Home Biographies -Signers of the Declaration -Signers of the A. O. C. -Signers of the U. S. Constitution -Wives of the Signers -Other Founders Documents Forum FAQs Search

Page 2 Declaration of Independence: Historically Considered A line by line historical analysis of the accusations of the Declaration of Independence. II. He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and, when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. In 1764, the assembly of New York were desirous of taking measures to conciliate the Indian tribes, particularly the Six Nations, and to attach them firmly to the British colonies. To this measure Governor Colden lent his cheerful assent, privately ; but representations having been made to the King, by an agent of Lord Bute, then travelling in the colonies, that the ulterior design was to add new strength to the physical power of the colonists for some future action inimical to their dependence upon Great Britain, the monarch sent instructions to all his governors to desist from such alliances, or to suspend their operations until his assent should be given. With this order, the matter rested, for then (as was doubtless his intention) he "utterly neglected to attend to them." The assembly of Massachusetts, in 1770, passed a law for taxing the commissioners of customs and other officers of the Crown, the same as other citizens. Of this they complained to the King, and he sent instructions to Governor Hutchinson to assent to no tax bill of this kind, without first obtaining the royal consent. These instructions were in violation of the expressed power of the charter of Massachusetts; and the assembly, by resolution, declared "that for the Governor to withhold his assent to bills, merely by force of his instructions, is vacating the charter, giving instructions the force of law within the province." Neither the assembly nor the Governor would yield, and no tax bill was passed that session. The assembly was prorogued until September, and then again until April, 1772; and all that while laws of pressing importance were virtually annulled—the King "utterly neglected to attend to them." < Prev Page Next Page > Designed and Edited by John Vinci Last modified August 10, 2004