enacted wholesome laws, the benefit of which is distinctly felt to this day.

It may be further remarked, that history shows the influence of the manners of a people upon their government, and the reciprocal influence of government upon the manners of a people. The history of this period furnishes striking examples of this. In Virginia, the free and licentious manners of society produce a government unsteady and capricious. This government re-acts upon their manners, and aids rather than checks their licentiousness. On the contrary, in New-England, the severe puritanical manners of the people produce a rigid, energetic government, and the government returns its puritanical influence back upon the manners of the people.

UNITED STATES.

PERIOD III.

DISTINGUISHED FOR THE WARS OF KING WILLIAM QUEEN ANNE, AND GEORGE II.

Extending from the accession of William and Mary to the throne of England, 1689, to the Declaration of the War by England against France, 1756, called "the French and Indian War."

Sec. 1. The news of William's accession to the throne of England, filled the colonies with ecstacy. Under the sudden impulse of their feelings, the inhabitants of Boston seized Sir Edmund Andross, with about fifty of his associates, and put them in close confinement, where they lay, until ordered to England, to answer for maleadministration. Connecticut and Rhode Island immediately resumed their charters, and were permitted by his majesty to re-establish their former governments. Massachusetts soon after obtained a new charter, in some respects less favorable to the colony, but in others, more so, than its former one.

Andross had formerly been governor of NewYork, under the duke of York, in which province his administration had been distinguished for measures both arbitrary and severe. Subsequent governors, under the duke, and after he came to the throne, had generally pursued a similar

course. The discontents of the people had been gradually increasing, and they were ready for revolution, when the above intelligence of the proceedings at Boston arrived. A revolution soon. commenced, and, although attended by unhappy events, issued in the restoration of the rights of the people, and the formation of a constitution, which laid the foundation of their provincial code.

From the reduction of New-York, in 1664, to 1683, the people had no share in the government. In 1681, the council court of assizes, and corporation, had solicited the Duke of York to permit the people to choose their own rulers. Accordingly, the next year, Thomas Dongan, a papist, was appointed governor, with instructions to call an assembly, to consist of a council of ten, and of eighteen representatives, elected by the freeholders.

On the accession of the Duke of York to the throne, under the title of James II., he refused to confirm to the people the privileges granted them when he was duke. No assembly was permitted to be convened; printing presses were prohibited, and the more important provincial offices were conferred on papists.

Such was the state of things, when intelligence of the seizure of Andross arrived. This gave a spring to the general dissatisfaction, which burst forth into open resistance to the existing administration.

One Jacob Leisler, with several others, immediately took possession of the fort. Governor Dongan had just embarked for England, leaving the administration of the government, during his absence, to Charles Nicholson, at that time nis deputy. Nicholson and his officers made what opposition to Leisler they were able, but he having been joined by six militia captains, and four hundred and seventy men, Nicholson absconded. Upon this, Leisler assumed the supreme command.

This assumption of Leisler was far from being pleasant to the council and magistrates, at the head of whom were Col. Bayard and the mayor. Finding it impossible, however, to succeed against Leisler in New-York, they retired to Albany, and there employed their influence to foment opposition. Both Leisler, in New-York, and the people at Albany, held their respective garrisons in the name of Will

iam and Mary, but neither would submit to the authority of the other.

In this state of things, a letter from the Lords Carmathen and Halifax, arrived, directed, "To Francis Nicholson, Esq., or in his absence, to such as, for the time being, take care for preserving the peace and administering the laws," &c. Accompanying this letter, was another of a subsequent date, vesting Nicholson with the chief command.

As Nicholson had absconded, Leisler construed the letter as directed to himself, and from that time assumed the title and authority of lieutenant governor. The southern part of New-York generally submitted to him; but Albany refusing subjection, Milborn, his son-in-law, was sent to reduce them. In his first attempt he failed; but during the ensuing spring, 1690, he took possession of the fort, and the inhabitants submitted.

On the 19th of March, 1691, Col. Slaughter arrived at New-York, in the capacity of the king's governor. Nicholson and Bayard, who had been imprisoned by Leisler, were released. The latter was obliged to abandon the fort, and with Milborn, his son-in-law, was apprehended, tried for high treason, and condemned. Their immediate execution was urged by the people; but the governor, fearful of consequences, chose to defer it. To effect their purpose, an nvitation was given him by the citizens to a sumptuous feast, and while his reason was drowned in intoxication, a warrant for their execution was presented to him and signed. Before he recovered his senses, the prisoners were no

more.

Measures so violent greatly agitated the existing parties, but in the end, the revolution which had taken place, restored the rights of Englishmen to the colony. Governor Slaughter convoked an assembly, who formed a constitution. This constitution, among other provisions, secured trials by jury, freedom from taxation, except by the consent of the assembly, and toleration to all denominations of Christians, excepting Roman Catholics.

Sec. 2. While these troubles were distressing the colonies of the north, that of Carolina, in the south, was far from being in a state of tranquillity. Dissensions early arose in that colony respecting the proprietary government, under which they still continued. On the one hand, a part of the

people insisted upon implicit obedience to all the laws and regulations of the proprietors in England while another part contended, on the other hand, that no such obedience was due. Both parties being ardent and determinded, the conflict between them was violent, and greatly prolonged, to the serious injury of the colony.

In addition to these dissensions, others arose between the English settlers and a colony of French Protestants who had planted themselves in the county of Craven; to whom the English denied nearly every civil privilege, and especially the right of representation in the assembly.

In view of these accumulating troubles, John Archdale, one of the proprietors, was sent to America in 1695, with full powers to redress grievances, and, if possible, to adjust existing differences.

Archdale was received with cordiality, and by his singular wisdom and address, was so happy as to accomplish the purposes of his mission, except that he was unable fully to secure the rights and liberties of the French refugees. Not long af ter, however, the prejudices of the English against them abated, and they became incorporated with the freemen of the colony.

Sec. 3. About this period, 1692, commenced in Danvers, then a part of Salem, Massachusetts, a singular infatuation on the supposed prevalence of witchcraft. In a short time, this infatuation pervaded several parts of New-England, producing in its progress, the greatest distress in private families, and disorder and tumult throughout the country.

The first suspicion of witchcraft in New-England, and in the United States, began at Springfield, Massachusetts,