Page:A Brief History of the Constitution and Government of Massachusetts (1925).pdf/17

Rh such charters. In 1463, for example, a charter was granted by Edward to the Merchants Adventurers trading with Flanders. Even as far back as the days of Henry, in fact, charters were given to merchants guilds. A notable charter was given to the East India Company by Elizabeth in 1599. Thus the charter of 1628 was not an unusual document. This charter and its successor granted under William and Mary were really constitutions. To quote Lord Bryce, a constitution is "a frame of government established by a superior authority creating a subordinate body which can do everything except violate the terms and transcend the powers of the instrument to which it owes its existence." The supreme authority under all charters was the Crown or Parliament. This supreme power passed, when independence was later obtained, not to the legislature but to the people of an independent commonwealth. In a democracy they are the source of all power, the members of the Legislature being elected by them, and consequently their agents.

The charter of 1628 was not brought over to this country by Governor Endicott and the first colonists who settled at Salem. In 1630, however, Winthrop and other settlers reached Salem, and brought the charter with them. Winthrop became Governor both of the company and of the colony. The legal justification for the transfer of this charter was the subject of controversy at the time and has been since. The step was taken, however, with legal advice, and was afterwards sustained in England by court decisions. There was nothing in the charter to prohibit its removal and its presence in Massachusetts was a strong guarantee of the vitality and endurance of the charter as well as of the liberties of those who were to live under it. No one was admitted as a freeman who was not a church member.