_Roxbury, July 9, 1772._
The present letter begins with some special colonial transactions
subsequent to the glorious revolution. Upon information of the accession
of William and Mary, the fort at New-York was seized by the rabble,
while the lieutenant governor Nicholson and the council, waited with
anxiety for orders to proclaim their new sovereign. On this occasion,
Jacob Leisler placed himself at the head of the insurgents; and
notwithstanding the protest of the council, possessed himself by force
of a letter transmitted by king William to the lieutenant governor, or
to such as for the time executed the law, and instantly assumed the name
and exerted the authority of governor. He convened two sessions of
assembly in 1690, which passed various laws. But colonel Sloughter, who
had been appointed governor in August, 1689, arriving in March, 1691,
Leisler was made prisoner, and, with others, condemned for treason and
murder; he and his principal adviser were executed. A legal general
assembly was now convened. The precaution taken in the declaration and
bill of rights, by the convention and parliament, to state the claims of
Englishmen, might naturally induce the Yorkers to propose somewhat
similar for themselves, had there been no prior propensity to that
business. But the prevailing opinion of the colonists naturally dictated
to them the seizing of the present fovorable opportunity. The New-York
general assembly passed “an act, declaring what are the rights and
privileges of their majesty’s subjects within the province.” The law
enacts, “That the supreme legislative power and authority under their
majesties, shall for ever be, and reside in a governor and council,
appointed by their majesties, their heirs and successors; and the people
by their representatives met and convened in general assembly.” It
further enacts, “_That no aid, tax, tallage, &c. whatsoever, shall be
laid, assessed, levied, or required, of or on any their majesties
subjects within the province, &c. or their estates, upon any manner of
colour or pretence whatsoever, but by the act and consent of the
governor and council, and representatives of the people in general
assembly met and convened_.” This memorable act was a virtual
declaration, that the inhabitants of the colony had a right to be
represented in assembly, and enjoyed it not as a privilege, through the
grace of the crown.[51] Six years after, in 1697, a negative was put
upon the act, probably by the regency, while the king was absent, which
was from April the 26th, to the middle of November, when he returned
after the peace of Ryswick was settled.
The _Massachusetts_ petitioned for a renewal of their former charter,
but it could not be obtained; and many reasons were assigned for not
granting it, among the rest, its giving them no power to lay taxes and
raise money, especially on inhabitants not being of the company, and on
strangers coming to or trading with them. One of the chief acts of
delinquency alleged in the writ of _scire facias_, issued against their
former charter, was, their having _levied money of the inhabitants_.
[1691.] King _William_ and queen _Mary_ granted a new charter, in which
_Plymouth_, the _Main_, _Acadia or Nova-Scotia_, and the tract lying
between _Nova-Scotia_ and the _Main_, were annexed to and made a part of
the _Massachusetts_. It was complained of, as being not much more than a
shadow of the old; seeing that the appointment of the governor,
lieutenant-governor, secretary, and all the officers of the admiralty,
was vested in the crown; that the power of the militia was wholly in the
hands of his majesty’s governor as captain general; that all judges,
justices, and sheriffs, were to be nominated by the governor, with the
advice of the council; that the governor had a negative upon the choice
of counsellors; that all laws enacted by the general assembly, were to
be sent home for the royal approbation or disallowance: and that no
laws, ordinances, elections, or acts of government whatsoever, were to
be of any validity, without the consent of the governor, signified in
writing. The new charter, however, conferred on the inhabitants a number
of very important privileges, and was to be preferred to the old in many
respects. They were informed by the best civilians, that their religious
liberties were forever secured; and that they could be touched by no tax
or law, but of their own making; which had a good effect in quieting
them under the variations to which they objected.
[1692.] The first act of the _Massachusetts_ legislature, after the
arrival of the charter, was a kind of Magna Charta, asserting and
setting forth their general privileges, and this clause was among the
rest, “_No aid, tax, tallage, assessment, custom, loan, benevolence, or
imposition whatsoever, shall be laid, assessed, imposed, or levied on
any of his majesty’s subjects, or their estates, on any pretence
whatever, but by the act and consent of the governor, council and
representatives of the people, assembled in general court_.” The general
court passed others favourable to liberty, which were perused by the
ministers of England at a distant period; and with the preceding,
disallowed of by the regency in 1695. In December the reasons of this
dissent were transmitted to the governor and council. The following
extract from the letter sent by the committee of plantations, is
subjoined, because of its being so extraordinary and decisive: “Whereas,
by the act for securing the liberty of the subject, and preventing
illegal imprisonments, the writ of Hæbeas Corpus is required to be
granted, in like manner as is appointed by the statute of 31 Charles II.
in England, which privilege has not yet been granted in any of his
majesty’s plantations; it was not thought in his majesty’s absence, that
the said act should be continued in force, and therefore the same hath
been repealed.”
The above extract makes this a proper place for mentioning, that the
ancient colonists being destitute of proper security, for want of an
Hæbeas Corpus act, were in some provinces grievously oppressed. Edward
Randolph, surveyor-general, during the reign of William III. represented
their condition to the board of trade, March 1700; and among other
beneficial regulations, he recommended, “That it being the practice of
governors to imprison the subjects without bail, the Hæbeas Corpus act
should be extended as fully to the colonies as it is in England.” It was
accordingly soon after conferred on Virginia, by queen Anne. The council
in their address said upon the occasion, “We, the council of Virginia,
acknowledge your majesty’s late favour, in allowing us the benefit of
the Hæbeas Corpus act, and in appointing courts of oyer and terminer,
for the more speedy execution of justice, and relief from long
imprisonments.” The lower house, in theirs, said, “We the burgesses now
assembled, do beseech your majesty to accept our sincere thanks for your
many favours bestowed on your subjects of this colony. We shall not
pretend to enumerate the particulars, nor can we omit mentioning those
lately communicated to us by your majesty’s royal instructions to your
governor, wherein you have asserted to your subjects their legal rights
and properties, by allowing them the Hæbeas Corpus act.”[52]
The extension of the Hæbeas Corpus act to the plantations, by queen
Anne, appears to have been only by instructions to the governors, and
not by any act of parliament. By what prerogative could she extend that
act to the colonists, were they not before entitled to its benefit? If
entitled to, it was unjust in any power to deny them the advantage of
the act; and the royal favour to the Virginians, consisted solely in the
queen’s _asserting to her subjects their legal rights and properties_
(as the burgesses expressed themselves) by giving suitable directions on
the business. The high sense of colonial liberty exhibited by the _York_
and _Massachusetts_ general courts, was opposed by the _English_
government.
[1696.] An act was passed by the parliament, declaring that “All laws,
bye-laws, usages and customs, which shall be in practice in any of the
plantations, repugnant to any law made or to be made in this kingdom,
relative to the said plantations, shall be void and of none effect.”
There might be no design on the part of the ministry of taxing any of
the colonies; but about 1696, a pamphlet was published, recommending the
laying a parliamentary tax on one of them. It was answered by two others
much read; which totally denied the power of taxing the colonies,
because they had no representation in parliament to give consent. No
answer, public or private, was given to these pamphlets; no censure
passed upon them; men were not startled at the doctrine, as either new
or illegal, or derogatory to the rights of parliament.[53]
Though the parliament might not then claim the right of taxing, they
claimed the right of punishing disobedience to their laws, with the loss
of charter privileges. In the 11th of _William_ III. an act was passed
[1699.] for the trial of pirates in _America_, in which there is the
following clause, “Be it further declared, _that if any of the
governors, or any person or persons in authority_ there, shall _refuse
to yield obedience to this act_, such refusal is hereby declared to be a
_forfeiture_ of all and every the _charters_ granted for the
_government_ or _propriety_ of such plantation.”
Severity is stamped upon the very face of the act, in making the
disobedience of a governor, the forfeiture of a charter, meant to secure
the liberties of thousands, who might not have any the least power of
preventing such disobedience. The proprieties and charter colonies were
so disinclined to admit of appeals to his majesty in council, and were
thought so to thirst after independence that these and other objections
against them were laid before the parliament, [1701.] and a bill
thereupon brought into the house of lords for re-uniting the right of
government in those colonies to the crown: but better council prevailed,
and matters were left unaltered. Some are for bringing as a precedent
for the parliament’s raising a revenue from the colonies, what was
passed in 1710, viz. “An act for establishing a general post-office for
all her majesty’s dominions, and for settling, a weekly sum out of the
revenues thereof, for the service of the war and other her majesty’s
occasions.” By this act the postage of England, Scotland, Ireland, and
America, were consolidated, to the end that a general post-office might
be established through Great-Britain and Ireland, her colonies and
plantations in North-America and the West-Indies, and all her other
dominions, in such manner as might be most beneficial to the people: and
that the revenue arising form the said office might be better improved.
The consolidation made a new act necessary; and afforded the opportunity
of advancing the rates of letters. The weekly sum amounted to £.700 and
was to be paid out of the revenue for 32 years; the payment was made
perpetual in the third year of her successor, having been soon after
granted, appropriated by another act toward paying off, with interest at
six _per cent._ the principal of £.2,602,200, which government borrowed
of the public. By the act, the post-riders carrying the mail, were
exempted from paying any thing for passing the ferries in North-America,
and the ferryman was subjected to a penalty of five pounds, if he did
not convey them over within half an hour after demanded.
Whatever power over the colonies the parliament might exercise in the
act, the dissimilarity between this and the sugar act, passed in 1764,
will not admit of the former’s being quoted, with propriety, as a
precedent for the latter. The colonists were in no wise uneasy at it,
and considered not the American postage in the light of an internal tax,
designed for the raising of a revenue from them; for it was but a few
comparatively who were affected by it; and these were accommodated in
the conveyance of their letters, received a full equivalent for the
postage of them, and were not bound to send them by the public post,
when they preferred a private conveyence.
In respect of the readiness of the colonies to co-operate with each
other and the mother country, for the general good, they manifested the
same as occasion required.
[1690.] The _Massachusetts_ general court wrote to the several governors
of the neighbouring colonies, desiring them to appoint commissioners “to
meet, advise, and conclude upon suitable methods in assisting each other
for the safety of the whole land.” The governor of _New-York_ was
requested to signify the same to _Maryland_, and parts adjacent.
The commissioners met on the 1st of May, at _New-York_, and were stiled
a _Congress_, as may be concluded from the following paragraph in Mr.
_Stoughton’s_ letter of October 20, 1693, to Lord _Nottingham_:[54] “I
crave leave further to acquaint your lordship, that the governor of
_New-York_ having written unto his excellency the governor here,
signifying his appointment of a meeting at _New-York_, upon the first
Wednesday of this month, of commissioners from the several governments
of _New-England_, _Virginia_, &c. to concert and agree upon a certain
_quota_ of men and money, for the defence of _Albany_, &c. in observance
of their majesties commands; it happened to be at such a time, and under
such a conjuncture of affairs here, that no meet persons could be
procured to attend _that Congress_.” It does not appear, that there was
any congress between the two periods. It may also be observed, that the
first was procured at the motion of the _Massachusetts_ general court,
formed, from the necessity of the day, upon the vacated charter, before
a new one was granted; and that the motion originated in the court, from
zeal for the common safety of the colonies, without any interposition of
their majesties command. We meet with no congress prior to what was thus
procured.
[Oct. 14, 1709.] At the desire of colonel _Vetch_, there was a congress
of several governors, with some of their council and assembly, to
consult upon the intended expedition against _Canada_, and to resolve on
methods for securing the frontiers.
[Oct. 31, 1711.] The _Massachusetts_ house of assembly, at the motion of
lieutenant-general _Nicholson_, advised, to a congress of her majesty’s
governors attended with such persons as the governments might appoint.
The council appointed two, and the house three, out of their respective
bodies, to attend the governor to congress, which appears to have met
afterwards at _New-London_.
But though the conduct of the _Massachusetts_, in their exertions for
the general good, was highly commendable, their behaviour afterward, in
their own colonial affairs, under governor _Shute_, was greatly
censurable.
[1722.] The house of assembly attempted to take from colonel _Shute_,
those powers in matters relative to the war, which belonged to him by
the constitution, and to vest them in a committee of the two houses.
They by degrees acquired, from the governor and council, the keys of the
treasury; and no monies could be issued, not so much as to pay an
express, without the vote of the house for that purpose; whereas by the
charter, all monies were to be paid out of the treasury, “by warrant
from the governor, with the advice and consent of the council.”
The ministry were greatly offended at the governor’s being made uneasy;
for colonel _Shute_ was known at court and the offices of state, under
the character of a very worthy gentleman, of a singular good temper,
fitted to make any people under his command happy. When, therefore, they
found the contrary in the _Massachusetts_, they concluded, that the
people wished to have no governor from _Great-Britain_, but wanted to be
independent of the crown. The cry of the city of _London_ ran
exceedingly against them; and a scheme, that had been long planned for
taking away the charter, had nearly been executed; but was fortunately
frustrated by the indefatigable pains of Mr. _Dummer_, their then agent.
Their own council at home were obliged to a confession of their illegal
proceedings. [Jan. 15, 1725.] An explanatory charter was prepared,
proposed, and accepted. Had it not been accepted, the design was to have
submitted to the consideration of the British legislature, “What further
provision may be necessary to support and preserve his majesty’s
authority in the colony, and prevent similar invasion of his prerogative
for the future.”[55]
It had been usual to give instructions to the several governors, to
recommend to the assembly the establishing of a salary suitable to the
dignity of their post; but the house had always declined complying,
prudently apprehensive, that disagreable consequences might ensue, from
the independency of the governor on the people over whom he was placed.
These instructions were renewed when governor _Burnet_ was appointed to
the chair, who adhering to them, and showing a fixed determination not
to part with govermental rights, warm disputes followed between him and
the house of representatives; whose treatment of him was so
unwarrantable, that the council board [1729.] within a week after the
affair, expressed their concern at the unbecoming and undutiful
treatment given to his excellency, in the message of the house on the
sixth of December.
In divers instances they showed such a disposition to encroach upon the
prerogative, to wrangle with their governor, and to dispute with the
crown, that the ministry and other persons in public offices, as is
natural for those who look for submissive compliance, were much
irritated; and improved to the utmost all advantages to excite
prejudices against them.
It was suggested that they were aiming at independence; and jealousies
were raised in the minds of some, that there was danger of the colonies
setting up for themselves. Nevertheless, it was certain that such a
scheme appeared to the whole country wild and extravagant; because of
the universal loyalty of the people, beyond what was to be found in any
other part of the British dominions, together with the infancy of the
colonies, and their being distinct from one another in forms of
government, religious rights, emulation of trade, and, consequently,
their affections; so that it was not supposable that they could unite in
so dangerous an enterprise.[56]
However, when the _Massachusetts_ petitioned the house of commons,
praying that they might be heard by council on the subject of
grievances, the house took that opportunity of discovering how jealous
it was of the kingdom’s supremacy and uncontroulable authority over the
colony; for the commons having considered the matter, resolved, “That
the petition was frivolous and groundless, a high insult upon his
majesty’s government, and tending to _shake off the dependency_ of the
said colony upon this kingdom, to which, _in law and right, they ought
to be subject_.”
The colonies might object to some acts passed respecting them,
particularly—the act prohibiting the cutting down of pitch and tar
trees, not being within a fence or enclosure—the act prohibiting the
exportation of hats made in the colonies, even from one colony to
another; and restraining all makers of hats from taking more than two
apprentices at a time, or any for less than seven years, and entirely
from employing negroes in the business—the act for the more easy
recovery of debts in his majesty’s plantations and colonies in America,
which made houses, lands, negroes, and other real estates, assets for
the payment of debts. It was passed in 1732, upon the petition of the
English merchants trading to the colonies, who complained, that the
Virginia and Jamaica, a privilege was claimed to exempt their houses,
lands, tenements, and negroes, from being attached for debt; the lords
of trade at the same time represented, that the assemblies of those
colonies could never be induced to divest themselves of these privileges
by any act of their own. But whatever objections were made to the above
acts, no general measure was adopted to obtain their repeal. They
continued in being; but the hatters act was disregarded: and methods
were devised for felling the prohibited trees, when the neighbourhood
wanted a supply. The operation of the act designed for the benefit of
creditors, was too often, as in other countries, weakened or evaded by
the dishonest debtor. Men of principle gave themselves little concern
about its existance, as they had nothing to fear from it, and knew that
the same was intended to prevent persons being cheated out of their
property.
The sugar colonists combined together, and obtained an act against the
trade carried on from the British northern provinces to the Dutch and
French colonies, for foreign rum, sugar, and molasses. The act passed in
1733, laid a duty of nine-pence a gallon on rum, six-pence a gallon on
molasses, and five pounds on every hundred weight of sugar, that came
not from the British West-India islands, and were brought into the
nothern colonies. It was professedly designed as a prohibition from the
foreign islands; but did not answer. It was found expedient, and for the
general benefit, to admit of the molasses, &c. being mostly run into the
colonies, without insisting upon the duties, or making frequent
seizures. The act unhappily produced an illegal spirit of trading; but
was continued by subsequent ones down to 1761; when the duty on the
molasses was reduced to three-pence, to prevent its being run any
longer. The act did not oppropriate the monies to be raised by the
duties, so that when, in length of time, there was a sum in the hands of
the receiver worth remitting, a demur ensued as to the application of
it.
The monies produced by this and other acts, were not considered as real
_taxes_, either by the colonies or the mother country. But some persons
wished to have taxes imposed upon them which would necessarily produce
many good posts and places in _America_ for courtiers; and during the
war with _Spain_, which broke out in 1739, a sheme for taxing the
_British_ colonies was mentioned to Sir _Robert Walpole_. He smiled, and
said, “I will leave that to some of my successors, who have more courage
than I have, and are less friends to commerce than I am. It has been a
maxim with me, during my administration, to encourage the trade of the
_American_ colonies in the utmost latitude; nay, it has been necessary
to pass over some irregularities in their trade with _Europe_; for by
encouraging them to an extensive growing foreign commerce, if they gain
£.500,000 I am convinced, that in two years afterwards full £.250,000 of
their gains will be in his majesty’s exchequer, by the labour and
produce of this kingdom, as immense quantities of every kind of our
manufactures go thither; and as they increase in their foreign American
trade, more of our produce will be wanted. This is taxing them more
agreeably to their own constitution and ours.”
Had the scheme for taxing the colonies been attempted, it would have
occasioned a ferment that must have prevented those exertions in the
common cause, which were given into by the _New-Englanders_, especially
the _Bay-men_, so the inhabitants of the _Massachusetts Bay_ are
frequently called.
War being declared against _Spain_, a requisition of troops was made to
the _Massachusetts_, and a larger number raised and embarked on his
majesty’s service than was required, of whom, scarce one in fifty
returned.
[1744.] Upon receiving the declaration of war with _France_, the general
court, then sitting, made immediate provision for raising forces for
_Anapolis_, in Nova-Scotia: they happily arrived in season; and were the
probable means of saving the country. Divers times afterward,
Nova-Scotia, when attacked by the French, was relieved by the Bay-men;
so that during that unprosperous war, possession was always kept of it
for the crown of Great-Britain.
[1745.] But the most important service to be mentioned, is the reduction
of _Louisburg_. Governor _Shirley’s_ heart was set upon effecting it. He
prevailed upon the two houses to lay themselves under an oath of
secrecy; and then communicated his plan of the expedition. A committee
was appointed to consider it, and were several days in deliberation.
After mature consideration, a majority disapproved of the proposal. The
report was accepted, and the members of the court laid aside all
thoughts of the expedition. By the governor’s influence probably, as
well as with his approbation, a petition from a number of merchants was
presented to the house of representatives, praying a re-consideration of
their vote, and their agreement to the governor’s proposal. A second
committee reported in favour of it. The report was debated in the house
the whole day. It is remarkable that Mr. _Oliver_[57] fell down and
broke his leg, while going to the house, with a full design of opposing
the expedition. His presence would have made a majority, and overset it;
but this accident occasioned his absence; and upon the division in the
house at night, the numbers were equal. The speaker, _Thomas
Hutchinson_, esq.[58] was called upon to give the casting vote; which he
did in favour of it, though he opposed it when in the committee. He was,
probably, prevailed upon thus to vote, that he might secure the favour
of the governor, and render himself the more popular.
[Jan. 25.] The point being now settled, there is an immediate union of
both parties; and all are equally zealous in carrying the design into
execution. Messengers are dispatched as far as _Pennsylvania_, to
entreat the junction of the several governments in the expedition. All
excuse themselves, except _Connecticut_, _New-Hampshire_, and
_Rhode-Island_. The first agrees to raise 500 men, the other two 300
each. _Connecticut_ and _Rhode-Island_ consent also, that their colony
sloops shall be employed as cruisers.
The time for preparing is short. But the winter proves so favourable
that all kinds of out-door business is carried on as well, and with as
great dispatch as at any other season. The appointment of a general
officer is of the utmost consequence. He must be acceptable to the body
of the people; the inlistment depends upon this circumstance. It is not
easy to find a person thus qualified, willing to accept. Colonel
_Pepperrell_[59] has the offer from the governor: but it has rather
pressed into the service than engage voluntarily. His example, in
quitting for the present his extensive mercantile business, has
considerable influence, and induces inferior officers, and even private
soldiers, to quit their smaller concerns, for the service of their
country. Governor Wentworth, of New-Hampshire, offers afterwards to take
the command of the expedition. Two or three gentlemen of prudence and
judgment, are consulted upon the occasion, by governor Shirley, who
finds them clearly of opinion, that any alteration of the present
command, would be attended with the greatest risk of entirely disgusting
both the Massachusetts assembly and soldiers.[60] By the efforts of a
general exertion in all orders of men, the armament is ready, sails, and
arrives at _Canso_ the fourth of April. The _Bay-men_ consist of 3,250
troops, exclusive of commission officers. The _New-Hampshire_ forces
304, including officers, arrived four days before. The _Connecticut_,
being 516, inclusive, arrive on the 25th. The 300 _Rhode-Islanders_ do
not arrive till the place has surrendered.
Toward the end of the month, commodore _Warren_ arrives from the
West-Indies, with a sixty gun ship, and two of forty; and joins another
of forty, which had reached _Canso_ the day before, in consequence of
his orders, received while under sail from _Portsmouth_ in
_New-Hampshire_, on her way to Britain. The men of war sail immediately
to cruise before _Louisburg_. The forces soon follow, and land at
_Chapeaurouge Bay_ the last day of April. The transports are discovered
from the town early in the morning, which gives the inhabitants the
first knowledge of the design.
The second day after landing, 400 men march round behind the hills, to
the north-east harbour, where they get about midnight, and fire all the
houses and store-houses until they come within a mile of the grand
battery. The clouds of thick smoke proceeding from the pitch, tar, and
other combustibles, prevent the garrison’s discovering the enemy, though
but a few rods distant. They expect the army upon them, and desert the
fort, having thrown their powder into a well; but the cannon and shot
are left, and prove of service to the Americans. A party, less than
twenty, come up to the battery the next morning early; and seeing no
signs of men, suspect a plot, and are afraid to enter. At length, an
_Indian_, for a pint of rum, ventures in alone through an embrasure, and
discovers the state of it to the rest, just as a number of French are
re-landing to recover possession. The army has near two miles to
transport their cannon, mortars, &c. through a morass. This must be done
by mere dint of labour. The hardiest and strongest bodies are employed,
and the service performed, agreeable to the advice of major Ezekiel
Gilman, of Exeter, who having been used to draw the masts over the
swamps, proposed making sleds to put the cannon, &c. upon, and then
yoking the men together for draught. The men know nothing of regular
approaches. They make merry with the terms _zigzags_ and _epaulements_;
and taking advantage of the night, go on, void of art, in their own
natural way.
While the forces are busy ashore, the men of war and other vessels are
cruising off the harbour, when the weather permits; and on the
eighteenth of May, capture a French sixty-four gun ship, having 560 men
on board, and stores of all sorts for the garrison. This prize, with the
arrival of other British ships, make the commodore’s fleet eleven by the
12th of June, consisting of a 64, four of 60 guns, one of 50, and five
of 40. It is given out that an attack will be made by sea with the
ships, on the eighteenth, while the army do the like by land. Whether a
general storm is really intended or not, the French seem to expect it,
from the preparations on board the men of war, and do not incline to
stand it. On the fifteenth, a flag of truce is sent to the general,
desiring a cessation of hostilities, that they may consider of articles
for a capitulation. Time is allowed; but their articles are rejected by
the general and commodore, and others offered, which are accepted by the
French, and hostages exchanged. The city is delivered up on the 17th of
June. But as it is the time to expect vessels from all parts to
_Louisburg_, the French flag is kept flying as a decoy. Two East-India,
and one South Sea ship, of the value of £.600,000 sterling, are taken by
the squadron, at the mouth of the harbour, into which they undoubtedly
meant to enter.
The weather proved remarkably fine during the siege; the day after the
surrender the rains began, and continued ten days incessantly, which
would undoubtedly have proved fatal to the expedition, had not the
capitulation prevented. It is not of material consequence for us to
determine whether the land or sea force had the greatest share in the
reduction of _Louisburg_. Neither would have succeeded alone. But there
was certainly the strongest evidence of a generous, noble, public
spirit, in the _New-Englanders_, which first inclined them to the
undertaking, and of a firmness of mind in the prosecution of it; for the
labour, fatigue, and other hardships of the siege were without parallel
in all preceding American operations.[61] The paying of the charges of
this expedition in 1748, lessens not the merit of the New-England
attempt; for they began it when they had no promise, and very little
prospect of being reimbursed. Had it not succeeded, they would not have
been reimbursed, and must therefore have been involved in the greatest
distress. This they foresaw, and yet cheerfully ran the risk for the
public service. It would have cost the crown double the sum paid the
New-England governments, to have sent an armament from Great-Britain for
the reduction of the same place. The colonies met with a heavy loss, not
easily repaired, in the destruction of the flower of their youth, by
camp fevers, other sicknesses, the hardships and distresses of the
siege. Of how much importance Louisburg was in the opinion of the
French, appeared from their demanding two hostages of the first nobility
in Britain as pledges for its restitution.
Should you hereafter read, “The leading men in the government of the
_Massachusetts_, having been guilty of certain mal-practices, for which
they were in danger of being called to an account, projected the
expedition against _Cape Breton_, in order to divert the storm: and
proving successful, the English nation was so overjoyed that they forgot
every other idea in the general transport, so that the planners and
conductors of the expedition, instead of being called to an account for
former misdemeanors, found themselves caressed and applauded”—believe it
not—especially should the writer give “this public notice, I build
nothing upon the present narration; and I only offer it (because not
corroborated by sufficient evidence) as a probable case, and as my own
opinion.”[62] Should he be a D. D. you may think it would have been well
for him to have recollected the complaint of _Jeremiah_, “I heard the
defaming of many; report, _say they_, and we will report;” and so to
have been silent on the head of _Cape Breton_. Should you judge it
uncharitable to retort upon him; yet you may deem it just to remind him
of his own, do you find him using such like expressions as these, “As I
never believed Dr. _Franklin_ in any public matter, excepting in his
electrical experiments, I was resolved to see with my own eyes, whether
what he advanced was true or not, having a strong suspicion that he
fibbed designedly, like Sir _Henry Wotton_’s ambassador, _patriæ
causa_.”[63]
But to return, the year after the reduction of Louisburg [1746.]
Great-Britain entertained the design of reducing _Canada_; and
requisitions were made to the colonies, from New-Hampshire to Virginia,
inclusive. It was expected that they should raise at least 5,000 men;
they voted 8,200; and the _Massachusetts_, to the amount of 3,500, were
ready to embark by the middle of July, about six weeks from the first
notice.[64] Though the expedition was not prosecuted, this did not
lessen the merit of the colonies in preparing to second the views of the
British government.
[1748.] No sooner were the distresses of war closed, by the renewal of
peace, than the colonists, particularly of _New-England_, were alarmed
with the report of an _American Episcopacy_; which it was the most
earnest desire of Dr. _Thomas Secker_, late archbishop of _Canterbury_,
to establish. The doctor, when bishop of _Oxford_, in his sermon before
the society for propagating she gospel, &c. “began those invectives
against the colonists and their religious character, which have been
unwarily continued, and were founded entirely upon misinformations and
misrepresentations of interested persons, the missionaries especially,
who found their account in abusing better christians than
themselves.”[65] This conduct had not the least tendency to reconcile
them to the project, but the direct contrary: and argued a secret
bitterness of spirit, which promised no great moderation, if the scheme
of episcopising succeeded. The talk of introducing bishops into America,
was very warm among the episcopalians in Connecticut; and it is not an
uncharitable conjecture, that it originated from, or was promoted by the
zeal of bishop Secker. During the height of the conversation, a worthy
divine, now at Rhode-Island, had the hopes of a bishopric held out to
him, to induce him to turn episcopalian, though without effect. The
colonists had reason to dread the introduction of episcopacy, for it
could not be thought it should come unaccompanied with such a degree of
civil power as would at length trample upon the rights of other
denominations. An extensive and united hierarchy, however named, when
armed with civil authority and in alliance with state power, is a
dangeaous engine, if under the direction of a crafty politician. The
failure of the episcopising project at this period, might be owing in a
great measure, to the part the _dissenting deputation_ acted upon the
occasion: for which the representatives of the Massachusetts Bay
returned them their thanks, in a message signed by the speaker.[66] But
though the colonies were relieved from this cause of uneasiness, they
were laid under another, by the parliament’s passing an act, enacting,
“That from and after the twenty-fourth of June, 1750, no _mill_ or
_other engine_ for _slitting_ or _rolling_ of _iron_, or any _platting
forge_, to work with a _tilt hammer_, or any _furnace_ for _making
steel_, shall be erected; or, after such erection, continued _in any of
his majesty’s colonies in America_.”
The four New-England colonies, however, had no just reason to complain,
when the power of parliament passed an act [1751.] “to regulate and
restrain paper bills of credit in said governments, and to prevent the
same being legal tenders in payment of money;” as they had made the act
absolutely necessary, that so British creditors might be secured from
being defrauded by a legal tender of a depreciated and depreciating
paper currency.
The year after the peace, a grant of 600,000 acres of the finest
American land in the neighbourhood of the _Ohio_, was made out to
certain noblemen, merchants, and others, of _Westminster_, _London_, and
_Virginia_, who associated under the title of the _Ohio Company_. The
governor of Canada obtained early intelligence of it; and was alarmed
with the apprehension that a scheme was in agitation, which would
forever deprive the French of the advantage arising from the trade with
the _Twightwees_, and cut off the communication so beneficial to the
colonies of _Louisiana_ and _Canada_. He wrote therefore to the
governors of _New-York_ and _Pennsylvania_, acquainting them that the
English traders had encroached on the French territories, by trading
with their Indians; and that if they did not desist, he should be
obliged to seize them wherever they were found. This was the first time
that either French or British had pretended to any exclusive trade with
any Indians, or even the declared friends and allies of either; for it
was expressly stipulated at the treaty of _Utrecht_, that, on both
sides, the two nations should enjoy full liberty of going and coming
among the Indians of either side, on account of trade; and that the
natives of the Indian countries should, with the same liberty, resort as
they pleased, to the British or French colonies, for the purpose of
trade, without any molestation from either the British or French
subjects.
The British Indian trade had been carried on mostly with _Pennsylvania_
by the river _Susquehanna_; a great part of it was now to be diverted
into another channel by the _Ohio company_; who by opening a waggon road
through the country, and building a truck-house at _Will’s-creek_, were
providing for its being carried into _Virginia_ by the _Patomack_. The
Pennsylvania traders, jealous of the Ohio company, were upon the watch
to injure them, which soon offered, when Mr. _Gist_ was employed by the
company, in surveying the lands upon the _Ohio_, in order to their
procuring 600,000 acres of the best and most convenient for the Indian
trade. He carefully concealed his design from the Indians, who were no
less suspicious and inquisitive; and being jealous that he meant to
settle their lands, made use of threats. They were not pacified till
there was delivered to them a pretended message from the king of
Great-Britain. The Pennsylvania traders, actuated by revenge, informed
both French and Indians, what was the service on which he was employed;
and while he was on his progress in the spring of 1771, some French
parties, with their Indians, put the governor of Canada’s menace into
execution, and [1753.] seized the British traders who were trading among
the _Twightwees_, and carried them to a fort they were building on the
south side of lake _Erie_. The British, alarmed at the capture of their
brethren, retired to the Indian towns for shelter, and the _Twightwees_,
resenting the violence done their allies, assembled to the number of
five or six hundred, and scoured the woods till they found three French
traders, whom they sent to Pennsylvania. The French, however, determined
to persist; and proceeded to build a second fort, about fifteen miles
south of the former, upon one of the branches of the Ohio. They also
erected a fort at the conflux of the _Ohio_ and _Wabache_; and thus
completed their designed communication between the mouth of the
_Missisippi_ and the river _St. Lawrence_. Nothing was done by the
Pennsylvania government, so that the French continued to strengthen
themselves without interruption; and encouraged by the little notice
taken of their violence, began to seize and plunder every British trader
they found on any part of the Ohio.
Repeated complaints were made to lieutenant governor _Dinwiddie_, of
Virginia; and as the Ohio company, whose existence depended upon
stopping the French encroachments and pretensions on that river, had
great influence there, that colony was prevailed upon to act with some
vigor.
The lieutenant governor having informed the house of burgesses, on the
first of November, that the French had erected a fort on the Ohio, it
was resolved to send some body to Mr. _St. Pierre_, the French
commandant, to demand the reason of his hostile proceedings, and to
require him at the same time to withdraw his forces. Major _Washington_,
who was of age only on the eleventh of the preceding February, offered
his service on this important occasion. The distance he had to go was
more than four hundred miles; two hundred of which lay through a
trackless desert, inhabited by Indians; and the season was uncommonly
severe. Notwithstanding these discouraging circumstances, the major,
attended by one companion only, set out upon this hazardous enterprise.
He travelled from Winchester on foot, carrying his provisions on his
back. Upon his arrival at the place of destination and delivering his
message, the French commandant refused to comply, denied the charge of
hostilities, and said that the country belonged to the king of France;
that no Englishman had a right to trade upon any of its rivers; and
that, therefore, he would seize, according to orders, and send prisoners
to Canada, every Englishman that should attempt to trade upon the Ohio
or any of its branches. Before major _Washington_ had got back, or the
Virginians had heard of the French commandant’s answer, they sent out
proper people, provided with materials for erecting a fort at the
conflux of the Ohio and Monongahela, whom he met on his return. After
excessive hardships, and many providential escapes, during his long and
tedious undertaking, he arrived safe at Williamsburgh, and gave an
account of his negociation to the house of burgesses the 14th of
February following.
Before the Virginians had finished their fort, the French came upon
them, drove them out of the country, and erected a regular fort on the
very spot where they had been at work. The consent of the Indian
warriors had not been gained by the Virginians, or they would have
supported the British against the French attack.
These proceedings of the French galled the British ministry. The Ohio
Company whose schemes were now demolished, was their fondling. They
could not submit to have their friends so treated; and therefore no
sooner had they the news, than it was resolved to instruct the colonies
to oppose the French encroachments by force of arms. The instructions
were received at Virginia early in the spring of 1754. The Virginians
applied to the other colonies for additional troops. Captain James
Mackay, with his independent company, upon the first order marched with
the utmost expedition from South Carolina to their assistance. Without
waiting for two independent companies from New-York, who were likewise
ordered to assist them, the Virginians resolved by themselves with
Mackay’s company, to oppose the French encroachments; and sent off that
and three hundred men raised by the colony, under the command of late
major, but now colonel Washington. An engagement ensued between a party
of French from fort _Du Quesne_, whom colonel Washington attacked and
defeated, on the twenty-eight of May—which put Mr. _de Villier_ upon
marching down against him with 900 men besides Indians, and attacking
him on the third of July. Washington made so brave a defence behind a
small incomplete intrenchment, called fort _Necessity_, that Villier
seeing what desperate men he had to deal with, and desirous of saving
his own, offered him an honorable capitulation; but the French officer
was careful, in forming the articles, to throw the blame of the war upon
the British, and to make it thought that they were the agressors.
The lords commissioners for trade and plantations, had also recommended
to the several colonies, to appoint commsssioners to meet each other.
Their Lordships designed, that there should be a general league of
friendship, between all the colonies, and the Indians, in his majesty’s
name. The _Massachusetts_ general court not only acceded to the
proposal, but both houses desired his excellency, governor _Shirley_
(April 10.) “to pray his majesty, that affairs which relate to the six
nations and their allies may be put under some general direction as his
majesty shall think proper; that the several governors may _be obliged_
to bear their proportions of defending his majesty’s territories against
the encroachments of the French, and the ravages and incursions of the
Indians.”
[July.] A general meeting of the governors and chief men from several of
the colonies, was held at _Albany_. At this congress, the commissioners
were unanimously of opioion, that an _union of all the colonies_ was
absolutely necessary for their common defence. The plan was, in short,
“That a grand council should be formed of members, to be chosen by the
assemblies, and sent from all the colonies; which council, together with
a governor-general to be appointed by the crown, should be empowered to
make general laws, to raise money in all the colonies for the defence of
the whole.” It was drawn up by Mr. _Hutchinson_, was accepted, and sent
home. Had it been approved and established, _British America_ thought
itself sufficiently able to cope with the _French_ without further
assistance; several of the colonies, in former years, having alone
withstood the enemy, unassisted not only by the mother country, but by
any of the neighbouring provinces. A _stamp act_ was talked of among the
commissioners, of which number was Mr. (now Dr.) _Franklin_, one of the
three from Pennsylvania; and it was thought a proper mode of taxing;
under the apprehension, that in its operation it would affect the
several governments fairly and equally. The idea of a stamp act had been
held out, so early as 1739, in two publications drawn up by a club of
American merchants at the head of whom were Sir _William Keith_,
governor of Pennsylvania, Mr. _Joshua Gee_, and many others. They
proposed, for the protection of the British traders among the Indians,
the raising a body of regulars, to be stationed all along the western
frontier of the British settlements; and that the expence should be paid
from the monies arising from a duty on stamp paper and parchment in all
the colonies to be laid on them by act of parliament. The congress plan
was not agreeable to the views of ministry; another was proposed—“That
the governors of all the colonies, attended by one or two members of
their respective councils, should assemble, concert measures for the
defence of the whole, erect forts where they judged proper, and raise
what troops they thought necessary, with power to draw upon the British
treasury for the sum that should be wanted; and the treasury to be
re-imbursed by a tax laid on the colonies by an act of parliament.” When
you are reminded, that the governors and councils were chiefly of the
king’s appointing, you will be apt to view the scheme as a most subtle
and dangerous contrivance, to provide for favorites, to sap the
liberties of the Americans, and eventually to chain them down to the
most abject slavery. Had the congress plan met with the countenance of
minstry, it might have been adopted after a while; though of that, it
appeared, there could be no certainty; for when the governor laid it
before the _Massachusetts_ assembly in October, the assembly determined,
not to give it the least countenance. The ministerial plan was
transmitted to governor _Shirley_, who was known to be for the British
parliament’s laying the tax. It was communicated by him to Mr. Franklin,
then at his native place, Boston, who soon returned it with a few short
remarks, and the next day sent the governor the following letter, _viz._
“SIR, _Wednesday morning, Dec. 1754_
I mentioned it yesterday to your excellency, as my opinion, that
excluding the people of the colonies from all share in the choice of the
grand council, would probably give extreme dissatisfaction, as well as
the taxing them by an act of parliament, where they have no
representative. In matters of general concern to the people and
especially where burthens are to be laid upon them, it is of use to
consider, as well what they will be apt to think and say, as what they
ought to think; I shall therefore, as your excellency requires it of me,
briefly mention what of either kind occurs to me on this occasion.
First, they will say, and perhaps with justice, that the body of the
people in the colonies are as loyal, and as firmly attached to the
present constitution and reigning family, as any subjects in the king’s
dominions:
That there is no reason to doubt the readiness and willingness of the
representatives they may choose, to grant from time to time such
supplies for the defence of the country, as shall be judged necessary,
so far as their abilities will allow:
That the people in the colonies, who are to feel the immediate mischiefs
of invasion and conquest by an enemy, in the loss of their estates,
lives and liberties, are likely to be better judges of the quantity of
forces necessary to be raised and maintained, forts to be built and
supported, and of their own abilities to bear the expence, than the
parliament of England at so great a distance:
The governors often come to the colonies merely to make fortunes with
which they intend to return to Britain; are not always men of the best
abilities or integrity; have many of them no estates here, nor any
natural connections with us, that should make them heartily concerned
for our welfare; and might possibly be fond of raising and keeping up
more forces than necessary, from the profits accruing to themselves, and
to make provision for their friends and dependants:
That the counsellors in most of the colonies being appointed by the
crown, on the recommendation of governors, are often of small estates,
frequently dependent on the governors for offices, and therefore too
much under influence;
That there is, therefore, great reason to be jealous of a power in such
governors and councils, to raise such sums as they shall judge
necessary, by draft on the lords of the treasury, to be afterward laid
on the colonies by act of parliament, and paid by the people here; since
they might abuse it, by projecting useless expeditions, harrassing the
people, and taking them from their labour to execute such projects,
merely to create offices and employments, and gratify their dependants,
and divide profits:
That the parliament of England is at a great distance, subject to be
misinformed and misled by such governors and councils, whose united
interests might probably secure them against the effect of any complaint
from hence:
That it is supposed to be an undoubted right of _Englishmen_ not to be
taxed but by their own consent given through their representatives:
That the colonies have no representatives in parliament:
That to propose taxing them by parliament, and refuse them the liberty
of choosing a representative council, to meet in the colonies, and
consider and judge of the necessity of any general tax, and the quantum,
shows a suspicion of their loyalty to the crown, of their regard for
their country, or of their common sense and understanding, which they
have not deserved:
That compelling the colonies to pay money without their consent, would
be rather like raising contributions in an enemy’s, country, than taxing
_Englishmen_ for their own public benefit:
That it would be treating them as a conquered people, and not as true
British subjects:
That a tax laid by the representatives of the colonies might easily be
lessened, as the occasion should lessen; but being once laid by
parliament, under the influence of the representations made by
governors, would probably be kept up, and continued for the benefit of
governors, to the grievous burden and discouragement of the colonies,
and prevention of their growth and increase:
That a power in governors to march the inhabitants from one end of the
British and French colonies to the other, being a country of at least
1500 square miles, without the approbation or consent of their
representatives first obtained, might occasion expeditions grievous and
ruinous to the people, and would put them upon a footing with the
subjects of France in Canada, that now groan under such oppression from
their governor, who for two years passed, has harrassed them with long
and destructive marches to the Ohio:
That, if the colonies in a body may be well governed by governors and
councils appointed by the crown without representatives, particular
colonies may as well, or better, be so governed: a tax may be laid on
them all by act of parliament for support of government, and their
assemblies be dismissed as an useless part of the constitution:
That the powers proposed by the _Albany_ plan of union, to be vested in
a grand representative council of the people, even with regard to
military matters, are not so great as those of the colonies of
_Rhode-Island_ and _Connecticut_ are entrusted with by their charter,
and have never abused: for by this plan, the president general is
appointed by the crown, and controuls all by his negative; but in these
governments the people choose the governor, and yet allow him no
negative:
That the British colonies bordering on the French, are properly
frontiers of the British empire; and the frontiers of an empire are
properly defended at the joint expence of the body of the people in such
empire. It would now be thought hard, by act of parliament, to oblige
the cinque ports, or sea coasts of Britain to maintain the whole navy,
because they are more immediately defended by it; not allowing them at
the same time, a vote in choosing the members of parliament; and if the
frontiers in America must bear the expence of their own defence, it
seems hard to allow them no share in voting the money, judging of the
necessity and sum, or advising the measures:
That besides the taxes necessary for the defence of the frontiers, the
colonies pay yearly great sums to the mother country unnoticed; for
taxes paid in Britain, by the landholder or artificer, must enter into
and increase the price of the produce of land, and of manufactures made
of it; and great part of this is paid by consumers in the colonies, who
thereby pay a considerable part of the British taxes.
We are restrained in our trade with foreign nations; and where we could
be supplied with any manufacture cheaper from them, but must buy the
same dearer from Britain, the difference of price is a clear tax to
Britain. We are obliged to carry great part of our produce directly to
Britain, and wherein the duties there laid upon it lessen its price to
the planter, or it sells for less than it would in foreign markets, the
defference is a tax paid to Britain.
Some manufactures we could make, but are fobidden, and must take of
_British_ merchants; the whole price of these is a tax paid to Britain.
By our greatly increasing the demand and consumption of British
manufactures, their price is considerably raised of late years; their
advance is clear profit to Britain, and enables its people better to pay
great taxes; and much of it being paid by us, is a clear tax to Britain.
In short, as we are not suffered to regulate our trade, and restrain the
importation and consumption of British superfluities, (as Britain can
the consumption of foreign superfluities) our whole wealth centres
finally among the merchants and inhabitants of Britain; and if we make
them richer, and enable them better to pay their taxes, it is nearly the
same as being taxed ourselves, and equally beneficial to the crown.
These kind of secondary taxes, however we do not complain of, though we
have no share in the laying or disposing of them: but to pay immediate
heavy taxes, in the laying, appropriation, and disposition of which we
have no part, and which, perhaps, we may know to be as unnecessary as
grievous, must seem hard measure to _Englishmen_; who cannot conceive,
that by hazarding their lives and fortunes, in subduing and settling new
countries, extending the dominion, and increasing the commerce of their
mother nation, they have forfeited the native rights of _Britons_, which
they think ought rather to be given them as due to such merit, if they
had been before in a state of slavery. These and such kind of things as
these, I apprehend, will be thought and said by the people, if the
proposed alteration of the Albany plan should take place. Then the
administration of the board of governors and councils so appointed, not
having any representative body of the people to approve and unite in its
measures, and conciliate the minds of the people to them, will probably
become suspected and odious: dangerous animosities and feuds will arise
between the governors and governed, and every thing go into confusion.
Perhaps I am too apprehensive in this matter; but having freely given my
opinion and reasons, your excellency can judge better than I whether
there be any weight in them; and the shortness of the time allowed me,
will, I hope, in some degree, excuse the imperfections of this scrawl.
With the geatest respect and fidelity, I have the honor to be, your
excellency’s most obedient and most humble servant,