liament, and as such ought to be observed. This House, Sir, has too great a reverence for the Supreme Legislature of the nation to question its authority. It by no means appertains to us to presume to adjust the boundaries of the power of Parliament; but boundaries there undoubtedly are. We hope we may, without offence, put your Excellency in mind of that most grievous sentence of excommunication solemnly denounced by the Church in the name of the sacred Trinity, in the presence of King Henry the Third and the estates of the realm, against all those who should make Statutes or observe them, being made contrary to the liberties of Magna Charta. We are ready to think those zealous advocates for the Constitution usually compared their Acts of Parliament with Magna Charta; and if it ever happened that such Acts were made as infringed upon the rights of that charter they were always repealed. We have the same confidence in the rectitude of the present Parliament, and therefore cannot but be surprised at an intimation in your speech, that they will require a submission to an Act as a preliminary to their granting relief from the unconstitutional burdens of it; which we apprehend includes a suggestion in it far from your Excellency's design, and supposes such a wanton exercise of me arbitrary power as ought never to be surmised of the patrons of liberty and justice.1

Then the members went into the question of alleged rights conferred by the charter of the province on the General Assembly-to make laws for its internal government and taxation-and touched on the grievance of nonrepresentation, professing to think that the Governor had enunciated an opinion against them on this point. They flatly refused to make any use of stamps, whatever might be the consequences, and made reflections on the Governor's conduct which will be best understood from his reply. This reply has been remarked upon as long and 'prolix'; but, in point of fact, it is considerably shorter than the

The Gentleman's Magazine for 1765; Supplement, The Answer of the Great and General Court of Assembly of Boston, in New England, on October 28, to the foregoing Speech of His Excellency Governor Bernard on occasion of the Stamp Act.' The date, 'October 28,' seems to be a misprint, as the Governor replied to this Answer on the 25th. One of these two dates must, of course, be wrong, and the date of the Governor's Reply appears to be sufficiently corroborated.

THE GOVERNOR'S REMONSTRANCE

19

speech of the House.' 1 Mr. Bernard begins by saying to

the General Court:

I was so determined to let the business of this part of the sessions pass on without any interruption from me, that I have postponed doing myself justice in a matter in which I think I have been much injured. But as it has not been my intention to pass it over in silence, and therefore seem to admit the justice of the charge, I take this opportunity to make the following expostulation.2

The remonstrance was addressed to the Gentlemen of the House of Representatives'; but only a few lines can be quoted to give an idea of its argument:

I have happened to be the Governor of this Province at a time when the Parliament has thought proper to enact a taxation of the colonies. It is not pretended that I have promoted this tax, nor can it with any truth be pretended that I have had it in my power to oppose it by any means whatsoever. However, when the Act was passed, it brought upon me a necessary duty, which, it seems, did not coincide with the opinions of the people. This is my offence; but it is really the offence of my office, and against that you should have expressed your resentment, and not against my person. If I could have dispensed with my duty, perhaps I might have pleased you; but then I must have condemned myself, and been condemned by my Royal Master. I cannot purchase your favour at so dear a rate. . .

...

You seem to be displeased with my making the opposition to the execution of the Act of Parliament a business of the Provincial Legislature. But, gentlemen, you should consider that it was in pursuance of the unanimous advice of a very full Council that I called you together for this very purpose. It was necessary for me to explain the cause of your meeting; and I could not avoid being explicit upon the subject, consistent with my sense of my duty. I should have thought myself very inexcusable if I had foreseen dangers to the province like to arise from the behaviour of the people, and not have warned you against them.

You charge me with casting a reflection on the loyalty of the province, by wresting my words to a meaning which it is not

It occupies about four columns, the Speech of the House about six columns, in The Gentleman's Magazine.

2 The Gentleman's Magazine, January 1766.

easy to conceive how they could be thought to bear. No one, gentlemen, has been louder in proclaiming the loyalty of this province than I myself have; I have boasted of it; I have prided myself in it; and I trust the time will come when I shall do so again.

He refers to the registered testimonies of their approval of 'his administration in previous years, to his letters in the English public offices as proofs of his interest in the welfare of the province, adding, I shall still serve it by all the means in my power,' and warning the malcontents that they might one day want advocates and friends to plead their cause with the English authorities. This, under a firmer Government, might have happened. He concludes: The pains which are taken to disunite the General Court must have bad consequences, more or less. But they shall not prevent me pursuing such measures as I shall think most conducive to the general welfare of the province.'

The House continued obdurate, and on the 28th once more emphatically refused to sanction the distribution of the stamps. On the 30th it adopted fourteen resolutions, drawn up by Samuel Adams, against the claim of Great Britain to tax America; according to Hutchinson, three-fourths of the members who voted for them were the same persons who, but one session before, had voted for an address explicitly admitting the right of Parliament to tax the

colonies.'

Soon after the delivery of his first speech in September Mr. Bernard wrote to General Conway, the new Secretary of State:

By my letter to Lord, bearing date the 7th instant, I informed [sic] that I had called the General Assembly to meet at Boston the 25th instant; this was done, not so much with the prospect of success, as that nothing might be left untried to procure obedience to the Act of Parliament. Before the Assembly met I was particularly cautioned against speaking freely on the subject of the Act of Parliament; that the people would not bear to hear of a submission to it; and therefore it would be best to say as little of it as possible. But I observed the violence of the mob had intimidated some of the best men of the pro

LETTER TO GENERAL CONWAY

21

vince and left the cause of the King and Parliament almost without an advocate; that if I should be awed also, so as not to explain to the Assembly the nature of the business for which they were called, there would be no means left to bring the people to their senses, and open their eyes to the danger they were running headlong into. It was therefore necessary for me to speak not only freely, but fully, upon the subject; as my speech would be the only antidote for the poison which was continually distributed in weekly papers. But I meant to be as cautious as I could, without weakening the force of my argument. I accordingly opened the session with the speech as enclosed; and herein I must beg your Honour's indulgence, in regard to the improprieties of it, that you will be pleased to consider it as addressed to a particular people and for particular purposes, which induced me to treat a delicate subject with more freedom than I should have done if my cause had not required it.

I shall constantly communicate to your Honour what shall further happen upon this dangerous and perilous situation; in the midst of those who first stirred up these disturbances; without a force to protect my person, without a Council to advise me; watched by every eye, and misrepresented and condemned for everything I do on the King's behalf; not indeed charged personally with any default of my own, but continually arraigned and abused for the execution of the functions of my office. If things do not take another turn before the 1st of November, the appearance of government must cease; as the real authority has ever since the first riot. I must, however, when I mention my being without a Council, except the Lieutenant-Governor, whose zeal for his Majesty's service, and firmness of mind, has not been abated by the cruel treatment he has met with.'

In a subsequent letter Mr. Bernard says that he would endeavour to keep his post, if possible, until he should receive his Majesty's orders, which he should expect, not without impatience.' He continues:

2

I inclose with this copies of my speech to the General Court, the answer of the House of Representatives, and my reply thereto; from all which I hope it will appear that I have left nothing

Conway, Secretary of State, better known as General Conway), Boston, October 28, 1765. This is the date given in Select Letters, but it is clearly wrong. Thomas Bernard, in his Life of his Father, ascribes it to September. 2 Life of Sir Francis Bernard.

undone to procure that obedience to this Act which I think due to every Act of Parliament from all British subjects. I am told here that I have done more than I need have done; in that I must judge for myself; certainly I have sacrificed to my duty considerably. Such I reckon my losing the general goodwill and good opinion of the people, not by any act of my own, but by the unavoidable obligations of my office, in a business in which I had no concern but as an executive officer.

I would not presume to give advice to his Majesty's Ministers of State; but yet I hope I shall be excused when I reveal my earnest wishes that some means may be found to make it consistent with the dignity of Parliament to put the Stamp Act out of the question, at least for the present. For I am persuaded that measures, which are now become more than ever necessary for bringing America into good order, will meet with tenfold difficulty if taken before the present fermentation has subsided. At present by artifice, prejudice, and passion, good men and bad men are unaccountably confounded together; a little time and management will separate them and bring them under their proper arrangements.1

November 1 arrived, and was everywhere heralded by demonstrations of indignation, muffled bells, minute guns, and flags half-mast high, with an accompaniment of seditious speeches; but in Boston it passed off more quietly than in many other provincial capitals. In New York Colden, the Acting Governor, was compelled to deliver the stamps into the keeping of the Common Council, a municipal body elected by the people. He fought hard, but his own Council turned against him, and General Gage deprecated further resistance. The stamps were lodged in the City Hall, and when Moore, the new Governor, arrived, he also gave way, 'dismantled the fort, and suspended his power to execute the Stamp Act.'

On the 23rd Governor Bernard wrote to a nobleman,

Esq. (H. S. Conway),

1 Select Letters, 'Letter VIII. to Secretary of State, Boston, October 28, 1765.' These two paragraphs are, indeed, printed in the collection as part of the same letter as the foregoing. It is not impossible for the letter to have been sent with the speeches enclosed on October 28, just after they had been delivered; but Thomas, in the Life, gives November 25 as its date. I cannot account for the mistakes in the Select Letters. 2 Bancroft, Hosmer, and other histories.