The influence exerted on government by the proprietors resident in
London seemed irresistible, and was such as no government of our time
could tolerate. The key to their power seems to be found in the
circumstances that they were, for the most part, men in intimate social
relations with parties in office, and, moreover, mainly consisted of
officers who were supposed to have rendered good service in time of war,
and whose complaints or representations, therefore, commanded at all
times the royal consideration and sympathy. The proprietors, besides,
cultivated the good-will and friendship of the under-secretaries, and
other secondary government officials, who kept them informed of what was
going on, and contributed in many indirect ways to promote their views.
Mr. Stuart, in his letters to Governor Patterson,—who was by no means
distinguished for the _suaviter in modo_,—frequently urged him to write
certain persons in the government offices in a conciliatory and friendly
manner, as he was convinced that they could exert no small influence in
behalf of his interests. The proprietors not only succeeded in
preventing the resolutions commended by the Duke of Portland from
leading to any practical result, but also in obtaining, in 1802, an
important reduction in the quitrents which remained unpaid, and which
now amounted to the large sum of fifty-nine thousand one hundred and
sixty-two pounds sterling; the sum due on some of the townships being
actually more than their estimated value. In order to discriminate
between the proprietors who had exerted themselves to carry out the
terms of their grants, and those who had not, the government divided the
commutation into four classes, requiring from the proprietors who had on
their property the necessary number of settlers only five years’
quitrents, instead of thirty-two years’,—namely, from 1769 to 1801,—and
making a proportionate deduction in the case of the four other classes.
But as evidence of the determination of many of the landowners not to
conform to the law, and their confidence in their own power to set the
regulations of government at defiance,—as they had hitherto
systematically done,—it may be here stated, that even the reduced amount
does not seem to have been paid; and it was mainly in consequence of
such daring and long-continued violation of obligation that the people,
from time to time, in paroxysms of just indignation, demanded the
establishment of courts of escheat.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account