The War of Independence | Page 8

Island, had governors elected by the people. These two colonies
were completely self-governing. In almost everything but name they
were independent of Great Britain, and this was so true that at the time
of the revolutionary war they did not need to make any new
constitutions for themselves, but continued to live on under their old
charters for many years,--Connecticut until 1818, Rhode Island until
1843. Before the revolution these two colonies had comparatively few
direct grievances to complain of at the hands of Great Britain; but as
they were next neighbours to Massachusetts and closely connected with
its history, they were likely to sympathize promptly with the kind of
grievances by which Massachusetts was disturbed.
[Sidenote: The proprietary governments: Pennsylvania, Delaware, and
Maryland]
Three of the colonies, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland, had a
peculiar kind of government, known as proprietary government. Their

territories had originally been granted by the crown to a person known
as the Lord Proprietary, and the lord-proprietorship descended from
father to son like a kingdom. In Maryland it was the Calvert family that
reigned for six generations as lords proprietary. Pennsylvania and
Delaware had each its own separate legislature, but over both colonies
reigned the same lord proprietary, who was a member of the Penn
family. These colonies were thus like little hereditary monarchies, and
they had but few direct dealings with the British government. For them
the lords proprietary stood in the place of the king, and appointed the
governors. In Maryland this system ran smoothly. In Pennsylvania
there was a good deal of dissatisfaction, but it generally assumed the
form of a wish to get rid of the lords proprietary and have the governors
appointed by the king; for as this was something they had not tried they
were not prepared to appreciate its evils.
[Sidenote: The crown colonies and their royal governors]
In the other eight colonies--New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York,
New Jersey, Virginia, the two Carolinas, and Georgia--the governors
were appointed by the king, and were commonly known as "royal
governors." They were sometimes natives of the colonies over which
they were appointed, as Dudley and Hutchinson of Massachusetts, and
others; but were more often sent over from England. Some of them, as
Pownall of Massachusetts and Spotswood of Virginia, were men of
marked ability. Some were honest gentlemen, who felt a real interest in
the welfare of the people they came to help govern; some were
unprincipled adventurers, who came to make money by fair means or
foul. Their position was one of much dignity, and they behaved
themselves like lesser kings. What with their crimson velvets and fine
laces and stately coaches, they made much more of a show than any
president of the United States would think of making to-day. They had
no fixed terms of office, but remained at their posts as long as the king,
or the king's colonial secretary, saw fit to keep them there.
[Sidenote: The question as to salaries]
Now it was generally true of the royal governors that, whether they
were natives of America or sent over from England, and whether they

were good men or bad, they were very apt to make themselves disliked
by the people, and they were almost always quarrelling with their
legislative assemblies. Questions were always coming up about which
the governor and the legislature could not agree, because the legislature
represented the views of the people who had chosen it, while the
governor represented his own views or the views which prevailed three
thousand miles away among the king's ministers, who very often knew
little about America and cared less. One of these disputed questions
related to the governor's salary. It was natural that the governor should
wish to have a salary of fixed amount, so that he might know from year
to year what he was going to receive. But the people were afraid that if
this were to be done the governor might become too independent. They
preferred that the legislature should each year make a grant of money
such as it should deem suitable for the governor's expenses, and this
sum it might increase or diminish according to its own good pleasure.
This would keep the governor properly subservient to the legislature.
Before 1750 there had been much bitter wrangling over this question in
several of the colonies, and the governors had one after another been
obliged to submit, though with very ill grace.
Sometimes the thoughts of the royal governors and their friends went
beyond this immediate question. Since the legislatures were so froward
and so niggardly, what an admirable plan it would be to have the
governors paid out of the royal treasury and thus made comparatively
independent of the legislatures! The judges, too, who were quite poorly
paid, might fare much better