The royal charter established a pure democracy. Every power, as well deliberative as active, was invested in the freeinen of the corporation or their delegates, and the colony was under no obligation to communicate the acts of their local legislature to the king. It was the same as to the royal charter,. granted the next year to Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations.*

[1685.] In July various articles of high misdemeanor were exhibited against the governor and company of Connecticut, and orders were given to issue a writ of quo warranto forthwith against the colony. The next year two writs were served by Mr. Randolph ; and after them a third in December. This is taken notice of by the governor and company in their letter of Jan. 26, 1686-7, wherein they mention their readiness to sub-mit to his majesty's royal commands; and that, " if it be to conjoin them with the other colonies and provinces under Sir Edmund Andros, it would be more pleasing than to be joined with any other province." Such professed submission probably prevented the quo warranto's being prosecuted with effect; and produced an order to Andros to accept the surrender of the charter and the submission of the colony. Sir Edmond went to Hartford in October; but when at night he expected the charter would have been surrendered into his hands, the candle was blown out, and the charter withdrawn from the table, carried off and secreted by one of the company whose extraordinary service was afterwards rewarded by the general assembly with five shillings, agreeable to the plain simple manners of the people.. He however published in the general court his orders and commission which every one tacitly obeyed.. He dissolved the former government, and assumed the administration, receiving into his legislative council the late governor and secretary, for the better carrying on the business of the colony. The subsequent revolution in England brought matters back, after a while to the former course; as the legal validity of the charter was admitted:

The peopling of these three last colonies was owing chiefly to the Puritan Ministers, who, being silenced at home, repaired to New-England, that they might enjoy liberty of conscience;. and drew after them vast numbers of their friends and favorers.. They amounted to seventy-seven before 1641; and though all were not person of the greatets learning and abilities, they had a better share of each than most of sheir neighbouring clergy at that period; and were men of eminent soberiety and virtue, Chalmer's Political Annals, under Conneticut and Rhode-Ifland.

plain,.

plain, serious, affectionate preachers, exactly conformable to. the doctrines of the church of England, and laboured much to promate a reformation of manners in their several parishes.-Many planters who accompained or followed them, were gentlemen of considerable fortunes and of no mean education, who spent their estates in New-England, and were at the charge of bringing over many poor families, that were not able of themselves to bear the expence. The body of laity and clergy, collectively considered, furnishes such a glorious constellation of characters, as would employ the pen of a first-rate writer to do them justice; notwithstanding what has been above remarked of their governmental mistake.

The dangers to which the New-England colonies were early exposed, induced them to think of confederating for their mutual safety. Articles were drawn up in 1638; but they were not finished and ratified till the seventh of September 1613; from which time we are to lock upon Plymouth, Massachusetts, Connecticut and New-Haven as one body, in regard to all public transactions with their neighbours, though the private affairs of each colony were still managed by their own courts and magistrates.

Pass we on to the settlement of the other New-England colonies.

Mr. Roger Williams, who succeeded Mr. Skelton, upon his decease, as pastor of the church at Salem, being banished from the Massachusetts, repaired with twelve companions to the Nar-raganset country, [1635] and had land given him by the Indian Sachem Canonicus; of whom he afterwards purchased the large tract, lying between Pawtucket and Pawturet rivers (the great falls and the little falls, as the Indian names signify,) and stiled it Providence "from a sense of God's merciful providence to. him in his distress." The authority and power of Miantonomy, another Sachem, and his uncle Canonicus, awed all the Indians round to assist him and his few associates. When the determinations of the Massachusetts general court (occasioned, by what they called antinomian disputes) banished many, and induced others to leave the colony, the heads of the party were entertained in a friendly manner by Mr. Williams; [1638.] who advised them to seek a settlement on Rhode-Island, and was very instrumental in procuring it of the Indian Sachems.

They, to the number of eighteen, incorporated themselves, and began settling the island. The plantations there and at Providence increased apace, owing to the liberel sentiments of the first settlers; and in 1643 Mr. Williams went to England as agent Neal's Hiftory of New-England, Vol. I. p. 214–217.

and

and obtained [March 16, 1644.]" a free and absolute charter of incorporation of Providence and Rhode-Island Plantations, empowering them to rule themselves, by that form they might voluntarily agree upon." They agreed upon a democratic. Mr. Williams justly claims the honor of having been the first legislator in the world, in its latter ages, who effectually provided for, and established a free, full, and absolute liberty of conscience, This was the chief cause that united the inhabitants of RhodeIsland and those of Providence, and made them one people, and one colony. The foundation principle on which this colony was first settled, was, that "every man who submits peaceably to the civil authority, may peaceably worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, without molestation." When the colony was applied to in 1656 by the four United Colonies "to join them in taking effectual methods to suppress the quakers, and prevent their pernicious doctrines being propagated in the country; the assembly returned for answer "We shall strictly adhere to the foundation principle on which this colony was first settled."

[July 8, 1663.] King Charles II. granted an ample charter, whereby the colony was made a body corporate and politic, by the name of the Governor and Company of the English colony of Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, in New-England, in America. The charter reserved only allegiance to the king without the smallest share of the legislative or executive powers.

[1685.] A writ of quo warranto was issued out against the colony, which was brought June 26, 1686. The assembly determined not to stand suit. After the revolution, they were allowed by government to resume their charter, no judgment having been given against it.

New-Hampshire and the Main were settled about the same time with the Massachusetts, by different proprietors who had obtained patents, and whose views were to enrich themselves, by the fishing trade at sea, and the beaver trade ashore. Religion had little concern in the settlements; but it had some in the plantation of Exeter, on the river Pascataqua; which was began by Mr. Wheelwright (a minister banished from the Massachusetts, on account of the antinomian dissensions with which the colony was convulsed) and by a number of his adherents. They formed themselves into a body politic. Three other distinct govern ments were also established on the branches of the said river. These governments, being altogether voluntary, had no security as to their continuance; and the several settlers were too divided in opinion to form any good general plan of permanent administration. Therefore the more considerate among them treated

with the Massachusetts, about taking them under its protection; which fully suited the wishes of that colony, as it afforded the heads of it the opportunity of realizing the construction they had put upon a clause of this charter, by which they extended their line, so as to comprehend both New-Hampshire and the Main. The business terminated in the incorporation of the two colonics, on condition that the inhabitants of each should enjoy equal privileges. They continued long united, and were of one heart and mind in civil and religious affairs.* When separated by the king's commission for the government of New-Hampshire, the new assembly at their first meeting, in a letter of March 25,1680, to the governor of the Massachusetts, to be communicated to the general court, expressed their full satisfaction in the past connection; grateful sense of the care that had been exercised over them; and of their having been well governed; and an unfeigned desire, that a mutual correspondence between them might be settled.+

The towns in the province of Main, after a time, fell into a state of confusion. The Massachusetts took that opportunity, for encouraging the disposition which prevailed in many of the inhabitants to submit to their jurisdiction; and, to forward their compliance, granted the people larger privileges than were enjoyed by their own; for they were all freemen upon taking the oath, whereas every where else no one could be made free, unless he was a church member. The province was made a county, by the name of Yorkshire; and the towns sent representatives to the general court at Boston. Though the major part of the inhabitants were brought to consent to this regulation, great opposition was made by some principal persons, who severely reproached the Massachusetts, for using force in order to reduce the province; but the people experienced the benefit of it, and were contented. They continued in union with the Massachusetts until 1665, when a short separation commenced.

You have now a sketch of the settlement of all New-England. It would have been far more concise, had it not been necessary, to correet the mistakes frequently committed, by those who publish on the subject; and to remove the reproaches cast upon the bulk of the inhabitants, on account of their religious profession. Whether there was any material difference between them and the other colonies, in regard to the opinion they entertained of their civil rights, you will be able to observe in the course of your reading. Their judgment in respect to the exercise of parliamentary powers over them, may be further known by what + Ibid. p. 328Randolph

* Hutchinson's Hiftory. Vol. I. p. 268.

Randolph wrote concerning the Massachusetts, in his narrative and letters, after the restoration; from whence" it seems to have been a general opinion that acts of parliament had no other force than what they derived from acts passed by the general court is establish or confirm them."

[1676.] Randolph declared, "No law is in force or esteem there, but such as are made by the general court; and therefore it is accounted a breach of their privileges, and a betraying the liberties of the commonwealth to urge the observation of the laws of England."-" No oath shall be urged, or required to be taken by any person, but such oath as the general court hath considered, allowed and required."-" there is no notice taken of the act of navigation, plantation, or any other laws made in England for the regulation of trade."-"All nations have free liberty to come into their ports, and vend their commodities without any restraint; in this as well as in other things, that government would make the world believe they are a free state, and do act in all matters accordingly."-"The magistrates have continually disobeyed his majesty's command in his royal letters, of 1662, 64, 65, and those of March last; ever reserving to themselves a power to alter, evade and disannul any law or command not agreeing with their humour, or the absolute authority of their government, acknowledging no superior."-" He (the governor) freely declared to me, that the laws made by your majesty and your parliament obligeth them in nothing, but what consists with the interest of the colony; that the legislative power is and abides in them solely

The Massachusetts general court, in a letter to their agents, mentioned, that not being represented in parliament, they looked not upon themselves to be impeded in their trade by the acts of trade and navigation, and that these could not be observed by his majesty's subjects in Massachusetts without invading their liberties and properties, until the general court made provision therein by a law, which they did in October. Notwithstanding such law, and a subsequent order, Feb. 15, 1681, "that the act of navigation and the act for the encouragement of trade, be published in Boston by beat of drum, and all clauses in said acts. relating to the plantation be strictly observed." Randolph complained to the commissioners of the customs in England, because of their not being duly observed. When the people found themselves in danger of a quo warranto, they agreed upon such

See Hutchinson's collection of papers, p. 477-506. The Maffachufetts affembly in their answer to Gov. Hutchinfen in 1773, quoted the above paffages in fuch a manner and to fuch a purpose, as expreffes their opinion of the truth of what Randolph declared.

emendations