repeal. His acquiescence in the association for
coercing that repeal led the moderate men among the patriots of
New York to plan a union of the colonies in an American Par-
liament (similar to that which now exists in the Dominion
of Canada), preserving the Governments of the several colonies,
and having the members of the General Parliament chosen
by their respective Legislatures. They were preparing the
greatest work of their generation, to be matured at a later day.
Their confidence of immediate success assisted to make them
alike disinclined to independence and firm in their expectation
of bringing England to reason by suspending their mutual
trade.

" The people of Boston, stimulated by the unanimity and
scrupulous fidelity of New York, were impatient that a son
of Barnard, two sons of Hutchinson, and about five others,
would not accede to the agreement. At a great meeting of
merchants in Faneuil Hall, Hancock proposed to send for Hutch-
inson's two sons, hinting, what was true, that the Lieutenant-
Governor was himself a partner with them in their late extra-
ordinary importations of tea. As the best means of coercion,
it wa^ voted not to purchase anjrthing of the recusants. Sub-
scription papers to that effect were carried around from house
to house, and everybody complied."

" A letter from New York next invited Boston to extend the
agreement against importing indefinitely, until every Act im-
posing duties should be repealed ; and on the 17th (of October),
by the great influence of Molineux, Otis, Samuel Adams, and
William Cooper, this new form was adopted."* The opposition

♦ History of the United States, "Vol. VI., Chap. xliL, pp. 308, 309, 311.
For the first non-importation resolutions adopted by the merchants of New
York, see note on page 356.

" The trade between Qreat Britain and her colonies on the continent of

CHAP. XV.

CHAP. XV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

361

in Boston to the reception of goods from England became so
general and determined, that even Governor Hutchinson quailed
before it, and the soldiers stood silent and inactive witnesses
of it. Mr. Bancroft says :

" Early in October (1769), a vessel laden with goods, shipped
by English houses themselves, arrived in Boston. The military
officers had been speculating on what would be done, and
Colonel Dalrymple stood ready to protect the factors. But his
assistance was not demanded. Hutchinson permitted the mer-
chants to reduce the consignees to submission, and even to
compel an English adventurer to re-embark his goods. One
and another of the Boston recusants yielded ; even the two
sons of Hutchinson himself, by their father's direction, gave up
18 chests of tea, and entered fully into the (non-importation)
agreement. Four still held out, and their names, with those
of the two sons of Hutchinson, whose sincerity was questioned,
stood recorded as infamous on the journals of the town of
Boston. On the 15th another ship arrived; again the troops
looked on as bystanders, and witnessed the complete victory
of the people.*

But in the following month, November, a new turn was
given to public thought, and new feelings of joy were inspired
throughout America, by a dispatch from Lord Hillsborough
to the King's personal friend, Lord Botetourt, Governor of
Virginia, promising the repeal of the obnoxious Revenue Acts,
and to impose no further taxes on the colonies. Lord Hills-
borough days :

" I can take upon me to assure you, notwithstanding informa-
tion to the contrary from men with factious and seditious

America, on an average of three years (from 1766 to 1769), employed 1,078
ships and 28,910 seamen. The value of goods exported from Great Britain
on the same a%erage was .£3,370,900 ; and of goods exported from the
colonies to Great Britain and elsewhere £3,924,606." (Holmes' Annals, etc.,
Vol. II., p. 162.)

• History of the United States, Vol. VI., Chap, xlii., p. 311.

" To the military its inactivity was humiliating. Soldiers and oflBcers
spoke of the people angrily as rebels. The men were rendered desperate
by the firmness with which the local magistrates put them on trial for every
transgression of the provincial laws. Arrests provoked resistance. ' If they
touch you, run them through the bodies,' said a captain of the 29th Regiment
to his soldiers, and he was indicted for the speech." — lb., p. 314.

ppwflf

362

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XV.

•* ii

viewSj that liis Majesty's present Administration have at no
time entertained a design to propose to Parliament to lay any
further taxes upon America for the purpose of raising a
revenue; and that it is at present their intention to propose,
the next session of Parliament, to take off the duties upon glass,
paper and colours, upon consideration of such duties having
been laid contrary to the true principles of commerce." Lord
Hillsborough further informed Lord Botetourt that " his
Majesty relied upon his prudence and fidelity to make such
explanation of his Majesty's measures as would tend to remove
prejudices and to re-establish mutual confidence and affection
between the mother country and the colonies."

In Lord Botetourt's address to the Virginia Assembly, trans-
mitting a copy of the dispatch, he said :

"It may possibly be objected that as his Majesty's present
Administration are not immortal, their successors may be
inclined to attempt to undo what the present Ministers shall
have attempted to perform ; and to that objection I can give
but this answer : that it is my firm opinion that the plan I
have stated to you will certainly take place, and that it will
never be departed from ; and so determined am I for ever to
abide by it, that I will be content to be declared infamous if
I do not, to the last hour of my life, at all times, in all places,
and upon all occasions, exert every power with which I either
am, or ever shall be, legally invested, in order to obtain and
maintain for the continent of America that satisfaction which
I have been authorized to promise this day by the confidential
servants of our gracious Sovereign, who, to my certain know-
ledge, rates his honour so high, that he would rather part with
his crown than preserve it by deceit."

These assurances were received by the Virginians with trans-
ports of joy, viewing them as they did as abandoning, never to
be resumed, the design of raising a revenue in America by Act
of Parliament. The General Assembly of Virginia, in reply to
Lord Botetourt's address, thus expressed themselves :

" We are sure our most gracious Sovereign, under whatever
changes may happen in his confidential servants, will remain
immutable in the ways of truth and justice, and that he is
incapable of deceiving his faithful subjects ; and we esteem your

.1 ! i >

3HAP. XV.

CHAP. XV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

363

.ve at no

lay any
raising a

1 propose,
pon glass,
s having
e." Lord
iat " his
ake such
.0 remove

aflfection

ily, trans-

s present
may be
ters shall
can give
le plan I
at it will
• ever to
'amous if
ill places,
1 I either
tain and
m which
ifidential
n know-
)art with

th trans-
never to

a by Act
reply to

whatever
I remain
at he is
sem your

lordship's information not only as warranted, but even sanctified
by the Royal word."*

It was understood and expected on all sides that the unpro-
ductive tax on tea would be repealed with the other articles
enumerated in the Revenue Acts. Such was the wish of Gover-
nor Botetourt ; such was the advice of Eden, the newly ap-
pointed Lieutenant-Governor of Maryland ; Golden, who now
administered the government of New York, on account of the
death of More, assured the Legislature of the greatest probability
that the late duties imposed by authority of Parliament, so
much to the dissatisfaction of the colonies, would be taken off
the ensuing session.-f-

" Thus," says Mr. Bancroft, " all America confined its issue
with Great Britain to the single question of the Act impos-
ing a duty on tea." " Will not a repeal of all other duties satisfy
the colonists ? " aaked one of the Ministerial party of Franklin
in London. And he frankly answered, ' I think not ; it is not
the sum paid in the duty on tea that is complained of as a
burden, but the principle of the Act expressed in the preamble.'
This faithful advice was communicated to the Ministry ; but
what efiect could it produce when Hillsborough administered
the colonies, with Barnard for his counsellor ?"J

* Quoted from Ramsay's Ctaonial History, Vol. I., Chap, iii., pp. 363, 364.

t Bancroft's History, Vol. VI., Chap, xlii., pp. 315, 316.

" The general tendency to conciliation prevailed. Since the merchants of
Philadelphia chose to confine their agreement for non-importation to the
repeal of Townshend's Act, the merchants of Boston, for the sake of union, gave
up their more extensive covenant, and reverted to their first stipulations.
The dispute about the Billeting Act had ceased in New Jersey and Pennsyl-
vania ; the Legislature of New York, pleased with the permission to issue
colonial bills of credit, disregarded the appeal from Macdougall to the betrayed
inhabitants of that city and colony, and sanctioned a compromise by a
majority of one. South Carolina was commercially the most closely con-
nected with England. The annual exports from Charleston reached in value
about two and a quarter millions of dollars, of which three-fourths went
directly or indirectly to England. But however closely the ties of interest
bound Carolina to England, the people were high-spirited ; and, notwith-
standing the great inconvenience to their trade, they preserveed in the strict
observance of their (non-importation) association, looking with impatient
anxiety for the desired repeal of the Act complained of." — lb., pp. 317, 318.

t History of the United States, YoL VI., Chap, xlii., p. 318.

■

364

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVI.

lii ^

CHAPTER XVI.

Events of 1770 — An Eventful Epoch — Expectations of Reconcilia-
tion AND Union Disappointed.

This was the year of bloody collision and parliamentary
decision, which determined the future relations between Great
Britain and the American colonies. Dr. Ramsay observes :

" From the Royal and Ministerial assurances given in favour
of America in 1769, and the subsequent repeal in 1770 of five-
sixths of the duties which had been imposed in 1767, together
with th( consequent renewal of the mercantile intercourse
between Great Britain and her colonies, many hoped that the
contention between the two countries was finally closed. In all
the provinces, excepting Massachusetts, appearances seemed to
favour that opinion. Many incidents operated there to the
prejudice of that harmony which had begun elsewhere to
return. Stationing a military force among them was a fruitful
source of uneasiness. The royal army had been brought thither
with the avowed design of enforcing submission to the mother
country. Speeches from the Throne and addresses from both
Houses of Parliament had taught them to look upon the
inhabitants of Massachusetts as a factious, turbulent people,
who aimed at throwing off all subordination to Great Britain.
They, on the other hand, were accustomed to look upon the
soldiery as instruments of tyranny, sent on purpose to dragoon
them out of their liberties.

" Reciprocal insults soured the tempers, and mutual injuries
embittered the passions of the opposite parties. Some fiery
spirits, who thought it an indignity to have troops quartered
among them, were constantly exciting the townspeople to
quarrel with the soldiers.

aAP. XVI.

CHAP. XVI,]

AND THEIR TIMES.

365

ECONCILIA-

" On the 2nd of March, 1770, a fray took place near Mr.
Gray's ropewalk, between a private soldier of the 20th Regi-
ment and an inhabitant. The former was supported by his
comrades, the latter by the ropemakers, till several on both
sides were involved in the consequences. On the 5th a more
dreadful scene was presented. The soldiers when under arms
were pressed upon, insulted and pelted by the mob, armed with
clubs, sticks, and snowballs covering stones. They were also
dared to fire. In this situation, one of the soldiers, who had
received a blow, in resentment fired at the supposed aggressors.
This was followed by a single discharge from six others. Three
of the inhabitants were killed and five were dangerously
wounded. The town was immediately in commotion. Such
were the temper, force, and number of the inhabitants, that
nothing but an engagement to remove the troops out of the
town, together with the advice of moderate men, prevented the
townsmen from falling on the soldiers, Capt. Preston, who
commanded, and the party who fired on the inhabitants, were
committed to jail, and afterwards tried. The captain and six
of the men were acquitted. Two were brought in guilty of
manslaughter (and were lightly punished). It appeared on the
trial that the soldiers were abused, insulted, threatened, and
pelted before they jired. It was also proved that only seven
guns were fired by the eight prisoners. These circumstances
induced the jury to give a favourable verdict. The result of
the trial reflected great honour en John Adams and Josiah
Quincy, the counsel for the prisoneis (promising young lawyers
and popular leaders), and also on the integrity of the jury, who
ventured to give an upright verdict in defiance of popular

opmion

»*

* Colonial History, Vol. I. Chap, iii., pp. 364, 365.

Several American historians have sought to represent the soldiers as the
first aggressors and offenders in this affair. The verdict of the jury refutes
such representations. Tlie accuracy of Dr. Ramsay's statements given above
cannot bd fairly questioned ; he was a member of South Carolina Legislature,
an officer in the revolutionary army during the whole war, and a pergonal
friend of Washington. Mr. Hildreth says : " A weekly paper, the * Journal
of the Times,' was filled with all sorts of stories, some true, but the greater
part false or exaggerated, on purpose to keep up prejudice against the soldiers.
A mob of men and boys, encouraged by the sympathy of the inhabitants, made
a constant practice to insult and prooke them. The result to be expected soon

3G6

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XVI.

lit

3 '

i'!

A further hindrance to returning harmony in Massachusetts,
as in the other colonies, was another ill-judged act of the Britisli
Ministers in making the Governor and judges wholly indepen-

Ibllowed. After numerous fights with straggling soldiers, a serious collision
at length took place : a picket guard of eight men, provoked beyond endurance
by words and blows, fired into a crowd, killed three persons and dangerously
wounded five others." " The story of the ' Boston massacre,' lor so it was
called, exaggerated into a ferocious and unprovoked assault by brutal soldiers
on a defenceless people, produced everywhere intense excitement. The
officer and soldiers of the picket guard were indicted and tried for murder.
They were defended, however, by John Adams and Josiah Quincy, two young
lawyers, the most zealous among the popular leaders: and so clear a case was
made in their behalf, that they were all acquitted except two, who were
found guilty of manslaughter and slightly punished." (History of the
United States, Chap, xxix., pp. 554, 655, 556.)

Dr. Holmes states that " the soldiers were pressed upon, insulted by the
populace, and dared to fire ; one of them, who had received a blow, fired at
the aggressors, and a single discharge from six others succeeded. Three of
the inhabitants were killed and five dangerously wounded. The town was
instantly thrown into the greatest commotion. The drums beat to arms, and
thousands of the inhabitants assembled in the adjacent streets. The next
morning Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson summoned a Council ; and while
the subject was in discussion, a message was received from the town, which
had convened in full assembly, declaring it to be their unanimous opinion
'that nothing can rationally be expected to restore the peace of the town, and
prevent blood and carnage, but the immediate removal of the troops.' On
an agreement to this measure, the commotion subsided. Captain Preston,
who commanded the party of soldiers, was committed with them to jail, and
all were afterwards tried. The captain and six of the men were acquitted.
Two were brought in guilty of manslaughter. The result of the trial reflected
great honour on John Adams and Josiah Quincy, the counsel for the
prisoners, and on the integrity of the jury." (Annals, etc., Vol. II., pp. 166,
167.)

How much more honourable and reliable are these straightforward state-
ments of those American historians of the times, and the verdict of even a
Boston jury, than the sophistical, elaborate, and reiterated efforts of Mr.
Bancroft, in the 43rd and 44th chapters of his History, to implicate the
soldiers as the provoking and guilty causes of the collision, and impugning
the integrity of the counsel for the prosecution, the court, and the jury.

In the Diary of J. Adams, Vol. II., p. 229, are the following words :

" Endeavours had been systematically pursued for many months by certain
• busy characters to excite quarrels, rencounters, and combats, single or com-
pound, in the night, between the inhabitants of the lower class and the
soldiers, and at all risks to enkindle an immortal hatred between them."—
(Quoted by Mr. Hildreth, VoL II., p. 409, in a note.)

I i

HAP. XVI.

CHAP. XVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

367

dent of the province in regard to their salaries, which had always
been paid by the local Legislature in annual grants, but which
were now, for the first time, paid by the Crown. The House of
Assembly remonstrated against this innovation, which struck at
the very heart of public liberty, by making the administrator
of the government, and the courts of law, wholly independent
of the people, and wholly dependent on the Crown, all holding
their offices during pleasure of the Crown, and depending upon
it alone for both the amount and payment of their salaries, and
that payment out of a revenue raised by taxing the people
without their consent.

The House addressed the Governor and judges to know
whether they would receive their salaries as heretofore, by
grants of the Legislature, or as stipends from the Crown.
Three out of the four judges announced that they would
receive their salaries as heretofore, by grants from the local
Legislature ; but Governor Hutchinson and Chief Justice Oliver
announced that they would receive their salaries from the
Crown. They therefore became more and more odious to the
inhabitants, while the discussion of the new question of the
relations of the Executive and Judiciary to the people, upon
the grounds of public freedom and the impartial administration
of justice, greatly increased the strength of the opposition
and the importance of the local House of Representatives
as the counterpart of the House of Commons, and as guardians
of the rights of the people.

At an early period of Canadian history, the salaries of gov-
ernors and judges were determined and paid by the Crown,
out of what was called a casual and territorial revenue, in-
dependent of the representatives of the people, and the judges
held their places during pleasure ; but after much agitation, and
a determined popular struggle of several years, a civil list for
both the governors and judges was agreed upon and voted by
the Legislature. The tenure of the offices of judges was made
that of good behaviour, instead of pleasure ; and executive
councillors and heads of departments were made dependent upon
the confidence of the Legislature, with the control of revenues
of every kind raised in the country; since which time there
have been peace, loyalty, and progress throughout the provinces
of the Canadian Dominion.

Wf^Tw^

868

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [cHAP. XVF.

I --i

] i

i i

To turn now to the affairs of tlio colonies as discussed and
decided upon in the British Parliament, whicli met the 9tli of
January, 1770. The King, in opening Parliament, expressed liis
regret that his endeavours to tramjuillize America had not been
attended with the desired success, and that combinations hat!
been formed to destroy the connnercial connection between tlio
colonies and the mother country. The opposition in botli
Houses of Parliament dwelt strongly on the prevailing dis-
contents, both in England and in the colonies. Ministers, ad-
mitting these discontents, imputed them to the spirit of faction,
the speeches and writings of agitators, and to petitions got up
and circulated by their influence. Lords Camden and Shel-
burne resigned, disapproving of the policy of the Administration,
as did soon after, on the 28th of January, 1770, the Duke of
Grafton, First Lord of the Treasury, and was succeeded by Lord
North as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Lord Chatham, after
an absence of two years, recovered sufficiently to make his
clarion voice once more heard in the councils of the nation
against official corruption, and in defence of liberty and the
rights of the colonies, the affairs of which now occupied the
attention of Parliament. The British manufacturers and mer-
chants who traded to America had sustained immense losses
by the rejection of their goods, through the non-importing
associations in America, and apprehended ruin from their con-
tinuance, and therefore petitioned Parliament, stating their
sufferings and imploring relief. On the 5th of March Lord North
introduced a Bill into the Commons for the repeal of the whole
of the Act of 1767, which imposed duties on glass, red lead,
paper, and painters' colours, but retaining the preamble, which
asserted the absolute authority of Parliament to bind the
colonies in all cases whatsoever, and retaining, as an illustration
of that authority, the clause of the Act which imposed a duty
on tea. He said: — "The articles taxed being chiefly British
manufactures, ought to have been encouraged instead of being
burdened with assessments. The duty on tea was continued,
for maintaining the parliamentary right of taxation. An im-
post of threepence in the pound could never be opposed by the
colonists, unless they were determined to rebel against Great
Britain. Besides, a duty on that article, payabb in England, and
amounting to nearly one shilling in the pound, was taken oft on

HAP. XVI.

f'HAP. XVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

3G9

its exportation to America ; so that the inhabitants of the colonies
saved ninepence in the pound. The members of the opposition,
in both House.s, advocated the repeal of the clause on tea, and
predicted the inefficiency of the Bill should that clause Ije
retained, and repeated the arguments on the inju.stice and
inexpediency of taxing America l)y Act of Parlianient ; but the
Bill was carried by a large majority, and as.sunted to by the
King on the 12th of April."

The repeal of the obnoxious port duties of 1707 left no
pretence for retaining the duty on tea for raising a revcmie, as
the tea duty, at the highest computation, would not exceed
£10,000 a year ; and when Lord North was pressed to relinquish
that remaining cause of contention, he replied :

" Has the reneal of the Stamp Act taught the Americans
obedience ? H ■ our lenity inspired them with moderation ^
Can it be proper, while they deny our legal right to tax them,
to acquiesce in the argument of illegality, and by the repeal of
the whole law to give up that honour ? No ; the most proper
time to exert our right of taxation is when the right is refused.
To temporize is to yield ; and the authority of the mother
country, if it is now unsupported, will in reality be relinquished
for ever. A total repeal cannot be thought of till America is
prostrate at our feet."

Governor Pownall, who had spent many years in America,
and had preceded Barnard as Governor of Massachusetts, moved
an amendment, to include the repeal of the duty on tea as well
as on the articles included in the original motion of Lord North.
In the course of his speech in support of the amendment he
said :

"If it be a»sked whether it will remove the apprehensions
excited by your resolutions and address of the last year, for
bringing to trial in England persons accused of treason in
America ? I answer, no. If it be asked, if this commercial con-
cession would quiet the minds of the Americans as to the
political doubts and fears which have struck them to the heart
throughout the continent ? I answer, no ; so long as they are left
in doubt whether the Habeas Corpus Act, whether the Bill of
Rights, whether the Common Law as now existing in England,
have any operation and effect in America, they cannot be satis-
fied. At this hour they know not whether the civil constitu-
24

rr^rrww-

370

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XVI.

tion be not suspended and superseded by the establishment of
a military force. The Americans think that they have, in
return to all their applications, experienced a temper and disposi-
tion that is unfriendly — that the enjoyment and exercise of the
common rights of freemen have been refused to them. Never
with these views will they solicit the favour of this House ;
never more will they wish to bring before Parliament the
grievances under which they conceive themselves to labour.
Deeply as they feel, they suffer and endure with alarming
silence. For their liberty they are under no apprehensions. It
was first planted under the auspicious genius of the constitu-
tion, and it has grown up into a verdant and flourishing tree ;
and should any severe strokes be aimed at the branches, and
fate reduce it to the bare stock, it would only take deeper root,
and spring out more hardy and durable than before. They
trust to Providence, and wait with firmness and fortitude the
issue."

The statements of Governor Pownall were the result of lonsr
observation and experience in America, and practical knowledge
of the colonists, and were shown by results to be true to the
letter, though treated with scorn by Lord North, and with
aversion by the House of Commons, which rejected his amend-
ment by a majority of 242 to 204.

The results of the combinations against the use of British
manufactures were illustrated this year by the candidates for the
degree of Bachelor of Arts at Harvard College appearing dressed
in black cloth manufactured wholly in New England. The
general plan of non-importation of English manufactured goods
was now relinquished on the repeal of the duties imposed upon
them; but the sentiment of the principal commercial towns
was against the importation of any tea from England. An
association was formed not to drink tea until the Act imposing
the duty should be repealed. This was generally agreed to and
observed throughout the colonies.

But the retaining of threepence in the pound on tea did
not excite so much hostility in the colonies against the Parlia-
ment as might have been expected. The Act of Parliament
was virtually defeated, and the expected revenue from tea
failed because of tlie resolution of the colonial associations
of the people to use no tea, and of the merchants

[AP. XVI.

CHAP. XVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

371

ment of
have, in
I disposi-
se of the
Never
1 House ;
[lent the
) labour,
alarming
lions. It
constitu-
ing tree ;
dies, and
;per root,
•e. Thev
itude the

It of long
nowledge
rue to the
and with
s amend-

>i British
les for the
.g dressed
,nd. The
|red goods
ised upon
al towns
land. An
[imposing ,
led to and

tea did

^e Parlia-

irliament

I from tea

Bociations

lerchants

to import none on which the duty was charged. The
merchants found means to smuggle, from countries to which
the authority of Great Britain did not extend, a suffi-
cient supply of tea for the tea-drinking colonists. Thus
the tea-dealers and tea-drinkers of America exercised their
patriotism and indulged their taste — the one class making an
additional threepence a pound on tea by evading the Act, and the
other class enjoying the luxury of tea as cheap as if no tea-
duty Act of Parliament existed, and with the additional relish
of rendering such Act abortive. The facilities for smuggling
tea, arising from the great extent of the American coasts, and
the great number of harbours, and the universality of the
British anti-tea associations, and the unity of popular sentiment
on the subject, rendered the Act of Parliament imposing the
duty a matter of sport rather than a measure of (oppression
even to the most scrupulous, as they regarded the Act uncon-
stitutional, and every means lawful and right by which the ob-
noxious Act could be evaded and defeated. It is probable that,
in the ordinary course of things, the Act would have become
practically obsolete, and the relations of the colonies to the
mother countiy have settled down into quietness and friend-
liness, but for another event, which not only revived with in-
creased intensity the original question of dispute, but gave rise
to other occurrences that kindled the flame of the Americaft
revolution. That event was the agreement between the Min-
istry and the East India Company, which interfered with the
natural and ordinary channels of trade, and gave to that
Company a m ?nopoly of the tea trade of j*.merica. From the
diminished exportation of tea from England to the colonies,
there were, in warehouses of the British East India Company,
seventeen millions of pounds of tea for which there was no
demand. Lord North and his colleagues were not willing
to lose the expected revenue, as small as it must be at last
from their American Tea Act, and the East India Company
were unwilling to lose the profits of their American tea trade.
An agreement was therefore entered into between the
Miiiistry and the Company, by which the Company, which was
authorized by law to export their tea free of duty to all places
whatsoever, could send their tea cheaper !.o the colonies than
others who had to pay the exceptionable (? jty, and even cheapei

! ■■

L^^

372

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XVI.

than before it had been made a source of revenue ; " for the duty
taken off it when exported from Great Britain was greater
than that to be paid for it on its importation into the colonies.
Confident of success in finding a market for their tea, thus
reduced in its price, and also of collecting a duty on its impor-
tation and sale in the colonies, the East India Company freighted
several ships with teas for the different colonies, and ap^/ointed
agents (or consignees) for its disposal." This measure united
both the English and American merchants in opposition to it
upon selfish grounds of interest, and the colonists generally
upon patriotic grounds. " The merchants in England were
alarmed at the losses that must come to themselves from the
exportations of the East India Company, and from the sales
going through the hands of consignees. Letteis were written to
colonial patriots, urging their opposition to the project. The
(American merchants) smugglers, who were both numerous and
powerful, could not relish a scheme which, by underselling
them and taking a profitable branch of business out of tlieir
hands, threatened a diminution of their gains. The colonists
were too suspicious of the designs of Great Britain to be
imposed upon.

" The cry of endangered liberty once more excited an alitrni
from New Hampshire to Georgia. The first opposition to the
execution of the scheme adopted by the East India Company
began with the American merchants. They saw a profitable
branch of their trade likely to be lost, and the benefits of it
transferred to a company in Great Britain. They felt for the
wound that would be inflicted on their country's claim of
exemption from parliamentary taxation; but they felt, with
equal sensibility, for the losses they would sustain by the
diversion of the streams of commerce into imusual channels.
Though the opposition originated in the selfishness of the
merchants, it did not end there. The great body of the people,
from principles of the purest patriotism, were brought over to
second their wishes. They considered the whole scheme as
calculated to seduce them into an acquiescence with the views
of Parliament for raising an American revenue. Much pains
were taken to enlighten the colonists on this subject, and to
convince them of the eminent hazard to which their liberties
were exposed.

CHAT. XVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

373

" The provincial patriots insisted largely on the persevering
determination of the parent state to establish her claim of taxa-
tion by compelling the sale of tea in tlie colonies against the
solemn resolutions and declared sense of the inhabitants, and
that at a time when the commercial intercourse of the two
countries was renewed, and their ancient harmony fast returning.
The proposed vendors . of the tea were represented as revenue
officers, employed in the collection of an unconstitutional tax
imposed by Great Britain. The colonists contended that, as the
duty and the price of the commodity were inseparably blended,
if the tea were sold every purchaser would pay a tax imposed
by the British Parliament as part of the purchase money."*

* Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., Chap. iii.,pp. 370 — 372.

374

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVII.

||-) !

J ' ,i

:;M

CHAPTER XVII.

Events of 1771, 1772, 1773 — The East India Company's Tea Rejected
IN every Province op America — Resolutions of a Public Meet-
ing IN Philadelphia the Model for those of other Colonies.

By this unprecedented and unjustifiable combination between
the British Ministry and East India Company to supersede the
ordinary channels of trade, and to force the sale of their tea in
America, the returning peace and confidence between Great
Britain and the colonies was arrested, the colonial merchants of
both England and America were roused and united in opposi-
tion to the scheme, meetings were held, associations were
formed, and hostility throughout all the colonies became so
general and intense, that not a chest of the East India Com-
pany's tea was sold from New Hampshire to Georgia, and only
landed in one instance, and then to rot in locked warehouses.
In all cases, except in Boston, the consignees were prevailed
upon to resign ; and in all cases except two, Boston and Charles-
ton, the tea was sent back to England without having been
landed. At Charleston, South Carolina, they allowed the tea
to be landed, but not sold ; and it rotted in the cellars of the
store-houses. At Philadelphia, the consignees were forced to
resign and send the tea back to England.* At New York they
did the same. At Portsmouth, New Hampshire, they sent the

i.i -^^^^H

■ ''

41 ^H

* The resolutions adopted by a meeting of the inhabitants of Philadelphia,
on the 18th of October, 1773, afford a specimen of the spirit of all the colonies,
and the model of resolutions adopted in several of them, even Boston. They
were as follows :

" 1. That the disposal of their own property is the inherent right of free-
men ; that there can be no property in that which another can, of right, take

"IjlJ

CHAP. XVII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

375

tea away to Halifax. At Boston the consignees were the sons
of Hutchinson, the Governor, and he determined that it should
be landed and sold ; while the mass of the people, led by com-
mittees of the " Sons of Liberty," were equally determined that
the tea should not be landed or sold.

As this Boston tea aftair resulted in the passing of two Acts
of Parliament — the Bill for closing the port of Boston, and the
Bill for suspending the Charter and establishing a new constitu-
tion of government for Massachusetts — and these were followed
by an American Congress and a civil war, I will state the
^-ran^actions as narrated by three American historians, agreeing
.n the main facts, but differing in regard to incidental circum-
stances.

Dr. Ramsay narrates the general opposition to the scheme of
the East India Company, and that at Boston in particular, in
the following words :

" As the time approached when the arrival of the tea ships

from us without our consent ; that the claim of Parliament to tax America
is, in other words, a claim of right to levy contributions on us at pleasure.

" 2. That the duty imposed by Pariiament upon tea landed in America ia a
tax on the Americans, or levying contributions on them without their consent.

" 3. That the express purpose for which the tax is levied on the Americans,
namely, for the support of government, administration of justice, and defence
of his Majesty's dominions in America, has a direct tendency to render Assem-
blies useless, and to introduce arbitrary government and slavery.

" 4. That a virtuous and steady opposition to this Ministerial plan of govern-
ing America is absolutely necessary to preserve even the shadow of liberty,
and is a duty which every freeman in America owes to his country, to
himself, and to his posterity.

" 5. That the resolution lately entered into by the East India Company,
to send out tl^eir tea to America, subject to the payment of duties on its
being landed here, is an open attempt to enforce this Ministerial plan, and u
violent attack upon the liberties of America.

" 6. That it is the duty of every American to oppose this attempt.

" 7. That whosoever shall, directly or indirectly, countenance this attempt,
or in anywise aid or al)et in unloading, receiving, or vending the tea sent or
to be sent out by the East India Company, while it remains subject to the
payment of a duty here, is an enemy to liis country.

" 8. That a Committee be immediately chosen to wait on tliose gentlemen
who it is reported are appointed by the East India Company to receive and
sell said tea, and request them, from a regard to their own character, and the
peace and good order of the city and province, immediately to resign their
ftppointments." (Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., pp. 372, 373.),

k . t^

If)

i. I

376

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVII.

might be soon expected, such measures were adopted as seemed
most likely to prevent the landing of their cargoes. The tea
consignees appointed by the East India Company were in
several places compelled to relinquish their appointments, and
no others could be found hardy enough to act in their stead.
The pilots in the River Delaware were warned not to conduct
any of the tea ships into their harbour. In New York, popular
vengeance was denounced against all who would contribute in
any measure to forward the views of the East India Company.
The captains of the New York and Philadelphia ships, being
apprised of the resolution of the people, and fearing the con-
sequence of landing a commodity charged with an odious duty,
in violation of their declared public sentiments, concluded to
return directly to Great Britain without making any entry at
the Custom-house. • i

" It was otherwise in Massachusetts. The tea ships designed
for the supply of Boston were consigned to the sons, cousins,
and particular friends of Governor Hutchinson. When they
were called upon to resign, they answered that ' it was out of
their power.' The Collector refused to give a clearance unless
the vessels were discharged of dutiable articles. The Governor
refused to give a pass for the vessels unless properly qualified
for the Custom-house. The Governor likewise requested Admiral
Montague to guard the passages out of the harbour, and gave
orders to suffer no vessels, coasters excepted, to pass the fortress
from the town without a pass signed by himself. From a com-
bination of these circumstances the return of the tea vessels
from Boston was rendered impossible. The inhabitants then
had no option but to prevent the landing of the tea, to suffer
it to be landed ana depend on the unanimity of the people not
to purchase it ; to destroy the tea, or to suffer a deep-laid
scheme against their sacred liberties to take effect. The first
would have required incessant watching, by night as well as by
day, for a period of time the duration of which no one could
compute. The second would have been visionary to childishness,
by suspending the liberties of a growing country on the self-
denial and discretion of every tea-drinker in the province.
Tliey viewed the tea as the vehicle of an unconstitutional tax,
and as inseparably associated with it. To avoid the one, they
resolved to destroy the other. About seventeen persons, dressed

CHAP. XVII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

377

as Indians, repaired to the tea ships, broke open 342 chests of
tea, and, without doing any other damage, discharged their con-
tents into the water.

" Thus, by the inflexibility of the Governor, the issue of this
business was different at Boston from what it was elsewhere.
The whole cargoes of tea were returned from New York and
Philadelphia ; that which was sent to Charleston was landed
and stored, but not offered for sale. Mr. Hutchinson had
repeatedly urged Government to be firm and persevering. He
could not, therefore, consistently with his honour, depart from a
line of conduct he had so often and so strongly recommended to
his superiors. He also believed that the inhabitants would not
dare to perfect their engagements, and flattered himself that
they would desist when the critical moment arrived.

" Admitting the rectitude of the American claims of exemp-
tion from parliamentary taxation, the destruction of the tea by ■
the Bostonians was warranted by the great law of self-preserva-
tion ; for it was> not possible for them by any other means to
discharge the duty they owed to their country.

" The event of this business was very different from what
had been expected in England. The colonists acted with so
much union and system, that there was not a single chest of
any of the cargoes sent out by the East India Company sold for
their benefit."*

The Rev. Dr. Holmes, in his Annals of America, says :

" The crisis now approached when the colonies were to decide
whether they would submit to be taxed by the British Par-
liament, or practically support their own principles and meet the
consequences. One sentiment seems to have pervaded the entire
continent. The new Ministerial plan was universally considered
as a direct attack on the liberties of the colonists, which it was
the duty of all to oppose. A violent ferment was everywhere ex-
cited; the Corresponding Committees were extremely active; and
it was very generally declared that whoever should, directly or
indirectly, countenance this dangerous invasion of their rights,
is an enemy to his country. The East India Company, confi-
dent of finding a market for their tea, reduced as it now was
in its price, freighted several ships to the colonies with that

* Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., Chap, iii., pp. 373—376.

pimif

378

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVIL

article, and appointed agents for the disposal of it. Some
cargoes were sent to New York, some to Philadelphia, some
to Charleston (South Carolina), and three to Boston. The
inhabitants of New York and Philadelphia sent the ships back
to London, ' and they sailed up the Thames to proclaim to all
the nation that New York and Pennyslvania would not be
enslaved.' The inhabitants of Charleston unloaded the tea and
stored it in cellars, where it could not be used, and where it
finally perished.

" The inhabitants of Boston tried every measure to send back
the three tea ships which had arrived there, but without suc-
cess. The captains of the ships had consented, if permitted, to
return with their cargoes to England ; but the consignees refused
to discharge them from their obligations, the Custom-house
to give them a clearance for their return, and the Governor
refused to grant them a passport for clearing the fort. It was
easily seen that the tea would be gradually landed from the
ships lying so near the town, and that if landed it would be
disposed of, and the purpose of establishing the monopoly
and raising a revenue effected. To prevent this dreaded con-
sequence, a number of armed men, disguised like Indians,
boarded the ships and threw their whole cargoes of tea into the
dock."»

A more circumstantial and graphic account of this affair is
given by Mr. J. S. Barry, in his History of Massachusetts, in
the following words :

" On Sunday, November 28, 1773, one of the ships an-ived,
bringing one hundred and fourteen chests of tea. Immediately
the Select Men held a meeting ; and the Committee of Corres-
pondence obtained from Rotch, the owner of the vessel, a promise
not to enter it until Tuesday. The towns around Boston were
summoned to meet on Monday; 'and every friend to his
country, to himself, and to posterity,' was desired to attend,
' to make a united and successful resistance to this last, worst,
and most destructive measure of administration.'

"At an early hour (Monday, November 29) the people
gathered, and by nine o'clock the concourse was so great that
Faneuil Hall was filled to overflowing. A motion to adjourn to

* Holmes' Annals, etc., Vol. II., pp. 181, 182.

; . i

HAP. XVII.

CHAP. XVII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

379

it. Some
)hia, some
ton. The
hips back
lim to all
Id not be
18 tea and
where it

send back
thout suc-
■mitted, to
es refused
bom-house

Governor
r. It was

from the
would be
monopoly
aded con-
Indians,
a into the

affair is
lusetts, in

i an'ived,
nediately
f Corres-
9, promise
ton were
to his
attend,
st, worst,

the Old South Meeting-house, the ' Sanctuary of Freedom,'
was made and carried ; and on reaching that place. Jonathan
Williams was chosen Moderator, and Hancock, Adams, Young,
Molineux, and Warren, fearlessly conducted the business of the
meeting. At least five thousand persons were in and around
the building, and but one spirit animated all. Samuel Adams
offered a resolution, which was unanimously adopted, ' That the
tea should be sent back to the place from whence it came, at all
events, and that no duty should be paid on it.' The consignees
asked time for consideration, and 'out of great tenderness'
their request was granted. To prevent any surprise, however,
a watch of twenty-five persons, under Edward Proctor, was
appointed to guard the ship during the night.

"The answer of the consignees was given in the morning
(November 30) ; and after declaring that it was out of their
power to send back the teas, they expressed their readiness to
store them until otherwise advised. In the midst of the meet-
ing the Sheriff of Suffolk entered, with a proclamation from
the Governor, warning the people to disperse ; but the message
was received with derision and hisses, and a unanimous vote
not to disperse. The master and owner of the ship which had
lately arrived were then required to attend; and a promise
was extorted from them that the teas should be returned
without landing or paying a duty. The factors of two other
vessels which were daily expected were next summoned, and
similar promises were given by them ; upon which the meeting,
after voting to carry into effect, ' at the risk of their lives and
properties,' their former resolves, quietly dissolved.

" After this dissolution, the Committee of Correspondence of
Boston and its vicinity held meetings daily, and gave such
directions as circumstances required. The other ships, on their
arrival, anchored beside the Dartmouth (Rotch's vessel), that
one guard might serve for all ; and the inhabitants of a number
of tov/ns, at meetings convened for the purpose, promised to
aid Boston whenever their services should be needed. At the
end of twenty days the question must be decided, and if the teas
were landed all was lost. As the crisis drew near the excite-
ment increased. Hutchinson was confident that no violent
measures would be taken. The wealth of Hancock and others
seemed sufficient security against such measures. But the

jLiI

pp*

380

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA. [CHAP. XVII.

u ■,

people had counted the cost, and had determined to risk all
rather than be slaves.

" The eventful day (December 16) at last dawned ; and two
thousand from the country, besides the citizens of Boston,
assembled in the Old South Meeting-house at ten o'clock, to
decide what should be done. It was reported that Rotch, the
owner of the Dartmouth, had been refused a clearance ; and he
was immediately instructed to 'protest against the Custom-
house, and apply to the Governor for his pass.* But the
Governor had stolen to his residence at Milton, and at three
o'clock in the afternoon Rotch had not returned. What should
be done ? 'Shall we abide by our resolutions?' it was asked.
Adams and Young were in favour of that course ; Quincy,
distinguished as a statesman and patriot, advised discretion ;
but the people cried, ' Our hands have been put to the plough ;
we must not look back ;' and the whole assemblage of seven
thousand persons voted unanimously that the tea should not be
landed.

" Darkness in the meantime had settled upon the town, and
in the dimly-lighted church the audience awaited the return of
Rotch. At a quarter before six he made his appearance, and
reported that the Governor had refused him his pass. ' We can
do no more to save the country,' said Samuel Adams ; and a
momentary silence ensued. The next instant a shout was
heard at the door ; the war-whoop sounded ; and forty or fifty
men, disguised as Indians, hurried along to Griffin's Wharf,
posted guards to prevent intrusion, boarded the ships, and
in three hours' time had broken and emptied into the sea three
hundred and forty-two chests of tea. So gr^at was the still-
ness, that the blows of the hatchets as the chests were split
open were distinctly heard. When the deed was done, every
one retired, and the town was as quiet as if nothing had
occurred."*

* Barry's History of Massachusetts, Second Period, Chap, xiv., pp. 470 — 473.

The historian adds : " The Governor was in a forlorn state, and was unable
to keep up even a show of authority. Every one was against him. The
Houses were against him. 'The superior judges were intimidated from
acting,' and * there was not a justice of the peace, sheriff, constable, or peace-
oflScer in the province who would venture to take cognizance of any breach
of law against the general bent of the people.' " — lb., 473, 474.

;hap. XVII.
to risk all

; and two
of Boston,
o'clock, to
Rotch, the
;e ; and he
e Custoni-
But the
i at three
liat should
vas asked.
i; Quincy,
discretion ;
le plough ;
e of seven
uld not be

town, and

return of

ranee, and

' We can
ns ; and a
hout was
,y or fifty
I's Wharf,
ihips, and
sea three

the still -
vere split
ne, every
hing had

470—473.
was unable
him. The
iated from
B, or peace-
my breach

CHAP. XVII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

381

The foregoing threefold narrative presents substantially the
American case of destroying the East India Company's tea by
the inhabitants of Boston. The account by Mr. Bancroft is more
elaborate, digressive, dramatic, and declamatory, but not so
consecutive or concise as the preceding. Governor Hutchinson,
who had advised the very policy which now recoiled upon him-
self, corroborates in all essential points the narrative given
above. He states, however, what is slightly intimated above
by Dr. Ramsay, that the opposition commenced by the mer-
chants against the monopoly of the East India Company, rather
than against the tax itself, which had been paid without nmr-
inuring for two years, and that the parliamentary tax on tea
was seized upon, at the suggestion of merchants in England, to
defeat the monopoly of the East India Company, and to revive
and perpetuate the excitement against the British Parliament
which had been created by the Stamp Act, and which was
rapidly subsiding. Governor Hutchinson says :

" When the intelligence first came to Boston it caused no
alarm. The threepenny duty had been paid the last two years
without any stir, and some of the great friends to liberty had
been importers of tea. The body of the people were pleased
with the prospect of drinking tea at less expense than ever.
The only apparent discontent was among the importers of tea,
as well those who had been legal importers from England, as
others who had illegally imported from Holland ; and the
complaint was against the East India Company for monopoliz-
ing a branch of commerce which had been beneficial to a great
number of individual merchants. And the first suggestion of a
design in the Ministry to enlarge the revenue, and to habituate
the colonies to parliamentary taxes, was made from England ;
and opposition to the measure was recommended, with an inti-
mation that it was expected that the tea would not be suflTered
to be landed."*

The Committees of Correspondence in the several colonies
soon availed themselves of so favourable an opportunity for
promoting their great purpose. It soon appeared to be their

* Governor Hutchinson, in a note, referring to the mercantile English
letters which contained the suggestion not to allow the landing of the tea of
the East India Company, says :

" These letters were dated in England the beginning of August, and were

wmm

- i 1 i

382

THK LOVALIHTH OF AMKUICA [ciIAP. XVII.

general determination, that at all events the tea Hhould be sent
back to England in the same (ships which brought it. The
first motions were at Philadelphia (Oct. 18th), where, at a meeting
of the people, every man who should b«j concerned in unlading,

received in Americft tlie latter end of September iind the beginning' of
October."

Mr. Biincroft stateH us followH tlie causes and circumstances of tliis disiw-
trous tea agreement between the British Ministry and East India Company :

" The continued refusal of North America to receive tea from England
had brought distress upon the East India Company, which had on liand,
wanting a market, great ([uantities imported in the faitli that that agreenniit
(in the colonies, not to purchase tea imported from England) could not liold.
They were able to pay neither their dividends nor their debts; their stuck
depreciated nearly one-half ; and the (lovernment must lose their annual pay-
ment of four hundred thousand pounds.

" The bankruptcies, brought on partly by this means, gave such a shock to
credit as had not been experienced since the South Sea year, and the great
manufacturers were sufferers. The directors came to Parliament with an
ample confession of their humbled state, together with entreaties for assisUuice
and relief, and particularly praying that leave might be given to exi)urt
tea free of all duties to America and to foreign ports. Had such leave
been granted in respect of America, it would have been an excellent commer-
cial regulation, as well as have restored a good understanding to every part
of the empire. Instead of this, Lord North proposed to give to the Company
itself the right of exporting its teas. The existing law granted on their expor-
tation to America a drawback of three-fifths only of the duties paid on impor-
tation. Lord North now offered to the East India Company a drawback of
the whole, Trecothick, in the committee, also advised to take off' the import
duty in America of threepence the pound, as it produced no income to tlie
revenue; but the Ministry would not listen to the thought of relieving
America from taxation. * Then,' added Trecothick in behalf of the East
India Company, ' as much or more 'i;ay be brought into revenue by not
allowing a full exemption from the dnfir-i paid here.' But Lord North re-
fused to discuss the right of Parliament to tax America, insisting that no
difficulty could arise ; that under the m* /f regulation America would be able
to buy tea from the Company at a lower price than from any other European
nation, and that men will always go to the cheapest market.

" The Ministry was still in its halcyon days ; no opposition was made even
by the Whigs; and the measure, which was the King's own, and was
designed to put America to the test, took effect as law from the 10th day of
May, 1773. It was immediately followed by a most carefully prepared
answer from the King to petitions from Massachusetts, announcing that he
* considered his authority to make laws in Parliament of sufficient force and
validity to bind his subjects in America, in all cases whatsoever, as essential
to the dignity of the Crown, and a right appertaining to the State, which it
was his duty to preserve entire and inviolate ; ' that he therefore ' could not

FIAP. XVII.

CHAP. XVII.l

AND THRIIl TIMFX

3S3

receiving, or vending the tea, was pronoiniced an enemy to lii.s
country. This was one of the eigl>t resolves passe* I at the
meeting. The example was followetl by Boston, November .'Jrd.*

Then follows Governor Hutchinson's account of the meetings
and gatlmrings in Boston ; the messages and answers between
their (Jonuiiittees and the consignees, Custom-house officers, and
the ultimate throwing of the tea into the dock, suUstantially as
narrated in the preceding pages, together with his consulta-
tions with his Council, and his remarks upon the motives and
conduct of the parties opposed to him. Ho admits that his
Council was opposed to the; measures which he proposed to
suppress the meetings of the people ; he admits the universal
hostility of the people of Boston and of the neighbouring towns
to the landing of the tea ; that " while the Governor and
Council were sitting on the Monday, in the Council Chamber,
and known to be consulting upon means for preservinf^ the
peace of the town, several thousands of inhabitants of Boston
and other towns were assembled in a public meeting-house at
a small distance, in direct opposition and defiance. He says
he " sent the Sheriff with a proclamation, to be read in the
meeting, bearing testimony against it as an unlawful assembly,
and requiring the Moderator and the people present forthwith
to separate at their peril. Being read, a general hiss followed,
and then a question whether they would surcease further pro-
ceedings, as the Governor required, which was determined in
the negative, nemine contradicente."

It may be asked upon what legal or even reasonable ground
had Governor Hutchinson the right to denounce a popular
meeting which happened at the same time that he was holding
a council, or because such meeting might entertain and express

but be greatly displeased with the petitions and remonstrance in which that
right was drawn into c|ue8tion,' but that he ' imputed the unwarrantable
doctrines held forth in the said petitions and remonstrance t(j the artifices of
a few.' All this while Lord Dartmouth (tlie new Secretary of State for the
Colonies, successor to Lord Hillsborough) ' had a true desire to see lenient
measures adopted towards the colonies,' not being in the least aware that
he was drifting with the Cabinet towards the very system of coercion again&t
which he gave the most public and the most explicit pledges," (History
of the United States, Vol. VL, pp. 458—460.)
* See these resolutions, in a note on pp. 374, 375.

-H;:

384

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVII.

U *

m '

-1 )

I '
i -.

II '

!;■ 'i!
i '1

lit
I

views differing from or in defiance of those which he was pro-
posing to his Council ?

Or, what authority had Governor Hutchinson to issue a
proclamation and send a Sheriff to forbid a public meeting
which the Charter and laws authorized to be called and held, as
much as the Governor was authorized to call and hold his
Council, or as any town or tov/nship council or meeting may Ite
called and held in any province of the Dominion of Canada ?
It is not surprising that a public meeting " hissed" a command
which was as lawless as it was powerless. The King himself
would not have ventured to do what Governor Hutchinson did,
in like circumstances ; and British subjects in Massachusetts
had equal civil rights with British subjects in England.

Governor Hutchinson admits that the public meeting was not
only numerous, but composed of all classes of inhabitants, and
was held in legal form ; and his objection to the legality of the
meeting merely because persons from other towns were allowed
to be present, while he confesses that the inhabitants of
Boston at the meeting were unanimous in their votes, is the
most trivial that can be conceived. He says :

" A more determined spirit was conspicuous in this body
than in any former assemblies of the people. It was composetl
of the lowest, as Avell, and probably in as great proportion, as of
the superior ranks and orders, and all had an equal voice. No
eccentric or irregular motions, however, were suffered to take
place — all seemed to have been the plan of but a few — it may be,
of a single person. The ' form' of town meeting was assumed,
the Select Men of Boston, town clerks, etc., taking their usual
places ; but the inhabitants of any other town being admittotl,
it could not assume the name of a ' legal meeting of any town.' "
(A trivial technical objection.)

Referring to another meeting — the last held before the day on
which the tea was thrown into the sea — Governor Hutchinson
states :

" The people came into Boston from the adjacent towns
within twenty miles, from some more, from others less, as they
were affected ; and, as soon as they were assembled (November
14th, 1773), enjoined the owner of the ship, at his peril, to
demand of the Collector of Customs a clearance for the ship,
and appointed ten of their number a committee to accompany

^"1

CHAP. XVII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

385

him, and adjourned for two days to receive the report. Bein'];
reassembled (at the end of the two days), and informed by the
owner that a clearance was refused, he was enjoined imme-
diately to apply to the Governor for a pass by the Castle. He
made an apology to the Governor for coming upon such an
errand, having been compelled to it, and received an answer
that no pass ever had been, or lawfully could be, given to uny
vessel which had not first been cleared at the Custom-house, and
that upon his producing a clearance, such pass would immediately
be given by the naval officer."

Governor Hutchinson knew that the Custom-house could not
give the clearance without the landing of the tea and pay-
ment of the duty provided for; he knew that the Custom-
house had been applied to in vain to obtain a clearance. His
reference of the owner to the Custom-house was a mere evasion
and pretext to gain time and prevent any decisive action on
the part of the town meeting until the night of the 16th, when
the 20 days after the entry of the ships would have expired,
and the Collector could seize the cargoes for non-payment
of duties, place it in charge of the Admiral at the Castle,
and sell it under pretence of paying the duties. He says :
" The body of the people remained in the meeting-house until
they had received the Governor's answer; and then, after it
had been obser>''ed to them that, everything else in their power
having been done, it now remained to proceed in the only
way left, and that the owner of the ship having behaved like
a man of honour, no injury ought to be offered to his person
or property, the meeting vto • ^^^red to be dissolved, and the
body of the people repaired to the wharf and surrounded the
immediate actors (whj vere 'covered with blankets, and
making the appearance o? ladians') as a guard and ^'^-^ -ity
until they had finished tl eir work. In two or three hours
they hoisted out of the holds of the ships three hundred
and forty-two chests of (ja, and emptied them into the sea.
The Governor was unjustly censured by many people in the
province, and much abused by Cne pamphlet and newspaper
writers L. England, for refusing liis pav, wliich it is said
would have saved the property thus dei,t:o y ed ; but he would
have been justly censured if he had gra^- ; ed ic, He was bound,
as all the Governors were, by oath, fa.ithx\;?i> t; observe the
25

386

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVII.

Acts of Trade, and to do his endeavour that the statute of King
William, which established a Custom-house, and is particu-
larly mentioned in the Act, be carried into execution."

In Governor Hutchinson's own statement and vindication of
his conduct, he admits that the meetings of the people were
lawfully called and regularly conducted ; that they were
attended by the higher as well as lower classes of the people ;
that they exhausted every means in their power, deliberately
and during successive days, to have the tea returned to England
without damage, as was done from the ports of New York and
Philadelphia ; and that by his own acts, different from those of
New York, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina, whose Governors
were subject to the same oaths as himself, the opposers of taxa-
tion by the British Parliament were reduced to the alternative
of defeat, or of throwing the tea in question into the sea, !i?
the Governor had effectually blocked up every possible way w)
their having the tea returned to England. Governor Hutch-
inson does not pretend to the technical scrupulousness of his oath,
applicable to ordinary cases, binding him to write to the Admiral
to guard the tea by an increased number of armed vessels in the
channel of the harbour, and to prevent any vessel from passing
out of the harbour for sea, without his own permit ; nor does
he intimate that he himself was the principal partner in the
firm, nominally in the name of his sons, to whom the East
India Company had principally consigned as agents the sale of
the tea in question ; much less does he say that in his letters to
England, which had been mysteriously obtained by Dr. Frank-
lin, and of the publication of which he so strongly and justly
complained, he had urged the virtual deprivation of his country
of its constitution of free government by having the Executive
Councillors appointed and the salaries of the governor, judges,
secretary, and attorney and solicitor-generals paid by the
Crown out of the taxes of the people of the colony, imposed
by the Imperial Parliament. Governor Hutchinson had ren-
dered great service to his country by his History, and as a
public representative, for many years in its Legislature and
Councils, and was long regarded as its chief leader ; but he had
at length yielded to the seductions of ambition and avaric'^
and became an object of popular hatred instead of being, 8 a he

1 1

HAP. XVII.

CHAP. XVII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

387

te of King
is particu-

iication of
3ople were
they were
he people ;
deliberately
to England
T York and
in those of
! Governors
grs of taxa-
alternativi
the sea, fu'^
ble way ;o
nor Hutch-
of his oath,
;he Admiral
essels in the
•ora passing
t ; nor does
tner in the
m the East
the sale of
is letters to
Dr. Frank-
and justly
lis country
Executive
ttor, judges,
id by the
ly, imposed
n had ren-
, and as a
Jature and
but he had
ind avarir'^,
)eing, 83 he

had many years been, a popular idol. He had sown the seed of
which he was now reaping the fruits.

It is not surprising that, under such circumstances, Governor
Hutchinson's health should become impaired and his spirits
depressed, and that he should seek relief from his burdens and
vexations by a visit to England, for which he applied and
obtained permission, and which proved to be the end of his
government of Massachusetts ; for General Gage was appointed
to succeed him as Governor, as well as Commander-in-Chief of
the King's forces in America.

In reviewing the last few months of Mr. Hutchinson's
government of Massachusetts, it is obvious that his ill-advised
policy and mode of proceeding — arising, no doubt, in a great
measure, from his personal and family interest in speculation
in the new system of tea trade — was the primary and chief cause
of those proceedings in which Boston differed from New York,
Philade phia, and Charleston in preventing the landing of the
East India Company's tea. Had the authorities in the
proYii ces of New York and Pennsylvania acted in the same
rv&y a did the Governor of Massachusetts, it cannot be
doubted that the same scenes would have been witnessed at
Charleston, Philadelphia, and New York as transpired at Boston.
The eight resolutions which were adopted by the inhabitants
of Philadelphia, in a public town meeting, on the 8th of October,
as th " ^ sis of their proceedings against the taxation of the
colotti* • ( ^ ■< he Imperial Parliament, and against the landing of
th'^ <,&si. India Company's tea, were adopted by the inhabitants
c r f'.>t( ;ti in a public town meeting the 3rd of November. The
tea v.ft.1 ; H «fF' ctually prevented from being landed at the ports
of New York and Philadelphia as it was at the port of Boston,
and was as completely destroyed in the damp cellars at Charles-
ton aa in the sea water at Boston.*

* 'In South Carolina, some of the tea was thrown into the river as at
BoKton." (English Annual Register for 1774, Vol XVII., p. 60.)

'V'^IB'^'''

388

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVIII.

CHAPTER XVIII.

Events of IV; -At,l Classes in the Colonies Discontented — All

.^\ "ii^h -^ il*

Classes ajx
pant's Tea.

iHE Pkovinces Reject the East India Com-

The year 1774 commenced, among other legacies of 1773,
>with that of the discontent of all the colonies,* their una-
nimous rejection of the East India tea, stamped with the
threepenny duty of parliamentary tax, as the symbol of the
absolutism of King and Parliament over the colonies. The
manner of its rejection, by being thrown into the sea at Boston,
was universally denounced by all parties in England. The
accounts of all the proceedings in America against the admission
of the East India tea to the colonial ports, were coloured by the
mediums through which they were transmitted — the royal
governors and their executive oflBcers, who expected large
advantages from being assigned and paid their salaries by the
Crown, independent of the local Legislatures ; and the consignees
of the East India Company, who anticipated large profits from
their monopoly of its sale. Opposition to the tea duty was
represented as " rebellion " — the assertors of colonial freedom
from imperial taxation without representation were designated
" rebels " and " traitors," notwithstanding their professed loyalty

* " The discontents and disorders continue to prevail in a greater or less
degree through all the old colonies on the continent. The same spirit
pervades the whole. Even those colonies which depended most upon the
mother country for the consumption of their productions entered into similar
associations with the others ; and nothing was to be heard of but resolutions
for the encouragement of their own manufactures, the consumption of liome
products, the discouragement of foreign articles, and the retrenchment of all
superfluities. (Englisii Annual Register for 1774, Vol. XVII., p. 45.)

lAP. XVIII.

CHAP. XVIII.]

AND THEIB TIMES.

389

ENTED — All
India Com-

8 of 1773.
their una-
[ with the
ibol of the
nies. The
L at Boston,
land. The
3 admission
ired by the
-the royal
jcted large
,ries by the

consignees
)rofits from
duty was
al freedom

designated
sed loyalty

ireater or less
same spirit
ost upon the
i into similar
it resolutions
tion of home
:hment of all
p. 45.)

to the Throne and to the unity of the empire, and that their
utmost wishes were limited to be replaced in the position they
occupied after the peace of Paris, in 1763, and after their una-
nimous and admitted loyalty, and even heroism, in defence
and support of British supremacy in America.

" Intelligence," says Dr. Holmes, " of the destruction of
the tea at Boston was communicated on the 7th of March
(1774), in a message from the Throne, to both Houses
of Parliament. In this communication the conduct of the
colonists was represented as not merely obstriicting the com-
merce of Great Britain, but as subversive o" the British
Constitution. Although the papers accompanying the Royal
message rendered it evident that the opposition to the sale
of the tea was common to all the colonies ; yet the Parliament,
enraged at the violence of Boston, selected that town as
the object of its legislative vengeance. Without giving the
opportimity of a he»,ring, a Bill was passed by which the port
of Boston was legally precluded from the privilege of landing
and discharging, or of lading or shipping goods, wares, and
merchandise; and every vessel within the points Aldeston
and Nahant was required to depart within six hours, unless
laden with food or fuel.

" This Act, which shut up the harbour of Boston, was speedily
followed by another, entitled 'An Act for Better Regulating
the Government of Massachusetts,' which provided that the
Council, heretofore elected by the General Assembly, was to be
appointed by the Crown; the Royal Governor was invested
with the power of appointing and removing all Judges of
the Courts of Common Pleas, Commissioners of Oyer and
Terminer, the Attorney-General, Provost-Marshal, Justices,
Sheriffs, etc. ; town meetings, which were sanctioned by the
Charter, were, with few exceptions, expressly forbidden, without
leave previously obtained of the Governor or Lieutenant-
Governor, expressing the special business of said meeting, and
with a further restriction that no matters should be treated of
fX these meetings except the electing of public officers and the
business expressed in the Governor's permission ; jurymen, who
had been elected before by the freeholders and inhabitants of
the several towns, were to be all summoned and returned by the
sheriflfe of the respective counties ; the whole executive govern-

'Hi

1*^

\l i

n m ii

I.I >

390

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVIII.

ment was taken out of the hands of the people, and tho
nomination of all important officers invested in the King or
his Governor.

"In the apprehension thAt in the execution of these Acts
riots would take place, and that trials or murders committed in
suppressing them would be partially decided by the colonists,
it was provided by another Act, that if any persons were
indicted for murder, or any capital offence, committed in aiding
the magistracy, the Governor might send the person so indicted
to another county, or to Great Britain, to be tried.

" These three Acts were passed in such quick succession as to
produce the most inflammatory effects in America, where they
were considered as forming a complete system of tyranny.
' By the first,' said the colonists, ' the property of unoffending
thousands 1 arbitrarily taken away for the act of a few indi-
viduals ; by the second, our chartered liberties are annihilated ;
and by the '^ird, ' r lives may be destroyed with impunity.' "*

The passing of these three Bills through Parliament was
attended in each case with protracted and animated debates.

The first debate or discussion of American affairs took place
on the 7th of March, in proposing an address of thanks to the
King for the message and the commimication of the American
papers, with an assurance that the House would not fail to
exert every means in their power of effectually providing for
objects so important to the general welfare as maintaining the
due execution of the laws, and for securing the just dependence
of the colonies upon the Crown and Parliament of Great Britain.

In moving this address to pledge Parliament to the exertion of
every means in its power, Mr. Rice said : " The question now
brought to issue is, whether the colonies are or are not the
colonies of Great Britain." Lord North said, " Nothing can be
done to re-establish peace, without additional powers from
Parliament." Nugent, now Lord Clare (who had advocated the
Stamp Act, if the revenue from it should not exceed a pepper-
corn, as a symbol of parliamentary power), entreated that there
might be no divided counsels. Dowdeswill said: "On the

♦ Holmes' Annals, etc., Vol. II., pp. 185, 186. These three Bills were
followed by a fourth, legalizing the quartering of the troops on the inhabi-
tants in the town of Boston.

lAP. XVIII.

!, and the
e King or

bhese Acts
imitted in
! colonists,
sons were
' in aiding
30 indicted

ission as to
vhere they
f tyranny,
noffending
I few indi-
mihilated ;
punity.'"*
iment was
lebates.
took place
nks to the
American
lot fail to
viding for
aining the
ependence
at Britain,
exertion of
istion now
re not the
ing can be
(vers from
ocated the
a pepper-
that there
'On the

e Bills were
the iiihabi-

■w^

CHAP. XVIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

391

repeal of the Stamp Act, all America was quiet; but in the
following year you would go in pursuit of your peppercorn — you
would collect from peppercorn to peppercorn — you would estab-
lish taxes as tests of obedience. Unravel the whole conduct of
America ; you will find out the fault is at home." Pownall,
former Governor of Massachusetts ^nd earnest advocate of
American rights, said : " The dependence of the colonies is a
part of the British Constitution. I hope, for the sake of this
country, for the sake of America, for the sake of general liberty,
that this address will pass with a unanimous vote," Colonel
Barre even applauded the good temper with which the subject
had been discussed, and refused to make any oppositioii.
William Burke, brother of Edmund Burke, said : " I speak as
an Englishman. We applaud ourselves for the struggles we
have had for our constitution ; the colonists are our fellow-
subjects ; they will not lose theirs without a struggle." Wedder-
burn, the Solicitor-General, who bore the principal part in the
debate, said : " The leading question is the dependence or inde-
pendence of America." The address was adopted without a
division.*

On the 14th of March, Lord North explained at large his
American policy, and opened the first part of his plan by asking
leave to bring in a Bill for the instant punishment of Boston.
He stated, says the Annual Register, " that the opposition to
the authority of Parliament had always originated in the colony
of Massachusetts, and that colony had been always instigated
to such conduct by the irregular and seditious proceedings of
the town of Boston : that, therefore, for the purpose of a

* Bancroft's History of the United States, VoL VI., Chap. Iti., pp. 503 —
510. Mr. Bancroft says :

" The next day letters arrived from America, manifesting no change in the
conduct of the colonies. Calumny, with its hundred tongues, exaggerated the
turbulence of the people, and invented wild tales of violence. It was said at
the palace, and the King believed, that there was in Boston a regular com-
mittee for tarring and feathering ; and that they were next,, to use the King's
expression, ' to pitch and feather ' Governor Hutchinson himself. The press
was also employed to rouse the national pride, till tlie zeal of the English
people for maintaining English supremacy became equal to the passions of
the Ministry. Even the merchants and manufacturers were made to believe
that their command of the American market depended on the enforcement
of the British claim of authority." — Ib.^ p. 511-

392

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVIII.

^ i i

..Mm

thorough reformation, it became necessary to begin with that
town, which by a late unpardonable outrage had led the way to
the destruction of the freedom of commerce in all parts of
America: that if a severe and exemplary punishment were
not inflicted on this heinous act, Great Britain would be wanting
in the protection she owed to her most peaceable and meritorious
subjects : that had such an insult been offered to British pro-
perty in a foreign port, the nation would have been called upon
to demand satisfaction for it.

" He would therefore propose that the town of Boston should
be obliged to pay for the tea which had been destroyed in their
port : that the injury was indeed offered by persons unknown
and in disguise, but that the town magistracy had taken no
notice of it, had never made any search for the offenders, and
therefore, by a neglect of manifest duty, became accomplices in
the guilt : that the fining of communities for their neglect in
punishing oflTences committed within their limits was justiried
by several examples. In King Charles the Second's time, the city
of London was fined when Dr. Lamb was killed by unknown
persons. The city of Edinburgh was fined and otherwise pun-
ished for the affair of Captain Porteous. A part of the revenue
of the town of Glasgow had been sequestered until satisfaction
was made for the pulling down of Mr. Campbell's house.
These examples were strong in point for such punishments.
The case of Boston was far worse. It was not a single act
of violence ; it was a series of seditious practices of every
kind, and carried on for several years.

" He was of opinion, therefore, that it would not be sufficient
to punish the town of Boston by obliging her to make a pecu-
niary satisfaction for the injury which, by not endeavouring to
prevent or punish, she has, in fact, encouraged ; security must be
given in future that trade may be safely carried on, property pro-
tected, laws obeyed, and duties regularly paid. Otherwise the
punishment of a single illegal act is no reformation. It would
be therefore proper to take away from Boston the privilege of
a port until his Majesty should be satisfied in these particulars,
and publicly declare in Council, on a proper certificate of the
good behaviour of the town, that he was so satisfied. Until
this should happen, the Custom-house officers, who were now
not safe in Boston, or safe no longer than while they neglected

[AP. XVIII.

CHAP. XVIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

393

their duty, should be removed to Salem, where they might
exercise their functions."*

The Bill pavssed the first reading without discussion. At the
second reading;, Mr. Byng alone voted no, though there was
considerable discussion. " Mr. Bollan, the agent for the Council
of Massachusetts Bay, presented a petition, desiring to be heard
in behalf of said Council and other inhabitants of Boston ;
but the House refused to receive the petition."*!*

At the third reading, the Lord Mayor of London presented a
petition in behalf of several natives and inhabitants of North
America then in London. " It was drawn," says the Annual
Register, "with remarkable ability." The petitioners alleged
that " the proceedings were repugnant to every principle of law

♦Annual Eegister for 1774, Vol. XVII., pp. 62, 63. " At the first intro-
duction, the Bill was received witli very general applause. The cry raised
against the Americans, partly the natural effect of their own acts, and partly
of the operations of Government, was so strong as nearly to overbear the
most resolute and determined in the opposition. Several of those who had
been the most sanguine favourers of the colonies now condemned their
behaviour aad applauded the measure as not only just biit lenient (even
Colonel Barr^). He said: 'After having weighed the noble lord's proposition
well, I cannot help giving it my hearty and determined approval.' Others,
indeed (as Dowdeswill and Edmund Burke), stood firmly by their old ground.
They contented themselves, in that stage of the business, with deprecating
the Bill ; predicting the most fatal consequences from it, and lamenting the .
spirit of the House, which drove on or was driving on to the most violent
measures, by the mischiefs produced by injudicious counsels ; one seeming
to render the other necessary. They declared that they would enter little
into a debate which they saw would be fruitless, and only spoke to clear them-
selves from having any share in such fatal proceedings." — 76., pp. 164, 165.

t Annual Register for 1774, Vol. XVII., p. 65, which adds : " This vote of
rejection was heavily censured. The opposition cried out at the inconsistency
of the House, who but a few days ago received a petition from this very
man, in this veiy character ; and now, only because they chose to exert their
power in acts of injustice and contradiction, totally refuse to receive any-
thing from him, as not duly qualified. But what, they asserted, made this
conduct the more unnecessary and outrageous was, that at that time the
House of Lords were actually hearing Mr. Bollan on his petition, as a person
duly qualified, at their bar. * Thus,' said they, * this House is at once in
contradiction to the other and to itself.' As to the reasons given against his
qualifications, they are equally applicable to all American agents ; none of
whom are appointed as the Minister now requires they should be, and thus
this House cuts off conununication between them and the colonies whom they
are assisting by their acts."

^r^ww

r^vi

394

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP, XVIII.

<!,' 1

■■r i

and justice, and under such a precedent no man in America
could enjoy a moment's security ; for if judgment be imme-
diately to follow on accusation against the people of America,
suppoi-ted by persons notoriously at enmity with them, the
accused unacquainted with the charges, and from the nature of
their situation utterly incapable of answering and defending
themselves, every fence against false accusation will be pulled
down.

" They asserted that law is executed with as much impar-
tiality in America as in any part of his Majesty's dominions.
They appealed for proof of this to the fair trial and favourable
verdict in the case of Captain Preston and his soldiers.

" That in such a case the interposition of parliamentary
power was full of danger and without precedent. The persons
committing the injury were unknown. If discovered, the law
ought first to be tried. If unknown, what rule of justice can
punish the town for a civil injury committed by persons not
known to them ?

" That the instances of the cities of London, Edinburgh, and
Glasgow were wholly dissimilar. All these towns were regularly
heard in their own defence. Their magistrates were of their
own choosing (which was not the case of Boston), and there-
fore they were more equitably responsible. But in Boston the
King's Governor has the power, and had been advised by his
Council to exert it ; if it has been neglected, he alone is
answerable."* In conclusion, the petitioners strongly insisted
on the injustice of the Act, and its tendency to alienate the
affections of America from the mother country.

The petition was received, but no particular proceedings took
place upon it. ^

" The Bill passed the House on the 25th of March, and was
carried up to the Lords, where it was likewise warmly debated ;
but, as in the Commons, without a division. It received the
Royal assent on the 31st of March.-f-

* Annual Register for 1774, Vol. XVII., pp. 65, 66.

t lb., p. 67.

The Bill underwent a more full and fair discussion in the House of Lords
than in the House of Commons. The amiable Lord Dartmouth, then
Secretary of State for the Colonies, "a man that prayed," desired lenient
measurer!, called what passed in Boston " commotion/' not open " rebellion."

— n

CHAP. XVIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

395

Dr. Ramsay remarks : " By the operation of the Boston Port
Act, the preceding situation of its inhabitants and that of the
East India Company was reversed. The former had more
reason to complain of the disproportinate penalty to which
they were indiscriminately subjected, than the latter of that
outrage on their property, for which punishment had been
inflicted. Hitherto the East India Company were the injured
party ; but from the passing of this Act the balance of injury
was on the opposite side. If wrongs received entitled the
former to reparation, the latter had a much stronger title on the
same ground. For the act of seventeen or eighteen individuals,
as many thousands were involved in one general calamity.*

But Lord Mansfield said, " What passed in Boston is the last overt act of
high treason, prccoeding from our own lenity and want ot foresight. It is,
however, the luckiest event that could befall this country, for all may now
be recovered. Compensation to the East India Company I regard as no
object of the Bill. The sword is drawn, and you must throw away the
scabbard. Pass this Act, and you will be past the Rubicon. The Ameri-
cans will then know that we shall not temporize any longer ; if it passes
with a tolerable unanimity, Boston will submit, and all will end in victory
without carnage." The Marquis of Rockingham and the Duke of Richmond
warmly opposed the measure, as did Lords Camden and Shelburne, the latter
of whom proved the tranquil and loyal condition in which he had left the
colonies on giving up their administration.

♦ Colonial History, Vol. I., Chap, iv., p. 379.

" The inhabitants of Boston, distinguished for politeness and liospitality
no less than for industry and opulence, were sentenced, on the short notice of
twenty days, to a deprivation of the means of subsistence. The rents of land-
holders ceased, or were greatly diminished. The immense property in stores
and wharves was rendered in a great measure useless. Labourers and arti-
ficers, and many others employed in the numerous occupations created by
an extensive trade, shared the general calamity. Those of the people who
depended on a regular ihcome, and those who earned their subsistence by
daily labour, were equally deprived of the means of support. Animatei'^ how-
ever, by the spirit of freedom, they endured their priVations with inflexible
fortitude. Their sufferings were soon mitigated by the sympathy and
relieved by the charity of the other colonists. Contributions were every-
where raised for their relief. Corporate bodies, town meetings, and provin-
cial conventions sent them letters and addresses applauding their conduct
and exhorting them to perseverance. The inhabitants of Marblehead (which
was to be the seaport instead of Boston) generously offered the Boston
merchants the use of their harbour, wharves, warehouses, and their personal
attendance, on the lading or unlading of their goods, free of all expense.
The inhabitants of Salem (the newly appointed capital) concluded an address

^j!fm^^

! ! 'fi

390

THK LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVIII.

Shortly aftor the paHsin^' of the Boston Port Bill, tho se-
cond Bill was brought into Parliament, entitled " An Ant
for the Better Regulating of the (lovernnient of tho Province
of Massachusetts Bay." This Bill was brought in on tho 2Hth of
March, three days before the Royal assent was given to the
Boston Port Bill. As the town of Boston had received no
notice of the Bill which closed its port, and had therefore no op
portunity to vindicate its conduct or rights; so the Province
received no notice of the Bill which changed its system of
government, which abrogated so much of its Charter as gave
to its Legislative Assembly the choice of the Council ; abolished
town meetings, except for the choice of town officers, or on
the special permission of the Governor, which gave to the Crown
the appointment and removal of the sheriffs, and to the sheriffs the
selection of the juries, which had hitherto been elected by the
people. After an animated debate, led by Dunning in opposi-
tion, the Bill passed the Commons by a vote of more than three
to one.

The third penal Bill brought in and passed was said to have
been specially recommended by the King himself. It authorized
at the discretion of the Governor, the removal for trial to Nova
Scotia or Great Britain of all magistrates, revenue officers, or
soldiers indicted for murder or other capital offence. Mr.
Bancroft says : " As Lord North brought forward this wholesale
Bill of indemnity to the Governor and soldiers, if they should
trample upon the people of Boston and be chpiged with murder,
it was noticed that he trembled and faltered at every word ;
showing that he was the vassal of a stronger will than his own,
and vainly struggled to wrestle down the feelings which his
nature refused to disavow."*

Colonel Barr6, who had supported the Boston Port Bill, said :
" I execrate the present measure ; you have had one meeting of

to Governor Gage in a manner that reflected great honour on their virtue
and patriotism. ' By shutting up the port of Boston,' they said, * some
imagine that the course of trade might be turned hither, and to our benefit ;
but nature, in the formation of our harbour, forbids our becoming rivals in
commerce with that convenient mart; and were it otherwise, we must be dead
to every idea of justice, lost to all feelings of humanity, could we indulge one
thought to seize on wealth and raise our fortunes on the ruins of our suffer-
ing neighbours.'" (Holmes' Annals, etc., VoL II., pp. 187, 188.)
♦ History of the United States, VoL VI., Chap, lii., pp. 525, 526.

CHAP. XVIII.]

AND THETR TIMES.

397

the colonies in Congress. You may soon Imvo another, i no
Americans will not abandon their principles ; for if they submit
they are slaves." The Bill pa.ssed the Conunons by a vote of
more than four to one.

The fourth Bill legalized the (juartering of troops within the
town of Boston.

The question now arises, What were the effects of these
measures upon the colonies ? Wo answer, the effects of these
metusures were the very reverse of what had been anticipated
and predicted by their advocates in England, both in and out of
Parliament. The general expectation in England was that they
would not be resisted in America ; that Boston and Massachu-
setts would submit ; that if they should not submit, they would
be isolated from the other provinces, who would not identify
themselves with or countenance the extreme proceedings of
Boston and of Massachusetts. These measures had been adopted
by the Government and Parliament of Or(^at Britain in the
months of March and April, and were to take effect the l.st of
June. In the two following months of May and June, America
spoke, and twelve colonies out of thirteen (Georgia alone
excepted) protested against the measures of the British Parlia-
ment, and expressed their sympathy with Boston and Massachu-
setts. Boston itself spoke first, and instead of submitting, as
had been predicted by Lords Mansfield and others, held a town
meeting as soon as they received intelligence of the passing of
the Boston Port Bill, at which resolutions were passed express-
ing their opinion of the impolicy, injustice, inhumanity and
cruelty of this Act, from which they appealed to God and to the
world ; also inviting other colonies to join with them in an
agreement to stop all imports and exports to and from Great
Britain and Ireland and the West Indies until the Act should
be repealed."*

* Marshall's Colonial History, Chap, xiv., p. 405.

" As soon as the Act was received, the Boston Committee of Correspondence,
by the hand of Joseph Warren, invited eight neighbouring towns to a con-
ference * on the critical state of public affairs.' On the 12th, at noon,
Metcalf Bowler, the Speaker of the Assembly of Rhode Island, came before
them •with the cheering news that, in answer to a recent circular letter from
the body over which he presided, all the thirteen Governments were pledged
to union. Punctually at the hour of three in the afternoon of that day, the

Ik I L»>^

rir

398

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVIII.

Mr. Bancroft, remarks :

" The merchants of Newburjrport were the first who agreed
to suspend all commerce with Britain and Ireland. Salem, also,
the place marked out as the new seat of government, in a very
full town meeting, and after unimpassioned debates, decided
almost unanimously to stop trade, not with Britain only, but even
with the West Indies. If in Boston a few cravens proposed to
purchase a relaxation of the blockade by quailing before power,
the majority were beset by no temptation so strong as that of
routing at once the insignificant number of troops who had
come to overawe them. But Samuel Adams, while he compared
their spirit to that of Sparta or Rome, was ever inculcating
patience as the characteristic of a true patriot ; and the people
having sent forth their cry to the continent, waited self-possessed
for voices of consolation."* •

committeea from the eight villages joined them in Faneuil Hall, the cradle of
American liberty, where for ten yc are the freemen of the town had debated
the great question of justifiable resistance. Placing Samuel Adams at their
head, and guided by a report prepared by Joseph Warren of Boston, Gardener
of Cambridge, and others, they agreed unanimously on the injustice and
cruelty of the Act by v,hich Parliament, without competent jurisdiction,
and contrary as well to natural right as to the laws of all civilized states, had,
without a hearing, set apart, accused, tried and condemmed the town of
Boston." (Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, i., pp.
35, 36.)

* History of the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, x., pp. 38, 39.

Referring to General Gage's arrival at Boston, as Commander-in-Chief of
the continent as well as successor to Hutchinson as Governor of Massachu-
setts, Mr. Bancroft says :

" On the 17th of May, Gage, who had remained four days with Hutchin-
son at Castle William, landed at Long Wharf amidst salutes from ships and
batteries. Received by the Council and civil officers, he was escorted by the
Boston cadets, under Hancock, to the State House, where the Council
presented a loyal address, and his commission was proclaimed with three
volleys of musketry and as many cheers. He then partook of a public dinner
in Faneuil Hall. A hope still lingered that relief might come through his
intercession. But Gage was neither fit to reconcile nor to subdue. By liis
mild temper and love of society, he gained the good-will of his boon com-
panions, and escaped personal enmities ; but in earnest business he inspired
neither confidence nor fear. Though his disposition was far from being
malignant, he was so poor in spirit and so weak of will, so dull in his percep-
tions and so unsettled in his opinions, that he was sure to follow the worst
advice, and vacillate between smooth words of concession and merciless

CHAP. XVIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

399

In the meantime, according? to the provisions of the Charter,
the Legislature of Massachusetts, the last Wednesday in May,
proceeded to nominate the twenty-eight councillors. Of these.
General Gage negatived the - .iiprecedented number of thirteen,
including all the popular leaders nominated. He laid nothing
before the General Assembly but the ordinary business of the
province ; but gave notice that the seat of government would
be removed to Salem the 1st of June, in pursuance of the Act
for Closing the Port of Boston.

The Legislature reassembled, according to adjournment, at
Salem the 7th day of June,* after ten days' prorogation, and on
the 9th the Council replied to the Governor's speech at the
opening of the session. Their answer was respectful, but
firmly and loyally expressive of their views and feelings. They
declared their readiness " on all occasions cheerfully to co-ope-
rate with his Excellency" in every step tending to " restore
harmony" and " extricate the province from their present em-
barrassments," which, in their estimation, were attributable to
the conduct of his " two immediate predecessors." They at the
same time affirmed that " the inhabitants of the colony claimed
no more than the rights of Englishmen, without diminution or
abridgment ;" and that these, " as it was their indispensable
duty, so would it be their constant endeavour to maintain to
the utmost of their power, in perfect consistence with the truest
loyalty to the Crown, the just prerogatives of which they
should ever be zealous to support." To this address the
Governor replied in the following bitter words : " I cannot
receive this address, which contains indecent reflections on my
predecessors, who have been tried and honourably acquitted by

soverity. He had promised the King that with four regiments he would play
the lion, and troops beyond his requisition were hourly expected. His
instnictions enjoined upon him the seizure and condign punishment of
Samuel Adams, Hancock, Joseph Warron, and other leading patriots ; Vtut he
stood in such dread of them that he never so much as attempted their arrest."
—76., pp. 37, 38.

* But before the prorogation, which took place the 28th of May, the
Assembly desired the Gbvemor to appoint the 1st day of June as a doy
of fasting and prayer ; but he r^iused, assigning as a reason, in a letter to
Lord Dartmouth, that " the request was only to give an opportunity for
sedition to flov/ from the pulpit."

)lK

400

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVIII.

i: I

.-■

i "^

i
i

■ i

ii Pl

III

the Lords of the Privy Council, and their conduct approved by
the King. I consider this address as an insult upon his Majesty
and the Lords of the Privy Council, and an affront to myself."

The answer of the Assembly was very courteous, but equally
decided with that of the Council. They congratulated his
Excellency on his safe arrival, and declared that they " honoured
him in the most exalted station of the province, and confided
in him to make the known Constitution and Charter the rule of
his administration ;" they " deprecated the removal of the Court
to Salem," but expressed a hope that " the true state of the
province, and the character of his Majesty's subjer n it, their
loyalty to their Sovereign and their affection fo^ the parent
country,* as well as their invincible attachment to their just
rights and liberties, would be laid before his Majesty, 8 id
that he would be the happy instrument of removing his
Majesty's displeasure, and restoring harmony, which had been
long interrupted by the artifices of interested and designing
men."

The House of Representatives, after much private consulta-
tion among its leading members, proceeded with closed doors to
the consideration and adoption, by a majority of 92 to 12, of
resolutions declaring the necessity of a general meeting of all
the colonies in Congress, " in order to consult together upon the
present state of the colonies, and the miseries to which they are
and must be reduced by the operation of certain Acts of Parlia-
ment respecting America; and to deliberate and determine
upon wise and proper measures to be by them recommended to
all the colonies for the recovery and establishment of their just
rights and liberties, civil and religious, and the restoration of
union and harmony between Great Britain and the colonies,
most ardently to be desired by all good men." They elected

* " The people of Massachusetts were almost exclusively of Englisli
origin. Beyoud any other colony they loved the land of their ancestors; but
their fond attachment made them only the more sensitive to its tyranny.
To subject them to taxation without their consent was robbing them of
their birthright ; they scorned the British Parliament as a ' Junta of the
servants of the Crown rather than the representatives of England.' Not
disguising to themselves their danger, but confident of victory, they were
resolved to stand together as brothers for a life of liberty." (Bancroft's
History of the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, i., p. 38).

p. XVIII.

oved by
1 Majesty
myself."
b equally
ated his
tionoured
confided
ne rule of
the Court
,te of the
1 it, their
le parent
bheir just
esty, 8 id
jving his
had been
designing

; consulta-
d doors to
^ to 12, of
ing of all
upon the
they are
of Parlia-
ietermine
lended to
their just
)ration of
colonies,
y elected

of English
lestors; but
Its tyranny,
ng them of
Lnta of the
land.' Not
1 they were
l(Bancroft'8

CHAP. XVIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

401

five gentlemen to represent Massachusetts to the proposed Con-
gress.

The House also proceeded with all expedition to draw up a
declaration of their sentiments, to be published as a rule for
the conduct of the people of Massachusetts. " This declaration,"
says Dr. Andrews, " contained a repetition of grievances ; the
necessity they were now under of struggling against lawless
power ; the disregard of their petitions, though founded on the
clearest and most equitable reasons ; the evident intention of
Great Britain to destroy the Constitution transmitted to them
from their ancestors, and to erect upon its ruins a system of
absolute sway, incompatible with their disposition and subver-
sive of the rights they had uninterruptedly enjoyed during the
space of more than a century and a half. Impelled by these
motives, they thought it their duty to advise the inhabitants of
Massachusetts to throw every obstruction in their power in the
way of such evil designs, and recommended as one of the most
effectual, a total disuse of all importations from Great Britain
until an entire redress had been obtained of every grievance.

" Notwithstanding the secrecy with which this business was
carried on," continues Dr. Andrews, " the Governor was apprized
of it ; and on the very day it was completed, and the report of
it made to the House (and adopted), he dissolved the Assembly,
which was the last that was held in that colony agreeably to the
tenor of the Charter."*

* History of the War with America, France and Spain, and Holland,
commencing in 1775, and ending in 1783. By John Andrews, LL.D., in
four volumes, with Maps and Charts. London : Published by his Majesty's
Royal Licence and Authority, 1788. Vol. I., pp. 137, 138.

A more minute and graphic account of the close of this session of the
Massachusetts Court or Legislature is as follows :

" On the appointed day the doors were closed and the subject was broached ;
but before any action could be taken in the premises, a loyalist member
obtained leave of absence and immediately dispatched a messenger to Qage,.
to inform him of what was passing. The Governor, in great haste, sent
the Secretary to dissolve the Court. Finding the door locked, he knocked
for admission, but was answered, that ' The House was upon very important
business, which when they had finished, they would let him in.' Failing to
obtain an entrance, he stood upon the steps and read the proclamation in the
hearing of several members and others, and after reading it in the Council
Chamber, returned. The House took no notice of this message, but pio-

402

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVIII.

ceeded with their husiness ; and, by a vote of 117 to 12, having determined
that a Committee should be appointed to meet, as soon aa may be, the Com-
mittees that are or shall be appointed by the several colonies on this conti-
nent to consult together upon the present state of the colonies, James
Bowdoin, Thomas Cushing, Samuel Adams, John Adams, and Robert Treat
Paine were selected for that purpose, and funds were provided for defraying
their expenses." (Barry's History of Massachusetts, Second Period, Chap,
xiv., pp. 484, 485.)

CHAP. XIX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

403

CHAPTER XIX.

1774, ONTIL THE Meeting of the First Qeneral Conoress in

September.

The responses to the appeals of Boston and the proposals of
the Assembly of Massachusetts, for a meeting of Congress
of all the colonies, were prompt and general and sympathetic
beyond what had been anticipated; and in some colonies
the expressions of approval and offers of co-operation and
assistance preceded any knowledge of what was doing, or had
been done, in Massachusetts.

In Virginia the House of Burgesses were in session when the
news arrived from England announcing the passing by the
British Parliament of the Boston Port Bill ; and on the 26th of
May the House resolved that the 1st of June, the day on which
that Bill was to go into effect, should be set apart by the
members as a day of fasting, humiliation, and prayer, " devoutly
to implore the Divine interposition for averting the heavy
calamities which threatened destruction to their civil rights,
and the evils of a civil war, and to give them one heart
and one mind to oppose, by all just and proper means,
every injury to American rights." On the publication of this
resolution, the Governor (the Earl of Dunmore) dissolved the
House. But the members, before separating, entered into an as-
sociation and signed an agreement, to the number of 87, in which,
among other things, they declared " that an attack made on one
of their sister colonies, to compel submission to arbitrary taxes,
was an attack made on all British America, and threatened ruin
to the civil rights of all, unless the united wisdom of the whole
be applied in prevention." They therefore recommended to

fi I < \

[

f^i

■

L, t'

404

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XIX.

their Committee of Correspondence to communicate with the
several Committees of the other provinces, on the expediency
of appointing deputies from the different colonies, to meet
annually in Congress, and to deliberate on the common interests
of America. This measure had already been proposed in town
meetings, both in New York and Boston. The colonies, from
New Hampshire to South Carolina inclusive, adopted this
measure ; and where the Legislatures were not in session, elec-
tions were made by the people.*

While there was a general agreement of sentiment through-
out the colonies in favour of a Congi-ess or Convention of all
the colonies to consult on common rights and interests, and to
devise the best means of securing them, there was also a cor-
responding sympathy and liberality for the relief of the in-
habitants of Boston, who were considered as suffering for the
maintenance of rights sacred to the liberties of all the colonies,
as all had resisted successfully the landing of the tea, the badge
of their enslavement, though all had not been driven by the
Governor, as in the case of Massachusetts, to destroy it in order
to prevent its being landed. Yet even this had been done to
some extent both in South Carolina and New York.

The town of Boston became an object of interest, and its
inhabitants subjects of sympathy throughout the colonies of
America. All the histories of those times agree " that as soon
as the true character of the Boston Port Act became known in
America, every colony, every city, every village, and, as it were,

♦ Majfshall's History of the American Colonies, Chap, xiv., pp. 406, 407.

" Resolutions were passed in every colony in which Legislatures were
convened, or delegates assembled in Convention, manifesting different
degrees of resentment, but concurring in the same great principles. All
declared that the cause of Boston was the cause of British America ; that
the late Acts respecting that devoted town were tyrannical and unconstitu-
tional ; that the opposition to this unministerial system of oppression ought
to be universally and perseveringly maintained ; that all intercourse with the
parent country ought to be suspended, and domestic manufactures en-
couraged ; and that a General Congress should be formed for the purpose
of uniting and guiding the Councils and directing the efforts of North
America.

" The Committees of Correspondence selected Philadelphia for the place,
and the beginning of September as the time, for the meeting of this impor-
tant CouncU."— /6., pp. 409, 410.

SAP. XIX.

with the
cpediency
to meet
I interests
i in town
lies, from
pted this
sion, elec-

; through-
ion of all
ts, and to
also a cor-
3f the in-
ig for the
e colonies,
the badge
en by the
it in order
en done to

and its

olonies of

at as soon

cnown in

as it were,

406, 407.
atiirea were
ag different

ciples.

CHAP. XIX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

405

All

nenca ; that
unconstitu-
ession ought
irse with the
factiires en-
the purpose
ts of North

B)r the place,
this impor-

the inmates of every farm-house, felt it as a wound of their
affections. The towns of Massachusetts abounded in kind
offices. The colonies vied with each other in liberality. The
record kept at Boston shows that ' the patriotic and generous
people ' of South Carolina were the first to minister to the
sufferers, sending early in June two hundred barrels of rice, and
promising eight hundred more. At Wilmington, North Carolina,
the sum of two thousand pounds currency was raised in a few
days ; the women of the place gave liberally. Throughout all
New England the towns sent rye, flour, peas, cattle, sheep, oil,
fish ; whatever the land or hook and line could furnish, and
sometimes gifts of money. The French inhabitants of Quebec,
joining with those of English origin, shipped a thousand and
forty bushels of wheat. Delaware was so much in earnest that
it devised plans for sending relief annually. All Maryland and
all Virginia were contributing liberally and cheerfully, being
resolved that the men of Boston, who were deprived of their
daily labour, should not lose their daily bread, nor be compelled
to change their residence for want. In Fairfax county, Wash-
ington presided at a spirited meeting, and headed a subscription
paper with his own gift of fifty pounds. A special chronicle
could hardly enumerate all the generous deeds. Cheered by the
universal sympathy, the inhabitants of Boston 'were deter-
mined to hold out and appeal to the justice of the colonies
and of the world ; * trusting in God that ' these things should
be overruled for the establishment of liberty, virtue and happi-
ness in America.' "*

It is worthy of inquiry, as to how information could be so
rapidly circulated throughout colonies sparsely settled over
a territory larger than that of Europe, and expressions of
sentiment and feeling elicited from their remotest settlements ?
For, as Dr. Ramsay says, "in the three first months which
followed the shutting up of the port of Boston, the inhabitants
of the colonies, in hundreds of small circles as well as in their
Provincial Assemblies and Congresses, expressed their abhor-
rence of the late proceedings of the British Parliament against
Massachusetts ; their concurrence in the proposed measure of
appointing deputies for a General Congress ; and their willing-

* Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol VII., pp. 72—76.

TT?fB|p«r

h
IS

406

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XIX.

ness to do and suffer whatever should be judged conducive to
the establishment of their liberties."* "In order to under-
stand," says the same author, " the mode by which this flame
was spread with such rapidity over so great an extent of
country, it is necessary to observe that the several colonies
were divided into counties, and these again subdivided into
districts, distinguished by the names of towns, townships,
precincts, hundreds, or parishes. In New England, the sub-
divisions which are called towns were, by law, bodies cor-
porate ; had their regular meetings, and might be occasionally
convened by their officers. The advantages derived from these
meetings, by uniting the whole body of the people in the
measures taken to oppose the Stamp Act, induced other pro-
vinces to follow the example. Accordingly, under the Association
which was formed to oppose the Revenue Act of 1767, Com-
mittees were established, not only in the capital of every pro-
vince, but in most of the subordinate districts. Great Britain,
without designing it, had, by her two preceding attempts at
American revenue, taught her colonies not only the advantage
but the means of union. The system of Committees which pre-
vailed in 1765, and also in 1767, was revived in 1774. By
them there was a quick transmission of intelligence from the
capital towns through the subordinate districts to the whole
body of the people ; a union of counsels and measures was
effected, among widely disseminated inhabitants."-|*

It will be observed that the three Acts passed by Parliament in

* Colonial History, Vol. I., Chap, v., p. 398.

t lb., pp. 395, 396.

" It is, perb' ps, impossible for human wisdom to contrive any system more
subservient to these purposes than such a reciprocal exchange of intelligenee
by Committees of Correspondence. From want of such a communication
with each other, and consequently of union among themselves, many States
have lost their liberties, and more have been iinsuccessful in their attempts
to regain them after they were lost.

" What the eloquence and talents of Demosthenes could not effect among
the States of Greece, might have been effected by the simple device of
Committees of Correspondence. The few have been enabled to keep the
many in subjection in every age from the want of union among the latter.
Several of the provinces of Spain complained of oppression under Charles
the Fifth, and in transports of rage took arms against him ; but they never
consulted or communicated with each other. They resisted separately, and
were, therefore, separately subdued." — lb., p. 396.

3HAP. XIX.

CHAP. XIX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

407

respect to Massachusetts, and the fourth, for quartering soldiers
in towns, changed the Charter of the province, and multiplied
the causes of difference between Great Britain and the colonies.
To the causes of dissatisfaction in the colonies arising from the
taxing of them assumed by Parliament (now only threepence
a pound on tea), the arrangement with the East India Company
and the Courts of Admiralty, depriving the colonists of the right
of trial by jury, were now added the Boston Port Bill, the Regu-
lating Act, the Act which essentially changed the chartered
Constitution of Massachusetts, and the Act which transferred
Government oflfxcera accused of murder, to be removed ta England .
Mr. Bancroft justly observes that " the Regulating Act compli-
cated the question between America and Great Britain. The
country, under the advice of Pennsylvania, might have indemni-
fied the East India Company, might have obtained by importu-
nity the repeal of the tax on tea, or might have borne the duty,
as it had borne that on wine ; but Parliament, after ten years
of premeditation, had exercised the power to abrogate the laws
and to change the Charter of a province without its consent ;
and on this arose the conflict of the American Revolution."*

bsures was

* Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, viii., p. 97.

The authority of this new Act was never acknowledged in Massachusetts.
Of the 36 Legislative Councillors nominated by the Crown, one-third of
them declined to accept the appointment, and nearly all who did accept
were soon compelled, by the remonstrances and threats of their neighbours, to
resign. So alarmed was Governor Oage, that after he had summoned th&
new Legislature to meet him at Salem, he countermanded his summons by
proclamation ; but which was considered unlawful, and the Assembly met,
organized itself, and passed resolutions on grievances, and adopted other pro-
ceedings to further the opposition to the new Act and other Acts com-
plained of.

Even the Courts could not be held. At Boston the judges took their
seatSj.and the usual proclamations were made ; when the men who had been
returned as jurors, one and all, refused to take the oath. Being asked why
they refused, Thomas Chase, one of the petit jury, gave as his reason, " that
the Chief Justice of the Court stood impeached by the late representatives of
the province." In a paper offered by the jury, the judges found their authority
disputed for further reasons, that the Charter of the province had been
changed with no warrant but an Act of Parliament, and that three of th&
judges, in violation of the Constitution, had accepted seats in the new CounciL
The Chief Justice and his colleagues repairing in a body to the Governor
represented the impossibility of exercising their office in Boston or in any-
other part of the province ; the army was too small for their protection; and

13 "•

408

THE LOYALISTS OP AMERICA [CHAP. XIX.

besides, none would act as jurors. Thus the authority of the new Qovem-
mcnt, as established by Act of Parliament, perished in the presence of the
Governor, the judges and the army. — lb., pp. Ill, 112.

The £nglish historian. Dr. Andrews, remarks on this subject :
" The list of the new (Legislativ6) Council appointed by the Orown con-
sisted of thirty-six members. But twelve of the number declined their
commissions, and most of those who accepted were speedily obliged to
resign them in order to save their property and persons from the fury of the
multitude. The judges newly appointed experienced much the same treat-
ment. All the inferior officers of the Courts of Judicature, the clerks, the
juries, and all others concerned, explicitly refused to oct under the new
laws. In some places the populace shut up the avenues to the court-houses;
and upon being required to make way for the judges and officers of the
court, they declared that they knew of no court nor establishment in the
province contrary to the ancient usages and forms, and would recognize
none.

" The former Constitution being thus destroyed by the British Legislature,
and the people refusing to acknowledge that which was substituted in its
room, a dissolution of all government necessarily ensued. The resolution to
oppose the designs of Great Britain produced occasionally some commotions;
but no other consequences followed this defect of government. Peace and
good order remained everywhere throughout the province, and the people
demeaned themselves with as much regularity as if the laws still continued
in their full and formal rigour." (Andrews' History of the War, Vol. I.,
pp. 145, 146.)

3HAP. XIX.

CHAP. XX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

409

CHAPTER XX.

The General Congress or Convention at Philadelphia, September

AND October, 1774.

The word Congress, in relation to the United States, is synony-
mous with the word Parliament in Great Britain, signifying the
Legislature of the nation at large; but before the revolution
the word Congress was used, for the most part, as synonymous
with Convention — a voluntary meeting of delegates elected by
towns or counties for certain purposes. A meeting of delegates
from the several towns of a county was called a Congress, or
Convention of such county ; a meeting of delegates of the
several towns of a province was called a Provincial Congress, or
Convention ; and a meeting of delegates of the several County
Conventions in the several provinces was called a General or
Continental Congress, though they possessed no Itgal power, and
their resolutions and addresses were the mere expressions of
opinion or advice.

Such was the Continental Congress that assembled in Phila-
delphia the 5th of September, 1774 — not a legislative or execu-
tive body possessing or assuming any legislative or executive
power — a body consisting of fifty-five delegates elected by the
representatives of twelve out of the thirteen provinces — Georgia,
the youngest and smallest province, not having elected delegates.
The sittings of this body, or Congress, as it was called, continued
about eight weeks, and its proceedings were conducted with all
the forms of a Legislative Assembly, but with closed doors,
and under the pledge of secrecy, until dissolved by the authority
of the Congress itself.

Each day's proceedings was commenced with prayer by some

410

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XX.

m»

minister. Mr. Peyton Randolph, Speaker of the House of
Burgesses of Virginia, was elected President, and Mr. Charles
Thompson, of Pennsylvania, was chosen Secretary.

After deciding upon the mode of conducting the business, it
was resolved, after lengthened discussion, that each colony
should be equal in voting — each colony having one vote, what-
ever might be the number of its delegates.

This Congress consisted of the assembled representatives of the
American colonies, and truly expressed their grievances, opinions,
and feelings. As the proceedings were with closed doors,
the utterances of individuals were not reported; but in the
reported results of their deliberations there is not an opinion or
wish expressed which does not savour of affection to the mother
country and loyalty to the British Constitution. Down to this
ninth or last year of the agitation which commenced with the
passing of the Stamp Act, before bloody conflicts took place
between British soldiers and inhabitants of Massachusetts, there
was not a resolution or petition or address adopted by any Con-
gress, or Convention, or public meeting in the colonies, that con-
tained a principle or sentiment which has not been professed by
the loyal inhabitants of British America, and which is not
recognized at this day by the British Government and enjoyed
by the people in all the provinces of the Dominion of Canada.

The correctness of these remarks will appear from a summary
of the proceedings of this Continental Congress, and extracts
from its addresses, which will show that the colonies, without
exception, were as loyal to their constitutional sovereign as
they were to their constitutional rights,* though in royal

* The royal historian, Andrews, states :

" The delegates were enjoined, by the instructions they had received from
their constituents, solemnly to acknowledge the sovereignty of Great P .ua
over them, and their willingness to pay her the fullest obedif or as

the constitution authorized her to demand it ; they were aim all

notions of separating from her ; and to declare it was with th pest regret
they beheld a suspension of that confidence and affection whii ulso !• ig,
and so happily for both, subsisted between Great Britain and her cclonr "S.

" But they were no less carefully directed at the same time to assert tlie
rights transmitted to them by their ancestors. These rights they would
never surrender, and would maintain them at all perils. They were entitled
to all the privileges of British subjects, and would not yield to the unjust
pretensions of Parliament, which, in the present treatment of the colonies.

[chap. XX.

CHAP. XX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

411

House of
Ir. Charles

business, it
ich colony
v^ote, what-

tivcs of the
IS, opinions,
>8ed doors,
but in the

opinion or
the mother
)wn to this
id with the
took place
isetts, there
y any Con-
s, that con-
rofessed by
ich is not
id enjoyed
)f Canada.
I summary
id extracts

s, without
vereign as
in royal

eceived from

reat B" Utxu

ur as

iini all

pest regret

Imdso 1' .ig,

r (-lion «.

to assert tJie

they would

irere entitled

) the unjust

he colonies,

ines.sages and ministerial speeches in Parliament their pctitioas
and remonstrances were called treason, and the authors of them
were termed rebels and traitors. The principal acts of this
Congress were a Declaration of Rights ; an address to the
King ; an address to the people of Great Britain ; a memorial
to the Americans ; a letter to the people of Canada. Non-im-
portation and non-exportation agreements were adopted and
signed by all the members ; and Committees of Vigilance were
appointed.

" Then on the 2Gth of October, the ' fifty-five ' separated and
returned to their homes, determined, as they expressed it, * that
they were themselves to stand or fall with the liberties of
America.' " *

Among the first important acts of this Congress was the
declaration of colonial rights, grievances, and policy. As this
part of their proceedings contains the whole case of the colonies
as stated by their own representatives, I will give it, though
long, in their own words, in a note.-f* This elaborate and ably

had violated the principles of the constitution and given them just occasion
to be dissatisfied and to rise in opposition. Parliament might depend this
opposition would never cease until those Acts were wholly repealed that had
been the radical cause of the present disturbances," (Andrews' History of
the War with America, Spain and Holland, from 1775 to 1783, pp. 156, 157.)

* Elliott's New England History, Vol. II., Chap, xvi., p. 289.

"Washington and Lee believed the non-importation and exportation
agreements would open the eyes of England ; but Patrick Henry agreed
with John and Samuel Adams in believing that force must decide it, and,
like them, was ready to meet any emergency." — 76.

" The New York Legislature at once repudiated the doings of the Con-
gress ; but elsewhere it met with a hearty response." — lb,, p. 290.

t" Whereas, since the close of the last war, the British Parliament, claim-
ing a power, of right, to bind the people of America by statutes in all cases
whatsoever, hath in some Acts expressly imposed taxes on them ; and in
others, under various pretences, but in fact for the purpose of raising a
revenue, hath imposed rates and duties payable in these colonies, established
a Board f^i Commissioners with unconstitutional powers, and extended the
jurisdiction of Courts of Admiralty, not only for collecting the said duties,
but for the trial of causes merely arising within the body of a county :

"And whereas, in consequence of other statutes, judges, who before held
only . i^tates at will in their offices, have been made dependent on the Crown
alone for their salaries, and standing armies kept in times of peace :

" And whereas it has lately been resolved in Parliament, that by force of a
statute made in the thirty-fifth year of the reigu of King Heniy VIII.,

412

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XX.

» 1

.; !

written paper does not appear to contain a sentiment of treason,
nor anything which the members of the Congress had not a
right to express and complain of as British subjects ; while they

colonists may be transported to England and tried there upon accusations for
treasons, and misprisions and concealments of treasons committed in the
colonies, and by a late statute such trials have been directed in cases the; v.in
mentioned :

" And whereas, in the last session of Parliament, three statutes were made —
one entitled, ' An Act to discontinue, in such manner and for such time oa
are therein mentioned, the landing and discharging, lading or shipping of
goods, wares, and merchandise, at the town, and within the harbour
of Boston, in the province of Massachusetts Boy, in North America ;'
another entitled, 'An Act for the better regulating the Government of
the Province of Massachusetts Bay, in New England ;' and another
Act entitled, * An Act for the impartial administration of justice, in the
cases of persons questioned for any act 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 another statute was then made,
' for making more effectual provision for the government of the province of
Quebec,' etc. — all which statutes are impolitic, unjust, and cruel, as well as
unconstitutional, and most dangerous and destructive of American rights :

" And whereas assemblies have been frequently dissolved, contrary to the
rights of the people, when they attempted to deliberate on grievances ; and
their dutiful, humble, loyal, and reasonable petitions to the Crown for redress
have been repeatedly treated with contempt by his Majesty's Ministers of
State ; the good people of the several*colonies of New Hampshire, Massachu-
setts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York,
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New Castle, Kent and Sussex on Delaware,
Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, justly alarmed at
the arbitrary proceedings of Parliament and Administration, have severally
elected, constituted, and appointed deputies to meet and sit in General Con-
gress, in the city of Philadelphia, in order to obtain such establishment as
that their religion, laws, and liberties may not be subverted : whereupon
the deputies so appointed being now assembled, in a full and free representa-
tion of these colonies, taking into their most serious consideration the best
means of attaining the ends aforesaid, do in the first place, as Englishmen,
what their ancestors in like cases have usually done, for asserting and vindi-
cating their rights and liberties. Declare, that the inhabitants of the English
colonies in North America, by the immutable laws of nature, the principled
of the English Constitution, and the several charters or compacts, have the
following rights ;

" Resolved, N. o. D. Ist, That they are entitled to life, liberty, and property ;
and they have never ceded to any sovereign power whatever a right to dis-
pose of either without their consent.

" Resolved, N. c. D. 2nd, That our ancestors, who first settled these colonies,
were, at the time of their emigration from the mother country, entitled to all

CHAP. XX.

CHAP. TiX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

413

explicitly recognized in Parliament all the authority which could
be constitutionally claimed for it, and which was requisite for
British supremacy over the colonies, or which had ever been
exercised before 1764.

the rights, liberties, and immunities of free ^nd natural-born subjects within
the realm of England.

" Resolved, N. c. D. 3rd, That by such emigration they by no means forfeited,
surrendered, or lost any of those rights, but that they were, and their de-
scendants now are, entitled to the exercise and enjoyment of all such of
them as their local and other circumstances enabled them to exercise and
enjoy.

" Resolved, 4th, That the foundation of English liberty and of all free gov-
ernment is a right in their people to participate in their Legislative Council ;
and as the English colonists are not represented, and from their local and
other circumstances cannot properly be represented in the British Parlia-
ment, they are entitled to a free and exclusive power of legislation in their
several Provincial Legislatures, where their right of representation can alone
be preserved, in all cases of taxation and internal polity, subject only to the
negative of their Sovereign, in such manner aa has been heretofore used and
accustomed. But from the necessity of the case, and a regard to the mutual
interest of both countries, we cheerfully consent to the operation of such
Acts of the British Parliament as are boria fide restrained to the regulation
of our external commerce, for the purpose of securing the commercial
advantages of the whole empire to the mother country, and tlie commercial
benefits of its respective members ; excluding every idea of taxation, internal
or external, for raising a revenue on the subjects in America without their
consent. *^

" Resolved, N. c. D. 5th, That the respective colonies are entitled to the
common law of England, and more especially to the great and inestimable
privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage, according to the course
of that law.

" Resolved, 6th, That they are entitled to the benefit of such of the English
statutes as existed at the time of their colonization ; and which they have,
by experience, respectively found to be applicable to their several local and
other circumstances.

" Resolved, N. c. D. 7th, That these his Majesty's colonies are likewise
entitled to all the immunities and privileges granted and confirmed to them
by Royal Charters, or secured by their several codes of Provincial laws.

" Resolved, N. c. D. 8th, That they have a right peaceably to assemble, con-
sider of their grievances, and petition the King ; and that all prosecutions,
prohibitory proclamations, and commitments for the same, are illegal.

" Resolved, n. c. d. 9th, That the keeping a st^inding army in these
colonies, in times of peace, without the consent of the Legislature of the
colony in which such army is ke;^)t, is against law.

" Resolved, N. c. D. 10th, It iji indispensably necessary to f^ood government,
and rendered essential by the English constitution, that the constituent

414

THE LOYALISTS OP AMERICA

[chap. XX.

•5 /

On the Ist of October, the Congress, after long consideration,
unanimously resolved —

" That a loyal address to his Majesty be prepared, dutifully
requesting the Royal attention to the grievances which alarm
and distress his Majesty's faithful subjects in North America,

branches of the Legislature be independent of each other ; that, therefore,
the exercise of legislative power in several colonies, by a Council appointed,
during pleasure, by the Crown, is unconstitutional, dangerous, and destruc-
tive to the freedom of American legislation.

" All and each of which the aforesaid deputies, in behalf of themselves and
their constituents, do claim, demand, and insist on, as their indubitable
rights and liberties ; which cannot be legally taken from them, altered or
abridged by any power whatever, without their own consent, by their repre-
sentatives in their several Provincial Legislatures.

" In the course of our inquiry, we find many infringements and violations
of the foregoing rights, which, from an ardent desire that harmony and
mutual intercourse of affection and interest may be restored, we pass over for
the present, and proceed to state such Acts and measures as have been adopted
since the last war, which demonstrate a system formed to enslave America

" Resolved, N. c. D., That the following Acts of Parliament are infringements
and violations of the rights of the colonies ; and that the repeal of them is
essentially necessary, in order to restore harmony between Qreat Britain and
the American colonies, viz. :

" The several Acts of 4 Geo. TIL chaps. 16 and 34 — 5 Geo. III. chap. 25
—6 Geo. III. chap. 62—7 Geo. III. chap. 41 and chap. 46—8 Geo. III.
chap. 22, which imposed duties for the purpose of raising a revenue in
America, extend the power of the Admiralty Courts beyond their ancient
limits ; deprive the American subject of trial by jury ; authorize the judge's
certificate to indemnify the prosecutor from damages that he might other-
wise be liable to ; requiring oppressive security from a claimant of ships and
goods seized, before he shall be allowed to defend his property, and are sub-
versive of American rights.

" Also 12 Geo. III. chap. 24, intituled ' An Act for the better securing
his Majesty's dockyards, magazines, ships, ammunition, and stores,' which
declares a new offence in America, and deprives the American subject of a
constitutional trial by a jury of the vicinage, by authorizing the trial of any
person charged with the committing of any offence described in the said Act,
out of the realm, to be indicted and tried for the same in any shire or county
within the realm.

" Also the three Acts passed in the last session of Parliament, for stopping
the port and blocking up the harbour of Boston, for altering the Charter and
Government of Massachusetts Bay, and that which is intituled ' An Act for
the better administration of justice,' etc.

" Also, the Act passed in the same session for establishing the Boman
Catholic religion in the province of Quebec, abolishing the equitable system

CHAP. XX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

415

3 Geo. III.

er securing

and entreating his Majesty's gracious interposition to remore
such grievances, and thereby to restore to Great Britain and the
colonies that harmony so necessary to the happiness of the
British empire, and so ardently desired by all America."

This address or petition, like all the papers emanating from
this Congress, was written with consummate ability.* " In this
petition to the King, the Congress begged leave to lay their
grievances before the Throne. After a particular enumeration
of these, they observed that they wholly arose from a destruc-
tive system of colony administration adopted since the conclu-
sion of the last war. They assured his Majesty that they had
made such provision for defraying the charges of the adminis-
tration of justice, and the support of civil government, as had
been judged just, and suitable to their respective circumstances ;
and that for the defence, protection, and security of the colonies,
their militia would be fully sufficient in time of peace ; and in
case of war, they were ready and willing, when constitutionally
required, to exert their most strenuous efforts in granting sup-
plies and raising forces. They said, "We ask but for peace,
liberty, and safety. We wish not a diminution of the preroga-
tive ; nor do we solicit the grant of any new right in our favour.
Your royal authority over us, and our connection with Great

of English laws, and erecting a tyranny there, to the great danger (from so
total a dissimilarity of religion, law, and government) of the neighbouring
British colonies, by the assistance of whose blood and treasure the said
country was conquered from France.

" Also, the Act passed in the same session for the better providing suitable
quarters for officers and soldiers in his Majesty's service in North America.

" Also, that the keeping a standing army in several of these colonies, in
time of peace, without the consent of the Legislature of that colony in
which such army is kept, is against law.

" To these grievous Acts and measures, Americans cannot submit ; but in
hopes their fellow-subjects in Great Britain wiU, on a revision of them,
restore us to that state in which both countries found happiness and pros-
perity, we have for the present only resolved to pursue the following peace-
able measures : 1. To enter into a non-importation, non-consumption, and
non-exportation agreement or association ; 2. To prepare an address to the
people of Great Britain, and a memorial to the inhabitants of British
America ; and 3. To prepare a loyal address to his Majesty, agreeable to
resolutions already entered into." (Marshall's American Colonial History,
Appendix IX., pp. 481 — 486.)

* See the Earl of Chatham's remarks on page 423.

416

THE LOYALISTS OP AMERICA

[chap. XX.

tt ■
N

Britain, we shall always carefully and zealously endeavour to
support and maintain."* They concluded their masterly and
touching address in the following words :

" Permit us, then, most gracious Sovereign, in the name of all
your faithful people in America, with the utmost humility, to
implore you, for the honour of Almighty God, whose pure
religion our enemies are undermining ; for your glory, which can
be advanced only by rendering your subjects happy and keep-
ing them united ; for the interest of your family, depending on
an adherence to the principles that enthroned it ; for the safety
and welfare of your kingdom and dominions, threatened with
almost unavoidable dangers and distresses, that your Majesty,
as the loving Father of your whole people, connected by the
same bonds of law, loyalty, faith, and blood, though dwelling
in various countries, will not suffer the transcendent relation
formed by these ties to be farther violated in certain expec-
tation of efforts that, if attained, never can compensate for the
calamities through which they must be gained."-(*

Their address to the people of Great Britain is equally
earnest and statesmanlike. Two or three passages, as samples,
must suffice. After stating the serious condition of America,
and the oppressions and mLsrepresentations of their conduct,
and their claim to be as free as their fellow-subjects in Great
Britain, they say :

" Are not the proprietors of the soil of Great Britain lords of
their own property ? Can it be taken from them without their
consent ? Will they yield it to the arbitrary disposal of any
men or number of men whatsoever ? You know they will not.

" Why then are the proprietors of the soil of America less
lords of their property than you are of yours ; or why should
they submit it to the disposal of your Parliament, or any other
Parliament or Council in the world, not of their election ? Can
the intervention of the sea that divides us cause disparity of
rights ; or can any reason be given why English subjects who

i :

* Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., p. 418.

t " The Committee which brought in this admirably well-drawn and truly
conciliatory address were Mr. Lee, Mr. John Adams, Mr. Johnston, Mr.
Henry, Mr. Rutledge, and Mr. Dickenson. The original composition has
been generally attributed to Mr. Dickenson." (Marshall's American Colonial
History, Chap, xiv., p. 419, in a note.) -

BAP. XX.

CHAP. XX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

417

Eivour to
erly and

me of all
nility, to
)se pure
rhich can
nd keep-
ading on
he safety
aed with

Majesty,
i by the

dwelling
; relation
in expec-
ts for the

s equally

samples,

America,

conduct,

in Great

lords of
iout their
il of any

will not.
jrica less
|y should
Iny other
? Can

)arity of

jcts who

and truly
iston, Mr.
bsitiou haa
In Colonial

live three thousand miles distant from the royal palace should
enjoy less liberty than those who are three hundred miles
distant from it ? Reason looks with indignation on such dis-
tinctions, and freemen can never perceive their propriety."

They conclude their address to their fellow-subjects in Great
Britain in the following words :

" We believe there is yet much virtue, much justice, and much
public spirit in the English nation. To that justice we now
appeal. You have been told that we are seditious, impatient of
government, and desirous of independence. Be assured that these
are not facts, but calumnies. Permit us to be as free as your-
selves, and we shall ever esteem a imion with you to be our
greatest glory and our greatest happiness ; and we shall ever
be ready to contribute all in our power to the welfare of the
empire. We shall consider your enemies as our enemies, and
your interest as our own.

" But if you are determined that your Ministers shall wan-
tonly sport with the rights of mankind ; if neither the voice of
justice, the dictates of law, the principles of the Constitution,
nor the suggestions of humanity can restrain your hands from
shedding human blood in such an impious cause, we must then
tell you that we will never submit to be hewers of wood and
drawers of water to any Ministry or nation in the world.

" Place U8 in the aarm situation that we were at the close of
the late war, and our forrMr hamiony will he restored."

The address of the members of this Congress to their con-
stituents is a lucid exposition of the several causes which had
led to the then existing state of things, and is replete with
earnest but temperate argument to prove that their liberties
must be destroyed, and the security of their persons and property
annihilated, by submission to the pretensions of the British
Ministry and Parliament. They state that the first object of
the Congress was to unite the people of America, by demonstrat-
ing the sincerity and earnestness with which reconciliation
had been sought with Great Britain upon terms compatible with
British liberty. After expressing their confidence in the efficacy
of the passive commercial resistance which had been adopted,
they conclude their address thus :

" Your own salvation and that of your posterity now depend
upon yourselves. You have already shown that you entertain
27

■m

418

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XX.

I ^

ill

'■ . 1'

i } ] -

a proper sense of the blessings you are striving to retain.
Against the temporary inconveniences you may suffer from a
stoppage of trade, you will weigh in the opposite balance the
endless miseries you and your descendants must endure from
an established arbitrary power." * * •

" Motives thus cogent, arising from the emergency of your
unhappy condition, must excite your utmost diligence and zeal
to give all possible strength and energy to pacific measures
calculated for your relief. But we think ourselves bound in
duty to observe to you, that the schemes agitated against the
colonies have been so conducted as to render it prudent that you
should extend your views to mournful events, and be in all
respects prepared for every contingency. Above all things, we
earnestly entreat you, with devotion of spirit, penitence of
heart, and amenu. >ent of life, to humble yourselves, and implore
the favour of Almighty God; and we fervently beseech His
Divine goodness to take you into His gracious protection."

The letters addressed to the other colonies not represented in
the Congress require no special reference or remark.

After completing the business before them, this first General
Congress in America recommended that another Congress should
be held in the same place on the tenth day of the succeeding
May, 1775, "unless redress of their grievances should be pre-
viously obtained," and recommending to all the colonies "to
choose deputies as soon as possible, to be ready to attend at that
time and place, should events make their meeting necessary,"

I have presented an embodiment of the complaints, sentiments,
and wishes of the American colonies in the words of their
elected representatives in their first General Congress. I have
done so for two reasons : First, to correct as far as I can the
erroneous impression of thousands of English and Canadian
readers, that during the ten years' conflict of words, before the
conflict of arms, between the British Ministry and Parliament
and Colonies, the colonists entertained opinions and views
incompatible with subordination to the mother country, and
were preparing the way for separation from it. Such an opinion
is utterly erroneous. Whatever solitary individuals may have
thought or wished, the petitions and resolutions adopted by the
complaining colonists during these ten years of agitation
breathe as pure a spirit of loyalty as they do of liberty ; and

CHAP. XX.

CHAP. XX.l

AND THEIR TIMES.

419

in no instance did they ask for more, or as much, as the inhabi-
tants of the provinces of the Canadian Dominion this day
enjoy.

My second reason for thus quoting the very words of the
declarations and petitions of the colonists is to show the injus-
tice with which they were represented and treated by the British
Ministry, Parliament, and press in England.

Tt was hoped by the Congress that their address to the
people of England would have a happy influence in favour of
the colonies upon the public mind, and tell favourably on the
English elections, which took place the latter part of the year
1774 ; but the elections were suddenly ordered before the pro-
ceedings of the Congress could be published in England. The
elections, of course, resulted adversely to the colonies ; and the
new Parliament was more subservient to the Ministry against
the colonies than the preceding Parliament.*

This new Parliament met the 30th day of November, when
the King was advised to inform them, among other things,
" that a most daring spirit of resistance and disobedience to the
laws unhappily prevailed in the province of Massachusetts, and
had broken forth in fresh violences of a very criminal nature ;
that these proceedings had been countenanced and encouraged
in his other colonies ; that unwarrantable attempts had been
made to obstruct the commerce of his kingdom by unlawful
combinations ; and that he had taken such measures and given
such orders as he judged most proper and effectual for carrying

* " Some time before the proceedings of Conjifreas reached England, it was
justly apprehended that the non-importation agreement would be one of the
measures they would adopt. The Ministry, apprehending that this event, by
distressing the trading and manufacturing towns, might influence votes against
the Court in the election of a new Parliament, which was, of course, to come
on in the succeeding year, suddenly dissolved the Parliament and immediately
ordered a new one to be chosen. It was their design to have the whole
business of elections over before the inconveniences of non importation
could be felt. The nation was thus surprised into an election. Without know-
ing that the late American acts had driven the colonies into a firm combina-
tion to support and make common cause with the people of Massachusetts, a
new Parliament was returned, which met thirty-four days after the pro-
ceedings of Congress were first published in Philadelphia, and before they
were known in Great Britain. This, for the most part, consisted either of the
former members, or of those who held similar sentiments." (Ramsay's
Colonial History, Vol I., Chap. vL, p. 424.)

\h a8^

420

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XX.

H t

-^..i _i

i ■ ;

J !

! . ; , ■

-i; ■

Li ?

into execution the laws which were passed in the last session of
the late Parliament relative to the province of Massachusetts."*

Answers were adopted in both Houses of Parliament re-
echoing the sentiments of the Royal Speech, but not without
vehement debates. There was a considerable minority in both
Lords and Commons that sympathised with the colonies, and
condemned the Ministerial policy and the Acts of the previous
Parliament complained of. In the Commons, the Minister was
reminded of the great effects he had predicted from the Ameri-
can acts. " They were to humble that whole continent without
further trouble ; and the punishment of Boston was to strike
so universal a panic in all the colonies that it would be totally
abandoned, and instead of obtaining relief, a dread of the same
fate would awe the other provinces to a most respectful sub-
mission."-f- But the address, re-echoing the Royal Speech for
coercion, was adopted by a majority of two to one.

In the Lords a similar address was passed by a large majority ;
but the Lords Richmond, Portland, Rockingham, Stamford,
Torrington, Ponsonby, Wycombe, and Camden entered upon the
journals a protest against it, which concluded in the following
memorable words :

"Whatever may be the mischievous designs or the incon-
siderate temerity, we wish to be known as persons who have
disapproved of measures so injurious in their past effects and
future tendency, and who are not in haste, without inquiry or
information, to commit ourselves in declarations which may
precipitate our country into all the calamities of civil war."J

Before the adjournment of the new Parliament for the
Christmas holidays, the papers containing the proceedings of
the Continental Congress at Philadelphia reached England.
The first impression made by them is said to have been in favour
of America. The Ministry seemed staggered, and their opposers
triumphed in the fulfilment of their own predictions as to the
effects of Ministerial acts and policy in America. The Earl of
Dartmouth, Secretary of State for the Colonies, after a day's
perusal of these papers, said that the petition of the Congress
to the King (of which extracts have been given above)

♦ Ramsay's Colonial History, Vol. I., Chap, vi., pp. 424, 426.
t /6., p. 425.
X lb., p. 426.

CHAP. XX.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

421

was a decent and proper one. He cheerfully undertook to
present it to the King ; and reported afterwards that his
Majesty was pleased to receive it very graciously, and would
lay it before his two Houses of Parliament. From these favour-
able circumstances, the friends of conciliation anticipated that
the petition of the Colonial Congress would be made the basis
of a change of measures and policy in regard to the colonies.
But these hopes were of short duration.

422

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XXI.

CHAPTER XXI.

The Re-abbemdlino of Parliament — Letters from Colonial Gover-
nors, Revenue and Military Officers, against the Colonists
OPPOSED TO the Ministerial Policy — The Ministry, Supported
BY Parliament, determine upon Continuing and Strengthening
the Coercive Policy against the Colonies.

On the re-assembling of Parliament in January, 1775, a
number of papers were produced from governors, and revenue
and military officers in America, which contained various state-
ments adverse to the proceedings and members of the Congress,
and the opposition to the coercive Acts of Parliament.

Ministers and their supporters were pleased with these papers,
which abetted their policy, lauded and caressed their authors,
and decided to concede nothing, and continue and strengthen
the policy of coercion.

On the 20th of January, the first day of the re-assembling of
the Lords, Lord Dartmouth laid the papers received from
America before the House. The- Earl of Chatham, after an
absence of two years, appeared again in the House with restored
health, and with all his former energy and eloquence. He
moved :

" That a humble address be presented to his Majesty, most
humbly to advise and beseech him that, in order to open the
way toward a happy settlement of the dangerous troubles in
America, by beginning to allay ferments and soften animosities
there, and above all for preventing, in the meantime, any
sudden catastrophe at Boston, now suffering under daily irrita-
tion of an army before their eyes, posted in their town, it may
graciously please his Majesty that immediate orders may be
despatched to General Gage for removing his Majesty's forces

CHAP. XXI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

423

from the town of Boston as soon a.s the rigours of the season
and other circumstances indispensable to the safety and accom-
modation of said troops may render tlie same practicable."

Lord Chatham advocated his motion in a very pathetic speech,
anil was supported by speeches by the Marquis of Rockingham,
Lords Shelburne and Camden, and petitions from merchants
and manufacturers throughout the kingdom, and most promi-
nently by those of London and Bristol. But the motion was
negatived by a majority of 03 to 13.

In the course of his speech Lord Chatham said :

" Resistance to your acts wa.s as necessary as it was just ; and
your imperious doctrine of the omnipotence of Parliament and
the necessity of submission will be found equally impotent to
convince or to enslave.

" The means of enforcing the thraldom are as weak in practice
as they are unjust in principle. General Gage and the troops
under his command are penned up, pining in inglorious
inactivity. You may call them an army of safety and of
guard, but they are in truth an army of impotence; and to
make the folly equal to the disgrace, thov are an army of
irritation.

" But this tameness, however contemptible, caimot be censured ;
for the first drop of blood shed in civil and unnatural war will
make a wound that years, perhaps ages, may not heal. * *
The indiscriminate hand of vengeance has lumped together
innocent and guilty ; with all the formalities of hostility, has
blocked up the town of Boston, and reduced to beggary and
famine thirty thousand inhabitants. * *

"When your lordships look at the papers transmitted to us
from America — when you consider their decency, firmness, and
wisdom, you cannot but respect their cause, and wish to make
it your own. For myself, I must avow that in all my reading
— and I have read Thucydidos, and have studied the master-
states of the world — for solidity of reason, force of sagacity, and
wisdom of conclusion under a complication of difficult circum-
stances, no nation or body of men can stand in preference to
the General Congress of Philadelphia. The histories of Greece
and Rome give us nothing equal to it, and all attempts to im-
pose servitude upon such a mighty continental nation must be
vain, We shall be forced ultimately to retract ; let us retract

424

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXI.

while we can, not when we must. These violent Acts must be
repealed ; you will repeal them ; I pledge myself for it, I stake
my reputation upon it, that you will in the end repeal them.
Avoid, then, this humiliating necessity. With a dignity hecom-
ing your exalted station, make the first advance towards concord,
peace, and happiness; for that is your true dignity. C<»nccs-
sion comes with better grace from superior power, and estab-
lishes solid confidence on the foundations of afliection and grati-
tude. Be the first to spare ; throw down the weapons in your
hand.

" Every motive of justice and policy, of dignity and of
prudence, urges you to allay the ferment in America by a
removal of your troops from Boston, by a repeal of your Acts of
Parliament, and by demonstrating amiable dispositions towards
your colonies. * * If the Ministers persevere in thus misadvis-
ing and misleading the King, I will not say that the King is
betrayed, but I will pronounce that the kingdom is undone ; I
will not say that they can alienate the affections of his subjects
from his Crown, but I will affirm that, the American jewel out
of it, they will make the Crown not worth his wearing."*

The Earl of Suffolk, with whining vehemence, assured the
House that, in spite of Lord Chatham's prophecy, the Govern-
ment was resolved to repeal not one of the Acts, but to use
all possible means to bring the Americans to obedience ; and
after declaiming violently against their conduct, boasted as
" having been one of the first to advise coercive measures."

Ex-Lord Chancellor Camden excelled every other speaker,
except Lord Chatham, in the discussion; he declared in the
course of his speech :

"This I will say, not only as a statesman, politician, and philoso-
pher, but as a common lawyer : My lords, you have no right to

1 I
i I

* When the words of Lord Cljotham were reported to the Kinfj, liis
Majesty was " stung to the heart," and was greatly enraged, denouncing Lord
Chatham as an " abandoned politician," " the trumpet of sedition," and classi-
fied him with Temple and Grenville as "void of gratitude." The King
repelled and hated every statesman who advised him to conciliate the
colonists by recognising them as having the rights of British subjects. He
was the prompter of the most violent measures against them, and seemed to
think that their only rights and duties were to obey whatever he might com-
mand and the Parliament declare.

HAP. XXI.

CHAP. XXI.]

AND TOETR TI>fES.

425

tax America ; the natural rights of man, and the immutable laws
of nature, are all with that people. King, Lords, and CommonR
are fine-sounding names, but King, Lords, and Commons may
become tyrants as well as others. It is as lawful to resist the
tyranny of many as of one. Somebody once a.sked the great
Selden in what book you might find the law for resisting
tyranny. ' It has always Vxjen the custom of England,' answered
Selden, ' and the castom of England is the law of the land.' "

After several other speeches and much recrimination, and
a characteristic reply from Lord Chatham, his motion was re-
jected by a majority of sixty-eight to eighteen ; but the Duke
of Cumberland, the King's own brother, was one of the
minority. The King triumphed in what he called " the very
handsome majority," and said he was sure " nothing could
be more calculated to bring the Americans to submission." The
King's prediction of " submission " was followed by more united
and energetic resistance in the colonies.

But Lord Chatham, persevering in his efforts of conciliation,
notwithstanding the large majority against him, brought in, the
1st of February, a Bill entitled " A Provisional Act for Settling
the Troubles in America, and for Asserting the Supreme Legis-
lative Authority and Superintending Power of Great Britain
over the Colonies." The Bill, however, was not allowed to be
read the first time, or even to lie on the table, but was rejected
by a majority of sixty-four to thirty-two — a contempt of the
colonists and a discourtesy to the noble mover of the Bill with-
out example in the House of Lords.

In the meantime, petitions were presented to the Commons
from various towns in England, Scotland, and Ireland, by
manufacturers and merchants connected with the colonial trade.
On the 23rd of January, Alderman Hayley presented a petition
from the merchants of the City of London trading to America,
stating at great length the nature and extent of the trade,
direct and indirect, between Great Britain and America, and
the immense injury to it by the recent Acts of Parliament,
and praying for relief ; but this petition was conveyed to the
"Committee of Oblivion," as were petitions from the mer-
chants of Glasgow, Liverpool, Norwich and other towns, on
American affairs. These petitions, together with their advocates
in both Houses of Parliament, showed that the oppressive

426

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XXI.

■-■ ■ I

policy and abuse of the Americans were the acts of the
Ministry of the day, and not properly of the English people.

On the 26th of January, Sir George Saville offered to present
a petition from Dr. Franklin, Mr. Bollan, and Mr. Lee, stating
that they had been authorized by the American Continental
Congress to present a petition from the Congress to the King,
which his Majesty had referred to that House, and that they
were able to throw great light upon the subject ; they therefore
prayed to be heard at the bar in support of the petition. After
a violent debate the petition was rejected by a majority of 218
to 68.*

Lord North, on the 2nd of February, moved that the House
resolve itself into Committee on an address to his Majesty,
thanking him for having communicated to the House the several
papers relating to the present state of the British colonies, and
from which " we find that a part of his Majesty's subjects in

* Dr. Franklin had been Postmaster-General for America. Wlien lie
assumed the office the expenditure exceeded the receipts by ;£3,000 a year ;
under his administration the receipts gradually increased so as to become
a source of revenue. The day after hia advocacy ot the American petitions
before the Privy Council, he was dismissed from office. Referring to the
manner in which American petitions and their agents were treated by the
British Government, Dr. Franklin expressed himself as follows, in a letter
to the Hon. Thomas Gushing, Speaker of the House of Representatives of
Massachusetts :

"When I see that all petitions "''d complaints of grievances are so
odious to Government that even the .lere pipe which conveys them becomes
obnoxious, I am at a loss to know how peace and union is to be maintained
or restored between the different parts of the empire. Grievances cannot be
redressed unless they are known ; and they cannot be known but through
complaints and petitions. If these are deemed affronts, and the messengers
punished as offenders, who will henceforth send petitions ? and who will
deliver them ? It has been thought a dangerous thing in any State to
stop up the vent of griefs. Wise governments have therefore generally
received petitions with some indulgence even when but slightly founded.
Those who think themselves injured by their rulers are sometimes, by
a mild and prudent answer, convinced of their error. But where complain-
ing is a crime, hope becomes despair." (Collections of Massachusetts His-
torical Society.)

[Yet the Government of Massachusetts, under the first Charter, pro-
nounced petitions a crime, and punished as criminals those who petitioned
against the governmental acts which denied them the right of worship or
elective franchise because they were non-Congregationalists,]

CHAP. XXI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

427

the province of Massachusetts Bay have proceeded so far as to
resist the authority of the Supreme Legislature ; that a rebellion
at this time actually exists within the said province ; and we
see, with the utmost concern, that they have been countenanced
and encouraged by unlawful combinations and engagements
entered into by his Majesty's subjects in several other colonies,
to the injury and oppression of many of their innocent fellow-
subjects resident within the kingdom of Great Britain and the
rest of his Majesty's dominions. This conduct on their part
appears to us the more inexcusable when we consider with how
much temper his Majesty and the tw: Houses of Parliament
have acted in support of the laws and constitution of Groat
Britain ; to declare that we can never so far desert the trust
reposed in us as to relinquish any part of the sovereign au-
thority over all his Majesty's dominions which by law is
invested in his Majesty and the two Houses of Parliament, and
that the conduct of many persons, in several of the colonies, during
the late disturbances, is alone sufficient to convince us how neces-
sary this power is for the protection of the lives and fortunes
of 8,11 his Majesty's subjects ; that we ever have been and always
shall be ready to pay attention and regard to any real griev-
ances of any of his Majesty's subjects, which shall, in a dutiful
and constitutional manner, be laid before us ; and whenever any
of the colonies shall make proper application to us, we shall be
ready to affijrd them every just and reasonable indulgence ; but
that, at the same time, we consider it our indispensable duty
humbly \g besofif*h his Majesty to take the most effectual
measures to enforce due obedience to the laws and authority
of the Supro ar Legislature ; and that we beg leave, in the most
solemn manner, to assure his Majesty that it is our fixed resolu-
tion, at the hazard of our lives and properties, to stand by his
Majesty against all rebellious attempts, in the maintenance of
the just rights of his Majesty and the two Houses of Parlia-
ment."*

I have given Lord North's proposed address to the King at
length, in order that the reader may understand fully the policy
of the Government at that eventful moment, and the statements
on which that policy was founded.

* Parliamentary Register for 1775, p. 134.

mmr

428

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXI.

In relation to this address several things may be observed :
1. There is not the slightest recognition in it that the American
colonists have any constitutional rights whatever; they are
claimed as the absolute property of King and Parliament, irre-
spective of local Charters or Legislatures. 2. It is alleged that
Parliament always ha^d been and would be " ready to pay atten-
tion to any real grievances of any of his Majesty's subjects
which shall, in a dutiful and constitutional manner, be laid
before us," when " we shall be ready to afford them every just
and reasonable indvlgence." Yet every one of the hundreds
of petitions which had been sent from the colonies to England
for the previous ten years, complaining of grievances, was
rejected, under one pretext or another, as not having been
adopted or transmitted in " a dutiful and constitutional manner,"
If a Legislative Assembly proceeded to prepare a petition of
grievances to the King, the King's Governor immediately dis-
solved the Assembly; and when its members afterwards met
in their private capacity and embodied their complaints, their
proceedings were pronounced unlawful and seditious. When
township, county, and provincial conventions met and expressed
their complaints and grievances in resolutions and petitions,
their proceedings were denounced by the Royal representatives
as unlawful and rebellious; and when elected representatives
frr m all the provinces (but Georgia) assembled in Philadelphia
to express tlie complaints and wishes of all the provinces, their
meeting was declared unlawful, and their petition to the King
a collection of fictitious statements and rebellious sentiments,
though more loyal sentiments to the King, and more full recog-
nition of his constitutional prerogatives were never expressed
in any document presented to his Majesty. When that petition
of the Continental congregation was presented to the Earl
of Dartmouth, the head of the Colonial Department, he said
it was a decent and proper document, and he would have
pleasure in laying it before the King, who referred it to the
House of Commons ; yet Lord North himself and a majority
of his colleagues, backed by a majority of the House of
Commons, rejected that petition, refused to consider its state-
ments and prayers, but instead thereof proposed an address
which declared one of the colonies in a state of rebellion,
abetted by many in other colonies, advised military force

It II.

CHAP, XXI.]

ANT) THEIR TIMES.

429

was

against the colonies, and a.s.sured tlie King that they would
stand by hi.s Majesty " at the hazard of their lives and pro-
perties, against all rel)elliou,s attempts " to maintain the assumed
rights of his Majesty and the two Houses of Parliament over
the colonies. Yet not one of tliem ever afterwards risked a hair
of his head in the war which they advised to maintain such rights.
3. It was also as insulting and provoking to the colonists as
it was unjust, impolitic, and untrue, to assert that a rebellion
" existed in one province of America, and was encouraged by
many persons in other colonies ; " when not an act of rebellion
existed in any colony, but dissatisfaction, meetings to express
sentiments and adopt petitions founded upon their declining and
agreeing not to buy or drink tea, or buy or wear clothes of
English manufacture, until English justice should be done to
ti.em — all which they had a right as British subjects to do,
and for doing which those were responsible who compelled
them to such self-denying acts in the maintenance of constitu-
tional rights which are now recognised as such, at this day,
throughout all the colonies of the British empire.

It is not surprising that Lord North's motion and statements
were severely canvassed in the House of Commons. Mr. Dun-
ning, in reply to Lord North, " insisted that America was not
in rebellion, and that every appearance of riot, disorder, tumult,
and sedition the noble lord had so carefully recounted arose
not from disobedience, treason, or rebellion, but was created by
the conduct of those whose views were to establish despotism."
The Attorney-General (Thurlow) argued strongly against Mr.
Dunning's position that the Americans were not in rebellion,
and affirmed the contrary. General Grant said " he had served
in America, knew the Americans well, and was certain they
would not tight ; they would never dare to tight an English
army ; they did not possess any of the qualifications necessary
to make good soldiers ; and that a very slight force would be
more than sufficient for their complete reduction. He repeated
many of their commonplace expressions, ridiculed their en-
thusiasm in religion, and drew a disagreeable picture of their
manners and ways of living."

Mr. Fox entered fully into the question; pointed out the
injustice, the inexpediency, the folly of the motion ; prophesied
defeat on one side of the water, and ruin and punishment on

i'i

tf ;j ^ •,{ V

W7^

430

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXI.

'I.

the other. He said, among other things, " The reason why the
colonies objected to taxes by Parliament for revenue was, that
such revenue, in the hands of Government, took out of the hands
of the people that were to be governed that control which
every Englishman thinks he ought to have over the Govern-
ment to which his rights and interests are entrusted." He
moved an amendment to omit all the motion but the three first
lines, and to substitute : " But deploring that the information
which they (the papers) had afforded served only to convince
the House that the measures taken by his Majesty's servants
tended rather to widen than to heal the unhappy differences
which had so long subsisted between Great Britain and
America, and praying a speedy alteration of the same."

A long debate ensued ; after which the House divided on Mr.
Fox's amendment, which was lost by a majority of 304 to 105.
Lord North's motion was then adopted by a majority of 29G to
106.

Thus was war virtwdly proclaimed by the British Ministry
of the day and the Parliament (not by the people) of Great
Britain against the colonies.

On the 0th of February the report of Lord North's address
was made to the House, when Lord John Cavendish moved to
recommit the proposed address agreed to in the Committee. He
strongly recommended the reconsideration of a measure which
he deemed fraught with much mischief. He commented on
the proposed address ; thought it improper to assert that
rebellion exists ; mentioned the insecurity created by the Act
changing the Government of Massachusetts Bay ; said the
inhabitants knew not for a moment under what Government
they lived.

A long discussion ensued. On the side of absolute prerogative,
and of subduing the colonies to it by military force, spoke Mr.
Grenville, Captain Harvey, Sir William Mayne, Mr. Stanley, Mr.
Adam, Mr. Scott, the Solicitor-General (Wedderburn, who
grossly insulted Dr. Franklin before the Privy Council), Mr.
Mackworth, and Mr. Sawbridge. For the recommitting the ad-
dress, and in favour of a conciliatory policy towards the colonies,
spoke, besides Lord John Cavendish, the mover, Mr. Lumley, the
Lord Mayor of London, Rt. Hon. T. Townshend, Mr. Jolyffe, Lord
Truham, Governor Johnstone, Mr. Burke, and Colonel Barre.

HAP. XX [.

why the
was, that
the hands
'ol which
5 Govern-
ted." He
three first
formation

convince
I servants
lifFercnces
tain and

ed on Mr.
04 to 105.
of 29C to

Ministry
I of Great

s address
moved to
ttee. He
are which
lented on
3sert that
y the Act
said the
vernment

erogative,
spoke Mr.
anley, Mr.
urn, who
ncil), Mr.

cr the ad-
e colonies,
imley, the
yffe, Lord

Barre.

CHAP. XXI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

431

A conference was held between the Lords and Commons, and
the address was made the joint address of both Houses of
Parliament and presented to the King the 9th of February ; to
which the King replied as follows :

" My Lords and Gentlemen, — I thank you for this very dutiful
address, and for the affectionate and solemn assurances you give
me of your support in maintaining the just rights of my crown
and of the two Houses of Parliament ; and you may depend on
my taking the most speedy and effectual measures for enforc-
ing due obedience to the laws and authority of the Supreme
Legislature. When any of my colonies shall make a proper
and dutiful application, I shall be ready to concur with you in
affording them every just and reasonable indulgence ; and it is
my ardent wish that this disposition on our part may have a
happy effect on the temper and conduct of my subjects in
America."

The " disposition " of " indulgence," shown by Parliament
was simply the enforcement of its declaratory Act of absolute
power to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever, and " the
proper and dutiful application of any colony " was simply a
renunciation of all they had claimed as their constitutional
rights — a penitent prayer of forgiveness for having avowed and
maintained those rights, and of submitting all their rights and
interests to the absolute and merciful consideration of the King
and his Parliament, and that in the presence of the parlia-
mentary enactments and royal institutions of the previous ten
years. During those years, the Parliament, with royal consent,
had passed acts to tax the colonies without representation,
ignoring their own representative Legislatures ; had imposed
duties on goods imported, to be enforced by Courts which
deprived the colonists of the privilege of trial by jury ; had
made by Act of Parliament, without trial, the city of Boston
not only responsible for tea destroyed by seventeen individuals,
but blocked up its port not only until the money wa" paid, but
until the city authorities should give guarantee satisfactory to
the King that the tea and other revenue Acts should be enforced
— a proceeding unprecedented and unparalleled in the annals of
British history. Even in more arbitrary times, when the cities
of London, Glasgow, and Edingurgh were made responsible for
property lawlessly destroyed within their limit, it was only

432

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXI,

until after trial in each ease, in which those cities had an
opportunity of defence, and in neither case was the trade of
the city prohibited and destroyed. But the British Ministiy
and Parliament proceeded still further by superseding the most
essential provisions of the Charter of the Province of Massachu-
setts, and changing its whole constitution of government — a
high-handed act of arbitrary government which had not been
attempted by either Charles the First or Charles the Second in
regard to the same colony ; for when charges were brought, in
1G32, against the Massachusetts authorities, for having violated
the Charter, Charles the First appointed a commission, gave the
accused a trial, which resulted in their acquittal and promised
support by the King; and when they were accused again in
1634, the King did not forthwith cancel their Charter, but
issued a second commission, which, however, never reported, in
consequence of the commencement of the civil war in England,
which resulted in the death of the King. Then, in the restora-
tion, when charges were preferred, by parties without as well as
within uhe province, against the Government of Massachusetts,
King Charles the Second appointed a commission to examine
into the complaints, and at length tested their acts by trial in the
highest courts of law, and by whose decision their first Charter
was cancelled for repeated and even habitual violations of it.
But without a trial, or even commission of inquiry, the King
and Parliament changed the constitution of the province as
well as extinguished the trade of its metropolis.

CHAP. XXII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

433

CHAPTER XXII.

jvmce as

1775 Continued — Parliament Puoceeds to Pass an Act to Punish all
THE New England Colonies fob Sympathising with Massachu-
setts, BY Restricting their Trade to England and Depriving
them of the Newfoundland Fisheries.

The British Ministry and both Houses of Parliament do not
seem to have been satisfied with having charged Massachusetts
and its abettors with rebellion, and determined to punish the
recusant province and its metropolis accordingly, but they pro-
ceeded, during the same session, even to punish the other New
England provinces for alleged sympathy with the town of
Boston and the province of Massachusetts. The very day after
the two Houses of Parliament had presented their joint address
to the King, declaring the existence of " rebellion" in the
province of Massachusetts, abetted by many persons in the other
provinces. Lord North introduced a Bill into the Commons to
restrain the trade and commerce of the provinces of New
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, to
Great Britain and Ireland and the British Islands in the West
Indies, and to prohibit those provinces from carrying on any
fishery on the banks of Newfoundland. Lord North assigned
as the reason for this Bill that the three other New England
colonies "had aided and abetted their offending neighbours,
and were so near them that the intentions of Parliament would
be frustrated unless they were in like manner comprehended
in the proposed restraints." The Bill encountered much opposi-
tion in both Houses, but was passed by large majorities.

Shortly after passing this Bill to restrain the trade of the
New England colonies and to prohibit them the fisheries of
28

434

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXII,

Newfoundland, as well as from trading with foreign countries,
intelligence reached England that the middle and southern
colonies were countenancing and encouraging the opposition of
their New England bretliren, and a second Bill was brought
into Parliament and passed for imposing similar restraints on
the colonies of East and West Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland,
Virginia, South Carolina, and the counties on the Delaware.
It is singular to note in this Bill the omission of New York,
Delaware, and North Carolina. It was probably thought that
the omission of these colonies would cause dissension among
the colonies ; but the three exempted provinces declined the
distinction, and submitted to the restraints imposed upon the
other colonies.

Much was expected by Lord North and his colleagues from
the General Assembly of New York, which had not endorsed
the proceedings of the first Continental Congress, held in Phila-
delphia the previous September and October ; but at the very
time that the British Parliament was passing the Act which
exempted New York from the disabilities and punishments
inflicted on its neighbouring colonies, north and south, the
Legislative Assembly of New York was preparing a petition
and remonstrance to the British Parliament on the grievances
of all the colonies, not omitting the province of Massachusetts.
This petition and remonstrance of the General Assembly of
New York was substantially a United Empire document, and
expressed the sentiments of all classes in the colonies, except
the Royal governors and some office-holders, as late as May,
1775. The following extracts from this elaborate and ably-
written address will indicate its general character. The whole
document is given in the Parliamentary Register, Vol, I., pp.
473 — 478, and is entitled "The Representation and Remon-
strance of the General Assembly of the Colony of New York,
to the Honourable the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses of Great
Britain, in Parliament assembled." It commences as follows :

" Impressed with the warmest sentiments of loyalty and
affection to our most gracious Sovereign, and zealously attaclied
to his person, family, and government, we, his Majesty's faith-
ful subjects, the i*epresentatives of the ancient and loyal colony
of New York, behold with the deepest concern the unhappy
disputes subsisting between the mother country and her colonies.

HAP. XXII.

countries,
[ southern
loaition of
IS brought
itraints on
Maryland,

Delaware.
^e\y York,
ought that
jion among
Bclined the
i upon the

ajruea from
)t endorsed
Id in Phila-
at the very
Act which
(unishments
south, the
r a petition
grievances
ts.sachusetts.
Lsserahly of
ument, and
Qies, except
ite as May,
and ably-
The whole
Vol. I., pp.
i,nd Remon-
New York,
ses of Great
3 follows :
oyalty and
ily attached
esty's faith-
oyal colony
he unhappy
her colonies.

CHAP. XXII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

435

Convinced that the grandeur and strength of the British empire,
the protection and opulence of his Majesty's American domi-
nions, and the happiness and welfare of both, depend essentially
on a restoration of harmony and affection between them, we
feel the mo.st ardent desire to promote a cordial reconciliation
with the parent state, which can be rendered permanent and
solid only by ascertaining the line of parliamentary authority
and American freedom on just, equitable, and constitutional
grounds. To effect these salutary purposes, and to represent the
grievances under which we labour, by the innovations which
have been made in the constitutional mode of government
since the close of the last war, we shall proceed with that
firmness which becomes the descendants of Englishmen and a
people accu.stomed to the blessings of liberty, and at the same
time with the deference and respect which is due to your august
Assembly to show —

"That from the year 1683 till the above-mentioned period
the colony has enjoyed a Legislature consisting of three distinct
branches — a Governor, Council, and General Assembly ; under
which political frame the representatives of the people have
uniformly exercised the right of their civil government and the
administration of justice in the colony.

" It is therefore with inexpressible grief that we have of late
years seen measures adopted by the British Parliament subver-
sive of that Constitution under which the people of this colony
have always enjoyed the same rights and privileges so highly
and deservedly prized by their fellow-subjects in Great Britain —
a Constitution in its infancy modelled after that of the parent
state, in its growth more nearly assimilated to it, and tacitly
implied and vmdeniably recognised in the requisitions made by
the Crown, with the consent and approbation of Parliament.

" An exemption from internal taxation, and the exclusive right
of providing for the support of our own civil government and
the administration of justice in this colony, we esteem our
undoubted and inalienable rights as Englishmen ; but while we
claim these essential rights, it is with equal pleasure and truth
we can declare, that we ever have been and ever will be ready
to bear our full proportion of aids to the Crown for the public
service, and to make provision for the necessary purposes, in as
ample and adequate a manner as the circumstances of the colony

436

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[CHAP. XXII.

I^J

i i

la.

will admit. Actuated by these sentiments, while wo address
ourselves to a British House of Commons, which has ever been
80 sensible of the rights of the people, and so tenacious of
preserving them from violation, can it be a matter of surprise
that we should feel the most distressing apprehensions from the
Act of the British Parliament declaring their right to bind the
colonies in all causes whatsoever ? — a principle which has been
actually exercised by the statutes made for the sole and express
purpose of raising a revenue in America, especially for the
support of Government, and other usual and ordinary services
of the colonies.

" The trial by a jurj' of the vicinage, in causes civil and crimi-
nal arising within the colony, we consider as essential to the
security of our lives and liberties, and one of the main pillai-s
of the Constitution, and therefore view with horror the con-
struction of the statute of the tSoth of Henry the Eighth, as held
up by the joint address of both Houses of Parliament in 1709,
advising his Majesty to send for persons guilty of treasons and
misprisions of treasons in the colony of Massachusetts Bay, in
order to be tried in England ; and we are equally alarmed at
the late Act empowering his Majesty to send persons guilty of
offences in one colony to be tried in another, or within the
realm of England. * * *

" We must also complain of the Act of the 7th of George the
Third, chapter 59th, requiring the Legislature of this colony to
make provision for the expense of supplying troops quartered
amongst us, with the necessaries prescribed by that law; and hold-
ing up by another Act a suspension of our legislative powers
till we should have complied, as it would have included all
the effects of a tax, and implied a distrust of our readiness
to contribute to the public service.

" Nor in claiming these essential rights do we entertain the
most distant desire of independence of the parent kingdom.
We acknowledge the Parliament of Great Britain necessarily
entitled to a supreme direction and government over the whole
empire, for a wise, powerful, and lasting preservation of the
great bond of union and safety among all the branches ; their
authority to regulate the trade of the colonies, so as to make it
subservient to the interest of the mother country, and to

HAP. XXII.

ro addre8.s
ever been
riaciou» of
t' surprise
s from the
I bind the
li has been
nd express
,y for the
ry services

and crimi-
tial to the
ain pillai-s
r the con-
ith, as held
nt in 1709.
jasons and
tis Bay, in
ilarmed at
, guilty of
vsrithin the

Jeorge the

colony to

quartered

and hold-

ve powers

icluded all

readiness

,ertain the
kingdom,
necessarily
the whole
ion of the
!hes; their
10 make it
y, and to

CHAP. XXII.]

AND TIIEIll TIMES.

487

prevent its being injurious to the other parts of his Majesty '.i
dominions. * ♦ ♦

" Interested as wo must consider ourselves in wljatever may
affect our sister colonies, we cannot help feeling for the dis-
tresses of our brethren in the Mas.sachusetts Bay, from tlie
operation of the several Acts of Parliament pas-sed relative to
that province, and of earnestly remonstrating in their behalf. At
the same time, we also must express our disapprobation of the
violent measures that have been pursued in some of the colonies,
which can only tend to increase our misfortunes and to prevent
our obtaining redress.

" We claim but a restoration of those rights which we enjoyed
by general consent before the close of the last war ; we desire
no more than a continuation of that ancient government to
which we are entitled by the principles of the British Constitu-
tion, and by which alone can be secured to us the rights of
Englishmen. Attached by every tie of interest and regard to
the British nation, and accustomed to behold with reverence
and respect its excellent form of government, we harbour not
an idea of diminishing the power and grandeur of the mother
country, or lessening the lustre and dignity of Parliament.
Our object is the happiness which we are convinced can only
arise from the union of both countries. To render this union
permanent and solid, we esteem it the undoubted right of the
colonies to participate in that Constitution whose direct aim is
the liberty of the subject ; fully trusting that your honourable
House will listen with attention to our complaints, and redress
our grievances by adopting such measures as shall be found
most conducive to the general welfare of the whole empire, and
most likely to restore union and harmony amongst all its
different branches.

" By order of the General Assembly,

" John Cruger, Speaker.

"Assembly Chamber, City of New York, the 25th day of
March, 1775."

This representation and remonstrance having been presented
to the House of Commons, Mr. Burke moved, the 15th of May,
that it be brought up. He said " he had in his hand a paper of
importance from the General Assembly of the Province of New
York — a province which yielded to no part of his Majesty's

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

I.I

1.25

3.50

tii

lit

IIIIIM

IIIIIM
IIM
1^

2.2

1.8

1-4 ill 1.6

^c>

c^:

Photographic

Sdences
Corporation

23 W-ST P'.AIN STREET

WEBSTER, i^^.Y. 14S80

(716) 872-4503

^9)

c^^^

'ij)

' 4

I'.r

)

438

I J

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA. [CHAP. XXIL

dominions in its zeal for the prosperity and unity of the empire,
and which had ever contributed as much as any, in its proportion,
to the defence and wealth of the whole." " They never had before
them so fair an opportunity of putting an end to the unhappy
disputes with the colonies as at present, and he conjured them
in the most earnest manner not to let it escape, as possibly
the like might never return. He thought this application from
America so very desirable to the House, that he could have
made no sort of doubt of their entering heartily into his ideas,
if Lord North, some days before, in opening the budget, had
not gone out of his way to make a panegyric on the last Parlia-
ment, and in particular to commend as acts of lenity and mercy
those very laws which the Remonstrance considers as intolerable
grievances."

" Lord North spoke greatly in favour of New York, and said he
would gladly do everything in his power to show his regard to
the good behaviour of that colony ; but the honour of Parlia-
ment required that no paper should be presented to that House
which tended to call in question the unlimited rights of Par-
liament."

" Mr. Fox said the right of Parliament to tax America was
noi/ simply denied in the Remonstrance, but was coupled with
the exercise of it. The exercise was the thing complained of,
not the right itself. When the Declaratory Act was passed,
asserting the right in the fullest extent, there were no tumults
in America, no opposition to Government in any part of that
country ; but when the right came to be exercised in the manner
we have seen, the whole country was alarmed, and there was an
unanimous determination to oppose it. The right simply is not
regarded ; it is the exercise of it that is the object of opposition.
It is this exercise that has irritated and made almost desperate
several of the colonies. But the noble lord (Lord North) chooses
to be consistent, and is determined to make them all alike.
The only province that was moderate, and in which England
had some friends, he now treats with contempt. What will be
the consequence when the people of this moderate province are
informed of this treatment ? That representation which the
cool and candid of this moderate province had framed with
deliberation and caution is rejected — is not suffered to be pre-
sented — is not even to be read by the clerk. When they hear

wm^

)HAP. XXII.

the empire,
proportion,
' had before
le unhappy
jured them
as possibly
cation from
could have
io his ideas,
budget, had
last Parlia-
T and mercy
3 intolerable

, and said he
iis regard to
ir of Parlia-
I that House
^hts of Par-

CHAP. XXII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

439

merica was
joupled with
mplained of,
was passed,
no tumults
part of that
I the manner
;here was an
(imply is not
f opposition.
>st desperate
orth) chooses
sm all alike,
ich England
^''hat will be
province are
which the
framed with
i to be pre-
in they hear

this they will be inflamed, and hereafter be as distinguished
by their violence as they have hitherto been by their modera-
tion. It is the only method they can take to regain the
esteem and confidence of their brethren in the other colonies
who have been offended at their moderation. Those who
refused to send deputies to the Congress (at Philadelphia), and
trusted to Parliament, will appear ridiculous in the eyes of all
America. It will be proved that those who distrusted and defied
Parliament had made a right judgment, and those who relied
upon its moderation and clemency had been mistaken and
duped ; and the consequence of this must be, that every friend
the Ministers have in America must either abandon them, or lose
all credit and means of serving them in future."

"Governor Johnstone observed that when Mr. Wilkes had
formerly presented a petition full of matter which the House
did not think to enter into, they did not prevent the petition
being brought up, but separated the matter which they thought
improper from that which they thought ought to be heard.
The House might make use of the same selection here. Ministers
have long declared they wished for a dutiful application from
one of the colonies, and now it is come they treat it with scorn
and indignity. Mr. Cornwall had said it came only from
twenty-six individuals. These twenty-six are the whole
Assembly. When the question to adopt the measures recom-
mended by the Congress was negatived by a majority of one
only in this Assembly of twenty-six individuals, the Ministers-
were in high spirits, and these individuals were then repre-
sented as all America."

Lord North's amendment to reject the petition was adopted
by a majority of 186 to 67.*

" After having been foiled in the House of Commons," says
the royal historian, " it now remained to be decided whether that
colony's representations would meet with a more gracious recep-
tion in the House of Lords. But here the difficulty was still
greater than in the other House. The dignity of the peerage
was said to be insulted by the appellation under which it had
been presumed to usher those representations into that Assembly.
They were styled a Memorial ; such a title was only allowable

* Parliamentary Register, Vol. I., pp. 467 — 473.

*fs

A -n

440

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXH.

in transactions between princes and states independent of each
other, but was insufferable on the part of subjects. The answer
was that the lowest officer in the service had a right to present
a memorial, even to his Majesty, should he think himself
aggrieved ; with much more reason might a respectable body
present one to the House of Lords. But, exclusive of the
general reason that entitled so important a colony to lay such
a paper before them, the particular 'eason of its fidelity, in spite
of so many examples of defection, was alone a motive which
ought to supersede all forms, and engage their most serious
attention to what it had to propose.

" After sundry arguments of the same nature, the question
was determined against hearing the Memorial by forty-five
peers to twenty-five.

" When the rejection of these applications was announced to
the public, a great part of the nation expressed the highest dis-
content. They now looked forward with dejection and sorrow
at the prospect of mutual destruction that lay before them, and
utterly gave up all other expectations."*

It might be supposed that such a rejection of the petition of

♦ Dr. Andrew History of the War with America, Spain, and Holland,
Vol. I., pp. 275, 276.

" The Ministerial objections were that it was incompatible with the dignity
of the House to suffer any paper to be presented that questioned its supreme
authority. Particular notice was taken at the same time that the title of
Petition did not accompany this paper ; it was called a Representation and
Remonstrance, which was not the usual nor the proper manner of applica-
tion to Parliament. This singularity alone was sufficient to put a negative
on its presentation.

" To this it was replied, that the times were so dangerous and critical that
words and forms were no longer depending of attention. The question was
whether they thought the colony of New York was worthy of a hearing ? No
colony had behaved with so much temperateness and discretion. Notwith-
standing the tempestuousness of the times, and the general wreck of Britisli
authority, it had yet preserved a steady obedience to Government. Whik
every other colony was bidding defiance to Britain, this alone submissively
applied to her for redress of grievances. Was it consistent with policy, after
losing the good-will of all the other colonies, to drive this, through a needless
and punctilious severity, into their confederacy against this country ? Cowld
we expect, after such a treatment, that this colony could withstand the argu-
ments that would be drawn from our superciliousness to induce it to relin-
■({uish a conduct which was so ill requited ?" — Jb., p. 274.

[chap. XXII.

ient of each
The answer
\t to present
link himself
Bctable body
isive of the
' to lay such
slity, in spite
lotive which
most serious

the question
)y forty-five

CHAP. XXII.J

AND THEIR TIMES.

441

the most loyal colony in America would end the presentation
of petitions on the part of the colonies to the King and Parlia-
ment, and decide them at once either to submit to "the extinction
of their constitutional rights as British subjects, or defend them
by force. But though they had, both separately and unitedly,
declared from the beginning that they would defend their
rights at all hazards, they persisted in exhausting every possible
means to persuade the King and Parliament to desist from such
a system of oppression, and to restore to them those rights which
they enjoyed for more than a century — down to the close of
the French war in 1763.

nnounced to
highest dis-
and sorrow

re them, and

i petition of

, and Holland,

i^ith the dignity
led its supreme
lat the title of
•esentation and
ner of applica-
put a negative

nd critical that
e question was
I hearing ? No
ion. Notwith-
reck of Britisli
[iment. While
ic submissively
ith policy, after
)ugh a needless
untry ? Could
itand the argu-
uce it to relin-

442

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [OHAP. XXIII.

E'1
ii!

1/ '

1^ '

CHAPTER XXIII.

1775 Continued — The Second Continental Congress in America,

Six months after the General Assembly of New York
adopted its Memorial, and four months after its rejection by
both Houses of Parliament, the second Continental Congress
met, in the month of September, at Philadelphia.

This Assembly consisted of fifty- five members, chosen by
twelve colonies. The little colony of Georgia did not elect
delegates, but promised to concur with the sister colonies in the
effort to maintain their rights to the British Constitution.
Many of the members of this Assembly were men of fortune
and learning, and represented not only the general sentiments
of the colonies, but their wealth and respectability.* "The

* " Each of the three divisions by which the colonies were usually de-
signated — the New England, the Middle, and the Southern Colonies — liad on
the floor of Congress men of a positive character. New England presented
in John Sullivan, vigour; in Roger Sherman, sterling sense and integrity ;
in Thomas Cushing, commercial knowledge ; in John Adams (afterwards Presi-
dent of the United States), large capacity for public affairs ; in Samuel
Adams (no relation to John Adams), a great character with influence and
power to organize. The Middle Colonies presented in Philip Livingston,
the merchant prince of enterprise and liberality ; in John Jay, rare public
virtue, juridical learning, and classic taste ; in William Livingston, pro-
gressive ideas tempered by conservatism; in John Dickenson, "The Immortal
Farmer," erudition and literary ability ; in Caesar Rodney and Thomas
McKean, working power ; in James Duane, timid Whigism, halting, but
keeping true to the cause ; in Joseph Galloway, downright Toryism,
seeking control, and at length going to the enemy. The Southern Colonies
presented in Thomas Johnson, the grasp of a statesman ; in Samuel Chase,
activity and boldness; in the Rutledges, wealth and accomplishment; in
Christopher Gadsden, the genuine American; and in the Virginia delegation—

HAP. XXIII.

IN America.

New York
•ejection by
Ell Congress

chbsen by
d not elect
pnies in the
onstitution.
of fortune
sentiments
ty.* " The

e usually de-
)iiie8 — had on
md presented
nd integrity ;
rwards Presi-
; in Samuel
nfluence and

Livingston,
, rare public
ingston, pro-
'he Immortal
and Thomas

halting, but
ht Toryism,
kern Colonies
imuel Chase,
liahment; in
delegation—

CHAP. XXIIl.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

443

object, as stated in the credentials of the delegates, and especially
in those of the two most powerful colonies of Massachusetts and
Virginia, was to obtain the redress of grievances, and to restore
harmony between Great Britain and America, which, it was
said, was desired by all good men. It was the conviction that
this might be done through a Bill of Eights, in which the limits
of the powers of the colonies and the mother country might be
defined."*

Some three weeks after the assembling of Congress, before
the end of September, a petition to the King was reported, con-
sidered, and adopted. This petition was addressed to the King,
in behalf of the colonists, beseeching the interposition of the Royal
authority and influence to procure them relief from their afflict-
ing fears and jealousies, excited by the mea-sures pursued by his
Ministers, and submitting to his Majesty's consideration whether
it may not be expedient for him to be pleased to direct some

an illustrious group — in Richard Bland, wisdom ; in Edmund Pendleton,
practical talent ; in Peyton Randolph, experience in legislation ; in Richard
Henry Lee, statesmanship in union with high culture ; in Patrick Heniy,
genius and eloquence ; in Washington, justice and patriotism. * If,' said
Patrick Henry, 'you speak of solid information and sound judgment,
Washington unquestionably is the greatest man of them all.' Those others
who might be named were chosen on account of their fitness for the duties
which the cause required. Many had independent fortunes. They con-
stituted a noble representation of the ability, culture, political intelligence,
and wisdom of twelve of the colonies." (Frothingham's Rise of the Republic
of the Twelve States, pp. 360, 361.)

* 76., pp. 363, 364. . ■

After preliminary proceedings, Congress decided to appoint a Committee
to state the rights of the colonies, the instances in which those rights had
been violated, and the most proper means to obtain their restoration ; and
another Committee to examine and report upon the statutes affecting the
trade and manufactures of the colonies. On the same day, Samuel Adams,
in answer to the objection to opening the session with prayer, grounded on
the diversity of religious sentiment among the members, said he could
hear prayer from any man of piety and virtue, who was a friend of the
country, and moved that Mr. Duchii, an Episcopalian, might be desired
to read prayers for the Congress the following morning. The motion pre-
vailed. " The Congress sat with closed doors. Nothing transpired of their
proceedings except their organization and the rule of voting (each province
having an equal vote^. The members bound themselves to keep their
doings secret until a majority should direct their publication." — lb., pp.
364, 365.

■P

¥ '■

444

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIII.

mode by which the united applications of his faithful colonists
to the Throne may be improved into a happy and permanent
reconciliation ; and that in the meantime measures be taken for
preventing the further destruction of the lives of his Majesty's
subjects * and that such statutes as more immediately distress
any of his Majesty's colonies be repealed. " Attached to your
Majesty's person, family, and government," concludes this address
of the Congress, " with all the devotion that principle and affec-
tion can inspire, connected with Great Britain by the strongest
ties that can unite societies, and deploring every event that tends
in any degree to weaken them, we solemnly assure your Majesty
that we not only most ardently desire that the former harmony
between her and these colonies may be restored, but that a con-
cord may be established between them upon so firm a basis as
to perpetuate its blessings, uninterrupted by any future dissen-
sions, to succeeding generations in both countries." This petition
was read in Parliament the 7th of December, 1775, at the
request of Mr. Hartley, with several other petitions for pacifi-
cation ; but they were all rejected by the House of Commons.f

* The battles of Lexington and Bunker's Hill had occurred some months
before the adoption of this petition.

t Holmes' Annals, Vol. II., p. 232.

Richard Penn, late Governor of Pennsylvania, was chosen by Congress to
go to Great Britain, with directions to deliver their petition to the King
himself, and to endeavour, by his personal influence, to procure its favourable
reception ; but Mr. Penn, though from tae city whose Congress had twice
assembled, a man distinguished in the colony for moderation and loyalty,
and the appointed agent of the Congress, was not asked a question, even
when he presented the American petition to the Secretary of State for the
Colonial Department, and the King refused to see him. — lb., pp. 231, 232.

" Two days after the delivery of a copy of the petition of Congrer-,, the King
sent out a proclamation for suppressing rebellion and sedition. It set forth that
many of his subjects in the colonies had proceeded to open and avowed
rebellion by arraying themselves to withstand the execution of the law, and
traitorously levying war against him. ' There is reason,' so ran its words, * to
apprehend that such rebellion hath been much promoted and encouraged by
the traitorous correspondence, counsels, and comfort of divers wicked and
desperate persons within our realm.' Not only all the officera, civil and mili-
tary, but all the subjects of the realm were therefore called upon to disclose all
traitorous conspiracies, and to transmit to one of the Secretaries of State
' full information of all persons who should be found carrying on correspon-
dence with, or in any manner or degree aiding or abetting the persons now in
open arms and rebellion against the Government within any of the colonies

CHAP. XXIII.

iful colonists
I permanent
be taken for
lis Majesty's
tely distress
bed to your
i this address
jle and afFec-
ihe strongest
it tbat tends
'^our Majesty
aer harmony
t that a con-
a a basis as
iture dissen-
This petition
L775, at the
IS for pacifi-
Commons.f

some months

»y Congress to
a to the King
B its favourable
ress had twice
a and loyalty,
question, even
' State for the
)p. 231, 232.
?rer-, the King
t set forth that
X and avowed
the law, and
its words, ' to
sncouraged by
•s wicked and
civil and mili-
to disclose all
aries of State
on correspon-
)erson8 now in
)f the colonies

CHAP. XXIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

445

The answer of the King to the respectful and loyal constitu-
tional petition of Congress was to proclaim the petitioners
" rebels," and all that supported them " abettors of treason."*

in North America, in order to bring to condign punishment the authors,
perpetrators, and abettors of such traitorous designs.'

" The proclamation, aimed at Chatham, Camden, Barr<S, and their friends,
and the boldest of the Rockingham party, even more than against the
Americans, was read, but not with the customary ceremonies, at the Roya
Exchange, where it was received with a general hiss."

" The irrevocable publication having been made, Penn and Arthur Lee
were * permitted' on the 1st of September to present the original of the
American petition to Lord Dartmouth, who promised to deliver it to the
King ; but on their pressing for an answer, * they were informed that as it was
not received on the throne, no answer would be given.' Lee e.\pres8ed
sorrow at the refusal, which would occasion so much bloodshed; and the
deluded Secretary answered : ' If I thought it would be the cause of
shedding one drop of blood, I should never have concurred in it." (Ban-
croft's History of the United States, Vol. VIII., Chap, xlix., pp. 132, 133.)

Yet " on the 23rd of August Lord Dartmouth wrote to General Howe,
who (Aug. 2, 1775) superseded General Gage as the Commander of the
British army, that there was ' no room left for any other consideration but
that of proceeding against the twelve associated colonies in all respects with
the utmost rigour, as the open and avowed enemies of the State.' " (Froth-
ingham's Rise of the American Republic, p. 446. )

* " In the meantime (beginning of October) Richard Penn hastened to Eng-
land with the second petition. The King was now continually occupied with
American affairs. He directed that General Gage should be ordered ' instantly
to come' over, on account of the battle of Bunker Hill; thought Admiral
Graves ought to be recalled from Boston * for doing nothiii'g,' and completed
the arrangements for the employment of Hanoverians in America. Impatient
at the delay of the Cabinet in acting upon the proclamation agreed upon,
he put this in train by ordering one to be framed and submitted, August 18th,
to Lord North, and fixed the day for its promulgation. He was confirmed
in his extreme views by General Haldimand, fresh from America, who
reported that ' nothing but force could bring the colonies to reason,' and
that it would be dangerous to give ear to any proposition they might submit.
The King was convinced that it would be better ' totally to abandon the
colonies' than ' to admit a single shadow' of their doctrines (a). Five days

(«) A private letter by Captain Collins, lately arrived from London,
says that " on the I9th of August General Haldimand was closeted with his
Majesty two hours, giving him a state of the American colonies ; and that
in the course of the conversation his Majesty expressed his resolution in
these memorable words : * 1 am unalterably determined, at every hazard,
and at the risk of every consequence, to compel the colonies to absolute
submission.' "

446

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIII.

I ]

The first day of November brought to the Continental Con-
gress this proclamation, together with the intelligence that the
British army and navy were to be largely increased, and that
German mercenary soldiers from Hanover and Hesse had been
hired, as it was found impossible to obtain soldiers in England
to fight against their fellow-subjects in America.* On the same
day the intelligence was received from General Washington, in
Massachusetts, of the burning of Falmouth (now Portland). f

after penning these words, lie issued (August 23rd) a proclamation for
suppressing rebellion and sedition. (The purpose of this fatal proclamutiou
is given in the sub-note.)

This proclamation, uidike Lord North's plan, ignored the colonies as
political unities. It is levelled against individuals in rebellion, and all
within the realm who should aid them." (Frothingham's Rise of the Ameri-
can Republic, pp. 444 — 446. Donne's Correspondence of Geo. III.)

* " in the autumn of this year (1775), General Gage repaired to England,
and the command of the British army devolved on Sir William Howe. The
offer of this command had been first made to General Oglethorpe, his senior
officer, who agreed to accept the appointment on the condition that the
Ministry would authorize him to assure the colonies that justice should be
done to them. This veteran and patriotic General declared at the same
time that he knew the people of America well ; that they never would be
subdued by arms, but that their obedience would be ever secured by doing
them justice." (Holmes' Annuls, Vol. II., p. 235.)

" The Earl of Ettingham, who in his youth had been prompted by military
genius to enter the army, and had lately served as a volunteer in the
war between Russia and Turkey, finding that his regiment was intended for
America, renounced the profession which he loved, as the only means of
escaping the obligation of fighting against the cause of freedom. This
resignation gave ott'ence to the Court, and was a severe rebuke to the officers
who did not share his scruple ; but at London the Common Hall, in
June, thanked him publicly as 'a true Englishman ;' and the guild of mer-
chants in Dublin addressed him in the strongest terms of approbation."
(Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, xxxiii. pp. 343,
344.)

t " In compliance with a resolve of the Provincial Congress to prevent
Tories from conveying out their ettects, the inhabitants of Falmouth, in the
north-eastern part of Massachusetts, had obstructed the loading of a mast ship.
The destruction of the town was determined on as a vindictive punishment.
Captain Mowat, detached for that purpose with armed* vessels by Admiral
Graves, arrived off the place on the evening of the 17th of October. He
gave notice to the inhabitants that he would give them two hours 'to
remove the human species,' at the end of which time a red pendant would
be hoisted &t the maintop-gallant mast-head ; and that on the least resistance,
he should be freed from all humanity dictated by his orders or his inclination.

CHAP. XXIII.]

AND THKIR TIMES.

447

The fiiinultaneous intelligence of the treatment of the second
petition of Congress, the Royal proclamation, the increase of
the army and navy, the employment of seventeen thousand
Hanoverians and Hessian mercenaries to subdue America, and
the burning of Falmouth, produced a great sensation in Congress

^-¥

Upon being inciuiivd of by three gentlemen who went on lioanl hiH wliip tor
thttt jmrpoae respecting the reason of this extruonUnary HiiiiunouH, he
replied tliut he had orders to set on fire all the seaport towns from lioston to
Halifax, and that he supposed New York was alrea<ly in ashes. He could
dispense with his orders, he said, on no terms but the compliance of the
inhabitants to deliver up their arms and ammunition, and their sending on
board a supply of provisions, four carriage guns, and the same number of
the principal persons in the town as hostages ; that they should engage not to
unite with their country in any opposition to Britain ; and he assured them
that on a refusal of these conditions he would lay their town in ashes within
three hours. Unprepared for the attack, the inhabitants by entreaty ol)tained
the suspension of an answer until morning, and employed this interval in
removing their families and effects. Considering opposition as unavailing,
they made no resistance. The next day. Captain Mowat commenced a
furious cannonade and bombardment ; and a great number of people standing
on the heights were spectators of the conflagration, which reduced many of
them to penury and despair ; 139 dwelling-houses and 278 stores were burnt.
Other seaports were threatened with conflagration, but escaped ; Newport,
on Rhode Island, was compelled to stipulate for a weekly supply, to avert it."
(Holmes' Annals, Vol. II., pp. 219, 220.)

Mr. Bancroft's account of this transaction is as follows : " In the
previous May, Mowat, a naval officer, had been held prisoner for a few hours
at Falmouth, now Portland ; and we have seen Linzee, in a sloop of war,
driven with loss from Gloucester. It was one of the last acts of Gage to plan
with the Admiral how to wre^k vengeance on the inhabitants of both those
ports. The design against Gloucester was never carried out ; but Mowat, in
a ship of sixteen guns, attended by three other vessels, went up the harbour of
Portland, and after a short parley, at half-past nine on the morning of the
16th of October, he began to fire upon the town. In five minutes several
houses were in a blaze ; parties of marines had landed, to spread the con-
flagration by hand. All sea-going vessels were burned except two, which
were carried away. The cannonade was kept up till after dark. St. Paul's
Church, the public buildings, and about one hundred and thirty dwelling-
houses, three-fourths of the whole, were burned down ; those that remained
standing were shattered by balls and shells. By the English account the
destruction was still greater. At the opening of a severe winter, the inhabi-
tants were turned adrift in poverty and misery. The wrath of Washing-
ton was justly kindled as he heard of these ' savage cruelties,' this new
' exertion of despotic barbarity.' " (History of the United States, Vol. VIII.,
Chap, xlvii., p. 113.)

448

TIIK LOYALISTS OF AMEUICA [CHAP. XXIU.

and throughout the colonies. Some of the New England mem-
bers of the Congress, especially John and Samuel Adams, had
long given up the idea of reconciliation with England, and had
desired independence. This feeling was, however, cherished hy
very few members of the Congress ; but the startling intelli-
gence caused many members to abandon all hope of reconcilia-
tion with the mother country, and to regard independence as
the only means of preserving their liberties. Yet a large
majority of the Congress still refused to entertain the proposi-
tion of independence, and awaited instructions from their con-
stituents as to what they should do in these novel and painful
circumstances. In the meantime the Congress adopted energetic
measures for the defence of the colonies, and the effectiveness
of their union and government. In answer to applications from
South Carolina and New Hampshire for advice on account of
the practical suspension of their local Government, Congress
" recommended " each province " to call a full and free repre-
sentation of the people, and that the representatives, if they
think it necessary, establish such a form of government as in
their judgment will best promote the happiness of the people,
and most effectually secure peace and good-will in the province
during the continuance of the present dispute betiueen Oreat
Britain and the colonies. The province of Massachusetts had
refused to acknowledge any other local Government than that
which had been established by the Royal Charter of William
and Mary, and which had never been cancelled by any legal
proceedings ; and they continued to elect their representatives,
and the representatives met and appointed the Council, and
acted under it, as far as possible, irrespective of General Gage
and the officers of his appointment.

The colonies were a unit as to their determination to defend
by force and at all hazards their constitutional rights and
liberties as British subjects ; but they were yet far from being
a unit as to renunciation of all connection with England and
the declaration of independence. The Legislature of Pennsyl-
vania was in session when the news of the rejection of the
second petition of Congress and the King's proclamation arrived,
and when fresh instructions were asked from constituents of the
members of Congress ; and even under these circumstances,
Mr. Dickenson, " The Immortal Farmer," whose masterly letters

HAP. XX ni.

CHAP. XXIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

449

Imd <lone so much to enli<.fhton tho public mind of both England
and America on tho rights of the colonies and the unconstitu-
tional acts of the British Administration and Parliament,
repelled the idea of separation from England. The Legislature
ot Pennsylvania continued to recjuire all its mend)ers to sub-
scribe the old legal (jualitication which included the promise of
allegiance to George tho Third ; " so that Franklin," says Ban-
croft, " though elected for Philadelphia, through the Irish and
Presbyterians, would never take his seat. Dicken.son had been
returned for the county by an almost unanimous v^oto." The
Legislature, on the 4th of November, elected nine delegates to
the Continental Congres.s. Of these, one was too ill to serve ;
of the rest, " Franklin stood alone as the unht ' iting champion
of independence; the majority remained to the last its opjw-
nenta. On the 9th, Dicken.son reported ar .' oarrixnl the f' "owing
instructions to the Penn.syl /mia delegates ; ' Wo dirict that you
exc^* >' »ur utmost endeavours to agree upon . nd recommend
such measures a;:; you shall judge to atford tlie best prospect of
obtaining redress of American grievances, and restoring that
union and harmony between Great Britain and the colonics so
essential to the welfare and happiness of both countries.
Though the oppressive measures of the British Parliament and
Administration have compelled us to resist their violence by
force of arms, yet we strictly enjoin you, that you, in behalf of
this colony, dissent from and utterly reject any propositions,
should such be made, that may cause or lead to a separation
from our mother country, or a change of the form of this
government.* The influence of the measure was wide. Dela-
ware was naturally swayed by the example of its more power-
ful neighbour ; the party of the proprietary of Maryland took
courage ; in a few weeks the Assembly of New Jersey, in like
manner, held back the delegates of that province by an equally
stringent declaration."* After stating that the Legislature of
Pennsylvania, before its adjournment, adopted rules for the
volunteer battalions, and appropriated eighty thousand pounds
in provincial paper money to defray the expenses of military
preparation, Mr. Bancroft adds, that "extreme discontent led
the more determined to expose through the press the trimming

* Bancroft's History United States, Vol. VIII., Chap, xlix., pp. 138, 139.
29

,m *

450

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIII.

of the Assembly ; and Franklin encouraged Thomas Paine, an
emigrant t'rom England of the previous year, who waa master
of a singularly lucid and attractive style, to write an appeal to
the people of America in favour of independence."* " Yet the
men of that day had been born and educated as subjects of a
king ; to them the House of Hanover was a symbol of religious
toleration, the British Constitution another word for the security
of liberty and property under a representative government.
They were not yet enemies of monarchy; they had as yet
turned away from considering whether well-organized civil
institutions could not be framed for wide territories without
a king ; and in the very moment of resistance they longed to
escape the necessity of a revolution. Zubly, a delegate from
Georgia, a Swiss by birth, declared in his place ' a republic to
be little better than a government of devils ; ' shuddered at the
idea of separation from Britain as fraught with greater evils
than had yet been sufFered."+

* In this appeal of Paine's, monarchy was for the first time attacked in
America, except by the rulers of the Massachusetts colony, under the first
Charter. Some of Paine's words were, that " In the early ages of the world,
mankind were equals in the order of creation ; the heathen introduced the
government of kings, which the will of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon
and the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproved. To the evil of monarchy
we have added that of hereditary succession ; and as the first is a lessening
of ourselves, so the second might put posterity under the government of a
rogue or a fool. Nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently
turn it into ridicule. England since the Conquest hath known some few good
monarchs, but groaned beneath a much larger number of bad ones." '' In
short, monarchy and succession have laid not England only, but the world,
in blood and ashes." (Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. VIII.,
Chap, xlix., pp. 236, 237.)

t But though Mr. Dickenson had done more than any other man in
America to vindicate colonial rights and expose the unconstitutional character
of the acts of the British Ministry and Parliament, he was opposed to a
'declaration of independence, like a majority of the colonists ; yet he advocated
resistance by force against submission to the Boston Port Bill, and the
suspension of the Massachusetts Charter, and both without a trial, as in
similar cases even under the despotic reigns of Charles the First and Second.
Mr. Bancroft blames Mr. Dickenson severely for the instructions of the
Pennsylvania Legislature to its nine delegates in the Continental Congress
in October, 1776 j but, writing under the date of the previous May, Mr.
Bancroft says : " Now that the Charter of Massachusetts had been impaired,
Dickenson did not ask merely relief from parliamentaij' taxation ; he required

M ;

CHAP. XXIII.

as Paine, an
I was master
an appeal to
* " Yet the
subjects of a
1 of religious
r the security
government.

had as yet
ganized civil
)ries without
ley longed to
lelegate from
' a rt public to
ddered at the

greater evils

ime attacked in

, under the first

jea of the world,

1 introduced the

ilared by Gideon

ril of monarchy

st is a lessening

government of a

not so frequently

m some few good

)ad ones." "In

, but the world,

ates, Vol. VIII.,

y other man in
utional character
is opposed to a
yet he advocated
•t Bill, and the
it a trial, as in
'irst and Second,
itructions of the
nental Congress
ivious May, Mr.
i been impaired,
ion ; he required

CHAP. XXIII.j

AND THEIR TIMES.

451

The exact time when the minds of the leading men in the
colonies, and the colonists, began to undergo a transition from
the defence of their constitutional liberties as British subjects
to their security by declaring independence of Great Britain,
seems to have been the receipt of the intelligence of the scorn-
ful rejection of the second petition of Congress, and of th«
King's proclamation, putting the advocates of colonial rights
out of the protection of the law, by declaring them rebels, and
requiring all public oflBcers, civil and military, to apprehend
them with a view to their punishment as such. Some indi-
viduals of eminence in the colonies had previously despaired of
reconciliation with England, and had regarded Independency as
the only hope of preserving their liberties, but these were the
exceptions : the leaders and colonists generally still hoped for
reconciliation with England by having their liberties restored, a.s
they were recognized and enjoyed at the ^lose of the French
war in 1763. They had regarded the King as their Father and
Friend, and laid all the blame upon his Ministers and Parlia-
ment, against whose acts they appealed to the King for the
protection of their rights and liberties. But it gradually trans-
pired, from year to year, that the King himself was the real
prompter of these oppressive acts and measures, and though
long discredited,* yet when the King ostentatiously announced
himself as the champion of the Parliament and its acts, his
determination to enforce by the whole power of the realm, the
absolute submission of the colonies ; and when all this intelli-
gence, so often repeated and doubted, was confirmed by the

security against the encroachments of Parliament on charters and laws.
The distinctness with which he spoke satisfied Samuel Adams himself, who
has left on record that the Farmer was a thorough Bostonian." (History of
the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, xxxvi., p. 377.)

* As late as May, 1775, after the bloody affair of Concord and Lexington,
Mr. Bancroft remarks :

" The delegates of New England, especially those from Massachusetts, could
bring no remedy fo the prevailing indecision (in the Continental Congress),
for they suffered from insinuations that they represented a people who were
republican in their principles of government and fanatics in religion, and
they wisely avoided the appearance of importunity or excess in their demands.

" As the delegates from South Carolina declined the responsibility of a
deci8''>n which would ha7c implied an abandonment of every hope of peace,
there could be no efficient opposition to the policy of again ueking th« rutora'

:' SJ

452

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIII.

li. '.

issue of the Royal proclamation, which it was known and
admitted that the King himself had urged and hastened, the
most sanguine advocates and friends of reconciliation were
astounded and began to despair ; and the idea of independence
was now boldly advocated by the press.

In 1773, Dr. Franklin said to the Earl of Chatham, " I never
heard from any person the least expression of a wish for
separation." In October, 1774, Washington wrote, " I am well
satisfied that no such thing as independence is desired by any
thinking man in America : on the contrary, that it is the ardent
wish of the warmest advocates for liberty that peace and
tranquillity, on constitutional grounds, may be restored, and the
horrors of civil discord prevented." Jefierson stated, " Before
the 19th of April, 1775 (the day of General Gage's attack on
Concord, and the Lexington affair), I never heard a whisper of a
disposition to separate from Great Britain." And thirty-seven
days before that wanton aggression of General Gage,* John
Adams, in Boston, published :

" That there are any who pant after independence is the
greatest slander on the Province." Sparks, in a note entitled
" American Independence," in the second volume of the Writings

Hon of A merican liberty through the mediation of the King, This plan had tlie
great advantage over the suggestion of an immediate separation from Britain,
that it could be boldly promulgated, and was in harmony with the general
wish ; for the people of the continent, taken collectively, had not as yet ceased
to cling to their old relations ^oith their parent land ; and so far from scheming
independence, now that independence was become inevitable, they postponed
the irrevocable decree and still longed that the necessity for it might pass by."
(History of the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, xxxvi., pp. 376, 377.)

* Lord Dartmouth (the Secretary of State for the Colonies) said : " Tlie
attempts of General Gage at Concord are fatal. By that unfortunate event
the happy moment of advantage is lost."

" The condemnation of Gage was universal. Many people in England
were from that moment convinced that the Americans could not be reduced,
and that England must concede their independence. The British force, if
drawn together, could occupy but a few insulated points, while all the rest
would be free ; if distributed, would be continually harassed and destroyed
in detail.

" These views were frequently brought before Lord North. That stateaman
WM endowed with Rtrong affections, and was happy in his family, in his
fortune and abilities ; in his public conduct, he and he alone among Ministers
was sensible to the reproaches of remorse ; and he cherished the sweet feel-

CHAP. XXIII.

CHAP. XXIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

of Washington, remarks : " It is not easy to determine at what
precise date the idea of independence was first entertained by
the principal persons in America." Samuel Adams, after the
events of the 19th of April, 1775, was prepared to advocate
it. Members of the Provincial Congress of New Hampshire
were of the same opinion. President Dwight, of Yale College
(Travels in New England and New York, Vol. I., p. 159), says :
" In the month of July, 1775, I urged in conversation with
several gentlemen of great respectability, firm Whigs, and my
intimate friends, the importance and even necessity of a declara-
tion of independence on the part of the colonies, but found
them disposed to give me and my arguments a hostile and con-
temptuous, instead of a cordial reception. These gentlemen
may be considered as the representatives of the great ho(\j of
thinking men of this country." In the note of Sparks are
embodied the recollections of Madison, Jay, and others, and the
contemporary statements of Franklin and Penn. They are in
harmony with the statements and quotations in the text, and
sustain the judgment of Dr. Ramsay (History of South
Carolina, Vol. I., p. 1G4), who says: "Till the rejection of
the second petition of Congress, the reconciliation with the
mother country was the unanimous wish of the Americans
generally."*

When Washington heard of the afiair of Concord and Lexing-
ton, April 19, 1775, he wrote, in his own quiet residence at
Mount Vernon, " Unhappy is it to reflect that a brother's sword
should be sheathed in a brother's breast, and that the once
happy and peaceful plains of America are to be either drenched
with blood or inhabited by slaves. Sad alternative ! But, can
a virtuous man hesitate in his choice ?" Mr. Bancroft says :
" The reply to Bunker Hill from England reached Washington
before the end of September (1775) ; and the manifest deter-
mination of the Ministers to push the war by sea and land,
with the utmost vigour, removed from his mind every doubt
of the necessity of independence. Such also was the conclu-

ings of human kindness. Appalled at the prospect, he wished to resign.
But the King would neither give him release, nor relent towards the Ameri-
cans. How to subdue the rebels was the subject of consideration." (Ban-
croft's History of the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, xxxiii., pp. 345, 346.)
* Frothingham's Rise of the American Republic, p. 453, in a note.

i*i!

sP-

454

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIH.

sion of Greene ; and the army was impatient when any of the
chaplains prayed for the King."*

It was thus that King George the Third, by his own acts,
lost the confidence and affection of his loyal subjects in America,
and hastened a catastrophe of which he had been repeatedly and
faithfully warned, and which none deprecated more generally
and earnestly than the leaders and inhabitants of the American
colonies ; but who determined, and openly declared their deter-
mination in every petition to the King and Parliament for ten
years, that, if necessary, at all hazards, they would maintain and
defend their constitutional rights as Englishmen.

Now, at the close of the year 1775, and before entering upon
the eventful year of 1776, when the American colonies adopted
the Declaration of Independence, let us recapitulate the events
which thus brought the mother country and her colonial
offspring face to face in armed hostility.

1. No loyalty and affection could be more cordial than that
of the American colonies to England at the conquest of Canada
from the French, and the peace of Paris between Great Britain
atnd France in 1763. Even the ancient and traditional disaffec-
tion of Massachusetts to England had dissolved into feelings of
gratitude and respect and avowed loyalty. Indeed, loyalty and
attachment to England, and pride in the British Constitution,
was the universal feeling of the American colonies at the close
of the war which secured North America to England, and for
the triumphant termination of which the American colonies had
raised and equipped no less than twenty-five thousand men, with-
out whose services the war could not have been accomplished.

♦ History of the United States, Vol. VIII., Chap, xlvii., p. 108.

In November, 1775, Jefferson wrote to a refugee : " It is an immense mis-
fortune to the whole empire to have a king of such a disposition at such a
time. We are told, and everything proves it true, that he is the bitterest
enemy we have ; his Minister is able, and that satisfies me that ignorance or
wickedness somewhere controls him. Our petitions told him, that from our
King there was but one appeal. After colonies have drawn the sword, there
is but one step more they can take. That step is now pressed iipon us by
the measures adopted, as if they were afraid we would not take it. There is
not in the British Empire a man who more cordially loves union with Great
Britain than I do ; but by the God that made me, I will cease to exist
before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament
propose ; and in this I speak the sentiments of America." — lb., p. 143.

iiM.

■nnHMiMM

[chap. XXIII.

a any of the

his own acts,
is in America,
jpeatedly and
ore generally
the American
d their deter-
iment for ten
maintain and

jntering upon

onies adopted

ite the events

her colonial

ial than that
est of Canada
Great Britain
ional disaffec-
ito feelings of
i, loyalty and
Constitution,
at the close
■land, and for
a colonies had
nd men, with-
complished.

>. 108.

m immense mis-
jsition at such a
e is the bittarest
hat ignorance or
n, that from our
the sword, there
ssed upon us by
,ke it. There is
inion with Great
11 cease to exist
tiah Parliament
b., p. 143.

CHAP. XXIII.]

AND THEIB TIMES.

455

2. The first five years of the war with France in America
had been disastrous to Great Britain and the colonies, under a
corrupt English Administration and incompetent generals ; but
after the accession of the Earl of Chatham to the Premiership
the tide of war in America turned in favour of Great Britain
by the appointment of able generals — Amherst and Wolfe —
and Admiral Boscawen and others, and by adopting constitu-
tional methods to develop the resources of the colonies for
the war ; and in two years the French pow er was crushed
and ceased to exist in America. When the Crown, through its
Prime Minister, made requisition to the Colonial Legislatures
for money and men, as was the usage in England, the Colonial
Legislatures responded by granting large sums of money, and
sending into the field more than twenty thousand soldiers, who,
by their skill, courage, and knowledge of the country, and
its modes of travel and warfare, constituted the pioneers,
skirmishers, and often the strongest arm of the Britsh army,
and largely contributed in every instance to its most splendid
victories. Their loyalty, bravery, and patriotism extracted
grateful acknowledgments in both Houses of Parliament, and
even from the Throne ; while the colonies as cordially acknow-
ledged the essential and successful assistance of the mother
country. At no period of colonial history was there so deep-
felt, enthusiastic loyalty to the British Constitution and
British connection as at the close of the war between France
and England in 1763. But in the meantime George the Third,
after his accession to the throne in 1760, determined not only to
reign over but to rule his kingdom, both at home and abroad.
He ignored party government or control in Parliament ; he
resolved to be his own Prime Minister — in other words, to be
despotic ; he dismissed the able and patriotic statesmen who
had wiped off the disgrace inflicted on British arms and prestige
during the five years of the French and Indian war in the
American colonies, and had given America to England, and
called men one after another to succeed them, who, though
in some instances they were men of ability, and in one or two
instances were men of amiable and Christian character, were
upon the whole the most unscrupulous and corrupt statesmen
that ever stood at the head of public aflfairs in England, and
the two Parliaments elected under their auspices were the most

iili=':i

■'f^m'

456

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIII.

i) '

f , i .^

'5«

l|:

venal ever known in British history. The King regarded as a
personal enemy any member of Parliament who opposed his
policy, and hated any Minister of State (and dismissed him as soon
as possible) who offered advice to, instead of receiving it from,
his Royal master and implicitly obeying it ; and the Ministers
whom he selected were too subservient to the despotism and
caprices of the Royal will, at the frequent sacrifice of their
own convictions and the best interests of the empire.

For more than a hundred years the colonies had provided for
and controlled their own civil, judicial, and military adminis-
tration of government; and when the King required special
appropriations of money and raising of men during the Seven
Years' War, requisitions were made by his Ministers in his
name, through the Governors, to the several Provincial Legisla-
tures, which responded with a liberality and patriotism that
excited surprise in England at the extent of their resources in
both money and men. But this very development of colonial
power excited jealousy and apprehensions in England, instead
of sympathy and respect ; and within a twelvemonth after the
treaty of Paris, in 1763, the King and his Ministers determined
to discourage and crush all military spirit and organization in
the colonies, to denude the Colonial Legislatures of all the attri-
butes of British constitutional free government, by the British
Government not only appointing the Governors of the colonies,
but by appointing the members of one branch of the Legisla-
ture, by appointing Judges as well as other public officers to
hold office during the pleasure of the Crown, and fixing and
paying their salaries out of moneys paid by colonists, but levied
not by the Colonial Legislatures, but by Acts of the British
Parliament, contrary to the usage of more than a century ; and
under the pretext of defending the colonies, but really for the
purpose of ruling them ; proposing an army of 20 regiments of
600 men each, to be raised and officered in England, from the
penniless and often worse than penniless of the scions and rela-
tives of Ministers and members of Parliament, and billeted upon
the colonies at the estimated expense of £100,000 sterling a
year, to be paid by the colonies out of the proceeds of the
Stamp and other Acts of Parliament passed for the purpose of
raising a revenue in the colonies for the support of its civil and
military government.

IHAP. XXIII.

CHAP. XXIII.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

457

No government is more odious and oppressive than that
which has the mockery of the form of free government with-
out its powers or attributes. An individual despot may be
reached, terrified, or persuaded, but a despotic oligarchy has no
restraint of individual responsibility, and is as intangible in its
individuality as it is grasping and heartless in its acts and
policy. For governors, all executive officers, judges, and legis-
lative councillors appointed from England, together with mili-
tary officers, 20 regiments all raised in England, the military
commanders taking precedence of the local civil authorities,
all irresponsible to the colonists, yet paid by them out of taxes
imposed upon them without their consent, is the worst and
most mercenary despotism that can be conceived. The colonists
could indeed continue to elect representatives to one branch of
their Legislatures; but the Houses of Assembly thus elected
were powerless to protect the liberties or properties of their
constituents, subject to abuse and dissolution in case of their
remonstrating against unconstitutional acts of tyranny or advo-
cating rights.

Such was the system passionately insisted upon by King
George the Third to establish his absolute authority over his
colonial subjects in America, and such were the methods devised
by his venal Ministers and Parliament to provide places and
emoluments for their sons, relatives, and dependents, at the
expense of the colonists, to say nothing of the consequences to
the virtue of colonial families from mercenary public officers
and an immoral soldiery.

The American colonies merited other treatment than that
which they received at the hands of the King and Parliament
from 1763 to 1776 ; and they would have been unworthy of the
name of Englishmen, and of the respect of mankind, had they
yielded an iota of the constitutional rights of British subjects,
for which they so lawfully and manfully contended. What the
old colonies contended for during that eventful period was
substantially the same as that which has been demanded and
obtained during the present century by the colonies of the
Canadian Dominion, under the names of " local self-govern-
ment " or " responsible government," and which is now so fully
enjoyed by them. Had Queen Victoria reigned in England
instead of George the Third, there would have been no Decla-

f f-

458

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIII.

I' 'I

ration of Independence, no civil war in America, but the thir-
teen American provinces would have remained as affectionately
united to the mother country, and as free as are the provinces
of the Canadian Dominion at this day.

George the Third seems to me to have been, before and
during the American Revolution, the worst Sovereign for the
colonies that ever occupied the throne of England ; but after
and since that revolution he was the best of Sovereigns for
the remaining British colonies of North America. He learned
lessons during that revolution which essentially changed his
character as the ruler of colonies, though I am not aware that
he ever formally confessed the change through which he had
passed. It is therefore quite reconcilable that he should be
regarded by the old American colonies, now the United States,
as a tyrant, while his name is revered and loved by the
colonists of the Canadian Dominion as the Father of his people.

{ '-

HAP. XXIII.

CHAP. XXIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

459

CHAPTER XXIV.

1775 AND BEGINNING OF 1776 — PREPARATION IN ENGLAND TO REDUCE

THE Colonists to Absolute Submission — Self-asserted Authority
OF Parliament.

The eventful year of 1775 — the year preceding that of the
American Declaration of Independence — opened with increased
and formidable preparations on the part of England to reduce
the American colonies to absolute submission. The ground of
this assumption of absolute power over the colonies had no
sanction in the British Constitution, much less in the history of
the colonies ; it was a simple declaration or declaratory Bill by
the Parliament itself, in 1764, of its right to bind the colonies in
all cases whatsoever, and no more a part of the British Constitu-
tion than any declaration of Parliament in the previous century
of its authority over tl e monarchy and the constitution and
existence of the House 0^' Lords. Assuming and declaring an
authority over the American colonies which Parliament had
never before, and which it has never since exercised, and
which no statesman or political writer of repute at this day
regards as constitutional, Parliament proceeded to tax the
colonies without their consent, to suspend the legislative powers
of the New York Legislature, to close the port of Boston, to
annul and change all that was free in the Charter Government
of Massachusetts, to forbid the New England colonies the
fisheries of Newfoundland, and afterwards to prohibit to all
the colonies commerce with each other and with foreign
countries ; to denounce, as in the Royal Speech to Parliament
of the previous October, as " rebellion," remonstrances against
and opposition to these arbitrary and cruel enactments; to

460

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIV.

Si
ii

appeal to Holland and Russia (but in vain) for the aid of
foreign soldiers, and to hire of German blood-trading princes
seventeen thousand mercenary soldiers to butcher British
subjects in the colonies, even to liberate slaves for the murder
of their masters, and to employ savage Indians to slaughter
men, women, and children.

All this was done by the King and his servants against the
colonies before the close of the year 1775, while they still dis-
claimed any design or desire for independence, and asked for
nothing more than they enjoyed in 17G3, after they had given
the noblest proof of liberality and courage, to establish and
maintain British supremacy in America during the seven years'
war between England and France, and enjoyed much less of
that local self-government, immunity, and privilege which every
inhabitant of the Canadian Dominion enjoys at this day.

During that French war, and for a hundred years before, the
colonists had provided fortresses, artillery, arms, and ammuni-
tion for their own defence ; they were practised marksmen, far
superior to the regular soldiery of the British army, with the
character and usages of which they had become familiar. They
offered to provide for their own defence as well as for the support
of their civil government, both of which the British Government
requires of the provinces of the Canadian Dominion, but both
of which were denied to the old provinces of America, after the
close of the seven years' war with France. The King and his
Ministers not only opposed the colonies providing for their own
defence, but ordered the seizure of their magazines, cannon, and
arms. General Gage commenced this kind of provocation and
attack upon the colonists and their property ; seized the arms of
the inhabitants of Boston; spiked their cannon at night on
Fort Hill ; seized by night, also, 13 tons of colonial powder stored
at Charleston ; sent by night an expedition of eight hundred
troops, twenty miles to Concord, to seize military provisions,
but they were driven back to Lexington with the loss of 65
killed and 180 wounded, and on the part of the colonists 50
killed and 34 wounded. This was the commencement of a
bloody revolution, and was soon followed by the battle of
Bunker's Hill, in which, "on the part of the British," says
Holmes, "about 3,000 men were engaged in this action; and
their killed and wounded amounted to 1,054. The number of

TAP. XXIV.

CHAP. XXIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES

461

Americans in this engagement was 1,500; and their killed,
wounded, and missing amounted to 453."*

In each of these conflicts the attack was made and the first
shot was fired on the part of the British troops. Of this, abun-
dant evidence was forthwith collected and sent to England.
It was carefully inculcated that in no instance should the
colonists attack or fire the first shot upon the British troops ;
that in all cases they should act upon the defensive, as their cause
was the defence of their rights and property; but when
attacked, they retaliated with a courage, skill, and deadly eft'ect
that astonished their assailants, and completely refuted the
statements diligently made in England and circulated in the
army, that the colonists had no military qualities and would
never face British troops.-}*

* Annals, etc., Vol. 11., p. 211. The annalist adds in a note, that "Of
the British 226 were killed and 828 wounded ; 19 commissioned officers
being among the former, and 70 among the latter. Of the Americans, 139
were killed and 314 wounded and missing. The only provincial officers of
distinction lost were General Joseph Wairen, Col. Gardner, Lieut.-Col.
Parker, and Messrs. Moore and McClany."

t The royal historian, Andrews, gives the following or English account of
the battle of Bunker's Hill, together with the circumstances which preceded
and followed it :

(preliminary statements.)

" On the 12th of June (1775), a proclamation was issued by the British
Government at Boston, offering a pardon, in the King's name, to all who laid
down their arms and returned to their homes and occupations. Two persons
only were excepted — Mr. Samuel Adams and Mr. John Hancock — whose guilt
was represented as too great and notorious to escape punishment. All who did
not accept of this offer, or who assisted, abetted, or corresponded with them,
were to be deemed guilty of treason and rebellion, and treated accordingly.
By this proclamation it was declared that as the Courts of Judicature were
shut, martial law should take place, till a due course of justice could be
re-established.

" But this act of Government was as little regarded as the preceding. To
convince the world how firmly they were determined to persevere in their
measures, and how small an impression was made by the menaces of Britain,
Mr. Hancock, immediately after his proscription, was chosen President of
the Congress. The proclamation had no other effect than to prepare people's
minds for the worst that might follow.

The reinforcements arrived from Britain; the eagerness of the British
military to avail themselves of their present strength, and the position
of the Provincials, concurred to make both parties diligent in their prepara-

402

THE L0YALi8TH OF AMKUICA [OUAP. XXIV.

About tho same time that General Gage thus commenced war
upon tho people of Massachusetts, who so nobly responded in
defence of their constitutional riglits, Lord Dunmore, Governor
of Virginia, committed similar outrages upon tho traditionally
loyal Virginians, who, as Mr. Bancroft says, " were accustomed
to associate all ideas of security in their political rights with

Il-
ls

tion for actiun. It was equally the defliro of both: the first were earnest
to cxliibit an unquestionable testimony of their superiority, and to terminate
the quarrel by one decisive blow ; the others were no less willing to come
to a second engagement (the first l)eing that of Concord and Lexington),
from a confidence they would be able to convince their enemies that they
would find the subjugation of America a much more difficult task than tliey
had promised tViemselves.

"Opposite to the northern shore of the peninsula upon which Boston
stands, lies Charleston, divided from it by a river (Mystic) about the breadth
of the Thames at London Bridge. Neither the British nor Provincial troops
had hitherto bethought themselves of securing this place. In its neighbour-
hood, a little to the east, is a high ground called Bunker's Hill, which over-
looks and commands the whole town of Boston.

" In the night of the 16th of June, a party of the Provincials took
possession of this hill, and worked with so much industry and diligence,
that by break of day they had almost completed a redoubt, together with
a strong intrenchmcnt, reaching half a mile, as far as the River Mystic to the
eost. As soon as discovered they were plied with a heavy and inces-
sant fire from the ships and floating batteries that surrounded the neck
on which Charleston is situated, and from the cannon planted on the nearest
eminence on the Boston side.

" This did not, however, prevent them from continuing their work, which
they had entirely finished by mid-day, when it was found necessary to take
more effectual methods to dislodge them.

" For this piu^ose a considerable body was landed at the foot of Bunker's
Hill, under the command of General Howe and General Pigot. The first
was to attack the Provincial lines, the second the redoubt. The British
troops advanced with great intrepidity, but on their approach were received
with a fire behind from the intrenchments, that continued pouring during a
full half hour upon them like a stream. The execution it did was terrible ;
some of the brave stand oldest officers declared that, for the time it lasted, it
was the hottest service they had ever seen. General Howe stood for some
moments almost alone, the officers and soldiers about him being nearly all
slain or disabled ; his intrepidity and presence of mind were remarkable on
this trying occasion.

" General Pigot, on the left, was in the meantime engaged with the Provin-
cials who had thrown themselves into Charleston, as well as with the redoubt,
and met with the same reception as the right. Though he conducted his
attack with great skill and courage, the incessant destruction made among the

ElAP. XXIV.

ncnced war
sponded in
0, Governor
•aditionally
accuHtomed
rights with

were earnest
d to terminate
illing to come
id Lexington),
nies that they
task than tliey

which Boston
)ut the breadth
•ovincial troops
I its neighbour-
11, which over-

rovincials took
and diligence,
, together with
er Mystic to the
avy and inces-
inded the neck
1 on the nearest

eir work, which
cessary to take

bot of Bunker's
'igot. The first
t. The British
h were received
curing during a
id was terrible;
time it lasted, it
stood for some
being nearly all
•e remarkable on

with the Provin-

urith the redoubt,

le conducted his

made among the

CHAP. XXIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

463

the dynasty of Hanover, and had never, even in thought, desired
to renounce their allegiance. They loved to consider them-
selves an integral part of the British empire. The distant life
of landed proprietors, in solitary mansion-houses, favoured
independence of thought ; but it also generated an aristocracy,
which differed widely from the simplicity and equality of New
England. Educated in the Anglican Church, no religious zeal
had imbued them with a fixed hatred of kingly power ; no
deep-seated antipathy to a distinction of ranks, no theoretic

troops threw them at first into some disorder ; but General Clinton coming
up with a reinforcement, they (luickly rallied and attacked the works with
such fury that the Provintials were not able to resist them, and retreated
beyond the neck of land that leads into Charleston.

" This was the bloodiest engagement during the whole war. The loss
of tJ , Tritish troops amounted in killed and wounded to upwards of 1,()00.
Amoi.j,' the first were 19, and among the last 70 officers. Colonel Aber-
crorabie. Major Pitcaini, of the Marines, and Majors Williams and Spenlowe,
men of distinguished bravery, fell in this action, which, though it terminated
to the advantage of the King's forces, cost altogether a dreadful price.

" The loss on the Provincial side, according to their account, did not exceed
500. This might be true, as they fought behind intrenchments, part of which
were cannon proof, and where it was not possible for the musketry to annoy
them. This accounts no less for the numbers they destroyed, to which the
expertness of their marksmen chiefly contributed. To render the dexterity
of these completely effectual, muskets ready loaded were handed to them as
fast as they could be discharged, that they might lose no time in reloading
them, and they took aim chiefly at the officers. * ♦ ♦

" The great slaughter occasioned on the left of the British troops, from the
houses in Chbrleston, obliged them to set fire to that place. The Provincials
defended it for some time with much obstinacy, but it was quickly reduced
to ashes ; and when deprived of that cover, they were immediately com-
pelled to retire.

" But notwithstanding the honour of the day remained to the British
troops, the Americans boasted that the real advantages were on their side.
They had, said they, so much weakened their enemies in this engagement,
as to put an entire stop to their operations. Instead of coming forth and im-
proving their pretended victory, they did not dare to venture out of the
trenches and fortifications they had constructed round Boston.

" The only apparent benefit gained by the troops was that they kept
possession of the ground whereon Charleston had stood ; they fortified it on
every side, in order to secure themselves from the sudden attacks that were
daily threatened from so numerous a force as that which now invested
Boston. ♦ * *

" The Provincials, on the other hand, to convince the troops how little
their success had availed them, raised intrenchments on a height opposite

464

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIV.

O i

It )

zeal for the introduction of a republic, no speculative fanaticism
drove them to a restless love of change. They had, on the
contrary, the greatest aversion to a revolution, and abhorred
the dangerous experiment of changing their form of govern-
ment without some absolute necessity.*

But the Virginians, like all true loyalists, were " loyal to the
people's part of the Constitution as well as to that which per-
tains to the Sovereign."*!* To intimidate them, Dunmore issued

Charleston, intimating to them that they were ready for another Bunker's
Hill business whenever they thought proper, and were no less willing than
they to make another trial of skill.

" Their boldness increased to a degree that astonished the British oflScers,
who had, unhappily, been taught to believe them a contemptible enemy,
averse to the dangers of war, and incapable of the regular operations of an
army. The skirmishes were now renewed in Boston Bay. The necessities of
the garrison occasioned several attempts to carry off the remaining stock
of cattle and other articles of provision the islands might contain. But tlie
Provincials, who were better acquainted with the navigation of the bay,
landed on these islands, in spite of the precaution of the numerous shipping,
and destroyed or carried off whatever could be of use ; they even ventured
80 far as to burn the light-house, situated at the entrance of the harbour, and
afterwards made prisoners of a number of workmen that had been sent
to repair it, together with a party of marines that guarded them." (Dr.
Andrews' History of the Late War, etc., Vol. I., Chap, xiii., pp. 300 — 306 ;
published under royal authority in 1785.)

* History of the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, xxv., pp. 271, 272.

t The Secretary of State had instructed Lord Dunmore to call the Assem-
bly together, in order to submit to them a " conciliatory proposition," as it
was called, which Lord North had introduced into Parliament — a proposition
calculated to divide the colonies, and then reduce each of them to servitude;
but the colonies saw the snare, and every one of them rejected the insidious
offer. Lord Dunmore, in obedience to his instructions, assembled for the
last time the Virginia House of Burgesses in June, 1776, to deliberate and
decide upon Lord North's proposition. But while the Burgesses were
deliberating upon the subject submitted to them. Lord Dunmore, agitated by
his own fears, left with his family the seat of government, and went on
board a ship of war. The House of Burgesses, however, proceeded in tlieir
deliberations ; referred the subject to a Committee, which presented a report
prepared by Mr. Jefferson, and adopted by the House, as a final answer to
Lord North's proposal. They said, " Next to the possession of liberty,
they should consider a reconciliation as the greatest of human blessings, but
that the resolution of the House of Commons only changed the form of
oppression, without lightening its burdens ; that government in the colonies
was instituted not for the British Parliament, but for the colonies them-

• , .' y^^Mrt- ■" '*« WM^Om

HAP. XXIV.

CHAP. XXIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

465

proclamations, and threatened freeing the slaves against their
masters. On the night of the 20th of April he sent a body of
marines, in the night, to carry off a quantity of gunpowder
belonging to the colony, and stored in its magazine at Williams-
burg. As soon as this arbitrary seizure of the colony's property
became known, drums sounded alarm throughout the city of
Williamsburg, the volunteer company rallied under arms, and
the inhabitants assembled for consultation, and at their request
the Mayor and Corporation waited upon the Governor and
asked him his motives for carrying off their powder privately
"by an armed force, particularly at a time when they were

selves ; that the British Parliament had no right to meddle with their
Constitution, or to prescribe either the number or the pecuniary appoint-
ments of their officers ; that they had a right to give their money without
coercion, and from time to time ; that they alone were the judges, alike of
the public exigencies and the ability of the people ; that they contended not
merely for the mode of raising their money, but for the freedom of granting
it ; that the resolve to forbear levying pecuniary taxes still left unrepealed the-
Acts restraining trade, altering the form of government of Massachusetts,,
changing the government of Qu($bec, enlarging the jurisdiction of Courts of
Admiralty, taking away the trial by jury, and keeping up standing armies ;
that iJie invasion of the colonies with large armaments by aea and land was
a style of asking gifts not reconcilable to freedom ; that the resolution did
not propose to the colonies to lay open a free trade with all the world ; that
as it involved the interests of all the other colonies, they were in honour bound
to share one fate with them ; that the Bill of Lord Chatham on the one part
and the terms of Congress on the other, would have formed a basis for
negotiation and a reconciliation ; that leaving the final determination of
the question to the General Congress, they will weary the King with no
more petition? — the British nation with no mo^-e appeals." " What then,"
they ask, " i emains to be done 1" and they answer, " That we commit our
injuries to the justice of the even-handed Being who doeth no wrong."

When the Earl of Shelburne read Mr. Jefferson's report, he said : " In
my life I was never more pleased with a State paper than with the Assem-
bly of Virginia's discussion of Lord North's proposition. It is masterly.
But what I fear is, that the evil is irretrievable."

" At Versailles, the French Minister, Vergennes, was equally attracted by
the wisdom and dignity of the document. He particularly noticed the
insinuation that a compromise might be effected on the basis of the modi-
fication of the Navigation Acts ; and saw so many ways opened of settling
every difficulty, that it was long before he could persuade himself that the
infatuation of the British Ministiy was so blind as to neglect them all."
(Bancroft's Histor}' of the United States, Vol. VJT , Chap, ixxvii., pp. 386—
388.)

466

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIV,

apprehensive of an insurrection among their slaves ; " and they
demanded that the powder should be forthwith restored.

Lord Dunmore first answered evasively; but learning that
the citizens had assembled under arms, he raged and threatened.
He said : " The whole country can easily be made a solitude ;
and by the living God, if any insult is offered to me, or to those
who have obeyed my orders, I will declare fre*^dom to the
slaves, and lay the town in ashes."*

Lord Dunmore at the same time wrote to the English
Secretary of State : " With a small body of troops and arms, I
could raise such a force among Indians, Negroes, and other
persons, as would soon reduce the refractory people of this
colony to obedience."

Yet, after all his boasting and threats, the value of the powder
thus unlawfully seized was restored to the colony. Lord Dun-
more, agitated with fears, as most tyrants are, left the Govern-
ment House from fear of the people excited by his own con-
duct towards them, and went on board of the nian-of-war
ship Tower, at York (about 12 miles from Williamsburg, the
capital of the Province), thus leaving the colony in the absolute
possession of its own inhabitants, giving as a reason for his
flight, his apprehension of " falling a sacrifice to the daringness
and atrociousness, the blind and unmeasurable fury of great
numbers of the people ; " and the assurance of the very people
whom he feared as to his personal safety and that of his family,
and the repeated entreaties of the Legislative Assembly that he

* Bancroft's Historj' of the United States, Vol. VII., Chap, xxv., p. 276-
" The offer of freedom to the negroes came very oddly from the representa-
tive of the nation which had sold them to their present masters, and of the
King who had heen displeased with the colony for its desire to tolerate that
inhuman traffic no longer ; and it was but a sad resource for a commercial
metropolis, to keep a hold on its colony by letting loose slaves against its
own colonists." — Ih., p. 276.

" Dunmore's menace to raise the standard of a servile insurrection and set
the slaves upon their masters, with British arms in their hands, Ailed the
South with horror and alarm. Besides, the retreat of the British troops from
Concord raised the belief that the American forces were invincible ; and the
spirit of resistance had grown so strong, that some of the Burgesses appeared
in the uniform of the recently instituted provincial troops, wearing a hunting
shirt of coarse linen over their clothes, and a woodman's axe by their sides."
— /6., pp. 384, 386.

CHAP. XXIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

467

would return to land, with assurance of perfect safety from
injury or insult, could not prevail upon Lord Dunmore to return
to the Government House, or prevent him from attempting to
govern the ancient Dominion of Virginia from ships of war.
He seized a private printing press, with two of its printers,
at the town of Norfolk, and was thus enabled to issue his
proclamations and other papers against the inhabitants whom
he had so grossly insulted and injured.*

"In October" (1775), says Bancroft, "Dunmore repeatedly
landed detachments to seize arms wherever he could find
them. Thus far Virginia had not resisted the British by force.
The war began in that colony with the defence of Hampton, a
small village at the end of the isthmus between York and
James rivers. An armed sloop had been driven on its shore in
a very violent gale ; its people took out of her six swivels and
other stores, made some of her men prisoners, and then set her
on fire. Dunmore blockaded the port; they called to their
assistance a company of " Shirtmen," as the British called the
Virginia regulars, from the hunting shirt which was their uni-
form, and another company of minute men, besides a body of
militia. ^ ^

" On the 26th Dunmore sent some of the tenders close into
Hampton Roads to destroy the town. The guard marched out
to repel them, and the moment they came within gunshot,
George Nicholas, who commanded the Virginians, fired hip
musket at one of the tenders ; it was the first gun fired in
Virginia against the British. His example was followed by his
party. Retarded by boats which had been simk across the
Channel, the British on that day vainly attempted to land.

♦ " Meantime, Dunmore, driven from the land of Vii^inia, maintained
command of the water by meana of a flotilla compoaed of the Mercury, of
24 guns ; the Kingfisher, of 16 ; the Otter, of 14, with other ships and Ughl
vessels, and tenders which he had engaged in the King's service. At Norfolk,
a town of about 6,000 inhabitants, a newspaper was published by John Holt
About noon on the last day of September (1775), Dunmore, finding fault
with its favouring (according to him) ' sedition and rebellion,' sent on shose
a small party, who, meeting with no resistance, seized and brought off two
printers ar^ all the materials of the printing office, so that he could publisb
from his ship a Gazette on the side of the King. The outrage, as we thai
see, produced retaliation." (Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol
VIIL, Chap. Iv., pp. 220, 221.)

468

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIV.

V--

The following night the Culpepper riflemen were despatched to
the aid of Hampton; and William Woodford, Colonel of the
2nd Regiment of Virginia, was sent by the Committee of Safety
from Williamsburg to take the direction. The next day the
British, having cut their way through the sunken boats, renewed
the attack ; but the riflemen poured upon them a heavy fire,
killing a few and wounding more. One of the tenders was
taken, with its armament and seven seamen ; the rest were with
difficulty towed out of the creek. The Virginians lost not
a man. This was the first battle of the revolution in the
ancient Dominion, and its honours belonged to the Virginians."*
In consequence of this failure of Lord Dunmore to burn the
town of Hampton, he proclaimed martial law and freedom
to the slaves. The English Annual Register states that, " In

• Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. VIII., Chap. Iv., pp. 221,
?22.

The English Annual Register of 1776 states as follows the policy of Lord
Dunmore, culminating in the successful defence of Hampton and the repulse
of his ships :

" Whether Lord Dunmore expected that any extraordinary advantages
might be derived from an insurrection of the slaves, or that he imagined
there was a much greater number of people in the colony who were satisfied
with the present system of government than really was the case (a mistake,
»nd an unfortunate one, which, like an epidemical distemper, seems to have spread
through all our official departments in America) — upon whatever grounds he
proceeded, he determined, though he relinquished his government, not to
abandon his hopes, nor entirely to lose sight of the country which he had
governed. He, accordingly, being joined by those friends of government who
had rendered themselves too obnoxious to the people to continue with safety
in the country, as well as by a number of runaway negroes, and supported
by the frigates of war which were upon the station, endeavoured to establish
such a marine force as would enable him, by means of the noble rivers,
which render the most valuable parts of that rich country accessible by
water, to be always at hand and ready to profit by any favourable occasion
that offered.

" Upon this or some similar system he by degrees equipped and armed
a number of vessels of different kinds and sizes, in one of which he constantly
nesided, never setting his foot on shore but in a hostile manner. The force thus put
together was, however, calculated only for depredation, and never hecame equal
to any essential service. The former, indeed, was in part a matter of necessity ;
for aa the people on shore would not supply those on board with provisions or
uecessaries, they must either starve or provide them by force. * ♦ These pro-
ceedings occasioned the sending of some detachments of the new-raised forces
of the colonists to protect their coasts, and from these ensued a small, mis-

[AP. XXIV.

CHAP. XXIV.l

AND THEIR TIMES.

469

consequence of the repulse (at Hampton) a proclamation wa.s
issued (Nov. 7th) by the Governor, dated on board the ship
William, off Norfolk, declaring, that as the civil law was
at present insufficient to prevent and punish treason and
traitors, martial law should take place, and be --iecuted through-
out the colony ; and requiring all persons capable of bearing
arms to repair to his Majesty's standard, or to be considered sa
traitors." He also declared all indentured servants, negroes, and
others, appertaining to_ rebels, who were able and willing
to bear arms, and who joined his Majesty's forces, to be free,

" The measure for emancipating the negroes," continues the
Annual Register, " excited less surprise, and probably had less
effect, from its being so long threatened and apprehended, than
if it had been more immediate and unexpected. It was, how-
ever, received with the greatest horror in all the colonies,
and has been severely condemned elsewhere, as tending to
loosen the bands of society, to destroy domestic security, and
encourage the most barbarous of mankind to the commission of
the most horrible crimes and the most inhuman cruelties ; that
it was confounding the innocent with the guilty, and exposing
those who were the best of friends to the Government, to
the same loss of property, danger, and destruction with the
most incorrigible rebels."*

chievous, predatory war, incapable of affording honour or benefit, and in
which, at length, every drop of water and every neceasarj' was purchased at
the price or risk of blood.

" During this state of hostility, Lord Dunmore procured a few soldiern
from different parts, with whose assistance an attempt (Oct. 25th) was made
to bum a post town in an important situation called Hampton. It seems
the inhabitants had some previous suspicion of the design, for they had sunk
boats in the entrance of the harbour and thrown such other obstacles in the
way as rendered the approach of the ships, and consequently a landing, im-
practicable on the day when the attack was commenced. The ships cut
a passage through the boats in the night, and began to cannonade the town
furiously in the morning ; but at this critical period the townspeople were
relieved from their apprehensions and danger by the arrival of a detachment
of rifle and minute men from Williamsburg, who had marched all night to
their assistance. These, joined with the inhabitants, attacked the ships so
vigorously with their small arms that they were obliged precipitately to
quit their station, with the loss of some men and of a tender, which was
taken." (Annual Register, Vol. XIX., Fourth Edition, pp. 26, 27.)

* English Annual Register, Vol. XIX.

: J.fljf » '

470

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIV.

) I

It will be observed in Lord Dunmore's proclamation, as
also in the English Register, and I may add in General Sted-
man's History of the American War, and in other histories of
those times, the terms " rebels," " treason," and " traitors" are
applied to those who, at that time, as in all previous years,
disclaimed all desire of separation from England, and only
claimed those constitutional rights of Englishmen to which they
were as lawfully entitled as the King was to his Crown, and
very much more so than Lord Dunmore was entitled to the
authority which he was then exercising ; for he had been in-
vested with authority to rule according to the Constitution of
the colony, but he had set aside the Legislature of the colony,
which had as much right to its opinions and the expression of
them as he had to his ; he had abandoned the legal seat of
government, and taken up his residence on board a man-of-war,
and employed his time and strength in issuing proclamations
against people to whom he had been sent to govern as the
representative of a constitutional sovereign, and made raids
upon their coasts, and burned their towns. In truth, Lord
Dunmore and his abettors were the real " rebels" and " traitors,"
who were committing " treason" against the constitutional
rights and liberties of their fellow-subjects, while the objects of
their hostility were the real loyalists to the Constitution, which
gave to the humblest subject his rights as well as to the
Sovereign his prerogatives.

Lord Dunmore, from his ship of war, had no right to rule
the rich and most extensive colony in America. He had
abandoned his appointed seat of government, and he became the
ravager of the coasts and the destroyer of the seaport towns of
the anciei^t dominion. This state of things could not long con-
tinue. Lord Dunmore could not subsist his fleet without pro-
visions ; and the people would not sell their provisions to those
who were seeking to rob them of their liberties and to plunder
their property. The English Annual Register observes :

" In the meantime, the people in the fleet were distressed
for provisions and necessaries of every sort, and were cut off"
from every kind of succour from the shore. This occasioned
constant bickering between the armed ships and boats, and the
forces that were stationed on the coast, particularly at Norfolk.
At length, upon the arrival of the Liverpool man-of-war from

■P

HAP. XXIV.

,mation, as
neral Sted-
histories of
•aitors" are
ious years,
, and only
which they
>own, and
tied to the
id been in-
stitution of
the colony,
pression of
egal seat of
nan-of-war,
oclamations
vern as the
made raids
truth, Lord

" traitors,"
nstitutional
le objects of
ition, which

as to the

ght to rule
He had
became the
•rt towns of
3t long con-
ithout pro-
Qs to those
to plunder
•ves :

s distressed
vere cut off
occasioned
ts, and the
at Norfolk.
►f-war from

CHAP. XXIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

471

England, a flag was sent on shore to put the question " whether
they would supply his Majesty's ships with provisions ?" which
being answered in the negative, and the ships in the harbour being
continually annoyed by the fire of the rebels from that part of
the town which lay next the water, it was determined to dis-
lodge them by destroying it. Previous notice being accordingly
given to the inhabitants that they might remove from danger,
the first day of the New Year (177G) was signalized by the
attack, when a violent cannonade from the Liverpool frigate,
two sloops of war, and the Governor's armed ship the Duiimore,
seconded by parties of sailors and marines, who landed and set
fire to the nearest houses, soon produced the desired effect,
and the whole town was reduced to ashes."*

Mr. Bancroft eloquently observes : " In this manner the Royal
Governor burned and laid waste the best town in the oldest and

♦ British Annual Register, Vol. XIX., p. 31.

Mr. Bancroft's account of this barbarous conflagration is as follows :
*• New Year's day, 1776, was the saddest day that ever broke on the women
and children then in Norfolk ; warned of their danger by the commander of
the squadron, tliere was for them no refuge. The Kingfisher was stationed at
the upper end of Norfolk ; a little below her, the Otter ; Belew, in the Liver-
pool, anchored near the middle of the town ; and next him lay the Dunmore ;
the rest of the fleet was moored in the harbour. Between three and four
in the afternoon, the Liverpool opened its fire upon the borough ; the other
ships immediately followed the example, and a severe cannonade was begun
from about sixty pieces of cannon. Dunmore then himself, as night was
coming on, ordered out several boats to bum warehouses on the wharves ;
and hailed to Belew to set fire to a large brig which lay in the dock.
All the vessels of the fleet, to show their zeal, sent great numbers of boats on
shore to assist in spreading the flames along the river ; and as the buildings
were chiefly of pine wood, the conflagration, favoured by the wind, spread
with amazing rapidity, and soon became general. Women and children,
mothers with little ones in their arms, were seen by the glare running
through the shower of cannon balls to get out of their range. Two or three
persons were hit ; and the scene became one of extreme horror and confusion.
Several times the British attempted to land, and once to bring cannon into
the street ; but they were driven back by the spirit and conduct of the
Americans. The cannonade did not abate till ten at night ; after a short
pause it was renewed, but with less fury, and was kept up till two the next
morning. The flames, which had made their way from sti-eet to street, raged
for three days ; till four-fifths, or, as some computed, nine-tenths of the
houses were reduced to ashes and heaps of ruins." (History of the United
States, VoL VIII., Chap. Ivi., pp. 230, 231.)

472

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIV.

ft ;

most loyal colony of England, to which Elizabeth had given a
name, and Raleigh devoted his fortune, and Shakspeare and
fiacon and Herbert foretokened greatness ; a colony where the
people themselves had established the Church of England, and
where many were still proud of their ancestors, and in the day
of the British Commonwealth had been faithful to the line
of kings."*

* History of the United States, Vol. VIII., Chap. Ivi., p. 231.

The English Annual Register observes : " Such Avas the fate of the unfortu-
nate town of Norfolk, the most considerable for commerce in the colony, and so
growing and flourishing before these unhappy troubles, that in the two years
from 1773 to 1775, the rents of tl.e houses increased from .£8,000 to .£10,000
a year. However just the cause, or urgent the necessity, which induced this
measure, it was undoubtedly a grievous and odious task to a Governor to be
himself the principal actor in burning and destroying the best town in his
government.

" Nor was the situation of other Governors in America much more eligible
than that of Lord Dunmore. In South Carolina, Lord William Campbell,
having as they said, entered into a negotiation with the Indians for coming
in to the support of the Government in that province, and having also
succeeded in exciting a number of those back settlers whom we have hereto-
fore seen distinguished in the Carolinas, under the title of Regulators, to
espouse the same cause, the discovery of these measures, before they were ripe
for execution, occasioned such a ferment among the people, that he
thought it necessary to retire from Charleston on board a ship of war in the
river, from whence he returned no more to the seat of his government.

" Similar measures were pursued in North Carolina (with the difl'erence
that Governor Martin wo,8 more active and vigorous in his proceedings), but
:attended with as little success. The Provincial Congress, Committees, and
Governor were in a continual state of the most violent warfare. Upon a
number of charges, particularly of fomenting a civil war, and exciting an
insurrection among the negroes, he was declared an enemy to America in
rgeneral, and to that colony in particular, and all persons were forbidden
from holding any communication with him. These declarations he answered
•with a proclamation of uncommon length, which the Provincial Congrebs
resolved to be a false, scandalous, scurrilous and seditious libel, and ordered
it to be burned by the hands of the common hangman.

" As the Governor expected, by means of the back settlers, as well as of
the Scotch inhabitants and Highland emigrants, who were numerous
in the province, to be able to raise a considerable force, he took
pains to fortify and arm his palace at Newburn, that it might answer the
double purpose of a garrison and a magazine. Before this could be effected,
'the moving of some cannon excited such a commotion among the people
that he found it necessary to abandon the palace and retire on board a sloop-
«f-war in Cape Fear river. The people upon this occasion discovered

■■^ Jr

HAP. XXIV.

CHAP. XXIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

473

When Washington learned the fate of the rich emporium of
his own " country," for so he called Virginia, his breast heaved
with waves of anger and grief. " I hope," said he, " this
and the threatened devastation of other places will unite
the whole country in one indissoluble band against a Govern-
ment which seems lost to every sense of virtue and those
feelings which distinguish a civilized people from the most
barbarous savages."

Thus the loyal churchmen of Virginia received the same
treatment from Lord Dunmore as did the republican Congrega-
tionalists of Massachusetts from General Gage. The loyal
Presbyterians of the two Carolinas experienced similar treat-
ment from Governors Campbell and Martin, as stated by the
English Annual Register, in the preceding note. The three
Southern Governors each fled from their seats of government
and betook themselves to ships of war ; while Gage was shut
up in Boston until his recall to England.

The Southern colonies, with those of New England, shared
the same fate of misrepresentation, abuse, and invasion of their
rights as British subjects ; the flames of discontent were spread
through all the colonies by a set of incompetent and reckless
Governors, the favourites and tools of perhaps the worst Admin-
istration and the most corrupt that ever ruled Great Britain.
All the colonies might adopt the language of the last address of
the Assembly of Virginia : " We have exhausted every mode of
application which our inventions could suggest, as proper and
promising. We have decently remonstrated with Parliament ;
they have added new injuries to the old. We have wearied the
King with our supplications; he has not deigned to answer
them. We have appealed to the native honour and justice of
the British nation ; their eflbrts in our favour have been hitherto

powder, shot, ball, and various military stores and implements which had
been buried in the palace garden and yard. This served to inflame them
exceedingly, every man considering it as if it had been a plot against himself
in particular.

" The Provincial Congress published an address to the inhabitants of the
British empire, of the same nature with those we have formerly seen
to the people of Great Britain and Ireland, containing the same professions
of loyalty and affection, and declaring the same earnest desire of a recon-
ciliation." (English Annual Register, Vol. XIX., pp. 31 — 33.)

' .^•IfP* ;'

474

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIV.

ineffectual." At the meeting of Parliament, October 26th, 1775,
the King was advised to utter in the Royal speech the usual
denunciation against the colonies, but the minority in Parlia-
ment (led by Mr. Fox, Mr. Burke, General Conway, and Lord
John Cavendish) discussed and denied the statements in the
Royal speech, and exhibited the results of the Ministerial war-
fare against the colonies at the close of the year 177.'^, the year
before the Declaration of Independence. " In this contest," says
the Annual Register of 177G, " the speech was taken to pieces,
and every part of it most severely scrutinized. The Ministers
were charged with having brought their Sovereign into the
most disgraceful and unhappy situation of any monarch now
living. Their conduct had already wrested the sceptre of
America out of his hands. One-half of the empire was lost,
and the other thrown into a state of anarchy and confusion.
After having spread corruption like a deluge through the land,
until all public virtue was lost, and the people were inebriated
with vice and profligacy, they were then taught in the parox-
ysms of their infatuation and madness to cry out for havoc and
war. History could not show an instance of such an empire
ruined in such a manner. They had lost a greater extent of
dominion in the first campaign of a ruino\j« civil war, which
was intentionally produced by their own acts, than the most
celebrated conquerors had ever acquired in so short a space of
time.

" The speech was said to be composed of a mixture of assumed
and false facts, with some general undefined and undisputed
axioms, which nobody would attempt to controvert. Of the
former, that of charging the colonies with aiming at indepen-
dence was severely reprehended, as being totally unfounded,
being directly contrary to the whole tenor of their conduct, to
their most express declarations both by word and writing, and
to what every person of any intelligence knew of their general
temper and disposition.* But what they never intended, we

* General Conway said : " The noble lord who has the direction of the
affairs of this country tells you that the Americans aim at Independence.
I defy the noble lord, or any other member of this House, to adduce one
solid proof of this charge. He says : ' The era of 1763 is the time they
wish to recur to, because such a concession on our part would be, in effect,
giving up their dependence on this country.' I would ask the noble lord,

aAP. XXIV.

OHAP. XXIV.]

AND THEIR TIMKS.

476

may drive them to. They will, undoubtedly, prefer indepen-
dence to slavery. They will never continue their connection
with this country unless they can be connected with its privi-
leges. The continuance of hostility, with the determined re-
fusal of security for these privileges, will infallibly bring on
separation.

" The charge of their making professions of duty and pro-
posals of reconciliation only for the insidious purpose of amus-
ing and deceiving, was equally reprobated. It was insisted that,
on the contrary, these had from the beginning told them
honestly, openly and bravely, without disguise or reserve, and
declared to all the world, that they never would submit to be
arbitrarily taxed by any body of men whatsoever in which they
were not represented. They did not whisper behind the door,
nor mince the matter ; they told fairly what they would do, and
have done, if they were unhappily urged to the last extremity.
And that though the Ministers affected not to believe them, it
was evident from the armament which they sent out that they
did ; for however incompetent that armament has been to the
end, nobody could admit a doubt that it was intended to
oppose men in arms, and to compel by force, the incompetence
for its purposes proceeding merely from that blind ignorance
and total misconception of American aifairs which had operated
upon the Ministers in every part of their conduct.

" The shameful accusation," they &aid, " was only to cover that
wretched conduct, and, if possible, to hide or excuse the dis-
grace and failure that had attended all their measures. Was
any other part of their policy more commendable or more suc-
cessful ? Did the cruel and sanguinary laws of the preceding
session answer any of the purposes for which they were pro-
posed ? Had they in any degree fulfilled the triumphant pre-
dictions, had they kept in countenance the overbearing vaunts

Did the people of America set up this claim previous to the year 1763 ? No;
they were then peaceful and dutiful subjects. They are still dutiful and
obedient. (Here was a murmur, of disapprobation.) I repeat my words ;
I think them so inclined ; I am sure they would be so, if they were permitted-
The acts they have committed arise from no want of either. They have
been forced into them. Taxes have been attempted to be levied on them ;
their Charters have been Adolated, nay, taken away ; administration has at-
tempted to coerce them by the most cruel and oppressive laws."

476

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIV.

i' )

of the Minister ? They have now sunk into the same nothing-
ness with the terrors of that armed force which was to have
looked all America into submission. The Americans have faced
the one, and they despise the injustice and iniquity of the
other. * * *

" The question of rebellion was also agitated ; and it was
asserted that the taking up of arms in the defence of just
rights did not; according to the spirit of the British Constitu-
tion, come within that comprehension. It was also asserted
with great confidence, that notwithstanding the mischiefs which
the Americans had suffered, and the great losses they had sus-
tained, they would still readily lay down their arms, and return
with the greatest good-will and emulation to their duty, if can-
did and unequivocal measures were taken for reinstating them
in their former rights ; but that this must be done speedily,
before the evils had taken too wide an extent, and *he ani-
mosity and irritation arising from them had gone beyond a
certain pitch. .

" The boasted lenity of Parliament was much lauded. It was
asked whether the Boston Port Bill, by which, without trial or
condemnation, a number of people were stripped of their com-
mercial property, and even deprived of the benefit of their real
estates, was an instance of it? Was it to be found in the
Fishery Bill, by which large countries were cut off from the use
of the elements, and deprived of the provision which nature had
allotted for their sustenance ? Or was taking away the Charter
and all the rights of the people without trial or forfeiture the
measure of lenity from which such applause was now sought ?
Was the indemnity held out to military power lenity ? Was it
lenity to free soldiers fronv a trial in the country where the
murders with which tin;/ should stand charged, when acting
in support of civil and revenue officers, were committed, and
forcing their accusers to come to England at the pleasure of a
governor ?" * ♦ »

" The debate in the House of Lords was rendered particularly
remarkable by the unexpected defection of a noble duke (Duke
of Grafton) who had been for some years at the head of the
Administration, had resigned of his own accord at a critical
period, but who had gone with the Government ever since, and
was at this time in high office. The line which he immediately

HAP. XXIV.

CHAP. XXIV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

477

took was fltill more alarming to tho Administration than the
act of defection. Besides a deci.sivo condemnation of all their
acts for .some time past witli respect to America, a.s well as of the
measures now held out by the speech, ho declared that he had
been deceived and misled upon that subject ; that by the with-
holding of informal ion, and the misrepresentation of facts,
he had been indue td to lend his countenance to measures
which he never approved ; among those was that in particular
of coercing America by force of arms, an idea the most distant
from his mind and opinions, but which ho was blindly led to
give a support to from his total ignorance of the true state and
disposition of the colonies, and tho firm persuasion held out
that matters would never come to an extremity of that nature ;
that an appearance of coerccion was all that was required to
establish a reconciliation, and that the stronger the Government
appeared, and the better it was supported, the sooner all
disputes would be adjusted."

" Ho declared that nothing less than a total repeal of all the
American laws which had been passed since 1703 could now
restore peace and happiness, or prevent tho most destructive
and fatal consequences — consequences which could not even
be thought of without feeling the utmost degree of grief and
horror ; that nothing could have brought him out in the present
ill state of his health but the fullest conviction of his being
right — a knowledge of the critical situation of his country, and
a sense of what he owed to his duty and to his conscience ; that
these operated so strongly upon him, that no state of indisposi-
tion, if he were even obliged to come in a litter, should pre-
vent his attending to express his utmost disapprobation of the
measures which were now being pursued, as well as of those
which he understood from the lords in office it was intended
still to pursue. He concluded by declaring that if his nearest
relations or dearest friends were to be afl'ected by this question
or that the loss of fortune, or of every other thing which he
most esteemed, was to be the certain consequence of his present
conduct, yet the strong conviction and compulsion operating at
once upon his mind and conscience would not permit him to
hesitate upon the part which he should take.

" The address was productive of a protest signed by nineteen
lords, in which they combat the civil war as unjust and im-

1311

478

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXIV.

politic in its principles, dangerous in its contingent and fatal in
its final consequences. They censured the calling in of foreign
forces to decide domestic quarrels as disgraceful and dangerous.
They sura up and conclude the protest by declaring : ' We cannot,
therefore, consent to an address which may deceive his Majesty
and the public into a belief of the confidence of this House
in the present Ministers, who have deceived Parliament, dis-
graced the nation, lost the colonies, and involved us in a civil
war against our clearest interests, and upon the most unjustifi-
able grounds wantonly spilling the blood of thousands of our
fellow-subjects.'"*

* Annual Register, Vol. XIX., Chap, ix., pp. 57, 58, 6«, 69, 70, 74, 76.

CHAP. XXV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

479

CHAPTER XXV.

The Asskmbling op Congress, May 10th, 1776, and Transactions
UNTIL THE Declaration of Independence, the 4th of July.

It was under the circumstances stated in the preceding
chapter, the General Congress, acccrding to adjournment the
previous October, re-assembled in Philadelphia the 10th of May,
1776. The colonies were profoundly convulsed by the transac-
tions which had taken place in Massachusetts, Virginia, North
and South Carolina, by the intelligence from England, that
Parliament had., the previous December, passed an Act to in-
crease the army, that the British Government had largely
increased both the army and navy, and on Tailure of obtaining
sufficient recruits m England, Scotland, and Ireland, had nego-
tiated with German princes, who traded in the blood of their
down-trodden subjects, for seventeen thousand Hanoverian
and Hessian mercenaries, to aid in reducing the American
colonies to absolute subm:' ion to the will of the King and
Parliament of Great Biitain. It was supposed in England that
the decisive Act ot Pu,riiament, the unbending and ho- tile atti-
tude of the British Mini^ cry, the formidable am un* -^f naval
and land forces, wou d awe the colonies into unresisting and
immediate submission ; but the effect of all these formidable
preparations on the nart of the British Government was to
unite rather than divide the colonies, and render them more
determined and resolute than ever to defend and maintain their
sacnd and inherited rights and liberties a,s TbritiMh aubjects.

The thirteen colonies were ip. unit «vs t: "what i,h')y understood
and contended for in regard to their ijri(i<'h constitutional rights
and liberties — namely, the rights wbi':h L %} had enjoyed for

480

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXV.

more than a century — the right of taxation by their own elected
representatives alone, the right of providing for the support of
their own civil government and its officers — rights far less exten-
sive than those which are and have long been enjoyed by the
loyal provinces of the Canadian Dominion. There were, indeed,
the Governors and their officers, sent from England — the
favourites and needy dependents of the British Ministry and
Parliament, sent out to subsist upon the colonists, but were not of
them, had no sympathy with them, nor any influence over them
except what they had over their dependents and the families
with whom they had formed connections. They were noisy
and troublesome as a faction, but not sufficient in numbers or
influence to constitute a party, properly speaking.

There was like unity among the colonies in regard to the
defence and support of the rights and liberties which ':h' ■/
claimed. There was, indeed, doubt on the part of a few , aiui
but a few, comparatively, as to the wisdom and expediency of
taking arms and meeting the King's officers and troops in tne
field of battle in support of their rights ; but all agreed that
they should defend themselves and their property when
attacked by the King's troops, whether attacked by the King's
orders or not ; for they held that their title to their property
and constitutional rights was as sacred and divine as that of
the King to his throne.*

* " The theory that the popular leaders were playing a game of hypocrisy
may be tested in the case of Washington, whose sterling patriotism was not
more conspicuoiis than his irreproachable integrity. The New York Pro-
vincial Congress, in an address to him (June 26th, 1775), on his way from
Philadelphia to the American camp around Boston, say that accommodation
with the mother country was ' the fondest wish of each American soul'
Washington, in reply, pledged his colleagues and himself to use every exer-
tion to re-establish peace and harmony. ' When we assumed the soldier,'
he said, ' we did not lay aside the citizen ; and w^e shall most sincerely rejoice
with you in that happy hour when the establishment of American liberty on
the most solid and iirm foundations shall enable us to return to our private
stations, in the bosom of a free, peaceful, and happy country. '(o) There was
no incompatibility in the position of military leader of a great uprising with
a desire to preserve the old political ties. When the Barons of Runnymede,

(a) " The London Chronicle of August 8th, 1775, has the speech '■f the
New York Provincial Congress, and the reply of Washington of the £6th of
June, 1776."

aAP. XXV.

CHAP. XXV]

AND THEIR TIMES.

481

vn elected
upport of
ess exten-
;d by the
re, indeed,
land — the
listry and
irere not of
over them
e families
rere noisy
umbers or

ird to the
hich Jiihf V
k few, and
ediency of
)ops in til e
a;reed thai
srty when
the King's
property
as that of

f hypocrisy
ism was not

York Pro-
ia way from
Diumodation
srican soul.'

every exer-
the soldier,'
erely rejoice
a liberty on

our private
There was

•rising with

lunnymede,

)eech '-f the
the £6th of

The question of questions with the General Congress on its
assembling in May, 1776, was wha*; measures should be adopted
for the defence of their violated and invaded rights, and upon
what grounds should that defence be conducted ? For the first
time in the General Congress was it proposed to abandon the
ground on which they had vindicated and maintained their
rights as British subjects in their several Legislatures and Con-
ventions for eleven years, and successfully defended them by
force of arms for more than one year, or to avow entire separa-
tion from the mother country, and declare absolute indepen-
dence as the ground of maintaining their rights and liberties ?

There had long been some prominent men who held repub-
lican sentiments, and some newspapers had in 1775 mooted
the idea of separation from the mother country. Such views
prevailed widely in Massachusetts; there had always been a
clique of Congregational Republicans and Separationists in
Boston, from the days of Cromwell. They looked back upon
the halcyon days when none but Congregationalists could hold
office — civil, judicial, or military — or even exercise the elective
franchise, and the disclaimers of any earthly king ; and though
the separation from the mother country and renunciation of
monarchical government was carefully avoided in the official
documents of Massachusetts, as it was disclaimed in the strongest
terms in the official papers of other colonies, yet the sentiment
of hostility to monarchy and of separation from England was
n.'f ti'-^ly inculcated in resolutions, addresses, etc., prepared by
S&n el Adams, and sent forth from the Massachusetts Conven-

f>„.Lu\n(l^d by their retainers, "wrested from King John the great Charter,.
Ihoy meai'.t not to renounce their allegiance, but simply to presei-ve the old
government. Though an act of apparent rebellion, yet it was in the
strictest sense an act of loyaltj'. So the popular leaders, in their attitude of
armed rewstance, were loyal to what they conceived to be essential to
American liberty. They were asserting the majesty of constitutional law
against those who would have destroyed it, and thus were more loyal to the
Constitution than was George III. There really is no ground on tvhich
justly t.(» question the sincerity of declarations like those of Congress and
Wa^hingtcn. They aimed at a redress of grievances ; and the idea v/as
iuit general, of a Bill of Rights, or an American Constitution, embodying
the idit'cons on which the integrity of the empire might be preserved.
This was their last appeal for a settlement on such a basis." (Frothingham's
Hdae of the Republic of the United States, Chap, xi., pp. 438, 439.)

482

:■»

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXV.

tion.* He was a man of blameless life (no relation to John
Adams) — a rigid religionist of the old Massachusetts Puritan
stamp — a hater of England and of British institutions, able and
indefatigable in everything that might tend to sever America
from England, in regard to which his writings exerted a power-
ful influence. He was the Corypheus of the Separatist party
in Boston, the Chairman of the Committee of Correspondence,
and wrote the Massachusets circulars to other colonies.

It was only early in May, 1776, that the question of in-
dependence was discussed in the General Congress. The Con-
gress recommended those colonies whose Governors had left
their go*, aments, or were declared disqualified on account of
their oppc ^'^-'^ ttinl cruel conduct, to form governments for
themselves. . .-, however, was not understood as a declara-
tion of indeperi'.. .xice, but a temporary measure of necessity, to
prevent anarchy and confusion in the colonies concerned. This
proceeding was immediately followed by a more comprehensive
measure intended to feel the pulse of the colonies on the
subject of independence.

" The Congress had waited with considerable patience, and
some anxiety, the result of the late session of Parliament ; they
had forborne to do anything which might not be justified upon
the fair principles of self-defence, until it appeared that the Min-
istry was resolved that nothing short of the most abject sub-
mission should be the price of accommodation. Early in May,
therefore, the Congress adopted a measure intended to sound
the sentiments of the colonies on the subject of independence.
They stated the rejection of their petitions, and the employment
of foreign mercenaries to reduce them to obedience, and con-
cluded by declaring it expedient that all the colonies should
proceed to the establishment of such a form of government as

* Mr. Bancroft, writing under date of October, 1775, says : "The Ameri-
cans had not designed to establish an independent government; of their
leading statesmen it was the desire of Samuel Adams alone; they had all
been educated in the love and admiration of constitutional monarchy ; and
even John Adams and Jefferson so sincerely shrank back from the attempt
at creating another government in its stead, that, to the last moment, they
were most anxious to avert a separation, if it could be avoided witliout a loss
of their inherited liberties." (History of the United States, Vol. VIII.,
Chap, li., p. 161.)

CHAP. XXV.

CHAP. XXV ]

AND THEIR TIMES.

483

3n to John
tts Puritan
IS, able and
er America
Bd a power-
ratist party
espondence,
es.

tion of in-
, The Con-
►rs had left
Q account of
mments for
8 a declara-
necessity, to
jmed. This
mprehensive
nies on the

latience, and
ament; they
istified upon
hat the Min-
t abject sub-
irly in May,
ed to sound
idependence.
employment
ce, and con-
onies should
vemment as

"The Ameri-
ment; of their
e; they had all
monarchy; and
)m the attempt

moment, they
i without a loss
eP, Vol. VIII.,

their representatives might think most conducive to the peace
and happiness of the people. This preamble and resolution
were immediately forwarded ; and in a few days afterwards
Richard Henry Lee, of Virginia, gave notice to the Congress
that he should, on an appointed day, move for a Declaration
of Independence. This was accordingly done, but the con-
sideration of the question was postponed until the 1st of July —
80 timid, 80 wavering, so v/nwilling to break the maternal con-
nection were moat of the members.*

It is clear that, so far from the Declaration of Independence
being the spontaneous uprising of the colonies, as represented
by so many American historians, that ;yhen it was first
mooted in Congress the majority of the General Congress itself
were startled at it, and were opposed to it. " On the 15th day
of May, only four of the colonies had acted definitely on the
question of independence. North Carolina had authorized her
delegates to concur with the delegates from the other colonies ' in
declaring independency ; ' Rhode Island had commissioned hers
' to join in any measures to secure American rights ; ' in Massa-
chusetts, various towns had pledged themselves to maintain any
declaration on which Congress might agree; and Virginia had
given positive instructions to her delegates that Congress should
make a declaration of independence. These proceedings were
accompanied with declarations respecting a reservation to each
colony of the right to form its own government, in the adjust-
ment of the power universally felt to be necessary, and which

* Allan's American Revolution, Vol. I., pp. 342, 343.

"The interval was employed in unceasing exertiona by the friends of
independence to prepare the minds of the people for the necessity and
advantages of such a measure. The press teemed with essays and pampiilets,
in which all the arts of eloquence were used to ridicule the prejudices M\iich
supported an attachment to the King and Government of England. Among
the numerous writers on this momentous question, the most luminous, the most
eloquent, and the most forcible was Thomas Paine. His pamphlet entitled
•Common Sense' was not only read, but understood, by everybody; and
those who regard the independence of the United States as a blessing will
never cease to cherish the remembrance of Thomas Paine. Wliatever may
have been his subsequent career — in whatever light his religious principles
may be regarded — it should never be forgotten that to him, more than to any
single ivAividual, was owing the rapid diffusion of those sentiments and feelingt
vjhich produced the act of separation from Cheat Britain." — lb., pp. 343, 344.

484

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA

[chap. XXV.

i ■

was to be lodged in a new political unit, designated by the
terms, ' Confederation,' * Continental Constitution,' and ' Ameri-
can Republic' "*

" On the 7th of June, Richard Henry Lee, in behalf of the
Virginia delegates, submitted in Congress resolves on indepen-
dence, a confederation, and foreign alliances. His biographer
says that ' tradition relates that he prefaced his motion with a
speech,' portraying the resources of the colonies and their
capacity for defence, dwelling especially on the bearing which
an independent position might have on foreign Powers, and
concluded by urging the members so to act, that the day might
give birth to an American Republic. The motion was : —

" ' That these united colonies are, and of right ought to be,
free and independent States, that they are absolved from all
allegian.^ m the British Crown, and that all political connection
between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to
be totally dissolved.'

" * Thtiw it iH expedient forthwith to take the most effectual
measures for forming foreign alliances.'

" ' That a plan of confederation be prepared and transmitted
to the respective colonies for their consideration and approba-
tion.'

"John Adams seconded the motion. The Journal of Con-
gress says, 'that certain resolutions respecting independency
being moved and seconded, they were postponed till to-morrow
morning,' and that ' the members were enjoined to attend
punctually at ten o'clock in order to take the same into their
consideration. Jefferson says the reason of postponement was
that the House were obliged to attend to other business. The
record indicates that no speech was made on that day.

" The next day was Saturday. John Hancock, the President,
was in the chair ; and Charles Thompson was the Secretary.
The resolves were immediately referred to a Committee of the
Whole, in which Benjamin Harrison presided — the confidential
correspondent of Washington, and subsequently Governor of
Virginia. They were debated with animation until seven o'clock
in the evening, when the President resumed the chair, and
reported that the Committee had considered the matter referred

Frotliingham's Rise of the Republic of the United States, p. 512.

l»W,l».'i,!'.i.li'.iJ<^.^ -,*.

HAP. XXV.

}d by the
d ' Ameri-

lalf of the
Q indepen-
biographer
ion with a
and their
ing which
owers, and
day might
is: —

ught to be,
d from all
connection
i ought to

)st effectual

transmitted
id approba-

lal of Con-
ependency
to-morrow
to attend
into their
lement was
iness. The

e President,
Secretary,
ttee of the
confidential
fovemor of
iven o'clock
chair, and
ter referred

512.

CHAP. XXV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

485

to them, but, not having come to any decision, directed him to
move for leave to sit again on Monday.

" In Congress, on Monday, Edward Rutledge moved that the
question be postponed three weeks. Tlie debate on this day
continued until seven o'clock in the evening. Not a single
speech of any member is known to be extant. Jefferson at the
time summed up the arguments used by the speakers during
both days The result may be given in his words : ' It appear-
ing, in the course of the debates, that the colonies of New York,
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland,, and South
Carolina were not yet matured for falling from the parent
stem, but that they wore fast advancing to that state, it waj
thought most prudent to wait awhile for them. It was agreci
in Committee of the Whole to report to Congress a resolution,
which was adopted by a vote of seven colonies t». five, and this
postponed the resolution on independence to the 1st day of
July ; and ' in meanwhile, that no time be lost, a Committee be
appointed to prepare a declaration in conformity to it.' On the
next day a Committee was chosen for this purpose by ballot :
Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia ; John Adams, of Massachusetts ;
Benjamin Franklin, of Pennsylvania Roger Sherman, of Con-
necticut ; and Robert R. Livingstone, of JN ew York. [Such was
the Committee that prepared the Declaration of Independence.]
On the 12th a Committee of one from each colony was appointed
to report the form of confederation, and a Committee of five to
prepare a plan of treaties to be proposed to foreign Powers.

" When Congress postponed the vote on independence, the
popular movement in its favour was in full activity. Some of
the members left this body to engage in it. Others promoted
it by their counsel."*

" On the day agreed upon for the consideration of Mr. Lee's
motion, the 1st of July, Congress resolved itself into a Com-
mittee of the Whole ; the debates on the question were continued
with great warmth for three days. It had been determined to
take the vote by colonies ; and as a master-stroke of policy, the
author of which is not known to history, it had been proposed
and agreed, that the decision on the question, whatever might he

* Frotbinghaui's Rise of the Republic of the United States, Chap, xi., pp.
613—617.

486

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXV.

the state of the votes, should appear to the world as the unani-
vious voice of the Congress, On the first question [of indepen-
dence], six colonies were in the aflSrmative, and six in the nega-
tive — Pennsylvania being without a vote by the equal division
of her delegates. In this state of the business, it appears, on
the authority of evidence afterwards adduced before Parliament,
that Mr. Samuel Adams once more successfully exerted his
influence ; and that one of the delegates of Pennsylvania was
brought over to the side of independence. It is more probable,
however, that the influence of Mr. Adams extended no further
than to procure that one of the dissenting members withdraw
from the House ; and that the vote of Pennsylvania was thus
obtained,"*

It is thus seen that the Declaration ^^f Independence, so far

* Allan's American Revolution, Chap, xii., pp. 344, 346.

" The question before the Committee was the portion of the motion relating
to independence, submitted by the Vii^inia delegates on the 7th of June.
The New York members read their instructions, and were excused from
voting. Of the three delegates from Delaware, Rodney was absent, Read in
the negative, and thus the vote of that colony was lost. South Carolina was
in the negative ; and so was Pennsylvania, by the votes of Dickenson,
Willing, Morris, and Humphries, against those of Franklin, Morton, and
Wilson. Nine colonies — New Hampshire, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode
Island, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia — voted in
the affirmative. The Committee rose, the President resumed the chair, and
Harrison reported the resolution as having been agreed to. Edward
Rutledge, of South Carolina, said that were the vote postponed till next day,
he believed that his colleagues, though they disapproved of the resolution,
would then join in it for the sake of unanimity. The final question, in
accordance with this request, was postponed until the next day ; but it waa
agreed to go into Committee on the draft of the Declaration.

" On the 2nd July, probably fifty members were present in Congress.
After disposing of the business of the morning, it resumed the resolution
on independence, and probably without much debate proceeded to vote.
McKean sent an express to Rodney, at Dover, which procured his atten-
dance, and secured the vote of Delaware in the affirmative ; while the same
result was reached for Pennsylvania by Dickenson and Morris absenting
themselves, and allowing Franklin, Wilson, and Morton to give the vote
against Willing and Humphries. The South Carolina delegates^ concluded
to vote for the measure. Thus twelve colonies united in adopting the
following resolution :

" * That these united colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and
independent States ; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British
Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of

CHAP. XXV.

CHAP. XXV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

487

from being the spontaneous uprising of the American colonies,
was the result of months of agitation by scarcely a dozen
leaders in the movement, by canvassing at public meetings,
and of delegates elected by them, not excelled by any
political and nearly balanced parties in England or Canada
in a life and death struggle for victory. In this case, the
important question was to be decided by some fifty members
of Congress ; and when the first vote was given, after many
weeks of popular agitation, and three days of warm discussion
in Congress, there was a tie — six colonies for and six against
the Declaration of Independence — after which a majority of
one was obtained for the Declaration, by inducing the absence
of certain members opposed to it ; and then, when a majority of
votes was thus obtained, others were persuaded to vote for the
measure "for the sake of unanimity" though they were opposed
to the measure itself.

It has indeed been represented by some American historians,

Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.' " (Frothingham'a Rise
of the Republic of the United States, Chap, xi., pp. 537, 538.)

On the adoption of this resolution, continues the same historian, " Con-
gress went immediately into Committee of the Whole to consider the draft of
a Declaration of Independence, or the form of announcing the fact to the
world. During the remainder of that day, and during the sessions of the
3rd and 4th, the phraseology, allegations, and principles of this paper
were subjected to severe scrutiny. Its author relates : ' The pusillanimous
idea that we had friends in England worth keeping terms with still haunted
the minds of many. For this reason, those passages which conveyed censure
on the people of England were struck out, lest they should give them offence.
The clause, too, reprobating the enslaving of the inhabitants of Africa was
struck out in complaisance to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never
attempted to restrain the importation of slaves, and who, on the contrary,
wished to continue it. Our northern brethren also, I believe, felt a little ten-
der under these censures ; for though their people had very few slaves them-
selves, yet they had been pretty considerable carriers of them to others.'
(Memoirs of Jefferson, i. 15.) The striking out of the passage declaring the
slave trade * piratical warfare against human nature itself,' was deeply re-
gretted by many of that generation. Other alterations were for the better,
making the paper more dispassionate and terse, and — what was no small im-
provement — more brief and exact. On the evening of the 4th the Committee
rose, when Harrison reported the Declaration as having been agreed upon.
It was then adopted by twelve States, unanimously." [That is, by the majority
of the delegates of twelve provinces, and, of course, reported as " unanimous,"
according to previous agreement.] — lb., ■p. 539.

488

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXV.

I-I

that the vote of Congress for Independence was unanimous ;
but the fact is far otherwise. As the vote was taken by
colonies, and not by the majority of the individual mem'i.2rs
present, as in ordinary legislative proceedings, the majority
of the delegates from each colony determined the vote of that
colony ; and by a previous and very adroit proposal, an agree-
ment was entered into that the vote of Congress should he
published to the world as unanimous, however divided the
votes of members on the question of Independence might
be ; and on this ground the signatures of those who had op-
posed it, as well as of those who voted in favour of it, were
ultimately affixed to the Declaration, though it was published
and authenticated by the signatures of the President, John
Hancock, of Massachusetts, and Charles Thompson, of Phila-
delphia, as Secretary.

The Declaration of Independence, as thus adopted, is as
follows :

" A Declaration by the Representatives of the United States of America,
in Congress assembled :

" When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people
to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and
to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to
which the laws of nature and nature's God entitle them, a decent respect
to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes
which impel them to such separation.

" We hold these truths to be self-evident : that all men are created equal ;
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights ; that
among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ; that to secure
these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the governed ; and whenever any form of govern-
ment becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or
abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such
principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most
likely to effect tlieir safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, would dictate
that governments long established should not be changed for light and
transient causes ; and accordingly, all experience hath shown that mankind
are more inclined to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right them-
selves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed ; but when
a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object,
evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their riglit,
it is their duty to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for
their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies,
And such is now the necessity which coustrains them to alter their former

CHAP. XXV.

CHAP. XXV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

489

nanimaus ;

taken by
il memljrs
le majority
ote of that
1, an agree -
t should he
livided the
ence might
ho had op-

of it, were
s published
ident, John
I, of Phila-

)pted, is as

8 of America,

for one people
1 another, and
ual station to
decent respect
ire the causes

created equal ;
e rights ; that
;hat to secure
ng their just
rm of govern-
ple to alter or
ition on such
all seem most
would dictate
"or light and
that mankind
> right them-
id ; but when

same object,
s their right,
ew guards for
;hese colonies,

their former

ByBtcms of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain
is a liistory of repeated injuries and usurpations ; all having in direct object
the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States : to prove this,
let facts be exhibited to a candid world,

" He has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome and necessary for
the public good.

" He has forbidden his Qovernnirs to pass laws of immediate and pressing
importance, unless suspended in their operations till his assent should be
obUiined ; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to
them.

" He has refused to pass other laws, for the accommodation cf large
districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the riglits of repre-
sentation in the Legislature ; a right inestimable to them, and formidable to
tyrants only.

" He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, unconjfortable,
and distant from the depositories of their public records, for the sole purpose
of fatiguing them into compliance with liis measures.

" He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing, with
manly firmness, his invasion on the rights of the people.

" He has refused, for a long time after such dissolution, to cause others to
be elected, whereby the legislative powers, incapable of anniliilation, have
returned to the people at large for their exercise — the State remaining, in the
meantime, exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convul-
sions within.

" He has endeavoured to prevent the population of the.e States ; for that
purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners, refusing to pass
others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new
appropriations of lands.

" He has obstnicted the administration of justice, by refusing his assent
to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

" He has made judges dependent on his will alone for the tenure of their
oflBces, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

" He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of
officers, to harass our people and eat out their substance.

" He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies, without the
consent of our Legislatures.

" He has affected to render the military independent of, n ^. uperior to,
the civil power.

" He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction forf ign to
our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent fo their
pretended acts of legislation.

" For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us.

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

" For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world.

" For imposing taxes on us without our consent.

" For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefit of trial by jury.

490

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [VAIAP. XXV.

" For transporting uh bcyon<l aeiis, to bo tried lor prutendcul oironctiH,

" For uboliHliing the i'ree Hyateni of KiigliMli laws in a neij,'lil)<)uring Pro-
vince, fatiiblisliiiig therein an urbitrury governnieiit, and eiihirging its
boundiuies so an to rcnih'r it at once un exumplu and lit instrument fur
introducing the same absolute rule into' these colonies.

" For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and
altering fundamentally the forms of our governments.

" For suspending our own Lt'.giir'atures, and declaring thenise' 'vested

with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

" He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his i)rotection,
and waging war against us.

" He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coast?, burnt our towns, and
destroyed the lives of our people.

" He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries
to complete the work of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with
circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous
ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

" He has constrained our fellow-citizens, taken captive on the high seas,
to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their
friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

" He has excited domestick insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured
to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indinn savages,
whose known rule of warfare is undistinguished destruction of a'' ^s, sexes,
and conditions.

" In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for reclrcos in the
most humble terms : our repeated petitions have been answered only by
repeated injury. A prince whose character is thus marked by every act which
may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

" Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We
have warned them, from time to time, of attempts by their Legislature to
extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us ; we have reminded them of
the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here ; we have appealed
to their native justice and magnanimity ; and we have conjured them,
by the ties of our common kindred, to disavow these usurpations,
which would inevitably interrupt our connection and correspondence. They
too have been deaf to the voice of justice and consanguinity. We must,
therefore, acquiesce in the necessity which denounces our separation, and
hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace
friends.

" We therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in
General Congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world
for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of
the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these
United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, Free and Independent States ;
and that they are absolved from allegiance to the British Crown ; and that
all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and
ought to be, totally dissolved; and that, as free and independent States, they

1 I

[chap. XXV,

OIIAP, XXV.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

491

I ofTeiiciiH.
,'lil)(mniig Pro-
[ t.-nla]'giiii{ itH
instrument for

uiblu laws, and

lac' " vested

his protection,

)ur towns, and

;n mercenaries
ly begun with
most barbarous

the higli seas,
oners of their

as endeavoured
[ndinn savages,
fal' fl, sexes,

redrcos in the
wered only by
2very act which

brethren. We

Legislature to

linded them of

have appealed

:onjured them,

le usurpations,

mdence. They

ity. We must,

separation, and

war, in peace

of America, in
je of the world
le authority of
ilare, that these
jendent States ;
own ; and that
Britain is, and
3nt States, they

have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, ostublish
commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent Suites may
of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm relianco
on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other
our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honour."

Note.—Thia Declaration will be discussed in the next chapter.

492

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVI.

ti '

CHAPTER XXVI.

Declaration of Indepbndencb Discussed.

The foregoing chapters bear ample testimony how heartily I
have sympathized with our elder brother colonists of America,
in their conception and manly advocacy and defence of their
constitutional rights as British subjects ; how faithfully I have
narrated their wrongs and advocated their rights, and how
utterly I have abhorred the despotic conduct of George the
Third, and of his corrupt Ministers and mercenary and corrupted
Parliament, in their unscrupulous efforts to wrest from the
American colonists the attributes and privileges of British
freemen, and to convert their lands, with their harbours and
commerce, into mere plantations and instruments to enrich the
manufacturers and merchants of England, and provide places of
honour and emolument for the scions and protegees of the
British aristocracy and Parliament. But I cannot sympathize
with, much less defend, the leaders of the old American colonists
in the- repudiating what they had professed from their fore-
fathers ; in avowing what they had for many years denied ; in
making their confiding and distinguished defenders in the
British Parliament — the Chathams, Camdens, Sherbumes, the
Foxes, Burkes, and Cavendishes — liars in presence of all Europe ;
in deliberately practising upon their fellow-colonists what they
had so loudly complained of against the King and Parliament
of Great Britain ; in seeking the alliance of a Power which had
sought to destroy them for a hundred years, against the land of
their forefathers which had protected them during that hundred
years, and whose Administration had wronged and sought to
oppress them for only twelve years.

CHAP. XXVI.

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

493

After many years of anxious study and reflection, I have
a strong conviction that the Declaration of American Inde-
pendence, in 1776, was a great mistake in itself, a great ca-
lamity to America as well as to England, a great injustice to
many thousands on both sides of the Atlantic, a great loss of
human life, a great blow to the real liberties of mankind, and a
great impediment to the highest Christian and Anglo-Saxon
civilization among the nations of the world.

In this summary statement of opinion — so contrary to the
sentiments of American historians and to popular feeling in the
United States — I mean no reflection on the motives, character,
patriotism, and abilities of those great men who advocated and
secured the adoption of the Declaration of Independence in the
General Congress of 1776. I believe America has never pro-
duced a race of statesmen equal in purity of character, in
comprehensiveness of views, in noble patriotism and moral
courage, to " the Fathers of the American Revolution." Their
discussions of public questions, during the eleven years which
preceded the Declaration of Independence, evince a clearness
of discernment, an accuracy of statement, a niceness of dis-
tinction, a thorough knowledge of the principles of government,
and the mutual relation of colonies and the parent State,
elegance of diction, and force of argument, not surpassed in
discussions of the kind in any age or country ; their diplomatic
correspondence displays great superiority in every respect over
the English statesmen of the day, who sought to oppress them ;
the correspondence of Washington with General Gage com-
manded alike the admiration of Europe and the gratitude of
America ; the memorials and other public papers transmitted to
England by the American Congress, and written by Jay and
other members, drew forth from the Earl of Chatham, in the
House of Lords, January 20th, 1775, the following eulogy :
" When your lordships look at the papers transmitted to us
from America — when you consider their decency, firmness, and
wisdom, you cannot but respect their cause, and wish to make
it your own. For myself, I must avow that in all my reading —
and I have read Thucydides, and have studied and admired the
master States of the world — for solidity of reason, force of
sagacity, and wisdom of conclusion under a complication of
diflicult circumstances, no nation or body of men can stand in

[J i . !'^''Vr!'* .

494

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVI.

preference to the General Congress at Philadelphia. The
histories of Greece and Rome give us nothing equal to it, and
all attempts to impose servitude upon such a mighty continental
nation must be vain."

" We shall be forced ultimately to retract ; let us retract while
we can, not when we must. These violent Acts must be i j-
pealed ; you will repeal them ; I pledge myself for it, I stake
my reputation on it, that you will in the end repeal them."

(Those violent Acts were repealed three years afterwards.)

When the Earl of Shelburne read the reply, written by
Jefferson, of the Virginia Legislature, to Lor;^ ^^orth's proposi-
tion, his Lordship said: " In my life, I was n*. er more pleased
with a State paper than with the Assembly of Virginia's dis-
cussion of Lord North's proposition. It is masterly. But what
I fear is that the evil is irretrievable."

Among the statesmanlike productions of that period, the cor-
respondence of Franklin, the masterly letters of Dickenson, the
letters and State papers of Samuel and John Adams, Jay and
Livingstone, and of many others, exhibit a scholarly race of states-
men and writers of whom any nation or age might be proud.

But it must not be forgotten that the education of every one
of these great men, and their training in public affairs, was
under English constitutional government, for which every one
of them (except Samuel Adams) expressed their unqualified
admiration, and to which they avowed their unswerving attach-
ment to within twelve months of the declaration of indepen-
dence. Though the United States can boast of many distin-
guished scholars and politicians and jurists, I believe American
democracy has never produced a generation of scholarly, able,
and stainless statesmen, such as those who had received the
whole of their mental, moral, and political training when
America formed a part of the British empire.

It is not surprising, indeed, that the major part (for they
were not unanimous) of so noble and patriotic a class of states-
men should, by the wicked policy and cruel measures against
them by the worst administration of government that ever
ruled England, be betrayed into an act which they had so many
years disavowed. Placing, as they rightly did, in the fore-
ground the civil and religious liberties of Englishmen as the
first ingredient of the elements of political greatness and social

CHAP. XXVI.

ilphia. The
d to it, and
' continental

etract while
must be ij-
[• it, I stake

them."
erwards.)

written by
th's proposi-
aaore pleased
irginia's dis-
r. But what

riod, the cor-
ickenson, the
ms, Jay and
race of states-
be proud,
of every one
5 affairs, was
h every one
' unqualified
rving attach-
of indepen-
tnany distin-
ve American
lolarly, able,
received the
ining when

,rt (for they
iss of states-
ures against
it that ever
ad so many
in the fore-
imen as the
ss and social

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

495

progress, they became exasperated into the conviction that the
last and only effective means of maintaining those liberties
was to sever their connection with England altogether, and
declare their own absolute independence. We honour the
sentiments and courage which prompted them to maintain and
defend their liberties ; we question not the purity and patriot-
ism of their motives in declaring independence as the means of
securing those liberties ; but we must believe that, had they
maintained the integrity of their professions and positions for
even a twelvemonth longer, they would have achieved all for
which they had contended, would have become a free and
happy country, as Canada now is, beside the mother country
and not in antagonism to her, maintaining inviolate their
national life and traditions, instead of forming an alliance for
bloody warfare with their own former and their mother
country's hereditary enemies.

It was unnatural and disgraceful for the British Ministry to
employ German mercenaries and savage Indians to subdue the
American colonists to unconditional obedience ; but was it less
unnatural for the colonists themselves to seek and obtain the
alliance of the King of France, whose government was a
despotism, and who had for a hundred years sought to destroy
the colonists, had murdered them without mercy, and employed
by high premiums the Indians to butcher and scalp men, women,
and children of the colonists — indeed, to " drive them into the
sea," and to exterminate them from the soil of America ? Yet
with such enemies of civil and religious liberty, with such
enemies of their own liberties, and even their existence as Anglo-
Saxons, the colonists sought and obtained an alliance against
the mother coimtry, which had effectually, and at an immense
expenditure, defended them against the efforts of both France
and Spain to destroy them. Had the American colonists main-
tained the position and professions after 1776, as they had
maintained them before 1776, presenting the contrast of their
own integrity and unity and patriotism to the perfidious
counsels, mercenary and un-English policy of the British
Ministry and Parliament, they would have escaped the disas-
trous defeats and bloodshed of 1777-8, and would have repeated
the victories which they had gained over the English soldiers
in 1775 and the early part of 1776. Unprepared and sadly

■WW

496

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVI,

deficient in arms and ammunition, they repulsed the regular
English soldiers sent against them at Concord, at Lexington, at
Bunker's Hill; they had shut up as prisoners the largest
English army ever sent to New England, and, though com-
manded by such generals as Howe and Clinton, compelled their
evacuation of the city of Boston. In the Southern States they
had routed the English forces, and had compelled t^ie Governors
of Virginia and South and North Carolina to take refuge on
board of English men-of-war. Before the declaration of inde-
pendence, the colonists fought with the enthusiasm of English-
men for Englishmen's rights, and the British soldiers fought
without heart against their fellow-subjects contending for what
many of both the soluiers and officers knew to be rights dear
to all true Englishmen ; but when the Congress of the American
colonies declared themselves to be no longer Englishmen, no
longer supporters of the constitutional rights of Englishmen,
but separationists from England, and seeking alliance with the
enemies of England, then the English army felt that they were
fighting against enemies and not fellow-subjects, and fought
with an energy and courage which carried disaster, in almost
every instance, to the heretofore united but now divided
colonists, until France and Spain came to their assistance.

With these preliminary and general remarks, we proceed to
state more specifically the grounds on which we regard, as a
calamity to the interests of true liberty and of civilization, the
change of position, policy, and principles avow ed by the General
Congress in the Declaration of Independence, 1776.

I. The Declaration of Independence was a renunciation of all
the principles on which the General Congress, Provincial Legis-
latures, and Conventions professed to act from the beginning
of the contest. The foregoing pages present abundant testi-
mony and illustration how earnestly, how constantly, how
unanimously the American colonists expressed their attachment
to the mother country and to the principles of the British Con-
stitution — how indignantly they repelled, as an insult and a
slander, every suspicion and statement that they meditated or
desired independence, or that they would ever consent to sever
the ties of their connection with the mother country and the
glorious principles of her constitution of government.

In the same Congress of 1775, by which Washington was

CHAP. XXVI.

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIP. TIMES

497

appointed Commander-in-Chief, the higher departments of the
army were organized. Bills of credit to the amount of three
millions were emitted to defray the expenses of the war, and
after the battles of Lexington and Bunker's Hill, while the
English army were shut in Boston by the Provincial volunteers,
a declaration was signed by Congress, justifying their proceed-
ings, but disdaining any idea of separation from England. They
say, " We are reduced to the alternative of choosing an uncon-
stitutional submission to the t3n:anny of irritated Ministers, or
resistance by force. The latter is our choice. We have counted
the cost of this contest, and find nothing so dreadful as volun-
tary slavery. Honour, justice, and humanity forbid us tamely
to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant
ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to
receive from us. * *

" With hearts fortified with these animating reflections, we
most solemnly, before God and the world, declare that, exerting
the utmost energy of those powers which our beneficent
Creator hath graciously bestowed upon us, the arms we have
been compelled by our enemies to assume, we will, in defiance of
every hazard, with unabating firmness and perseverance, employ
for the preservation of our liberties ; being with one mind re-
solved to die freemen rather than^to live slaves.

" Lest this declaration should disquiet the minds of our friends
and fellow-subjects in any part of the empire, we assure them
that we mean not to dissolve that union which has so long and
80 happily subsisted between us, and ivhich we sincerely wish
to see restored. Necessity has not yet driven us to that
desperate measure, or induced us to excite any other nation to
war against them. We have not raised armies with ambitious
designs of separating from Great Britain, and of establishing
independent States. We fight not for glory or for conquest.
We exhibit to mankind the remarkable spectacle of a people
attacked by unprovoked enemies, without any imputation or
even suspicion of oflence. They boast of their privileges and
civilization, and yet proffer no milder conditions than servitude
or death.

" In our native land, in defence of the freedom that is our
birthright, and which we ever enjoyed until the late violation
of it, for the protection of our property acquired solely by the
32

;~'

498

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVI.

honest industry of our forefathers and ourselves, against vio-
lence actually offered, we have taken up arms. We shall lay
them down when hostilities shall cease on the part of the
aggressors, and all danger of their being renewed shall L=^ re-
moved, and not before."*

" Amidst these hostile operations, the voice of peace was yet
heard — allegiance to the King was still acknowhidged, and a
lingering hope remained that an accommodation was not impos-
sible. Congress voted a petition to his Majesty, replete with
professions of duty and attachment ; and addressed a letter to
the people of England, conjuring them, by the endearing appella-
tions of 'friends, countrymen, and brethren,' to prevent the
dissolution of ' that connection which the remembrance of
former friendships, pride in the glorious achievements of common
ancestors, and affection for the heirs of their virtues had here-
tofore maintained.' They uniformly disclaimed any idea of
independenxie, and professed themselves to consider union with
England, on constitidional principles, as the greatest blessing
which could be bestowed on them."-|-

It is needless to multiply authorities and illustrations ; the
whole tenor of the history of the colonies, as presented in the
preceding chapters of this volume, evinces their universal appre-
ciation of the principles of the British Constitution and their
universal attachment to union with the mother country .J

♦ Judge Marshall's History of the American Colonies, Chap. XIV.,
pp. 449—451.

t 76., p. 457.

X " The commencement of hostilities on the 19th of April, 1775, exhibited
the parent State in an odious point of view. But, nevertheless, at that
time, and for a twelvemonth after, a majority if the colonists wished for no
more than to be re-established as subjects in their ancient rights. Had
independence been their object, even at the commencement of hostilities,
they would have rescinded the associations which have been already men-
tioned, and imported more largely than ever. Common sense revolts at the
idea that colonists, unfurnished with military stores and wanting manufoc-
tures of every kind, should, at the time of their intending a serious struggle
for independence, by a voluntary agreement, deprive themselves of the
obvious means of procuring such foreign supplies as their circumstances
might make necessary. Instead of pursuing a line of conduct which might
have been dictated by a wish for independence, they continued their exports
for nearly a year after they ceased to import. This not only lessened the
debts they owed to Great Britain, but furnished additional means for carry-

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

499

es, Chap. XIV.,

Even in the spring of 1776, after months of agitation by
advocates of separation in various colonies, a majority of the
delegates in Congress were for weeks opposed to separation ;
and it required long preparation to familiarize the minds of its
advocates to separation, and to reconcile any considerable
number of colonists to hostile severance from the land of their
forefathers. It may easily be conceived what must have been
the shock to a large part, if not a majority, of the colonists, to
have burst upon them, after weeks' secret session of Congress,
a declaration which, under the term Independence, renounced
all the principles and associations in which they had been
educated, which they had often avowed and held dear from
their ancestors, which proclaimed their mother country their
enemy, and denounced connection with her a crime. Such a
renunciation of the past, and wrenching from it, could not
otherwise than weaken the foundations of society and the
obligation of oaths, as may be seen by a comparison in these
respects of the sacredness of laws and oaths, and their adminis-
tration in America before and since the revolution.

II. The Declaration of Independence was a violation of good
faith to those statesmen and numerous other parties in Eng-
land who had, in and out of Parliament, supported the rights
and character of the colonies during the whole contest. They
had all done so upon the ground that the colonists were
contending for the constitutional rights of Englishmen; that
they intended and desired nothing more. On the ground that
the colonists, like the barons of Runnymede, were contending for
the sacred rights of Englishmen, and relying on the faith of
their declaration that Englishmen they would ever remain, their
cause was patriotically espoused and nobly vindicated in
England by Lords Chatham, Camden, Shelbume, the Duke of
Richmond, and others in the House of Lords ; by Messrs. Burke
and Fox, Lord John Cavendish, Mr. Dunning (afterwards Lord
Ashburton), and others in the House of Commons ; and by cor-
ing on war against the.nselves. To aim at independence, and at the same
time to transfer their resources to their enemies, could not have been the
policy of an enlightened people. It was not till some time in 1776 that the
colonists began to take other ground, and contend that it was for their interest
to be for ever separated from Great Britain." (Dr. Ramsay's History of the
United States, Vol. II., Chap. xiL, pp. 168, 159.)

600

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA. [CHAP. XXVI.

porations of cities and towns, and multitudes out of Parliament.
Lord Mahon, in the sixth volume of his History of England
(pp. 35 — 37), relates that before the Earl of Chatham intro-
duced his famous " Provincial Bill for Settling Troubles in
America," and supported it by his masterly speeches in the
Lords, he sent for Dr. Franklin, the principal representative
of the colonists, to consult him and ascertain from him distinctly
whether there was any tendency or danger of the American
colonies separating from England, and was assured by Dr.
Franklin that there was not the least feeling in that direction ;
that the American colonies were universally loyal to connection
with the mother country, and desired and contended for no-
thing more than the constitutional rights of Englishmen.*

It was not till after this assurance, and it was under this
conviction and with this object, that the Earl of Chatham
delivered those appeals in behalf of America which electrified
the British public, and gave tone to the subsequent debates in
both Houses of Parliament, These eloquent and unanswerable
defences of British rights, invaded and denied in regard to the
persons of the American colonists, were delivered in 1775 and
the early part of 1776 ; but scarcely had their echoes died away
on the waves of the Atlantic, when news came from America

* Lord Mahon says : " In framing this measure, he sought the aid and
counsel of Dr, Franklin. Already, in the month of August preceding, they
had become accjuainted, through the mediation of Lord Stanhope, who
carried Dr. Franklin to Hayes (the residence of Lord Chatham). Lord
Chatham had then referred to the idea which began to prevail in England,
that America aimed at setting up for herself as a separate State. The truth of
any stich idea was loudly denied by Dr. Franklin, ' I assured his lordship,'
Dr. Franklin said, ' that having more than once travelled almost from one
end of the continent to the other, and kept a great variety of company, eat-
ing and drinking and conversing with them freely, I never had heard from
any person, drunk or sober, the least expression of a wish for separation, or
hint that such a thing would be advantageous to America. * * In fine,
Lord Chatham expressed much satisfaction in my having called upon him,
and particularly in the assurances I had given him that America did rwt aim at
independence.'" (Works, Vol. V., p. 7, ed. 1844.)

The Earl of Chatham's last speech was an appeal against the separation of
the American colonies from England, and his last words were : " My lords,
I rejoice that the grave has not closed upon me ; that I am still alive to lift
up my voice against the dismemberment of this ancient and most noble
monarchy." (Bancroft, Vol. IX., p. 495.)

[chap. XXVI.

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

501

»f Parliament,
r of England
atham intro-
Troubles in
jeches in £he
epresentative
lim distinctly
ihe American
jured by Dr.
lat direction ;
to connection
nded for no-
jhmen.*
IS under this

of Chatham
ch electrified
it debates in
unanswerable
regard to the

in 1775 and
les died away
rom America

:lit the aid and
preceding, they
Stanhope, who
hathani). Lord
ail in England,
te. The truth of
id his lordship/
Imost from one
f company, eat-
had heard from
r separation, or
a. * * In fine,
lied upon liini,
a did not aim at

he separation of
re : " My lords,
still alive to lift
ind most noble

that the Congress, so warmly eulogized in the British Parlia-
ment for its fidelity to English connection, as well as to the
rights of England, had, after a secret session of two months,
renounced all connection with England, and all acknowledg-
ment of its authority and principles of government, thus ful-
filling the statements and predictions of the parliamentary
enemies of American rights, and presenting their advocates,
Chatham, Camden, Burke, etc., as liars and deceivers before the
British nation and in the face of all Europe. The Ministerial
party triumphed ; the advocates of colonial rights were con-
founded, and their influence in and out of Parliament was
paralyzed. The power of the corrupt Ministers who had been
oppressing the colonies for ten years, was tottering to their fall ;
they had played their last card; they had exhausted their
credit; they had staked their existence on the truth of the
statements they had made, and the accomplishmennt of the
measures they had adopted ; their measures had failed ; they
saw that half-armed colonists had everywhere repulsed the
picked English generals and soldiers ; their statements as to
the intentions and principles of the colonists would have also
been falsified had the Congress in 1776 adhered to the declara-
tion of principles and avowal of purposes which it had made
in 1775 ; the friends of American rights would have been
triumphant, in and out of Parliament, in England, and 1777
would doubtless have witnessed the overthrow of the corrupt
British Ministry, the constitutional freedom of the American
colonies in connection with the unity of the empire, instead of
seven years' bloody warfare, the destruction of the national life
and of the oneness of the Anglo-Saxon race.

III. But the Declaration of Independence on the part of its
authors was not only a violation of good faith to the states-
men and others in England who had advocated the constitu-
tional rights of the colonists, it was also a violation both of
good faith and justice to their colonial fellow-countrymen who
continued to adhere to connection with the mother country upon
the principles professed in all times past by the separationists
themselves.*

* " In the beginning of the memorable year 1776, there was a public opinion
in favour of independence in New England, and but little more than indi-
vidual preferences for it in the Middle or Southern colonies. So deeply

602

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVI

The adherents of connection with England had, with the
exception of certain office-holders and their relations, been as
earnest advocates of colonial rights as had the leaders of the
separation. The opponents of the constitutional rights of the
colonies, in the colonies, were few and far between — not nume-
rous enough to form a party, or even to be called a party. The
Congress of 1775 declared the colonies to be " a unit " in their
determination to defend their rights, but disdained the idea of
separation from the mother country; and Mr. John Adams
stated at the same time : " All America is united in sentiment.
When a masterly statesman, to whom America has erected a
statue in her heart for his integrity, fortitude, and perseverance
in her cause, invented a Committee of Correspondence in Boston,
did not every colony, nay, every county, city, hundred, and
town upon the whole continent adopt the measure as if it had
been a revelation from above ? Look over the resolves of the
colonies for the past year ; you will see that one understanding
governs, one heart animates the whole."*

Such were the sentiments and feelings of America in resisting
the innovations upon their rights of a British Ministry, while
they denied the idea of separation from the mother country as
a calumny ; and such were the grounds on which millions in
England and Scotland, in and out of Parliament, supported
them.-f-

seated was the affection for the mother country, that it required all the severe
acta of war, directed hy an inexorable Ministry and the fierce words from the
throne, to be made fully known throughout America before the majority of
the people could be persuaded to renounce their allegiance and assume the
sovereignty. Jefferson says that Samuel Adams was constantly holding
caucuses with distinguished men, in which the measures to be pursued were
generally determined upon, and their several parts were assigned to the
actors who afterwards appeared in them." (Frothingham's Rise of the
Republic of the United States, pp. 468, 469.)

" Though that measure (independence), a few months before, was not only
foreign from their wishes, but the object of their abhorrence, the current
suddenly became so strong in its favour that it bore down all opposition.
The multitude was hurried down the stream ; but some worthy men could
not easily reconcile themselves to the idea of an eternal separation from a
country to which they had long been bound by the most endearing ties."
(Ramsay's History of the United States, Vol. II., pp. 161, 162.)

* Quoted by Bancroft, Vol. VII., p. 234.

t " Millions in England and Scotland" (said John Adams, who nominated

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

503

nrho nominated

When, therefore, the Congress at Philadelphia voted, by a
majority of one or two, but declaring that their vote should be
published as unanimous, to renounce all tlie professions of the past
of connection with the mother country, to declare her their enemy,
and to avow eternal separation from her, it may be easily con-
ceived how a large portion of the colonists would feel that their
confidence had been betrayed ; that the representations they had
made to English statesmen would bear the stamp of untruth ;
that their hopes had been blasted, and that they were now to
be treated as rebels and traitors for adhering to the faith of
their forefathers ; for. as Mr. Allan remarks, the Declaration
of Independence " left no neutrals. He who was not for inde-
pendence, unconditional independence, was an enemy."* Thus
the many tens of thousands of colonists who adhered to the
faith of their forefathers, and the traditions and professions of
their own personal history, were, by a single act of Congress,
declared "enemies" of their country, " rebels," and even "traitors,"
because they would not renounce their oath of allegiance, and
swear allegiance to a self and newly-created authority, to re-
linquish the defence of the rights of Englishmen for the theory
of republican independence, adherence to which had been
advocated by the Chathams and Burkes in the British Parlia-
ment, in preference to the new doctrines propounded by the
leaders in the Philadelphia Congress, for maintaining the unity
and life of a great nation rather than dismember and destroy it.
Was it doing as one would be done by ? Was it not a violation
of good faith, and hard treatment, for men to be declared by a
new tribunal criminals in July, for maintaining what all had
held to be loyal and patriotic in January ? All the arguments
and appeals of the Northern States against the separation of the

Washington as Commander-in-Chief, and was afterwards President of the
United States) — " millions in England and Scotland think it unrighteous,
impolitic, and ruinous to make war upon us ; Jind a Minister, though he may
have a marble heart, will proceed with a desponding spirit. London has
bound her members under their hands to assist uij ; Bristol has chosen two
known friends of America ; many of the most virtuous of the nobility and
gentry are for us, and among them a St. Asaph, a Camden, and a Chatham ;
the best bishop that adorns the bench, as great a judge as the nation can
boast, and the greatest statesman it ever saw." (Bancroft's History of the
United States, Vol. VII., Chap, xxi., p. 235.)
* History of the American Revolution, Vol. I., Chap, xiii., p. 353.

504

THE LOYALISTS OF AMKUICA [CHAP. XXVL

Soutliern States from the Republic, aa destructive of the life of
the nation, in the recent civil war of 18G4 — 18G9, wore equally
strong, on the same ground, against the separation of the
American colonies from the mother country in the civil war of
177G— 1783. The United Empire Loyalists of that day were,
as the conservators of the life of the nation, against the dis-
memberment of the empire, as are the Americans of the Northern
States of the present day the conservators of the life of their
nation in opposing the dismemberment of the Republic.

IV. But this is not all. This Declaration of the 4th of July,
177C, was the commencement of persecutions, proscriptions, and
confiscations of property against those who refused to renounce
the oaths which they had taken, as well as the principles and
traditions which had, until then, been professed by their persecu-
tors and oppressors as well as by themselves. The declaration
of independence had been made in the name and for the pro-
fessed purposes of liberty ; but the very first acts under it
were to deprive a large portion of the colonists not only of
liberty of action, but liberty of thought and opinion — to extract
from them oaths and declarations which could not have been
sincere, and which could have been little better than perjuries,
for the sole purpose of saving life, liberty, or property. They
were a numerous and intelligent portion of the community;
were equally interested in the welfare of the country as thoir
assailants, instead of being designated by every epithet of
opprobrium, and denied the freedom of opinion and privileges
of citizenship.* Mr. Elliott remarks : —

" The Tories 'comprised a large number, among whom were
many rich, cultivated, and kindly people ; these last, above all,

♦ It waa the plea then, as it had and has always been in n'' mny
whether vdelded by an individual or an oligarchy or a cm mittei', wlnther
under the pretext of liberty or of order, to perse "♦ ussenting parties,

under profession of preventing division and prom nity. But t ' nie

friends of liberty, even in perilous times, have ahv ndied unon the justice
of their principles and excellence of their policy ana leas' rs for support
and success, and not upon the prison, the gallows, and the nijioverishraent
of the dissenters by plunder. The Congress itself had declared to England
that the " colonists were a unit" in behalf of liberty ; but their own enact-
ments and proceedings against the Loyalists refuted their own statements.
Even in England, tyrannical and corrupt as was the Government at the time,
And divided as were both Parliament and people, and assailed by foreign

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

505

needed watching, and were most dangerous. In looking over
the harsh treatment of the Tories by the rebels, it should be
remembered that a covert enemy i.s more dangerous than an open
one, and that the Tories comprised both of these. Many men
of property and character in Ma.ssachusetts were in favour of
England, partly from conviction and partly from fear. That
large and often cultivated class called " Conservatives," who hold
by the past rather than hope for the future, and are constitu-
tionally timid, feared change ; they were naturally Tories.
Most of the Episcopalians in New England (though not in
Virginia) opposed the revolutionary movements. They had felt
the oppression and contempt of the New England Congrega-
tionalists, and looked to the English Government and the
English Church for help. But in Virginia, where they were
strong, this was not so; and there the Episcopalians were
among the warmest asserters of the rights of man."

" In New York there was at first a very large proportion of
Tories; in 1776, not less than twelve hundred and ninety-three
persons, in the County of Queen's alone, professed themselves
subjects to the King. In Suffolk County, eight hundred en-
rolled themselves as King's militia."

" In New Jersey, Governor Franklin, son of Benjamin Frank-
lin, led the King's friends, and was active against the Ameri-
cans until it became necessary to put him in confinement. The
war carried on between Tories and Whigs was more merciless
than any other, and more cruel and wanton than that of the
Indians."

and domestic enemies, the proceedings of both Houses of Parliament were
open to the public } every member was not only free to express his opinions,
but those opinions were fortliwith published to the world, and every man
throughout the kingdom enjoyed freedom of opinion. It was reserved for
the American Congress, while professing to found liberty, to conduct its pro-
ceedings in secret for eleven years, to suppress the freedom of the press
and individual freedom of opinion, and to treat as criminals these who
dissented from its acts of policy. The private biography and letters of the
principal actors in the American revolution, published during the present
century, show (with the exception of Washington and very few others) that
individual ambition had quite as much to do in the contest of separation
from the mother country as patriotic love of constitutional liberty, which,
even at this day, in the United States, is not comparable with that of Great
Britain — some of the ablest American writers being judges.

?T7?1

606

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVI.

" Laws were made in Rhode Island against all who supplied
the enemy with provisions, or gave them information.

" In Connecticut the Tories were not allowed to speak or
write agaiiist Congress or the Assembly.

" In Massachusetts a man might be banished unless he would
swear fealty to the cause of liberty.

"Severe laws were also passed against the Tories in New
Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, and Virginia, and in
nearly all the colonies now seaboard States.

" John Jay thought the Confiscation Act of New York
inexcusable and disgraceful."*

Mr. Hildreth remarks : " Very serious was the change in the
legal position of the class known as Tories — in many of the
States a very large minority, and in all, respectable for wealth
and social position. Of those thus stigmatized, some were
inclined to favour the utmost claims of the mother country ;
but the greater part, though determined to adhere to the British
connection, yet deprecated the policy which had brought on so
fatal a quan^el. This loyal minority, especially its more con-
spicuous members, as the warmth of political feeling increased,
had been exposed to the violence of mobs, and to all sorts of
personal indignities, in which private malice or a wanton and
violent spirit of mischief had been too often gratified under

* Elliott's New England History, Vol. II., Chap, xxvii., pp. 369—375.

" A large number of the merchants in all the chief commercial towns of
the colonies were openly hostile, or but coldly inclined to the common cause.
General Lee, sent to Newport (Rhode Island) to advise about throwing up
fortifications, called the principal persons among the disaffected before him, and
obliged them by a tremendous oath to support the authority of Congress. The
Assembly met shortly after, and passed an Act subjecting to death, with
confiscation of property, all who should hold intercourse with or assist the
British sliips. But to save Newport from destruction it presently became
necessary to permit a certain stated supply to be furnished to the British
ships from that town." (Hildreth's History of the United States, Vol. TIL,
Chap, xxxii., p. 102.)

" In the Middle colonies the unwillingness to separate from Greut Britain
was greater than in the colonies either to the North or South. One reason
prol)ably was, that in this division were the towns of New York and Phila-
delphia, which greatly profited by their trade to England, and which
contained a larger proportion of English and Scotch merchants, who, with
few exceptions, were attached to the royal cause." (Tucker's History of the
United States, Vol. I., p. 150.)

[chap. XXVI.

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

607

who supplied

ion.

i to speak or

less he would

>ries in New
;inia, and in

' New York

ihange in the
many of the
le for wealth
1, some were
bher country;
to the British
nought on so
its more con-
ing increased,
o till sorts of
wanton and
atified under

i. 369—375.

[lercial towns of
common cause.

out throwing up
before him, and
Congress. The
to death, with

ith or assist the

resently became

to the British

tates. Vol. III.,

Greut Britain
h. One reason
fork and Phila-
nd, and which
ants, who, with
History of the

the guise of patriotism. By the recent political changes, Tories
and suspected persons became exposed to dangers from the law
as well as from mobs. Having boldly seized the reins of
government, the new State authorities claimed the allegiance of
all residents within their limits, and under the lead and recom-
mendation of Congress, those who refused to acknowledge their
authority, or who adhered to their enemies, were exposed
to severe penalties, confiscation of property, imprisonment,
banishment, and finally death."*

^ Thus was a large minority of the most wealthy and intelli-
gent (their wealth and intelligence making them the greater
criminals) inhabitants of the colonies, by the act of a new body
not known to the Constitutions of any of their provinces,
reduced to the alternative of violating their convictions, con-
sciences, aad oaths, or being branded and treated as enemies of
their country, deprived not only of the freedom of the press
and of speech, but made criminals for even neutrality and
silence, and their property confiscated to defray the expenses of
a war upon themselves. Had Congress, in July, 177G, main-
tained the principles and objects it avowed even in the autumn
of 1775, there would have been no occasion of thus violating
good faith and common justice to the large minority of the
colonies; there is every reason to believe that there would
have been a universal rallying, as there had been the year
before, in defence of the constitutional rights of Englishmen
and the unimpaired life of the empire ; there would have been
a far larger military force of enthusiastic and patriotic volun-
teers collected and organized to defend those rights than could
ever afterwards be embodied to support independence ; there
would have been a union of the friends of constitutional liberty
on both sides of the Atlantic; good faith would have been

* History of the United States, Vol. III., Chap, xxxiii., pp. 137, 138.

On the 18th of June, 1776, about two weeks before adopting the
Declaration of Independence, Congress ^'Resolved, — That no man in these
colonies chai-ged with being a Tory, or unfriendly to tlie cause of American
liberty, be injured in his person or property, unless the proceeding against
him be founded on an order^f Congress or Comnii'^ee," etc. But this reso-
lution amounted practically to nothing. It seems to have been intended to
allay the fears and weaken ^he opposition of loyalists, but contributed nothing
for their protection, or to mitigate the cruel persecutions everywhere waged
against them.

508

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVI.

■^

kept on both sides, and the " millions in England and Scotland,"
sustained by the millions in America, instead of being aban-
doned by them in the very crisis of the contest in the mother
country, would have achieved in less than a twelvemonth a
victory for freedom, for civilization, and for humanity, far beyond
what had been accomplished in the English Revolution of 1G88.

V. The Declaration of Independence was the commencement
of weakness in the army of its authors, and of defeats in their
fields of battle. The Declaration has been announced as the
birth of a nation, though it was actiially the dismemberment
of a nation. It was hailed with every demonstration of joy
ard triumph on the part of those who had been prepared for
the event, and no eftbrts were spared on the part of those who
had advocated independence in the army, in the Congress, and
in the provinces, to accompany the circulation of the Declaration
with every enthusiastic expression of delight and anticipated
free government, in which, of course, they themselves would
occupy the chief places of profit and power. But this enthu-
siavSm, notwithstanding the glowing descriptions of some Ameri-
can historians, was far from being general or ardent. Lord
Mahon says: "As sent forth by Congress, the Declaration of
Independence having reached the camp of Washington, was,
by his orders (as commanded by Congress), read aloud at the
head of every regiment. There, as in most other places, it
excited much less notice than might have been supposed." An
American author of our own day (President Reed), most careful
in his statements, and most zealous in the cause of indepen-
dence, observes that " No one can read the private correspon-
dence of the times without being struck with the slight im-
pression made on either the army or the mass of the people by
the Declaration."*

The Adjutant-General, in his familiar and almost daily letters
to his wife, does not even allude to it. But though there was
little enthusiasm, there were some excesses. At New York a
party of soldiers, with tumultuary violence, tore down and
beheaded a statue of the King which stood upon Broadway,

* Life and Correspondence of President Reed, Vol. I., p. 195. Washing-
ton, however, in his public letter to Congress (unless Mr. Jared Sparks has
improved this passage), says that the troops had testified their "warmest
approbation." (Writings, Vol. III., p. 467.)

'CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

509

having been erected only six years before. Washington, greatly
to his honour, did not shrink from the duty of rebuking them
next day, in his General Orders, for their misdirected zeal.*

Within a few weeks after the Declaration of Independence,
Washington's army, composed of forces raised before that
Declaration, consisted of 27,000 men — a larger army than he
was ever after able to assemble, and more than twice as large
as he commanded within a few months afterwards.

It has been seen with what readiness, zeal, and enthusiasm
thousands and tens of thousands of volunteers offered their
services during the year 1775, and the first part of the year
1776, in defence of British liberty, in union with the friends
of civil liberty and defenders of American liberty in Eng-
land ; but when, after the Declaration of the 4th of July,
1776, the cause became one of Congressional liberty instead
of British liberty, of separation from the mother country
instead of union with it, of a new form of government instead
of one to which they had sworn allegiance, and which they had
ever lauded and professed to love, — then, in these novel circum-
stances, the provincial army dwindled from day to day by
desertions, as well as from other causes, and recruiting its ranks

* Lord Mahon's History of England from the Peace of Utrecht, Vol. VI.,
Chap, liv., pp. 161, 162.

Lord Mahon adds : " It was at this inauspicious juncture, only a few
hours after independence had been proclaimed in the ranks of his opponents,
that the bearer of the pacific commission. Lord Howe, arrived off Sandy
Hook. He had cause to regret most bitterly both the delay of his passage
and the limitation of his powers. He did not neglect, however, whatever
means of peace were still within his reach. He sent on shore a declaration,
announcing to the people the object of his mission. He despatched a friendly
letter, written at sea, to Dr. FranJ'.lin, at Philadelphia. But when Franklin's
answer came it showed him wholly adverse to a reconciliation, expressing in
strong terms his resentment of the 'atrocious injuries' which, as he said,
America had suffered from ' your unformed and proud nation.' Lord Howe's
next step was to send a flag of truce, with another letter, to Washington. But
here a preliminary point of form arose. Lord Howe, as holding the King's
commission, could not readily acknowledge any rank or title not derived from
his Majesty. He had therefore directed his letter to ' George Washington,
Esq.' On the other hand, Washington, feeling that, in his circumstances, to
yield a punctilio would be to sacrifice a principle, declined to receive or open
any letter not addressed to him as General. Thus at the very outset this
negotiation was cut short." — lb., pp. 162, 163.

RSp

:r'i

510

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVI.

',§

I*.
i

could only be effected by bounties in money and the promise of
lands ; the uninterrupted victories of the colonists during the
twelve months previous to the Declaration of Independence
were succeeded by uninterrupted defeats during the twelve
months succeeding it, with the exception of the brilliant and
successful surprise raids which Washington made upon Tren-
ton and Prinxieton. But these exploits were wholly owing to
Washington's skill, and sleepless energy, and heroic courage,
with feeble forces, in contrast to the lethargy and self-indul-
gence of the English officers on the one hand and the inactivity
of Congress on the other.

The lirst trial of strength and courage between the English
and revolutionary forces took place in August, a few weeks
after the Declaration of Independence, in the battle of Long
Island, in which Washington's army was completely defeated ;
New York and all New Jersey soon fell into the hands of the
British. For this success General Howe received the honour of
knighthood, as did General Carlton for similar success in
Canada — the one becoming Sir William Howe, and the other
Sir Guy Carlton ; but neither did much afterwards to merit
the honour. The English officers seemed to have anticipated a
pastime in America instead of hard fighting and severe service,
and the German mercenaries anticipated rich plunder and
sensual indulgence.

In the autumn and winter following Washington's defeat at
Long Island and forced evacuation of New York, and indeed of
New Jersey, Sir William Howe buried himself in self-indul-
gent inactivity for six months in New York ; while a portion
of his army sought quarters and plunder, and committed brutal
acts of sensuality, in the chief places of New Jersey. Loyalty
seems to have been the prevalent feeling of New Jersey on the
first passing of the King's troops through it.*

This is stated on unquestionable authority (see the previous
note) ; scarcely any of the inhabitants joined the American

♦ After the battle of Long Island and the evacuation of New York, " six
thousand men, led by Earl Cornwallis, were landed on the Jersey side. At
their approach the Americans withdrew in great haste to Fort Lee, leaving
behind their artillery and stores. Washington himself had no other alter-
native than to give way with all speed as his enemy advanced. He fell back
successively upon Brunswick, upon Princeton, upon Trenton, and at last to

[chap. XXVI.

he promise of
IS during the
[ndepeudence
r the twelve
brilliant and
} upon Tren-
olly owing to
3roic courage,
ad self-indul-
the inactivitv

Q the English
a few weeks
attle of Long
tely defeated ;
hands of the
the honour of
ar success in
and the other
rards to merit
! anticipated a
severe service,

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

611

plunder and

ion's defeat at
land indeed of

in self-indul-
Ihile a portion
Imitted brutal

ley. Loyalty
ersey on the

[the previous
le American

I^ew York, " six

[ersey side. At

jrt Lee, leaving

no other alter-

He fell back

1, and at last to

retreating army, while numbers were daily flocking to the royal
army. But within twelve months, when that royal army
passed through the same country, on the evacuation of Phila-
dephia by Sir Henry Clinton (Sir William Howe having
returned to England), the inhabitants were universally hostile,

the Pennsylvania side of the Delaware. To all these places, one after
another, did Lord Comwallis, though slowly, and with little vigour, pursue
him.

" This fair province of the Jerseys, sometimes called the Garden of America,
did not certainly on this occasion prove to be its bulwark. The scene is
described as follows by one of their own historians. Dr. Eamsay : * As the
retreating Americans marched through the country, scarcely one of the inhabi-
tants joined them, while numbers were daily flocking to the royal army to
make their peace and obtain protection. They saw on the one side a nume-
rous, well-appointed, and full-clad army, dazzling their eyes with their ele-
gance of uniforms ; on the other a few poor fellows wlio, from their shabby
clothing, were called ragamuthns, fleeing for their safety. Not only the
common people changed sides in this gloomy state of public affairs, but some
of the leading men in New Jersey and Pennsylvania adopted the same
expedient.'

'*Yet it is scarcely just to the Americans to ascribe, with Dr. Ramsay,
their change of sides to nothing beyond their change of fortune. May we
not rather believe that a feeling of concern at the separation, hitlierto
suppressed in terror, was now first freely avowed — that in New Jersey, and
not in New Jersey alone, an active and bold minority had been able to over-
rule numbers much larger, but more quiescent and complying ]

" Another remark made by the same historian might, as history shows, be
extended to other times and countries besides his own. The men who had
been the vainest braggarts, the loudest blusterers in favour of independence,
were now the first to veer around or to slink away. This remark, which
Dr. Ramsay makes only four years afterwards, is fully confirmed by other
documents of earlier date, but much later publication, by the secret corres-
pondence of the time. Thus writes the Adjutant-General : ' Some of our
Philadelphia gentlemen, who came over on visits, upon the first cannon
went off in a violent hurry. Your noisy Sons of Liberty are, I find, the
quietest in the field.' Thus again Washington, with felicitous expression,
points a paragraph at the ' chimney-corner heroes.'

" At this period the effective force under Washington had dwindled down
to four thousand men.

" The Congress at this juncture, like most other public assemblies, seemed
but slightly affected by the dangers which as yet were not close upon them.
On the 11th of December they passed some resolutions contradicting, as
false and malicious, a report that they intended to remove from Philadelphia.
They declared that they had a higher opinion of the good people of these
States than to suppose such a measure requisite, and that they would not

P^WilFf

512

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVf.

'■■A

I
■J

J,'.

instead of being universally loyal, as the year before. The
royal historian says :

" In setting out on this dangerous retreat, the British general
clearly perceived that it would be indispensably necessary to
provide for all possible contingencies. His way lay entirely
through an enemy's country, where everything was hostile in
the extreme, and from whence no assistance or help of any sort
was to be expected."*

The causes of this change in the feelings of the inhabitants
of the Jerseys, in the space of a few months, in regard to the
British army and mother country, will be a subject of future
inquiry; but, in the meantime, the manifest failure of the
revolutionary army to maintain its position during the twelve
months following the Declaration of Independence, its declining
numbers, and the difficulty of recruiting its ranks, show that the
act of violent severance from the mother country did not spring
from the heart and intellect of the colonists, but from a portion
of them which had obtained all the resources of material and
military power, under the profession of defending their rights
as British subjects, with a view to ultimate reconciliation and
union with the mother country ; but had used their advantages
to declare severance from the mother country, to excite hatred
against it, and establish themselves in sovereignty over
America. Referring to the state of the colonies toward the
close of 1777, the latest American historian, Mr. Frothingham,
says :

" This was a period of great political languor. The burden
of the war was severely felt. The blaze of freedom, it was said,
that burst forth at the begiiming had gone down, and numbers',
in the thirst for riches, lost sight of the original object. (Inde-

leave the city of Philadelphia 'unless the last necessity shall direct it.'
These resolutions were transmitted by the President to Washington, with a
request that he would pviblish them to the army in General Orders. Washing-
ton, in reply, excused himself from complying with that suggestion. In thus
declining it, he showed his usual sagacity and foresight ; for on the very
next day after the first resolution, the Congress underwent a sudden revulsion
of opinion, and did not scruple to disperse in all haste, to meet again the
20th of the same month, not at Philadelphia, but at Baltimore." (Lord
Mahon's History of England, etc, Vol. VI., Chap, liv., pp. 189—193.)

* Dr. Andrews' History of the American War, etc., Vol. III., Chap, xxxv.,
p. 111.

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

613

pendent Chronicle, March 12, 1778.) 'Where,' wrote Henry
Laurens (successor to John Hancock as the President of the
Congress) to Washington, ' where is virtue, where is patriotism
now, when ahiiost every man has turned his thoughts and atten-
tion to gain and pleasures V " (Letter, November 20, 1778.)*

VL The Declaration of Independence was the avowed expe-
dient and prelude to a sought-for alliance with France and Spain
against the mother country, notwithstanding they had sought for
a hundred years to extirpate the colonists, and had been pre-
vented from " driving them into the sea " by the aid of the army
and navy and vast expenditure of the mother coiuitry.

It seems difficult to reconcile with truthfulness, fairness, and
consistency, the intrigues and proposed terms of alliance be-
tween the leaders of Congress and the King of France. These
intrigues commenced several months betore the Declaration of
Independence, when the authors of it were disclaiming any wish
or design to separate from England, and their desire, for recon-
ciliation with the mother country by a recognition of their
rights as they existed in 17G3. As early as December, 1775,
six months before the Declaration of Independence, a Congress
Secret Committee of Correspondence wrote to Arthur Lee, in
London (a native of Virginia, but a practising barrister in
London), and Charles Dumas, at the Hague, requesting them
to ascertain the feeling of European Courts respecting America,
enjoining "great circumspection and secrecy ."-f" They hoped
most from France ; but opposition was made in Congress when
it was first suggested to apply for aid to the ancient enemy
both of the colonies and England. Dr. Zubly, of Georgia, said :
" A proposal has been made to apply to France and Spain. I
apprehend the man who would propose it (to his constituents)
would be torn to pieces like De Witt." Within three months
after the utterance of these words in Congress, M. de Bouvou-
loir, agent of the French Government, appeared in Philadelphia,
held secret conferences with the Secret Committee, and assured
them that France was ready to aid the colonies on such con-
ditions as might be considered equitable. These conferences were

* FrotHngham's Rise of the American Republic, Chap, xii., p. 572.

t The Life of Arthur Lee (I., p. 53) contains the letter to Lee, copied from
the original MSS. in.the handwriting of Franklin, dated December 12, 1775,
and signed by Franklin, Dickenson, and Jay.
33

514

THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXVL

3Ei^

m •■

SO secret that De Bouvouloir says that " the Committee met
him at an appointed place after dark, each going to it by
a different road."*

A few weeks later, the Secret Committee appointed Silas
Deane commercial agent to Europe (March 3), to procure
military supplies, and to state to the French Minister, Count
Vergennes, the probability of the colonies totally separating
from England ; that France was looked upon as the power
whose friendship they should most desire to cultivate; and to
inquire whether, in case of their independence, France would
acknowledge it, and receive their Ambassadors.

In April, 1776, three months before the Declaration of
Independence, the inquiry was made of Franklin, " When
is the Continental Congress by general consent to be formed
into a Supreme Legislature ?" He replied, " Nothing seems
wanting but that general consent. The novelty of the thing
deters some ; the doubt of success, others ; the vain hope of
reconciliation, many. Every day furnishes us with new causes
of increasing enmity, and new reasons for wishing an eternal
separation ; so that there is a rapid increase of the formerly
miall party who were for an independent government."*

From these words of Dr. Franklin, as well as from the facts
stated in the preceding pages, it is clear the Declaration of Ind>
pendence was not the spontaneous voice of a continent, as repre-
sented by many American historians, but the result of a per-
sistent agitation on the part of the leaders in Congress, and
their agents and partizans in the several provinces, who no^u
represented every act of the corrupt Administration in England
as the act of the nation, and thus sought to alienate the affec-
tions of the colonists from the mother country. Upon Dr.
Franklin's own authority, it is clear that he was opposed to any
reconciliation with England and in favour of an " eternal
separation" months before the Declaration of Independence ;
that the party " for an independent government" were " the
formerly small party," but had " a rapid increase," which Dr.
Franklin and his friends knew so well how to promote, while
they amused and deceived the friends of the unity of the

* Frothingham's Rise of the American Republic, Chap, xi., p. 488.

* Franklin to Josiah Quincy, April 15, 1776. Sparks' Works, Vol. VIII.,
p. 181.

[chap. XXVI.

ommittee met
ling to it by

ppointed Sila.s
t), to procure
[inister, Count
lly separating
as the power
livate ; and to
France would

Declaration of

iklin, "When

to be formed

Nothing seems

' of the thinff

vain hope of

ith new causes

ng an eternal

' the formerly

[nent."*

Prom the facts

ration of Ind

inent, as repre-

sult of a per-

Congress, and

ees, who now

m in England

nate the afFec-

Upon Dr.

»pposed to any

an " eternal

ndependence ;

were " the

which Dr.

:omote, while

unity of the

p. 488.
)rk8, Vol. VIII.,

CHAP. XXVI.]

AND THEIR TIMES.

empire, in both England and America, by professing an earnest
desire for reconciliation with the mother country.

The same double game was played against England by the
French Government and the secret leaders of the American
Congress, the latter professing a desire for reconciliation with
England, and the former professing the warmest friendship for
England and disapprobation of the separation of the colonies
from England, while both parties were secretly consulting
together as to the means of dismembering the British empire.
" It was," says Dr. Ramsay, " evidently the interest of France
to encourage the Americans in their opposition to Great Britain ;
and it was true policy to do this by degrees, and in a private
manner, lest Great Britain might take the alarm. It is certain
that Great Britain was amused with declarations of the most
pacific disposition on the part of France, at the time the
Americans were liberally supplied with the means of defence ;
and it is equally certain that this was the true line of policy for
promoting that dismemberment of the British empire which
France had an interest in accomplishing. It was the interest of
Congress to apply to the Court of France, and it was the interest
of France to listen to their application."*

The application for alliance with France to war with England

* History of the United States, Vol. II., Chap, xv., pp. 242, 243.

The same historian observes : " On the 11th of June, Congress appointed
a Committee to prepare a plan of a treaty to be proposed to foreign powers.
The discussion of this novel subject engaged their attention till the latter
end of September. Congress having agreed on the plan of the treaty which
they intended to propose to the King of France, proceeded to elect commis-
sioners to solicit its acceptance. Dr. Franklin, Silas Deane, and Thomas
Jefferson were chosen. The latter declining to serve, Arthur Lee, who was
then in London, and had been very serviceable to his country in a variety of
ways, was elected in his room. It was resolved that no member should
be at liberty to divulge anything more of these transactions than ' that Con-
gress had taken such steps as they judged necessary for obtaining foreign
alliances.'"— 76., pp. 242, 243.

It is worthy of remark, that although Dr. Franklin consented to act as one
of the commissioners to France, he opposed the application itself ; for he him-
self wrote a few months afterwards as follows : " I have never yet changed
the opinions I gave in Congress, that a virgin state should preserve a
virgin character, and not go about suitoring for alliances, but wait with
decent dignity for the applications of others. I was overruled, perhaps for
the best." (Works, Vol. VIII., p. 209.)

616

THE LOYALISTS OF AM'^RICA [CHAP. XXVI.

was far from being the voice of America. The fact that it was
under discussion in Congress three months before it could be
carried, shows how strong must have been the opposition to
it in Congress itself, and how vigorous and persevering must
have been the efforts to manipidate a majority of its memlxjrs
into acquiescing in an application for arms, money, and men to
a Government which was and had always been the enemy of
civil and Protestant liberty — which had hired savage Indians to
butcher and scalp their forefathers, mothers, and children, with-
out regard to age or sex, and which had sought to destroy their
very settlements, and drive them into the sea, while the British
Government had preserved them from destruction and secured
to them the American continent. It is easy to conceive how
every British heart in America must have revolted at the idea
of seeking to become brother warriors with the French against
the mother country. Nor was the proceeding known in America
until America was committed to it, for the Congress made itself
a secret conclave ; its sittings were held in secret ; no divisions
were allowed to be recorded ; its debates were suppressed ; its
members were sworn to secrecy ; the minorities had no means
of making known their views to the public ; it was decided by
the majority that every resolution published should be reported
as having been adopted unanimously, though actually carried
by the slenderest majority. The proceedings of that elected
Congress, which converted itself into a secret conclave, were
never fully known until the present century, and many of them
not until the present age, by the biographies of the men and
the private correspondence of the times of the American Revo-
lution. The United Empire Loyalists of those times were not
permitted to speak for themselves, and their principles, cha-
racter and acts were only known from the pens of their adver-
saries. Had the heart of America been allowed to speak and
act, there would have been no alliance of America, France,
and Spain against England ; the American colonies would have
achieved their own noblest freedom unstained by future blood-
shed, and untainted by so unnatural an alliance; the Anglo-
Saxon race and language would have been one, and greatly
more advanced than it now is in the cause of the world's free-
dom and civilization.

History has justly censured, in the severest language, the

CHAP. XXVI.J

ANF) THKIR TIMER.

conduct of Lord North's A.lu.inistration for tmipl.,ying (Jerinan
niorcenaries to aid in maintaining the assunuMl j)rerogative of
King ami Parliament in the colonics; but wa.s it less cmsurable
and more patriotic for the administrative leaclers in (.'on.nvsa
to engage French and Spanish forces, both at sea and land to
invade Great Britain and her possessions, and to unite with
Republicans for the dismemberment of the British empire ?

END OF VOL. I.