LETTER II.
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.