incident to the state of affairs, but from the frequent incursions of the French and their savage confederates. The latter, encouraged by the successes of the French, had broken from their English connexions, and now swept over the country, and committed the most atrocious depredations and cruelties. But at length, under the vigorous administration of the celebrated Pitt, an entire alteration took place. The British arms became triumphant, and after the battle on the plains of Abraham, in September, 1759, and the consequent surrender of Quebec, the power of France in America was nearly prostrated. Negotiations for peace soon followed, but these not being successful, a "family compact" was entered into between France and Spain, to oppose the growing pretensions and power of the English.25 The union of these powers was a means of prolonging the contest for a time. This indeed had been foreseen by Pitt, and he had urged upon the Cabinet the necessity of forestalling the effect, by an early attack upon Spain. But a new King of narrow capacity and a determined temper, had come to the throne, and a portion of the Cabinet were jealous of the power and influence which the principal Minister had held and wielded.26 Pitt was overruled, and he, resolving not to be responsible for movements he could no longer direct, resigned his employments and place. But a powerful impulse had been given to the course of affairs, and the new Minister had sufficient wisdom to follow in the track that had already been opened, and Great Britain, by the aid of her colonies, rose superior to the united power of the Bourbons. In 1762, Havanna, the capital of Cuba, and the strong hold of Spanish America, surrendered to the English, and other places of strength were also reduced. These continued successes gave rise to dispositions favourable to peace. France and

28

25 In this agreement between France and Spain, which was concluded on the 15th of August, 1761, it was declared that the two Crowns would consider as their common enemy every power that should become such to either, and that whoever attacked one Crown, attacked also the other. It was also agreed that when they should terminate by peace, the war they had supported in common, they would balance the advantages that one might have gained, against the losses of the other.

20

Upon the death of George the Second, in October, 1760, George the Third ascended the Throne.

Spain were dispirited, and England was less desirous of farther conquest, than for relief from the embarrassments caused by the debts incurred in the war. Preliminaries for a treaty of peace were agreed to, and signed on the 3d of November, 1762, and the articles were finally ratified and confirmed at Paris in February, 1763.

By this treaty, Nova Scotia, Canada, and all their dependencies were ceded to Great Britain, and a line was agreed upon between the dominions of his Britanic Majesty, and those of his most Christian Majesty, drawn along the middle of the River Mississippi, from its source, to the River Iberville, and from thence by a line drawn along the middle of the River and the Lakes Maurepas and Pontchartrain, to the sea; and his most Christian Majesty ceded in full right and guarantied to his Britanic Majesty the river and port of Mobile, and every thing he possessed or ought to possess, on the left side of the River Mississippi, except the town of New Orleans and the island on which it is situated, which were reserved to France. To secure the restoration of Havanna, the King of Spain was obliged to yield to Great Britain, Florida, St. Augustine, the Bay of Pensacola, and all her possessions to the east and south-east of the Mississippi. To compensate Spain for the loss of Florida, and thus to "balance" advantages and losses, France, by a secret article, ceded Louisiana to his most Catholic Majesty.

The design of France to confine the English colonists to a narrow strip of coast, or perhaps to subjugate them entirely, was thus completely defeated. The entire command of the country to the east of the Mississippi, was secured by the English, and Canada was added to their possessions. But these advantages had not been easily or cheaply obtained. There had been a great expenditure of treasure and of life. The colonists had generally kept in the field a force of twenty thousand men, and had contributed more than three millions of pounds.27 New Jersey had raised at different periods, near three hundred thousand pounds, and for a great part of the time had maintained a force of one thousand men, beside particular bodies for special services.

"Of this sum the British Parliament reimbursed at different times, one million of pounds.

Several changes had occurred during this period in the government of New Jersey. At the death of Governor Belcher, which occurred in August, 1757, the administration again devolved upon John Reading, who continued in office until he was superseded, in June, 1758, by the arrival of Francis Bernard, Esq.28 Governor Bernard performed important services in effecting a pacification with the Indian tribes. In 1760, he was transferred to the government of Massachusetts, and was succeeded by Thomas Boone, who, in about one year, was also transferred, being removed to South Carolina. Josiah Hardy, Esq., was the next in succession; his period of service was likewise but brief; being appointed soon afterwards to the Consulate at Cadiz. In September, 1762, a commission was given to William Franklin, Esq. He was the son of Dr. Benjamin Franklin. He had served as a captain in the late war, and afterwards had accompanied his father to England. He owed his appointment to the influence of Lord Bute.29

President Reading at first refused to enter upon office, on account of his age and infirmities, which he said rendered "the administration too burdensome for me cheerfully to undertake." But he finally consented.

29

The appointment of Franklin as Governor, was the cause of some surprise at the time, his fitness for the place being strongly questioned.

See Life of Lord Sterling, p. 69.

CHAPTER XVIII.

OPINIONS RELATING TO THE RIGHTS OF THE COLONIES.-PASSAGE OF THE STAMP ACT.-OPPOSITION TO THE STAMP ACT.-THE REPEAL.

THE long contest that had been carried on by England and her American colonies against a common enemy, had served, for the time, to bring them into closer union, both of interest and of feeling. The sympathies that arose from a common extraction, had been strengthened by a participation in danger, and afterwards in triumph. The Assembly of New Jersey declared, at the conclusion of the war, that "ages to come will rejoice in the happy event, and we trust the recompence to our mother country will prove unfailing returns of wealth and gratitude, in a manner not now easily foreseen." But the concord that had thus arisen was not destined to be of long duration. At an early period differences of opinion began to be manifested as to the relative condition and claims of the countries. Such differences indeed had long existed, but no marked occasion had occurred for their general exhibition. The colonial governments had been established at different times and in different modes; there were provincial, proprietary, and charter governments. In some of these the dependence of the people upon the Crown was closer than in others; but whatever might be the particular character of their institutions, the colonists claimed to be entitled to all the privileges which belonged to other subjects of Great Britain. They claimed, that in the new and distant country in which they were placed, they had lost none of the rights and immunities that were enjoyed by residents and native born subjects in the ancient realm. The limitations upon authority, which existed and were in force in the mother country, were supposed also to be in force in the provinces. In the maintenance of these claims, important questions arose from time to time for consideration and decision, and among the most important of these, were those relat

ing to representation and taxation. It was one of the vital principles of the English constitution, that the people should be free from all taxation, except such as they had assented to, either directly, or by the representatives they had chosen. In the government of England, representation and taxation were regarded as inseparable. The colonists claimed that this immunity belonged to them as fully as to any other subjects; that Americans could not be taxed but by their own consent. This claim had been advanced at the earliest periods, and had been constantly maintained. They also declared that they were not, and from their local situation could not be represented in the British Parliament, and therefore, that they could not be taxed by that body; that the authority of Parliament in this respect was entirely inoperative in the provinces; and this doctrine seemed to be supported not only by justice, but also by the general scope of provincial government. There was not, except in one instance, any thing to give color to an exercise of Parliamentary authority in the colonies for the purpose of taxation. The original charter of Pennsylvania contained a provision that the Crown should levy no tax, or custom upon the inhabitants, or their goods, unless by the consent of the proprietary or the Assembly, "or by

So early as 1636, the Assembly of Plymouth declared that "no act, imposition, law, or ordinance be made or imposed upon us at present or to come, but such as has, or shall be enacted by the consent of the body of freemen or their Representatives legally assembled; which is according to the free liberties of the free born people of England." In 1650, when the constitution of Maryland was settled, the Legislature enacted, that no taxes should be assessed or levied on the freemen of the province without their own consent, or that of their deputies. In 1661, the General Court of Massachusetts made a similar declaration, and very soon afterwards Rhode Island adopted, on her own behalf, the words of Magna Charta, that "no tallage, or custom, loan, or benevolence, gift, excise, duty, or imposition whatsoever, be laid, assessed, imposed, levied, or required of any of his Majesty's subjects within this colony, or upon their estates, upon any pretence, but by the assent of the General Assembly of this colony." (Pitkin, vol. 1, p. 80.) At an early period, the same principle was asserted in New Jersey. The attempt of Andross to impose customs upon the people of West Jersey drew forth the admirable defence which was made by the proprietors against such a demand. They asserted that it was in direct opposition to their English right of common assent to taxes. Similar declarations were made at different times in nearly all of the colonies.