79 | From the Board of Trade


    We have received your Letters to Us dated the 3d. 6.th & 27.th of August last, and the Papers transmitted with them.357

    The Subject matter of the first of these Letters is, of so great Importance, and so many Doubts and Questions have occurred to Us upon a Consideration of those parts of the Charter, and of the Act of 1692,358 which relate to the Constitution of the House of Representatives, that We do not care hastily to pass a Judgement upon it; We are convinced however, that the Directions contained in the 40th. Article of His late Majesty’s Instructions to you, were by no means a proper Remedy to the Evil complained of, and have therefore omitted it in the Draught approved and signed by his present Majesty,359 intending when the Act for establishing the Township of Pittsfield, shall come before Us,360 to take that Opportunity of laying before His Majesty Our Sentiments at large upon this matter; in the mean time We cannot but be of Opinion, that those Acts for erecting Townships which are totally silent as to the Right of choosing a Representative, are most consistent with the Constitution as settled by the Act of 1692. by which the Circumstances under which each Township shall elect, one or more Representative are fixed and ascertained.

    It is not necessary for Us to say any thing further upon your Letters of the 6th. & 27. of August, than, that We are much concern’d that the Facts therein stated should have occasioned so much Trouble & Per[p]lexity to you in the administration of your Government; Our Sentiments upon the Facts themselves, and the measures necessary to be pursued, for bringing the matter in question, before His Majesty in Council, are fully contained in the inclosed Copy of Our Secretary’s Letter to Mr West,361 Secretary to the Lords Commisioners of the Treasury.

    We are, Sir, Your most Obedient humble Servants,


    Soame Jenyns

    Ed. Bacon

    Ed. Thomas


    Whitehall Novr. 25. 1761

    L, LbC CO 5/920, pp. 130-133.

    In his letter to West, Pownall notes having forwarded to the treasury secretary copies of FB’s letters of 6 and 27 Aug. 1761, and their enclosures, in which FB discusses at length the court cases arising from the Barons affair. Surveyor General Lechmere had suspended Barons from office a second time, on 20 Jun., but Pownall purported to avoid commenting on Barons, who, as a customs officer, was subject to the jurisdiction of the Treasury rather than the Board of Trade. None the less, Pownall suggested that “his Conduct both in respect to personal Insult to the Governor, and the embarrassment and Obstructions which have arisen to His Majesty’s Service from it, cannot escape censure and Animadversion.” The Treasury upheld Barons’s dismissal.