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 eccentric elements of her population." But with clear-eyed faith Williams and his friends persisted, and finally worked out successfully their "livelie experiment."

CONNECTICUT

The birthplace of American democracy is Hartford.-JOHNSTON.

Massa

Three Massachusetts towns had been foremost in the struggle against aristocracy, Watertown, Dorchester, and Newtown. In 1635-1636, the people of these Withdrawal towns made a new migration to the Connecticut of demovalley, to try their own experiment of a demo- cratic cratic state. Other motives had part in the move- chusetts ment, among them, a desire for the more fertile towns to 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.

Connecticut

The inspirer of this movement was Thomas Hooker, pastor of Newtown. Hooker became to Connecticut even more than Cotton to Massachusetts. These two great Thomas leaders were widely different in their lives and feel- Hooker ings. Cotton belonged to the aristocratic English gentry. Hooker's father was a yeoman. He himself had been a menial "sizar" 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.

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 con

cern the common good, a general council chosen by all, to transact business which concerns all, I conceive . . . most suitable to rule and most safe for the relief of the whole." Winthrop and Cotton taught that the magistrates' authority had divine sanction. Hooker preached a great political sermon to teach that (1) “the foundation of authority is laid in the consent of the governed"; (2) "the choice of magistrates belongs to the people"; and (3) "those who have power to appoint officers, have also the right to set bounds to their authority."

For a time the three Connecticut towns kept their Massachusetts names. Later, they were known as Hartford, Wethersfield, and Windsor. At first they recognized a vague authority in commissioners appointed over them by Massachusetts; but each town managed freely its own local affairs, and, in 1639, an independent central government was provided by a mass meeting of the inhabitants of the colony. This gathering adopted a set of eleven "Fundamental Orders"-"the first written constitution" in the modern sense. The document set up a plan of government similar to that which had been worked out in Massachusetts, emphasizing, however, all democratic features found there and adding a few of its own.

The Fundamental Orders, 1639

The governor held office for one year only, and he could not serve two terms in succession. He had no veto, and in two other respects he lacked authority usually possessed by an English executive: (1) the General Court could not be dissolved except by its own vote; and (2) it could be elected and brought together, on occasion, without the governor's summons. The right of the General Court is expressly asserted to "call into question" magistrate or governor, and even (in modern phrase) to "recall" them during their short term of office. The franchise was never restricted to church members, as in Massachusetts. At first, anyone whom a town allowed to vote in town meeting could vote also in the General Court of Elections. That is, the towns fixed not only the local, but also the general franchise. But in 1659 the General

BIRTHPLACE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY

103

Court ordered that thereafter no one should vote for governor or for members of the General Court unless he were possessed of thirty pounds' worth of property, real or personal. Even in democratic Connecticut this property qualification stood, with slight change, until long after the American Revolution.

Connecticut did not reject theocracy. Hooker believed in a Bible commonwealth as zealously as Cotton did, though he understood his Bible differently on political Connecticut matters. The governor had to be a member of and a church; the preamble of the Orders states the theocracy first purpose of the government to be the maintaining of "the discipline of the churches, which according to the truth of the gospell is now practiced amongst us"; and the first code of laws, in 1650, authorizes the government "to see [that] the force, ordinances, and rules of Christe bee observed in every

Church according to his word." The General Court placed ministers, defined their powers, and even decided who should be admitted to the sacraments.

The need of union

THE NEW ENGLAND CONFEDERATION

The New England. colonies had hardly established themselves in the wilderness before they began a movement toward federal union. The Connecticut valley was claimed by the Dutch New Netherlands. Moreover, the English settlers in the valley found themselves at once involved in war with the Pequod Indians. Connecticut felt keenly the need of protection by the other English colonies; and, in 1637, Hooker (present at Boston for the synod that condemned Mrs. Hutchinson) proposed to Massachusetts a federal compact. For the moment the negotiations fell through because of States-rights jealousy. Much as Connecticut feared Dutchman and Indian, she feared interference in her own affairs hardly less, and hesitated to intrust any Organiza- real authority to a central government. But, in tion in 1643 1643, commissioners from Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Haven, and Plymouth met at Boston, and organized the New England Confederation.

Rhode Island and the New Hampshire towns asked in vain for admission to this union. The leaders of Massachusetts were wont to refer to Rhode Island as "that sewer"; and regarding the exclusion of New Hampshire, Winthrop wrote: "They ran a different course from us, both in their ministry and civil administration . . . for they .. had made a tailor their mayor and had entertained one Hull, an excommunicated person, and very contentious, to be their minister."

The date (1643) suggests an important relation between English and American history. The union of the colonies without sanction from England was really a defiance of authority. But war had just broken out in England between King Charles and the Puritans. Accordingly, the colonies could excuse themselves (as they did) on the ground

AND ITS CONSTITUTION

105

The Articles

of necessity, since the home government was temporarily unable to protect them; while really they were influenced still more by the fact that it could not interfere. The preamble to the Articles states all other motives for the union admirably, but, naturally, it omits this last consideration. The Articles of Confederation established “a firm and perpetual league." For matters of common concern, a congress of eight commissioners, two from each of the four colonies, was elected annually. These commissioners had "full power from their severall Generall Courtes respectively" to determine upon war or peace, divide spoils, admit new confederates, and to manage "all things of like nature, which are the proper concomitants or consequents of such a Confederation for amity, offence, and defence, not intermeddling with the Government of any of the Jurisdictions, which . . . is reserved entirely to themselves." The vote of six commissioners was to be final in all matters; but if in any case six could not agree, then the matter was to be referred to the several colonial "Courts" for negotiation between them. Special provision was made for the surrender of fugitive criminals or "servants" escaping from one colony to another and for arbitration of differences that might arise between any two colonies of the union.

This document compares well with the constitution of any earlier confederation in history. Its weak points were common to all previous unions. The greatest difficulty And their arose from the fact that one of the confederates was working much larger than the others. Each of the three smaller colonies had about three thousand people: Massachusetts alone had fifteen thousand. Consequently she bore two thirds of all burdens, while she had only a fourth share in the government. The Bay Colony made an earnest demand for three commissioners, but the smaller states unanimously resisted the claim.

Under these conditions, Massachusetts became dissatisfied. In 1653 six of the federal commissioners voted a levy of 500 men for war upon New Netherlands. Massachusetts felt least interested in the war, and her General