Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

Proceedings against them

[ocr errors]

took place in New Haven1 and Plymouth, especially in Plymouth, which, as being nearest to Rhode Island, the Quakers most frequented of all the in the small- confederate Colonies, after Massachusetts. But, among the Colonies of New England, it is the unhappy distinction of the chartered- and therefore at

er Colonies.

"Twenty-two have been banished upon pain of death. Three have been martyred. Three have had their right ears cut. One hath been burned in the hand with the letter H. Thirtyone persons have received six hundred and fifty stripes. One was beat while his body was like a jelly. Several were beat with pitched ropes. Five appeals made to England were denied by the rulers of Boston. One thousand forty-four pounds' worth of goods hath been taken from them (being poor men) for meeting together in the fear of the Lord, and for keeping the commands of Christ. One now lieth in iron fetters, condemned to die."

This book is in the form of an Address to the King, in reply to statements in the Address of the General Court of Massachusetts. (See above, p. 449.) It is signed by seven persons, all of whom had been sufferers in the Colony, and were now in London. A postscript, which has the signature of "E. B." (Edward Burrough, I suppose), is dated 15 March, 1660 (1661), indicating the time when it was presented. As might be expected in the circumstances, the treatise was aggressive as well as apologetic. It aimed to incense the King by averring (p. 11), that in "a letter subscribed by some of these petitioners" (the Massachusetts Magistrates) were these words: "There is more danger in the Quakers to trouble and overcome England, than in the King of Scots, and all the Popish princes in Germany."

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

Inquisition, &c., 12. - The one case of branding in the hand mentioned in the "Declaration," &c., was, I suppose, that of Humphrey Norton, in New Haven Colony. See N. H. Rec., IL 217, 238, 276, 291, 363, 412.

2 See Bishop, 160-203; Howgill, Popish Inquisition, &c., 13-17. — James Cudworth, an important man of Plymouth Colony, was a friend and champion of the Quakers, though no convert to their opinions. Timothy Hatherly was in sympathy with him, and both were left out of the magistracy, in 1658, on account of the displeas ure thus occasioned. For the legislation in Plymouth against the Quakers, extending through four years, see Brigham, Compact, &c., 102, 103, 114, 122, 125-127, 129, 130; comp. Plym. Rec., III. 111, 123–130, 139, 147, 151, 167, 176, 179, 184, 185, 197, 199; Baylies, Historical Memoir of Plymouth, II. 30 -48.-In Connecticut, notwithstanding the menace of some dangerouslooking laws (Conn. Rec., I. 283, 303, 324), Bishop allows (pp. 226, 227) that, on the whole, his friends did not fare very ill; though they were not “suffered to abide," and two women "were imprisoned several days, and some of their clothes sold to pay their fees."

In England, at the same time, thousands of Quakers were punished in the same way (see Sewel, 252, 254, 335); and the return of Quakers from banishment continued to be a felony in Virginia years after it ceased to be a felony in Massachusetts. (Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, Query

once more self-confident and more endangered - Colony of Massachusetts, to have been the only one in which Quakers who refused to absent themselves were condemned to die. Her right to her territory was absolute, deplorable as was the extreme assertion of it. No householder has a more unqualified title to declare who shall have the shelter of his roof, than had the Governor and Company of Massachusetts Bay to decide who should be sojourners or visitors within their precincts. Their danger was real, though the experiment proved it to be far less than was at first supposed. The provocations which were offered were exceedingly offensive. It is hard to say what should have been done with disturbers so unmanageable. But that one thing should not have been done till they had become more mischievous, is plain enough. They should not have been put to death. Sooner than put them to death, it were devoutly to be wished that the annoyed dwellers in Massachusetts had opened their hospitable drawing-rooms to naked women, and suffered their ministers to ascend the pulpits by steps paved with fragments of glass bottles.

The reader is aware that in Massachusetts there had been from an early period a law against Baptists, which had for the most part remained a dead letter, Proceedings though in one important instance it had been against carried rigorously into effect.1 A congregation

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Baptists.

anabaptistery, &c.," led to an investigation, which, as far as we know, ended in nothing. (Mass. Rec., II. 253.) In the same year, according to Backus (History, &c., iv.), a person of the name of Samuel Hubbard, and his wife, went from Connecticut to Newport, because, according to Hubbard's account, in consequence of being "enlightened" as to "baptizing only visible believers," they were "threatened with imprisonment to Hartford gaol, if they did not renounce it or remove."

1665.

1666.

1668.

of that sect, which was organized at Charlestown, gave special offence by receiving to the communion persons who had been excommunicated by other churches. Its meetings were forbidden, but were not discontinued. Five of the members, being freemen, were acOct. 11. cordingly disfranchised; and two, Thomas Gold and Thomas Osborn, were sent to prison, where they remained nearly a year. After their discharge, Sept. 11. the meetings were resumed; and three leaders were sentenced to be banished from the jurisdicMay 27. tion, under the penalty of imprisonment, should they venture to return. A petition, with influential signatures, was presented against this measure; and, Nov. 7. though it was not granted, no pains appear to have been taken to prosecute the offenders. Nothing further respecting the Baptists occurs in the records for twelve years, and in two years more the agents of the Colony in England had instructions to represent: "As for the Anabaptists, they are now subject to no other penal statutes than those of the Congregational way." A question respecting the rite of baptism, different

1

According to Samuel Willard (Ne Sutor ultra Crepidam, 13), Gold had "used unbecoming gestures in the time of administration [of baptism], of which being asked the reason, he, before the congregation, acknowledged they were to cast disrespect upon it;" and Osborn, when his practices began, did "not so much as pretend any doubt about infant baptism." (Ibid., 15.)

2 Mass. Rec., IV. (ii.) 290, 316, 373; comp. Mather, Magnalia, VII. 26 – 30. - An indication of the feeling which prevailed is seen in the republication, this year, at Cambridge, of a translation of Guy de Brez's exciting book, then a hundred years old, on "The Rise, Spring, and Foundation of the Anabaptists." Had the Magistrates of Massachusetts known all that Lord

"4

Clarendon knew, they might have
found a still further cause of alarm in
a suspicion of having a new set of royal
emissaries among them. Two years be-
fore the restoration of the exiled prince,
he received a letter from some of his
Baptist friends in England, in which
they described the Protector as "that
grand impostor, that loathsome hypo-
crite, that detestable traitor, that prod-
igy of nature, that opprobrium of man-
kind, that landscape of iniquity, that
sink of sin, and that compendium of
baseness." (Clarendon, History of the
Rebellion, XV.113.)-Scott puts these
words (perhaps unconsciously supplied
by memory) into the mouth of Sir Hen-
ry Lee, in "Woodstock," Chap. XXV.
& Mass. Rec., IV. (ii.) 404, 413.
♦ Ibid., V. 271, 272, 347.

[ocr errors]

tism in the

tional Church.

from the questions which were presented by the Baptists, occasioned at the same time a lively contention Questions rewithin the Congregational Church itself. Ac- specting bapcording to the original scheme of that Church, Congregathe proper subjects of baptism were such believers, hitherto unbaptized, as desired admission into the church and to the Lord's Supper, and the infant children of church-members in full standing, that is, of communicants. In the lapse of years, numbers, who had been baptized in infancy, but who were not ready for the tests of admission into the church, had now become heads of families. What was their ecclesiastical position? Were they, through their baptism, in any sense members of the church? If so, were they not entitled to have their children baptized? Or, if not so entitled already, might they not become so, by expressly assuming the engagements which at baptism had been made for them by their parents? These questions naturally led to others. Were not the terms of admission to the Lord's Supper, and to full membership in the church, too strict? Ought a relation of personal religious experience to be rigidly insisted on, as a condition? Had not all baptized persons of regular life a right to be received to the communiontable? Some went even further than this, and asked, whether all members of a congregation, who contributed to its support, had not a right to act in the election of its officers with those members of the church to whom hitherto that prerogative had exclusively belonged.

The dispute first assumed form and practical importance in the church of Hartford. The Reverend Mr. Stone, whom the reader remembers as the chaplain of Captain Mason's party in the Pequot war,1 had done some act in relation to baptism or to the communion, which by Governor Webster, the Magistrates Whiting and Cullick, and several other members of his congregation, was re

1 See Vol. I. 463.

in the church of Hartford.

1656.

garded as of latitudinarian tendency. One council after another was convoked, and vainly endeavored Ministers and messento compose the feud. 1654, 1655. gers came from Massachusetts, but their efforts had no better success. The General Court of Connecticut appointed a committee of four leading men to confer with the ministers of the Colony, and, with their assistance, to prepare such a statement of the matters May. in debate as should be a basis for consulting the several governments of the Confederacy.1 It was drawn up and circulated accordingly, being digested in twenty-one questions. The General Court of Massachusetts advised that it should be submitted at Boston to a Synod of divines from the several Colonies, and appointed a delegation of fifteen distinguished ministers.2 Connecticut accepted the proposal, Feb. 26. and nominated on her part four ministers, of whom Mr. Stone was one.3 Plymouth took no action in the matter. New Haven, attached to the old system, and fearful of the consequences of the present movement, refused to have a part in it, and sent a letter of warning, and a full answer to the questions, both

Oct. 14.

1657.

Feb. 25.

prepared by Mr. Davenport.*

Synod of Con

The Synod met in Boston, and sat two or three weeks Its Result was embodied in full answers to the necticut and questions which had been proposed.5 It favored some of the views which had been recently gaining ground. In particular, as to the case of such

Massachu

setts.

June 4.

1 Conn. Rec., I. 281.

2 Mass. Rec., III. 419, IV. (i.) 280. 3 Conn. Rec., I. 288-291.

* N. H. Rec., II. 195–198. — In the British Museum, among the Lansdowne manuscripts (Catalogue, p. 184, Nos. 72-93), there are twenty-two autograph manuscripts belonging to this controversy. The last of them is a letter from Davenport. I examined the collection, when in London; and since,

by the kindness of a friend, have a full abstract of them. But they are not instructive to the reader of the present day, even so far as to afford him information concerning the precise occasion of the original dispute.

5 It was printed in London in 1659, in a quarto volume, with the title, “A Disputation concerning Church-Members and their Children." See it in Hubbard, 563 – 569.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »