jealousy which forbade free action to Massachusetts being allayed, they renewed their demand for a fundamental law. To the suggestion that the opportunity annually to change their representatives ought to satisfy them, they replied, in substance, "What we crave is not the privilege of changing masters. Some of the powers inherent in the people we do not choose to delegate; some we would intrust, with carefully-guarded restrictions, to our representatives; all we would have exercised by ourselves as well as our deputies, in certain well-defined modes of operation, and in accordance with a fundamental law solemnly agreed upon. That is, we ask a constitution for the Commonwealth." Upon this simple demand they rang the changes through six years of angry political controversy.

Sorely pressed to forego this boon till a more convenient season, they at last pledged themselves to yield for the time even to the existing government, upon the single condition that it should first be submitted to a vote of the people, so that their will might thus be recognized as the proper source of all rightful authority. A Constitution once established, it received their fullest allegiance. From first to last there was nothing factious in their conduct.

For many things they expressed desire as component parts of the frame of government; but upon one only they insisted, and that was a distinct recognition of the people's right to model and remodel their institutions as they saw cause.

It was urged upon them, that their uncompromising demand for this disturbed the harmony which, while the war lasted, ought to be preserved in the patriotic ranks. Their reply was, that, if they were to be the subjects of arbitrary power, it mattered little whether its seat were in London or Boston, and that, if the government now set up were once quietly "permitted to take place,” it would be very difficult ever after to shake it off. The example of Connecticut, and still more emphatically that of Rhode Island, — both which States retained charters far more liberal than that of Massachusetts as the bases of their independent governments, show how just was that apprehension. Nor was there really much in the turmoil of the times to defer the task of framing and adopting a new form of government. The most perfect charters of freedom- so cunningly devised that tyranny cannot reach its victims without entirely setting them aside were the work of disturbed eras. Magna Charta was not the child of

Peace, nor was the Habeas Corpus act. Trial by jury dates back to an age of perpetual war. The Declaration of American Independence was born of conflict; and the Constitution of Massachusetts, providing for the most complex relations of people and government, was none the less wisely constructed, that it was finally framed while war gave strength and tone to men's minds. Is it too much to claim that the Berkshire constitutionalists were wiser than their generation in their strenuous opposition to "the interests which had grown up in the State adverse to any more permanent form of government" than consorted with the small ambitions of the magisterial class?

Committees of Correspondence, Inspection, and Safety. Their Character and Origin. Subordinated in 1776 to the Courts of Law. - The Berkshire Committees refuse Submission. Their Administration of Justice.—Curious Surveillance of Morals and Manners. Town Court established. - Its Rules of Practice and Fee-Table. — Discipline of Capt. Goodrich by the Committee. — He appeals to the Legislature. Details of the Case.

NLY brief allusion has been made in the foregoing chapters

in Pitisfield

courts of law; but the reader will curiously inquire how, when the ordinary machinery of government was obstructed, “tolerable order was maintained."

It so happened that Massachusetts had retained, through all changes in her condition, what to her was of more worth than royal charters, her system of town governments, each so complete within itself, that, in the lapse of exterior authority, it lacked little to become a perfect State; and each with citizens so accustomed to the conduct of public affairs, that they were capable of meeting whatever responsibilities were thrown upon them.

When, therefore, in 1774, the judicial system of the Province was broken up, the towns found little difficulty in assuming so much of its authority as the public necessity required should not utterly fail; resorting, in the absence of precedent, to divers plans for the proper execution of the duties newly devolved upon them. Occasionally the people, in town-meeting assembled, adjudicated directly upon matters brought before them. Sometimes they erected special tribunals; as in Attleborough, where the old Provin

cial fabric was imitated in miniature, with a superior court of four judges, and an inferior court of seven. But generally and in Berkshire County universally-the improvised machinery of justice was much less complex; its entire powers being vested in the committees of inspection, with the occasional aid of a board of arbitrators, such as, immediately after the first suppression of the courts, was appointed in Pittsfield, and of which an account was given in the proper connection.

It must not, however, be supposed that the committee rule was formally devised, adopted, and organized as a substitute for the courts and magistracy. It was an outgrowth, developed little by little by the necessities of the times, from the New-England practice of placing every public business in the hands of a commission.

Under the different organizations known as committees of correspondence, inspection, and safety, it had played an important part in securing unity and vigor in the initiatory stages of the Revolution; and the powers recognized in those bodies by the State and Continental governments were formidable and extensive. Precisely what they were, we are informed by a report to the General Court in October, 1776. According to this paper, the committees, originally existing by sufferance, acted upon their own discretion until the resolves of Congress, directed to them,2 confirmed and in some measure defined their powers; but they continued to "act discretionally" when the resolves were not to be procured, or did not meet the case in hand. Originally the province of the committees of correspondence was, by the interchange of letters and the speedy communication of information, to apprise the community of dangers, and to concert measures for the public good, expose the designs of the enemies of liberty to public execration, and incite opposition to them. The committees of inspection took cognizance of unpatriotic importations of British goods, exerted themselves to suppress the sale of tea, and generally exposed and reprehended violations of the non-importation association, and denounced all acts detrimental to the common interests. The committees of safety were instituted to concert measures for the public safety of their respective towns, and the general safety of the community; "taking cognizance of measures afterwards taken up by Congress

1 Mass. Ar., vol. cxxxvii. p. 118.

2 The Resolves of Association, directed to the committees of inspection.

as well of lesser matters relative to internal police at a time when prostrate law gave no remedy against disorder and confusion."

"These," says the report, "were the powers these several committees had at their institution, although they afterwards received the sanction of the highest authority."

It will be perceived, that, in many particulars, the powers and duties of the three classes of committee were identical; and on the 13th of October, 1775, they were consolidated in one, by an act of the General Court, directing each town, at its annual election, to choose "a committee of correspondence, inspection, and safety for the especial purpose of attending to the general and political interests of the Colonies; to transmit intelligence to committees of the same denomination in other towns and counties, to the General Court and the Council, as they might deem expedient; to inspect the conduct of any inhabitants or residents in their respective towns or districts violating the Continental association, the resolves, directions, or recommendations of Congress, the acts or resolves of the General Court, or the proceedings of former Congresses of this Colony, respecting the struggle with Great Britain; to proceed according to the direction of Congress, and the laws and resolves of this Colony in such cases made and provided; to inform the General Court or the Council of all breaches of trust in the officers of state and other servants of the Colony; to use their influence in promoting peace and harmony; and, finally, to execute any order and resolves of this Court to them directed."

On the 6th of October, the Continental Congress, addressing the committees of inspection, empowered them to arrest and secure every person in their opinion endangering their Colony or the liberties of America.

On the 19th of August, 1776, the committees were directed by the General Court,

"To take possession of the personal and real estate of persons who had, in their opinion, fled to Boston—when in the possession of Gen. Gage — in the late times of trouble, to secure themselves, or have joined our enemies, or have withdrawn themselves out of the country with a view to aid their despotic measures; to take and let out such estates for one year, making an inventory of the personal property, and returning it with the rent of the real estate to the General Court; and to return a list of addressors, associates, and other unfriendly persons; and also the names and crimes of those who have fled to the British fleet or army, together with the evidence of facts against such persons, unless they have given proof of contrition, and made satisfaction to the public."