Elucidations.
[Note 1, page 191.] Morton's settlement has become the subject of a literature of its own, and of some rather violent and amusing discussion even in our times. Morton's New English Canaan has been edited by Mr. C. F. Adams for the Prince Society. His defensive account of himself leaves the impression that the author was just the sort of clever and reckless rake who is most dangerous to settlements in contact with savages, and who might be expelled neck and heels from a frontier community holding no scruples of a Puritan sort. The Royal Proclamation in Rymer's Foedera, xvii, 416 (and Hazard's State Papers, i, 151), 1622, sets forth the evil of the sale of arms to the savages, but it was leveled at earlier offenders than Morton. Compare Sainsbury's Calendar, September 29 and November 24, 1630, pp. 120, 122. There are also references, more or less extended, to Morton in the Massachusetts Records, Winthrop's Journal, Bradford's Plimouth Plantation, Dudley's Letter to the Countess of Lincoln in Young's Chronicles of Massachusetts, and in other early accounts.
[Note 2, page 193.] Abbott's account of Laud's rise, Rushworth, i, 440, is traced with a bitter pen, no doubt, but the student Laud, as Abbott draws him, is so much like his later self that one can not but believe that the description of him picking quarrels with the public readers and carrying information against them to the bishop has a basis of fact.
[Note 3, page 199.] Rushworth, writing under the later date of 1637, says: "The severe Censures in Star Chamber, and the greatness of the Fines, and the rigorous Proceedings to impose Ceremonies, the suspending and silencing Multitudes of Ministers, for not reading in the Church the Book for Sports to be exercised on the Lord's day, caused many of the Nation, both Ministers and others, to sell their Estates, and to set Sail for New England (a late Plantation in America), where they hold a Plantation by Patent from the King." Part II, vol. i, p. 410.
[Note 4, page 204.] "We trust you will not be unmindful of the main end of our Plantation, by endeavouring to bring the Indians to a knowledge of the Gospel." Cradock's letter to Endecott, February 16, 1629, Young's Chronicle, 133; also the official letter, ibid., page 142, where the "propagation of the Gospel" among whites and Indians is the "aim." The Royal Charter itself declared that "to win and invite the natives of the country to the knowledge and obedience of the only true God and Saviour of mankind ... is the principal end of this Plantation." (A similar provision was inserted in the Connecticut Charter in 1662, in imitation of that of Massachusetts.) The common seal of the Massachusetts colony, sent over in 1629, bore an Indian with the inscription, "Come over and help us." Young's Chronicles of Massachusetts, 155, Instructions to Endecott. The paper of "Reasons," attributed to Winthrop, keeps the conversion of the Indians in view, but it is blended with that which was in his mind the main end, the founding of a Puritan church. The first paragraph reads, "It will be a service to the Church of great consequence to carry the Gospell into those parts of the world, to helpe on the comminge of the fullnesse of the Gentiles, & to raise a Bulworke against the kingdome of Ante-Christ which the Jesuites labour to reare up in those parts." Life and Letters of Winthrop, i, 309. The copy of this paper in Sir John Eliot's handwriting has a preamble written in a nervous style that may well be Eliot's own. This preamble goes back to the conversion of the Indians as a main purpose. The Antapologia of T. Edwards, 1644, declares that White of Dorchester and others had the conversion of the Indians in view in promoting emigration to New England. Edwards says, page 41, that the establishing of Congregational churches "was not in the thoughts of them that were the first movers in that or of the ministers that were sent over in the beginning." The statement is quite too strong, but the ecclesiastical purpose seems to have grown rapidly when the number of emigrants revealed the greatness of the opportunity.
[Note 5, page 204.] Cotton Mather says, Magnalia, Book II, chap. iv, 3, that Winthrop was made a justice at eighteen, but Mather's account of anything marvelous needs support. Winthrop held his first court at Groton Hall several months after he had attained his majority. Life and Letters, i, 62. Compare page 223 of the same volume.
[Note 6, page 205.] Of his election to the governorship he wrote to his wife, "The onely thinge that I have comforte of in it is, that heerby I have assurance that my charge is of the Lorde & that he hath called me to this worke." Life and Letters, i, 340.
[Note 7, page 208.] The government of the colony under Endecott was substantially that prescribed for "particular plantations" in the general order of the Virginia Company at the time the charter for the Pilgrim colony was granted, and like that which was formed at Plymouth under the Compact. The Massachusetts form may have been borrowed from Plymouth. This may be considered the primary form of colony government in the scheme of the Virginia Company. The plan antedates the formation of the Virginia Company by at least twenty years, for it was a form proposed by Ralegh when, in 1587, he organized his colony under the title: "The Governor and Assistants of the city of Ralegh in Virginia." The secondary form of government was that prescribed for Virginia in the charter of 1618, which added a lower house elective by the people. This fully developed government could come only when the population had become large enough to render a representative system possible.
[Note 8, page 210.] It has been maintained by several writers that the charter had been worded with a view to removal. See, for example, Palfrey's New England, i, 307. But a paper read before the Massachusetts Historical Society, and printed in the Proceedings for December, 1869, by the late Charles Deane, shows that such a presumption is groundless. In calling the subordinate government of Endecott "London's Plantation in Massachusetts Bay in New England," the company showed that it proposed to keep its headquarters in London. It is open to question, however, whether Deane does not go too far in denying that the charter gave authority for the transfer. In that technical age the letter of the instrument would probably be counted more conclusive than at present, and the evidence of the dockets would have less weight. The removal of the government was not one of the charges made in the quo warranto proceedings against the company. On the main question compare also the very significant treatment of the subject by Winthrop in his paper on Arbitrary Government, Life and Letters, ii, 443, where he expressly says that it was intended to have the chief government in England, "and with much difficulty we gott it abscinded." It is to be remembered that the exercise of governmental functions by a commercial corporation was not a novel spectacle in that age. In 1620 the English and Dutch East India Companies, after having been at war while the two nations were allies, concluded a treaty of peace. No doubt the exercise of such powers by trading companies had been made familiar by the mingling of the functions of government with those of commerce by the merchants of the Hanse cities. The East India and the Hudson Bay Companies continued to exercise territorial jurisdiction until a very recent period.
[Note 9, page 214.] This rebound from their previous attitude of compromise is well exemplified in the church covenant adopted at Dorchester, Mass., in 1636, under the lead of Richard Mather, which contains these words: "We do likewise promise by his Grace assisting us, to endeavour the establishing amongst ourselves all His Holy Ordinances which He hath appointed for His church here on Earth, ... opposing to the utmost of our power whatsoever is contrary thereto and bewailing from our Hearts our own neglect hereof in former times and our poluting ourselves therein with any Sinful Invention of men." Blake's Annals of Dorchester. Robinson of Leyden, in his Justification of Separation, 1610, declared that the Puritans would soon separate if they might have the magistrates' license; and Backus, who quotes the passage (i, pp. 2, 3), remarks on the confirmation which the history of Massachusetts gives to Robinson's theory of conformity.