Fanueil Hall

THE BOSTON PORT BILL

The second reading passed without a division; but a petition was then presented by the lord mayor from a number of American settlers resident in London. It urged that the citizens of Boston had not been heard in their own defence, nor redress sought at common law. The place was not walled, nor held any executive power, and the offence had not even been committed within its limits. They proceeded, in very bold language, to observe that the attachment of their countrymen could not survive the justice of Great Britain, -a violation of which might extinguish the filial sentiments hitherto cherished. Some opposition was now mustered, Mr. Fuller proposing merely the imposition of a fine. Mr. Burke began that series of splendid orations which he devoted to the cause of American liberty. He denounced this confounding of the innocent and guilty, and expressed his heartfelt sorrow at the general aspect of affairs; the universal resistance of all America; one town in proscription, the rest in rebellion; not a port on its coast where goods could be landed and vended. The consequences would be dreadful, nay, he was afraid, destructive; and he ga ve the prophetic warning, that ministers would dra w upon themselves a foreign enemy at a time they little expected.

Two former governors, Johnstone and Pownall, expressed themselves earnestly in favour of the Americans; the former declaring he had advised the company against sending the tea, and was sure the affair would issue in rebellion. The latter excited the laughter of the bouse, by extolling the people for their love of order and peace. But it is remarkable, that none of their advocates ,now disputed the right of taxation. Mr. Dowdeswell referred to a time when this had been doubted by persons of great knowledge; now there was no such opimon; the policy only was questioned. It is remarkable that Mr. Fox on this Dccasion made his first appearance in parliamentary life, by objeding to the power vested in the crown of reopening the port; a suggestion which was not supported by either party.

The bill passed without a division. In the Lords, however, it encountered a stronger opposition from certain noblemen of great eminence and talent, par- ticularly Rockingham, Shelburne, and Richmond; but the debates have not been preserved, and it passed - finally without any protest.

However severe this measure, it seems not improbable that, had the minister stopped there, affairs might yet have been adjusted. Unhappily, the recol- lection of the ad vices of Bernard and Hutchinson, the long and obstinate opposition of the Massachusetts

Lord George Germain.

government, the recent outrage doubtless supported by some of its members, impelled to a determination of proceeding further, and divesting Boston of those privileges, certainly ample, which it had hitherto cIIljoyed. The town-meetings were to be prohibited, unless with the eonsent of the govemor, who was also to have the appointment of all civil officers, except the supreme judges. On the suggestion of Lord George Germain, who warmly seconded the motion, the council was to be nominated solely by the crown, and juries to be chosen in a less popular manner. All the advocates of America, including Colonel Barre, and others who had acquiesced in the first bill, encountered the present with decided hostility. The opposition divided against it, though mustering only sixty-four to two hundred and thirty-nine. In the Lords it was resiisted with greater energy, and voted against, though only by twemty to ninety-two; but eleven signed a protest.

While this bill was going through its stages, the minister crowned the whole by a third, respecting individuals charged with offences against the state. According to a law formerly passed, but never exe- cuted, they might be conveyed for trial either to Britain or to some other colony. There was doubt- less little prospect in New England of convicting them by jury for offences in which their countrymen generally sympathized; still, the being removed for trial to a remote country, the inhabitants of which were generally hostile, was a measure full of hardship and terror. Barre denounced it as big with misery and apprehension to America, and of danger to Great Britain. Let the banner of rebellion be once spread, and the British were an undone people. Ministers were urging this desperate, this destructive issue, and with such violence as if insurrection were their de- liberate purpose. Alderman Sawbridge declared, if the provincials submitted, they would be the most abject slaves that ever the earth produced. Pownall loudly predicted a congress, and perhaps a war.

At the same time, another petition was presented by the resident Americans, describing the state to which these bills would reduce their countrymen as one of total slavery. While boasting of their loyal feelings, and their horror at an unnatural contest, they indicated not obscurely that such must be the result of an attempt to execute these laws. The bill, however, passed in a thinner house, but with even a larger majority than the former, one hundred and twenty.'seven to twenty-four. In the Lords, though there was a similar opposition, and a protest by eight peers, it was carried by forty-nine to twelve.