At intervals, extremely valuable for the future of America, the
Massachusetts colony certainly was free of all restraint. Charles's
benediction seems to have been "Good riddance!" From the crown the
colonists received no assistance whatever, and it was long both their
boast and their plea that they had planted the colony "at their own
expense." They were left to work out their own salvation.[3] As a
result, their passionate desire for freedom from interference by the
king grew into the feeling that they had earned it as a right.
Englishmen they were still, and subjects of the king; but to the
privileges of Englishmen they had added the right to manage their own
affairs. The English king and the English law were to help them in their
difficulties and to settle cases of appeal. In return they would grant
money and fight for the king when necessary; but in the meantime they
would live by themselves.
Taking advantage of the clause in their charter which authorized them
"to ordain and establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable orders,
laws, statutes, and ordinances," they speedily took to themselves
everything but the name of independence. They instituted courts for all
purposes, set up their legislative government, raised their own taxes,
whether general or local, and perfected that wonderful instrument of
resistance to oppression, New England town government. They even coined
money. And, different from most of the other colonies, they chose their
governor from among their own number.
Distance and home difficulties--for the Stuart kings usually had their
hands full of trouble with their subjects--favored the non-interference
which the colonists craved. When, however, the Stuarts had any leisure
at all, they at once devoted it to quarrelling with their subjects in
New England. Even to the easy-going Charles II the cool aloofness of the
colonists was a bit too strong; to his father and brother it was
intolerable.
The invariable methods of the colonists, when facing a demand from the
king, were evasion and delay. "Avoid or protract" were Winthrop's own
words in 1635. In 1684 the General Court wrote advising their attorney,
employed in England in defending the charter, "to spin out the case to
the uttermost."[4] Once and once only until the Revolution--in the case
of the seizing of Andros--did the men of Massachusetts proceed to
action. Their habitual policy was safe, and, on the whole, successful.
Slow communication (one voyage of commissioners from Boston to England
took three months), and the existence in England of a strong party of
friends, helped powerfully to obscure and obliterate the issues. Yet
Charles I in 1640, and James II in 1689, made preparations to reduce the
colony to proper subjection, by force if necessary.
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