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
late discovered the intrigues of her artful neighbours; and, after two
years opposition, submitted to the charter purely out of fear lest
some of her ministers and magistrates should suffer ignominious deaths
for aiding in the murder of their King.[24]
To the great joy of the People of Boston and Saybrook, Mr. Winthrop
was appointed, by the Charter, Governor of all Connecticut. Their joy,
however, sprung from different motives: Saybrook hoped for effectual
protection from the insults of Hertford and the persecutions of
Newhaven; and Boston expected to govern the Governor.
Mr. Winthrop settled at New-London, in the kingdom of Sassacus, or
colony of Saybrook, where he purchased lands of the claimants under
Lords Say and Brook. Wisdom and moderation guided Mr. Winthrop. He was
annually elected Governor till his death, which happened in 1676.
Whether it were owing to the discovery of any defect in the title of
the People of Connecticut to the soil, or of any undue arts practised
in obtaining their charter, or whether it must be considered as an
instance of Charles’s fickle or arbitrary disposition, that Monarch,
in the short space of two years after granting that charter, comprized
half Connecticut in another grant to his brother, the Duke of York, of
the territory between the rivers Connecticut and Delaware, called by
the Dutch New-Netherlands. This step excited much discontent in
Connecticut, especially when an actual defalcation of its territory
was discovered to be in agitation, after Colonel Nichols had succeeded
in an enterprise he was sent upon against the Dutch at New-York.
Commissioners were sent thither from Connecticut, the latter end of
1664, to defend the interests of the Colony; but, notwithstanding all
the opposition they could make, they were constrained to yield up the
whole of Long-Island and a strip of land on the east side of Hudson’s
river. This dismemberment is not easily to be justified; but,
probably, finding it necessary to the performance of a promise he had
made the Dutch of the enjoyment of their possessions, Nichols might
think himself at liberty of insisting upon it, furnished as he was
with almost regal powers as the Duke of York’s deputy. In that
capacity, he assumed the government of the conquered territory, but
does not appear to have intermeddled further with that of Connecticut.
With Colonel Nichols were associated three other gentlemen, in a
commission, empowering them to enquire into the state of the
New-England provinces, to hear and redress complaints, settle
differences, and check abuses of power: but the ill humour and
obstinacy of those of Connecticut and Massachusets-Bay, in a great
measure frustrated their endeavours.
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