ward of a thousand pounds each for the detection of the two leaders, and of five hundred pounds for the discovery of each one of their associates. The Governor of Rhode Island, with Auchmuty of Boston, Judge of Admiralty, and the Chief Justices of New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, were constituted a Commission to investigate the case; and the Governor of Rhode Island was instructed to send to England for trial such persons as the Commissioners might arraign. At one time there seemed good prospect of a discovery of evidence sufficient to authorize prosecutions. A mulatto lad testified that he had been of the party from Providence, and that with him in the boats were five inhabitants of Providence, Bristol, and Warwick, whom he named. The Admiral sent his deposition to Wanton, with the request that he would cause the persons named to be apprehended and examined; but the Governor excused himself from doing so, on the ground of sworn evidence which had been brought to him, to the effect that the witness was notoriously unworthy of belief, and that on the night in question he had not been absent from his master's house in Portsmouth.

1773.

Jan.

A quorum of the Commissioners met at Newport, but failed of obtaining evidence on which to proceed to any purpose. Dudingston was in England; the Admiral did not find it convenient to come from Boston; and after an unprofitable session protracted through most of a month, the Commissioners adjourned. They met again in the following summer, but after further consultations which wasted three weeks, found nothing to report to England but that their investigations had been fruitless. They saw nothing to censure in the conduct of the colonial magistrates, and they found "too much reason to believe that in some instances Lieutenant Dudingston, from an intemperate if not a reprehensible zeal to aid the revenue service, exceeded the bounds of his

duty." The most important consequence which followed the transaction was in the alarm and indignation. spread through the Colonies by the ministerial scheme of sending accused persons from Rhode Island to England to be tried. This measure had been proposed by the Duke of Richmond some years before, but then it had had such a reception as caused it to be abandoned. Now the actual attempt was made to put it in force, and that at a moment most inopportune. It was a time of vehement agitation in Massachusetts, and the excitement created in Virginia by the ministerial threat to transport citizens of Rhode Island abroad for trial was no unimportant influence among those which prompted the action of the great southern Colony at this period.2 Rhode Island at once appointed its Committee of Correspondence, and active communications followed between it and the other Colonies.3

Along with letters of Hutchinson and Oliver, which, procured from England at this time, brought upon them

1 For a full and minute history of all the transactions relating to the destruction of the Gaspee, and the proceedings of the British Government thereupon, see R. I. Rec., VII. 55-192.

2 It is particularly referred to in that connection in the Virginia Resolves of March 12, 1773, relating to the establishment of Committees for Correspondence between the Colonies. (R. I. Rec., VII. 226.) — Hutchinson took a characteristic interest in this affair. August 29 he wrote to Secretary Pownall, "people in this Province, both friends and enemies to government, are in great expectations from the late affair in Rhode Island. . If it is passed over without a full enquiry and due resentment, our liberty people will think they may with impunity commit any acts of violence, be they ever so atrocious, and the friends to gov

ernment will despond, and give up all hopes of being able to withstand the faction. . . . . If ever the government of that Colony is to be reformed, this seems to be the time, and it would have a happy effect in the Colonies which adjoin to it. . . . . The denial of the supremacy of Parliament and the contempt with which its authority has been treated by the Lilliputian Assemblies of America can never be justified or excused by any one member of either House of Parliament." And again to Commodore Hood (September 2): Admiral Montague says that Lord Sandwich will never leave pursuing the Colony until it is disfranchised. If it is passed over, the other Colonies will follow the example." (Ibid., VII., 102, 103, notes.)

66

8 R. I. Rec., VII. 225-240; comp. 287-307.

so much resentment in Massachusetts, it has been mentioned that there was a letter from George Rome, of Newport. Rome was an English merchant, who had resided. several years in that town, holding no public place. The letter now produced against him, written six years before to a friend in Connecticut, complained of the faulty administration of justice in New England, by which he said he had been largely the loser; and he digressed into some sharp comments on the condition of the governments in general. The letter was scarcely a fair subject for public animadversion, but it kindled a fierce flame of indignation in Rhode Island.'

The ministerial arrangement for admitting the tea-ships. of the East India Company included by name no port of New England but that of Boston, so that elsewhere it occasioned directly no disturbance or excitement, and the current of affairs in Rhode Island was not further affected by it than as it led to new expostulations by several of the towns against the new artifice to collect a tax in America, and assertions of a continued determination to resist it. Some confidence was inspired by what was known of the numerical force of the Colony. A census taken by public authority at this time ascertained the

1 William Palfrey, who had had a business correspondence with Rome, wrote to him (June 13) that he had seen his letter, and feared that "although it was wrote in private confidence," it would make trouble for him, when published, as it very soon would be. Rome replied (June 25): "What is called my letter is published, and I suppose not less than five hundred copies of it is circulating. The town [Newport] and populace has behaved extremely well on the occasion, so that I am not apprehensive of any bad consequences from it." Still, to guard against the worst, he made the request to his friend, which of course was not com

plied with, to forward to him the original, which was in Boston. His hope of not being molested proved to be too sanguine. The Assembly summoned him before them at their session in October, and required him to own the authorship of the letter; and on his refusal to answer, they committed him for a contempt. A journey of Palfrey to the south on the business of the tea-ships interrupted the correspondence. Rome was soon discharged from his arrest, but at a later period he was very hardly dealt with. (R. I. Rec., VII. 376, 394, 421, 499, 521, 549, 550.)

279.

2 R. I. Rec., VII. 272, 274, 276

population to be 59,678; of which number 54,435 were whites. There were 3,761 blacks and 1,482 Indians.1

The defeat in Connecticut, as in the other New England Colonies, of the attempt to introduce the use of stamped paper has been related. The chasm in one portion of the public records of this period withdraws an important. source of supply for the materials of its history. But the general course of events and some significant facts may be gathered through other channels of information. Stephen Johnson, minister of the town of Lyme, took a strenuous part in exciting the popular displeasure against the usurping Act of Parliament; but the expression of such sentiments as he entertained was still thought so dangerous that, concealing his authorship, he caused the papers which he wrote to be stealthily conveyed by a friend to the "New London Gazette ;" and his very vigorous Sermon, preached on the Fast Day apDec. pointed by the Assembly, was printed at Newport, and without the author's name.5 A Resolve of the Legislature, reciting that in several parts of the Colony there had been "divers tumultuous and unlawful assemblies," desired the Governor to issue his proclamation against them. The Declaration and Petitions of the Congress at New York were approved, and a letter was written to the colonial agent with instructions to give them his support. "The Sons of Liberty of the Colony of New York of the one part, and the Sons of Liberty of the Colony of Connecticut on the other part," made a formal engage

1765.

1 R. I. Rec., VII. 253, 299. 2 See above, p. 325.

3 The Journals of neither branch of the General Assembly between 1744 and 1779 are known to exist, and the Colonial Records which preserve only the joint action of the two branches do not entirely supply the defect for this portion of the history.

4 Gordon, Hist. Amer. Rev., I. 129. 5 It was not even published as a sermon. The stout pamphlet (61 pages) bore the title: "Some Important Observations, occasioned by, and adapted to, the Public Fast ordered by Authority, Dec. 18, a. d. 1765, on account of the Peculiar Circumstances of the Present Day."

ment together" to march with the utmost despatch, at their own proper costs and expense, on the first proper notice (which must be signified to them by at least six of the Sons of Liberty), with their whole force, if it is required, and can be spared, to the relief of those that shall, are, or may be in danger from the Stamp Act, or its promoters or abettors, or anything relative to it, on account of anything that may have been done in opposition to its obtaining." 1 Fitch, Governor for the last twelve years, and three of his Counsellors, consented to take the oath for the support of the Stamp Act. The consequence was that they were dismissed at the next election.2 Fitch was succeeded by Lieutenant-Governor William Pitkin.3

1766.

May.

In Connecticut, as elsewhere, the intelligence of the repeal of the Stamp Act was received with all demonstrations of delight. A day of public Thanksgiving was appointed, and the new Governor was instructed to prepare and transmit "a humble, dutiful, and loyal Address to his Majesty, expressive of the filial duty, gratitude, and satisfaction of the Governor and Company of this Colony on

1 Gordon, Hist. Amer. Rev., I. 146, 147.-Jan., 1766, Governor Bernard wrote to in England that, two or three weeks before, two men had come to New London, saying that they were sent by "one Sears of New York, a noted captain of the mob there," to learn how many men could be had from Connecticut in case troops should be sent to New York from England. (Letter of Bernard in the Sparks Collection.)

2 They published their defence in a pamphlet, entitled "Some Reasons that influenced the Governor to take, and the Counsellors to administer, the oath required by the Act of Parliament commonly called the Stamp Act." They argued (p. 7) that they were "bound, not only by their allegiance, but by accepting

their offices. . . . to yield obedience to the requirements of the King and Parliament,” and further (9-14) that their neglect to render such obedience "in the particular aforesaid would be fatal to the charter privileges granted to the good people of this Colony." But their constituents had now got too far to be quieted even by this last consideration.

8 In October of this year, William Samuel Johnson was appointed to be agent for the Colony in England.

At a rejoicing in Hartford for the repeal of the Stamp Act, three persons were killed by the explosion of some powder, and more than twenty wounded. (Barber, Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., 54.)