ings with the colonial traders and might resume their trade and intercourse with the French. Dudley at first proposed that the Court admit the Indians to trade under strict regulations. To the first part of this proposition the Court agreed, and voted to admit the Indians to trade. But a free and unrestricted trade was not what the governor wanted; he desired that a trading post should be established having a monopoly of all the Indian trade and that it be kept under strict governmental control. To this the Court would not agree, but as a temporary compromise, voted that the governor might license certain persons not connected with the government to trade with the Indians. In the following year, Dudley renewed his application for a trading house, to be managed by an officer who should have no interest in the profits made at the post; by this means he hoped to establish peaceful relations with the Indians and to gain their trade, which was in danger of going over to the French. Though the Council at first supported the governor, the House was firm, and the matter ended in a defeat for Dudley; for on June 18 the House voted to admit the Indians to trade with any one or in any part of the province.1

It is probable that the deputies believed that the governor had eaten his "bushel of salt," and saw in this measure but another one of his attempts to benefit himself. Had his plan been adopted, it is certain that the door would have been open for some corruption, that places would have been made for the governor's supporters, and that his interest would have been strengthened. On the other hand, it is equally certain that Dudley's plan was a wise one, for it was used with remarkable success both by the French in Canada and by the English in New

1 Records of the General Court (Ms.), ix. 315. 2 Ibid. 340.

4

Ibid. 375, May 26, 1714.

▲ Ibid. 376.

York. The General Court was jealous of the executive power, and the trading class was so anxious for gains that Dudley's

? well-tried plan was never put into effect in Massachusetts;

L

but the Indians were left to the mercy of the frontier traders, who were practically uncontrolled by the government.

NOTE

DUDLEY'S REPORT TO THE BOARD OF TRADE, OCTOBER 8, 1706

.. I had a Number of French Prisoners belonging to Port Royale, And they near an Equale Number of our men, And Some that belonged to Virginea taken at Sea, which I was willing to exchange, and accordingly sent a Sloop to Port Royale on that Score, The Master I employed was one Rouse who foolishly & wickedly agreed with a Fishing Vessell or Two to follow him, And hoping for some gain carried Trade with him, cloathes & Grain, And at the same time some other vessell managed by Captain Vetch That came from Darien when that place broke up, was concerned also; And Sayled to the Poynt of Cancer on the bank of Newfoundland; I had soon advice thereof and they were all apprehended & Comitted to Prison, and the people thereupon in a very great displeasure, That any Body should be so wicked as to Labour to Supply The Indian Rebells that were fled from us, And whose Planting there three Years I had prevented by very hard Marches of the Queens Subjects.

The General Assembly being Sitting at the Time I allowed them to take cognisance thereof as the Charter doth admit, And upon a long hearing and process Six of the Said Persons are fined. The Acts of the Assembly are now laid before your Lordships, And I have underwritten and agreed The Acts Severally with these words Saving to her Majesty her Royall prerogative reserving to the Fines as I am Comanded.

I am humbly of opinion That the fines are beyond the Power of Some of them (especially Rouse) to pay, And would have been glad had all been moderated about one halfe, To Which if Her Majesty will of her royal Grace please to remite, or however it

shall please her Majesty to dispose, I most humbly submit it to her royale Pleasure.

I am sensible that the Persons in their Applications to your Lordships and elsewhere will reflect upon Some Methods in the Proceedings, Especially of the house of Representatives, but when it shall be remembered, That they are farr distant from home, of less education and knowledge in the Law, and in a very great displeasure against Traders with the Enimy, aggravated by a hard pressure of the Enimy at the very instant when this was discovered, it will go a great way in their Excuse.

It was a very difficult thing for mee to keep the People within bounds in their Displeasure, and I was something fearfule of any outrage upon the Delinquents, but it is well over, And the proceeding of the Generall Assembly, The Members will to be sure [to] use their endavours to make it look well & satisfactory to the People everywhere, And no other Court could have done the Same.

I pray leave to Assure your Lordships That I was never more sorry for anything in my Life, Than that so ill and inconvenient thing should happen to outrage the People while they are under so heavy Taxes & hard Service to starve And Destroy the Enimy. That I have used all possible means in my Power in the Proceedings to have them modedate as well as reasonably Satisfactory in so Publick a Case.

That I have no animosity to any The Persons delinquents who had suffered to the Last Degree If I had not with all the Skill I have, laboured to quiet The People.

That I shall be very glad of her Majestys favour to any or all of them as well as to all her good Subjects in the Government, who are at this Time patient of the utmost Charges and heavy Service for Her Majestys honour as well as their own Support.1

1 Board of Trade, Papers, New England (Ms.), 13, Q. 90.

CHAPTER VII

DUDLEY'S RELATIONS WITH THE COLONIES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, RHODE ISLAND, AND CONNECTICUT

THE Stuart plan for the consolidation of the American colonies was checked by the revolution of 1689. The charters granted by Charles II to Rhode Island and Connecticut were quietly resumed, and the governments established under them were tacitly recognized by William III. Of the Dominion of New England, as it existed in the time of Andros, New Hampshire and New York remained royal provinces, directly dependent upon the crown; while Massachusetts received a charter vesting the appointment of the governor in the king. During the administration of Lord Bellomont, the experiment of joining New York to New England was again tried; but from his death until 1702 this policy was held in abeyance, and was definitely abandoned upon the appointment of Dudley as governor of Massachusetts and of Lord Cornbury as governor of New York. From 1702, throughout the colonial period, New York and Massachusetts, though both exposed to the same dangers and each needing the coöperation of the other, existed not merely independent of one another, but often selfishly neglectful of each other's needs and best interests.

Yet even without New York, many of the military resources of the old jurisdiction of Andros were at Dudley's command. On the same day on which he received his commission for Massachusetts he was commissioned governor of New Hamp

shire; and, pursuant to the resolution of the Privy Council made in 1696, he was directed to take command of the military forces of both Connecticut and Rhode Island in time of war or danger. Although the territory over which Dudley ruled was smaller than that governed by either Andros or Bellomont, yet Dudley interpreted the powers granted to him to the broadest extent, and sought, as far as possible, to establish within the narrower limits a system similar to that which had existed under Andros. He exerted himself to the utmost in his several capacities; and in trying to increase the influence of the crown, and at the same time to extend his own personal power, he became involved in quarrels quite apart from those resulting from his administration in Massachusetts. Massachusetts had boundary disputes with all the other New England colonies; and, although the negotiations over their settlement throw little light upon Dudley's character or administration, they account in some measure for his widespread unpopularity throughout New England. These disputes, however, were minor matters compared with those larger and wider plans which he tried to put into operation and which made him the most hated man in all New England.

1

In New Hampshire alone he was popular. His commission and instructions for the government of that province were almost identical with those which he had received for Massachusetts; but in New Hampshire the quarrels and disputes were of such a nature that, as representative of the queen, he could side with the people against the heirs of the old proprietors, and thus, instead of gaining the ill-will of the Assembly, he won its confidence and support. He resided in Massachusetts during his term of office, and, though he made frequent

1 New Hampshire Provincial Papers, ii. 366 et seq.; Massachusetts Historical Society, Proceedings, 2d Series, viii. 93 et seq.