in the colony, should enjoy all the privileges of free and natural 1662. subjects within the realm of England; and that the patent should always have the most favourable construction for the benefit of the governor and company.1

does not

The charter included the colony of New Haven; but that N. Haven colony did not accept it, nor agree to be united under one government with Connecticut.2

accept the charter.

The agents, sent by Massachusetts to England, presented to king Charles the address and petition of the general court, which The king's met with a gracious reception. The colony received a letter Mass. govfrom the king, confirming and offering to renew its charter, ten- erament. dering pardon to all his subjects, for all offences, excepting such as stood attainted; but requiring the following conditions: That all laws made in the late troubles, derogatory to the royal authority and government, should be repealed; that the rules of the charter for administering the oath of allegiance be observed; that the administration of justice be in the king's name; and charging the government, that freedom and liberty of conscience, in the use of the Book of Common Prayer be allowed; and that all persons of good and honest lives and conversations be admitted to the sacrament of the Lord's supper according to it, with an exception to any indulgence to quakers. The letter also enjoined, that there should be impartiality in the election of the governor and of magistrates, without any regard to any faction with respect to their opinion or profession; that all freeholders of competent estates, not vicious in their lives, and orthodox in religion, though of different persuasions concerning church government, should be admitted to vote; and that at the next general court their letter should be communicated and published.3

1 Trumbull, i. 249. Chalmers, b. 1. 293, 294. Stokes, Brit. Colonies, 63— 67. Brit. Emp. ii. 169–171. Anderson, A. D. 1662. See the entire Charter, prefixed to the Acts and Laws of Connecticut. The general court of Connecticut, in 1661, prepared a Petition to the king for a charter; and John Winthrop, then governor of the colony, went to England to procure it. An extraordinary ring, that Mr. Winthrop now presented to Charles II, which the king's father Charles I. had presented to Mr. Winthrop's grandfather, is thought to have been influential in procuring the royal favour. Governor Winthrop did not arrive with the charter until after the general election in May; and the freemen made no alteration in their officers until 9 October; on which day Mr. Winthrop was chosen governor, and Mr. Mason, deputy governor; magistrates, or assistants, were also chosen; and the charter was publicly read to the freemen. Trumbull. Mather [Magnal. b. 1. 24.] says, it was "as amply priviledged a charter, as was ever enjoyed perhaps by any people under the cope of heaven." The Petition for it is in Hazard, ii. 586-588, and Trumbull, i. Append. No. VII. It cost the colony about £1300 sterling.

2 Chaliners, b. 1. 296. Trumbull, i. 260-277, where the objections to the union, with the arguments for it, and the negotiations to effect it, are recited at large. See A. D. 1665.

3 Hazard, ii. 605-607. 2 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc. viii. 52-55. Minot, Mass.

1662.

How received;

and acted

upon by the general

court.

Answer to the king's letter.

Act of parliament against quakers

The colonists had, from their first settlement, entertained such an opinion of the nature and extent of their allegiance and obligations to the crown of England, as would not admit a prompt compliance with all these conditions. Believing they were subject to the king, and dependent on his authority, only according to their charter, which some of the requisitions might be thought to infringe, their compliance was slow and occasional, as prudence would admit, or necessity impel them. At the next session of the general court, all processes were ordered to be carried on in his majesty's name; the king's letter was committed for consideration until the subsequent session; all the inhabitants were invited to give their opinions upon it; and it was ordered to be published, but with an express injunction, that all acting upon it should be suspended until the next meeting of the court.1

The answer of the general court to his majesty's letter is characteristic of the colony. After a respectful introduction, the court say : "For the repealing of all laws here established since the late changes, contrary and derogatory to his majesty's authority and government, we having considered thereof, are not conscious to any of that tendency; concerning the oath of allegiance, we are ready to attend to it as formerly, according to the charter;-concerning liberty to use the Common Prayer Book, none as yet among us have appeared to desire it; touching administration of the sacraments, this matter hath been under consideration of a synod, orderly called, the result whereof our last general court commended to the several congregations, and we hope will have a tendency to general satisfaction."2

An act was passed by parliament for preventing the mischiefs and damages that may arise by certain persons called quakers, and others refusing to take lawful oaths. By this act it was provided, that every five of them, meeting for religious worship, should be fined for the first offence £5; for the second offence, £10; and for the third offence, abjure the realm, or be transported by order of his majesty to any of his plantations. Many quakers refused to take the oath; and they were accordingly transported. They were alike subject to vexation on both sides of the Atlantic. By an act of the Virginia legislature, every

i. 41. The king's language, in his exception of the quakers, is remarkable: "We cannot be understood hereby to direct, or wish, that any indulgence should be granted to those persons commonly called Quakers, whose principles being inconsistent with any kind of government, we have found it necessary, by the advice of parliament here, to make a sharp law against them, and are well contented that you should do the like there."

1 Minot, i. 42, 43.

2 Danforth Papers in 2 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc. viii. 48. The Court's Declaration of their Rights by Charter, in 1661, is in Hutchinson, i. Appendix, No. XIII. and in Hazard, ii. 591, 592.

Virginia

master of a vessel, who should import a quaker, unless such as 1662. had been shipped from England under the above act, was subjected to a fine of 5000 pounds of tobacco, for the first offence. Laws of Laws were made in the same colony against sectarians of every against denomination; and many of the most industrious inhabitants, quakers, constrained as they now were to leave the colony, fled 80 or 90 and other miles into the wilderness, to avoid the operation of these laws. To this cause it is ascribed, that the first settlers near Pasquetank and Perquimons were chiefly emigrants from Virginia, and dissenters from the established church of England. Many of them were quakers.

sectaries.

The assembly of Virginia passed an act to make provision for Virginia a college. After premising the want of able and faithful minis- college. ters, and the improbability of a constant supply from the parent country, the act declares, That for the advancement of learning, education of youth, supply of the ministry, and promotion of piety, there be land taken up or purchased for a College and Free School; and that, with all convenient speed, there be buildings erected upon it for the entertainment of students and scholars. The same assembly passed an act, That no Indian Laws of king, or other person shall, upon any pretence, alien or sell, and Virginia in that no English shall purchase or buy any tract or parcel of land Indians; now justly claimed, or actually possessed, by any Indian or Indians whatsoever; and that the Indians' properties in their goods be

1 Trott's Laws of Virginia, No. 11, 29, 30. Williamson, N. Carolina, i. 81-83. In March 1664, 60 quakers were exported from England in one ship, the Black Eagle, and the governors of the plantations were ordered to receive them. Ib.The preamble of a law, passed in 1662, or the following year, prohibiting the unlawful assembling of quakers, states, that, under that and other names of separation, persons have taken up and maintained sundry dangerous opinions and tenets, and, under pretence of religious worship, often assemble themselves in great numbers, in several parts of this colony, to the great endangering of its public peace and safety. Laws of Virginia. Beverly, Virg. 57. Jefferson [Virg. Qu. XVII.] says: "Several acts of the Virginia assembly of 1659, 1662, and 1693, had made it penal in parents to refuse to have their children baptized; had prohibited the unlawful assembling of Quakers; had made it penal for any master of a vessel to bring a Quaker into the state; had ordered those already here, and such as should come thereafter, to be imprisoned till they should abjure the country; provided a milder punishment for their first and second return, but death for the third; had inhibited all persons from suffering their meetings in or near their houses, entertaining them individually, or disposing of books which supported their tenets." See a remark of Mr. Jefferson, made in reference to these laws, under A. D. 1661. Beverly says, the restraints laid upon sectaries in Virginia, to prevent their increase, "made many of them fly to other colonies, and prevented abundance of others from going over to seat themselves among them. And as the former ill treatment of my lord Baltimore kept many people away, and drove others to Maryland; so the present severities towards the nonconformists kept off many more, who went to the neighbouring colonies."

2 Trott, Laws of Virginia, No. 23. The preamble says: "The want of able and faithful ministers in this country deprives us of those great blessings and mercies that always attend upon the service of God &c."

behalf of

courts;

1662. hereby assured and confirmed to them; and their persons so secured, that whoever shall defraud or take from them their goods, or do injury to their persons, shall make such satisfaction, and suffer such punishment, as the laws of England, or of this country, do inflict, if the same be done to an Englishman.1 An for county act was also passed, appointing county courts, one in each county, to consist of eight of the most able, honest, and judicious persons in the county; who were to be empowered to do whatever, by the laws of England, is to be done by justices of the peace for observ- there.2 Acts were passed by the same assembly, that the 30th ing the 30th of January, the day on which king Charles I. was beheaded, be kept as a yearly fast; and that the 29th of May, the day of his majesty's birth and happy restoration, be annually celebrated as a holiday.3

of January;

and 29th of

May.

Licensers of

the press.

French

refugees.

Synod at

Boston.

The general court of Massachusetts appointed two licensers of the press. The same court granted liberty to a few French protestant refugees to inhabit in the colony.5

A synod of all the ministers in Massachusetts, with messengers September. from the churches, was holden at Boston, by appointment of the general court, to deliberate and decide on certain subjects of ecclesiastical controversy. The result of its deliberations was delivered to the general court, which ordered it to be printed, and recommended its observance to all the churches in its jurisdiction."

6

The three townships, settled on Connecticut river, in the

1 Laws of Virginia. The law was passed, in consideration of "the mutual discontents, complaints, jealousies, and fears of English and Indians, proceeding from the violent intrusions of divers English, made into their lands."

2 Laws of Virginia, What alterations were now made, it does not appear; but such courts had " of a long time been accustomed."

3 Trott's Laws of Virginia, Nos. 12 and 13. The reason assigned for the fast is, "that our sorrows may expiate our crime, and our tears wash away our guilt;" for the holiday, "in testimony of our thankfulness and joy." 4 Hutchinson, i. 257. Daniel Gookin Esq. and Rev. Mr. Mitchel. 5 Hutchinson, i. c. 2. Chalmers, b. 1. 315. "John Touton, a French doctor and inhabitant of Rochelle, made application to the court in behalf of himself and other protestants expelled from their habitations on account of their religion, that they might have liberty to inhabit here, which was readily granted to them." See A. D. 1686.

6 Mather, Magnal. b. 5. 63, 64. Hutchinson, i. 223. Trumbull, i. 325. Two questions were referred to its decision: 1. Who are the subjects of baptism? 2. Whether, according to the Word of God, there ought to be a consociation of churches? In answer to the first, the synod declared, "That church members, who were admitted in minority, understanding the doctrine of faith, and publicly professing their assent thereunto, not scandalous in life, and solemnly owning the covenant before the church, wherein they give up themselves and children to the Lord, and subject themselves to the government of Christ in his church, their children are to be baptized." This answer "was substantially the same with that given by the council in 1657." The synod also gave their opinion in favour of the consociation of churches. See "The Answer of the Elders and other Messengers of the Churches," with Remarks, in Mather, Magnal. b. 5. 64-84.

7 Hubbard, N. Eng. c. 67.

colony of Massachusetts, were made a county, by the name of 1662. Hampshire.1

The town of Dorchester voted, that Unquety, since called Milton inMilton, should be a township, if it have the consent of the general corporated. court.2

Pokanoket

Philip, sachem of Pokanoket, made his appearance at the August 6. court of Plymouth, and solicited the continuance of the amity Philip of and friendship, which had subsisted between the governor of renews Plymouth and his father and brother. To that end he desired amity with Plymouth. for himself and his successors, that they might forever remain subject to the king of England, his heirs and successors; and promised, that he and his would truly and exactly observe and keep inviolable, such conditions as had formerly been made by his predecessors; and particularly, that he would not at any time, needlessly or unjustly, provoke or raise war with any of the natives; nor give, sell, or dispose of any lands to strangers, or to any others, without their privity or appointment; but would in all things endeavour to behave peaceably and inoffensively towards the English. The court expressed their willingness to continue the friendship; and promised to afford the Indians such friendly assistance, by advice and otherwise, as they justly might, and to require their own people at all times to maintain a friendly conduct towards them.3

The authority of lord Baltimore, the proprietary of Maryland, Governbeing reestablished at the Restoration, he appointed Charles ment of Maryland Calvert, his eldest son, governor of the colony; who now as reverts to sumed the administration. The assembly of Maryland besought lord Baltithe proprietary" to take order for setting up a mint," and a law Law for a was passed for that purpose. The prosperity of this province mint.

5

1 Hutchinson, i. 226. Springfield, Northampton, and Hadley.

2 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc. i 100. It had the consent of court.

3 Morton, A. D. 1662. Neal, N. Eng. i. 352. Stiles, MSS. The original name of Philip was Metacom. I. Mather [Troubles with the Indians, 70.] says, it was at this time that he desired an English name, and that the court named him Philip. Judge Davis says: "After the death of Massasoit, about the year 1656, his two sons, Wamsutta and Metacomet came to the court, at Plymouth, and, professing great respect, requested English names might be given to them. Wamsutta, the eldest brother, was thereupon, named Alexander; the younger, Metacomet, was called Philip." Note on Morton.-The Agreement in 1662 was soon after the death of Alexander. It is signed, "The mark of Philip alias Metacom;" "Witness, John Sausamen, The mark of Francis the Sachem of Nauset."

4 Chalmers, b. 1. 360. Univ. Hist. xl. 469. Europ. Settlements, ii. 229. 5 Chalmers, b. 1. 248. "The great hindrance to the colony in trade, for the want of money," is assigned as the reason for the measure. It was enacted, that the money coined shall be of as good silver as English sterling; that every shilling, and so in proportion for other pieces, shall weigh above nine pence in such silver; and that the proprietary shall accept of it in payment of his rents and other debts. This coin being afterward circulated, the present law was confirmed among the perpetual laws of Maryland in 1676. This is the only law for coining money, which occurs in colonial history, previous to the Ameri can Revolution, excepting the ordinance of Massachusetts in 1652. Chalmers.

more.