“A free republic, where, beneath the swayOf mild and equal laws, framed by themselves,One people dwell, and own no lord save God.”Mrs. Hale’sOrmond Grosvenor.
“A free republic, where, beneath the swayOf mild and equal laws, framed by themselves,One people dwell, and own no lord save God.”Mrs. Hale’sOrmond Grosvenor.
“A free republic, where, beneath the sway
Of mild and equal laws, framed by themselves,
One people dwell, and own no lord save God.”
Mrs. Hale’sOrmond Grosvenor.
Just here it is perhaps fit that the salient features of the unique government under which the forefathers lived and prospered should be briefly sketched; and in order that this exposition may be clear, claiming the privilege of a chronicler, we shall command the clock of this narration to stand still, while we peer at times into the then future, in tracing some law to its result, or in depicting the change of front of an exploded policy.
At the outset, the arrangements of the Pilgrims were extremely simple, and grew naturally from their needs, from their crude ideas of liberty, and their imperfect conception of a model state. Nominally, the sovereignty of Britain was recognized; in fact, all through these opening decades of American history, the colonists were despised by the home government, and left free to plant the most radical principles of a “proper democracy.” It was only when the greed of gain squeezed her heart, not repentance nor love, that England recognized the legitimacy of the neglected child whom she hadpronounced a bastard, and left to freeze in the winter wilderness. When God wrote success upon the frontlet of the colony, the Shylocks on the Rialtos of the world were eager to invest in the enterprise, while England, with motherly pride, patted New England upon the head and said, “I rocked your cradle; but, bless me, how you are grown, and how like me you are. You may pay me your earnings, and I’ll send you a governor.”
But through the bitter months of the incipient settlement Shylock could see nothing in New England but a barren coast, while Britain could not discern Plymouth Rock across the water; nor if she had would any craving governor have itched to set up his chair of state in a cheerless Eldorado of ice and snow.
So the Pilgrims were left to shift for themselves until, strengthened by incessant tussles with a rugged climate and the savage foe, they expanded into robust manhood. In these first months, the Plymouth colonists regarded themselves as one family, at whose head stood the governor,in loco parentis.[310]But as business increased, the whole burden of government was felt to be too onerous for the single shoulders of the governor to bear; and when Bradford stepped into the gubernatorial chair left vacant by the death of Carver, he was voted an assistant.[311]In 1624, he was given five assistants. Afterwards, in 1633, the number was increased to seven; andthese, called “the Governor’s Council,”[312]governed the commonwealth in conjunction with their primitive executive. The vote of each councillor counted one, and the vote of the chief magistrate was but double—the only check he had over the action of the Council.[313]
The governor was chosen annually, by general suffrage,[314]as were also the councillors.[315]The name of the man who was disposed to shirk his civil duty we do not know; “but a curious law waspassed in 1632, that whoever should refuse the office of governor, being chosen thereto, should pay twenty pounds; and that of magistrate, ten pounds. Very singular, certainly; and we may suppose that that race has run out even in Massachusetts.”[316]
The legislative body was at first composed of the whole company of voters.[317]Then, when their numbers grew, church-membership was made the test of citizenship[318]—a test which endured till 1665, when it was reluctantly yielded at the requisition of the king’s commissioners.[319]It was not until 1669 that the increase of population warranted the establishment of a House of Representatives.[320]
“Narrow as the restriction of citizenship to church-members was, it is easy to explain it by remembering that toleration, in any large sense,was hardly entertained by the most liberal religionists in that twilight age, and that the one idea which inspired this emigration and nerved these men for the bitterest sacrifices was, that they and their children might be free from an ecclesiastical tyranny which, if it followed, would endanger them. It should also be borne in mind that the history they studied, and the guide they felt bound to follow, was the Jewish theocracy, ordained by God, as they doubted not, to be a model in church and state for all time; and that, under that dispensation, death was the punishment for smaller errors than dissent. These facts explain and palliate the religious precision and severity afterwards practised in New England. But the free idea with which they started gradually grew broader, overcame the evil customs of the time, and strangled the prejudices of the Pilgrims themselves.”[321]
So early as the 17th of December, 1623, it was decreed that “all criminal facts, and all manner of trespass and debt betwixt man and man, should be tried by the verdict of twelve honest men.”[322]Thus the jury trial, the distinctive badge of Saxon civilization, a right which a long line of able lawyers, from Coke and Hale to Mansfield and Erskine, have united in styling the palladium of civil liberty, was planted in America.
Previous to the year 1632, the laws of Plymouth colony were little more than the customs of thepeople.[323]In 1636 these were digested, and prefaced with a declaration of rights; and, with various alterations and additions, the whole manuscript collection was printed in 1671.[324]Let us open the ponderous old folio, and cull from the mass a few specimen and characteristic samples. Early provision was made for the education of youth. Many of the Pilgrims were men of liberal culture, as Winslow and Brewster,[325]and all recognized its value and necessity; so, in order that knowledge and civil liberty might clasp hands, it was enacted, “that twelve pounds should be raised for the salary of a teacher, and that children should be forced to attend school.”[326]
Decreed: “For ordering of persons and distributing the lands, That freemen shall be twenty-one years of age; sober and peaceable; orthodox in the fundamentals of religion. That drunkards shall be subject to fines, to the stocks, and be posted; and sellers be forbidden to sell them liquors.
“Horse-racing is forbidden; so also walking about late o’ nights.
“The minister’s salary shall be paid by rate levied on all the citizens. Sabbath work and travelling is forbidden; also all visiting on that day.
“Profane swearing punishable by ‘placing in the stocks; lying, by the stocks or by fine.’
“Fowling, fishing, and hunting, shall be free.
“Every wolf’s head shall be worth, to an Indian,twelve shillings or ‘a coat of duffels;’ to a white man, twenty shillings.
“Haunters of ale-houses shall be disciplined by the church.
“A motion of marriage to any man’s daughter, if made without obtaining leave, shall be punished by fine or corporal punishment, at the discretion of the court, so it extend not to the endangering of life or limb.
“Women shall not wear short sleeves; nor shall their sleeves be more than twenty-two inches wide:”[327]an enactment the object of which was, to prevent indecent extremes and extravagance in dress.
So runs this “quaint old volume of forgotten lore.” If some of these laws seem severe, as we scan them through the vista of two centuries, and in an age when sumptuary laws are perhaps too little known, it may be said in their defence, that they were quite upon a level with the kindred legislation of Europe, even in their most obnoxious features, while their progressive and liberal tone is as new and unique as the colony which gave them birth, and whose ideas they mirror.
In May, 1621, the first marriage in New England was celebrated.[328]Edward Winslow espoused the widow of William White, and the mother of Peregrine White, whose infant lullaby was the first ever sung by Saxon voice in New England.[329]“Accordingto the laudable custom of the Low Countries,” says Bradford, “the ceremony was thought most requisite to be performed by the magistrate, as being a civil contract upon which many questions of inheritance do depend, with other things most proper for their cognizance, and most consonant to the Scriptures,[330]it being nowhere found in the gospel to be layed on ministers as a necessary part of their office. This practice continued, not only among them, but it was followed by all the famous churches of Christ in those parts to the year 1646.”[331]