Memoir of Roger Williams, the Founder of the State of Rhode-Island — John Shaqi
Memoir of Roger Williams, the Founder of the State of Rhode-IslandKnowles, James D. (James Davis)
History
Memoir of Roger Williams, the Founder of the State of Rhode-Island
Knowles, James D. (James Davis)
Rhode Island -- History -- Colonial period, ca. 1600-1775; Williams, Roger, 1604?-1683
The book, which occasioned these transactions, has not been
preserved.[65] We know not in what terms Mr. Williams uttered his
offensive opinions. The doctrine which he maintained, that the charter
from the King of England could not convey to the colonists the right to
occupy the lands of the Indians, without their consent, is, in the
highest degree, honorable to his head and his heart. He clearly saw the
utter absurdity and injustice of the pretension, whether made by the
Pope or by a Protestant monarch, of sovereignty over other countries,
merely on the ground of prior discovery, or of the barbarous and
wandering character of the inhabitants. It may be a useful regulation
among nations, that the first discoverers of a country shall possess a
superior right to intercourse with the inhabitants for trade or other
purposes. But no people, whether Pagans or Christians, can rightfully be
subjected to a sway, to which they have not voluntarily submitted. This
fundamental principle of human rights applies to the Indians. They were
independent tribes, and could, in no sense, be considered as the
subjects of the King of England. The fact, that some of his vessels had
sailed along their coasts, no more gave him a title to be their
sovereign, than the passage of one of their canoes up the Thames would
have transferred to Canonicus or Powhatan a claim to the crown of
England. If the King possessed no jurisdiction over the Indians, he
could not, of course, convey a title to their lands. It was this point
on which Mr. Williams insisted with special earnestness. “His own
account of this matter,” says Mr. Backus, (vol. i. p. 58,) “informs us,
that the sin of the patents which lay so heavy on his mind was, that
therein ‘Christian Kings (so called) are invested with a right, by
virtue of their _Christianity_, to take and give away the lands and
countries of other men.’[66] And he tells us, that this evil so deeply
afflicted his soul, that ‘before his troubles and banishment, he drew up
a letter, not without the approbation of some of the chiefs of
New-England, then tender also upon this point before God, directed unto
the King himself, humbly acknowledging the evil of THAT PART of the
patent, which respects the donation of lands,’” &c.[67] And the
colonists themselves acted, generally, on the very principle which Mr.
Williams advocated. They purchased the lands of the natives, for a
trifling recompense, as it may seem to us, but such as satisfied the
Indians. Cotton Mather states, though he reckons it as a proof of
_civility_, that “notwithstanding the patent which they had for the
country, they fairly purchased of the natives the several tracts of land
which they afterwards possessed.”[68] Dr. Dwight asserts, that
“exclusively of the country of the Pequods, the inhabitants of
Connecticut bought, unless I am deceived, every inch of ground contained
within that colony, of its native proprietors. The people of
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