[70]. It does not seem quite clear whether this provision means merely that each town should be represented, or that each town should have its full representation. Arnold (I, 365) thinks the latter. When the tax of 1673 was levied no deputies are recorded as being present from New Shoreham (Block Island) or Westerly. The great distance in the one case and the interference of Connecticut in the other, rendered attendance from those towns very uncertain and may have caused their absence to be necessarily disregarded. Only five deputies from Newport and one from Warwick however are reported as "engaged." This would make it seem doubtful if a complete representation was actually required. An act of April, 1678, (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 6.) repealed this act of 1672, and provided that the general assembly should consist (as provided in the charter) of the governor or deputy governor with six assistants, "and soe many of the freemen as shall be elected in each respective towne, x x x or the major part of them then present," who should have to make laws and levy taxes, provided however that no tax should be levied without notice given to each town, that the "townes may accordingly by their representatives give their due attendance." A year later the restriction was removed and the assembly resumed its old powers. (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 53).

[71]. Arnold II, 502: Under the Andros government (in the case of the per centage taxes and the £120 tax ordered in December, 1688) a return seems to have been made to the system of assessment by town councils. A copy of a warrant, dated July 20, 1687, from John Usher, treasurer and receiver general of his majesty's revenue in New England, to the constable and selectmen of Providence is preserved among the papers of the historical society. The constable is ordered to call a town meeting for the choice of a "commissioner" who, with the selectmen, is to make a list of all males over sixteen and "a true Estimation of all reall & personall Estates," as provided in the act of Andros and council, and then to assess a poll tax of 1s. 8d. (members of his majesty's council exempt) and a property tax of a penny in the pound. The commissioner was then to meet with the commissioners of the other towns of the county (Rhode Island), when as a body they were to "examine x x & correct & perfect" the rate lists according to the true meaning of the act and transmit the result to Usher, together with the names of the constables in each town to whom warrants for collection were to be issued. I have not been able to find the act of Andros and his council here referred to, but it seems to have included the provisions contained in the warrant and also a table of values at which the different kinds of property were to be estimated. It is in these taxes levied by Andros that we first meet with the poll tax which was soon to become a part of the regular system of taxation adopted by the colony.

[72]. These proceedings are to be found in the town records Vol. III, p p. 12-15. A table of values such as that given in the text was not always adopted when a rate was to be levied, but the rate of assessment seems often to have been left to the discretion of the assessors. In the case of the £160 rate of 1684 a committee was appointed to "Consider what lands may be deemed Rateable." The committee report "That all Meadowes & Orchards & all other improved lands what so Ever it is yt is inclosed, is Rateable, and as for Cattell, That all Sorts of Cattell upward of a yeare old are Rateable," but no table of values is reported. The number of assessors varied from three to five. They were prominent men of the community and there was a tendency to reelect the same individuals for the service. In a list of twenty-two assessors appointed between 1678 and 1687 there are only eleven different individuals.

[73]. The following is the account of the rateable estate of Daniel Abbott, like Whipple a prominent citizen. "My house & Land at home, & yt in ye neck that seem to be fenc't, and ye 3d part of a share of meddow in my Custody wth ye demolished orchard of Tho. walling. 2 Cows, one of them farrow, a of 3 yeares & vantage steers one horse, & one Maire 5 poor swine and as oe household-things you may be pleased to vew them yorselves, we have but one poor bed of or owne Saith Daniell Abbott Memoorand a yoak of oxen yet." An entry on the back of this list shows that about 290-1/2 acres of land had been laid out to Abbott, more than the usual amount it would appear. Much of it was probably wild land. An entry in the colonial records (II, 415), in 1671, shows us also the character of property at the time. The inhabitants of Westerly petitioned the assembly to send thither persons to take an "inventory of their personal estate." The assembly accordingly delegated certain persons to "take an exact inventory of the personal estate of each inhabitant, consisting either of house, household stuff, goods, cattle, horse kinde, or any other chattels whatever."

[74]. "The first grand period of Rhode Island history, the formation period, was ended. The era of domestic strife and outward conflict for existence, of change and interruption, of doubt and gloom, anxiety and distress, had almost passed. The problem of self-government was solved, and a new era of independent action commenced". (Arnold I, 519)

[75]. The exemption was granted in 1690. (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 274). It would seem to be uncertain how long it lasted as in 1707 (Ib. IV, 24) a law is passed exempting the "Governor x x x; his dwelling house" and its conveniences from taxation during his term of office. The other legislation during the period in regard to the payment of public officers was as follows. In 1698, the governor's salary was increased to £30 and, in 1701, to £40. In addition the assembly in many years voted him a gratuity, amounting sometimes to as much as his salary. In 1695 deputies were allowed, apparently out of the general treasury, 3s. a day, with a double fine for non-attendance. In 1698, the towns were ordered to pay the deputies, but in 1703 it was again ordered that they be paid out of the colony treasury. On account of the increasing revenue the treasurer's fees were reduced to one shilling in the pound in 1698, and to six pence in 1705. Before 1702, the agents were inhabitants of the colony, sent over to England by the assembly. In that year Penn, then in England, was intrusted with the interests of the colony. He employed for the purpose a solicitor, William Wharton, at £40 a year. In March, 1708-9, the assembly granted Wharton £30 a year additional for past services, to cover expenses, and appointed him agent for the future with £80 a year salary.

[76]. It seems to have been intended to send the money to aid other colonies. In July, 1695, the rate was to a great extent uncollected, however, and none of it seems to have been applied to the purpose intended. With the exception of the May and June sessions of 1691, and August, 1692, no records of the assembly are known to exist, for the period October, 1690, to July, 1695.

[77]. During this period however the colony seems to have run into debt, which was defrayed out of future taxes.

[78]. The loose way in which the treasury accounts were kept does not permit us to show exactly how much of the revenue went for each of these objects. It is possible to make an estimate of some value, however. After the governor's salary had been increased to £40, and including the special grants frequently made to him, the payments made to the legislative and executive officers amounted, probably, to about £150 a year. The payments made to agents for the period 1695-1710, were probably not far from £1,000. The whole cost of the civil government, including the support of the agent, seems on the average not to have exceeded £500 a year. It was probably under rather than over that amount. The remainder were military expenditures, the most important being on account of the expeditions of 1709 and 1710.

[79]. This census is included in a report, containing quite a full account of the condition of the colony, sent by Governor Cranston to the Board of Trade in reply to their inquiries (R.I. Col. Recs. IV, 56). It probably cannot be depended on for accuracy, and would seem to be rather an under estimate. Some years before the militia, which is here given at 1362, had been estimated at 2,000. This however was doubtless too high.