The first English colonists came to the shores of Massachusetts Bay in the early 1600s. By 1645, about 15,000 colonists had settled in the Bay Colony, experimenting with representative institutions as they cleared the land and built their homes.The Crown gave them a commercial charter, which was similar to that of a business corporation - a joint stock company managed by a governor, deputy governor, and a board of 18 assistants elected annually by the stockholders. The early settlers fashioned that corporate charter into an instrument of self-government with a two-house legislature, an executive, and a judiciary. As the towns were being founded, local government was being organized in them, rules and regulations passed, and delegates chosen to gather in Boston to regulate the affairs of the colony.
Colonists continued to arrive, adding to the population of the settled towns, helping found additional ones, and bringing diverse ideas. As the original settlers grew older and died, their children took their places and had families. By 1691, a third or fourth generation received the royal charter of Massachusetts, the Charter of 1691, and fine-tuned it in the coming decades as a representative instrument. Most people were still hard-working farmers who lived in a vast area of unoccupied land, much of which they set aside for their heirs. Land on the frontier, they calculated, was also available for future generations.
The infertility of the soil forced colonists into trade and fishing, but commerce was also essential to the lives of these people. Boston, Salem, Gloucester, and Piscataqua rose to be centers of commercial enterprise, attracting many men to the coast each year. Some engaged in trade and served on ships, and others tried shipbuilding, timber cutting, or commercial fishing as alternative occupations, but many eventually returned to their homes in the agricultural villages.
Soon after settlement, the secular side of Massachusetts life probably came to predominate and Puritanism evolved into a code of societal conduct. All of the people were surely Protestant believers in God and readers of the Bible, but they had fields to plow, warehouses to fill, and fish to prepare. Many liked sermon literature, religious disquisitions, and a purified society, but they were concerned about frontier safety, taxation, and matters of trade, and some used their savings to build and furnish comfortable homes. Institutions other than the church and school were rare, but the people sought to handle domestic crises and scandals within the privacy of the family and found ways to distribute charity to the needy.
Before 1691, Massachusetts society had departed slightly from the prevailing English institutions. Laws tended to be softer, more humane, and more reflective of the popular will. Their criminal code was never as brutal as that of the English, although it prescribed hanging for many crimes, including murder and piracy, and whipping and public humiliation to discourage lesser crimes. Massachusetts society never had a hereditary aristocracy, but family was a sign of recognition, honor, and social control everywhere. At the basis of most issues was the popular will and its interpretation, taking place in town meetings, courts, and the legislature. The popular voice was heard most everywhere as institutions set to solving daily problems.
The Massachusetts Bay people resisted English interference whenever they could and strove to separate Puritanism from other ideologies. They opposed Quakers, Jews, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Baptists, and witches. They even quarreled over the accepted doctrine of Congregationalism. Their unwillingness to obey the rules and regulations of the Crown in commerce, however, was rebuked by the English government in the1660s and 1670s and set off an investigation of local laws that included the harsh treatment of unpopular religious groups and of Massachusetts Bay's general disobedience of English laws.
The government of Charles II became aware of Massachusetts Bay's reluctance in obeying English laws and arrogance in treating royal officials. After warnings and investigations, the colony lost its charter in 1684. It was soon incorporated into the Dominion of New England and ruled by a governor general, Sir Edmund Andros, and a group of assistants that included some Massachusetts leaders like Joseph Dudley.
Although Massachusetts Bay was certainly responsible for its fate, Charles II and later James II were also determined to construct a new form of English imperial government. They wanted to regulate trade and direct it through the ports of England. English merchants were also anxious to get their hands on the trade and supported royal efforts to confine it within the empire. But royal absolutism in England and Scotland of course offended most people, and James II's overthrow in 1688 was welcomed.
In Massachusetts Bay, the English revolution brought about an uprising against Andros and his staff, caused debate about restoring the old charter, and raised the idea of a new document. Because Massachusetts outrageously opposed English mercantile laws, the leading advisors of William and Mary, the new monarchs, urged another charter with more supervision. Much debate occurred in royal circles, while leading political and religious figures of Massachusetts Bay journeyed to London to give their advice. Few were more important than Increase Mather and his English friends who were received by the new monarchs and invited to report to governmental commissions. At first Mather tried to have Parliament restore the old charter, but when he realized the intensity of the opposition, he worked for a charter less restrictive than the one being advocated by critics of the colony. Whether he actually succeeded in securing a less restrictive charter is debatable, but he did succeed in suggesting candidates for the new governor, deputy governor, and the 28 councilors, and in keeping his enemies momentarily out of office. William Phips was appointed first governor of the new royal commonwealth and William Stoughton, the deputy governor. Two of Mather's rivals, Elisha Cooke and Thomas Oakes, were not recommended for seats on the council nor asked for advice. Some leaders of the temporary government in Boston were also excluded such as Thomas Danforth, William Johnson, John Smith, and Peter Tilton. Mather gave his blessings to such new men as John Foster, Bartholomew Gedney, Adam Winthrop, and Peter Sergeant. Mather's close friends John Richards and Stephen Mason were offered seats on the new council but did not go to Massachusetts.
The Charter of 1691 was approved on October 7 and taken to Massachusetts the next year by its first royal governor. The new charter primarily established English rule in the colony, with the appointment of governor, deputy governor, and secretary, and the confirmation by the governor of members of the council chosen by the legislature (beginning in 1693). The crown also reserved to its ministry emergency powers that would permit direct intervention in the colony and that could take the form of a veto of legislation and modification of the Charter. Under ordinary conditions, however, the Charter gave the governor power to convene, prorogue, or disband the legislature and to approve or disapprove all proposed legislation, including the election of councilors. It gave the governor power to appoint all regimental and general officers of the militia and authority to appoint all judicial officers. The Charter excluded, however, the Massachusetts government from English regulation of the forests and trade offshore. New Hampshire was formally separated from Massachusetts (except that it would share governors until 1741), but Plymouth Colony and Maine were incorporated into Massachusetts and given special representation in the Council.
The Charter, notwithstanding these limitations of power, gave the people a vast country to live in, a legislature to write bills, and a court system to enforce the law. Liberty of conscience was provided for Christians, except Papists. A grand pattern of self-government was laid before them, requiring only loyalty to the Crown and the passage of statutes "not repugnant or contrary to the lawes of this our Realme of England."
Some people regretted that the colony had lost its original charter, but most Massachusetts English subjects quietly welcomed the end of the crisis. Officials ordered elections for the House of Representatives in 1692, and all male landholders in the population of about 50,000 met in towns of the colony, debated the issues confronting the colony, selected and instructed delegates, and went back to their chores on the farm, in the counting houses, or on their ships and docks, content that they had a voice in their future.
During the 90 years of rule under the second charter, the Massachusetts people were always aware that Great Britain could have the final word about their liberties. The legislature struggled to gain sufficient power to challenge governors and imperial officials regarding the nature of English liberty in Colonial America. Many farmers and town dwellers came to Boston each year as legislators to exercise the rights of Englishmen. Over those 90 years, 3,117 New Englanders took the oath of office for the legislature. They met each May and at other times during the year, sent bills to the governor, and processed hundreds of petitions for personal relief for grievances.
These citizen legislators were an amazing group, alert to popular problems, human liberty, and law and order. They were Englishmen, Scots, Welsh, and northern Irish, joined over the years by a few French Huguenots, Dutch, and Germans. They were mostly married men, and their families were part of their joy and responsibility as legislators - often the motive for spending time in Boston was the hope of creating a better life.
The following essays describe the lives of the 3,117 men who served in the Massachusetts legislature (the General Court) between 1691 and 1780 and the biographical entries that follow the essays individualize their lives. The habits, opinions, and family backgrounds of these leaders reveal the characteristics of British Americans who faced directly the issues of daily life in the towns, the hazards and satisfactions of frontier life, and, after 1760, the issues arising from discontent with colonial rule. Primarily they were sturdy farmers, whose hands regularly touched the soil, whose voices filled town meetings, and whose prayers worshiped God and offered petitions for the safety of the king and commonwealth. Some were also shopkeepers, petty merchants, owners of shares in ships, and traders of farm and naval products. A few were wealthy landowners, tradesmen, and merchants whose great homes reflected the luxuries within and whose servants, carriages, clothes, and tastes caused envy to the observer. 1
The roster of legislators in this volume was developed from lists of members published in journals after 1715, and earlier from newspapers and official reports. Often the minutes of the town meeting in May recorded the name of the elected representative. But we cannot be certain that every legislator who ever served his town is known due to the informality in recording such matters. Omissions may arise, too, because the repeated use of given names makes distinguishing fathers from sons - maybe nephews - difficult. Consulting town minutes and genealogies, however, has solved questions of identity for most individuals.
Information on these legislators has not always been easy to amass, especially for the years of the Revolution, when New Englanders sought safety by pushing deeper into the interior. Over the years, people were always moving as the landless sought better opportunities. Others lived private lives, often not bothering to register with the town clerk or local minister. Some people seem to have appeared out of nowhere as townsmen and, after years of visibility as officeholders, they disappear into the frontiers of New York, Vermont, or New Hampshire, or take up residence in the West Indies. Thus some careers are incomplete in the biographical accounts.Tardy and absent members also abound in the legislative journals. My hope is that all elusive representatives were tracked down.
This collection of talented men shared a love for their families, for the township, and for New England. When they were away from home, they were restless and anxious to return to their families, their farms, and the politics of the township. Most lawmakers committed themselves to one to five years of legislative service, but then they wanted to return home to live, content with holding local offices or serving on county juries. Few men served many terms in the legislature, and others limited their stay in Boston to a few weeks so that they could be present for town meetings and enjoy the comforts of their own firesides. The House of Representatives does not appear to have been controlled year after year by any continuing group of legislators, but most delegates from Boston and some smaller commercial towns along the seacoast frequently served longer terms. The House was a place for men to conduct business, meet people of similar interests, and then, anticipating an early end of the legislative session, return home. 2
Custom differed a little for councilors who frequently served multiple terms and had varying interests. Even so, councilors were drawn back to their home seats for the annual town meetings and during legislative recesses. Serving as moderators of the meetings, they were advisors on town problems. In some years, the councilors left Boston in such numbers that even the House of Representatives recognized their absence. 3
Besides the love of home, councilors also shared with the representatives something more fundamental: through the decades, the same families were called onto solve governmental problems. Members of the same families would sit as selectmen, clerks, and representatives; hold military rank and deaconates; and contribute service with little expectation of financial reward. Of the Burrill family members of Lynn, for example, six were elected representatives and two did additional duty as councilors. John Burrill Jr. (1658-1721) served as clerk and selectman of the township from 1693 to near his death in 1721. When the town needed a moderator for its meetings, John accepted the task. At least 20 times in 27 years he represented the town in Boston, while he also served as town clerk. Though Lynn is not far from Boston as the crow flies, the trip over country roads took nearly a day.
The Burrills' devotion to Lynn is an example of loyal, honorable public servants, ever sensitive to local interests and ever appreciated by the townsmen. In 1771, the town records show a "full vote" for Ebenezer Burrill Jr. when he was elected representative, and in 1773, the records note election by a "great majority." 4Simultaneously, representative Ebenezer was Lynn's clerk, selectman, and assessor. Samuel Burrill, the last of the family for this era of Massachusetts history, attended the 1779 Constitutional Convention and served in the new republican legislature. For many years in the late 1700s, his immediate family served in Lynn as townclerks and selectmen, and in Boston as representatives. The public spirit of the Burrill family had indeed a religious quality.
Other families, like the Converses of Woburn, also offered themselves for service year after year. James Converse (1645-1706) served 13 years as a representative and many years as town clerk, militia officer, and selectman, in addition to nearly a lifetime in the militia. His cousin Josiah performed the duties of a selectman and was a representative for a year. James' son, Josiah (1684-1771), settled in Brookfield and served as the town's representative for six terms and its selectman for nine years. The last of the Converses, James (1725-1811), became a colonel in the Revolution and was elected by Brookfield to the 1777 House of Representatives. In his younger years, he was a selectman, farmer, and father of ten children, besides helping his town oversee many minor tasks of government. 5
The usual profile of a councilor would differ slightly from that of a representative, though he was generally older and wealthier. His terms were usually continuous, and his service would extend into a decade or more. 6Councilors like William Pepperrell of York County, Maine, were usually countymen. As colonels of the militia, judges of the courts, and owners of land, they spoke for geographic areas of the colony. Their presence at the county seat, in the market towns, and in their hometowns was quite regular. They were well acquainted with administrative and legal issues, and their familiarity with colonial problems made them a source of knowledge and inspiration att own meetings. Like Pepperrell, wealthier councilors had both country and city residences and were available in both areas for consultation on almost any subject, but especially politics. Serving on regional or county juries gave townsmen opportunities to meet Council members who may have been the judges. These encounters fostered friendships that often would lead the townsmen to Boston and the legislature.
Service in the legislature was not usually the culmination of a succession of town or county positions. It could be, but most men preferred to remain at home or they could not leave because of debts, family obligations, or the hardships associated with travel and living in rooming houses. A man who accepted duty in Boston often combined it with other personal business to justify the expense and exertion. Considerable time in the capital was thus allotted to personal interests - often as important to a representative as his service on committees. One way to promote personal interests was to develop contacts with county and provincial leaders in Boston that could lead to a regimental commission, an appointment as justice of the peace, or a partnership in a land scheme in frontier Maine or Massachusetts. For most westerners, "partnership" was too strong a connection, but acquaintances with promoters might win a land grant that would give sons or sons-in-law an opportunity
to migrate to the new township. The sources of much patronage were in Boston, through contracts with the governor, councilors, representatives, and influential merchants. Short residences in Boston helped a man become aware of market opportunities and make invaluable contacts.
For young men in the towns, the emphasis was less on eventual service in Boston than it was on immediate service in the town itself. Becoming a prosperous farmer, marrying well, and having children, in addition to having health and safety, the respect of one's neighbors, and the blessing of God, constituted an abundant life that was within the reach of most men. Even so, because the amount of good land was limited, men often had to diversify. A man might own a tavern, blacksmith shop, a black servant, cooperage, or mill, or teach in the local school to improve his income. He might serve as a doctor or lawyer or preach occasionally in the meeting house. Sometimes he left home to work at sea, to cut timber in Maine, to serve in the military forces. Those who stayed home were bound to town affairs by local service, and some accepted a fine instead of a burdensome position.
To be a member of town committees was undoubtedly a responsibility of citizenship, and there was often no way of avoiding election. The round of offices available to townsmen reflected age, experience, regard, and standing. To be selectman, assessor, and moderator was a badge of distinction, which may have helped sons or daughters marry well or obtain a rental contract of some land or a better pew in the meeting house. For others, to be deacon, teacher, militia officer, or petty or grand juror was a fine mark of civic affection and fulfillment of life's ambition. Service to the town was seen as important and necessary because to further a local ambition or help the town solve a local problem made the community a better place to live.
Still some families hesitated to get overly involved in colony business; they spoke, advised, and voted at town meetings, but were reluctant to do much more. They were often families of distinction - with Harvard or Yale graduates or sons in the Congregational clergy - that had settled the town, were related to the founders of the colony, and ranked high in their church. In a time of crisis, family members might feel the obligation of service and accept tasks in the town and election to the legislature.
Being chosen a representative thus may not have reflected long service as a selectman or in another town office. In times of distress, it may have reflected an admiration for a townsman's inheritance, his advice expressed over the years in town meetings, his wealth, or his accomplishments, both felt and imagined.
Although representation was very important in any list of cherished liberties, many towns did not exercise it unless local or provincial issues for them reached a breaking point. Some men were only willing to offer their services when the town faced a crisis - and some towns sent a delegate only at a time of crisis. Even in the dangerous days of the Revolution, a few towns asked to be excused from sending representatives, and a few did not trouble themselves to answer the writ requiring a delegate from the town. 7The profound concern for local matters gave greater weight to those issues than those of colony concern. The costs of finding a suitable representative and making the sacrifices involved in travel were enough to convince small townships to skip the election.
Those special country people who answered the call to be representatives had serious missions. For them, Boston was distant, beyond the neighboring hills and valleys, and business there took on an extraordinary importance. Boston presented for many their first view of urban living - the ship-filled harbor, the docks, the warehouses, and the brick buildings. The differences between country and city life - in clothing style, language and accents, and customs - were consciously felt. 8For most men, the opening day of the legislature was an awe-inspiring experience as they looked over the crowd of representatives and councilors, presented their credentials, and heard the royal governor's state of the colony address in council chambers. Standing in that crowded chamber, the new members joined mostly strangers and heard in hushed silence the king's other voice raise issues of government. At this moment, they were aware of a new stratum of politics.
On returning to their chamber, the new representatives participated in the elections of a speaker and clerk. The governor entered the process by either approving the choices or vetoing them to emphasize his authority. The older representatives felt bitter about the governor's legal intervention and passed on their opinions of legislative independence to their newer colleagues.
The important business of choosing councilors was also handled routinely. Most old councilors were re-elected time and again, but a few were vulnerable to challenge and several vacancies had to be filled due to resignations and deaths. The contest for these seats could be intense and decided by close votes. Leading representatives wanted the honor, and others wanted the prestige. Again the new legislators found themselves part of the struggle, and again the governor could intervene, if he dared, and refuse to approve candidates.
Meanwhile, the speaker was appointing committees to perform the tasks of the House. Some congratulated the governor on his address, and others advised the Council on the progress of business. These committees of three, five, or seven members performed mostly ceremonial tasks at first. They were, nonetheless, marks of recognitions of leaders, and the speaker sometimes called on a new member to serve as a committeeman.
Traditionally an elected clergyman would speak on the state of the colony's relationship with God and King. The whole legislature and the governor often marched to a neighboring meeting house, accompanied by militia and any resident officers. Cannon shot and martial music added to the ceremony. In the quiet of the meeting house, however, only the clergyman's voice was heard during his lengthy sermon. It was sobering, usually a theological disquisition, ending with remarks appropriate to the current problems of church and state.
The inaugural festivities may have ended with a banquet at a local tavern where legislators offered to asts to the king and enjoyed conversation, food, and fellowship with colleagues. For many new legislators, this convivial occasion eased the strains of their initial experience in the House, and warmed now by the food and ale, many were ready to meet the tasks outlined by the governor and by their own constituents.
NOTES
1. Extensive research has been done on the Massachusetts towns and some indirectly on the legislature. A chapter of mine in Generations and Change: Genealogical Perspectives in Social History, ed. by Robert M. Taylor, Jr. and Ralph J. Crandall (Macon, Ga., 1986), 159-180, reproduces some of the present material. I have drawn on the town studies of many scholars but have specifically studied the work of Edward M. Cook, Jr., The Fathers of the Towns (Baltimore and London, 1976); Michael Zuckerman, Peaceable Kingdoms: New England Towns in the Eighteenth Century (New York, 1970); and Robert M. Zemsky, Farmers and River Gods (Boston, 1971).
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us |Copyright 2001-2010, New England Historic Genealogical Society. Do not reproduce without permission. New England Historic Genealogical Society | 99 Newbury Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02116, USA | (888) 296-3447 | Fax (617) 536-7307 
