New England -- History -- Colonial period, ca. 1600-1775
The effects of the frontier life, and of the distance separating England
from her colonies, were already beginning to show themselves strongly.
The semi-independent communities which had been established in Rhode
Island, Connecticut, and New Haven were entirely without legal
authority; and the two latter, in their “constitutions,” had utterly
ignored the existence of any power outside of themselves. The situation
was not wholly overlooked in England, but as the crisis in public
affairs there was rapidly drawing near, the authorities were helpless to
interfere. A new demand for the return of the Massachusetts charter,
when flatly refused by that colony in 1638,[503] could not be followed
by any show of force; and during the next twenty-two years—which were
those of the Civil War, the fall of the Stuart monarchy, and the reign
of Cromwell—the New England colonies pursued their way almost wholly
without reference to the power of England.
Footnote 503:
J. Winthrop, _History_, vol. I, p. 324; _Acts Privy Council,
Colonial_, vol. I, pp. 217, 227 _f._; Hutchinson, _History_, vol. I,
pp. 84 _ff._, 442 _ff._; Hazard, _Historical Collections_, vol. I, pp.
432 _f._
The influence of the frontier was being felt in their domestic concerns
as well. Although the most aggressively radical of the inhabitants of
Massachusetts had, perhaps, gone to the other colonies, there to
establish themselves in greater freedom, the struggle of the citizens
continued, nevertheless, against the arbitrary power of their
government. From the first, the body of magistrates had acted in a
judicial, as well as an executive, capacity. The only rule by which they
were guided is indicated by a resolution in the General Court of 1636,
which provided that they should “determine all causes according to the
lawes nowe established, and where there is noe law, then as neere the
lawe of God as they can.”[504] As English law, in many cases, was not
justly applicable, and as, in others, it was largely neglected, this
really meant the comparatively few laws already enacted in the colony,
and the same arbitrary selection and interpretation of Old Testament
texts that we have just noted in New Haven. As the magistrates acted as
both attorneys and judges, and as no appeals were permitted from their
decisions, no accused person had any protection against them. Anyone,
therefore, who might be obnoxious to the ruling powers on account of his
views, could not hope for justice; and the so-called trials of Mrs.
Hutchinson, Wheelwright, and other notable offenders, were, in reality,
not trials at all, but “relentless inquisitions used by the government
for the purpose of crushing opposition.”[505] That condition was not,
indeed, peculiar to Massachusetts, and was probably just as true of
contemporary England. It was Hooker's glory in Connecticut to have
raised his voice, as the leader of that colony, to plead for a legal
restraint upon this arbitrary exercise of the judicial power 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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account