1702. was urged upon the Commons. What would have followed, had it now come to a vote, can be only conjectured; but the exciting question of the impeachment of the King's friends was pending in Parliament, and the movement could not obtain attention. The King's death, and the new interests thereby presented, postponed the revival of it; but it was only two months before that event March 18. that the Board laid before him their opinion that "the national interest required that such independent administrations should be placed, by the legislative power of the kingdom, in the same state of dependency as the royal governments." 1 Intrigues England. After the death of the Governor and the LieutenantGovernor, the Council, by a provision of the charter, became the chief executive authority of Massachusetts.2 There now appeared a prospect that Joseph Dudley's ambition to govern there might be gratified. He had been industrious in endeavoring to remove those discouraging obstacles to his promotion which of Joseph have been mentioned. New York was no sphere Dudley in for him; and the satisfaction which he had had in bringing Leisler to the gallows, for proceedings bearing some resemblance to those of the Massachusetts patriots against himself and his friends, was more than balanced by the apprehensions which followed it when the party of Leisler revived. After a few months passed in New York as Chief Justice,3 he returned to England, and there employed his rare powers of address to September. recommend himself on the one hand to men in power, 44; XL. 689.) October 18, the Board received from the General Court a remonstrance against the measure. (British Colonial Papers.) 'Chalmers, Revolt, II. 307; Journals of the Board of Trade for January 8. 2 The Council Records show Winthrop to have been the presiding 1692. officer of that body, though he was not the oldest member. 8 Dudley was made Chief Justice of New York, May 15, 1691. (Brodhead, New York, 646.) He was displaced by Governor Fletcher, in September, 1692. (Fletcher to Blath. wait, in O'Callaghan, III. 848.) and on the other to conciliate the dissenting ministers who might make peace for him in Massachusetts. Disappointed by the persistent opposition of Constantine Phipps and Ashurst, the agents, in his hope, first of displacing Sir William Phips, and then of succeeding him at his death, he became Lieutenant-Governor of the Isle of Wight, under Lord Cutts, whose valuable friendship he had secured. In Parliament, where at length he obtained a seat, his superior capacity, indefatigable diligence, 1701. and engaging manners, obtained for him no small consideration, and his obsequious officiousness in promot ing the measures for the subversion of the colonial charters, alike with his local knowledge and experience, marked him for the kind of instrument now required by the British government. Lord Bellomont's death revived his hopes. If his pride was enormous, still, unless when his violent passions were roused, he had a will strong enough to bridle his pride, if it threatened to obstruct his ambition. The Mathers had shared and stimulated the hot resentment which had driven him from power in Massachusetts. But the father was at the head of the clergy of the Province, and the son was the most active of men, whether as partisan or as foe. Their weaknesses were familiarly known to Dudley, and he managed with patient assiduity to bring them over to his side. The two agents in England understood him, and continued to loathe him in their hearts. But he showed to them at least no anger for their triumph over him in the appointment of Lord Bellomont, and by the time when the vacancy again occurred Ashurst had withdrawn from the agency,1 and the Jacobite Phipps, who may have indulged in the hope of making Dudley his tool, professed to have been brought to think that, among the untried candidates for the succession, the colonists might do worse than by favoring their able compatriot, upon whom, it might be hoped, so much hard experience would not prove to have been thrown away. If no trust could be placed in his virtue, his selfishness might be confidently counted on, and in future it might prompt to better services. An active member of Parliament was not without opportunities to oblige, or at least to compliment and to encourage, the dissenting ministers, whose cause, throughout William's reign, was in a condition at once critical and hopeful. The judgment of the dissenting ministers of England was of the greatest weight with their brethren in Massachusetts, and Dudley at length got it in favor of his coveted advancement. He voted for Onslow, put forward by the court for the place of Speaker of the Commons, though he was under what are called obligations of gratitude to Harley, the opposing candidate. The King, knowing how he was hated in Massachusetts, was unwilling to appoint him. But Dudley produced a petition in his favor, purporting to be from Massachusetts men then in London, and from merchants trading with that Province. Finally he placed in the King's hands a letter from Cotton Mather, authorizing him to affirm that there was not one minister nor one of the Assembly but were impatient for his coming," -a strong statement, which might be wondered at if it came from some other 66 source.2 1 April 17, 1702, Constantine Phipps, writing to Addington, says that Dudley, in the opinion of all understanding men here, as well as with you, is the only person under whose administration you would be as easy as you are now like to be." (Mass. Archives, LI. 139.) "It was a very great satisfaction to me that I had an opportunity of giving him some small assistance." (Ibid.) Sir Henry, however, did not weary of his opposition to the persistent candidate. As late as November 13 of the same year, "Colonel Dudley acquainted the Board that, whilst his commission for the Governor of New England was passing the seals, Sir Henry Ashurst had presented a memorial against him to the Lords Justices." (Journals of the Board of Trade; comp. Hutch., II. 123.) 2 Perhaps Cotton Mather did not know that the ci-devant Congregational preacher had turned Episcopalian. The House of Representatives had resolved on sending a special agent to England. The ostensible object was to obtain a charter for the College, and to represent the uneasiness felt in Massachusetts on account of the French claim to the eastern country and the fisheries on the eastern coast. But there is no doubt that the immediately urgent motive was to obstruct the elevation of Dudley. Elisha Cooke, the opponent of President Mather in respect to the new charter, was now the most powerful man in the General Court. The President, who in England had been flattered with much attention in high circles, was extremely desirous to be employed in this agency.1 Cooke's old grudge, or permanent distrust, or persuasion that the President was already Dudley's partisan, determined that the President should not be gratified. While Mather was urging and Cooke was counteracting, Dudley had convenient time for his operations in England. Wait Winthrop was at length Frustrated appointed to be agent, but, just as this was done, news came of Dudley's appointment to be Governor. The vote which had been passed for instructions to Winthrop was then reconsidered, and the project of sending him was dismissed. The needs of the College and the apprehensions from the French were no longer thought so serious as to require immediate at tention. 1702. The King's sudden death before Dudley was prepared to leave England made it necessary for him to receive a new commission. But there was now no competition for the post, and the commission was issued on the March 10. second day of the new monarch's reign. Dudley was fifty-seven years old when, convoyed by two armed vessels, he came back to the place associated in his memory with events of such various interest. June 11. 1 Scarcely is there more amusing reading than the extracts from the Diaries of the Mathers, relating to this subject, in Quincy's History of Harvard University, I. 475–484. 2 ' Privy Council for Feb. 15, 1702. CHAPTER VII. New Hamp govern 1679. THE relation which had subsisted between Massachusetts and New Hampshire after their political separation was inconvenient and vexatious to both parties. The four feeble settlements which collectively were known by the latter name lay close to and between some of the towns of Massachusetts, but, forming another body politic, were beyond her protection or control when they shire an inwere in danger or in disorder. When a band of dependent Indian marauders was passing between the towns ment. of Massachusetts on the Merrimac and her towns. in Maine, she had to chase them through the territory of a different government; and her vessels going into the river Piscataqua were subject to be visited by the customhouse officers of a foreign jurisdiction. For New Hampshire this separation was still more disadvantageous. To her the connection with Massachusetts had been uniformly and unexceptionally beneficial. The sister Colony had afforded an effective defence, and its government had been honest and generous. There had been parties and cabals among the New Hampshire people; but, as often as there had been occasion for their deliberate sense to be expressed, it had always proved to be in favor of incorporation into the chief Colony of New England. Two influences had all along more or less obstructed this arrangement, and both were in action at the time when King William gave to Massachusetts her second charter. From the earliest period of the importance of that Colony, the English statesmen, not excepting those of the Commonwealth, had been jealous of her growth. Occasionally it was unavoidable for them to allow weight |