صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

40

COURSE OF MASSACHUSETTS.

espoused the cause of Cromwell. The expression of loyalty by Connecticut, on that occasion, was more temperate. Both were doubtless somewhat influenced by policy, with a view to the favors for which they were about to solicit the monarch. They both sent agents to England-Connecticut, Governor Winthrop, and Rhode Island, John Clarke'- to petition Charles for the renewal of their charters. Their applications were successful, and the charters which those colonies then received were of so liberal a character that they were found adapted to their circumstances respectively when they became sovereign republics; and they continued unchanged not only after the Revolution, but until some years after the adoption of the Federal Constitution.

The conduct of Massachusetts, on the other hand, was little likely to find favor with Charles. The news of his restoration was brought over by two of the regicides, Whalley and Goffe, in July; yet it was October before the Legislature, or General Court, was convened. The motion to address the King was then rejected, but it afterwards prevailed in December. The address was cold and formal as an effusion of loyalty, and exhibited rather a desire to vindicate themselves, especially for their treatment of the Quakers, than to declare their

1 Grahame, in his Colonial History, having charged Clarke with mean and servile adulation to Charles on this occasion, the historian is in turn sharply reprehended by Mr. Bancroft. A literary controversy thus arose which is very fully stated by Mr. Josiah Quincy, who published in Philadelphia a posthumous edition of Grahame's history. While the unbiassed reader will find nothing there to justify Grahame's censure of Clarke, who lived and died in the esteem of his countrymen, he will also acquit Grahame of wilful misrepresentation. He seems to be no otherwise blamable than in drawing inferences from the authorities he quotes which they do not fairly warrant. He partially corrects his first error in his revised edition.

MASSACHUSETTS COMMISSIONERS.

41

attachment to the king. Evidently dictated more by prudence than affection, it could not impose upon Charles, who was at once sceptical of human sincerity, and jealous of the republican spirit which Massachusetts had even then manifested. With his wonted facility, however, he returned a gracious answer to the colonists, which so gratified them that a day of public thanksgiving was appointed by way of acknowledgment. But their hopes, thus raised, proved short-lived. Rumors soon reached them from England that schemes were on foot to abridge their commerce as well as that of the other colonies, and to deprive them of some of their dearest political rights.

A General Court was thereupon called in May 1661, when, finding that professions of loyalty and humility had no effect, they decided on a more manly course. In a solemn manifesto they defined the limits of their rights, and their obedience to the parent state. They even asserted the right to defend their just claims by force of

arms.

Commissioners were appointed to carry this address to England. They were well received by the king, who readily consented to a confirmation of their charter, and an amnesty of all offences during the late suspension of royal authority, but, at the same time, he insisted on the rights of the Crown, and demanded a repeal of all laws which conflicted with those rights. He required that the colonists should take the oath of allegiance-that justice should be administered in his name an unconditional toleration of the Church of England-and the right of suffrage to every inhabitant possessing the requisite estate. By way of further strengthening the royal authority, Charles appointed Commissioners to hear and determine all complaints in the colony.

These Commissioners accordingly proceeded to Massa

42

CLAIM OF MASSACHUSETTS TO MAINE.

chusetts, where they found themselves in a continual state of bickering and altercation with the Legislature and the people. Their authority, seldom appealed to, and often openly resisted, proved unavailing to the royal cause. Determining at length to carve out business for themselves, they repaired to New Hampshire, and there held a court to inquire into the title of Mason to that province, and of Gorges to Maine. But as Massachusetts, encouraged, as it is said, by the known favor of Cromwell, and the fact that Gorges was a loyalist, had asserted a claim to Maine, and had actually obtained possession of it, she was summoned before the English Commissioners, and required to surrender her claims to the province. Having passed judgment in favor of the claim of Mason's heirs to New Hampshire, and against the claim of Massachusetts to Maine, they organized governments in both.

But Massachusetts still strenuously asserting her rights, the whole subject of controversy was referred by the parties to the decision of the Chief Justice of England, who decided that the claim of jurisdiction in New Hampshire, asserted by Mason's heirs, was invalid; that the right reverted to the Crown; but that the rights of Gorges were complete, both as to jurisdiction and soil.

Massachusetts then purchased the rights of Gorges from his grandson and heir, for the sum of about six thousand dollars (twelve hundred and fifty pounds sterling), and thus secured a valid title. Charles was greatly offended at this purchase, since he had intended to make it himself, when he could spare the money, as a provision for his natural son, Monmouth. He openly rebuked the colonists for this intermeddling, and required them to give up the province on receiving the purchase-money; but this they refused. A quo warranto was then sued out

DISCONTENTS IN VIRGINIA.

43

against Massachusetts, and judgment having been given against her, she, like New Hampshire, became a royal province.

It deserves to be remarked that Maine was not incorporated with Massachusetts, but was treated as a dependency — a sort of colony-so that the decision of the quo warranto was probably as acceptable to the people of Maine as it was offensive to Massachusetts.

In Virginia, after the Restoration, there were great discontents among the people, caused by the large grants of land to court favorites;' by the heavy impositions for keeping up forts; by the exorbitant fees to public officers; by the very high pay to members of Assembly; by the new restrictions on their foreign commerce, which, first imposed by Cromwell, had been continued by Charles; and lastly, by the low price of tobacco. They therefore, in 1674, appointed three agents to apply to the king for redress, and to obtain for them a new charter that would afford them security against their principal grievances.

The petition of those agents having been referred to the Attorney-General and Solicitor-General, and those officers having made a favorable report, the king in council directed them to prepare a charter in accordance with the petition and their report, which was accordingly done; but before that instrument was perfected by the royal signature, events had taken place in Virginia which produced an entire change in Charles's purpose.

The discontents in that colony having been aggravated in 1676 by hostilities of the neighboring Indians, while her agents in England were yet negotiating for a redress of grievances, the patience of the people was exhausted.

1

By one of these grants the careless and prodigal Charles conferred the whole territory of Virginia for thirty-one years on Lords Culpeper and Arlington

44

NATHANIEL BACON.

Determining, therefore, to demand instant redress, they found a fit leader in Nathaniel Bacon, a young Englishman of talents and address, who had studied law in the inns of court; and though he had been but three years in Virginia, was, by reason of his accomplishments, and the influence of his connections in the colony, already made a member of the Council of State.

On the ground of defending the country from the Indians, he applied to Governor Berkeley for a commission to raise volunteers, which being evaded or refused, Bacon actually placed himself at the head of a force that he was able to recruit, and undertook an expedition against the hostile tribes. He and his party were then denounced by the Governor as rebels; but the discontents of the people being thereby rather increased than lessened, the Governor, to appease them, dissolved the Assembly, and ordered a new election; in which Bacon, more popular than ever by his recent successes, against the Indians, was elected a member. Proceeding then to James Town by water, he was captured by a government vessel, and while a prisoner, an amicable arrangement seems to have been entered into between Sir William Berkeley and himself. It is of record that having appeared at the bar of the House of Burgesses, and on his knees, asked pardon for his "unlawful, mutinous, and rebellious practices," he was pardoned, and restored to his place in the Council. A few days afterwards, however, he secretly withdrew, and putting himself at the head of some four or five hundred men, indignant that he had not obtained the commission said to have been promised him, conducted them to the Assembly then in session. By their

1

1

1 See a lively account of this rebellion in Hildreth, Vol. I. Chap. XV., which was written at the time by a member of the Virginia House of Burgesses.

« السابقةمتابعة »