The Protest of the House

    873. To Lord Hillsborough, 22 June 1771

    874. To John Pownall, 22 June [1771]

    When the first session of the new General Court opened on 29 May, Hutchinson was optimistic that the majority would cease to challenge his gubernatorial prerogative and plead for a return to Boston simply as a matter of convenience, but on 22 June the House abruptly reversed itself, issuing a strongly worded protest that called Hutchinson’s summoning them to meet in Cambridge “an abuse of power.”

    873. To Lord Hillsborough

    Boston 22d June 1771

    (No 7)

    My Lord, At the time of the date of my Letter No 5 every thing appeared fair for the removal of the General Court to Boston. What effect a very ill judged proceeding of the House of Representatives since that time may have to prevent it I must submit to your Lordships consideration and I may not omit transmitting it as it is published in a News paper under the name of a Protest, and this by the first opportunity least His Majestys Pleasure should be signified before this Fact comes to his knowledge.1 It passed the House when it was much more exceptionable but was reconsidered and some high paragraphs expunged and the Members were enjoined to take no copies of them. The whole proceeding has been opposed by about a third part of the House in number and men of the best characters in the House and the majority of the other two thirds seem to have come into it rather from ignorance than any ill intention and the real spring of it is from the heads of the Party who make the most clamour at the Courts being held out of Boston and yet secretly wish it may not return there because they will be deprived of the principal means of keeping up discontent in the minds of the people. It is so mean and pitiful a performance that, when proper notice is taken of it, which I intend shall be before the close of the Session, it will be of real service to Government and strengthen my interest with the people and it is already considered, by many, as a miserable effort of a few dispairing men which will only sink them the faster. I have the honour to be with the greatest respect My Lord Your Lordship’s most humble and most Obedient Servant,

    RC (National Archives UK, CO 5/760, ff. 184–85); at foot of letter, “The Rt. Honble. the Earl of Hillsborough”; docketed, “Boston 22d. June 1771. Govr. Hutchinson (No. 7) Rx 24. July. D——12.” AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:188–89); in WSH’s hand. SC (National Archives UK, CO 5/768. ff. 205–06); docketed, “Boston June 22d. 1771 Governor Hutchinson (No. 7.) R. 24th. July”; at foot of letter, “Inclosure. A Boston Gazette dated Thursday July 20 1771.” Enclosure to RC: Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter, 20 June 1771 (National Archives UK, CO 5/760, ff. 186–87).

    874. To John Pownall

    Boston 22d June 1770 [1771]

    Hall

    Dear Sir, I have transmitted to the Ld Hillsborough in a Letter of this date what is called a Protest of the House of Representatives which is such a despicable Performance that I fear no other ill consequence from it than of keeping the Court out of Boston & so preventing that general peace and concord which seemd to be just at hand. Some of the Boston Members saw the Prospect & altho they make all the clamour on account of the Courts being out of Town yet they secretly wish it may be kept out to maintain their own Importance. The poor Country men had not penetration enough to discover this or they would not have consented to such a nonsensical unmannerly & unprecedented a thing as they have orderd to be put upon their Journal. I beg leave to suggest that if my Restraint from carrying the Court to Boston should be continued some notice may be taken of this wretched proceeding as the cause of it & if it should be done by a publick censure either of His Majesty in Council or in any other way that I may lay it before them & that it may appear to the people that it is owing to the madness of their Representatives that the Kings Instruction is continued it will have a tendency to destroy the Interest of many of the present Members & to procure a better House another year. I write this Letter just as the Ship is coming to sail which prevents any further Remarks. I am with great Truth Sir Your faithful & most obedient Servant,

    AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:189); at head of letter, “Mr Pownall”; at foot of letter, “Inclosed 10 & 17 June news papers to Sir F Bernard.”

    875. From Lord Hillsborough

    Whitehall 3d: July 1771

    (No. 9)

    Sir, I have received and laid before The King your Dispatches of the 1st: & 15th of May. Nos. 3, and 4.

    His Majesty approves of your having dissolved the Assembly & issued Writts for a new Election; for although it may, as you observe, be doubtful upon the true Construction of the Charter whether an annual Election is requisite, yet the Practice has been so established by Usage that it may not be adviseable, for the present at least, to attempt an alteration.

    With regard to the Vote passed in Council in consequence of my Letter signifying His Majesty’s Approbation of Mr. Oliver’s Conduct, I think it no otherways material than as it must remain a proof to Posterity of a Conduct in the present Council equally dishonourable and disingenuous.1

    The Three Bills, to which you withheld your Assent untill His Majesty’s Pleasure was known, are certainly of such a Nature as required that Caution;2 and if the King’s Governors would in all Cases shew the same attention to their Instructions, it would be of very little Consequence whether the Assemblies did or did not insert in their Laws the Suspending Clause.

    I observe that the Bill for establishing a Marine Society is not liable to the same Objection upon which the Law for establishing a Society for propagating the Gospel among the Indians, was disallowed; and therefore His Majesty does not think there is any material Objection to your assenting to such Bill, if it should be again proposed: But it is His Majestys Pleasure that you should not Assent to any Bill prohibiting the Importation of Slaves, nor to a Militia Bill, so long as the Provisions of it are introduced by a Preamble containing Assertions that you think are not founded in fact.

    Your Conduct in putting a negative upon the Persons elected to manage the Trade with the Indians, and upon the Votes for payment of Money to Mr Deberdt, and to Mr Bollan, is approved by The King, as well as in refusing to move the General Court to Boston, so long as the Assembly continues to dispute the Authority by which you are directed to cause it to be held in any place, except Boston; but you may assure them that whenever they shall cease to dispute that Authority, & it shall not be found inexpedient for other reasons, His Majesty will most graciously comply with their Wishes.

    In your Letter, No 4, you say that the Judges of the Supreme Court were struck with the Informality of the Instrument inclosed in my Dispatch No. 5. by which I presume you mean the Warrant for the Pardon of Ebenezer Richardson.3 As you do not explain yourself, as to the nature of the informality, I am at a loss to guess whether the doubt refers to the Mode of doing it by Warrant to the Recorder of London, or to the Omission of the Christian Name of the Boy; if it refers to the former Case I can only say that the same Mode of pardoning Persons convicted of Murder in the Colonies, has been in all cases invariably pursued almost ever since the Revolution; and therefore though I have always had great doubt of the propriety of it, yet it was not fit for me to make any alteration in a practice against which the Law-Servants of the Crown had reported no legal Objections; If the doubt on the contrary refers to the omission of the Name of the Boy, it was an unavoidable defect, as I was not able, either from your Letters, or from the fullest enquiry to procure His Christian Name. I am &ca.,

    Hillsborough

    SC (National Archives UK, CO 5/765, ff. 208–10); docketed, “Govr. Hutchinson (No. 9).” SC (National Archives UK, CO 5/761, ff. 134–35); docketed, “Extract of Letter from Lord Hillsborough to Governor Hutchinson. In Govr. Hutchinson’s (No 28) of 15th: June 1772”; excerpt of sixth paragraph only. SC (National Archives UK, CO 5/760, ff. 170–71); docketed, “(No. 9) Govr. Hutchinson.”