Regarding the existing government of the City of New York as unadapted to the changed order of things, they did not, however, presume to reorganize it by the use of appointive powers, but ordeal a popular election for the choice of a new mayor and aldermen. The spirit and transactions of the Leisler period afford convincing evidence of the very early preparedness of the people of New York for political independence, and also of their perfect capacity for its orderly and creditable exercise. There is no letter established fact than this in American colonial history. After the restitution of the provincial assembly as a permanent parliament by William 1 1 1, in 1091, the people ardently availed themselves of the resources provided by {hat body for defending such rights as they possessed against royal invasion, for harassing arbitrary or objectionable governors, and for gradually asserting the broad principle of American liberty. Tie- government of the province was modeled upon that of England, with important differences. The assembly corresponded to the house of commons, to which, as a representative elective body of the people a1 large, it bore a perfect similitude. The council took the place of both the house of lords and the ministerial cabinet, being in theory partly a higher chamber and partly a body of executive advisers. It was in practice wholly subservient to the governor, since its members were appointable and removable by the home government in England, subject singly to his recommendation. By the entire absence of a ki government of the day," executive power was concentrated in the hands of the governor, who, unless a man of exceptionally virtuous and moderate character (which seldom happened), was therefore under strong temptation to regard himself as a ruler to whom uncommon individual authority