Independence of the Massachusetts Legislature
Response to the King’s Letter About Committees of Correspondence
Aug 30, 2009
In December 1773, colonial patriots masquerading as Indians threw tea off three ships in Boston Harbor—the now famous Boston Tea Party. This and other actions of the colonists over several years had caused the governor to take strong measures. He had set himself as the final decision maker in court matters of probate, marriage, and divorce.
The Governor Overruled by the King
Governor Hutchinson had informed the king about this practice, in 1771, and continued what he was doing. King George III talked it over with his Privy Council, but did not respond until sometime in 1773. The king decided the governor had acted wrongly and expected the governor to make this report to the Massachusetts legislature: “I am now able to inform you, that it has been signified to me, to be his majesty’s pleasure, that I do acquiesce in the determination of the majority of the councilors present, voting as a court for proving will and administration, and deciding controversies concerning marriage and divorce, although I should differ in opinion from that majority.”
But, also included in the governor’s letter to the legislature was this item: “I am required to signify to you his majesty’s disapprobation of the appointment of committees of correspondence, in various instances, which sit and act, during the recess of the general court, by prorogation.”
The Committees of Correspondence Angered the King
Colonial legislatures were elected by the people, but sat in session at the pleasure of the governor, a royal appointee. And the governor could prorogate the legislature (end their session) whenever he chose. The governors did that as they thought the king would be pleased with their actions. The colonies felt that they needed some means to overcome the loss of their legislatures.
So several of the colonies formed Committees of Correspondence. These were elected by the assemblies when they were in sessions, and were empowered to sit and act in the full legislature’s absence. Corresponding with other colonies was only a part of their purpose. They were to function as a mini-legislature on matters dealing with loss of rights when the full legislature was not available to protect the citizens. The governor in one colony could not act without the other colonies knowing about it and coming to the aid of the colony being persecuted.
The Legislature Responds, Declaring They Were an Independent Body
The Massachusetts House of Representatives selected a committee of Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Col. Warren, Col. Thayer, and Captain Derby to respond to the governor’s letter and, indirectly, to King George himself. They first expressed satisfaction that the governor would no longer have the final say in the court matters mentioned.
Concerning the matter of Committees of Correspondence, the response was not one of acceptance. The governor’s letter had not given the reasons why the king was displeased about the Committees. Therefore, Adams and the others wrote: “until we shall have such explanation laid before us, a full answer to this part of your speech will not be expected from us.”
However, they could not “omit saying, upon this occasion, that while the common rights of the American subjects, continue to be attacked in various instances, and at times when the several assemblies are not sitting, it is highly necessary that they should correspond with each other, in order to unite in the most effectual means for the obtaining a redress of their grievances.”
The Response Puts the Blame on Those who Misinformed the King
The Massachusetts legislature was not going to back down. The king could express his disapprobation about the Committees all he wanted to. So long as the governors of the various colonies, acting in the king’s name, chose to prorogate the elected assemblies, those assemblies would protect themselves as best they could, by keeping in touch with one another and sending aid and encouragement whenever some new action of the king’s governors tried to curtail American rights.
The response went on to give the king the benefit of the doubt. Massachusetts had obtained the king’s disfavor, they wrote, “by means of misrepresentations.” The king was taking this step against the Committees because he was misinformed, and there was “good ground to suspect, that those who may have misinformed him, have had in meditation further measures destructive to the colonies, which there were apprehensive would be defeated by means of the committees of correspondence sitting and acting in the recess of the respective assemblies.
The Massachusetts legislature, in declaring they would not follow the king’s wishes, took another step for the thirteen colonies along the road to independence.
Source: Hezekiah Niles, Principles and Acts of the Revolution in America, Centennial edition, 1876, available at Google books.
 |
 |
