1646
The rigid adherence of Massachusetts to the principle of withholding the privilege of a freeman from all who dissented from the majority in any religious opinion, could not fail to generate perpetual discontents. Petition of the non-conformists.A petition was presented to the general court, signed by several persons highly respectable for their situation and character, but, not being church members, excluded from the common rights of society, complaining that the fundamental laws of England were not acknowledged by the colony; and that they were denied those civil and religious privileges to which they were entitled, as freeborn Englishmen, of good moral conduct. Their prayer to be admitted to the rights, or to be relieved from the burdens, of society, was accompanied with observations conveying a very intelligible censure on the proceedings of the colony, and a threat of applying to Parliament, should the prayer of their petition be rejected.
The most popular governments not being always the most inclined to tolerate opinions differing from those of the majority, this petition gave great offence, and its signers were required to attend the court. Their plea, that the right to petition government was sacred, was answered by saying that they were not accused for petitioning, but for using contemptuous and seditious expressions. They were required to find sureties for their good behaviour; and, on refusing to acknowledge their offence, were fined at the discretion of the court. An appeal from this decision having been refused, they sent deputies to lay their case before Parliament; but the clergy exerted themselves on the occasion; and the celebrated Cotton, in one of his sermons, asserted "that if any should carry writings or complaints against the people of God in that country to England, it would be as Jonas in the ship." A storm having risen during the passage, the mariners, impressed with the prophecy of Cotton, insisted that the obnoxious papers should be thrown overboard; and the deputies were constrained to consign their credentials to the waves. On their arrival in England, they found Parliament but little disposed to listen to their complaints. The agents of Massachusetts had received instructions to counteract their efforts; and the governments of New England were too high in favour, to admit of a rigid scrutiny into their conduct.[78]
In some of the internal dissensions which agitated Massachusetts, Winthrop, a man of great influence, always among their first magistrates, and often their governor, was charged while deputy governor with some arbitrary conduct. He defended himself at the bar, in the presence of a vast concourse of people; and, having been honourably acquitted, addressed them from the bench, in a speech which was highly approved.
As this speech tends to illustrate the political opinions of the day, an extract from it may not be unworthy of regard. "The questions," he said, "which have troubled the country of late, and from which these disturbances in the state have arisen, have been about the authority of the magistrate and the liberty of the people. Magistracy is certainly an appointment from God. We take an oath to govern you according to God's law, and our own; and if we commit errors, not willingly, but for want of skill, you ought to bear with us, because, being chosen from among yourselves, we are but men, and subject to the like passions as yourselves. Nor would I have you mistake your own liberty. There is a freedom of doing what we list, without regard to law or justice; this liberty is indeed inconsistent with authority; but civil, moral, and federal liberty, consists in every man's enjoying his property, and having the benefit of the laws of his country; which is very consistent with a due subjection to the civil magistrate. And for this you ought to contend, with the hazard of your lives."[79]
During the remnant of his life, he was annually chosen governor.
1649
About this time, a controversy which had long subsisted between Massachusetts, and Connecticut, was terminated. The latter, for the purpose of maintaining Saybrooke, had laid a duty on all goods exported from Connecticut river. The inhabitants of Springfield, a town of Massachusetts lying on the river, having refused to pay this duty, the cause was laid before the commissioners of the united colonies; and, after hearing the parties, those of Plymouth and New Haven adjourned the final decision of the case until the next meeting, in order to hear farther objections from Massachusetts, but directed that, in the meantime, the duty should be paid.
At the meeting in 1648, Massachusetts insisted on the production of the patent of Connecticut. It was perfectly well known that the original patent could not be procured; and the agents for Connecticut, after stating this fact, offered an authentic copy. The commissioners recommended that the boundary line should be run, to ascertain whether Springfield was really in Massachusetts, but still directed that the duty should continue to be paid. On this order being made, the commissioners of Massachusetts produced a law of their general court, reciting the controversy, with the orders which had been made in it, and imposing a duty on all goods belonging to the inhabitants of Plymouth, Connecticut, or New Haven, which should be imported within the castle, or exported from any part of the bay, and subjecting them to forfeiture for non-payment. The commissioners remonstrated strongly against this measure, and recommended it to the general court of Massachusetts, seriously to consider whether such proceedings were reconcilable with "the law of love," and the tenor of the articles of confederation. In the meantime, they begged to be excused from "all farther agitations concerning Springfield."
In this state of the controversy fort Saybrooke was consumed by fire, and Connecticut forbore to re-build it, or to demand the duty. In the following year, Massachusetts repealed the ordinance which had so successfully decided the contest.[80]
Thus does a member of a confederacy, feeling its own strength, and the weakness of those with whom it is associated, deride the legitimate decisions of the federal body, when opposed to its own interest or passions, and obey the general will, only when that will is dictated by itself.
Although, while civil war raged in the mother country, New England had been permitted to govern itself as an independent nation, Parliament seems to have entertained very decisive opinions respecting the subordination of the provinces, and its own controlling power. The measures taken for giving effect to these opinions, involved all the colonies equally. The council of state was authorised to displace governors and magistrates, and to appoint others. Massachusetts was required to take a new patent, and to hold its courts, not in the name of the colony, but in the name of the Parliament. 1651The general court, unwilling to comply with these requisitions, transmitted a petition to Parliament, styling that body "the supreme authority," and expressing for it the highest respect. They stated their uniform attachment to Parliament during the civil war, the aid they had given, and the losses they had sustained. After speaking of the favours they had received, they expressed the hope "that it will not go worse with them than it did under the late King; and that the frame of this government will not be changed, and governors and magistrates imposed on them against their will." They declared, however, their entire submission to the will of Parliament; and, avowing for that body the most zealous attachment, prayed a favourable answer to their humble petition.
But the united colonies had lately given great umbrage by supplying Virginia and Barbadoes, then enemies of the commonwealth, with warlike stores and other commodities. It was also matter of real complaint that their exemption from the payment of duties enabled them to enrich themselves at the expense of others; and a revocation of their privileges in this respect was seriously contemplated. Yet the requisitions concerning their charter were never complied with, and do not appear to have been repeated.[81]
In this year, war was declared by England against Holland. The united colonies, accustomed to conduct their affairs in their own way, did not think themselves involved in this contest, unless engaged in it by some act of their own. The Dutch at Manhadoes, too weak to encounter their English neighbours,