for the abrogation of all American charters.
The journals of the house of lords relate that Con-
necticut was publicly heard against the bill, contending that its liberties were held by contract, in return for services that had been performed; that the taking away of so many charters would destroy all confidence in royal promises, and would afford a precedent dangerous to all the chartered corporations of England
Yet the bill was read a second time, and its principle, as applied to colonies, was advocated by the mercantile interest and by ‘great men’ in England
The impending war with the French
postponed the purpose till the accession of the house of Hanover
But the object was not left out of mind.
Lord Cornbury, who had in vain solicited money of Con-
necticut, wrote home, that ‘this vast continent would never be useful to England
, till all the proprietary and
charter governments were brought under the crown.’
Quarry, also, reported to the lords of trade, that ‘the roguery and villany of Connecticut
were enough to fill a volume;’ and, appealing to the powerful sympathy in the English
policy of that age, declared that, ‘if the government be continued longer in these men's hands, the honest trade of these parts will be ruined.’
, a native New England
man, now governor of Massachusetts
, took the lead in the conspiracy against the liberties of New England
, preparing a volume of complaints, and urging the appointment of a governor over Connecticut
by the royal prerogative.
their associates, are the men who first filled the world with calumnies against that commonwealth.
The lords of trade were too just to condemn the colony unheard, and it succeeded in its vindication; only an obsolete law against Quakers, which had never been