settlement commenced in 1630, was for a long time in an unhappy
condition, from the number and hostility of the Indians within its
borders. The early settlers, after the death of their proprietary, Sir
Fernando Gorges, formed some kind of voluntary compacts, and chose
their own rulers; but the difficulties under which they labored
induced them, in 1650, to unite with the government of Massachusetts,
and to become an integral part of that colony. Their civil and
religious institutions generally resembled those of the other colonies
of New England. In the first settlements, churches were early
established, which enjoyed the labors of some of the worthiest
ministers of their time.[14]
A project of great importance was consummated, in 1643, in the _union_
formed by the New England colonists. It had been proposed, by the
colonies of Connecticut and New Haven, as early as 1638, but was not
brought to a conclusion until five years after. The confederacy
consisted of Massachusetts, New Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven.
The plan of it evidently reminds one of the great confederacy,
afterwards formed between the thirteen United States, with similar
provisions and principles. It was a powerful means of defence, and of
the subsequent strength and prosperity of the colonies. It maintained
their internal peace, awed the savage tribes, and caused their
neighbors, the Dutch, and the French in Canada, to respect them. By
the articles of confederation, they entered into a firm and perpetual
league of friendship and amity, for offence and defence, mutual advice
and assistance upon all just occasions, both for preserving and
propagating the truth and liberties of the Gospel, and for their own
mutual safety and welfare. Each colony was to continue its separate
organization, as to courts and laws, but to be considered as one, in
regard to their public transactions. This union subsisted, with some
alterations, more than forty years, and was dissolved when the
charters of all the colonies were rescinded by James II. It was known
under the style of _The United Colonies of New England_.
The state of VERMONT was not settled until long after the other New
England states. It was as late as the year 1724, before any settlement
was made in that territory. This was on a spot, within the present
town of Brattleborough, where, at the same time, during a severe
Indian war, the government of Massachusetts had erected a fort. It was
then supposed that the settlement was within the limits of that state,
but it afterwards appeared not to be the case. Subsequently it was
believed that the territory belonged to New Hampshire. Grants were
accordingly made from time to time, by the latter colony, of tracts
within the territory of Vermont. As it was the scene of warfare,
during the middle part of the century, the country became well known
to many individuals, and not a few openings were made in the
wilderness, towards the cessation of hostilities, on the northern
borders. During the revolutionary war, the Green-mountain Boys, as
they were familiarly called, distinguished themselves by their
bravery, and rendered important service to the cause. In 1777, the
inhabitants constituted themselves an independent state. As Vermont
was settled mostly by emigrants from Connecticut, the character of the
people was similar to that of the inhabitants of the latter state, and
of New England in general. They were careful to establish their civil
and religious institutions in accordance with those of the
sister-states, and have been highly distinguished by their stability
in the principles and usages of the fathers.
The _character_ of the early settlers of New England deserves a
distinct notice, beyond that which has incidentally appeared in
narrating the history of their achievements. A brief sketch can only
be presented, and scarcely commensurate with the importance of the
topic; but it is all that the limits of this work will admit. The
greatness of the results, though affected extensively by the direct
providence of God, manifests the peculiarity of the dispositions and
motives of the agents who were concerned in producing them.
The planters of New England were men of whom their descendants need
not be ashamed. So far as the pride of ancestry may be lawfully
indulged, New Englanders, of the present race, may indulge it to the
full, in view of the character and deeds of their forefathers. They
were _inferior_ men in _no sense of the word_, however apt we may be
to connect the idea of adventurers with that of a roving, restless,
dissipated, loose-living class of men, loving savage nature, or
freedom from the restraints of civilized life. They became
adventurers, not from love of adventure, but from high and noble
impulses--the impulses of religion. To advance that precious interest
was, indeed, their commanding object. This was indicated by their
circumstances and manner of life in Holland before they removed
thence, and by the desire they felt to leave that country. Could their
favorite views, in respect to religion, have been carried out there,
they would, probably, never have come to this western wilderness.
Their declarations and professions, through their leading men, also
show that the establishment and enjoyment of a free Gospel was their
great object. Their laws and institutions, moreover, evince that this
was their principal concern, in connection with the diffusion of
education and knowledge. These all had reference, more or less
directly, to the moral and religious welfare of the community. The
cause of God and righteousness was guarded by the wisest and most
decided legal provisions. The concurrent declarations of all the early
writers among them, likewise indicate the spirit and purposes which
distinguished the fathers of New England above, perhaps, all other
settlers of new countries, in proposing and carrying forward the
interests of religion. Indeed, no object but religion and its
enjoyment, could have borne them through their almost unprecedented
trials and privations. To these they voluntarily submitted, on account
of their religion. They were not otherwise compelled to leave their
native land and the homes of their childhood--the seats of ease and
plenty. To hardships, of any kind, many of them had never been exposed
before; but the love of God's word, and freedom of worship, according
to the light of their own minds, were motives, with them, sufficient
to brave every peril and earthly woe.
They were not inferior men, in respect to their _civil standing in the
community_. They did not proceed, generally, from the lower orders of
society--the poorer artisans and the laborers. They belonged, mostly,
to the middle and respectable ranks of English society. A few were
classed with the higher orders, but not to the same extent as was the
fact with the settlers of Virginia, if we may judge from the list of
names and titles of several emigrants of the different colonies. In
respect to a worldly, chivalrous bearing and spirit of adventure, New
England and Virginia differed--the latter were eminent in this
respect, but never were men more truly brave than the fathers of New
England; in moral courage, they were unrivalled. Like other
adventurers, they manifested their undaunted spirit in relinquishing
their comfortable homes, in braving the dangers of the deep, in
encountering the horrors of a wilderness, in incurring the risk of
famine and pestilence, and in frequently combatting a fierce savage
foe. There were as extraordinary traits of martial heroism displayed
among the pilgrims of New England, when called forth by the necessity
of circumstances, as can be found in the history of any of the
American colonists, though this was not a characteristic in which they
gloried. The exploits of Miles Standish, of Plymouth, and John Mason,
of Connecticut, might be ranked among the most striking exhibitions
of courage on record. Of Standish, it is remarked, by an old
historian, that "he was allied to the noble house of Standish, in
Lancashire, and inherited some of the virtues of that honorable
family, as well as the name." But the high bearing and courage of the
planters was eminently of a moral kind. Unlike their Virginian
neighbors, they suffered no misrule in their settlements. If any
threatened for a time, they promptly put it down. Their courage was
seen in resisting evil among themselves. They feared not to put their
laws into execution. They were characterized by a healthful, vigorous
public spirit, consenting to sacrifice their own individual interest
for the general good. They thus manifested a noble nature, the product
of principle, if not of birth.
The fathers of New England were not _ignorant_ men, and unversed in the
concerns of the world. Their clergymen and leading men in civil life,
were among the ripe scholars of the age. They had been educated at the
English universities, and numbers of them had occupied important
stations in church and state. As authors and men of influence, in their
native land, they could not have sunk their high character by
emigration; and though in a wilderness, and under the pressure of mighty
cares, they could not so advantageously pursue their studies as in the
shades of academic retirement, they still did not neglect to add to
their intellectual stores. In several instances, they brought large and
valuable libraries with them. The writings of Colton, Hooker, Davenport,
Winthrop, Bradford, Prince, and others, show that they were eminently
men of mind and masters of language--that they were well versed in the
science and literature which adorned the age; and their universal
learning, sanctified by grace, we know, was devoted to the most noble
and beneficent purposes. There were among the merchants and men of
business, who had figured in the world's affairs before they came to
these solitudes--men of large experience and cultivated taste, not
wanting in any accomplishment deemed essential in refined and honorable
society. The mass of the people, who came over to this country as its
settlers, must evidently, from the nature of the case, have been of that
thinking, intellectual, practical class, who understood their rights and
duties as human beings, as also the principles of government; and could
not, therefore, with their good sense and honesty, submit to the
exactions and wrongs of tyranny. This, of all others, is the most
valuable body of the community.
The estimate which the fathers placed upon education, is seen in the
immediate establishment of literary institutions, both of the higher
and lower grades. Scarcely had the venerable men felled the trees of
the forest, than they erected the common school-house, the academy,
and the college. In the midst of their untold personal pressing cares
and troubles, they exercised a far-reaching sagacity and benevolent
regard towards the common good, and towards posterity, in laying
broadly the foundations of order, intelligence, and virtue. They
conceived the highest idea of the importance of sound education to
their rising republic. They wisely judged that solid learning and true
religion were the firmest pillars of the commonwealth and of the
church. Within ten years from the settlement of Massachusetts, a
college, with good endowments, was founded for the use of the colony.
The planters of New England were not _poor_ men--needy adventurers.
Had they been such, whence could the funds have been derived that were
necessary to sustain the enterprise? It is evident that large sums of
money were expended in the transportation of themselves, their cattle,
and their effects to this country, and in their various removals when
here, as well as in the continued sustentation of their families in
times of scarcity and famine. These we know, from their history, were
of frequent occurrence. Governors Winthrop, Haynes, Eaton, and
Hopkins, were men of wealth; so also were Mr. Johnson, Mr. Colton, and
Mr. Hooker--the last two uncommonly rich for ministers. Mr. Johnson
was reputed to be the wealthiest of all the original emigrants. The
mass of the early comers must also have possessed no inconsiderable
means, to enable them to bear the heavy expenses of their voyage and
settlement. With such a basis of property, it is not a matter of
surprise that, notwithstanding the drain and exhaustion of the few
first years, they should have increased greatly in their worldly
substance in the end, inasmuch as they settled on a virgin soil,
possessed abundance of land, and carried on a lucrative trade in the
products of the country. Their habits of sobriety and industry were
essentially favorable to their advancement in wealth.
The New England planters were not _wanting in any moral virtues_,
_piety_, _wisdom_, _or magnanimity_. There never lived on earth, if we
may credit history, a more disinterested, upright, conscientious,
prudent, and holy body of men. Their souls were imbued with the
loftiest principles of patriotism and piety. They gave undoubted
proofs of the possession of this spirit in their exertions, toils, and
sacrifices for the best welfare of their descendants and the cause of
Christianity--in their spirituality, prayerfulness, purity, and
well-ordered lives. They wished, above all things, to serve God and to
do good--to transmit to posterity a pure church and free form of
government. They received the Word of God as their sole guide in
religious concerns and moral conduct--they regulated their individual
life, their families, their local societies, their churches, and their
state, by its rules, so far as the latter could be consistently
applied. They were sound in the faith, receiving the doctrines of
grace as the real system of divine truth--were strict in preserving
the order and carrying out the discipline of the churches--and were
rigid in the administration of law and justice. Their zeal and
liberality in supporting the institutions of the Gospel among
themselves, and in efforts to Christianize the Indians, were marked
traits in their character. They considered it one of the great objects
of their mission to this continent, to become the means of the
salvation of its aboriginal inhabitants, and thus to extend Christ's
kingdom in the world. In a most commendable degree, they carried their
religion into the various every-day concerns of life, and consulted,
especially on every occasion of interest and importance, the
particular guidance and blessing of God.
Such was the character of New England's fathers: they were not perfect
men; they did not claim for themselves the attributes of perfection;
neither can others, their warmest panegyrists, claim it for them with
any consistency. They had their errors--the errors of the age. All
darkness had not passed away from their understandings, nor all
obliquity from their hearts. There was an austerity, a preciseness in
some points, an unaccommodating temper, which perhaps is not well suited
to all times, or every state of society, but which better agreed with
their circumstances as the founders of a nation, and as an example for
others to follow. In the natural course of imitation from age to age,
there will be apt to be a feebler resemblance of the original; so that
where the conduct in the beginning was over-strict, in the lapse of
years it will be apt to fall quite too far below the true standard of
virtue. The founders of a nation, if they fail at all in firmness of
temper or rigidness of discipline, will be very apt to bring on the
sooner a dissolute state of the body politic. Our fathers, on this
account, were not so much at fault as many suppose. They were fitted, by
the guidance and grace of God, for the times in which they lived--for
the work which they were called to perform. If some few spots or shades
could have been effaced from their characters, they would have been
still more fitting instruments of good to the Church and to posterity;
but as the case is, no other founders of an empire probably ever
possessed so large a portion of wisdom and goodness.
In respect to charges made against the fathers of New England,
pertaining to superstition, enthusiasm, injustice towards the Indians,
treatment of supposed witches, bigotry, persecution, and the
incorporation of church and state, they are capable of a satisfactory
refutation in all the material points, and have often received that
refutation. While something, however, is to be laid to human
imperfection in their case, yet, even in these matters, more is due to
the grace of God, which preserved them so comparatively free from
evils to which their natural dispositions, or their circumstances,
might be supposed to lead them.
It was indeed a new order of things which was introduced by the
pilgrim fathers, in their removal to America. The Mayflower came to
these shores freighted with great moral principles, as well as with a
precious cargo of godly men and women. Of those principles, some were
the following, viz: The right of private judgment in the examination
of divine truth, is to be held sacred--Conscience, enlightened by the
Word of God, is a sufficient guide as to truth and duty--a majority
governs in church and state--universal education is the basis of free
government--the observation of the Sabbath is a moral virtue, and
essential to the safety of a people. From these principles, others
have been deduced; or to them others, of scarcely less importance,
have been added in more recent times.
[Illustration]
FOOTNOTES:
[6] Holmes' Annals.
[7] New England Memorial, by Nathaniel Morton.
[8] New England Memorial.
[9] New England's Memorial--Appendix.
[10] Young's Chronicles of the Pilgrims.
[11] Trumbull's History of Connecticut.
[12] Bacon's Historical Discourses.
[13] T. Robbins.
[14] T. Robbins.
III. MIDDLE AND SOUTHERN SETTLEMENTS.[15]
NEW YORK--New Jersey--Delaware--Maryland--North Carolina--South
Carolina--Georgia--Pennsylvania.
The settlement of the state of NEW YORK commenced in 1613, so far as
the erection of a fort, near the present city of Albany, and a few
trading-houses on the island of Manhattan (New York), may be said to
constitute a settlement. The Dutch founded their claim to the soil
from the discovery of the Hudson by an Englishman of that name, who
was then in the employ of the Dutch; but the British king disputed the
claim, from the fact of the previous discovery of the country by the
Cabots. The Dutch were forced, for a short time, to yield to the
demands of the English; but, the colony having increased in the course
of a year, the English were required, in their turn, to yield their
authority to the original occupants. For a series of years, the latter
continued in peaceful possession, and, by characteristic toil and
perseverance, secured the blessings of a growing settlement.
The territory on both sides of the Hudson, occupied by the settlers,
was called New Netherlands. In defence of their colony, in 1623, they
built several forts, one on the east side of Delaware bay, which they
named Nassau, and another, one hundred and fifty miles up the river,
which they called Aurania. At the mouth of the river they built a
town, to which they gave the name of New Amsterdam, afterwards New
York. Near fort Nassau, the Swedes had a settlement, and, from the
interfering claims of the two people, quarrels arose, which in a few
years ended in the subjugation of the Swedes. In consequence of the
Dutch claims so far to the eastward, difficulties frequently arose
between them and the Connecticut and New Haven colonies; but these
never amounted to another rupture, and the Dutch were occasionally
assisted in the Indian warfare by their more courageous neighbors.
At the ascension of Charles II. to the British throne, the province of
New Netherlands passed into the hands of the English. As the king, by a
charter, had conveyed the whole territory to his brother, the Duke of
York and Albany, he undertook to effect his object by force, and
accordingly despatched an armament, under the command of Colonel
Nichols, who was also appointed governor of the province. The exhibition
of force was the means of effecting a treaty of capitulation on the part
of Stuyvesant the Dutch governor. From this time, New Amsterdam and the
whole conquered province received the name of New York, the original
settlers choosing, for the most part, to remain, and being permitted to
adopt many of their own forms of government.
[Illustration: The Dutch Governor surrendering New Amsterdam.]
NEW JERSEY was settled by the Dutch, not long after they had fixed
themselves on the Hudson river. The Danes, also, commenced a
settlement at a place to which they gave the name Bergen. This was
about the year 1624. In 1626, a company of Swedes and Finns purchased
land on both sides of Delaware river, and commenced a settlement on
the western bank. The Dutch, however, considering themselves as the
original settlers, laid claim to the country. They had built a fort,
as early as 1623, on the east bank of the South river, as the Delaware
was then called. It was not until the year 1640, that the English made
any attempt to colonize the territory in question, and then they were
resisted and expelled by the Swedes and Dutch. A few years afterwards,
however, the Duke of York granted New Jersey to John, Lord Berkley,
and Sir George Carteret, the territory receiving that name in
compliment to Sir George, who had been governor of the island of
Jersey in the English channel. Carteret soon after arrived at
Elizabethtown, which he made the seat of government.
The state of DELAWARE was originally settled by the Dutch and Swedes,
the former as early as 1629, having purchased a tract of land near
Cape Henlopen. The enterprise of planting a colony, on the Delaware,
was entrusted to an experienced navigator, De Vriez; and, in 1630, an
association was formed for this purpose, in pursuance of which, a
settlement was made, the next spring, on the west side of the river,
at a place since called Lewiston. The Swedes, also, made considerable
settlements on the same side of the river; but, whether these preceded
that of the Dutch, is considered doubtful, the more recent authorities
leaning rather to the Dutch claim. The Swedes, however, whatever their
pretensions may have been, were conquered by the Dutch, in whose
possession the country remained until the surrender of New York, in
1664. It was immediately after taken possession of, for the Duke of
York, by Sir Robert Carr. A portion of its subsequent history is
included in that of Pennsylvania, as Delaware had not even an
assembly, separate from that of Pennsylvania, for several years.