USA > Rhode Island > Providence County > Providence > History of the state of Rhode Island and Providence plantations, Vol. I > Part 3
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
A few weeks previous to the meeting of this Gene- ral Court, the ship Lyon arrived at Nantasket, with twenty passengers and a large store of provisions. Her arrival was most timely, for the colonists were reduced to the last exigencies of famine. Many had already died of want, and many more were rescued from imminent peril by this providential occurrence. A public fast had been appointed for the day succeeding that on which the ship
CHAP. I.
- Y 1631.
Feb. 5.
9.
20
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND.
CHAP. I. reached Boston. It was changed to a general thanksgiv- ing. There was another incident connected with the arri- 1631. val of this ship, which made it an era, not only in the affairs of Massachusetts, but in the history of America. She brought to the shores of New England the founder of a new State, the exponent of a new philosophy, the intel- lect that was to harmonize religious differences, and soothe the sectarian asperities of the New World; a man whose clearness of mind enabled him to deduce, from the mass of crude speculations which abounded in the 17th century, a proposition so comprehensive, that it is difficult to say whether its application has produced the most beneficial influence upon religion, or morals, or politics. This man was Roger Williams, then about thirty-two years of age.1 He was a scholar, well versed in the ancient and some of the modern tongues, an earnest inquirer after truth, and an ardent friend of popular liberty as well for the mind as for the body. As "a godly minister," he was welcomed to the society of the Puritans, and soon invited by the church in Salem to supply the place of the lamented Hig- ginson, as an assistant to their pastor Samuel Skelton. The invitation was accepted, but the term of his ministry was destined to be brief. The authorities at Boston re- monstrated with those at Salem against the reception of Williams. The Court at its next session addressed a April 12. letter to Mr. Endicott to this effect : "That whereas Mr. Williams had refused to join with the congregation at
1 See Appendix A for research into his early life. A Rhode Islander may be permitted to notice the coincidence of a general thanksgiving day " by or- der from the Governor and Council, directed to all the plantations," to cele- brate the arrival of the ship which brought the founder of his State to the shores of the New World. With the exception of the thanksgiving held July 8, upon the arrival of " the great emigration " by the emigrants themselves, this was the first instance of what has long since become, by universal cus- tom, one of the " institutions " of these United States. And happily for the country, the principles which emanated from the cabin of the Lyon have been no less widely diffused than has the custom to which her arrival gave occa- sion.
21
CHAP I 1631.
WILLIAMS SETTLED AT SALEM.
Boston, because they would not make a public declara- tion of their repentance for having communion with the churches of England, while they lived there ; and, besides, had declared his opinion that the magistrate might not punish the breach of the Sabbath, nor any other offence, as it was a breach of the first table ; therefore, they mar- velled they would choose him without advising with the council, and withal desiring him, that they would forbear to proceed till they had conferred about it."!
This attempt of the magistrates of Boston to control the election of a church officer at Salem, met with the re- buke it so richly merited. The people were not ignorant of the hostility their invitation had excited ; yet on the very day the remonstrance was written, they settled Wil- liams as their minister .? The ostensible reasons for this hostility are set forth in the letter above cited. That they were to a great extent the real ones cannot be ques- tioned. The ecclesiastical polity of the Puritans sanc- tioned this interference. Their church platform approved it .? Positive statute would seem to require it. Never- theless, we cannot but think that, underlying all this, there was a secret stimulus of ambition on the part of the Boston Court to strengthen its authority over the prosper- ous and, in some respects, rival colony of Salem. Salem was the oldest town in what was then Massachusetts, and had been the seat of power under Gov. Endicott until the corporation emigrated to America, supplanting his author- ity by that of Gov. Winthrop, and making Boston the capital of New England. But the advantages of Salem were considerable, and the feeling of independence re- sulting from these circumstances was apparent. The ex- pediency of reducing the people of Salem to more com- plete subjection to the central power, could not have been
1 Winthrop, i. 63. 2 Bentley's Hist. of Salem, 1, M. H. C. vi. 246. 3 Mather's Magnalia, B. v. ch. 17, § 9.
22
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND.
CHAP. I. overlooked by the Court, and accordingly we find them r speedily embracing the earliest opportunity to assert that 1631. power-gently, at first, expressing wonder and requesting delay on certain theological grounds, but more harshly afterward as we shall presently see. As a political meas- ure this interference failed of its object. The people resent- ed so great a stretch of authority, and the church disregard- ed the remonstrance. The reasons assigned by the Court, we do not propose here to discuss. The first involved a point in which Williams was not alone. The "great John Cotton " himself withdrew from communion with the churches of England, and persuaded other eminent di- vines to adopt the same course."! The second reason re- dounds to the everlasting honor of Williams as " the great, earliest assertor of religious freedom."2 What could not as yet be accomplished by direct intervention of the Court was effected in a surer manner. The fearlessness of Wil- liams in denouncing the errors of the times, and especially the doctrine of the magistrate's power in religion, gave rise to a system of persecution which, before the close of the summer, obliged him to seek refuge beyond the juris- diction of Massachusetts in the more liberal colony of the Pilgrims.3
Aug.
At Plymouth "he was well accepted as an assistant in the ministry to Mr. Ralph Smith, then pastor of the church there."4 The principal men of the colony treated him with marked attention. Gov. Bradford, in his Jour- nal, speaks well of him,5 and Gov. Winthrop, who had uniformly opposed him, mentions having partaken of the Holy Sacrament with him, in company with Mr. Wilson, pastor of the Boston church, when on a visit at Plymouth. Williams remained for two years at Plymouth.6 The
1 Magnalia, B. iii. ch. 1, § 10-18. 2 Mr. Savage in note 2, Winthrop, i. 41.
3 Bentley's Salem, 1, M. H. C. vi. 246. 4 Morton's Memorial, 151.
5 Prince, 377.
" The weight of authority assigns this limit to R. W.'s residence at Ply-
mouth. See citations in Knowles, p. 55, note.
23
THE NARRAGANSETT INDIANS.
opportunities there presented for cultivating an intimate acquaintance with the chief Sachems of the neighboring tribes were well improved, and exerted an important in- fluence, not only in creating the State of which he was to be the founder, but also in protecting all New England amid the horrors of savage warfare.
Ousamequin, or Massasoit, as he is usually called, was the Sachem of the Wampanoags, called also the Pokanoket tribe, inhabiting the Plymouth territory. His seat was at Mount Hope, in what is now the town of Bristol, R. I. With this chief, the early and steadfast friend of the English, Williams established a friendship which proved of the greatest service at the time of his exile.
West of the Pokanoket country, embracing the islands in and around Narragansett bay, the eastern end of Long Island, with nearly the whole mainland as far as Paw- catuck river, was the powerful tribe of the Narragansetts, including several subordinate tribes, all owning the sway of the sagacious and venerable Canonicus, with his brave and generous nephew, Miantinomo, as their chief Sachems. Tradition speaks of this tribe as a fierce and warlike race, extending their conquests from the main, over all the adjacent islands, and it still points to the spot on the island of Rhode Island, where in a great battle, anterior to the arrival of the English, the former proprietors of these beautiful shores were vanquished by the valor of their assailants. There is a clause in the Indian deed of Aquidneck to Wm. Coddington, which appears to confirm this tradition. It is, however, certain that at this time the schemes of the Narragansetts for territorial aggran- dizement had ceased, and their attention had become directed in some measure to the arts of civilization. They coined money in their rude way from sea-shells, and were skilled in various branches of Indian manufacture. With these Indians, as with Massasoit, Williams sought friend- ship, and by kindness and attention, making them pres-
CHAP. I. 1631.
24
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND.
CHAP. I. 1632.
ents and visiting them, as his letters describe, "in their filthy smoky holes to gain their tongue," he overcame the shyness of the old Canonicus and won the esteem of the high-spirited Miantinomo. It proved well for himself and for New England that this intercourse was maintained.
The generous spirit of the Pilgrims preserved Roger Williams in a great measure from the annoyance which had caused his removal from Salem, and protected him from the offensive interference of the civil authorities. Still his own views were too liberal for the times in which he lived ; he was misunderstood by the enlightened, and misrepresented by the bigoted who sympathized with their brethren of the Bay. His attachment appears never to have been withdrawn from the people of Salem, who reciprocated the warmth of his regard and invited his return.1 So great was the respect and love entertained Aug. for him at Plymouth, that it was not without difficulty 1633. he obtained his dismissal from the church, through the influence of Brewster, the ruling elder, who was one of those who dreaded the effect of his opinions. It illus- trates the singular power which, through his whole life, Roger Williams exerted on the minds of his companions, whether savage or civilized, that several members of the Plymouth church, unwilling to be separated from him, desired their dismission at the same time and followed him to Salem .? Here he again assisted Mr. Skelton, whose health was rapidly failing.
Now, within the jurisdiction of the Bay, was resumed a conflict between the despotic spirit of theocracy and the genius of intellectual liberty, which was to result in the temporary triumph of arbitrary power over abstract right ; which was to call into existence an independent State, and finally to achieve the emancipation of the human soul from the thraldom of priestly oppression. It should be borne in mind that in most of the points of dispute which
1 Backus, i. 56. 2 Morton's Memorial, 151.
25
MISREPRESENTATIONS CONCERNING WILLIAMS.
now arose Williams was not alone or even foremost in the CHAP. discussion, while in respect to some of the most important I. encroachments of the Court upon the rights of the people 1633. all the inhabitants of Salem were with him. His de- tractors have delighted to represent him as if he were the only thorn in the side of the authorities, the sole disturber of fraternal harmony in the otherwise happy family of the Puritans. To fasten upon Roger Williams the stigma of factious opposition to government, as has often been attempted, is to belie history by an effort to vindicate bigotry and tyranny at the expense of truth. It is a memorable fact, which a careful examination of the evi- dence presented by the Puritan writers themselves will establish, that of the many singular and bitter contro- versies which raged at this time, in most of which Roger Williams bore a conspicuous part, and for all of which his enemies have endeavored to make him solely responsible, only one was initiated by him, save that which has become his crowning glory. The contentious spirit with which he has been charged was characteristic of the age in which he lived, and eminently so of the society in which he moved. Transition periods are necessarily eras of agita- tion, more or less prolonged according to the importance of the principles to be evolved. In this case the Protes- tant reformation had opened a discussion, in the 16th century, involving the dearest rights of humanity, which had already convulsed all Europe, and was about to sub- vert the ancient monarchy of England. To establish the inherent right of private judgment, the free agency of the mind in spiritual matters,-this was the grand result towards which a hundred years of toil and strife, in camp and court, in school and closet, were slowly tending. In the controversy which directly led to this result, Williams had many ardent friends among his Puritan compeers, the more perhaps from his bearing only a secondary part in the subordinate agitations which first occurred.
.
26
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND.
CHAP. I. A meeting of the ministers, held at each other's houses, to debate " questions of moment," inspired the cautious 1633. mind of Skelton with fear lest1 " it might grow in time to a presbytery, or superintendency, to the prejudice of the church's liberties." In this feeling Williams shared, but remained passive, while Skelton openly denounced the frequent meetings of the clergy."? They had both seen enough of priestly arrogance in England to dread its appearance in America. Already had the interference of the Court at Boston, at the instigation of the ministers, given warning of the actual usurpation from which the church at Salem was shortly to suffer. Liberty is rarely subverted at a single blow. Its foundations are sapped by gradual and regular approaches under the guise of lawful authority, and often in the very name of freedom itself. These manifestations could not escape the vigilance of the Salem pastors, or fail to fill their minds with anxious fore- bodings. The event justified the anxiety of these watch- ful guardians of public liberty, notwithstanding the remark of the amiable Winthrop, who was soon to feel in his own person the fickleness of popular favor, with- drawn at the dictation of the clergy, that " this fear was without cause."
The custom of women wearing veils in public formed a theme of pulpit discussion at that time, which has un- justly been charged upon Williams. The earnestness of Endicott and the eloquence of Cotton upon this topic are recorded by contemporary writers. It has remained for the ignorance or the ill-will of more recent times, to cast upon Roger Williams the absurdity of a controversy which began before his arrival,3 and in which there is no reliable evidence to prove that he took a prominent part.4
1 Winthrop, i. 117. 2 Bentley's Salem, 248. 3 Bentley, 245.
4 Hubbard is the earliest Puritan writer who connects the name of Wil- liams with this ridiculous controversy. His tirade upon Roger Williams. chap. 30, General History of New England, is the source whence most of the abuse of the Founder of Rhode Island is derived, wherein he is closely fol-
27
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WILLIAMS.
More serious difficulties soon arose. During Williams' residence at Plymouth, he had written a treatise upon
CHAP. I. the royal patent, under which the Massachusetts colony 1633. held their lands, wherein he maintained that the planters could have no just title except what they derived from the Indians. The Court, as usual, took advice of the ministers, "who much condemned Mr. Williams' error and presumption, and were greatly offended at these three passages : " 1. For that he chargeth King James to have told a solemn public lie, because in his patent he blesses God that he was the first Christian prince that had discovered this land : 2. For that he chargeth him and others with blasphemy for calling Europe Christendom, or the Christian world : 3. For that he did personally apply to our present King, Charles, these three places in the Re- velation, viz."1 As to the first point, we are at loss to discover any very strong grounds for clerical indignation. If it was "presumption" in Williams to deny to the reigning family the honor of discovery, it certainly was not an error. To the Tudors, and not to the Stuarts, that honor belongs. It was under the auspices of Henry VII., more than a century before James I. ascended the throne, that New England was discovered .? Politically Williams
lowed by Cotton Mather a few years later. Other portions of his history are equally unreliable ; in fact, nowhere is he to be trusted as an original author- ity. His prejudices color his whole narrative. His plagiarisms and his care- lessness are sufficiently exposed by the diligent editor of Winthrop, in an am- ple note on p. 296, vol. i., to which the reader is referred.
1 Mr. Savage's note at this place should be cited : " Perhaps the same expressions, by another, would have given less offence. From Williams they were not at first received in the mildest, or even the most natural sense ; though further reflection satisfied the magistrates, that his were not danger- ous. The passages from the Apocalypse were probably not applied to the honor of the King, and I regret, therefore, that Winthrop did not preserve them."-Winthrop, i. 102. In his 2d edition, p. 145, Mr. S. adds : " No com- plaint of such indiscretion would have been expressed ten years later, when the mother country far outran the colony in these perversions of Scripture."
? The author does not propose to discuss the question of the Ante-Colum- bian discovery of America. If the claim of the Danish writers for their
28
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND.
1633.
CHAP. may have been presumptuous ; historically he was correct I. in this first charge. That the second point should have given offence, displays more earnestness to preserve the royal favor than zeal in the cause which they considered to be the only true one. Men who had repeatedly denied the Christianity of Europe, need not so suddenly have become indignant that one of their number should write what all of them spoke and believed. This spasmodic loyalty may be attributed to a fear lest the influence of Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, should so far prevail with the Crown as to lead to a repeal of the New England patent. The solicitude for the honor of the king, manifested in the third stated ground of offence, furnishes an amusing contrast to the conduct of the same reverend legislators a few years later. The arbitrary action of the Court, in calling for a paper Dec. written beyond the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, " for the 27. private satisfaction of the Governor of Plymouth," and which had never been published, would have been properly resented by refusing to obey the summons. None of his persecutors in those days, or of his detractors in later times, ever displayed a more Christian, or less "contentious spirit," than did Williams on this occasion. He " offered the book, or any part of it, to be burnt, and gave satisfac- tion of his intention and loyalty." On a further examina- tion of the offensive passages by the council, " they found Jan. 24. the matters not to be so evil as at first they seemed." Thus the subject rested for a few months until it was found con- venient again to call it up.
1633-4.
Upon the death of Mr. Skelton, the church ordained Roger Williams as their pastor, although the Court a sec-
northern progenitors were fully established, identifying New England, and es- pecially Rhode Island, with the Vineland of Icelandic explorers, it would have no bearing upon the New England of our day ; while in the present state of the subject it is more a matter for archeological investigation than of historical research. For a view of this point see R. I. Hist. Coll's, iv. Ap. 2, and for the whole subject, Prof. Rafin's Antiquitates Americana.
29
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WILLIAMS.
ond time interfered to prevent it. We shall presently see how severely their contumacy was punished.
In the autumn Williams was again summoned to ap- 1634. pear at Court, for promulgating his views concerning the patent. When we remember that the practice of the Nov. 27. Puritans accorded precisely with the theory of Williams, in respect to the Indian titles-that all the land they oc- cupied, except what they found deserted, owing to the pestilence which preceded the arrival of the Pilgrims, had been purchased by them of the original proprietors-we cannot discover in the ostensible reasons for this second arrest, any sufficient cause for such treatment. That he took what we should consider a needless exception to the language of the patent is apparent. Perhaps he thought that words are sometimes things. The sense of justice which formed so striking a feature of his character, com- pelled him to deny the royal claim to possession by right of discovery. Yet this language was in itself harmless so long as it remained merely a form of kingly phraseology. We are forced to the conclusion that the real reasons for pursuing this matter are not upon the record, and that the repeated refusal of the Salem church to permit the interference of the Court in their choice of a teacher was the principal cause. This opinion is strengthened by the fact that after this time we hear nothing further of the . controversy about the patent ; more tangible and serious causes of complaint being found by the Court.
One other subordinate point remains to be noticed be- fore we arrive at the immediate causes of the banishment of Roger Williams. The conduct of Endicott in cutting out the cross from the national colors, for which singular action he was suspended from office for one year by order of the Court, has been ascribed to the influence of Wil- liams, who has been made, as in the dispute about veils, the convenient author of most of the erratic deeds and no- tions of the times. The opposition to Popery and all its
CHAP. I.
1635. May.
30
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND.
1635.
CHAP. symbols, which formed so deep a feeling in the Puritan I. mind, was the real cause of this unwarrantable act of the Salem magistrate. That Williams countenanced the act is nowhere asserted, unless such a construction be given to the language of Hubbard.1 Even Mather, who cannot be suspected of any bias in favor of Williams, says of this proceeding, " that he was but obliquely and remotely con- cerned in it." 2 How far he may be considered as morally responsible for this application of an abstract opinion which he entertained in common with his fellows, is rather a question of ethics than of history. The clear- ness with which he discerned the dividing line between civil and spiritual concerns, in an age when these subjects had scarcely begun to attract public attention, forbids the idea that he advised the mutilation of the ensigns. The subject afterwards assumed a much greater prominence ; the Court, at first divided in opinion as to the lawfulness of the cross, at length ordered the ensigns to be laid aside entirely, two months before Endicott, from motives of policy, was disgraced for defacing them ; and when a year later, at the request of certain shipmasters, these colors were hoisted upon the castle, it was done "with the pro- testation, that we held the cross in the ensign idolatrous, and therefore might not set it up in our own ensigns." 3 This was subsequent to the banishment of Williams, and furnishes fair presumptive evidence to acquit him of re- sponsibility for this singular transaction.
March 4. May 6.
April 30.
A more serious occasion for complaint was found in the views entertained by Williams on the nature of judicial oaths. He was cited before the council for teaching "that a magistrate ought not to tender an oath to an unre- generate man." It appears that he considered taking an oatlı to be in itself an act of worship, recognizing as it does the existence and power of a Supreme Being, and
1 Hubbard, ch. 30, p. 205, in which he is followed by Hutchinson, 1, 38.
2 Magnalia, B. 7, ch. 2, § 8. 3 June 16, 1636, Winthrop, ii. 344.
31
THE FREEMAN'S OATH.
hence, as a direct result of his views in respect to liberty CHAP. of conscience, he denied the right of any one to enforce it. I. There was nothing in this proposition to excite alarm, so 1635. long as it did not come in conflict with the tenets of the ministers or the designs of the magistrates.
Passages in his writings indicate that he had long en- tertained, and in some cases had suffered losses in chan- cery on account of his views on this subject, which in some respects resemble those held by the Society of Friends, and for which, to this day, they are liable to pe- cuniary damage by the laws of England. Very soon, however, the action of the Court, in requiring a new oath to be taken by all the citizens, brought Williams' abstract notions into practical opposition. Alarmed at the rumors of " some Episcopal and malignant practices against the country," the Court decreed that an oath of fidelity to the laws of the colony should be taken by all freemen. It will be remembered that "the freeman's oath" had already been taken by all who were admitted freemen of the colony. The terms in which it was expressed, requiring obedience to laws which should be " lawfully" made by the Court, acknowledged the charter as the fundamental law, and the source whence it was derived as the sovereign power. But this new oath of fidelity ignored the charter, and bound the citizens to obey the acts of the Legislature without reference to their compatibility with the laws of England. What right had the magistrates, with their ever present counsellors, the clergy, to adopt this new law ? There were more reasons for Williams' earnest hostility to the measure than his enemies saw fit to assign. The charter, although general in its terms, was yet a safe guide in the broad principles of legislation. No laws repugnant to those of England could be enacted under it. It shielded the colonists from the possible tyranny of the king, and pro- tected them from the more probable despotism of their own local magistrates. A friend of popular liberty might well
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.