Читать книгу The Life & Legacy of George Washington - John Marshall - Страница 9

Table of Contents

Massachusetts claims New Hampshire and part of Maine. … Dissensions among the inhabitants. … Confederation of the New England colonies. … Rhode Island excluded from it. … Separate chambers provided for the two branches of the Legislature. … New England takes part with Parliament. … Treaty with Acadié. … Petition of the non-conformists. … Disputes between Massachusetts and Connecticut. … War between England and Holland. … Machinations of the Dutch at Manhadoes among the Indians. … Massachusetts refuses to join the united colonies in the war. … Application of New Haven to Cromwell for assistance. … Peace with the Dutch. … Expedition of Sedgewic against Acadié. … Religious intolerance.

1639

The government of Massachusetts, induced by the rapidity with which the colony had attained its present strength to form sanguine hopes of future importance, instituted an inquiry into the extent of their patent, with a view to the enlargement of territory. To facilitate this object, commissioners were appointed to explore the Merrimack, and to ascertain its northernmost point. The charter conveyed to the grantees all the lands within lines to be drawn three miles south of Charles river, and the same distance north of the Merrimack. Massachusetts claims New Hampshire and part of Maine.The government construed this description as authorising a line to be drawn due east from a point three miles north of the head of Merrimack, which soon leaves that river, and includes all New Hampshire, and a considerable part of Maine. In pursuance of this exposition of the charter, the general court asserted its jurisdiction over New Hampshire, in which there were a few scattered habitations, and proceeded to authorise settlements in that country.[68]

The attempts which had been made to colonise the northern and eastern parts of New England had proved almost entirely unsuccessful. Sir Ferdinando Gorges and John Mason had built a small house at the mouth of Piscataqua, about the year 1623; and, nearly at the same time, others erected a few huts along the coast from Merrimack eastward to Sagadahock for the purpose of fishing. In 1631, Gorges and Mason sent over a small party of planters and fishermen under the conduct of a Mr. Williams, who laid the foundation of Portsmouth.

When the Plymouth company divided New England among its members, that territory lying along the coast from Merrimack river, and for sixty miles into the country to the river Piscataqua, was granted to Mason, and was called New Hampshire; that territory northeastward of New Hampshire, to the river Kennebec, and sixty miles into the country, was granted to Sir Ferdinando Gorges. In 1639, Gorges obtained a patent for this district under the name of Maine, comprehending the lands for one hundred, instead of sixty miles, into the country, together with the powers of sovereignty. He framed a system of government which, being purely executive, could not even preserve itself. After struggling with a long course of confusion, and drawing out, for several years, a miserable political existence, Maine submitted itself to the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, and consented to become a part of that colony. In the course of the years 1651 and 1652, this junction was effected, and Maine was erected into a county, the towns of which sent deputies to the general court at Boston. To this county was conceded the peculiar privilege that its inhabitants, although not members of the church, should be entitled to the rights of freemen on taking the oath.[69]

The settlements in New Hampshire, too, were maintaining only a doubtful and feeble existence, when they drew a recruit of inhabitants from the same causes which had peopled Rhode Island and Connecticut.

1637

In 1637, when Mrs. Hutchinson and other Antinomians were exiled, Mr. Wheelright, her brother in law, a popular preacher, was likewise banished. He carried with him a considerable number of his followers; and, just passing the north-eastern boundary of Massachusetts, planted the town of Exeter. These emigrants immediately formed themselves, according to the manner of New England, into a body politic for their own government.

1640

A few persons arrived soon afterwards from England, and laid the foundation of the town of Dover. They also established a distinct government. Their first act proved to be the source of future discord. The majority chose one Underbill as governor; but a respectable minority was opposed to his election. To this cause of discontent was added another of irresistible influence. They were divided on the subject of the covenant of works, and of grace. These dissensions soon grew into a civil war, which was happily terminated by Williams, who was, according to the practice of small societies torn by civil broils, invited by the weaker party to its aid. He marched from Portsmouth at the head of a small military force; and, banishing the governor, and the leaders of the Antinomian faction, restored peace to this distracted village.

Massachusetts had asserted a right over this territory. Her claim derived aid, not only from the factions which agitated these feeble settlements, but also from the uncertainty of the tenure by which the inhabitants held their lands. Only the settlers at Portsmouth had acquired a title from Mason; and the others were, consequently, unfriendly to his pretensions. These causes produced a voluntary offer of submission to the government of Massachusetts, which was accepted; and the general court passed an order, declaring the inhabitants of Piscataqua to be within their jurisdiction, with the privileges of participating in all their rights, and of being exempted from all "public charges, other than those which shall arise for, or among themselves, or from any action, or course that may be taken for their own good or benefit." Under the protecting wing of this more powerful neighbour, New Hampshire attained the growth which afterwards enabled her to stand alone; and long remembered with affection the benefits she had received.[70]

Charles, environed with difficulties arising from his own misrule, was at length compelled to meet his Parliament; and, in November, the great council of the nation was again assembled. The circumstances which had caused such considerable emigrations to New England, existed no longer. The puritans were not only exempt from persecution, but became the strongest party in the nation; and, from this time, New England is supposed to have derived no increase of population from the parent state.[71]

Confederation of the New England colonies.

About the same period many evidences were given of a general combination of the neighbouring Indians against the settlements of New England; and apprehensions were also entertained of hostility from the Dutch at Manhadoes. A sense of impending danger suggested the policy of forming a confederacy of the sister colonies for their mutual defence; and so confirmed had the habit of self-government become since the attention of England was absorbed in her domestic dissensions, that it was not thought necessary to consult the parent state on this important measure. 1643After mature deliberation, articles of confederation were digested; and in May 1643, they were conclusively adopted.[72]

By them the united colonies of New England, viz. Massachusetts, Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven, entered into a firm and perpetual league, offensive and defensive.

Each colony retained a distinct and separate jurisdiction; no two colonies could join in one jurisdiction without the consent of the whole; and no other colony could be received into the confederacy without the like consent.

The charge of all wars was to be borne by the colonies respectively, in proportion to the male inhabitants of each, between sixteen and sixty years of age.

On notice of an invasion given by three magistrates of any colony, the confederates were immediately to furnish their respective quotas. These were fixed at one hundred from Massachusetts, and forty-five from each of the other parties to the agreement. If a larger armament should be found necessary, commissioners were to meet, and ascertain the number of men to be required.

Two commissioners from each government, being church members, were to meet annually on the first Monday in September. Six possessed the power of binding the whole. Any measure approved by a majority of less than six was to be referred to the general court of each colony, and the consent of all was necessary to its adoption.

They were to choose annually a president from their own body, and had power to frame laws or rules of a civil nature, and of general concern. Of this description were rules which respected their conduct towards the Indians, and measures to be taken with fugitives from one colony to another.

No colony was permitted, without the general consent, to engage in war, but in sudden and inevitable cases.

If, on any extraordinary meeting of the commissioners, their whole number should not assemble, any four who should meet were empowered to determine on a war, and to call for the respective quotas of the several colonies; but not less than six could determine on the justice of the war, or settle the expenses, or levy the money for its support.

If any colony should be charged with breaking an article of the agreement, or with doing an injury to another colony, the complaint was to be submitted to the consideration and determination of the commissioners of such colonies as should be disinterested.[73]

This union, the result of good sense, and of a judicious consideration of the real interests of the colonies, remained in force until their charters were dissolved. Rhode Island excluded from it.Rhode Island, at the instance of Massachusetts, was excluded; and her commissioners were not admitted into the congress of deputies which formed the confederation.

On her petitioning at a subsequent period to be received as a member, her request was refused, unless she would consent to be incorporated with Plymouth. This condition being deemed inadmissible, she never was taken into the confederacy. From the formation of this league, its members were considered by their neighbours as one body with regard to external affairs, and such as were of general concern; though the internal and particular objects of each continued to be managed by its own magistrates and legislature.

The vigorous and prudent measures pursued by the united colonies, disconcerted the plans of the Indians, and preserved peace.

Rhode Island and Providence plantations, excluded from the general confederacy, were under the necessity of courting the friendship of the neighbouring Indians. So successful were their endeavours that, in the year 1644, they obtained from the chiefs of the Narraghansetts a formal surrender of their country.[74]

The first general assembly, consisting of the collective freemen of the plantations, was convened in May, 1647. In this body the supreme authority of the nation resided. The executive duties were performed by a governor and four assistants, chosen from among the freemen by their several towns; and the same persons constituted also the supreme court for the administration of justice. Every township, forming within itself a corporation, elected a council of six, for the management of its peculiar affairs, and for the settlement of its disputes.[75]

1644

Hitherto the governor, assistants, and representatives, of Massachusetts had assembled in the same chamber, and deliberated together. At first their relative powers do not seem to have been accurately understood; nor the mode of deciding controverted questions to have been well defined. The representatives being the most numerous body, contended that every question should be decided by a majority of the whole, while the assistants asserted their right to a negative. More than once, this contest suspended the proceedings of the general court. But the assistants having, with the aid of the clergy, succeeded on each occasion, the representatives yielded the point, and moved that separate chambers should be provided for the two branches of the legislature. This motion being carried in the affirmative, their deliberations were afterwards conducted apart from each other.

This regulation was subsequently modified with respect to judicial proceedings; for the legislature was the court of the last resort. If, in these, the two houses differed, the vote was to be taken conjointly.

New England takes part with Parliament.

In England, the contests between the King and Parliament, at length ripened into open war. The colonies of New England took an early and sincere part on the side of Parliament. Their interests were committed to such agents as might best conciliate the favour of the House of Commons, who, in return, manifested the impression received from them, and from the general conduct of their northern colonies, by passing a resolutions exempting from the payment of "duties or other customs," until the house should order otherwise, all merchandises exported to or from New England.[76] And, in 1644, the general court passed an ordinance declaring "that what person soever shall by word, writing, or action, endeavour to disturb our peace directly or indirectly by drawing a party under pretence that he is for the King of England, and such as join with him against the Parliament, shall be accounted as an offender of a high nature against this commonwealth, and to be proceeded with either capitally or otherwise, according to the quality and degree of his offence; provided always that this shall not be extended against any merchants, strangers and shipmen that come hither merely for trade or merchandise, albeit they should come from any of those parts that are in the hands of the King, and such as adhere to him against the Parliament; carrying themselves here quietly, and free from railing, or nourishing any faction, mutiny, or sedition among us as aforesaid."[77]

These manifestations of mutual kindness were not interrupted by an ordinance of Parliament, passed in 1643, appointing the earl of Warwick, governor in chief and lord high admiral of the colonies, with a council of five peers, and twelve commoners, to assist him; and empowering him, in conjunction with his associates, to examine the state of their affairs; to send for papers and persons; to remove governors and officers, appointing others in their places; and to assign over to them such part of the powers then granted as he should think proper. Jealous as were the people of New England of measures endangering their liberty, they do not appear to have been alarmed at this extraordinary exercise of power. So true is it that men close their eyes on encroachments committed by that party to which they are attached, in the delusive hope that power, in such hands, will always be wielded against their adversaries, never against themselves.

This prosperous state of things was still farther improved by a transaction which is the more worthy of notice as being an additional evidence of the extent to which the colonies of New England then exercised the powers of self-government. Treaty with Acadié.A treaty of peace and commerce was entered into between the governor of Massachusetts, styling himself governor of New England, and Monsieur D'Aulney, lieutenant general of the King of France in Acadié. This treaty was laid before the commissioners for the colonies and received their sanction.

1646

The rigid adherence of Massachusetts to the principle of withholding the privilege of a freeman from all who dissented from the majority in any religious opinion, could not fail to generate perpetual discontents. Petition of the non-conformists.A petition was presented to the general court, signed by several persons highly respectable for their situation and character, but, not being church members, excluded from the common rights of society, complaining that the fundamental laws of England were not acknowledged by the colony; and that they were denied those civil and religious privileges to which they were entitled, as freeborn Englishmen, of good moral conduct. Their prayer to be admitted to the rights, or to be relieved from the burdens, of society, was accompanied with observations conveying a very intelligible censure on the proceedings of the colony, and a threat of applying to Parliament, should the prayer of their petition be rejected.

The most popular governments not being always the most inclined to tolerate opinions differing from those of the majority, this petition gave great offence, and its signers were required to attend the court. Their plea, that the right to petition government was sacred, was answered by saying that they were not accused for petitioning, but for using contemptuous and seditious expressions. They were required to find sureties for their good behaviour; and, on refusing to acknowledge their offence, were fined at the discretion of the court. An appeal from this decision having been refused, they sent deputies to lay their case before Parliament; but the clergy exerted themselves on the occasion; and the celebrated Cotton, in one of his sermons, asserted "that if any should carry writings or complaints against the people of God in that country to England, it would be as Jonas in the ship." A storm having risen during the passage, the mariners, impressed with the prophecy of Cotton, insisted that the obnoxious papers should be thrown overboard; and the deputies were constrained to consign their credentials to the waves. On their arrival in England, they found Parliament but little disposed to listen to their complaints. The agents of Massachusetts had received instructions to counteract their efforts; and the governments of New England were too high in favour, to admit of a rigid scrutiny into their conduct.[78]

In some of the internal dissensions which agitated Massachusetts, Winthrop, a man of great influence, always among their first magistrates, and often their governor, was charged while deputy governor with some arbitrary conduct. He defended himself at the bar, in the presence of a vast concourse of people; and, having been honourably acquitted, addressed them from the bench, in a speech which was highly approved.

As this speech tends to illustrate the political opinions of the day, an extract from it may not be unworthy of regard. "The questions," he said, "which have troubled the country of late, and from which these disturbances in the state have arisen, have been about the authority of the magistrate and the liberty of the people. Magistracy is certainly an appointment from God. We take an oath to govern you according to God's law, and our own; and if we commit errors, not willingly, but for want of skill, you ought to bear with us, because, being chosen from among yourselves, we are but men, and subject to the like passions as yourselves. Nor would I have you mistake your own liberty. There is a freedom of doing what we list, without regard to law or justice; this liberty is indeed inconsistent with authority; but civil, moral, and federal liberty, consists in every man's enjoying his property, and having the benefit of the laws of his country; which is very consistent with a due subjection to the civil magistrate. And for this you ought to contend, with the hazard of your lives."[79]

During the remnant of his life, he was annually chosen governor.

1649

About this time, a controversy which had long subsisted between Massachusetts, and Connecticut, was terminated. The latter, for the purpose of maintaining Saybrooke, had laid a duty on all goods exported from Connecticut river. The inhabitants of Springfield, a town of Massachusetts lying on the river, having refused to pay this duty, the cause was laid before the commissioners of the united colonies; and, after hearing the parties, those of Plymouth and New Haven adjourned the final decision of the case until the next meeting, in order to hear farther objections from Massachusetts, but directed that, in the meantime, the duty should be paid.

At the meeting in 1648, Massachusetts insisted on the production of the patent of Connecticut. It was perfectly well known that the original patent could not be procured; and the agents for Connecticut, after stating this fact, offered an authentic copy. The commissioners recommended that the boundary line should be run, to ascertain whether Springfield was really in Massachusetts, but still directed that the duty should continue to be paid. On this order being made, the commissioners of Massachusetts produced a law of their general court, reciting the controversy, with the orders which had been made in it, and imposing a duty on all goods belonging to the inhabitants of Plymouth, Connecticut, or New Haven, which should be imported within the castle, or exported from any part of the bay, and subjecting them to forfeiture for non-payment. The commissioners remonstrated strongly against this measure, and recommended it to the general court of Massachusetts, seriously to consider whether such proceedings were reconcilable with "the law of love," and the tenor of the articles of confederation. In the meantime, they begged to be excused from "all farther agitations concerning Springfield."

In this state of the controversy fort Saybrooke was consumed by fire, and Connecticut forbore to re-build it, or to demand the duty. In the following year, Massachusetts repealed the ordinance which had so successfully decided the contest.[80]

Thus does a member of a confederacy, feeling its own strength, and the weakness of those with whom it is associated, deride the legitimate decisions of the federal body, when opposed to its own interest or passions, and obey the general will, only when that will is dictated by itself.

Although, while civil war raged in the mother country, New England had been permitted to govern itself as an independent nation, Parliament seems to have entertained very decisive opinions respecting the subordination of the provinces, and its own controlling power. The measures taken for giving effect to these opinions, involved all the colonies equally. The council of state was authorised to displace governors and magistrates, and to appoint others. Massachusetts was required to take a new patent, and to hold its courts, not in the name of the colony, but in the name of the Parliament. 1651The general court, unwilling to comply with these requisitions, transmitted a petition to Parliament, styling that body "the supreme authority," and expressing for it the highest respect. They stated their uniform attachment to Parliament during the civil war, the aid they had given, and the losses they had sustained. After speaking of the favours they had received, they expressed the hope "that it will not go worse with them than it did under the late King; and that the frame of this government will not be changed, and governors and magistrates imposed on them against their will." They declared, however, their entire submission to the will of Parliament; and, avowing for that body the most zealous attachment, prayed a favourable answer to their humble petition.

But the united colonies had lately given great umbrage by supplying Virginia and Barbadoes, then enemies of the commonwealth, with warlike stores and other commodities. It was also matter of real complaint that their exemption from the payment of duties enabled them to enrich themselves at the expense of others; and a revocation of their privileges in this respect was seriously contemplated. Yet the requisitions concerning their charter were never complied with, and do not appear to have been repeated.[81]

In this year, war was declared by England against Holland. The united colonies, accustomed to conduct their affairs in their own way, did not think themselves involved in this contest, unless engaged in it by some act of their own. The Dutch at Manhadoes, too weak to encounter their English neighbours, solicited the continuance of peace; and, as the trade carried on between them was mutually advantageous, this request was readily granted. 1653Machinations of the Dutch with the Indians.Intelligence however was soon brought by the Indians, that the Dutch were privately inciting them to a general confederacy for the purpose of extirpating the English. This intelligence gave the more alarm, because the massacre at Amboyna was then fresh in the recollection of the colonists. An extraordinary meeting of the commissioners was called at Boston, who were divided in opinion with regard to the propriety of declaring war. In consequence of this division, a conference was held before the general court and several elders of Massachusetts. The elders, being requested to give their opinion in writing, stated "that the proofs and presumptions of the execrable plot, tending to the destruction of so many of the dear saints of God, imputed to the Dutch governor, and the fiscal, were of such weights as to induce them to believe the reality of it; yet they were not so fully conclusive as to clear up a present proceeding to war before the world, and to bear up their hearts with that fullness of persuasion which was mete, in commending the case to God in prayer, and to the people in exhortations; and that it would be safest for the colonies to forbear the use of the sword; but advised to be in a posture of defence until the mind of God should be more fully known either for a settled peace, or more manifest grounds of war."[82] With this opinion of the elders, the vote of the general court concurred.

The intelligence of the practices of the Dutch governor with the Indians becoming more certain, all the commissioners except Mr. Bradstreet of Massachusetts, declared in favour of war. Their proceedings were immediately interrupted by a declaration of the general court of Massachusetts, that no determination of the commissioners, although they should be unanimous, should bind the general court to join in an offensive war which should appear to be unjust. A serious altercation ensued, in the course of which the other colonies pressed the war as a measure essential to their safety; but Massachusetts adhered inflexibly to its first resolution. This additional evidence of the incompetency of their union to bind one member, stronger than all the rest, threatened a dissolution of the confederacy; and that event seems to have been prevented only by the inability of the others to stand alone. Alarmed at their situation, and irritated by the conduct of their elder sister, Connecticut and New Haven represented Cromwell, then lord protector of England, the danger to which the colonies were exposed from the Dutch and the Indians; and the hazard the smaller provinces must continue to incur, unless the league between them could be maintained and executed according to its true intent, and the interpretation which its articles had uniformly received.

With his usual promptness and decision, Cromwell detached a small armament for the reduction of the Dutch colony, and recommended to Massachusetts to furnish aid to the expedition. Although the legitimate requisitions of the government of the union had been ineffectual, the recommendation of the lord protector was not to be disregarded; and the general court passed a resolution conforming to it. 1654A treaty of peace, which was signed in April, saved the Dutch colony.[83]

The progress of the French in their neighbourhood had been viewed with regret and apprehension by all New England. Expedition against Acadié.Sedgewic, the commander of the forces which had been destined against Manhadoes, animated with the vigour of his master, was easily prevailed on to turn his arms against a people, whose religious tenets he detested, and whose country he hated. He soon dislodged the French from Penobscot, and subdued all Acadié. 1655The ministers of his most christian majesty, pending the negotiations for the treaty of Westminster, demanded restitution of the forts Pentagoet, St. Johns, and Port Royal; but, each nation having claims on the country, their pretensions were referred to the arbitrators appointed to adjust the damages committed on either side since the year 1640; and the restitution of Acadié was postponed for future discussion.

1656

Cromwell seems not to have intended to restore the countries he had conquered. He granted to St. Etienne, Crown and Temple, for ever, the territory denominated Acadié, and part of the country commonly called Nova Scotia, extending along the coast to Pentagoet, and to the river St. George.

Until the restoration, the colonies of New England continued in a state of unexampled prosperity. Those regulations respecting navigation, which were rigorously enforced against others less in favour, were dispensed with for their benefit. They maintained external peace by the vigour and sagacity with which their government was administered; and, improved the advantages which the times afforded them by industry and attention to their interests. In this period of prosperity, they acquired a degree of strength and consistence which enabled them to struggle through the difficulties that afterwards assailed them.

These sober industrious people were peculiarly attentive to the instruction of youth. Education was among the first objects of their care. In addition to private institutions, they had brought the college at Cambridge to a state of forwardness which reflects much credit on their character. As early as the year 1636, the general court had bestowed four hundred pounds on a public school at Newtown, the name by which Cambridge was then known. Two years afterwards, an additional donation was made by the reverend Mr. John Harvard, in consequence of which the institution received the name of Harvard college. In 1642, this college was placed under the government of the governor, and deputy governor, and of the magistrates, and ministers of the six next adjacent towns, who, with the president were incorporated for that purpose; and, in 1650, its first charter was granted.[84]

It is to be lamented that the same people possessed a degree of bigotry in religion, and a spirit of intolerance, which their enlightened posterity will view with regret. During this period of prosperity, the government maintained the severity of its institutions against all those who dissented from the church; and exerted itself assiduously in what was thought the holy work of punishing heretics, and introducing conformity in matters of faith. In this time, the sect denominated Quakers appeared. They were fined, imprisoned, whipped, and, at length put to death; but could not be totally suppressed. As enthusiastic as their persecutors, they gloried in their sufferings, and deemed themselves the martyrs of truth.