Chapter IX: The West, (9)

[244] Mr. Wm. R. Staples had earlier published the _Documentary Hist. of the destruction of the Gaspee_ (Providence, 1845). An account by Ephraim Bowen is given in S. G. Arnold's _Rhode Island_ (vol. ii. ch. 19, 20). For local accounts, see _Providence Plantations_ (Providence, 1886), pp. 58, 359; O. P. Fuller's _Warwick, R. I._ (p. 101); Foster's _Stephen Hopkins_ (ii. 83, 245); E. M. Stone's _John Howland_ (p. 35). For the political bearings to the country at large, see Frothingham's _Rise of the Republic_ (p. 278); Parton's _Jefferson_ (ch. 14, 15); _Life of R. H. Lee_ (i. 85); Lossing's _Field-Book_ (ii. 60). There are in the _Sparks MSS._ (xliii. vol. i. p. 140, etc.) the letters of the British Admiral Montague, and depositions copied from papers in the English Archives. G. C. Mason, in the _R. I. Hist. Soc. Coll._, vii. 301, etc., traces the presence of different English war vessels in the bay between 1765, and 1776. Cf. _New Jersey Archives_, x. 375, 395.

[245] Sam. Adams seems to have drafted this reply, with aid on law-points from John Adams, the latter being almost the exclusive author of the reply of the House to the second speech of the governor. Wells thinks Hawley may have had a hand in these papers. Cf. Quincy's _Quincy_, p. 113; _Life, etc., of John Adams_, i. 118-133, ii. 310; Wells's _Sam. Adams_, ii. 29, 31, 41; Tudor's _Otis_, p. 410; Bradford's _Mass. State Papers_, 336, 399; Bancroft, orig. ed., vi. 446-453; Niles's _Principles_ (1876 ed., pp. 79, 87); _Speeches of his Excellency, with the answers of his Majesty's Council and the House of Representatives_ (Boston, 1773). A meeting of the town of Boston was held in Faneuil Hall, March 8, 1773, "to vindicate the town from the gross misrepresentations of his Excellency's message to both Houses", and its proceedings were circulated in broadside.

One of the most violent of the tracts of this year was _The American Alarm, or the Bostonian Plea, by a British Bostonian_ (Boston, 1773,—Stevens's _Nuggets_, no. 3,257). Joseph Reed was writing to Dartmouth on the condition of affairs (Reed's _Reed_, i. ch. 2); and as respects the feelings farther south, see Gov. Wright's letters from Georgia to Dartmouth, in the _Georgia Hist. Soc. Coll._, vol. iii.

[246] Pownall (b. 1722; d. 1805), who knew America well from residence and official station, proved a man of great forecast, and a prudent, conciliatory friend of both countries. We have his speech in Parliament in 1769 (Haven in Thomas, ii. 604, 649), and know how impatient Parliament was of his wisdom (Smyth, _Lectures on Mod. Hist._, Bohn's ed., ii. 384-85). We see his admirable spirit in his correspondence (1772) with James Bowdoin (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, v. 238).

Pownall had first published his _Administration of the Colonies_ (London, 1764) at the very outset of the dispute, and it was enlarged in 1765. In an appendix to the edition of 1766 he made a strong statement of his views in opposition to the right of Parliament to tax America, and he reprinted this in a fourth ed. (1768), and also issued it separately. In the fifth edition (1774) he added a second part, giving his plan of pacification. The last edition was in 1777 (Sabin, xv. nos. 64,841, etc.; Carter-Brown, iii. nos. 1,425, 1,470, 1,537, 1,636). In 1780 Pownall published a tract that has acquired some fame, as a forecast of the future republic (Harper's _Cyclo. of U. S. Hist._, ii. 1,151), entitled _A Memorial to the Sovereigns of Europe on the present state of affairs between the old and new world_ (London, 1780). Somebody undertook what was rather fancifully called _A Translation_ of this tract into plainer language (London, 1781,—_Brinley Catal._, no. 4,109), but it did not meet with Pownall's approval. In 1783 he published a _Memorial addressed to the sovereigns of America_ (Lond., 1783,—Sabin, xv. nos. 64,824, etc.). On his tracts, see Shea's _Hamilton_, p. 261. There is a portrait of Pownall at Earl Orford's in Norfolk (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, Nov., 1875), and an engraving of it published in 1777, of which there is a reproduction in the _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, Nov., 1886, with an account of the governor by Robert Ludlow Fowler. The painting in the gallery of the Mass. Hist. Soc. is said to have been painted from this engraving. Cf. _Mem. Hist. Boston_, ii. 63.

[247] First in a Philadelphia paper, Sept. 29, in a letter dated London, Aug. 4.

[248] We have full reports of the Boston meetings. The newspapers give us the accounts of the earlier irregular conferences, and the town printed the reports of the first regular town meetings in _The votes and proceedings of the freeholders and other inhabitants of the town of Boston, in town meeting assembled, according to law, the 5th and 18th days of Nov., 1773_ (Boston, 1773). It was reprinted in London by Franklin, with a preface. The call of the committee for the later meetings exists in Mr. Bancroft's collection, in the handwriting of Joseph Warren (Frothingham's _Warren_, 255), and was circulated in broadside. The reports of the meetings of Nov. 29th and 30th exist in the original minutes in the handwriting of William Cooper among the papers in the Charity Building in Boston, and have been printed by Dr. Green in the _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._ (xx. 10, etc.). The prepared record was printed in a broadside dated Dec. 1, 1773, and a copy is preserved in the Boston Public Library. It represents the meeting as called "for consulting, advising, and determining upon the most proper and effectual method to prevent the unloading, receiving, or vending the detestable tea sent out by the East India Company, part of which has just arrived in this harbor." Hutchinson wrote from Milton, Nov. 30, to his son, one of the consignees of the tea, who had taken refuge in the Castle, that the proclamation, warning the meeting to dissolve, which he had just sent into Boston, might "possibly cause [him] to take [his] lodging at the Castle also" (P. O. Hutchinson, i. 94). The full report of these meetings was also printed in the Boston newspapers, and particularly in the _Boston Gazette_ of Dec. 6th, whose report was reprinted in one of _Poole's Mass. Registers_, and in the _Boston Journal_, Dec. 15, 1849.

Of the meeting of Dec. 16, 1773, and the raid of the "Mohawks" upon the tea-ships, an account was printed in the _Boston Gazette_ of Dec. 20th (Buckingham's _Reminiscences_, i. 169), and in the _Boston Evening Post_ of Dec. 20th (_Bay State Monthly_, April, 1884, p. 261), and the spread of these accounts as they were copied through the country can be followed in the postscript of the _Penna. Gazette_ of Dec. 24th. The speech of Josiah Quincy, Jr., at the meeting, as reported by himself and sent back to his wife after he had reached England, is the only harangue of this critical stage of the controversy in Boston of which we have any detailed account (_Life of Quincy_, 2d ed., 124; Frothingham's _Warren_, 39; _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, Dec. 16, 1873). The conclave which planned the raid was held in Court Street (Drake's _Old Landmarks of Boston_, 81; _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, Dec., 1871, for an account of the punch-bowl around which the conclave was held). There are a number of contemporary journals and statements respecting these riotous proceedings. The letter of the Mass. Ho. of Rep. to Franklin, Dec. 21, is preserved in the Lee MSS. (Harvard College library, vol. ii. no. 14), and is printed in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll._ (xxxiv. 377). There are details in the Andrews letters (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, viii. 325), in Newell's diary (_Ibid._, Oct., 1877), in the Jolley narrative (_Ibid._, Feb., 1878, p. 69), in John Adams's diary (_Ibid._, Dec., 1873, and his letter, Dec. 17, to James Warren, in _Works_, ix. 333). A copy of the testimony of Dr. Hugh Williamson before the Privy Council, Feb. 19, 1774, copied from his own draft, and relating the destruction of the tea, was transcribed from the original in 1827, while in the possession of Dr. Hosack, and is included in the _Sparks MSS._ (lii. vol. iii.). Cf. _Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll._, xxxiv. 373, etc.

All this and other documentary evidence can be found in Force; in Niles's _Principles and Acts_ (1876), p. 96; in the _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, Dec. 16, 1873; and in Francis S. Drake's _Tea Leaves: being a collection of letters and documents relating to the shipment of tea to the American colonies in the year 1773, by the East India tea company. Now first printed from the original manuscript. With an introduction, notes, and biographical notices of the Boston tea party_ (Boston, 1884). The only considerable narrative of an actor in the "Mohawk" raid is G. R. T. Hewes's _Traits of the Tea Party_ (N. Y., 1835), which was written out for him by B. B. Thacher. Cf. also _Retrospect of the Boston Tea Party, with a memoir of Hewes_ (N. Y., 1834); Loring's _Hundred Boston Orators_ (p. 554). The last survivor was Capt. Henry Purkitt, who died March 3, 1846. A picture of David Kinnison, also called the last survivor, is in Lossing's _Field-Book of the Revolution_ (i. 499). Of Samuel Phillips Savage, the moderator of the meeting of Dec. 16th, there is a portrait owned by Mr. G. H. Emery, engraved in Drake's _Tea-leaves_.

Hutchinson gives his view of the transactions in the third volume (pp. 422-441) of his _Massachusetts_. (Cf. Ryerson's _Loyalists_, i. 383.) There is among the Bernard Papers (vol. viii. p. 229), in the _Sparks MSS._, a paper giving the story as those in authority transmitted it to the home government.

Among the later American sources, see Frothingham's _Warren_ (ch. 9), his _Rise of The Republic_ (ch. 8), and his paper in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._ (Dec. 16, 1873): Tudor's _Otis_ (ch. 21); Wells's _Adams_ (ii. ch. 28), Ramsay's _Amer. Rev._ (i. 373); Holmes's _Annals_ (ii. 181); Palfrey's _New England_ (iv. 427); Barry's _Mass._ (ii. ch. 15); Bancroft's _United States_ (orig. ed., vi. ch. 50); Lossing's _Field-Book_ (i. 496); and his paper in _Harper's Monthly_ (iv. 1); Snow's _Boston_; the _Mem. Hist. of Boston_ (iii. 46-51); _Essex Inst. Hist. Coll._ (xii. 197); _Niles's Register_ (1827), from Flint's _Western Monthly Rev._ (July, 1827).

The first accounts of the destruction of the tea which reached London (Jan. 19, 1774) were printed in the London newspapers of Jan. 21st and in the _Gentleman's Mag._ (1774, p. 26), copied in Carlyle's _Frederick the Great_ (vi. p.524). Cf. Mahon (v. 319); May's _Const. Hist. Eng._ (ii. 521); Massey's _England_ (ii. ch. 18); McKnight's _Burke_ (ii. ch. 20); Fitzmaurice's _Shelburne_ (ii. ch. 8). Lecky, in his _Eng. in the Eighteenth Century_ (iii. p. 371), speaks of the speech of George Grenville, reported by Cavendish, as particularly worthy of attention. Cf. _Parliamentary History_ and Force's _Amer. Archives_ (4th ser., i. 133).

For the commotions in the other colonies, see, for New Hampshire, beside the histories, the _N. H. Prov. Papers_, vii. 408, 413, and the letter of July 26, 1774, in the Chas. Lovell Papers (Mass. Hist. Soc.). For Connecticut, the general histories of the State, Peters's _Connecticut_, and McCormick's reprint, to be corrected by J. L. Kingsley's _Hist. Address_ (1838), _New Englander_ (1871, p. 248), and _Scribner's Mag._, June, 1878. Cf. also J. H. Trumbull's _Blue Laws true and false_. Dawson (_Westchester County_, p. 7) claims that the refusal of the New York authorities to allow the tea ship Nancy to enter the harbor was more significant than the riot in Boston, and he cites various authorities. Cf. Lossing's _Schuyler_ (i. ch. 16) and Leake's _Lamb_ (ch. 6). For Pennsylvania, see the histories of Philadelphia; Niles's _Principles and Acts_ (1876, p. 201); Reed's _Life of Joseph Reed_ (i. ch. 2) for his letters to Dartmouth; Madison's _Works_ (i. 10). For North Carolina, see _Hist. Mag._ (xv. 118).

[249] For a portrait of Cushing, see _Mem. Hist. of Boston_, iii. 34.

[250] _Journals of the House_, 1773; _Boston Gazette_; Alden Bradford's ed. of _Mass. State Papers_; _Gent. Mag._, July, 1773. The letters were first published June 16, 1773 (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, Oct., 1877, p. 339).

_Copy of letters sent to Great Britain by Thomas Hutchinson and Andrew Oliver, and several other persons born and educated among us; which original letters have been returned to America_ (Boston, 1773; reprinted in Salem, 1773). _The letters of Gov. Hutchinson and Lieut.-Gov. Oliver, 1st and 2d ed._ (edited by Israel Mauduit) (London, 1774). _The representations of Gov. Hutchinson and others contained in certain letters transmitted to England, and afterwards returned from thence_ (Boston, 1773). These letters are reprinted in _Franklin before the Privy Council_ (Philad., 1859). Cf. _Works relating to Franklin in the Boston Public Library_, pp. 21, 22; Sabin, vi. p. 344, Haven in Thomas, ii. 632, 633; Stevens's _Hist. Coll._, i. p. 166.

[251] Mahon (v. 323) thinks it strange that any American of high standing should care to justify or palliate the conduct of Franklin. Goldwin Smith (_Study of History_, N. Y., 1866, p. 213) says: "Franklin alone, perhaps, of the leading Americans, by the dishonorable publication of an exasperating correspondence, which he had improperly obtained, shared with Grenville, Townshend, and Lord North the guilt of bringing this great disaster on the English race." Lecky (_England in the Eighteenth Century_, iii. 380, 416) alleges rather hastily that Hutchinson had once been concerned in using Franklin's letters with a certain disregard of rights. (Cf. Sparks's _Franklin_, iv. 450.) Some memoranda of Chalmers are in the _Sparks MSS._ (x. vol. iv.) Cf. Campbell's _Lives of the Chancellors_ (vi. 105); Massey's _England_ (vol. ii.); Adolphus's _England_ (vol. ii. 34); Walpole's _Last Journals_, i. 255, 289.

[252] It is included in Sparks's edition, iv. 405, and embraces Franklin's letters to Cushing and his replies. Cf. also Sparks's _Franklin_, i. 356, viii. (his letters), 72, 79, 81, 85, 98, 100, 116, 117; Bigelow's _Life of Franklin_, ii. 130, 141, 158, 187, 206; Parton's _Franklin_, i. 560, 564, 582.

[253] _A faithful account of the transaction relating to a late affair of honour between J. Temple and W. Whateley, containing a particular history of that unhappy quarrel_ (London, 1774). On Temple's connection with the Hutchinson letters, see the citations of the contemporary correspondence in Temple Prime's _Some account of the Temple Family_ (N. Y., 1887), pp. 61-85.

[254] _Franklin's Works_, iv. 435.

[255] _Ibid._, iv. 441.

[256] Cf. _Boston Daily Advertiser_, April 3 and 5, 1856.

[257] _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xvi. 43; R. C. Winthrop's _Speeches_, 1878-1886, p. 1.

[258] Cf. Bancroft's _United States_, orig. ed., vi. 435; Almon's _Biog., lit., and polit. anecdotes_ (Lond., 1797); Wells's _Sam. Adams_ (ii. 74); Barry's _Mass._, ii. 462. Hutchinson's own account of the transactions is given in his third volume (pp. 400-418), which may be supplemented by sundry references in P. O. Hutchinson's _Governor Hutchinson_ (pp. 82-93, 577; ii. 79), part of which refer to that editor's own views. C. F. Adams (_Adams's Works_, ii. 319) thinks the evidence nearly conclusive that John Temple was the person who gave the letters to Franklin. (Cf. P. O. Hutchinson, pp. 205, 210, 221, 222, 232, 353.) Cf. statement in _Mass. Archives_, "Miscellaneous", i. 386.

[259] Sparks's _Franklin_, iv. 426; _Sparks MSS._, xlviii.

[260] Sparks's _Franklin_, iv. 430. Cf. _Ibid._, viii. 93, 103, 110. Cf. Bigelow's _Life of Franklin_, ii. 189.

[261] An account of it is given in Israel Mauduit's edition of _The letters of Gov. Hutchinson_, etc. (London, 1774), with an abstract of Wedderburn's speech. There is a description of this scene in Bowring's _Memoir of Jeremy Bentham_ (p. 59; cf. _Monthly Mag._, Nov. 10, 1802, and Sparks's _Franklin_, iv. 451). Gage wrote from London to Hutchinson, Feb. 2, 1774, that no man's conduct was ever so abused for so vile a transaction as Franklin's. There is a letter of Burke on the hearing (_Sparks MSS._, xlix. ii.). There is a contemporary double-folio print, _Proceedings of his majesty's Privy Council on the address of the Assembly of Mass. Bay to remove the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, with the substance of Mr. Wedderburn's speech_ (Mass. Hist. Soc.). The whole proceedings are given in _Franklin before the Privy Council in behalf of the Province of Mass. Bay, to advocate the removal of Hutchinson and Oliver_ (Philad., privately printed, 1859). Arthur Lee has a word to say on the scene (_Life of A. Lee_, i. 240, 273). Franklin is said to have worn a suit of Manchester velvet during this castigation from Wedderburn, which he did not put on again till he signed the treaty of alliance with France in 1778 (Mahon, v. 328).

[262] In 1772 the town of Boston had sent a printed circular to the neighboring towns, asking their advice as to the course best to be pursued in consequence of the crown's assuming to regulate the judges' salaries. Hutchinson (_History_, iii. 545, 546) gives the report of the committee of the Assembly on the grant of the governor's salary from the crown, and the governor's answer (July, 1772). For John Adams's controversy with Brattle on this point, see _Adams's Works_, iii. 513. On Oliver's impeachment, see Hutchinson (iii. 443, 445), and P. O. Hutchinson (i. 133, 142), and papers in the MS. collection of _Letters and Papers_, 1761-1776, in Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet.

A portrait of Chief Justice Peter Oliver, by Copley, painted in England in 1772 (Perkins, p. 89), belongs to Dr. F. E. Oliver of Boston. Cf. photograph in _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, July, 1886, with a memoir which was issued separately as _Peter Oliver, the last chief-justice of the Superior Court of Judicature of the Province of Mass. Bay. A sketch by Thomas Weston, Jr._ (Boston, 1886).

Something of the Boston spirit appears in various letters from her patriots which are printed in Leake's _Lamb_. The _Familiar Letters of John and Abigail Adams_ begin at this time. Cf. summary in Sargent's _Andre_, ch. 4. Lecky finds (_Eighteenth Century_, iii. 379) in the talk of the hour the "exaggerated and declamatory rhetoric peculiarly popular at Boston." Isaac Royal's letter to Dartmouth, Jan. 18, 1774, is in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, Dec., 1873. There is a letter to the British officers at Boston attributed to General Prescott (Sabin, x. 40,316).

[263] The action of Parliament can be readily traced in Force, 4th ser., i. 35. The bill was immediately sent in print to this country, and it can be found in Force, in the _N. H. Prov. Papers_, vii. 402, and elsewhere.

[264] There are in the Boston Archives sundry record-books of this time: list of donations; records of Donation Committee; list of persons aided; cash-book of the Donation Committee. The House of Representatives at Salem, June 18, 1774, passed resolutions commending Boston to the aid of all, and sent these resolutions through the country in broadsides. The provincial congress at Cambridge, Dec. 6, 1774, recorded their vote and similarly scattered it. (Cf. _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xiii. 182.) For the gifts which came to Boston, and the attendant records and correspondence, see _Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll._, xix. 158, and vol. xxxiv.; Frothingham's _Rise of the Republic_, 382; Col. A. H. Hoyt's paper in the _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._, July, 1876. For the help from Virginia, see _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, iii. 259.

For notes on the condition of Boston during the operation of the act, see the Andrews letters in the _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, July, 1865, p. 330; Timothy Newell's diary, _Ibid._, Feb., 1859; Thomas Newell's, _Ibid._, Oct., 1877, p. 335; _M. H. Soc. Coll._, xxxi.; Bowdoin's letter to Franklin in _Franklin's Works_, viii. 127; letter of Ellis Gray in _M. H. Soc. Proc._, xiv. 315; Charles Chauncy's _Letter to a friend ... on the sufferings of the town of Boston_ (Boston, 1774); _Review of the rise, progress, services, and sufferings of New England, humbly submitted to the consideration of both houses of Parliament_ (London, 1774); _A very short and candid appeal to free born Britons, by an American_, i. e. Carolinian (London, 1774). For a general treatment of the effect of the Port Bill, see, among modern writers, Bancroft; Frothingham's _Rise of the Republic_, 319, and _Life of Warren_, ch. 10; Tudor's _Otis_; Wells's _S. Adams_ (ii. 170); Reed's _Joseph Reed_ (i. ch. 3); lives of John Adams, Josiah Quincy, Jr.; A. C. Goodell's Address at Salem in _Essex Inst. Hist. Coll._, xiii. p. 1; Pitkin's _United States_ (i. App. 15); Grahame (iv. 358); Sargent's _Dealings with the Dead_ (i. 152); and the histories of Boston. On the British side, see _Parliamentary History_, xvii. 1163; _Annual Register_, xvii. 1159; Donne's _Corresp. of Geo. III. and North_, i. 174; _Protests of the lords_, ed. by Rogers, ii. 141; Adolphus, ii. 59; Massey, ii.; _Pict. Hist. Eng. Geo. III._, i. 159; Smyth's _Lectures_; Mahon (vi. 3); Ryerson's _Loyalists_ (i. 358); Russell's _Life and Times of Fox_, ch. 5; _Life of Shelburne_, ii. 302; _Chatham Corresp._, iv. 342; _Rockingham Memoirs_, ii. 238; Macknight's _Burke_, ii. 50. The London limners made several caricatures out of the hungry Bostonians.

[265] Cf. letter from Portsmouth, N. H., in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, 2d ser., ii. 481; Hollister's _Connecticut_, ii. ch. 6; lives of Jay by Jay and by Flanders, and documents in Force, for the effect in New York; _Minutes of the Prov. Congress of New Jersey_, p. 3; _New Jersey Archives_, x. 457, etc. A paper by Joseph Reed on the action in Pennsylvania (_N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._, 1878, p. 269) was controverted by Thomson (_Ibid._, p. 274), who held that Reed had no intimate knowledge in the matter. Cf. Chas. Thomson's letter to Wm. H. Drayton in the _Penna. Mag. of Hist._ (ii. 411), from _the Sparks MSS._, and his letter in the _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Proc._ (1878, p. 218); Niles's _Principles and Acts_ (1876), p. 203; Dickinson's _Polit. Works_, i. 285-416. The resolutions of Delaware are in the _Life of George Read_, pp. 88, 101. For the Maryland action, see Niles (p.258) and McSherry's _Maryland_. For Virginia, see Rives's _Madison_ (i. 60); Niles (p. 272); _Life of R. H. Lee_ (i. 97); Randall's _Jefferson_ (i. 85); Parton's _Jefferson_ (p. 130). For North Carolina, McRee's _Iredell_.

[266] The covenant was printed in the _Mass. Gazette_, June 23, 1774, and is reprinted in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._ (xii. 45), where is also (_Ibid._, xi. 392; also see xii. 46) the protest against the covenant, and the loyalist signers of the protest (given in _Mass. Gazette_, July 7, 1774). This drew out a proclamation from Gage, pointing out the error of illegal combinations (_Mass. Gazette_, June 30, 1774, and _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xii. 47). It was turned into verse in ridicule (Moore's _Songs and Ballads of the Rev._, p. 65). Dr. Belknap gave his reasons for not entering such a combination (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, 2nd ser., ii. 484). Cf. Frothingham's _Rise of the Republic_, 336. Timothy Ruggles soon organized a counter-association of loyalists.

[267] An account of this interview by Hutchinson himself was first published at length in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, xv. p. 326, Oct., 1877. Cf. _Ibid._, April, 1884, p. 164; P. O. Hutchinson, i. 158, and ii. preface; Donne's _Corresp. of Geo. III. and North_, i. 194.

[268] There are in the Mass. Hist. Soc. cabinet two early, apparently official copies of the act for regulating the government. Cf. Ramsay's _Revolution in South Carolina_ (i. 204); Frothingham's _Rise of the Republic_, p.347, where are various references. Hutchinson wrote from London that he was opposed to these acts (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, Jan., 1862, p. 301). A letter from Jos. Wood, in London, April 18, 1774, makes note of the efforts of the Americans in London to prevent Parliament committing itself so hastily to the Regulating Act (_Penna. Mag. of Hist._, x. 265). Something of the spirit of these protests can be seen in Bishop Shipley's _Speech intended to have been spoken on the bill for altering the charters of the colony of Massachusetts Bay_ (London, 1774). Cf. in reply _A speech never intended to be spoken in answer to a speech intended_, etc. (London, 1774). Cf., on Shipley, _Franklin's Works_, viii. 40. The bishop's views are also expressed in his _Sermon before the Soc. for the propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts_ (London, 1773; Norwich, Conn., 1773). There is a portrait of Shipley in the _European Mag._, April, 1788.

For the debate in Parliament, see Force, 4th series, i. 65; Niles's _Principles_, etc. (1876 ed.), pp. 414, 419.

[269] _Westchester County, N. Y., during the Amer. Rev._ (Morrisania, 1886), pp. 84, 87.

[270] J. C. Hamilton's _Repub. of the U. S._, i. 55; Shea's _Hamilton_, ch. 7; Lossing's _Schuyler_, vol. i.; _Life of Peter Van Schaack_; Jones's _N. Y. during the Rev._, i. 477, 490, etc. John Adams (_Works_, ix. 407, 411) believed that New York held back. Dawson (_Westchester_, 9) thinks that ignorance or neglect is at the bottom of the usual view of the New York sluggishness, held to by writers, but he admits that Gouverneur Morris was doubtful for a while (p. 12; cf. Sparks's _Life of Morris_); he sets forth the great ability of the Tory organ, _Rivington's Gazetteer_ (p. 127); he gives a fuller account than Hinman or Beardsley of the arrest of Samuel Seabury, the "Westchester Farmer", by Isaac Sears (pp. 127, 136; and on Sears, Jones, ii. 337, 622). Much can be gleaned from Tryon and Colden's letters to Dartmouth in _N. Y. Col. Docs._, viii.

[271] Beside the general histories, see, for Pennsylvania, the resolutions of Northampton County in _Hist. Mag._, ix. 49 (also see _Penna. Archives_, iii. 543); for Virginia, Jefferson's resolutions, a _Summary view of the rights of British America_ (Williamsburg, London, and Philadelphia, 1774); the Fairfax County resolutions (Sparks's _Washington_, ii. 488), and Irving's _Washington_ (vol. i. ch. 1); for North Carolina, E. F. Rockwell on Rowan County, in _Hist. Mag._ (xv. 118), and letters in _N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg._ (xiii. 329); for South Carolina, _Hist. Mag._, ix. 341, and xxii. 90; and _Southern Quarterly_, xi. 468; xiv. 37. In a more general way, for movements in the South, see, for South Carolina, Ramsay, Moultrie, Drayton, R. W. Gibbs; for North Carolina, Cooke, Jones, Foote, Martin, Caruthers's _Caldwell_; for Virginia, C. Campbell's _Bland Papers_, Wirt's _P. Henry_, Randall's _Jefferson_, Parton's _Jefferson_, Rives's _Madison_; and for Maryland, Purviance's _Baltimore_. For Southern sentiment of a Tory cast, see Jonathan Boucher's _Views of the Amer. Revolution_.

[272] Force's _Amer. Archives_, 4th ser., i. 333; Dawson's _Westchester County_, 18; Arnold's _Rhode Island_, ii. 334; W. E. Foster's _Stephen Hopkins_, ii. p. 232.

[273] Sparks's _Franklin_, i. 350. It is claimed that Sam. Adams was earlier. Cf. Wells, ii. p. 84.

[274] Bancroft, orig. ed., vi. 508.

[275] Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 40. To New York the precedence is also given by Gordon, Ramsay, Hildreth, and Dawson (_Westchester County_, p. 19).

[276] Dawson, pp. 18, 19.

[277] Wells's _Sam. Adams_, ii. 221. Silas Deane's letters home are in _Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll._, ii.

[278] _Works_, ix. 339. Cf. E. D. Neill in _Penna. Mag. of Hist._, ii. 58; Scharf and Westcott's _Philadelphia_, i. 291.

[279] _John Adams's Works_, ix. 617, x. 78, 173; _Life of Geo. Read_, 93. The Congress met in Carpenter's Hall. (Cf. Scharf and Westcott's _Philadelphia_, i. 290; Egle's _Penna._, 141; Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 262.)

[280] _Works_, viii. 131, 142. The Congress had been variously constituted. New York and Pennsylvania had acted outside their legislatures. John Adams, in going through those States on his way to Philadelphia, had remarked "that some in them wanted a little animation." The spirit in New York is shown on the loyal side in Jones's _New York during the Rev._, i. 449. Cf. J. A. Stevens on "New York in the Continental Congress" in _The Galaxy_, xxii. 149. The credentials of the Delaware members are in the _Life of Geo. Read_, 91. The Virginia delegates were at variance. Patrick Henry was eager for a fight. R. H. Lee thought Great Britain would revoke her obnoxious legislature. Washington was undecided. The instructions of the Virginia delegates are in _Jefferson's Writings_, i. 122. Gadsden was for forcing the conflict by attacking Gage in Boston; and a rumor reaching Philadelphia that Boston was undergoing bombardment fanned the flame, and Samuel Adams wrote home that America would stand by the devoted town. In Georgia the royal governor had prevented the choice of delegates, and that province was not represented. The opposing feelings, North and South, can be gathered from some of the tracts Which the Congress elicited:—

_A few remarks upon some of the resolutions and votes of the Continental Congress at Philad. in Sept., and the Provincial Congress at Cambridge in November, by a friend to Peace and Good order_ (Boston, 1775; same, no date,—Sabin, iv. 15,529). _The two Congresses cut up_ (Boston and New York,—Sabin, iv. 15,597). Thomas Jefferson's _Summary View of the rights of British America, set forth in some resolutions, intended for the inspection of the delegates now in convention_ (Williamsburg, 1774; Philad., 1774). _A letter from a Virginian to the members of the Congress to be held at Philadelphia, Sept., 1774_ (without place, 1774; Boston, 1774, in three editions; London, 1774),—in opposition to the non-importation combination. _Address to the deputies in General Congress_ (Aug. 10, 1774, Charlestown, S. C.,—Sabin, v. 15,511). _Letter from a freeman of South Carolina to the deputies of North America, assembled in High Court of Congress at Philadelphia_ (Charlestown, S. C., 1774,—Sabin, x. 40,277).

The relations of the colonies to the Congress appear in the lives of the leading members. For New England, of which there was not a little jealousy, and whose members refused to attend Sunday sessions (Wells's _Sam. Adams_, ii. 237; _Life of George Read_, 97), see C. F. Adams's _John Adams_; Wells's _Sam. Adams_, vol. ii. 218; Frothingham's _Joseph Warren_, ch. 12; Quincy's _Josiah Quincy_; Austin's _Elbridge Gerry_, ch. 5. For the Middle States, see Sedgwick's _William Livingston_; Lossing's _Schuyler_, i. ch. 17; Shea's (p. 234) and other lives of _Hamilton_; Read's _Geo. Read_, 93; Jay's _John Jay_, and the life of Jay in Flanders's _Chief Justices_. For Virginia, the lives of _Washington_ (Marshall; Sparks, ii. 505; Irving, i. 365); Rives's _Madison_, i. 51; Lee's lives of Arthur and R. H. Lee; Wirt's _Patrick Henry_, 105; lives of Jefferson (Tucker, i. ch. 3; Parton, ch. 17). For South Carolina, the life of Rutledge in Flanders.

The legal aspects are particularly touched in Towle's _Constitution_, 311; _Cocke's Constitutional Hist._, i. 29; Scott's _Development of Constitutional Liberty_, 166; Oscar S. Strauss's _Origin of Republican Form of Government_, (N. Y.) 1885. Cf. Daniel Webster's _Address before the N. Y. Hist. Society_, Feb. 23, 1852, pp. 36, 40; and H. A. Brown's _Oration on the Centennial of the Congress_, 1874.

The general works to be consulted are Grahame, iv. 373; Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 127; Hildreth, vol. iii.; Pitkin, i. ch. 8; Frothingham's _Rise of the Republic_, 335, 359; Greene's _Hist. View of the Amer. Rev._, 79; Dunlap's _New York_, i. ch. 29, 31, and Jones's _N. Y. during the Rev._, i. 468; Gordon's _Pennsylvania_, ch. 20; Mulford's _New Jersey_, 389.

[281] _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, i. 438.

[282] Sabin, iv. 15,542. A MS. copy of the journal, attested by C. Thomson, and evidently brought home by Thos. Cushing, a Massachusetts member, is in the library of the Mass. Hist. Soc. (_Proc._, i. 271). Later editions are _The whole proceedings of the American Continental Congress held at Philadelphia_ (New York, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 15,598); _Extracts from the journal and from the votes and proceedings of Congress, published in Philad., reprinted in Boston and London_ (_Ibid._, iv. 15,526-28; Brinley, ii. 3,990; Stevens, _Nuggets_, no. 3,264). There were other editions in Providence, Newport, New London, Hartford. There were two editions published in London by Almon in 1775 (Sabin, iv. 15,544; Brinley, ii. 3,989). The journal appears also in the several authenticated series of the _Journals of Congress_, 1777, 1801, 1823, etc.

The correspondence of Congress with Gage (Oct. 10th and 20th) is contained in the _Journal_, i. 18, 46.

The documents of the Congress are given by Force.

[283] _Works_, i. 150, ii. 340, 366, 370, 382, 387, 393, ix. 339, 343; his correspondence with Mercy Warren is in _Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll._, xliv. 348.

[284] Vol. ii. p. 535. It was printed separately at the time in Philad., Watertown (Mass.), and Newport. It will also be found in the _Journals of Congress_, i. p. 19; in Ryerson's _Loyalists_, i. p. 411; in Marshall's _Hist. of the Colonies_, App. ix. p. 481. Cf. Story's _Constitution_, i. 179; Curtis's _Constitution_, i. 22; Pitkin's _United States_, i. 283; Hildreth's _United States_, iii. 43; Gay's _Pop. Hist. U. S._, iii. 341; Frothingham's _Rise of the Republic_, p. 371; Greene's _Hist. View_, p. 83; Ramsay's _South Carolina_, i. p. 233.

[285] Cf. note on the authorship of it, in _N. Jersey Archives_, x. 529.

[286] It is printed from this copy, with fac-similes of the signatures, in the _Mag. of Amer. Hist._ (May, 1883, p. 377), together with the letter transmitting it (Stevens's _Hist. Coll._, i. 167; _Bibl. Hist._, 1870, no. 1,026). Franklin printed it at once in Almon's edition of the _Journal of the Congress_ (_Works relating to Franklin in the Bost. Pub. Lib._, p. 24; _U. S. 47th Cong., 1st Sess. Misc. Doc._, no. 21, p. 20). It is also in the Philad. ed. of the _Journal_, i. 46; and was separately printed at Boston in 1774 and 1775, and at New York in 1776, with other documents (Sabin, iv. nos. 15,581-83; Haven in Thomas, ii. pp. 642-43). It has since been given in Force, 4th ser., i. 934; _N. H. Prov. Papers_, vii. 437-41; _N. Jersey Archives_, x. 522; Spencer's _United States_, i. 348, 381; Griffeth's _Historical Notes_, 136. Cf. Ramsay's _So. Carolina_, i. 242; _John Adams's Works_, i. 159, x. 273; Frothingham's _Rise of the Republic_, 377; _Amer. Quart. Review_, i. 413.

[287] Cf. _Journals of Congress_, i. 26; Pitkin's _United States_, i. App. 17; Spencer's _United States_, i. 338; Lee's _Life of R. H. Lee_, i. 119; Jay's _Life of John Jay_, i. App.; Ramsay's _South Carolina_, 263. There was published in London _A letter to the people of Great Britain in answer to that published by the American Congress_ (London, 1775,—Sabin, x. no. 40,509).

[288] Given in Ramsay's _Rev. in So. Carolina_, i. 279; _N. H. Prov. Papers_, vii. 426, etc.

[289] Given in the Appendix of Frothingham's _Joseph Warren_, and in _Journal Cont. Cong._, i. p. 9. Cf. _Mem. Hist. Boston_, iii. 59; _Life of George Read_, 95.

[290] _New York during the Rev._, i. 34, 36.

[291] P. O. Hutchinson's _Governor Hutchinson_, i. 272.

[292] Cf. a letter of A. Lee on the effect of the Congress on the ministry, in _Life of A. Lee_, i. 213.

[293] The plan was published in Philadelphia at the time, and was included the next year in Galloway's _Candid examination of the mutual claims of Great Britain and the colonies, with a plan of accommodation on Constitutional principles_ (New York, 1775, and again in 1780). This drew out _An Address to the Author of a pamphlet entitled_, etc., to which Galloway responded in _A Reply_ (N. Y., 1775). It was later included in Galloway's _Historical and political Reflections on the Rise and Progress of the Amer. Rebellion_ (London, 1780). Cf. Force, 4th ser., i. p. 1; Sparks's _Franklin_, vii. 276, viii. 145; Bigelow's _Franklin_, ii. 249; Gordon, i. 409; _John Adams's Works_, ii. 387, iv. 141; Jones's _N. Y. during the Rev._, ii. 109, 430; Bancroft, _United States_, orig. ed., vii. 140; Pitkin's _United States_, i. 299; Hildreth's _United States_, iii. 46; Frothingham's _Rise of the Republic_, 367, 399; Wells's _Sam. Adams_, ii. 218; Dawson's _Westchester County_, 34; Graydon's _Memoirs_, 117; lives of Washington by Marshall and Sparks; lives of John Jay by Jay and by Flanders; and of Patrick Henry by Wirt.

Jones, in his _New York during the Rev._, i. ch. 2, with notes on pp. 438, 449, 477, 490, explains the relations of the loyalists to this Congress. Governor Franklin sent the Galloway plan to Dartmouth with comments (_N. J. Archives_, x. 503).

Galloway explains his relations to this Congress, and divulged more than the agreement of secrecy was held to warrant, in his _Examination before the House of Commons in a committee on the American Papers_ (London, 1779; 2d ed., with explanatory notes, 1780; ed. by Thomas Balch, Philad., for the Seventy-Six Society, 1855). There is a Dutch version, 1781 (Muller, 1877, no. 1,200). Respecting this examination, Lecky (ii. pp. 443, 481, etc.) says: "As a loyalist, Galloway's mind was no doubt biased; but he was a very able and honest man, and he had much more than common means of forming a correct judgment."

It has been supposed that Galloway conveyed to Governor Franklin the information which through that official reached Dartmouth (_N. Jersey Archives_, x. 473). Galloway is said also to have prepared the pamphlet _Arguments on both sides in the dispute_, etc., which is also reprinted in the _N. J. Archives_, x. 478. On Galloway, see Sabine's _Loyalists_, i. 453.

Haven ascribes to Thomas B. Chandler, and Sabin (no. 16,591) to Dr. Myles Cooper, a tract, _What think ye of Congress now? Or an Enquiry how far the Americans are bound to abide by and execute the decisions of the late Continental Congress, with a plan by Samuel_ [sic] _Galloway, Esq., for a proposed union between Great Britain and her Colonies_ (N. Y., 1775; Lond., 1775). This pamphlet accuses the New England republicans of urging the Congress beyond the purpose for which its members were elected.

[294] The articles were printed in all newspapers, and in those of Boston, Nov. 7th. They are also in the _Journals of Congress_, i. 23; in Ramsay's _Rev. in South Carolina_, i. 252; in H. W. Preston's _Docs. illus. Amer. Hist._ (N. Y., 1886), p. 199; in Force, 4th ser., i. 915, with fac-simile of signatures; in the _Charleston Year Book_ (1883), p. 216, with fac-similes; in Jos. Johnson's _Traditions and Reminiscences of the Amer. Rev._ (Charleston, 1851), p. 51, with fac-similes. The signatures, somewhat reduced, are given herewith from Smith's _Hist. and Lit. Curiosities_, 2d ser., p. liii. Maryland's copy of the original printed broadside, with written signatures, is in the Penna. Hist. Soc. library. Frothingham gives the best account of the genesis of the document and the effect it had (_Rise of the Republic_, 373, 396). In Massachusetts, a broadside Resolution of the Provincial Congress, signed by Hancock, Dec. 6th, was sent to all the ministers, urging them to give their influence to secure a general compliance (in Boston Pub. Lib., H. 90 _a_, 3). This plan of association was opposed by Galloway, Duane, and all the South Carolina delegates except Gadsden. Jones (_N. Y. during the Rev._, i. 438) gives the loyalist view. _The association of the delegates, etc., by Bob Jinger_, is a burlesque on the association (_Harris Collection of Amer. Poetry_, p. 13).

[295] Bancroft, orig. ed., vii. 161.

[296] _Cavendish Debates_, ed. by Wright, viz., _Debates of the House of Commons in 1774 on the bill for making more effectual provision for the government of the Province of Quebec, with Mitchell's map of Canada_ (Lond., 1839). See also the proceedings and the bill in _Amer. Archives_, 4th ser., i. 170-219, 1823-1838. The bill is also in the Regents of the University of New York's _Report on the boundaries of the State of N. Y._, i. 90. Cf. Burke's letter on the Quebec Bill and the bounds of New York in _N. Y. Hist. Coll._, 2d ser., ii. 215, 219; Mill's _Boundaries of Ontario_, p. 50; Gordon's Sermon in Thornton's _Pulpit of the Rev._, 217, Shea's _Hamilton_, 324; and _Works of Alex. Hamilton_.

The satirical print "Virtual Representation", given herewith, follows an original print in a volume of _Proclamations_ in the library of the Mass. Hist. Society. Cf. Lossing's _Field-Book of the Rev._, i. 158.

[297] Cf. Lecky, _England in the Eighteenth Century_, iii. 400, 433, on the effect of the act. Cf. also _The Singular and Diverting Behaviour of Doctor Marriot, His Majesty's Advocate-General; Who was Examined concerning the Religion and Laws of Quebec; And found means from his incomparable Wit and Subtility To defeat the Purposes for which he was brought to the Bar of Parliament On the 3d of June, 1774_ (Phila., 1774). Samuel Johnson's _Hypocrisy unmasked, or a short inquiry into the religious Complaints of our Amer. Colonies_ (Lond., 1776, 3 editions), defends the bill, and says it extends no more rights to Catholics than some of the colonies do (Sabin, ix. no. 36,297). _A Letter to Lord Chatham on the Quebec Bill_ reached five editions (London, 1774; reprinted, Boston, 1774), and was corrected in the second edition. Sabin (x. 40,468) says it was attributed to Lord Lyttelton, and more probably to Sir William Meredith. The New York reprint (1774) gave it as _A letter from Lord Thomas Lyttelton to Wm. Pitt, Earl of Chatham_ (Stevens, _Hist. Coll._, ii. no. 433). Wilkie published _The justice and policy of the late Act of Parliament, for making more effectual provision for the government of Quebec, asserted and proved; and the conduct of the administration respecting that province stated and vindicated_ (London, 1774, two editions), which is attributed to William Knox. Francis Masères published _An account of the proceedings of the British and other Protestants, inhabitants of the province of Quebec_, with _Additional papers concerning the province of Quebec_ (Lond., 1776), and _The Canadian Freeholder ... shewing the sentiments of the bulk of the freeholders of Canada, concerning the late Quebeck act_ (Lond., 1777, in three vols.). _An Appeal to the public, stating and considering the objections to the Quebec bill_ (London, 1774), was dedicated to the patriotic society of the Bill of Rights.

[298] _A letter to the inhabitants of the Province of Quebec_ (Philad., 1774). _Lettre addressée aux habitans de la Province de Quebec_ (Philad., 1774). _A clear idea of the genuine and uncorrupted British Constitution in an address to the inhabitants of the province of Quebec from the forty-nine delegates in the Continental Congress at Philadelphia, Sept. 5-Oct. 10, 1774_ (London, 1774). Cf. Sabin, iv. 15,516, ix. p. 293, x. 40,664; _Journals of Congress_, i. 39.

[299] P. O. Hutchinson's _Governor Hutchinson_, i. 296.

[300] _Aspinwall Papers_ (_Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll._), ii. 706.

[301] Cf. Reed's _Life of Reed_, i. 76, 78, 82, and George Bancroft's _Jos. Reed_, p. 10. Governor Franklin's letters to Dartmouth are in the _New Jersey Archives_ (x. 473, 503), where the anxiety of the king is disclosed (_Ibid._ x. 496, 534-5). Chatham's opinion is cited in Quincy's _Life of Josiah Quincy, Jr._, 268. Later English views are given in Mahon, vi. 13, and Lecky, iii. 408, 443.

[302] Dawson's _Westchester County_, pp. 36, 37.

[303] On the Tory side were Doctors Cooper, Inglis, Seabury, and Chandler; on the Whig side, William Livingston, John Jay, and Alex. Hamilton. Cf. Lossing's _Schuyler_, i. ch. 17.

[304] Dawson, _Westchester County_, p. 137 (see also _Hist. Mag._, 1868, p. 9), contends for Wilkins, and doubts what is put forward as Seabury's own evidence in the _Mag. of Amer. Hist._, Feb., 1882, p. 117. Cf. _Amer. Quart. Church Rev._, April, 1881; Shea's _Hamilton_, ch. 7; _Manual of N. Y. City_, 1868, p. 813.

[305] The Seabury-Wilkins tracts are:

_Free thoughts on the proceedings of the Continental congress, held at Philadelphia, Sept. 5, 1774: wherein their errors are exhibited, their reasonings confuted and the fatal tendency of their non-importation, non-exportation, and non-consumption measures, are laid open to the plainest understanding_ [_etc._]; _in a letter to the farmers, and other inhabitants of North America in general, and to those of the province of New York in particular. By a farmer._ [_Signed A. W. farmer._] (Without place, 1774.)

_The congress canvassed: or, an examination into the conduct of the delegates, at their grand convention, held in Philadelphia, Sept. 1, 1774. Addressed to the merchants of New York. By A. W., Farmer_ (Philad., 1774).

There was a reply to the Farmer in _Holt's New York Journal_, Dec. 22, 1774 (Dawson, p. 40); but the most extraordinary rejoinder was that of the youthful Alexander Hamilton, then eighteen years old, in _A full vindication of the measures of the congress, from the calumnies of their enemies; in answer to a letter, tender the signature of A. W., Farmer. Whereby his sophistry is exposed_ [_etc._]; _in a general address to the inhabitants of America, and a particular address to the farmers of the province of New York._ [_Signed, A friend to America._] (New York, 1774.) Cf. P. L. Ford's _Bibliotheca Hamiltoniana_ (N. Y., 1886), no. 1.

The "Farmer" replied in _A view of the controversy between Great Britain and her colonies. In a letter to the author of A full vindication of the measures of congress, from the calumnies of their enemies. By A. W., Farmer?_ (New York, 1774.)

Hamilton's final rejoinder is _The farmer refuted; or, a more comprehensive and impartial view of the disputes between Great Britain and the colonies. Intended as a further Vindication of the congress, in answer to a Letter from a Westchester farmer, entitled a View of the controversy between Great Britain and her colonies. By a sincere friend to America_ (1775). Cf. Ford, no. 3.

These productions of the young Whig are contained in the various editions of _Hamilton's Works_. Cf. J. Hamilton's _Repub. of the U. S._, i. 65; Shea's _Hamilton_, p. 330.

[306] _A friendly address to all reasonable Americans on our political confusions_ (New York, 1774; America, 1774; Lond., 1774; Dublin, 1775; abridged, New York, 1774. Sabin, iv. 16,587-8). A copy with the author's MS. corrections was sold at Bangs's, N. Y., Feb., 1854, no. 178. The resulting tracts are: _The other side of the question, or a defence of the liberties of No. America, in answer to a late Friendly Address_ (N. Y., 1774; Boston, 1775). By Philip Livingston. _Strictures on a pamphlet entitled a Friendly Address_ (N. Y., 1774; Philad., 1774; Boston, 1775). This is by Charles Lee, and is reprinted in the Charles Lee Papers, in _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._, 1871, p. 151. _The strictures on the Friendly Address examined and a refutation of its principles attempted_ (Philad., 1775, two editions). This is sometimes ascribed to Thomas B. Chandler, and sometimes to Lieut. Henry Barry. Cooper also printed _The American querist, or some questions proposed relative to the present disputes between Great Britain and her American colonies_ (N. Y., 1774; Boston, 1774; London, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 16,586).

[307] It is printed in Almon's _Prior Documents_ (1777), with Franklin's name, and Sparks includes it in his edition of Franklin (iv. 466). Lee is also said to have had a main hand, aided by Franklin, in _An appeal to the justice and interests of the people of Great Britain in the present dispute with America_ (London, 1774). Cf. Sparks's _Franklin_, iv. 409. Another tract ascribed at the time to Franklin was really written by James Wilson, namely, _Considerations on the nature and extent of the legislative authority of the British parliament_ Philad., 1774. Cf, Sparks's _Franklin_, iv. 409.

[308] Philad. and London, 1774; included in _Political Writings of Dickinson_ (Wilmington, 1801, vol. i.), and in _Penna. Archives_, 2d ser., iii. 560. Cf. _Hist. Mag._, x. 288. Governor Bernard briefly set forth his view of _The Causes of the present distractions in America_ (1774), and also gathered certain letters written from Boston in 1763-68, and published them as _Select letters on the trade and government of America_ (London, 1774,—Sabin, ii. 4,920, 4,925). The government printed a _Report of the Lords' Committee, appointed to inquire into the several proceedings in the colony of Mass. Bay, in opposition to the sovereignty of his Majesty_ (London, 1774). Granville Sharp's _Declaration of the people's natural right to a share in the legislature_, issued in London (1774), was reprinted in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia (Haven in Thomas, ii. p. 650).

[309] Cf., for instance, the letters of the king to Dartmouth, in the Dartmouth Papers (_Hist. MSS. Com. Rept._, ii.); proceedings in Parliament given in Force, 4th ser., i. 5, and in Niles's _Principles_, etc.; Hutchinson's diary, including his interview with the king (P. O. Hutchinson, i. p. 157) and talks with Pownall (p. 251); the picture of Fox and Barré in debates in Smyth's _Lectures_ (ii. 386), and such more general accounts as those in Frothingham's _Rise_, etc. (p. 344), Bancroft's _United States_ (vii. 173, 186, 194), Parton's _Franklin_ (ii. 5), and papers by T. H. Pattison in the _New Englander_ (xl. 571), and Winthrop Sargent in the _No. Amer. Rev._, lxxx. p. 236. The letters of Franklin (_Works_, iv.) add much, and the influence and speeches of Chatham bring him into prominence.

[310] Dawson's _Westchester_, 48, 50, 60, where the authorities of the diverse views are cited. Its sessions closed April 3d, and it was the last Assembly under the royal order. Its proceedings are in Jones's _New York during the Rev._, i. 506. Within a month a general association was signed (April 29th) in New York of the opposers of government (Jones, i. 505). The proceedings of the New York and Elizabethtown committee of observation, relating to infractions of the non-importation agreements, are in the _N. Jersey Archives_, x. 561. The records of the provincial congress (which followed) are at Albany, and are partly printed in Force. The _Sparks MSS._ (no. xxxvii.) show extracts, 1775-78. (Cf. Dawson, 91. Cf. Hamilton's _Repub. of the U. S._, i. ch. 3; Reed's _Jos. Reed_, i.93.) As soon as Governor Tryon discovered the temper of the Continental Congress he sought safety on board a man-of-war in the harbor (_Ibid._, 118), and later in the year (Dec. 4th) he addressed a letter to the people of the province, urging the adoption of plans of reconciliation (_Ibid._, 141).

[311] Henry was a character of which, as time goes on, there is an appreciating estimate. His grandson, William Wirt Henry, is preparing an extended memoir, having already sketched his career in the _Hist. Mag._, xii. 90, 368, xxii. 272, 346; _Penna. Mag. of Hist._, p. 78. Professor Moses Coit Tyler has embodied new material in his _Patrick Henry_ of the "American Statesmen Series." Cf. Frothingham's _Rise_, etc., 179; Mahon, v. 89; and references in _Poole's Index_. For contemporary judgments, see _John Adams's Works_, i. 208, x. 277; and Jefferson's letter in _Hist. Mag._, Aug., 1867, and comments in _Ibid._, Dec., 1867. Alexander Johnston, in his _Representative American Orations_ (vol. i.), selects Henry's speech in the House of Delegates, March 28, 1775, as the leading specimen of Revolutionary oratory. The usual portrait of Patrick Henry is the one by Sully, representing him with his spectacles raised upon his forehead. It was engraved by W. S. Leney in 1817. There is a woodcut in Lossing's _Field-Book_, ii. 439. His is one of the portraits in Independence Hall. On the class rank of the leading agitators in Virginia, compare Rives's _Madison_, i. 71; Grigsby on _The Virginia Convention of 1776_; and John Tyler's _Address at Jamestown, May, 1857_.

[312] _Journals of Congress_, i. 40.

[313] Cf. verses "Loyal York" from _Rivington's Gazetteer_, in Moore's _Songs and Ballads_, 74.

[314] Sparks's _Washington_, iii. 37. For Hancock's character, see Wells's _Sam. Adams_, an unfavorable view. Cf. also Sanderson's _Signers of the Decl. of Ind._; Loring's _Hundred Boston Orators_; C. W. Upham's speech in the Mass. Legislature, March 17, 1859, on the bill for preserving the Hancock House. Hancock's correspondence as president of Congress is in Force, 4th ser., v.; 5th ser., i., ii., iii.

[315] Cf. ed. in 13 vols. Also see _List of delegates, with journal of their proceedings from May 10 to July 31, 1775_ (Philad., 1775,—Sabin, x. 41,447). Extracts from the votes, etc., were printed in New York; and their _Journal_ in Philad. and New York (Haven in Thomas, ii. 656). There are notes on the debates in _John Adams's Works_, ii. 445. Cf. _Elliot's Debates_, i. 45. A fac-simile of the minutes for Dec. 26, 1775, signed by Chas. Thomson, is given in J. J. Smith's _Hist. and Lit. Curios._, 2d ser., p. xiii. The several publications of the Congress (included also in their _Journals_) are as follows:—_Declaration by the representatives of the United Colonies_ ... _setting forth the causes and necessity of taking up arms_ (Philad., Watertown, Newport, 1775; London, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 15,522). Cf. L. H. Porter's _Outlines of the Const. Hist. of the U. S._, p. 38.

_The twelve United Colonies by their delegates in Congress to the inhabitants of Great Britain, July 8, 1775_ (Philad., 1775; Newport, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 15,596). It was drafted by R. H. Lee. Cf. his _Life_, i. 143. Cf. Ramsay's _Rev. in S. Carolina_, p. 362.

_Address of the twelve United Colonies_ ... _to the people of Ireland_ (Philad. and New York, 1775,—Sabin, iv. 15,512).

_Address from the delegates of the twelve United Colonies to the people of New England_ (Newport, 1775; reprinted in the _R. I. Hist. Mag._, 1885).

A petition to the king was adopted July 8th. It is said to have been moulded, in part at least, upon an appeal of Richard Stockton, of New Jersey, dated Dec. 12, 1774 (_Orderly-book of Sir John Johnson_, p. 176-78). Cf. Force, 4th ser., iv. 607; Ramsay, i. 355; Sparks's _Franklin_, i. 372, x. 435; Bancroft, vii. 186; Barry's _Mass._, ii. 60, 61, with references; Lee's _Arthur Lee_, i. 47; ii. 312. The London agents were instructed to print and circulate it (_Journals_, i. 112). Mahon (vol. vi.) says that the king was influenced by a mere punctilio in not replying to it, and Dartmouth writes to Carleton that it found no favor in or out of Parliament.