The Bay colony : a civil, religious and social history of the Massachusetts colony and its settlements from the landing at Cape Ann in 1624 to the death of Governor Winthrop in 1649

Introduction

rHE early history of Massachusetts is a subject of intense interest to its people, and to the many scattered throughout the United States who are of Massachusetts lineage.

The causes which led to its settlement ; the character of the men who laid the foundation stones ; the governments they instituted ; the provisions they made for religious worship and for the education of the people cannot be too often adverted to or studied.

As there are many facts of this period which have not been fully developed, and as writers upon it have differed in some important particulars, it has seemed to me that a history of the period, prepared from the records and other accepted authorities, would be of value. I have, accordingly, written this work with special reference to the subjects stated on the title-page. Yet the subjects named are so interwoven with the general history of the time, that it has been necessary to incorporate much of it in the work, as illustrating and explaining the main topics of investigation.

VI

In passing upon the acts and opinions of men who lived three centuries ago, it should be borne in mind that since that time the world has advanced fast and far, so that it would be very unjust to judge them by any standard of the present day. Some conception of the extent of this advance can be gathered from the great change in opinion upon important subjects made within the lifetime of many now living. The acts of the fathers of this Commonwealth are to be judged by comparison with the acts of the best and wisest men of that period in other countries. Applying this test, I believe the men who settled Massachusetts will not suffer in the comparison.

The author desires to express his obligations to Mr. William P. Upham and to Mr. Theodore M. Osborne for advice and suggestions in the preparation of this work, and to Mrs. Mary E. Nevins for valuable assistance in its revision.

Appendix

The Charter of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay,

1629 305

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

HISTORY of the Massachusetts Bay Colony would

^ ^ be incomplete without a reference to the several settlements made within the present limits of Massachusetts before the settlement at Cape Ann ; and to the characteristics of the different classes of settlers before their emigration, especially in their religious views.

It is difficult at the present day to realise the intensity of the religious convictions which governed the people of the mother country in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

Much progress had been made in the great Reformation when Parliament, under Henry VIII., early in the sixteenth century, divorced the national Church from the Roman See, and substituted the reigning sovereign for the Pope of Rome, as its head. This act gave much satisfaction to the reformers.

But little change, however, was made except in the head of the Church, and most of the forms and ceremonies of the Roman Church were retained, a result which caused

THE BAY COLONY.

great disappointment to the large numbers of the people who were zealous for a thorough reformation in ecclesiastical matters, and who were known as nonconformists, but in derision were called Puritans. They did not object to the doctrines of the national Church, and proposed no revolutionary action against it. They only desired and strove for reformation within the Church. It was the almost universal conviction of the English people that it was not compatible with the peace and safety of Church or Commonwealth that there should be different church establishments within the realm ; and it is questionable to-day, whether, with the intensity of religious enthusiasm that existed, they were not correct in this. Toleration came, and was maintained, only when the religious zeal of the time abated.

So strong was the feeling of the reformers against the obnoxious forms and ceremonies of the Church, that many declined to observe them, and large numbers of the clergy refused to conform to them in their service. This called for laws to enforce attendance at church, and the observance of all its forms and ceremonies. As a result, hundreds of the clergy were dismissed from their livings, or “ silenced,” as it was called. The nonconformists regarded the forms and ceremonies as the inventions of men, not authorised by Scripture, and sinful to observe.

In the reign of Elizabeth, there sprang up a sect known as the Separatists, or Brownists, from the name of its founder. Its members defied the national Church, declaring that it was no true church, and that it “ was sinful and

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER .

wrong to attend its worshipping assemblies, or hear the preaching of the Word of God therein.” This sect was opposed by conformists and nonconformists alike ; and they united in Parliament in the passage of severe laws against all who should refuse to acknowledge the supremacy of the national Church.

These laws were strictly enforced, and in 1608 a company of Separatists in Scrooby, in the north of England, finding they could not continue their form of worship in safety, expatriated themselves and went first to Amsterdam, and afterwards to Leyden, in Holland ; where they were, from time to time, joined by others. They were known as the Pilgrims. In 1620 a portion of them emigrated from Leyden, and settled in what is now the town of Plymouth.

A brief reference to some of the principal historical facts of this settlement is rendered important by the fact that historians have confounded, to a considerable extent, its history with that of the Massachusetts Bay Colony.

About the year 1617, the Pilgrims at Leyden resolved to remove to some new country where they could constitute a community by themselves. Their attention was first called to Guiana, but they feared the climate was not suited to them. Afterwards, they concluded to emigrate to America, if they could procure a patent, the consent of King James, and aid from England ; as they had not sufficient means for the undertaking. To promote these ends, a written statement, consisting of seven articles, was prepared and signed by John Robinson, the pastor, and

THE BAY COLONY.

William Brewster, the elder of the Pilgrim Church, somewhat inconsistent with their professions of separation. The statement is as follows : *

“i. To the confession of faith published in the name of the Church of England, and to every article thereof, we do with the reformed churches where we live, and also elsewhere, assent wholly.

“ 2. As we do acknowledge the doctrine of faith there taught, so do we the fruits and effects of the same doctrine to the begetting of saving faith in thousands in the land (conformist and reformists as they are called), with whom also, as with our brethren, we do desire to keep spiritual communion in peace, and will practise in our parts all lawful things.

“3. The King’s Majesty we acknowledge for supreme governor in his dominion in all causes and over all persons, and that none may decline or appeal from his authority or judgment in any cause whatsoever, but that in all things obedience is due unto him, either active, if the thing commanded be not against God’s word, or passive, if it be, except pardon can be obtained.

“4. We judge it lawful for His Majesty to appoint bishops, civil overseers, or officers in authority under him, in the several provinces, dioceses, congregations or parishes, to oversee the churches and govern them civilly according to the laws of the land, unto whom they are in all things to give account, and by them to be ordered according to Godliness.

“5. The authority of the present bishops in the land we do acknowledge, so far forth as the same is indeed derived from His Majesty unto them and as they proceed in his name, whom we will also therein honour in all things and him in them.

“6. We believe that no synod, class, convocation, or assembly of ecclesiastical officers hath any power or authority at all, but as the same by the magistrate given unto them.

* Colonial papers, 1618.

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER .

“7. Lastly, we desire to give unto all superiors due honour, to preserve the unity of the spirit with all that fear God, to have peace with all men what in us lieth, and wherein we are to be instructed by any0

“ Subscribed by

“John Robinson and

“ William Brewster.”

An application was made to King James to grant them “freedom of religion,” which he refused. “Yet thus far they prevailed, in sounding His Majesty’s mind, that he would connive at them and not molest them, provided they carried themselves peaceably. But to allow or tolerate them by his public authority, under his seal, they found it would not be.” *

An application was also made to the Council for Virginia for a patent. A reply addressed to Robinson and Brewster was made by Sir Edwin Sandys, for the Council, in which he writes : “ The agents of your con-

gregation, Robert Cushman and John Carver, have been in communication with divers select gentlemen of His Majesty’s Council for Virginia ; and, by the writing of seven articles, subscribed with your names, have given them that good degree of satisfaction, which has carried them on with a resolution to set forward your desire in the best sort that may be for your own and the public’s good.” He further writes, that “they have lequested further time to confer with them that are to be interested in this action.”!

* Bradford, 29. t Bradford, 30.

THE BAY COLONY.

Afterwards, further explanation was desired by some members of the Council, evidently in regard to the relation of the Pilgrim Church to the French reformed churches, with which churchmen in England were in sympathy.* Robinson and Brewster replied, in a letter of date January 27, 1617, that they agreed generally with the F'rench reformed churches, “ though some small differences be to be found in our practices, not at all in the substance of the things, but only in some accidental cir-

* In 1598, Henry IV. of France issued the Edict of Nantes, which recognised the reformed churches and authorised their worship in freedom in all places in which they had been established, with full amnesty to all members charged with offences against the established church ; subject to certain conditions, the principal of which were : that they should observe the appointed festivals of the Roman Catholic Church and refrain from work on their days; that they should pay the regular tithes to the established church, but might raise money for their own clergy ; that public religious meetings should only be held in established houses of worship ; that religious exercises, without limit of the numbers in attendance, might be held in the house of a lord or noble, but only in the presence of the lord or noble — that all others might have religious exercises at home, but should never have more than thirty persons at one time present ; and that they should obey the laws of the Roman Catholic Church with respect to consanguinity and relationship of parties making marriage contracts.

Subject to these conditions, the members of the reformed churches were to be in every respect, in the enjoyment of rights and privileges, on an equality with members of the established church. Careful provisions were made to protect them in the enjoyment of such rights and privileges. In all suits at law the members of the reformed churches were to have one-half the judges of their own faith; and liberal provisions for challenge of judges were made. The Edict remained in force for nearly a century. The members of the French reformed churches were styled Huguenots, intended as a name of reproach. The origin of the name is not known.

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER .

cumstances,” some of which they mentioned. In the reply they write : “ The oath of supremacy we shall willingly take if it be required of us, and that convenient satisfaction be not given by our taking the oath of allegiance.” *

The significance of these declarations is seen from the fact that the members of the Council for Virginia, and of the company they relied upon for aid, were members of the English Church ; and could not be expected to give aid and encouragement to professed Separatists.

No action seems to have been taken by the Council for Virginia until 1619.

In the spring of 1619, Cushman and Brewster were sent to England, in the words of Bradford, “to end with the Virginia Company as well as they could, and to procure a patent with as good and ample conditions as they might by any good means obtain, as also to treat and conclude with such merchants and other friends as had manifested their forwardness to provoke to, and adventure in this voyage.” f

A patent was issued, by the advice of friends, to one John Wincob, instead of to the company, he intending to go with them. He did not go, the patent was never used, and its date and provisions are unknown. February 16, 1619, another patent was issued to John Pierce and his associates. This was never used.J Thomas Weston,

* Bradford, 34, 35. f Ibid, 30.

t Pierce obtained, in 1621 and in 1622, other patents from the Council for New England; which in 1620 received a charter from the king, superseding the charter of the Council for Virginia. These patents were never used.

THE BAY COLONY.

representing the company in London which was to furnish the means, proceeded to Leyden and conferred with Robinson and others, and advised immediate preparations for their departure. An agreement was drawn up and approved by Weston and by the Pilgrims, of date July i, 1620. The agreement provided that every one who went over should have an interest in the project ; that everything should be carried on in common for seven years — “ the capital and profits, viz. : the houses, lands, goods, and chattels be equally divided among the adventurers.,, It was also provided in the articles of agreement that the houses and improved lands should belong to the planters at the end of seven years, and that the planters have two days of each week for their own private employment. This provision was subsequently stricken out.*

Preparations for departure were immediately commenced. The provision made for the voyage was insufficient for the emigration by the Pilgrims as a body, and probably it was not considered by them desirable for all to go at one time. It was agreed that “the youngest and strongest part ” should go, and those who desired to go should offer themselves. The minor part only offered to go.f It was probably intended that those who went should act as pioneers, and make preparation for the migration of the rest.J It was further agreed that Rob-

* Young’s Chron. of the Pilgrims, 82-85.

t Of those who went, “ Bradford and Brewster alone are ascertained to have been members of the Scrooby congregation.” Palfrey, I. 160.

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER .

inson should remain in Leyden with the majority, and that the emigrants should be placed under the charge of Brewster, the ruling elder.

After much delay, the company, consisting of one hundred and two persons, set sail from Plymouth, England, in the Mayflower, September 6, 1620, and arrived at Cape Cod, November 11 o. s., 21 n. s.

They embarked without a patent, and apparently without any definite place of destination.

Explorations were made, and December 20 o. s., 30 n. s., Plymouth or New Plymouth, as it was then called, was decided upon for their settlement, and immediately after they commenced the building of houses. The first house built was about twenty feet square, called the “ common house.” It was finished and occupied in January. The same month, “ the house was as full of beds as they could lie one by another.” *

Of those who came over in the Mayflower ; a portion, who had no sympathy with the Pilgrims in their religious views, were sent by the London Company.

The precise number of these is not known, yet it was so large, “ it was thought meet and convenient by them in Holland that these strangers that were to go with them should appoint one thus to be joined with them ( i.e ., Carver and Cushman previously appointed to oversee the purchases for the voyage), not so much for any great need of their help, as to avoid all suspicion or jealousy of any partiality.” f How far these “ strangers ” were responsible

* Young’s Chron. of the Pilgrims, 167, 178. f Bradford, 56.

IO

THE BAY COLONY.

for the lack of unity shown on the voyage, is not known. In Bradford and Winslow’s Journal, known as “Mourt’s Relation,” it is stated, “This day (November n), before we came to harbour, observing some not well affected to unity and concord, but gave some appearance of faction, it was thought good there should be an association and agreement, that we should combine together in one body, and to submit to such government and governors as we should by common consent agree to make and choose, and set our hands to this that follows, word for word.”* Then follows the compact, as it is styled. We give in a note the comments of Dr. Young, compiler of Young’s Chronicles of the Pilgrims, on the compact. f

There seems to have been no change in the mode of worship at Plymouth Trom that practised in Leyden. This caused great dissatisfaction among the members of the London Company; and they sent over one John Lyford, an Episcopal clergyman, to take charge of the

* Young’s Chron. of the Pilgrims, 120.

t “ Here for the first time in the world’s history, the philosophical fiction of a social compact was realised in practice. And yet it seems to me that a great deal more has been discerned in this document than the signers contemplated. It is evident, from p. 95, that when they left Holland, they expected ‘ to become a body politic, using amongst themselves civil government, and to choose their own rulers from among themselves.’ Their purpose in drawing up and signing this compact, was simply, as they state, to restrain certain of their number, who had manifested an unruly and factious disposition. This was the whole philosophy of the instrument, whatever may since have been discovered and deduced from it by astute civilians, philosophical historians, and imaginative orators.” Young’s Chron. of the Pilgrims, 120, n.

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

I I

congregation. He came over with Winslow in the Charity , and arrived in March, 1624.

Cushman, in a letter dated January 24, 1623, wrote, referring to Lyford, “Mr. Winslow and myself gave way to his going to give content to some here.” * Bradford refers to “the minister, Mr. John Lyford, whom a faction of the adventurers send, to hinder Mr. Robinson.”

Robinson, in a letter to Brewster dated December 20, 1623, which was brought over by Winslow, speaks of a determination by members of the London Company to prevent his coming over, and says, “A notable experiment of this, they gave in your messenger’s presence, constraining the company to promise that none of the money now gathered should be expended or employed to the help of any of us towards you.”

In the same letter, he says, “ Now touching the question propounded by you, I judge it not lawful for you, being a ruling elder, as Rom. XII., 7, 8, and I Tim. V., 17, opposed to the elders that teach and exhort and labour in the word and doctrine, to which the sacraments are annexed, to administer them, nor convenient if it were lawful.” f

It was one of the principal complaints made by the London Company that the congregation had no minister to administer the sacraments, and that none had been administered during the three years the company had been at Plymouth. J

* Bradford, 160. f Bradford, 166, 167.

t No sacraments were administered in the Plymouth Church until the settlement of Ralph Smith as its minister, in 1629.

THE BAY COLONY.

Within a few months after Lyford’s arrival, upon suspicion that letters, written by him and by one Oldham to their friends in England, contained unfriendly representations of the state of affairs in Plymouth, the governor went on board the ship in which the letters were to be taken over, opened the letters and retained some, substituting copies of them, and of others he took copies.

Bradford says many of the letters were “large” and “ full of slanders and false accusations, tending not only to their prejudice but to their ruin and utter subversion.” * This proceeding was kept secret for several weeks. The reason given was, “to let things ripen that they might the better discover their intents and see who were their adherents. And the rather because amongst the rest they found a letter of one of their confederates, in which was written that Mr. Oldham and Mr. Lyford intended a reformation in Church and Commonwealth ; and, as soon as the ship was gone, they intended to join together and have the sacraments, etc.” “And thinking they were now strong enough, they began to pick quarrels at everything.” “ But to cut things short, at length it grew to this issue, that Lyford with his accomplices without ever speaking one word either to the governor, church or elder, withdrew themselves and set up a public meeting apart on the Lord’s day.” Upon this the governor called a meeting of the whole company, and made charges against Lyford and Oldham, and produced and read the letters and copies obtained on board the ship, upon which they were con-

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER .

victed, and “ the court censured them to be expelled the place; Oldham presently, though his wife and family had liberty to stay all winter, or longer till he could make provision to remove them comfortably. Lyford had liberty to stay six months/ ’ *

Oldham, with some associates, returned without leave in March succeeding. He made much disturbance by blustering threats, and was finally taken by force to the waterside, where a boat was ready to take him off. f Lyford, having given no satisfaction within the six months he was allowed to remain, was banished, when he went with some of his friends to Nantasket, to which place Oldham had preceded him. Charges of gross immorality were made against Lyford before he left, which were probably, at the least, exaggerated, as imn^ediately after his banishment he was invited by Mr. White, who was influential in the settlement at Cape Ann, to go as minister to that place, which he did, and remained until the company there removed to Naumkeag, giving great satisfaction, and when he left to go to Virginia many of the company desired to go with him. Bradford says : “ This storm being thus blown over, yet sundry sad effects followed the same, for the company of adventurers broke in pieces hereupon, and the greatest part wholly deserted the colony in regard of any further supplys or care of their subsistence. And not only so, but some of Lyford’s and Oldham’s friends and their adherents set out a ship on fishing on their own account, and getting the start of * Bradford, 174, 175, 176, 182. | Ibid, 189, 190.

THE BA Y COLONY.

the ships that came to the plantation, they took away their stage and other necessary provisions that they had made for fishing at Cape Ann the year before, at their great charge, and would not restore the same except they would fight for it. But the governor sent some of the planters to help the fishermen to build a new one, and so let them keep it.” *

“ Also by this ship f they, some of them, sent (in the

An amusing account of this transaction is given by Hubbard, probably obtained by him from Conant, as they were contemporaries. He says that in 1624, the Plymouth people built a fishing stage at Cape Ann, — that the next year they went there under the charge of Standish to cure fish, and found the stage occupied by^a Mr. Hewes, employed by some of the west country merchants. Standish demanded possession of it, which was refused; that, ‘‘The dispute grew to be very hot, and high words were passed between them which might have ended in blows, if not in blood and slaughter, had not the prudence and moderation of Mr. Roger Conant, at that time there present, and Mr. Pierse’s interposition, that lay just by with his ship, timely prevented. For Mr. Hewes had barricaded his company with hogsheads on the stagehead, while the demandants stood upon the land, and might easily have been cut off ; but the ship’s crew, by advise, promising to help them build another, the difference was thereby ended. Captain Standish had been bred a soldier in the Low Countries and never entered the school of our Saviour Christ, or of John Baptist, his harbinger, or if he was ever there, had forgot his first lessons, to offer violence to no man, and to part with the cloak rather than needlessly contend for the coat, though taken away without order. A little chimney is soon fired ; so was the Plymouth captain, a man of very little stature, yet of a very hot and angry temper. The fire of his passion soon kindled and blown up into a flame by hot words, might easily have consumed all, had it not been seasonably quenched.” Hubbard, no.

t By this ship is intended the ship sent over by “ some of Lyford’s and Oldham’s friends.”

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER .

name of the rest)* certain reasons of their breaking off from the plantation.” Two are given.

“ First. Reason they charged them for dissembling with His Majesty in their petition, and with the adventurers about the French discipline, etc.”

“ Secondly, for receiving a man into their church, that in his confession renounced all, universal, national and diocesan churches, etc., by which (say they) it appears, that though they deny the name of Brownists, yet they practise the same, etc. And, therefore, they should sin against God in building up such a people. ”f

A compromise was made with the London Company in 1627, and all connection between the company and the people of Plymouth under the original contract was dissolved.!

Upon an application to the Council for New England, a patent was granted, of date January 13, i629,§ to William Bradford and “ his heirs, associates, and assigns,” of territory including what are now Bristol, Barnstable, and a large part of Plymouth Counties, known as the Old Colony. The patent also granted fifteen miles on each side of the Kennebec, including what is now the city of Augusta, for trading purposes. ||

The patent gave only title to the land. A strong effort was made to obtain from the King, Charles I., a charter with powers of government, which failed. An unsuc-

* The London Company. § January 13, 1630, n. s.

t Bradford, 197. || Plymouth Colony laws, Brigham ed.

i6

THE BAY COLONY.

cessful attempt was also made to obtain from Charles II. the desired charter.

In March, 1640, Bradford assigned the patent to the people of Plymouth, reserving to himself, with their consent, a tract of land.*

The officers of the government of Plymouth consisted of a governor and one assistant, until 1624, when four assistants were added; and in 1633 the number was increased to seven. They were elected annually. All matters of importance were submitted to the people in “ town meeting assembled.” These meetings were styled courts.

The population of Plymouth in 1627, as shown in a distribution of cattle that year, was one hundred and fiftysix. This number was increased to about two hundred and fifty by immigrants who arrived in 1629 and 1630. In the patent to Bradford in 1629, it is recited that the population was “near three hundred people.” There was no immigration from Leyden to Plymouth after 1630.

From the time of the settlement in 1620 until 1633, the only inhabitants of the colony were the settlers of the town of Plymouth, some of whom had removed to Duxbury, Marshfield, and Eastham ; and with the exception of this population of about two hundred and fifty, the entire colony was subsequently settled by people from Massachusetts Bay Colony, with few exceptions, representing the views and characteristics of the people of that colony. When the General Court, consisting of deputies from the several towns, was established, in 1639, so large

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER .

had been the immigration from Massachusetts Bay, that six towns or settlements besides Plymouth were represented.*

It has been said that the church at Plymouth was the mother church of the churches of Massachusetts Bay, or that they were patterned after it.f This is without

* “ Bradford had scarcely been three months in his grave before the narrower spirit of Massachusetts began to make itself felt where he had always exercised a restraining hand. The old Pilgrim Colony had been inundated and overwhelmed by migrations from her sister colony. Taunton, Rehoboth, Barnstable, Sandwich, and Yarmouth — all represented in the General Court — had been settled by immigrants having little or no affiliations with the colony into which they had come, who were permeated with the modes of thought and of legislation characterising the colony they had left.” — William T. Davis’ History of the Town of Plymouth, 65, 66.

“ The origin of New England, as the living embodiment of certain political and religious principles, dates from the foundation of Massachusetts. The more vigourous life of the younger Commonwealth overshadowed, and in the long run swallowed up, that of her older but weaker yokefellow ; nor can it be fairly urged that Plymouth had either by example or otherwise much effect on Massachusetts. If the Plymouth settlement had never been made, the political life of New England would in all probability have taken the same form and run the same course as it did.” — Doyle’s English Colonies in America, I., 46.