Chapter VI: Letter I: Roxbury, December 28, 1771 (2)

[1685.] In July various articles of high misdemeanor were exhibited against the governor and company of Connecticut, and orders were given to issue a writ of _quo warranto_ forthwith against the colony. The next year two writs were served by Mr. _Randolph_; and after them a third in December. This is taken notice of by the governor and company in their letter of Jan. 26, 1686–7, wherein they mention their readiness to submit to his majesty’s royal commands; and that, “if it be to conjoin them with the other colonies and provinces under Sir _Edmund Andros_, it would be more pleasing than to be joined with any other province.” Such professed submission probably prevented the _quo warranto’s_ being prosecuted with effect; and produced an order to Andros to accept the surrender of the charter and the submission of the colony. Sir Edmond went to _Hartford_ in October; but when at night he expected the charter would have been surrendered into his hands, the candle was blown out, and the charter withdrawn from the table, carried off and secreted by one of the company: whose extraordinary service was afterwards rewarded by the general assembly with five shillings, agreeable to the plain simple manners of the people. He however published in the general court his orders and commission which every one tacitly obeyed. He dissolved the former government, and assumed the administration, receiving into his legislative council the late governor and secretary, for the better carrying on the business of the colony. The subsequent revolution in England brought matters back, after a while to the former course; as the legal validity of the charter was admitted.

The peopling of these three last colonies was owing chiefly to the _Puritan Ministers_, who, being silenced at home, repaired to _New-England_, that they might enjoy liberty of conscience; and drew after them vast numbers of their friends and favorers. They amounted to seventy-seven before 1641; and though all were not person of the greatets learning and abilities, they had a better share of each than most of sheir neighbouring clergy at that period; and were men of eminent soberiety and virtue, plain, serious, affectionate preachers, exactly conformable to the doctrines of the church of _England_, and laboured much to promate a reformation of manners in their several parishes.—Many planters who accompained or followed them, were gentlemen of considerable fortunes and of no mean education, who spent their estates in New-England, and were at the charge of bringing over many poor families, that were not able of themselves to bear the expence.[24] The body of laity and clergy, collectively considered, furnishes such a glorious constellation of characters, as would employ the pen of a first-rate writer to do them justice; notwithstanding what has been above remarked of their governmental mistake.

The dangers to which the _New-England_ colonies were early exposed, induced them to think of confederating for their mutual safety. Articles were drawn up in 1638; but they were not finished and ratified till the seventh of September 1643; from which time we are to look upon _Plymouth_, _Massachusetts_, _Connecticut_ and _New-Haven_ as one body, in regard to all public transactions with their neighbours, though the private affairs of each colony were still managed by their own courts and magistrates.

Pass we on to the settlement of the other _New-England_ colonies.

Mr. _Roger Williams_, who succeeded Mr. _Skelton_, upon his decease, as pastor of the church at Salem, being banished from the Massachusetts, repaired with twelve companions to the _Narraganset_ country, [1635] and had land given him by the _Indian Sachem Canonicus_; of whom he afterwards purchased the large tract, lying between _Pawtucket_ and _Pawtuxet_ rivers (the great falls and the little falls, as the Indian names signify,) and stiled it _Providence_ “from a sense of God’s merciful providence to him in his distress.” The authority and power of _Miantonomy_, another Sachem, and his uncle _Canonicus_, awed all the Indians round to assist him and his few associates. When the determinations of the Massachusetts general court (occasioned, by what they called antinomian disputes) banished many, and induced others to leave the colony, the heads of the party were entertained in a friendly manner by Mr. _Williams_; [1638.] who advised them to seek a settlement on _Rhode-Island_, and was very instrumental in procuring it of the Indian Sachems.

They, to the number of eighteen, incorporated themselves, and began settling the island. The plantations there and at Providence increased apace, owing to the liberel sentiments of the first settlers; and in 1643 Mr. _Williams_ went to England as agent, and obtained [March 16, 1644.] “a free and absolute charter of incorporation of _Providence_ and _Rhode-Island_ Plantations, empowering them to rule themselves, by that form they might voluntarily agree upon.” They agreed upon a democratic. Mr. _Williams_ justly claims the honor of having been the first legislator in the world, in its latter ages, who effectually provided for, and established a free, full, and absolute liberty of conscience. This was the chief cause that united the inhabitants of _Rhode-Island_ and those of _Providence_, and made them one people, and one colony. The foundation principle on which this colony was first settled, was, that “_every man who submits peaceably to the civil authority, may peaceably worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience without molestation_.” When the colony was applied to in 1656 by the four _United Colonies_ “to join them in taking effectual methods to suppress the quakers, and prevent their pernicious doctrines being propagated in the country; the assembly returned for answer “We shall strictly adhere to the foundation principle on which this colony was first settled.”

[July 8, 1663.] King _Charles_ II. granted an ample charter, whereby the colony was made a body corporate and politic, by the name of the _Governor and Company of the English colony of Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, in New-England, in America_. The charter reserved only allegiance to the king without the smallest share of the legislative or executive powers.

[1685.] A writ of _quo warranto_ was issued out against the colony, which was brought June 26, 1686. The assembly determined not to stand suit. After the revolution, they were allowed by government to resume their charter, no judgment having been given against it.

_New-Hampshire_ and the _Main_ were settled about the same time with the _Massachusetts_, by different proprietors who had obtained patents, and whose views were to enrich themselves, by the fishing trade at sea, and the beaver trade ashore. Religion had little concern in the settlements; but it had some in the plantation of _Exeter_, on the river _Pascataqua_; which was began by Mr. _Wheelwright_ (a minister banished from the Massachusetts, on account of the antinomian dissensions with which the colony was convulsed) and by a number of his adherents. They formed themselves into a body politic. Three other distinct governments were also established on the branches of the said river. These governments, being altogether voluntary, had no security as to their continuance; and the several settlers were too divided in opinion to form any good general plan of permanent administration. Therefore the more considerate among them treated with the Massachusetts, about taking them under its protection; which fully suited the wishes of that colony, as it afforded the heads of it the opportunity of realizing the construction they had put upon a clause of this charter, by which they extended their line, so as to comprehend both _New-Hampshire_ and the _Main_. The business terminated in the incorporation of the two colonies, on condition that the inhabitants of each should enjoy equal privileges. They continued long united, and were of one heart and mind in civil and religious affairs.[25] When separated by the king’s commission for the government of _New-Hampshire_, the new assembly at their first meeting, in a letter of March 25, 1680, to the governor of the Massachusetts, to be communicated to the general court, expressed their full satisfaction in the past connection; grateful sense of the care that had been exercised over them; and of their having been well governed; and an unfeigned desire, that a mutual correspondence between them might be settled.[26]

The towns in the province of _Main_, after a time, fell into a state of confusion. The Massachusetts took that opportunity, for encouraging the disposition which prevailed in many of the inhabitants to submit to their jurisdiction; and, to forward their compliance, granted the people larger privileges than were enjoyed by their own; for they were all freemen upon taking the oath, whereas every where else no one could be made free, unless he was a church member. The province was made a county, by the name of _Yorkshire_; and the towns sent representatives to the general court at _Boston_. Though the major part of the inhabitants were brought to consent to this regulation, great opposition was made by some principal persons, who severely reproached the Massachusetts, for using force in order to reduce the province: but the people experienced the benefit of it, and were contented. They continued in union with the Massachusetts until 1665, when a short separation commenced.

You have now a sketch of the settlement of all _New-England_. It would have been far more concise, had it not been necessary, to correct the mistakes frequently committed, by those who publish on the subject; and to remove the reproaches cast upon the bulk of the inhabitants, on account of their religious profession. Whether there was any material difference between them and the other colonies, in regard to the opinion they entertained of their civil rights, you will be able to observe in the course of your reading. Their judgment in respect to the exercise of parliamentary powers over them, may be further known by what _Randolph_ wrote concerning the Massachusetts, in his narrative and letters, after the restoration; from whence “_it seems to have been a general opinion that acts of parliament had no other force than what they derived from acts passed by the general court to establish or confirm them_.”

[1676.] _Randolph_ declared, “No law is in force or esteem there, but such as are made by the general court; and therefore it is accounted a breach of their privileges, and a betraying the liberties of the commonwealth to urge the observation of the laws of _England_.”—“No oath shall be urged, or required to be taken by any person, but such oath as the general court hath considered, allowed and required.”—“there is no notice taken of the act of navigation, plantation, or any other laws made in _England_ for the regulation of trade.”—“All nations have free liberty to come into their ports, and vend their commodities without any restraint; in this as well as in other things, that government would make the world believe they are a free state, and do act in all matters accordingly.”—“The magistrates have continually disobeyed his majesty’s command in his royal letters, of 1662, 64, 65, and those of March last; ever reserving to themselves a power to alter, evade and disannul any law or command not agreeing with their humour, or the absolute authority of their government, acknowledging no superior.”—” He (the governor) freely declared to me, that the laws made by your majesty and your parliament obligeth them in nothing, but what consists with the interest of the colony; that the legislative power is and abides in them _solely_.[27]

The _Massachusetts_ general court, in a letter to their agents, mentioned, that not being represented in parliament, they looked not upon themselves to be impeded in their trade by the acts of trade and navigation, and that these could not be observed by his majesty’s subjects in Massachusetts without invading their liberties and properties, until the general court made provision therein by a law, which they did in October. Notwithstanding such law, and a subsequent order, Feb. 15, 1681, “that the act of navigation and the act for the encouragement of trade, be published in Boston by beat of drum, and all clauses in said acts relating to the plantation be strictly observed.” _Randolph_ complained to the commissioners of the customs in England, because of their not being duly observed. When the people found themselves in danger of a _quo warranto_, they agreed upon such emendations of their acts of trade, as to make them accord in all things with the laws of England. But it was too late. A _quo warranto_ was sent them, and brought by _Randolph_, Nov. 3, 1683; and the next year a writ of _scire ficias_ was prosecuted in the court of chancery against the governor and company, and judgment given, that the charter should be annihilated. Considering the temper of _Charles_ II. it is rather matter of astonishment, that the sentiments and conduct of the Massachusetts government did not provoke him to vacate the charter much sooner. However mortifying, yet it would have been more prudent, to have declined contending with the king, when they knew that they must be vanquished, than virtually to bid him defiance. Such submission might not have saved them from the arbitrary government that followed, but could have been of no disservice, had there not been a subsequent revolution: that event taking place, it would have been extremely beneficial. They might have been allowed to resume their charter, nearly, if not wholly.

Before we proceed to the southward, let it be noted, that in 1672, the English parliament enacted by law, “That if any vessel, which by law may trade in the plantations, shall take on board any enumerated commodities, and a bond shall not have been given with sufficient security to unlade them in England, there shall be rendered to his majesty, for sugars, tobacco, ginger, cocoa nut, indigo, logwood, fustic, cotton wool, the several duties mentioned in the law, to be paid in such places in the plantations, and to such officers as shall be appointed to collect the same: and for their better collection, it is enactad, that the whole business shall be managed, and the imposts be levied by officers appointed by the commissioners of the customs in England.” This is the first act that imposed customs on the colonies alone, to be regularly collected by colonial revenue officers. But the best affected colonies, Barbadoes, Virginia and Maryland, considering the laws of trade either as inconsistent with their privileges, or destructive to their infant commerce, hesitated to obey, or elude the provisions of the laws; and trafficked without restraint, wherever hope of gain directed their navigators. Charles II. reprimanded them, and his successors gave standing instructions upon the head, but without effect.[28]

Governor _Nicholson_ of Maryland wrote to the board of trade, August 16, 1698, “I have observed that a great many people in all these provinces and colonies, especially in those under proprietaries, and the two others under Connecticut and Rhode-Island, think that no law of England ought to be in force and binding to them without their own consent; for they foolishly say, they have no representatives sent from themselves to the parliament of England; and they look upon all laws made in England, that put any restraint upon them, to be great hardships.” These were the colonial sentiments two years after passing the famous declaratory act of Willian and Mary, which you will find mentioned below. Molyneux’s Case of Ireland, asserting openly the same doctrines, was first published in February, 1697–8.

The colony of _New-York_ demands our next attention. The Dutch had settled, and named it the _New-Netherlands_. Charles II. resolved upon its conquest in 1664, and in March granted to his brother the Duke of York, the region extending from the western banks of Connecticut to the eastern shore of the _Delaware_, together with _Long-Island_, conferring on him the civil and military powers of government. Colonel _Nichols_ was sent with four frigates and three hundred soldiers to effect the business. The Dutch governor being unable to make resistance, the New-Netherlands submitted to the English crown, in September, without any other change than of rulers. Few of the Dutch removed; and Nichols instantly entered upon the exercise of his power, as deputy governor of the duke of York, the proprietary.

In July, 1673, the Dutch repossessed themselves of the province, by attacking it suddenly when in a defenceless state. By the peace in February following it was restored. The validity of the grant, while the Dutch were in quiet possession having been questioned, the duke of York thought it prudent to obtain a new one the following June, and _Edmund Andros_ having been appointed governor, the Dutch resigned their authority to him in October. Thus was New-York regained; but the inhabitants were again enslaved to the will of the conqueror; for, being admitted to no share in the legislature, they were subject to laws to which they had never assented.

[1681.] To be relieved from a servitude that had degraded the colony, and now gave dissatisfaction to every one, the council, the court of assizes, and the corporation of New-York, concurred in soliciting the duke, “to permit the people to participate in the legislative power.” The duke, though strongly prejudiced against democratic assemblies, yet in expectation that the inhabitants would agree to raise money to discharge the public debts, and to settle such a fund for the future as might be sufficient for the maintenance of the government and garrison, informed the lieutenant-governor, in 1682, that “he intended to establish the same frame of government as the other plantations enjoyed, particularly in the choosing of an assembly.”

Mr. Dongan was appointed governor in September, and instructed to call an assembly, to consist of a council of ten, and of a house of representatives, chosen by the freeholders, of the number of eighteen members. The assembly was empowered to make laws for the people, agreeable to the general jurisprudence of the state of England, which should be of no force, however, without the ratification of the proprietary. “Thus the inhabitants of New-York, after being ruled almost twenty years at the will of the duke’s deputies, were first admitted to participate in the legislative power.”

[1683.] An assembly was called on governor Dongan’s arrival, which passed an act of general naturalization, in order to give equal privileges to the various kinds of people then inhabiting the province; together with an act “declaring the liberties of the people;” as also one “for defraying the requisite charges of government for a limitted time.” The legislature was convened once more in August 1684, when it explained the last act. These seem to have been the only assemblies called prior to the revolution.

When the duke became king of England, he refused to confirm that grant of privileges to which, as duke, he had agreed. He established a real tyranny, and reduced New-York once more to the deplorable condition of a conquered province.

_New-Jersey_, which was also taken from the _Dutch_ (who were considered as having no right to any of their settlements in these parts of America) was included in the grant to the duke of York. The duke disposed of it to lord _Berkely_ Sir _George Carteret_ who, being sole proprietors, for the better settlement of it, agreed [1664.] upon certain constitutions of government, so well relished, that the eastern parts were soon considerably peopled. One of the stipulations was, “no qualified person, at any time, shall be any ways molested, punished, disquieted, or called into question, for any difference in opinion or practice in matters of religious concernments, who does not acturally disturb the civil peace of the province; but all and every such person and persons, may, from time to time, and at all times, freely and fully have and enjoy his and their judgments and consciences in matters of religion, they behaving themselves peaceably and quietly, and not using this liberty to licentiousness, nor to the civil injury or outward disturbance of others; _any law, statute, or clause contained or to be contained, usage or custom of the realm of England, to the contrary thereof in any wise notwithstanding_.”[29] The lords proprietors further agreed, “for the better security of all the inhabitants in the province—That _they are not to impose_, NOR SUFFER TO BE IMPOSED, _any tax, custom, subsidy, tallage, assessment, or any other duty whatsoever, upon any colour or pretence, upon the said province and inhabitants thereof, other than what shall be imposed by the authority and consent of the general assembly_.”[30] What can more strongly express the then opinion of Lord _Berkely_ and Sir _George Carteret_, as to the parliaments having no right to tax the inhabitants of the province, possessed by them as lords proprietors!

[1674.] Lord _Berkely_ sold his moiety of the province to _John Fenwick_, in trust for _Edward Byllinge_ and his assigns.—After which the proprietors, _E. Byllinge, William Penn, Gawen Lawrie, Nicholas Lucas, and Edmund Warner_, of the quaker persuasion, agreed with Sir _George Carteret_ [1676.] upon a division; and that his moiety should be called _New East-Jersey_; and theirs _New West-Jersey_. The agreement respecting the _not imposing or suffering to be imposed any tax, &c._ was adopted: the other stipulation is worded somewhat differently—“No man, nor number of men upon earth, hath power or authority to rule over men’s conscience in religious matters; therefore it is consented, agreed and ordained, that no person or persons whatsoever, within the province, at any time or times hereafter, shall be any ways, upon any pretence whatsoever, called in question, or in the least punished or hurt, either in person, estate or privilege, for the sake of his opinion, judgment, faith or worship towards God in matters of religion; but that all and every such person and persons, may from time to time, and at all times, freely and fully have and enjoy his and their judgments, and the exercise of their consciences, in matters of religious worship, throughout all the province.”[31] It was also agreed, “that all elections be not determined by the common and confused way of cries and voices; but by putting balls into balloting boxes, to be provided for that purpose, for the prevention of all partiality, and whereby every man may freely choose according to his own judgment and honest intention.”[32]

Soon after, many quakers resorted to _West-Jersey_ from England, and the country filled apace. But the people early experienced the dreadful effects of arbitrary power. Major _Andros_ the governor of _New-York_, imposed 10 per cent. on all goods imported at the _Hoar-kill_,[33] and demanded 5 percent. of the settlers at arrival or afterwards, though neither _West-Jersey_, nor the _Hoar-kill_, was legally under his jurisdiction. They complained of the hardship from the first, but bore it patiently, till about 1680, when application was made to the duke of York, who referred the matter to the council, where it rested for a considerable time, and then was reported in their favour, and the duty ordered to be discontinued. Among the arguments used by Messrs. _William Penn_, _George Hutchinson_ and others, chiefly if not all quakers, in the paper presented to the duke’s commissioners, were these, “Powers of government are expressly granted, in the cenveyance lord Berkely made us; for that only could have induced us to buy it; and the reason is plain, because to all prudent men, the government of any place is more inviting than the soil: for what is good land without good laws; the better, the worse. And if we could not assume people of an easy and free, and safe government, both with respect to their spiritual and worldly property, that is an uninterrupted liberty of conscience and an inviolable possession of their civil rights and freedoms, by a just and wise government, a mere wilderness would be no encouragement; for it were a madness to leave a free, good and improved country, to plant in a wilderness, and there adventure many thousands of pounds, to give an absolute title to another person to tax us at will and pleasure.” Natural right and human prudence oppose such doctrine all the world over, as says, “that people free by law, under their prince at home, are at his mercy in the plantations abroad.” The King’s grant to the duke of York, is plainly restrictive to the laws and government of England. Now, we humbly conceive, it is made a fundamental in our constitution, and government, that the king of England cannot justly take his subjects goods without their consent: this needs no more to be proved than a principal; ’tis _jus indigene_, and home-bore right, declared to be law by divers statutes; as in the great charter, ch. 29 and 34. Ed. III. ch. 2; again 25 Ed. ch. 7.[34] To give up the power of making laws is to change the government, to sell or rather resign ourselves to the will of another; and that for nothing; for we buy nothing of the duke, if not the right of an undisturbed colonizing, with no diminution, but expectation of some increase of these freedoms and privileges enjoyed in our own country. We humbly say, that we have not lost any part of our liberty, by leaving our country; but we transplant to a place with express limitation to erect no policy contrary to the established government (of England) but as near as may be to it; and this variation is allowed but for the sake of emergencies; and that latitude bounded with these words, _for the good of the adventurer and planter_. This tax is not to be found in the duke’s conveyances, but is an after business. Had the planters foreseen it, they would sooner have taken up in any other plantation in America—[a plain intimation that no such tax was imposed in any other American plantation.] Beside, there is no end of this power; for since we are by this precedent assessed without any law, and thereby excluded our English right of common assent to taxes; what security have we of any thing we possess? We can call nothing our own, but are tenants at will not only for the soil, but for all our personal estates; we endure penury, and the sweat of our brows, to improve them at our own hazard only. This is to transplant from good to bad. _This sort of conduct has destroyed government, but never raised one to any true greatness._[35]

The paper presented to the duke’s commissioners, evidently proves, that it was the opinion of these gentlemen, who were quakers, that no tax could be justly imposed upon the inhabitants, without their own consent first had, and by the authority of their own general assembly. The report of the council in favour of the aggrieved, and the relief that followed, were virtual concessions to the same purport. This will not be judged wholly unprecedented by those who are acquainted with what happened relative to the county-palatine and city of _Chester_, in the 35th year of the reign of _Henry_ VIII. [1543.] The inhabitants complained in a petition to the king, that for want of knights and burgesses in the court of parliament, they sustained manifold damages, not only in their lands, goods, and bodies, but in the civil and politic governance and maintenance of the commonwealth of their said county; and that while they had been always bound by the acts and statutes of the said court of parliament, the same as other counties, cities, and boroughs, that had knights and burgesses in said court, they had often been touched, and grieved with acts and statutes made within the said court, as well derogatory unto the most ancient jurisdictions, liberties, and privileges of the said court-palatine, as prejudicial unto the commonwealth, quietness, and peace of his majesty’s subjects. They proposed to the king, as a remedy, that it would please his highness, that it be enacted, with the assent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and by the commons in parliament assembled, that from the end of the session, the county-palatine shall have two knights for the said county, and likewise two citizens to be burgesses for the city of Chester. The complaint and remedy were thought to be so just and reasonable, that the relief for which they prayed was granted, and they were admitted to send representatives to parliament, to guard their interests and to secure their liberties and privileges.

The reasons for my passing from the Jerseys to Virginia will soon be obvious.

_Virginia_ was the original name for all the English North-American continental claims, given in honor to the virgin queen, Elizabeth. King James, being applied to, granted letters patent to a body of gentlemen on the 6th of April, 1606, with powers to divide themselves into two distinct companies, the one consisting of London adventurers, called the first or southern colony of Virginia; the second or northern colony, composed of merchants belonging to Bristol, Plymouth and Exeter. The territory granted to the first or southern colony, was generally called _Virginia_ without any distinguishing epithet; and retained that name after the second or northern colony obtained the name of New-England, in 1614.

The London company applied their attention immediately to the forming of a settlement, and sent off a hundred and ten emigrants, who arrived on the coast of Virginia, April 29th, 1607: a party landed on the promontory, called, in honor of the prince of Wales, _Cape-Henry_; afterward proceeded to and took possession of a peninsula in James-river, and began a settement at _James-town_. The instructions given by the company of proprietors, when they sent out their second supply the following year, show that the most active projectors in England had for their chief objects discovery and gain, rather than colonization.

[1609.] A new charter was obtained: many of the first nobility and gentry were added to the former proprietors, and were incorporared by the name of “The Treasurer and Company of Adventurers, of the city of London, for the first colony of Virginia.” To them was granted in absolute property the lands extending from Cape Comfort along the sea-coast southward 200 miles, from the same promontory 200 miles northward, and from the Atlantic westward to the South-sea. The company was empowered to make ordinances for the colony, and for those on the seas going thither. There was granted to the treasurer and company and their assigns, a freedom from all subsidies in Virginia for 21 years, and from all impositions on importations and exportations to and from England, or any other of the king’s dominions, “except only the five pounds in the hundred due for customs.” Little was conceded to the emigrants by the charter; and much conferred on the corporation. The colonists were to be governed by the ordinances of a corporation residing in England, in which they were not represented, and over the deliberations of which they had no control. The powers of the corporation were indeed controlable, as it was subject to the superintendance of the courts of justice within the realm, which could compel it to act agreeable as well to the grant, as to the laws of the state.

The adventurers, warmed with golden dreams of great riches, soon fitted out nine ships, with 500 emigrants, and every necessary for the establishment of a permanent colony, excepting suitable encouragement to the settlers. Lord Delaware was appointed captain-general for life. Only seven vessels arrived safe.

When Mr. Smith, who had governed the colony, departed for England, he left behind him 500 persons, of whom, what with bad management, dissensions, attacks from the Indians, waste of provisions, which occasioned a famine, &c. there remained only sixty of all ages and sexes, at the expiration of six months. When Sir _Thomas Gates_, the lieutenant-governor arrived in May, 1610, and saw the calamitous situation of affairs, he concluded on embarking the colonists and sailing for England: but before he could proceed to sea, Lord _Delaware_ arrived with three ships, bringing abundant supplies, and carried back with him to James-town the feeble remains of the colony. He soon re-established matters; but his health obliging him, he sailed for England the beginning of the subsequent year, [1611.] leaving about 200 colonists, possessed of health, plenty, and peace with their neighbours. After his departure they relapsed; but his successor, Sir _Thomas Dale_, arriving in May with more emigrants, cattle, and provision for a year, things were again restored. This same year the adventurers obtained a new charter, by which the two former were confirmed, and they had also granted to them all the islands situated in the ocean, within 300 leagues of any part of the Virginia coast. The corporation was now considerably new modelled, and, in order to promote the effectual settlement of the plantation, licence was given to open lotteries in any part of England. The lotteries alone, which were the first ever granted in England, brought 29,000l. into The campany’s treasury. At length being considered as a national evil, they attracted the notice of parliament, were presented by the commons as a grievance, and in March, 1620, suspended by an order of council.

Sir _Thomas Gates_ was dispatched with six large ships, carrying 300 colonists, 100 cattle, and useful supplies. He arrived in August: and parties were sent out from James-town to form distant settlements. He returned the beginning of 1614, and the administration devolved once more on Sir _Thomas Dale_, to whom the Virginians owe the introduction of landed property. In 1615, fifty acres of land were granted to every emigrant and his heirs, and the same quantity to every person imported by others. Dale sailed for England in the beginning of 1616, giving up the trust to Sir _George Yeardley_, as deputy governor, and in this year the cultivation of tobacco was introduced. It was originally carried from Tobago to England. Mr. _Argal_, a new deputy, arrived in May, 1617. He published a variety of edicts, and was guilty of those wrongs and oppressions, that the treasurer and council appointed _Yeardly_ captain-general, and empowered him to examine into and redress grievances. Sir George arrived April, 1619, bringing with him several instructions favourable to freedom, and soon declared his intention of calling a general assembly, which gave the greatest joy to men, who had been hitherto subjected to the arbitrary orders of their prince, to the interested ordinances of an English corporation, or to the edicts of a haughty governor; and who enjoyed none of those liberties which Englishmen claim as their birth-right.

In June, Yeardley, pursuant to his instructions from the company, issued writs for the election of delegates, called burgesses. The colony had been divided into seven hundreds or distinct settlements, which seemed to enjoy some of the privileges of boroughs, and from this circumstance the democratic branch of the assembly has been called to this day the house of burgesses, though composed almost entirely of the representatives of counties. The assembly, formed of the governor and council of state, who were appointed by the treasurer and company, and of the burgesses chosen by the people, met together in one apartment, and transacted affairs like the parliament of Scotland of old, which mode continued till after the restoration of Charles II. Thus convened, and thus composed, the legislature “debated all matters thought expedient for the good of the whole.” The laws were transmitted to England, for the approbation of the treasurer and company, without whose confirmation they were of no validity. The introduction of an assembly was attended with the happiest effects. The emigrants, for the first time, resolved to settle themselves, and to perpetuate the plantation. The assembly thanked the company for their favour, and begged them “to reduce into a compendious form, with his majesty’s approbation, the laws of England proper for Virginia, with suitable additions;” giving as a reason, “that it was not fit that his subjects should be governed by any other rules, than such as received their influence from him.” This year the treasurer and council received a letter, “commanding them to send a hundred dissolute persons (convicts) to Virginia.” They were accordingly transported; and were at that period very acceptable to the colonies,” though the unlimited practice of emptying the English jails on the American continent has of late years been complained of as a nuisance. [1602.] The subsequent year must, on account of the introduction of _African slaves_ into the colonies, be stigmatized as a much viler æra.—The Hollanders were not then precluded by any law from trading with the colonies. A Dutch vessel carried to Virginia a cargo of negroes, and the Virginians, who had themselves just emerged from a state of slavery, became chargeable with reducing their fellow men to the condition of brutes.

[1621.] In July, the treasurer and company carried into execution a resolution formerly taken, for establishing a proper constitution for the colony. The ordinance they passed, declared that there should be two supreme councils in Virginia, the one to be called the council of state, to be appointed and displaced by the treasurer and company, and which was to advise the governor in governmental affairs; the other was to be denominated the general assembly, and to consist of the governor and council, and of two burgesses, to be chosen, for the present, by the inhabitants of every town, hundred, and settlement in the colony. The assembly was to determine by the majority of the voices then present, and to enact general laws for the colony, reserving to the governor a negative voice. They were to imitate the laws and customs, and judicial proceedings used in England. “No acts were to be in force till confirmed by the general court in England: on the other hand, no order of the general court was to bind the colony, till assented to by the assembly.” The company having offered territory to those who should either emigrate themselves, or engage to transport people to the colony, found this policy so successful, that upward of 3500 persons emigrated to Virginia during this and the two preceding years.

[1622.] This year was remarkable for a massacre of the colonists by the _Indians_, which was executed with the utmost subtilty, and without any regard to age, sex, or dignity. A well concerted attack on all the settlements, destroyed, in one hour, and almost at the same instant, 347 persons, who were defenceless and incapable of making resistance. The emigrants, notwithstanding the orders they had received, had never been solicitous to cultivate the good-will of the natives, and had neither asked permission when they occupied their country, nor given a price for their valuable property, which was violently taken away. The miseries of famine were soon superadded to the horrors of massacre. Of eighty plantations, which were filling apace, only eight remained; and of the numbers which had been transported thither, no more than about 1800 survived those manifold disasters.

Frequent complaints having been made to king James of the oppressions of the treasurer and company, and the before-mentioned calamities being attributed to their misconduct or neglect, it was determined that a commission should issue to enquire into the affairs of Virginia and the Somer-isles, from the earliest settlement of each. Upon the report of the commissioners, the king concluded on giving a new charter, and required of the company the surrender of former grants, which being refused, a writ of _quo warranto_ issued in November, 1623, against the patents of the corporation; and judgment was given by the court of king’s-bench against the treasurer and company, in Trinity-term, 1624. These proceedings “were so conformable to the general strain of the arbitrary administration of that reign, that they made little impression at the time, though the Virginia company was composed of persons of the first quality, wealth, and consequence in the nation.” The company probably would not have exercised so tame and submissive a spirit, had they not been wholly disappointed in their visionary prospects, and met with considerable losses, instead of acquiring enormous profits. They had obtained from individuals, who sported in their lotteries from the hope of sudden riches, £. 29,000. but the transportation of more than 9000 English subjects, had cost them £.150,000. They did not, however, abandon the colony in its distress, while they continued a corporation. Timely supplies were sent from England to the Virginia settlers, which so animated them, that they carried on an offensive war against the Indians, pursued them into their fastnesses, and drove them from the neighbourhood of those rivers where they had fixed their own plantations.

As to king _James_, he “assuredly considered the colonies as acquired by conquest; and that they ought to be holden of his person, independent of his crown or political capacity; and might be ruled according to his good will, by prerogative; and he endeavored, agreeable to the strange œconomy of his reign, to convert them into a mere private estate, descendable to his personal heirs.”[36]

The Virginia company being dissolved, James took the colony under his immediate dependence, which occasioned much confusion. Upon his death, king _Charles_ [1625.] being of the same judgment with his father as to the government of Virginia, determined to tread in the same steps. In May he named a new governor and council for Virginia, and invested them with an authority fully legislative and arbitrary. They were empowered to make and execute laws, to impose taxes, and enforce payment. Neither the commission nor instructions mentioned expressly, or even alluded to an assembly, to the laws of England, or to the acts of the provincial legislature, as a rule of government. They were required to transport colonists into England, to be punished there for crimes committed in Virginia. This system increased the colonial dissatisfaction, which continued for years, till the Virginians received a letter containing the royal assurance, that “all their estates, trade, freedom, and privileges, should be enjoyed by them in as extensive a manner as they enjoyed them before the recalling of the company’s patent.” On this they were reconciled, and began again to exert themselves in making improvements.[37]

Being left for some years in a manner to themselves, they increased beyond expectation. They remained under the administration of their governors and other officers, who respected their privileges because they loved the colony. The governor whom Charles had been anxious to appoint, had no opportunity of exercising those illegal and extraordinary powers with which he had been invested. His death in 1627, put an end to his authority, and prevented the colony’s feeling its full extent. His successor, _John Harvey_, esq. was nominated in March 1629; and his commission and instructions were precisely the same with those of the former. He departed soon after for Virginia. The spirit of his administration was an exact counterpart of what had too long prevailed in England. He was severe in his extortions, proud in his councils, unjust and arbitrary in every department of his government. The _Virginians_, roused almost to madness by oppression, seized and sent him prisoner to England, accompanied with two deputies, to represent their grievances and his misconduct. His behaviour was so thought of, that he was honored with a new commission which confirmed former powers, and he was sent back to Virginia in April, 1637. After that, his government was so excessively oppressive and cruel, that the complaints of the colonists became at length too loud to be longer neglected, and his commission was revoked in January, 16389—. During his ten years administration, the Virginians were ruled rather as the vassels of an eastern despot, than as subjects entitled to English liberties; but it is to their credit, that, having tasted the sweets of a simple government, they opposed with a firm spirit, during the reign of Charles, the attempts of those who endeavoured to revive the patents, and to restore the corporation.

Sir _William Berkely_ was appointed governor the beginning of 1639. His instructions evidenced a prodigious change in colonial policy, which must be partly ascribed to the then state of affairs in England. He was directed to summon all the burgesses of the plantations; who with the governor and council were to constitute the grand assembly, with power to make acts for the government of the colony, as near as might be to the laws of England—to cause speedy justice to be administered to all, according to English forms—and to forbid all trade with foreign vessels except upon necessity. Thus were the Virginians restored to that system of freedom which they had derived from the Virginia company, and which the writ of _quo warranto_ had involved in the same ruin with the corporation itself.

Civil dissentions however took place, which were embittered by religious differences, and inflamed by acts made to prohibit the preaching of the doctrines of the puritans. The discontented party presented a petition to the house of commons, in the name of the assembly, “praying for the restoration of the antient patents and corporation government.” But the governor, council and burgesses, no sooner heard of the transaction, than they transmitted an explicit disavowal of it. They sent also an address to king _Charles_ acknowledging his bounty and favor toward them, and earnestly desiring to continue under his immediate protection. In 1642, they declared in the form of an act, “that they were born under monarchy, and would never degenerate from the condition of their births, by being subjects to any other government.” Nothing could be more acceptable than this act, which being presented to the king at _York_, drew from him an answer, in which he gave them the fullest assurances, that they always should be immediately dependent upon the crown, and that the form of government should never be changed.

They remained unalterably attached to the cause of their sovereign. But when the commons of England had triumphed over their European opponents, their attention was turned to the plantations; and an ordinance was passed in October, 1650, “for prohibiting trade with _Barbadoes_, _Virginia_, _Bermuda_, and _Antego_.” It recited, that “in Virginia, and other places in America, their are colonies, which were planted at the cost, and settled by the people, and by the authority of this nation, which ought to be subordinate to, and depend upon England—that they ever had been, and ought to be subject to such laws and regulations, as are, or shall be made by the parliament—that divers acts of rebellion have been committed by many persons inhabiting Virginia, whereby they have set up themselves in opposition to the commonwealth” It therefore declared them “notorious robbers and traitors.” Persons in power generally reason alike against those who oppose their authority, and dispute the legality or equity of their measures, whatever might be their own sentiments when in a lower station, and while aggrieved by superiors. The ordinance authorised the council of state to send a fleet thither, and to grant commissions to proper persons to enforce to obedience all such as stood opposed to the authority of parliament. In consequence hereof commissioners were appointed, and a powerful fleet and army detached, to reduce all their enemies to submission. They were to use their endeavors, by granting pardons and by other peaceful arts, to induce the colonists to obey the state of England; but, if these means should prove ineffectual, then they were to employ every act of hostility; to free those servants and slaves of masters opposing the government, that would serve as soldiers to subdue them; and to cause the acts of parliament to be executed, and justice to be administered, in the name of the commonwealth. After the arrival of the commissioners with the naval and military force, the Virginians refused to submit, till articles of surrender had been agreed upon, by which it was stipulated, “The plantation of Virginia, and all the inhabitants thereof, shall enjoy such freedoms and privileges as belong to the free people of England. The general assembly, as formerly, shall convene and transact the affairs of the colony. The people of Virginia shall have a free trade, as the people of England, to all places, and with all nations.” Virginia shall be free from all taxes, customs, and impositions whatsoever; and none shall be imposed on them without consent of the general assembly; and neither forts nor castles shall be erected, nor garrisons maintained without their consent.”[38]

The hardships the _Virginians_ experienced from restrictions on their trade under _Oliver Cromwell_, together with their attachment to the royal family, induced them to seize the occasion of the death of the protector’s governor, for applying to Sir _William Berkely_, who had lived privately during the revolutions of the day, to resume the government of the colony, to which he consented, on their solemnly promising to venture their lives and fortunes with him for Charles II. Before they had heard of the death of Cromwell, _Charles_ was proclaimed by them king of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Virginia. During the distresses to which the royalists were exposed in England prior to this event, they resorted to that colony, so that Virginia contained about 30,000 persons at the restoration. Sir William Berkely, in his answer to the enquiries of the lords of the committee of the colonies, writes, June 20, 1671, “there are 40,000 persons, men, women, and children, 2000 black slaves, and 6000 christian servants for a short time.” You will not have your good opinion heightened of him for his adding—“I thank God there are no free schools, nor printing, and I hope we shall not have them these hundred years. For learning has brought disobedience, and heresy, and sects into the world, and printing has divulged them and libels against the government. God keep us from both!”[39]

You will remark, that, however zealous the Virginians were to honor the Charles’s with their loyalty, they boldly declined complimenting king, commonwealth, and protector with their liberties.

_Maryland_ comes now to be considered.

Sir _George Calvert_ was one of the original associates in the great Virginia company, and continued a member of that corporation during its existance: and, as secretary of state, he acted as one of the committee of council for the affairs of the plantations while James I. lived. Sir George in his reign, having thought proper to alter his religious sentiments and embrace popery, ingenuously avowed the change. The king pleased with his sincerity, granted him a part of _Newfoundland_, which the French at length obliged him to abandon. His majesty further testified his regard, by creating him Lord Baltimore of Ireland. King _Charles_, to compensate for his loss of the Newfoundland territory, gave him a grant of the country on the north side of the _Chesapeak-bay_.

His Lordship died April 15, 1632, before the patent was made out; on which his son Cecil took it out in his own name the June following. Charles, in honor to his royal consort Henrietta Maria, named the colony Maryland; and, being desirous of gratifying the proprietary all in his power invested him with as much sovereignty as could well consist with an immediate subjection to the crown of England. His Lordship, with the assent of the freemen, or their delegates, whom he was required to assemble for that purpose, might make laws of what kind soever for the province, so that they were not repugnant, but agreeable to the jurisprudence and rights of the realm of England; and he was authorised to execute the acts of the assembly. There was no clause in the charter obliging him to transmit their acts to the king for approbation or dissent: nor any saving of the royal interference in the government of the colony. Charles reserved to himself and his heirs forever, imposts, duties, and customs, which the colonies were bound to pay; but declared in the same charter, “We, our heirs and successors, shall at no time set and make, or cause to be set, any imposition, custom, or taxation on the inhabitants of the province, for their lands, goods, tenements, or chattels whithin the said province.” By this clause the king covenanted for himself, heirs and successors, that having reserved for ever the imposts, duties, and customs, he would not contribute toward setting upon the inhabitants any imposition, custom, or taxation, for their lands, goods, tenaments, or chattels, within the said province; and therein bound both himself and them, not to assent to any bill subjecting the inhabitants to an internal taxation by an external legislation.