the people thronged to Faneuil Hall, and, through a committee, declared to the Governor and Council that " nothing can rationally be expected to restore the peace of the town, and prevent blood and carnage, but the immediate removal of the troops." Governor Hutchinson said: "Nothing shall ever induce me to order the troops out of town;" but Mr. Secretary Oliver whispered: "You must either comply or determine to leave the province." This would have been an end to "his Honor's" advancement. The troops were removed to the castle.

In compliance with the mandate of the minister, Governor Hutchinson further prorogued the General Court, to meet at Cambridge, March 15th, instead of at its ancient seat at Boston. They remonstrated, and Hutchinson answered: "I must consider myself, as a servant of the king, to be governed"— solely "by what appears to be his Majesty's pleasure.” Many messages and speeches were exchanged; and on May 30th the House, before electing the Council, entered on its journal a protest against its session at Cambridge being drawn into precedent.

Boston, in the instructions to her representatives in this court, denounces the doctrines of the ministry as "political solecisms, which may take root and spring up under the meridian of modern Rome; but we trust in GOD they will not flourish in the soil and climate of British America. .. We, therefore, enjoin you, at all hazards, to deport yourselves (as we rely your own hearts will stimulate) like the faithful representatives of a free-born, awakened, and determined people, who, being impregnated with the spirit of liberty in conception, and nurtured in principles of freedom from their infancy, are resolved to breathe the same celestial ether till summoned to resign the heavenly flame by that omnipotent God who gave it."

writs of assistance: "The same glorious portraits of King Charles the Second and King James the Second, to which might be added little, miserable likenesses of Governor Winthrop, Governor Bradstreet, Governor Endecott, and Governor Belcher, hung up in obscure corners of the room." The latter are now in the Senate Chamber. "Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson, Commander-in-chief in the absence of the governor, is at the head of the council table. LieutenantColonel Dalrymple, Commander-in-chief of his Majesty's military forces, taking rank of all his Majesty's counsellors, must be seated by the side of the LieutenantGovernor and Commander-in-chief of the province. Eight and twenty counsellors must be painted, all seated at the council board. Let me see!--what costume? What was the fashion of that day? Large white wigs, English scarlet cloth cloaks; some of them with gold-laced hats, not on their heads indeed, in so august a presence, but on a table before them."-See pp. 113-14.

Such were some of the leading events after Dr. Chauncy's sermon in 1766, and such the condition and spirit of the times when Dr. Cook preached the "Election Sermon" of 1770,- a discourse that must have "come home to men's business and bosoms."

The preacher, a graduate of Harvard College in the class of 1735, then in the sixty-second year of his age, was "a man of science, of a social disposition, distinguished by his good sense and prudence, and a faithful servant of the Lord Jesus." He died June 4, 1783, aged 74.

The spirit and formula of legislative action on "election-day," in the revolutionary period, appear in the following contemporary account:

"BOSTON, May 31, 1770. Wednesday being the Anniversary of the Day appointed by the Royal Charter for the Election of Councillors for this Province, the Great and General Court or Assembly met at Harvard College, in Cambridge, at Nine o'clock in the Morning; when the usual Oaths were administered to the Gentlemen, who were returned to serve as Members of the Honorable House of Representatives, who also subscribed to the Declaration:-' -The House then made Choice of Mr. SAMUEL ADAMS for their Clerk; after which they chose the Hon. THOMAS CUSHING, Esq., their Speaker.

"About Ten o'clock His Honor the Lieutenant-Governor, being escorted by the Troop of Guards from his Seat at Milton, arrived at Harvard College, and being in the Chair, a Committee of the House presented the Speaker elect to His Honor, who afterwards sent a Message in Writing, agreeable to the Royal Explanatory Charter, that he approved of their Choice. The House then chose a Committee to remonstrate to His Honor the Calling of the Assembly at that Place.

"At Eleven o'clock His Honor the Lieutenant-Governor, accompanied by the Honorable His Majesty's Council, the Honorable House of Representatives, and a Number of other Gentlemen, preceded by the first Company in Cambridge of the Regiment of Militia, commanded by the Honorable Brigadier Brattle, went in Procession to the Meeting-House, where a Sermon suitable to the Occasion was preached by the Rev'd Mr. SAMUEL COOKE, of Cambridge, from these words: 2 Sam. xxiii. 3, 4. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over man must be just, ruling in the fear of God, etc. After Divine Service the Procession returned to Harvard-Hall, where an Entertainment was provided.

"Previous to the choice of Councillors,

1 Allen.

in the afternoon, Letters

were read from the Hon. BENJAMIN LINCOLN, Esq.; the Hon. JOHN
HILL, Esq.; the Hon. GAMALIEL BRADFORD, Esq.; resigning their Seats
at the Council Board, on account of their Age and Bodily Indisposition.
"The following gentlemen were elected Councillors for the ensuing
year, viz.:

For the late Colony of MASSACHUSETTS BAY.
The HONORABLE

SAMUEL DANFORTH, Esq.;
ISAAC ROYALL, Esq.;
JOHN ERVING, Esq.;
† WILLIAM BRATTLE, Esq.;
JAMES BOWDOIN, Esq.;
THOMAS HUBBARD, Esq.;
HARRISON GRAY, Esq.;
JAMES RUSSELL, Esq.;
ROYALL TYLER, Esq.;

JAMES PITTS, Esq.;
SAMUEL DEXTER, Esq.;
† JOSEPH GERRISH, Esq.;
† THOMAS SANDERS, Esq.;
† JOHN HANCOCK, Esq.;

† ARTEMAS WARD, Esq.;
† BENJA. GREENLEAF, Esq.;
JOSHUA HENSHAW, Esq.;
† STEPHEN HALL, Esq.

"The list of Councillors chosen Yesterday being this day, agreeable to the Direction of the Royal Charter, presented to the Lieutenant Governor, His Honor was pleased to consent to the Election of the Gentlemen before-mentioned, except the Hon. JOHN HANCOCK, Esq., and JERATHMEEL BOWERS, Esq. JOSEPH GERRISH, Esq., declined going to the Board."- The Massachusetts Gazette, Monday, June 4, 1770.

DISCOURSE III.

AN ELECTION SERMON.

HE THAT RULETH OVER MEN MUST BE JUST, RULING IN THE FEAR OF GOD. AND HE SHALL BE AS THE LIGHT OF THE MORNING WHEN THE SUN RISETH, EVEN A MORNING WITHOUT CLOUDS: AS THE TENDER GRASS SPRINGING

OUT OF THE EARTH BY CLEAR SHINING AFTER RAIN. -2 Sam. xxiii. 3, 4.

THE solemn introduction to the words now read, respectable hearers, is manifestly designed to engage your attention and regard, as given by inspiration from God, and as containing the last, the dying words of one of the greatest and best of earthly rulers, who, by ruling in the fear of God, had served his generation according to the divine will. Transporting reflection! when his flesh and his heart failed, and his glory was consigned to dust.

From this and many other passages in the sacred oracles, it is evident that the Supreme Ruler, though he has directed to no particular mode of civil government, yet allows and approves of the establishment of it among

men.

The ends of civil government, in divine revelation, are clearly pointed out, the character of rulers described, and the duty of subjects asserted and explained; and in this view civil government may be considered as an ordinance of God, and, when justly exercised, greatly subservient to the glorious purposes of divine providence and grace: but the particular form is left to the choice and determination of mankind.

In a pure state of nature, government is in a great measure unnecessary. Private property in that state is inconsiderable. Men need no arbiter to determine their rights; they covet only a bare support; their stock is but the subsistence of a day; the uncultivated deserts are their habitations, and they carry their all with them in their frequent removes. They are each one a law to himself, which, in general, is of force sufficient for their security in that course of life.

It is far otherwise when mankind are formed into collective bodies, or a social state of life. Here, their frequent mutual intercourse, in a degree, necessarily leads them to different apprehensions respecting their several rights, even where their intentions are upright. Temptations to injustice and violence increase, and the occasions of them multiply in proportion to the increase and opulence of the society. The laws of nature, though enforced by divine revelation, which bind the conscience of the upright, prove insufficient to restrain the sons of violence, who have not the fear of God before their eyes.

A society cannot long subsist in such a state; their safety, their social being, depends upon the establishment of determinate rules or laws, with proper penalties to enforce them, to which individuals shall be subjected. The laws, however wisely adapted, cannot operate to the public security unless they are properly executed. The execution of them remaining in the hands of the whole community, leaves individuals to determine their own rights, and, in effect, in the same circumstances as in a state of nature. The remedy in this case is solely in the hands of the community.

A society emerging from a state of nature, in respect to authority, are all upon a level; no individual can justly challenge a right to make or execute the laws by which it

1