Minor statutes. 5, sec. 14. 12 Ann., 1762 about one-third of the European inhabitants of Jamaica were either Scotch by birth or by descent. In this connection we may note the expectation expressed by Logan1 to Penn that the passing of the Union would double the value of land in Pennsylvania. Enough has already been said about the Navigation Act passed in the reign of William and Mary. Some minor 3 and 4 Acts of the reign of Anne may here be noticed. In 1705 Ann., c. rice and molasses became enumerated articles. By an Act 3 and 4 passed in the same year "for encouraging the importaAnn., c. 10 (con- tion of naval stores," a bounty was given on their importatinued by tion into England from the American plantations. A few See years later an Act was passed which exempted mariners also 8 trading to America from being impressed by English naval c. 14). officers and suspended during the continuance of the war, 6 Ann., the rule that three-fourths of the crew of vessels must be c. 64, secs. 9 and 19. English, substituting the proportion of one-fourth in its c. 9. Ann., stead. In 1708 an attempt was made to settle the difficult question of the value and kinds of money in the Colonies 6 Ann., by the passing of an Act "for ascertaining the rates of c. 57. foreign coins in Her Majesty's plantations in America." As an example of the truth that statutes, no less than books, 9 Ann., habent sua fata, we may note that a statute passed in 1710, establishing a general post-office for the Colonies, and declaring that any surplus should be expended on colonial defence, passed without any protest from the colonial legislatures. 1 Logan Corr. CHAPTER V Britain Colonies 1756. THE long period which elapsed between the signing of the Great Treaty of Utrecht and the outbreak of the Seven Years' War and the was, so far as Colonial policy was concerned, singularly dull American and uneventful. The old controversies remained, and new between ones were added to their number. But no permanent solu- 1713 and tion of difficulties was in any way arrived at. It is true that, regarded through the moonlight of memory, the time appeared to the next generation of colonists as one of unbroken contentment and calm; and so high an authority as Mr Lecky has stated1 that while "for some years before the English Revolution, and for several years after the accession of William, the relations of the Colonies to England had been extremely tense . . . in the long period of unbroken Whig rule which followed, most of the elements of discontent had subsided." But an inspection of what actually occurred hardly bears out this statement. It is true, of course, that colonial questions were more and more shirked by the Home Government. For twenty-four years in succession the Duke of Newcastle was Secretary of State for the Southern Department, which dealt with the Colonies; and Newcastle's ignorance and incapacity became a bye-word among men. "Annapolis, Annapolis! Oh, yes! Annapolis must be defended," he is reported to have said. "To be sure, Annapolis should be defended. Where is Annapolis ?" It was said of him that he always appeared to have lost half an hour in the morning, and to be running after it all the rest of the day. But, with regard to colonial matters, he did not even try to overtake the past. Inasmuch as he discouraged all measurs might arouse opposition, he might, in a sense, be mill or othe safe. Colonial Minister. But his procrastinahteenth Cent., Vol. IV. p. 8. 1892 ed. 2 Macpherson's Annals of last ten years of George II. 1 MSS. in R. O. tion solved nothing. The old sores, which, it must be remembered, were caused more by the relations between the Colonial Governors and the Colonial Assemblies than they were by the relations between the Colonies and the Home Government, went festering on. It can with no justice be claimed that the Whig régime of the early Georges contained in it any solution of the problems which had gone on puzzling statesmen since the first starting of the Colonial Empire. We have the authority of Horace Walpole1 for the statement that, during the administration of his father, the Board of Trade had almost lapsed into a sinecure. So far as results went, this was doubtless true; but they appear to have gone on, with tolerable regularity, making the same reports which nobody read, and the same recommendations, which nobody heeded. At the outset a new cause of quarrel meets us. It has been seen how the difficulty with regard to the voting of a revenue by the New York Assembly was at last overcome by the granting of a revenue for five years. Further trouble, however, arose through the action of the Assembly in imposing a two-and-a-half per cent. duty on all goods imported from Great Britain. For a time, though not without protest, the English authorities allowed the imposition. In former Acts of Revenue similar provisions had been passed without complaint. In 1724, however, an Order in Council was issued, advising the vetoing of an Act imposing a two per cent. duty on European goods imported in English bottoms. The same cause of quarrel arose in the case of other Colonies. Acts had been passed by the Massachusetts and Virginia legislatures, laying duties, the one on imported goods, the other on the importation of liquors and slaves. It was felt that resistance must be made, and the Acts were disallowed. On another question the English authorities endeavoured to establish a clear rule. In particular cases, the Colonial legislatures had claimed to approach Government independently of their Govern 1 Memoirs of last ten years of 2 N. Y. Docs., Vol. V. nglish nia legislature had done so in 1701, Barbados in 1705, and in 1716 Jamaica followed the example of Virginia. It was decided1 that such a course was only allowable where complaint was made of the personal conduct of the Governor, and that in all other cases the Governor must be the conduit pipe through which the Colony should approach the Home Government. "We cannot but take notice," the Board of Trade significantly adds, "that not only the Assembly of Jamaica, but of several other Colonies in America, have of late pretended to assume new privileges and powers, which, if not prevented, may tend to the weakening of His Majesty's prerogative in those parts." Meanwhile the mind of the Navy Board was seriously exercised by the question of naval stores. The Act of Anne expired in 1726, but a new Act was passed in 1729, under which encouragement 2 G. II., c. was given to the production of all naval stores. The growth 35 (continued by and culture of raw silk, and the making of pot-ashes, were 24 G. II., also encouraged by being admitted into England free of c. 52). duty. 23 G. II., c. 20, and 24 G. II., c. 57. In other directions, however, the influences at work were not so favourable. The English mercantile interest was becoming of increasing importance, and what it demanded Parliament had to grant. In 1719 the House of Commons resolved" that the erecting of manufactures in the Colonies tended to lessen their dependence upon Great Britain." In the same year a Bill passed both Houses, forbidding the American Colonies to manufacture iron of any kind. Under this, no smith would have been able to make so much as a bolt, a spike, or a nail. No forge could have been erected for making "sows, pigs, or cast iron into bar or rod iron." 2 The opposition aroused, however, by this measure was so great that it was dropped, but duties were imposed on all American iron imported into England. In 1750 these were 23 G. II., modified, and pig and bar iron were allowed a free admission to the English market. At the same time it was provided 3 that "no mill or other engine for slitting or rolling of iron, or any 1 MSS. in R. O. 2 Macpherson's Annals of Commerce, Vol. III. 3 Sec. 9. "2 c. 29. plateing forge to work with a tilt hammer, or any furnace for making steel," should be permitted in the Colonies. A yet more striking instance of trade jealousy was given in 5 G. II., 1732. North America was the land of furs, and therefore c. 22. it was natural that a hat industry should come into being. An Act was thereupon passed, forbidding the export of hats not only to England, or to foreign countries, but from one colony to another, and providing that no colonist should pursue the trade, unless he had served a seven years' apprenticeship and should himself employ two apprentices or should teach the industry to negroes. Nor was it merely in the interests of English manufacturers that Parliament interfered. The American Colonies had been in the habit of carrying on a profitable export trade to the French West Indies, and of bringing back, in return, rum, sugar, and molasses. A Bill was introduced into the House of Commons, directed against this trade, and, after much dispute, and the defeat of the Bill in its original shape, it 6 G. II., was enacted in 1733, that a duty of ninepence per gallon c. 13. should be paid upon all rum and spirits made in the plantations not subject to Great Britain, on their importation into any of the British plantations: that sixpence a gallon should be paid on all foreign molasses and syrups imported, and five shillings on every hundredweight of sugar. As a matter of fact, it was found impossible to enforce this law, and therefore the practical grievance of the colonists was slight, but it was none the less a sign of the spirit in which colonial affairs were considered. About the same time 3 G. II., permission was given first to Carolina and then to Georgia to ship rice to any port south of Cape Finisterre, and a few c. 19. years later the same privilege was conferred on West India 12 G. II., c. 30. sugar, provided that it was carried in British-built ships navigated according to law. c. 28. 8 G. II., Relations Mother It will be seen from the foregoing summary that, so far between from the period in question being one of peace and goodwill country towards the Colonies, it was a time wherein fresh links were and being continually added to that chain of commercial legislation which did so much to alienate and disgust the Ameri Colonies. |