1775 and beginning of 1776—preparation in england to reduce the colonists to absolute submission—self-asserted authority of parliament.

the eventful year of 1775—the year preceding that of the american declaration of independence—opened with increased and formidable preparations on the part of england to reduce the american colonies to absolute submission. the ground of this assumption of absolute power over the colonies had no sanction in the british constitution, much less in the history of the colonies; it was a simple declaration or declaratory bill by the parliament itself, in 1764, of its right to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever, and no more a part of the british constitution than any declaration of parliament in the previous century of its authority over the monarchy and the constitution and existence of the house of lords. assuming and declaring an authority over the american colonies which parliament had never before, and which it has never since exercised, and which no statesman or political writer of repute at this day regards as constitutional, parliament proceeded to tax the colonies without their consent, to suspend the legislative powers of the new york legislature, to close the port of boston, to annul and change all that was free in the charter government of massachusetts, to forbid the new england colonies the fisheries of newfoundland, and afterwards to prohibit to all the colonies commerce with each other and with foreign countries; to denounce, as in the royal speech to parliament of the previous october, as "rebellion," remonstrances against and opposition to these arbitrary and cruel enactments; to[pg 460] appeal to holland and russia (but in vain) for the aid of foreign soldiers, and to hire of german blood-trading princes seventeen thousand mercenary soldiers to butcher british subjects in the colonies, even to liberate slaves for the murder of their masters, and to employ savage indians to slaughter men, women, and children.

all this was done by the king and his servants against the colonies before the close of the year 1775, while they still disclaimed any design or desire for independence, and asked for nothing more than they enjoyed in 1763, after they had given the noblest proof of liberality and courage, to establish and maintain british supremacy in america during the seven years' war between england and france, and enjoyed much less of that local self-government, immunity, and privilege which every inhabitant of the canadian dominion enjoys at this day.

during that french war, and for a hundred years before, the colonists had provided fortresses, artillery, arms, and ammunition for their own defence; they were practised marksmen, far superior to the regular soldiery of the british army, with the character and usages of which they had become familiar. they offered to provide for their own defence as well as for the support of their civil government, both of which the british government requires of the provinces of the canadian dominion, but both of which were denied to the old provinces of america, after the close of the seven years' war with france. the king and his ministers not only opposed the colonies providing for their own defence, but ordered the seizure of their magazines, cannon, and arms. general gage commenced this kind of provocation and attack upon the colonists and their property; seized the arms of the inhabitants of boston; spiked their cannon at night on fort hill; seized by night, also, 13 tons of colonial powder stored at charleston; sent by night an expedition of eight hundred troops, twenty miles to concord, to seize military provisions, but they were driven back to lexington with the loss of 65 killed and 180 wounded, and on the part of the colonists 50 killed and 34 wounded. this was the commencement of a bloody revolution, and was soon followed by the battle of bunker's hill, in which, "on the part of the british," says holmes, "about 3,000 men were engaged in this action; and their killed and wounded amounted to 1,054. the number of[pg 461] americans in this engagement was 1,500; and their killed, wounded, and missing amounted to 453."[374]

in each of these conflicts the attack was made and the first shot was fired on the part of the british troops. of this, abundant evidence was forthwith collected and sent to england. it was carefully inculcated that in no instance should the colonists attack or fire the first shot upon the british troops; that in all cases they should act upon the defensive, as their cause was the defence of their rights and property; but when attacked, they retaliated with a courage, skill, and deadly effect that astonished their assailants, and completely refuted the statements diligently made in england and circulated in the army, that the colonists had no military qualities and would never face british troops.[375]

[pg 462]

about the same time that general gage thus commenced war upon the people of massachusetts, who so nobly responded in defence of their constitutional rights, lord dunmore, governor of virginia, committed similar outrages upon the traditionally loyal virginians, who, as mr. bancroft says, "were accustomed to associate all ideas of security in their political rights with[pg 463] the dynasty of hanover, and had never, even in thought, desired to renounce their allegiance. they loved to consider themselves an integral part of the british empire. the distant life of landed proprietors, in solitary mansion-houses, favoured independence of thought; but it also generated an aristocracy, which differed widely from the simplicity and equality of new england. educated in the anglican church, no religious zeal had imbued them with a fixed hatred of kingly power; no deep-seated antipathy to a distinction of ranks, no theoretic[pg 464] zeal for the introduction of a republic, no speculative fanaticism drove them to a restless love of change. they had, on the contrary, the greatest aversion to a revolution, and abhorred the dangerous experiment of changing their form of government without some absolute necessity."[376]

but the virginians, like all true loyalists, were "loyal to the people's part of the constitution as well as to that which pertains to the sovereign."[377] to intimidate them, dunmore issued[pg 465] proclamations, and threatened freeing the slaves against their masters. on the night of the 20th of april he sent a body of marines, in the night, to carry off a quantity of gunpowder belonging to the colony, and stored in its magazine at williamsburg. as soon as this arbitrary seizure of the colony's property became known, drums sounded alarm throughout the city of williamsburg, the volunteer company rallied under arms, and the inhabitants assembled for consultation, and at their request the mayor and corporation waited upon the governor and asked him his motives for carrying off their powder privately "by an armed force, particularly at a time when they were[pg 466] apprehensive of an insurrection among their slaves;" and they demanded that the powder should be forthwith restored.

lord dunmore first answered evasively; but learning that the citizens had assembled under arms, he raged and threatened. he said: "the whole country can easily be made a solitude; and by the living god, if any insult is offered to me, or to those who have obeyed my orders, i will declare freedom to the slaves, and lay the town in ashes."[378]

lord dunmore at the same time wrote to the english secretary of state: "with a small body of troops and arms, i could raise such a force among indians, negroes, and other persons, as would soon reduce the refractory people of this colony to obedience."

yet, after all his boasting and threats, the value of the powder thus unlawfully seized was restored to the colony. lord dunmore, agitated with fears, as most tyrants are, left the government house from fear of the people excited by his own conduct towards them, and went on board of the man-of-war ship tower, at york (about 12 miles from williamsburg, the capital of the province), thus leaving the colony in the absolute possession of its own inhabitants, giving as a reason for his flight, his apprehension of "falling a sacrifice to the daringness and atrociousness, the blind and unmeasurable fury of great numbers of the people;" and the assurance of the very people whom he feared as to his personal safety and that of his family, and the repeated entreaties of the legislative assembly that he[pg 467] would return to land, with assurance of perfect safety from injury or insult, could not prevail upon lord dunmore to return to the government house, or prevent him from attempting to govern the ancient dominion of virginia from ships of war. he seized a private printing press, with two of its printers, at the town of norfolk, and was thus enabled to issue his proclamations and other papers against the inhabitants whom he had so grossly insulted and injured.[379]

"in october" (1775), says bancroft, "dunmore repeatedly landed detachments to seize arms wherever he could find them. thus far virginia had not resisted the british by force. the war began in that colony with the defence of hampton, a small village at the end of the isthmus between york and james rivers. an armed sloop had been driven on its shore in a very violent gale; its people took out of her six swivels and other stores, made some of her men prisoners, and then set her on fire. dunmore blockaded the port; they called to their assistance a company of "shirtmen," as the british called the virginia regulars, from the hunting shirt which was their uniform, and another company of minute men, besides a body of militia."

"on the 26th dunmore sent some of the tenders close into hampton roads to destroy the town. the guard marched out to repel them, and the moment they came within gunshot, george nicholas, who commanded the virginians, fired his musket at one of the tenders; it was the first gun fired in virginia against the british. his example was followed by his party. retarded by boats which had been sunk across the channel, the british on that day vainly attempted to land.[pg 468] the following night the culpepper riflemen were despatched to the aid of hampton; and william woodford, colonel of the 2nd regiment of virginia, was sent by the committee of safety from williamsburg to take the direction. the next day the british, having cut their way through the sunken boats, renewed the attack; but the riflemen poured upon them a heavy fire, killing a few and wounding more. one of the tenders was taken, with its armament and seven seamen; the rest were with difficulty towed out of the creek. the virginians lost not a man. this was the first battle of the revolution in the ancient dominion, and its honours belonged to the virginians."[380]

in consequence of this failure of lord dunmore to burn the town of hampton, he proclaimed martial law and freedom to the slaves. the english annual register states that, "in[pg 469] consequence of the repulse (at hampton) a proclamation was issued (nov. 7th) by the governor, dated on board the ship william, off norfolk, declaring, that as the civil law was at present insufficient to prevent and punish treason and traitors, martial law should take place, and be executed throughout the colony; and requiring all persons capable of bearing arms to repair to his majesty's standard, or to be considered as traitors." he also declared all indentured servants, negroes, and others, appertaining to rebels, who were able and willing to bear arms, and who joined his majesty's forces, to be free.

"the measure for emancipating the negroes," continues the annual register, "excited less surprise, and probably had less effect, from its being so long threatened and apprehended, than if it had been more immediate and unexpected. it was, however, received with the greatest horror in all the colonies, and has been severely condemned elsewhere, as tending to loosen the bands of society, to destroy domestic security, and encourage the most barbarous of mankind to the commission of the most horrible crimes and the most inhuman cruelties; that it was confounding the innocent with the guilty, and exposing those who were the best of friends to the government, to the same loss of property, danger, and destruction with the most incorrigible rebels."[381]

[pg 470]

it will be observed in lord dunmore's proclamation, as also in the english register, and i may add in general stedman's history of the american war, and in other histories of those times, the terms "rebels," "treason," and "traitors" are applied to those who, at that time, as in all previous years, disclaimed all desire of separation from england, and only claimed those constitutional rights of englishmen to which they were as lawfully entitled as the king was to his crown, and very much more so than lord dunmore was entitled to the authority which he was then exercising; for he had been invested with authority to rule according to the constitution of the colony, but he had set aside the legislature of the colony, which had as much right to its opinions and the expression of them as he had to his; he had abandoned the legal seat of government, and taken up his residence on board a man-of-war, and employed his time and strength in issuing proclamations against people to whom he had been sent to govern as the representative of a constitutional sovereign, and made raids upon their coasts, and burned their towns. in truth, lord dunmore and his abettors were the real "rebels" and "traitors," who were committing "treason" against the constitutional rights and liberties of their fellow-subjects, while the objects of their hostility were the real loyalists to the constitution, which gave to the humblest subject his rights as well as to the sovereign his prerogatives.

lord dunmore, from his ship of war, had no right to rule the rich and most extensive colony in america. he had abandoned his appointed seat of government, and he became the ravager of the coasts and the destroyer of the seaport towns of the ancient dominion. this state of things could not long continue. lord dunmore could not subsist his fleet without provisions; and the people would not sell their provisions to those who were seeking to rob them of their liberties and to plunder their property. the english annual register observes:

"in the meantime, the people in the fleet were distressed for provisions and necessaries of every sort, and were cut off from every kind of succour from the shore. this occasioned constant bickering between the armed ships and boats, and the forces that were stationed on the coast, particularly at norfolk. at length, upon the arrival of the liverpool man-of-war from[pg 471] england, a flag was sent on shore to put the question "whether they would supply his majesty's ships with provisions?" which being answered in the negative, and the ships in the harbour being continually annoyed by the fire of the rebels from that part of the town which lay next the water, it was determined to dislodge them by destroying it. previous notice being accordingly given to the inhabitants that they might remove from danger, the first day of the new year (1776) was signalized by the attack, when a violent cannonade from the liverpool frigate, two sloops of war, and the governor's armed ship the dunmore, seconded by parties of sailors and marines, who landed and set fire to the nearest houses, soon produced the desired effect, and the whole town was reduced to ashes."[382]

mr. bancroft eloquently observes: "in this manner the royal governor burned and laid waste the best town in the oldest and[pg 472] most loyal colony of england, to which elizabeth had given a name, and raleigh devoted his fortune, and shakspeare and bacon and herbert foretokened greatness; a colony where the people themselves had established the church of england, and where many were still proud of their ancestors, and in the day of the british commonwealth had been faithful to the line of kings."[383]

[pg 473]

when washington learned the fate of the rich emporium of his own "country," for so he called virginia, his breast heaved with waves of anger and grief. "i hope," said he, "this and the threatened devastation of other places will unite the whole country in one indissoluble band against a government which seems lost to every sense of virtue and those feelings which distinguish a civilized people from the most barbarous savages."

thus the loyal churchmen of virginia received the same treatment from lord dunmore as did the republican congregationalists of massachusetts from general gage. the loyal presbyterians of the two carolinas experienced similar treatment from governors campbell and martin, as stated by the english annual register, in the preceding note. the three southern governors each fled from their seats of government and betook themselves to ships of war; while gage was shut up in boston until his recall to england.

the southern colonies, with those of new england, shared the same fate of misrepresentation, abuse, and invasion of their rights as british subjects; the flames of discontent were spread through all the colonies by a set of incompetent and reckless governors, the favourites and tools of perhaps the worst administration and the most corrupt that ever ruled great britain. all the colonies might adopt the language of the last address of the assembly of virginia: "we have exhausted every mode of application which our inventions could suggest, as proper and promising. we have decently remonstrated with parliament; they have added new injuries to the old. we have wearied the king with our supplications; he has not deigned to answer them. we have appealed to the native honour and justice of the british nation; their efforts in our favour have been hitherto[pg 474] ineffectual." at the meeting of parliament, october 26th, 1775, the king was advised to utter in the royal speech the usual denunciation against the colonies, but the minority in parliament (led by mr. fox, mr. burke, general conway, and lord john cavendish) discussed and denied the statements in the royal speech, and exhibited the results of the ministerial warfare against the colonies at the close of the year 1775, the year before the declaration of independence. "in this contest," says the annual register of 1776, "the speech was taken to pieces, and every part of it most severely scrutinized. the ministers were charged with having brought their sovereign into the most disgraceful and unhappy situation of any monarch now living. their conduct had already wrested the sceptre of america out of his hands. one-half of the empire was lost, and the other thrown into a state of anarchy and confusion. after having spread corruption like a deluge through the land, until all public virtue was lost, and the people were inebriated with vice and profligacy, they were then taught in the paroxysms of their infatuation and madness to cry out for havoc and war. history could not show an instance of such an empire ruined in such a manner. they had lost a greater extent of dominion in the first campaign of a ruinous civil war, which was intentionally produced by their own acts, than the most celebrated conquerors had ever acquired in so short a space of time.

"the speech was said to be composed of a mixture of assumed and false facts, with some general undefined and undisputed axioms, which nobody would attempt to controvert. of the former, that of charging the colonies with aiming at independence was severely reprehended, as being totally unfounded, being directly contrary to the whole tenor of their conduct, to their most express declarations both by word and writing, and to what every person of any intelligence knew of their general temper and disposition.[384] but what they never intended, we[pg 475] may drive them to. they will, undoubtedly, prefer independence to slavery. they will never continue their connection with this country unless they can be connected with its privileges. the continuance of hostility, with the determined refusal of security for these privileges, will infallibly bring on separation.

"the charge of their making professions of duty and proposals of reconciliation only for the insidious purpose of amusing and deceiving, was equally reprobated. it was insisted that, on the contrary, these had from the beginning told them honestly, openly and bravely, without disguise or reserve, and declared to all the world, that they never would submit to be arbitrarily taxed by any body of men whatsoever in which they were not represented. they did not whisper behind the door, nor mince the matter; they told fairly what they would do, and have done, if they were unhappily urged to the last extremity. and that though the ministers affected not to believe them, it was evident from the armament which they sent out that they did; for however incompetent that armament has been to the end, nobody could admit a doubt that it was intended to oppose men in arms, and to compel by force, the incompetence for its purposes proceeding merely from that blind ignorance and total misconception of american affairs which had operated upon the ministers in every part of their conduct.

"the shameful accusation," they said, "was only to cover that wretched conduct, and, if possible, to hide or excuse the disgrace and failure that had attended all their measures. was any other part of their policy more commendable or more successful? did the cruel and sanguinary laws of the preceding session answer any of the purposes for which they were proposed? had they in any degree fulfilled the triumphant predictions, had they kept in countenance the overbearing vaunts[pg 476] of the minister? they have now sunk into the same nothingness with the terrors of that armed force which was to have looked all america into submission. the americans have faced the one, and they despise the injustice and iniquity of the other....

"the question of rebellion was also agitated; and it was asserted that the taking up of arms in the defence of just rights did not, according to the spirit of the british constitution, come within that comprehension. it was also asserted with great confidence, that notwithstanding the mischiefs which the americans had suffered, and the great losses they had sustained, they would still readily lay down their arms, and return with the greatest good-will and emulation to their duty, if candid and unequivocal measures were taken for reinstating them in their former rights; but that this must be done speedily, before the evils had taken too wide an extent, and the animosity and irritation arising from them had gone beyond a certain pitch.

"the boasted lenity of parliament was much lauded. it was asked whether the boston port bill, by which, without trial or condemnation, a number of people were stripped of their commercial property, and even deprived of the benefit of their real estates, was an instance of it? was it to be found in the fishery bill, by which large countries were cut off from the use of the elements, and deprived of the provision which nature had allotted for their sustenance? or was taking away the charter and all the rights of the people without trial or forfeiture the measure of lenity from which such applause was now sought? was the indemnity held out to military power lenity? was it lenity to free soldiers from a trial in the country where the murders with which they should stand charged, when acting in support of civil and revenue officers, were committed, and forcing their accusers to come to england at the pleasure of a governor?" ...

"the debate in the house of lords was rendered particularly remarkable by the unexpected defection of a noble duke (duke of grafton) who had been for some years at the head of the administration, had resigned of his own accord at a critical period, but who had gone with the government ever since, and was at this time in high office. the line which he immediately[pg 477] took was still more alarming to the administration than the act of defection. besides a decisive condemnation of all their acts for some time past with respect to america, as well as of the measures now held out by the speech, he declared that he had been deceived and misled upon that subject; that by the withholding of information, and the misrepresentation of facts, he had been induced to lend his countenance to measures which he never approved; among those was that in particular of coercing america by force of arms, an idea the most distant from his mind and opinions, but which he was blindly led to give a support to from his total ignorance of the true state and disposition of the colonies, and the firm persuasion held out that matters would never come to an extremity of that nature; that an appearance of coercion was all that was required to establish a reconciliation, and that the stronger the government appeared, and the better it was supported, the sooner all disputes would be adjusted."

"he declared that nothing less than a total repeal of all the american laws which had been passed since 1763 could now restore peace and happiness, or prevent the most destructive and fatal consequences—consequences which could not even be thought of without feeling the utmost degree of grief and horror; that nothing could have brought him out in the present ill state of his health but the fullest conviction of his being right—a knowledge of the critical situation of his country, and a sense of what he owed to his duty and to his conscience; that these operated so strongly upon him, that no state of indisposition, if he were even obliged to come in a litter, should prevent his attending to express his utmost disapprobation of the measures which were now being pursued, as well as of those which he understood from the lords in office it was intended still to pursue. he concluded by declaring that if his nearest relations or dearest friends were to be affected by this question or that the loss of fortune, or of every other thing which he most esteemed, was to be the certain consequence of his present conduct, yet the strong conviction and compulsion operating at once upon his mind and conscience would not permit him to hesitate upon the part which he should take.

"the address was productive of a protest signed by nineteen lords, in which they combat the civil war as unjust and im[pg 478]politic in its principles, dangerous in its contingent and fatal in its final consequences. they censured the calling in of foreign forces to decide domestic quarrels as disgraceful and dangerous. they sum up and conclude the protest by declaring: 'we cannot, therefore, consent to an address which may deceive his majesty and the public into a belief of the confidence of this house in the present ministers, who have deceived parliament, disgraced the nation, lost the colonies, and involved us in a civil war against our clearest interests, and upon the most unjustifiable grounds wantonly spilling the blood of thousands of our fellow-subjects.'"[385]

footnotes:

[374] annals, etc., vol. ii., p. 211. the annalist adds in a note, that "of the british 226 were killed and 828 wounded; 19 commissioned officers being among the former, and 70 among the latter. of the americans, 139 were killed and 314 wounded and missing. the only provincial officers of distinction lost were general joseph warren, col. gardner, lieut.-col. parker, and messrs. moore and mcclany."

[375] the royal historian, andrews, gives the following or english account of the battle of bunker's hill, together with the circumstances which preceded and followed it:

(preliminary statements.)

"on the 12th of june (1775), a proclamation was issued by the british government at boston, offering a pardon, in the king's name, to all who laid down their arms and returned to their homes and occupations. two persons only were excepted—mr. samuel adams and mr. john hancock—whose guilt was represented as too great and notorious to escape punishment. all who did not accept of this offer, or who assisted, abetted, or corresponded with them, were to be deemed guilty of treason and rebellion, and treated accordingly. by this proclamation it was declared that as the courts of judicature were shut, martial law should take place, till a due course of justice could be re-established.

"but this act of government was as little regarded as the preceding. to convince the world how firmly they were determined to persevere in their measures, and how small an impression was made by the menaces of britain, mr. hancock, immediately after his proscription, was chosen president of the congress. the proclamation had no other effect than to prepare people's minds for the worst that might follow.

"the reinforcements arrived from britain; the eagerness of the british military to avail themselves of their present strength, and the position of the provincials, concurred to make both parties diligent in their preparation for action. it was equally the desire of both: the first were earnest to exhibit an unquestionable testimony of their superiority, and to terminate the quarrel by one decisive blow; the others were no less willing to come to a second engagement (the first being that of concord and lexington), from a confidence they would be able to convince their enemies that they would find the subjugation of america a much more difficult task than they hod promised themselves.

"opposite to the northern shore of the peninsula upon which boston stands, lies charleston, divided from it by a river (mystic) about the breadth of the thames at london bridge. neither the british nor provincial troops had hitherto bethought themselves of securing this place. in its neighbourhood, a little to the east, is a high ground called bunker's hill, which overlooks and commands the whole town of boston.

"in the night of the 16th of june, a party of the provincials took possession of this hill, and worked with so much industry and diligence, that by break of day they had almost completed a redoubt, together with a strong intrenchment, reaching half a mile, as far as the river mystic to the east. as soon as discovered they were plied with a heavy and incessant fire from the ships and floating batteries that surrounded the neck on which charleston is situated, and from the cannon planted on the nearest eminence on the boston side.

"this did not, however, prevent them from continuing their work, which they had entirely finished by mid-day, when it was found necessary to take more effectual methods to dislodge them.

"for this purpose a considerable body was landed at the foot of bunker's hill, under the command of general howe and general pigot. the first was to attack the provincial lines, the second the redoubt. the british troops advanced with great intrepidity, but on their approach were received with a fire behind from the intrenchments, that continued pouring during a full half hour upon them like a stream. the execution it did was terrible; some of the bravest and oldest officers declared that, for the time it lasted, it was the hottest service they had ever seen. general howe stood for some moments almost alone, the officers and soldiers about him being nearly all slain or disabled; his intrepidity and presence of mind were remarkable on this trying occasion.

"general pigot, on the left, was in the meantime engaged with the provincials who had thrown themselves into charleston, as well as with the redoubt, and met with the same reception as the right. though he conducted his attack with great skill and courage, the incessant destruction made among the troops threw them at first into some disorder; but general clinton coming up with a reinforcement, they quickly rallied and attacked the works with such fury that the provincials were not able to resist them, and retreated beyond the neck of land that leads into charleston.

"this was the bloodiest engagement during the whole war. the loss of the british troops amounted in killed and wounded to upwards of 1,000. among the first were 19, and among the last 70 officers. colonel abercrombie, major pitcairn, of the marines, and majors williams and spenlowe, men of distinguished bravery, fell in this action, which, though it terminated to the advantage of the king's forces, cost altogether a dreadful price.

"the loss on the provincial side, according to their account, did not exceed 500. this might be true, as they fought behind intrenchments, part of which were cannon proof, and where it was not possible for the musketry to annoy them. this accounts no less for the numbers they destroyed, to which the expertness of their marksmen chiefly contributed. to render the dexterity of these completely effectual, muskets ready loaded were handed to them as fast as they could be discharged, that they might lose no time in reloading them, and they took aim chiefly at the officers....

"the great slaughter occasioned on the left of the british troops, from the houses in charleston, obliged them to set fire to that place. the provincials defended it for some time with much obstinacy, but it was quickly reduced to ashes; and when deprived of that cover, they were immediately compelled to retire.

"but notwithstanding the honour of the day remained to the british troops, the americans boasted that the real advantages were on their side. they had, said they, so much weakened their enemies in this engagement, as to put an entire stop to their operations. instead of coming forth and improving their pretended victory, they did not dare to venture out of the trenches and fortifications they had constructed round boston.

"the only apparent benefit gained by the troops was that they kept possession of the ground whereon charleston had stood; they fortified it on every side, in order to secure themselves from the sudden attacks that were daily threatened from so numerous a force as that which now invested boston....

"the provincials, on the other hand, to convince the troops how little their success had availed them, raised intrenchments on a height opposite charleston, intimating to them that they were ready for another bunker's hill business whenever they thought proper, and were no less willing than they to make another trial of skill.

"their boldness increased to a degree that astonished the british officers, who had, unhappily, been taught to believe them a contemptible enemy, averse to the dangers of war, and incapable of the regular operations of an army. the skirmishes were now renewed in boston bay. the necessities of the garrison occasioned several attempts to carry off the remaining stock of cattle and other articles of provision the islands might contain. but the provincials, who were better acquainted with the navigation of the bay, landed on these islands, in spite of the precaution of the numerous shipping, and destroyed or carried off whatever could be of use; they even ventured so far as to burn the light-house, situated at the entrance of the harbour, and afterwards made prisoners of a number of workmen that had been sent to repair it, together with a party of marines that guarded them." (dr. andrews' history of the late war, etc., vol. i., chap. xiii., pp. 300-306; published under royal authority in 1785.)

[376] history of the united states, vol. vii., chap. xxv., pp. 271, 272.

[377] the secretary of state had instructed lord dunmore to call the assembly together, in order to submit to them a "conciliatory proposition," as it was called, which lord north had introduced into parliament—a proposition calculated to divide the colonies, and then reduce each of them to servitude; but the colonies saw the snare, and every one of them rejected the insidious offer. lord dunmore, in obedience to his instructions, assembled for the last time the virginia house of burgesses in june, 1775, to deliberate and decide upon lord north's proposition. but while the burgesses were deliberating upon the subject submitted to them, lord dunmore, agitated by his own fears, left with his family the seat of government, and went on board a ship of war. the house of burgesses, however, proceeded in their deliberations; referred the subject to a committee, which presented a report prepared by mr. jefferson, and adopted by the house, as a final answer to lord north's proposal. they said, "next to the possession of liberty, they should consider a reconciliation as the greatest of human blessings, but that the resolution of the house of commons only changed the form of oppression, without lightening its burdens; that government in the colonies was instituted not for the british parliament, but for the colonies themselves; that the british parliament had no right to meddle with their constitution, or to prescribe either the number or the pecuniary appointments of their officers; that they had a right to give their money without coercion, and from time to time; that they alone were the judges, alike of the public exigencies and the ability of the people; that they contended not merely for the mode of raising their money, but for the freedom of granting it; that the resolve to forbear levying pecuniary taxes still left unrepealed the acts restraining trade, altering the form of government of massachusetts, changing the government of quebec, enlarging the jurisdiction of courts of admiralty, taking away the trial by jury, and keeping up standing armies; that the invasion of the colonies with large armaments by sea and land was a style of asking gifts not reconcilable to freedom; that the resolution did not propose to the colonies to lay open a free trade with all the world; that as it involved the interests of all the other colonies, they were in honour bound to share one fate with them; that the bill of lord chatham on the one part, and the terms of congress on the other, would have formed a basis for negotiation and a reconciliation; that leaving the final determination of the question to the general congress, they will weary the king with no more petitions—the british nation with no more appeals." "what then," they ask, "remains to be done?" and they answer, "that we commit our injuries to the justice of the even-handed being who doeth no wrong."

when the earl of shelburne read mr. jefferson's report, he said: "in my life i was never more pleased with a state paper than with the assembly of virginia's discussion of lord north's proposition. it is masterly. but what i fear is, that the evil is irretrievable."

"at versailles, the french minister, vergennes, was equally attracted by the wisdom and dignity of the document. he particularly noticed the insinuation that a compromise might be effected on the basis of the modification of the navigation acts; and saw so many ways opened of settling every difficulty, that it was long before he could persuade himself that the infatuation of the british ministry was so blind as to neglect them all." (bancroft's history of the united states, vol. vii., chap, xxxvii., pp. 386-388.)

[378] bancroft's history of the united states, vol. vii., chap. xxv., p. 276.

"the offer of freedom to the negroes came very oddly from the representative of the nation which had sold them to their present masters, and of the king who had been displeased with the colony for its desire to tolerate that inhuman traffic no longer; and it was but a sad resource for a commercial metropolis, to keep a hold on its colony by letting loose slaves against its own colonists."—ib., p. 276.

"dunmore's menace to raise the standard of a servile insurrection and set the slaves upon their masters, with british arms in their hands, filled the south with horror and alarm. besides, the retreat of the british troops from concord raised the belief that the american forces were invincible; and the spirit of resistance had grown so strong, that some of the burgesses appeared in the uniform of the recently instituted provincial troops, wearing a hunting shirt of coarse linen over their clothes, and a woodman's axe by their sides."—ib., pp. 384, 385.

[379] "meantime, dunmore, driven from the land of virginia, maintained command of the water by means of a flotilla composed of the mercury, of 24 guns; the kingfisher, of 16; the otter, of 14, with other ships and light vessels, and tenders which he had engaged in the king's service. at norfolk, a town of about 6,000 inhabitants, a newspaper was published by john holt. about noon on the last day of september (1775), dunmore, finding fault with its favouring (according to him) 'sedition and rebellion,' sent on shore a small party, who, meeting with no resistance, seized and brought off two printers and all the materials of the printing office, so that he could publish from his ship a gazette on the side of the king. the outrage, as we shall see, produced retaliation." (bancroft's history of the united states, vol. viii., chap. lv., pp. 220, 221.)

[380] bancroft's history of the united states, vol. viii., chap. lv., pp. 221, 222.

the english annual register of 1776 states as follows the policy of lord dunmore, culminating in the successful defence of hampton and the repulse of his ships:

"whether lord dunmore expected that any extraordinary advantages might be derived from an insurrection of the slaves, or that he imagined there was a much greater number of people in the colony who were satisfied with the present system of government than really was the case (a mistake, and an unfortunate one, which, like an epidemical distemper, seems to have spread through all our official departments in america)—upon whatever grounds he proceeded, he determined, though he relinquished his government, not to abandon his hopes, nor entirely to lose sight of the country which he had governed. he, accordingly, being joined by those friends of government who had rendered themselves too obnoxious to the people to continue with safety in the country, as well as by a number of runaway negroes, and supported by the frigates of war which were upon the station, endeavoured to establish such a marine force as would enable him, by means of the noble rivers, which render the most valuable parts of that rich country accessible by water, to be always at hand and ready to profit by any favourable occasion that offered.

"upon this or some similar system he by degrees equipped and armed a number of vessels of different kinds and sizes, in one of which he constantly resided, never setting his foot on shore but in a hostile manner. the force thus put together was, however, calculated only for depredation, and never became equal to any essential service. the former, indeed, was in part a matter of necessity; for as the people on shore would not supply those on board with provisions or necessaries, they must either starve or provide them by force.... these proceedings occasioned the sending of some detachments of the new-raised forces of the colonists to protect their coasts, and from these ensued a small, mischievous, predatory war, incapable of affording honour or benefit, and in which, at length, every drop of water and every necessary was purchased at the price or risk of blood.

"during this state of hostility, lord dunmore procured a few soldiers from different parts, with whose assistance an attempt (oct. 25th) was made to burn a post town in an important situation called hampton. it seems the inhabitants had some previous suspicion of the design, for they had sunk boats in the entrance of the harbour and thrown such other obstacles in the way as rendered the approach of the ships, and consequently a landing, impracticable on the day when the attack was commenced. the ships cut a passage through the boats in the night, and began to cannonade the town furiously in the morning; but at this critical period the townspeople were relieved from their apprehensions and danger by the arrival of a detachment of rifle and minute men from williamsburg, who had marched all night to their assistance. these, joined with the inhabitants, attacked the ships so vigorously with their small arms that they were obliged precipitately to quit their station, with the loss of some men and of a tender, which was taken." (annual register, vol. xix., fourth edition, pp. 26, 27.)

[381] english annual register, vol. xix.

[382] british annual register, vol. xix., p. 31.

mr. bancroft's account of this barbarous conflagration is as follows:

"new year's day, 1776, was the saddest day that ever broke on the women and children then in norfolk; warned of their danger by the commander of the squadron, there was for them no refuge. the kingfisher was stationed at the upper end of norfolk; a little below her, the otter; belew, in the liverpool, anchored near the middle of the town; and next him lay the dunmore; the rest of the fleet was moored in the harbour. between three and four in the afternoon, the liverpool opened its fire upon the borough; the other ships immediately followed the example, and a severe cannonade was begun from about sixty pieces of cannon. dunmore then himself, as night was coming on, ordered out several boats to burn warehouses on the wharves; and hailed to belew to set fire to a large brig which lay in the dock. all the vessels of the fleet, to show their zeal, sent great numbers of boats on shore to assist in spreading the flames along the river; and as the buildings were chiefly of pine wood, the conflagration, favoured by the wind, spread with amazing rapidity, and soon became general. women and children, mothers with little ones in their arms, were seen by the glare running through the shower of cannon balls to get out of their range. two or three persons were hit; and the scene became one of extreme horror and confusion. several times the british attempted to land, and once to bring cannon into the street; but they were driven back by the spirit and conduct of the americans. the cannonade did not abate till ten at night; after a short pause it was renewed, but with less fury, and was kept up till two the next morning. the flames, which had made their way from street to street, raged for three days; till four-fifths, or, as some computed, nine-tenths of the houses were reduced to ashes and heaps of ruins." (history of the united states, vol. viii., chap. lvi., pp. 230, 231.)

[383] history of the united states, vol. viii., chap. lvi., p. 231.

the english annual register observes: "such was the fate of the unfortunate town of norfolk, the most considerable for commerce in the colony, and so growing and flourishing before these unhappy troubles, that in the two years from 1773 to 1775, the rents of the houses increased from ￡8,000 to ￡10,000 a year. however just the cause, or urgent the necessity, which induced this measure, it was undoubtedly a grievous and odious task to a governor to be himself the principal actor in burning and destroying the best town in his government.

"nor was the situation of other governors in america much more eligible than that of lord dunmore. in south carolina, lord william campbell, having as they said, entered into a negotiation with the indians for coming in to the support of the government in that province, and having also succeeded in exciting a number of those back settlers whom we have heretofore seen distinguished in the carolinas, under the title of regulators, to espouse the same cause, the discovery of these measures, before they were ripe for execution, occasioned such a ferment among the people, that he thought it necessary to retire from charleston on board a ship of war in the river, from whence he returned no more to the seat of his government.

"similar measures were pursued in north carolina (with the difference that governor martin was more active and vigorous in his proceedings), but attended with as little success. the provincial congress, committees, and governor were in a continual state of the most violent warfare. upon a number of charges, particularly of fomenting a civil war, and exciting an insurrection among the negroes, he was declared an enemy to america in general, and to that colony in particular, and all persons were forbidden from holding any communication with him. these declarations he answered with a proclamation of uncommon length, which the provincial congress resolved to be a false, scandalous, scurrilous and seditious libel, and ordered it to be burned by the hands of the common hangman.

"as the governor expected, by means of the back settlers, as well as of the scotch inhabitants and highland emigrants, who were numerous in the province, to be able to raise a considerable force, he took pains to fortify and arm his palace at newburn, that it might answer the double purpose of a garrison and a magazine. before this could be effected, the moving of some cannon excited such a commotion among the people that he found it necessary to abandon the palace and retire on board a sloop-of-war in cape fear river. the people upon this occasion discovered powder, shot, ball, and various military stores and implements which had been buried in the palace garden and yard. this served to inflame them exceedingly, every man considering it as if it had been a plot against himself in particular.

"the provincial congress published an address to the inhabitants of the british empire, of the same nature with those we have formerly seen to the people of great britain and ireland, containing the same professions of loyalty and affection, and declaring the same earnest desire of a reconciliation." (english annual register, vol. xix., pp. 31-33.)

[384] general conway said: "the noble lord who has the direction of the affairs of this country tells you that the americans aim at independence. i defy the noble lord, or any other member of this house, to adduce one solid proof of this charge. he says: 'the era of 1763 is the time they wish to recur to, because such a concession on our part would be, in effect, giving up their dependence on this country.' i would ask the noble lord, did the people of america set up this claim previous to the year 1763? no; they were then peaceful and dutiful subjects. they are still dutiful and obedient. (here was a murmur of disapprobation.) i repeat my words; i think them so inclined; i am sure they would be so, if they were permitted: the acts they have committed arise from no want of either. they have been forced into them. taxes have been attempted to be levied on them; their charters have been violated, nay, taken away; administration has attempted to coerce them by the most cruel and oppressive laws."

[385] annual register, vol. xix., chap. ix., pp. 57, 58, 63, 69, 70, 74, 75.