Governor Nicholson of Maryland wrote to the board of trade, August 16, 1698, “I have observed that a great many people in all these provinces and colonies, especially in those under proprietaries, and the two others under Connecticut and Rhode-Island, think that no law of England ought to be in force and binding to them without their own consent; for they foolishly say, they have no representatives sent from themselves to the parliament of England; and they look upon all laws made in England, that put any restraint upon them, to be great hardships.” These were the colonial sentiments two years after passing the famous declaratory act of Willian and Mary, which you will find mentioned below. Molyneux’s Case of Ireland, asserting openly the same doctrines, was first published in February, 1697–8.
The colony of New-York demands our next attention. The Dutch had settled, and named it the New-Netherlands. Charles II. resolved upon its conquest in 1664, and in March granted to his brother the Duke of York, the region extending from the western banks of Connecticut to the eastern shore of the Delaware, together with Long-Island, conferring on him the civil and military powers of government. Colonel Nichols was sent with four frigates and three hundred soldiers to effect the business. The Dutch governor being unable to make resistance, the New-Netherlands submitted to the English crown, in September, without any other change than of rulers. Few of the Dutch removed; and Nichols instantly entered upon the exercise of his power, as deputy governor of the duke of York, the proprietary.
In July, 1673, the Dutch repossessed themselves of the province, by attacking it suddenly when in a defenceless state. By the peace in February following it was restored. The validity of the grant, while the Dutch were in quiet possession having been questioned, the duke of York thought it prudent to obtain a new one the following June, and Edmund Andros having been appointed governor, the Dutch resigned their authority to him in October. Thus was New-York regained; but the inhabitants were again enslaved to the will of the conqueror; for, being admitted to no share in the legislature, they were subject to laws to which they had never assented.
[1681.] To be relieved from a servitude that had degraded the colony, and now gave dissatisfaction to every one, the council, the court of assizes, and the corporation of New-York, concurred in soliciting the duke, “to permit the people to participate in the legislative power.” The duke, though strongly prejudiced against democratic assemblies, yet in expectation that the inhabitants would agree to raise money to discharge the public debts, and to settle such a fund for the future as might be sufficient for the maintenance of the government and garrison, informed the lieutenant-governor, in 1682, that “he intended to establish the same frame of government as the other plantations enjoyed, particularly in the choosing of an assembly.”
Mr. Dongan was appointed governor in September, and instructed to call an assembly, to consist of a council of ten, and of a house of representatives, chosen by the freeholders, of the number of eighteen members. The assembly was empowered to make laws for the people, agreeable to the general jurisprudence of the state of England, which should be of no force, however, without the ratification of the proprietary. “Thus the inhabitants of New-York, after being ruled almost twenty years at the will of the duke’s deputies, were first admitted to participate in the legislative power.”
[1683.] An assembly was called on governor Dongan’s arrival, which passed an act of general naturalization, in order to give equal privileges to the various kinds of people then inhabiting the province; together with an act “declaring the liberties of the people;” as also one “for defraying the requisite charges of government for a limitted time.” The legislature was convened once more in August 1684, when it explained the last act. These seem to have been the only assemblies called prior to the revolution.
When the duke became king of England, he refused to confirm that grant of privileges to which, as duke, he had agreed. He established a real tyranny, and reduced New-York once more to the deplorable condition of a conquered province.
New-Jersey, which was also taken from the Dutch (who were considered as having no right to any of their settlements in these parts of America) was included in the grant to the duke of York. The duke disposed of it to lord Berkely Sir George Carteret who, being sole proprietors, for the better settlement of it, agreed [1664.] upon certain constitutions of government, so well relished, that the eastern parts were soon considerably peopled. One of the stipulations was, “no qualified person, at any time, shall be any ways molested, punished, disquieted, or called into question, for any difference in opinion or practice in matters of religious concernments, who does not acturally disturb the civil peace of the province; but all and every such person and persons, may, from time to time, and at all times, freely and fully have and enjoy his and their judgments and consciences in matters of religion, they behaving themselves peaceably and quietly, and not using this liberty to licentiousness, nor to the civil injury or outward disturbance of others; any law, statute, or clause contained or to be contained, usage or custom of the realm of England, to the contrary thereof in any wise notwithstanding.”[29] The lords proprietors further agreed, “for the better security of all the inhabitants in the province—That they are not to impose, NOR SUFFER TO BE IMPOSED, any tax, custom, subsidy, tallage, assessment, or any other duty whatsoever, upon any colour or pretence, upon the said province and inhabitants thereof, other than what shall be imposed by the authority and consent of the general assembly.”[30] What can more strongly express the then opinion of Lord Berkely and Sir George Carteret, as to the parliaments having no right to tax the inhabitants of the province, possessed by them as lords proprietors!
[1674.] Lord Berkely sold his moiety of the province to John Fenwick, in trust for Edward Byllinge and his assigns.—After which the proprietors, E. Byllinge, William Penn, Gawen Lawrie, Nicholas Lucas, and Edmund Warner, of the quaker persuasion, agreed with Sir George Carteret [1676.] upon a division; and that his moiety should be called New East-Jersey; and theirs New West-Jersey. The agreement respecting the not imposing or suffering to be imposed any tax, &c. was adopted: the other stipulation is worded somewhat differently—“No man, nor number of men upon earth, hath power or authority to rule over men’s conscience in religious matters; therefore it is consented, agreed and ordained, that no person or persons whatsoever, within the province, at any time or times hereafter, shall be any ways, upon any pretence whatsoever, called in question, or in the least punished or hurt, either in person, estate or privilege, for the sake of his opinion, judgment, faith or worship towards God in matters of religion; but that all and every such person and persons, may from time to time, and at all times, freely and fully have and enjoy his and their judgments, and the exercise of their consciences, in matters of religious worship, throughout all the province.”[31] It was also agreed, “that all elections be not determined by the common and confused way of cries and voices; but by putting balls into balloting boxes, to be provided for that purpose, for the prevention of all partiality, and whereby every man may freely choose according to his own judgment and honest intention.”[32]
Soon after, many quakers resorted to West-Jersey from England, and the country filled apace. But the people early experienced the dreadful effects of arbitrary power. Major Andros the governor of New-York, imposed 10 per cent. on all goods imported at the Hoar-kill,[33] and demanded 5 percent. of the settlers at arrival or afterwards, though neither West-Jersey, nor the Hoar-kill, was legally under his jurisdiction. They complained of the hardship from the first, but bore it patiently, till about 1680, when application was made to the duke of York, who referred the matter to the council, where it rested for a considerable time, and then was reported in their favour, and the duty ordered to be discontinued. Among the arguments used by Messrs. William Penn, George Hutchinson and others, chiefly if not all quakers, in the paper presented to the duke’s commissioners, were these, “Powers of government are expressly granted, in the cenveyance lord Berkely made us; for that only could have induced us to buy it; and the reason is plain, because to all prudent men, the government of any place is more inviting than the soil: for what is good land without good laws; the better, the worse. And if we could not assume people of an easy and free, and safe government, both with respect to their spiritual and worldly property, that is an uninterrupted liberty of conscience and an inviolable possession of their civil rights and freedoms, by a just and wise government, a mere wilderness would be no encouragement; for it were a madness to leave a free, good and improved country, to plant in a wilderness, and there adventure many thousands of pounds, to give an absolute title to another person to tax us at will and pleasure.” Natural right and human prudence oppose such doctrine all the world over, as says, “that people free by law, under their prince at home, are at his mercy in the plantations abroad.” The King’s grant to the duke of York, is plainly restrictive to the laws and government of England. Now, we humbly conceive, it is made a fundamental in our constitution, and government, that the king of England cannot justly take his subjects goods without their consent: this needs no more to be proved than a principal; ’tis jus indigene, and home-bore right, declared to be law by divers statutes; as in the great charter, ch. 29 and 34. Ed. III. ch. 2; again 25 Ed. ch. 7.[34] To give up the power of making laws is to change the government, to sell or rather resign ourselves to the will of another; and that for nothing; for we buy nothing of the duke, if not the right of an undisturbed colonizing, with no diminution, but expectation of some increase of these freedoms and privileges enjoyed in our own country. We humbly say, that we have not lost any part of our liberty, by leaving our country; but we transplant to a place with express limitation to erect no policy contrary to the established government (of England) but as near as may be to it; and this variation is allowed but for the sake of emergencies; and that latitude bounded with these words, for the good of the adventurer and planter. This tax is not to be found in the duke’s conveyances, but is an after business. Had the planters foreseen it, they would sooner have taken up in any other plantation in America—[a plain intimation that no such tax was imposed in any other American plantation.] Beside, there is no end of this power; for since we are by this precedent assessed without any law, and thereby excluded our English right of common assent to taxes; what security have we of any thing we possess? We can call nothing our own, but are tenants at will not only for the soil, but for all our personal estates; we endure penury, and the sweat of our brows, to improve them at our own hazard only. This is to transplant from good to bad. This sort of conduct has destroyed government, but never raised one to any true greatness.[35]
The paper presented to the duke’s commissioners, evidently proves, that it was the opinion of these gentlemen, who were quakers, that no tax could be justly imposed upon the inhabitants, without their own consent first had, and by the authority of their own general assembly. The report of the council in favour of the aggrieved, and the relief that followed, were virtual concessions to the same purport. This will not be judged wholly unprecedented by those who are acquainted with what happened relative to the county-palatine and city of Chester, in the 35th year of the reign of Henry VIII. [1543.] The inhabitants complained in a petition to the king, that for want of knights and burgesses in the court of parliament, they sustained manifold damages, not only in their lands, goods, and bodies, but in the civil and politic governance and maintenance of the commonwealth of their said county; and that while they had been always bound by the acts and statutes of the said court of parliament, the same as other counties, cities, and boroughs, that had knights and burgesses in said court, they had often been touched, and grieved with acts and statutes made within the said court, as well derogatory unto the most ancient jurisdictions, liberties, and privileges of the said court-palatine, as prejudicial unto the commonwealth, quietness, and peace of his majesty’s subjects. They proposed to the king, as a remedy, that it would please his highness, that it be enacted, with the assent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and by the commons in parliament assembled, that from the end of the session, the county-palatine shall have two knights for the said county, and likewise two citizens to be burgesses for the city of Chester. The complaint and remedy were thought to be so just and reasonable, that the relief for which they prayed was granted, and they were admitted to send representatives to parliament, to guard their interests and to secure their liberties and privileges.
The reasons for my passing from the Jerseys to Virginia will soon be obvious.
Virginia was the original name for all the English North-American continental claims, given in honor to the virgin queen, Elizabeth. King James, being applied to, granted letters patent to a body of gentlemen on the 6th of April, 1606, with powers to divide themselves into two distinct companies, the one consisting of London adventurers, called the first or southern colony of Virginia; the second or northern colony, composed of merchants belonging to Bristol, Plymouth and Exeter. The territory granted to the first or southern colony, was generally called Virginia without any distinguishing epithet; and retained that name after the second or northern colony obtained the name of New-England, in 1614.
The London company applied their attention immediately to the forming of a settlement, and sent off a hundred and ten emigrants, who arrived on the coast of Virginia, April 29th, 1607: a party landed on the promontory, called, in honor of the prince of Wales, Cape-Henry; afterward proceeded to and took possession of a peninsula in James-river, and began a settement at James-town. The instructions given by the company of proprietors, when they sent out their second supply the following year, show that the most active projectors in England had for their chief objects discovery and gain, rather than colonization.
[1609.] A new charter was obtained: many of the first nobility and gentry were added to the former proprietors, and were incorporared by the name of “The Treasurer and Company of Adventurers, of the city of London, for the first colony of Virginia.” To them was granted in absolute property the lands extending from Cape Comfort along the sea-coast southward 200 miles, from the same promontory 200 miles northward, and from the Atlantic westward to the South-sea. The company was empowered to make ordinances for the colony, and for those on the seas going thither. There was granted to the treasurer and company and their assigns, a freedom from all subsidies in Virginia for 21 years, and from all impositions on importations and exportations to and from England, or any other of the king’s dominions, “except only the five pounds in the hundred due for customs.” Little was conceded to the emigrants by the charter; and much conferred on the corporation. The colonists were to be governed by the ordinances of a corporation residing in England, in which they were not represented, and over the deliberations of which they had no control. The powers of the corporation were indeed controlable, as it was subject to the superintendance of the courts of justice within the realm, which could compel it to act agreeable as well to the grant, as to the laws of the state.
The adventurers, warmed with golden dreams of great riches, soon fitted out nine ships, with 500 emigrants, and every necessary for the establishment of a permanent colony, excepting suitable encouragement to the settlers. Lord Delaware was appointed captain-general for life. Only seven vessels arrived safe.
When Mr. Smith, who had governed the colony, departed for England, he left behind him 500 persons, of whom, what with bad management, dissensions, attacks from the Indians, waste of provisions, which occasioned a famine, &c. there remained only sixty of all ages and sexes, at the expiration of six months. When Sir Thomas Gates, the lieutenant-governor arrived in May, 1610, and saw the calamitous situation of affairs, he concluded on embarking the colonists and sailing for England: but before he could proceed to sea, Lord Delaware arrived with three ships, bringing abundant supplies, and carried back with him to James-town the feeble remains of the colony. He soon re-established matters; but his health obliging him, he sailed for England the beginning of the subsequent year, [1611.] leaving about 200 colonists, possessed of health, plenty, and peace with their neighbours. After his departure they relapsed; but his successor, Sir Thomas Dale, arriving in May with more emigrants, cattle, and provision for a year, things were again restored. This same year the adventurers obtained a new charter, by which the two former were confirmed, and they had also granted to them all the islands situated in the ocean, within 300 leagues of any part of the Virginia coast. The corporation was now considerably new modelled, and, in order to promote the effectual settlement of the plantation, licence was given to open lotteries in any part of England. The lotteries alone, which were the first ever granted in England, brought 29,000l. into The campany’s treasury. At length being considered as a national evil, they attracted the notice of parliament, were presented by the commons as a grievance, and in March, 1620, suspended by an order of council.
Sir Thomas Gates was dispatched with six large ships, carrying 300 colonists, 100 cattle, and useful supplies. He arrived in August: and parties were sent out from James-town to form distant settlements. He returned the beginning of 1614, and the administration devolved once more on Sir Thomas Dale, to whom the Virginians owe the introduction of landed property. In 1615, fifty acres of land were granted to every emigrant and his heirs, and the same quantity to every person imported by others. Dale sailed for England in the beginning of 1616, giving up the trust to Sir George Yeardley, as deputy governor, and in this year the cultivation of tobacco was introduced. It was originally carried from Tobago to England. Mr. Argal, a new deputy, arrived in May, 1617. He published a variety of edicts, and was guilty of those wrongs and oppressions, that the treasurer and council appointed Yeardly captain-general, and empowered him to examine into and redress grievances. Sir George arrived April, 1619, bringing with him several instructions favourable to freedom, and soon declared his intention of calling a general assembly, which gave the greatest joy to men, who had been hitherto subjected to the arbitrary orders of their prince, to the interested ordinances of an English corporation, or to the edicts of a haughty governor; and who enjoyed none of those liberties which Englishmen claim as their birth-right.
In June, Yeardley, pursuant to his instructions from the company, issued writs for the election of delegates, called burgesses. The colony had been divided into seven hundreds or distinct settlements, which seemed to enjoy some of the privileges of boroughs, and from this circumstance the democratic branch of the assembly has been called to this day the house of burgesses, though composed almost entirely of the representatives of counties. The assembly, formed of the governor and council of state, who were appointed by the treasurer and company, and of the burgesses chosen by the people, met together in one apartment, and transacted affairs like the parliament of Scotland of old, which mode continued till after the restoration of Charles II. Thus convened, and thus composed, the legislature “debated all matters thought expedient for the good of the whole.” The laws were transmitted to England, for the approbation of the treasurer and company, without whose confirmation they were of no validity. The introduction of an assembly was attended with the happiest effects. The emigrants, for the first time, resolved to settle themselves, and to perpetuate the plantation. The assembly thanked the company for their favour, and begged them “to reduce into a compendious form, with his majesty’s approbation, the laws of England proper for Virginia, with suitable additions;” giving as a reason, “that it was not fit that his subjects should be governed by any other rules, than such as received their influence from him.” This year the treasurer and council received a letter, “commanding them to send a hundred dissolute persons (convicts) to Virginia.” They were accordingly transported; and were at that period very acceptable to the colonies,” though the unlimited practice of emptying the English jails on the American continent has of late years been complained of as a nuisance. [1602.] The subsequent year must, on account of the introduction of African slaves into the colonies, be stigmatized as a much viler æra.—The Hollanders were not then precluded by any law from trading with the colonies. A Dutch vessel carried to Virginia a cargo of negroes, and the Virginians, who had themselves just emerged from a state of slavery, became chargeable with reducing their fellow men to the condition of brutes.
[1621.] In July, the treasurer and company carried into execution a resolution formerly taken, for establishing a proper constitution for the colony. The ordinance they passed, declared that there should be two supreme councils in Virginia, the one to be called the council of state, to be appointed and displaced by the treasurer and company, and which was to advise the governor in governmental affairs; the other was to be denominated the general assembly, and to consist of the governor and council, and of two burgesses, to be chosen, for the present, by the inhabitants of every town, hundred, and settlement in the colony. The assembly was to determine by the majority of the voices then present, and to enact general laws for the colony, reserving to the governor a negative voice. They were to imitate the laws and customs, and judicial proceedings used in England. “No acts were to be in force till confirmed by the general court in England: on the other hand, no order of the general court was to bind the colony, till assented to by the assembly.” The company having offered territory to those who should either emigrate themselves, or engage to transport people to the colony, found this policy so successful, that upward of 3500 persons emigrated to Virginia during this and the two preceding years.
[1622.] This year was remarkable for a massacre of the colonists by the Indians, which was executed with the utmost subtilty, and without any regard to age, sex, or dignity. A well concerted attack on all the settlements, destroyed, in one hour, and almost at the same instant, 347 persons, who were defenceless and incapable of making resistance. The emigrants, notwithstanding the orders they had received, had never been solicitous to cultivate the good-will of the natives, and had neither asked permission when they occupied their country, nor given a price for their valuable property, which was violently taken away. The miseries of famine were soon superadded to the horrors of massacre. Of eighty plantations, which were filling apace, only eight remained; and of the numbers which had been transported thither, no more than about 1800 survived those manifold disasters.
Frequent complaints having been made to king James of the oppressions of the treasurer and company, and the before-mentioned calamities being attributed to their misconduct or neglect, it was determined that a commission should issue to enquire into the affairs of Virginia and the Somer-isles, from the earliest settlement of each. Upon the report of the commissioners, the king concluded on giving a new charter, and required of the company the surrender of former grants, which being refused, a writ of quo warranto issued in November, 1623, against the patents of the corporation; and judgment was given by the court of king’s-bench against the treasurer and company, in Trinity-term, 1624. These proceedings “were so conformable to the general strain of the arbitrary administration of that reign, that they made little impression at the time, though the Virginia company was composed of persons of the first quality, wealth, and consequence in the nation.” The company probably would not have exercised so tame and submissive a spirit, had they not been wholly disappointed in their visionary prospects, and met with considerable losses, instead of acquiring enormous profits. They had obtained from individuals, who sported in their lotteries from the hope of sudden riches, £. 29,000. but the transportation of more than 9000 English subjects, had cost them £.150,000. They did not, however, abandon the colony in its distress, while they continued a corporation. Timely supplies were sent from England to the Virginia settlers, which so animated them, that they carried on an offensive war against the Indians, pursued them into their fastnesses, and drove them from the neighbourhood of those rivers where they had fixed their own plantations.
As to king James, he “assuredly considered the colonies as acquired by conquest; and that they ought to be holden of his person, independent of his crown or political capacity; and might be ruled according to his good will, by prerogative; and he endeavored, agreeable to the strange œconomy of his reign, to convert them into a mere private estate, descendable to his personal heirs.”[36]
The Virginia company being dissolved, James took the colony under his immediate dependence, which occasioned much confusion. Upon his death, king Charles [1625.] being of the same judgment with his father as to the government of Virginia, determined to tread in the same steps. In May he named a new governor and council for Virginia, and invested them with an authority fully legislative and arbitrary. They were empowered to make and execute laws, to impose taxes, and enforce payment. Neither the commission nor instructions mentioned expressly, or even alluded to an assembly, to the laws of England, or to the acts of the provincial legislature, as a rule of government. They were required to transport colonists into England, to be punished there for crimes committed in Virginia. This system increased the colonial dissatisfaction, which continued for years, till the Virginians received a letter containing the royal assurance, that “all their estates, trade, freedom, and privileges, should be enjoyed by them in as extensive a manner as they enjoyed them before the recalling of the company’s patent.” On this they were reconciled, and began again to exert themselves in making improvements.[37]
Being left for some years in a manner to themselves, they increased beyond expectation. They remained under the administration of their governors and other officers, who respected their privileges because they loved the colony. The governor whom Charles had been anxious to appoint, had no opportunity of exercising those illegal and extraordinary powers with which he had been invested. His death in 1627, put an end to his authority, and prevented the colony’s feeling its full extent. His successor, John Harvey, esq. was nominated in March 1629; and his commission and instructions were precisely the same with those of the former. He departed soon after for Virginia. The spirit of his administration was an exact counterpart of what had too long prevailed in England. He was severe in his extortions, proud in his councils, unjust and arbitrary in every department of his government. The Virginians, roused almost to madness by oppression, seized and sent him prisoner to England, accompanied with two deputies, to represent their grievances and his misconduct. His behaviour was so thought of, that he was honored with a new commission which confirmed former powers, and he was sent back to Virginia in April, 1637. After that, his government was so excessively oppressive and cruel, that the complaints of the colonists became at length too loud to be longer neglected, and his commission was revoked in January, 16389—. During his ten years administration, the Virginians were ruled rather as the vassels of an eastern despot, than as subjects entitled to English liberties; but it is to their credit, that, having tasted the sweets of a simple government, they opposed with a firm spirit, during the reign of Charles, the attempts of those who endeavoured to revive the patents, and to restore the corporation.
Sir William Berkely was appointed governor the beginning of 1639. His instructions evidenced a prodigious change in colonial policy, which must be partly ascribed to the then state of affairs in England. He was directed to summon all the burgesses of the plantations; who with the governor and council were to constitute the grand assembly, with power to make acts for the government of the colony, as near as might be to the laws of England—to cause speedy justice to be administered to all, according to English forms—and to forbid all trade with foreign vessels except upon necessity. Thus were the Virginians restored to that system of freedom which they had derived from the Virginia company, and which the writ of quo warranto had involved in the same ruin with the corporation itself.
Civil dissentions however took place, which were embittered by religious differences, and inflamed by acts made to prohibit the preaching of the doctrines of the puritans. The discontented party presented a petition to the house of commons, in the name of the assembly, “praying for the restoration of the antient patents and corporation government.” But the governor, council and burgesses, no sooner heard of the transaction, than they transmitted an explicit disavowal of it. They sent also an address to king Charles acknowledging his bounty and favor toward them, and earnestly desiring to continue under his immediate protection. In 1642, they declared in the form of an act, “that they were born under monarchy, and would never degenerate from the condition of their births, by being subjects to any other government.” Nothing could be more acceptable than this act, which being presented to the king at York, drew from him an answer, in which he gave them the fullest assurances, that they always should be immediately dependent upon the crown, and that the form of government should never be changed.
They remained unalterably attached to the cause of their sovereign. But when the commons of England had triumphed over their European opponents, their attention was turned to the plantations; and an ordinance was passed in October, 1650, “for prohibiting trade with Barbadoes, Virginia, Bermuda, and Antego.” It recited, that “in Virginia, and other places in America, their are colonies, which were planted at the cost, and settled by the people, and by the authority of this nation, which ought to be subordinate to, and depend upon England—that they ever had been, and ought to be subject to such laws and regulations, as are, or shall be made by the parliament—that divers acts of rebellion have been committed by many persons inhabiting Virginia, whereby they have set up themselves in opposition to the commonwealth” It therefore declared them “notorious robbers and traitors.” Persons in power generally reason alike against those who oppose their authority, and dispute the legality or equity of their measures, whatever might be their own sentiments when in a lower station, and while aggrieved by superiors. The ordinance authorised the council of state to send a fleet thither, and to grant commissions to proper persons to enforce to obedience all such as stood opposed to the authority of parliament. In consequence hereof commissioners were appointed, and a powerful fleet and army detached, to reduce all their enemies to submission. They were to use their endeavors, by granting pardons and by other peaceful arts, to induce the colonists to obey the state of England; but, if these means should prove ineffectual, then they were to employ every act of hostility; to free those servants and slaves of masters opposing the government, that would serve as soldiers to subdue them; and to cause the acts of parliament to be executed, and justice to be administered, in the name of the commonwealth. After the arrival of the commissioners with the naval and military force, the Virginians refused to submit, till articles of surrender had been agreed upon, by which it was stipulated, “The plantation of Virginia, and all the inhabitants thereof, shall enjoy such freedoms and privileges as belong to the free people of England. The general assembly, as formerly, shall convene and transact the affairs of the colony. The people of Virginia shall have a free trade, as the people of England, to all places, and with all nations.” Virginia shall be free from all taxes, customs, and impositions whatsoever; and none shall be imposed on them without consent of the general assembly; and neither forts nor castles shall be erected, nor garrisons maintained without their consent.”[38]
The hardships the Virginians experienced from restrictions on their trade under Oliver Cromwell, together with their attachment to the royal family, induced them to seize the occasion of the death of the protector’s governor, for applying to Sir William Berkely, who had lived privately during the revolutions of the day, to resume the government of the colony, to which he consented, on their solemnly promising to venture their lives and fortunes with him for Charles II. Before they had heard of the death of Cromwell, Charles was proclaimed by them king of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Virginia. During the distresses to which the royalists were exposed in England prior to this event, they resorted to that colony, so that Virginia contained about 30,000 persons at the restoration. Sir William Berkely, in his answer to the enquiries of the lords of the committee of the colonies, writes, June 20, 1671, “there are 40,000 persons, men, women, and children, 2000 black slaves, and 6000 christian servants for a short time.” You will not have your good opinion heightened of him for his adding—“I thank God there are no free schools, nor printing, and I hope we shall not have them these hundred years. For learning has brought disobedience, and heresy, and sects into the world, and printing has divulged them and libels against the government. God keep us from both!”[39]
You will remark, that, however zealous the Virginians were to honor the Charles’s with their loyalty, they boldly declined complimenting king, commonwealth, and protector with their liberties.
Maryland comes now to be considered.
Sir George Calvert was one of the original associates in the great Virginia company, and continued a member of that corporation during its existance: and, as secretary of state, he acted as one of the committee of council for the affairs of the plantations while James I. lived. Sir George in his reign, having thought proper to alter his religious sentiments and embrace popery, ingenuously avowed the change. The king pleased with his sincerity, granted him a part of Newfoundland, which the French at length obliged him to abandon. His majesty further testified his regard, by creating him Lord Baltimore of Ireland. King Charles, to compensate for his loss of the Newfoundland territory, gave him a grant of the country on the north side of the Chesapeak-bay.
His Lordship died April 15, 1632, before the patent was made out; on which his son Cecil took it out in his own name the June following. Charles, in honor to his royal consort Henrietta Maria, named the colony Maryland; and, being desirous of gratifying the proprietary all in his power invested him with as much sovereignty as could well consist with an immediate subjection to the crown of England. His Lordship, with the assent of the freemen, or their delegates, whom he was required to assemble for that purpose, might make laws of what kind soever for the province, so that they were not repugnant, but agreeable to the jurisprudence and rights of the realm of England; and he was authorised to execute the acts of the assembly. There was no clause in the charter obliging him to transmit their acts to the king for approbation or dissent: nor any saving of the royal interference in the government of the colony. Charles reserved to himself and his heirs forever, imposts, duties, and customs, which the colonies were bound to pay; but declared in the same charter, “We, our heirs and successors, shall at no time set and make, or cause to be set, any imposition, custom, or taxation on the inhabitants of the province, for their lands, goods, tenements, or chattels whithin the said province.” By this clause the king covenanted for himself, heirs and successors, that having reserved for ever the imposts, duties, and customs, he would not contribute toward setting upon the inhabitants any imposition, custom, or taxation, for their lands, goods, tenaments, or chattels, within the said province; and therein bound both himself and them, not to assent to any bill subjecting the inhabitants to an internal taxation by an external legislation.
The first emigration consisted of two hundred gentlemen of considerable fortune and rank, with their adherents, chiefly Roman Catholics, who hoped to enjoy liberty of conscience, under a proprietary of their own profession. They sailed from England in November, and landed in Maryland the beginning of 1633. Governor Colvert, brother to lord Baltimore, very wisely and justly purchased, by presents of various goods, the rights of the Indians, and with their free consent took possession of their town, which he called St. Mary’s. The country was settled with so much ease, and furnished with so many conveniences, that emigrants repaired thither in such numbers, that the colony soon became popular and flourishing. A third assembly of freemen was held at St. John’s in February, 1638–9, when an act was passed “for establishing the house of assembly.” It inacted that those who shall be elected pursuant to writs issued, shall be called burgesses, and shall supply the place of the freemen who chose them—that the gentlemen summoned by the special writ of the proprietary, and those freemen who shall not have voted at any of the elections, together with the governor and secretary, shall be called “the house of assembly”—that all acts assented to by that body, shall be deemed of the same force, as if the proprietary and freemen had been personly present. Slavery seems to have gained an early establishment in Maryland, for an act of this assembly describes “the people” to consist of all christian inhabitants “slaves only excepted.” The persecuting laws which were passed by the Viginians, soon after this period against the puritans, made the latter emigrate in considerable numbers to Maryland, that they might enjoy, under a popish proprietary, that liberty of conscience, of which they were deprived by fellow protestants.
In 1642, the burgesses “desired that they might be separated, and sit by themselves, and have a negative,”—such was their progress in entertaining just conceptions of their own democratic rights. The governor did not grant their request; but they were afterwards more successful. The assembly of 1649, was assuredly divided into two parts, and transacted business in the form of an upper and lower house. That assembly, which convened in April, enacted, that no persons professing to believe in Jesus Christ, shall be molested in respect of their religion, or in the exercise thereof, or be compelled to the belief or exercise of any other religion against their consent, so that they be not unfaithful to the proprietary, or conspire against the civil government—that those reproaching any with opprobrious names of religious distinction, shall forfeit ten shillings to the persons injured—that any one speaking reproachfully against the blessed Virgin, or the Apostles, shall forfeit five pounds—but blasphemy against God, shall be punished with death.
In 1650, a law was passed “for settling this present assembly.” It enacted, that those who were called by special writ shall form the upper house—that those who were chosen by the hundreds shall compose the lower house—and that all bills which shall be assented to by the two branches of the legislature thus established, and assented to by the governor, shall be deemed the laws of the province, and have the same effect as if the freemen were personally present. There was also passed “an act against raising money without the consent of the assembly.” It mentioned, “That no taxes shall be assessed or levied on the freemen of the province, without their own consent, or that of their deputies, first declared in a general assembly. The printed words and early date of this Maryland act demand particular notice. The act of the general assembly and governor were of the same force in their own province, as acts of parliament in England; and could not be repealed without the concurring assent of the proprietary, or his deputy, with the other two estates.
Carolina follows Maryland in the order of existence.
A few adventurers emigrated from the Massachusetts, and settled round Cape Fear, about the time of the restoration. They considered mere occupancy, with a transfer from the natives, without any grant from the king, as a good title to the lands which they possessed. They deemed themselves entitled to the same “civil privileges” as those of the country from whence they had emigrated. For years they experienced the complicated miseries of want. They solicited the aid of their countrymen; and the general court, with an attention and humanity which did it the greatest honor, ordered an extensive contribution for their relief. But the final settlement of the province was effected equally through the rapacity of the courtiers of Charles the II. and his own facility in rewarding those to whom he was greatly indebted, with a liberality that cost him little. The pretence which had been used on former occasions, of a pious zeal for the propagation of the gospel among the Indians, was successfully employed to procure a grant of the immense region lying between the 36° of north latitude and the river St. Matheo, under the 31°. March 24, 1663, this territory was erected into a province, by the name of Carolina, and conferred on lord Clarendon, the duke of Albemarle, lord Craven, lord Berkely, lord Ashley, Sir George Carteret, Sir John Colleton, and Sir William Berkely, as absolute lords proprietaris for ever, saving the sovereign allegience due to the crown. The charter seems to have been copied from that of Maryland, so extensive in its powers, and so noble in its privileges. The noblemen held their first meeting in May; and at the desire of the New-England people abovementioned, published proposals to all that would plant in Carolina. They declared, that all persons settling on Charles River, to the southward of Cape Fear, should have power to fortify its banks, taking the oath of allegiance to the king, and submitting to the government of the proprietaries—that the emigrants might present to them thirteen persons, in order that they might appoint a governor and a council of six for three years—that an assembly, composed of the governor, the council, and delegates of the freemen, should be called as soon as circumstances would allow, with power to make laws, not contrary to those of England, nor of any validity after the publication of the dissent of the proprietaries—that every one should enjoy the most perfect freedom in religion—that during five years, every freeman should be allowed one hundred acres of land, and fifty for every servant, paying only an half-penny an acre—and that the same freedom from customs which had been confirmed by the royal charter, should be allowed to every one.
The proprietaries appointed Sir William Berkely, then governor of Virginia, general superintendant of the affairs of the county of Albemarle, within the boundaries of which, a small plantation, of the New-Englanders probably, had been established for some years, on the north eastern shores of the river Chowan. Sir William Berkely repaired to the county, confirmed and granted lands on the conditions beforementioned, appointed Mr. Drummond the first governor, and likewise other officers, and then returned to Virginia.
The assembly of 1666, being dissatisfied with the tenures by which they held their lands, petitioned the proprietaries, that the people of Albemarle might hold their possessions on the same terms on which the Virginians enjoyed theirs, and were gratified.
[1665.] The proprietaries appointed John Yeamans, a respectable planter of Barbadoes, commander in chief of Clarendon county, stretching from Cape Fear to the river St. Matheo; and he was at the same time created a baronet. To secure its prosperity, the same powers were conferred, and the same constitution established, as those which had made Albemarle happy.
A settlement was also now projected to the southward of Cape Romain, which acquired the name of Carteret. Thus a variety of separate and independent colonies, each of which had its own government, its own assembly, its own customs and laws, were established in Carolina.
In June, 1665, the proprietaries obtained a second charter which recited and confirmed the former. They were enabled to make laws for the province, with the consent of the freemen or their delegates: and likewise to grant titles of honor by creation of a nobility. No one prerogative of the crown was reserved, except the sovereign dominion.
Samuel Stevens, esq. was appointed governor of Albemarle in October, 1667, and was commanded to act agreeable to the advice of a council of twelve, the one half of which he was to appoint, the other was to be chosen by the assembly. The assembly was to be composed of the governor, the council, and twelve delegates chosen annually by the freeholders. Various regulations provided for the security of property: and no taxes were to be imposed without the consent of the assembly. The proprietaries might mean no more, than that neither they, nor the governor and council, shall impose taxes without the consent of the assembly: but the mode of expression tended to confirm the people at large in the opinion of their being exempted from all taxes which had not the consent of their own assembly. The settlers had their land confirmed, and granted to be now held by the free tenure of soccage, expressing a certain rent and independence. All men were declared entitled to equal privileges on taking the oath of allegiance to the king, and of fidelity to the proprietaries.
It was not till 1669 that an assembly constituted as abovementioned was convened: when it was enacted—“none shall be sued, during five years, for any cause of action arising out of the country—and none shall accept a power of attorney, to receive debts contracted abroad.” Hence this colony was long considered as the refuge of the criminal, and the asylum of the fugitive debtor.
The proprietaries, at length dissatisfied with every system which they had hitherto divised for the government of their province, signed in July, a body of fundamental constitutions compiled by the celebrated Locke, giving as a reason, “That we may establish a government agreeable to the monarchy of which Carolina is a part, and may avoid making too numerous a democracy.”
By this edict a palatine was to be chosen from among the proprietaries for life; who was to act as president of the palatine court, composed of the whole; which was intrusted with the exection of the powers of the charter. A body of hereditary nobility was created, and denominated landgraves and caciques; the former were to be invested with four baronies, each consisting of 12,000 acres; the latter to have two, containing one half of that quantity: and those estates were to descend with the dignities inseparably. There were to be as many landgraves as counties; and twice as many caciques, but no more. Two fifths of the counties, stiled signiories and baronies, were to be possessed by the nobility; the other three fifths, called The colonies, were to be left among the people.
The provincial legislature, dignified with the name of parliament, was to be biennial, and to consist of the proprietaries, alias landgraves, or the deputy of each, of the cacique nobility, of the representatives of the freeholders of every district, who were to meet in one appartment, and every member to enjoy an equal vote: but no business was to be proposed till it had been debated in the grand council, whose duty it was to prepare bills for the parliamentary consideration. The grand council was to be composed of the governor, the nobility, and the deputies of the proprietaries, these being absent; and was invested with the executive of the province. The church of England alone was to be allowed a public maintenance by parliament; but every congragation might tax its own members for the support of its own ministers; and to every one was allowed perfect freedom in religion. However the most degrading slavery was introduced by investing in every man the property of his negro.[40]
These constitutions, consisting of 120 articles, and containing a great variety of perplexing regulations, were declared to be the sacred and unalterable rule of government in Carolina for ever; and yet they were never altogether adopted. The parties engaged in this act of legislation should have reflected, that the inhabitants had settled no conditions, which it was no longer in their power to abrogate; and that in the forms of government which had been actually established, the people had acquired an interest which could not be taken away without their consent.
[1670.] A number of emigrants were sent in January, under William Sayle, esq. appointed governor of that part of the coast which lies south-westward of Cape Carteret, to form a colony at Port-Royal. They arrived safe; and as it was found impracticable to conform to the constitutions, it was determined to keep as close to them as possible. Sayle dying, Sir John Yeamans had his command extended to and over this colony in August, 1671. This year planters resorted from Clarendon on the north, and Port-Royal on the south, to the banks of Ashley river, for the convenience of pasture and tillage; and laid on the first high land the foundation of old Charles-Town. The proprietaries promulgated temporary laws, till through a sufficient number of inhabitants, government could be administered according to the fundamental constitutions. The temporary laws were of no long duration, being derided by a people without whose consent they had been established.
In May, 1674, Joseph West, esq. was appointed governor of the southern colony, in the room of Sir John Yeamans, with whose conduct the proprietaries were dissatisfied. But the difficulty of establishing the colony was not overcome for years; not till the people repaired to it at their own expence, and men of estate ventured thither under the firm persuasion of being fairly treated. In expectation of such treatment, the dissenters, being harrassed by persecutions in England, and dreading a popish successor, emigrated to Carolina in great numbers, and made a considerable part of the inhabitants. They acquired the honor of introducing religion into the province, while they strengthened it also by their personal accessions. But the promising appearances of the country inviting many over of a very different stamp, after a while disturbances followed.
The planters being informed that the Oyster-Point, so delightfully formed by the confluence of the rivers Ashley and Cooper, was more convenient than what was fixed upon eight years before, and the proprietaries encouraging their inclination, they began to remove, and in the subsequent year laid the foundation of the present Charles-Town, and built 30 houses [1680.] It was instantly declared the port for the purposes of traffic, and the capital for the administration of government. It was long unhealthy; but the adjacent country being now cleared and cultivated, it is allowed to enjoy the most salubrious air of Carolina.
Though the province had been formed into manors and baronies, it was not till 1682, that it was divided into three counties. In the autumn of this year, governor West held a parliament; and afterwards immediately resigned his administration to Mr. Joseph Moreton. Thence commenced a reiterated change of governors. Cyrle, West, Kuerry, Moreton, were successively appointed. There was a similar change of every public officer. These changes produced turbulency and faction.
But prior to this period, an insurrection broke out in the colony of Albemarle, in December, 1677. At the end of two years succesful revolt, Culpepper, who was deeply concered in the business, was dispatched with another person to England with a promise of submission to the proprietaries, on certain conditions. When about to return after executing his trust, he was impeached by the commissioners of the customs, for acting as collector without their authority, and embezzling the king’s revenue in Carolina. He was seized on board a vessel in the Downs, brought back, and in Trinity-term, 1680, tried by virtue of the statute of Henry VIII. on an indictment of high treason committed without the realm. The famous Lord Shaftesbury, then in the zenith of his popularity, appeared on his behalf, and represented, contrary to the most undoubted facts, “That there never had been any regular government in Albemarle, that its disorders were only feuds between the planters, which could only amount to a riot.” On this Culpepper was acquitted. He is the first colonist who appears to have been regularly tried in the court of King’s-bench upon that statute:[41] but he was not transported from America in order to trial. His acquittal induced the proprietaries to resolve upon governing, in future, according to the portion of obedience which the insurgents should be disposed to yield. They recommended, however, an healing disposition. But the persons bearing the chief sway, being actuated too much by a vindictive spirit, proseeded against their opponents by imprisonment, fine, and banishment The seenes of anarchy produced by these measures were not changed, nor the condition of the colony mended by the arrival of governor Seth Sothel, in 1683, who was sent in hopes of quieting the disorders by his authority, as he had purchased Lord Clarendon’s share of the province. He was guilty of that bribery, extortion, injustice, rapacity, breach of trust, and disobedience of orders, for five years, that the inhabitants, driven almost to dispair, seized him with a view of sending him to England to answer to their complaints: but upon his intreaties, and offering to submit to their mutual accusations to the next assmbly, they accepted his proposal. The assembly gave judgment against him in all the above-mentioned particulars, and compelled him to abjure the country for twelve months, and the government for ever.
Charles-town having been made the principal port, the first collector was established there in 1685. The governor and council were at the same time ordered, not to fail to shew their forwardness in assisting the collection of the duty on tobacco transported to other colonies, and in seizing ships that presumed to trade contarary to the acts of navigation. Little regard was paid to orders so contrary to the views of every one. An illicit trade was not only practised, but justified under the clause of the patent, which the people believed to be of superior force to the law.—Though the royal grant of 1665 was passed subsequent to the act of navigation, the present exemption was insisted upon, with the same spirit that it was contended during this reign, that a king of England may dispense with the law. The principle of the Carolinians, and the doctrine so fashionable at the court of James, were therefore exactly the same.
James Colleton, esq. a proprietary, was appointed governor, in August. The next year he called an assembly, in which he and his party took upon them to pass such laws as lost him the affections of the people. During the ferments that followed, Seth Sothel, whom we have seen banished from Albemarle, suddenly arrived at Charles-town. Countenanced by a powerful party, and presuming on his powers as a proprietary, he seized the reins of government in 1690, notwithstanding the opposition of governar and council. A general return of member was procured, who readily sanctioned by their votes whatever was dictated by those that had thus acquired power. Colleton, whose conduct had been far from blameless, was instantly impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors, disabled from holding any office, and banished. Others were fined, imprisoned, and expelled the province. The proprietaries appointed a new governor; and the next year, [1692] upon the requisitions of the Carolinians, abrogated Mr. Locke’s system of laws, the fundamental constitutions, which far from having answered their end introduced only dissatisfaction and disorders, that were not cured till the final dissolation of the proprietary government.[42] The operation and fate of Mr. Locke’s system may convince us of this truth, that a person “may defend the principles of liberty and the rights of mankind, with great abilities and success; and yet after all, when called upon to produce a plan of legislation, he may astonish the world with a signal absurdity.”[43]
Governor Archdale arrived at Carolinia in August, 1695. He managed with great prudence, and succeeded so well, that the assembly voted him an address of thanks. He was succeeded by Joseph Blake, esq. whose sentiments were so liberal, that, though a dissenter, he prevailed with the assembly to settle £ 150 per annum upon the episcopal minister of Charles-town for ever, and likewise to furnish him with a good house, a glebe, and two servants. A very different spirit wrought in the earl of Bath, when he succeeded to the power of palatine [1701.] and became eldest proprietary. Being a zealot for the church of England, he was ambitious of establishing its worship, and of excluding non-episcopalians from a share in the government of Carolina; a similar principle was at that time too prevalent in England. His views were seconded by the pliableness of governor Moor, who was after a while succeeded by Sir Nathaniel Johnson. Then the assembly being convened, a bill was brought in for the more effectual preservation of the government, by requiring all persons chosen members of the assembly, to conform to religious worship, and receive the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, according to the usage of the church of England. By this act, all dissenters were disqualified from sitting in the assembly, though legally elected, and the candidate who had the greatest number of voices, after the disqualified dissenter, was to be admitted. The passing of this act was unconstitutional and oppressive. Another bill was passed for establishing religious worship in the province, according to the church of England, and also for the erecting of churches, the maintenance of ministers, and the building of convenient parsonages. Both these acts were afterwards signed and settled by John lord Granville, then palatine, for himself and the other proprietors. In consequence of the last act, many oppressions were committed by the government against the dissenters, who laboured under these and other grievances, till the matter at length was brought before the house of lords, who having fully weighed the same, addressed the queen in favour of the Carolinians; and the laws complained of [1706.] were declared null and void.
An Indian war having broken out in Carolina, and the proprietaries finding themselves unable to maintain it against the Indians, while these were supported by the French and Spaniards, [1728.] resolved to surrender their charter to the crown. One-eighth of the province belonged to lord Carteret. The proprietors of the other seven-eighths were to receive for their cession £ 17,500 together with £ 5000 more, due to them from the province on account of outstanding debts. The surrender and payment was confirmed by a British act of parliament, wherein was a clause, reserving always to John lord Carteret, his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, all such estate, right, and title to one-eighth part of the share of the said provinces or territories, and to one-eighth part of all arrears as was his due. After passing the act, the British government applied itself in earnest to encourage this colony, and Robert Johnson, esq. was appointed governor, and continued such till he died in 1735; in which year Carolina was divided into two Colonies, North and South, and each placed under a separate governor.[44]
Pennsylvania and the Delaware Counties next demand our attention. Mr. William Penn, one of the joint purchasers of the western part of the Jerseys, having received the most exact information of the country to the westward of the Deleware, while engaged in the administration of the joint purchase, became desirous of acquiring a separate estate.
He presented a petition to Charles II. in June 1680, stating not only his relationship to the late admiral; but that he was deprived of a debt due from the crown, when the exchequer was shut. He prayed for a grant of land, lying to the northward of Maryland, and westward of the Delaware; and added, that by his interest he should be able to settle a province which might, in time, repay his claims. Having the prospect of success, he copied from the charter of Maryland the sketch of a patent which in November was laid before the attorney-general for his opinion. Penn had the same object in view as lord Baltimore had, the guarding against the exertions of prerogative, which experience had taught both were very inconvenient. The attorney-general declared the clause of exemption from taxation illegal: and chief justice North, being of the same opinion, and observing its tendency, added the saving of the authority of the English parliament, so that it was stipulated by the king, for himself and his successors, “that no customs or other contribution shall be laid on the inhabitants or their estates, unless by the consent of the porprietary, or governor and assembly, or by act of parliament in England.”
The next year [1681] the patent was granted, in consideration of “the merits of the father, and the good purposes of the son, in order to extend the English empire, and to promote useful commodities.” It was provided by fit clauses, that the sovereignty of the king should be preserved; and that acts of parliament, concerning trade and navigation and the customs, be duly observed. Penn was empowered to assemble the freemen, or their delegates, in such form as he should think proper, for raising money for the uses of the colony, and for making useful laws, not contrary to those of England, or the rights of the kingdom. A duplicate of the acts of the assembly was to be transmitted within five year to the king in council, and the acts might be declared void within six months, if not approved.
The novel introduction of the clause subjecting the inhabitants of Pennsylvania to taxation by act of parliament, might afford an argument against being so taxed, to all the colonies whose charters contained no such clause. Dr. Franklin being asked, when examined by the house of commons, in the time of the stamp act, “Seeing their is in the Pennsylvania charter, an express reservation of the right of parliament to lay taxes there, how could the assembly assert, that laying a tax on them by the stamp act was an infringement on their rights? answered, “They understand it thus—by the same charter and otherwise they are entitled to all the privileges and liberties of Englishmen. They find in the great charters and the petition and declaration of rights, that one of the privileges of English subjects is, that they are not to be taxed but by their own consent: they have therefore relied upon it, from the first settlement, that the parliament never would or could, by colour of that clause, tax them till it had qualified itself for the exercise of such right, by admitting representatives from the people to be taxed.” You will recollect governor Nicholson’s writing in 1698, “a great many people in all the colonies, especially in those under proprietaries, think that no law of England ought to be binding to them without their own consent: for they foolishly say, they have no representatives sent from themselves to the parliament of England.” [p. 39.]
The Pennsylvanians, it may be noted, were not declared by the patent to be English subjects. There was no express stipulation, as had been inserted in all the other colonial patents, “that the Pennsylvanians and their descendants should be considered as subjects born within the realm;” for the lawyers who revised it, considered such declaratious as nugatory, since they were inferred by law.[45] If the right of the English parliament to tax the colonies could also have been inferred by law, why was not the express reservation of that right considered likewise as nugatory.
In May, Penn detached Mr. Markham, his kinsman, with a small emigration, in order to take possession of the country, and prepare it for a more numerous colony. Care was taken to order an humane attention to the rights of the Indians.
[1628] The frame of government for Pennsylvania was published in April. It was forced from the proprietary by friends, who would not have settled his country, unless gratified in whatever they demanded. It underwent a similar fate with the constitutions of Locke; and after a variety of alterations, was at length wholly laid aside, and a simpler form established. As a supplement to the frame, there was published, in the subsequent May, a body of laws agreed upon in England by the adventurers, which was intended as a great charter, and does honor to their wisdom as statesmen, to their morals as men, and to their spirit as colonists.
Mr. Penn, desirous of carrying his religion southward to the Chesapeak, was continually soliciting the duke of York, for a grant of the Delaware colony. The prince at length wearied out, conveyed, in August, the town of Newcastle, with a territory of twelve miles round; as also that tract of land extending southward from it upon the Delaware to Cape-Henlopen. It was known to both parties, that the title of what was now granted was extremely exceptionable, as the duke could transfer no other right than mere occupancy in opposition to the legal claim, of lord Baltimore. Penn, however, who was intent on his own interest in those parts, immediately assumed the powers of jurisdiction.
When, for the first time, he arrived on the banks of the Delaware, October the 24th, he found them inhabited by 3,000 persons, composed of Swedes, Dutch, Finlanders and English. Not only his own colonists, but the rest, received him with joy and respect. He was accompanied thither by about 2,000 emigrants, who being either quakers or other dissenters, wished to enjoy their peculiarities and religion, in a country that offered a peaceful asylum to the persecuted. Mr. Penn immediately entered into a treaty with the Indians, and, agreeable to the bishop of London’s counsel, purchased from them as much of the soil as the circumstances of the colony required, for a price that gave them satisfaction: he also settled with them a very kind correspondence. In December, he convened the first assembly at Chester, consiting of seventy-two delegates from the six counties, into which they had divided Pennsylvania and the Delaware colony, soon after denominated the territories. The inhabitants proposed that the deputies might serve both for the provincial council and general assembly; three out of every county for the former, and nine for the latter. Their proposals were passed by the assembly without hesitation into an act of settlement. The persons returned were declared to be the legal council and assembly, and every county was empowered to send the same number in future, which in the same manner should constitute the legislature; and after the addition of a few other explanations, the modified frame of government was solemnly recognized and accepted. Then an act was passed, annexing the territories to the province, and communicating to the one the same privileges, government, and laws, as the other already enjoyed. Every foreigner who promised allegience to the king, and obedience to the proprietary, was at the same time declared to be a freeman, and entitled to his rights. By the legislative regulation, established as fundamentals by this assembly, factors who wronged their employers were to make satisfaction and one-third over—not only the goods, but the lands of the debtor were subjected to the payment of debts—every thing which excited the people to rudeness, cruelty, and irreligion, was to be discouraged and severely punished—no person acknowledging one God, and living peaceably in society, was to be molested for his opinions or practice, or to be compelled to frequent or maintain any ministry whatsoever. It was a principle of the great charter, “that children shall be taught some useful trade, to the end that none may be idle, but the poor may work to live, and the rich, if they become poor may not want.”
Penn, dissatisfied with the act of settlement, without difficulty created a second frame, agreeing partly with the first, modified according to the act of settlement in certain particulars, and in some measure essentially different from both; to which he procured the assent of the next assembly, in 1683; but which in time shared the fate of the former.
[1684.] He departed for England. The most violent dissensions followed almost instantly upon it, the provincial council and the assembly contending eagerly with regard to their mutual privileges and powers. Tranquility was not restored by the duputy governor Blackwell, who entered upon his government in December, 1688.
[1685.] Toward the close of this year Mr. Penn obtained a new grant to the Delaware colony, which he had been soliciting for some time.
[1688.] The Pennsylvanians and their rulers, when Blackwell entered upon his administration, were so much engaged in their own contests and pursuits, and so actuated by the principles of their superior, [the proprietary whose attachments to James II. during those days are well known] that they seem to have disregarded that signal revolution which transferred their allegience and Pennsylvania to the prince and princess of Orange: for the very laws and government of the province were administered in the name of the abdicated monarch, long after William and Mary had been formally proclaimed in other colonies.
It is a singularity in the history of this province, that neither its various systems, nor its fundamental laws, were communicated to the king for dissent or approbation, though strongly enforced.[46]