New England -- History -- Colonial period, ca. 1600-1775
In 1632, Gorges and Mason, with the assistance of Gardiner, Morton, and
Ratcliffe, prepared a petition, which was presented to the Privy Council
in December.[371] Winthrop stated that among many false accusations and
“some truths misrepeated,” it accused the colony of separating from the
Church of England, and of threatening to cast off its political
allegiance.[372] Supporters of the company in England hastily put into
motion those unseen agencies that were most efficacious in doing
business at the court of Charles; and, in spite of what seemed
overwhelming odds against them, in courtly influence, won an unexpected
victory, even gaining a word of commendation from the King.[373] Their
success is involved in a mystery, which, however, we suspect might be
unlocked by that same “golden key” which the Pilgrims were using
contemporaneously at another of the royal doors. Meanwhile, the Council
for New England had requested that the Company's charter be presented
for examination, and Humphrey had been forced to confess that it was in
New England, stating that, though he had often written for it, he had
been unable to obtain it.[374]
Footnote 371:
_Acts Privy Council, Colonial_, vol. I, p. 183.
Footnote 372:
J. Winthrop, _History_, vol. I, p. 122.
Footnote 373:
J. Winthrop, _History_, vol. I, p. 123 _n._
Footnote 374:
Records Council for New England; _American Antiquarian Society
Proceedings_, 1866, p. 107.
The demand, however, was repeated from a more powerful source two years
later. In 1633, Laud had become Archbishop of Canterbury, and had
declared war upon the Puritans. Colonial affairs, which had heretofore
been considered, when considered at all, by the Privy Council, were now
put into the hands of a body styled “the Lords Commissioners for
Plantations in General,” which was headed by the Archbishop, and given
almost royal powers in both civil and ecclesiastical matters, including
that of revoking all charters and patents unduly obtained.[375] Gorges
utilized this new opportunity, and at once began to work upon the
Archbishop's hatred of Puritanism, in order to recover his own legal
claims. On February 21, 1634, the Board, having taken into consideration
the great numbers of persons “known to be ill-affected and discontented,
as well with the Civil as Ecclesiastical government,” who were daily
resorting to New England, ordered that Cradock produce the Massachusetts
charter.[376] Upon receipt of Cradock's first letter requesting its
return, the authorities at Boston decided to return an evasive answer,
ignoring the Council's demand. After the first communication had been
followed by an official copy of the order itself, word was returned by
Winslow, who was acting as agent for both Plymouth and Massachusetts,
that the charter could not be sent except by a vote of the General
Court, which body would not meet until September.[377]
Footnote 375:
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