66

Mr. Ch. Just. [']Gentlemen of the Jury. The great Pains Mr. Hamilton has taken, to shew how little Regards Juries are to Pay to the Opinion of the Judges . . . is done, no doubt, with a Design, that you should take but very little Notice of what I may say. I shall trouble you no further with any Thing more of my own, but read to you the Words of a learned and upright Judge in a Case of the like Nature. . . If people should not be called to account for possessing the People with an ill Opinion of the Government, no Government can subsist. For it is necessary for all Governments that the People should have a good Opinion of it. . . . Now you are to Consider whether these words . . . do not tend to beget an ill Opinion of the Administration of the Government. . . ."['] . . .

The Jury withdrew, and in a small Time returned, and being asked by the Clerk, . . . they answered. . . Not Guilty. Upon which there were three Huzzas in the Hall which was crowded with People, and the next Day I was discharged from my Imprisonment.” 61

John Adams: James Otis' Declaration of Colonial Constitutional Rights (Extract from Adams' account of Otis' speech at Boston, February, 1761, against the British use of a "general writ of assistance" in search for smuggled goods). "Mr. Otis appeared for the inhabitants of Boston. [']May it please

your honors-I was desired . . . to look into the books, and consider the question . . . concerning writs of assistance; I have accordingly considered it, and now appear . . . in behalf of the inhabitants of this town and out of regard to the liberties of the [British] subject.

. . I will to my dying day

oppose with all the powers and faculties God has given me, all such instruments of slavery. . . It appears to me the worst instrument of arbitrary power, the most destructive of English liberty, that ever was found in an English lawI argue this cause . . with the greater pleasure as it is in favor of British liberty, . . . and as it is in opposition to a kind of power, the exercise of which in former

book.

61. A. B. Hart, Contemporaries, II, 192-199.

periods of English history cost one king of England his head and another his throne. . . . Not more than one instance can be found of it [i.e,. of the "general writ"] in all our law books. . . But if this writ had been in any book whatever, it would have been illegal; all precedents are under the controll of the principles of law-. . no acts of parliament can establish such a writ. . . . An act against the constitution is void. . .

1962

Rev. James Maury: Patrick Henry's Attack upon the King's Veto Power (Extracts from a letter of Dec. 12, 1763, by Maury, giving an account of the Parson's Cause" in which Henry denied the right of the King to veto the act of a Colonial legislature). "Mr. Henry, . . who had been called in by the Defendants, . . rose and harangued the jury for near an hour. This harangue turned upon points as much out of his own depth as they were foreign from the purpose [of the trial]. [He] labored to prove that the act of 1758 [by the Virginia assembly, allowing salaries of clergy to be paid in either tobacco or money] had every characteristic of a good law; that it was a law of general utility, and could not, consistently with what he called the original compact between King and people, stipulating protection on the one hand and obedience on the other be annulled.' Hence, he inferred, ‘that a King, by disallowing Acts of this salutary nature, from being the father of his people, degenerated into a Tyrant, and forfeits all right to his subjects' obedience.' . . And then he perorates to the following purpose, 'that excepting they (the jury) were disposed to rivet the chains of bondage on their own necks, he hoped they would not let slip the opportunity . . . of making such an example . . . as might, hereafter, be a warning not to . . . dispute the validity of such laws, authenticated by the only authority, which, in his conception, could give force to laws for the government of this Colony. When he came to that part of it where he undertook to assert, 'that a King . . . forfeits all right to his subjects' obedience ;' [there] was a confused murmur of Treason, Treason! Yet Mr. Henry went on in the same treasonable . . . strain, without interruption from the Bench. . . . One of the jury,

62. Niles Weekly Register (Baltimore), XIV (Apr. 25, 1818), 138-139.

he

too, was so highly pleased with these doctrines, that every now and then gave the traitorous declaimer a nod of approbation. After the Court was adjourned, he [Henry] apologised to me for what he had said, alleging that his sole view was to render himself popular. You see, then, it is so clear a point in this person's opinion, that the ready road to popularity here, is, to trample under foot. . . the prerogative of the Crown. If this be not pleading for the ‘assumption of a power to bind the King's hands,' if it be not asserting 'such supremacy in provincial Legislatures' as manifestly tends to draw the people of these plantations from their allegiance to the King, tell me, my dear sir, what is so.

QUESTIONS

1963

I. (1) What was the object of the European struggle begun in 1689 between France and England? (2) What was the object of the American warfare begun at the same time between the colonies of France and England? (3) Which of the first three French-English conflicts produced any territorial results in America? (4) What was the region over which the French and Indian War began? (5) What was the chief purpose of the Albany Congress of 1754? (6) What other important thing did it do? (7) Why was its plan of colonial union rejected by the colonies? by England? (8) Against what points did the English strike in 1755-1756? (9) What success against each? (10) When did English success begin, and marked by what victories? (11) In the peace of 1762-1763, what became of French Canada? of French Louisiana? of Spanish Florida? of New Orleans? (12) How did the Indians accept English victory over the French? (13) What was done with the territories won from the French by the English? (14) What three types of immigrants came to America in large numbers between 1700 and 1763, and to which of the colonies did they come? (15) What was the chief purpose in the founding of Georgia? (16) Over what matters did disputes arise during the early history of Georgia? (17) Into what portion of the trans-mountain west did English population first penetrate? (18) Of what racial elements was this first " westward movement" chiefly composed? (19) What were the important duties of the Lords of Trade as created in 1696? (20) What do you think the increased amount of Parliamentary legislation of this period indicates? (21) Why did England want to change the

63. A. B. Hart, American History told by Contemporaries, II, 105-106.

charter and proprietary colonies into "royal" colonies? (22) What kind of colonial union was proposed by Great Britain? (23) Where was greatest objection found to the establishment of an Episcopalian Bishop in America? (24) Why did Colonial Assemblies wish to control the salaries of royal officials in the Colonies? (25) Why did the colonists object to the limitation of their "right of free speech"? (26) What kind of a colonial "right" did Otis say the general writ of assistance violated? (27) On what ground did Henry deny the right of the King to veto colonial legislation?

II. (1) Color two outline maps of the United States to show French, Spanish, and English possessions before and after the French and Indian War. (2) Trace the steps in the FrenchEnglish attempts to get possession of the Ohio valley between 1748 and 1754. (3) Compare the motives for colonization in Virginia, Massachusetts, and Georgia. (4) Discuss "Immigration into the Colonies before and after 1700." (5) What purpose on the part of England do you think the extracts in the last portion of this section indicate? (6) What attitude on the part of the colonists in regard to the same? (7) Do you find anything in these extracts that seems to foretell conflict between Colonies and Mother Country?

III. (1) What were the names of the three European wars corresponding to King William's, Queen Anne's, and King George's wars in America? (2) Compare the characteristics of French and English colonies about 1754. (3) What effect or effects upon the future of America did the English victory of 1763 have? (4) Find the names of three great Americans who were of Scotch-Irish ancestry? (5) What were the organs of Imperial administration before the establishment of the Lords of Trade in 1696? (6) Were English restraints on colonial trade and manufactures according to or contrary to the commonly accepted economic theories of that time? (7) Make a list of all the officials in England and the Colonies who represented British authority in Colonial administration.

Text-Book References.-Adams & Trent, 69-86; Ashley, 86, 88-101;Channing (revision 1908), 110-120; Hart, 69-75, 107133; James & Sanford, 106-126, 128-129, 134-140; Macdonald's Johnston, 46-47, 62-63, 84-96; McLaughlin, 116-128, 129-150; McMaster, 57-58, 61-65, 77-91; Montgomery (revision 1905), 57-62, 92-93, 97-98, 114-115, 128-154; Thomas (revision 1903), 57-58, 67-70, 85-102, 107-109.

CHAPTER II

REVOLUTION AND INDEPENDENCE-1764-1786

In 1764-1765 Great Britain began an attempt to bring bout a "change of policy" in the government of its Amercan colonies. The "change" consisted of three things: (1) Parliamentary taxation of the colonies for the purpose of raising a British revenue; (2) enforcement of the old but neglected or ignored "trade acts" of 1696 and 1733; (3) the maintenance of a British standing army in the colonies in time of peace. The American Revolution was the result of the repeated attempts of Great Britain to put this "change of policy" into effect.

The colonists at first appealed to their "constitutional rights as Englishmen"; but, when this did not avail, demanded their "natural rights as men." Their opposition at first was merely political-protest, argument, appeal, nonimportation of English goods; but when Great Britain sought to suppress this by force, they took up arms in defense of what they considered their rights. Their demand at first was only for a redress of grievances—the abandonment of the offensive "change of policy"; but when Great Britain declared them in rebellion, and sent English and foreign troops against them, they made a new demandindependence, or separation from the British Empire-as the only means by which their rights and liberties could be preserved.

The seven years of war that followed brought an alliance with France, and some sort of aid from almost every one of the other European rivals of Great Britain; it produced the first formal union among the colonies, in the Confederation of 1781; and it ended in American victory in 1782-1783.

165