USA > Rhode Island > Providence County > Providence > State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations at the end of the century : a history, Volume 1 > 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
1See Mass. Col. Rec. iv, pt. 1, 353. Southertown was later named Stoning- ton.
2The deeds and several other documents relative to the subject are in R. I. H. S. Coll. iii, 241-269. The validity of the title to this tract depended upon whether the Narragansetts or the Pequots owned the land before the Pequot war. (See note on p. 98.) It is a question that can scarcely be set- tled at the present day, since the Indian witnesses furnished nearly the entire testimony.
"The documents relating to these matters are in R. I. C. R. i, 455-463, 469, 493; Plym. Col. Rec. x, 267, 287.
101
THE PERIOD OF THE FIRST CHARTER, 1648-63.
it will be seen, clashed with those of the Charter of 1644, and made it necessary for the Rhode Island agent to take immediate action. For- tunate it was for the colony that its affairs were entrusted to one so able and diplomatic as Dr. John Clarke. During the very year of the granting of the Connecticut instrument, he had presented two peti- tions to the King, in which he affirmed that the people of his colony had it "much on their hearts, if they may be permitted, to hold forth a lively experiment, that a flourishing civil state may stand, yea, and best be maintained, with a full liberty in religious concernments".1
So forceful were Clarke's objections to the boundaries of the Con- necticut charter, that Winthrop was compelled to overstay his time abroad in order to compose the differences between them. In April, 1663, the justice of Rhode Island's claim was recognized by the award of four arbitrators, who decided that the "Pawcatuck River should be the certain bounds between the two colonies, which said river should for the future be also called alias Narrogansett, or Narrogansett River"; and also that the Atherton Company should "have free lib- erty to choose to which of the colonies they should belong".2 This agreement was signed by both the agents and the danger to both char- ters was averted. Having settled this difficulty, Clarke was now ready to act. So well had he bespoken the royal patronage and gained the esteem of influential men, especially of the Earl of Clarendon, that on July 8, 1663, he obtained a charter completely confirming the Rhode Island boundary claims, and making concessions even more liberal than those granted to Connecticut.3 In the following chapter allusion
1R. I. C. R. i, 490. These two petitions, although undated, are probably of the year 1662. See Arnold i, 280.
2R. I. C. R. i, 518. This terming the Pawcatuck, the Narragansett, was merely a compromise in order to conform to the wording of the Connecticut charter. This action of Winthrop's was subsequently disowned by Connecti- cut, upon the ground that his commission expired as soon as the charter was obtained. Such a disavowal, however, possessed no legal force when con- trasted with the royal wish expressed in the explicit wording of the R. I. charter of 1663.
"The original documents for a study of Clarke's career in obtaining the charter may be found in Calendar of State Papers, Colonial series, 1661-1608, pp. 20, 110, 145, 148; R. I. C. R. i, 432, 485, 518, et passim; 5 Mass. H. S. Coll. viii, 75-79, ix, 33, 37-44, 50-53; R. I. H. S. Publ. viii, 147; and Arnold, Hist. of R. I. i, 378-383. For an account of the imputation made upon Clarke's char- acter by the historian Grahame, which later became the subject of a spirited controversy between Josiah Quincy and George Bancroft, see Hist. Mag. ix, 233; Quincy, Memory of the late James Grahame vindicated; Arnold, i, 370. and Palfrey, iii, 431. A letter of June, 1663, inimical to Clarke's interests, which was obtained from the King by one John Scot, is discussed in copious foot-notes in Palfrey ii, 564; Aspinwall, Narragansett Patent, p. 30; and in Arnold, i, 300, 383.
102
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS.
will be made to the reception and installation of this charter, and some attention will be given to its separate provisions.
Rhode Island had finally completed the first period of her colony existence, and could now look forward to the future with more confi- dence and hope. She had weathered the storms and hardships inci- dent to the beginnings of all settlements, and though threatened with anarchy from within and oppression from without, she had held fast to the free and lofty principles that distinguished her from her neigh- bors. In spite of the warnings and forebodings of her incredulous Puritan opponents, in spite of their scorn and reviling, she persevered to the end, and clearly showed to them and to the world that a state could stand, even although it permitted a man to worship God as he saw fit.
- =
CHAPTER VIII.
FROM THE CHARTER OF 1663 TO KING PHILIP'S WAR.
The Rhode Island Charter of 1663, which doubtless contained more liberal provisions than did any similar instrument ever granted by a monarch, which was expansive enough to remain as Rhode Island's only basis of government for one hundred and eighty years, and which at the time of its death was the oldest constitutional charter in exist- ence, is surely worthy of careful study. In the first place the Con- necticut and Rhode Island Charters mark a great departure in the line of constitutional powers of government granted to those incor- porated. Previous royal charters, outside of those of the proprietary type, intended merely the exercise of rights of trade and commerce. It was purely a commercial venture, entered into by the individual as proprietor or by the colony as a corporation. England had Spain's example of assisting such commercial projects and hoped to reap the same rich reward. It is doubtful if the Massachusetts Charter of 1629, which is the best type of the earlier colonial charters, intended the least exercise of governmental powers.1 By 1663, however, the
1W. E. Foster, in a paper on the R. I. Charter of 1663, read before the R. I. Historical Society Nov. 13, 1888, thus summed up the opinions of those writers who had expressed themselves in regard to this much discussed subject; "First, those who take the ground that the Massachusetts Charter was essen- tially that of a trading corporation, including Gov. Hutchinson, George Chal-
103
FROM THE CHARTER OF 1663 TO KING PHILIP'S WAR.
commercial attitude of the colonies had considerably worn away. Im- migration had set in, and persons sought out the New World for purposes far other than those of trade. The Massachusetts colonists, whatever may have been the intentions and desires of the home govern- ment, had construed their original grant as providing all powers of local self-government, and were rapidly adjusting it to suit their material welfare. Towns were incorporated, courts organized, taxes levied, laws enacted restricting civil and personal rights-and all with- out reference to the fountainhead of their authority, the English throne. Rapidly, indeed, had the powers of colony government devel- oped in Puritan New England. So far were they advanced that we find the Connecticut grantees, according to their charter of 1662, authorized by the King to make virtually whatever laws they liked that were not "contrary to the laws and statutes of the realm of England". In the following year came the charter of Rhode Island. Here we find a still further advance. In a similar manner Rhode Island law-makers could enact what laws they desired, "so as they be not contrary or repugnant unto the laws of this our realm of Eng- land", and then comes the conditional and practically annulling clause "considering the nature and constitution of the place and people there".
Under such a provision Rhode Island might as well have been an ab- solutely independent state. We should certainly be justified in assert- ing that English political thought had changed most strangely were it not for the fact that these liberal provisions were but in reiteration of the patent of 1644. The chief reason why the later instrument is remarkable and worthy of especial attention is that it was granted under the hand of royal authority. The parliamentary patent, to be sure, marked a forward step in political freedom, but it should be remembered that it was granted by a revolutionary government, at a time when allegiance to supreme authority was somewhat weakened and when the bestowal of favors was a necessary adjunct to the intro- duction of a new regime. The charter of 1663, however, had no such contributory aids to its establishment. That, with such an austere monarch as Charles II on the throne, it did pass the seals of the Royal Council, is as noteworthy as it was unexampled.
mers, James Grahame, Charles Deane, and Brooks Adams. Second, those who hold that the charter warranted the exercise of governmental powers under it, including Dr. Palfrey, Judge Parker, and Judge Aldrich. Third, those who hold a somewhat intermediate view, including Judge Chamberlain, J. A. Doyle and Geo. Ellis." Mr. Foster himself rather favors Dr. Deane's view.
104
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS.
Even more notable than this grant of political power was the specific and absolute bestowal of perfeet religious liberty. Although England refused religious toleration to her subjeets, yet we find in this royal charter the following remarkable clause: "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 ealled in question, for any differences in opinion in matters of religion, and do not actually disturb the eivil peace of our said colony . any
law, statute or clause therein contained, or to be contained, usage or custom of this realm, to the contrary hereof, in any wise, notwithstand- ing".1 Rhode Island had gained what the mother country could not. That this grant excited some dismay among the more fearful of the English courtiers is true. Roger Williams, evidently referring to this provision, says: "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, fearing the lion's roaring, they crouched, against their wills, in obedience to his Majesty's pleasure".2 That which Charles was unwilling to bestow upon the great English nation, he did grant to the little insignificant colony beyond the seas. Thus unconsciously was he laying the foundation of what is now considered a fundamental principle in religion.
All the provisions of this charter were as free and as favorable to the grantees as the elauses relating to religion and to the limitation of politieal power. The government was to be vested in a governor, deputy-governor, ten assistants, and several deputies, who, meeting the first Wednesday in May and the last Wednesday in October, were to be - styled the general assembly. The deputies were not to exceed six from Newport, four each from Providence, Portsmouth and Warwiek, and two for each other town. This body was empowered to appoint new
1The identity of language of this clause with that of the famous "Declara- tion from Breda", is worthy of notice. General George Monk, in one of his communications to the King, dated in March, 1660, beseeched "his Majesty to declare his assent for a toleration and liberty of conscience to all his sub- jects, who should so employ it as not to give any disturbance to the civil government". A month later, from the little Dutch town of Breda, came the
response, attested to by the royal signature, "We declare that no man shall be disquieted or called in question for differences of opinion in matters of religion which do not disturb the peace of the kingdom". (Skin- ner's Life of Monk, p. 301, Echard's Hist. of England, ii, 897.) These signifi- cant words, which the King was scarcely ready to turn into deeds, were widely known to the English people at the time of their utterance. Clarke, eager to accept every opportunity to further his purpose, must have seized upon this clause and incorporated it, almost word for word, in the contemplated charter of his colony.
2Letter to Mason in Narr. Club. Publ. vi, 346.
105
FROM THE CHARTER OF 1663 TO KING PHILIP'S WAR.
meetings of the assembly, elect freemen, grant commissions, erect courts of judicature,1 prescribe town boundaries, impose fines and punishments, declare martial law against any who attempted to invade or annoy the colony, and make whatever laws seemed necessary for the welfare of the inhabitants. The chief officers of the colony were to be annually elected by the general body of freemen attending the May session of the general assembly. Finally all present and future inhabitants were to enjoy the liberties and immunities of free and natural subjects of the realm of England, together with right of appeal to English courts, and provided they conducted themselves peaceably, could pass through the other colonies, any law of the said colonies to the contrary notwithstanding.
So far as boundaries were concerned, Rhode Island reaped the fruitful harvest of John Clarke's able negotiation. Thoroughly con- versant with the numerous conflicting claims to the territory of his colony, he readily recognized that the clearest title lay in the fact that it was purchased from the Indians. This paramount right of the natives to their soil was set forth by him in his previous addresses to the King, and was safely embodied in the preamble to the charter. According to its specific terms, the grant was bounded on the south by the ocean as far west as the Pawcatuck River; on the west by the Pawcatuck River extending north as far as its head, and then by a straight line due north to the Massachusetts south line; on the north by the said south line; towards the east it extended three miles "to the east and northeast of the most eastern and northeastern parts of Narragansett Bay, as the said bay extendeth from the ocean on the south, unto the mouth of the river which runneth to the town of Provi- dence", thence up the Seekonk River as far as the Pawtucket Falls, and thence by a straight line due north to the Massachusetts south line. In particular, the grant included Misquamicuk (alias Pawca- tuck), the Island of Rhode Island, Block Island, and all the rest of the islands in Narragansett Bay and bordering on the coast (Fisher's Island alone excepted). One provision especially nullified any con- tradictory clause in the "late Connecticut grant", stating that the Pawcatuck River had been yielded by the agents of both colonies to be
1At the meeting of the Assembly in March, 1664, it was ordered that two General Courts of trials, presided over by either the governor, deputy-gover- nor, and at least six assistants, should be held in May and October at Newport. Courts for cases to the value of ten pounds were to be held at Providence and Warwick in September and March respectively, at which at least three assist- ants should preside. Special courts might also be called at Newport at any time if sufficient cause was shown.
106
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS.
the fixed bound between the colonies. Both agents had agreed, the charter goes on to state, that the Pawcatuek River should also be ealled the Narragansett River, and merely to prevent further disputes, should be so deemed in the Connecticut eharter. The detail of these bound- ary lines has been entered into somewhat minutely, sinee the phrase- ology of the instrument in this respect formed the basis of a great deal of Rhode Island's history for the next half-century. Suffiee it to say that had the eolonies with whom Rhode Island disputed held to the exact language of this instrument so carefully and skillfully worded by John Clarke, boundary controversies would not have played so im- portant a part as they did in the colony's history. No eharter ever granted, with regard to boundaries as well as to the liberties and immunities accorded to the grantees, has reflected more credit on its author.1
The elaborate reception of the charter reminds one of the triumphal return of Williams with the Patent of 1644. Thus reads the old record : "At a very great meeting and assembly of the freemen of the Colony of Providenee Plantations, at Newport, in Rhode Island, in New England, November the 24, 1663. The abovesaid assembly being legally ealled and orderly met for the solemn reception of his Majesty's gracious letters patent unto them sent, and having in order thereto chosen the President, Benedict Arnold, moderator of the assembly.
"It was ordered and voted, neme contra decente. 1. That Mr. John Clarke, the Colony agent's letter to the President, assistants and free- men of the Colony, be opened and read, which aeeordingly was done with delivery and attention. 2. That the box in which the King's gracious letters were enelosed be opened, and the letters with the broad seal thereto affixed, be taken forth and read by Captain George Baxter in the audience and view of all the people; which was aeeordingly done, and the said letters with his Majesty's royal stamp, and the broad seal, with mueh beeoming gravity held up on high, and pre- sented to the perfect view of the people, and then returned into the box and locked up by the Governor, in order to the safe keeping of it. 3. That the most humble thanks of this Colony unto our graeious sov- ereign Lord, King Charles the second, of England, for the high and inestimable, yea, incomparable grace and favor unto the eolony, in giving these his gracious letters patent unto us, thanks may be pre- sented and returned by the Governor and Deputy Governor, in the behalf of the whole Colony".
1The Charter itself is printed in R. I. C. R. ii, 3-21, and elsewhere.
107
FROM THE CHARTER OF 1663 TO KING PHILIP'S WAR.
Block Island, as has previously been noted, was joined to Rhode Island in the charter. After the murder of Captain Oldham in 1636, this island had been taken by Massachusetts "by right of conquest", and October 19, 1658, was granted to John Endicott, Richard Belling- ham, Daniel Denison and William Hawthorne as a recognition for their efficient services to their colony. But the territory was remote and not very desirable, and in 1660 was sold to a company of Massachusetts men. After considerable discussion as to ways and means, they de- cided to remove there, and by 1662 a settlement was begun. Such was the condition of affairs at the time of the granting of the Charter of 1663. The island, though settled by Massachusetts Puritans, natur- ally belonged to Rhode Island on account of its location. At any rate, the King saw fit to include it within Rhode Island territory, and as the settlers themselves never protested, no controversy as to former posses- sion arose.1
Soon after the arrival of the charter, at the March session of 1664, the General Assembly informed the inhabitants of Block Island that they were henceforth under Rhode Island jurisdiction. At the follow- ing session, it admitted several of the islanders as freemen, appointed selectmen with power to try causes not exceeding forty shillings, told them that "no person should be molested for any difference of opinion in matters of religion", and gave them liberty to send deputies to the General Assembly. After some slight embarrassment in becoming accustomed to their new government, they began to enter into colony life, accept the colony's assistance and pay colony taxes. In 1672, they were incorporated by the General Assembly as the Town of New Shoreham, the sixth town, in point of time, to be received into the colony. They received a charter empowering them to choose town officers, and henceforth, so far as their colony relations were con- cerned, lived the quiet and untroubled life that their remoteness made possible.
In the Narragansett country, the state of affairs was different. The controversy, apparently settled with unmistakable clearness by the Charter of 1663, was only just begun, and remained unsettled until over half a century had passed away. As soon as Connecticut had
1For the early history of Block Island, see the historical sketches by Liver- more, Sheffield, and Beckwith; also Mass. Col. Rec. iv, pt. 1, 356. Massachu- setts in March, 1664, included Block Island among those lands which were subject to controversy (Extracts from Mass. MSS. i, 237, in R. I. H. S. Lib'y), and John Alcock petitioned the Royal Commissioners in 1665 that, as Block Island had submitted to Rhode Island, he might not be dispossessed of his purchase (R. I. C. R. ii, 128). No attempt, however, seems to have been made by Massachusetts to question the King's dictum.
108
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS.
received her charter, the Federal Commissioners immediately wrote to Rhode Island, in September, 1662, that according to the King's pleas- urc, the lands at Pawcatuck and Narragansett now belonged to Con- necticut. Rhode Island replied that the charter in question had been procured "by a underhand dealing, and that the power that granted doth so resent it, being now fully informed of the sleights used by those that did purchase the same", and William Brenton wrote Connecticut, imploring that the differences should be "composed in peace and friend- ship".1 Nothing further seems to have been done until July, 1663, when the Atherton Company at Narragansett took decisive action by submitting themselves to Connecticut jurisdiction. Connecticut, in her letter of acceptance, appointed officers for "the plantation at Mr. Smith's trading-house", urged "that the said plantation be settled with such inhabitants as may promote those religious ends mentioned in our Charter", and ordered that the place should henceforth be called by the name of Wickford.2
As soon as Rhode Island received her charter making the Narra- gansett country a part of her soil, she immediately took action upon these questions of territorial jurisdiction. At the first general assem- bly held after its arrival, in March, 1664, she summoned the intruders at Narragansett to answer for their conduct at the next meeting of the Court, and also wrote a letter to Connecticut complaining of the moles- tation of Rhode Islanders at Westerly and giving notice of the inten- tion to run the western line. Connecticut, busy with the settlement of her own internal affairs, paid no attention to this letter, nor to subsequent complaints made by her subjects at Wickford, of Rhode Island aggressiveness. Again did Rhode Island write in July, 1664, requesting a reply to her former letter, and expressing surprise that Connecticut should exercise authority at Narragansett in view of the King's decision as to the bounds of that country. Again did those at Wickford complain, asserting "Our own inhabitants begin much to
1Plym. Rec. x, 288; R. I. C. R. i, 495; Extracts from Conn. MSS. relating to R. I. i, 5, in R. I. H. S. Library.
2Ext. Conn. MSS. i, 10, 12; Conn. Rec. i, 407. This submission was in accordance with the third provision of the Winthrop-Clarke agreement, although the Atherton partners in a later letter, stated that Connecticut was the "place we desired to be under before ever the charter was granted, as may be manifest by our desire to your Governor before his going to England". (Ext. Conn. MSS. i, 13.) Wickford received its name from Wickford, Essex Co., England, which was the early home of Elizabeth, the wife of Gov. John Winthrop, of Connecticut. (See Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc. xiii, 250; Potter's Early History of Narragansett, 1886 ed., p. 415.)
109
FROM THE CHARTER OF 1663 TO KING PHILIP'S WAR.
desert your interest the government of Rhode Island takes advantage, we conceive, by your silence and slowness to action".1
At last Connecticut realized that, if she wished to obtain the Narra- gansett country, she must take immediate action. In a letter to Rhode Island of July 20, she requested that that colony should refrain from exercising jurisdiction over the Atherton men, who had merely carried out one of the provisions agreed to by John Clarke. She further sug- gested that before the colony line was run, a meeting of arbiters should be held to consider their respective claims. To this Rhode Island agreed, and in October commissioners were appointed by both colonies to settle the boundary disputes, the Connecticut act of appointment providing that "the said Committee shall not give away any part of the bounds of our Charter". Before this joint commission, which on account of the Connecticut proviso could never have accomplished any- thing, could make arrangements for a meeting, the news arrived that the Royal Commission appointed by the King early in 1664, was about to visit Rhode Island, and all eyes were turned toward this event.
This Commission, consisting of Colonel Richard Nicolls, Sir Robert Carr, Colonel George Cartwright, and Mr. Samuel Maverick, were appointed to reduce the Dutch at New Amsterdam, to gain information about the general condition of the New England colonies, to settle all colonial disputes, and to define the boundary lines of the several char- tered jurisdictions, subject, however, to the approval of the King. Arriving at Boston in July, 1664, they soon sailed for New Amster- dam, where they settled several controversies in that vicinity, then returned east to visit Plymouth, and entered Rhode Island in March, 1665.2 Their arrival meant a great deal to the colony. The coinci- dence of Rhode Island views with the expressed wishes of the King's representatives, together with the gratitude felt for the granting of the colony charter, made the assurances of allegiance a pleasure rather than a duty. Those of the commissioners who had visited the colony on their way to New York had been entertained as well as possible, and were "pleased to accept that poor expressions of ours as season afford- ed"; while to Nicolls was written a letter, acknowledging the receipt of the King's behests, desiring a full and equal hearing concerning the Narragansett country, and professing devotion to the King and his representatives.
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.