General History of Connecticut, from Its First Settlement Under George Fenwick to its Latest Period of Amity with Great Britain — John Shaqi
General History of Connecticut, from Its First Settlement Under George Fenwick to its Latest Period of Amity with Great BritainPeters, Samuel
History
General History of Connecticut, from Its First Settlement Under George Fenwick to its Latest Period of Amity with Great Britain
Peters, Samuel
Connecticut -- History -- Colonial period, ca. 1600-1775; Connecticut -- History -- Revolution, 1775-1783
As to any purchases made of the Saybrook settlers, those of Hertford
totally declined them till the farcical business respecting their
charter came into agitation between the two juntos who procured it, of
which I shall speak hereafter; and, so far were the people of Newhaven
from buying any right of Fenwick or his associates that they scorned
the idea of claiming under them; nay, it was one of their principal
views, in the machinations wherein they were continually employed, to
reduce the Saybrook colony under the tyranny of their own dominions as
having no more title to the country than possession gave them. And,
upon the other supposition, it is impossible to account for the
neglect of the colonizers of Hertford to secure their lands by such a
purchase, seeming as they did to ransack heaven and earth for a title
satisfactory even in their own eyes; they were conscious no purchase
of that kind could give them firmer footing than they had already.
The truth, therefore, undoubtedly is that Fenwick and Peters had no
legal right to sell the lands they occupied, whatever might be their
pretensions; nor, indeed, did they pretend to the power of selling
more on their own account than was granted to them severally by their
patrons--the Lords Say and Brook--which cannot be supposed but an
inconsiderable proportion of their American property.
No wonder, then, that we find another claim set up--a claim by
conquest. This was particularly agreeable to the genius of the
Hertford and Newhaven heroes, but will nevertheless appear to as
little for their right as their honor, from the following
considerations: 1. The invaders did not find Connecticut in a state of
Nature, but cultivated and settled by its Indian inhabitants, whose
numbers were thousands, and who had three kings, viz., Connecticote,
Quinnipiog, and Sassacus, of whom Connecticote was the emperor, or
king of kings--a dignity he and his ancestors had enjoyed, according to
the Indian mode of reckoning, twenty sticks,[13] i. e., time
immemorial; 2. They had no authority to invade, make war upon, and
conquer the Indians, who were not at war with the King of England, nor
his patentees, or their assignees; and, 3. Seizures, without legal
commission, of however long standing, do not convey right or title by
the English law.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account