Chapter 38

80. The Court, in March, 1634–5, passed an act, “entreating of the brethren and elders of every church within their jurisdiction, that they will consult and advise of oneuniformorder of discipline in the churches, agreeable to the Scriptures, and then to consider how far the magistrates are bound to interpose for the preservation of that uniformity and the peace of the churches.”

81. Ecclesiastes, vii. 7.

82. Winthrop, vol. i. p. 167, note.

83. Winthrop places the banishment under the date of October, but the Colonial Records, (I. 163) state, that it took place, November 3, 1635.

84. See Appendix C.

85. Backus, vol. i. p. 516. He called this daughter Freeborn. This was in the taste of the times. The first three children christened in Boston church were named Joy, Recompense and Pity. It is worthy of remark, that the name Freeborn was given, while the father was the object of what he doubtless thought oppression. It shows his indomitable spirit.

86. MSS. Letter.

87. This is the ground on which Mr. Cotton himself justified the punishment of heretics. See the “Bloody Tenet.”

88. About the same time that Bossuet, the most illustrious champion of the Church of Rome, was engaged in maintaining, with all the force of his overwhelming eloquence, and inexhaustible ingenuity, that the sovereign was bound to use his authority in extirpating false religions from the state, the Scotch Commissioners in London were remonstrating, in the name of their national Church, against the introduction of a ‘sinful and ungodly toleration in matters of religion;’ whilst the whole body of the English Presbyterian Clergy, in their official papers, protested against the schemes of Cromwell’s party, and solemnly declared, ‘that they detested and abhorred toleration.’ ‘My judgment,’ said Baxter, a man noted in his day for moderation, ‘I have always freely made known. I abhor unlimited liberty or toleration of all.’—‘Toleration,’ said Edwards, another distinguished divine, ‘will make the kingdom a chaos, a Babel, another Amsterdam, a Sodom, an Egypt, a Babylon. Toleration is the grand work of the Devil, his master-piece, and chief engine to uphold his tottering kingdom. It is the most compendious, ready, sure way to destroy all religion, lay all waste and bring in all evil. It is a most transcendent, catholic and fundamental evil. As original sin is the fundamental sin, having the seed and spawn of all sins in it, so toleration hath all errors in it, and all evils.’Verplank’s Discourses, pp. 23, 24. Similar language was used in this country. The Rev. Mr. Ward, in his Simple Cobler of Agawam, written in 1647, utters his detestation of toleration, and says: “He that is willing to tolerate any religion, or decrepit way of religion, besides his own, unless it be in matters merely indifferent, either doubts of his own, or is not sincere in it.”

89. 1 His. Col. vi. p. 248.

90. Mr. Haynes was preceded by Mr. Dudley, who was a stern man, and particularly opposed to toleration. He died soon after, with a copy of verses in his pocket, written with his own hand. The two following lines made a part of it:“Let men of God in court and churches watch“O’er such as do a toleration hatch.”Mr. Haynes also accused Governor Winthrop as too mild. Winthrop, vol. i. p. 178.

“Let men of God in court and churches watch“O’er such as do a toleration hatch.”

“Let men of God in court and churches watch

“O’er such as do a toleration hatch.”

Mr. Haynes also accused Governor Winthrop as too mild. Winthrop, vol. i. p. 178.

91. Mr. Cotton denied, in his Reply to the Bloody Tenet, that he had any agency in the banishment of Mr. Williams, but avowed that he approved of it. Mr. Williams asserts, “Some gentlemen who consented to the sentence against me, solemnly testified with tears, that they did it by the advice and counsel of Mr. Cotton.” These two assertions may be reconciled, perhaps, by the remark of Mr. Cotton, that “if he did counsel one or two, it would not argue the act of the government.”

92. In the Bloody Tenet such phrases as these are repeatedly applied to Mr. Cotton: “I speak with honorable respect for the answerer”—“the worthy answerer”—“a man incomparably too worthy for such a service.”

93. Baylies’ History of Plymouth, vol. i. chap. 4.

94. 2 His. Col. vol. ix. pp. 235, 236.

95. Key, Introduction.

96. Key, ch. 21.

97. The remark of Tacitus, respecting the German tribes, is true of the Indians: “Reges̄ ex nobilitate, Duces ex virtute sumunt. Nec Regibus infinita aut libera potestas, et Duces exemplo potius quam imperio; si prompti, si conspicui, si ante aciem agant, admiratione præsunt.” De Mor. Ger. c. vii.

98. Key, ch. 22.

99. Encyclopædia Americana, art. Indians.

100. Hutchinson, vol. i. p. 411.

101. Roger Williams says, “I have known many of them run between fourscore or an hundred miles in a summer’s day, and back in two days.” Key, ch. 11.

102. Key, ch. 2.

103. When boiled whole it was called msickquatash, and it is still eaten in New-England, under the name of suckatash. The ground corn, when boiled, was called Nasaump. “From this,” says Roger Williams, “the English call theirsamp, which is the Indian corn, beaten and boiled, and eaten hot or cold with milk or butter, which are mercies beyond the natives’ plain water, and which is a dish exceeding wholesome for the English bodies.” Key, ch. 2.

104. This shell fish is now called quahawg. The blue part of the shell seems to have been broken off, drilled, ground to a round, smooth surface, and polished. It appears that the white parts of the quahawg shell were in like manner made into wampum. Morton’s Memorial, Appendix, p. 388.

105. Hutchinson, vol. i. p. 406.

106. The remark of Lord Bacon is applicable to the native tribes of our land. “It is certain, that sedentary and within door arts, and delicate manufactures (that require rather the finger than the arm) have in their nature a contrariety to a warlike disposition; and generally all warlike people are a little idle, and love danger better than travail.” Essay 29.

107. They supposed that their elysium was situated in the southwest, because the wind from that quarter is always the attendant or precursor of fine weather. It was not unnatural for an ignorant savage to imagine, that the balmy and delightful breezes from the southwest were “airs from heaven.”

108. Key, ch. 21.

109. The Rev. John Eliot, called the Indian apostle, was settled as the teacher of the church in Roxbury, in 1632. He learned the Indian language, and commenced preaching to the natives. In 1651, an Indian town was built, on a pleasant spot on Charles river, about 16 miles from Boston, and called Natick. A house of worship was erected, and a church of converted Indians was formed, in 1660. In 1661, he published the New Testament, in the Indian language, and in a few years after, the whole Bible, and several other books. His labors for the welfare of the natives were very great, and his success was gratifying. In 1670, there were between 60 and 70 praying communicants. The example of Eliot was followed by others, especially by the Mayhews, who labored among the Indians on Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard. Many churches were formed in various places besides Natick, schools established, books printed, and other efforts made for the welfare of the natives. The aggregate number of praying Indians, in 1674, has been estimated as follows:In Massachusetts, principally under Mr. Eliot’s care,1100In Plymouth, under Mr. Bourne,530In Plymouth, under Mr. Cotton,170On the island of Nantucket,300On Martha’s Vineyard and Chappequiddick, under the Mayhews,15003600See Morton’s Memorial, note U, p. 407, and Qu. Register of the Am. Ed. Soc. for Feb. 1832. Adams’ Bio. Dic. art. Eliot and Mayhew.

See Morton’s Memorial, note U, p. 407, and Qu. Register of the Am. Ed. Soc. for Feb. 1832. Adams’ Bio. Dic. art. Eliot and Mayhew.

110. The illustrious Professors Adelung and Vater, and Baron Humboldt, deserve a special mention. They are the authors of that astonishing work, the Mithridates.

111. The Cherokee language exceeds even the Greek in its power to express, by the inflection of a single word, delicate modifications of thought. An example is given in the Appendix to the 6th volume of the Encyclopædia Americana. It is also a specimen of the length to which the words in the Indian languages are often extended. The word is, Winitaw´tigeginaliskawlungtanawneli´tisesti, which may be rendered, “They will by that time have nearly done granting [favors] from a distance to thee and to me.” This word is understood to be regularly inflected, according to fixed rules. If so, the Cherokee language must have an arrangement of modes, tenses and numbers, which few if any other languages on earth can equal.

112. 2 His. Col. ix. 227.

113. The number assigned, in the same work, to Europe, is 587; to Africa, 276; to Asia, 987. Total, in the world, 3064.

114. 2 His. Col. ix. 233, 234.

115. Heckewelder and Edwards assert this fact.

116. Key, introduction.

117. Vattel’s Law of Nations, book i. sections 81 and 209.

118. “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth, and subdue it.” Genesis, i. 28.

119. The patents which they brought with them were, in theory, unjust; for they implied, in terms, the absolute control of the English monarch over the ceded territory, and contained no recognition of the rights of the natives. But the Christian integrity of the Pilgrims corrected, in practice, the error or defect of the patents. An able writer says: “It is beyond all question, that the early settlers at Plymouth, at Saybrook, and, as a general rule, all along the Atlantic coast, purchased the lands upon which they settled, and proceeded in their settlements with the consent of the natives. Nineteen twentieths of the land in the Atlantic States, and nearly all the land settled by the whites in the western States, came into our possession as the result of amicable treaties.” “The settlers usually gave as much for land as it was then worth, according to any fair and judicious estimate. An Indian would sell a square mile of land for a blanket and a jack-knife; and this would appear to many to be a fraudulent bargain. It would, however, by no means deserve such an appellation. The knife alone would add more to the comfort of an Indian, and more to his wealth, than forty square miles of land, in the actual circumstances of the case.” See a very judicious article in the North American Review, for October, 1830. We may add, that, at this day, a square mile of land might be bought in some parts of the United States, for less than the first settlers paid the Indians for their lands. Indeed, as the writer just quoted says, “There are millions of acres of land in the Carolinas, which would not, at this moment, be accepted as a gift, and yet much of this land will produce, with very little labor, one hundred and fifty bushels of sweet potatoes to the acre.” Vattel says, (book i. § 209) “We cannot help praising the moderation of the English puritans, who first settled in New-England, who, notwithstanding their being furnished with a charter from their sovereign, purchased of the Indians the land they resolved to cultivate. This laudable example was followed by Mr. William Penn, who planted the colony of Quakers in Pennsylvania.”

120. The consternation which the war with Black Hawk spread over the western country the last year, may give some faint idea of the horrors of an Indian warfare in the early days of the colonies.

121. See Opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, at January term, 1832, in the Cherokee case.

122. There is a strange confusion in the statements of different authors respecting the time of Mr. Williams’ banishment, and of the settlement of Providence. The above date is unquestionably correct, for reasons which will hereafter be presented.

123. Letter to Major Mason.

124. Letter of Roger Williams.

125. Letter to Major Mason.

126. Key, chap. ii.

127. The venerable Moses Brown assures me, that he has ascertained this fact, to his own satisfaction.

128. William Harris, John Smith (miller), Joshua Verin, Thomas Angell and Francis Wickes. R. I. Register, 1828, article written by Moses Brown.

129. Equivalent to the modernHow do you do?

130. The lands adjacent to this spot were calledWhatcheer, in memory of the occurrence.

131. “Tradition has uniformly stated the place where they landed, to be at the spring southwest of the Episcopal church, at which a house has recently been built by Mr. Nehemiah Dodge.” Moses Brown.

132. Mrs. Hemans’ noble ode, “The Landing of the Pilgrim Fathers.” This beautiful stanza applies with more literal truth to Roger Williams and his companions, than to all the Pilgrim fathers.

133. Published in the Providence Gazette, from January to March, 1765, and republished in the 2 Mass. His. Col. ix.

134. Mass. Rec. vol. i. p. 163.

135. Backus, vol. i. 74.

136. The Plymouth settlers, in 1623, began to plant their corn the middle of April. Prince, p. 216.

137. Winthrop, vol. i. p. 190.

138. In a letter to the author, from John Howland, Esq. of Providence, one of the most intelligent and active members of the Rhode-Island Historical Society, he says, “When our Society was first formed, it was proposed to fix on the day of his arrival here, as the day of the annual meetings of the Society; and till that day could be ascertained, we decided on the day of the date of the charter of Charles II.”

139. Backus, vol. i. p. 89.

140. Rhode-Island Register, 1828.

141. “Under the general name of Narraganset, were included Narraganset proper, and Coweset. Narraganset proper extended south from what is now called Warwick to the ocean; Coweset, from Narraganset northerly to the Nipmuck country, which now forms Oxford, (Mass.) and some other adjoining towns. The western boundaries of Narraganset and Coweset cannot be definitely ascertained. Gookin says, the Narraganset jurisdiction extended thirty or forty miles from Seekonk river and Narraganset Bay, including the islands, southwesterly to a place called Wekapage, four or five miles to the eastward of Pawcatuck river; that it included a part of Long-Island, Block-Island, Coweset and Niantick, and received tribute from some of the Nipmucks. After some research, I am induced to believe, that the Nianticks occupied the territory now called Westerly. If so, then the jurisdiction of the Narragansets extended to the Pawcatuck, and perhaps beyond it.”—Whatcheer, Notes, p. 176.

142. This is transcribed from a copy furnished by John Howland, Esq. It differs a little from that contained in Backus, vol. i. p. 89. The orthography is conformed to modern usage.

143. “The great hill, Notaquoncanot, mentioned as a bound, is three miles west from Weybosset bridge. Mashapaug is about two miles south of the hill.—J. H.”

144. Mr. Backus (vol. i. p. 90) has this reading: “He acknowledged this his act and hand; up the streams,” &c. But the reading in the text is retained, according to Mr. Howland’s copy. The deed was written by Roger Williams, but the memorandum by some other person.

145. Backus, vol. i. p. 94.

146. Backus, vol. i. p. 290.

147. See above. He adds, “It hath been told me, that I labored for a licentious and contentious people; that I have foolishly parted with town and colony advantages, by which I might have preserved both town and colony in as good order as any in the country about us.” The following letter from his son may be properly quoted here, as confirming the preceding statements:“To all them that deem themselves purchasers in the town of Providence, if they be real purchasers, I would have them make it appear.“Gentlemen,“I thought good in short to present you with these few lines, concerning the bounds of Providence, &c. I have put forth several queries to several men in the township, to be answered; but have not any answer from any of them; and, as I judge, doth not care to have any discourse about it. Therefore, now I speak to you all, desiring your honors will be pleased to consider of the matter, and to answer me to one or two queries; that is, whether you have any thing under my father’s hand to prove the bounds of this town afore those twelve men were concerned; or whether my father disposed of any of the township to any other persons since the twelve men were first in power, &c. If my father had disposed or sold his whole township, and they he sold it to, or have it under his hand, prove the sale, although it was but for one penny, God forbid that ever I should open my mouth about it, &c. It is evident, that this township was my father’s, and it is held in his name against all unjust clamors, &c. Can you find such another now alive, or in this age? He gave away his lands and other estate, to them that he thought were most in want, until he gave away all, so that he had nothing to help himself, so that he being not in a way to get for his supply, and being ancient, it must needs pinch somewhere. I do not desire to say what I have done for both father and mother. I judge they wanted nothing that was convenient for ancient people, &c. What my father gave, I believe he had a good intent in it, and thought God would provide for his family. He never gave me but about three acres of land, and but a little afore he deceased. It looked hard, that out of so much at his disposing, that I should have so little, and he so little. For the rest, &c. I did not think to be so large; so referring your honors to those queries you have among you,“Your friend and neighbor,“DANIEL WILLIAMS.“Providence, Aug. 24, 1710.“If a covetous man had that opportunity as he had, most of this town would have been his tenants, I believe.D. W.”

“To all them that deem themselves purchasers in the town of Providence, if they be real purchasers, I would have them make it appear.

“Gentlemen,

“I thought good in short to present you with these few lines, concerning the bounds of Providence, &c. I have put forth several queries to several men in the township, to be answered; but have not any answer from any of them; and, as I judge, doth not care to have any discourse about it. Therefore, now I speak to you all, desiring your honors will be pleased to consider of the matter, and to answer me to one or two queries; that is, whether you have any thing under my father’s hand to prove the bounds of this town afore those twelve men were concerned; or whether my father disposed of any of the township to any other persons since the twelve men were first in power, &c. If my father had disposed or sold his whole township, and they he sold it to, or have it under his hand, prove the sale, although it was but for one penny, God forbid that ever I should open my mouth about it, &c. It is evident, that this township was my father’s, and it is held in his name against all unjust clamors, &c. Can you find such another now alive, or in this age? He gave away his lands and other estate, to them that he thought were most in want, until he gave away all, so that he had nothing to help himself, so that he being not in a way to get for his supply, and being ancient, it must needs pinch somewhere. I do not desire to say what I have done for both father and mother. I judge they wanted nothing that was convenient for ancient people, &c. What my father gave, I believe he had a good intent in it, and thought God would provide for his family. He never gave me but about three acres of land, and but a little afore he deceased. It looked hard, that out of so much at his disposing, that I should have so little, and he so little. For the rest, &c. I did not think to be so large; so referring your honors to those queries you have among you,

“Your friend and neighbor,“DANIEL WILLIAMS.

“Your friend and neighbor,

“DANIEL WILLIAMS.

“Providence, Aug. 24, 1710.

“If a covetous man had that opportunity as he had, most of this town would have been his tenants, I believe.

D. W.”

148. The first deed was “written in a strait of time and haste,” as he alleged, and contained only the initials of the names of the grantees. He was censured for this by some of them, as if he had done it for some sinister design! They urged him to give them another deed, which he finally did, on the 22d of December, 1666, when the document in the text was written, retaining the original date.

149. The name,New Providence, appears in a few documents written by Mr. Williams himself, and by others, but it was soon discontinued. The origin of the epithetNewmay have been, a desire to distinguish the town from the island of Providence, one of the Bahama islands, on which a plantation was begun in 1629. Holmes’ Annals, vol. i. p. 201. This island has since received the name of New Providence. The town of Roger Williams was entitled to the precedence.

150. Backus, vol. i. p. 92.

151. This seems to be loosely expressed. Mr. Williams could not mean that he delivered the deed to the grantees in 1637, for several of the persons named, did not arrive in Providence till after April, 1638. (Backus, vol. i. p. 92.) His own deed of cession is dated Oct. 8, 1638. He probably meant, that he delivered the deed, signed by the sachems in 1637, to the purchasers. This deed was dated March 24, the last day of 1637, old style.

152. An anchor, reclining.

153. We are surprised at the form of this signature. That Mrs. Williams could not write, would be incredible, if it were not rendered certain that she could write, by a reference to her letters, in a public document at Providence. It is probable, that she wrote the initials, believing them to be sufficient; and some person added the words,the mark of, and wrote the name at length.

154. Mr. Backus so understood it. Vol. i. p. 93.

155. He found “Indian gifts” very costly. He was under the necessity of making frequent presents. He says, that he let the Indians have his shallop and pinnace at command, transporting fifty at a time, and lodging fifty at his house; that he never denied them any thing lawful; that when he established a trading house at Narraganset, Canonicus had freely what he desired; and when the old chief was about to die, he sent for Mr. Williams, and “desired to be buried in my cloth, of free gift.”

156. Throckmorton, Olney and Westcott, three of the first proprietors, were members of the Salem church. Hutchinson, vol. i. p. 371.

157. Hubbard repeatedly alludes, in a somewhat taunting tone, to the poverty of Roger Williams.—pp. 205, 350.

158. The author of Whatcheer, (p. 163) has accommodated his hero with the dwelling of a deceased Indian powaw. Poets have a license to build castles in the air, or on the land. I fear that Roger Williams was not so easily furnished with a habitation. It was, however, we may suppose, sufficiently humble.

159. Among these, were Chad Brown, William Field, Thomas Harris, William Wickenden, Robert Williams (brother of Roger), Richard Scott, William Reynolds, John Warner, Benedict Arnold, Joshua Winsor and Thomas Hopkins. Backus, vol. i. p. 93.

160. Gov. Hopkins, History of Providence, 2 Mass. His. Col. ix. p. 183.

161. Vol. i. p. 293.

162. John Howland, Esq. in a letter to the author.

163. Moses Brown says (Rhode-Island Register, 1828) “Roger Williams’ lot was No. 38, northward from Mile End Cove, at the south end of the town; William Harris’ was No. 36; John Smith’s, No. 41; Joshua Verins’, No. 39, adjoining on the north of Roger Williams’ lot; Francis Wickes’, No. 35. The Court House appears to be standing on No. 34. These first six settlers all became proprietors, though Francis Wickes and Thomas Angell did not receive full shares till they became of age.”

164. Copied from 3 His. Col. i. 165.

165. Journal, vol. ii. p. 360.

166. Winthrop, vol. i. 147, 149. The Pequods agreed to deliver up the individuals who were engaged in the murder, and to pay four hundred fathoms of wampumpeag, forty beaver skins, and thirty otter skins. While the Pequod ambassadors were at Boston, a party of the Narragansets came as far as Naponset, and it was rumored that their object was to murder the Pequod ambassadors. The magistrates had a conference at Roxbury, with the Narragansets, (among whom were two sachems) and persuaded them to make peace with the Pequods, to which the sachems agreed, the magistrates having secretly promised them, as a condition, a part of the wampumpeag, which the Pequods had stipulated to pay. The note of Mr. Savage, on this affair, deserves to be repeated:“If any doubt has ever been entertained, in Europe or America, of the equitable and pacific principles of the founders of New-England, in their relations with the Indians, the secret history, in the foregoing paragraph, of this negotiation, should dissipate it. By the unholy maxims of vulgar policy, the discord of these unfriendly nations would have been encouraged, and our European fathers should have employed the passions of the aborigines for their mutual destruction. On the contrary, an honest artifice was resorted to for their reconciliation, and the tribute received by us from one offending party was, by a Christian deception, divided with their enemies, to procure mutual peace. Such mediation is more useful than victory, and more honorable than conquest.”It may be added, here, as an illustration of the temper of the times, that Mr. Eliot, the Indian apostle, expressed, in a sermon, some disapprobation of this treaty with the Pequods, for this reason, among others, that the magistrates and ministers acted without authority from the people. He was called to account, and Mr. Cotton and two other ministers were appointed to convince him of his error. The good man appeared to be convinced, and agreed to make a public retraction. It is stated by Dr. Bentley, that Mr. Williams, then at Salem, expressed his disapprobation of the treaty, doubtless on the same ground, of the combination of civil and clerical agency in the transaction. But Mr. Williams would not retract, after the example of Eliot.

“If any doubt has ever been entertained, in Europe or America, of the equitable and pacific principles of the founders of New-England, in their relations with the Indians, the secret history, in the foregoing paragraph, of this negotiation, should dissipate it. By the unholy maxims of vulgar policy, the discord of these unfriendly nations would have been encouraged, and our European fathers should have employed the passions of the aborigines for their mutual destruction. On the contrary, an honest artifice was resorted to for their reconciliation, and the tribute received by us from one offending party was, by a Christian deception, divided with their enemies, to procure mutual peace. Such mediation is more useful than victory, and more honorable than conquest.”

It may be added, here, as an illustration of the temper of the times, that Mr. Eliot, the Indian apostle, expressed, in a sermon, some disapprobation of this treaty with the Pequods, for this reason, among others, that the magistrates and ministers acted without authority from the people. He was called to account, and Mr. Cotton and two other ministers were appointed to convince him of his error. The good man appeared to be convinced, and agreed to make a public retraction. It is stated by Dr. Bentley, that Mr. Williams, then at Salem, expressed his disapprobation of the treaty, doubtless on the same ground, of the combination of civil and clerical agency in the transaction. But Mr. Williams would not retract, after the example of Eliot.

167. Winthrop, vol. i. p. 192.

168. Winthrop, vol. i. p. 199. Hutchinson, vol. i. p. 61. The last article of the treaty provided, that it should continue to theposterity of both parties. Our fathers thus treated with the Indians as independent tribes. They did not then dream of the doctrine, that the Indians are mere tenants of the soil, and are under the jurisdiction of the whites.

169. 3 His. Col. i. p. 159.

170. Letter to Major Mason.

171. The principal force from Massachusetts, under General Stoughton, did not arrive till some time after the action. The Plymouth troops did not march, though fifty men were got in readiness, but not till the war was nearly finished. The friendly Indians did very little service, except to intercept some fugitives. The battle was fought by the whites.

172. “It was judged,” says Dr. Holmes, (Annals, vol. i. p. 241) “that, during the summer, seven hundred Pequods were destroyed, among whom were thirteen sachems. About two hundred, besides women and children, survived the swamp fight. Of this number, the English gave eighty to Miantinomo, and twenty to Ninigret, two sachems of Narraganset, and the other hundred to Uncas, sachem of the Mohegans, to be received and treated as their men. A number of the male children were sent to Bermuda. However just the occasion of this war, humanity demands a tear on the extinction of a valiant tribe, which preferred death to what it might naturally anticipate from the progress of English settlements—dependence, or extirpation.‘Indulge, my native land! indulge the tear,That steals, impassion’d, o’er a nation’s doom;To me each twig from Adam’s stock, is dear,And sorrows fell upon an Indian’s tomb.’”Dwight’s Greenfield Hill.

‘Indulge, my native land! indulge the tear,That steals, impassion’d, o’er a nation’s doom;To me each twig from Adam’s stock, is dear,And sorrows fell upon an Indian’s tomb.’”Dwight’s Greenfield Hill.

‘Indulge, my native land! indulge the tear,

That steals, impassion’d, o’er a nation’s doom;

To me each twig from Adam’s stock, is dear,

And sorrows fell upon an Indian’s tomb.’”

Dwight’s Greenfield Hill.

173. Backus, vol. i. p. 95. None might have a voice in government in this new plantation, who would not allow this liberty. Hence, about this time, I found the following town act, viz. “It was agreed, that Joshua Verin, upon breach of covenant, for restraining liberty of conscience, shall be withheld from liberty of voting, till he shall declare the contrary.” Verin left the town, and his absence seems to have been considered as a forfeiture of his land, for in 1650, he wrote the following letter to the town, claiming his property. The town replied, that if he would come and prove his title, he should receive the land.“Gentlemen and countrymen of the town of Providence:“This is to certify you, that I look upon my purchase of the town of Providence to be my lawful right. In my travel, I have inquired, and do find it is recoverable according to law; for my coming away could not disinherit me. Some of you cannot but recollect, that we six which came first should have the first convenience, as it was put in practice by our house lots, and 2d by the meadow in Wanasquatucket river, and then those that were admitted by us unto the purchase to have the next which were about; but it is contrary to law, reason and equity, for to dispose of my part without my consent. Therefore deal not worse with me than we dealt with the Indians, for we made conscience of purchasing of it of them, and hazarded our lives. Therefore we need not, nor any one of us ought to be denied of our purchase. So hoping you will take it into serious consideration, and to give me reasonable satisfaction, I rest,“Yours in the way of right and equity,“JOSHUA VERIN.“From Salem, the 21st Nov. 1650.“This be delivered to the deputies of the town of Providence, to be presented to the whole town.”Winthrop’s account of this affair (vol. i. p. 282) under the date of December 13, 1638, is a good specimen of the manner in which that great and good man was biased by his feelings, when he spoke of Rhode-Island. The account must have been founded on reports, perhaps on mere gossip:“At Providence, also, the devil was not idle. For whereas, at their first coming thither, Mr. Williams and the rest did make an order, that no man should be molested for his conscience, now men’s wives, and children, and servants, claimed liberty hereby to go to all religious meetings, though never so often, or though private, upon the week days; and because one Verin refused to let his wife go to Mr. Williams so oft as she was called for, they required to have him censured. But there stood up one Arnold, a witty man of their own company, and withstood it, telling them, that when he consented to that order, he never intended it should extend to the breach of any ordinance of God, such as the subjection of wives to their husbands, &c. and gave divers solid reasons against it. Then one Greene, (who hath married the wife of one Beggerly, whose husband is living, and no divorce, &c. but only, it was said, that he had lived in adultery and had confessed it,) he replied, that if they should restrain their wives, &c. all the women in the country would cry out of them, &c. Arnold answered him thus: Did you pretend to leave Massachusetts because you would not offend God to please men, and would you now break an ordinance and commandment of God, to please women? Some were of opinion, that if Verin would not suffer his wife to have her liberty, the church should dispose her to some other man who would use her better. Arnold told them, it was not the woman’s desire, to go so oft from home, but only Mr. Williams’ and others. In conclusion, when they would have censured Verin, Arnold told them, that it was against their own order, for Verin did that he did out of conscience; and their order was, that no man should be censured for his conscience.”

“Gentlemen and countrymen of the town of Providence:

“This is to certify you, that I look upon my purchase of the town of Providence to be my lawful right. In my travel, I have inquired, and do find it is recoverable according to law; for my coming away could not disinherit me. Some of you cannot but recollect, that we six which came first should have the first convenience, as it was put in practice by our house lots, and 2d by the meadow in Wanasquatucket river, and then those that were admitted by us unto the purchase to have the next which were about; but it is contrary to law, reason and equity, for to dispose of my part without my consent. Therefore deal not worse with me than we dealt with the Indians, for we made conscience of purchasing of it of them, and hazarded our lives. Therefore we need not, nor any one of us ought to be denied of our purchase. So hoping you will take it into serious consideration, and to give me reasonable satisfaction, I rest,

“Yours in the way of right and equity,

“JOSHUA VERIN.

“From Salem, the 21st Nov. 1650.

“This be delivered to the deputies of the town of Providence, to be presented to the whole town.”

Winthrop’s account of this affair (vol. i. p. 282) under the date of December 13, 1638, is a good specimen of the manner in which that great and good man was biased by his feelings, when he spoke of Rhode-Island. The account must have been founded on reports, perhaps on mere gossip:

“At Providence, also, the devil was not idle. For whereas, at their first coming thither, Mr. Williams and the rest did make an order, that no man should be molested for his conscience, now men’s wives, and children, and servants, claimed liberty hereby to go to all religious meetings, though never so often, or though private, upon the week days; and because one Verin refused to let his wife go to Mr. Williams so oft as she was called for, they required to have him censured. But there stood up one Arnold, a witty man of their own company, and withstood it, telling them, that when he consented to that order, he never intended it should extend to the breach of any ordinance of God, such as the subjection of wives to their husbands, &c. and gave divers solid reasons against it. Then one Greene, (who hath married the wife of one Beggerly, whose husband is living, and no divorce, &c. but only, it was said, that he had lived in adultery and had confessed it,) he replied, that if they should restrain their wives, &c. all the women in the country would cry out of them, &c. Arnold answered him thus: Did you pretend to leave Massachusetts because you would not offend God to please men, and would you now break an ordinance and commandment of God, to please women? Some were of opinion, that if Verin would not suffer his wife to have her liberty, the church should dispose her to some other man who would use her better. Arnold told them, it was not the woman’s desire, to go so oft from home, but only Mr. Williams’ and others. In conclusion, when they would have censured Verin, Arnold told them, that it was against their own order, for Verin did that he did out of conscience; and their order was, that no man should be censured for his conscience.”

174. “Every man and woman, who had brains enough to form some imperfect conception of them, inferred and maintained some other point, such as these: a man is justified before he believes; faith is no cause of justification; and if faith be before justification, it is only passive faith, an empty vessel, &c. and assurance is by immediate revelation only. The fear of God and love of our neighbor seemed to be laid by, and out of the question.” Hutchinson, vol. i. p. 59.

Back to Index Next