USA > Rhode Island > Early Rhode Island; a social history of the people > Part 6
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
During some two years of the " Usurpation," there were virtually two governments in the colony, often conflicting with each other.33 Coddington's commission was revoked in England and the formal news was brought by William
33 Brigham, " R. I.," p. 93, a full account.
7
I
67
1657]
Persecution of Quakers by the Bay
Dyer to Rhode Island in 1653. Among other negotia- tions for a suzerain, the usurper had coquetted with the Dutch at Manhattan. This proceeding materially helped Williams and Sir Henry Vane in their efforts with the Parliamentary Commission for the revocation.
Perhaps nothing more clearly reveals the strangely in- human and ferocious sentiment prevailing in Massachu- setts at this period, than their wanton persecution of the Quakers, or Society of Friends, as they finally became. Such cruelty was not a necessary outcome of the Puritan spirit of government, for Connecticut, an orderly com- monwealth, did not actively persecute in the name of Chris- tianity. That community was unfriendly and banished Mary Dyer from New Haven for preaching in 1658; but they did not whip nor hang these heretics. Bradstreet and the Commissioners of the United Colonies in Sep- tember, 1657, addressed this gentle request to the Gov- ernor of Rhode Island: " to preserve us from such a pest the Contagion whereof (if Received within youer Collonie were dangerous, &c., to bee defused to the other by means of the Intercourse, especially to the places of trad amongst us ; which wee desire may bee with safety continued between us; Wee therefore make it our Request that you Remove those Quakers that have been Received, and for the future prohibite theire coming amongst you." 34 The conscience of Rhode Island was hardly worth considering by Boston magistrates. But evidently these governors thought that a direct thrust at the pocket by threatening "trad " might touch an uni- versal passion and move the deepest springs of civilized feeling. The Rhode Island outcasts did not regard the appeal to covetousness, but answered immediately through Governor Benedict Arnold, "We have no law among us 84 " R. I. C. R.," Vol. I., p. 374.
68
The Island
whereby to punish any for only declaring by words their minds concerning the things and ways of God." 35
Fines, the jail, whipping-post and gallows were used to reform these simple believers, and they throve upon such severe regimen. Mary Dyer, a devout and much respected woman of Newport and Providence, was arrested in Boston and executed on the Common, June 1, 1660. When expecting death, she said, " It is an hour of the greatest joy I can enjoy in this world. No eye can see, no ear can hear, no tongue can speak, no heart can under- stand, the sweet incomes and refreshings of the spirit of the Lord which now I enjoy."
The large incoming of the Quakers was an important factor in the early prosperity of the colony. Many lead- ing men like Coddington embraced their doctrines, and their social influence can hardly be exaggerated. Ana- baptists and Antinomians, all ready for assimilation, often adopted the better formulated ideas of Fox and Barclay. While the majority of Friends were not learned in the schools, their whole system was a severe method of mental discipline. Their complete self-repression, their close study of the Bible, their gentle manners, all af- fected profoundly the ways of a new community. Rhode Island lacked the regulated ecclesiastical methods of Mas- sachusetts and Connecticut. But we may remember that, while it lost much in a positive way, it gained somewhat by not having to unlearn. Compare the above utterances of Bradstreet and Mary Dyer. For a century, until the schools of our colony were regularly developed, the cul- ture of the Friends was education in the concrete.
Significant evidence of the increasing trade of Newport appears in the immigration of wealthy Jews, the har- bingers of active commerce throughout the world. A 85 " R. I. C. R.," pp. 374-380.
69
1658]
Jewish Immigration. The Charter
large immigration from Lisbon came in 1655 and fifteen families came from Holland in 1658.36 They brought besides capital and mercantile skill, the first three degrees in Masonry. Religious freedom admitted them, but they would not have settled where there was not an abounding trade. Their people were to become an important ele- ment in our colonial life, and they appeared before the General Assembly by petition in 1684.
John Hull, the mint master, Major Atherton and others purchased of the Indians the southeastern por- tion of the Narragansett lands, to be known as the Petta- quamscutt Purchases. John Winthrop, the younger, ob- tained a charter from King Charles II., giving Connecti- cut jurisdiction over all Southern Narragansett. This movement in London was checked and reversed by the timely, discreet and vigorous action of John Clarke, our agent there. He convinced the King's advisers, the Earl of Clarendon especially, of the injustice to Rhode Island, in this contemplated extension of Connecticut over her territory. Clarke obtained the liberal charter "to hold forth a lively experiment," which was adopted by the whole colony in 1663.
This royal patent became the basis of colonial gov- ernment and carried Rhode Island through the struggle against the Crown of Great Britain. Then the independ- ent state went into the American Union, and the Charter lasted until 1843. Granting liberty of conscience to its citizens, it governed first a remote colonial dependency, then a state warring for independence, then a common- wealth merged into a great republic. In all, this docu- ment stood for one hundred and eighty years, certainly establishing a brilliant chapter in political history. Whatever the vagaries of the small commonwealth-and
36 " Mag. Amer. His.," Vol. VI., p. 456.
1
£
1
70
The Island
they were many-it pursued an onward political develop- ment, proving that an orderly state might exist without theocratic control of the individual citizen. Person and property were safe.
Our charter 37 with its fellow given Connecticut in the previous year formed a new departure in royal govern- ment. The early colonial charters, following the exam- ple of Spain, had been commercial adventures. It is at least doubtful whether any political initiative was in- tended in the incorporation of Massachusetts in 1629. Massachusetts assumed such power, organized towns and courts, levied taxes and enacted laws for persons and property, most efficiently, even if done in a way only half legitimate. The American political efficiency-supe- rior to every emergency or accident-showed itself in the germ.
Recognizing these great facts, the revolutionary parlia- ment, influenced by Vane and the personal persuasion of Roger Williams, granted Rhode Island in 1644 splendid powers for political initiative and religious freedom. The King was very liberal to Connecticut in 1662 and went farther in the Rhode Island patent of 1663. In this nego- tiation, John Clarke, more practical than Williams, seized every opportunity to ally himself with the most liberal religious thought of continental Europe, as well as of England. There was not religious toleration at home, but for his distant colony the King pronounced this ex- traordinary manifesto : 38 " Our royal will and pleasure is that no person within the said colony at any time here- after, shall be anywise molested, punished, disquieted, or called in question, for any differences in opinion in mat- ters of religion, and do not actually disturb the civil
37 Brigham, " R. I.," p. 102 et seq.
38 Cf. " R. I. C. R.," Vol. II., pp. 3-21.
الكردا
71
1663]
New Charter Founds Religious Liberty
peace of our said colony any law, statute or clause therein contained, or to be contained, usage or cus- tom of this realm, to the contrary hereof, in any wise, not- withstanding." The divine right of Kings for the nonce justified itself, for here was perfect religious liberty be- stowed through an executive decree. Simple and natural as the King's action appears to-day, it seemed al- most revolutionary to statesmen then, as Roger Williams reported in plain terms : 39 " This, his Majesty's grant, was startled at by his Majesty's high officers of state, who were to view it in course before the sealing, but, fear- ing the lion's roaring, they crouched against their wills in obedience to his Majesty's pleasure." Sagacious as Charles was, he built better than he knew, when he al- lowed absolute freedom of conscience in the little depend- ency of Rhode Island.
John Clarke laid his topographical lines as skilfully as he negotiated politically. Wisely basing his claims on title by Indian purchase, he kept the land away from Massachusetts and Connecticut, seeking to encroach on either side. The north boundary was the south line of Massachusetts; the west along Connecticut and down- ward to Pawcatuck river; on .the south the ocean includ- ing Block Island; the island of Rhode Island and three miles to the east and northeast of Narragansett Bay- substantially our present territory. Great disputes with the larger Puritan colonies concerning boundaries on either side, distracted the next half century ; but Clarke's positions were so well chosen that they held the territory.
If George Bancroft was correct in affirming that more ideas finally becoming national have proceeded from Rhode Island, than from any other colony, we should consider well the "livelie experiment " in John Clarke's 39 " Letter to Mason," Narr. Club. Pub., Vol. VI., p. 346.
П
×
-INI
72
The Island
charter. In the process of organization and develop- ment, Mr. Foster's dates and definitions are significant.
1636-41. Providence, Portsmouth, Newport were dis- tinct sovereignties.
1641-47. Providence, Aquidneck, Warwick were dis- tinct sovereignties.
1647-51. Colony Providence Plantations was a dis- tinct commonwealth.
1651-54. Providence, Warwick (the mainland), Ports- mouth, Newport (the island), were a distinct common- wealth.
1654-86. Colony Providence Plantations was a distinct commonwealth.
Mr. Richman 40 remarks that Providence disliked au- thority from any source. Newport sanctioned authority only when it proceeded from itself. Portsmouth was like Providence. Warwick varied, but approached Newport in theory.
We dwell on these features not so much for the tech- nical divisions, as to mark the distinguishing character- istics of the novel ways of state-making. .Williams, Clarke, Coddington, Gorton all appear in the varying life of the towns. The planters, seeking a civic structure, forced their will into submission to the larger principles of government and gradually methodized a citizenship under the royal government.
40 " R. I .- Its Making," p. 309.
CHAPTER IV THE COLONY AND THE TOWN OF PROVIDENCE. 1648-1710
W TE may turn back to the story of Providence after the adoption of the first charter in 1647, when discussions around the town-mill, where there was " a par- liament in perpetual session," were developing new com- munal life. The first houses about Roger Williams' Spring and along the Towne Street without doubt were of logs halved together at the corners.1 Having only one room they were roofed over with logs or thatched on poles. The chimney was probably of logs, outside at the end and plastered with clay. The houses succeeding these log huts were similar-they being a single or "Fire Room." One end was almost given up to the stone chim- ney and cavernous fireplace. These conclusions of Isham and Brown correspond with those of Mr. Dorr, though the architects investigated independently and by different methods.
There were no larger houses of the comfortable type introduced from Connecticut, as we have noted at New- port. Mr. Dorr found in the probate records that houses until the last decade of the seventeenth century had two apartments only, a "lower room " and a " chamber." Often there were no stairs, and a ladder communicated. Most dwellings were destroyed in 1676 by the Indians, and the pioneer work of our plantation had to be repeated. One of the most interesting dwellings built about 1653 sur-
1 Isham and Brown, " Early R. I. Houses," p. 16.
73
1
الـ
74
The Colony and the Town of Providence
.
vived the ravage of King Philip's War, and until our own time. It was known as the Roger Mowry house, or tav- ern, and recently as the Abbott house. It was a small building, and originally had a huge stone chimney. It was the first licensed tavern, where town meetings were held and the council assembled. Roger Williams gathered peo- ple there for worship.
To enter into this pioneer living we must remember that these planters made their habitations and the furni- ture chiefly with their own hands.2 They framed the solid chests and tables-rude but strong-which stood on the sanded floors. The clumsy but hospitable old English settle 3 lifted its high back at the family table; then by the fireplace it afforded a room and partial exclusion from the fierce wintry drafts. In summer it was moved out of doors, and helped to make the evening cosy and agreeable. Regular chairs were a luxury-many having none, some possessing one or two. John Smith, the miller and town clerk, had four. The inventory of John Whipple, inn- keeper, recorded in 1685 " three chaires." The way of living and the comforts were such as English yeomen of the period enjoyed. There was little table linen. The ancient wooden trencher held its place-little disputed by earthern ware or " puter." Culinary utensils were limited, and the ancient iron pot served in many functions. No early inventories carried silver plate or carved furniture, as in Massachusetts; for Providence was striving hard to maintain life by agriculture alone.
Living was very simple, except when some large political
2 " R. I. Hist. T., No. 15," Dorr, p. 28.
3 " It is, to the hearths of old-fashioned cavernous fireplaces, what the east belt of trees is to the exposed country estate, or the north wall to the garden. Outside the settle candles gutter, locks of hair wave, young women shiver, and old men sneeze. Inside is Paradise."
-
£
محاور بابنه
-
75
Simple Living
1650]
question involving colonial administration forced the lit- tle community to go beyond its own narrow affairs.
An ordinance4 in 1649 compelled every man to mend and make good the highway "before his house Lot or Lots." Suits at law regulated differences, for the attor- ney's fee for preparing a cause and pleading was fixed at 6s. 8d .; " if any man will have a lawyer he shall pay ls."
We have noted the secondary proprietors, who received a gift of twenty-five acres, and they are voted in from time to time. In 1650 it was enacted 5 that in future all men received should pay for their "home-share Is. per acre and 6d. per acre for the rest not exceeding twenty-five acres." Outside their lots and farms, privilege of pasture on the common lands helped the semi-pastoral cultivation. Rates were 3d. for cows, 1d. for swine and 1d. for goats on the common, assessed in 1649, and collected by the town constable. There was much legislation concerning the commons, and in 1650, it was forbidden to take off lumber or timber. As the cattle ran in a common herd literally, marks identifying the ownership were quite important. These were formally enrolled on the records of the town. Many only cropped one ear in some way, but others intro- duced an elaborate device; as a crop from the top of the right ear, and a halfpenny behind under the ear. Another has a flower de luce on the left ear. The sale of liquors, to Indians especially, caused constant annoyance and tinkering of statutes. Entertainment of travelers and strangers seemed to be a burden requiring supervision, before taverns were regularly installed and maintained. An ordinance in 1650 allowed any one to sell " without doores "; but if " any man sell Wine or strong Liquors in his house, he shall also entertaine strangers to bed and
+ " Early Rec.," Vol. II., 44.
5 Ibid, p. 53.
7
76
.
The Colony and the Town of Providence
board." Notice for sale ankers (10 galls.) liquors by sundry persons appear from 1656 to 1664. In all American hostelry, while the weary and hungry traveler might need rest and food, the necessary profit has come from the alcoholic thirst of the majority.
At the only town-meeting when Roger Williams appears as moderator June 24, 1655, the sale of wines or liquors to Indians was absolutely forbidden, under a penalty of six pounds, one half to the informer.
In 1657 Mr. ffenner was allowed by vote to exchange a six-acre lot at Notakonkanit bought of "Goodman lippet " for - acres. The distinctions Mr. occasionally old English Goodman and Yeoman frequently were used, but the differences marking the titles were not altogether clear.
In common names, English uses prevailed. As might be expected Gideon, Daniel, John, James, Simon, Zacha- riah; Mary, Rebecca, Esther, Ruth were frequent. A person might be denominated or designated by these familiar words, but the extraordinary fashion of the Puri- tans appeared occasionally. What conceit, fancy or ideal spelled out Mahershalalhashbaz? It might be consid- ered unique, were it not recorded twice before 1680. A name preserved through many generations of honorable men, according to tradition, marks an event in colonial history. Richard Waterman set to keep the garrison at Warwick " firmly resolved " to hold out to the last. In reminiscence he named his son " Resolved." 6
The apprentice system was important in this period of colonial life. When unkindly fate had left lad or girl without parental care, he or she was bound out in order to learn. We shall note many interesting examples in the life at Portsmouth. In 1659 at Providence · Moses Brown MSS., " R. I. H. S."
n
77
1660]
Apprentice System
William Field took in charge William Warner, who was bound " his Secretes to keep and not to frequent Taverns or Ale-Houses, except about my said master's bussenes." At the end of his subjection, he was to receive the cus- tomary freedom suit of clothing.
The community of interest and feeling which makes a state, appears to have been of slow growth in our plan- tation of Providence. Clarke was not fully paid for his proper expenses. Roger Williams was obliged to berate the town they " ride securely by a new cable and ankor of Mr. Clarke's procuring" and refused his just claims. In 1660 when the charter had been working a dozen years or more, a petition was sent to the commissioners at Portsmouth asking release from an assessment of £30 toward building a common prison at Newport, which " will be in no ways beneficiall to us." Moreover, Provi- dence was expending £160 for a bridge over the Moshas- suck which was completed in 1662. The colony would not relieve the plantation from its proper burden and a tax for £35 was laid in 1661 to discharge the responsi- bility.
The community of the plantation at Providence grew out of the determination of Williams and his near asso- ciates to have absolute freedom of conscience. They must live, whether worshipping freely or under theocratic tyranny as they conceived it. Williams' own views of practical government were simple and notably naïve, whenever he came into conflict with the proprietors. Without doubt, he had expected greater practical authority in the town than had fallen to him. He at- tempted in that time to assert political influence in a com- munity which had no religious establishment. Mr. Dorr 7 sagaciously points out that he expected substantial 7 " R. I. H. S.," New Series, IV., p. 81.
1
78
The Colony and the Town of Providence
results without due causes. He forgot that a theocracy plants its feet on the earth and that the civil power made John Cotton the foremost man in Massachusetts. Yet Williams in inmost conviction, cared far more for the spiritual than for the material conditions of life. This appears in most striking form, as he writes his friend Major John Mason in Connecticut in 1670. 8 What- ever might be his deficiency as statesman and executor of civil law, certainly the seer and prophet spoke in him.
A controversy in the turbulent winter 1654-1655 sug- gests much in the development of our early history. We should bear in mind that two main parties at this time were constantly struggling for control of the town! meeting. One led by William Harris and Thomas Olney represented the Proprietors or original purchasers under Williams' " Initial deed." The other led by Roger Wil- liams and Gregory Dexter generally consisted of small freeholders admitted afterward.º All these men had resolute wills, while Harris and Olney had much execu- tive ability. This difference began early, and for some two-score years, disputes growing out of these peculiar, differentiated land-titles convulsed the little plantation. Many small freeholders believed with Williams that the lands bought from the Indians were a virtual trust for the whole body of freemen. Proprietors on the contrary held that the lands were administered by the central authority in town meeting, for the benefit of private owners who had paid for them. The economic principle of ownership and the larger political motive involved in government, did not coincide in practical action.
Williams was never able to induce the town meeting to decide on any definite and particular sale of lands. 8 Ante, p. 9.
º Cf. " R. I. H. S.," New Series, Vol. III., Dorr, " Proprietors and Freeholders."
-
£
I
79
1660]
Differences of Proprietors and Citizens
The Proprietors insisted on their view and they alone acted on such propositions. It appears from Williams' own writings 10 that the smaller freeholders came to Providence with no clear understanding of their relations to the first Proprietors. The "Initial deed " created no definite trust. Instead of such legal obligation, there was in Williams' mind a moral duty-an inference. In the absence of coercive judicial power, this was " the weak point of all Williams' machinery."
The first organization of our Plantation in Providence -a voluntary association or " town fellowship," without coercive force-was ill adapted for the political regula- tion of a community, in which there were many discon- tented people. The small freeholders were hazy about rights in public property and they fed their goats and swine on the common; taking thence, timber, firewood and other supplies. " Common " in Providence was not in the legal sense an "incorporeal right " of pasturage or other profit on land of another or of the town, but it meant unenclosed or nonimproved land claimed by the Proprietors.
There was a process of development going on step by step, as was indicated in the twenty-five-acre agreement of 1645. Then the pressure of Massachusetts and the fear of intervention on the part of England, warned both proprietors and freeholders that mutual concession must be made. Whatever the technical proprietary right might be, the sensible forecasting American saw that a monopoly could not avail, when the whole institution of property was supported only by voluntary association. The disputes tended toward settlement, by the creation of new classes of citizens, who, though they might be lower in property qualification, could vote if respectable. 10 Cf. Mr. Dorr.
١٢
80
The Colony and the Town of Providence
By 1649, there were oxen enough in use to compel the dwellers on Towne Streete to make a good highway before each estate. In the autumn of 1654 there was a tumult occasioned by a voluntary training. The record says Thomas Olney, John Field, William Harris and others were implicated. In the names reported, we see the pro- prietary party, striving for order according to their own notion. Those remonstrating against their action sent a paper to the town asserting " that it was blood- guiltiness and against the rule of the gospel, to execute judgment upon transgressors against the private or pub- lic weal." This not only rebuked a particular executive act, but would have upset the authority of all civil society. These aberrations of his followers drew from Williams an expression which the learned and sedate Arnold well defines to be a "masterly " analysis of the limits of civil and religious freedom. It shows moreover that though executive facility might be lacking in Wil- liams, the preacher and prophet yielded in him, to the greater powers of the civilized man.
11 This admirable statement sufficiently rebukes the main detractors of Williams. A-society based on these divine principles, could never go far astray though it might indulge individual aberrations. A generation later, Cotton Mather busied himself in slurring Rhode Island for its many social defects. He wrote like one blind, who had never seen the light.
Reinforced by this moral support of Williams, the party in power-the proprietors-forebore wisely and con- doned the civic offense. It was voted, "that for the Colony's sake, who have since chosen Thomas Olney an assistant, and for the public union and peace's sake, it (the tumult and disturbance) should be passed by, and no 11 Ante, p. 9.
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.