Patronage Matters

    895. To Jonathan Sewall, 16 September 1771

    896. To Sir Francis Bernard, [before 20–23] September 1771

    After the caning of James Otis in the fall of 1770, John Robinson left Boston quickly for England, realizing that legal complications and public animosity would make it difficult ever to return. Robinson’s father-in-law, Boston merchant James Boutineau, proposed an arrangement whereby Robinson would take Jonathan Sewall’s post as vice-admiralty court judge in Nova Scotia (a position it was difficult for Sewall to hold while still attorney general in Massachusetts) and Sewall would take Robinson’s place at the customs board. Boutineau did not anticipate, however, that Michael Francklin, lieutenant governor of Nova Scotia, was also interested in the vice-admiralty court job and would offer Sewall an additional payment of two hundred pounds a year if he would resign in Francklin’s favor.

    Meanwhile, Hutchinson needed to find someone to replace himself as chief justice of the Superior Court and fill two additional vacancies created by resignations. There was also the matter of what level of compensation the judges would receive, since they were now to be paid out of the customs revenue and not by the General Court.

    895. To Jonathan Sewall

    Boston 16 Sept 1771

    Dear Sir, I send you a Paragraph of my Letters by Scot from Sir F. B.1 After informing me that 150£ will be established for the Attorney General and 100£ for the Sollicitor General & giving me the reasons why the Sums are not greater he adds

    “Now let us consider what effects this may have. In the first place Mr Sewall can’t hold the Attorney General’s place & the place of Judge of the Admiralty also. It was proposed to give Mr Sewall £300—which I said would satisfy him for quitting his Judge’s Place, but that was not agreeable to the nature of the Establishment & it was not tho’t [proper?]2 to make an addition to it in the way of a pension. This was the plan first proposed but it would not go down at the Treasury. Mr Robinson the Commissioner is desirous of the place at Halifax. Lt. Gov. Franklin is also very desirous of it. As they both spoke to me on the Subject I have brought them together that they should not act in opposition to each other. Mr Robinson is willing to exchange with Mr Sewall place for place, and says he can prevail at the Treasury to have it allowed. Mr Franklin is willing upon his being appointed to engage to pay Mr Sewall 200£ a year in addition to his Salary as Attorney General & to get the stipulation approved of by Lord Sandwich. Mr Robinson has, as he says, made his proposal to Mr Sewall two months ago. Mr Franklin’s is but of this date. Lord Hillsborough has no objection to either, those Offices not being in his department. It will remain with Mr Sewall to signify whether each of those Offers or either and which of them will be agreeable to him. As the Business of the year is closing nothing will be done with [it]3 till the Fall. I am obliged to comm[unicate] to you the whole intention, but it wo[uld be] best to reveal as little of it as may be.”

    Mr Boutineau has shewn me his Letter from Mr Franklin. As to Robinson’s proposal I think you would not have agreed to it and I am informed, upon hearing Franklin’s, he himself supposed you would not and Mr Waldo tells me he is going upon an errand, from Administration, to Jamaica to spend a few months until he knows the issue of his Lawsuit here.4

    I should not have taken the trouble of transcribing the Paragraph of Sir F.B.’s Letter nor have given you any trouble when you are so much engaged if there was not a Ship now near sailing which will probably be gone before your return. If you are determined I could wish to know your mind. I am obliged to write and would do it with certainty if I could and inconvenience may arise from delay. However, if more time be necessary for you I would not press you. Before you leave Worcester [I sho]uld be glad of a line from you. I am Sir Your most obedient Servant,

    RC (Capital & Counties Property Company Limited, St. Andrew’s House, 40 Broadway, London SW1). The curious circumstances for the discovery of this letter are described in Mary Beth Norton, “A Recently Discovered Thomas Hutchinson Letter,” MHS Procs., 82:105–09.

    896. To Sir Francis Bernard

    Boston [before 20–23] Sept. 1771

    Davis

    Dear Sir, I now sit down to answer your favour of 18 July.1 If the Establishment proposed be made I shall be able to keep Judge Oliver who has often told me that he would resign with Lynde & Cushing who propose to do it at the close of the present year & their age especially Cushings who will be 77 or 78 I think may excuse them. I intend Ropes who you know was a Rescinder & who is in every respect well qualified for one & Cushings son the Judge of Probate in Lincoln County & a very good Lawyer for the other to fill their places.2 If the Sums I mean their being too large increase the difficulty its better to reduce the five for the Chief to four for there is not that difference in the business or the importance unless he has it in himself of the Chief from the puisne Judges as in the Courts in Westin Hall or in the Kings Governments as they are called in the Colonies.3

    The other Judges cant be less than they are fixed at. I wish instead of 5 Judges there had been but three but it cant be altered. Mr Sewall is now at Worcester attending the Court & goes from thence to Hampshire. I have wrote to him & suppose I shall have an answer.4 I know he will not agree to Mr Robinsons proposal I think it probable that he will to L. Gov Franklins. What if Robn. should take the Judges place at Halifax & make the allowance to Sewall & Franklin take Robinsn. place in the Customs? Perhaps when Robinson hears of the most extravagant verdict gained by Otis (who by the way is as distracted as ever) he may desire the Exchange.5 But this only affects themselves. I shall keep this plan private except when it may be necessary to reveal any part of it to the persons interested in it.

    Mr Pownall had wrote me before concerning the Ships6 and I am waiting for answers to my Letters after the Court was prorogued before I meet it again at Boston or any where else. As to the Castle it certainly is necessary to make Repairs if it was only to prevent a clamor if any of the works should tumble down. I never saw the Estimate & have never been consulted nor do I know what is intended or proposed to be done & its possible such a plan may be laid as may amount to 10000£. The Platform must in general be new. The Parade must be in larged. I would only extend the upper Battery or what they call the Fort towards Shirley Battery & let the other sides remain as they are which will turn the present small square into an Oblong and under the extended new Works, sufficient Casemates may be made. All this seems necessary to make the place in any degree defenceable. I am not capable of making an Estimate of the cost of this but could easily procure it. I wish to see a strong respectable Fortress. I think I should have been consulted with both as to the Works & the Workmen. For the latter it is not yet too late. I only wish that such maybe employed as have been the least concerned in promoting our late disorders & that they may know they depend upon my recommendation & I wish this only for the sake of strengthening Government.

    There is among the Officers still a strong expectation of the establishment of a Staff at the Castle. I shall be obliged to you to inform me if there is any probability of it. I have spoke to Paxton concerning Mr Williams.7 I think as you do that it is not well judged to force him to be inimical. Paxt. says he would readily give his voice for allowing him his Salary if the restraint they are under could be taken off. He says they have received orders from the Treasury within two or three months to pay his Salary upon a proper persons being procured to do the duty of the place. I will talk further with [h]im upon the Subject.

    As for Mr Waldo I believe I shall have no difficulty in procuring for him what you propose.8 I will follow your advice & write to Lord Sandwich in favor of Mr Cotton & cover the Letter under direction to you.9 I will advise & assist Mr Bernard in the best manner I can & when I have made more full inquiry will inform you whether there is any prospect of dissolving the partnership before the regular expiration of it. I think with you it ought to be done if it can be done.10 The Committee of Council which I sent down to Machias are returned & pursuant to their Instructions have reported to me the state of the Country which I shall send to My Ld Hillsborough & inclose a Copy to you. It is intended to shew the necessity of encouraging the Settlements there but it is a felo de se for if clearing the Sea Coasts be necessary in order to the Servants of the Crown coming at the King’s Timber it is necessary for the Trespassers also notwithstanding the pains taken to shew a distinction.11 While I am upon this part of the Province there comes into my mind a Law suit between Doctor Gardner & Company & Colo Donnell for an Estate there in which Donnell recovered in the S. Court here & I remember that I thought he had a very clear case but Gardner appealed to the King in Council, but I dont know that the Decree is yet sent.12 Judge Goffe tells me that he has seen the Letter to Gardner which says that the reason of the Reversal was the Courts admitting Indian Deeds to be given in Evidence directly in the face of the Province Law which makes them void. And the Letter further says that it was moved to have the reason in the Decree but it was answered there was an impropriety in it & no occasion for it because this was known by what passed at the hearing to be the Reason.13 This Law was offered against admitting the Deeds in the Trial here by Otis & the Court were under some surprize to think they had for 60 or 70 years past admitted Evidence against Law.14 I had considered the Law before & presently satisfied my brethren of the true constructions of it and Otis himself gave up the Point. It is an Act of the 13 Wm Chapter 21 & the 137 page of the last Edition of the Laws.15 You see by the preamble that so far as respected all preceding Indian purchases it was founded upon the Laws of the Colonies of Massa Bay & New Plimo which from the year 1633 had prohibited all such Purchases but there was no such Law in the Country East of Piscataqua River and not the like reason for declaring null purchases there and the proviso that the Act shall not extend to such purchases was therefore just & necessary but it is said that the proviso intends such Indian purchases only as were for further confirmation of their other lawful titles & possessions. But these words in the Law are confined to purchases in Marthas Vineyard & Nantucket and do not extend to the Eastern Country. The repetition or if any person or persons makes it probable & the peculiar custom of those Islands makes it certain. Until the present Charter they were under the Government of New York & their Estates depend not only upon Grants derived from the Crown but upon confirmations obtained from the Indians by the respective Grantees & in all Controversies & Law Suits for recovery of any Estates in Marthas Vineyard especially I remember both purchases to have been generally given in Evidence. Upon this construction of the Law which was the contemporaneous construction & which has continued to this day Indian Deeds for Lands in the Eastern Country are not at all affected.

    I designed to have wrote to Mr Pownall & represented this Affair but I have given him too much trouble with other matters. Can any thing be done? If the Cause is sent back I doubt whether Donnell is able to go through another trial. I suppose want of money was the reason he did not appear to defend the cause in England though he was persuaded by many to give himself no trouble about it because Appeals in Real Actions are contrary to Charter & the Decree for reversing the Judgment in the Province could never be carried into Execution. If the cause really turned upon what Gardners Letter says it did it is pity Donnel should suffer so much as he must do unless some way can be found to bring the matter again before the King in Council without going thro a new Trial here.

    I must beg your inquiry into the affair & that you will write me upon it. It will, besides, be best to keep off this dispute concerning Appeals in Real Actions & the Opposition which will be made to the carrying the Decree for a Reversal into Execution until some other Points are more fully settled.

    I am now at the 20 of Sept & have just received an Answer from Mr Sewall which I shall inclose to you & which is so explicit that I need add nothing to it.16 I have also seen Mr Bernard & had much conversation with him & he seems determind to take the first convenient opportunity to propose the thing to his Partner. I tell him he need only Indorse the Articles that the term shall expire in three instead of ten years that if at the expiration of 3 years there should be a necessity which we do not foresee of continuing the Term it may very easily be done & he appeared to be quite reconciled to it. I wish to convince you on evry occasion that I am Dear Sir Your faithful & most Obedient Servant,

    My letter being kept open to the 23d I have been consulted by Mr Bernard upon a dispute with Mr. Pemberton have seen them together & have told Pemberton that I thought nothing could be more frivolous than the reasons he offered in support of his claim & that if you had remained in the Government he never would have said a word about it.17 I have advised Mr Bernard to give himself no concern about the 60£ & always to retain so much back from the annuity as to secure the smaller sum which Pemberton received who shewed me a Letter he intended to send you upon the Subject. He is mortifying 1000£ sterling at Roxbury which makes him I fancy more anxious about these savings than otherwise he would be.18

    Story has been with me to tell me he has taken his passage in Hood & to desire Letters. I told him I had done so much that way that I could take no further Liberties. I discouraged him all I could but he flatters himself he shall obtain either some compensation for his Losses by the Mob or that the Treasury will remit 500£ which he received as Register of the Admiralty for the Kings part of Seizures which he left in Wheelwrights hands & for which Ruddock is liable.19 I was loth you should have any trouble with him but I suppose he is determind. His Affairs here cannot be worse than they are & I suppose if he can find money enough for his Expences it will be only paying so much less to his Creditors. I am as before,

    AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:228–31).