When the General Court assembled to try the accused, there were present the Governor, magistrates and deputies, with the elders and ministers, (who were present to assist at the trial by their advice) and a large assembly of the populace. It was "lecture day" when the accused were brought forth from prison. The Governor arose and stated to the accused the cause and manner of the proceeding against them. The letters, one from Gorton and one from Randall Holden, were then read. Their answer was: First. That they were not personally within the jurisdiction of Massachusetts. To this, the Governor answered, that they were either within Plymouth or Mr. Fenwick's, and they had yilded their power to Massachusetts in the proceedings, and if the accused were under no jurisdiction, then Massachusetts had none to complain to for redress of its justice and they must right themselves by force of arms or else sit still under all their reproaches and injuries, among which the prisoners uttered this insolent passage: "We do not more disdain that you should send for us to come to you, than you could do, if we should send for the chiefest among you, to come up to us for you to be employed to our pleasure in such works as we should appoint you." They were asked if they maintained what was written in the letters? The answer was, they did, in the sense in which they were written. The prisoners were then severally brought into court and separately examined as to the interpretation of the letters. The interpretations the accused gave, Winthrop says, were contradictory. They were then demanded to retract what they had expressed in the letters-this they refused to do, saying they would be denying the truth. Gorton maintained that the image of God, wherein Adam was created was Christ, and so the loss of that image was the death of Christ, and the restoration of it, in regeneration, was Christ's resurrection, and so the death of him, that was born of the Virgin Mary, was but a manifestation of the form of the death and resurrection of Christ.

Winthrop says "They were all illiterate men, the ablest of them could not write true English, yet they would take upon them the interpretation of the most difficult places of Scripture, and worst than any way to give their own terms."

There were three of the accused persons, who escaped at Warwick. Two of them were sent for and went to the Court. One of them did not sign either of the letters, and he was discharged.

One gave his own bond to appear at the next term of the Court -some of his cattle were taken towards paying the charges, and he was permitted to go. One of the signers of the letters had died, and his estate was not proceeded against. The arms of all the men were taken-of these, the Court gave one fowling-piece to Pomham, the Indian Sachem of Shawomett, another piece was given to Soconoco, another chieftain of the Shawomett tribe, and they were granted liberty to have powder. The sentences of the Court were as follows: "It is ordered that Samuel Gorton shall be confined to Charlestown, there to be set to work and to wear such bolts and irons as may hinder his escape, and to continue during the pleasure of the Court, provided that if he shall break his said confinement, or shall in the meantime, either by speech or writings publish, declare or maintain any of the blasphemies or abominable heresies, wherewith he has been charged by the General Court, contained in either of the two books sent us by him or Randall Holden, or shall reproach or reprove the churches of our Lord Jesus Christ in these United Colonies, or the civil government, or the public ordinances of God therein (unless it be by answer to some questions propounded to him, or conference with any elder or with any other licensed to speak with him private, under the hand of one of the assistants), that immediately upon the accusation of any such writing or speech, he shall by such assistant be brought and be committed to prison, till the next Court of Assistants, then and there to be tried by a jury, whether he hath so spoken or written, and upon his conviction thereof, shall be condemned to death and executed." tence was passed November 3, 1643.

(To be concluded in next Number.)

This sen-

THE TITLE AND OFFICE OF SCHEPEN.

It is a very curious fact that although the title and office of Schepen, which it is to be supposed was perfectly understood throughout every province or colony under the authority of the Seven United States, or Provinces of Holland, there are no authorities which agree in regard to the duties and powers exerted by this class of officers. *

In France, the corresponding official was styled Echevin, who is described as one elected to exercise charges over the police or the general affairs of a city, and this title was borne by such at Paris, at Lyons and at Marseilles; whereas at Toulouse he was styled Capitoul, at Bordeaux Jurat, in other cities Consul. The English significations given by Fleming and Tibbins are She: iff, Alderman, Eschevin. The equivalents of these titles are hardly reconcilable. For instance, at Toulouse, the Capitoul was "the first magistrate of the city," who had all the executive authority of a sheriff. Any one who jostled with a Capitoul in Toulouse, would find that he had come in contact with a snag with the prerogatives of a little king. However, it may be well to observe here that a Schepen in New Amsterdam was an Echevin in Rotterdam, for one of the writer's ancestral relatives and namesake held that office in the latter city about 1700, and he was a lawyer of the highest grade, a requisite perhaps for the office.

"According to the 'National Review,' (represented in 'Littell's Living Age,' 2509, 30 on July, 1892, 318 (2) The Executive power [of a Commune] (each town forms a single and separate Commune) is vested in a Burgomaster' (Mayor) and two or more Westhouders (French Echevins). The latter office is paid, and is no sinecure in large places. "

* ECHEVIN, or its equivalent in Holland, is derived from the German Schaben, or Sceben (almost exactly Schepen), SCABINUS, in Base-Latin, which signifies a judge or learned person, a scholar. (According to Du Cange, Scabinus and Procurator were equivalent as also, translating into French and exemplifying Echevin; Scabini Synodales were ecclesiastical officers) The Franks (German or Teuton) brought with them this term into Gaul (Romanized Celtic). This was towards the middle of the VII. Century, the title of the Assessors or Counsellors of Counts. The military men (Gens d'Epée) who, during the reign of Clovis (Louis) II assisted Aigulphus, Count of the Palace, to dispense justice, were entitled Echevins du Palais. There is mention also of these Echevins in a Chronicle of Louis-le-Debonnaire, son of Charlemagne, (A. D. 781-840) and in a Charter of his son Charles-le-Chauve (A. D. 823-877). Afterwards, the Echevins were municipal officers charged, during a certain term, with the police and the business of cities and towns. In France, after the Revolution (1788-1804), municipal officers (so styled) were substituted for Echevins and the former by the present Mayors and their Deputies or Assistants. Finally Du Cange gives "Echevinus, Judex Urbanus (City judge)" Echevin and Schepen.

It would seem that Westhouder is an error of spelling and should be written Wethouder, which by Halma is translated Regent (Magistrate): De Heeren Van de Wet, the Magistrates Schepen, Eschevin, Judge, Sheriff-which are not consistent with our understanding of the authority or duties of the officers bearing. the different titles.

"The Government of every town was administered by a Senate (Wethouderschap), formed by two, three or four burgomasters and a certain number of sheriffs (Schepenem), generally seven. The duties of the Senate were to provide for the public safety by keeping the city walls and fortifications in repair, to call out and muster the burgher guards in case of invasion or civil tumult, to administer the finances, to provide for the expenses of the town by levying excises on different articles of consumption, and to affix the portion of county taxes to be paid by each individual."*

Douglas Campbell in "The Puritan in Holland, England and America," I., 150-151, II., 329-330, furnishes the following explanation :

"In Holland, and in the Northern Provinces generally, the form of town government was somewhat simpler. The Senate was composed of two, three or four Burgomasters, and a certain number of Schepens or Sheriffs, generally seven. Together these officers administered the affairs of the town, but the Schepens sitting alone formed a civil and criminal court. The sovereign was represented by an official called a Schout, whom he appointed, but sometimes from three candidates named by the Senate. A great council of the citizens possessing certain qualifications, met annually, and chose eight or nine Good Men; these in turn elected the Burgomasters and the candidates, from whom the Schout, as representative of his master, selected the Schepens."

"The men who administered affairs in the Netherlands were of a very different class from the favorites and greedy courtiers who swarmed around the Stuarts. The representatives who made its laws bore little resemblance to the illiterate country squires, some of them mere boys, who at intervals, often of many years, trooped up to London to sit for a few weeks in Parliament. In Holland, no man could be appointed to a Schepenship-an office combining some of the duties of a sheriff, judge, and legislatoruntil he had attained the age of thirty, and for the office of *Davies, History of Holland and the Dutch; London, 1851, vol. 1, p. 77.

Burgomaster the limit was forty years. "-(Geddes John De Witt, pp. 28-45.)

This was a Roman idea. (Pliny's Letters, x. 83.) Under the Constitution of the United States, no one can sit in the House of Representatives until the age of twenty-five, or in the Senate until the age of thirty. This is a minor difference between the English and American systems, but not unimportant. The men who filled these offices and who ruled the municipalities and state were all men of education. Most of them could speak two or three languages. Trained at the universities or at the famous classical schools of Holland, no one among the governing classes felt that his education was complete without several supplementary years of foreign travel. They traveled largely to learn the customs and mode of doing business in other countries, and all their acquisitions were at the service of their native land. If they sought office, it was for the honor, and not for the emoluments. Most of the offices were unpaid, and those to which a salary was attached presented no temptation to the needy.

The majority of the ruling class were engaged in industrial pursuits. They held office for short terms, soon going back to their constituents. Probably no body of men governing a State were ever more enlightened and better acquainted with the necessities of legislation than were these burghers, merchants, and manufacturers, who for two centuries gave laws to Holland.

It was largely due to the intelligence displayed by these men that the Republic, during the continuance of its war, was enabled to support a burden of taxation such as the world has rarely seen before or since. The internal taxes were appalling. Rents were taxed twenty-five per cent.; on all sales of real estate two and a half per cent. were levied, and on all collateral inheritances five per cent. On beer, wine, meat, salt, spirits, and all articles of luxury, the tax was one hundred per cent., and on some articles this was doubled.

The only way to reconcile these different settings forth of the duties and powers of Schepens, is that their authority and peculiar services were not exactly the same in different provinces, cities, communities and colonies of the United States of Holland; just as in France, although the Capitoul, a Jurat, a Consul, and other titles were considered equivalents of Echevin in Paris, it is well known that the relative power exerted by such officials was very