XXXIX. 1769. Jan. for an escape from strife by some Plan of Union; CHAP. that Grafton, who was much connected with NewYork, was believed to be well disposed; that the population was not homogeneous in religion, language, customs, or origin; that the Government and the churchmen acted together; that the city was a corporation in which the mayor was appointed by the king; and the reasons appear why at the hotly1 contested election, which was the last ever held in New-York under the Crown, the coalition gained success over John Morin Scott, and the ardent Sons of Liberty. 6 5 3 In Massachusetts Bernard kept up the ferment. He knew it to be a part of Lord Hillsborough's system that there never should be another election of Councillors, and he and Hutchinson also, most secretly furnished lists of persons whose appointment they advised. They both importuned the Ministry to remove Temple, who would not conceal his opinion, that the affections of the colonists were wasting away from the mother country, from the incapacity and "avarice" of his associates. The wily Hutchinson opposed with all his influence the repeal of the 'Moore to Hillsborough, 20 Jan. 1769. Daniel Colden to his brother, 31 January, 1769. "It is certainly a part of Lord Hillsborough's plan," &c., Hutchinson to Israel Williams, 26 Jan. 1769; and compare Bernard to Hillsborough, 4 Feb. 1769, "This opinion is so sanguinely entertained," &c. &c. Postscript, Supplement to No. 4, Private; Bernard to Hillsborough, 14 Feb. 1769. "Hutchinson to Richard Jackson, See the whole of Bernard to Bernard to Hillsborough, 21 8 Boston Gazette of 6 Feb. 1769; 723, 1 and 2. The notes to the Letter from London are by Temple. 9 • Temple to Grenville, 7 November, 1768; in Grenville Papers, iv. 396, and compare 460. 1769. Jan. CHAP. Revenue Act;1 recommended to remove the main XXXIX. objection to Parliamentary authority, by the offer to the colonists of such "a plan of representation" in the British Parliament, as he knew they must reject;2 informed against the free constitutions of Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island as tending to produce another Congress; and advised and solicited and importunately demanded such an extension of the laws of Treason as would have rendered every considerable man in Boston liable to its penalties. In letters to a member of that Parliament, whose authority he wished it made treasonable to deny,-written for public purposes, and communicated to Grenville himself, to Temple," and to others, he declared that "measures which he could not think of without pain were necessary for the peace and good of the Colony." "There must be," said he, "an abridgment of what are called English Liberties." He avowed his desire to see some further restraint, lest otherwise the connection with Great Britain should be broken; and he consoled himself for his advice, by declaring it impossible for so distant a Colony to "enjoy all the lib 8 1 Hutchinson to Richard Jack- tleman, one of whose letters I son, 24 Jan. 1769. lately sent you," &c. &c. tleman was Hutchinson. firms Almon's statement. 2 Hutchinson to Richard Jack- From the Draft by Hutchinson. ly, 20 Jan. 1769. Of a previous Letter Whately writes, "I have not been wanting to signify through proper channels," &c. &c. Whately to Hutchinson, London, 11 Feb. 1769. 6 The genThis con 'Almon's Biographical anecdotes of Eminent Men; ii. 105. Biog. of Thomas Whately. "Mr. Whately showed them to Mr. Grenville, who showed them to Lord Temple, and they were seen by other gentlemen." This refers to the very letter of Hutchinson above cited. Almon is good authority for what relates to Temple. Compare for example, Whately to Grenville, 3 Dec. 1769. "An- 8 The Letters of Gov. Hutchinson other Correspondent, the same gen- and Lieut Gov. Oliver, 16 17. erty of the Parent State." He had put many sugges- CHAP. tions on paper, but behind all he had further XXXIX. "thoughts, which he dared not trust to pen Jan. and ink." 1 1769. "Poison will continue to be instilled into the minds of the people," wrote Hutchinson's brother-inlaw, Oliver," "if there be no way found to take off the original incendiaries." The Bedford Address for shipping American traitors to England having come to hand, a way was open for "taking them off;" and Bernard and Oliver and Hutchinson, the three relentness enemies to Colonial freedom, with the Attorney-General, were very busy in getting evidence especially against Samuel Adams; and affidavits, sworn to before Hutchinson,* were sent to England, to prove him fit to be transported under the Act of Henry the Eighth. Nor was he alone to be called to account; but Edes and Gill, also, "the trumpeters of sedition," and through them "all the chiefs of the Faction, all the authors of numberless treasonable and seditious writings." "A few individuals stigmatized," wrote one of Hutchinson's underlings," "would cause us to reform." "I sometimes wish," said one of a neighboring Colony, "that two thirds of the gentlemen of the law, and as great a number of the printers, had been shipped to some sandy spot on the African shore for at least seven years.' From the Letter Book; where the person to whom the letter is addressed is not named. Andrew Oliver to Thomas Whately, Boston, 13 Feb. 1769; in Letters, &c., 30, 31. Bernard to Hillsborough, 24 January, 1769. 4 Copies of the Affidavits in my Bernard to Hillsborough, 25 N. Rogers [connected with J Chew of New London, Conn. CHAP. Jan. While Hutchinson, eager to find "proceedings1 XXXIX amounting to treason," was taking depositions, so that 1769. "the principal actors might be called to account," those whom he sought to arraign as traitors were aware of his designs, publicly reproached him for his baseness in performing "the office of an informer" while he held the post of Chief Justice, and avowed their opinions more boldly than ever. "Parliament will offer you a share in the representative body," said the royalists; and the suggestion was always indignantly spurned, since a true representation was impossible. "Boston may be deprived of its trade," thus they foreshadowed the policy adopted five years later. "What then?" it was asked. "Will the decline of British credit be remedied by turning our sea-ports into villages? ” "Governor Bernard has been spoken of with great respect; reported the official journal. "And so has Otis,” rejoined the Boston Gazette; "and has been compared to the Pyms, the Hampdens, the Shippens of Britain." "Bernard has had some very uncommon difficulties to contend with," said royalists in his excuse. "And Otis and his compatriots," retorted Samuel Adams, "have doubtless had none! no toils, no self-denials, no threatenings, no tempting baits! All the virtue is on one side; virtue was never known to be separated from power or profit." "We should have been ruined by this time, had not the troops arrived," wrote one who was grasping at a lucrative 'Samuel Adams under the signature of Shippen, in the Boston Gazette of 30 January, 1769; 722, 2, 1, 2 and 3. "N. Rogers to W. S. Johnson, 12 Jan. 1769. XXXIX. 1769. Jan. office. "Military power," repeated the people, "is CHAP. the last resource of ignorant despotism." "The opposition to government is faction;" said the friends to Government. "As well," answered Samuel Adams, "might the general nneasiness that introduced the revolution by William the Third, or that settled the succession in the House of Hanover, be called a Faction." The patriot was in earnest. Since Great Britain persisted in enforcing her Revenue Act, he knew no remedy but American Independence. 1 Lord North, though he feared to strike, wished to intimidate. He would not allow a Petition from the Council of Massachusetts for the Repeal of Townshend's Act to be referred with the other American papers; nor would he receive a Petition which denied that the Act of Henry the Eighth extended to the Colonies; and on the twenty-sixth of January after a delay of many weeks, he asked the House of Commons to agree with the Resolves and Address of the House of Lords. "No lawyer," said Dowdeswell, "will justify them; none but the House of Lords who think only of their dignity, could have originated them." "Suppose," said Edmund Burke, 'you do call over two or three of these unfortunate men; what will become of the rest? Let me have the heads of the principal leaders, exclaimed the Duke of Alva; these heads proved Hydra's heads. Suppose a man brought over for High Treason; if his witnesses do not appear, he cannot have a fair trial. God and nature oppose you." Grenville spoke against the Ad 1 Cavendish Debates, i. 185, &c. 2 Parliamentary History, xvi. 485, &c. MS. Letters and Diary of W. S. Johnson; Cavendish DeVOL. VI. 22 bates, i. 191 &c. Thomas Pownall |