chap. V.} 1763. Feb.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
1 This part of the scheme was not at once brought out. The evidence of its existence in idea is, therefore, not to be found in the journals of parliament; but see Alnon's Biographical Anecdotes of most Emninent Persons, II. 83: ‘To make a new division of the colonies;’ ‘to make them all royal governments.’ See also Chas. Townshend's speech in the House of Commons, on the third of June, 1766; ‘It has long been my opinion,’ &c. &c. See also the communication from Governor Wentworth, of New Hampshire, to Dr. Langdon, as narrated in Gordon's American Revolution, i. 142-144. Compare also Richard Jackson to Lieutenant Governor Hutchinson, 18 Nov. 1766. Charles Townshend ‘has often turned that matter, the alteration of the constitutions in America, in his thoughts, and was once inclined that way.’ This can hardly refer to any other moment than Townshend's short career as first lord of trade. Compare, further, the letter of Governor Bernard to Halifax, of 9 November, 1764, where the idea of these constitutional alterations is most fully developed, and where it is said, ‘This business seems only to have waited for a proper time.’ See, too, the many letters from the colonies, just before the peace, strongly recommending the changes. Lieut. Gov. Colden's paper on the same subject. So, too, the queries of the Rev. Dr. Samuel Johnson, of Connecticut, sent, in 1760, to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Seeker to Johnson. R. Jackson to Hutchinson, 13 Aug. 1764, and Hutchinson to Jackson, 15 October, 1764, relate to the same subject. The purpose against Rhode Island and Connecticut was transmitted through successive ministries till the Declaration of Independence.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.