DOCSLIB.ORG

Pennsylvania Magazine of HISTORY and BIOGRAPHY

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE Pennsylvania Magazine OF HISTORY AND BIOGRAPHY The Mystery of Pennsylvania's Royal Charter IN 1812 a document, alleged to be the original Charter of Charles II to William Penn for his province in America, was deposited with the Secretary of the Commonwealth at Harrisburg. It has since been transferred to the State Archives and is now on exhibit in the State Museum. If authentic, it is beyond question the basic historical manuscript of Pennsylvania's record; it marks the formal beginning of her history. Although at first accepted as the original copy of the royal grant, its authenticity was later challenged by many writers and historians. Their arguments may be summarized as follows: 1. Many historians have recorded the fact that Charles II signed the Charter on March 4, 1680/1.1 As his signature is not on the copy at Harrisburg, that copy cannot be the original. 2. William Brooke Rawle made the statement that the Harrisburg copy "is not a copy of the Charter as it ultimately passed the Great Seal, but merely a copy of the record of the Charter as it passed the Privy Seal."2 1 This statement is to be found in most histories of Pennsylvania and in most biographies of William Penn. 2 The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography (PMHB)> XVI (1892), 91. 415 416 NICHOLAS B. WAINWRIGHT October 3. Circumstantial evidence indicated that a Penn agent, John Cadwalader, had sent the original Charter to a lawyer in York, Pennsylvania, in 1844, and it had never been returned.3 4. The Harrisburg document bears an endorsement dated June 27, 1682, thereby indicating that it was simply a certified copy of later date than the original.4 Mr. Rawle's attack on the Harrisburg copy was published in this MAGAZINE in 1892 under the title, "Where is The Original of the Charter of Charles The Second to William Penn For The Province of Pennsylvania?"5 It is thus fitting that an answer to this conundrum should appear in these pages. However, before the arguments given above can be considered, it will first be necessary to trace the prepa- ration of the original document and to detail the few facts which have come to light concerning its whereabouts during the past two and one-half centuries. Notice of Penn's first formal effort to secure his grant is found in early English records, which show that by order of the King the Earl of Sunderland referred a petition of Penn's to the Lords of Trade and Plantations on June 1, 1680. It then became the duty of that committee of the Privy Council to study the petition, praying that Penn be granted a tract of land in America, and to report on it to His Majesty.6 The Lords of Trade consulted with Penn from time to time, and referred copies of his petition to the agents of the Duke of York and Lord Baltimore to determine how far Penn's desires agreed with the boundaries of Maryland and the Duke's properties. In due course the Duke's approval was secured, and on November 4, 1680, the 3 Mr. Rawle states that a box of Penn title deeds was delivered to him by General George Cadwalader, sometime after 1869. In this box was a letter of Judge John Cadwalader, dated November 9, 1844, and addressed to Thomas C. Hambly in York. The letter lists various documents that Cadwalader was sending to Hambly, the first of which was "1681—Charter to W. Penn." From this, Mr. Rawle concluded that the original charter had never been turned over to the state at all, but had been sent to Hambly and never returned. Ibid., 87. 4Scharf and Westcott took this view in their 1884 History of Philadelphia, I, 83. Other historians accepted and repeated this statement. 5 PMHB, XVI (1892), 86-92. Mr. Rawle, however, had questioned the authenticity of the document as early as 1880. Ibid., IV (1880), 513. 6 Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, America and West Indies, 1677-1680 (London, 1896), 544, item 1373. A fragment of Penn's petition, all- that remained of the original, was printed on page 51 of the Breviate of Penn v. Baltimore. It may also be found in Samuel Hazard's Annals of Pennsylvania, 1609-1682 (Philadelphia, 1850), 474. 1949 MYSTERY OF PENNSYLVANIA S ROYAL CHARTER 4I7 Lords of Trade recorded "A draft Patent submitted by Mr. Penn ordered to be shown to Lord Baltimore's agents and the Attorney- General." Later in the same month this draft was examined by Lord Chief Justice North.7 By February 24 of the following year the draft of the grant had reached its final stages. On that day it was read to the Lords of Trade and Plantations, and "there being a blank left for the name agreed to leave the nomination to the King." Accordingly, William Blathwayt, secretary of the committee, drafted the following letter:8 May it please yr Majy: In obediance to yr. Majy: orders signified unto us by the E. of Sunderland on the first of June last We have prepared the Draught of a Charter constituting William Pen Esq Absolute Proprietary of a Tract of Land in America therein mentioned, Which We humbly present to yr Majy: for yr. Royall Approbatn leaving also the naming of the sd. Province unto yr. Majy: Which is most humby submitted 24th: of Feb. 1680/1 When this draft was brought before the King in Privy Council on February 25, he was pleased to approve it, "And did Order, that one of his Principall Secretarys of State do give Directions for preparing a Bill for his Majestys Royall Signature to passe the Great Seale of England, according to the said draft (which was thereunto annexed) and that his Majestys Principall Secretary of State do receive his Majestys Pleasure, what Name he will give the said Province, to the end the same may be inserted in the said Bill accordingly."9 It would then have been in order for the Secretary of State to prepare a warrant to the Attorney General ordering the preparation 7 Calendar of State Papers, 625, 628, 629, 632, items 1574, 1580, 1584, 1592. An account of the processing of Penn's petition and draft patent may be found in greater detail in the Breviate. 8 Photostatic copy of Blathwayt's draft. Photostatic copies of the English documents as' well as other manuscripts cited, unless otherwise specified, are in The Historical Society of Pennsylvania. $ Acts of The Privy Council of England. Colonial Series (Hereford, 1910), II, 17, item 28. This printed transcript records February 23 as the date of the draft's appearance before the King. This is an error. A check of the original entry (page 224, Privy Council Register, Charles II, Volume 16, P.C. 2/69, Public Record Office) gives the date as February 25. 418 NICHOLAS B. WAINWRIGHT October of the King's bill. This warrant went to the Clerk of the Patents, who made a fair copy of it and sent it on to the Attorney General. Such warrants became the property of the recipient and are, there- fore, not in public hands. The Attorney General then transmitted the draft of the patent to the Patent Bill Office, where a copy was made and returned to him for approval. Upon obtaining this it was sent back to the Patent Office and copied on parchment. Two tran- scripts of the engrossed copy were also made, one being sent to the Privy Signet Office and one to the Privy Seal Office. The engrossed copy became the King's bill and was presented to Charles for his royal signature.10 Charles signed the top of each of the three sheets constituting the King's bill, Charles R. The concluding line of the last sheet contained some blanks: "Witnesse Ourselfe at Westminster the in the yeare of our Reigne ." Those blanks were not filled in, but the necessary information was added by endorsement of the Lord Chancellor, Lord Finch, who wrote on the face of this sheet "Heneage Finch Feb 28th 1680/1."11 This may be taken as evidence that the King signed the bill on that day, a Monday, prob- ably in the Chancellor's presence. The bill took its date from the latter's endorsement, as did the bills of signet and privy seal which passed on the same day. It is proper at this point to note that the only document the King signed was the King's bill. This was a bill authorizing the passage of a charter—it was not the charter itself. Moreover, it was signed on February 28. Because of this, historians who record that Charles signed the Charter on March 4 are not exact either in their dating or in their document. We can thus disregard the first argument listed against the Harrisburg document. The signed King's bill was immediately transmitted to the Privy Signet Office as authority for that office to issue the signet bill. The Clerk of the Signet Office having compared the bill with the tran- script of it sent to him by the Patent Office, collated the transcript with the King's bill, and transformed it into a bill of privy signet by 10 Information on the passage of a charter is based largely on Charles M. Andrews* Guide to the Materials for American History to 1783 in the Public Record Office of Great Britain, Carnegie Institution of Washington, 90-A (Washington, 1908), I, 268-272. H Photostatic copy of the King's bill.
Recommended publications
  • Bibliography of A.F. Pollard's Writings

    Bibliography of A.F. Pollard's Writings

    BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.F. POLLARD'S WRITINGS This bibliography is not quite complete: we omitted mention of very short book reviews, and we have not been able to trace every one of Pollard's contributions to the T.L.S. As to his letters to the Editor of The Times, we only mentioned the ones consulted on behalf of our research. There has been no separate mention of Pollard's essays from the years 1915-1917, collectedly published in The Commonwealth at War (1917). The Jesuits in Poland, Oxford, 1892. D.N.B. vol. 34: Lucas, Ch. (1769-1854); Luckombe, Ph. (d. 1803); Lydiat, Th. (1572-1646). vol. 35: Macdonald, A. (1834-1886); Macdonell, A. (1762-1840); Macegan, O. (d. 1603); Macfarlan, W. (d. 1767); Macha­ do, R. (d. lSI I?); Mackenzie, W.B. (1806-1870); Maclean, Ch. (1788-1824); Magauran, E. (IS48-IS93); Maguire, H. (d. 1600); Maguire, N. (1460-1512). vol. 36: Manderstown, W. (ISIS-IS40); Mansell, F. (1579-166S); Marshall, W. (d. 153S); Martin, Fr. (1652-1722); Martyn, R. (d. 1483); Mascall,R. (d. 1416); Mason,]. (1503-1566); Mason, R. (1571-1635). Review :].B. Perkins, France under the Regency, London, 1892. E.H.R. 8 (1893), pp. 79 1-793. 'Sir Edward Kelley' in Lives oj Twelve Bad Men, ed. Th. Seccombe, London, 1894, pp. 34-54· BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.F. POLLARD'S WRITINGS 375 D.N.B. vol. 37: Matcham, G. (1753-1833); Maunsfield, H. (d. 1328); Maurice, Th. (1754-1824); Maxfield, Th. (d. 1616); May, W. (d. 1560); Mayart, S. (d. 1660?); Mayers, W.F.
  • Mapmaking in England, Ca. 1470–1650

    Mapmaking in England, Ca. 1470–1650

    54 • Mapmaking in England, ca. 1470 –1650 Peter Barber The English Heritage to vey, eds., Local Maps and Plans from Medieval England (Oxford: 1525 Clarendon Press, 1986); Mapmaker’s Art for Edward Lyman, The Map- world maps maker’s Art: Essays on the History of Maps (London: Batchworth Press, 1953); Monarchs, Ministers, and Maps for David Buisseret, ed., Mon- archs, Ministers, and Maps: The Emergence of Cartography as a Tool There is little evidence of a significant cartographic pres- of Government in Early Modern Europe (Chicago: University of Chi- ence in late fifteenth-century England in terms of most cago Press, 1992); Rural Images for David Buisseret, ed., Rural Images: modern indices, such as an extensive familiarity with and Estate Maps in the Old and New Worlds (Chicago: University of Chi- use of maps on the part of its citizenry, a widespread use cago Press, 1996); Tales from the Map Room for Peter Barber and of maps for administration and in the transaction of busi- Christopher Board, eds., Tales from the Map Room: Fact and Fiction about Maps and Their Makers (London: BBC Books, 1993); and TNA ness, the domestic production of printed maps, and an ac- for The National Archives of the UK, Kew (formerly the Public Record 1 tive market in them. Although the first map to be printed Office). in England, a T-O map illustrating William Caxton’s 1. This notion is challenged in Catherine Delano-Smith and R. J. P. Myrrour of the Worlde of 1481, appeared at a relatively Kain, English Maps: A History (London: British Library, 1999), 28–29, early date, no further map, other than one illustrating a who state that “certainly by the late fourteenth century, or at the latest by the early fifteenth century, the practical use of maps was diffusing 1489 reprint of Caxton’s text, was to be printed for sev- into society at large,” but the scarcity of surviving maps of any descrip- 2 eral decades.
  • The Role of the Channel Islands in the Development and Application of Norman Law During the Late Middle Ages and Early Modern Period

    The Role of the Channel Islands in the Development and Application of Norman Law During the Late Middle Ages and Early Modern Period

    THE JERSEY & GUERNSEY LAW REVIEW 2018 THE ROLE OF THE CHANNEL ISLANDS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF NORMAN LAW DURING THE LATE MIDDLE AGES AND EARLY MODERN PERIOD Tim Thornton Although attention has been paid to the impact of continental Norman law on the Channel Islands, the impact of the experience and practice of the islands themselves on Norman law, more generally, has not been taken into consideration. This is despite the fact that it is increasingly clear that, far from being isolated from developments in continental Normandy, at the social, economic and ecclesiastical level after 1204 the islands were directly involved in exchanges in many contexts. In this paper the role of the islands is assessed in the practice and development of Norman law in the period from the fifteenth century to the seventeenth century. 1 In this short paper I intend to consider briefly the history of Norman law in its relation to the Islands, and more specifically the place and influence of the Islands within the wider Norman legal context. The role of Norman customary law in Jersey and Guernsey has been extensively discussed. Terrien’s commentary on the Ancienne Coutume was published in 1574 and was reprinted in 1578 and 1654. It was in Guernsey’s case the reference point for the limited degree of codification achieved through the Approbation des Loix in 1583, while Jersey remained more straightforwardly able to refer to what ironically in same year was published on the mainland as the Coutume Reformée. Even after the end of the 16th century, Island law across both Bailiwicks continued to develop with reference to the practice of the mainland, including the Coutume Reformée, through the commentators on it, Basnage, Bérault, Godefroy, and D’Aviron being the main ones in the period before the 18th century.
  • Her Majesty's Mails

    Her Majesty's Mails

    HER MAJESTY'S MAILS: HISTOEY OF THE POST-OFFICE, AND AN INDUSTRIAL ACCOUNT OF ITS PRESENT CONDITION. BY WJLLIAM LEWINS, OF THE GENEKAL POST-OFFICE. SECOND EDITION, REVISED, CORRECTED, AND ENLARGED. LONDON : SAMPSON LOW, SON, AND MAESTON, MILTON HOUSE, LUDGATE HILL. 1865. [The Right of Translation is reserved.} TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE HENRY, LOED BKOUGHAM AND VAUX ETC. ETC. ETC. WHO DURING AN UNUSUALLY LONG AND LABORIOUS LIFE HAS EVER BEEN THE EARNEST ELOQUENT AND SUCCESSFUL ADVOCATE OF ALL KINDS OF SOCIAL PROGRESS AND INTELLECTUAL ADVANCEMENT AND WHO FROM THE FIRST GAVE HIS MOST STRENUOUS AND INVALUABLE ASSISTANCE IN PARLIAMENT TOWARDS CARRYING THE MEASURE OF PENNY POSTAGE REFORM IS BY PERMISSION DEDICATED WITH FEELINGS OF DEEP ADMIRATION RESPECT AND GRATITUDE BY THE AUTHOR PBEFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. THE general interest taken in this work on its first appearance, and the favourable reception accorded to it, has abundantly- proved that many agreed with me in thinking that, in spite of the world of books issuing from the press, there were still great gaps in the "literature of social history," and that to some extent my present venture was calculated to fill one of them. That my critics have been most indulgent I have had more and more reason to know as I have gone on with the revision of the book. To make it less unworthy of the kind treatment it received, I have taken this opportunity to re-write the principal part of it, and to go over with extreme care and fidelity the remaining portion. In addition to the ordinary sources of information, of which I have made diligent and conscientious use, I have been privileged to peruse the old records of the Post-office, still carefully kept at St.
  • The General Court of Virginia, 1619–1776

    The General Court of Virginia, 1619–1776

    University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Law Faculty Publications School of Law 2020 The General Court of Virginia, 1619–1776 William Hamilton Bryson University of Richmond - School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/law-faculty-publications Part of the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation W. H. Bryson, The General Court of Virginia 1619-1776, in Central Courts in Early Modern Europe and the Americas, 531 (A. M. Godfrey and C. H. van Rhee ed., 2020). This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 29.04.20, 15:24 | L101 |Werk Godfrey_van Rhee, Duncker | #13501, Godfrey_van Rhee.indd, D / VSchn | ((NR / Fr/CS6)) S. 530 W. H. BRySoN The General Court of Virginia, 1619–1776 Introduction The General Court of Virginia began with the reorganization of the gov- ernment of the colony of Virginia in 1619. The court was established not for any political motives to control, or for any financial motives to collect lucra- tive fines, but it was a part of the tradition of good government. Private disputes are better settled in official courts of law rather than by self-help and vendetta. Therefore, access to the courts is good public policy. From its foundation in 1607 until 1624, Virginia was a private corporation that was created by a succession of royal charters; in its organization, it was similar to an English municipal corporation.1 The first royal charter and the accompanying instructions set up a Council of government, and this Council was given broad and general judicial powers.2 The model for this was the cities and boroughs of medieval England which had their own courts of law for the settlement of local disputes.
  • The Library Catalogue Is Available As a PDF Here

    The Library Catalogue Is Available As a PDF Here

    Author Title Section Name Shelf Index Scriptorum Novus. Mediae Latinitatis Ab Anno DCCC Usque AD Dictionaries 2E Annum MCC. Supplementum Rolls of Parliament, Reign of Henry V, vol.IV Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Rolls of Parliament, Reign of Henry VI, vol.V Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Rolls of Parliament, Reign of Richard II, vol. III Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Inquisitionum in Officio Rotulorum Cancellariae Hiberniae asservatarum Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Repertorium, vol. I Patent Rolls Henry II-Henry VII. Rotulorum Patentium et Clausorum Cancellariae Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Hiberniae Calendarium Calendar of the Irish Patent Rolls of James I Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Einhardi Vita Karoli Magni Sources 5B Rolls of Parliament. Edward I & II, vol. I Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Rolls of Parliament. Edward III, vol. II Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Rolls of Parliament. Edward IV, vol.VI Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Transcripts of Charters and Privileges to cities, Towns, Abbeys and other Bodies Corporate Irish Sources: Oversize 4A 18 Henry II to 18 Richard II (1171-1395) Ninth Report of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscript. Irish Sources: Oversize 4A Part II, Appendix & Index Pleas before Theobald de Verdun, Irish Sources 4A Justiciar of Ireland Pleas of the Crown before Edward le Botilla, Irish Sources 4A Justiciar of Ireland Laws of Breteuil. (2 vols. Bound in Orange Plastic Covers) Irish Sources 4A Calendar of the Justiciary Rolls or the Proceedings in the Court of Justiciar Irish Sources: Central of Ireland preserved in the Public Record 4B Administration Office of Ireland. 1st -7th Years of the reign of Edward II(1308-1314) Calendar of Memoranda Rolls (Exchequer) Irish Sources: Central 4B Michaelmas 1326-Michaelmas 1327 Administration Author Title Section Name Shelf Irish Sources: Sancti Bernardi Opera vol.I 4D Ecclesiastical Irish Sources: Sancti Bernardi Opera vol.II 4D Ecclesiastical Irish Sources: Sancti Bernardi Opera vol.III 4D Ecclesiastical Irish Sources: Sancti Bernardi Opera vol.IV 4D Ecclesiastical Irish Sources: Sancti Bernardi Opera vol.
  • Jurisdiction in the English Atlantic, 1603-1643

    Jurisdiction in the English Atlantic, 1603-1643

    Legal Settlements: Jurisdiction in the English Atlantic, 1603-1643 Ryan Matthew Bibler San Jose, CA Bachelor of Arts, California State University, Sacramento, 2007 Master of Arts, University of Virginia, 2009 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History University of Virginia May, 2015 ii Abstract This dissertation examines the proliferation of English jurisdictions that accompanied and in many ways drove early seventeenth century English Atlantic settlement. It presents a process of jurisdictional definition, refinement, and performance by which the king, his council, and all the proprietors, governors, and planters engaged in Atlantic enterprise established frameworks for government in the king’s Atlantic dominions. In establishing English jurisdictions in Atlantic places, these actors both extended England’s legal regime to new shores and also integrated places like Barbados and Virginia into the king’s composite monarchy. The dissertation seeks to integrate two historiographies that are often held distinct: the story of domestic English legal development and the story of “imperial” legal development. By viewing legal development and English Atlantic settlement through the lens of jurisdiction this study shows that the domestic and the imperial were inextricably intertwined. Yet the novel circumstances of Atlantic settlement prompted significant legal innovation, particularly as the prominent model of colonial government shifted from corporate authority to proprietorial authority. As jurisdiction became commoditized with the introduction of proprietary grants, colonial legal development began to diverge and the possibility of a distinct imperial sphere began to emerge, though it remained nebulous and ill-formed.
  • The Regimes of Somerset and Northumberland

    The Regimes of Somerset and Northumberland

    RE-WRITING THE HISTORY OF TUDOR POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT: THE REGIMES OF SOMERSET AND NORTHUMBERLAND BY DALE HOAK Professor Hoak is a member of the history department at the College of William and Mary OR sheer drama, few periods in English history can compare with the shock-ridden reign of Edward VI (i547-1553). Infla- Ftion, war, rebellion, plague, famine, political scandal—national calamities of every sort, it seemed, visited England in these years, dis- asters punctuated, as it were, by the ultimate tragedy of the king's pre- mature death (6 July 1553). At fifteen, three years before his majority, this bright lad, whose portraits picture him so jauntily daggered and plumed, died hairless and pitiful, the nearly comatose victim of tubercu- losis and colds. The boy's end was all the more poignant since in life this Renaissance prince, so full of promise and learning, gave only his name to a reign: in fact he was a crowned puppet, his kingly authority divided among the members of a band of avaricious courtiers who, in their quest to dominate him and his powers of patronage, predictably fell out, their hatreds and jealousies erupting publicly in treasons and state trials. At the center of this struggle for power and authority stood the two great personalities of the age, Edward Seymour, duke of Somerset, and John Dudley, earl of Warwick and (after 1551) duke of Northumber- land. For six and a half years these two successively governed England, acting essentially as de facto kings. As England's designated Lord Pro- tector, Somerset survived at the top until October 1549 when his office was abolished in a couf d'état directed in part by Northumberland, a man so obsessed by the threat of Somerset's subsequent opposition that he was driven finally to arrange for Somerset's execution (January 1552).
  • Imagining a Constitutional World of Legislative Supremacy

    Imagining a Constitutional World of Legislative Supremacy

    WHAT IF MADISON HAD WON? IMAGINING A CONSTITUTIONAL WORLD OF LEGISLATIVE SUPREMACY ALISON L. LACROIX* INTRODUCTION In the summer of 1787, when the delegates to the Constitutional Convention gathered in Philadelphia, one of the most formidable hurdles they faced was building a functional federal government that contained more than one sovereign. Throughout much of the colonial period, British North American political thinkers had challenged the orthodox metropolitan insistence on unitary sovereignty vested in Parliament, and the accompanying metropolitan aversion to any constitutional system that appeared to create an imperium in imperio, or a sovereign within a sovereign.1 By the 1780s, despite much disagreement among the members of the founding generation as to the precise balance between sovereigns, both political theory and lived experience had convinced Americans that their system could, and indeed must, not just accommodate but also depend upon multiple levels of government.2 Identifying the proper degree of federal supremacy and the best means of building it into the constitutional structure were thus central concerns for many members of the founding generation.3 Their real project was an institutional one: whether—which soon became how—to replace the highly decentralized, legislature-centered structure of the Articles of Confederation with a more robust, multi-branch general government to serve as the constitutional hub connecting the state spokes. In preparing for the convention, Virginia delegate James Madison, who was at the
  • Placemen's Progress: the Governors of Provincial New York, 1717Т•Fi1753

    Placemen's Progress: the Governors of Provincial New York, 1717Т•Fi1753

    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 1974 Placemen's Progress: The Governors of Provincial New York, 1717–1753 Neil Ovadia The Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/3909 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Paga(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, tney are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
  • CHRONOLOGY of QUEEN ELIZABETH I's PROGRESSES AND

    CHRONOLOGY of QUEEN ELIZABETH I's PROGRESSES AND

    Select Bibliography. Abbreviations used in the Text. A: Lord North’s accounts. APC. Acts of the Privy Council. B. Lord Burghley’s ‘Diary’. BL. British Library. BT. Baschet's transcripts of French dispatches, TNA. C. Cofferer/Controller of the Household's Accounts, TNA. CH. Chancery Warrants under the Great Seal, TNA. CHA. John Chamberlain’s Letters. D. Dee’s Diary. EHR. English Historical Review. ES. Elizabethan Stage, by E.K.Chambers. HMC. Historical Manuscripts Commission. HT. Hatfield MSS. KL. Kervyn de Lettenhove. L. Earl of Leicester’s accounts. LA. Lambeth churchwardens’ accounts. LEY. Leycester Correspondence, ed. Bruce. Lost. Arnold: Lost from her Majesties back. M. Metcalfe: Knights. MA. Machyn’s Diary. MG. St Margaret Westminster churchwardens’ accounts. MK. Munck’s Journal. MLR. Modern Language Review. MT. St Martin in the Fields churchwardens’ accounte. N. Navy Accounts, TNA. n.s. new style date, using Gregorian Calendar from October 1582. o.s. old style date, using Julian Calendar, 10 days behind Gregorian. ODNB. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. P: Calendars of Patent Rolls. Parl. Proceedings in Parliament, ed. Hartley. PS. Privy Seal books, TNA. Revels. Documents relating to the Revels, ed. Feuillerat. RO. Record Office. RT. HMC Rutland MSS. SD. Collins ‘Sidney Papers’, and HMC De l’Isle and Dudley MSS. SH. Countess of Shrewsbury’s accounts. SP. State Papers, at TNA. SPD. State Papers Domestic. SPF. State Papers Foreign. Span. State Papers at Simancas. [Spanish]. T. Treasurer of the Chamber's Accounts, TNA. TH. Arthur Throckmorton’s Diaries. TNA. The National Archives, Kew. VCH. Victoria History of the Counties of England.
  • 'Chief Princes and Owners of All': Native American Appeals to The

    'Chief Princes and Owners of All': Native American Appeals to The

    ‘Chief Princes and Owners of All’: Native American Appeals to the Crown in the Early Modern British Atlantic forthcoming in Saliha Belmessous, ed., Indigenous versus European Land Claims, 1500-1914 (Oxford University Press, 2011) Craig Yirush Department of History U.C.L.A. In the last twenty years, the history of legal and political ideas has experienced a renaissance as scholars in these fields have discovered important connections between many of the seminal theorists of the early modern period and empire.1 While this new scholarship on the intellectual justifications of European expansion has brought the question of the rights of the indigenous peoples of the Americas to the center of our understanding of seventeenth and eighteenth-century political thought, it has, for the most part, ignored the ideas of the indigenous peoples themselves. Yet in these encounters, Native Americans were not merely passive objects of European discourses. Rather, they responded to European claims with their own conceptions of law, property, and political authority. This paper uncovers these indigenous norms by looking at a little-studied legal genre: the appeals made by Native Americans to the British Crown in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.2 These appeals show that they were aware of (and able to exploit) the complicated politics of the British Atlantic world for their own ends, turning the Crown against the settlers in ways they hoped would preserve their rights, and in the 1 For a state of the art summary of this large literature, see Duncan Ivison, “The Nature of Rights and the History of Empire,” in David Armitage, ed., British Political Thought in History, Literature and Theory, 1500-1800 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 191-211.