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.