mands became unprofitable, and concessions to settlers were steadily accumulating in the form of vested rights. The transfer of the official residences and headquarters from England to Massachusetts was one of the great steps indicating progress in the right direction. But on the 23d of July, 1664, his Majesty's commissioners arrived; and they would assume control over this question of the right of soil, and all other questions.

"The lands" claimed by the settlers in Massachusetts, the royalists said, "belonged to Robert Gorges;" but these Puritan intruders had "made themselves a free people." "The right of England to the soil, under the pretence of discovery, they derided as a Popish doctrine, derived from Alexander VI.; and they pleaded, as of more avail, their just occupation, and their purchase from the natives;"" and, as the establishment of a commission with discretionary powers was not specially sanctioned by their charter, they resolved to resist the orders of the king, and nullify his commission." *

In 1672, Carteret began to think it time to collect his quit-rents of half a penny an acre from the New-Jersey Puritans; but they resisted the lawyers with the very primitive doctrine, that "the heathen, as the lineal descendants of Noah, had a rightful claim to their lands." They chose, therefore, to get their titles from the Indians, refuse to pay their "quitrents" to parties who never had lawfully owned the soil, and, by act of assembly, to drive away "Mr. Carteret," and keep him away, until he could learn not to speak of "quit-rents" for "the lands belonging of right to New-Jersey freemen."

These are specimens of the contest which arose inevitably in this virgin land. Titles acquired from the natives by honest contract, or acquired under the primal laws of discovery and occupation by hardy Christian enterprise, or obtained by concessions wrung from proprietaries, companies, or the crown, as the result of firmness in asserting the right, were so many victories in the great mind-struggle which preceded the wars of the Revolution.

* Bancroft, ii. 79.

THE RIGHTS OF TRADE.

As soon as the feeble colonists began to discover native products which could be converted into articles of traffic, or to produce from the soil a little corn and tobacco, companies and proprietaries began to dictate the laws of trade, exact revenue, and establish grand monopolies, the tendency of which was to impoverish the settlers, and enrich the governing classes. When, therefore, the spirit of Virginians rose sufficiently high to say, "For the encouragement of men to plant store of corn, the price shall not be restricted, but it shall be free for every man to sell it as deare as he can," they used brave words, which contained the fundamental principle of free and successful trade.

In 1622, the commerce of New England began to attract attention. These Puritans were likely to have advantages, which, in the judgment of men" at home," from whose oppression they had fled, were of very questionable right. "In the second year after the settlement of Plymouth, five and thirty sail of vessels went to fish on the coasts of New England, and made good voyages. The monopolists appealed to King James; and the monarch, preferring to assert his own extended prerogatives rather than to regard the spirit of the House of Commons, issued a proclamation which forbade any to approach the northern coast of America, except with the special leave of the Company of Plymouth or of the Privy Council. It was monstrous thus to attempt to seal up a large portion of an immense continent."* Will the attempt succeed? "Your patent," said Sir Edward Coke to Gorges," contains many particulars contrary to the laws and privileges of the subject: it is a monopoly, and the ends of private gain are concealed under color of planting a colony. Shall none visit the seacoast for fishing? This is to make a monopoly upon the seas, which wont to be free. If you alone are to pack and dry fish, you attempt a monopoly of the wind and the sun." It was in vain for Sir George Calvert to

*Bancroft, i. 325.

growl, "The fishermen hinder the plantations; they choke the harbors with their ballast, and waste the forests by improvident use." The Commons were determined. The bill repealing this odious patent "passed without amendment." James refused his assent; but neither that nor his royal orders already quoted availed any thing. Both patent and orders went down with the monopoly of the company in a struggle with a handful of Pilgrims representing the principles of eternal justice.

In 1642, the Virginians come up to this question again. Under the administration of Sir William Berkeley; they assert their rights in the clearest and most dignified language. "Freedom of trade," they insist, "is the blood and life of a commonwealth."

Spain and Portugal were greedy of the profits of trade; and, based upon the enterprise of discovery, sanctioned by the authority of Rome, they resolved upon a monopoly of the commerce of the world, and "denounced the severest penalties" against those who should dare to intrude. God, however, made use of the commercial freedom of Holland to antagonize this usurpation, and wrest from the usurpers the dominion of the seas. Then the Dutch, in their turn, became the commercial monopolists of Europe.

England rose up to dispute this sovereignty of the ocean. Cromwell resisted Holland, and established the famous Navigation Act. He was friendly to the colonies; and, intending to make America the great commercial interest of the commonwealth, he accorded to her the unrestricted sale of her great staple in all the markets of the world.

Monarchy restored returned immediately to its old passion for revenues, and determined upon monopolies of American trade, and especially of the tobacco-trade, as the means of accomplishing the purpose. Charles "invoked the authority of the Star Chamber to assist in filling his exchequer by new and onerous duties on tobacco." He sent commissioners to buy up the whole crop. The colonists dared to

resist; and he would try other proclamations, restricting the markets to London, determined in some way, by "his will and pleasure, to have the sole pre-emption of all tobacco."

Whenever it seemed necessary, for the time being, to consent to the measures which sought to forge commercial fetters for the colonists, it was done with such caution as to give no historical advantage to tyranny.

In 1663, "the importation of European commodities into the colonies, except in English ships from England," was prohibited by a stringent law. Even exchanges between New England and the Southern colonies were prohibited; and duties were levied upon little articles of traffic between these future States, the same as on foreign goods. Americans were forbidden to manufacture articles which would compete with England; and this odious system of monopoly was fortified by all the cruelty that ingenuity could crowd into at least "twenty-nine acts of Parliament."

The contest must, therefore, go on. The right to cripple and virtually destroy American trade, so fiercely asserted, was just as persistently denied, until the battles of mind resulted in blood.

THE RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION AND FREE LEGISLATION.

We have seen that one of the first instincts of colonists, whether under the patronage of England, or refugees from her tyranny, was to provide laws for the protection of personal and social rights, and the preservation of public order. This necessity, at first acquiesced in by all parties, at length became a question of vigorously-contested prerogative.

In 1621, Virginia received through Sir George Yeardley a written constitution for "the great comfort and benefit of the people, and the prevention of injustice, grievances, and oppression;" and "the system of representative government, and trial by jury, thus became in New Hemisphere an acknowledged right." This concession was, however, only

indirectly from the crown, and would be recalled whenever the caprice of tyranny suggested it.

Virginia, however, would and did make her own laws. "There is more likelihood," she said distinctly in the ears of power, "that such as are acquainted with the clime and its accidents may upon better grounds prescribe our advantages than such as shall sit at the helm in England."

Maryland, one day in advance of Virginia, in the house of Robert Sly, claimed through her lawful representatives the right of independent legislation.

The other colonies of the Southern group followed in the train. Severe contests arose; but the future Republic never retraced her steps.

The Pilgrims, as we have seen, asserted their right of selfgovernment in "The Mayflower." This right they never surrendered. "The Bay State" resisted every encroachment upon her fundamental rights, and, in 1634, enacted "the test oath," requiring from every freeman sworn allegiance, "not to King Charles, but to Massachusetts."

No charter granting prerogatives of government could as yet be obtained. The Plymouth colonists would like to have it, would try hard, and expend much money in an attempt to get it; but, if they failed, they would surrender no right, and omit no act necessary to vindicate the righteous prerogatives of God's freemen.

"Relying upon their original compact, the colonists gradually assumed all the prerogatives of government; even the power, after some hesitation, of capital punishment. No less than eight capital offences are enumerated in the first Plymouth code, including treason or rebellion against the colony, and 'solemn compaction or conversing with the Devil.' Trial by jury was early introduced; but the punishments to be inflicted on minor offences remained, for the most part, discretionary. For eighteen years, all laws were enacted in general assembly of all the colonists. The governor chosen annually was but president of a council, in which he had