Introduction...xlvii

message to the Governor, the Lower House expressed concern that on every
occasion he should seek to throw the blame on the Lower House for the failure
of the Assembly to pass a Supply bill, and that he should intimate that the
censure upon the Assembly contained in Pitt's letter was intended to apply
to the Lower House. It added that it would certainly pass a Supply bill of its
own making, and not one that was suggested by the other branch. With this
message, approved by a vote of 27 to 19, the house sent to the Governor a
copy of all its resolves on the subject of the bill, with the request that they
be transmitted to his Majesty's generals (pp. 176-178, 179-181). The bill
was passed on April 14 by a vote of 28 to 19 (pp. 182-183), sent to the Upper
House on April 16, where, for the fifth time it was thrown out, this time on
one reading, with a brief message that it was rejected for the same reason as
it had been on four previous occasions (p. 185).

An attempt in the Lower House, probably by certain members of the Pro-
prietary party, to introduce a compromise tax measure failed, when three days
later, a motion was made and voted down, 23 to 12, that a f 50,000 Supply bill
be offered, the money to be raised by taxes on land, poll taxes, taxes on negroes,
ferries, pilots, wheels, clocks, watches, saddle horses, and perukes, and by an
assessment on all lucrative offices, places of profit, benefices, and professions
(pp. 190-191). Immediately after the rejection of the compromise proposed on
April 17 Sharpe sent an address to the Lower House in which he requested a
categorial answer to his former question, whether or not the Lower House
"were Resolved on no Account to propose to agree to any Supply bill, beside that
which the Gentlemen of the Upper House have now five times refused to pass"
so that he could notify General Stanwix to-morrow of their determination
(p. 191). After the house had, by a vote of 22 to n, refused to consider the
Governor's message (pp. 191-192), he promptly on April 17 prorogued the
Assembly until July 16, as they "seemed to have lost Sight" of the discharge of
this duty in the "unreasonable Pursuit of other Objects", and as there is "not
the least Glimmering of Hope" that they will make amends for their former
failures (pp. 191-193).

At the March-April 1760 session the Lower House on March 25 began con-
sideration of a Supply bill by adopting the usual resolves as to its scope and
the means by which the money was to be raised (pp. 232-234). Except as to
certain minor details, these resolves were identical with those adopted at the
two previous sessions (pp. 78-79, 166-168). The amount of money to be raised
under the bill, £60,000, was the same as that provided in the preceding Supply
bill (p. 168). The Lower House sitting as a committee of the whole then voted,
27 to 7, that this be raised by an equal assessment on all estates, lucrative offices,
and employments (pp. 233-234). A committee headed by Philip Hammond was
ordered to bring in such a bill (pp. 234-235).

The bill was promptly introduced, so promptly that there is no reason to
question that it was the identical bill which had been before recent sessions.
After it had been amended in committee of the whole by a vote of 23 to 9 to
read that any overplus of funds arising from it might be expended as the
Assembly should direct, it was passed, 26 to 6, on March 29, 1760, and sent