Mr. Samuel Adams’s name will occur frequently in the course of our correspondence; be it noted, therefore, that the first time of his being returned for Boston, [Sept. 27, 1765] and serving as a representative, was upon an election occasioned by the death of Oxenbridge Thacher, esq. The deceased belonged to the band of patriots; but when he happened to think differently from Mr. Otis, jun. in the house of assembly, the latter treated him in so overbearing and indecent a manner, that he was obliged at times to call upon the speaker to interpose and protect him. The state of affairs required a particular attention to the political sentiments of the person who should be chosen. The inhabitants, in fixing upon Mr. S. Adams, made choice of a member who was zealously attached to the rights of the Massachusetts in particular, and the colonies in general, and but little to his own personal interests. He was well qualified to second Mr. Otis, and learned in time to serve his own public views by the influence of the other. He was soon noticed by the house, chosen and continued their clerk from year to year, by which means he had the custody of their papers, and of these he knew how to make an advantage for political purposes. He was frequently upon important committees, and acquired great ascendency by discovering a readiness to acquiesce in the proposals and amendments of others, while the end aimed at by them, did not eventually frustrate his leading designs. He showed a pliableness and complaisance in these smaller matters, which enabled him in the issue to carry those of much greater consequence; and there were many favorite points which the sons of liberty in the Massachusetts meant to carry, even though the stamp act should be repealed.

[1766.] Mr. Pitt’s declaration against the parliament’s right to impose internal taxes, and his saying I am glad America has resisted, were seized with eagerness by the popular leaders in the colonies. They praised and idolized him for the same, without regarding what he had declared in favor of the authority of parliament in all cases of external taxation, and for enforcing all laws for that purpose; and notwithstanding his having said, “If obedience be refused, I would not suffer a horse-nail to be made in the plantations.” Their spirits were elated, and they took encouragement from his declaration, to fortify themselves in their own sentiments upon American liberty.

It is impossible to express or describe the extraordinary joy with which the body of the Americans received the news of the repeal, though the power of the vice-admiralty courts remained unabridged, and the declaratory act was added. The latter was considered by some, as passed merely to save appearances, while contemned by others, whose wisdom would have been more evident had they repressed their contempt, whatever was their opinion. In regard to the former, “the judges of the vice-admiralty courts in the colonies, had assigned them, by acts of parliament, a jurisdiction for the recovery of penalties upon the laws of revenue and trade, without juries for near a century past.”^[92] Had a prudent and moderate temper taken possession of all parties at this period, it had been happy: but they were so much heated in some colonies, as to be determined upon opposing each other.

When the choice of members for Boston, to represent the town in the next general court, was approaching, Mr. John Rowe, a merchant, who had been active on the side of liberty in matters of trade, was thought of by some influential persons. Mr. Samuel Adams artfully nominated a different one, by asking with his eyes looking to Mr. Hancock’s house, “Is there not another John that may do better?” The hint took. Mr. John Hancock’s uncle was dead, and had left him a very considerable fortune. Mr. Samuel Adams judged that the fortune would give credit and support to the cause of liberty; that popularity would please the possessor; and that he might be easily secured by prudent management, and might make a conspicuous figure in the band of patriots.

Messrs. James Otis, jun. Thomas Cushing, Samuel Adams, and John Hancock (who had never been of the house before) were returned for Boston. The town of Plymouth made choice also of a new representative, the high sheriff of the county, James Warren, esq. a gentleman of real abilities, and who espoused the side of liberty upon principle. The government wished to have him upon their side, and played off both threats and promises; however he was immoveable.

[May 28.] The general court met according to charter. The house of assembly chose Mr. Otis speaker. Governor Bernard negatived, instead of adopting the conciliating measure of accepting him. The acceptance might have softened and induced him to have dropped the plan of leaving out of the council, in the new election, the crown officers and justices of the superior court; but the refusal confirmed him in it, and by irritating the house, enabled him to execute it the more easily. The crown officers were, the lieutenant governor and secretary, Messrs. Hutchinson and Oliver; the others held only provincial commissions. The opposition assigned as the reason for leaving them out, that they might redress a grievance long complained of by their constituents, a dangerous union of legislative and executive powers in the same persons. But the true ones probably were, the suspicions and dislike they entertained of and to their political sentiments, and Mr. Otis’s having been negatived. Mr. Bernard retaliated, and excepted against the six counsellors chosen in the room of the others. Thus the animosity was increased. Had he negatived two or three only, there might have been an opening for healing the breach; but now it was otherwise. The liberty party gained strength, and it was ordered by the assembly [June 12.] “That the debates of this house be open, and that a gallery be erected for the accommodation of such as shall be inclined to attend them.” A gallery was prepared with the utmost expedition, and finished in a few days. It was viewed as a great acquisition to the common cause; and certainly served a double purpose. The admission of the people at large to hear the debates, and to watch the members, restrained some from speaking with their usual freedom in support of governmental measures; and encouraged others to indulge themselves in all that animated language, and those solemn protestations of disinterested zeal for the rights and privileges of their country, which are so taking with men of honest minds and plain understandings. But you are not to suppose that these protestations were always true on this side of the Atlantic any more than on yours. Many joined the banners of liberty, and violently opposed the governor and governmental measures, because of the restraints they were under from the laws of trade, the danger they were in of suffering by them, and his persisting to give these laws all the support in his power. The opposition had great advantage in the political contest, by branding all the supporters of government as friends to the stamp act, though they knew to the contrary. Both sides were sensible that the act was merely financial, without any regard to the political state of America, or any purpose to remove one of its difficulties.

The house was unanimous in voting, that thanks should be returned to the duke of Grafton and other noblemen, to Mr. Pitt and other gentlemen, who had been active and aiding in the repeal of the stamp act. However, when his majesty’s recommendation to make up the losses of the sufferers in the late unhappy times, came before them from the governor, with these words, “The justice and humanity of this requisition is so forcible that it cannot be controverted; the authority with which it is introduced, should preclude all disputation about complying with it;” they objected to the manner in which it was proposed, as being “derogatory to the honor of the house, and in breach of the privileges thereof,” and unreasonably declined making compensation; whereas their privileges might have been preserved uninjured, by a vote to relieve the sufferers on their own application, out of dutiful respect to the mild representation of his majesty, and out of humanity and generosity to the sufferers.

When a compensation was first talked of, it was the general opinion that it ought to be made, but that it was due from Boston only, and not the province in general. This thought probably determined the Boston members to oppose making the compensation even out of the treasury; a way in which it might have been done, had they and their friends joined the friends of government. But had the money been ordered out of the treasury, a subsequent motion might have charged it upon Boston, which as the tax bill was to be past at that time, would have been easily effected. The interest of the town induced its members to employ every circumstance to prevent the compensation’s being voted at present. After a while repeated advices were received, that the honor of parliament was engaged to see the compensation made, and that they would certainly take it in hand, if the provincial assembly refused. It was obvious that the parliament could enforce payment from a sea port. The people of Boston grew uneasy that the money was not paid. A town-meeting was called; the above mentioned expedient was proposed and approved of, and their representatives were directed to use their influence that compensation might be granted upon those principles, and the money be paid out of the treasury.

[Sept.] Mr. Hutchinson and the other sufferers petitioned for relief.^[93] Their petitions were considered; and on the question being put, “Whether shall compensation be made out of the province treasury?” it passed in the negative. A bill, however, was finally admitted for making compensation, which was to be transmitted to the several towns, for the sentiments of the constituents.

[Dec. 5.] It passed to be engrossed, yeas 53, nays 35; but not without the house’s resolving, “That it is under a full persuasion that the sufferers have no just claim or demand on the province.” A needless resolve, tending to excite disgust in many, without answering any important purpose. The act granted compensation to the sufferers; and a free and general pardon, indemnity, and oblivion to the offenders in the late times. It was disallowed at home, on account of the assembly’s having incorporated an act of pardon with an act of compensation, without having obtained his majesty’s previous consent to such an act of pardon. The sufferers, however, received the compensation, and the offenders were not prosecuted.

[Nov. 7.] In Virginia a bill passed the house of burgesses, for erecting a statue to his majesty, as an acknowledgment for repealing the stamp act, and also an obelisk to commemorate those worthy patriots who distinguished themselves in bringing about that happy event. And at New-York [Dec.] an act was passed for making restitution to the several persons therein named, for losses sustained in the late commotions. But when the assembly was applied to for carrying into execution the act of parliament of the preceding year, for quartering his majesty’s troops, they said in their address to the governor, Sir Henry Moore, “According to the construction put on it here, it is required that all the forces which shall at any time enter this colony, shall be quartered during the whole year in a very unusual and expensive manner; by marching several regiments into this colony, this expence would become ruinous and insupportable; and therefore we cannot, consistent with our duty to our constituents, put it in the power of any person (whatsoever confidence we may have of his prudence and integrity) to lay such a burden on them,” and so justified their declining to provide for the troops.

Before closing the account of 1766, be it observed, that the people of Connecticut failed not to show their resentment against their late governor’s having qualified, agreeable to what the stamp act enjoined. There was a meeting of gentlemen at Hartford, for concerting a plan for the choice of a new governor and counsellors, in the room of those, who with him had taken the oath required. Matters were so managed at this meeting, that when the election came on, Mr. Petkin was chosen governor, and colonel Trumbull deputy governor. But the episcopalians, almost to a man, voted for Mr. Fitch; and by thus making a party with administration against the claims and rights of their colony, rendered themselves obnoxious.

[Jan. 31, 1767.] The Massachusetts house of assembly continued their opposition to the lieutenant governor Mr. Hutchinson, and resolved, “That he not being elected a counsellor, has by the charter, no right to a seat at the council board, with or without a voice, while the commander in chief is in the province.” March the fifth the council determined the same; but in their message to the house, expressed their surprise at what had been done without them, and at its not being mentioned to the board till February the twenty-fourth. Mr. Hutchinson afterward did not attempt to be present. Lord Shelburne, in answer to what was transmitted to him by the governor upon the affair, wrote in September, “the admission of the lieutenant governor, lies after all in the breast of the council only, as being the proper judges of their own privileges, and as having a right to determine whom they will admit to be present at their deliberations.” These proceedings of the Massachusetts and New-York assemblies, thought to be, in name at least, two of the most considerable in the colonies, were ascribed to an unreasonable perverseness of temper; and exasperated the friends of America by exposing them, however unjustly, to the imputation of sacrificing the interests of Great-Britain to those of America. They also encouraged the anti-Americans to resume the plan of taxing the colonies; and Mr. Charles Townsend pawned his credit to them for effecting it, and became chancellor of the exchequer. But three of the ministry opposed in the council taxing the Americans afresh, and it would have been a blessing had their opinion prevailed.

[May 13.] The chancellor of the exchequer moved for leave to bring in bills for granting a duty upon paper, glass, painters colours, &c. in the British American colonies; for settling salaries on the governors, judges, &c. in North-America; and for taking off the duty on teas exported to America, and granting a duty of three-pence a pound on the importation in America. Two bills were at length framed, the one for granting duties in the British colonies in America, on paper, glass, painters colours, tea, &c. the other for taking off the duty of a shilling a pound on all black and singlo tea, and for granting a drawback on teas exported to Ireland and America. The first received the royal assent June the twenty-ninth; the last July the second. The preamble to the first act expresses, that the duties are laid “for the better support of government, and the administration of the colonies.” The colonists deemed it unnecessary, unjust, and dangerous to their most important rights. There is a clause in it enabling the crown, by sign manual to establish a general civil list throughout every province in North-America, to any indefinite extent, with any salaries, pensions, or appointments, to any unlimited amount, even to the produce of the last farthing of the American revenue. The point was now carried, which had been the object of every minister since the reign of Charles II. viz. the establishment of a civil list in America, independent of the assemblies. Mr. Richard Jackson spoke in the house of commons against that part of the bill, and was supported only by Mr. Huske, and no other member. He was convinced, that though the judges ought to be independent both of crown and people, yet mischiefs might arise from the independency of governors on the people, much greater than could arise from their dependence; and that it was not fit that such persons as governors usually are, should be independent of the people, and dependent upon the crown for their governments. The act provides, that after all such ministerial warrants under the sign manual, as are thought proper and necessary, shall be satisfied, the residue of the revenue shall be at the disposal of the parliament. But who can suppose that such warrants will ever be satisfied till ministers have provided for all their friends and favorites? May it not be said upon the plan of this act, “the mockery of an American revenue proves at last to be the crumbs that fall from the minister’s table—the residue, indeed, of a royal warrant, countersigned by the first lord of the treasury.”^[94]

An account being received of New-York’s having refused to provide for quartering the troops, Mr. Grenville and his adherents raised such a clamor against America, that it was thought necessary to bring in a bill [May 27.] “for restraining the assembly of New-York from passing any act till they had complied with the act of parliament for the furnishing his majesty’s troops with the necessaries required by that act;” and it had the royal assent the second of July. The taking away in this manner from the province of New-York all the powers of legislation, till they should comply with the former act, occasioned a general alarm among the Americans. They now saw that their own colonial parliaments, as they considered them, were to be bound to what the British ministry might deem their good behavior, by the acts of a British parliament. Nothing could be more grating to the sons of liberty in every province. It was the club of power, which, while it knocked down the New-York assembly, threatened every other with the like, if not pliable.

A plan of a board of commissioners for the American department, in order to ease the old board of commissioners of part of its burden through increasing business, had been in contemplation. It was intended to be placed in London, in order to be near the treasury, the ultimatum of revenue matters. Mr. Paxton, thought to be the most plausible and insinuating of mankind though not the most sincere, having left Boston and gone to Britain, had free access to the chancellor of the exchequer, Mr. Charles Townsend. It is said that he whined, cried, professed, swore, and made his will in favor of that great man; and then urged the necessity of an American board of commissioners, and his having a seat at it. He might forward the business. Be that as it may, the chancellor brought in a bill [June 3.] for establishing a custom-house and a board of commissioners in America, which also passed into an act at the same time with the former. Mr. Paxton, for his own convenience and pleasure, might procure the fixing the board at Boston; but of all places it was the most improper. The people were, of all others, the most jealous of infringements on their liberties; and were the least suited to see crown officers living among them in great state, upon what they could not but deem, from the mediocrity of their own circumstances, large salaries, payable from the revenue to be raised from the colonies. The board should have been placed at New-York. Smuggling was as prevalent there as at Boston. The inhabitants had been long used to crown officers with splendid appearances; the commanders of his majesty’s troops resided much among them; numbers of them lived in a higher stile than the Bostonians; beside, there the commissioners would have had forces at hand to have supported them, and have met with greater assistance from the servants of a royal government and their connections. The timing also as well as the placing of the board, was rather unfortunate; for it supplied the Americans with the opportunity of propagating that it was appointed merely to enforce the new duties. By this means the people were inflamed, and the appointment was pronounced unconstitutional and oppressive. The duties were to take place after the twentieth of November; and in the beginning of that month, three of the commissioners, Henry Hulton, William Burch, and Charles Paxton, esqs. arrived at Boston; the other two, John Temple and John Robinson, esqs. were in America before. As to the expence of the board of customs, including the whole, it was a thousand pounds less than that of the four surveyors general, and the office connected with them at London. The chancellor had been instrumental in reviving those American animosities which the repeal of the stamp act had quieted; but did not live to see the fatal consequences which have followed, as he died the fourth of September.

[Oct. 28.] A few gentlemen at a private club in Boston, having suggested a non-importation agreement, the thought was improved upon, till at length the inhabitants, at a town meeting, agreed upon measures to promote industry, œconomy, and manufactures; thereby to prevent the unnecessary importation of European commodities. They also voted, that a subscription paper should be prepared, and a committee appointed to procure subscriptions to it; by which the parties engaged to encourage the use and consumption of all articles manufactured in any of the British American colonies; and after the thirty-first of December following, not to purchase certain enumerated articles imported from abroad.

The failure of expected success from these measures, and an apprehension of disagreeable consequences from an ineffectual opposition, were probably the motives that induced Mr. Otis at a subsequent town-meeting [Nov. 20.] to make a long speech on the side of government, wherein he asserted the king’s right to appoint officers of the customs, in which number and by what denomination he pleased; and that as to the new duties, it would be very imprudent in the town to make an opposition to them, when every town in the province, and every other province in America seemed to acquiesce in them and be contented. But the proposed measures were afterward approved of and adopted Providence and Newport.

[Jan. 1768.] The Connecticut towns and New-York followed the exemple. Still the business laboured without being productive of any important effects. This engaged the attention of one captain Malcolm, a small trader, who about eighteen months before had made himself famous by a violent and successful resistance with sword and pistol to the custom-house officers, when endeavouring to search his house for uncustomed goods, under the authority of a writ of assistance. Having, about the middle of February, safely run the cargo of a schooner from Fyall, consisting of about sixty pipes of wine, he, within two or three days, procured a meeting of some merchants and traders at which he presided. Nothing was determined upon more, than the calling of a general meeting of the merchants on Friday, March the fourth. This may be stiled the first movement of the merchants against the new acts of parliament. The result of this meeting was, that a subscription for not importing any English goods, except for the fishery, for eighteen months, should be prepared and carried round the town. It met with no great encouragement, and many declined subscribing. On this all engines were set to work; some were threatened and made afraid for their person and houses; others for their trade and credit.—By such means the subscription was filled. But the merchants of New-York and Philadelphia declined to concur in the measure, those of Boston were obliged to give it up for the present. However, they renewed it within a few months, as you will learn below.

The New-England spirit of patriotism and œconomy was greatly approved of at Philadelphia: and it was said, that “If America is saved from its impending danger, New-England will be its acknowledged guardian.” Periodical pieces were published at Boston on the nature and extent of British parliamentary power. Hints were thrown out about independency, and intimations given, that freemen were not to be governed any more than taxed but by their own consent, in real or virtual representatives. The power of British legislation over the Americans was questioned, and virtually denied. Matters were brought to this length, by broaching a new dispute that should never have been moved again; and which might happily have lain dorment for half a century or more had no fresh attempt been made to tax the Americans. Before the stamp act they allowed the mother country a certain prerogative over them. They acquiesced in the parliament’s right to make many acts, binding them in divers internal matters, and regulating their trade. They did not reason neither then nor immediately after the repeal, “if the parliament has no right to tax us internally, they have none to tax us externally, or to make any other law to bind us.” They admitted the distinction between internal and external taxation, and between raising money from the regulation of trade, and raising it for the purpose of a revenue. The wisdom of parliament should have abode by their concessions, and have adopted and confirmed their distinction. But being obliged to enter afresh the field of political controversy, great numbers began to think, that the want of representation in parliament, freed them absolutely from any obedience to the power of the British legislature; and that there was no real, and only a nominal difference between internal and external taxation, agreeable to what was insisted upon by the party opposing the repeal of the stamp act. John Dickinson, esq. began so early as in November, 1767, to employ his pen against the act which had been passed, in a series of Letters from a farmer in Pennsylvania to the inhabitants of the British Colonies. They amounted to twelve; and in them he ably maintained the rights of the colonists. He closed with a postscript in these words: “Is there not the greatest reason to hope, if the universal sense of these colonies is immediately exprest by resolves of the assembles in support of their rights, by instructions to their agents on the subject, and by petitions to the crown and parliament for redress, that those measures will have the same success now that they had in the time of the stamp act?” The inhabitants of Boston were so sensible of the eminent service he did to the common cause, that they wrote to him upon the occasion. It his answer, April the eleventh, he said, “Never will my heart become insensible till insensible of all worldly things, of the unspeakable obligation I owe to the inhabitants of the Massachusetts Bay, for the vigilance with which they have watched over, and the magnanimity with which they have maintained the liberties of the British colonies on this continent.” It was probably owing to Mr. Dickinson’s publications, that the Pennsylvania assembly, early in February, before they knew what measure the Massachusetts Bay, or any other colony, would pursue, took into consideration the act imposing duties on paper, glass, &c. and gave positive instructions to their agents, to unite with other agents, in applying to parliament and praying relief.

It may be justly concluded, from governor Bernard’s letters to lord Shelburne, that the Massachusetts assembly were inclined to bury in oblivion the discords occasioned by the stamp act, and to escape other subjects of future controversy, had not the late chancellor unhappily revived the animosities. “The house, (says the governor) from the time of opening the session to this day, has shown a disposition to avoid all dispute with me; every thing having passed with as much good humor as I could desire, except only their continuing to act in addressing the king, remonstrating to the secretary of state, and employing a separate agent. It is the importance of this innovation which induces me to make this remonstrance, at a time when I have a fair prospect of having in all other business, nothing but good to say of the proceedings of the house.”^[95]

“They have acted in all thing, even in their remonstrance, with temper and moderation: they have avoided some subjects of dispute, and have laid a foundation for removing some causes of former altercation.”^[96]

“I will make such a prudent and proper use of the letter, as, I hope, will perfectly restore the peace and tranquility of this province, for which purpose considerable steps have been made by the house of representatives.”^[97]

[Jan. 21.] The Massachusetts house of representatives, in a debate upon the expediency of writing to the assemblies of the other colonies upon the continent, with respect to the importance of joining with them,” put a question on the proposition of writing letters, desiring those assemblies to join them, which was negatived for this very reason, because containing the proposition of joining. The house thought exceptions might be taken at it, as having a tendency to from combinations; and that it might be considered at home as the appointing another congress. It is an excellent rule of the house, that no vote shall be re-considered, unless the number of members present equals the number at its passing. When they had the same number, eithty-two, which makes a full house, a motion was made [Feb. 4.] for re-considering the vote against applying to the other colonies; and the vote of re-consideration was obtained by a large majority. The same day a committee was appointed to prepare a letter to be transmitted to the several houses of representatives and burgesses upon the continent, to inform them of the measures the house had taken with regard to difficulties they were apprehensive would arise from the operation of several acts of parliament for levying duties and taxes on the American colonies. The committee after deliberating a week, reported the letter, [Feb 11.] which being read in the house, was accepted almost unanimously, in the presence of eighty-three members. It began thus: “Sir, the house of representatives of this province have taken into their serious consideration the great difficulties that must accrue to themselves and their constituents, by the operation of several acts of parliament imposing duties and taxes on the American colonies.” It then related the measures they had taken in petitioning the king, making representations to the ministry, &c. and concluded with, “the house is fully satisfied that your assembly is too generous and enlarged in sentiment, to believe that this letter proceeds from an ambition of taking the lead or dictating to the other assemblies. They freely submit their opinion to the judgment of others, and shall take it kind in your house to point out to them any thing further that may be though necessary. This house cannot conclude without expressing their firm confidence in the king, our common head and father, that the united and dutiful supplications of his distressed American subjects will meet with his royal and favorable acceptance.”

[Feb. 25.] Peter Gilman, esq. speaker of the New-Hampshire assembly wrote by order of the house, in answer to the Massachusetts circular letter—“The sentiments contained in it are highly approved, and the communication kindly received and gratefully acknowledged. The time of the house’s existance in that relation is near expiring; they cannot engage for their successors and can only express their satisfaction in the Massachusetts proceedings, and declare their hopes, that the next assembly will heartily concur in sentiments on this affair, and pursue the same method.” The letter ran in the highest recommendatory strain of the Massachusetts Bay assembly; and concluded with, “What remains for us at present, is to offer our daily prayer to the Governor and Lord of the universe, to avert the impending evil, and to make way for the full establishment of British liberty in every branch of it, and to quiet every colony in the enjoyment of all their civil and religious rights and privileges.” For these courtly expressions, with which the house declined doing any thing in the business, the next assembly was rewarded with courtly commendations. The governor, John Wentworth, esq. in a message of October the twentieth, communicated the copy of the following extract of a letter from Lord Hillsborough, of July the ninth: “It is his majesty’s pleasure that you should assure his faithful subjects in New-Hampshire, that his majesty has nothing more at heart than to promote their welfare and happiness, whose cheerful obedience to the laws of this kingdom, and steady resolution in refusing to accede to the measures and proposals which have been urged with so much indecent warmth in other colonies, cannot fail to recommend them to his royal favour and countenance.” The assembly, however, nine days after, petitioned the king, and mentioned that his royal predecessors granted them a power of legislation, limited to the approbation or disallowance of the crown, with the powers and privileges essential to British liberty, of raising internal taxes by their own representatives. The petition was most profoundly humble, and so softly worded, that it could not offend the most delicate ear of the highest parliamentary prerogative man. By some accident or contrivance, it was not sent till antiquated and out of season. Mr. Wentworth had gained an ascendency over the people of his government, by which he kept them from entering into such spirited measures for the redress of grievances as would be offensive to ministry. The other colonies adopted a different line of conduct. The Virginia house of burgesses applauded the Massachusetts representatives for their attention to American liberty; took notice of the act suspending the legislative powers of New-York; and said, “If the parliament can compel the colonies to furnish a single article to the troops sent over, they may, by the same rule, oblige them to furnish clothes, arms, and every other necessary, even to the pay of the officers and soldiers, a doctrine replete with every mischief, and utterly subversive of all that is dear and valuable.” The council concurred with them in all their proceedings; and their agent was enjoined to consult the agents of the other colonies, and to co-operate with them in applying for redress. Most of the assemblies upon the continent, as they had opportunity, approved of the doings of the Massachusetts, and harmonized with them in resolves and petitions. [April 22.] But an account of their doings had not reached Great-Britain long, before lord Hillsborough wrote Gov. Bernard upon the occasion. For want of fuller and juster information, or of due attention to the governor’s expressions, the proceeding which originated the circular letter, was mentioned—“as unfair, contrary to the real sense of the assembly, and procured by surprise; and therefore” upon this mistaken principle, the governor was instructed, “so soon as the general court is again assembled, to require of the house of representatives, in his majesty’s name, to rescind the resolution which gave birth to the circular letter from the speaker, and to declare their disapprobation of, and dissent to that rash and hasty proceeding.” In case they refused to comply, he was immediately to dissolve them, and to transmit to his lordship an account of their transactions. [June 21.] The house was informed of what was required; and three days after, of what they were to expect if unpliable. Their resolution not being returned within six days of the last part of the information, the governor sent them word he could wait no longer, which hastened the business in which they were engaged.

[30.] A committee of the house reported a letter to Lord Hillsborough, setting forth the several votes and resolutions which passed in the last house of representatives, relating to the circular letter; and showing that the whole of these matters was transacted in the height of the cession in a full house, and by a large majority. The letter was approved of by 93 out of 105 members present, and ordered to be transmitted to his lordship. The house agreed also upon a message to the governor, in which they said, “It is to us incomprehensible that we should be required, on the peril of a dissolution of the general court, to rescind a resolution of a former house, when it is evident, that that resolution has no existence but as a mere historical fact. Your excellency must know, that the resolution is, to speak in the language of the common law, not now executory, but to all intents and purposes executed. If, as is most probable, by the word rescinding is intended the passing a vote, in direct and express disapprobation of the measure taken by the former house as illegal, inflammatory, and tending to promote unjustifiable combinations against his majesty’s peace, crown and dignity, we must take the liberty to testify and publicly declare, that we take it to be the native, inherent, and indefeasible right of the subject, jointly or severally, to petition the king for the redress of grievances; provided alway, that the same be done in a decent, dutiful, loyal and constitutional way, without tumult, disorder and confusion.—If the votes of the house are to be controuled by the direction of a minister, we have left us but a vain semblance of liberty.—We have now only to inform you, that this house have voted not to rescind, and that on a division on the question, there were ninety-two nays, and seventeen yeas.” The message was firm, patriotic, and spirited; and in some parts allusively severe upon the governor, but every where decently expressed. The rescinders were governmental receivers or expectants. They had, or looked for a reward for their crouching compliance. The next day [July 1.] the governor passed some necessary acts, and then dissolved the assembly. It is scarce conceivable how a new assembly of representatives could think themselves capable of being more grossly insulted, than by being made accountable for the proceedings of a dissolved and dead one, and by being punished with immediate destruction for not declaring themselves of opposite sentiments to their predecessors. Mr. Otis, in his speech against rescinding, said, “When Lord Hillsborough knows that we will not rescind our acts, he should apply to parliament to rescind theirs. Let Britain rescind their measures or they are lost for ever.” His speech, by the patriotic enthusiasts was extolled to the skies; and by the governmental ones, was declared to be the most violent, insolent, abusive, treasonable declamation, that perhaps ever was delivered. While the matter of rescinding was under consideration, the house received an answer from Virginia, and one from New-Jersey, which, though not so very high as the other, was far from being unfavorable. They had also intelligence that they might expect the like from other assemblies: these circumstances probably increased the majority against rescinding. Had it not been for the mandate to rescind, the sessions might have terminated prosperously and peaceably; for Mr. Otis, though he had distinguished himself by carrying the objections to the authority of parliament to the greatest length, had retracted all his former opinions, in a set speech at the opening of it. He said, he had fully informed himself of the relation between Great-Britain and her colonies; and was convinced that the power of parliament over her colonies was absolute, with this qualification, that they ought not to tax them until they allowed them to send representatives; and that if the colonies had representatives, the power of parliament would be as perfect in America as in England. He then argued for an American representation. This surprised the assembly, and induced a member on the side of government to charge the opposition with the intention of making an American representation necessary, by denying the authority of parliament over them because not represented. The answers of the other party were thought to strengthen the suspicion. Upon which Mr. Timothy Ruggles pointedly said, that as they were determined to have representatives, he begged leave to recommend to them a merchant who would undertake to carry their representatives to England for half what they would sell for when they arrived there. But the best argument to have silenced any of the opposition, who might interestedly hanker after an American representation, would have been to have repeated the resolve of the house on the 29th of October, 1765—“A representation in parliament of the inhabitants of the province, such as the subjects in Britain actually enjoy, is impracticable for the subjects in America.” The day before lord Hillsborough wrote to Mr. Bernard upon the business of rescinding, a circular letter was written to the governors of the respective provinces, to accompany a copy of that of the Massachusetts, in which his lordship said, “It is his majesty’s pleasure, that you should immediately, on the receipt hereof, exert your utmost influence to defeat this flagitious attempt to disturb the public peace, by prevailing upon the assembly of your province to take no notice of it, which will be treating it with the contempt it deserves.” He then added a closing paragraph meant to influence the assemblies into a compliance. The circular letter was in some instances received in time, but produced a very different effect from what was intended. The New-York assembly had felt the weight of the parliament’s high displeasure, and been bereaved of legislative power till they should comply with the billeting act. In the beginning of the year they voted the sum wanted to the general, for the purchase of salt, pepper and vinegar, instead of passing an act conformable to the parliament’s act, which vote was accepted. But when they met at the close of the year, after having completed a petition to his majesty, another to the lords, and a remonstrance to the commons, they proceeded to consider the circular letters from the assemblies of Massachusetts-Bay and Virginia, and unanimously agreed to answer them in the most respectful manner. They then entered into some very spirited resolves in favor of liberty, and the rights of their constituents; and appointed a committee to correspond and consult with any other his majesty’s subjects out of the colony, either individually or collectively, on any matter or thing whatsoever, whereby the rights or privileges of the house or its constituents might be affected. These doings occasioned their being dissolved.

We are now entering upon another interesting period.

It had been the common practice for the tide-waiter, upon the arrival of a vessel, to repair to the cabin, and there to remain, drinking punch with the master, while the sailors and others upon deck were employed in landing the wines, molasses, or other dutiable goods. The commissioners of the customs were determined that the laws of trade should be executed.

Upon the arrival of Mr. Hancock’s sloop Liberty, Nathaniel Bernard, master, from Madeira, the tidesman, Thomas Kirk, went on board in the afternoon. Captain Marshall, in Mr. Hancock’s employ, followed; and about nine in the evening, made several proposals to Kirk, which being rejected, captain Marshall, with five or six others, laid hold of, overpowered, and confined him below for three hours, in which time the wine was taken out, before entry had been made at the custom-house or naval office. Marshall threatened Kirk in case of discovery. The captain wrought so hard in unloading the sloop, that his sudden death, that night, while in bed, before assistance could be obtained, was generally believed to have been owing to some injury received from his uncommon exertions. The next morning the master entered, as it is said, four or five pipes, and swore that was the whole of his cargo. It was resolved to seize the sloop for a false entry’s being made; though it was thought by many that no one would undertake the business.

[June 10.] Mr. Joseph Harrison, the collector, and Mr. Benjamin Hallowell, the comptroller, repaired to Hancock’s wharf. Mr. Harrison objected to the unseasonableness of the time, being between six and seven, when the lower class of people were returning from their day labour. The seizure however was made before sun-set, so as to be perfectly legal. Mr. Harrison thought the sloop might lie at the wharf, after clapping the broad arrow upon her; but Mr. Hallowell judged it would be best to move her under the guns of the Romney, and made signal for her boats to come ashore. The people upon the wharf cried out, “There is no occasion, she will lie safe, and no officer has a right to remove her;” but the master of the man of war cut her moorings and carried her off. Every mean was used to interrupt the officers in the execution of their business, and numbers swore that they would be revenged. A mob was soon collected, which increased to a thousand or two, chiefly of sturdy boys and negroes. The minds of the people were inflamed by the seizure and removal of the vessel. They had been before irritated by the captain of the man of war’s pressing some seamen belonging to the town; add to that; their aversion to the board of commissioners, the popularity of the owner, and the name of the sloop—these of course excited their resentments, and wrought them up into a combustible body. Captain Malcolm, who was deeply engaged in running the wines, headed a number of men after the seizure, and was very active in attempting to prevent the sloop’s being removed. Mr. Harrison was pelted with stones, bricks, and dirt, and received several blows with sticks, particularly one on the breast, so that it was with difficulty he could keep from falling; he was afterward confined to his bed from the injuries he had received. Mr. Hallowell, Mr. Irving, inspector of imports and exports, and the collector’s son were sharers in the treatment. They all escaped with the utmost hazard of their lives. Mr. Hallowell was confined to his house under the care of a surgeon from wounds and bruises. Mr. Richard Harrison, the collector’s son, was thrown down, dragged by the hair of his head, and otherwise treated barbarously. Mr. Irving was beaten with clubs and sticks; had his sword broken to pieces, and received a few slight wounds. The mob proceeded to the houses of the collector and comptroller, broke their windows, and those of Mr. Williams, inspector general, then dragged the collector’s boat through the town, and burnt it on the common. This was on Friday evening. Saturday and Sunday evenings are sacred; and the commissioners Hulton, Burch, Paxton and Robinson, esqrs. remained pretty easy; during the outrages, to avoid insults, they retired from their own to neighbours houses. But receiving information that further riots were intended, and the governor telling them he could not protect them, and that there would be no safety for them in Boston, considering the temper of the people; on Monday morning early, they sent a card to the governor, to let him know that they were going on board the Romney, and desired his orders for their reception at the castle, which he readily gave. They repaired first on board the man of war, and then proceded from thence to the castle. The collector and comptroller, and most of the other officers of the customs withdrew, either then or afterward. [13.] On the Monday morning large numbers of people were gathered together, and to appearance regularly formed into parties, under their different leaders, in several parts of the town. If they meant any thing against the commissioners, they were disappointed by their having withdrawn. In the afternoon printed tickets were put up, notifying a meeting of the sons of liberty the next day at ten o’clock. This prevented all mischief in the evening. [14.] At the appointed time, thousands of the lower class met; but the day being rainy, numbers adjourned to Faneuil-hall, and there agreed to send the constables about to notify a legal town meeting for the afternoon. Little else was done at this meeting, but the appointing a committee to wait upon the governor with a petition, the receiving his answer, writing a letter to a friend, and voting such instructions as they thought proper to their representatives. The common talk was that the removal of the sloop was an affront to the town, as it contained an insinuation, that she would not have been safe if left at the wharf in custody of a custom-house officer. It was asserted, and very truely, that there had been no rescue lately; but an invincible reason existed for it, as no seizure had been lately made. When captain Malcolm, more that a year and a half back, opposed in an armed manner, the officers attempting to search his house, such a number of people assembled about it, when he had got the officers out and shut his gates against them, that they were glad to retreat without doing their business. This defiance the of law passed unnoticed and unpunished, so that the officers never afterward attempted to make a seizure, although informations were not wanting, until the present time, when they were ordered by their superiors. About a month after, a schooner was seized for having thirty hogsheads of molasses on board, and was left at the wharf in custody of two custom-house officers. July the eighth at night, thirty men boarded her, confined the officers to the cabin, and carried off the molasses. The town’s-people were dissatisfied that their declarations concering the sloop Liberty, that she would have been safe if left at the wharf, should be so soon falsified. The select men sent for the master, and ordered him to return the molasses directly under pain of the displeasure of the town. It was immediately done, and the molasses put on board again, the day after it was conveyed away.

The day before the town meeting of June the fourteenth, a committee of both houses was appointed to inquire into the state of the province. When they made their report, [30.] in speaking of the affair on Friday the tenth, they said, “The seizure occasioned a number of people to be collected, who, from the violence and unprecedentedness of the procedure in carrying off the vessel, &c. took occasion to insult and abuse the officers, and to commit other disorders, &c.—Resolved, that though the extraordinary circumstances of said seizure may extenuate the criminality, yet being of a very criminal nature, and of dangerous consequence, the two houses delare their utter abhorrence and detestation of them and resolve that the governor be desired to direct the attorney-general to prosecute all persons concerned in the said riot, and that a proclamation be issued, offering a reward for making discovery, so as the rioters or abettors may be brought to condign punishment.” Neither rioters not abettors had any thing to fear from either proclamation or prosecution; and knew themselves to be perfectly safe, notwithstanding the report; but the politicians saw it was expedient to say something to save appearances, and well-meaning persons might join them, in the simplicity of their hearts, believing that the others intended their words should be productive of the events to which they seemingly pointed. At the sitting of the superior court in August, the grand jury was found to have among them several of the abettors of the Boston rioters, and particularly the famous captain Malcolm, a circumstance that necessarily quashed all informations and prosecutions, as it strongly foreboded their issue.

The council in a letter to Lord Hillsborough insinuated, that the commissioners had concerted a plan, with the design of raising a disturbance by the seizure of the sloop Liberty. The insinuation must be placed to the ill will they bore to the commissioners, more than to any thing beside. On the twenty-ninth of July, they said, “The commissioners were not obliged to quit the town; there never had been any insult offered to them; their quitting the town was a voluntary act of their own; we do not apprehend there was any sufficient ground for their quitting it.” But it appears from a manuscript in Mr. Hutchinson’s hand writing, that the commissioners applied, December the nineteenth, to each of the four judges of the superior court separately for their opinions upon four questions; and that after having conferred together, they were unanimously of opinion,

“That from the spirit which had been excited in the populace against all the commissioners of the customs, Mr. Temple excepted, they could not have remained long in safety at Boston after the seizure of the sloop Liberty, but would have been in great danger of violence to their persons and properties from a mob, which, at that time, it was generally expected would be raised for that purpose:

“That government was insufficient to restrain, suppress or punish the several mobs, which had been assembled since the fourteenth of August, 1765; and that at the time of the commissioners retiring to the castle, there was no probability that the same authority could have had any greater force:

“That they could not have returned to town, and executed their commission with safety, at any time after they withdrew, before the arrival of his majesty’s troops:

“And that they knew of no better measure that they could have taken, than retiring to Castle William.”

Mr. Temple was excepted, for he was not obnoxious to the populace, being averse to the establishment of the board of commissioners, which lessoned both his salary and his power. He wished the dissolution of it and to be restored to his former place of surveyor general of the customs. Though the rest of the commissioners could not have returned to have executed their commission with safety, they might most probably have returned and been safe, had they declined executing the same, which however was not to be expected. They continued at, but were not confined to the castle. They rode adout the country at pleasure, without any interuption from the people.

[June 15.] The commissioners wrote to general Gage, colonel Dalrymple, and commodore Hood, desiring troops to support them in their office. Whatever this application might contribute toward the sending of them, yet it certainly did not give rise to it. Measures had been taken to procure them long before. Mr. Paxton, when in London the preceding year, told Mr. Bollan repeatedly, that Mr. Hutchinson and some other of his friends were of opinion, that standing troops were necessary to support the authority of the government at Boston; and that he was authorised to inform him of this their opinion. Most probably he was authorised to inform others also. Mr. Bollan was against sending troops, and when there was a talk of doing it, endeavoured to prevent it, and freely related to a gentleman of considerable influence, what some of the principal merchants said, that they who should send over the standing troops, would certainly be cursed to all posterity.^[98] But the disposition of some to try the experiment was strengthened by a letter from the commissioners to the lords of the treasury, received before the riot happened; and rendered efficacious upon the arrival of governor Bernard’s letters at the secretary’s office, especially that of March, giving an aggravated detailed account of a terrible disturbance on the joyous anniversary of the repeal of the stamp act, which general Gage, in his letter of October to Lord Hillsborough, declared, from the best intelligence he could procure, to have been trifling. When the matter came to be considered, it was agreed to send troops to Boston. Accordingly, Lord Hillsborough, in his secret and confidential letter to Gen. Gage, [June 8.] wrote, “I am to signify to you his majesty’s pleasure, that you do forthwith order one regiment, or such force as you shall think necessary, to Boston, to be quartered in that town, and to give every legal assistance to the civil magistrate, in the preservation of the public peace, and to the officers of the revenue, in the execution of the laws of trade and revenue; and as this appears to be a service of a delicate nature, and possibly leading to consequences not easily foreseen, I am directed by the king to recommend to you to make choice of an officer for the command of those troops, upon whose prudence, resolution and integrity, you can entirely rely.” And on the eleventh, he informed the governor, that his majesty, from the representation made by him and the commissioners of the customs, had directed one regiment at least to be stationed in Boston, and to garrison, and (if necessary) to repair the castle; and had ordered a frigate, two sloops, and two cutters to repair to, and remain in the harbour of Boston, for supporting and assisting the officers of the customs in the execution of their duty. His lordship’s letter to Gage being dated two days before the riot occasioned by the seizure of the sloop Liberty, the order contained in it, could not possibly be founded on such riot; though the riot, with the subsequent transactions of the town, might be related as a reason in the resolves afterward drawn up, exhibiting the necessity of sending a military force to Boston. But persons in office are liable to fall into mistakes, through the multiplicity and hurry of business, and for want of due consideration or better intelligence. In this way you may account for his lordship’s signing a circular letter, [Sept. 2.] to the governor and council of Rhode-Island, to the following purpose—“Gentlemen, the king having observed, that the governors of his colonies have, upon several occasions, taken upon them to communicate to their councils and assemblies, either the whole or parts of letters from his majesty’s principal secretary of state, I have it in command to signify, that it is his majesty’s pleasure that you do not, upon any pretence whatever, communicate to the assembly, any copies or extracts of such letters, unless you have his majesty’s particular directions.” This was soon published in the Providence Gazette after being received. That colony chooses its own governor annually and he has neither right nor power to with-hold from the assembly copies of any such letters. Upon another occasion his lordship gave orders to the governor of Pennsylvania, in case the assembly did not act conformable to what was expected, immediately to dissolve them; whereas it is the inherent privilege of that house to set on their own adjournments; and the governor has no power to dissolve them.

[Nov. 3.] A month after the arrival of the troops at Boston Mr. Hancock was served with a precept for £.9000 sterling, by the marshal of the court of admiralty. The marshal having arrested him, demanded bail for £.3000. Five other gentlemen were arrested for the like sum. He and the five others gave bail.—The commissioners prosecuted the supposed owner, and each person they imagined concerned in unloading the wines, for the value of the whole cargo and treble damages. The vessel seized was restored after a long detention; and the suits in the courts of admiralty dropped, March the twenty-sixth, 1769, by a declaration from the king’s advocate, that his majesty would prosecute no further. It was idle to think of supporting the prosecution by sufficient evidence. Want of inclination or fear would prevent witnesses appearing, and corruption would procure counterevidence from men of no principle, who would justify themselves from the prosecution’s being built upon acts of parliament, to which they supposed the colonies owed no obedience; and would plead, as in too many instances is done at home, that it is not he who takes, but he who imposes the oath, who is chargeable with the crime of swearing falsely. The law would not allow the prosecuted any costs or damages. In this case the allowance would have been unreasonable; the innocence of the parties could not have been urged in its behalf.

The colonists could not overlook the good effects produced by the former non-importation agreement; and were earnest for playing off the same engine against the new attempts of ministry, to saddle them with the payment of taxes. About the beginning of April, several gentlemen of Boston and New-York, wrote to others at Philadelphia, in order to learn, whether they would unite with them in stopping the importation of goods from Great-Britain, until certain acts of parliament should be repealed, which were thought to be injurious to their rights, as freemen and British subjects. A numerous meeting of merchants followed, when an address was read to them. It set forth the claims of the colonies, and then went into an enumeration of grievances, which the colonists had long borne, and seemed willing to forget, had they not been alarmed afresh by the late proceedings of the ministry. The address remarked, that, in the act obliging the several assemblies to provide quarters for the soldiers, &c. a power is granted to every officer, upon obtaining a warrant from any justice (which warrant the justice is empowered and ordered to grant, without any previous oath) to break into any house by day or by night, under pretence (these are the words of the act) of searching for deserters. It pointed out to them the danger they were in, of having erected over them a despotic government, to rule them as slaves. It called upon them to deliberate, by what means they might defend their rights and liberties, and obtain a repeal of the obnoxious acts. It urged them to join in the measure proposed by their brethren of Boston and New-York; and closed with “United we conquer, divided we die.” The Pennsylvania merchants agreed with the other colonies in opinion, that the revenue acts were unconstitutional; but declined adopting the non-importation agreement, as they believed it to be premature. They knew that multitudes in Great-Britain would suffer much by a suspension of trade with her, whenever it should be carried into execution; and judged that it ought not to be made use of but as the last and most certain remedy, when petitions proved ineffectual. They saw clearly that the acts were manifestly injurious to the British trade, and hoped the parliament would therefore find it expedient to repeal them; and were willing to allow a proper time for the repeals being effected. These reasons induced them to refuse complying with the solicitations of their neighbours. But the merchants and traders of Philadelphia agreed upon a memorial, wherein they stated their grievances, which was transmitted to their mercantile friends in London, on whose assistance they relied for an application to government for relief; and this they hoped to obtain as to some of the chief, though it might not be all the articles of complaint.

But the Boston merchants and traders having been drawn in, partly by their connections with the politicians and the fear of opposing the popular stream, agreed upon a new subscription paper, [Aug. 1.] wherein they engaged as follows:—“We will not send for or import from Great-Britain, either upon our own account, or upon commissions, this fall, any other goods than what are already ordered for the fall supply.”—“We will not send for or import any kind of goods or merchandise from Great-Britain, &c. from the first of January, 1769, to the first of January, 1770, except salt, coals, fish-hooks and lines, hemp and duck, bar lead and shot, wool-cards and card-wire.”—“We will not purchase of any factor or others, any kind of goods imported from Great-Britain, from January, 1769, to January, 1770.”—“We will not import on our own account, or on commissions, or purchase of any, who shall import from any other colony in America, from January, 1769, to January, 1770, any tea, glass, paper or other goods commonly imported from Great-Britain.”—“We will not, from and after the first of January, 1769, import into this province any tea, paper, glass, or painters colours, until the act imposing duties on those articles shall be repealed.” The subscription paper was carried about town; and, at length, generally signed, though several respectable merchants remained non-subscribers. The same month the Connecticut and New-York merchants came into similar agreements; and those of Salem, the beginning of September. Some merchants had undoubtedly the foresight to provide for an abstinence from importation for a year, by unusually large orders.

A report having been spread that governor Bernard had intimated his apprehensions that one or more regiments were to be daily expected at Boston, a meeting of the inhabitants was called, and a committee appointed to wait on him to know the grounds of his apprehensions, and to pray him to issue precepts forthwith for convening a general assembly. He acknowledged his having received those informations which produced such apprehensions, but said they were of a private nature. The calling of another assembly he told them could not be complied with, till his majesty’s commands were received. The answer being reported, it was resolved, “That the freeholders, and other inhabitants of the town of Boston, will, at the peril of their lives and fortunes, take all legal and constitutional measures to defend all and singular the rights, liberties, privileges, and immunities, granted in their royal charter.” It was also declared to be the opinion of those present, “That a suitable number of persons to act for them as a committee in convention, with such as may be sent to join them from the other towns, should be now chosen, in order that such measures may be consulted and advised, as his majesty’s service, and the safety of the province may require.” It was then voted, “That the select men of Boston should write to the select men of the other towns, to acquaint them with the foregoing resolutions, and to propose, that a convention be held at Fanueil-hall in Boston, on the twenty-second instant.” It was afterward voted, “That, as there is an apprehension, in the minds, of many, of an approaching war with France, those inhabitants who are not provided, be requested to furnish themselves forthwith with arms.

[Sept. 22.] The convention, consisting of committees from ninety-six towns and eight districts, met as proposed; and after conference and consultation, petitioning the governor, declaring that they only considered themselves as private persons, making loyal professions, expressing their aversion to standing armies, to tumults and disorders, their readiness to assist in suppressing riots and preserving the peace, and recommending patience and regard to good order, they broke up and went home on Thursday the twenty-ninth. Advice was received the day before, that the men of war and transports from Halifax, with some hundreds of troops, were safe arrived at Nantasket harbour, a few miles below Castle William. Two days before the convention closed, they dispatched a letter to Mr. Berdi, containing a representation of what had taken place, with such papers and instructions as were judged most suitable to the circumstances of their assembly.

When the news was first received of troops being ordered to Boston, broad hints were thrown out that they should never land; and to strengthen the appearance of an intention to oppose them, a barrel was placed upon the beacon, supposed to be a tar barrel, to have been fired to call in the country upon the troops appearing, which was afterwards found to be an empty nail barrel. Many of the deputies came down to the convention, with instructions and dispositions to prevent the Bostonians involving the province in the fatal consequences of their own furious devices. Numbers were from the beginning sensible of the impropriety and danger of their proceeding, and desirous by a moderate conduct, to correct the one and ward off the other. The governor’s message to them after their address, was high, and might tend to keep some of them in awe, as the troops were thought to be at no great distance. When Mr. Otis joined them, instead of being violent he was quite moderate: and when Mr. Samuel Adams attempted to launch out into the same free and unrestrained language to which he was accustomed in the house of representatives, he was presently silenced.

The convention having finished in the above manner, the persons just named assumed to themselves the moderation of those whom they called together for very different purposes. The governor himself was not always wholly ignorant of what was going forward among the sons of liberty. He kept up an acquaintance with some of them, and by that means, at times, procured useful intelligence, while he gave his informers the strongest assurance that their names should not be quoted, nor any communication be made of it, which could make them suspected. Too much occasion was given for this paragraph, which soon after appeared in the New-York Journal. “I blame the Bostonians for having given some room for the idle reports of their designing to oppose the landing of the troops, by the ridiculous puff and bombast (for which our eastern brethren have always been too famous) of warning every man to provide himself with a good firelock, ammunition, &c. under the disingenuous jesuitical pretence of the prospect of a French war, full as absurd and hypocritical as is the pretence of a military establishment in America for its protection and defence.”

When the troops from Halifax were daily expected, the governor would have prevailed upon the council to have provided quarters for them in Boston, but they refused; and in answer to what he advanced, said, “the troops are by act of parliament, to be quartered no where else but in the barracks, until they are full: there are barracks enough at the castle to hold both the regiments; and it is therefore against the act to bring any of them into town.” However, the orders of general Gage to lieutenant-colonel Dalrymple were positive to land one of them at Boston. But in the interim, captain Montresor, the engineer arrived, with letters of a subsequent date, from general Gage, for the governor and the colonel, wherein the general mentioned, that it being reported and believed from a number of private letters and the publications, that the people in and about Boston had revolted, he had therefore sent the captain to assist the forces, and enable them to recover and maintain the castle, and such other posts as they could secure. Upon this the colonel altered his plan, and concluded to land both regiments at Boston without loss of time. The fleet therefore was immediately put into motion, and the next morning commanded the whole town.—Every thing being fully prepared, near upon fourteen^[99] ships of war lying with their broadsides to the town, having springs on their cables, and their guns ready for firing instantly upon the place, in case of the least opposition; about one o’clock at noon, October the first, the troops began landing, under cover of the ships cannon, without molestation; and having effected it, marched into the common, with muskets charged, bayonets fixed, drums beating, fifes playing, &c. making with the train of artillery, upward of 700 men. In the evening, the select men were required to quarter the two regiments in town, but absolutely refused. One of the regiments, however, being without their camp equipage, was humanely permitted to enter Faneuil-hall and its chambers, about nine o’clock at night, that so the men might enjoy a temporary shelter. The next being Lord’s day, the town or state-house was opened in the evening, by order of the governor, for the reception of the troops, who took possession of all the chambers, except the one appropriated for the meeting of the council. He certainly stretched his authority in several points; but particularly in thus acting. This step was an insult not only to the town, as it was a great annoyance to the gentlemen and merchants, who had been accustomed to make the lower floor their exchange, but to the whole colony, as the representatives chamber was now possessed by the soldiery. After the quarters of the troops were settled, the main-guard was posted directly opposite to, and not twelve yards from the state-house with two field pieces pointed to it. It was with no small indignation that the people beheld the representatives chamber, court-house, and Faneuil-hall—seats of freedom and justice—occupied by troops, and guards placed at the doors, and the council passing through the guards in going to their own chamber. They resented also the common’s being covered with tents, and alive with soldiers; their marchings and counter-marchings to relieve the guards; the town’s being a perfect garrison, and the inhabitants being challenged by the sentinels, as they passed and repassed. Persons devoutly inclined, complained much of being disturbed at public worship on the sabbaths, with drums beating, and fifes playing, to which they had never been accustomed in the Massachusetts. Quarters being obtained for the troops, the council were required to provide barrack provisions for them, agreeable to act of parliament; but resolutely declined going into any measure which might be construed into a submission to the said act. The opposition of the council to the quartering of, and providing for the troops, was so encouraged and strengthened by Mr. James Bowdoin, who was one of them, that Mr. Hutchinson, in his letter of November 6, ascribed the whole to his management. It was thought that the peaceable landing of the troops was not what some of the ministry either expected or desired; and that they were in hopes, that the folly and rage of the town and colony would have led them into an hostile opposition, and thereby have afforded an opportunity for giving them some naval and military correction. Under this apprehension, the gentleman who delivered the first dispatches from governor Bernard, containing the account of the troops having landed, &c. narrowly watched the countenance and conduct of the person who read them, and was confirmed in such opinion. But had he not possessed that opinion, it might not have been excited by what he observed. The sentiments of the military differed so extremely from those of the Bostonians, who were unjustly viewed as rebelliously inclined, that it was not to be wondered at that they were insulted and abused, and that quarrels should ensue, tho’ they did not proceed soon to a dangerous height. Undoubtedly the inhabitants could not be continually blameless; there would necessarily be some rash and imprudent persons among such a multitude; but the greatest rashness and imprudence lay in the sending of troops on a service which could have been effectually and better executed by a naval force properly stationed and employed. Ships of war might have possessed the harbour till the commissioners could have executed their office with safety.