Browsing named entities in George Bancroft, History of the United States from the Discovery of the American Continent, Vol. 6, 10th edition.. You can also browse the collection for Andrew Eliot or search for Andrew Eliot in all documents.

Your search returned 27 results in 14 document sections:

1 2
Carolina; and specimens of the Correspondence of Knox and Franklin, as Agents of Georgia. Analogous to these are the confidential communications which passed between Hutchinson and Israel Mauduit and Thomas Whately; between one of the Proprietaries of Pennsylvania and Deputy Governor Hamilton; between Cecil Calvert and Hugh Hammersley, successive Secretaries of Maryland, and Lieutenant Governor Sharpe; between Ex-Governor Pownall and Dr. Cooper of Boston; between Hollis and Mayhew and Andrew Eliot of Boston. Of all these I have copies. Of the letter-books and drafts of letters of men in office, I had access to those of Bernard for a single year; to those of Hutchinson for many years; to that of Dr. Johnson, the patriarch of the American Episcopal Church, with Archbishop Secker; to those of Colden; to those of Lieutenant Governor Sharpe. Many letters of their correspondents also fell within my reach. For the affairs of the Colonies I have consulted their own Archives, and to
only neans of perpetuating our liberties. Jonathan Mayhew to James Otis, Lord's Day Morning, 8 June, 1766. See Bradford's Life of Mayhew, 428, 429. The patriot uttered this great word of counsel on the morning of his last day of health in Boston. From his youth he had consecrated himself to the service of colonial freedom in the State and Church; he died, overtasked, in the unblemished beauty of manhood, consumed by his fiery zeal, foreseeing independence. Compare Thomas Hollis to Andrew Eliot, 1 July, 1768. His character was so deeply impressed on the place of his activity, that it is not yet grown over. Whoever repeats the story of American liberty renews his fame. The time for intercolonial correspondence was not come; but to keep up a fellow-feeling with its own constituents, the House, setting an example to be followed by all representative bodies, opened Vote of the House of 12 June, 1766. a gallery for the public to attend its debates. It also sent a grateful Add
favorable to the Crown Officers, it would have been made use of in America. In America, said the calm Andrew Eliot, of Chap. XXIX.} 1767. May. Boston, the people glory in the name, and only desire to enjoy the liberties of Englishmen. Andrew Eliot to T. Hollis, 13 May, 1767. There is not the least foundation for the suspicion, that they aim at independence. If we have no forces, or new Stamp Act, I would almost answer for them. Our warmest patriots speak of our connection with Great Ball us. We are not so vain as to think we could be able to effect it; and nothing could influence us to desire it, but such attempts on our liberties as I hope Great Britain will be just enough never to make. Oppression makes wise men mad. Andrew Eliot to Archdeacon Blackburne, 3 May, 1767. To tranquillize America nothing more was wanting than a respect for its rights, and some accommodation to its confirmed habits and opinions. The Colonies had, each of them, a direction of its own and
the field. The King may make a page first Minister, Walpole's Memoirs, III. 66. said Lord Holland. The day was past when England was to be governed by Privilege alone; but with the decline of the aristocracy, the people not less than the King increased in authority; demanded more and more to know what was passing in Parliament; and prepared to enforce their right to intervene. All that could be done through the press in their support, was done with alacrity. Compare T. Hollis to Andrew Eliot, 23 Feb. 1767. Power, thought a French observer, Durand, acting as French minister at London, to Choiseul, 21 July, 1767. has passed into the hands of the populace and the merchants. The country is exceedingly jealous of its liberty. While Rockingham, self-deluded as to the purposes of his associates, Walpole's Memoirs, III. 68. summoned his political allies to London, Shelburne was quieting the controversy with America respecting the Billeting Act. New-York had foreseen the sto
Durand to Choiseul, Dec. 1767. Compare Andrew Eliot to Thomas Hollis, 15 Dec. 1767. the Americaatch and oppress those who support them. Andrew Eliot to T. Hollis, 10 Dec. 1767; and compare A. A. Eliot to Archdeacon Blackburne, 15 Dec. 1767. If large salaries are given, needy poor lawyers from Eprecious a jewel to be resigned. Compare Andrew Eliot to Rev. William Harris, Dec. 1767. Suchem who would not count the consequences. Andrew Eliot to T. Hollis, 5 Jan. 1768; and compare Thomas Hollis to A. Eliot, 1 July, 1768. Of the country Members, Hawley, than whom no one was abler, or s production. As to external evidence, 1. Andrew Eliot, a most estimable clergyman of Boston, thorhe History of Hutchinson, and the biography of Eliot, attribute generally many Massachusetts State r seems to me to be no copy. The letter of Andrew Eliot also attributes the authorship of the Petit the evidence of the contemporary letter by Andrew Eliot, the whole conduct of Samuel Adams for the
elf. But it was only a coarse sketch of his own bad qualities. I told the Grand Jury, said Hutchinson, almost in plain words, that they might depend on being damned, Hutchinson to——26 March, 1768. if they did not find against the paper, as containing High Treason. The Jury refused. Oaths and the laws have lost their force, Hutchinson to the Duke of Grafton, 27 March, 1768. Hutchinson to Richard Jackson, 23 March, 1768. wrote Hutchinson; while the people were overjoyed, Compare A. Eliot to T. Hollis, 18 April, 1768. Hutchinson's Hist. of Massachusetts, III. 184. and the honest and independent Grand Jurors became the favorite toast of the Sons of Liberty. On the day on which the General Court was prorogued, merchants of Boston came together, began a subscription to renounce commerce with England, and invited the merchants of the whole Continent to give the world the spectacle of a universal passive resistance. De Kalb, who was astonished at the prosperity of the Col
the public tranquillity. Hillsborough to Gage, 23 April, 1768. But it was characteristic of Massachusetts, that the peace had not been broken. The power of Parliament was denied, but not resisted. Things are fast hastening to a crisis, said Eliot Andrew Eliot to Thomas Hollis, 18 April, 1768. of Boston. Yet none desponded. The people were persuaded that England had greater cause to fear the loss of their trade, than they the withholding of her protection. The grand design of God in Andrew Eliot to Thomas Hollis, 18 April, 1768. of Boston. Yet none desponded. The people were persuaded that England had greater cause to fear the loss of their trade, than they the withholding of her protection. The grand design of God in the settlement of New England, Boston Gazette, 25 April, 1768, 682, 1, 3. began to be more clearly discerned. Some enthusiasts saw in this western Continent the wilderness spoken of in the vision of the Evangelist John, as the asylum Chap. Xxxiii} 1768. April. of persecuted multitudes, to whom the wings of a Great Eagle had been given to bear them to the place prepared by God for their rest from tribulation. Meantime, on Saturday, the second day of April, the Assembly of Virginia read
hatelet to Choiseul, 21 June, 1768. have no longer need of support from the British Crown, and see in the projects of their metropolis measures of tyranny and oppression. I apprehend a breach between the two countries, owned Franklin. Franklin to his Son, 2 July, 1768. Works, VII. 411. Franklin to Joseph Galloway, 2 July, 1768; Works, VII. 412. I was always of opinion since the accession of George the Third, that matters would issue the way you now expect, wrote Hollis T. Hollis to A. Eliot, 1 July, 1768. to a New England man, who predicted independence; you are an ungracious people. There is original sin in you. You are assertors of Liberty, and the principles of the Revolution. The whole body of the people of New Hampshire were resolved to stand or fall with the Massachusetts. It is best, counselled the good Langdon Samuel Langdon to Ezra Stiles, 6 July, 1768. of Portsmouth, for the Americans to let the King know the utmost of their resolutions, and the danger of a v
en to the King's Government. Chap. XXXVI.} 1768. Sept. Nine tenths of the people considered the declaration of the Council just. Hutchinson to T. Whately, Boston, 4 Oct. 1768. Throughout the Province they were ripe for almost any thing. Andrew Eliot to T. Hollis, 27 Sept. 1768. The British Ministry, never dared seriously to insist on the provision for the troops required by the Billeting Act. The Convention, which remained but six days in session, repeated the Protest of Massachusetts their just rights, relying on Him who ruleth according to his pleasure, with unerring wisdom and irresistible influence, in the hearts of the children of men. Compare Frances to Choiseul, 21 Sept. 1768; and Same to Same, 23 Sept. 1768. Also A. Eliot, to T. Hollis, 27 Sept, 1768, and Same to Same, 17 Oct. 1768. They then dissolved themselves, leaving the care for the public to the Council. This was the first great example in America of the Fabian policy; the first restoration of affairs
, were each in a different frame of mind. A troublesome anxiety took possession of Bernard, who began to fear his recall, and intercede to be spared. Hutchinson to T. Whately, Boston, 17 Oct. 1768. These red coats make a formidable appearance, said Hutchinson, with an exulting countenance, and an air of complacency, buoyant with the prospect of rising one step higher. The soldiers liked the country they were come to, and, sure that none would betray them, soon deserted in numbers. Andrew Eliot to Thomas Hollis, 17 Oct. 1768. The Commissioners were more haughty than before, and gratified their malignity by arresting Hancock and Malcom on charges, confidently made but never established. Gage to Hillsborough, No. 19 and No. 28, 5 March, 1769. All were anxious to know the decision of the King and the New Parliament, respecting the great question between Government by consent and Government by authority. But the determination of the King was evident from the first. Chatham, ev
1 2