throne of King David." But the expediency of this second Address was reconsidered, and it appears not to have been sent.

specting the

Sept. 9.

The complaints of the Quakers had reached the royal ear. Edward Burrough obtained an audience, and presented their case. The careless King, who did not like the annoyance of refusing a request, unless the granting of it would interfere with his ease or his pleasures, allowed a letter to be written to Endicott and the other Message from Governors and officers of the New-England Col- the King reonies, directing "that, if there were any of those Quakers. people called Quakers amongst them, now already condemned to suffer death, or other corporal punishment, or that were imprisoned, and obnoxious to the like condemnation, they were to forbear to proceed any further therein," and should send such persons to England for trial. At Burrough's request, the mandamus, as it has been inaccurately called, was given in charge to Samuel Shattuck, a Quaker of Salem, then in England under a sentence of banishment, with the usual condition of being capitally punished if he should return. As soon as arrangements could with all haste be made, Shattuck sailed for Boston in a vessel provided by some of his fellow-sectaries, and commanded by one of them.

November.

There

On their arrival, the messenger and the shipmaster presented themselves at the Governor's door, and sent him word that "their business was from the King of England, and that they would deliver their message to none but the Governor himself. upon they were admitted to go in; and the Governor came to them, and commanded Shattuck's hat to be taken off; and, having received the deputation and the mandamus, he laid off his hat; and, ordering Shattuck's hat to be given him again, he looked

1 Mass. Rec., IV. (ii.) 32, 33; Hutch. Coll., 341, 348. All proceed

upon the papers, and then,

ings of the kind must have been unpalatable in a high degree.

going out, went to the Deputy-Governor, and bid the King's deputy and the master of the ship follow him; and, having consulted with him about the matter, he returned to the two aforesaid persons, and said, 'We shall obey his Majesty's command.'" 1 The command, however, produced little effect. The resolution to abstain from further capital punishments had been taken some months before, though the Magistrates perhaps were not indisposed to appeal to the King's injunction rather than avow a change of judgment on their own part. The General Court, not because a royal mandate to them was coercive, but "that they might not in the least offend his Majesty," saw fit to "order and declare that Nov. 27. the execution of the laws in force against Quakers, as such, so far as they respected corporal punishment or death, should be suspended until the Court took further order." The Court did take further order Oct. 8. within a year, and laws respecting the corporal punishment of Quakers were revived. And no Quaker prisoners were sent to England for trial. It would have been a violation of one of the most cherished local maxims.

1662.

A question started at this time as to "the Court's sending a meet person or persons with an Address to his Majesty," divided the opinion of the rulers, and was “referred to the next Court." A special session was called

1 Sewel, 272-274; comp. Bishop,

344-346.

2 Mass. Rec., IV. (ii.) 34, 59.

Hutchinson says (Hist., I. 201) that this proposal was in consequence of "orders being received from the King that persons should be sent over to make answer." Chalmers (Annals, 253) makes the same statement, and refers to Hutchinson, and to "NewEngland Entries." I have never seen these "orders," nor do I get any light upon them from Chalmers's original

memoranda from the documents in the English offices, of which memoranda (composing two folio volumes in manuscript, and extending from 1633 to 1765) I have the use, by the kindness of my friend, Mr. Sparks. When the Court voted to send, they said that it was because of "duly considering the weight of their occasions in England." (Mass. Rec., IV. (ii.) 37.) I am not sure that Hutchinson was not thinking of a later order of the King to send agents. See below, pp. 624, 625.

Mission of

and

to England.

1661.

Dec. 31.

the next month, and it was resolved to send Mr. Bradstreet and Mr. Norton. Further conference having somewhat developed the critical character of the Bradstreet measure contemplated, the Court determined to norted. intrust to a Committee the arrangements for the mission, including the preparation of instructions for the messengers, "that so," say they, "the means used for our safety may not be improved against us for our ruin." The Committee consisted of the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, the Magistrates Gookin and Danforth, and Captain Lusher, Captain Johnson, and Mr. Joseph Hill, Deputies respectively for Dedham, Woburn, and Malden. Some men of influence were desired to collect money to defray the expenses; and a letter was despatched "to the Church of Christ in Boston, to stir up their willing minds to part with the Reverend Mr. John Norton, their Teacher, to further the service and occasions of the country." 1

1662.

Jan. 4

Feb. 7.

The majority of the Committee took up the business with zealous promptness. Within five weeks they met ten times "at the Anchor tavern in Boston." The Governor and the Deputy-Governor were so averse to the measure, that they refused to be present at the meetings, though invited with urgent repetition. As many as four members always attended;

1 Mass. Rec., IV. (ii.) 40.

2 In the Massachusetts Archives (CVI. 49, 50), under the date of February 7, 1662, is a letter from the General Court to Colonel Crowne, bespeaking his good offices in London. In the previous July, by Crowne, who then returned from a visit to England, Lord Say and Sele had written to them: "You have had several appeared against you, and have been examined against you, as Captain Breedon and others; and I must say for Mr. Crowne, he hath appeared both here

.....

in the Council, and to the Lord Chamberlain and others, as really and cordially for you as any could do, and hath allayed the ill opinion of your cruelty against the Quakers." (Hutch., I. 202.)

Their aversion, no doubt, arose from jealousy lest the rights of Massachusetts should be compromised by the agents, or lest some advantage should be extorted from them. But, this being so, it is not obvious how Endicott and Bellingham became opposed to Danforth, who was specially

and Danforth, Johnson, and Hill were not once absent. Arrangements were made for procuring money, besides credit to the amount of seven hundred pounds, to defray the expense of the expedition; and the persons having this part of the business in charge were instructed to "be secret, as far as they possibly might, especially respecting the quantity of money procured." The Secretary was directed to transcribe for the use of the messengers a mass of documents, relating to the course of transactions from the beginning of the settlement.

Bradstreet and Norton were extremely unwilling to undertake the service. It involved a heavy responsibility in respect to the public interests at stake. Failure in the negotiation which was to take place was extremely probable, and would naturally bring odium upon the agents, however faithful they might be. Nor were more immediate discouragements wanting. The agents might be detained in England as hostages for the obedient conduct of their constituents. If the complaints against the Colony should be favorably regarded, both of them might be brought into personal peril; for Bradstreet, as an Assistant from the first, had been a party to every transaction, and Norton, above most men, had been forward in the proceedings against the Quakers. If the result should be a disturbance of the local government, they might be without effectual resource for an indemnity for any losses they might incur.

At the third meeting of the Committee, the agents formally inquired whether it would be prudent Jan. 18. to make so large

active in expediting the mission, and who, from first to last of his eminent public career, was behind no man in the boldness of his advocacy of popular rights. Endicott and Bellingham, probably, had their anxieties about Norton, who had distinguished himself by pleading for an early accommoda

claims in England as the

tion with the King, and about Bradstreet, who was constitutionally slow, if not timid. Danforth, though as hightoned as either the Governor or Lieutenant-Governor, was more of a calculating politician, and may have thought that Norton and Bradstreet were just the men to make most favor at court.

General Court had proposed; whether the Committee had authority to change the terms of the Address which had been adopted; whether the Committee would engage to guaranty the agents against any loss sustained by them in the public service; and whether the disapprobation expressed by the Governor and the DeputyGovernor as to the whole proceeding was not a sufficient reason for delay and reconsideration. To the last question the Committee gave a negative reply. They agreed, for the General Court, to the desired pledge of indemnity. And they expressed the opinion that, instead of the Address recently voted, the agents "were at liberty to present the other petition agreed in the former session, in case they should judge it more conducing to attain the preservation of the country's just liberties and privileges, than the latter."

Jan. 23, 24.

The necessary funds were with no little difficulty obtained; the agents received their commission and a letter of instructions, both unwillingly signed by the Governor in the name of the General Court; letters commending their suit to the patronage of Lord Clarendon, Lord Manchester, Lord Say and Sele, and other distinguished persons, were placed in their hands; and a vessel, all ready to sail, was detained for their conveyance. Still they hesitated, and again approached the Committee with a representation of "such inconveniences and hazards" as made it "seem less consisting with Christian prudence to proceed at this time." The Committee, with a courteously concealed impatience, invited them to suggest any expedients for the removal of their difficulties, and were still cherishing the hope that some expedient might

Mr. Usher advanced £ 100; Hull, the mint-master, and Mr. John Paine, £50 each; and others, sums varying from £10 to £ 30. The names of most

Jan. 29.

of the contributors are new, and indicate to me that the measure was not generally agreeable to the class which had hitherto taken the lead.