12 June 1770. MS
not found. Printed: Mass., House Jour.
, 1770–1771, p. 25–32. Prepared by a committee appointed 8 June composed of Joseph
Hawley, Samuel Adams, JA
, John Pickering Jr., Daniel Leonard, Edward Mitchell, Nathaniel Sumner, Humphrey
Hobson, and Thomas Denny (same, p. 24), and presented to the House by Joseph Hawley.
Upon receipt of the House Address of 7 June
(see preceding calendar entry), Lt. Gov. Hutchinson replied with a message which
justified the legality of removing the General Court to Cambridge and urged the need
to proceed with the session's business (Mass., House Jour.
, 23–24). The committee listed above was named “to state the Reasons of this House
for coming into a Resolution, That it is not expedient to proceed to the Business
of the Session while the General Assembly is held out of the Town-House in Boston
; and also for adhering to the same.”
On 12 June the House adopted the committee's report, which recommended publication
of the House resolutions of 6 June along with “Reasons for adhering to said Resolutions”
which the Committee had prepared. The “Reasons” waived “at present . . . any further
Observations on the Legality” of holding legislative sessions out of Boston. Instead,
the report conceded the validity of prerogative when used “to the public Good,” but
attacked Hutchinson's policies as a misuse of power, unjustified by public need and
contrary to the public welfare. The “Reasons” answered each historical and legal precedent
Hutchinson had raised in his defense and closed with the claim that Hutchinson, not
the General Court, must bear the blame for any inconveniences suffered as a result
of the legislature's refusal to conduct business while sessions were held in Cambridge.
The report was adopted with only three dissenting votes (same, p. 31–32).