New England -- History -- Colonial period, ca. 1600-1775
The antagonism to the power of the magistrates was manifested also by
new episodes in the struggle between them and the more democratic
deputies, which we noted as beginning at the time of the Connecticut
emigration. A dispute over the ownership of a sow, between a poor widow
and a rich man notorious for his unjust business dealings, was finally
brought to the General Court for decision. The evidence was by no means
convincing, and the Court was divided, with a majority of the
magistrates in favor of a verdict for the rich Keaynes, and a majority
of the deputies in favor of the poor widow. The point was thus raised
again as to whether the small number of magistrates, by a negative vote,
could block the will of the much larger body of deputies.[511] Winthrop
wrote a treatise on the question, appealing to certain English
precedents and the Old Testament, and stated that, if the magistrates
were not allowed to veto the action of the deputies, the colony would be
a democracy and “there was no such government in Israel.”[512] So
implacably did the grim shades of Moses and Aaron block the paths of
Boston Common. The magistrates, in view of the strong opposition that
developed, offered to leave the matter to the clergy, and to give way if
the decision were adverse. They knew, of course, that it would not be
so, and Winthrop records that it was “their only care to gain time,”
until the people could be brought to the heel of their clerical leaders
as usual. As part of the plan, the members of the Court were asked to
take advice before the next meeting; and it is interesting as showing
the normal danger for the ordinary citizen in discussing public matters,
that a special act should be thought necessary making it “no offence for
any, either publicly or privately, to declare their opinion in the case,
so it were modestly.”[513] The following year, a compromise was
effected, which, however, was distinctly in favor of the magistrates;
and thereafter the deputies and the magistrates sat as two separate
houses, each with a negative vote on the other.[514]
Footnote 511:
J. Winthrop, _History_, vols. I, pp. 377 _ff._; and II, pp. 83 _ff._,
142 _ff._
Footnote 512:
The essay is given in R. C. Winthrop, _J. Winthrop_, vol. II, pp. 427
_ff._
Footnote 513:
J. Winthrop, _History_, vol. II, p. 143.
Footnote 514:
_Massachusetts Records_, vol. II, pp. 58 _f._
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