IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) V m. {/ i^^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 ■*«IIIIM ill 1^^ m fib Hi iiM mil 2.2 m lllMO 2.0 lA II 1.6 Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y USffO (716) 872-4503 iV iV % ^^ :\ \ 0^^ . «^ % \ ^0 ;\ '"{P^, ^-u^ ,<" €P. . 1 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. D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D n 7 D 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 D [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 n 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 J 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' t i 1 2 3 4 5 6 p^ 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 ■•■■ * m irf0^ ,W ■J/7 ^-f/- ■? -zv^Zw ;>^ THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA AND S 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. i 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. if 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. 1 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;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 m 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. XV ;i 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 h 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, ef 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 ■ 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 iirolifce 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 6 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 8 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [chap. I. '1^ l! 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. 9 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, ani).) 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(> 10 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. 11 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.) 12 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. 13 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 u 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 i FT"*' -r 1 \ ii' IG 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. 17 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 ii ;1 18 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. 10 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." 20 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-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. 35 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 followinp. 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- 40 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. 41 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 il 42 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. 4S 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! \M 44 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. 45 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.) li 40 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. 47 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» OF AMKKK'A [{•HAP. III. (HAP. I I Company, wlio asia'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 nnoth 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 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- 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 cle 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 - 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>li.shetl CHAP. III.] AND THEIR TIMES. 69 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 ; anrporation, it shouM be remembered, were not at that time Separatist.". Even Higginson, anreach of faith with him, notwithstanding his acknowledged kindness to il * History of the Uiiite. 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. 60 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 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 ii 64 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. 65 It as 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 \\ ll i m I . li : i :l 66 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.^ In to til plainf must long, ir * 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. G7 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 W i u 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. FT 68 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. GO of rds liat Ihc I 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 70 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [chap. III. m '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, n 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 72 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, 11 * 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. w 74 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. 75 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.) m THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. III. !H iiji: !li!i P 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 act coil the chf CHAP. III.] AND THEIR TIMES. 77 (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.) i| 78 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. 79 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.) 80 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 f 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. m 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 1' Si 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 m 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- w 8G 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. S7 in le le m. of ir or tin to "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. II I ; I 88 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. 89 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 90 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. 91 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 ip m\ 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. 93 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. I r?' \- 94 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. 95 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 1 ^1 H 1 'i ■ 1 96 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. 97 to to 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. 98 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. 99 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 I * 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()ptefaiust 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'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. It :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 to 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- ff 112 THE LOYALISTS OF AMEUICA [t;HAP. IV. U 1 1 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 ml 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 w 114 THK LOYALIHTS i)¥ AMEIiICA [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 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. ew 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 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. 9 130 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, II m w 1 132 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. 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. II m * 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 PR 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• 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, Vy 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 !l "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 anrayer 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 eonril 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 m «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, accordinrM;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.) . V. 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, 11 II 'I 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. :/ 5r /^/^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 IIM 1121 IIIM m m, 12.0 2.2 JA 11.6 V] <^ //y. / / '/ /A Hiotographic Sciences Corporation 33 WeST MAIN STREET AfSBSTKR, N.Y. 14580 (7i6) 872-4503 ^^ iV iV :\ \ X" /ws> Q. i/x \- ■S- V w^ MMaMIHittlKMUiUBi 156 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [chap. V. ^1 4 1' >n 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 V. 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 H 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 SO 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. R 164 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [chap. V. i m. 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 comprehenest 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. m 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. 12 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- l^ 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 a5 i 4* I • * '5 I 1 182 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.. A '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." ' V. 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.) i w ■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 r ■ I 192 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [chap. V. m m 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. 13 194 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^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.) I « CHAP, v.] AND THEIR TIMES. 19(V '.n !'he t^st Hi 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 )rgivetter 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 Hl f : Hi" HI;: I 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.) w 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 th Ch ♦ 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 II 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. li i. if 5- B 11 1 1 f ■}\ 1 M t 1 1 M 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- i 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. nr 220 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [chap. VI. m 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. W: 222 THE LOYALISTS OF AMKUICA [chap. vn. They averred, and no 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. u 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 }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 iV iV % V %^ <^ o^ ^^. '^^ f*>^

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 aii0 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'<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 Pf 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 i' ■' i { ' > ; ' '^H !i |h fm [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 If It 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.) ii 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 r n 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.*!* I: ' * " 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.) m 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. mm 312 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [chap. X. 1 I 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- i? 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. m 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 sr y 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 21 322 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" i 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 i 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 I .'• s '% m 1 336 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. 22 338 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 = 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 m 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. M m 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 II [chap. XV. r •* ii tf 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. ■ m Wm s 364 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVI. I) :1 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. m Wf^Tw^ 868 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [cHAP. XVF. 4! 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 I i ! ■■ i" 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. Hi 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 1 ■ '' 41 ^H m\ L * 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^ U\ 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 m 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 m wmm - i 1 i .; J U 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! i '1 1 lit I ii 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 I i 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 m 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- l\ 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. ^ rir 398 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XVIII. m i if m 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. VS i: I .-■ i "^ 1^ 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- 26 * 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.) , hW 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 1 In fi I < \ [ f^i 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 m i^ 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.) i! 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. HI 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 1 i : 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 \m m 418 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [chap. XX. I I ^ ill '■ . 1' m H 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 w\ -^..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 ft 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. t 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 4 426 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 it 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, II 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 ^1 la. m 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 m 3.50 tii ta lit IIIIIM IIIIIM IIM 1^ M 2.2 1.8 1-4 ill 1.6 V] c^: Ci

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 1 i A -n 440 THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXH. p! 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' »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. m 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. l! i) ' f , i .^ 3 '5« J i l|: i: 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. { '- HI 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 I' Il- ls ii 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 1 < 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.) 30 466 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. lb If 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." I 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 I 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.) 31 482 :■» THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA [CHAP. XXV. I' 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 y- 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. m 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. ii " For transporting uh bcyon3 i 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 1 ;i i * 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. I ■^ 1 ?1 ' 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. vS u '■■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 F^ 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. H5 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.) I 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. M7 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.