Theological differences were early apparent in the teachings of the two leaders. Trivial enough to the modern mind are these questions concerning works as an evidence of justification and concerning active and passive faith in justification. Hooker maintained all by himself that there was "a saving preparation in a Christian soule before unyon with Christ." The other ministers pretended to understand what he meant by this, and at first opposed him unanimously. No doubt, too, Hooker and his disciples found some fault with the outer form of the church as shaped by Cotton. Certain it is that Hooker's theories of civil government were more liberal and modern than Cotton's, though like Cotton's they were hung upon texts of Scripture. Hooker lacked Cotton's superfluity of ingenuity; he had less imagination and less poetic sentiment than Cotton, but his intellect was more rugged, practical, and virile. He was not a man to have visions of a political paradise; he did not attempt to limit citizenship to church members when he framed a constitution for the Connecticut towns. Nor did he give so much power and privilege to the magistrate as was given in Massachusetts. He disapproved of Cotton's aristocratic theory of the permanence of the magistrate's office, as he did apparently of the negative vote of the upper house and of the arbitrary decisions which the Massachusetts magistrates assumed the right to make. VII. [Sidenote: Attractions of Connecticut.] One other potent motive there was. Stories of the fertility of the "intervale" land on the Connecticut River came by the mouth of every daring adventurer who had sailed or tramped so far. There one might find pasture for the priceless cattle and hay to last the long winter through, and in that valley one might cultivate plains of great fertility. VIII. [Sidenote: Obstacles to removal.] [Sidenote: Savage's Winthrop, i, 167, 168.] There were dangerous Pequots on the Connecticut, it is true, and the Dutch had already planted a trading house and laid claim to the territory. The Plymouth people who traded there were also claimants. And, more than all, leaving Massachusetts in a time of danger from the machinations of Laud would seem desertion. The government of the Massachusetts Bay colony was anomalous; it partook of the character of the commercial company from which it sprang, yet it had traits of a religious or at least a voluntary society. It was the accepted opinion that those who had taken the freeman's oath were "knit" together "in one body," and that none of them ought to leave the colony without permission. Hooker's party gained the consent of a majority of the representative members of the General Court, but not of a majority of the assistants. This precipitated a debate in the colony on the constitutional question of the right of the assistants, or magistrates, to form an upper house and veto a decision of the chosen deputies of the towns. IX. [Sidenote: Attempts to prevent removal.]