[
80]
pleading its imperfections.
The charter sketched by
Sir George Treby was rejected by the privy council for its liberality; and that which was finally conceded
Correct Ebeling, i. 1015, by I. Mather's Account p. 9. |
reserved such powers to the crown, that
Cooke, the popular envoy, declined to accept it.
Somers and King William were less liberal to
Massachusetts than Clar-
endon and Charles II.
The freemen of Massachusetts, under the old charter, had elected their governor annually; he was henceforward appointed by the king during the royal pleasure.
The governor had been but first among the magistrates; he was now the representative of English royalty, and could convene, adjourn, or dissolve the general court.
The freemen had, by popular vote, annually elected their magistrates, or judicial officers; the judges were now appointed, with consent of council, by the royal governor.
The decisions in the courts of New England had been final; appeals to the privy council were now admitted.
The freemen had exercised the full power of legislation within themselves by their deputies; the warrior king reserved a double veto —an immediate negative to the governor of the colony, while, at any time within three years, the king might cancel any act of colonial legislation.
In one respect, the new charter was an advancement.
Every form of Christianity, except, unhappily, the Roman Catholic, was enfranchised; and, in civil affairs, the freedom of the colony, no longer restricted to the members of the church, was extended so widely as to be, in a practical sense, nearly universal.
The legislature continued to encourage by law the religion professed by the majority of the inhabitants, but it no longer decided controversies on opinions; and no synod was ever again convened.
The charter government of Massachusetts, as
