by "a majority of voices" to assist the Governor and Council in managing the Colony.

James I., displeased at this popular form of Government, dissolved the Company by a writ of quo warranto, 1624, and assumed the control of the province. He appointed a Governor and Councillors to govern in his name and under his instructions. They were authorized to levy taxes; to transport the Colonists to England to be tried for crimes committed in Virginia; to ship all tobacco to England to be delivered to agents of the King.

Charles I. for a time maintained the arbitrary system of his father, but afterwards sent a new Governor with instructions to restore the right of representation to the Colony.

These Royal Governments existed in Virginia, New York, New Jersey, the Carolinas, and Georgia. The Carolinas and Jersey were at first under Proprietary Government, but later they became subject to Royal authority.

Under the third form of Government, known as the Proprietary, the right of the so 1 was conveyed by the Crown to certain individuals called Proprietors, as well as the power to establish a Body Politic. They appointed the Governor and other officials. They organized and convened the Legislature, exercising a Veto on its acts. The Proprietors were only responsible to the Crown which created them. Their position in fact greatly resembled that of the feudal Lords in the Middle Ages.

The territory named Pennsylvania was ceded to William Penn by Charles II. in 1681, in lieu of a claim on the Crown.

Penn was a man of culture, integrity, and benevolence. Montesquieu called him the "Modern Lycurgus." He arrived from England in 1682, with 2,000 emigrants, and founded Philadelphia. He brought with him a form of Government, and a Code of laws prepared by himself. The political structure was similar to that of the other Colonies-a Governor, Council, and an Assembly.

All these Constitutions, Charter, Royal, Proprietary, endured down to the Revolution.

William Penn was a son of Admiral Sir William Penn. After visiting various countries, he joined the Quaker sect on his return to England, and was disinherited by his father. He continued to write and preach in favor of liberty and conscience, and was twice imprisoned in the Tower. Inheriting a claim on the Crown of £16,000$80.000-he took in exchange for it the property and sovereignty of the territory "west of the Delaware," which he afterwards colonized. He made it an asylum for all sects; entered into treaties with the Indians which he punctually observed, and abolished slavery. He died in England in 1718, at 74 years of age.

THE MOTHER-COUNTRY RENOUNCED.

THE infant Colonies had scarcely begun to grow before disputes broke out with the Mother-country.

As might have been expected, the Plymouth Colony was the first to make resistance. These spirited men had not left their homes to brave the ordeal they were enduring only to be subject to a political control they had virtually abjured. As early as 1636-the very year that Hampden refused to pay "Ship Money" in England-the men of Plymouth declared through their Legislature that "no taxes should be imposed but by consent of the body of freemen or their representatives." From this date the principle of "no taxation without representation" was established, and Colony after Colony as they matured adopted it. In England, however, it was maintained that Parliament had the power "to bind the Colonies in all cases whatsoever," and consequently the right to tax them.

This was the old quarrel over again with the parties changed. The Nobles and Middle Class in England had long contended that the Crown could impose no taxes without their consent. The Colonies repeated the same constitutional doctrine, and protested that, as British subjects, Parliament had no right to tax them without their consent.

This precipitate outcry against taxation arose from the dread of the Colonies lest England should extend her

jurisdiction over their internal affairs, but the Home Government entertained far more practical views. It was not the Administrative control of the Colonies it aimed at, but simply the amount of Revenue it could extract from them. For this object it was sought from the first to monopolize their trade. Even in 1621 it was ordered that "no tobacco or other productions of the Colonies should be carried into any foreign port until first landed in England and the customs paid."

A far more memorable event was the Navigation Act of 1651, which ordained that there should be neither imports nor exports between England and the Colonies, except in English or Colonial vessels. This was meant, of course, to exclude all foreign interference with the trade. It was further enacted that no productions of the Colonies should be exported to any other country than to such as belonged to Great Britain.

It is striking that this sweeping measure, which shut out the Colonies from all the world as to their exports, was the work of the Puritan House of Commons under the supremacy of Oliver Cromwell. The King and House of Lords having both disappeared, England was wholly under the sway of the Puritan Politicians and their stern master-another proof that there is little sentiment in politics, for the English Puritans felt no delicacy in fleecing their American brethren to the uttermost.

In 1663, Parliament forbade all imports from any part of the world to the Colonies, save in English-built vessels, and shipped from England direct to the said Colonies or Plantations. This monopolizing policy was in such entire harmony with the commercial spirit of that age, that the oppressed Colonies submitted without

murmur.

Their internal trade thus far was free, but to obtain more revenue Parliament declared, in 1672, that henceforth Duties must be paid on sugar, tobacco, cotton, &c., transported from one Colony to another. This caused an explosion. Outcries were heard in New England against "these invasions of the rights, liberties, and properties of the subjects of His Majesty, they not being represented in Parliament." This manifest subordination of the interests of the Colonies to those of the Mother-country made a deadly quarrel between them a mere question of time.

These restrictions on their commerce were bad enough, but Colonial manufactures were looming up, and the Mother-country grew alarmed. Forthwith Parliament began enacting that "no wool, yarn, or woollen manufactures of the American colonies should be shipped or transported to any place whatever."

In 1732, another edict appeared forbidding New England to export hats, extensively manufactured there, to Foreign Countries or to the other Colonies.

In 1750, all Colonial manufactures were declared to be "nuisances" which the Governors, under a penalty of £500, were required to abate.

In 1760, regulations still more stringent were issued against the trade of the Colonies.

It may be supposed that the Colonists were exasperated at this grasping policy, but so long as taxation was external, and fell on them in the shape of Duties, they bore it. What they resolved never to tolerate was any attempt to tax them internally. This would be an interference with their domestic Government, which nothing would induce them to brook.

At last the blow came. In 1765, Parliament passed a Law that all obligations in writing, newspapers,