USA > Massachusetts > History of the Connecticut Valley in Massachusetts, with illustrations and biographical sketches of some of its prominent men and pioneers, Vol. I > Part 12
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125 | Part 126 | Part 127 | Part 128 | Part 129 | Part 130 | Part 131 | Part 132 | Part 133 | Part 134 | Part 135 | Part 136 | Part 137 | Part 138 | Part 139 | Part 140 | Part 141 | Part 142 | Part 143 | Part 144 | Part 145 | Part 146 | Part 147 | Part 148 | Part 149 | Part 150 | Part 151 | Part 152 | Part 153 | Part 154 | Part 155 | Part 156 | Part 157 | Part 158 | Part 159 | Part 160 | Part 161 | Part 162 | Part 163 | Part 164 | Part 165 | Part 166 | Part 167 | Part 168 | Part 169 | Part 170 | Part 171 | Part 172 | Part 173 | Part 174 | Part 175 | Part 176 | Part 177 | Part 178 | Part 179 | Part 180 | Part 181 | Part 182 | Part 183 | Part 184 | Part 185 | Part 186
The little fort at the mouth of the river, commanded by Gardiner in the Pequot war, had no politieal connection with the upper towns, and Fenwick took possession of it, made his residence there, and named it Saybrook, in honor of the two noblemen who were the most distinguished members of the company.
Fenwick, in the year 1644, sold out his interest in the set- tlement at Saybrook to the upper towns of Hartford, Windsor, and Wethersfield. The conditions of the sale were that Mr. Fenwick, during the period of ten years, should receive the avails of certain duties to be collected from all vessels passing out of the river, and of certain taxes on the domestic trade in beaver and live stoek.
As the purchase and maintenance of the fort were deemed necessary by the Connecticut people for the protection of all the towns on the river, including Agawam, to pay this debt to Mr. Fenwick and to raise money sufficient to maintain the fort, it was resolved to impose a duty upon all exports which should pass out of the river. To effect this object, officers were appointed at Windsor, Hartford, and Wethersfield to give clearances to vessels outward bound, and the fort at Say- brook was authorized to "make stays" of vessels which did not produce such clearances.
The traders from Springfield, the other river town, refused to pay this duty, on the ground that, as they belonged to the juris- diction of Massachusetts, Connecticut had no right to impose the same upon them, and they promptly laid the matter before the General Court of Massachusetts, at Boston. This duty was imposed on the 5th day of February, 1645.
On the 18th day of June of that year the Massachusetts General Court adopted this resolution, viz. :
" Itt is ye mindo of this House yt none of ours should pay any import to any of Connecticutt jurisdiction, with relation to ye passing through any parte of Con- necticut River."
Information of this resolution was conveyed to the people of Connecticut, and an animated dispute grew up between the two colonies, which was referred to the judgment of the com- missioners of the other colonies for settlement.
The penalty preseribed for the non-payment of these duties was confiscation of property, but Connecticut deferred the execution thereof until the decision of the commissioners could be obtained.
Accordingly, on the 22d day of September, 1646, at a meet- ing of the commissioners of the United Colonies, held at Hartford, Connecticut brought the question before that body, representing that the purpose of the import was "chiefly to maintain the fort for security and convenieney," and that "Springfield had in its proportion the same benefit" as the towns lower down the river.
It will be seen by the following record of the action of the commissioners that they were of the same mind; but the mat- ter was postponed for further consideration, at the request of Massachusetts :
"September, 1646 .- A question was propounded by the Commissioners fur Con- necticut concerning an imposition layd on goods passinge by the River's mouth to the sea, which all the plantations on Connectient River pay, chiefly to mantayne the fort for security and conveniency, onely Mr. Pincham, at Sprink field, who
have in their proportion the same benefit, refuse. The Commissioners thought it of weighty concernment to the plantations above, that the month of the River be secured ; but Mr. Pincham being absent, and noe instructions given from the General Courte in the Mattachusetts, the issue and determination was respited till the Commissioners' next meetings."*
At a meeting of the General Court at Boston, held on the 4th day of November next after, the resolution of the Com- missioners of the Colonies was presented, and action taken thereon. The resolutions adopted by the General Court at this meeting were presented in the argument of the matter before the Commissioners of the United Colonies, which was held in Boston the succeeding summer, an account of which follows.
In the month of July, 1647, a special session of the Com- missioners of the United Colonies was held at Boston, and the matter of the Connecticut import duties again considered.
In the mean time, however, the fort had been destroyed by fire.
Upon the argument written briefs were delivered by both the contending colonies.
That of Massachusetts consisted of the resolves of her Gen- eral Court adopted at the November session, as above stated, which were in words as follows :
" November 4th, 1646 .- THE COMMITTEE having considered ye controversy be- tween the jurisdiction of Hartford upon Connecticutt & the inhabitants of Springfield, on ye same river, touching either the purchase of ye fort, &c., at the river's mouth, or the payment of such customes as is or shall be imposed upon them towards the maintainance of the same, doe declare their judgments as fol- loweth :
"Ist. They conceave yt ye jurisdiction of Hartford upon Connecticutt had not a legall power to force any inhabitant of another jurisdiction to purchase any fort or other lauds out of their jurisdiction without their consent.
"20. They conceave yt it were injurious to require custome to ye maintainance of such a fort which is not usefull to such of whom it is demanded.
"3d. They think it very unequall for them to impose a custome upon their friends and confederates, who have not more benefitt of the river, by exporting and importing of goods, &c., than straingers of another nation, who (though they live within Hartford jurisdiction) pay none.
"4th. The pounding and standing upon an imposition & custome, to be paid to ye river's month by such as were or are within our jurisdiction, hindered our confederation above tenn yeares since, and then never any paid to this day, & now to impose it on any of our confederation will putt us to new thoughts.
"5th. Itt seems to ns very hard yt any of our jurisdiction should be forced to such a hondage as will either constrain them to depart their habitations or weaken much their estates, especially when as they, with the first, tooke possession of the river, and were at great charge of building, etc., which, if they had fore- seene, would out then have been planted.
"6th. If Hartford jurisdiction shall make use of their power over any of ours, we conceave wo have the same power to imitate them in ye like kinde, which wee deesier may be forborno on both sides. The whole Courte approves of this retourne. By both."
Upon the presentation of these resolutions of her General Court the Massachusetts Commissioners rested their case.
On the part of Connecticut, Mr. Hopkins, "some respite being given him to consider of the same," delivered the fol- lowing answer in writing:
" A SHORTE ANSWER to the reason propounded by generall Corte of the Matta- chusetts for Springfield not paying of the imposition at Seabrook forte presenteil the Commissioners of the United Colonies, 27 July, 1647.
" The first argument seemed (at least to us) to laboure of a grente mistako in reference to the case in hand (to omit all other just exceptions that might le made against that affirmation) and doth not touch the present question, which is, whether such an iniposition be lawfull and regular, bottomed upon a fonnda- tion of equity and righteousness, & not to what uses or improvement the means raised upon the imposition is put; for if there be sufficient grounds & reason for the imposition, that it transgresse not a rule of righteousness in regard to of the thinge itself, not exceeding a rule of moderation in regarde of the quantity, it concernes not the party that payes to inquire after, or call to account for, the employment of the monies raised by ye imposition ; therefore, the further answer, it might be denyed that which is imposed to be payed by Springfield as they passe is to purchase land or forte. The second, as it is a position in itselfe, nakedly considered, seems at least to lay most of the government of Europe under the guilt of injustice; yet because it hath an appearance of an equitable consideration in it, we are content the issue of the present difference may lye there, for we affirme the forte mentioned hath beene for nigh 12 yeares past, is at present, & may be still for the future, usefull to that plantation, & yet not ja. pd by them towards it to this very day.
* Plymouth Col. Rec.
43
HISTORY OF THE CONNECTICUT VALLEY.
" The third is but a presumption, & if it had any cleare foundation, yet the com- parison is not equall.
"The fourth, ever since the first readinge of it, hath beene a reall trouble to our thoughts, laboringe of so apparant mistakes, both in the one part of it & in the other, which makes us heartily wish that we may be all conscientious care- full that our publick records may carry such evidence of the truth that those who desire to take advantages may not have any just occasions given them; for whereas it is said the combination was hindred above 10 years by the means propounded, if a due consideration be had of it, it will appeare it was not above five years from the mentioned agitation for combination & the conclusion of this present confederation, the one beinge in June, 1638, the other agreed upon in May, 1643; and whereas it is affirmed that the propounding and standing upon an imposition of customes at the River's mouth hindered the combination soe many yeares, it shall (if need) be made appeare by the oath of those who were ent- ployed in that service, that they were soe far from stiflly standing upon such au imposition that they did not soe much as propounde it, as it is there expressed, nor couldl they in reason doe it, the townes havinge no interest in nor relation to the forte at that time.
" The fifth earrieth not that strength of reason with it as to compell onr under- standing to fall in therewith, for what inthralement such an imposition is or can be to the inhabitants there, as to cause them to forsake their habitations upon that grounde, our thoughts reach not, especially consideringe if that jurisdiction grow exorbitant in their taxes, there is a remedy provided in this combination to rectify any such deviations; but if weakninge of estates be a sufficient plea to free meo froot payinge of taxes, we know not who will pay, for all sueli payments doe weaken men's estates.
" What is meant by taking of possession of the River (which was possest by the other townes a considerable time before the foundation of that plantation was layd) & the greate charges in buildings we understand not, for we are wholly ignorant what expences they have beene at in that kinde, But for their owne particular private advantages; nor can we yeild a ready beleefe to what is affirmed, that if they had foreseeo the or present imposition would have been required they would not then have planted, for the thing carryeth that evidence of equity with it that Mr. Pinchon, while he looked upon biniselfo as a member of that jurisdiction, acknowledged the same & yielded upon a motion made by himselfe to Mr. Feunicke (as we have it from his testimony deserving credit) that the trade of beavor upon the River, which is the greatest thing now stuck at, ought in reason to contribute to the chardg of the forto; besides the inconrage- meat given by Mr. Pinehon under his owne hand, by others to the gentlemen interested in Scabrooke forte, which might well draw out from them an addition to the former expense, there seems to deserve some weight of consideration in the present cuse.
" To the sixth we willingly assent, & in parallel cases shall readily submit."
The argument being conchided on the part of the colonies, the Commissioners gave their decision thereon in writing, of which the following is a copy, to wit :
" WHICH ARGUMENTS & answers being read & a further debate letwixt the Commissioners of the Massachusetts & Connectient had, & Mr. Pincheon, then in Boston, being sent for and desired to add what further reasons he could against the impositions in question, he wholly referring to what the Generall Corte had done, it appeared to the Commissioners for the other two Collonies, upon their most serious consideration, that it was of weighty concernment to all the plantations upon the River of Connecticut that the mouth of the River & the passages of goods through it to and fro (though at some chardg) be preserved, and seemed to them that though the forte at Seabrooke be not of force against an enemy of any considerable strength, yet an English plantation being now settled there it may more easily be preserved, & may in a comfortable measure seenre the passage aforesaid for the convenience of all the plantations upon that River, of which benefite Springfield doth share with the rest. That though nothinge be as yet demanded from the Dutch house within Hartford limits, yet this imposition, with other difference, are like to be considered in a fitt season. That whatever conference bath formerly passed about the custome or imposition at Seabrooke, there never was any settled or demanded of any of the plantations upon that River have paid it, bath npoo the same grounds beeno demanded and expected of it from Springfield. That it is no impeachment of any liberty granted by patent to the Mattachusetts that Springfield, seated upon the River of Connecticut, doe beare a moderate & equall parte of charges, whither of scouring any parte of that River, or River's mouth (if there should be occasion) or in making or mainetayning such a forte as is in question to secure the pas- sage to and fro. That the imposition in question is but the payment of 2 p. bushell for corne and about jd pt for beaver passing out through ye mouth of that River, and therefore seemeth a moderate charge in reference to the enstoole propounded & no matter of just grievance or discouragement to the plantations themselves, then settled.
" The premises being weighed & considered with all due tenderness & respects to the Intresiens, the said Commissioners for Plymouth & New Haven doe con- ceive and conclude : First, that Springfield doe henceforward from time to time give in to Connecticut or the Agent or agents a true note or accompt of all corne & beaver they or any of them ship, or carry out through the month of that River to the sea, to pay or desposet into their hands after the rate of 2d per bushell for corne & 20s per hogshead for beaver soe exported.
"That the mentioned imposition be neether at any time hereafter raised nor increased upon any of the inhabitants of Springfield without just & necessary cause, to be first approved & allowed by the other Colonies, nor continued longer than the forte in question is maintayued & the passage as at present thereby secured.
" That at the next meetinge of the Commissioners any Deputy from the Mat- tachusett Colony, or from Springfield plantation, shall have liberty further to propound or object as they see cause against the present imposition, which, ac- cording to the nature & proper weight of the matter alleadged, shall be duly heard & considered, without any disadvantage from the conclusion now made in the premises."
But this did not end the matter. On the 7th of Septem- ber, 1648, the commissioners of the United Colonies met at Plymouth, and the dispute between the two colonies of Con- necticut and Massachusetts in reference to import duties levied upon goods passing out of the mouth of Connecticut River was again renewed with considerable bitterness on both sides.
In addition to the reasons urged in the argument before the commissioners, the following year further reasons were urged on both sides, for a statement of which the reader is referred to the records of the commissioners.
After the conclusion of the arguments, the commissioners decided that they found not sufficient cause to reverse what was done the last year ; but, as there were some questions in the matter still unsettled, among others, that of jurisdiction over Springfield, they desired that, if there were cause, the matter should be brought and presented to the commissioners for further consideration the next year, and "that in the mean time the colonies would agree upon some equal and satis- fying way of running the Massachusetts line."
On the 3d of May, 1649, the action at the last meeting of the commissioners held at Plymouth, in September, 1648, con- firming the action of the commissioners of the United Colonies at their meeting held in July, 1647, was presented to the court, and caused great indignation. Retaliatory measures were at once resolved upon, the nature of which ean best be shown hy quoting the records of the General Court, expressed in the quaint but forcible language of the times :
" May 3, 1649.
" THE ANSWER of the Court concerning Springfield wee think it meete that our commission's, at their next meeting, be mindfull to press what arguments and reasons they cann for the revertion of the last order of the commissioners con- cerning Springfield, atul, amongst other, these in speciall :
" Ist. That the commissioners of Connecticutt produced no pattentt, or exem- plification thereof, or any order of their own Courte for their custonie they re- quire of Springfield.
" 2nd. They had no evidence of any forte at all in being at the river's month, as we are informed.
"3d. By a clause in the commissioners' order, July, 1647, when they first de- termined against Springfield, page III, they provided that the said imposition should be continewed no longer than the forte in question was maintained, and the passage thereby secured as at that present; yett after the said forte was de- molished by fire, and no security of the passage provided, the commissioners confirmed their former order at the last meeting.
" WHEREAS, the commissioners for the United Colonies have thought it but just & eqnall that Springfield, a member of this jurisdiction, should pay custome or contribution to the erecting and maintaneney of Seabrooke forte, being of no force against an encory of any considerable strength (before it was burot) in the commissioners' owne judgment, exprest in their owne order, page 109, which determination against Springfield they have also continewed by an order at their last meeting at Pliommouth (though the said forte was then demolished by fire, and the passage not secured), contrary to a clawse in their order, provided on Springfield's bchalfe, page 111; and forasmuch as this jurisdiction hath ex- pended many thousand pounds in erecting and maintaining several forts which others (as well as ourselves) have received the benefit of, and have at present one principall forte or castle of good force against an enemy of considerable strength, well garrisoned, and otherwise furnished with sufficient ammunition, besides severall other fortes and batteries, whereby vessels and goods of all sorts are seenred.
"IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED by this courte and the authority thereof, that all goods belonging, or any way appertaining to, any inhabitant of the jurisdic- tion of Plymouth, Connecticott, or New Haven, that shall be imported witbin the castle or exported from any parte of the Bay, shall pay snch custome as here- after is expressed, viz .: all skinus of beaver, otter, mouse, or beare, two penee per skioo; and all other goods packt up in hogsheads or otherwise, tean shil- lings pr tunne ; meale and corne of all sorts, two pence per bushell ; biskett, sixe pence pr hundred; & it is further ordered, that all such skinos and other goods as shall be imported or exported as aforesaid shall be dewly entered with the Auditor Generall, and the custome thereof paid or deposited, before any parte of the said goods be either sould, shipt, landed, or otherwise disposed of, under the penalty of forfeiting the said goods not so entered, or the dew value thereof.
" And if any inhabitant of this jurisdiction, or strainger, shall buy any of the forementioned goods belonging or any ways appertaining to any of the inhabi- tants of Plymouth, Connecticott, or New Haven, aforesaid, imported to any other
44
HISTORY OF THE CONNECTICUT VALLEY.
parte of our jurisdiction, or shall sell or deliver to any such inhabitant any other goodes in any parte of the Bay, without the Bay, without the Castle, he shall enter the said goods with the auditor generall, and pay or deposite the same, after the same manner and proportion, and under the same penalty, as is provided for goods, &c., brought within the castle. This order to take place the first day of the next month.
" And the auditor generall is hereby appointed and authorized to take care for the execution of this order in all the particulars thereof, either by himself or by his deputy or deputies."*
In July, 1649, another special meeting of the commission- ers of the United Colonies was convened at Boston, and the controversies between Massachusetts 'and Connecticut were again brought to its notice.
In behalf of Massachusetts it was represented that she had agreed with Mr. Fenwick, who represented Connecticut, to run the boundary-line between the two colonies at their joint expense. That the line had been run accordingly, but at the sole charge of Massachusetts. And as Mr. Fenwick had " failed to send in any to join," and as Connecticut was dissatisfied and desired the work to be done anew, it ought to be at her own cost.
The nature of the past relations of Springfield, both to Mas- sachusetts and Connecticut, was now at some length discussed. On the part of Massachusetts, it was denied, Ist. That there was "any fort at all in being, worthy the name of a fort." 2d. It was denied that "any instance could be given of any government in the world that had compelled the people of any other jurisdiction to contribute to the erecting of a fort or place of strength by which they might rule over them and order them at pleasure, as well as be a protection to them." Massachusetts also produced the vote passed two months be- fore, quoted above, imposing retaliatory duties, not only upon Connecticut, but also upon Plymouth and New Haven.
As the quarrel was now becoming general, the commis- sioners of the other colonies forwarded a remonstrance to Massachusetts against her action, and with proper dignity re- solved that they " desired to be spared in any case all further agitations concerning Springfield."
This prompt and decisive action on the part of Massachu- setts, the more powerful colony, and which seems to have been just, under the circumstances, at once decided the contest. The manner of its termination is best shown by quoting from the Massachusetts General Court.
" May 23, 1650.
" IN ANSWER to the petition of the inhabitants of Boston for repealing the order that requires custome of the other colonies.
" This Court, having beene credibly informed that the jurisdiction at Queneceti- cutt will for the present suspend the takinge of any eustome of us, & that at theire next Generall Court, they intend to reprale the order whereby they im- posed it, doth therefore HEREBY ORDER that there shall be no more enstome re- quired of the other confederate colonies until we shall certainly know that Con- neelicott doe take custome of us p. curimm,"
CHAPTER XIII. WITCHCRAFT. 1.
THE BELIEF IN IT UNIVERSAL IN FORMER TIMES.
THE tragic events growing out of the witchcraft delusion of the seventeenth century in New England cast sombre shadows over the brightest page of her history, the era of her carly struggles through the wilderness to the promised land of her prosperity and power. But those tragic scenes were after all the outgrowth of the prevailing errors and super- stitions of the times, heightened by the rigorous circumstances under which they lived, rather than the result of any inherent viciousness in the character of the New England people.
The belief in witchcraft was one of the lingering supersti- tions of the Middle Ages. It was by no means peculiar
to New England. All Christendom was at the time still thoroughly imbucd with the most implicit belief in witches, and in the power of Satan to possess individual men and women, and use them as his instruments in tormenting and destroying the souls and bodies of their fellows. All Chris- tendom, too, at the time, with rare exceptions, was ferreting out witches by due form of law, convicting them at courts presided over by the most eminent judges of the day, and burning their bodies eventually at the stake. What wonder then that the stern and sombre theologians of New England should be zealous in doing what no one, unprejudiced, disputes they honestly believed was God's service, in ridding the world of those whom they deemed to be Satan's chosen children ?
These considerations are not urged by way of exeuse or justification, for to excuse or justify such doings would be to uphold grievous wrongs, but they are urged by way of ex- planation. They do not justify, but they do explain, many things which have so often been charged as being inconsistent with the religious professions of the Puritan Fathers. Duty, duty toward God and man, was the one solemn incentive which moved the stern hearts and strong minds of the prim- itive people of New England, and do it they must, though to do it was to walk, with stained hands and blistering feet through blood and fire.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.