Death of Cromwell—his character—Richard Cromwell succeeds—Restoration
of Charles II.—Act of Uniformity, and ejection of the
Non-conformists—Affairs in Rhode-Island—Indian deed—letters to Mr.
Winthrop.
The Protector Cromwell died in September, 1658. This wonderful man
raised himself, from a private station, to the supreme power, and
fulfilled his high functions with an ability and energy, which few
occupants of a throne have ever displayed. He has shared the usual fate
of those men, whose conduct and principles have placed them apart from
the mass of mankind. No other man was ever in a position, which exposed
him to the hatred and misrepresentation of so many parties. The
royalists heaped on him unmeasured obloquy as a usurper. The High Church
party denounced him as a foe to the hierarchy. The Presbyterians
disliked and opposed him, as a friend of toleration. The
ultra-republicans reproached him for his ambition, because he did not
think England, in her existing condition, to be capable of a free
republican government, and therefore retained in his hands the power
which he believed to be indispensable to the peace of the state. The
irreligious, of all parties, scoffed at him as a hypocrite and a
fanatic, though the charge is somewhat inconsistent with itself.[305]
That Cromwell had faults, may be freely acknowledged, by his warmest
friends. That his course was always wise and justifiable, cannot be
maintained; but it may be doubted, whether, if the circumstances of that
stormy and critical period in which he lived were fairly weighed, and
his character and conduct were sifted, with a candid spirit, it would
not be found, that Cromwell deserves more of the applause of the friends
of liberty and religion, than of their censures. It is certain, that his
accusers yield to him the praise of qualities, which it is difficult to
reconcile with the crimes that they impute to him.
It is surprising to hear, from American writers, reproaches against
Cromwell as a “usurper.”[306] This language is not strange from the lips
of a royalist, or a High Church partisan, in England; but from an
American, it is inconsistent, and unworthy of his position as a citizen
of a great and free country, where public opinion ought to be decisively
and steadily in favor of republican principles, and ought thus to form
an august tribunal, whose verdict should be felt and respected
throughout the earth.
An American, surely, can feel no respect for hereditary titles. In his
view, Cromwell would have had a clear right to the throne, if the people
had chosen to give him the crown; and there is quite as much evidence,
that the great body of the people of England were satisfied with the
government of Cromwell, as that they were content with that of Charles
II. If by usurpation is meant a violation of the Constitution, it may be
replied, that the Constitution was already broken. The King had trampled
on it, and the Long Parliament had governed the kingdom for years with
an entire disregard of the Constitution. The country was in a state of
anarchy, and it was a blessing to England that Cromwell seized the
reins, and controlled the fierce parties who convulsed the nation.
Napoleon, though his subsequent course was unjustifiable, did a good
service to France, when he overthrew the detestable demagogues who had
deluged her with blood. If our peerless Washington had found this
country, in 1784, in the condition in which England was in 1653, and
France in 1800, it would have been his duty, as a patriot and a
philanthropist, to employ the power at his control for the preservation
of order, and the restoration of public happiness.
It is certain, that the great ends of government,—peace and prosperity
at home and respect abroad,—were enjoyed under Cromwell’s sway, to a far
higher degree than they were under most of the British monarchs,
preceding the revolution. Even Hume, who was an infidel and a tory, and
of course hated Cromwell, acknowledges, that the distracted state of
England, and the mutual rancor of its various factions, rendered an
energetic government indispensable, and would have furnished a
reasonable excuse for what he calls the “temporary usurpation” of
Cromwell, if the Protector had been guilty of no other crime.[307] The
excellent Baxter, who carried his loyalty to the preposterous length of
opposing Cromwell, under whom he enjoyed perfect toleration, and
striving to restore the “legitimate” King, with the almost certain
prospect of being persecuted and silenced, confesses, that religion
flourished, under the Protector, in a degree before unknown. “I do not
believe,” he says,[308] “that ever England had so able and faithful a
ministry since it was a nation, as it hath at this day; and I fear, that
few nations on earth, if any, have the like. Sure I am, the change is so
great, within these twelve years, that it is one of the greatest joys
that ever I had in the world to behold it. O how many congregations are
now plainly and frequently taught, that lived then in great obscurity.
How many able, faithful men are there now in a county, in comparison of
what were then.” And yet Baxter labored and prayed for the restoration
of Charles, under whom Baxter himself and two thousand more of these
faithful ministers were speedily silenced.
Cromwell has been accused of hypocrisy, but this charge, especially when
made by such men as Hume, is unworthy of credit. Baxter, who was a good
judge of piety, does not accuse Cromwell of hypocrisy, but acknowledges
that he was a pious man, though misled by ambition. “Both piety and
ambition,” he says, “concurred in countenancing all whom he thought
godly, of what sect soever. Piety pleaded for them as godly, and charity
as men, and ambition secretly told him what use he might make of them.
He meant well in all this at the beginning, and thought he did all for
the safety of the godly, and the public good, but not without an eye to
himself.”[309] As to his ambition, he probably had a sufficient share of
it; but he refused the crown when it was urged on him, with many
plausible arguments, by Parliament, and when, as Hume intimates, a large
part of the nation would have acquiesced. His personal and domestic
habits are acknowledged, by all parties, to have been pure and amiable.
His court was perhaps the most moral and decorous, that England has ever
seen.
The Protector was a friend of toleration, and this single trait in his
character is sufficient to entitle his memory to respect. He was not
entirely consistent, it is true, but no public man, at that day, except
Roger Williams, was so. Cromwell was surrounded with difficulties; and
the “Instrument of Government,” under which he held the Protectorship,
excluded Episcopalians and Catholics from the enjoyment of that
religious liberty which it granted to all others.[310] But the spirit of
the Protector was more tolerant than the laws, and he often connived at
the meetings of the Episcopalians. A man, who, at that time, and in his
post, could act, so far as he did, on the principle of an equitable
toleration of all religious opinions, could not have been either a
fanatic or a despot.[311]
Roger Williams was a friend of Cromwell. It has been supposed, that he
was allied to him by birth. He was certainly drawn to him by a communion
of spirit, on the subject of religious liberty. In his letters, he
repeatedly alludes to familiar conversations with Cromwell. The
friendship of Milton and Roger Williams may be viewed as an honorable
testimony to the character of the Protector. It is difficult to believe,
that these men would have yielded their confidence and esteem to a
hypocrite, either in religion or in politics. It is not more easy to
believe, that such a man as Cromwell has been described, would have
admitted men so sagacious and upright as Milton and Williams, to a close
scrutiny of his actions, or that by all the cunning which has been
ascribed to him he could have deceived them.
These three men, in fact, resembled each other, in their character, in
their opinions, and in the treatment which they received. Each was
misunderstood; each has suffered obloquy, and each is receiving, from
the calm and enlightened judgment of the present age, that just
sentence, which, sooner or later, will reward him, who aims to advance
the happiness of men, and who perseveres, through evil and good report,
in upholding the persecuted cause of truth and freedom.[312]
Cromwell was quietly succeeded, as Protector, by his son Richard, a
proof, that the nation were not very much dissatisfied with Cromwell’s
sway. But Richard possessed neither the talents, nor the ambition of his
father.[313] The aspiring and factious men whom Oliver held in check,
soon forced his son to retire from his burthensome and difficult office.
A stormy period succeeded, during which the rival parties struggled for
victory. At length, General Monk, obtaining the command of a powerful
army, restored the King, Charles II. who entered London in triumph, May
29, 1660. The nation received him with apparent joy, being weary of the
disorders which preceded and followed the energetic government of
Cromwell. The royalists, among whom were the Episcopalians, welcomed the
King with delight. The Presbyterians, who had disliked Cromwell, were
also zealous in restoring Charles, with the expectation that their
system would be continued as the national religion. They were so eager
to merit the gratitude of the King, that they exacted of him no
conditions, but were satisfied with the assurance, that he would grant
liberty to all _tender consciences_; a promise, which he afterwards
found it very easy to violate, by insisting, that all consciences which
did not agree with his views, were not tender, but criminally obstinate.
The efforts of the Presbyterians to obtain a compromise with the
Episcopalians, by which they might be comprehended in the Established
Church, failed.[314] The bishops would not consent to any alterations of
the liturgy. The Presbyterians would not listen to the King’s
proposition of toleration to other denominations, by which he meant to
favor the Papists, but which the Presbyterians rejected, more from a
dread of Popery, we may hope, than from their general aversion to
toleration. The Act of Uniformity was passed, and took effect, August
24, 1662. Two thousand of the best ministers in England were ejected
from their livings, because they could not submit to the rigorous
requirements of the act. Dreadful distress to them and to their families
was the natural consequence. The interests of religion suffered
incalculable injury, by the loss of these ministers, and by the
character of many of their successors.
King Charles II. was proclaimed in Rhode-Island, October 19, 1660. A new
commission was sent to Mr. Clarke, and he continued his exertions to
procure a new charter for the colony. Various sums of money were voted,
at different times, to be sent to Mr. Clarke.[315]
At Providence, there seems to have been a spirit among some of the
inhabitants, which disturbed the peace of Mr. Williams. Whether they
were envious of his influence, or impatient under the restraints which
he steadily advocated, with the whole weight of his authority, does not
now appear. But it is certain, that parties were formed, which, for many
years, greatly interrupted the tranquillity of the town; and it was
thought necessary, in 1669, to send a Committee of the General Assembly,
to settle the difficulties. The boundaries of the town were a fruitful
cause of contention, and involved the inhabitants in disputes, which
were not adjusted till long after the death of Mr. Williams and of most
of his contemporaries. He complains, in a letter, dated July, 1669, that
they had “four sorts of bounds at least.” He says: “some (that never did
this town nor colony good, and it is feared never will) cried out, when
Roger Williams had laid himself down as a stone in the dust for after
comers to step on in town and colony, _Who is Roger Williams?_ We know
the Indians and the sachems as well as he. We will trust Roger Williams
no longer. We will have our bounds confirmed us under the sachems’ hands
before us.”[316]
In August, 1659, the following deed was procured from the Narraganset
sachems:
“Deed of Scattape and Quoquagunewett, son of Mexham, son of
Qunnouone, called by the English Canonicus, uncle to Miantinomo, who
made a league of peace with the English in the Massachusetts, for
all the Indians in these parts, in the time of the Pequod war with
the English, this our grandfather and cousin, these sachems, granted
to Roger Williams, agent for the men of Providence and the men of
Pawtuxet, a tract of land, reaching from Pawtucket river to Pawtuxet
river. All the lands between the streams of those rivers, and up
these streams without limits, for their use of cattle, did they
grant to the men aforesaid, the men of Providence and the men of
Pawtuxet:—to whom we establish the lands aforesaid, up the streams
of those rivers, and confirm, without limit, or as far as the men
abovesaid, of Providence and of Pawtuxet, shall judge convenient for
their use of cattle, as feeding, ploughing, planting all manner of
plantations whatsoever; we say, all the lands, according to the
limits abovesaid, we establish and confirm to the men of Providence
and the men of Pawtuxet, according to their joint agreement, in the
most absolute tenure of fee simple, to them, their heirs and assigns
forever. And hereby bind ourselves, our heirs and assigns, not to
molest or trouble the men abovesaid, in the full enjoyment of the
land abovesaid. Nevertheless, it shall not be lawful for the men
abovesaid to remove the Indians that are up in the country, from
their fields, without the Indians’ content and consent; nor shall it
be lawful for any of those Indians to sell any of the lands
abovesaid to any, only it shall be lawful for them to take of the
men of Providence and the men of Pawtuxet, according to their joint
agreements, satisfaction for their removing. And, as we have
established to the men abovesaid the land and deed granted by our
grandfather and cousin, so do we now, also, confirm the grant of
confirmation by our cousin, Cursackquanth, Caufanequanutte, and
Kenerselath.
“Dated this first day of December, 1659.
“The mark of (_a tomahawk_) SCUTTAPE,
“The mark of (_bow and arrow_) QUOQUAGUNEWETT.
“Signed and delivered, in presence of
NAUTEMOREAW,—his mark,
RICHARD SMITH,
RICHARD SMITH, JR.,
JAMES SMITH,
WILLIAM DYRE.
“Richard Smith, and Richard Smith, jun. swore, that this deed was
explained before it was signed.” April 28, 1660, Acaquaomitt, son of
Quoquagunewett, confirmed the preceding deed.
This deed was, it appears, written by Mr. William Harris. This fact
accounts for its phraseology. It was asserted by Mr. Williams and
others, that the sachems did not understand its full import, when they
signed it. It was procured on the ground, that Mr. Williams’ deed from
the sachems conveyed a life estate only to him, and consequently his
deed to the purchasers could convey no other title. This deed, also,
greatly extended the original bounds, and thus gratified those who had
contended, that the phrase “up streams without limits,” in the sachems’
deed to Mr. Williams, gave a title to the lands lying along the rivers
Pawtuxet and Pawtucket, up to their sources. This construction was
always resisted by Roger Williams, as false, and as injurious to the
natives. The new deed was disapproved by himself and others.[317] It
appears to have been procured in no friendly spirit towards himself. It
implied that he had acted improperly, in taking the deed in his own
name, and it calls him the “agent of the men of Providence and the men
of Pawtuxet.” But it has, we trust, been satisfactorily shown, in
preceding pages, that Mr. Williams was the rightful proprietor of the
original grant, and was under no obligation to divide the land among his
fellow-colonists.
The following letters to Mr. Winthrop, touch on several interesting
topics:
“To my honored, kind friend, Mr. John Winthrop, Governor, at
Hartford, on Connecticut.
“_Providence, 6, 12, 59–60._
“Sir,
“Loving respects to yourself and Mrs. Winthrop, &c. Your loving
lines in this cold, dead season, were as a cup of your Connecticut
cider, which we are glad to hear abounds with you, or of that
western metheglin, which you and I have drunk at Bristol together,
&c. Indeed, it is the wonderful power and goodness of God, that we
are preserved in our dispersions among these wild, barbarous
wretches. I hear not of their excursions this winter, and should
rejoice if, as you hint, Uncas and his brother were removed to
Long-Island, or any where, or else, as I have sometimes motioned, a
truce for some good term of years might be obtained amongst them.
But how should we expect that the streams of blood should stop among
the dregs of mankind, when the bloody issues flow so fresh and
fearfully among the finest and most refined sons of men and sons of
God. We have not only heard of the four northern nations, Dania,
Swedia, Anglia, and Belgium, all Protestants, (heretics and dogs,
with the Pope, &c.) last year tearing and devouring one another, in
the narrow straits and eminent high passages and turns of the sea
and world; but we also have a sound of the Presbyterians’ rage new
burst out into flames of war from Scotland, and the independent and
sectarian army provoked again to new appeals to God, and engagements
against them. Thus, while this last Pope hath plied with sails and
oars, and brought all his popish sons to peace, except Portugal, and
brought in his grand engineers, the Jesuits, again to Venice, after
their long just banishment, we Protestants are wofully disposed to
row backward, and bring our sails aback-stays, and provoke the holy,
jealous Lord, who is a consuming fire, to kindle again those fires
from Rome and hell, which formerly consumed (in Protestant
countries) so many precious servants of God. The late renowned
Oliver confessed to me, in close discourse about the Protestants’
affairs, &c. that he yet feared great persecutions to the
Protestants from the Romanists, before the downfall of the Papacy.
The histories of our fathers before us, tell us what huge bowls of
the blood of the saints that great whore hath been drunk with, in
(now) Protestant dominions. Sure her judgment will ring through the
world, and it is hoped it is not far from the door. Sir, you were,
not long since, the son of two noble fathers, Mr. John Winthrop and
Mr. H. Peters. It is said they are both extinguished. Surely, I did
ever, from my soul, honor and love them even when their judgments
led them to afflict me. Ye the Father of Spirits spares us breath,
and I rejoice, Sir that your name (amongst the New-England
magistrates printed, to the Parliament and army, by H. Nort. Rous,
&c.) is not blurred, but rather honored, for your prudent and
moderate hand in the late Quakers’ trials amongst us. And it is
said, that in the late Parliament, yourself were one of the three in
nomination for General Governor over New-England, which however that
design ripened not, yet your name keeps up a high esteem, &c. I have
seen your hand to a letter to this colony, as to your late purchase
of some land at Narraganset.[318] The sight of your hand hath
quieted some jealousies amongst us, that the Bay, by this purchase,
designed some prejudice to the liberty of conscience amongst us. We
are in consultations how to answer that letter, and my endeavor
shall be, with God’s help, to welcome, with both our hands and arms,
your interest in these parts, though we have no hope to enjoy your
personal residence amongst us. I rejoice to hear that you gain, by
new plantations, upon this wilderness. I fear that many precious
souls will be glad to hide their heads, shortly, in these parts.
Your candle and mine draws towards its end. The Lord graciously help
us to shine in light and love universally, to all that fear his
name, without that monopoly of the affection to such of our own
persuasion only; for the common enemy, the Romish wolf, is very high
in resolution, and hope, and advantage to make a prey on all, of all
sorts, that desire to fear God. Divers of our neighbors thankfully
re-salute you. We have buried, this winter, Mr. Olney’s son, whom,
formerly, you heard to be afflicted with a lethargy. He lay two or
three days wholly senseless, until his last groans. My youngest son,
Joseph, was troubled with a spice of an epilepsy. We used some
remedies, but it hath pleased God, by his taking of tobacco,
perfectly, as we hope, to cure him. Good Mr. Parker, of Boston,
passing from Prudence Island, at his coming on shore, on Seekonk
land, trod awry upon a stone or stick, and fell down, and broke the
small bone of his leg. He hath lain by of it all this winter, and
the last week was carried to Boston in a horse litter. Some fears
there were of a gangrene. But, Sir, I use too much boldness and
prolixity. I shall now only subscribe myself,
“Your unworthy friend,
“R. W.
“Sir, my loving respects to Mr. Stone, Mr. Lord, Mr. Allen, Mr.
Webster, and other loving friends.”
“To my honored, kind friend, Mr. Winthrop, Governor of Connecticut,
these presents.
“_Providence, 8, 7, 60 (so called.)_
“Sir,
“A sudden warning gives me but time of this abrupt salutation to
your kind self and Mrs. Winthrop, wishing you peace. I promised to a
neighbor, a former servant of your father’s, (Joshua Windsor,) to
write a line, on his behalf, and at his desire, unto you. His prayer
to you is, that when you travel toward Boston, you would please to
come by Providence, and spare one hour to heal an old sore,—a
controversy between him and most of his neighbors, in which, I am
apt to think, he hath suffered some wrong. He hath promised to
submit to your sentence. His opposite, one James Ashton, being
desired by me to nominate also, he resolves also to submit to your
sentence, which will concern more will and stomach than damage; for
the matter only concerns a few poles of ground, wherein Joshua hath
cried out of wrong these many years. I hope, Sir, the blessed Lord
will make you a blessed instrument of chiding the winds and seas;
and I shall rejoice in your presence amongst us. There are greater
ulcers in my thoughts at present, which, I fear, are incurable, and
that it hath pleased the Most Wise and Most High to pass an
irrevocable sentence of amputations and cauterizations upon the poor
Protestant party. The clouds gather mighty fast and thick upon our
heads from all the Popish quarters. It hath pleased the Lord to glad
the Romish conclave with the departure of those two mighty bulwarks
of the Protestants, Oliver and Gustavus; to unite, (I think by this
time) all the Catholic kings and princes, for Portugal was like,
very like, of late, to return to the yoke of Spain, whose treasure
from the Indies it hath pleased God to send home, so wonderfully
great and rich this year, that I cannot but fear the Lord hath some
mighty work to effect with it. We know the Catholic King was in
debt, but he now overflows with millions, which God is most like to
expend against the Protestants or the Turks, the two great enemies,
(the sword-fish and the thrasher) against the Popish leviathan. The
Presbyterian party in England and Scotland is yet very likely to
make some struggle against the Popish invasions; and yet in the end
I fear (as long I have feared, and long since told Oliver, to which
he much inclined,) the bloody whore is not yet drunk enough with the
blood of the saints and witnesses of Jesus. One cordial is, (amongst
so many the merciful Lord hath provided) that that whore will
shortly appear so extremely loathsome, in her drunkenness,
bestialities, &c. that her bewitched paramours will tear her flesh,
and burn her with fire unquenchable. Here is a sound that Fairfax,
and about two hundred of the House with him, differ with the King.
The merciful Lord fit us to hear and feel more. It is a very thick
and dreadful mist and swamp, with which the Lord hath a great while
suffered us to labor in, as hoping to wade out, break through, and
escape shipwreck. In Richard Protector’s Parliament, they fell into
three factions presently: royalists, protectorians, (which were most
Presbyterian, and earned it,) and commonwealth’s men. The
Presbyterians, when General Monk brought in the secluded members,
carried it again, of late, clearly, and so vigorously against the
Papists, that stricter laws than ever. There must surely, then, be
great flames, before the King can accomplish his engagements to the
Popish party.
“You know well, Sir, at sea, the first entertainment of a storm is
with, down with top-sails. The Lord mercifully help us to lower, and
make us truly more and more low, humble, contented, thankful for the
least crumbs of mercy. But the storm increaseth, and trying with our
mainsails and mizzens will not do. We must, therefore, humbly beg
patience from the Father of Lights and God of all mercies, to lay at
Hull, in hope. It was a motto in one of the late Parliaments:
cornets, under a shower of blood. ‘Transibit.’
“Sir, my neighbor, Mrs. Scott, is come from England; and, what the
whip at Boston could not do, converse with friends in England, and
their arguments, have, in a great measure drawn her from the
Quakers, and wholly from their meetings. Try the spirits. There are
many abroad, and must be, but the Lord will be glorious, in plucking
up whatever his holy hand hath not planted. My brother runs strongly
to Origen’s notion of universal mercy at last, against an eternal
sentence. Our times will call upon us for thorough discussions. The
fire is like to try us. It is a wonderful mercy the barbarians are
yet so quiet. A portion of our neighbors are just now come home, _re
infecta_. The Mohegans would not sally, and the Narragansets would
not spoil the corn, for fear of offending the English. The Lord
mercifully guide the councils of the commissioners. Mr. Arnold, Mr.
Brenton, and others, struggle against your interest at Narraganset;
but I hope your presence might do much good amongst us in a few
days.
“Sir, I am, unworthy, yours,
“R. W.”