Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

to forty pounds and ten pounds respectively. But it was not yet prepared for surrender; and the General Court passed a vote, "that no treaty be made by this Colony with Connecticut, before such acts of power exerted by them upon any of our towns be revoked and recalled, according to honored Mr. Winthrop's letter engaging the same, the Commissioners' advice, and our frequent desires." They "set apart a day for extraordinary humiliation and seeking of God by fasting and prayer." They seemed to themselves to have obtained an advantage when they received a royal missive requiring observance of the Navigation Laws, addressed to "the Governor and Assistants of New Haven,” and bearing a date a year later than that by which New Haven had been said to be annihilated; and they proceeded to turn it to the best account by prompt and liberal compliance with the demands which were made.

June 21.

Dec. 9.

1

They seized the opportunity, afforded by the order, to say that, to give effect to their legislation for this, as for any other purpose, it was necessary that the authority of their government should be maintained, and, to that end, it was necessary that its legal revenues should be collected. They accordingly issued what they named a Declaration, calling upon seceders "to return to their due obedience, and pay their arrears of rates." To such as should do this within three days, indemnity was promised for past malfeasances. "If any should presume to stand out against his Majesty's pleasure so declared," it would be "at their peril," as the Court "would not fail to call the said persons to a strict account, and proceed against them as disloyal to his Majesty, and disturbers of the peace of the jurisdiction." 2

Bray Rossiter and his son John, citizens of Guilford,

1 N. H. Rec., II. 500–504.

2

Ibid., 510-512.

Dec. 30.

long disaffected to the government of New Haven, were of those who had lately submitted themselves to the sister Colony. When the Declaration was published in their town, they repaired to Hartford, and "obtained two of their Magistrates, marshal and sundry others, to come down with them to Guilford. Coming into the town at an unseasonable hour of the night, their party, by shooting off sundry guns, caused the town to be alarmed, and great disturbance, and some of them giving out threatening speeches, which caused the Governor to send away speedily to Branford and New Haven for help, which caused both towns to be alarmed also, to great disturbance."1 At Stamford, the Declaration, "set up in a public place," was "violently plucked down, and with reproachful speeches rejected." 2

1664.

Jan. 7.

Leete convened his General Court, and told his story. He set forth the dangers and scandal of the existing state of things, and advised the opening of another negotiation, which, he said, "the gentlemen from Connecticut did earnestly desire." The Court would entertain no such proposal. They remained firm in the purpose to adhere to their Declaration, and not to treat till the usurpations which had been practised upon them were forborne. This decision was not without effect. The Magistrates of Connecticut offered, as the condition of a treaty, a provisional restitution of the ancient order of things at Guilford and Stamford, and a continuance, for the present, of the Colonial government of New Haven. The freemen met in the spring for their annual election as usual. Deputies appeared for Guilford and Stamford, as well as for

1 N. H. Rec., II. 513, 514.- John Allyn, and three other Magistrates of Connecticut, were in Guilford on the 30th of December. (Ibid., 512, note.)

* Ibid., 527.
Ibid., 513, 514.
* Ibid., 515.

Feb. 24.

May 25.

the three more constant towns. Leete was again chosen Governor. Two of the elect Magistrates, Treat of Milford and Nash of New Haven, declined to serve.

Jan. 7.

March 9,

When the General Court of New Haven announced their final determination respecting the matters in dispute with Connecticut, they "desired Mr. Davenport and Mr. Street to draw up in writing all their grievances," to be laid before the General Assembly of Connecticut in the second following month. The elaborate and forcible paper, prepared and transmitted under this order, bears the title of "New Haven's Case Stated." It recounts in full the history of New-Haven Colony; its past relations to Connecticut; its exertions and sacrifices for the common cause; the acknowledgments of its independence and integrity on the part of the other confederate Colonies; the engagement made by Winthrop, at the time of his suit for a charter, that no invasion of the rights of New Haven should be allowed; and the later unfriendly proceedings of Connecticut. It contends that only by uncertain construction, contradicted by other considerations of weight, could it be argued that it was the royal pleasure that the separate existence of New Haven should cease. "The premises duly weighed," say the Court through these writers, "it will be your wisdom and way to desist wholly and for ever from endeavoring to draw us into a union under your patent by any treaty for the future, and to apply yourselves to your duty towards God, the King, and us." And it concludes by showing how duty in each of these relations would oblige their neighbors to desist from their present course. The Record of the Connecticut Court contains no notice of this plea. Good judgment was shown in abstaining from an attempt to answer it.

In the Archives of Connecticut in the handwriting of Allyn. Whether there is a draft of an answer, mostly it was sent, or made public, is uncer

In the progress of his negotiation for a charter for his Colony, Winthrop had unexpectedly found himself obstructed by the interference of John Clarke, of Rhode Island, who had remained in England in England. since the time when he went thither on his errand

John Clarke

1651.

to the Parliament.1 After Clarke's main business had been concluded by the annulling of Coddington's "commission," his fellow-citizens from time to time employed him

2

tain. Mr. Hoadly has printed it (N. H. Rec., II. 530-537). Allyn was an able man, but he was not John Davenport, to say nothing of the causes of which they were respectively the champions. It is far from clear, however, that Allyn was the author of this paper, which is supercilious and offensive. The Latin quotations, the illustrations from the Old Testament, and the lofty tone, so foreign from the usual tone of the soft-spoken Secretary, indicate rather a clergyman's hand. Stone did not write it, for he did not justify his Colony. (N. H. Rec., II. 522.)

1 See above, p. 354.

2 At the time when the ninth chapter of this volume passed from my hands, I had given up the hope of ever seeing the instrument by which the "commission" of Coddington was revoked, having diligently sought it in vain in the places, both in England and in America, which appeared likely to reward the quest. (See above, pp. 357, 359.) Since then, through the kindness of Dr. King, of Newport, I have been furnished with a copy of it, made from a transcript in the handwriting of William Lytherland, which came into Dr. King's possession in a parcel of ancient writings. Lytherland was Town Clerk of Newport in 1653. The paper is as follows:

[blocks in formation]

Island, hath so behaved himself as hath produced great matters of complaint against him, now depending before us. The consequence thereof hath been the bringing of things there into great disorders and extremities amongst yourselves, by means whereof the whole Colony is exposed as a prey to the Dutch, the enemies of this Commonwealth, who (as we are informed) have designs upon that place in the absence of the Governor that hath withdrawn himself. Upon consideration of all which, we have thought it necessary, for the present, and until further direction and order be given by the Parliament, or this Council, for settling that Colony, to authorize you, and do hereby authorize you, to take care for the peace and quiet thereof, according to such orders and instructions as hath been given you by virtue of any ordinances or acts of Parliament. And, the better to defend the Colony against the Dutch, power is hereby given you to raise such forts and otherwise arm and strengthen your Colony, for defending yourselves against the Dutch, or other enemies of this Commonwealth, or for offending them, as you shall think necessary; and also to take and seize all such Dutch ships and vessels at sea, or as shall come into any of your harbors, or within your power, taking care that such account be given to the State as is usual in the like cases. And, to that end, you are to appoint one or

up

Relations of

about some miscellaneous affairs, and especially in keeping their communication with the Republican government and with Cromwell, and securing good-will and Rhode Island protection in those quarters. Through him they lish Common- presented "letters of humble thanksgiving to his Highness the Lord Protector, Sir Henry Vane, By his advice they sent "a

to the Eng

wealth.

1654.

Sept. 18. and Mr. Holland."2

more persons to attend the care of that business; and we conceive the bearer hereof, Mr. William Dyer, is a fit man to be employed therein; and you are to give account of your proceeding to the Parliament or Council.

66

It was doubtless by the authority of these votes that Harington wrote the letter copied above. One naturally imagines that Clarke was at his ear when it was composed.

In Newport this letter was interpreted as an authoritative restoration of the order of things, as formerly established under Williams's charter before

Signed in the name and by order of the Council of State appointed by authority of Parliament, "JAMES HARINGTON, Presid. Coddington's "obstruction;" and a "Whitehall, 2 October, 1652.

"JO. THURLOE, Clerk of the Council. แ Magistrates and Free Inhabitants of

Providence Plantation. "A true copy by me.

"WILL. LYTHERLAND,
Town Clerk (Newport)."

The discovery of this paper gives significance to two memoranda which I obtained in England. One is an entry in the "Draft Order Books" of the Commonwealth's Council of State:

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

copy was sent, with proposals founded upon it, to the "Commissioners" of the mainland towns (R. I. Rec., I. 259– 261), though a copy had at first been refused (Ibid., 269; comp. 383), perhaps from distrust of the construction which would be put upon it elsewhere. Coddington, however, to whom were imputed the representations made in England respecting danger from the Dutch (Ibid., 328, 329), — found the tide turned too strongly against him, and gave up the struggle, leaving the towns free to fall back upon the authority to frame their own government, which had been obtained for them by Williams ten years before.

In the circumstances thus elucidated, our surprise is lessened at Coddington's saying that he had not "seen anything to show that his commission was annulled." (See above, p. 359.)

1 R. I. Rec., I. 328, 346, 364, 395, 416, 421, 422.

2 Ibid., 283. At the same time they "ordered, that all transactions that had passed formerly under the title of the Bodies of the Liberties of England, &c., should from henceforth be issued out

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »