Volume I Part 10 (1/2)
[Footnote 79: In 1646 the Parliament pa.s.sed another ordinance, exempting the colonies for three years from all tollages, ”except the excise,”
provided their productions should not be ”exported but only in English vessels.” While this Act also a.s.serted the parliamentary right of taxation over the Colonial plantations, it formed a part of what was extended and executed by the famous Act of Navigation, first pa.s.sed by the Puritan Parliament five years afterwards, in 1651, as will be seen hereafter.]
[Footnote 80: Mr. Bancroft must have been aware of the existence of this ordinance, for he makes two allusions to the Commission appointed by it.
In connection with one allusion to it, he states the following interesting facts, ill.u.s.trative of Ma.s.sachusetts exclusiveness on the one record, and on the other the instruments and progress of religious liberty in New England. ”The people of Rhode Island,” says Mr. Bancroft, ”_excluded from the colonial union_, would never have maintained their existence as a separate state, had they not sought the interference and protection of the Mother Country; and the founder of the colony (Roger Williams) was chosen to conduct the important mission. Embarking at Manhattan [for he was not allowed to go to Boston], he arrived in England not long after the death of Hampden. _The Parliament had placed the affairs of the American Colonies under the Earl of Warwick, as Governor-in-Chief, a.s.sisted by a Council of five peers and twelve commoners_. Among these commoners was Henry Vane, a man who was ever true in his affections as he was undeviating in his principles, and who now welcomed the American envoy as an ancient friend. The favour of Parliament was won by his [Roger Williams'] incomparable 'printed Indian labours, the like whereof was not extant from any part of America;' and his merits as a missionary induced both houses of Parliament to grant unto him and friends with him a free and absolute charter[84] of civil government for those parts of his abode.' Thus were the places of refuge for 'soul-liberty' on the Narragansett Bay incorporated 'with full power and authority to rule themselves.' To the Long Parliament, and especially to Sir Harry Vane, Rhode Island owes its existence as a political State.”--History of the United States, Vol. I., pp. 460, 461.
The other allusion of Mr. Bancroft to the Parliamentary Act and Commission of 1643 is in the following words: ”_The Commissioners appointed by Parliament, with unlimited authority over the Plantations_, found no favour in Virginia. They promised indeed freedom from English taxation, but this immunity was already enjoyed. They gave the colony liberty to choose its own Governor, but it had no dislike to Berkeley; and though there was a party for the Parliament, yet the King's authority was maintained. The sovereignty of Charles had ever been mildly exercised.”--_Ib._, p. 222.]
[Footnote 84: Hazard, Vol. 1., p. 538; Ma.s.sachusetts Records. The working of this Act, and the punishments inflicted under it for more than twenty years, will be seen hereafter.]
[Footnote 81: This is not quite accurate. The word 'absolute' does not occur in the patent. The words of the Charter are: ”A _free_ Charter of civil incorporation and government; that they may order and govern their Plantations in such a manner as to maintain justice and peace, both among themselves, and towards all men with whom they shall have to do”--”Provided nevertheless that the said laws, const.i.tutions, and punishments, for the civil government of said plantations, be conformable to the laws of England, so far as the nature and const.i.tution of the place will admit. And always reserving to the said Earl and Commissioners, and their successors, power and authority for to dispose the general government of that, as it stands in relation to the rest of the Plantations in America, as they shall conceive from time to time most conducing to the general good of the said Plantations, the honour of his Majesty, and the service of the State.”--(Hazard, Vol. I., pp. 529-531, where the Charter is printed at length.)]
[Footnote 82: But Mr. Holmes makes explicit mention of the parliamentary ordinance of 1643 in the following terms:--”The English Parliament pa.s.sed an ordinance appointing the Earl of Warwick Governor-in-Chief and Lord High Admiral of the American Colonies, with a Council of five Peers and twelve Commoners. It empowered him, in conjunction with his a.s.sociates, to examine the state of affairs; to send for papers and persons, to remove Governors and officers, and appoints other in their places; and to a.s.sign over to these such part of the powers that were now granted, as he should think proper.” (Annals of America, Vol. I., p.
273.)]
[Footnote 83: History of Ma.s.sachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 117; Ma.s.sachusetts Laws, pp. 140-145.]
[Footnote 85: ”Mr. Winthrop, who was then Deputy-Governor, was active in the prosecution of the pet.i.tioners, but the party in favour of them had so much interest as to obtain a vote to require him to answer in public to the complaint against him. Dr. Mather says: 'He was most irregularly called forth to an ignominious hearing before a vast a.s.sembly, to which, ”with a sagacious humility,” he consented, although he showed he might have refused it. The result of the hearing was that he was honourably acquitted,' etc.”]
[Footnote 86: This refers to a sermon preached by Mr. Cotton on a fast day, an extract of which is published in the Magnalia, B. III., p. 29, wherein he denounces the judgments of G.o.d upon such of his hearers as were then going to England with evil intentions against the country.]
[Footnote 87: Hutchinson's History of Ma.s.sachusetts Bay, Vol. I., pp.
145-149.
Mr. Palfrey, under the head of ”Presbyterian Cabal,” states the following facts as to the treatment of Dr. Child, Mr. Dand, and others who proposed to make their appeal to the English Parliament:
”Child and Dand, two of the remonstrants, were preparing to go to England with a pet.i.tion to the Parliament from a number of the non-freemen. Informed of their intention, the magistrates ordered a seizure of their papers. The searching officers found in their possession certain memorials to the Commissioners for Plantations, asking for 'settled Churches according to the (Presbyterian) Reformation in England;' for the establishment in the colony of the laws of the realm; for the appointment of 'a General Governor, or some honourable Commissioner,' to reform the existing state of things. For this further offence, such of the prominent conspirators as remained in the country were punished by additional fines. Child and Dand were mulcted in the sum of two hundred pounds; Mauerick, in that of a hundred and fifty pounds; and two others of a hundred pounds each.”--Palfrey's History of New England [Abridged edition], Vol. I., pp. 327, 328.]
[Footnote 88: Mr. Bancroft, referring to the pet.i.tion of Dr. Child and others, quoted on page 94, says: ”The doc.u.ment was written in the spirit of wanton insult;” then refers to the case of Gorton, who had appealed to the Earl of Warwick and the other Parliamentary Commissioners against a judicial decision of the Ma.s.sachusetts Bay Court in regard to land claimed by him. From Mr. Bancroft's statement, it appears that the claim of Gorton, friendless as he was, was so just as to commend itself to the favourable judgment of an impartial and competent tribunal of the Parliamentary Commissioners, whose authority his oppressors expressly denied, and then, in their address to Parliament in reference to its order, denied any authority of Parliament over their proceedings. Mr.
Bancroft's words are as follows:
”Gorton had carried his complaints to the Mother Country; and, though unaided by personal influence or by powerful friends, had succeeded in all his wishes. At this very juncture an order respecting his claims arrived in Boston; and was couched in terms _which involved an a.s.sertion of the right of Parliament to reverse the decisions and control the Government of Ma.s.sachusetts_. The danger was imminent; it struck at the very life and foundation of the rising Commonwealth. _Had the Long Parliament succeeded in revoking the patent of Ma.s.sachusetts_, the Stuarts, on their restoration, would have found not one chartered government in the colonies; and the tenor of American history would have been changed. The people[89] rallied with great unanimity in support of their magistrates.
”At length the General Court a.s.sembled for the discussion of _the usurpations of Parliament_ and the _dangers from domestic treachery_.
The elders [ministers] did not fail to attend in the gloomy season. One faithless deputy was desired to withdraw; and then, _with closed doors_, that the consultation might remain in the breast of the Court, the _nature of the relation with England_ was made the subject of debate.
After much deliberation it was agreed that Ma.s.sachusetts owed the same allegiance to England as the free Hanse Towns had rendered to the Empire; as Normandy, when its dukes were kings in England, had paid to the monarchs of France. It was also resolved not to accept a new Charter from Parliament, for that would imply a surrender of the old. Besides, Parliament granted none but by way of ordinance, and always made for itself an express preservation of a supreme power in all things. The _elders_ (ministers), after a day's consultation, _confirmed the decisions_.
”The colony proceeded to exercise the _independence_ which it claimed.
The General Court replied to the pet.i.tion in a State paper, written with great moderation; and the disturbers of the public security were summoned into its presence. Robert Child and his companions appealed to the Commissioners in England. _The appeal was not admitted._” ”To the Parliament of England the Legislature remonstrated with the n.o.blest frankness _against any a.s.sertion of permanent authority of that body_.”--Hist. U.S., Vol. I., pp. 475-477.]
[Footnote 89: By the ”people” here Mr. Bancroft must mean the members of the Congregational Churches (one-sixth of the whole population), for they alone were _freemen_, and had all the united powers of the franchise--the _sword_, the _legislation_--in a word, the whole civil, judicial, ecclesiastical, and military government.]
[Footnote 90: But Mr. Bancroft seems to forget that in less than forty years after this the Charter was revoked, and that very system of government was established which the General Court of Ma.s.sachusetts Bay now deprecated, but under which Ma.s.sachusetts itself was most prosperous and peaceful for more than half a century, until the old spirit was revived, which rendered friendly government with England impossible.]
[Footnote 91: Mr. Hutchinson says: ”The Earl of Warwick had a patent for Ma.s.sachusetts Bay about 1623, but the bounds are not known.” (History of Ma.s.sachusetts Bay, Vol. I., p. 7.)]
[Footnote 92: Mr. Palfrey says: ”While in England the literary war against Presbytery was in great part conducted by American combatants, their attention was presently required at home. William Va.s.sal, a man of fortune, was one of the original a.s.sistants named in the Charter of the Ma.s.sachusetts Company. He came to Ma.s.sachusetts with Winthrop's fleet in the great emigration; but for some cause--_possibly from dissatisfaction with the tendencies to Separatism which he witnessed_--he almost immediately returned. He crossed the sea again five years after, but then it was to the colony of Plymouth. Establis.h.i.+ng his home at Seituate, he there conducted himself so as to come under the reproach of being 'a man of a busy, factious spirit, and always opposite to the civil government of the country and the way of the Churches.'”
(Winthrop, II., p. 261.) His disaffection occasioned the more uneasiness, because his brother Samuel, also formerly an a.s.sistant of the Ma.s.sachusetts Company, was now one of the Parliament's Commissioners for the government of Foreign Plantations.
In the year when the early struggle between the Presbyterians and Independents in England had disclosed the importance of the issues depending upon it, and the obstinate determination with which it was to be carried on, Va.s.sal ”practised with” a few persons in Ma.s.sachusetts ”to take some course, first by pet.i.tioning the Courts of Ma.s.sachusetts and of Plymouth, _and if that succeeded not_, then to the Parliament of England, that the distinctions which were maintained here, both in civil and church state, might be done away, and that we might be wholly governed by the laws of England.” In [93] a ”Remonstrance and Humble Pet.i.tion,” addressed by them to the General Court [of Ma.s.sachusetts], they represented--1. That they could not discern in that colony ”a settled form of government according to the laws of England;” 2. That ”many thousands in the plantation of the English nation were debarred from civil employments,” and not permitted ”so much as to have any vote in choosing magistrates, captains, or other civil and military officers;” and, 3. ”That numerous members of the Church of England,...