New England takes part with Parliament.
In England, the contests between the King and Parliament, at length ripened into open war. The colonies of New England took an early and sincere part on the side of Parliament. Their interests were committed to such agents as might best conciliate the favour of the House of Commons, who, in return, manifested the impression received from them, and from the general conduct of their northern colonies, by passing a resolutions exempting from the payment of "duties or other customs," until the house should order otherwise, all merchandises exported to or from New England.[76] And, in 1644, the general court passed an ordinance declaring "that what person soever shall by word, writing, or action, endeavour to disturb our peace directly or indirectly by drawing a party under pretence that he is for the King of England, and such as join with him against the Parliament, shall be accounted as an offender of a high nature against this commonwealth, and to be proceeded with either capitally or otherwise, according to the quality and degree of his offence; provided always that this shall not be extended against any merchants, strangers and shipmen that come hither merely for trade or merchandise, albeit they should come from any of those parts that are in the hands of the King, and such as adhere to him against the Parliament; carrying themselves here quietly, and free from railing, or nourishing any faction, mutiny, or sedition among us as aforesaid."[77]
These manifestations of mutual kindness were not interrupted by an ordinance of Parliament, passed in 1643, appointing the earl of Warwick, governor in chief and lord high admiral of the colonies, with a council of five peers, and twelve commoners, to assist him; and empowering him, in conjunction with his associates, to examine the state of their affairs; to send for papers and persons; to remove governors and officers, appointing others in their places; and to assign over to them such part of the powers then granted as he should think proper. Jealous as were the people of New England of measures endangering their liberty, they do not appear to have been alarmed at this extraordinary exercise of power. So true is it that men close their eyes on encroachments committed by that party to which they are attached, in the delusive hope that power, in such hands, will always be wielded against their adversaries, never against themselves.
This prosperous state of things was still farther improved by a transaction which is the more worthy of notice as being an additional evidence of the extent to which the colonies of New England then exercised the powers of self-government. Treaty with Acadié.A treaty of peace and commerce was entered into between the governor of Massachusetts, styling himself governor of New England, and Monsieur D'Aulney, lieutenant general of the King of France in Acadié. This treaty was laid before the commissioners for the colonies and received their sanction.
1646
The rigid adherence of Massachusetts to the principle of withholding the privilege of a freeman from all who dissented from the majority in any religious opinion, could not fail to generate perpetual discontents. Petition of the non-conformists.A petition was presented to the general court, signed by several persons highly respectable for their situation and character, but, not being church members, excluded from the common rights of society, complaining that the fundamental laws of England were not acknowledged by the colony; and that they were denied those civil and religious privileges to which they were entitled, as freeborn Englishmen, of good moral conduct. Their prayer to be admitted to the rights, or to be relieved from the burdens, of society, was accompanied with observations conveying a very intelligible censure on the proceedings of the colony, and a threat of applying to Parliament, should the prayer of their petition be rejected.
The most popular governments not being always the most inclined to tolerate opinions differing from those of the majority, this petition gave great offence, and its signers were required to attend the court. Their plea, that the right to petition government was sacred, was answered by saying that they were not accused for petitioning, but for using contemptuous and seditious expressions. They were required to find sureties for their good behaviour; and, on refusing to acknowledge their offence, were fined at the discretion of the court. An appeal from this decision having been refused, they sent deputies to lay their case before Parliament; but the clergy exerted themselves on the occasion; and the celebrated Cotton, in one of his sermons, asserted "that if any should carry writings or complaints against the people of God in that country to England, it would be as Jonas in the ship." A storm having risen during the passage, the mariners, impressed with the prophecy of Cotton, insisted that the obnoxious papers should be thrown overboard; and the deputies were constrained to consign their credentials to the waves. On their arrival in England, they found Parliament but little disposed to listen to their complaints. The agents of Massachusetts had received instructions to counteract their efforts; and the governments of New England were too high in favour, to admit of a rigid scrutiny into their conduct.[78]
In some of the internal dissensions which agitated Massachusetts, Winthrop, a man of great influence, always among their first magistrates, and often their governor, was charged while deputy governor with some arbitrary conduct. He defended himself at the bar, in the presence of a vast concourse of people; and, having been honourably acquitted, addressed them from the bench, in a speech which was highly approved.
As this speech tends to illustrate the political opinions of the day, an extract from it may not be unworthy of regard. "The questions," he said, "which have troubled the country of late, and from which these disturbances in the state have arisen, have been about the authority of the magistrate and the liberty of the people. Magistracy is certainly an appointment from God. We take an oath to govern you according to God's law, and our own; and if we commit errors, not willingly, but for want of skill, you ought to bear with us, because, being chosen from among yourselves, we are but men, and subject to the like passions as yourselves. Nor would I have you mistake your own liberty. There is a freedom of doing what we list, without regard to law or justice; this liberty is indeed inconsistent with authority; but civil, moral, and federal liberty, consists in every man's enjoying his property, and having the benefit of the laws of his country; which is very consistent with a due subjection to the civil magistrate. And for this you ought to contend, with the hazard of your lives."[79]
During the remnant of his life, he was annually chosen governor.