The Protestant Reformation was eminently suited to the spirit of the
English people, although forced upon them in the first instance by the
absolute power of a capricious king, and unaccompanied by any
acknowledgment of those rights of toleration and individual judgment
upon which its strength seemed mainly to depend. The monarch, when
constituted the head of the Church, exacted the same spiritual obedience
from his subjects as they had formerly rendered to the Pope of Rome.
Queen Elizabeth adopted her father's principles: she favored the power
of the hierarchy, and the pomp and ceremony of external religious
observances. But the English people, shocked by the horrors of Mary's
reign, and terrified by the papal persecutions on the Continent, were
generally inclined to favor the extremes of Calvinistic simplicity, as a
supposed security against another reaction to the Romish faith. The
stern and despotic queen, encouraged by the counsels of Archbishop
Whitgift, assumed the groundless right of putting down the opinions of
the Puritans by force. (1583.) Various severities were exercised against
those who held the obnoxious doctrines; but, despite the storm of
persecution, the spirit of religious independence spread rapidly among
the sturdy people of England. At length a statute was passed of a nature
now almost incredible--secession from the Church was punishable by
banishment, and by death in case of refusal on return.[314] (1593.)
The Puritans were thus driven to extremity.[315] The followers of an
enthusiastic seceder named Brown[316] formed the first example of an
independent system: each congregation was in itself a Church, and the
spiritual power was wholly vested in its members. This sect was
persecuted to the uttermost: the leader was imprisoned in no less than
thirty-two different places, and many of his followers suffered death
itself for conscience' sake. Some of the Brownists took refuge in
Holland[317] (1598); but, impelled by a longing for an independent home,
or perhaps urged by the mysterious impulse of their great destiny, they
cast their eyes upon that stern Western shore, where the untrodden
wilderness offered them at least the "freedom to worship God." They
applied to the London Company for a grant of land, declaring that they
were "weaned from the delicate milk of their native country, and knit
together in a strict and sacred band, whom small things could not
discourage, nor small discontents cause to wish themselves home again."
After some delay they accomplished their object; however, the only
security they could obtain for religious independence was a promise
that, as long they demeaned themselves quietly, no inquiry should be
made.[318]
Much of the history of nations may be traced through the foundation and
progress of their colonies. Each particular era has shown, in the
settlements of the time, types of the several mother countries, examples
of their systems, and the results of their exigencies. At one time this
type is of an adventurous, at another of a religious character; now
formed by political, again by social influences. The depth and
durability of this impress may be measured by the strength of the first
motives, and the genius of the people from whom the emigration
flows.[319] The ancient colonies of Asia Minor displayed the original
characteristics of the mother country long after her states had become
utterly changed. The Roman settlements in Italy raised upon the ruins of
a subjugated nation a fabric of civilization and power that can never be
forgotten. The proud and adventurous, but ruthless spirit that
distinguished the Spanish nation at the time of their wonderful
conquests in the New World, is still exhibited in the haughty tyranny of
Cuba, and the sanguinary struggles of the South American republics. The
French Canadian of to-day retains most or many of the national
sentiments of those who crossed the Atlantic to extend the power of
France and of her proudest king. And still, in that great Anglo-Saxon
nation of the West, through the strife of democratic ambition, and amid
the toils and successes of an enormous commerce, we trace the
foundations, overgrown perhaps, but all unshaken, of that stern edifice
of civil and religious liberty[322] which the Pilgrim fathers raised
with their untiring labor, and cemented with their blood.
The peculiar nature of the first New England emigration was the result
of those strong tendencies of the British people soon afterward
strengthened into a determination sufficiently powerful to sacrifice
the monarch and subvert the Church and State.
The Brownists, or, as they are more happily called, the Pilgrim fathers,
set sail on the 12th of July, 1620, in two small vessels. There were in
all 120 souls, with a moderate supply of provisions and goods. On the
9th of November they reached Cape Cod, after a rough voyage; they had
been obliged to send one of their ships back to England. From ignorance
of the coast and from the lateness of the season, they could not find
any very advantageous place of settlement; they finally fixed upon New
Plymouth,[323] where they landed on the 21st of December. During the
remainder of the winter they suffered terribly from cold, want, and
sickness; no more than fifty remained alive when spring came to mitigate
their sufferings. The after progress of the little colony was for some
time slow and painful. The system of common property[324] had excited
grievous discontent; this tended to create an aversion to labor that was
to be productive of no more benefit to the industrious than to the idle;
in a short time it became necessary to enforce a certain degree of
exertion by the punishment of whipping. They intrusted all religious
matters to the gifted among their brethren, and would not allow of the
formation of any regular ministry. However, the unsuitableness of these
systems to men subject to the usual impulses and weakness of human
nature soon became obvious, and the first errors were gradually
corrected. In the course of ten years the population reached to 300, and
the settlement prospered considerably.
King James was not satisfied with the slow progress of American
colonization. (1620.) In the same year that the Pilgrim fathers landed
at Plymouth, he formed a new company under the title of the Grand
Council of Plymouth,[325] and appointed many people of rank and
influence to its direction. Little good, however, resulted from this
step. Though the council itself was incapable of the generous project of
planting colonies, it was ever ready to make sale of patents, which
sales, owing to Parliamentary opposition to their claims, soon became
their only source of revenue.[326] They sold to some gentlemen of
Dorchester a belt of land stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific,
and extending three miles south of the River Charles, and three miles
north of _every_ part of the River Merrimac. Other associates in the
enterprise were sought and found in and about London: Winthrop, Johnson,
Pinchon, Eaton, Saltonstall, Billingham, famous in colonial annals.
Endicott, the first governor of the new colony, was one of the original
purchasers of the patent. They were all kindred spirits, men of
religious fervor, uniting the emotions of enthusiasm with unbending
resolution in action.
The first winter brought to these colonists the usual privation,
suffering, and death, but a now rapidly-increasing emigration more than
filled up the places of all casualties. From this period, many men of
respectability and talent,[327] especially ministers of the Gospel,
sought that religious freedom[328] in America which was denied them at
home. A general impulse was given among the commercial and industrious
classes; vessels constantly crowded from the English ports across the
Atlantic, till at length the court took the alarm. A proclamation was
issued "to restrain the disorderly transportation of his majesty's
subjects, because of the many idle and refractory humors, 'whose only or
principal end is to live beyond the reach of authority.'" It has long
been a popular story that eight emigrant ships were seized when on the
point of sailing for America, and the passengers forced to land; among
whom were John Hampden,[329] Sir Arthur Hazlerig, and Oliver Cromwell.
This tale has, however, been proved untrue by modern historians.[330]
Notwithstanding these unjust and mischievous prohibitions, a
considerable number of emigrants still found their way across the
Atlantic. But when the outburst of popular indignation swept away all
the barriers raised by a short-sighted tyranny against English freedom,
many flocked hack again to their native country to enjoy its
newly-acquired liberty. (1648.) The odious and iniquitous persecution of
the Puritans resulted in a great benefit to the human race, and gave the
first strong impulse to the spirit of resistance that ultimately
overthrew oppression. It caused, also, the colonization of New England
to be effected by a class of men far superior in industry, energy,
principle, and character to those who usually left their English homes
to seek their fortunes in new countries. That religion, for which they
had made so great a sacrifice, was the main-spring of all their social
and political systems. They were, however, too blindly zealous to
discriminate between the peculiar administration of a theocracy and the
catholic and abiding principles of the Gospel. If they did not openly
profess that the judicial law of Moses was still in force, they at any
rate openly practiced its stern enactments.
The intolerance of these martyrs of intolerance is a sad example of
human waywardness.[331] In their little commonwealth, seceders from the
established forms of faith were persecuted with an unholy zeal.
Imprisonment, banishment, and even death itself, were inflicted for that
free exercise of religious opinions which the Pilgrim fathers had
sacrificed all earthly interests to win for themselves. In those dark
days of fanatic faith or vicious skepticism, the softening influence of
true Christianity was but little felt. The stern denunciations and
terrible punishments of the Old Testament were more suited to the iron
temper of the age than the gentle dispensations of the New--the fiery
zeal of Joshua than the loving persuasiveness of St. John.
As the tenets of each successive sect rose into popularity and
influenced the majority, they became state questions,[332] distracted
the Church, and threatened the very existence of the colony. The first
schism that disturbed the peace of the settlements was raised by Roger
Williams at Salem. (1635.) This worthy and sincere enthusiast held many
just and sound views among others that were wild and injurious: he
stoutly upheld freedom of conscience, and inconveniently contested the
right of the British crown to bestow Indian lands upon Englishmen. On
the other hand, he contrived to raise a storm of fanatic hatred against
the red cross in the banner of St. George, which seriously disturbed
the state,[333] and led to violent writings and altercations. At length
Williams was banished as a distractor of the public peace, but a popular
uproar attended his departure, and the greater part of the inhabitants
were with difficulty dissuaded from following him. He retired to
Providence, Rhode Island[334] (1636), where a little colony soon settled
round him, and he there lived and died in general esteem and
regard.[335]
The Antinomian sect shortly after excited a still more dangerous
commotion in the colony. (1637.) Mrs. Hutchinson, a Lincolnshire lady of
great zeal and determination, joined by nearly the whole female
population, adopted these views in the strongest manner. The ministers
of the church, although decided Calvinists, and firmly opposed to the
Romish doctrines of salvation by works, earnestly pressed the
reformation of heart and conduct as a test of religion. Mrs. Hutchinson
and her followers held that to inculcate any rule of life or manners was
a crime against the Holy Spirit; in their actual deportment, however, it
must be confessed that their bitterest enemies could not find grounds of
censure. With the powerful advocacy of female zeal, these doctrines
spread rapidly, and the whole colony was soon divided between "the
covenant of works and the covenant of grace;" the ardor and obstinacy of
the disputants being by no means proportioned to their full
understanding of the point[336] in dispute. Sir Harry Vane,[337] whose
rank and character had caused him to be elected governor in spite of
his youth, zealously adopted Antinomian opinions, and, in consequence,
was ejected from office by the opposite party at the ensuing election,
Mrs. Hutchinson having failed to secure in the country districts that
superiority which she possessed in the town of Boston.[338] After some
ineffectual efforts to reconcile the seceders to the Church, the new
governor and the ministers summoned a general synod of the colonial
clergy to meet at Cambridge, where, after some very turbulent
proceedings, the whole of the Antinomian doctrines were condemned.
As might have been supposed, this condemnation had but little effect.
The obnoxious principles were preached as widely and zealously as
before, till the civil authority resorted to the rude argument of force,
banished Mr. Wheelwright, one of the leaders, with two of his followers,
from the colony, and fined and disfranchised others. Mrs. Hutchinson was
ultimately accused, condemned, and ordered to leave the colony in six
months. Although she made a sort of recantation of her errors, her
inexorable judges insisted in carrying out the sentence.[339] The
unhappy lady removed to Rhode Island, where her husband, through her
influence, was elected governor, and where she was followed by many of
her devoted adherents. (1638.) Thus the persecutions in the old
settlement of Massachusetts had the same effect as those in England--of
elevating a few stubborn recusants into the founders of states and
nations. After her husband's death Mrs. Hutchinson removed into a
neighboring Dutch settlement, where she and all her family met with a
dreadful fate; they were surprised by the Indians, and every one
destroyed. (1643.)
Although by these violent and unjust punishments, and by disarming the
disaffected, the Antinomian spirit was for a time put down, unity was by
no means restored. Pride and the love of novelty continually gave birth
to new sects. Ministers, who had possessed the highest reputation in
England, saw with sorrow that their colonial churches were neglected for
the sake of ignorant and mischievous enthusiasts. Even common
profligates and rogues, when other lesser villainies had failed, assumed
the hypocritical semblance of some peculiar religion, and enjoyed their
day of popularity.
The Anabaptists next carried away the fickle affections of the
multitude, and excited the enmity of their rulers. (1643.) This schism
first became perceptible by people leaving the church when the rites of
baptism were being administered; but at length private meetings for
worship were held, attended by large congregations. The magistrates, as
usual, practiced great severities against these seceders, first by fine,
imprisonment, and even whipping; finally by banishment. The Anabaptists
were, however, not put down by the arm of power, but were speedily
forgotten in the sudden appearance of a stranger sect than any that had
hitherto appeared even in New England.
The people called Quakers had lately made their appearance in the north
of England. (1648.) They soon found their way to America, where they
were received with bitter hostility from the commencement. (1656.) The
dangerous enthusiasts who first went forth to preach the doctrines of
this strange sect were very different men from those who now command the
respect and good will of all classes by their industry, benevolence, and
love of order. The original propagandists believed that the divine
government was still administered on earth by direct and special
communication, as in the times chronicled by Holy Writ: they therefore
despised and disregarded all human authorities. To actual force, indeed,
they only opposed a passive resistance; and their patience and
obstinacy in carrying out this principle must excite astonishment, if
not admiration. But their language was most violent and abusive against
all priests and ministers, governors and magistrates.[340] The women of
this novel persuasion were even more fanatic than the men. Several
leaving their husbands and children in England, crossed the seas to bear
witness to their inspiration at Boston. They were, however, rudely
received, their books burned, and themselves either imprisoned or
scourged and banished. Nowise intimidated by these severities, several
other women brought upon themselves the vengeance of the law by frantic
and almost incredible demonstrations; and a man named Faubord endeavored
to sacrifice his first-born son under a supposed command from Heaven.
The ministers and magistrates came to the conclusion that the colony
could never enjoy peace while the Quakers continued among them. These
sectarians were altogether unmanageable by the means of ordinary power
or reason; they would neither pay fines nor work in prison, nor, when
liberated, promise to amend their conduct. The government now enacted
still more violent laws against them, one, among others, rendering them
liable to have their ears cut off for obstinacy; and yet this strange
fanaticism increased from day to day. At length the Quakers were
banished from the colony, under the threat of death in case of return.
They were, however, scarcely beyond the borders when a supposed
inspiration prompted them to retrace their steps to Boston: scarcely had
their absence been observed, when their solemn voices were again heard
denouncing the city of their persecutors.
The horrible law decreeing the punishment of death against the Quakers
had only been carried by a majority of thirteen to twelve in the
Colonial Court of Deputies, and after a strong opposition; but, to the
eternal disgrace of the local government, its atrocious provisions were
carried into effect, and four of the unhappy fanatics were judicially
murdered. The tidings of these executions filled England with horror.
Even Charles II. was moved to interpose the royal power for the
protection of at least the lives of the obnoxious sectarians. He issued
a warrant on the 9th of September, 1661, absolutely prohibiting the
punishment of death against Quakers, and directing that they should be
sent to England for trial. In consequence of this interference, no more
executions took place, but other penalties were continued with unabated
severity.
While the persecution of the Quakers and Anabaptists raged in New
England, an important addition to the numbers of the colonists was
gained, a large body of Nonconformists having fled across the Atlantic
from a fresh assault commenced against their liberties by Charles II.
This Puritan emigration was regarded with great displeasure by the king.
He speedily took an opportunity of arbitrarily depriving the colony of
its charter, and sent out Sir Edmund Andros to administrate as absolute
governor. The country soon felt painfully the despotic tyranny of their
new ruler; and the establishment of an English Church, with the usual
ritual, spread general consternation. When James ascended the throne, a
proclamation of tolerance somewhat allayed the fears of the settlers;
but the administration of temporal affairs became ruinously oppressive.
On the pretense that the titles of all land obtained under the old
charter had become void by its abrogation, new and exorbitant fees were
exacted, heavy and injudicious taxes arbitrarily imposed, and all right
of representation denied to the colonists. At length, in the year 1689,
a man, named Winslow, brought from Virginia the joyful news of the
Prince of Orange's proclamation; he was immediately arrested for
treason; but the people rose tumultuously, imprisoned the governor, and
re-established the authority of their old magistrates. On the 26th of
May, a vessel arrived with the intelligence that William and Mary had
been proclaimed in England. Although the new monarch declared himself
favorably disposed toward the colonists, he did not restore their
beloved charter. He, however, granted them a Constitution nearly similar
to that of the mother country, which rendered the people of New England
tolerably contented.
The colony was now fated to suffer from a delusion more frantic and
insane than any it had hitherto admitted, and which compromised its very
existence. The New Englanders had brought with them the belief in
witchcraft prevalent among the early reformers, and the wild and savage
wilderness where their lot was now cast tended to deepen the impressions
of superstition upon their minds. Two young girls, of the family of Mr.
Paris, minister of Salem, were suddenly afflicted with a singular
complaint, probably of an hysterical character, which baffled the united
skill of the neighboring physicians; till one, more decided than the
rest, declared that the sufferers were bewitched. From this time prayers
and fasting were the remedies adopted, and the whole town of Salem at
length joined in a day of humiliation. The patients, however, did not
improve, till an Indian servingwoman denounced another, named Tituba, as
the author of the evil. Mr. Paris assailed the accused, and tortured her
in the view of extracting a confession of guilt, which she at length
made, with many absurd particulars, hoping to appease her persecutor.
From this time the mischievous folly spread wider; a respectable
clergyman, Mr. Burroughs, was tried for witchcraft on the evidence of
five women, and condemned to death, his only defense being that he was
accused of that which had no existence, and was impossible. New charges
multiplied daily; the jails of Salem were full of the accused, and
prisoners were transferred to other towns, where the silly infection
spread, and filled the whole colony with alarm.
Nothing could afford stronger proof of the hold which this sad delusion
had taken of the popular mind than the readiness so constantly displayed
by the accused to confess the monstrous imputation, whose punishment was
infamy and death. Many detailed long consultations held with Satan for
the purpose of overthrowing the kingdom of heaven. In some cases these
confessions were the result of distempered understandings; but,
generally, they may be attributed to the hope of respite and ultimate
reprieve, as none but the supposed impenitent sorcerers were executed.
Thus only the truthful and conscientious suffered from the effects of
this odious insanity. Some among the wretched people who had confessed
witchcraft showed a subsequent disposition to retract. A man named
Samuel Wardmell, having solemnly recanted his former statement, was
tried, condemned, and executed. Despite this terrible warning, a few
others followed the conscientious but fatal example. Every one of the
sufferers during this dreadful period protested their innocence to the
last. It seems difficult to discover any adequate motives for these
atrocious and constant accusations. There is too much reason to believe
that the confiscation of the condemned persons' property, malice against
the accused, a desire to excite the public mind, and gain the notice and
favor of those in power, were generally the objects of the witnesses.
The evil at length attained such a frightful magnitude that the firmest
believers in witchcraft began to waver. In two months nineteen unhappy
victims had been executed, eight more remained under sentence of death,
150 accused were still in prison, and there was no more room for the
crowds daily brought in. No character or position was a shield against
these absurd imputations; all lay at the mercy of a few mad or malignant
beings. The first mitigation of the mischief was effected by the
governor assembling the ministers to discuss whether what was called
specter evidence should be held sufficient for the condemnation of the
accused. The assembly decided against that particular sort of evidence
being conclusive; but, at the same time, exhorted the governor to
persevere in the vigorous prosecution of witchcraft, "according to the
wholesome statutes of the English nation."[341] Public opinion,
however, soon began to run strongly against those proceedings, and
finally the governor took the bold step of pardoning all these under
sentence for witchcraft, throwing open all the prisons, and turning a
deaf ear to every accusation (January, 1693). From that time the
troubles of the afflicted were heard of no more. Those who had confessed
came forward to retract or disclaim their former statements, and the
most active judges and persecutors publicly expressed contrition for the
part they had taken in the fatal and almost incredible insanity. In the
reaction that ensued, many urged strict inquiry into the fearful
prejudices that had sacrificed innocent lives; but so general had been
the crime, that it was deemed wisest to throw a vail of oblivion over
the whole dreadful scene.[342]
While the settlers of New England were distracted by their own madness
and intolerance, they had to contend with great external difficulties
from the animosity of the Indians. The native races in this part of the
continent appear to have been in some respects superior to those
dwelling by the shores of the St. Lawrence and the Great Lake. They
acknowledged the absolute power of a sachem or king, which gave a
dangerous vigor and unity to their actions. They at first received the
English with hospitality and kindness, and the colonists, on their part,
passed laws to protect not only the persons of the natives, but to
insure them an equitable price for their lands. The narrowed limits of
their hunting-grounds, however, and the rapid advance of the white men,
soon began to alarm the Indians.[343] When their jealousy was thus
aroused, occasions of quarrel speedily presented themselves; the baneful
influence of strong liquors, largely furnished in spite of the strictest
prohibitions, increased their excitement. Some Englishmen were slain;
the murderers were seized, tried, and executed by the colonial
government, according to British law. These proceedings kindled a deep
resentment among the savages, and led to measures of retaliation at
their hands.
It has been an unfortunate feature of European settlement in America,
that the border population, those most in contact with the natives, have
been visually men of wild and desperate character, the tainted foam of
the advancing tide of civilization. Those reckless adventurers were
little scrupulous in their dealings with the simple savage; they utterly
disregarded those rights which his weakness could not defend, and by
intolerable provocation excited him to a bloody but futile resistance.
The Indians naturally confounded the whole English race with these
contemptuous oppressors, and commenced a war that resulted in their own
extermination. They did not face the English in the field, but hovered
round the border, and, with sudden surprise, overwhelmed detached posts
and settlements in a horrible destruction. The astute colonists soon
adopted the policy of forming alliances, and taking advantage of ancient
enmities to stir up hostilities among them. By this means they
accomplished the destruction of the warlike Pequods,[344] their
bitterest foes. Other enemies, however, soon came into the field, and
at length, the original allies of the English, jealous of the
encroaching power of the white strangers, also took arms against them.
The Indian chiefs, after a time, began to adopt European tactics of war,
and for many years kept the colony in alarm by their formidable attacks:
they were, however, finally driven altogether from the field.
The New England settlers showed more sincerity than other adventurers in
endeavoring to accomplish their principal professed object of
colonization, that of teaching Christianity to the Indians.[345] They
appointed zealous and pious ministers for the mission,[346] and
established a seminary for the education of the natives, whence some
scholars were to be selected to preach the Gospel among their savage
countrymen. Great obstacles were encountered in this good work; the
Indians showed a bigoted attachment to their own strange religious
conceits, and their priests and conjurers used all their powerful
influence against Christianity, denouncing in furious terms all who
forsook their creed for the English God. Despite these difficulties, a
number of savages were induced to form themselves in villages, and lead
a civilized[347] and Christian life, under the guidance of ministers of
their own race.[348] In a few years thirty congregations of "praying
Indians,"[349] their numbers amounting to 3000, were established in
Massachusetts.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 314: 35 Eliz., c. 1, stat. 4, p. 841-843; _Parl. Hist._, p.
863; Strype's _Whitgift_, p. 414, &c.; Neale's _Puritans_, vol. i., p.
526, 527, quoted by Bancroft, vol. i., p. 290.]
[Footnote 315: "The _Gospel Advocate_ asserts that 'the judicial law of
Moses being still in force, no prince or law ought to save the lives of
(_inter alios_) heretics, willful breakers of the Sabbath, neglecters of
the sacrament without just reason.' Well may the historian of the
Puritans (Neale) say, 'Both parties agreed in asserting the necessity of
a uniformity of public worship, _and of using the sword of the
magistrate in support of their respective principles_.' It should never
be forgotten by those who are inclined to blame the severe laws passed
against these Nonconformists, that the English government was dealing
with men whose avowed wish and object it was not simply to be tolerated,
but to subvert existing institutions in Church and State, and set up in
their place those approved by themselves."--Godley's _Letters from
America_, vol. ii., p. 135.]
[Footnote 316: "The most noisy advocate of the new opinions was Brown, a
man of rashness, possessing neither true courage nor constancy. He has
acquired historical notoriety because his hot-headed indiscretion urged
him to undertake the defense of separation.... Brown eventually
purchased a living in the English Church by conformity."--Bancroft's
_History of the United States_, vol. i., p. 287.]
[Footnote 317: "But, although Holland is a country of the greatest
religious freedom, they were not better satisfied there than in England.
They were tolerated, indeed, but watched. Their zeal began to have
dangerous languor for want of opposition, and being without power and
influence, they grew tired of the indolent security of their sanctuary.
They were desirous of removing to a country where they should see no
superior."--Russell's _Modern Europe_, vol. ii., p. 427.
"They were restless from the consciousness of ability to act a more
important part on the theater of the world ... they were moved by an
enlightened desire of improving their condition ... the honorable
ambition of becoming the founders of a state."--Bancroft's _History of
the United States_, vol. i., p. 303.]
[Footnote 318: This was a promise from James I., who had now succeeded
to the throne of England.]
[Footnote 319: "A strongly-marked distinction exists between the
Southern and Northern Americans. The two extremes are formed by the New
Englanders[320] and the Virginians. The former are certainly the more
respectable. They are industrious, frugal, enterprising, regular in
their habits, pure in their manners, and strongly impressed with
sentiments of religion. The name Yankee, which we apply as one of
reproach and derision to Americans in general, is assumed by them as
their natural and appropriate designation.[321] It is a common proverb
in America, that a Yankee will live where another would starve. Their
very prosperity, however, with a certain reserve in their character, and
supposed steady attention to small gains, renders them not excessively
popular with those among whom they settle. They are charged with a
peculiar species of finesse, called 'Yankee tricks,' and the character
of being 'up to every thing' is applied to them, we know not exactly
how, in a sense of reproach. The Virginian planter, on the contrary, is
lax in principle, destitute of industry, eager in the pursuit of rough
pleasures, and demoralized by the system of negro slavery, which exists
in almost a West Indian form. Yet, with all the Americans who attempt to
draw the parallel, he seems rather the favorite. He is frank,
open-hearted, and exercising a splendid hospitality. Both Cooper and
Judge Hall report him as a complete gentleman; by which they evidently
mean, not the finished courtier, but the English country gentleman or
squire, though the opening afforded by the political constitution of his
country causes him to cultivate his mind more by reading and inquiry. A
large proportion of the most eminent and ruling statesmen in
America--Washington, Jefferson, Madison--were Virginians. Surrounded
from their infancy with ease and wealth, accustomed to despise, and to
see despised, money on a small scale, and no laborious exertions made
for its attainment, they imbibe from youth the habits and ideas of the
higher classes. Luxurious living, gaming, horse-racing, cock-fighting,
and other rough, turbulent amusements, absorb a great portion of their
life. Although, therefore, the leisure enjoyed by them, when well
improved, may have produced some very elevated and accomplished
characters, they can not, taken at the highest, be considered so
respectable a class as their somewhat despised northern brethren; and
the lower ranks are decidedly in a state of comparative moral
debasement."--Murray, vol. ii., p. 394.]
[Footnote 320: Descendants of the Puritans.]
[Footnote 321: "The word Yankees (which is the Indian corruption of
English _Yengeese_) is both offensive and incorrect as applied to any
but New Englanders."--Godley's _Letters from America_.]
[Footnote 322: "James I. ranked among their party, as much as he was
able by severe usage, all those who stood up in defense even of civil
liberty."--Bolingbroke's _Remarks upon English History_, p. 283.]
[Footnote 323: "In memory of the hospitalities which the company had
received at the last English port from which they had sailed, this
oldest New England colony obtained the name of Plymouth. The two vessels
which conveyed the Pilgrim fathers from Delft Haven were the _Mayflower_
and the _Speedwell_. The Mayflower alone proceeded to America."--Bancroft,
vol. i., p. 313.]
[Footnote 324: "Under the influence of this wild notion, the colonists
of New Plymouth, in imitation of the primitive Christians, threw all
their property into a common stock."--Robertson's _America_, book x. One
of the many errors with which the volume of Robertson teems. There was
no attempt at imitating the primitive Christians; the partnership was a
consequence of negotiation with British merchants; the colonists
preferred the system of private property, and acted upon it, as far and
as soon as was possible.--Bancroft's _History of the United States_,
vol. i., p. 306.]
[Footnote 325: "The remonstrances of the Virginia corporation and a
transient regard for the rights of the country could delay, but could
not defeat, a measure that was sustained by the personal favorites of
the monarch. King James issued to forty of his subjects, some of them
members of his household and his government, the most wealthy and
powerful of the English nobility, a patent, which in American annals,
and even in the history of the world, has but one parallel. The
territory conferred on the patentees in absolute property, with
unlimited jurisdiction, the sole powers of legislation, the appointment
of all officers and all forms of government, comprised, and at the time
was believed to comprise, much more than a million of square miles: it
was, by a single signature of King James, given away to a corporation
within the realm, composed of but forty individuals."--Bancroft, vol.
i., p. 273.]
[Footnote 326: "The very extent of the grant rendered it of little
value. The results which grew out of the concession of this charter form
a new proof, if any were wanting, of that mysterious connection of
events by which Providence leads to ends that human councils had not
conceived."--Bancroft, vol. i., p. 273.
The Grand Council of Plymouth resigned their charter in 1635.]
[Footnote 327: "The circumstance which threw a greater luster on the
colony than any other was the arrival of Mr. John Cotton, the most
esteemed of all the Puritan ministers in England. He was equally
distinguished for his learning, and for a brilliant and figurative
eloquence. He was so generally beloved that his nonconformity to the
ritual of the Established Church, of which he was a minister, was for a
considerable time disregarded. At last, however, he was called before
the ecclesiastical commission, and he determined upon emigration, 'Some
reverend and renowned ministers of our Lord' endeavored to persuade him
that the forms to which he refused obedience were 'sufferable trifles,'
and did not actually amount to a breach of the second commandment. Mr.
Cotton, however, argued so forcibly on the opposite side, that several
of the most eminent became all that he was, and afterward followed his
example. There went out with him Mr. Hooker and Mr. Stone, who were
esteemed to make 'a glorious triumvirate,' and were received in New
England with the utmost exultation. It was doubtless a severe trial to
these ministers, who appear really to have been, as they say, 'faithful,
watchful, painful, serving their flock daily with prayers and tears,'
who possessed such a reputation at home and over Europe, to find that no
sooner did any half-crazed enthusiast spring up or arrive in the colony,
that the people could be prevented only by the most odious compulsion
from deserting their churches and flocking to him in a mass. Vainly did
Mr. John Cotton strive to persuade Roger Williams, the sectary, that the
red cross on the English banner, or his wife's being in the room while
he said grace, were 'sufferable trifles,' and 'Mrs. Hutchinson and her
ladies' treated his advice and exhortations with equal disregard and
contempt. One of them sent him a pound of candles to intimate his need
of more spiritual light. This was then the freedom for which his church
and his country had been deserted."--Mather; Neale; Hutchinson.]
[Footnote 328: "Robertson is astonished that Neale (see Neale, p. 56)
should assert that freedom of religious worship was granted, when the
charter expressly asserts the king's supremacy. But this, in fact, was
never the article at which they demurred; for the spirit of loyalty was
still very strong. It seems quite clear, from the confidence with which
they went, and the manner in which they acted when there, that, though
there was no formal or written stipulation, the most full understanding
existed that very ample latitude was to be allowed in this respect. We
have seen on every occasion the vast sacrifices which kings were willing
to make in order to people their distant possessions; and the necessity
was increased by the backwardness hitherto visible."--Murray's
_America_, vol. i., p. 249.]
[Footnote 329: During the year 1635 we find the name of John Hampden
joined with those of six other gentlemen of family and fortune, who
united with the Lords Say and Brooke in making a purchase from the Earl
of Warwick of an extensive grant of land in a wide wilderness then
called Virginia, but which now forms a part of the State of Connecticut.
That these transatlantic possessions were designed by the associates
ultimately, or under certain contingencies, to serve as an asylum to
themselves and a home to their posterity, there is no room to doubt; but
it is evident that nothing short of circumstances constituting a moral
necessity would have urged persons of their rank, fortunes, and habits
of life to encounter the perils, privations, and hardships attendant
upon the pioneers of civilization in that inhospitable clime.
Accordingly, they for the present contented themselves with sending out
an agent to take possession of these territories and to build a fort.
This was done, and the town called Saybrook, from the united names of
the two noble proprietors, still preserves the memory of the enterprise.
They finally abandoned the whole design, and sold the land in 1636,
probably.--Miss Aikin's _Life of Charles I._, p. 471. Bancroft, vol. i.,
p. 384.]
[Footnote 330: "In one of these embargoed ships had actually embarked
for their voyage across the Atlantic two no less considerable personages
than John Hampden and his kinsman, Oliver Cromwell."--_Life of Hampden_,
by Lord Nugent, vol. i., p. 254. London, 1832.
Lord Nugent has fallen into the vulgar error, an invention, probably, of
the Puritan historian, and unanswerably disproved by a reference to
Parliamentary records. See Miss Aikin's _Life of Charles I._, vol. i.,
p. 472; Bancroft's _History of the United States_, vol. i., p. 411. The
exultation of the Puritan writers on the subject is excessive. They
ascribe all the subsequent misfortunes of Charles I. in connection with
the scheme of Providence to this tyrannical edict, as they call
it.--Russell's _Modern Europe_, vol. ii., p. 237. See Bancroft's
_History of the United States_, vol. i., p. 412.
"Nothing could be more barbarous than this! To impose laws on men which
in conscience they thought they could not comply with, to punish them
for their noncompliance, and continually revile them as undutiful and
disobedient subjects by reason thereof, and yet not permit them
peaceably to depart and enjoy their own opinions in a distant part of
the world, yet dependent on the sovereign: to do all this was base,
barbarous, and inhuman. But persecutors of all ages and nations are near
the same; they are without the feelings and the understandings of men.
Cromwell or Hampden could have given little opposition to the measures
of Charles in the wilds of North America. In England they engaged with
spirit against him, and he had reason to repent his hindering their
voyage. May such at all times be the reward of those who attempt to rule
over their fellow-men with rigor: may they find that they will not be
slaves to kings or priests, but that they know the rights by nature
conferred on them, and will assert them! This will make princes cautious
how they give themselves up to arbitrary counsels, and dread the
consequences of them."--Harris's _Life of Cromwell_, p. 56.]
[Footnote 331: "Mr. Dudley, one of the most respectable of the
governors, was found, at his death, with a copy of verses in his pocket,
which included the following couplet:
"'Let men of God in court and churches watch
O'er such as do a toleration hatch'"--CHALMERS.]
[Footnote 332: "The cutting the hair very close, which seemed supported
by St. Paul's authority, was the chief outward symbol of a Puritan. In
the case of a minister, it was considered essential that the ear should
be thoroughly uncovered. Even after the example of Dr. Owen and other
eminent divines had given a sanction to letting the hair grow, and even
to periwigs, a numerous association was formed at Boston (where Mr. John
Cotton was pastor), with Mr. Endicot, the governor, at their head, the
members of which bound themselves to stand by each other in resisting
long hair to the last extremity. Vane, a young man of birth and fashion,
continued for some time a recusant against the uncouth test of his
principles, but at last we find a letter congratulating him on having
'glorified God by cutting his hair.'"--Hutchinson's _Massachusetts_,
quoted by Murray.]
[Footnote 333: One of Williams's disciples, who held some command, cut
the cross out, and trampled it under foot. This red cross had nearly
subverted the colony. One part of the trained bands would not march
with, another would not march without it.--Mather, Neale, &c., quoted by
Murray.]
[Footnote 334: The town of Providence, now the capital of Rhode Island,
was founded by Williams. The Indian name was Mooshausick, but he changed
it to Providence in commemoration of his wonderful escape from
persecution.--Arfwedson, vol. i., p. 224.]
[Footnote 335: Mather, vol. vii., ch. ii.; Neale, ch. i., p. 138;
Hutchinson, p. 37, 39.]
[Footnote 336: _Ibid._]
[Footnote 337: "Mr. Controller, Sir Harry Vane's eldest son, hath left
his father, his mother, his country, and that fortune which his father
would have left him here, and is for conscience' sake gone into New
England, there to lead the rest of his days, being about twenty years of
age. He had abstained two years from taking the sacrament in England,
because he could get nobody to administer it to him standing."--_Strafford
Letters_, September, 1635, quoted by Miss Aikin, _Life of Charles I._,
vol. i., p. 479.
"Sir Harry Vane returned to England immediately after the loss of his
election. His personal experience of the uncharitableness and
intolerance exercised upon one another by men who had themselves been
the victims of a similar spirit at home, seems to have produced for some
time a tranquilizing effect upon the mind of Vane. He was reconciled to
his father, married by his direction a lady of family, obtained the
place of joint treasurer of the navy, and exhibited for some time no
hostility to the measures of the government. But his fire was smothered
only, not extinguished."--Miss Aikin's _Life of Charles I._, vol. i., p.
481.
"After the Restoration of Charles II., Sir Harry Vane suffered death
upon the block. (See Hallam, vol. ii., p. 443.) The manner of his death
was the admiration of his times."--Bancroft, vol. ii., p. 40.]
[Footnote 338: Boston was the capital of Massachusetts, and the center
of the most fervent Puritanism.
"Boston may be ranked as the seat of the Unitarians, as Baltimore is
that of the Roman Catholics, and Philadelphia that of the Quakers.... No
axiom is more applicable to the pensive, serious, scrutinizing
inhabitant of the New England States than this: 'What I do not
understand, I reject as worthless and false;' so said one of the most
learned men of Boston to me. 'Why occupy the mind with that which is
incomprehensible? Have we not enough of that which appears clear and
plain around us?' ... The greater part of the Bostonians, including
every one of wealth, talents, and learning, have adopted this
doctrine."--Arfwedson, vol. i., p. 179.
"In Boston all the leading men are Unitarians, a creed peculiarly
acceptable to the pride and self-sufficiency of our nature, asserting,
as it does, the independence and perfectibility of man, and denying the
necessity of atonement or sanctification by supernatural influences.
"Though every where in New England the greatest possible decency and
respect with regard to morals and religion is still observed, I have no
hesitation in saying that I do not think the New Englanders a
_religious_ people. The assertion, I know, is paradoxical, but it is
nevertheless true, that is, if a strong and earnest belief be a
necessary element in a religious character: to me it seems to be its
very essence and foundation. I am not now speaking of belief in _the
truth_, but belief in something or any thing which is removed from the
action of the senses.... I am not trusting to my own limited observation
in arriving at this conclusion; I find in M. de Tocqueville's work an
assertion of the same fact. He accounts for it, indeed, in a different
way.... What I complain of is, not the absence of nominal, but of real,
heartfelt, unearthly religion, such as led the Puritan Nonconformists to
sacrifice country and kindred, and brave the dangers of the ocean and
the wilderness for the sake of what they believed God's truth. In my
opinion, those men were prejudiced and mistaken, and committed great and
grievous faults; but there was, at least, a redeeming element in their
character--that of high conscientiousness. There was no compromise of
truth, no sacrifice to expediency about them; they believed in the
invisible, and they acted on that belief. Every where the tone of
religious feeling, since that time, has been altered and relaxed, but
perhaps nowhere so much as in the land where the descendants of those
Pilgrims lived."--Godley's _Letters from America_, vol. ii., p. 90,
133.]
[Footnote 339: "The arbitrary will of the single tyrant, the excesses of
the prerogative, seem light when compared with their (the Puritans')
more intolerant, more arbitrary, and more absolute power."--_Commentaries
on the Life and Reign of Charles I._, vol. iii., p. 28, by I. D'Israeli.
London, 1830.]
[Footnote 340: Mather affirms that the Quakers used to go about saying,
"We deny thy Christ: we deny thy God, whom thou callest Father, Son, and
Spirit; thy Bible is the word of the devil." They used to rise up
suddenly in the midst of a sermon, and call upon the preacher to cease
his abomination. One writer says, "For hellish reviling of the painful
ministers of Christ, I know no people can match them." The following
epithets bestowed by Fisher on Dr. Owen are said to be fair specimens of
their usual addresses: "Thou green-headed trumpeter! thou hedgehog and
grinning dog! thou tinker! thou lizard! thou whirligig! thou firebrand!
thou louse! thou mooncalf! thou ragged tatterdemalion! thou livest in
philosophy and logic, which are of the devil." Even Penn is said to have
addressed the same respected divine as, "Thou bane of reason and beast
of the earth." When the governor or any magistrate came in sight, they
would call out, "Woe to thee, thou oppressor," and in the language of
Scripture prophecy would announce the judgments that were about to fall
upon their head.--Neale, cap. i., p. 341-345. Mather, b. vii., cap. iv.
Hutchinson, p. 196-205.]
[Footnote 341: "Sir Matthew Hale burned two persons for witchcraft in
1664. Three thousand were executed in England during the Long
Parliament. Two pretended witches were executed at Northampton in 1705.
In 1716, Mrs. Hicks and her daughter, aged nine, were hanged at
Huntingdon. The last sufferer in Scotland was in 1722, at Dornoch. The
laws against witchcraft had lain dormant for many years, when an
ignorant person attempting to revive them by finding a bill against a
poor old woman in Surrey for the practice of witchcraft, they were
repealed, 10 George II., 1736."--Viner's _Abridgement_.]
[Footnote 342: Neale, vol. ii., p. 164-170. Mather, vol. ii., p. 62-64.
Arfwedson says, "Close to the town of Salem is Beverley, a small,
insignificant place, remarkable only in the annals of history as having
formerly contained a superstitious population. Many lives have here been
cruelly sacrificed, and the barren hill is still in existence where
persons accused of witchcraft were hung upon tall trees. Tradition
points out the place where the witches of old resided. Cotton Mather
records in a work, truly original for that age, that the good people who
lived near Massachusetts Bay were every night roused from their slumbers
by the sound of a trumpet, summoning all the witches and
demons."--Cotton Mather's _Magnalia_; Arfwedson, vol. i., p. 186.
"And thrice that night the trumpet rang,
And rock and hill replied;
And down the glen strange shadows sprang--
Mortal and fiend--a wizard gang,
Seen dimly, side by side.
"They gathered there from every land
That sleepeth in the sun;
They came with spell and charm in hand,
Waiting their master's high command--
Slaves to the Evil One."--_Legends of New England._]
[Footnote 343: "During the war with Philip, the Indians took some
English alive, and set them upright in the ground, with this sarcasm:
'You English, since you came into this country, have grown considerably
above ground; let us now see how you will grow when planted into the
ground.'"--_Narrative of the Wars in New England_, 1675.-_Harleian
Miscellany_, vol. v., p. 400.]
[Footnote 344: "The Pequods were a powerful nation on the Connecticut
border, who could muster a thousand warriors. The English might have
found it difficult to withstand them but for an alliance with the second
most powerful people, the Narragansets, whose ancient enmity to the
Pequods for a time prevailed over their jealousy of the foreigners. But
at length, when the Pequods were nearly exterminated, the Narragansets,
seeing the power of the strangers paramount, began to side with their
enemies. The Indian chiefs began to imitate the English mode of
fighting, and even to assume English names, with some characteristic
epithet. One-eyed John, Stone-wall John, and Sagamore Sam, kept the
colony in perpetual alarm. But their most deadly and formidable enemy
was Philip, sachem of the Wampanoags. No Indian was ever more dreaded by
civilized man. A century and a half has now elapsed since this hero of
Pokanoket fell a victim to his own race, but even to this day his name
is respected, and the last object supposed to have been touched by him
in his lifetime is considered by every American as a valuable relic.
This extraordinary man, whose real name was Metacom, succeeded his
brother in the government of the Wampanoags. The wrongs and grievances
suffered by this brother, added to those which he had himself
experienced from the English colonists, induced him to engage in a war
against them. The issue might, perhaps, have been less doubtful, had not
one of his followers defeated his plans by a premature explosion before
he had time to summon and concentrate his warriors and allies. From this
time no smiles were seen on his face. But though he soon perceived that
the great enterprise he had formed was likely to be frustrated, he never
lost that elevation of soul which distinguished him to the last moments
of his life. By his exertions and energy, all the Indian nations
occupying the territory between Maine and the River Connecticut, a
distance of nearly 200 miles, took up arms. Every where the name of King
Philip was the signal for massacre and flames. But fraud and treason
soon accomplished what open warfare could not effect; his followers gave
way to numbers; his nearest relations and friends forsook him, and a
treacherous ball at last struck his heart. His head was carried round
the country in triumph, and exposed as that of a traitor; but posterity
has done him justice. Patriotism was his only crime, and his death was
that of a hero."--Arfwedson, vol. i., p. 229.]
[Footnote 345: "This was not the case in the earlier and more northern
settlements, where Mather mentions a clergyman who, from the pulpit,
alluded to this as the main object of his flock's coming out, when one
of the principal members rose and said, 'Sir, you are mistaken; our main
object was to catch fish.'"--Murray's _America_.
"To this day the Council of Massachusets, in the impress of their public
seal, have an Indian engraven, with these words: 'Come over and help
us,' alluding to Acts, xv., 9."--_Narrative of the Wars in New England_,
1675. _Harleian Miscellany_, vol. v., p. 400.]
[Footnote 346: "Among these was the celebrated Eliot. Notwithstanding
the almost incredible hardships endured by Eliot during his missionary
labors, he lived to the age of eighty-six. He expired in 1690, and has
ever since been known by the well-earned title of Apostle to the
Indians."--_Missionary Records_, p. 34.
Dr. Dwight says of him, "He was naturally qualified beyond almost any
other man for the business of a missionary. In promoting among the
Indians agriculture, health, morals, and religion, this great and good
man labored with constancy, faithfulness, and benevolence which place
his name not unworthily among those who are arranged immediately after
the apostles of our Divine Redeemer." Eliot translated the Holy
Scriptures into the Indian language. In 1661, the New Testament,
dedicated to Charles II., was printed at Cambridge, in New England, and
about three years afterward, it was followed by the Old Testament. This
was the first Bible ever printed in America; and, though the impression
consisted of 2000 copies, a second edition was required in
1685.--_Ibid._, p. 27.
"When at Harvard College, a copy of the Bible was shown me by Mr. Jared
Sparks, translated by the missionary, Father Eliot, into the Indian
tongue. It is now a dead language, although preached for several
generations to crowded congregations."--Lyell's _America_, vol. i., p.
260.
"Eliot had become an acute grammarian by his studies at the English
university of Cambridge. Having finished his laborious and difficult
work, the Indian grammar, at the close of it, under a full sense of the
difficulties he had encountered, and the acquisition he had made, he
said, 'Prayers and pains, through faith in Christ Jesus, do any
thing.'"--_Life of Eliot_, p. 55.
"The Honorable Robert Boyle often strengthened Eliot's hands and
encouraged him in his work--he who was not more admirable among
philosophers for his discoveries in science, than he was beloved by
Christians for his active kindness and his pious spirit."--_Ibid._, p.
64.
"Nor was Eliot alone. In the islands round Massachusetts, and within the
limits of the Plymouth patent, missionary zeal and missionary enterprise
were active; and the gentle Mayhew, forgetting the pride of learning,
endeavored to win the natives to a new religion. At a later day, he took
passage for New England to awaken interest there, and the ship in which
he sailed was never more heard of. But such had been the force of his
example, that his father, though bowed down with the weight of seventy
years, resolved on assuming the office of the son whom he had lost, and
till beyond the age of fourscore years and twelve, continued to instruct
the natives, and with the happiest results. The Indians within his
influence, though twenty times more numerous than the whites in their
immediate neighborhood, preserved an immutable friendship with
Massachusetts."--Bancroft's _Hist of the United States_, vol. ii., p.
97. See _Missionary Records_; _Life of Eliot_; Mayhew's _Indian
Converts_; T. Prince's _Account of English Ministers_.]
[Footnote 347: "History has no example to offer of any successful
attempt, however slight, to introduce civilization among savage tribes
in colonies or in their vicinity, except through the influence of
religious missionaries. This is no question of a balance of
advantages--no matter of comparison between opposite systems. I repeat
that no instance can be shown of the reclaiming of savages by any other
influence than that of religion. There are two obvious reasons why such
should be the case: the first, that religion only can supply a motive to
the governors, placed in obscure situations, and without the reach of
responsibility, to act with zeal, perseverance, and charity; the other,
that it alone can supply a motive to the governed to undergo that
alteration of habits through which the reclaimed savage must pass, and
to which the hope of mere temporal advantage will very rarely induce him
to consent." This position is well stated in the words of Southey: 'The
wealth and power of governments may be vainly employed in the endeavor
to conciliate and reclaim brute man, if religious zeal and Christian
charity, in the true import of the word, be wanting.'--Merivale _on
Colonization_, vol. i., p. 289.]
[Footnote 348: "The attempt to organize an Indian priesthood at this
period failed altogether, the converts possessing neither the steadiness
nor the sobriety requisite for the holy office. The duty, therefore,
devolved upon European teachers, who in many cases scarcely obtained the
wages of a day laborer, and that very precariously. The formation,
however, of a society in England for the propagation of the Gospel in
this settlement, and pretty liberal contributions raised in the
principal towns, in some degree remedied these evils. After the lapse of
a few more generations, the Indian character, in its slow but steady
upward progress under the teaching of devoted and enlightened Christian
ministers, underwent a change so effectual, that the native teachers and
preachers of the present day may well bear comparison in zeal, piety,
and eloquence with their European colleagues."--Catlin's _American
Indians_; Cotton's _American Lakes_.]
[Footnote 349: "The Indians about this time (1653) obtained the
appellation of 'Praying Indians,' and the court appointed Major Daniel
Gookin their ruler."--_Life of Eliot_, p. 53.]