. See generally, Albion, Forests and Sea Power
256–267. For the House action, see 2 Mass., House Jour.
362–366, 381, 383, 386, 388; 3 id.
at 30–32, 42, 154, 159, 174, 186. For Cooke's justification, see 3 id.
at 31–32, 40. See also 2 Hutchinson, Massachusetts Bay, ed. Mayo
, 190–191. Shute's charges were the result of a struggle that had been going on between
him and the House since his arrival in 1716. Cooke, who was involved in all of the
questions, traveled to England to argue the case for the House. He tried to maintain
that they had acted so as to preserve the King's rights, but he was confronted with
the defiant resolutions of the House, and after an adverse report by the hearing officers,
was forced to abandon this and several other points. He ultimately prevailed before
the Privy Council on the questions whether the Governor had the power to negative
him as Speaker of the House, and whether the House could adjourn without the Governor's
consent. The Explanatory Charter of 1726 was a direct result of Cooke's activities.
See Cal. State Papers (Col.)
, 1722–1723, §§683, 704; id.
1724–1725, §346 1; 3 Acts, Privy Council (Col.)
94–95, 102–104; John Colman to Rev. Dr. Colman, 18 May 1724, 2 MHS, Colls.
, (1st ser.) 32 (2d edn., 1810); Boston Chronicle
, 7–1 1 Jan. 1768, p. 33, cols. 1–3; 1 A&R