practically the whole territory of the colony. The claim of
Connecticut up to the bay on the west was not settled until 1703, and
the claim of Massachusetts (which had succeeded to the Plymouth claim)
up to the bay on the east was not settled until 1746.
Footnote 32:
None of this tax was paid for some years, and the whole amount was
never received by Williams (See his letter to the town clerk of
Providence, Jan. 1680-81, printed in the Narragansett Club
Publications, Vol. 6, p. 400) Contributions (amounting it was claimed
to £200) seem to have been taken up in Warwick and Providence to send
Williams on his second agency (See R.I. Col. Recs. I, 234, & II, 78),
but he was obliged to sell his trading house in Narragansett to
support his family during his absence (Arnold I, 239), and he seems to
have been compelled to support himself by teaching while in England
(Arnold I, 251). As he himself expresses it he was "left to starve, or
steal, or beg or borrow." (Letter to Providence R.I. Col. Recs. I,
351). He was also obliged to sell several islands in the bay owned by
him to meet his expenses incurred on his journeys to England (Arnold
I, 105). Clarke seems to have supported himself in part by preaching
and other means. (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 79)
Footnote 33:
It was first attempted to raise the necessary amount by contribution
(R.I. Col. Recs. I, 443). About £40 seem to have been secured this
way. Those who had contributed were allowed to set off their
contributions against their part of the rate.
Footnote 34:
Does not seem to have been fully paid Oct., 1663. (R.I. Col. Recs. I,
506)
Footnote 35:
This tax was collected with the greatest difficulty. Hardly any of it
seems to have been paid for several years. A "great part" remains
unpaid in October, 1669, (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 288) and we find
measures taken for its collection in certain places as late as May,
1671. (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 380-3). In October, 1666, (ditto II, 183)
it is mentioned that "several persons" are "yett behind" in former
rates.
Footnote 36:
Westerly had contributed £65 and was excused from the tax. In May,
1671, (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 380 et seq.) a great portion of this tax
had not been assessed.
Footnote 37:
This was the first percentage tax. In May, 1674, "under severall
pretences few or none paid." (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 521). Some are also
behind in former rates, (ditto 522). So far as shown by the colony
account book, the receipts from this tax amounted to but a few pounds.
Footnote 38:
In May, 1679, several towns had not assessed the rate. (R.I. Col.
Recs. III, 33) An audit in July, 1681, shows that £108 6s. 10d. is due
on this and the rate of 1680, a considerable portion of the deficiency
being for the present tax.
Footnote 39:
The sum was paid down by Stephen Arnold, who was guaranteed by the
notes of several other persons who in turn were to be paid out of the
tax. In June, 1681, certain of those who had given their notes to
Arnold petition for relief, from which it is evident that the tax had
not been paid. The delinquent towns are ordered to pay.
Footnote 40:
For delinquency in payment see notes 38 and 41.
Footnote 41:
The colony account book shows the receipt of but £59, 13s. 10d. up to
September, 1686, from the deficiency of £108, 6s. 10d. (Note 38) and
the present tax. More may have been received for the accounts were
left in an irregular manner, and the custom of offsetting debts due
from the colony against rates may have prevented some payments being
recorded at all. On the other hand it was in the summer of 1686, that
the colony forfeited its charter so that it would not be strange if
the taxes due were not collected.
Footnote 42:
I have been able to find no trace of this tax in the colony records,
but such a tax seems to have been ordered by Andros throughout his
whole jurisdiction, and it is mentioned as levied in Staples Annals of
Providence, p. 177.
Footnote 43:
This tax as assessed in Providence amounted to £37 12s. 3d. of which
£14 was poll money, giving the number of polls assessed as 178. The
number of separate property assessments was 144. In the rate of £120
levied in the same year Providence paid one sixth of the whole. Using
this as a basis of calculation the penny in the pound and poll tax
would have amounted to about £225. The other penny in the pound taxes
do not seem to have yielded quite so much. The three perhaps yielded
about £600.
Footnote 44:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 104-5. Herdsmen or lightermen detained on their
necessary employment were subject to a fine of only 2s. 6d., and
farmers might leave one man at home subject to the same penalty.
Footnote 45:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 153: Provision was also made for archery. Every
person above seven years of age was required to be supplied with bow
and arrows and to practice shooting. (Ibid 186)
Footnote 46:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 372: In 1673, those also were exempted who could
not fight without violating their conscience. A concession to the
Quakers, but the abuse to which the law was subject led to its repeal
a few years later.
Footnote 47:
The arms required by the act of 1647, were "a musket, one pound of
powder, twenty bullets, and two fadom of match, with sword, rest
bandaliers all completely furnished." By act of 1665, in addition to
his arms each man must be furnished with two pounds of powder and four
pounds of lead or shot. (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 117). Under the law of
1677 the requirements were one gun or musket, one pound of powder, and
thirty bullets (Ibid 570). The act of 1665, speaks of the burden on
the poorer citizens in keeping their arms in repair, and ammunition on
hand, and provides that to meet these expenses nine shillings a year
in current pay shall be paid to each enlisted soldier, the necessary
amount to be levied by rate. No future law makes any mention of such
payment and service was probably as a rule without recompense.
Footnote 48:
We have of course no accurate records of the number of the population
at that time. From the data which we do have however it is probably
safe to say that when the four towns came together in 1647, the colony
contained less than one thousand inhabitants, and that the number
gradually increased until at the end of the period, it amounted to
between four and five thousand. The royal commissioners reported in
1665, that the "Colony hath its scattered townes upon Rhode Island,
two upon the maine land, and four small villages" (R.I. Col. Recs. II,
129). By 1678 the towns had increased to nine, at which number they
remained for many years. Certain parts of the colony, as the island
and some of the country in the south and to the west of the bay (the
Narragansett country) seem to have been very fertile. Say the
commissioners above quoted "In this Province also is the best English
grasse, and most sheepe, the ground very fruitfull, ewes bring
ordinarily two lambs, corn yields eighty for one, and in some places,
they have had corne sixe years together without manuring." The
industry of the colony at this period was wholly agricultural and
tended to stock and dairy farming rather than to the raising of grain.
Indeed the colony seems on some occasions to have been dependent on
its neighbors to supplement its own supply of the latter article. The
colonists seem to have been comfortably off, without either great
wealth or great poverty. In Providence estates were of small size (a
few acres), life was on a very humble scale, the inhabitants enjoying
only the real necessities. On the island estates were also small in
size but there was more wealth, and the Narragansett country a few
years later saw the growth of large stock farms and plantations,
sometimes five, six, or even ten square miles in extent, managed by
slave labor. Perhaps the condition of the colony as a whole during the
period from 1647 to 1689, is best summed up in the words of Governor
Ward in a letter to the Board of Trade many years later, "for,
although we were not rich, yet poverty was a stranger among us, till
the year 1710." An excellent picture of the early economic development
of Providence can be found in Dorr's "Planting and Growth of
Providence," published as No. 15 of the Rhode Island Hist. Tracts. A
description of the "Narragansett Planters" is given by Mr. Edward
Channing (Johns Hopkins University Studies, Series IV, No. III). Not
only were the people of that time lacking in wealth according to the
standard of today, but the organization of their economic life was
entirely different from that we now know. Each family possessed a
sufficiency of land, but produced only enough to meet the current
needs of the household. There was no chance for saving, investment and
accumulation; there was no adequate money system. All this would make
a tax fall much more heavily than under our present conditions.
Another circumstance that added to the burden was that taxes were not
levied continuously, a small amount each year, but in considerable
amounts, at intervals of several years. The colony suffered greatly at
the time of Philips war. Warwick and a large part of Providence were
destroyed, the inhabitants taking refuge on the island. All these
considerations must be taken into account in the endeavor to form a
judgment of the burden of taxation during the period.
Footnote 49:
In the letter from Roger Williams to the town clerk of Providence,
already mentioned (note 32) he says that taxation in Rhode Island is
far lighter than in any other colony. He also mentions that the
charter cost about £1,000, while that of Connecticut cost £6,000. The
letter itself is a plea for the more prompt payment of rates.
Footnote 50:
R.I. Col. Recs. II, 505.
Footnote 51:
Ibid III, 13.
Footnote 52:
Ibid III, 162.
Footnote 53:
That these loans or contributions were often only for a few pounds is
expressive of the poverty of the treasury. The occasional reports
entered in the colony account book give us some idea of the financial
transactions of the colony at this time. The amount entered as due the
colony from May, 1672, to May, 1673, was £33, all from fines (£8 from
jurors fines), of which £23 12s. had been received. In August, 1673,
there was reported due £64 14s. 4d. for rates and fines unpaid between
1664 and 1670. The amount expended from May, 1672, to August, 1673,
was £21 6s. 3d. for jury dinners, provisions for the general court
(wine and brandy), for transportation of public officers, for books
for the treasurer, for capturing a prisoner, for support of prisoners,
for hanging prisoners, for messengers to and from Plymouth. The audit
committee in August, report £137 6s. due from the colony. The receipts
entered from October, 1673, to May, 1675, are £125 9s. 10d. of which
£95 is specified as coming from fines, and £3 12s. from rates (the
farthing in the pound rate of 1673), the remainder not being
specified. This may not be the amount actually received, but rather
what was known to be due the treasury, for the amount entered as
expended between May, 1672, and April, 1677, was £101 2s. 3d., the
most important items being as before jury dinners. (£7 1s. 8d.)
criminal matters (£ll 16s. 6d.), carriage of public officers (£2
11s.), general sergeant (£23 1s. O.) general recorder (£17 11s.) The
committee to audit the accounts of Peleg Sanford whose term of office
as treasurer was from May, 1678 to May, 1681, reported payments
amounting to £392 1s. 9d., largely for surveys made in the
Narragansett country, expenses in connection with the boundary line,
and other expenses similar to those previously mentioned. In the
greater part of the payments, however, only the name of the person
paid and not the purpose is given. Some of these payments may have
been on account of expenses in connection with the war. Fines form a
principal element of the receipts, but the principal item was £299
13s. 2d. from the taxes of 1678 and 1680. The expenditures entered
between September, 1681, and September, 1686, amounts to only £82 0s.
11d. largely for jury dinners and payments to the sergeant and
recorder. The audit of the accounts of the treasurer under Andros show
nominal receipts of £213 6s. 8d. from taxes, and expenditures of £232
7s. 1d, the principal items being the court houses and the bounty on
wolves, the purposes for which the taxes were laid, and payment of the
sheriff. (£18 4s.).
Footnote 54:
One of the complaints made against the colony by Bellemont in 1699
was, "They raise and levy taxes and assessments upon the people, there
being no express authority in the charter for so doing." (R.I. Col.
Rec. III, 386). Article IV, Sec. 10, of the present constitution
provides that "The general assembly shall continue to exercise the
powers they have heretofore exercised, unless prohibited in this
constitution," but makes no more definite grant of the right to tax.
It would seem that this right has never been _specifically_ granted to
the assembly.
Footnote 55:
The separation took place in 1696, Arnold I, 533.
Footnote 56:
During the early years of the colony there were several outlying
districts (Block Island, Conanicut, and certain districts which
afterwards became Kingstown and Greenwich) not yet incorporated into
towns. For those places assessors were generally appointed by the
general assembly, collection was by the general sergeant. By 1678,
however, these places had all attained to the dignity of towns.
Footnote 57:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 306: If any person refused to assist an officer in
gathering rates he was to be fined ten shillings.
Footnote 58:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 227: Those individuals that did not pay their tax
within twenty days were to be liable "in Generall, and each man in
particular x x to the penealtie of the forfeiture of ten pounds,"
imposed by the court of commissioners upon the town for failure to pay
its quota. Both of these provisions are also found in the act ordering
that the magazines be supplied in 1650. (Ibid 223)
Footnote 59:
In the act ordering the erection of prisons in 1655, the assembly
chose three men to make the rate in each town except Newport, for
which four were chosen. Each town was empowered to add to the number,
or to substitute others for those chosen. These same men were to have
the charge of building the prisons. (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 311). The
several acts in regard to the rates of 1662 and 1664, do not prescribe
the machinery of assessment and collection except where extraordinary
measures are adopted as a result of non-payment. In other cases it is
simply ordered that the inhabitants of the towns meet and assess the
rate. It does not seem probable that a full town meeting would
undertake to apportion a rate. It is more likely a committee of
assessors would be appointed for the purpose. The law of 1665,
providing for the military assessment orders the appointment of men to
make the rate. An act of October, 1670, directs each town to choose a
convenient number of persons to make the rate ordered the June before.
After 1678, the records of Providence show that the election of
assessors was customary. They were elected for each tax. It was not
till well into the next century that assessors became regular town
officers.
Footnote 60:
It is probable that in the earlier years each individual was his own
collector, the constable being sent for the rate only on failure to
pay. Before long, however, the constable must have become practically
the collector. A law of June, 1684, provides that all future rates
shall be gathered by the town constables who were to be allowed two
shillings on the pound for their services, and to forfeit double their
fees in case of neglect (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 162)
Footnote 61:
R.I. Col. Recs. II, 510.
Footnote 62:
Taxation according to "strength and estate," as it usually reads, is
the almost unvarying form in which these early colonists expressed
their idea of equality in taxation. It would be difficult to find a
better expression.
Footnote 63:
Payment however must be made in what may be kept in a store house
three months without damage.
Footnote 64:
This is explained as follows, "or that is accordinge to tenn upon the
hundred a yeare forbearance". This and a like reference further on in
the text would seem to show that it was ten per cent interest which
was to be charged on rates not paid when due and that the usual rate
of interest was five per cent.
Footnote 65:
The only case before the time of Andros was the farthing in the pound
tax levied at the time of the passage of the law. Very little seems to
have been received from this tax. The following provision of the law
may afford some explanation. "All rates to be paid in country pay,
accordinge to price of wooll twelve pence a pound; and to vallue their
estates according as it would be worth to pay a debt in old England."
It was added by way of explanation at the next session, "every penny
of English money to be the value of four pence here." From other laws
&c., it appears that the English pound sterling was only a little more
than twice as valuable as the pound of "country pay" so that a
valuation at the rate of four to one would be an undervaluation. And
again, wool was usually received in payment at six or seven pence a
pound so that payment at the rate of wool twelve pence a pound would
be payment in a depreciated currency.
Footnote 66:
It should be noted however that the magistrates were also members of
the councils of the towns in which they lived.
Footnote 67:
It was a common thing to make the rate makers, whether appointed by
the town or the assembly, responsible for the rate in case it was not
made. The same is true for the constables and sergeants in case it was
not collected. The reasons for the non-payment of taxes seem to have
been political rather than economic. All through this period,
particularly in the early part, the central government, as we have
said, was weak and the colony was torn by dissensions. There does not
seem to have been entire harmony between the main land and the island,
and it was in the main land towns and outlying districts that the
greatest difficulty was found in collecting taxes. Warwick protested
strongly against paying her portion of the £600 tax to pay Clarke in
1664, (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 78) claiming that most of the time Clarke
had been merely the agent of the island. If the tax must be levied,
the town prayed that it might be levied on the Indians who had
intruded on their lands and stolen their goods, or by "just fines and
amersements, layd upon such in the Collony as have not only gone
about, but allso have betrayed the Collony." This tax was not
collected in Warwick for six or seven years. There were also internal
dissensions in the towns themselves, particularly in Providence where
the opposing parties seem to have been of nearly equal strength. In
1641, the inhabitants of Pawtuxet, an outlying district of Providence,
submitted to Massachusetts jurisdiction and was not permanently
reunited to Rhode Island until 1658, (Arnold I, 111). Until 1703 the
conflicting claims in Narragansett country continued to interfere
seriously with the exercise of jurisdiction in that country, sometime
rendering it altogether impossible. Another cause which rendered
collection difficult was the custom of offsetting debts due from the
colony against rates. One of the provisions enacted at the same time
with the sedition act was "neither shall any persons plea that the
Collony is in his debt, be of any force or offset to his or their said
rate on that pretence, untill the end be answered for which the rate
is or shall be made." Similar acts were passed on many other
occasions. Nevertheless offsetting rates against debts was customary
and the practice is authorized by a general law of 1684. (R.I. Col.
Recs. III, 165)
Footnote 68:
R.I. Col. Recs. II, 438: The act speaks of "a covetous or ffactious
and mallicious sperritt appeeringe in sundry townes and places of this
Collony; who oppose all or any rates, and thereby prevailinge, by
their deluded adherents in overpowering the more prudent and loyall
partys in such towne and place, to the frustration of the most
necessary and needfull ends for which such rates are levied."
Footnote 69:
Arnold I, 356.
Footnote 70:
It does not seem quite clear whether this provision means merely that
each town should be represented, or that each town should have its
full representation. Arnold (I, 365) thinks the latter. When the tax
of 1673 was levied no deputies are recorded as being present from New
Shoreham (Block Island) or Westerly. The great distance in the one
case and the interference of Connecticut in the other, rendered
attendance from those towns very uncertain and may have caused their
absence to be necessarily disregarded. Only five deputies from Newport
and one from Warwick however are reported as "engaged." This would
make it seem doubtful if a complete representation was actually
required. An act of April, 1678, (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 6.) repealed
this act of 1672, and provided that the general assembly should
consist (as provided in the charter) of the governor or deputy
governor with six assistants, "and soe many of the freemen as shall be
elected in each respective towne, x x x or the major part of them then
present," who should have to make laws and levy taxes, provided
however that no tax should be levied without notice given to each
town, that the "townes may accordingly by their representatives give
their due attendance." A year later the restriction was removed and
the assembly resumed its old powers. (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 53).
Footnote 71:
Arnold II, 502: Under the Andros government (in the case of the per
centage taxes and the £120 tax ordered in December, 1688) a return
seems to have been made to the system of assessment by town councils.
A copy of a warrant, dated July 20, 1687, from John Usher, treasurer
and receiver general of his majesty's revenue in New England, to the
constable and selectmen of Providence is preserved among the papers of
the historical society. The constable is ordered to call a town
meeting for the choice of a "commissioner" who, with the selectmen, is
to make a list of all males over sixteen and "a true Estimation of all
reall & personall Estates," as provided in the act of Andros and
council, and then to assess a poll tax of 1s. 8d. (members of his
majesty's council exempt) and a property tax of a penny in the pound.
The commissioner was then to meet with the commissioners of the other
towns of the county (Rhode Island), when as a body they were to
"examine x x & correct & perfect" the rate lists according to the true
meaning of the act and transmit the result to Usher, together with the
names of the constables in each town to whom warrants for collection
were to be issued. I have not been able to find the act of Andros and
his council here referred to, but it seems to have included the
provisions contained in the warrant and also a table of values at
which the different kinds of property were to be estimated. It is in
these taxes levied by Andros that we first meet with the poll tax
which was soon to become a part of the regular system of taxation
adopted by the colony.
Footnote 72:
These proceedings are to be found in the town records Vol. III, p p.
12-15. A table of values such as that given in the text was not always
adopted when a rate was to be levied, but the rate of assessment seems
often to have been left to the discretion of the assessors. In the
case of the £160 rate of 1684 a committee was appointed to "Consider
what lands may be deemed Rateable." The committee report "That all
Meadowes & Orchards & all other improved lands what so Ever it is yt
is inclosed, is Rateable, and as for Cattell, That all Sorts of
Cattell upward of a yeare old are Rateable," but no table of values is
reported. The number of assessors varied from three to five. They were
prominent men of the community and there was a tendency to reelect the
same individuals for the service. In a list of twenty-two assessors
appointed between 1678 and 1687 there are only eleven different
individuals.
Footnote 73: