February Meeting, 1937

A STATED Meeting of the Society was held, at the invitation of Mr. James M. Hunnewell, at the Club of Odd Volumes, No. 77 Mount Vernon Street, Boston, on Thursday, February 25, at three o’clock in the afternoon, the President, Samuel Eliot Morison, in the chair.

The records of the last Stated Meeting were read and approved.

The Corresponding Secretary announced the death of the Hon. James Parker Parmenter, a Resident Member, on January 14, 1937, and of the Hon. Elihu Root, an Honorary Member, on February 7, 1937.

The Corresponding Secretary reported the receipt of letters from Mr. Bentley Wirt Warren, accepting Resident Membership; from the Hon. Joseph Burr Tyrrell, accepting Corresponding Membership; and from Mr. Howard Mumford Jones, accepting Associate Membership in the Society.

Mr. Jerome Davis Greene, of Cambridge, and Dr. Henry Rouse Viets, of Boston, were elected Resident Members of the Society.

Dr. James Lincoln Huntington read a paper on

The Honorable Charles Phelps

A SCANT mile back from the busy artery which carries the traffic from Brattleboro to Bennington, through upland meadow, abandoned stage road now overgrown, through thick forest—there, deep in the shade of massive trees, one comes upon a patch of ground so thickly surrounded that one literally stumbles over the low stone wall into this God’s Acre. Inside, enclosed by mossy stones and an old iron gate, trees nearly if not quite a century old tower high—birches, maples, and spruce. Standing in almost their original plumb are five splendid headstones of finely carved marble, each balanced by a footstone. On one of these slabs is lettered:

CHARLES PHELPS

An Eminent Jurist

and Theologian

Born Aug. 27, 1717

Died Apr. 17, 1789

This stone is erected

AD 1824

By one whose hands

while a child

Hath been joined to his—

And unto whom

Hath descended

A Grandsires Blessing.

It is of this eminent jurist—and I might almost add philosopher—I wish to tell. One reason for doing so is that Charles Phelps has appeared more than once in the pages of this Society’s Publications. Then, too, we have an elaborate and painstaking portrait of this great-great-great-grand-father of mine which is very picturesque, and also a sketch of his curious domicile. These descriptions seem worth perpetuating. They are by the hand of his grandson, John Phelps, who erected the tombstone. He was born in Marlborough, Vermont, November 18, 1777, and died in 1849. Thus for twelve years he lived with his grandfather, while later this grandson was the close friend and advisor of Charles Phelps’s widow, who survived her husband by some twenty years.

From The Phelps Family of America and Their English Ancestry—a book rich in errors—and from family papers in my possession, one learns that Charles Phelps was born in Northampton, Massachusetts, August 16, 1717.1175 His great-great-grandfather William, born in Tewkesbury, England, in 1599, came to Dorchester, Massachusetts, in 1630 with his six children. He shortly thereafter moved to Windsor, Connecticut, where he died in 1672. His son Nathaniel, born in England in 1627, went with his father to Windsor, but subsequently continued the migration up the Connecticut Valley to Northampton, where he died in 1702. It was his grandson, the third Nathaniel, born in Northampton, February 13, 1692, who was the father of Charles Phelps, the subject of this paper. This Nathaniel, it appears from a deed dated May 29, 1738, was a bricklayer. We know little of Charles Phelps’s education or why he moved across the river to Hadley, which he did shortly after his marriage to Dorothy Root, of Northampton, in 1740. The historian Judd states that Charles Phelps moved to Hadley “in 1743 or 1744”; but it must have been earlier, for in one of my deeds, dated February 20, 1740/41, he is described as “Charles Phelps of Northampton bricklayer”; and another deed, dated September 22, 1741, refers to him as “Charles Phelps of Hadley Mason.” Evidently he followed his father’s trade for several years, for he is referred to in deeds as bricklayer as late as 1750. But in 1753 we find him described in a deed as “gentleman,” and from then on he seems to have pursued the practice of law, for these latter deeds are filled in by his own hand. That he made rapid strides in the practice of law would seem evident from the fact that in the records of the Court of General Sessions for the County of Hampshire held at Springfield on May 15, 1759, we read, following a list of “Justices of said Court present,” that “Charles Phelps Esq.… now published his commission.” His name also appeared in these lists in 1760 and 1761.

I have in my possession a long letter to Charles Phelps from his eldest son, Solomon, written at Cambridge, January 28, 1760, in which he quotes at some length from Virgil. He ends his letter with this N.B.: “Brother Charles can give you the English of my Lattin Motto.” This rather implies that the elder Charles was not over proficient in Latin. The earliest of the father’s letters that I now own, written on August 22, 1760, is addressed: “For the Venerable y^e President & the Reputable Worthy fellows of Harvard College at Cambridge.” In it he writes:

I hereby assign the Reason why my Son has tarried here so long My Riding horse was Lame and my other Cut with a Sithe that Neither of them could Perform the Journey and as soon as I Could Get another Horse upon Hire and Get him Shod He Set out and Some other Hindrances I met with that nessesarily Detained him—Therefore I pray he may not be fined but Excused for These Reasons the mean time begging Leave to Subscribe my self your Very Humble and Most obed^t Servant at Comm^d &c

C. Phelps

Earlier in that same year, as the following document in my possession testifies, Charles Phelps had encountered trouble at home.

January 19^th 1760

These may certify whom it may concern

That at a meeting of the Pastor and Breatheren of the Chh. of Christ in Hadley To inquire into the Reason of Charles Phelps Esq’s his Conduct in so long absenting himself from the Comunion of this Chh. Sd. Phelps appeard and declared himself of different Sentiments from this Chh. in Respect of the Qualifications of such as are to be admitted to full Communion and that he esteemed the matter of Difference between him and the Chh. herein to be in a Point of such Importance that He could not in Consience hold Communion with a Chh. of different Sentiments from him in it and of a Practice in the admission of members so differing from what he thought it ought to be as that of this chh. and that for this Reason only he could not hold Communion with us in the Ordinance of the Lords Supper. Where upon the Chh. (Tho in the opinion of the chh. what he alledged would not justify his forsaking our Communion) Judged that it became them in such a Case to shew that leniety and toleration of Conscience as not to censure his conduct as gross scandel or proceed against him as a Scandelous offender and yet this chh. could not look upon his Conduct as any other than a Breaking off from us whereby (persisting in it not withstanding all that could be said to convince him that the difference in Sentiments was not a sufficient ground for it nor would warrent his withdrawing from our Communion). He had cut himself off from the Communion of this Chh. and came into the following vote:

Voted That Charles Phelps Esq. by long absenting himself from the Communion of this Chh. hath cut himself off from the Communion of it and this Chh. Esteems and declares itself discharged from any further Jurisdiction over him.

N.B. That when the above Vote was taken Sd. Phelps tho he had withdrawn and divided himself from the Communion of this Chh. was not otherwise scandelous. Nothing further had ever been laid to his charge in this Chh.

Hadley, Jan. 27, 1760

Sam^l Hopkins, Pastor of Chh. of Christ in Hadley

Whether it was this friction with the church in Hadley or the adventurous spirit which existed in the family we have no means of telling, but shortly after his son Solomon graduated from Harvard in 1762 we find Charles making plans to leave Hadley and Massachusetts, taking up in 17641176 grants in three townships that were supposed to be within the jurisdiction of the province of New Hampshire. These townships were New Marlborough, Draper (now Wilmington), and Somerset at the foot of the Green Mountains. Here he established, with the help of his son Timothy then but seventeen years of age, a large farm. The house was extraordinary and is thus described by his grandson, John Phelps:

… [It was] a sort of castle built of hewed logs, standing in a bleak, open field, recently partly cleared, stumps, logs and other vestiges of rude creation surrounding it; … never … finished. The original design of the building was large and magnificent. In the basement were mills, worked by hand or horse-power, for grinding corn. On the first floor was a spacious hall, with folding-doors at either end, through which the north winds were wont to sweep at pleasure. In this hall, also, was the staircase. Entering this hall from the south, on your left you entered the grand parlor, next was a spare sleeping-room, and lastly, on the extreme end, was his honor’s chosen library, composed of the best authors of the day, on divinity, law, physics, belles-lettres, &c., &c. Divinity and law occupying by far the heavier shelves. On the right side of the hall were his honor’s dining-hall, cook room, sleeping-room, and two bedrooms as convenient appendages. The two upper stories were designed as rooms for a college establishment, recitation rooms, lecture rooms, and dormitories for young gentlemen students.1177

It was clearly Charles Phelps’s idea to found a college, and in his will, according to his grandson John, he left

this whole college establishment solemnly dedicated and set apart for an institution of learning, in perpetuity, and endowed with many ten thousand acres of his Draper and Somerset estates. Young Moses Porter Phelps, son of Charles Phelps Esq., of Old Hadley, his grandson, then [1789] a student in Cambridge College, was duly appointed first President thereof.…1178

But, as has been said, the house was never finished. In fact, according to John Phelps, “there were no chimneys, no glass windows, no recitation rooms, no dormitories, no [upper] floors. The upper stories were always used for hay-lofts.”1179 The house was “cold, smoky and cheerless; a poor defense against the rude blasts of an inclement climate.”

Charles Phelps took up his abode in New Marlborough in 1764 being the third settler in that township. It was at that time supposed to be part of New Hampshire, but was soon after claimed by New York as a part of Cumberland County. In the early disputes which terminated in the Westminster Massacre of March 13, 1775, the Phelps family is found lined up against the New Yorkers, for on May 1, 1775, Solomon Phelps writes: “Our country is now in a very critical situation. The people in general are almost ready to revolt from New York. Such consummate ignorance and knavery are blended in our magistrates, that they are insufferable.”

In Benjamin H. Hall’s History of Eastern Vermont there are further details concerning the members of the Phelps family and their early activities against New York. Charles Phelps was a delegate to the third Westminster Convention, February 7, 1775, called mainly for the purpose of seeking judicial reforms from the New York legislature. Together with Dr. Solomon Harvey he was entrusted with the preparation for publication of such extracts from the proceedings as they should deem advisable. It was Phelps who drew up the convention’s formal petition stating the people’s burdens and grievances, and pointing out that failure to relieve them might involve obstruction of the further settlement of the county.1180

In the following month Phelps had further occasion to display his hostility to New York when he attended a meeting at Westminster of committees of Cumberland and Gloucester counties. He was one of three appointed to draw up a remonstrance and petition on behalf of those assembled there. But this attitude could not long endure in the face of the issue that was developing between the colonies as a whole and Great Britain; and Phelps, like most of the other dissenters, soon threw in his lot with the New Yorkers against the greater enemy.1181 Later in the war, when the majority of the Vermonters, seized with the idea of forming a separate state, ceased to coöperate with New York, Phelps adopted the view that New York had a valid claim to the territory in question. From then on he became a leader of the adherents to the New York authority in southeastern Vermont.

And yet, while during this period the New York angle of the Vermont question loomed large in his mind, Phelps from time to time seems to have looked for at least a partial solution of the problem to his native Massachusetts where old claims to Vermont lands were intermittently revived. In June, 1774, he was in Boston in connection with a petition to the General Court regarding the “50 Townships” lying within the Massachusetts claim.1182 Three years later, in July, 1777, when the American evacuation of Ticonderoga left the people of Cumberland County open to threats of British invasion, Phelps, citing New York’s refusal to come to their aid, turned to Massachusetts for assistance. General Heath’s reference at the time to Phelps as being of “New Marlborough within the Claims of this State” is one indication that Phelps certainly made use of this drawing card in promoting his cause.1183 As a result of his energetic efforts, the Council provided the Vermonters with 300 firearms, 150 pounds of powder, 300 pounds of lead, and 455 flints. In October of this same year he was once more before the Massachusetts Council, this time with a petition for a supply of salt, and again in June, 1779, Phelps brought the matter of Vermont claims to the attention of the Massachusetts authorities.1184

On September 11, 1777, “at Brother Amos Allens Greenfield about sunset,” Phelps’s first wife died. The next year he married again. The following memorandum relating to this event is in his own hand:

I was married to my 2^nd wife the widow Anstis Kneeland of Boston 2^nd day of November 1778 by the rev^rnd M^r Parker Church of England Minister in Trinity Church at Boston on Monday at Eleven of the clock forenoon according to the form of the Episcopalian Church as used in their Common prayer Book… She was the widow of the Late M^r Timothy Kneeland printer son of M^r Samuel Kneeland Printer of Boston.

The story of this courtship is told by his grandson, John Phelps. Apparently the distinguished judge had had designs on a certain rich widow named Eustis, much nearer his age.

His call at her elegant mansion was to declare this his intention. This princess of a lady gently declined the honor intended her, but politely informed him that she had a niece visiting with her, also a widow, to whom an offer of the kind might be more agreeable; and she thereupon introduced her. The young lady, all covered with blushes, and trembling with apprehension, received the salutation of an old gentleman, large and corpulent, six feet three inches in the clear, in full bottom wig, frizzed and powdered in the most approved style, either for the judicial bench or ladies’ drawing-room. The announcement of the question immediately followed. The lady turned pale. Her delicacy was shocked. With overpowered sensations she begged to withdraw a moment. Her aunt also gently obtained leave of absence and followed. After a short consideration the ladies both returned. “Judge Phelps,” remarked the elder lady, “we are taken by surprise. The subject is deeply important. My niece, although favorably impressed, asks time to consider. She presumes upon your delicacy, and is assured that if it at all corresponds with your gallantry, you will indulge her a short space for reflection, say one week, after which, if you will honor us with a call, my niece, we, I mean, will be better prepared.” “Preparation! Dearest madam, do me the favor to commit all preparation to my care. I am so happy in this respect that I have already hinted to a dear friend of mine, a Presbyterian minister of the Kirk of Scotland, (to which Evangelical communion I have no doubt you conform) that I may have need.” “Not on account of the marriage of my niece, sir! By a Presbyterian! That will never do; never, sir.” Alas! how liable are the most eager hopes and expectations to receive a chill. In the way of his own cherished profession the gentleman was brought up with a special demurrer here, and that by a lady.

With the astute eye of a lawyer, however, he perceived that the lady had committed a departure from the original issue, which was a matter of substance, to wit: marry now, or not marry at all, and had closed upon a new issue, and that too of a mere Presbyterian form, of no substance at all. He therefore adroitly proposed, in the most eloquent and polite terms, to the ladies, and in a manner most condescending, that on reflection he cheerfully yielded in matter of form to their superior propriety and taste, and would be married in any church they might choose on the morrow morning, so that in the afternoon they might set out on their journey to his seat in the Grants.1185

In The Evening Post; and the General Advertiser for November 14, 1778, appeared the following notice:

On Monday the second instant, after a very short courtship, was married Charles Phelps, Esq; to Mrs.—Kneeland. If true genius, profound learning, a marvelous fluency and uncommon politenese—have any tendency to attract the fair—no person can wonder a lady should bestow herself upon the gentleman above mendoned.

Back to the cheerless unfinished barracks this rural magistrate took his elegant Boston mistress. Let us briefly contrast the two as described by the grandson who knew them both so well. First the judge:

His dress on ordinary, every day occasions, was mean, badly attended to and slovenly. But when dressed for public occasions, nothing could be more magnificent, fashionable, and in better taste. The finest linen, frilled at wrists and bosom with the most costly cambrics; golden buckles to his stock, costly gems for buttons to his wristbands; deep blue broadcloth coat of the finest and firmest material; buff vest and small clothes, with bands at the knee secured with golden buckles; or else, for change, cravat of black, with satin vest and small clothes, silk stockings, with shoes or boots to fit. And then the wig: That ample, full-bottomed, full-powdered wig of the style of Louis XIV, or George II, to which add the brilliant on his finger, and the rings in his ears, the whole being surmounted with the tasteful chapeau-de-bras, with buttons of gold; .…1186

And his new-found Boston wife, how is she described by this same step-grandson? He writes as follows:

Methinks I see her now of a fine summer’s afternoon or evening, dressed to see her little Johnny, some four years of age, the only quality she expected, unless upon an evening of uncommon leisure, when my lively, spirited mother might accompany me. There she sits, clad in rich, changeable silks, gold watch, with heavy establishment in her girdle; a double chain of gold, connected in front with a large, precious stone locket set in gold, around her delicately turned neck; golden bracelets around her wrists… Methinks I can see her now, and hear, too, that soft and gentle “ahem,” as if to prepare her voice for the sweetest and tenderest welcome,.…1187

In the summer of 1779 Charles Phelps was instructed by those citizens of Cumberland County loyal to New York to present a petition concerning their troubles to the New York legislature, then sitting in Kingston, and thence to bring it before the Continental Congress, provided the legislature assume the expenses involved. It was in August while at Kingston that he wrote the following letter to his son Charles at Hadley, Massachusetts:

Dear Son Charles

I have waited a whole fortnit for some of the members of both Houses of Legislature Ere any thing relative to my affaires Could officially be transacted at my first mention thereof to the Governor he seemed to be very spiritted in his Resolutions to do Every thing on his part to have the Legislature take up Vermont affair—and has been as assiduous since as he ought to both Houses & Especially the Senate—and both houses seems to approve of my Plan well my affairs are the first Engaged y^r serious attention yesterday the assembly unanimously voted to send me to Congress with expenc to be bore by the State how the Senate will Conduct theron I know not; to day they will Determin I am told; what it is I dont yet Know whether they concur or non Concur—I intend to know before I seat up

I am well & have been Ever since Except a Little Ill turn one Day not bad—A Grate Blast at Esopus here where the assembly sets 60 od miles Down Hudsons River from Albany near it West Side one of the Best Dutch Country towns I Ever saw the people the most anglifyd have been a rich people burnt all the town 2 years since by regulars y^e houses Stone & Lime bright Walls yet standing in part some houses in part restored all furniture Consumed allmost in the fire.

These in hast from your Loving Father

Chas Phelps

August 26: 1779. If I live till to morrow shall be 62 years old O! Longevity to what multitudes fall Short of from which a Due Sensation affords matter of the most Serious & Important Speculation—

N:B: Prepare your Eternal Welfare Let what will become of your Secular remember your once Dear mother will no more advise you here of—

My best respects to Mrs Porter your Dear Mother and Warmest affection to your Dear Wife, Dolly,1188 her husband, & your & their Children my Grand ones, and my Due regards to all Inquiring acquaintances &c

P. S. Many people in these parts are Exceedingly affronted with Boston State for breaking the regulating Act & now they have run down the Currency almost to nothing & are fearfull it will sink vast Sums in their wicked hands of manopoly & Extortion Least it should more they say they are urgent to have the money made Good now it is Good for nothing but when it was near as Good as Silver then they would kill it so as to Get vast sums of it These people are rady to Execrate all such people but multitudes here think it is best to Let it sink to nothing that them Sharpers & Cut throats may Loose it all & strike off a new Emission on Interest redeemable in a short time they wont hear nothing to the scheem of raising the value of it again. Committees meet often but bring nothing to pass as I hear of—

The New York legislature agreed to Phelps’s proposition on August 27 and he proceeded to Philadelphia with his documents for Congress. That body on September 24 passed Resolutions favorable to the petitioners. Phelps, who in the interval since his arrival had lent his efforts to the attempt to secure favorable action by Congress on the Vermont measures proposed by the New York delegation, lingered fora while in Philadelphia after his own task was completed. John Jay, writing to Governor Clinton on October 7, had this to say about Phelps:

Dear Sir, You will receive this by Mr. Phelps, of whose Fidelity to New York I have a good opinion; tho I cannot approve of all his manoeuvres to serve the State on this occasion. He appears neither to want Talents or Zeal, but the latter is not always according to knowledge, and the former carry him sometimes into Forrests [?] One of the New Hampshire Delegates told me that Phelps, in order to engage him against Vermont, endeavoured to persuade him that New Hampshire had a Right to a number of Townships in it; and he further told me, that on comparing notes with the Massachusetts Delegates, he found that Phelps had been playing the same Game with them. This story he told me in the Presence of some of the Massachusetts Delegates who smiled and were silent. I have never said any thing of this to Phelps because it could have answered no good Purpose; and I mention it to you, as a Circumstance which marks the man. He has, however, by talking on the Subject with every body done good. In my opinion his Expences should be paid without Hesitation, and he should be so treated as to go Home in perfect good Humour with the Legislature, for whom he now professes great Regard & Esteem, & I believe he is sincere in his attachment. Men of his Turn and Talk are always useful when properly directed. It is easily done by encouraging the good opinion he entertains of his own Importance.1189

These indeed were anything but tranquil times in Vermont, and much worse was to follow. On May 17, 1782, a convention of representatives from Brattleboro, Guilford, Halifax, and Marlborough drew up for presentation to Governor Clinton a combined “remonstrance and Petition.” Charles Phelps was the bearer and carried proper credentials to Poughkeepsie. In this document he was recommended as a proper person for first justice of the Inferior Court of Cumberland County if New York should set up such a tribunal. On June 5, he, with fourteen others, was appointed Justice of the Peace for Cumberland County. He was also appointed, with two others, “a commissioner to administer the oath of office to all civil and military appointees.” His son Timothy was appointed sheriff and also adjutant of the military organization.

On September 11, 1782, following a series of drastic measures taken by the Vermont government against the New York faction, Charles Phelps was chosen by a number of that faction in Cumberland County as their agent to bring their problems before Governor Clinton and then before Congress. On that very day a warrant had been issued by the Vermont authorities for Phelps’s arrest, and he did not dare to go home to his family, but set out at once upon his mission. He was pursued for some miles by a posse of eight or ten men, but escaped from them and went to the home of his son in Hadley, Massachusetts. My great-great-grand-mother, Elizabeth Phelps, the daughter-in-law of the judge, writing in her diary in the house in Hadley, made the following entry: “Sept. 14 Satt… In the afternoon Father Phelps came here, there has been great commotion there about a new State, got to Bloodshed but no-one Killed yet as we know of.” She notes further that he set off for New York the following Wednesday. Charles Phelps arrived at Poughkeepsie on September 20, and stayed there until October 1, when, in spite of Clinton’s attempts to dissuade him, he started for Philadelphia. It was undoubtedly in Poughkeepsie and at this time that Phelps’s twelve-page pamphlet, Vermonters Unmasked, was printed by John Holt, a New York printer who had left that city for Poughkeepsie just before the British occupation.1190

Phelps appeared before a committee of the Continental Congress on October 8, 1782. In a letter to Governor Clinton, October 9, 1782, James Duane, a New York delegate, wrote from Philadelphia:

… Mr. Phelps has arrived and I believe his Eloquence will be well employed. He has opportunities; his singularity draws attention, and he overflows in the plenitude of his Communicative Powers. He is, however, terribly distressed; without Cloaths fit for the season: without money or Credit to pay for his board: and leaning on the scanty support which the exhausted purses of your Delegates can afford. What is to be done for him?1191

On October 10, Charles Phelps presented his memorial to Congress.1192 He continued his communications to that body throughout the fall although his money was exhausted and he was in great want and depended to a considerable degree upon charity for the food that he ate. Indeed his friends in Congress were fearful that he would be arrested and imprisoned for the debts which he had incurred in Philadelphia, but at last he obtained a loan and cleared up his obligations. Congress adopted Resolutions in behalf of the New York faction in Vermont on December 5, 1782, and on December 9 Phelps set out on his return, going by way of Poughkeepsie and arriving at his home in Marlborough in January, 1783. In his absence the contents of his house, including his library, which was supposed to be the finest in Vermont, had been seized and sold under the hammer. All his documents were burned at this time.

That Charles Phelps was undoubtedly very unpopular in Vermont is seen by the following extract from a letter of the governor, Thomas Chittenden, to the president of the Continental Congress written on January 9, 1783:

But admitting that Congress have a judicial authority to control the internal police of this state, this state has an incontrovertible right to be heard in its defence, as a party (in law), and should, on this thesis, have been cited by Congress to a hearing at their tribunal, previous to their having passed their resolutions on the 5th of December last, this state might have had the privilege of vindicating its cause. But that Congress, at the special instance of Charles Phelps (a notorious cheat and nuisance to mankind, as far as his acquaintance and dealings have been extended), should come to a decision of so important a matter, ex parte, is illegal, and contrary to the law of nature and nations.1193

Charles Phelps’s property had been confiscated, as has been noted. His son Timothy, who had been banished from Vermont in October, 1782, and had returned the following January, was imprisoned in Bennington during the first half of the year 1783. Charles Phelps actually was not arrested until January 4, 1784. He was imprisoned in the jail in Westminster and was tried on February 3. He pleaded not guilty to the charge of resisting arrest and was sentenced with others to pay the cost of prosecution. To the charge of being hostile to the State of Vermont he pleaded guilty; he was adjudged “attainted of Treason” and sentenced to sixty days’ imprisonment and forfeiture of all his estates to the use of the State.

An attempt was made at about this time to recapture Timothy, who was in hiding at his brother’s home in Hadley, Massachusetts. In Elizabeth Phelps’s diary we read as follows:

Jan. 19, 1784 Monday five men came to take Brother Timothy they abused my husband and took Tim. Went off. We had a most Dreadful fright, but Blessed be God no lives lost. My husband went to Col. Porter’s, a number of men pursued em brought em back. Tuesday had court in Northampton. Brother [Timothy] went on to New York.

On October 27, 1784, a bill was passed granting the Phelps family full pardon. The sentence of the Supreme Court against Charles Phelps was rescinded, and all that remained of his property was restored to him, thus saving him from beggary and ruin. As a result of all his losses the State of New York in 1786 granted him 508 acres in Montgomery County, New York, in the township of Jericho.

What of Charles Phelps after this turbulent period was over? He was never reconciled and spent most of his declining years writing and pleading for the New York cause. He saw the Federal Constitution adopted, for he lived until 1789. Before he died he was convinced that Vermont would soon be recognized as an independent State, and so it was on March 4, 1791

How can we further appraise the intellectual attainments of this man? His grandson John reports this conversation with Micah Townsend, a distinguished jurist, formerly of New York, who, because of his Loyalist sympathies, had left that city for Brattleborough at the outbreak of the Revolution. There he spent the remainder of his life. John Phelps quotes him as follows:

Sir, I knew your grandfather well … [He] was a much greater man than your father, or ever you will be … It has been my fortune to act with and against your grandfather on many great occasions. I have known all the men who have ever acted an important public part in this State. Among them all your grandfather was the most learned, the ablest, and the readiest upon all occasions of any one I have ever acted with or against, save one. Nathaniel Chipman … was his only superior. But he … in my opinion has a mind all but unsurpassed among men.

It is interesting to note that when the Phelps library was confiscated the choice of these books was allotted by the Vermonters to Nathaniel Chipman and Micah Townsend. Perhaps this tribute is inspired by a sense of gratitude. At any rate, we may accept this view of his contemporary and former enemy for what it is worth. Certainly Charles Phelps had a vivid and active life. What if only the timorous deer and the drumming partridge visit his tomb? He has left a deep impression on the tablets of one of the most rugged States of the Union.

Appendix

Charles Phelps’s Memorial to Congress1194

To the Honorable United States in Congress assembled

THE Memorial of Charles Phelps of the County of Cumberland in that Part of the State of New York commonly the New Hampshire Grants, humbly sheweth that your Memori[a]list with a great Majority of the Inhabitants of the said County are attached to the Gover[n]ment of the State of New York and profess to owe Allegiance to the same: That by the Resolutions of Congress of the 21st of September 1779 and the 2^d of June 1780 Those Inhabitants considered themselves protected and secured in their Persons and Properties from any Authority which might be attempted to be exercised over them (either civil or military) by the pretended state of Vermont, especially as those Resolutions of Congress, so wisely adopted to preserve the Peace of that District of Country, have been religiously observed by the Inhabitants professing allegiance to the State of New York and New Hampshire, who are by far the greatest number of Inhabitants residing on the East Side of the Green Mountains, west of Connecticut River, and in no Instance have been violated by them, in exercising any Authority under the State of New York, over those Inhabitants who profess to owe Allegiance to the pretended State of Vermont.—That the said pretended State of Vermont in direct Violation of the said Resolves of Congress in the month of June last did make & publish a pretended Act, inflicting the most cruel & unheard of Penalties on such of the Inhabitants residing on the New Hampshire Grants, who should not submit to the authority of their usurped Gover[n]ment, a Copy of which Act is herewith presented to Congress for their inspection; And Ethan Allen (who holds a Commission of Colonel under the United States) in pursuance of the said Act and in obedience to the Authority of Vermont, so called, did in September last past with some Hundreds of armed men make a sudden Decent [sic] upon the said County of Cumberland and has taken and confined in Prisons a Number of reputable Inhabitants of the said County, perticularly the High Sheriff & other officers both civil & military, holding commissions under the Authority of the State of New York, some of whom have been fined in large Sums, Others are condemned to Banishment not to return on Pain of Death, and their Estates Confiscated; and to add to their Affliction, tis said & believed they will be sent into Canady to be delive[re]d up to that Power with whom the Executive of the said pretended State of Vermont, the last year, made a Treaty of Alliance.

That your Memorialist is duly authorised by a Convention of the County of Cumberland to lay before the United States in Congress Assembled the unhappy and deplorable Scituation of such of the Inhabitants of the said County as profess allegiance to the state of New York, as by the Certificate of the Cha[i]rman of the said Convention herewith presented, more fully may appear;

Wherefore your Memorialist humbly prays, that Congress would immediately interpose by their Authority for the Relief & Protection of those unhappy sufferers who are now Prisoners or banished, and to prevent any violences of the like kind in future; This Protection and relief they humbly conceive they have a Right to expect and receive as good Citicens of the United States professing Allegiance to the state of New York, & having inviolably observed those Resolutions of Congress which intitles them to the Notice & Protection of the United States.

Your Memorialist further begs leave to observe that unless a restoration of Property is ordered, and the Authority of the United States interposed for the Preservation of that Peace, which by their Resolves they have declared to be so necessary to the foederal Union & which they were determined to support & maintain, many Hundreds of Families owning Allegiance to the state of New York will soon be reduced to a state of the greatest Poverty and misery, which will evidently appear by a Number of affidavits and other Papers herewith presented to your honorable Body relative to the violent Proceedings of the Vermonters in pursuance of their said pretended Act, besides the Information your Memorialist is able to give of the Present state of that District of Country if he should have the Honour to be heard before a Committee of Congress on that subject, and your Memorialist as in duty bound shall ever pray

Charles Phelps

Mr. George P. Anderson commented on Dr. Huntington’s paper as follows:

I AM interested in this study of Charles Phelps, first because I am a native Vermonter, and second because my great-great-grandmother, Ruth Phelps, of Northampton, Massachusetts, is identified with this same Phelps family. I suppose I am a distant kinsman of Dr. Huntington.

The Vermont career of Charles Phelps is complex and somewhat bewildering. Let us assume that he was honest in his contentions. He was, none the less, on three sides of a changing political scene, and, first and last, never got anywhere. Moreover, he did all he could for more than twenty years to embarrass the constructive plans of those who were trying to erect an independent State.

Phelps started out with various tracts of land in the New Hampshire Grants, so called, which he had secured by purchase from Benning Wentworth. If he had steadfastly identified himself with the party that supported those New Hampshire titles, he would have come out all right, and he would have retained all that he ever had in Vermont land titles. But he switched to the New York party, and although the New Yorkers refused to confirm his earlier titles, he continued to adhere to the New York group despite rebuffs, and remained a partisan in their camp for a long period of years—too long for his own good. At last, an old man and in desperate financial straits, concluding that he would meet with no ultimate success in the group he so long had supported, he switched again and made a determined effort to induce the lawmakers of Massachusetts to set up an ancient claim to the southern part of what is now Vermont, which, if successful, would have brought fifty towns in that section under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts. This last move doubtless was based on the hope that Congress might consent to a division of the whole disputed territory, and give New Hampshire, New York, and Massachusetts each a slice.1195 The appeal by Phelps to the Massachusetts lawmakers aroused no enthusiasm, and for the third time this determined but erratic advocate was tied to a futile plan. If he had only favored the Haldimand negotiations initiated by the British, which were based on a hope that what is now Vermont would return as an English colony, his cycle of mistakes would have been complete.

In his own day Phelps was regarded as a trouble-maker, and his record as unfolded here today shows, I think, that he was a trimmer. You have heard what Governor Thomas Chittenden said about him, and Chittenden was very patient and long-suffering. To be sure, Chittenden and Phelps belonged to opposite political parties, and allowance must be made for the tension of the times, but I have always regarded Phelps as a disturbing element who jumped from one dilemma to another and never landed on solid ground. He was on all sides but the winning one. His last five years, 1784–1789, were spent in comparative quiet, thanks to the indulgence of the settlers who had erected an independent republic and ruled it firmly and wisely from 1777 until Vermont was admitted as a State. Phelps never was reconciled to the Vermont party, his attitude being totally different, for instance, from that of Robert E. Lee after the Confederate cause was crushed.

Charles Phelps was a lawyer of the type that believes in persistent litigation. He may, however, have felt that he was in the same position as a present-day attorney who not long ago was arguing a case in court when the presiding justice interrupted him by saying: “Were you not here a short time ago in another case, urging an argument exactly opposite to the one you now are offering?” “Yes, I was, your Honor,” replied the lawyer, “and I figure that I cannot be wrong in both instances.” Perhaps Phelps thought that he eventually would emerge a winner from some of his forums. But he never did win. His descendants have had better luck, for the name of Phelps is honored in Vermont, in Massachusetts, and elsewhere. The best that I can say for Phelps is that his motive throughout was to save his home. I have said that he was a trimmer, and in my opinion he was, but it might be fair to say that he was a conscientious trimmer—whatever that may be.

Most of the settlers of Vermont were kept in a similar quandary for nearly a generation. But, unlike Phelps, they were not wranglers, and few of them displayed his shifting qualities. It is difficult for us at this distance to understand or appreciate considerations that prompted the acts of the settlers of that period. In the last analysis the unrest in Vermont shows two sets of land-jobbers striving to dominate the district where titles were in dispute. There is little to choose between them.1196 A huge stake was on the board, and the winner of the game was entitled to a rich reward. On one side were the New Hampshire titles, first in the field and valid when made. At a later period, when the king had decided in favor of New York, that province appeared to be on top, and it doubtless would have been a winner if the American Revolution had not knocked into a cocked hat any royal decrees applying to land in this country.

At the juncture under discussion, men whom I shall call “the Connecticut machine,” relying upon old New Hampshire titles that were supposed to have lapsed for breach of condition, entered the field and proceeded to take steps to make their titles good. Most of these lapsed titles had been bought for a song. In this Connecticut machine were the Allens, Ethan and Ira, Thomas Chittenden, and a host of other resolute men. They confronted the New York land-jobbers, of whom James Duane was a leader and Governor George Clinton one of the most belligerent figures. These two parties clashed, and neither ever lost sight of the main chance. The Connecticut group, to which were added a few Massachusetts figures, and most of the Wentworth grantees, who had stubbornly held to their soil in the face of attempted New York evictions, were on the soil and refused to yield. Had the New Yorkers been tactful, they might have had with little dispute the greater part of what is now Vermont. But they insisted that by virtue of the Crown decree they were entitled to receive fees a second time from the settlers who had already bought titles from the Wentworth régime. Some settlers having ample resources bought the land a second time, but the great bulk of yeomen rose in anger, the row spread and reached such proportions that it was not ended until a new State was created and recognized.

One political consequence which might have occurred if New York had established control over the section now known as Vermont may be noted in the presidential election of 1884 when James G. Blaine would have been chosen president instead of Grover Cleveland. In the official canvass Cleveland carried the Empire State by the narrow margin of 1,149 votes, the figures being: Cleveland, 563,154, while Blaine had 562,005. In Vermont Cleveland had only 17,331, while Blaine received 39,514 votes.1197 If we can believe that the political complexion of the people living in Vermont in 1884 would not have been materially different if that tract for a century had been a part of the State of New York, then it is easy to see that Blaine would have carried New York by a plurality of more than 20,000 votes and would have been elected.

I shall not pursue in detail this vein of speculation, but it can easily be seen that in any state-wide election in New York that was carried by the Democratic party by a plurality, say, of less than 20,000 votes the result might have been reversed if the section known as Vermont were embraced within New York limits. The fate of governors and senators, and the complexion of the Assembly and of the State Senate might on several occasions have been changed. Vermont, as we know, is to date the only State that never has been carried by a Democratic candidate for president or governor. This, to be sure, is all speculative, but the subject matter may interest students of colonial politics and statecraft.

One other political event of consequence may have resulted from the failure of the State of New York to maintain jurisdiction over the district now known as Vermont. That consequence is enmeshed in the political manoeuvres that led to the final selection of the capital of the new nation.1198 The city of New York had been selected in January, 1785, as the temporary seat of Congress. It was well understood that the selection was temporary, but that body continued to hold its sessions there for more than three years. When, early in July, 1788, Congress was officially notified of the ratification of the Constitution by eleven of the thirteen states, sharp rivalry broke out once more among the various States over the selection of a place for the inauguration. New York, of course, desired the honor and confidently expected to receive it; but it was not until more than twenty ballots had been taken that New York was finally selected as the place where George Washington should be sworn in as our first president.

This decision, although for the moment settling the issue in favor of New York, was far from clinching victory with finality. The dispute over a final site for the capital went on, and the contest had many acrimonious features. The dispute was in a great degree sectional in character, and the southern states were strenuous in their demand that the seat of government should be in their part of the country. Kentucky, then the western section of Virginia, had, with the consent of Virginia, applied to Congress for admission to the Union. The New Yorkers did not wish another southern State to be created. The politicians stalled for time, and the question of Kentucky’s admission was by agreement postponed in July, 1788, until the new government had been inaugurated.1199

It was a foregone conclusion that Kentucky would be admitted as a State, and the politicians of New York, if unscrupulous and unbelievably selfish, were alert enough to see the handwriting on the wall. Kentucky was potentially another vote to carry the capital to the South. How could they offset this? It was easy to see that the admission of a northern State would leave the contest on an even basis. At this juncture they initiated efforts to hurry along the admission of Vermont before Kentucky should be admitted. It was a crafty move, worthy of the statesmen of New York. But it failed chiefly because the Vermonters were slow to confer any benefits upon the men who for more than thirty years had been their enemies. The New Yorkers argued that it would be more to the advantage of Vermont to have the capital near at hand rather than at a long distance to the South. Travel distances were factors of great importance in those days, but human nature is always strongly displayed in a long-drawn controversy. The sop thrown out by the New Yorkers was regarded as a case of deathbed repentance, and the Vermonters proceeded leisurely to examine the olive branch extended by their long-time adversary. Vermont had no public debt, and some of her statesmen were not anxious to have her join the Union. Neither were they in any great hurry to accommodate New York, and negotiations dragged along. Vermont finally went into the Union ahead of Kentucky, but New York, beyond a money payment, reaped no benefit from that fact.1200 Admitted in 1791, Vermont was able to be included in the federal census of 1790, as that undertaking was not completed within the twelve months of 1790. Kentucky, admitted in 1792, did not get into the census.

Meanwhile New York had lost the prize of having the capital. Negotiations looking to the early admission of Vermont, despite the helping hands of Alexander Hamilton and John Jay of New York, took so long that the extra vote from the North was non-existent. If Vermont promptly had let bygones be bygones, there is a possibility that New York might have won.

The rivalry in the South ended with Maryland and Virginia ceding to the government certain tracts of land, and the District of Columbia was created, and the issue settled forever. It is interesting, however, to speculate as to what might have happened in 1788 or 1789 if in 1782 the politicians of New York, when Congress was willing, except for the opposition of New York, to admit Vermont to the Union, had given up their land-jobbing fight and substituted statecraft for the policy of greed. This is purely historical speculation—one of the “might-have-beens” of that early formative period. The persistent demands of the Shylocks of New York for their pound of flesh may or may not have deprived New York of the capital. There is a good chance that it did. In colonial history there are many instances of greed, sometimes for office but usually for domain. Few more sinister shadows can be found anywhere than that cast by the persistent New Yorkers who finally pocketed their thirty pieces of silver.

Mr. Albert Matthews presented the following communication:

Documents

Relating to the Last Meetings of the Massachusetts Royal Council, 1774–1776

THE sixteenth volume of the Council Records in the Massachusetts Archives ends with the meeting of May 14, 1774, while the seventeenth begins with the meeting of July 26, 1775, under the patriot government. When preparing over twenty years ago my “Notes on the Massachusetts Royal Commissions, 1681–1775,”1201 I asked at the State House whether there were not some records of the Council after May 14, 1774, but none were forthcoming. When, however, proofs came in of Mr. Oliver Elton’s interesting paper, “Lieutenant-Governor Thomas Oliver, 1734–1815,”1202 I made another attack on the Archives and was rewarded by the production of a volume of which the contents are here printed. The title fairly describes those contents,1203 which are not original documents but copies of papers relating to the Council in the last two years of the royal government obtained from the State Paper (now the Public Record) Office in London in 1852. Here will be found letters from Gage, Oliver, and the Council to Dartmouth, with his replies; an instruction to Gage; the proceedings at nine Council meetings; lists of Councillors; addresses of the Council to Gage, Oliver, and the king; letters from several Mandamus Councillors or their relatives detailing the violent measures taken by the patriots to compel the former to resign from the Council; the oaths taken by Oliver on October 25, 1775, when he became acting governor; and descriptions of conditions in the Province and in Boston during the siege. Though some of the material has already appeared in print, much of it is new, and all comes directly from the actors in the drama themselves.

Of the value of the new evidence no better illustration can be given than the light it throws on Oliver’s resignation from the Mandamus Council, correcting some points in regard to which Mr. Elton was under misapprehension. Oliver’s resignation was extorted from him under threats on September 2, 1774. On that day he firmly promised and engaged “as a Man of Honour and a Christian, that I will never hereafter upon any Terms whatsoever accept a Seat at said Board on the present novel and oppressive Plan of Government.”1204 Yet he is stated to have said on October 12, 1784, that “As soon as he got into Boston under the protection of the Kings Troops he reassumed his Office.”1205 Mr. Elton made a gallant attempt to defend Oliver from the charge of having gone back on his word, remarking that “an Englishman and a descendant may breathe a fleeting wish that Oliver could have told his persecutors to go to the nether regions”; and continued: “There is, indeed, no doubt that he remained Lieutenant Governor.” Of course that statement is accurate,1206 but then Mr. Elton went on to say:

On the face of it, the only office he could re-assume was his post on the Council. But this surely cannot be supposed. Not only would it have been out of his character to go back on his word; but any such action would have led to a tempest of abuse, not undeservedly, from the patriots; and of this we could not fail to have a record. I suggest that the re-assumption was simply that of his Lieutenant Governorship, which, though technically never abandoned, had been, de facto, interrupted by the crisis. In Boston, at any rate, he could function.

Now Oliver’s lieutenant-governorship was not in question; his resignation from that position had been neither requested nor made; and the office he reassumed was of course his place in the Council. It is a little difficult to understand why Mr. Elton should have been so worried over his ancestor’s action, for a promise exacted under threats of ill-usage is not generally regarded as binding; yet it is interesting to find that Oliver himself suffered real agony of mind before deciding to disregard his promise. This is abundantly clear from his letters to Dartmouth of September 3, 10, and December 9, 1774.

Letters & Doings of the Council &c., between April 9, 1774 & April 21, 1776

State Paper Office

London, 2 September 1852

Sir

In conformity with your letter of the 30^th June last, I endeavoured to trace out such notices of the minutes of the Council of Massachusetts Bay as might be found in the Correspondence here, subsequent to the 14^th of May 1774, at which date the regular series of Minutes ceases. But observing such notices of minutes to be very fragmentory and meagre, it occurred to me that I should be able to procure a more lucid view of the transactions of the Council, by extracts from the Correspondence of the period, referring exclusively to their proceedings. The result of my labors confirms me in my opinion, that after the 14^th of May 1774 above alluded to, no regular transmission of minutes of Council, to England, ever took place; and I feel pretty well assured, that by a careful perusal of the series of extracts now sent, you will arrive at the same conclusion.

I think there can be no doubt that the singular minute of Council of the 28^th of October 1775, and the following one of the 30^th of that month, were the last instances in which that body exercised its powers; and the state of Boston, according to Governor Oliver’s letter of 26 Jan^y 1776, clearly shews that for some considerable time prior to that date, all civil Government had been in a dormant state, and from that period there is no evidence of the exercise of any of the functions of Council, till at last the remnant of its members merged in the population of Halifax.

If the mode I have pursued in thus tracing out the course of the Council to its extinction, meets with your approbation, I shall be very much gratified.

I have the honor to be

Sir,

Your most obedient

The Honorable	& very humble Servant
Amasa Walker, Esq	Rob^t Lemon [2]

Proceedings in Council of the Province of Massachusetts Bay; extracted from Documents in Her Majesty’s State Paper Office, London. [3]

Secretary the Earl of Dartmouth to General Gage, 9 April 1774. Extracts

S. P. O.

Mass^ts Bay

Vol. 157

Whitehall 9^th April 1774.

Sir…

I send you herewith, by His Majesty’s command, a Commission under the Great Seal, appointing you Captain General and Governor in Chief of His Majesty’s Province of Massachusetts Bay; together with such Instructions as have been usually given to Governors of that Province for their guidance in the exercise of the ordinary and more permanent Powers and Authorities incident to that command…

You will observe Sir, that I have throughout the whole of this letter, avoided making any [4] mention of the Council for the Province of Massachusets Bay, and I have been thus silent with regard to them, from an apprehension that from what has already appeared respecting their conduct, any hope of proper Advice or assistance from them would be vain: at the same time I do not mean that any Constitutional power or authority vested in them, should be set aside by any part of these Instructions, or that you should not be at liberty to give them full confidence and communication, in case you shall perceive such an alteration in their conduct as will justify such a behaviour towards them.

There are however some amongst those who constitute the present Council there, upon whose attachment to the Constitution no reliance can be had in any case where the Sovereignty of The King in his Parliament is in question; and His Majesty thinks it essential to the due support of that Sovereignty, that the principal of those who insisted upon the Report of the Committee of the Council on the 27^th of September1207 last, in which Report that Sovereignty is questioned, at a time when the execution of the Laws was openly opposed by force and violence, should not have Seats at the Council Board. It is therefore His Majesty’s pleasure that if those Persons, or any of them, shall be chosen at the next General Election, you do put your negative upon such Election…

I am &^c

Dartmouth [5]

Additional Instructions to General Gage 20 May 1774

S. P. O.

Mass^ts Bay

Vol. 87 B.T. p. 19

1774 May 20

Additional Instruction to our Trusty and Welbeloved Thomas Gage Esq^r our Captain General and Governor in Chief, in and over our Province and Territory of the Massachusetts Bay in New England in America. Given &^c1208

Whereas by an Act passed in the present Session of Parliament intituled “An Act for the better regulating the Government of the Province of the Massachusetts Bay in New England,” it is amongst other things enacted and provided that from and after the 1st day of August 1774, so much of the Charter granted by Their Majestys King William and Queen Mary to the Inhabitants of the said Province of the Massachusetts Bay in New England, and all and every clause matter and thing therein contained, which relates to the time and manner of electing the Assistants or Counsellors for the said Province, be revoked, and it is thereby revoked and made void and of none effect, and that the Offices of all Councellors and Assistants elected and appointed in pursuance thereof shall from thenceforth cease and determine [6] and that from and after the said first day of August 1774 the Council or Court of Assistants of the said Province for the time being, shall be composed of such of the Inhabitants or Proprietors of Land within the same, as shall be thereunto nominated and appointed by Us our Heirs and Successors from time to time, by Warrant under Our or their Signet or Sign Manual, and with the Advice of the Privy Council, agreable to the practice now used in respect to the appointment of Counsellors in such of our other Colonies in America, the Governors whereof are appointed by Commission under the Great Seal of Great Britain: Provided that the Number of the said Assistants or Counsellors shall not at any one time exceed thirty six nor be less than Twelve. It is therefore our Will and Pleasure that so soon as the time limited by the said Act for the continuance of the Council or Court of Assistants for our said Province, elected and chosen by the General Court or Assembly pursuant to the said Charter shall have expired, you do forthwith call together the following Persons, whom We do with the advice of Our Privy Council and in pursuance of the said Act, hereby nominate and appoint to be Our Council or Court of Assistants for our said Province of the Massachusetts Bay in New England for and during our pleasure:—Thomas Oliver Esq^r Our Lieutenant Governor of our said Province or Our Lieu tenant Governor of our said Province for the time being, Thomas Flucker, Peter Oliver, Forster Hutchinson, Thomas Hutchinson, Harrison Grey, Samuel Danforth, John Irwin, James Russel, Timothy Ruggles, Joseph Lee of Cambridge, Isaac Winslowe, Israel Williams of Hatfield, George Watson of Plymouth, Nathaniel Rae Thomas, Timothy Woodbridge, William Vassal, Joseph Greene, William Browne of Salem, James Bouteneau, Andrew Oliver [7] of Salem, Josiah Edson of Bridgewater, Richard Letchmere, Joshua Loring, John Worthington, Timothy Paine, William Pepperell, Jeremiah Powell, Jonathan Simpson, [John] Murray of Rutland, Daniel Leonard, Thomas Palmer, Isaac Royal, Robert Hooper of Marblehead, Abijah Willard, and William Cucking Esquires.

And it is Our further Will and Pleasure that you do upon the first Meeting of our said Council or Court of Assistants, and before any other business is proceeded upon, administer to each of the Members thereof the Oaths, and also cause each of them to make repeat and subscribe the declaration required, as well by the said Charter as by any Law or Laws of our said Province now in force, to be taken made repeated & subscribed by the Assistants or Counsellors who have been so elected and constituted by the General Court or Assembly under the Authority of the said Charter; and it is our further Will and Pleasure that you do permit the Members of our said Council, to have and enjoy freedom of Debate and Vote in all affairs of Public concern that may be debated in Council, and also all the powers, privileges and immunities at present held exercised and enjoyed by the Assistants and Counsellors of the said Province, constituted and elected from time to time under the said Charter as aforesaid, except only in such cases as are otherwise provided for by the said Act of Parliament intituled “An Act for the better regulating the Government of the Massachusetts Bay in New England.” And it is our further Will and Pleasure that you do from time to time as vacancys may happen in Our said Council, transmit unto Us, by one of our Principal Secretaries of State, the name or names of any person or persons, Inhabitants or Proprietors of Lands within our said [8] Province, whom you shall esteem the best qualified for that Trust. But you are not of your own authority to appoint any person or persons to be a Member or Members of our said Council nor to augment nor diminish the number thereof, as it may from time to time be constituted & appointed by Us our Heirs and Successors.

And whereas we are sensible that effectual care ought to be taken to oblige the Members of Our Council to a due attendance therein, in order to prevent the many inconveniencies that may happen for want of a Quorum of the Council to transact business as occasion may require; It is our Will and Pleasure that if any of the Members of our said Council residing in the said Province shall hereafter absent themselves from the said Province, and continue absent for above the space of Twelve Months together, without leave from you, or from the Governor or Commander in Chief of the said Province for the time being, first obtained under your or his hand and seal, or shall remain absent for the space of two Years successively without Our leave given them under Our Royal Sign Manual, their place or places in the said Council shall immediately therupon become void; and that if any of the Members of the said Council residing in the said Province shall hereafter wilfully absent themselves from the Council Board when duly summoned, without a just and lawful cause, and shall persist therein after admonition, you give timely notice thereof to Us, by one of Our Principal Secretaries of State. And We do hereby Will & require you that this our Royal Pleasure be signified to the several Members of Our Council aforesaid, and that it be entered in the Council Book of the said Province as a Standing Rule. [9]

Governor Gage to the Earl of Dartmouth 19 May 1774. Extract

Boston May 19^th 1774

MY LORD…

The New Members of the General Court meet on Wednesday next, the 25^th Ins^t to be sworn, and elect the New Council, at which time I shall observe His Majesty’s orders respecting the Councillors who drew up and supported the Report of the Committee on the 27^th of November last, in case they are reelected…

Tho: Gage

Governor Gage to the Earl of Dartmouth. Extract

Boston May 31^st 1774

MY LORD

Since my last of the 19^th Instant, the General Court assembled here to be sworn, & elect the Members of His Majesty’s Council. The inclosed paper will inform Your Lordship of all that passed on the occasion; in which you will observe that I refused my consent to the Election of thirteen of the New Counsellors. The three first on that list were of the Old Council who drew up the Report of the Committee of Council on the 27^th of November last, and the rest either Committee Men for Correspondence or such Persons as I could not approve. [10]

A List of the Counsellors

Elected by the Assembly of the Massachusetts Bay on Wednesday 25^th of May

Counsellors elected and consented to by the Gov^r

Samuel Danforth Esq.
John Erving Esq.
James Pitts Esq.
Artemas Ward Esq.
Benjⁿ Greenleaf Esq.
Caleb Cushing Esq.
Samuel Phillips Esq.
Richard Derby Jun^r Esq.
James Otis Esq.
William Sever Esq.
Walter Spooner Esq.
Jeremiah Powell Esq.
Benjⁿ Chadbum Esq.
George Leonard Jun^r Esq.
Jedediah Prebble Esq.

Counsellors elected and not consented to by the Gov^r

Ja^s Bowdoin Esq.
Sam^l Dexter Esq.
John Winthrop Esq.
Will^m Phillips Esq.
John Adams Esq.
Ja^s Prescott Esq.
Timothy Danielson Esq.
Michael Farley Esq.
Benjⁿ Austin Esq.
Norton Quincy Esq.
Jerathmeel Bowers Esq.
Enoch Freeman Esq.
Jedediah Foster Esq. [11]

Earl of Dartmouth to Gov^r Gage 3 June 1774. Extracts

Separate.

Whitehall 3 June 1774

Sir

Since you left England the Parliament has made a very considerable progress in the American business, and I send you herewith, by the King’s command, two Acts, to which His Majesty gave the Royal Assent a few days ago…

The Act for the better Regulation of the Government of the Province of Massachusetts Bay provides that from the First of August next, all Elections of the Council under the Authority of the Charter shall be void, and that for the future the Council shall be appointed by the King.

In consequence of that provision His Majesty has, with the Advice of his Privy Council, nominated 36 persons, qualified as the Act directs, to be the Council of Massachusetts Bay from and after the time limited for the continuance of the present Council, and inclosed herewith I send you His Majestys Additional instruction,1209 under the Sign Manual, authorizing and requiring you to assemble the said Council, and containing such further directions as are thought necessary and incident to this new Establishment, and as correspond with the Provisions of the Act in relation thereto.

It would perhaps have been in some respects desirable that it might have been left to the King’s discretion to have directed that, in case of the death or absence of both Governor and Lieutenant Governor, the Administration of Government should [12] have devolved upon the Senior Counsellor, as in other Governments; but as the Act reserves to the New Council all the Liberties Privileges & Immunities enjoyed by the other, except in the cases provided for, it is apprehended that such direction cannot be given; and for the same reason it has appeared at least doubtful, whether the Crown could delegate to you the powers of Suspension and Appointment to vacancies, pro tempore, exercised in the other Royal Governments.

In this situation it became the more necessary that a Lieutenant Governor should be immediately appointed, and the King having, upon M^r Hutchinson’s recommendation, nominated M^r Oliver of Cambridge to that Office, inclosed I send you His Majesty’s Sign Manual containing his appointment.

It would have been a great satisfaction if in the choice of the Persons recommended to the King to be of the New Council, we could have procured more perfect and satisfactory information both of the characters and connections of the principal Persons in the Colony, qualified for such a Trust; but the case would admit of no delay, and we have been obliged to make our choice by such assistance as we could procure from those who are supposed to be the best informed.

There is little room to hope that every one of the persons whom His Majesty has appointed to be of his Council, will be induced to accept that honour; for there can be no doubt that every art will be practised to intimidate and prejudice. I trust however that the number of those who decline will not be so considerable as to involve you in any difficulty on that account, or to create any embarrassment in the execution of a measure upon which so much depends. [13]

Whatever vacancies may be created, by any of the present Members refusing to act, ought to be filled up as soon as possible, and therefore you will transmit to me, by the first opportunity, the names of such Persons as you think best qualified for that Trust, and the most likely to give weight and authority to the measures of Government; taking care at the same time not to propose any from whom you have not received assurances of their readiness to accept the Office.

It is to be expected that every artifice, which has been hitherto used with so much success, to keep alive a spirit of Sedition and Opposition in the people, will be exerted on the present occasion, to entangle and embarrass; but the King trusts that by temper and prudence on the one hand, and by firmness and resolution on the other, you will be able to surmount all the obstacles that can be thrown in your way…

I am &^c

Dartmouth

Governor Gage to Sec^y Dartmouth 26 June 1774. Extracts

N^o 3.

Salem June 26^th 1774

My Lord

The General Court met here on the 7^th Instant…

The Council sent me the inclosed Libel on my [14] Predecessors in this Government in an Address, on which account I refused to receive it, sending them the reasons for my refusal, which I also send Your Lordship…

I got the consent of Council to my nomination of M^r Justice Brown of the Inferior Court of Essex County, to succeed the late Judge Ropes, as Judge in the Superior Court, and he is appointed and sworn in accordingly…

I have the honor to be, &^c

Tho^s Gage

Inclosure

Boston

In Council, June 9, 1774

Ordered that Jeremiah Powell, William Sever and Jedediah Preble Esq^rs be a Committee to wait on His Excellency the Governor with the following Address in answer to his Speech at the opening of the present General Court.

Tho^s Flucker Sec^ry

To His Excellency Thomas Gage Esqr Captain General and Governor in Chief of the Province of Massachusetts Bay &c

The Address of the Council of the said Province

May it please Your Excellency

Your Speech to the two Houses at the opening of this Session has been duly considered by this Board. [15]

His Majesty having been pleased to appoint you to the Government of this Province, We take this opportunity to wait on you with our congratulations on that occasion.

Your Excellency has arrived at a Juncture when the harmony between Great Britain & the Colonies is greatly interrupted, whereby your Station, though elevated, must needs be rendered less agreeable to you than otherwise it would have been. But if you should be the happy Instrument of restoring in any measure that harmony, and of extricating the Province from their present embarrassments, you will doubtless consider these happy effects as more than a compensation of any inconveniences arising to you from the peculiar circumstances of the times. His Majesty’s faithful Council will on all occasions chearfully co-operate with Your Excellency, in every attempt for accomplishing those desirable ends. We wish Your Excellency every felicity: the greatest of a Political Nature, both to yourself and the Province, is, that your Administration, in the principles and general conduct of it, may be a happy contrast to that of your two immediate Predecessors. It is irksome to us to censure any one, but we are constrained to say there is the greatest reason to apprehend, that from their machinations (both in concert and apart) are derived the Origin & Progress of the disunion between Britain and the Colonies and the present distressed state of this Province,—a Province, to which the latter of them, in an especial manner owed his best services, and whose Liberties and Rights he was under every obligation of duty and gratitude to support.

The Inhabitants of this Province claim no more than the Rights of Englishmen, without Diminution or “Abridgement.” These as it is our indispensible [16] duty so it shall be our constant endeavour to maintain to the utmost of our power, in perfect consistence however with the truest Loyalty to the Crown, the just Prerogatives of which Your Excellency will ever find this Board zealous to support.

Permit us Sir on this occasion to express the firmest confidence that under their present Grievances, the People of this Province will not in vain look to your Excellency for your paternal Aid and Assistance; and as the great End of government is the good of the People, that your experience and abilities will be applied to attain that end; the steady pursuit of which, at the same time it insures their confidence and esteem, will be a source of the truest enjoyment,—self Approbation.

We thank Your Excellency for the assurance you have given, “that you shall with pleasure concur with the two Houses to the utmost of your power, in all matters that tend to the Welfare and Prosperity of the Province;” and Your Excellency may be assured that we shall contribute everything on our part, to promote measures of so salutary a tendency.

June 14. The Committee appointed to present the foregoing Address, waited on His Excellency therewith yesterday, and read as far as that part which reflects on the Administration of His Excellency’s two immediate Predecessors, when he desired the Chairman not to proceed any further, and that he would assign his Reasons for refusing to receive it, in a message to the Council; and on the same day sent by the Secretary the following Message. [17]

Gentlemen of the Council.

I cannot receive an Address which contains indecent reflections on my Predecessors, who have been tried and honourably acquitted by 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 his Privy Council, and an Affront to myself.

T. Gage

Governor Gage to Sec^y Dartmouth 27 August 1774. Extracts

Separate.

Salem August 27^th 1774

My Lord.

I had the honour to receive Your Lordship’s separate letter dated 3^d of June, on the 6^th Instant, in which came inclosed two Acts of Parliament for regulating the Government of the Massachusetts Bay, and for the more impartial Administration of Justice in the said Province; together with an Additional Instruction to the Governor, & M^r Oliver’s appointment of Lieutenant Governor…

No time was lost in forming the New Council. I assembled all the Members who could be collected on so short a notice, on the 8^th Instant, & appointed the whole to meet on the 16^th. The List inclosed will inform Your Lordship of the names of the Gentlemen [18] sworn in, of those who have refused to accept the nomination, or are wavering, absent, or dead.

The twenty four who have accepted the honour the King has conferred upon them, are as respectable Persons as any in the Province, and the Lieutenant Governour is generally approved of by all parties. I must defer sending Your Lordship recommendations to the vacancys, to another opportunity, for though I have several in my mind, I am first to be assured of their willingness to act, and the number of Counsellors being considerable, gives time to look out for others. Your Lordship judged right that Art would be practised on this occasion to intimidate & prejudice; even force was attempted on M^r Ruggles by a number of People collected on the road near Worcester, with intent to stop him, but he made his way through them.

My former letters have acquainted Your Lordship that the Acts in question had been published here, and People have had leisure to consider means to elude them, in doing which they are very expert. At a Town Meeting held at Boston in July, in order to avoid the Calling a meeting afterwards, they adjourned themselves to the 9^th of August, and adjourned again on that day to sometime in October. I assembled the Select Men in Boston, had the Clause read respecting Town Meetings, told them I expected their obedience to it, that I should put the Act in force, and they would be answerable for any bad consequences. They replyed they had Called no Meeting, that a former meeting had only adjourned themselves.

I laid the affair of Adjournments before the New Council, and found some of Opinion that the Clause was thereby clearly evaded, and nearly the whole unwilling to debate upon it, terming it a Point of Law, which ought to be referred to the Crown Lawyer, [19] whose opinion is to be taken upon it, and by which I must govern myself.

Another clause of the Act is likewise referred to the Lawyers, concerning the removal of Sheriffs. Upon intimating to the Council my desire to remove a Sheriff, some immediately objected that it did not belong to the Council, for that the Governour was alone empowered to remove any of the Sheriffs now in office, and that the Act only required Consent of Council, to remove such Sheriffs as the Governor should first appoint by his own authority, & want to remove afterwards.

It was the unanimous Opinion of the Council that an Assembly should be called as early as possible, and Writs will be issued for their meeting by the latter end of October.

The state of the Province was at the same time taken into consideration, and a letter read that I had received from Hampshire County, an extract of which I transmit to Your Lordship; & several Members gave an account of the state of their respective Countys; from whence it appeared that the Phrenzy had spread in a greater or less degree thro’ all; of which I shall write more fully before closing my letter…

I have the honor to be, with the greatest regard respect and esteem, My Lord

Your Lordships most obedient and most humble servant

Tho^s Gage [20]

List of Counsellors

Sworn in Augt 8^th 1774		Refused to Accept
M^r Oliver Lieut. Governor	r1210	M^r Royal
M^r Gray		M^r Hooper
M^r Flucker		M^r Williams
M^r Foster Hutchinson		M^r Russell
M^r Browne		M^r Green
M^r Lee	r	M^r Vassal
M^r Loring		M^r John Erving Senior
M^r Winslow	r
M^r Pepperell
M^r Boutineau
M^r John Erving Jun^r
Sworn in Aug. 16^th 1774
M^r Danforth	r
M^r Chief Justice Oliver		M^r Powell	Has been summoned but no answer received.
M^r Paine	r
M^r Ruggles		M^r Palmer, at Surinam
M^r Edson
M^r Oliver	r	M^r Worthington,		Begs time for further consideration
M^r Thomas Hutchinson	r
M^r Murray		M^r Woodbridge, deceased
M^r Willard
M^r Watson
M^r Simpson	r
M^r Thomas	r
M^r Leonard
M^r Lechmere

[21] Extract of a Letter from Hampshire County, dated August 10^th 1774

I sincerely congratulate Your Excellency on your appointment and arrival to the Chief Seat in Government, and as heartily wish you may be the happy instrument, under God, of restoring peace, good order and subjection to Government, now almost at an end. Never was a time when such numbers of wise and good men, as well as others, were so infatuated, ’till the present; an enthusiastick frenzy and surprising madness obtains everywhere; nothing said in the coolest manner avails, but rather irritates. Indeed whoever proposes pacific measures, is considered as an enemy to his country, and threatened with ruin. The source of all this Your Excellency will easily conceive, and from whence propagated. The fences of Law are broken down, and without Your Excellency’s aid, our lives as well as property will be much endangered. We rely on Your Excellency’s wisdom and power to support and defend us against the fury of the Mob, which are rising in many places, abusing individuals, and, as I am well informed, are determined in case the Royal Assent be given to the two last Bills, to prevent the holding the Courts the ensuing Term in the County of Berkshire, and the same thing is threatened to be done in this County. Even the people of Connecticut have undertaken to reform the laws in this Province, and chastise the King’s subjects within Your Excellency’s jurisdiction. No attempts, that we hear are made by the Magistrates of that Colony to prevent and suppress the disorders and insurrections. Every measure proposed & pursued seems to be with a view to insult Majesty and widen the breach between this and the Parent State, and even to dare the vengeance of the Supreme Authority [22] of the British Empire, in America, which without some immediate powerful interposition, will, it is to be feared, be felo de se.

Gov^r Gage to Secretary Dartmouth 25 August 1774. Extract

Separate & secret

Salem August 25^th 1774

My Lord

Your Lordship’s letter Separate and Secret of the 3^rd of June has been received…

I will here acquaint Your Lordship that the Extract of the letter from the Country, which you will receive by this opportunity, is from Colonel Williams, and written to me to excuse his acceptance of the honor the King has conferred upon him in nominating him a Counsellor. Colonel Worthington, who lives in his neighbourhood, gave the same reasons for not accepting at present, who from the reputation of his abilities, firmness and influence, is of more loss than all the rest who have refused. Royal’s refusal is from timidity; Russell, who is a good man, feared the loss of some post he enjoys; Vassall, Green and Hooper, plead age and infirmities, but I believe choose to avoid the present disputes. M^r Irwin, who has not yet decided, has connections with all sides, and would keep well with all, and I apprehend wants to see what turn affairs will take before he gives a positive answer. M^r Powell lives at a great distance, and I suppose has had no opportunity to send an answer; but it is of little consequence whether he refuses or accepts.

[23] Upon the whole I dont apprehend that better men could have been chosen than those who have been sworn in; altho’ I found a shyness in several towards giving an opinion about the Adjournment of Town Meetings, and a desire to throw the removal of Sheriffs now in office, entirely upon the Governor, by a construction of the Act which appeared to me quite foreign to its intent, and contrary to the plain words of it.

I have the honour to be, with the greatest regard respect and esteem, My Lord

Your Lordships most obedient & most humble Servant

Thos Gage

P.S. M^r Irwin has since sent his refusal. T.G.

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth 2 Sept^r 1774. Extracts

N^o 11.

Boston September 2^d 1774

My Lord

Your Lordship’s dispatch N^o 6 is duely received. Your Lordship will know that the state, not of this Province only, but of the rest, is greatly changed since M^r Hutchinson left America.

Tho’ I saw things were bad when I wrote from Salem, I found them much worse than I expected when I arrived here. Several of the New Counsellors who dwell at a distance had fled from their houses, and been obliged to seek protection amongst the Troops in Boston. In that number Mess^rs Ruggles, Edson, [24] Leonard, and Murray, and Mess^rs Loring and Pepperell are lately come into town. The object of the people was to force them to give up their Seats in Council, which has taken effect with M^r Paine, who was seized and roughly treated. There are bad reports of M^r Watson tho’ I have no news from him; but M^r Willard was grievously maltreated first in Connecticut where he went on business, and every Township he passed through in his way home in this Province had previous notice of his approach, and ready to insult him. Arms were put to his breast with threats of instant death, unless he signed a paper, the contents of which he did not know, nor regard. He went home after making me that report, but the news is that a large body was marching to his house in Lancaster, to force him to some other concessions.

Upon the first rumour of disturbance M^r Andrew Oliver resigned his seat in Council, as have also since, Mess^rs Isaac Winslow, Thomas Hutchinson, Lee of Cambridge, Danforth, and this moment M^r Watson…

I ordered a Council to assemble, but upon their representation that they should be watched, stopped and insulted on the road to Salem, and desiring to be assembled here, I hope His Majesty will approve of my consenting to their request.

The Council was of Opinion that it was very improper to weaken the Troops here by any detachments whatever, as they could not be of any use to the Courts, as no Jurors would appear and by that means defeat their proceedings, and that disturbance being so general and not confined to any particular spots, there was no knowing where to send them to be of use, and would terminate only in dividing them in [25] small detachments, and tempt numbers to fall upon them; which was reported to be the scheme of the Directors of these operations.

It was considered that the whole is now at stake, Connecticut and, they add, Rhode Island, as furious as they are in this Province, and that the first & only step now to take was, to secure the friends of Government in Boston, and to reinforce the Troops here with as many more as could possibly be collected, and to act as opportunities and exigencies shall offer…

Precepts are issued for the calling an Assembly on the beginning of next month, tho’ uncertain whether the People will choose Representatives; but we may be assured, if chosen, that they will not Act with the New Council; and it’s supposed the project has been to annihilate said Council, before Meeting, to throw the refusal upon the Governour to act with the Old Council elected the last Sessions. So that we shall shortly be without either Law or Legislative Power…

I transmit Your Lordship a Minute of Council and Copies of attested Papers and letters.

I have the honor to be with the greatest regard respect and esteem. My Lord,

Your Lordships most obedient and most humble Servant

Tho^s Gage

P.S. M^r Simpson, another Counsellor, has just resigned. [26]

At a Council held at the Council Chamber in Boston, Wednesday August 31^st 1774

Present

His Excellency Governor Gage
His Honor, Lieut. Governor Oliver

M^r Chief Justice Oliver	Col^o Murray
M^r Treasurer Gray	M^r Boutineau
M^r Secretary Flucker	M^r Lechmere
Brigadier Ruggles	Commod^e Loring
Judge Hutchinson	Col^o Erving
Judge Brown	Col^o Leonard
Col^o Edson	M^r Pepperell

His Excellency represented to the Board the very great tumults and disorders prevailing in many parts of the Province, tending to the intire subversion of Government, and particularly the attacks made upon divers Members of this Board (residing in the Country) which had arisen to such a height, as that several of them had thought it necessary for the safety of their persons, to repair to and continue in the town of Boston, and referred them to the Gentlemen’s own account of this matter, which they related and reduced to writing.

His Excellency then desired the Advice of Council what they thought expedient and proper for him to do in this exigency of affairs, and whether they would advise to the sending of any troops into the County of Worcester, or any other County in the Province, for the protection of the Judges and other Officers of the Courts of Justice. Whereupon several Gentlemen of the Council expressed their Opinions, that inasmuch as the opposition to the execution of any part of the late Acts of Parliament relating to this Province, was [27] so general, they apprehended it would not be for His Majesty’s service to send any Troops into the interior parts of the Province, but that the main body continue in the Town of Boston, which might be strengthened by the addition of other Troops, to be improved as circumstances may occur, and be a place of safe retreat for all those who may find it necessary to remove thither.

To which the Council Unanimously Advised.

The foregoing is a true Copy from the Minutes of Council.

N^o 1.

Attest. Tho^s Flucker Sec^y

Daniel Oliver to Col^o Ruggles

Hardmicke 19^th Aug: 1774

Dear Sir

It is with the greatest anxiety of mind for your safety that I now set down to inform you, that the spirits of the People in this and the neighbouring towns, especially New Braintree and Greenwich, are worked up to such a pitch of resentment and rage, v^s1211 you, that you must not attribute it to pusilanimity in me, when I advise you, if you value the preservation of your life, not to return home at present; I mean at least, if you have accepted of any appointment under the Crown or the Government, in consequence of the late Acts of Parliament: for the People are determined not to submit to them, and to run all hazards to avoid it. There are those here who I am satisfied thirst for your blood, and they have influence enough over others to put them upon spilling it. High threats continue that you shall [28] never pass the great Bridge alive, and all unite in the opinion that you will not be able to do it. I really think it will be the highest act of rashness in you to attempt it, at present.

I am, Dear Sir, Your affectionate friend and humble Servant

Daniel Oliver

Col^o Ruggles

A true Copy from the Original on the Council Files.

N^o 2

Attest. Tho Flucker

M^r Paine to the Governor

Worcester, August 27^th 1774

May it please Your Excellency.

In my letter to Your Excellency of yesterday, I had not opportunity to give you the particulars of the transactions of that day, which happen’d in this town; so far as I can recollect I now send them. On the 25^th persons were employed to ride round to the neighbouring towns, to assemble the people early on the 26^th. I had some private notice of it, but upon the whole I thought it not best to go out of the way, and determined to stay and see how far they intended to carry matters. The People began to assemble so early as Seven oClock in the morning, and by Nine, by the best computation, more than Two Thousand men were paraded on our Common. They were led into town by particular persons chosen for that purpose, many were Officers of the Militia, and marched in at the head of their companies. Being so assembled they chose a large Committee from the whole body, which Committee chose a Sub Committee to wait upon me, namely Joshua Bigelow, Edwd Rawson, Thomas [29] Denny, John Goulding and Joseph Gilbert, (the three first were of the last House of Representatives) who came to my house, leaving the main body upon the Common. I received them first at my Chamber Window, but upon assurance from them they had no design to treat me ill, I admitted them into my house. They then informed me of their business, that they were a Committee chosen by a large body of People assembled on the Common to wait upon me to resign my Seat at the Council Board. I endeavoured to convince them of the ill consequences that would ensue upon the measures they were taking, that instead of having their grievances redressed which they complained of, they were pursuing steps that would tend to the ruin of the Province: but all to no purpose, they insisting that the measures were peaceable, and that nothing would satisfy the Assembly unless I resigned, & that they would not answer for the consequences if I did not. Thus surrounded on every side, without any protection, I found myself under a necessity of complying, and prepared and signed a resignation, which the Committee refused to accept, and after making alteration according to their own minds they accepted of the following form, viz^t

To Messrs Joshua Bigelow, Thomas Denny, Joseph Gilbert, Edward Rawson and John Goulding

Gentlemen,

As you have waited upon me as a Committee chosen by a large body of People now assembled on the Common in Worcester, desiring that I now resign my Seat at the Council Board; my Appointment was without my sollicitation, and am very sorry I accepted, and thereby given any uneasiness to the People of the County, from whom I have received many favors, and take this opportunity to thank them: and I do hereby assure you that I will not take a Seat at the Board [30] unless it is agreable to the Charter of this Province.

The Committee then insisted that I should go with them to the main Body, and there read said Resignation, which I at first refused to do, but there came several messages from the Body, telling me that the People would not be satisfied unless I appeared before them, at the same time giving me assurances that I should meet with no insult. I then was escorted by the grand Committee to the main Body, who were drawn up in the form of a hollow square, and there was obliged to read said Resignation. I met with no insult excepting they obliged me to walk with my Hat off when I passed through them to come off. They soon after dispersed, and the Town by noon was all still, part of them went home, and a large detachment went to Rutland to wait upon Colonel Murray, but I hear he had taken himself away in the night.

Thus Sir you see an open opposition has taken place to the Acts of the British Parliament. I dread the consequence of enforcing them by a Military Power; people’s spirits are so raised they seem determined to risque their lives and everything dear to them in the opposition, and prevent any person from executing any commission he may receive under the present administration. They give out that Brigadier Ruggles shall not sit as a Judge in our County Court, and that the Court shall not be held here.

I ask Your Excellency’s pardon for troubling you with this long epistle, but I hope Your Excellency will excuse me, as I thought it my duty to let you know the particulars of the affair and of the present temper & disposition of the People in this part of the Province.

I wish Your Excellency all that wisdom [31] necessary to direct you at this critical time.

I am, Your Excellencys most obedient & humble Servant

Tim^o Paine

A true Copy from the Original on file in the Secretary’s Office.

N^o 3

Attest:

Colonel Murray to his Father

Rutland August 28^th 1774

Hon^d Sir

The reports that prevailed on Fryday last, respecting your being waited on by the People, were yesterday confirmed. In the morning early I had word brought me from different quarters that the People had been gathering all night and marching to Worcester to treat with Mr Paine, and when they had done with him, they would proceed to Rutland to bring you to terms, and that to prevent your going away, Centry’s had been fixed on the several roads leading from Rutland and round the house, from 9 or 10 o’Clock last evening; that the time of your setting off in the evening was but in season to prevent falling into their hands. About 12 o’Clock at noon they began to appear about the house; the first parties that came up were the Templetown, Hubbardston, and Princetown people, commanded by Captain Wilder of Templetown and his subalterns, and Captain Holden of Princetown. From this command Centrys were planted about the house and in the adjacent fields, the night Centrys as the day light came on, having disappeared. Soon after this they were coming in from all the adjoining towns, untill three in the afternoon, at which time [32] they had a body of 1500 men, most of them armed with sticks, in general heavy enough to have levelled a man at a stroke. The Princetown People, I have been since told, marched from home with Fire Arms, but lodged them a little distance from town, to be repaired to if occasion required it. I was by this time informed that some of your friends that knew of your going off, had assured them you were not at home, in hopes they would disperse, as it was given out by them that they had no design to destroy your property or injure any one of your family; but assurances of that sort had no effect; the disappointment of their not meeting with you at home, so exasperated them, that it was feared by your few friends it would be difficult to prevent their destroying the buildings. But they at last determined if they could be suffered to make search for you in the house & out buildings to satisfie themselves that you were not at home, they would disperse: to which I at first would not consent, but told them that rather than suffer such a rabble to enter the house, I would defend it with the little force I had (which was only our own family, which you are sensible could have made but a poor defence) to the last extremity. However finding them determined, I finally consented a small number of their leading men might enter, upon a promise from them that no insult should be offered. Upon which a Committee of Seven were chosen, and the house searched; they then joined their Body and wrote the inclosed letter to you, which I am told was unanimously approved of. Soon after which (Sun about half an hour high) every one dispersed without doing the least damage to any part of the estate. But I have been told, and have not the least doubt but it will be put in execution, that if you do not make a Public Recantation (as they express it) of your Seat at the Council Board [33] by the 10^th of September next, they will make you another visit and destroy all your buildings, &^c; and should you be at home, the greatest indignities would be offered to you; and I have too much reason to fear you might expect nothing short of death. Upon the whole, Sir, the temper of the People is worked up to such a pitch, that every person whatever (not to speak of those in office only) that will not join them, are considered as enemies to their country, and must expect sooner or later to feel their severest resentments, and perhaps at last be obliged to take up arms in defence of their cause, or suffer the loss of their lives. Tell them the consequences of their proceedings will be Rebellion, Confiscation and Death, and it only serves as oil to increase the flame; they can draw no consequence to be equally dreadful to a Free People (as they say) like that of being made Slaves, and that this is not the language of the common People only you may be assured, as those that have heretofore in life sustained the fairest characters in every respect, are the warmest in this matter, and it is likewise general almost without exception, so that among the many friends you have heretofore had, I can scarcely mention any to you now; and the very few that remain so, dare not say it, looking upon themselves in the greatest danger. The few troops the General has, they consider as nothing; therefore I hope none will be sent, as it would throw us all into the greatest confusion. I have related facts as they really are, and must beg of you not to think of returning home at present, unless you think you can consistently resign your Seat at the Council Board; as I cannot doubt of their failing to put in execution what they have threatened. Should anything further transpire from them, I shall not fail to give you [34] the earliest intelligence. And am with all respect

Your dutiful Son

Daniel Murray

A true Copy from the Original in the Secretarys Office.

N^o 4

Attest: Tho^s Flucker Sec^y

M^r Tho^s Hutchinson Jun^r to the Governor

Milton August 30^th 1774

May it please Your Excellency.

Altho’ I am fully sensible of the honor conferred on me in my appointment as a Member of His Majesty’s Council, and should think myself happy to be able, in the least, to contribute to the restoring of peace and good order in the Province; yet as I perceive the same spirit which has obliged a number of the Gentlemen of the Towns in the country to resign their office as Counsellors, or to quit their places of abode, to be enkindling in the breasts of the people of this and the neighbouring Towns against me also, and as it would be exceedingly inconvenient for me to change the place of my residence, or submit to any kind of restraint of my person, being the only one of Governor Hutchinson’s family now in the country, and having the care of his affairs here, as well as those of the late Lieut. Governor [Andrew] Oliver, both of which I apprehend will suffer greatly by my being under any personal restraint.

I am sensible these reasons are of a private nature, but as they relate to the concerns of others more than my own, I hope Your Excellency will think them sufficient to induce you to accept the Resignation of my trust as one of His Majesty’s [35] Council for this Province.

I am, with the greatest respect

Your Excellency’s most obedient Servant

Tho^s Hutchinson Jun^r

A true Copy from the Original, on file in the Secretary’s Office.

N^o 5

Attest. Tho^s Flucker Sec^y

M^r Loring’s Narrative 31 August 1774

At 12 o’Clock in the night of the 29^th Instant I was awaked by a very hard knocking at my door; immediately I jump’d out of bed and threw up the window, when I saw five men disguised, their faces black’d, hatts flap’d, and with cutlasses in their hands: I ask’d them who they were, they answered they came from a Mob. I then asked them what they wanted; they told me they came to know if I would resign my Seat at the Board. I answer’d I would not, and went into some discourse with them, asking what right they had to make such a demand on me or any other man. They told me they did not come to talk, they came to act, & that they wanted my answer: I replied that they had got it already. They then told me they would give me till tomorrow night to consider of it, and then the speaker gave orders to a large party who were in the road, to discharge their pieces, which they accordingly did, and which I took to be pistols. They then told me my house should be safe till tomorrow night, and went off in number about sixty. The next night being the 30^th I thought it most prudent to leave my house, and my son went [36] out to it to receive the Mob. He informs me as follows:—that in the evening about ½ past 8 o’Clock his mother came home much affrighted, and told him at or near Liberty Tree in Roxbury, she saw about fifty men assembled, who immediately on knowing the carriage began to huzza scream & whistle, and called out to the Coachman to stop, but he continued on, and they followed the carriage in this manner for near a mile, and were then close at hand. About 9 o’Clock he heard their noise, and in a few minutes they were up to the house, and immediately knocked at the door; he went to it and found five men disguised, their faces black’d and cutlasses in their hands: they order’d the candle to be put out, and then asked for the Commodore, and said they came for his answer. He told them he was gone to Boston, and then endeavoured to reason with them against their demand, but to no purpose; they said this was the second time they had come, and to beware of the third, that if he would publish in the Thursdays News Paper a Recantation, it would be well, if not, he must abide by the consequences, which would be very severe, that his house should be levelled to the ground, and many other of the like threats; and then these Five who seemed to have the direction, I can’t say command, of the Mob who were at the gate, retired to them, and during all this time they kept laying on the board fence with clubs, and crying out Dont fire, for God’s sake dont fire, keep back, keep back: but the People did not seem to mind them, and continued their hollowing and knocking on the fence with their clubs: all which was designed to intimidate. They soon went off, and, as he was informed, to the house of M^r Pepperell, who not being at home, they returned again within the space of [37] half an hour, and in the same tumultous manner halted in the road opposite the house, and all at once were very silent, occasioned, as he was informed, by some friends speaking to them; a few minutes after they set up their hollowing &c again, and went off. And as it was a very dark night he could not judge of their numbers, but was told they were about two hundred.

J. Loring

Boston 31^st August 1774

A true copy from the Original on file in the Secretarys Office.

N^o 6

Attest: Tho^s Flucker Sec^y

Colonel Leonard to Governor Gage

May it please Your Excellency.

Agreable to your request I have committed to writing the particulars of the late riot in the County of Bristol. I returned to my house at Taunton on the Saturday after my having taken the oaths &c requisite for my taking a Seat at the Council Board. On Sunday noon I received intelligence that the People were much exasperated at me, and the Town of Taunton, with the neighbouring towns, were to assemble the next day to deal with me (that was the expression) for accepting a Seat at the Board, that it was expected they would begin with remonstrance and entreaty, and if that proved sufficient to obtain an engagement on my part to resign my Seat, all would be well, if not, that a number had determined to proceed to violence. Such was the intelligence I received and could depend on. Many things rendered it impracticable for me to make any resistance in my own house, one of which I beg leave to mention, the [38] situation of my wife, who was pregnant. I accordingly came as far as Stoughton that day, and the next to Boston, supposing that the People would disperse without giving my family any trouble, when it should be known that I was absent. But I was mistaken: on the next day which was the 22^d Instant, about five hundred persons assembled, many of them Freeholders and some of them Officers in the Militia, and formed themselves into a Battalion before my house; they had then no Fire-arms, but generally had clubs. Some of the principal persons came to my house with a message that the People were much incensed at my accepting a Seat at the Board, and begged I would resign it. Upon being informed that I was not at home, they returned to the main Body, who dispersed before night, after having been treated with rum by their Principals.

My Family supposing all would remain quiet, went to bed at their usual hour; at 11 o’Clock in the evening a Party fired upon the house with small arms and run off; how many they consisted of is uncertain, I suppose not many; four bullets and some Swan-shot entered the house at the windows, part in a lower room and part in the chamber above, where one Capt. Job Williams lodged. The balls that were fired into the lower room were in a direction to his bed, but were obstructed by the Chamber floor. No other attack was made, tho’ several persons were afterwards discovered lurking behind some uninhabited buildings and in other places near my house.

Capt. Williams at whom the firing seems to have directed, was the person that furnished me with the intelligence that the People were to assemble, and who pulled down and tore in pieces a written notification that was fixed on the Meeting House for the People to assemble; [39] wherefore I conclude it probable that the attack upon the house was principally designed for him. However that may be, my family were exposed by it, and I have received repeated advices from my friends at Taunton, since I arrived at Boston, that my life will be in danger if I return.

I am with great respect, Your Excellencys most obedient humble servant

Dan: Leonard

Boston Aug. 31^st 1774

A true Copy from the Original on file in the Secretarys Office.

N^o 7

Attest. Tho^s Flucker Sec^y

M^r Pepperell to Governor Gage

Boston August 31^st 1774

Sir

I think it my duty to inform Your Excellency, that in consequence of my neighbor Captain Joshua Loring’s informing me yesterday that he was attacked by a Mob on the evening of the 29^th Instant, and threatened with very ill consequences if he did not by the next night resign his Seat at the Board, and M^r Loring’s mentioning to me his determination not to stay in the country any longer at present, I thought myself obliged to come to Town last evening. Very early this morning my servant brought me intelligence from the country, that a large number of men, in disguise, came to my house last evening and inquired for me, and being informed that I was in town, they ordered my servant to come to me this morning and tell me that I must resign my Seat at the Council Board or take the consequence of a [40] refusal. It gives me the greatest pain Sir, to see the Province in so disorderly and confused a state. I know of nothing that will tend more to convince the People of their error, and of the necessity of a due subordination to Government, than Your Excellency’s wise and cautious Administration.

I have the honor to be with the greatest respect,

Your Excellency’s most obedient & most faithful h[um]ble Servant

W. Pepperell

A true Copy from the Original, on file in the Secretary’s Office.

N^o 8

Attest: Tho^s Flucker Sec^y

M^r Lee to Governor Gage

May it please Your Excellency.

When I qualified as a Counsellour, I did it under an apprehension that I might be serviceable to my King and Country, and that the fixing a Civil Council, agreable to Act of Parliament, would have contributed in some measure to quiet the disturbed state of the Province and been preventive of any extraordinary exertions of power; but on the contrary I find the establishing such a Council has so universally inflamed the minds of the People of the Province, and excited such tumults and disorders in various parts of it, as threatens a catastrophe greatly to be dreaded, and exposes the Members of the Council to such continual injurys and insults as I am unable to sustain. I am therefore obliged to submitt to the rage of the times, and must beg Your Excellency to accept a Resignation [41] of my Seat at the Board, which I am under a necessity of forfeiting by Non-attendance.

With perfect esteem and respect, I am,

Your Excellencys most obed^t humble servant

Jo^s: Lee

Cambridge 1^st Sept. 1774

A true Copy from the Original, on file in the Secretary’s Office.

N^o 9.

Attest: Tho^s Flucker Sec^y

Governor Gage to Sec[retary] Dartmouth

Separate.

Boston Sept^r 2^d 1774

My Lord.

I have given Your Lordship in my letter of this date, the names of several of the New Council who desire to resign their Seats; and I have now the honour to transmit you the names of Three Gentlemen who desire to be of the Council, viz^t—M^r John Vassall of Cambridge, M^r Eliakim Hutchinson, and M^r Nathaniel Hatch.

I have the honour to be with the greatest regard respect and esteem, My Lord

Your Lordships most obedient and most humble Servant

Thos Gage [42]

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extracts

N^o 12.

Boston September 3^d 1774

My Lord

In my letter of yesterday I just made mention of a letter in the moment received from Lieutenant Governor Oliver. That Gentleman came to me yesterday about noon, and acquainted me that a number of people had passed his house in Cambridge going into Town, which is about eight miles from this; but that he had talked to them and they listened to his advice to be quiet and return peaceably home, which they promised to do without making any disturbance. It was supposed they assembled in order to force Mess^rs Danforth and Lee to resign their Seats in Council, which they had done the day before…

It was therefore concluded, that all objects being removed, for that they were satisfied of his being in the Council as he was at the same time Lieutenant Governor, the People would immediately go away, and he therefore begged I would not think of ordering any troops there, as there would be no occasion for it, and could only be productive of mischief…

I expected to hear from the Sheriff, M^r Phipps, if anything extraordinary happened at Cambridge, but received no farther advice till near six in the evening, when the letter which I have mentioned, and inclose,1212 was brought me from the Lieut. Governor, about which time the Insurgents had finished their business and went off, after forcing him to resign his Seat in Council. I have found since, that when [43] M^r Oliver came first to me, it was in consequence of the People’s desire, and of their assurances that no disturbance or violence would happen, and he was so confident in their promises and of his own influence over them, as to go back to Cambridge, and in his way met the Sheriff, whom he perswaded to go with him. They thus both fell into the snare; for they obliged the Sheriff to sign a paper as well as M^r Oliver.

The Lieutenant Governor came to me this morning with the news, and in the greatest distress. He told me many particulars, which I desired him to commit to writing and tell Your Lordship his own story.

I have the honor to be with the greatest regard respect and esteem, My Lord,

Your Lordship’s most obedient and most humble Servant

Tho^s Gage

Lieut[enant] Governor Oliver to Secretary Dartmouth

Cambridge September the 3^d 1774

My Lord.

Having on the arrival of the Scarborough received thro’ the hands of His Excellency Gen^l Gage a Commission from His Majesty appointing me Lieut. Governor of this Province, I am bound to acquaint Your Lordship of such circumstances as relate to me in that station.

His Excellency immediately upon the receipt of the Commission inclosed it to me, with an order for my [44] attendance in Council, in obedience to which I attended and took the usual and requisite Oaths.

Your Lordship will have heard that the commotions of the People upon the alterations of Government, had arisen to such a pitch in this Province, that several gentlemen of the Council declined taking their Seats at the Board, and several others, after they had taken the oaths, constrained by violence to sign papers renouncing their appointment & resigning their Seats.

But during all these commotions I was considered as entirely free from any danger of these attacks. And in this confidence remained at my house in Cambridge, exerting myself in cultivating loyalty to the King, and submission to Parliament, as the only sure means of having their grievances redressed. I wish my success had been equal to my endeavours. The disposition of the People to oppose the late regulations, universally thro’ the Province, rising higher & higher, appeared yesterday in a more eminent degree than it had before done, in the County of Middlesex. A large body of People to the amount of 1500 came down from the country, without arms, consisting of Landholders of this County, marching thro’ this Town. Many of the inhabitants of this and the neighbouring towns came to me, desiring I would use my influence to make them return peaceably home.

They were to pass by my house; as soon as they arrived I went out to them, enquiring the cause of such an appearance. They respectfully answered they came peaceably to enquire why they had been deprived of their Rights and Priviledges. I addressed them upon the impropriety of such embodied multitudes, spoke to the different subjects on which they founded their complaints, and imagined I had quieted them, from the respectful manner in which they expressed their thanks, and promising they would conduct [45] themselves in the most orderly manner. They proceeded on to the Common about a mile from my house, where a report soon prevailed that the troops were on their march to disperse them.

They interceeded with me that I would wait on the General to prevent their coming, and promised that no disorders should arise. I waited on His Excellency and related the particulars, and requested the troops might not be sent: he told me no troops were ordered. I returned to them as I had promised, and received their thanks by their Committee. Upon my being about to leave them, they desired to speak to me. I told them I would hear them. They began with expressing their regard and respect for me, and ended with observing how happy I should make them, if I would quit the Board. I told them I considered it as very ungrateful treatment to mention the thing to me, I urged many reasons and particularly as I stood in a general relation to the whole Province, could hear nothing which came from a particular County. They considered my reasons, and Voted them satisfactory. I submitted to these things in order to quiet their uneasy minds, upon principles of humanity as well as policy.

This left me entirely clear that I should have no further trouble with them upon this subject; and as their deportment was peaceable, I flattered myself they would soon disperse.

But in the afternoon, observing such companies pouring in from all quarters, and those of a lower class, I began to apprehend they would become unmanageable, and fearing some troubles would arise, wherein I should be called upon, I chose to get out of the way.

I was just going into my carriage to proceed to Boston, when a vast crowd advanced, and in a [46] short time my house was surrounded by 4000 People, and one 4^th part in arms. Not apprehending any abuse designed to me, I waited in my hall, when 5 persons entered, with a decent appearance, who informed me they were a Committee from the body of the People to demand my Resignation as a Councillor. I reproached them with ingratitude & false dealings, and refused to hear them. They answered that the People were dissatisfied with the Votes of their Committee in the morning, and now demanded my Resignation, as drawn up in a Paper which they held in their hands. I absolutely refused to sign any paper. They desired me to consider the consequences of refusing the demands of an inraged People. I told them they might put me to death, but I would never submit. The Populace growing impatient began to press up to my windows, calling for vengeance against the Foes of their Liberty. The five persons appeared anxious for me, and, impressed with some humanity, endeavoured to appease the people: but in vain. I could hear them from a distance, swearing they would have my blood. At this time the distresses of my Wife and Children, which I heard in the next room, called up feelings, My Lord, which I confess I could not suppress. I found myself giving way, and at that instant, Nature, ingenious in forming new reasons, suggested to my mind the calamities which would ensue if I did not comply. I cast about to find some means of preserving my reputation. I proposed that the People should take me by force; but they urged the danger of such an expedient. I told them I would take the risque; but they would not consent. Reduced to this extremity I took up the paper, and casting my eyes over it with a hurry of mind and conflict of passion which rendered me unable to remark the contents I wrote underneath the following words:—

My house being [47] surrounded with four thousand People, in compliance with their commands I sign my name.

Tho. Oliver

The five Persons taking it, carried it out to the People, and found great difficulty in getting it accepted. I had several messages sent me, informing me it would not do. But I declared I would do nothing else, if they put me to death. The more respectable farmers used all their endeavours to reconcile the rest, and finally prevailed, when they all marched off in their several companies, wishing me well, & cautioning not to break my Promise.

Thus my Lord I have given you a plain narrative of the proceedings of this day. If I stand acquitted to His Majesty, Your Lordship and the World, I shall esteem myself happy. I could not have done more unless I had determined to have died, which would have brought on a train of calamities to this country which I shudder to think of.

I should esteem it as the highest favour, if Your Lordship would signify by one line your opinion of my conduct in this affair, and in what manner I ought to act with regard to taking my Seat at the Board; as I shall remain under a most embarrassing suspense until I hear the event.

I have the honor to be

Your Lordships most obedient and most faithful humble Servant

Thomas Oliver

I hope Your Lordship will excuse the many corrections in my letter,1213 as my mind is ill at ease. I must confess I have scruples of taking my Seat at the Board, as I have promised, altho’ by force. Yet as I did not prefer Death to making the Promise, I have scruples which His Majestys commands will [48] dissipate. There is published a very erroneous account in the Newspapers, to answer their purposes; but Your Lordship may assure yourself of the truth of my account in every particular.

Secretary Dartmouth to Govr Gage. Extracts

N^o 9.

Whitehall Sept^r 8^th 1774

Sir

Your letters of the 20^th and 27^th July, which were received by a New York Mail that arrived yesterday, do not contain any thing that requires particular instruction…

Your not having received on the 27^th July the Bill for regulating the Government of the Massachusetts Bay and His Majestys Sign Manual for the appointment of the New Council, is a very unlucky circumstance; and I am the more surprized, as I find that my dispatch containing those documents was sent from my office on the 3^d of June, to be put on board the Scarborough Man of War that lay at Plymouth to receive it…

I am &^c

Dartmouth [49]

Lieutenant Gov^r Oliver to Sec[retary] Dartmouth

Boston September the 10^th 1774

My Lord

I did myself the honor of writing Your Lordship the 3^d of this month, giving an account of the transactions at Cambridge the day before.

I have the pleasure to find my behaviour approved in this part of the world, although I submitted at the last. Some gentlemen of the army may regret that they had not an opportunity of sharing in the business of that day, and from thence may not approve of my humanity and tenderness to an ungrateful people.

But Your Lordship will perceive by my account published in the Massachusetts Gazette, the reasons I acted upon; namely, that at the time when I applied to His Excellency General Gage, they appeared to have no design of any kind of harm, but only to enquire into some circumstances relative to their Powder being removed, which as soon as they had informed themselves of, they would peaceably return. I imagined I had satisfied them with regard to their complaints, and that as soon as they had talked the matter over among themselves, they would all disperse. I knew His Excellency had been advised not to send the troops out of town; and I knew that as the People were then without arms, no glory would be derived to the Military to destroy a number of poor farmers, but on the contrary, that it would have been considered as an act of inhumanity, & rather serve to irritate than suppress their spirits. Under these considerations I readily undertook it, and if I erred, it was an error in judgment. But I flatter myself I shall stand acquitted to Your Lordship upon these principles.

But, my Lord, the principal question upon [50] which I have presumed to trouble Your Lordship at this time, is relating to my conduct consequent upon this matter. I have applied to the General; he has referred me to the Opinion of my Friends, and my own Feelings.

Various are the opinions of my Friends, and with regard to my own Feelings, I have scruples which embarrass me.

I am sensible by the common rules laid down on this subject, I may be acquitted in breaking this extorted Promise. But in every man’s mind there is a certain standard by which he must try his actions. In some, that rule or standard is more vague than in others. Common rules of rectitude are sufficient to satisfy some; while others must, for self approbation, consider the subject more nicely.

In my case now before Your Lordship, I consider myself at the time, even of compulsion, to have had an Election. A hard alternative ’tis true; but still I had it in my power, either to die, or make the Promise: I chose to live.

A mind under the habitual influence of candour recurs not to those reservations, by which others excuse themselves.

At the time when I gave the Preference to Life, I had no reservation in my mind, that Compulsion would liberate me.

But I now conceive that the Commands of His Majesty, as the fountain of Honor, will secure my reputation from any impeachment

From the same principles I deduce, that should such a conjunction of circumstances take place, as that just so many of the Council should be obliged to resign, as to invalidate the Board for the want of my attendance; from the importance of His Majesty’s service I should conceive a Command to be implied, [51] and consider it as my Duty to attend.

But I shall esteem it as a particular instance of Your Lordship’s goodness, that you would signify your directions in this matter to me; which would take off every difficulty from my mind.

I do not presume to give Your Lordship any account of things here, as it might be considered as putting myself forward, and breaking in upon the line of the Commander in Chief.

I hope Your Lordship will pardon me in the trouble I have given you in this affair, and permit me to subscribe myself

Your Lordships most faithful and most obedient Servant

Thomas Oliver

Governor Gage to Sec^y Dartmouth. Extracts

N^o 13.

Boston Sept^r 20^th 1774

My Lord

Since my letters by the Scarborough ship of War, I have received some letters and papers, which I transmit Your Lordship, relative to the proceedings in the distant Countys…

M^r Willard has been obliged to resign his Seat in Council since my last; the rest remain firm notwithstanding daily threats of Plunder, Devastation and ruin, and even of Assassination…

I have the honor to be &^c

Tho^s Gage [52]

To Josiah Edson Esq^r

Sir

In consequence of the Town assembling the 29^th of August, and choosing us the Subscribers to demand your Resignation (as Counsellor) your absenting yourself, and our making report thereof to the Town, they Unanimously Voted that unless you signed the inclosed Recantation by the 26^th Ins^t and publish the same in the News Paper, they will consider you as obstinate, refractory, and unfitt to live in the town for the future: And directed us to leave the same in writing, to be forwarded to you.

Samuel Dunbar	Committee
Robert Latham
Rich^d Peckin
Eleaser Cary
Nathan Mitchell
Philip Bryant
David Leonard
David Kingman

Bridgwater September 14^th 1774

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

N^o 14.

Boston Sept^r 25^th 1774

My Lord…

Many Members are chosen for the General Court that was appointed to meet at Salem on the 5^th of next month, and I have information that the Old Council has been summoned to attend there. The New Council appointed by the King who have taken [53] refuge in this Town, dare not attend at Salem, unless escorted there and back again by a large force; which as affairs are circumstanced will answer no end. The Assembly will not act with them, and I cannot act with the Old Council, so that nothing but confusion can arise from a meeting of the General Court, on which account I mean to fall on measures to postpone the Session…

I have the honor to be &c

Tho^s Gage

Secretary Dartmouth to Gov^r Gage, Extracts

N^o 11.

Whitehall 17^th October 1774

Sir

From the accounts which we had received through various channels of what passed in the Province of Massachusetts Bay, upon the arrival of the Scarborough with my dispatches to you of the 3^d of June, we had entertained hopes that the popular phrenzy had begun to subside, that the acceptance of Seats in the New Council, by so large a number of respectable persons, would disappoint the expectations of the faction, and that tho’ they might seek to elude the Laws by artifice and chicane, yet that the execution of them was not likely to be opposed by violence, and that the People in general would at least have waited the result of the General Congress before they took any decided measures.

Your letters however, which I have received by the return of the Scarborough, represent the affairs of the Province to be indeed in a very dangerous & critical [54] situation, and it looks not only as if the People were determined at all events to refuse obedience to the Law, but that notwithstanding the assistance of so large a Military force, sent purposely to support the Authority of Civil Government, they have it still in their power to trample upon it with impunity, and to bid defiance to all controll.

This however is a state that cannot have long duration; the discontinuance of Courts of Justice must produce the greatest anarchy and confusion; and tho’ I see that you have still a Quorum of the Council to act with you, yet I fear that whilst they can act but in the midst of a camp and under the protection of an army, that Authority will have little weight…

Appearances in general are at present certainly very unfavourable; some however there are that do not wear so gloomy an aspect; and I cannot but persuade myself that even in the New England Government, where prejudice and resentment have taken such strong hold, there are many Friends to the Constitution who would stand forth under the protection of Government. Such men ought to be encouraged, and inclosed I send you the Royal Mandamus for the admission into the Council, of Messieurs Eliakim Hutchinson, Nathaniel Hatch, and John Vassall, the gentlemen whom you recommend, and also of M^r George Erving, who is stated by M^r Hutchinson to be a very proper person, and was I find much disappointed at not being in the first Nomination.

I am &^c

Dartmouth [55]

Secretary Dartmouth to Lieut[enant] Governor Oliver

Whitehall 17^th October 1774

Sir

Your letter to me of the 3^d of September has been laid before the King.

The manner in which you have been compelled, by violence, to subscribe to a resignation of your Seat in Council, is as disgraceful to Government, as I am persuaded it must have been painful and humiliating to you; but as from the circumstances attending that transaction (as stated by you) it is evident that your refusal to resign would have been attended with very fatal consequences, His Majesty is graciously pleased to acquiesce in the reasons you assign for your conduct.

It will be a very great satisfaction to me to hear that such an alteration has happened in the affairs of the Province, as to admit of your taking your Seat at the Council Board, without hazard of your life; but if the People should continue in the same state of frenzy and violence, such a step can be of no advantage to the King’s service, and may (indeed most probably would) expose you to the resentment of a People who seem determined at all events to resist the Civil Authority, and even to sacrifice the lives of their fellow subjects to the most unjustifiable pretensions.

I am &^c

Dartmouth [56]

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

N^o 17.

Boston October 30^th 1774, and Nov. 2

My Lord…

Nov. 2. The King’s Schooner the S^t Laurence which conveys this dispatch, being detained, I transmit Your Lordship the last resolves which this Provincial Congress has published, after which they adjourned to the 23^d Ins^t. And I learn that their secret determination is, to assemble the Old Council at their next meeting, in order to form as compleat a Government as they can…

I have the honor to be &^c

Tho^s Gage

Lieutenant Governor Oliver to Secretary Dartmouth

Boston December the 9^th 1774

My Lord

The honor done me in your much esteemed favor of the seventeenth of October, signifying “His Majestys gracious acquiescence in the reasons assigned for my conduct” calls for my particular acknowledgments to Your Lordship, as well as my utmost exertions in the cause of my Royal Master.

General Gage has no doubt acquainted Your Lordship that since the 2^d of September, the Province has been in such a state of confusion, in which the People have so far put an end to all law and order, that the direction of Government has been rather in the line of a General than that of a Governor. And as the forms of a Council under these circumstances, and the prejudices of the People would only tend to [57] encrease their violences, and add to his difficulties and embarrassment; upon these reasons I presume he has avoided calling one. But by moderation & prudence as a Governor, and the strictest discipline as a General, has prevented every occasion which could give them a pretence for commencing hostilities, and in the mean time has enclosed and fortified the Town in such manner as to give us a full assurance of security.

How long the Province may continue in this state, or what particular circumstances may turn up, to render a Council expedient, I cannot presume to say; but whenever His Excellency thinks proper to call a Council, I shall surely attend my Duty. This I had determined on before I had the honor to receive Your Lordships letter, and mentioned it to Gov^r Hutchinson in former letter.

Indeed the more I examined the whole affair, the more clearly it appeared I could not be bound to the observance of a compulsory Promise, extorted by a Mob, who every day were verging to, and at length arrived at, a state of rebellion.

Soon after the attack made on me the 2^d of September, I removed with my family to Boston; judging it unsafe to remain longer among a People, who in such a state of frenzy, were governed by no principles, but blindly led, or impelled by a set of wicked seditious Levellers, who in form of Committees of Correspondence, and under the name of Patriots, were propagating Treason and Rebellion thro’ the Country. Various means were used to induce me to return; but not availing, they changed their conduct, and tried the effects of abuse in false reports and publications, equally unavailing.

Here, my Lord, I shall continue, ever ready to exert myself in a cause which from Principle I have [58] uniformly asserted, and which it now more immediately becomes my duty to support.

I have in a former letter to Your Lordship observed that I was restrained from giving any intelligence upon the general concerns of the Province, from a delicacy that I might not intrude myself into a course of communication that may be considered as more properly belonging to the Commander in Chief. But I shall be ever ready to obey Your Lordships commands upon that head.

I am, Your Lordships most faithful and most obedient humble Servant

Tho^s Oliver

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

N^o 20.

Boston December 15^th 1774

My Lord…

Nothing has been left untryed that could tend to hurt and terrify the Mandamus Counsellors to resign, who have withstood all threats against their persons and properties, but they are still obliged to take shelter with the Troops, and I have judged what Your Lordship remarks, that in such a state the taking any step by their Advice would add no weight to the authority of Government, but rather be an argument for disobedience; for that reason I have avoided the assembling of them in Council as much as possible. I am to acknowledge the receipt of the Royal Mandamus for the admission of the Gentlemen therein nominated, into the Council; [59] Mess^rs Erving, Vassal and Hatch have accepted the honour conferred upon them, but desire that it may be kept secret for a time, and that they may not be called upon till they are prepared. I have yet received no positive answer from M^r Hutchinson. All the former Counsellors stand firm and deserve the greatest encouragement…

I have the honor to be &^c

Tho^s Gage

Governor Gage to Sec^y Dartmouth

Separate.

Boston December 25^th 1774

My Lord.

I am to acknowledge Your Lordships circular letter of 2^d of November, and inclose Your Lordship a List of the Council of the Massachusetts Bay, as it stands at present, and will not fail to transmit a like list at the Periods mentioned in Your Lordship’s letter.

I have the honour to be with the greatest regard respect and esteem, My Lord

Your Lordships most obedient and most humble Servant

Tho^s Gage [60]

A List Of Majesty’s Council

In his Province of the Massachusett’s Bay

Thomas Oliver Esq. Lieut. Gov^r	John Murray
Chief Justice Oliver	Joshua Loring
Harrison Gray, Treasurer	John Irving Jun^r
Thomas Flucker, Secretary	Nat. Ray Thomas
Foster Hutchinson	Will^m Pepperell
William Browne	Dan^l Leonard
Timothy Ruggles	Rich^d Lechmere
Josiah Edson	Jas. Boutineau
John Vassal	Accepted but not sworn in, for reasons given in letter N^o 20.
Nathaniel Hatch
George Irving
Eliakim Hutchinson Ill, and has given no positive answer.

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extracts

N^o 35.

Boston July 24^th 1775

My Lord…

I have the honour to transmit Your Lordship an Address to the King from the Council of this Province, who, notwithstanding every insult and oppression, have stood firm in their principles of Loyalty and affection to His Majestys Person and Government. I also inclose a List of the Council, to which I add the names of other Gentlemen who, as well as many of the Council are suffering for their attachment to the King and Constitution… [61]

I am to acquaint Your Lordship of the death of M^r Eliakim Hutchinson one of His Majesty’s Council, and a Judge of the Inferior Court.…

I have the honor to be &^c

Tho^s Gage

At a Council held in the Council Chamber in Boston Monday July 17^th 1775

Present

His Excellency the Governor
His Honor the Lieut. Governor

Chief Justice Oliver	Col. Edson	M^r Thomas
M^r Gray	Col. Murray	Col. Leonard
M^r Flucker	M^r Boutineau	M^r Loring
Brig^r Ruggles	M^r Lechmere	S^r W^m Pepperell
Judge Hutchinson	Col. Erving	Col. Hatch
Judge Brown	Col. Willard	M^r G. Erving

The Council signified to His Excellency their desire that he would give them an opportunity to testify their Loyalty to their Gracious Sovereign and attachment to His Government in Humble Address, which His Excellency was pleased to Consent to, and thereupon appointed His Honor the Lieut. Governor, Chief Justice Oliver, Treasurer Gray, Brig^r Ruggles, and Judge Browne to prepare an Address and report it to the Board: and then directed that the Council be adjourned to Thursday next.

In Council July 20^th

The Council being met according to Adjournment [62] and every Member of the Board being present:—

The Committee reported that they had prepared an Address to His Most Excellent Majesty; which was read and Unanimously Accepted, and

Ordered, that His Excellency the Governor be desired to transmit said Address to the Right Honorable the Earl of Dartmouth to be laid before His Majesty.

A true Copy from the Minnets of Councill

Attest. Tho^s Flucker Secretary

The Humble Address of the Council of the Province of Massachusetts Bay

To the King’s most Excellent Majesty

Most Gracious Sovereign.

At a time when a most unnatural Rebellion is raging in this Province, We Your Majesty’s Council of the Massachusetts Bay, animated with the warmest affection for your Sacred Person, the most entire confidence in the wisdom and benignity of your Government, and the strongest attachment to the British Constitution, beg leave in humble Address to approach the Throne.

While we lament the disorders and confusions of Your Majestie’s Colonies in America, we are constrained to express our abhorrence and detestation of those flagitious machinations of a number of evil men, who uninfluenced by the lenity and clemency of your Government, and unawed by the dread of your displeasure, have seduced the unwary and undisceming multitudes to adopt their Principles and promote their destructive purposes.

With that humble satisfaction which arises from conscious integrity, we beg permission to assure Your Majesty, that notwithstanding the Resolves of Congress and the Obloquy we have been loaded with, the dangers [63] we have encountered and the evils we have suffered; yet, supported by a sense of our duty, and the hopes of your most gracious approbation, we have steadily adhered to that cause, which from principle we are engaged in.

Regardless of those efforts to degrade us, we have ever been ready to discharge the trust reposed in us, chearfully acquiesing in the wisdom and goodness of Parliament, and acknowledging its Authority to bind us in all cases whatsoever.

It is with concern and indignation we see the honor of our King and the Authority of the Supreme Legislature injured and affronted; tho’ with tenderness we contemplate that punitive Justice which the dignity of our Sovereign, the Authority of a British Parliament, and the security and welfare of an August Empire, require to be exercised upon a refractory People.

We consider our connection with & dependance upon Great Britain as the surest basis of lasting peace, and prosperity to this Province. We think it our indispensable duty to contribute our utmost exertions to perpetuate, as well as our highest felicity to enjoy its blessings: and most ardently wish it may be established, under the happy auspices of Your Majesty and your illustrious family, to the latest Posterity.

In the name and on behalf of the Council

Thomas Oliver, President [64]

List of Counsellors

For the Province of Massachusetts Bay. July 21^st 1775

Thomas Oliver Esq^r Lieutenant Governor

Peter Oliver Esq. Chief Justice	Abijah Willard Esq.
Harrison Gray Esq.	John Erving Jun^r Esq^r
Thomas Flucker Esq.	Daniel Leonard Esq.
Timothy Ruggles Esq.	Nathaniel R. Thomas Esq.
Josiah Edson Esq.	Sir William Pepperrell Bar^t
John Murray Esq.	Joshua Loring Esq.
James Bouteneau Esq.	William Brown Esq.
Richard Lechmere Esq.	Foster Hutchinson Esq.
Nathaniel Hatch Esq.	Sworn in since last return
George Erving Esq.	Sworn in since last return

List of Persons

Who are suffering for their attachment to Government

James Putnam Esq.
John Chandler Esq.
Richard Saltonstall Esq. Sheriff of Essex
William Tyng Esq. Sheriff of Cumberland
David Phipps Esq. Sheriff of Middlesex
Joshua Loring Jun^r Esq. Sheriff of Suffolk
Elisha Jones Esq. of Weston
Charles Russell Esq.
Peter Johonnet [65]
Thomas Amory
Thomas Brindley
Rev^d M^r Wiswall
Richard Clark		Consignees
Benjamin Faneul
Thomas Hutchinson
Henry Barns Esq. of Marlborough
John Worthington Esq.		Fled or Kept Prisoners
Israel Williams Esq.
William Payne Esq.
James Russel Esq. and others at Charlestown
Isaac Rand - - - -	ditto
Thomas Gilbert Esq.
Jonathan Sewall Esq.
Daniel Bless, of Concord

N.B. The foregoing Persons, both Counsellors and others have suffered exceedingly in their property, for their attachment to Government, by a Resolve of the Provincial Congress, and a total stop to all kinds of business.

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

Private.

Boston July 24^th 1775

My Lord…

I am sorry to acquaint Your Lordship that many of the Friends of Government and even several of the Council who have sought Protection in this Town, begin to feel distress, the money they brought with them being expended, and the Rebels preventing their receiving any profits from their [66] estates. Some of the most respectable of the Council have applyed to me for assistance; we have no publick money, nor could I dispose of it in that channel if we had. And I have been obliged to divide with them the little cash remaining of my own. We shall all soon be in the same situation, till cash is sent to us by our Agents; for by a Decree of the Congress no Officer’s Bill is to be taken, and there is not a merchant, even in New York, who now dares to send us money for our draughts…

I have the honour to be &^c

Tho^s Gage

Secretary Dartmouth to Governor Gage. Extract

Separate.

Whitehall 2^d August 1775

Sir…

I have only to add, that if we are driven to the difficulty of relinquishing Boston, care must be taken that the Officers and Friends of Government be not left exposed to the rage and insults of Rebels who set no bounds to their barbarity. And when I mention this circumstance, I must not omit to inform you that His Majesty is graciously pleased, upon a representation made to him of the distress to which many of the Members of your present Council are exposed, to direct that you do, from time to time, give them such relief and make them such allowance as you shall judge necessary, and include the expence in your Contingent Accounts…

I am &^c

Dartmouth [67]

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

Boston 9^th October 1775

My Lord…

I must inform Your Lordship that a Theft has been committed on the Province, and that all the Seals have been taken out of the Council Chamber where they were kept. This was observed on the 4^th Inst; on the 6^th I sent a Message to the Lieutenant Governor and Council, to make every necessary enquiry they possibly could, into the matter, which they have done, and I am sorry to tell Your Lordship without any good effect; which you will see by their answer to my message, which I have now the honor to transmit to Your Lordship.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest regard respect and esteem, My Lord

Your Lordship’s most obedient and most humble Servant

Tho^s Gage

In Council, October 9^th 1775

Ordered, that His Honor the Lieutenant Governor, Chief Justice Oliver, Treas^r Gray, Judge Brown and M^r Lechmere, be a Committee to wait on His Excellency the Governor with the following Answer to his Message of the 6^th Instant.

Tho^s Flucker Sec^y

May it please Your Excellency.

Agreeable to Your Excellency’s Message to the Board of the 6^th Instant, We have gone into a [68] strict enquiry and examination under oath, of all those persons who have been returned to us, as having had access to the Council Chamber between the Ninth day of September and the Fourth of October Instant, in which we have not been able to discover any traces whereby we might come at the knowledge of the Publick Seals.

We have directed the Secretary to lay the several affidavits before Your Excellency.

Lieutenant Governor Oliver to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

Boston November 28^th 1775

My Lord

Agreeable to His Majestys Instructions left with me by His Excellency Governor Gage, I take the earliest opportunity of acquainting Your Lordship with those circumstances which in any way relate to the Civil Government of this Province.

Immediately upon the departure of the Governor,1214 I waited on Major General Howe and Admiral Graves, assuring them of my readiness to do every thing in my power to promote the good of His Majesty’s service, and offering my assistance, and that of the Council, in any thing that might in the least degree contribute thereto.

General Howe soon after communicated to me a proclamation which he proposed to publish, for promoting an Association of the Inhabitants. I immediately called the Council together, & recommended it to them. They having referred the matter to me, I drew up the form of Association; such an one as I thought best calculated to answer the purpose, and [69] named to the General, the Hon^ble Peter Oliver, Foster Hutchinson and William Brown, as proper persons to regulate it and receive the Subscriptions.

Within the time limited by the Proclamation, 480 persons subscribed their names, and excepting some few whose characters had been doubtful, they were generally men who in principle were supporters of Government. I have already forwarded to Your Lordship, by General Burgoyne, an Abstract of the Minutes of Council, with a List of the Members, agreeable to the Instructions, and that you might be more fully informed of the whole matter, I took the liberty to send with them the General’s Proclamation with the Association referred to…

I am, My Lord, &^c

Thomas Oliver

At a Council held at the Council Chamber in Boston, on Wednesday the 25^th day of October 1775

Present

His Honor Thomas Oliver Esq. Lieutenant Governor

Chief Justice Oliver	Col^o Edson	M^r Thomas
Treasurer Gray	Col^o Murray	Col^o Leonard
Brig^r Ruggles	M^r Lechmere	M^r Loring
Judge Hutchinson	Col^o Erving	Col^o Hatch
Judge Browne	Col^o Willard	M^r Geo. Erving

His Excellency Thomas Gage Esq. Captain General and Governor in Chief of the Province having embarked for Great Britain, His Honor the Lieutenant Governor this day in Council took the Oaths by Act of Parliament appointed to be taken instead of the Oaths of Allegiance [70] and Supremacy, repeated and subscribed the Test or Declaration therein contained; together with the Oath of Abjuration, and an Oath that he would to the utmost of his power endeavour that all the Clauses matters and things contained in the several Acts of Parliament now in force, or that shall hereafter be made relating to the Colonies or Plantations, be punctually and bona fide observed according to the intent and meaning thereof; and that he would faithfully perform the duties of Lieutenant Governor & Commander in Chief1215 of the Province, according to his best skill and judgment.

The following Message from the Lieutenant Governor was then delivered to the Council, viz^t—

A Message from His Honor the Lieutenant Governor to the Council 25 October 1775

Gentlemen of the Council.

His Excellency Major General Howe, Commander in Chief1216 &^c &^c has thought proper to communicate to me a Proclamation which he means to issue, & has desired I would communicate it to the Council. His intentions are to recommend to the well affected inhabitants of this Town, an Association for the preservation of internal Order and good Government, proposing thereby to give an opportunity to the loyal subjects under his protection, to distinguish themselves from those who are dis-affected to the King’s Government, and at the same time to establish a Military Watch or Patrole for the better maintaining the Police and internal security of the Town. He has still a further view founded on principles of humanity as well as the good of the service. He conjectures that there may be many loyal good subjects here, who in the present [71] scarcity of provisions and fuel may want relief, whose health and strength may admit of their being applied to the good purposes before mentioned. Of such he would select from the Associators a certain number, to be formed into Companies, under Officers appointed by him out of the Associators, to be solely employed within the Town for those purposes; and for which service they should be furnished with arms, and an allowance be made to such as required it, of fuel and provisions equal to what is issued to His Majesty’s troops within the Garrison.

The General would wish that the regulation of this Association should be undertaken by some persons in whom both he and the Inhabitants can confide. I therefore refer to you the consideration of this matter; and of such persons as you shall recommend, I will take the earliest opportunity to acquaint His Excellency.

Thomas Oliver

And the said Message having been read, Chief Justice Oliver, Brig^dr Ruggles and Judge Browne were appointed a Committee, to take the same into consideration and report an Answer thereto.

And then the Board were adjourned to the next day.

Thursday October 26, 1775

Present in Council

His Honor the Lieutenant Governor and the same Gentlemen as on yesterday

The Committee appointed to take into consideration His Honors Message, reported the following answer, viz^t

May it please Your Honor.

Your Honor having been pleased to communicate to the Board His Excellency the Honorable Major General [72] Howe’s intention to publish a Proclamation, to promote an Association within the Town of Boston, in order to maintain the Police and internal security of the Town, at this important crisis, as also his desire of its being communicated to His Majesty’s Council:—

Your Honor having desired the Opinion & Advice of the Board upon this interesting occasion, we beg leave Sir to express our grateful resentment1217 of His Excellency’s great politeness in submitting his intentions to the Board and our warmest sentiments of esteem for that humanity expressed in the intended Proclamation, so evidential of a mind interesting itself not only in attention to the public welfare, but also to the relief of those private distresses in which so many of His Majesty’s loyal subject[s] are unhappily involved, from the effects of a most ungrateful rebellion: and a most sensible pleasure must be derived from the reflection that we may expect every thing which we can hope or wish for, from the Military exertions of a Gentleman endued with so amiable a character as that which General Howe is adorned with.

Your Honor hath been pleased to refer the consideration of regulating the form of the Association to the Board, and have intimated General Howe’s wish that the regulation may be undertaken by persons in whom both himself and the Inhabitants may confide. We would therefore Sir beg leave to offer as our opinion, that we imagine the affair is so peculiar to the Military Department, that we Advise Your Honor as Commander in Chief,1218 and in whom the Board hath the most perfect confidence, from the experience of your abilities, to recommend to General Howe such persons to regulate this important and necessary Association as he may approve of, that peace and good order & the safety of His Majesty’s Loyal Subjects may be secured & established. [73]

Read and Accepted, and Ordered that Harrison Gray, Foster Hutchinson, John Erving, Daniel Leonard and Nathaniel Hatch, Esquires, be a Committee to wait on His Honor the Lieutenant Governor with the foregoing Answer to his Message of yesterday.

And then the Council was adjourned to the 28^th of October.

Saturday 28 October 1775

The Council met according to Adjournment.

Present

His Honor the Lieutenant Governor
And the same Gentlemen as before, except Brig^dr Ruggles

The Lieutenant Governor informed the Council, that the Small Pox had broken out in several parts of the Town, and that no steps had been taken by the persons appointed by law to prevent its spreading, & recommended to the Board to take some immediate measures for stopping the progress of that disease before it became more general.

The Board entering into a consideration of the matter requested the Lieutenant Governor to consult with Major General Howe, whether it was for the good of His Majesty’s service that it should be stopped.

And the Board was adjourned to Monday the 30^th.[74]

Monday 30^th October 1775

The Council met according to Adjournment.

Present

His Honor the Lieutenant Governor
And the same Gentlemen of the Council, as before.

The Lieutenant Governor having informed the Board that he was authorized by Major General Howe to say that it was for the benefit of the service that the Small Pox should if possible be prevented from spreading;—

The Council thereupon Ordered that Richard Lechmere, John Erving and Nathaniel Hatch Esq^rs be a Committee to prepare a Hospital to receive the several infected persons, and to take proper steps for their removal thereto.

A true Copy from the Council Minutes Attest

Fra^s Skinner D. Sec^y

Lieutenant Governor Oliver to Secretary Dartmouth. Extracts

Boston January 26^th 1776

My Lord…

I am come now to lay before Your Lordship the state of this Town, in which I beg leave to be a little more particular.

The Town of Boston, which in its most flourishing [75] state might contain about 15000 Inhabitants, is now reduced to about 3500. Of this number I presume there may be one thousand males. Two hundred and fifty of which are refugees from the Country, 750 of its original male inhabitants, and 2500 women and children.

Of the 1000 males I have no doubt that 500 are truly loyal subjects, and such as have exhibited the strongest proofs of their attachment to Government. Of the remaining 500 I believe one half, viz. 250 to be as strongly attached to the Rebel interest; the other half to be mere indifferent. I should here observe that the women and children are for the greatest part families of the loyal subjects, the others having more generally sent their families out when they could not go themselves; so that the Loyal and their connections may amount to upwards of 2000.

During the Blockade these people have generally subsisted themselves by their own means & industry. The difficulties they have undergone have been great and pressing. We had no fund to support these people nor the expence of the Police; no rent being paid either by the troops or others, at least with very few exceptions. Under these circumstances it was impossible to exercise the Civil Powers, without embarrassment to the service, and for that reason it has continued in a dormant state, most things being conducted in a Military line. Thus far My Lord, I have acted upon my own judgment; but I could wish to have Your Lordships directions for my future conduct.

If this post is to be maintained and the country to be penetrated from hence, it may possibly produce such an alteration of circumstances as to require an alteration of our present mode of Government. If we are able to drive the Rebels back in the country (which will require a great force and early applied) it may [76] open a door to many persons coming in, of whom we may form some kind of Civil Society. A continuation of military Government in that case, might deter many from returning to their loyalty, and lead them rather to retreat back with the Rebels, to the increase of their numbers.

If a Garrison should only be continued here, and the War prosecuted in some other part, and the Port Bill suspended (which seems absolutely necessary) Trade in that case might require a restoration of Civil Government, or many of the Inhabitants must be supported as part of the Garrison at public charge.

But if this Place should be abandoned & the army remove to any other part of the Continent, I beg leave to be directed how I shall dispose of the Council and other Civil Officers. To carry them with the army would perhaps be a clog to the service: to leave them behind, would be to expose many of them to destruction. There are I suppose sixty or seventy Persons, with their families, who could never make their peace with the Rebels, and who would be unable to subsist themselves by any means when deprived of their Property. Thirty of them, exclusive of the Revenue Officers, are now some way or other supported by Government. If that support was continued they might remove to some cheap country, until their services were wanted: but the remainder must suffer…

Your Lordships most faithful and most obedient humber Servant

Tho^s Oliver [77]

Lieutenant General [sic] Oliver to Secretary Dartmouth. Extracts

Boston March the 10^th 1776

My Lord.

General Howe having determined to remove with the Garrison immediately from this place, (the reasons of which Your Lordship will more particularly learn from him) I am now preparing to embark for Halifax, with the Council, and such of the Inhabitants as dare not trust themselves to the violence of the People.

Solicitous to pursue such steps as may be most for the interest of Government I am under some embarrassment what course to take; whether to go with the army, or to proceed to England. But as the shipping here is not sufficient to convey those who choose to leave America, I thought it most prudent to go with them to Halifax.

General Howe has been so kind as to provide us ships, but as our removal is sudden and the means of transportation rather confined, we are obliged to content ourselves with taking only such necessaries as will barely suffice for the passage. The remainder of our effects we must leave behind…

As my charge and trust must of course cease (at least for some time) and as I can no way contribute to the promoting of the service, I shall think it my duty to repair to England…

I have the honor to be. My Lord

Your Lordships most obedient & most faithful humble Servant

Tho^s Oliver [78]

Lieutenant Governor Oliver to Secretary Lord George Germain. Extract

Halifax Nov. Scot^a 21 April 1776

My Lord.

By His Majesty’s ship Milford I had the honor to receive Your Lordships letters, circular, bearing date the Tenth of November and 23^d of December last…

The abandoning of the Town of Boston, & removal of the troops from that post, renders it, My Lord, unnecessary to say any thing upon the subject of Your Lordship’s instructions to me, as Civil Commander1219 of that Province. I can only assure Your Lordship that, had it been expedient to have maintained that Post, I should with the utmost zeal, have continued to have discharged my duty in paying all obedience to His Majesty’s Instructions…

I have advised with General Howe, my Lord Percy, and Admiral Shuldham, whether by my continuance here, I could in any degree contribute to the promoting of His Majesty’s service. They all agree, that in the present circumstances there can be nothing for me to do, and approve of my going to England…

The Hon^ble Major General Howe having determined on the 6^th of March to evacuate the Town of Boston, made me acquainted with his intentions, & desired I would with the greatest expedition prepare the Council and such of the Inhabitants as choose to leave the Town, for embarking with the Army. Accordingly the short time allowed for that purpose was employed in making the necessary preparations; and on the Tenth of March, by orders from the General, we embarked on board five transports allotted for that [79] purpose. The very hasty manner of our embarkation, as well as the crowded condition of the ships, prevented our taking with us any thing more than our private Papers, Plate, and Sea Stores.

On the 17^th of March the General and the Army embarked, … and, stopping at King-Road some days to make the necessary arrangements, and to destroy the works at the Castle, proceeded to Nantasket Harbour. On the 25^th of March the wind being fair, we sailed in the first Division for Halifax, under the convoy of the Fowey Man of War, where we arrived the 29^th of March…

I Robert Lemon Chief Clerk in Her Majesty’s State Paper Office, London, do hereby Declare that this Transcript of the Minutes and Proceedings of the Council of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, from the 9th of April 1774 to the 21st of April 1776, is a true Copy, extracted from the Originals preserved in the State Paper Office. Witness my hand this 3rd day of September in the Tear of Our Lord One Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Two.

Rob^t Lemon

I hereby Certify that M^r Robert Lemon made the above Declaration and signed the same in my presence this 3^rd day of September 1852.

Abbott Lawrence

Envoy Extraordinary & Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States of America

1 See below, p. 15.

2 Edward Randolph (Prince Society Publications), II. 217, 220–222, 256; III. 92, 161, 178, 147, 187, 286.

3 Andros Tracts (Prince Society Publications), II. 37.

4 Viola F. Barnes, The Dominion of New England, p. 124.

5 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 258, 571.

6 Cotton Mather makes some amusing comments on this situation in his Diary (7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 804).

7 The First Americans, p. 108.

8 James Truslow Adams, The Founding of New England, p. 450. For more of the same, see id., pp. 447, 449; Homer C. Hockett, Political and Social Growth of the United States, p. 120; Marcus W. Jernegan, The American Colonies, p. 160; Wertenbaker, First Americans, pp. 108–109.

9 Randolph, iv. 92, 107.

10 Andros Tracts, ii. 37–39, 71.

11 Jeremy Belknap, History of New Hampshire, i. 178.

12 For example, Vernon L. Parrington, The Colonial Mind, p. 87.

13 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 280–281, 312.

14 Randolph, iv. 106.

15 Andros Tracts, iii. 174.

16 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 617–620.

17 Id., p. 253.

18 Randolph, iv. 105.

19 Randolph, iii. 146–148, 180; iv. 90; vi. 189; Andros Tracts, iii. 200.

20 Randolph, iii. 290.

21 Id., pp. 322–323.

22 Andros Tracts, ii. 76.

23 Id., 45.

24 Samuel G. Arnold, History of the State of Rhode Island, i. 474.

25 Belknap, New Hampshire, i. 205–206.

26 Andros Tracts, ii. 200; Robert Calef, More Wonders of the Invisible World, pp. 149–151.

27 Sketches of Elisha Cooke, Timothy Lindall, and Jonathan Belcher in Sibley’s Harvard Graduates, iv.

28 Andros Tracts, iii. 155, 169–173; Cotton Mather’s Diary, 7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 148.

29 See sketches of Pemberton, Colman, and Wadsworth in Sibley, iv.

30 Disquisition Concerning Ecclesiastical Councils (Boston, 1716).

31 See below, pp. 35–37.

32 Photostat of agreement of June 1, 1704, at Massachusetts Historical Society.

33 Particularly the Brookfield Association. Congregational Quarterly, xii. 277 ff.

34 For example, Calvin R. Batchelder, History of the Eastern Diocese.

35 Ebenezer Turell, The Life and Character of the Reverend Benjamin Colman (Boston, 1749), PP. 136–141.

36 Recently by J. T. Adams, Provincial Society, p. 63.

37 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 291–292.

38 Id.

39 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., p. 478.

40 Id., p. 508.

41 Samuel Willard, Ne Sutor Ultra Crepidam (Boston, 1681).

42 Sibley, iv. 194.

43 Cotton Mather’s Diary, 7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii, passim.

44 Brooks Adams, Emancipation of Massachusetts, p. 297. Cf. Kenneth B. Murdock, Increase Mather, p. 142.

45 Abijah P. Marvin, Cotton Mather, p. iii; Mather, Optanda (Boston, 1692), pp. 42–45.

46 Memorable Providences (Boston, 1689), appendix, p. ii.

47 Andros Tracts, iii. 170.

48 Magnalia (ed. 1702), Bk. vii. 23.

49 Diary, 7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 445.

50 Colonial Mind, p. 113.

51 Andros Tracts, ii. 73.

52 Id., i. 68.

53 Magnalia (ed. 1702), Bk. iii. 10.

54 See sketch of Cutler in Sibley, v.

55 Chronological History (Boston, 1826), p. xxi.

56 Parable of the Ten Virgins (2d ed., Boston, 1747), pp. 56–57 (first published, 1707).

57 The Duty of an Apostatizing People (Boston, 1737), p. 67.

58 Andros Tracts, ii. 37. See also Taken from the Flying-Post, May 14–16, 1719 (broadside in Harvard College Library).

59 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 621–622.

60 Id., pp. 397–401; Diary, 7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 161–162.

61 This recalcitrant seems to have been the only clergyman the writer’s family ever produced.

62 Parrington, Colonial Mind, p. 86.

63 Id., p. 114.

64 Id., p. 148; Wertenbaker (First Americans, p. 113) says of the new rationalism: “This movement found no corresponding development among the old school of churchmen. So far from attempting … to shape their theology in conformity with new ideals and new points of view, they remained rigid and unyielding.”

65 Diary, 7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 349–350.

66 First Americans, p. 248.

67 Samuel E. Morison, “The Harvard School of Astronomy in the Seventeenth Century,” New England Quarterly, vi. 3–24.

68 Preface, p. xviii.

69 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 354–355. The book was probably John Spencer’s Discourse Concerning Prodigies (London, 1663).

70 “An arch-conservative, he justified his ways to his conscience by the excellence of the heritage he strove to conserve. A formalist, he satisfied his intellectual curiosity by extolling the sufficiency of the creed of the fathers. He closed the windows of his mind against the winds of new doctrine, and bounded the fields of speculative inquiry by orthodox fences … Why should one expect to find in the works of such a man the seeds of new systems of thought…?” Parrington, Colonial Mind, pp. 99, 100.

71 Diary, 7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 86.

72 Id., p. 282 and passim.

73 The Christian Philosopher (London, 1721). This may be the “volume of garbled science and platitudinous moralizing” which Mr. Adams (Revolutionary New England, p. 36) attacks on the authority of a secondary work, but, as his reference is incorrect, one cannot be certain.

74 New York Times, December 24, 1933.

75 For violently contrasting interpretations, cf. Moses Coit Tyler, History of American Literature, ii. 183, 185–187, and American Literature, i. 393–404.

76 For an attack by Cotton Mather on popular astronomical superstitions, see Manuductio ad Ministerium (Boston, 1726), pp. 54, 55.

77 Jernegan, American Colonies, p. 187.

78 Founding of New England, p. 396.

79 Political and Social Growth, p. 124. See also Wertenbaker, First Americans, p. 155.

80 Truth Held Forthe (New York, 1695), pp. 174–200. Cf. John Hale, A Modest Inquiry (Boston, 1702), pp. 155–156.

81 Political and Social Growth, p. 124.

82 Printed in 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 550–570.

83 For example, Hockett, Political and Social Growth, p. 124.

84 Their attitude was that of modern psychologists who warn people not to play with automatic writing lest it lead to split personalities. These last square perfectly with the “demoniac seizures” of witchcraft days. For modern examples, distressing to a man who likes an ordered universe, see Elwood Worcester, Body, Mind, and Spirit.

85 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 391–397.

86 More Wonders, p. 93 (i.e., 53).

87 Christ’s Fidelity (London, 1704), pp. 70 ff.

88 Some Miscellany Observations (Philadelphia, 1692).

89 Political and Social Growth, p. 125.

90 Increase Mather, Cases of Conscience (Boston, 1693), appendix.

91 Id., p. 32.

92 This has been proved by the vast scholarship of Thomas J. Holmes in Increase Mather, A Bibliography of his Works, i. 115–138. This book was not available to the men I have been criticizing.

93 Cases of Conscience, postscript.

94 P. 13 of “Enchantments Encountered,” in Wonders of the Invisible World (Boston, 1693).

95 Adams, Founding of New England, p. 454.

96 Wonders of the Invisible World, pp. 50–51, and “Enchantments Encountered” in id.

97 “Cotton Mather not only ran with the mob, but he came near to outdistancing the most credulous.” Parrington, Colonial Mind, p. 115.

98 Adams, Founding of New England, p. 455. “During the Salem witchcraft delusion it was Thomas Brattle and Robert Calef, both merchants, who had the common sense to see the folly of the inquisition and the bravery to denounce the justices and the ministers for their part in it.” Wertenbaker, First Americans, p. 113.

99 The letter on which his reputation in this matter is based is printed in i Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., v. 61–79.

100 Founding of New England, p. 455; Provincial Society, p. 120.

101 More Wonders, p. 78.

102 This statement is based on the frequent appearance of Hale’s book in inventories and on mention of it elsewhere. But it is true that people who left enough books to be inventoried would have been the sort to despise Calef.

103 Hockett, Political and Social Growth, p. 125; Wertenbaker, First Americans, pp. 113, 162; Adams, Founding of New England, p. 455.

104 Provincial Society, p. 120.

105 More Wonders, p. 96 (i.e., 56).

106 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 646–647.

107 Printed in New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxiii. 193 n.

108 Diary, 7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 739–740.

109 For a detailed account of Edwards’s reading, see our Publications, xxviii. 193–222.

110 Cotton Mather, p. 303.

111 The situation is well illustrated by the experience of the town of Norwich, Connecticut, which was unable to pay the salary of its minister, John Woodward. But when he was discharged in 1716, the church split into four congregations, and under his successor the First Church threw off three more.

112 Daniel Lewes, Of Taking Heed to, and Fulfilling the Ministry (Boston, 1720), introduction, p. ii.

113 The Firm Union of a People Represented (New London, 1717), p. 55.

114 These are based upon Sibley, Dexter, histories and records of towns and churches, diaries, letters, and all the available newspapers of the period.

115 For examples, sec Justin Winsor, History of Duxbury, pp. 189–192. “One does not, of course, look for any genuine humility or a sense of humor in a Puritan. They destroy his specific characteristics as the sunshine does microbes, and that way tolerance lies.” Adams, Revolutionary New England, p. 34. Of course one does not find things without looking for them.

116 The Defects of Preachers Reproved (New London, 1724).

117 Edward L. Goodwin, The Colonial Church in Virginia, pp. 241–319. Of course no New England colony ever legislated in regard to its clergy as did Virginia. Cf. William W. Hening, Virginia Statutes at Large, iii. 362.

118 Sibley, iii. 396.

119 Id., iv, see index.

120 Franklin B. Dexter, Biographical Sketches of the Graduates of Yale College, pp. 182–184.

121 Solomon Stoddard, Defects of Preachers, introduction, pp. iv, v.

122 For example, Andrew Gardner of Worcester. Sibley, v.

123 The Man of God Thoroughly Furnished to Every Good Work (New London, 1758).

124 First Americans, pp. 189–190.

125 Id., p. 273.

126 Thomas W. Higginson, Travellers and Outlaws, pp. 15–16.

127 Diary, 7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii.

128 In Terra Nova: The Northeast Coast of America before 1602.

129 First published in the London Chronicle, February 8, 1766, with an introduction by “A Lover of Britain”; see The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, A. H. Smyth, editor (cited hereafter as Writings), iii. 231, and Correspondence of William Shirley, C. H. Lincoln, editor, ii. 103–107. The text of the quotations is from the latter, pp. 104, 106–107.

130 Writings, iv. 362.

131 MS., William L. Clements Library. In this letter Franklin went on to assert that the plan had later found favor with members of the Rockingham ministry, who conferred frequently with him upon it, “and really strengthened one another and their Friends in the Resolution of Repealing the Stamp Act, on a Supposition that by this Plan of a Loan Office they could raise a greater sum with more satisfaction to the People.” The letter is referred to briefly by R. A. Humphreys in the English Historical Review, l. 267–268; and also by L. J. Carey in Franklin’s Economic Views (p. 20). But by the latter the episode is assigned to the year 1766, which obscures the true raison d’être of the proposal. I have also been able to identify a portion of Franklin’s draft of his scheme in the American Philosophical Society, Franklin Manuscripts, l (ii), 18. It is clear that this is the project which Pownall inserted in 1768 in his current edition of The Administration of the Colonies, and which he described as the joint production of himself and an American friend. But by 1768—indeed by 1767, when it looked for a time as if parliament, with the backing of the merchants, would take it seriously—Franklin had long since lost his enthusiasm for the plan. For his later attitude toward this revenue scheme, see his letter to Galloway of June 13, 1767, in Writings, v. 25–28.

132 American Philosophical Society, Franklin MSS., lviii (i), 36. The letter is dated December 21, 1766, and is incomplete.

133 “Observations,” in the London Chronicle, January 15, 1765; and “North American,” reprinted in the Newport Mercury, June 3, 1765, probably from the Westminster Gazette.

134 On Franklin and the Mutiny Act (5 Geo. III, c. 33). see Writings, iv. 388; v. 18. Bernard Faÿ, in his Franklin, the Apostle of Modern Times, p. 315, makes this a provision of the Stamp Act. In the Am. Philos. Soc., Franklin MSS., l (ii), 55, is a draft in Franklin’s own hand of a note to Welbore Ellis, Secretary at War: “Mr Glover & Mr Trecothic from the Committee of North American Merch^ts present their respectful Compliments to Mr [Ellis—name struck out] Secretary at War, and request halt an Hours Audience of him on the Mutiny Bill.…” The agents’ card is in the Newport Mercury, July 8, 1765, reprinted from the Gazetteer, May 2, 1765; the letters by “An American” are in the St. James’s Chronicle, April 18 and 23, 1765.

135 Writings, iv. 390.

136 London Chronicle, November 16, 1765. See Franklin to Thomson, February 27, 1766, Writings, iv. 411.

137 Writings, iv. p. 392.

138 Pennsylvania Magazine of History, x. 92.

139 Writings, v. 16.

140 Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Penn Papers (MSS.), Official Correspondence, x. 35; Pemberton Papers (MSS.), xxxiv. 142.

141 Pennsylvania Chronicle, February 9, 1767. See also the issues for February 16, 23, March 9, 23, 1767. These pieces are incompletely reprinted in Writings, iv. 393–399; v. 14–15.

142 Pennsylvania Journal, September 25, 1766.

143 Pennsylvania Chronicle, March 23, 1767.

144 “A Virginian,” in Lloyd’s Evening Post, September 2, 11, 1765 (the letters were dated, respectively, August 23 and September 5); “Equity,” in the Boston Evening-Post, December 2, 1765, reprinted from the Gazetteer, September 3, 1765.

145 “Americus,” in the Newport Mercury, February 3, 1766, reprinted from the Public Ledger, November 22, 1765; “Justice,” in the Newport Mercury, February 17, 1766, probably from the Gazetteer; “O,” in the Boston Evening-Post, March 17, 1766, reprinted from the Gazetteer, December 16, 1765.

146 Pennsylvania Journal, Supplement, September 18, 1766: “An Essay, Towards discovering the Authors and Promoters of the memorable Stamp Act, In a Letter from a Gentleman in London, to his friend in Philadelphia.”

147 Am. Philos. Soc., Franklin MSS., L (ii), 27, 30a, 31, 31a, 31b, 31c, 31d, 31e. A draft of the letter in the London Chronicle, April 9, 1767, is found in id., L. 9.

148 “Extract of a Letter from B. F. to W[illiam] F[ranklin],” London, November 9, 1765, Charles Norton Smith MSS., ii. 44, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. This is a copy in the handwriting of William Franklin. The original letter, not at the moment available, is in the Mason collection of Franklin material recently acquired by Yale University.

149 L. S. Sutherland, “Edmund Burke and the First Rockingham Ministry,” English Historical Review, xlvii. 46–70. At several points this new and illuminating exposition of the twofold movement for repeal and trade reform can be supplemented by a reading of the many extracts dealing with the movement from letters from London which were published in the colonial newspapers in the early months of 1766. In particular it appears that trade reform was the original purpose of the merchants, but that they were persuaded, probably by the arguments of the colonial agents, to concentrate first upon repeal.

150 Pennsylvania Journal, Supplement, September 18, 1766.

151 Am. Philos. Soc., Franklin MSS., l (ii), 46, 51. These parallels include two of the most famous passages in the Examination: the description of the altered temper of the Americans toward Great Britain after 1763; and the long discussion of colonial participation in the last French war and the character of the war as one for the supremacy of a British interest, the Indian trade. See Writings, iv. 418–419, 436–439.

152 Am. Philos. Soc., Franklin MSS., l (ii), 51.

153 Writings, iv. 446.

154 Id., p. 419.

155 On Franklin’s library and the present location of Franklin’s copies of the controversial pamphlets of this period, some of them annotated, see George Simpson Eddy, “Dr. Benjamin Franklin’s Library,” Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, n.s., xxxiv. 206–226. Franklin’s copy of the charters is in the Historical Society of Pennsylvania; the other two items are in the New York Public Library.

156 F. J. Hinkhouse, The Preliminaries of the American Revolution as seen in the English Press, 1763–1775 (1926), pp. 93–94; and advertisements, as in the Daily Advertiser, January 11, 1766.

157 Franklin was uncomfortably aware of the reservation in the Pennsylvania charter of which the Grenvillites made so much: “King covenants not to tax but by Assembly or Act of Par^t” was his entry opposite this clause. When he noted the point in Knox, The Claim of the Colonies (p. 5), he wrote: “A Right that never existed cannot be a Right Reserved. … Qu^y If the Parliament had before no such Right, it would not be given to them by Words in the Charter?” See also his argument in his examination, Writings, iv. 445.

158 At the head of the title-page is a mutilated entry: “… mean by a thorough Inquisition of the point to procure a Settlement of Rights.” Again, opposite the record of the vote in the House of Lords on repeal, is the memorandum: “Comp[limen]t the Lords … Proof of my Opinion of their Goodness in the Freedom with which I purpose to examine their Protests.” And following a passage in which the peers had contested the right of the Americans to be exempt from a due share of the imperial burdens, he wrote: “Repeat on this Head all that has been done & paid by America.—King’s Message, Parl^t Grants, &c.” Where the Lords alleged that the last war was entered upon “for the interest and security of those Colonies,” Franklin wrote: “The fact deny’d. State the Cause & Effect of the War. The expensive Manner of Carrying it on &c.” Others of these marginalia are in the same style of hints for an intended rejoinder.

159 Protest against the Bill to Repeal the American Stamp Act (1766), p. 11.

160 Gazetteer, January 11, 1766, reprinted in the Pennsylvania Chronicle, March 9, 1767; Writings, iv. 421.

161 The Works of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, editor, iv. 209–210; Protest, p. 13.

162 Writings, iv. 441.

163 Protest, p. 12.

164 Id., p. 6.

165 William Knox, The Claim of the Colonies (1765), p. 8.

166 Id.

167 Protest, p. 4. Franklin, to be sure, struck out the second sentence, but apparently because it rested upon a strained reading of the text. Franklin also wrote “Neg.” in the margin opposite this passage.

168 There was, to be sure, a good deal of home-rule sentiment and expression in America from the beginning of the controversy, as Professor C. F. Mullett has clearly shown in his “Colonial Claims to Home Rule (1764–1775),” University of Missouri Studies, ii, no. 4 (1927).

169 Protest, p. 10. This claim, the text continued, “must (if admitted) set them absolutely free from any obedience to the power of the British Legislature.” Franklin commented: “but not to the Power of the Crown.”

170 The Claim of the Colonies, p. 9. Knox specified, among other such acts, those “restraining their commerce; prohibiting the carriage or exportation of their manufactures from one colony to another; taxing the productions of one colony when brought into another.” Franklin underscored these lines, and wrote: “Wicked.” When the Lords referred to “the wise policy” of the Navigation Act and subsequent trade laws (Protest, p. 11), Franklin observed: “The Policy wise with regard to foreigners. Selfish with Regd to Colonies.” Opposite the prediction of evils which would follow “that absolute freedom of trade, which they appear to desire,” he wrote “Qu^y. Other Advantages of Colonies besides Commerce. Selfishness of Commercial Views.”

171 Writings, v. 324–325.

172 In the margin of the Protest, p. 7.

173 Writings, v. 20–21.

174 Id., pp. 115–116.

175 Protest, p. 15.

176 Writings, v. 17–18, 21. Cf. “Letter concerning the Gratitude of America,” January 6, 1766, id., iv. 400–404.

177 Protest, p. 8. See also Writings, v. 260, for another expression of this view in 1770.

178 Writings, iv. 456.

179 See Franklin to Samuel Cooper, June 8, 1770, id., v. 261. The quotation is from Franklin to Joseph Galloway, January 11, 1770, MS., William L. Clements Library.

180 Writings, iv. 456; v. 17. See also “Francis Lynn,” id., v. 168. The germ of these passages is to be found in Am. Philos. Soc., Franklin MSS., l (ii), 46b.

181 Letter of February 18, 1774, MS., William L. Clements Library.

182 Writings, v. 115.

183 Id., vi. 260.

184 The Victoria County History of Survey, iv. 32–33.

185 Gardyner, Description, pp. 54–55.

186 Id., pp. 55–56.

187 Id., p. 74.

188 John H. Lefroy, Memorials of the Discovery and Early Settlement of the Bermudas or Somers Islands, 1515–1685, i. 548.

189 Leo F. Stock, Proceedings and Debates of the British Parliaments Respecting North America, i. 169–170.

190 Id., p. 196.

191 Id., p. 196 n.

192 Henry Wilkinson, The Adventurers of Bermuda, pp. 285, 287.

193 I am obliged to Miss Mary Isabel Fry, of the staff of the Huntington Library, for the careful collation of this text with the photostatic copy.

194 A useful short introduction is Arthur S. P. Woodhouse, “Milton, Puritanism, and Liberty,” University of Toronto Quarterly, iv. 483–513.

195 In addition to indebtedness for aid specifically acknowledged in the notes, the author wishes to express his thanks to the Library Company of Philadelphia, and to its librarian, Mr. Austin K. Gray, for many courtesies, culminating in permission to reproduce here the Maylem manuscript poems and letters in the Du Simitière Papers (see note 2, p. 94). Most of this material is now printed for the first time.

196 Statements concerning Maylem, incorrect in one or both of these particulars, are found in Samuel Kettell, Specimens of American Poetry, i. 83; E. A. and G. L. Duyckinck, Cyclopaedia of American Literature, i. 432; Moses Coit Tyler, A History of American Literature, ii. 53–54, in which the poet is confused with his father, but the inconsistency concerning his death in 1742 is pointed out; John C. Stockbridge, A Catalogue of the Harris Collection of American Poetry, p. 167; Charles E. Hammett, A Contribution to the Bibliography and Literature of Newport, R. I., p. 92; S. A. Allibone, Critical Dictionary of English Literature, ii. 1255; Charles Evans, American Bibliography, iii, Index of Authors. So far as I know, the first writer to point out the inconsistency in full was the late Sidney Rider, in a severe review of Hammett’s Bibliography of Newport, published in his Book Notes, ii (Providence, R. I., January 7, 1888). I should like to acknowledge in this note my indebtedness in the preparation of the present study to Mr. Rider, in whose miscellaneous collections in the John Hay Library of Brown University I found (Box 245, No. 8) notes and transcripts that opened the way to the main lines of inquiry pursued in my investigation.

197 Justin Winsor, Memorial History of Boston, i. 560, 570; ii. xii.

198 See the will of Joseph Maylem, dated August 13, 1730, in the Suffolk County Probate Court Records, Case No. 6378. Our Publications, xiv. 405, locates one of his lots in Boston next door to that upon which was built the Huguenot Church. This lot was left by the above-mentioned will to his son Mark. Joseph Maylem’s will was allowed February 13, 1733. The Boston Weekly News-Letter for Thursday, February 1, 1733, contains a notice which reads: “On Monday Evening [i.e. January 29, 1733] died at his House in School-Street, Mr. Joseph Maylem, who laboured under great bodily Indisposition and Pain for a long Time, in the 74th year of his age.” Samuel G. Drake, History and Antiquities of Boston, p. 592 n, suggests that Joseph was the son of the John Mylom referred to in the text above as having been admitted into church membership in 1635 The relationship is probable, but not certain.

199 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., v. 167.

200 “Record Book of First Church in Charlestown,” New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxix. 71.

201 Emma L. Coleman, New England Captives Carried to Canada between 1677 and 1760, i. 74, 209, 212. Sec also Herbert I. Brackett, Brackett Genealogy, p. 122.

202 Suffolk County Probate Court Records, xxxi. 317. See also, for information about Keziah (Brackett) Maylem, Brackett, Brackett Genealogy, pp. 71, 122. Keziah Maylem’s will was allowed March 20, 1733. The Boston Weekly News-Letter for Thursday, March 8, 1733, contains a notice announcing that on “Tuesday last [i.e. March 6, 1733] died here the Widow Maylem, a very discreet and industrious Woman.”

203 See note 2, p. 91, below, for the names of the children of John and Ann Maylem.

204 Joseph Maylem names in his will (note 3, p. 88, above) three sons: Joseph, Mark, and John. The first of these he cut off with the proverbial five shillings, for reasons given. After providing for his widow Keziah by her legal “thirds,” he made a scrupulous division of his remaining property, real and personal, between his sons Mark and John. John’s inheritance, briefly stated, was a ten-acre lot, No. 17, in Bow Street in the township of Nottingham, New Hampshire, with buildings and improvements thereon; a silver tankard; a great chest with a Dantrick lock on it; the easternmost half of his double house in School Street, Boston; and a piece of land in that city lately purchased from. Peter Luce, both these pieces of real estate to be entailed to the third generation.

205 This date is given in Charles Evans, American Bibliography, iii, Index of Authors. It is obviously approximately correct.

206 For these newspaper references I am indebted to the interest of Mr. Clifford K. Shipton.

207 In her application for administrative rights upon the estate of her sister, Rachel Greene, Ann Maylem, or an amanuensis, has twice written the name Rachel “Dehane” and then erased it in favor of the married name “Greene.” Rhode Island Archives, Records of Governor and Council folder, 1760–1769, and “Petitions Voted Out” folder, June, 1768. Jacob Dehane, of Newport, on one occasion went on John Maylem’s bond. Rhode Island Archives, Cases in Equity, Part ii, 1743, 35–4, pp. 5–6. In the Short Narrative (see facsimile) Ann refers to a bond jointly signed by her husband and “Brother Dehane.”

208 See note 3, p. 92, below.

209 The Maylem family Bible was first described and its entries published by Dr. Henry E. Turner, its former owner, in the Rhode Island Historical Magazine, vi. 50. It is not definitely stated in the Bible that the births recorded there are those of the children of John and Ann Maylem, but the grounds for such an assertion are solid. The Bible contains this inscription: “The gift of Ann Maylem to her daughter, Rachel Denison, May the 6th, 1775.” The list of children shows three daughters, Frances, Rachel, and Mary, and a son John, alive in 1742, when in the newspaper notice of the death of John Maylem of Newport three daughters and one son were said to survive him. Furthermore, in the Newport Town Council Records (x. 6), in June, 1743, we find guardianship granted to Ann Maylem, widow of John, for her children Frances, Rachel, Mary, and John. There can be no question that the Bible referred to is the family Bible of John and Ann Maylem. I owe thanks to the late Lloyd M. Mayer, Librarian of the Newport Historical Society, for numerous courtesies in connection with the preparation of this paper, notably for information about the Maylem Bible, and for the several extracts from the Newport Town Council Records, the Newport Administration Bonds, and the Newport Land Evidence Records, which are referred to elsewhere in the notes.

It seems worth while to record here the essential data from the Maylem Bible, as abstracted for me by Mr. Mayer from Dr. Henry E. Turner’s manuscript collections.

Children of John and Ann Maylem from the Maylem Bible.

Ann Maylem, born July 22, 1721, Newport; bapt. by Mr. Clap; died Sept. 28, 1721, Newport (Common Burial Ground). The date of death is given as September 5 by Dr. Turner in the Rhode Island Historical Magazine, vi. 51.
Mary Maylem, born Feb. 7, 1722/3, Newport; bapt. by Mr. Clap; died Sept. 5, 1727, at Newport (Common Burial Ground).
Francis Maylem, born Oct. 8, 1725, Newport; died (still-born) Oct. 8, 1725 (Common Burial Ground).
Frances Maylem, born March 13, 1726/7, Newport; bapt. by Mr. Clap; died Feb. 4, 1750/1, aged 23 yrs. 10 mos. 22 days.
Brackett Maylem, born May 24, 1728, Newport; bapt. by Mr. Clap; died Aug. 22, Exeter.
Keziah Maylem, born Dec. 7, 1730, Exeter; bapt. by Mr. Odlin; died Nov. 13, 1731, Exeter.
Rachel Maylem, born Jan. 1, 1733/4, Boston; bapt. by Dr. Sewall; married — Denison.
Mary Maylem, born Aug. 12, 1737, Boston; bapt. by Mr. Prince.
John Maylem, born April 30, 1739, Boston; bapt. May 6, 1739, by Dr. Sewall.

In the Rider Collection in the John Hay Library of Brown University, Box 245, No. 8, is the following note: “Extracts by Dr. Turner from Church Records. Frances Maylen married Wm. Gubbins, May 7, 1747. (1st C. Ch.) Rachel Malane married Jabez Dennison, Nov. 17, 1774. (2nd C. Ch.) Mary Maylen married Paul Mumford Feb. 3, 1769 (Trinity Ch.).”

Mary Maylem, who married Paul Mumford, was doubtless the “Molly Maylem” who before her marriage conducted what seems to have been a large and active dry-goods store in Newport. See her numerous advertisements in the Newport Mercury, for example that of November 17, 1766, signed “Molly Maylem,” and a later one of June 25, 1767, signed “Mary Maylem.”

210 Land Evidence Records, Newport, vii 124–125.

211 John Bolitho’s petition of June 16, 1729, is found in Petitions to the Rhode Island General Assembly, 1725–1729, i. 60, MS. in Rhode Island Archives.

212 During this period, 1729–1732, John Maylem, husband of Ann, is three times described as of Nottingham or of Exeter, New Hampshire. The following extracts, covering a period of twenty years, from the New Hampshire Provincial Deeds, at the New Hampshire Historical Society, for which I am indebted to the courtesy of Mr. Otis G. Hammond, indicate a fairly extensive interest on the part of the elder John Maylem in land transactions in New Hampshire and Maine:

1722, May 21, John Maylem of Boston, gentleman, buys a proprietor’s right in Nottingham, N. H., from John Russell of Boston.
1729, December 10, John Maylem of Exeter, N. H., sells land in Nottingham to Samuel Little of Newmarket, N. H.; on June 28, 1731, to Israel Folsom of Newmarket.
1731, John Maylem of Nottingham, together with wife Ann, sells land in Nottingham to John Rindge of Portsmouth, N. H.; 1731/2, February 1, to Thomas Bartlett of Newbury, Mass.
1732, August 13, John Maylem of Nottingham buys land in Exeter from Moses Norris of Nottingham.
1741 October 6, John Maylem of Newport, R. I., together with wife Ann, sells land in Falmouth, Me., Exeter, N. H., Sagadahoc, Me., and Nottingham, N. H., to Samuel Lowe of Barrington, Mass.

213 One of these copies, bearing the inscription, “John Maylem Feb. 12th 1736/37 d^d to him this day by Mr. Gerrish,” was sold as No. 261 in the sale catalogue of The Library of the late Rev. Dr. Roderick Terry of Newport, Rhode Island, Part Two, American Art Association-Anderson Galleries, Inc., November 7 and 8, 1934.

214 Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, iv. 571.

215 See last entry in note 3, page 92, above.

216 The petition of 1744 is found in Petitions to the Rhode Island General Assembly, 1743–1747. vi. 13; that of 1748, in the “Voted Out” folder for 1748, MSS. in the Rhode Island Archives.

217 The only known copy of the broadside is in the Massachusetts Historical Society. The probability is that this broadside was issued from the Newport press of the Widow Franklin. Its date seems to be late in 1742 or early in 1743, for in the statement, under June 7 1742, is a reference to an action of the “last Tuesday of May past.” In other words, no month of May had come and gone at the time of writing since the month of May, 1742. By the next entry in the statement it is also made clear that the date of publication was later than November 19, 1742.

218 Other documents relating to Ann Maylem’s various legal troubles in connection with the estates she administered are found in manuscript in the Rhode Island Archives in: Cases in Equity, 1743, vi, Part ii, throughout; Record of Equity Court Judgments, October, 1743; Petitions, 1768–1770, xiii. 80; Records of Governor and Council folder, 1760–1769; “Petitions Voted Out” folder, June, 1768. From certain of these records it becomes clear that John Maylem had borrowed heavily from three or four individuals and by his untimely death had left his estate in considerable disorder. The inventory of his goods and chattels (Cases in Equity, 1743, Part ii, 35–4, pp. 5–6) shows at the time of his death a comfortable amount of furniture and equipment, appraised at £659, all of which had to be sold for the benefit of his creditors.

219 “A Poem by John Maylem on his birth day 30^th April 1760 being then 21 years of age.” A manuscript copy of this unpublished poem is found in the Du Simitière Collection in the Library Company of Philadelphia. All the manuscript poems referred to in this study are taken from the materials under Maylem’s name in this same collection. The article on Pierre Eugène Du Simitière in the Dictionary of American Biography provides a brief and general view of the life of the Swiss artist who devoted himself from about 1765 until his death in 1784 to the collecting of materials for the natural and civil history of North America which he proposed to write. The later history of these materials, particularly of the collections of papers in the Library Company of Philadelphia and in the Library of Congress, is set out in the excellent bibliography by Victor Hugo Paltsits in volume vi of I. N. Phelps Stokes’s Iconography of Manhattan Island (pp. 233–235). The writers of both these articles acknowledge indebtedness to the monographic study of Du Simitière by W. J. Potts in the Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, xiii (October, 1889). Du Simitière’s papers are normally, I believe, fair copies of original materials. Presumably the originals from which these copies were made were afterwards destroyed. The Maylem letters here drawn upon, addressed to several different persons, must have been copied from Maylem’s own drafts.

220 Newport Town Council Records, x. 6; Account of estate of John Maylem, dec’d, Mrs. Ann Maylem, Admx., June 29, 1745 (Newport Town Council Records, ix. 76); Ann Maylem, widow, et al., administrators on estate of Rachel Greene, late of Newport, April 5, 1766 (Newport Administrators Bonds, II. 127); Ann Maylem, widow, et al., administrators on estate of William Gubbins, Mariner, dec’d (Newport Administrators Bonds, 11. 209); Francis Gubbins, minor, asked to have his grandmother, Mrs. Ann Maylem, appointed his guardian, August 4, 1766 (Newport Town Council Records, xv. 37). According to the Maylem Bible (see note 2, p. 91, above), Frances (Maylem) Gubbins died February 4, 1750/1.

221 See note 2, p. 91, above, where the entry of the poet’s birth has been given in condensed form. This fuller entry is given as in the text by Dr. Henry E. Turner, in the Rhode Island Historical Magazine, vi. 50.

222 See pp. 110–111, below.

223 Reference will be made later to the praise of Maylem by Joseph Brown Ladd in 1786. There may be quoted at this point, however, the following comment: “His productions bear every mark of a deficient education; but his genius rose superior to every inconvenience.…” Joseph Brown Ladd, The Poems of Arouet (Charleston, S. C., 1786), p. 23.

224 In view of Maylem’s later designation of himself as “farmer” at the time of his enlistment, the assumption may be that part of his boyhood days were spent on a farm, but when, where, or whose farm it was does not appear in the record.

225 In the eighth section of this study is found a list of the unpublished Maylem poems in the Du Simitière Papers in the Library Company of Philadelphia. Miss Polly Turner, “Paphian Goddess,” has succeeded in withholding her identity from me.

226 From the Annals of Trinity Church, Newport, by George Champlin Mason (first series), p. 131, it appears that Catharine Malbone was married to Major Fairchild (“Major,” a Christian name, not a title) on October 28, 1764. A note informs us that Catharine was the daughter of Godfrey and Catharine Malbone, and was born October 21, 1737. She was thus a sister of John Malbone, father of Edward Greene Malbone, the artist.

227 See note 4, p. 95, above.

228 This poem, like the other known unpublished writings of Maylem, is from the Du Simitière Papers.

229 See No. 1 in the list of Maylem’s published works, p. 117, below

230 Massachusetts Archives, French and Indian War Records. For this and other references to the main facts of Maylem’s military career, taken from the Massachusetts Archives, I am indebted to the courtesy of Mr. Albert Harrison Hall, State Archivist, and Miss Marie J. Hession, Principal Archives Assistant

231 Id.

232 Id.

233 Massachusetts Archives, Military Series, lxxvii. 578

234 For bibliographical description, see No. 2 in the list of Maylem’s published works, p. 117, below.

235 The Conquest of Beau-se-jour, by Colonels Moncton [sic] and Winslow, in 1755.

236 Lieutenant Simon Wade, who signed the letter with Maylem, was an associate in arms of the poet in more than one campaign, and at Fort William Henry both were officers under Colonel Frye. Wade’s record is found in Massachusetts Archives, French and Indian War Records, and in Massachusetts Archives, Military Series, lxxvi. 195, 239, 241, 708, and 709. Thomas Shaw, who seems to have endorsed the letter, was a captain of New Jersey troops present at Fort William Henry. After his release from captivity, he was promoted to a lieutenant-colonelcy and was killed before Ticonderoga on July 8, 1758. See Documents Relating to the Colonial History of New Jersey (New Jersey Archives Series), ix. 184–185.

237 For bibliographical discussion, see No. 5 in the list of Maylem’s published works, p. 118, below. The 358 lines of the poem are wrongly numbered 362.

238 See note 4, p. 99, above.

239 MS. in Du Simitiére Papers, Library Company of Philadelphia, whence this piece was printed by Duyckinck, Cyclopaedia of American Literature, i. 432. A list of the Maylem items in the Du Simitiére Papers is given below, p. 110.

240 This period is determined roughly by the dates of the Maylem letters in the Du Simitière Papers, now to be quoted.

241 Du Simitière Papers.

242 Id.

243 Id.

244 Id.

245 Du Simitière Papers.

246 Id.

247 Id.

248 This anonymous poem was reprinted from the Newport Mercury by Carl Bridenbaugh in the New England Quarterly, vii. 325–326, with an interesting note, but without attribution of authorship. Its inclusion in manuscript among the Maylem poems in the Du Simitière Papers and its publication in the Newport Mercury during Maylem’s lifetime in that town seem sufficient warrant for attributing it to Maylem’s pen.

249 Howard M. Chapin, Rhode Island in the Colonial Wars. A List of Rhode Island Soldiers & Sailors in the Old French and Indian War, 1755–1762, p. 100. We learn from Mr. Chapin also that a large company of those who enlisted in Newport in 1762 went upon the West Indian campaign.

250 See pp. 117–120, below, for an account of the late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century reprints of Maylem’s poems.

251 Ladd, The Poems of Arouet, p. 23.

252 Petitions, x. 82, June 13, 1759

253 See Mason, Annals of Trinity Church.

254 Intruding himself once into the Lodge, they got him drunk—shinn’d his face & play’d the devil with him—as ’tis said.

255 There liv’d in New Port a very miserable object of the name of Bird, who subsisted upon alms she was born y^e night before the great fire in London 1666—& came (as did the subject of this satire) from London—whether they stood in relation to one another or not, is nothing to the purpose, this being Poetica Licentia—’tis to be observ’d however that there never was a greater connection between a couple of guineas, than the resemblance they bore to each other—as every body that knew her will confess she died in the alms house in New Port some short time ago aged 92—a most unreasonable age!—’tis reported he was a blue coat boy & a F—dl—g—tho at present he is in very affluent circumstances.

256 She us’d to go to meeting & sit in the alley opposite the pulpit & a damn’d motley figur [word illegible].

257 a d—d small fellow—

258 a d—d freckled Chap—

259 this word is defaced in the original. (Du Simitière’s note.)

260 this fellow, murder’d several passages in Hudibras, & one Green a great Satyrist in Boston—to adapt them to his matchless Essay which is just as comprehensive as Jacob Behmen—I wish I had a Copy of it.

261 The conquest of Beau-se-jour, by Colonels Monckton and Winslor, in 1756.

262 The more recent biographical studies of New England governors include: Mrs. Napier Higgins, The Bernards of Abington and Nether Winchendon, vols. i and ii constituting a biography of Sir Francis Bernard; Everett Kimball, The Public Life of Joseph Dudley; James K. Hosmer, The Life of Thomas Hutchinson, Royal Governor of the Province of Massachusetts Bay; Viola F. Barnes, “The Rise of William Phips” and “Phippius Maximus,” New England Quarterly, i. 271–294, 532–553; C. A. W. Pownall, Thomas Pownall M.P., F.R.S., Governor of Massachusetts Bay, Author of the Letters of Junius; George A. Wood, William Shirley, Governor of Massachusetts, 1741–1756, A History; Lawrence S. Mayo, John Wentworth, Governor of New Hampshire, 1767–1775. A good short account of Jonathan Belcher is in Clifford K. Shipton, Sibley’s Harvard Graduates, iv. 434–449. In addition, the Dictionary of American Biography contains sketches of all the New England royal governors except Samuel Allen: Jonathan Belcher, Sir Francis Bernard, William Burnet, Joseph Dudley, Thomas Gage, William Shirley, and Samuel Shute, by James Truslow Adams; Sir Edmund Andros and Sir William Phips, by Viola F. Barnes; the Earl of Bellomont, by Charles W. Spencer; Thomas Hutchinson, by Carl Becker; Thomas Pownall, by Leonard W. Labaree; Benning Wentworth, by Isabel M. S. Whittier; and John Wentworth, by Wayne E. Stevens. For biographical data not otherwise credited in subsequent footnotes, I have usually relied upon the above works.

263 Assumed office, December 20, 1686; arrested and deprived of authority by the insurgents, April 18, 1689.

264 Assumed office, May 16, 1692; departed for England, December 4, 1694; died in London, February 18, 1695.

265 Appointed in 1692, but active governor only from September 15, 1698, until superseded on July 31, 1699.

266 Appointed in 1697; assumed office in Massachusetts, May 26, 1699; in New Hampshire, July 31, 1699; died in office, March 5, 1701.

267 Assumed office in Massachusetts, June 11, 1702; in New Hampshire, July 13, 1702; commissions not renewed in 1715.

268 Assumed office in Massachusetts, October 5, 1716; in New Hampshire, October 17, 1716; left for England, January 1, 1723; commissions not renewed in 1727.

269 Assumed office in Massachusetts, September 17, 1728; in New Hampshire, October 2, 1728; died in office, September 7, 1729.

270 Assumed office in Massachusetts, August to, 1730; in New Hampshire, August 25, 1730; superseded, August 14, 1741.

271 Assumed office, August 14, 1741; sailed for England upon recall, September 15, 1756.

272 Assumed office, August 3, 1757; sailed for England upon recall, June 3, 1760.

273 Assumed office, August 2, 1760; sailed for England, August 1, 1769.

274 Assumed office as acting governor, August 1, 1769, and as governor, March 4, 1771; superseded, May 17, 1774.

275 Assumed office, May 17, 1774; sailed for England during siege of Boston, October 10, 1775.

276 Assumed office, December 13, 1741; superseded, June 13, 1767.

277 Assumed office, June 13, 1767; fled to Boston, August 23, 1775.

278 The places and dates of birth of these men were as follows: Phips: Woolwich, Maine, February 2, 1650/1; Dudley: Roxbury, Massachusetts, September 23, 1647; Belcher: Cambridge, January 8, 1681/2; Hutchinson: Boston, September 9, 1711; Benning Wentworth: Portsmouth, New Hampshire, July 24, 1696; John Wentworth: Portsmouth, August 9, 1737.

279 Sir Henry Moore, Bart, (governor of New York, 1765–1769), was born at Vere, Jamaica, February 7, 1712/3.

280 Lewis Morris (governor, 1738–1746), born at “Bronck’s Land,” New York, October 15, 1671; Jonathan Belcher (governor, 1747–1757), born at Cambridge, January 8, 1681/2; William Franklin (governor, 1763–1775), born, probably in Philadelphia, in 1731.

281 Allen, though never in America before his assumption of the governorship, had a considerable stake in New Hampshire, since he had bought the proprietary claims to the province from the heirs of John Mason.

282 Andros had been an officer in a regiment in Barbados from 1666 until about 1672, in which year he was made a landgrave of Carolina. From 1674 until 1681 he was proprietary governor of New York. Burnet had been governor of New York and New Jersey, 1720–1728. Bernard had been governor of New Jersey, 1758–1759.

283 Wood (William Shirley, pp. 35–91) gives a detailed account of Shirley’s years in Boston as barrister, judge of the vice-admiralty court, and advocate-general, before attaining the governorship.

284 Pownall was sent over as secretary to Governor Sir Thomas Osborn of New York in 1753, and upon the latter’s almost immediate suicide, travelled among the colonies. He attended the Albany Congress in 1754 and Braddock’s council of governors in 1755. He was nominal lieutenant-governor of New Jersey from 1755 on, and for some months in 1756 was secretary extraordinary to the commander-in-chief in America, Lord Loudoun.

285 Gage first came to America in 1754 under General Braddock. He became commander-in-chief in 1763 and remained continuously in the colonies until the Revolution, except for a visit to England from the summer of 1773 until the spring of 1774. The article in the Dictionary of American Biography (vii. 87) is incorrect in stating that he left for England in February, 1773. He was in New York as late as the following June 3, as his correspondence shows. Clarence E. Carter, editor, The Correspondence of General Thomas Gage, i. 354.

286 See Frederic DePeyster, The Life and Administration of Richard Coote, Earl of Bellomont.

287 Acts and Resolves of the Province of the Massachusetts Bay, i. 109, 174, 188, 395, 437; vii. 230.

288 Instead of being met upon arrival at Boston by the General Court, leading officials, and citizens, and escorted through the streets to an immediate induction, Gage found, when he reached Boston, May 14, 1774, that a town meeting was in progress, called to consider the news of the Port Bill. “The late Governor Hutchinson, The Cheif Justice, the Commissioners of the Customs, and the Consignies, were either at the Castle, or dispersed in the Country, not daring to reside in Boston. I Went to M^r Hutchinson and remained with him at Castle William till Preparations were made for My Reception in Boston, where My Commission Was read and Published in the usual Forms on the 17^th Ins^t.” Gage to Dartmouth, May 19, 1774, Carter, Gage Correspondence, i. 355. Cf. the account of the enthusiastic reception of Belcher in 1730 as given in the Boston NewsLetter, August 6–13 (reprinted in large part in Sibley, iv. 439–440).

289 The ancestries of most of these men are conveniently summarized in their biographical sketches in the Dictionary of American Biography.

290 Colonial Office Papers 138: 5, pp. 245–246, 250, 254–255; Calendar of Treasury Books, 1685–1689, pp. 1258, 1463; Estelle F. Ward, Christopher Monck, Duke of Albemarle, pp. 273–278.

291 The list, with the years of receiving the bachelor’s degree, is as follows: Oxford: Bernard, 1733 (Joseph Foster, Alumni Oxonienses, i. 100); Cambridge: Shirley, 1714 (J. and J. A. Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, iv. 67); Pownall, 1744 (id., iii. 389); Harvard: Dudley, 1665 (Sibley, ii. 166–188); Belcher, 1699 (id., iv. 434–449); Benning Wentworth, 1715 (Harvard University Quinquennial Catalogue, 1636–1930, p. 175); Hutchinson, 1727 (id., p. 178); John Wentworth, 1755 (id., p. 186).

292 Shute was admitted at the Middle Temple, November 23, 1683. Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, iv. 72.

293 T. E. S. Clarke and H. C. Foxcroft, A Life of Gilbert Burnet, pp. 426–428; H. C. Foxcroft, A Supplement to Burnet’s History of My Own Time, pp. 511–512 (autobiographical extract).

294 Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, i. 261.

295 Burnet’s papers in the Philosophical Transactions have the following tides: “On the Icy Mountains in Switzerland” (xxvi. 316); “Observations on the eclipse of the first satellite of Jupiter, in 1723, made at New York” (xxxiii. 162); “Account of a doublebodied child” (l. 315).

296 An Essay on Scripture-Prophecy, Wherein it is Endeavored to Explain the Three Periods Contain’d in the XII Chapter of the Prophet Daniel. With some Arguments to make it Probable, that the First of the Periods did Expire in the Year 1715. [New York], 1724. This remarkable treatise demonstrates that the Kingdom of God was due to arrive in the year 1790. The Yale University Library copy was presented by the author to Samuel Johnson, the first Anglican minister in Connecticut, and later the first president of King’s College (Columbia).

297 Aedis Christi Olim Alumni Odarum. Libri Duo. London, 1752.

298 London, 1764, 1765, 1766, 1768, 1774, 1777.

299 Bibliographies of Pownall’s writings are in the Dictionary of National Biography, and C. A. W. Pownall, Thomas Pownall, appendix, pp. 3–6.

300 History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, 1628–1691 (Boston, 1764); History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, 1691–1750 (Boston, 1767); History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, 1749–1774 (London, 1828).

301 Charles Dalton, English Army Lists and Commission Registers, 1661–1714, i. 37, 75, 115, 119, 168–169.

302 Id., v, part ii, pp. 16–17; Dalton, George the First’s Army, 1714–1727, i. 105.

303 Promoted in 1770. War Office, Army Lists, 1772, pp. 2, 76.

304 For a recent appraisal of Shirley as a military leader see Stanley M. Pargellis, Lord Loudoun in North America, especially pp. 134–135.

305 J. K. Hosmer, Thomas Hutchinson, pp. 66–68.

306 For example, he wrote Hillsborough, March 27, 1770: “I shall faithfully endeavor to support such person [as might be appointed governor] according to the best of my abilities, and I think it not improbable that I may be capable of doing his Majesty greater service in the Province, even in a private station, than at present.” Id., p. 188. To Richard Jackson he wrote in the same month: “I find my constitution is not strong enough to bear so great a burden [as the governorship], and I hope the next vessel will bring us news of a person of weight and importance appointed to the government.” Id., p. 189.

307 Dudley’s efforts to win the governorship are fully described in Kimball, Joseph Dudley, chap. iv.

308 Hutchinson, History of Massachusetts Bay, ii. 367; Sibley, iv. 438–439. In 1745, however, Belcher wrote to Newcastle: “I never sought the government of New England, but it was offered me.” British Museum, Additional MSS. 32,704 (Newcastle Papers, xix), fol. 547. Although he repeated this assertion in the following year (Add. MSS. 32,706, Newcastle Papers, xxi, fol. 292), the independent evidence runs overwhelmingly to the contrary.

309 Belcher to the Board of Trade, June 12, 1731. Acts and Resolves, ii. 633–634. Further light on Belcher’s zeal for office-holding is shed by the letters and memorials with which he and his friends bombarded the British ministers in 1745 and 1746, pleading that the South Carolina governorship be given him after his removal from Massachusetts. Add. MSS. 32,704, fol. 547; 32,706, fols. 235, 292–293, 314–315.

310 In a typical letter to Newcastle in support of Benning Wentworth’s candidacy, Joseph Windham Ashe wrote, November 23, 1739: “I therefore would humbly recommend to Your Grace Benning Wentworth, Esq. one of His Majesty’s council in the said Province of New Hampshire (Now in London) to be made Governor of His Majesty’s said Province. I shall only mention to Your Grace that he was eldest son of the late Lieutenant Governor Wentworth of the said Province and to his capacity and integrity there can be no objection. He has been a very great sufferer by the Crown of Spain, but as to any pretensions he may have to hope for Your Grace’s favour on this account, I must beg leave to refer Your Grace to Mr. Keene who designs to wait on Your Grace in his behalf so soon as his health will permit him to come abroad.” Add. MSS. 32,692, fol. 475.

311 William Tudor, Lift of James Otis of Massachusetts, p. 44; C. A. W. Pownall, Thomas Pownall, pp. 90–91.

312 Charles F. Adams, editor, Works of John Adams, x. 243.

313 Hutchinson, History of Massachusetts Bay, ii. 206–208, 392–399; Kimball, Joseph Dudley, pp 157–174; James T. Adams, Revolutionary New England, pp. 93–96, 154–160.

314 Hutchinson, History of Massachusetts Bay, ii. 435–440; Hosmer, Hutchinson, pp. 26–35.

315 The assistance of one of my former students, Miss Josephine Cobb, in arranging and summarizing the documents used in this article, entitles her to be credited with coauthorship of this paper

316 Harriet S. Tapley, “The Province Galley of Massachusetts Bay, 1694–1716,” Essex Institute Historical Collections, lviii. 73–88, 153–175.

317 These are now part of the files of the Supreme Judicial Court.

318 Our Publications, xxix. xvii–xciv.

319 Suffolk Files (hereafter cited as S. F.), 10,941; Boston Public Library MSS., 578

320 Waldo Lincoln, Genealogy of the Waldo Family, i. 69.

321 Acts and Resolves of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, ix. 430.

322 Savage’s account book, S. F. 13,529 (45 and 46); deposition of Francis Lamontais, id., 12,358 (13).

323 Boston News-Letter, March 15–22, 1713/14.

324 Samuel Roads, Jr., The History and Traditions of Marblehead, pp. 42–43.

325 Apparently the Province Galley was secured by two anchors, the cable of one of which overlapped the cable which moored the Dragon. Depositions of Eleazar Ingalls and Peter Stevens, S. F. 12,358 (11).

326 Deposition of Francis Lamontais, id., 12,358 (13). The remainder of the account is from id., 10,921; deposition of Robert Orange, id., 12,358 (12) and 28,863; deposition of John Pittman; deposition of Nathaniel Greenwood, id., 11,153 (5).

327 S. F. 10,647 (5), deposition of Ephraim Landin. Others testified that Savage could have saved the Dragon had he pleased. Id., 9,960.

328 Of these, 118½ quintals were Colonel Legg’s; 312 came from Hill’s sloop, 110 from Martin’s sloop, 251½ from Masefield’s sloop, 311 from Waters’s sloop, and 224½ had been brought by land from Cape Anne. Id., 11,153 (3); 13,529 (16–17).

329 Concerning the fish, see id., 11,084; 11,151; 11,153; 13,259.

330 Id., 11,151 (15). Phillips bought ten quintals on his own privilege and sold it for $8 a quintal. He thought Savage could have done the same if the fish had been as good.

331 Id., 11,151 (3).

332 S. F. 10,941 (2); 13,529 (19).

333 S. F. 13,529 (9).

334 Id.,11,037 (1, 2, 3).

335 “Observations taken from our orders to Captain Arthur Savage and from his proceedings in the Province Galley,” id., 13,529 (34). The original is in the Knox Papers, Maine Historical Society.

336 Edward M. Saunders, The Life and Times of the Rev. John Wiswall, a Loyalist Clergyman of New England and Nova Scotia; William A. Calnek, History of the County of Annapolis, pp. 633–634.

337 S. F. 10,941 (1, fol. 4).

338 S. F. 10,941 (1, fol. 4).

339 “Observations,” id., 13,529 (34).

340 Account Book, June 9, id., 13,529 (45 and 46).

341 Wiswall’s Journal, in “Observations,” id., 13,529 (34).

342 Letter to Tidcombe, June 25, id., 13,529 (27).

343 Account Book, id., 13,529 (45 and 46).

344 Wiswall’s Journal, in “Observations,” id., 13,529 (34)

345 Id., 10,941 (1, fol. 4).

346 S. F. 13,529 (31), letter to Oulton and Waldo, September 13, 1714.

347 Wiswall’s Journal, in “Observations,” id., 13,529 (34).

348 Id., 10,941 (1, fol. 4).

349 Id., 13,529 (31), letter to Oulton and Waldo, September 13, 1714.

350 Id., 13,529 (35), deposition of Phillips.

351 Id., 11,151 (12); deposition of Peleg Wiswall, id., 11,151 (5).

352 Id., 13,529 (30), letter written from Mataro, August 27, 1714; letter to Shallet and Crowe, August 27, 1714

353 Id; 13.529 (30).

354 Papers of the Castilian Club on the War of the Austrian Succession, Nos. 24, 25.

355 S. F. 13,529 (35), deposition of Phillips.

356 Account Book, id., 13,529 (46).

357 Id., 10,941 (1, fol. 5).

358 Id., 10,941 (1, fol. 6).

359 Wiswall’s Journal, in “Observations,” id., 13,529 (34).

360 Id., 10,941 (1, fol. 6).

361 S. F. 13,529 (32), letter to Crowe and Spikeman, October 20, 1714.

362 Id., 13,529 (35), deposition of Phillips.

363 Id.

364 Id., 10,941 (1, fol. 6).

365 Id.,10,941 (1, fols. 6, 7).

366 Id., 13,529 (52).

367 Id., 10,941 (1, fol. 7).

368 Id.

369 S. F. 10,941 (1, fol. 7).

370 Account Book, id., 13,529 (46).

371 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 77 (Sewall’s Diary).

372 S. F. 12,343.

373 S. F. 13,529 (33).

374 Menzies arrived in Rhode Island, December 24, 1715 (Boston News-Letter, January 9–16, 1715/16), and in Boston, January 4, 1715/16 (5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 70).

375 S. F. 11,150 (5).

376 These suspicions were in part based on the accusations of Jonathan Caswall. See his letter from London, February 29, 1715/16 (read April 13, 1716).

377 On this point Savage later remarked: “Their insipid pun upon the word Savage discovers them to be as low and poor in their wit as they are now in trade and business.” S. F. 12,343 (3).

378 “Observations.” The quotation here is from the original in the Knox MSS. at the Maine Historical Society. It differs slightly from the copy in the court files.

379 Id., 13,529 (34).

380 Records of the Superior Court, 1715–1721 (MS.), pp. 152, 204, 186, 40 (in that order);S. F. 12,343 (twelve papers which have to do with the breach of orders case); Acts of the Privy Council, Colonial Series, 1680–1720, p. 721; Journals of the House of Representatives of Massachusetts, i. 132; ii. 180.

381 Records of the Superior Court, 1715–1721 (MS.), pp. 5, 142, 159, 193, 204, 209, 220; id., 1700–1714, p. 309.

382 See Savage’s list of his complaints, S. F. 12,343.

383 Acts and Resolves, i. 19.

384 Acts and Resolves, i. 72–76 (chap. 33, 1692–3, disallowed August 22, 1695); 283–287 (chap. 9, 1697, disallowed November 24, 1698).

385 Id., pp. 370–372 (chap. 3, 1699–1700).

386 J. Franklin Jameson, Privateering and Piracy in the Colonial Period, p. 318.

387 Dummer’s position was concurred in by the king’s attorney-general, Mr. West. In a report to the Council of Trade and Plantations, June 20, 1720, on admiralty jurisdiction, West argued that wherever the common law is in force, the people must have protection against illegal extension of admiralty power. Calendar of State Papers, Colonial, American & West Indies, 1720–21, pp. 53–55.

388 Boston News-Letter, August 27–September 3, September 9–16, 1716.

389 Report of the Record Commissioners of the City of Boston, xiii. 9.

390 Possibly it was a notice stating their side of the case.

391 S. F. ii, 150 (10).

392 Records of the Superior Court, 1715–1721 (MS.), p. 202. Smith protested to Governor Shute concerning his arrest (Cat. St. Pap., Col., Amer. & W. I., 1719–20, pp. 25–29) and later was suspended by him from his position as advocate-general. By way of revenge, according to John Bridger, Surveyor-General of the King’s Woods (a position for which Smith had been an applicant), Smith went home loaded with complaints against the governor (id., pp. 178–179). These complaints may, in part at least, be found in Smith’s anonymous pamphlet Some Considerations on the Consequences of the French Settling Colonies on the Mississippi (London, 1720). In a reprint of this pamphlet published by the Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio in 1928, the editor states that internal evidence discredits Smith as the author, since the latter was judge of the admiralty court of South Carolina, while the author of the pamphlet shows intimate knowledge of New England. In reality, of course, Smith meets precisely all the conditions for authorship laid down by internal evidence. A copy of this pamphlet is in the Boston Public Library. A reply to it, Copy of a Letter by a Gentleman in New-England, to his Friend & Correspondent at London, containing Remarks on a late Pamphlet Entitled, Some Considerations (Boston, 1720), is in the John Carter Brown Library. I am indebted to Professor Zechariah Chafee, Jr., of the Harvard Law School for his detailed references to the 1934–35 Report of the John Carter Brown Library, which discusses both these pamphlets.

393 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 226.

394 Jameson, Privateering and Piracy, p. 318. Smith, in the “Abstract of a Letter concerning the Officers of Admiralty in N,” contained in his pamphlet noted above, vigorously attacked the integrity of Judge Menzies, he implied, was subservient to the governor. He argues that the governor should be divested of his power as vice-admiral.

395 S. F. 12,343; 10,941 (3 to 12).

396 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 170.

397 Boston News-Letter, November 26–December 3, 1716. According to Savage’s advertisement a “Lion of Barbary” was to be exhibited by William Nichols, who was Savage’s servant (S. F. 11, 171, 11, 236).

398 S. F. 11,150(10).

399 S.F. 11,150 (13).

400 S.F. 11,150 (12).

401 S.F. 11,150 (2).

402 Records of the Superior Court, 1715–1721 (MS.), pp. 202–203.

403 See above, pp. 78–86.

404 William Walwyn published Some Considerations tending to the undeceiving those, whose judgements are misinformed (1642) and The Power of Love (1643). John Lilburne wrote copiously on the topic. John Goodwin wrote Theomachia (1644) and other tracts. Henry Robinson published Liberty of Conscience (1643) and numerous other pieces on this theme. For the attribution of the Walwyn tracts, see William Haller, Tracts on Liberty in the Puritan Revolution, i. 121–127; for that of the Robinson tract, see Sir Charles H. Firth’s short essay in English Historical Review, ix. 715–717.

405 The idea of the progressive revelation of religious truth is expressed in the writings of Thomas Goodwin, Roger Williams, Milton, Cromwell, Ireton, Henry Robinson, and others. An article by Arthur S. P. Woodhouse, “Puritanism and Liberty” (University of Toronto Quarterly, iv. 395–404), and another article by the same writer (id., pp. 483–513) are of more than usual interest in connection with the substance of the present topic. The quotation from Robinson given in the text is taken from the edition published by William Haller, Tracts, iii. 166.

406 Haller, Tracts, ii. 157.

407 Haller, Tracts, ii. 299.

408 The idea of the separation of Church and State was quite new at this time. Charles Borgeaud, The Rise of Modem Democracy in Old and New England, p. 156; George P. Gooch and Harold J. Laski, English Democratic Ideas in the Seventeenth Century, p. 73.

409 Puritan ministers on both sides of the Atlantic were interested in the conversion of the Indians. In several New England tracts, e.g., [Thomas Shepard], The Day-Breaking, if not the Sun Rising of the Gospel with the Indians in New-England (London, 1647), the matter is discussed. Mayhew and Eliot were at work among the Indians by 1646, and this tract was published in April of that year, only a few months before the Bahama broadside. The movement came to a head in 1649 when parliament incorporated the so-called New England Company, the purpose of which was to promote missionary work among the Indians of that region.

410 Charles H. Firth, editor, The Clarke Papers, i. l–li, lx–lxiv.

411 Id., p. lxii.

412 Id., pp. lxii–lxiii.

413 Id., pp. 301–302.

414 Samuel R. Gardiner, Constitutional Documents of the Puritan Revolution, 1625–1660, p. 411.

415 Joseph R. Tanner, English Constitutional Conflicts of the Seventeenth Century, p. 145.

416 Pride’s Purge, December 6, 1648, in which the Presbyterian element was expelled from parliament. Thereafter the Independents, formerly a minority, became the sole possessors of power.

417 H. F. Russell Smith, Harrington and His Oceana, pp. 40–49.

418 Charles H. McIlwain, The High Court of Parliament and Its Supremacy (p. 104), supplies a passage which is pertinent comment at this point: “By the ‘logic of events’ the new idea was slowly but surely borne in upon the minds of [seventeenth-century] Englishmen that Parliament was a real lawmaking organ. Times of crisis, of course, hastened this process. Emergencies arose that required prompt action [italics mine]; existing laws were inadequate; no rule was in existence to be ‘determined’; there was no time for a fiction; a rule must be made. Such a crisis confronted the Long Parliament. It was met by an assumption of power wholly unusual. The acts of the Long Parliament, legal and illegal, justifiable and unjustifiable, did much to habituate the minds of Englishmen to a legislative assembly.” The provision in the Articles and Orders for emergency action is a pointed contemporary illustration of the process to which Professor McIlwain refers.

419 The intellectual connection between the ideas of Levellers and radical Independents on the one hand and the republican theories of Harrington on the other still waits to be explored. Harrington’s theories are much more intimately related to the fabric of English progressive economic and political thought at this time than a reading of H. F. Russell Smith’s study would lead one to suppose.

420 Gooch and Laski, English Democratic Ideas, pp. 308–311.

421 Henry Robinson, England’s Safety in Trade’s Encrease (London, 1641), pp. 25–28. Page 28 is misnumbered “34.”

422 Id., pp. 25–28.

423 Firth, Clarke Papers, i. xi.

424 Gardiner, Constitutional Documents, p. 334; Theodore C. Pease, The Leveller Movement, p. 300.

425 The writer is informed by Dr. James A. Williamson that the Earl of Warwick had a hand in this enterprise. See also James A. Williamson, Short History of British Expansion, i. 212–213. The Spaniards took Old Providence, off the Central American coast, in 1641; but in 1647 the Bahama settlers applied the name “Providence” to one of the islands of the Bahama group, which thereupon became New Providence.

426 In 1675, Major John Fenwick, an old Cromwellian who had obtained a grant of land in West New Jersey, and was then preparing to colonize, issued at London a broadside advertising the nature of the community he proposed to set up there. Some of his provisions are so similar to those outlined in the Articles and Orders that Fenwick’s proposed arrangements may well be indicated here. Politically, he contemplated a republican form of government, with “a Governor and 12 Council to be Chosen every year, 6 of the Council to go out, and 6 to come in; whereby every Proprietor may be made capable of Government, and know the Affairs of the Country, and Privileges of the People.” The application of the principle of rotation in office is unmistakable.

Fenwick also proposed cultivation of the land in common for a limited term of years. This proposal seems to be similar to, though more fully explained than, the scheme outlined in the Articles and Orders: “First, 10,000 Acres being pitch’d Upon, and divided according to every mans Propriety; then Lots shall be cast, and when every one knows where his Lot lies, there being also a place Chosen and set out for a Town or City to be Built, in which every Purchaser must have a Part, by reason of Delaware River for Trade. Then every one must joyn their Hands, first in Building the Houses, and next in Improving the Land, casting Lots whose Houses shall be first built, and whose Land first Improved: And as the Land is Improved so it shall be for the Use of all the Hands and their Families which are joyned in this Community, until the whole 10,000 Acres be Improved; Then every one to have his own Lot to his own Use: And so this Method to be used till the Country be Planted. If any like not this Method, they may be left to Improve their Propriety alone.” The complete text of the broadside issued by Fenwick is found in Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vi. 86–88.

427 Our Publications, xxxi. 29. Nathaniel White (H. C. 1646) returned to Boston in the summer of 1650 from a visit to the Bahamas. He brought with him a cargo of Brazil wood, produce of the islands, which the Eleuthera men had sent to the college as a “pledge of thankfulness … to bee disposed of … as a stock for your Colledges use.” The wood fetched a price of £124. The best account of the episode is by Samuel E. Morison, “The Strange History of the Eleuthera Donation,” Harvard Alumni Bulletin (June 19, 1930), pp. 1067–1072. See also Morison, Harvard College in the Seventeenth Century, pp. 39–43.

428 In a broadside parliamentary proclamation dated January 23, 1646/7, one reads that the legislature is concerned with regulating in some degree the exportation of servants to the colonies in America. It is stipulated that the names of such persons as are to be transported must be registered in the customhouse, and that certificates must be returned to England within one year, giving notice by the governors of colonies concerned that the servants have disembarked in the colonies. Servants are not to be spirited away from England, and apprentices are not to be urged to desert their masters. These are some of the aspects of the traffic in transported persons; the items in the Articles and Orders refer to still others of this unlovely business. The broadside is listed in Thomason Tracts under the date cited above; its caption is Die Sabbathi 23 Ianuarii 1646.

429 Inherited, it would seem likely, from the internal rules and regulations in force among guilds and business corporations.

430 On the fusion of powers in the old English government, see McIlwain, High Court of Parliament, passim. Lilburne expounded the theory of the separation of powers in pamphlets published in the spring of 1648. The words of T. C. Pease on this phase of the Levellers’ thought (Leveller Movement, pp. 241–242) are apposite: “[The Levellers] no longer designed that Parliament should be a supreme constituent body free of all restraint from lesser authorities and subject to reversal only by the people. Advancing a step further with their doctrine that the Parliament must be subject to law, they suggested the possibility of an inferior court’s sitting to review actions of the High Court of Parliament manifestly contrary to the law of England. The doctrine of Lilburne left Parliament supreme as a legislature, but erected beside it a judiciary bound by the known law, but nevertheless capable of checking the legislature if it passed the bounds of that law.”

431 William A. Shaw, Select Tracts and Documents Illustrative of English Monetary History, 1626–1730, pp. 49–50. Very little of a biographical nature concerning Robinson is known, and that little we owe to Dr. Shaw, who wrote the pioneer article on this interesting London merchant for the Dictionary of National Biography. There is a brief but good discussion of Robinson’s importance in Haller, Tracts, i. 64–65.

It would be desirable to have a thorough study dealing with this seminal figure in economic and religious thought. An effort ought to be made to determine his intellectual relationship to contemporaries like John Goodwin, William Walwyn, and Roger Williams on the one hand; and the extent of his influence, if any, on William Petty and James Harrington, his literary successors, on the other. Undoubtedly his influence radiated in many directions, just as the sources of his ideas are not confined to one place or a few writers. He read Montaigne: so much is certain.

432 Dr. Shaw is satisfied that “Robinson is doubtless the author of many works beside these,” of which the authenticity is certain (D.N.B.). The list printed above follows that given by Shaw, although Professor Haller has lately entered an objection to the attribution to Robinson of An Answer to Mr. John Dury (Tracts, i. 65, note 53). One may query whether The Waste Land Improved (1653) is by Robinson. It sounds in part as though it might be.

433 England’s Safety in Trade’s Encrease, A2 recto (Huntington Library copy).

434 Id., B1 recto.

435 England’s Safety, p. 13. The expression “people of good report and ranke” is a periphrasis for “rich Puritans,” the very sort of folk the Bahama enterprise was seeking to attract.

436 Id., p. 45.

437 Id., pp. 45–46.

438 Id., pp. 13–18.

439 England’s Safety, p. 19.

440 Id., p. 20.

441 Id., p. 46.

442 Our Publications, xxvii. 130–156.

443 Report of the Record Commissioner of the City of Boston, x. 70 (April 25, 1681).

444 Diary of Samuel Sewall (5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., v. 213), entry for May 14, 1688. Moody, also well known as a scrivener, was in Boston as late as 1706 (id., vi. 175). He died in Dedham in 1720.

445 Mass. Archives, cxxix. 144a (Boston “Valuation List” of August 27, 1688).

446 Samuel Sewall’s ledger (MS. at New England Historic Genealogical Society), fol. 97, entry for October 8, 1701. Sewall’s daughter Elizabeth attended Samson’s school.

447 Suffolk County Probate Records, xxvii. 69 (will, dated June 1, 1727). Gatchell died before February 12, 1727/28. He was in Boston as early as October 19, 1722, when he married Elizabeth Calfe (Boston Records, xxviii. 106).

448 The entries under the dates December 22 and 29, 1670, and November 27, 1671, in Boston Records, vii (pp. 57, 63), indicate that he served a second time as usher in the public school, from March 1, 1669/70, to March 1, 1670/71.

449 I am convinced that the name should be Natstock, not Ratstock, as given in my earlier list. See my Public Schools of Colonial Boston, 1636–1775, p. 8, n 37.

450 Sewall’s ledger, fol. 71; Peter Burr’s account book (MS. at Massachusetts Historical Society); Boston Records, xxix. 226 (August 6, 1698).

451 Our Publications, xxvii. 136, n 8, line 4, should read “January 6, 1670/71” instead of “January 11.”

452 In view of the fact that Richard Henchman died at the age of seventy on February 15, 1724/25, I do not believe that he matriculated at Harvard with the Class of 1697.

453 Our Publications, xxvii. 142, n 35, line 7: “xi” should read “xiii.”

454 Id., p. 144, n 48, line 2: “xx” should be deleted.

455 Id., p. 154, n 101, line 1: “May 4, 1769” should read “March 13, 1769.”

456 This was Peter Pelham, Sr., not Peter Pelham, Jr. See my Private Schools of Colonial Boston, pp. 26 n, 27, 29 n, 31 n, 32, 35. Our Publications, xxvii. 146, n 55, line 6: “May 30, June 13, 20, 27” should be deleted.

457 This Samuel Holyoke (bap. May 18, 1729, d. July 24, 1784) was not the one who graduated from Harvard in 1734. See my Private Schools of Colonial Boston, p. 41, n 54.

458 This was Vere Ross. Our Publications, xxvii. 152: note 86 should be added to note 88.

459 This was William Dall, Jr., b. December 22, 1753.

460 Records of the Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay in New England (cited hereafter as Mass. Records), i. 358–360. In 1636, the colony held a fast, partly because of the lack of grain. In the same season, candid, crotchety Lion Gardiner, when consulted about fortifications, said: “… I thought no forraigne potent enemie would doe them any hurt, but one yt was neare, they asked me who that was & I said it was Capt. Hunger threatened them most.…” Lion Gardiner, Relation of the Pequot Warres (Acorn Club Publications, No. 4), p. 7.

461 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 1–4.

462 See the letter from Hugh Peter to Winthrop, probably written in April, 1639, in 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 200–201.

463 Mass. Records, i. 326; John Winthrop, Journal (Hosmer ed.), ii. 19.

464 See, for example, Lord Say and Sele’s letter to Winthrop, July 9, 1640, in 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., i. 297–303.

465 Winthrop, Journal, i. 333–335; ii. 11; Mass. Records, i. 239; Frances Rose-Troup, “John Humfry,” Essex Institute Historical Collections, lxv. 293–299.

466 Mass. Records, i. 303–304, 307; Winthrop, Journal, ii. 6.

467 Hugh Peter, especially, set forth this possibility; see his letter to Winthrop in 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 200–201.

468 Winthrop, Journal, i. 127–128, 274–275, 300–301.

469 Id., ii. 24.

470 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 25.

471 Endecott’s objections are all embraced in a long letter to Winthrop, 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 138–141.

472 This was cited by Winthrop (Journal, ii. 25–26) as the “main reason … privately intimated.”

473 Id.

474 William D. Chappie, “The Public Service of John Endecott in the Massachusetts Bay Colony,” Essex Inst. Hist. Coll., lxv. 403–447.

475 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 26.

476 Mass. Records, i. 332.

477 Winthrop, Journal, ii, 31–32; Thomas Lechford, Plain Dealing (Trumbull ed.), pp. xxxvi, 109.

478 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 32.

479 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 35. He does not indicate in his letter who the others sailing with him were.

480 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 31.

481 Id.

482 Hugh Peter, A Dying Fathers Last Legacy (London, 1660), pp. 101–102; almost the same words appear in The Case of Mr. Hugh Peters (London, 1660), p. 3, and in his petition, printed in the Seventh Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Part i, pp. 115b–116.

483 Before the agents left the Bay Colony, Emmanuel Downing, failing to bid them farewell in person as he had intended, wrote a letter which was delivered to Hugh Peter by the younger Winthrop, wherein he gave legal advice relative to the charter difficulties. Cf. 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 58, 59.

484 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 25. J. B. Felt’s denial of this object of the mission (Ecclesiastica History of New England, i. 434) is refuted by Winthrop, by the work of the agents in England, and by Hugh Peter’s statements. Edward Johnson, writing in 1652, said that Peter and Weld, “so soon as they heard of the chaining up of those biting beasts, who went under the name of spiritual Lords,” returned to England where “what assistance the Gospel of Christ found there by their preaching, is since clearly manifested.…” Wonder-Working Providence (Poole ed.), p. 224.

485 William Bradford, History of Plymouth Plantation (Ford ed.) ii. 164–171.

486 A. C. Flick, editor, History of the State of New York, ii. 40–46.

487 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 33.

488 E. B. O’Callaghan, editor, Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York, I. 568; “Afschriften der Depêches van de Nederlandsche Gezanten in Engeland aan de Staten Generaal der Vereenigde Nederlanden,” Add. MSS. 17677 W, fols. 5–6 (British Museum); Felt, Ecclesiastical History, i. 468–469.

489 Hibbins’s name is variously spelled “Hibbins,” “Hibbens,” “Hibbons.” The materials from which the above facts are derived are found in: Second Report of the Record Commissioners of the City of Boston, pp. 41, 44, 53, 55 ff.; 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 200–201; Thomas Hutchinson, The History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, i. 187; article on Ann Hibbins in the Dictionary of American Biography.

490 Samuel R. Gardiner, editor, Report of Cases in the Courts of the Star Chamber and High Commission (Camden Society Publications), pp. 260, 264; 3 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., i. 235–239; 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 10; A. G. Matthews, Calamy Revised, pp. 517–518.

491 For an account of the troubles in Holland in which Hugh Peter was concerned, see my article, “The New England Way in Holland,” New England Quarterly, vi. 747–792.

492 For references to Hugh Peter’s economic activities, see Winthrop, Journal, i. 165, 168 178; ii. 23; 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 93, 97–98; vii. 200–201.

493 Mass. Records, ii. 225, 259, 271; Winthrop, Journal, ii. 28–29.

494 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 23.

495 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 138–141.

496 The Root and Branch Petition, December 11, 1640. Cf. Samuel R. Gardiner, editor, The Constitutional Documents of the Puritan Revolution (3d ed.), p. 138.

497 George L. Beer, The Origins of the British Colonial System, 1578–1660, pp. 300–305, 341–342.

498 Charles M. Andrews, British Committees, Commissions, and Councils of Trade and Plantations, 1622–75 (Johns Hopkins University Studies, Series xxvi, nos. 1–3), pp. 16–23.

499 Journals of the House of Lords, iv. 187b (cited hereafter as L. J.).

500 Id., iv. 188a.

501 If Hugh Peter consulted Charles I, “with whom,” as Peter wrote later, “I dealt about my New Eng: busines and was 3 or 4 tymes with him,” it was probably with regard to this phase of the agents’ efforts. Cf. 7th Report, Hist. MSS. Comm., Part i, p. 116.

502 Journals of the House of Commons, iii. 207 (cited hereafter as C. J.). A good example of the restraints which had been imposed upon vessels sailing for New England is found in the case of John Winthrop, Jr., who was delayed in 1643 when he set out with men and supplies to establish an ironworks in New England. Cf. 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., viii. 36–37.

503 Doubtless the agents early undertook, as they were charged, to satisfy the colony’s irate creditors, but the records do not indicate what progress was made.

504 Winthrop, Journal (Savage ed., 1826), ii. 342.

505 Henry C. Shelley, John Underhill, pp. 153–156.

506 Mass. Records, ii. 28.

507 Winthrop, Journal (Hosmer ed.), ii. 70; Mass. Records, ii. 27.

508 It is uncertain who gave this sum. Winthrop mentions it (Journal, Savage ed., 1826, II. 342); and the General Court, in returning thanks to the chief benefactors in September, 1642, mentions the three large gifts as those of “Mr. Willobie, Mr. Houghton, & Mr. Andrews.” Mass. Records, ii. 27.

509 Winthrop, Journal (Hosmer ed.), ii. 71; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxvi. 63.

510 See Bradford, Plymouth, ii. 32–38, 64–73, 294–300.

511 Mass. Records, ii. 32; Winthrop, Journal, ii. 70 (the amount as stated here was £500).

512 Bradford, Plymouth, ii. 330–342. Sherley wrote to his Plymouth partners on June 14, 1642: “Mr. Andrews hath sealed an acquitance also, and sent it to Mr. Winthrop, whith shuch directions as he conceived fitt, and, as I hear, hath given his debte, which he makes 544^li unto the gentlemen of the Bay. Indeed, Mr. Welld, Mr. Peters, and Mr. Hibbens have taken a great deale of paines with Mr. Andrews, Mr. Beachamp, & my selfe, to bring us to agree, and to that end we have had many meetings and spent much time aboute it. But as they are very religious & honest gentle-men, yet they had an end that they drove at and laboured to accomplish (I meane not any private end, but for the generall good of their patente).” The arrangements were not completed nor the money received in Massachusetts until 1643. See Mass. Records, ii. 39.

513 Bradford, Plymouth, ii. 330–334. Weld wrote of this matter later: “There was about Five hundred pounds due from Newe Plymouth plantation to three Londoners which wee procured to bee given to the Bay to whome it was paid (as M^r Winslowe knowes) but itt never came into our hande, only one of the three refusing to give his share, Brother Peters and I were bound to pay him One hundred and Tenn pounds for his part, which not coming from thence [Massachusetts] att the tyme the Bond expired wee were driven to pay out of our owne purses, after y^e Accompt was made vpp, and are out of the money still.” Weld to Steele, January 2, 1649/50, Rawlinson MSS. (Bodleian), c. 934, fol. 5; reprinted in New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxvi. 64.

514 Massachusetts Archives, iii. 4; C. 2, 34.

515 New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xlv. 162–163; George Sherwood, American Colonists in English Records (1st series, 1932), pp. 38–39. Weld wrote later that Bridges’s gift to the college “was paid vs in wollen cloath; but when it was about to be sent; we received order from ye Governour & Trustees of ye Coll. to pay it to Alderman Oldham in London, for so much rec’d in N. Engl: by Mr. Sparrowhawk for ye vse of ye Colledge. So we paid that 50l to him & received his acquittance.” Of the £20 for “clothing of the poore,” Weld said, “we sent 50l to Mr. Hooker, & as much to Mr. Simes, to distribute, & ourselves sent ye rest according to ye trust.” Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fol. 29b.

516 Publications of this Society, xv. 175.

517 Weld recorded later that some donors “laid out for Utensills for the Colledge by theire [the college overseers’] desires as pewter, bras, Ironware, lynnen,… Bookes to supply theire Library.… others gave some cloth woollen and lynnen, all which was sent with directions, some gave publique Faith bills, for which wee laid downe as much ready money as the bills procured, and accounted for.” Weld to Steele, January 2, 1649/50, New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvi. 62–64. is impossible to learn whether these gifts are included in or are in addition to the items of Weld’s imperfect accounts.

518 Thomas Carte, The Life of James, Duke of Ormond, i. 279–378.

519 Id., ii. 52; John Borlase, History of the Irish Rebellion (copy revised by the author, in Stowe MSS., 82, British Museum), pp. 19–34.

520 Borlase, History of the Irish Rebellion, pp. 19–34.

521 Report of the Council for Ireland, November 15, 1641, in John Nalson, An Impartial Collection of the Great Affairs of State (London, 1682–3), ii. 737; The Last Newes from Ireland of the Rebel Papists (London, 1641), unpaged; A True Coppy of a Letter from Ireland (London, 1641), pp. 1–2. Sir Philip Warwick wrote (Memoirs of the Reign of King Charles I, p. 199) that “in one week they [the Irish] massacred very near one hundred thousand persons, men, women, and children.” Probably less than one third of that number of English people were in Ireland in 1641. See also A True and Credible Relation of the Barbarous Crveltie and Bloudy Massacres in Ireland, 1641 (London, 1642), pp. 1–8.

522 C.J., ii. 462–463, 467 ff.

523 Borlase, History of the Irish Rebellion, pp. 38–39.

524 Id., pp. 25, 52; Carte, Ormond, ii. 1–50; Warwick, Memoirs, pp. 199–200; John Turbervill to John Willoughby, January 29, 1641/2, Trevelyan Papers (Camden Society Publications), iii. 216–217.

525 A Continuation of the Passages in Parliament, No. 5, February 7–14, 1641/2, p. 38; Rushworth, Historical Collections, iv. 553, 556–557, 564–565.

526 Henry Scobell, A Collection of Acts and Ordinances (London, 1658), pp. 26–35; A Perfect Diurnall, February 21–28, 1641/2, p. 6; Carte, Ormond, ii. 305–306.

527 [Hugh Peter], A True Relation of a Voyage for Ireland (London, 1642), p. 3. Peter’s pamphlet was, in effect, an official account of the entire expedition.

528 Charles H. Firth and Robert S. Rait, Acts and Ordinances of the Interregnum, 1642–60, i. 9–12.

529 Peter, True Relation, p. 4.

530 I have gathered the names of men connected with the expedition from a variety of sources. See especially Peter, True Relation, p. 4; C. J., v. 191; L. J., vi. 155b; ix. 165a; Firth and Rait, Acts and Ordinances, i. 9–12; Scobell, Collection of Acts, p. 27.

531 C. J., iii. 133–134; New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xl. 168–169.

532 Peter, True Relation, p. 4; A Relation of the Svndry Occurrences in Ireland of the Additionall Forces by Sea (London, 1642), unpaged.

533 The author, at least, has found no indication of either disapproval or approval by Massachusetts leaders either in 1642 or later.

534 For accounts of the Forbes expedition, see, in addition to references cited above, The Last and Truest Intelligence from Ireland (London, October 17, 1642); Desiderata Curiosa Hibernica (Dublin, 1772), ii. 194–212; Edmund Hogan, editor, The History of the Warr of Ireland by a British Officer; Mary Hickson, Ireland in the Seventeenth Century.

535 A Perfect Diurnall, No. 15, September 19–26, 1642.

536 The Weekly Intelligence from Several Parts of this Kingdome, October 10–18, 1642, reported (p. 10) that the five captured ships had been sent “all at the charge of his Holynesse for the defence and support of the Catholick cause.…” See also, A Continuation of Certain Speciall & Remarkable Passages, No. 15, October 10–14, 1642; Special Passages and Certain Informations from Severall Parts, No. 10, October 11–18, p. 85.

537 L. J., v. 397a.

538 Both of Forbes’s letters sent by Peter to parliament were published as advertising sheets for the undertakers. See A True Copie of Two Letters Brought by Mr. Peters, this October 11, from my L. Forbes from Ireland (London, 1642).

539 True Copie of Two Letters, pp. 5–6.

540 The imprint reads: “London. Printed by Lvke Norton, for Henry Overton, in the Yeare mdcxlii.”

541 True Relation, p. 19.

542 See, for example, C. J., iii. 91; a committee of parliament was appointed in 1643 “to prepare a Declaration, to set forth, That the Rebellion in Ireland, and this in England, spring from one Head; and are managed with concurrent Counsels to one End; for the utter Overthrow and Extirpation of the Protestant Religion.…”—and this was done just after a committee had been appointed to prevent the spread of “false rumors”!

543 Samuel R. Gardiner, History of the Great Civil War (London, 1893), i. 67–76.

544 “Our militant Evangelists,” wrote a Cavalier, “Dr. Bayes, Dr. Downing, Mr. Marshall and Sedgwicke, whose consciences start out of the way at a white surplesse, but never boggle at garments rolled in blood.” “An Honest Letter” (1642), T. W. Webb and John Webb, Memorials of the Civil War as it affected Herefordshire, i. 180 n.

545 Speciall Passages, No. 18, December 6–13, 1642, pp. 152–153.

546 Id.

547 The True and Originall Copy of the first Petition which was delivered by Sir David Watkins, Mr. Shute, M. Peters (London, 1642), unpaged.

548 Id.

549 Gardiner, History of the Civil War, i. 75.

550 Id.

551 True and Originall Copy of the first Petition.

552 Gardiner, History of the Civil War, i. 75.

553 Mercurius Aulicus, April 2–9, 1643, p. 170. As this news-sheet was radically royalis in its bias, its reports must be accepted with great care. I have been unable to check this particular account against any other contemporary relation; this account is accepted because Aulicus’s stories of this sort usually have a basis in truth, and this particular one, in view of foregoing circumstances, seems credible.

554 Id., pp. 170–171.

555 Id.

556 Id. John Saltmarsh, later Hugh Peter’s fellow-chaplain in the army, preached the same ideas at this time. Cf. A Peace but No Pacification (London, 1643).

557 XIV Articles of Treason and Other Misdemeanors Exhibited to Isaac Pennington (Oxford, 1643), pp. 2–3.

558 Increasing attention to Hugh Peter in royalist pamphlets is evidence of his part in urging on the war. For his pains, he was impeached for high treason by the king. Cf. An Answer to the Articles against Master Calamy, Master Martiall, Master Burton, Master Peters (London, 1642).

559 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 201.

560 Peter, True Relation, p. 15.

561 Certain Informations, No. 3, January 30–February 6, 1642/3, p. 2.

562 Charles Deane, editor, “Records of the Council for New England,” Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, 1867, pp. 61, 7.1–73, 85; Beer, Origins of the British Colonial System, p. 45.

563 C. J., ii. 949.

564 Id.; Certain Informations, No. 3, January 30–February 6, 1642/3, p. 22.

565 See Weld’s accounts in Publications of this Society, xiv. 121–126 (reprinted from Mass. Archives, lviii. 3–4); New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxix. 179–182 (reprinted from Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fols. 19–21); Weld, “Innocency Cleared,” Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fols. 26–30 (reprinted in New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvi. 64–70). The writer of XIV Articles of Treason Exhibited to Isaac Pennington (said by Thomason to have appeared March 30, 1643) states (pp. 2–3): “… I cannot thus passe by Mr. Peters, a man that hath done so much good for us, especially by his indefatigable pains in every parish in London to find out those our many Babes borne out of the estate & Covenant of Grace (though by this Malignant [Edward Dobson] called Bastards) and conveyed dilligently to New-England, by whose meanes the obiects of our owne vilenesse are taken away from our perpetuall remembrance.”

566 Mass. Archives, lviii. 3–4; Publications of this Society, xiv. 121–126.

567 This assumes a transportation cost of £6 a child, which was a common rate for those days. Actually, the agents contracted with shipmasters at the rate of £5 a child. See Weld, “Innocency Cleared,” Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fols. 27b–28 (New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvi. 66).

568 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 96. Were the “other passengers” whom the governor mentions Irish refugees transported by means of the children’s fund?

569 Mass. Records, ii. 45, 89, 141.

570 £150 went towards a house for President Dunster of Harvard College (id., pp. 70, 84), and £50 was allowed John Winthrop, Jr., for expenses incurred in England on behalf of the colony (Winthrop Papers, i. 159, MSS., Massachusetts Historical Society). More of the children’s fund was spent for soldiers to go with Captain Cook to Providence in 1643 (Mass. Records, ii. 45), and a portion of the funds was later paid to Captain Richard Davenport “in pt of what the country stands indebted to him, for the Castle” (id., p. 164). In addition, some appears to have been pocketed by Emmanuel Downing and Nehemiah Bourne (Mass. Archives, c. 5b; Mass. Records, ii. 89, 141). Evidently the General Court used the children’s fund as a convenient way to avoid unpopular taxes; if any of the moneys thus misapplied were replaced, I have found no record of it.

571 Mass. Archives, c. 5b; Mass. Records, ii. 89, 141; 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 59–60.

572 Mass. Archives, lviii. 5.

573 Certain Informations, No. 3, January 30–February 6, 1642/3, p. 22.

574 C. J., ii. 949.

575 Id., pp. 987, 998; L. J., v. 632b; vii. 75a–b; Mass. Archives, lx. 23; Mass. Records, ii 34; Winthrop, Journal, ii. 96. Students of constitutional problems of British colonial policy might well note the early official use herein of the word “kingdom” as applied by parliament to “New England,” i.e., to Massachusetts Bay. Employed before exigencies of civil war led parliament to assume complete control of colonial affairs by the creation of the Warwick Commission, the word suggests parliamentary recognition of Massachusetts Bay as a separate realm analogous to Scotland and Ireland and associated with England only by relation to an identical Crown. Evidently Weld and Peter, as instructed by Massachusetts magistrates, were taking pains not to compromise “charter liberties” or the constitutional position of the colony.

576 C. J., iv. 337 (November 10, 1645).

577 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 246.

578 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 516.

579 Mass. Archives, lix. 13.

580 William Hubbard, “A General History of New England,” 2 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., ii. 374.

581 Reprinted in Samuel E. Morison, The Founding of Harvard College, pp. 420–447. As to the authorship of this pamphlet, see Worthington C. Ford’s critical study in Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., xlii. 259–266; Morison, Founding of Harvard College, pp. 304–305. It seems “almost certain,” according to Mr. Morison, that Dunster “had the leading hand in compiling” the part of the pamphlet which refers to Harvard College, although “he did not actually write it.” In the portion which deals with the Indians, the numerous references to Salem experiences (pp. 2, 3, 4) and that to Agamenticus (p. 9) suggest Hugh Peter’s influence. Again, in the last part, the pamphlet’s preoccupation with material affairs—fishing, cloth-making, the fur-trade, shipbuilding, and the West Indies trade; the comparison of New England’s climate with that of Holland; the reference to the poor children, and the praise of New England’s morality (“… one may live there from yeare to yeare, and not see a drunkard, heare an oath, or meet a beggar”)—all these show traces of Peter’s hand in the pamphlet. The reference to New England’s morality, although an idea common at the time, is almost exactly like one of Peter’s later expressions in The Case of Mr. Hugh Peters by His Own Hand (London, 1660), pp. 2–3.

582 New Englands First Fruits, p. 1.

583 Id., p. 17.

584 See Andrew McF. Davis’s articles, “The First Scholarship at Harvard College,” Proc. Amer. Antiq. Soc., n.s., v. 129–139; “The Lady Moulson Scholarship at Cambridge,” id., viii. 274–280.

585 Davis, “The First Scholarship at Harvard College,” id., v. 133.

586 Weld’s accounts show £231 for the college, including Lady Moulson’s gift. Mass. Archives, lviii. 4; Publications of this Society, xiv. 121–126. He also reported various other sums for educational purposes, but the accounts are so confused and incomplete that it is impossible to determine the exact amounts. See also Hutchinson Papers, Mass. Archives, ccxl. 58.

587 Weld, “Innocency Cleared,” Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fol. 29b (New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvi. 68).

588 Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fol. 29 (New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvi. 68).

589 No records arc available to show the date or the circumstances of Mrs. Peter’s excommunication or the date of her return to England. Opposite her name in the MS. Records of the First Church at Salem, 1629–1736, p. 7, is written “Excom.” Weld’s letter, which is quoted below in the text, is the only proof that she was in England at this time although there is proof that she was there later.

590 Thomas Weld to the General Court, September 25, 1643, New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvi. 39.

591 Thomas Weld to the General Court, September 25, 1643, New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvi. 39. Weld added a postscript saying: “m^r Peters consented to this l’er but is not in Lon. at the p^rsent coming away of the ship.”

592 Hugh Peter had published a reprint of his little catechism, Milk for Babes, and Meat for Men (London, 1641) and an introduction to The Advice of That Worthy Commander, Sir Ed: Harwood, Collonell (London, 1642), called “The Life and Death of Collonell Harwood”; but neither of these pamphlets was primarily of a polemic nature.

593 Benjamin Hanbury, Historical Memorials Relating to the Independents, ii. 18–39; Williston Walker, Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism, pp. 134–135.

594 The copy in the British Museum is marked by Thomason “June 15, 1643.” It is possible, even likely, that Weld collaborated with Peter in preparing the introduction.

595 Weld, however, did: in 1644, he was induced by Presbyterian plotters to edit, with additions, Governor Winthrop’s manuscript account of New England’s Antinomian troubles. The book, by emphasizing Congregational intolerance in New England, jeopardized the Independents’ political aspirations in Old England and placed Weld in a difficult position. See C. F. Adams, Antinomianism in the Colony of Massachusetts Bay (Prince Society Publications), pp. 60–63; Thomas Edwards, The Third Part of Gangraena (London, 1646), preface; Thomas Hooker to Thomas Shepard, September 17, 1646, Mass. Archives, ccxl. 100–101.

596 Peter’s introduction to Richard Mather, Church-Government and Church-Covenant Discussed.

597 See Worthington C. Ford’s comments in Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., xlii. 264–266.

598 The True Constitution of a Particular Visible Church, proved by Scripture (London, 1642), and A Modest and Clear Answer to Mr. Ball’s Discourse of Set Forms of Prayer (London, 1642). Cf. Hanbury, Historical Memorials, ii. 154–166.

599 Such as An Answer to W. R. (London, 1644), and A Short Story of the Rise, Reign and Ruine of the Antinomians (London, 1644).

600 Mr. Challenor His Confession & Speech Made Upon the Ladder before his Execution on Wednesday the Fifth of July, 1643 (London, 1643), pp. 3–5; see also Gardiner, History of the Civil War, i. 157–158.

601 Firth and Rait, Acts and Ordinances, i. 165.

602 See the committees chosen for sequestration and the levying of money, id., i. 113–115, 148–150. See also C. Thomas Stanford, Sussex in the Great Civil War and Interregnum, pp. 64–65; R. Almack, editor, Papers Relating to the County of Kent (Camden Society Publications), pp. 16–17; Victoria History of Sussex, i. 523–524.

603 Commissioners of Sussex to Hugh Peter, Lewes, July 15, 1643, New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxix. 371–372. The commission suggests that a similar one for Kent existed, but it has not been located.

604 Edwards, The Third Part of Gangraena, p. 105.

605 Id., pp. 76–77.

606 XIV Articles of Treason, p. 4.

607 A Letter from Mercurius Civicus to Mercurius Rusticus (Oxford, 1643), pp. 6–8.

608 Sir William Dugdale, A Short View of the Late Troubles (Oxford, 1681), p. 566.

609 Id., pp. 72–73.

610 Letter from Mercurius Civicus to Mercurius Rusticus, p. 13.

611 Reliquiae Baxterianae, p. 34. The truth of the charge is well demonstrated by the action of parliament on August 9, 1643, in ordering the divines of the Westminster Assembly who resided in the Associated Counties to go home and “stir up the People … to rise for their Defense.” C. J., iii. 199.

612 Firth and Rait, Acts and Ordinances, i. 220–221.

613 Deposition of Hugh Squier, New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxviii. 414.

614 Clarendon Papers (Bodleian), 16109.22, fol. 128. The instructions are reprinted in full in New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxix. 372.

615 Certain Informations, No. 47, December 4–11, 1643, p. 370; L. J., vii. 154a, 155a.

616 Memoirs of Edmund Ludlow (London, 1751), p. 368.

617 L. J., x. 135–154; Rushworth, Historical Collections, vii. 963; C. J., iii. 531, 570; iv. 8.

618 “… I haue very strong thoughts to speake with the Duitch Governor, & lay some way there.… Why should wee not make some league with them? who are very probable to bee more then ordinary good or bad neighbors.” Hugh Peter to Governor Winthrop, 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 200–201.

619 Documents Relative to the Colonial History of New York, i. 567–568; see also id., ii. 150–151; “Afschriften der Depêches,” Add. MSS. 17677 W, fols. 5–6 (British Museum).

620 History of the State of New York, ii. 50–51.

621 Documents Relative to the Colonial History of New York, i. 564–566; ii. 135; “Afschriften der Depêches,” Add. MSS. 17677 W, fols. 7–12.

622 Charles H. Firth, Oliver Cromwell and the Rule of the Puritans in England, pp. 312–313. 371–373.

623 Id., p. 371.

624 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 33; History of the State of New York, ii. 47. In 1644, when trouble with the Dutch was renewed with considerable heat, Edward Winslow suggested that the colonies commission Hugh Peter again to deal with the Dutch, but evidently nothing came of the suggestion. Cf. Winslow to John Winthrop, August 6, 1644, New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxix. 237.

625 Firth and Rait, Acts and Ordinances, i. 331–333. The ordinance was passed November 2, 1643.

626 Id.; see also Winthrop, Journal, ii. 163.

627 Id., pp. 186–187, 290–295; Beer, Origins of the British Colonial System, pp. 347–348.

628 Beer, Origins of the British Colonial System, pp. 329–330, 349 n; Andrews, British Committees, pp. 18–23.

629 As Hugh Peter was in Holland from before the time of the Warwick Committee’s appointment until the following March (1644), he could have had no part in the negotiations for the Narragansett charter.

630 For a description of the troubles between the Bay Colony on the one hand and the Narragansett Indians, the Gortonists, and the Williamsites on the other, see John G. Palfrey, History of New England (Boston, 1860), ii. 112–140.

631 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 53–54; Palfrey, History of New England, ii. 116–117.

632 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 81; Palfrey, History of New England, ii. 120–121.

633 See the dispute over this point between Charles Deane and Colonel Aspinwall in 1 Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., v. 39–41, 399–406; vi. 41–77. A careful reading of the ordinance creating the Warwick Commission shows that ten names were necessary. See also Herbert L. Osgood, The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, i. 354.

634 Cf. Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, i. 143–146; Collections of the Rhode Island Historical Society, iv. 221–225.

635 Mass. Records, iii. 49; Roger Williams to Major Mason, 1 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., i. 275–293; Thomas Aspinwall, “The Narragansett Patent,” 1 Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 41–77.

636 Parliament rewarded Peter with £100 and “a Study of Books, to that Value”; the books were the remains of Archbishop Laud’s library. Cf. C. J., iii. 421, 469, 544; L. J., vi. 458b, 476b, 499b. Thomas Shepard attempted—without success, it appears—to obtain the books from Peter for Harvard College. Cf. Shepard to Peter, December 27, 1645, American Historical Review, iv. 105–107.

637 Endecott to Winthrop, April 22, 1644, 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 147.

638 Thomas Edwards (The Second Part of Gangraena, London, 1646, p. 84) chid Weld and Peter for their delay. Master Weld halts, wrote Edwards, “between Giles Cripplegate and New England, between Master Walker and the money for the poore childrens sending over to New England.…” See also id., pp. 289–290.

639 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 108.

640 Mass. Records, ii. 138.

641 Winthrop, Journal, ii. 222.

642 Mass. Records, iii. 48. Evidently William Hibbins, who had returned to England temporarily, was also associated with Pocock and his colleagues. Cf. id., ii. 185.

643 Mass. Archives, cvi. 4a; Mass. Records, ii. 137.

644 From the agents’ viewpoint this would have been impossible; parliament granted for a specific purpose the right to collect the money and the license to transport the children, and the funds could not have been applied for another design in England without grave risk of scandal.

645 Giles Firmin expresses the attitude of Massachusetts in a letter from England to John Winthrop, July 1, 1646: “Mr. Peters hath done very much service since hither hee came. I could wish hee did not too much countenance the Opinionists, which wee did so cast out in N. England. I know he abhorrs them in his heart, but hee hath many hang vpon him, bejng a man of such vse.” 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 276–277. Thomas Weld appears not actually to have advocated a policy of toleration, but he acquiesced in the system of the Independent party, of which he was a constant member.

646 For an account of this juxtaposition, see Perry Miller, Orthodoxy in Massachusetts, pp. 262–313.

647 See note 5, p. 215, above.

648 For evidences of misappropriation of college moneys, see Mass. Archives, ccxl. 58; Mass. Records, ii. 70, 200, 205.

649 The money which Lady Armine granted for conversion of the natives was not applied for that purpose until 1647. Mass. Records, ii. 189.

650 At the colony’s order, Weld, Peter, and Hibbins purchased (in 1642) cloth to the value £150 from Pocock and engaged to pay for it in six months. The colony sold the goods at a profit but neglected to reimburse Pocock. Peter and Weld paid £100 out of money that they collected in England, but the remaining £50 went unpaid until 1656, much to Pocock’s irritation. See his letter to Thomas Weld, London, April 1, 1646, Mass. Archives, iii. 4; to Hugh Peter, London, May 26, 1651, id., c. 34. See also Mass. Records, ii. 82, 262; iii. 144, 247–248, 255, 291; iv. 66; Mass. Archives, iii. 160, 325, 366; c. 35a, 50.

651 Thomas Weld, “Innocency Cleared,” Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fol. 26b (New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvx. 64–70).

652 Osgood, American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, i. 423.

653 Mass. Records, ii. 141–144.

654 Edwards urged with great vehemence that Hugh Peter be called to account for the money embezzled from the poor children’s fund and from the other begging enterprises. Cf. The First Part of Gangraena (3d ed., London, 1646), pp. 40–42; The Second Part, pp. 84, 289–290.

655 See the act creating the Society for Promoting the Gospel in New England (the so-called New England Company) in Firth and Rait, Acts and Ordinances, ii. 197 ff.

656 “Records of the United Colonies of New England,” Records of the Colony of New Plymouth, ix. 192; Ebenezer Hazard, Historical Collections, ii. 174–177.

657 “Wee are begging all England ouer for N. E. Wee hope it may come to some thing.” Hugh Peter to John Winthrop, Jr., July 17, 1649, 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 113. As will be seen below, by the next year Peter’s attitude was altered.

658 Steele to the Commissioners of the United Colonies, April 7, 1651, Plymouth Colony Records, ix. 193; Hazard, Historical Collections, ii. 175.

659 Commissioners of the United Colonies to the New England Company, New Haven, September 10, 1651, Plymouth Colony Records, ix. 195; Hazard, Historical Collections, ii. 177–178.

660 Mass. Records, ii. 162; iii. 79; Ezekiel Rogers to John Winthrop, Sr., on Weld’s behalf, November 9, 1647, 3 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., i. 26–27; Weld to Winthrop, 1648, 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., i. 365–367; Weld’s earlier accounts (1645) were probably those referred to as among the elder John Winthrop’s papers in 1649, but they have since been lost. Cf. Mass. Records, iii. 179.

661 Mass. Archives, lviii. 3–6; Publications of this Society, xiv. 121–126. Weld evidently sent another copy of his report, dated April 21, 1647, which was attested and signed by “Natha: Duncan Aud^r” and returned to him. This is probably the copy in Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fols. 19–21, with other papers of Weld. The second copy is published in New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxix. 179–182. It checks exactly with the copy in the Massachusetts Archives except in the matter of the date, and that is only eleven days later.

662 See the copy in the Massachusetts Archives, reprinted in the Publications of this Society, xiv. 123–126. The copy sent to England has not been discovered.

663 Thomas Weld to William Steele, Gateshead, January 2, 1649/50, Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fols. 5–6 (New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvi. 62–64).

664 Id.

665 The MS. copy is in Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fols. 26–30; it is printed inaccurately in New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxvi. 64–70.

666 This is further proof that the attacks against the agents in England were of Presbyterian origin.

667 Weld, “Innocency Cleared,” Rawlinson MSS., c. 934, fols. 26–27 (New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxix. 65).

668 Id., p. 70.

669 Letter from the New England Company to the Commissioners of the United Colonies, London, February 18, 1653/4, Hutchinson Papers (Prince Society Publications), i. 287; Hazard, Historical Collections, ii. 311–312; Plymouth Colony Records, x. 118.

670 See William Steele’s letter to the Governor and General Court of Massachusetts, London, February 14, 1653/4, chiding the colony for causing these dissensions in the Confederation. Mass. Archives, x. 202–204; Plymouth Colony Records, x. 431–433.

671 Id.

672 Plymouth Colony Records, x. 432–433.

673 Id., p. 160; Hazard, Historical Collections, ii. 424.

674 Mass. Records, ii. 189; iii. 106.

675 Hutchinson Papers, i. 287–290; Hazard, Historical Collections, ii. 311–312; Plymouth Colony Records, x. 118.

676 See his letter to John Winthrop, Jr., July 17, 1649, 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 113.

677 See these and later pamphlets published to further the work of Indian conversion, 3 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., iv. 1 ff. In a letter to John Winthrop, Jr., in 1654, Peter wrote: “Here is 900l per annum for the Indians, I wish it were imployed for the English poore there.” 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 115–116.

678 Hutchinson Papers, i. 288; Plymouth Colony Records, x. 118; Hazard, Historical Collections, ii. 311–312.

679 Hutchinson Papers, i. 291.

680 George P. Winship, The New England Company of 1649 and John Eliot (Prince Society Publications), p. 17.

681 Id.

682 “… pd. Mr Weld, old debt—£0061 18 7.” Mass. Archives, c. 50.

683 Peter to John Winthrop, Jr., June 4, 1654, 4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 114–115.

684 Edwards, First Part of Gangraena, p. 53.

685 They did not even consider him the fountainhead of their thought, but regarded him as one among many “judicious” divines. To an English correspondent who asked if Calvin had not definitely settled a certain point, Thomas Shepard replied: “I have forgot what he hath wrote and myself have read long since out of him” (Works, John Albro, editor, Boston, 1853, i. 326). Thomas Hooker did not hesitate to point out in a sermon that Calvin “casts a different construction” upon some words of Scripture, and to insist upon his own interpretation (A Comment Upon Christs Last Prayer in the Seventeenth of John, London, 1656, p. 157).

686 Institutes, iii. xxi, 2.

687 John Preston, Life Eternall, or, A Treatise of the Knowledge of the Divine Essence and Attributes (London, 1631), p. 94.

688 John preston, The New Covenant, or the Saints Portion (London, 1629), p. 503.

689 Id., p. 111.

690 The Marrow of Sacred Divinity (London, 1643), p. 11.

691 Id., p. 191.

692 Works (Cambridge, 1626), p. 278.

693 Works, i. 14.

694 Marrow, A₃ verso.

695 Institutes, iii. xxiii, 12.

696 Id., ii. ii, 1.

697 Works, p. 21.

698 Marrow, p. 198.

699 Institutes, iii. xxi, 1.

700 Marrow, p. 131.

701 Id., p. 118.

702 Institutes, i. iii–vi.

703 Marrow, p. 24.

704 Id., p. 2.

705 Marrow, p. 1.

706 Id., p. 117.

707 Preston, New Covenant, p. 556.

708 Shepard, Works, i. 329.

709 Shepard, Works, ii. 283.

710 Works, pp. 107–112.

711 The Holy State, Bk. ii, Chap. x.

712 Cf. “A Graine of Mustard Seed,” Works, pp. 637 ff.; “A Treatise Tending unto a Declaration Whether a man be in the estate of damnation,” id., pp. 356 ff.; “A Case of Conscience,” id., pp. 423 ff.

713 Works, p. 32.

714 Orthodoxy in Massachusetts, chap. vi.

715 Marrow, pp. 101–103.

716 Life Eternall, p. A6 recto.

717 New Covenant, p. 317.

718 Miller, Orthodoxy in Massachusetts, pp. 73–102.

719 Works (Alexander B. Grossart, editor, Edinburgh, 1862), i. 100; for interconnections of the group, see Grossart’s introduction, id., i, passim.

720 I should by no means wish to contend that Perkins, Ames, and Preston were the sole authors of the theory of the covenant. While these Englishmen were in the vanguard of the movement, they were probably not so much leaders of thought as indications of a spontaneous evolution among Calvinists of the period, brought about by the necessities I have outlined. There seems to have been a group of theologians in Germany in the late sixteenth century who used the idea, though there is no evidence that they had any influence in England. Sibbes could write as early as 1623, on the supposition that the reader was already familiar with the covenant doctrine: “It supposeth a reader grounded in the knowledge of the nature and properties of God, of Christ and his offices, of the covenant of grace, and such like” (Preface to Ezekiel Culverwell, Treatise of Faith). The Covenant of Grace was, of course, an old catchword in theology, which is legitimately derived from its frequent mention in the Bible. It had served to characterize the general scheme of redemption; more concretely, it had been used to signify an agreement of a sort with God, entered into by believers at their baptism. Richard Hooker had employed it as both Anglican and Puritan in the sixteenth century would probably have understood it when he said that baptism implied “a covenant or league between God and man,” wherein God bestows remission of sins, “binding also himself to add in process of time” sufficient grace for the attainment of life hereafter (Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, v. lxiv, 4). But though Hooker calls it a league and speaks of the covenant as God’s “binding” Himself, he does not stress the contractual nature of the agreement. The special quality of the Puritan emphasis upon the covenant does not, so far as I can tell, seem to derive from historic theology at all. Instead, in the background of Preston’s thought, lies the common-law conception of the covenant, the idea of a formal agreement of legal validity, a promise or contract under seal. Whether this school took the notion from the law consciously or unconsciously I cannot yet say, though I suspect that they knew what they were doing. A later English writer on the covenant, who constantly cites Ames, Preston, and Cotton for his authorities, explicitly acknowledges the influence of the law. He declares that “our Lawyers … have given us Presidents” for defining a covenant; and in countering the attack of an opponent he says: “We will referre it to the Common Law, whether this way of reasoning will hold or no” (Thomas Blake, Vindiciae Foederis, London, 1653, pp. 38, 377). It is enough to remember that the Puritans, in their controversy with the Crown, were steeped in the law, and it is no wonder that sooner or later they should be found busily reinterpreting theology in accordance with legal habits of thought. Hence it is quite plausible that many Puritans of the first decades of the seventeenth century should begin simultaneously to seize upon the idea of covenant and to stress it in their accounts of Calvinistic theology. William Ames taught the elements of the doctrine at Franeker. Among his students was a Dutchman known to history as Cocceius, who became the founder of a school which took the covenant as its central doctrine, and which, throughout the seventeenth century, disturbed the theological peace of Holland almost as much as did the Arminians. Without dwelling too long upon the fascinating history of the idea, we may sum up the situation in some such fashion as this: from its inception in England, as illustrated in the work of Perkins and Preston, the doctrine had a sort of triple life—in England it continued to be preached by various theologians, particularly by the Independents; in Holland it became the particular doctrine of a faction denominated in histories of theology as the Cocceian, or the Covenant, or the Federal School; and in New England it became a fundamental tenet, a doctrine that completely modified what otherwise would be called Calvinism, and became the starting point for many intellectual developments, not only theological, but also ecclesiastical, political, and philosophical. The chief seventeenth-century English documents on the subject, in addition to the works of Perkins, Ames, Preston, and Sibbes, are, chronologically: John Downame, The Christian Warfare, 1604, 1611; [Anon.], The Covenant between God and man plainly declared, 1616; George Downame, The Covenant of Grace, 1631; John Ball, A Treatise of Faith, 1631; Tobias Crisp, Christ Alone Exalted, 1643; James Ussher, A Body of Divinity, 1645; John Ball, A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace, 1645; Thomas Blake, Vindiciae Foederis, 1653, The Covenant Sealed, 1655; Edward Leigh, A System or Body of Divinity, 1654, A Treatise of Religion and Learning, 1656; William Allen, Discourse on the Nature, Ends and Differences of the Two Covenants, 1673 (preface by Richard Baxter); John Owen, The Doctrine of justification by Faith, 1677; William Strong, Discourse of the Two Covenants, 1678; Daniel Williams, Gospel Truth Stated and Vindicated, 1692. The Westminster Confession has some features of the doctrine rather covertly introduced, which fact helps to explain why it could be adopted without reservation by the Cambridge Synod in 1648. In the last half of the seventeenth century the covenant doctrine replaced other forms of Calvinism among English Calvinists, until in the eighteenth century all Calvinists—Ridgely, Doddridge, Watts—are nothing but Federalists. Though the idea and philosophy of the covenant run through almost the entire output of the first generation of New England authors, the principal works devoted to it are: Peter Bulkley, The Gospel-Covenant, 2nd ed., 1651; Thomas Cobbett, A Just Vindication of the Covenant, 1648; John Cotton, The Covenant of God’s Free Grace, 1645, The Grounds and Ends of the Baptisme of the Children of the Faithfull, 1647, Of the Holinesse of Church-Members, 1650, The New Covenant, 1654, A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace, 1659; John Davenport, The Power of Congregational Churches, 1672; George Phillips, A Reply to a Confutation, 1645; Thomas Shepard, The Sincere Convert, 1640, The Sound Beleever, 1645, The Church-Membership of Children, 1663. No one work of Thomas Hooker is especially devoted to the covenant, but the theory recurs in all his sermons, and he gives it even more prominence than do the other divines.

721 New Covenant, p. 351.

722 The Gospel-Covenant, or the Covenant of Grace Opened (2nd ed., London, 1651), p. 27.

723 New Covenant, p. 38; the innovation of this theology upon the theology of Calvin becomes apparent when its interpretation of Biblical texts is compared with his. Calvin, for instance, finds no such proposal of terms in Genesis, xvii, but only a statement of the permanence of God’s promises (Institutes, ii. viii, 21; x, 9) or the institution of the sacraments of circumcision and baptism (id., iv. xvi, 3; xvii, 21–22).

724 Sibbes, Works, i. civ.

725 John Cotton, Christ the Fountaine of Life (London, 1651), p. 35.

726 Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. 86.

727 Id., p. 133 (cf. id., pp. 38, 112–113, 120); Preston, New Covenant, pp. 352–353, 357; Hooker, The Saintes Dignitie (London, 1651), p. 104; Cotton, The Grounds and Ends of the Baptisme of the Children of the Faithfull (London, 1647), p. 38; Shepard, Works, iii. 521.

728 Cotton, Grounds and Ends, p. 32.

729 Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. 47; cf. p. 28.

730 New Couenant, p. 316.

731 Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. 276.

732 Id., p. 314.

733 The Way of Life (London, 1641), p. 415. Cf. Hooker, The Application of Redemption (London, 1659): “Its Gods usual way so to deal not that he is tyed … to this manner of dealing upon necessity, but that he hath expressed it to be his good pleasure so to dispense himself” (p. 337).

734 Preston, New Covenant, pp. 330–331.

735 Id., p. 364.

736 Id., p. 105.

737 Works, vi. 6.

738 Preface to Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. B1 recto. Bulkley, in the text of this volume, finds God committed by His covenant not only to mercy, but to insuring both the success of the Massachusetts Commonwealth—“The Lords end in taking us into covenant with himself, is to make us a happy and blessed people.…” (p. 194)—and the material prosperity of individuals within the covenant: “for any one to say, I feare I am none of Gods people, because I prosper in the world, is all one as if he should say, I feare the Lord intends me no good, because he makes good unto me the blessings which he hath promised in his Covenant” (p. 299). Cf. John Ball, A Treatise of Faith (London, 1632), pp. 63–64, 351, 363; Thomas Cobbett, A Just Vindication of the Covenant (London, 1648), p. 40.

739 Preface to Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. B1 recto.

740 Preston, New Covenant, p. 321.

741 Shepard, Preface to Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. B2 verso.

742 Preston, New Covenant, p. 32.

743 A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace (3rd ed., London, 1671), p. 6.

744 Shepard, Works, iii. 31–37; it should be noted that by “reason” Shepard carefully points out that he does not mean reason as it is corrupted by sin, but “right” reason. However, he can pronounce with perfect certainty the rules of right reason by which to test the rationality and so the validity of a moral law (pp. 37–41).

745 Id., p. 42.

746 Hooker, Christs Last Prayer, p. 422.

747 Consequently the Federal theologians of Holland were among the earliest adherents of Descartes.

748 New Covenant, p. 46.

749 Sibbes, Works, i. 204–205.

750 Cotton, Christ the Fountaine, p. 33. On another occasion Cotton paraphrases “the Philosopher” to this effect: “Miracula sine necessitate sunt multiplicanda” (Way of the Congregational Churches Cleared, London, 1648, pt. i. 42); though the providence of God is not always predictable, yet “there is a settled order and constancy in that instability, as there is in the motions of the Heavens and heavenly bodies” (Briefe Exposition upon the Whole Book of Ecclesiastes (London, 1654, p. 66).

751 Sibbes, Works, i. 225.

752 Marrow, pp. 40–41.

753 The New Creature (London, 1633), p. 97.

754 Life Eternall, p. 33.

755 Sibbes, Works, i. 197.

756 Preston, New Covenant, p. 118.

757 Hooker, The Soules Exaltation (London, 1638), pp. 27–28.

758 Hooker, The Soules Humiliation (London, 1638), pp. 59–60.

759 Christ the Fountaine, p. 174.

760 Marrow, p. 170; probably as a result of his teaching, Cocceius particularly stressed the evolutionary theory, and in Holland more energies were devoted to this aspect of the doctrine than in New England.

761 Id., pp. 38–42, 170 ff.; cf. Sibbes, Works, vi. 4.

762 Gospel-Cavenant, p. 118.

763 Hooker, Saintes Dignitie, p. 105.

764 Life Eternall, p. 57.

765 New Covenant, p. 155.

766 Id., p. 446.

767 Life Eternall, p. 55; he instances Alexander Polyhistor, Josephus, Cyril, “Chaldee Historians,” Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, Xenophon, “The Tables of Ptolomy, lately found.” Cf. George Phillips, A Reply to a Confutation (London, 1645): “The Argument from humane authority is as easily rejected as propounded, though otherwise much good use may be made of their writing” (p. 119).

768 Thomas Hutchinson, A Collection of Original Papers Relative to the History of Massachusetts Bay (Prince Society Publications), i. 79 ff.

769 A Survey of the Summe of Church Discipline (London, 1648), pt. i, pp. 50, 79, C3 recto.

770 Preston, New Covenant, p. 390.

771 Preston, Life Eternall, pt. ii, p. 84.

772 Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, pp. 323–324.

773 Soules Exaltation, p. 8.

774 The Covenant of Gods Free Grace (London, 1645), p. 18.

775 Gospel-Covenant, p. 321.

776 Preston, New Creature, p. 23.

777 Preston, New Covenant, p. 477.

778 Cotton, Christ the Fountaine, p.32.

779 Cotton, The Covenant of Gods Free Grace, p. 18.

780 New Creature, p. 23.

781 Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. 182.

782 Works, i. 266.

783 Id., p. 137.

784 Works, vi. 24–25.

785 Marrow, pp. 56–57, 60–61, 63, 219.

786 Life Eternall, p. A7 recto.

787 Id., p. 15.

788 The Saints Qualification (London, 1633), p. 129.

789 Id., p. 222. How far the covenant thought had strayed from pristine Calvinism is nowhere better illustrated than in the contrast between Preston and Calvin on this very question of the “remains.” What Preston says every man can know by nature Calvin says has at best been barely guessed by only the wisest of philosophers, and even their glimmerings are of no value, because they are overwhelmed in a mountain of falsehoods. “Human reason, then, neither approaches, nor teaches, nor directs its views toward this truth, to understand who is the true God, or in what character he will manifest himself to us” (Institutes, ii. ii, 18). Calvin does grant that in secular realms—civil polity, domestic economy, mechanical arts, and liberal sciences—reason is capable of discovering good principles. But his explanation for this ability indicates the immense gulf between his thought and Preston’s: the achievements of reason in any of these respects result from the talents possessed by occasional individuals, and these are temporary gifts bestowed here and there by God, not instances of an inherent ability still remaining in the soul (id., ii. ii, 12–17). Calvin is arguing for the utter incapacity of nature, relieved by occasional grants of power bestowed at the mere pleasure of an arbitrary sovereign. Preston is arguing for an innate and universal capacity in nature to achieve some good things in and by itself, even though the capacity is imperfect and cannot reach to the attainment of salvation. Cf. Hooker, Application of Redemption (p. 142): “The Lord hath left in thee the remainder of many natural abilities, hath lent thee the help of many common Gifts and Graces, which by Art and Education have grown to some ripeness.” Hooker goes as far as to assert that in the human will, considering it “merely as it ariseth from the power of those natural principles whereof its made,” there exist certain principles “which were at the first imprinted upon it,” and which naturally incline it “to close with God …” (id., p. 369).

790 The Cuppe of Blessing (London, 1633), p. 10. Cf. Calvin: “Are all our industry, perspicacity, understanding and care so depraved, that we cannot conceive or meditate anything that is right in the sight of God? … In the estimation of the Holy Spirit … such a representation is consistent with the strictest truth” (Institutes, ii. ii, 25).

791 Cuppe of Blessing, pp. 12–13.

792 Preston, New Covenant, p. 565.

793 Works, i. 409.

794 Survey, pt. i, p. 44.

795 Works, iii. 177. Cf. Cotton, A Practical Commentary upon the First Epistle Generall of John (London, 1656): “Though the Law of Nature was more dimly and darkly known, Moses Law was but a new draught of the Law of Nature in innocency. Heathen law givers, Philosophers, and Poets have expressed the effect of all the commandements save the tenth” (p. 234).

796 Preston, Saints Qualification, p. 130.

797 Id., p. 182.

798 Preston, Life Eternall, pp. 4–5.

799 Preston, Life Eternall, p. 15.

800 Shepard, Works, i. 10.

801 Id., iii. 178. The best revelation of the Puritan attitude toward the study of natural science that I have been able to discover among the writings of early New Englanders occurs in John Cotton’s Gods Mercie Mixed with His Iustice (London, 1641, pp. 113–134), in a discourse on the feasibility of predicting fair weather from the aspect of the sky at sunset or sunrise. He expounds the meteorological theories of the time, but reminds his listeners that these theories are utterly incapable of establishing with scientific accuracy a necessary connection between a red sky and the subsequent weather. “Every man that observes them to bee evident, yet findes them not alwaies certain: And those that are best able to discerne the reason, and the naturall causes, are not able to say, that the event hath and will alwayes follow.” This reflection leads to the conventional Puritan insistence that the providence of God rather than natural causality is to be accounted the reason for the behavior of phenomena, and Cotton declares that even if the signs were invariably followed by the correct effect, “and the reason were evident,” the whole business is not of such importance that a man should busy himself with it overmuch. He inveighs against those who spend time in the study of “philosophy” when they should be occupied with their salvation: “It is the nature of hypocrisie to bee very quick sighted in points of nature, but very dull and heavy in matters of Religion and grace.” Yet Cotton is far from intending hostility to natural science as such, for he immediately goes on to say that if nature is studied in subordination to religion, if the natural world is viewed, not as an end in itself, but as a symbol of the spirit, like “a mappe and shadow of the spiritual estate and soules of men,” there need be no inhibition upon such investigation. “It is not utterly unlawful for men to make observation of the estate of the weather, and face of the sky; our Saviour doth not reproove it in them, but onely reprooves this, in that they were better skilled in the face of the sky, and signes of the weather, then in the signes of the times … He rejects not such kind of conjectures, there is a workmanship of God in them, nor doth hee mislike the study of nature.” In this sense, Cotton can assert: “To study the nature and course, and use of all Gods works, is a duty imposed by God upon all sorts of men; from the King that sitteth upon the Throne to the Artificer” (Briefe Exposition upon Ecclesiastes, p. 23).

802 Preston, Saints Qualification, p. 152.

803 Id., p. 225. It should be noted that the idea of the Law of Nature being written in the heart sufficiently to render men inexcusable is good Calvinist doctrine (Institutes, ii. ii, 22–25); but in Calvin natural knowledge of natural law serves only this use. It is of no validity for any further regulation of life, and it is incapable of formulating an ideal of righteousness; it merely exists to make men know they have fallen short of something which they cannot even conceive.

804 Id., pp. 224–225.

805 Preston, New Covenant, p. 62.

806 Preston, New Creature, p. 129.

807 Id., pp. 95–96.

808 Soules Exaltation, p. 29.

809 Preston, Life Eternall, p. 21.

810 Preston, Life Eternall, pp. 46–47.

811 Preston, Cuppe of Blessing, p. 13.

812 Shepard, Works, iii. 96–97.

813 Hooker, Application of Redemption, p. 556.

814 There is no suspicion of the legal imputation theory in Calvin; cf. Institutes, ii. i, 7–8.

815 Marrow, p. 67.

816 Preston, New Creature, p. 19.

817 Saintes Dignitie, p. 29.

818 Works, i. 344.

819 The entire direction of this argument—the enlarging of natural abilities to provide a fulcrum for the lever of moral incitement—had been condemned by Calvin in so many words. He held that all the Fathers except Augustine committed precisely this error for the same reason. They attributed to the reasoning faculty more power toward the pursuit of virtue than was proper, because otherwise “they supposed it impossible to awaken our innate torpor” (Institutes, ii. ii, 4). From the heights of spiritual intensity upon which Calvin dwelt, he could afford to spurn all such devices for the coddling of faith.

820 Cotton, Way of Life, p. 229.

821 Preston, New Covenant, p. 102.

822 Hooker, Saintes Dignitie, pp. 4–5.

823 Cotton, Covenant of Gods Free Grace, p. 12.

824 Preston, A Sermon Preached at A Generali Fast Before the Commons-House of Parliament (London, 1633), p. 281.

825 Cotton, Way of Life, pp. 347–348.

826 Shepard, Works, iii. 128. It was in the tangle of this argument that Mrs. Hutchinson tripped and fell, and consequently denounced the law and works and called upon the regenerate to live by grace alone. And it was by the doctrine of the covenant that she was found in error and excommunicated by the Church of Boston: “If any therefore accuse the Doctrine of the Covenant of free grace, of Antinomianisme.… and if they commit any sin, they plead they are not bound unto the Law … The children of the Covenant of grace will onely tell you, that they are free from the Covenant of the Law, but not from the Commandment of it” (Cotton, The New Covenant, pp. 134–135).

827 How strained the reasoning became at this point to distinguish the conditional covenant from Arminianism is illustrated by the argument of Peter Bulkley:

“The grace of the Covenant is free notwithstanding the condition, because we doe not put any condition as antecedent to the Covenant on Gods part, whereby to induce and move the Lord to enter in Covenant with us, as if there were any thing supposed in us, which might invite and draw him to take us into Covenant with himselfe; but onely we suppose a condition antecedent to the promise of life, which condition we are to observe and walke in; and in the observation thereof to expect the blessing of life which the Covenant promiseth” (Gospel-Covenant, p. 383).

The difference between the Federal theory and Arminianism, therefore, hinges upon the fact that in the covenant theory good works are not the cause, but the accompaniment of salvation. In the twentieth century, when theology has become a wearisome desert, this difference may seem to be a mere quibble over words, but to the first generation in New England it involved the fundamental problems of philosophy and of life: “Where we finde the promise of life made unto good workes, wee must not looke at them as workes of the Law, but as workes and fruits of Faith … These kind of promises … are … not casuall, but declarative, making manifest who be those true believers … In these promises workes are not set as the causes of our salvation, but as evidences and signes of those that do believe unto life” (id., p. 384).

828 Works, vi. 8.

829 Preface to Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. A2 verso.

830 Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. 315.

831 Cotton, Covenant of Gods Free Grace, pp. 19–20.

832 Preston, New Covenant, pp. 434–435.

833 Works, ii. 31.

834 Preston, Saints Qualification, p. 223.

835 Hooker, “The Poore Doubting Christian,” in The Saints Cordials (London, 1629), p. 361.

836 Hooker, Saintes Dignitie, pp. 82–83.

837 The Soules Implantation (London, 1637), p. 77.

838 In many passages describing the extent to which an unregenerate man may go in the work of preparation, some of these writers passed beyond any limits that could be reconciled with Calvinism. In New England clearly the most extreme was Thomas Hooker, who with great eloquence magnified the possibilities of a man’s producing in himself the receptive frame of mind, bringing himself to be “willingly content that Jesus Christ should come into it” (Soules Implantation, p. 34), and dared to assert that he who could force himself to the point of readiness would certainly receive grace in time. “It is onely in the way to be ingrafted into Christ; but so that undoubtedly that soule which hath this worke upon it, shall have faith poured into it” (Soules Preparation, London, 1632, p. 155). “If ever you thinke to share in the salvation that Christ hath purchased … if you would have him dwell with you, and doe good to you, either prepare for him, or else never expect him … Christ is marvellous ready to come, only he watcheth the time till your heart be ready to receive and entertaine him … If the soule be broken and humbled, he will come presently” (Soules Implantation, p. 47). It is probably significant, therefore, that John Cotton’s regard for consistency was more circumspect, and though he, no less than Hooker, argued that unregenerate man was responsible for his own state, he could not admit that before some experience of faith a man could undertake even to put himself in readiness: “for our first union, there are no steps unto the Altar” (New Covenant, p. 54). “There is no promise of life made to those that wait & seek in their own strength, who being driven to it, have taken it up by their own resolutions” (id., pp. 196–197). Yet even in denying the possibilities of natural preparation, Cotton prefaces his remarks: “Reserving due honour to such gracious and precious Saints as may be otherwise minded” (Treatise of the Covenant of Grace, p. 35). Under the circumstances this may very possibly be a reference to Hooker, and the difference of opinion between Hooker and Cotton on this important issue may throw some light upon the reasons why Hooker led the migration to Connecticut rather than remain in Massachusetts where Cotton had become installed as the principal interpreter of dogma. However, Thomas Shepard was in agreement with Hooker, and his Sincere Convert was attacked by Giles Firmin for demanding too much of natural man before grace (Shepard, Works, i. clxxxvi; cf. id., i. 160–163, 173; iii. 308).

839 Shepard, Works, ii. 57.

840 Hooker, The Christians Two Chiefe Lessons (London, 1640), p. 64.

841 Shepard, Works, ii. 224.

842 Bulkley, Gospel-Covenant, p. 313.

843 Id., p. 316; cf. pt. iv, passim.

844 Preston, New Creature, pp. 30–31.

845 The Saints Daily Exercise (London, 1630), p. 35.

846 Works, i. 199.

847 Way of Life, pp. 11–12.

848 Winthrop, Journal (Hosmer ed.), ii. 239.

849 Survey, pt. i, p. 50.

850 Cotton, New Covenant, p. 34.

851 Gospel-Covenant, p. 346.

852 Id., pp. 219–220. There can hardly be any doubt that the development of the covenant theology is in some fashion connected with the amplification of the social compact engineered by the lawyers and parliamentarians with whom the Puritans were associated in the struggle with the Crown. It is impossible to tell, without further research in the lives of such men as Preston and Sibbes and their associates, whether the political theory was the father of the theology, or the theology of the theory. It is clear, however, that the two ideas were developed pari passu. Certainly, in expounding the theological covenant the writers were constantly illustrating it by the analogy of the political, once more revealing the extremely legalistic cast of their minds.

“The Covenant which passeth betwixt God and us, is like that which passeth between a King and his people; the King promiseth to rule and govern in mercy and righteousnesse; and they againe promise to obey in loyalty and faithfulnesse.…” (id., pp. 345–346). “Such a covenant there is usually in all well governed Common-wealths, unlesse the King comes in by way of Conquest and Tyranny, but in well settled Commonwealths, there is a Covenant and Oath between Prince and People” (Cotton, Christ the Fountaine, p. 34). From the political point of view this theology was a strategic assistance to parliament; it made God a constitutional monarch, so that James and Charles might feel no indignity in becoming such a ruler as well.

853 Hooker, Survey, pt. i, p. 69.

854 Hooker, Survey, pt. i, p. 78.

855 Cotton, Covenant of Gods Free Grace, p. 22.

856 Cotton, Way of Life, p. 357.

857 Works (Reginald Heber, editor, London, 1851), ix. 67.

858 Id., pp. 67–68.

859 Cotton, Way of Life, p. 113.

860 Id., p. 477.

861 Preston, Life Eternall, pp. 100–102.

862 Preston, Life Eternall, pp. 68–69.

863 Works, iii. 35.

864 Christs Last Prayer, p. 110.

865 Printed in Hermann F. Clarke and Henry W. Foote, Jeremiah Dummer, Colonial Craftsman and Merchant, pp. 101–127.

866 Sewall’s Diary contains references earlier than those found in the official records— March 8, 1685/6: “Mr. [Samuel] Nowell begun with Prayer, and I, by mere accident being left, was fain to conclude” (5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., v. 125); March 14, 1686/87: “Capt. [William] Gerrish [the moderator] begun and ended with Prayer (id., p. 170); May 21, 1688: “No Prayer” (id., p. 214).

867 The invitations are in the selectmen’s minutes. The other records, which show that the minister in question actually did officiate, appear in the minutes of the town meetings.

868 Eliphalet Adams was an assistant to Benjamin Colman, August, 1701–February, 1704.

869 The selectmen voted, May 2, 1771, to invite Andrew Eliot.

870 The selectmen voted, May 7, 1746, to invite William Hooper.

871 The selectmen voted, April 27, 1739, to invite Joshua Gee.

872 The selectmen voted, April 27, 1745, to invite Thomas Foxcroft.

873 The town clerk did not indicate which Samuel Checkley it was in 1753 and 1765. Samuel Checkley, Sr., ordained November 22, 1719, died December 1, 1769; Samuel Checkley, Jr., ordained September 3, 1747, died March 19, 1768.

874 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 9.

875 Id., p. 303.

876 The selectmen voted, March 5, 1772, to invite John Lathrop.

877 5 Col. Mass. Hist. Soc., v. 474.

878 Id., vi. 275.

879 Id., p. 254.

880 The selectmen voted, June 1, 1764, to invite Samuel Checkley, Jr.

881 Id., p. 309.

882 The selectmen voted, March 24, 1786, to invite Samuel Stillman to offer a prayer at the meeting of April 1, 1786. The records do not indicate whether he accepted the invitation.

From 1638 until 1770, the ministers who preached the election sermons of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company were Congregationalists. This tradition was broken in 1770 by Samuel Stillman.

883 Samuel Parker, rector of Trinity Church, offered the prayer at the meeting of April 7, 1788, being the first of his denomination to do so. He was also the first Episcopalian to preach an election sermon (1791).

884 Tucker and Gilbert were two of his shipmates.

885 Travels and Works of Captain John Smith, Edward Arber and A. G. Bradley, editors, i. 6.

886 “The two and twentieth day of August, there died Captaine Bartholomew Gosnold, one of our Councell: he was honourably buried, hauing all the Ordnance in the Fort shot off, with many vollies of small shot.” “Observations Gathered out of A Discourse of the Plantation of the Southerne Colonie of Virginia,” id., p. lxxi.

887 Cf., in addition to the quotation from Percy, Wingfield’s “A Discourse of Virginia,” id., pp. lxxv–lxxvi.

888 Id., pp. 89–90.

889 The map is reproduced in id., 11, facing p. 384.

890 “Captaine Bartholomew Gosnold, the first mover of this plantation, hauing many yeares solicited many of his friends, but found small assistants; at last prevailed with some Gentlemen, as Maister Edward maria Wingfield, Captaine John Smith, and diverse others, who depended a yeare vpon his proiects, but nothing could be effected, till by their great charge and industrie it came to be apprehended by certaine of the Nobilitie, Gentrie, and Marchants, so that his Maiestie by his letters patent, gaue commission for establishing Councels, to direct here, and to governe and to execute there.” Thomas Studley, “The Proceedings of the English Colony in Virginia.” Arber and Bradley, John Smith, i. 89–90.

891 New England Quarterly, iv. 448–459; Old-Time New England, xxiv. 135–141.

892 Forum, lxxxv. 142.

893 i. 28 (1904 ed.).

894 British Colonial Policy, 1754–1765, p. 161.

895 The Colonial Period of American History, i. 437.

896 Charles E. Banks, “Religious ‘Persecution’ as a Factor in Emigration to New England, 1630–1640,” Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., lxiii. 136–154.

897 Democracy in America (1898 ed.), i. 15, 32.

898 Quoted by Herbert L. Osgood, The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, i. 276.

899 “Capitalistic and Socialistic Tendencies in the Puritan Colonies,” Annual Report of the American Historical Association, 1920, p. 235.

900 Religion and Capitalism in the Seventeenth Century, p. 113.

901 Quoted by E. A. J. Johnson, “The Economic Ideas of John Winthrop,” New England Quarterly, iii. 248.

902 Wonder-Working Providence, J. Franklin Jameson, editor, p. 35.

903 Writings and Speeches of Daniel Webster (1903 ed.), i. 211–212. See De Tocqueville’s comment on this, Democracy in America (1898 ed.), pp. 59–60.

904 For a recent discussion, see Robert B. Morris, Studies in the History of American Law, pp. 69 ff.

905 American Historical Review, xl. 217–231.

906 3 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., vii. 45.

907 See H. L. Osgood, “The Political Ideas of the Puritans,” Political Science Quarterly, vi. 1–28, 201–231; H. D. Foster, “The Political Theories of Calvinists before the Puritan Exodus to America,” American Historical Review, xxi. 481–503; and A. J. Carlyle, “The Sources of Mediaeval Political Theory and its Connection with Mediaeval Politics,” id., xix. 1–12.

908 Robert C. Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop, ii. 440.

909 William MacDonald, Select Charters Illustrative of American History, p. 73.

910 Political Science Quarterly, vi. 21.

911 Our Publications, xxviii. 67–86.

912 Clifford K. Shipton, “A Plea for Puritanism,” American Historical Review, xl. 460–467.

913 Claude H. Van Tyne, Causes of the War of Independence, p. 358.

914 Herbert Agar, The People’s Choice, pp. 34, 93.

915 C. M. Andrews, The Colonial Period, p. 67.

916 xxxiii. 34–35; xxxiv. 310–311. Mr. Henry Williams (id., xlix. 182) corrected from it a mistake made by Savage and Sibley. Mr. Williams calls the book a “Journal or Church Record.”

917 Several of these have already been printed in my Harvard College in the Seventeenth Century (i. 126–127) and in my Puritan Pronaos, pp. 47–49, 51.

918 Our Publications, xxxi. 47–48.

919 The best accounts of Seaborn Cotton’s life and pastorate are in Sibley’s Harvard Graduates, i. 286–293, and Joseph Dow, History of Hampton, N. H., i. 356–365.

920 This was a common practice of students in the seventeenth century. In an autobiographical fragment, the Hon. Robert Boyle writes: “Yet did he at idle hours write some few verses, both in French and Latin, and many copies of amorous, merry, and devout ones in English.” Thomas Birch, Robert Boyle (London, 1744), p. 31.

921 Morison, Harvard College in the Seventeenth Century, i. 115.

922 I have collated the facetiae in Cotton’s book with the 1640, 1641, and 1654 editions in the Harvard College Library, and with the cumulative reprint of 1874, entitled Facetiae, Musarum Deliciae, etc. Dr. Raymond P. Stearns kindly collated them with the 1645 and 1650 editions in the British Museum. Every one of Cotton’s nineteen extracts are found in the 1640 edition, and in the same sequence that he copies them; but several are not to be found in any of the later editions, where, moreover, the order is different. This proves that it was the 1640 edition to which Cotton had access.

923 The remaining pages start with the back of the book, reversed.

924 Continued from pp. [53–54] of the manuscript (see below, pp. 333–336), which should be read first.

925 Written over “skill” crossed out; the version in Joseph W. Ebsworth, The Roxburghe Ballads, has “skills.”

926 Three lines of the Roxburghe copy here omitted.

927 “But now I’m come too late to kiss her, which were it not in vain” (Roxburghe).

928 “Gerhard’s” (Roxburghe).

929 This unidentified poem is in handwriting A′.

930 The rest of the poem was copied at a different time.

931 Cotton wrote “Ραλμερ”

932 Thomas Manton, A Practical Commentary, or an Exposition on the Epistle of James (London, 1651).

933 Edward Elton’s folio exposition of Colossians was first published in 1620 and again in 1637; I find no commentary of his on Corinthians.

934 Matthew Barker (1619–1698), a well-known Puritan divine, whose most important work was Natural Theology (1674).

935 Zacharius Ursinus, Opera Theologica (Heidelberg, 1612; Hanover, 1634), or his Corpus Doctrinae Orthodoxae sive Catechetiarum (Geneva, 1612, englished by “Henrie Parrie,” London, 1617, etc.).

936 Probably the last-named work in the preceding note. It ran to over 1,100 pages.

937 William (“Painful”) Perkins, A Case of Conscience, the Greatest That Ever Was, came out as early as 1592, and is also included in some editions of his Armilla Aurea or Golden Chaine.

938 Calvin wrote ten or twelve commentaries on the Epistles.

939 William Ames’s famous Medulla Theologiae, or Marrow of Divinity.

940 John Cotton, Practical Commentary upon the First Epistle Generall of John (London, 1656; 2d ed., 1658), may be alluded to, or some manuscript sermon in the son’s possession.

941 This paragraph is written in a different ink and in a slightly older handwriting.

942 This paragraph is written in a different ink from the preceding.

943 They are written in handwriting B.

944 These lines are written at the foot of the page, reversed.

945 The first four paragraphs are in handwriting A′.

946 This paragraph is in a different ink and a later hand.

947 This is in handwriting A′ or A″.

948 This is in handwriting A′ and is almost illegible.

949 This is in handwriting A′ and is almost illegible.

950 This is in handwriting A′ and is signed “Seaborne Cotton.”

951 This is in handwriting A′.

952 This is in handwriting A′.

953 A word is inserted here, possibly “Junior.”

954 The Complete Works of Sir Philip Sidney, Albert Feuillerat, editor (cited hereafter as Works).

955 Cotton omits the first words, “Here now have you,” and “Lady” after “deare,” inserting “here you have”; and he takes other liberties with the text.

956 Arcadia, dedication; Works, i. 6–7.

957 Works, i. 21.

958 Several broadside copies are known; for the list, see the reprint in Ebsworth, Roxburghe Ballads, vi. 563–566, whence the tide has been obtained. Mr. Ebsworth assigns 1660 as the probable date. The same ballad is paraphrased in Henry Bold, Poems Lyrique, Macaronique, Heroique (London, 1664), pp. 105–110.

959 These four lines are not in the Roxburghe version, but resemble that of Henry Bold, “Song lxvi. A Mock” (Poems Lyrique, p. 107):

Nor did I fear, though at my Bosome, all at once,

Such Darts did move;

She that receives, A thousand Sheaves,

She can no more, but Love.

960 Cotton’s note for his own benefit. The next four lines precede the previous four, as they do in Henry Bold’s version (p. 106):

But yet, my fore acknowledgment, shall testifie,

Thou hast no Craft,

To bend thy Bow, Against a Foe,

That aim’d, to catch the shaft;

961 This stanza resembles more closely the Roxburghe than the Henry Bold version, although some of the lines are transposed.

962 “Divines” appears in the Bold but not in the Roxburghe version.

963 “The Young-Man’s Answer; or, his Dying Breath, Lamenting for his fair Cordelia’s Death,” is the tide of this reply. It appears on the same broadside as “The Love-Sick Maid” and is reprinted in Roxburghe Ballads, vi. 565. It is not found in Henry Bold’s Poems.

964 “Where slumber hath no power to close the eye” (Roxburghe).

965 Three lines of the Roxburghe version are omitted here.

966 Continued on page [1]; see above, p. 326.

967 Arcadia, i. vii, 4; Works, i. 50.

968 Arcadia, i. viii, 3; Works, i. 53–54.

969 Arcadia, i. xiii, 6; Works, i. 90. Prose quotations from the Arcadia continue through p. [78]. I have copied only the beginings of the longer passages.

970 Arcadia, ii. ii, 4; Works, i. 156.

971 Id.

972 Arcadia, ii. xi, 7; Works, i. 164.

973 Arcadia, ii. xi, 6; Works, i. 218–222.

974 Arcadia, i. xiii, 6; Works, i. 91.

975 Arcadia, iii. iv, 5; Works, i. 375. This group of extracts continues through p. [86].

976 Patri Reverendissimo Honorabilissimo et Chiarissimo is the suggestion for expanding these initials made by our associate Edward Kennard Rand, who has kindly helped me establish the Latin text.

977 Operaeque is called for.

978 Another copyist’s mistake; should be poenitet.

979 Doubtful. The comparison of parental counsels to the contents of Pandora’s box is one of those compliments that might have been better expressed.

980 Juro is called for.

981 Obedientissimus Filius?

982 This line and the letter that follows are in the same ink, and in Seaborn Cotton’s earliest hand.

983 Numerous pen flourishes follow.

984 Title from Roxburghe Ballads, vi. 228, where an undated broadside copy is reprinted.

985 “Upon his Face he lay along, hard by a Chrystal River” (Roxburghe).

986 “Song” (Roxburghe).

987 “Wo worth her face, her comly grace!” (Roxburghe).

988 “Her splendid Rays cuts off my days” (Roxburghe); Cotton’s line is at the end of the next stanza in the Roxburghe version, which he omits.

989 “You chrystal Streams that sweetly glide, be partners of my Mourning” (Roxburghe).

990 “Meadows wide” (Roxburghe).

991 Cotton omits here two stanzas of the Roxburghe version.

992 “Who hath my Death conspired” (Roxburghe).

993 “Thus I perceived him near his Death” (Roxburghe).

994 The Roxburghe version concludes here.

995 Facetiae, Musarum Deliciae, ii. 38; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 116.

996 Facetiae, ii. 17; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 126.

997 Facetiae, ii. 17; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 129.

998 Title from Facetiae, ii. 97; also in Witts Recreations (1640), No. 138; (1641), No. 117; (1645), No. 111; (1650), No. 129; (1654), No. 129.

999 Facetiae, ii. 314; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 163; also in edition of 1654, among “Fancies & Fantastickes,” with title “Another.”

1000 Facetiae, ii. 18; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 164.

1001 Facetiae, ii. 106; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 165; (1641), No. 143; (1654), No. 168.

1002 Facetiae, ii. 44; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 168(2); (1641), No. 147.

1003 Facetiae, ii. 300; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 206 (here reproduced in facsimile); (1641), page 1 of “Fancies and Fantastickes.”

1004 Facetiae, ii. 112; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 211; (1641), No. 176.

1005 Facetiae, ii. 113; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 213; (1641), No. 178.

1006 Facetiae, ii. 139; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 216; (1641), No. 182.

1007 Facetiae, ii. 118; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 238; (1641), No. 200; (1654), No. 230.

1008 Facetiae, ii. 126; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 279; (1641), no. 239; (1654), No. 272.

1009 Facetiae, ii. 23–24; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 298.

1010 Facetiae, ii. 25; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 345. Measure for Measure, iv. 1.

1011 Facetiae, ii. 26; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 462.

1012 Facetiae, ii. 60; Witts Recreations (1640), No. 467; (1641), No. 494; in Francis Davison, Poetical Rhapsody (1602), no. 190, where it is called “Madrigal I. To Cupid,” and the lines are arranged differently. In Hyder E. Rollins’s edition of this latter work (ii. 118–120), it is shown that this madrigal is translated from the Rime of Luigi Groto (1541–1585).

1013 Facetiae, ii. 61–62; Witts Recreations (1640), no. 467; (1641), No. 497.

1014 Title from broadside of c. 1670–87 reprinted in J. W. Ebsworth, The Bagford Ballads, ii. 471–474. A copy not listed by Ebsworth is in the Pepys Collection, iii. 325, at Magdalene College, Cambridge. Cf. Bibliotheca Lindesiana. Catalogue of a Collection of English Ballads of the XVII^th and XVIII^th Centuries, No. 388. The first two lines are quoted in Elnathan Chauncy’s commonplace book.

1015 “E’er I from thee will part, my turtle-dove” (Bagford).

1016 Two stanzas of the Bagford version are here omitted, and the next stanza there is as follows:

Then let me go with you,

heart, love and joy;

I will attend on you,

and be your boy:

If you will go to sea,

I’ll serve you night and day,

For here I will not stay,

if you go hence.

There are eight more stanzas which Seaborn does not copy.

1017 Title from Westminster Drolleries, Both Parts, of 1671, 1672, J. W. Ebsworth, editor, Appendix, pp. x–xi; the poem, without the title, is also in John Cotgrave, Wits Interpreter: Or, Apollo and Orpheus (1655), pp. 103–104.

1018 These vital records have been printed in New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxiii. 35.

1019 P. [146] is blank.

1020 P. [148] is blank.

1021 Seaborn’s younger brother, John Cotton (H.C. 1657), was ordained pastor of the church in Plymouth on June 30, 1669. See our Publications, xxii. 144.

1022 These were also printed in New Eng. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxviii. 35.

1023 This entry and that for the ninth child are in a younger hand than that for the eighth. The record of the birth of the eleventh child and that of the death of his wife were entered separately.

1024 This was entered later than the above deaths, and is in Seaborn Cotton’s oldest handwriting (A″), as are the remaining entries on p. [174].

1025 Beginning with this entry the handwriting is that of John Cotton (C).

1026 The last volume published before his death carried his work into the year 1799.

1027 The book was first reprinted by the Bradford Press, New York, 1868 (99 copies); next by Samuel Adams Drake in his Bunker Hill, Boston, 1875; then by William Abbatt in Number 8 of his Extra Numbers of the Magazine of History, 1909. All these follow, properly, the second edition. Both the 1775 editions are extremely rare.

1028 General Sir William Howe’s Orderly Book, B. F. Stevens, editor (London, 1890), p. 41.

1029 Army List for 1775, p. 181. A searcher in the Lists should notice that the Marines, whether on regular or half pay, are not in the general lists of army officers. Perhaps that is why Drake and Abbatt missed Clarke.

1030 A complete set of Army Lists would doubtless allow one to follow John Clarke pretty well, though names sometimes disappear and reappear very strangely. The letter to me from the Admiralty is dated August 27, 1930.

1031 Mr. Abbatt seems to ascribe the name of the author to the cataloguer, not to the book itself. I have not had the volume in my hand. Mr. Abbatt apparently set a research worker to hunting in the British Museum. As I shall show, while the fact he was looking for was there, where I found it, both he and I should have searched first in the Admiralty records, now in the Public Record Office, London.

1032 The First Year of the American Revolution, chapters xv and xvi.

1033 Allen French, General Gage’s Informers, p. 98.

1034 2 Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., xii. 83; cf. id., p. 81, where Farnsworth writes of the fight at Hog Island.

1035 Clarke, Narrative (2d ed.), pp. 4–5.

1036 id., pp. 3–4.

1037 Percy was on duty at Roxbury.

1038 The list of casualties differs somewhat from the official list sent over by General Gage, by the vessel in which Clarke probably sailed, the Cerberus. For example, in the Fifth Regiment Clarke gives Major Mitchell as wounded, while Gage does not, and omits Harris, who was wounded and was in Gage’s list. As the despatches were sealed, Clarke of course had no access to them on board ship, nor did he correct his list by them afterward. He disagrees with the official total.

1039 Gage issued a list of promotions on June 25, and presumably sent it with his despatches of that date, also by Clarke’s ship. It is in Howe’s Orderly Book (pp. 20 ff.), but is not in the official despatches. The fact that it is not in Clarke’s first edition makes it seem as if the book had been rushed into print. Again Clarke’s list differs somewhat from the official one

1040 Clarke, Narrative, p. 18.

1041 The Command in the Battle of Bunker Hill, p. 43.

1042 From a letter, dated July 5, 1775, by an officer in Boston, quoted in Detail and Conduct of the American War. Americans believed that Warren’s coat was sold in Boston. Richard Frothingham, Life and Times of Joseph Warren, p. 519, quoting Jane Belknap Marcou, Life of Jeremy Belinap, p. 93.

1043 Clarke, Narrative, pp. 31–32.

1044 This can be found, not only in manuscript in the British Museum, but also in a modern manuscript copy in the Massachusetts Historical Society.

1045 These three passages (which can also be found under their proper dates in Graves’s despatches in Ad. 1: 485 in the Public Record Office) I take from his MS. “Conduct” in the British Museum (Add. MSS. 14,038). This is numbered twice; the references are pp. 82 or 47v, 119 or 68, 120–121 or 68v–69. They can also be found in the transcript in the Massachusetts Historical Society under the dates of June 8 and 14. The “8” is, however, an error for “7,” and the admiral gives it correctly in his second entry.

1046 Graves’s despatches and his “Conduct” show that the Cerberus arrived from England on May 25, and that her return voyage was delayed in order that she might carry the account of Bunker Hill. As Gage’s despatches were dated June 25, the ship doubtless sailed on the next fair wind

1047 Howe’s Orderly Book, p. 41.

1048 Cf. my First Year of the American Revolution, p. 96. Yet notice that the casualty list of Bunker Hill contains the name of a Volunteer in the Royal Artillery. Was he of old standing?

1049 Howe’s Orderly Book, p. 78, under date of August 28. Note that a Volunteer had no other title. On Gage’s Bunker Hill list the Volunteers are all “Mr.,” except for “Lieutenant Alexander Campbell, on half-pay.” He was “late [of] Barre’s,” a unit that I cannot identify.

1050 Ad. 1: 485: 447–448, 451–452; or in Ad. 1: 5307, not paged, June 7 and 8.

1051 The captain of the Cerberus reported to Lord Dartmouth on August 2. Dartmouth to Gage, August 2, C.O. 5: 92.

1052 The answers to Wilkins’s and Clarke’s petitions are to be found in Ad. 2:1169: 10, 274. I find little more about Clarke in the muster-book of his ship, the Falcon (Ad. 1: 8014), except the dates of his reporting for duty, and the fact that he was of Portsmouth. It is to be noted that Clarke, though a second lieutenant, was given first lieutenant’s half-pay, as was Wilkins in 1775, though on the previous occasion Wilkins received only the half-pay of his grade. Further, Wilkins does not again appear in the Army Lists, either on half-pay or as restored to duty. Yet promotion in the Marines during the Revolutionary War was very rapid, as is shown in the Army Lists, proving that trained men were much wanted.

1053 Both Gage and Graves feared an attack on Charlestown, and Gage did not feel that he was quite safe in Boston till he had disarmed the inhabitants, late in April.

1054 Our Publications, vii. 94–122, 125 note.

1055 The Reformado, p. 9. These “monuments” of Queen Elizabeth were erected in many English churches after her death. Cf. our Publications, vii. 102–105.

1056 If the latter, it might have come about as follows: the Puritans were given to bestowing biblical names on their children; a Puritan in England was satirically or derisively called “Brother Jonathan”; the early settlers in New England were mostly Puritans, and so the nickname followed them across the Atlantic.

1057 For this extract I am indebted to Mr. Allen French, who tells me that the letter was written to Humphrey Palmer of Providence, R. I.; and that Allen and Palmer “were not soldiers (at least at this stage of the war) but merchants established in a general business in Cambridge and Providence.”

On the same date (March 17, 1776) William Heath wrote: “In the morning the British evacuated Boston; their rear guard, with some marks of precipitation. A number of cannon were left spiked, and two large marine mortars, which they in vain attempted to burst. The garrison at Bunker’s Hill practised some deception to cover their retreat. They fixed some images, representing men, in the places of their centinels, with muskets placed on their shoulders, &c. Their immoveable position led to the discovery of the deception, and a detachment of the Americans marched in and took possession.” Memoirs, p. 43

This extract was not quoted in my original paper for the obvious reason that it is not relevant to the term under discussion since Heath failed to give the label. But it corroborates the presence of the images and so is pertinent. My guess is that Heath considered the label “beneath the dignity of history,” or else did not have sufficient sense of humor to record an epithet then regarded as uncomplimentary.

1058 Literary Diary, ii. 2. Quoted in my former paper, but repeated here for comparison with Allen’s letter.

1059 Catalogue of Political and Personal Satires preserved in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, v. 218–219, No. 5329. This volume, edited by Dr. Mary Dorothy George, covers the years 1771–1783. Both the prints between which No. 5329 is placed are dated March 1, 1776. Mrs. George says (pp. xix–xx, 218–219): “1776 is noteworthy for two of the few anti-American satires, one a crude and ill-timed print on the American entrenchments near Boston (No. 5329), which incidentally illustrates the fact that at the beginning of the war Putnam was the best known (in England) of the American commanders.… The artist appears to have been ignorant of Washington’s appointment, 15 June 1775, as commander-in-chief. He took over the command of the troops round Boston on 3 July 1775, superseding not Israel Putnam (appointed fourth major-general June 1775) but Artemas Ward…. One of the few satires hostile to the Americans, cf. Nos. 5401, 6288.” The size of the print is 8 × 9⅝. Through the courtesy of Mr. Allen French it is here reproduced from a photograph, probably the only one in this country.

Mrs. George kindly writes me: “I think it extremely likely that No. 5329 was prepared at the end of 1775 for publication early in 1776. I have run across instances of prints dated with the year only where I suspect this to be the case—but this is only conjecture. The allusion to Putnam also suggests an earlier date than March 1, 1776; but the only thing we can say with certainty or truth is that it was published before news of the evacuation of Boston.” She adds that this allusion to Jonathan is “the only one that have run across, and I have now dealt with prints in this collection up to the end of 1792.” To a similar effect Professor Leonard W. Labarce, who called my attention to the above book, writes: “I take it the print was made either very late in 1775 or early in 1776. Certainly before news reached England of the evacuation. From this it seems clear that the term Jonathan for a New Englander had become sufficiently well known in England before the Boston evacuation for it to be used in a print intended for public sale. This, of course, simply goes to confirm your theory of a fairly wide use of the term much earlier than any important service of Trumbull to the Revolutionary cause.” In 1880, Nathaniel H. Morgan wrote: “The phrase ‘we must consult Brother Jonathan,’ used by Gen. Washington when he first took command of the army at Cambridge, was so often uttered by him afterwards, that it became a by-word among his staff, and spread through the army and the country.” Early Lebanon, p. 85. On his way from Virginia to Cambridge Washington passed through Hartford, but he and Trumbull did not then meet. Their correspondence, which began in July, 1775, was of slight importance until the spring of 1776. Leaving Boston on April 4, 1776, Washington went to New York by the “shore line,” and the two men met on the eighth at Norwich. Cf. 5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., ix. 517–518; x. 1–11.

1060 Here the satirist appears to have made a slight slip and should have said “Liberty or Death.” On December 27, 1775, when preparations for storming Quebec that night were made but had to be postponed because “the weather cleared away serene and bright,” Isaac Senter, the surgeon of Arnold’s expedition against Canada, wrote: “For a mark of distinction each soldier was ordered to procure a fir sprig, and fix it in front of their caps, whereby they might be discriminated”; and again on December 31, the day of the actual assault: “To discriminate our troops from the enemy in action, they were ordered each officer and soldier to make fast a piece of white paper across their caps from the front to the acmé of them.” “Journal,” Bulletin of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, i. 32, 33. In a letter dated Quebec, May 14, 1776, to a friend in Glasgow, the anonymous writer said: “The rebels had slips of paper pinned to their caps, with the words Liberty or Death! wrote on them.” Pennsylvania Archives, Second Series, ii. 57. In 1897, a writer, describing the dress of the Virginia riflemen under Morgan who served in Arnold’s expedition, said: “On the part of their shirts covering the breast are the words of Henry ‘Liberty or Death.’” Essex Institute Historical Collections, xxxiii. 253. Patrick Henry’s famous words— “I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!”—are said by William Wirt (cf. M. C. Tyler, Patrick Henry, pp. 128–133) to have been uttered before the Virginia Convention in March, 1775; but the phrase “Liberty or Death” had doubtless for a decade been a commonplace on the lips of Americans, since the last two lines in Act ii, Scene iv, of Addison’s Cato, acted and published in 1713, read:

“It is not now a Time for aught

But Chains, or Conquest; Liberty, or Death.”

1061 A song printed in the Royal Gazette (New York) of October 3, 1778, contains the line, “And Jonathan felt bold Sir.” The letters and squibs of the period frequently allude to the Americans as “feeling bold,” and the Loyalists appear to have regarded it as a huge joke; but the exact significance of the phrase is obscure. Perhaps an extract from “Observations on the Government account of the late action near Charles Town,” which appeared in an English magazine soon after the battle of Bunker Hill, may give a clue to the origin of the phrase. The writer, it need scarcely be pointed out, was friendly to the Americans:

“But, ‘this action has shewn the superiority of the King’s troops.’—Has it indeed? How?—‘Why they (with a proportion of field artillery, and with the assistance of ships, armed vessels, and boats, and with the encouragement of certain and speedy reinforcement if necessary) attacked and defeated above three times their own numbers.’—What three times their own numbers? Of whom, pray? Of French or Spanish Regulars?—No, of the Americans—Of the Americans! What, of these dastardly, hypocritical cowards, who (Lord Sandwich knows) do not feel bold enough to dare to look a soldier in the face!” Almon’s Remembrancer, 1775, i. 135.

1062 In the War of 1812 “Uncle Tim” was a frequent target for ridicule by the Democratic press. Cf. “All Tories Together,” our Publications, x. 139–140

1063 The Boston Independent Chronicle, the Philadelphia Aurora, and the New York Argus.

1064 During the Revolutionary War Americans evidently did feel “injured” by “Jonathan,” and certainly they did not “glory” in “Yankee” until after April 19, 1775. In a letter written from Boston in 1777 by William Gardiner of Gardiner, Maine, there is an allusion to “a Joe Bunker justice.” Boston Transcript, November 12, 1910. The first line of “A New Song,” printed in the Massachusetts Centinel of July 11, 1787 (p. 131), reads: “Huzza, my joe-bunkers! no taxes we’ll pay!” I do not know exactly what the term means. The expression “a leather-button Curse” is new to me, and its meaning escapes me.

1065 In the Annual Report of the Street Laying-out Department for the Year 1896 (p. 279) it is stated that the name of King Street, Boston, was changed to State Street in 1784; but there is an allusion to State Street on August 28, 1782, and another to “State Street now so called” on March 25, 1783. Boston Records, xxv. 190–191; xxvi. 303. Evidently the new name was used colloquially before it was officially adopted; but there could hardly have been a State Street in this country before July 4, 1776. The name of Long Lane, Boston, was changed to Federal Street in 1788 (id., xxxi. 179); and there could hardly have been a street of that name before 1787. The verb “to burke” originated on January 28, 1829, which was the very day on which William Burke was executed. The word “boycott” first appeared in the autumn of 1880. But it is seldom that a word can be traced to its very birth.

1066 John Harriott (1745–1817), of whom there is a notice in the Dictionary of National Biography, had a varied and interesting career in several parts of the world. Recollections of events of half a century earlier must always be received with caution, if not suspicion. Harriott says that he came to Boston in 1765 in the Mary, commanded by “Captain D——n,” thus providing three tests as to the accuracy of his memory. A list of “Port Arrivals—Immigrants” from March 16, 1763, to August 14, 1769, is printed in Boston Records, xxix. 245–317. “Captain D——n” must have been one of the following: Ephraim Dean, James Dean, John Dean, William Dean, William Devers on, William Deverson, Jr., George Diamond, Thomas Dimond, — Doan, Nathaniel Doan, Seth Doan, John Dunn, Nathaniel Dunn, Richard Dunn. This embarrassment of riches makes it impossible to say which of the fourteen it was under whom Harriott served as second mate. But the name of Harriott’s vessel gives the clue. The following Marys arrived in Boston in 1763–1769: sloop Mary, Chars. Andrews, from Connecticut, October 17, 1763 (p. 251); schooner Mary, Theop^a Simonton, from New York, May 14, 1764 (p. 256); ship Mary, William Devers on, from London, June 25, 1764 (p. 257); schooner Mary, Caleb Hopkins, from Martinico, July 23, 1765 (p. 267); and schooner Mary, Thomas Mitchel, from Newfoundland, October 28, 1765 (p. 272). Thus only one Mary was a “ship,” only one Mary came from London, and only one Mary was commanded by “Captain D——n:” namely, the Mary, William Devers on, which entered June 25, 1764. The Boston Evening-Post of Monday, June 25, 1764, stated that “Last Saturday Evening arrived here Capt. Devers on in 9 Weeks from London”; and in the issue of July 2 was advertised the sale of books “Just Imported in the Mary, Capt. Deverson.” Though the Mary arrived Saturday evening, June 23, it would probably have been a violation of the Sabbath to allow her passengers to land, and her entry was not recorded until Monday the twenty-fifth. That was Captain William Deverson’s first and only voyage with the Mary; but he arrived here on September 11, 1765, with he ship Thomas and Samuel from London (p. 270); on February 4, 1766, with the ship Britannia from London (p. 275); and with the same ship on September 23, 1766, October 16, 1767, and September 23, 1768 (pp. 284, 298, 308). And he was also here with the Britannia in July, 1771. Id., xxiii. 92–95. Thus Harriott was correct as to the names of the ship and its captain, and was only one year out in the date of his voyage. Captain William Deverson was from “the old country,” and so would have particularly enjoyed retailing jokes at the expense of New Englanders.

1067 Several naval officers named Montagu (Montague) served in American waters in the eighteenth century. This one, Mr. Alien French tells me, was the Hon. William Montagu (1720?–1757), younger brother of John Montagu, fourth Earl of Sandwich, the latter of whom in 1763 was given the opprobrious nickname of “Jemmy Twitcher.” Cf. Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., lxii. 180 note 1. Not wholly accurate is the notice of Captain Montagu in the Dictionary of National Biography, where it is stated that, getting into difficulties with Sir Peter Warren in the West Indies, he was in the Eltham “carried to New England, where, after he had been seven months under arrest, he was promoted by Warren to the post-ship Mermaid on 23 May 1745.” Warren did sail for Boston, having sent word to his wife (who was an American) to meet him there, but on the way he was intercepted and informed that the expedition against Louisbourg had already sailed, and so he changed his course and made directly for Canseau. Cf. Francis Parkman, A Half-Century of Conflict, ii. 103. After the capture of Louisbourg, Montagu was dispatched to carry the news to England, and thereafter remained in European waters; nor, so far as I can ascertain, was he ever on the Halifax or any other American station.

1068 Struggles through Life (3d ed., London, 1815), i. 138–146. This work went through the following editions: London, 1807 (in two volumes); London, 1808 (second edition, in two volumes); Philadelphia and New York, 1809 (in two volumes, from the second London edition); London, 1815 (third edition, in three volumes). The story is told in the seventeenth chapter of the first volume of the 1815 edition, which fills pp. 135–155, and is not found in any of the earlier editions, in each of which the chapter contains only about two pages. In it are also allusions to “Jonathan,” “our Brother Jonathans,” and “Brother Jonathan” (i. 149, 152, 153).

1069 This story in one form or another can be traced from 1674 to 1931.

1070 Struggles through Life, i. 15, 20, 23, 30, 119, 162–171; ii. 113, 347; iii. 33.

1071 E.A. Kendall Travels, i. 315–316.

1072 Out of 444 graduates in 1642–1700, there were 10 Jonathans, of whom certainly two (Jonathan Mitchell of 1647 and Jonathan Burr of 1651) and perhaps a third (Jonathan Ince of 1650) were born in England. There was no Jonathan in 1652–1674, the fourth of that name being Jonathan Russell of 1675. Out of 1,289 graduates in 1701–1750 there were 29 Jonathans, or 1 in 44 also.

1073 Kendall, Travels, i. 312–313; cf. p. 157.

1074 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1598–1601, p. 425.

1075 Records of the Virginia Company, i. 269, 337, 409, 430, 509.

1076 D. W. Prowse, History of Newfoundland, p. 132. The writer of the letter was Sir George Calvert, who had been created Baron Baltimore the month before.

1077 Boteler’s Dialogues (1929), p. xiii.

1078 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1625–1626, p. 493. Apparently this, too, was in the expedition against Cadiz. It is not quite clear whether there were two vessels of the name in that expedition or only one vessel.

1079 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxii. 407.

1080 Calendar of State Papers, Colonial, America and West Indies, 1574–1660, p. 367.

1081 American Magazine, i (November, 1743), pp. 107–111.

1082 A Match for a Widow: or, the Frolics of Fancy. A Comic Opera, in Three Acts. As performed at the Theatre-Royal, Dublin. London, 1788. “SCENE, the Castle and Village of Bloomingdale,” presumably Ireland. For knowledge of this play I am indebted to Mr. Charles E. Goodspeed, who sold me a copy about twenty years ago. There is a copy in the Boston Public Library.

1083 The author goes on to say that Daly and others “earnestly recommended and urged me, instead of confining it to an after Musical Piece, to extend the design to a compleat Comic Opera by the assistance of new characters and an under-plot”; that “in the course of the week I again presented you, and read the Opera in its present state”; that it was then “transmitted to Mr. [Charles] Dibdin in London, who embellished it with his harmony”; and that “with the ornament of new scenery and dresses, and the then musical strength of your company, you in the spring of 1786, gave it a fair trial before an Irish audience.”

1084 A Match for a Widow, p. 12.

1085 In 1762, there were two Joseph Atkinsons in the British Army. One was commissioned an ensign in the Eighty-Sixth Regiment of Foot on June 26, 1761, and a lieutenant in the same regiment on May 17, 1762; but he left the regiment, and presumably the army, on December 9, 1762. That Eighty-Sixth Regiment is not to be confused with another regiment of the same number, raised in 1793. British Amy Lists, 1761, p. 152; 1763, pp. 152, 241; R. Trimen, Regiments of the British Army, p. 131; J. S. Farmer, Regimental Records of the British Army, p. 200.

Of the other Joseph Atkinson (1743–1818), who was the author of A Match for a Widow, the Dictionary of National Biography says that he “served in the Army until he obtained a captain’s commission,” which doesn’t tell us where he served and is slightly inaccurate, since he remained in the army four and a half years after obtaining his captaincy. (Besides the references in that work, there are glimpses of Atkinson in Lionel Stevenson’s The Wild Irish Girl: The Life of Sydney Owenson, Lady Morgan.) Atkinson’s rank in the army dated from March 4, 1762, when he was commissioned a lieutenant in the Eighty-Sixth Regiment of Foot, which, raised in 1759 and disbanded in 1763, was stationed in Senegal, Africa. In 1763–1768 he was on half-pay, but on February 4, 1768, he was commissioned a lieutenant, and on May 25, 1772, a captain in the Forty-Sixth Regiment of Foot, which was stationed in the West Indies in 1762–1764, on the American continent in 1764–1767, and in Ireland in 1767–1776. Early in 1776 the Forty-Sixth Regiment embarked from Ireland; arrived on the coast of North Carolina early in April; landed at Cape Fear; on June 1 sailed with the expedition against Charleston; passed the Charleston bar, but could not capture the capital and so reëmbarked and proceeded to Long Island, New York. At the end of 1776 Atkinson sold his commission, as appears from an entry dated December 24: “46th. Regiment.—Hon. Lieut. Chetwynd, 52d. Regiment, to be Captain vice Atkinson, by Purchase 23d. Dec., 1776.” Kemble Papers, i. 429. By mistake, owing to the slow communication between New York and London, Atkinson’s name is in both the London and the Dublin editions of the 1777 Army List, but in one copy of the latter that I have seen the name has been run through with pen or pencil. British Army Lists, 1763, p. 152; 1765–1768, under “Half-Pay…. Regiments, See. Reduced or Disbanded, 1763”; 1769–1777, p. 100; R. Cannon, Historical Records of the British Army, pp. 17–25; Farmer, Regimental Records, p. 140. Whether after leaving the army Atkinson remained for a while in New York or returned immediately to Ireland is unknown; and, though he may have been in New England before 1776 or between 1776 and 1785, there is no evidence that he ever was.

1086 i Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., iii. 131–150.

1087 Journal (Savage ed., Boston, 1853), ii. 24.

1088 The Founding of New England, p. 453.

1089 For the history of the Winthrop Papers, see the preface to Winthrop Papers, 1 (Boston, 1929).

1090 It afterwards became mine.

1091 Students of Winthrop’s Journal will remember that the precise dates of the different entries are not always easy to determine. So far as can be discovered, the reference to the ravages of the mice was written about December 15, 1640.

1092 The Greek New Testament lacks a title-page, but at the foot of the last page (229) some former owner has written “Aurelia Allobrogum, Excudebat Petrus de la Roviere. M D C X.” Aurelia Allobrogum is a very ancient name for Geneva. Dictionnaire de Géographie Ancienne et Moderne, pp. 134, 554–556.

1093 See the letter of Margaret Winthrop to John Winthrop, Jr., who was then in London, ca. December, 1630, Winthrop Papers, ii (Boston, 1931), p. 321.

1094 2 Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., vi. 2–20.

1095 See above, p. 311.

1096 Printed in Essex Institute Historical Collections, lxxii. 1–42.

1097 Arthur M. Schlesinger, “The Colonial Newspapers and the Stamp Act,” New England Quarterly, viii. 63–83.

1098 Article by “A Son of Liberty,” reprinted in the Boston Post-Boy, March 24, 1766, from A Providence Gazette Extraordinary, March 12. The writer had in mind pamphlet publications as well as newspapers.

1099 Letter to Richard Jackson, February 18, 1767, Bernard Papers (Sparks MSS., Harvard College Library), vi. 14.

1100 “No Seeker” in the Boston Evening-Post, March 30, 1767, quoting the “Lines of a celebrated Writer.”

1101 Issues of August 17, 24, 1767.

1102 Letter to Richard Jackson, September 14, 1767, Bernard Papers, vi. 47. “The proceedings in the newspapers are precisely the same as those preceding the former disturbances,” Bernard had written Lord Shelburne, August 24, 1767. British Papers (Sparks MSS.), i. 74.

1103 A good example was the article by “M. Y.” in the Boston Gazette, September 14, 1767.

1104 The series appeared originally in the Pennsylvania Chronicle from December 2, 1767, to February 15, 1768.

1105 Letter of December 5, 1767 (Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., lxxii. 3). Dickinson and Otis had been fellow-members of the Stamp Act Congress.

1106 Bernard to John Pownall, January 9, February 8, 1768, Bernard Papers, vi. 59–60, 89.

1107 Representation to Privy Council, January, 1774, The Barrington-Bernard Correspondence and Illustrative Matter, 1760–1770, Edward Channing and A. C. Coolidge, editors, p. 266.

1108 See valedictory editorials of Edes in the Boston Gazette, January 1, 1797, and September 17, 1798, quoted by Frederic Hudson, Journalism in the United States, from 1690 to 1872, pp. 165–167.

1109 Thomas Hutchinson, History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, iii. 167.

1110 Entry of September 3, 1769, The Works of John Adams, C. F. Adams, editor, ii. 219.

1111 Letter to Shelburne, March 5, 1768, Bernard Papers, vi. 273.

1112 Hutchinson, Massachusetts Bay, iii. 295.

1113 See the list in William V. Wells, The Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams, i. 445 n., and Harry A. Cushing’s identifications in The Writings of Samuel Adams, i–ii, passim.

1114 Statement to Privy Council, Barrington-Bernard Correspondence, p. 266. During the years 1767–1770 Josiah Quincy, Jr., used the signatures “Hyperion,” “An Independant,” and “An Old Man” in the Gazette. The manuscript copy of some of his pieces contained the significant direction to the printers: “Let Samuel Adams Esq. correct the press.” Josiah Quincy, Memoir of the Life of Josiah Quincy Jun., pp. 11–13, 18–29. Though active earlier, John Adams declared on June 22, 1771, that he had not written in the newspapers for two years. Works, ii. 282.

1115 Letter of September 30, 1769, Letters of James Murray, Loyalist, Nina M. Tiffany, editor, pp. 161–162.

1116 Letter of July 18–19, 1768, Letters to the Ministry (Boston, 1769), pp. 44–46.

1117 This statement is quoted by “Tacitus” in the Boston Gazette, December 21, 1767. Others, of whom James Murray was typical, thought the two sets of contributors equally objectionable. Letters, p. 162. On occasion the Evening-Post’s independence also proved a source of annoyance to the radicals. Thus “Tacitus,” in the article just cited, referred to “that Emblem of Light and Purity, the Evening-Post, printed by those sweet, harmless, lovely Lambkins Tommy and Johnny Fleet, who are wholly ignorant that by this Conduct their Paper may be fitly compared to the Lanthorns, … which tho’ they give some Light, yet … ‘ray out, Abundance of Darkness.’”

1118 Unsigned article in Boston Evening-Post, December 7, 1767.

1119 Letter of May ii, 1768, The letters of Governor Hutchinson and Lieut. Governor Oliver, &c. (London, 1774), p. 27. See also id., pp. 30–31.

1120 William Tudor, The Life of James Otis, of Massachusetts, p. 450 n.

1121 Josiah Quincy, Jr., Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Superior Court of Judicature of the Province of Massachusetts Bay between 1761 and 1772, S. M. Quincy, editor, pp. 248–250; E. F. Brown, Joseph Hawley, Colonial Radical, pp. 63–67.

1122 Quincy, Reports, 244–246; New-Hampshire Gazette, October 16, 1767.

1123 Hutchinson in time came to believe that the disbarment had had the unfortunate effect of driving Hawley into the arms of the extremists. In a vain effort to repair the fancied damage he secured Hawley’s reinstatement in the fall of 1769. Brown, Joseph Hawley, pp. 67–68, 118, 121.

1124 That the writer was Joseph Warren seems beyond reasonable doubt. See Quincy, Reports, p. 271, and Richard Frothingham, Life and Times of Joseph Warren, p. 40 n. With much less evidence Wells (Samuel Adams, i. 175) assigns the authorship to James Otis.

1125 The House adopted the reply by a vote of 39 to 30. On the whole incident, see Quincy, Reports, pp. 270–275; Speeches of the Governors of Massachusetts, from 1765 to 1775; and the Answers of the House of Representatives to the Same, Alden Bradford, editor, pp. 118–119; Boston Gazette, March 7,1768; Bernard, Letters to Ministry, pp. 8–10; Hutchinson, Massachusetts Bay, iii. 186–187.

1126 Quincy, Reports, pp. 263–270.

1127 Hutchinson and Oliver, Letters, p. 9; Bernard, Letters to Ministry, pp. 10–12.

1128 Boston Gazette, March 21, 1768.

1129 Bernard, Letters to Ministry, p. 51; Quincy, Reports, p. 305. Bernard informed Hillsborough that on the day before the session the Boston Gazette, August 22, 1768, threatened publicly to expose Hutchinson’s “private Life and Conversation” if he renewed his charge. If such an article appeared, it was in a supplement no longer extant. A letter in that issue from “W.,” however, denounced Hutchinson (without naming him) for supposedly accepting a salary from home; the printers corrected this false report in their next number

1130 Quincy, Reports, p. 309

1131 Isaiah Thomas, The History of Printing in America, i. 145–147; ii. 57–58; John Adams, Notes, 1770, MS., Massachusetts Historical Society

1132 The Massachusetts Gazette, though issued from two different presses, adopted a system of consecutive numbering, beginning with No. 177 as a sort of continuation of the Massachusetts Gazette, and Boston News-Letter. When the arrangement lapsed, the News-Letter reverted to its earlier title, and the Boston Post-Boy lengthened its name to the Massachusetts Gazette, and Boston Post-Boy. On this whole matter, see Albert Matthews, “Bibliographical Notes on Boston Newspapers, 1704–1780,” our Publications, ix. 430–432, 470–471, 484–493.

1133 As early as October 5, 1767, “Anonymous,” writing in the Boston Gazette, had warned Draper: “Thy Paper will never gain the better Circulation if too frequently thou art made a Cat’s paw to Individuals, or a Party in judging thy Superiors.” By 1769 popular disapproval was assuming the form of muscular violence.

1134 “Journal of the Times,” April 14, 1769, in Boston Evening-Post, June 12, 1769.

1135 Letter to Hillsborough, September 17, 1768, Bernard, Letters to Ministry, p. 52. This article, headed “READER, ATTEND!,” bitterly arraigned the course of the royal officials and urged that, in theory, such acts had broken the compact between the colonies and the mother country and had dissolved the connection between them.

1136 Letter to Hillsborough, October 14, 1768, id., pp. 72–75.

1137 Through his privileges as a member of parliament Alderman William Beckford of London had secured copies for the agent of the Council, William Bollan, who transmitted them to Boston. Hutchinson, Massachusetts Bay, iii. 226–230; Bernard to John Pownall, April 12, 1769, Bernard Papers, vii. 280–282. The pamphlet was titled Letters to the Right Honourable The Earl of Hillsborough from Gov. Bernard, General Gage, and the Honourable his Majesty’s Council.

1138 Letters and Diary of John Rowe, Boston Merchant, 1759–1762, 1764–1779, Anne R. Cunningham, editor, p. 190. The account in the Boston Gazette (August 7) began: “Tuesday last embarked on board his Majesty’s Ship the Rippon, sir Francis Bernard of Nettleham, Bart., who for nine Years past, has been a Scourge to this Province, a Curse to North-America, and a Plague to the whole Empire.”

1139 Tudor, James Otis, pp. 360–366, 474–475; Boston Post-Boy, September 11, 1769. For the later indictment of Bernard and the commissioners by a grand jury of Suffolk County for “slandering the inhabitants of the town of Boston, and of the province of Massachusetts Bay,” see Hutchinson, Massachusetts Bay, iii. 262–263. The pamphlet publication, which presently appeared from the press of Edes and Gill, bore the title: Letters to the Ministry from Governor Bernard, General Gage, and Commodore Hood. And also. Memorials to the Lords of the Treasury, from the Commissioners of the Customs. With Sundry Letters and Papers.

1140 Boston Gazette, September 11, 25, 1769; Samuel Adams, Writings, i. 380–386.

1141 The series began in the New-York Journal on October 13, 1768, and lasted till September 14, 1769. The question of the “Journal’s” authorship is probably insoluble. Bernard doubtless got as near the facts as any later investigator is likely to when he informed Hillsborough on February 25, 1769, that the “Journal” was “composed by [Samuel] Adams & his Assistants among which there must be some one at least of the Council.…” Bernard Papers, vii. 148. I am indebted to Mr. Albert Matthews for information in regard to the “Journal.”

1142 Boston Evening-Post, February 6, 1769. For allegations of seduction and attempted rape, see, for example, the “Journal” for April 30, May 16 and 17, June 14, and July 5, 1769, in the Evening-Post, June 26, July 17, 31, and August 14, 1769.

1143 The Virginia Resolves, dated May 16, 1769, were printed in the Boston press on June 8 and were commented on in the “Journal” on June 16 (in the Evening-Post, July 31).

1144 Hutchinson, Massachusetts Bay, iii. 225. The Evening-Post, printing the first installment on December 12, 1768, sought to sustain its professed independence of parties with the statement: “…. if any of the Facts shall appear to have been misrepresented, a Place shall always be open to any Gentleman who shall think proper to correct them.”

1145 Letter of January 26, 1769, Charles M. Andrews, “Boston Merchants and the Non-importation Movement,” our Publications, xix. 196 n. Hutchinson concluded the account of the “Journal” in his history with the sentiment: “This lying for the sake of truth may as well be excused in the cause of liberty, as in that of religion, though, as has been long since observed, it is a scurvy trick at best.” Massachusetts Bay, iii. 225.

1146 Letter to Hillsborough, February 25, 1769, Bernard Papers, vii. 148–150.

1147 Printed also in the Boston Gazette and the Boston Chronicle, May 29.

1148 In due course the “Journal” directly replied to Murray, reiterating at length the substance of the earlier charges. See the “Journal” under the dates June 3, 8, and 9, in the Boston Evening-Post, July 31, 1769.

1149 It was printed in the Boston Evening-Post, December 11, 18, 1769. The items for July 25–30 had appeared in the issue of October 2.

1150 The Boston Gazette, March 12, 1770, observed that the friction between the townsfolk and the military had continued to grow after the “Journal” ceased to appear.

1151 Murray, Letters, p. 162.

1152 The cut, made by Paul Revere on March 9, originally showed “5 Coffings.” See E. H. Goss, The Life of Colonel Paul Revere (4th ed., Boston, 1904), i. 75–77. One of the victims, Patrick Carr, did not die until two days after the Boston Gazette appeared. The next issue (March 19) displayed in a black frame a single coffin, marked “P. C.”

1153 Accounts of Mein may be found in our Publications, xix. 227–230; Charles K. Bolton, “Circulating Libraries in Boston, 1765–1865,” id., xi. 196–200; Arthur M. Schlesinger, The Colonial Merchants and the American Revolution, 1763–1776, pp. 159–178; Thomas, History of Printing, i. 151–154; ii. 59–61.

1154 Proposals for Printing a New Weekly Paper, called The Boston Chronicle, dated October 22, 1767.

1155 See “Americus” in Boston Gazette, January 18, 1768, and Edes’s statement in id., January 25. Mein was haled into court where, he later said, James Otis “bandied about the Liberty of the Press as the Salvation of America” and accused him (Mein) of endeavoring by violence “to shutt up that great Source of freedom.” Papers Relating to New England (Sparks MSS.), iii. 45, 47; Adams, Notes. “Populus” (Samuel Adams?) took the same line as Otis in the Boston Gazette, February 1. Mein’s burst of temper cost him nearly £100 sterling at the hands of the court.

1156 Mein’s memorial to the Treasury, quoted by Andrews. “Boston Merchants,” our Publications, xix. 228 n.

1157 Francis Green’s characterization, reprinted in the Boston News-Letter, September 21, 1769.

1158 Boston Gazette, August 14, 1769.

1159 Mrs. Christian Barnes, in a letter from Marlboro in June, 1770, referred, as a matter of course, to the “Well Disposed Commity.” Murray, Letters, p. 176. Even the Boston Gazette, March 5, 1770, alluded to the “several ‘Well disposed’ Counties in this Province.”

1160 Hutchinson, Massachusetts Bay, iii. 259. For reasons that will appear presently, only the first installment was published.

1161 Papers Relating to New England, iii. 45–47.

1162 Letter of November 21, 1771, to Peter Timothy, Charleston, S. C., Writings, ii. 65. The merits of Mein’s contentions are canvassed in Schlesinger, Colonial Merchants, esp. p. 170.

1163 The principal charge against Hancock can be easily disposed of. He had infringed the spirit, not the letter, of the agreement by allowing some of his ships to carry prohibited goods as freight. This practice was not expressly proscribed until July 26, 1769. On September 6, he sent appropriate instructions to his London correspondents. Massachusetts Gazette, July 31, 1769; John Hancock His Book, A. E. Brown, editor, p. 166. For Mein’s chief articles against Hancock, see the Chronicle, August 21, 28, September 4, 18, October 9, 1769. The quotation above is from the issue of October 26.

1164 The pamphlet, entitled State of the Importations from Great Britain into Boston, from Jan. 1769 to Aug. 17, 1769, was twice reissued the next year with appendices of importations to January 1, 1770, and from January 1 to June 19. In a letter, July 1, 1770, to Mein, then in London, Fleeming declared that the popular rage excited by the appearance of the last edition had caused him on June 30 to take refuge in Castle William. Papers Relating to New England, iv. 5. A writer in the New-Tort Gazette and Weekly Mercury, October 15, 1770, refers to a further “Pamphlet of Entries at the Port of Boston” for the period July 7 to August 14.

1165 Issue of September 4, 1769. For a similar attitude, see “Civis” in the New-Hampshire Gazette, July 6, 13, 1770.

1166 Andrews, “Boston Merchants,” our Publications, xix. 250–252. For a sharp exchange of letters between the Boston and New York committees in regard to Mein’s accusations, see the New-York Journal, August 9, 1770, and the Boston Evening-Post, September 10.

1167 Murray, Letters, pp. 159–161.

1168 A Boston item of November 20 in the New-York Journal, December 14, 1769, sourly characterized the appointment as pay for Mein’s “impertinent, grossly abusive and false publications.”

1169 Letter of George Mason to Joseph Harrison, October 20, 1769. Papers Relating to New England, iii. 40.

1170 Letter of Mein to Joseph Hanson, November 5, 1769, id., p. 51; Hutchinson, Massachusetts Bay, iii. 258–261; Rowe, Diary, p. 194; Boston Evening-Post, October 30, 1769; Matthews, “Bibliographical Notes,” our Publications, ix. 480–481 n. Mein’s temporary absence marked no truce in the warfare on the “Well Disposed,” a fact which may in part perhaps be explained by Hudson’s statement in Journalism in the United States (p. 128) that Mein was aided in his editorial labors by Samuel Waterhouse, a customs officer, and Joseph Green, a Boston wit of repute. He may also have had other helpers. In an allusion to William Burch, one of the customs commissioners, the Boston Gazette, September 11, 1769, reported “certain Knowledge” that “Shylock Burch” wrote “the Impertinence that Mein exhibits in his Paper.” Green was probably responsible for the proposal (Chronicle, January 18, 1770) that non-marriage, with its threat of depopulation, be substituted for non-importation as a weapon against England, himself to act as chairman of a committee for storing females: “If any man should refuse to deliver up his wife or daughter upon such an interesting occasion, he must be deemed AN ENEMY TO HIS COUNTRY.”

1171 Boston Chronicle, November 9, 1769; also Boston Evening-Post, November 13.

1172 Facsimile in Narrative and Critical History of America, Justin Winsor, editor, vi. 78.

1173 Vote of January 23, in the Boston Evening-Post, January 29, 1770

1174 Judgments were eventually assessed against Mein totaling over £2,612 with costs and damages. His financial tribulations are set forth in Murray, Letters, pp. 169–174; John Hancock His Book, p. 74; and Bolton, “Circulating Libraries in Boston,” our Publications, xi. 198–200. John Adams, in the “Novanglus” papers (1774), perverted the facts in describing Mein’s difficulties in Boston. See his Works, iv. 30.

1175 The tombstone, as noted above, gives August 27, 1717, as the date. John Phelps, Family Memoirs, gives August 15. A memorandum by Charles Phelps in his own hand gives August 16, which is Old Style for August 27, 1717.

1176 The date April, 1764, is given as the time of the arrival of the Phelps family in Marlborough. This is to be found on the gravestone of Timothy Phelps, son of Charles Phelps, in the abandoned burying-ground in Marlborough, Vermont. The town of New Marlborough was chartered by New Hampshire on April 17, 1764, in the name of Charles Phelps and his associates. Benjamin H. Hall, History of Eastern Vermont, p. 97.

Subsequent to the order of the King in Council fixing the Connecticut River as the eastern boundary of New York, Phelps applied to that Province for a charter for this town, but there is no record that he ever obtained it. His petmon was originally filed October 15, 1766 (New York Land Papers, xxi. 183, 185), and was renewed March 16, 1772 (id., xxxi. 48). The petition was finally granted by the Governor and Council on June 15, 1772, but no patent was taken out. For this information I am indebted to our associate, Mr. M. B. Jones.

1177 Phelps, Family Memoirs, p. 10.

1178 Id.

1179 Id., p. 11.

1180 Hall, History of Eastern Vermont, pp. 206–208.

1181 Id., pp. 243–244.

1182 Our Publications, xxv. 51–52.

1183 Heath Papers (MSS., Massachusetts Historical Society), v. 279.

1184 A communication of his to the Massachusetts Council, July 29, 1779, is printed in our Publications, xxv. 54–57.

1185 Phelps, Family Memoirs, pp. 9–10.

1186 Id., p. 15.

1187 Id., p. 11.

1188 Dorothy Phelps, the judge’s daughter, wife of Jonathan Warner of Hadley.

1189 Public Papers of George Clinton, v. 311–312.

1190 For information regarding this excessively rare pamphlet, I am indebted to Mr. Jones.

1191 Public Papers of George Clinton, viii. 44.

1192 See Appendix, below.

1193 Quoted in Hall, History of Eastern Vermont, p. 483.

1194 The original MS. is in the Library of Congress.

1195 This proposal is said to have been made in view of the partition of Poland of 1772.

1196 In my opinion the most illuminating discussion of the existence of land-jobbery by both parties in the New Hampshire Grants is to be found in The Vermont Settlers and the New York Land Speculators, an 188-page pamphlet printed in 1894 by Reuben Clark Benton, a native Vermonter

1197 The election figures given herewith are taken from the World Almanac, 1937.

1198 See Hiland Hall, Early History of Vermont, p. 444, for a statement of the bearing of the admission of Vermont into the Union upon the prospective choice of the permanent seat of the Federal Government. See also James B. Wilbur, Ira Allen, ii. 1–2.

1199 A summary of the case of Vermont, then an applicant before Congress for admission to the Union, dated May 1, 1782, and prepared by James Madison of Virginia, then in Congress, is found in Madison’s Papers, i. 122. It is also in Hiland Hall, Early History of Vermont, pp. 406–408.

1200 For an account of the distribution of the $30,000 paid by Vermont to New York as a condition of the latter’s withdrawal of all claim to Vermont lands, see Hiland Hall, Early History of Vermont, pp. 506–511. There were seventy-six claimants who shared in the total, the sums varying from $2,655.03 to $9.98, most of the claims being small. Most of the original claimants were dead when the distribution finally occurred, April 23, 1799.

1201 Our Publications, xvii. 2–111.

1202 Id., xxviii. 37–66.

1203 It is a thin folio, bound in green cloth with back and comers in black leather, and on the front cover is pasted a piece of black leather, on which is printed in gold letters the title. Of Amasa Walker (1799–1875), who was Secretary of State of Massachusetts in 1851–1853, there is a sketch in the Dictionary of American Biography; and of Robert Lemon (1800–1867), to whom “the suggestion of forming and publishing the ‘Calendars of State Papers’ is due,” there is a sketch in the Dictionary of National Biography.

1204 The extracts in this paragraph quoted from Mr. Elton’s paper are from our Publications, xxviii. 52, 57–58, 59.

1205 After May 14, 1774, the only meeting of the Council under the Province charter of 1691 recorded in the documents here printed took place on June 9, 1774; but as Oliver did not become lieutenant-governor until August 8 following, he of course was not present at that meeting. The Mandamus Council, as these documents show, met on August 31, 1774, and on July 17, 20, October 9, 25, 26, 28, and 30, 1775. Why there was no meeting of the Council between August 31, 1774, and July 17, 1775, is explained in Oliver’s letter to Dartmouth of December 9, 1774: “General Gage has no doubt acquainted Your Lordship that since the 2d of September, the Province has been in such a state of confusion, in which the People have so far put an end to all law and order, that the direction of Government has been rather in the line of a General than that of a Governor. And as the forms of a Council under these circumstances, and the Prejudices of the People would only tend to encrease their violences, and add to his difficulties and embarrassment; upon these reason I presume he has avoided calling one.” Thus instead of reassuming his seat in the Council “as soon as he got into Boston” in September, 1774, Oliver did not do so until July 17, 1775. It is not surprising that after the lapse of a decade Oliver’s memory, if indeed he used the exact words attributed to him, should have been slightly at fault.

1206 In his discussion of that point, Mr. Elton remarks that some writers call him “Governor Oliver,” and goes on to say: “It is probable, however, that between Gage’s departure on October 10, 1775, and Oliver’s on March 17, 1776, the latter was acting Governor, although officially entitled ‘Lieutenant Governor.’” It is not “probable” but certain that such was the fact. In the years 1694–1771, because either of the absence from Massachusetts or of the death of the governor, five lieutenant-governors became acting governors, and, oddly enough, each of them served twice in that capacity. William Stoughton was acting governor from December 4, 1694, to May 26, 1699, and again from July 22, 1700, to his death on July 7, 1701; William Tailer, from November 9, 1715, to October 5, 1716, and again from June 11 to August 10, 1730; William Dummer, from January 2, 1723, to July 19, 1728, and again from September 10, 1729, to June 11, 1730; Spencer Phips, from September 15, 1749, to August 7, 1753, and again from September 25, 1756, to April 4,1757; and Thomas Hutchinson, from June 3 to August 2, 1760, and again from August 2, 1769, to March 14, 1771, when he himself became governor. A lieutenant-governor never (except, as in the case of Hutchinson, through a new commission) became governor; and when serving as acting governor was never addressed as “His [or Your] Excellency,” but always as “His [or Your] Honor.” Cf. our Publications, xvii. 48, 49, 51, 52, 61, 68, 71, 72, 76, 82, 85, 92, 109, 110. And now a sixth must be added to the list of acting governors, for on October 25, 1775—Gage having departed on the tenth—Oliver took the usual oaths that “he would faithfully perform the duties of Lieutenant Governor & Commander in Chief of the Province, according to his best skill and judgment”—just as if nothing had happened! Certainly Oliver played the game to the bitter end. His salary as lieutenant-governor continued to be paid up to October, 1782. The words “according to his best skill and judgment,” or some slight variation of the words, are found in the oaths taken by Hutchinson, November 26, 1761, on becoming lieutenant-governor, again, August 2, 1769, on becoming acting governor, and for a third time, March 14, 1771, on becoming actual governor; by Gage, May 17, 1774, on becoming governor; and by Andrew Oliver, March 14, 1771, on becoming lieutenant-governor. Cf. our Publications, xvii. 84, 86, 87, 95.

1207 Here Mr. Lemon has underlined “September” and has written in the margin: “sic q Nov^r.” The correct date is November 27,1774: see p. [9], below

1208 The following note is in the hand of Mr. Lemon: “These were Draft Instructions, proposed by the Board of Trade on the 20th of May, which were referred to the Privy Council on the 25th of that month, and agreed to and reported on the 1st of June following; the only alterations in the Names being that of John Erving Senior instead of John Irwin, and the substitution of John Erving Junior for the last name William Clicking.”

1209 Here is written in the margin: “see ante,” a reference to p. [5], above.

1210 Mr. Lemon has appended the following note: “The letter r. has been added to several names apparently at a subsequent period.”

1211 Here is written in the margin: “sic q versus.”

1212“A short note dated 2^d September, begging the Governor, on no consideration, to send out any Troops.”

1213 Oliver’s letter is, according to Mr. Lemon, “in several parts, corrected & interlined.”

1214 Gage had left Boston on October 10.

1215 Here “Commander in Chief” of course refers to Oliver under his commission as lieutenant-governor.

1216 Here Oliver refers to Howe as “Commander in Chief” because Gage on his departure was succeeded by Howe as commander-in-chief of the British forces in North America.

1217 This word is here used in its obsolete sense of “grateful appreciation or acknowledgment (of a service, kindness, etc.); a feeling or expression of gratitude.” Cf. our Publications, xvi. 870.

1218 Again the title refers to Oliver under his commission as lieutenant-governor.

1219 That is, as lieutenant-governor under his commission as such.

1220 The fleet from which the Mt. Vernon so narrowly escaped was undoubtedly the French, under the command of Admiral Bruix, which was sent from Brest into the Mediterranean in the spring of 1799 to support Napoleon in Egypt after Nelson had destroyed the French fleet in the Battle of the Nile. However, without going into the eastern Mediterranean at all, Bruix returned to Brest on August 13, 1799, so that this must have been his fleet that the Mt. Vernon met off Cape St. Vincent on July 28.

1221 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xlii. 300–307. I have also had the benefit of the notes taken by our associate, Clifford K. Shipton, in preparing a sketch of Hugh Hall for Volume VI of Sibley’s Harvard Graduates. The Hall arms and crest here reproduced are: arms—silver semy of crosslets and three talbots’ heads sable, the tongues gules; crest—a talbot’s head erased sable, the tongue gules.

1222 This was probably Joseph Parsons of the Class of 1697, who was dismissed from the ministry in 1708, and was in business in Boston until 1717. Sibley, Harvard Graduates, iv. 366–368.

1223 He wrote to President Leverett, February 28, 1717, requesting letters “to some of y^e Royall Society, or South Sea Company”—an odd alternative.

1224 Letter to President Leverett, August 2, 1717. Letter-Book, p. 29.

1225 London, 1710–11. The set is noted in the 1723 Catalogue of the Harvard College Library, p. 71.

1226 In a later letter to Benning Wentworth (p. 142), Hall writes, “I could have been Content to have Drank your health in … Cytron Water Punch.” In the inventory of the estate of Lieutenant-Governor John Montgomery of New York, at the New York Public Library, are several dozen pints of citron-water, which sold at about £2 8s a dozen.

1227 Apparently there was quite a market in Boston for broken cannons and other scrap iron, as later letters show (p. 266). To John Cabot, Hall sent “Six barrells of Select Old Iron” in 1720 (p. 222) and solicits in return “Good Refuse Cod and Polluck Fish” (p. 221).

1228 Williams had formerly been minister of a Congregational church in Barbados. Sibley, Harvard Graduates, iv. 182–183.

1229 Alice Morse Earle, Child Life in Colonial Days, pp. 102–103. Both children took dancing and writing lessons from Increase Gatchell.

1230 Doubtless the father of Charles Carroll of Carrollton.

1231 At this period the term “Union flag” was used in America to mean a flag having the union of the two crosses in the canton. See George H. Preble, History of the Flag of the United States of America (2nd ed., Boston, 1880), p. 197. Cf. the use of the phrase “Grand Union Flag,” meaning a flag with a union in the canton, not with the union as the design of the field.

1232 For a discussion of Hopkins’s flags, see “The Signal Instructions of Esek Hopkins,” by William Davis Miller, in The Correspondence of Esek Hopkins, pp. 7–15.

1233 Cf. W. G. Perrin, British Flags, Their Early History, and Their Development at Sea, pp. 117–120.

1234 Van Wyck Brooks, The Flowering of New England, pp. 21, 22, 45; see also Plutarch’s Cicero, chap. v.

1235 Letters of Members of the Continental Congress, Edmund C. Burnett, Editor, ii. 49–50. Presumably “Gribelin” should be “Gobelin.”

1236 John C. Miller, Sam Adams, Pioneer in Propaganda, p. 108.

1237 Cf. extract from Pennsylvania Packet, September 22, 1787, in Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, John B. McMaster and Frederick D. Stone, Editors, p. 125.

1238 Richard F. Upton, Revolutionary New Hampshire, p. 215.

1239 A biographical sketch of Wilson can be found in Dictionary of American Biography, xx. 326–330. His writings have been published as follows: Works of James Wilson, Bird Wilson, Editor, 3 vols. (Philadelphia, 1804); Selected Political Essays of James Wilson, Randolph G. Adams, Editor (New York, 1930), which contains a good bibliography of Wilson’s writings and speeches; Works of James Wilson, James DeWitt Andrews, Editor, 2 vols. (Chicago, 1896). B. A. Konkle, author of James Wilson and the Constitution, is projecting a complete Life and Works.

1240 Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, pp. 631, 682.

1241 Id., p. 511.

1242 L. H. Alexander, “James Wilson, Patriot, and the Wilson Doctrine,” North American Review, clxxxiii, p. 3, 5, 8, 10, 16.

1243 L. H. Alexander, “James Wilson, Patriot, and the Wilson Doctrine,” North American Review, clxxxiii, p. 5.

1244 Letters of Members of the Continental Congress, i. 175.

1245 Id., ii. 215–217.

1246 Works (Andrews edition), i, Introduction.

1247 Letters of Members of the Continental Congress, ii. 53.

1248 Works (Bird Wilson edition), i. 443, iii. 390.

1249 Id., i. 211.

1250 “A gangrened wound must be amputated with the knife, lest the healthy part of the body be corrupted also.” Ovid, Metamorphoses, i, 190–191; Works (Bird Wilson edition), i. 466, ii. 351.

1251 “The Law is the foundation of the liberty which we enjoy. We are all slaves to the law, in order that we may be free.” Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 146.

1252 Cicero, De Legibus, ii, 23; Plato, Laws, 624, 659, etc.

1253 Cicero, De Oratore, i, 199; Works (Bird Wilson edition), i. 32; Cicero, Brutus, 53; Tacitus, Dialogus de Oratoribus, 28.

1254 “The mind, soul, purpose, and idea of the State depend upon its laws.” Cicero, Pro Cluentio, 146.

1255 “What tribe or race of men is there that does not have an intimation of immortality, without formal training?” Cicero, De Natura Deorum, i, 16.

1256 “What is holier or more protected by every article of faith, than any individual citizen’s household?” Cicero, Pro Domo, 41; Tacitus, Germania, 21.

1257 “Let me assure you, each of you receives a greater heritage in these same goods from the law and from legislation than from those persons by whom these very goods have been left by will.” Cicero, Pro Caecina, 26.

1258 “In every class of mankind, and especially in the most untutored, there is at work a mighty and marvellous process of nature.” Cicero, De Oralore, iii, 50.

1259 Works (Bird Wilson edition), ii. 288, i. 85, ii. 234; Homer, Iliad, xviii, 497.

1260 Aristotle, Politics, iv, 9; Sir Henry Maine, Ancient Law (Sir Frederick Pollock, Editor), chap. iii.

1261 Cicero, De Republica, Book iii (fragment), in Lactantius, Institutes, vi, 10.

1262 Miller, Sam Adams, p. 267; see also Selected Essays of Wilson, p. xxxv.

1263 “I think that, if our allegiance to the gods were annulled, faith and the society of mankind and that primarily excellent virtue, justice, would disappear.” Cicero, De Natura Deorum, i, 4.

1264 Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved (2d ed., London, 1765), p. 70; Ulpian, Digest, l, 17, 32; Justinian, Institutes, i, 5. For this idea, even in Tudor England, see Albert F. Pollard, Henry VIII, ii. 234.

1265 Aristotle, Ethics, 1102 a, 5; William A. Dunning, History of Political Theories, i. 68.

1266 “According as each man perceives most clearly the kernel of every fact, and is able with the greatest acumen and speed to explain its principles, so he may be properly regarded as the wisest and soundest of all.” Cicero, De Officiis, i, 5.

1267 De Jure Naturae et Gentium, i, 6, 10–11.

1268 Aeschylus, Supplices, 370–375; Livy, v, 48; Thucydides, v, 105; Dio, i, 5; Suetonius, Caligula, 22 (perhaps); Marcus Aurelius (Loeb Classical Library), pp. 357, 365, 367. Wilson quotes a great deal from memory, and often gives a free rendering of the original.

1269 Politics, iv, 7 (1293 b).

1270 “So I prescribe, so I order it; let my will take the place of explanations.” Juvenal, Satires, vi, 223 (hoc for sic; sit for stet).

1271 Works (Bird Wilson edition), i. 210.

1272 “Nothing is more welcome to the Godhead of the universe than councils and gatherings of men which are united by the sanction of the law.” Cicero, Pro Balbo, 13, Somnium Scipionis, 3.

1273 Marcus Aurelius (Loeb Classical Library), p. 137.

1274 Cicero, De Republica, iii, 2, De Fato, 28; Lactantius, Institutes, i, 6. The phrase is adapted by Wilson as is so often the case.

1275 Cicero, De Officiis, i, 15, iii, 23, i, 22; De Amicitia, 87.

1276 Tacitus, Germania, 12; Cicero, De Officiis, ii, 41.

1277 Cicero, De Republica, ii, 41; Tacitus, Annals, iv, 33.

1278 Tacitus, Germania, xi.

1279 Metamorphoses, ii, 13–14.

1280 Ars Poetica, 191.

1281 Livy, viii, 23; Herodotus, vi, 108.

1282 Cicero, De Officiis, i, 17, De Legibus, iii, 1.

February Meeting, 1937

Appendix

Charles Phelps’s Memorial to Congress1194

To the Honorable United States in Congress assembled

Relating to the Last Meetings of the Massachusetts Royal Council, 1774–1776

Secretary the Earl of Dartmouth to General Gage, 9 April 1774. Extracts

Additional Instructions to General Gage 20 May 1774

Governor Gage to the Earl of Dartmouth 19 May 1774. Extract

Governor Gage to the Earl of Dartmouth. Extract

A List of the Counsellors

Elected by the Assembly of the Massachusetts Bay on Wednesday 25th of May

Counsellors elected and consented to by the Govr

Counsellors elected and not consented to by the Govr

Earl of Dartmouth to Govr Gage 3 June 1774. Extracts

Governor Gage to Secy Dartmouth 26 June 1774. Extracts

Inclosure

Governor Gage to Secy Dartmouth 27 August 1774. Extracts

List of Counsellors

[21] Extract of a Letter from Hampshire County, dated August 10th 1774

Govr Gage to Secretary Dartmouth 25 August 1774. Extract

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth 2 Septr 1774. Extracts

At a Council held at the Council Chamber in Boston, Wednesday August 31st 1774

Present

Daniel Oliver to Colo Ruggles

Mr Paine to the Governor

Colonel Murray to his Father

Mr Thos Hutchinson Junr to the Governor

Mr Loring’s Narrative 31 August 1774

Colonel Leonard to Governor Gage

Mr Pepperell to Governor Gage

Mr Lee to Governor Gage

Governor Gage to Sec[retary] Dartmouth

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extracts

Lieut[enant] Governor Oliver to Secretary Dartmouth

Lieutenant Govr Oliver to Sec[retary] Dartmouth

Governor Gage to Secy Dartmouth. Extracts

To Josiah Edson Esqr

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

Secretary Dartmouth to Govr Gage, Extracts

Secretary Dartmouth to Lieut[enant] Governor Oliver

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

Lieutenant Governor Oliver to Secretary Dartmouth

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

Governor Gage to Secy Dartmouth

A List Of Majesty’s Council

In his Province of the Massachusett’s Bay

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extracts

At a Council held in the Council Chamber in Boston Monday July 17th 1775

Present

In Council July 20th

The Humble Address of the Council of the Province of Massachusetts Bay

To the King’s most Excellent Majesty

List of Counsellors

For the Province of Massachusetts Bay. July 21st 1775

List of Persons

Who are suffering for their attachment to Government

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

Secretary Dartmouth to Governor Gage. Extract

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth. Extract

In Council, October 9th 1775

At a Council held at the Council Chamber in Boston, on Wednesday the 25th day of October 1775

Present

A Message from His Honor the Lieutenant Governor to the Council 25 October 1775

Gentlemen of the Council.

Present

Present

Lieutenant Governor Oliver to Secretary Dartmouth. Extracts

Lieutenant General [sic] Oliver to Secretary Dartmouth. Extracts

Lieutenant Governor Oliver to Secretary Lord George Germain. Extract

Children of John and Ann Maylem from the Maylem Bible.

Elected by the Assembly of the Massachusetts Bay on Wednesday 25^th of May

Counsellors elected and consented to by the Gov^r

Counsellors elected and not consented to by the Gov^r

Earl of Dartmouth to Gov^r Gage 3 June 1774. Extracts

Governor Gage to Sec^y Dartmouth 26 June 1774. Extracts

Governor Gage to Sec^y Dartmouth 27 August 1774. Extracts

[21] Extract of a Letter from Hampshire County, dated August 10^th 1774

Gov^r Gage to Secretary Dartmouth 25 August 1774. Extract

Governor Gage to Secretary Dartmouth 2 Sept^r 1774. Extracts

At a Council held at the Council Chamber in Boston, Wednesday August 31^st 1774

Daniel Oliver to Col^o Ruggles

M^r Paine to the Governor

M^r Tho^s Hutchinson Jun^r to the Governor

M^r Loring’s Narrative 31 August 1774

M^r Pepperell to Governor Gage

M^r Lee to Governor Gage

Lieutenant Gov^r Oliver to Sec[retary] Dartmouth

Governor Gage to Sec^y Dartmouth. Extracts

To Josiah Edson Esq^r

Secretary Dartmouth to Gov^r Gage, Extracts

Governor Gage to Sec^y Dartmouth

At a Council held in the Council Chamber in Boston Monday July 17^th 1775

In Council July 20^th

For the Province of Massachusetts Bay. July 21^st 1775

In Council, October 9^th 1775

At a Council held at the Council Chamber in Boston, on Wednesday the 25^th day of October 1775