cessful almost beyond belief. They were left with selfgovernment nearly as complete as before. In neither colony did the crown appoint the governor or any other important official. This remarkable, liberality was due partly to the careless good nature of Charles in the early portion of his reign; partly to an enthusiasm among English officials just then for the colonies; and partly, perhaps, to a willingness to build up other New England governments so as to offset the stiff-necked Bay Colony. All that the Massachusetts charter had become, this and more these new charters were from the first. They made the settlers a "corporation upon the place," and sanctioned democratic self-government. With good reason they were cherished and venerated. At the time of the Revolution they received the name of constitutions; and they continued in force, without other alteration, in Connecticut until 1818, and in Rhode Island until 1842. A glance at the map on page 99 shows sufficient reason why New Haven and Connecticut should not both receive charters. The question was which should swallow the other. New Haven used little diplomacy in her negotiations; and possibly she was too much of the Massachusetts type to find favor in any case. Her territory was included in the Connecticut grant. This began the process of consolidation which was soon to be tried on a larger scale. Continued friction between England Friction with Massachusetts continued. Episcopalians there complained still that for thirty years they had been robbed of civil and religious rights. So in 1664 Charles sent commissioners to regulate New England and to conquer New Netherlands from and Massa- the Dutch with whom England was at war. chusetts In their military expedition the commissioners were entirely successful. Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Plymouth then recognized their authority cordially, and even permitted them to hear appeals from colonial courts; but Massachusetts still gave them scant welcome. THE COMMISSIONERS OF 1664 115 of 1664: the The matter of appeals was a chief point in the commissioners' instructions. It was to be the means of enforcing royal authority. The men of Massachusetts The comwere sternly resolved not to yield the point. missioners After weeks of futile discussion, the commis- question of sioners announced a day when they would sit appeals as a court of appeals in Boston. At sunrise on that day, by order of the Massachusetts magistrates, a crier, with trumpet, passed through the town, warning all citizens not to recognize the court. No one ventured to disobey the stern Puritan government, and the chagrined commissioners returned to England. There they at once recommended that Massachusetts be deprived of its charter. But the next year the victorious Dutch fleet was in the Thames. Then came the great London fire and the plague. The Colonial Board did repeatedly order Massachusetts to send an agent to England to arrange a settlement; but the colony procrastinated stubbornly, and for ten years with success. In 1675, however, a great Indian outbreak, known as King Philip's War, weakened Massachusetts. Just at this time, Massatoo, Charles, entering upon a more despotic period chusetts at home, began to act more vigorously toward the loses her colonies; and in 1684 the Court of the Kings Bench declared the charter of 1629 forfeited and void. charter authority The Lords of Trade had decided that to have so many independent governments "without a more immediate dependence upon the crown" was "prejudicial" Consolidato England's interest; and they drew up a plan tion under for the union of Massachusetts, Plymouth, and royal the Maine and New Hampshire towns, under one royal governor-general. They would gladly have included Connecticut and Rhode Island in the plan, and so consolidated all New England into one province, but the recent charters stood in the way; and, unlike Massachusetts, these colonies had given no excuse for legal proceedings against them. Still, when Charles died in 1685, James II forced the consolidation, in spite of the charters. He appointed Sir Edmund Andros governor-general of all New England, and instructed him to set aside the governments of Connecticut and Rhode Island by force. The original plan of the Lords of Trade had provided one elected legislature for New England. James struck out this clause, leaving the government despotic as well as unified, despite the declaration of the attorney-general in England that the colonists had the right "to consent to such laws and taxes as should be made or imposed on them." James also once more extended the territory to which the plan should apply. He was already proprietor of New York and New Jersey (page 128), and these colonies were soon united with New England under the rule of Andros. Andros was a bluff, hot-tempered soldier. He was commander of the soldiery he brought with him and of the miliThe rule of tia; and, with the consent of an appointed counAndros cil, he was authorized to lay taxes, make laws, administer justice, and grant lands. His management of military affairs was admirable, and he saved New England from serious Indian danger; but the colonists gave him scant credit. In other matters, naturally, he clashed violently with the settlers. He insisted that Episcopalian services should be held on at least part of each Sunday in one of the Boston churches. To the Puritans this was a bitter offense. Land titles, too, were a fruitful source of irritation. In granting lands, the colonies had paid little attention to the forms of English law or to proper precaution against future confusion. Andros provided for accurate surveys, and compelled old holders to take out new deeds, with small fees for registration. He treated all the common lands, too, as crown land. More serious was the total disappearance of self-government and even of civil rights. Andros ordered the old taxes to be continued. Some Massachusetts towns resisted; and at Ipswich a town meeting voted that such method of raising taxes "did infringe their liberty as free-born English subjects." The offenders were tried for "seditious votes and writings," not before the usual courts, but by a special commission. The jury was packed and was browbeaten into a ANDROS AND THE SETTLEMENT OF 1690 117 verdict of guilty, and leading citizens who had dared to stand up against tyranny were imprisoned and ruinously fined. This absolute government lasted two years and a half. Massachusetts was getting ready to rebel; but under ordinary conditions a rising would have been put And its down bloodily. Thanks to the "Glorious Revolu- overthrow tion" of 1688 in Old England, the rising when it came was Ο April 18h 1589 Ur @vines as well as many others the Inbabitants of this Count and places abricent, being furprized with the Proples fudɔn tasing to Aris, in the tick motion whereof we were wholly ignorant, art driven by the prifcat Engate and Pacfur to acquaint your Excellency, that for the Cacing and excurity of the People Inhung this Counter from the imminent Dangees they many ways he opan, and arc erpoled unto, and for your own Safety; 21; mdge at neceffare that rou forthath Surrender, and Deliver up the Sobriment and Fortifications to be preferord, to be Difpoled according to Croes and Diri on zoin the Crown of England, which is fudotale erputed may accide, Promiling all from clance to your Self, or any other of your entlemen and Extours mp.tlon or Eltate: or rift we are allured they will Enderhour the taking of the Fortifications by Storm, if any op position be made. Wait Winthrop Bufton Printed by Samuel Gets 1689. BOSTON'S SUMMONS TO ANDROS; from the Massachusetts State Archives. The first signature is that of the clergyman who soon after uttered the words about "choice grain" sent into the wilderness (page 62). was successful and bloodless. In April, 1689, Boston learned that James II a fugitive. The new king, William of Orange, had issued a "Declaration," inviting all boroughs in England, and all officials unjustly deprived of charters and positions by James, to resume their former powers. The colonists assumed that this sanctioned like action by them also. The people of Boston and neighboring towns seized a war vessel in the harbor, imprisoned Andros, and restored the charter government. Connecticut and Rhode Island also revived their former charters. William III would have been glad to continue part of The settle the Stuart policy in America. He wished, so far ment of 1690 as possible, to consolidate small jurisdictions into large ones, and to keep the governor and judges in each colony dependent upon himself. The Connecticut and Rhode Island charters stood in the way of a complete rearrangement of this sort; and the King's lawyers assured him that those grants still held good, since legal proceedings against them had never been completed. Massachusetts did not fare so well. Her charter had been formally surrendered. The colony strove skillfully to obtain a regrant of the original patent; but the best it could do was to accept a new one. To conciliate William, the promised reform in the franchise was at last made effective. The certificate of a clergyman as to the applicant's fitness was not required, and the taxpaying qualification was reduced from ten shillings to four. Then in a few weeks 909 new freemen were admitted - more than in the preceding sixteen years. Notwithstanding this sudden access of liberality, there were within the colony considerable bodies of people dissatisfied with the Puritan rule. Several petitions were sent to the King against the renewal of the old charter, one with signatures of two hundred and fifty persons who call themselves "Merchants and inhabitants of Boston." The "Charter of 1691" created a government for Massachusetts more like that of Virginia than like that of ConMassa- necticut. The crown appointed and removed the chusetts virtually a royal province governor. The Assembly nominated the Council, but these nominations were valid only after the governor's approval. The governor could adjourn or dissolve the Assembly at will; and he, and the crown, held an absolute veto upon all its acts. The higher judiciary were appointed by the governor; and appeals to the king in council were provided for, in cases where the sum in dispute amounted to £300. These four provisions, to all practical intents, made Massachusetts a royal province. Two other provisions, thoroughly praiseworthy, overthrew the old theocracy. Religious freedom for all Protestant sects was promised; and the franchise was given to all men owning land of forty shillings annual value, or possessing forty pounds |