of the Treasury to appoint a distributor of the stamped papers," but that he was "convinced that it would be to no purpose to attempt to make such an appointment under the present circumstances." It was at this session that, in obedience to a vote of the House, Mr. Ruggles was formally reprimanded by the Speaker for his conduct in the late Congress at New York. Permission was given him to print his justification in the Journal, but it was afterwards retracted.2 Immediately on the occurrence of the first violent demonstration in Boston against the Stamp Act, the Governor sent his accounts of it to England, where the delusion which possessed the Ministry, and to no small extent the people, caused them to be received with surprise. The Lords of Trade had already directed extracts to be made," to be laid before his Majesty, of those parts of Governor Bernard's letter which related to the attempt made to discontinue his salary, and to the proceedings and resolutions of the House of Representatives in respect to a Congress of Committees from the several Assemblies in America." As to the action respecting a provision for the Governor, the Privy Council, understanding "that an opposition had been made in the General Court of Massachusetts Bay to the usual grant to the Governor, upon this principle, that, as the Parliament had taxed the American Colonies, they ought also to provide for the expense of their government, which though withdrawn at that time was declared to be intended to be enforced the next year," considered a proposal "that such a fixed and permanent salary should be allowed to the Governor of said Province as shall be sufficient for his support without the precarious grant of the General Court; " and they adopted a Report of a Committee," that this is a matter of the utmost importance to the Kingdom 8 Grenville Papers, III. 100, 108. 1 V. p. 329, supra. 2 Journal for Jan. 28, Feb. 6, 13, 19. 1765. Oct. and the Legislature of Great Britain, and of too high a nature for the determination of your Majesty in your Privy Council, and is proper only for the consideration of Parliament, and to that end that it may be advisable for your Majesty to give directions that the same be laid before the Parliament." 1765. Oct. During these deliberations, the more serious news of the riots at Boston in the second preceding month came to England. The Privy Council now advised an order to one of the Secretaries of State to instruct the Colonial Governors to " use all legal means to preserve peace and good order, . . . . and in case, by the exigency of affairs in any of the Provinces, it should be necessary to procure the aid of the military, . . . . that the Governor of the Province where that might happen. should apply to the Commanders of the land and sea forces in America, or either of them," who should have the necessary orders for their concurrence and assistance. Later letters from Governor Bernard, "enclosing certain seditious papers printed and published in Massachusetts Bay," and relating the proceedings of the General Court at its first session in the autumn, were applied for by the Duke of Grafton, now a Secretary of State, and communicated to him by the Board of Trade, "along with all orders, &c., issued by their Lordships since the passing" of the Stamp Act. Dec. A change of the Ministry had now taken place, and the Parliament about to meet was no longer under influences altogether the same as had controlled the movement of affairs under the lead of Mr. Grenville. Just at the time of the passing of the Stamp Act, the King had a monitory, though not severe attack of that disease which at three subsequent periods incapacitated him for the royal functions.1 On his recovery, it was thought prudent 1" I learnt a piece of history to day [June 30, 1804] which I did not know before: the King was ill in the same way in the year 1765, very early 1765. to take measures for a regency, to exercise the powers of the Crown in case of a recurrence of a like occasion, or of the sovereign's death while the heir apparent was a child. It was determined to empower the King from time to time to name as Regent either "the Queen or any other person of the royal family usually residing in Great Britain;" and in a royal speech this pro- April. posal was made to Parliament.1 But an unexpected question arose. Under the description which had been used, the King thought that his mother, the Princess Dowager of Wales, was eligible to the Regency. Mr. Grenville and some of his colleagues judged that the Princess, not being in the order of succession to the throne, could not be esteemed one of the royal family. The King felt hurt, his mother was enraged, and her intriguing friends saw their advantage. The Prime Minister, who had no personal popularity, was outvoted in the House of Commons. The King was impatient to be rid of him. He tried through the Duke of Cumberland, his uncle, to make terms with Pitt for the formation of a government. But Pitt had too much sense of past ill-treatment, and too fixed a determination to rule in reality if he accepted office, to be won except upon absolute conditions. The result of much caballing and of many defeats was that a Ministry was formed, with the young Marquess of Rockingham at its head, the representative of a great Whig connection, a man without shining qualities, but of integrity, of good in his reign. I will show you a passage in the continuation of Smollett which proves it, and which was softened down even to what it is at the instance of Government, and at a good price." (Life and Letters of Sir Gilbert Elliot, First Earl of Minto, III. 350.) 1 Parliamentary History, XVI. 53. 2 Almon, History of the Minority, July. 315; Walpole's George the Third, II. 106 et seq. 3 Walpole's George the Third, II. 163-193; Almon, History of the Minority, 320-332; Prior, Life of Burke, I. 131-133; Works of Edmund Burke, I. 309-331; comp Autobiography of the Duke of Grafton, and Walpole's George the Third, IV. 379-383. intentions, and of experience, for his years, in public business. Lord Rockingham was First Lord of the Treasury, and the Duke of Grafton and General Conway were Secretaries of State. Lord Rockingham had no pride to gratify by adherence to the colonial policy of his predecessor, and, if he did not see the injustice, he clearly perceived the extreme inconvenience, of persistence in it. He met Parliament 1765. Dec. with statements of the action of the Congress at New York, and of the utter failure of the Stamp Act in America. He and General Conway had both opposed the Act, but, on the other hand, in their new position they were responsible for the dignity of the realm.2 In At the opening of the session the King only said in general terms that " matters of importance had lately occurred in some of the Colonies in America, which would demand the most serious attention of Parliament.' the Address of reply presented for the adoption of the Commons, they were made to say merely: "We will not fail. . . . to apply ourselves with the utmost diligence and attention to those important occurrences in America which your Majesty recommends to our consideration, and to exert our most zealous endeavors for the honor of your Majesty's government and the true interest of your people in all parts of your extended empire." Mr. Grenville moved an amendment by adding an expression of the purpose of the House "to express a just resentment and indignation at the outrageous tumults and insurrections which have been excited and carried on in North America, and at the resistance given by open and rebellious force to the execution of the laws in that part of his Majesty's dominions; to assure his Majesty that his faithful Commons, animated with the warmest duty and attachment to 1 Parliamentary History, XVI. 112 et seq.; comp. Chatham Correspondence, II. 350-353. 2 Walpole's George the Third, II. 217-223. 8 Albemarle, Memoirs of Rockingham, I. 257, 258. his royal person and government and to the constitution of these kingdoins, will firmly and effectually support his Majesty in all such measures as shall be necessary for preserving and securing the legal dependence of the Colonies upon this their mother country, for enforcing their due obedience to the laws, for maintaining the dignity of the Crown, and asserting the indubitable and fundamental rights of the Legislature of Great Britain.' 1766. Jan. Pitt came from his sick-chamber into the House. "As to the late Ministry" (the Ministry of Grenville, his wife's brother), he said, "every capital measure they have taken has been entirely wrong. This kingdom has no right to lay a tax upon the Colonies." 2 Grenville delivered an elaborate defence of the Stamp Act, and flamed with indignation against the philoAmerican agitators in England. Pitt fell upon him fiercely. "The gentleman tells us that America is obstinate. America is almost in open rebellion. I rejoice that America has resisted. Three millions of people so dead to all the feelings of liberty as voluntarily to submit to be slaves, would have been fit instruments to make slaves of all the rest." He advised "that the Stamp Act be repealed absolutely, totally, and immediately... At the same time let the sovereign authority of this country over the Colonies be asserted in as strong terms as can be devised, and made to extend to every kind of legislation whatsoever." The The power of taxing he had carefully distinguished from that of legislating. "Taxation is no part of the governing or legislating power." 1 Parliamentary History, XVI. 83, 81, 88 89; comp. Walpole's George the Third, II. 235-238. 99. James Fox, I. 48, 49; Russell, Memorials and Correspondence of Charles James Fox, I. 109-111; Walpole's 2 Parliamentary History, XVI. 97, George the Third, II. 260-269; Chatham Correspondence. II. 362-373; Adolphus, History of England, I. 195– Ibid., 101, 102, 104-108; comp. Russell, Life and Times of Charles 209. |