Massachusetts was ever in an attitude of jealousy towards even a suspicion of interference from England. In 1644 the General Court voted that any one attempting to raise soldiers for the king should be "accounted as an offender of an high nature against this commonwealth, and to be proceeded with, either capitally or otherwise, according to the quality and degree of his offence." The colony was, however, no more for the Commons than for the king. When, in 1651, Parliament desired that Massachusetts surrender her charter granted by King Charles and receive a new one at its hands, for a year no notice was taken of the command; when at last England had a war with Holland on her hands, the Massachusetts men evasively replied that they were quite satisfied "to live under the government of a governor and magistrates of their own choosing and under laws of their own making." The General Court was also bold enough to establish a colonial mint (1652), and for thirty years coined "pine-tree shillings," in the face of all objections. In 1653 Cromwell, always a firm friend to New England, was declared Lord Protector; yet Massachusetts did not allow the event to be proclaimed within her borders, and when he wished Massachusetts to help him in his war against the Dutch by capturing New Amsterdam, the colonial court somewhat haughtily "gave liberty to his Highness's commissioners" to raise volunteers in her territory. At the Restoration it was not until warning came from friends in England, that Charles II. was proclaimed in New England.

66. Disturbances in Rhode Island (1641-1647).

The sectaries on Narragansett Bay.

Over on Narragansett Bay the public peace continued to be disturbed by factious disputations. Because of the freedom there generously offered to all men, the settlements of Rhode Island and Providence were the harboring-place for dissenters of every class, who for the most part had been ordered to leave the other colonies. Many of these persons were of the Baptist faith, or held other theological views which would be considered sober enough in our day; but among them were numerous rank fanatics, whom no well-ordered society was calculated to please.

The case of Gorton.

Some of Roger Williams's adherents had built Pawtuxet. To them came a band of fanatics, headed by Samuel Gorton, described by his orthodox neighbors as "a proud and pestilent seducer," of "insolent and riotous carriage," but who was by no means so black as they painted him. The Pawtuxet settlers asked Massachusetts (1641) "of gentle courtesy and for the preservation of humanity and mankind," to "lend a neighbor-like helping hand" and relieve them of the disturber. At the same time they secured the annexation of their town to Massachusetts, so that it might be within the jurisdiction of the latter. Gorton and nine of his followers were taken as prisoners to Boston (1643), where they were convicted of blasphemy, and after four or five months at hard labor were released, with threats of death if they did not at once depart from Massachusetts soil.

Gorton went to England (1646) and appealed to the parliamentary commissioners, who declared that he might "freely and quietly live and plant" upon his land which he had purchased from the Indians at Shawomet (Warwick), on the western shore of Narragansett Bay. Edward Winslow of Plymouth was now sent over (1647) to represent Massachusetts in the Gorton case; and through him the plea was entered that the commissioners, being far distant from America, should not undertake the decision of appeals from the colonies; and moreover, that the Massachusetts charter was an "absolute power of government." The commissioners, in return, protested that they "intended not to encourage any appeals from your justice;" nevertheless, they "commanded" the General Court to allow Gorton and his followers to dwell in peace; but "if they shall be faulty, we leave them to be proceeded with according to justice." The offender was allowed to return, but his presence was haughtily ignored; and when his settlement was threatened by Indians, he cited in vain the parliamentary order as a warrant for assistance.

67. Policy of the Confederation (1646-1660).

Expressions of independence.

The sturdy and independent spirit of the colonists was expressed in words as well as in deeds. While Winslow was thus representing the colonists in England he made his famous reply to those who were disposed to criticise the formation of the New England confederacy as a presumptuous assertion of independence: "If we in America should forbear to unite for offence and defence against a common enemy till we have leave from England, our throats might be all cut before the messenger would be half seas through." A similar impatience of authority from England was expressed by Governor John Winthrop. An opinion which he delivered about this time betokened the proud and independent attitude of Massachusetts, and was prophetic of the spirit of the Revolution. By a legal fiction, when the king granted land in America it was held as being in the manor of East Greenwich. It was said that the American colonists were represented in that body by the member returned from the borough containing this manor, and were therefore subject to Parliament. Winthrop held, however, that the supreme law in the colonies was the common weal, and should parliamentary authority endanger the welfare of the colonists, then they would be justified in ignoring that authority.