USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > Boston > The memorial history of Boston : including Suffolk County, Massachusetts, 1630-1880. Vol. I > Part 40
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
The articles of peace, with the ratification of the Commissioners, were sent to D'Aulnay shortly afterward, with the expression of a readiness on the part of the Massachusetts Colony to hear and settle all complaints for
I The New England Confederacy had been formed about a year and a half before the date of these negotiations, the articles of confedera tion being dated May 19, 1643.
2 Winthrop, Ilist. of New England, ii. 196, 197; Hutchinson, Coll. of Original Papers, pp. 146. 147 ; Acts of the Commissioners in Plymouth Col. Records, 1x 55-60
292
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
injuries, and to keep the peace if he would subscribe to it. D'Aulnay treated the messenger with great courtesy, but refused to sign the articles until aff differences had been composed, and sent back an insulting answer to the effect that " our drift was to gain time," and that " we should find that it was more his honor which he stood upon than his benefit." Under these circumstances, he would wait until spring for an answer to his com- plaints. On the receipt of this message there was an animated discussion in the General Court, from which it appeared that wide differences of opin- ion existed as to the proper course to be pursued. It was finally decided to send Deputy-Governor Dudley, who was then upward of seventy years of age, and two other prominent men-Mr. Hawthorne and Major Denison-to D'Aul- nay, with full powers to treat of all mat- ters of difference.1 As soon as information of this appointment reached the French Governor, he Daniel Demson professed to feel highly honored, and expressed a wish to save the Colony from trouble, offering to send two or three of his own people to Boston to settle the matters at issue.2 Accordingly, in the fol- lowing September, - almost exactly two years after the negotiation of the treaty, -" being the Lord's Day, and the people ready to go to the As- sembly after dinner," three of D'Aulnay's principal men arrived in Boston. The next day they presented their credentials, and on the third day the negotiations began. While here the messengers were treated with great respect. "Their diet was provided at the ordinary," says Winthrop, "where the magistrates used to diet in court times, and the Governor accompanied them always at meals. Their manner was to repair to the Governor's house every morning about eight of the clock, who accompanied them to the place of meeting; and at night either himself or some of the commissioners accompanied them to their lodging." At first their de- mands were set pretty high. They claimed great injuries and damages from the acts of Captain Hawkins and his men, for which they desired to hold the Colony responsible; but after a protracted discussion, in which the colonial authorities denied all responsibility either by commission or permission, and contended that the treaty of peace had been concluded without any reservation as to these matters, the extravagant demands of the French envoys were abandoned. "In the end they came to this conclu- sion," says Winthrop. "We accepted their commissioners' answer in satis- faction of those things we had charged upon Monsieur D'Aulnay, and they accepted our answer for clearing our government of what he had charged upon us." It was agreed that a small present should also be sent to D'Aul- nay to make amends for the acts of Captain Hawkins; and, in accordance with this understanding, " a very fair new sedan (worth forty or fifty pounds where it was made, but of no use to us)," which had been taken in the West Indies, and given to the Governor, was sent to D'Aulnay.3 The agreement
Winthrop, Hist. of New England, ii. 259, 260. 2 Ibid. pp. 266, 267. 3 Ibid. pp. 273, 274.
293
BOSTON AND THE NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS.
was then signed and executed, and in about a week after their arrival the French Commissioners returned home.
In the mean time D'Aulnay waged an active warfare against his rival ; and while the latter was absent on a trading voyage, his fort at St. John's was attacked and taken by assault. Madame La Tour fell into the hands of her enemy, and died in less than three weeks afterward. By the capture of his fort La Tour lost jewels, plate, furniture, and other movables valued by him at ten thousand pounds, and was for a time rendered utterly help- less. His debts to the Boston merchants were very heavy, and to one of them alone (Major Gibbons) he owed upward of twenty-five hundred pounds. This was a total loss; and, from the want of money to pay his adherents, his men became scattered, and he was himself obliged to seek shelter in Newfoundland. The Governor, Sir David Kirk, promised him assistance ; and subsequently he came to Boston, and was hospitably enter- tained at Noddle's Island by Maverick.1
In the midst of his distress La Tour was not without friends in Boston, who furnished him with trading commodities of the value of four hundred pounds With these he sailed on a voyage to the eastward; but when he reached Cape Sable, " which was in the heart of winter," he conspired with the master and a part of the crew, seized the vessel, and put the Boston men ashore. "Whereby it appeared (as the Scripture saith) that there is no confidence in an unfaithful or carnal man," Winthrop sadly writes. " Though tied with many strong bonds of courtesy, &c., he turned pirate." Our men wandered about on the land for two weeks, when they met some friendly Indians, who furnished them with a shallop, food, and an Indian pilot, and at length they arrived home in safety.2
D'Aulnay reappears only once more in our history. In March, 1646-47, Captain Venner Dobson fitted out a small vessel, and obtained a license from the colonial authorities to trade in the Gulf of Canada. Stress of weather compelled him to put into harbor at Cape Sable. Here he traded with the Indians for some skins; and information of this fact having reached D'Aulnay, the latter immediately sent a party of men through the woods to put a stop to the transactions. Circumstances favored D'Aulnay's party, and through gross negligence the ship and cargo, valued at a thou- sand pounds, were captured. As a matter of course both were confiscated, and the men were sent home in two old shallops. The Boston merchants were exasperated at this, and petitioned the General Court for redress, proposing to send out a good vessel to make reprisals on some of D'Aul- nay's vessels. "But the Court," says Winthrop, " thought it not safe nor expedient for us to begin a war with the French; nor could we charge any manifest wrong upon D'Aulnay, secing we had told him that if ours did trade within his liberties, they should do it at their own peril. And though we judged it an injury to restrain the natives and others from trading, &c. (they
1 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, ii. 238. See also Hubbard, Hist. of New England, in 2 Muss. Ilist. Coll., vi. 497, 493. 2 Winthrop, Hest. of New England, ii. 266.
294
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
being a free people), yet, it being a common practice of all civil nations, his seizure of our ship would be accounted lawful, and our letters of reprisal unjust. And, besides, there appeared an overruling Providence in it, other- wise he could not have seized a ship so well fitted, nor could wise men have lost her so foolishly."1
In 1650 or 1651 D'Aulnay died, and in 1652 his widow married La Tour.2 By this marriage he had several children, and the race is not yet extinct in Nova Scotia. With this romantie termination of a long rivalry, which had largely influenced colonial politics, the names of D'Aulnay and La Tour disappear from our annals. As has been stated already, the course pursucd by the colonial authorities caused much dissatisfaction at the time. In the vigorous protest signed by the younger Richard Saltonstall and six others, in July, 1643, sometimes called the Ipswich letter, the writers argued with great ability against this course, and shrewdly remarked that neither D'Aul- nay nor the French Government was so weak in intelleet " as to deem it no act of State, when upon consultation with some of our chief persons, our men are suffered, if not encouraged, to go forth with our provision and munition " to help La Tour. The course of the Government was not im- properly regarded by the writers as little short of an act of war; and the grounds of a war, they maintained, ought to be just and necessary. But New England had no sufficient information to determine positively as to the justice of the war in which the colony had been invited to take part. In the next place, they argued, " wars ought not to be undertaken without the counsel and command of the supreme authority whence expeditions come," and in the then existing relations of France and England there ought not to be any act of hostility by the subjects of one against the other without a public commission of State, or unless it was in defence against a sud- den assault. They then proposed three questions: (1) If D'Aulnay or France should demand the surrender of any persons who went on the ex- pedition, on the ground that they were enemies or murderers, what was to be done? "(2) If any of the parents or wives shall require their lives at our hands, who shall answer them? (3) If any of their widows or children shall require sustenance, or any maimed soldier in this expedition call for main- tenance, who shall give it them? Or if taken captive and made slaves, who shall rescue or redeem them?" In the third place, the ends of a war ought to be religious ; but the writers failed to sce what honor was intended to God, and how peace was to be settled by engaging in this conflict. Fourthly, there ought to be probable ground for thinking the undertakings of a war to be feasible ; but this expedition did not seem so to the remon- strants. Finally, "according to Scripture and the custom of religious and ingenuous nations" there ought to be a previous summons and warning before beginning a war; the defendant should have an opportunity to state
1 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, ii. 309, Williamson, Hist. of Maine, i. 323; Mr. Shea's notes to Charlevoix's Ilist. of New France, iii. 2 Sullivan, Hist. of the Dist of Maine, p. 282; 131, 132.
310. Sce also 5 Mass. Hist. Coll., i. 158.
295
BOSTON AND THE NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS.
his case, and there should be an offer of terms of peace, and instructions to the men engaged, -neither of which preliminaries could be observed in this instance "without a professed embarking ourselves in the action, which, it seems, is wholly declined on our parts.") In our own time the action of the colonial authorities has been criticised by Mr. Savage in his notes to Winthrop's History, and by other writers; and it must be conceded that there are strong grounds for adverse criticism on the course pursucd by them. The distinction which they attempted to draw between the acts of the Colony and the acts of individuals hired in Boston by La Tour is not a valid defence; and the action of the Colony in this particular was censured by implication when the Commissioners of the United Colonies ordered, in September, 1644, " that no jurisdiction within this Confederation shall per- mit any voluntaries to go forth in a warlike way against any people what- soever, without order and direction of the Commissioners of the several jurisdictions."2 But it should be observed that both La Tour and D'Aulnay claimed to be acting under the authority of the French Crown, and that Massachusetts was justified in treating the whole matter as a personal quarrel, and in maintaining that nothing which she did or permitted could give just ground of offence to France. Moreover, the Colony had good reason for complaining of the hostile acts of D'Aulnay, and would have been justified in making reprisals on him. Whether any rcal advantage was gained for Massachusetts or for Boston by the course pursued is, per- haps, doubtful. But there was a wide-spread belief that D'Aulnay was likely to become a dangerous neighbor, and his proximity to the English settle- ments made him much more an object of fear than La Tour. " If a thorough work could be made," Thomas Gorges wrote to Winthrop, in June, 1643, " that he might utterly be extirpated, I should like it well." 3
The most important event in the history of the relations of Boston with the neighboring colonies was the formation of the New England Confed- cracy in 1643. The plan of this confederation appears to have originated with Connecticut, who was anxious to strengthen herself against encroach- ments from the Dutch. In August, 1637, after the close of the Pequot war, some of the ministers and magistrates of that colony came to Boston to attend the synod called to consider the theological errors spread through the country by the Antinomians. While they were here a meeting was appointed " to agree upon some articles of confederation, and notice was given to Plymouth that they might join in it; but their warning was so short as they could not come."" Nothing, therefore, was donc, and the matter rested until June, 1638, when a plan of confederation was partially agreed on ; but this plan finally failed to obtain the necessary ratifications. It was afterward claimed by Massachusetts, and denied by Connecticut, that the chief obstacle was the levying of a duty by the latter, as has been
I Hutchinson, Coll. of Original Papers, pp.
3 Ilutchinson, Coll. of Original Papers, p. 115-119.
114.
2 Plymouth Col. Records, ix. 22.
+ Winthrop, Hist. of New England, i. 237.
296
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
mentioned in another place, on vessels passing the fort at Saybrook.1 At the close of the negotiations the Deputy-Governor of Connecticut wrote a letter in the name of their Court, which Winthrop characterizes as so harsh in its tone as to preclude a reply ; but, in order to prevent an open rupture, the latter wrote a private letter to the Governor of Connecticut, stating our view of the case, and pointing out the mistakes of the Connecticut authori- ties. Commenting on this transaction he adds: " These and the like mis- carriages in point of correspondency were conceived to arise from these two errors in their government: ( 1) They chose divers scores men who had no learning nor judgment which might fit them for those affairs, though other- wise holy and religions. (2) By occasion hereof the main burden for man- aging of State business fell upon some one or other of their ministers (as the phrase and style of these letters will clearly discover), who, though they were men of singular wisdom and godliness, yet, stepping out of their course, their actions wanted that blessing which otherwise might have been expected."2 The scheme was again revived in the early part of the follow- ing year, when Haynes, the Governor of Connecticut, Hooker, her most prominent minister, and others came to Boston, and stayed a month. They were unwilling, however, to move in the matter, though the idea of union was favorably entertained by Massachusetts; 3 and again it failed to be consummated.
Here the matter stood until September, 1642, when Connecticut sent new propositions for forming a confederacy.+ These propositions were referred to the magistrates in and near Boston, and to the deputies from Boston and the neighboring towns, to confer with any commissioners from Plymouth, Connecticut, or New Haven, and to take such action as might be thought necessary, " so as they enter not into an offensive war without order of this Court."5 Winter was then approaching, and nothing more was done until the following spring; but at the General Court in May, 1643, commissioners appeared from Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven, accompanied by George Fenwick, of Saybrook.6 On their arri- val the General Court appointed a committee, consisting of the Governor and five others, " to treat with our friends of Connecticut, New Haven, and Plymouth about a confederacy between us."" The result of the discussions was that, in two or three meetings, articles of union were agreed on, and signed by all the commissioners except those from Plymouth, who were only authorized to treat, but not to sign any agreement. The articles of confederation were then submitted to the Courts of the several colonies and duly ratified by them. The settlements in Maine under the patent of Sir Ferdinando Gorges "were not received nor called into the confederation," says Winthrop, " because they ran a different course from us both in their
1 Plymouth Col. Records, ix. 90, 91, 123. [An 3 account of the first attempts at negotiation will be found in the New Haven Col. Records, edited by Hoadley .- ED.]
2 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, i. 286.
Ibid. p. 299.
4 Ibid. ii. 85.
Mass. Col. Records, ii. 31.
6 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, ii. 99.
7 Mass. Col. Records, ii. 35.
297
BOSTON AND THE NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS.
ministry and civil administration." 1 Probably not one of the colonies would have been willing to unite with Rhode Island. Early in 1642 Gov- ernor Bradford, of Plymouth, wrote to Bellingham, the Governor of Massa- chusetts: "Concerning the Islanders, we have no conversing with them, nor desire to have, further than necessity or humanity may require." 2 Massachusetts had already declared her unwillingness to join with Rhode Island in any confederacy.
The act of union bears the date of May 19, 1643, Old Style, and recites in words that ought not to be forgotten the reasons which moved the colo- nies to take this important step, -the precedent for a far more important union which separated a larger confederation from the mother country. It declares that, "Whereas, we all came into these parts of America with one and the same end and aim, namely, to advance the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to enjoy the liberties of the Gospel in purity with peace; and whereas, in our settling (by a wise providence of God) we are further dis- persed upon the sea-coasts and rivers than was at first intended, so that we cannot, according to our desire, with convenience communicate in one gov- ernment and jurisdiction ; and whereas, we live encompassed with people of several nations and strange languages, which hereafter may prove inju- rious to us or our posterity; and forasmuch as the natives have formerly committed sundry insolences and outrages upon several plantations of the English, and have of late combined themselves against us; and seeing by reason of those sad distractions in England which they have heard of, and by which they know we are hindered from that humble way of seeking advice, or reaping those comfortable fruits of protection which at other times we might well expect: We therefore do conceive it our bounden duty without delay to enter into a present consociation amongst ourselves for mutual help and strength in all our future concernments, that as in nation and religion, so in other respects, we be and continue one according to the tenor and true meaning of the ensuing articles. Wherefore it is fully agreed and concluded by and between the parties or jurisdictions above named, and they jointly and severally do by these presents agree and conclude, that they all be, and henceforth be called by the name of, the United Colonies of New England." 3
Then followed cleven articles, commonly counted with the preamble as twelve. Of these, the first-numbered II. in the Plymouth copy of the Articles of Confederation-simply declared that the United Colonies joint- ly and severally united into a firm and perpetual league, both offensive and defensive, "for preserving and propagating the truth and liberties of the Gospel, and for their own mutual safety and welfare." The next article pro- vided that each colony should have exclusive jurisdiction within its own territory ; that no new member should be admitted into the confederation,
Winthrop, Hist. of New England, ii. 100. 8 Plymouth Col. Records, ix. 3; Hazard, Historical Collections, ii. 1, 2. [See Mr. Win- throp's chapter. - ED.]
2 Bradford, Plymouth Plantation, in 4 Mass. Hist. Coll., iii. 388.
VOL. I. - 38.
298
TIIE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
and no two colonies should be united under one government, without the consent of the rest. Provision was made by the next article that the charge of all just wars, offensive or defensive, in which any member should be involved, should be borne by all the colonies in proportion to the number of male inhabitants in cach between the ages of sixteen and sixty. The fifth article provided that if either of the colonies should be invaded, the others, upon notice and request of any three magistrates of the invaded colony, should forthwith send aid, - Massachusetts sending one hundred armed men, and each of the other colonies forty-five, if so many should be required.1 At the next meeting of the commissioners the cause of the invasion was to be duly considered, and if it should appear that the colony invaded was in fault, no part of the cost of the war was to be charged to the other colonies. If any colony should anticipate an invasion, and there should be sufficient time to call the commissioners together, a meeting was to be summoned by any three magistrates of the colony so threatened. The next three articles provided that there should be two commissioners for each colony, to meet once a year,-the first two meetings being held at Boston, the third at Hartford, the fourth at New Haven, and the fifth at Plymouth. Boston was always to be the place of meeting for two consecutive years. The concurrent votes of six of the commissioners were to be sufficient to secure the adoption of any measure ; but if six members failed to agree, the matter was to be referred to the four General Courts, and the agree- ment of all the Courts became necessary. A president was to be chosen at each meeting, whose duties and powers were to be merely those of a presid- ing officer. The commissioners were specially empowered "to frame and establish agreements and orders in general cases of a civil nature, wherein all the plantations are interested for preserving peace among themselves, and preventing as much as may be all occasions of war or differences with others;" and express stipulations were also made for the rendition of fugi- tives from service or justice. By the ninth article, the confederate colonies bound themselves not to undertake a war, except in a sudden emergency, without the consent of six commissioners; and no charge for even a defensive war was to be made on any of the colonies, until the commis- sioners had met and approved of the war, and agreed on the proper amount of money to be levied. The tenth article provided that in extraordinary occasions, if any of the commissioners after being summoned failed to appear, four of the commissioners should have power to direct a war which could not be delayed, and to send for the several quotas of men; but to approve of the war, or allow the cost, or "cause any levies to be made
1 Johnson, whose Wonder-working Providence was printed in 1654, quamtly says (p 182) : " But herein the Mattachuset had the worst end of the staff, in bearing as much or more charge than all the other three, and yet no greater number of commissioners to negotiate and judge in transacting of affairs concerning peace and war
than the least of the other, and any one of the other as likely to involve them in a chargeable war with the naked natives, that have neither plunder nor cash to bear the charge of it; nay, hitherto the most hath arisen from the lesser colonies, yet are the Mattachusets far from de- serting them."
299
BOSTON AND THE NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS.
for the same," required the votes of not less than six members. The eleventh article provided against infractions of the agreement; and by the last article it was agreed that if the General Court of Plymouth should not ratify the articles of confederation, they should nevertheless be binding on the other three colonies.1 These articles were signed on the 19th of May, Old Style, by the Secretary in behalf of the General Court of Massachusetts, and by the commissioners for Connecticut and New Haven. Subsequently the articles were approved by the General Court of Plymouth, and by all the townships in that colony ; and by an order dated the 29th of August, Edward Winslow and William Collyer were authorized to ratify them, and were appointed commissioners for Plymouth. The 19th of May, however, was regarded by all parties as the date of the formation of the confederacy ; and in 1843, the 29th of May, which is the corresponding date, as we reckon time, was selected by the Massachusetts Historical Society for their bi- centennial celebration of this great event in New England history .?
The second meeting of the commissioners was held in Boston, Sept. 7, 1643. After the transaction of some formal business, they took up the matter of the war between Uncas and Miantinimo, reaching the very harsh conclusion "that Uncas cannot be safe while Miantinimo lives, but that either by secret treachery or open force his life will be still in danger. Wherefore they think he may justly put such a false and bloodthirsty enemy to death, but in his own jurisdiction, not in the English plantations; and advising that in the manner of his death all mercy and moderation be shown, contrary to the practice of the Indians, who exercise tortures and cruelty."3 The commissioners then recommended that each General Court should see that every man kept by him a good gun and sword, one pound of powder, four pounds of shot, and suitable match or flints, to be exam- med at least four times a year, and that each colony also should keep a stock of powder, shot, and match ; that there should be a uniform standard of measure throughout all the plantations in the United Colonies ; and that there should be at least six training-days yearly in every plantation. They then determined the proportion of men to be furnished by each colony in any present danger ; and taking into consideration the complaints against
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.