Clarendon and his colonial policy. Lodge's Washington (S. S.1); biographies of Franklin, Samuel Adams, A CENTURY OF COLONIAL HISTORY, 1660-1760 78. The New Era in Colonization. -Charles II was restored to the English throne in 1660; his leading adviser was Lord Chancellor Clarendon. They found much to condemn in the existing state of affairs in the colonies. The Puritans in New England, for example, seemed to look upon themselves as almost independent of England, and the people of no colony paid much attention to the commercial regulations which Parliament had laid down in the time of the Puritan supremacy in England. The first thing to do was to revive the navigation laws and then to enforce the royal authority in America. The First Navigation Act which was passed in 1660 provided that certain goods should be carried from the colonies direct to England; these were The Naviga- enumerated in the act, and hence were called the " enumerated goods"; among them was tobacco. This policy was America, VI, developed as time went on; but the colonists constantly disobeyed these laws except those which limited the commerce of the empire to vessels owned and manned by the subjects of the English king, among whom, of course, were the colonists. tion Acts. Winsor's 5-10. American History Leaflets, No. 19 George Fox 79. The Puritans and the Quakers. - In the Puritan time in England many new sects arose, among them the Society of Friends or Quakers. Their founder was George Fox, a man of logical mind, who could express his ideas in language which plain men and women could understand. 1 "American Statesmen" series, and so throughout these lists 1656] The Puritans and the Quakers 91 America, III, 469-473; Janney's Among other things, he taught that God still appears to men Winsor's and women and reveals to them his will. As between man and man, Fox held to extreme democratic views, based on a literal reading of the Bible. To him all men were equal; Penn, ch. ii; tokens of respect were due to no man, but to God alone. Fiske's New England, The Quakers, therefore, refused to address those in author- 179-181. ity by their ordinary titles, as "Your Honor," etc. They also refused to take an oath of allegiance, or to swear to speak the truth in court, because the Bible commanded men to "swear not at all." It happened that the Puritans were very firm in their ideas on two of the points mentioned above they believed that with the writing of the Bible the period of revelation had come to an end, and they demanded that those in authority should be treated with the utmost respect. The first Quakers appeared in Massachusetts in The Quaker 1656; they addressed the magistrates as "hirelings, baals Invasion, begins 1656. [priests of Baal], and seed of the serpent," and threw down Fiske's New a challenge which the magistrates were not slow to take up. They put the Quakers into prison for safe keeping until the vessel which brought them over was ready to sail on its return voyage. The Quakers next came overland by way of Rhode Island, where they were cordially received and sheltered. The Commissioners of the United Colonies (p. 79) now took the matter in hand and advised the members of the Confederation to pass laws providing banishment, under pain of death in case of return. In this they were merely following English examples, as it was in this way that Parliament had repeatedly dealt with persons of whose doings it did not approve. The Massachusetts General Court at once passed such a law, and the Quakers hastened to Boston to "test the law"; four of them were hanged, and others were severely punished. Many writers have sought to justify the action of Massachusetts on the ground that every state has the power to close its boundaries to outsiders and to eject from its midst any persons who are hostile to its well being. This power, the English government had delegated to the Massachusetts England, 183-190; Criminal Trials, I, 33-63; Stedman and Chandler's Hutchinson, 1, 394-403; Hart's Contemporaries, I, No. 140 142. Attempts to justify Mas sachusetts. The Quakers in the other colonies. Massachusetts and England, New Eng land, 191- Bay Company, which undoubtedly possessed the legal right to refuse admission to the Quakers. It should also be said that the executions of the Quakers were disliked by the plain people of Massachusetts and were carried out only through a display of force. The other members of the Confederation made severe laws against the Quakers; but none of them proceeded to such extremities. Outside New England also, the Quakers were received with disfavor. For instance, in New Netherland, where Stuyvesant still ruled, they were treated with great harshness, were beaten, hung by the hands, and otherwise cruelly abused. 80. The English Government and Massachusetts. - The Quakers complained of the action of the Massachusetts 1661. Fiske's magistrates, and the English government at once interfered. From the outset the Massachusetts rulers had allowed no appeal from their decisions to the courts in England; it seemed now that a case had arisen where the English authorities might compel the colony to permit an appeal. An order was drawn up directing the Massachusetts Bay Company to send the Quakers to England for trial. But when the order reached Boston the laws had already been modified, the jails emptied of their inmates, and there were no prisoners under accusation to send to England. The king's judges. Stedman and Fiske's New A far more serious offense in the eyes of the new rulers of England was the sheltering of two of the judges who had signed the death warrant of Charles the First. These regicides, as they were termed, were seen in Boston by an English ship captain, who reported the matter to the authorities on his return to England. Orders were at once sent to the colony to seize them and send them to England. They escaped, however, and lived concealed in the New Haven colony, and later in the interior of Massachusetts. The colonial government showed so much zeal for their arrest, and so much skill in managing their escape, that the English authorities could do nothing in the matter, whatever their suspicions may have been. 1661] Massachusetts Declaration of Rights 93 1661. 81. Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, 1661. -Soon Declaration afterwards, the Massachusetts General Court drew up a of Rights, Declaration of Rights, which carries us forward a century. In it the General Court asserted that its right to govern depended on the charter, which gave it full legislative power, provided its laws were not contrary to those of England. The charter, furthermore, gave it power to defend the colony, by sea and by land, against all persons who should seek to annoy the colony. "We conceive," said the General Court, that "any imposition [which is] prejudicial to the country, contrary to any just law of ours, [which is] not repugnant to the laws of England, to be an infringement of our right." This was plainly aimed against the Navigation Act. On the other hand, it acknowledged that the company had certain duties to perform: to bear allegiance to the king, to protect the person and the dominions of the monarch, and to govern according to the charter. Two agents were sent to England to try to smooth over English dematters. They returned with a royal letter in which the mands, 1661. king told the men of Massachusetts that they might make "sharp laws against the Quakers," for their ideas " were inconsistent with any kind of government." The king's letter also contained some new demands: that the oath of allegiance should be taken, that divine service should be permitted according to the rites of the Church of England, and that all persons orthodox in religion, though of different beliefs as to church government, and of competent estate should be admitted to a share in the government. Accordingly, the General Court enacted a new law for admission to the company, in almost the words used by the king; but, as the certificate of orthodoxy was to be given by the ministers in the several towns, who were all Puritans, it is not probable that the new law helped those who were not church members. The General Court also made regulations better to enforce the Navigation Acts; but these, too, amounted to little in practice. 82. The Commission of 1664.- Massachusetts, it will be Complaints against Mas sachusetts. Commis sioners sent to Boston, 1664. Failure of sioners. remembered, had governed the feeble settlements to the northward, to some of which she had a good claim; and she had treated the Rhode Island colonists in a most overbearing manner. From all these colonies complaints reached England, and the grantees of New Hampshire and Maine, whose claims Massachusetts had treated with scant courtesy, seized this favorable opportunity for revenge; nor were the discontented dwellers within the colony silent. The English government sent a commission to New England to examine into these accusations and to settle as many of these questions as possible. When the news of the appointment of this commission reached Boston the General Court ordered the fort in the harbor to be strengthened and prepared for defense; they also confided the charter to a committee for safe keeping. The commissioners arrived in 1664, communicated their the commis- instructions to the General Court, and then departed to the conquest of New Netherland. In 1665 they returned to Boston and demanded a positive answer from the General Court, as to whether or not it recognized the force of the king's commission. The General Court replied that it was not its business to determine the force of the commission; it had a charter and was obliged to govern according to it. The commissioners then endeavored to hold a court in the king's name, but the magistrates warned all persons against attending it, on their duty to God and allegiance to the king. Beaten at every step, the commissioners returned to England. In 1666 the king ordered the Massachusetts authorities to send over some of their principal men to justify their proceedings; but the General Court declined to do so "on suspicion of the authenticity of the letter." Now again, as in 1635, events in England prevented the punishment of the colony; the Dutch were in the Thames, and were blockading London. Connecticut and Rhode 83. Charters of Connecticut and Rhode Island. — While Massachusetts had been engaged in this contest with the ters, 1662-63 crown, Connecticut and Rhode Island had won favors from Island char |