USA > Rhode Island > Kent County > Warwick > The history of Warwick, Rhode Island, from its settlement in 1642 to the present time; including accounts of the early settlement and development of its several villages; sketches of the origin and progress of the different churches of the town, &c., &c > Part 2
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
DEED OF SHAWOMET.
The following is a copy of the deed given by Miantonomi to the Warwick settlers :-
Know all men that I, Myantinomy Cheefe Sachem of the Nanheygansett, have sould unto the persons here named, one
11
DEED OF SHAWOMET.
1642-48.]
parsell of lands with all the rights and privileges thereoff what- soever lyinge uppon the west syde of that part of the sea called Sowhomes Bay from Copassenetuxett over against a little Iland in the sayd Bay, being the north bounds and the outermost point of that neck of land called Shawhomett; being the south bound ffrom the sea shoare of each boundary uppon a straight lyne westword twentie miles. I say I have truly sould the parsell of lands above sayde the proportion whereof is according to the mapp underwritten or drawne, being the form of it, unto Randall Houlden, John Greene, John Wickes, ffrancis Weston, Samuel Gorton, Richard Waterman, John Warner, Richard Carder, Sampson Shotten, William Wuddall ffor one hundred and forty foure ffathoms of wampumpeage. I say I have sould it, and possession of it given unto the men above sayd with the ffree and joint consent of the present inhabitants, being natives, as it appears by their hands here- unto annexed.
Dated ye twelfth of January, 1642. Being enacted uppon the above sayd parsell of lande.
In the presence off
Totanomans
His + marke
MYANTONOMY
PUMHAM Sachem of Shawomet
His
marke
JANO
His
marke
John Greene
The original deed of the above mentioned tract of land is now in possession of Hon. George A. Brayton, the late chief justice of Rhode Island, a native and late resident of this town. It embraced all the territory at present included in the present town of Warwick and Coventry, with the exception of the Potowomut purchase made subse- quently, and the northeast corner of Warwick, included north of a straight line running from Copasnetuxet cove to the Pawtuxet river. The tract embraced about ninety square miles of territory, or about 60,000 acres .*
* This is only a rough estimate. The present towns of Warwick and Coventry contain 103.7 square miles. Coventry was subsequently set off from Warwick.
12
HISTORY OF WARWICK.
[1642-48.
The price paid was equivalent to £36. Backus says the value was computed at £40, 16s. Peage seems to have been the general term for money, and wampum, which signifies white, and sackauhock (sacki: black), distinguished the two kinds, the former made from the metauhock or periwinkle and the black from the poqua -. hock, or quahaug.
The deed of John Greene from Miantonomi and Sac- ononoco of Occupasnetuxet, including the farm now in possession of the heirs of the late Governor John Brown Francis, is dated October 1st, 1642, and confirmed by Surquans, alias Moosup, to Major, or Deputy Governor John Greene, June 15, 1662.
Richard Waterman, though one of the original purchasers, does not appear to have resided long in this town We find him a resident of Salem, in 1636, and subsequently of Provi- dence. He afterwards removed to this town, and was present when the Massachusetts soldiers came and arrested the settlers. It is not quite clear that he was arrested with the others. but he received about the same time the compliments of the General Court of Massachusetts held on the 29th of the 3d month, 1644, in the following order :-
" Richard Waterman being found erroneous, heretical and obstinate, it was agreed that he should be detained prisoner till the Quarter Court in the 7th month, (September,) unless five of the magistrates do find cause to send him away, which if they do, it is ordered, he shall not return within this jurisdiction upon pain of death."
He lived chiefly in Providence and Newport, dying in the latter place, October 27, 1673. He was buried in Providence, corner of Waterman and Benefit streets. He left four children; viz : Nathaniel. Resolved, Mehitable and Waiting; Mehitable married a Fenner, the ancestor of Governor Fenner; Resolved married Mercy, daughter of Roger Williams; he had five chil- dren: Richard, John, Resolved, Mary and Waite. John, the second son of Resolved, married Anne Olney, daughter of Thomas Olney; this John was the first of the name who made Warwick a place of permanent residence. A sketch of the house built by John Waterman " was made by Mary A. Greene, as described by her grandmother Welthian Waterman, in 1842, in the original room built by John." This John died August 26, 1728. aged 63. leaving eight children: Elizabeth, Mary, Ann, John, Benoni, Resolved, Patience, Phebe.
Richard Carder was admitted a freeman in Massachusetts,
13
PECULIAR FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
1642-48.]
May 25, 1636; he afterwards settled on Rhode Island, where, being disfranchised, a fate not uncommon in those times, he united his fortunes with the original purchasers of this town.
During the Indian war, the inhabitants left their town, and took up their abode at Newport, where Carder died before the war closed. His son John married Mary, daughter of Randall Holden. His descendants are now found in various parts of the town.
The little colony did not presume to exercise any of the powers of a legal government until 1647, when the four towns-Providence, Portsmouth, Newport and Warwick, were duly organized, under a charter, obtained from the English Parliament, March 14, 1644. The settlers con- sidered themselves subjects of the English government, and until they received authority from it, continued to dwell together as a voluntary association, making from time to time such rules and regulations as seemed both conducive to their interests and compatible with their ideas of such an association. They had denied the au- thority of the self constituted governments of the other towns, and now acted in accordance with these principles. Some of the acts, however agreed upon during this time, closely border upon the authority they denied to the other towns, and how they would have determined cases of resistance to their rules and regulations it is difficult to say. It does not appear from any records remaining that they ever experienced any serious difficulty in this respect, however, during the five years in which they con- tinued in this condition. Within this period, and proba- bly soon after they received the deed of the lands, (the date. is not given) we find upon the records in the clerk's office the following regulations, which are entitled :
TOWN ORDERS.
" The purchasers of the plantation doe order and conclude ffirst:
"That wee keepe the disposall of the lands in our own name.
"That none shall enjoy anny land in the Neck called Mishao- met but by grant of ye owners and purchasers.
" That every aker of medow shall have its proportion of up- land as the Neck may afford.
2
14
HISTORY OF WARWICK.
[1642-48.
" That we lay our hiewaies into the Neck in the most conve- nient places as we think fiting.
" That no man shall either directly or indirectly take in anny cattell to common, but only milch cattell and laboring cattell.
" That whomsoever is granted a lott, if hee doe not fence it and build a dwelling house upon it, in 6 months, or in forward- ness thereto, for ye neglect his lot is to return to ye Towne, to dispose of.
" That for the towne proper to all the inhabitants, is to bee from ye ffrout fence of the Neck into the countrie four miles. and that no part of this common shall [be] appropriated to anny but by the maior part of all ye inhabitants; and that every inhabitant is to have six akers to his house lott, for which hee is to pay to ye Treasurer 12s. and this four miles common is an- nexed to every man's lot."
Several other "orders" follow; one in regard to the manner in which a person could be received into the company is specified : he was to be "propounded" and afterwards voted in "by papers or beans" and pay the sum of ten pounds sterling. The fourteenth order pro- vided that "no man in the towne is to sell strong lickers or sack to the Indians, for to drink in their houses, and if it bee proved, hee that so breaks this order shall pay to the treaserie five shillings for each offence." Subse- quently (1648), after the organization of the government under the charter, this last order was strengthened by the addition of wine to the prohibited "lickers," with an increased fine of twenty shillings for its violation. This was the beginning of the prohibitory liquor legislation in this town, but by no means its ending.
The trials to which the hardy pioneers were about to be subjected, and to which we now turn our attention, is pro- bably without a parallel in the history of any of the New England settlements. They had nearly all of them at different times been inhabitants of the Massachusetts, or the Plymouth colony, and had either been formally ban- ished by the authorities, for their peculiar religious, or pol- itical views, or found it necessary for their comfort to seek a home elsewhere. It does not appear that any were charged with immoral conduct. Gorton was regarded as an ecclesiastical Ishmaelite, and not without some rea son. His associates were men of independent views, who
15
CLAIMS OF MASSACHUSETTS.
1642-48.]-
preferred a dwelling in the wilderness with savages, to a home among the civilized without liberty of conscience. This liberty had been denied them in Massachusetts, and to a less extent, perhaps at Aquidneck and Provi- dence. In those days it was a favorite pastime for the Massachusetts magistrates and divines to engage in theo- logical controversy, and for a man to differ in the slight- est degree from their standard of orthodoxy, was to sub- ject himself to untold hardships, among the least of which, was that of banishment from the state. Their re- membrance of the trouble which the Rhode Island colo- nists had already occasioned them, with other reasons that will appear in the course of these pages, led to the disturbances that were about to follow.
Massachusetts had assumed authority at Pawtuxet at the suggestion of some of the people there, and on May 10th, 1643,* appointed a committee to treat with Sacon- onoco and Pomham, Sachems of Pawtuxet and Shawo- met, in regard to the submission of themselves and their lands to the jurisdiction of Massachusetts. Those sachems appear to have been previously influenced by the dwellers at Pawtuxet, and so far became disaffected toward the new settlers that they were induced to make submission, and even denied having assented to the sale of Shawo- met. This extraordinary act was a sufficient pretext for Massachusetts to claim jurisdiction over the settlement of Warwick, which she accordingly did. Matters now were becoming decidedly "mixed." Gorton and his com- panions, who supposed they were out of the jurisdiction even of Providence and Aquidneck, and where no claim of either civilized or Indian parties would interfere with them, unless the mother country across the sea should be that party, suddenly found themselves and their lands claimed by Massachusetts, from which colony some of them had been banished at the peril of their lives.
Some of the reasons that led to this state of things may here be mentioned. Massachusetts had long desired
* Mass Col. Rec., ii, 35.
16
HISTORY OF WARWICK.
[1642-48.
possession of the waters of Narragansett Bay for obvious reasons. William, and afterwards his son, Benedict Arnold, had possession of lands whose titles depended upon the right of Sacononoco to convey them, or in other words depended upon the establishment of the indepen- dence of this sachem. The settlers of Warwick had bought their lands of Miantonomi, "chiefe sachem" of the Narragansetts, whose right to sell them seems un- doubted. Pomham had assented to the sale and affixed his "mark" to the deed as a witness. His subsequent treatment as an independent sachem by the Massachu- setts committee, rather than as a tributary or subordinate one, may have flattered his vanity and induced him to take the position he now assumed. But with these must be mentioned another reason which cannot be overlooked, which was the envy and opposition felt by both the Massachusetts government and the dwellers at Pawtuxet, on account of the peculiar religious views of the Gor- tonists and the trouble they had formerly given them.
William Arnold was born in England, in 1589. In 1635 we find him in Plymouth colony. He afterwards went to Provi- dence with Roger Williams, where his name appears in Wil- liams' first deed. He had four children: Benedict, Thomas, Stephen, and a daughter who married Zachary Rhodes. Bene- dict was born in England, December 21, 1615. He married Damaris, daughter of Stukely Westcott, by whom he had the following children: Godsgift, Josias. Benedict, Freelove, Oliver, Caleb, Damaris, and Priscilla. Benedict, son of William, re- moved to Newport, in 1653. He was president of Aquidneck from 1657 to 1660, and governor under the royal charter several years. He died in June, 1678. His house in Newport stood near the spot now occupied by the Union Bank. Stephen, son of Wil- liam, lived and died in Pawtuxet. Thomas settled in Smith- field. Their descendants are among the most numerous in the town. An enthusiastic genealogist of the family traces it back in a connected line for twenty-five generations.
Robert Coles, one of the "received " purchasers of Warwick, purchased the tract of land from Williams, in the vicinity of Pawtuxet, which the latter bought of Miantonomi. In 1632 he was one of the committee to advise with the Governor and as- sistants of Massachusetts about the raising of public stock. He resided at that time in Roxbury. The following year we find him settled at Ipswich. He was one of the first settlers of
17
FURTHER COMPLICATIONS.
16 42-48.]
Providence, and his name appears in the first deed of Roger Williams to his fellow-settlers. In 1640 he was one of three persons who were appointed by the colony to report a form of government, which was adopted, and which remained in force until the arrival of the first charter. He subsequently removed to Warwick. A deed to his widow, Mary Coles, dated Novem- ber, 1655, made by John Coles, indicates that he died previous to that date. He had at least three children, one son, John, and two daughters, who married Richard and Henry Townsend, the latter living at the time of Coles' death at Oyster Bay, Long Island.
In Septemter, 1643,* Massachusetts sent a letter to the purchasers of Shawomet containing the complaints and submission of the sachems, and requesting them to ap. pear at once before the court there, where the plaintiffs were then present. They returned a verbal reply by the messenger, refusing to appear, denying their jurisdiction, and declaring that they were subject only to the Crown of England, from which they expected "in due season to receive direction for their well-ordering in all civil re- spects." A few days after they sent a lengthy letter, whichis a marvel of curiousness, dated, " From our Neck, Curo, Sept. 15, 1643," and signed by Randall Holden, but which bears unmistakable evidence of having been written by Gorton. It is directed "To the great, honored and Idol General, now set up in the Massachusetts, whose pretended equity in the distribution of justice un- to the souls and bodies of men, is nothing else but a mere device of man, according to the ancient custom and sleights of Satan, transforming himself into an angel of light, to subject and make slaves of that species or kind that God hath honored with his own image." The letter, with a postscript of more than two printed pages long, may be found in Vol. 2, R. I. Historical Collections. The letter could have produced no other effect upon the Massachusetts government than to exasperate it, and ac- cordingly a few days after that it dispatched another let- ter saying, that commissioners, attended with an armed guard would soon be sent to obtain satisfaction. The fol-
* Arnold's Hist. of R. I., i, 178. 2*
18
HISTORY OF WARWICK.
[1642-48.
lowing week three commissioners, with forty soldiers, started for Warwick. They were met on their way by a messenger, who bore another letter from the "owners and inhabitants of Warwick," warning them upon their peril not to invade their town. A reply was returned that the commissioners wished to speak with them and show them their misdeeds, and lead them to repent, fail- ing in which they should "look upon them as men pre- pared for slaughter," and they should act accordingly .*
This announcement spread, of course consternation, throughout the little settlement. They neither liked the idea of being "slaughtered" or of submitting to the arrogant claims of their enemies. Their foes were near at hand and confident in their strength. The women and children were hastily sent away, "some to the woods and others in boats to gain the neighboring plantations," while the men fortified a house and awaited their assail- ants. Before making an assault a conference was held between the opposing parties, in which four Providence men participated, who had accompanied the troops to see if they could render assistance in settling the difficul- ty. [Simp. Defence, 108.] The commissioners stated the charges against the settlers, viz., that they had wronged some of the subjects of Massachusetts, and held blasphemous errors. That unless they repented of these things they must be carried to Boston for trial, or be slain where they were. This they declined to do, but proposed an appeal to England, which in turn being re- fused, they suggested that the dispute be referred to arbitration. This occasioned a truce, and a messenger was sent to Massachusetts to learn the views of the rulers. The four Providence men sent a letter to Governor Winthrop in the interests of peace. The reply that was returned was unfavorable. They said "it was neither seasonable or reasonable, neither safe or honorable for us to accept such a proposition." They gave several rea- sons, one of which was that the little company "were no
* Arnold, I, 100.
19
THE SETTLERS UNDER ARREST.
1642-48.]
State, but a few fugitives living without law or govern- ment, and so not honorable for us to join with them in such a course." Also that "their blasphemous and revil- ing writings, etc., were not matters fit to be compounded by arbitrament, but to be purged away only by re- pentance and public satisfaction, or else by public pun- ishment." The commissioners were directed to proceed at once.
All hope of effecting a settlement was now at an end, and the little party prepared to defend itself against four times its number. The little war commenced. The small company of eleven men, one of them not bearing arms, hung out the English flag in acknowledgment of their allegiance to England, from their extemporized fort, which was "riddled by the shot of their assailants." The siege lasted several days, and during the time an at- tempt was made to burn the building, which failed. The besieged fired no shot during the whole time, and it does not appear that any one was killed on either side. Seeing there was no hope for them against such numbers, they finally agreed upon articles of surrender by which they were to go with their assailants "as freemen and neighbors" to Boston. They went, however, as prison- ers, and on their arrival at Boston were committed to jail to await their trial. Their captors also took with them "eighty head of cattle besides swine and goates, which they divided among themselves." * Thus, before two years had elapsed, the purchasers of Warwick, with the exception of Sampson Shotten, who had died, found them- selves in a Boston prison and their families dispersed, they knew not where.
On the Sabbath following their reception in Boston, the prisoners were required to attend church, to listen, as they supposed, to a sermon from Mr. Cotton for their special edification. They declined to attend unless they could be permitted to speak after the sermon if they
* The first cattle, a bull and three heifers, were brought to Plymouth in March, 1624, by Edward Winslow. Prince's Annals, p. 225.
20
HISTORY OF WARWICK.
[1642-48
should desire. This liberty was promised them, for what reason it is difficult to determine, unless it was to increase the amount of evidence against them and give the people an opportunity to witness their behavior, as the magistrates would not have hesitated to compel their attendance. The minister "preached at them about Demetrius and the shrines of Ephesus, after which Gor- ton, leave being granted, replied, somewhat varying the application of the text, to the great scandal of his hearers."
On the Tuesday following, "Oct. 17, 1643, the pris- oners were brought before the court on the charge of heresy and sedition, as follows : " Upon much examina- tion and serious consideration of your writings, with your answers about them, wee do charge you to bee a blasphemous enemy of the true religion of our Lord Jesus Christ and His Holy ordinances, and also of all civil authority among the people of God, and particularly in this jurisdiction."
In " Simplicitie's. Defence," Gorton mentions the fol- lowing questions which the magistrates proposed to him, and required his answer " speedily upon life or death," in writing :
"1. Whether the Fathers, who died before Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, were justified and saved only by the blood which he shed and the death which he suffered after his in car- nation.
2 Whether the only price of our redemption were not the death of Christ upon the cross, with the rest of his sufferings and obedience in the time of his life here, after he was born of the Virgin Mary.
3. Who is that God whom he thinks we serve?
4. What he means when he saith . We worship the star of our god Remphan, Chion, Moloch.'"
Gorton was fully self-possessed, and gave his answers in a lengthy and mystical communication, which must have required the combined sagacity of his judges to comprehend. Indeed, at this age, the whole trial, in-
* This was the charge against Gorton; those against the others were essentially the same.
214
IN PRISON.
1642-18.]
cluding the course of the judges, their questions, the answers returned and the sentences pronounced, is a curious commentary upon the spirit of that age. The court was divided. All but three of the magistrates condemned Gorton to death, but a majority of the depu- ties refused to sanction the sentence. Finally, he and six others were sentenced to be confined in irons during the pleasure of the court, and should they break jail, or preach their heresies, or speak against the church or State, on conviction, they should die. They were sepa- rated and sent in chains to different towns near by- Gorton to Charlestown, Weston to Dorchester, Holden to Salem, Potter to Rowley, Wicks to Ipswich, Carder to Roxbury, and Warner remained in Boston. Waddell was allowed to remain at large at Watertown ; Water- man was fined and released, after giving bonds to appear at the next court, but was afterwards arrested and im- prisoned. Power was dismissed with an admonition, and Greene had managed to escape during the siege. *
But little is known of Nicholas Power. His name does not occur among the early lists of inhabitants. When the rest of the settlers were sentenced by the Massachusetts court, he " was dismissed with an admonition." He died in Providence, August 25, 1657, leaving a widow Jane, a son Nicholas, and a daughter Hope. The son married Rebecca, daughter of Zach- ary Rhodes. Ten years after his death, the Town Council of Providence made a will for him (he dying intestate), in order, as they say, " that we may prevent differences before they be- gin." The tradition is that Nicholas, Jr., was killed in the In- dian war in 1675-6.
Francis Weston was admitted a freeman in Massachusetts in November, 1633. He was one of the deputies from Salem to the General Court in 1634. He died previous to June 4, 1645, of consumption contracted " through cold and hardships " at this time.
William Waddel was a resident in Boston in 1637, when he was disarmed, with fifty-seven others, among whom was Rich- ard Carder. His name does not occur in the records subse- quently.
They were confined during the whole winter and until the following March, when by an act of the Gene-
* For Gov, Winthrop's account of the trial, see Sav. Winthrop, Vol. II, p. 142.
HISTORY OF WARWICK.
[1642-48.
ral Court they were set at liberty and banished out of the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, and from the Rhode Island Plantations. Fourteen days were given them to remove, and if found after that time within the specified limits they were to suffer death. They were subse- quently ordered to leave Boston in two hours. They started at once for their deserted homes at Shawomet, staying there, however, but one night, and then went to the island of Aquidneck, probably in search of their families. Not feeling certain whether their own lands in Warwick were included within the prescribed limits, they wrote to Gov. Winthrop, and were informed that they were, and they were ordered to leave them at once on peril of their lives. They were kindly received at Aquidneck, and resided there till after the charter to the colony was received in 1644, when it appears they returned and resumed their residence at Shawomet. The full account of the arrest and trial may be found in Arnold's History of Rhode Island. Gorton's own ac- count of the matter is given in his " Simplicitie's De- fence," the manuscript of which, owned by John Holden, Esq., of Old Warwick, is at present in the archives of the R. I. Historical Society.
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.