History of Northampton, Massachusetts, from its settlement in 1654;

344 HISTORY OF NORTHAMPTON. [1774.
"was sent to all tlie towns in the Province, and the names of
those who refused to sign it were to be published. Opposi-
tion to this measure developed in some of the towns, and it
is possible that Northampton did not respond favorably.
Mr. Judd of Southampton in his diary, quotes Major
Hawley as "not for signing these covenants." A similar
meeting was held in Southampton, and Mr. Judd thus com-
" The People are raised in Temper
ments upon the affair :
not a little here and all around us. This Covenant a bad
thing." Southampton, however, voted in favor of it, and
it may be possible that Northampton did also, but no diary
remains in which its decision is embalmed.
Almost simultaneously with the Boston Port
other Obnoxious
Laws. gill were enacted other equally obnoxious
laws for the "better regulation of the gov-
ernnaent of Massachusetts Bay." As an act of retaliation
against the General Court, Parliament took from it the
power to assist in the choice of Councillors. Henceforth
they were to be appointed by the King, and were known as
the " Mandamus Councillors." To bring the people more
directly under the control of the executive, all townmeetings
were abolished, except for the purpose of choosing
municipal officers, though some might be licensed by the
Governor for a stated purpose. In order to concentrate all
judicial authority in the hands of the government, on the
Governor was conferred the power of appointing Judges,
as well as that of appointing and removing Sheriffs ; and
to the latter was entrusted the authority of returning
jurors, who had heretofore been chosen by the towns. For
the enforcement of these laws, acts were passed providing
for the quartering of troops upon the inhabitants in any
part of the country. Provision was also made for the
transportation of criminals charged with capital offences,
committed in support of the royal authority, to Nova
Scotia or England for trial. Another act, previously
passed, which the General Court protested against in vain,
provided that the salaries of the Governor and Judges of
the courts should be paid from the royal treasury. Colo-
nial revenue went into the hands of the King's officers to
be disbursed in accordance with the royal will. Thus was