Book _,^ Syr 
 
Phases of Royal Government 
 in New York 1691-1719 
 
 y^" 'l.il„„,.'"" '^'^^■ 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS 
 
 FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 IN 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 By 
 CHARLES WORTHEN SPENCER 
 
 SOMETIME UNIVERSITY FELLOW IN AMERICAN HISTORY, 
 
 IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, 
 
 PROFESSOR OF HISTORY, COLGATE UNIVERSITY 
 
 COLUMBUS, OHIO 
 
 Press of Fred. J. Heer 
 
 1905 
 
Phases of Royal Government 
 in New York 1691-1719 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS 
 
 FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 IN 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 By 
 
 CHARLES WORTHEN SPENCER 
 
 ■f 
 
 SO^IETI^!E UNIVERSITY FELLOW IN AMERICAN HISTORY, 
 
 IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, 
 
 PROFESSOR OF HISTORY, COLGATE UNIVERSITY 
 
 COLUMBUS, OHIO 
 
 Press of Fred. J. Heer 
 
 1905 
 
S7r 
 
 ?/<PP., 'S;^^ 
 
 By tranefei 
 
 OCT 20 1915 
 
l"^, ,-.?^«*^o, "<^t% 
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Chapter I. Introduction 5 
 
 Chapter II. The Executive Official System 12 
 
 Chapter III. The Legislature 58 
 
 Chapter IV. Financial Affairs before 1709 97 
 
 Chapter V. The Revenue Controversy, 1709-1717 129 
 
 Bibliographical Note 156 
 
 (3) 
 
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 As a royal province in the British empire in the eighteenth 
 century, New York well illustrates the duality of political exist- 
 ence characteristic of such a community. It was, on the one 
 hand, a province with its own local interests to be respected and 
 developed, its peculiar history, and its own local consciousness 
 of these as features of identity. It was, equally, on the other 
 hand, a part of the British empire, with its share of the benefits 
 and burdens attaching to that relation. The ideal of empire, 
 probably only vaguely before the mind of the British government 
 at that time, provided for co-operation and interaction between 
 these two aspects of provincial existence, which, while always 
 emphasizing imperial welfare, yet sought to achieve that welfare 
 by development of the peculiar situation of the province. For 
 example, provincial policy in the matter of Indian relations illus- 
 trates with peculiar felicity this duality of existence. Upon main- 
 tenance of the friendly relations with the Iroquois, inherited 
 from the Dutch, depended, not alone the fur-trade, but the very 
 existence of the province. Experience developed the fact that, 
 owing to the peculiar position of the Five Nations among the 
 native races of the continent, this Iroquois alliance was the key 
 to the Indian policy of all the continental English communities 
 taken together. Successful administration of this problem re- 
 quired recognition of both local and general aspects and the elab- 
 oration of a line of conduct vvhich should make the two aspects 
 serve each other. 
 
 It was the unic[ue task of the governor of such a province 
 to blend, in his actual conduct of public affairs, these two aspects 
 of provincial existence. In theory, he was the governmental 
 head of the community, and, at the same time, the crown's agent 
 in this particular unit of the administrative system of a general 
 imperial policy. In theory, also, the organization of the legis- 
 lature provided simply for assistance to the governor in the 
 execution of his dual function by representatives of the com- 
 munity at large. Actually, however, as described in Chapter 
 II., the organization and relations of the executive official system 
 
 (5) 
 
6 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 made it far iiiorc easily and characteristically llic exponent of 
 the policy of the imperial government than of the local interests 
 of the province. Similarly, the legislature became, in practice, 
 the exponent of local-provincial feeling and policy, rather than 
 of any attempt to embody this with general imperial interest in 
 the conduct of public aflfairs. 
 
 It is obvious that the realization of the ideal of co-operation 
 and supplementation of these two aspects of provincial existence 
 would be difficult. As in the case of the Holy Roman Empire 
 successful working required mutual confidence on the part of the 
 two elements, which was seldom realized ; so, in this case, the 
 relation between executive and legislature was seldom for any 
 long period one of mutual understanding and intelligent co- 
 operation. There were certain circumstances in particular, act- 
 ing as obstructions in the path of the realization of the ideal, 
 which may be mentioned. The imperial administration, on the 
 one hand, awkward and lumbering under the best of circum- 
 stances, failed to exercise the requisite care in the delicate matter 
 of appointment to the governorship. Court influences resulted 
 in the a]:)pointment of adventurers like Fletcher and Cornbury. 
 Even when pains were taken to select a man on the basis of the 
 particular needs of the situation from the government point of 
 view, the result might not be the choice of a man with the right 
 sort of skill. This was true in the case of the Bellomont appoint- 
 ment. Even in the case of what was, in its results, the nearest 
 to an ideal appointment — that of Hunter — efficient svipport 
 from home could not be relied upon by th.e appointee. Circum- 
 stances of local character in the province, on the other hand, v/ere 
 equally an obstruction to the attainment of the ideal. In the 
 first place, the heat of factious passion, coming over from the 
 Leisler affair, caused popular attention and interest to center 
 more on measures bringing triumph to one or other of the local 
 factions than on issues of truly public policy. Then, too, outside 
 the realm of Leislerian or .Anti-Leislerian politics, the men of 
 leading calibre were, as a class, characterized more by selfish 
 ambition for the interests of a group of local magnates and their 
 dependents, than bv intelligent appreciation of the true relations 
 of local-provincial and general-imperial interests. 
 
 The actual interworking of all these features, during the 
 first twenty years after 1691, was such that we may say that 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 7 
 
 durir.g all this time there was no effective opportunity for the 
 realization of the possibilities contained in the theory of the Royal 
 Provin':e. Not until experience had brought the province 
 through a period of developing education, and fortune had 
 brought to the governorship a man having both an intelligent 
 conception of the ideal, and — what was equally important — the 
 personal temperament and political skill capable of making an 
 impression on the actual conduct of affairs, was a sound basis 
 of political development reached. 
 
 The four months of Sloughter's administration served merely 
 to commit the newly established government to the policy of perse- 
 cuting the leaders of the Leislerian regime. Whatever may be 
 the degree of truth in Smith's violently hostile characterization 
 of Sloughter, he certainly was not a person of the strength of 
 character required to settle the government in a community torn 
 with faction as was- New York. Ingoldsby's administration of 
 fourteen months was, in main outline, a continuation of the 
 regime inaugurated under Sloughter's auspices by those who 
 had played the part of victims during Leisler's rule. Ingoldsby's 
 administration illustrated the characteristics of periods happen- 
 ing with unfortunate frequency during New York's early exist- 
 ence as a royal province, viz., the intervals between the death, 
 removal or long absence of a governor, and his return or the 
 arrival of the next incumbent. Under such circumstances, there 
 was likely to be either a suspension of the more active and 
 aggressive features of provincial development, with surreptitious 
 exploitation of opportunities for private gain, such as corrupt 
 dealings in land grants, or a violent use of governmental ma- 
 chinery, made unscrupulous by a consciousness of desperation 
 such as is illustrated in the last weeks of Nanfan's power. In- 
 goldsby's term, in 1691-1692, illustrates the former group of activ 
 ities, which served almost as well as the other type of proceedings 
 to hinder the normal development of the possibilities of interac- 
 tion between the two aspects of provincial existence. 
 
 The administration of Fletcher, from 1692 to 1698, did little 
 to improve the situation. Important elements of the imperial 
 system were perverted for corrupt purposes. The system of 
 connivance at violations of the imperial trade system enriched 
 a few New Yorkers at the expense of the ideal of the empire. 
 Extravagant grants of land to a few favorites endangered Indian 
 
O rilASKS OF ROYAL GOVERNMEiNT 
 
 relations and retarded the development and peopling of the prov- 
 ince for many years to come. The circumstances of war on the 
 frontiers necessitated activity in those departments of the imperial 
 and provincial systems which bore on military matters, but the 
 actual conduct of these affairs did little to promote tlie spirit 
 of co-operation. Fletcher's conduct of hostilities was energetic, 
 but unskilful and wasteful. The heavy burdens of taxation and 
 detaciiments of militia for frontier service were not rendered 
 lighter by the conviction on the part of many that the governor's 
 arrogance and lack of tact were responsible for the disobedience 
 of the neighboring provinces to the direction from England that 
 they should be aiding and assisting to New York. The home 
 government itself was hard pressed and could render bttle effect- 
 ive aid. Then, Fletcher's attitude in matters of local partisan- 
 ship was practically a continuation of the Anti-Leislerian course 
 pursued by the government since Sloughter's arrival. This com- 
 plicated the relations between governor and assembly in the mat- 
 ter of raising supplies for military purposes. Altogether, these 
 were not favorable circumstances for the development of the 
 ideal of co-operation between the local and imperial aspects of 
 provincial life. 
 
 Bellomont's arrival inaugurated a veritable revolution in the 
 course of affairs. He threw himself vigorously into the task 
 of the suppression of piracy, in so far as New York was con- 
 cerned therewith. He put into practice, as it was intended to be 
 used, the system of penalties for violations of the acts of trade 
 and navigation. In other words, the imperial trade system, with 
 ill the machinery that that involved, began to have effective 
 operation in New York for the first time. Bellomont was very 
 active in attempts at development of the positive aspect of the 
 imperial trade system, and expended much energy in devising 
 ways and means for inaugurating the naval stores policy in 
 New York. It was impossible for him to develop the crown's 
 landed estate on account of Fletcher's misconduct, but all his 
 efforts went towards correcting and undoing as far as jijossible 
 that official's mischief. Rut in all this, as in other matters, the 
 complication of local jjartisan politics exercised a baleful influ- 
 ence. Fletcher and Cornbury went through the motions of a 
 zeal for the empire, which, practically, as events worked out, 
 meant a zeal for the personal welfare of themselves and a 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 9 
 
 favored group of magnates whose provincial interests made po- 
 litical influence with the government necessary to them. In the 
 case of Bellomont we have a genuine zeal for imperial interests, 
 intelligently conceived and impartially administered, as far as 
 "graft" is concerned. But the circumstances of his accession and 
 the circumstances of the province combined to make the spirit of 
 partisanship in the assembly and in the subordinate executive ser- 
 vice too much for him to control. Long before he came to the 
 province it was known that he was enthusiastically of the opinion 
 that the Leislerian cause and party had been shamefully treated. 
 So much of his activity on arriving in the province was of the neg- 
 ative kind — undoing mischief and punishing wrong-doers — and 
 he made it such a personal affair with Fletcher that, with a 
 people of provincial character, he could hardly avoid presenting 
 the appearance of being chief of the Leislerian faction. This, 
 of course, awakened into well-nigh ungovernable activity the 
 revengeful zeal of the friends of Leisler. Bellomont had his 
 hands full, even when he was in the province, in keeping a decent 
 peace. When, then, death removed the only member of the gov- 
 ernment whose authority and personality was sufficient to hold 
 passions in leash, the violence of the long-repressed Leislerians 
 knew no bounds. The debauch of vindictive passion under the 
 administration of Nanfan, of which the Bayard and Hutchins 
 trial and the confiscation of Robert Livingston's estate are the 
 most conspicuous manifestations, is a measure for us of Bello- 
 mont's real service. From some points of view it seems as if 
 Bellomont's administration was too short to am.ount to anything 
 as an object-lesson of what royal provincial government might 
 be. But the odds against success in this attempt were heavy. 
 The division of his attention between three governments, lack 
 of the most efficient support from home, the excessive rage 
 of passions, for a part of which lie was, for personal rea.sons, 
 unwittingly and inevitably responsible, militated strongly against 
 the success of his administration. Hard-won progress was 
 made towards giving the theory of the empire a chance. But 
 the province needed more experience to make this beginning 
 fruitful. 
 
 Up to the time of Bellomont's death, it may be said that the 
 exponents of the general-imperial aspect of provincial life had 
 been more conspicuous, had been more bold in grasp and initia- 
 
10 PHASES OF KOYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 tivc. This was natural. The assembly was new to its work. 
 The circumstances of war complicated development. Nanfan's 
 administration from 1701 to 1702, taken as the outspoken and 
 unrestrained expression of what was present but suppressed 
 under Bellomont, is the time when local provincial forces get 
 the upper hand. This period, discouraging in its revelation of 
 possibilities, is not to be taken as fairly representing what was 
 truly characteristic of provincial life, any more than Fletcher's 
 administration is to be taken as an exemplification of the im- 
 perial theory. In fact, the" features of excessive violence may 
 be regarded as the consequences of the exasperation resulting 
 from the Sloughter and Fletcher regimes, and the escape from 
 utter wrecking of the imperial machinery, wdiich even the most 
 violent Leislerians recognized as out of the question as a matter 
 of expediency, may be regarded as due to Bellomont. 
 
 The promise of better things, vaguely felt as expressed in 
 tlie appointment of Cornbury, came to nothing. His relationship 
 to the queen and his "interest" at court flattered the New 
 Yorkers' sense of importance. But experience soon developed 
 to the eyes of the knot of maG:nates, v/ho were the real springs 
 of power in the province, that for their purposes he was worse 
 than Fletcher and Bellomont. We may indeed suppose that this 
 group of leading individuals, standing, really, midway between 
 popular feeling in general and the particular designs of the em- 
 pire for the province, had themselves grown into slightly larger- 
 minded conceptions of tlie interest of the province. Still they 
 looked upon public policy with a view in which their personal 
 interests bulked most conspicuously. For their purpose, a gov- 
 ernor must manage to keep just enough in favor with the home 
 
 -^overnment to keep his place, and must equally escape ahenating 
 popular provincial favor so as to avoid frittering away his energy 
 in fruitless quarrels with the popular element — fruitless, that 
 is, to their schemes. The great service rendered by Cornbury 's 
 administration to the development of New York as a royal prov- 
 ince was the fact that he lost estimation both with the people 
 of the province and with the local magnates, and thus compelled 
 a measure of union among all elements for a common public end. 
 This union against Cornbury's aim to make both imperial and 
 ])rovincial interests serve his personal ends was finally successful. 
 
 But another short term of office — that of Lovelace for six 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. II 
 
 months — and another interval of government by a figure-head 
 — Ingoldsby, again, for thirteen months — intervened before the 
 arrival of a governor adequate to the task before him. 
 
 In Hunter we have the first governor whose administration 
 displayed not only intelligent zeal for the empire and sympa- 
 thetic appreciation of the situation of the provincials, but also 
 the ability to relate these two features in the actual conduct of 
 affairs. 
 
 Full description of these successive administrations and of 
 Hunter's career in New York would be an extensive task, requir- 
 ing for its satisfactory 'achievement materials not at present 
 accessible. It would practically constitute a political history of 
 the province during its first 'stage of royal provincial existence. 
 It is one of the purposes of this sketch rather to describe as 
 carefully as may be the two elements of the governmental system, 
 representing respectively the general-imperial and the local-pro- 
 vincial aspects of New York, as they actually developed during 
 the period from 1691 to the close of Hunter's administration. 
 Chapters II. and III. are concerned with this description. These 
 chronological limits are chosen because this was the period during 
 v/hich were elaborated the main outlines of the system and the 
 more or less permanent methods of control, of that which has 
 always been fundamental in English political development, viz., 
 the power of the purse. Throughout all the manifestations of 
 social and public life in the province, there was, to an extent, a 
 general contest between provincial and imperial ideals. The 
 essentially fundamental relation of financial, to all other ques- 
 tions, gives particular importance to the development of the 
 contest between these ideals in the matter of control over raising 
 and spending public money. In chapters IV. and V. an endeavor 
 is m.ade to trace the story of this development. The elaboration 
 of this financial system and the application of the results of the 
 controversy over the matter to the general conduct of provincial 
 aflfairs, in a way, make up the first stage of the existence of New 
 York as a royal province. 
 
CHAPTER II. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICIAL SYSTEM. 
 
 In the original constitution of government in the province 
 of New York, after its organization by the government of Wil- 
 liam and Mary, the executive held a position of especial advan- 
 tage and, at first, at any rate, of power. The newly established as- 
 sembly took some time in learning its position and possible 
 power, and a struggle for vantage ground preceded its engage- 
 ment in the struggle for the dominating position in the provincial 
 government which it afterward attained. And in the executive 
 department tlie governor was easily the dominating figure. There 
 were other executive officials, holding office by patent from the 
 crown and having functions important in provincial and impe- 
 rial life. The executive aspect of the functions of the council 
 was also of great importance. Nevertheless the relations between 
 the governor and these officials and the council were such that, 
 in the last analysis, it was the character and aims of the individ- 
 ual who held the office of governor that determined the com- 
 plexion of the adminir^tration of public affairs in the province. 
 
 With this view of the importance of the governor, the cir- 
 cumstances surrounding appointment to an office of so great 
 possibilities come to be of interest. The appointment was made 
 by the King in Council, the name of the appointee was then sig- 
 nified by the Principal Secretary of State, wlto was at the time in 
 charge of colonial affairs, to the Board of Trade, and at the same 
 time the latter were desired to prepare a commission and a set 
 of instructions. The influences actually having weight in the 
 selection of individuals for this im.portant office are not easy to 
 determine. Authoritative information on the subject is scanty 
 and fragmentary and yields only negative results to the search 
 for light on the workings of the imperial system at this period. 
 
 It would appear that, whether solicited or not, the crown did 
 not lack for intimations from interested parties, at any rate as 
 to the qualities desired in an appointee. Thus, in 1689 we find a 
 petition to the king from twenty-one merchants trading to and 
 in New York, expressing to the king satisfaction in the appoint- 
 ment of Sloughter, calling attention to the strategic position of 
 
 (12) 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 13 
 
 New York and desiring- that some military force and equipment 
 be sent out with the,new irovernor.^ In 1701, after the death of 
 Bellomont, we find Robert Livingston in a long communication 
 to the Board of Trade mentioning as among the things necessary 
 at that time for the preservation of the province, "that a governor 
 be appointed who is a soldier, a man fearing God and hating 
 covetousness and who will administer impartially without sid- 
 ing with any faction."- Again, in 1708, we find Lewis Morris 
 writing to the Secretary of State in terms of the greatest 
 freedom as to the "impudent conduct of the Governors, to call 
 it no worse, that has been the great prejudice of her Majesty's 
 service in America ;" adding, "We are told Sir Gilbert Heathcote 
 has made some interest for his brother. Coll. Caleb Heathcote; 
 he will be a man to the general satisfaction of ye people, and at 
 this juncture to obteine a resetlement of her Ma j -ties revenue no 
 man fitter. I know no man understands the Province or People 
 better, or is more capable of doing her Majestic reall service. He 
 is an honest man and the reverse of my Lord Cornbury."^ 
 Whether either of these latter communications, or their substance, 
 ever came to the knowledge of the sovereign is of course impos- 
 sible to determine. Certainly Cornbury was as far as it is possi- 
 ble to conceive from the ideal figure sketched by Livingston and 
 the appointment of Lovelace would at best indicate that military 
 qualities at that juncture were considered more important than 
 thoroug'h understanding of the province and people. 
 
 The appointment of Bellomont. an appointment as to which 
 we have more than the usual amount of evidence concerning 
 the crown's specific purpose, and upon which, apparently, unusual 
 care was expended in consideration of the qualities of the appoin- 
 tee, reflected the disposition to consider more the interests of the 
 trading empire at large than the exceedingly peculiar local situ- 
 ation in New York. At that time the quality of impartiality men- 
 tioned in Livingston's requirements was quite as necessary as in 
 1 70 1, and in this particular Bellomont was deficient, at any rate 
 in any effective degree, and his predilection for the cause of one 
 
 ' Col. Doc. III. 651. 
 ^Ibid. IV. 878. 
 •■' Ibid. V. 37-8. 
 
14 PHASKS OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 of tb.e factions in the province had hcen matter of pubHc knowl- 
 cdge before his appointment..^ 
 
 In the case of Fletcher, (1692-1698), we have his own asser- 
 tion in liis defence against charges of corruption, that "in the 
 Irish Warr" and in his thirty years of service precechng he was 
 "so far from making gaine by the misfortunes of our friends that 
 I never did it from the ruine of our enemies and it was I presume 
 the report of this behaviour that sent me into New York for I 
 had never thought of the place till the moment it was proposed 
 to me and my answer required."- We have no more than his 
 own assertion for these points, however, and in the reply made 
 to this defence of Fletcher's, we have a hint as to forces that 
 were reputed to have great weight in the making of all these 
 appointments. It was asserted that, so far as misfortunes in 
 Ireland were concerned, Bellomont had suffered more in this par- 
 ticular "from that power that preferred and advanced Col. 
 Fletcher," and that, too, at a time when Fletcher was not disturbed 
 in his patrimony." As to Fletcher's need for the exercise of favor 
 from some quarter, we have the testimony of William Penn to 
 the fact of his being "a necessitous man," of whom it was to 
 be feared that he would "more consider the advancement of his 
 own private fortunes than the public benefit of the Province."* 
 
 The disposition to explain the influences determining ap- 
 pointments in terms of other things than personal fitness is re- 
 flected all through William Smith's "History of New York." 
 Thus in the case of Sloughter's appointment he remarks that a 
 governor never was more necessary for reconciling a divided 
 people as well as for defending them ; "But cither through the 
 hurry of the King's affairs or the powerful interest of a favorite 
 a man was sent over utterly destitute of every qualification for 
 government."^ In like manner. Smith describes Cornburv's earlv 
 
 ' "The King did him the honor to say that he thought him a man 
 of resolution and integrity, and with these qualities more likely than any 
 other he could think of, to put a stop to the growth of piracy." Smith. 
 History of New York, p. 150. 
 
 = Col. Doc. IV. 445. 
 
 Mbid. IV. 458. 
 
 * Ibid. IV. 221. 
 
 '' Smith, p. 122. Colden's estimate of the reliability of Smith's char- 
 acterizations of governors was very low, Smith's defects in this regard 
 being ascribed to "force of early prejudice — a narrow education, a weak 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. I5 
 
 desertion of James II. for William, and adds, "King William in 
 gratitude for his services gave him a commission for this gov- 
 ernment."^ 
 
 The appointment of Hunter is the most interesting of all, 
 for, though he proved to be the best governor New York ever 
 had, there seems to be no evidence that there was anything more 
 in this case than the bestowal of a place on a favorite, this time 
 happening to be a man well qualified for his post. Smith men- 
 tions his acquaintance with Addison and others and hazards the 
 suggestion that it was "by their interest that he was advanced 
 to this profitable place."- Colden in his Letters on Smith's "His- 
 tory" mentions Hunter's membership in the guard of honor of the 
 Princess Anne when she retired from her father's court, his ser- 
 vice in William's and Anne's army till after Ramillies, his com- 
 mission as governor of Virginia, obtained through "friends in 
 Queen Anne's Court," and, further, names Dr. Arbuthnot, the 
 queen's favorite physician, as the court influence behind Hunter. 
 "The Duke of Marlborough's influence over the Queen began 
 about this time to lessen, and Dr. Arbuthnot prevailed with the 
 Queen to name Mr. Hunter for the government of Jamaica which 
 happened to be vacant without consulting her Ministry who had 
 designed that government for another, but Mr. Hunter being 
 apprehensive that if he went to Jamaica against the inclinations 
 of the ministry he would be made uneasy in his government and 
 the government of New York becoming vacant at this time by 
 the death of Lord Lovelace, the Ministers were willing that he 
 should have the Government of New York, therefor Mr. Hunter 
 desired his friends to inform the Queen that he would rather 
 have the government of New York than Jamaica, and it was 
 accordingly granted him."^ An undoubted instance in eighteenth 
 century English politics of "something equally as good" ! 
 
 judgement and a stubborn temper of mind" (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls., 1869, 
 p. 207). It is not necessary to agree with Colden in this opinion of 
 Smith, but, apart from the general question, it is to be observed that 
 upon the point of reasons leading to the appointment Smith would 
 probably be simply recording what was matter of general impression m 
 N. Y. at the time and, so far as this goes, his serviceability is hardly to 
 be impeached. 
 
 'Smith, p. 169. 
 
 'Ibid. 199. 
 
 'N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls. 1868, p. 196. 
 
!0 1 iiASiiS OF ROYAL GOVERN M1£NT 
 
 Huring the period under consideration, three of the gov- 
 ernors were members of the nobihty — Richard, Earl of Bello- 
 mont, Edward, Viscount Cornbury, and John, Lord Lovelace, 
 Baron of Hurley; three were soldiers — Colonels Sloughter and 
 Fletcher, and Brigadier Hunter. None were natives of New 
 York or persons with previous experience in any practical way 
 with the affairs of the dependencies. All but one, Sloughter, 
 were governors of other provinces at the same time with their 
 incumbency in New York ; Fletcher, of Pennsylvania, from 26 
 October, 1692, to 20 August, 1694; Bellomont, throughout his 
 incumbency, of Massachusetts and New Hampshire; Cornbury, 
 Lovelace and Hunter, of New Jersey. It does not appear that this 
 circumstance of a double government was regarded in New York 
 as of very serious importance except in the case of Bellomont, 
 who was absent from New York for nearly a year out of his three 
 years of residence in America. At this time a petition of thirty- 
 three New York merchants was preferred to the king, alleging 
 that the strictness of Bellomont's instructions to the lieutenant 
 governor during his (Bellomont's) absence acted as a great hind- 
 rance to justice, trade and industry without any advantage to 
 other sui'jccts or to the king, and praying that the province be 
 restored to "its former manner of administration unconcerned 
 with the Governor of any other place. "^ This should probably 
 be interpreted, however, as a part of the general mercantile hos- 
 tilitv to Bellomont rather than as a serious complaint on this 
 point as a specific grievance. As to the connection with New 
 Jersey, no complaint appears from any quarter in New York, 
 and tliere would seem to be little reason for any, for the gov- 
 ernor's absences in that province were only for the purpose of 
 meeting the assembly there and the sessions rarely consumed 
 more than seven or eight weeks out of the year. In 1709 the 
 point was raised, whether orders concerning New York given by 
 the governor when he himself was in New Jersey were not void. 
 The Board of Trade gave opinion that this was "groundless and 
 unreasonable the contrary being practised every Day here by the 
 Lords Lieutenants of Counties and particularly by the Lords 
 Lieutenants of Ireland who frequently send orders into Ireland 
 whilst they are Resident in the Kingdom."^ 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 624. 
 'Col. Doc. V. 155. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. I7 
 
 The tenure of office by the governor was during the pleas- 
 ure of the crown and the powers granted by the commission were 
 to be exercised immediately upon arrival within the province, 
 which arrival, followed immediately by the publication of the 
 commission, worked the determination of the effectiveness of the 
 commission of the preceding incumbent.^ It might, and fre- 
 quently did, happen that some time elapsed between the appoint- 
 ment of a governor and the exercise by him of the powers con- 
 veyed by his commission. Thus : 
 
 Sloughter — Commission dated 14 November, 1689 ; arrived 
 in New York 19 March, 1691. 
 
 Fletcher — Commission dated 17 March, 1692; arrived in 
 JSjew York 28 August, 1692. 
 
 Bellomont- — Appointed 16 March, 1697 ; arrived 2 April, 
 1698. 
 
 Cornbury — Appointed 13 June, 1701 ; arrived 3 May, 1702. 
 
 Lovelace — Appointed 28 March, 1708; arrived 18 Decem- 
 ber, 1708. 
 
 Hunter — Appointed 9 September, 1709; arrived 14 June, 
 1710. 
 
 During the period from 1691 to 1720 the frequency with 
 which the office of governor changed hands undoubtedly consti- 
 tuted a feature of weakness in the imperial system of colonial 
 admisintration.^ Eleven different persons administered the pow- 
 ers of the governor's commission during the above-mentioned 
 period, of whom six held commissions as governor and six 
 acted ad interim ; one, Ingoldsby, as commander-in-chief, from 
 2^ July, 1691, to 30 August, 1692, and as lieutenant governor 
 from 6 May, 1709, to 10 April, 1710; one, Nanfan, as lieutenant 
 governor from 20 May, 1701, to 3 May, 1702; and two, as pres- 
 ident of the council, Beekman, from 10 April, 1710, to 16 June, 
 1710, and Schuyler, from July, 1719, to September, 1720. There 
 was one period of interregnum, as it were. On the death of Bel- 
 lomont, 5 March, 1701, the lieutenant governor, Nanfan, was 
 
 ' Col. Doc. IV. 272. 
 
 ^ Smith (p. 149) says that Bellomont was appointed in 1695 but the 
 appointment was signified to the Board of Trade on the above date. Col. 
 Doc. IV. 261. 
 
 ^ Egerton : A Short History of British Colonial Policy, pp. 156-8. 
 
 2 
 
15 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERN MliNT 
 
 on leave of absence in Barbadoes. Dispute immediately arose as 
 to whether powers of administration devolved upon the president 
 of the council or upon the council acting by a majority of votes 
 under the presidency of the eldest councilor. The violence of 
 the spirit of faction then raging in the province caused the eldest 
 councilor, William Smith, to proceed with so great caution that 
 no precedent could be said to have been created by the case, the 
 details of which will be related in anotb.er connection. Fortun- 
 ately no outbreak occurred, and the arrival of Xanfan, 20 May, 
 1701, {)ut an end to an extremely awkward situation. Making 
 no distinction between governors holding office by commission 
 and persons administering the povv'ers of the commission ad in- 
 terim, the office changed hands ten times between 1691 and 1720, 
 and the average term was, approximately, two years and a half. 
 J t is to be noted with respect to this average, that it does not by 
 any means tell the story. The terms of two governors, Sloughter 
 and Lovelace, were cut very short by death, in the case of Slough- 
 ter, after four months, and in the case of Lovelace, after six 
 months, of office. As we shall see, the powers of a lieutenant 
 governor or a president of the council, particularly the latter, 
 were of a somewhat curtailed character, compared v»ith those of 
 a governor ; so that as material for the study of the working of 
 the imperial system under normal circumstances, we have during 
 this period only the administrations of Fletcher, of five years and 
 a half, Bellomont, nearly three years, Cornbury, five years and 
 a half, and Hunter, a little over nine years. 
 
 During the period considered two governors were displaced, 
 Fletcher and Cornbury. It is difficult to find any very reliable 
 material for judgment upon the standard of efficiency required 
 of governors in their tenure of office, in the circumstances of 
 these displacements. Fletcher made a great deal of Shrewsbury's 
 letter recalling him, in which Fletcher was informed that "it 
 was not for any dissatisfaction but in favor of the Earl of Bello- 
 mont," and that the king would take care of him and employ 
 him otherwise for the future.^ It docs not appear that Fletcher 
 ever was given another post, and his administration was certainly 
 subjected to very close and suspicious examination, and, in sev- 
 eral items, described as "not for your Majesty's service," by the 
 
 ' Cal. Treas. Papers, vol. 1697-1701-2, p. 542 ; Col. Doc. IV. 443. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. IQ 
 
 Board of Trade. ^ This was after a series of hearings by the 
 Board upon charges against Fletcher covering a variety of sub- 
 jects. Complaints had been made against him to the Board in 
 August and September, 1695, by Robert Livingston, charging 
 him with refusal to account to the assembly for disposal of pub- 
 lic money and with undue influence over elections.- Further 
 complaints were entered in September, 1696, by Leisler and 
 Gouverneur, for partisanship in the internal factions in the prov- 
 ince, undue influence over elections, misapplications of money 
 raised by the assembly and of money sent by other colonies for 
 defence, defrauding of the soldiers of the independent com- 
 panies.^ Later in the year, in December, Penn submitted a letter 
 from New York, dated 13 June, 1695, which he said he had kept 
 by him for eight months, "being unwilling to concern himself in 
 the matters — chiefly complaints against Colonel Fletcher. But 
 however he thought fit in the end to discharge his hands of it." 
 This letter, the signature of which was cancelled, was from Peter 
 de la Noy, a prominent Leislerian, and covered the same subjects 
 mentioned above and, in addition, mentioned the matter of 
 Fletcher's complicity in the operations of New York pirates.* 
 These complaints, with Bellomont's voluminous correspondence 
 upon the subject of Fletcher's misdeeds, formed the basis of the 
 formal charges, which covered a great variety of subjects — pro- 
 tection of pirates, exorbitant grants of land, connivance at illegal 
 trade, neglect of the military forces and of fortifications, illegal 
 grant of letters of denization, discourtesy to the governor of Can- 
 ada.^ Whether these evidences of inefficiency or improper pro- 
 cedure would of themselves have been sufficient to secure his dis- 
 missal, it is hard to say. Both Fletcher and Livingston seem each 
 to have thought himself in favor with the Duke of Shrewsbury, 
 and the letter from de la Noy before referred to speaks of the 
 people's "apprehension of his (Fletcher's) great power at court." 
 That skilful use of complaints from the province, coupled with 
 manipulation of court influences, was considered to be a possible 
 method of getting rid of an obnoxious governor, we have ample 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 481. 
 'Ibid. IV. 127-30, 143-5. 
 'Ibid. IV. 212-16. 
 ^Ibid. IV. 221-4. 
 Mbid. IV. 443. 
 
20 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 evidence. Perhaps the best example is the case of Bellomont 
 himself, whose activity in enforcing the acts of trade and in 
 discountenancing piracy so angered the merchants of New York 
 that within a year of his arrival they "raised a sum of money 
 by contribution, which they have sent for England, therewith to 
 apply privately at Court to get the Earl removed."^ Apparently 
 an equally important part of the scheme was to influence elec- 
 tions to the assembly, so that the latter would refuse to renew 
 the revenue, which would be a "sure means to ruin the Earl's 
 interest at Court and get him quickly called horae."^ This plot 
 was fomented from England by Fletcher after his return, who 
 wrote to his New York friends just before these elections that 
 "his affairs were in a very prosperous condition at the Court of 
 England and that he made no manner of question to baffle all the 
 accusations sent home against him."^ And later, in 1700, we 
 find London merchants who traded to New York representing to 
 the Board that Bellomont was discouraging lawful trade by his 
 mismanagement, and in February, 1701, petitioning parliament 
 for redress in the same matter.* The question whether Fletcher 
 should be recalled actually for the misconduct indicated in the 
 charges was probably never squarely faced by the imperial ad- 
 ministration. The materials for the charges had been coming 
 to the knowledge of the "Lords of the Committee" for nearly a 
 year before the establishment of the "Board of Trade," in May, 
 1696. This Board, composed for the most part of men without 
 official experience, was made acquainted in a still more compre- 
 hensive way with the complaints against Fletcher in August and 
 September, 1696, and in their representation on the northern 
 colonies to the Lord Justices, 30 September, 1696, suggested, for 
 military reasons,^ the appointment of a captain-general for the 
 war, to command all regular forces and the militia of all the 
 colonies on the continent, this captain-general to have the power 
 
 ' Col. Doc. IV. 462. 
 
 Mbid. IV. 508. 
 
 ' Ibid. 
 
 * Ibid. IV. 604. 
 
 " Possibly on the basis of the suggestion of Nelson, a Bostonian who 
 had been taken prisoner by the French and who was at that time in 
 England on parole. Brooke and Nicolls recommended him to the Board 
 as able to inform them very particularly on the strength of the French 
 in Canada. Col. Doc. IV. 186. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 21 
 
 of governor of any of the plantations immediately depending on 
 the crown while present in it.^ It was after this, 11 December, 
 1696, that the information concerning Fletcher's complicity with 
 pirates seems to have been brought to the attention of the Board, 
 who notified Fletcher in a letter of i February, 1697, that infor- 
 mation had reached them from recent trials of pirates that his 
 government was reputed to offer protections to pirates.^ In their 
 representation to the king, 27 February, 1697, the Board pre- 
 sented the matured results of their consideration of their sugges- 
 tion to the Lords Justices for the military union of all the colonies. 
 Their proposition now took the form of a governor for Mas- 
 sachusetts, New York and New Hampshire, with chief residence 
 at New York and with power of captain-general in those prov- 
 inces and in Connecticut, Rhode Island and the Jersies.^ This 
 was followed in less than a month by the appointment of Bello- 
 mont to the position whose powers had thus been indicated. It 
 seems probable that this appointment was made for the reasons 
 which had had weight in the determination to carry out the 
 above-mentioned recommendation of the Board, the importance 
 of the position requiring a man of greater consequence than 
 Fletcher could possibly be, and perhaps in view also of the 
 king's high opinion of Bellomont, which was expressed at the 
 time of his appointment. 
 
 There are some circumstances about the recall of Fletcher 
 and the appointment of Bellomont which suggest that it was 
 an early case of securing the recall of an obnoxious governor 
 through the medium of an agency, in this case informally con- 
 stituted. It was noted above that complaints against Fletcher 
 were brought to the Board in August and September, 1696, by 
 Leisler and Gouverneur at just about the time that Brooke and 
 Nicolls as agents of the province were making representations 
 on the condition of the province with reference to the question of 
 defence. Leisler and Gouverneur were the natural leaders of the 
 Leislerian party in New York, which outnumbered their oppo- 
 nents three to one,* and which had undoubtedly been discrim- 
 inated against ever since Sloughter's arrival. They found no 
 
 ^Col. Doc. IV. 228-9. 
 ' Ibid. IV. 255. 
 'Ibid. IV. 259. 
 *Ibid. IV. 524. 
 
22 PHASES OF ROYAL C.OVliRNMENT 
 
 opportunity of expressing themselves in the governmental organ- 
 ization of the province, and the visit of Lcisler and (jouverneur 
 to England was naturally used by the party to improve its gen- 
 eral situation in every possible way. Their success with parlia- 
 ment in getting the attainder of the elder Leisler reversed natur- 
 ally gave them the greatest encouragement and they bitterly 
 resented the appointment of Brooke and Nicolls as agents, as- 
 serting that it was a packed assembly that voted the money for 
 the agency, that the agents were inveterate Anti-Leislerians sent 
 over ostensibly to represent the state of the province, but actually 
 to secure the "interest" of Fletcher and the Anti-Leislerians at 
 court, etc. Peter de la Noy's letter to Penn, already referred 
 to, shows plainly one object which the Anti-Leislerians hoped 
 for, viz., "the removall of this man and we are not sollicitous 
 whether he is gently recalled or falls into disgrace, so we are 
 rid of him."^ But in view of all the circumstances — ■ Fletcher's 
 well-known "interest" at court, the equally obvious fact of the 
 success of the Leislerian campaign in other high official quarters, 
 the inaction of the administration in reference to the serious 
 matters proved at the hearings of the charges against Fletcher, 
 the opportunity to ascribe the supersession of Fletcher by Bello- 
 mont to military exigencies of undoubtedly pressing character 
 
 — in view of all these circumstances — it seems probable that the 
 expressions used in Shrewsbury's letter to Fletcher — "not for 
 dissatisfaction with him but in favor of the Earl of Bellomont" 
 
 — were a very fair description of the situation. - 
 
 In the case of Cornbury, we find complaints previous to his 
 recall, from the collector and receiver-general in the province 
 as to obstruction from the governor in the performance of his 
 duties ;•'' from the lieutenant governor, that the governor gave 
 him no instructions and prevented him from exercising any 
 power either in New York or New Jersey ;' and from Lewis 
 Morris of New Jersey, giving a detailed account of partisanship 
 
 ' Col. Doc. IV. 224. 
 
 '' Chalmer.s say.s, "he vva.s soon after recalled partly owing to com- 
 plaints made against him, but more with design to make room for a new 
 plan of union of the Northern Colonies, on which the safety of the 
 whole was supposed to depend." N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls. 1868, p. 149. 
 
 »Col. Doc. V. 28. 
 
 •Ibid. IV. 1162-3. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 23 
 
 and corruption in New Jersey and plainly stating Cornbury's 
 conduct in New York to be as bad or worse/ These complaints 
 came by way of incident after a considerable number of experi- 
 ences by the Board of his neglect and inefficiency in attending 
 to their requirements. It seems likely, too, that the administra- 
 tion was moved partly by a negative aspect of the news com- 
 municated by Morris, viz., that it was useless to expect the 
 province under present conditions to renew the revenue which 
 v/as shortly to expire ; and partly by the possibility of a use for 
 extraordinary military qualities in a governor of New York in 
 view of the intended expedition to Canada. At all events, Love- 
 lace's appointment would seem to tally with these conditions. 
 Smith bluntly says, "We never had a governor so universally 
 detested, nor any who so richly deserved the publick abhorrence. 
 . . . Her Majesty graciously listened to the cries of her in- 
 jured subjects, divested him of his power and appointed Lord 
 Lovelace in his stead ; declaring that she would not countenance 
 her nearest relations in oppressing her people."- He mentions 
 Cornbury's impotency with the assembly, particularly in the 
 matter of the revenue, and ascribes it to his partisanship against 
 the Leislerians, his persecution of the Presbyterians, the fear of 
 his bigotry entertained by the Dutch, his avarice, embezzlement 
 of the public money and his sordid refusal to pay his private 
 debts. ^ It would seem to be a plain case of personal unfitness, 
 finally exhausting the long-suffering patience of all concerned. 
 Of the actual forces efficient with the home government in 
 bringing about his removal we have, however, in the material 
 at present accessible no reliable evidence. 
 
 From the circumstances thus brought out concerning the 
 displacement of these two governors it appears that inefficiency 
 and even corruption in the office could run rather a long course 
 before meeting with decided action by the authorities at home. 
 It also appears that, among the influences practically determining 
 the duration and security of a governor's lease of power, faithful 
 and efficient discharge of the office did not play the leading part. 
 
 The governor was supported by the salary or allowance, 
 and perquisites. The former was allotted by the crown from the 
 
 'Col. Doc. V. 33. 
 'Smith, p. 188. 
 'Smith, p. 185. 
 
24 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 revenue p^ranted by the assembly for the support of government, 
 and the amount was specified in the instructions. This allotted 
 salary tended to increase during the period under consideration. 
 His instructions directed Sloughtcr to take i6oo sterling, and 
 the same amount was allotted to Fletcher. In the case of Bello- 
 mont, who was governor of three colonies at once, the £600 was 
 divided, and £400 allotted to Bellomont as governor of New 
 York, and £200 to the lieutenant governor resident at New 
 York.^ The theory was that Bellomont could afford to lose a 
 portion of the customary New York salary because of his receipt 
 of salaries in his other governments. And, on the other hand, 
 considering the likelihood of frequent and prolonged absences of 
 the governor from New York, the lieutenant governor here 
 would require more than the usual compensation for that office, 
 viz., one half the salary and perquisites of the governor during 
 the time of the latter's absence. 
 
 In the case of these first three governors, the allotted salary 
 had been supplemented by the "presents," i. e., sums of money 
 granted by the assembly "for the use of" the governor, gen- 
 erally immediately after his arrival.- These presents seem to 
 have been officially recognized by the crown as a part of the 
 system of recompense for the governor, for a clause in the in- 
 structions particularly required that no money or value thereof 
 be granted "by any Act or Order of Assembly to any Governor 
 or Lieutenant Governor or Commander-in-Chief . . . which 
 shall not according to the Stile of Acts of Parliament in England 
 be mentioned to be given and granted to us with the humble 
 desire of such Assembly that the same be applyed to the use and 
 behoof of such Governor . . . if we shall think fit or if we 
 shall not approve of such gift or application" the money should 
 be appropriated to other uses mentioned in the Act and to remain 
 in the hands of the Collector till the royal j)lcasure be known.-'' 
 Nevertheless Sloughter's first assembly granted the money that 
 came in to the receiver-general on account of duties, etc., "accus- 
 tomed to be taken but not Warrantable bv the Law" between 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. '290. The reverse of the arrangement in the case of 
 Andros in 1688. 
 
 ' Peter de la Noy, referring to the present to Fletcher, calls It "the 
 usual compliment made to a new Governor." Col. Doc. IV. 221. 
 
 ' Ibid III. 680. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 2$ 
 
 29 January, 1691, the date of Ingoldsby's arrival, and 18 May, 
 1691, the date of publication of the act granting a revenue for 
 the support of government, to "his said Excellency to enable 
 (him) to defray his extraordinary expence."^ 
 
 The first assembly called by Fletcher made him a present, 
 partially complying with the requirements of the instructions. 
 By this act "the Rate of one Penny in the Pound upon all the 
 Reall and Personal Estates within the Province" was granted 
 to their Majesties "to be allowed unto his Excellency the Gov- 
 ernor for his care of the Province ;" but no provision was made 
 for complying with the other requirements of the instructions 
 for such a case.- This rate, according to his own account, brought 
 in to Fletcher actually about £600. His enemies asserted that 
 it should have amounted to £2000, but that Fletcher, by his 
 greediness, mismanaged tne collection so that he lost the greater 
 part, that he accused the assessors of partiality and threatened to 
 commit them to jail for not assessing the inhabitants heavily 
 enough. Fletcher himself ascribed his misfortune to a merchant 
 of the city to whom he entrusted the collection and by whom he 
 
 ' Colonial Laws of N. Y., 253-4. It is to be observed that this was 
 the first assembly legally held in the province, since it came under the 
 direct government of the crown. This assembly evidently took the 
 ground that the new plan of government contained in the commission 
 and instructions to Sloughter went into operation with the arrival of a 
 royal officer commissioned to obey the king's "Governor of N. Y. now 
 and for the time being." In that case, taxes of any sort could only be 
 collected on the authority of the assembly which was directed to be 
 summoned by the governor. A collector, then, who had continued to 
 receive taxes dependent for their authority on the former regime, would 
 need to be indemnified for such proceeding for the period between the 
 determination of the old regime and actual granting of taxes by the 
 proper authority of the new government. This indemnification was 
 another feature of the act, which granted the proceeds of such collection 
 to the governor. It is further to be observed that according to that which 
 later became the custom of the province, the administration of a new 
 governor did not begin till he had actually arrived and published his 
 commission. From this technical point of view, then, the new Constitu- 
 tion could not be regarded as actually in operation till the arrival of 
 Sloughter, 19 March, nearly two months after the arrival of Ingoldsby, 
 and in this act the assembly was granting what did not belong to it, 
 and that to the amount of the proceeds of these two months. It does not 
 appear, however, that this view of the matter was ever publicly mentioned. 
 ' Col. Laws I. 308. 
 
26 I'll ASKS OF KOVAL (".OVliUN M KNT 
 
 was deceived — this according to Bellomont's report.^ Fletcher 
 was also accused of trying to enforce the "present" device upon 
 the smaller units of government, procuring, through his tools, an 
 Address and a golden cup of the value of £20 from the city of 
 New York, and, by the use of blackmailing methods uix)n the 
 Indian fur-trade at Albany, a present of fifty or sixty of the best 
 skins. ^ 
 
 The first assembly of Bellomont's administration did no 
 pulilic business. But at the first session of his second assembly, 
 elected after changes in the lists of the returning officers and 
 under circumstances of great excitement, an act was passed, 
 granting to the king £2000, "£1500 whereof to be allowed to 
 his Excellency. . . . and £500 to . . . the Lieutenant 
 Governor." The provisions of this act seem even more at vari- 
 ance with the letter of the requirements of the instructions, for, 
 though the language of the introductory sentences conveys une- 
 quivocally the meaning of a direct gift to the crown in the most 
 humble terms, the enacting clause provides that the said sum be 
 "raised to the uses aforesaid and to no other use . . . what- 
 ever."" It is uncertain whether the governor and lieutenant 
 governor ever had any ])enefit from this act. As late as 29 July, 
 1700, Bellomont complained of ill usage from the home govern- 
 ment in "not allowing me to make use of the £1500 given by 
 this province in almost a year and a half's time."* And in Octo- 
 ber, 1700, he complained most bitterly that the long suspension 
 of this act was being used by his opponents in New York as 
 an undeniable token of his disgrace at home.'^ It would seem 
 that the delay was occasioned by the solicitor general's office 
 in London and that the whole matter of salaries was under con- 
 sideration by the crown as late as 21 June, 1700. I'ut the terms 
 used in the letter of the Board, 19 September, 1700, make it 
 entirely uncertain whether this act is or is not one of those which 
 they mention as having declined to give an opinion upon." A 
 part, at any rate, of the £2000 was collected, but no full account 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 221, 611-2. 
 ' Ibid. IV. 222-3. 
 ^Col. Laws I. 397. 
 *Co\. Doc. IV. 698. 
 "Ibid. 714. 
 "Ibid. G67, 099. 840. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 27 
 
 was ever obtained. Apparently what accounts there ever were 
 on the subject disappeared when Weaver, collector and receiver 
 general under Bellomont, was suspended by Cornbury/ 
 
 Apparently the home government had not reached any con- 
 clusion in the matter of an increase of the allotted salary of 
 the governor, when, in the summer of 1701, a commission and 
 a set of instructions were drawn up for Cornbury ; for none of 
 the few alterations made in the instructions of Bellomont 
 concerned the matter of the governor's salary.^ Cornbury 's 
 first assembly passed an act for a present of £2000 to the gov- 
 ernor, which act conformed fully to the letter of the require- 
 ments, appropriating the sum so raised to the defense of the 
 country in the absence of the king's permission for its original 
 application." This act was confirmed by the queen.* But in 
 April, 1703, a letter from the queen, alleging the inconveniency 
 arising from the custom, forbade a governor to give his consent 
 to any law or act for a gift or present from the assembly to 
 any governor or lieutenant governor or commander-in-chief, 
 and also forbade such persons to accept any present from the 
 assembly or any one else in any manner under penalty of high- 
 est displeasure and recall from office. By the same letter, which, 
 incidentally, was incorporated in all succeeding instructions, the 
 governor was directed to take from the revenue £1200 instead 
 of £600 as his salary, and the assembly, in consideration of light- 
 ening the "customary burthen of presents," was to be informed 
 of the queen's expectation "that they would contribute in a 
 more ample and effectuall manner to their own safety and pres- 
 ervation."^ No further change was made by the crown in the 
 amount of the governor's allotted salary during the period under 
 consideration. 
 
 No resistance seems to have been actually put forth against 
 this allotment by the crown out of the revenue raised by the 
 assembly till 1710, when, at the beginning of Hunter's adminis- 
 tration, the assembly entered upon a long contest with the gov- 
 
 ' Minutes of the Executive Council, VIII. 144, 152, 183-4, 259, 270, 
 328. Colonial Mss. XLIV. 51, XLVII. 110. 
 ==Col. Doc. IV. 885. 
 •' Col. Laws I. 508. 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 1038. 
 'Ibid. IV. 1040-1. 
 
28 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 ernor and council upon the whole issue of support of govern- 
 ment, a contest which, as its development showed, was waged 
 upon the abstract question of the political consequences of the 
 previous method of support, unconnected with complications of 
 personal animosity against the governor. This contest was of 
 signal importance for the constitutional development of the prov- 
 ince, and the story of it will be related in another connection. 
 On this particular point of the amount of the governor's salary 
 and the crown's allotment of it from the revenue, it is to be 
 observed that one feature of the contest was the proposition of 
 the assembly in 1710 to vote 2500 ounces of silver — about one 
 half the value of the appointed salary — "towards defraying the 
 Governor's necessary expense for one year." Hunter reported 
 that in doing this the assembly was acting definitely on the 
 notion that the crown had no right to appoint a governor's salary 
 out of the revenue raised by them. He exhibited to the assembly 
 the clause of his instructions fixing his salary, but all to no pur- 
 pose. The matter went so far that the Board of Trade prepared 
 bills for parliament enacting "a Revenue of what has usually 
 been allowed . . . for the support of the Governor and the 
 necessary expenses of government."^ In the final settlement, 
 by compromise, of the whole dispute, in 1715, the assembly by 
 resolve fixed the governor's salary at the figure named in the 
 instructions.^ 
 
 The perquisites were described by Bellomont at the begin- 
 ning of his administration as consisting of fees — for passes for 
 ships, marriage licenses, probate business and other things re- 
 quiring the province seal, — fines and forfeitures, one third of 
 the proceeds from seizures of vessels and goods for unlawful 
 trade, and presents from the Indians.^ The governor's share in 
 the proceeds from seizures was secured to him by act of par- 
 liament.* His income from fees became increasingly liable to 
 attack on the part of the assembly as time went on, but during 
 the period under consideration no act regulating fees escaped 
 disallowance in England. Besides, the dispute over fees, which 
 was a feature of the great struggle between the governor and 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 191-3, 197, 285, 287, 330, 333, 359-60, 367, 452. 
 "Journal of the Assembly I. 375. 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 316, 522-3. 
 'Ibid. IV. 316. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 29 
 
 council and assembly, 1709- 171 5, seems to have been rather 
 over fees of court ofificers and attorneys than those taken by the 
 governor and secretary.^ In the Table of Fees proposed by 
 the assembly in 1709 there appear in addition to the fees for 
 purposes already mentioned, fees taken at different stages in the 
 process of getting a patent for land.^ 
 
 From Bellomont, more than any one else, we get information 
 concerning both the amount of salary and perquisites together, 
 and the amount of different items of perquisites. He complains 
 early in his residence in New York that he does not see how 
 he can make above £800 salary and perquisites, and somewhat 
 later reports that in thirteen months, outside of salary and pro- 
 ceeds of seizures, he has received only £83 : 6, New York money, 
 for passes for ships, marriage licenses, probate business and all 
 things requiring the province seal,^ and £88 : 9 : 10 from the sale 
 of skins received as presents from the Indians. According to 
 the accounts of Weaver, collector and receiver general under 
 Bellomont, the seizures for the period from 8 June, 1698, to 
 25 November, 1700, amounted to £375:13:72-* So that Bello- 
 mont's fears, expressed above, as to his yearly income from his 
 New York government not reaching £800 seem entirely justified. 
 Bellomont was not at all backward in representing the matter 
 to the Board of Trade, asserting that he was worse off in fortune 
 than when he came, though if he were willing to use the corrup- 
 tion of Fletcher he could make the government more valuable 
 than that of Ireland, "reckoned the best government in His Maj- 
 estie's gift ;" calling their attention to the fact that the intendant 
 of Canada gets as much as he himself gets from all three of 
 his governments, while the emoluments of the governor of Can- 
 ada are reckoned anywhere from six to ten thousand pistoles. 
 He admits that Virginia and Maryland, whose governorships 
 are worth respectively £4000 and £2500, yield a great revenue 
 to the crown, but contends that that very revenue in those prov- 
 inces depends upon his own right management of the Indians in 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 157, 170, 177, 184, 947. Col. Laws I. 639. 
 Mbid. 638. 
 
 ' The governor received twelve shillings for every use of the Pro- 
 vince seal. Col. Doc. IV. 378, 522-3, 687. 
 *Col. Mss. XLVIII. 110. 
 
30 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 New York.^ We have seen that early in Cornbury's term the 
 allotted salary was doubled, but whether this was in direct re- 
 sponse to Bellomont's representations, we have no means of 
 knowing. Fletcher was accused of having, by the use of all 
 possible devices, cleared from £30,000 to £40,000 in his six years 
 of residence. He himself said that if he should get all that was 
 due to him his net gains would not amount to more than £3000.'- 
 Fletcher certainly must have cleared more than that, by all ac- 
 counts but his own, but whatever the figure, his is not a typical 
 case, for no subsequent governor was allowed the opportunities 
 which he so richly exploited. 
 
 A travelling allowance seems to have been made in some 
 cases out of the revenue in England. Bellomont accused Fletcher 
 of having obtained the consent of the council in New York to 
 the issue of a warrant to himself for £130, to reimburse him for 
 his expenses on the voyage from England ("notwithstanding his 
 Majesty's Allowance of £600 on that account in England.")* 
 The minutes of the council show the passage of such a warrant, 
 but as yet no indications have been found of the payment of such 
 sum in England. Tn the case of Cornbury, we have his request 
 to the Board of Trade for "such allowance of tunnage as is usual" 
 for transporting his servants and goods to New York'.* And on 
 a date suspiciously close to that of his request we have the follow- 
 ing: "His Majesty directs that in order to avoid making prece- 
 dents there be paid to Lord Cornbury Governor of New York 
 £1000 out of the secret service money as of His Majesty's bounty 
 to enable him to proceed on his voyage. "° From this it is natural 
 to infer that such an allowance at any rate was not usual. And 
 it is of interest to note that Cornbury succeeded in the first few 
 days of his residence in New York in persuading the council to 
 give him a warrant for one half his salary for the period between 
 the date of his commission and his arrival in the province, a 
 period of eight months." No evidence of a travelling allowance 
 appears in the cases of the other governors, and as both of those 
 
 ' Col. Doc. IV. 378, 676, 724. 
 
 ' Ibid. IV. 451. 
 
 Mbid. IV. 422. 
 
 Mbid. IV. 913. 
 
 °Cal. Treas. Papers Vol. 1701-1707, 2/13 Sept. 1701. 
 
 • Minutes of Exec. Council IX. 27. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 3I 
 
 who succeeded in obtaining it had an unsavory reputation for 
 greed, we must consider that it was not a regular feature of the 
 governor's support. 
 
 The powers to be exercised by the governor were conveyed 
 through, and described by, the commission and instructions. 
 The relation between these two documents has been well indi- 
 cated by Greene, who describes the commission as containing 
 the grant of power and the instructions as containing directions 
 for the use of that power, frequently limiting its scope. ^ 
 
 Here it will be convenient to consider the commission and 
 instructions together, and inquire to what degree they partook of 
 that comparative fixity of character and publicity which we asso- 
 ciate with the idea of a written constitution and note some partic- 
 ulars of the form in which this quasi constitution appears. 
 
 The changes in the commission were made gradually and 
 in the period under consideration were, though rather numerous 
 in the aggregate, not very extensive in character. Sloughter's 
 commission, which was modelled on Dongan's rather than on 
 Andros', was expressed in forty clauses and covered twelve dif- 
 ferent subjects. Hunter's commission, which was shorter and 
 covered fewer general subjects, showed twenty-two changes in 
 all from that of Sloughter, of which some were purely formal, 
 two consisted of slight and insignificant changes in verbal ex- 
 pression, some were omissions because of changes in the imperial 
 system, such as the power to "erect, nominate and appoint Cus- 
 tom houses and officers pertaining," and some were the result of 
 local development within the province, such as the direction in 
 Hunter's commission for summoning assemblies according to 
 the usage of the province of New York instead of according to 
 the usage of other plantations in America.- Of these changes 
 more than one-half were made between the issue of a commission 
 to Bellomont and that to Hunter. The commission was published 
 immediately upon a governor's arrival, that is to say, it was pub- 
 licly read under conditions of some ceremony. Sometimes it was 
 read twice, once at the fort in the presence of the council, after 
 which the governor and council took the oaths and then pro- 
 ceeded to the City Hall, where the commission was read again.'' 
 
 ' Greene : Provincial Governor, p. 94. 
 ' Col. Doc. III. 623 ; V. 62-8. 
 'Minutes of Exec. Council IX. 16-18. 
 
32 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 In form the commission consisted chiefly of conveyances of 
 power from the king, the terms used being "we do hereby give 
 and grant full power and authority ;" of requirements or direc- 
 tions, the terms used being, "our Will and Pleasure is," "we will 
 and require you," and of appointment or declaration, using such 
 phrase as "we do ordain, constitute and appoint." The form of 
 direct grant of power is used in two-thirds of the instances and 
 though there seems to be a slight preponderance of the use of the 
 phrases of requirement and direction in the case of restrictions 
 on popular power, this is not at all certain. 
 
 The instructions showed a very much greater tendency to 
 increase in length and to go into more and more specific detail 
 and complexity. Sloughter's instructions contained sixty-two 
 clauses, which number had increased by Hunter's time to one 
 hundred and twelve, and three-fourths of the increase was made 
 in the latter's instructions. Sloughter's instructions, like his 
 commission, were based on Dongan's, the chief differences being 
 due to the presence of an assembly, the encouragement of the 
 ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Bishop of London instead of the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury and the exclusion of Papists from the 
 privileges of toleration, the limitation of the appointing powers 
 of the governor and the specific inclusion of the matter of ap- 
 peals to the privy council. Of the sixty-two clauses in Slough- 
 ter's instructions, nine concerned the governor and his relation 
 to other officials, six concerned legislation, seven administration 
 of justice, twelve guardianship of morals and ecclesiastical admin- 
 istration, six administration of military affairs, eight fiscal admin- 
 istration, three diplomatic affairs, meaning by that relations with 
 other colonies, with the Indians and with European powers in 
 treaty relation with Great Britain, and two concerned the trans- 
 mission of statistical matter by the governor. Of the forty-five 
 changes between Sloughter and Hunter, twenty-two concerned 
 the conduct of the machinery of government by the executive, 
 twelve the legislative part of the work of government, and eleven 
 were of a temporary or emergent character.^ The form ordinarily 
 used in the clauses of the instructions was that of direction — 
 "you are to" or "you are not to," "you are to take care that." etc. 
 In certain cases, "particular" care was enjoined ; in the case of 
 
 'Col. Doc. III. C85: V. 124. 
 
IN NEW YORK^ 169I-I719. 33 
 
 Sloug-hter's instructions, in six matters — the form of grant of 
 money as a present, the prohibition of a law or act lessening the 
 revenue, regulation of salaries and fees, the frequency of musters 
 of the militia, the settling of military storehouses, and the equip- 
 ping of orthodox churches with the Table of Marriages. This 
 particular care was enjoined in addition on Fletcher in the matter 
 of worship according to the Anglican rite and on Hunter in the 
 matter of forms of law-making, transmission of accounts, keep- 
 ing of entries of imports and exports and shipping and the 
 account of the province's supply of negroes. The phrase "Our 
 Will and Pleasure is" seems in the instructions to be used for 
 much the same purpose as the enjoining of particular care. For 
 example, it was used in Sloughter's instructions in reference to 
 six matters — the quorum in council, the salary of the lieutenant 
 governor, the requirement of a certificate from the Bishop of 
 London in preferring to benefice, admission of ministers to ves- 
 tries, salary of the governor and the clause conferring general 
 powers in matters not covered in the instructions. In succeeding 
 instructions it is used in reference to fourteen other matters, 
 which, like those already adduced, seem to have reference to 
 points in the conduct of government by the executive which ex- 
 perience had shown to be important for efficiency. Special stress 
 was laid by means of threats of loss of salary, or loss of place, or 
 of highest displeasure on the transmission of accounts and laws 
 and vigilance in execution of the acts of trade and navigation. 
 The instructions i;ecame increasingly minute in directions as to 
 conduct of the legislative work of government, the chief objects 
 being the prohibition of the passage of certain kinds of acts, re- 
 quirement of certain conditions in certain kinds of acts, prohibi- 
 tion of insertion of certain kinds of clauses, recommendation of 
 certain acts to the assembly, etc. It is worthy of note that in 
 respect to all these matters — number of articles or clauses, num- 
 ber of those clauses on which special stress is laid, and minuteness 
 of direction with respect to the conduct of government in those 
 matters shown by imperial experience to be important, there is 
 marked development during the period between Bellomont and 
 Hunter, and that the commission and instructions in Hunter's 
 time seem, more than in the case of any of his predecessors, to 
 
34 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 embody the results of experience as well as the ideals of the 
 empire. 
 
 As to publicity, we observe that by their own tenor the in- 
 structions were required to be exhibited only in certain parts and 
 to certain parties — the clauses in which the advice and consent 
 of the council were required for the validity of some action were 
 to be communicated to the council, — and such other instruc- 
 tions as should be found convenient for the service to be imparted 
 unto them. The former were not very numerous, being four in 
 Sloughter's and seven in Hunter's instructions. Practically, the 
 instructions seem to have been accessible at times of exceptional 
 emergency. On Bellomont's death, his commission and instruc- 
 tions were produced at the following council meeting and read.^ 
 And in the dispute following, Smith, the eldest councilor, argued 
 in objection to the procedure proposed by the Leislerian leaders 
 that business men would be slow to risk on the credit of a gov- 
 ernment "which they are not satisfied pursues the powers of His 
 Majestie's letters patent."- On Lovelace's death, his instructions 
 were entered in full in the council book.^ When Bellomont was 
 in doubt as to the meaning of the clause giving half his salary 
 and perquisites to the lieutenant governor, he showed the clause 
 to a "friend or two that are lawyers."* Of course instructions 
 respecting legislation, both as to form and effect, became common 
 property when use of them became necessary to a governor in 
 defense of his course. But, to whatever degree non-official people, 
 who were nevertheless interested in the contents of the instruc- 
 tions, succeeded in getting knowledge of them here and there, 
 the fact remains that the instructions were nothing like the pub- 
 licly known document that a modern constitution is, though they 
 constituted the most important part of what was actually the 
 public law of the province. 
 
 Hunter was the first of the New York governors to receive 
 a separate set of instructions relating to his duty in the enforce- 
 ment of the acts of trade and navigation. In the instructions 
 to Bellomont and to Cornbury a clause appeared, reciting that 
 notwithstanding the act of 1696-97 great abuses were still prac- 
 
 ' Minutes of the Exec. Council VIII. 211-12. 
 
 'Col. Mss. XLIV. 90. 
 
 * Minutes of Exec. Council 10 :.303. 
 
 *Col. Doc. IV. 317. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 35 
 
 ticed, arising either from the insolvency of the persons accepted 
 as securities or from tlie remissness or connivance of the gov- 
 ernors in the plantations, and declaring that failure in due ob- 
 servance of these laws in New York through wilful fault or 
 neglect on the part of the governor would be looked upon as a 
 breach of trust and would be punished with loss of place and 
 further marks of royal displeasure.^ The same clause appeared 
 in Hunter's instructions,- and, in addition, he was given a set 
 of "Orders and Instructions ... in pursuance of several 
 Laws relating to the Trade and Navigation of . . . Great 
 Britain and our Colonies and Plantations in America." By these 
 he was required to inform himself of the principal laws on this 
 subject, specifying the Acts of 12, 14, 15, 22 and 2^, and 25, 
 Car. II, and of 7 and 8, William III. He was to take care 
 that his Naval Officer give security to and be approved by the 
 commissioners of the customs in England. He was to transmit 
 every three months or oftener lists of the vessels trading in the 
 province and copies of the returns made by masters concerning 
 the contents and quality of cargoes, according to enclosed forms. 
 He was not to make or allow any by-law, usage or custom in the 
 province repugnant to such laws of parliament as mention the 
 plantations, but was to declare such usages null and void. He 
 was to assist in all ways the collector and other officers appointed 
 by the commissioners of the customs. He was to take care 
 that in any actions at law in the matter of forfeitures for unlaw- 
 ful trade "there be not any Jury but such as are natives of this 
 kingdom or Ireland or are Born in any of our said Plantations." 
 He was to take care that offices in courts, "or in what relates 
 to the Treasury of our . . , province of New York," be in 
 the hands of native born subjects. He was to correspond with 
 the commissioners of the customs as to the conduct of the cus- 
 toms officers in the province and as to all occurrences that were 
 necessary for their information. The rest of the twenty-four 
 clauses consist of explanations and interpretations of the laws 
 already mentioned and such other laws relating to the same sub- 
 ject as had been passed since that time.^ 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 291-2. 
 'Col. Doc. V. 143. 
 = Col. Doc. V. 144-53. 
 
36 rilASES OF KOYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 Attempt was made to insure clue performance of his func- 
 tions from a governor by the exaction of a series of oaths. 
 Sloughtcr was required in his commission to take an oath for the 
 due execution of his office and trust, and this oath might be ad- 
 ministered to him by any five of the council. Presumably he 
 himself took at the same time the oaths "appointed by Act of 
 Parliament to be taken instead of the oaths of Allegiance and 
 Supremacy and the Test," for he was required to administer 
 these oaths to the members of the council, and in Bellomont's 
 commission and instructions it was tlefinitely specified that he 
 should himself take and then administer to the council the above- 
 mentioned oaths. In addition, he and the members of the council 
 were required to subscribe the Association.^ In addition to these 
 engagements, Cornbury "took a solemn oath to observe punctu- 
 ally and bona fide the Act of 7 and 8, William III, and all other 
 Acts of Trade."- The council minutes describe Lovelace as tak- 
 ing all the oaths and subscribing the Declaration, by which is 
 probably meant the Declaration "mentioned in an Act of Parlia- 
 ment made in the 25th year of the reign of King Charles the 
 Second, Entitled 'An Act for preventing dangers which may 
 happen from Popish Recusants,' " for we find the requirement of 
 this Declaration mentioned in Hunter's commission. Hunter 
 was further required to take the oath mentioned in the Act of 
 Succession.^ 
 
 Arrangements for the administration of the powers of the 
 governor's commission and instructions in case of the death, re- 
 moval, or departure from the province of the regular incumbent 
 were a long time in reaching a practical settlement. Till Bello- 
 mont's time, the commission provided for the succession of "such 
 Person as shall be appointed by us to be Commander in Chief" 
 and in case there should be "no Person upon the Place com- 
 missionated or appointed l)y us to be Commander in Chief Our 
 Will and Pleasure is that . . . Council ... do take 
 u])on them the Administration of the Government."* The in- 
 structions, however, provided for the enjoyment of one-half of 
 the salarv and perquisites during the absence of the governor by 
 
 ' Col. Doc. III. 62.S, 685, 818, 827. Ibid. IV. 266. 2M. 
 ^ Minutes of Exec. Council IX. 16-18. 
 ' Minutes of Exec. Council X. 266, 513. Col. Doc. V. 92. 
 *Col. Doc. III. 623. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 37 
 
 "such Lieutenant Governor or Commander in Chief who shall be 
 resident upon the place for the time being."^ And in general 
 throughout the period the terms Lieutenant Governor and Com- 
 mander in Chief seem to be used practically without distinction. 
 When Bellomont v/as appointed governor of New York, Massa- 
 chusetts and New Hampshire, his kinsman, Nanfan, was com- 
 missioned as lieutenant governor of New York, and empowered 
 to execute the powers and directions of the commission and in- 
 structions in the case of the death or absence of the governor 
 and to follow the directions of the governor of New York for 
 the time being during the latter's residence in the province.^ 
 Bellomont died at New York in March, 1701, and after an inter- 
 val of confusion, Nanfan administered the government till the 
 arrival of Cornbury in May, 1702. 
 
 On the appointment of Cornbury as governor of New Jer- 
 sey as well as of New York, Major Richard Ingoldsby received 
 two commissions, one as lieutenant governor of New York, and 
 one for the same office in New Jersey. That for New York was 
 dated 25 November, 1702, and it is to be presumed that, as in the 
 case of a governor's commission, the arrival of Ingoldsby ter- 
 minated the effectiveness of the commission to Nanfan, of the 
 formal revocation of which there appears no record.^ Experi- 
 ence under this arrangement proving unsatisfactory, Ingoldsby's 
 commission as lieutenant governor of New York was, in 1706, 
 ordered to be revoked, and he was directed to reside in New 
 Jersey.' But for some reason no notice of the revocation of his 
 commission was sent to him at the time, and on the death of 
 Lovelace in 1709, he succeeded to the governorship. The Board 
 of Trade on learning of his accession looked the matter up and 
 thereupon revocation of his commission was formally notified 
 to him. This brought the administration of the powers of the 
 government into the hands of the council, of which Gerardus 
 Beekman was president, and, shortly after, an order in council 
 was despatched, recognizing him as the head of the government 
 in the province and restricting him in the exercise of this power 
 
 'Col. Doc. III. 686. 
 - Ibid. IV. 277. 
 'Ibid. 1002, 1162. 
 'Ibid. 1174-6. 
 
38 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 in certain matters.^ These are the only instances during this 
 period of the succession of the lieutenant governor. 
 
 The only case of the administration of the government by 
 a commander-in-chief is an entirely anomalous one, occurring 
 at the beginning of the period. As a matter of fact, though the 
 terms Lieutenant Governor and Commander-in-Chief are used 
 apparently without practical distinction, we have no instance of 
 a commander-in-chief acting by regular commission. On the 
 death of Sloughter in 1691, four months after his arrival, there 
 was no one in the province commissioned as commander-in- 
 chief or lieutenant governor. The governor's commission 
 directed that in such circumstances the "Council ... do 
 take upon them the Administration of the Government and exe- 
 cute this Commission . . . and that the first Councilor 
 . . Preside in our said Council with such Powers and Pre- 
 heminences as any former President hath used or enjoyed within 
 our said Province or any other our Plantations in America until 
 our further Pleasure be known." This arrangement had been 
 incorporated in the act of the first assembly "declaring what are 
 the Rights and Privileges of their Majesties Subjects inhabiting 
 within their Province of New York."- Interpreting this arrange- 
 ment in the sense afterwards explicitly given to it by the Lords 
 of Trade, Frederick Phillipse was entitled to preside in the coun- 
 cil. His name appeared first in the list of the council which 
 Sloughter was instructed to call together on his arrival, and in 
 this list as given in the "Documents relating to the Colonial His- 
 tory of New York" the name of Dudley does not appear at all. 
 Yet Sloughter, on his arrival, describes Joseph Dudley as "the 
 first of their Majesties' Council here," and it is known that Dud- 
 ley's appointment as "Chief of the Council in New York" was 
 desired by the king. Smith says plainly that Dudley had the 
 right to preside in the council, and we know from the journals 
 of the council that he was sworn on the day after Sloughter's 
 arrival.^ Whatever the facts in this matter, the council put their 
 own interpretation on the direction to take the care of the govern- 
 ment on themselves, and, as they afterwards reported. "pursuant to 
 
 'Col. Doc. V. 80-2, 89-91, 110. 
 'Col. Doc. III. 623. Col. Laws I. 244. 
 
 "Council J. I. 1-15. Exec. Council Min. VI. 1. Smith, 130. Col. 
 Doc. III. 68b. Cal. Brit. State Papers Domestic Vol. 1690-91, 128. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 39 
 
 their Majesties' Lres Patent (?) did unanimously declare Major 
 R. Ingoldsby to be Commander-in-Chief until their Majesties' 
 pleasure shall be further known and on the 27th instant (July, 
 1691) he was sworn to execute the Powers and Authorities con- 
 tained in their Majesties' said Lres."^ By what color of authority 
 they took this step does not appear. Dudley's absence from the 
 province at the time of Sloughter's death of course accounts for 
 his not acting as president of the council, but the directions in 
 that case called for the presidency of Phillipse, whose name stood 
 next on the list.- It may be that they made a distinction, such 
 as was afterwards raised on the death of Bellomont, between 
 the right to preside in the council and the right to execute the 
 powers of the commission and instructions as commander-in-chief. 
 Throughout this period the governor presided at the meetings 
 of the council in both its legislative and executive capacity, but 
 during the first session of the assembly there are indications that 
 the governor and the president of the council were considered 
 as having distinct parts to play.^ But this would not justify the 
 bestowal upon a person of the council's choice of both the power 
 to preside in the council and the power to execute the commission. 
 This latter was, in the absence of the commander-in-chief, who 
 was plainly referred to as a commissioned officer, to be exercised 
 by the council itself. From a technical point of view the "dec- 
 laration" of Ingoldsby as commander-in-chief would seem to 
 be a coup d'etat quite as much as the assumption of power by 
 Leisler. The nearest thing we have to a contemporaneous view 
 of the matter is Smith's account, which, after mentioning Dud- 
 ley's right to preside, goes on; "but they committed the chief 
 command to R. Ingoldslay . . . Dudley did not think proper 
 to dispute Ingoldsby's authority, though the latter had no title. 
 ... To the late troubles and the agreement subsisting be- 
 tween the Council and Assembly we must ascribe it that the for- 
 mer tacitly acknowledged Ingoldsby's right to the president's 
 chair, for they concurred with him in passing several laws the 
 validity of which have never yet been disputed." The fact that 
 Ingoldsby was in command of the "Independent Companies," 
 
 ' Col. Doc. III. 791. 
 
 = Lamb. Hist, of N. Y. City I. 396. Col. Doc. III. 576, 586, 608, 
 
 793, 836. 
 
 ^Ass. J. I. 2-3. 
 
40 PHASES OV ROYAL GOVKRNMENT 
 
 would furnish the party controlling' the "agreement between the 
 Council and the Assembly" with just the power they needed over 
 a community exhausted but factious. And their proceeding at 
 this time was merely a repetition of their action at the time of 
 Ingoldsby's arrival before the coming of Sloughter. But the 
 circumstances of that time were plainly anomalous and necessi- 
 tated a certain irregularity in procedure, whereas, the circum- 
 stances at Sloug:hter's death, though unfortunate, were those of 
 a government pacified and settled on a regular basis, whose doc- 
 uments, the commission and instructions, were now of recorcj 
 in the province. The irregularity was apparently winked at by 
 the home government, and Ingoldsby held office for over a year, 
 till the arrival of Fletcher. But, though the council and In- 
 goldsby sent a number of letters to Secretary Blaithwait and the 
 Duke of Bolton, there are no letters in the "New York Colonial 
 Documents" from the Board or any Secretary to Ingoldsby.^ 
 This curious episode was the only instance of the succession of a 
 commander-in-chief to the powers of the governor and its anomal- 
 ous character has been sufficiently indicated. 
 
 This experience did not lead to any change in the wording 
 of those parts of the commission and instructions which provided 
 for succession to a vacancy in the governor's office. The pro- 
 vince was to pass through another extraordinary experience in 
 matters connected with this subject before the whofe was put in 
 intelligible order. On the 5th of March, 1701, the governor, the 
 Earl of Bellomont, died, and, as the lieutenant governor, Nanfan, 
 was on leave of alisence at Barbadoes and there was no one on 
 the spot commissioned as commander-in-chief, the opportunity 
 arose for the interpretation of what was meant by the "powers 
 and pre-heminences" belonging to a president of the council. 
 The first councilor resident in the province was William Smith, 
 recently suspended from the office of chief justice of the prov- 
 ince. The council at that time numbered seven, of whom four, 
 all Leislerians, were in the city at the time, and three, Smith, 
 Schuyler and Livingston, were at their homes in distant parts of 
 the province. Bellomont's whole administration had been a time 
 of violent faction and it was alleged that Smith, Schuyler and 
 Livingston were to have been suspended on the very night that 
 
 •Smith, p. 105. Exec. Council Min. VI. 40. 
 
IxV NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 41 
 
 Bellomont died. Whether Bellomont, if he had Hved, would have 
 been able, in that case, to restrain the fury of the Leislerian passion 
 for revenge, it is impossible to say. He certainly had not been 
 crowned with success so far in his difficult task of holding a 
 steady course between the "angry party," characterized by dis- 
 regard for the imperial trade system, and the "black party," con- 
 cerned with a passion for revenge upon their oppressors during 
 the Fletcher regime. He certainly could not have kept them from 
 a certain measure of their desires. The control of the execution 
 of the powers of the commission and instructions was absolutely 
 essential to the realization of these Leislerian ambitions and when, 
 on the arrival of Smith, it appeared that he interpreted the powers 
 of a president of the council to mean that he alone had power to 
 call the council and that without him the rest of the council 
 could not sit and act as a government, the four Leislerians pre- 
 sented views categorically opposed to this interpretation. They 
 resolved that, while the eldest councilor should preside at meet- 
 ings, all acts relating to the administration of the government 
 "should be signed, acted and done by the greater part of his 
 Majesties' said Council met in Council and the Government be 
 administered in the name of his Majesties' Council," and that 
 "when a majority of them should agree that it was for the King's 
 service that they should meet and act, they will meet and act, 
 giving notice to Col. Smith to meet with them and to preside and 
 act as President, which if he refuses they will proceed without 
 him."i 
 
 In the vigorous controversy which followed, Smith seems to 
 have conducted himself with much the greater dignity and mod- 
 eration. His report of the dispute to the Lords of Trade was 
 fair. He made concessions, though with explicit reservation of 
 what should turn out to be his rights, which showed a disposition 
 to do everything, short of surrendering his entire position, which 
 might tend to keep the peace till the arrival of Nanfan. And 
 he carefully refrained from the attempted exercise of any more 
 power than was absolutely necessary for that purpose. The con- 
 duct of Weaver, however, who was practically the Leislerian 
 leader, was violent, his use of the majority vote, as shown by 
 the proceedings with regard to the journal, was governed wholly 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 849. Exec. Council Min. VIII. 2ia 
 
42 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 by partisan considerations ; and his desperation is indicated by 
 his attempt to bribe and then to intimidate Smith himself. The 
 particular power in the actual exercise of which the Leislerians 
 were chiefly insistent that Smith should be "concluded by" the 
 majority vote, and over which the two parties came to a dead- 
 lock, was with reference to a summons of a session of the assem- 
 bly. As to this Smith was inclined to think that the assembly 
 had been dissolved by the death of the governor, and, in any 
 case, he was anxious to prevent a session of the assembly at this 
 time, being confident that the Leislerians intended mischief, and 
 having no notion that they would be at all scrupulous in their 
 use of power. Nevertheless, though taking the ground that there 
 was no occasion for a session, he did, under protest, sign procla- 
 mations for a session at the time which had been set by Bello- 
 mont, knowing that, unless some proclamation were issued, the 
 assembly would meet anyway, and hoping that time might bring 
 a fairer disposition or some authoritative interpretation of the 
 meaning of the commission. The assembly met, but Smith re- 
 fused to sit with the rest of the council as the upper house, 
 though sitting with them for administrative business, and after 
 all, the assembly passed no acts. It may be that the Leislerians 
 lacked nerve in the face of the opinion of "a great number of 
 the inhabitants and those of the best sort, too," against the Leis- 
 lerian constitutional theory. The application of this theory met 
 with another important check in the domain of administration, 
 for the business men of the city would not maintain the credit 
 of the government unless the method of the latter were made to 
 conform to the practice of the other plantations. Fortunately, 
 no outbreaks of violence occurred before the arrival of Nanfan, 
 ten weeks after the governor's death, and for this the credit 
 must belong largely to Smith. Strangely enough, the only com- 
 ment made by the Lords of Trade upon this affair was to the 
 eflfect that they did not find "that any distinct power is conferred 
 on a President separate from the rest of the Council." In his 
 report Smith suggested the importance of making the terms of 
 the commission explicit upon this point — "is informed that the 
 practice is diflferent in diflferent plantations and have not been 
 determined without some straine and struggle in all such Planta- 
 tions who had never been under the like circumstances of admin- 
 istration." Nevertheless it was not until 1707 that in an addi- 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 43 
 
 tional instruction to Cornbury direction was given that under 
 such circumstances as have been described, the councilor whose 
 name is placed first in the instructions is to take upon him the 
 administration of the government and "execute the powers of 
 the Commission in the same manner as a Governor or Com- 
 mander-in-Chief." This was certainly an effective, though tardy, 
 endorsement of the correctness of Smith's reasoning and there- 
 after the course of procedure was plain. The council never- 
 theless clung to its own interpretation whenever possible, but 
 the matter never again became an issue of importance.^ 
 
 As a provincial office the lieutenant-governorship was as 
 merely occasional and transitory in importance as the vice-pres- 
 idency of the United States, and less useful, actually, under 
 ordinary circumstances. He did not even act as presiding offi- 
 cer in the council when the governor was in the province and 
 in the case of both Nanfan and Ingoldsby, the instructions 
 given by the governor left the lieutenant governor in a posi- 
 tion of almost quaint impotence.- It happened that the only 
 two lieutenant governors who held office during this period were 
 officers who commanded the "Independent Companies" ; so that 
 there was at least something for them to do. Under Bellomont, 
 Nanfan was allowed by instructions from home a salary of £200, 
 one-half the amount of the salary of the governor at that time, 
 and it was a standing instruction that during the absence of the 
 governor from the province, one-half of the salary and perquisites 
 should go to the lieutenant governor or commander-in-chief. 
 The exact meaning of this arrangement was brought into ques- 
 tion bv Bellomont whose duties as governor in three provinces 
 and captain-general of militia in five or six made frequent and 
 prolonged absences a necessity. He complained that if he were 
 considered as absent from New York while still present in one 
 of his governments, "every Journey will be very expensive to 
 me," and, "at that rate my Lieutenant Governor will have a bet- 
 ter' time of it than I shall." The Lords of Trade ruled accord- 
 
 ^Col Doc. IV. 859. E. C. M. VII. 213-220. Col. Mss. XLIV. 
 90, 98. Col. Doc. IV. 857-9, 887, 867, V. 5. E. C. M. X. 465, 528. 
 
 ^For example, Nanfan was forbidden to lodge in the new apart- 
 ment in the King's house in the fort, or to permit any one else to do so. 
 Cornbury absolutely disdained to give Ingoldsby any instructions at all! 
 E. C. M. VIIT. 111-13. Col. Doc. IV. 1162-4. 
 
44 i'iiASliS OF UOYAl. GO VK UN. ME XT 
 
 ingly that the Heutenant governor should receive one-half of 
 the salary and perquisites, only when the governor should be 
 absent from all his governments. When Nan fan succeeded to 
 the governorship he was informed that he was entitled to his 
 salary of lieutenant governor and to one-half of the governor's 
 salary and perquisites, and that therefore he was not to pass 
 any act of assembly which granted any present to himself.^ 
 
 The situation of the province under the rule of a lieuten- 
 ant governor was fruitful of mischief. It was during Nanfan's 
 administration that the Leislerian fury was allowed to run to 
 the lengths typified by the outrageous proceedings of the Bayard 
 and Hutchins trial, though apparently Nanfan did not prove a 
 wholly pliant tool in the hands of the Leislerians. Ingoldsby, 
 in his term as lieutenant governor, was accused of being wholly 
 imder the influence of the lately disgraced Cornbury. These 
 possibilities of mischief seem to have been at least vaguely be- 
 fore the minds of the Lords of Trade, for as early as 1698 we 
 find them instructing Bellomont that he is empowered, if neces- 
 sary, to suspend a lieutenant governor and to appoint ad interim 
 to that office, as in the case of councilors. And on the acces- 
 sion of Nanfan the Board applied to him as lieutenant governor 
 the limitation imposed on a president of council, viz., not to 
 pass any acts but such as were immediately necessary. And, 
 finally, in 1706, the Board represented to the privy council that, 
 "as the Governor of New York does most reside at New York, 
 and that upon the occasions of his being absent from thence to 
 visit the Jersies there is a president and Council in New York 
 for the despatch of business there they are of opinion . . . 
 your Majesty's service does no ways require that there be a 
 Lieutenant Governor of New York." And in 1709 the presi- 
 dent of the council was shut f)ff from the two ways of doing 
 mischief which experience had shown to ofifcr the greatest temp- 
 tations, by a prohibition upon passing any grants of land as well 
 as any acts but those that were immediately necessary.^ 
 
 Next in dignity and importance to the governor as a part 
 of the executive official system stands "His Majesty's Council 
 for the Province of New York." This body had been an import- 
 ant branch of the government of the province from the very 
 
 ' Col. Doc. IV. 284, III. 68G, IV. 31G-17, 415. 864. 
 = Col. Doc. IV. 3G1, 864, 1174. V. 110. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 4$. 
 
 beginning' and had, throughout its existence, the influence nat- 
 urally pertaining to a body which had assistant-executive, appel- 
 late-judicial and assistant-legislative powers. During the period 
 under consideration it was popularly considered to play, in the 
 miniature copy of the English constitution, the parts of the 
 Privy Council and House of Lords combined ; and in its execu- 
 tive capacity the council showed its view of its position by a 
 reference in the minutes to the oath of office as that of a "privy 
 Councillor of the province." The privileged position of a mem- 
 ber of the council is also indicated by an order issued in 1710, 
 "on complaints of some members that upon a notion of the law- 
 yers that they are equally liable to arrest with other people, 
 and some of them have been arrested on vexatious actions to the 
 hindrance of their attending on public business." The order 
 directed that in case of demand or cause of action against any 
 member of the council, before arrest should take place a dec- 
 laration should be filed against him and if he refused to appear 
 and plead according to the ordinary rules of the court that then 
 the plaintiff might take out a writ against him.^ In all three of 
 the capacities mentioned above the purpose of the constitution 
 of the council was apparently to provide the representative of 
 the crown v/ith the assistance and advice, and, in some points, 
 the restraint, in the exercise of the powers committed to him for 
 the management of the province, which could be afforded by a 
 group of men acquainted with its capacities and personally in- 
 terested in its welfare. The admission of the representatives of 
 the people to a share in the legislative work of provincial gov- 
 ernment in 1 69 1 operated of course as a narrowing of the sphere 
 of opportunity which might be directly and unrestrainedly ex- 
 ploited by the representative of the crown and in this process 
 it was the council that lost most. The career of the council 
 throughout this period must be estimated in the perspective of 
 the extensive range and thorough-going character of its powers 
 prior to 1691, with the brief interruption of the years 1683-4. 
 In the Charter of Liberties in 1683 an attempt was made to limit 
 tlie powers of the governor, assisted by the council, to the task 
 of ruling and governing the province according to the laws 
 thereof. But by the failure of this attempted legislation, the 
 
 ' E. C. M. IX. 16-18. X. 575. Col. Mss. XLVII. 12. L. 30. Smith, 
 364-5. 
 
46 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 council's work of assistance was left to be described by the com- 
 mission and instructions and the laws of the province were not 
 ])v any means the sole measure of direction of the exercise of 
 these powers. The sphere of powers and activities assigned to 
 the Council of the Dominion of New Enoland by Andros' com- 
 mission and instructions in 1688 was exactly the same as that 
 of the Council of New York under Dongan. But the brief 
 exercise of power by this organization and the fragmentary 
 character of our knowledge of its proceedings with regard to 
 New York render this period unavailable as a source of infor- 
 mation on this subject. 
 
 In theory the composition of the council was determined 
 by the crown ; practically during this period the governor had 
 the weightiest share in the determination of its membership. 
 The instructions to a new governor contained a list of names 
 of those whom he was to call together as a council and to 
 whom he was authorized to administer the oath of office. He 
 was empowered by the commission to suspend a councilor for 
 just cause from sitting, voting and assisting therein, and the ex- 
 ercise of this power was checked by a clause in the instructions 
 requiring the transmission to the home government of the 
 reasons for suspension, together with the charges and proofs 
 and the answer of the suspended individual thereto. Vacancy, 
 by reason of death, removal from the province, or suspension, 
 was to be signified to the crown in order that the latter might 
 appoint to the vacancy ; while for the crown's assistance in this 
 matter, the governor was required to transmit a list of six names 
 of persons best qualified for the trust. In case, however, that 
 the number of vacancies brought the membership below seven, 
 the governor was empowered to choose enough to make up 
 seven, these to be to all intents and purposes councilors till con- 
 firmed from home or till the constructive vacancy was filled by 
 the appointment of some one else. As to the individuals sought, 
 they were to be of the principal freeholders, men of estate and 
 ability and not necessitous or much in debt, and were to be 
 "well afifected to our government." In the latter part of this 
 period the quality of "good life" was added to the requirements.^ 
 The program thus outlined for composition of the council was 
 
 'Col. Doc. III. G23, 685. V. 124. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 47 
 
 early departed from and for reasons which the home govern- 
 ment seemed to recognize as practically urgent. The council 
 might be said to be continually in session; rarely was there 
 more than a week or ten days between sessions. A quorum of 
 five was required by the instructions and, except at certain 
 seasons of the year, it was the members resident in New York 
 or the immediate vicinity who had to be relied on to supply this 
 number. So that, for example, a governor was likely, as in 
 Fletcher's case, to waive the requirement that he should make 
 appointments ad interim only when the number fell below seven, 
 and appoint enough to furnish him with a working quorum, at 
 a time when the list of councilors in the province was still clearly 
 above the required minimum. Naturally, such appointments 
 were likely to be of men resident in New York or the immediate 
 vicinity. In the case of the appointment of Heathcote by 
 Fletcher, it is probable that the ability "to advance his private 
 fortune for his Majesty's service to answer an emergency when 
 money was not in the Treasury," and the inability of a number 
 of the then titular councilors to be similarly serviceable were the 
 urgent reasons for the appointment. The home government 
 seems to have taken no notice of the irregularity; but when 
 Cornbury took the same measures he was cautioned to keep more 
 closely to his mstructions, though his appointments were immed- 
 iately confirmed.^ 
 
 The total membership of the council at first varied. Slough- 
 ter's instructions named twelve ; Fletcher's, fifteen ; Bellomont's, 
 thirteen ; but by Cornbury's time the limit was settled at twelve. - 
 As to the representation of the different localities, no prin- 
 ciple seems to have been explicitly adopted, but there were always 
 one or two from the Albany region, and most of the time one 
 from the eastern end of Long Island ; but the bulk of the mem- 
 bership was always from the district easily accessible to New 
 York City. But even so, the governor experienced much diffi- 
 culty in living up to the requirement of five for a quorum, and 
 Cornbury urged that attention be particularly directed to that 
 feature of the situation in appointments to the council. In 1698 
 a clause was inserted in the instructions providing for suspen- 
 sion of any member of the council who wilfully absented himself 
 
 1 Col. Doc. IV. 1136-7, 1156. 
 ' Ibid. V. 470. 
 
48 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 without just excuse when duly summoned and who persisted 
 therein after admonition. And in the instructions to Hunter it 
 was provided that if a councilor were absent from the province 
 without leave from the crown for more than a year his place 
 should become vacant. Hunter suggested the appointment of 
 "supernumerary Councilors," but it did not meet with favor. ^ 
 There was always a certain element of ex officio membership. 
 The collector and receiver general was always a member, but 
 the Lords of Trade took pains, in confirming the appointment in 
 one case, to disclaim any necessary connection between the offices. 
 Though the commission of the Lords of the Treasury to Byer- 
 ley, as collector, in 1703. recommended his admission, Cornbury 
 refused to nominate him, and he was not appointed till 171 1. 
 Bellomont regarded it as highly desirable that the secretary of 
 the province should be a member, but this was not the case till 
 1716, when Clarke, who had been secretary for thirteen years, 
 was appointed. During the whole of the period, the chief jus- 
 tice and, during the administrations of Bellomont and of Corn- 
 bury, the attorney-general, were usually members. During Corn- 
 bury's administration we find Romcr, the royal engineer, a mem- 
 ber ; but he was so seldom in the province that his member- 
 ship hardly counted. Colonel Quary, surveyor-general of the 
 customs, was empowered to be a councilor during his stay in 
 each province where his business called him ; but it does not 
 appear that he was regularly sworn in in New York.^ Under 
 the circumstances of difficulty in getting a quorum which have 
 already been referred to, it is not surprising that the governor 
 should come to depend on the official portion of the council 
 membership for attendance ; though it is to be observed that 
 this official element did not become formidable till the latter 
 part of the period. 
 
 This brings us to the dependence of the composition of the 
 council on the governor's use of his power of suspension. In 
 the ordinary course of affairs, when a councilor died or removed 
 from the province, the governor nominated a successor, admitted 
 him to the council till the pleasure of the crown should be 
 known, and sent the name home for confirmation. It is impos- 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 56, 470, 124, IV. 856. E. C. M. X. 186. 
 *Col. Doc. IV. 536, 1136-7, V. 470. E. C. M. XI. 352. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 49 
 
 sible to say how strictly the governor kept to the lists of eligi- 
 bles which the instructions required him to furnish to the home 
 government ; but it is to be presumed that they were pretty 
 closely adhered to, for there appear only three cases of refusal 
 to confirm. One was so entirely exceptional as to lack signifi- 
 cance. The two others were rejected because they had no estate 
 in the province, though they were prominent citizens of New 
 Jersey.^ 
 
 As has been indicated, after the province had come down 
 to settled ways of living, the usual reason for changes in mem- 
 bership was death or departure from the province. But in the 
 period prior to the close of Lovelace's administration in 1709, 
 there were two occasions when the governor's power of removal 
 was used with much freedom, and both of the resulting upheavals 
 occurred at the beginning of a new governor's term. Bellomont's 
 instructions named thirteen councilors. Of these, one had died 
 before Bellomont's arrival, one was "superannuated," one, being 
 non-resident, refused to accept ; and when for different reasons 
 the governor had, within six months, suspended eight, his nom- 
 ination of five new members, which practically re-constituted the 
 body, was entirely within the limits of the narrowest interpre- 
 tation of his powers. As for three of the eight persons sus- 
 pended, he gave as reasons, their complicity in dealings with 
 pirates, and as for the other five, he described the act as "abso- 
 lutely necessary for his Majesty's service," — they were "always 
 resty and perverse in everything I propose . . . always 
 caballing and contriving to make the government uneasy to 
 me." The truth is, that, as is well known, the Earl had come 
 full of zeal for the suppression of piracy and evasion of the acts 
 of trade and had early discovered that the council, as well as his 
 predecessor, were all pretty equally involved in the scandal. It 
 is hardly to be doubted that all of the eight suspended coun- 
 cilors had been involved in the "system" ; but Bellomont's frank 
 avowal of the partisan-political character of his reasons for 
 suspension could easily lend color to the accusations of his ene- 
 mies that these removals were upon frivolous pretences, "in 
 order to procure Sherififs and consequently an Assembly to his 
 liking." It was unfortunate, too, that three out of five of those 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 965. 
 4 
 
5^ rilASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 who were appointed to the vacancies were prominent Leisler- 
 ians, accused of lacking the estate and financial ability, which 
 was considered an important requisite. Nevertheless we find all 
 but one of those appointed by Bellomont during his term in the 
 list of councilors brought over by Cornbury.^ 
 
 This list was, however, soon disturbed by the second great 
 shaking-up in membership. The nearly complete capture of the 
 organization of government and the revengeful use of the power 
 thus gained by the Leislerians during the interval between Bello- 
 mont and Cornbury had led them into a variety of excesses, 
 the whole temper and personal passion of which was nucleated 
 in the affair of Bayard and Hutchins. Cornbury promptly 
 espoused the cause of the' Anti-Leislerians, and with entire dis- 
 regard of his instructions, formal and otherwise, lent himself 
 to the designs, equally vengeful, of the party which had lately 
 been the sufferers. He immediately suspended from the council, 
 not only those who had been actively identified with the irregu- 
 larities of the trial, but also those known to be of Leislerian 
 tendencies. He frankly assigned complicity with the Bayard- 
 Hutchins trial as his reason for the suspension, and it was ap- 
 proved by the crown. As this reduced the number of the council 
 to just seven, there was technically no vacancy to which to nom- 
 inate, nevertheless two were admitted and were apparently con- 
 firmed, as their names appeared in the list of the council in the 
 new instructions to Cornbury in 1703. Cornbury 's procedure in 
 the case of these suspensions was so neglectful of the program 
 laid down by the instructions, as to defeat his own ends in the 
 long run. One of the surviving councilors suspended by him 
 was included in the list in Lovelace's instructions, whereupon 
 two of the other survivors made vigorous representations as to 
 the injustice of leaving them out of such a vindication, and were 
 able apparently to satisfy the council that the requirement laid 
 upon the governor to furnish a suspended councilor with a copy 
 of the reasons had not been complied with and that the facts 
 should be represented to the home government. They professed 
 that they were neither "envious nor soliciting to be restored to 
 that Honourable Post," but only anxious that they "may no 
 longer be looked upon as scandalous persons by the Home Gov- 
 
 ' Col. Doc. IV. 399, 620. E. C. M. IX. 226. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 5^ 
 
 ernment." Nevertheless in the Hst of the council in Hunter's 
 instructions their names appeared "in their places according to 
 their precedency they . . . had" formerly, "as has usually 
 been done in like cases. "^ 
 
 It is perhaps because of the wholesale changes for partisan 
 political reasons, as carried on by Bellomont and Cornbury, that 
 we find the instructions, as drawn up in Hunter's time, altered 
 to provide for a better enforcement of the requirement of the 
 list of six eligibles, for strict conformity to the established num- 
 ber of formal membership, and for transmission to the Lords of 
 Trade or to the Secretary of State of justification for not enter- 
 ing the reasons for suspension of a councilor on the council 
 books, "in case you do not so enter them." Whether for this 
 reason or because of the abler and more straightforward char- 
 acter of the governors who succeeded Cornbury, there were no 
 more changes of membership by the v/holesale.- 
 
 The requirement of the commission and instructions, that 
 persons nominated to the council should be of the principal 
 freeholders, men of estate and ability, and the practical require- 
 ment for quorum purposes, brought it to pass that the mercantile 
 interest of New York City had a preponderating influence in the 
 body. At times this was of serious consequence for the province. 
 Bellomont reports himself puzzled "who to recommend for a sup- 
 ply of Counsellors unless I should send the names of merchants," 
 and the Lords of Trade, probably on his representation, report 
 great difficulty in "getting men for the Council free from the 
 practices that ought to be reformed." Appreciation of the situ- 
 ation does not seem, however, to have made much difference with 
 the practice of the Lords of Trade in following the recommenda- 
 tions of the governor pretty closely. The council continued 
 to contain representatives of the great landed interest, like the 
 Van Rensselaers and the Smiths of Long Island ; of the wild land 
 and fur-trading interest, like the Schuylers and Livingstons ; of 
 the mercantile interest reaching out into land-holding, like the 
 . Phillipses and Van Cortlandts ; and of the strictly city and mer- 
 cantile interest, like Van Dam.^ 
 
 ' E. C. M. IX. 22c, 296, X. 267, 286-7. Col. Mss. LIII. 14. Col. Doc. 
 V. 123. 
 
 'Col. Doc. V. 124. 
 ''Col. Doc. IV. 396, 719. 
 
52 PHASES OF KOYAL GOVIiRNMENT 
 
 The executive duties of the council were in the nature of 
 general assistance and advice to the i;:overnor but the commis- 
 sion and instructions specified certain activities of the jrovernor 
 as requirinq- the j^articipation of the council in some way or other. 
 The consent of the council was required for a declaration of war 
 against the Indians on emergent occasions, and that of tl:e coun- 
 cil and of the assembly for the making of laws. The advice 
 and consent of the council was required for the calling of assem- 
 blies, the erection of courts, the issue of warrants for the pay- 
 ment of public money, for regulation of fees, for appointing 
 markets, fairs and ports, and, in the latter part of the period, for 
 commissioning judges and justices of the peace and for execut- 
 ing "Articles of War or other Law Martial" on the inliabit- 
 ants. The advice of the council was required for action in ref- 
 erence to fortifications and in regulations concerning "that free- 
 dom which commerce ought to have," and for the granting of 
 lands, though in this last matter change was afterwards made so 
 as to require consent as well as advice. Finally the assistance of 
 the council was required to "find out the best means to facilitate 
 and encourage the Conversion of Negroes and Indians" and "to 
 provide for the raising and building of Publique Work Houses."^ 
 
 For the execution of these powers the council seems, dur- 
 ing this period, to have had no organization separate or distin- 
 guishable from its organization as the upper house of the leg- 
 islature. Items of legislative business occur in its minutes inter- 
 mingled with executive items ; so that, for example, we have in 
 the "Journal of the Legislative Council" a record of the approval 
 of an answer of the governor to an address from the assembly 
 on the subject of amendments proposed by the governor and 
 council to a bill from the assembly ; also of advice given by the 
 council to the governor to pass a certain bill in the form in which 
 they in their legislative capacity have amended it. The governor 
 presided at their sessions. Only occasionally, and this not until 
 the latter part of Cornbury's term, does the journal give us any 
 information concerning the votes of members. - 
 
 The frequency of sessions and the volume of business fall 
 oflF very sharply in the latter part of the period. During the 
 administrations of Fletcher and Bellomont we find wceklv ses- 
 
 ' Col. Doc. III. fi23, 085. 818, 827, IV. 266, 284, V. 92, 124. 
 'Journal of Leg. Council. I. 91, 107. 
 
IN xVEW YORK, ■1691-1719- 
 
 53 
 
 sions in the very dullest times, which were from the middle of 
 July to the middle of September, and from December to March. 
 In the spring and autumn, sessions averaged two or three weekly 
 and often there were daily sessions for weeks at a time. iHere 
 was a tendency for sessions to be numerous at the beginning 
 of a new governor's administration. The first part of Corn- 
 bury's administration shows an increase in number of sessions 
 and volume of business over the preceding year and a ha f bu 
 there is a decided falling ofiE in the latter part ; while m Hunter s 
 administration a lower level is reached than was the casem any 
 part of Cornbury's term. And in Hunter's time the busmess 1 
 less miscellaneous in character - is easily classified under the 
 heads of judicial affairs, land, accounts and warrant-issue. 
 
 ^s to compensation by way of salary, we have the testimony 
 of Hunter, before the Lords of Trade in 1720, that the council 
 "alwavs claimed an allowance as well as the Assembly m pro- 
 portion to the Number of days they attended the Publick Service 
 [n a Leoislative Capacity, though that Allowance was "ever paid 
 them before the passing the two late Acts for paying the Publick 
 Debts of the Province." (1714 and 1717)-' 
 
 As to relations between the governor and council m the 
 ordinary discharge of business, the commissi^, and instructions 
 required that the council should be allowed freedom of debate 
 and vote in all things. Cornbury was accused, in letters of com- 
 plaint sent home, of browbeating the councilors and not allowing 
 Ln. freedom of debate. He informed them of this and, bemg 
 ieft to themselves, they unanimously declared their ignorance of 
 any such denial of freedom and caused their declaration to be 
 entered on the records. The general circumstances of the admin- 
 istration, however, rob this formal vindication of convincmg 
 power Fletcher was believed by Bellomont to have been guilty 
 of undue influence of another kind -"so managed the Council 
 here by gratifications of grants of land, connivance at their un - 
 LfuAr^de, etc., . • • ^hat on perusal of the Coimc^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 I do not find that they would contradict him but joined with 
 Lm in almost everything that was proposed to them altho' never 
 so extra judicial.- Naturally, anything like adequate proof of 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 552. 
 
 ^E. C. M. X. 250. Col. Doc. IV. 320. 
 
54 PHASES OK ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 this condition it is impossible to obtain from merely formal rec- 
 ords and from the indii^nant letters of Fletcher's successor. But 
 examination of the council minutes bears out Bellomont's charges 
 of a complete agreement, or — what was for practical purposes 
 just as effective — acquiescence in Fletcher's proceedings; and 
 of pernicious activity in land grants in which members of the 
 council unblushingly participated on a great scale. As to the 
 general ])osition of the council in the government, consideration 
 may be fitly postponed till after a survey in the following chap- 
 ter of the position and powers of this same body in its legislative 
 capacity. 
 
 The other executive officials in the province were at first 
 wholly under the power of the governor, though the commission 
 and instructions, after lodging the appointing power generally 
 in the governor's hands, required that removal from office should 
 be for cause signified home, and, particularly that commissions 
 to judges and justices of the peace should not contain limitations 
 of time. The commission and instructions further reserved the 
 appointment to offices under the Great Seal of England — "patent 
 places" — to the crown, but allowed to the governor power of 
 suspension and ad interim appointment, as in the case of other 
 officers. In Hunter's instructions the consent of the council was 
 required in making appointments to offices connected with the 
 administration of justice. All officers were to be aiding and 
 assisting to the governor in the execution of the powers of the 
 commission, and the governor was forbidden to allow any person 
 to execute more than one office by deputy.^ 
 
 With respect to the "patent places," which were, besides the 
 councilorships, the offices of secretary of the province, the collector 
 and receiver general, and for most of the period the Admiralty 
 Court, it is sufficient to observe that the control over the filling 
 of these offices was not practically in the hands of the governor 
 as was the case with the councilorships. The collector and 
 receiver general was subject to instructions from the commis- 
 sioners of the customs in England and was more than once at 
 cross purposes with the governor. The experience of the prov- 
 ince ran through the combinations of a lax governor and a cor- 
 rupt collector, Fletcher and Brooke ; a zealous governor, Bello- 
 
 'Col. Doc. III. 623, 685, V. 124. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 55 
 
 mont, and this same corrupt collector ; a corrupt governor, Corn- 
 bury, and a strict and active collector, Byerley ; with the result 
 of frequent suspensions of the collector and consequent disputes 
 over accounts, restorations with new disputes over the new trans- 
 fer of accounts, and, in general, an intolerable confusion in all 
 financial and accounting relations, which made an important ele- 
 ment in the development of the assembly's financial powers. It 
 was not until Hunter's time that harmonious and efficient relations 
 between the governor and collector became a regular feature of 
 provincial life. Bellomont complained loudly of the inefficiency 
 of the person whom he found holding office as secretary and had 
 evidently made arrangements, in England before coming over, 
 to have the office filled to his liking; but his man had disap- 
 pointed him. He had high ideals for the office — "should be the 
 Governor's right hand man," able to canvass accounts, etc. — but 
 he was unable to get these ideals realized.^ Till Bellomont 's time 
 it had been customary for the secretary to hold also the office of 
 clerk of council, executing its duties by deputy ; and also the 
 offices of register and examiner of the court of chancery. But 
 Bellomont was very clear in his mind as to the iniquity of hold- 
 ing office by deputation, and suspended the secretary's deputy. 
 But after the appointment by the crown of George Clarke as 
 secretary, in 1703, the offices of secretary of the province and 
 clerk of the council were by order of the governor in 1705 re- 
 united.^ 
 
 There was comparatively little office-holding by deputy. 
 The governors, however, experienced much annoyance from per- 
 sons who were appointed in England to office in New York, but 
 who delaved their sailing for an unreasonable time after appoint- 
 ment. More than once such individuals succeeded, against the 
 efforts of the governor, in obtaining payment of salary for the 
 period between their appointment and their arrival in the prov- 
 ince.^ 
 
 The other executive officials of the province were appointed 
 and commissioned by the governor, and the salaries, as well as 
 
 ' Col. Doc. IV. 536. 
 
 'Col. Mss. XLV. 116. E. C. M. IX. 78, 300, 502. Col. Doc. IV. 
 925. 
 
 ' E. C. M. VIII. 286-8. Col. Doc. IV. 855. 
 
56 1']1ASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 those of the patent officers, were estabhshed on the provincial 
 revenue, the governor being" instructed to regulate all salaries and 
 fees. The most important of these officials were the Justices of 
 the Supreme Court, the Attorney General, Naval Officer, Clerk 
 and Messenger of the Council, Surveyor General, *'The Gentle- 
 men at Albany appointed to manage the Indian Affairs," the 
 Custom-house officers, Public Printer, Justices of the Peace, and 
 Sheriffs in the Counties, and the Mayors of the Cities of New 
 York and Albany. In the early part of the period there are a 
 number of instances of the creation of special offices, usually 
 for doubtful or partisan purposes and filled by creatures of the 
 governor or of a triumphant faction. Examples of this are to be 
 found in the office of Accountant General and of Secretary at 
 War, created by Fletcher and filled by the disreputable Honan.^ 
 Another example is the office of Solicitor General, created by 
 Nanfan at the time of the Bayard and Hutchins trial, when the 
 attorney general blocked the plans of the Leislerians by an opin- 
 ion hostile to their course. It was filled, significantly, by Weaver, 
 the active leader of the Leislerians at this time. At this period, 
 also, the office of "Corrector of the Presse" was set up and filled 
 by Gouverneur. a personage of partisan significance equal almost 
 to Weaver. The office of Escheator General also appears in 
 these last desperate hours of Leislerian opportunity. It was 
 created apparently for the purpose of facilitating the confiscation 
 of Robert Livingston's estate, and at the same time providing 
 for one Cosens, another professional Leislerian office holder. 
 For all salaried offices the governor found no opposition from 
 the council in ordering a salary paid out of the provincial rev- 
 enue ; but in none of these cases did the offices remain established 
 long enough to make a permanent impression on the official 
 system of tlie province during the i)criod.- 
 
 Bellomont's program as general overseer of the official system 
 was sufficiently ambitious. "I take a great deal of pains to serve 
 the King myself and I will oblige all other officers in the Govern- 
 ment to take the same pains in their respective employments or 
 I will turn them out and apply home for new ones in their places." 
 He did apply home a good deal for office-holding material, his 
 
 *Col. Doc. IV. 421. 
 
 *Col. Doc. IV. 974. E. C. M. VIII. 844, 308. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 57 
 
 opinion of the abilities and iionesty of New Yorkers being rather 
 low. He made particularly strong representations as to the low 
 state of the legal profession, and succeeded in getting a judge 
 and an attorney general appointed from home. The chief justice 
 received at first an allowance from the Treasury but during the 
 disputes in Cornbury's time arising from the Bayard and Hutch- 
 ins afifair, the payment seems to have been discontinued. In the 
 case of the attorney general a custom grew up of requiring a 
 certificate of ability from the Justices of the Courts at Westmin- 
 ster ; but this was not absolutely essential, if the crown chose to 
 forego the requirement. The payment of an allowance from 
 England seems in like manner to have depended on the favor 
 of the crown. ^ 
 
 There are no instances of the control of executive officers 
 by the assembly until the struggle over the right to appoint a 
 ^'Country Treasurer," for the custody of funds raised for extra- 
 ordinary uses, outside the support of government. From this 
 time, i. e., 1706, on, we find the assembly increasing the number 
 of officers immediately dependent on it ; as, for example, the com- 
 missioners of the excise, the tonnage officer, officials charged 
 with the custody of funds arising in the manner indicated by their 
 titles. As for control of the whole executive official system, the 
 assembly's attempts in thi^ direction, through its struggles for 
 control of fees and for annually renewed grants of revenue, with 
 appropriations of salaries, form a separate story and will be de- 
 scribed in a subsequent chapter. 
 
 From the foregoing survey it becomes apparent how com- 
 pletely the executive system of the province and the office of the 
 governor as crown agent were merged. It was true, as a mat- 
 ter of abstract theory, that the governor acted in a dual capacity. 
 Actually, his powers and his relations with the strictly provincial 
 executive officers were such as to be in exercise very difficult to 
 distinguish. As the constitutional development of the province 
 was inextricably involved with the contests between the gov- 
 ernors and assemblies, this circumstance is of profound signifi- 
 cance. 
 
 Xol. Doc. IV. 287, 442, 514-6, 1142, V. 599, V. 49, 70, 161. 
 
CHAPTER III. THE LEGISLATURE. 
 
 The legislature of the province, as constituted in 1691, had 
 one body ot precedents as a basis — the representative assembly 
 of the last two years of Charles II. In 1683 the Duke of York, 
 as proprietor, had, contrary to his inclinations but counselled by 
 considerations of expediency, instructed Governor Dongan to 
 call an assembly composed of representatives from every part of 
 his government, to consult with himself and the council as to 
 what laws were fit and necessary to be made. The instructions 
 were detailed in character and in accordance with them two 
 assemblies were summoned ; the first holding two sessions, one 
 in October, 1683, at which fifteen acts were passed, and one in 
 October, 1684, at which thirty-one acts were passed. The 
 second assembly met in October, 1685, and passed six acts and 
 considered four more. The output of these sessions was com- 
 prehensive in character, ranging from a Charter of Liberties to 
 a Bill concerning Swine. ^ It is probable that the fundamental 
 character of the Charter of Liberties helped to confirm the duke 
 in his previously expressed distrust of such assemblies and made 
 all the mo!e grateful to him the opportunity to remodel the con- 
 stitution of the province aflforded by his accession to the throne. 
 At all events, the Charter of Liberties, though formally con- 
 firmed by him as proprietor, and this confirmed instrument all 
 but dispatched to his governor, was disallowed by the same in- 
 dividual as king. Hy the new commission in 1686, Dongan was 
 given "full power and authority with the advice and consent of 
 the Council ... to make . . . laws for the . . . 
 peace, welfare and good government of the Province and of the 
 people and inhabitants thereof," and was instructed to "observe 
 in the passing of Laws that the Stile of Enacting the same — 
 By the Governor and Council — bee henceforth used and noe 
 other." The legislative activity of the council under Dongan, 
 till July, 1688, was comparatively slight but it included measures 
 for continuing the revenue, raising taxes, and regulating fees, 
 as well as proceedings having to do with more general interests, 
 such as naturalization, the christianization of negroes and the 
 
 'J. of L. C. pp. xii-xv. Col. Laws I. 111-177. 
 
 (68) 
 
IN NEW YORK^ 169I-1719. 59 
 
 adoption of the English language for legal instruments. Of the 
 proceedings having reference to New York which emanated from 
 Andros' Council for the Dominion of New England, we know 
 practically nothing. The assembly called by Leisler, though from 
 the fact of its summoning highly significant of the ideals of that 
 movement, contributed very little, if anything, to the development 
 of representative institutions. The Leislerians professed to be 
 guided by the Charter of Liberties but felt themselves practically 
 forced to a procedure very far removed in spirit from the pro- 
 visions of that document. Our sources for this assembly are 
 very slight, but the titles of the bills passed in the brief time it 
 was allowed to sit reveal a partisan and oppressive character.^ 
 The settlement of the government of New York made by 
 the government of William and Mary provided once more — 
 and this time permanently — for participation in the work of 
 legislation by the representatives of the people. The passages 
 of the commission and instructions to Sloughter which bear on 
 this point set up again practically the legislative system that was 
 authorized by the Dongan instructions in 1683, and show no 
 trace of influence from the Charter of Liberties. The only differ- 
 ence lay in the requirement of the Test from the assembly of 1691 
 and in the omission of the clauses requiring that all laws, unless 
 temporary in purpose, be made indefinite and without limitation 
 of time, and, finally that laws be agreeable to those of England. 
 According to this system the governor was empowered to sum- 
 mon general assemblies in accordance with the usage of other 
 plahtations, and, with the consent of the council and this assembly, 
 to make laws which were to be sent home within three months 
 for approval or disallowance. The governor was to enjoy a 
 "negative voice" in the passing of laws and was empowered to 
 adjourn, prorogue and dissolve the assembly. He was further 
 instructed not to pass acts of a certain character and to use all 
 efforts for the passage of certain other acts, and the tendency 
 was for instructions from home with regard to legislation to 
 increase. The whole legislative system may be said to have con- 
 sisted of four parts, (a) the privy council in England, with 
 powers of confirmation or repeal over the product of the colonial 
 legislative activity; (b) the governor in the province, with a 
 
 'J. of L. C. pp. viii-xxv. Col. Doc. III. 369. Brodhead, II. 416. 
 
60 PHASES OF KUVAI. GuN'ERNMlZNT 
 
 "ncgaiive voice'" upon the measures aoreed upon by the two 
 houses; (c) the council in its legislative aspect, performing the 
 work of an upper house; and (d) the house of representatives 
 of the "assembly," that of a lower house. The title "assembly" 
 became a matter of dispute between the council and the lower 
 house in the course of the struggle for the right to appoint a 
 CountryTreasurer, in the years 1703-6. In the particular matter 
 under dispute, viz., the style to be used in the enacting clause of 
 a bill, the lower house won its point. The contention of the 
 council was for a continuation of the form followed up to that 
 time, which contained an enumeration of the participating bodies 
 in the phrase "the Governor, Council of this Province and Rep- 
 resentatives in General Assembly convened." On this the council 
 insisted for the reason, that the general assembly was a body 
 composed of these several members, which were jointly the 
 legislative power in the province. The council also adduced the 
 practice of the parliament of England. The lower house in re- 
 ply was able to make the point that in the letters patent from 
 the crown "which the House are humbly of opinion is the Meas- 
 ure of the Powers of this Government and the Rules of the 
 People's Obedience," all reference to assemblies meant plainly 
 the representatives of the people. This particular bill was there- 
 fore declared to be enacted by "The Governor by and with the 
 consent of his Majesty's Council and this General Assembly." 
 Thereafter the style usually employed was, "Be it enacted by 
 the Governor, Council and Assembly (or General Assembly) and 
 by the authority of the same." ^ 
 
 The legislative system in the province, as thus constituted, 
 performed the usual functions of representative bodies in that 
 branch of the government, affording constitutional means for the 
 expression of public opinion on emergent occasions as well as 
 for criticism of the general course of the government. The most 
 conspicuous occasion when the opinion of the legislature was 
 expressed at a crisis of public excitement occurred in connection 
 with events just prior to the execution of Leisler. Within the 
 first ten days of the first session of the first assembly a series 
 of resolves was passed, condemning proceedings under the Leis- 
 ler regime and pledging loyalty and support to the government 
 
 • Ass. J. I. 179-80, 185. Col. Laws I. 575-6. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-1719. 61 
 
 as established. Tliese resolves had the concurrence of the gov- 
 ernor and council and were published. The question of the re- 
 prieve of Leisler and ]\Iilborn was referred by the governor to 
 the lower house, which refrained from any expression of opinion 
 on the ground that the matter of reprieve was a prerogative be- 
 longing solely to the governor. Three weeks later, however, on 
 being consulted on the same subject as a means of quieting and 
 securing the government, the house appointed a committee to 
 confer with the council on the question. At this conference, 
 presumably, the advice of the council in favor of immediate 
 execution for the sake of satisfying the Indians, asserting the 
 authority of the government and preventing insurrections in the 
 future was elaborated. The assembly, at any rate, gave formal 
 approval, "according to their opinion given," of the action of 
 the governor and council.^ Criticism of the conduct of the gov- 
 ernment was also expressed on various occasions in the form of 
 resolves, usually elaborated under the direction of the grievance 
 committee. 
 
 The exercise of the power of final scrutiny of the legislative 
 output of the general assembly was formally in the hands of the 
 privy council. Practically, the council depended on the repre- 
 sentations of the Board of Trade and Plantations or its prede- 
 cessors, as the basis of its action. The length of time required 
 for communication between the home government and the prov- 
 ince enhanced the practical importance of legislation which had 
 passed through all but this final stage. The instructions to Don- 
 gan, in 1683, required that laws assented to by the governor 
 should be held good and binding till the duke's disapproval 
 should be signified, and that all laws should be made "indefinite 
 and without limitation of time except the same be for a temporary 
 end and which shall expire and have its full eflfect within a 
 certain time." The Charter of Liberties provided that laws 
 should remain in force till repealed by the general assembly "by 
 and with the approbation of his Royal Highness."^ The exact 
 meaning of this provision, if carried out into detailed application, 
 is not clear. As the Charter of Liberties was never confirmed, 
 the matter is significant only as revealing provincial ideals. It 
 may be that it was desired that the presumption should be in 
 
 'Ass. J. I. 6-7, 13-14. Doc. Hist. II. 374. 
 'Col. Doc. III. 332. Col. Laws I. 113. 
 
62 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 favor of the bill which had passed and that special action by the 
 enacting body itself, directed, it is true, by the proprietor, should 
 be necessary to change. That this would be no merely formal 
 advantage is shown by the difficulty that governors repeatedly 
 experienced in persuading assemblies to carry out precise direc- 
 tions of the crown regarding legislation. The instructions to 
 Sloughter in 1691, as has been indicated, omit the requirement 
 that laws be made indefinite, etc. Whether this omission was de- 
 liberate and the result of experience, sources which are at pres- 
 ent accessible do not inform us. It had been omitted from the 
 instructions of 1686, which abolished the assembly, and was not 
 re-inserted till the instructions to Hunter in 1709. As a matter 
 of actual practice the Board of Trade and the privy council seem 
 to have been content to allow the presumption to be in favor 
 of the enacted law, relying on the governor to inform the Eng- 
 lish authorities of the desirability of prompt action either in con- 
 firmation or disallowance. Under ordinary circumstances, action 
 of any kind by the home authorities on provincial legislation 
 was very slow in coming and was resorted to only spasmodically. 
 The government of William and Mary apparently took no action 
 on any provincial legislation from New York till 1697, when 
 out of sixty-three acts passed since 1691, eleven were confirmed 
 and one repealed. There was another burst of activity in 1700, 
 and another more notable one in 1708, when seventeen acts were 
 confirmed, three of which had passed the provincial legislature 
 prior to 1700. There was another wholesale confirmation in 
 1709, after which action one way or the other seems to have 
 depended wholly on the question of urgency, as represented by 
 the governor in specific cases. ^ 
 
 It would seem that the assembly deliberately traded on the 
 government's indisposition to take action relating to laws of 
 limited duration and cast as many as possible of their acts in a 
 temporary form accordingly. Of sixty-three acts, passed between 
 T69T and 1697, we have record of action by the imperial author- 
 ities on tvv'elve ; of fifty-three acts, passed between 1697 3"<^ the 
 arrival of Cornbury, fourteen received attention and three of 
 these were not acted on till 1708; of seventy-two acts, passed in 
 
 ' Information relating to confirmation or repeal of acts is taken from 
 Colonial Laws, which follows Col. Docs, or ancient editions of the laws 
 or Fowler's Bradford. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-1719. 63 
 
 Cornbury's administration we have twenty-four confirmations 
 and four repeals. Of twenty-eight acts passed in the adminis- 
 tration of Ingoldsby between the death of Lovelace and the 
 arrival of Hunter we know of only one action — a repeal. But 
 this was the period of the first Canada expedition, which de- 
 manded of the legislature much activity of a nature not sub- 
 ject to cavil. The same is true of the early part of Hunter's 
 administration, within whose term of nearly ten years a total of 
 more than one hundred and fifty acts was passed, followed by 
 decisive imperial action on only six. Throughout the whole 
 period acts not of a duration manifestly limited by their wording 
 and at the same time not acted on by the home authorities, are 
 very few indeed. And the number of acts formally disallowed 
 during the whole period was, according to present sources of in- 
 formation, hardly more than a dozen, of which six were the 
 product of a legislature about whose truly representative char- 
 acter there was so much reasonable doubt as to justify the gov- 
 ernor's recommendation that its whole output be annulled.'^ 
 
 The crown veto was exercised in anticipatory fashion, as it 
 were, by the increasing strictness with which the exercise of the 
 legislative power was circumscribed in the successive sets of in- 
 structions to the governors. In addition to the requirements that 
 (i) laws made be agreeable (as near as may be) to the laws 
 of England; (2) that acts levying money and inflicting fines 
 should reserve the same to public uses indicated in the act; (3) 
 that acts granting money to the governor should follow the style 
 of acts of parliament for an analogous purpose in England; (4) 
 that no act lessening or impairing the revenue should be passed 
 without leave from home, all of which are found in the instruc- 
 tions to Sloughter, many others appeared in those to Hunter in 
 1709. "Riders" and "jokers" were apparently provided against 
 by the requirement that, "whatever may be requisite upon each 
 different matter be accordingly provided for by a different law. 
 without intermixing in one and the same act such things as have 
 no proper relation to each other," going on to forbid particularly 
 the insertion in an act of any clause foreign to what the title 
 should import, or of a perpetual clause into a temporary act, and 
 the suspending, confirming or repealing of any act by genera'i 
 
 ' Col. Doc. IV. 999. 
 
64 PHASIiS OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 words. It was further required that all ])rivate acts should con- 
 tain a clause savinj:^ the rights of the crown and of all bodies, 
 politic or corporate, and of all persons except such as are men- 
 tioned in the act. "And whereas great mischief may arise by 
 passing bills of an unusual and extraordinary nature and import- 
 ance in the plantations which Bills remain in force there from the 
 time of enacting until our Pleasure be signified to the Contrary 
 We do hereby will and require you not to pass or give your con- 
 sent hereafter to any Bill ... of unusual and extraordinary 
 importance wherein our prerogative or iVoperty of our subjects 
 may be prejudiced without either having first transmitted unto us 
 the Draught of such Bill . . . and our having signified our 
 Royal Pleasure thereupon or that you take care that in the pass- 
 ing of (any) Act . . . that there be a clause inserted therein 
 suspending and deferring the execution thereof until our Pleasure 
 be known concerning the said Act." No law for raising any 
 imposition on wines or strong liquors should be made to continue 
 for less than one whole year. The governor was not to re-enact 
 any law once enacted, except on very urgent occasion, and in no 
 case more than once without express consent from home. It is 
 evident that these instructions, if carried out, would prevent the 
 appearance before the privy council of laws bearing certain ob- 
 jectionable characteristics. Laws passed after the receipt of these 
 instructions still, however, display many of the features prohib- 
 ited. The threatened use of the crown's veto as a weapon where- 
 with to compel the assembly to pass legislation in the required 
 form is another reason for the small number of actual instances 
 of the exercise itself. This is illustrated by the experience in 
 the case of the act for suppressing and punishing the conspiracy 
 and insurrection of negroes, passed in 1712, concerning which 
 Hunter reported that it had been found in practice to work 
 several abuses. In 1715 the Board of Trade gave Hunter permis- 
 sion to recommend to the assembly the passing of a new act for 
 the purpose, not liable to the inconveniences complained of, saying 
 that otherwise they would be obliged to lay the act before his 
 Majesty for disallowance. The act was accordingly revised in 
 1717^ The elastic possibilities of the governor's power to use 
 his influence, in one way for an immediate and temporary end, 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 181, 480, 503. 
 
IN NEW YORK^ 169I-I719. 65 
 
 and in another for distant objects is illustrated by the case of 
 the act for the better settlement and assuring of lands, passed 
 in 17 10. On this, Hunter observed that he passed it reluctantly, 
 because "there was no saving the Queen's right in it," that he 
 was induced to pass it by the fact that the assembly was very 
 fond of it and he wished to leave them no excuse for not settling 
 the revenue ; that since the persons who hoped to- profit by it 
 were to remain in peaceable possession till 1713, "Her Majesty 
 will have so long time to disallow it without receiving any pre- 
 judice by it, if any encroachments have been made on any of 
 her lands." In 1716 he again urged that the act be disallowed, 
 saying that that would pave the way for a second resumption of 
 lands, which otherwise would be very difficult; also that the 
 want of a clause saving the rights of the crown was sufficient 
 reason for disallowance, though he could give others. In 1718 
 the Attorney General gave opinion that, though he had objections 
 to it, yet he thought its disallowance would tend to some ill con- 
 sequences. The Board of Trade suggested that if the assembly 
 would "pass a new act for repealing this whereby the persons 
 who purchased under the security of the act of 17 10 may be 
 safe and the new law not liable to any other objections, Hunter 
 might give his assent, provided there was a clause in it declaring 
 that it should not be in force till His Majesty's pleasure be 
 known." It does not appear that, during this period at any 
 rate, either the assembly or the crown took any further steps in 
 the matter, so that whatever harm the Prerogative received,, 
 though it had been the design of the governor to purchase a 
 permanent advantage by a temporary risk, became in this case 
 a permanent loss — a process which had in the history of the 
 province more than one illustrative demonstration.^ 
 
 In the comparatively few cases of an actual exercise of 
 direct veto by the crown the reasons seem to have been, ( i ) con- 
 travention of the instructions, (2) uncertain and dangerously 
 loose form of wording; (3) inconsistency with the trade system 
 of the empire ; (4) grounds of general public policy. Of the 
 last the disallowance of the assembly's act, which repealed the 
 law for vacating the extravagant grants of land made by Fletcher, 
 is the most important example. It is curious to note that this 
 
 ' Col. Boc. V. 181, 480, 503. 
 5 
 
66 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 disallowance of the assembly's repealing act was the form under 
 which the merits of the original question appeared for final settle- 
 ment by the Lords of Trade, nine years after the passage of the 
 vacating act.* 
 
 We have already seen, in the case of the act for a present to 
 Bellomont and Nanfan, how the slow, lumbering process of ex- 
 amination of provincial legislation by the crown might annoy a 
 governor and even mar the effectiveness of his administration, 
 by the implication thereby thrown upon the matter of his stand- 
 ing at court. An even more serious consequence for the welfare 
 of the province, at one point, at any rate, in this period is de- 
 scribed by Cornbury in 1704. He suggests that it would be 
 proper for him "to have an account what acts of this province 
 have been confirmed and what not . . . because there is now 
 no footsteps in the Secretary's office . . . nor in the Coun- 
 cil books which acts have been confirmed or repealed or neither 
 till the list your lordships were pleased to send me and very often 
 in hearings before me in Council, the lawyers in their quotation of 
 acts, on one side affirm certain acts to be repealed when those on 
 the other side affirm the same acts to be confirmed." When, 
 however, an act deemed by the governor of critical importance, 
 had passed the provincial legislature, every effort was made to 
 obtain a speedy verdict from the crown. In Cornbury's time an 
 act granting him a present was confirmed in four months. In 
 Hunter's administration the act settling the revenue contest was 
 confirmed, after considerable opposition, which involved taking 
 the opinion of the attorney general, in three years. - 
 
 The governor's "negative voice" had been given him by the 
 crown for the express "end that nothing may be passed or done 
 by our said Council or Assembly to the prejudice of us. our heirs 
 and Successours."^ This power of the "negative voice" was used 
 under quite different forms in the first two administrations from 
 those which prevailed later, but throughout the period the lack 
 of any effective distinction between the executive and legislative 
 aspects of the council's organization reduced the occasion for 
 direct use of the governor's veto. Under these conditions it be- 
 comes necessary to speak of the governor's use of the veto, and 
 
 'Col. Doc. V. 65-67, 71, 82, 143. 157. 
 
 *Col. Doc. IV. 1112, V. 501. Col. Laws I. 508. 
 
 *Col. Doc. V. 94. 
 
IN NEW YORK^ 169I-I719. 67 
 
 of the relations between the governor and council in the whole 
 process of law-making, in connection with each other. In the 
 first session of the assembly in 1691, the question of the form 
 of signifying the assent of the governor and council to bills sent 
 up by the representatives arose, by reason of the assembly's 
 discovery that in the case of certain bills returned with amend- 
 ments, some contained an assent of the governor and council, 
 and others only of the council. On investigating the precedents 
 of "the former General Assembly," it was discovered that the 
 earlier custom of signifying assent of the governor and council 
 was for the governor to put his sign manual to the bills; and 
 direction was given that the governor be desired to continue this 
 method, "being most consonant to the Customs of England and 
 their Majesties' other plantations."^ This would seem to in- 
 dicate that it was the assembly's theory that, in form as well as 
 in fact, the governor should have two separate opportunities to 
 take part in the same act of legislation, viz., the giving the 
 assent of the governor and council to a bill, indicated by the affix- 
 ing the governor's signature ; and the enactment, enrolling and 
 publication of the bill as an act. This certainly was the pro- 
 cedure in some cases.- On the other hand, we have an instance 
 of a vote of the council in favor of an assembly bill ; the record 
 of the governor's signing it on another day. and, on the last day 
 of the session also referring to it as one of the acts which he 
 has assented to and has passed, and inviting the representatives 
 to remain and attend him at the publication of these acts.^ 
 
 The confusion in Fletcher's mind on this point and the actual 
 relation between himself and the council are well illustrated by 
 the following incident. The assembly had, in July, 1695, sent 
 up a bill providing for a present to Fletcher. The council voted 
 to "lay it aside," and no further action was taken. When, how- 
 ever, at the end of the session, the governor announced the re- 
 sults of the assembly's labors, he referred to this bill in these 
 words, — "as that Bill was framed he doth reject it," — as incon- 
 sistent with his honor, thus giving no opportunity for the council 
 as the upper house to bring the question regularly before him 
 for decision on the matter of assent and enactment ; on which 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 10. 
 
 'Ibid. 64. J. of L. C. I. 
 
 'J. of L. C I. 52, 55-6. 
 
68 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 question, indeed, he might require their advice as an executive 
 council !^ 
 
 By Bellomont's time tlie matter was straightened out so that 
 the procedure inchided the agreement hy both houses to the bill 
 by separate vote, which, in the case of the council, was recorded 
 as "an assent of this House," and not of "His Excellency and 
 Council," as formerly, and then the signing of the bill by the 
 governor, in the presence of the council, followed by his order 
 for enrollment. This signing was described as "giving the as- 
 sent," and was always followed by enactment and order for 
 enrollment. This was descril)ed as the "usual form of passing 
 Bills into Acts in this province" in 1699.- 
 
 It would api)ear, then, that under Fletcher the governor's 
 "negative voice" was used, in connection with his dominating 
 personal influence in the council on legislative projects, in some- 
 thing like the anticipatory fashion in which the crown's veto was 
 used towards provincial legislation in general. Instead of pre- 
 serving the appearance of leaving the two houses to arrive at 
 some practical agreement on the issue, and then using his veto 
 according to his estimate of the necessity of the situation, he 
 made a practice of interfering by special message at any stage 
 of the assembly's procedure, and lecturing them on their duty 
 and on their interest in view of the intention of the governor 
 and council to use their power of assent in one way or another. 
 Much dependence was apparently placed on the effect, as a last 
 resort, of personal interviews between the assembly en masse, 
 and the governor and council. This method was successful upon 
 one occasion, but upon being repeated at the next session of the 
 same assembly, it failed utterly.^ When, under Bellomont and 
 successors, a procedure was followed, which separated the assent 
 of the council as the upper house from the assent of the governor 
 as a third house, this device of the message of the governor to 
 the assembly during the course of a session was. in the main, 
 used only for emergent occasions. Aiul the governor's influence 
 as holding the power of a third house was made effective in 
 shaping legislation indirectly, through the medium of the council 
 as the upper house and its close connection in this and in its 
 
 ' J. of L. C. I. 79-80. 
 Mbid. 137-40, 143, 171. 
 'Ibid. G2-6G, 71-77. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 69 
 
 executive capacity with the governor. But the governor still 
 continued — and" did so throughout the period, — to sit with the 
 council when acting as the upper house, and, in case of a tie, 
 to give the casting vote/ The withholding of assent, the actual 
 form of the veto, was still sometimes confounded with the lack 
 of action by the upper house, in the governor's remarks to the 
 assembly at the close of a session.- As experience with the work 
 of legislation developed, the instances became more frequent of 
 the use of the veto, by the governor in an independent manner, 
 but they were never very numerous.^ 
 
 The governor's "negative voice" was only one, and that the 
 most direct, of a number of ways of influencing legislation. He 
 had unrestrained powers in the matter of summoning, proroguing 
 and dissolving assemblies. He recommended legislation, and 
 action on the governor's speech, as a whole, and item by item, 
 often constituted the program of the assembly's activity. We 
 have seen what was his actual influence and power in the com- 
 position of the council. He had numerous indirect means of 
 influence over the membership and organization of the lower 
 house. We will consider these later in connection with the de- 
 scription of the house of representatives itself, and at present 
 inquire into the governor's use of his power over the frequency 
 and duration of sessions of the assembly. 
 
 Provincial ideals in the matter of control over the sessions 
 of the assembly were unmistakably indicated in the Charter of 
 Liberties in 1683, and in the act of 1691, "Declaring what are 
 the Rights, and Privileges of Subjects within the Province." 
 The former provided for a session of the assembly once in three 
 years, "according to the usage Custome and practice of the 
 Realme of England" ; and the latter for annual sessions ; and 
 both, for control by the representatives,* over times of meeting 
 during sessions and over adjournment. Af we have seen, neither 
 of these acts was allowed permanently to have the force of law ; 
 but, in practice, throughout the whole period, there was but one 
 year in which there was not at least one session of the assembly, 
 and generally there were two. For the most part the governors 
 
 *J. of L. C. I. 273. 
 'Ibid. 155, 234. 
 "Col. Doc. V. 357. 
 * Col. Laws I. 113, 245. 
 
yo PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 seem to have exercised tlieir prerogative in the matter of fixing 
 the time of sessions in an accommodating spirit, frequently con- 
 sidting with the house through the sjx^aker as to what would 
 be a convenient date to which to adjourn. The sessions thus 
 arranqied were usually held in March or April, and in September 
 and October, of each year. Conditions of travel seem to have 
 had an important effect on the dates of opening the spring, and 
 closing the fall sessions, and "occasions of husbandry," on the 
 closing of the spring, and opening of the fall sessions. But in 
 time of war, or of unusually critical political interest the sessions 
 might prolong themselves into the middle of harvest, or almost 
 to Christmas. The usual length of a session was about six weeks. 
 
 It seems to have depended on the idiosyncrasies of the several 
 governors whether the house should adjourn itself to the agreed 
 date, or be adjourned by the governor. Cornbury always ad- 
 journed the house himself, but his predecessors and successors 
 seem to have allowed either form indififerently, with a tendency, 
 if anything, in favor of allowing the hou.se to conform to the 
 program agreed upon. 
 
 Custom as officially interpreted did not at first require that a 
 newly arrived governor should dissolve the existing, and summon 
 a new, assembly. There were at least two occasions, however, 
 when an opinion to the contrary was in evidence, it probably 
 being due to a desire on the part of the popular party to find an 
 excuse for a new election. On one of these occasions this opin- 
 ion was explicitly frowned upon by the governor.^ Neverthe- 
 less, as things actually happened, it did come about that, till 
 Burnet's time, a new governor was always persuaded to call a 
 new assembly shortly after his arrival. The death of the sover- 
 eign was regarded as working a dissolution as of course.- The 
 arrival of a new commission and set of instructions for the gov- 
 ernor from the newly crowned king was, in 171 5, made the excuse 
 for a dissolution by Hunter, though such a proceeding had ap- 
 parently not been thought necessary under analogous circum- 
 stances in Cornbury's time.^ Smith evidently regards this pro- 
 ceeding of Hunter's as a pretext and describes him in this action 
 as "determined to subdue those (of his opponents) whom he 
 
 • Ass. J. I. 122. 
 
 * Smith, p. 224. 
 •J. of L. C. I. 396. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 7I 
 
 could not allure," and was plainly impressed with the success 
 of the device/ The governor was able to secure an opinion from 
 the provincial attorney general to the efifect that "the Assembly 
 being called by Virtue of the Letters patent from her late Majestic 
 and those being determined by those from his Majestic" was 
 dissolved.- This precedent, however, was studiously ignored by 
 Burnet. 
 
 The change of assembly obtained by Hunter through the 
 device just referred to, and one case in Fletcher's administration, 
 are the only instances out of at least six different attempts in 
 that direction of the successful use of the power of dissolution 
 for the purpose of obtaining a more compliant body. It was 
 usually resorted to when either the governor, council, and assem- 
 bly, or the council and assembly, had, in the course of some con- 
 test, come to an impasse.^ In one case the governor found it 
 necessary to use this power to save his dignity. In the course 
 of the revenue controversy, 1709-1715, the assembly attempted 
 to disguise its backwardness in supporting the government, by 
 pretending a scruple at the fact that the proclamation for its 
 prorogation had been dated at Burlington, in New Jersey. 
 The governor decided that the "assembly are Resolved not to act 
 Notwithstanding the opinions of the Lords of Trade," and fol- 
 lowed the advice of the council, "to send for the house and dis- 
 solve, which they would otherwise doe themselves." 
 
 There was one instance of the refusal of the governor to 
 use his power of dissolution over such an extended period that 
 the province generally came to regard it as a grievance. The 
 assembly already referred to as procured by Hunter for the pur- 
 pose of serving his interest was kept in existence from 5 June, 
 1 716, to 10 August, 1726. The continuance of this assembly, 
 described by Hunter, as "the most dutiful to their Sovereign and 
 the most attentive to the true interests of the Colony that the 
 Province could ever boast of," was deemed by him so essential 
 to the preservation of the "measures that he had with much 
 labor settled for the peace of that country." that he made the 
 matter the feature of a letter of advice, which was approved by 
 the council, and delivered to Schuyler, who was president of the 
 
 ' Smith, 224. 
 
 'J. of L. C. I. 396. 
 
 » Ibid. 311. 
 
72 PHASES OF KOVAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 council at Hunter's departure. I'urther, on his arrival at Lon- 
 don, l:e succeeded in havino; Schuyler particularly directed by 
 the Lords of Trade "not to presume to dissolve the i)resent 
 Assembly or suffer the same to be dissolved for want of due 
 prorogations till his Majesty's pleasure be further known." The 
 close personal relations between Hunter and Burnet made pos- 
 sible the continuance of all the fundamental features of the 
 former's policy, including the relations with the assembly, and, 
 though "the continuance of an Assembly after the accession of 
 a new Governor was represented as an anti-constitutional pro- 
 ject," it was not until "frequent deaths of members," aided by 
 the "intrigues of his adversaries" and the clamors of the people 
 for a new election obliged him to that course, that Burnet dis- 
 solved the house. ^ It is not surprising under the circumstances 
 that we find this assembly rebuking suggestions of the illegality 
 of their continuance, and quoting the practice of Ireland in the 
 matter, and that we hear nothing in the proceedings of the body, 
 of triennial or septennial acts.^ Previous to this "Long Assem- 
 bly," provincial experience had developed no necessity for any- 
 thing of the sort. During the period from 1691 to 1716, there 
 were no more than three examples of an interval of more than 
 two years between successive elections of new assemblies. The 
 average interval was about eighteen months. 
 
 There is but one instance of a dissolution and the ordering 
 of a new election by a lieutenant governor or commander-in- 
 chief. This was in 1701, when Nanfan, as lieutenant governor 
 was induced, probably practically compelled, to this step. The 
 excesses indulged in by this assembly, and the discredit put upon 
 its work by the crown, deprived this precedent of any effective- 
 ness. And the spirit of the direction to a lieutenant governor 
 or commander-in-chief to forbear to pass any act but such as 
 should be absolutely necessary certainly forbade the use of such 
 an important power by a locum-tenens in any but the most un- 
 doubtedly emergent occasions. 
 
 In using the power of prorogation, the governors, in the 
 early part of the period, seem to have made little distinction be- 
 tween it and adjournment. But from the beginning of the 
 eighteenth century the practice seemed to be, that a prorogation 
 
 •Col. Doc. V. 534-5, 7(35-9, 783. Smith, pp. 240, 245, 267. 
 *Ass. J. I. 442-3, 451. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 73 
 
 put an end to the life of bills, and an adjournment to that of 
 committees. There was at least one occasion when the gover- 
 nor prorogued the assembly for the conventional reason — that 
 "second thoughts and better Acquaintance may perhaps create a 
 better Disposition."^ 
 
 We have thus far been describing the crown and the gov- 
 ernor in their relation to the work of the legislature, taking 
 the fact and the mode of existence of the latter for granted. It 
 is now in order to describe the process of constituting the legis- 
 lature, its membership, the organization of the two houses re- 
 spectively and their relation to each other in the actual work of 
 legislation. 
 
 The constitution of the upper house of the legislature has 
 already been described in speaking of the executive council. Its 
 membership in one capacity was identical with that in the other, 
 and, as has already been indicated, the connection between them 
 was confusingly close. 
 
 Taking up then, the constitution of the lower house, we 
 find that, in form, the governor's discretion in summoning rep- 
 resentatives in the matter of the number of delegates, their 
 apportionment and qualifications, was only vaguely restrained by 
 the commission and instructions. In 1691, these required that 
 the assemblies should be of the "Inhabitants being freeholders 
 within your government," that persons elected should take the 
 modified oaths of allegiance and supremacy and the Test, and 
 that the summoning should be "according to the usage," at first 
 of "our other Plantations in America," and from 1692 on, "of 
 our colony of New York." In general, in the evolution of 
 "usage" in this matter, as in so many other directions, the action 
 of the assembly was the more prominent feature ; but the co- 
 operation of the governor and council was by no means lacking. 
 
 In the matter of apportionment, experience prior to 1691 
 furnished useful precedents. The instructions to Dongan for 
 calling the first assembly directed him to "issue out soe many 
 writs or summons and to such officers in every part not ex- 
 ceeding eighteene soe that the . . . inhabitants of every 
 part of the said government may have convenient notice there- 
 of and attend at such ellection."^ In accordance with these 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 10, 321, 352, 287. 
 'Col. Laws I. 112, 121-2. 
 
74 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 instructions writs were issued to the sheriffs, in some cases 
 prescribing a method of choice within a particular jurisdiction. 
 For example, the sheriflf of Long Island was ordered to "warne 
 the Freeholders to name two deputies for each Rideing" ; this 
 as a general direction, supplemented by specific commands that 
 Staten Island should nominate one representative, that the towns 
 on Long Island should each send a committee of four to the 
 Session-house of each riding to nominate two representatives for 
 the riding, and that the inhabitants of Fisher's, Silvester's and 
 Gardiner's Island vote with the East Riding. By thus using 
 the existing organization of the localities as a basis, and adapt- 
 ing it by the most practically convenient methods, the sense of 
 the directions in the instructions seems to have been carried out. 
 At the first session of this first assembly an act was passed 
 dividing the province into twelve counties, including Martha's 
 Vineyard and adjacent islands, and the Pemaquid region, each, 
 as counties. The Charter of Liberties apportioned the repre- 
 sentatives among ten counties, on the basis of two representa- 
 tives to each county named, except that New York had four, 
 and the township of Schenectady, within Albany County, was 
 given a representative separate from the county delegation. To 
 the general description of apportionment in the act was appended 
 these words ; "and as many more as his Royal Highness shall 
 think fitt to Establish."^ This division of the territory of the 
 province into counties and apportionment of the representatives 
 among them is practically identical with the plan of the assembly 
 as originally called, organized on a systematic basis and pro- 
 viding for the expansion of the representative system under the 
 auspices of the proprietor. In summoning the second assembly, 
 under Dongan. we have record of the issue of writs only to New 
 York, Kings, Queens, Duke's, Suffolk, Albany and Ulster Coun- 
 ties ; and, in the case of the asscmbl\- summoned by Leisler, of 
 the issue of writs to the same list with the exception of Suflfolk 
 and Duke's, and the addition of Westchester.- Nothing in the 
 sources which are at present accessible throw? any light on the 
 omission, in 1685, to send writs to the other counties. Those 
 in the list are certainly the most important counties in point of 
 population and wealth ; and it may be that the others were 
 
 'J. of L. C. I. Introd. p. xi. 
 
 ' Col. Doc. III. 624. J. of L. C. I. Introd. pp. xiv-xxiv. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 75 
 
 linked in with those to which writs were sent, as was the case 
 with Oranj^e County, prior to its attaining a respectable position 
 in numbers and property. 
 
 The commission and instructions to Sloughter in 1691, which 
 outlined the organization of the provincial government for the 
 next sixty years, required the summoning of assemblies accord- 
 ing to the usage of the plantations. The persons elected by the 
 major part of the "freeholders of the respective Counties and 
 places" were also required to take the oaths and the Test before 
 being qualified to sit.^ Accordingly, within a few days ^ of 
 Sloughter's arrival, we find the governor and council appointing 
 sheriffs and issuing writs of election to New York, Kings, 
 Queens. Suffolk, Westchester, Richmond, Albany, and Ulster 
 and Dutchess Counties, the last two being mentioned together 
 as under one sheriff, and, presumably, receiving but one writ. 
 The first assembly of William and Mary, then, as at first con- 
 stituted, consisted of two representatives from each of the above 
 county constituencies except New York, which sent four. On 
 the first day of the session, the council ordered the sheriff of 
 Albany County to cause an election to be held, of a Burgess 
 from the Manor of Rensselaerwyck, so that the total member- 
 ship of the assembly stood at nineteen.- The act passed in this 
 first session, declaring the rights of subjects in New York — for 
 most purposes a re-enactment of the Charter of Liberties — pro- 
 vided for the scheme of apportionment that prevailed in the assem- 
 bly which enacted it, except that Duke's County appears in the 
 list as entitled to two representatives, and that Dutchess is not 
 mentioned in connection with Ulster. As in the Charter of 
 Liberties, provision was made for expansion of the representative 
 system by the phrase, "and as many more as their Majesties, 
 heirs and successours may think fit to establish."^ It is to be 
 observed that both by the governor and council and by the terms 
 of the act declaring the rights of subjects in New York, the 
 limitation of the number of delegates to eighteen, as prescribed 
 in the instructions to Dongan, was disregarded. But it is to be 
 presumed that the action of the governor and council in sum- 
 moning a representative from Rensselaerwyck was taken to be 
 
 ^Col. Doc. III. 624. 
 
 ^ J. of L. C. I. 1. Ass. J. I. 1. 
 
 'Col. Laws I. 245. 
 
76 rilASIiS OF UOVAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 the act of the crown, till distinctly reversed from home — which 
 was never done. The action of the crown in transferring Duke's 
 County to Massachusetts settled the question, so far as it con- 
 cerned that region. The first four assemblies mention the names 
 of two representatives as coming from "Ulster and Dutchess 
 Counties" ; after which, Dutchess does not appear as represented, 
 even jointly with Ulster, till 17 13. when the council ordered 
 that it have one representative, and, in 17 14, that it have two. 
 There appears to be no reason for mention of Dutchess County 
 in the roll of members in the first four assemblies, and it is 
 probable that the lists of the counties which are printed with 
 the names of the representatives, at the beginning of each assem- 
 bly, are not official. In 1701, Dutchess County was declared by 
 act of assembly to be annexed to Ulster County for purposes of 
 representation, for seven years after publication of the act.^ 
 This act was repealed by the assembly in 1702, and though the 
 repealing act was itself disallowed by the crown, this was not 
 until 1 70S, when the benefit which came to Dutchess County 
 under the terms of the original act was expiring. The same as- 
 sembly of 1701, at a later session, passed an act augmenting the 
 number of representatives, bringing the total to twenty-five, 
 giving New York six, Albany five, and all other counties but 
 Dutchess, two each. This involved less expansion of the repre- 
 sentative system than Bellomont had proposed to the council, 
 viz., an increase from nineteen to thirty, in order "to put it 
 further from the power of any Governor to make a party for the 
 future to carry on any private end." But even the assembly's 
 scheme of expansion was disallowed within a year.- The right 
 to send a representative was usually conferred upon a locality 
 by the governor and council. In 1698, on memorial from the 
 inhabitants of Orange County, the council ordered that a sheriff 
 be appointed and a representative chosen, as for the other 
 counties. This proceeding, without direct authorization from 
 home, was complained of by Bellomont's opponents, as a stretch 
 of the governor's power, and an evidence of his design to pack 
 the assembly. Orange County being at that time sparsely popu- 
 lated.^ In the same year, Albany County was empowered to 
 
 ' Col. Laws I. 453. 
 
 Mbid. 478-9. E. C. M. VIII. 39. 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 621. E. C. M. VIII. 74. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. yj 
 
 send three, instead of two, representatives, and the Borough of 
 Westchester, incorporated in 1696, was empowered to choose a 
 representative, thus bringing the total membership of the assem- 
 bly to twenty-two/ Here the number remained till 1713, when 
 Dutchess County was empowered to elect a representative ; while, 
 in 1 7 14, Dutchess and Orange Counties were authorized to elect 
 two each, and, in 171 7, a member was admitted from Livingston 
 Manor.- This brought the total up to twenty-six, where it re- 
 mained for nearly twenty years. It is curious to note that this 
 increase in membership under Hunter was apparently made for 
 the very purpose which Bellomont's plan of expansion was de- 
 signed to avoid, viz., to make it possible for the governor to 
 found a party in the assembly. Hunter, however, used this "in- 
 terest," when acquired, never for private ends, but for the wel- 
 fare of the province. This will be referred to in connection 
 with the revenue controversy in a subsequent chapter. Nothing 
 could better illustrate the growth of the power of the assembly 
 in the interval between the administrations of Bellomont and 
 Hunter. 
 
 There was a peculiar feature in connection with the rep- 
 resentation of manors, which may be mentioned here. In 1701 
 Bellomont reported with indignation that, among other bad feat- 
 ures of Fletcher's extravagant grants of land, the privilege of 
 sending, after twenty years, a representative to the assembly, 
 had been included in three of the grants, and that they had been 
 erected into manors. Cortlandt's was one of these, and, presum- 
 ably also, Livingston's, for promptly after the expiration of the 
 twenty years, i. e., in 1717, we find a representative from Liv- 
 ingston Manor admitted to the assembly without action by the 
 council in either its legislative, or its executive capacity. Im- 
 mediately thereafter a bill was ordered, providing that every 
 manor in the colony, together with the village of Islip, be allowed 
 a member ; that Suffolk and Queens Counties be divided into 
 three counties and represented accordingly, and that no other 
 member be hereafter admitted without the consent of the gov- 
 ernor, council and assembly. Later in the session, a bill provid- 
 ing for the union of Kings and Queens Counties, and the creation 
 of a new county, to be called King George County, and its rep- 
 
 'E. C M. VII. 179, VIII. 76, IX. 69. 
 
 'E. C M. XL 167. J. of C. L. I. 381. Ass. J. I. 395. 
 
78 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 rescntatation by six members, was introduced ; but even under 
 tbe circumstances of a close understanding:^ between the governor 
 and assembly at this time, 1717, it did not escape rejection on 
 the second reading.' 
 
 With respect to the general characteristics of the apportion- 
 ment, it is to be observed that the influence of ideas derived from 
 the English House of Commons was strong. The house was 
 practically composed of county and borough members, the man- 
 ors which sent representatives being, so far as crown influence 
 was concerned, rural parliamentary boroughs. The members 
 were "not the peculiar or separate agents" of the localities, "but 
 their quota in the ])rovincial representation."^ There was no 
 attempt to arrange the representation of the counties according 
 to population. Richmond, Westchester and Orange Counties 
 were, throughout the period, very much over-represented as com- 
 pared with the Long Island population, Richmond and West- 
 chester never having more than one-third to one-half of the 
 population of either Queens or Suffolk, yet sending the same 
 number of representatives. Of the Long Island counties them- 
 selves. Kings seldom numbered more than one-half the popula- 
 tion of Queens or Suffolk, but it had an equal number of repre- 
 sentatives. l*"or at least one-half of the period, Albany County 
 had three representatives to the two from Queens or Suffolk, 
 while her population would not quite equal one-half of either 
 of them.'' That the Long Island people felt this situation to be 
 a grievance is evidenced by the attempt in 17 17, which has just 
 been referred to. 
 
 In examining the process by which a general assembly was 
 brought into existence, we inquire next into the election of rep- 
 resentatives. Taking up, first, the right of suffrage, we find 
 the commission and instructions vague in their expressions on 
 this point. The assemblies were to be "of the Inhabitants being 
 freeholders within your Government." The Charter of Liber- 
 ties declared that "Every freeholder within this province and 
 freeman in any Corporation Shall have free Choise and Vote 
 in the Electing the Representatives without any manner of con- 
 straint or Imposicon . . . and by freeholder is understood 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 395, 409, 428. Col. Doc. IV. 823. 
 ' Douglass, Summary, II. p. 264. 
 "Doc. Hist. I. (iS7-699. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 79 
 
 every one who is Soe understood according to the Lawes of 
 England." The act of 1691, declaring the rights of subjects 
 in New York, contained the same provisions except that "by 
 freeholder is to be understood every one who shall have fourty 
 shillings P Annum in freehold. "'^ 
 
 By 1699, ^" experience of seven elections, at least one-half 
 of which had been "carried with great heat," and all but the 
 last two of which had been held under the auspices of returning 
 officers appointed by one administration, led to an attempt by the 
 assembly to remedy certain abuses in the conduct of elections.^ 
 This assembly itself was a partisan body ; and impartial wisdom 
 in selection of points for, and methods of, remedy, is not to be 
 expected from it. But its features show at least some of the 
 opportunities for undue influence in elections. The act, which 
 was based on the English statutes (8 Henry VI. c. 7, and 8 Will. 
 III.), recited "great outrage, tumult and Deceit" in the manage- 
 ment of late elections, for remedy whereof provision was made 
 that the suffrage should be the right of persons over twenty-one 
 years of age, resident within a city, county or manor, having 
 land or tenements improved to the value of £40 in freehold, free 
 from all incumbrances, and possessed for three months before 
 the test of the writ, and that the sheriff should have power to 
 examine every "chooser" upon oath as to his estate. Freemen 
 in New York and Albany were to have liberty to vote in their 
 respective corporations, provided that they had been freemen 
 and residents for three months before the issue of the last writ 
 of election, any usage to the contrary notwithstanding. The act 
 further provided that on the summoning of a new assembly, 
 forty days should elapse between the test and the return of the 
 writ ; that the secretary of the province should issue the writs, 
 sealed, to the sheriffs, who on receipt of the same were to endorse 
 the date on the back of the writ, and, within six days of that 
 date, give public notice of the time and place of the election, 
 giving at least six days' notice to the constable of each town. 
 No sheriff or undersheriff was to receive a gratuity for any act 
 with reference to the writ or notice. The sheriff was required 
 to hold his court for election at the most usual and public place 
 for that purpose ; and in case the election be not determined 
 
 'Col. Doc. III. 686. Col. Laws I. 112, 245. 
 ^'Col. Doc. IV. 322-3. 
 
80 I'llASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 "upon the view" with tlie consent of the electors present, but 
 that a poll be required, the sheriff, or deputy thereto appointed 
 by the sheriff, was to take the poll in some open or public place. 
 This was to be done in the following manner : the sheriff was 
 to appoint clerks to take the poll, who should be sworn "truly 
 and Indifferently to take . . . the poll and to sett Down 
 the name of each Elector and the place of his freehold and for 
 whom he shall poll And to poll no Elector who is not sworn if 
 so required by the Candidates or any of them." Further, the 
 sheriff was to appoint "for each Candidate such one person . 
 . . nominated to him by such candidate ... to be in- 
 spector of the poll," and poll clerks. The oath, which might be 
 required of each elector before giving his poll, covered the fol- 
 lowing points ; the location and value of the freehold by which 
 he claimed the right to elect, that he had not before been polled 
 at that election, and that he had not procured the freehold in 
 order to gain a vote in the election. The sheriff was forbidden 
 to adjourn the poll to any other place in the city or county with- 
 out the consent of the candidates, or by unnecessary adjourn- 
 ment to protract or delay the election. The taking of the poll 
 was to proceed from day to day, without adjournment without 
 consent of the candidates, till all the electors present should be 
 polled. Copies of the poll were to be furnished to those desir- 
 ing them at a charge only sufficient to cover the cost of writing. 
 Return of the wTit was to be in the form of an indenture be- 
 tween the sheriff and the choosers. For every wilful violation 
 of this act, the sheriff was to forfeit to every person aggrieved 
 the sum of £30.^ 
 
 Two years later, an assembly under the same party influence, 
 passed an act for the regulation of elections, which recited a 
 continuation of many and great abuses. It provided that no 
 papist, popish recusant or person refusing to take the oaths of 
 allegiance and supremacy, as modified by parliament, or the Test 
 and the Association, on the tender of the sheriff or either of the 
 candidates, should be allowed to vote for representatives or any 
 other officer; that any person, otherwise qualified as required, 
 having freehold in possession during his life or that of his wife, 
 of the required value, should be regarded as qualified to vote ; and 
 that a mortgage on a man's freehold, provided the freeholder 
 
 'Col. Laws I. 405-408. Wilson. Memorial Hist. II. 577. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-1719. 81 
 
 were in possession and receiving the income, should not debar the 
 freeholder from voting.^ Both of these acts were repealed by the 
 assembly in 1702, but the former had already been confirmed by 
 the king and the assembly's repealing act was itself disallowed 
 by the queen, the latter of the two acts being expressly confirmed 
 in 1708-9. So that, though after long delay, both of the acts 
 may be regarded as contributing to the election law of the prov- 
 ince during the period. No other laws on the subject were 
 passed prior to 1719. The numerous and detailed directions and 
 prohibitions indicate with sufficient fullness what were the oppor- 
 tunities for fraud in the conduct of elections. The estimate com- 
 monly prevailing concerning the relation of the governor and 
 council to the election of representatives is well represented by 
 Douglass : "As the king and his ministry in Great Britain, 
 though they do not chuse the parliament yet have a very great 
 influence in the choice ; so it is with respect to the governors 
 and assemblymen in our colonies.^ Plans to use the official 
 influence of the governor and council in elections became matter 
 of record more than once. For example, in 1695, the Governor, 
 Fletcher, "did recommend to the Council to consider of honest 
 men for the next Assembly advising them to use their endeav- 
 ours that way." And, in 1692, the same governor asked the 
 advice of the council "if it might not be Conducive to the peace 
 of the Government for him to be personally present in the field" ; 
 whereupon the council unanimously agreed that "it is very nec- 
 essary and humbly desire it." There was loud complaint against 
 Fletcher on account of this "presence in the field," his accusers 
 relating the circumstances of his packing the poll with soldiers 
 from the fort, and seamen from the station ship, these men being 
 endowed with the freedom of the Corporation of the City of 
 New York for the purpose ; also of false arrests at the polling 
 place, of threats to imprison opponents of the government's can- 
 didates and of undue returns from elections in the rural counties.^ 
 The election act of 1699 by no means put an end to influence 
 over elections exerted from above ; but it seems to have been 
 
 *Col. Laws I. 453, 523. 
 ' Douglass : Summary II. p. 264. 
 
 'E. C. M. VI. 137, VII. 133. Col. Doc. IV. 127, 129, 143, 213, 218, 
 223. Smith, 155. 
 
82 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 exercised thereafter with less of ^ross and open violence, and 
 in at least a superficially legal manner. Bellomont made very 
 numerous changes in the appointments of sheriffs, and his 
 enemies reported that the "Sheriffs performed their business 
 they were appointed for by admitting some for freeholders who 
 were not so, and rejecting others who really were so, as they 
 voted for or against their party and by nominating and appoint- 
 ing inspectors of the poll who upon any complaint of unfair 
 dealing gave this general answer: 'If you are aggrieved com- 
 plain to Mylord Bellomont'." Complaint was also made that 
 the sheriffs appointed the same day for the election in all places 
 except the two most remote counties, "whereby the best free- 
 holders who had estates in several Counties were deprived of 
 giving their votes at several elections." Both of these elections 
 Bellomont himself describes as "very fairly carried," and refers 
 to the trick of simultaneous elections in all the counties as "a 
 thing purely in the Sheriff's' power to do and cannot be reckoned 
 unfair."^ Hunter's influence seems to have been exerted not 
 only in manipulation of the polls but also in dealing with the 
 assemblymen after election. But nothing like the gross and 
 violent interference with the freedom of elections carried on by 
 Fletcher appears at this time.^ 
 
 There seems to have been great interest and much violent 
 partisanship displayed at the elections. Smith's frequent char- 
 acterization of elections as "carried with great heat," and Bello- 
 mont's amusement at certain Long Island politicians, who for 
 reasons of political convenience had assumed the mark of Quaker- 
 ism but in the excitement of the occasion had dropped their dis- 
 guise and had become involved in bloody frays, are suggestive 
 indications.^ The contests were closer and hotter in the early 
 part of the period than they were at a later time. At first a 
 change in membership amounting to one-third of the whole 
 number of assemblymen was not unusual ; in one case — the 
 revolution after Bellomont's arrival — the change amounted to 
 nearly one-half. Whereas, in the latter part of the ]:)eriod. a 
 change of one-fourth or one-fifth of the total was remarkable. 
 
 • Col. Doc. IV. 507, 621, 8-21. 
 
 Mbid. 419, 429, 515, 534. 537. 769-70. Smith, pp. 107, 224. 240. 
 241, 245. 
 
 » Col. Doc. IV. 507, 509. Smith, pp. 156, 158. 162. 173, 223. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-1719. 83 
 
 and the return of all but two or three of the members of the 
 former assembly happened more than once. There were a num- 
 ber of instances of long, continuous periods of service in the 
 assembly, extendin;^ over fifteen or sixteen years. One Colonel 
 Jackson, of Queens County, was a member of every assembly but 
 one, from 169.2 to 171 5. 
 
 Control of membership in the assembly was shared between 
 the governor and the assembly itself. In the hands of the former, 
 according to the commission and instructions, lay the power to 
 administer the oaths, without which the elected members could 
 not sit in the assembly ; while the latter, by legislative action 
 determined the qualifications required of persons to be elected, 
 scrutinized cases of contested election and expelled members 
 when it saw fit. The requirement of the oaths appointed by 
 parliament to be taken instead of the oaths of allegiance and 
 supremacy, and of the taking of the Test, by persons elected as 
 representatives, before being allowed to sit and act in the assem- 
 bly, were precise and unmistakable.^ The matter came up at the 
 first session of the first assembly in 1691, when the representa- 
 tives from Queens County, being Quakers, refused the oaths, 
 though indicating their willingness to sign the Test, and to 
 engage to perform the tenor of the oaths under the penalty of 
 perjury. On consultation of the commission and instructions, 
 this was deemed insufficient, and they were therefore dismissed 
 by the house, and new writs were ordered for election of mem- 
 bers to take their places.^ There is no instance of the governor's 
 withholding the oath from any person who appeared to have 
 been returned by the sherifif. All examination of anything but 
 the face of the returns was made by the assembly itself. In 
 swearing in the members, the usual procedure was for commis- 
 sioners, appointed for the purpose by the governor, to meet the 
 members at the usual place of assembly and tender them the 
 oaths, after which the ceremonies of organization went on. When 
 a member arrived late, it was a frequent practice for two mem- 
 bers to accompany him to the governor, and on their return and 
 report to the assembly that they had seen him swear and sign 
 the Test, the member was admitted and took his seat. The com- 
 
 'Col. Doc. III. 686. 
 'Ass. J. I. 2, 3-5. 
 
84 I'llASi-S (JK KUVAL (JUXKKN MliNT 
 
 mission and instructions g'ave explicit authority over the member- 
 ship of the assembly neither to the house itself nor to the gov- 
 ernor, except what was involved in ofTerini^^ them the oaths. 
 Nevertheless the assembly exercised the authority fully and with- 
 out dispute. The provincial ideal in this, as in so many other 
 matters, was expressed in the Charter of Liberties, and in the act 
 declaring; the rights of subjects in New York, in both of which 
 it was provided that the assembly was to be "judge of the quali- 
 fications of the members, as well as of undue elections and to 
 have power to purge the house as they see occasion."* 
 
 The practice of the province throughout the period was 
 based upon these provisions, in spite of the fact that the acts 
 containing them never received confirmation. By the act of 16 
 May, 1696, the assembly described the qualifications of members 
 of the house so as to require the age of twenty-one years, resi- 
 dence in tliC district for which the person was chosen, and pos- 
 session of freehold, free from incumbrance, improved to the 
 value of £40. But the assembly's greatest activity in control of 
 its mcmbershij) appears in the direct examination of the circum- 
 stances of the election, and of the qualifications of its members, 
 as the cases were brought before it by the petitions of those 
 aggrieved. The heat of factious strife within the province for 
 the first twelve years of this period gave the assembly frequent 
 opportunity for the use of its powers ; and, throughout the period, 
 it had little scruple in purging its membership for reasons based 
 on its jx'irtisan notions of dignity and propriety. Most of such 
 expulsions were made, ostensibly, because of some contempt of 
 the privilege of the assembly which had been committed by the 
 offending member. In general, this whole matter of control over 
 its own membership was treated as a privilege belonging to itself, 
 though not in the list of those mentioned by the speaker at the 
 organization of each new assembly. In 17 10, Lewis Morris 
 gave utterance to some "warm expressions" in debate, on con- 
 sideration of which next day, Morris having been ordered to 
 withdraw, the asseml)ly resolved that he "has falsely and scand- 
 alously vilified the Integrity and Honesty of this house," and he 
 was forthwith expelled.^ In 171 5, Samuel Mulford was ex- 
 
 'Col. Laws I. ir2, 246. 
 'Ass. J. I. 28:i 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 85 
 
 pelled, "for printing a Speech formerly made to the General 
 Assembly without Leave of the House in which are many false 
 and scandalous Reflections upon the Governor of this Province."^ 
 These are cases in which the personal characteristics of the in- 
 dividuals concerned have great importance. The assembly, in 
 1701, expelled one Matthew Howell, for writing a paper and 
 delivering it in to the house, expressing the views of five mem- 
 bers on the pending dispute as to the powers of a president of 
 the council. This paper was characterized by the committee 
 charged with its examination as "tending to the subversion of 
 government."- By the notorious assembly of 1701 three mem- 
 bers were expelled for challenging the authority of the speaker 
 and of the house by refusing to sit and act with them till the 
 question of the speaker's citizenship had been resolved, thus, as 
 the assembly expressed it, presuming "to take upon them the 
 Judgment of the Qualifications of members and to take notice 
 of the Proceedings of the House before they had been in the 
 House to observe any Transactions there," — "a manifest breach 
 of its Privileges and of dangerous Example."^ On abstract prin- 
 ciples the assembly was probably in the right, but the grossly 
 partisan proceedings of this assembly in other ways gave it, and 
 all precedents connected with it, a bad name. For example, it 
 was the custom, in cases of contested election, where the person 
 returned was decided by the house itself to fail of the required 
 qualifications, for the house to dismiss the person and order a 
 new election. Nevertheless we find this assembly, in one of two 
 similar cases, ordering a new election, and in the other, examin- 
 ing the sheriff's poll and ordering the next on the list to take 
 the place of the dismissed person ! And, in another case, on com- 
 plaint of an undue election, the committee found that the person 
 returned was not duly elected, but that the petitioner duly was, 
 and the assembly ordered the clerk of the crown ro alter the 
 indenture of the county accordingly ! Election cases were heard 
 and determined, at first, by the whole house, with the occasional 
 assistance of special and temporary committees. In 1699 we 
 first hear of a standing "committee on undue elections," and by 
 
 ^Ass. J. I. 372. 
 'Ibid. 110. 
 'Ibid. 130. 
 
86 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 1709, vvc find the assembly endowing this committee with power 
 to send for persons and papers, etc.^ The questions ordinarily 
 brought before the house were such as the validity of a given 
 return, the fact of the qualification of a certain individual, and 
 the like. 
 
 As has been indicated, the assembly usually proceeded upon 
 its organization immediately on assembling, and without waiting 
 for the formal decision as to disputed cases of membership. This 
 organization was attended with considerable ceremony, in which 
 the influence of House of Commons usage is plainly apparent. 
 A typical procedure — that of 1693 — is as follows: the gov- 
 ernor sent for the members to come to him at the fort (the 
 assembly's place of sitting was at first in a tavern, after 1704, 
 at the City Hall). He then desired them, if they were in suffi- 
 cient number to form a house, to return to their house and choose 
 a speaker, to be presented to the governor at their next meeting. 
 The house returned, and "after some debates," and "many urgent 
 Arguments to be excused," chose James Graham as Speaker ; 
 "the House being unanimous all rose up and conducted him to 
 the Chair." The house then requested that, on his being ap- 
 proved, he would demand confirmation of their "Rights, Priv- 
 ileges and Customs." The house then proceeded to the governor 
 and presented the speaker, and "desired his Excellency's appro- 
 bation," which was accordingly granted — it was never withheld. 
 It was apparently good form for the speaker, on his presentation, 
 to "make a modest apology." On his presentation, likewise, the 
 speaker made his demand for the confirmation of the privileges 
 of the house, which was always granted as of course, together 
 with the request that they be entered on the council book. The 
 governor then delivered his speech, upon which the "representa- 
 tives niade a bow and withdrew." At first the speaker used to 
 repeat to the house the heads of the governor's speech, after 
 their return from this interview, but finally the usage crystallized 
 into the form of reading a copy of it.^ 
 
 The first assembly ordered that, in all debates, determina- 
 tion should be reached by a majority of votes of the members 
 present, and that w'hen a majority of the representatives were 
 present it should be esteemed a house. No formal enactment 
 
 •Ass. J. I. 116-118, 36, 87, 95-6, 241. 92-07, 49-50. 
 
 »Ass. J. I. 1-2, 32, 36, 58. J. of L. C I. 47, 49. Col. Doc. IV. 1115. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 87 
 
 of any other rule appears, and it would seem that even these 
 rules were not formally adopted by succeeding assemblies. Thus 
 informally was custom allowed to develop. No reports of divi- 
 sions on proceedings are given on any regular plan. The num- 
 bers of each side were occasionally mentioned, but no principle 
 appears in the reasons for such mention. Various systems of 
 fines for absence from roll-call were tried by the assembly for 
 the purpose of obtaining a quorum, but, apparently, with indiffer- 
 ent success. 
 
 The committee system of the assembly was in process of 
 gradual evolution throughout the period, and could hardly be de- 
 scribed as having attained systematic form at any time. The 
 committee which sat most often was the "Committee of the Whole 
 House," or "Grand Committee," — usually "to consider of His 
 Excellency's Speech," always in consideration of supply bills, 
 and, in general, for matters of large importance and interest. 
 The "Committee on Undue Elections," or "Committee on Priv- 
 ileges and Elections" has already been mentioned. The "Griev- 
 ance Committee" was the one which came the nearest to the 
 present notion of a standing committee. In some form or other, 
 we find such a committee in use from the very beginning of 
 the period. Sometimes a committee was appointed, "to inquire 
 into the grievances of this Province," and to make a report 
 within a limited time. Sometimes it was ordered, that all mem- 
 bers be a committee of grievances, "to receive and report oppres- 
 sions of the people and make report as Grievance may appear." 
 In a period when public opinion was excited, such a committee 
 was likely to consist of the most active leaders of the majority, 
 and its activities might extend to any subject agitating the public 
 mind.^ It was such a committee that conducted a kind of trial 
 of the persons concerned in the extravagant grants of land by 
 Fletcher. We find the assembly exhibiting an accusation against 
 the parties concerned, who in time present an answer, to which 
 the committee of grievances prepare a replication. The act 
 vacating these grants was passed at this session.^ 
 
 The assembly sometimes chose to embody its sense of griev- 
 ance in an "Address to the Governor," which would be likely 
 to include the subjects with which, at other sessions, the griev- 
 
 'Ass. J. I. 20, 33, 96-101. 
 Mbid. 96-104. 
 
88 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 ancc committee concerned itself. In 17 13, at the height of the 
 revenue controversy, the assembly ordered, that they "resolve 
 every Thursday P. M. into a Committee for Redress of Griev- 
 ances, and every Friday P. M. into a Committee for Reformation 
 of Abuses in the Courts of Justice" ; and after a report, three 
 weeks later, bills were ordered in accordance with the report, 
 and the committee ordered to be adjourned.^ The reports of 
 the grievance committee covered every variety of subject, from 
 that of the wrongs of the boatmen of New York in having to 
 pay dockage for use of the Queen's wharf, to the grievance of 
 the province in the erection of a Court of Chancery, without 
 consent of the general assembly, and in the appointment of cor- 
 oners.- The appointment of special committees on particular 
 bills was common throughout the period. The first assembly 
 ordered, that for the recess, the New York members and others, 
 when they should be in town, be a committee "to examine . . . 
 and prepare to report to this House at the next session all such 
 Matters and Things whatsoever as may conduce to the good and 
 welfare of this government." But we find no repetition of this 
 proceeding." 
 
 Beyond the habit of referring bills to special committees, or 
 to "the Council or any two of them," or "the Council or any three 
 of them." it does not appear that the council had any committee 
 organization. 
 
 The officers of the assembly were, besides the speaker, a 
 clerk, a sergeant at arms, a doorkeeper and a printer. These 
 were at first appointed by the governor, though they were de- 
 pendent for their compensation on warrants upon the revenue, 
 issued by the governor and council, on address of the assembly. 
 Under the circumstances of the failure of the revenue, and the 
 disputes over payments of salaries in the times of Cornbury and 
 Hunter, the officers suffered considerably ; and we find acts for 
 the payment of their salaries, and for empowering the clerk to 
 receive a reasonable fee for "passing a private bill." The "long 
 bills" of 1714 and 1717 provided for payment of arrears to the 
 officers ; and in the resolves, in accordance with which the gov- 
 ernor, after 171 5, issued salary warrants on the revenue estab- 
 
 Ass. J. I. 170, a34. 336. 377. 
 Ibid. 150-1, 224, 226-30. 
 Ibid. 13. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 1691-1719- ^9 
 
 lished by the assembly, provision was made for these officials.* 
 The sergeant at arms seems not to have been a permanent official 
 but to have been appointed by the governor, on motion of the 
 assembly, whenever necessity for his services developed.- After 
 failinP-, at the first session of the first assembly, to establish the 
 drawing of bills for the assembly as one of the duties of the 
 attorney general, the house seems to have made use of the ser- 
 vices of the speaker for that purpose — with what means for 
 rewarding him, is not clear.^ 
 
 The council's officers were a clerk, a doorkeeper and mes- 
 senger, and a sergeant at arms, and their salaries, as established, 
 were drawn from the revenue.* 
 
 Coming to the matter of privilege, we find one curious case, 
 which seems to raise the question of a peculiar privilege of the 
 council in its legislative capacity. Without going into its details 
 it may be sufficient to remark that the council's contention was 
 founded upon the notion, that "this house dureing the sessions 
 of Assembly was Invested with a greater power as being part of 
 that Constitution, than at other times in the Quality of Governor 
 and Council" ; that, "in such cases the Governor and Council have 
 dureing the Session a judiciall power like that of the House of 
 Lords 1n England and can hear and determine civil causes (not 
 appealable to the King) and imprison the parties ofifending.'' 
 Objection was brought against this proceeding in England, and 
 the attempt was not repeated.^ 
 
 The privileges of the assembly, as demanded at the beginning 
 of every session bv the speaker, and confirmed by the governor, 
 were as follows : ^freedom of members and their servants from 
 arrest and molestation during the sessions, freedom of speech and 
 of debate in the house, a favorable and candid construction upon 
 all words, freedom of access to the governor and council in rela- 
 tion to the present service, "for the Removal of all Misunder- 
 standings between the Governor and Council and this House; 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 193, 199, 202, 310. Col. Laws I. 815-26, 938-991. 
 
 ^ Ass. J. I. 4, 147. 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 512. J. of L. C. I. 34. 
 
 ♦Col. Mss. XLV. 170. 
 
 »Col. Doc. IV. 821. Col. Laws I. 392. J. of L. C. L 128-131. N. Y. 
 
 Hist. Soc. Colls. 1869, 179-183. 
 
90 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 that a Committee of the Council may join with a Committee of 
 this House to confer on such Matters as occurs," and that these 
 privileges be entered on the council book. They were frequently 
 stated in a more abridged form, and summed up in the expression 
 — "and all other their ancient privileges and customs." The spirit 
 in which the whole matter of privilege was developed is indicated 
 in the reply of confirmation made by Cornbury — "that he knew 
 them to be the Rights of the House of Commons of the Kingdom 
 of England and of this Assembly and therefore he did entirely 
 confirm them as large as ever they were granted."^ The assembly 
 defended itself against "contemners" of its privileges, both mem- 
 bers and others, within and outside the precincts of the house, 
 generally by commitment to the custody of the sergeant at arms, 
 to whom fees had to be paid on discharge. On one occasion, 
 three persons, apparently for insolent behaviour before a com- 
 mittee of the assembly, were kept in the custody of the sergeant 
 at arms from i8 November, 1702, till ly April, 1703, their im- 
 prisonment covering a period iDetween sessions.- One Christo- 
 pher Den. for insolent conduct to a member outside the precincts 
 of the house, was punished by a month's imprisonment.^ The 
 assembly seems to have been somewhat capricious in its treat- 
 ment of the matter of privilege. David Provoost, a member, 
 petitioned the assembly for his enlargement from arrest for not 
 having paid certain orphans' portions, pleading the privilege of 
 the assembly, but seems not to have been successful.* An at- 
 tempt by the governor to hold up bills which the assembly had 
 passed and sent up to the governor and council for assent, till 
 the desire of the government had been attained by the passage 
 of a supply bill by the assembly, seems to have been regarded 
 by that body as an invasion of their privileges — "it being the 
 Privilege of this House to send up their Bills when they please." 
 On this occasion the assembly seems to have won its point, though 
 the imperfection of the journal obscures the matter. Ever after, 
 the assembly was strict about the requirement of some action by 
 the council on measures sent up by them, and return of such 
 
 ■Ass. J. I. 145. 
 
 'Ass. J. I. 153, 156-9. 
 
 •Ibid. 233-4, 236-8. 
 
 * Ibid. 290, 293, 300, 301, 303, 309. 
 
IN NEW YORK, l69I-l7I9- ^^ 
 
 action to the assembly before proceeding, itself, to do anything 
 further in the matter.^ 
 
 In c^eneral, the assembly seems to have made free use for 
 its own;urpos;s, of the whole range of parliamentary pnv.lege 
 adapting it liberally to local and pecuhar requirements. Hunter s 
 :' ntn'was that 'the warmest Assembly of Men in the mo^t 
 tumultuous times never strained the word Privilege to that bent 
 that they dayly doe."^ 
 
 The oav of the representatives was fixed by an act of the 
 first Lse.i?y, at ten shillings per day o^ atten^-^^^^^^^^ 
 with the day of leaving home, not more than -f ^ j^^^^^^^^^ 
 the meetino- till their return, not more than eight days after ad 
 ou ";' The expense was to be borne by the county or city 
 endin<. the representative.^ This act was repealed by an act 
 of a sembly in 1701, which fixed the rate of compensation at six 
 smiir'p r day; but as this was itself repealed by a general 
 e tlfn/act, wllch was not disallowed till i7o8^Jhe rate of ^n 
 shmin^s prevailed for nearly twenty years, ^oth rates we e 
 onkred by Hunter as too high instituting an in«^^^ 
 the representatives to prolong their sessions and P^^.^^^ct con 
 t'oversls in the legislature, for the sake of ^^e P^ die- ^^^^^^^^^^ 
 ance^ On the other hand, the counties were lax or neglecttui 
 in the payment of the allowance; and acts for its payment and 
 or tl e pLment of arrears, in the case of particular individuals^ 
 ver frequently resorted to.^ The revenue act of 1715 P-ided 
 To tl payment of an allowance of ten shillings per diem, ou 
 ft revenue for the year 1715. This --ngement Hun^r 
 honed would be "a considerable ease to the County s, and 
 wo Id caut the return of members with instructions to co^^^^^^ 
 this Dhn bv an act, and to repeal the former law, which hatti 
 been ^ - pe-icious Consequence to the Government and peo- 
 ple" Tl^s method was continued in slightly different and vary- 
 ing forms during the remainder of the period.^ 
 
 ^Ass. J. 1.16, 18,82, 155,214. 
 
 = Wilson, Mem. Hist. II. 595. Col. Doc. V. 179. 
 
 Col. Laws I. 239. 
 Col. Doc. V. 179, 19' 
 
 ■' Col. Laws I. 586, 70; 
 
 ■' Col. Doc. V. 416, 417. 
 
 'Col. Laws I. 239. 
 
 * Col Doc. V. 179, 192, 416. 
 
 .^ ■ T T K^a 709 7Q1 921 929. 989. 
 
 »Col. Laws I. 586, <02, 7Jl, J-i, ^-^^ . j 3-^5_ 
 
 »rn1 Doc V 416, 417. Col. Laws I. 916, 921, JSy yi- ^ss. j. 
 
92 PHASES OK. ROYAL GOvT-RN MEXT 
 
 The evolution of procedure in the conduct of business within 
 each house, and in the relations of the houses to each other was 
 a gradual process. The council seems to have gone through 
 with its share of legislative business without any elaborate forms 
 of procedure. Each bill coming from the assembly received three 
 readings, after the first of which, usually, it was referred to 
 "the members of this Board," or any three or five of them, as a 
 special committee on that bill. If amendments reported by such 
 a committee were agreed to by the council, the clerk was then 
 ordered to make the amendments in the bill, which was then 
 sent down, with the amendments, to the assembly for concur- 
 rence. This latter feature of procedure, and the notification to 
 the assembly upon occasion, that such and such a bill had passed 
 without amendment, were reached only after the better separa- 
 tion of powers of those concerned in legislation had been attained 
 in the times of Bellomont and Cornbury. 
 
 In the assembly, the governor's speech was normally the 
 starting-point of activity. Though satisfied at first with the speak- 
 er's repetition of the heads of the discourse, the assembly before 
 long, fearful lest "some may have been omitted in the recital," 
 began to require a copy, even insisting that the copy be attested 
 by the clerk of the council.^ With the speech thus officially 
 before it, the assembly proceeded to consider it in committee of 
 the whole, item by item, reporting resolves upon each item from 
 time to time. Sometimes certain items w^ere referred to special 
 committees, on whose report, as upon reports of the committee 
 of the whole, bills would be ordered to be brought in. Some- 
 times also the assembly voted as to which of the items in the 
 speech should be taken up first.- Whether a subject was brought 
 before the assembly by mention in the speech, or by petition to 
 the assembly, or on a motion by a member, it was usual for the 
 body to consider it, or vote as to when they would consider it ; 
 then, either to resolve upon it and order a bill to be brought in 
 accordingly, or consider it in committee of the whole, and, upon 
 agreement of the assembly to the report of the committee, order 
 a bill. A bill was always read three times before passage and 
 sending up for assent, but at first these three readings might all 
 occur at the same day's session. Later, however, it was more 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 36, 55. 
 'Ass. J. I. 93, 160-1. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-1719. 93 
 
 customary for a bill to be referred to a special committee after 
 the first or second reading-, and for the amendments reported by 
 this committee to be acted upon, before the bill >vas ordered to 
 be engrossed. This engrossed bill was then given a third read- 
 ing, a'iid ordered to be sent up to the council "for their con- 
 currence." It sometimes happened that a bill was referred to 
 three different committees, before a report satisfactory to the 
 assembly could be obtained. And there might be several commit- 
 tees at work upon different aspects of the same subject, the re- 
 ports of all being made use of, when the committee of the whole 
 reported resolves, upon which the bill was constructed.^ In the 
 early part of the period a case arose of a committee feeling itself 
 in difificulty and calling in the speaker to its assistance.=^ This 
 feeling of inexperience, at first at any rate, made it necessary that 
 the speaker should be ehher a lawyer, as was the case with Gra- 
 ham and Nicolls, who, with two very brief exceptions, were the 
 only persons holding the office of speaker for the first thirty 
 years ; or a person in the position of an unquestioned party leader, 
 as was Gouverneur, during his speakership in 1 700-1 701. The 
 assembly, at its first session in 1691. tried to make use of the 
 attorney general's services in drawing bills, and the governor at 
 first acquiesced. But on his later decision that, according to the 
 instructions, this was no part of the attorney general's duties, 
 the assembly laid the services of the speaker under contribution, 
 addressing the governor and council for special compensation for 
 him. Later, however, that is, m Cornbury's time, the attorney 
 general drew bills for the assembly, and in the "long bill" of 
 1714 for payment of the public debts, we find an item in favor 
 of Lewis Morris for services in this matter.^^ 
 
 In its relations with the council, the assembly was inclined 
 to be strict in requiring decisive action by the council on an as- 
 sembly bill, before proceeding in response to suggestions by the 
 governor upon new or different legislation on the same subject.* 
 The sessions of both houses were private, but they kept track 
 of each other's proceedings to an extent, the governor and council 
 receiving the printed proceedings of the assembly each day, and 
 
 'Ass. J. I. 314-17, 137, 140, 142, 148-9, 261. 
 
 ""Ibid. 29. 
 
 ^Ass. J. I. 5-12, 41-46, 166. J. of L. C. I. 34. Col. Laws I. 962. 
 
 * Ass. J. I. 82, 155. 
 
94 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 occasionally sending messages urging action ; while the assembly 
 might appoint a committee to inspect the council journal and 
 report what action had been taken on bills sent up. and, as a result, 
 address the council on the subject of favorite measures.^ Occa- 
 sionally the governor wrote to the speaker, asking him to urge 
 certain measures on the assembly. Agreement or disagreement 
 with bills or amendments was signified by messages which were 
 sent back and forth between the houses, and differences were 
 adjusted at conferences, both formal and free. The assembly 
 occasionally developed great scruple about keeping to the subject- 
 matter for which a conference was appointed, and on one of 
 the occasions when it was opposing the council's right to amend 
 money bills, refused to go into conference on such a bill.^ There 
 seems to have been no attempt on the part of the assembly to 
 deny the right of the council to initiate legislation, nevertheless 
 the right was not exercised very vigorously. For some purposes, 
 even, a conference between committees from each house consti- 
 tuted the initial step in legislation. This was frequently the case 
 with bills for supply for military purposes ; and, at the time of 
 the Canada expeditions of 1709 and 171 1, such a joint committee 
 was kept almost continuously in existence to facilitate the work 
 of preparation.^ The council's right to amend money bills was, 
 however, denied by the assembly, beginning with 1703 during 
 the struggle for the appointment of a Colony Treasurer. This 
 was an unprecedented stand for the assembly to take, and was 
 resented by the council, which was able to cite many instances 
 of a contrary practice in the previous history of the province. 
 It was also formally condemned by the Lords of Trade. The 
 assembly, however, had its way in the matter, and did not hesi- 
 tate at the inconsistency of resolving, upon occasion, that such 
 and such a bill, amendments to which by the council it was 
 willing to consider, was not to be considered a money bill. In 
 one case, a bill raising and authorizing the payment of public 
 money was so treated.'' 
 
 This brings us to the comparative position of the council and 
 assembly in the government. Contemporary estimates on this 
 
 • Ass. J. I. 72-3, 287. 254, 319. Smith, p. 365. 
 'Ass. J. I. 72-3, 327. 
 
 ' Ibid. 48. 247. 
 
 * Ass. J. I. 157-215. J. of L. C. I. 189-245. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 95 
 
 point are conflicting. The local magnate character of the council 
 has been referred to. The membership, as a whole, was fairly 
 representative of the leading classes in the political life of the 
 province. Opinion as to the general character of the membership 
 of the assembly seems to have been unfavorable. Golden and 
 Smith agree in emphasizing the features of ignorance, even illit- 
 eracy, and the predominance of a narrowly local point of view 
 on public questions. Colden's views as to their integrity were 
 equally pessimistic. "When Mr. Hunter came to his govern- 
 ment," says Golden, "he thought that an American Assembly 
 might be governed by reason, but experience taught him that it 
 was a vain imagination. It may be a question whether man- 
 kind in general can be governed otherwise than by their affec- 
 tions. For that reason wise legislators found means to raise 
 artificial affections to control the natural." Hunter's system of 
 relations with the members of the Assembly, by means of which 
 he brought the revenue question and questions allied with it in 
 his time to a settlement, would seem to have been in Golden's 
 mind when he wrote as above, for he relates with great gusto 
 Hunter's indignation at being obliged "to rake in the dunghill of 
 these people's vile affections."^ 
 
 Opinions as to the position and influence of the council in 
 the government vary with the circumstances of the province, and 
 with the point of view of the observer. Golonel Quary expresses 
 the opinion in 1709, that "the Generality of the Gouncils being 
 Gentlemen of the Gountry are wholly in the interest of the as- 
 sembly and as ready to lessen the Prerogative in all things as 
 they are."" This was from a zealous imperial official, at a time 
 when the governor, Gornbury, had succeeded in alienating all 
 elements in turn, and had practically compelled them to unite 
 against him and crowd him out, by displaying to the home gov- 
 ernment the impossibility of co-operating with him. Hunter, on 
 the other hand, a governor who was personally popular, and who 
 had an ambition to make local-provincial and general-imperial 
 interests serve each other, found ready support in the council 
 against the assembly's attempt to settle the revenue in a manner 
 contrary to the instructions. He testifies in behalf of the council 
 that he must "do them the justice to declare that I think that it 
 
 'Smith, 371. N. Y. H. S. Colls. 1868, 205-6. 
 = Col. Doc. V. 116. 
 
y6 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 is not possible for men in their station to behave with more virtue 
 and resokition with regard to H. M. Right and Prerogative" — 
 with the exception of one member.^ On the whole, Greene's 
 summary statement for the colonies in general would seem to 
 describe the situation in New York during this period — "although 
 it would be a mistake to suppose that the Council was always 
 or necessarily under the control of the Governor yet ... it 
 was usually on the Governor's side in his contests with the As- 
 sembly, exercising on the whole a conservative influence."^ 
 
 The marked development of the powers of the assembly, as 
 manifested in the struggle for control of expenditure, which is 
 described in a later chapter, wrought great change in the com- 
 parative position of the two houses. The imperious necessity for 
 a working relation between the governor and the revenue-grant- 
 ing body, coming out with particular clearness in Hunter's time, 
 directed to the proceedings of the assembly much of the atten- 
 tion and manipulation, of which, till then, the council had had 
 the greater share. The activity in the assembly, which was kept 
 up by such men as Morris and Livingston — both of them men of 
 council calibre — together with their relation with the governor 
 in the capacity of leaders in the assembly affords eloquent testi- 
 mony to the increased significance of the lower house. The 
 mediocre character of its average membership would render that 
 body peculiarly susceptible to the "management" of men of lead- 
 ing capacity, who chose to develop the possibilities of a relation 
 between the governor and the representatives of the community 
 at large, as against the class interests so effectively intrenched 
 in the council. This development seems to have been going on 
 during that portion of Hunter's administration which succeeded 
 the passage of the revenue act in 1715. We have unmistakable 
 testimony from such competent observers as George Qarke and 
 Lewis Morris, Jr., of the decline of the council's power during 
 this time. And it was not until the separation of the council's 
 executive, from its legislative functions, was accomplished by 
 the removal in 1736 of the governor from the presidency of the 
 legislative council, that anything like a restoration of the council 
 to its former position was achieved. 
 
 'Col. Doc. V. 185. 
 
 ^ Greene : Provincial Governor p. 90. 
 
CHAPTER IV. FINANCIAL AFFAIRS BEFORE 1709. 
 
 It was peculiarly true of New York that the conduct of 
 finance in its dynamic aspect was intimately associated with the 
 constitutional history of the province. Contest over its manage- 
 ment was perennial, and it was in terms of this struggle that 
 many other contests in the first stage of full-fledged provincial 
 existence finally came to be settled. It was the contest through 
 which the province groped to political self-consciousness and to 
 an activity in which the issues were of a higher order than those 
 of factional hatred or personal intrigue. It was constant, pro- 
 gressive development of this department of activity which finally 
 brought the power of the crown, wielded by a governor person- 
 ally popular and estimable, face to face with the local provincial 
 power in such a way as to force a compromise. 
 
 The ideal of the prerogative party, as contained in the com- 
 mission and instructions and in the governor's addresses to the 
 assembly, was that the assemljly should raise money for public 
 purposes and that this should be expended under the direction of 
 tlie governor and council. The ideal of the '"country party,'" 
 like the party itself, was only gradually conceived and developed. 
 Till the disposition to use the public policy of the province as an 
 opportunity to give vent to manifestations of extreme partisan 
 violence was outgrown or relegated to the background, there could 
 be no political force possessed of the steadiness of aim and con- 
 stancy of composition which were required to constitute a patri- 
 otic opposition. As thus gradually conceived and developed, the 
 program of resistance to the government ideal was centred on 
 the acquisition of increasing power over expenditure by the as- 
 sembly. In the course of this struggle the assembly freely used 
 its recognized power of the purse as a weapon for gaining further 
 advantage. The struggle over control of expenditure was long 
 in shaping itself. When it had finally attained recognizable 
 form, the prerogative party made no attempt to deny the taxing 
 power in all its fullness as possessed by the assembly. But by 
 keeping control of the regulation of the fee system and by at- 
 tempting to develop the crown's territorial revenue as a source 
 7 (97) 
 
98 PIIASliS OF ROYAL GOVliRN MKNT 
 
 of supply beyond the assembly's reach, they tried to neutralize 
 the revenue-raisingf power of the assembly in reference to the 
 support of government, while resisting all attempts by the latter 
 body to reserve control of expenditure to itself. The final result 
 of the struggle was practically a victory for the assembly, inas- 
 much as, whatever the forms traversed, substantial control of 
 expenditure of all important items of income for the usual pub- 
 lic purposes was achieved. This process, when finally completed, 
 involved a balance of constitutional forces actually effective within 
 the province, which constituted a compromise that was to an 
 extent inconsistent with the imperial idea of a royal province. 
 The process, as has been hinted, was long. Not until nearly 
 thirty years after the settlement of 169 1 was an equilibrium of 
 any stability reached. Two stages may be recognized in the 
 process. The period from 1691 to 1709 was one in which the 
 attempt of the lower house to attain greater control over ex- 
 penditure was carried on against heavy odds. With blind ab- 
 sorption in the partisan aspects of politics, the grants by the 
 assembly of revenue for the constant charges of government were 
 made for periods far in advance of the time of passage of the 
 acts, in order to gain the governor's complaisance in party legis- 
 lation. Hence, till the expiration of these grants in 1709, there 
 was no opi^ortunity to realize the potentialities of the assembly 
 in enforcing its program. This semi-paralysis was improved to 
 advance the personal interests of a small group of unscrupulous 
 characters surrounding the inefficient Cornbury — to the conse- 
 quent ruin of the credit of the government. The second stage 
 is occupied with a direct controversy between a governor who 
 was personally esteemed in the province, an "Empire-builder" of 
 sagacious views, and the assembly. That body was moved by 
 resentment at the destruction of public credit already accom- 
 plished, by the conviction that the disaster was chargeable to 
 the system as well as to its perversion by individuals and by 
 a resolution against any arrangement for the future which could 
 possibly permit of a repetition of the catastrophe. The contro- 
 versy was settled by an exceedingly complex compromise, one of 
 the important features of which was the removal, to a hopeful 
 degree, of the most harmful phases of Leislerian faction from 
 the domain of politics. It was in the course of the evolution of 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 99 
 
 arrangements which were designed to protect this settlement that 
 a new balanced system of provincial forces acquired momentum. 
 In reviewing the financial system of the province during the 
 period from 1691 to 1709, — the stage of preparation and educa- 
 tion as it were, — it will be convenient to consider the sources and 
 method of provision of revenue of various kinds, and then the 
 method of expenditure, giving particular attention to attempts 
 by the assembly to secure increasing control of the latter. The 
 passages in the commission and instructions bearing on public 
 income are concerned chiefly with the forms to be used in granting 
 money, and apparently take for granted the control of the taxing 
 and money-granting power by the assembly. Those who were 
 animated by provincial ideals would have had the matter more 
 explicitly stated, and in the so-called Charter of Liberties of 1683 
 and in the "Act declaring . . . the Rights and Privileges of 
 . . . Subjects in New York," passed in 1691, the phraseology 
 of Magna Carta and of the Petition and Bill of Rights is em- 
 ployed to confine the taxing power in the hands of the legis- 
 lature.^ These acts were disallowed, it is true, but in practice 
 the principle thus explicitly stated was not violated except in 
 the most indirect manner. The chief sources of income, as 
 familiarly considered, were "The Revenue" and "Taxes." The 
 distinction was based on practical grounds rather than abstractly 
 scientific principles. The phrase, "The Revenue," came early to 
 be applied with special meaning to public monies of a certain 
 character, those that under settled conditions of provincial life 
 were likely to be fairly constant in yield and thus well adapted to 
 meet the permanent and standing part of the public expenses — 
 the "ordinary support of government." In some ways, "The Rev- 
 enue" may fairly be compared with the "Consolidated Fund," 
 later established in the English financial system. The larger 
 number of the items, and those the most productive, which came 
 from this source, were dependent on votes of grant by the assem- 
 bly. The component parts of the revenue were : duties on trade 
 — generally referred to as the "customs," — the excise, quit- 
 rents, fines and forfeitures, the weigh-house duties and certain 
 relics of the regalian rights of the crown, such as the license to 
 take royal fish. 
 
 'Col. Doc. III. 819. Col. Laws I. 113, 246. 
 
lOO PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMKUT 
 
 The customs, for the first twelve years after 1691 averaged 
 about two-thirds of the revenue/ The system continued till 1709 
 to be practically that established in 1683 by the Dongan assembly. 
 It consisted of duties on imports of distilled liquors, wines, and 
 merchandise and duties on exports of fur. The export duties 
 were specific, and were accompanied by schedules of valuation ; 
 and duties and valuations remained practically unchanged until 
 1709. In connection with the duty on exported furs the act of 
 1683 provided for what amounted to a license of ten per cent, on 
 transaction in furs within the province. This appears in the 
 revenue act of 1691, but after that was dropped. The duties 
 on imported liquors were specific and remained fixed, except for 
 a reduction of the duty on rum sent up the river for the Indian 
 trade. There was more development in the system of duties on 
 imported merchandise. The act of 1683 and the explanatory act 
 of 1684 imposed a duty of two per cent, on merchandise, with a 
 list of exemptions which included farm products of the neigh- 
 boring colonies on the mainland and a number of semi-tropical 
 products from the island colonies, as well as certain building 
 materials. An additional duty of ten per cent, was laid on "In- 
 dian goods," and specific duties on arms and ammunition and 
 rum, when sent up the river. A schedule of valuations for each 
 variety of Indian goods was provided. This system was con- 
 tinued by the act of 1691. Rut in 1692 the duty of ten per cent, 
 on Indian goods sent up the river, in addition to the two per 
 cent, on general merchandise on importation, was changed to a 
 system which laid a five per cent, duty on all Indian goods on 
 importation, in addition to the two per cent, duty which the same 
 goods had already paid as general merchandise. The ten per 
 cent, tax on transactions in furs also disappeared at this time. 
 The specific duties on arms and ammunition and rum sent up 
 the river remained till 1700, when the four pence per gallon on 
 rum, thus designed for the Indian trade, was dropped. - 
 
 The productiveness of this item of the revenue would evi- 
 dently be dependent not only on the character of the collector. 
 but also upon the character of the mercantile population and the 
 opportunities for smuggling afforded by the toj^ography of the 
 
 'Doc. Hist. I. 701-2. Col. Mss. XLVII. 110. 
 *Col. Laws I. 116, 170, 248. 287, 325, 419. 
 
IN KEW YORK, 169I-I719. lOI 
 
 region. Bellomont considered that he had found a combination 
 of unfavorable tendencies in all these directions at once — "the 
 Acts of Trade being no otherwise put in execution than in the 
 voice of the people." Even at the close of an administration full 
 of an active, and, on the whole, successful, crusade against viola- 
 tions of all acts of trade, imperial and colonial, Bellomont was 
 obliged to report that probably one-third of the trade of the prov- 
 ince was against law. Imperfection in the machinery of collec- 
 tion was evidently a contributing feature, and even parliamentary 
 interference for its improvement was suggested and threatened. 
 There seems, further, to have been an actual decay in the volume 
 of trade, beginning with the opening of the eighteenth century. 
 Its causes were at the time, variously ascribed to losses by war, 
 shifting in the habits of the commercial community occasioned 
 by Bellomont's attack on the New York system of illegal and 
 piratical trade, and the dissolution of the New York City monop- 
 oly of bolting flour, an important export item. It may not un- 
 reasonably be assumed that all of the features, the separate exist- 
 ence of which is fully attested^ combined to account for the 
 decay in the volume of trade, which seems to have been unques- 
 tioned.^ 
 
 The excise, levied on liquors sold at retail within the prov- 
 itice, was throughout the period, granted in the same act with the 
 customs. In proportionate amount of the whole revenue for the 
 period for which figures are accessible, it averaged a little under 
 one-fifth. The act of 1691 abolished the distinction between New 
 York City and the rest of the province, previously existing in this 
 matter, and provided for an excise on the sale of distilled liquors 
 in quantity under fifteen gallons ; the same rate, viz., twelve pence 
 per gallon, on the sale of wine in quantity under five gallons, 
 and continued the former rate of six shillings per barrel on the 
 sale of beer or cider. The act of 1692 abolished the distinction 
 between distilled liquors and v/ines in the matter of the quantity 
 constituting retail sale, making it five gallons for both. These 
 were all the changes in the rates of excise during this period.^ 
 
 The management of this item of the revenue, like that of 
 the customs, seems to have been in the hands of the collector 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 324-5, 417, 590-1, 515-6, 634. 603, 721, 778, 1012, 
 1083-4, 1150, V. 57-9. 
 
 ' Col. Laws I. 116, 248, 287. 
 
102 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 and receiver general under the more or less active superintend- 
 ence of the governor and council. It was usually farmed by 
 counties, and the resulting opportunities for "graft" were appar- 
 ently improved. Thus Bellomont reports the corrupt dealing of 
 Fletcher's collector, Brooke, in the awarding of the contract for 
 Long Island for £52 to his friend, the sheriff of New York, 
 whose company was reported to be making £500. Accusations 
 of the same nature, however, were made against Weaver, Bello- 
 mont's own collector, and on the arrival of Cornbury all Weaver's 
 arrangements on this matter were annulled. Bellomont thought 
 that the excise on the province should amount to i 12,000, and 
 was informed by those who had experience that it ought to yield 
 at least £2,000; but he found difficulty in bringing it to i 1,200, 
 though he estimated the population as four times and the num- 
 ber of public houses as ten times as great as before the Leisler 
 episode. Apparently the only alternatives to the award of the 
 farming contracts to friends of the collector were, award by the 
 council itself, selling the contracts at auction to the highest bidder, 
 the process of "agreeing with" the public house keepers for at 
 least the highest sum they had ever before paid, and a combina- 
 tion of all these methods, varying the arrangement to suit the 
 peculiarities of the counties. The last method seems to have been 
 that which prevailed, for the most part, with what results on the 
 productiveness of the excise as an item of revenue, figures are 
 lacking to show.^ 
 
 As these two items together constituted the largest part of 
 the revenue and were always, till 1709, granted in one act, the 
 circumstances connected with the passage of these acts are of 
 some importance. The passage of the act of 1691 presents no 
 features of special interest beyond the fact that the desire of the 
 New York City merchants that the importation of European 
 goods from neighboring colonies be restrained by a ten per cent, 
 duty was denied, such restraint being resolved by the assembly 
 to be "at this juncture a grievance to the inhabitants."- This 
 assembly granted the revenue for a jicriod of two years from pub- 
 lication, viz., 18 May, 1691. In the autumn preceding the expi- 
 ration of this revenue, the newly arrived governor, Fletcher, en- 
 
 'Exec. Council Minutes 8:39. 105-6, 183-4, 194, 9:49-50, 235. Col. 
 Doc. IV. 418, 617. 
 
 " Ass. Journal I. 16-7. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. IO3 
 
 deavored to make the point of having the revenue granted for the 
 life of the sovereign. The records of this assembly are incom- 
 plete, and those which are accessible reveal the council demand- 
 ing a grant for five years instead of two. In the conferences on 
 the subject the assembly defended itself against the charge of 
 disrespect or ingratitude to the crown by pleading the heavy 
 burdens on the province, particularly in consideration of the free- 
 dom from such burdens enjoyed by their neighbors. They further 
 announced that they were considering a new method of support- 
 ing the government, with the hope of making it more easy for the 
 merchant ; but, till the wished-for annexation of the neighboring 
 colonies, they thought it best not to discourage the merchants by 
 grants of the present revenue for too long a period. How seri- 
 ously this announcement is to be taken we have no information 
 to show. xA-t all events, the governor and council did not push 
 the matter any further and the grant was made again for two 
 years. ^ 
 
 At the next session in the spring of 1693, the revenue for 
 life was again proposed in the governor's speech but the house 
 took no action. The same subject was warmly urged on the newly 
 elected assembly in the fall of 1693, and an animated debate took 
 place in the conference. The council urged the example of Vir- 
 ginia and Maryland and the previous grant in New York to 
 James II., represented that giving it for life was no more than 
 for a succession of periods and suggested that the corhpliment to 
 the sovereign would enable the governor with greater boldness 
 to ask for aid from home, and would lighten the burden of the 
 militia detachments and taxes to support them. The assembly 
 in reply repeated the announcement made by the previous assem- 
 bly, of a design to support the government on a new basis, the 
 present method being but a makeshift till conditions of war should 
 be ended and their neighbours annexed. They protested that 
 they did not intend to settle any less sum, but to settle it for life 
 would be "presidentall," and "would be expected by the next 
 Successour." And despite the council's enthusiastic laudation of 
 the customs and excise as the "easiest" method of supporting the 
 government, the assembly remained firm, and the governor and 
 council, though with exceeding bad grace, were compelled to 
 
 ^Ass. J. I. 26-28. Council J. I. 30-32, 35. 
 
104 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 submit. It may be sis^nificant that it was at this session that the 
 act for settHng- a ministry in certain parts of the province, an 
 act on which the governor had set his heart, was passed.^ 
 
 The next grant, in 1699, for a period of six years from 1700, 
 was made by an assembly elected on this issue of granting a 
 revenue, as it stood related to the whole question of the policy 
 of Bellomont, the new governor. The opponents of his policy 
 of enforcement of the imperial trade system had not scrupled to 
 use their whole endeavor to arouse popular prejudice against him. 
 On account of his vigorous attack on the "system" countenanced 
 by Fletcher, he had not been able to avoid the appearance of 
 patronizing the Leislerian faction. The scheme of his oppon- 
 ents was to get an assembly elected which would refuse to con- 
 tinue the revenue and thus involve the governor in such disgrace 
 at home as would inevitably lead to his recall. On his part the 
 governor did not scruple to use executive patronage to procure 
 a "tractable" assembly, one which would continue the revenue 
 for five years, "which is what I Chieftly stickle for." In this he 
 was entirely "successful and the revenue was continued for six 
 years, this time without effort on the governor's part to secure 
 a grant for life. But the governor's "management" of the as- 
 sembly for this purpose also involved his co-operation in acts 
 of legislation which Itad a decided bearing an partisan interests. 
 Here is a plain case of barter between governor and assembly, 
 with continuation of revenue legislation on the one side and com- 
 plaisance in partisan legislation on the other.^ 
 
 The same is true to even greater degree of the next grant 
 of revenue, which occurred under peculiar circumstances, four 
 years before the expiration of the current revenue, i. e., in 1702.. 
 Bellomont had experienced the greatest difficulty in restraining 
 the vengeful passions of the Leislerians, who, as we have seen, 
 were willing to buy legislative measures of redress with a longer 
 grant of revenue than had been usual. Nanfan, the lieutenant 
 governor, who succeeded on the death of Bellomont, was quite 
 unable to restrain this fury ; and among the acts rushed through 
 the assembly just before the arrival of Cornbury was one con- 
 tinuing the revenue for two years after 1706, and at the same 
 time requiring immediate payment of salaries to certain favorites 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 32-3. Council J. I. 43-8. 
 
 *Ass. J. 92-105. Col. Doc. IV. 327, 379, 507-8, 524, 821. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. IO5 
 
 of the Leislerian party. This latter feature was an innovation 
 in an act granting the revenue, and was probably, as Cornbury 
 reported, the reason for passing the act. The whole legislative 
 output of this session was subsequently annulled, but Cornbury, 
 in the first session of the assembly elected after his arrival, ex- 
 acted a real continuation of the revenue for three years after 
 1706, in return for legislation repealing certain important statutes 
 of Bellomont's time which had frustrated schemes of the Anti- 
 Leislerian leaders.^ The point of importance to be noted in con- 
 nection with all these grants of revenue is, that in the reckless 
 excitement of factional conflict both parties for the sake of cor- 
 rupt advantage put it beyond the power of an opposition to bring 
 the pressure of a denial of supply for the ordinary support of 
 government to bear upon the administration till after 1709. 
 
 As the customs and the excise together constituted about 
 eighty-five per cent, of the revenue, the remaining items were 
 comparatively unimportant in point of productiveness. The only 
 one that was dependent on the vote of the assembly was that de- 
 rived from the "Weigh house Duties," which averaged about 
 two and one half per cent, of the total revenue. This was granted 
 by the assembly in 1692, having been collected prior to that time 
 by virtue of the prerogative. The assembly attempted to make 
 the grant for two years only, but were told by the council that, 
 since it was only out of the condescension of the governor that 
 they were allowed to ascertain the rates, nothing less than an 
 unlimited grant could be considered. A subsequent request from 
 the assembly, that the proceeds from the "King's Beam" be 
 appropriated to the fortifications of New York City, "that the 
 imposition may be the more willingly paid by the inhabitants," 
 was ignored. - 
 
 The income derived from seizures and forfeitures was from 
 the nature of the case variable — "casual and accidental" was the 
 term contemporaneously employed in description. During the 
 first eleven years after 169 1 it averaged about two and one-half 
 per cent, of the total revenue. During Cornbury's administra- 
 tion the collector would not make any payments from this source 
 of income without special orders from home. 
 
 ' Col. Laws I. 487, 517. Col. Doc. IV. 999, 1004. 
 
 ' Col. Laws L 322. Ass. J. I. 30. Council J. L 38-9. 
 
I06 PHASliS OF KOVAL GOXERNMliNT 
 
 The quit rents constituted an item which, from its nature, 
 might have been supposed to be an important feature of the rev- 
 enue. The territorial revenue of the crown being beyond the 
 direct influence of the assembly might have been the nucleus of an 
 independent resource. That it was not thus available in any im- 
 portant degree was due to the negligence of some, and the cor- 
 rupt activity of other governors. In 17 lo the attorney general 
 reported that by reason of the small reservations of quit-rents, 
 the non-enrollment of patents or their loss if made, the presence 
 of illegal features in many of the grants and the non-fulfillment 
 of conditions, the income from "the greatest part of the conti- 
 nent" would not average £100 a year. Whatever the fault of the 
 early governors (and the proceedings of Fletcher in granting 
 three-fourths of the province to less than a dozen peaple for 
 quit rents amounting to less than £5 per annum shows that this 
 was not inconsiderable), a wide-spread spirit of lawlessness con- 
 cerning these matters in the rural regions is equally an element of 
 the situation. Bellomont's opponents, in the election on the rev- 
 enue issue already referred to, placed great reliance on their trick 
 in getting him to essay the collection of the quit rents on a whole- 
 sale plan during the progress of the" campaign. He himself sug- 
 gested the necessity of an act of parliament for the regulation of 
 land-granting in the province, being sure that no dependence 
 could be placed on the assembly. He estimated that at a proper 
 rate the income from this source should amount to £3000. Noth- 
 ing in the line of improvement of the situation was achieved, 
 however, during the currency of the revenue, though effort was 
 made in this direction by the council in Cornbury's time, and 
 though it was the government's only available resource in una- 
 voidable exigencies.^ 
 
 The subject of fees was one upon which there was strong 
 popular feeling and much determined effort on the part of the 
 assembly. The commission and instructions of the early part 
 of the period seemed to commit the regulation of them to the 
 governor and council, although in terms which did not entirely 
 exclude the possibility of participation by the assembly. The 
 subject had importance for the question of control of the finances 
 by the popular body, because to the degree that the support of 
 
 * Col. Doc. IV. 419, 519-20, 514, 555, V. 161-2. Council J. I. 212, 218-9. 
 
I>f NEW YORK^ 169I-I719. 107 
 
 such officers was withdrawn from dependence on the legislature 
 was control of them by that body rendered difficult. In their offi- 
 cial expressions, however, it was always the burden on the ordin- 
 ary conduct of affairs which was entailed by the extravagant 
 charges, that was emphasized. In connection with the grants of 
 revenue prior to Cornbury, tables or catalogues of fees were sent 
 up to the council by the assembly. A regulation seems to have 
 been provided by the council, after the receipt of a table from the 
 assembly in 1693 ; but it seems never to have passed in regular 
 form as an ordinance. Bellomont was of opinion that power in 
 this matter was in the hands of the governor and council whose 
 action must be especially approved by the home government ; and 
 he so informed the assembly, who thereupon withdrew their 
 table which they had intended to form part of the revenue act 
 in 1699. It does not appear that any action from home was 
 secured, and the regulation of 1693 continued in form. The 
 general movement for reform of financial method by the as- 
 sembly under Cornbury included repeated attacks on the fee 
 system, which was represented as a form of taking away the 
 property of the subject without consent in general assembly. 
 These attempts culminated in 1709 in an act establishing fees, 
 passed by both houses, and assented to by the lieutenant gov- 
 ernor in the fear of stirring up trouble with the assembly at a 
 time when so much was expected of it in the way of military 
 supplies for the Canada expedition. In his correspondence with 
 the home government Ingoldsby hinted that reform in some par- 
 ticulars would be entirely in order ; but that the assembly had 
 gone much too far in the other direction, reducing the fees so low 
 that officers could not live. The act was disallowed and the con- 
 tinuance of this contest formed a part of the general revenue 
 controversy under Hunter.^ 
 
 Levies of direct taxes comprised an item of public income 
 which at any rate, for the first twenty years, after 1691, consid- 
 erably exceeded the revenue in productiveness. The purposes for 
 which these levies were made were, in theory, the "extraordinary 
 uses" of the province, as distinguished from the "ordinary support 
 of government." Naturally then, they were not necessarily mat- 
 
 ' Col. Laws I. 638. Ass. J. I. 12-13, 17, 28, 30, 223-4. Council J. I. 
 32, 132-4. Col. Doc. IV. 287, V. 82, 603. 
 
I08 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 ters of annual or regular grant, but in fact, as the acts levying 
 them were chiefly for purposes of defense, and as there were 
 only four years of formal peace during this period, such acts 
 came to be quite regular in their recurrence till the movement 
 for the creation of the office of the country treasurer began in 
 1703. During this period there were only two years in which 
 an act for the levy of direct taxes was not passed by the legis- 
 lature. By governors' administrations, the levies of direct taxes 
 ran as follows : 
 
 Sloughter and Ingolds- 
 
 by £5000 Defense 
 
 Fletcher £20,477 : 6 : 8 Defense 
 
 £1,000 Agency 
 £750 Present to governor 
 
 Bellomont and Nanfan £ 1,000 Defense 
 
 i2,ooo Present to governor and 
 
 lieutenant-governor. 
 ii,ooo Payment of debts 
 
 Cornbury £8,483 : 10 Defense 
 
 £2,000 Present to governor 
 £143:10:10 Room for assembly 
 £1,010 Payment of debts 
 
 Practically all these levies were of the nature of a general 
 property tax ; that is, a lump sum was granted, which was vari- 
 ously called a "sum," "supply," "levy," "fund," quotas of which 
 were by the terms of the act assigned among the several counties, 
 to be "levied, assessed and raised upon the inhabitants, residents 
 and freeholders." There was only one instance of the use of the 
 "penny in the pound rate," viz. in 1692, for a present to Fletcher. 
 There was one instance of the use of a poll-tax. in 1703, by 
 which nine pence was imposed on freemen of sixteen years and 
 over, three shillings on bachelors of twenty-five years, five shil- 
 lings and six pence on persons wearing a periwig, twenty shil- 
 lings on practising lawyers, twenty shillings on members of the 
 assembly, and forty shillings on members of the coimcil. With 
 these exceptions the levies were of the nature indicated. For 
 assessment and collection of these taxes, the machinery used 
 by the counties for their local rates was employed, and penalties 
 were provided for failure by the justices of the peace of the 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-1719. IO9 
 
 counties or the mayors or aldermen 01 the cities to enforce 
 the powers of the act. Considerable difficulty was experienced 
 in keeping the county officers to their duty, and for the first ten 
 or fifteen years the records of the executive council contain 
 many instances of pressure from that body on the justices. 
 Most of the development in the system was concerned with 
 strengthening here and there the penalties for the non-enforce- 
 ment of the acts. At first, payment in produce was allowed, and 
 schedules of rates at which it was to be received formed part 
 of the acts. By 1695, this practice seems to have been dis- 
 continued. A number of the early tax acts provide for taking up 
 a proportional part of the sum to be raised at interest, on the 
 credit of the act, with special appropriation clauses for the repay- 
 ment of the persons who should thus advance ready money. 
 Attempt was madfe early in the period to arrange for a system 
 of commissioners in each county, to be appointed by the as- 
 sembly and commissioned by the governor, for estimating es- 
 tates ; and an establishment for such estimation "to prevent un- 
 certainties in the Proportioning of all Subsidies ;" was included in 
 the plan. But the device was rejected in council. Unfortunately 
 the records of the assembly give no information concerning any 
 debates over the assignment of quotas to the counties. The 
 quotas bear a proportionate relation, not strictly maintained, to 
 the population of the counties.^ 
 
 It was matter of complaint by the Anti-Leislerians that what 
 was praised as public spirit in their adversaries in reality cost 
 them little, for their whole number paid scarcely one-fifth of the 
 public assessments and scarcely one-fiftieth of the customs reve- 
 nue. During Fletcher's administration, the taxes for defense, — 
 and most of them were for that purpose, — omitted Albany from 
 the quotas, in consideration of that county furnishing quarters. 
 
 ' Col. Laws I. 239, 258, 272, 282. 315, 344, 352, 354, 358, 364, 369, 381. 
 Ass-y J. I. 36-8. 
 
 In the period 1691-1711, the quota of the City and County of N. Y. 
 averaged roughly from 20% to 30% of the total levy, beginning at the 
 lower figure during the first two acts after Sloughter's arrival, and hold- 
 ing at nearly 30% during Fletcher's and Bellomont's administrations and 
 falling to 21% during the period from 1702 to 1711. The higher pro- 
 portion corresponds pretty closely with New York's population if reck- 
 oned by totals, the lower, if reckoned on the basis of the number of 
 white males. 
 
no 1>IIAS1-:S OK ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 fire and candle for the detachments there stationed. This prac- 
 tice was abandoned in the second intercolonial war. No convinc- 
 ing explanation appears at present for several departures from 
 the principle of population as a basis for reckoning quotas.^ 
 
 In comparing the reliance placed upon the productiveness of 
 the revenue and upon the levies, as sources of income, we are 
 embarrassed by the absence of figures for receipts of revenue 
 during the first twenty years of the eighteenth century. For the 
 period, 1691-1695, the average revenue amounted to ^3,550, while 
 the taxes voted for the corresponding period averaged £4,892 per 
 annum. The figures for the administration of Bellomont and 
 Nanfan seem to show a disposition on the part of the Leislerians, 
 during their brief day of power, to take advantage of the greater 
 accessiliility of their enemies' mercantile investments for public 
 purposes. Both the periods 1698-1702 and 1 721-1728 were times 
 of formal peace upon the frontiers ; yet in the former period direct 
 taxes are in a ratio to the revenue of one to five, while in the 
 latter the ratio is one to two. This feature appears particularlv 
 in connection with their use of the additional duty, which, as a 
 nearly constant feature of the finance of the early period, may 
 propeviy be described here.- 
 
 Partly as a result of loosenesss in the system of expenditure, 
 partly as the result of the severe and long continued frontier 
 struggles of the first intercolonial war, the province was con- 
 tinually running in debt. Aside from all attempts to saddle 
 upon the government, as constituted in 1691, the respon- 
 sibilities incurred by the government of the Leisler interregnum, 
 the actual expenses of the government continually exceeded 
 its income. To meet these "anticipations of the revenue," — for 
 so they were regarded — the practice was begun as early as 1692, 
 of laying a duty upon the importation of certain goods, over and 
 above the duties laid by all other acts. The act of November, 1692, 
 imposed an additional specific duty on distilled liquors, wine and 
 molasses, an additional duty of two per cent, on European goods, 
 and of six per cent, in addition to this, upon such goods when im- 
 ported from anywhere but England, Wales and Berwick. It was 
 
 'Council J. I. 53. Col. Doc. IV. 621. Col. Mss. XLVII. 110. Doc. 
 Hist. I. 687-702. 
 'Ibid. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. Ill 
 
 granted for two years and continued till 1698, by successive acts, 
 mainly for the same purpose, viz., payment of public debts. In 
 1699, a schedule of additional duties, in which the principle of 
 discriminating between imports from England or place of manu- 
 facture and elsewhere is still further carried out, was enacted for 
 two years. It was during the period of this act that the assembly 
 grudgingly co-operated with the governor in the project of erect- 
 ing a fort in the Onondaga country. To provide ii,ooo for this 
 purpose, for^vhich they had no real enthusiasm, they granted what 
 might be called an additional additional duty. If, for the sake of 
 keeping in touch with the governor, they must at least appear to 
 assist him in this object, it should be in the manner least burden- 
 some to their special following. B'ellomont called it a ''foolish 
 money bill," and commented on the injurious effect it would have 
 upon the regular revenue by putting an excessive clog upon trade. 
 But for the sake of appearances before the Indians, he thought 
 best to consent to it. It was, shortly afterwards, repealed, and 
 a property tax was levied to meet the cost of the fort. The dis- 
 position of the Leislerian leaders to bear with special weight on 
 the trading interest as a source of public income is also displayed 
 in an act that was passed on the expiration of the additional 
 duty voted in 1699. The varieties of imports newly taxed by 
 this schedule had a wide range, and some at a later period be- 
 came a permanent element in provincial finance. But the speedy 
 annullment of most of the legislation of this assembly deprives 
 this of permanent significance.^ 
 
 New York did not begin the practice of issuing bills of credit 
 till 1709, when, owing to the urgent necessity of military 
 supplies for the Canada Expedition of that year, such bills were 
 authorized to issue, under elaborate directions as to currency, re- 
 demption and retirement. They were regarded as anticipations 
 of the proceeds of the taxes, provision for whose levy in at least 
 equal amount was coincidently made. The issue was provided 
 for by act, not by resolve, and, during the period now considered 
 seems not to have been questioned at home.^ 
 
 ' Col. Laws 312, 325, 331, 342, 403, 444, 467. Col. Doc. IV. 713. Ass. 
 J. I. 
 
 ' Col. Laws I. 666, 669, 689, 693, 695. 
 
112 PHASKS OF ROYAL GOVERNiMKNT 
 
 In all these different methods of raising money for public 
 purposes, the assemi)ly, as a matter of fact, look the initiative ; 
 but the claim of an exclusive power of framing such legislation, 
 leaving to the council only the right to accept or reject entire, 
 does not appear until the general revolt against prerogative con- 
 trol of expenditure was undertaken. Prior to 1703, when the 
 assembly resolved, "that it is inconvenient to admit of amend- 
 ments by the Council to a money bill," such amendments had re- 
 peatedly been made by the council, both in the case of grants of 
 the revenue and of tax levies. The council was not slow to resent 
 this assumption, and was entirely supported in its claim to the 
 right of making such amendments, by the Lords of Trade. Nev- 
 ertheless, the struggle for the right to appoint its treasurer for 
 funds raised for extraordinary uses, which was the struggle in 
 which it found this claim a useful weapon, resulted in a victory 
 for the assembly ; and the council, as a matter of fact, did not 
 offend again till the occasion of the controversy over the grant- 
 ing the revenue in Hunter's time. Undeterred by the previous 
 rebuke of the Lords of Trade, the assembly persisted in its refusal 
 to consider council amendments to money bills. And even in 
 the settlement of the controversy, which involved the practical 
 necessity of admitting council amendments to the bill for paying 
 the debts of the colony, the assembly saved its face by formally 
 resolving that this was not a money bill ! The same course of 
 action, in practical consequence, was taken with regard to con- 
 ferences concerning money bills. ^ 
 
 As has been indicated, the chief struggle was that over control 
 of expenditure. The commission required that "all public moneys 
 . . . raised by an act . . . be issued out by Warrant from 
 you by and with the advice and consent of the Council and Dis- 
 posed of by you for the support of the government and not other- 
 wise." The instructions required the governor not to "suffer any 
 public money to be issued or disposed of other than by Warrant" 
 from himself by and with advice and consent of the council, and 
 also required that, in all acts or orders for levying money express 
 mention should be made that the same was granted to the crown 
 for the public uses of the province and the support of the govern- 
 ment, "as by the said Act or Order shall be directed." The 
 
 'Ass. J. I. 180. iO-i. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 1691-1719. II3 
 
 governor was further required to take care that books of ac- 
 counts of receipts and payments of pubHc money in which the 
 particular sums raised and disposed of should be mentioned, be 
 kept and transmitted to theTreasury at home and to the Board 
 of Trade, "to the end we may be satisfied of the right and due 
 application of the Revenue." The practical result is plain. It 
 was evidently the intention that the money should be disposed 
 of as directed in general terms ])y the money-granting power ; 
 provision was made for satisfying the crown that this had been 
 done ; but it is to be observed that in case of deviation from 
 the ideal working of the machinery of expenditure, only 
 remedial action, and that after the injury had been accom- 
 plished, could be taken by the dissatisfied home government ; that, 
 considering the means of communication and the imperfections of 
 the system of imperial control generally, great harm might be 
 wrought to the provincial finances before any remedy could be 
 applied ; and finally, that there was no provision for the effective 
 satisfaction of the body which had made the grant, that its pur- 
 poses had been regarded. The experience of the first three ad- 
 ministrations immediately demonstrated these possibilities, and 
 they seem to be partially recognized in the new feature in Corn- 
 bury 's instructions of 1702, in which it was stated that "the as- 
 sembly may nevertheless be permitted from time to time to view 
 and examine the accounts of money . . . disposed of by 
 virtue of laws made by them."^ 
 
 Control of expenditure of money granted for purposes out- 
 side the range of the usual necessary and constant charges of gov- 
 ernment was the first thing aimed at by the assembly. As we 
 have seen, the raising of money for these purposes was accom- 
 plished by levies of direct taxes ; and from the very first we find 
 the acts stating the object of the grant in general terms, some- 
 times in the title alone, sometimes more fully in the preamble. 
 Usually both features were present, and were generally followed 
 by some such phrase as this, "and for no other use whatsoever," 
 or, "and not otherwise," or a provision that the money granted 
 be "only appropriated or applied to," etc. The preamble was 
 likely to contain, besides a recital of the facts setting forth the 
 reasons for the grant, a more detailed statement of its object than 
 
 'Ass. J. I. 188. Col. Doc. IV. 26(5. '284, 884-5. 
 8 
 
114 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 was contained in the title. In the case of acts providing for pay- 
 ing and maintaining detachments of militia, or for bounty money 
 for enlistments to increase the force of the "Independent Com- 
 panies," the practice came to be to state with much minuteness 
 the number of men, the days they were to serve, the places where 
 they were to be posted, etc., and a pay establishment was included 
 in the act. By 1696, the differentiation of objects for which the 
 money was granted and the allotment of definite sums to each pur- 
 pose had gone so far, as practically to deprive the expending 
 power of all discretion.^ 
 
 For the assembly thus to manifest its intention was one thing; 
 to enforce action in conformity with this intention upon a power 
 beyond its direct control was quite another. In the absence of a 
 positive requirement of accountability of the expending power to 
 the tax-granting power, the latter could only work indirectly upon 
 the situation, by exacting what satisfaction the former could be 
 persuaded to grant, as a condition precedent to further supply. 
 This, in time of public danger, would be an awkward thing to do, 
 and in any cAse would be pretty certain to be associated with a 
 complete breach with the governor and council. If the governor 
 and council did not choose, or were unable, to compel the collector 
 and receiver-general to give complete satisfaction to the assem- 
 bly, it would depend upon the flagrancy of the proved departure 
 from the assembly's wishes, or upon the degree of urgency of 
 military supply, whether the assembly would go so far as actually 
 to deny further supplies till satisfaction were obtained. One de- 
 vice was made use of at an early stage of proceedings, viz., 
 through the agency of a committee of accounts, frequently much 
 hindered by the dilatoriness of the collector, to ascertain a bal- 
 ance from funds previously raised, by means of objections to 
 items in the collector's accounts, and to include this balance in a 
 new bill for supply, thus diminishing, by the amount of the 
 balance found, the sum to be raised by the new bill. During 
 Fletcher's administration, obstructions of many kinds were placed 
 in the path of this process, the assembly never being given satis- 
 factory access to muster-rolls or accounts of expenditure of taxes 
 for military purposes. In enforcing its program the assembly 
 
 * Col. Laws I. 239, 258, 272. 282, 315, 344-52, 354, 358, 364, 369. 381. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. II5 
 
 was pressed to its weapon of last resort — a denial of supply — 
 and, on dissolution and the election of a new assembly, provision 
 for defence was made on a different basis/ 
 
 Apparently in recognition of the futility of attempts to control 
 expenditure of taxes by any such indirect process as the foregoing, 
 a further step in advance was taken, when, in 1700, the additional 
 additional duty was granted for the erection of a fort in the On- 
 ondaga country. Apparently with the encouragement of Bello- 
 mont, managers named in the act, were appointed on whose ad- 
 vice the governor was to issue warrants for the payment of bills 
 connected with the fort, the collector and receiver-general being 
 by the act required to transmit every three months to the man- 
 agers, accounts of his receipts from the additonal duty.- Other 
 acts passed by this assembly, while still under Leislerian influence 
 but without the restraining hand of Bellomont, acts providing for 
 even more rigid control of expenditure by representatives of the 
 tax-granting power, are deprived of permanent significance by the 
 fact that Weaver, the collector for the time, was a prominent 
 leader of the Leislerian faction, for whose benefit these acts were 
 passed. According to these acts, the collector was to pay the pro- 
 ceeds of the tax thus raised to persons to be named by commis- 
 sioners appointed for each county by the assembly. The acts 
 were repealed by the Cornbury government with all speed, but 
 the significance of the system provided for the enforcement of 
 the assembly's intention is important and apparent. In previous 
 acts for the payment of the debts, the assembly had ascertained 
 the debts for itself, then had granted the additional duty for 
 their payment, and finally had provided for the progressive 
 division of the proceeds of the duty among the claimants, whose 
 names and acknowledged accounts were stated in the act. The 
 loose method of ascertainment which was provided in the act of 
 1701 bears witness to the suspicious atmosphere clinging to the 
 whole output of this assembly. The same taint of extreme and 
 offensive partisanship vitiates the significance of the revenue act 
 passed at this same session, which provided for immediate pay- 
 ment of allotted salaries out of the proceeds of the duties imposed 
 
 'Ass. J. I. 47-53. Council J. I. 67-77. 
 = Col. Laws I. 367. Council J. I. 146. 
 
Il6 rilASES OF ROYAL GOVICRNM IJNT 
 
 — a Step beyond the boldest dreams of the past, and only to be 
 resorted to again after the province had been through the fiery 
 trials of the Cornbury administration.* 
 
 It was through the developing activity of the committees of 
 accounts that the suggestion of the next important step was made. 
 These committees were chiefly active in the attempt to ascertain 
 the amount of the public debt, and in the rightful location of 
 claims of accounts to be parts of this debt. Nearly every session 
 of the assembly saw a committee of its own membership ap- 
 pointed to inspect the accounts of the taxes and revenue, and to 
 arrive at a statement of the debts of the government. Both 
 Fletcher and Bellomont appear to have had but slight regard for 
 the abilities of these committees to make use of accounts when they 
 got hold of them. It was by joint committee of council and as- 
 sembly that the information was obtained, which resulted in the 
 passage of both acts for granting the additional duty for payment 
 of debts in 1692 and 1696. By 1698, the assembly conmiittee 
 found that the original lists of debts for which the additional 
 duty had been granted had been paid ; but, according to Bello- 
 mont, the indebtedness of the province was still great and its 
 credit very low'.- The activity of the assembly committee on ac- 
 counts, whose members were shortly made commissioners of 
 accounts together with one outsider, the merchant Van Dam, and 
 whose powers of investigation were at the same time made eflrec- 
 tive, was apparently colored by the ambition to find their late 
 antagonists sufficiently in debt to the government to make resti- 
 tution by them answer for many claims and for the expenses of 
 fortifications which the governor was pressing on the assembly. 
 The commissioners found the accounts in a scandalous state of 
 confusion, the claims of Livingston and Schuyler, against whom 
 their wrath seemed to be especially kindled, filled with objection- 
 able items which were not according to the acts or according 
 to any principle of good management. But the excessive rigor 
 and severity pursued in relation to these accounts, and the reck- 
 lessness with which claims of their fellow partisans at the time 
 of the Leisler episode were allowed and the leaders in their recent 
 
 • Col. Law.s I. 467-79, 479-88. 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 522, 721. Ass. J. I. 09, 90. Council J. I. 27, 76, 
 
IN NEW YORK. 169I-1719. II7 
 
 time of prosperity were rewarded, enveloped the whole subject of 
 provincial debt-paying in an atmosphere of corruption which 
 clung to it throughout the whole period.^ The commissioners 
 of accounts appointed by the assembly called by Cornbury were, 
 with the exception of Van Dam, now a member of council, 
 , Anti-Leislerians ; and they were directed to inquire only into 
 the accounts from the time of Bellomont's arrival. This is 
 significant of the spirit of their principals ; but their inquiry 
 within these limits seems to have been conducted with greater 
 efificiency than has been observable before. Their findings in- 
 cluded discovery of negligence equal to that of Brooke, on the 
 part of Weaver, Bellomont's collector, while many objections to 
 items of discharge in which partisan animus is evident, appear. 
 Their objections, however, display a continuity in principle with 
 objections made by the Leislerian commissioners in the matter of 
 the use of the ordinary revenue for the support of the 'Tnde- 
 pendent Companies." The commissioners also severely criti- 
 cised the deputy of the Auditor-General of the Plantations for 
 passing accounts so full of errors. Particularly important is 
 their final observation : "This Board are of Opinion, That it 
 will be very difficult to come to the satisfactory knowledge of 
 the Uses and distributions of the Revenue and public Sub- 
 sidies and of the Debts of the Gov't (forasmuch as the Charges 
 do take their arise from the Council Board) not knowing that 
 there is any Accountant Established or Books kept wherein 
 the Accounts are fairly entered by way of Journal, as they 
 are past in Council ; and the Collectors or Commissioners of 
 the Customs take up no more warrants than what they pay, 
 which for the most part bear only some General Hint of the Use. 
 Neither can we know where the Arrears of Taxes are standing 
 out, nor have any distinct account of the distribution of them, 
 some of the Collectors having Charged themselves in Gross with 
 all the monies they receive and the Deputy Auditor having allowed 
 the Discharge promiscuously : We are therefore of opinion it 
 would be very necessary the Country would appoint a Receiver 
 for all Subsidies and Taxes Except the Revenue, who should be 
 
 'Col. Laws I. 441, 459, 469, 479. Col. Doc. IV. Ass. J. I. 112-14, 
 119-38. Exec. Council Min. VIII. 204-10, 225, 276, 339, 340. Col. Mss. 
 XLIV. 81, 156, 276, XLV. 85. 
 
Il8 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 accountable to the Assembly for the Same and the disposition 
 thereof, to the uses for which they are Granted."^ 
 
 This report was presented at the spring session of 1703, and 
 the suggestion was immediately acted upon. In a bill for raising 
 £1,500 towards the construction of batteries to guard the Narrows, 
 provision was made for a treasurer for receiving and paying the 
 money which was now intended to be raised. Being informed in 
 the series of conferences which ensued upon the council's attempt 
 to amend the bill, that such proceeding was contrary to the in- 
 structions, the assembly presented an address to the governor, 
 desiring him to represent to the queen its purpose, viz., the pre- 
 vention of misa]:)plications in the future, and to desire an instruc- 
 tion to himself to commissionate some fit person to be treasurer, 
 the same to give sufficient security by freeholders and inhabitants, 
 for the due execution of his office.* In the meantime, the assem- 
 bly incorporated in the £1,500 bill a clause reciting the abuse and 
 misapplication of the public money as a matter of notoriety, and 
 requiring the collector to keep a separate account of the money 
 received by virtue of this act and exhibit the same to the assem- 
 bly when required.^ 
 
 This was the beginning of a struggle in which, for the first 
 time, the assembly used its whole power for the attainment 
 of a truly political end uncomplicated, or comparatively so, by 
 any partisan aspects. In the course of this struggle, an ac- 
 count of which in detail is forbidden by space limitations, the 
 assembly attempted to force the council into a subordinate po- 
 sition in the matter of legislation involving money-raising, by 
 denying the council's right to amend such bills, and did not 
 hesitate to enforce its demand, by refusing a supply even at 
 the risk of danger to the province in time of war. On retreating 
 from its original demand for a treasurer who should be account- 
 able to itself, it revived the practice of former times, by inserting 
 minute directions as to appropriations and ascertainments of 
 of balances from former supplies, which had not been expended 
 in accordance with the directions of the acts. In opposition to 
 Combury's interpretation of the instruction which permitted 
 
 'Col. Mss. XLVII. 110. 
 ' Ass. J. I. 170. 
 •Col. Laws I. 550. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 119 
 
 them to view the accounts as not extending to their "meddHng 
 with them," they held that the whole intent of that instruction 
 was that the assembly might be satisfied that the money 
 raised by them was applied to the uses appointed. In reply 
 to the council's objection to their device of making a certifi- 
 cate from the commanding officer a discharge to the treasurer, 
 that it was in violation of the instruction forbidding the issue of 
 public money in any other way than by warrant from the gov- 
 ernor and. council, they held that their desire in this connection 
 was no more than the requirement of the approval of the coun- 
 cil to the governor's warrants for the ordinary support of 
 government. This they described as equally a kind of voucher for 
 the due disposition of that money according to the necessities of 
 the colony. Throughout the controversy, they based their policy 
 on the report of the commissioners of accounts, already referred 
 to, which recited the impossibility of a certain knowledge of the 
 state of the revenue under the existing system, and on the fact of 
 misapplications in the past and at the time, which were being 
 progressively brought to light through the agency of the com- 
 missioners. Dissolution only brought upon the scene an as- 
 sembly more determined upon the original project. The gover- 
 nor represented the matter to the Lords of Trade as another evi- 
 dence of the spirit of independency everywhere rife — "as the 
 country increases they grow more sawcy." Nevertheless, in 
 1706, the Lords of Trade directed the governor to permit the 
 assembly "to name their own Treasurer when they raise extra- 
 ordinary Supplies for particular L^ses," to be accountable to 
 governor, council and assembly. Warrants might be issued 
 by the colonels, captains or other persons according to the 
 direction of the act, but the governor must always be informed 
 of the occasion of issuing such warrants, and all persons con- 
 cerned in issuing and disposing of such money must be made 
 accountable to the governor, council and assembly. The course 
 of the assembly in pretending to the privileges of the House 
 of Commons was definitely rebuked. The money must be 
 granted expressly to the crown "which need not hinder the 
 Assembly of New York from appropriating the money so granted 
 to such particular uses as are found requisite." This last point 
 was a valuable feature of the message for the assembly's pur- 
 pose, practically confirming its previous use of the power of 
 
120 I'llASliS OK ROYAL GOVKRNMENT 
 
 appropriation and forming a basis for the extension of the usage 
 at a later period.^ 
 
 One dangerous feature of the situation had thus been rem- 
 edied for the future, and thereafter all acts levying taxes contained 
 clauses providing for the custody of the funds thus raised by the 
 treasurer appointed by the act. The payment of such money was 
 to be performed by the treasurer, either upon warrants addressed 
 to him by commissioners or managers named in the act, which 
 also carefully limited the purposes for which the warrants were 
 to be drawn ; or directly to persons named in the act, whose 
 receipts were pronounced a sufficient discharge to the treasurer. 
 One part at least of the public income was now under the effective 
 control of the power that had raised and granted it. Expenditure 
 of money raised for the ordinary support of government was still 
 beyond control, and the methods and consequences of preroga- 
 tive control of this portion of the public income must now be 
 examined. 
 
 There was one circumstance peculiar to the expenditure of 
 this portion of provincial income, viz., the fact that certain items 
 were assigned or allotted by forces entirely outside the province. 
 The governor's salary, for example, was fixed by a clause in 
 the instructions empowering him to take to himself such and 
 such a sum as his salary. The collector and receiver-general 
 was assigned his salary by the Lords of the Treasury out of the 
 quit-rents. Such manifestations of control over resources it 
 was entirely out of the power of the province to prevent during 
 the continuance of a revenue already granted. Only when the 
 assembly had gotten a leverage by reason of the expiration of 
 the revenue of 1709. do we hear anything of an opinion that her 
 Majesty might not allot salaries out of the revenue. The power 
 given to the governor by the commission and instructions to reg- 
 ulate all salaries and fees might be influenced in its effectual 
 working in the long run by the size of the funds established by 
 the money-granting power at intervals for the support of gov- 
 ernment, and by the unwillingness of the assembly to regard an- 
 ticipations of the revenue, in so far as they were caused by such 
 salary-regulation by the governor, as truly public debts. Rut only 
 
 'J. I. 157-215 csp. 203. 205-7. Council J. I. 189-245. Col. Doc 
 IV. 1121-2, 1145-47, 115«. ll()5-nf), 1171-2. 1181-5. 
 
IN XEVV YORK, 169I-I719. 121 
 
 thus indirectly could the assembly do its work. Ordinary support 
 of government would naturally include, in addition to salaries 
 of officers, incidental expenses of government, and the meeting of 
 unexpected emergencies. The latter in time of war would be 
 likely to be heavy, as would the former during the periods in which 
 the government was especially active in enforcing its program 
 upon an unwilling people. Both of these conditions were present 
 during the administrations of the first four governors till 1709, 
 but particularly so during the period from 1691 to 1702. 
 
 The salary list varied considerably during the period, but ex- 
 hibited a general tendency to increase. In 1693 it amounted to 
 £1,738, in 1702 to £2,855, in ^7^4 to £3,097, in 1708 to £3,542. 
 The governor and council had from the first established the rule 
 that warrants sliould be paid in course following the dates of issue, 
 with the exception that salary warrants should be paid quarterly.^ 
 "Contingent charges of government," which it is impossible to 
 estimate or report in even approximate figures, including such 
 items as expresses on Indian diplomatic service, the cost of 
 maintaining good relations with the Indians in general, expenses 
 of legislative sessions, and the like, constituted an important 
 item in the support of the government. The presence of troops 
 in the king's pay also involved a burden on the revenue, for, 
 owing to the high prices prevailing in America, their pay, 
 even when transmitted at sterling value, was not sufficient to 
 defray their "incidents" in addition to their subsistence. These 
 "incidents," together with support of stafif officers, and main- 
 tenance of barracks and fortifications were supposed to be pro- 
 vided for by the stoppage of ten per cent, from the pay ; but 
 for the reasons indicated, the provision was utterly inadequate 
 even for one of the objects. It is to be observed that these 
 items are of comparatively regular recurrence, even though 
 difficult to calculate in amount. Add to these items those con- 
 nected with sudden and unavoidable emergencies, to be expected 
 in time of war; and the necessity for an intelligent system, and 
 scrupulous adherence to at least the outline of such system be- 
 comes apparent. The commission and instructions placed in the 
 hands of the governor and council exclusively, the issuing of war- 
 
 'Doc. Hist. I. 313. Ass. J. I. 243. Col, Mss. XLIX. 142. E.xec. 
 Council Min. VI. 139. 
 
122 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 rants upon the collector and receiver-general for payment of all 
 monies raised for the ordinary support of government. The actual 
 conduct of the matter is perhaps best portrayed by George Clarke, 
 secretary of the province, deputy to, and kinsman of, Blaith- 
 waite, the auditor-general, in a letter written in 1706, after three 
 years of residence in the province had familiarized him with the 
 conditions. "The Governor being judge of whatever is necessary 
 to be done for Her Majesty's service in the province whenever 
 he thinks it convenient directs the performance thereof accord- 
 ingly. The service completed, the persons employed or furnishing 
 materials bring in accounts to the Governor and Council. Where- 
 upon a committee of three at least is appointed to examine the 
 accounts and they report according to the nature and circum- 
 stance of the affair, 'though Generally and indeed almost always 
 the Substance of their Report is that they have Examined the 
 account and believe it to be true and are of opinion that his Ex- 
 cellency may safely Issue Warrants for payment of the same out 
 of the Revenue.' The preparatory steps being taken the Gov- 
 ernor in Council Issues his Warrant (under) his hand and Scale 
 to the Receiver-Generall ... In obedience to these warrants 
 the Receiver-General pays the sums for which they are drawn 
 so farr as the Revenue will Extend (after the Sallarys of the 
 Governor and other officers are paid these being by order of the 
 Governor and Council made preferrable to all payments) yett 
 sometimes and indeed frequently Sallary warrants are not paid 
 when others are, and at other times The Receiver-General makes 
 distinctions of persons when their warrants make none. 
 Hereupon arise this Generall observation That there seems to be 
 Little or no hopes of having the Revenue applied to the necessary 
 uses only for which it was Intended For the to per cent, falling 
 Short (as I am informed) of what is Sufficient to pay the Staff 
 officers, consequently the Incidents of fire Candles. Nursing Sick 
 Soldiers etc. being unavoidable and what the Garrisons cannot 
 Subsist without these Expenses must be paid out of another fund 
 and there being no other but the Revenue and the Governor hav- 
 ing the disposall thereof in the manner aforesaid he orders the 
 payments thereout of those and all other expences by Warrants as 
 aforesaid to the Receiver General."^ 
 
 ' Col. Mss. LI. 170. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. I23 
 
 The partiality in the recognition of claims upon the govern- 
 ment, thus indicated, is one of the many features of the system of 
 exclusive control of expenditure for support of government by 
 governor and council which, in the first eleven years of the period, 
 had excited a deep-rooted distrust on the part of the people, and 
 which went under the general label of "mismanagement" or "mis- 
 applications." This "mismanagement" is exceedingly difficult 
 to analyze and to account for in any systematic way. Only a few 
 features, samples as it were, can be given. Perhaps its most seri- 
 ous feature was the heavy accumulation of indebtedness actually 
 incurred under the operation of the system, which, with the par- 
 tiality in the treatment of creditors above indicated, would be 
 enough to ruin the government's credit. That the latter result 
 was accomplished, there is abundant evidence to show. Estimates 
 of the amount of indebtedness at different times are necessarily 
 vague, and the reasons assigned for its existence conflicting. 
 Colonel Quary reported, in 1703, that at the end of Fletcher's 
 administration, the debt of the provice was no more than could 
 be discharged by the arrears of revenue and taxes. Bellomont 
 reported, in 1699, that the debt amounted to £5,000; while, in 
 1702, at the beginning of Cornbury's administration it was re- 
 ported at i 10,000, and ascribed to mismanagement in Bellomont's 
 time. Livingston reported, in 1707, that ten years' revenue, if 
 settled, would not clear the debts. The two acts in Hunter's 
 time for payment of debts recognized an indebtedness amount- 
 ing to over £42,000, but a respectable fraction of this was 
 for debts incurred subsequent to the expiration of the revenue in 
 1709. In any case the seriousness of the burden is manifest.^ 
 
 The objections of the deputy auditor general to the collec- 
 tor's accounts in Cornbury's administration shows that another 
 feature of mismanagement was profuse extravagance in provid- 
 ing for certain objects, which were entirely legitimate in them- 
 selves. One of the most notorious of these instances of extrava- 
 gance was Cornbury's first journey to Albany to meet the Indians. 
 The trip cost more than twice as much as any previous one. and 
 the excess can not be charged to unusual liberality in regard 
 to the presents to the Indians. Another illustration is to be 
 found in the extravagant expenditure for candles, and for many 
 
 'Col. Doc. IV. 513, 829. Cal. Treas-y Papers Vol. 1702-7, 511-12. 
 
1_'4 I'HASliS OF ROYAL COX i:KN M ENT 
 
 Other items which should have gone to the governor's house- 
 hold account. From the same source we learn of the greatest 
 carelessness in using the revenue for purposes for which the 
 pay of the "Independent Companies" was established. Laxness 
 in control of subordinate officers by the governor was another 
 feature of mismanagemnt. The charging to the revenue of a 
 double salary, one to the commissioner for executing the office 
 of collector during the time of Byerley's suspension, and one to 
 Byerley himself for the same period, a result which was made 
 necessary by the disapproval at home of Byerley's suspension, still 
 further swelled the biu'den of debt. Another feature which con- 
 tributed to mismanagement was the uncertainty in regard to the 
 state of the revenue at any given time. The frequent changes in 
 l)ersonnel in the office of collector, with the disputes and obstruc- 
 tions concerning the settlement of accounts on each transfer, and 
 animosity existing between Cornbury and Byerley and extend- 
 ing through nearly the whole of the former's administration 
 made it practically impossible that the authentic information 
 should be attained, had there been any determined official dispo- 
 sition to make such information accessible.' The same uncer- 
 tainty, it will be observed, had already been noted by the com- 
 missioner of accounts in the matter of the state of the taxes. 
 
 The letters of the executive council during the latter part of 
 Cornbury's administration are full of quarrelsome charges and 
 recriminations on the part of all officers who had to do with ex- 
 penditure as well as complaints of the various claimants on the 
 public purse. Out of all the tangled swirl a few chief currents 
 or eddies seem to be distinguishable — the dissipation of public 
 funds by profuse expenditure for the governor's personal ends ; 
 the activity of Fauconnier, who was naval officer and com- 
 missioner for executing the office of collector whenever Byerley 
 was under suspension, as chief manager of Cornbury's schemes ; 
 the opposition of Byerley to these schemes, many of which were 
 for the purpose of assisting those to whom Cornbury was under 
 corrupt obligation : the helplessness or indiflFerence of the coun- 
 cil in making its function of advice to the governor in the matter 
 of warrant-issue effective in checking such practices ; the con- 
 
 ' Col. Mss. LII. 24, 26, 81. Exec. Council Min. X. 120. Cdl. Treas-y 
 Papers vol. 1702-7:535. Col. Doc. V. 405, 408. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. I25 
 
 sequently difficult position of Clarke, the deputy auditor general, 
 who objected to the proceedings of both parties ; and the atti- 
 tude of the assembly, which was becoming more and more dis- 
 gusted with the working of the system as developed by Corn- 
 bury.^ 
 
 The excessively bad reputation of the Cornbury administra- 
 tion, as that of a plundering pro-consul, seems partly to be ac- 
 counted for by the man's low personal character, partly by the 
 impudently open use of certain public monies for ends of 
 purely personal gratification, and partly by the unusual opportuni- 
 ties presented to a governor of such a character. For the first 
 time in the history of the province we have the combination of a 
 governor using his power with a faction largely for personal ends, 
 and a collector at odds with the governor in the latter's devices for 
 exploiting provincial resources and for saving his subordinates 
 and accomplices, and using the due execution of his office as his 
 protection against compliance with the governor's irregular 
 courses. Under these circumstances, whatever injury was inflicted 
 on the provincial finances would be peculiarly exasperating; and 
 the fact that after at least eighteen months' confinement in New 
 York, Cornbury was only able to get away from his creditors by 
 the good nature of Hunter, would seem to indicate that, however 
 great his "pickings," they had not permanently bettered his for- 
 tune very much. Complaints of the bad possibilities of the system 
 of prerogative expenditure and of the partial exploitation of these 
 possibilities had been made with reference to Bellomont's admin- 
 istration, but without slur on Bellomont's personal reputation. It 
 was Cornbury's peculiarly sordid use of the opportunity that 
 earned for his administration the especial degree of obloquy which 
 is associated with it. The fact that Byerley, though not himself 
 entirely free from irregularities, was able to work harmoniously 
 with Hunter inclines one to the view that in his controversies 
 with Cornbury, it was Byerley's that was, comparatively speak- 
 ing, official righteousness. Specific instances of Cornbury's em- 
 bezzlements of public money given for public uses are, in the pres- 
 ent state of the records, well-nigh impossible to prove. Colden 
 refers to his applying the proceeds of the i 1,500 tax designed for 
 
 ' Col. Mss. LII. 87. Cal. Treas-y Papers vol. 1702-7 :557. Ass. J. L 
 224, 236-8. 
 
126 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 the fortification of the Narrows, to the erection of a pleasure- 
 house on Nutten's, now Governor's, Island, as though it were mat- 
 ter of common knowledge. Cornbury himself referred to these 
 rumors in his speech to the assembly in its session of 1706, and, 
 declaring that the tax had not been collected, asked for an inves- 
 tigation. He complained at the end of the session of their lack 
 of thoroughness in this investigation, the results of which seemed 
 to be the finding that only £356:6:5^ had been collected. In 
 connection with the ii,8oo voted for defense in the same year 
 with the £1,500, the assembly found that £793:6: of the £1,800 
 were in the hands of the commissioners for executing the office 
 of collector, not applied to the uses intended by the act.^ 
 
 The inadequacy for such a situation, of the check upon gov- 
 ernmental expenditure supposed to be exerted by the presence of 
 a deputy of the auditor-general and the transmission of the col- 
 lector's accounts to the Lords of the Treasury, is plainly pointed 
 out by Clarke in the letter from which quotation has already been 
 made. The respective duties of the governor and council and 
 of the deputy auditor in relation to the collector's accounts seem 
 to have been practically undetermined at this time. The collec- 
 tor's accounts were supposed to be examined and approved by the 
 council after having been sworn to by the collector. Byerley, 
 however, held that if the deputy auditor allowed his accounts, 
 that was sufficient, and examination by the governor and council 
 was not necessary. This was, however, only when it was the gov- 
 ernor and council that he was disputing with. Clarke thus repre- 
 sents the practical difficulties of the situation to his principal, the 
 auditor-general. "And allowing that the Receiver-General (as 
 he alledges it to be) is by his Instructions Sufficiently discharged 
 by Warrants past by the Governor in the manner above said he 
 may notwithstanding your observations or objections pay what 
 warrants he pleases because they are his discharge ; and indeed he 
 does accordingly for he pays warants of the like nature with those 
 vou have objected to and gives what I have just said for his 
 Reason though nobody will persuade me he does it without a Con- 
 sideration. ... To prevent future misapplications 'twould 
 be very proper I should think to send hither orders in Relation to 
 the applying and Issuing the Revenue, or Else the money must be 
 
 ' N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls. 1868. 204. Ass. J. I. 208-212, 227. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. I27 
 
 appropriated from home (vizt.) so much for firewood and so on 
 with all the particular Expenses : But if the latter be not thought 
 proper 'twill be very necessary that a way be found to Submitt 
 all accounts (before the Governor's Warrant Issues for payment 
 of the Sume) to the Auditor Generall or his Deputy and that no 
 more nor other Expences should be allowed than what he thinks 
 reasonable and herein the Deputy Auditor should be fully and par- 
 ticularly instructed, that he may not be in the Dark nor do what 
 may not be approved of at home afterwards. For as it is now 
 he can only allow or disallow of Warrants after they are paid 
 and that the Receiver Generall does not in the least regard but 
 says the very warrants he pays are Sufficient discharges to him 
 for so much. Though this (is) proposed as the properest method 
 I can think of at present yett I hope a better way may be found : 
 for by this there is vast trouble like to attend the Deputy Auditor 
 in the Examination and allowance of all accounts which before 
 was done by a Committee of Council (who 'tis true favor their 
 friends and are themselves often concerned) and besides this 
 Great trouble the Deputy Auditor will be continually Subjected 
 to the frowns and resentment of the Governor to whom there will 
 be constant applications^and thereupon Commands or orders which 
 may bring the Deputy-Auditor under this Dilemma either that 
 he must disobey the Governor or betray the Trust reposed in 
 him."^ Comment on the foregoing as a revelation of conditions 
 prevailing in Cornbury's time is hardly necessary. The difficul- 
 ties, thus described, disappeared with a change of personnel in 
 the governor's office. 
 
 The net result of this whole period would appear to be about 
 as follows : during the first eleven years, the assembly was find- 
 ing itself, as it were, and acquiring experience. The conditions 
 of the financial problem were in the mean tim^ accumulating, 
 and that, at a time when public attention was occupied with a 
 partisan conflict under Sloughter, Fletcher and Bellomont, and 
 with the results which might follow the enforcement of the im- 
 perial trade system under Bellomont. From the beginning of 
 Cornbury's administration, after experience had been gained 
 under the domination of each of the local factions in turn, a move- 
 ment begins to be visible amid the dust of partisan strife, working 
 
 ' Col. Mss. LI. 170. 
 
128 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 in the direction of practical control over the expenditure of at 
 least one element of provincial income. After success had been 
 attained in this direction, however, by the winning of the right 
 to appoint a Country Treasurer, the expenditure of money raised 
 for support of government was still beyond the control of any 
 element which effectively represented popular interest. Effective 
 action on this point could only become possible when the expira- 
 tion of the revenue act in 1709 should once more give the assem- 
 bly leverage. The exhibition, to greater and more exasperating 
 degree, of the working of the prerogative system of expendi- 
 ture, together with the decreasing volume of trade already noted, 
 was establishing more firmly every day the well grounded objec- 
 tion to the whole system by which the government was supported. 
 This opposition found adequate, but under the circumstances 
 alarming, expression, in the resolve of the assembly of the elev- 
 enth of Septeml)cr, I70(S — "That the raising of any Monies, 
 for the Support of Government or other necessary Charge, 
 by any Tax, Impost or Burthen on Goods imported or ex- 
 ported, or any clog or Hindrance on Trafifick or Commerce, 
 is found by sad Experience, to be the Expulsion of many and 
 the Impoverishing of the rest of the Planters, Freeholders and 
 Inhabitants of this Colony, of most pernicious consequence, 
 which if continued will unavoidably prove the Destruction of 
 the Colony." 
 
CHAPTER V. THE REVENUE CONTROVERSY, 
 
 1709-1717. 
 
 The dispute over the method of supporting the government 
 constituted the main action of the period, 1709-17 17. The con- 
 troversy itself is only to be understood in the long perspective 
 of the period described in the preceding chapter, as well as in the 
 light of the period between the administrations of Cornbury and 
 Hunter. 
 
 The resolve quoted at the close of the last chapter indicates 
 the general character of the assembly's sentiments concerning 
 the working of the revenue system in the past. The general con- 
 dition of the province and the plans of the opponents of a con- 
 tinuation of the former system are set forth in the communica- 
 tions of prominent residents and officials. Livingston and Morris 
 agreed in reviling the Cornbury administration, the latter liken- 
 ing it to that of Gessius Florus in Judaea. Livingston described 
 the province as appearing to be "under a visible judgment . . . 
 since this gent, came among us . . . trade decayed, house rent 
 fell . . . everything behindhand," — "a poor dispirited people, a 
 mixture of English French and Dutch ... if never so much 
 oppressed dared not complain because they were not unanimous 
 and did not stick to one another. So that if a governor were 
 not a man of honor and probity he could oppress the people when 
 he pleased. He had but to strike in with one party and they 
 assisted him to destroy the other." The province was evidently 
 not prosperous and many of its inhabitants v/ere in bad temper. 
 As to the intentions of the assembly in regard to the revenue, 
 Colonel Quary describes the intention never to renew it as "the 
 discourse in every man's mouth, but some of the most consider- 
 ing men say that perhaps they will give money for the support 
 of government but it shall be only from year to year and disposed 
 of as they think fit, so that the governor and all the officers shall 
 depend on them for bread. "^ 
 
 The conduct of the assembly itself, as soon as, under ordinary 
 circumstances, action for a continuance of the revenue would 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 19, 87. Cal. Treas-y Papers, Vol. 1708-14, pp. 611-13, 
 9 (129) 
 
130 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 have been in order, certainly bears out much of this descrip- 
 tion. Since the assembly had received permission to name their 
 own treasurer, they had raised no funds except for extraordinary 
 uses, and these acts had contained extremely detailed appropria- 
 tions.^ When action in the direction of continuing the excise, 
 which seems to have been taken as a matter of course, became 
 necessary, the disposition of the assembly toward innovation upon 
 former methods became evident. The same rates were continued 
 but they were granted only for one year. Practically the same 
 system of management was employed, but now the system was 
 established by law, and the mayors and aldermen and the justices 
 of the peace were made the assembly's agents in the matter ; and 
 the country treasurer was designated as the receiver of the pro- 
 ceeds, instead of the collector and receiver-general. In the same 
 act, notice was taken of the fact that, though the weighhouse 
 duties had been granted to King William and Queen Mary, never- 
 theless, since the demise of the crown these duties had been col- 
 lected without grant. It was now formally provided that the 
 duties should be paid to the treasurer instead of to the collector 
 and receiver general, and the latter official was furthermore re- 
 quired to account with the treasurer for what he had received 
 on that account. It was provided also that the treasurer should 
 pay out the money raised by this act, "in Such Manner and to 
 Such uses only as by Act of General Assembly hereafter to be 
 made for that purpose, shall be Limitted appointed and Expressed 
 and not otherwise."^ 
 
 The necessity of supporting the government in the manner 
 usual in the past, as well as the restoration of the government's 
 credit by the ascertainment and settlement of the numerous pub- 
 lic debts, had been urged on this assembly by Lovelace, the new 
 governor. The assembly replied with chill politeness that it was 
 their desire that people should be attracted hither and then kept 
 here, and that the contrast between the "wrong Methods too long 
 taken and the Severities practiced here" and the conditions in the 
 neighboring colonies had kept people away. They then called 
 for the accounts of the revenue, the salary list and the claims upon 
 the government ; and on the day of Lovelace's death, 5 May. 1709, 
 had resolved to raise £2,500, of which £1,600 was to be paid to 
 
 ' Col. Laws I. 593, 598, 628, 662. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. I3I 
 
 the governor and the rest for "incidents" of the garrisons and 
 small salaries for a few of the officers.^ Almost immediately 
 after Lovelace's death came the news of the intended expedition 
 against Canada, and in the rush of preparation for this enter- 
 prise, the assembly got no further in support of government 
 than the passage of the excise act already referred to ; and this 
 as was observed, made no provision for payment of any of the 
 expenses of government. Resolves, however, were passed, look- 
 ing to the provision of a tonnage duty, a duty on importation. of'' 
 slaves, a chimney tax and a poll tax on slaves in the colony, and 
 to payments to Lady Lovelace, the lieutenant governor and the 
 chief I'ustice. At the autumn session in 1709, these resolves 
 found expression in legislation, the payment of the "allowances" 
 referred to, except that for Lady Lovelace, being provided for in 
 a separate "Act for the Treasurer's paying certain sums of 
 money." Items relating to the maintenance of the "Independent 
 Companies," such as had previously formed part of the ordinary 
 expenses of government, together with a few small salaries, prin- 
 cipally those of legislative officers, were also provided for in 
 another separate appropriation bill. At the spring session they 
 had taken the opportunity to embody their long-cherished ideas 
 concerning fees in a bill, which, for reasons of the moment, was 
 allowed to be passed into an act.- Thus they were showing them- 
 selves true to the intentions ascribed to them at the close of the 
 Cornbury administration, though as yet on a small scale and 
 under peculiar circumstances. The Canada expedition, now on 
 foot, though it was made as attractive as possible by the imperial 
 authorities, and though it met with enthusiastically responsive sen- 
 timents in the province, required very considerable exertions in 
 the way of financial and military support. Even in reference to 
 matters that were not deemed important for the expedition by 
 the council, that body showed itself anxious to avoid exasperat- 
 ing the assembly; and objections which under other circum- 
 stances would undoubtedly have been insisted on. were yielded, 
 among them, these innovations in the matter of the ordinary sup- 
 port of government.'* 
 
 'Ass. Journal I. 240, 242, 246. 
 
 = Ass. J. I. 253-6. Col. Laws I. 675, 682, 684, 698, 638. 
 ' Ass. J. I. 2.52-3, 267. Col. Laws L 654, 669, 693, 698, 675, 682, 684. 
 Col. Doc. V. 82-3. Smith, 194-5. 
 
132 PHASES UF UOYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 The acts which provided money l)y (Hrect taxation for the ex- 
 penses of tlie expedition inchuled precautions exi)ressed with even 
 greater detail than in previous acts, for the nianagenieiU of the 
 expe(htion hy the commissioners appointed hy the assembly. Al- 
 together some £14,000 was raised; and for accounting for it and 
 for management of its expenditure, the assembly laid down strict 
 rules which appear to have been followed, to its own satisfac- 
 tion, at least. Jt was probably due to a combination of circum- 
 stances, that the assembly in New York was enabled at this criti- 
 cal moment to make such a hopeful beginning in the realization 
 of its designs. Tliese circumstances were the fear of stirring 
 up the opposition of the body from which much was expected 
 in the v^'ay of financial assistance ; the wielding, even though 
 for a brief time, of the powers of the governor's commission 
 by a locum-tenens under the influence of Cornbury ; and the 
 existence of a determined spirit in the assembly to make use 
 of the precedent set, perhaps inadvertently, by Lovelace in 
 the Jersies. The assembly had succeeded in making the offi- 
 cers of government entirely dependent on its votes by grant- 
 ing a continuation of the most certain item of revenue for but one 
 year, and then had made them feel that dependence by doling out 
 to but few of the officers what it chose by way of salary. It 
 had even succeeded in it'^ favorite aim of participating in the 
 regulation of fees, upon which some officers were entirely depend- 
 ent and others dependent in an uncomfortable degree for their 
 support. In this last feature the assembly was, however, imme- 
 diately checked by the disallowance of the Fee Act and by the 
 instruction specifically committing that matter to the governor and 
 council.^ In the nature of the case, however, the real struggle 
 was bound to come when the assembly should attempt to continue 
 its program, with a newly-apponted governor in the possession 
 of the executive power. Enough has been said about the designs 
 of the assembly to show that what it was really aiming at, and 
 what was resisted, later, so vigorously by governor and council, 
 was a shifting of the balance of the political forces of the prov- 
 ince. Should the assembly succeed in its aim of controlling the 
 expenditure for the ordinary support of government in what 
 seemed to it the only effective manner of preventing "misman- 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 1 U), 157. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 133 
 
 agement," it would inevitably mean a greater dependence of the 
 executive officers on the legislature which provided their remu- 
 neration, than on the governor, whose policy they were supposed 
 to assist in executing. If successful, the assembly, would, in 
 other words, make its position in the working constitution of the 
 province at least co-ordinate with that of the governor. The 
 policy actually pursued by the government would then be a real 
 compromise between the aims of the assembly on the one hand, 
 and the governor in his double capacity on the other, rather than, 
 as heretofore, when things had not been colored by partisan fac- 
 tion, the policy of the executive, tempered and checked by the ob- 
 struction of the assembly. It is impossible to say how fully the 
 assembly realized what was essentially at stake. There was un- 
 doubtedly much of simply stubborn and unintelligent obstruction. 
 Our sources are meagre, and only the outline of policy and hints 
 at what the leaders were actually doing are possible. Light on 
 the inner working of forces and on the real aims that were con- 
 cealed beneath the formal actions taken is at present wanting. 
 We have no hint as to any prepossessions or as to any infor- 
 mation in regard to the situation, which may have been brought 
 by Hunter the new governor, in 17 10. The assembly, which 
 was apparently elected after his arrival, contained a majority of 
 members who had served in the previous assembly, and, of the 
 nev/ members, the larger part were persons who had been promi- 
 nent in the affairs of the assembly during the Cornbury admin- 
 istration. A very important place among the new members was 
 held by Lewis Morris, who represented the borough of Westches- 
 ter. Smith represents him as "always busy in matters of a political 
 nature, and no man in the colony equalled him in the knowledge 
 of the law and the arts of intrigue." He had till recently been a 
 resident of New Jersey, where he had had a most active career 
 in opposition to the Cornbury system of exploiting the governor's 
 office; and Smith apparently applauds Hunter's shrewdness in 
 making a confidant of him, "his talents and advantages rendering 
 him either a useful friend or formidable foe."^ The two were a 
 congenial pair in more than one relation, but Morris' chief func- 
 tion was to act as Hunter's legislative "manager ;" and his services 
 in bringing the revenue controversy to a settlement were after- 
 
 ' Smith, p. 203. Col. Doc. V. 429. 
 
134 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 wards rewarded by appointment to the chief justiceship and the 
 appointment was cordially approved from home on this very 
 ground. 
 
 The first meeting of the governor with the assembly partook 
 of the nature of a preliminary skirmish. In his opening speech, 
 I September, 1710, Hunter communicated the "very particular" 
 recommendation of her Majesty that the assembly settle such a 
 revenue and for such a term as they themselves, "the most com- 
 petent judges, should think sufficient to answer the End." Pay- 
 ment of the public debts was also recommended. In the course 
 of considering ways and means for support of government, the 
 assembly passed bills continuing the excise and the tonnage and 
 slave duties, the former for one, the latter for three years ; both 
 of which bills unamended by the council, became laws.^ They 
 had then resolved to allow certain sums for military "incidents," 
 and 2,500 ounces of plate, "towards defraying His Excellency's 
 necessary expense for one year." At this point the governor, 
 hearing of this proceeding, sent a communication to be entered 
 on the journal, containing the instruction allowing his salary of 
 ii,200 sterling. He afterwards reported to the Lords of Trade 
 that the only effect this had was, that they struck out some items 
 that had been usually allowed and reduced others, and that 
 finally, because of "warm expressions" which he used in urging 
 the assembly to take the governor's message into consideration, 
 Lewis Morris had been expelled.^ 
 
 In order to raise a revenue in addition to the excise and the 
 tonnage and slave duties, the assembly now began upon a scries 
 of bills which were intended to provide a duty on chimneys and 
 hearths, and upon goods sold at auction, and also entered upon 
 a bill for payment of certain accounts by the treasurer. The 
 council attempted to amend all of these. Its objection to the 
 chimney tax had reference to the accountability of the treas- 
 urer. By the assembly bill he was made accountable only to 
 the assembly, whereas the council insisted that, according to 
 the practice of the province since 1706, and also according to 
 the practice of England, the treasurer in such a case should ac- 
 count with the legislature as a whole. The assembly, however, 
 
 *CoI. Laws I. 708-714. 
 
 *Ass. J. I. 280-3. Col. Doc. V. 177. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-1719. 135 
 
 remained constant in its announced determination not to agree to 
 amendments by the council to a money bill. The same was the 
 case with the act for laying a duty on goods sold at auction, 
 though we are not informed as to the reasons for its objection or 
 for the insistence of both sides on their original propositions. In 
 the case of the bill for the treasurer's paying sundry sums of 
 money, the council's amendment was in the line of having the 
 treasurer pay a sum not exceeding that mentioned in the assembly 
 bill, to such persons and uses as the governor by regular warrant 
 should direct. As reasons for insisting on its amendments, 
 it invoked the instruction not to suffer public money to issue 
 otherwise than by such warrant, the former practice of the prov- 
 ince, the practice of other provinces, and of the English parlia- 
 ment, which did not appropriate what was given for support of 
 government, but gave what was thought necessary in such man- 
 ner as left it entirely in the power of the crown "to Dispose of as 
 they thought most proper for the support of government and 
 for rewarding their servants as they judged they deserved." The 
 assembly replied, that what were called amendments would de- 
 stroy the very essence and intent of the bill, which was to be 
 regarded as consonant with the instructions, since an act of 
 governor, council and assembly was a good warrant ; that appro- 
 priating acts were no novelty ; that if the council intended that 
 the money mentioned in the bill be disposed of according to the 
 direction of the bill, there would be no difficulty in consenting 
 to it, — "if they do not, plain dealing is best." And finally, the 
 object of the bill was declared to be to prevent misapplications, 
 "such as have been too apparent in the past." This object they 
 deemed "much preferable to any posterior remedy." To this 
 the council replied, that the amendments were not destructive 
 of the intent of the bill if the intent were to support the govern- 
 ment ; denied the equivalency of an act of assembly to a warrant 
 of governor and council, and emphasized the distinction pre- 
 viously made between acts appropriating money which was voted 
 for extraordinary uses and for the ordinary support of govern- 
 ment. No acts of the latter description had ever passed 
 the parliament of England, and only once in the province ; 
 that was in Ingoldsby's administration, when the council were 
 not acquainted with the governor's instructions. They affirmed 
 their intention of having the money expended for the purposes 
 
136 I'll ASICS OF KOVAL GOX'KRN MENT 
 
 mentioned in the bill ; "but they think the Queen has the sole right 
 of applying money given for the support of the government, and 
 the only judge of the merits of her officers, and therefore they 
 made those amendments, for plain dealing is best." Finally, they 
 deprecated the idea of misapplications under present circum- 
 stances, and pointed out that the bill, as amended, sufficiently pro- 
 vided against drawing out any more money, than that expressed 
 in the bill.^ The thoroughgoing character of the difference be- 
 tween the two houses and the spirit in which the discussion was 
 carried on are sufficiently indicated by these rather full extracts. 
 As the season was far advanced, and the hope of reaching a settle- 
 ment on these measures was slight, the assembly was prorogued 
 without the passage of these acts into laws. By the failure of 
 the bills for the chimney and auction duties, the expected revenue 
 was reduced far below even what the act for the treasurer's pay- 
 ing sundry sums, had appropriated, viz., £2,307 ; and by the 
 failure of the last-named act the public officers were left without 
 support. From now till 1713, they were maintained largely on 
 the personal credit of the governor.- 
 
 Hunter's correspondence with the home government shows 
 that he had not been idle during the session. He asserts that he 
 had privately suggested to several members that the receiver 
 general might be made accountable to the assembly as well as to 
 the crown, and that he had worked out a somewhat elaborate 
 system designed to prevent any governor and council from again 
 loading the country with debt through warrants. This was in- 
 tended to meet one of the reasons given by assembly members 
 themselves in explanation of their backwardness in supporting the 
 government. The othe "pretended" reason was the Imrden on 
 the country which was involved in the taxes for the ill-starred 
 Canada expedition. The true reasons, so far as he could make 
 them out "from private discourse with the most considerable 
 amongst them." were the exemption of the neighboring govern- 
 ments from such heavy expense in supporting the government, 
 and an opinion which was opposed to the right of the crown 
 to allot salaries, on the ground that if i 1,200 were appointed, 
 £12,000 might be. The third reason he held to be. the fact, that, 
 by reason of the per diem allowance to each assemblyman, a 
 
 •Ass. J. I. 284-7. Col. Mss. LIV. \1\, 124. 
 -Col. Doc. V. 178. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-1719. 137 
 
 number of them practically supported themselves, by acquiring 
 a reputation among their constituents of saving the country's 
 money, and thus getting an almost permanent hold on office. As 
 a remedy for the situation he could only suggest the passage of 
 an act of parliament providing for payment by all lands granted 
 or to be granted, of a quit rent of two shillings six oence per one 
 hundred acres, which he believed would go a long ways towards 
 supporting the government ; or the passage of another act of 
 parliament levying duties on imports and exports, and laying 
 an excise — but he supposed that in that case it would be made 
 of general application throughout the colonies. The only com- 
 munication from the Lords of Trade in reply to these repre- 
 sentations that could have reached the governor before meet- 
 ing the assembly again in April, 171 1, was to the effect that the 
 information had been communicated to the queen ; so that the 
 governor's vigorous speech at the opening of the session could 
 hardly be described as made only after he had learned the senti- 
 ments of the ministry, as Smith intimates. The sting of this 
 speech consisted principally in the suggestion that rumors might 
 gain credit at last, "that however your Resentment has fallen upon 
 Governors, it is the Government that you dislike ;" and in the as- 
 sertion that "giving Money for Support of Government and dis- 
 posing of it at your Pleasure is the same with giving none at all." 
 Because of its resentment at this speech, in wdiich the governor 
 plainly took up the cause of the council in the recent disputes, 
 the assembly chose to find a scruple in the fact that the proclama- 
 tion proroguing them from the original date of summons had 
 been dated at Burlington, New Jersey. The governor found 
 himself obliged to follow the advice of the council, that, since 
 the assembly was resolved not to act, in spite of the opinion of 
 the Lords of Trade quieting their pretended scruple, it would 
 be necessary to dissolve them, "which they would otherwise 
 doe themselves."^ Hunter now represented himself to the home 
 government as at a loss what to do till action might be taken 
 from home. He had no expectations that a new assembly would 
 be any more tractable, "the Resolutions of putting themselves 
 on the same foote with the Charter Governments being too 
 general to be allayed by any measures that can be taken on this 
 
 •Col. Doc. V. 179-80. 186. As.s. J. I. 287-8. Council J. I. 311. 
 Smith, p. 204. 
 
138 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 side." His desires with regard to action by the home govern- 
 ment seem to have been justified by the proceedings of the Lords 
 of Trade, who with unusual celerity had recommended that the 
 governor be directed to intimate to the assembly the queen's 
 displeasure, and the likelihood of the passage of an act of par- 
 liament granting a revenue for them. And within a month they 
 had. as ordered by the privy council, prepared a draft of a bill 
 for that purpose, which, however, was not perfected before the 
 adjournment of parliament.^ 
 
 In the meantime a new assembly had been elected, and 
 proved indeed to be practically the same in membership as the pre- 
 ceding body. Its first session, in July, 171 1, was taken up wholly 
 with action relative to the Canada expedition of that year. Bills 
 of credit to the amount of £10,000 were ordered to be issued and 
 provision was made for their redemption by a direct tax, due to be 
 paid in five annual installments, beginning in 1714. Six hundred 
 men were raised and commissioners were appointed for purchas- 
 ing, transporting and caring for provisions for the troops, having 
 the same relation to the treasurer as in the case of the preceding 
 expedition. In all these proceedings, as in the act for continuing 
 the excise for two years, no difficulty in the relations between the 
 assembly and council developed — that is, on the surface. The 
 pains taken to avoid the slightest opportunity for trouble of that 
 sort is indicated by the governor's procedure on finding certain 
 mistakes in the bills as they came from the assembly. He re- 
 turned the bills privately, after their first reading in council, as 
 though they had not been read at all, and with the request that 
 the mistakes be amended in their own house. "This conduct 
 . . . I was obliged to follow or baulk the Expedition."^ 
 
 In a most interesting disquisition to the Lords of Trade 
 upon the design of the assemblies on the continent, by claiming 
 all the privileges of a House of Commons and stretching them 
 even beyond what they were ever imagined to be there, to attain a 
 condition which would result in a federative empire. Hunter 
 suggests as a temporary measure, that a royal letter from the 
 queen be dispatched, reminding the assembly that "all such 
 privileges as they clayme as bodyes politick they hold of her 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 192, 197, 209, 285. 
 
 = Col. Laws I. 723, 727, 735, 737. Col. Doc. V. 263. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 139 
 
 especiall grace and noe longer than they shall use them for her 
 interest and for the support of her government." This he sug- 
 gested not with the expectation that it would contribute to the 
 settling of a revenue, but in the hope that it would help to keep 
 them in bounds in other matters.^ 
 
 It was apparently, then, not without official inspiration that 
 the dispute between the council and assembly at the fall session 
 of 171 1 turned largely on the discussion of the status of the two 
 houses in the matter of financial legislation. The occasion of the 
 dispute was furnished by two bills sent up by the assembly, one 
 providing for an increase of the tonnage duty, and the other for 
 a duty on chimnies and for a poll-tax. The council's objection 
 to both bills was that the duties were to be paid to the colony 
 treasurer instead of to the receiver general. By the latter bill, 
 the treasurer was made accountable to no one, and by the former 
 to the governor and assembly. The amendments were directed 
 toward making the monies payable to the receiver general, who, 
 as a concession, was made accountable to governor, council and 
 assembly, as well as to the queen. The proceeds of the tonnage 
 duty were further directed to be issued in a manner pursuant to the 
 instructions. To all of this the assembly replied by merely 
 returning the bills, with notification of its resolve not to admit 
 such amendments. The same old issue was thus joined again. In 
 the exchange of reasons in support of their respective positions, 
 the council upbraided the assembly by citation of previous in- 
 stances of their allowing such amendments. It then went on 
 to justify its right by asserting the equality of the position of 
 the two houses in the legislature, both being constituted by the 
 same power, viz., "the mere grace of the Crown signified in the 
 Governor's Commission," and by the opinion of the Lords of 
 Trade obtained in the course of the struggle for the treasurer. 
 The bulk of the assembly's reply is sufficiently remarkable to 
 justify quotation entire: '"Tis true the Share the Council have (if 
 any) in the Legislation does not flow from any Title they have, 
 from the Nature of that Board, which is only to advise, or from 
 their being another distinct State or Rank of People, in the Con- 
 stitution which they are not, being all Commons, but only from 
 the meer Pleasure of the Prince signified in the Commission. 
 
 ' Co]. Doc. V. 255-6. 
 
140 PIIASliS OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 "On the contrary, the inherent Ris^ht the yVsscmhly have to 
 dispose of the Money of the Freemen of this Colony, does not 
 proceed from any Commission, Letters Patent, or other Grant 
 from the Crown, but from the free Choice and Election of the 
 People; who ought not to be divested of their Property (nor justly 
 can) without their Consent. 
 
 "Any former Condescensions of otlier Assemblies, will not 
 prescribe to the Council, a Privilege to make any of those Amend- 
 ments and therefore they have it not. 
 
 "If the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, did 
 conceive no Reason, why the Council should not have Right to 
 amend Money Bills, is far from concluding there are none ; the 
 Assembly understand them very well, and are sufficiently con- 
 vinced of the Necessity they are in, not to admit of any Incroach- 
 ment so much to their Prejudice."^ 
 
 Bills directing the treasurer to pay certain sums of money 
 for some of the usual purposes of government and for certain saN 
 aries, appropriating a definite sum for each purpose and for each 
 salary, were also sent up, and on the repeated attempt of the 
 council to amend them, met with the same fate. The temper of 
 the assembly towards the governor personally is indicated by its 
 passage of acts for repair of fortifications and for support of 
 troops on winter service on the frontier, by which the sums were 
 directed to be paid to the governor with only general directions as 
 to their use. The general temper of the assembly on the issue 
 under discussion was, however, alarmingly indicated, in the 
 opinion expressed by the council in its representation to the 
 crown, by the resolves into which they entered at the close 
 of the session, to the effect that establishing fees without consent 
 in general assembly was contrary to law ; and that erecting a court 
 of chancery without consent in general assembly was contrary 
 to law, without precedent and of dangerous consequence to the 
 liberty and property of the subject. The opinion of both gover- 
 nor and council on these proceedings is well reflected in Hun- 
 ter's words : — "now the mask is thrown off ; they have called 
 in question the Council's share in legislation, trumpt up an in- 
 herent right, declared powers granted by her Majesty's letters 
 patent to be against law and have but one short step to make 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 307. Col. Doc. V. 293. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 1691-1719. I4I 
 
 towards what I am unwilling to name. The Connecticut scheme 
 is what they have in their heads. "^ 
 
 The ambitions of the assembly were furtlier displayed in 
 their attempted acts of legislation. After the disallowance of the 
 fee act of 1709, Hunter had been instructed specifically to regu- 
 late and establish fees with the assistance of the council, and of 
 this the assembly had been informed. In making a Table of Fees 
 the council's opinion, that they had been too high, prevailed 
 against the governor's judgment, and the resulting ordinance was 
 a grievance to some of the officers. The assembly had never- 
 theless persisted in the attempt to attain a share in control of this 
 matter by establishing the precedent of enacting the ordinance 
 as established by the council in the form of a statute ; but as the 
 Lords of Trade had manifested a certain hesitation in regard to 
 certain items as just established, the council let the assembly bill 
 lie on the table. The assembly's resolve on the subject was 
 later declared by the Lords of Trade to be "very presumptuous," 
 though in the same sentence they disclaimed objection to the enact- 
 ment of the ordinance into law." 
 
 The ambition of the assembly to venture upon regions of 
 power hitherto untrodden is further indicated by the act for the 
 assigning of sheriffs, an attempted invasion of the governor's 
 prerogative of appointment, according to Hunter ; and by the act 
 for an agency, which, by the same person, was described as an 
 attempt to make the agent a representative exclusively of the 
 assembly, by making his appointment, instruction and support a 
 matter in that body's entire control. According to Hunter's in- 
 formation, the assembly's choice, in case of success, would have 
 fallen on Colonel Lodwick, of London, whose letters to DePeyster 
 had been extensively used to obstruct the settlement of a revenue. 
 The assembly had also used its legislative powers in obstructing 
 the attempt of the governor and council to develop the crown's 
 territorial revenue, by pigeon-holing a bill for the more effectual 
 discovery and payment of quit-rents.^ 
 
 The situation of the governor was now becoming more and 
 more difficult. The retirement from office in England of the min- 
 
 ' Col. Laws I. 746, 750. Col. Doc. V. 296. Ass. J. 3, 309. 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 274. Col. Doc. V. 184, 216, 230^1, 238, 298, 333, 359. 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 299, 300. 
 
142 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 istry which was responsible for the Palatine enterprise suspended 
 the payment of bills which had been contracted by Hunter for 
 their subsistence. Probably from the same cause, his bills in- 
 curred in connection with his duties in provisioning the Canada 
 expedition met with obstruction. These, and the like circum- 
 stances connected with the refusal of the assembly to proceed in 
 the required manner in the support of the provincial government, 
 put him in the greatest financial embarrassment. His situation 
 also gave opportunity to his enemies to play the familiar game 
 of discrediting him in the province by tales of his lack of "in- 
 terest" at court ; at the same time that, by obstructive tactics, 
 they prevented a settlement of the revenue in the hope of getting 
 him actually recalled on that score. The most active force in 
 this lobby at court seems to have been Cornbury, now Earl of 
 Clarendon ; while in the province the Anglican clergy^, led by 
 Vesey, of New York, by the most ingenious attempts to get 
 themselves persecuted, labored hard to raise the cry of "The 
 Church in danger," with the purpose of getting Nicholson, the 
 zealous Churchman, appointed to Hunter's place. We have the 
 testimony of Colden to the efifect that the clouds of disfavor sur- 
 rounding Plunter on all these accounts were gradually but very 
 effectively dispelled by a real personal popularity, which before 
 long became a definite force in the political situation.^ 
 
 Under these circumstances, the two sessions of 17 12 did little 
 to advance the controversy. At the autumn session the gov- 
 ernor in his speech proposed the scheme which he had mentioned 
 privately to members of the previous assembly. The scheme 
 provided elaborately and. it would seem, effectively, against the 
 issue at any given time of warrants for more money than was in 
 the hands of the collector, chiefly by precautions for keeping the 
 governor and council informed, and against partiality on the part 
 of the collector in making payments of warrants. The assembly 
 could not he brought to pay any attention to this scheme, and in 
 general continued their policy of "bantering the government by 
 proposing bills they know cannot pass, or, if passed, would raise 
 no money ;" though bills for the payment of a few items of gov- 
 ernment support were grudgingly allowed to slip through without 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 400, 402-3, 420, 447-453, 310-329, 336-8, 356-7. N. Y. 
 Hist. Soc. Colls. 1868, pp. 200-202. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 143 
 
 the objectionable features, and every hint was given to the gover- 
 nor of a willingness to make him, personally, "easy." The climax 
 af the assembly's "undutiful conduct" was reached, when after 
 being informed of the council's representation to the crown con- 
 cerning their proceedings the year before, they composed an ad- 
 dress to the queen, complaining of being misrepresented and de- 
 siring permission to maintain an agent. For this "disrespectful 
 behaviour" the governor thought it necessary to dissolve them, 
 though he had no hope of a new assembly.^ 
 
 The home government in the meantime supported the posi- 
 tion taken by the council, specifically rebuked the assembly for 
 its claims and revived the plan of proceeding by act of parlia- 
 ment. The sincerity of their maneuvering with the weapon of 
 parliamentary interference is, however, seriously impugned by a 
 passage in one of Hunter's letters, which strongly intimates that 
 the bill prepared and introduced was never intended to be passed ; 
 as well as by the opinion of some of Hunter's friends that the set- 
 tling of a revenue, even by act of parliament, would mean his 
 removal, to make way for a ministerial favorite, now that the place 
 had been made "easy."- More efficacious in the improvement of 
 the position of the executive officers was the activity of the Lords 
 of Trade and of the attorney-general in support of Hunter's ef- 
 forts, through the issue of chancery writs, to collect quit rents 
 and their arrears. After several years during which payments 
 of this kind had wholly ceased, this practice had the effect of soon 
 bringing the total produce of this item to some £300 or £400, and 
 finally even to i6oo. An effort was also begun at this time to 
 realize effectually on such regalian rights as the licensing of 
 the whale-fishery, and the escheat of real property. These efforts 
 could not, however, be expected to bear fruit for some time yet, 
 and in the meantime the issue between the governor and council 
 and the assembly was as pressing and significant as ever.^ 
 
 In the elections for a new assembly, held in the spring of 
 1 71 3, the governor seems to have made every effort short of 
 interference with the personnel of county officers having to do 
 
 ' Ass. J. I. 321. Col. Doc. V. 339-40, 348. 350, 356. 
 'Col. Doc. V. 830, 833, 356, 359, 367, 389, 543. 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 357, 362-8. 368-70, 378, 555-61, 498-9. 
 
144 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 with elections. Smith describes the elections as "very hot." Six 
 changes in membership appeared, and one constituency was added 
 — Dutchess County being separated from Ulster and given one 
 member. With a possible change of seven votes, the majority 
 was, however, still "in the interest of the late Assembly." The 
 governor himself was exceedingly skeptical, and expected a 
 speedy dissolution, after which be warned the Lords of Trade to 
 "expect to hear of alterations in the commissions of peace and of 
 the militia, that ill men may no longer use her Majesty's author- 
 ity against her."^ Nevertheless he met this assembly with a stout 
 front, and in his speech at the opening of the session informed 
 them that they were called to settle a revenue for the support of the 
 government and not to settle the government itself ; re-affirmed 
 his course of conduct with reference to method of support ; inti- 
 mated his intention not to pass any important act of legislation 
 without efficient procedure in providing for a support of gov- 
 ernment ; and hinted again at the threat of parliamentary inter- 
 ference. He suggested more frequent consultation with the 
 council in framing bills, to avoid the necessity of amendments 
 and the disputes over the right of making them.^ 
 
 With this session began the slow, hesitating process, at all 
 stages uncertain of ultimate success, which actually served to 
 remove the political confusion of the province. It is impos- 
 sible to know to what extent the settlement was conceived of as 
 a systematic affair. In its actual achievement the piece- 
 meal method appears, and at no time did Hunter appear in any 
 degree confident of its efficacy. It seems likely, from the tone 
 of his references at all stages of the affair, that the enterprise 
 grew on the hands of all concerned, till a point was reached when 
 the possible significance of what had already been attained became 
 evident, and then the governor bent all his energies to the preser- 
 vation of a system which was designed to protect what had al- 
 ready been reached. The first line of policy looking towards any- 
 thing permanent in its nature into which the assembly entered, 
 was that of the payment of the public debts. Rehabilitation of 
 the public credit in some way had been made at first a matter of 
 equal importance, in the governor's recommendations, with the 
 support of government ; but the contest seems almost immedi- 
 
 'Col. Doc. V. 3fi4. Smith, 223. 
 'Ass. J. I. 333. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 145 
 
 ately to have centered on the latter feature. This assembly 
 seemed ready to beghi at the other end of the problem, and 
 spent much time during its first session in May and June of 
 171 3, in considering the report of its. committee on claims, the 
 appointment of which had been one of the few achievements 
 of the previous assembly. As the fruit of these deliberations, 
 a bill was presented to the governor at the close of the session 
 granting the excise as then managed for twenty years, and 
 appropriating the proceeds to the payment of the public debts 
 in such manner as future legislation should determine. The 
 governor was evidently unwilling to commit himself to a meas- 
 ure which put such great sums into the hands of the treasurer, 
 without assurance that the proposal to pay the debts was made 
 in good faith ; and did not give his assent till the reassembling 
 of the legislature in the fall of the same year.^ 
 
 In the meantime a duty on goods sold at auction had been 
 granted without specific application, and, for the first time since 
 1709, a "Supply towards supporting the government." It was only 
 for one year, and was inadequate, viz. £2,800, to be raised by 
 duties on imported rum and wines and European goods from the 
 plantations, with discriminations in the rates in favor of local 
 shipping. But the objectionable features of previous acts were 
 omitted, and the act provided that, if these duties should not 
 amount to £2,800, the treasurer, on certificate to that effect by the 
 receiver general, should make up the deficiency out of any public 
 money in his hands. The receiver general was made accountable 
 for the proceeds of the duties to the governor, council and as- 
 sembly.^ 
 
 The governor was not satisfied with this as a support of gov- 
 ernment, but the fact that both sides should have cooperated at all 
 in an arrangement involving so many departures from the ideals 
 for which they had striven seems to argue that this was only a 
 part of a more complex affair. That this was so, seems to be 
 borne out in part by the character of the act for the payment of 
 the debts, which was only passed after a long session in 1714 
 which was exclusively devoted to that subject. The act provided 
 for the payment of accounts amounting to £27,684, the payment 
 
 'Ass. J. I. 342-5. Col. Doc. V. 365-7. Col. Laws I. 785. 
 " Col. Laws L 779. 
 
 no 
 
146 PHASES OF K(»V.\I. t;u\ i:i<.\ iM ENT 
 
 including what the governor had expended on his personal credit 
 in the course of maintaining the government during the years of 
 controversy ; accounts presented by a number of prominent Anti- 
 Leislerians for disbursements in connection with the conduct of 
 government for a number of years past ; an account of over 
 £2,000 due to the Leisler family ; payments to military and civil 
 officers covering nearly the whole period since Leisler ; and the 
 per diem allowance to members of the assembly for the time of the 
 long session which was occupied with this subject. Golden 
 charged the assembly in this proceeding with partiality for the 
 Leislerians, and asserted that the misapplications of previous gov- 
 ernors were not to be compared with the profuseness of this body. 
 But a dispassionate view .of the matter will credit the preamble of 
 the act with more sincerity than Golden would allow lo it. This 
 preamble recited the great misapplications, the resulting destruc- 
 tion of public credit, the sufifering that would ensue upon repudi- 
 ation of the claims involved in the unpaid warrants, which were 
 circulating in a way like bills of credit ; and stated the object of 
 their proceedings to be the restoration of credit by the discharge 
 of these claims and the fixing it on such a foundation as would 
 conduce to the good of the queen's service and to the settling 
 the minds of the inhabitants and Ijurying strifes and animosities. 
 For such a purpose it is not surprising that some of the claims 
 discharged should have a bearing upon matters erstwhile of ])ar- 
 tisan significance. But if the analysis of the payments authorized 
 by the act be correct, the proportion of such payments cannot be 
 called excessive, while, in its efifects, the act, according to Hunter, 
 made a fundamental contribution towards the object mentioned 
 in the preamble. The act further i)rovided for the issue of bills 
 of credit for the amount which was ordered to be paid as the 
 province's indebtedness, and for the redemption of the bills at 
 periodic intervals as the proceeds of the excise came into the 
 hands of the treasurer. The act included a form of oath to be 
 taken by the treasurer and by the auditors appointed for the ]nir- 
 poses of the act ; made the treasurer accountable to governor, 
 council and assembly ; and provided in set terms for the disposi- 
 tion of all the money to be raised in the future by act of assembly 
 and lodged in the treasurer's hands, only in accordance with acts 
 of assembly ; and for the disposition of all money raised by act of 
 assembly for support of government and lodged in the hands of 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 147 
 
 the receiver general, by warrant from the governor and council 
 with the consent of the majority of the council present.^ 
 
 In defense of the bill against the attacks made upon it by the 
 obstructive lobby at court, Hunter described it as practically a 
 bill for the support of government, since it provided for expenses 
 incurred in past support. He pointed with pride to the reviving 
 prosperity of the province, resulting from the superior credit of 
 the bills issued by the act, and intimated that a formidable part of 
 the opposition to this and associated measures was carried on by 
 those who, in the previously distressful condition of public credit, 
 had had what amounted to a monopoly of the control of availa- 
 ble capital. The council and assembly joined in an address to 
 the Lords of Trade in further defence of the act, commenting 
 with fine scorn on the spectacle of Cornbury's complaint of unjust 
 treatment, "seeing the money given for the Support of this gov- 
 ernment Dureing the hole Course of his administration was Suf- 
 ficient with any tolerable good Management to have Defrayed 
 the proper necessary Expences of it." Whether due to the vig- 
 orous character of these representations or to the precaution 
 taken by the assembly to appropriate by resolve ^310 out of the 
 next year's excise towards getting the royal assent to the act, 
 it was promptly confirmed at home and a long step was thereby 
 taken toward the removal of the previous confusion. 
 
 Not the least important feature of the act was the clause 
 making declaration of the future policy of the assembly in pro- 
 viding for the custody of public money. On careful inspection 
 of this clause it will be observed that only in case money granted 
 for support of government was directed by the terms of the act 
 to be lodged in the hands of the receiver general, was it to be 
 issued out by warrant from the governor and council. How 
 much deliberate guile there was in the careful wording of this 
 clause we have no means of knowing. It was afterwards de- 
 scribed by the auditor general of the plantations as a "quirk"' 
 by means of which the assembly "gott the entire Receipt and dis- 
 position of His Majesty's Revenue into their own power." And 
 as a matter of fact practically no money thereafter granted for 
 the support of government was directed to be lodged in the hands 
 of the receiver general, and his duties were thus reduced almost 
 
 'Col. Laws I. 815. N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls. 1868, p. 202. 
 
148 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 solely to the receipt of the quit rents and administration of the 
 imperial trade system/ 
 
 During the process of adjusting the matter of public debts, 
 a certain provision already referred to, had been made for the 
 support of government for one year ; and at the expiration of this 
 period the same arrangement, with some slight modification, was 
 made for another year. At the same time a tonnage duty and an 
 import duty on slaves, to be collected by an officer appointed by 
 the assembly and to be paid to the treasurer, was granted for two 
 years. No object was mentioned to which this duty was to be 
 applied, the disposition being referred to future legislation. But 
 the absence of clauses making specific appropriation of money 
 given for support of government, which had been a feature of 
 this bill in previous sessions, brought it within the limits of the 
 governor's competency of assent. Once the money was actually 
 available for public purposes, it would depend on the effectiveness 
 of the governor's "interest" in the assembly how much of it 
 could be directed by legislative act to the support of government. 
 At this session also, the proceeds from peddlers' licenses were 
 granted for four years towards the support of government with- 
 out any appropriating clauses, and were to be paid to the receiver 
 general — one of a very few such instances. The management 
 of the excise was also changed, by taking it from the hands of the 
 justices of the peace in the counties and the mayors and aldermen 
 of the cities, and giving it to commissioners appointed in the 
 body of the act. who were required to give security and were 
 allowed an assigned per cent, of the proceeds. - 
 
 We have no means of knowing how well justified was Hun- 
 ter's stubborn skepticism, even after the passage of the debt bill 
 — the "first long bill," as it was called — as to the assembly's in- 
 tentions concerning the support of government ; for the demise 
 of the crown worked the dissolution of this body. The body 
 which came together in May, 171 5. contained a majority of mem- 
 bers of the previous assembly. There were six changes in mem- 
 bership, the delegation of three from Albany County and of two 
 from Westchester County and the representative from Rensse- 
 laerwick being entirely new. There was- also an enlargement of 
 
 • Ass. J. I. 366. Col. Doc. V. 380, 494, 405-6, 412. 
 
 * Col. Laws I. 801, 805, 812. Col. Doc. V. 377-80. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 149 
 
 membership due to the return of two representatives from Dutch- 
 ess County, instead of one. Nevertheless, according to Hunter's 
 "plain and true history" of the affair, related to the Lords of 
 Trade, it was only after the expulsion of Mulford, a turbulent 
 member from Suffolk County, that "that part of the house that 
 was in earnest" about the revenue "got the majority." Appar- 
 ently, then, even under the circumstances about to be related, it 
 was only by a tour de force that effective action in the matter of 
 a relatively permanent support of government could be attained. 
 Hunter frankly sets forth in his letter to the Lords of Trade, 
 which is our only source of information, that an act for settling 
 a revenue for the support of government during five years, and 
 an act for a general naturalization were deliberately exchanged 
 the one for the other by the parties to the controversy. Through- 
 out his whole communication there runs a flavor of semi-defiant 
 apology. His experience on the spot convinces him that the price 
 paid for a settlement is not too high, but he is evidently not so 
 sure that the Lords of Trade will view it in that light.^ 
 
 The "Revenue Act" granted, for five years, "for the better 
 defraying the publick and necessary charges ... of this gov- 
 ernment," duties on imported wines and distilled liquors, cocoa, 
 European goods, and slaves ; and also tonnage duties, making 
 distinctions in the rates between goods imported from the place of 
 growth or manufacture and from other places, and excepting 
 from the tonnage duty coasting sloops from the neighboring colo- 
 nies, ships directly from Great Britain and vessels colony-owned 
 or built. Provision was made for weighing at the King's beam 
 all exports of bread and flour, as well as both exports and imports 
 of the goods on which duties were granted by the act. Practi- 
 cally the same machinery for collection was provided as had pre- 
 viously existed, but in addition importers were required to give 
 to the treasurer copies of entries of goods with the collector and 
 receiver general, and on payment of the duties, the treasurer 
 was to issue a certificate of such payment, upon which the col- 
 lector was to permit the landing of the goods. This extra elab- 
 oration of procedure, necessitated by the obtrusion of the treas- 
 erer into a realm formerly monopolized by the collector, was 
 later made subject of complaint. The proceeds of the duties were 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 378-80, 416. Ass. J. I. 332. Council J. I. 381. 
 
150 I'ilASES OK ROVAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 required to be paid to the treasurer. Bills of credit to the value 
 of £6,000 were authorized to be issued, with the usual arrange- 
 ments for redemption. The treasurer was required to pay out the 
 bills of credit, and all sums accruing from the act over and above 
 the bills of credit, to such persons and in such manner as should 
 be directed by warrants passed in council by the governor. The 
 warrants were to be numbered and paid in course according to 
 number, aiul the clerk of the council was to signify, immediately 
 after passing tlie same, the warrants, their numbers and the 
 persons to whom they were payable.^ 
 
 Without going into a description of the naturalization act, 
 for which this revenue act was exchanged, it may be sufficient 
 to remark, in Hunter's words, that, if approved, it would have 
 the efi'ect of uniting the minds of the majority of the considerable 
 people of the province, and that, if not approved, it would do no 
 harm if it lay for some time without action. It was one of those 
 measures whicli. during the stormy years of controversy, the as- 
 sembly had shown itself "fond" of ; and it had passed through 
 all the stages of legislation except the assent of the governor. 
 Thus, as the act for payment of public debts had prepared the 
 v\'ay for the revenue by rehabilitating credit, so this act, by con- 
 tributing to the quieting of apprehensions concerning the possi- 
 bility of the strict enforcement of all the legal consequences of the 
 anomalous mixture of national elements in the population, ac- 
 complished its share in "a lasting settlement on this hitherto un- 
 settled and ungovernable Province." Hunter was evidently 
 doubtful about the reception of this act at home and tried to 
 obtain the insertion of a suspending clause, but he had to yield 
 on this point. The opinion of the attorney general in reference 
 to the act was decidedly dubious, and there is at present no evi- 
 dence that it was either confirmed or disallowed.^ 
 
 There are several noteworthy features about this revenue 
 act which bear testimony to its character as a compromise settle- 
 ment. In the first place, it is to be observed that the treasurer, 
 not the receiver general, was made the custodian of the funds 
 arising from the act. This was evidently regarded as an objection 
 by the governor, but he observed that, as the bills of credit au- 
 thorized by the act were perforce lodged in the treasurer's hands, 
 
 ' Col. Laws I. 847. 
 
 'Col. Laws L 858. Col. Doc. V. 416, 495. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. I5I 
 
 it was necessary that the funds for sinking them should be in the 
 same custody. Further, he asserted that it was done with the 
 consent of the receiver general himself, who gave the casting 
 vote in the council against amendments designed to defeat the 
 bill. Thus one feature of the assembly's policy had been gained. 
 In the method of disposition of the funds compromise is equally 
 conspicuous. It will be remembered that a cardinal feature of 
 objection to- the assembly's bills for the support of government 
 had been the clauses making appropriations for the payment of 
 salaries, thus depriving the crown of its power of rewarding its 
 servants according to its own judgment. The terms of the act 
 provided merely for the issue of the money by the treasurer, in 
 accordance with warrants from the governor and council. On the 
 surface, then, the directions of the instructions were technically 
 complied with. But in connection with this act, (and here Hun- 
 ter's candor deserts him, for he fails to mention this circumstance 
 in his official correspondence) resolves were passed, appropriating 
 salaries and regularly recurring incidental expenses for support 
 of government. And we have Hunter's own testimony before the 
 Lords of Trade at a later time, to the fact that he gave his word 
 that he would issue the warrants in accordance with these re- 
 solves, and that he regularly did so during the rest of his admin- 
 istration. This was a compromise in which, as to .essentials of 
 financial management, the assembly had certainly the weight of 
 advantage. They had, it is true, yielded the point of annual 
 grant ; but the feature just described, together with the precau- 
 tionary processes suggested by the governor and finally adopted, 
 would certainly overbalance the five year term and the preser- 
 vation of the form of disposition by warrant.^ 
 
 There is another compromise feature in the act, which has 
 not yet been mentioned. It was from the first a theory with 
 Hunter that the system of compensation of assemblymen by the 
 counties which they represented contributed to their obstructive 
 attitude. So long as the per diem allowance was regularly forth- 
 coming from their counties, an attitude on legislative propositions 
 which enabled them to pose before their constituents as careful 
 husbands of the colony resources, and at the same time multiplied 
 the necessity for sessions of many days, enabled the assembly- 
 
 'Ass. J. I. 375. Col. Doc. V. 559. 
 
152 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 man to make his office more profitable than his rej^^ular occupa- 
 tion. Hunter had from the first endeavored to get the system 
 changed, and had succeeded in having the allowance for the 
 session which passed the debt bill charged to the funds appro- 
 priated for the payment of the debts. This was defended at 
 the time on the ground that the long session had been devoted 
 almost exclusively to that subject, and that it was equitable 
 that the funds from which those who benefited by the act were 
 to be paid should bear the expense of the session. He labored 
 to have this allowance also changed to the revenue for the whole 
 period for which it was granted, believing that the saving in 
 the local levies of the constituencies would be approved there 
 and that the arrangement might be made permanent. He failed 
 in this ; but succeeded in having the arrangement tried for one 
 year, and as a matter of fact, this was the method followed 
 thereafter in the compensation of members of the assembly.^ 
 
 Still another compromise feature appears in the settlement 
 of the dispute over the matter of an agency, which had been run- 
 ning for nearly as long as the revenue controversy. It will be 
 remembered that the assembly's bills had provided for an exclu- 
 sive control by that body of the appointment, instruction and sup- 
 port of an agent. At the session which granted the revenue, an 
 act was passed, appointing John Champantc, a person much ap- 
 proved by the governor, as agent, providing for his instruction 
 either by the governor and council or by the assemblv. and direct- 
 ing the treasurer to pay the agent five hundred ounces of plate 
 on the order of the assembly, signed by the speaker.^ 
 
 Enough has been said to show how extensive were the ramifi- 
 cations of the settlement of the dispute between the prerogative 
 and popular bodies, of which the matter of the revenue was the 
 nucleus. As a method of support of government, this settlement 
 proved to be comparatively permanent in its nature. After a 
 grant for one year, in 1720, the revenue was continued with cer- 
 tain modifications, for successive periods of three or five years 
 till 1737, when a new contest over annual appropriating acts arose 
 under a different set of conditions. 
 
 In a review of the financial methods of the province the pro- 
 gress and development of the power of the assembly over ex- 
 
 'Col. Doc. V. 180, 404, 41f). 
 
 'Col. Laws I. 881. Col. Doc. V. 420. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 153 
 
 penditure, as well as provision, of public income, is marked. Be- 
 ginning with a condition of affairs in which even a knowledge of 
 the disposition of funds voted for extraordinary uses was prac- 
 tically unattainable, the assembly used its power of the purse as 
 a weapon to induce the avoidance by the expending body of a just 
 suspicion of misuse. Then, on the findings of its committee of 
 accounts, it proceeded to establish control over funds for extra- 
 ordinary uses by providing for the separate custody and disposi- 
 tion of such funds by its own agent, the colony treasurer. As we 
 have seen, this was not attained without a struggle. Becoming 
 further convinced of the inadequacy of the system of expenditure 
 of funds for the support of government by the experience under 
 Cornbury, at the earliest practicable moment it attempted reform 
 by a project far too radical in its form to be practicable under 
 any conscientious royal governor. By aiming so high, and by 
 stubborn persistence in denial of supply in the face of threats of 
 parliamentary interference, it was enabled, in the resulting com- 
 promise to attain an arrangement which secured to it substantial 
 control of the main items of governmental support which it rec- 
 ognized as regular and necessary. In view of the original cir- 
 cumstances of New York as a conquered province, proceeding 
 under the Revolution settlement on the theory that "England, 
 having granted ... a representative Assembly was bound 
 to abide by the logic of that grant as . . . illustrated and 
 enforced in the history of her own Commons," this constitutes 
 certainly a remarkable achievement.^ 
 
 The controversy over the method of support of government 
 and the character of its settlement as just related, constitute 
 from the purely financial aspect an important feature of provin- 
 cial development. Any account of this development, however, 
 would be incomplete without at least a hint as to the general effect 
 of the struggle upon the balance of political forces in the con- 
 stitution of the province. Reference has already been made to 
 the share in the settlement of the revenue matter contributed by 
 Hunter's personal popularity, aided by the skill of Morris as 
 legislative manager in working up a "Governor's interest" in the 
 assembly. The passage of the revenue act, even under the hard 
 conditions referred to, is the best evidence as to the substantial 
 
 ' S. N. D. North in Mag. Am. Hist. III. IGl. 
 
154 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 character of this "interest." We have also noticed how widely 
 extended were the elements of compromise associated with the 
 passage of this act. From that time Hunter's chief policy seems 
 to have been directed to the task of defending- at home the meas- 
 ures already accomplished, and equally to the perfection of the 
 working relation between himself and the assembly, already so 
 fruitful, for the purpose of preserving what had been gained. In 
 the former purpose he was finally successful against the efforts of 
 a determined opposition, in having all the main features of the 
 settlement either actually confirmed or laid on the table. This 
 opposition drew strength both from provincial and from English 
 sources, was so formidable as to give the governor great anxiety, 
 and finally formed one of the strong reasons for his return to 
 England in 1719.^ In order to the continuation of the work begun 
 by the revenue act, a number of things remained to be done. 
 There were still outstanding many claims against the government, 
 of equal justice with those already satisfied, and the quieting and 
 settling work must be completed by attention to them. The rev- 
 enue act left unprovided for, a number of items not likely to ap- 
 pear regularly in the provincial budget, such as repairs made 
 necessary by the long denial of supply, expenses of running a 
 boundary line, compensation for slaves executed at the time of the 
 negro plot. For these, as well as other purposes, a more numer- 
 ous, as well as more reliable, majority in the assembly was re- 
 quired, if the governor was to be able to carry out his policy. 
 Accordingly we find Hunter availing himself of the arrival of his 
 new commission as an excuse for a dissolution and the summons 
 of a new assembly. In the elections, his "interest" must have been 
 perniciously active, for he later took pride in his success in hav- 
 ing had "the luck or art to get the better" of his opponents, par- 
 ticularly in New York City, which returned an entirely new dele- 
 gation. Several changes occurred in the rural delegations, and 
 the number of the house was increased by the addition of one 
 new constituency — the Manor of Livingston, — and by an addi- 
 tional member from Orange County. This brought the total 
 number to twenty-six, and established an equality of representa- 
 tion from the counties, except in the case of New York and Al- 
 bany. It is not without significance that this very rapid increase 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 493-4. 512. 514-5, 521-6. 
 
IN NEW YORK, 169I-I719. 155 
 
 of total membership from twenty-two to twenty-six was made 
 entirely in the time of Hunter's administration. \ It is presum- 
 ably at this time, too, that the custom developed of making the 
 governor's use of his patronage in the counties a matter of bar- 
 gain with the assemblymen representing the counties, which 
 Burnet, Clarke, and Morris later refer to as fully established." 
 
 In this reciprocal relation as to county patronage and good 
 behavior during the sessions, as well as in the mutual benefits 
 derivable from the barter of grants of revenue for favorite meas- 
 ures of doubtful reception at home, is to be found the basis of 
 the "System" of political relations which obtained for the next 
 twenty' years. Its immediate fruit is to be found in a second bill 
 for the payment of debts, which, including many items of necessity 
 for the welfare of the government as well as for payment of purely 
 Leislerian claims, was deemed by Hunter to be an essential part of 
 the settlement already partially realized. But the main purpose 
 of the "System" was the assurance thereby afforded to the g'ov- 
 ernor of a continued support of government, a question, which, 
 if unsettled, made orderly development of any policy impossible. 
 The price paid for this assurance was seriously formidable. The 
 "System" not only involved the "undue" influence of the governor 
 over the composition of the assembly, and the elections to it, 
 as well as the patronage relations already referred to. It involved 
 also the placation of important family "interests," like those of 
 Livingston and Morris, by gifts of office. It involved the con- 
 tinuation of the assembly elected in 17 16 over a period of more 
 than ten years ; this circumstance, though mitigated by numerous 
 bye-elections, finallv attaining serious proportions as a popular 
 grievance. The preservation of the life of this assembly was 
 considered so important for government purposes that the aHena- 
 tion of the Schuyler "interest" was not considered too high a 
 price to pay for its attainment. All this concentration upon the 
 relation between the governor and the assembly had the inevita- 
 ble effect of reducing the council to a position of comparative 
 insignificance ; and it is not until the practice of the governor's 
 presiding over, and sometimes voting in, the council is broken 
 
 ^ Council J. I. 396. Ass. J. I. 381, 395. Col. Doc. V. 514-5. 
 ^Col. Doc. V. 764, 768-771. 
 
156 PHASES OF ROYAL GOVERNMENT 
 
 up, that anything like the old balance of elements in the Consti- 
 tution was restored.^ 
 
 Enough has perhaps been said to indicate how important 
 were the possibilities for provincial development contained in the 
 system of relations between the executive and legislature to 
 which the revenue controversy actually led up. The workings of 
 the "System" were complex and elaborate and make up a story 
 by themselves. These operations are significant not merely as 
 making up a structure of political relations in the province, based 
 on a self-conscious movement for something more than a partisan 
 or factional end. They constitute as well the perspective of the 
 struggle for the general advance in provincial autonomy carried 
 on under Clarke. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE. 
 
 In preparing the foregoing, the original sources have throughout been 
 exclusively consulted. Of these sources the following is a list. 
 
 Colonial Manuscripts. In the State Library, Albany, N. Y. Re- 
 ferred to as Col. Mss. 
 
 Council Minutes (Executive). State Library. Referred to as E. 
 C. M. 
 
 Journal of the Legislative Council. O'Callaghan, Editor. Published 
 Albany, 1861. Referred to as J. of L. C. 
 
 Journal of the General Assembly. Abraham Lott, Jr., Editor. Pub- 
 lished New York, 1764. Referred to as Ass. J. 
 
 Colonial Laws. Commissioners of Statutory Revision. Published 
 Albany, 1896. 
 
 Documents relating to the Colonial History of the State of New 
 York. O'Callaghan. Editor. Published Albany, 1854. Referred to as 
 Col. Doc. 
 
 Documentary History of the State of New York. O'Callaghan, Ed- 
 itor. Published Albany, 1849. Referred to as Doc. Hist. 
 
 Calendar of Treasury Papers. London. 
 
 The New York State Library has produced an excellent bibliography 
 of New York Colonial History, under that title, as Bulletin 56, February, 
 1901, by Charles A. Flagg and Judson T. Jennings. 
 
 ' Col. Doc. V. 577-9, 580, 585, 805, 882-8. 
 
VITA. 
 
 The author was prepared for college at the Coburn Classical In- 
 stitute, Waterville, Maine ; received the degree of Bachelor 
 of Arts from Colby College in 1890; from 1892 to 1894 was 
 Honorary Fellow in Social Science at the University of 
 Chicago ; and was a student in the School of Political Sci- 
 ence, Columbia University, during the academic year, 1894- 
 1895. At the end of that year he received an appointment 
 to a Town^hend Scholarship at Harvard University, which 
 he resigned in order to take the chair of History at Colgate 
 University. While on leave of absence from that institu- 
 tion in the academic year, 1900-1901, he was University 
 Fellow in American History at Columbia University. He 
 is at present Professor of History af Colgate University. 
 

 l_RRin'1fi