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
[41] This Mr. Dyer had been in England, had petitioned for,
and, through Dr. Franklin’s interest, obtained a new office
at the port of New-London, viz. that of Comptroller, but
afterwards had thought proper to resign that office, in
order to be made a Judge of the Superior Court and one of
the Council; and, forsooth, that a stranger only might serve
the King of Great Britain in the character of a publican in
Connecticut.
APPENDIX.
The preceding sheets bring the “History of Connecticut” to its latest
period of amity with Great Britain, agreeable to the plan upon which
it was begun. I propose laying before my readers, in an Appendix, a
summary account of the proceedings of the people of Connecticut
immediately leading to their open hostilities against the Mother
Country, not only because some events are not at all, or erroneously,
known here, but also because they will form a supplement necessary in
several instances to what has been already related. Another reason
that induces me to make the proposed addition is, the contradictions
that have so frequently appeared regarding the statements made by the
author of the “History,” as to acts and laws that were in force in the
colony of Connecticut during its early settlement, and which had been
handed down to their posterity by the _Sober Dissenters_, as they
called themselves, many of which laws remained in force up to the
beginning of the Revolutionary War.
Mr. James Hammond Trumbull, a descendant of Governor Trumbull, so
frequently spoken of in this work and notes, in a book lately
published by him, entitled “The True Blue Laws of Connecticut and
Newhaven, and the False Blue Laws invented by the Rev. Samuel Peters,”
has taken unnecessary pains to show that the Blue Laws represented in
the “History” were never published in the colony, and consequently
must be factitious. The author of the “History” himself mentions that
they never were published; and had Mr. Trumbull referred to the action
of the meeting of the planters in Quinnipiack, the 4th of June, 1639,
he would have seen that the general resolutions then and there adopted
were to be their laws, and that no laws were enacted. (See Note on
pages 44-47.)
Many writers have endeavoured to point out the motive which prompted
the Americans to the wish of being independent of Great Britain, who
had for a century and a half nursed and protected them with parental
tenderness; but they have only touched upon the reasons ostensibly
held up by the Americans, but which are merely a veil to the true
causes. These, therefore, I shall endeavour to set before the reader.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account