In New England the earliest action taken by the colonial government with regard to the religious instruction of slaves occurred in 1677 in connection with the disposal as slaves of the captives taken in King Philip’s War, when it was decreed that all the Indian slaves distributed among the inhabitants of the colony should “be taught and instructed in the Christian religion.”[1056] How far such religious training was carried out would be difficult to ascertain. Occasional glimpses of the situation can be obtained. Experience Mayhew lamented that all the English did not instruct their servants in the “principles of the true religion”;[1057] though he cited instances when Indian servants, some of whom may have been slaves, were so instructed.[1058] Just how much missionary work was done in the homes of Massachusetts or elsewhere for the conversion of Indian servants and slaves is not known. Indian slaves were owned by ministers of the gospel, and it may be supposed that some attention was given to their instruction. Evidently the religious spirit of the Massachusetts colonists was sufficiently strong to include Indian slaves and servants, for in some churches negroes and Indians had a special location assigned them in the church[1059] and occasional reference is found to Indian slaves being church members. According to the baptismal records of November 19, 1727, for example, the Indian slave of Lieutenant Stephen Longfellow, great-great-grandfather of the poet, was his fellow member in the Byfield church.[1060] In this same year the Reverend Timothy Cutler reported from Boston: “Negro and Indian slaves belonging to my parish are about thirty-two, their education is according to the houses they belong to. I have baptized but two. But I know of the masters of some others who are disposed to this important good of their slaves and are preparing them for it; however, there is too great a remissness upon this article”.[1061] In Rhode Island, also, for a long period the slaves were excluded from the church because their owners considered church membership to be inconsistent with their position. Finally in 1721 James MacSparran, pastor of Narragansett, protested against denying slaves the benefit of religious instruction and activities, and carried his point.[1062] After that date Indian and other slaves could belong to the churches, though baptism and membership were still held in disfavor by the slave owners.[1063] Connecticut, too, in 1727, favored the work of the church by enacting that masters and mistresses of Indian children were to use their utmost endeavors to instruct them in the Christian faith.[1064]