Preface | British History Online (2024)

PREFACE.

§ 1 GENERAL.

Secretaries of State.

After the failure of the Jacobite Rebellion wasassured, Mr. Stanhope accompanied the King to Hanover(July, 1716). Negotiations were there begun with theRegent Orleans, and were concluded in the followingJanuary by the signing of a Triple Alliance betweenGreat Britain, France, and Holland. It guaranteed thoseclauses of the Treaty of Utrecht which referred to theProtestant Succession in England, the French Succession,and the renunciation by the Spanish King of his claimson the French throne. This compact, and a defensivealliance with Austria, involved the antagonism of Spain,which issued in the war of 1718. In 1717 Charles XII ofSweden, having formed an alliance with Spain, joined withAlberoni in a projected invasion of Scotland on behalf ofthe Pretender. The plot was discovered in England andaverted. In Stanhope's absence the conduct of colonialaffairs was entrusted to Paul Methuen. Lord Townshendremained at the head of the Ministry at home, whilst thePrince of Wales acted as "Guardian of the Realm andLieutenant" (263, 265, etc.). Townshend's oppositionto the foreign policy of the King and Stanhope, combinedwith his championship of the claims of the Prince ofWales as Regent, and his resistance to the demands ofgreedy German courtiers, led to his dismissal. Inannouncing the safe return of the King (January, 1717),Methuen informed the Governors of the Plantations thatStanhope had been appointed Secretary of State forthe Northern Provinces, whilst he himself succeeded tothe direction of the affairs of the Southern Province(454). Three months later, when Walpole and Townshend passed into opposition, Stanhope succeeded theformer as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Sunderlandtook his place as Secretary of State for the NorthernProvince, and Addison succeeded Methuen (535, 536).

Joseph Addison.

The famous Whig writer had already served for overa year as a Commissioner for Trade and Plantations,long enough, that is, to make him well acquainted withthe problems of the Colonies, and also with the workingof the office of the Council of Trade (2). It will be seenthat, as the result of that experience, he lent a ready ear,as Secretary of State, to suggestions from that Board.One of his first steps was to direct the Board to remindGovernors once more of their Instructions to transmitregular accounts of the Revenue in the Plantations(646, 662).

Addison had been Chief Secretary of Ireland in 1708,and Secretary to the Lords Justices on the accessionof George I. There is a traditional story that when hewas promoted to the latter office, this accomplished andversatile essayist and pamphleteer found himself quiteincapable of composing a letter to the King without theassistance of a clerk. The routine of each office has, ofcourse, as Macaulay observed "some little mysterieswhich the dullest man may learn with a little attention,and which the greatest man cannot possibly know byintuition." (fn. 1) On such points Addison might well requiresome prompting. But with his experience of previousoffices, and the knowledge drawn from over a year's workat the Board of Trade, a man of Addison's literary abilitycannot now at any rate have needed any clerk at his elbowto help him in drawing up a State Paper. Certainly thedocuments here printed, many of them written in hisown hand, exhibit just that lucidity and simplicity andthat easy adoption of appropriate official directness,without any attempt at literary ornament, which onewould naturally expect from such a master of style. Thewit and humour of the Spectator would be as out of placein the dispatches of a Secretary of State as the eloquenceof Cato. Instead we find simple and straightforwardstatements of policy and facts with no trace of fastidiousness.

Congratulations on failure of the '15.

All these events and changes had their repercussionsover-seas. Loyal addresses came from Jamaica and theLeeward Islands, from Carolina, New England, NewYork, New Jersey and Virginia, congratulating the Kingon the failure of the Jacobite Rebellion, the success of hisforeign policy, and his safe return (97 i., 118 x.–xii., xiv.,165 i., 192, 192 ii., iv., v., 203 iv., v., 589, 607, 626). The"Friends of Popery and arbitrary power" were denounced (118 xii.), and the Ministers of New England,assembled in their annual convention at Boston, withCotton Mather for Moderator, expressed their "detestation of the late new hellish plot." They acknowledgedthe "King's goodness and justice to the Protestant dissenters," and hailed him as the "light of the Morningand the breath of their nostrils" (589). Associations insupport of the Crown and the Government against "thehorrid and detestable conspiracy of Papists" had beenformed in Jamaica (27 i., 203 iii., iv.), and New York(133, 133 ii.).

Rebel Prisoners transported to the Plantations.

A large number of the rebels who had been takenprisoners at Preston were transported to the Plantations.Directions were given by the Secretary of State to theseveral Governors for securing them on their arrival andseeing that they were disposed of as indented labourers,bound to serve their masters for seven years, accordingto the terms of their pardon (128, 129, 144, 145). TheCouncil of Jamaica particularly requested that some ofthese prisoners should be sent thither immediately (203 i.).They were sent to Virginia, Maryland, South Carolina,St. Kitts and Jamaica. Lists of these prisoners, numbering 639 in all, are given (309–314). Some, on arrivingin Maryland, refused to indent or ran away from theirmasters, and a Proclamation had to be issued by theGovernor for their arrest (543, 543 i., ii.). One or twofavoured individuals, after being assigned as indentedservants to Lord Carteret, were immediately grantedtheir liberty and recommended to the friendly offices ofthe Governor of South Carolina (202, 215, 222, 223).

White Servants.

Everywhere the problem of increasing the whitepopulation by means of the import of indentured labourwas coming to the fore (651 etc.). Joshua Gee representedthat the supply of white servants had decreased of lateowing to an abuse of the Statutes for preventing personsbeing sent beyond seas without licence. The abuse ofkidnapping or "spiriting away" to the Plantations ofpersons to be sold as indentured servants is well-known.But Gee reveals a trick by which merchants and shipperswere being prosecuted for transporting genuine unemployed servants who wished to go to the Colonies, andwere thus being prevented, by fear of falling into thehands of rogues, from "assisting thousands of peoplethat are industriously inclined." He proposed thatpersons transporting servants directly to the Plantationsshould be exempted from prosecution under thosestatutes, and that "six governors of Bridewell or theWorkhouse" should be empowered to sign warrantsfor the exportation of youthful pickpockets (505).

Petitions in French.

It will be noticed that petitions to the King began nowto be written in French. The Hanoverian King couldnot speak English, and his Secretary, the Robethon towhom Walpole so strongly objected, was a Frenchman(544 i.).

Relations with the French.

The French continued their fortification of CapeBreton and their fishing along the coast of Nova Scotia(51, 154). On the mainland they were pressing forwardwith the new colony of Louisiana, and their extension fromQuebec down the Mississippi to Mobile "on the back ofall the most valuable British Plantations" continued toexcite apprehension, particularly in Carolina, where theywere suspected of having stirred up several of the Indiannations to take part in the war (230). The Governor ofNew York once more urged the Assembly to take measuresfor defence "against the evil day to come," in view of"the vast preparations in France for settlements behindyou along the Messasipi and the neighbourhood of a veryconsiderable garrison and sea-port at Cape Breton"(192 iv.).

Effect of the New Alliance. Revolt at Martinique.

On the other hand the effect of the alliance with Francewas soon felt. When a revolt broke out in Martiniqueas the result of an attempt by the new Governor tocollect arrears of taxes, orders were sent to BritishGovernors, at the request of the Regent Orleans, thatthey should not only prevent any assistance being givento the rebels but should even "pursue such furthermethods for discountenancing and discouraging the revolt,as may be consistent with your authority, and withoutprejudice to His Majesty's service" (640, 677). Thenew alliance was also expected to put an end to Frenchinterference with British trade with the Spaniards, ofwhich bitter complaints had come from Jamaica, for theFrench were now prohibited from trading to the SpanishDominions in America (572). A similar prohibition wasextended to the commerce of French settlements withthose of any other nation. British vessels, suspected oftrading at Martinique, were seized by the new GovernorGeneral, a proceeding which provoked a protest from theGovernor of the Leeward Islands (568, 568 i.–iv.).

Foreign trade prohibited by the French.

The prohibition of trade between the French andEnglish Plantations was in accordance with the Treatyof Neutrality of 1686. The Governor of Barbados haddeclared himself at a loss in the matter, not finding anylaw to forbid such trade. When Archibald Cumings,the Custom House Officer at Boston, drew attention tothe large importations of Dutch, French, and Danishsugar, rum, and molasses into that port, the Council ofTrade enquired of the Commissioners of Customs whetherthere was any such law (297, 389, 486, 486 i.). Beingassured that there was not, they then raised the questionwhether the Treaty of Neutrality was still regarded asbeing in force (393, 463). They were instructed thatit was, and ordered to remind the Governors of Plantationsthat it was their duty to prevent such illegal trade inaccordance with the 5th and 6th Articles of that Treaty(524, 571).

Mr. Cumings' proposals.; A tax on foreign imports and a Stamp tax.

Mr. Cumings, in his above-mentioned report, madetwo proposals, the adoption of which at a later date wasdestined to have very far-reaching results. Observingthat imports from foreign Plantations into New Englandpaid no duty, whilst the products of the British SugarIslands (except Jamaica) were handicapped by the 4½per cent. export duty, he suggested that foreign commodities should pay an import duty of that amount. Arevenue of £1,000 a year might thus be raised (297) fordefraying the expenses of the Civil Establishment, andthis revenue might be increased by setting up a StampOffice (297, 486). He submitted a return of imports fromforeign plantations. Cumings was commended for hisaccounts and suggestions, and invited to continue them,whilst the Council of Trade, on taking the matter intoconsideration, presently requested a return of foreignimports and exports for the last three years from theGovernor of New England (486 i., 578, 579).

Resumption of Charter Governments urged.

Cumings urged the resumption of the Charter Governmentsas being "all enemies to the prerogative" andopposed to the Admiralty Courts. All officers appointedby the Crown were looked upon as a burden and impositionupon them, and it was only in the AdmiraltyCourts that the revenue officers could expect justice inputting the acts of trade in execution. The act relatingto wool in the Plantations required amending on thispoint. As for Providence Plantation in Rhode IslandGovernment, "no notice was taken of the Sabbath, butemployed in revelling" (297, 486).

All this, be it observed, was written in 1716 and 1717.It shows how long those seeds had lain in the groundwhich came to fruition half a century later.

The Wool Act.; Jurisdiction of the Admiralty Courts denied.

Cumings' complaint with regard to the Act to preventthe exportation of wool, etc. was, that the Courts ofCommon Law denied the jurisdiction of the AdmiraltyCourts in the recovery of forfeitures under that act,which prohibited the exportation of wool or woollen goodsmanufactured in the Plantations. But the AttorneyGeneral, on being consulted by the Council of Trade,upheld the action of the colonial Courts of Common Lawas being in accordance with the provisions of the Act(297, 390, 399).

Charter Governments.; Gaudin's indictment.

As to the Proprietary Governments, whilst the inhabitantsof South Carolina were again and again urgingthe resumption of their Charter to the Crown (v. §2),vested interests had brought their influence to bearupon the Committee appointed by Parliament to preparea bill to resume the grants of Proprietary Governments.Stephen Gaudin, therefore, writing as a British merchant,with whom, "as with all lovers of their country,the improvement of the Navigation and encouragementof the manufactures of Great Britain" weighed mostheavily, offered as the strongest reason for such action,"the unequal taxes laid upon the manufactures, trade,and shipping of Great Britain." British merchants, hecomplained, were treated by Proprietary Governmentsas foreigners in their own Colonies. This was an infringement of their Charters, and unless they were forfeited,"they may truely be termed Independents of the Crownand Laws of Great Britain, as is often asserted in thoseAssemblys" (285).

Relations with Spain.; Piracies and reprisals on the Spaniards.; Seizure of Logwood cutters by the Spaniards.; Spaniards and Indians at St. Augustine.

Relations with Spain were less happy than with France.The Fleet of homeward-bound galleons was wrecked offVera Cruz in the Gulf of Florida (27 i., 308). Vesselswere immediately fitted out from Jamaica and otherColonies to fish upon the sunken wrecks for the vasttreasure they contained. Some of these vessels sailedunder commissions for the suppression of pirates, andbeing heavily armed, proceeded themselves to commitacts of piracy upon the Spaniards on the coast of Floridaand Cuba (158, 158 i.–vii., ix., 175 i., 203, 240, 240 i.–iii.,300, 308, 308 i., ii., 357 (h), 408 ii., iii., 409 i., and seeJamaica). These acts, however, were represented asbeing to some extent reprisals for the great losses causedby the seizure of British vessels by the Spaniards (203,357 (h), 359 i., 677). Spanish ships, whether with orwithout commissions as guarda costas, had for some timebeen seizing British vessels passing on their lawfuloccasions, either on the grounds that they were attemptingto trade with the Spanish settlements, or on the pretextthat they had on board some Spanish coins, which were,of course, the current money of the Plantations. Nosatisfaction could be obtained when restitution wasdemanded, until, towards the end of 1716, a new Governorof Havana promised redress (27 i., 118, 203, 240, 308,308 i., 339, 339 ii., 357 (h), 409 i., 595, 595 iv.). Aboutthe same time the Spanish Ambassador presented tothe Secretary of State a memorial demanding the withdrawal of the British from the Laguna de Terminos,which they frequented for the purpose of cutting andexporting logwood. Their right to do so in that andother places not occupied in the Province of Yucatanhad long been upheld, and by "right sufferance or indulgence" seemed clearly established by the Treaties of1670 and 1713. Spain now declared that unless theywithdrew within eight months from that time they wouldbe treated as pirates (388 i.). But within a month ofthe presentation of this memorial, a Spanish squadronacting under the orders of the Viceroy of Mexico, sailedinto the Bay of Campeachy and seized twenty-fourships and sloops (five of them Dutch) which were loadingor about to load logwood in the harbour of Triste (delCarmen). This port and the Laguna de Terminos theSpaniards proceeded to settle and fortify. The Britishmasters of ships, after protesting against being treated aspirates and asserting that they had lawful clearances,demanded the release of their ships and goods, but wereonly granted a pass for themselves and crews in a smallship (Nov., 1716). Their account of the affair wasplaced before the Secretary of State (484 i.–x., 546, 570),together with other complaints against the Spaniards(429, 429 i.–vi.). For the Carolinians complained bitterlythat both the Spaniards at St. Augustine and the Frenchhad not only stirred up the Yamassee Indians to attackthe British and provided them with arms, but alsoprotected them when they sought refuge in Florida, andrefused to deliver up the prisoners, slaves and cattlebrought in by rebel Indians. This, it was urged, was adirect breach of the first article of the Treaty of Utrecht(239 iii., 413, 413 i., iv., 601). The Spanish Governor,however, denied the sale of arms to the Indians, and asfor protecting refugees, he regarded them as Spanishsubjects returning to their old allegiance to theCatholic King (545 i.).

Seizure of Virginian privateer.; Increase of pirates.; Action by H.M.S. Scarborough.; Admiralty Instructions.

But perhaps the most high-handed action was theseizure upon the high seas by a Spanish man-of-warof the Virginian privateer commissioned by Lt.-GovernorSpotswood to investigate the settlement of pirates inthe Bahamas (595, 595 i.–iv., v. infra, p. xv.) Apartfrom the piratical or semi-piratical activities of privateers,whether British, Spanish, French or French with Spanishcommissions (95), the increase of pirates in the WestIndies had become a grave problem (308, 518, 518 i.–v.,595, 595 iv., 596, 661). The losses of the merchantservice were severe, and the dislocation of trade noless so. Trading vessels could not leave Jamaica andthe other islands without convoy. The Governor of theLeeward Islands was prevented from visiting the variousparts of his government for lack of a man-of-war ofsufficient strength to face the pirates who hovered offhis coasts and Barbados. The American coast fromFlorida to New England was similarly infested (66 i., 68,118, 118 ii., 203, 213, 224, 240, 240 i.–iii., 267, 308, 308i.–iv., 350, 352, 359 i., 411, 411 i., 419, 425, 425 i.–iii.,v., 476, 484, 526, 527, 546, 548, 568, 570, 595, 595 i.–iv.,629, 658 iv., 661, 666, 677, 690). Some of these gentry,indeed, professed not to attack British vessels, but toconfine their attention to foreigners (240, 240 i., ii., 635).Others for the most part stood in little fear of the King'sships on the West Indian stations, which were oftenpartially disabled for lack of men or by foul bottoms.The Governor of Barbados, indeed, reported that theKing's ships were commonly confined to harbour fortwo-thirds of the year owing to sickness, death anddesertion of their seamen. Their Captains could notcompete with the merchant service in obtaining recruits,nor were they permitted by the late act to press marinersin the West Indies. Lowther therefore proposed thatthey should be given "a legal regulated power" forimpressing in emergencies (661). In spite of thesehandicaps, however, Scarborough, reinforced by a detachment of soldiers from the regiment in the Leeward Islands,succeeded in bringing some of the pirates to book in theharbour of Sta. Cruz (411, 425, 425 i., iii., v., 484, 568,595, 661). But he had only been able to sail afterthe Governor and his friends had put up a purse tohelp him to engage sufficient seamen to navigate hisship. The attention of the Admiralty was called to thedemands for an increase in the strength of guardships(203, 411, 474, 484, 568, 595). The Council of Trade wasinformed of the dispatch of men-of-war, and of theinstructions issued to their Commanders to co-operatewith Governors in the quest and destruction of pirates(489). None the less, the Captain of H.M.S. Swift, whenasked to cruise against pirates, had informed the Governorof Jamaica that he dared not stir without orders fromhome (411).

Pirates' haunts and rendezvous in the Bahamas.

A description of the chief haunts of the pirates, theircharacters, nationalities, and some of their brutalities, isgiven by the acting Governor of Jamaica (411, 411 i.).Their principal place of rendezvous was in the Bahamas.Fortifying Harbour Island, they proposed to make it asecond Madagascar (240 i., 595, 677). Here came suchnotorious pirates as Hornigold, Stillwell, Barrow, Jenings,Fernandez, Burgiss, White, and Thatch, either to settleor to divide their booty, whilst Ham chose Beef Islandfor his headquarters. They terrorised the inhabitants ofProvidence Island, Barrow and Hornigold proclaimingthemselves Governors of the place and protectors ofpirates (240, 240 i., iii., 425, 425 i., iii., v., 595, 596, 635,639 i.). Captain Thomas Walker and many of the inhabitants were forced to leave Providence (240 i., iii.,596, 635). The number of the pirates was increased bythose Jamaican privateersmen who, having committedacts of piracy against the French and Spaniards, fledthither when proceedings were begun against them (203,240, 240 i., 359 i., 408 iii., 411).

Bellamy's fate.

Samuel Bellamy commanded a ship of 26 guns, aBristol merchantman which he had captured off theBahamas when homeward bound from Jamaica. He hadalso a sloop of 14 guns, a force too great for the "smallbauble" of a guardship at the Leeward Islands totackle. After visiting the Virgin Islands, he was castaway off Cape Cod. Only two out of a crew of 120 weresaved. The Madeira wine found on board a ship theyhad just taken proved their undoing. Bellamy hadtaken all the crew, with the exception of one man and aboy, out of the prize, and put seven of the pirates on board.But, according to the story told in Boston, "the piratesin both vessells regaled themselves so liberally withmadera that they all got drunk and ran their ownvessel on shoar" at Nossetts Bay. The man and boyon board the captured ship, seeing the seven men drunkand asleep on deck, seized the opportunity to run thevessel ashore. The seven pirates were secured andtaken prisoners to Boston (425 iii., 484, 568, 595 i., 629,639 i., 666, 677).

Trials of Pirates.

Governors were much exercised by the problem of whatwas to be done with these "rovers" when captured, fortheir Commissions for trying them under the Act for themore effectual suppression of pirates, had expired. Revivalof the Act was suggested (411, 661, 677, 678, 690).Hunter plainly declared that a New York jury wasunlikely to convict, "be the evidence ever so plain andclear" (690). Writing from Virginia, Colonel Spotswoodurged the dispatch of a sufficient force to protect thetrade and dislodge the pirates from the Bahamas, andalso the offer of pardon to those who should make theirsubmission (240, 595). He himself, as holding a Commission of Vice-Admiralty for the Bahamas, on receivinginformation of the state of those islands, commissioneda sloop to sail thither and make enquiries as to thestrength and designs of the pirates who were congregatingthere (240, 240 i.–iii.). This sloop was seized by a Spanishman-of-war off Bermuda, its goods sold and its crewmade prisoners without trial and without any attentionbeing paid to the instructions and credentials of itscommander (595, 595 i.–iv.).

An affray in Carolina.

A commission issued to a privateer in South Carolinaled to a clash between the Governor and Colonel Rhett,Surveyor-General of Customs, and the Commander ofH.M.S. Shoreham over the contents of a prize, the Lt.-Governor firing at Captain Howard, a Lieutenant offeringto shoot the Governor, and Col. Rhett and other officialsgiving a remarkable display of rough manners andlanguage (267, 268, 273).

Report upon measures for suppressing pirates.; Proclamation of pardon.

In December, 1716, the Council of Trade was commanded to consider the best course for dislodging thepirates from the island of Providence. In the followingFebruary they answered by referring to their formerrepresentations and the need of settling the Bahamas.The problem of dislodging the pirates was rather one forthe Admiralty (408, 408 i.–iii., 418). In February theyagain called the attention of the Secretary of State to thereports of the settlements of pirates in the Bahamas andVirgin Islands (473). Mr. Addison presently repeatedMethuen's demand for a report from them upon whatmeasures should be taken for suppressing pirates in theWest Indies, moved thereto by a petition from themerchants of Bristol (587, 587 i.). The Board, afterconsulting with the merchants (v. Journal, 31st May,1717), recommended the immediate despatch of asufficient naval force, and that Governors of Plantationsshould be empowered to issue Proclamations granting ageneral pardon to all pirates who should surrender beforea given date (596). A Proclamation to this effect wasordered to be drawn up (649).

Naval Stores.; Proposal for encouraging.

The encouragement of the production and export ofNaval Stores continued to be the subject of anxiousconsideration (19). Many interviews at the Board ofTrade are recorded in the Journal. Merchants tradingto New England proposed that the import duty on timbershould be removed, ships be convoyed, and seamenengaged in this traffic be exempt from pressing (21). Abounty on imported timber was also suggested (487).Another proposal was that hemp seed should be distributed gratis and taxes in New England be payable intar (22, 472, 510 i.). On behalf of South Carolina it wassuggested that all naval stores should be admitted dutyfree, and that the importer should be allowed a bounty(488). For Virginia, the payment of quit-rents in navalstores was proposed, and the prompt payment of thepremiums allowed, which should be extended for twentyyears (506, 507).

Certificates of quality.

Certificates as to the excellence of New England mastswere submitted, in one case of a ship named theLusitania; and of New England iron and Carolina tar(14, 17, 18, 26, 33, 478, 487, 508 i.). Bounties uponPlantation hemp and iron were also suggested (505,508 i.).

Board of Trade Report.

In January, 1717, a report upon the whole subject wascalled for. Accounts of imports were collected (23, 459,460, 461 i., ii., 464 i.–iv., 465, 487), and after consideringthe views of the merchants, Colonial agents, and theNavy Board, who objected to the payment of the premiums by the Navy, the Board of Trade presented acomprehensive survey of the problem on 28th March(515 i., iii.). Their recommendations followed in generalthe suggestions indicated above, and included thegranting of a premium on imported tar and cast iron.They concluded by proposing that the several Assembliesshould be recommended to take steps for the encouragement of these industries.

Waste of Woods.

In the meantime, complaints continued as to the wastein H.M. woods in New England of masts fit for the Navyand their export to Spain and Portugal (19 i., 33).

Mr. Bridger re-appointed.

Mr. Bridger, Surveyor-General of the Woods, proposedan amendment of the Act for the preservation of pinetrees so as to cover the waste of young trees (510 i.).His commission had been renewed, but a stop had beenput to his salary through the intervention of the Admiralty, which represented his office as being a uselessexpense to the Navy. At the same time, however, theyrecommended that the Governor of New England shouldstop the waste of woods (13 i., ii.). The Council ofTrade pointed out the weakness of this suggestion andemphasised the necessity of a Surveyor-General, andBridger's fitness for the office (33). Their representationhad its effect, and the Secretary of State, in announcinghis re-appointment to the Governors of New England,New York and Virginia, reminded them that it was theirduty to support him in the execution of his office (436,436 i.).

Settlement of disbanded soldiers.

The production of Naval Stores was one of the inducements offered by the disbanded officers and soldiers whenthey renewed their application for a grant of lands forsettlement between Nova Scotia and Maine. Theyestimated the cost of settling such a Colony at about£30,000 and proposed to repay this sum, if advanced bythe Crown, in Naval Stores (485 i., 495). Subsequentlythey offered to transport themselves at their own expense (528). They admitted that this region lying between the St. Croix and Maine, had been included in thecharter of New England, with a reservation to the Crownof the right of granting lands. But they argued that bythe surrender of Pemaquid to the French, its reconquestby the British in 1710, and the neglect of Massachusettsto rebuild that fort, their right had lapsed to the Crown(509).

Claim of Massachusetts to the tract between Penobscot and Kennebec Rivers. Other claims and petitions for grants.; Capt. Coram's proposal for Georgia.

The Massachusetts Government, however, asserted itsclaim to the tract between Penobscot, Sagadehoc andKennebec rivers, and demanded that in any grants ofland in the Eastern part of New England, it should beexpressly reserved to the proprietors (412, 576, 583, 584,593). Other claims were advanced by the duch*ess ofHamilton, on behalf of the Duke (594), Sir Bibye Lake(591), and Col. William Partridge. The request of thelatter for permission to make a settlement, and for theconfirmation of a purchase of lands made by him wasregarded with favour by the Massachusetts Government.It was granted, on the conditions proposed by the Boardof Trade, providing for the reservation of mast-trees forthe Navy, forbidding the export of naval stores to foreignparts, and requiring the completion of the settlementwithin a stated time (249, 249 i., 286, 291, 291 i.–ix.,301–303, 305, 340, 592). These claims were answeredby Capt. Thomas Coram (599), who had previouslysupported the scheme of the disbanded soldiers, andnow submitted a proposal on behalf of himself and theMarquis de Wignacourt, and other French gentlemen.Twelve hundred families, it was represented, were readyto sail as soon as a patent should be granted, and to founda colony between Nova Scotia and Maine to be called"the Royall province of Georgeia." The patent was tobe vested in trustees, one of whom, the Earl of Berkeley,was to be the Governor. He was to nominate a Patenteeas Lt.-Governor, who with the rest of the Court of Patentees, was to form the Council. The Assembly was to beannually chosen by freeholders and other inhabitants(567, 577, 582). The opinion of the Solicitor-Generalwas invited as to what were the rights of the Crown inthe lands in question (600). The scheme, it will benoticed, as well as the name bears a close resemblanceto the subsequent foundation of Georgia in whichCoram was associated with Oglethorpe.

Patent Offices; grants of reversions.

The Council of Trade continued their endeavours tosecure the proper execution of patent offices (123). Butthe system of deputies grew in spite of them. Leave ofabsence was freely granted to the patentees (59, 191,307), and offices were bestowed in reversion and for twolives (168, 189).

Governors' flags.

The Governor of the Leeward Islands complained thatthe Admiralty had issued orders forbidding the hoistinga Governor's flag when on board H.M. ships. Apart fromhis dignity as Governor in Chief and Vice-Admiral, herepresented that the flag was of service as a warning ofthe Governor's approach to the several islands under hisadministration. The Admiralty, however, refused towithdraw their prohibition (541, 638, 641).

§ 2 THE AMERICAN COLONIES.

South Carolina. Governor Craven.

Governor Craven having returned from S. Carolina,he was promptly called upon to account to the Secretaryof State for the property of the Marquis de Navarres,taken by a pirate and alleged to have been detained byhim (34, 34 i., ii., 40, 41, 53, 56, 208, 304, cf. C.S.P.,1715).

Robert Johnson appointed.

Robert Johnson, son of Sir Nathaniel Johnson, wasappointed to succeed him, and his appointment wasapproved by the Crown (372, 414, 500).

The Assembly request protection of the Crown.

The Assembly, after congratulating the King on thefailure of the rising of the 'Fifteen, again petitioned thatthe colony should be taken under the immediate protection of the Crown (97 i.). On the eve of his departureCraven declared that the clouds, which had threatened thedestruction of their land, had blown away. The positionhad, indeed, improved. For peace had been made withthe Cherokees, who after being nearly persuaded to jointhe Creeks and Yamassees, had finally decided to keepto their engagement, and had fallen upon the members ofthose tribes who were in their towns and massacred them(97, 239 iii., 287). But the Carolinians remained atwar with fifteen other nations, whilst the French atMobile and the Spaniards at St. Augustine continued toarm and incite the Creeks and Yamassees against them(97, 230, 239 iii., 413, 413 i.–iv., 545 i., v. § 1).

Causes of the Indian war.

But as to the general causes of the Indian war, Lt.-Governor Spotswood makes the significant commentthat "the Indians have rarely broken with the English,except when they have received some notorious injury"from traders, etc. (146); and again, "It is a very generalobservation, both here and in the neighbouring Provinces,that no murders or hostilitys have ever been committedby the Indians except where the English have given thefirst provocation" (522).

Reply of Assembly to Lords Proprietors.

The Assembly therefore continued to insist upon thenecessity of men and money being sent to their relief,and hastened to express their dissent from the optimisticstatement of Governor Eden, giving their reasons (239 ii.,iii.). At the same time they answered in detail the statements made to the Council of Trade by the Lords Proprietors, who, they declared, had given them no assistanceand were, indeed, "the sole bar" to their relief (239 i.,C.S.P., 1715, Nos. 516 i., 517). They again repeatedtheir request to be taken under the protection of theCrown (239 iii.). These papers make it clear that theresumption of Carolina to the Crown was not due tothe initiative of the Board of Trade and Plantations,as is frequently stated, but to the repeated and urgentdemands of the people of Carolina.

The Agents and the Board of Trade.; Resources of Carolina.

In pursuance of these petitions of the Assembly, theiragents Messrs. Boone & Beresford (with the former ofwhom the Lords Proprietors had fallen foul) emphasisedthe importance of South Carolina both as producingcommodities "suitable and necessary to the occasionsof Great Britain," and as constituting a South Westernfrontier against the French, Spaniards and Indians. Theyalso submitted a return of the imports and exports of theColony (71, 226, 226 i., 230, 284, 407). In anothermemorial they presented a survey of the state of theprovince, its importance, possibilities, and valuation,as well as the cost of the war.

Answer of Lords Proprietors.; Repeated petitions by the Assembly, etc.; Grants of Yamassee lands.; Margravate of Azilia.

Incidentally they urged the re-settlement of theBahama Islands. The Board of Trade examined them onthese points, and obtained returns of exports of skins andfurs from Carolina and Virginia (207, 210, 211, 219–221,229, 230, 230 i., 259, 413 i.–v., cf. Journal, 28th June,1716). The Board then asked the Lords Proprietors for anaccount of the state of the Province and of what steps,if any, they had taken for its security (245). Theirreply was in the optimistic vein of Craven's speech, towhom they referred the Board. They added that theyhad spent several hundred pounds on some arms andammunition, which had been sent out (239 ii., 287, 597).But in August and November, 1716, the Assemblyreported that the war still continued, and that they werethreatened with a new eruption of Indian tribes, whichhad already committed outrages in the neighbourhood ofPort Royal. They complained that Virginian Indiantraders as well as the French and Spaniards weresupplying their enemies with munitions of war, and statedthat they had only 1,400 Englishmen capable of bearingarms to resist many thousands of Indians. They askedpermission to attack those enemy Indians who had takenrefuge at St. Augustine and were there protected by theSpaniards. A shipload of prisoners from Preston had,indeed, arrived to swell their man power, and theCherokees had compelled the Cuttabas and some othersmall nations near to them to make peace. But the costof the war and devastation and abandonment of plantations were bringing the Colony to the verge of ruin.Once more they besought the intervention of the Crown,disclaiming the imputation of the Lords Proprietors thatsuch a demand was made by a mere faction (128, 407,407 i., 413, 413 i.–v., 462, 517, 601). In January, 1717,the Lt.-Governor and Council again appealed to the LordsProprietors for succour, representing the situation ascritical (456), and a further petition from the inhabitantsto the King for men was referred in April. The Board ofTrade repeated their enquiries to the Lords Proprietors,who once more declared that the war was over and minimised the seriousness of the danger (544, 544 i., 569,597, 601). Lord Carteret's statement in this senseappears in the Journal (31st May). But throughoutthe Spring frontier raids were reported, and Charlestownwas said to be on the verge of starvation. The Creeks,however, were making overtures for peace. But as theywere mortal foes of the Cherokees, it was a nice problemhow far it would be possible to keep friendship with both,whilst "assisting them in cutting one another's throats"(462, 517, 541, 542, 601). But shortly afterwards it wasannounced that the Senecas or Mohawks were about tojoin the Creeks and, in conjunction with the FrenchIndians, to attack the Cherokees and Cuttabas, andthat the Creeks had deferred their negotiations for peace(601). About the same time the case for the resumptionof the Colony to the Crown as prepared by the agentswas offered for the consideration of Parliament (557).As soon as they heard that the Cherokees were about tomake peace, the Lords Proprietors, hoping that theYamassee Indians would soon be driven out anddispersed, withdrew the prohibition on the settlement oftheir lands between the Cambahee and Savannah riverswhich had hitherto been reserves for the exclusive use ofthe Indians, so that they might form a buffer between thewhite settlers and hostile Indians to the South underSpanish influence. They stated the terms on whichthese lands might be granted, and the Assembly presentlypassed an act to encourage the settlement of the Yamasseelands (72, 413 i.). Later on, the Lords Proprietorsgranted "all that tract of land between the riversAllatamaha and Savannah" to Sir Robert Montgomeryfor the establishment of a new province, independent ofSouth Carolina, to be known as the Margravate of Azilia(608, 609). In response to the representations of theAssembly, who objected to the Chief Justice being onthe Council and having in his gift the office of ProvostMarshall, Nicholas Trott was deprived of his powers(73).

Relations with Virginia.

Apart from their complaints against the VirginianIndian traders for supplying arms to the Indians (413,413 i.–iv., 462, etc.), the Carolinians displayed an intensejealousy of the Virginians. It was even suggested thattheir policy was to "have us in a continual war withour Southern Indians that they may have the wholetrade with the Northern" (413 ii.). This suggestionwas based on Lt.-Governor Spotswood's endeavour tomake peace with the Northern Indians. The aid renderedto Carolina by the Virginians was belittled, and the termson which their troops had been sent were representedas onerous (413, 413 i.–iii.). They began to negotiateover the fulfilment of their contract (97), whilst Spotswood appealed to the Board of Trade to compel "thatGovernment to keep their publick faith" (165, 545).This the Board urged the Lords Proprietors to insistupon (319, 619. See also § 1, Pirates).

North Carolina.; Lords Proprietors and sale of lands, etc.; Creation of a seaport at Bath.

The Governors of Virginia and North Carolina arrivedat an agreement for the settlement of the disputed boundary, which was approved by the Lords Proprietors andawaited the assent of the Crown (45, 45 i., 186, 452 i.).On receiving the recently revised acts of the Province,the Lords Proprietors expressed their strong resentmentat the interference of the Council and Assembly by anact relating to the sale of lands and payment of quitrents. They insisted that the purchase money for landsshould be paid in sterling or equivalent produce, insteadof in Province bills as that act provided, and that tenantsmust be held to payment of their quit-rents. Theyforbade any further sale of lands in North Carolina.All future sales were to be conducted at the Board inLondon. Assent was given to the creation of a seaportat Bath. By this development the North Carolinaplanters would acquire a much needed port from whichto ship their tobacco crops direct to England. It was avital necessity for the prosperity of North Carolina. Forwithout it, seeing that Virginia prohibited the importation of tobacco from that province, the North Carolinaplanters were entirely at the mercy of New Englandshippers (293, 294).

A diving machine.

The grant of a patent for a diving machine is mentioned (124).

Maryland.

From Maryland a petition to the Guardian of theLord Proprietor is recorded, praying for the repeal oftwo acts directed against the Roman Catholic inhabitants,one excluding them from election to the Magistracy orAssembly, and the other prohibiting the exercise of theirreligion (444, 445, and see § 1, Transported prisoners).

New England. Appointment of Governor Shute.

Joseph Dudley accepted his retirement from the government of New England with a graceful gesture, returningthanks for the appointment of his son-in-law, Mr.Dummer, as Lt.-Governor, and welcoming that of Governor Shute who took the place of the recently appointedElizeus Burges (126, 127, 391).

Command of Rhode Island Militia.; Instructions concerning Oaths.

In the new Governor's Instructions an alteration wasmade in the long standing clause which gave him, ingeneral terms, the power of commanding the Militia ofRhode Island. That colony had protested against beingdeprived of the command of their own Militia, whichwas vested in the Governor and Company by theirCharter. The Attorney-General upheld their right, andthe alteration now introduced restricted the power of theGovernor of New England to times of war or imminentdanger only (112, 131 i., 139, 149, 149 i., 157). Anotherchange in the Instructions was in the clause relating tothe taking and administering of oaths, so as to includethe oath mentioned in the recent Act for the furthersecurity of His Majesty's person (199, 200, 270).

Custom House Officers' fees.

On the occasion of an act of Massachusetts stating thefees of Custom House officers, Mr. Cumings drew attention to the discrepancy between them and those of NewYork, and suggested that a general scale of fees for allsuch officers in the several colonies should be fixed athome (297, 297 i.–iii.). This suggestion was approvedby the Commissioners of Customs (389, 393).

Lighthouse Act.; Shute's Report.; Lt.-Gov. Vaughan.; Dispute as to powers of Lt.-Governor.

Captain Coram entered a protest against the Act forbuilding a lighthouse on the coast, as laying a tax uponBritish shipping, and failing to provide for pilots (172,cf. Journal, June 15). Colonel Shute announced that hehad "found all things quiet" on his arrival, and thatthe Indians whom he met at Piscataqua in January,1717, were very well disposed (482). George Vaughan,however, his Lieutenant Governor in New Hampshire,was not so well satisfied. In the first place he was surprised and disgusted to find that the paper of suggestionswhich he had put before the Board whilst in England,and which he thought "very conducive to ye benefittof this country," had aroused much ill-feeling in thatColony (316, cf. C.S.P., 1714–15. No. 389 i.). Then,"after having governed this little Province a year withall the serenity imaginable," he reports that "civil andintestine broils" had commenced in New Hampshire.These, he said, so far as he was concerned, were due toGovernor Shute's reception of the recommendation bythe Council and Assembly of their Lt.-Governor for someoffice of profit. Shute apparently regarded this as anattempt on their part to dictate the choice of their Lt.Governor, and after asking whether they expected to betreated like Charter Governments, replied to theirrecommendation by docking Vaughan of customaryperquisites and powers. The tension between the Governor and Lt.-Governor was increased by the claim putforward by Vaughan that during the former's absence fromthe Province, the Lt.-Governor was empowered by Shute'sCommission to act with the full powers of a Governor.

Fast on occasion of drought in New England.

Shute, on the contrary, would not allow that the Lt.-Governor had any independent power by virtue ofthe King's Commission, so long as the Governor waspresent in any part of America. Accordingly he gaveorders that no public instrument should be issued in theLt.-Governor's name, as Vaughan found when he triedto alter the wording of a proclamation of a General Faston account of a drought in New England. Vaughanvery reasonably protested that he was thus left withoutpower to take any action in any emergency, howeverdesperate or urgent, "which is not Latin per mygrammar." He applied for leave to return home in orderto represent these and other grievances (658, 658 i.–iv.).

New York Association.

In New York whilst the majority of the inhabitantswelcomed, as we have seen, the accession of King George,and joined the Association formed by Governor Hunteron receipt of the news of the 'Fifteen (133, 133 ii., 192,192 iv., v., 626), bills of indictment found by the GrandJury indicate the activities of some of the minority(133, 133 iii., iv.).

The Assembly.; Act for resuming extravagant grants proposed.

After the storms of the preceding years, Hunter hadpiloted the State into smoother waters. When theAssembly met in June, 1716, he was able to announcethat he could look forward to "nothing but what isdutiful and fair in their sessions" (192). In the autumnhe assured the Board that the Province was gratefulfor the interest and care shown by them in dealing withthe Naturalisation Act of 1715, and that the NewAssembly, the best he had seen there, would pass anotheract not liable to the objections raised to the former one(96, 348). In writing to the Governor in March, 1716,the Board informed him that decisions upon his proposalsconcerning the erection of a new fort, presents to theIndians, and an increase of soldiers etc., had been delayedby the disorder arising from the Rebellion (86, 95, 96).In reply to his report upon the lack of lands for newsettlers, they suggested that another act for resumingpast extravagant grants of land might have the effectof releasing the desired territory (96). Hunter answeredthat such an act was not likely to be carried in theAssembly.

Hunter's Fort.

He forwarded a map of the country about the greatLakes, to explain his proposed erection of a fort "atthe great carrying place or Fort Nicholson." Thiswould prepare the way for building another "at theentry of the Lakes" (348).

Samuel Mulford.

Opposition to Hunter's policy in this and other matterswas voiced chiefly by Samuel Mulford, whom he representsas one who was always "agin the Government" (348,348 i.). Mulford had been prosecuted and bound overfor printing and publishing a libellous and seditiousspeech delivered by him in the Assembly. He set up asthe champion of Long Island and the country districts,which, he maintained, were under-represented in theAssembly. He had himself an axe to grind in the matterof the Crown rights in the whale fishery, as the Governorwas claiming a royalty on each whale killed. Mulfordwent to England in order to air this grievance (348), andon arrival presented his petitions (348, 605, 686, 686 i.–iii.).

Conference with the Five Nations.

In June, 1717, Hunter held a conference with the FiveNations at Albany, when he induced them to makeamends for having attacked one of the tribes of Indianswhich had been at war with Carolina, but had justconcluded peace (133, 565, 690, 690 i.) This was doneat the instance of Lt-Governor Spotswood, who alsoproposed that the Five Nations should send deputiesto Virginia to renew the covenants made in 1685. But,though Hunter pressed them to do so, the Five Nationsrefused to treat anywhere but at Albany. Hunter thenadvised Lt.-Governor Spotswood to send deputies toAlbany for that purpose (133, 565, 690, 690 i.–viii.;and Spotswood Papers II., 257).

Governor Hunter's Leave of Absence.;The Palatines.; Huter's claim laid before Parliament.; Charles Delafaye.;Ambrose Philips.

In response to an application on his behalf, Hunter wasgranted leave of absence to attend to his private affairsin England, but he did not at present feel justified inavailing himself of it (353, 353 i., 469, 690). He answeredan enquiry as to the reason for the failure of the treesprepared to produce pitch and tar, by attributing it tothe "unruly and unskilful multitude" of Palatines whohad disobeyed their instructions for tapping them. Afterhis disappointing experience with them, he was notinclined to advise a renewal of the project, at leastuntil they could be instructed by some person skilled inthe methods used in Norway and Sweden (96, 348). Hewas more concerned with recovering the large expense towhich he had been committed on their behalf. Papersrelating to them were laid before Parliament (110,117), and, though for the reason above stated Hunterwas not himself able to attend, his claim for payment wassubmitted to the House by his friends (383, 548). Onthe other hand, his enemies were hoping that it wouldprove his ruin (634 i.), and candidates were suggested assuccessors in his Government. The sister and brother-in-law of Charles Delafaye, the capable Secretary of theLords Justices, urged their "dear Bro." to obtain itfor himself, representing, no doubt with imaginationsfired by lively expectations of favours to come, thatHunter had made a fortune, and that the governmentwith its perquisites was worth many thousands a year.They paint the Governor's lot in colours so bright thatHunter would scarcely have recognised it, though hisown hopes for the future were high (405, 405 i., 469, 561,642). Hunter was a man of literary tastes and the friendof men of letters of the day. Ambrose Philips, "a goodWhig and middling poet" as Macaulay dubs him, whoseinsipid pastorals gave rise to the term "namby-pamby,"acted for him as Agent in the troublesome affairs of NewJersey (176 i., 523, 580, 634).

Agents for the Province and for private acts required.

The Council of Trade insisted upon the necessity ofappointing Agents not only to solicit the affairs of bothProvinces, but also to watch the progress and pay thefees of private acts and Councillors' warrants (103,121).

New York Juries and Pirates.

The attitude of New York juries towards pirates ismentioned in § 1.

Trading Ships.

A list of ships trading to New York from the year1705 to 1716 is indicated (470).

New Jersey. Agitation for separation from New York.; Union with Pennsylvania mooted. Quakers and Cox's party.; Confirmation of Act qualifying Quakers requested.; The Assembly at Perth Amboy.; Coxe expelled.; Flight of Coxe and his friends.; The Assembly meets at Chesterfield.; The Burlington Plot.

An agitation had been begun for separating the government of New York from that of New Jersey. This wasthe work of Daniel Coxe, and followed on the passing ofan act in Lt.-Governor Ingoldsby's time for better qualifying Representatives, which aimed at excluding residentsin New York from exercising the share in the government of New Jersey to which their estates entitled them.Hunter, who writes in no measured terms of the violentpartisanship of Coxe, asked for the repeal of this act, aswell as that for explaining an act for the support of H.M.Government, also passed by Ingoldsby. The demand fora separate government he dismissed as merely a devicefor causing trouble (135, 565, 634 i.). But it is significantthat the idea of uniting the Jerseys with Pennsylvania,if that province were resumed to the Crown, was mootedby the Quaker party (138 i.). The Quakers, who spokehighly of Hunter's efforts for moderation and goodgovernment, were firm supporters of his government(135, 138, 138 i., ii.), whilst Coxe and his party wereclosely identified with the traditions of Lord Cornburyand the efforts of the Jacobite and High Church party,especially in the Western Division (135, 138, 138 i., ii.,585, 624). There Coxe, after being dismissed from theCouncil, had got himself elected to the Assembly, inwhich he was chosen Speaker. He started an agitationfor the non-payment of taxes and the exclusion of theQuakers from serving on juries in criminal cases. Therefusal to pay taxes was based on the view that the actsof the last Assembly, which continued for over threeyears, were void by reason of the Triennial act. Theexclusion of Quakers was based on the Act of 1st George I.,which was said to repeal the New Jersey Act allowingthem to qualify by affirmation. Coxe, Basse, and theirfriends proceeded to indict the Chief Justice, DavidJamison, and Lewis Morris, the President of the Council,and Thomas Gordon, the Attorney-General, for directingthe qualification of Quakers for a Grand Jury, on theirinterpretation of that act. In order to spike theirguns, Hunter begged for the speedy confirmation of thenew Act for the solemn affirmation of Quakers (135,135 i., ii., 195 i.). In the new Assembly a majorityadverse to Hunter had been returned, by means, as hesays, "of false suggestions, fraudulent conveyances andthe rum bottle." He promptly dissolved it, and a secondelection proved rather more favourable to the Government, the Quakers carrying the County of Burlingtonagainst Coxe. They met at Perth Amboy. The rightof the Governor to summon them to meet there was atonce challenged. Coxe having tried in vain to dissuadethe members of the Western Division from coming toAmboy, succeeded in carrying an Address for the removalof the Assembly to Burlington. The Act passed underIngoldsby and confirmed by the Crown had fixed allsessions at Burlington. But by Hunter's Instructionsthe holding of alternate sessions there and at PerthAmboy had been restored, following the arrangementmade at the surrender of the Government by the Proprietors. Hunter, who knew that Burlington was a hot-bedof the Opposition, declared that he should abide by hisInstructions, and that the appointing the time andplace of sessions of Assemblies was an undisputed prerogative of the Crown (135). This attempt by Coxe'sparty to make Burlington the sole meeting place of theAssembly indicates not only a survival of the divisionbetween East and West Jersey, but also that it was thecentre of the extreme Anglican party. Under the leadership of Coxe and the Rev. John Talbot, they hoped tosee that place the seat of a Colonial Bishop (176). Findinghimself unable to carry his points, Coxe and some ofhis friends absented themselves from the Assembly.The House, being reduced to twelve members, requestedthe Governor to order them to attend. Some obeyed,and a quorum was formed, a new Speaker elected, andthe Serjeant-at-arms was instructed to compel theattendance of the absent members. When it was foundthat they had fled to Pennsylvania, they were expelledfrom the House, and writs issued for new elections tofill their places. The Assembly thus constituted addressed the Governor, praising his continued justice andmoderation, and promising to vote a handsome supportfor the Government. Hunter was now able to look forward to a period when the Province would be "as easyand happy as" New York. The power of Coxe andTalbot, and "the skulking disaffected few" who hadsought refuge at Bristol, was rapidly dwindling, thoughthey talked of appealing to the House of Commons(176, 176 i., 192, 192 i., iii., 195). Their flight from NewJersey, Hunter explained, was to avoid arrest, which hadbeen ordered "on information that he and his emissarieswere carrying papers privately round the Provinces forsubscriptions." Coxe and his friend Mr. Bustall thensailed for England to make their complaint there. Huntersuggested that before they were listened to, both Coxe andMr. Sonmans, who had also escaped from justice, shouldfirst be sent back to be tried in New Jersey (349, 690).The lines of Coxe's intrigues, and the hopes on whichthey were founded, are indicated by two letters of his andMr. Bustall's which were intercepted by Hunter (392 i.,634 i.). In the absence of this "Boute-feu," Hunterlooked forward to a good session when the Assembly met.Indeed, the defeat of the Cornbury party was complete.The places of the absent members were filled by newelections, and formed a house in favour of Hunter andthe Proprietary party. It was now the turn of Burlington for the meeting of the Assembly. But small-poxwas raging there, and Hunter shrank from calling anothersession at Amboy. He therefore summoned them tomeet at Chesterfield. It was fortunate that he did so.For Mr. Talbot revealed the existence of what Hunterdescribes as "a most hellish contrivance," a plot tocreate a riot against the Quakers there, and to burn downtheir meeting house and dwelling houses. Talbot thenmade his submission to the Governor, and representedthat he had done good service to the Government bypreventing the outbreak (469, 523, 580 i., ii., 585 v.,vii., 675 xii.–xiv.).

Quiet restored.; Acts passed.; Coxe's charges against Hunter. Reply to the petition.

Having eliminated Coxe and his supporters, Hunterwas at length able to report (January, 1717), that NewJersey, which "a year ago was the most tumultuous"was now "the most quiet and satisfied of His Majesty'sProvinces" (469). The New Assembly made good itspromises, and Hunter returning to New York in February,could look back upon "a very happy sessions." Actswere passed for repealing the act for ascertaining theplace of the Assembly (at Burlington), and to enforcethe payment of taxes (349, 469, 523, 585 iii.). £2,000 werevoted for the support of the Government and the paymentof the outstanding bills for the Canada Expedition (585,585 vi.). But a few weeks later Hunter received thepetition of the "several traders and inhabitants andProprietors of New Jersey," in which Coxe embodiedhis complaints against the Governor. He immediatelysailed for New Jersey to communicate these charges tothe Council. The Council dismissed them as for the mostpart false in fact, whilst those which had any colour oftruth arose out of actions justified by the need for preserving the public peace (585, 588 i.). Hunter himselfreplied in detail, and, claiming that he had shown theseaccusations to be "false and infamous," asked for apublic declaration of the opinion of the Council of Tradeupon the whole matter. The petition, he averred, wassigned only by insignificant persons, many of whom, astheir depositions showed, were tricked into signing it.Not content with this reply, he carried the war into theenemy's camp. Whilst expressing his dislike of "exculpation by recrimination" he plainly stated that if theProvince was not in arms and rebellion, it was not thefault of Coxe and his friends, who during the last year ofQueen Anne had "rung the peal of the Church in dangerlouder than ever it had been rung in England." Heoffered evidence of Coxe's close connection with theJacobite rebellion, and of the mischievous dealings ofsome of his party with the Indians, which the Government had succeeded in counteracting (469, 469 iii.–vi.,588 i., 674, 675 i.–lxiii., 690).

Nova Scotia. Governor Vetch's Report.; French inhabitants.; Hardships of the Garrison.; Report of Comptrollers of Accounts.; Need of port and naval protection.

At the request of the Board of Trade, Governor Vetchpresented another report upon the fortification, fishery,and fur trade of Nova Scotia (51). In spite of the pressureput upon them to move to Cape Breton, the Frenchinhabitants were anxious to remain on their plantations,though their loyalty might be doubtful (51, 154, 615).Incidentally, Vetch drew attention once more to thehardships endured by the garrison, who were left withoutpay, clothing, or provisions, whilst the temptation todesert was heightened by the good wages obtainable inthe neighbouring Colonies (43, 51, 62, 63). Lettersfrom Lt.-Governor Caulfield emphasised their wretchedcondition (154, 154 i.). In reply to enquiries by theBoard of Trade the Secretary at War stated in March,1716, that no orders had been issued since last Augustfor providing their subsistence, owing to the want ofregular muster-rolls. Steps, however, were being takento deal with the situation (35, 57, 60, 64, 75, 75 i.). Thedispatch of provisions was ordered and accounts demanded from the Lt.-Governor (185). Shortly afterwardsthe Comptrollers of the accounts of the Army presented areport upon the whole question (615). They proposedamongst other things, that the Commodore of the Newfoundland Convoy should visit Annapolis Royal and becommissioned to examine the state of the garrison andtheir accounts and complaints. To prevent desertionto New England ships, it was suggested that the Governorof New England should issue a proclamation restrainingthe inhabitants from harbouring deserters. Turning tothe question of the settlement of Nova Scotia, the Commissioners, acknowledging the assistance of the Board ofTrade, recommended the development of the fishery andthat care should be taken "to make and keep it absolutelydependent upon Great Britain, and not to suffer it to beannexed to New England," as had been proposed (C.S.P.,1714–15, No. 416 i.). The reason advanced is notable,"For by the manufactures and other improvementslately made at New England, they not only consumemuch less of the products of Great Britain than theydid formerly, but have taken away great part of theprofits of the fishing trade from us, and become daylyless dependent upon Great Britain, to which a watchfuleye should always be had not only in regard to NewEngland but all the other Plantations." They pointedout that the Fishery needed for its protection a good portand naval force. They therefore proposed that instead ofthe large and expensive garrison at Annapolis Royal,which was too far up the river to afford protection tothe Fishery, a small fort should be erected at Placentiaand smaller ones built and garrisoned at the entranceto the British river and at Chebucto. They proposedthat an Engineer should be sent to choose sites for suchforts, and that a survey of the timber suitable for masts,ships' timber, and naval stores should be made by theAdmiralty. Till these steps were completed, they were ofopinion that the present garrison must be maintained, inorder to secure the country against recapture by theFrench. A sufficient encouragement for a residentGovernor of Nova Scotia was desirable, in order that hemight win over the French and Indian inhabitants to beloyal subjects of the Crown, and thus direct their fur tradeinto British channels and lead to the firm settlement ofthe country without the expense of sending British settlersthither. Lastly, they recommended that all such distantgarrisons should be relieved every two or three years(615).

John Doucet succeeds Lt.-Gov. Caulfield. Pennsylvania.

Lt.-Governor Caulfield having died in March, 1717,John Doucet was appointed to succeed him (496, 586).

William Keith succeeds Lt.-Gov. Gookin.

In Pennsylvania Lt.-Governor Gookin had come tologgerheads with the Quakers and Assembly over mattersnot indicated here. (fn. 2) Governor Hunter reported thathe was going home as Daniel Coxe's "Ambassador"(176 i.). William Keith was appointed by the Pennfamily to succeed him, and the approbation of the Crownwas solicited. This was granted upon condition thatgood security should be given for his observance of theActs of Trade and Navigation, and that William Pennshould renew his declaration that such approbation shouldnot be construed as diminishing the claim of the Crownto the Three Lower Counties (337, 337 i., 338, 356, 360,381, 428, 430). Keith had formerly succeeded RobertQuary as Surveyor-General of Customs in America, buthad been superceded after the death of Queen Anne.He had been recommended by Logan and other membersof the Council of Pennsylvania and "a considerablebody of the people called Quakers," to the trustees ofWilliam Penn (344). His appointment was ferventlywelcomed (630 i.).

The Three Lower Counties. Petition of the Earl of Sutherland.; Protest by Bristol Naval Stores Company, etc.; Iron mines and bounty.

Whilst the declaration of William Penn concerning theThree Lower Counties was thus being renewed, a petitionwas presented to the King by the Earl of Sutherland fora grant of those lands on Delaware Bay in lieu of a largesum of money said to be due to him since the Revolution.He declared himself ready to prove the right of the Crownto these Three Lower Counties, and, in referring his petition to the consideration of the Council of Trade, Stanhopementioned that the King was favourably inclined to hisLordship's request (434, 434 i.). The Law Officers ofthe Crown were consulted (434 ii., 514). As soon as itwas known that this petition had been lodged, theRepresentatives of the Three Lower Counties protestedstrongly in an address to the Lt.-Governor against beingseparated from Penn's proprietary jurisdiction, withwhose interests their own were identified (620, 620 i.,621). A similar protest came, through Joshua Gee,from the Naval Stores Company of Bristol, which hadrecently purchased of Penn 3,120 acres in the county ofKent for the purpose of raising hemp. Encouraged bythe bounties offered by recent acts, this Quaker Companyhad already expended a considerable sum on that project.Gee explained that whilst the inhabitants were contentedwith the present administration, they would be wellsatisfied also if the surrender of the Government to theCrown were completed, "knowing the tender regardH.M. has for all his subjects immediately under the Crown,of which Barbados and the other islands are testimonies."But if a new Proprietor were introduced, it would"frighten away great part of the present inhabitants,who came there purely to enjoy liberty of conscienceunder a Governor of their own persuasion." He mentioned the great quantities of iron mines there, and thehope of encouragement from the Government for theerection of iron works (505, 552, 552 i.).

Virginia. Passage across the Blue Ridge discovered.; Spotswood and the Indian Company Act.; Education of Indian children.; Spotswood on intercourse with Indians.

In May, 1716, Lt.-Governor Spotswood announced thata passage had been discovered through the mountains,"which have always been looked upon as unpassable"(146). It is this exploration of the Blue Ridge whichmarks Spotswood as the pioneer in the Westward movement. It was a necessary step in the development ofhis policy of defence, and of pushing a trade with theIndians beyond, as a countermove to the French advancefrom the North-west. This policy was bound up withthe Virginian Indian Company which he had sponsored.At the beginning of this period he was able to reportthat the most considerable nation of the Tributary Indianswas settling on the frontier about the fort he had builtat Christanna, which was to be maintained by theIndian Company, and where all the Indian trade of theColony was to be concentrated and carried on by it.The Indians were being encouraged to permit theirchildren to be educated in the Christian religion, for whichpurpose Spotswood had provided a schoolmaster at hisown expense, who had already had one hundred Indianchildren under his tuition (45). In reply, the Council ofTrade commended his care for the education of the Indianchildren, but expressed their dissent from his policy ofkeeping the Friend Indians away from the Britishsettlements. For they knew "by experience that theFrench living amongst the Indians and intermarryingwith them has been one great reason of the Canadianand Eastern Indians adhering so steadily to the interestof the French." They commended him for the aid hehad rendered to South Carolina, but reprimanded himfor the tone of his Speech to the Assembly, as beingcalculated to cause exasperation, even supposing itwere merited (186). Spotswood's reply is enlightening.He painted in dark colours the treatment meted out tothe Indians by the settlers on the frontier (cf. § 1), andinsisted on the advantage of regulating intercoursebetween them. This advantage had already been demonstrated. For, apart from establishing control overthe supply of arms and ammunition to the Indians,it had caused a cessation of Indian outrages on thefrontier settlements. As to intermarriage, he knewof no instance of it, and drew the correct inference thatthe racial instinct of the British was against it (146,522).

Objections to act for better regulating the Indian trade.; Hearing at the Board.; Indian Trade act. Repeal.; Additional Instruction for suspensory clause in acts affecting British trade and shipping.

Objections to this act for the better regulating the IndianTrade. were, of course, entered by the traders in Englandand Virginia whose hands were tied by it (143, 179,179 ii., 242, 258, 413, 533). Spirited replies to them weremade by Spotswood and the Council (146, 146 i., 166, 206,241, 522, 530, 530 i., 540). The arguments of bothsides were fully discussed before the Commissionersof Trade in July, 1716, who decided to leave the actprobationary whilst awaiting a further reply fromSpotswood (v. Journal, 10th July). But in forwarding tohim the papers on the subject, the Board censured theLt.-Governor for not having followed his instructionsand having passed an act of this kind without a suspensoryclause until H.M. pleasure should be known (318).After further representations from the merchants, theAct was referred to the Law Officers in the followingSpring. The Solicitor-General reported that it wascontrary to law in several particulars, and that thechief part of it, which excluded persons not of the Company from trading, was contrary to several Acts of Parliament which preserved the right of British subjects totrade to the Plantations. The Act was accordinglyrepealed. But in recommending this course, the Boardof Trade admitted the necessity of regulating the Indiantrade. They therefore proposed that the Governor shouldbe instructed to submit the question to the Assembly,and also to recommend that the Indian Company shouldbe reimbursed for such expenses as they should appearto have been at for the public benefit (559, 610, 625,687, cf. Journal, 10th May, 1717, etc.). They alsoproposed, on the occasion of reporting upon this act andthat for preventing frauds in tobacco payments, that inview of several acts having been passed by Governors"that have either restrained the trade or laid burthensupon the shipping of British subjects, which do immediately take place and are in force before your Majesty'spleasure is known," that an additional Instructionshould be prepared for all Governors "that they do notpass any Act which may any ways affect the trade orshipping of this Kingdom, without a clause declaringthat the said acts shall not be in force until they beapproved and confirmed by your Majesty" (625).This Instruction was approved by the King in Council,July 31, 1717 (687).

Act for preventing frauds in tobacco payments.

Very careful consideration was given to the Act forpreventing frauds in tobacco payments. Opposition to itwas strong. It was objected that the quality of tobaccoexported had not been improved by it, as had beenpromised, and that it gave excessive powers to theGovernor (179 i., 533, 660 i., and Journal, May 8 and 15).The Solicitor-General reported adversely upon it. Forit introduced innovations of so striking a character that,according to the Governor's Instructions, it ought notto have been passed by him without first consulting theHome Government, or without a suspensory clause.The Council of Trade concurred, and the act was repealed(559, 603, 606, 610, 625, 687).

Acts transscribed for printing.; Act concerning foreign debts.

The body of Laws, which had been transcribed, wasnow sent home to be printed (165, 452 i., 559, 603, 606).Attention was then called to an act passed in 1663 concerning foreign debts. It was represented that its purportwas to bar creditors in Great Britain from recoveringdebts due to them from emigrants, unless they hadbrought to the Colony property equivalent to the valueof such debts. The act was described as notoriouslyunjust, unfair to Great Britain and infamous to Virginia,and it was stated that it had recently been pleaded"in bar of very just actions" (140–142, 534).

Accounts of quit-rents and revenue.; The Opposition.

Spotswood pursued his policy of reform in the collection of quit-rents and the keeping of accounts so as tocontrol returns. He found that in the Offices of theDeputy Auditor and Receiver General no detailed accounts of receipts were kept, and therefore it was impossible for the Council and Assembly to audit therevenue. There was no satisfactory account of escheats,fines, forfeitures or sales of Crown lands. Spotswoodtherefore gladly took advantage of orders from the Councilof Trade for a statement of the revenue and the layingof accounts before the Assembly, and called for a reportfrom the Deputy Auditor and Receiver-General. Theseinnovations increased the hostility of Philip Ludwell,the Deputy Auditor, who was one of the leaders of thepolitical opposition. This party, "which set up aspatriots"—an interesting anticipation of a future nomenclature—and whose stock in trade was opposition to theLt.-Governor, accused him of stretching the prerogativeof the Crown in the matter of the new act for enforcingpayment of quit-rents. "They envy His Majesty theprofits of his own revenues" Spotswood declares, "andlook upon all persons not born in the country as foreigners,and seem to allow no jurisdiction but what is establishedby laws of their own making." There were, addedSpotswood, "few persons of figure" in this party.But it is an interesting indication of the growth of asignificant political sentiment among the native born(171).

Suspension of Philip Ludwell.

Spotswood suspended Ludwell from his office of DeputyAuditor for fraud and mismanagement of the Revenue,and would have liked to suspend him from the Counciltoo, for his malignant opposition. But the new Instruction, by which a majority of the Council was required forthe suspension of a Councillor, rendered such a stepimpossible. For as there were no fewer than sevenof Ludwell's relatives in the Council, it was hopeless toexpect to get a majority to consent to his suspension orthat of any of his kindred. Spotswood protestedagainst this transference of power to the Council (171,171 i.–iv., vi.–xi., 240, 545, 550, 590, 590 i., ii., 646, 662).

Council's claim to be sole judges.

This preponderance of Councillors who were membersof one influential family of planters figured in Spotswood'sdispute with the Council over their claim to be solejudges in cases of Oyer and Terminer. He explainedthat when there were so many members of the Councilwho were related, it was essential that he should havethe power of nominating judges from outside the Council.Otherwise, when a case arose in which a member of thefamily was concerned and Councillors related had, inaccordance with the law, to retire from the Bench, itwould be impossible to hold a Court. The Council ofTrade agreed with him and referred the point to theAttorney-General. The Assembly, however, associatedthemselves with the contention of the Councillors, whor*presented Spotswood's appointment of special Commissioners to sit with them as an endeavour to reducethe judicial powers of the Council, and appointed WilliamByrd as Agent to present their case. Spotswood maintained that his action was strictly in accordance withthe act of 1710, and also with the Instruction whichempowered Governors to establish Courts (186, 240,522, 522 i., 550).

Councillors acting in different capacities.

The Council of Trade did not appreciate Spotswood'sobjection to the claim put forward by Councillors thatthey were entitled to take different views when actingin their legislative and advisory capacities. But theyasked for further explanation (186, 522).

Complaints against Spotswood. His replies.

A report upon Spotswood's enterprises, written fromCarolina in a grudging and parochial spirit, admits thathe is "a very politick and ingenious gentleman" (243).But his reforms and forward policy, combined with hisoutspoken and contemptuous criticism of the Assemblynaturally created enemies (522, 550). Grievances weresubmitted by anonymous complainants (36 i., 136).His reply was trenchant and sufficient, and was accompanied by complimentary addresses from the GrandJury (452, 452 i., ix.).

Punishment of negroes.

One of the grounds of opposition to Spotswood washis attitude towards the brutal punishment of slaves.He had countenanced "the prosecution of a womanfor whipping her slave to death," although it was urgedin her defence, that as the law stood, she was not liable.Spotswood answered that however unpopular the doctrinemight be, he would stand by his charge to the Grand Jurythat slaves were subjects of the King and their ownersmust be called to account if they killed them. He furtherquoted his 116th Instruction, directing him to endeavourto get a law passed enacting that the wilful killing ofIndians and negroes should be punished with death(452, 452 i., iv.–vi.). The humane attitude of theGovernor in this matter was in harmony with his policyof educating the Indians at Christanna and instructingthem in Christianity and lends weight to his observationas to the cause of Indian outrages and hostilities quotedabove (Nos. 146, 522 and p. xx. supra).

Pirates.

The increase and depredations of pirates off the Capesled Spotswood to ask for an additional guardship fromthe Admiralty (240, 527), and also to despatch a sloopto the Bahamas, whose fortunes have been referred to(§1).

Carolina.

The questions of the boundary with N. Carolina andthe payment of aid by S. Carolina are mentioned above(p. xxiii.).

A smaller Seal required.

One suggestion made by Spotswood was that the newseal should be smaller, and so more suited to the needsof the country, for "many things pass under the presentseal, scarcely smaller than the Great Seal of England,for a fee of 20s., which hardly pays for the wax" (165).

§ 3 THE WEST INDIES.

Pirates in the Bahamas.

We have seen that the Bahamas, left derelict by theLords Proprietors, had become a regular nest andrendezvous of pirates (v. § 1), and that they had drivenout the acting Governor, Captain Thomas Walker, fromProvidence, which they had begun to fortify (230, 240,240 i.–iii., 328, 328 i.–iii., 595, 635, 677, etc.).

Resumption of Charter urged.

At the beginning of 1716, the Committee of the PrivyCouncil reported their concurrence with the recommendation of the Council of Trade that the Charter of the LordsProprietors should be resumed to the Crown. They alsoproposed that Roger Mostyn, whose appointment asGovernor was approved by the Crown, should receive acommission and instructions from the King, and beordered to proceed at once to this Government (7, 58,87). An Order of Council was issued to this effect.The Council of Trade at once pointed out that this decisiondid not cover the ground of their Representation whichhad been referred to that Committee. They had proposed a scheme for settling and fortifying Providence,and they insisted that unless provision were made forfortifying and garrisoning it, no settlement could bemade, and that it was useless to hurry a Governor thither.Nor was it easy to see how a Commission and Instructionscould be prepared for the Governor of a place whereinwere only a dozen scattered families. They evidentlyperceived that this appointment of a Governor was merelya device of the Lords Proprietors to maintain their rightsin the Charter. They asked for a decision (108), andmaintained the same note when required to report thebest method of dislodging the pirates (408, 408 i.–iii.,587); and took every opportunity of reiterating thederelict state of the Islands, the importance of theirsituation, and the danger of allowing them to fall into thehands of foreigners or pirates (331, 418, 453, 596, 671 i.).

Lord Carteret on surrender of government.; Captain Woodes Rogers' proposals.; A favourable report.

At length in May, 1717, Lord Carteret, at an interviewwith the Council of Trade, expressed himself as willingto surrender the government of the Bahamas as theProprietors of New Jersey had done, whilst retainingtheir rights to the quit-rents and the soil. He mentionedthat several proposals had been submitted to the LordsProprietors for re-settling the islands, but none hadhitherto been deemed practicable (v. Journal, 31st May,1717). Shortly afterwards the proposals of CaptainWoodes Rogers were referred by the Secretary of Statefor the consideration of the Board, together with severalpetitions from merchants of Bristol and other tradersurging the necessity of securing the islands. WoodesRogers, that stout sea captain, petitioned the King fora commission as Governor, and the command of acompany to be sent as garrison. He explained that theLords Proprietors were awaiting the interposition of theCrown before concluding the arrangement which he and"some gentlemen concerned with me" had submittedto them. The proposal of his company was to financean expedition with the object of dislodging the piratesand re-settling the Bahamas, in return for the rightsin the soil, or of a lease for their lands and royalties fortwenty-one years (657, 657 i.–vii.). The Council ofTrade reported favourably upon this proposal and uponthe qualifications of Capt. Woodes Rogers. His scheme,they held, would be "not only of great advantage to thepublic, but also to the Lords Proprietors" (671, 671 i.).

Barbados and Sta.Lucia.; The Colleton case.

The history of Barbados was uneventful, save forpirates (473, 661 and § 1), and the report of an intendedsettlement by the French on Sta. Lucia, which wasincluded in that government (568, 637). The longstanding case of the Colletons, a private matter exceptthat it involved the question of a councillor sitting inhis own case, was argued before the Board, and at lastbrought to a settlement, when the objection to JohnColleton's appointment to the Council was withdrawn(131 i., 147, 151, 152, 233, 234, 238, 255, 539, and Journal16th June, 1716).

Ecclesiastical jurisdiction.; Character of the Commissary.

One subject of controversy, however, had arisen overthe attempt by the Commissary to erect an EcclesiasticalCourt. The Governor, Robert Lowther, refused torecognise the Bishop of London's commission to hisCommissary, Mr. Gordon, on the grounds that it was"very extensive," until he knew what powers had beengranted to the Bishop. Strong objection was takenby him and the Assembly to the Ecclesiastical Courtwhich Gordon was attempting to erect. The Royalistparty had always been strong in Barbados. Lowtheraccused Gordon of being not only a factious incendiary,openly spreading the Jacobite cause, but also of beingof low moral character and neglecting his duties as aparish priest for trading enterprises in the Leeward Islandsand Martinique, where he was known as the "wanderingapostle" and "le marchand spirituel." Two otherclergymen, whom the Bishop of London had recommendedfor benefices, Lowther describes also as "monstrousTories" and "only fit to officiate in the Pretender'sChapel" (573, 573 i., ii.).

Rebel prisoner.

In marked contrast to Cromwellian days, only oneprisoner from Preston was "Barbadosed" (310 vi.),though the recent act to oblige planters to keep a certainproportion of white servants showed that the need ofincreasing the white population was recognised. Possiblyit may have been thought impolitic to add to the numbersof the Royalists, concerning whom the Board of Tradewarned the Governor that his vigilance could not be toogreat (572).

Census and returns.

A census of the inhabitants in 1715, and lists ofchristenings, burials, and causes tried or depending areindicated (276, 661 i.–xiv.).

The 4½ percent. duty.

An account of the 4½ p.c. duty, and a report concerningit, were given in connection with a demand for stores ofwar from the Leeward Islands (341 i., 424), whilst itseffect upon competition with foreign sugar was referredto by Mr. Cumings as a reason for taxing the latter whenimported to the American continent (297).

Bermuda. Charge against Lt.-Governor.

An unfounded charge of screening an act of piracy wasbrought against the Lt.-Governor and Council of Bermuda,and being found to be engineered by Bennett's enemies,was withdrawn (247 i., 280, 306, 672). Bennett alsoprotested against the charge that Bermuda men wereconcerned with the Jamaican privateers in the matterof the Spanish galleons (300, 677). The fortificationswere reported to have been damaged by a hurricane(300).

Act for breaking an entail.

The careful report of the Solicitor-General upon aprivate act for permitting the sale of some lands to paythe debts of a tenant in tail is typical of the carewith which such acts were considered. As there wasno procedure by fines and recoveries in the Plantations,and such permission was not repugnant to the laws ofGreat Britain, it was thought reasonable to leave thedecision to the direction of the Assembly, which wasbest able to examine the facts and rights of such a case(49, 104, 566, 574, 581, 684. See also § 1, Pirates).

Jamaica.; The Assembly continues its campaign against Governor, Council and Regiment. Address not transmitted through Governor.; Report by Council of Trade.

This was an eventful period in the history of Jamaica.A great deal of time was spent by the Council of Tradeand Plantations on the consideration of its affairs.Whilst thanking the new Board for the passing of thetwo acts which had been intended to inaugurate a periodof conciliation (39), the Assembly gave no sign ofwavering in their campaign against the Governor andCouncil and the retention of the two companies of solidiers(v. C.S.P. 1715, pp. xxxvii.–xli.). When their Addresswas brought to Mr. Secretary Stanhope by Sir GilbertHeathcote, Francis March, and Richard Harris, the question of their right to present an Address to the Kingthrough their Agents, without awaiting the co-operationof the Governor and Council, and without requestingthe Governor to transmit it, was referred to the Councilof Trade. In their report the Board quoted the precedentof 1702 and 1705, when the Commissioners for Tradehad held that such procedure was only permissible whenthe Address contained complaints against Governors,or when they refused to transmit or represent what wasdesired (48, cf. Journal, 8th February, 1716). In thiscase no such complaint had yet been made, and theGovernor appeared to have followed his Instructionsvery strictly. The Board were therefore of opinion thatsuch a method of presenting Addresses ought to bediscountenanced. They took the opportunity of observing that not only the Assembly of Jamaica, butalso those of other Colonies were "pretending to assumenew privileges and powers, which if not prevented, maylead to the weakening of H.M. prerogative in those parts."They explained the position with regard to the inadequateprovision made for the two Companies, and the refusalof the Assembly to pay off the debt to the Governorand Council for the money advanced by them for thesubsistence of the soldiers. They recommended thatthe Governor should be instructed, as he had proposed,to discharge this debt out of H.M. revenue. A warrantto this effect was issued. It also empowered the Governorto supplement the allowance for the soldiers from thesame source (27 i., 48, 116). As to the two IndependentCompanies, the Board insisted on the absolute necessityof retaining them as a protection against rebelliousnegroes or foreign enemies, at least until there weresufficient white settlers to render the island safe. TheGovernor had complained of an abuse practised in theelections by Assemblymen, who, by splitting up holdingsof land, had multiplied the votes of their supporters.Into this abuse they intended to enquire (27 i., 48).Two months later they reminded the Secretary of Stateof the urgency of these matters (122), and informed theGovernor of the views expressed above (123). At thesame time they forwarded, for further information, aprotest from the South Sea Company against a duty of40s. per head said to have been recently imposed onnegroes exported from the island, a duty which wouldbe prohibitive in the case of slaves landed for refreshmenten route from Africa to the Spanish settlements (50, 67,67 i., 85, 123).

Memorial and Address in defence of Assembly.

They also forwarded for Lord Archibald's reply amemorial in defence of the proceedings of the Assemblywhich had been presented to them by Jamaica merchants,assuring him that such complaints would be given nocredit until he had been allowed an opportunity of answering (50, 123). The case of the Assembly was furtherset out in their Address to the King, in which the Governor was accused of Jacobitism, of replacing those who inthe Council and civil and military posts were loyal tothe present government, and of opening a trade with theFrench (which he had definite instructions from Ministersto do). Further, the right of the Assembly to adjournitself was claimed, and it was very disingenuously assertedthat they had used their best endeavours to complywith the Royal recommendation to grant a sufficientrevenue, and to provide the necessary subsistence forthe two Companies, but had been prevented by frequentdissolutions (50, 78, 158 viii., xi., 357 c.). The grievancesof the Assembly against Lord Archibald Hamilton, manyof them transparently malicious, were summarised underten heads, and concluded with an appeal to the Crown tointerpose (158 xii.). About the same time Mr. PeterHeywood, who had been dismissed from the Council andfrom his office of Chief Justice with the unanimousconsent of the rest of the councillors, was writing tothe Secretary of State and calling attention to his ownmerits (78, 158 xiii.–xv.).

Proceedings of the Assembly.; Assembly dissolved.; Subscriptions for an Agent.

Meanwhile, the attempt to conciliate the Assemblyhad proved futile (27 i., 78). The contest over theright of the Council to amend money bills, and overthe method of granting money and issuing it, wasresumed. As the Assembly rejected the Council'samendment to most bills for these reasons, only threewere passed. One of these was described by the Governoras little better than a Schism Act. At last, when allbusiness had practically been brought to a standstill,a message from the House throwing aspersions on theGovernor's loyalty, roused him to throw it back at themembers who brought it and to dissolve the Assembly(78, 203 iii., iv.). Among the bills rejected by theCouncil was one for raising money for an agent of theAssembly in England. On its rejection, steps weretaken in the Assembly for raising subscriptions for thatpurpose in the country. Funds were presently forwardedto Sir Gilbert Heathcote and Mr. March in London(78, 203, 357 c.).

Fund used for support of the Government.

The revenue was now exhausted, the country washeavily in debt, and the soldiers unprovided for. LordArchibald had no hope that a new Assembly would provemore amenable than the last. He therefore decided tocarry on by taking a sum of £8,000, the surplus of theAdditional Duty Act of 1712, out of the hands of a Commissioner appointed by the Assembly, and transferringit to the Receiver-General. This sum, with the unanimousconsent of the Council, was to be applied to the mostpressing requirements of the Government (78).

The Council's Memorial.

In memorials to the Council of Trade, the Councilgave their version of the controversy with the Assembly,as well as their own policy for providing a revenueand increasing the population of the island. Theywished to enforce the already existing acts for encouragingthe importation of white settlers, and believed that theAdditional Duty Bill, as they had amended it, wouldhave provided a sufficient revenue as well as a fund forbringing over and settling emigrants. They asked thatprisoners from Preston should be sent to Jamaica, anddescribed their policy as aiming at the encouragementof new settlers and small settlements, and the throwingof the burden of taxation chiefly upon those best able tobear it. The Governor expressed his agreement withtheir proposals, but confessed that he had little hope thatthe new Assembly would consent to them (203, 203 i., ii.).Unless they did so, he confessed himself practically atan end of his resources. He would not recommend the"making of laws for them in Britain," as that wouldbe resented by all parties, but suggested that the Governorand Council might be empowered to pass an AdditionalDuty Act embodying the views of the Council, if theAssembly refused to join in it. He also proposed anincrease in the number of Councillors, from twelve tofifteen. He concluded by affirming that the encroachments of the Assembly upon the authority of the Crownand the necessity of measures for providing a revenue andpeopling the island called for the immediate interventionof the Crown (203, 357 c.).

Lord A. Hamilton recalled and arrested.

Suddenly the situation underwent a dramatic change.Lord Archibald was dismissed from his government andsent home under arrest. On 19th May, Mr. SecretaryStanhope came down to the Board of Trade, and, layingbefore them a bundle of complaints against the Governor,directed them to propose a Commission and Instructionsfor Peter Heywood, the eldest Councillor, to assume thegovernment as Commander in Chief. He, with theCouncil, was to enquire into piracies alleged to have beenperpetrated against the Spaniards by persons commissioned by Lord Archibald, of which complaint had beenmade to the Spanish Ambassador. He was to send homefor trial the principal persons involved, together withtheir effects and the evidence against them, and alsoto arrest Lord Archibald, seize his effects and sendthem over with him, if he should appear to be in any wayresponsible (158, 158 i.–xv., 175, 175 i., Journal, 19thMay, 1716). These instructions were subsequently modified. A precedent for sending a Governor home underarrest had been found in the case of Sir Thomas Modyfordin 1671 (158 x.). But it was now explained that onlythe Governor and those who were guilty of piracies atsea were to be sent home for trial. Accessories on landmust be tried upon the place. Nor were any effects tobe sent home; they were only to be seized and held incase of conviction (201, 201 i., 283).

The allegations against him.

The complaint made to the Spanish Ambassador wassupported by an English naval officer, the Captain ofH.M.S. Diamond, some Jamaica merchants, and SamuelPage, whom Lord Archibald had at first refused toaccept as Deputy Secretary, and who, at the instigationof the Assembly, had sailed with the funds subscribed bythe Assembly in the Diamond without a permit from theGovernor. It was to the effect that certain privateers,commissioned by the Governor, had perpetrated grossacts of piracy upon the Spaniards in the gulf of Floridaand off Havana, and others by fishing on the wrecksof ships which the Spaniards had not abandoned. LordArchibald himself was alleged to be part owner of someof these vessels, to have shared in their plunder, andto have refused restitution (158, 158 i.–vii., 604 i.–iii.).

Stay of proceedings requested.; Page and Addington bound to appear.

Lord Archibald's friends were not idle. As soon asthey heard of these proceedings, they entered a strongprotest at the Board of Trade, complaining that they,planters and merchants of Jamaica now in England, andmany of the most considerable gentlemen of that islandwere not advised with, nor consenting to what hadbeen done. They asked for a stay of proceedings forthe further examination of the charges, stating that "thecomplaints against the Governor were not well founded,but were carried on by persons of small credit in Jamaica."They expressed great nervousness as to what might bedone by the new government and urged that, if LordArchibald must be recalled, his place should be filledat once by a person "of honour, ability, and integrity"(182, 182 i., ii., 203 i., ii., v.). On enquiry, however,the Board was informed by Mr. Stanhope that Mr.Heywood's Commission and Instructions had alreadygone (Journal, 31st May). Lord Archibald's agent alsointervened. He declared that the Governor was entirelyinnocent of the crimes against the Spaniards, and thatthe affidavits of Samuel Page and William Addingtonwere "in a great measure groundless and malicious,"and therefore asked that they should be required to givesecurities for their appearance at Lord Archibald's trial.Page had returned to Jamaica, where he complained that hehad not been sufficiently rewarded out of the subscriptionsraised by the Assembly. After consultation with theAttorney-General, the newly appointed Governor wasinstructed to cause these witnesses to be examined andto give their recognizances for their appearance at theKing's Bench bar, when Lord Archibald should be broughtto trial under the act of King William III. (246 i., 282, 283,377, 395, 403, 403 i., 406 i.). In view of the nature andsource of the evidence, it would appear that Stanhopeacted with curious precipitancy in taking so strong ameasure, without waiting to hear the other side.

Lord Archibald's explanation.

Lord Archibald's explanation of the affair, writtenwithin a fortnight of the despatch of Stanhope's hurriedinstructions for his recall, was simple and apparentlystraight-forward (203, 357 c.) Ever since the conclusionof peace there had been complaints against Spanishguarda costas and French ships with Spanish commissions,which, under pretence of guarding the coasts of theSpanish settlements, had been attacking British traders.In some cases they had justified their seizures by thepresence of Spanish pistoles on board—the currentmoney of the West Indies—and in others they detainedthem without proof or trial. Lord Archibald's demandsfor restitution had been everywhere ignored, althoughhe had himself set the example by restoring Spanishgoods captured before the cessation of arms was known(27 i., 95, 203, 357 h). Combined with the increaseof pirates, this condition of affairs had rendered navigation more dangerous than it had been in times of openwarfare. H.M. ships on the station were of little use, asthey were not allowed to clean abroad, and were in anycase almost useless for chasing "clean, light, and nimblevessels." In these circ*mstances, the Governor hadyielded "to the clamours of the trading people" and hadcommissioned privateers to cruise against pirates. Unfortunately the wreck of the Spanish galleons in the Gulf ofFlorida proved too great a temptation to the Jamaicaprivateersmen. Not only did they go to "fish upon thewrecks" without drawing any nice distinctions as towhether they had been abandoned by the Spaniardsor not, but one party, landing on the coast of Florida,attacked a Spanish camp and carried off 120,000 pieces ofeight besides wrought silver, which the Spaniards themselves had recovered from the sunken flota. One privateer, the Bennet, " commanded by a tawny Moor calledFernando Fernandez" seized a Spanish sloop, which hadformerly belonged to some Jamaica merchants and hadbeen taken by the Spaniards, but never condemned inany Spanish port. This sloop, after first taking out themoney and jewels in her, and communicating with theGovernor, he sent into Port Royal. There she wascondemned with her cargo in the Admiralty Court ashaving been piratically taken. An appeal was intended,and the Governor stated that he would see justice done.But he omitted to mention that he had one share in theBennet. The Governor of the Havana sent a representative, one Don Juan del Valle, to demand restitutionof all monies and effects taken out of the flota, the punishment of the pirates, and the prohibition of any suchenterprise for the future. Lord Archibald agreed thatsuch piracies ought to be punished and restitution made,whilst holding that wrecks left derelict belonged to thefirst occupant, and he presently issued a Proclamationrecalling the privateers and prohibiting fishing or divingon the wrecks. But as to restitutions, he informed theGovernor of Havana that they must be reciprocal, andthat the Spaniards having been the first aggressors oughtto be the first to give satisfaction. In fact, he representedto the Council of Trade, "the buckaneering and seafareing people" were exasperated by the losses theyhad suffered at the hands of the Spanish guarda costas,and were tempted by the riches of the wrecks to makereprisals. He was afraid that too rigorous prosecutionswould drive away the sea-faring population and forcethem to turn pirates, to the great weakening of theisland. Moreover, the temper of the people had beenshown recently by two incidents. One one occasion aman condemned to be hanged for robbing a Spanishboat was rescued from the gibbet by a mob at PortRoyal. On another a vessel seized by the King's Officersin Port Royal harbour was boarded by armed men andthe goods carried away (158 i.–vii., 203, 308, 357 h.,604 i.–iv.).

Reconstruction of the Council.; Object of the Assembly achieved.; Obtain control of the Executive.

Stanhope had no sooner given orders for the Governor'srecall, than he began to reconstruct the Council, themajority of which, since its reconstitution, had stood byLord Archibald in his struggle with the Assembly (164. v.Journal, 23rd May). To the new Council were appointedsome of those who had been displaced at Lord Archibald'srequest, John Blair and Charles Chaplin, and otherswho had been leaders of the Opposition in the Assembly,Thomas Beckford, James Risby and George Bennet.Thus in spite of a protest on behalf of some of thosewho were to be dismissed, a new Council was constitutedcontaining an equal number of partisans of either side(104, 169, 175 i., 178). The Assembly had thus achievedtheir object. They had obtained the recall of the Governor, and in his place was installed a Lt.-Governor who wasa strong supporter of their policy, a native of the island,and practically their nominee. The Council was sonicely balanced as to be almost neutralised, but with aLt.-Governor thus inclined and the partisans of the lateGovernor thus discouraged, it might be expected inpractice to be on their side. The control of the Executivewas, for the time at least, in their hands, Heywood,however, was warned in his Instructions that he was not,in his temporary capacity as Governor, to pass any actsexcept such as were immediately necessary for thepeace and welfare of the island, without particular orders(163 i.). The Council of Trade took the opportunity ofurging him to a conciliatory policy with a view to thesafety and welfare of the island and provision of subsistence of the troops, assuring him at the same time oftheir "readiness to second whatever might be offeredby the gentlemen of Jamaica, that may promote theirtrue interest and H.M. service" (187).

The enquiry into Lord Archibald's conduct.; His defence.

On receipt of his Instructions, Peter Heywood,according to his meagre account, sat daily with theCouncil to enquire into Lord Archibald's late conduct(308). But instead of examining him and sending himhome under arrest with the witnesses against him, incase he was found guilty of being concerned in thepiracies, they refused to communicate to him a copy ofthe charge against him, so that there could be no properexamination or cross-examination of witnesses. Theyarrested him under a warrant which did not specify thecause of commitment, and sent him home post hastewithout any witnesses for the prosecution (cf. Minutesof Council of Jamaica, and B.T. Journal, 2nd October,1717). Heywood explained that there were only twoindividuals, Thomas Bendysh, part owner of the Bennet,and Jonathan Barnet, one of the privatersmen, whomthey thought fit to send home to give evidence, and thatthey were both unable to leave the island on account ofwrits out against them for debts (387). Whilst theCouncil was deliberating whether they should be justifiedin arresting the Governor, the Chief Justice and Attorney-General made oath to the following facts, which, theydeclared, in their opinion were sufficient proof that hewas not concerned in the piracy. It was admitted thatLord Archibald had a share in the Bennet privateer.But, learning that the Commander, Fernandez, hadexceeded his commission and instructions by seizingSpanish goods, and before complaint against that shiphad been lodged by Don Juan del Valle, he had consultedthe Chief Justice and Attorney-General. It was decided,that, in order to secure as many as possible of the effectstaken from the Spaniards and return them to the owners,he should "temporize with Bendysh," and himselfreceive his own share. This he had done and depositedit in the hands of the Provost Marshall, to await H.M.orders. By an Order in Council of 9th June, Bendysh,who had brought in the Governor's share of the capture,had been required to give security for the return of suchpart of the Spanish effects as had come into his hands.As for Don Juan del Valle, the Governor had consultedwith him as to the desirability of prosecuting the privateersmen complained of, and this the former had declined,lest such procedure and issue of a proclamation at thatmoment might deter others, then at sea, from returningto Jamaica. The Governor had gone out of his way tofurther the appeal in the case of the Nuestra Senora deBethlehem, although it was not made in proper form, soanxious was he to do justice to the Spaniards (203, 357 h).All this evidence was ignored, and by a majority of one,the Council decided to arrest Lord Archibald. It wassuggested that their proceedings exposed the wholemanœuvre, which was to get rid of the Governor and toscreen from prosecution or restitution all those concerned in the many privateers. Heywood, at any rate,made no further reference to the affair, but began atonce to echo Lord Archibald's complaints of the seizureof Jamaican vessels by the French and Spaniards, andto demand reparation therefor (308, 308 i.–iv., 339,339 i., ii., 409, 409 i.). And, as Lord Archibald hadforetold, enquiries into the further misbehaviour of theprivateers, and the arrest of a few principals andaccessories in the case of a French ship taken in the Bayof Hondo, occasioned a general stampede of the seafaring population, who feared prosecution (308, 308 i.–iv.,359 i., 411, 411 i.). They increased the swarm of pirateswho were infesting those seas, and some of whose brutalitiesare described. The guardships were incapable of dealingwith them, and, if arrested, the Commander in Chief hadno commission for trying them (352, 352 i., 411, 411 i.).The Council of Trade represented the necessity of dealingpromptly with this dangerous situation (518, cf. §1 Pirates).

The Council and Assembly.

Heywood at once found himself in difficulties withthe Council. The question of the subsistence of thetwo companies was acute, and the soldiers were pressingfor payment and clothing long overdue. This "standing army," of which the Assembly was so anxiousto be rid, was now reduced to 61 men (339 iii., 411,519). The majority of the Council voted that theyshould be subsisted out of the Treasury, as had recentlybeen done. The minority, with Heywood, consideredthat as there was no law to sanction this, it should notbe done, but that an Assembly should be called, which,they thought would deal with the situation. On theexpediency of calling an Assembly the Council was equallydivided. Such were the first fruits of appointing anicely balanced Council, intended to represent bothparties in the island. Those who had supported LordArchibald, continued to support the policy for whichthey had voted under him, whilst the remainder votedwith Heywood (308, 359 i.). But the Treasury wasempty. Heywood therefore determined to summon anAssembly. In the meantime he was obliged, as LordArchibald Hamilton had been obliged, to subsist thesoldiers out of his own pocket. The new Assembly hedescribed as good (352). He did nothing to disturb theirequanimity. Ignoring his instructions, he informed themthat he would pass what bills they liked. He was, infact merely their instrument. The Assembly promptlybrought in all the bills which had been rejected duringthe existence of the last Assembly, including one whichhad already been annulled by the Crown (451 e). LordArchibald's party continued their opposition to billswhich encroached upon the Governor's powers. Theiropposition was strenuous but vain. For Heywood wasprepared to do the Assembly's bidding, and the Assemblywould accept no amendments by the Council to theirmoney bills. The opposition in the Council had by thistime been reduced to two. For William Broderick, theAttorney-General, had gone home with the Governor,and Peake and Mumby were dead. Francis Rose andThomas Bernard, the Chief Justice, remained. The latterthe Assembly addressed the Commander in Chief toremove, on account of his having opposed the summoningof a new Assembly. They further requested the removalof Anthony Swymmer from the Bench, as being of "tooloose and atheistical principles," and hinted at theremoval of the opposing Councillors (387, 387 i.). Theyalso proceeded to punish the Deputy-Receiver, who, inobedience to an order of the Governor and Council, hadreceived from the Commissioner appointed to collectthe Additional Duty of 1712, the money arising therefrom,and had issued it for the payment of the soldiers' subsistence and the exigencies of the Government. By aclause in their new Additional Duty Act, they nowrequired him to make good this sum and pay it overagain to their Commissioner. The Council of Traderepresented that this was a great injustice, and offeredthat orders should be sent to stop proceedings againstthe Receiver on that account (387, 446, 446 i., 450, 451).The Assembly then reduced its claim on the ReceiverGeneral to the amount issued by him for the subsistenceof the soldiers (659, 659 i.). Yet to Heywood theyrepaid the money advanced by him for that purpose, andrepaid it with interest at generous rate (652 i.). Theprinciple involved was precisely the same as that in thecase of the money advanced by Lord Archibald Hamiltonand his Council, which they had so long refused to refund(48, 50, 158 xi. a). In a petition on behalf of LordArchibald it was asked that the newly appointed Governorshould be instructed to recommend to the Assembly thedischarge of this debt. An order to this effect was made(378 i., 415). Later, on the appointment of anotherGovernor, Lord Archibald renewed this petition, with arequest that he should be allowed ordinary interest,seeing that the Assembly had allowed Mr. Heywood"his principall with an extraordinary interest" (652,652 i.).

Thomas Pitt appointed Governor. His proposals.; Claims of the Assembly.

Thomas Pitt was appointed to succeed Lord Archibaldin June (216). Three months later he asked for instructions for remedying the state of danger and disorder inwhich the island was reported to be (343, 343 i.). On16th October Mr. Secretary Methuen conferred with theBoard of Trade (Journal, 16th October), and discusseda memorandum by Mr. Pitt, in which he enumeratedthe matters in dispute with the Assembly, and asked forinstructions concerning them. He also requested thatthe Acts of Jamaica which had not yet been confirmedby the Crown should be either confirmed or annulledbefore his departure (357). As he had attributed thedisorders and defenceless condition of the island in largemeasure to the Assembly's "in a manner assuming theexecutive part of the Government" (357), he wasasked to be more explicit on that point (370). Hisreply was that the whole drift of their proceedings, towhich the late Governor and Council had taken objection,was in this direction, and recapitulated their claims andactions (370, 375).

As to the Acts not yet confirmed, the Council ofTrade pointed out that they remained in force untildisapproved by the Crown. To await decisions uponthem all would delay the Governor's departure to anextent that would be inconsistent with the public service.But they offered to report immediately upon any to whichhe had objections, or which he thought it would be forthe advantage of the island or acceptable to the inhabitants to take with him confirmed (376). Mr. Pittreferred them to the acts mentioned by the Council ofJamaica in their memorial (203 i., ii., 396).

Decisions upon rights and claims of the Assembly.

Upon the points raised by him in relation to the claimsand privileges of the Assembly, the Council of Tradesubmitted a careful record of precedents from therecords of the island. These they offered as materialfor a decision by the King in Council, not presuming togive any opinion of their own in matters which so nearlyconcerned the prerogative of the Crown and were soessential to the Constitution and Government of thatisland. They again drew attention to the fact thatdisputes of the like nature had lately arisen in otherGovernments in America (435, 435 i.). Four monthslater (April 12th, 1717), after mature consideration,decisions were made upon the thirteen points raised byMr. Pitt, and directions were given by Mr. Stanhope fordrawing his Instructions in accordance with them (526).The right of the Council to amend money bills wasaffirmed; that of the Assembly to adjourn withoutthe Governor's leave, except de die in diem, denied.The Receiver-General was appointed by patent underthe Great Seal, and the naming of the Receiver by theAssembly was undesirable. Provision of a revenueequal to the expenses of the Government (£6,000), andfor the subsistence of the soldiers was to be recommendedto the Assembly, who were to be promised that the twocompanies would be withdrawn as soon as it was deemedsafe to do so. Other minor points were dealt with, andthe suggestion that the Governor should appoint theClerk and other officers of the Assembly was over-ruledby precedent (526).

Colonel Lawes appointed in place of Mr. Pitt.

Mr. Pitt, however, did not receive these instructions.For some reason, which does not appear here, he did notgo to Jamaica (217). Col. Nicholas Lawes was appointed Governor in his stead (614). The Commissionersof Customs, on being consulted as to their views for thenew Instructions, desired that officers of the Customsshould be excused from serving in the Militia or uponjuries, or any parochial offices, since such services interfered with the execution of their duties (630, 680).

Private Acts. Evidence of negroes.

Two private acts were confirmed, one of considerableinterest being to disqualify negroes from giving evidenceagainst the family of John Williams, a free negro whohad been converted to Christianity and amassed considerable property in the island (387, 521, 554, 683). This, asthe Attorney-General observed, admitted Williams tothe same privileges as other freemen, since by the lawof Jamaica the evidence of one slave against anotherwho was or had been a slave was admitted, but not againstany other (531).

Kingston Act.

The act for the relief of the inhabitants of Kingstonwas repealed (648 i., 670, 681, 682).

Sickness.

The island in general was reported to "continuevery sickly" (409).

Leeward Islands.; Antigua.; Pirates.; Additional guardships required.; Request for grant of stores of war.; Intervention of the Board of Ordnance.; Council of Trade on the 4½ p.c. duty.

Addresses from the four chief Leeward Islands expressed appreciation of the appointment of GovernorHamilton, who arrived at Antigua in April, 1716 (68,118 vii.–xv.). There he recommended the Assembly toamend their law for the recovery of debts and to takemeasures for defence, and this, he reports, they set aboutwith great good will (68). But a severe drought, whichafflicted all the islands, interfered with the realisationof their good intentions (651). For want of a suitableman of war, and by reason of the numerous and powerfulpirate ships which infested these seas, Hamilton foundgreat difficulty in visiting the other islands (68, 68 i.,118, 118 i., 173, 425, 425 i.–iii., v., 466, 484, 568; andsee §1, Pirates). The need of a stronger guardship wasrepresented by the Council of Trade, and also the defenceless condition of the islands owing to the want of munitions of war (224, 224 i., 473, 474, 570). The need of agrant of supplies of this nature was repeatedly emphasisedby Hamilton, who represented that the heavy taxes borneduring the late war and the high prices then ruling fornecessaries of life had reduced the capacity of the plantersto provide these on their own account (118, 651). TheBoard of Ordnance, however, interposed. Over £10,000was due to their office for munitions supplied by themfor the Leeward Islands since 1702. Parliament hadgranted no money to the office for these stores, whichwere ordered to be paid out of the 4½ p.c. duty. Theythought, therefore, that, before a new grant was made,an account of past expenditure of stores should bedemanded, and details of what were required, moreespecially as the request of the Leeward Islands exceededin proportion those of other Dominions, and the suppliessent appeared to them to have been fully sufficient ifdue care had been taken of them. To this the Councilof Trade replied by reviewing the situation with regardto the 4½ p.c. duty, which in 1702 had been ordered tobe devoted to the fortifications and other public uses ofBarbados and the Leeward Islands, to which it hadoriginally been appropriated. Since 1702 that dutyhad amounted to over £78,000, whilst the LeewardIslands had only been supplied with stores of war valuedat £15,241 4s. 10d. How the balance had been spentwas a question for the Treasury. But as Nevis, St.Christopher, and Montserrat had been plundered bythe French and as the account of what stores were wantingand what were remaining was quite explicit, they thoughtan immediate dispatch of stores was necessary (198, 204ii.–vii., 274, 341 i., 398 i., 424). The matter was thenreferred to the Treasury, to whom the Board of Ordnanceexplained that they had received little more than £9,000out of the 4½ p.c. for stores of war to the value of £30,000odd supplied by them to the Leeward Islands andBarbados. They asked to be reimbursed out of thebalance of the 4½ p.c. since 1702. They repeated theiropinion that the further demand from the Leeward Islandsrequired explanation (433, 475, 475 i.). In answer tothis the Council of Trade repeated their former statement(476, 476 i.).

Antigua. Acts.; Agent appointed.

One or two acts of Antigua were confirmed. But theAttorney General entered strong objections to the Actfor establishing a Court of King's Bench, etc., as it wasdrawn, whilst approving the provision that the Courtof Chancery should be held before the Governor andCouncil instead of the Governor alone (368, 384, 422,688). An important act for prohibiting the importationof foreign sugar, rum, cotton, or molasses was passed in1716 (261). An act to encourage the importation ofProtestant white servants was also passed, and recommended by the Governor as the best and only expedientfor increasing the population, which had suffered fromthe effects of the taxation and invasions of the latewar (323, 651), and also from the development of largeplantations at the expense of small holders (118). Uponthe reiterated recommendation of the Governor, Mr.William Nevine was appointed to act as Agent for theisland (323).

Governor's presents and house rent. Sugar and prices.; Nevis.; The case of the Hostages at Martinique.

The Assembly settled £1,000 a year upon the Governorfor his house rent. This sum was in excess of the sumallowed by his Instructions. But it was pointed outthat it was £1,000 current money, and current money wassugar. When realised in London, it would producelittle more than £400. House rents were very dear, andprices had risen to such an extent that the Governor'ssalary of £2,000 was less than the £1,200 from which ithad been raised a few years ago. Moreover, neitherNevis nor Montserrat had ever contributed to the Governor's house rent, and St. Kitts only once. Nor couldthey now do so, as Assemblies had been already heldby each of them since his arrival, and they were thereforeprecluded from voting him any present. In thesecirc*mstances, the Council proposed that Hamiltonshould be permitted to receive the house rent voted tohim, but that the act should not be confirmed by theCrown, so that, if any ill results appeared, it would stillbe feasible to annul it. They also expressed the viewthat some alteration in the Instructions regulating theGovernor's house rent was desirable (120, 483, 532).In Nevis, an act for fortifying Saddle Hill was passed.This and an act for a return of negroes were confirmed(66 ii., 365, 373, 417). A request was made for an engineerand munitions of war (66 ii.). The case of the hostages,who were detained at Martinique against the payment ofthe ransom demanded by Iberville in 1706, was raisedagain, in the hope of relief through the Commissariesto be appointed under the Treaty of Utrecht. It wasagain pleaded that the Capitulation was extorted byforce, and that the terms of it had been broken by theFrench. The condition of the two hostages who hadrefused to make their escape from Martinique waspitiable, and the sum claimed by Iberville was ruinous(66 iii.,–xv.). They refuted the suggestion that theyhad neglected to provide for the maintenance of thehostages (66 iii., iv.). The addresses and petitions fromNevis were submitted to the Advocate-General forreconsideration of his opinion of August 2, 1715 (82). SirNathaniel Lloyd advised the Board to await the reportof the Commissaries (91).

St. Christopher. Brimstone Hill.

In St. Kitts, an act was passed and subsequently confirmed, for acquiring Brimstone Hill with a view tofortifying it (555, 622, 622 i., 628, 689).

The disposal of the former French lands.; Col. Douglass' offer.

There was some correspondence over the question ofthe ownership of plantations and the confirmation ofgrants of returned French Protestant planters on theformer French quarter of the island (173 etc.). Theamount of workable land available for distribution wasestimated by the Surveyor at 15,000 acres (68). Col.Douglass now came forward with a proposal to purchase10,000 acres for £16,000, the remainder, after allowingfor the grants to French refugees and salt pans, to beassigned gratis to the poor settlers. On this offer beingreferred to the Council of Trade, they reported, that,whilst they could not deal with its merits until directionswere given as to the disposal of the lands, they nowthought that, instead of appointing Commissaries forarranging the sale of them, as they had previously suggested, it would be more to the advantage of the Crownto put them up for sale in England, since their value wasnow better known. They presently repeated their opinionas to the urgency of settling the matter, both from thepoint of view of the Treasury and of peopling the island(225, 225 i., 251, 265, 320 i.).

Resolution of the House of Commons.

The House of Commons then passed a resolution forthe sale of the lands yielded by France, and the Treasuryinvited the Council of Trade to give them all theinformation on the subject in their possession (653,665; and see § 1, Relations with French; Governors'flags).

Virgin Islands.

In response to the enquiries of the Board of Trade,which were repeated in June, 1716 (213), Hamiltonexplained that he was unable to visit the Virgin Islandsfor lack of a man of war, but he sent in the reports fromthe Lt.-Governors of Anguilla and Spanish Town (68, 118,118 iv.–vii., 350 i.–iii.). The soil of Anguilla was saidto be exhausted, and the inhabitants, suffering from thedrought, were anxious to remove to Sta. Cruz. Theywere petitioning for grants of land there. SpanishTown, Tortola, and Beef Island were sparsely inhabited.Such inhabitants as there were gained a wretchedlivelihood. Hamilton thought it would be an advantageif they were all removed to St. Kitts and given grantsof the former French lands there (118, 350, 425, 651).The Lt.-Governors of Anguilla and Spanish Townreceived their commissions and instructions from theGovernor of the Leeward Islands, but had no salaries,and it was not easy to find anyone suitable for the office(213, 350). Later, Hamilton reported that some settlershad left the Leeward Islands for Tortola, but he repeatedhis view that Captain Walton had exaggerated therichness of this group (425, 651).

Captain Walton's petition.

The Council of Trade had meanwhile reported favourably upon Capt. Walton's petition, recommending thathe should accompany the ship appointed to visit theVirgin Islands, and that he should be granted an allowancefor his present undertaking and some recompense forhis past services (153). This matter was then referredto the Treasury (334). In May, 1717, Captain Candlerof H.M.S. Winchelsea sent in the result of his surveyof the Virgin Islands. It agreed with the opinion ofGovernor Hamilton, and emphasised that they were anest of pirates and likely to remain so, and that it wouldnot be worth while for the Government to go to anyexpense on their account (425, 425 ii.–iv., 639 i.).

Danish claim to St. John and Crab Island.

These activities in the Virgin Islands roused the apprehension of the Danes, who claimed for their West IndiaCompany not only St. Thomas (of which Capt. Candlergave an uncomplimentary description as inhabited by"rogues and pirates"), but also Crab Island and St.John, which they announced their intention to settle.They asked that instructions should be sent forbiddingthe interference threatened by the English (562, 562 i.,ii., 639 i.).

Newfoundland.; New Act proposed.; Report by the Council of Trade.; Commodore's Instructions.; Increase of sailings.

The enquiries of the Council of Trade (C.S.P. 1715, p.xlvi.) elicited several complaints from the out-portsinterested in the Newfoundland fishery. The NewEnglanders and the inhabitants were debauching thefishermen with rum, and the former inticing them awayto the Continent. Total prohibition of the sale of liquorand tobacco was demanded. Alien ships were tradingwith Newfoundland and using the fishery. Lt.-GovernorMoody by taking part in the fishery and permittingthe French to share in trade, and engrossing the Frenchplantations at Placentia, was preventing the developmentof the fishery there. It was suggested that the Militaryshould be forbidden to take any part in trade or thefishery. Also that the observance of the Sabbath,which was at present "as it were an universall day ofdrunkeness and debauchery," should be inculcated byministers supported from home, and enforced by corporalpunishment. Infringements of the act to encouragethe trade to Newfoundland were noted (3, 4, 15, 24, 25,439 i.). Captain Taverner, in his report, confirmedthese observations, and added that trading by theFrench and their encroachments at St. Peters werepreventing the expected development of the newlyacquired Fishery (44 ii.). It had been recognised thatsome penalties must be provided for infringements ofthe above Act. The Attorney-General gave his opinionthat a new act would be necessary for this purpose, andthat a Proclamation would not suffice (15, 25, 29). Capt.Taverner submitted a draft for a new act (44 iii.) Fromthe information thus acquired, the Council of Tradecompiled a long and careful report (70 i.), describing theabuses in the fishery, and proposing a new law layingpenalties and directing where and how they were tobe recovered. They further proposed that the Commodore and Fishing Admirals should make a surveyand record of the rights and ownership of the variouscook-rooms, stages, and beaches, which had been thesource of many disputes. To fill the gap when, in thewinter and in the absence of the Commodore and FishingAdmirals, there was "a sort of respite from all observanceof law or government," they recommended that twojudges should be appointed for each of the principalharbours, and that they should be elected by the inhabitants before the departure of the fishing fleet. Thesemagistrates were to hold a Court once a month, andappeals were to lie from their decision to the Commodoreof the ensuing season. To counter the tactics of theNew Englanders, who debauched the fishermen withtheir rum, and of the British traders who, sailing directfrom Europe to the fishery, took advantage of theinhabitants' need of salt for their fish to oblige them tobuy one butt of wine and a quarter cask of brandy withevery ten hogsheads of salt, they proposed that no wineor brandy (except from Madeira, etc.), no tobacco, andno rum, except from the West Indies, should be allowedto be imported into Newfoundland except from GreatBritain. Sellers of alcoholic liquor were to be licensed.To prevent enticing away of seamen, it was proposed thatmasters of New England ships should be compelled toenter into bonds not to sail with more than theircomplement. Masters were to be obliged by penalty and abond to carry their full complement of sailors and"green" men according to law. The revival of thesystem of paying wages by shares in the fisherywas recommended. The French ought to be stoppedbringing their fishing tackle and goods to St. Petersand Placentia annually from France, and also fromleaving their boats at Petit Nore, and the inhabitantsof Cape Breton and French Indians from hunting andfurring at Cape Ray. The military must be prohibitedfrom concerning themselves in the fishery. Theseregulations, with penalties for infringements, to beembodied in a new act (70 i.). In the meantime theCommodore of the Convoys of the Fishing Fleets in 1716and 1717 received additional Instructions for puttingseveral of these suggestions into practice (183 i., 558 ii.).A petition from Bideford for further protection frompirates for the fishing ships, revealed a gratifying increasein the sailings for the fishery in 1717 (479, 480).

Reports by the Commodore.; Garrison and fortifications at Placentia.; Report by the Comptrollers of the accounts of the Army.

A report by the Commodore for 1716 gave returns ofthe fishery and repeated the need of reforms (402 i., ii.).The value of Isle of May as a source of salt for the fisherywas emphasised, and its need of protection by a man ofwar (69, 69 i.). Mr. Secretary Stanhope wrote to Lt.-Governor Moody rebuking him for the confusion of theaccounts and lack of muster rolls of the garrison inMay, 1716 (184). But this was no relief to the unfortunate soldiers who remained in the most deplorable condition for lack of provisions, clothes, and pay (351, 366,538, 538 i.). Charges were brought against Moody oftrading and profiteering in their supplies (560). Heapplied for leave to return and answer them (538, 538 i.,676). As a reduction of the garrison had been contemplated, the Council of Trade suggested that thesurplus of men should be sent to strengthen the garrisonon the frontiers of New York. Estimates were submittedfor the construction of a new fort instead of repairingthe old fortification at much greater expense (100,100 i.–iii., 102). It was not until the end of July, 1717,that the Comptrollers of the accounts of the Armyannounced that they had ordered the dispatch of clothingand provisions. At the same time they recommendedthe recall of Moody to answer the charges against himand state the accounts. Whilst approving the proposalsof the Board of Ordnance for reducing the garrison andbuilding a new and small fort, the Comptrollers gavetheir views upon the residents of Newfoundland, to whomthey attributed the greater part of the responsibilityfor the disorders in the fishery. They recommendedthe removal of "these miserable bankrupts," who couldnot be brought to order by any regulations, in order thatthere might be no inducements for any merchants butthose who were "truly intent upon the Fishery" (676).

Case of M. Tulon.; Report by the Council of Trade.

The case of one M. Tulon caused much controversy.This Frenchman, having taken the oaths of allegianceand bought a plantation in Newfoundland, brought aship and supplies from St. Malo, acting for the originalFrench owner of the plantation in question. SomeFishing Admirals, who objected to the competition ofthe French with their own cargoes of salt, prohibitedhis landing, and appealed to Lt.-Governor Moody, whointerposed on behalf of His Majesty's new subjectsand the fishermen who needed supplies (44 ii., 46, 47 i.–iii.,76, 439 i., ii., 468 v.). On his next voyage, some fishcaught by Tulon and his French servants, was seized bythe Fishing Admirals and shipped in a Guernsey vessel,with instructions to the master to render an account oftheir proceedings to the Privy Council. On his arrivalat Bilboa, however, the master was thrown into prison,and the fish seized at the instance of a French merchantrepresenting Tulon. Stanhope ordered a very strongrepresentation to be made to the Court of Madrid uponthis "violence and injustice of the Biscayners" in athing "they have no right to meddle with" (439,439 i.–ix., 468, 468 i., ii., 492–494, 502). The Attorney-General gave his opinion that if Tulon was qualified as aBritish subject, his fishing with the aid of foreign servantswas no infringement of the act (481 i., 491, 491 i.–xi.).But the Council of Trade repeated their opinion that theemployment of foreign fishermen, and fishing withtackle brought from foreign countries ought to be prohibited. Tulon was not a naturalised British subjectand therefore, according to the Attorney-General, hadno right to fish at Newfoundland. The bringing ofservants, tackle, and goods from France, and such actionas that of the Bilboans must be firmly discouraged. Butsince Tulon had taken the oath of allegiance, he mightbe entitled to some consideration. These ends wouldbest be served by remitting the value of the fish to Tulon,after it had first been returned to the Crown (551).

Words and phrases.

One or two words and phrases are worth noting. Thepirates' Daudorus (Deuchandorus), or farewell greeting,to a small boy who wished to leave them, took the formof a good whipping (p. 212). Two "maroon periaguas"are mentioned (411 i.). Colonel Rhett, abusing theLt.-Governor of S. Carolina, called him a "Lurkenburgdog" (268 h.).

Important Representations.

The most important representations printed in thisvolume are those on Naval Stores (515 i.), and Newfoundland (70 i.).

CECIL HEADLAM,
January, 1929.

Preface | British History Online (2024)

PREFACE.

§ 1 GENERAL.

§ 2 THE AMERICAN COLONIES.

§ 3 THE WEST INDIES.

References