All this was done under the Crown, and it was done correctly, legitimately, constitutionally. That was one hundred and twenty-five years ago. How does the case stand today? The Revolution was a great success, because we had local self-government, even under the Crown. How now?

In 1816, a distinguished Chief Justice ruled that the Towns were the creatures of the State. In 1822, Boston took its City Charter, and a very distinguished lawyer put in a little clause that the General Court might annul almost anything that the City of Boston might do. Then, in 1885, the General Court said: "We have the sole power. Boston shall do this, and it shall be governed thus." Ten years later, when the City of Boston had a splendid system of water works, the General Court thought it might as well take that.

You have all heard of municipal ownership. There are those who say that in Massachusetts there is no municipal ownership, and that the State controls everything. In the Revolution, it was possible for the Town of Boston to argue with a King and a great Kingdom. Today, the legal profession tells us that Boston is created by the General Court, and that Boston cannot act except in so far as it has permission from the General Court.

I find no fault with the General Court. I find no fault with Massachusetts. But I tell you that no state, no free country, can live that has not local self-government. Massachusetts won imperishable fame when Boston had home rule.

What will the future bring?

CHRIST CHURCH AND THE

SIGNAL LIGHTS.

[Read before the Society by Edward Webster McGlenen.]

OCTOBER 16, 1902.

ONE of the earliest of the centennial celebrations commemorating events of the Revolutionary War took place in Christ Church, Salem street, Boston.

On the evening of April 18, 1875, appropriate services were held in the church. A most interesting feature took place, when Samuel Haskell Newman, a son of Robert Newman (who was sexton of the church in 1775, and who it is claimed hung the lanterns from the steeple at the request of Paul Revere to warn the watchers on the Charlestown shore), passed up the aisle, lanterns in hand, climbed the belfry stair, and from the upper window of the steeple displayed the twin lights, flashing the warning that "the British troops were crossing the river," as his father had done a century before.

It was proposed to place a tablet on the church the next year, but objections were raised, claiming that it was from the Old North Meeting-house which stood in North square that the lanterns were hung, and not from the church in Salem street. The evidence supporting the claim failed to convince the committee, who decided that Christ Church was the North Church in question, and the tablet was placed on it.