York, Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia, had this form of government, some of them for a long time, and from an early period of their settlement.

Of the proprietary governments there were three only-Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. These were granted by the crown to individuals in the nature of feudatory principalities, with all the inferior royalties and subordinate powers of legislation which formerly belonged to the owners of counties palatine. The governors were appointed by the proprietaries, and legislative assemblies were convened under their authority. In Maryland its laws were not even subject to the supervision of the crown.

The charter governments Blackstone describes as ' in the nature of civil corporations, with the power of making bye-laws for their own internal regulations not contrary to the laws of England, and with such rights and authorities as are specially given them in their several charters of incorporation. They have a governor, named by the king, who is his representative or deputy. They have courts of justice of their Their general assemblies make laws suited to their own emergencies.' The parliament* of Great

own.

* The colonies and plantations in America are subordinate unto and dependent upon the Imperial Crown and Parliament of Great Britain; and the King, with the advice and consent of Parliament, hath full power and authority to make laws and statutes to bind the colonies and people of America in all cases whatsoever.' (6 Geo. III. c. 12.)

Britain being in theory omnipotent, no doubt these colonial governments are merely municipal, whatever powers of legislation they may assume, and however complete under the crown and parliament their political organization may be. The only charter governments existing at the period of the American Revolution were those of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut.

The first charter of Massachusetts seemed to contemplate only a civil corporation within the realm, but the colonists exercised executive, legislative, and judicial powers upon the renewal of their charter. That of William and Mary, granted in 1691, was framed upon a broader foundation, and gave the usual powers contained in provincial charters. The governor was appointed by the crown; the council was chosen by the general assembly; and the house of representatives by the people. But in Connecticut and Rhode Island the charter governments were organized upon popular and democratic principles; the governor, council, and assembly being annually chosen by the freemen of the colony, and all other officers appointed by their authority.

CHAPTER II.

AMERICAN CONFEDERATIONS FROM 1643-1790.

Confederations from 1643 to 1790-Declaration of Rights— Character of the Confederations-Pp. 12-18.

6

As early as 1643, the New England colonies were united under a confederation. In 1637, less than twenty years after the first settlements, the subject had been discussed, and outlines of a union for offence and defence, material advice and assistance,' were drawn up. In May 1643, articles were signed at Boston between Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Haven, and Plymouth. The reasons assigned for this union were, the dispersed state of the colonies, the vicinity of the Dutch, Swiss, and French, the hostile disposition of the Indians, the appearance of a general combination of the savage tribes to exterminate the English, the commencement of civil contests in the parent state, and the impossibility of obtaining assistance from England in any emergency. They assumed the title of the United Colonies of New England. Immediately after its formation, several

Indian tribes sent in their submission to the new confederacy. This union, their historians inform us, rendered the colonies formidable to the Dutch and

French as well as to the Indians, maintained general harmony among themselves, preserved them during the civil wars of England, contributed chiefly to their defence against the Indian King Philip, and was essentially serviceable in civilizing and Christianising the Indians. We find the United Colonies assuming at once the functions of an independent state, by entering the next year, 1644, into a treaty of peace with the French Governor of Acadia, proposing, in 1648, to D'Ailleboust, Governor of Canada, a similar treaty, and in 1652 preparing for hostilities apprehended on the part of the Dutch.*

In consequence of the dissatisfaction arising out of the Sugar Act of 1764 and the Stamp Act of 1765, Massachusetts proposed a general congress, to be held in New York. This congress, consisting of twentyeight delegates from ten States, met at New York in October 1765. In their Declaration of Rights they set forth that they are entitled to all the rights and

* The population of all the colonies in America is estimated a few years later, 1660, at 80,000 (Holmes' Ann. p. 315); and in 1763, at about 1,500,000, Massachusetts alone having 240,000, and Pennsylvania 280,000; Canada only 100,000.

liberties of natural born subjects, amongst the most essential of which are the exclusive power to tax themselves, and the privilege of trial by jury. The grievance chiefly complained of was the Act granting certain Stamp Duties and other duties in the British colonies, which they declared to have a direct tendency to subvert their rights and liberties. A petition to the king and memorial to each house of parliament were agreed upon. The assemblies of Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia, being prevented by their governors from sending representatives to the congress, forwarded petitions direct to England, similar to those adopted by that body. The following year, 1776, parliament repealed the Stamp Act.

The colonies having failed to obtain redress for their other grievances by appeals to the king and parliament, Massachusetts recommended, in 1774, the assembling of a continental congress. The delegates appointed, some by the legislatures and some by conventions of the people, met at Philadelphia in September 1774. The congress thus assembled exercised de facto and de jure a sovereign authority, not as delegated agents of the governments of the several colonies, but in virtue of original powers derived from the people. This, the first general or national government over the American States, sprang directly from the people, and not from the