§ 1. GENERAL.
This volume has been compiled and edited in the
intervals of other work more closely connected with the
World-war which began in August, 1914. The events
recorded in it are over two hundred years old. But many
of them have an interest which has been redoubled by
recent occurrences. At that time, too, a world-war was
being waged on land and sea. England, with her Allies,
was fighting on the Continent, on the self-same terrain
in Flanders as now, and elsewhere throughout the globe.
She was struggling then to obtain that complete mastery
of the seas, which in this war she, with her Allies, has
established and held from the beginning. The foundations
of International Law were being laid. For many of the
same problems of trade, of the rights of neutrals, of contraband, prizes, and of losses at sea, of treatment and exchange
of prisoners, and so forth, arose at the beginning of the
eighteenth century, and became the subjects of discussion,
or petition, couched in some cases in language startlingly
similar to that which has been used of late.
The grant in aid of Nevis and St. Christopher's, voted
by Parliament on the occasion of Iberville's raid on the
Leeward Islands in 1706, formed a precedent for the
compensation granted to the sufferers from the Scarborough raid of 1915. For the British Empire, the
important problem of what contribution the Colonies
should make towards Imperial Defence had not been
then so happily solved.
By a curious coincidence, upon the very day on which
England declared war upon Germany for her violation
of Belgium, the Editor happened to transcribe the words
in which the Secretary of State announced to the Governors
of the American and West Indian Colonies the good news
of Marlborough's wonderful victories in Flanders, and
prophesied that the arms of England and her Allies would
be completely victorious (501).
Act of Union.
Not less important than Marlborough's military
achievements abroad, was an act of legislative wisdom
performed at this time at home. For the pre-eminent
event in domestic affairs during the two and a half years
now under review, was the passing of the Act of Union.
It was destined to have far-reaching consequences in
the development of the Colonies. For the Act of Union
admitted Scotsmen to a share in the heritage of the British
Empire. They were not slow to make abundant and
loyal use of an opportunity for which the enterprise of the
Darien scheme and other incidents recorded in previous
volumes of this Calendar had shown that they were ripe.
The question of the status of Scotch traders and settlers
in the Plantations was laid for ever. Governors were
instructed to publish the Act in the most solemn manner,
and to look upon "Scotchmen for the future as Englishmen
to all intents and purposes whatsoever" (883, 889, 905).
Apart from the disabilities in point of trade and otherwise
from which Scotsmen had suffered before the Kingdoms
were united, the attitude of some unthinking Englishmen
towards them is curiously exemplified by a proposal
which emanated from the Governor of the Leeward Islands
whilst the delicate negotiations for the Union were in
progress. Col. Parke, anxious to lead an expedition
against Martinique, asked for "10,000 Scotch with otemeal
enough to keep them for 3 or 4 months." He proposed
to settle them there, if successful, and, if not, to get
those knocked on the head "who are so zealous to maintain the Kerke" (123). The Secretary of State disapproved
of this ill-timed scheme, and informed the gallant officer
that her Majesty looked upon Scotchmen as "good subjects
and good Christians, too good to be knock'd on the head
upon so wild a project" (834).
The Earl of Sunderland Secretary of State.
The Statesman who administered this salutary snub
was the Earl of Sunderland. He had succeeded Sir Charles
Hedges in the office of "Secretary of State in the Southern
Province," as he informed the Governors of Plantations
in December, 1706 (658). He soon took an opportunity
of asserting himself with the Council of Trade. He
insisted that all business connected with his province
should be submitted to him before being brought before
the Privy Council and the Queen (703). Six months later
the Commissioners of Trade were uneasily aware of a
tendency on the part of the Minister to decide matters
relating to the Colonies over their heads and without
reference to them. They took occasion to request his
Lordship that "when anything is ordered by H.M. which
relates to the business of the Board, we may from time
to time be acquainted therewith" (1067). It cannot
be said that the decisions of the Minister, when they were
made contrary to the advice of the Board, were either
wise or fortunate. The contrary was notably the case
in the affairs of Newfoundland at this period.
Meanwhile the evil system of Patent Offices, against
which the Board had so often protested, grew and struck
deeper roots. The misuse of the Plantations for providing
sinecure posts for the relatives and supporters of Ministers
is frequently indicated (559, 591, 604 etc.). The consequent
evils of absentee officials, absentee officers, absentee landlords and Councillors, and underpaid deputies became
increasingly apparent (559, 591, 604, 1220, 1380).
The War of the Spanish Succession.; The Spanish in the West Indies.
But matters of more vital importance than the multiplication of sinecures might well have absorbed all the
energies of Ministers, and did naturally employ them
to a large extent. The varying fortunes of the Allies in
Flanders, Italy and Spain are reflected in the despatches
of the Minister "for the Southern Province." The war
was prosecuted with spasmodic energy in the Western
hemisphere. Raids were carried out by one side or the
other in Carolina, the Bahamas, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and the Leeward Islands. But the fate of the English,
French and Spanish Colonies was being decided by
Marlborough's armies and the English high sea fleets.
Successes by the Allies on the Continent were immediately
communicated to the Governors of the Plantations by
flying packets (325, 403, 417, 454, 486, 501). Thanksgiving
Days were ordered to be celebrated in the Colonies (343,
354, 357.i.). Great pains were taken to keep the
Spaniards in the West Indies fully apprised of Marlborough's
victories and the successes of the Allies in Catalonia and
Italy. Every effort was made to induce the Governors
of Cartagena and Havanna to declare for Charles III (33.i.).
Under the impression produced by the fall of Barcelona,
the success of the Allies on the Portuguese frontier, and
the victory of Ramillies (17, 313, 325), the Spanish
Governors appeared to incline that way. But when the
balance began to swing in favour of Philip V, the influence
of France, backed by French men-of-war, quickly reasserted itself.
Admiral Whetstone in the Spanish West Indies.
Rear-Admiral Whetstone sailed from Jamaica with
"a noble squadron" for the Spanish Main in the summer
of 1706, and, acting under instructions from Mr. Secretary
Hedges, endeavoured to induce the Spanish Governors
to throw off the French yoke by the promise of the aid
of British arms (33, 33.i., ii., 68, 461, 493.i.).
He was able to report that the majority of the
Spaniards had a good inclination to Charles III, if they
dared but show it. They were overawed, however, by the
French forces. For Ducasse had recently arrived with
a squadron off the Spanish coast, with the intention of
convoying the galleons home (376, 377).
General Handasyd and the Spaniards.
Whetstone's efforts were seconded by the diplomacy
of General Handasyd. In letters addressed to the
Governor of Cartagena, he insinuated that the French
intended to seize Cartagena and the Havanna, and
promised, in the name of the Queen, that those Spanish
Governors would be rewarded who should "declare for
King Charles III, shakeing off that avaricious and devouring
French Batt" [=Vampire] (221, 221.iii., iv.). As a result
of these representations he was able to report a rebuff
to the French interest on the part of the Governor of
Cartagena (458). The Spaniards refused to allow any
French men-of-war or merchant ships to enter their ports.
And when they endeavoured to force their way ashore
at Havanna, the Spanish guard fell on them and killed
some ninety of the Frenchmen. Handasyd concluded
that the Spaniards in general, except such as were mere
pensioners of the French, were zealous for the interest
of the House of Austria (554).
The French, on the other hand, wooed the Spaniards
by boasting that, whilst we were amusing ourselves at
Catalonia, they would sweep the English Colonies, and
prove more useful to the Spaniards than we could be,
by furnishing them with negroes from our Islands (337,
The reaction came when the news of the failure of the
Allies reached the Spanish in the West Indies, at the
beginning of 1707 (735). The French party triumphed
in New Spain in proportion to the success of the Duc
d'Anjou in Old Spain. Governors who were reputed
to be in the interest of Charles III were turned out and
their places filled by those whose loyalty to France was
above suspicion (793). Admiral Sir John Jennings,
arriving on the Spanish coast, met with but a cold reception.
He found that those who had dallied with the proposals
of Sir William Whetstone and General Handasyd, when
Charles III was proclaimed King, were now suddenly
converted again to the cause of Philip V, when it was
known that his Catholic Majesty was restored to the
Court of Madrid. In his defence they were prepared to
spill the last drop of their blood. So the Governor of
Cartagena replied to the blandishments of the English
Admiral (735.i.). In vain did the Earl of Sunderland
insist upon the desperate situation of France, and the
vigour of the effort which was being prepared by the Allies
Capture of Spanish galleons.
The energies of the English Fleet in those parts were
now mainly directed towards the capture of the Spanish
galleons, when they should sail for Old Spain, laden with
the treasure of Philip V (752, 793, 797). Their movements had long been carefully watched. At the end
of November, 1707, Commodore Wager sailed from
Jamaica for the Spanish coast, with the object of
intercepting them (1223). Here he received intelligence
of the arrival of a strong French squadron at Martinique under M. Ducasse (1223, 1223.i.). Prudence
compelled him to return to Jamaica, after losing one ship
through bad weather (1250, 1379.i.). The presence of Ducasse caused some apprehension of an attack upon Jamaica,
Barbados, or the Leeward Islands. His real business,
however, was to escort the Spanish galleons to Europe (838,
961, 1087, 1201). They had refused to trust themselves
to the care of Iberville two years before (499). Ducasse
proceeded to Havanna, and there awaited the arrival
of a fleet of Spanish merchant ships and galleons, which
had sailed from Cartagena for Porto Bello in January.
Commodore Wager thereupon came out from Jamaica and
lay in wait in the passage between Porto Bello and Havanna,
in order to intercept them on their voyage to join Ducasse.
His weakened squadron was partly manned by soldiers
drafted from the regiment at Jamaica. If he could lie
there undiscovered, he would have the Spanish treasureships at his mercy, for the French squadron would be
prevented from coming to their rescue, owing to the great
distance and contrary currents (1339, 1487, p. 714). His
long watch was at length rewarded. In the beginning
of June, unaware of his presence, the Spanish galleons
came out. Commodore Wager engaged the Spanish
Admiral, and blew up his ship. He then captured one
galleon; another escaped from the Kingston into
Cartagena; a fourth was forced ashore, where her crew
only partly succeeded in destroying her.
The value of the treasure in the three ships so captured
and destroyed was said to amount to some fifteen millions
sterling. But, like Benbow, Commodore Wager was badly
supported by the other ships under his command. The
commanders of the two men-of-war and the fireship,
which completed his squadron, left their chief to do the
fighting (1551, 1551.i.).
Trade with the Spaniards.; Complaint against Commodore Kerr.
We have seen, in the previous volume, that trade had
been re-opened with the Spaniards. The importance of
it was emphasised by Sir Charles Hedges when he sent
the Queen's Instructions to General Handasyd to win
over the Spanish Governors. He explained that the
French were working themselves into the Spanish West
India Trade, and were endeavouring to monopolise it,
through the agency of M. Ducasse and the Assiento (33,
33.i., ii., 68). The trade was accordingly pushed from
Jamaica and Barbados, with results which fluctuated,
naturally, as the progress of the Allies and the influence
of the French waxed and waned (735, 777, 998, 1223, 1250,
1339, 1591). Its development was retarded by the
behaviour of the English Commodore, William Kerr.
Jamaica merchants complained that he exacted large
sums from them as the price of providing them with a
convoy of H.M. ships. When they refused to pay the
extortionate sums demanded, they lost their ships to
privateers. When they paid, their profits ceased to be
proportionate to their risks. On returning from their
voyage, their sloops and their cargoes were liable to be
seized by the Commodore on frivolous charges of illegal
trade. These matters were made the subject of investigation by a Committee of the House of Lords. There was
some complaint also of the piratical behaviour of certain
Jamaican sloops in those latitudes (1180, 1199, 1204,
When a Commodore was capable of such blackmailing
tactics, it is not surprising to find that great abuses were
common in the Plantations in the matter of prizes. It
was deemed necessary to instruct Governors to interpose
with their authority and advice in all differences between
the Agents for Prizes and the Captains of ships of war
(59, 1330.viii., 1482.iii.–vi.).
Rights of Neutrals.
An attempt on the part of some Swedish merchants
to cut into this coveted trade with the Spanish West
Indies under the ægis of the British flag, was not encouraged
by the Council of Trade. But whilst not deeming it
desirable to foster any such efforts on the part of foreign
countries, they stated clearly enough that the Swedes,
being neuters, could not be prohibited from trading to the
Spanish West Indies with goods not contraband (1172,
The damage wrought by French privateers continued
to be very great. Five out of eleven Virginia merchantmen,
for instance, were taken off the Canaries (323). But the
biter was sometimes bit. The master of an Irish vessel,
attacked by a sloop of greatly superior force, captured
his aggressor and brought her in. He had himself already
been taken three times during the war (432). Another
instance of pluck upon the part of the mercantile marine
was the feat of one Coleby, the commander of a trading
sloop, who fell in with a French privateer of superior
equipment, which had taken many of our trading sloops
off the coast of Cartagena. Coleby gave fight, and,
after repelling three attempts at boarding him, turned
the tables by capturing the privateer (17).
With the seas so infested by enemy privateers, the
question of convoys for the merchant fleets became
increasingly a matter for concern. Moreover, the French
raid upon the Leeward Islands, to which we shall refer
more particularly when dealing with the West Indies,
created something like a panic in all the American Colonies.
The Council of Trade recommended the despatch of convoys
at regular periods, adapted so far as possible to suit the
occasions of all traders in the Colonies concerned, so that
the homeward-bound ships might all sail together under
convoy (72). Great losses had been incurred by the
Virginia and Maryland fleets coming away so late the year
before (672.i.). Orders were given to this effect (772).
A report by Col. Quary emphasises the disastrous results
of "the late distractive and irregular way of fleets" upon
the tobacco market (130.i.). It was not, however, so easy
to reconcile the divergent views and interests of the trader
at the various home ports. When they consulted them,
the Council of Trade found that the problem of the London
merchants differed from those of the Liverpool, Whitehaven and Bristol shippers. The Whitehaven men wished
to sail later than the London, agreeing with the Liverpool
men that Col. Quary's proposal of one convoy a year
to Virginia and Maryland was not to be desired, and that
all ships should have liberty to sail as they got ready (159,
242, 295.i.). Contrary to the recommendations of the
Board, permits were granted in increasing numbers for
ships to sail without convoy, much to the benefit of the
enemy's privateers and to the loss of H.M. Revenue (63.i.,
etc.). The whole matter was presently brought before
the House of Commons (1214.i., see below, § 3, Newfoundland).
The Tobacco Trade.
The tobacco trade, especially, was affected by the
insecurity of the seas. Maryland and Virginia, the chief
tobacco Colonies, suffered severely in consequence. No
trade, the Surveyor General of the Customs reported in the
memorial already referred to, was worse managed. Apart
from the irregular sailings of the convoys, and the capture
of tobacco-laden runners, two causes are suggested as
contributing to the dislocation of the tobacco market,
and the consequent ruin of planters and merchants. One
is, that the Continental trade in American tobacco was
being cut into by the growth of tobacco in Holland and
Germany; the other, that certain English merchants
had obtained a concession from the Czar for setting up
the manufacture of tobacco in Russia, and were
endeavouring to obtain a monopoly of importing it (130,
131.i., 225). Besides this, the markets of France, Spain,
Flanders, Portugal and the Baltic were now, in whole
or in part, closed to the English exporters. To remedy
these evils, the merchants made several proposals. The
opening of the markets of Spain, Portugal, Russia and
Sweden, and liberty for H.M. subjects to export tobacco
from England to France in neutral bottoms, were amongst
the remedies proposed by them, and recommended by
the Board of Trade. The suggestion that all tobacco
used by our soldiers and sailors abroad should be manufactured in England, and allowed the same drawback
as for foreign exportation, did not, however, meet with
their approval (130.i., 200, 201, 225, 250, 293, 295.i., 684,
990, 992). A report upon the whole matter was presented
by the Council of Trade in July, 1707 (1024.i.).
The Woollen Trade and the Plantations.
The use of the word Plantations indicates very suggestively the attitude of England upon the whole theory
of colonisation at this time. "The Plantations," observed
Mr. Secretary Hedges, "are to be valued as they are
more or less valuable to England" (71). Economically,
at this stage of their development, Colonies and MotherCountry could be mutually most beneficial to each other,
if the Plantations produced raw material to be worked up
in the factories at home. So applied, the manufactures
of England could be produced for the Colonial market
much better and more cheaply than similar goods could
be made there. Towards the development of this end,
the English Government applied all its influence. Any
tendency to manufacture woollen goods, articles of dress,
or to build ships, was actively discouraged. Every effort
was made to concentrate the energies of the Colonists within
their proper sphere, the production of rice, tobacco, sugar,
flax, hemp, potash, timber, pitch and tar (71, 127, 157,
232, 233, 423, 523, 641). The Council of Trade, however,
did not support the extravagant proposal of the English
wool-merchants, who were capable of ignoring the consumer's point of view so far as to suggest that the planters
should be obliged by an Act of Parliament to clothe their
servants and slaves with English woollen goods at fixed
prices. They also made other proposals for taxing imports
into the American and West Indian Colonies, pleading
that the planters had paid no taxes towards the war, whilst
England was put to vast expense to defend them (365.ii.).
In negativing the proposal, the Council of Trade pointed
out that those branches of trade, which were proposed to
be taxed, were, in fact, already in great measure subject
to taxation, and they laid down the principle that, "the
wares and merchandises of any sort to be sent from
England for the supply of the Plantations, ought rather
to be recommended to H.M. subjects there by their proper
goodness, usefulness and cheapness than be imposed
upon them by a rated price, by the power and compulsion
of Laws, which would be the greatest discouragement to
The production of Naval Stores—pitch, tar, hemp
and timber for the use of the Navy—had long been
encouraged in the Plantations by the Government. The
growth of this trade, stimulated as it was by the Act
which granted a premium to the importers, is indicated
by Custom House returns, and Mr. Bridger's reports
(363.i., 544, 641, 691, 788, 1186, 1384, 1395). Adopting
the suggestion of the latter, who had been sent to
superintend this industry and to instruct the planters
in the manufacture of pitch and tar, it was decided not
to apply too stringent a test to the quality of the goods
sent over, for fear lest traders, if they failed to receive
the premium, might be inclined to turn their energies
into other channels (631, 673, 1218.i.).
New Acts of Parliament.
Apart from the Act of Union, three Acts of Parliament
were passed during 1707 and 1708 directly concerning
the Plantations. The first was an Act " for the more
effectual suppression of piracy," of which, however, very
much less has lately been heard in these pages (872).
The others were "for the encouragement of trade to
America" and "for ascertaining the rates of foreign
coins in H.M. Plantations" (1440, 1477). The latter
Act, which was prepared by the Council of Trade, was
rendered necessary by the refusal of many Colonies to
obey the Proclamation of 1704 (976.i., 1157, 1260, 1261,
1268, 1274, 1278, 1289, 1309, 1318). The unsatisfactory
state of the currency, and its evil effects upon trade are
indicated in Lord Cornbury's despatch in 1706 (463).
The Council of Trade had already enunciated some plain
principles of political economy for the benefit of the
Assembly of the Massachusetts Bay (85). But in vain.
The Propriety and Charter Governments in particular
clung to their old bad ways of clipping coinage, and altering
the value of the currency. In the Islands, the Proclamation had been obeyed in some cases, but not in others.
The result was that money flowed to those places where
the price of the currency was enhanced. Barbados, which
had obediently adopted the lower rates prescribed by
the Proclamation, found itself drained of cash. To supply
the deficiency, it passed the disastrous Paper Act, to which
we shall presently refer, § 3 (976.i.).
Propriety and Charter Governments.
The disobedience of the Propriety and Charter Governments in this matter was urged by the Council of Trade
as yet another proof of the desirability of resuming them
to the Crown. A Bill for their better regulation had
already been prepared (18, 88,120, 121). It was introduced
into the House of Commons by Mr. Blathwayt, the former
Commissioner of Trade, February 23, 1706, but it was
thrown out on the first reading, March 2. (fn. 1) (See below, s.
Carolina, § 2.)
New Instructions for Governors.
The passing of these and other new Acts and the development of the produce of the Plantations involved certain
alterations in the Instructions of Governors. The Council
of Trade took the opportunity offered by the appointment
of a new Governor of New York to introduce these
alterations. By the recent Act, for granting a subsidy,
rice, molasses, pitch and tar were included in the
"enumerated commodities" (1496, 1599.ii.).
Councils in the Colonies.
The unhappy consequences of the Paper Act in Barbados
gave occasion for a new Instruction to Governors forbidding them to pass any Acts of an extraordinary nature
or importance, without having first received the Royal
sanction (546, 566, 583). The crisis arising in the same
Island from the same cause led to the issue of an Order
that members of Councils in the Colonies who persisted
in absenting themselves from their duties were to be
suspended (948, 1153.i., 1203). The Council of Trade
pointed out to the Earl of Sunderland that the granting
of leave to Councillors to remain in England without
their knowledge was likely to nullify the object aimed
at by this Order (220). It is to be observed that, whilst
the position of Councillor was coveted in some Colonies,
whether as a post of honour and influence, or a source of
perquisites, or a refuge from judicial proceedings and the
recovery of debt, in others, as for instance, in New Hampshire and the Leeward Islands, the office was regarded
as a liturgy without profit, involving much labour and
expense, with little or no return. In the latter case,
Councillors were, not unnaturally, little inclined to pay
fees for the honour of serving their Queen and Country.
They took exception, therefore, to the new method of
appointment by warrant, of which some indications occur
in this volume, and which involved the payment of fees
by those appointed (789, 1077, 1085, 1396, 1504).
The position of the President of the Council, in case
of the death of a Governor, was liable to be called in
question, and had, within the last few years given rise
to serious controversies in New York, Virginia, and
Barbados. Upon the occasion of the appointment of a
new Governor of Virginia, the Council of Trade therefore
secured the issue of a new Instruction to all Governors
appointed by the Crown, that, in the case of the death
or absence of Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, the
President, or eldest member of the Council, was in future
to act as Governor for the time being (859.i., 860, 861,
Changes in the Council of Trade.; African Negro Trade.
These and other matters kept the Council of Trade
fully occupied. When, in 1707, some changes were made
in the Board, they added to their labours by addressing
a series of questions to the Governors, and reiterated
former injunctions as to returns of accounts, Acts, and
Minutes, which had been but very irregularly observed
hitherto (896, 904, 1006). Amongst these was an enquiry
as to the working of the African negro trade (1434).
The new Commission consisted of Lords Stamford,
Dartmouth and Herbert of Chirbury, Sir Philip Meadows,
John Pulteney and Robert Monckton. With them,
apparently, George Stepney was associated (904, 1284).
As Secretary, already a Popple to a Popple had succeeded.
For upon the retirement of William Popple, his son, of
the same name, who had been acting as Deputy Secretary,
was appointed (933). An interesting little example of
the compliments which passed between him and some of
the men of position in the Colonies is preserved in the
note from the President of the Council of Virginia:—"Mirtle wax was not to be had . . . . Birds are
difficult to be got or kept alive. … I hope to send
you some squirrels" (485). This myrtle wax, it may
be observed, was made out of myrtle-berries and used
for making green wax candles. The new Commissioners
drew attention to the increasing business of the Office,
and, upon the occasion of the new Privy Seal, demanded
the addition of a new clerk (1147, 1147.i.). The underofficers of the Department were reduced to great straits,
owing to the long delay in settling the arrears of their
salaries (1065, 1066).
A Commercial Agent.
The appointment of a Commercial Agent to the Board
was suggested. His reports, as he said, would contribute
to a sort of Trade History of England. The Council
of Trade replied that they were already sufficiently well
served. Their answer furnishes a valuable sidelight upon
the methods of the Office, and the relations of the Board
with prominent merchants at home and abroad (967,
Mr. Dummer's Packet-boats continued to provide an
improved channel of communication with the Colonies,
and also to collect intelligence for the use of the Board
(386, etc.). But, even so, means of communication with
the mainland were still so imperfect that Governor Dudley
complains, in 1706, that he has had no letter from the
Board for nine months, and hardly any opportunity of
writing to them (443). Lord Cornbury received no letter
from them for a whole year. Proposals for extending
Mr. Dummer's mail-service to the mainland appear to
have hung fire.
A thin stream of Protestant Refugees from the
Continent continued to flow through England to the
Plantations (30, 144.i., 172). Two groups in particular,
of Protestant Refugees from High Germany, after being
entertained and naturalised at the expense of the Government, were despatched to New York, and provided for.
Their trades, and their names—somewhat obscured in
the process of naturalisation—are given (1442.i., 1445,
1456.i., 1506, 1565.i., 1594).
§ 2. THE AMERICAN COLONIES.
The Massachusetts Bay, Dudley's complaints.; A question of Prerogative.; Admiralty Jurisdiction.
At the beginning of the period under review, Governor
Dudley is still loud in his complaints as to his scurvy
treatment at the hands of the Assembly of the Massachusetts Bay. His only offence is asserted to be his "care
and attendance on the Church of England, and the strict
pursuit of H.M. commands" (97.i.). But the Assembly
still refused to vote supplies for the support of the Government (511). The Judges were still miserably underpaid.
The Lieutenant-Governor, Povey, was starved into
throwing up his post (p. 31, No. 76). And, in face of
the persistent refusal of the Assembly to comply with the
demands of the Crown, the Council of Trade were obliged
to confess themselves unable to remedy matters. They
commended Dudley's action, however, in regard to the
Speaker, and reasserted the Queen's right to veto the
choice of a Speaker or of Members of Council (85).
Dudley reiterates his old complaint that, in spite of all
H.M. commands, he had not received the assistance of
one man or one penny from Connecticut or Rhode Island
towards the present war, and he sends home another
instance of the infringement of the Admiralty jurisdiction
by New England justices—an infringement described by
the Advocate-General as "very irregular" (69, 815).
As the result of his precautions in keeping a large force
on the frontiers, Dudley had the satisfaction of being
able to announce that the enemy Indians had been driven
starving into Canada. He was in a position to refuse
to purchase the release of prisoners, and to reject the
truce proposed by M. Vandreuil, Governor of Canada
(456, 511). Nay, more. Given four ships of war and some
mortars, he once more undertakes to "remove all the
French from Canada and Port Royal" (69, 69.ii., 511).
His proposal was submitted to the Admiralty (70), and
the success of his frontier policy praised by the Council
of Trade (434).
The Vetch Case.
Before long, however, a noticeable change comes over
the tone of his correspondence. Whilst he insists more
than ever upon the success of his measures against the
Indians and his defence of the frontiers, he drops his
complaints against Connecticut and Rhode Island, and,
waiving the grievance as to his salary, confines himself
to emphasizing the satisfaction of the Assembly and the
people in the success of his measures (305, 443, 511, 947,
1135, 1186). The reason for this change of tone is
evidently to be found in the scandal of the Vetch case,
and the use made of it by Dudley's enemies.
It appears that Dudley had employed one William
Rouse to carry some French prisoners to Port Royal,
there to be exchanged for an equal number of New England
and Virginian prisoners. He was also to ransom some
English ships (525, 530.i.). He was forbidden to trade
(530). But in company with some other masters of sloops—including an old adventurer from Darien, Samuel Vetch—he took the opportunity of trading with the Indians and
French in the course of the voyage along the coasts of
Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. The people of Boston,
smarting under the frontier raids of the enemy, which
had cost them so dear, were furious when they heard
that they had been supplying the enemy with arms and
ammunition, as well as provisions and clothing (536).
There was a great outburst of popular indignation. The
Governor yielded to the storm. He allowed the General
Assembly, which was sitting at the time of their return,
to take cognizance of the case, "as the Charter doth
admit." Acts were passed inflicting heavy fines upon the
persons involved. The fines were so far beyond the means
of the defendants, that they were equivalent to condemnation to prison for life. Dudley recommended that they
should be remitted in part (525, 525.ii.).
Vetch and his companions in misfortune appealed
against this judgment, stating their case, and claiming
that the Assembly had acted ultra vires, and that, in any
case, yielding to the pressure of the mob, they had inflicted
fines that were extravagant (773.i., ii., 774.i.).
When the case was submitted to the Attorney-General,
he gave it as his opinion that the Governor, Council and
Representatives, composing the General Assembly, had
by the Charter no judicial powers, and that the passing
of these Acts would, if confirmed by the Crown, form a
dangerous precedent in depriving H.M. subjects of their
birthright as Englishmen, trial by a jury upon oath (787,
Acts v. Vetch, etc. repealed.
Upon these grounds the Acts in question were repealed,
the offenders being ordered to stand a new trial in the
ordinary course of Law (873, 1121, 1122, 1504).
Indictment of Dudley.; "Philopolites."
The matter, however, was not allowed to rest there.
These men, it was rumoured, were only scapegoats. Great
persons, it was asserted, were involved in this unsavoury
matter (536, 637). It is probable that Paul Dudley was
in it. But there is no evidence at all that the Governor
was. His enemies, however, seized the opportunity of
making an elaborate indictment of the whole administration of Joseph Dudley before the Privy Council (1100).
In a pamphlet published by "Philopolites," which has
been re-printed in the Sewall Papers, Vol. II, and in which
the influence of Cotton and Increase Mather is clearly
traceable, the case against the Governor and his son is
stated with the utmost venom, but not proven. The
venom of the attack defeated its object. Dudley was
charged with trading with the enemy, and the sporadic
outrages of the Indians were laid to his charge (1100).
He was able, in reply, to point to the success of his policy
of frontier defence. His answer was effective (1186,
1186.ii.). And even Vetch's guilt, if he was guilty, was
quickly condoned. For we shall presently find him
promoted to the rank of Colonel, and consulted upon
the proposed expedition against Canada.
Expedition v. Port Royal.
Dudley had continued, meanwhile, to press his project
of an attack upon Quebec and Port Royal (69, 70, 511,
526, 1186.i.). These places, he urges, might easily be
reduced. Either of them would be "a very fair settlement
for a Scotch Province" (p. 240).
Presently, in May, 1707, he despatched an expedition
of a thousand musqueteers, in a score of sloops and
brigantines from Boston, to ravage the French settlements
in Nova Scotia. This force included a contingent from
Rhode Island. They landed in the same month upon
the Port Royal headland (947, 1135, 1186).
Reasons of its failure.
The Expedition was a failure, so far as its objective
was the capture of Port Royal. Col. Redknap, who sailed
with it as H.M. Engineer, puts the best face on the matter
by insisting upon the damage wrought amongst the cattle
and habitations, which were burnt up to the very gates
of the Fort, the number of prisoners brought back, and
the insignificant losses of the expeditionary force (1347).
Dudley echoes him. But he admits that our forces retired
sooner than he had intended, and that he compelled them
to return to Port Royal, though without avail. The
strength of the Fort and garrison, and the lack of heavy
artillery are alleged as their excuse (1135, 1186). The
fact remains that having come up to the gates of Port
Royal, the Expedition retired almost without having fired
a shot. Col. Quary, who emphasises the importance of
Port Royal, hints at a black story of cowardice and illconduct. He asserts that, in spite of "all the misery
that hath happened, and still threatens New England
from the settlement of the French at Port Royall, yett
there hath been and still is a trade carried on with that
place by some of the topping men of that Government,
under the colour of sending and receiving Flaggs of Truce"
Lt.-Governor Usher (who, it must be remembered,
had no love for his Chief) speaks of a "horible, shamfull
miscariage," due to the lack of a good soldier to manage
the war (1592). In a diary of the Expedition, which is
indeed anonymous, but which I attribute confidently to
Usher, as being unmistakably in his handwriting, spelling
and style, he gives an exceedingly vivid and illuminating
account of the bungling of this business, whether at first
or second hand. Both Paul Dudley and Col. Redknap
are directly blamed for cowardice and incompetence, if
not worse (1592.ii.).
Prospect of Reprisals.
The failure of the attempt upon Port Royal gave rise
to fear of reprisals on the part of the French. Complaint
was lodged at home that the Colonists of New York, so far
from taking their share in the task of fighting the common
enemy, were actually trading with the Canadian and
Eastern Indians, and that the Governor of that Province
had refused to urge the Five Nations to take up arms
against the French. Once more a request was made to
England for assistance from the Navy in order to reduce
Port Royal (1511).
The Charles galley.; Saco Fort.; Republican attitude of the General Assembly.
Dudley makes his defence in the case of the Charles galley
(511). In the same despatch he announces that Saco
Fort has been abandoned in favour of a site lower down
the River. And once again he draws attention to the
Republican attitude of the Council and Assembly, who
have pointedly refused to return thanks to the Queen
for the gift of Her portrait, which had been set up in the
Council Chamber (p. 239).
Days of Fasting and Thanksgiving.
A Day of Thanksgiving was observed for Marlborough's
victories and a bountiful harvest, and a Day of Fasting
in the hopes of a remission of sins and the success of the
Port Royal adventure (525.iii., 1186.ix.).
List of Causes.; Court of Chancery.
A list of causes tried in 1706 and 1707 is indicated
(1186.iv.). A petition was proffered for the establishment
of a Court of Chancery (215).
Boston News-Letter and the Quakers.
The Editor of the "Boston News-Letter" was taken
to task for representing that the Quakers at home had
unjustly complained against severe laws of the Province
penalising them "for their conscientious dissent from
the National way."Dudley, at the instance of the Council
of Trade, reprimanded the writer, and "required him
to tell his news without any reflection for the future."
There was no Law, he declared, which was grievous
to the Friends, saving the Military Laws (510, 510.i.,
Effects of the war on Boston.
Col. Quary calls attention to the ruinous effect of the
war upon the trade of Boston, now reduced to a third
of what it had been, in spite of infringements of the Acts
of Trade and Navigation. The fishery and mercantile
marine of the Province was in a fair way to be ruined by
the French settlement at Port Royal "just under their
Woollen Trade in New England.
Although, as has already been pointed out, the manufacture of their own woollen goods by the planters was
discouraged so far as possible, the suggestion that the
importation of wool-combs into New England for the
purposes of that "growing, thriving trade" was illegal,
was not upheld (157, 232, 423).
Export of Naval Stores.
The Act for the encouragement of the production of Naval
Stores had, however, begun to bear fruit. The attention
of the Colonists was being turned from the working up
of wool to the production of raw material (673). In the
autumn of 1706 the mast fleet sailed from Piscataqua
with 10,000 barrels of pitch and tar (550, 552, 552.i., and
see supra). In the following year the contract of
Mr. Collins for cutting masts for the Navy Board led to
some confusion with Mr. Bridger and Governor Dudley
New Hampshire Act to prevent waste of trees.
In New Hampshire an Act was at length passed for the
better preservation of mast trees, and the Governor
endeavoured, but in vain, to induce the Representatives
of the Massachusetts Bay to follow suit (1560).
Lt.-Gov. Usher.; Charges v. Vaughan, Waldron, etc.
Mr. Usher, the Lt.-Governor, found his position
increasingly unpleasant. The Council of Trade warned
him that he ought to reside in the Province, in spite of
the slights which had driven him to retire to Boston (846).
Usher, not being able to obtain any grant towards his
expenses or salary, then applied to be relieved of his office.
At the same time he repeated a direct charge of embezzling
and misapplying the Revenue and of mutilating the
Records against his enemies, Waldron and Vaughan (536,
George vaughan appointed Agent.
To his great indignation, this very Vaughan, this
Republican who had urged that Usher's expenses in
visiting his Government should not be paid by the Province,
was, in his absence, appointed by the Representatives
to go to England as their Agent. This was done with
Governor Dudley's assent and approval (1186, 1363,
1381). On his arrival at home, Vaughan laid before
the Secretary of State an account of the "poverty and
distressing circumstances of New England," with a request
for a man-of-war and arms and munitions to protect
New Hampshire (1514). The unsatisfactory state of the
currency, the large profits exacted by the English manufacturers and merchants, and the expenses of the war
were, indeed, as Usher explains, pressing heavily upon
the New England Colonies (1592).
Case of Thomas Allen.
The inheritance of the Law-suit of the Proprietor,
Samuel Allen, passed to his son, Thomas. In spite of the
Queen's commands and the Governor's endeavours in
accordance therewith, the New Hampshire Courts refused
to find a special verdict in the trials concerning the
property of the soil of the country. In 1708 the papers
in the case were sent home to be laid before H.M. in Council
on appeal (16, 204, 1186).
Acts of New Hampshire.
The Attorney General reported upon the Acts of New
Hampshire in use in 1703. He took exception to some
sixteen of them upon the various grounds of inexpediency,
unreasonableness, bad draughtsmanship, infringement of
the Queen's prerogative or the liberty of subject, excessive
severity of the penalties inflicted or inconsistency with
the English Law, etc. (369).
On the occasion of the Bill for raising 1,700l., the
Assembly of New York had claimed the sole right of
framing Money-bills, and had denied the Council's right
to amend them. This claim the Council of Trade flatly
New York. Council of Trade on the claims of the Assembly.
No Assembly in the Plantations, so it was now plainly
stated, ought to pretend to all the privileges of the House
of Commons, "which will be no more allowed them than
it would be to the Councils, if they should pretend to
all the priviledges of ye House of Lords here." Apart
from this, the Assembly was blamed for other irregularities
in the Bill for raising 1,700l., whereby the royal prerogative
was directly infringed. On the other hand, Cornbury
was instructed that the appointment of a Treasurer by
the Assembly in the case of extraordinary grants by
them earmarked for particular purposes, was to be permitted.
Cornbury warned.; Defence of the Colony
Whilst blaming the Assembly for what was amiss, the
Council of Trade did not refrain from a broad hint to
the Governor. They expressed the hope that no occasion
had been given for the Assembly's distrust of the Government, and that "your Lordship has and will lay before
them an account of all monies raised by Acts of Assembly,
whenever they shall desire the same" (p. 45). If the
Assembly were satisfied that the money they voted was
rightly applied, they would be encouraged, it is suggested,
to raise further supplies for the defence of their country,
instead of making demands upon the Crown. For it was
thought reasonable that each Colony should themselves
make due provision for their own protection (86).
Cornbury was urged, therefore, to press the Assembly
to appropriate a fund for the purchase of arms, as was
done in other Plantations. Meantime he was warned
that his demands for further supplies of stores of war from
home would not be granted, until a full account was
received of those which had been sent in former years
Panic on account of Iberville's raid.
Something like a panic reigned in New York when
it was rumoured that Iberville, after his raid on the
Leeward Islands, intended to destroy that city on his
way home. It was remembered how, five years ago, he
had lain off Staten Island, and made himself familiar with
the soundings of the harbour. The Militia was called
out and concentrated about the city. The Fort received
some badly needed repairs, and some batteries were erected
with feverish haste in order to defend the place, which,
it was at last recognised, lay quite open to the attacks
of an enemy (pp. 246, 247).
Vacating Act confirmed.
In 1707 the Council of Trade reviewed the question
of those extravagant grants of land made by Governor
Fletcher, and vacated under Lord Bellomont's administration. The Act, passed by Cornbury, repealing Bellomont's
Act of Repeal was then in turn annulled, and the original
Vacating Act confirmed (June, 1708), on the ground that
such exorbitant grants as those made by Fletcher were
highly prejudicial to the Province. A regrant of 2,000
acres only was made to each grantee, under certain
conditions (1068.i., 1585, 1586).
Act concerning Bayard and Hutchins.
At the beginning of the same year, the necessary recognizances having been entered into, the Act of 1704,
declaring the illegality of the proceedings against
Col. Bayard and Alderman Hutchins, was at length confirmed, and that of 1705 was repealed (1175.i., 1264, 1265).
Probate of wills, etc.
A question of general interest to the Plantations was
raised by Cornbury with regard to the granting of letters
of administration and the probate of wills in England.
The problem is stated (517), and the Attorney General's
opinion, afterwards issued as an instruction, appears
(842; cf. 646, 1593).
Col. Ingoldesby's Commission revoked.
The position of Col. Ingoldesby, as Lt.–Governor of
New York and of New Jersey, having led to some friction,
his commission for the former office was revoked, which
was, indeed, stated to be one no longer needed (248, 256).
Settlement of German Protestant Refugees.
The immigration of a party of Protestant Refugees
from the Palatinate has been referred to above (§ 1,
Cornbury and Vice-Admiralty.
As Vice-Admiral, Cornbury had occasion to complain
of the conduct of Capt. Miles, who used his powers of
pressing seamen as a means of money–making, by disposing
of the men he pressed to merchantmen, for a consideration (p. 245). Miles died shortly afterwards. A dispute
then arose between Cornbury and Capt. Fane, the former
claiming the right, as Vice–Admiral, of appointing Miles'
successor, until H.M. pleasure should be known, the latter
refusing to recognise Cornbury's jurisdiction, and insisting
upon the appointment of his own nominee (666, 666. i.–v.,
In this Fane was upheld by the Admiralty, who made
it clear that Cornbury had no manner of right to appoint
officers to ships. His doing so was, indeed, "such an
infringement of the known rights and authority of the
office of Admiral as cannot in the least degree be dispensed
Lord Cornbury and Thomas Byerley.
In the beginning of 1706 Thomas Byerley, the Collector
at New York, complained that the Governor, by an Order
in Council, had directed the costs of prosecutions, in cases
of seizures for irregular trade, to be paid, not out of the
gross sum forfeited, but out of the Queen's third when the
proceeds had been divided. The Governor's third was
thereby freed of costs (90. i., 124). The Council of Trade
reported that this arrangement was scarcely desirable.
Byerley, whom Cornbury had suspended, was ordered
to be restored to his office by the Lord High Treasurer,
on the ground, amongst other reasons, that Cornbury
had exceeded his powers in suspending him without first
receiving instructions (304). Cornbury obeyed, so far as
restoring Byerley to his office was concerned. But Byerley
soon had occasion for further complaint. Lord Cornbury's
nominee, Mr. Fauconnier, who had acted as Commissioner
during his suspension, refused to restore the records of
his office, and the Governor continued to persecute him
Recall of Cornbury.
Cornbury, indeed, was treated with over-much patience.
But at length the scandal of his arbitrary and avaricious
conduct, and his neglect of public business save for his
own ends, was recognised as intolerable. The immediate
occasion of his recall, judging by the dates on which the
several complaints against him were received and read,
would appear to have been the serious charges contained
in the "Remonstrance" of the Assembly of New Jersey
(see infra). This complaint from New Jersey arrived
very shortly after censure had been passed upon him
in reference to the case of Richard Budge.
Case of the Hope.
Cornbury's conduct in seizing and confiscating the
Hope in 1702, had been declared on appeal to be illegal
and arbitrary. A direct order from the Crown was issued,
bidding him to make restitution to the unhappy owner
and master, one Budge. This order Cornbury ignored.
In October, 1707, the Council of Trade asked for H.M.
censure upon his behaviour in this connection. The
judgment on the appeal was then once more ordered to
be put in execution (541, 1033. i., 1152. i., 1266).
New Jersey. Council of Trade to Lord Cornbury.; Prisons and salaries.
In the beginning of 1706 the Council of Trade had
written to Lord Cornbury, delivering judgment upon
the matters then in controversy in New Jersey (80).
Col. Morris was to be restored to the Council, on making
his submission to the Governor. It was left to the discreation of the Governor to get the qualification of electors
and representatives altered, if need be. Cornbury was
commended for having maintained that the surrender of
the Government of New Jersey by the Proprietors had been
absolute. But, even apart from the restoration of
Col. Morris, he received a plain hint that his conduct
was not regarded with unmixed approval or confidence.
In reference to the complaints about the elections, he was
warned not to infringe the privileges of the Assembly.
He was advised to be careful not to grant commissions
to "mean and contemptible" persons. He was reminded
that he had sent home on transcripts of the Minutes of
the Council or Assembly. The records relating to the
proprietorship of the soil were ordered to be returned
to the custody of the Proprietors' Agents. And the
money voted by the Militia Bill, instead of being placed
at the discretion of the Governor, ought, so it was laid
down, to be paid only into the Receiver's hands, for purposes which should be plainly specified in the Act (80,
1593; cf. 1325.iv.). He was recommended to urge upon
the Assembly the need of building some prisons, and was
informed as to the proper interpretations to be put upon
the clause in his Instructions as to the salaries of Members
of Council and Assembly.
On the whole, this despatch amounted to no less than
a severe reprimand in the guise of a warning. It had
little effect, however, upon the recipient's behaviour.
The Assembly's remonstrance against Lord Cornbury.; Charges against Cornbury. His reply.
He replied in September (488). But when, after an
adjournment in November, followed by a dissolution
(608), the Assembly met at Burlington in April, 1707,
they refused to transact any of the business recommended
to them by the Governor, and proceeded to draw up a
statement of their grievances against him. They formulated a long list of charges against his administration,
some more and some less serious and reasonable than
others. These they presented to him in the form of a
"Remonstrance." The authors of this Remonstrance
were Mr. Jennings, a Quaker who had resigned from the
Council in order to become Speaker of the Assembly,
and Lewis Morris, who had also become a Member of
the Assembly rather than make his submission to Cornbury and take his place again in the Council. The
circumstances in which, according to Cornbury, the
Remonstrance was drawn up, are described by him (963).
It contained, amongst other complaints of more or less
importance, a direct accusation of bribery against the
Governor. He had, so it was alleged, received sums
raised in the Province in order to procure the dissolution
of the first Assembly. The proceedings on this occasion
are too long and important to abstract here. The charges
were definite, and damning, if true. Cornbury could
do no less, and apparently he could do little more, than
profess indignation, and ride off on side issues (963, 963.i.,
ii.). The peevish brain of Morris, and the forward,
grasping nature of the Quakers, he declared, were to blame.
No good Militia Act, for instance, could be hoped for,
so long as any Quakers were allowed to hold office or
serve in the Assembly, as witness Pennsylvania (pp. 449–451). In this view he was supported by Col. Quary,
who usually echoed him. Here, he declares, as in New
York and Pennsylvania, they were determined to make
no laws save such as impair the Queen's prerogative and
suit their own humours, to grant no money in support of
the Government, and to pay no attention to the Laws of
England, save when it serves their turn, or unless their
Representatives be allowed to sit in the Parliament of
Great Britain (1016, 1213).
Morris on Cornbury.; Recall of Cornbury and appointment of Lord Lovelace.
Cornbury put an end to the Session in May. When the
Representatives re-assembled in October at Amboy, he
found them no less determined than before to transact
no business and to grant no Revenue for the Government,
until their grievances against him had been fully answered
and redressed (1213, 1213.i.). Cornbury's reply was to
adjourn them for another six months. He observes that
he has received no letter from the Commissioners of Trade
for a twelvemonth. Possibly this apparent absence of
control from home increased his sense of irresponsibility.
Before the Assembly met again, however, he forwarded
an address by the Lt.–Governor and Council in his favour
(1329.ii.). But, under almost the same date, Lewis Morris
despatched a remarkable indictment of Cornbury and all
his works, covering the protests of the Assembly, and
their direct appeal to the Crown against a corrupt and
degenerate Governor (1325, 1325. i.–vii.). There could
be no reply to such an indictment except the recall of
Cornbury. Lord Lovelace, his successor, had indeed
already been appointed a couple of months after the
receipt of the Assembly's first Remonstrance, March,
1708 (913.ii., 1417). Nearly a month later a letter was
despatched to him granting him "leave of absence for
some time upon his private affairs," nominally at humble
suit made in his behalf (1441). But a letter from the
Earl of Sunderland in June, announcing the appointment
of his successor, leaves no room for doubt that his recall
was in the nature of a disgrace, was definite, and was
made in the interest of his Province rather than of himself (1548, 1558).
Lord Lovelace's Instructions.
Upon the appointment of Lord Lovelace to the Governments of New York and New Jersey, besides the usual
Instructions of Governors (1508.iii., 1509.ii.), and the
new General Instructions relating to the Act of Union,
the new Acts concerning trade, etc. (1599. ii.), and the
probate of wills, to which reference has been made above,
he was given other particular instructions by the Council
of Trade (1593). Amendments to some Acts of New
Jersey, including that for elections, were committed to
him to be laid before the Assembly (cf. 1325.iv.). The
objection, which had recently been raised to the Governor's
sending orders to one of the Provinces under his jurisdiction
whilst he himself was residing in another (1213), was
dismissed as "a very trifling and extravagant opinion,"
the analogy of the procedure of the Lords Lieutenants of
Ireland and the English counties being instanced.
Lord Cornbury's omission to send any Minutes of Council
or Assembly of either Province, or any accounts of
Revenue or shipping was ordered to be made good by the
new Governor. And an opinion was expressed upon
some of the matters in controversy between him and the
Assembly of New Jersey (1593). The Councillors Revell
and Leeds were displaced for their share in past "arbitrary
Peter Sonmans and the Council.
Appointments to the Council, especially that of Peter
Sonmans, Agent for the Proprietors of the Eastern
Division, remained a subject of acute contention amongst
the Proprietors throughout this stormy period (105, 608,
909, 1475, 1484, 1519, 1530, 1557).
Report against Proprietary Colonies.
At the beginning of 1706 the Council of Trade made
their report upon the "misfeazances of the Proprietary
and Charter Colonies," once more urging that they should
be resumed to the Crown. The reasons for doing so,
and the charges against these Governments, have been
rendered familiar by the previous volumes of this Calendar
(18; cf. § 1).
Reply of Rhode Island.
About the same time the Governor and Company of
Rhode Island were formulating a detailed reply to the
charges which had been exhibited against that Government
in the preceding year. The charges they denied, and
they appealed to their Charter. As to the Quota, they
declared that they were not legally obliged to furnish it,
nor was there any need for it (73). On the same day
as this reply was read, Sir Charles Hedges wrote to Dudley
giving a plain hint that, if the Quota continued to be
refused, a remedy would have to be applied by Parliament
(70). A few months later the Rhode Island Government
submitted an account of the steps they had taken to secure
themselves from invasion, of which apprehension arose
after the raid upon the Leeward Islands (490).
The Quakers of Connecticut appealed against several
Laws, which, they said, were inconsistent with the Laws of
England and their Charter. In answer, the Agent stated
that there were not above seven of them in the Colony
(730, 790). This was shortly after the Boston News-Letter
had been rebuked for criticising their opposition to the
Act of Hereticks, etc. (85).
The Case of the Mohicans.
Upon the appeal of Sir H. Ashhurst, the sentence of
costs in the case of the Mohican Indians was reversed,
and a Commission of Review was granted for determining
their claim. No Commissioner was to have any interest
in the lands in dispute (368, 430). The new Commission
of Review consisted of Lord Cornbury and eleven
Councillors of New York (391, 392, 732, 733). Meantime,
Owaneco and the Mohicans had acknowledged the Queen's
favour by volunteering to fight against the Eastern Indians.
Governor Dudley accepted their offer, and thereby gave
offence to the Governor of Connecticut (p. 239).
Death of Governor Winthrop.
At the end of 1707 Governor Winthrop died, and
Mr. Saltonstall was chosen in his place (1213).
Quary's account of Connecticut and Illegal Trade.
Before Winthrop's death, Col. Quary had visited Connecticut. The Governor had begged him not to look
too narrowly into the mistakes of that Government. The
need for this caution was revealed upon an examination
of the Custom-house. There he found "nothing but
confusion and roguery." Everyone connived at illegal
trade, and the example was set by the Collector, "one
Mr. Withred, a Pillar of their Church, but a great Rogue."
Col. Quary made a clean sweep of the Collectors, and put
others in their places, but confessed that he had no hopes
of preventing illegal trade so long as the Government
remained in the same hands. And so with Rhode Island
In Pennsylvania, as in New Jersey, Col. Quary saw
signs unmistakable that Quaker principles were inconsistent with Government. The Assemblies in the Colonies,
which were influenced by their teaching, were, so he warned
the Council of Trade, increasingly determined to engross
all the powers of Government, judicial and executive,
in their own hands. They were equally ready to infringe
the Queen's Prerogative and to flout the rights and
authority of Proprietors, even of William Penn himself
(pp. 490, 639).
Currency Proclamation ignored.; Act for Qualification of Officers.
The Assembly of Pennsylvania demonstrated their
recalcitrant spirit in several ways. They refused to put
into operation H.M. Proclamation fixing the value of
foreign coin, until New York and other Provinces should
have led the way. In the meantime they passed an Act
of their own for regulating values (40, 40.iii.). Another
Act, which roused much indignation in Anglican circles,
was that for the qualification of officers. It provided a
remedy, by admitting affirmation, for cases when there
was no magistrate present in Court who would administer
an oath. For the administration of an oath to another
was as offensive to the Friends' consciences as taking one
themselves. The Bishop of London fulminated against
this Act as "a new instance of Mr. Pence insolence . . . .
for it seems to control H.M. former Instructions, and to
tell us no man shall take an oath where he governs" (415,
415.i.). The Attorney General, however, took the matter
more calmly. It was a provision reasonable enough in
a country where the greater part of the inhabitants were
Quakers (422). The case for and against the Law was
argued with spirit by Mr. Willcocks and Mr. Penn (569,
628, 1098, 1098.i., 1227).
The Act was, in the end, repealed upon other grounds.
For, as the Attorney General had pointed out, this Law
allowed the deposition of a person sick or going out of
the Province to be taken and accepted as good evidence—a practice wholly contrary to English criminal law, and
seldom allowed even in civil cases (1247.i., 1267).
The Lieutenant Governor, John Evans, also found himself exposed to what he describes as the "ill–grounded
fury of a people drunk, with wide notions of privileges."
Like Col. Quary, he complains that the Assembly is
arrogating to itself "the most exorbitant authorities"
(1126, p. 490). The resentment of the country against
the Proprietor and his Deputy Governor had, at any rate,
reached a high pitch. The leader of the movement was the
notorious David Lloyd, now Speaker of the Assembly
The Militia.; Penn appoints Capt. Gookin Lt. Governor.; Is compelled to renew his Declaration as to the Three Lower Counties.
Apart from the offence of having beaten "an ill-mannerly
Dutch Constable," the chief difference between the
Lieutenant-Governor and the people was upon the fundamental question of the self-defence, of the Province. Upon
the scare of a raid by D'Iberville's squadron, Evans gave
an alarm in Philadelphia, in order to test the strength of
the Militia. Three hundred men responded to the call,
"a poor number indeed in a place where are near as many
thousand men." Evans' endeavours to regulate the
Militia raised such a storm, that William Penn presently
thought fit to supersede him. His successor, it is to be
noted, was a retired soldier—Capt. Charles Gookin, "late
of Lieut.–General Erle's Regiment" (1495.i.). Penn
applied in due course for the Queen's approbation of his
new Deputy. But before this necessary approbation
was forthcoming, he was compelled, very much against
his will, to renew his Declaration as to the Queen's
right to the Three Lower Counties (1515, 1516, 1600,
Pennsylvania and the Three Lower Counties: "a state of war."
The division of Pennsylvania and the Three Lower
Counties into two distinct Governments had now resulted
in what Col. Quary calls a state of war. For by virtue of
a Fort at Newcastle, Evans and the Assembly had laid
a heavy powder-tax upon the ships using the River. The
merchants and inhabitants of Pennsylvania refused to
submit to this imposition. Then the Fort fired upon
ships that tried to run the gauntlet. If they missed, they
chased the ships in boats. On one occasion the Lieut.Governor, in the ardour of the chase, pursued a vessel,
belonging to some of the chief Quakers in Philadelphia,
into New Jersey waters, until Lord Cornbury brought
him to a stop. "It is impossible," says Quary, "to
represent the confusion that is between these two Governments on this occasion, Mr. Penn's authority fighting
against himself" (963, 1016).
Penn's surrender of the Government.; Question of Compensation.; Pennsylvania, exports and imports. John Keble and Potash.
On February 5th, 1707, the Council of Trade and
Plantations reported to the Earl of Sunderland upon the
long-delayed surrender of his Proprietary Government by
William Penn. They fully recognised the great task
which he had accomplished, at great cost to himself, and
that there had not yet been time for him to reap the rewards
of his charge and labour. They advised that he should
be recompensed, but that his surrender should be "absolute
and unconditional, including a renunciation of all right,
claim, and pretension as well to the Government of Pennsylvania, as to that of New Castle and the two Lower
Counties" (734, 745). In order to arrive at some just
measure of compensation, the Council of Trade, to whom
the question had been referred, entered into further correspondence with Penn. He displayed his usual restiveness
at their interrogations. But in the course of the argument
several interesting statistics emerge as to the growth of
the export and import trade of Pennsylvania (806, 855,
857.i., 903, 914, 1026). In order to increase the exports,
he recommended the petition of John Keble for encouragement to develop "a noble staple, potash" (1502, 1503).
Virginia: the Assembly and Virginia.
The complaint of the Assembly of Virginia against
Col. Quary was answered by the Council of Trade in the
beginning of 1706. They rebuked the malicious misrepresentations of Robert Beverly, and, at their instance,
the new Governor, Nott, was directed to discourage similar
groundless complaints, "which tend only to the fomenting
divisions" (45. i., 66).
Crisis in the Tobacco Trade.
Discontent in Virginia was probably accentuated by
the crisis in the tobacco trade, referred to in § 1. In
August, 1706, the greatest fleet "that ever went from
the tobacco Plantations" sailed for England, 300 strong
(p. 215). A glut of tobacco in the restricted market was
the result. Two years later the Governor had to report a
falling off in the crops (1573). The great fall in the prices
of tobacco, combined with the shortness of supplies of
clothing from home, had here, as elsewhere, turned the
Planters' attention to the growing of flax, cotton and wool
(149, 477, 537, 775, 1573).
Although the country was thrown into great consternation by the news of the French raid upon the Leeward
Islands, the Assembly could not be persuaded to undertake any works of defence. In response to Nott's
exhortations, they petitioned for the application of the
whole of the Crown revenue from quit-rents to that purpose (p. 206). Subsequently, the activity of privateers
off the Capes led to a further appeal for a "guardship of
good force" (1010, 1573).
Murder by Tuscoruro Indians.
A murder by Tuscoruro Indians is reported (1573).
Grants of Lands.; Act repealed.; List of Grants.
The recent Instructions for a new method of patenting
lands and for preventing grants of large tracts of lands
were not well received. Nor was the stopping of grants of
land on the South side of Blackwater Swamp more popular.
A petition was forwarded praying for a reversion to the
old scheme (149, 478.i., 484). An Act was passed which,
whilst restricting each grant to 4,000 acres, allowed one
person to have several patents. The result of this and
other provisions would be that the remainder of the
unoccupied land would fall into the hands of a few rich
men, without imposing on them any obligation to cultivate
and develop an adequate proportion of it, thus hindering
the healthy settlement of the Colony. For these reasons
it was repealed (149, 827). In relation to this subject, a
list of the grants of lands on the South side of Blackwater Swamp, put in by Col. Nicholson, supplies a
valuable record of Virginia land-holders at this period
Death of Governor Nott.; Government by President and Council.
Governor Nott died of fever on August 23rd, 1706.
His administration, inspired by a conciliatory and impartial
temper, was said to have already gone far towards composing the internal differences of the Province. "A
Gentleman of a very happy temper to cure our Divisions,"
so the President and Council framed his epitaph (476,
484, 722.i.). Nott was the first Governor to die in Virginia.
Doubts at once arose here, as formerly in Barbados and
New York, as to the powers of the President of the Council.
And the notion that the Assembly was dissolved upon
the death of a Governor cropped up here also. This
doubt was answered by the Council of Trade, who explained
that the continuity of the Assembly was derived, not from
the particular Commander-in-Chief, but from the Royal
Power, which persisted. It rested, therefore, with a Governor's successors in the Administration to decide whether it
was desirable to dissolve an Assembly, or not (484, 824).
Col. Hunter appointed.; His salary.; Absentee Governors.
Seven months after Nott's death, Col. Robert Hunter
was appointed to succeed him. He at once suggested
that his salary should be paid to him from the day of the
late Governor's death, after deducting the moiety allowed
to the President of the Council (849, 849.i.). The Council
of Trade, however, pointed out that the rule that a
Governor's salary should not commence till his arrival
in his Government was probably intended to hasten his
departure thither. If it were relaxed, the consequences
would not be happy, "it being reasonable to think that
any Governor will be glad as long as he can to avoid the
expence and charge of living there, if his salary shal run
on while he continues in England." This was, in fact, yet
one more move in the direction of that pernicious
system of absentee officers and deputies, against the growth
of which the Council of Trade had long struggled in vain
(1047; cf. § 1). It was four months later—almost exactly
a year after Col. Nott's death—that Col. Hunter took
ship for Virginia—only to be driven back to Torbay by
a gale (1096).
Revenue Act.; Admeasurement of Ships.
The Revenue Act of 1705 came in for much criticism.
One clause restricted the payment of Members of Council
to those who had resided in the Colony for three years.
This was resented by Col. Quary, who regarded it as aimed
directly at him, besides being an infringement of the
Prerogative of the Queen to dispose of Crown revenues
as she thought best. A similar measure designed to
dock the Secretary's Office of the long-established perquisite of appointing County Court Clerks was complained
of by Mr. Jennings as being directed against himself for
having attended the Council of Trade and brought back
the amended Laws, including the Church Bill, which was
still distasteful to the Burgesses (483, 484, p. 204). We
may, however, see in these measures yet another symptom
of the growing desire in the Colonies for local control of
expenditure, and the reservation of Colonial appointments
for the country–born (cf. § 1). Another clause in the
Revenue Act for readjusting the admeasurement of ships
with a view to taxation, led to a strong protest from
merchants and ship-owners, and to a good deal of correspondence as to an equitable method of measuring tonnage
for Customs (917, 1059).
Revenue and other Acts repealed.
After consulting with the Law Officers of the Crown,
the Council of Trade obtained the repeal of the Revenue
Act, mainly on the grounds that it taxed Virginia traders
and ship-owners of the United Kingdom more heavily
than Virginian owners, and also because, as Quary had
urged, it encroached upon the Royal Prerogative (1226,
1242, 1259, 1304, 1305, 1324.i.). Other Acts infringing
the Prerogative were repealed (824), and the Marriage Act
met with the disapproval of the Bishop of London (922,
949, 958). One Act was objected to by the Attorney
General as lacking in justice towards negro offenders
Progress was reported in the building of the Governor's
Boundaries of Virginia and Carolina.
Disputed boundaries had long been a cause of friction
between Virginia and Carolina. A fresh encroachment
by the latter gave ground for complaint by Virginia in
1706, the Surveyor of Carolina having proceeded on his
own account to draw the boundary line within the reputed
limits of Virginia (478, 555). The Council of Trade urged
the prompt settlement of this dispute, but the Assembly
of Virginia waited for the expenses to be paid by the Crown
Troubles in Maryland.
These were troublous times for Maryland. Her export
trade was almost wholly confirmed to tobacco (1570), and
that market, as we have seen above (§ 1), was severely
affected by the war, and the question of convoys and shipping. There was no guardship to protect her coasts
and shipping, which were exposed to the depredations
of any rascally pirate or enterprising privateer. The
Province was deeply in debt; the Plantations heavily
mortgaged. These factors tended to curtail the supply
of clothing from the manufacturers at home, and to send
up the price of manufactured commodities to an almost
intolerable figure (pp. 197, 472). Imports, Governor
Seymour declared, were practically confined to protested
Bills of Exchange! And he advocated an Act of
Bankruptcy (1570). The Colonists were, therefore, forced
to turn to the cultivation and manufacture of whole
and linen goods for themselves, which it was the whole
object of the Plantation theory to discourage (1113, 1570;
see § 1).
Demand for Coinage.; Clarke's rebellion.; Execultion of Clarke.
The absence of a small currency in the country was
severely felt, and a petition was sent home for a supply
of copper coins (630, 825). Meantime, Richard Clarke
and his confederates had endeavoured to satisfy this
want by issuing a whole series of counterfeit dollars and
pieces of eight (p. 471). These were the rebels who had
been concerned in a plot for a rising against the Government, in concert with the Indians, and for burning
Annapolis and turning pirates. A worse crime is hardly
conceivable. But the Council of Trade would not for that
reason condone Governor Seymour's procedure in selling
two of the ringleaders, Benjamin Celie and Humphrey
Hernaman, to Barbados, "for the country's good." They
at once called for an explanation (84, 975). Seymour
replied that they had been sold into servitude for a period
of seven years, or until they should be reprieved. And
this had been done in accordance with an Act and a petition
of Assembly, in order to reimburse the Province for the
expense incurred by their trial, and to avoid putting into
execution sentences of death or prolonged imprisonment
(792). The Council of Trade, however, could not accept
this reason. Criminals, they stated, should be punished
according to Law; and they know of no Law which
authorized the sale of H.M. Christian subjects in the
Plantations, though criminals (1113). Celie and Hernaman
were then released and worked at their trades in Pennsylvania (1570). Clarke himself, after escaping to
Carolina, which proved too hot for him, returned to
Maryland. There for a while he eluded arrest for some
time, posing as a Quaker. Repudiated by the Friends,
he was protected by his relatives, native-born sympathisers,
malcontents and bankrupts. He was taken at last, and
executed for high treason (1101, 1570, p. 469).
It is in the support which he received, according to
Seymour's own testimony, from "the countrie-born,"
that the chief interest of Richard Clarke and his rebellion
lies. Just as in Jamaica there was a strong feeling for
reserving Jamaica for the Creoles, so in Maryland the
Act of 1694 for the encouragement of learning, which reserved
offices of trust or profit to those who had resided at least
three years in the Province, pointed to a growing sense
of local patriotism in the native-born. But this point
of view, however admirable as one indication of genuine
and successful colonisation, was not yet fully justified
by the educational standard of the Colonists. The Act
deterred men of ability from coming from England "to
starve so long a terme," whilst the absence of any Grammar
School in the Province, in spite of the Act, left the natives
very ignorant and unfit for office (975).
Probably, feeling on this subject was created and
accentuated by the growing abuse of Patent Offices and
their absentee holders (cf. § 1). The Act for depriving
that absentee Patent Officer, Sir Thomas Laurence, of some
of the emoluments of his Secretaryship, may be regarded
as the outcome of such feeling. The details of the controversy betwixt him and the Assembly, which had taken
away from his office the perquisite of granting Ordinary
Licences, are long and intricate, but not without significance, if this be accepted as the key to the struggle.
Sir T. Laurence's rights were upheld at home (84, 731,
792.i., 1072, 1113, 1151.i., 1269, 1280, 1570). Nor indeed
could it easily be maintained that the Act which deprived
him of his profits was just and equitable. Laurence then
petitioned for the recovery of arrears due to him (1292.i.).
Act concerning Lord Baltimore's Agents.
To rectify another grievance in connection with the
incompetent and indigent Deputy Surveyors appointed
by Lord Baltimore's Agents, an Act was passed, which
was intended to establish greater control over them (975).
The Lord Proprietor of course complained (1346, 1464).
But the Solicitor General bluntly declared that the
provisions of this Act might be of service to the public
and do a great deal of good (1522ff.). In the case of
another Law, to enable Lord Baltimore's Agents to recover
arrears of rent, he observes that the makers of Laws in
the Colonies are the best judges of the conveniency of
their own Acts, although they might be open to objection
in England (1522ff.).
Zeal of the Jesuits.
Owing to the connection with Lord Baltimore, the
Roman Catholic and Jacobite propaganda was particularly
active in Maryland, and called for repression.
Although Lord Baltimore had written to the leading
Jesuits calling upon them to moderate their zeal, further
news came to hand of their unabated energy in
proselytising and abusing the Government. Whereupon
the Assembly prepared a Bill "to curb their extravagancy"
(9, 10, 84, pp. 195, 196), and the Council of Trade made
enquiries as to whether it would be lawful to expel the
leading Jesuits from the Colony (783). At the same time,
whilst orders were given that the Quakers should be made
to bear their share of the expense of defending the country,
the Governor was directed to take care they should
be protected in case of distresses levied upon them.
English Law in the Plantations.; Acts of Maryland.
In Maryland, as elsewhere, doubt prevailed as to
whether English Laws were valid in the Colonies, unless
it were expressly stated that they applied to the Plantations.
The doubt involved a dilemma. If the Laws of England
were not to be regarded as generally in force, then, the
Statute books of the Colonies being as yet very incomplete,
many criminals would escape for want of a particular
Act, as, in Maryland, in the case of "conventicles, rape,
bigamy, Jesuits and other felons." If they were held
to be in force, then there was a danger of infringing the
Prerogative of the Crown, or of involving the Colonists
in awkward consequences, such as being haled to Westminster on trivial occasions (p. 67). The Attorney
General's view, as regards the Common Law, is given
in a review of the Acts of the Leeward Islands (164). The
same Officer reported upon the Acts of Maryland, passed
in 1704, 1705. He recommended the repeal of several,
on the grounds that they were unreasonable, ill-penned,
contrary to common justice, or repugnant to the Laws
of England (1117).
Another Law passed during this period was the long
delayed Act for Ports (470, 975).
In order to encourage the production of Naval Stores,
and at the same time to relieve the land exhausted by
tobacco crops, a Law was passed to make hemp and flax
currency, like tobacco, for part-payment of debts (470).
Two Acts for regulating the size of hogsheads were
repealed, and Instructions given for the passing of a new
Act conformable to a Virginian Law now confirmed (1224.i.,
1398, 1398.i., 1404.i., 1425, 1427, 1428).
The Census.; Competitions of North Carolina and Pennsylvania.
In answer to the enquiries of the Council of Trade,
a rough census of the inhabitants and the Militia was
returned. It showed that, since the Crown had resumed
the administration of the Province, the number of taxables
had increased by about 50 per cent. But economic
difficulties brought about by the war, and invidious legislation had led to an exodus of the planters to the neighbouring Colonies. For North Carolina had passed an
Act inviting debtors to settle there, under a guaranteed
exemption from paying their debts for five years. Needy
planters naturally welcomed such an extension of credit
by crossing the borders (1101, 1101.ii., 1570, p. 472).
Maryland and Pennsylvania.
And Pennsylvania, by raising the value of the coinage
contrary to the Queen's Proclamation, and by encouraging
sailors and artificers to work within her boundaries, had
further contributed to drain Maryland of her proper
The bounds of these two Provinces had long been in
dispute. Uncertainty rendered the ownership of estates
on the confines very precarious. The Assembly of
Maryland therefore petitioned the Queen that the
Proprietors should be compelled to settle their controversy
and define the boundaries forthwith (p. 470, No. 1115.i.).
William Penn under restraint.
The question was therefore re-opened, and Lord
Baltimore and Mr. Penn were called upon to submit their
evidence to the Council of Trade (1322.i., 1352, 1354, 1367,
1369). Delay was caused by Penn "being under restraint"
Carolina Acts repealed.; Proposal to revoke Charter.; Killigrew on Carolina Products.; Process begun.
Upon an Address of the House of Lords to the Queen,
issuing out of a petition by Joseph Boone and others
against two Acts of Carolina, for establishing religious worship
and for the better preservation of the Government, these
Laws were repealed (158, and see House of Lords' Journal,
xviii., pp. 150–3, and House of Lords MSS., vi., pp. 406–8,
411). The passing of them, if they had indeed been
confirmed by the Lords Proprietors, was declared by the
Law Officers of the Crown to amount to so great an abuse
of the power granted them under their Charter as to
constitute good grounds for revoking it (328, 336.i., 367).
In the course of a discussion as to the best method of
procedure with a view to this end, Mr. Killigrew contributed a very interesting description of Carolina and its
products, amongst which he included peach-fed hams
(287; cf. 940). His scheme for raising a fund to buy out
the Proprietors of Carolina and the Bahamas was based
on a renewal of licences to Hackney Coachmen (449.i.).
Process was at length begun in the form of Quo warranto
in 1707. But the Solicitor for the Treasurer had to report,
a year later, that he had been baulked by the Privilege of
Parliament enjoyed by the Defendants (1535).
Act to encourage settlement repealed.
Meantime, another Act, the Act to encourage the settlement
of Carolina, so obnoxious to Maryland, had been repealed
(1448). The passing of this Law, with its inducement to
debtors to desert other plantations and settle in Carolina
under a guarantee of protection from their creditors for
five years, was represented by the Council of Trade as
yet another breach of trust, amounting to a forfeiture
of the Charter (1189, 1349). But the Lords Proprietors
disclaimed any responsibility for it. They had neither
seen nor sanctioned it (1448).
Dispute with Virginia as to Indian trade.
Carolina was involved in yet another dispute with her
neighbours. Virginia protested against her interference
with the trade long carried on by Virginian traders with
the Western Indians, and seizure of their goods (1573).
French and Spanish raid on Charlestown.; Spirited defence by Sir N. Johnson.
The most interesting episode in the history of Carolina
at this period was the gallant repulse of an enemy raid
upon Charlestown. Encouraged by the news that the
town had been much weakened by an outbreak of
pestilence, a combined force of French and Spaniards
from Havana and St. Augustine made an attempt upon
the place in August, 1706. Gallantly led by the aged
Governor, Sir Nathaniel Johnson, the Militia companies
proved equal to the occasion. Given an hour's time to
decide whether he would yield to a summons to surrender,
the Governor replied that he needed not a minute. Not
waiting to be attacked, the Colonists with their Indians
took the offensive, and put the enemy's landing-parties
to flight. Then, taking to their ships, they chased the
enemy fleet over the bar and out of sight. The same
evening a belated transport arrived. She was attacked
and made prisoner in the same vigorous fashion. In spite
of their courageous motto, the enemy showed little stomach
for fighting or desire to die "pour les deux Rois" (517.i.,
Disposal of the Prisoners.
Being at a loss how to deal with their some 250 prisoners,
the Carolinans shipped them off to Virginia, in hopes of
getting them conveyed thence to England. But should
conveyance be lacking, the Master was instructed to
give them his ship and turn them loose on the sea. This
simple method of shifting the burden on to their neighbours'
shoulders, with the alternative of having a new privateer
off their coasts, was not unnaturally resented by the
Virginians (555, 755, 824).
§ 3. THE WEST INDIES.
Barbados and the Raid on the Leeward Islands.; The 4½ p.c.; Defences.
The most important event connected with the West
Indies during this period was the French raid upon Nevis
and St. Kitts. It naturally caused something of a panic
in Barbados. Attention was paid then to the longneglected entrenchments and redoubts, which, it was
hoped, might atone for the increasing lack of men (245,
427). Little, however, was accomplished. In the
impoverished state of the Island, the Assembly soon
ceased to vote funds for fortifications, which, they held,
ought to be built out of a special grant from the 4½ p.c.
duty (383, 482, 589, 613.i., 719.i., 961, 1090, 1099, 1256,
1364). Nor was the Militia more efficient than the forts
(1131, 1364). A further alarm of invasion towards the
end of 1707, combined with the efforts of Governor Crowe,
produced some improvement (1176, 1225ff., 1379.i.). The
Council of Trade urged the Governor to press the Assembly
to build magazines, complete Fort St. Anne's and to
maintain the matrosses. The sending of a regiment of
regular troops there, as desired, was, they hinted, to some
extent contingent upon the Colonists' own efforts towards
self-defence (613.i., 1316, 1566, 1578).
Recall of Governor Sir B. Granville.; Paper Act repealed.
Lillington's appeal was allowed and his fine remitted
at the beginning of 1706 (36, 37). Complaints against
Sir B. Granville were reiterated, Lesley, Kirton and
Maxwell petitioning the House of Lords for redress
(11, 51, 351-3, 600, 618, 619, 623, 695). A few months
later he was recalled. He died on his way home. Mitford
Crowe was appointed in his stead (324, 500, 506.i., 580.i.,
682). He sailed at the end of January, 1707, with
instructions to remove those Members of Council who
were guilty of having promoted the Paper Act and of other
misdemeanours (612, 693.ii., 739). That disastrous Act
was repealed, its effects having been clearly set forth by
the merchants and others concerned (529, 540, 542.i.,
545, 1256, 1257). The Governor was directed to procure
the passing of a new Act to indemnify those who held the
new paper (582).
Triennial Bill repealed.
This had already been attempted by Col. Sharpe, as
President of the Council. He had been one of the promoters of the Paper Act. But as soon as he realised its
evil effects, he endeavoured to remedy it. A cabal was
at once formed against him in the Council and Assembly,
composed of those who stood to gain by the Act, and
headed by Col. Holder (632.ii., 644). Meantime, at home,
petitions to the Queen and the House of Lords had flowed
in for the repeal of the Act by which the Assembly had
continued itself and, incidentally, those who had passed
the Paper Act, for two years. The Act was annulled
(567, 572–4, 598.i., 599.iv., 624, 696). But before he was
aware of this, Sharpe dissolved the Assembly. Holder
and his supporters, Cleland and Colleton, did their utmost
to prevent this step, by absenting themselves from Council,
protesting, refusing to publish the writs, creating a riot
in Court, and attempting to overawe the Assembly (697,
697.iv., 752, 809, 830.i., 900, 900.i., 981.i., 1177).
Cleland and Holder suspended.; Act amending Paper Act.; Crowe restores Holder.; Suspends Sharpe, Milles, Cox and Walker.; They are restored.; Crowe dispenses Holder.
The President and other Councillors thereupon suspended
Cleland and Holder. This action was upheld at home
(831.i., 835, 836, 948, 974.i., 1006, 1079, 1080). The new
Assembly was inclined to continue rather than to amend
the Paper Act. This, however, they were at length induced
to do (752, 817, 961, 1056.i., 1064). They addressed
Crowe upon his arrival with a long list of grievances against
the recent administration (927, 961.i.; cf. 697.i., ii.,
1090.iv., v.). Unhappily, his first step was so to interpret
Lord Sunderland's instructions as to restore Holder to
the Council (961, 1069, 1163), and the next, to suspend
Cols. Sharpe, Cox, Milles, and A. Walker, as having been
promoters of the Paper Bill (1090.i., 1133, 1136). He
identified himself, in fact, with Col. Cleland and the party
which had done so much to disturb the Island and had
profited so largely by the pernicious Paper Act (740, 1145).
He was promptly rebuked by the Council of Trade (1163,
1167, 1482). But he rapidly multiplied his errors. Whilst
orders were being issued for the restoration of the four
Councillors (1290, 1303), he was busy revising the Commission of Peace and dispensing on his own authority
Col. Holder from the effects of the Act for ascertaining
the payment of the Bills, etc., which would have had the
effect of making him disgorge some of his extravagant
gains as Manager of the Paper Bank (1092.i., 1140.i.–iii.,
1156, 1176.iff., 1177, 1308, 1316, 1355).
Barbados Credit ruined.; Bill to raise the rates of currency.
These, and similar proceedings, which cannot be referred
to at greater length here, plunged the Island into greater
distraction than ever. The credit of Barbados had been
shattered by the Paper Act, itself designed to remedy
the evil of the withdrawal of the currency, due to their
adoption of the Currency Proclamation whilst other
Plantations ignored it (1131, 1141, 1256, 1257, 1364). An
attempt by the Assembly to pass an Act for raising the
rates of foreign coins, led the Council of Trade to press
once more for an Act of Parliament to enforce the recent
Proclamation (961, 1157, 1167; cf. § 1).
New Assembly.; Imperfect Minutes.; Crowe sits as sole Judge.
A new Assembly at the beginning of 1708 consisted of
practically the same Members as the old, and proceeded
on the same lines, pressing for the redress of the same
grievances, and tacking on to an Excise Bill' a clause
appointing their own Agent (1131, 1364, 1482.ii., x.). The
Council of Trade had occasion to complain that they
were left very much in the dark owing to the imperfect
state of the Minutes transmitted to them (1413). One
cause of complaint against Crowe was that he sat as sole
Judge, even in a cause concerning himself. Sunderland
had commended his proposal to do so, which the Council
of Trade had more wisely condemned (961, 1089, 1099,
The Cartel arranged with the French at Martinique by
Col. Sharpe was the subject of some discussion, Governor
Crowe representing it as only serving to promote French
trade and spying, the Council of Trade commending its
use with caution (817, 961, 1006, 1131, 1176, 1316).
Act for Governor's house-rent repealed.
An Act allowing the Governor house-rent was repealed
on the grounds that Pilgrim's House, already provided,
was a suitable residence (1372.i., 1375).
Trade of Barbados.
The course and progress of the trade of Barbados with
England and the Plantations is indicated by returns (44.i.,
1090.xxi., 1591. v.).
Presentments of Grand Juries.
Presentments of Grand Juries (1090.iv.–vi., 1591.ii., iv.)
are of interest as showing to some extent the needs and
feelings of the country.
Governor Crowe exposed himself to rebuke by
arrogating to himself the right of appointing the Naval
Officer—a perquisite claimed by the Crown (1145, 1167,
1291.i., 1539, 1546).
St. Vincents and Dominica.
The appointment of a new Governor of Barbados gave
occasion for further attention being paid to the Caribs
of St. Vincents and Dominica. Granville had already
been in negotiation with them (405). The British claims
were re-asserted, and endeavours made to counteract
French influence amongst the Carib chiefs (502, 693.ii.,
1090, 1131, 1194, 1225.vi.).
The Bahamas.; House of Lords' Address.; Question of a Governor.
The Bahamas lay practically derelict. Byrche, finding
but a cool welcome, had gone to Carolina (277.i.). Left
without a Governor or any organised force, the settlers
were exposed to savage raids by French and Spanish
marauders, against whom they scarce raised a finger in
self-defence (1116, 1119, 1422). A fresh account of the
raid of 1703 attributes its success in part to the hospitality
of Ellis Lightwood, who appears as a sort of Udaller of
the Islands(277). Upon a petition from the inhabitants
presented by John Graves, the House of Lords addressed
the Queen, praying that the Bahamas should be resumed
to the Crown. The Lords Proprietors had by their neglect
clearly forfeited their rights (231.i., 277.ii., 327). Correspondence ensued as to ways and means, and the cost of
resettling and fortifying these important Islands (264,
336.ii., 362, 393, 396, 449.i.). The problem merged into
that of Carolina (see § 2), and, as in that case, was the
occasion of some interesting statistics as to the state and
products of the Islands (287, 1128). The Lords Proprietors
appointed Robert Holden to be Governor in 1707 (939).
But the Council of Trade, whilst offering no objection
to him, again and yet again recommended that the Crown,
in view of the neglected state of the Bahamas, should
resume the Islands, and in the meantime send over a
Governor of its own appointing (993.i., 1155, 1424).
Bermuda: Lt.–Governor Bennett and Mr. Jones.
In Bermuda the quarrel between the placeman, Jones,
and the Lieut.-Governor dragged its slow length along.
Business in the Courts was at a standstill owing to the
refusal of the Judges and Council to allow Jones to act
as he claimed. The Council, Assembly and Judges supported Lieut.-Governor Bennett sturdily against Jones,
Starr and their clique, who hoped to get him removed
(1330). Jones, recalled to answer for his behaviour to
the Lieut.-Governor, countered with numerous charges
against him, including one, which if it had been true, might
have formed the basis of a story from Boccaccio (197, 371,
381, 424, 606, 785).
The Case of the Rose.
Further complaints were made by Matthew Newnam
and by the Rev. Robert Baron, to the letter of
whom Capt. Bennett replied effectively (1559, 1562,
1562.ii.). The case of the prize Rose is of interest, as another
instance of the blackmailing tactics by some members of
the Royal Navy, referred to in § 1 (1330, 1330.viii.).
Trade of Bermuda.; Ports.
In the course of one of his despatches, Capt. Bennett
describes the trade of Bermuda (1330). The Assembly
petitioned against the order as to ports, which, they
declared, would ruin the Island (761.i.).
Several Acts were repealed (1351), after careful
consideration (996, 997, 1015.i.).
Jamaica: Creolian party.
It is frequently to be observed that the same political
ideas find expression in several Colonies at. once. As
in Maryland and Virginia, for instance, there was a party
of the "country-born," so in Jamaica the Creoles were
now an important section of the community. Moreover,
the democratic doctrines of Sir Harry Vane, the Puritan
Idealist and late Governor of the Massachusetts Bay, had
spread to the Island, and had been adopted by the Creolian
party, who were opposed to English and Kingly Government alike. Governor Handasyd, therefore, found himself
in constant antagonism with an Assembly in which the
majority held such views and endeavoured at once to
infringe the Royal Prerogative and to debar Englishmen from holding office (616, 678, 793, 1423, 1423.i.,
Tacking and Money Bills.; Quartering Act repealed and repeated.; Assembly rebuked.; Defence.
In order to pass Bills after their own mind, they adopted
the device of "tacking" Bills on to such necessary Acts
as the new Quartering Act, whilst they insisted that this
was a Money Bill, in which the Council should not have
any part (297, 503, 678, 735, 793). The previous Act
for quartering and subsisting the officers and soldiers had
been repealed because it contained an unkind clause
forbidding any person to benefit by it who married an
inhabitant of the Island, and also because it disabled any
officer or soldier from holding any civil or Militia commission in the Islands, and penalised any but natural-born
subjects of England, Ireland or the Plantations from
holding office, civil or military, except in the regular
forces. The re-enacting of a repealed Law was in itself
forbidden. But to reject the new Act would have been
to subject the unfortunate regular soldiers to even greater
hardships than they had already to bear. The Act was
therefore allowed to run on till it had nearly expired, before
being repealed. But meantime the Assembly was severely
rebuked by the Crown (319, 426, 433, 601, 793, 898, 968.i.,
1076, 1219, 1237). A new Assembly passed a new Act
in accordance with H.M. Letter. They had ample reason
to be grateful to the soldiers, who, besides frequently
repelling enemy raids and preventing the kidnapping of
negroes, were also used to man the ships of Commodore
Wager, whose complements were sadly depleted by sickness (678, 735, 868, 1180, 1339, 1577).
Throughout this period there were rumours of coming
attacks by the French. Martial Law was proclaimed,
and other preparations were made to give Monsieur a
warm reception should he come (116, 116.ii., 221, 319,
377, 385, 445, 458, 493, 1379.i.).
Pains were taken to foster the trade between Jamaica
and the Spanish coast (493, 926, 936, 1166, 1250), which
was, however, interfered with by certain privateers from
Jamaica itself (1073).
Quit-rents and escheats.
A Bill for quieting possessions and dealing with quitrents was rejected by Handasyd, upon grounds which
were approved of at home (554, 1339, 1423.ii., iii., 1547,
1577). Great complaints were presently heard against
him on account of a campaign of escheats which he had
inaugurated. He issued a proclamation that holders of
lands without patents were to pay the quit-rents due and
would then have patents granted them; if not, they
would be prosecuted, and the informer would be rewarded
with the escheated lands. There were nearly a million acres,
he said, not paying the quit-rents due, and H.M. Revenue
would benefit accordingly. But by thus hastily granting
escheats to informers he gravely exceeded his Instructions
and laid himself open to rebuke and suspicion (1307, 1390,
1429, 1435.i., 1436.i., 1454.i., 1513, 1545, 1551, 1551. ii.,
Iberville's Raid on the Leeward Islands.
At the end of 1705 and the beginning of 1706 we learn
from various Governors in the West Indies that a strong
French squadron was expected at Martinique, whence
an attack on Jamaica or some other of the Islands was
expected (24, 44, 221). Other French ships and troops
made rendezvous at Tobago (116). Parke's proposal
to wipe out the French base by an expedition against
Martinique and Porto Rico was sound strategy, but could
not be put into execution at the moment (431, 474, 591,
733, 834, 994). What happened was something in the
nature of a surprise. It was supposed in England that
the French navy was sufficiently engaged nearer home
(278, 279). But at the beginning of February a considerable force of French ships and men appeared off
Nevis. The forts and platforms erected by Lieut.-Governor
Johnson made a good defence, whilst troops and guardships were hurried up from Antigua and Barbados to
defend the back of the Island. Failing to make a landing
here, the French threw the weight of their attack upon
St. Kitts. The inhabitants, ill-prepared for defence,
retreated to Brimstone Hill, whilst the French plundered
their mills and plantations, until, upon a sudden scare
of approaching English ships, they left hurriedly for
Martinique (152, 167.ii., 168, 195.i., 431.ii.).
Nevis at once petitioned for help from home, pointing
out that the regiment quartered there was very weak
and the arms supplied from the Tower had proved very
defective. Col. Parke's demand for a regiment had,
it will be remembered, been supported by the Board of
Trade (28, 167). In St. Kitts, where the people had
obstinately refused to believe in the possibility of an
attack or to prepare for it, until an hour before the French
arrived, trenches were now dug and court-martials held
upon delinquents (195, 195.i., 281, 653).
This raid was conducted by the Comte de Chavagnac.
Upon the arrival of M. D'Iberville at Martinique a
fresh expedition sailed in March, consisting of some 50 sail,
including 12 men-of-war, as well as privateers and transports (244, 318). A surprise landing was made in Nevis at
Green Bay, taking the forts in the rear, thanks to the failure
of Col. Burt and Lieut.-Col. Butler to make a fight of it.
The Englishmen retreated to their stronghold in the
mountains, the Deodand, where they might have made
a proper stand. But they surrendered almost without
a blow, upon terms which indicated Iberville's contempt
for their courage. The surrender, indeed, by all accounts,
from that of the Paris Gazette to that of Col. Parke and
the inhabitants themselves, was a discreditable affair. If
the armed negroes succeeded in beating off the enemy,
their white masters might well have maintained themselves
for some time in the mountains (270, 274, 275, 282, 284,
318, 338, 357.ii., 406, 431, 519, 653, 654, 1200).
Iberville's harsh terms.
Iberville, not content with an immense booty, behaved
with barbarous ferocity and the most dishonourable
lack of good faith (357.ii.–ix.). Besides carrying off large
numbers of slaves and much shipping, Iberville extorted
from the inhabitants, by force majeure, an undertaking to
bring 1,400 negroes to Martinique in three months' time,
and took four hostages to ensure payment (357.vi., 385).
Nature of the Raid.
When the news reached London, Mr. Secretary Hedges
at once wrote to re-assure the Colonists and to promise
relief. The terms of the capitulation need not be observed.
They had been extorted by force, contrary to the Laws
of Nations, from a few persons who had no right to make
them, and after all the articles of the capitulation had
been barbarously violated by Iberville himself (398, 417,
591, 723). The British fleet would prevent a renewal of
the attack. So it proved. The French from Martinique
demanded the fulfilment of the terms. But for fear of
the English fleet and an expeditionary force they did
not come back to enforce them, any more than they could
carry out their projected attack upon Jamaica. Iberville's
expedition was, in fact, merely a raid undertaken with
the object of plundering and damaging his enemy, without
any hope of conquering the Leeward Islands (431.ii., 455,
560, 652, p. 329). In that object he had undoubtedly
succeeded, although some of the booty was recaptured
by Massachusetts privateers on the way back to
Martinique (445, 448, 452, 455, 526).
Grant in aid voted.; Help from home and Massachusetts Bay.; Defence.
The damage inflicted was estimated at half a million
sterling. Nevis was reduced to the utmost misery and
disorder (455). In response to an appeal for help and
various remedial measures, and upon an address of the
House of Commons, a grant in aid was made and a Commission sent out to distribute it (341, 342, 355, 804, 804.i.,
1048, 1063). Some French ships recently captured off
the Irish coast were dispatched with provisions and stores
of war (417, 591). And before long Commodore Kerr,
Commodore Wager and Sir John Jennings arrived with
help from the Navy (427, 606, 723, 776, 961, 973). The
proceeds of a relief "brief" issued in Massachusetts Bay
were laid out in provisions for the relief of St. Kitts (526).
Subsequently, the Council of Trade urged once more the
despatch of good cruisers and more regular forces to guard
the Leeward Islands, as had been recommended continually
for the last ten years (499, 597, 1031.i., 1102, 1187, 1201,
1238, 1313). The soldiers already there had fared
wretchedly, partly through the neglect of their absenteeofficers, partly through the refusal of the Colonists to vote
them quarters. This, they now represented, they were quite
unable to do, and begged for the remission of the 4½ p.c.
Nor did Col. Parke, on his arrival, find it easy to persuade the Colonists to continued and concentrated efforts
at self-defence. In Antigua he proceeded with the
fortification of Monk's Hill. In St. Kitts they worked
hard at the defences, though the blowing up of the
magazine on Brimstone Hill put them at a further disadvantage. At Nevis, the people waited for everything
to be done for them by the Crown (520, 560, 620, 653, 763,
764, 838, 973, 1146, 1148, 1187, 1201, 1251).
Pestilence succeeded the raid. And no sooner had
the Islands begun to recover from the devastating effects
of these disasters, than a terrible hurricane burst upon
them, destroying every green thing in its course, and
inflicting even greater damage than Iberville. Antigua
alone was reported to have suffered loss to the amount of
half a million (1132,1200,1293, p. 329). H.M.S. Winchelsea
and Child's Play were lost in the storm (1132, 1200).
Death of Col. Johnson.
There are some hints as to collusion between Lieut.Governor Johnson, and other leading men, and Iberville.
Into this and other matters Col. Parke was ordered to
inquire (472, 591). He gives what is probably an
exaggerated account of Col. Johnson's incompetence (653).
He criticised his strategy. But it is to be observed that
when there were rumours of a fresh attack, he copied
it, concentrating his troops, with himself at their head,
at Antigua, as being "the richest and most likely to be
attacked first" (763, 765).
At all events, Johnson's account was settled soon afterwards by Mr. Pogson, one of the Council of St. Kitts.
For he was slain in a duel, which was little, if anything,
short of murder. Pogson was acquitted by a jury composed of Justices. But he fled the Islands in order to
avoid a further trial by Col. Parke. "A hangman," the
latter observes laconically, "is like to have but little
business in these Islands." The Attorney General pointed
out that a man could not be tried twice for his life on the
some count. Pogson was ordered to be turned out of
the Council and deprived of all public employment. In
spite of this, however, he was presently recommended
for the Council, on the grounds that "his misfortune of
killing a man may befall ye best of men" (491, 559, 559.i.,
ii., 653, 757, 833, 848.i., 862, 1465).
Parke and Codrington.; The rich Planters.
Upon his arrival Parke at once fell foul of Codrington,
whom he accused of thwarting him at every turn (473,
519, 712, 839, 1380, 1447.i.). His despatches are those of
a peevish and disappointed man (597, 1077). But in one
particular they are noteworthy. For he explains the
depopulation of the Islands as being largely due to the
oppression of the rich and absentee-landowners, who
bought up small estates and left them to be worked by
slaves under one white overseer. The rich planters themselves he represents as independent and lawless, combining to oppress the poor and acquit each other in the
Courts. Every rich man, he declares, is a Bashaw, who
can commit even murder with impunity. In view of the
experiences of Codrington, the death of Johnson, and the
subsequent fate of Parke himself, these accusations cannot
be regarded as devoid of foundation (519, 559, 1168, p. 521).
Parke represents that his championship of justice cost
him his salary and house-rent, which was not paid him
Laws repealed.; Militia Act.
The Act for establishing Courts was repealed, the Council
of Trade recommending the passing of a Law for the better
administration of justice (663, 1576). Several other Acts
were disallowed for reasons stated by the Attorney General
(302, 306, 307; cf. 1380). One of his objections to the
Militia Act is curious. A clause in it provided that a
soldier blaspheming a second time should be bored through
the tongue. Seeing that these were the times when,
according to "my Uncle Toby," our army swore so terribly
in Flanders, it is not surprising that the Attorney General
viewed with alarm a punishment likely to incapacitate the
The Islands had been drained of cash by the action
of the recent Proclamation, and the need of money was
sorely felt (499, 710). Indications of the course of trade
are given (171.vi., vii., 1184.i., 1590), and of the names
of numbers of the inhabitants (1383.ii., 1396. iv.–vii.).
Parke's Residence.; Antigua.
Parke had been ordered to reside at Nevis. But he
preferred to establish himself at Antigua for six months
in the year (519, 741, 1178, 1272). He was soon at loggerheads with the Assembly of that Island, of which he gives
an account (1383.i., ii., 1388).
Capt. Kidd's Crew.
A curious information is laid, describing how members
of Capt. Kidd's crews were now settled in St. Thomas'
and the Leeward Islands, and continued to carry on a
profitable trade in piratical and illegal goods (53).
House of Commons' Enquiry concerning Newfoundland.
The whole question of the French raids upon Newfoundland fishing stations and the decay of the fishery
was considered by the House of Commons (Journal, Feb. 12
and 16, 1706) (32.i.). Upon an Address of the House,
orders were given, directed mainly towards obviating
the "uncertain and unseasonable sailing of convoys," to
which the decrease of the fishery and the consequent lack
of English seamen were largely due (41, 56, 104, 108, 115,
133, 716, 720, 721, 736, 743, 751, 1233, 1279, 1281, 1331).
Much evidence was given as to abuses and irregularity
in the trade and fishery. The project of establishing
a permanent civil government there was mooted, but
opposed. The need of a "minister not given to drink"
was also insisted upon (101). The establishment of a
Militia was also urged and presently carried into effect
(101, 110, 155, 253, 254). Fishing Admirals were reminded
to keep records and to send copies of their journals to the
Privy Council (126). The Act to encourage trade to Newfoundland was to be more rigorously applied (726, 1353,
1463.i., 1468, 1488.i.).
Complaints against Lloyd and Moodv.; Loss of H.M.S. Loos.
A Committee of the House was appointed to enquire
into the complaints against Capt. Moody and Major Lloyd
(50, 57, 65). The charges against the latter, of forcing
the soldiers under his command to trade with him, and
of mulcting them of their pay, could not be ignored. His
patron, Sir C. Hedges, wrote to caution him (114, 138,
216, 360). Evidence as to the embezzlement of stores
was, however, damaged by the ravages of the French and
by the loss of H.M.S. Loos off the Needles, with many
documents relating to Newfoundland on board (4, 25.i.,
26ff., 29, 52, 74).
Inspection of Stores.
It was only after long insistence that the Council of
Trade secured that an inspection and return of Government
stores should be made by the Commodore, restored to the
position of C. in C. from which he had been unhappily
removed in favour of Lloyd (252, 254, 1362, 1377, 1393.i.,
Capt. Underdown's Reports. His Raid upon the French.
Capt. Underdown's reports are given (588.i., ii., 1211.i.).
Whilst in Newfoundland in the summer of 1707, he undertook a successful raid upon the French harbours and
fishing ships, in which Lloyd bore his share (1109, 1110).
The Council of Trade cleared Moody of some of the
charges against him. He seems to have been a brave
soldier in action, but something of a rascal in barracks
(52, 173ff., 228).
Placentia.; French Raids.; Further complaints v. Lloyd.
Placentia, it was again urged, must be wiped out (139).
But Major Lloyd did no more than view the place, declaring
that without the support of the inhabitants of St. John's
and without the forces he had been promised from home
he could not accomplish the task of taking the place (19,
419.i., 446.i., 533, 751). He showed some activity in
checking French raids (453, 489, 1109). Before long,
however, serious complaints came to hand against
Major Lloyd, completely justifying the Council of Trade's
estimate of his character. He was said to be hiring
out the soldiers, bullying and taxing civilians, and
entertaining the enemy at Fort St. John's, instead of
fighting him. Whilst these accusations were being
examined, a severe letter of reprimand in H.M. name was
despatched to call him to account (1286.i., 1377, 1378,
1416, 1426.i., 1488.i., 1494, 1512.iii.).
Some words used in an obsolete sense remain to
be noted. Hurry=disturbance ; amuzement=
bewilderment, occurs frequently at this date; workhouse=
factory, as opposed to its modern specialised sense (310).
A parson in Bermuda offended his parishioners by calling
them porgey-headed dogs, a term of abuse presumably
derived from porgy, the fish, which has a black head
(1562). The word "deodand" =a stronghold in the