NEW ENGLAND FROM 1643 TO 1700.
63. References.
Bibliographies.--Same as § 47, above; Avery, II., III.; Channing and Hart,
_Guide_, §§ 124-128.
Historical Maps.--Same as § 47, above.
General Accounts.--Doyle, _Colonies_, II. chs. viii., ix., III. chs. i.-v.;
Lodge, _Colonies_, 351-362, 375-380, 387-392, 398-400; Osgood, _Colonies_;
Avery, II. chs. xiii.-xviii., III. chs. vii., viii., x.-xii., xix.-xxi.; G.
Bancroft, I. 289-407, 574-613; Channing, _United States_, I. chs. xv.,
xviii., xix.; Hildreth, I. chs. x., xii., xiv.; Palfrey, _New England_, I.
269-408, III. 1-386; Fiske, _Beginnings of New England_; Hallowell, _Quaker
Invasion of Massachusetts_; R. Frothingham, _Rise of the Republic_, chs.
ii., iii.; A. MacLear, _Early New England Towns_; Winsor, _Narrative and
Critical_, as in § 47.
Special Histories.--Consult the numerous local histories, some of them of
much importance; Winsor's _Boston_, and Sheldon's _Deerfield_ are examples.
Contemporary Accounts.--Sewall, _Diary_; Mather, _Magnalia_; Bishop, _New
England Judged_; Hubbard, _Trouble with the Indians_.--Reprints in
publications of colonial and town record commissions, historical and
antiquarian societies, Prince Society, Gorges Society, etc.; Andros,
_Tracts_; _American History Leaflets_, Nos. 7, 25, 29; _Old South
Leaflets_; _American History told by Contemporaries_, I. ch. xx., II.
64. New England Confederation formed (1637-1643).
Sidenote: Local politics excluded.
In the preceding chapter has been sketched the origin and planting of the
New England colonies. Most of those colonies maintained a separate
existence and had a history of their own during the rest of the seventeenth
century. But the limits of this work do not permit a sketch of the local
and internal history of each colony. In this chapter will therefore be
considered only those events of common interest and having a significance
in the development of all the colonies.
Sidenote: Connecticut makes overtures for a colonial federation (1637).
First in time and first in its consequences is the federation of the New
England colonies, for which in August, 1637, the men of Connecticut made
overtures to the Massachusetts General Court. Connecticut, as an outpost of
English civilization in the heart of the Indian country and "over against
the Dutch," had especial need of support from the older colonies to the
east. The tribesmen were uneasy and the menaces of the Dutch at New
Amsterdam were especially alarming. Twice had the doughty Hollanders
endeavored to drive English settlers from the Connecticut valley and
recover their lost fur-trade there; both attempts had been failures, but it
seemed likely that in time the Dutch might summon sufficient strength to
make it more difficult to withstand them. Again, the French, who had
settled at Quebec in 1608, were beginning to push the confines of New
France southward; and there had been trouble with them at various times for
several years, the outgrowth of boundary disputes and race hatred. The
Connecticut and Hudson rivers were highways quite familiar to the French
Canadians and their Indian allies, and the Connecticut colonists were
apprehensive of partisan raids overland from the north, which they could
not hope to repel single-handed.
Sidenote: Massachusetts at last favorable (1642).
The proposition for union was renewed in 1639, and again in September,
1642. At first Massachusetts was indifferent; but finally "the ill news we
had out of England concerning the breach between the king and Parliament"
appears to have caused her statesmen to look favorably on the project.
Affairs were at such a pass in the mother-country that it behooved
Englishmen in America to be prepared to act on the defensive in the event
of the war-cloud drifting in their direction. Should the king win, there
was reason to believe that he would speedily turn his attention towards the
correction of New England, which had long been to dissenting Englishmen in
the mother-land an object-lesson in political independence and a ready
refuge in time of danger.
Sidenote: Formation of the New England Confederation.
In May, 1643, twelve articles were agreed upon at Boston between the
representatives of Massachusetts Bay, Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven.
Winthrop tells us that the representatives "coming to consultation
encountered some difficulties, but being all desirous of union and studious
of peace, they readily yielded each to other in such things as tended to
common utility." Compromises were the foundation of this as well as of
later American constitutions.
Sidenote: The Constitution.
The four colonies were bound together by a formal written constitution,
under the name of "The United Colonies of New England," in "a firm and
perpetual league of friendship and amity for offence and defence, mutual
advice and succor, upon all just occasions, both for preserving and
propagating the truth and liberties of the Gospel, and for their own mutual
safety and welfare." Each colony was allowed to manage its internal
affairs; but a body of eight federal commissioners, two from each colony,
and all of them church members, were empowered to "determine all affairs of
war or peace, leagues, aids, charges, and numbers of men for war, division
of spoils and whatsoever was gotten by conquest, receiving of more
confederates for plantations into combination with any of the confederates,
and all things of like nature which were the proper concomitants or
consequents of such a confederation for amity, offence, and defence." Six
commissioners formed a working majority of the board; but in case of
disagreement, the question at issue was to be sent to the legislatures of
the several colonies for decision. War expenses were to be levied against
each colony in proportion to its male population between the ages of
sixteen and sixty. The board was to meet at least once a year, and oftener
when necessary. The president of the commissioners, chosen from their own
number, was to be "invested with no power or respect" except that of a
presiding officer.
65. Workings of the Confederation (1643-1660).
Sidenote: Inequality of representation.
The league which it represented is "interesting as the first American
experiment in federation;" but it had one fertile source of weakness. There
were in the four colonies represented an aggregate population of about
twenty-four thousand, of which Massachusetts contained fifteen thousand,
the other three having not more than three thousand each. In case of war
Massachusetts agreed to send one hundred men for every forty-five furnished
by each of her colleagues. In two ways she bore the heaviest burden,--in
the number of men sent to war, and in the amount of taxes levied therefor.
As each colony was to have an equal vote in the conduct of the league,
Massachusetts was placed at a disadvantage. She frequently endeavored to
exercise larger power than was allowed her under the articles, thus
arousing the enmity of the smaller colonies, and endangering the existence
of the union.
Sidenote: Massachusetts in control.
Nevertheless, during the twenty years in which the confederation was the
strongest political power on the continent of North America, Massachusetts
maintained control of its general policy. Maine and the settlements along
Narragansett Bay in vain made application to join the confederation. It was
objected that public order was not established in Rhode Island, and
moreover the oath taken by the freemen there bespoke fealty to the English
king. As for Maine, its proprietor, Gorges, was enlisted on the side of the
monarch, and the political system in vogue in his province differed from
that in the other colonies.
Sidenote: Nature of the Board of Commissioners.
The board was little more than a committee of public safety; it acted upon
the colonial legislatures, and not on the individual colonists, and had no
power to enforce its decrees. One of its early interests was the building
up of Harvard College; and at its request there was taken up, throughout
the four colonies, a contribution of "corn for the poor scholars in
Cambridge."
Sidenote: Local independence greater than national patriotism.
In the articles of confederation there was no reference whatever to the
home government. The New Englanders had taken charge of their own affairs,
apparently without a thought of the supremacy of either king or parliament.
The spirit of local independence among these people was greater than
national patriotism. With Laud in prison and the king an outcast, there
could be no interference from that quarter, and Parliament was too busy
just then to give much thought to the doings of the distant American
colonists. In November (1643) Parliament instituted a commission for the
government of the colonies, with the Earl of Warwick at its head; but it
was of small avail so far as New England was concerned.
Sidenote: Jealousy of interference from England.
Massachusetts was ever in an attitude of jealousy towards even a suspicion
of interference from England. In 1644 the General Court voted that any one
attempting to raise soldiers for the king should be "accounted as an
offender of an high nature against this commonwealth, and to be proceeded
with, either capitally or otherwise, according to the quality and degree of
his offence." The colony was, however, no more for the Commons than for the
king. When, in 1651, Parliament desired that Massachusetts surrender her
charter granted by King Charles and receive a new one at its hands, for a
year no notice was taken of the command; when at last England had a war
with Holland on her hands, the Massachusetts men evasively replied that
they were quite satisfied "to live under the government of a governor and
magistrates of their own choosing and under laws of their own making." The
General Court was also bold enough to establish a colonial mint (1652), and
for thirty years coined "pine-tree shillings," in the face of all
objections. In 1653 Cromwell, always a firm friend to New England, was
declared Lord Protector; yet Massachusetts did not allow the event to be
proclaimed within her borders, and when he wished Massachusetts to help him
in his war against the Dutch by capturing New Amsterdam, the colonial court
somewhat haughtily "gave liberty to his Highness's commissioners" to raise
volunteers in her territory. At the Restoration it was not until warning
came from friends in England, that Charles II. was proclaimed in New
England.
66. Disturbances in Rhode Island (1641-1647).
Sidenote: The sectaries on Narragansett Bay.
Over on Narragansett Bay the public peace continued to be disturbed by
factious disputations. Because of the freedom there generously offered to
all men, the settlements of Rhode Island and Providence were the
harboring-place for dissenters of every class, who for the most part had
been ordered to leave the other colonies. Many of these persons were of the
Baptist faith, or held other theological views which would be considered
sober enough in our day; but among them were numerous rank fanatics, whom
no well-ordered society was calculated to please.
Sidenote: The case of Gorton.
Some of Roger Williams's adherents had built Pawtuxet. To them came a band
of fanatics, headed by Samuel Gorton, described by his orthodox neighbors
as "a proud and pestilent seducer," of "insolent and riotous carriage," but
who was by no means so black as they painted him. The Pawtuxet settlers
asked Massachusetts (1641) "of gentle courtesy and for the preservation of
humanity and mankind," to "lend a neighbor-like helping hand" and relieve
them of the disturber. At the same time they secured the annexation of
their town to Massachusetts, so that it might be within the jurisdiction of
the latter. Gorton and nine of his followers were taken as prisoners to
Boston (1643), where they were convicted of blasphemy, and after four or
five months at hard labor were released, with threats of death if they did
not at once depart from Massachusetts soil.
Gorton went to England (1646) and appealed to the parliamentary
commissioners, who declared that he might "freely and quietly live and
plant" upon his land which he had purchased from the Indians at Shawomet
(Warwick), on the western shore of Narragansett Bay. Edward Winslow of
Plymouth was now sent over (1647) to represent Massachusetts in the Gorton
case; and through him the plea was entered that the commissioners, being
far distant from America, should not undertake the decision of appeals from
the colonies; and moreover, that the Massachusetts charter was an "absolute
power of government." The commissioners, in return, protested that they
"intended not to encourage any appeals from your justice;" nevertheless,
they "commanded" the General Court to allow Gorton and his followers to
dwell in peace; but "if they shall be faulty, we leave them to be proceeded
with according to justice." The offender was allowed to return, but his
presence was haughtily ignored; and when his settlement was threatened by
Indians, he cited in vain the parliamentary order as a warrant for
assistance.
67. Policy of the Confederation (1646-1660).
Sidenote: Expressions of independence.
The sturdy and independent spirit of the colonists was expressed in words
as well as in deeds. While Winslow was thus representing the colonists in
England he made his famous reply to those who were disposed to criticise
the formation of the New England confederacy as a presumptuous assertion of
independence: "If we in America should forbear to unite for offence and
defence against a common enemy till we have leave from England, our throats
might be all cut before the messenger would be half seas through." A
similar impatience of authority from England was expressed by Governor John
Winthrop. An opinion which he delivered about this time betokened the proud
and independent attitude of Massachusetts, and was prophetic of the spirit
of the Revolution. By a legal fiction, when the king granted land in
America it was held as being in the manor of East Greenwich. It was said
that the American colonists were represented in that body by the member
returned from the borough containing this manor, and were therefore subject
to Parliament. Winthrop held, however, that the supreme law in the colonies
was the common weal, and should parliamentary authority endanger the
welfare of the colonists, then they would be justified in ignoring that
authority.
Sidenote: The Presbyterians.
Religious liberty was quite as dear to the New England people as political
liberty. In 1645, under Scottish influence, Presbyterianism was established
by Act of Parliament as the state religion of England. Massachusetts was,
however, stoutly Independent, and furnished some of the chief champions for
that faith during the great controversy which was then raging between the
two sects on both sides of the water. A number of Massachusetts
Presbyterians sought (1646) to induce the home government to settle
churches of their faith in the colonies, and to secure the franchise to
all, regardless of religious affiliation; but before they reached England
to state their case the Independents were again in the ascendent, and the
Puritan theocracy in Massachusetts was undisturbed. Two years later (1648)
a synod of churches was held at Cambridge, at which was formulated a church
discipline familiarly styled "the Cambridge platform." In it the
Westminster Confession was approved, the powers of the clergy defined, the
civil power invoked to "coerce" churches which should "walk incorrigibly or
obstinately in any corrupt way of their own," and the term "Congregational"
established, to distinguish New England orthodoxy from "those corrupt sects
and heresies which showed themselves under the vast title of Independency."
In 1649 this platform was laid by the General Court before the several
congregations, and two years later it was formally agreed to.
Sidenote: Encroachments upon Dutch possessions.
It was hardly to be supposed that a people so little inclined to
acknowledge the rights of England should treat with greater respect those
of Holland; and indeed they had the countenance of the home government in
encroachments upon the Dutch colonies. In 1642 Boswell, who represented
England at the Hague, advised his fellow-countrymen in New England to "put
forward their plantations and crowd on, crowding the Dutch out of those
places where they have occupied."
The New Englanders were not slow to adopt this aggressive policy.
Settlements were pushed out westward from New Haven on the mainland, and
southward on Long Island. Peter Stuyvesant, then governor of New
Netherland, bitterly complained of these encroachments,--for the Dutch then
claimed everything between the Connecticut and Delaware rivers,--and
appealed to the federal commissioners to put a stop to them; but the answer
came that the Dutch were selling arms and ammunition to the Indians, that
their conduct was not conducive to peace, that they harbored criminals from
the English colonies, and that the United Colonies proposed to "vindicate
the English rights by all suitable and just means." Stuyvesant, who was a
hot-headed man, would have liked to go to war with the New Englanders, but
was informed by the Dutch West India Company that war "cannot in any event
be to our advantage: the New England people are too powerful for us." The
matter was finally (1651) left to arbitrators, who settled a provisional
boundary line which "on the mainland was not to come within ten miles of
the Hudson River," and which gave to Connecticut the greater part of Long
Island.
Sidenote: Weakness of the confederation in the Dutch War.
War broke out between England and Holland in 1652, and the Connecticut
people were anxious to attack New Netherland, which had not ceased its
depredations on the outlying settlements. All of the federal commissioners
except those from Massachusetts voted to go to war; there was a stormy
session of the federal court, in which Massachusetts endeavored in vain to
override the other colonies. Connecticut and New Haven applied to Cromwell
for assistance. He sent over a fleet to Boston, with injunctions to
Massachusetts to cease her opposition. The General Court stoutly refused to
raise troops for the enterprise, although it gave to the agents of Cromwell
the privilege of enlisting five hundred volunteers in the colony if they
could. But while arrangements were in progress for an attack by eight
hundred men on New Amsterdam, news came that England and Holland had
proclaimed peace (April 5, 1654), and warlike preparations in America
ceased.
Sidenote: Massachusetts in collision with the commissioners.
The weakness of the New England confederation was evident in domestic
affairs as well as in foreign wars. Massachusetts was frequently in
collision with the commissioners. An instance occurred as early as
1642-1643, when trouble broke out with the Narragansetts, who were friends
and allies of the disturber Gorton at Shawomet. Massachusetts refused to
sanction hostilities; nevertheless the commissioners despatched a federal
force against the Indians; but the expedition proved futile, owing to lack
of support from the chief colony.
Sidenote: Contention between Connecticut and Massachusetts.
Saybrook, at the mouth of the Connecticut River, was purchased by the
Connecticut federation in 1644. In order to compensate herself, Connecticut
levied toll on every vessel passing up the river. Massachusetts owned the
valley town of Springfield, and entered complaint before the commissioners
(1647) that Connecticut had no right to tax Massachusetts vessels trading
with a Massachusetts town. Two years later (1649) the commissioners decided
in favor of Connecticut; whereupon Massachusetts levied both export and
import duties at Boston designed to hamper the trade of her sister
colonies; at the same time she demanded that because of her greater size
she be allowed three commissioners, and insisted that the power of the
federal body be reduced. This action created great hostility, and
threatened at one time to break up the union. By 1654 the contention had
been allowed to drop on both sides, and duties on intercolonial trade
ceased.
68. Repression of the Quakers (1656-1660).
Sidenote: Treatment of the Quakers.
During the remainder of the Commonwealth period the most serious question
which arose in New England was what to do with the Quakers. In the
theocracy of the seventeenth century the attitude of the sect was both
theologically and politically well calculated to arouse hostility. They
would strip all formalities from religion, they would recognize no priestly
class, they would not take up arms in the common defence, would pay no
tithes and take no oath of allegiance, they doubted the efficacy of
baptism, had no veneration for the Sabbath, and had a large respect for the
right of individual judgment in spiritual matters. They were aggressive and
stubborn, and, goaded on by persecution, broke out into fantastic displays
of opposition to the State religion. In England four thousand of them were
in jail at one time. When Anne Austin and Mary Fisher arrived in Boston
(1656) from England, by way of the Barbados, as a vanguard of the Quaker
missionary army, the colonial authorities were aghast with horror. The
adventurous women were shipped back to the Barbados, and a law was enacted
against "all Quakers, Ranters, and other notorious heretics," providing for
their flogging and imprisonment at hard labor. Despite this harsh
treatment, the Quakers continued to arrive. Roger Williams said, when
applied to by Massachusetts to harry them out of Rhode Island: where they
are "most of all suffered to declare themselves freely, and only opposed by
arguments in discourse, there they least of all desire to come.... They are
likely to gain more followers by the conceit of their patient sufferings
than by consent to their pernicious sayings." Nevertheless, Rhode Island
was and is the stronghold of the Friends in New England.
In 1657 it was enacted that Quakers who had once been sent away and
returned, should have their ears lopped off, and for the third offence
should have their tongues pierced with red-hot irons. Banishment on pain of
death was recommended by the federal commissioners in 1658; and in
1659-1660 four Quakers lost their lives by hanging on Boston Common. Public
sentiment revolted at these spectacles, and in 1660 the Massachusetts
death-law was repealed, and Quakers were thereafter subjected to nothing
worse than being flogged in the several towns; even this gradually ceased,
with the growth of a more humane spirit. In Connecticut the sect suffered
but little persecution, and in Rhode Island none; while Plymouth and New
Haven were nearly as harsh in their treatment as Massachusetts.
Sidenote: New England in the hands of the council for the plantations.
The restoration of royalty in England (1660) began a new epoch in the
history of the colonies. Their control was placed in the hands of a council
for the plantations, and twelve privy councillors were designated to take
New England in charge. The Quakers had seized the opportunity of gaining an
early hearing from the new king, who was charitably disposed towards them.
In its address to Charles, the Massachusetts court expatiated on the
factious spirit of the Quakers; but the king replied that while he meant
well by the colonies, he desired that hereafter the Quakers be sent to
England for trial,--a desire which was as a matter of course disregarded.
69. Royal Commission (1660-1664).
Sidenote: The king suspects New England's loyalty.
It is not surprising that the king was disposed to look with suspicion upon
the men of New England. He had been told that the confederacy was "a war
combination made by the four colonies when they had a design to throw off
their dependence on England, and for that purpose." The New Englanders,
too, had been somewhat slow to proclaim his ascendancy; while two of the
judges who had sentenced his father to death, Goffe and Whalley, were
screened from royal justice by the people of New Haven, and afterwards by
those of Hadley, a Massachusetts town in the Connecticut valley.
Massachusetts had been bold enough when the home government was so
distracted by other affairs as to render attention to the colonies
impracticable; now that Charles appeared to be turning his attention to
America a more politic course was pursued. Simon Bradstreet, a leading
layman, and John Norton, prominent among the ministers, were sent to
England to make peace with the Crown, and soon returned (1662) with a
gracious answer, which, however, was coupled with an order to the court to
grant all "freeholders of competent estate" the right of suffrage and
office-holding, "without reference to their opinion or profession," to
allow the Church of England to hold services, to administer justice in the
name of the king, and to compel all inhabitants to swear allegiance to him.
The court decreed that legal papers should thereafter run in the king's
name; but all other matters in the royal mandate were referred to a
committee which failed to report upon them.
Sidenote: Arrival of royal commissioners.
Affairs now went on peacefully enough in Massachusetts until 1664. In that
year the king sent over four royal commissioners to look after the
colonies, among them being Samuel Maverick, one of the Presbyterian
petitioners who had made trouble for the New Englanders a few years before.
These commissioners were required "to dispose the people to an entire
submission and obedience to the king's government;" also to feel the public
pulse in Massachusetts, in order to see whether the Crown might not
judiciously assume to appoint a governor for that colony. They arrived at
Boston in July with two ships-of-war and four hundred troops. Obtaining
help from Connecticut, the expedition proceeded to New Amsterdam and easily
conquered that port from the Dutch. During the months the commissioners
were at Boston they were engaged in a prolonged quarrel with the
Massachusetts men, who claimed that their charter allowed them to govern
themselves after their own fashion, without interference from a royal
commission. The court was persistently importuned to give a plain answer to
the king's demands sent out in 1662; but nothing satisfactory could be
obtained, and the commissioners were obliged to return without having
accomplished their mission. The Dutch war against England was now going on,
and political affairs at home were unquiet. A policy of delay had been
profitable for Massachusetts.
Sidenote: Treatment of Connecticut, and of Rhode Island.
In the other colonies of New England better treatment had been accorded the
commissioners. Connecticut had sent over her governor, the younger
Winthrop, to represent her at court. He was well received there, being a
man of scholarly tastes and pleasing manner; the king was the more disposed
to favor him because by helping Connecticut a rival to Massachusetts would
be built up. A liberal charter was granted to his colony; and New
Haven--disliked by Charles for having harbored the regicides--was now,
despite her protest, annexed to her sister colony. Rhode Island, too, was
benefited by the royal favor, and received a charter making it a separate
colony. Doubtless the fact that the people of Narragansett Bay had been
shut out from the New England confederacy had inclined the king to look
kindly upon them. For these reasons Connecticut and Rhode Island had
received the commissioners with consideration, while weak Plymouth was also
praised for her ready obedience.
Sidenote: Decadence of the confederation.
The suppression of New Haven by the king, and the practical victory of the
Quakers over the theocratic policy of Massachusetts, were staggering blows
to the confederation. The federal commissioners held triennial meetings
thereafter until 1684, when the Massachusetts charter was revoked; but its
proceedings, except during King Philip's war, were of little importance.
Sidenote: A prosperous period.
The period of the decadence of the confederation, however, was in the main
one of prosperity for New England. Emigration to America had almost wholly
ceased after 1640, with the rise of the Puritans in England; but the
restoration of the Stuarts and the passage of the Act of Uniformity, with
its accompanying persecutions, caused a renewal of the departure of
Dissenters, and the movement included many, both laymen and clericals, of
eminent ability. New industries were introduced, commerce grew, the area of
settlement extended, and wealth increased.
Sidenote: Change of attitude towards England.
But the accretion of wealth and the passage of time brought changes in the
attitude towards England that threatened in a measure to counteract the
quiet struggle for independence which had been going on for nearly half a
century. A second generation of Americans had come upon the stage, with but
a traditional knowledge of the tyrannies practised upon their fathers in
the old country. Larger wealth secured greater leisure, which resulted in a
cultivation of the graceful arts, with a softening of the austere manners
and thinking of the first emigrants. There was now manifest a desire on the
part of many members of the upper class to bring about closer relations
with the Old World, with its fine manners, its aristocracy, and its
historic associations. Opposition to England began to give place to
imitation of England; colonial life had entered the provincial stage. Two
parties had by this time sprung up, although as yet without
organization,--one desiring to conciliate England, the other standing for
independence in everything except in name. Thus far none had ventured to
think of the possibility of dissolving all political connection with the
mother-land.
70. Indian Wars (1660-1678).
Sidenote: Indian policy of New England.
The Indian policy of the New Englanders was more humane than that adopted
in any of the other colonies except Pennsylvania. Compensation had been
granted to the savages for lands taken, firm friendships had been formed
between some of the chiefs and the whites, and the missionary enterprises
among the red-men were conducted on a large scale and with much zeal.
Martha's Vineyard, Cape Cod, and the country round about Boston were the
centres of proselytism; the "praying Indians" were gathered into village
congregations with native teachers, most notable being those under the
supervision of John Eliot, "the apostle." Of these converted Indians there
were in 1674 about four thousand; several hundred of them were taught a
written language invented by Eliot, who successfully undertook the
monumental labor of translating the Bible into it for their benefit.
Sidenote: Troubles with Philip.
Massasoit, head-chief of the Pokanokets, had made a treaty of alliance with
the Plymouth colonists soon after their arrival, and kept it strictly until
his death (1660). His two sons were christened at Plymouth as Alexander and
Philip. Alexander died (1662) at Plymouth, where he had gone to answer to a
charge of plotting with the Narragansetts against the whites. Philip, now
chief sachem, wrongfully thinking his brother to have been poisoned, was
thereafter a bitter enemy of the dominant race. For twelve years there were
numerous complaints against him, and he was frequently summoned to Plymouth
to make answer. He was smooth-spoken and fair of promise, but came to be
regarded as an unsatisfactory person with whom to deal. In 1674 it became
evident that Philip was planning a general Indian uprising, to drive the
English out of the land.
Sidenote: King Philip's War.
His territory was now chiefly confined to Mount Hope,--a peninsula running
into Narragansett Bay; and here he "began to keep his men in arms about
him, and to gather strangers unto him, and to march about in arms towards
the upper end of the neck on which he lived, and near to the English
houses." On the twentieth of June a party of his warriors attacked the
little town of Swanzey, killing many settlers and perpetrating fiendish
outrages. War-parties from Mount Hope now quickly spread over the country,
joined by the Nipmucks and other tribes. Throughout the white settlements
panic prevailed, and several towns in Massachusetts, as far west as the
Connecticut valley, were scenes of heart-rending tragedies.
The Narragansetts had played fast and loose in this struggle, their
disaffection growing with the success of the savage arms. It was evident
that unless crushed, they would openly espouse Philip's cause in the coming
spring, and the danger be doubled. A thousand volunteers, enlisted by the
federal commissioners, on December 19 attacked their palisaded fortress in
what is now South Kingston. Two thousand warriors, with many women and
children, were gathered within the walls. About one thousand Indians were
slain in the contest, which was one of the most desperate of its kind ever
fought in America.
The following spring and summer Philip again made bloody forays on the
settlements; but he was persistently attacked, his followers were
scattered, and he was at last driven, with a handful of followers, into a
swamp on Mount Hope. Here (Aug. 12, 1676) he was shot to death by a
friendly Indian, and "fell upon his face in the mud and water, with his gun
under him; ... upon which the whole army gave three loud huzzas." His hands
and head were cut off and taken to Boston and Plymouth respectively, in
token to the people at home that King Philip's war was at an end, and that
thereafter white men were to be supreme in New England.
Sidenote: The effect of the struggle.
During the two years' deadly struggle the colonists had been surfeited with
horrors, of which the statistics of loss can convey but slight idea. Of the
eighty or ninety towns in Plymouth and Massachusetts, nearly two-thirds had
been harried by the savages,--ten or twelve wholly, and the others
partially destroyed; while nearly six hundred fighting men--about ten per
cent of the whole--had either lost their lives or had been taken prisoners,
never to return. It was many years before the heavy war-debts of the
colonies could be paid; in Plymouth the debt exceeded in amount the value
of all the personal property.
The year before Philip fell (1675), trouble broke out with the Indians to
the north, on the Piscataqua. In the summer of 1678 the English of Maine
felt themselves compelled to purchase peace, thus establishing a precedent
which fortunately has not often been followed in America. The home
government was much annoyed at the obstinacy of the colonists in not
calling on it for aid in these two Indian wars. Jealous of English
interference, they preferred to fight their battles for themselves, and
thus to give no excuse to the king for maintaining royal troops in New
England.
71. Territorial Disputes (1649-1685).
Sidenote: Massachusetts extends her territory.
Massachusetts early gave evidence of a desire to extend her territory.
Disputes in regard to lands frequently gave rise to quarrels with the
Indians. In 1649 the strip of mainland along Long Island Sound, between the
western boundary of Rhode Island and Mystic River, was granted to her by
the federal commissioners. From 1652 to 1658 she absorbed the settlements
in Maine, now neglected by the heirs of Gorges, just as in 1642-1643 she
had annexed the New Hampshire towns. The council for foreign plantations
had been dissolved in 1675, and the management of colonial affairs was
resumed by a standing committee of the Privy Council styled "the Lords of
the Committee of Trade and Plantations." At this time the Gorges and Mason
heirs renewed their respective claims to Maine and New Hampshire, which
they said had been wrongfully swallowed up by Massachusetts.
Sidenote: The king's charges against Massachusetts.
Other complaints against the Bay Colony, that had been allowed to slumber
for some time, were now revived, and the Lords of Trade, as they were
familiarly called, were soon sitting in council upon the deeds of the
obstinate colony. The king's charges of early years were again advanced:
that the Acts of Navigation and Trade (page 104, § 44) were not being
observed; that ships from various European countries traded with Boston
direct, without paying duty to England on their cargoes; that money was
being coined at a colonial mint; and that Church of England members were
denied the right of suffrage. Edward Randolph, a relative of the Masons,
was sent over (1676) to be collector at the port of Boston, now a town of
five thousand inhabitants, and to investigate the colonies. His manner was
insulting, and he was rudely treated by the people, who were greatly
embittered against England in consequence of his malicious reports to the
home government.
Sidenote: New Hampshire a royal province.
In 1679 the king erected New Hampshire into a separate royal province.
Edward Cranfield, a tyrannical man, became the governor (1682), but his
conduct drove the people into insurrection. He was obliged to fly to the
West Indies (1685), and in the same year New Hampshire was reunited to
Massachusetts.
Sidenote: Massachusetts purchases Maine.
In 1665 the royal commissioners detached Maine from Massachusetts; but
three years later (1668) that commonwealth calmly took it back again.
Gorges was inclined to make trouble, and agents of Massachusetts quietly
purchased his claim (1677) for £1,250. The skilful manoeuvre excited the
displeasure of the king, who had intended himself to buy out the claims of
Gorges, in order to erect Maine into a proprietary province for his reputed
son, the Duke of Monmouth. The company of Massachusetts Bay now governed
Maine under the Gorges charter as lord proprietor, and did not make it a
part of the Massachusetts colony.
72. Revocation of the Charters (1679-1687).
Sidenote: The Massachusetts charter annulled.
It was two years later (1679) before Charles was ready again to make a
movement upon Massachusetts. He demanded that Maine should be delivered up
to the Crown, on repayment of the purchase money, and also that all other
complaints should at once be satisfied. The General Court gave an evasive
answer, and adopted its usual method of sending over agents to ward off
hostilities by a policy of delay. But in 1684 the blow came: a writ of _quo
warranto_ was issued against the simple trading charter under which
Massachusetts had so long been permitted to grow and prosper; the charter
was held to be annulled, and the colony now became a royal possession.
Sidenote: Arrival of Andros.
With the death of Charles II. (1685), James II. came to the English throne.
As a Roman Catholic, and imbued with a taste of absolute power, the
colonies had little favor to expect from him. In 1686, as a step towards
abolishing the American charters, James sent over Sir Edmund Andros as
governor of Massachusetts, Plymouth, New Hampshire, and Maine; he brought
authority to ignore all local political machinery and to govern the country
through a council, the president of which was Joseph Dudley, the unpopular
Tory son of the stern old Puritan who had been Winthrop's lieutenant. The
charters of Rhode Island and Connecticut were demanded for annulment
(1686). The former colony was, as usual, obedient, and yielded up her
charter; Connecticut failed to respond to the demand of Andros, and he went
to Hartford (October, 1687) and ordered the charter to be produced. A
familiar myth alleges that the document was concealed from him in the
hollow trunk of a large tree, known ever after as the "charter oak;"
nevertheless Andros arbitrarily declared the colony annexed to the other
New England colonies which he governed.
Sidenote: His despotic rule.
The following year (1688) Andros was also made governor of New York and the
Jerseys, his jurisdiction now extending from Delaware Bay to the confines
of New France, with his seat of government at Boston. The government of
Andros was despotic, and fell heavily on a people who had up to this time
been accustomed to their own way. Episcopal services were held in the
principal towns, and Congregational churches were frequently seized upon
for the purpose; the writ of _habeas corpus_ was suspended; a censorship of
the press was restored, with Dudley as censor; excessive registry fees were
charged; arbitrary taxes were levied; land grants made under former
administrations were annulled; private property was unsafe from
governmental interference; common lands were enclosed and divided among the
friends of Andros; the General Court was abolished, and most popular rights
were ignored. Dudley tersely described the situation (1687) on the trial of
the Rev. John Wise, of Ipswich, for heading a movement in that town to
resent taxation without representation: "Mr. Wise, you have no more
privileges left you than not to be sold for slaves."
73. Restoration of the Charters (1689-1692).
Sidenote: Andros deposed.
In April, 1689, news came of the Revolution in England, the flight of the
arrogant James, and the accession of the Prince of Orange. The example of
revolt was already foreshadowed in Boston, where Andros and Dudley were
deposed. Elsewhere in the Northern colonies the representatives of the
tyrant extortioners were driven out. The Protestant sovereigns, William and
Mary, were proclaimed amid great popular rejoicings.
Sidenote: New England under William and Mary.
The old charters were restored for the time. In September, 1691, Plymouth
and the newly acquired territory of Acadia were united to Massachusetts
under a new charter, which had been secured from the king chiefly through
the agency of the Rev. Increase Mather, of Boston, now influential in
colonial politics, as were also other members of the Mather family. In May
following (1692) this new charter for Massachusetts was received at Boston.
It was not as liberal as had been hoped. The people were allowed their
representative assembly as before, but the governor was to be appointed by
the Crown; the religious qualification for suffrage was abolished, a small
property qualification (an estate of £40 value, or a freehold worth £2 a
year) being substituted; laws passed by the General Court were subject to
veto by the king,--a provision fraught with danger to the colonists. Thus
Massachusetts became a Crown charter colony,--a position not uncomfortable
so long as the executive and the legislature could agree. The first royal
governor, Sir William Phipps (1692-1695), proved to be popular, generous,
and well-meaning. He had a romantic history, but was of slender capacity,
and owed his appointment to the favor of his pastor, Increase Mather.
Connecticut and Rhode Island received their charters back; New Hampshire
was governed by its new proprietor, Samuel Allen, but without a charter;
Maine continued under Massachusetts,--the Bay Colony now extending from
Rhode Island to New Brunswick, except for the short intervening strip of
New Hampshire coast.
It was fortunate for American liberty that the scheme of a consolidation of
the New England colonies was put forward by the Stuarts too late for
accomplishment. It was also fortunate that Massachusetts was flanked by and
often competed with by her neighbors, Plymouth, Connecticut, Rhode Island,
and New Hampshire, who were protected against her by a jealous government
in England, and that the Dutch cut off her ambitious territorial
aspirations to the west. In the separate colonial life was sown the spirit
of local patriotism which is now embodied in the American States. In New
England, as in the South, there was a leading, but never a dominant,
colony; the smaller colonies shared the experiences of the larger, but were
freer from calamitous changes, and enjoyed in some respects governments
which were more immediately under the control of the people.
The end of the century saw all the New England colonies established on what
seemed a permanent basis of loyalty to the Crown and of local independence.