A Source Book in American History to 1787

by Unknown

And that the Governor or Deputie Governor ... or either of them, and any two or more of such of the saide Assistants as may be there unto appointed ... shall and maie at all Tymes, and from Tyme to Tyme hereafter, have full Power and Authority to minister and give the Oathe and Oathes of Supremacie and Allegiance, or either of them, to all and everie Person and Persons which shall at any Tyme ... pass to the Landes ... hereby mencioned....

And wee doe ... graunt ..., That it shall ... be lawfull to and for the Governor or Deputie Governor and such of the Assistants and Freemen of the said Company ... as shalbe assembled in any of their Generall Courts aforesaide, or in any other Courtes to be specially summoned and assembled for that purpose, or the greater parte of them, (whereof the Governor or Deputie Governor and six of the Assistants, to be alwaies seaven,) from tyme to tyme to make, ordeine, and establishe all manner of wholesome and reasonable orders, lawes, statutes, and ordinances, directions, and instructions not contrarie to the lawes of this our realme of England, aswell for setling of the formes and ceremonies of government and magistracy fitt and necessary for the said plantation and the inhabitants there, and for nameing and stiling of all sortes of officers, both superior and inferior, which they shall finde needefull for that governement and plantation, and the distinguishing and setting forth of the severall duties, powers, and lymytts of every such office and place, and the formes of such oathes warrantable by the lawes and statutes of this our realme of England as shalbe respectivelie ministred unto them, for the execution of the said severall offices and places, as also for the disposing and ordering of the elections of such of the said officers as shalbe annuall, and of such others as shalbe to suceede in case of death or removeall, and ministring the said oathes to the newe elected officers, and for impositions of lawfull fynes, mulcts, imprisonment, or other lawfull correction, according to the course of other corporations in this our realme of England, and for the directing, ruling, and disposeing of all other matters and things whereby our said people, inhabitants there, maie be soe religiously, peaceablie, and civilly governed, as their good life and orderlie conversation maie wynn and incite the natives of [that] country to the knowledg and obedience of the onlie true God and Savior of mankinde, and the Christian fayth, which, in our royall intention and the adventurers free profession, is the principall ende of this plantation.

And Wee Doe, further ... graunte to the saide ... Company ... that it may be lawful [for the Company and its officers] from Tyme to Tyme, and at all Tymes hereafter, for their speciall Defence and Safety, to incounter, expulse, repell, and resist by Force of Armes, as well by Sea as by Lande, and by all fitting Waies and Meanes whatsoever, all such Persons as shall at any Tyme hereafter attempt or enterprise the Destruction, Invasion, Detriment, or Annoyance to the saide Plantation ... [with the usual clause reserving to the English King the privilege of disavowing wrongful acts by the colony if he prefer to put it out of his allegiance, and without the usual half of the "expulse" clause relating to settlers who "may attempt to inhabit" in the colony without the permission of the Company; provided further that other Englishmen may fish on the coasts of the colony; and with the usual clause promising the Company the most favorable construction of any disputed clause.]

[Hints for Study.—1.—Early New England historians assumed that this charter gave unusual powers. A comparison with the Virginia Company charters of 1609 and 1612, or with the New England Council charter of 1620, shows this assumption wholly false. Students may be asked to find four important powers given to those earlier corporations and not contained in this grant (noting the limited authority here in the inflictions of punishment, and the omission of the power to regulate settlement in connection with the usual "expulse, repel, etc." clause). The charter is not "very liberal," but very limited. This is more apparent when we notice that all these powers missing in this charter (or vaguely phrased here) reappear in the usual explicit form in the charter granted a few months later to the company for planting Providence Isle (No. 55, below).

2.—American historians (e.g. John Fiske, in Beginnings of New England) have often assumed that this charter used loose language as to the oath of supremacy in order that the Puritans might set up their own form of worship. The wording, however, is practically identical with that of the Virginia Company charter of 1612—from which unquestionably it was copied, with only the necessary changes of names. (Let students verify this statement.)

3.—With the overthrow of these false assumptions goes another (in great measure) founded upon them,—i.e. that the Puritans intended, when they were securing this charter, to bring it to America and use it as a constitution for a free state. This assumption, however, is worth further investigation by the student, because it offers so admirable a lesson in historical criticism.

A single sentence of Governor John Winthrop's has been taken often as sufficient proof that the grantees so intended. Indeed (except for the groundless assumptions of 1 and 2 above, and for the equally worthless consideration discussed in 4 below) there is no other evidence.[34] Winthrop states that, in drawing up the charter, there was at first a clause which would have fixed the Company in England, "and, with much difficulty, we got it abscinded." Winthrop is high authority. But this sentence was written fifteen years after the event, and it is interjected hastily, as a parenthesis, in a bitter controversy (Life and Letters, II, p. 443). It could have been only "hearsay" at the best; since Winthrop did not belong to the Company until some months after the charter was secured (though he seems to have forgotten that for the moment when he says "we"). Such evidence would prove little in a law court, even if there were no evidence on the other side.

But there is evidence on the other side,—abundant, conclusive, unimpeachable.

(1) The abstract of the charter (docket) presented to the king by his legal advisors shows with absolute certainty that they and the grantor expected the charter powers to be exercised "here in England" (No. 54 below).

(2) The official records of the Company, made at the time, declare explicitly that Governor Cradock's proposal to transfer the charter to America (five months after it was granted) was "conceived by himself." Further, the general tenor of those records for those five intervening months agree wholly with the idea that the Company then had no thought of leaving England (see some extracts, No. 57 below), and they contain, in their fifty odd pages, no single suggestion of the other sort. Most conclusive of all, the Records show that even after the surprised Company had come to look with approval upon Cradock's proposal, they could not easily adjust their plans and financial interests to the new movement. (Advanced students will find the proof in the Records. It is impossible to represent them here in the necessary complete detail to show this. It may be added, however, that Cradock's proposal of July 28 was first debated, then deferred a month for secret consideration; then debated, in two meetings, by assigned sets of debaters for the two sides of the argument; then legal advice was sought, with what result, we don't know; and afterwards many plans were discussed as to how the transfer could be made without "prejudicing" the interests of the majority of the Company[35]. See Nos. 57, 58, for some of the evidence.)