were in place when Mr. Coddington's commission obstructed, should stand in those places, to act according to their former commissions." 1 But Coddington, being applied to for "the statute book and book of records," replied that "he dared not lay down his commission, having no order thereto, nor had he seen anything to show that his commission was annulled." 2 The mainlanders and the islanders could not take the preliminary step of agreeing upon a place where they should meet to "receive the orders from the Right Honorable the Council of State." The northern settlements said that, obstacles to for the present purpose, they represented the reunion. legal Colony, having continued the charter government of the "Providence Plantations." The southern towns maintained that, for the present purpose, they were the Colony, since they contained the larger number of its people. Neither party would give way. On the one hand Newport and Portsmouth, on the other Providence and Warwick, each pair, in the absence of the other, professing to act for the whole, chose a board of magistrates to administer the colonial government. Each board was acknowledged only within the limits of its own constituency; and so, instead of relief having been obtained by the last action in London, a new complication was introduced.

As if the Rhode-Islanders, in this imbecile condition, had not enough upon their hands, they undertook to constitute themselves a party to the war between the English Commonwealth and the Dutch. They set up Rhode Island privateering, issued commissions to three officers privateering. for service against New Netherland, and instituted an Admiralty Court for the trial of prizes.3

1 R. I. Rec., I. 240.

* Ibid., 265; comp. 259, 260, 269.After much inquiry, I cannot learn that the act of revocation of Coddington's "commission," either in the origi

1653.

May 24.

nal or in a copy, exists in Rhode Island; nor does it, or any record of its being granted, appear in the Journal of the Council of State. See below, p. 557.

3 Ibid., 266; comp. 261.- Our old

The colonial rulers chosen by Providence and Warwick condemned this measure, and passed a vote disfranchising its friends.1 Captain Hull, who held one of the commissions, interpreted it with such latitude that he captured a French ship. Captain Baxter, a Rhode-Island officer, subsequently employed, seized a vessel belonging to Barnstable, in Plymouth Colony. The same commander took a Dutch prize into Fairfield, whither he was pursued by two Dutch armed vessels, who proceeded to blockade the port. The distracted community was fertile in ways of being vexatious to its neighbors.

1654.

The generous statesman who had flattered himself that his intervention had secured to it a new tranquillity was amazed at the infatuation of its turbulent people. "How is it," wrote Sir Henry Vane, "that there are Feb. 8. such divisions amongst you,-such headiness, tumults, disorders, injustice? The noise echoes into the ears of all, as well friends as enemies, by every return of ships from those parts. Is not the fear and awe of God amongst you to restrain? Is not the love of Christ in

you, to fill you with yearning bowels one towards another, and constrain you not to live to yourselves, but to Him that died for you, yea, and is risen again? Are there no wise men amongst you; no public, self-denying spirits,

friend, John Underhill, who was not particular as to the colors under which he served, and who had been getting himself into trouble with his recent masters in New Netherland (Brodhead, I. 556), was one of those officers, and William Dyer was another. The commission constituted "Captain John Underhill commander-in-chief upon the land, and Captain William Dyer commander-in-chief at sea, yet to join in counsel, to be assistant each to other, for the propagating of the service premised." “Mr. Dyer, ..... being ruined by party contentions with Mr. Cottington, hopes for a re

-

.....

that, at least upon the grounds of public safety, equity, and prudence, can find out some way or means of union and reconciliation for you amongst yourselves, before you become a prey to common enemies, especially since this State, by the last letter from the Council of State, gave you your freedom, as supposing a better use would have been made of it than there hath been? Surely when kind and simple remedies have been applied and are ineffectual, it speaks loud and broadly the high and dangerous distempers of such a body, as if the wounds were incurable." 1

Williams to

June.

This letter was brought by Williams to New England. Landing at Boston, he produced a letter of safeconduct from twelve members of the Council of Return of State, and was permitted to proceed without America. molestation to his home. Distressed to find, on his arrival there, that, though the forms of a general election had lately been gone through,3 no actual union was made or prepared for, he addressed to his neighbors a letter of remonstrance. He reproached them for the misconduct by which they had brought on themselves the reproach of being "a licentious and contentious people," and urged them, with the eloquence almost of despair, to find some way to a settlement, if they would not seem to have disfranchised humanity and love." The evident necessity of the case lent force to his advice. A meeting of "Commissioners" for the four towns - six for each was arranged. They voted to restore the government as it had been constituted seven years before, under the patent obtained by Williams, at the same time ratifying the proceedings which, during its suspension, had been had by the two separate colonial authorities. An election was ordered,

1 R. I. Rec., 285.

2 Ibid., 290.

VOL. II.

31

• Ibid., 273.

Aug. 31.

Sept. 12.

• Knowles, Memoir, &c., 266.

at which Williams was chosen President, and a prospect of better things seemed to be disclosed.1

A list of freemen, made about this time, exhibits two hundred and forty-seven names.

Reunion

of the four towns.

1647.

Of these, one hundred and sixty-seven belonged to the island, Newport having ninety-six, and Portsmouth seventy-one. Of the residue, Providence numbered fortytwo, and Warwick thirty-eight, Newport alone being considerably more populous than both these settlements together. The aggregate population may have amounted to twelve hundred. The Colony was rounded by the adjustment of the dispute, of sixteen years' standing, respecting Pawtuxet. It had been ordered, when a government was organized under the patent for " ProviMay 19. dence Plantations," that the planters at Pawtuxet should be left to their choice, whether they would have Providence, Portsmouth, or Newport over them.” 3 But the Pawtuxet people desired to attach themselves to no one of those towns. They continued to consider themselves under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts. Two years after, under the Presidency of John Smith, the General Court of Providence "ordered that a messenger be sent to Pomham and the other sachem, to require them to come to this Court, and that letters be sent to Benedict Arnold and his father, and the rest of Pawtuxet, about their subjecting to this Colony."4

1649. May 22.

The Pawtuxet people reported this to the General Court of Massachusetts, who warned Smith's government to desist from troubling them. To clear her claim, Massachusetts then applied to Plymouth; and,

1650. May 23.

1 R. I. Rec., I. 276.

Ibid., 209-302.

3 Ibid., 152.

4 Ibid., 218.

5 Mass. Rec., III. 196.- Massachusetts had first (July, 1649) asked the

advice of the Federal Commissioners respecting the question of her jurisdiction, and had been advised by them to settle it with Plymouth "by a neighborly and friendly treaty." (Records, &c., in Hazard, II. 144.)

June 7.

receiving from that Colony a formal surrender of its title to the lands occupied by Arnold and his friends, she proceeded to annex them to her county of Suffolk.2 Providence undertook to collect taxes at the settlement, and was threatened by the General Court of Massachusetts, in a letter to Wil- 1651. liams, which declared that, if the pretension was not abandoned, that government "intended to seek satisfaction in such manner as God should put into their hands." 3

May 22.

1653.

June 2.

The Commissioners from Plymouth now disputed the legality of the earlier proceedings of their Colony in making the cession to Massachusetts; and the question. became further perplexed. Once more the Pawtuxet people were molested by their neighbors with a claim for taxes. But Massachusetts was getting tired of the dispute, and the original purpose of it had long ago been answered. She merely replied by a protest against the claim, and by a permission to the Pawtuxet people to recover compensation in her courts, if they could find within her jurisdiction any property of those by whom they were aggrieved. Their number was reduced by removals, till only four heads of families remained. Two desired to attach themselves to the new 1655. government; and two, William Arnold and Wil- November. liam Carpenter, weary of the annoyances which were be costly and troublesome. (Plym. Rec., II. 171; Records, &c., in Hazard, II. 153; comp. 143.)

1 Mass. Rec., III. 198; Plym. Rec., II. 158.

* Mass. Rec., III. 201, 202.- The Federal Commissioners, being informed of this cession at their next meeting (September 5, 1650), advised, for the sake of conciliating the Warwick people, that Plymouth should retract it, and assume jurisdiction of the territory. (Records, &c., in Hazard, 153, 154.) Massachusetts readily acceded to that arrangement (Mass. Rec., III. 216); but Plymouth declined a business likely to

3 Mass. Rec., III. 228.

Records, &c., in Hazard, II. 199203.-The business was revived at this time by a notice to the Commissioners, from Gorton and his friends, of their intention to make another application to Parliament. (Ibid., 198; see also Winthrop, II. 251, 252.)

5 Mass. Rec., IV. (i.) 149.