CHAPTER XIV

OTHER NEW ENGLAND COLONIES

120. By 1640, when the great Puritan migration came to an end (§ 80), there were five colonies in New England, besides Plymouth and Massachusetts. English proprietors had founded fishing stations on the coasts of Maine and New Hampshire, and these settlements had been reinforced and Puritanized by Hutchinson sympathizers from Massachusetts.1 The New Haven group of towns began with a Puritan migration from England in 1638. This colony closely resembled Massachusetts; but it had a little less aristocracy, and depended a little more on the Old Testament as a guide in government.

The two remaining colonies, Rhode Island and Connecticut, represented new ideas and played new parts in history. Each was born of rebellion against one part of the Massachusetts ideal: Rhode Island, against theocracy; Connecticut, against aristocracy. In the long run the great Massachusetts plan of aristocratic theocracy broke down; while these two little protesting colonies laid broad and deep the foundations of America. Roger Williams in Rhode Island was the apostle of modern religious liberty; and Thomas Hooker in Connecticut was the apostle of modern democracy.

I. RHODE ISLAND

121. Williams founded the town of Providence in the spring of 1636 (§ 116). From the Indians he bought a tract of land, and deeded it in joint ownership to twelve companions "and to

1 Both these colonies were democratic in society. See the interesting "Exeter Agreement" in Source Book, No. 46, addendum.

such others as the major part of us shall admit into the same fellowship." Later comers signed an agreement to submit themselves "only in civil things," to orders made for the public good by the town fellowship, in which they were freely granted an equal voice. "Civil" in this passage is used in its common English sense in that day, as opposed to "ecclesiastical."

The point to the agreement is that the people did not purpose to let the government meddle with religion. Williams' opinion upon the possibility of maintaining civil order without compelling uniformity in religion is set forth admirably in his figure of speech, comparing a state to a ship, where all, passengers and seamen, must obey the captain in matters of navigation, though all need not attend the ship's prayers (Source Book, No. 90).

In

122. No opportunity was lost to assert this doctrine. 1644 Williams secured from the Long Parliament a "Patent" authorizing the Rhode Island settlements to rule themselves "by such a form of civill government," and to make "such civil laws and constitutions" as the majority might prefer. Then, in 1663, when the colony received its first royal charter (§ 144), the fundamental idea was made yet more explicit :·

66

...

:

"Whereas it is much on their hearts," says a preamble, quoting the petition of the colonists, "to hold forth a livelie experiment that a most flourishing civill state may stand . . . with a full libertie in religious concernments,' accordingly, noe person within the sayd colonye, at any tyme hereafter, shall bee any wise molested, punished, disquieted, or called in question, for any differences in opinione in matters of religion, and [i.e. provided he] doe not actually disturb the civill peace."

123. The practice of the colony, too, kept to this high level. During the Commonwealth (§ 48) in England, Massachusetts complained that Rhode Island sheltered Quakers, who then swarmed across her borders to annoy her neighbors. Williams disliked Quakers heartily; but he now replied that they ought to be punished only when they had actually disturbed the peace, and not merely for being Quakers. "We have no law," ran this noble argument, "to punish any for declaring by words their

§ 125]

CONNECTICUT

105

minds concerning the ways and things of God." Massachusetts threatened interference. The smaller colony appealed to Eng. land, praying-"Whatever fortune may befall us, let us not be compelled to exercise power over men's consciences."

In Rhode Island, religious freedom was not a mere means to timorous toleration. The chief purpose of this social “experiment" was to prove that such freedom was compatible with orderly government and good morals. For a time there was much turbulence in the colony. Providence became a "crank's paradise," "New England's dumping ground for the disorderly and excentric elements of her population." But with clear-eyed faith Williams and his friends persisted, and finally worked out successfully their "livelie experiment.'

II. CONNECTICUT

The birthplace of American democracy is Hartford. JOHNSTON.

ALEXANDER

124. Three Massachusetts towns had been foremost in the struggle against aristocracy, Watertown, Dorchester, and Newtown.1 In 1635-1636, the people of these towns made a new migration to the Connecticut valley, to try their own experiment of a democratic state.

When the seceding towns gave their reasons for the migration, they put emphasis upon "the strong bent of our spirits to remove." This surely has reference to their dissatisfaction with aristocratic rule in Massachu

setts. But other motives had part in the movement, - among them, a desire for the more fertile land of the valley. The journey through the forests, with women and children, herds, and household goods, was the first of the overland pilgrimages which were to become so characteristic of American life.

125. The inspirer of this movement was Thomas Hooker, pastor of Newtown. Hooker became to Connecticut even more than

1 Some instances of Watertown and Dorchester democracy have been given (§§ 90, 102, 104). With regard to Newtown, it was said that the people there 'grew very jealous of their liberties" soon after the arrival of their pastor Hooker, from England.

66

Cotton to Massachusetts. These two great leaders were widely different in their lives and feelings. Cotton belonged to the aristocratic English gentry. Hooker's father was a yeoman. He himself had been a menial "sizar "1 at Cambridge University, and his wife had been a ladies' maid. By birth and association, as well as by conviction, he was a man of the people.2

66

Over against the aristocratic doctrines of the great Massachusetts leaders, Hooker stated admirably the case for democracy. Winthrop wrote to him that democracy was unwarrantable" because "the best part is always the least, and of that best part the wiser part is always the lesser "; but Hooker replied: "In matters. . . that concern the common good, a general council

1 This term will be familiar to students who know Tom Brown at Oxford. 2 Sixty years later, the gossipy Cotton Mather insinuated that Hooker instigated the Connecticut migration because he was jealous of Cotton's fame in Massachusetts. This seems to be a wholly gratuitous slander, without a particle of evidence back of it, -- although many later writers have repeated it.