Historical Sketch—View of the condition of the country at the time of
Mr. Williams’ arrival.
The first settlement, by Europeans, in North America, was made in 1585,
when Sir Walter Raleigh sent a fleet of seven ships from England to
Virginia. One hundred and seven persons were landed on the island of
Roanoke, near the mouth of Albemarle Sound, in the present State of
North Carolina. But discouraged by the want of provisions, and probably
by other causes, all the colonists returned to England the next year.
Another, and more successful, attempt was made twenty years afterwards,
under the authority of a patent from King James, who granted all the
territory in North America, comprehended between the 34th and 45th
degrees of latitude, to be equally divided between two companies,
called, respectively, the London and the Plymouth.
In 1607, three ships, with one hundred emigrants, formed a settlement on
the James River, in Virginia, and called the spot Jamestown, in honor of
the King.
In the same year, a small colony made a settlement at the mouth of the
Kennebec River, in the present State of Maine; but the loss of their
stores by fire, and the severity of the winter, induced them all to
abandon the undertaking the next year, and return to England.
In 1610, a settlement was commenced at Newfoundland, and in 1614, the
Dutch built a fort on the island of Manhattan, where the city of New
York now stands, and held the country many years, under a grant from the
States’ General, by the name of the New Netherlands.[20]
In 1620, the ever memorable landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth took
place. The colonists were a company of Puritans, who left England so
early as 1608, with their pastor, the Rev. John Robinson, and settled at
Leyden, in Holland. The merciless oppression which they endured in
England impelled them thus to abandon their native land. They enjoyed
protection and prosperity in Holland, but they were not satisfied with
their condition and prospects in that country, which a foreign language
and lax morals rendered an undesirable home for them and their children.
They accordingly resolved to emigrate to America. They sailed from
Plymouth (England) in September, 1620, and on the 11th of December they
landed at the spot to which they gave the name of Plymouth.
The settlement of Massachusetts Bay occurred a few years after. This
great enterprise was conducted under the direction of the Plymouth
Company, who obtained a new patent from King James, by which a number of
the highest nobility and gentry of England, their associates and
successors, were constituted “the Council established at Plymouth, in
the county of Devon, for the planting, ruling, ordering and governing of
New England, in America.” By this patent, the whole territory between
the 40th and the 48th degrees of north latitude, from the Atlantic to
the Pacific Ocean, was granted to the company.[21] In 1627–8, the
Company sold to several gentlemen, among whom were John Endicott and
John Humfrey, all that part of New-England which lies between three
miles north of Merrimac River and three miles south of Charles River,
across the whole breadth of the continent. In June, 1628, Mr. Endicott
sailed from England, for Naumkeag, since called Salem, where a small
company of emigrants had fixed their residence a short time before. Mr.
Endicott’s first letter from America is dated September 13, 1628, and
his arrival is considered as the date of the first permanent settlement
of Massachusetts Proper.
The patent from the Council of Plymouth gave a good right to the soil,
(says Hutchinson, vol. i. pp. 16, 17) but no powers of government. A
royal charter was necessary. This passed the seals March 4, 1628–9. It
confirmed the patent of the Council of Plymouth, and created the
Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay, in New-England, a body
politic and corporate. By this charter, the Company were empowered to
elect, annually, forever, out of the freemen of said Company, a
Governor, a Deputy Governor, and eighteen assistants, and to make laws
not repugnant to the laws of England.
As the state of things in the parent country daily became more
distressing to the friends of religion and liberty, an emigration,
unparalleled for its extent, and for the character of the emigrants, was
projected. A considerable number of persons of great respectability, of
good fortune, and of consideration in society, among whom were Winthrop,
Dudley, Johnson, and Saltonstall, resolved to remove, with their
families and property, to Massachusetts, on condition that the charter
of the colony and the seat of its government should be transferred to
America. This important proposition was acceded to, and on the 28th of
April, 1630, Winthrop, who had been elected Governor, and his
associates, sailed from Yarmouth,[22] in a fleet, which, with the
vessels that preceded and followed them the same season, amounted in the
whole to seventeen sail,[23] with above fifteen hundred passengers.[24]
The Arbella, with Governor Winthrop on board, arrived at Salem on the
12th of June, and the other vessels arrived soon after. The colonists
there had lost eighty of their number by death the winter previous.
Their provisions were nearly consumed, and they were in a distressing
situation. The arrival of the new emigrants occasioned great joy to the
sufferers, and revived their hopes.
It was early determined that Salem was not the proper position for the
capital. The Governor, and the principal part of the emigrants, left
Salem soon after their arrival, and resided awhile at Charlestown. Here
sickness prevailed among them, and a considerable number died.[25] They
were distressed by the want of fresh water. Many of them accordingly
abandoned Charlestown, and settled at Watertown and Dorchester, while a
still larger number removed, in September, to the other side of the
river, and laid the foundation of Boston. The peninsula was then
inhabited by only one white man, the Rev. William Blackstone.[26] It was
called by the Indians Shawmut, and by the neighboring settlers,
Trimountain, the former name signifying the abundance and sweetness of
its waters, the latter the peculiar character of its hills.[27] It was
called Boston by a vote of the Court, September 7, in well deserved
honor of the Rev. John Cotton, who had been a minister of Boston, in
England, and whose arrival in America was earnestly expected.
The sufferings of the first inhabitants of the metropolis were very
great. Sickness swept many of them into the grave. The weather during
the winter was extremely severe, and provisions were so scarce, that the
inhabitants were in imminent peril of starvation.[28] At this critical
juncture, the ship Lyon, in which Roger Williams had embarked, arrived,
on the 5th of February, 1630–1. Governor Winthrop (vol. i. pp. 41, 42)
thus records the arrival of this vessel:
“Feb. 5. The ship Lyon,[29] Mr. William Peirce, master, arrived at
Nantasket. She brought Mr. Williams, a godly minister,[30] with his
wife, Mr. Throgmorton, Perkins, Ong, and others, with their wives and
children, about twenty passengers, and about two hundred tons of goods.
She set sail from Bristol, December 1. She had a very tempestuous
passage, yet through God’s mercy, all her people came safe, except Way
his son, who fell from the spritsail yard in a tempest, and could not be
recovered, though he kept in sight near a quarter of an hour; her goods
also came all in good condition.”
The strong contrast between the situation of the present inhabitants of
the metropolis, and that of the little company of suffering exiles in
1630, forces itself on our minds. They were few in number. They had no
suitable dwellings to shelter them from the rigors of winter, then more
severe, perhaps, than any which we now experience. They were almost
without food. Disease was among them, and several of their number sunk
into the grave, whose lives might doubtless have been preserved, had
they been furnished with suitable shelter, food and medicine. When they
looked around them, all was dreary and melancholy. “Where now exists a
dense and aggregated mass of living beings and material things, amid all
the accommodations of life, the splendors of wealth, the delights of
taste, and whatever can gratify the cultivated intellect, there were
then only a few hills, which, when the ocean receded, were intersected
by wide marshes, and when its tide returned, appeared a group of lofty
islands, abruptly rising from the surrounding waters. Thick forests
concealed the neighboring hills, and the deep silence of nature was
broken only by the voice of the wild beast or the bird, and the war
whoop of the savage.”[31]
How different the situation of the present inhabitants. That little
company has swelled to more than sixty thousand. Those forests, which
then covered the hills and vallies, are gone; the ocean has been driven
back from much of the space over which it then rolled; and now, where
stood the few tents and cabins of the first settlers, have sprung up,
over the whole peninsula, sumptuous structures and spacious temples,
comfortable dwellings, ample warehouses, and every thing which can
minister to the happiness of men. The poorest of its citizens is better
sheltered and better fed, than some of the richest families among the
first inhabitants. Let them give devout thanks to God, that He has
reserved for them a happier lot than that of their fathers. Let them,
amid their profusion of blessings, praise the Lord, who has done so
great things for their city, and its successive generations. Let them,
above all, hold fast those great truths, for which the founders
sacrificed every thing dear to them on earth.
As the colonists came to this country to enjoy the privilege of
worshipping God according to their conceptions of His will, it was, of
course, among their first objects to form churches, and make provision
for the regular worship of the Most High.
The settlers at Plymouth were organized as a church before they left
Holland, and as such they landed on our shores. This church was formed
on the principle of entire independence on all human authority. Its
members belonged to that class of the Non-Conformists, who had separated
entirely from the Church of England, and adopted a form of church polity
which they deemed more consistent with the letter and the spirit of the
New Testament.
The separate independence of each church on all others; the necessity of
true piety as a qualification for membership; the right of each church
to elect its own officers; the rejection of all officers except pastors
or elders, and deacons, and the entire equality of all pastors and
elders, in respect to power and privileges, were among the principles
adopted by this excellent body of Christians. They are the principles
which the Scriptures teach, and it would have been happy for the cause
of truth, if they had been held fast, without any corrupt mixture, by
all the churches which professed to receive them. Another principle
adopted by the church of Plymouth was, that ecclesiastical censures are
wholly spiritual, and not to be accompanied with temporal penalties. In
this respect, the church of Plymouth were in advance of their brethren
in Massachusetts, and the history of the Plymouth colony is honorably
distinguished by a tolerant spirit, which contributed not less to her
peace and prosperity, than to her true fame.
The first settlers at Salem, Boston, and other towns in Massachusetts
Bay, belonged, for the most part, to the other class of Non-Conformists,
who did not, while in England, separate wholly from the Established
Church, though they opposed her corruptions. They desired only a further
reform of the Church herself, and retained their membership, some of
them conforming, though reluctantly, to her ceremonies, to avoid
persecution, and others refusing such a conformity, protected awhile by
the indulgence of some mild Prelates, or by the friendship of powerful
laymen. When, at length, despairing of the desired reform, and weary of
persecution, they embarked for America, they came as members of the
Church of England. Winthrop and his associates, while on board the fleet
at Yarmouth, addressed a farewell letter to the “rest of their brethren
in and of the Church of England,” which is as beautiful in diction as it
is admirable for its affectionate pathos. They say, “We desire you would
be pleased to take notice of the principals and body of our company, as
those who esteem it our honor to call the Church of England, from whence
we arise, our dear mother, and cannot part from our native country,
where she specially resideth, without much sadness of heart and many
tears in our eyes; ever acknowledging, that such hope and part as we
have obtained in the common salvation, we have received in her bosom,
and sucked it from her breasts. We leave it not, therefore, as loathing
that milk, wherewith we were nourished, but blessing God for the
parentage and education, as members of the same body, shall always
rejoice in her good, and unfeignedly grieve for any sorrow that shall
ever betide her; and, while we have breath, sincerely desire and
endeavor the continuance and abundance of her welfare, with the
enlargement of her bounds in the kingdom of Christ Jesus.”[32]
There was, unquestionably, an entire sincerity in these expressions of
attachment to the Church of England. There was, as they judged, no
inconsistency in their subsequent conduct, in forming churches, from
which Episcopacy, and all the ceremonies of the parent Church, were
excluded. Their love for that Church was founded on her doctrines, not
on her ceremonies. They recognised in her articles the genuine faith,
once delivered to the saints. Her ceremonies they regarded as unseemly
appendages, the relics of Popish superstition, of which they desired to
divest her. They loved the inward spirit, not the outward form. They did
reverence to the majestic soul, while they looked with sorrow on her
fantastic attire. They would have remained in her bosom, and submitted
to much which they deemed undesirable, if she would have permitted them
to reject what they considered as positively unlawful and wrong. But as
she left them no alternative but unconditional submission, or exile,
they departed for America; and when they came to form churches here,
they endeavored to incorporate that soul in a body befitting her
dignity. The American church was, in their view, the Church of England,
redeemed and regenerated, holding to her former self a similar relation
to that which the just man made perfect bears to the saint who is still
on earth, and encumbered with his diseased and mortal body.
A church was formed at Salem, on the 6th of August, 1629, when thirty
persons entered into a covenant in writing, and the Rev. Mr. Skelton was
ordained, or instituted, as the pastor, and the Rev. Mr. Higginson as
the teacher; these offices being considered as distinct, and both being
deemed essential to the welfare of a church. The church thus formed was
entirely independent. The Governor of Plymouth, and other members of the
church there, who had been invited to attend the ceremony, were not
permitted to give the right hand of fellowship to the new church, till
an explicit declaration had been made, that this service was not meant
to indicate any right of interference or control. The pastor and teacher
were inducted into office by the vote of the church, and by the
imposition of the hands of the ruling elder, as the organ of the church.
Thus careful were this body to exclude, at the outset, all authority but
that of the Head of the Church. Several of the inhabitants, among whom
Messrs. John and Samuel Brown were the principal men, opposed the new
church, because the liturgy of the Church of England was rejected.[33]
They accordingly formed another society, in which the book of common
prayer was read. The schism was speedily remedied, by a measure which
was much more energetic than just. Mr. John Brown and his brother, the
leaders, were sent to England, and their followers quietly relinquished
their opposition.
A church was formed at Charlestown, July 30, 1630, by Governor Winthrop
and a number of other persons, who signed a covenant, in which they
simply promised to “walk in all our ways according to the rule of the
Gospel, and in all sincere conformity to his holy ordinances, and in
mutual love and respect to each other, so near as God shall give us
grace.”[34] On the 27th of August, the Rev. John Wilson was elected
teacher. “We used imposition of hands,” says Governor Winthrop, “but
with this protestation by all, that it was only as a sign of election
and confirmation, not of any intent that Mr. Wilson should renounce his
ministry he received in England.”[35] Thus careful were they to guard
the independence of the church, while they preserved due respect for the
Church of England, whose ministers, so far as they were pastors and
teachers, they acknowledged and honored.
When the Governor and the greater portion of the colonists removed to
Boston, the church, with the minister, removed thither. It remained
without a house for public worship till August, 1632, when a building
was commenced,[36] on the south side of State street, opposite the spot
where the Branch Bank now stands. It was a humble structure, with a
thatched roof and mud walls.[37] Perhaps, however, the metropolis has
never seen a more devout congregation than that which was accustomed to
assemble there. It well illustrates the piety of the founders, and their
high regard for the ministry, that at the first Court of Assistants,
held on board the Arbella, at Charlestown, August 23, 1630, the first
question propounded was, _How shall the ministers be maintained?_ It was
ordered, that houses be built for them with convenient speed, at the
public charge, and their salaries were established. These were
sufficiently moderate. Mr. Wilson was allowed twenty pounds per annum,
till his wife should arrive, and Mr. Phillips, the minister of
Watertown, was to receive thirty pounds.[38]
The ecclesiastical polity, now commenced, was afterwards moulded into a
more regular and permanent form, by the personal influence of Mr.
Cotton, and by the authority of the platform adopted in 1648. The great
principles which were established were these: each church is
independent, and possesses the sole power of governing itself, according
to the Scriptures; piety and a holy life are the qualifications for
church membership; the officers of a church are pastors, teachers,
ruling elders and deacons, and are to be chosen by the church itself;
the ordination of ministers is to be performed with imposition of hands,
by the ministers of the neighboring churches. These and other
principles, which, with some exceptions, are still held by the
Independent, Congregational and Baptist churches, were joined, with
another article, which was the source of manifold mischiefs to the
colony. It is thus expressed, in the words of Hubbard, (540): “Church
government and civil government may very well stand together, it being
the duty of the magistrate to take care of matters of religion, and to
improve his civil authority for observing the duties commanded in the
first as well as in the second table; seeing the end of their office is
not only the quiet and peaceable life of the subject in matters of
righteousness and honesty, but also in matters of godliness.” 1 Tim. ii.
1, 2.
The ecclesiastical polity being adjusted, the civil government was made
to conform to it.[39] To the excellent founders, religion was the most
precious of all interests, and civil government was, in their view,
useful, no further than it was necessary for the good order of the
community, and the security of their religious privileges. Having
escaped from the grasp of the civil power in England, they resolved,
that in the new state to be formed here, the church should hold the
first place. They wished to erect here a community, which should be
itself a church, governed by the laws of Jesus Christ, flourishing in
the peace and beauty of holiness, and realizing the glorious visions of
the prophets. It was a noble conception, a sublime purpose, of which
none but pure hearted men would have been capable. That they failed in
accomplishing all their plans, was the natural result of human
corruption; but they succeeded in forming a community, more moral, more
easily governed, better educated, more thoroughly under the control of
religious principles, and more truly free, than the world had then seen.
At the General Court, held so early as May 18, 1631, it was ordered,
that no person should be admitted to the privileges of a freeman, unless
he was a member of some church in the colony. This law was, no doubt,
unjust, and the colony was afterwards forced to repeal it. It was, also,
injurious to the interests of religion, for it made church membership an
object of earnest desire, for political purposes, and thus introduced
men without piety into the church. It led to the adoption, to some
extent, of the ruinous principle, that piety is not necessary to church
membership, and it was one of the causes of that unhappy strife, which
issued in the introduction of the half-way covenant.[40] But the law is
characteristic of the founders, and proves their determination to keep
the state subordinate to the church. They also adopted, as the basis of
their civil code, the laws of Moses, so far as they were of a moral
nature, though, as Roger Williams remarked, “they extended their moral
equity to so many particulars as to take in the whole judicial law.”
They punished crimes, not by the laws of England, but by those of Moses.
Idolatry, blasphemy, man stealing, adultery, and some other crimes, not
punishable with death by the laws of the parent country, were made
capital. Every inhabitant was compelled to contribute, in proportion to
his ability, to the support of religion. This adoption of the Mosaic
code, and a constant disposition to seek for precedents in the Old
Testament, will account for many of the measures which have been
attributed to the bigotry of our fathers.