Chapter I (3)

COMMON RAILERS AND BRAWLERS were punishable by the old provincial laws as they are by our present laws, but in a different way. A curious case is recorded by Mr. Holyoke as having come before the courts at the time John Pynehon, Samuel Chapin and Eliziar Holyoke were the Magistrates.

“March 13, 1655—Obadiah Miller complaynes against Joane, his wife, for abusing him with reproachfull tearmes or names as calling him foole, toad, vermine and threateninge him; as also for yt yesterday shee fell upon him endeavoring to beat him, at which tyme shee scratched his face and hands. The case being examined it was found that Joane, the wife of Obadiah Miller was guilty of very evil behavior towards her said husband; it being proved by the testimony of John Lamb and Tho. Miller.

John Lamb testifyed he heard her say shee would knock him on the head, and yt shee did often call him foole and other reproachful tearmes.

Thomas Miller testifyed yt wn his brother Obediah, his wife lived with him she did comonly call him foole and vermine; and he doth not remember he ever heard her call him husband, and that shee said shee did not love him but hated him; yea shee here said shee did not love him and shee should not love him.

For which, her vile misbehaviour towards her husband, she was adjudged to be taken forth to ye whipping post, there to receive soe many stripes on ye naked body as ye commissioners should see cause to inflict on her; whereuppon shee was brought forth, but by her humileation and earnest protestations for better carriage towards her said husband, the punishment was remitted and this sentence passed yt for the least miscarriage to her husband after this tyme, shee should be brought forth agayne to receive a good whipping on the naked body well laid on.”

HUSBAND OR WIFE STRIKING.

Colony Laws, Chap. 66.

October 1650. “It is ordered by the Court and authority thereof, that no man shall strike his wife, nor any woman her husband, on penalty of such fine not exceeding ten pounds for one offence, or such corporall punishment as the County Court shall determine.”

The Colony laws regarding the OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH were quite numerous and strictly enforced by various penalties.

At a court before the Commissioners John Pynehon, Eliziar Holyoke and Samuel Chapin. May 8th, 1654.

“Daniel, a Scotchman servant to Thomas Merick being found to profhane the Sabbath in idle walkinge about, and not cominge to ye ordinances of ye Lord, yea though he had warninge to ye contrary; and being also complayned of by his said master for his grevious idleness in neglecting his busyness for severall dayes, yea synce he was called before authority for the like misbehaviour formerly at wh tyme he promised amendment; but he grew worse and worse and therefore was adjudged to be whipped on ye bare back wth five lashes well laid on, and execution was done accordingly.”

Another case in which four young men were charged with violation of the Sabbath was attended with this peculiarity—that two of the culprits were sons of Holyoke, one of the two Magistrates before whom the trial was had.

This trial was in 1664, and was thus recorded in the handwriting of Holyoke.

“Thomas Noble, Constable, presenting Thomas Thomson and John Horton for that last Sabb., was fortnight, June ye 7, they made a fray in ye street in ye evening about ½ an hour after sunsett. Samuel & Elizar Holyoke being accessory in ye said fray.

The Commissioners uppon examination of ye case doe fynd that the said foure persons did profane the Lord’s day, and therefor doe determine that they all shall be admonished thereof & that Thomas Thomson, John Horton, and Samuel Holyoke shall pay a fyne of five shillings apeece to the County, or be whipped by the Constable on ye naked body with three stripes apeece; whereuppon they were all admonished & the 3 former desiring to pay ye fynes, then otherwise were ordered to pay them to ye County Treasurer.”

Samuel Holyoke upon whom this sentence was passed by his own father, was then a boy of seventeen years. Twelve years afterwards in 1676, he was the Capt. Holyoke who so greatly distinguished himself in the celebrated Falls fight with the Indians.

ASSAULTING OF WOMEN.

PROVINCE LAWS CH. 105-1711.

SEC. 2. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that whosoever shall be convicted of assaulting or offering any insolence or violence to any woman or mankind in the fields, streets or lanes in any town, or of despoiling them, damnifying or defacing of their attire or ornaments, or attempting the same, shall be punished by being publickly whipped, not exceeding two stripes, or by being committed to the house of correction to receive the discipline of the house and continue there by the space of thirty days.

The discipline of the house by a law passed in 1699, included among other things, “moderate whipping not exceeding ten stripes at once, which shall be inflicted at their first coming in and from time to time, in case they be stubborn, disorderly or idle.”

(At a Court holden at Northampton, June 19, 1672, John Edwards, of Northampton, who came to that place from Virginia, was tried for some misdemeanor in lascivious carriage towards divers women of Northampton, and the case being searched into. It is found and proved yt the sd Edwards hath been notoriously lascivious and hath carried himself very debauchedly towards diverse women of N (as by test on file appears) and yt he hathe traded? this way:)

“The Courte doth adjudge him to be whipt on ye naked body with 20 stripes well laid on.”

A different case with a different penalty is this. At a County Corte holden at Northampton, March 31, 1674.

“Martin Smith, resident at Pacomtuck, being bound over to this Corte by N. Comiss: for offering abuse to Jedidiak Strong’s wife (in ye street near her father Woodwards house) laying hold on her to kiss her as shee thinks, and she testifying her offence to be soe affronted whereby shee sayth also shee was somewhat affrighted; he appearing in Corte and owning his fact and condemning himself and seeming sorrowful that he should be left to such folly, was fyned only 20s. to be pd to ye Treasurer and 2s. and 6d. as ye Recorder’s fees.”

SITTING IN THE STOCKS was a mode of punishment for certain offences to which persons of either sex were sometimes subjected. Occasionally it was ordered as an alternative sentence in a case where the culprit failed to pay the fine imposed.

Webster’s Unabridged describes the stocks as a machine consisting of a frame of timber, with holes in which the feet, or the feet and hands of the criminals were confined by way of punishment. The picture gives a much better idea of this punishment than can be gained from the definition. The offender sits on a bench with a high back, his feet projecting through two holes in an upright plank in front secured so that they cannot be withdrawn or moved. In this situation he can neither lie down or stand up, but must remain fixed until released. The stocks were usually located in some public place where the culprit could be seen by all passers by—and not seldom he was subjected to the taunts and ridicule of the crowd that were sure to gather on such an occasion.

PROFANE CURSING AND SWEARING was one of the offences subjecting the transgressor to the punishment of the stocks.

COLONY LAWS, CHAP. 94.

AN ACT AGAINST SWEARING AND CURSING.

“SEC. 1. It is ordered by this Court and authority thereof, that if any person within this jurisdiction shall swear rashly or vainly by the holy name of God, or other oath, he shall forfeit to the common treasury for every such offence ten shillings; and it shall be in the power of any Magistrate by warrant to the constable, to call such person before him, and upon sufficient proof to sentence such offender, and to give order to levy the fine; and if such person be not able or shall refuse to pay the said fine, he shall be committed to the stocks, there to continue not exceeding three hours nor less than one hour.

SEC. 2. And if any person shall swear more oaths than one at a time before he remove out of the room or company where he so swears, he shall then pay 20 shillings. The like penalty shall be inflicted for profane and wicked cursing of any person or creature, and for the multiplying the same as is appointed for profane swearing, and in case any person so offending by multiplying oaths or cursing, shall not pay his or their fines forthwith, they shall be whipt or committed to prison till they shall pay the same at the discretion of the Court or Magistrate that shall have cognyance thereof.”

The wife of Henry Gregory, one of the early settlers here, transgressed this law, and her case came before Mr. William Pynehon as a Magistrate. His record of it is as follows under date of February 15, 1640:

“Goody Gregory being accused by oath of John Woodcoke & Richard Williams for swearing before God I could break thy head: She did acknowledge it was her great sin & fault & saith she hath bin much humbled for it.

She is fined 12d (12 pence) to the poore to be paid to Henry Smyth within a month; or if she doe not she is to sit 3 hours in the stocks.”

COMMON SCOLD.

By the English common law in force here in the early times a common scold was liable to a peculiar form of punishment. Blackstone (4 Black. Com. 168) says:

“A common scold—communis rixatrix—(for our law confines it to the feminine gender) is a public nuisance to her neighborhood for which offence she may be indicted, and if convicted shall be sentenced to be placed in a certain engine of correction called the trebucket, castigatory or cucking stool, which in the Saxon language is said to signify the scolding stool, though now it is frequently corrupted into ducking stool, because the residue of the judgment is that when she is placed therein she shall be plunged in the water for her punishment.”

Oct. 24, 1673—“John Petty complaines agt Goodwife Hunter for offering to mischiefe his wife & giving her ill language; calling her as ye testimonys speake:

Railing, scolding & other exorbitancys of ye Young appearing as by ye Testimonys of Mary Brookes & Mercy Johns on file & also ye neighbors, declaring her continual trade upon every occasion to be exorbitant in her Toung as particularly Sam Marshfull & John Bagg so declared. I sentenced her to be gaged or else set on a ducking stool & dipped in water as law provides. Shee to choose wh of ym shee pleases within this half houre; or else I do determine & order either as I see cause. Shee not choosing either, I order her to be gagged & so to stand half an hour in ye open street wh was done accordingly; & for her reproaching Goodie Petty shoe did openly cleare her of all shee spake agt her & asked forgiveness wch G. Petty accepting of shee was released as to yt.”

The Puritan Fathers are often blamed on account of their witchcraft persecutions. Long after Massachusetts had confessed her wrong-doing, England and Germany put people to death for witchcraft. Twenty-five years after persecution had ceased in New England, Chief Justice Matthew Hale, of England, sent a mother and her little daughter to the scaffold for the same offence; and one hundred and one years afterwards Germany did likewise. The age in which these men lived is responsible for these things, and not the men themselves. They were founders of schools, and were not intolerant. I do not believe in the cry of the “good old times” simply. There are more good men and women now than ever before. I think it almost unfortunate to explain away witchcraft and some other peculiar things of those times, as then some people would have nothing to talk about and sneer at and criticise the Pilgrim Fathers. Some persons like to continue this. Dr. Blake of Boston, says that a good Baptist brother had often met him and chaffingly asked, “How is Roger Williams to-day?” when Mr. Blake, tiring of the question, answered, “Oh, he is warm and dry by this time.” The Pilgrims had especially three noble qualities: Earnestness, definiteness of belief and stalwartness of spiritual life.

GENERAL WILLIAM EMERSON STRONG.

With the death of General William E. Strong of Chicago, in April of the present year, there passed away another of the distinguished volunteer soldiers of the United States who won distinction during the War of the Rebellion, and at the close of that great conflict returned to civil life to become the flower of American manhood, and a perfect representative of American citizenship. Brave, loyal and patriotic, when the call came for his services in support of the Union he was prompt to respond, and was a faithful and gallant soldier until the struggle was ended and victory achieved. When that time came it found him equally ready to return to peaceful pursuits in which in later years his high character and ability made him both successful and distinguished.

William Emerson Strong was born in Granville, in Washington County, New York, August 10, 1840. The family to which he belonged was one of the oldest and most noted of the Puritan families of New England. Elder John Strong, the founder of the family in America, was a native of Taunton, England—where his ancestors had been honorably mentioned in public records as long ago as 1545. He sailed from Plymouth in the ship “Mary and John,” March 20th, 1630, in company with one hundred and forty other persons. They landed at Nantasket, (twelve miles s. e. of Boston) at the end of a voyage of more than seventy days, and John Strong settled at Northampton, Massachusetts. Here several generations of his descendants lived, and from thence representatives of the family drifted into other States, to become conspicuous in all the walks of life.

One of these descendants, but three or four generations removed from the pilgrim John Strong was Caleb Strong, one of the framers of the Federal Constitution, Governor of Massachusetts from 1800 to 1807, and again from 1812 to 1816, and also one of the first United States Senators from the “Old Bay State.”

Other representatives of the family who have achieved extraordinary distinction have been Gen. George C. Strong, who was mortally wounded while leading the Federal troops in the assault on Fort Wagner, July 18th, 1863, Rear Admiral James Hooker Strong of the United States Navy, Theron R. Strong, at one time a Judge of the Supreme Court of New York State, William Strong one of the most noted of American jurists, and Simeon Strong, who sat on the Supreme Court Bench of Massachusetts from 1800 to 1805.

General William E. Strong was descended on the father’s side from the Emerson family of New England, one of his near kinsmen being Ralph Waldo Emerson, the poet-philosopher, whose name is revered by all those who appreciate the purest and best in intellectual culture.

Gen. Strong’s father, John Emerson Strong, was a wealthy manufacturer and merchant of Granville, New York, up to 1849, when he met with business reverses which changed the character of his business and led him to seek a new location. In the spring of 1853 he removed from New York to Wisconsin, and settled with his family at Jefferson Prairie, in Rock County, where he purchased a farm and turned his attention to bringing it under cultivation. His son William was at this time thirteen years of age. Prior to the removal of the family from New York he had enjoyed all the educational advantages afforded by the excellent schools of the town in which he had lived and had made good progress in his studies. From the time he was thirteen until he was seventeen years of age however, he was busily employed at work on his father’s farm and only attended school during the winter months of each year with the exception of one year, when he had the privilege of spending six months in the preparatory department of Beloit College.

In the fall of 1856 when he was in his seventeenth year, he entered the law office of Strong & Fuller, at Racine, Wisconsin, and under their preceptorship began the study of law. He was at that time an active, manly young fellow, and he entered upon the work of fitting himself for a professional career with all the ardor, enthusiasm and determination which characterized him in later years. Whatever he undertook to do, he endeavored to do better than it had been done before. In everything he strove to excel, and in this he observed the spirit of the old motto “Tentanda est Via,” placed upon the Strong escutcheon three hundred years ago.

After a time he temporarily dropped his law studies and went to Phillips Academy at Andover, Massachusetts, where he prepared for college and was admitted to the sophomore class of Harvard. Before completing his college course however, he determined to enter upon the practice of law, and in accordance with the course he had mapped out for himself, he made application for admission to the bar of Wisconsin. He was examined at Racine, in open court, by a committee appointed for the purpose in accordance with the usages of that period, and the examination being passed successfully he was duly authorized to begin practicing his profession in the courts of the First Judicial Circuit of Wisconsin. This was in 1861, and it will be observed that notwithstanding the fact that he had had to contend with disadvantages of various kinds, before he was twenty-one years of age he had fitted himself to enter the profession in which so large a number of those bearing the same name and belonging to the same stock had achieved unusual distinction.

The day he received the certificate which entitled him to begin the practice of law, was that which brought the news of the fall of Fort Sumpter. This suddenly changed all his plans, and ultimately the whole course of his life. At once he resolved to tender his services to the government, and on the same day that President Lincoln issued his first call for volunteers, he was regularly enlisted in the government service. He proceeded to raise a company, known as the Belle City Rifles, which was assigned to the Second Regiment of Wisconsin Infantry. When the company was organized, William E. Strong was commissioned Captain and went into the field in command of it, the regiment becoming part of a brigade commanded by Colonel (afterward General) W. T. Sherman. He retained the command of the company between four and five months, participating in the battle of Blackburn’s Fort and Bull Run. He was also in command of his company when the next advance of the army into Virginia was made by way of Chain Ridge. It was during his first campaign that Captain Strong met with one of his most thrilling experiences, and demonstrated that his fighting qualities were such as could be depended upon under all circumstances. At one time while extending his picket line, he ventured too far out and found himself inside the lines of the enemy. Before he could retire from this embarrassing and dangerous position he was surrounded by a band of five confederates, three of whom were mounted and two of whom were on foot, and was taken prisoner. The confederates demanded his pistols, and with great courtesy and suavity he responded “certainly gentlemen,” at the same time drawing the weapons from their holsters. His “suaviter in modo” threw his enemies off their guard, but he had no intention of being captured without a struggle, and no sooner were the pistols in his hands than they were brought to bear on the confederates and two of them fell at his first fire. The suddenness and vigor of the attack caused the remaining captors to beat a retreat, and Captain Strong reached the Federal lines in safety. In this encounter he was shot through the cheek, but although the wound was painful he did not regard it as serious and did not allow it to interfere with his regular discharge of his military duties.

On the 12th of September he was commissioned Major of the 12th. Regiment of Wisconsin Infantry, serving with it in Kansas, Missouri, and New Mexico. In October of 1862, he was assigned to duty on the staff of General McLean, as Inspector General of the first division, right wing of the Army of the Tennessee. He served in this capacity two months and was then assigned to duty on the staff of General James B. McPherson, as inspector General of the right wing of the Army of the Tennessee. In February, 1863, he was promoted to Lieutenant Colonel and became Assistant Inspector General of the Seventeenth Army corps. On the 20th of April, 1864, he was appointed Inspector General of the Department and Army of the Tennessee, serving in that capacity until the close of the war. He was chief of staff to General O. O. Howard, on the march to the sea and through the Carolinas to Beaufort, Goldboro, Raleigh and thence to Washington. At Atlanta he was promoted to a Colonelcy, dating from July 22d, 1864, for “gallantry on the field of battle,” and on the 21st of March, 1865, he was brevetted a brigadier general of volunteers, having attained this distinction while still under 24 years of age.

After participating in the grand review of troops at Washington in May, 1865, General Strong was assigned with General Howard, to duty in connection with the conduct and management of the Freedman’s Bureau, and in September, 1866, was then mustered out of the service at his own request, having served in all over five years.

Throughout his entire term of service he was recognized as a brave and capable officer, and his gallantry was attested on numerous occasions. It was he who raised the stars and stripes over the Courthouse at Vicksburg immediately after the capitulation of the confederate forces.

He received the last order from the brilliant and lamented McPherson, while acting as his chief of staff, and led the desperate and daring charge which was made to recover the dead chieftain’s body. The following is a list of battles and campaigns in which he participated; The battles of Blackburn’s Ford and Bull Run in July, 1861. The campaign in Kansas, and also the campaign in Kentucky, Tennessee and Central Mississippi in 1862-63; the campaign against Vicksburg by way of the Mississippi River; and also in the battles of Port Gibson, May 1st; battle of Raymond, May 12th; battle of Jackson, May 14th; battle of Champign Hills, May 16th; battle of Black River Bridge, May 17th; Siege of Vicksburgh, May 17th to July 4th, 1863; the campaign against Meridian, Mississippi, and that against Atlanta in 1864, in which he participated in the battle of Resaca, Dallas, New Hope Church, Kennesaw Mountain, Atlanta, Ezra Chapel, Jonesboro, Lovejoy Station, and later Fort McAllister, and Bentonville, one of the final contests of the war, and was present at the final surrender of Johnston’s army on April 26th of that year. Esteemed by his superior officers and subordinates alike for his soldierly qualities, he was equally noted for his uniform courtesy and his efficiency as an executive officer.

In 1867, soon after he left the military service, General Strong formed a business connection with the Peshtigo Company, one of the largest corporate organizations engaged in the lumber trade in the United States. The same year he was married to Miss Mary Bostwick Ogden, an accomplished young woman, daughter of Mahlon D. Ogden, one of the pioneer citizens of Chicago. Establishing his home in Chicago at that time it continued to be his place of residence to the date of his death, and with many of its most important enterprises and undertakings of late years he was most prominently identified. Chosen secretary and treasurer of the Peshtigo Company in 1867, he retained that position until 1873, when he became president of the corporation. This position he filled for eighteen years, and was holding at the time of his death, April 10th, 1891. He was one of the promoters and builders of the Sturgeon Bay Ship Canal, became a director and was also treasurer and assistant secretary of the Sturgeon Bay & Lake Michigan Canal Company, and was largely instrumental in developing the resources of the lumber regions of the northwest. In his business life he showed great capacity for the conduct of affairs of more than ordinary magnitude. His management of the important interests committed to his care was uniformally successful. He never lost his interest in military affairs, and after he became a citizen of Illinois was among those most active in promoting the organization and providing for the proper discipline and equipment of the National Guard of the State. In 1876, he was commissioned by Gov. Beveridge, Inspector General of the Illinois’ National Guard. Gov. Cullom, the immediate successor of Gov. Beveridge, commissioned him Inspector General and Inspector of Rifle practice on his staff, with the rank of Brigadier General in 1877, and again in 1879. In addition to his interest in the National Guard, he was active in building up and promoting the growth of the veteran organizations particularly of the Military Order of the Loyal Legion, of the Illinois commandery of which he was a charter member and also commander.

In politics he took a moderately active interest as a member of the Republican party to the principles of which he was devotedly attached. He was a member of the Local Committee of Arrangements which had charge of the preparations for the meeting of the National Republican convention of 1880, was designated to take charge of the convention building, and to act as sergeant-at-arms after the sessions began. This convention was memorable for the length of time it lasted, for the large number of distinguished men who participated in the proceedings, and the multitude of people from all parts of the country in attendance. The great crowds were handled by General Strong with remarkable skill, and at the close of the convention he was publicly thanked for his services by General James A. Garfield, who had been made the Presidential nominee.

From early boyhood General Strong was a lover of field sports, and was passionately found of hunting wild fowl and large game, and visited at one time and another, almost every portion of the United States, having attractions of this kind to offer. In company with General Phil. Sheridan—for many years, one of his most intimate friends—he made several visits to the Yellowstone Park region, and wrote numerous interesting sketches of these experiences, adventures and explorations. While the busy life he led did not allow him to give as much attention as he would have liked to literature, he gathered together a valuable library, one of the most conspicuous features of which was the amount of war literature which it contained, inclusive of rare manuscripts, autograph letters, papers, documents, and photographs, which it is said can scarcely be duplicated in the United States. He was a member of the Literary Club of Chicago and also of the Commercial Club. His last public service was rendered to the city in the capacity of a director of the Worlds Fair, an enterprise with the inception and inauguration of which he had much to do.

General Strong was in the prime of a splendid manhood when failing health admonished him that he must seek rest and a change of climate. Accordingly on the 14th of March last, he sailed from New York to join his wife and daughters in Europe. Traveling by easy stages he reached Florence, Italy, where the end came suddenly, and at least to his thousands of friends in the United States, unexpectedly on the 10th of April. His remains were brought back to the land of his nativity and to his former home in Chicago. From thence they were carried by the comrades of former days and the devoted friends of his later years to his last resting place in Graceland cemetery, where he sleeps peacefully, wrapped in the national colors which he so bravely defended in his young manhood.

At the obsequies of General Strong the fact was made apparent that a man had passed away whom a great busy community, felt called upon to honor, and the tenderest tributes of love, respect, and admiration were laid on his grave. Said one who paid tribute to his character and worth as a man and patriot: “It is befitting to preserve in memory and hand down to the generations something about a man who has helped to make citizens heroic soldiers, and to render possible the triumph of liberty and manhood. While his was a beneficent existence of many manly years, it seems to the view of man that he died before his time. It is but just to say of him that his conduct as a soldier, sprang from a truly patriotic, martyr spirit which enabled him to dare unflinchingly, with a smile to the green earth, and a smile to the bright heavens, and a cheer to his companions.”

Of striking appearance, pleasing manners and great personal magnetism, he drew around him a circle of friends which was composed of many of the men best known in public and official life, in the world of trade and commerce, and in the various professions. These men were drawn to him by his geniality, his candor, his culture, his broad liberality and his unswerving fidelity to his friends. He was of that chivalrous nature which was regarded as the distinguishing characteristic of the Preux Chevalier in the days of knight errantry and with it all, was the practical, level-headed man of affairs.

A brave soldier, a good citizen, a courteous gentleman, General Strong was a splendid type of American manhood.

HOWARD LOUIS CONARD.

MISTAKES IN HISTORY—THE PILGRIMS NOT PURITANS BUT SEPARATISTS.

Among the wrong impressions and mistaken ideas which have been conveyed by writers and speakers during the last two hundred and fifty years, and even down to the present day, there are, perhaps, none more prominent and important than those relating to, and connected with, that most interesting body of people and most important event in our history—the Pilgrims and their coming to America. In no instance that is now called to mind, of the settling of a country or planting of a colony, have the motives and purposes of the colonists been so misrepresented and falsified, and so much fiction made to hang about their acts, as in the case of the Pilgrims. It is proposed in the present article to deal with two main ideas—who were the Pilgrims, and what were their objects or motives in coming to this country.

With regard to the first idea there seems to be great and unpardonable ignorance and confusion, for they were not Puritans nor Persecutors, as the latter became both in England and early in America, but were Separatists. Much has been done by Mr. Benjamin Scott, Chamberlain of the City of London, towards setting this matter right and putting it in proper shape before the public, and, he in turn, obtained much information through the studies and investigations of Dr. Waddington. The latter says: “The ignorance still existing on this subject is almost incredible. We find men of education who seem to have no exact information respecting the Pilgrim Fathers. Quarterly reviewers, members of Parliament, Christian divines and ecclesiastical historians speak of them with the same complacent disregard of facts.” The church presumed to dictate as to what kind of christians the Puritans should be, and the form and manner of worship they should adopt and be governed by. To these requirements there was a partial submission.

The Pilgrims separated from them because of this church imposition, and so became “Separatists.” Parliament declared, in Mary’s reign, the Pope to be the spiritual head of the church in England. When Elizabeth ascended to the throne 1558, she was confronted with this state of affairs respecting these matters, and issued a proclamation forbidding any change in the forms of religion, until they should be determined according to law. Thus it happened that there was no freedom to worship according to conscience for either Roman Catholics or Protestants. Elizabeth was opposed to Popery, but she was just as vindictive toward Protestants who did not shape their religious course and belief in accordance with her standard and the law of the State.

This Act of Supremacy, which she caused to be passed soon after she came into power, was not long after followed by the Act of Uniformity, which required everybody to worship, not only as the State directed, but also in the parish churches. Two years later came the crowning act in the adoption of the Articles of Religion; and the Church of England was established by the highest authority of the realm, and then commenced separations and persecutions. There were a few people, a small band, who found some errors yet left in the wake of the Reformation against which they protested. They also objected to any human power assuming that headship which they claimed belonged alone to Christ, and also asked the privilege of worshiping according to the simplicity of form and practice of the primitive Christians. Minor questions, such as baptism and the like, which have since given rise to divisions and sects, were not considered, and this little band of people, together with the Roman Catholics, were the only persons throughout England who objected to the church as the law had established it. Accordingly they formed themselves into distinct bodies, or associations, or churches, chose their own teachers and determined their own affairs. They claimed that the church was a spiritual association and should, therefore, be separated from the world, and was amenable only to the laws of Christ as given in the New Testament. Hence the name “Separatists.” They were simple in their manners and conduct and morals, and all these things rendered them unpopular and drew upon them the ill-will and enmity of the church, which found plenty of reason and many excuses and opportunities for persecuting them. There arose at this period another party, some of whom were English reformers, who had been driven from the country and had returned on the ascension of Elizabeth, but were disappointed to find that religious matters and laws had been settled and established.

Many of them however, accepted the change, including Royal Supremacy, Uniformity of Worship and Articles of Religion. They were nevertheless much dissatisfied, but hoped to effect still further changes and reformations. But in this they failed. This as will be seen, was a party within a party, a church within a church, or a party within the “establishment,” and they were the “Puritans.” In other words, the Protestants may be said to have been divided into three classes. The High Ritualists, Puritans and Separatists. High Ritualists claimed divine authority for the form of government, and the ceremonial of the Church of England. The king, they claimed, was the head of the church, as well as supreme in all civil matters and had power and authority over persons and property. The Puritans, on the contrary, believed none of these doctrines, although they were as devoted to the Church of England as was the other party, the High Ritualists, and the reforms they desired, they sought to make from within the church. Separation they regarded as the rankest kind of an offense, a terrible sin. To draw a comparison, or to make an illustration—the Puritans were Episcopalians—the low-church wing of that period. In another sense there was a difference or distinction between Puritans and Pilgrims: The Puritans had among their number, as influential persons, many of the nobility, men of business, capitalists and educated, fashionable and accomplished people. Indeed, during the entire reign of James I, they formed a majority in the House of Commons, and no person not a communicant of the Church of England could then sit in that body.

From this body of Puritan Episcopalians sprang that company who landed at Salem and settled at Boston in 1630, not the Pilgrims who settled at Plymouth in 1620. The latter, the “Separatists,” renounced the Church of England, and separated from it. They were likewise socially from the humbler walks of life. Some of their number, it is true, were persons of education, culture and refinement, but as has been said, the great bulk were from among the common people, without means, power or influence. Indeed, they sustained about the same relation to other classes and denominations that the Methodists, in their beginning, did to other religious denominations. In short, they were persecuted by the Church of England by the Puritans and by the Roman Catholics.

The Separatists, one and all, suffered every indignity, privation and want, while many, among them Barrow, Greenwood, Dennis and Penry, were hung. Others still were thrown into prison, and died from neglect, hunger and cold. Others were permitted to leave the country, but were informed that if they returned, their lives would be the forfeit. Later on, this was even denied them, and their departure from the country was forbidden. For these reasons, the Separatist congregations fled secretly to Holland, and even in Holland the Dutch shunned them, for they were afraid of offending King James, whose good will and help they wanted. These “Separatists,” or Pilgrims, therefore gradually disappeared from English soil, and from the English mind, and in 1607, there remained in the kingdom only one organized congregation of this kind, which was within the limits of the little town of Scrooby. Here their pastors were Richard Clifton and John Robinson, the latter a somewhat rash and inconsiderate young man, but they depended chiefly for material aid and favors, as well as sympathy and encouragement, on William Brewster, afterwards their “venerated elder.” He was postmaster, and his duties included the charge of public travel, which necessitated a house of large dimensions, and in this building he permitted the “Separatists” to worship weekly, lodging and entertaining them. About this time there appeared another person, a mere lad, who became interested in, and identified himself with, the Pilgrims, and who subsequently occupied a useful and prominent position in their history.

This was William Bradford, who came from a very respectable family in a neighboring village. They were not long, however, to remain here in peace and unmolested quiet. Their retreat was sought out and persecutions anew visited upon them, and there remained only two alternatives, the one to yield a hypocritical conformity and submission, or to become exiles from their native land, from “the graves in which their fathers slept.” They accordingly gathered themselves together, and under the leadership of the youthful and brave Bradford, fled to Amsterdam—Brewster, Robinson and Clifton remaining behind, like the marshal of Napoleon’s grand army, to guard the rear, when, having seen all safely on their journey and beyond the reach of the “King’s hirelings,” they followed on and soon joined those who had gone before. They were disappointed however, and failed to find peace and quiet and rest, for at Amsterdam there were two societies or congregations of English worshipers who had fled their country, but they were in continual dissensions with each other, and rendered the situation of the little band of “Separatists,” uncomfortable and unpleasant. There remained therefore, nothing for the latter to do but to “move on,” which they did, forty miles distant to the “goodly and pleasant city” of Leyden. Here at last they found peace and quiet and freedom of worship, but were not without perplexities and disadvantages.

They had to depend upon manual labor for subsistence, which employment they sought from the Dutch, of whose language they understood not a word. In their own land they had been chiefly agriculturists, but many of them now became manufacturers and mechanics of various kinds. Thus were they, by the force of circumstances, fortunate in learning trades which were useful to the community in after years in their home beyond the sea. Bradford engaged in the silk dyeing business and Brewster set up a printing office. It could not be expected that this condition of affairs, even, although a great improvement, would long satisfy the spiritual and intellectual longings and demands of such men as the Pilgrims. Their life, on the whole, was far from satisfactory. True their numbers had more than doubled, grown from one to over two hundred, yet their lot here seemed to have been cast in a hard place. Their children were losing English habits, character and language. Sunday, as was generally the case in European countries, was a day of recreation and was given up to merry-making and the playing of games. Influences, associations and examples were unfortunate, and all these things caused serious apprehensions in the minds of the Pilgrims. The old adage, too, that “a rolling stone gathers no moss,” was strikingly illustrated in their case. Years and life were passing rapidly away.

They had, many of them, become physically weakened from the hardships they had endured and were nearing old age, Brewster being sixty at the time of the landing, and they had the very natural feeling and desire to “lay up something for a rainy day.” After much thoughtful and prayerful consideration, in view of all these facts and circumstances, they decided to emigrate to America.

At this period in their lives, from their wanderings, misfortunes and persecutions, nearly every member of the Separatist-Pilgrim Company had become reduced to the direst straits. Indeed, this had been the common lot and experience of a large majority of them from their youth up, and when it was determined to seek homes in the new world, they were without means to secure their passage.

To obtain this, they made the best terms and conditions that they could with the London merchants.

The conditions were hard, but they were in the power of the merchants and there was no alternative. Concerning this Mr. Cushman who, acted as agent in the matter, says: “Although they (the proposals) were very afflictive to the minds of such as were concerned in the voyage, and hard enough for the poor people that were to adventure their persons as well as their estates,” they had to be accepted. Had they not done so, Mr. Cushman adds, “the whole design would have fallen to the ground.”

At the end of the seven years all the original and acquired assets of the colony, were to be equally divided between the merchants and the Pilgrims. So practically, it cost the Pilgrims seven years of severe labor to get from England to America. Nor was this all. There had been disaffection among the merchants and some had withdrawn from the co-partnership, leaving an accumulation of indebtedness. Those remaining friendly to the Pilgrims, wrote the latter: “As there has been a faction among us more than two years, so now there is an utter breach and sequestration. The company’s debts are no less than 1400 pounds, and we hope you will do your best to free them. We are still persuaded that you are the people that must make a plantation in those remote places where all others fail. We have sent some cattle, clothes, hoes, shoes, leather etc., for Allerton and Winslow to sell as our factors.”

And these goods the Pilgrims were to purchase at an advance of seventy per cent. Thus matters went from bad to worse, until the Pilgrims, seeing no way of “making out” of the difficulty became convinced that the best thing they could do was to break up the co-partnership and wind up its affairs. With this in view, they sent Miles Standish to London to “oblige them to come to a composition.” He took up 150 pounds of the indebtedness at the rate of fifty per cent.

Matters were in bad shape in England for the colonists, and among disheartening things, Standish found that both Robinson and Cushman had died. Finally, late in 1626, Mr. Allerton went over and through influence brought to bear on the merchants, the latter agreed to sell out to the colonists for 1,800 pounds, in payments of 200 pounds a year, beginning with the year 1628. Here were nine years more of hard labor before they could hope to be clear of the indebtedness incurred for their passage money with living expenses added. An arrangement was at last affected by some of the leading men of the colony with a few staunch friends in London to take the trade of the colony for six years, pay off the debts and send the remainder of the Leyden church over. The six years would end in 1632, a period of twelve years from the time of landing. It was also the length of time spent by the Separatists in Holland after they left England. What a history! Almost a generation in time, and crowded full of trials, hardships, discouragements, sickness and death.

The Pilgrims doubtless were a kind, tender hearted and sympathetic people naturally, and their surroundings and experiences in life would tend to render more marked these characteristics. They as clearly were a christian people and deeply religious, and it could hardly be expected that the Reformation of the sixteenth century, setting men’s minds and thoughts religiously free, would result in aught else than great diversity of opinion, and that beliefs and doctrines would be sharply outlined and stoutly maintained; Luther died but a few years before Brewster was born, and Melanchthon, his coadjutor and ally, lived for several years after. Bradford and Robinson were born before religious feeling and ardor had become cooled. It is not, therefore, a matter of surprise, when we find Robinson taking a hand in the discussions of the day. This suited his nature; he seemed to be in his “element,” for he was yet young, only 32, when the “Separatists,” went from Scrooby into Holland.

Lest it be thought that the opinion we have expressed concerning Robinson was incorrect and unjust, the language is here given of an eminent, English writer and speaker: “It was with the Calvinists that Robinson took part, entering into the subject with all the learning of which he was master and all the ardor of a man of his temperament, and still not 40 years old. It is to be regretted that, like all the other polemics of his day, his zeal betrayed him into intemperate warmth, and the adoption of harsh, acrimonious and uncharitable expressions. It must be remembered that the most vehement, violent and vituperative language used by the most ultra bigot of our times is as mild as milk, compared with the controversial tone of the theological disputants of the seventeenth century.” Bradford also says of Robinson that “he was a man of quick and sharp wit, an acute and expert disputant, very quick and ready;” and Winslow adds: “’Tis true, I confess, he was more rigid in his course and way at first than towards his latter end,” when the “fiery vehemence of youth” had given place to the cooler judgment and conservatism of riper years. But Robinson did not come to America with the Pilgrims, nor at all, for he died at the age of 49, in 1625.

He had expected to come, but a majority of the flock at Leyden decided to remain at that place instead of emigrating, and he concluded to remain also.

Leaving Robinson out, who had been obliged in early manhood, to resort to daily labor for a living, it is very doubtful if the desire for freedom in religious worship was the main motive for their emigrating.

Bradford was thirteen years younger than Robinson, and but a mere boy when the church at Scrooby was formed, and only nineteen at the removal to Leyden. He was a noble youth (and a nobler man) and was easily influenced and led by Brewster and Robinson. The whole company went to Leyden expecting probably to spend their lives there, and engaged in various business callings and occupations. On coming of age, Bradford inherited some money. This he sank in unfortunate business operations. Brewster had been postmaster at Scrooby from 1594 to 1607, when he resigned, presumably because his sympathy with the “Separatists” was obnoxious to the government, which, in all probability, would have removed him had not he himself deprived it of that pleasure, by vacating office, following which action he immediately went to Holland.

It will be borne in mind that the Pilgrims, as a congregation or church, were not the first Separatist body or organization, for one John Smith had organized a company of these people as early as 1602, at Gainsborough, numbering some three or four hundred, and in 1604 went with them to Amsterdam. This was undoubtedly one reason for the Pilgrims going to that place under Brewster and Bradford, instead of going to any other place. It is believed that Robinson had little or no connection with our Pilgrims until after Brewster left the post-office, and they were about to leave Scrooby. On the way to Amsterdam, and later, on the way to and at Leyden, accessions were made to the company, so that before the final emigration their numbers had reached between two and three hundred. These latter additions were from the common or laboring class, who, in all probability, joined in the wake of the movement, thinking to better their worldly condition.

On this point another English writer has said: “The vicinity of Scrooby was an agricultural district, having a few villages scattered about, each with its church and perhaps an esquire’s seat, but the population was for the most part employed in husbandry, an occupation little congenial to the growth of extreme opinions in either religion or politics or of voluntary sacrifices to a severe estimate of duty, or a supposed call of conscience.” The same writer, speaking of those who were even prominently identified with the movement, says: “Neither Bradford nor Brewster, nor the divines who were concerned in the movement, were of the eminent of the earth, about whom there is curiosity widely extended through the country which gave them birth, and concerning whom nothing is thought unimportant. It may even be said that they were but inconsiderable persons at home, and their consequence has undoubtedly arisen out of the grand results which, unforeseen by themselves, have ensued on their great resolve. So that there is scarcely anything to be told of their early history besides those very small facts which make the history of men who are of but small account in the midst of a large and advanced population.” It has also been said that the Pilgrims, as we speak of them, would scarcely have been heard of had it not been first for Robinson and Brewster and Bradford, and there can be no doubt that the great majority of them came to this country that they might find homes and advance their worldly circumstances.

An American of high historical standing and learning has said: “Here lay a new world for the most part unoccupied, inviting colonization, and it was as natural for men to come and settle here as to embark in any other enterprise in life. The only wonder is that the work of colonization was not begun earlier and pursued by thousands rather than by hundreds.” This colonizing, this settling and developing a country, the desire to own the roof under which one sleeps “raise the personal importance and dignity of the subject or citizens,” and “it can never be too well understood that the generations of men sow and plant for their successors.” It seems to have been an entire and pushing necessity that these people should get away from Holland in order to secure a comfortable living and to make any provision for their posterity. Bradford says: “The country (Holland) was hard and many were discouraged. Grim and grizzled poverty was coming on them as an armed man, old age was coming upon them and no amelioration of their condition came with it.” That they should come to America, and for the reasons given, seems quite reasonable and natural when it is remembered that Captain Smith and others, returning to England, had expressed the opinion that the fisheries on the New England coast might be made profitable. And we know that this was one of the first industries engaged in by the Pilgrims. Smith states that in 1616 four ships of London and two of Plymouth and Sir Richard Hawkins were again in the fishing waters in the vicinity of Massachusetts and Maine.

Early in 1620, also, six or seven sailing vessels set out for the western country for the same purpose and visited the country about the harbor where the Pilgrims landed in December following.

That there was a Providence in their coming here is altogether probable. That the same Providence reached out and extended its ruling and benignant hand on the journey and after the arrival is certain.