he may naturally have desired to diminish, in the Confederacy, that influence of which New Haven, even more than Massachusetts, was the devoted champion. But he was now Chief Magistrate of one of the Colonies united in a Confederacy, which in its very existence implied the independence of New Haven, and in its articles of agreement recognized and guarantied that independence. He had no authority to act for New Haven in anything, least of all to stipulate for its extinction as a body politic. When he was about to embark, in reply to the expression, by "a friend" (Mr. Davenport), of fears of "so unrighteous an act, as so far to extend the line that the Colony of New Haven should be involved within it," he gave and reiterated the assurance, "that no such thing was intended, but rather the contrary;" and that, in case the old patent, of which the royal confirmation was to be sought, should be found to include New Haven, yet that "Colony should be at liberty to join or not." He renewed these assurances when the charter had passed the seals, and appealed to the General Court to respect his pledge. But he must have known, throughout the transaction, that, the charter once executed, his personal control over it would cease, and that in all probability, much esteemed as he was, his remonstrances would be to extremely little purpose. The signed and sealed parchment was not his. It went at once into the hands of men, who, however they would have respected their own scruples, did not feel bound to respect the scruples of another person, and did feel bound to advance the greatness of Connecticut. 1 It may have been some misgiving, on the agent's part, as to the position in which he was about to be placed, Arrival of in New Eng that occasioned delay in the transmission of this important paper. After nearly four months, during which time, in both Colonies, the elections had been made, and the government had proceeded as usual, the arrival of the charter was first publicly made the charter known at the annual meeting of the Federal land. Commissioners, which this year was held at Bos- Sept. 4. ton. The Commissioners for New Haven, who appeared in their place, and acted throughout the session, may have been taken by surprise. They left this certificate on the margin of the Journal: "We cannot as yet say that the procurement of this patent will be acceptable to us or our Colony." " Proceedings in Connecti cut on the reception of the charter. Oct. 9. In Connecticut, at a General Court held the next month, it was received with great joy, and was committed to the custody of three leading citizens, who were bound by an oath to keep it safely. The Court passed votes to "declare all the laws and orders of the Colony to stand in full force and virtue," and to "establish all officers, both civil and military, in their respective places and power as formerly." Then they proceeded at once to exercise the extraordinary powers with which they were newly invested. Not waiting for action on the part of New Haven, they received the submission, not only of Southhold, a town of that Colony, which acted in the case in its corporate capacity, but also of a minority of the inhabitants of Guilford, Greenwich, and Stamford. They sent a notice to West Chester, within the Dutch territory, of their claim to that plantation. They ordered "that the inhab 1 It had probably just then arrived. A letter from the Connecticut General Court to the Commissioners, in the week before their meeting, says nothing of the charter, but intimates that important intelligence from England was expected. (Conn. Rec., I. 384.) 2 Records, &c., in Hazard, II. 467. 3 Conn. Rec., I. 384 388.- -Southhold and Stamford had long borne uneasily the yoke of New-Haven Colony. See N. H. Rec., II. 17, 23, 51, 59 – 65, 92-96, 143, 177, &c. itants at Mystic and Paucatuck [Southertown] should forbear to exercise authority by virtue of commissions from any other Colony," thus undertaking to oust Massachusetts. And they appointed a committee of two Magistrates and two ministers "to go down to New Haven to treat with the gentlemen and others of their loving friends there."1 New Haven The impetuosity of these proceedings of Connecticut was unfortunate. In the sister Colony a sense of gratuitous affront deepened the sense of unprovoked wrong. Resistance of The freemen of the town of New Haven held a meeting, on the second day after an "extraordinary seeking of God by fasting and prayer for his guidance of the Colony in this weighty business." The Connecticut committee had sent a letter, expressing their desire for "a happy and comfortable union, to the charter. Oct. 17. 66 according to the tenor of the charter;" and the Magistrates of New Haven Colony, replying that they would consult their constituents, had added a request that the issuing of matters might be respited until they might receive fuller information from the honored Mr. Winthrop, or satisfaction otherwise, and that in the mean time the Colony might remain distinct and uninterrupted, as heretofore." Town-meet Haven. Oct. 31. At the New-Haven town-meeting, Mr. Davening at New port, in emphatic terms, deprecated the proposed union of the Colonies, and condemned the proceedings instituted by Connecticut to that end. He argued that the language of the new charter did not by necessary construction require a surrender of the independence of New Haven, and that, as a voluntary measure, it was not to be chosen. "The DeputyGovernor [Gilbert] declared that the things spoken by Mr. Davenport were of great weight." 1 Conn. Rec., I. 388–390. Mr. Street, Teacher of the church, sustained him in an earnest appeal, concluding with a text from the prophecy of Isaiah: "What shall one then answer the messengers of the nation? That the Lord hath founded Zion, and the poor of his people shall trust in it." "The matter was largely debated," and the meeting "by general vote declared their disapproving of the manner of Connecticut Colony's proceeding in this business." Meeting of of New-Haven Nov. 4. Four days after, a mass meeting of the freemen of the Colony was held at the same place. The Governor took no decided part in the discus- the freemen sion which followed. Though officially cautious Colony. about a manifestation of his views, his conduct, throughout the proceedings, indicated that he was not unfavorably disposed towards the union. Perhaps he was insensibly biassed by the delicacy of his position. No conspicuous man in his Colony, except Davenport, was so much exposed to a prosecution for treason for giving shelter to the regicides; and he may well have been disinclined, at this moment of excitement, to offer new provocation to the crown.1 The freemen separated after declaring that "they looked upon themselves bound to 1 Leete was very uneasy about his standing in England, on account of the report which had been sent thither of his sheltering the regicides. A year before the transactions mentioned in the text, he had gone to Boston, and had engaged Mr. Norton to make interest in his behalf with friends of Norton in England. A letter which Norton accordingly addressed to Richard Baxter (September 28, 1661), to bespeak his interposition in Leete's favor, is printed in "Reliquiæ Baxterianæ" (291). Nor ton requests that his own name may not be mentioned. Endicott also applied to Baxter (August 7, 1661) for a like mediation. (Ibid., 292.) Davenport was anxious for himself on the same grounds, and wrote to Sir Thomas Temple (August 19, 1661), who was just about to embark for England, soliciting his good offices there. Some representations in Davenport's letter (for which see Mass. Hist. Coll., XXVIII. 327) require an indulgent construction to reconcile them with facts known to us from other sources. But Davenport's was a bolder nature than Leete's; and, when the questions respecting the charter arose, his personal apprehensions did not prevent him from doing frankly and thoroughly what he esteemed to be a patriot's duty. The stand which he now took must have been more painful to him by reason of a close friendship which had for many years united him with Winthrop. See a series of his letters stand by the Magistrates according to the laws here established," and appointing a committee (which consisted of the Magistrates and elders of the Colony, with Mr. Law of Stamford) " to draw up an answer to the General Assembly of Connecticut out of these three heads: (1.) that there be due witness-bearing against their sin; (2.) that there may be a deferring of things till Mr. Winthrop's coming, or we [obtain] satisfaction otherwise, and that we remain in the same state as we are till then; (3.) that we can do nothing till we consult with the other confederates." The committee was to "consider also about making address to his Majesty."1 Meeting of the General Court. Nov. 5. In their answer, prepared accordingly, and submitted to the General Court, the committee said: "We do not find in the patent any command given to you, nor prohibition to us, to dissolve covenants, or alter the orderly settlements of New England; nor any sufficient reason why we may not so remain to be as formerly; also your beginning to procure, and proceeding to improve, the patent without us, doth confirm this belief; yet, if it shall appear (after a due and full information of our state) to have been his Majesty's pleasure so to unite us, as you understand the patent, we must submit according to God." They set forth the disorders which had already resulted from the hasty course of Connecticut in extending her jurisdiction, and urged, by considerations of reason, justice, and ancient friendship, the propriety of discontinuing such proceedings, while means should be fully used "for the gaining of a right understanding, and to bring a peaceable issue or reconcilement of the matter." 2 to Winthrop, collected by Dr. Bacon (Thirteen Historical Discourses, 366 -386). They are also among the Winthrop Papers in the Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society |