In the autumn of 1629, Harvey, the new governor, arrived. He was unwelcome from various causes; he belonged to the faction to which Virginia ascribed her earliest sorrows; he had rendered himself extremely unpopular as a member of the council; besides which, it had been well pleasing to the colony that King James, on assuming supreme authority, had entrusted the government to impartial agents; but now the appointment of Harvey indicated a change of policy. His arrival among them was naturally cause neither of satisfaction nor of rejoicing, nor does he appear to have conciliated their favour. The older historians charge him with arbitrary and tyrannical conduct; yet it may be questionable whether he was quite deserving of the ill-will with which he was regarded, as the revised code of laws, which was published with consent of the governor and the council, neither abrogated nor abridged any of the civil rights of the colonists. His administration, however, was disturbed by disputes respecting land-titles under the royal grants, and principally in consequence of the grant of Maryland to Lord Baltimore, which caused the first European blood to be shed by Europeans on the banks of the Chesapeake. Harvey not seconding the claims of Virginia against the royal grant, was considered by the colonists to have betrayed their interests; and full of indignation against him, they “thrust him out of his government,” says the old chronicle, and “appointed Captain John West governor in his stead till the king’s pleasure should be known.” Harvey consented to go to England to meet his accusers there, but, as might have been expected, no accusations would be received there against the man who had been merely acting according to royal instructions. The commission of accusation could not even obtain a hearing. Harvey returned to occupy his former post, and remained in office till 1639, when Sir Francis Wyatt succeeded him. Two years afterwards, Sir William Berkeley was appointed governor. The civil condition of Virginia was greatly improved; the laws and customs of England still further introduced; cruel punishments were abolished; old controversies adjusted; a more equitable system of taxation was introduced; taxes being assessed not in proportion to numbers, but “to men’s abilities and estates;” the rights of property and the freedom of industry were secured, so that Virginia enjoyed all the civil liberties which a more free form of government could have conferred. The Virginians seem early to have understood the true elements of political economy. In a petition addressed to England, in 1642, they asserted the necessity of the freedom of trade, “for freedom of trade,” say they, “is the blood and life of a commonwealth.” And as regarded self-government, they argued with the force of truth, “there is more likelihood that such as are acquainted with the clime and its accidents may, upon better grounds, prescribe our advantages, than