Colonial governors and assemblies had way too much power in upholding the law. The Colonial governor could order a person's house to be searched without anyone else's consent. The Colonial assembly acted much like a vigilante group, targeting certain people that they thought were spreading Propaganda. This was all before the Bill of Rights was passed.
Chat with our AI personalities
It depends The colonial governer was appointed by the king however, the colonial assemblies were incharge of paying the governer so the governer wouldn't be mean to them but the assemblies wouldn't be mean to him or else he would not allow their meetings to be held.
The assemblies had gained experience and confidence.
The assemblies believed the colonists had a right to representation under their royal charters.
The governor frequently could not control the assembly.
P.S if you are being asked the exact same question you probably go to Western Christian Academy (Homeschooling program) if not then good luck:)
Colonial proprietary governors did not really deal that much with the assemblies. They often were not in attendance to know what was happening. The assemblies raised militias and made taxes.
First, they controlled the budget by their right to vote on taxes and expenditures. Second, they held the power to initiate legislation.
representative assemblies Legislative assemblies, whose members were elected by voters, evolved during the colonial period. Most became so powerful that they held the power of the purse and so controlled the actions of colonial governors.
To deal with a scarcity of gold and silver coins, legislatures supported printing paper money despite opposition from the governors.
no
The home government that colonised the region.
the colony's landowning white males