Puslapio vaizdai
PDF
„ePub“
[blocks in formation]

πᾶσα ἀποικία εν μεν πάσχουσα τιμᾷ τὴν μητρόπολιν, ἀδικουμένη δὲ ἀλλοτριοῦται.

That baleful spirit of Commerce that wished to govern great Nations on the Maxims of the Counter.

BE

CHAPTER I

ence of

Colonies.

ENOUGH has been perhaps said to show how hesitating Virtual and uncertain were the first steps of English Colonial independpolicy. So many Colonies-we may almost say-so many New different types. Virginia, New England, Maryland, all England present special features, are all examples of a distinct method of treatment. But for whoever had eyes to read the signs of the times, there could be no question which type would, in the long run, prevail. As surely as the house built upon the rock is firmer than the house built upon the sand, so surely would the New England character become the predominant one in the eastern states of the future. We know how large were the powers in fact possessed by Massachusetts. It elected its own governors; it carried on its domestic affairs in complete independence of England. We even find it going to war with the French without consulting the Home Government. When Connecticut set up as a separate Colony, it did not ask the leave of England. New Hampshire, and at a later date Maine,1 were absorbed by Massachusetts in the same independent fashion. When, in 1643, the four Colonies of Plymouth, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Newhaven formed a confederation, as the United Colonies of New England, no leave was asked of the Mother country. It is true that, in the preamble to the Articles, "those sad distractions in England" are alluded to as to some extent necessitating the measure; but the confederation in all probability would have been formed in any case. In the same spirit, Massachusetts set up its own Mint in 1652. Nor did the New England Colonies confine themselves to the field of practice. They also maintained in theory what they claimed to be their rights. In 1646 the court of elders and assistants drew up à formal statement of their views.

1 In 1641 and 1652.

of

Colonies.

Opinions were not quite unanimous, but the prevailing doctrine was, as given by Winthrop, that "by our charter we have absolute power of government, for thereby we have power to make laws, to erect all sorts of magistracy, to correct, punish, pardon, govern, and rule the people absolutely." Their allegiance only bound them to the laws of England while they lived in England; "for the laws of the Parliament of England reach no further, nor do the King's writs under the Great Seal go any further." Their dependence upon England lay in owing allegiance and fidelity. Such allegiance was shown by "the erecting such a government as the patent prescribes, and subjecting ourselves to the laws here ordained by that government." On the whole, the practical conclusion seemed to be that England had the right to interfere in the single case of the Colony acting in violation of the provisions of its charter.

Attitude Such being the temper of Massachusetts, of the leaven which was to leaven the United States, the sequel of the story may well seem inevitable: but if we turn to a Royalist Colony, to Barbados, a West Indian Island, 2" principally inhabited by men who had retired thither only to be quiet and to be free from the noise and oppression in England," we find the same 1651. note of independence. The declaration issued by Barbados

protests against the doctrine that they should "be subjected to the will and command of those that stay at home." Two 1653. years later we are told that some persons had a design to make this place "a free State and not to run any fortune with England either in peace or war." Such being the temper of men of both parties it is obvious how dangerous for the future of English Empire were the distractions of the Civil War. In the Bermudas, for a time, power was practically in the hands of the ministers, who went "to such lengths as to make a man quite out of love with the government of the clergy." 3 We are not surprised that henceforth the Bermudas inclined to the royalist side.

1 Journal History of Massachusetts, Vol. II., p. 352.
2 Clarendon, Hist. of the Rebellion, book xiii.

Sainsbury, 1574-1660. Feb. 1642.

In the American Colonies there was in New England naturally no royalist party, as the method of the colonists in dealing with those who differed on fundamentals had been to put them on a ship and send them home again. In Virginia parties were more divided. It is difficult to believe that among the Virginian settlers there were many who really sympathised with Puritanism, but undoubtedly there was a popular party, strongly represented in the house of Burgesses, who saw in the success of the parliamentary party at home a means to improve their own position. In Maryland, on the other hand, there appears to have been little independent feeling on the question, the one thought in the mind of its astute proprietor being how, wh prevailed,

tion Acts.

he might feather his own private nest. In this state of things all seems drifting towards disruption, and yet what we find is the exact opposite, a definite Colonial policy first Policy of deliberately adopted which was to prevail for more than a Naviga hundred and fifty years. It has been often noticed how many of the leaders of the Long Parliament had passed their political apprenticeship in New England. The younger Sir Henry Vane and S. Vassall were among those who could speak with practical experience on colonial affairs, but the men who were now ruling England, whatever their faults, were not the men to cower before difficulties. Already in 1643. 1643, Lord Warwick had been appointed Governor-in-Chief of all Plantations, as well as Lord High Admiral. Commis- Nov. 24. sioners for the Plantations were, at the same time, appointed, among whom we find the names of Lord Pembroke, Lord Saye and Seal, Sir Henry Vane, John Pym, Oliver Cromwell, and S. Vassall. After the execution of Charles I., one of the first measures taken was to apprise the Colonies of the change of Government. When Barbados, Antigua, Virginia, and Somers Islands, appeared to be still Royalist, an Ordinance 1650. of Parliament was at once passed, prohibiting trade with them. In the next year a Fleet was despatched against Barbados, and Commissioners sent to settle the affairs of Virginia. With regard to Barbados, the terms offered by Sir G. Ayscue, the Parliamentary Admiral, were very gener

« AnkstesnisTęsti »