instance was in the reign of Charles I., who got on without a parliament from 1629 to 1640.1 In the American colonies the dissolution of the assembly by the governor was not especially dangerous, but it sometimes made mischief by delaying needed legislation. During the few years preceding the Revolution, the assemblies were so often dissolved that it became necessary for the people to devise some new way of getting their representatives together to act for the colony. In Massachusetts this end was attained by the famous "Committees of Correspondence.' No one could deny that town-meetings were legal, or that the people of one township had a right to ask advice from the people of another township. Accordingly each township appointed a committee to correspond or confer with committees from other townships. This system was put into operation by Samuel Adams in 1772, and for the next two years the popular resistance to the crown was organized by these committees. For example, before the tea was thrown into Boston harbour, the Boston committee sought and received advice from every township in Massachusetts, and the treatment of the tea-ships was from first to last directed by the committees of Boston and five neighbour towns.

Committees of Correspondence.

In 1774 a further step was taken. As parliament had overthrown the old government, and sent over General Gage as military governor, to put its new system into operation, the people defied and ignored Gage, and the townships elected delegates to meet

1 The kings of France contrived to get along without a representative assembly from 1614 to 1789, and during this long period abuses so multiplied that the meeting of the States-General in 1789 precipitated the great revolution which overthrew the monarchy.

together in what was called a "Provincial Congress." The president of this congress was the chief Provincial executive officer of the commonwealth, and Congress. there was a small executive council, known as the "Committee of Safety."

This provisional government lasted about a year. In the summer of 1775 the people went further. They fell back upon their charter and proceeded to carry on their government as it had been carried on before 1774, except that the governor was left out altogether. The people in town-meeting elected their representatives to a general assembly, as of old, and this assembly chose a council of twenty-eight members to sit as an upper house. The president of the council was the foremost executive officer of the commonwealth, but he had not the powers of a governor. He was no more the governor than the president of our federal senate is the president of the United States. The powers of the governor were really vested in the council, which was an executive as well as a legislative body, and the president was its chairman. Indeed, the title Provisional "president" is simply the Latin for "chair- governman," he who "presides " or "sits before" an assembly. In 1775 it was a more mod- "presiest title than "governor," and had not the smack of semi-royalty which lingered about the latter. Governors had made so much trouble that people were distrustful of the office, and at first it was thought that the council would be quite sufficient for the executive work that was to be done. Several of the states thus organized their governments with a council at the head instead of a governor; and hence in reading about that period one often comes across the title "president," somewhat loosely used as if equivalent to governor. Thus in 1787 we find Benja

ments;

66

governors" and

dents."

min Franklin called "president of Pennsylvania," meaning "president of the council of Pennsylvania.” But this arrangement did not prove satisfactory and did not last long. It soon appeared that for executive work one man is better than a group of men. In Massachusetts, in 1780, the old charter was replaced by a new written constitution, under which was formed. the state government which, with some emendations in detail, has continued to the present day. Before the end of the eighteenth century all the states except Connecticut and Rhode Island, which had always been practically independent, thus remodelled their governments.

Origin of

These changes, however, were very conservative. The old form of government was closely followed. First there was the governor, elected in some states by the legislature, in others by the people. Then there was the two-chambered legislature, of which the lower house was the same institution after the Revolution that it had been before. The upper the Senates. house, or council, was retained, but in a somewhat altered form. The Americans had been used to having the acts of their popular assemblies reviewed by a council, and so they retained this revisory body as an upper house. But the fashion of copying names and titles from the ancient Roman republic was then prevalent, and accordingly the upper house was called a Senate. There was a higher property qualification for senators than for representatives, and generally their terms of service were longer. In some states they were chosen by the people, in others by the lower house. In Maryland they were chosen by a special college of electors, an arrangement which was copied in our federal government in the election of the president of the United States. In most of the

states there was a lieutenant-governor, as there had been in the colonial period, to serve in case of the governor's death or incapacity; ordinarily the lieutenant-governor presided over the senate.

Thus our state governments came to be repetitions on a small scale of the king, lords, and commons of England. The governor answered to the king, with his dignity very much curtailed by election for a short period. The senate answered to the House of Lords except in being a representative and not a hereditary body. It was supposed to represent more especially that part of the community which was possessed of most wealth and consideration; and in several states the senators were apportioned with some reference to the amount of taxes paid by different parts of the state. When New York made its senate a supreme court of appeal, it was in deliberate imitation of the House of Lords. On the other hand, the House of Representatives answered to the House of Commons as it used to be in the days when its power was really limited by that of the upper house and the Likenesses king. At the present day the English and differHouse of Commons is a supreme body. In tween Britcase of a serious difference with the House American systems. of Lords, the upper house must yield, or else new peers will be created in sufficient number to reverse its vote; and the lords always yield before this point is reached. So, too, though the veto power of the sovereign has never been explicitly abolished, it has not been exercised since 1707, and would not now be tolerated for a moment. In America there is no such supreme body. The bill passed by the lower house may be thrown out by the upper house, or if it passes both it may be vetoed by the governor; and

ences be

ish and

1 See my Critical Period of American History, p. 68.

unless the bill can again pass both houses by more than a simple majority, the veto will stand. In most of the states a two-thirds vote in the affirmative is required.

QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT.

1. The dissolution of assemblies and parliaments : —

a. The governor's power over the assembly in the colonies. b. The king's power over parliament in England.

c. The danger of dissolution in the time of the Stuarts. d. The safety of dissolution in modern England.

e. The frequency of dissolution before the Revolution. 2. Representation of the people in the provisional government of Massachusetts :

a. The committees of correspondence.

b. Their function, with an illustration from the "

c. The provincial congress.

d. The committee of safety.

tea-ships."

e. The return to the two-chambered legislature of the char

ter.

3. Executive powers in the provisional government of Massachu

setts;

a. The foremost executive officer.

b. Where the power of governor was really vested.

c. Why the name of president was preferred to that of gov

ernor.

d. The example of Massachusetts followed elsewhere.

e. The end of provisional government in 1780.

4. The council transformed to a senate :

a. The principle of reviewing the acts of the popular assembly.

b. The borrowing of Roman names.

c. The qualifications and service of senators.

d. The lieutenant-governor.

5. Our state governments patterned after the government of England:

a. The governor and the king.

b. The Senate and the House of Lords.

c. The House of Representatives and the House of Commons. d. Some differences between the British system and the American.