X, FROM THE LIBRARY OF REV. LOUIS FITZGERALD BENSON. D. D. BEQUEATHED BY HIM TO THE LIBRARY OF PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ) PUKITANIS^!^5:roFPRw^^ ^APR 23 1932 A CHURCHMAN'S DEFENCE AGAINST ITS ASPERSIONS, BY AN APPEAL TO ITS OWN HISTORY, Tender stomachs that cannot endure milk, but can very well digest iron." Jeremy Taylor^s Works, vi. cccxxxv. " Laud was justified by the men whom he had wronged." BancrofVs United States, i. 451. yy By THOMAS W. COIT, D.D., KHCTOB OF TRINITY CHURCH, NEW-BOCHELLl!, N. T., AND A. MEMBER OF TH] NKW-TORK: HISTORICAIi 300IETT, NEW-YORK : D. APPLETON & CO., 200 BROADWAY. PHILADELPHIA : GEORGE S. APPLETON, No. 148 Chesnut-st. MDCCCXLV. Ehtzred, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1845, by THOMAS W. COIT, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Southern District of New- York. J. F. Trow & Co., pr., 33 Ann-street. ' They tell us, that on th.e lilglieat of the Capsian raountains in Spain, there is a lake, whereinto if you thro-w a stone, there presently ascends a smoke, which forms a dense cloud, from -whence issues a tempest of rain, hail, and horrid thun- der-claps, for a good quarter of an hour. Our Church History ■wiH he like a stone cast into that lake, for the furious tempest which it will raise among some, whose ecclesiastical dignities have set them, as on the top of Spanish mountains." — Mather's Magnalia, i. 35, edit. 1820. " Milton was a Puritan." Leonard Bacon^s Hist, Disc. p. 36. Behold, then, a Puritan's picture of the Westminster Assembly of Divines ! — " Setting sail to all winds, that might blow gain into their covetous bosoms." "They taught compulsion without conviction, which not long before they com- plained of as executed unchristianly, against themselves." " And well did their disciples manifest themselves to be no better principled than their teachers, trusted with committeeships and other gainful offices, upon their commendations for zealous, (and as they sticked not to term them,) godly men ; but executing their places like children of the devil, unfaithfully, unjustly, unmercifully, and where not corruptly, stupidly. So that between them the teachers, and these the disciples, there hath not been a more ignominious and mortal wound to faith, to piety, to the work of reformation, nor more cause of blaspheming given to the enemies of Ood and truth, since the first preaching of reformation.^' Milton's Prose Works, in one vol. Lond. 1838, p. 503. N. B. An intelligent reader will not be surprised to learn, that the Puritans have succeeded in suppressing the above passages, with a number more like them, in most of the editions of Milton. See note to the edition quoted, p. 502. 1* PREFACE. In the autumn of 1843, I received, from several of the bishops arid a large number of the clergy, a letter relative to certain communications made by me to " The Churchman," during the year 1835, concerning the his- tory of the Puritans, and their harsh and unwearied cavils against Episcopalians. They expressed an earnest de- sire that those letters should be revised, and published in a permanent form ; giving it as their decided opinion, that " the cause of truth and justice" required the labor at my hands. It was not the first nor the twentieth time, probably, that I had been approached upon the subject — a subject which the recollection of abuse, (" rain, hail, and horrid thunder-claps,") poured upon me without measure, determined me never to resume on my individual responsibility. But it was the first time that my brethren in the ministry seemed willing, by giv- ing me their signatures, to share with me the responsibil- ity of publishing disagreeable facts. Accordingly, I felt it to be a duty to go forward to my task, and made some preparation for it without delay. But another work, which the Church was pleased to ask of me, interfered, (the editing of a Standard Prayer Book,) and it was not until this last winter, that I could devote myself to labors, which it was my intention to have begun a year sooner. viii PREFACE. Nor was I able to complete those labors, as soon as was expected of me. The original letters of 1835 were less used, than it was presumed they would be, the work swelled under my hand, and has become, a large portion of it, entirely new. I was the more willing, perhaps, that it should be mainly new, as the temper of it, in its first form, was so much complained of. Probably, many will think it sharp enough now ; but they may be assured it is easier, vastly easier, to be sharp than to be otherwise, in reviewing the sharpest and most unflagging of all fault-finders — a full-blooded Puritan. Such an one seems never so much at home, as when he is whetting his knife or dissect- ing ; and to contemplate him disarmed requires serious effort. The candid among my brethren will therefore give me credit for moderation, rather than tax me with severity. As to '' those without," I must, of course, ex- pect no quarter, for rousing facts from a sleep, which they fain hoped to make eternal. So I must look to posterity for justice, and bide my time. It was necessary, probably, that some one should bring these facts into open view ; and if I am to be vic- timized for thus doing, be it so. My facts will not be extinguished, if I myself am rhetorically crucified. N^on omnis ?noj'iar ; multaque pars mei Vitabit Lihitinam. I close all I have to say in this connexion, with a refer- ence to a remark of the late Dr. Dwight of Yale College. In his Letters on New England, to put an end to the complaints of foreigners about persecutions inflicted by Puritans, he says, '' An Englishman, certainly, must, if PREFACE. ix he look into the ecclesiastical annals of his own country, be forever silent on the subject." (Travels, i. pp. 163, 164.) If this logic is good, then when a Puritan looks into the ecclesiastical annals of his predecessors, he must be as silent also. Dr. Dwight has settled this point from his presidential chair, (a throne if it were in England,) and the criminations of Plymouth Rock orators are at an end, " forever." I have but a word more to offer, and that respects the execution of my work. The nature of the argument (one in its aim, but numerous in its applications) required me to go over the same ground, again and again. If, then, sentiments or authorities are occasionally repeated, it is hoped an excuse will be found for me, in the necessity of the case — in the importance of helping dull memories by iterations — and in the example of Puritan orators, etc., who have repeated the same things, systematically, for some two hundred years. New Rochelle, N. Y., July 9, 1845. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Letter I., p. 13. General sketch of the subjects embraced in these Letters. The mo- tives which prompted them, and the plan pursued. Letter IL, p. 25. Origin and aim of Puritanism in England. Letter IIL, p. 40. The temper of Puritanism in England, with its treatment there. Letter IV., p. 63. Expatriation of the Puritans. Was " a purely religious cause" its object ? Letter V., p. 79. Review of some apologies for the Puritans, offered by their advocates. Letter VI., p. 104. Review of the reasons for Puritan expatriation, assigned in N. Mor- ton's " New England's Memorial." Letter VII., p. 130. Early history of Puritanism in New England. The patents from the Virginia and Plymouth companies, Massachusetts charters, etc. Letter VIII., p. 153. Professions of the Puritans towards the Church of England. Their rejection of the ordinations of that Church. Reordinations of Episcopal clergymen. Lay ordinations, etc. xii CONTENTS. Letter IX., p. 174. Treatment of early Episcopal settlers by the Puritans. William Blackstone — the Browns — Bright — Morell — Vassall — petitioners of 1646. Letter X., p. 194. New England in the days of the Commonwealth. Importance of dates to illustrate Laud's conduct. Cromwell tries to check New Eng- land. Treatment of Churchmen by the Puritans, from the days of Charles II. and onward. Letter XL, p. 214. Puritan church Establishment. Fines, etc., under this Establishment. Laws against Holy-Days. Contempt of Puritan ministers punished. Richard Gibson. Gov. Andross in a Puritan meeting-house. Puritan- ism less republican than is supposed. Letter XII., p. 238. Influence of the Puritan ministers in both Church and State. Ad- ministrations of Gov. Winthrop and Gov. Endicott. Letter XIIL, p. 260. Puritanic efforts to defeat an American Episcopate, and to thwart Episcopal missionaries. Episcopacy invidiously represented as a cause of the American Revolution. Letter XIV., p. 279. Puritanic treatment of the Baptists. Letter XV., p. 306. Puritanic treatment of the Quakers. Letter XVI., p. 333. Puritanic treatment of the Papists. Letter XVII., p. 361. Puritanic treatment of the Presbyterians. Letter XVIIL, p. 394. Puritanic treatment of the Indians. LETTER I. TO THE BISHOPS AND CLERGY, WHO HAVE URGED ME TO MY PRESENT UNDERTAKING. Fathers and Brethren : — Agreeably to the plan which I have marked out for ray- self, this first letter will be, almost entirely, an exact reprint of the first letter on the Puritans, addressed to '* The Church- man" in January 1835. I consider it important to give this letter in full, as well because it is a bird's-eye view of the whole subject, as because it shows the provocation under which 1 at first acted. That letter was designed to be all I might write ; but a fresh and bitterer provocation induced me to continue writing. I accordingly commenced anew, but with abundant references to books and documents, to show that I did not mean to deal in unsupported allegations ; and I was not aware that I was under the influence of an angry temper ; for I am quite sure, Puritan history has made me smile twenty times, where it has made me scowl once : if, indeed, I am amenable to the charge of scowling, in any just degree whatever. Nevertheless, I was informed, to my profound astonishment, that I was considered quite ferocious; and, at Andover, pronounced to be (after the fashion of old indictments,) under the direct instigation of the devil. And when so told I smiled again ; for, un- 2 14 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. conscious of any malice, I thouglit the sting of my papers lay in my facts ; and especially in my arranging those facts under a line of poetry, taken from a Puritan himself ^ and which he would fain have applied to Churchmen, or to dissenters from a Puritan establishment. The line — " Old wounds need vinegar as well as oil" — is doubtless well re- membered ; but perhaps it is not as well remembered, that when I was informed of its ofTensiveness, I struck it out, and never intruded it again. But I will not dwell on these matters, and postpone what is far more important. They have been introduced solely to show, that when I wrote before, I was not under the influ- ence of that aggressive hostility to Puritanism, which many imputed to me, and that I am not under it still. I wrote, because constrained to do it in defence of our Church ; and take up my pen again, not self-prompted, but at your urgent request, because you assure me the Church may be bene- fited by my humble advocacy. I regret the necessity which requires us, in support of our own cause, to tell plain and unwelcome truths concerning our opponents ; but, relying on your judgment in the case, shall proceed to my task. One thing those opponents most certainly must admit, viz : that I have been in no hurry to repeat the disagreeable statements I once made; or to repeat them in a more durable form than that of a fugitive newspaper. It is now more than ten years, since I first wrote what here follows. I have just been reading a pamphlet, the imitator of a succession as closely adhered to by Congregationalists, as the apostolical one by Churchmen. Its title is, " Great Princi- ples associated with Plymouth Rock." Now, Mr. Editor, suppose your humble servant were to attempt a pamphlet with a similar title, only altering the association from this inuch-famed piece of granite, to some spot of clay, or sand, REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 15 in Virginia, or Maryland, or Pennsylvania, or perchance to quite as good a block of stone on the shores of Rhode Island* — how our Massachusetts Puritans,^ (I beg pardon, the descendants of them — the name is rather unsavory to some,) would stare ! And yet as a Churchman, or a Roman Catholic, or a Quaker, or a Baptist, it might be done by me with a very serene conscience, as these few lines may show. The celebrity of Plymouth-rock heroes is expatiated on, year by year, with most unflagging perseverance. Why? Oh! because, as this address tells us, for about the two-hundreth time, (they landed in 1620,) '' they were persecuted — that they fled from persecution — that they came in suffering and poverty to a desolate shore, in the dreariness of winter, and reared their rude habitations amid 'the peltings of the piti- less storm,' and the ravages of disease;" (p. 19;) because they were striving " to escape from the tyranny of unjust kings, and the domination of lords spiritual;" (p. 12;) and were willing to endure all this, that they might throw off" " the yoke of despotism, and cast aside the mummeries of superstition ;" (p. 12;) because, "if a heathen could declare, that a great man struggling with adversity is a sight worthy of the gods," then we ought to " venerate Christians, thus suffering with fortitude for conscience' sake." (p. 19.) Is the tyranny by which public opinion is swayed — the yoke under which it is bowed — the mummery by which it is mocked, never to cease ? Here are a body of men who desert their native land,'' at a most inclement season of the year, and subject themselves to excessive and protracted hardships. True, the spectacle is melancholy, and we are fain to pity it. But so also is the spectacle of the privations endured by a Greenland 1 See Note 1. ^ See Note 2. ^ See Note 3. 16 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. whale-fisherman : why are we not as much bound to com- passionate him ? Tliis question shows, it is not their mere losses and pains, which makes the case of the Puritans deeply lamentable. Still, as the naked exhibition of human misery (aside from its causes) is an effective means by which to move our sensibilities, it has been unfailingly relied on by Plymouth orators. So the advocates in Roman courts often introduced the wives and children of an individual client, and made their tears and moans speak for him. At this day, whether rhetoric is argument need not be asked. Let us then forego sensibility a moment, and with cool justice inquire, simply and plainly, why the Puritans came to these Atlantic shores. Did they abandon England solely ^ or even principally^ on account of religious considerations ?* My answer is an immediate negative : and I think it can easily be made out from a single work I have at hand, and might as well or better be from many others, had I at this moment access to them. The work alluded to is entitled, "An Ac- count of the European Settlements in America, in six parts." London, 1757. 2 vols. 8vo. The work is a rare and valu- ble one, and speaks with candor of the faults and excellencies of both parties. It states unequivocally, (vol. ii. 137, 138,) that '' early in the reign of King James, a number of persons of this per- suasion [Puritan] had sought refuge in Holland; in which, though a country of the greatest religious freedom in the world, they did not find themselves better satisfied than they had been in England. They were tolerated, indeed, but watched ; their zeal began to have dangerous languors for want of opposition, and being without power or consequence, they grew tired of the indolent security of their sanctuary ; they chose to remove to a place where they should see no superior." Now, if they merely wanted freedom of con- 4 See Note 4. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 17 science, they had it in Holland, ex abtindanti. But as our author affirms, with unquestionable truth, they were there " without power or consequence." And, moreover, as their charter for a settlement in America, which they had wit or influence enough to obtain even ivhen they had left England^ — as this charter shows, they were not quite so stern in practice, as in preaching, about the compatibility between piety and a regajrd to temporal interests. These formidable denouncers of that love which is '* the root of all evil," took precious good care that this charter should cover an " ex- clusive trade," " from Nova Scotia to the southern parts of Carolina," and, (though they had a most pious horror of the Pope, and would have execrated him from head to foot, after his own fashion of cursing, for giving away the soil of South America,) that it should also guarantee " the entire property of the soil besides." (See vol. ii. 138, of the work above.) Nay, as this same work shows, p. 140, " the then profitable trade of furs and skins," and the fisheries, induced not a few, " uneasy at home upon a religious account," to go where they might enjoy the invaluable privilege of free thought, and the inconsiderable one of making money a little faster. In connexion with the testimony of the work just quoted, I cannot refrain from adding one which occurs to me, from a discourse I heard delivered a few years since, before the Essex Historical Society, by the Hon. Justice Story.* It amply proves, that aversion to the Church of England, as a spiritual institution, was by no means the excuse of the Puritans for expatriating themselves from a land dear to them by almost every sacred tie. The Judge quoted from their farewell communication, when they were under weigh, or had just launched upon the deep. He showed how they called the Church of England their '' dear mother," and ^ See Note 5. * Delivered Sept. 18, 1828 ; and now to be found in Story's Miscel- lanieSj p. 34. 18 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. indulged in terms of unbounded reverence and affection towards her. In fact, so strong and pertinent was the lan- guage quoted by him,* that, as it fell from his lips, a Calvin- ist near me was unable to keep quiet. True to his sect, he could not accredit the Judge's honesty, in a matter which militated against them ; for he knew that the sympathies of the speaker were with Unitarians. So, turning to me, he whispered with most ominous emphasis and deliberation, " Can this be true V^ Such evidence, Mr. Editor, (and it might be piled up in heaps, if necessary,) establishes incontestably the fact, that persecution for religious opinions never drove the Puritans from home, to seek the inhospitable shelter of a howling wilderness. They might have had comfortable homes, by good Dutch peat-fires, and lived and died unmolested and unfearing ; although, perhaps, \\\\\\ less stock at the bank- er's, than " exclusive trade " in furs and fisheries might secure. But they wanted a little more notoriety — a little more power — a little more money. They who wielded the government of England, and enjoyed its offices, were Epis- copalians : those who were at the helm in Holland, were Presbyterians ; who were rather more fond than they of Ar- minianism,t and fully as much so of "exclusive trade," and "entire property" in soil. The ascendency in Holland would be as hard to gain, as the ascendency at home ; (I mean the ascendency in politics, money-making and reli- gion;) and so nothing remained but to " hoist the mainsail to the wind," and steer for a land where they might be unrivalled and supreme. Verily this is the plain case, and the whole of it. The Puritans did not hate the Church of England 'per se.^ Their affectionate and reverential language, (language « See Note 6. * Story's Miscellanies, p. 54. t I should have said * of their own church polity.' REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 19 Strong enough to excite suspicions of garbling and misquo- tation, against a gentleman of unblemished honor and in- tegrity,) proves this beyond all question ; or they really were, what their enemies have called them, canting hypo- crites. If they could have enjoyed the powers, immunities, and revenues of the Church of England, that Church would have become " all glorious within :" she would have been " without wrinkle and without spot;" as she would now be, in the eyes of many a Dissenter, who is sounding alarms about her corruptions, and shouting ' Reform ! Reform !' with the vociferous zeal of the multitude, who cried ' Cru- cify him ! Crucify him!"" They were any thing but in- imical to Establishments on principle ; for they commenced their own Establishment in Massachusetts, with marvellous speed and sagacity ; and so well were its foundations laid — so accurately and solidly were its parts cemented, that we find the author of our address saying, (p. 26,) " The last link, connecting Church and State in this Commonwealth, has happily been broken, by abolishing the law requiring a general assessment for the support of public worship :" — broken however, be it remembered, not till 1834 : — pretty good iron, Mr. Editor, and well taken care of, to last so long.^ I say they commenced their own Establishment. Let our author speak to this point. (Eu. Sett. ii. 144.) '' As soon as they began to think of making laws, I find no less than five about matters of religion ; all contrived, and not only contrived but executed in some respects with so much rigor, that the persecution which drove the Puritans out of England, [you see he spares not Churchmen,] might be considered as great lenity and indulgence in the compar- ison."^ The penalties of these laws were inflicted on Episcopa- ' See Note 7. « See Note 8. » See Note 9. 20 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. lians, Roman Catholics, Quakers, and Baptists; who were arraigned, fined, proscribed, banished, threatened with death, and in several instances actually executed. Yes, be it never forgotten, when an attempt is made to drug us with the praises of meek and mourning Puritans — martyrs in the cause of truth and conscience — that, though lambs dumb before their shearers in England, a journey of three thou- sand miles was enough to convert them into wolves that dabble in blood!'" Such men, (the black deed cannot be wiped out of history's page,) appealed to the cord and the gibbet, when decrees of banishment and threats of violence were not sufficiently intimidating. The fires of Smithfield — the dungeons of the Inquisition — the fines of the Star Chamber, are all bad enough ; but let a Puritan beware of comment on them ; his own story, especially when con- trasted with his pretensions, is as bad as any chapter in the horrible or disgusting records of human wrath and vio- lence.'^ Indeed, I never wonder, as I read it, at the keen and witty comment of one of their own number, whom de- testation of their uncharitableness constrained to seek refuge in the very country he had abandoned.* *' I fled," said he, " from England to escape the tyranny of my lord- bisJiops ; but I was glad to get back again to escape the ty- ranny of my lord-brethren.''^ ^ t Let us now turn, a few moments, from the Puritans to their neighbors ; pretendedly so much their inferiors in piety, and confessedly their inferiors in the love of power and domination, and withal of finding and keeping money. The poor Cavaliers, and their descendants, fled from ^° See Note 10. ^' See Note 11. 12 ggg -^^^^ i^. * So I then thought ; but it seems he went to Rhode Island. t This was said by the Rev. Mr. Blackstone, whom Cotton Mather condescends to call one of the " some godly Episcopalians." Magnalia, i. 221. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 21 Puritan persecution, in the days of the Parliament, and sought refuge in Virginia. There they were content to remain in quiet, if undisturbed. But no : the trade in to- bacco, &/C., was getting to be valuable ; and missionaries were therefore necessary to convert them to the true faith I Missionaries were actually sent from New England to Vir- ginia, and by men whose descendants raised a grievous out- cry, in the days of Drs. Mayhew and Apthorp, because the Society for Propagating the Gospel presumed to send mis- sionaries to Massachusetts — a soil, forsooth, " the entire property," (remember the charter, Mr. Editor,) '' the entire property " of the Puritans. It were a singular theme of speculation, to pause here and try to conjecture why, when a Papist or a Churchman descants on ecclesiastical jurisdic- tion, his ideas are divertingly ridiculous, but wholly change their nature when the theme of a Congregation alist. But this curious subject must be left, with some other mysteries in our American logic and psychology, to an author of our own Church; who, when his history of Virginia, &c., shall appear, will undoubtedly solve them for the satisfaction of all, at least, of all Churchmen. '^ I proceed. In Maryland the Roman Catholics clus- tered together ; but they, although quite as much, or more oppressed by civil enactments than the Puritans, better esti- mated the value of an unharassed conscience, and more cordially respected its privileges. In Maryland, (so the Roman Catholics claim : see the well-written pastoral letter of their prelates, assembled in council in Baltimore, a few years since,) the rights of conscience were first fully recog- nized in this country. This is a fact I never knew dis- puted by good authority ; and, though a Protestant with all my heart,- I accord them the full praise of it with the frankest sincerity, and boldly declare, it honors them on the 13 See Note 13. 2* ^o 22 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. silent page of our annals, more than the Puritans were ever honored by the noisy plaudits of a hundred Plymouth de- claimers.^* In Pennsylvania, the scouted Quakers acknowledged, respected, and granted the right of unrestricted enjoyment in matters of religion. In Rhode Island, the same thing was done by Roger Williams, and the banished Baptists. Now, Mr. Editor, in view of so cursory an illustration and comparison as even this, let me ask, — Is it fair, is it honorable, is it candid, for a selfish and unsparing clan, who with their descendants never admitted nor conceded the right of private judgment — who linked Church and State to- gether so tightly, that centuries could hardly sunder them — who persecuted by law, by penalties, by proscription and violence — who shrunk not from the tremendous daring of deeds of blood in the sight of all heaven — is it fair, is it honorable, is it candid, oh ! is it to be tolerated, that such men should be eulogized, and re-eulogized, with every suc- cessive year, until their fame has become a standing topic for canonization ? To me, when I think of the superior lib- erality of Churchmen, of Papists, of Quakers, and of Bap- tists, this seems at times quite monstrous ; and I feel as if a few of the unlovely, nay the disgraceful, merciless, and san- guinary passages of Puritan history, in this country, ought to be known and well known. They shall be, if the writer live to see the repetition of laudatory harangues over them. He has borne the infliction of such harangues, till he thought the good sense of the community would be an ample correc- tion. It seems that this cannot be relied on, for the simple reason, that but {e\\ of the community have ever heard but one side of the question ; and on that so many changes have been rung, as to induce many to believe none other " See Note 14. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 23 can be sounded. Our patience is not respected. Still the wearisome and revolting tale about the persecutions of the Church of Enorland is clanored, clanged in our ears, and thrust up in our faces ; as though it would be heresy or treason to think it suspicious or untrue. Such treatment can only be parried by alert self-defence. Let this then be resorted to. It has been attempted in this hasty sketch ; which, scanty as* it is, can still show what might be said, and may possibly provoke a caution, which has long been swallowing anodynes and has fallen asleep. January 24, 1835. Such was the beginning of my observations on the Puri- tans, at the date given above ; and, with this, it was fully intended my labors, in the defence of our Church against modern assailants, should rest. But, (if I may repeat a little, to be very explicitly understood,) my ink was scarcely dry, when my resolution was put to an acute trial by another pamphlet, far more virulent than its predecessor : which I descwbed, at the time, in language of little reserve, but which, as some thought it too caustic, shall not be reiterated. Feeling challenged to meet the issue I had contemplated, but earnestly hoped to escape, I commenced again, and wrote for *' The Churchman" (published then, as it still is, in New-York,) a series of articles, which drew down upon my name a shower of scorching execrations, that might well have withered a stronger resolution than I ever could boast of But, luckily for myself, I was in retirement, and knew extremely little of what was said by friend or foe. I heard of the storm after it had passed, and with amazement ; for I did not imagine that, in this enlightened and liberal age, facts (and my columns were studded with references) could alarm any one. Yet so it was ; and so thoroughly was I possessed with the idea that I had acquired a most unblessed 24 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. celebrity, that, though urged and urged again to put my ar- ticles into a permanent form, I steadily refused. Churchmen have so often assured me that I have erred, and such a list of names is at last sent to induce me to yield my determina- tion, that I have acquiesced. And I have done so with a firm belief, that the virulence of past days has not abated. Never have American Episcopalians known more fiery trials, under the assaults of adversaries, than during the last few years. And these assaults threaten, like Nebuchadnez- zar's furnace, to be seven times hotter. For example, could any thing, in the compass of the human imagination, picture our Church in a more woeful, reprobate condition, than the last New Englander, (Oct. 1844, p. 526,) which portrays it as on the eve of becoming " a sacramental way to hell ?"* If in such circumstances, then, some of that plainness of speech and open array of fact, which was deemed so un- necessary in 1835, be again attempted, upon the heads of those who have provoked it let the blame fall. My plan, in the letters that may follow, will be to give a brief outline of the origin and aim of Puritanism in England, with some developments of its temper and treatment ; Jthen to pursue its history in New England, more in detail, as was before done. For the accomplishment of my work, I shall rely much upon the letters addressed to " The Churchman ;" though I shall not quote them as I have the first, and shall endeavor to have less " vinegar" in my ink, than I was sup- posed to use previously, however the sharpness of the times might justify its employment. * This is an echo, like many such things, of the style of an earlier day. Bogue and Bennett represent the Puritans as flying from a false and superstitious religion with impositions on conscience — the greatest evil on this side hell. — Hist, of Dissenters, ii. 427. One of the fashiona- ble Puritan ways, in old times, to describe the Church of England, was to say, that she was "Anti-Christian, yea, of the Devil." — Edwards' Gangraena, pt. i. p. 25. Or see Edwards quoted in Note 29. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 25 LETTER II. Pursuing my plan, I shall endeavor, in this letter, to present you my views of the origin and rise of Puritanism in England. It is generally supposed that Puritanism took its rise from the exiles, who were compelled to fly the kingdom in the reign of Queen Mary, and who sojourned on the conti- nent long enough to imbibe a love for the discipline and doctrine of the continental Protestants. But a writer, who deals largely in quotations from their own books, and who lived through all the reverses of Charles I. and Abp. Laud, maintains the contrary. This writer is Sir William Dug- dale, who was born in 1605 and died in 1686. In his folio upon *' the late troubles in England," published in 1681, he advances the opinion, that they were first imported into England from the continent, in the reign of King Edward VI., and created so much disturbance as to excite the ire even of Calvin, who was no enemy of wholesome authority, and by no means shrank from the use of carnal weapons and material fire. Calvin would have had Somerset, the Protector during Edward's minority, restrain them " by the revenging sword."* No doubt the leaven of Puritanism was working in Eng- land before the days of Queen Elizabeth. The very emblem of it (a round head) was well known in Germany, long be- fore its appearance on English shores ;t and if the outside * Dugdale, p. 9. t Dugdale, p. 8. 26 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. of its liead was imported from a land of fierce fanaticism, it is hard to suppose that some of the inside of it did not come from the same source. Bishop Hall fearlessly avowed as much, in his place in Parliament. *' Your Lordships know," said he in one of his speeches, *' that the Jack Straws, and Cades, and Wat Tylers of former times, did not more cry down learning than nobility ; and those of your Lordships that have read the history of the Anabaptistical tumults at Munster, will need no other item : let it be enough to say, that many of these sectaries are of the same profession."* The fanatics of Germany then are the first fathers of Pu- ritanism— fanatics, whom the sternness of Roman despo- tism drove into the terrible extremes which they adven- tured. There is no question, however, that Puritanism was abetted and fomented by the exiles who returned from Geneva and elsewhere, saturated with foreign disci- pline, doctrine, and politics ; and as these exiles were made such, by the same despotism, we are in more than one way indebted to the Romish Church for all the evils which Pu- ritanism has drawn in its train.' ^ Rome denounces the Protestant world for its dissensions. When all liberty has been taken from men, they are apt to abuse it, if regained by blood from their oppressors ; and more of the sin of Pro- testant dissension will be found in the skirts of Popery, than was ever remotely suspected in the halls of the Vatican. f And in England itself, the commencement of Puritan- ism was neither unnoticed nor unregarded by politicians, '^ See Note 15. * Works, viU. 490. t Singularly enough, as some may think, this very opinion was en- tertained by Abp. Laud himself. In his most able Conference with the Jesuit Fisher, he affirmed, that the divisions of Protestants were the inev- itable result of" the corruptions and superstitions of Rome, which forced many men to hold and teach the contrar)'." — (Conference, Oxford edit. 1839, p. 112.) REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 27 and by politicians of high station. It is well known that many politicians, in the reign of Henry VIII., favored his Protestant views ; not so much because they loved the Ro- mish Church but little, as because they loved its spoils the more. Greedy politicians battened upon the impropriated revenues of the Church then, and they hoped to play the same game over again, in the days of Elizabeth. Bishops were lords under a Protestant queen, as well as under a Popish monarch ; and in the progress of time their sees were .calculated to become richer than ever, by a natural advance in the value of landed ^property. This was easily foreseen, by eyes roving for golden prospects ; and any scheme which would divert the lands of an Episcopal see, and erect them into a temporal barony, was of course a fair one to find fa- vor. Good Isaac Walton saw through all this, with half an eye, and thus states the matter in his life of Richard Hooker. " So that those very men, that began with tender, meek petitions, proceeded to admonitions, then to satirical remonstrances ; and at last having, like Absalom, numbered who was not and who was for their cause, they got a supposed certainty of so great a party, that they durst threaten first the bishops, and then the Queen and Parliament : to all which they were secretly encouraged by the Earl of Leicester, then in great favor with her Majesty, and the reputed cherisher and pa- tron-general of these pretenders to tenderness of conscience : his design being, by their means, to bring such odium upon the bishops, as to procure the alienation of their lands, and a large proportion of them for himself; which avaricious desire had at last so blinded his reason, that his ambitious and greedy hopes seemed to put him into a present posses- sion of Lambeth House."* * Hanbury's Hooker, i. pp. Ixxv, Ixxvi. Maddox's Vindication, pp. 186, 187. Soame's Elizabethan History, 78, 366-67. Broughton's Diet. ii. 303. Lathbury's Eng. Episcopacy, 43. King Charles saw the same disposition in his day. '' The confiscation of men's estates being 28 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. And there is stronger testimony than this, which goes straight to show, that the Puritans looked further, much further, than relief from a few " indifferent ceremonies." *' The same spirit," says De Lolme, ** which had made an attack on the established faith, now directed itself to poli- tics."* This was in reference to a somewhat later time than the period now under review ; but it is the direct fulfilment of a prophecy uttered by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London, in an official letter, so early as A. D. 1573. " In the platform set down by these new builders, we evidently see the spoliation of the patrimony of Christ and a popular state to be sought. The end will be, ruin to reli- gion, and confusion to our country. "t Laud, who by a singular coincidence was born this very year, 1573, fore- saw and predicted the same result. " These men," said he, " do but begin with the Church, that they might after have the freer access to the State." '^ J For Laud was a scholar, beyond even Puritan question ; and I dare say he remembered his Virgil, or Montaigne's beautiful ver- sion of him, where he says : " I am betimes sensible of the little breezes, that begin to sing and whistle in the shrouds ; the forerunners of the storm." The protestation of loyalty, required of Puritans as well as Papists, demonstrates the open apprehension of Elizabeth's government ; though Mr. Neal, with his usual confidence, presumes to say there was " no manner of occasion" for it.§ And, beginning upon the Church, where did their ad- vancing and branching schemes design to end ? In nothing less than in a political, as well as ecclesiastical, revolution 16 See Note 16. more beneficial than the charity of saving their lives, or reforming their errors." — Eikon Basilike, p. 105. London, 182-i. * De Lolme on the Constitution, p. 50. t Collier's Eccl. Hist. vi. 536. t Harris's Charles L p. 231. § Neal's Puritans, i. 274. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 29 of all England. " Reformation begins at the sanctuary," was their motto, in the preface to a most radical little vol- ume, called the " Anatomy of the Service Booke ;" which was intended to provoke Parliament to throw the Liturgy overboard, that bishops, and king, and constitution, might follow after. Truly, they would have '' meted out and trod- den down" Church and State, " as straw is trodden down for the dunghill ;" and built every thing anew, after " the right stamp, and agreeable to the pattern in the Mount."* This is admitted, virtually, by Mr. Hallam, who calls Laud " choleric, vindictive," &.C., and grants, as a sweet concession, that he was " not literally destitute of religion." He allows that their writings prove, that they would have made no compromise, short of the overthrow of the Estab- lished Church. t It is admitted by Peirce, in his Vindication of Dissenters, in terms still stronger. " But I fear," he says, *' could they have obtained their desire of the Parlia- ment, the platform they proposed must have been estab- lished by some persecuting laws."| That is, they not only wanted their own establishment, but wanted it, besides, a persecuting one. Brook, another of their zealous advocates, makes a similar admission, § Their principles, as disclosed in the quotations ofDugdale, and Bp. Hall, (see vol. x. of his Works,) show their wishes in formidable fulness. But, better perhaps than any thing, their terrible sort of conspirator's oath, proves how deeply their revolutionary spirit had pene- trated ; and how much they hoped to effect, by using the souls as well as bodies of sworn associates. Well does Collier say, " as none were more active to increase their party, so they were particularly careful to fasten their proselytes, and to fix them in their mistakes." He says this in prefacing the * Camb. and Saybrook Platforms, p. 6, ed. 1829. t Quarterly Review, 37, pp. 225, 226, 239. X Vind. p. 84. § Christian Observer, American Edition, xiv, 397. 30 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. oath, which, though long, is given in full, as an original document of the highest authority.* " Being thoroughly persuaded in my conscience, by the working and by the word of the Almighty, that these relics of ANTICHRIST be abominable before the Lord our God ; and also for that by the power, mercy, strength, and goodness of the Lord our God only, I am escaped from the filthiness and pollution of these detestable tra- ditions, through the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ; and, last of all, inasmuch as by the working also of the Lord Jesus his Holy Spirit, I have joined in prayer and hearing God's word, with those that have not yielded to this idolatrous trash, notwithstanding the danger for not coming to my parish church, &c. Therefore I come not back again to the preaching, d^c, of them that have re- ceived those marks of the Romish beast. " I. Because of God's commandment to go forward to per- fection. Heb. vi. 1 ; 2 Cor. vii. I ; Psalm Ixxxiv. 1 ; Eph. iv. 15. Also to avoid them, Rom. xvi. 17; Eph. v. 11; 1 Thess. V. 22. " II. Because they are abomination before the Lord our God, Deut. vii. 25, 26, and xiii. 17 ; Ezek. xiv. 6. " III. I will not beautify with my presence those filthy rags, which bring the heavenly word of the Eternal, our Lord God, into bondage, subjection, and slavery. " IV. Because I would not communicate with other men's sins; John ii. 9, 10, 11 ; 2 Cor. vi. 17. Touch no unclean thing, &LC., Sirach xiii. 1.'^ " V. They give offences both to the preachers and the hearers. Rom. xvi. 17 ; Luke xvii. 1. " VI. They gladden and strengthen the Papists in their errors, and grieve the godly; Ezek. xiii. 21, 22. Note this 21st verse. 17 See Note 17. * Collier's Eccl. Hist. vi. 538, 539 ; or ii. 544. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 31 " Vll. They do persecute our Saviour Jesus Christ in his members ; Acts ix. 4, 5 ; 2 Cor. i. 5. Also they reject and despise our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ; Luke x. 16. Moreover those laborers, who, at the prayer of the faithful, the Lord hath sent forth into his harvest, they refuse, and also reject ; Matt. ix. 38. " VIIL These. popish garments are now become very idols indeed, because they are exalted above the word of the Almighty. ** IX. I come not to them, because they should be ashamed, and so leave their idolatrous garments, &,c. ; 2 Thess, iii. 14. If any man obey not our sayings, note him. *' Moreover, I have now joined myself to the Church of Christ,'^ wherein I have yielded myself subject to the discipline of God's word, as I promised at my baptism ;* which, if I should now again mistake, and join myself with their traditions, I should forsake the union wherein I am knit to the body of Christ, and join myself to the discipline of ANTICHRIST. For, in the Church of the traditioners, there is no other discipline than that which hath been main- tained by the antichristian pope of Rome : whereby the Church of God has always been afflicted, and is until this day. For the which cause I refuse them. " God give us grace still to thrive, in suffering under the cross, that the blessed word of our God may only rule, and have the highest place, to cast down strong holds, to destroy or overthrow policy or imaginations, [i. e. polity, or civil government ; and imaginations, or systems of religion,] and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and to bring into captivity, or subjection, every i« See Note 18. * Note this. Even in a horrid oath for the destruction of Episcopa- cy, the Puritans could not forget their Episcopal education. They did not believe, it appears, as their successors do, that baptism is " a mere form." 32 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. thought to the obedience of Christ, &lc. 2 Cor. x. 4, 5. That the name and word of the Eternal, our Lord God, may be exalted or magnified above all things. Psalm viii. 2." To this hydra-oath, with these nine awful heads, the fol- lowing paragraph was annexed, and, says Collier, " stands written in Abp. Parker's hands." " To this protestation the congregation singularly did swear ; and after took the Communion for ratification of their assent." All this, be it remembered, dates as early as 1573.* No wonder that such an egg hatched all the mischiefs of the re- bellion, ending with the downfall, and sack, and devastation, of the Church and State of England. But if the wrathful and final aim of this tremendous ad- juration were so thorough, why, say some, did the Puritans commence their warfare on such jots and tittles as caps and surplices? The answer is easy. How does an expert gen- eral attack a fortress, almost impregnable ? By drawing his lines of circumvallation, cutting off a bastion here, and a redoubt there ; till he can bring his guns to bear upon its citadel, and beat that to pieces about the ears of his oppo- nents, unless they surrender at discretion. And so did the Puritans begin in England. The Church might be made vulnerable, by raising against her the hue and cry of Po- pery.'^ The State could be made vulnerable through the Church, for both were allied.^" And thus both might 19 See Note 19. '° See Note 20. * They loved anti-Episcopal oaths so well, they had them in rhyme also. I subjoin a specimen : " I owe assistance to the king by oath ; And if he please to put the prelates down, As who can tell what may be, I'll be loath To see Tom Becket's mitre push the crown." For this amiable effusion see Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d ser. iv. 104. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 33 be made to fall, and the Puritan darling, Independency, establish its " beautifying presence"* upon their crum- bling fragments. '* As the hangings are made fit for the house," said the sapper and miner Cartwright, '' so the Commonwealth must be made to agree with the Church, and the government thereof with her government."! " Syllables govern the world," said old Selden, who in many things agreed with the Puritans ; though as a philo- sopher he laughed at their eccentricities. If they could teach the people syllables, they could teach them a creed ; and if a creed in religion, why they could teach them a creed in politics too. Charles I. comprehended this game well enough, as his pregnant line, written in Carisbrooke castle, expressively proves. " The crown is crucified with the creed."! His nobility comprehended it as fully, as the Earl of Dorset's speech on Prynne's libellous book, proves also. " Though you seemed, by the title of your book, * to scourge stage-plays, yet it was to make the people be- lieve that there was an apostacy in the magistrates."^ And even King James saw it, when that sentence dropped from him at Hampton Court, which has so often been referred to, as an evidence of the easy grace wiih which he inhaled Episcopal flattery. " No bishop," said he, " no king." And thus, exclaim Puritan commentators, the wily prelates caught him with their sycophantic guile. Not so. King Jamie had all the shrewdness of a Scotch- man, if he did sometimes exhibit the fooleries of a pedant. 2' His rapid conversion to Episcopacy never surprised me. He divined the end of such concessions as were demanded of him ; and saw that he would have no peace from one ra- pacious claim after another, till he laid at the feet of his 21 See Note 21. "* Vide Puritan Oath, No. iii. t Maddox Vind. pp. 211, 212. t Harris's Charles I. p. 126. § Rushworth's Col. ii. 239. 34 REVIEW OF THE PURIJANS. dictatorial suppliants his royal crown.* And this same divination of the end, too, made him, I doubt not, talk more grandiloquently of the prerogatives of crowned heads, than his secret good sense justified. Fear naturally in- clines us to buttress that portion of an edifice we believe most liable to be assaulted. So he bolstered up royalty, with all his might, as did also his successor ; and in their just fears, I can find an extenuation for much of the intol- erance, for which they have been so coarsely upbraided. And the end which the Puritans did finally lay hold on, and the manner in which they rode down Episcopalians, and rode round Presbyterians to reach it, satisfies me com- pletely, that that end was foreseen, (in hope at least,) long before they attained the prize of their calling. Nations are not born in a day. The Puritans expected to struggle long, patiently, and in Macedonian phalanx, as their stringent oath demonstrates.! They knew, moreover, that their final object might cost more than their own unassisted efforts could accomplish. It did. They were obliged to court the alliance of sectaries of every name, and, finally, of the Presbyterians of Scotland. The united parties triumphed. ** It was the union of the three kinds of Puritans, above mentioned, which gave the Parliament the victory in the civil war which followed."! And, then, when the Presbyterians, imagining themselves the stronger portion of the " Holy Alliance," supposed that they would be chiefly benefited, and that their polity would be ascendant in church and state, lo ! they found them- * Compare his own speech. — Fuller's Ch. Hist. iii. 189. It is fuller, and even pathetic, in the Phenix, i. 169, 170. No one should speak, harshly of him, who could speak so tenderly and beautifully of a mother. t " They proceeded with caution : they never submitted any pro- position to the House, calculated to disclose their real sentiments," &c. — Lathbury, 112. t Encyc. Americana, x. 431. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 35 selves foiled by the arts of that serpent, which '' was more subtle than any beast of the field." Their disappointment amounted to agony, and vented itself in dolorous groans ; as the Gangraena, (oh, Puritanism, what a cankering name !) the Gangraena of Thomas Edwards manifests — an echo of which, in some of its purulent statements, has not yet died away: witness Hetherington's History of the West- minster Assembly. Take this sample, from a multitude, of the character of the " Dissenting Brethren," as he, high- church-wise, cognominates them. " The answer of the As- sembly is expressed in somewhat sharper terms, than any of their preceding papers ; which is not surprising, consider- ing the disingenuous and evasive conduct of the Independent party, and it certainly exposes their duplicity in a manner altogether unanswerable."^'^ * A word upon the thoroughness with which the Puritans did their work. They were root and branch men, whose favorite text was, " not a hoof shall be left behind." They were the radicals and destructives of their day.~^ t It was not enough for them to annihilate offices, they must cut off heads also. The blood of Strafford, and Laud, and Charles I., will stain their annals forever. They may try to cast its guilt from themselves, and sprinkle it upon the politicians. But politicians might repay the compliment with interest ; for probably politicians would never have dreamed of succeed- ing against the State, if Puritan ecclesiastics had not begun upon the Church ; and if they did use them for their own 22 See Note 22. 23 g^g ^^^6 23. * Hetherington's Hist. p. 193. t The wits of the day thus described them : " Pluto, beware, to thee they come. When here their work is done : For they'll break loose, and beat up drum, And storm thee in thy throne." Fhcenix Britannicus, i. 180. 36 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. ends, they after a while were nothing loath, and worked marvellously free in their harness. ^^^ jt ^y\\\ never answer, therefore, for the Puritan ministers to resist the imputation of bloodguiltiness. It is one, and but one, of their unfortu- nate imitations of Rome ; which says she never takes away life, she only excommunicates heretics. True, but those whom she condemns as heretics, the State forthwith con- demns (when it dare) to the stake ; and if we must burn in an Auto da Fe, it matters little who kindles the fagots. The Puritan ministers preached down Strafford, and Laud, and Charles; and Puritan emissaries of state dragged them to the block. And so it was, afterwards, as we shall by and by see, in New England. Cesium non animum mutant, qui trans mare currunt. " They quickly began to do those things them- selves, for which they had accused others," says plaintive Robert Barclay.* The Puritan Vatican at Boston is- sued bulls against Barclay's brethren, and a Puritan gov- ernor imbrued his hands in their blood. And, what seems most remarkable, it was a monarch, and a monarch de- scended from one whose life Puritan violence had short- ened, who arrested their violence in this far off land. Charles II. interfered, and the gallows saw no more quivering Quakers. The same king it was, too, (laughed at, sneered at, and denounced as he has been a thousand times, by Puri- tans,) who put an end to what they never thought it necessa'ry to blot from the statute-book, the infernal law de heretico comhurendo. Who would believe, that such a law's flaminor terrors could have been forgotten by the advocates, in theory at least, of free and unlimited toleration 1 But so it was. A heretic could have been burned at the stake till the year 1677. t " Upon which Blackstone observes, that ' in one ^ See Note 24. * Preface to Apology, p. vii. • t Christian Obsen-er, American edition, .\iv., 399. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 37 and the same reign, our lands were delivered from the slavery of military tenures, our bodies from arbitrary imprisonment by the Habeas Corpus Act, and our minds from the tyranny of superstitious bigotry, by demolishing this last badge of persecution in the English law.' "* Nor was that quite all. I cannot refrain from adding something further from Mr. Glad- stone; since on but the next page he says, " We find, howev- er, some curious facts in the history of the reign of Charles II. It was then that the Earl of Granard procured for the Puri- tans of Ireland, a pension of 500^. annually from govern- ment ; and in 1672 the king issued an order for pensions of 50Z. and 100/. yearly to many of the nonconformist ministers."! So then the abolition of death by fire, of military tenures, and the passage of an Habeas Corpus Act, were the bright visions of heads, which Puritans would once have cleft from their kindred shoulders ; and the praise of lavishing gratuities on those whose principles had shed his father's blood, and deluged his native country with misery, belongs to one, whom Puritan anathemas would have hurled with Judas to his own place. Oh, how fitly did the Patriarch David say, " Let us fall now into the hand of the Lord ; let me not fall into the hand of man." There may be mercy in the day of judg- ment, for those who could never find it here. Before concluding this letter, it may be well to settle one point, which should be borne in mind, in all my com- ments on Puritan display of principle and conduct. It is this. The Puritans consisted, as Lathbury says,J of three distinct parties : the moderate Puritans, who never left the * Gladstone's State and Church, 4th edition, ii. 231. t For another specimen of Charles IPs liberality, see Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d ser. ii. 266. He gave Dr. Owen a thousand guineas, "to dis- tribute among those who had suffered most by the late severities." And yet his recompense was, to be called " a profligate tyrant." t History English Episcopacy, pp. 54, 55. 3 38 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. Church, the Presbyterians, and the Brownists.^s Bat it is from the most violent grade of the three, that our New England Puritans have descended : I mean the Brownists. I well know, that this is a most touchy and ire-provoking point in Puritan story.* The object of their American apologists is studiously to shov.', that the New England Puritans were de- scended from the Independents ; and from those who were placable and tolerant, as they maintain Robinson of Leyden was. Mr. Young, the compiler of the Chronicles, whom I often quote, knows well enough, that to claim some of the Puritans as his ecclesiastical ancestry, would be to boast a pedigree that would do him no honor. And so he warily en- ters \\\Q caveat, that the Plymouth Puritans (alas for Boston, Salem, and New Haven !) are the only ones who merit the name of " Pilgrim. "f But the demurrer will not save his precarious cause. Let his claim be granted ; the Plymouth "pilgriirs" are the direct descendants of Robinson's con- gregation, as no New Englander will deny. But Robinson left England, as Neal, (who was rebuked by Dr. Watts, for not having "mollified" some of his " relations" of New England history,)! as Neal and Belknap both freely admit, *' a rigid Brownist."^^ 9, 70, of his new edition, volume first. So, then, as *' themselves do declare it," (to use Master Cotton's favorite appeal,) neither the Pilgrims of Plymouth, nor the quasi Pilgrims of Massachusetts, were driven to New England by persecution. LETTER yil In the last letter, my readers had an opportunity to see and canvass the reasons which prompted the removal of the Puritans from Holland. In all probability, they easily under- stood how the Colonial Secretary, though stiff as steel in opposition to Prelacy, could practise " a little bending," to avoid such unamiable reasons as the sixth and seventh. The Puritans (let us admit the current tale for the object in view,) were quarrelled tvith by the Government of England, and sought refuge among the Dutch. There they quarrel with one another or their friends, " and the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder, one from the other." Robinson forsakes Smith and his congregation at Amsterdam, though they had " the same re- ligious views." He goes to Leyden, where he and his preach a ten years' homily to Calvinists, on breaches of the Sab- bath, and sundry other "things amiss" in theology and morals. They receive "reproofs" and "reproaches" in i REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 131 their turn. The prospect becomes wearisome, the neigh- borhood thorny, and they determine to go away. This is the short, plain tale ; and what does it say, but that they found it so difficult to agree with any body, that they were willing to risk the toils and perils of any distance, so they might not be contradicted with ease or safety? Wherein does it make their ambition to differ from theirs, who join house to house, and lay field to field, till there be no place, that they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth? (Isa. v. 8.) All this, too, when in an official document to the commissioners of Charles II., they style themselves " voluntary exiles from our dear native country ;"* and when the pleading Secretary frames ''painfull" sentences to prove that the people of Holland did not drive them out, but they went of their own free choice and motion. Now, let us grant both statements. They were " voluntary exiles" from England : they left Holland of " their own free choice and motion." Still, can it be an astonishing riddle that England should help them to such volitions — nay, should have helped them therein somewhat impatiently ; when they could not abide those who entertained " the same religious views," nor endure the company of Calvinists, who had so de- tested Arminianism as to cut off the head of one of its great- est advocates, and banish another from his native land ? Was it an enigma, that England should not love those who could not love even their favorite Calvinism, when them selves could not control its destinies,! though Calvinism of * Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d series, viii. 73. t Master John Wilson's dying testimony was, that contempt of Puri- tan authority in Church and State might be the ruin of the country. It was in his view the crying sin of the times ; unless their " luxury and sloth" were its equal. — Emerson's First Church, p. 104. This is such sorry testimony, that Mr. Emerson would fain persuade us the Puritan patriarch was in his dotage. He seems to forget that he had just said, this testimony was drawn out of him by a crowd of friends. 132 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. such genuine virtue as to sacrifice men like Barnevelt and Grotius without a sigh ? * Pass we now from this, to the next advance in our Pil- grims' Progress, and let us imagine them, after leaving Pre- latisis and Calvinists alike behind, stepping out upon that memorable rock, which *' as a beacon upon the top of a mountain, and as an ensign on an hill," marks the com- mencement of all Puritan story on this transatlantic soil. Their posterity hate saintly festivals and relics, by right of *' uninterrupted succession." But they have nevertheless dignified the birth-day of this rock's Puritanic fame, as a day for something more substantial than red letters in a Cidendar. They have given the rock itself more honor, than a Papist would confer upon a leg of St. Ignatius, or a Prelatist would accord to a consecrated church. They have not worshipped it, indeed ; for a Papist never worships relics, he only bestows upon them "due honor and venera- tion."t But they have called it by a name, as sacred as might be given to the purest heart, which was ever a temple for the Holy Ghost. They have called it " sancti- fied !"| '* Now by the side of something thus exalted, beyond Pa- "■* See Note 74. because of his " unwavering faith and prophetic spirit." Wilson no doubt spoke out plainly, and without fear, because he was on his death-bed. And had his language but honored Puritanism, as much as it condemned it, instead of finding him set down as an old driveller, we should have seen him compared to Moses in the book of Deuteronomy : " His eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated." Poor Sir John, your honesty has robbed you of a splendid epitaph I — T say Sir John ; for the Puritans, unable to call Paul and James, &c. by the name of saint, gave them the title of a knight. Thus Sir Paul, Sir James, See. This was another of their ways to avoid Popery I — Maskell's Martin Mar-Prelate, pp. 175, 176. » Watkins's Biog. Diet. p. 586. t Creed of Pope Pius IV. t See Boston Columbian Centinel for March 2, 1835. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 133 pistical relics or Prelatical cathedrals, is the fit place to ex- amine that wondrous piece of parchment, to which I have acrain and again referred, and on which Puritan hopes grounded as pertinacious and as just a claim, as that of pa- pal Spaniards, when half the globe was given them by Heaven's Vicar for the whole. King James was no Pope, indeed, but sufficiently heaven's viceregent, M'hen disposed, through his patent to the Plymouth Council, to sanction or connive at Puritan appetites for '* the entire property" of that, which Ap. Laud said they had fallen quite in love with : I mean the solid soil* And here I cannot perhaps do better, than give Mr. Bancroft's version of this most com- prehensive instrument ; for he is a gentleman having an inkling for philosophic views and statesmanlike descriptions, and a devotee of sententious brevity. The company in England with whom the Puritans had leagued themselves, under the ban of whose princely privi- leges they expected to grow from a mustard seed into '' the greatest of trees," were incorporated as " The Council es- tablished at Plymouth, in the county of Devon, for the planting, ruling, ordering, and governing New England in America."! " The territory," says Mr. B.," conferred on the patentees in absolute property, with unlimited jurisdiction, the sole powers of legislation, the appointment of all officers and all forms of government, extended in breadth from the 40th to the 48th degree of north latitude, and in length from the Atlantic to the Pacific : that is to say, nearly all the inhabited British possessions in the north of the United States, all New England, New-York,half of New Jersey, very nearly all Pennsylvania, and the whole of the country to the west of these States, comprising, and at the time believed to comprise much more than a million of square miles, capable of sustaining far more than two hundred millions of inhabitants, * Laud's Troubles, p. 142. t Bancroft, i. 272. 134 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. were, by a single signature of King James, given away to a single corporation within the realm, composed of but forty individuals. The grant was absolute and exclusive ; it con- ceded the land and the islands, the rivers and the harbors ; the mines and the fisheries. Without the leave of the Council of Plymouth, not a ship might sail into a harbor from Newfoundland to the latitude of Philadelphia, not a skin might be purchased in the interior, not a fish might be caught on the coast, not an emigrant might tread the soil. * * * The patent left the emigrants at the mercy of the unrestrained power of the corporation ; and it was under concessions from that plenary power, confirmed indeed by the English monarch, that institutions the most favorable to colonial liberty were established." This last hint is cor- roborated, by Mr. Graham, in respect to King Charles I. also. " It is indeed a strange coincidence, that this arbi- trary prince, at the very time he was exercising the sternest despotism over the royalists in Virginia, should have been cherishing the principles of liberty in New England."* It may appear somewhat singular, that such an instru- ment could ever have been obtained from any monarch. But there were conspiring causes, which influenced the "especial grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion" of the royal mind. Noble dependents were to be provided for. Flatterers were to be rewarded. Complainants wanted hush-money. Merchants desired encouragement. Com- merce sought for guidance, adventure, and protection. And lastly, " and which was not the least," as the Plymouth Secretary phrases it, the turbulent might be removed, and vent their spleen where its nitric fumes might be less cor- rosive, or spend themselves like a bomb-shell bursting in upper air. The king promised to connive at even their Puritanism, " provided they behaved peaceably ;"t a tole- * North America, i. 2G0. Compare Burks Virginia, ii. 8. t Belknap's Biog. i. 365. — Chalmers' Annals, pp. 85. 86. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 135 rable proof, by the way, that at home they had behaved in any manner but a peaceable one, under the influence of that ecclesiastical system. There were Puritans among the high and the mighty, (" people of distinguished family and fortune," as Mr. Graham calls them, N. America i. 257,) who, whether for political, commercial, or religious reasons, labored to advance the views of their humbler brethren — humbler I mean in rank or opulence. Beyond a question, they knew the hazard of the game they played at, and were not a little anxious to secure some distant place of re- fuge, should their hopes be blown and lost. Says the au- thor of European settlements in America, (ii. 140.) " This colony [Plymouth] received its principal assistance from the discontent of several great men of the Puritan party, who were its protectors, and who entertained a design of settling among them in New England, if they should fail in the measures tliey were pursuing, for establishing the liberty and reforming the religion of their mother country"* — es- tablishing a liberty and religion, our author might have added, which made even Presbyterians groan ! The cele- brated Presbyterian, Walker, called the reign of such liberty and religion, *' The English Anarchy. "t These various causes and interests, combined and operating, hatched a golden Qggi which no one of them alone could perhaps have brought to light. And yet so strange, so wayward is human nature, that while the Puritans wanted all the benefits which Charters would convey, they were nevertheless, (though at the hazard of sawing off the limb between themselves and the tree,) sorely tempted to dispute a king's right to grant them. The House of Commons, where there were men who looked * Dr. Morse endorses this. Geography, p. 157. ed. 1792. — Raynal does also. West Indies, v. 180. — See also Note 75. t Biog. Universelle, vol. 50, p. 85. 136 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. anxiously to New England as a dernier resort, summoned Sir Ferdinando Gorges, the President of the Plymouth Council, and required him to deliver uj3 his Patent, because forsootii it was a king's monopoly !* How completely this illustrates their ungracious demeanor towards royalty. They would cut off the hand that blessed them, if it was linked to a royal shoulder. t O, if Charles II,, when he or- dered the writ of quo warranto to be issued against the Government of Massachusetts, had quoted from the Journal of a Puritan House of Commons, and told them they were a monopoly, built up by royal hands, he might have made his court ring with louder laughter, than when the bribe of 2000 guineas was unfortunately published. | But Charles resorted to other arguments ; and the one about a monopoly was left for them to employ, with as much effect, and as little consistency, as often marked their purposes. They wearied out the Plymouth Company, when they had obtained a better means of accomplishing their aims ; to wit, a Charter for their own private use. The Plymouth Com- pany worn down with opposition, gave up their Patent of their own accord ; but the Puritans clung to the Charter over which they exercised entire control, as the body clings to the spirit — to the latest gasp. But I am insensibly, and almost unavoidably, anticipat- * Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d series, vi. 66, 67. Belknap's Biog. i. 369. Pownall on the Colonies, pp. 48, 49, fourth edition. t The Kpiscopal king granted, but the Puritan House would not, the right of self-taxation — the very thing our fathers of '76 fought and bled for ! — Chalmers' Revolt of the Colonies, i. 35. We see, then, to whom the necessity for a Revolution in '76, may ultimately be traced. Had the Puritans permitted the king to make his grants of self-taxation unre- buked, a precedent w^ould have been established, which would have made a Revolution and a civil war needless. While the men ^^hose forefa- thers would not prevent .such awful consequences, are the very men who now ascribe those consequences to Episcopacy ! \ Chalmers, p. 413. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 137 ing ; the portions of this history so run together. While the Plymouth Patent was the best which offered, the Puri- tans were by no means backward to make the most of it ; monopoly though it were, and ** a grievance of the Com- monwealth." The story usually told, of course is, that the proposition to avail themselves of the shelter and privileges of the Plymouth Council came from themselves — that the Leyden Puritans, e. g. first resolved to abandon Holland, of *' their own free choice and motion." But Sir Ferdinando Gorges, who was under no temptation to misstate, and whom the House of Commons pronounced " a gentleman of honor and worth,"* presents us with a very different tale. He says that the Virginia Company, being somewhat strait- ened in their means, were advised to make offers t to the Puritans in Holland; who if they had " such freedom and liberty as might stand with their likings," would work cheaper for them than others. He says that the Puritans closed with these offers, and sailed for New England ; where finding " that the authority they had from the Com- pany of Virginia could not warrant their abode," they ap- plied to him. The current version of their romance also is, that their sufferings in New England were almost intolerable. But Gorges declares, that they found the country *' so prosper- ous and pleasing to them, they hastened away their ship with order to their Solicitor to deal with" him, '' to be a means they might have a grant from the Council of New England's affairs to settle in the place ; which was accord- ingly performed to their particular satisfaction, and good content of them all."| This account mars the poetry and sinks the pathos of * Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d series, vi. 66, 67. Belknap's Biog. i. 370. t " To draw" others, and not " to be drawn" themselves, is the lan- guage of Gorges. — Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d series, vi. 73. \ Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d series, vi. 73. 138 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. the scheme for leaving Holland ; but it is too simple, sensi- ble, self-consistent, and disinterested, to be otherwise than true. I must acc^^pt it, and represent the plan for depar- ture from the *' sweet liberties" of a Calvinistic territory, as one suggested by a company of mercantile adventurers ; who, on the one hand, would indulge tender consciences, if, on the other hand, the possessors of those consciences would do their best to replenish said company's exhausted coffers. This plan was originated by mercantile speculators, and was entered into as a mercantile compact ; in which " such freedom and liberty as might stand with" the *' likings" of one of the contracting parties, was specified as an actual consideration, along with grosser matters of per centage, ships, and trade. Puritan fancy, Puritan rhymes, Puritan ora- tors, and Puritan historians, may put a fairer and more spirit- ual representation upon these unpoetic facts. But the plain, unvarnished statements of Gorges, will always look a hun- dred-fold more like the naked, natural truth.* There is another point brought plainly out by the nar- rative of Gorges, and which should be particularly observed. I believe it is not an uncommon thing for the readers of Puritan history, who would throw as much as possible of the halo of romance about it, to confound the connexion of the Puritans with the Virginia Company and the Plymouth Council, and to transfer all the hardness of their bargain with the former, to their patent under the latter. Their bargain with the Virginia Company was a close one ; for as Gorges , testifies the funds of the company were low, and they were obliged to count their coppers. " The terms of the contract," says Mr. Bancroft, " were deemed exceed- ingly severe."! And the impositions of the contract, if * Even Hutchinson admits a strong doubt about religion's concern in "the settlement" of North America. He ascribes its "present flourish- ing state" to that cause. — Hutch. Hist. i. 11. t Bancroft, i. 305. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 139 they were such, if they submitted to them blindly, have been ** aggravated when convenient ;"' as Baxter, in his Reformed Liturgy, (p. 64,) actually allows a minister to do with the sins of the impenitent. One would think, that the iron of feudal bondage was all the while entering into their souls. But the exact truth is, as Gorges states, that their fealty to the Virginia Company was of short duration ; for finding, or suspecting themselves to be out of its jurisdic- tion, and of course out of its protection, they forthwith ap- plied to him, as the head of the Plymouth Council, to be brought under the wing of a better corporation. Their wishes were complied with, to the '' particular satisfaction and good content of them all." And even Mr. Bancroft is constrained to admit, that their agent in London " obtained from the Council of Plymouth, concessions equal to all his desires."* How worse than idle then, how unfair, and how untrue, to represent them as distressed by a bargain, in which they were not the applicants but the appiied-to ; and that they wrung hard concessions from those, who took advantage of their needs, instead of being themselves, by " their own free choice and motion," the accepters of a scheme and terms, proposed to them by a mercantile association ! And how still more destitute of truth and fairness, the picture, which represents them grinding in such a sort of prison-mill, as that at which poor Gorton labored ;t when lo ! they were soon situated under better auspices, to the particular satis- faction and good content of every soul among them, with all their desires responded to. Trahit sua quemque volup- tas : if such a situation could not please them, where could they have found one, in which contentment would have seen them professedly more true disciples 1 * Bancroft, i. 320. t Spark's American Biography, 2d series, v. 364. 140 REVIEW OF THE PURITAiS'S. And much poetry and rhetoric too is often wasted upon the sufferings, which the Puritans at first endured from the inhospitable soil and clime of young New England. Many a sentimental eye sees nothing but parched corn upon their table, and an avalanche of snow upon their roof '^ Gorges admits, that when they landed at Plymouth many of them were weak and feeble. " But," he goes on to say, *' they were not many days ashore, before they had gotten both health and strength, through the comfort of the air, the store of fish and fowl, with plenty of wholesome roots and herbs the country afforded : besides the civil respect the natives used towards them, tending much to their happiness in so great extremity they were in.''* And to this the Puritan historian Trumbull fully agrees. *' In New England, Provi- dence had prepared the way for their settlement. The un- common mortality in 1617 had in a manner depopulated that part of the country, in which they began their planta- tion. They found fields which had been planted, without owners, and a fine country round them, in some measure cultivated, without an inhabitant."! It will be supposed, no doubt, that the attractions of this "fine country" were utterly unknown and unthought-of, by the humble-minded Puritans. But this could hardly be. Captain Smith's description of New England, where he displayed upon his very title-page " the proofeof the present benefit this country affbords; whither, this present yeare 1616, eight voluntary Ships are gone to make further try- ale," was published no less than four years before the ex- '** See Note 76. "* Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d series, vi. 73. t Trumbull's United States, p. 72. — So says Gov. Winthrop, in a letter to his son in England. " Here can be no want of any thing, to those who bring means to raise out of the earth and sea." — He, too, would tempt the rich. — Savage's Wint. i. 375. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 141 pedition in the Mayflower.* And Smith himself was not unknown to the adventurers from Leyden. He would have sailed with them to Plymouth, and might have been of im- mense service to them, if they would have recompensed his personal experience and ingenuity. But the Pilgrims pre- ferred his books and maps to his more costly self; because, as he says in his quaint way, they were " much better cheap." No wonder he should add somewhat of a philo- sophic comment on their penuriousness. " Many other have used the like goo*d husbandry, that have payed sound- ly in trying their self-willed conclusions. "f That New England soon became in Puritanic eyes an El Dorado, however some may suppose it was at first con- templated but as a mere place of refuge from the storms of persecution, is amply evident from the fact, that emigration to it became such a perfect tide, that it was checked by Government. I But this, in Puritan historians, is no proof that New England was becoming a most desirable abode ; it only evinces another burst of hostility on the part of Pre- latical authorities. But how, or why, should a Government which all along had countenanced their going, at last ar- rest it? because of their hatred of their faith, and desire to have them longer within reach of persecution's fangs ? So multitudes would say, and spontaneously believe. But let us hear the uncommitted Gorges, on this delicate subject. ''The reason of that restraint," he affirms, " was grounded upon the several complaints that came out of those parts, of the divers sects and schisms that were amongst them all, contemning the public government of the ecclesiastical state. And it was doubted that they would, in short time, wholly shake off the royal jurisdiction of the Sovereign * Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d series, vi. 95. t Smith's Gen. Hist. ii. 263. X Europ. Sett. ii. 140, 141. — " The passion for land" became a per- fect epidemic. — Bancroft's United States, i. 328. 7* 142 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. Magistrate."* And what then was the protection that England assumed to herself, in such threatening circum- stances— circumstances which the after history of Massa- chusetts more and more developed ? This, says Gorges, on the page just quoted : She insisted none should go, until they had taken '' the oaths of supremacy and allegiance." But this the Puritans would not consent to." They would sooner desert the realm, by stealth or violence. They might go scot-free with their religion, if they would swear to be loyal to their lawful Sovereign. But that they ob- stinately refused to do. And what does this prove, but what has been proved before, that their cavils and clamors were political rather than religious — that they wanted not the Government's tolerance, but the Government itself. And as they could not obtain their foremost aim, they wanted the privilege of establishing their economy on the ** outside of the world," as they expressed it,t so it might be out of " view" and beyond " reach." *' You may have your way," says an accommodating King, " provided you will not use your power against myself, but will still be loyal to authority at home." "No," is the virtual answer, *' we will run the gauntlet first, and owe you no allegiance we can possibly avoid." " Then," the reply is, " I will stop you if I can."^^ And this is persecution — persecution to the uttermost ;J and the men who suffer it are, (when they are supplicating for a charter,) are terribly afraid they shall " lose their interest in the English nation — they being desirous rather to enlarge his Majesty's dominions, and to live under their natural Prince!" Well, we have the major portion of the Ley den congre- '7 See Note 77. " See Note 78. * Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d series, vi 80-82. Belknap's Biography, i. 38] .—Compare Chalmers' Revolt of the Col. i. 44, 45. t Hutchinson, i. 448. t Neal's New England, i. 151. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 143 gallon established around Plymouth Bay at last : whether the whole came over, Dr. Morse says must remain uncer- tain.* But as the advocates of Puritanic exclusive privi- leges would fain incline us to believe, they were destined to be disturbed afresh by Prelatic neighbors. The Plymouth Council gave a patent to a son of Sir Ferdinando Gorges, in 1633, for a tract on Massachusetts Bay. This gentleman was appointed Lieutenant-General of New England ; and with him came one William Morrell, an Episcopalian in holy orders, who was to be his compeer in the Church ! This was an ominous step indeed. But (a most singular fact!) it was the nearest approach to an English bishopric, which this country was ever destined to behold. The set- tlement of Gorges did not succeed,! and Morrell never as- sumed any powers which might have been intrusted to him : in fact, was so modest and so prudent, that though he re- sided in New England above a year, he never mentioned his intended character, till just before his departure to his native land. | He left behind him a poem on New England, in Latin and English, which may be found in the Massachusetts Historical Collections, at the reference just given. And thus ended an expedition which was looked upon by many, as likely to bring with it Star Cham- bers, High Commissions, and Archbishops. It did not vaunt itself; and so Mr. Bancroft permits it to depart with a quiet sneer. " They came to plant a hierarchy and a General Government, and they produced only a fruitless * Geography, p. 157. t Gorges himself tells us why. Because the Puritans at Plymouth, hearing he was in trouble at home, drew off from his son, and left him " disabled to do any thing to purpose." — Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d series, vi. 74. X Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st series, i. 125. Davis's Morton, p. 109. Bay- lies' Plym. i. 125. 144 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. quarrel and a dull poem,"* It was unquestionably better, however, for Episcopacy to end its attempts in that " dull" way, than to write its temper, as Draco and as Puritanism wrote their laws and deeds, in characters of blood. What would not Gov. Winthrop have given, in those final hours when he bitterly repented having been the instrument of Puritan cruelty, f if he had only had such a stupid crime to answer for ! There is nothing further for me particularly to allude to at this period of the history of New England ; and I will here bid Plymouth farewell, and turn to the Charters of Massachusetts. Before doing so, however, I cheerfully quote a compliment from Dr. Morse, that, *' However rigid the New Plymouth colonists may have been, at their first separation from the Church of England, yet they never dis- covered that persecuting spirit which we have seen in Mas- sachusetts."| And sorry am I to find, that Massachusetts should have so little respected Plymouth, as to keep it in perpetual awe, and make one of the disturbers of its peace a member of its General Court, because he was " a daring trader among the Indians. '"§ Massachusetts, as we know, finally swallowed Plymouth up alive, and she became but one of her fourteen counties; pretty much as she remains at the present day. ^yhen the deed was done, and Plymouth ceased to be a separate colony in 1691, her agent in Eng- land could not refrain from bitter objurgation. He thus wrote home to the last Governor. " All the frame of heaven * Bancroft, i. 326. — Belknap, however, compliments Morrell. Per- haps because he did not turn out an Archbishop Laud. Biog. i. 368. t Belknap's Biog. ii. 356. Savage's VVint. ii. 174. X Geog. p. 156. — Compare Chalmers' Annals, p. 97. — Morse doubt- less had Chalmers' testimony in his eye ; but, ut inodo, he mollifies it. For example, Chalmers does not say " never discovered," but " seldom discovered." § Baylies' Plymouth, Pt. i. pp. 132, 133, 217, and notes. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 145 moves on one axis, and the whole of New England's interest seems designed to be loaden on one bottom, and her partic- ular motions to concentrate to the Massachusetts tropic."* Come we now to that ascendant Colony, which im- pressed multitudes about its designs upon New England, as Caesar impressed Cato about his designs upon the world. On the 4th of March, A. D. 16-29, King Charles I. granted a Charter to certain individuals, styled " the Company of Massachusetts Bay." And this charter, when it had been vacated under a writ of quo icarranto, on the 18th of June, 1684, was followed by another from William and Mary, on the 7th of October, 1691. Thus a charter, and a royal charter, with the stamp of monopoly and popular grievance on its front, is, notwithstanding, you see, the banner under which, sooner than live in such a place as Holland, with its freedom for conscience and the austerest Calvinism, anti- monarchists and anti-Churchmen are content to sail. And, what is singular indeed, they loved such charters better, absolutely better, than the tender mercies of a Puri- tanic Parliament. In the days of the Commonwealth, in 1651, there was a rumor that their royal charter would be taken from them.t Thereupon along, circuitous, and most peculiar address was forwarded to Parliament ; in which, lest it appear that the Colony had been a charge at its founda- tion to the parent country, they represent themselves as hav- ing left home rich, and spent money freely : in which again, lest they appear rich now, and thus become a mark for politi- cal cupidity, they represent themselves as living in " a mean and low condition;" and in which, finally, so much greater is their fear of republicans than of a monarch, they importu- nately supplicate that " it shall go no worse with them than it did under the late King." The document may be found "* Baylies' Plymouth, Pt. iv. p. 138. t The address, or petition, itself shows this. 146 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. in the appendix to Hutchinson's first volume of his history, and is altogether one of the most unique specimens of Pu- ritanic logic, and Puritanic love of gain and power, which can any where be found. The tyrannical patronage of one monarch rather than a hundred, is then that which suits the preferences of Puritans. Under this they feel safe in attempting to erect a new politi- cal constitution, which, according to the terms of the old oath, they might " beautify with their presence." There was no hope for independence under a Parliament. There was such hope under a King — a hope which was ultimately fruition. No wonder they loved royal charters so dearly, when not called to discuss their merits in a House of Com- mons, but to enjoy their privileges in a house exclusively their own. Bad, then, as Kings are, Protestant Episcopal ones are useful for some purposes. Independence may, in in some way or other, be gleaned out of their charters. But Puritan Parliaments and Popish Kings are utterly impracti- cable : they offer not a hook to hang a hope on. We have seen how the Puritans dreaded their own Parliament, in the document from Hutchinson's appendix. A document in the same appendix will show, how they dreaded Oliver Cromwell also, who had formed a strange plan for having some of them, as they express it, "transplanted into Ire- land." And now, as neither Parliaments nor my Lord Pro- tector give them any satisfaction, let us suppose them Hu- guenots, who had felt the weight of a hand, that could de- stroy so solemn an edict as that of Nantes with a single blow. What could they have acquired at the foot of the throne of the " Grand Monarque ?" Firebrands, arrows, and death, would have been their answer, for supplications in behalf of conscience there.* But charters can be obtained from a Protestant Episco- * Miller's Phil, of Hist. iv. 104, shows how the losses of the Hugue- nots were indirectly a great gain to the Puritans. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 147 pal monarch one of which could be cherished '* as the most precious boon,"* and a second hailed " almost as another magna charta of liberty. "t And still such a monarch is stigmatized, as no better than a Papist himself, as a ruthless oppressor of consciences, and a foe to the liberties of his subjects. Sooner than take an oath of allegiance to him, they will fly from their native land, like deserters, to ''the outside of the world." Can we not now see, how much of truth there is, and how much of ad captandiini declamation, in the flings of Puritans at Churchmen, with a king as their civil head, de- nouncing them as " mere formalists, angry bigots, fiery zealots, sons of violence, furious persecutors, Popishly af- fected, haters of godliness and godly men ?"j: Is it not a part of a Puritan's destiny to vituperate prelatical England? have not the Fates ordained him to it ? He can take a charter from her, indeed, and like the buyer in the market say, (Prov. xx. 14,) It is naught, it is naught. It is a stark monopoly, and a grievance to the Commonwealth for a king (one man) to be so lavish of exclusive privileges. But when he is gone his way, then he boasteth : his berated parch- ment becomes a most precious boon, and an almost magna charta of liberty. He sees in all its pages, but one feature against which he can with the slightest consistency mur- mur, and that is an exception of Papists from toleration. This was found in the Charter of William and Mary, while that of Charles was silent upon the subject of religious privi- eges. Of course he preferred that ; for then he could deal with religion as he pleased, and tolerate nobody : moreover, that Charter had no such uncomfortable injunctions, as the * Bancroft, i 342. t Story's Misc. p. 64. — Compare Mather's Life of Phips, p. 63. Hutch. Hist. iii. 84. t White's Letters to Dissenters, i. 8. ]4S REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. new one, about oaths to Government ;* and thus allowed him (as he understood it) to pay allegiance to no one but himself. Still, King William's Charter was no mean one for civil privileges ; and it was taken, as the issue shows, with a determination to abide by it, in all which gratified his ambition, or promoted his worldly interests, and to treat it as a dead letter, when its injunctions did not please. For example, more than thirty years before, had King Charles II. issued a mandamus to save Quakers from the gallows ; and the new Charter tolerated every body but a Papist. Yet in 1G94, a man who wrote a Quaker pamphlet, was impri- soned for nearly a whole year, and all his books, which the sheriff could lay his hands on, committed to the flames. t And ten years later, 1704, I find the Quakers impor- tuning the Dissenters in England, to remonstrate with their brethren in New England, against the unrepealed laws which bore upon them with extreme severity. A letter was written, at their request, to show the Government at heme that Dissenters there would not deny to one another, what they claimed for their particular party ! t Such did the Puritans continue to be, under a Charter which pledged all but unbounded toleration. As to the times of the old Charter, especially from 1640 to 1660, when, says Hutchinson, § Massachusetts " approached very near to an independent commonwealth," and threw off all disguises — the days of Endicott's chief glory — no language could more truly describe their temper, than that of the au- thor, or authors, II of" European Settlements." " The very doctrine of any sort of toleration was so odious to the great- * The old charter empowered, but did not require, the administration of such oaths ; because it was intended for a Company who were to stay in England, and not run away from it — See Bancroft, i. 343. + Felt's Annals of Salem, pp. 323, 325. t Calamy's Life of Baxter abridged, i. 670. ^ Hist. ii. 10. II London Gallery of Portraits, iii. 34. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 149 est part, that one of the first persecutions set up here was against a small party, who were hardy enough to maintain that the civil magistrate had no lawful power, to use com- pulsory measures in affairs of religion."* And yet, these most reluctant yielders to toleration, who kept the scorpion whip of persecution lying by their sides, when they dare no longer use it, are, we are told, among persecution's most blameless victims. They are those " fa- vorites with heaven," about the " severe virtue" *' of whose rude intolerance, the world has been filled with malignant calumnies. "t They are those moderate exclusives, whose " transient persecutions" " in self-defence" '* were no more than a train of mists, hovering of an autumn morning over the channel of a fine river, that diffused freshness and fer- tility wherever it wound. "| The Huguenots, says Mr. Smedley in one of his in- teresting and able volumes, § exhibited " the most unresist- ing patience," beneath a system which would have dragoon- ed them into Popery. But they might as well have looked for water *' from the rock of flint," as hoped for a drop of mercy to put out the well-fed fires, beneath which they and their possessions vanished like smoke away. The Puritans were as unruly and libellous, as fiery blood and unbridled tongues could make them.|| But they obtained privileges, securing to them all the rights, comforts, immunities and hopes, with which social safety, and nearly entire political independence, could enrich them. The only ugly and pro- voking page in a charter, " almost a magna charta of lib- erty," was one authorizing a partial toleration ;^ and that, * Eur. Sett. ii. 143. t Bancroft, i. 348. X Bancroft, i. 463. § Eng. edit. iii. 256. II The Calvinists of Zurich called them " vain brawlers." Compare Epistle to Titus, iii. 2. — Zurich Letters, p. 364. IT They thus speak of those who advocated toleration in New Eng- J50 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. but for other pages of antidote, and the power of putting it to sleep, they would willingly have treated as Jehudi did the prophet's scroll. (Jeremiah xxxvi. 23.) But notwithstanding the tale goes round and round, as true in its cycles as frosts and comets, that they were the meek, unpitied victims of a stony persecution, that all but ground them into powder. Their requiem is chanted as formally as if, like Popish masses, it could shorten the pur- gation of the dead. Their acclaim is made to swell and soar, as if listening angels would lean from from the skies to hear it. The very spot which their feet first touched, is contemplated with a reverence not surpassed by that of Mo- hammedans for the " black stone," brought by Gabriel to Abraham, and on which the Father of the Faithful '* left the print o[ his feet."* This spot is enclosed from all rude and ignoble treading, t and is to be guarded with due sec- tarian vigilance, to all future time ; and this by the descend- ents of men, who broke down (he carved work of Episcopal temples with axes and hammers. t (Ps. Ixxiv. 6.) And the text to which I have gone for its terms, they would have gone to for authority, to justify their ruthless demolition. Nor is that all. A chip of Plymouth's " sanctified rock" is as necessary a relic, for the consecration of a " Church of the Pilgrims," as the bones of an apostle for St. Peter's at Rome. Godwin, the infidel, and who wrote an essay on sepul- land : " buzzing our people in the ear, with a thing they call liberty." Mass. Hist. Coll 2d series, iv. 21. * Ch. Butler's Hor. Bib. p. 215. t I did not speak, of the iron railing, &,c., around the Rock, when speaking of the trident over it. It would be horrible, however, for a Pa- pist to put a railing around the shrine oi his devotion. X See Mercurjus Rusticus by Ryves, ed. 1685. Pt. ii. 116-163, for facts ; some almost too enormous to be credible. — That, however, was not the worst of Puritan fury ; sacrilege was defended upon principle ! See Gauden's answer to its pleas. — Tears and Sighs of the Church of England, book iii. chaps. 20, 23. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. J5l chres to procure honor for the illustrious dead — an essay he feared his name would injure — would encounter no rebuke, if he spent a fortune on a Mount x4Luburn, to procure repose for Puritan ashes. The Jiat seems to have issued forth, that as the place where Puritan feet first rested, shall be evermore " sanctified," so shall Puritan memory be ever- more glorified. And all this, too, comes from the " High Commission Court" of those, who detest the ** man-wor- ship" of the servile Prelatist, and account the rites and ceremonies of even Protestant Episcopacy an object for ridicule, it matters not how reckless, if " well-conducted." " We do not hesitate," says the editor of the Andover Re- view, " to avow the belief, that well-conducted ridicule is a proper, and will be a most useful weapon, against the claims of Episcopacy." And what is one of the first and foremost things, on which this " well-conducted ridicule" is made to pounce ? On the habit of bowing the head and offering a silent prayer, just after entering the house of God. O terapora ! O mores ! and would it then be better to be listless and irreverent ? But let us not argue ; it is better to condemn such a censor out of his own brethren's mouth. It is the custom of the Calvinists at Zurich, the Calvinists of Zuingle's tutoring, who would agree with such a censor in one of his most favorite theories, (that which depreciates the Eucharist to an office as low as that of a Papal picture,) — it is the custom of such model Calvinists, to do precisely this same ridiculous thing !* And is tiiere no appeal from the wilfulness of those, who poured abuse upon our fathers, and whose children are solemnly taught to turn even our devotions into ridicule ? Is there no hope for the reaction of honor or justice ? Fearfully not. We have waited for the returning tide of charity and wisdom — for the sanative balm of time — " more * Turner's Hist, of all Religions, edit. 1695, pp. 230, 282, 289. 152 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. than they that watch for the morning — I say more than they that watcli for the morning." Still they come not. We may have the word " Protestant" over our doors, as the first Church of Trinity Parish, in New York, had ,* we may stamp it on our Prayer Book ; but it will read to many eyes nothing but ** Papist." Our clergy may one and all say, as solemnly and as vehemently as the calumniated Monta- gue, '* I call God and all his holy angels to witness, I nor am, nor have been, nor intend to be hereafter, either Papist, or Romish Catholic, a Papist of State or of Religion ; but a priest, a member, a follower, of the Church and Doctrine of the Church of England."! Still, and on our oath, we are Protestants in vain. We are believers in " The Holy Catholic I Church," and therefore, inevitably. Catholics after the fashion of Rome ; though Rome be, as she is, the worst enemy of true Catholicity it ever had : since, but for Rome, Catholicity would have come down to us pure. So Catholic and Papist are, to Puritan eyes, all one ; and he who dares to say this is a profound blunder, and that a genuine Puritan is nearer a Papist than a genuine Catho- lic, '' is condemned already."^ He is consigned to the pains ^ Smith's New-York, 4lo, p. 190. t Appeal, pp. 110, 111, edit. 1625. t The squeaniishness of some about the word " Catholic," is even ridiculous. If we are to reject so good a word, because Papists please to appropriate it, we must give up " Church," and " Bishop ;" and say, with an old version, " Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my con- gregation;" or, as one wished to translate 1 Peter, ii. 25, " the Shepherd and Presbyterian of our souls." — To all such over-sensitiveness I know no better reply than King James's to Dr. Rainolds, at Hampton Court ; who was for giving up this, that, and the other thing, simply because the Papists had the same. " Doctor," said the king, " do you mean to go barefoot, because the Papists wear shoes and stockings ]" Upon the change of" congregation" for" church," there are some in- teresting remarks in Skinner's Truth and Order, pp. 130, 131. Swords' ed. § Doubtless that was one ground of Bishop Montague's condemna- tion, for he said so. (Appeal, p. 112.) He said, too, what we often see REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 153 and penalties of an uncharitableness, bleak as the shore, rocky as the soil, and enduringr as the granite of Plymouth.* The writer of these lines will undoubtedly be esteemed an arch-heretic, for his presumptuous questioning of opinions, which have become as well-known fixtures as the hills of New England. Had he lived in the days of John Endicott, he could hardly have hoped for so soft a death, as being smothered in one of the " autumnal mists" of the imagina- tive Mr. Bancroft. He would have been driven into the wilderness like Upshal and Williams, manacled and made a menial like Gorton and his associates, or left to swing upon a scaffold with Marmaduke Stephenson and Mary Dyar. LETTER VIII I HAVE given, in my former letters, what my readers may consider sufficient, (to use one of our German-English words,) for an excursus on the question, Why did the Puri- tans leave Europe ? How far " a purely religious cause" influenced them, and how far the love of power, notoriety, now, that the lowest churchmen, when they turn, make the worst high churchmen, and are most apt to become Papists in the end. * Such outrageously partial judgment was severely condemned, by even so loose a moralist as Montaigne. I commend his counsel to those who are so fond of proscribing Churchmen by the wholesale. " I am a mortal enemy to this vicious form of censure ; He is of the League, be- cause he admires the Duke of Guise ; he is astonished at the King of Navarre's valor and diligence, and therefore he is a Huguenot ; he finds such and such faults in the King's manners and conduct, and therefore he IS seditious in his heart." — Montaigne's Essays, book iii. chap. 10. 154 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. or trade, of an enlargement of his Majesty's dominions, or, as Mr, Bancroft semi-poetically has it, ** the passion for land,"* was mingled up with such a cause, qualified or su- perseded it, authorities enough have probably been furnished, for those who are willing to examine both sides of a debated question. If any of them can arrive at the comfortable conclusion of Mr. Minot, one of the historians of Massa- chusetts, and announce, with his placid assurance, that it was not " derogatory to the principles of their emigration to entertain a hope, that while the cause of religion was served with so much hazard, success might also attend an honest attempt at husbandry and traffic,"! 1 will not wage war with their reasoning, nor with its comforts, but — leave them alone with their glory. Some might hint, to be sure, that an inference like Mr. Minot's is slightly tinctured with the doctrine of merit, as it seems to intimate that the Puri- tans deserved, if they did not expect, plentiful gains in com- merce, through their toils and losses for religion. If it do, that would not frighten me ; for after sundry stares, excla- mations, and surprises, it has at length been ascertained, that Puritanism and Popery are nearer of kin than the theory and practice of Calvinistic toleration, or the theory and practice of Socinian liberality. The one takes to itself merit, from its wearing shirts of horse-hair ; the other, from lavish self-abuse of its unfortunate human nature : — the one superstitiously reverences rites and ceremonies ; the other, superstitiously dreads them : — the one is infallibly right, in abetting the supremacy of St. Peter's chair; the other, the supremacy of the congregational platform : — the one claims * This passion, Roger Williams said, was " one of the gods of New England." Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st series, i. 279. — Dissenters, as Mr. White says, have complained that nonconformity was a money-losing speculation. He shows the contrary. — White's Letters to Towgood, 2d ed. 1745, p. 10, &c. t Minot's Mass. i. 14, 15. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. I55 distant countries, through Father Pope ; the other, through Father Adam :* — the one thinks it right to terrify or subju- gate heretics by the penalties of the sword ; and to this, the other, though usually averse to responses, accords a long and loud Amen. Specimens of this last point of consanguinity it is now proposed to exhibit; and in this letter, with particular re- ference to the treatment manifested by Puritans, towards those from whose immediate society they had torn them- selves— tncmhers of the Church of England. In order to arrive at that just point of observation, and properly attempered sensibility, which will enable us to ap- preciate facts under this head, it will be necessary, as a preliminary, to show what feelings the Puritans prq/esscc? — may I not say actually entertained ? — toward the Church of England, how they practically regarded things, which to her were as the signet on her right hand, the ordinations of her ministers, and their administration of sacraments. The Rev. Francis Higginson, one of the earliest Puritan ministers of Salem, Mass., was once a clergyman of the Es- tablished Church, at Leicester in England. He left Eng- land, because too much respect was demanded of him for its Establishment ; but his name became famous for the respect it afterwards demanded for the Establishment of Massachusetts. He died in 1630 ; but his son and successor John, who as one of" the seven pillars, "f or as a preacher, was seventy-two years in office, and who lived till 1708, sup- ported Puritan dignity with an energy, which the father thought a most grievous intolerance in an ecclesiastical * Hutch. Colleet. p. 27. Reason sixth for Emigration. t " The idea of" seven pillars" to a congregation seems to have come from Prov. ix. 1. A text of Scripture for Congregationalism, even from the Old Testament ; while for poor Episcopacy, there was none even in the New ! 156 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. court beyond the seas.* The defamers of his clerical voca- tion were whipped and fined, with summary justice, and he could not walk to his meeting-house without a sexton parad- ed by his side — an exaction which I cannot find authorized by Gibson's ponderous Codex, or alluded to, as desirable, among the multitudinous wants enumerated by Stackhouse in his '' Miseries of the Clergy."! Such was the disposition of the Higginsons, for conces- sions to their Puritan prejudices ; yet the father of the race could make none to a Church in which he had been reared and tutored, and at whose altars he had pronounced the most solemn vows of fealty. | Still, when embarked on board *' the good and strong ship" Talbot, with five and twenty cannon to support his new pretensions, and " all manner of munition and provision for the plantation for a twelve- month,"§ he could not abandon Britain rudely. || As he saw the white cliffs of that father-land sinking beneath the hori- zon, (to him forever,) his natural feelings, with perhaps some qualms of compunction, rose within his bosom. He called, (so says Mr. Noah Hobart, in addressing " the mem- bers of the Episcopal Separation,") he called '* his children and the other passengers'] to the stern of the ship, to take their last sight of their native country, and made this speech to them ; ' We will not say, as the Separatists were wont to * John boasted that he was " acknowledged to be a member of the purest church in Salem." — Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d series, vii. 222. — So the Puritans could depreciate the purity of one another, to exalt their own. t Felt's Annals of Salem, pp. 236, 243, 246. t " At first he was a strict Episcopalian." Felt's Salem, p. 42. — Magnalia, i. 323. § The fleet had 80 guns, with stores of arms and powder, drums and colors, 's Misc. p. 65. t Hist. i. 80. t Why are these letters kept from public view ? "Would they be read too eagerly by Episcopalians, or afford troublesome quotations ? Compare Savage's Wint. ii. 2G9. § Vol. i. 344, note. |I Storv-'s Misc. p. 66. ^ Il)id. p 66. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 227 €t salva ccclcsia Puriianica. And in fact I believe the due exception may be found there ; though, as often in the writings of the school of Loyola, under a disguise which it requires penetration to detect. It is indeed, and the whole of it, in a petty monosyllable. On closer examination, I find the preamble to section thirteenth reading thus : *' Though no human power be lord over all the faith and conscience of men." Now we have the idea in full ; and it gives a Puritan seeming credit for liberality, and yet sanc- tions just those acts of persecution, which would suit his taste. Human power is not lord over all the faith of men; but it is lord over a part of it, and precisely that part of it, which a Puritan would determine to control.* I give this to my readers, as a specimen of the ingenuity of Puritanic legislation. It is doubtless one of those curious but rff.cicnt interweavings of Church and State, alluded to by the Hon- orable President of Harvard University. t As to Fast days, because perhaps mince-pie and custard were then eschewed, there is no specific law against them ; yet it somewhat curiously happened that Good Friday, a day for which Puritans cared nothing, was the day when Sir Edmund Andross forced his way into the Old South, Boston ; and it becomes therefore a day quite memorable in American Church history, as the first when Episcopal services were heard within Puritanic walls. t No doubt, Good Friday, or any other day likely to give prominence to the Liturgy of the Church of England, had it not been * Just so the Pope has the art of making his official documents have a meaning of greater or less latitude, to please himself. For example, his bull against Elizabeth. Romish Fox and Sectarian Firebrands, pp. 135, 136. t And again, ut quondam, for a Popish parallel. The King of France intended to allow liberty of conscience ; but, nevertheless, he would have but one religion in his realms. — Smedley's France, ii. 4fi, Eng. edit. \ King's Chapel, p. 39. 228 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. thought advisable to repeal the statute against Christmas for the Charter's sake, would soon have fallen under pro- scription, and been ruled out of the docket of Christian observances. And on second thought, and new examina- tion, I am satisfied it was denounced ; for the law includes not Christmas Day alone, but '* the like" : and this must mean the like holy-day, not the like festival, for it proceeds to say, that all are guilty on such days, not for " feasting" only, but for *' forbearing labor." So, then, doubtless, it was superstitious, and dishonora- ble to God, and offensive to man, to forbear labor and fast, in commemoration of the day when the great work of re- deeming a world was " finished," through chastisement borne by the very Son of God. But nothing could be more law- ful or appropriate, than to fast for " the prevalence of Anti- christ in reformed [not Papal it will be observed] churches beyond the seas," for " Episcopal usurpation," and " to gain the favor of the King, and the continuance of charter privi- leges;" i. e., with old consistency, it was right to fast in order to pull the King's Church about his ears, and alike right to fast, that his favor might be propitiated !* It was " an evil and a bitter thing" to take such notice of a miser- able earthly monarch, as to pray for his health, long life, &/C., according to the Liturgy. Rebellion against him, as we shall presently see, was obedience to God. Still, when, as Mr. Quincy says,t " for protection against foreign pow- ers, a Charter from the parent State was necessary," such a Charter was a transcendent boon, and for that, as in duty bound, they might " ever pray." And further, though to contemn royalty was so far forth to be magnanimous; yet, if royalty would only lend its troops when they were wanted, any mortification and fasting would be undergone to insure their victory, and the heartiest thanksgiving indulged, if vic- » Felfs Salem, pp. 21 fi, 221, 262. t Cent. Add. p. 23. J REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 229 tory, though drenched in blood, could perch upon their ban- ners.* In truth, if by one such victory, the blood of as many Papistical Frenchmen could have been spilt, as of Huguenots at the massacre of St. Bartholomew, it may fair- ly be believed, the Puritans, like Gregory XIII., would have sung praises, fired cannon, and coined medals.t In England, to talk like Martin Marprelate of those " petty popelings," the bishops, and to experience therefor the discipline of the Court of High Commission, was to suffer martyr-like for doing God service. In New England, to speak irreverently of the *' Lord's anointed ministers," was to hazard the lively consideration of some fifteen lash- es, or the ensobering atmosphere of a dungeon. J And this, too, when the offender was a woman, (unless the cleft stick were the alternative,) and when incest met with no heavier retribution. § All, however, which could be said on this side the water, against ministers of Church of England origin, was two-fold more pardonable : it was rolled as a sweet morsel under the tongue by Puritanic epicures. "It would seem," says Mr. Boucher, an ear and an eye witness, " that in these men religion exhausts itself in profession : the more they have of it in their mouths, the less charity there is in their hearts. Against the ministers of the Established Church, their censures are particularly sharp and severe : in their harangues, they are liberal only in bestowing on our whole order the coarse epithets of venal and corrupt hire- lings, carnal-minded and ungodly teachers." || Let, however, * Felt's Salem, 453, 455, et alibi. t Smedley's France, ii. 35. GifTord's France, iii. 285. X No whipping, however, is inflicted for blaspheming the Queen. — Sav. Wint. ii. 10, 11. And when honest Thomas Parker, one of their own ministers, would not denounce the bishops as hard as they did, he is forthwith denounced himself. — Eliot's Diet. 362. Magnalia, i. 435. § Felt's Salem, 118, 212, 246, 270. !l Boucher's Discourses, p. 82, 11 230 REVIEW OP THE PURITANS. an unfortunate Episcopal minister but deny, and in respect- ful terms, the imperial sovereignty of Massachusetts, and though out of her jurisdiction, (like the victimized Gorton,) she can summon him to her awful bar of justice, and suffer him to escape, only by promise of voluntary banishment. Such was the lot of the Rev. Richard Gibson, of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, as early as 1640 ! * Thus illustriously did they begin to expound their most sacred vow, not to " deal hardly or oppressingly with any, wherein they were the Lord's stewards" — thus *' curiously and efficiently," to dry up those fountains of tears, which they had promised to keep flowing for the Church of England's everlasting welfare — thus to rejoice in her good, and unfeignedly grieve for any sorrow that should ever betide her ! If Mr. Gibson had quot- ed the vow and the letter, which I have now quoted, he might have cost them more time for a reply, than the peti- tioners of 1646 ; but, like Morell, he seems to have been a quiet man, and made no resistance, though probably like Blackstone he drew a longer breath at each pace, that re- moved him from the dominion of the '' Lord Brethren." However, if Gibson was silent under his own wTongs, one of the Eastern Governors was somewhat restive, under the encroachments of the Bay State. He denounces Mas- sachusetts, for reaching too freely and too far, what he calls, in a graphic word, an " engrasping" arm.t It has been seen already, how pervading was " the passion for land, "J among those who professed to have a passion for love of liberty and love of conscience, solely and supremely. The imagery of the prophet soon became literally fulfilled, in the notoriously most " engrasping" government in British Amer- ica. The stretching out of its wings filled the breadth of * Adams's Portsmouth, p. 27. Farmer's Belknap, i. 29. t Folsora's Saco, 91. t Bancroft confesses this cost Massachusetts an immense amount of treasure and blood. — United States, iii. 81. J REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 231 the land. (Isa. viii. 8.) " The great Charter of the Bay Company was unrolled before the General Court in Boston," says Mr. Bancroft, to bring the issue forward full pompous- ly.* And he might have added, (to refer to another prophet,) that " lamentations and mourning and woe," were found written therein, for many who supposed themselves snugly and safely afar. The Charter's wings were found long enough to brood over Maine ; and but for Connecticut's suspicions and shyness, (of which Gov. Winthrop distinctly complainSjt) might have folded her, too, like a chicken unto its mother's side. Maine did not escape for many a long year. Connecticut did ; though, as Dr. Trumbull amply demonstrates, Massachusetts had ever " an itching palm" for her high hills and lovely vallies, and nearly made them her's so late as 1 704. Connecticut's Book of Doom was once prepared by a Massachusetts governor ; but her Day of Judgment, fortunately, Massachusetts never yet has seen. J Now, with the treatment of Episcopal clergymen in the person of Richard Gibson, compare Puritanical treatment of an Episcopal Governor, in the person of Edmund Andross ; and that, too -«imid the solemnities of public worship. § On such a mdC^y^, connected with Andross individually, I would not over-anxiously insist. I have no special sympathies with him, or with his administration ; though I could not, even if a sturdy Athanasian, curse them with the vehemence of the Puritanical President, and especially as he does in the name of all New England. || I but introduce him as an * Bancroft, i. 430. t Savage's Wint. i. 284. — Notice the reason why Gorton and his associates were drawn into the vortex of Massachusetts, and why Ply- mouth and Maine held off. — Savage's Wint. ii. 84, 85 ; and note 2, to page 85. X Trumbull's Connecticut, i. 411. Hinman's Antiquit. 302, 303. § Stiles' Judges, pp. 130, 131. II Ibid. p. Hi. — Compare Mather's " eternal farewell" of Randolph, 232 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. illustration of the feelings of Puritans towards an Episco- palian in authority ; for he was the first avowed Episcopal governor in New England. The insult to which I have al- luded, was given by deaconing out , as the phrase goes, (i. e., the reading a line or two at a time, by a Congregational deacon, for the people to sing after him,) the following verses from the 52d Psalm of Sternhold and Hopkins' version — ^w incidental proof, by the way, that the Puritans had learned to sing the Psalms of the Church, though they would neither read her Bible, nor pray her Prayers ! 1. Why dost thou, tyrant, boast abroad, Thy wicked works to praise ? Dost thou not know there is a God, Whose mercies last always ? 2. Why doth thy mind yet still devise Such wicked wiles to warp ? Thy tongue untrue, in forging lies. Is like a razor sharp. 3. On mischief why set'st thou thy mind. And wilt not walk upright ? Thou hast more lust false tales to find, Than bring the truth to light. tP-^' 4. Thou dost delight in fraud and guile, In mischief, blood, and wrong ; Thy lips have learned the flattering style, O false, deceitful tongue ! As to the originality of such abuse, this is but a wretched imitation of the manner in which Charles I. was insulted, by means of the same Psalm, when a prisoner.* As for its as a "blasted wretch." Remarkables, p. 107. Stout cursing, this. Rome would be put to its trumps to surpass it. * Lathbury, p. 334. — Long's Review of Baxter's Life, p. 45. The king paid them in their own coin. He called for the Psalm beginning thus, " Have mercy. Lord, on me, I pray, For men would me devour." REVIEW OP THE PURITANS. 333 wit, it might do for a political town-meeting ; which many a time and oft has been held in a Puritan house of worship. But thus to rail at him, who, with all his faults as a Church- man and a politician, Douglass declares, *' was a good moral man,"* — and that, too, when he was complaisant enough to attend their own services — then to ward off (or try to do so,) his just and expected displeasure with the school-boy fib, that the Psalms were sung in course, (mark : the Jesuit- ical deacon does not say that Psalm was, and even President Stiles cannot defend him) — thus to do, I say, if a specimen of what Puritanical congregations could countenance, is to afford no small proof of the imputation, so often fastened upon them, of copying the Romanist, in making even reli- gion subservient to their private aims and sectarian passions. But why should not even religion have been employed by them, to annoy an unpopular ruler, since it was one of their legitimate maxims — a motto even for the sepulchre — that ** rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."t This was an admirable text to fight aristocrats with, a century or more ago. It was inspiring truth, when levelled against monarchs, monarchical governors, or Episcopalians. But, unfortunately, just like the veto which the Federalists inserted into our National Constitution, it can be, and it is, turned upon its authors. The demagogue, the mobocrat, the sans-culottes, can claim it, and plead it, as warmly as Dr. Stiles himself, and shout it with even braver lungs. It is no longer true, (sic transit gloria mundi,) as Dr. Morse once said of Connecticut, with such quiet assurance : " The clergy, who are numerous, and, as a body, very respectable, have hitherto preserved a kind of aristocratical balance, in the very democratical government of the State ; which has happily operated as a check upon the overbearing spirit of republicanism. "J But the awrea REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 353 They encountered the greatest hardships, and frequently exposed their lives to the merciless tomahawks of the sava- ges. In propagating their religion, they braved death in ten thousand shapes ; they have left to their successors in the same vineyard, though few of this description now remain, examples of suffering and patience, which alone could result from an elevated faith and a well-grounded hope."* Chateaubriand may of course be suspected of no inconsiderable partiality. Still, in the fourth book of his " Beauties of Christianity," he has given instances, that, aside from the drapery in which his imagination and eloquence have clothed them, can sustain his eulogy in pro- nouncing them a display of " miracles of the arts, of laws, of humanity and courage, in the four quarters of the globe." Recalling things like these, and pondering on them as a philanthropist, without regard to religious differences, one cannot but reflect with pain, that for suspicions wholly, (at least mostly,) .£500 were offered for Ralle alive or dead, and that he was finally murdered and mangled by those, whose fathers came to our far-off shores, ostensibly for the same kind and sacred purpose to which he had given up his comfort, health and life, viz., the conversion of the savages. t It should never be forgotten, that this was " the principal end" of the settlement of Massachusetts, by the '* free profession" of its earliest inhabitants. Notwithstand- ing, with savages only for associates and nurses, Ralle found himself the victim of sufferings that required the gentlest alleviations. His last years dragged heavily along, amid debility and sickness ; yet he never left his post, and spent his latest strength in attempting to stop an effusion of blood, or in defence of his fireside. It is melancholy to think of * Stoddard's Louisiana, p. 315. Compare Wynne's America, i. 309, etc. t Williamson's Maine, ii. 102. 354 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. his lonely grave and shattered chapel, as the only ruins of an extensive mission ; but these are all which remained seventy years since, and the vestiges of these now, perhaps, have vanished.* Indeed, the Jesuit missionaries, at the lowest estimate, often deserve our pity ; and when we see what a monument of philosophy and erudition they have reared for themselves, in their Lettres Edifiantes et Curieuses,f we must respect their labors if we condemn their creed. '^^ In connexion with such matters, Papists will probably think I ought to comment severely on the bearing of the Puritans towards them, because of their prior and superior love of human rights and liberties, and their embarking as they did in the cause of our memorable Revolution. But if so, I must disappoint them. Closer examination con- strains me to retract, somewhat, from the praise once be- stowed on the Baron of Baltimore, and the early Romish settlers of Maryland. Lord Baltimore had refused the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, tendered him in the Old Dominion. '' It was evident" therefore, says Bancroft,! *' that Lord Baltimore could never hope for quiet, in any attempt at establishing a colony within the jurisdiction of Virginia." The papistical principles of his family, thus proving a hinderance at the outset, as indeed they did long afterward,^ it became necessary to put them in abeyance. I am induced accordingly to believe, that surrounded as they were by jealous and stronger settlements, the Papists became satisfied that their success depended upon an at- »^7 See Note 117. * Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d ser. ii. 231. t An edition of these, seventy years ago, amounted to thirty volumes. Since, I suppose, they have much increased ; though I have not the means at hand of ascertaining. See Catalogue of the Library of Harv. University, i. 468. Also Watts' Bibliotheca, i. 420. u. t Bancroft, i. 241. § Proud's Pennsylvania, i. 121. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 355 tractive, and, to them, entirely novel plan. So they placed in the background the natural exclusivenessof their system, and opened their doors, as David did * when overawed by necessity, to whomsoever would enter. t For the increase of a new state, which, if it rose at all, had to rise in the neighborhood of formidable rivals, must depend on its pos- session of attractions which might win those, who hung loosely on the skirts of its superiors. Moreover, the cele- brated act of 1638-9, which gave *' Holy Church within this province," ** all her rights, liberties, and franchises, wholly and without blemish," was passed, so Chalmers as- sures us, because " of a laudable jealousy of the papal juris- diction"j: — in other words, to keep *' Holy Church" abroad, from overstepping, as she was wont to do, the modesty of equal rights and privileges; and to let "Holy Church" at home know, she should have just her own, and nothing more. In addition to this, a contemporary quoted by Dr. Hawks, also assures us, that the celebrated act of toleration of 1649 was passed by a legislature, in which the Papists formed but one part out of several! § Mr. Knowles, there- fore, in his memoir of Roger Williams, is justified in dis- puting the alleged priority of the Papists in the cause of re- ligious freedom, on this ground, rather than on the one he contends for ; since on that they can answer him by saying, that Rhode Island did not tolerate Papists till the virtual independence of these States, i. e., February, 1783. I al- lude here to a matter, about which there has been no little clangor ; but the discovery of the Rhode Island act of February, 1783, by Mr. Howland, settles the difficulty at last.jl * 1 Sam. xxii. 2. t Even Mr. Walsh says Episcopalians were unavoidably Xo\qv ViitdL. Appeal, p. 428. X Annals, p. 213. § Leah and Rachell, quoted in Hawks's Maryland, p. 35. II See Holmes's Annals, i. 336. Walsh's Appeal, p. 427, etc. KnowW* 356 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. And as to the hearty, at least the spontaneous, devotion of Romanists in the doubtful and anxious warfare of our American patriots, this also may, I hope, be questioned, without sectarian malevolence. Boucher, who seems to have been their friend, and who pleaded nobly and fervently for their toleration, in an hour when the most sagacious politicians thought it not advisable, declares that they hesitated not a little ; and maintained to the last moment a neutrality, which would allow them to join a victorious party safely, and shelter their persons and opulence, of which they had no small share, beneath the wingof its protection. He declares, too, that they were looked at askant by our whigs ; who suspected them of an inward proclivity for toryism, and accounted their ostensible perpendicularity as somewhat critical.* Another contemporary also says, they had lost their former political influence in the State ;t which, of course, it was highly important to regain. Their " irreso- lution," according to Boucher, *' drew down on them many suspicions, censures, and threats." And he adds, that one Memoir Rog. Williams, p. 321, etc. Verplanck's Discourses, p. 86. Also Gammell's Life of Williams, Sparks' Am. Biog. 2d ser. iv. 209, etc. — The act of 1783, which repeals the exception against the Roman Ca- tholics, may be found in Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. v. pp. 243, 244. It is surprising that Mr. Gammell should not have .seen it, and that Mr. Sparks should allow Mr. Gammell to repeat the arguments of Mr. Walsh, which it effectually explodes. It may not be amiss to add here, that the settlement of this controversy reflects most favorably upon the accuracy of Mr. Chalmers, who, in his Political Annals, was the first to say Rhode Island had passed a law refusing toleration to Roman Catho- lics. Chalmers has made so many statements, which the Puritans dis- like, they have been glad to lower his authority. The attack upon him has only redounded to his honor. His assailants, in the old fashioned language of the Prayer Book, have fallen themselves into the destruction that they made for another. * Boucher's Discourses, p. 242. Boucher was familiar with both Virginia and Maryland, before the Revolution. Disc. p. xc. Pref. t Mr. Surveyor Eddis. Letters, p. 46. 4 REVIEW OP THE PURITANS. 357 object of his own plea for toleration was, actually, ** to save them from persecution ;" for which act of charity he was no doubt duly honored with the suspicion of being himself a Jesuit in disguise. *' At length," he continues, *' a [Roman] Catholic gen- tleman of good abilities, who was possessed of one of the first fortunes in that country," " openly espoused the cause of Congress." This was Mr. Carroll ; who, it would seem, finding at length when the combat deepened, that he and his fellow-believers had but the two alternatives, of confis- cation or " rebellion," abandoned neutrality and sought alliance with those, from whom danger was nearest. When this was done — the Rubicon crossed — a careful manifesta- tion of fealty became necessary, to wipe away the stains which had been attached to them. A part of this manifes- tation might have been the appearance of Mr. Carroll upon the floor of Congress; since he was the leading man of the Romanists of Maryland. Boucher, however, does not hesi- tate to say, that the personal ambition of Mr. C. had a part in the production of this (as matters had stood) rather singular result. " He was actuated," is his testimony, " as was generally thought, solely by his desire to become a public man ;" or, as I may say, to regain that political influence for his friends, which Mr. Eddis declares they had lost. These may be ungracious facts in the view of some; but if true, we have a right to know, and must in candor, though with regret, admit them. That there is, upon the lowest estimate, ?i verisimilitude about them which we cannot blink, is clear. Nor must it be forgotten, that they are given upon the authority of one, who was even a phenomenon among the politicians of his day, for his liberal opinions upon that long litigated and agitating topic — the toleration or relief of Roman Catholics. For myself, and without the fear of the Inquisition before my eyes, I avow it to be as 16* 358 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. difficult for me, as it was for the patriotic Episcopalians, who were the great majority in Maryland in the days of '76,* to believe thai there is any more elective affinity between Popery and republicanism, than between an acid and an alkali. True, Popery has a phase for every quarter ^ like the moon in the sky, and the contrary may appear to be the fact. Popery publishes Bibles in this country, because she cannot help herself But in Austria she prohibits even a Hebrew Bible, to a passing traveller.! So I am constrained to believe, that, as respects their genuine dispositions. Popery and a free government are as unlike as our arctic and tempe- rate zones. The one cannot endure the climate of the other, better than a polar bear a transportation from his native latitude. "Whether," says the British Critic, *' we consult the annals of experience, or the oracles of reason — whether we survey the present or the past — we gather only fresh con- firmation of our belief, that republicanism and [Roman] Catholicism cannot long, or flourishingly, or comfortably, coexist. J That this is true, is evinced by what some may think trifles worthy only of a smile, but which are certainly wor- thy one serious glance, if there is any sense in the old proverb, that straws can show how the wind is setting. It is notorious, that Papists do, among themselves, assign some of their clergy titles, and render them a homage — bending even the knee to them — which never existed but under their system, or a monarchy. Their bishops are freely addressed as " My lord " — their bishops' houses, though never so humble, are looked upon as the abodes of a spir- itual prince, and denominated "palaces" — their bishops' * Eddis's Letters, p. 46. t Church of Eng. Quart. Rev. October, 1844, p. 419.— Edward Leigh said, nearly two hundred years ago, that Popery made it a capital crime to read the Bible in Spain and Italy ; but allowed it in England and France, where she could not help it. — Leigh's Religion and Learning, p. 22. London, 1656. t Brit. Cril. xvii. 198. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 359 churches are called '' cathedrals." In the Popish Almanac, intended most probably for few or none but believing optics, a republican eye detects, as the unpropitious caption of their clerical catalogue, "THE HIERARCHY of the UNITED STATES."* It is printed here, in type of their own chosen size ; and I cannot but request a moment's attention to its supernal phraseology. It would appear that these dig- nitaries are indeed magnates of the " Mother of us all;" for they are described as having hierarchical empire over our whole Union. t It will be said, perhaps, this is but a title, and may be but a convenient abbreviation for " The hierar- chy of the Holy Roman Church | in [not, of] the United * It so reads in the Almanac for 1835, but in an Almanac for 1844 I cannot find it. Once, this would have surprised me, in a Church which is infallibly and always the same. But since I have discovered changes in the Bible even, under that Church's auspices, the thing seems quite natural. — As to changes in the Bible, let the following facts speak for themselves. There is a technical distinction made by Papists, between adoration and worship. We may worship images ; but we may adore God only. Now the Rheims Testament of 1582 reads Hebrews xi. 21, unflinchingly, thus : " By faith, Jacob dying, blessed every one of the sons of Joseph ; and adored the top of his rod." But the Rheims Testament of 1582, republished at Philadelphia in 1831, and under all possible au- thority, reads the same text thus : " By faith, Jacob when he was dying blessed each of the sons of Joseph ; and worshipped the top of his rod." So much for one instance. Enough can be^said about hundreds more, if it is wanted. And as to Latin Vulgates, sanctioned by Popes themselves, Mr. James in his " Corruptions" says the differences " amount to some thousands." See new edition of 1843, p. 195, note — However, all this is, I suppose, as it should be. It is but a legitimate illustration of Dr. Moehler's theory of " development." t The later Almanac hardly mends the matter. It reads " Diocesses of the United States :" as if the government of the United States had dioceses ; or there were no dioceses but their own. By the way, in a very, very small matter. Popery is here inflexible. It spells diocese in the old way, " diocess." No development for orthography yet, I sup- pose. I I say " Roman Church," and not " Roman Catholic Church ,-" for 360 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. States." It were little to be cared for in other Almanacs; but here it means what it says. This is the legitimate style pontifical of a community, which absolutely and literally claims the entire ecclesiastical jurisdiction of this immense republican soil — nay, of the world itself; for the Pope is Christ's vicar for the terraqueous globe, and could give away continents as pertinently as ever. And, too, it is the style of a community, one of whose lordly " hierarchy " averred to a young friend of mine, susceptible of intimidation, but now safe in Paradise, that unless a man believed the wafer and wine of the mass were, as certainly and exactly, the flesh and the blood of his Saviour, as were the body which suffered on the cross and the blood which was shed from it, ** HE COULD NOT BE SAVED !" But I must conclude. Such things then can show, that while Popery, after its own fashion, had judgment without mercy, from its extreme in theory, and its cousin-german in temper, Puritanism — and that while that judgment was inflicted by the same pushing and elbowing disposition, which hustled all who dare tread on soil of which it claimed more than the entire ecclesiastical jurisdiction, viz., the entire property — that still, the votaries of Popery were, if any are, tolerably fair subjects for the experiments of intole- rant selfishness. Alas! that there should be a system, in which frail, fallible mortals are actors and umpires, which claims jurisdiction over the living and the dead, through this world, and into that which is to come ! And yet Pa- pists anathematize us all without exception, who question the supremacy of a single bishop over the faith and worship of the globe — doom us all, unless '' invincible ignorance" even Pope Pius IV.'s Creed uses this appellation, as if sufficient, and the other involves a contradiction, so that I ordinarily eschew it. The Cath- olic Church is of no country. It is neither Roman, nor English, nor American. Its limit of comprehension is the world. And it is one of the grave solecisms of Popery, to claim it as if it belonged to Rome. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 361 can save us,* (a hook on which no sure hope can hang,) to the penal fires of hell — will not grant the decencies of burial, to our poor impassive clay. O, if the Puritans had never been severe but upon such unearthly assumption, such undying hate, it would have been grating to have passed one censure on them. Sorry indeed am I to assign their proscription of those who proscribe earth and heaven to us, to the same dismal temper, which made them similar oppo- nents of all who varied from that stern standard, which had the opinion of Puritan parsons and the vote of Puritan legislatures for its indestructible foundation. LETTER XVII. Agreeably to an intimation in my last letter, the present one will notice* the bearings of the Puritans towards the Presbyterians. * The bearings of the Puritans towards the Presbyte- rians !' some, at least, of my readers will exclaim. * Are not the parties identically the same? We had always sup- posed there was no difference between the two; and that to talk of one as arrayed against the other, was like talking of Satan's being arrayed against himself.' As to the Satan- * Tottie's Sermons, p. 338. Leslie's Works, i. 500 ; or iii. 87. — Bramhall's Works, new edit. i. 198. Milnefs End of Controversy ; in the conclusion. Milner lays down the Popish doctrine on this subject hke a genuine partisan. Now and then, however, we are treated more mercifully. The Rev. James Archer, e. g. an author to whom Charles Butler, Esq., the opponent of Southey, was partial, will not allow the title heretic to be applied to us indiscriminately. See his Sermon on Persecution, page 11. 362 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. ical reference in this observation, a Quaker, or a Baptist, not to say an Episcopal reader, of a/w// history of the West- minster Assembly, might possibly think it not altogether inappropriate to either side ; for the conflicts which that ** Most Sacred Assembly"* witnessed, often wore a most unearthly aspect. And it may be affirmed, as an unques- tionable fact, that Puritans and Presbyterians have not long been true yoke-fellows, any where. Their opposition began before the Assembly's days, and has not ceased still, in the view of those who understand their character thoroughly. It is difficult to say, in precise terms, what sort of mem- bership the genuine Presbyterians held in the Church of England ; for membership they unquestionably did have in it, and in greater or less numbers, for no inconsiderable period of time. We have a word in politics which describes their position, the word " lobby-member ;" but its use would be esteemed ungracious, and if I introduce it, I must be understood as doing so for definition's sake alone. Yet, it comes nearer to a precise description of their position, than any other at my command. They were seeking to mould the will of the Legislators in spiritual matters — were off and on — now obsequious in the hope of success, and now testy and rebellious from disappointment. Still, they never pre- sumed to go so far in their hostility to the Church of Eng- land, as to say it was no church at all. Not so was it with the Independents or Congregational- ists, whom I regard as the real fathers of Puritanism, of such Puritanism, at least, as established and generated itself * Right Reverend, &c., are horrible misnomers, when applied to Churchmen. Yet " Most Sacred" was not thought too lofty a style for anti-churchmen. Collier, viii. 257. In the same temper Baxter, in that edition of his Saints' Rest, published in Cromwell's days, said, " Parlia- ment of Heaven" for " Kingdom of Heaven," and put Brook, Pym, Sec. there. But he afterwards took them out again I — Long's Review of Bax- ter's Life, p. 41. See also Jones of Nayland's Works, v. 63. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. in New England. They denounced the Church, as a mere anti-Christian hierarchy, which it was lawful for them, nay, a bounden duty for them, utterly to overturn.* Presbyterians, however, were often partial conformists, and continued to be such to a very late date. Collier, for example, tells us that in Charles the Second's time, after the Act of Uniformity, even their ministers did not hesitate, when they had finished their sermons to their own congregations, to attend at the Established Church, and commune there ! t This is a most remarkable fact, and shows that many of them viewed their separation, as Wesley did his, as but partial or temporary. But the out and out Puritan, the descendant of Robert Brown, called the Church of England, Babylon, Rome, &c., &,c. And he thought the doom of Babylon in the Apoca- lypse,! to be cast like a great millstone into the sea, and to be sunk so deep as to be found no more at all, her just and appropriate due. And such were the Puritans with whom the Independents, or Congregationalists, of New England, the rather sympathized — after the grace of whose fashion they preferred to copy.§ They professed, it is quite true, * See Ball's answer to John Canne, edit. 1642, Pt. i. p. 125, Pt. ii. 4, 5. Also Bartlet, who quotes ex ahundanti the highest Puritan Inde- pendent authorities, is very plain in his declarations of the anti-Christian- ism of the Church of England, and admits its baptisms, (mark and remark this, my fellow-churchmen,) only on the principle of the validity of lay bap- tism ! ! !— Bartlet's Congregational Way. Lond. 1647, pp. 104, 105, 119, etc, t Collier, ii. 89 ; or viii.460.— Lathbury, pp. 355, 56. X Rev. xviii. 21. § Even John Robinson, be it remembered, with all his boasted change for the better, would never allow commumon with the Church of England. With what decency then can the Puritans complain, that we never re- ceive the Eucharisl at their hands'? And further, (for I may as well mention it here, perhaps, as any where,) this is a particular of Brownistic polity, from which " the New England di- vines " took strict care not to depart. It may be questioned whether, in tem- per, they have departed from it stilU That they adhered to RobinBon's utter 364 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. as Higginson and his companions did, not to adopt the rough language of separation, "Farewell Babylon, farewell Rome, &,c." They indited a most deferential and affec- tionate epistle from the Arabella, addressed to *' their breth- ren in and of the Church of England." But it is an adage, old and trite enough for a schoolboy, that actions speak louder than words. Their actions, as Hutchinson admits, (whom I have already quoted on this matter,) *' left no room for doubt, after they arrived in America."* Then they soon developed their inward and fond conformity, to Brown's principles and platform. This, indeed, has been denied, and is still denied, with stereotyped formality. But, it is asserted, and just as stead- fastly, and that also by Presbyterian authority. Hethering- ton, the latest Presbyterian writer upon the subject, with whom I am acquainted, does not hesitate to declare, that " From this person [Brown] the first form of what has since been termed the Independent or Congregational sys- tem of Church government, appears to have had its origin ; the great majority of the Puritans [i. e., moderate Puritans,] disallowance of the Sacraments of the Church of England, and considered worship by its liturgical forms unlawful, is evident from their Answers to thirty-two Questions, &.c. ; a tract which will be alluded to before this this letter is done. See p. 28, where they absolutely bewail their ever having had any thing to do with the ordinances and rites of their " dear mother." — Can the posterity of these people, who once bewailed having had aught to do with the Church of England, and who still think that Church nothing but a stone-cold and stone-dead exemplification of Christian- ity, murmur with the smallest propriety if we let their ordinances entirely alone ? The Puritans disallowed the Ordinations, the Sacraments, and the Liturgy, of the Church of England. Was there much left for them to disown ] And now, forsooth, their posterity turn round and talk of the exclusiveness of Episcopalians ! " Faith," said Richard III., "some certain dregs of «conscience are yet within me." May the experience of the usurper be imparted to them, in their consideration of Church- men ; and then we and our exclusiveness can henceforth go free. * Hutch. Hist. i. 24, 25. I t REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 3^5 either retaining their connection with the Church of Eng- land, in a species of constrained half-conformity, or associa- ting on the Presbyterian model."* And he goes on to add, that *' Brown not only renounced communion with the Church of England, but also with all others of the reformed churches, who would not adopt the model which he had constructed, "t Now it is in this respect that Ross, another Presbyterian writer, says the Independents of New England imitated Brown, as has been shown by a former reference.^ And, in fact, the object of all these letters is but an illustra- tion of the same proposition. Now Ross is an old writer, while Hetherington is a late one. The edition of Ross's book, from which I quote, is the fifth ; and it bears the date of 1675. Of Hetherington, I quote the American edition of 1843. I could go higher, and quote the Jus Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici, or, the Divine Right of Church Government, of the Presbyterians, of which the second edition of 1647 is before me.§ But it is not necessary : the oldest Presbyterian writers avowed and maintained the Brunonian paternity of Congregational- ism, as well as Bishop Hall, or an Episcopalian of the nine- teenth century. II And, from them onward, down to our own * Hist. West. Assembly, p. 46. f How different the temper of Dr. Rainolds, of Hampton Court memory. He asked for absolution from a Churchman on his dealh-bed, and kissed the hand of him who pronounced it ! — Fuller's Ch. Hist. iii. 231. t Ross's Hist, all Rel. p. 390, 391. § Also the Presbyterian Jus Divinum Ministerii Evangelici, or, Di- vine Right of the Gospel Ministry ; of the edition of 1654. Pref. to Part ii. II The plain-speaking Mr. Edwards comes out with all his strength upon this subject ; for he is provoked by the Jesuitical denials of the In- dependents. He says, all the water in the Thames will not wash away from them the imputation of Brownism. Antapologia, p. 197 : also, pp. 136, and 296. Comp. Baillie's Dissuasive, pp. 102, 103, etc. Baillie's Anabaptists, p. 54. 366 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. times, tlie impressions of true Presbyterians have remained unchanged, respecting a point which Congregationalists never allow, but with the most parsimonious reluctance.* It may be expected of me, however, to be more explicit in my proof of it. Accordingly I am willing to undertake for some, what they may consider better proof of the identity of New England Puritanism, and Brunonian Puritanism, or Independency ; which was as thoroughly anti-Presbyterian, as it was anti-Episcopalian. This proof can be derived from the identity of their principles. And there are four principles, not to mention more, which strongly characterized Independency even under Brown's personal auspices — which characterized it when it obtruded its unwelcome presence in the Westmin- ster Assembly, and which continued to characterize it on American shores, whither it had exiled itself to enjoy freedom and supremacy. These principles respect the following subjects, viz., the Church, Ordination, what may now as well be called Development as any thing, and Intolerance. It can easily be shown, how Brownism and Independency differed upon these topics from Presbyterianism ; and a person of very limited acquaintance with modern ecclesi- astical history, can determine for himself as I proceed, under my four particulars, whether the Congregationalists of New England have not proved themselves like the ancient Brown- ists, and are not, so far as "the spirit of the age" will ad- mit, very like them still. I. The Church. Let us hear Mr. Hetherington's testimony as to the dif- ference between Independents and Presbyterians concerning this subject. One would suppose, that a right view of the Church as a whole, as an institution, was, if not a funda- mental, the next thing to it, at the lowest estimation. * It used to cost a flogging, to call a Massachusetts Puritan a Brownist. If the hbel, (libel if it were,) had not had a terrible sting in it, its author would have escaped the lash. — Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. iii. 81. I REVIEW OP THE PURITANS. 3^7 Nevertheless, he positively asserts, that ** The point on which the greatest disagreement existed, vi^as that relating to the ideas which they attached to the term Church."* The Independents held, that any seven persons, professing a belief in the Christian religion, and voluntarily associating together, were competent to any ecclesiastical act whatever. t They could elect and ordain their own clergymen, (a point which, for distinctness' sake, will come up separately,) and perform any act competent to be performed by a Synod or a General Council ; and their action was absolute and final. In other words, these seven were a complete ecclesiastical sovereignty. J And it is so with genuine Congregationalism still; unless the principle is admitted in a yet morelatitudi- narian style, if I am not misinformed, three^^^ can now do all which seven once could; so that upon Congregational principles any three Christians, voluntarily associating, are an ecclesiastical corporation which knows no superior be- neath the sun.§ True, such a corporation hearkens to a council, or an association, or a consociation, or any thing else — to which it pleases. But all which it does in this way, is the condescension of majesty, and not a submission to right. Now, a Presbyterian idea of the Church is so different from all this, that Mr. Hetherington is justified fuHy in ,"8 See Note 118. * Hist. West. Ass. 165. Compare Jus Div. Regiminis Ecclesiastic!. Pref.jpp. xiii, xiv. t Walker's Hist. Independency, Pt. iii. p. 23. X See P. Nye, on the oath of Supremacy, &.e., vindicating Dissenters. London, reprinted 1683, p. 41, etc. § " In whom [Ministers and other church officers] they say church power is only executively, (as to the exercise or dispensation ;) but it is primarily and eminently, in that Body of the people, never so small, which is so combined together." — Gauden's Hieraspistes, p. 98, London, 1653. 368 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. stating, that between it and the idea of the Independents, "the greatest disagreement" existed. The Presbyterian idea of the Church differs from the Episcopal in form, rather than essence; as the very title of the theological classics of 1647 and 1654 effectually demonstrate. " Jus Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici, or, the Divine Right of Church Government," and " Jus Divinum Ministerii Ecclesiastici, or, the Divine Right of the Gospel Ministry," sound so much like the titles of genuine church-books, that a Churchman might easily mistake them for one written by Ap. Laud, in propria persona. Still more would he be puzzled, if he turned to p. 264 of the first, and p. U2 of the second part, of the next, and found *' a ministerial succession" vindicated, even if it came through Rome ! Or looked into the Vindication, sometimes bf>und up with the first, and found Popish baptism pronounced valid, Timothy and Titus pro- nounced apostles, and the Eucharistic wine called " the blood of Christ sacramental."* Or, turned to p. 23 of the first part of the Min. Ecc, and found that Baptism *' is called by the Holy Ghost, a saving ordinance." But, most of all, would the current of discourse gratify him, when he discovered all matters of discipline, all canons, decrees, and definitions of faith, committed to the judicatories of the Church, and officers not manufactured by the people. Surely, he would exclaim, * The Christians who made this book differ heaven- wide from new-light Puritans, and from the Evangelical Congregationalists, so called, of our own times. For those » See Vindication, &c., pp. 93, 143. Hubbard's N. Eng. 143. Pres- byterians of the present day are wiser than their forefathers, for they have just decreed Romish baptism to be invalid. They are wiser too than the school of Richard Baxter Baxter in his Reformed Liturgy, (no ob- jection to a liturgy, it seems, of his own making,) calls the elements of the Eucharist " no common bread and wine, but sacramentally the body and blood of Christ." He also calls Baptism, " this sacrament of regenera- tion." Alas for Baxter now I REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 369 new-lights were, (as their counterparts still are,) so devoted to their own inventions, in every particular, that they pre- ferred singing their own hymns, to singing as near as may be the language of inspiration itself — a translation of David's Psalms !' Now it is most remarkable, how, in so minute a matter as this, the old Puritan spirit, which considers itself ^ar excellence evangelical, has been faithfully perpetuated. A passion for human hymns, in opposition to divine psalms, has labored to foist itself into other communions, so that even the Episcopal Church in this country, has had to fortify herself against it, by drawing up a rubric requiring God's own language to be sung ! I say God's own language, meaning of course a translation of it ; but then the Bible itself, that every body save a scholar uses, is nothing more. As if it would seem, there must of course be an opposition to almost every thing that claimed a divine right. And so also it appeared to the Presbyterians of old. A Presbyterian of the days of the Westminster Assembly distinctly com- plains of this strange Puritan passion for hymns, in opposi- tion to psalms — hymns, he adds, "of their own making."* Not to dwell too long on each of my four points, let us now come to the second. II. — Ordination. This the Presbyterian believed, (as the Churchman does,) to be no affair of the people ; and talked, as we have seen, of a " ministerial succession," out of which he was not to be frightened even if it came through Rome. Here, he and the genuine Puritan separated again, and totally. Such a Puritan renounced Episcopal ordination, not as a nullity only, but as a sin. I need not go over ground traversed in my eighth letter; but it may be well to * Gangraena, Pt. i. p. 45. However, when the Puritans could sing psalms under their own auspices they did so : as Sir Edmund Andros dis- covered to his annovance. 370 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. add, that this renunciation of an ordination not conferred by the people, began in the days of Queen Elizabeth,* and was well known in the days of the Commonwealth. f It was repeated in this country, and habitually. True, the Con- gregational laity are now disfranchised of their old rights, because a lay ordination appears undignified : it comes as it were from the shop, or the farm, and clerical self-conse- quence will not endure it. But when it was hr^i forbidden ^ it was so treated by a fastidious and aristocratical officer of Harvard University, and was indignantly protested against as a" bill of exclusion."! This bold step was taken in 1696, and was infectious enough, notwithstanding its imitation of a " di- vine right" practice, to create and transmit a new custom. Dr. Holmes, in his Dudleian Lecture of iSlO, in the same town of Cambridge, where the laity were first thrust away from ordinations, could safely enough say, that ordination " has been performed by apostles ; by prophets and teach- ers; by evangelists; and by elders and presbyters; and by none others."^ Fortunately Deacon Gile, who denounced the " bill of exclusion" of 1696, had taken no care to keep up his succession ; and Dr. Holmes's dogma was as safe as one of the definitions of Euclid. After all, however, it may fairly be questioned, whether at the present day, clerical ordination among the Congrega- tionalists is any thing more than an affair of courtesy or of taste. If a man were elected a minister by a Congrega- tional Society, if any two or three of the so called church- members imposed hands upon him, and he then assumed all a Congregational minister's prerogatives, I could make a present of my own letters of orders to any association * Soames's Elizabeth, p. 255. Note. — Lechford in his Plaine Deal- ing confirms this. Mass. Hist, Coll. 3d ser. iii 123. t Baillie's Letters, (fee. New Edition, ii. 348. X Quincy's Harv. Univ. i. pp 89, 489. § Holmes's Dud. Lect, p. 7. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 371 which would dare to pronounce him a mere layman, and beg to have them issued anew by such resolute authority.^ *^ III. — Development. By this I mean that Independency has always looked upon itself, as (to use the language of a geologist) in a transition-state, and prepared for any changes whatsoever. ^20 And it avowed this peculiarity of itself, in almost the very face and eyes of the " Most Sacred Assembly," in its noto- rious " Apologeticall Narration." Its disciples wished the purpose of never making present judgment and practice a binding law for the future, enacted as the most sacred of all laws.* This is evidently the notion which Robinson had in view, in his farewell address to the Plymouth Pil- grims, when he told them to be ready for any novelties, since God had yet more truth to break forth out of his holy word. That this was the flickering principle or policy of the early Independents is incontestable :t and that it was acted upon, and acted out, in New England, the history of Unita- rianism there is an ample voucher. Nay, that Unitarianism is its legitimate result, has been contended for in a sermon by Mr. Charles W. Upham, delivered at Salem, Mass., November, 1826, called ** Principles of the Reformation." Few Unitarians have written a better sustained sermon than this. How Calvinistic Congregational ists can upbraid him, or his sect, for their position, I know not. They are, as he proves most successfully, but carrying out the es- tablished law of Independency — indeed the most sacred of its laws. And Mr. Upham is as frank as he is ingenious. His forefathers were Calvinists ; he and his are Socinians ; "9 SeeNote_ll9. 120 See Note 120. * Hetherington, p. 160. Edwards' Antapologia, p. 85. t Gauden's Hieraspistes, p. 452. This is one of the follies Gauden condemns. Walker's Independency, Ft. iii. p. 22. 372 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. and his posterity may be — ^just what they please.'" Nay, if they come to conclusions different from his own, or from those of any higher predecessor, he solemnly charges '* their contemporaries not to reproach them." (Sermon, p. 8.) Now this is precisely as it should be. Independency was originally and professedly a Proteus,* and it has prac- tically proved itself one; as Mr. Upham earnestly contends it may do, without fear and without reproach. Not to speak of the strides which a portion of its adherents have taken towards Socinianism, Humanitarianism, Transcendentalism, and I fear Pantheism, [for the late Prof. Ware had to preach a sermon before Harvard University, to prove the personality of God !]t it might be asked what are the remaining and the more considerate portions doing ? Mr. Newton's speech, quoted in my fifth letter, shows that the Cambridge Platform has waxed old, and is ready to vanish away. Has the Say- brook Platform fared better ? Would the majority of the Congregational ministers in Connecticut adopt it as their '2' See Note 121, * Baillie speaks decidedly of its " most slie and cunning way," and that it was the " mother and true fountaine of all the church-distractions" of England. Notwithstanding, Baillie, though promoted by Charles II. after the Restoration, continued a sturdy old Presbyterian to the last ; and would not so much as give a bishop his titles by courtesy. — Baillie's Letters, &c.,7je«? crf/f. of 1841, 1842, ii. 130, 216; andiii. 487.— My re- ferences to Baillie's Letters, it may be well enough to say, are almost all of them to the edition of 1775. I had not the new in time. t This was delivered September 23, 1S38 ; and, though one of a course of sermons, was deemed necessary for immediate publication. It might well fail of all effect, however, for it admits that " express infidelity is not vice," and " atheism is not immorality." (See p. 22.) These are strange assertions for a Christian to convert infidels and atheists with. They remind one of what Bp. Horsley told Dr. Priestley, that his way of converting unbelievers resembled that of the Jesuit, who taught his sav- ages our Saviour was a great cacique, who in three years scalped men, women, and children without number ; and thereby made plenty of converts forthwith !— See Horsley's Tracts, 3d edit. p. 298. REVIEW OF THE PURITAXS. 373 creed ? Let semi-pelagian Taylorism answer. Or let an ex animo consent to the language of the consecrating prayer of our Communion Service, which calls the atonement " a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satis- faction, for the sins of the whole world" — be applied as a test to candidates for Congregational ordination; and the man who will not wince under it, would deserve the mark of an angel, as one that sighs and cries for the abominations of Jerusalem.* But Presbyterianism, when genuine, believes in no developments. It understands not the Jesuitical art of adopting a creed for substance, and denying any of its disagreeable particulars. Like Episcopacy, (see the Preface of the English Prayer Book to the XXXIX Articles,) it would have its adherent submit to its Confessions of Faith " in the plain and full meaning thereof," and would not allow him to " put his own sense or comment, to be the meaning of the Article," but require him to " take it in the literal and grammatical sense." It may be said, indeed it is said, that by departing from the strictness of its own standards, Presbyterianism in this country has riven itself in twain. But that only convinces its less Puritanic half, (the old school party,) of their sad mistake in allowing the development and creed-depreciating tendency of Congregationalism to be mingled with its own elements, till they produced an absolute explosion. It is Puritanism in the shape of Independency, which has wrought mischief in t!ie Presbyterian General Assembly in this country; as it wrought mischief in the Assembly at West- minster, two hundred years ago. It gave that Assembly the severest blow it received from any hand whatever.! — * Ezekiel ix. 4. t Walker's Independency, Pt. i. p. 27. — Alton's life of Henderson, pp. 526, 527.— Hunter's Life of Heywood, pp. 107, 108.— Edwards' An- tapologia, p. 269. 17 374 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. It has given Presbyterianism in this country the unkindest cut of all. Many weakly and ignorantly suppose, that Puritanism and Presbyterianism are identical. They have yet to learn, and perhaps to their own cost, that genuine Presbyterianism has not had a deadlier foe. Nor is that foe yet put effectually at a distance, by geographical divisions. He has left a sting behind. Already in the old school party has the question occasioned fierce debates, whether ruling elders should not impose hands in ordination. Here is the virus of Independency, creating a new sore spot — an abscess will be the consequence ; and Presbyterianism will have to divide again, to try to let the matter out. Alas, it has entered its protest against Puritanic Independency too late ! The law of change with which this system started, falls in quite too harmoniously with " the spirit of the age ;" and that law will now be inflicted on Presbyterianism without mercy, till it is shred into sectarian patches. These remarks accord too well with my fourth topic, not to make me think it is time to bring that up formally. I therefore introduce it. IV. Intolerance. And by this I mean Independency's intolerance towards Presbyterianism, and its efforts to extinguish it. But that idea will, to many, be a perfect puzzle. What ! Puritanism persecuting Presbyterianism ? There is some strange mis- nomer here — this language is a mere blind paradox. And yet the idea conveyed by it has virtually been before my readers, in remarks under the topic now concluded ; and if I again adduce it, I do so but to impress it, if possible, more deeply, knowing how some will revolt at it, and how others try to sneer it off, or laugh it down. But the provoking truth is necessary, and it must stand out in all its plainness: for its ugliness I am not responsible. Puritans of the straitest sect, then, have persecuted Presbyterians unmer- REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 375 cifully ;* and a bitterer feeling has existed between these parties, than between Presbyterians and Churchmen. This sort of Puritans are characterized in the dedication of King James's Bible, as " self-conceited brethren, who run their own ways, and give liking unto nothing but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on their own anvil." Presbyterians found them such, as well as Churchmen ; and now for the proof of my assertion. • It is quite true, that when they were at the outset of their career, the Puritan Independents felt weak, and tried to gain strength, by keeping their more powerful neighbors, the Puritan Presbyterians, at bay with the catch-words, *' toleration," and " liberty to tender consciences." Then they complained of the Presbyterians, as earnestly as Presby- terians ever did of Prelatists. Hear the lugubrious wail of Thomas Goodwin, one of the most celebrated of his party, and, in Cromwell's day. President of Magdalen Col- lege, Oxford. t *'They do worse than all this; for when they have joined with the world, they make use of worldly force and compulsion, and employ and call in aid and strength from the world, whereby to compel their poor Dis- senting Brethren to their way." The term '' Dissenting Brethren," my readers should understand, was a term which was then applied censoriously, by the Presbyterians to the Independents; who were looked upon, we shall presently see, as schismatics. Goodwin has much more to the same effect, in that one of his voluminous treatises quoted, and which is necessarily passed by. Suffice it to say, he is very severe, and tells the Presbyterians that they have less forbear- * Dissenter Disarmed, Ft. i. 161. London, 1681 . t Compare Johnson's wail of " so many [Presbyterian] books, to prove the Congregational or Independent churches to be the sluice through which so many floods of error flow in." — Mass. Coll. 2d series, vii. 2. 376 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. ance for the Independents, than men of the world have for one another* But how was it when the wheel of fortune rolled over, and the lower spoke became the uppermost — when Thomas Goodwin, e. g., was established as Cromwell's favorite, and basked in the sunshine of a tyrant's greatness? Now we can hear the other side, and let them speak. — ''They were thus led," says Hetherington, "to advocate a toleration in theory, which they never granted when their own power was predominant, as in New England — and which, it may be added, they never would consent to grant to the Presbyterians ; whom they would not admit to com- munion with them, unless they were willing to abandon Presbyterianism and become Congregationalists."t " A sect had lately sprung up," writes Mr. Tytler, " who termed themselves Independents. They held the Presbyterians in as great abhorrence, as those of the Church of England."^ And now for a wail from the oppressed, to correspond to Dr. Goodwin's. "The Greek word for schism," write the Presbyterians to the Independents, under the sanction of a Provincial Assembly, " signifies rending, and sure it is that you rend yourselves from us, and not as from Churches of the same rule,'^ but as Churches differing in the rule, with a dislike of us, and a protestation that you cannot join with us, as fixed members, without sin."|| You hear us preach not as persons in oflice, but as gifted men only ; [Note this, O ye Episcopal bigots!] and some of you refuse to * T. Goodwin's Works, vol iv. Gov't of the Church, p. 406. See also Neal referred to for the same purpose, by Lathbury, p. 195. Lilly's Life and Times, new edit. pp. 128, 135, 190. t Hetherington, p. 168. — Compare the Dissenter Disarmed, Pt. ii. 184, 185. t Tytler's Hist. ii. 406. § These Italics are not mine. II Baillie, one of the most zealous of the Presbyterians, retorts upon them their favorite censure, and says nobody had a good opinion of their piety. — Letters, i. 438- REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 377 hear us preach at all. You renounce all church-commu- nion with us as members ; and, not only so, but you invite our people from us, by telling them that they cannot con- tinue with us without sin."* Edwards, in his celebrated Gangraena, uses even stronger language ; and shows that the Presbyterians were called papistical and anti-christian, as well as Episcopalians ! This, according to him, is one of the positions of the uprising faction, which was trying to tread Presbyterianism in the dust : " That the Presbytery and the Presbyteriall Government are the false prophet, and the beast spoken of in the Revelations. Presbytery is a third part of the city of Rome ; yea, that beast in Rev. xi. that ascends, and shall kill the two witnesses, viz., the lNDEPENDENTs."t In this Way, by assuming to themselves a divine mission, and representing themselves as likely to suffer martyrdom, for their fidelity in denouncing papistic Presbyterianism, the Puritanic Independents calculated upon inflaming the prejudices and passions of the multitude. — And they succeeded. The sun of Presbyterianism went down in clouds. It set hopelessly. It has never risen in brightness ; for, as Dr. Buchanan assures us, all the old Presbyterian societies in England are now Socinian without exception. I It is not to be supposed that Presbyterianism sunk with- out a desperate struggle. It did not. But the Independents secured the army,§ and, by the *' holy text of pike and gun," proved their doctrine at least valiantly and prevailingly orthodox. The Presbyterians were peculiarly unfortunate. Even their patriotism was held cheap. They fomented re- bellion against the King, under the patronage of the Scotch, * Vindic. Presbyt. Government, &c., 1649, pp. 130, 131. Edwards' Antapologia,pp. 199, 200. t Gangraena, Pt. i. 28. t Buchanan's Researches, 11th edit. p. 120. | § Hetherington calls the strife between the Presbyterians and Indepen- dents, "a conflict of principle against intrigue and power," p. 195. 378 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. and the Solemn League and Covenant. And when the In- dependents outgeneralled them by intrigue, and the King was put to death, they tried to rouse a faint cry of loyalty, by professing horror at the execution. But their sincerity was distrusted : it came too late, and it availed them nothing. Dean Swift speaks a general sentiment, when he says, " As to what is alleged, that some of the Presbyterians declared openly against the King's murder, I allow it to be true. But from what motives ? No other can possibly be assign- ed, than perfect spite, rage, and envy, to find themselves wormed out of all power, by a new infant spawn of Inde- pendents, sprung from their own bowels."* All this goes to show, and does show, that the aliena- tion between the Presbyterians and the Independents be- came, at last, even furiously bitter.'^^ << Acerrima ferme prox- imorum odia sunt," says the philosophical historian of Rome ; and they exemplified it to a tittle. Edwards, the Presbyterian, can even compliment Churchmen at the ex- pense of Independents ; while they, on the other hand, not only loved Churchmen, if not Papists, far better than they did the Presbyterians, but preferred before them even the scouted Anabaptist.t The climax of mutual abuse was reached, by calling each other Papist and Jesuit : the toughest ecclesiastical nicknames of that day, or of any other. We have seen, already, how Presbyterianism was compared to the Babylonish adulteress in the Revelations; and I may now add, to complete the picture, that the Pres- byterians took special pains to show the similarity between the Puritan Independent, and the crafty, reckless Jesuit. ^23 See Note 122. * Swift's Presbyterian plea of merit ; or, in my copy of his Works, xiii. 112. — Compare the Dissenter Disarmed, Pt. ii. p. 106. t Antapologia, p. 279. Gangraena, Pt. i. 44. Vindic. Pres. Govt, p. 137. Baillie's Dissuasive, p. 106. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 379 Edwards musters and marshals seven potent reasons to es- tablish the likeness ; and not content with that, he gives his schismatical neighbors a parting lunge, such as Ehud gave Eglon, and says they outstrip Machiavel himself.* Such complimenting as this, will no doubt be excused, on account of the " spirit of the age ;" but it is i/ct believed all pertinent and true, when applied by Presbyterians or In- dependents to Episcopalians. By what mysterious revolu- tion has it suddenly grown false and meaningless, when Presbyterians and Independents apply it to one another ?t And now, at length, may I not say, that this review of some of the chief differences between Puritanic Presbyterians, and the still more Puritanic Independents — differences in principle, resulting in utter alienation in point of fact — that this review excuses my going, as it was thought might be necessary, into a regular historical sketch of the controversy, between these ever-famous dissentients from one another ? I expected, indeed, to have to trace the purer Puritanism, from its rise in the reign of Elizabeth, to its vigorous matu- rity in the days of Cromwell, when virtually it wielded a sceptre. I expected to have to present a view of the caustic ** Apologeticall Narration" — the great Congregational man- ifesto—which Hetherington styles a declaration of war t — to * Edwards' Gangraena,Tt. i. 40 ; Pt. iii. 150.— Judges, iii. 21. And a New Englander thus paid him back, in speaking of the' Presbyterians, There is a sett of Bishops coming next behind, Will ride the Devil off his legs, and Weak his wind. t See Simple Cobbler of Agawam, p. 37. Dissenter Disarmed, Pt. i. pp. 162, 163. Roger Williams, speaking of Rhode Island's comforts in 1653, thus chastises both Presbyterian and Independent. " We have not felt the new claims of the Presbyterian tyrants, nor been consumed by the over-zealous fire of those, called godly magistrates." — Mass. H. Coll, 2d ser. ix. 195. X Hetherington, p. 163. Baillie, also, speaks of it in similar terms. See his Letters, &c., i. 420, 421. He also lets out an amusing piece of secret history. The same day the Independents offered the Narration, 380 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. follow out the Independents, in their intrigues with the Par- liament and the army * — to show, too, how artfully they pressed talent, as well as power, into their service ; inducing even Milton to abuse Presbyterians with all his might t — [Is that, Mr. Bacon, one of your reasons for commending his Puritanism ?] — and finally, to show how they had raised up a host of Presbyterian authors, such as Rutherford, and Case, and Cawdrey, and Calamy, and Seaman, and Gataker, and Palmer, and Edwards, and Baillie, and Love, and John Vi- carSjf and Clement Walker, and even William Prynne and John Bastwick, after prelacy had cut their ears off; — who have showered on Puritanism, of the strictest kind, a perfect tempest of hailstones. It may be, that I shall yet have to avail myself of these redoubtable Presbyterian scribes, and that the draught of Pu- ritanism, by a Presbyterian graving-tool, is not yet sufficient- ly executed in alto relievo. Well, if so, I must be recon- ciled to my fate ; but for the present shall content myself with saying, that I look upon two in the above list, as genuine Presbyterian martyrs — martyrs by Puritan hands ! What, what, do you say, our " Dissenting Brethren" will ask — do our eyes tell true, or must we wipe our spectacles ? Have Puritans ever martyred Presbyterians ? Yes, I do verily and conscientiously believe so. Christopher Love was a Pres- byterian divine, who felt some compunction when he saw Puritanism bestriding the nation like a Colossus. He en- deavored to have the old government restored, and was they made " a very great feast" for the Presbyterians ; to see if they could not get them to wash it down. But it was a complete choke-pear: so they lost their labor, wine, money, and all. * Hetherington, 118, 132. t Brook's Religious Liberty, i. 488. Milton's Poems. Boston, vol. ii. 342, 343. Milton's Prose Works, in one vol. p. 103. X Wood's Ath. Oxonienses, ii. 153. I give a reference to Vicars, as I suppose him less known than the rest. Five of ite list given, Bartlet calls dirt-throwers. — Cong. Way, p. 115. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 381 made a head shorter for it.* Love died, proclaiming himself a martyr with his latest breath.t Clement Walker wrote^'^^ the sharpest history of Puritanism, which, perhaps, it ever received. It cost him his life. He was thrown into a dun- geon, and left to die, as he did die, a lingering death. J And so Puritanism, which spares not the Churchman, nor the Quaker, nor the Baptist, nor the Papist, nor any sectary from itself whatever, spares even the Presbyterian with n o more reluctance, but takes his very blood, if necessary, to glut its revenge or to batten its ambition. This may be called strong language; but, it must be remembered, that it is used after returning from Presbyterian pages, and that it would have been stronger still, if I had drank more deeply of a Presbyterian spirit. Let these two sentences of Mr. Hetherington be my attestation : " From that time, forward, the contest between the Independents and the Presbyterians became one of irreconcilable rivalry : to which the utter defeat of the one or the other, was the only possible termi- nation. And historical truth compels us to say, that, as this bitter warfare was begun by the Independents, they are justly chargeable with all the consequences of the fatal feud."§ Mr. Hetherington is a modern, and [his language follows that of Edwards and his contemporaries, hand passibus ccquis. Yet the words " rivalry," " warfare," and *' feud," fall from his pen as naturally as life ; and he quali- '23 See Note, 123. * Calamy's Baxter, i. 66. Brooks' Religious Liberty, i. 498. Of course it will be said that Love died for his treason, and not for his doctrine, as old Anthony Wood remarked, long ago. — Oxonienses, ii. 137. t Neal, iv. 75. X Wood's Ath. Oxonienses, ii. 145. Speaking of his perishing in his dungeon, Wood says, "He gave way to fate there, to the great grief of the Presbyterian parly." § Hetherington, pp. 157, 158, 382 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. fies them with the austere adjectives, ** irreconcilable," " bitter," and ** fatal," without the shadow of a compunc- tion. Let this suffice, then, to disabuse uninformed minds, about the bearings of Puritanism towards Presbyterianism in Eng- land. Come we now to see, in a shorter compass, if possible, something of its bearings towards it on these shores, peopled by exiles for freedom. It may easily be supposed, that as there were mixed up among the elements of opposition to the Establishment, what may be called high-church and low-church Puritans, that the same compound might be found among the early emi- grants to New England. Such was the fact. The only difference was, that the low-church Puritans, or the Inde- pendents,* emigrated first ; as the high-church Puritans, or Prebyterians, had better prospects for success, as matters lay at that period, and could better afford to stay at home. But then, as was natural, these low-church Puritans in New England, finding themselves here at the head of affairs, (like a low-churchman when made a bishop,) turned a somerset, and came up high-churchmen of the tallest sort. Now then, there was no doctrine, discipline, or worship, that was right, that could possibly be right, but theirs. Presbyterianism became, forthwith, a rival beneath them, struggling upward for their ascendency ; and accordingly it must be frowned down. It was so treated, at a very early date in the history of Massachusetts. This is distinctly the testimony of Hutch- inson. " Several persons who came from England in 1643, made a muster to set up Presbyterian government, under the authority of the Assembly at Westminster ; but a New England assembly, the General Court, soon put them to the * Or " Brownistical Independents," as Cotton Mather calls them. So here is one of themselves, and a classic, admitting what is so often and so testily denied — the connexion between Brownism and Congrega- tionalism.— Magnalia, ii. 426. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 383 rout."* No doubt this language describes, with graphic exactness, the amount of charity and ceremony with which these pioneers of Presbyterianism were greeted. Congrega- tionalism, by this time, had made up its mind what the development of itself^ for the latitude of Massachusetts, was designed to be. It was growing warm in its nest, feeling domesticated and at ease ; and therefore pushed Presbyteri- anism out of doors, with as small compunction as political partisans hustle one another out of office. t To some it may appear singular, that this disposition to- wards Presbyterianism did not appear when Roger Williams avowed his suspicions of ministerial caucuses, several years before. Roger was afraid they would end in presbyteries, and denounced them. Still, he found no favor. How can these things be ? Ah\ Roger was too sincere and simple- hearted. He really objected to clerical assemblages, on the ground of principle. But such assemblages, if they could, as they did do and were designed to do, upbuild Indepen- dency in Massachusetts, and give it there supremacy, were all right enough. He had not the wit to understand this ; and so, anti-presbyterian though he might be, he was ban- ished forever. Afterwards, when Congregationalism was the Establish- ment of Massachusetts, he who disfavored Presbyterianism was just the agent which it wanted, and was enlisted for that warfare, which soon ended in the utter *' rout" of the inter- lopers, who talked of synods and ruling elders, and a lord- ship above the congregation, to which there might be an ap- peal from the mischiefs of popular votes * Hutchinson, i. 112, Felt's Salem, pp. 160, 161.— They made surer work than their friends in England, who had left Presbyterianism " gasping." They killed it without ceremony. — Dugdale, p, 243. Sav. Wint. ii. 77, note. t " In all New England," says Baillie, in April 1644, '* no liberty of Uving for a Presbyterian." — Letters and Journals, ii. 4. 384 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. Yes, Puritanism drave Presbyterianism from'the judg- ment-seat, as recklessly as Gallic did the Jews. Nor so only ; but when remonstrances came over from England, from its old friends and associates, against its high-handed- ness in setting up for itself as supreme, it had a firm and a ready answer. Such a remonstrance seems to have come, in the name of '* divers ministers in England," and in par- ticular of one Master Bernard, " minister of Batrombe."* It came in the shape of two-and-thirty questions, thirteen objections, and nine positions ; a somewhat heavy dose, one might suppose, and which occasioned a few fits of indiges- tion. Nevertheless it was finally all got through with, and due return made, in the shape of three pamphlets, one for each batch of ingredients making the entire bolus, and which cover, in the small quarto of the times, 1G2 well- stuffed pages. Of course I cannot bestow comments on the fiftieth part of them. Nor is it needful. It is quite enough if I can point out the marks of exclusiveness in them, and show that they gave semi-Puritan brethren in England no quarter. And this can be done in a very brief space. *' Christ," says the first pamphlet, which may stand as a specimen for the rest, '' hath left but one way for all churches, and the same to be observed to the world's end." (p. 82 ) " And as for acknowledging a company to be a sister church, that shall set up and practice another form of church-discipline, beinor otherwise in some measure as you say approvable, we con- ceive the company that shall so do shall not be approvable therein.! For the discipline appointed by Jesus Christ for * Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. ix. 16, note. Or, Richard Bernard, Rec- tor of Batcomb ; see Wood's Ath. Oxon. 11. 689. t This and the rest compares with the Apologetical Narration, which in words acknowledged the Presbytertan Church of England as a true church ; and for the insincerity of which words, Mr. Edwards, the Presbyterian scourged it sorely. — Antapologia, p. 44, etc. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 385 his churches, is not arbitrary, that one church may set up and practice one form, and another another form, as each one shall please; but is one and the same for all churches." " Again, if that discipline which we here practice, be, (as we are persuaded of it,) the same which Christ hath appoint- ed, and therefore unalterable, we see not how another can be lawful." " We think if you were here, we should gladly accept of you and your people as a sister church, and that you would do the like to ours ; and yet not when you should set up and practice one form of church discipline, and we another." (pp. 83,84.)* This language, which was used in 1639 and 1640, part of it sanctioned directly by Hugh Peters, (whom Edwards calls " the Vicar General and Metropolitan of the Indepen- dents both in New and Old England,"!) and all of it uttered, no doubt, under the nod of Master Cotton, told Presbyte- rians, in terms sufficiently plain, what they were to expect, if they ventured to descend upon the coasts of New Eng- land. There was but one right way of church discipline. That right way was already there ; and no other must intrude itself, but at the hazard of stern expulsion. Nevertheless, Presbyterianism growing stronger and more confident in Eng land, in 1643, when the " Most Sacred Assembly," (that " Par- liament of Heaven" below,) began its sessions, the attempt was actually made. But Congregationalism was as good as its word of warning. Its rival was routed from the land.J Nor did that satisfy. Having received an intrusive visit from Presbyterianism, the Congregationalists of New Eng * Here is the Divine right system, plain as noonday. Yet Congrega- tionalists of the present age give it all up. — Congregational Catechism, p. 82. — But if they have no Divine right to stay where they are — then why stay there 1 t Gangraena, Pt. iii. p. 50. X Mr. Savage is candid enough to admit, that Presbyterianism was "at least as offensive" to the New England Puritans as Episcopacy. Sav. Wint. ii. 77, Note. 3-^0 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. land thought themselves authorized, agreeably to that plea- sant law, Lex Talionis, to return the call. And they resolv- ed to do so. Accordingly we find Master Cotton, in 1645, uttering his system of ohurch-poiity, and sending it over to London to be printed there, for the benefit of Independency, and the subversion, in due time, of Presbyterianism.* This may seem a somewhat hazardous declaration ; but I do not fear to make it, with the Preface to Cotton's book now open before me, and which was written by some of the Indepen- dent party in England. This preface shows, how well the Independents understood polemical tactics. It alludes to no less than seven successive publications, aimed to insinuate their views into the minds of the community; of which Cotton's, the last, contains " a fuller declaration of all our way." That is, after having given you leaves and buds, we here give you the expanded blossom. And the Preface, (hardly by intention, but to make an impression against the Presbyterians, who had very foolishly attempted to control the press by a censorship,) lets out even more truth than this. It absolutely admits, that no sort of toil or chicanery were spared, to hurry these publications through the religious cor- don sanitaire, by which Presbyterianism had surrounded itself. " Yet," it says, " with much sweat and wiles, some messengers have got through that Court of Guard. "t * " The Way of the Churches of Christ in New England," etc. London, 1645, pp. 116, quarto. New England kept Old England well supplied with her wares. She sent over Hugh Peters, Hibbins, and Weld, or Wells, in 1641, (Chalmers' Annals, 172 :) and the Brownists' Conventicle, p. 5, published the same year, speaks of Samuel Eaton and others, as about as profitable an importation. Weld, or Wells, is the man who went to discomfort Ap. Laud in his imprisonment. — Laud's Troubles, pp. 213, 214. t Alluding to a Presbyterian censorship of the press. This was a terrible thing for Laud to establish. Yet the Presbyterians soon had one themselves ; and, by and by, the Puritans in New England followed suit. Then, suddenly, it became all right. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 337 Altogether, the book and its preface is a most precious specimen of the temper of the times. Here is New England Puritanism, goaded itself a year or two before by Presbyte- rianism, now attempting retaliation, or self-defence, some no doubt will call it — i. e. upon the principles of the Romans, who drove away Hannibal by attacking Carthage. And here is the same system in England, coolly admitting that no labor or trickery was esteemed a sacrifice, or an immo- rality, so that this scheme of retaliation might be carried into effect, and Presbyt^rianism be worn out and trodden down, by one squadron after another of assailants. Still, with such plain authorities before me, many, proba- bly, will call all this a huge extravagance, and say that Puritan- ism in the shapeof Independency, never did have, and never could have had, that intense hatred of Presbyterianism, which these statements ascribe to it. To such, I say, there is proof that the same hatred was even perpetuated ; and, too, in an age when toleration was universal, appears to have lost not one atom of its sharpness. And the proof is at hand. I quote a book, the^rs^ edition of which appeared so late as 1778, and which was so unboundedly popular with English Dissenters, that it was endorsed by a synod, and ran through Jive editions in four years. The quotation is supplied me by the " Churchman Armed." " Popery," says the great oracle of modern non-conformity, " is the consummation of religious tyranny, and Presbyterianism a weak degree of it. But the latter [Presbyterianism] has in it the essence of the former [Popery], and differs from it [Presbyterianism differs from Popery] only as a kept mistress differs from a street- walking prostitute, or as a musket differs from a cannon."* The coarseness and virulence of this language are not sur- passed by Hugh Peters, or Peter Sterry.t And yet, this is * Churchman Armed, i. 445. t See Baillie's opinion of Peters, Sterry, &.c. — Letters, &c., new edit. iii. 443. 388 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. a tirade against Presbyterianism, perfectly lawful, even in our day, for Puritanism to give vent to. Alas, if these are the relics of its spleen against its ancient enemy, how relent- less must its opposition have been, in the days of fresher and more open strife ! Such, then, were the bearings of Puritanism towards Presbyterianism, when they came in contact on American soil. It would not be difficult, though it might be tedious, to trace the history of them in detail, in after years. Proba- bly this will not be expected ; and ^otiticB, after so fair a development at the outset, will be deemed sufficient. I find, then, that Thomas Hooker and others labored hard to counteract Presbyterianism, as well as Cotton ;* and that Shepard, who complained of Ap. Laud's "extreme malice and secret venom," was himself complained of by an English Presbyterian, as striving to infuse his own malice and venom, upon the subject of persecution, into the West- minster Assembly. t I find, as already stated, (but the fact is too important to leave out of this series,) that the General Court of Massachusetts carried on the same vile game, by sending three agents to England, in 1641, viz., Hibbins, Weld, and Hugh Peters ; whose mission was " to promote the interest of reformation, by stirring up the war, and driving it on."| I find Cotton Mather himself, putting down among his Ecdesiarum Prcelia, contests, and fierce ones, between those inclined to Presbyterianism and those inclined to Independency. § True, Mr. Noah Hobart, in his controversy with Mr. Beach the Episcopalian, denies this fact;!! and, what is not a little singular, on Mather's own authority. Leaving Mather out of the account, (since * Sav. Winthrop, ii. 248. Felt's Salem, p. 173. t Edwards' Gangraena, Ft. i. pp. 9, 10. X Chalmer's Revolt of the Colonies, i. 84. Chalmers' Annals, p. 172. Sav. Wint. ii. 25, 212. Hutch. Hist. i. 95. § Magnalia, ii. 426. || Hobart's Sec. Address, p. 96. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 3^9 Mr. Savage will not trust him freely,)* other authorities are at hand, to set at naught an assertion, which Hobart's pride provoked him to make, and his bigotry to think true.t But to let such contradictions pass, I find Mather quoting his father, and his father quoting President Oakes, (all showing the true succession,) to prove that for Independents to adopt Presbyterianism, would be a " sad issue," nay, no less than sad degeneracy. "I I find the same author vituperating two of the ablest Presbyterian writers against Puritan Independency, most cordially — calling one a scandalous inflicter of most horrid injuries, and the other a most un- christian and bespattering reviler.§ I find Peter Hobart, (the ancestor of John Henry Hobart, dreaded for that de- testation of Puritanical tyranny in the brethren, which finally developed itself in the churchmanship of his descend- ant,) prohibited even from preaching, where his plainness might expose some of the weak points of Independency. || I find lay-ordination, or the preaching of " gifted brethren," without any ordination whatever, encouraged — all of which is censured severely in the Presbyterian classics. Jus Divinum Regiminis ecclesiastici, and Jus Divinum Min- isterii ecclesiastici. I find men who appealed to a Pu- ritan legislature, in behalf of Presbyterians in 1646, meet- ing with a most summary denial, and made to smart with fines. I find the Presbyterian Huguenots, forbidden the privilege of erecting a house of public worship in the city of Boston.^ I find Dr. Colman's society, (after the classic style already alluded to, imitating Peters and Sterry,) called " a Presbyterian brat ;"** though it is believed that * Sav. Wint. ii. 231. t Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. ix.48, 2d ser. iv. 118-120. I Magnalia,ii. 64, 65. § Ibid. i. 234,4,5. II Tudor's Otis, p. 497. Young's Chronicles, p. 402. Lincoln's Ilingham, p. 79. IT Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. ii. 63. ** Colman had to go to England for Presbyterian orders ; as it was feared the Bostonian Puritans would ojfjiose him ! ! — Snow's Boston, pp. 202, 203. 399 - REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. they nude it corituiae always a brat, and never allowed it to grow to manhood.* I find the Scottish and Genevan models carefully avoided in the construction of formularies of faith. t I find a controversy set on foot to exclude Pres- byterianism from Massachusetts, as late as 1705 ; even after a sort of peace had been patched up between the Indepen- dents and Presbyterians in England in 1690, and their con- cordat adopted for all it was worth in the colony of Con- necticut.! I find a Presbyterian house of worship assaulted at dead of night — and by a mob composed of the most re- spectable inhabitants of a Puritan town — levelled with the ground, and its occupants obliged to flee for protection into a neighboring State — and all this as far down as 1720. § I find Presbyterians attacked even with firearms, and their petitions answered with *' mingled subtlety and illiberality."|| And even down to the very late date of 1783, when this country had been severed from England, I find such efforts made in Massachusetts to convert a Presbyterian Society into a Congregational one, as to draw from a Presbytery the awful sentence of excommunication upon all who joined in them — not less than twenty persons. Surely there must have been something very pernicious, and very wrong, in the treatment of Presbyterianism by Puritanism, up to the times which border upon our own, to provoke its wrath so sorely !^ And at last the question came up before me. Can I not put my finger on something which displays the belligerent aspect of Puritanism and Presbyterianism, in the times amid * Douglass' Summary, ii. 149. Eliot's Biog. Did. p. 125. Turell's Life of Colman, pp. 96, 125. t Douglass' Sum. i. 440. t See Wise's " Churches' Quarrel Espoused." § See Lincoln's Hist, of Worcester, where this shameful violence occurred, pp. 47, 191. II Lincoln's Worcester, pp. 48, 1 92, &,c. H Felt's Salem, pp. 519, 52§. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 391 which we actually live ? If, thought I, the testimony I want cannot be found in the cross-fire of the Theological Review, published at New-York until 1839, and the Christian Spec- tator, published in New Haven, Connecticut, then, as a New-Englander would say, I make a strange guess indeed. To that review I went, and, in one of its latest numbers,* discovered a criticism upon a volume which has not escaped some comments of my own — the Historical Discourses of Mr. Leonard Bacon. And before the second page was finished, I found Mr. Bacon's motives routed from their lurking places, as successfully as the perhaps half-jesuitical schemes of the Presbyterians, in 1643. " Whafever other motives induced him to write the book, that one chief end of it is to subserve the interests of the theological party, with which he fraternizes, [i. e., the modern Puritanical,] and disparage their opponents, [old-fashioned Presbyterians, and all who resemble them in doctrine,] is too apparent to admit of disguise." Now for another extract, to see who^praises the Puritans of New England, and how little love is lost between the old litigants ; and in fact, how the breach has rather widened — covering broad differences as to doctrine, while anciently it respected discij^Une almost altogether. " To laud our Pilgrim Fathers is so congenial to the pre- vailing sentiments and feelings of the better portion of New England people, that they lack not eulogists of all grades. It has been a marvel with some, that the frequency and ardor of this panegyric, seem to be nearly in the ratio of depar- ture from their religious principles ; in other words, that the men who would most heartily disrelish and oppose one, who should now appear teaching those religious opinions which they taught, and in the faith of which they lived and died, should be most loud and abundant of all in their * Literary and Theol. Review vi. 166. 39:> REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. praises of these same Puritans. We know of no class who have carried it so far, as the Unitarians of Massachusetts.* And with all their horror of antiquity and * retrospective views,' we think the New School party in the country, rank next in their exuberant eulogies of the ' Puritans,' and the ' primitive New England spirit.' Whether they hope thus to lull the apprehensions of the public, in regard to any de- parture from New England's primitive faith, it is not for us to say." Now, had some luckless Churchman, (myself for exam- ple,) expressed himself in this free and rasping style, it would have been considered, according to the course of nature — a modern outburst of the old " Laudean persecution." But it is a Presbyterian, par excellence, who writes thus. And do you think a Churchman only could match him, my suspicious reader ? Behold he surpasses himself. Where will you find purer nitric acid, than in the following sentences, wound up with such a formidable application of one of the most terrific rebukes of Scripture ? " It is ever true of mankind, that if their reverence for eminent departed saints respects their persons merely, and not their religious belief, it degenerates in to some- thing approaching man-worship or idolatry. And idolatry of dead saints, goes hand in hand with hatred of living ones. The Romish Church canonized dead saints, and persecuted living ones. And if Bellamy or Edwards should now appear among men, preaching what they did when alive, would it be strange if some of their supposed admirers should cry, * This is perfectly true. See how Mr. Young in his Chronicles de- nounces Douglass, Chalmers, Robertson, Burke, et id genus omne ; be- cause forsooth the}' believed the Puritans actuated by a little worldly ambi- tion. He calls them contemptible sneerers 1 1 — Young's Chronicles, p. 48. — Alas, why is it that so many, if you lisp a syllable against the Puri- tans, are transported into downright fury I If such people are like the Puritans themselves, of old, no wonder England was out of patience ^^-ith them. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 393 " Away with them?' We cannot think that Christ was pointing at a sin confined to the Pharisees, alone, when he said, * Wo unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! be- cause ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be wit- nesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.' " This is about the coronation of a climax, some will surely think, and yet the writer is not quite content; he gives Mr. Bacon a Parthian arrow as he leaves him, for broaching the old theory of development for the exigencies of the age. " Lack of sympathy with the popular heart" is, with Mr. Bacon, '' a fatal disqualification for the pulpit." The reviewer aptly reminds him of that shout which once burst from the "popular heart," " Great is Diana of the Ephe- sians" ! He might better have reminded him of another, which was once brought to the mind of an older pleader for popular infallibility. ' I must be right,' said John Wesley, ' for vox populi, vox Dei.' ' Yes,' replied his sister, with a wit and wisdom any maw who ever lived might envy, * it said, Crucify him ! Crucify him !' Wesley was paralyzed into silence ; and would to Heaven the developing tendencies of Puritanism might ever be thus arrested. But alas ! as the prophet said of old, " My people love to have it so," and the forewarning query, " W^hat will ye do in the end thereof?" is lost upon unwilling ears, like " the sounding again of the mountains."* The law, the most sacred of laws, which Puritanic Independency impressed upon its own destinies, in the Great Manifesto of the days of the Commonwealth, to be never yesterday and to-day the same, abides with it, and rules it still. Mr. Bacon and his fellow semi-pelagians, per- * Jer. V. 31. Ezek. vii.7. 304 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. fectionists, &c., &,c.,* are but carrying out its legitimate aim. And when I see Presbyterianism rising to rebuke it, as in the extracts just given, I do but seem to hear the voices of such as Thomas Edwards and Robert Baillie, echoing from the vistas of the past. P. S. — To show how effectually Presbyterianism has been kept out of Massachusetts — more effectually far than Episcopacy — I add the following statistics. Morse, in his Geography of 1792, gives the number of Presbyterians in Massachusetts, in 17 iO, as 2,994. In 1792, as 2,776. — While Hay ward, in his statistics of 18:36, says they have but two churches in the whole State. — Morse's Geog. p. 171 . Hay ward 143. LETTER XVIII. The present letter will be the last of this series, and will be devoted to the consideration of sufferers at the hands of the Puritans, who deserve a far more honored place among such sufferers, than multitudes, who have no particular sympathy with the Puritans, are willing to allow. I allude to the * Independency may create such a brood now, as it did of old. " It was out of Independency, that there sprang the numerous sects which are the reproach of Presbyterianism, and of itself — the Sabbatarians, Millen- arians, Grindletonians, Muggletonians, Fifth-Monarchists, Ranters, Seek- ers, Quakers, Anabaptists ; with many others, more short-lived than these." — Rise of Old Dissent, exemplified in the Life of Oliver Heywood, by J. Hunter. London, 1842, p. 61. Mr. Hunter, I presume, is a Pres- byterian ! See his pref. p. xii. And see the Churchman of Sept. 13, 1834, for some amusing com- ments on Perfectionism, tracing its succession through Doctors Taylor and Beecher. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 395 Aborigines. I am reluctant to believe, what the testimony of history requires me to admit, that my countrymen of all classes have too little fellow feeling for "the poor Indian" — far less than becomes professed and forward advocates for the doctrine of an equality of natural rights. This doctrine is elaborately set forth in our Declaration of Independence : which solemnly announces that all men — not one nation, or one clan, but all men without distinction of rank or color — are born free and equal. It is difficult to account for this, but upon the supposition that we are conscious of an immense amount of wrong-doing towards this unfortunate race ; and that it is the peculiarity of the wrong-doer, rather than of the injured, to retain intense dislike. Proprium humani ingenii est odisse quem laeseris. However, if Americans generally have failed in compas- sion for the unhappy fortunes of the Red Man, the Puritans should have been the very last among them to do so. They had given sacred and voluntary pledges to treat them with the utmost consideration. These letters effectually prove, what an incomparable favor Puritans deemed royal charters — how they compassed sea and land to make one proselyte to their schemes for obtaining such " a precious boon." — But the very, the exact, the grand consideration, for which those charters were imparted, was a Christian devotion to the best welfare of the native inhabitants of America. This point, like others, has been alluded to before. It must now come up formally. I appeal, then, to the language of the Charter — I must beg my readers to be particular in their recollections — not of the King's letter, or the King's manda- mus, but of the great parchment Charter of Massachusetts ; which Mr. Bancroft once said was unrolled with so much state, when an enlargement of territory was hoped for. — ''And we do of our further grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion, give and grant to the said Governor and Com- pany, and their successors, &/C., for the directing, ruling. 396 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. and disposing of all other matters and things, whereby our said people, inhabitants there, may be so religiously, peace- ably, and civilly governed, as their good life and orderly conversation may win and incite the natives of the country to the knowledge and obedience of the only true God and Saviour of mankind, and the Christian faith ; which in our royal intention * and the adventurers' free profession, is the principal end of this plantation.'' f The language of the Charter of Connecticut is precisely similar, with two varia- tions. It reads " win and invite;" for '' win and incite;" which may possibly be a typographical error. And it also reads " the only and principal end of this plantation"! — ^ somewhat ominous addition ; as if negligence, or something worse, required the English Government to be more emphatic upon a point, rather too costly to the pocket and trying to patience, to be remembered with perfect precision ! So then, it appears, that these celebrated Charters were granted, not upon an implied or virtual, but upon the ex- pressed and literal stipulation and condition, that the Puritan *' adventurers" should put forth their best and most unwea- ried efforts, for the conversion of the natives of New Eng- land to Christianity. This was the rnttter of fact quid pro quo — was neither more nor less than the plain price, or bonus as we might now say, which they, of their own unconstrain- ed accord, paid for these charters. It is true, indeed, that the king might receive other and further compensation; as, e g., a fifth of the revenue of mines and gold and silver. But * Or *•' intentions :" I am not certain about the reading. t Anc. Charters, &:., p. 14. Cradock's letter, Felt's Salem, p. 11. t Hazard's Collect, ii. 602. Hinman's Antiquities, 183. And fur- ther. This peculiarity of the Charter was occasionally confessed. See a preamble to an act about the Indians, p. 95 of the Connecticut Laws, edit. 1769. There is one drawback, however. The Charter says, " the only," & •. The preamble Jesuitically lowers this very decided language, and says, " one great end." This is interpreting a Constitution by the favorite rule, " as I understand it." We see where the rule comes from REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 397 all that was problematical. The sure and certain compen- sation which was provided for, was the conversion of the na- tives to Christianity ; and the granting Charters to distant settlements for such a noble object, were an act which might well entitle a monarch to that highest of human appellations, " The father of his country." Thus it appears, that it was the King of England, (big- oted Churchman, and half-papist as they esteemed him,) rather than the Puritans,* who took the Aborigines into a kind consideration, and prospectively regarded their welfare. And if the Puritans had seconded the King's wishes without delay — had acceded with all their hearts to his terms, in re- spect to the missionary requital expected for charter privi- leges and protection — and had labored, at once and zealous- ly, to fulfil their contract, by devoting undivided efibrts to the conversion of the Indians — making that their only or principal business, as it was the only and principal end of their plantation — I say, if they had done all this, they had done no more than a duty which might have been exacted of them by a human court of law ! They would have gone not a whit beyond common mercantile honesty, in the fulfil- ment of a pecuniary contract. They would have merited not one single plaudit. But how different, how immensely different, the represen- tations usually made of this aftair ! Do but look into such a volume as that fourth of the third series of the Massachu- setts Historical Collections, and see. Here is line upon line, tract upon tract, to display the wonders of Puritan phi- lanthropy, for the victim of heathenism in New England. And the series of goodly tales is ushered into new-born life, by a publishing committee, *' as authentic narratives of the * No wonder even Dr. Dwight was constrained to say, as he review- ed Puritan and Episcopal annals, " I really believe, that the English I Church has done more than most others to promote the cause of Chris- tianity."— Travels, i. 61 , 18 398 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. GREAT EFFORTS, made by some of the fathers in our Israel, for the spiritual welfare of the children of the forest." Great efforts ! Are those great efforts of charity, which are made in mere payment of a debt — for the fulfilment of a legal bond? The Jesuit of North America asked for no charter, but went with his life in his hands, into the depths of the forest; and shared an Indian's fare, and an Indian's toils, so he might "win and invite" him to his faith. '' Iho, et non redibo,'' was his foreboding farewell. And when he died, as he often did, a martyr, (his whole body, perhaps, converted into a blazing torch,) he could depart without a murmur for his fate, the name of Jesus breathed forth with his last sigh !* And yet a Puritan will tell us, he was but a political em- issary dispatched by France,t to stir up the northern tribes for the massacre of himself and family ; while he, whose chartered duty it was to convert Indians, could foredoom them to destruction, and still be all the while an emissary of God ! A Puritan minister is recorded by Increase Mather in his Indian Troubles, who " publickly declared that he foresaw the destruction of the Narragansett nation ; solemn- ly confirming his speech by saying, If God do not destroy that people, then say that his Spirit hath not spoken by me." And adds Mather, with his own oracular presumption, " Surely that holy man was a prophet."! Such an incendi- ary as this, safe in his nest, is Heaven's own prophet : while a Jesuit, hacked in pieces, or consumed by a slow fire, for his efforts to convert infidels, is the mere tool of chicanery and the slave of superstition ! I blush for Protestantism, that history wrings from me the shameful comparison. * Bancroft, iii. 137-141. t The words of Gov. Bradford might be retorted by the French and Dutch too ; for he confessed the Indians had English guns, because the French and Dutch were too slight. This shows where the guns of the Indians came from. — Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. iii. 83. I Mather's Ind. Troubles, edit. 1677, p. 60. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 399 And, moreover, if we grant a license to Puritan rhetoric about the "great efforts" made by its fathers in Israel, no small deduction must be made when we come to dry, dull fact. For when did these great efforts begin ? The Char- ter of Masssachusetts was granted in 1629. And our vol- ume of mcmorahilia, just adverted to, opens with the date of a post-note which has had an extension, viz., with October 28, 1646, i. e., seventeen years later ! A somewhat liberal allowance of time, to attend to the principal and only end of their settlement ; but which, I suppose, must be granted to those, who were always right while every body else was wrong. They could found a college ; for Harvard Univer- sity had its beginning in 1638. They could establish an Iron Works Company, for the manufacture possibly of swords and guns, as well as pruning-hooks and plough- shares.* They could make voyages to sell captive Indians into slavery, and come back with cargoes of cotton, tobac- co, salt, and negroes ;f and this as early as 1637 ; that is, in eight years after a Charter had been granted them. But as to any thing like a just fulfilment of their indebtedness for Indian conversions — why, twice ^hat period was enough lo think about it.'^^ Polemical theology in the schools, manu- factures, trade and traffic in luxuries as well as necessa- ries— in " cheese, wine, oil, and strong water,"| in " slaves and souls of men "§ must be attended to beforehand. And to help on trade, and traffic, and war, other abominations of later days, the press-gang and conscription systems might be ^" See Note 125. * Felt's Salem, p. 167. t Ibid. p. 109. — Hutchinson, i. 26, note. See also Note 124. X Felt's Salem, p. 62. § Slaves were made of both Indians and Africans ! Felt's Ipswich, pp. 119, 120. Also of poor debtors ! ! Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. iii. 330. 400 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. resorted to.* But religion for the poor heathen — oh, for that, they must wait for greater leisure ? Notwithstanding they were not without sound rebukes for their illegal and dishonest, as well as unchristian negli- gence. Before the Charter was brought over and laid upon a shelf, where no eyes but their own could see it,t and dis- cover in it disturbing reminiscences, they were carefully exhorted by the Company in England, not to " be unmindful of the mayne end of our plantation, by endeavoringe to bring the Indians to the knowledge of the Gospel. "J Roger Williams, the victim of their persecution and outlawry, re- membered the duty of the Colony, and set them an example, had they followed which, an immense amount of blood and treasure had been unwasted.§ And an Episcopalian, re- calling the conditions of an Episcopal King's Charter, in- voked their attention to their duty, years before they barkened to any purpose whatsoever. Thomas Lechford, a lawver, from England, and a Churchman, spent the four years from 1637 to 1641 in Massachusetts, in the practice of his profession.il On his return to the mother country, he published his " Plaine Dealing;" in which, among other thincrs, he tells us how plainly he dealt with the Puritans * Fell's Salem, p. 76. Plymouth Col. Laws, 112, 121, 193. Anc. Col. Laws, &c. 130. t The Charter was carried away by stealth ; and that ii was, which made the English Government issue orders to stop emigration, unless the emif^rants would take the oath of allegiance ; and no wonder. — Chal- iner's Revolt, i. 49. X Felt's Salem, p. 11. § Williams remonstrated with them too, most pathetically, in after years. Let this appeal suffice as a specimen. " I beseech you consider, how the name of the most holy and jealous God may be presers^ed, be- tween the clashings of these two, viz., the glorious conversion of the In- dians in New England, and the unnecessary wars and cruel destructions of the Indians in New England." — R. I. Hist. Coll. iii. 155. 11 Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. iii. 399. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 401 about their duties to the Aborigines.* And no wonder ; for not the King of England only had manifested the deepest anxiety for the conversion of the Indians, but one of that King's high-church bishops declared, that nothing but age and infirmities prevented him from going to America, and devoting himself to the work, arduous as it might be.t A high-churchman in lawn could hardly be contented to be outdone by a Jesuit in such business ; however complacently that eclipse could be endured by a Puritan, while filling his pocket with gold 1; for the sale of human flesh — tickling his palate with " cheese, wine, oil, and strong water," and going to taverns to hear sermons. § But with such hard and frequent hints as to his duty, and with that duty symbolized and stamped upon the very seal of his Colony, (for the device on the Massachusetts seal was an Indian with a label at his mouth, containing the words. Come over and help us !) a Puritan could still hold out. Seventeen years give him time barely sufficient to look about him, and think wherefore he was an adventurer from his natal soil. But then, surely, he does his duty manfully, and with good grace. Alas ! would that I could say so. His Elders, who are forward enough in civil matters, and who can pro- phetically send the poor Indians to perdition, have to be provoked to the work of converting them by a legislature. || And even then, perhaps, nothing had been accomplished but for the earnestness of a single man ; whose marvellous de- votion Hutchinson tries to portray, by saying, that he ap- * Lechford's tract is reprinted in 3d vol. 3d series, Mass. Hist. Coll. See especially, pp. 80, 88. t Sparks' Am. Biog. 1st ser. v. 36. t " The grosse Goddons, or great masters, as also some of their merchants, are damnable rich." — Josselyn's Voyages, Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. iii. 331. § Felt's Salem, 61, 62. II Hutchinson, i. 151. Sparks' Am. Biog. 1st. ser. v. 38. 402 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. plied himself to his volunteered undertaking, '' with zeal equal to that of the missionaries of the Romish Church,"* This man was the (so called) Apostle, John Eliot ; for the Puritans could easily appropriate even a stronger word than bishop, when it was required to dignify one of their own order. Yet, Eliot could not commence his workt with even the self-sacrificing temper of a Jesuit, without ac- knowledging the remissness of former years. " But me- thinkes now," he says, in his " Day-Breaking of the Gospell," '' that it is with the Indians, as it was with our New-English ground, when we first came over ; there was scarce a man that could believe that English grain would grow, or that the plow could doe any good in this woody and rocky soile. And thus they continued, in this supine unhcliefe, for some years, till experience taught them otherwise ; and now all see it to bee scarce inferiour to Old-English tillage, but beares very good burdens : so wee have thought of our Indian people. "t However, there was one point on which he was deficient, with all his intelligence and zeal. He supposed that civilization must precede Christianity : after all, not making any great advance beyond the apprehen- sions of his countrymen whom he censured. § Now the modern theory is, and it is undoubtedly the true one, that the direct application of the Gospel to the heathen, is the best method of proceeding. The Moravian missionaries in Greenland enlightened Christendom, upon this point of Christian policy. They found the story of a Saviour's atoning death, more effectual, even to begin with, » Hutchinson, i. 152. Comp. Williams' Vermont, 1809, i. 271,272. t For which the Legislature vote him ten pounds, not out of their own pockets, but out of twenty left for that purpose by a pious lady ! No wonder Josselyn should call them " inexplicably covetous." — See Felt's Salem, p. 176, and Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. iii 331. Also Sparks' Am. Biog. 1st ser. V. 129-131. X Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. iv. 15. § Hutchinson, i. 152, 153. REVIEW OF THE PURITAN ». 493 than arguments for the existence of a God.* And Jowett, a Church of England missionary for the countries around the Mediterranean, gives his attestation to the same power of the same truths. And these have been looked upon as fruits of modern light and experience, when lo ! the same result was reached by that Churchman, whom the posterity of the Puritans are wont to disparage for his '' Plaine Dealing ;" and was com- mended to the attention of the Puritans themselves, when he rebuked them for their supineness. '* In vaine," says Lechford, '' doe some think of civillizing them, either by the sword or otherwise, [it seems both alternatives were thought of, and which was first practised will duly appear,] till withall the Word of God hath spoken to their hearts : wherein I conceive great advice is to be taken. "f Had so truly divine a thought come from a Puritan parson, it would have been pronounced an oracle. It teemed in the brain of an Episcopal lawyer, and the rubbish of centuries has been piled upon it. And now, having shown, pretty effectually, how all the good the Puritans did the Indians was done only in fulfil- ment of bare legal duty — legal, i. e., in the human sense, and under the sanction of a human court, and of course a mere debt — it behoves me next, to show something also of the evil they did them, and which they dealt out with no slow or relenting hand. It may be expected by some, per- haps, that I should speak more at large of Eliot, before doing so. But if (for example) I were to eulogize Eliot for his Indian translation of the Scriptures, as a marvel of patient toil, I ought to eulogize the Dictionary of Sebastian Ralle, as a much greater ; since it is far harder, and more praiseworthy, to make a Dictionary for a ichole language, than to translate any one book in it, however important. * Greenland Missions, Dublin, 1831, p. 90. t Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. iii. 91. 404 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. My Puritiin readers, therefore, had better not form such expectations; for, assuredly, if I must praise their missiona- ries of legal obligation, I must praise the voluntary mis- sionaries of the Jesuits ten times more. For their own sakes, therefore, I prefer to be silent.* Upon the positive evil, however, done by the Puritans to the Aborigines, historical fidelity requires me not to be silent ; and if my dealing, like Lechford's, is plain, it will be because my facts are palpable. Doubtless, their de- scendants will think me bitter, and that I have been poring over, and trying to exemplify, that even-handed justice, about which Shakspeare talks with as much truth as poetry, when he says it — Commends the ingredients of our poisoned chalice To our own lips. But I shall go on, fearless of censure; for probably the measure in store for me, is too copious to be much in- creased.! And here, as has before seemed my lot, when I have been upon the brink of some fresh expanse of Puritan mis- chief, a sea of troubles, like that which I have beheld chafing the iron-bound shores of Massachusetts, opens be- fore my eyes. The difficulty to be encountered is, not to find facts, but to class them, and give specimens. I must try a few under two or three captions, and refer to histo- rians for more. * " Of all that ever crossed the American seas," says the Presbyterian Baillie of the Puritans, " they are noted as most neglectful of the work of conversion." — Baillie's Dissuasive, p. 60. — I say no more of them, then, than the Presbyterians did. t The Unitarian (!) Mr. Young gives one to understand, that a wri- ter who impeaches Puritan virtue, loses all his respectability at one fell Bwoop. So I stand some chance of becoming a martyr. — Young's Chronicles, p. 48. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 405 I. — My first point will be, that often the Indians did not receive fair compensation for their lands. Chalmers, whose accuracy was so long put to the test about the Rhode Island law against Roman Catholics, and who came off triumphant, may well be relied on here. For myself I have the more confidence in him, because of the precision of his statement upon this litigated subject. He does not absolutely deny, that the Indians were compensated for the soil ; but he says that proof of the fact has never been made out. This is his own language. " Yet it does not appear that any compensation was given to the natives, when possession was taken of their country, by a people who soon overspread the land, and unjustly deemed every exertion in its defence an act of rebellion against their laws." And he adds, with a gentle sarcasm, when he might have thundered in philippics, " Had the tribes any other mode of acquiring experience, than from the tradition of their fathers, what a school of knowledge, moral and politi- cal, would the colonial annals open to their researches!"* No doubt this is the exact state of the matter : non est inventus must often be returned upon the search-warrant for Indian deeds of soil. Neal himself seems clearly to be under this impression ; for when Mather, in his Magnalia, roundly asserts that the Indian lands were paid for, he omi- nously comments thus, " If the Doctor's allegations are true."t Nothing but allegations to sustain the doctrine, in Neal's view, and those allegations so suspicious that they must be alloyed with a base " if" It is not surprising, that * Chalmers' Annals, p. 154. The Indians could complain, however, and did complain in their way. — See poor Old Will's murmurs. Coffin's Newburyport, p. 363. t Neal's New England, i. 155. So Dr. Dwight, after all his zealous defence of the Puritans, has to say, " unless lam deceived." He excepts also the country of the Pequots. — Dwight's Travels, i. 167. 18* 406 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. one more accurate than Neal, (the editor of Winthrop,) should utter as a maxim, * Put not your faith in Mather.'* And when we come down to later authorities, there is the same melancholy deficiency of available evidence. Not, I mean, for want of strong allegation, as in Mather's case. Oh no ! Felt, and Young, and Knowles even, maintain stoutly that the Indians did receive compensation. But what is Mr. Felt's best prooft to show that Indian claims to land were equitably extinguished? A direction from the Company in England, before the secret transfer of the Charter, that such things should be attended to. Very well, exceedingly well, so far as it goes. But a more solemn instrument, the Charter itself, gave a most explicit direction as to the conversion of the Indians — a duty long, and some will think, wantonly disregarded. And if in respect to debts towards souls, which are of much value, the Puritans were so negligent, Vv'hat is to be inferred as to their attention to debts, of lesser value indeed in God's eye, but of far greater value in man's — viz. those which might be disastrous to the pocket ? Yet this same direction is one of Mr. Young's strong proofs ; J while Mr. Knowles§ goes to the North American Re- view, and Vattel's Law of Nations — this last, an amusing proof indeed — as if an allegation on this side of the Atlantic, echoed by a European, ought to be listened to by all the world ! Vattel, moreover, gives an authority of the blindest kind for his opinion, viz. " History of the English Colonies in North America;" but hy whom, he does not say, nor does he give date, page, or volume. However, this is quite sufficient, is * Savage's Wint. ii. 331, note. t Felt's Salem, pp. 17, 22, 24. Yet, even on Mr. Felt's own show- ing, the Company at home thought it necessary to speak, more than once. And the Puritans were very dull of hearing upon this subject, as we shall see by and by. X Chronicles, p. 259, note. § Knowles' R. Williams, p. 9G. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 407 perfect demonstration to an advocate of Puritan honesty ; and doubtless would remain so, if perchance found in a book, which the Chrysostom of modern Puritans calls *' that most unscrupulous and malicious of lying narratives, Peters' His- tory of Connecticut."* And by the way, since I have introduced him casually, I may as well go on to observe, that our Chrysostom, (whom any one would recognize by the golden specimen of his elo- quence now quoted,) is particularly nervous upon this sub- ject of Indian compensation, and gives a somewhat funny sign of it. " Patents and charters from the king," he says, " were never considered good against the rights of the na- tives. Let any man demonstrate if he can, that in Connec- ticut," &:c.t Not so fast, not so fast, O logician, veiiiis et fuhninis ocyor alis. You are perpetrating a noii seqidtur. You assert roundly, that a king's patent was never con- sidered good against a native's rights, and then attempt to prove your proposition true by the history of Connecticut. t But this will by no means answer. " Never" covers the history of Massachusetts; and it is with Massachusetts prin- cipally that I have to do. And now, who but the willingly forgetful, (and I intend- ed this fact as one of my strong arguments per contra,) need to be reminded, that one of the grand heads and fronts of Roger Williams' offending — one of the procuring causes of his cruel banishment — was the fact, that he maintained the insufficiency of the King's Charter to entitle settlers to the soil ? § And what induced him to be so zealous about such * Bacon's Histor. Discourses, p. 34. Mr. B. should remember, that he has admitted in the same volume, that even David Brainerd could be a slanderer, p. 245. This is leaving himself a very narrow chance in- deed ! t Ibid. p. 330. X Was Xew Haven fairly purchased ? See Drake's Old Ind. Chron. p. 156. § To show how long this continued a touchy point, see Bulkley's ela- 408 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. a matter, if a different doctrine were not prevalent in his day? Did the Indians put such a metaphysical crotchet into his head ? j^las! they could not reason like Mr. Bacon ; and so Mr. Knowles loathly admits, that Williams' book upon the subject was *' probably called forth by some ex- pression of the opposite doctrine.'"* Perhaps some may think, from such a confident assertion as is quoted by Mr. Young from the lips of Gov, Winslow f of Plymouth, about the pur- chase of Indian lands in that colony, that Massachusetts onlif must bear the blame and shame, of controverting and con- demning Roger Williams, for his argument against a mon- arch's right to give away soil he no more owned than he did the moon. But Mr. Felt declares that Mr. Williams' doc- trine was "the occasion of much controversy," "both at Plymouth and Salem. ''t Non nostrum inter vos, tantas componere lites. I must leave such contrarieties of statement where I found them, and proceed. It will doubtless be esteemed owing to the perversities of my Episcopal vision, but I cannot refrain from saying, that, in their sentiments about the virtue of a royal patent in giving away territory, the Puritans exhibit another of their points of similarity with the Papists. The Pope could give away territory for the Jesuit : the King could give away ter- ritory for the Puritan. Both were equally well satisfied with the endowment, with its morality, and its efficiency. Each could persecute the opponent of his sovereign claim, under such supreme authority. What the Papists did in borate essay in 1724, to prove that the Indians had no right to the soil, and that his ancestors were not fools enough to suppose they had. Bulk- ley tries to come down like a regular trump. — Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. iv. 159. * Knowles' Wil'iams, p. 60. t Young's Chronicles, p. 259, note. — See also Note 126. t Felt's Salem, p. 17. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 409 South America, and Mexico especially, need not be particu- larized. The making such an opponent the victim of public accusation and banishment, is one of Puritanism's earliest sins in North America. Roger Williams' opinions about the Charter, as conferring no title to foreign soil, formed the basis of '' the first article in his indictment."* There is no evading this awkward and damning fact : it is stamped upon Puritan records with a truly Indian dye. And there is the more reason to believe its truth ; for the Puritans manifested what may be called a proclivity for the doctrine which produced it, before they reached these shores. The question about a right to Indian territory, was no novelty. It had been discussed by them in England t — or, rather, its discussion had been forced upon them by ob- jectors. And what was the answer then, when there was no royal patent under whose broad ban they might plead more safely, and in such a flattering v»'ay that royalty's self would be beguiled to silence ? It was plumply this : " This savage people ruleth over many lands, without title or prop- erty, [A petitio principii at the outset ;] for they inclose no ground, neither have they cattle to maintayne it, but remove their dwellings as they have occasion, [and Nomades require evidently a great extent of what may be called loose territo- ry,] or as they can prevail against their neighbor. And why may not Christians have liberty to go and dwell amongst them, in their waste lands and woods, (leaving them such places as they have manured for their corn,) as lawfully as Abraham did among the Sodomites, "| This is by a Puritan parson, afterwards settled in the very town whence Roger * Benedict's Baptists, i. 454, note. — Sav. Wint. i, 122. — So Connec- ticut was claimed by the same warrant. — Hutch. Hist. i. 46. t Walker's Independency, Pt. iii. p. 22. X Hutch. Collect, p. 30. Compare Bulkley in Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. iv. 159. Also, 2d ser. viii. 86. And 3d ser. iii. 331. Also, Walk- er's Independency, Pt. iii, 22. 410 REVIEW OP^ THE PURITANS. Williams was banished ; and he ought to have remembered Abraham's deed in fee simple, in the best of all registers, and from the top of all authority, " Arise, walk throughTheland, in the length of it and in the breadth of it ; for I will give it unto thee."* Such sophistry about the case of Abraham, might easily introduce greater sophistry, under a sanction vastly inferior ; and that sophistry, (for a wrong cause always uses force or passion in preference to cool argument,) could angrily defend itself, by the decree of a Court and the sacri- fice of a victim. This explains the case and the fate of Roger Williams to the full, and I need advert to them no longer. Still, I suppose, notwithstanding such difficulties, great names will be quoted, and a great clamor raised to show that the Indians were fairly dealt by ; and Mr. Bacon will stand ready, as the procession and the shout go forward, to cry out against every refractory knee which does not do them homage: just as he would do, if he were a Romanist in some Romish land, and the host were passing by. Let me say then, that if stiff allegations can be found by scores, and here and there some straggling deed of sale, that satis- faction will not quite be given. Hutchinson, on one of his pages, shows that such deeds might be virtually extorted ;t that an Indian brain might conceive such a possibility and act upon it — nay, act upon it bloodily, as an outrageous wrong. It is thus he explains the war of King Philip. — " Philip was a man of a high spirit, and could not bear to see the English of New Plymouth extending their settle- ments over the dominions of his ancestors; and although his father had, at one time or other, conveyed to them all that they were possessed of, yet he had sense enough to distin- guish a free, voluntary covenant, from one made under a * Gen. xiii. 17. Compare Gen. xii. 1, 7. t Compare such a submission, e. g. as was drawn out of the Indians at Ipswich, and consummated by " a pot full of wine." — Felt's Ipswich, pp. 4, 5. — Who then taught the Indians to love strong drink ? REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 41 J sort of duresse, and he could never rest until he brought on the war which ended in his destruction."* Callender insists upon it that King Philip went to war reluctantly. t Would he ever have attempted to vindicate, by so dreaded an expe- dient, any but enormous wrongs. t Had he and his been treated as the Indians of Pennsylvania were treated by Wil- liam Penn, might not his alliance with the Puritans, like that of Pennsylvania, have lasted unbroken for more than seventy years ?§ There is proof, fortunately, that the Indians of Massa- chusetts could be quiet and friendly, if dealt by honestly — a fair bargain made with them for their lands, and a fair compensation, not promised merely, but actually rendered. Look, for example, into Shattuck's History of the Town of Concord, and you will see an array of sales and purchases, which you will not find in the histories of some other Puri- tan settlements.'-' And in the history of the same town, there is a corresponding absence of Indian hostilities. And why is this? Another historian of Concord explains it most significantly. " The settlers," says he, " never had any contest with the Indians ; nor were there ever by them but three persons killed within the limits of the town. It is supposed, ' That the cause of their quietness was owing, in a good measure, to the full satisfaction they received at 127 See Note 127. * Hutchinson, i. 2.58, 259. Compare page 252. Compare also, R. I. Hist. Coll. iii. 22, 46. and the references there given. t R. I. Hist. Coll. iv. 126, note. t One of these enormous wrongs was the siezure and ill-treatment of his brother, on bare suspicion — treatment which occasioned his death. Could they expect uneducated savages to forgive such things, when they, the best of Christians, could never forgive the Pequots ? — Hutch. Hist. i. 252, note. § Proud's Pennsylvania, i. 212. Watson's Philadelphia, pp. 93, 128, 129. Watson says eighty years. 412 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. the time of purchase.' "* Ah ! if other settlers had resem- bled those of Concord, it would not have been necessary for Mather to put on record such quarrels, as he owns, (in one instance at least,) began about alleged encroachments on Indian lands; nor would he have dared, with the common presumption of his sect, to arrogate the interference of the Almighty in behalf of them, and say, *' God ended the con- troversy, by sending the small-pox among the Indians."! Oh, this cruel doubling of God's chastisements, by calling them direct judgments in vindication of themselves ! how characteristic of the Puritans, and of multitudes who now inherit a Puritan temper without the name ! But it flowed naturally from their opinionated self-consequence. Of those who presumed to diifer from their platform, (assuming but the right they themselves exercised and defended, when they left England and the Church of England,) this was their pon- tifical style of speaking, not outdone in the Epistles of the Vatican : '* Men have set up their thresholds by God's threshold, and their post by God's post." And, again, such persons " do no better than set up an altar against the Lord's altar."! It is any thing but surprising, that such people looked upon themselves, as the only true portion of the Church on earth, and as receiving New England, as it were, from God's own hands, in the manner the Jews re- ceived Canaan. Their threshold, their post, their altar, [no quarrel with the Puseyite word in those days] were God's; and he had, he would have, he could have, no others. But oh, the wonder, the wonder of all wonders, that such people could upbraid Ap. Laud as an exclusive ! * Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. i. 241. Compare Du Pratz's Louisiana, ii. 206. t Mather's Indian Troubles, p. 23. X Neal's N. Eng. ii. 356. — It is curious, to the philosophical observer of human nature, to find their complaints of altars against their own altar, made against their Independent brethren in England by a Presbyterian ! —Edwards' Antapologia, p. 199, 200. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 413 It is too easy to be discursive on such topics, and I must therefore close this branch of my subject with two au- authorities, one of which goes point-blank against the doc- trine, that the Indians were compensated for their lands, and the other is as effective for the same purpose, though less direct. The first is that of S. G. Drake, Esq., whose research into Indian history has not been surpassed in our day, if in any other. This is one of his impracticable memoranda. " These Indian places, 3IisJiam, since Charles- town ; Matapan, since Dorchester ; and Shawnuit, since Boston; are intruded into and possessed by Englishmen; whose descendants, to this day, hold thern with as much right as another people would, who should come now and crowd them out, and whose manners and occupations might be as different from theirs, as those of their ancestors were from those of the Indians."* The other authority I sup- pose to be Dr. Bentley of Salem, one of the best antiqua- rians of his day. He says of the inhabitants of Salem, e. g., (whom Drake, by the way, pronounces intruders,) that " as soon as they heard of Penn's purchase, they purchased their lands of such Indians as they could find, though fifty years afterwards, still remembering the doctrine of the patent."! Could those people who were seventeen years' long unable to recollect '' the principal end" of their emigration, the conversion of the natives ; twenty-six years' long heedless, even in an Indian's eye, of the Gospel's value ;t and fifty years' long unable to recollect their debt for the soil they trod upon ; have cared over-much for Indian claims or for Indian rights, for Indian bodies or for Indian souls ? * Drake's Old Ind. Chronicle, p. 155. t Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser, viii. 4. See also Lincoln's Hingham, p. 159, etc. for similar conduct. — And yet Bogue and Bennet have the hardihood to say, that Penn imitated the Puritans in his treatment of the Indians ! ! Hist, of Dissenters, ii. 431. X Hutchinson, i. 150. 414 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. I turn now to a brief consideration of one or two topics more, and this letter shall then close. II. — My second point is, that the Puritans, in their treat- ment of the Indians, began with guns rather than the Gospel.'-^ Roger Williams, heretic though he were, began more sagaciously and kindly. " My soul's desire," said he, "was to do the natives good."* And with him, this was not mere solemn language, to be recorded in a diary, or to go home to England in what would be termed an Evangelical epistle. — He showed his faith by his works.t Notwithstanding, with true Christian humility, he ascribed the virtue he practised to "the healthful Spirit of God's grace." "God was pleased," he continued, " to give me a painful, patient spirit, to lodge with them in their filthy, smoky holes, (even while I lived at Plymouth and Salem,) to gain their tongue." And what was the result of such condescending Christian treatment? Neither more nor less than this, that Roger Williams, evp.?i after his banishment, was able to be of more service to Massachusetts, than regiments of dragoons or parks of artillery. Had he been as vindictive as the cruel State which banished him, and never relaxed in her imperial inflexibility, he might almost have fulfilled the hyperbole of Hushai, to the letter, and dragged Boston into the ocean. t But he had the true forgiving spirit of his Master, and returned good for evil.§ Two sentences which he wrote in his Letter of Vindication to Major Mason, are worth all the religious diaries which have been written since the days of Martin Luther. Indeed, I know not any higher or fairer '35 See Note 128. * Knowles' Williams, p. 52. t He " spared not purse, nor pains, nor hazards." — R. I. Hist. Coll. iii. 153. t 2 Sam. xvii. 13. § Hutch. Hist. i. 42. Benedict's Bap. i. 477. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 415 testimony of exalted Christian virtue, than they afford, since the time when apostolic martyrs counted not their lives dear, so that they might testify of the Gospel of the grace of God. For, in practical religion, active benevolence to those we can neglect, is the foremost of excellencies ; standing even before freedom from the world's taint and corruption.* The sen- tences alluded to, (true patents of Christian nobility, worth those of a dozen dukedoms,) are these : *' When God wondrously preserved me, and helped me to break to pieces thePequots' negociation and design, and to make, promote, and finish,- by many travells and charges, the English league with the Nahiggonsiks and Monhiggins [Narragansetts and Mohegans] against the Pequois, and that the English forces marched up to the Nahiggonsik country against thePequots, I gladly entertained at my house in Providence, the general Stoughton and his officers, and used my utmost care that all his officers and soldiers should be well accommodated with us. I marched up with them to the Nahiggonsik Sachems, and brought my countrymen and the barbarians. Sachems and Captains, to a mutuall confidence and complacence each in other."t Such was the way in which a genuine Christian began his career with the Indians, and such was his triumph over their barbarism, and the cruelty of his unrelenting persecu- tors. Truly his godliness, coupled with contentment amid all the roughnesses of his destiny, brought him great gain at last. If Roger Williams had never lived another day, after recording such a passage in his chequered life, he mio-ht have said his Nunc dimittis, and laid him down to die, as one of the veriest Christian heroes who ever adorned the doctrine of God our Saviour — or, if I may attend to criti- cism in such a page as this, the doctrine of the Saviour our God.| * James i. 27. t Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. i. 277. X Titus, if. 10. See the Greek 416 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. But how was it with others, who, as Mather says in his Indian Troubles, " proposed not so much worldly as spir- itual ends in their undertaking," and who, *' ayming at the Conversion of the Indians [his own Italics] and the esta- blishment of the worship of God in purity, did therefore transport themselves and families into this howling wilder- ness" ?* Did they begin as Roger Williams did? Alas, how differently ! Mather who professes an exact acquaint- ance with Indian history, admits that the Indians had been maltreated by his countrymen, who touched on the Massa- chusetts shore on their fishing expeditions, before the arrival of " the Pilgrims." The Indians, therefore, he says, were in a state of exasperation against the English, when " the Pilgrims" arrived. Well then, there was all the more reason that they, such matchless emigrants for ** spiritual ends," should have imitated such as Williams, and approached them as familiarly and blandly as he did. Williams ac- quired such influence over their rugged natures, that he could venture among them, and stay *' three days and nights,"t when they were fresh from battle — when, as he says, their " hands and arms methought reeked with the blood of my countrymen."! But his superiors \n proposing (Mather hits the idea exactly, they 'proposed many a good deed they never thought of exemplifying) to act a Christian part towards the poor Indians, no sooner receive a few harm- less arrows from them, than a quick reply comes from a musket, followed by a death-shriek, the forerunner to a thousand more.§ Well might John Robinson rebuke them, * Indian Troubles, p. 5. t Roger Williams could live in peace with them, without difficulty. So Richard Smith lived in their very midst, 40 years, without molesta- tion, when they were 30,000 in number. — (Drake O. I. Chron. 157 ) Well might Williams pray the Puritans to consider " Whether it be not only possible, but very easy, to live and die in peace with the natives," — R. I. Hist. Coll. iii. 154. X Letter to Maj. Mason. § Mather's Troubles, p. 6. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 417 as he afterwards did, in this memorable language, " O how happy a thing had it been, that you had converted some be- fore you killed any !"* They ought to have received far sharper rebukes from their own consciences. But no, the spirit which developed itself with powder and ball, continued to follow the same direction. A foolish Indian bravado, even, is answered in the temper of a modern duelist. The sachem of those Narragansets,t (whom Roger Williams con- ciliated without perhaps an angry word,) provoked, no doubt, by some of his evil information, sent a bundle of arrows, wrapped in a rattle-snake skin to an Indian at Ply- mouth, whom Mather himself allows to have been a knave. f The Governor is told, that it signifies '' Enmity and War." He receives the communication in its worst construction, at once fires up, and without the slightest effort to soften his bar- barian neighbor's imagined wrath, sends the rattle-snake's skin back filled with powder and shot, and adds this furious message, ' That if he had shipping at hand, he would en- deavour to beat the Indians out of their country.'^ Nor was this the worst result of an intercourse, which began with such violence, that even an occasional interlude of peace only tended to heighten the suspicion and aliena- tion of the parties. ' What is the reason,' said one of the Sachems to the English, ' that when we come to visit you, you hold the mouths of your guns against us?' And the answer, so ominously hypocritical || as to make even a barba- * Drake's Old Chronicle, p. 155. Sparks' Am. Biog. 1st ser. v. 37. t This was Canonicus, one of the best friends the English ever had. R. I. Hist. Coll. iii. 42. — Canonicus solemnly declared to Roger Will- iams, he had never done the EngUsh any wrong. — R. I. Hist. Coll. iii. 47. — Finally, a friendly Indian accompanied the embassy. — Davis' Mor- ton, p. 75, note. — Young's Chronicles, p. 281. X Neal says " an arch knave." — N. Eng. i, 97. § Maiher's Troubles, pp. 10,11. II The word "hypocritical" may seem too hard. If so, let a later instance of Puritan diplomacy be compared with this, to bear it out. 418 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. rian shake liis head, was, ' Such is the English manner of entertaining friends.'* O, if such records pertained to the lives of the papist- ical Hernando Cortez and Francis Pizarro, we should be told that every item was in perfect keeping — that this was just what might be expected from a religion, which claims foreign territory by virtue of inherent saintship, and is au- thorized to maintain its claims by force and arms.t How, then, are such approaches towards the Indians, from those proposing to save their souls, to be pronounced free from the slightest taint of worldliness ? Cortez and Pizarro did not even begin as bad as the Puritans did, /. e., with open war. In the end, however, the Mexicans and Peruvians were sleeping in bloody graves, in a soil over which they or their myrmidons walked the masters. The Puritans shed Indian blood, almost immediately ; and the result was precisely the same as with the wretched proprietors of Peru and Mexico : the soil changed hands entirely, and its original owners died not deaths of peace; many of them died in the bondage of slavery in distant lands. ^^^ Even the son of the greatest '29 See Note 129. Here is a deliberately drawn article of Puritan management, to make their private concert seem like a providential unity, and thus induce a superstitious people to think they were half inspired. " That the magis- trates (as far as might be) ripen their consultations beforehand, that their vote in public might bear, as the voice of God." (Savage's Wint. i. 178.) Such Machiavellian art as this article recommends, seems fit for a council of Jesuits only. Still I have heard of matters concocted in a " conference- room " a night previous, over which the blessing of God was next day asksd, as if the suggestions of the moment. And I cannot but think, in such circumstances, of the old " article of faith" just quoted. * Mather's Troubles, p. 15. — In a salute the mouth of the gun is pointed upwards, not at the person saluted. The answer, however, was worthy " that Puritan-Papist, the Jesuit." t This is one of the six principles of Independency, recorded by Walker.— Hist. Indep. Pt. iii. 22. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 419 Sachem and chieftain, the Indians ever knew, (King PhiJip of Mount Hope,) is doomed to death in cold blood, and receives banishment and slavery as a boon.* He was but nine years old, and still, if the advice of Puritan parsons had prevailed, the innocent child would have gone like a lamb to the slaughter ! ! ! t Nevertheless, we are required to be- lieve, that the Jesuits or Inquisitors, who are suspected of contriving such a death as that of Don Carlos, son of Philip II., are monsters of iniquity ; while they who contrived the death of the son of Philip of Mount Hope, are to shine as the brightness of the firmament, and as the stars, forever and ever ! O, the astounding changes of that Great Day, when all the crooked passages in human history shall be made straight, and its rough places plain ! This last specification reminds me that my next head, and the only one that can further be attended to, (for the present at least,) may as well be now brought forward. It might occupy more space than any of the others, but my limits warn me to compress it, if possible, into the briefest. III. My third and last point in this melancholy argu- ment accordingly is, that the Puritans treated the Indians with excessive cruelty. | * With all his special pleading, Mr. Everett cannot stand this, but bursts out against it quite Demosthenically. See Orations, &c. pp. 611, 612. With this horrid passage in history, compare the language of a conscientious, though perhaps not formally Christian savage. " We," said he, " could easily be too hard faj; the English ; but," striking his breast, " the Englishmen's God makes us afraid here." Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. i. 95. t Baylies' Plymouth, iii. 190, 191, and notes. t King Charles II., in his Commission of 1664, told Massachusetts to her face, that the natives entered this complaint to him against her. Hutch. Hist. i. 459. Mr. Halkett, in his Notes on the N. American In- dians, though disposed to make every allowance for the Puritans, distinct- ly says, " Enough may be gathered from them [their own historians] to satisfy every unprejudiced reader, that the Indians were treated by the Europeans with extreme injustice." — Notes, &c. p. 122. 420 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. It is remarkable, how some particulars in this depart- ment of their history, resemble, upon a smaller scale, some of the saddest scenes of the history of Europe. The parallel just drawn between the fate of a son of King Philip in Spain, and King Philip in Rhode Island, is painfully obvious. And who can fail to see the similarity between the fates of King Charles I., and King Miantonimoh ? Charles would never have suffered, let men denounce Cromwell as they choose, if the Puritan ministers had been as resolutely determined to save him, as the Presbyterian ministers (some of them) pretended, and affirmed, that they themselves were. But, as in days of yore, Gibbon testifies,* that " the Arian clergy surpassed in religious cruelty the king and his Van- dals :" so here, the Puritan ministers seemed to inflict death with a hardihood from which the magistrates shrank. They advised, and urged, and virtually decreed the death of the noble Miantonimoh ;t and worked the magistrates up to the fearful deed, by suggesting to them that the actual execution should take place out of their jurisdiction. They consented, provided " some discreet and faithfull persons" see the deed effectually done ;| and a tomahawk was buried in Miantoni- moh's brain, while he was journeying unsuspectingly as a prisoner. ^^° This version of the subject. Dr. Morse, with such can- dor as is found in other Puritan writers, repudiates; and glosses the matter over with the easy ignoramus, " I know of no foundation for this unfavorable representation of the 130 See Note 130. * Dec. and Fall. chap. 38 ; or vol vi. 273. t The editor of Gorton says the secret of this clerical counsel is, that Miantonimoh gave shelter to the heretics of Massachusetts. There is verisimilitude in this, to say the least. — R. I. Hist. Coll. ii. 155, 155. See also editor of Winthrop, Sav. Wint. ii. 133.— R. I. Hist. Coll. iii. 39—43. X Hazard's Collect, ii. 13. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 401 affair."* But Dr. Trumbull is more candid, and admits it; and admits too the instrumentality of the ministers. t Other authorities may be found in my references ;t and the follow- ing remark of the Hon. Mr. Savage clinches this matter and a hundred more : " Whenever any course that might proceed to a result of extreme injustice, cruelty, or tyranny, was contemplated by the civil rulers, the sanction of the churches, or of the elders, was usually solicited, and too often obtained. "§ " The fate of Agag," as he elsewhere says, then " followed of course. "|| Theeditor of Winthrop's journal could see this, with provoking plainness ; but though the Ji?^st edition of Winthrop's Journal was published in 1790, Dr. Morse could not find in it the shadow of a fact so ghastly. And the same blindness in part has happened unto Dr. Morse's Israel, both before and since. I have remarked the parallels in the case of Philip's son, and Miantonimoh : the dismemberment and extermination of the Pequots, (a whole nation,) reminds one strongly of the fate of Poland. After the Pequots had been administered upon with bayonets, shot, and fire,^] their women and children slauorhtered, and their wigwams burnt, they were summoned (a wretched, shivering remnant) to Puritan head-quarters, to hear their final earthly doom. There were only about 180 remaining of this once powerful tribe.** "Then," * Morse's Geog. edit. 1792, p. 236. t Tnimbuirs Connect, i. 133, 134. t R. I. Hist. Coll. ii. 155, 156. Allen's Diet, 581. Sav. Wint. ii. 131, 132. Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d ser. ix. 202. § Sav. Wint. 1. 284, note. |1 Ibid. ii. 133, note. IT Mr. Bacon says the war with the Pequots was " as righteous as ever was waged." — ^^courses, p. 330. This is disputed. — R. I. Hist. Coll. iii. 23. — Well does the'editor of Winthrop say," Savages are hard- ly tamed by kindness ; never by severity." — Sav. Wint. i. 223, note. ** Vincent's narrative shows, how coolly and deliberately the extermi- nation of the Pequots was resolved on, after their total defeat and rout. Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. vi. 39, 40. 19 422 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. adds the cool and minute Puritan annalist, " were there granted to Uncas, Sachem of Moheag, eighty, and to Miantonimoh, Sachem of Narragansett, eighty, and to Nin- nicraft twenty men, when he should satisfy for a mare of Eltwood Pomeroy's, killed by some of his men."* Thus, in a single breath, a whole people are scattered to the winds, and a lost mare compounded for: no unapt illustration of Puritan mercilessness on the one hand, and shilling and penny exactitude on the other! And would that the latter feature, abounding and superabounding as it did, and still does, in Puritania, had here and always preponderated. — But the fell revenge which sold the Pequots into bondage, was not satiated. They " were by covenant bound, that they should no more inhabit their native country." Oh, how could they forget their own murmurs against those, who made their native country uninhabitable to themselves! — Yet they did, and added moreover the last drop to the cup of a homeless Pequot's misery. They denied him, and that forever, the very name of his forefathers.! And their char- ter, wanderers though they called themselves, gave them, the while, the name, the protection, and the freedom of Englishmen ! Ah, if there are those against whom the pagans of Sodom and Gomorrah shall rise in judgment, may not some poor Pequots yet testify against those, who to-day bemoaned themselves as the victims of oppression, and to- morrow annihilated not the estates and the liberty only, but the very name of their own victims — swept them from the world, as with the besom of perdition. I The case of Philip, the king whose throne was on a » Mather's Troubles, p. 39. R. I. Hist. Coll. iii. 26. t Drake's Old Indian Chronicle, p. 156. # \ Pirates never were guilty of a bloodier deed, than the taking thirty Indians out in a boat, murdering them in cold blood, and then throwing their bodies overboard to be eaten by the monsters of the deep. Yet such was a Puritan revel, and a Puritan historian is merry over it ; speak- ing of the boat that took them, as Charon's ferry-boat ! — Drake's Book of the Indians, B ii. 106 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 423 mount miserably misnamed for him — Mount Hope — fur- nishes, some think, a fair apology for Puritan retributions. It were useless, therefore, for me to speak of it in my own language. I accordingly quote from a Puritan retrospective review, which preceded the North American: "Philip viewed them with jealousy, and for this was called a perfidi- ous wretch.* Every epithet was applied to him, which the Roman writers apply to Hannibal or Jugurtha, or any bar- barous prince, who fought in defence of his own country, or for a while kept his possessions from the mighty grasp of their iron hand. We here compare small things with great ; but the sentiment applies to a savage warrior of these west- ern regions, who made every effort to prolong the existence of his own nation. It was criminal in this man, as his ene- mies thought, to have a different religion; or not to fall in with their ideas of property, when they wanted his estate. [This clause refers aptly to my first head.] This might have been said if the Indians had had any friends to assert their claims ; but their actions are recorded by those wlio wished to make them odious.''f A page or two onwards, the review- er informs us, that Philip was hunted like a wild beast, that when shot his body was quartered and set upon poles, his head carried as a trophy to Plymouth, and his skull preserved as a curiosity for future generations! J Cruel, cruel fate — even Mr. Felt is moved by it, and exclaims, " Could some his- torians of his own nation have described the principles of his policy, and the traits of his character, they would have pre- sented him before us as one of the greatest heroes of his age.§ * Mr. Savage, however, hesitates not to accuse the Puritans, in the shocking case of Miantoniinoh, of loth perfidy and cniehy — Sav. Wint, ii. 132, Note. t Monthly Anthology, 1809, vol. vii. 415. t Drake says that Philip's head was kept hanging for twenty years. — Book of the Indians, B. iii. p. 43. § Felt's Salem, p. 255. He is eloquent, too, over the sufferings and death of Sassacus, the chief of the Pequots, pp. 104, 105. " His patriot- ism," he says, " was of high order." 424 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. But it is impossible, in my limits, and quite needless for my purpose, for me to run into details of their relentless severity, whose pr/es^s could indite such counsels and such triumphs as these : '' Happy shall he be that shall reward them, as they have served us, and cursed be he that shall do the work of the Lord negligently."* — " Happy were they that could bring in their heads [of the Pequots] to the Eng- lish."— "For the Lord was pleased to smite our enemies in the hinder parts, and to give us their land for an inheritance ; who remejiibered us in our low estate, and redeemed us out of our enemies' hands. "t This is the paean for the burning wigwams, and the expiring groans of the down-trodden sav- age. But the cries of the oppressed were louder in the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth ; and the day of reckoning will come, if it have not come already. If a resurrection were to bring the generation of Ward and Mather from their graves, they would chant no paean to find New England such as she is now. I will quote but two authorities more ; one to show that the direful disposition to revenge was so pervading in a Pu- ritan breast, that it infected even the gentler sex, and could be restrained by no solemnity; another, to show that Puri- tanism itself, in a moment of candor, is shocked by the treat- ment of the Aborigines. The first is from Hutchinson's History, and the second from Trumbull's ; and the two are quite enough to set a seal upon stronger assertions than I have ventured upon, had I chosen to use them. *' Mr. Increase Mather, in a letter to Mr. Cotton, 2J3d 5 mo. 1677, [for the Puritans were once Quakerish in their notions of dates,] J mentions an instance of rage against two prisoners of the Eastern * Ward's Cobbler of Agawam. New edit. p. 79. t Mather's Troubles, pp. 38, 39, 41. Mather, in his Prevalency of Prayer, says they prayed the bullet into Philip's heart ! p. 10. t " In order not to denote the months as the [Roman] Catholics did." r-Felt's Ipswich, pp. 21. 22. REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 425 Indians, then at Marblehead, a fishing town, which goes beyond any other I ever heard of. ' Sabbath day was se'n- night, the women at Marblehead as they came out of the meetinghouse, [no churches in those days,] fell upon two Indians that were brought in as captives, and in a tumultuous way very barbarously murdered them.'"* '* Though the first planters of New England and Connecticut,"t says Trumbull, dragging Connecticut up to justice, when Dr. Bacon | would fain whiten her every sin, " were men of emi- nent piety and strict morals; yet, like other good men, they were subject to misconception and the influence of passion. Their beheading sachems whom they took in war, kill- ing the male captives, and enslaving the women and chil- dren of the Pequots, after it was finished, was treating them with a severity, which, on the benevolent principles of Chris- tianity, it will be difficult ever to justify. The executing of all those as murderers, who were active in killing any of the English people, [when, as he admits, they did it in war, and under orders from their native prince,] and oblig- ing all the Indian nations to bring in such persons, or their heads, was an act of severity unpractised, at this day, by civilized and Christian nations. The decapitation of their enemies, and the setting of their heads upon poles, was a kind of barbarous triumph, too nearly symbolizing with the examples of uncivilized and pagan nations. "§ I have somewhere read, that one of the best possible methods to disabuse one's self of Socinian prejudices, would be to read the Gospel of St. John, all the while saying to one's self, "Such expressions as 'The -Word was God' * Hutchinson, i. 277, 278, note. t Is not Connecticut a part of New England ? Or is Dr. Trumbull shy of the fellowship ? t I have called him Mr. Bacon, as he has no title in the books quote d But the newspapers, 1 see, call him Doctor ; and so honor to whom honor, &c. § Trumbuirs Connect, i, 115. Also Note 131. 426 REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. and * The world was made by Him,' &c., &c., are asserted of a mere mortal like me." I know of no better method for disabusing one's self of a proclivity to laud Puritanism, and hate Episcopacy, than to read such passages as I have given in Puritan history, and as Trumbull alludes to, all the while saying to one's self, " These are the doings of * men of emi- nent piety and strict morals,' of men, in fine, who thought themselves the ecclesiastical nonpareils of the world, whose threshold was God's threshold, whose post was his post, and whose altar was his altar — men from whom the most com- plete specimens of human virtue were to be looked for, who had pleaded for toleration and charity with all their might,* and fled to enjoy and to exemplify them, thousands and thousands of miles along the tumbling billows of the main." Ah, how soon would such a reader cry out to his ad- viser, '' You have beguiled me ! These are not the deeds of Puritans — meek victims of^' Laudean persecution.' These are the foot-prints of the old ' Malignant Party' in sheep's clothing. Away with the supposition, that they who made the arches of heaven ring with their protests against op- pression, could belie themselves so outrageously !" But facts, as the adage goes, are stubborn things. Pu- ritan history is entered upon an immutable record ; for the past. Omnipotence itself cannot change. And it goes to swell the proof of the maxim, that truth itself is stranger than fiction. Puritanism in England, when denouncing the Church, if prophetically assured it would do worse than its opponents, no doubt would have answered, as Hazael did, Is thy servant a dog that he should do this thing? But the future made Hazael worse, than he scorned to believe a possibility. And how did Puritanism fulfil its own boasts? The experience of the Churchman, and the Baptist, and the Quaker, and the Papist, and the Presbyterian, and the In- * Edwards' Antapologia. p. 280, etc. Edwards, it must never be forgotten, is a Presbyterian ! REVIEW OF THE PURITANS. 427 dian, recorded on these pages, can answer. Sir Richard Saltonstall said its conduct laid it very low in the hearts of the saints in England ; and Dr. Watts, that it made him blush for shame; while Baillie announces, with the solemnity of a fact, that the opinion of its more than ordinary piety had vanished.* And the proof is cumulative, if the answer must be lifted to a louder key. May Heaven grant that it be not necessary, and that the descendants of the Puritans, seeing how their forefathers proved themselves men of like passions with those whom they condemned, and seeing what they themselves are, split into intestine factions, may begin to stoop from their heights of pride, and learn the severest lesson which has ever been taught them ; that they are no more pious in heart, no more orthodox in principle, no more benevolent in life, than the mass of Christians which sur- rounds them.t^^^ CONCLUSION. And now, I suppose, the question will be asked, Having said all which one of the ' Malignant Party' can say to dis- parage the Puritans, are you going to part with them, and utter no words in their praise ?f And my reply will be shorter, much shorter, than many may expect. In the first place, I have not shown myself un- 132 See Note 132. * Hutchinson's Collect. 401, 402. M. H. Coll. 1st ser. v. 201.~ Baillie's Letters, edit. 1775, vol. i. 438. — Sir H. Vane's letter, an echo of Saltonstall's. Hutch. Collect, p. 137. t Let the reader here compare the quotations from Dr. Owen, given in Note 43. Also from Milton, p. 5. t Compare the latter part of Note 95. 428 KEVIEVV OF THE PURITANS. ready to give praise, where praise is due. The Huguenots, Governor Winthrop, and Roger Williams, can testify for me on this point. I know no writer, alive or dead, who has eulogized Roger Williams for higher virtue, than my poor pen has ascribed to him. In the second place, I have as full faith in the piety, in the honesty, and in the Protestant- ism of Ap. Laud, as any descendant of the Puritans has, in the same qualities, as endowing and adorning the Cottons, the Wilsons, and the Mathers, of his ecclesiastical pedigree. And should I ever (though the day may about be despaired of) see that age of miracles, which produces Puritan authors (sermonizers, orators, reviewers, and song-writers) looking away from Lajid's failings, and honoring his un- doubted virtues, the example may so captivate me, that I may forget it is my duty to silence Puritan clamors by enumerat- ing Puritan faults, and attempt a more grateful task in its congenial strain. NOTES NOTE l,p. 15. There is a rock, I am told, in Rhode Island, famous as a stepping- stone, where Roger Williams disembarked from his canoe. But the Baptists have never made any noise about it, or it would hav? been noto- rious long ago. NOTE 2, p. 15. The writer was at this time (1^35) resident in Massachusetts. It may answer the curiosity of some to know, who was the author of the tract to which reference is made just above ; and I take this occasion to say, that it was " An Address delivered before the Pilgrim Society of Ply- mouth, December 22, 1834. By George W. Blagden." It was printed under the auspices of the " Trustees of the Pilgrim Society ;" and thus became a sort of Pilgrim manifesto. And of so much consequence was it considered, as to be made the subject of a copy-right. NOTE 3, p. 15. This is stating the matter over-fairly for the Puritans. The band to which New England traces its religious history, did not come from their " native land ;" but, be it never forgotten, from Holland, where they had lived quietly for eleven years, and might have lived quietly till their death, if their own uneasiness had not prevented. This is a link in the chain of Puritan history many would gladly leave out ; for it is fatal to the argu- ment that persecution compelled them to come hither. Were they perse- cuted out of Holland ? That is the true question ; and, by the fear of the ninth commandment, let them answer it honestly. I have no appre- hension in that case ; for, says Douglass, in his Summary, &c., " In Leyden to this day [1760], an English Presbyterian congregation is main- tained in their works by the States. (Vol. i. 395, note.) This shows how false their fears, and how ungenerous their insinuations, that the Dutch might swallow them up. So complaisant are the Dutch, that 138 19* 430 NOTES. years after the departure of Robinson's congregation, which was looked upon as the nucleus of New England Puritanism, and the morning-star of its glory, they cherish that which remained and was thought ready to die. A formidable necessity truly, which constrained them to desert such obstinate friends ! NOTE 4, p. 16. The very Charter obtained of Charles I., in 1629, a few years after the landing at Plymouth, shows on the face of it, that they were not perse- cuted out of England, and that they left England as " adventurers" to convert the Indians ! For, in the first place, how inexplicably queer it is, to suppose that they whom the Government drave out by violence, should have succeeded in obtaining from that very Government a charter, which clothed them (according to their own interpretation of it, and action under it) with all the powers and honors of a new independent state ! Could Huguenots have obtained a thousandth part of such grace from Louis XIV. ? And in the next place, the Charter itself says expressly, that they were clothed with corporate powers, so as to " win and incite the natives of the country to the knowledge and obedience of the only true God and Saviour of mankind, and the Christian faith ; which in our royal ixten- TION, AND THE ADVENTURERS' FREE PROFESSION, IS THE PRINCIPAL END OF THIS PLANTATION." (Ancient Colony Laws, pp. 14, 15.) Now, unless the Puritans tricked the King, they were missionary adventurers, and not persecuted pilgrims, by their own "free profession." But Charles is represented as greatly reverencing religion ; and perhaps they did induce him to believe they wanted nothing but the conversion of the wretc'ied heathen. — The more worldly King Jamie understood them better. When they asked him for a charter, under the same pretence, he inquired carefully "What profits might arise." And it was answered, with a bluntness like his own, " Fishing." (Young's Chronicles, pp. 382, 383.) And that these " fishing" profits were not thought lightly of, is evident from the fact, that in the year the Puritans landed, no less than 35 vessels visited the coast of New England for them," from the West of England," and in the next year 40. In addition to which, Canada and New England shipped off, in six years of the same era, 20,000 beaver skins (Douglass' Summary, i. 395, 396.) Truly, the icy seas and howling wilds of North America must, even as early as 1620, have filled some pockets very com- fortably.* * Compare Mass. Hist. Coll. 3cl ser. viii. 95. Oldmixon, i. 44. Trumbull's U. S. p. 72. NOTES. 431 Yet, say the advocates of the Puritans, they did not grow rich, but continued poor and suffering. Well, and whose fault was that 1 That they expected to grow rich is incontestable, from the confession of one of their own number — Dudley. He thus wrote home in 1631 : " If any comes to this settlement to plant for worldly ends, (but if for spiritual he may do well,) that can live well at home, he commits an error of which he will soon repent him ; we failed of our expectation, to our great DAMAGE." (Douglass' Summary, i. 426, note. Compare Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. viii. 42.) So here two formidable facts leak out. Multi- tudes were coming over for worldly ends, and he wrote to stop them ! — But the reason, alas ! the reason. Why, we failed in the success we counted on, and so beware : you may be disappointed also, to the " great damage" — of what ] Of your souls 1 Nay, but of your purses ! NOTE 5, p. 17. There is a technical inaccuracy here, which, however, redounds not to Puritan credit, but rather the contrary. The charter under which they first acted was the charter of the Plymouth Council in England ; and it is from this, and not from the charter of 1629, (obtained after they had left England,) that the quotations in the text come. Those expressions seem quite strong enough ; but of course the charter of 1629 was esteemed bet- ter and stronger, or they would have had nothing to do with it. The real secret was, that the charter of 1629 made them, as they supposed, independent ; and independence of all control, in order to carry out their own favorite measures, was the darling object of their ambition. They could not accomplish that, any better in Holland than in England ; and so they left the one as readily as they did the other. " Disregarding equally her charter," says Chalmers in his Annals, "and the laws of Eng- land, Massachusetts established for herself an independent government, extremely similar to those of the Grecian colonies." (Annals, p. 682 ; also, pp. 177, 178.) Nay, such a favorite idea was this independence, that it was exemplified largely during the civil wars ; showing that it was not freedom of conscience which was wanted, so much as sovereignty. (Chalmers, 181. Gordon's Am. Rev., i. 27, 28, London edit. 1778. Mass. Hist. Coll., 3d series, iii. 84.) NOTE 6, p. 18. The celebrated farewell letter, which may be found in the appendix to the first volume of Hutchinson's Massachusetts, is abundant proof of this ; but it may be well enough to add something from Robinson's own lips. Robinson went over to Holland with his congregation, " one of the most 432 NOTES. rigid separatists from the Church of England." (Belknap's Biog., ii. 161.) But, as Belknap shows, he became more moderate, disavowed the name of Brownist, taught his followers to do so, and finally proclaimed such sentiments as these : " For myself, thus I believe with my heart, and pro- fess with my tongue, and have before the world, that I have one and the same faith, hope, spirit, baptism, and Lord, which I had in the Church of England, and none other ; that I esteem so many in that Church, of what state or order soever, as are truly partakers of that faith, (as I ac- count many thousands to be,) for my Christian brethren, and myself a fellow-member with them of that one mystical body of Christ, scattered far and wide throughout the world." (Young's Chronicles, pp. 400,401.) So, then, the model-Puritans drew nearer and nearer to the Church of England, instead of departing further and further from it ; and if their followers in New England did not imitate them in their later and cooler days, those followers should never quote them as their progenitors. Is there one in " many thousands" of our New England Puritans, who would now say, after Robinson, " I have one and the same faith, hope, spirit, baptism, and Lord, which my fathers had in the Church of England, and NONE OTHER V I fear not ; in spite of Mr. Professor Kingsley's just re- buke to all, " who do not feel a reverence for the Church of England." (Historical Discourse, p. 55.) NOTE 7, p. 19. " But this colony received its principal assistance from the discontent of several great men of the Puritan party, who were its protectors, and who entertained a design of settling amongst them in New England, if they should fail in the measures they were pursuing for establishing the liberty and refonning the religion of their mother country." (European Settlements, ii." 140. Oldmixon, i. 67.) This illustrates, clearly, the connexion between the Puritans in New England, and politicians of emi- nence at home. It shows, too, that New England was not so much as dreamed of for a residence, by the chief men of the Puritan party, unless they should fail in their revolutionary schemes. It was a dernier resort, and nothing more — a city of refuge, to escape the avenger of blood, and that was all. Like Caesar, the Puritan politicians were determined to be frst in the village, rather than second at Rome ; and so, if they could not overturn the English monarchy, they w^ould start a republic beyond the Atlantic. The quotation shows, too, that, as a thousand times before, designing politicians made religious fanaticism a tool to work their own ends. Little did many a simple-minded zealot, whose enthusiasm kept him NOTES. 433 warm amid the snows of New England — little did he dream, that he was but the servitor of the crafty great at home. But it was even so. They burned incense unto his drag, and then put their hook into his nose. (Collier's Ecc. Hist., vi. 436. or, ii. 508.) Hetherington (a Presbyterian) says, Cromwell played off this game on the Independents, i. e. Congrega- tionalists. (Hist. Westmin. Assembly, p. 198.) NOTE 8, p. 19. Gordon, a Puritan himself and a minister, freely admits and condemns the union of Church and State, attempted and effected " so early," he says, "as the second General Court;" i. e. in May, 1631. (Gordon's Am. Rev. i. 29.) In a few years, even the words " established religion," which were so terrible and infamous in England, became virtually as fa- miliar as household words in New England ! An act against heresy in 1658, speaks undisguisedly and plumply of " the order established in Church and Commonwealth." (Ancient Colony Laws, p. 124.) Proba- bly, the fact that the Puritan religion was established by law, in both Massachusetts and Connecticut, will not now be very pugnaciously denied. But it may be interesting to the curious, to know what put an end to its establishment in Massachusetts, in 1834. The law gave to the first Congregational society in each town a pecuniary pre-eminence. The odds and ends, the taxes of all the stragglers, nothingarians, and infidels, went there. But the Unitarians, some how or other, contrived to get a good many of these first societies into their hands ; and thus " brought no small gain unto" their " craftsmen," from the laws supporting religion. This the Calvinists could not complacently endure ; and so they deter- mined to defeat the Unitarians, by raising a hue and cry with the Uni- versalists, infidels, &c., against the cruelty of making a man pay for a reUgion which his conscience did not approve of. The contest, to a philo- sophical observer, was singular enough. Here were Predestinarians, who would doom multitudes to a hopeless hereafter, contending for their pecu- niary emancipation now. While the Unitarians, (who do not differ essentially from Universalists about future punishment — at the worst be- lievmgonly in a sort of Purgatory.) were contending as resolutely for their pecuniary thraldom. And then the secret motive on both sides — nothing but an offshoot of the old love of" exclusive property in soil !" NOTE 9, p. 19. The Puritans, says Chandler, " used worse severities towards others for conscience' sake, than what they themselves had experienced from 434 NOTES. th^ bitterest of their enemies ;* and thereby made it appear, that they complained against the persecutions of the prelatical party, not because they were for moderation and Christian charity in their own conduct, but because they thought the right of persecution only in themselves, and that violence ought not to be made use of to support any but the ortho- dox opinions of such as they themselves esteemed to be godly, and to maintain what they called the order and fellowship of their own churches." (Chandler on Persecution, p. 402. London, 1736. Compare Hewatt's South Carolina, i. pp. 33, 34.) NOTE 10, p. 20. " The same demon," says O'Leary, another testifier from a different school, that my readers may see how people from various points of ob- servation have seen the same melancholy spectacle — " The same demon that poured the poisonous cup over the kingdoms and provinces of Europe, took his flight over the Atlantic, and spread his baneful influence amongst colonists who had themselves fled from the scourge. Their new-built cities, like so many Jerusalems, were purified from idolatry. There, no Popish priest dared to bend his knee to ' his idols, or to transfer to stock or stone the worship due to the God of Israel.' There, the Quaker woman's silent groans were raised on the high key of loud shrieks, when the Lord's deputy ordered her profane breasts to be whipped off by the Gospel scourge, that whipped the profaners out of the temple. There, the Quaker was seen suspended by the neck on high, for daring to pollute the sacred streets with his profane feet, moved by Baal's spirit." (O'Leary's Tracts, 3d ed. p. 316.) NOTE 11, p. 20. " How easy and plain might we make our defence, how clear and al- low-able even unto them, if we could but obtain of them to admit the same things consonant unto equity in our mouths, which they require to be so taken from their own ! If that which is truth, being uttered in maintenance of Scotland or Geneva, do not cease to be truth when the Church of England once allegeth it, this great crime of * Tyranny* wherewith we are charged hath a plain and an easy defence." (Hook- er's Ecc. Polity, Hanbury's edit., iii., 166 ; or, B. vii.. Sect. 14.) Ad- just the matter on Hooker's claim for an impartial hearing, and the voice of a Puritan against Laud and Charles I. would be silenced forever. For * This will do as an offset to Prof. Kingsley, who undertakes to show, (carefully quoting but one side,) that England and Virginia were severer than the Puritans. — Hilt. Disc. pp. 48, 49. NOTES. 435 example, a Presbyterian shows how the Puritans made it a sufficient ex- cuse, to say they punished ecclesiastical crimes because they were civil ones. (Edwards' Antapologia, pp. 165, 166.) But if this excuses the Puritans, then why not Churchmen too ? NOTE 12, p. 20. See Hutchinson's Massachusetts, i. 26, 398, note ; Snow's History of Boston, p. 52. A multitude more of references could be given, if ne- cessary. The Puritans did not escape authority by flying from bishops : they only submitted to twenty bishops, where before they had one. Well did Melancthon say, after some such experience as youthful Boston sup- plied, " I would to God it lay in me to restore the government of bishops ; for I see what manner of Church we shall have, the ecclesiastical policy being dissolved. I foresee that hereafter there will be a much more in- tolerable tyranny than there ever was before." (Worgan on the Reforma- tion, pp. 202,203.*) Hooker, also, complains of the consequences of cheap- ening the ministry, and exalting the brethren in his day. (Hanbury's Hook- er, iii. 191, 241.) But a better authority than all, with some, will be the testimony given by Bissland on the Preaching of the Cross, pp. 97, 98, note. " It is frequently admitted," he says, " by dissenting teachers, that the interference of the leading members of their congregation is some- times intolerable, and that they are in as much bondage to some wealthy, though perhaps ignorant layman, as if he claimed the infallibility of the Pope. No one can speak more strongly on this subject, than Mr. J. A. James of Birmingham ; and probably no man is better qualified to speak upon it. ' What is the deacon of some of our dissenting communities 1 The patron of the living, the Bible of the minister, and the wolf of the flock In many of our churches, the pastor is depressed far below his level His opinion is received with no deference, his person is treated with no respect ; and in the presence of some of his lay tyrants he is only permitted to peep and mutter in the dust.' " " There never was a difficulty," said a suffering Puritan minister, "but there was a deacon in it." And even Mr. Mitchell is obliged to acknowledge this half true. (Church Member, p. 134.) NOTE 13, p. 21. Dr. Hawks, the author alluded to, puts rather a different face upon the mission to Virginia, by saying it was requested by residents in Virginia * So Lord Digby warned them. " I am confident that instead of every Bishop we put down in a Diocese, we shall set up a Pope in every parish." (Rushworth's Collections, iv. 174.) This was in 1640. 436 NOTES. itself. (Hawks' Virginia, p. 51.*) Most cheerfully, therefore, would I abandon the paragraph, as one blot effaced from the Puritan escutcheon. But it unfortunately happens, that the application was made the year poor Ap. Laud was committed to the Tower, and was answered the next year, when it was clearly seen, no doubt, that he would never go out of prison but to his grave. That was indeed a most auspicious moment to make an inroad on a loyal colony, which, in their view and language, was " the region and shadow of death." (Mather's Magnalia, i. 538.) And, too, I can never forget their excessive testiness about Episcopal missions, so late as the days of Mayhew and Apthorp, more than a century after- wards. Such a people had scanty reason for complaining, that they were treated themselves, as they would treat others. Had their ministers, in- stead of having " little encouragement from the rulers," been treated as they themselves began to treat the Quakers, when they found it necessary to moderate their severity, they would have been whipped through but three towns, instead of from end to end of the Commonwealth. It is an actual fact, that a Puritan statute against the Quakers decreed, as a con- descension, that they should be whipped " but through three towns"! This was in 1661, when Charles H. had forbidden hanging and boring with a red hot iron. This was the way in which Puritan mercies became tender. (See Ancient Col. Laws, p. 126. Hutchinson's Hist. i. 188. Wynne's America, i. 80. Oldmixons British Empire in America, i. 108.) NOTE 14, p. 22. When this was written, I had not seen Prof. Knowles' Life of Roger Williams. He disputes the claim of the Romanists, and I must think successfully. (Life, p. 371, &c.) Maryland tolerated Christians and Trinitarians only ;f and even passed a law in 1649, mulcting all who should speak reproachfully against the Blessed Virgin, or the Apostles.! (Gordon's America, i. 68, edit. 17S8.) Mr. Knowles correctly says, such a provision might be made a terrible engine of persecution ; for a Protest- ant might say, e. g. that the Virgin Mary should not be worshipped, and that would be a dismal reproach to her, in the eye of a Papist. But Roger Williams, he says, granted toleration to every body.§ The palm * On the 52d page, however, he half takes this back, by showing that the mission was probably suggested by Puritan emigrants. t N. B. When Puritans had sway in Maryland, in Cromwell's day, a persecnting law was passed against Romanists and Episcopalians also ! The contrast is most expressive. (Bozman's Marylaml, 170. 171.) X The Law of 1649, threatened Anti-Trinitarians with death. BancroA, i. C5P. $ In Upham's life of Vane, in Sparks' Am. Biog , the priority appears to be claim- ed for Sir Harry Vane, as an assenor of liberty of conscience. See pp. 155, KG, 204. NOTES. 437 in peerless charity might therefore be assigned to him ; but unfortunately this apostle of universal good-will is found selling Indians into slavery ! Mr. Knowles mourns over him, (Life, p. 348,) and w^ell he may ; and, on the whole, both the plea for him and the Romanists, must be taken with some abatement. Detract from it, however, never so much ; and yet how transcendently superior are Baptists and Papists to Puritans, for they sometimes would not hear one another ! One Mr. Hobart, who had a little of that energy and dauntlessness which afterwards shone so con- spicuously in a bishop, who, as Tudor says in his Life of Otis, p. 497, was his descendant, was positively and peremptorily forbidden by the magis- trates to preach in Boston, because, alas ! " he was a hold man, and would speak his mind.'' This was bad enough ; but Mr. Hobart capped the climax when he " managed all affairs without advice of the brethren" ! ! That fixed his fate, and the Boston Inquisition put their seal upon his lips, as if like Darius they were fastening the den of lions. (See Young's Chronicles, p. 402, notes. Sav. Wint. ii. 313.) Cotton Mather says he was a determined foe to those, who were " furiously set upon having all things carried their way, which they would call th* rule." (Magnalia, i. 450.) Of course such a man was an uncomfortable neighbor to Puritan autocrats, such as Mather alludes to. NOTE 15, p. 26. To Puritanism also, says Dean Swift, England, by a sort of vice versa rule, has been indebted for Popery. Puritanism drove the children of Charles I. into exile, " where one of them at least, I mean King James II., was seduced to Popery ; which ended in the loss of his kingdoms, the misery and desolation of this country, and a long and expensive war abroad." (Swift's Works, xiv. 73, 12mo edit. London, 1803.) This will be a new way, to some, of acc(?unting for the semi-popery (as the Pu- ritans believed) of Charles I., and the thorough Popery of James II. But the Dean had a very common sense way of looking at facts, as well as of expressing his opinions. His obser%'ation is worthy no small defer- ence. , And certainly, if Roger Williams had aught to do with the exception of Roman Catho- lics, in the Rhode Island statute of March 1663, he could hardly be deemed a consistent assertor of the doctrine. See foot-note upon- this subject, in Letter XVI, on the Papists ; and the Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. v. 243, 244, which prove incontestably the existence of the statute alluded to. — See Mr. Hallam's opinion on this subject. Introd. to Literature, iii. 61, Paris edit. 1839. Mr. Hallam seems not to have been aware of the existence of Roger Williams, and gives the palm, on the whole, to the Arminians. This is worth noting, when we remember that Ap. Laud was considered a strong Arminian '. 438 NOTES. NOTE 16, p. 28. Briscoe's letter from England, in October, 1652, fully confirms Laud's prediction. He thus writes to his son-in-law, at Boston, Massachusetts : " They make themselves rich, and that is all they do. King's lands, and bishops', deans' and delinquents' lands, sold ; and debts not paid, but very few ; nor heavy burdens taken oflT. I could write a great deal more to you of the carriage of things, hut dare not. Those that went to Holland in the bishops' days, as Thomas Goodwin, Nye, and Simson, &c., will prove as great persecutors a^the bishops." (Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. i. 33.) One would think Briscoe's actual description bad enough ; but we see his possible description might have been tremendous. Doubtless, however, he remembered the awful fate of Christopher Love in 1651, (I shall allude to Love in the seventeenth Letter,) and so was cautious. — It might have cost him his liberty, if not his life, to be too plain. His caution was provident. The letter was ferreted out in Boston, and, by order of the Legislature, sent back to England. This confirms the statement of Chalmers, about the intermeddling of Massachusetts with private correspondence. (Mass. Hist. Coll. 3d ser. i. 35. Chalmers' Annals, pp. 146, 148,149.) NOTE 17, p. 30. This is exquisite indeed : a text from the Apocrypha, to fortify Puri- tans in denouncing the Church' of England as Antichrist! Why, one of their sternest objections to the Liturgy was, that it allowed apocryphal lessons to be read in divine service ; though some of those lessons were purposely read on such days as Papists would over-magnify, (days com- memorative e. g. of the Virgin Mary,) in order that the Church might manifest no undue deference towards them, and give the world to under- stand she regarded them as daysof human and not of divine appointment. (Shepherd's Elucidation, i. 178. Rowe on the Rubric, p. 40.) Never- theless, when it was desirable to prove such a damnatory doctrine as Milton's, (viz. " Nor is there any thing that hath more marks of schism and sectarism, than English Episcopacy :" Milton's Prose Works, p. 310. Lond. 1838,) and so justify entire separation from the Church of England — oh, then, the Apocrypha is capital and resistless authority ! — Touch no such unclean thing as the Church of England, says the Apo- crypha ; and every Puritan shall say Amen. NOTE 18, p. 31. This expression of the oath is worthy the closest observation. It establishes, conclusively, what has been said again and again, and as often \ NOTES. 439 denied. " Moreover 1 have now joined myself to the Church of Christ." Of course the swearer thereby virtually admits and asserts that he was never in the Church of Christ before : a position which is abundantly strengthened by what is avowed below, that to go back and join the Church of England would be to join Antichrist. It has often and often been said, and denied, that the Puritans maintained the Church of England to be no Church at all, and as, therefore, a lawful subject for utter demolition. Let their oath of conspiracy now settle the question. Let not such con- cessions as Robinson's,* on the eve of the expedition in the Mayflower, or the farewell letter signed by Winthrop, &c., "aboord the Arbella," be interpreted as signifying quite other views. The expression of such views then, shows rather that once they thought otherwise, and now relented. But the relentings of a few are not the retrogression of all. NOTE 19, p. 32, " It must be further observed, that all these attempts have been mad& under the old outcries and noise of Popery ; which, when loudest and most clamorous, is as sure a sign of some violent assault from Presbytery, as a ruffian's endeavoring to divert your eyes from himself, betokens his intention of stabbing you in the back." — Walker's Sufl^erings of the Clergy, Pref p. X. NOTE 20, p. 32. " All popular factions," says L' Estrange, who lived in the midst of the turbulent days of the Puritans, " take the Church in their way to the State." (Holy Cheat, p. 170.) But Bishop Pilkington describes the whole process most graphically. " The disputes which began about the vestments were now carried further, even to the whole constitution. — Pious persons lamented this, atheists laughed, and the Papists blew the coals ; and the blame of all was cast upon the bishops." (Lathbury, 49. Maddox, 181.) Yet, as Neal and Fuller testify. Bishop Pilkington " was always a very great friend and favorer of the non-conformists," and " a conniver" at their delinquencies — in other words, half a Puritan himself. (Neal, i. 357. Fuller, ii. 513.) Pilkington's testimony, therefore, is peculiarly valuable. * And after all, what does Robinson's concession (so often quoted) amount to? Simply to this, that the Ministers of the Church of England might be listened to, when they preached. He renounced the communion, sacraments and ordination of the Church of England, as stiffly as ever. A huge concession indeed I 440 NOTES. NOTE 21, p. 33. Mr. Bacon, who believes in the virtue of hard names,. calls King James " a low-minded, vainglorious, pedantic fool." (Hist. Discourses, p. 9.)* But he showed no folly in his argument about the motto, " No bishop, no king." His speech, referred to in Fuller, shows how he understood it. Here is a Churchman's familiar explanation oT it, at another day. " By no bishop, no king, is not intended that bishops are the props of royalty, nor do Episcopalians understand it so : but that both one and the other are objects of the same fury ; only the Church goes first." — (L'Estrange's Holy Cheat, p. 170.) James might well feel suspicious of the ulterior aims of the Puritans, and their recklessness of means to accomplish them. They professed to hate Elizabeth ; yet, (as I shall have to say a second time.) they provoked her to the darkest deed of all her reign. " No persons were more strenu- ous than the Puritans, in their endeavors to bring the Queen of Scots to the scaffold." (Shorts' Ch. Hist. i. 443.) NOTE 22, p. 35. Ross, another Presbyterian, enumerates one hundred and six heresies,t which grew up on the soil of Independency after good wholesome Presby- terianism was pushed away ; and adds, " these are some of the poysonous weeds, which have (too much of late) infested our English garden ; I mean the Church once admired (both at home and abroad) for the beauty of her doctrine and discipline, and envied by none but Ignorantsand men of perverse minds." (Ross's Views of all Religions, 5th ed. 1675, pp. 426,427.) t The Edinburgh Review says the tricks of the Independents were remembered and paid off, when the question of Charles II.'s Resto- ration came up. " The Presbyterians, in their eagerness to be revenged on the Independents, sacrificed their own liberty, and deserted all their old principles. Without casting one glance on the past, or requiring one stipulation for the future, they threw down their freedom at the feet of the most frivolous and heartless of tyrants." (Select. Ed. Rev. ii. 57. Paris, 1835.) Such were the fraternal interchanges between old-school and * D'Israeli, a somewhat more competent judge, forms a very different opinion of King James' character, and says he has been wronged. — Cariosities of Literature, ii. 240, 24-2. Boston edit. 1833. •f Edwards in his Gangraena, Pt. i. 15, and Pt. iii. pp. 1, 116, says two hundred and ten! Morse says more than eighty wete soon engendered by it on the soil of New England '.—Geography, p. 185. X Compare Bastwick's dismal confirmation of this, in his "Second part of Inde- pendency." Q,uoted in Baillie's Dissuasive, p. 95. Prelacy cut Ba.stwick's ears off j yet Puritanism in its genuine form, was, notwithstanding, a dose he could not swallow. NOTES. 441 new-school, in days long forgotten. Can modern Philadelphia furnish us with any similar " beauties of history]" NOTE 23, p. 35. Wilson, one of their own historians, admits, says the Quarterly Re- view (vol. X. 91), "How the earliest dissenters held 'that the con- stitution of the hierarchy was too bad to be mended ; that the very pillars of it were rotten ; that the structure ought to be raised anew ; and that they were resolved to lay a new foundation, though it were at the hazard of all that was dear to ihem in the world.' ' Their chief error/ he says, ' seems to have been their uncharitableness in unchurching the whole Christian world except themselves.' " O remember this, ye who talk about unchurching, bigoted, Episcopalians ! NOTE 24, p. 36. " They" (i. e. the political Puritans) says the Edinburgh Review, " seem to have borne some resemblance to the Brissotines of the French Revolution. But it is not very easy to draw the line of distinction be- tween them and their devout associates ; whose tone and manner they sometimes found it convenient to affect, and sometimes, it is probable, imperceptibly adopted." (Select. Edin. Rev. ii. 60.) This much too, be it remembered, when this Review sympathized with them poUtically. Now for an authority from the Quarterly, in respect to the influence of the clergy, and the ease with which they learned their lessons ; and as it states a fact, its testimony may be taken in full latitude. " Cromwell would have remitted the barbarous punishment to which he [James Naylor, a fanatic] was condemned ; but the public preachers, Caryl, Manton, Nye, Griffith, and Reynolds, were as inexorable as so many Dominican friars ; and like all punishments in those days, it was inflicted th the utmost rigor of inhumanity." (Quart. Rev. x. 107.) i NOTE 25, p. 38. Mr. Lathbury is a very clear-headed and dispassionate writer, who refutes Neal, &,c., in the quietest way imaginable. I wish his octavo of only 363 leaded pages could be reprinted. If done by any one, let him by no means forget a good index, which the English copy wants. An extensive index would double the book's value. NOTE 26, p. 38. Neal's own words are, as quoted, " a rigid Brownist." Belknap " mollified" the " relation" a little, and said, " rigid in his separation from 442 NOTES. the Episcopal Church." Neal's knuckles were dealt so faithfully with by Dr. Watts, that when he wrote afterwards the history of the Puritans in England, they guided his pen more astutely. The history of New England appeared in 1720 ; the first volume of the history of the Puri- tans appeared in 1732. The mollification there is all on the right side, and Neal's character, accordingly, is fully recovered by Puritanic ad- measurement. He is not quite " unimpeachable," however, with Pres- byterians, except when he abuses Churchmen, When he touches the scar of an old Presbyterian wound, there is some wincing, as we see even at this day. " Indeed," says Hetherington, " the whole of Neal's statement re- specting the conduct of the Presbyterians is so warped and biassed by prejudice, that it presents a very unfair view, not only of their characters, but even of the facts that occurred, in which they bore a leading part." (Hist. West. Assembly, p. 231.) On p. 245, he says that the authority of Neal is" by no means unimpeachable."* NOTE 27, p. 38. The change in Robinson himself was not much of a regeneration, according to Neal. " His adversaries," he says, " called him a Semi- Separatist; because he allowed of communion with other reformed churches in the word and prayer, but not in the Sacraments and disci- pline." (Neal's N. Eng. i. 110, 111.) As to Robinson's congregation, the unraoUifying historian doggedly adds, (vol. i. 116.) " Tis certain, however, they were too much attached to some of the Brownistical Principles, which Mr. Rohinson, if he had livod, would have weaned them from, and particularly to the Preachings of the Gifted Brethren." The italics are Neal's own ; and if there be a faint sneer in them at the " Gifted Brethren," I hope it will be duly pardoned. Robinson stands higher with the descendants of the " Pilgrims," than almost any one ; but I cannot see why even they should canonize hi Here, in 1620, we find him repudiating the name of Brownist, and in 1619, (but the year before, such is the date in Watt's Bibliotheca, and Mr. Young admits it, page 40 of his Chronicles,) he publishes his solemn apology for Brownism! This was published in English, says Mr. Young, in 1644; but Watt says in 1625; and, if so, very possibly during Robinson's life, and by himself! t These things look curious, and tally * For a very strong Protestant's opinion respecting Neal, take the following : " No one who looks for truth will trust the historian of the Puritans alone, from one sentence to another." — Mendham's Pius V. p. J59, notes. t Since writing this, I have seen Punchard's History of Congregationalism, p. 344 ; from which it appears that Robinson's Apology for Brownism was translated by him- self, and published in 1625. So my conjecture was true ! NOTES, 443 poorly with the lofty compliment, that Robinson " was never satisfied in himself, until he had searched any cause or argument he had to deal in, thoroughly, and to the bottom." (Young's Chron. 452.) Was he such, and did he do so, in very deed ? Then the Church of England should have suffered less from him ; for he was once a beneficed clergyman within her pale, and might have paused, longer than he did, ere he re- nounced her as very Antichrist : which was one of the distinct positions of the Brownists. (See the letter prefacing Bp. Hall's Apology against the Brownists, which was an answer to one of Robinson's pamphlets, where he alludes to the abusive violence of Robinson ; and see also his Epistle to him and Smith, Decade third, letter first.) But behold, after Robinson's decease, a treatise is found in his study on the lawfulness of hearing the ministers of the Church of England ! (Young, 400). So then, this profound and thorough gentleman begins by swearing allegiance to the Church of England ; he next casts upon her " the blas- phemous imputations of apostasy, antichristianism, whoredom, and rebel- lion ;" (see Bp. Hall's prefatory letter ;*) he then defends Brownism ; he then disowns it ; he then defends it for a second time ; and finally closes the scene, by saying, " I have one and the same faith, hope, spirit, bap- tism, and Lord, which I had in the Church of England, and none OTHER."t I am willing to take his dying testimony, and believe that, on the whole, this was the reason, and not want of money, as Mr. Young sug- gests, (p. 453,) which kept him from following the " pilgrims" to New England. There has always hung a mystery around Robinson's shrink- * Robinson deserved small allowance for his own motives, for he was in the habit of blackening the motives of clergymen. He used to tell his people, that many of those who preached against them, and wrote against them, if they were where they dare be honest, would be just like themselves. — Hazard's Collect, i. 357. t An unfortunate Churchman, to try to soothe a Puritan in New England, told him they had the same religion. Gospel, and hope. And what was the reply ? See how sharp and trenchant. " What," he says, to his own friends, " renounce your commu- nion, church-government, and some of your essential doctrines, too, and yet hold the same religion with you !— Again, Is it the same religion, Gospel, and hope .'" — See a Teply to a letter of a Church of England minister to his dissenting parishioners. Bos- ton, 1736, p. 17. Now Robinson could talk in the same way, this poor Churchman did, and it was all right— all an exhibition of famous charity. The moment a Churchman begins to talk 80, a Puritan cleaves him to the very chine. I cannot say, however, he did not serve him quito right. And I commend the case, and its issue, to those of my brethren who think it best to tell anti-Episcopalians how slightl/ they differ from them, how much they love them, &;c. They get not a particle of credit for this extra charity. They only get a back-blow. ' Why, then, are you not like iis, not almost, but altogether ?'— May they learn a little wisdom by caustic experience. 444 NOTES. ing delay, for five long years in Holland.* He was not an old man : he died at the age of fifty only, and was in the prime, doubtless, of his vigor. And he alone v^mt money, when a whole shipload of inferior persons found it ? And this, too, when as Neal says, his presence was indispen- sable to wean them from Brownism, and silence the too free effusions of the Gifted Brethren ? Credat Judceus, &,c. No : his confidence in Pu- ritanism began to shake, and his attachment to the Church of England to revive. A few years more would have sufficed to make him follow Brown's steps, and go home to his spiritual mother. I cannot but be- lieve, too, that the words of Bp. Hall t rang in his ears, in the loneUness of that study where he again inclined to think her preaching lawful ; and that, " ungenerous" as Mr. Young pleases to pronounce them, (Chron. p. 453,) they touched a heart which had learned to repent of its hostility, to remember its first love, and to consider by whose bread its youth had been nourished. As the words may not be accessible to many, I will quote them, and close this protracted note. " Must God be accused of your wilfulness ? Before that God, and his blessed angels and saints, we fear not to protest, that we are undoubtedly persuaded, that whosoever wilfully forsake the communion, government, ministry, or worship of the Church of England, are enemies to the sceptre of Christ, and rebels against his Church and Anointed : neither doubt we to say, that the Mastership of the Hospital at Norwich, or a lease from that city (sued for with re- ^pulse) might have procured, that this separation from the communion, government, and worship of the Church of England should not have been made by John Robinson." — Hall's Works, x. 113. Oxford ed. 1837. NOTE28, p. 41. Perhaps I ought to qualify this, which is stronger language than Neal himself dare use. He says " the little army of confessors," (vol. iv. pref p. iv.,) and so the little army of confessors let it be. * There can be no great harm, for yet another reason, in suspecting Robinson's motives ; for he suspected his own brethren at Plymouth. He said they did not want him there; because he would stop lay-preaching! So even they suspected he was g( tting to be too high a churchmam ! All tliis is clear from his own letter. — Hazard's Coll. i. 372. — Mr. Young in his Chronicles, p. 476, inclines to the suppo- sition, that the Rev. Mr. Ly ord, &c. were opposed to Robinson's coming. But if the "Gifted Brethren" had not advanced high pretensions, why does Robinson's letter forbid a layman's administering sacraments.'' t It is remarkable that Bishop Hall quoted to him his own colleague's words, when Robinson shrank from the lengths to which he went. " He tells you true : your station is unsafe : either you must forward to him, or back to us." — Hall, x. 9. — No doubt these words lodged in Robinson's memory, very deeply. NOTES. 445 NOTE 29, p. 41. That Episcopacy was detested by the Puritans more than Popery, is clear from the Gangraena of Edwards. Here are two of the positions which he ascribes to the Independents, i. e. the Congregaiionalists, or tip- top Puritans, who professed what he called " Brownism refined." " That the Church of England and the ministry thereof is Antichris- tian,yea of the Devil, and that it is absolutely sinful and unlawful to hear any of their ministers preach in their assemblies." " That the Church of Rome was once a true Church, but so was the Church of England never ; therefore it is likelier the Church of Rome should be in the right, in the doctrines of free-will, universal redemption, original sin, &.c., than the Church of England." (Gangraena, Pt. i. p. 25, Compare p. 12.) NOTE 30, p. 41. The character of Neal is thus given by Mosheim, who, being neither Churchman nor Puritan, may be accounted an impartial critic. " While he relates in the most circumstantial manner all the injuries the Puritans received from the bishops, and those of the established religion, he in many places diminishes, excuses, or suppresses, the faults and failings of these separatists." (Maclaine's Mosheim, iv. 379.) It is remarkable that Dr. Murdock, himself an Independent, should give this sentence even more edge in his translation. " While he is full in narrating and emblazoning the wrongs which the bishops inflicted, or caused to be inflicted on the Puritans, he frequently extenuates, excuses, or passes silently over, the faults of the Puritan sect." (Murdock's Mosh. iii. 201.) NOTE 31, p. 42. " Neal states that, in 1573, three hundred were deprived in the dio- cese of Norwich alone ; whereas Strype mentions only three." (Lath- bury, 50. Maddox Vind. 340. Compare Neal,i. 320.) NOTE 32, p. 49. The government were gentle enough to those who took the advice, that the Puritan historian Hubbard thought proper to give all who dis- sented from his New England establishment. " However, it were well if all those who cannot comply with the reli- gion of the State and place where they live, yet had so much manners as not to jostle against it, nor openly practice that that is inconsistent there- with, as if they would bid a kind of defiance thereunto." N. Eng. 373-4. This was perfectly proper, doubtless, for the Puritans themselves to 20 446 NOTES. say against all who presumed to differ from ihem. Had the authorities of England so talked to John Cotton and company, the answer would have been, in the classics'of Bogue and Bennet, " You impose on conscience, and are only not worse than Satan himself" NOTE 33, p. 49. Chalmers describes their sensations graphically. They " thought themselves persecuted, because they were not allowed to persecute." (Annals, p. 135.) They did not mean to show the government any mercy, but when they became the government themselves. Well does Sir R. L'Estrange say, " If toleration might compose the difference, there were some hope ; but that, alas, is more than they can afford the govern- ment." (Holy Cheat, p. 74. — Compare Nalson's Countermine, Ch. 12.) NOTE 34, p. 51. Baxter's " Reformed Liturgy,"* is a wondrous curiosity on two ac- cotmts, not to mention a dozen others. In disciplining a penitent, the minister may not absolve him : that would be hideously popish. So he may "aggravate" the sin, *' when it is convenient." (Ref. Lit. p. 64.) And this theory was reduced to practice. For, says Governor Winthrop, of an anti-puritan transgressor, " He made a very free and full confession of his offence, with much aggravation against himself, so as the assembly were well satisfied." (Sav. Wint. i. 326.) So then, not to absolve a sin, i. e. to try to make it less than it is, but to aggravate it, i. e. to try to make it worse than it is, is the way to improve upon Jesuitical morality ! Now for a further improvement upon language and doctrine, deemed too popish. The word " Sponsoi-" is an abomination : so the word " Pro- parent" is adopted. (Ref Lit. p. 38.) Here again is another instance of getting deeper into trouble, by trjang to get out of it. " Pro-parent" is a stronger term than " Sponsor." — Then the Church of England approxi- mates too closely the notion of Transubstantiation. So Baxter would save her by putting the following language into her lips : " This bread and wine, being now set apart and consecrated to this holy use, by God's appointment, are now no common bread and wine ; but sacramentally the body and blood of Christ." (Ref. Lit. p. 32.) After a baptism, to allude to " Baptismal regeneration," would be heretical. So he gives thanks for an infant's being made " a member of Christ ,t by this sacrament of regen- * This is best known, I believe; as bound up with Calamy's Life of Baxter. It may be found in a more modem work, viz. in Orme's edition of his Practical Works, vol. XT. 449. t This expreision in the Church Catechism, *• a member of Christ," horrifies NOTES. 447 eration." (Ref. Lit. p. 43.) Let tinkerers on Creeds and Liturgies be- ware ! It would have been a narrow escape for Baxter, at this day, not to have been doomed as a Puseyite.* — See the Reformed Liturgy at the end of the first volume of Calamy's Life of Baxter, for the above quotations. {^ There was more of what is now called Puseyism among the elder ministers of Puritan descent in New-England, than one in a hundred is aware of ; and as the authorities are not of easy access to Episcopalians, I hope I shall be pardoned for taking this opportunity to insert a few. Governor Winthrop has his child baptized, within eight days after its birth, j This is a compliance with the letter of the English rubric, now not known. There was a system of Church Offerings in his day, also. Prince's Annals, in vol. vii. Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d ser. pp. 66, 71, for both. The Puritans are not aware how Popish they are, when they talk of dedicating, and never of consecrating a Church ; as if to consecrate were profane. The word dedicate is the word the Papists themselves always use. (Broughton's Diet. i. 279.) When an Episcopalian talks of his Prayer Book, as the best interpre- tation of the Word of God — when of the first four General Councils — when of Baptismal regeneration — oh, what Popery, cry those, who claim Puritanical affinity. But once it was the orthodox doctrine, that " the truest understanding of these things is from the Platform," i. e. the Plat- form is the true interpreter of the Bible. See an edition of the Platform,^ published at Boston, in 1772, p. 67. Then as to the four Councils. In the Preface to the Confession of Faith in 1680, it is said, not that man has owned them, but that the Lord has done so ; and that not faintly, but signally. As to Baptismal regeneration, the Platform, ch. xii. sect. 7, tells us, that baptized children, " if not regenerated, yet are in a more hopeful way of attaining regenerating grace, and all the spiritual blessings both of the covenant and seal." This is coming as near to the doctrine, as ninety-nine and three quarters comes to a hundred. For mark ! there is a blessing not in the Covenant only, but also in its Seal. Bome, when put upon the lips of a child. Baxter, we see, copies it literally, and applies it to an infant. * If what has been said already would not have settled Baxter's case, as a Pusey- ite, the following authority must be a finisher : '•I dare not incur the guilt of contradicting two General Councils in a matter of faith, when they anathematize the Dissenters, and agree therein, though disagree- ing in other things, and pleading the tradition of the Fathers, and the Scripture." Alas ! the tradition of the Fathers to help out Scripture ! Oh, luckless Baxter, you are now for ever done for. — See the fatal authority in Orme's Baxter's Practical Works, XV. 530. How could Mr. Orme, as if to make bad worse, put such dismal matter among the practical theology of the author of the Saints' Everlasting Rest ? 448 NOTES. By the way, the acknowledgment of the first four General Councils was no accidental matter. Whitelocke tells us it was done, to show how the Puritans conformed to proper English law — that acknowledgment being part of the law of the land. See his Essays, p. 93. The Puritans began their " Sabbath," as ihey called it, at sun-down on Saturday. For this they claim most peculiar merit. But, unfortu- nately, this is an old Romish custom, of which we find traces in England, when Popery was in full blast there, and persecuting the reformer Wicliff. See Gibson's Codex, pp. 280, 282. Or, for a more modern and acces- sible authority, E. V. Neale, on Feasts and Fasts, pp. 118, 120.* This keeping of Saturday night, as holy time, is nothing but an imi- tation of the vigils of the Romish and Oriental churches ; and, what is particularly unfortunate in the Puritans, is an imitation of the Romish vigils, which, as Mr. L. Coleman the Congregationalist confesses, were fasts, while the Oriental vigils were festivals. (Coleman's Antiquities, p. 431.) But this is all natural ; for a genuine Puritan is quite in love with many a Romish practice, as we have seen again and again. To finish this particular specification, I must say, that a Puritan uses Romish logic in justifying penalties for the neglect of Puritan holy-days. For ex- ample. " As the rulers of Massachusetts colony had authority to com- mand the observance of fasts and thanksgivings, they had like power to enforce the keeping of them." (Coleman's Antiquities, p. 457.) Oh, doubtless. And so, as the Pope and the King of Spain, &c. had authority to command the " Holy and Apostolic Court of the Inquisition" to sit, they had like authority to enforce the keeping of its most orthodox decrees. As to the use of the Cross as a symbol, Thomas Hooker of Hartford, Connecticut, wrote an essay in its behalf, which is among the manu- scripts of the Mass. Hist. Society. (See Savage's Winthrop, i. 158, 159, notes. Magnalia, ii. 435, 436.) Will they allow Episcopalians to re- print it? If so, the subscription shall be opened at once. Episcopalians have sometimes been scouted for saying, that a true ministry and true sacraments, &c., go together. Nevertheless, such was the unequivocal doctrine of the celebrated Jus Divinum Ministerii Evan- gelici. Thus, on p. 31, of Part Second, " If our ministry be no true ministry, then is our baptisme no true baptisme, the sacrament of the Lord's Supper no true sacrament, our Church no true Church." Noah Hobart argued for the Presbyterian succession, because there was vastly greater probability it had been preserved unbroken, than the * For Festivals, &c., too. Neale says, " The dominion of the Long Parliament and of Cromwell was not marked by any alteration in the law concerning holy sea- ons." Neale, p. 191. NOTES. 449 Episcopal. (Second Address to the " Episcopal Separation in N. Eng land," p. 82, etc.) ] President Stiles believed in bishops, priests, and deacons, as jure di- vino ; only they must never be over morg than one congregation. (Stiles' Judges, p. 258.) President Chauncey believed in weekly communions ; and this, Baillie tells us, was at first the common practice of the Independents. (Deane's Scituate, p. 89. Baillie's Dissuasive, p. 121.) Cotton Mather kept sixty fasts and twenty vigils in one year. (Al- len's Biog. Diet. p. 568.) The Church of England appoints but sixteen vigils : so this was " positive reformation." Mather's own diary tells us of his fasts! ! (Compare Note 70.) Dr. Hemmenway, in his treatise on the Church, holds this language about the title of church members to grace : " Though the word may come to the heathen, as well as church members, yet it comes not to thera by way of covenant, as it doth to church members ; nor have they any promise of mercy beforehand, as church members have ; nor is it chiefly belonging to such, but unto the children of the covenant." (Hemmen- way on the Church, p. 120.) He was quoting an authority older than himself, (his book was published in 1792,) on the church membership of children. So all children, out of the Church, are left to uncovenanted mercies. President Clap believed the clergy were the only authorized expound- ers of Holy Writ. " Ministers, in their public preaching and joint con- sultation in councils, [councils divine if not infallible,] are an ordinance, appointed by God, to hold forth light and truth to his Church, and to de- clare the true sense and meaning of Scripture." (Discourse on the Doc- trines of the N. England Churches, p. 25, New Haven, 1755.) So, ac- cording to President Clap, the Church is the interpreter of Scripture. But again, he abhors the word " sect." " Neither can those who adhere to the ancient doctrines of the Christian Church, be properly called a party. That odious name properly belongs to each of those particular sects, which, from time to time, oppose those doctrines, and thereby make themselves a party." (Discourse, &c., p. 39.) President Clap was thought, as Allen tells us in his Biographical Dic- tionary, to be rather too antiquated for his day. Yale College is probably far enough from his latitude now. At any rate, if Dr. Bacon ever sit in President Clap's chair, and will hold fofth his doctrine in the Discourse from which I have quoted, I think I can promise him that he shall be endorsed as a very respectable Puseyite,and that he shall receive honorable mention on the pages of " The Churchman" of New York. 450 NOTES. I cannot close this note without a word for our Baptist friends, inasmuch as they have employed an editor to vamp anew Neal's Puritans. What has become of their ancient Puseyism, about the laying on of hands, in a quasi confirmation ? This was one of their constant practices formerly. (See Benedict's Baptists, i. 218, 480, 487, et alibi. Wall on Inf Bap. ii. 356.) Do they ever practice /our ordinations'now,Y\z., to the orders of deacon, ruling elder, preacher of the Gospel, Evangelist 1 (Benedict, again, their own historian, ii. 176.) Do they appoint apostles, with episcopal if not apostolic powers, as they once did l (Benedict, ii. 54, etc.) Do they ever practice " a dry christening" of infants now ? (Benedict, ii. 107.) Finally, the Romanists have seven sacraments, but the Baptists used to have something like nine, viz., " Baptism, the Lord's Supper, love-feasts, laying on of hands, washing feet, anointing the sick,* right hand of fel- lowship, kiss of charity, and devoting children." (Benedict, ii. 107; where also, eZdcrs, elderesses, deaconesses, 6^c.,are mentioned.) Alas, alas, what incorrigible people ! Puseyism would not have half satisfied their devouring appetites in those days. NOTE 35, p. 55. Here are some testimonies respecting such men as they hesitated not to sacrifice, and the indignities they heaped upon them. " Of the great and good Bishop Hall," says the biographer of the Puritan Dr. Reynolds, " it is only necessary to say, in this place, that there is no instance in the history of the enemies of the Church, of such heartless barbarity, such inconsistent enmity, as they exerted against one of the greatest orna- ments of religion and learning which the seventeenth century aflbrds ; and all this, because, in the early days of the Revolution, he endeavored to defend his Church by argument, which they were determined to de- stroy by force." (Reynolds' Works, i. p. Uvi.) " And in London," says the biographer of Bishop Sanderson, " all the bishops' houses were turned to be prisons, and they filled with divines that would not take the covenant, or forbear reading Common Prayer, or that were accused for some faults like these. For, it may be noted, that about this time the Parliament sent out a proclamation to encourage all laymen that had occasion to complain of their ministere for being trou- blesome or scandalous, or that conformed not to orders of Parliament, to make their complaint to a select committee for that purpose ; and the * Wall on Inf. Bap. ii. 354. NOTES. 451 minister, though one hundred miles from London, was to appear there or be sequestrated ; (and you may be sure no parish could want a covetous, or malicious, or cross-grained complainant ;) by which means all prisons Lu London, and in many other places, became the sad habitations of con- foiTOing divines." (Bishop Sanderson's Works, new ed. i. 28, 29.) Clement Walker, a Presbyterian, speaking of the grievances in- flicted by the Committees, says, in his History of Independency, Pt. i. pp. 6, 7, " That to historize them at large, would require a volume as big as the Book of Martyrs ; and that the people were then generally of opinion that they might as easily find charity in hell, as justice in any committee, and that the king hath taken down one star-chamber and the parliament have set up a hundred." See this quoted in Lathbury, pp. 278, 279. See also pp. 196, 197, and quotations from Hallam. Bishop Hall's " Hard Measure," the state ment of an actual sufferer, is in vol. i. of his Works. Neal tries to smooth over the persecution by the committees thus : " None were turned out or imprisoned for their adhering to the doctrine or discipline of the Church of England, till after the imposing of the Scots Covenant ;* but for immorality, false doctrine, non-residence, or for taking part with the king against the parliament." — (Neal, iii. 50.) But Lilly, an impartial eye-witness ,test\^es differently. " In these times, many worthy ministers lost their livings or benefices, for not complying with the Three-penny Directory. Had you seen (O noble Esquire) what pitiful idiots were preferred into sequestrated church-benefices, you would have grieved in your soul ; but when they came before the classis of divines, could those simpletons but only say they were converted by hear- ing such a sermon, such a lecture, of that godly man Hugh Peters, Ste- phen Marshall, or any of that gang, he was presently admitted." (Lilly's Memoirs, new edit. pp. 136, 137.) All this might easily be done, in an age which imprisoned Jeremy Taylor for a frontispiece to his Holy Living and Dying ; and tried to deprive the profound Pococke on the ground of ignorance ! ! — (Lathbury, pp. 188, 280. See also Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy, and Mercurius Rusticus, passim.) If, to all this, we add Cromwell's forbidding the sequestered clergy, after reducing them to beggary, from so much as school-keeping, to save themselves from absolute starvation ; and also his project for decimating the already ruined estates of the cavaliers throughout England, it may with truth be said, that the apostate emperor Julian was less cruel to Christians, than Independents, alias Puritans, to Churchmen. (See the * As to the Covenant, no wonder Churchmen were superstitiously afraid of it j for it was found to contain six articles and 666 words : " the number of the beast.'' — Querela Cantabrigiensis, Lond, 1685, p. 205. 452 NOTES. notes in Harris's Cromwell, pp. 436-446. Compare the Bulwark Storm- ed, pp. 86, 87.) — All this is in keeping with Puritan principles ; for says a Puritan author, often quoted, " There is no room in Christ's army for toleratorists." (Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d Ser. viii. 34.) NOTE 36, p. 56. The connexion between Puritans and Papists has often been ques- tioned ; and accordingly I subjoin a list of authorities, which may satisfy those who have no means of examining themselves, and enable those who have, to see whether the thing is so rashly maintained, as Puritan writers would fain teach.* Leslie's Works, folio ii. 94, 560. Or, vol. iv. 190, new edit. — Lon- don Cases, iii. 257, etc. 303, etc. with numerous references. — Fowler on Christian Liberty, edit. 1680, p. 207. — Nalson's Countermine, p. 11. — Sherlock on Rel. Assemblies, 3d ed. 1700, p. 224.— Laud's Troubles, folio, p. 587.— Dissenter Disarmed, London, 1681. Pt. i. 141, 142. pt. ii. 41. This book is now very rare, I will therefore so far allude to the last reference as to say, it mentions familiarly together the names of Jesuits and Puritans, to show how they were associated in the minds of the people. It calls the first " Puritan-Papist," and the last " Puritan- Protestant." And it is remarkable that Bishop Montague, so strongly suspected of popery himself, should have called the Jesuits " Puritan- Papists," long before. See his Appeal, pp. 112, 113. "Our revolters unto popery," said he, " were Puritans, avowed or addicted, first." No wonder they tried to ward off his keen truth, by calling him a Papist. Calamy's Baxter, i. 100, 101, 102, 103.— Baxter, in his dislike of some things in the Independents, tries to make out how the Papists deluded and used them. " The friars and Jesuits were their deceivers, and, under several vizors, were dispersed among them."t So here is Richard Baxter admitting that the Puritans and Jesuits were intermin- gled ! ! This accords fully with the records of old Strype, whom I would quote if I could, but the note would be too long. See Strype's Annals, folio, of 1709. For the year 1560, chap. ix. pp. 220, 221. Also for 1568, chap. Iii. pp. 521, 522. ♦ Compare Orme's Baxter's Works, i. 642 j where, besides Baxter's testimony, may be found Archbishop Usher's, and Archbishop Bramhall's. f There is a curious coincidence between Popery and Puritanism, which I be- lieve few know, i.e. their multiplying the Notes of the Church beyond those given in the ancient Creeds. The Creeds say that the Church is one, holy, catholic, apostolic, i. p. has/oMr notes or marks. But Popery by Bellarmine says she has Jifieen, and Congregationalism by Bartlet that she has seren. Both indulge private judgment, on such a subject.— See Bellarmine's Notes, ed. 1840.— Bartlet's Congregational 1 Way, 647, p 139. NOTES. 453 Collier's Ecc. Hist. ii. 518 ; or, vi. 463. — Dugdale's Short View, &c. p. 16, &c. — Maddox's Vindication, pp. 6, 183, 184. — Lavington's En- thusiasm of Methodists and Papists Compared, part. ii. p. 179, &.c. ed. 1749. — Carwithen's Ch. of Eng. ii. 94, with references in a note. — Th. Fuller's Thoughts, p. 269 : Papists : he says, " multiply as maggots in May, and act in and under the fanatics." — Saywell against Baxter, p. 329. — Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation. The Preface. — South's Sermons, ii. 40. — Barwick on the Church, pp. xix, xx. — Jones of Nayland's Theological Works, v. 60.— Wall on Baptism, Oxf. ed. 1835, ii. 371, etc. — Pullers Moderation, chap. xvii. sect. 7, or, p. 291, «fec. new edit. — Stephens' Life of Archbp. Sharp, pp. 258, 554. — Lathbury's Eng. Epis. p. 45, Sec — British Critic, xv. 67. — Perceval's Apost. Succ. ch. vi. obj. 3. — Finally, the Puritans believed in extreme unction. See Th. Goodwin's Works, vol. iv. Treatise on Ch. Gov't, p. 387, etc.* What has become of this ancient, more than Puseyite practice ] did the Presbyterians laugh them out of it ? Mr. Edwards speaks very scorn- fully of it, in the preface to his Gangraena : to say nothing of his efforts. Ft. i. p. 40, to show the strong likeness between all the sectaries of his day, (among whom, p. 12, he puts the Puritan-Independents,) and the worst of Rome's orders — the Jesuits. Upon this entire " squadron of authorities," as Master Prynne would say, I will make but one remark ; and that relates to p. 6, of Bishop Maddox. He there shows, that the Puritans copy the Jesuits in their " ceremonial accoutrements." The Puritans wished to avoid the sur- plice, which resembles the dress of a Romish parish-priest, and therefore they adopted a black gown, which resembles the dress of the Jesuits. So the black gown of Geneva is an outward imitation of Jesuitry ! ! I may well ask, under the Presbyterian auspices of Mr. Edwards, is that the only way in which its adherents have copied it ?t NOTE 37, p. 56. I presume, by a little research among modern pubhcations, it would be easy to pick up many a sad forewaraing by Churchmen, of the consequen- ces of a union of Romanists and Dissenters. I have not the means at hand to enable me to give references. One or two, perhaps, may suffice for a hundred. Mr. Southey speaks strongly upon the subject, on p. xvi. Pref. to his Vindiciae Ecclesiae Anglicanae. Also, p. 518, in the body of his book. * Compare Edwards' Antapologia, pp. 36, £62.— Wall on Inf. Bap. ii. 354. •f The Edinburgh Review, in spite of its whiggery, answers this question against the Puritans ; for it candidly says, " in spite of their hatred of Popery, they too often fell into the worst vices of that bad system." Selections Edinb. Rev. ii. 60. 20* 454 NOTES. NOTE 38, p. 57. This mode of argument (the calling of hard names) was one afterwards paid back upon themselves, even in New England. Mrs. Hutchinson and her followers called the Puritan ministers " Baal's priests, Popish factors," &c. &c. &-c. (See Upham's "Vane, p. 133, etc.) Whitfield and his followers dealt in the same commodity, even more liberally. Dr. Chauncey has collected a tremendous catalogue, on pp. 249, 250, of his *' Seasonable Thoughts," published in 1743. Whitfield must have been tart and bitter ; but sometimes, I suspect, he found his match. " In a company of gentlemen, where Father Flynt, who was a preacher and many years a tutor at Cambridge, was present, Mr. Whitfield said, ' It is my opinion that Dr. Tillotson is now in hell for his heresy.' Father Flynt replied, ' It is my opinion you will not meet him there.' " (Mass. Hist. Coll. 2dser. iii. 211.) Doubtless it will be said, that Churchmen were as violent against the Puritans, as the Puritans against them. But I may confidently ap- peal to Sir Matthew Hale, as a most impartial witness upon this subject. In his " True Religion," published by Richard Baxter (!), he bears the following remarkable testimony : " 1 do remember when Ben Johnson made his play of the Alchymist, wherein he brings in Ananias, in de- rision of the persons then called Puritans, with many of their phrases in use among them, taken out of the Scriptures, with a design to render that sort of persons ridiculous, and to gain applause to his wit and fancy. But although those persons were not in very good esteem among the great ones and gallants, yet the play was disliked, and indeed abhorred ; be- cause it seemed to reproach religion itself, though intended only to render the Puritans ridiculous." (Edit. 1684, p. 44.) Now, surely, those who visited a play-house would not be so sensitive as the soberer part of an Episcopal community ; and yet, Judge Hale and Richard Baxter be- ing witnesses, even they were not disposed to ridicule the religion of the Puritans. But it was the religion of Churchmen, principally, on which Puritans poured out their bitterest vituperations. NOTE 39, p. 57. Bishop Meade of Virginia will surely be admitted as unexceptionable testimony, to the conduct and character of the English bishops, though he do wear the lawn himself No Presbyterian or Puritan doubts his evangelical character. Yet he says as follows, in his Address to his Con- vention in 1844. " As to the Church of England, it is a well known fact, that not only were bishops chief martyrs of the Reformation, but when, at any time, there was evinced a disposition to return again to Romish NOTES. 455 doctrines and practices, the bishops were, for the most part, the decided opponents of it. The history of the Church of England will show, that they were generally for moderate measures, not so much towards Rome, as towards those who had separated from the English Church, being anxious not for union with Rome, but for comprehension of those who pro- tested against Rome ; and could their wise and conciliatory councils have prevailed, on more than one Occasion the breaches might have been in some good degree repaired." Again, he blames the unreasonableness of the Puritans. " In England, when the Puritans objected to some few of them, [expressions in the Liturgy,] there were those among the bishops and clergy who were willing to have omitted, or modified them ; believ- ing that naught of the true doctrine of the Reformers or of the Bible would be lost thereby, and but for the unreasonableness of the opposite party it would have been done.' (Bishop Meade's Address, 1844, pp. 5, 9.) With this compare Milton's portraiture of the English Bishops. — " But they, contrary, that by the impairing and diminution of the true faith, the distresses and servitude of their country, aspire to high dignity, rule and promotion here, after a shameful end in this life, (which God grant them,*) shall be thrown down eternally into the darkest and deepest gulf of hell, where, under the despiteful control, the trample and spurn of all the other damned, that, in the anguish of their torture, shall have no other ease than to exercise a raving and bestial tyranny over them as slaves and negroes, they shall remain in that plight forever, the basest, the lowermost, the most dejected, most underfoot, and down-trodden vassals of perdition." See his "Reformation in England," at the end. (Prose Works, p. 21. Lond. ed. 1838.) But how could the heads of the Church expect more mercy, when even the humble tenants of its orchestras were thus berated by Prynne : — " Choristers bellow the tenor, as it were oxen ; bark a counterpart, as it were a kennel of dogs ; roar out a treble, as it were a sort of bulls ; and grunt out a bass, as it were a number of hogs." Prynne could not say that they sung Romanism, if he could that Archbishop Laud wrote it ; and yet to make the Church ridiculous, he spared not even them. — (Hone's Year Book, p. 66. Granger's Biog. Diet. 2d ed. i. 205.) NOTE 40, p. 59. Their opinions of the Canons I have not given. They may be formed from the title of a book published in 1640. "England's complaint to Jesus Christ, against the Bishops' canons of the late sinful synod, a sedi- * The curses of Popery, as the Quakers well know, were never objected to by the Puritans. 456 NOTES tious conventicle, a pack of hypocrites, a sworn confederacy, a traitorous conspiracy against the true religion of Christ, and the weal of the public of the land, and consequently against the kingdom and crown." Locke's Works, X. 244, note. It may be supposed that when the Puritans got scot free from Ap. Laud, they left such language behind them. Not so.* They took what Cotton Mather calls " the revenges of a deep repentance," on this side of the Atlantic. Dr. Chauncey thus rails at the Liturgy, &c., forty years after he had abandoned them, and when he came to die ! Among his chief sins to be mourned for at that awful hour, he especially desired to remember his " many sinful compliances with, and conformity unto, vile human inventions, and will-worship, and hell-bred superstition, and patcheries stitcht into the service of the Lord : which the English Mass Book, I mean the Book of Common Prayer and the ordination of priests, &c., are fully fraught withal." And with such language, recorded in his last will and testament, he supposed himself going to that blessed place, where the greatest of the virtues — one that leaves repentance, faith, and hope, all, all behind it — is charity ! (Mather's Magnalia, i. 421.) NOTE 41, p. 60. As a specimen of what they would substitute for the Litany, I give an extract from a mock Litany, quoted by Harris. " From this prelatical pride and their lordly dignities. From all their superstitious vanities and Popish ceremonies. From their most corrupt courts and their vexing slaveries. From their fruitless shadows and hypocritical formalities, From their hatred and malice against Christ's appointed ordinances. From their sinful synods and all their papal hierarchy. From Abaddon and ApoUyon, with their priests, Jesuits, their favorites and all their furious blasphemers. Good Lord deliver us J" (Harris's Cromwell, p. 49.) Who but a furious blasphemer could in- dite such a Litany as this 1 NOTE 42, p. 60. The Puritans appropriated all Scripture to themselves, in the most wholesale way. There was a book of metre Psalms set forth by Parlia- ment in 1644. Psalm 94, verse 7, reads thus : * The same language almost is used in England, to this day. See the tracts of •' The Rev. William Thorn, Winchester." Here are the titles of two : " All Church People essentially Papists" — " The Church more opposed to Dissent than to Immo rality," &c. Sec. This is a winning way to convert Churchmen i NOTES. 457 The Lord yet shall not see, they say, JVor Jacobus Qod shall note. In the margin there is a note to explain to the reader, that by " Jacob's God" is meant " the God of the Puritans." [Lathbury, p. 311, note.) It is curious, hut not very surprising, to find the Mohammedans appro- priating the Psalms in the same way. (Ockley's Saracens, p. 192.) NOTE 43, p. 63. The Christian Observer's opinion has been quoted, because many are governed by the opinion of volumes vi'hich they are familiar with, and accustomed to respect. Really, however, it is by no means so strong in expression, or in fact, as the following from an " old school" Presbyte- rian, who lived in the days of the Puritans, and saw their excesses with his own eyes. " And we find it by experience in England, how, since the Reformation began in the first and second years of the Parliament, wherein we thought the devil had and should have been cast out of Eng- land, what fresh footing he hath got again. And I am confident that, for the present, the devil hath gained more in the matter of false doc- trine, disorder, deformation, anarchy, and libertinism, than he lost in the Reformation, by putting down of many Popish errors, superstitious prac- tices and tyrannies. Yea, I think it may be said safely, that the devil hath had a more plentiful harvest this last year in England, than ever in any one year since the Reformation. Nay, certainly more damnable doctrines, heresies, and blasphemies, have been of late vented among us than in fourscore years before."* And again. " The points complained of in Dr. Jackson, Bishop Montague, &c., were harmlesse, wholesome errors, (if any errors could be harmlesse and wholesome,) in comparison of many errors in this catalogue. [Jackson, Montague, &c., were the Puseyites, be it remembered, of those days.] Certainly if Mahomet were * Compare Dr. Owen himself. " If vain spending of time, talents, unprofitableness in men's places, envy, strife, variance, emulations, wrath, pride, worldliness, selfish- ness, be badges of Christians, we have them on us and among us, in abundance."—" Oh what a picture of Puritanism by a Puritan's very self. — See Owen's Mortification of Sin in Believers, p. 29. — And again, more plainly still, in another of his treatises : " He that should see the prevailing part of these nations, many of those in rule, power, fa- vor, with all their adherents, and remember that they were a colony of Puritans, whose habitation was in a low place, as the prophet speaks of the city of God, translated by an high hand to the mountains they now possess, cannot but wonder how soon they have forgot the customes, manners, ways of their own old people, and are cast into the mould of them that went before them in the places whereunto they are translated. * * What were those before us that ice are not ? what did they which we do not ?" Ow- en's Book of Temptations, pp. 55, 56.— Compare Nelson's Life of Bull, ed. 1827, p. 44. — Hey's Lectures, Book. iv. Art. xi. Sec. 12. 458 NOTES. now alive among us, he would be a gallant fellow in these times, and be in great request for his revelations and New Light. Yea, we are fain to that madnesse and folly, that I am persuaded, if the devil came visibly among many, and held out Independency, and liberty of conscience, and should preach never such false doctrines ; as that there were no devils, no hell, no sin at all, but these were only men's imaginations, with several other doctrines, he would be cried up, followed, admired. And if it should happen he were complained of and questioned by some Press yteriaus, (for to be sure sectaries would not,) he would have some or other to speak for him, and help to bring him off." (Edwards' Gangraena, Pt, ii. pp. 67, 68, 75. Third edit. London, 1646 ) Does any one now say my comments on Puritanism are severe ? I defy the production from my pages, of any thing comparable to the se- verity of this Presbyterian, who saw it, and described it, with its image in living array before him ! This acknowledgment of Edwards is of im- mense value as testimony ; and as to the confusion, heresy, &c., of Puritan times, Dr. Reynolds himself uses language scarcely less emphatic. See his Sermon before Parliament, previous to the Restora- tion, but when Cromwell was dead, and he was not afraid to speak out ! Life in his Works, i. pp. Ivii., Iviii. See also the very strong language of the London ministers in 1647, in their testimony to the " Solemn League and Covenant" — Quoted in Stephens' Life of Ap. Sharp, pp. 554, 555. This testimony confessed that instead of a reformation, they had a de- formation of religion. — See also Chauncey's " Seasonable Thoughts," pp. 351,352. NOTE 44, p. 63. Compare such instances as honest old Howell, a layman too, gives in his Familiar Letters ; and of which he says he " could produce a cloud of examples." (Book iv. Lett. 43, or p. 506.) People wonder at the strength of our expressions respecting the Puritans. Howell saw them with his own eyes, and this is his record. " Difference in opinion may work a disaffection in me, but not a detestation. I rather pity than hate Turk, or Infidel; for they are of the same metal, and bear the same stamp as I do, though the inscriptions differ. If I hate any, 'tis those schismatics that puzzle the sweet peace of our Church ; so that I could be content to see an Anabaptist go to hell on a Brotcnisfs back." (Book i. Section vi. Lett. 32.) Now the Puritans thought the Anabaptists the most horrible of all sectaries in their day. Yet here is an impartial ob- server, who gives them the preference to the Puritanical Brownists. NOTES. 459 NOTE 45, p. 63. Grant's Eng. Ch., i. 456. Also, Maskell's Martin MarPrelate, p. 197.* Possibly it may amuse some of my readers to see part of the epitaph, which church-wits of the day wrote for the traitors alluded to by Mr. Grant. Hie jacet, ut pinus, O vos Martinistae, Nee Caesar, nee Ninus, Et vos Brownistae, Nee Petrus, nee Linus, Et vos Barrowistse, Nee Magnus Godwin us, Et vos Atheistse, Nee plus, nee minus, Et Anabaptistse, Quam clandestinus, Et vos Hacketistae, Miser ille Martinus, ^ Et Wiggintonistae, Videte Singuli. Et omnes Sectistse, Quorum dux fuit iste, Lugete Singuli. NOTE 46, p. 64. The kindness of the English Government to Protestant refugees from the Continent, is ascribed by Neal to Archbp. Grindal ; so reluctant is he that Queen Elizabeth should have a jot of praise for it. (Neal i. 395, note.) De Laune even abuses the government for criminal partiality, on account of it. " Is it not," he says, " a wonderful contradiction to abet, succor, and relieve the French Presbyterian Dissenters, under their cniel persecution for their non-conformity, and yet, at the same time, to exer- cise all that cruelty, ruin, and destruction to the English Presbyterian non- conformist : like the Scribes and Pharisees, who built the tombs of the prophets, and at the same time killed the prophets?" (De Laune' s Plea, h^c. p. 102. t) Not at all, Mr. De Laune ; for you yourself admit, on p. 96, that " If some of the non-conformists are found tardy, on good proof, let them suffer the penalty of the law." Now multitudes of them were tardy enough to be contented and quiet ; and the government had to try its ferule, as a schoolmaster on refractory pupils. Besides, your complaint shows, incontestably, what we Churchmen want to show, that the government did make a distinction, and a great distinction. It, just as you say, abetted, succored, and relieved the peaceable and submissive : those who would tolerate England, if England would tolerate them. * The reading by Maskell varie.s a little from the one given. Doubtless there were many versions of it. t My edition is the Boston one of 1763, This was the era of the Mayhew and Althorp controversy, of which I must speak by and by ; and it was no doubt put forth then, to heighten, if possible, bad impressions against Episcopacy. De Laune had Buffered for his Plea, eighty years previously. 460 NOTES. This book of De Laune's, by the way, is one of the Puritan master- pieces.* Doubtless many have heard of it, who never heard how eflec- tually it was answered by E. Hart and Dr. Brett, in the " Bulwark Stormed." My copy bears date London, 1717. The Puritans (and their coadjutors the Baptists, when Episcopacy is to be annihilated) are sadly ignorant of the answers made to their philippics ; for an Episcopal book, to many of them, has poison in its very cover. For example, to my perfect amazement, I once heard a Baptist, afterwards a president of a college, speak of Campbell's Lectures on Ecc. History, as a book Churchmen had never so much as pretended to answer. When I named Skinner's Truth and Order to him, he stared like a man electritied. NOTE 47, p. 65. " The Queen's preference for Churchmen," says vone who favors the Puritans as much as he can, "was inevitable. She disfavored the Puri- tans, not only for disputing her authority, but as in her judgment distract- ing the Protestant party. The season for open war against the Catho- lics was fast approaching." (Mackintosh's Eng. in one vol. p. 374, Chap xviii.) This shows, clearly, that the Queen did not oppose the Puritans from that love of Popery, which has been slanderously imputed to her. They criminally, not to say foolishly, weakened their own side, and hers too ; while Popery rejoiced in the distractions of Protestants, and hoped to crush them all indiscriminately. No wonder she was vexed : any good Protestant ought to have been. Sir James's testimony is very important, and should be well remembered. Puller's defence of the Gov- ernment from the charge of persecution, raised on this side by Romanist?, and on that by Separatists, is well worth examination. (Moderation, Ch. xiii. §. 8, or p. 235, new edit.) NOTE 48, p. 65. This pretence of Mr. Neal's looks very suspicious. Puritans were not apt to deal in fool's play. Their native language looks much more like Gov. Winthrop's postscript to that most unfortunate victim of long- armed vengeance, who was dragged from Rhode Island to Boston — I mean Samuel Gorton. " You must know% withal," says the Governor, " that the Court did not intend their order should be a scare-crow, (as * De Laune annexes to his Plea his trial, fine, &c. De Laune was tried in 1683. Checkley was tried and fined, as a libeller, in 1724, more than forty years after, for publishing Leslie on Episcopacy. And still, in the very place of Checkley's trial, [Boston] they proclaim De Laune's story in 1763. They.had contrived to forgetpoor Checkley. NOTES. 461 you write ;) for you will find it real and effectual, if you transgress it." (R. I. Hist. Coll. ii. 152.) This sounds like Puritan vernacular; and completely sets at naught Neal's poetical version of in terror em. NOTE 49, p. 69. Mr. Leonard Bacon, in his Address before the New England Society, Dec. 22, 1838, is completely gravelled by the Restoration. He blames the Puritans for it excessively ; and calls the people who allowed it, in- fatuated. Meanwhile, let us take all the comfort we can, from his wry- faced concessions. He admits that it was the faults of the Puritans themselves, which occasioned the Restoration ; and that it was the People who got tired of them, and preferred to be emancipated from their yoke, rather than from the thraldom of Episcopacy. But let us hear him. " By their errors and faults, the great cause, which their vir- tue so earnestly espoused, and their valor so strongly defended, was wrecked and almost ruined. But dearly did they pay, in disappointment, in persecution, in many sufferings, in the contempt which was heaped upon them by the infatuated people they had vainly struggled to emanci- pate— the penalty of their faults and errors." (Address, p. 29.) Charles I. was beheaded Jan. 30, 1648 ; and Charles H. was restored May 29, 1660. So the sovereign empire of Puritanism was about twelve years long.* And now, query : Could that cause be so exceedingly virtuous and valorous, whose own faults and errors wrecked and ruined it before it got into its their own^ Thanksgiving* and Fasts are fortified by the same penal- ties which guarded Sunday. And were these heavy 1 Why, Massachu- setts, down to 1726, and very much later for aught I know, would put a man in a cage (this detestable instrument of public torture not yet ex- tinguished) for absenting himself from Puritan worship for a month to- gether. (See Laws, edit. 1726, p. 252.) By the way, how curiously the extension of holy time to an additional evening every week, and to holy-days of an indefinite number, compares with the old established Puritan principle, " that the Scripture must be the rule to direct in all things, even so far as to the ' taking up of a rush or straw.' "t See proem to the second book of Richard, not Thomas, Hooker's Ecc. Polity. * Some of these thousands were, notwithstanding, quits favorable to the ob- servance of Christmas, Easter, &c. See " Judgment of tlie Reformed Churches of Holy Days." — Proceedings of the Assembly at Perth in Scotland, Lond. 1621, Pt. iii.79, etc. The Synod of Dort kept the Festival of the Nativity for three days. See pp. 84, 85. — Compare Bingham's Works, ix. 251. f When Master Cotton had to contend with the Baptists, and they employed this old Puritan principle against infant baptism, he told them the Devil helped them to such a notion ! I — Benedict's Baptists, i. 362, 363. 4g0 NOTES. NOTE 71, p. 112. Cushman rebuked his Plymouth friends in 1621, in the following good round terms. " Men may make a great appearance of respect unto God, and yet but dissemble with him, having their own lusts carrying them ; and, out of doubt, men that have taken in hand hither to come, out of discontentment in regard to their estates in England, and aiming at great matters here, affecting it to be gentlemen, landed men, or hoping for office, place, dignity, or fleshly liberty." Could they who landed for conscience' sake in 1620, require such preaching as this in 1621 ] But the fact speaks for itself; though I by no means give all Cushman's plain speaking. (Young's Chronicles, p. 263.) NOTE 72, p. 120. Hutchinson says the proposal to bribe the king was a trick of Cran- field's — a governor of New Hampshire, who owed Massachusetts a grudge, for having felt some of the Teachings of its " engrasping" arm. Be it so. By Hutchinson's own confession, the bait took ; for he adds, *' The court," i. e. the General Court of Massachusetts, for Cranfield was at Boston when he advised tkem what to do — " The court agreed to the proposal." (Hutchinson, i. 303.) The General Court, then, were nothing loth to try bribes ; and that is all that I am concerned to show. While upon this subject of underhand dealing, I must quote two authorities more. A letter of Shirley, a Plymouth agent, shows how freely bribes could be given. He says thus to Governor Bradford : " But as Festus said to Paul, with no small sum obtained I this freedom ; [i. e. of access to the ear of the Lord Keeper ;] for, by the way, there were many riddles which must be resolved, and many locks must be opened with the silver, nay the golden key." (Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. iii. 70.) These men,* like John Cotton, would not bend the knee at the Eucharist, though but for a solita- ry time, to gain the Church's favor ; (Magnalia, i. 237 ;) but they could bend conscience like a willow withe, at the shrine of Mammon, to pro- mote their worldly interest. And now for my last testimony, on this humiliating subject. Says a New England Review, " Old politicians, grown gray in practices of arti- fice and deception, could never have discovered more simulation than our General Court, in their apologies for not joining the other colonies, when Connecticut was threatened with invasion by the Dutch at Manhadoes ; and which would actually have taken place, had not Oliver Cromwell, by * " I write here," says Shirley, " in the behalf of aW our partners." P. 71. NOTES. 481 his threats, annihilated all their bold resolutions." (Monthly Anthology. Boston, 1809, vii. 63, 64.) This picture of Massachusetts, by her own children, is far more for- midable than any of my painting. It shows, first, how little the Puri- tans cared for the lives of their own brethren, if they could save their own pockets — next, that Oliver Cromwell was their superior in charity — and lastly, that Talleyrand himself could not have surpassed them in du- plicity : — and all this by a Massachusetts pen ! ! NOTE 73, p. 124. (Last line of the foot notes.) This exeedingly sensitive spot in the annals of Puritanism was noticed by the Presbyterian Baillie, in his " Dissuasive from the errors of the times." Master Cotton in his reply to him and Mr. Rutherford, another Presbyterian who had assailed Puritan Independency, alias Congrega- tionalism, felt the point of Mr. Baillie's spear as acutely as Mr. Young ; who quotes Cotton with great eagerness as a Goliath against Baillie, on p. 380 of his Chronicles. But what is Cotton's overwhelming authority ? Nothing but the simple assertion of the *' Pilgrims" themselves : some- what interested witnesses, as all must grant. " Themselves do declare it," (is Cotton's annihilating answer to Mr. Baillie,) that you are totally in the wrong. (Way of the Cong. Churches cleared, &c., p. 14. Lon- don. 1648.) And then he proceeds to give, as he himself doth declare, " their own words ;" when he cuts those words into a shape that better suited his own fancy — giving, as I have said, but four reasons out of five, and leaving out, among other things, all allusion to their " being desirous rather to enlarge his Majesty's dominions, and to live under their natural Prince." All this is plain enough. Cotton was writing in the days of the Parliament, when it would have been rather awkward to talk about the loyalty of the " Pilgrims," to an authority they were then full willing to disown. So Cotton quietly dodges that difficulty, by the slight sin of omission. But let such matters pass. Analyzed thus, what is Cotton's assertion worth more than Baillie's? Who will say the ipse dixit of the Congrega- lionalist is better than that of the Presbyterian ? We are then thrown back upon the "Pilgrims" themselves; and their own story has been given by Secretary Morton, and commented on quite enough probably, any Puritan will without doubt say. However, there are one or two collateral matters, which may be sub- joined here. It speaks not over well for the " Pilgrims," that the archbishop would not favor thera. (See Hazard's Collect, i. 361. Young's Chronicles, 482 NOTES. p. 56.) Some will say, By no means: this was of course to be expected, from such a man as Laud. Laud, reader? Why Laud was not then so much as a plain bishop. This was in 1618 ; while Laud was not a bishop till 1621, nor an archbishop till 1633. The archbishop in ques- tion was George Abbot, the Calvinist, and the devoted patron of non- conformists, and opponent of the Book of Sports!* And he look with a cold eye upon our Leyden friends ] There is something in this very strange, and very suspicious. Abbot knew Robinson in England ; for he left England just about as Abbot had entered on his archiepiscopate. He had doubtless read Bishop Hall against the Brownists, alias Bishop Hall against John Robinson ; and he distrusted a man who, having called his ecclesiastical mother a harlot, now came cap in hand to solicit her smiles. Another thing. Why does Robinson, in his parting letter to the " Pilgrims," dwell so intently upon the necessity of their peace with one another 1 Why warn them against that " touchy humor," which even to this day has lost none of its testiness in their descendants ? Why tell them that they, " above others," should be most cautious to guard against it ? I leave these questions for my readers' own reflections, and add but the reference to the letter itself. (Young's Chronicles, pp. 92, 93. Or, Mass. H. Coll. 2d ser. ix. 30.) Perhaps however I ought to say, that Robinson's caution was zeal- ously followed up in 1624 by the agents of Plymouth in England. They warn the "Pilgrims" against "hatred or heartburning," "long and sharp disputes." (Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. iii. 30.) Notwithstanding, the version of Puritan perfection in Cotton Mather is, that " God sifted three nations, that he might bring choice grain into * I do not remember giving a Churchman's apology for the Book of Sports. The design was to keep people from going back to Romanism, in consequence of the hor- rors of a Puritan sabbath ; a breach of which Master Cotton would have punished with death. (Hutch. Collect, pp. 161, .173.) It was an error, doubtless, but a sincere one ; and therefore harmless, according to Puritan logic, and quite excusable. Sin- cerity, as we shall by and by see, covers up all defects. Even Hutchinson is beguil- ed into the common cant about sincerity. (Hutch. Hist. i. J75.) For an authority on the Church side about the Book of Sports, see Bp. Montague's Articles of Enquiry, Cambridge edit. 1641. pp. 86, 121. — Poor Bishop Montague wrote against Popery, as well as Archbishop Laud ; but was considered as a concealed Papist of the most malignant kind. Nevertheless, on the Tery page where he asks a clergyman if he had read the Book of Lawful Sports, according to the King's order, he also asks a question, whicli the ministers of Puritanic Ma.'?sachusetts could not answer very favorably, with tee-totalism in temperance to help them. It is this. "Do any in your parish buy or sell, or keep open their shops, or set out any wares to be sold on Suudaya or Holy Days, by themselves, their servants, or apprentices :" 4 NOTES. 4g3 this wilderness." (Magnalia, i. 219.) Alas, for our degeneracy, if the siftings of three nations, by Heaven's own hand, need so much re-sifting from the hand of man ! NOTE 74, p. 132. It is indeed most amusing to a philosophical observer to remark, what some good people can do, most complacently, who would be shocked, unspeakably, by a Romish devotion to relics. Thus we have the chair of the Dairyman's Daughter exhibited on a public platform, and the museum at Worcester, Mass., matching, I dare say, any of the mortua- ries, &c., at Rome. Thus also Mary Chilton, who first touched the Rock, converted into a St. Catharine or St. Agnes — not to use a loftier name. And, what outstrips them all, we have a chip of the " Sancti- fied Rock" cut out and inserted into the "Church of the Pilgrims" in Brooklyn, L. I. ; and, as I am told by an eyewitness, at the convenient height of the foot of St. Peter's image at Rome, so that one can kiss it if he should feel inclined that way. Now I have no objection to this veneration of relics, if people choose to indulge it ; but it is abominable to abuse a Romanist for indulging it, and then do the same thing ourselves. But only see how the worship- pers, (i. e., worshippers in the sense of the Douay Bible) of the '* Sancti- fied Rock" show their horror of a Romish superstition. It would have been profane to put the cross over it ; so they put Neptune's trident there ! ! ! This at least was the proposition, fully assented to, in the Columbian Centinel. Whether carried into execution, I cannot say. How curiously the erection of a heathen symbol over the " Sanctified Rock," compares with the cutting a Christian symbol out of the flag of Massachusetts ! And notice also the singular language of Mrs. Adams, when she " visited the church at Leyden, in which our forefathers wor- shipped." She did not feel the veneration of a Christian — oh, no — but " like what the ancients paid to their Druids," i. e., the veneration of a Pagan idolater! (Letters of Mrs. Adams, Boston, 1840, ii. 150.) And Mr. Young quotes this with admiration ! (Chronicles, p. 393.) I must adduce here the language of a Presbyterian, which will come up again, but it will not spoil by repetition. " It is ever true of mankind, that if their reverence for eminent departed saints respects their persons merely, and not their religious belief, it degenerates into something approaching man-worship or idolatry." (Lit. and Theol. Rev., New-York, 1839, vol. vi. 186.)* * The author of Mercurius Rusticus saw this and remarked it, long ago. " They have their idols and th°ir idolatry, as much as the Church of Rome." He said this of their man-worship.— Merc. Rus. Ft. ii. 141. 484 NOTES. NOTE 75, p. 135. (Last line but one of the foot notes.) These great men would not leave England, unless they could carry the Charter with them. (Chalmers' Annals, p. 150, and Hutchinson's Hist. i. 19, 20.) In order to please them, it was conveyed over, and by stealth! (Chalmers' Revolt of the Colonies, i. 44, 49.) Thus the goT- ernment of Massachusetts was begun by that " simulation," her own children have ascribed to her : see Note 72. And when England dis- covered the sly conduct of the settlers of Massachusetts, and began to exercise a privilege, not only her natural right, but a right expressly re- served by the Charter* — of preventing persons going to Massachusetts, she is called a bitter persecutor ! England was willing to let those go who would be loyal, i. e., as we shall see, take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy. But was it not natural, inevitable, I may say, for her to suspect those who would purloin her charter, and then run off without giving any token of loyalty? If the magistrate, according to Thomas Hooker, not only has the power, but " is hound to know and judge of the ways of godliness," (Summe of Church Discipline, Pt. iv. 58,) surely he is bound to look after such ways and doings, and to see how they af- fect " the nationality" of his country. NOTE 76, p. 140. See what Higginson said in 1629, to induce emigrants to come over, i. e.,"you that are rich!" Their children and families " may live as well, both for soul and body, as any where in the world." He closes with saying, " While I was writing this letter, my wife brought me word that the fishers had caught 1600 bass, at one draught, which if they were in England were worth many a pound." (Hutchinson's Collect, pp. 48, 50.) Edward Winslow t talks in the same style, when he wants to toll the rich over in 1621 — so early a date even as that! " By the goodness of God we are so far from want, that we often wish you partakers of our plenty." Then, " fresh cod in the summer is but coarse meat with us ;" and then such an array of strawberries, gooseberries, raspberries, plums, and roses, (Heaven save the mark !) as makes the very mouth of the reader water.t (Mass. H. Coll. 2d ser. ix. 60-62.) * See Anc. Col. Laws, edit. 1814, p. 11, near the bottom. This is admitted by Bancroft, i. 343. f Winslow is a Puritan author of much celebrity ; and Mr. Young quotes largely from hira, in the compilation of his Chronicles. But it should be carefully under- stood, that an honest Puritan contemporary accuses him of telling in one of hia tracts, no less than ^^ forty lies.'' Hutch. Hist. i. 470. i Compare the humiliating apology poor John Pratt had to make, for writing NOTES. 485 No doubt the Puritans, having another object in view, could talk in a different style, after the fashion of their amusing and self-depreciating petition to Parliament in 1651, (see Hutchinson's Hist. i. 448,) when they were afraid Parliament would put obstacles in the way of " trading roundly ;"* and wherein we have a studious display of their poverty, though the next year they established a mint to coin their own money ! (Holmes' Annals, i. 297.) But as they have told two very different stories, they cannot complain if their observers believe which of the two they please ; both standing upon equal authority ! However, perhaps I may as well inform my reader, how some at least of the explanations of Puritan sufferings have become current. They were sick at first ; as they were likely to be, in a new climate and an uncleared country, if surrounded with all life's appliances and means — And the mistake is, multitudes suppose they continued sick, no one knows how long. But let us hear an impartial annalist. " They found all the people they left so ill, lusty and well for all their poverties, except six that died." (J. Smith's Gen. Hist. edit. 1819, ii. 228.) They arrived in 1620, and Smith's date is about a year later ! Then writers like Belknap have helped this on. He pretends to quote Smith thus : " About an hundred Brownists went to New Plymouth ; whose humorous ignorance caused them to endure a wonderful deal of misery with infinite patience." (Belknap's Biog. i. 317.) Now the gen- uine sentence is as follows ; the words altered or omitted being put*in italics for the sake of distinction. " About some hundred of your Brown- ists, of England, Amsterdam, and Leyden, went to New Plymouth ; whose humorous ignorances caused them, for more than a year, to endure a wonderful deal of misery with an infinite patience." (Smith's Gen. Hist. i. 263.) Is this the man who presumed so condescendingly to excuse Gov. Hutchinson for an " inattention," which he is quite willing, any one can see, to have imputed to a worse fault ] (Belknap's Biog. ii, 158.) He leaves out the very pith and core of Smith's sentence, " for more than a year," that we may suppose the sufferings of the Puritans were of the severest and most protracted kind. And now may I not fairly say, it is easy to see how, in compositions less grave than history, (orations, poems, &c.,) still more partial representations have been made ? home that New England was a wretched place to live in.— Savage's Wint. i. 173. — Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d Ser. vii. 126. * Among other things, the tariff was too high. The tide is now turned, and New England would fain see the Parliament back, to make the tariff a little higher. She should remember, however, that a high tariff ia contrary to good Puritan doctriue. 486 NOTES. NOTE 77, p. 142. These oaths were not taken till 1676, when the Charter was trembling under a threatened Quo Warranto. (Hutchinson, i. 289.) On the con- trary, there was a law forbidding any oath " but such as the General Court hath considered, allowed, and required" ; and another requiring allegiance to Massachusetts, " by the great name of the ever-living God." The King is nowhere alluded to. (See Anc. Col. Laws, p. 171.)* But when they wanted his Charters, they were his ** most humble subjects and suppliants." NOTE 78, p. 142. I have already remarked, that the king had expressly reserved to him- self the right of prohibiting any person from settUng in Massachusetts, (See note 75.) So his prohibition was but one of those chartered provi- sions, for which Massachusetts was so pertinaciously zealous. She there fore had no right to complain ; especially after having run away with the Charter itself. But now, let us look at the actual prohibition. It may be found in Hazard's Coll. i. 421. It is levelled against "promiscuous and disorderly departing out of the realm." It required that a subsidy man, i. e., a taxa- ble man, one of the upper classes, should not go without license from his Majesty's Commissioners for Plantations ; and that one under a subsidy- man, i. e., one of humble life, and likely to be made a tool of, that he should show, before he went, that he had taken the oaths of supremacy and allegiance, and could produce a certificate from his minister of his " conformity to," not his " approbation of," the orders and discipline of the Church of England. As for the upper classes, they were " assured from some of the Council, that his Majesty did not intend to impose the ceremonies of the Church of England upon them, for that it was consid- ered it was for the sake of freedom from those things the people went over thither." (Hutchinson's Hist. i. 37. Hubbard's N. Eng. p. 154.)t So it is clear, all the king wanted, was to be assured the emigrants would be loyal. He and his ministry were justly alarmed, to find that the Charter bad been gone from England, for years, without their know- ledge. (Chalmers' Revolt of the Amer. Col., i. 44, 49. Hutch. Hist., 1. 37. Savage's Wint., i. 135, 137.) They wanted an immediate and effectual stop put to such a state of things. They were determined none * "They acknowledged no standard but their own charter." — Washburn's Ju- dicial Histoiy of Massachusetts, p. 83. t The Charter did not grant even religious freedom, according to Judge Story. — Bancroft, i. 343. NOTES, 487 should leave England, to plot against her. And this self-defensive act was the quintessence of persecution ! ! And lastly, to crown my climax, behold the Puritans themselves doing the same thing, soon after they got over — actually trying to stop people from leaving Massachusetts, and that without making any exception about licenses, and throwing the whole colony into a ferment because they can- not compass their point! (See Chalmers' Annals, p. 160. Sav. Wint., i. 140.) And then, to make the cordon complete, actually passing laws prohibiting the entrance of strangers upon their jurisdiction, and that, too, the very year the king endeavored to prevent the departure of those, who would set him and his government at defiance ; and still be all the while pretending to act under his chartered protection ! ! (See Savage's Wint., i. 224. Hutch. Hist. i. 63. Anc. Col. Laws, pp. 191, 192.) NOTE 79, p. 158. President Quincy is one of the most frank authorities upon this sub- ject, that I have been able to find. He does not mince the matter, but says plumply, that the Puritans had " an utter detestation of the English hierarchy, service, and discipline." Moreover, he does not give them much credit for the Arabella letter, or any of their professions of friend- ship or allowance for the Church of England. He admits, what it is most hnportant for me to notice, that they could be guilty of duplicity, and even of falsehood, to gain their ends. " Though compelled by cir- cumstances, sometimes to conceal, and sometimes to deny this antipathy, it was in truth one of the master-passions in the breasts of those early emigrants, [he cannot say Pilgrims,] and constitutes a principal clew to their language, conduct, policy, and laws." (Harv. Univer., i. 351.) I have no doubt of the entire truth of the venerable President's statement ; but I could not, as he appears to do, hold in lofty estimation, men who could conceal the existence of a master-passion — a passion spread over and tinging all their words and works — and when close pressed, stoutly deny it. This to me is downright Jesuitry ; or plain equivocation and lying, disguise it rhetorically as you will.* I do not understand how a man is compelled, by circumstances which affect his worldly interest, to be guilty of such things. There is a plain Scripture for tlds subject, if not for all the peculiarities of Congregationalism, as I am perfectly ready to concede. And it is this : " Thou shalt not bear false witness." * The Puritans themselves, of course, could not be expected to'see this ; fo Mr. Washburn assures us their very courts proceeded upon the loosest principles. " The courts of the colony seem to have paid little regard to the ordinary rules of evi- dence."—Judicial History of Massachusetts, p. 55. 488 NOTES. NOTE 80, p. 162. Mr. Brattle, in 1696, forbade a layman to officiate at hia ordination. It was a deviation, says President Quincy, " from the established practice of the early Congregational churches." (Harv. Univer., i. 88, 89, comp. p. 489.) The so-called leather-mitten ordination proves, incontestably, the interference of the laity at Congregational ordinations. This was the ordination of Israel Chauncey, son of President Chauncey, and set- tled at Stratford, Connecticut. Here the brethren insisted on their right to lay on hands ; in doing which one forgot to take off his leather mit- ten. Hence the name of the ordination. " It was not long after this,'' says Dr. Eliot, in his Dictionary, " that in Connecticut and Massachusetts the clergy deprived the brethren of this privilege." " But," adds he, with a perfect consciousness of the peculiarities of the Congregational system, " could we now refuse them if they insisted upon it V (Eliot's Biog. Diet., p. 101. Pierce's Hist. Harv. Univer., p. 163. Compare Mass. Hist. Coll., 2d ser., i. 166.) The editor of the Cambridge Platform of 1829 tries to get over a second and third ordination of the same person, upon his having a second or third congregation, by saying that the Platform makes no difference " between Ordination and Installation." (See Platform, 1829, p. 43.)* No difference indeed 1 It knows no such thing as an Installation — that is a modern manufacture, to cover up the absurdity of ordaining the same person (if need be) half a dozen times over. The Platform speaks of a man ordained a second time over a new congregation, as " again orderly called unto office ••" by a second imposition of hands, also, and not as called unto a new place for an old office. Thus my readers will see the Congregationalists are ignorant of their own sj^stem, or artfully try to hide its defects. But no wonder : they can conceal or deny systematic- ally, as President Quincy tells us, when circumstances require. * Mr. Felt tries the same game. See his Annals of Salem, p. 207. But the ar- tifice is too shallow for a Churchman. He understands the mysteries of ordination, &c., too well. The Congregationalists never impose hands at an Installation, any more than a bishop at an Institution. Moreover, such efforts as these of the Editor of the Platform, and of Mr. Felt, are shown to be superlatively effete, by a contem- porary publication of the Prssbyterians, levelled against the old Platform itself: I allude to the Jus Divinum Jifinisterii Evangelici of 1654. There the Congregational- ists are duly taken to task, for the allowance of double, treble, &;c. ardinaticms— not a word about installation ; showing how modern a coinage that is. " Interpretatio con- temporanea fortissima est." So Mr. Editor and Mr. Felt amount to nothing. — See Jus Divinum, Part First, pp. 145, etc. It may be well enough to add here, that Bingham says these double and treble ordi- nations are a device and practice of Geneva. Calvin, whose ordination of any sort has been doubted, might willingly encouiago such a practice.— Biogbam's VVorlu, ix. 308. NOTES. 489 The fact is, a genuine Congregationalist considers himself not only as out of office, when he leaves a particular congregation, but out of the Church, too, till he unites himself with a new congregation ! ! Thus " Mr. Lathrop, who had been pastor of a private congregation in London," when he came over to Boston, durst not receive their Eucharist, although present at the ceremony, till he had been again taken formally into com- munion. (Sav, Wint. i. 144.) Dr. Eliot in his Diet. p. 5^3, says, " He met the ideas of our^fathers upon this subject," and that Master Cotton (then not over) rebuked them for it. " I am constrained," he said, " to bear witness against your judgment and practice, that you think no man may be admitted to the sacrament, though a member of the Catholic Church, except he be a member of some particular church."* Master Cotton, it seems, had some little leaven of churchmanship left in him, till he reached Boston. Then he soon got rid of the uncomfortable exotic. To add another authority upon this curious subject. A magistrate visiting Salem, had a child born there. He wanted baptism for his in- fant, and the Communion for himself; and was refused both ! (Felt's Salem, p. 526.) Here Cotton broke out, and showed his aristocratical tem- per, (he was then in Boston,) by saying that a godly magistrate had a right, as a magistrate, to the seals of the Covenant, be he where he might. This is farcical enough, and should be well remembered by all those Pu- ritans, who have berated the administration of the Communion to new- made magistrates in England — a thing, however, now done away with. NOTE 81, p. 163. This subject of re-ordination puzzles the Editor of Winthrop's Jour- nal, for he says " ordination by a bishop must have been thought valid." " But how it should be a sin, yet a valid entrance to the Christian minis- try, can be explained only by such timid casuists as humbled themselves for their act in submitting to it." (Sav. Wint. i. 217, note.) Now timidity in casuistry, or Jesuitry, according to President Quincy,was one of Puritanism's most infrequent sins. The Hon. Mr. Savage will find the clue to help him out of his trouble, in the clear quotation of Mr. Felt. Such ministers of the Church of England as could prove they had a call from their people, should be considered as ministers ; a bishop out of the question. Such as had nothing but an Episcopal ordination to back them, * They did worse than that, they would not baptize Mr. Coddington's child, be- cause, though a member of the Church of England, and one of the signers of the Arabella Letter, he had not subscribed to their new covenant. So they accounted a membership in the Church of England, as nothing after all. — Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. 17, note. 490 NOTES. should humble themselves and repent.* This was clearly making a mere Episcopal ordination a sin, and a matter also of supreme indifference and contempt — in fact, a perfect immorality, if not a fearful crime. And this, the true Congregational theory makes just as necessary as ever.t So if Congregationalists do now, in spite of their system, allow Episcopal ordi- nation, we owe no thanks to their system for this seeming condescension. NOTE 82, p. 166. It is no uncommon thing for Congregational ministers to become laymen, in the view of their own people. Thus I have a sermon by " The Rev. Edward Everett," late our ambassador to England — another by " The Rev. Jared Sparks," the biographer of Washington, &.c., late editor of the North American Review — and a whole volume, by the " Rev. J. G. Palfrey, D. D., LL. D.," now secretary of state of Massa- chusetts ! These things look strange — outre — to a Churchman ; but they are all in keeping with the strictest Congregationalism ; for, singular as it may seem, the Unitarians, as mere Congregationalists, are stricter than the Calvinists. NOTE 83, p. 172. Higginson's action as a lajTtian is an abundant denial to Dr. Allen's assenion, p. 225 of his Dictionary, that T. Carter's case is the only un- doubted one of lay ordination. Dr. A. forgets the principle on which * It was a gad thing with the Puritans, that the Presbyterians did not always be- wail and renounce their Episcopal ordinations. " A man may come into 40 places, where they are preaching and praying even upon days of humiliation, and yet never hear them bewaile (among multitudes of other sinnes they confesse) this particular evill of their Antichristian ordination." — Bartlet's Congregational Way, p. 120, and its own italics. — Compare Ball's Answer, p. 125, to Ctinne, the successor of the Mr. Lathrop mentioned in Note 80. People have naw not the slightest idea of the excessive scrupulosity of the Puri- tans, about a right to administer sacraments. It was questioned even, whether the teacher of a congregation could baptize ; many supposing the 'pastor only compe- tent to do it. — Cotton's Way of the Churches, edit. 1645. p. 67. — Moreover. Arch- bishop Whitgift said that not Puritans only, but Continental Protestants generally, would not acknowledge Episcopal ordination in his day, but insisted upon re-ordina- tion.—See Brett on Tradition, Pt. i. p. 49. London, 1718. How. with what semblance of propriety, can they complain of Episcopalians, whose forefathers were thus hostile to our ministry as an utter nullity, or what is worse, a most grievous sin .'j t It was no new thing to cast contempt on Episcopal ordination, in the days of early New England history. It began even in the reign of Q.ueen Elizabeth. — Soame's Elizabeth, p. 255. Comparo Nichols' Def. of the Church of England, p. SO. —Bingham's Works, ix. 239. NOTES. 49 J that ordination was performed, viz., on that of the entire competency of the brethren to do such an act, and that Congregational ministers were present who made no objection. He forgets himself too, for, on p. 464, he says Mr. Hooker also had lay ordination. He forgets the ordination of Mr. Higginson's son in 1660, when Major Hathome and two other brethren (they kept the canon of the Council of Nice in having three ordainers) laid on hands, and " the messengers of the churches," some beyond a doubt ministers, offered no scruple at their exclusion, as a lay brother afterwards did at his. (See Hutchinson's Hist. i. 374, 375 ; and Quincy's Harv. Univ. i. 489.) He forgets Dr. Belknap's defence of Dr. Freeman's ordination by the laymen of King's Chapel, on the score of 'principle. (See Greenwood's K. Chapel, p. 195.) He forgets, too, such cases as Trumbull gives in his Connecticut, i. 286 ; where the brethren ordain in spite of the ministers, and in contempt of their prerogative. Nevertheless, the zeal of Dr. Allen to gloss this matter over, shows us where another of Congregationalism's sensitive spots and weak points may be known to lie. NOTE 84, p. 181. " Other principles and opinions." I am taught by experience to weigh the words of a Puritan author, as I would those of a Jesuit. Hubbard died, as I state, in 1704 ; and was born in 1621. He could not be unacquainted with so notorious a book* as Edward Johnson's " Wonderworking Providence," published in 1654. Yet in that book, Churchmen are stigmatized as one in a sevenfold class of " sectaries," with whom the Puritans are warned " never to make league ;" and indeed warned never to tolerate, but to " lay out" their " coin for pow- der, bullets, match, arms of all sorts," to keep such pestilent heretics away. (Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d ser. ii. 58, 59.) And now, forsooth, Hubbard knows no one among the Puritans, who did not always regard the Church of England with filial affection. But the end of my climax is yet to come. Johnson tries the same game, and would fain undo his own words. He tries to meet the accu- sation that the Puritans were persecutors. He denies the charge. He says they never persecuted heretics ; they only " endeavored to expel all such beasts of prey." (Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d ser. iv. 22.) Thank you. Captain Johnson.t Then England never persecuted the Puritans, she * " Of great value," says Allen in his Diet. p. 496. ■f Johnson figured among the Puritan militia. He was one of the forty who ar- rested and dragged poor Gorton to Boston. Allen's Diet. p. 496. 492 NOTES. only endeavored to drive them away — or, at any rate, to keep them from eating herself up. This is Puritan logic ; for we have seen specimens of the same in Mr. Bancroft and Dr. Hawes. But it is less creditable than Cromwell's, who once, at least, spent his force on things and not on persons. " Upon the surrender of a town in Ireland, the popish governor insisted upon an article for liberty of conscience. Cromwell said, * He meddled with no man's conscience ; but if by liberty of conscience the governor meant the liberty of the mass, he had express orders from the Parliament of Eng- land against admitting any such liberty at all.' " One can smile at Cromwell's logic, for it has real ingenuity ; and as Swift admits, from whom I quote it, genuine force. The other is mere Jesuitical evasion. (See Dean Swift's Thoughts on Religion, near the end. Or, Works, xiv. 160.) NOTE 85, p. 163. The Browns are perpetuated by an inscription on a handsome marble tablet in St. Peter's church, Salem, Mass., of which the following is a copy. " In memory of John and Samuel Bro^s*n, members of the Massa- chusetts Company, A. D. 1628 ; the former of the first Court of Asast- ants, and both members of the first council ; to w^hose intrepidity in the cause of religious freedom, this, the first Episcopal Society gathered in New England, imder God owed its establishment, in the year of our Lord 1629: and in memory of Philip English, who, in the year 1733, pre- sented the land on which this edifice is erected ; this tablet is inscribed in the year 1S33, as a grateful memorial of their devotion to the cause of Christianity, and to the ritual of the Protestant Episcopal Church." NOTE 86, p. 190. The writer is clear enough that Puritanism would not allow a man to be a freeholder, or a voter, unless he belonged to the Puritan church establishment. " Notwithstanding," says a writer of the known reputa- tion of the Hon. Mr. Everett, " we are indebted to them [the Puritans] for two great principles" — one of which is " the separation of church and state." (Everett's Orations, p. 225. And so Bancroft, i. 348.) WTiy, as I have elsewhere shown. Episcopal Virginia began with our present democratical boast — universal sulfrage — while church and state were not entirely severed in Massachusetts till 1834 ! Is it strange, is it at all strange, if (to let Mr. Bancroft pass,) a writer of Gov. Everett's wide-spread reputation can either make such mistakes, or perpetuate NOTES. 493 them, that thousands of humbler minds should be utterly deceived about the genuine character of Puritan history ? I may be thought presumptuous, in impeaching such a name as Mr. Everett's. I take shelter, therefore, behind a greater. Justice Story* distinctly says, that " the fundamental error of our ancestors, an error which began with the very settlement of the colony, was a doctrine which has since been happily exploded ; I mean the necessity of a union between church and state. To this they clung as the ark of their safety.' (Story's Miscell. p. 66.) And is it from such men that we learn to separate church and state — nay, as Bancroft hardily represents it, to separate them entirely ? Why one could as soon endorse the sopho- more's syllogism, " Moses was the meekest man ; but Jonah lay in the whale's belly ; therefore David killed Goliah." NOTE 87, p. 197. Laud's severity is of course a hackneyed topic. Yet Archbp. Abbot, who, as Rapin says, (ii. 179,) " Was even suspected and accused of being a Puritan," was severer than he was ! ! Laud was not a man to deal in generalities and slang, like his accu- sers ; so when charged with severity, he went to the Records of the High- Commission Court to ascertain the facts. Archbp. Abbot was arch- bishop, he says, twenty-one years :t he himself, before his commitment to the tower, was archbishop seven years. Yet, he says, he found in the records, that three more censures, deprivations, &.c., were inflicted in every seven of Archbp. Abbot's term of twenty-one years, than in his own term of seven simply. So all his official life, (and the scrutiny is a fair specimen of Laud's accuracy,) Archbp. Abbot, the Puritan, was severer than Archbp. Laud, the high-churchman ! ! (See Laud's Trou- bles, p. 164.) Still, Archbp. Abbot was highly popular with the Puritanical party. And now, what does all this show, but that a man might act as a high- churchman, a persecutor, or almost any body, so long as he would secretly countenance Puritan orthodoxy 1 But this is just what a Jesuit would allow. And so here is another of the many, many points of resemblance, between the Puritan-Protestant and the Puritan-Papist. * Neal's New England, too, shows that even the system of tithes was resorted to, and actually argued against the Quakers ! See also Note 8 j and Blagden's ad- mission which produced it. Neal's N. E. ii. 367. f The Ap. was an archbishop for 23 years ; yet in consequence of his accident- ally killing a man, when hunting, his faculties were for a while suspended. It is not surprising that he became an enemy to field-sports. 22 494 NOTES. NOTE 88, p. 199. Hubbard stretches verbal truth to the utmost, or tells a downright untruth, when he says no authority but the king;'s was ever recognized in Massachusetts, during Cromwell's usurpation !* (N. Eng. pp. 575, 576. Compare Hutchinson's Coll. p. 326.) His language is Jesuitical, and he means, probably, that Massachusetts de jure never recognized any thing but her own charter, which was given by royal authority .t But under such a cover to attack the disloyalty of her sister colonies, is, I will not say to be wanting in courtesy, it is to be wanting in honesty. For de facto Massachusetts (see Note 72,) could pay heed enough to Cromwell's commands — nay, she could be his pander, to sell his Scotch enemies into slavery " for six, seven, or eight years." (Hutchinson's Collect, p. 235. )t And yet I have known this treatment of the Scotch extolled as a mercy ! It is so extolled by Master Cotton, on the very page quoted ; because the Scotch whom Cromwell shipped over to New England after the battle of Dunbar, were not sold into " perpetuall servi- tude." Oh, let it be noted as an example, that Puritanism, in its tender mercy, sells white prisoners into six, seven, or eight years' slavery — poor Indians, whom its main chartered duty it was to convert to Christianity, it sells for life !§ NOTE 89, p. 206. This idea is not a conjuration of fancy. Boston used to be a noisy place for carts, &c., if it is not still. In 1749, (see Prov. Laws, folio, p. * No authority but the king's ! Why they proclaimed a fast to preserve Crom- well from "ranters, Quakers, and plotters;" and that the Lord might help him •gainst Antichrist: that is, I suppose, against prelacy. — Felt's Salem, pp. 192, 193. f " All agreed," says Winthrop, when the nature of their constitution was de- bated, "that our charter was the foundation of our government." But Dr. Bentley gays they disregarded the patent. — M. P. Coll. 1st ser. viii. 2.— Sav. Wint. ii. 279. X Doubtless they got them cheap enough. Cromwell sold prisoners for twelve pence a head. — Walker's Hist. Independency, Ft. i. 95. Compare p. 144 3 also, Pt. il 62, and Pt. iii. 26.— Also Dugdale's Short View, p. 577. $ Hubbard's testimony is curious enough, at the best ; and at one moment since writing this note 1 was ready to condemn him for downright falsehood, when I fount! Chalmers, in his Revolt of the Colonies, saying that Massachusetts doomed to death any one, who took up arms for the King against the Parliament. (Revolt, i. 86.) But CD p. 91 , he says Massachusetts never formally acknowledged Cromwell after all — only she asked favors of him, and dodged his claims. So upon the whole, as this is quite characteristic, I must let Master Hubbard go, and refer to Note 72. — Mr. Savage's note (Wint. ii. 247,) can be compared with this, and also p. 300, same volume which shows that no legal instruments were, in early days, allowed to run in the king's name. Also, p. 100, to show how the oath of allegiance was rejected. And they, all the while, truly loyal ! NOTES. 495 63,) a law had actually to be passed, to keep carts, &,c., from disturbing the Legislature. NOTE 90, p. 206. Snow, in his history of Boston, alludes to the principle on which prayer at funerals had been abstained from, viz., " lest it might in time introduce the customs of the English Church." (p. 92.) Upon a similar principle, Calvin forbade it in his society at Geneva, (The Phoenix, ii. 267 ;) and Knox in the Kirk of Scotland. (Knox's Liturgy. Cumming's edit. p. 105.) The Puritans, in the Directory of the days of the Commonwealth, did the same ; (Neal, iii. 170, and v. 344 ;) and I am sorry to say, this is a fault from which even the Huguenots were not free. (Quick's Synod- icon, i. p. xliv. Compare, however, Bingham's explanation of this. — Wks. ix. 206.) Thus it is, that an effort to avoid superstition sometimes begets irrev- erence. Surely the proper way to cure a wrong praying over the dead, or for the dead, cannot be to pray not at all.* Yet we see about all Protes- tants, save those of the Church of England, fell into this mistake, and have had to retrace their steps. There is another error about an occasional religious ceremony, into which, so far as I know, the Puritans alone fell. This was to allow none but magistrates to solemnize marriages. (See Snow's Boston as before, p. 1 92.) At the instance of their first Episcopal governor, this was corrected ; but the result of the old practice has been the low and mischievous doc- trine, that marriage is but a civil contract merely. Hence the ease with which divorces are granted, in Connecticut and elsewhere. (Remarks on a Rev. of Inchiquin's Letters, pp. 128, 129.) For modern views of the mere worldly, secular character of marriage, we have then to thank the Puritans ! And this is the way to cure the superstition of Papists, who call matrimony a sacrament, and of Prelatists, who marry by a priest and with a ring ! ! NOTE 91, p. 209. It is not true, however, that the Baptists were entirely free from burdens, till after the American Revolution — nor then, indeed. (See Benedict's Baptists, i. 381, and further onward in the same vol. Also vol. ii. 482-86.) * The way, however, to avoid superstition about fish-eating was different. Dun-fish is excellent, so it would not answer to give it up. Therefi)re the Puritan way of eating fish is, to eat it Saturday instead of Friday. There are no better dun- fish in the world, than in the land of the Puritans. This I know. 496 NOTES. While upon this subject, I cannot forbear mentioning a most curious fact. It is well known that the Revolution grew out of the resistance of the Colonies to their taxation by England. The Puritans should have been the last to repudiate such taxation ; for they hesitated not to tax English property y whenever they could, by any pretence, lay their hands on it. Mr. Felt admits, that so early as 1639, "they ordered persons here, and through the Colony, who owned estates in England, to be taxed for them." (Felt's Salem, p. 121.) And these are the people who raised such a hue and cry against taxa- tion without representation I* Were these persons who owned estates in England allowed to vote in Puritan councils ? Never, unless they owned the Puritan covenant. Without that qualification, they could not be so much as freemen. t Yet without representation, without a title to so much as the elective franchise, they might be taxed for estates situated under another government, 3000 miles away, and taxed over again under that government, for its legitimate support. And this in the land of liberty, and by the fiat of the refugees of persecution ! This by men, to whom the taxation of England, (looked upon by England as but an equiv- alent for charter privileges,) was a usurpation, the most monstrous the heavens ever saw ! NOTE 92, p. 212. Myself doubtless will be esteemed most prejudiced. I therefore quote the Hon. Mr. Savage. " Put not your faith in Mather," he says. (Sav. Wint. ii. 331, note.) Moreover, he adds, this saying will become an axiom. t President Quincy, in his Hist. Harv. Univ., vol. i. pp. 91, 156, shows how the records of the College could be tampered with, and false facts made out to suit a purpose. Such things abundantly warrant the low faith I sometimes put in Puritan authorities, and the suspicions I have thrown upon them. \i ti public address of Puritan ministers could, as Quincy (i. 156) most satisfactorily shows, tell a palpable fib ; then Puri- * It must be remembered, that I apply this language to the Puritans only. 1 agree to the doctrine of our forefathers, that taxation and representation should go together, and I believe in their complaints of grievances. But I see not how tha Puritans could complain of England's conduct, when they had already set her the example. t And this, as usual, is an imitation of Popery. The theory of Popery is, that government is founded in grace, and so none but the gracious must have a share in it. Massachusetts was once taught this sharp lesson in her own legislature. — See Leland's Speech. Benedict's Baptists, ii. 485. X Compare Edwards' Mss. history, quoted in Benedict's Baptists, i. 469. NOTES. 497 tan ecclesiastical documents are to be watched, as the " European Set- tlements" said the Pilgrims were in Holland. The conclusion is una- Toidable ; for confidence (as many seem not to be aware) is not, and cannot be, a voluntary thing. NOTE 93, p. 224. Gov. Andross, as we see, has been bitterly censured for this act. But he did first, what they said they did with the Quakers — tried to coax, and found it ineffectual. Moreover, at the worst, he did but exercise the prerogative awarded him by Thomas, " the judicious Hooker" of New England. " The supreme magistrate hath liberty and power, both to inquire and judge of professions and religions, which is true and ought to be maintained, which is false and ought to be rejected." (Sur- vey of Church Discipline, Pt. iv. p. 57.) Such discipline as this Puritan Solomon sanctions, would have allowed Andross to shut up the Old South altogether, except for his own use. It is hard for me to believe the severe comments of the Puritans on Andross, for his administration in Massachusetts.* Dr. Allen in his Dic- tionary, (art. Andross,) who is caustic in his remarks on him, admits that, previously, as Governor of New- York, and afterwards, as Governor of Virginia, he behaved very well. Burk says he had " a sound judgment and a liberal policy," and was " of a conciliating deportment and of great generosity." (Burk's Va. ii. 316.) Even Allen concedes that he hegan fairly in Massachusetts. And, now, what was one of his foremost and heaviest offences ] Why, that the Charter being vacated, their legal title to lands was gone, and they must have a new one. And what if he so held ? Well might I say, imitating Mr. Greenwood, * What a retribution ! Think of the days of Roger Williams !' Was it not their very own, darling doctrine against poor Roger and the Indians, that the royal charter gave them a title to Massachusetts soil ? did they not maintain this dor-trine, to the sad detriment of both ? and if the doc- trine were true, did not all the Charter gave, depart with it when it died? and what then did Andross do, but use their own position against them- selves 1 I should be loath to say, that the sufferings of the Puritans under Andross were Heaven's vindication of Williams and the Aborigines ; but if I had a Puritan tact at interpreting and applying Scripture, I should do so without hesitation. And at any rate, if the chief sin of Andross * Mr. Washburn, in his Judicial History, (p. 94, etc.) condemns Andross severely as a matter of course. Yet, on p. 104, he admits that he improved the forms of jus- tice. He forgets that one of the old forms, by his own stricture, (p. 55,) was to pay " little regard to the ordinary rules of evidence." 498 NOTES. were, as stated, and if the materials he had to operate upon were as cross-grained, as I am sure they were, I should be rather disposed to judge his character by the testimony of New-York and Virginia, than by that of Puritanical Massachusetts. NOTE 94, p. 244. I have hinted that something might be expected from me, to show that the Puritans, " for all their poverties," as Capt. Smith says, were quite as much given to the fashions of the world, as some of far humbler pretensions than they made — such pretensions, e. g., as John Higginson's, about being a member of the purest among pure churches. I am told that some who have examined the exuvia Puritanica, at the museum of the Antiquarian Society at Worcester, Mass., have looked on, mute with wonder, to find the Puritans guilty of so much external splendor. I should expect to find such splendor there ; for so early as 1634, according to Mr. Felt, their devotion to " new and immodest fash- ions" became intolerable, and a subject for legislation. (Felt's Salem, pp. 70, 71.) Accordingly, all the canonical thunder which could be mustered was discharged " at the ordinary, [mark, reader, it was every -day fashions which were to be laid aside — on Sunday, I beg pardon, on the Sabbath, I suppose they could be worn still,] the ordinary wearing of silver, gold, and silk laces, girdles, hat-bands, &c. Also, that no person, either man or woman, [alas, the men were in the scrape — the ladies are not always the " weaker vessels," at least on Puritan soil,] shall make, or buy, any slashed clothes, other than one slash in each sleeve, and another in the back. Also, all cut works, embroidered or needle-worked caps, bands^ and rayles." [A rayl, or rail, old N. Bailey says, is a sort of short cloak worn by women : perhaps what we now call " cardinals."] " Also, all gold or silver girdles, hat-bands, belts, rufis, beaver hats, are prohibited to be bought and worn." Also, another discharge is made against " im- moderate great sleeves, slash apparel, immoderate great rayles, long wings, &.C." And now, would one believe that these are the habits of people, but yesterday feeding on parched corn and clams ? Why Broadway itself, with all its gay and glittering stores, would hardly furnish out their wardrobe i And they are so " immoderate," their " wings" are so insufferably " long," that even legislative violence has to pluck their plumes ! But I doubt, I gravely doubt, after all, whether the Legislature with its would-be om- nipotence did much.* Let us see what Boston was, near the close of ♦ They tried hard another time, in 1651, and in this way. "They declare, that ' intolerable exceasc and bravery hath crept in upon us, and especially among people NOTES. 499 this same auspicious century, and when my testifier assures me it enjoyed " the ft-ee liberty of the [Puritanic] Gospel." " All sorts," I must beg my reader to note the words," All sorts of calicoes, aligers, remwalls, muslin, silks for clothing and linings ; [even linings, it seems, must be silk too ;] all sorts of drugs proper for the apothecaries, and all sorts of spice, are ven- dible with us." (Mass. Hist. Coll., 3d ser. vii. 203, 209.) Also, " For musk, bezoar, pearl, and diamond, I believe some of them may sell well." These are the cool, calculating answei-s of a Massachusetts merchant to his distant brother, who wanted to know how to invest his money for a Boston cargo. So it seems a Puritan Legislature could no more keep out fashion than it could keep out heresy ; and that their degenerate con- stituents, (of course church-members,) were seeking to perfume themselves with musk, and shine in the diamonds of Golconda, I have, on another occasion, (Note 90,) shown that no prayers were allowed at Puritanic funerals, " lest it might in time introduce the customs of the English Church." It is proper for me, in this note, to show what was allowed. I quote Mr. Felt, for so low a date as 1685. " Voted, that some persons be appointed to look to the burning of the wine and heat- ing of the cider, against the time appointed for the funeral. The expense of the occasion was £17 19s., exclusive of clothing for the minister's family. [This at even a minister's fiineral, be it remembered !]* Among the articles provided were thirty-two gallons of wine, and a larger quan- tity of cider, with one hundred and four pounds of sugar, [very dear ia of mean conditioo ; and their utter detestation and dislike, that men of mean condi- tions and callings phould take upon them the garb of gentlemen, by wearing gold or silver lace, or buttons, or points at their knees, to walk in great boots, or women of the same ranke, to wear silk or tiffany hoods or scarfs : which, though allowable to per- sons of greater estates, or more liberal education, they judge it intolerable in persons of such like condition.^ " They then go on to enact, that if worth two hundred pounds, or a magistrate, parson, &c., a man might be a Puritan dandy ; or his wife and daugh- ters, Puritan dandizettes. (See Coffin's Newburyport, p. 55, and Holmes's Annals, i. 579 ; though Holmes, ut modo, leaves out the worst parts.) What have New Englanders more complained of, at the present day, than the sup- posed intention of the democrats, to excite a hatred of the poor against the rich 1 We now see, where this hatred was first taught systematically to Americans. A more detestable law than the above, or one better calculated to array the humbler classes of society against the richer, cannot be found in the annals of despotism. Yet such a law Puritans sanction, in the height of their glory ; for the next year they had a mint ! Dr. Holmes is mistaken, in supposing the law from Stow's Chronicle, an example for this. That did not, with legislative solemnity, teach the poor to hate the wealthy: it only pruned dandyism at large. It did not teach, either, " an utter detestation and dislike" of those, who, unfortunately were not worth " the true and indifferent sura of two hundred pounds." * In 1739, Mr. Felt says, the expenses were ten times greater ! So then they must have consumed 320 gallons of wine. &c. 500 NOTES. those times,] and about four dozen gloves." (Felt's Ipswich, pp. 198, 199.) I might go on to show, what was allowed in this way at ordinations also, but perhaps the note is too long already. NOTE 95, p. 244. Mention has already been made, on p. 21, of the mission of Puritan ministers to Virginia. But Virginia did not want them, and sent them away. This was a thing which President Quincy, &c., would earnestly defend, if done by them. See now how they viewed it. Prelatic super- Btitution is one of their hackneyed themes : they accounted the awful in- cursion of Opechancanough and his savages, as the just punishment of the irreverent Episcopal colony. It sent away Puritan ministers, who would surely have stirred up a faction, " chusing rather," so testifies one of the purest of pure church-members, " the fellowship of their drunken com- panions, and a priest of their own profession, who could hardly continue so long sober, as till he could read them the reliques of man's invention in a common prayer book." (Mass. Hist. Coll., 2d ser., viii. 30, 31.) But it is wrong, very wrong, say my Puritan critics, to revive such bitter things — better cover them with the mantle of oblivion. Not to say that poor Ap. Laud never yet received the ravellings of that mantle from their hands, I have merely to add, this is an old argument, and has had an old reply. As I have revived one of the '* bitter things," I will revive the answer too, and let the matter go. " You desire," say the Rhode Islanders of Providence, in 1722, to an association of Puritan ministers of Massachusetts, of all of them per- haps, " that all former injuries done by you to us, may be buried in obliv- ion. We say, far be it from us to avenge ourselves, or to deal to you as you have dealt to us, but rather to say with our Lord, Father , forgive them, for they know not what they do I But if you mean that we should not speak of former actions, done hurtfully to any man's person, we say God never called for that, nor suffered to be so done ; as witness Cain, Joab, and Judas, which are upon record to deter other men from doing the like." (Benedict's Baptists, i. 471.) NOTE 96, p. 250. The Winthrops were a suspected race. There was a book of Com- mon Prayer in the library of one of them, and it was eaten by mice ; though bound up with some other books, which were left untouched. (Sav. Wint., ii. 20.) This was a formidable disaster, and Gov. Winthrop is obliged to put it into his journal. No doubt it was a sad thing, to own NOTES. 501 such a doleful volume, and so he must record Heaven's judgment against it, to save his own reputation. But we may content ourselves with Mr. Savage's better than German criticism : " If the cat had been in Win- throp's library, she might have prevented the stigma on the common prayer." NOTE 97, p. 255. I have made no search for the presents given to Endicott. While looking for other things, I have accidentally noticed, that Massachusetts gave him the amount of a splendid plantation, more than 1300 acres of land — sold him another of 1000 acres, for some eighteen pence an acre — pensioned his widow, and endowed his son. This, surely, among a people who counted pennies, evinced a very rich estimation of him. (See Felt's Salem, pp. 57, 120, 179, 195, 206, 211, 239.) NOTE 98, p, 258. This boring the tongue with a red-hot iron, whether actually inflicted by Massachusetts or not, was certainly a favorite idea of hers. As late as 1697, in the act against Socinianism, and denial of the full canon of Scripture, it is decreed as one of the punishments. Had it been decreed a century later, Mr. Bancroft might have been bored, most effectually, by his new foster-children, the Calvinists. (See foot note in Letter XH, p. 245, noticing his alterations of his first edition.) There is a peculiarity in the orthography of the old act. (See Acts and Laws of Mass. 1726, p. 88.) It says " boaring thorow the tongue ;" which I supposed was intended to mean, what we should by " through the tongue." But on p. 137, for exaniple, of the same volume, I twice find " through" spelt as we now spell it. I am constrained, therefore, to confess with a shudder, that it seems designed to amount to " thorough," or " thoroughly." NOTE 99, p. 259. There were but four actually put to death. But what was the wel- come of Chalkley, the Quaker, when he ventured to travel in New Eng- land as late as 1693 1 " Oh what a pity that all your society were not hanged with the other four." (Gough's Quakers, i. 494.) The case is too desperate even for Mr. |Bacon, though Mr. Bancroft endeavors to give it a serene look. He confesses that Connecticut, like Massachusetts, indulged in " branding, whipping, and fining ;" and then enforces him- self and adds, " I doubt not that if these penalties had not kept their coasts clear from such invaders, they would have proceeded to hanging." (Hist. 22* 502 NOTES. Discourses, p. 99.) Who can be surprised, therefore, at the sharp lan- guage of the authors of the Europ. Settlements : " This people, who in England could not bear being chastised with rods, had no sooner got free from their fetters, than they scourged their fellow-refugees with scorpi- ons." (E. Sett. ii. 146.) But, let us remember, the book just quoted is one at which Mr. Young flouts, for what he calls its contemptible sneers. (Chronicles, p. 48, notes.) A book of facts laughs at such pop-gun artillery. NOTE 100, p. 263. The Propagation Society was founded in 1700, (See Humphrey's Hist. Account,) while Missionary Societies which have been founded since 1800, have been looked upon as novelties in religious history, and have received applause without bounds. But they happen to be non- Episcopal. Episcopalians have probably one of the oldest charitable societies in North America ; but for all that, they have been supposed to be neglect- ful of alms-giving, because they did not attend to it in the society- fashion, and publish lists of their benefactions. Yet the Episcopal Char- itable Society of Boston dates from 1724. (See Rev. Dr. Boyle's Hist. Memoir, 1840.) And what is very curious, a Puritan governor of Mas- sachusetts, when it wanted a Charter after the Revolution, objected to giving one, because an annual meeting was named for " Easter Tuesday." He had no objection to their meeting on any day of the year they pleased, but they must not call their days by such Popish or heathenish names. I have this anecdote from an aged friend, living at the time upon the spot. Thus we see how Puritanism, even among the most intelligent, waged war upon her, for the smallest minutiae, and to the very last. NOTE 101, p. 264. (Last line but one of the foot notes.) Bogue and Bennett, in their History of Dissenters, seemed to look upon King William as founding this Society with mere sectarian mo- tives. (Diss. ii. 334.) It is well known that one of the nicknames given the Society was, " The Society for propagating Episcopacy in foreign parts." But the society sent missionaries here, at the urgent request of the people : it was any thing but obtrusive. (Humphrey's Account, pp. 44, 45.) Yet so it is. In the first place. Episcopalians are said to be mere formalists, more dead than alive, who have no religion themselves, and care not to see any in others. And when they do send missionaries — oh, you are intrusive busybodies, who want to build yourselves up, and pull Congregationalists down. Thus it was of old : " We have piped unto you, but ye have not danced ; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented." NOTES. 503 NOTE 102, p. 266. The number which perished on the ocean, or by disease, amid their attempts to obtain Holy Orders, is stated by a writer in the Gentleman's Magazine, as a very large proportion. The volume I cannot now refer to ; but perhaps the index to the volumes between 1760 and 1770 will enable a curious inquirer to satisfy himself. NOTE 103, p. 267. The following is the communication to which allusion is here made. It may be found in the Churchman for Sept. 13, 1834. " Queen Anne died in August, 1714. She was a fast friend to the Propagation Society, and always ready to sustain and carry out its be- nevolent plans. Toward the close of her reign, the patrons of the society became persuaded, as well from considerations of high expediency, as from a true zeal for the primitive organization of the Church, that the ecclesiastical establishments in the colonies should be perfected by the appointment of colonial bishops. A plan, some details of which may be found in Greenwood's Hist, of King's Chapel, Boston, pp. 78-82, was drawn up about 1714, and wanted but the ready co-operation of the Queen to become a reality. According to this plan, there were to be four bishops, with salaries from £1000 to £1500 ; two for the West In- dies, and two for the Continent. Death frustrated the intentions of her Majesty, and blighted the hopes of many hearty advocates for Episcopacy. " But the plan was not forgotten. It was not likely it would be. Episcopacy was growing fast in the Colonies, and even in 1714, says Mr. Greenwood, the Propagation Society, in the prosecution of their scheme for colonial bishops, ' were warmly seconded by the congrega- tion of the Chapel.' Efforts were accordingly repeated in the reign of George I., which might have resulted favorably, had not the king been a German, and been more solicitous about Hanover than America. How- ever, notwithstanding Germany occupied the place next home in his Majesty's regard, the friends of the Colonies, (at the time to which I wish more particularly to allude, the winter of 1724-5,) were considera- bly cheered. The mission of a bishop to New England became a topic of frequent mention. " Did the Puritan Independents hear nothing of this ? That is not at all probable. Would they hear it quietly ] That is as little probable. Well, then, what did they do 1 Why it had been customary for them to have a convention of their ministers yearly, as they have in Boston to this day. It was proposed in a Memorial to the Legislature, by one who wa» no bad shot at a guess, (Cotton Mather, of Magnalian memory,) K 504 NOTES. to call in 1724 a muck larger convention than usual, that they might ascertain, ' What are the miscarriages whereof we have reason to think the judgments of Heaven upon us call us to be more generally sensible, and what may be the most evangelical and effectual expedients to put a stop unto those or the like miscarriages.' (Hutchinson's Mass., 3d edit. ii. 292, note.) " What was the real object on which the Herculean energies of this Synod were to work 1 The manufacture of an ecclesiastical platform 1 They had one already : the Confession of 1680. To tinker on the old one 1 They were not infested with the creed-hating mania, which has spread so contagiously in our day. No : Hutchinson himself testifies to the affection of many for the old platform, and even offers this as a plausible extenuation of the designs for a synod. What then was the nodus of this imposing scheme ] Some precious morceaux of the ec- clesiastical history of Massachusetts, preserved in the letters of Dr. Cut- ler, Mr. John Checkley, and extracts from newspapers, and which may be found in the fourth volume of Nichols's Literary Illustrations, p. 268, et. seq., can I think give it to us. From these, and from Gov. Dummer's letter of 1st Sept., 1725, (for which see Hutch. Hist. ii. 292,) the desired solution can be made out. (Compare Douglass's Summary, i. 440, No. 6.— Tudor's Otis, pp. 499, 500.) " It seems that the proposed Synod attracted the attention of Episco- palians, who were hoping, with encouragement, for the appearance of a bishop. This could hardly have been, had they not apprehended from it all possible interference with their plans for the establishment of an American Episcopate ; and how much this possibility might have includ- ed, it is not very hard to conjecture, when we know that Mather was a presiding genius in the councils of Congregationalism. Well knowing, or justly fearing the effects of the Synod, it was of course a primary ob- ject with the Churchmen of Boston, to obtain some authentic document in relation to it, and see (so far as might be) what was proposed for its consideration. It is not a little remarkable that the memorial of Mather, in the name of his associates, had hitherto been kept carefully out of sight. News, indeed, of the desire for a Synod had, somehow or other (not officially) reached England ; and so severe a rebuke* had * This rebuke was perfectly justifiable, according to the Church Polity of the Puritan Hooker. " And the same power he [the supreme magistrate] hath, to con- fine his own people from such general assemblings, within his own precincts." Hooker's survey of the Summe of Ch. Discipline, Pt. iT. p. 58. — In this point, as might be expected, Hooker agrees with the Pope : the Puritan- Protestant and the Puritan-Papist assimilatinj as utual.— See Ward's Law of Nations, ii. 103, 104 NOTES. 505 come back, that the curiosity of Episcopalians in Boston was still more whetted, to see what treason there might be in the schemes of the enemy. They wanted to read the memorial praying for a Synod ; or rather one good honest member of the House of Representatives, who heard the rebuke alluded to, wanted to do so, (whether Churchman or not, it is not said, but the presumption is strong he was one,) and he accordingly went to the Secretary of State, and procured a copy of it. This copy he presented to Checkley, who transcribed it, and it was soon in many hands. " This is a very simple matter, truly : going to the archives of the State to procure the copy of a document, which had never been acted on in secret conclave — never been pronounced a matter of privacy, and never intrusted to the Secretary with prohibitions as to loaning it to unworthy eyes. But the consequences were not quite so simple. The poor wight who went to the Secretary, soon finds a mittimus at his heels — is not even permitted to see this mittimus — is accused of stealing the memorial — is denied counsel — is refused a hearing at the bar of the House of which he is a blameless member — and finally is ignominiously expelled that House, with the brand of a liar and peace-disturber upon his hitherto unsullied name. Nay, the list of grievances is not ended here. The unfortunate Secretary, who thought he was selling a piece of paper, and not double- battled gunpowder, when he delivered the copy of the memorial and put his ten shillings in his fob, finds his house about his ears, and himself Secretary no more, with an expedition bordering on the marvellous. " Much more might be said conceruing this once famous memorial — the efforts to keep it away from all who did not understand, what Papists call "the discipline of the secret" — and the punishment of those who made too free with its cabalistic words. But enough has been said, if it induces any to think of and look into the past of our Church History, with a little of that curiosity and interest they so well deserve and will so richly reward. Much has been said, much is still said, about the tyranny of Bishops and the intolerance of Churchmen. I would submissively take and patiently bear all just reproach ; but would also bid our censurers beware, ere they assail our escutcheon, to look well to their own. There may be other little spots in the track of their story ; which, like the one just alluded to, will hardly be as refreshing if brought to view, as an oasis to a traveller in the desert." This, with a few verbal alterations, was written in Sept. 1834, and when I had not the remotest expectation that it would be followed by a series of letters in the year following, and a book in 1845. 506 NOTES. NOTE 104, p. 269. Much might be said here about Whitfield, whom the Puritans gladly employed, thinking he would preach down the Church. (See Chandler's Johnson, pp. 65, 66.) But he lighted so much wildfire among themselves, that many regretted they had not let him alone. I find even Mr. Bacon recording some of the disasters which occurred about 1740, the year when Whitfield made his first appearance in New England. See his Hist. Discourses, pp. 245, 252. Dr. Charles Chauncey, in his " Seasonable Thoughts, " published at Boston in 1743, tells us a longer and sadder story ; and, among other things, informs us that Connecticut actually passed a law restraining ministers " from preaching in other men's parishes, without their and their church's consent, and wholly prohibiting the ex- hortations of illiterate laymen," (Seas. Thoughts, p. 41.) Dr. Cutler, Rector of Christ Church, Boston, wrote thus about Dr. Chauncey's book and the times, to Dr. Zachary Grey, one of the castigators of Neal. " The author, Dr. Chauncey, told me that he could have printed more flagrant accounts, if his intelligencers would have allowed him. This has turned to the growth of the Church in many places, and its reputation univer- sally." (Nichols's Lit. Illustrations, iv. 304.) Whitfield's wildfire is not the first, nor the last, of such ecclesiastical prairie-burnings of Congrega- tionalism, which have driven many into the fold of the mother their fathers loved so " dearly." Cannot many of our elderly clergy in New England testify to a verification of Dr. Cutler's experience in their own parishes 1 Besides scenes such as Whitfield ushered in, and their results to the Church, there are multitudes of such cases as the Rev. Thomas Davies records, who was a missionary at Great Barrington, in Mass., in the year 1764. A notice of his sermon, on Christmas, 1764, and a note from him- self may be found in the Churchman for March 17, 1835. Here was a case, where Churchmen were harassed with taxes, rates, &,c. &.c., and by every other possible means, to prevent their getting a foothold in Great Barrington. The case is but a parallel to many more ; and is merely alluded to for an example, and to show how the bitter spirit of the Puri- tans travelled with them, or was sent forth as an emissary. I should not have been surprised to find Puritans at Boston, or Salem, doing all they could to vex Episcopalians, But at G. Barrington, on the western verge of Mass., and in almost another country, I should have expected more moderation. But even there, it seems to to have lost none of its sharp- ness, but kept its tenor like unadulterated vinegar. NOTES. 507 NOTE 105, p. 270. Such tattlers as Whitfield, who pretended to let two congregational ministers know half of a scheme to oppress America in 1764, and en- joined secrecy upon them with such peculiar earnestness, that one of them soon after committed the secret to a public sermon, delivered before a clerical convention, — such tattlers and fire-kindiers, rather than Epis- copacy, brought on the Revolution. It is a principle of Episcopacy, never to force a bishop's ordination or mission. " A bishop, by the rules of the Holy Ghost, must be thoroughly examined and peaceably ordained, by such as shall impose hands on him ; and not peremptorily intruded, or imposed, by any earthly power." (Bilson's Ch. Gov., new ed., p. 476.) The British Government would not have obtruded a bishop upon the Puritans, on this side of the Atlantic : they would have sent him to, and /or. Episcopalians only. Dr. Chandler wrote to explain the views and wishes of Churchmen upon this subject, and to correct misrepresentations. He wrote, too, as expressing the views and feelings of Churchmen generally. (Chandlers Johnson, pp. 114, 115.) Let him, or a dozen like him, howeyer, have done their best, one such inflammatory effort as Whitfield's — a man, too, with the unrevoked vows of the Church of England upon his soul — could have brought their best exertions to none effect. The anecdote of Whitfield alluded to, may be found in Gordon's Amer. Rev. i, 143, 144 ; and is one melancholy illustration, among a thousand, that the highest pretensions to piety are consistent with the dereliction of principles voluntarily assumed. * A politician may not be unfaithful to a party, without peril to his reputa- tion ; but a clergyman may show all possible nonconformity to a system, which he has freely before God and man professed, and he will be thought by many to know more of the religion of the heart than the man who keeps his vows. It is one of this world's mysteries. A soldier or a sailor untrue to the articles of war, is thought a traitor. A minister, whose vows are freely taken, may be untrue to the regulations of his Church, and he is pious par excellence ; as though treason against a creed or a canon were fidelity to Christ ! t * This may seem hard, but when we know, by Whitfield's own letters, (see Christian Remembrancer, iv. 5*90,) that he would not so much as come to Ameri- ca without his bishop's permission, and then that as soon as he got here he set all church law and order at defiance, it will appear no ways excessive. I I may be pardoned perhaps, for speaking thus upon this subject, when I show, that it is one on which a bare sense of honor can make even an Infidel truly moral. " Ought any man," says Hume himself, rebuking Puritan laxity upon this matter, " to accept of an office or benefice in an establishment, while he declines compli- ance with the fixed aod known rules o{ that establishment?" (Hist, of Eng. N. Y- 508 NOTES. NOTE 106, p. 272. The cause of the American Revolution is candidly and exactly stated by Dr. John J. Zubly, a Presbyterian minister at Savannah, Georgia, in a sermon published by him in 1775, before the Revolution began. Zubly, according to Gordon, was the principal agent " who roused the attention of many in the province, to the alarming situation of American affairs." (Amer. Rev. ii. 75.) This is his voluntary testimony. " The question between Great Britain and America, which has already been productive of such alarming effects, is, ' Whether the Parliament of Great Britain have any power or authority to tax the Americans, without their con- sent ?' Every impartial man will allow, that this is the foundation of the tchole dispute." (Zubly's Sermon, p. 28.) * This covers the entire debateable ground ; and coming from an intel- ligent Presbyterian, ought to be considered as relieving Episcopacy from any responsibility in the premises. Boucher, in his Discourses, declares that Episcopacy was little cared for in itself, but was made a stalking-horse by politicians. " It by no means follows that Episcopacy was thus opposed, from its haN-ing been thought by these transatlantic oppositionists as in any respect in itself proper to be opposed ; but it ser\ed to keep the public mind in a state of ferment and effervescence ; to make them jealous and suspicious of all measures not brought forward by demagogues, and, above all, to train and habituate the people to opposition." That in this way, without its being ♦' apparent at the time," politicians made it a cause of political agitation, he admits. (Discourses, pp. 149, 150.) But is this strange, when Pow- nall, in his 4th edition of his work on the Colonies, published in 1768, talks of " the mother country and her colonies, misrepresented to and mis- informed of each other ?" (Pownall, p. 29.) In his sermon on the Ame- rican Episcopate, delivered at St. Mary's Ch., Caroline Co., Virginia, in 1771, Boucher distinctly and solemnly declared, "All that has been or will be solicited by ns, is a primitive bishop : a bishop without power of and Boston, 1810, vol. v. p. 172.) O intolerable, that an avowed unbeliever should be teaching moral obligations to professed ministers of the Gospel I It may answer for a heathen to say, as Hippolytus in Euripides, " My tongue hath sworn : my mind is still unsworn." It may do for a Jesuit, or a Puritan, to swear with mental reservations ; but against all such swearing, let every honest man be a Protestant iodeed. I mix up the Puritans and the Jesuiu. How can I help it, when I remember the letter from the Arabella, and Pres. Q,uincy's tesiimoaies to their duplicity .' — Hisu Harv. Univ. i 91, 136, 156, 351. * Compare the New York declaration of rights in Stone's Brant, i. 35.— Otis's Botta, i. 78, 79. Bradford's Massachusetts, p. 102, etc NOTES. 509 any kind, excepting in what relates to the clergy." (Disc. p. 139.) And this sentiment had been just as distinctly maintained by all the Episco- palians at the north ; and all Dr. Chauncey's arguments from gossip and hearsay amounted to nothing, against the explicit averments of Dr. Chandler in the name of the whole Episcopal community. See Chandler's Johnson, pp. 114, 115, 116. Also Eddis's Letters, p. 50, from which it appears, that Episcopalians themselves at the South (though they, as he says, " greatly exceed those of all other denomina- tions,") were made as hostile to the introduction of a bishop, as their neighbors. Surely politicians must have been very busy, to make Churchmen so unfriendly to a part of their own system. If the world had let the Church alone, all would have gone on quietly and well. To make her contend against herself, and then blame her for the contention, may be agreeable to " the spirit of the world ;" and to be condemned by such a spirit is not very discomposing. NOTE 107, p. 275. Puritanism refused to bury Chillingworth's body, because he was an Episcopalian ; but it buried his immortal book in behalf of Protestantism,* and that with one of its deepest anathemas. Cheynell, the Puritan min- ister at Chichester, where Chillingworth died in 1644, refused to bury him, but threw his book into his grave with the following anathema, and then went away and preached forthwith from the text, " Let the dead bury their dead," &c. (Luke ix. 60) : " Get thee gone, thou cursed booke, which has seduced so many precious souls ; get thee gone, thou cor- rupt, rotten booke, earth to earth and dust to dust ; get thee gone into the place of rottennesse, that thou maist rot with thy author and see corrup- tion." (SeeBiog. Universelle, viii. 371, and Christian Disciple for 1819, p. 343 : published at Boston.) I cannot forbear adding, that Chillingworth, one of the most earnest champions for Protestantism ever known, was brought back from Roman- ism mainly under the instrumentality of William Laud, so often accused of being a Papist himself. And also, to show Laud's true conscientious- ness and devotion to his duties as a Churchman, that his pecuUar interest in Chillingworth, personally, was owing to the fact that he was his god- father. Though Chillingworth had reached manhood, and had probably long before been confirmed. Laud could not and would not forget his spiritual * Chillingworth, though his book is now considered one of the strongest bul- warks of Proteslantism, died, in the opinion of Puritanism, " a desperate, apostate Papist." (Le Bas's Laud, p. 242.) If justice is at last done to his name, may we hope that the time will come, when not less justice will be done to Archbishop Laud 'a .' 510 NOTES. child, or let him go. The letters which passed between Laud and Chil- lingworth, would probably do unbounded credit to the heads and hearts of both, but they have perished. The Puritans doubtless destroyed them, when they seized Laud's papers ; for he appeals to these very letters in his Defence, as in their possession, to show his instrumentality in Chil- lingworth's conversion. (See Laud's Troubles, pref. p. vii. and p. 227. Wood's Ath. Ox. ii. 41, 42. Gen. Biog. Diet, folio, iv. 317. Le Bas's Laud, chap. vii. or pp. 241,242, Eng. edit.) NOTE 108, p. 276. Churchmen are often blamed for their uncharitableness towards their " dissenting brethren ;" because, it is said, the differences which separate them by no means touch the essentials of Christianity — in fact, are mere trifles. And why, it is asked, are they excluded from our pulpits, 18 NOTES. NOTE 119, p. 371. Punchard, in his view of Congregationalism, admits in form the valid- ity of lay-ordination. (See p. 124.) The ordaining councils of old time were obliged to admit it, however unwelcome : the people chose to have it so, and doubtless the people did but act out Congregational theory to the full. (See Trumbull's Connect, i. 286. And comp. Bacon's Hist, Disc. p. 294.) And to show what strange language can be used, even by a minister, and at an ordination, I quote, as a specimen, from a charge delivered by Dr. Frothingham, at the ordination of Mr. Lunt in New York, 1828. " When the minister of this new church was invited to assume that trust, and consented to assume it, he became, by those acts, a minister of the gospel among this people. We have not come here to make him such. He was so before we came. We confer no new privi- lege on him. We bestow no new gift on them. We lay no new obliga- tions on either. The covenant is between themselves." NOTE 120, p. 371. The lengths to which their theory of development led, and must lead the Puritans, they were duly advised of. For example, Edwards asked them, " whether a great gap and wide door be not left open for schism upon schism, and separation upon separation, from your churches to the Brownists, [he says thus, for at this time they had begun to draw off from the Brownists, as less respectable,] and from the Brownists to the Ana- baptists, and so on in infinitum 7" (Antapologia, p. 200.) And such language had a curious illustration. The question came up, practically, in Mr. Lathrop's society, whether the baptisms of the Church of England were valid ? The decision was (Speciatum admissi, risum teneatis amici ?) that " at present," they would not say they were invalid ! and even that decision rent in twain the congregation which made it ! (Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d series, i. 167, 168.) Afterwards, Mr. Bartlet, who was minister of the " Congregational Way" at Wapping, in 1646, and published his " ModeU"in 1647, claimed some credit for him- self because, in opposition to many, he did believe in the validity of the baptisms of the Church of England ; and, forsooth, on the old ground of lay-baptism, that right matter and words are all which are necessary to any baptism, and the administrator is — any body. (Bartlet's Cong. Way, pp. 104, 105.) It must be a precious consolation to Churchmen to think that their baptisms are valid, because they are lay-baptisms ! However, visible church." I have not space to quote it ; but one thing the reader can per- ceive, that these old Puritans had none of that puerile horror of the word " catholic," which we Bometimes see now. NOTES. 519 Robinson, the putative father of Congregationalism, never got far enough, be it remembered, to allow them so much as this ! All his condescen- sion reached participation with the Church of England in prayers and sermons only ; from her sacraments he held off to the last. And now, verily, his posterity think it a horrible thing in Episcopalians, that they do not recognize his sacraments, begun and perpetuated in manifest schism ; and that, too, simply because we think them in error about the polity Christ has set in his Church, and not because we charge them, as Robinson did the Church of England, with having sacraments* positively corrupt and anti-Christian. We doubt their heads : Robinson and his followers denounced our Church's very heart. Can it be surprising that it is the fashion of his followers to doubt of nothing sooner than of the piety of an Episcopalian — to assume nothing with more ease, than to sit in judgment on his soul and attack his motives, as if they were discerners of the thoughts and intents of the heart — to come to no conclusion with more speed or satisfaction, than that he (most especially if unfortunate enough to be called a high-churchman) is to be cast out of the pale of charity, and to be withstood as deserving of nothing but the buffetings of Satan? NOTE 121, p. 372. Justice Story expresses this in captivating language: " Their precept, like their example, speaking as it were from their sepulchres, is, to follow truth now, not as they saw it, but as we see it, fearlessly and faithfully." (Story's Misc., p. 61.) I wish I could give such apparently philanthropic counsel a good paternity ; but I am afraid I must trace it to some of the worst of those puritanically inclined, about the period of the Reformation. One of the peculiarities of the German sectaries, according to Dugdale, was, that that was not Divine truth which lay upon the pages of the Bible, but which those pages helped our own minds to see. In other words, the very Bible itself must be distilled through the alembic of our understandings, before its specific truths could appear. Its written decla- rations were nothing. Dugdale, in his " Short View," thus describes the matter. " The truth, said they, was, (that when the word is said to en- gender faith in the heart, and to convert the soul of man, or to work any such spiritual divine effect,) these speeches are not thereunto appliable, as it is read and preached, but as it is engrafted in us by the power of the Holy Ghost." (Dugdale, p. 3.) And what seems not a little curious, Ap. * Marriages too. Edwards charges one of the very writers of the " Apologeti- call Narration," with going over to Holland to be married by a magistrate, because Robinson's system required it. So the Puritans would have bastardized England ! ! — Aiilapologia, p. 22. 520 NOTES. Laud noticed a similar thing in the Puritans of his day ; and said that this was one particular, among others, wherein they resembled the Papists. (Conference with Fisher, new edit. p. 81.) Unquestionably with the Puritans that only was truth which appeared to be truth to them ; and there was no such thing whatever as objective truth, or truth in the abstract. And one fruit of this appeared in the " Apologeticall Narration," which fell like a bomb into the midst of the Westminster Assembly, Another shape of it was a refusal to have the Bible read in the congregation, unless expounded ; for read, merely, it was not the Bible.* And finally. Fox and the Quakers carried this to perfection, by making every thing dependent on the light within. NOTE 122, p. 378. One proof of this is the necessity of some publications of the day, to try to reconcile them, I have before me, e.g. an octavo pamphlet of nearly 100 pages, published in 1648, the benevolent aim of which was, " The reconcilement of that long debated and much lamented difference, between the godly Presbyterians and the godly Independents, about Church Government." But for all their godliness, these Presbyterians and Independents fought on, and fought it out, to the bitter end. I am willing, however, to close this note with the testimony of a Presbyterian contemporary. He solemnly declares, that the Presbyterians were content for an accommodation " in just terms ;" but, he adds, " the Independents always scorned it." (Baillie's Letters, tfcc, ii. 179.) It is not very hard to believe this ; for Puritan-Protestants, just like their coimterparts, Puritan-Papists,t have always found it one of the hardest of tasks to agree to disagree, i. e. to entertain mutual tolerance for an opponent. No, says the Puritan ; No, says the Inquisitor ; I can make such an agreement with nobody. You must come up to my standard in every thing ; or — or — I'll make you. NOTE 123, p. 381. There was another sufferer put to death with Mr. Love, whom I pre- sume was a Presbyterian, but I can find no particular account of him. His name was Gibbons ; and from an allusion to him on p. iv, of the preface to Love's sermons, republished in 1807, I should suppose him to have been a Presbyterian minister. If so, then we have three Presbyte- rian martyrs instead of two, * Maddox's Vindication, p. 185. t This term was by no means singular among our old divines. I have referred in Note 36, to some instances : I now give another. — Proceedings at Perth, London, 1621, Pt. iii. p. 87. NOTES. 521 NOTE 124, p. 399. (Second line of the foot notes.) The Hon. R. C. Winthrop, in his Address before the New England Society in 1839, cannot forbear giving Virginia a severe side-cut for her slave-trade.* (See p. 52.) Surely the recollection of Indians sold and negroes bought into slavery, by the Puritan Colony of Massachusetts, and that as early as 1637, (Felt's Salem, p. 109,) w^hen she v^^as at the height of her Puritan glory, and had done nothing towards her great chartered duty of converting the savages, ought to make even as earnest advocates of herself as we know the Bay State habitually supplies, some- what cautious about castigation of a sister government. More espe- cially, when we know that this poor denounced Virginia commenced her system with universal suffrage, while Massachusetts, with a temper worthy the age of Hildebrand himself, would tolerate no one as a free- man who would not profess and maintain Puritanism in its whole length and breadth. And again, too, when we know that the Colony of Vir- ginia remonstrated against the slave-trade with the Mother-Country, and besought her to arrest it : to the shame of Britain be it spoken, wholly in vain ! (See Walsh's Appeal, Sect. ix. or p. 317.)t In this step, I am informed that Virginia was not alone — that South Carolina e. g. did the same thing, and with like success. Walsh de- clares, that Virginia's efforts in this matter began as far back as 1662 — when, perhaps, I add. New England was doing, what she certainly did afterwards, import slaves into our southern states, and sell them there ! God forbid that I should be, or seem to be, an advocate for slavery, which I account an awful curse. But when I see northerners abusing southern- ers for its existence among them, I blush for shame ; for I am sadly aware that if oMr vessels had not imported and sold slaves into southern states,* there would have been many, very many fewer slaves there, and by this time, possibly, they might have given all their freedom. Now, for the burden thrown upon them by northern hands, they must wait a tedious time. But of all who should be the last to complain, and who should have longest patience with them, are New Englanders and their descendants. * Massachusetts was ready enough to catch Virginia's runaway slaves in old times, whatever she may do now. — See Gov. Berkley's Letter. Hutchinson's Coll. pp. 136, 137. t Can any such bold remonstrance be found among the annals of Massachusetts ? Belknap, who says all he can, speaks of none. — Mass. H. Coll. 1st ser. iv. 195,6. I Mass. H. Coll. 1st ser. iv. 197, admits this; and on the next page it is shown, with what a true Puritan conscience, some of the New Englanders treated the subject of slavery. They declaimed against the slave-trade with all their mignt; yet, when slaves were brought to their doors, actually bought them and jiistified their posses- sion of them. Abraham, &c., they said, had slaves, and so might they have. Here we have doctrine^ aud there practice ! 23* 522 NOTES. NOTE 125, p. 399. "One professed design," says Hutchinson, " of the colony charter, was the gospelizing the natives. The long neglect of any attempts this icay cannot be excused. The Indians themselves asked, how it happened, if Christianity was of such importance, that for six and twenty years together th^ English had said nothing to them about it." (Hutch. Hist. i. 150.) This brings in " the Plymouthians" also guilty ; for this six and twenty years runs back to 1620, the date of their settlement. The whole then goes to show, that stupid as the Indians were, inacces- sible by Christian ideas according to Puritan doctrine, they had wit enough to see into and condemn a most flagrant Puritan inconsistency. No marvel then that the Puritans thought them (as the Presbyterian Mr. Stone tells us) the agents and familiars of the Devil, and therefore fit for nothing but destruction. (See Stone's Brant, Pref. p. xv.) NOTE 126, p. 408. (Sixth line of the foot notes.) I am quite willing to suppose that Gov. Winslow stated what he be- lieved, (or, rather, to follow his own language,) thought to be true. Yet, if the Indians were always compensated for every foot of their territory, how comes it that Seipican, or Rochester, in Massachusetts, is given away by Plymouth in 1638, while in 1682, after the sale of Rochester, a native sets up a claim to it, proves it, and has his claim allowed ? (See Mass. Hist. Coll. 2d ser. iv. 258, 265.) And further, take Gov. Wins- low's testimony at the utmost : he says, with unlucky emphasis, " this col- ony ;" implying that the sister colony did otherwise. So his testimony condemns Massachusetts, at all events. Moreover, it is equivocal in any sense. It says " I think," and not " I am sure." It says lands were always bought " before these present troubles." But when did they begin ? There's the rub. Some would say, Almost as soon as Puritan feet ouched Indian soil. So Mr. Young may make the most of his friend Winslow's testimony, in welcome. He must pardon me for w^eighing Puritan language with precision : experientia docei. NOTE 127, p. 411. No sooner, however, do we get through the purchase of Concord, than we find the General Court giving away plantations " adjoining Concord," as Shattuck says, with entire freedom, as if the rest of the country were theirs exclusively.* How could this be lawfully done ? (Shattuck's * Even sucli grants could be refused to those who favored a heretic like Roger Williams. — Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. viii. 2. NOTES. 523 Concord, pp. 13, 14.) There does not appear any evidence to show, that these new grantees paid or offered to pay for the soil ; and indeed Shat- tuck is obliged to admit that the grantees of Concord itself were not in any hurry to purchase or pay for their land, (p. 6.) — in any more hurry, e. g. than the General Court was to pay for its gunpowder. (Sav. Wint. ii. 211.) Doubtless, however, they paid in time to prevent such a quarrel as happened in 1631 about Indian purchases; and the recollection of which might have quickened action in 1636. (See Mather's Ind. Tbls., p. 23, for the dispute.) Perhaps I ought to add, that Shattuck's theory is, that the General Court granted a mere permission to settle. (P. 4.) But their action reads very differently. They granted not a mere permission to settle, but a precise number of acres, e. g., as on p. 14, such a curiously specific number as 533.* The proper way would have been to begin at the other end — ask permission of the natives, buy their property, and then go to the Legislature to confirm the bargain. It is a curious way to purchase a man's property, to squat upon it, as we now say, and then compel him to sell it — if we like it. Finally, purchasing in one case condemns the Puritans for not pur- chasing in every other. A solitary purchase was a tacit, yet complete recognition of Indian title to the soil ; and folios of such logic as Higgin- son's and Bulkley's could not mend the matter afterwards. (For Hig- ginson's, see Hutch. Coll. p. 30. For Bulkley's, see Mass. Hist. Coll. 1st ser. iv.J159.) NOTE 128, p. 414. An authority from Benedict's Baptists speaks volumes upon this sub- ject. It shows how Massachusetts and Connecticut conspired to put Rhode Island down, on account of the religious freedom indulged there ; and when they could not accomplish their aims otherwise, employed the Indian tomahawk and scalping knife to endeavor to drive them through. " Connecticut and Massachusetts, on either side of them, were now making strong exertions to enforce their religious laws, and could not endure the maxims of this little colony, which were a tacit and standing condemna- tion of their bigotry and intolerance. They therefore stretched their ines, if possible, to swallow up the little State, and Massachusetts actu- ally took possession of a large share of it on one side, and Connecticut on * Compare Felt's Ipswich, pp. 14, 15. — Nay, the poor Indians themselves had to apply to the Legislature just like any other newjcomers I — Allen's Chelmsford, pp. 8, 9. This proves incontestably that the Legislature looked upon itself, as the sole proprietor of the soil. 524 NOTES. the other ; but failing of their design on this plan, they encouraged the Indians to harass them to the loss of 80 or 100 pounds a- year ; they refused to let them have ammunition for their money, when in imminent danger ; they fomented divisions among them, and encouraged their sub- jects to refuse obedience to their authority ; they finally labored hard, after they could not dismember the colony, to gain a party within its bounds of sufficient strength to outvote them in their elections, and establish among them their abominable system of parish worship and parish taxes." (Benedict, i. 466.) So, then, the Puritans could use the Indians against others without scruple ; but when an Indian weapon was turned against themselves, they could, as the poor Pequots found out, exterminate a nation. Had the Pequots dismembered Rhode Island, they might have founded a kingdom upon its ruins, till — till — the Puritans wanted it for themselves. For though Indians could be used against those not Puritans, to subju- gate them to the faith ; when that was done, they must bow down in turn, or follow the same destiny. Roger Williams says that when he was going to England, he was importuned by the Narragansett sachems to appeal in their behalf " to the high sachems of England, that they might not be forced from their religion, and for not changing their reli- gion be invaded by war ; for they said they were daily visited with threat- enings by Indians that came from about the Massachusetts, that if they would not pray, they should be destroyed by war." (R. 1. Hist. Coll. iii. 154.) So Puritanism understood how to dragoon heretics into the faith, or seize upon their possessions, as well as the papistical Louis XIV. NOTE 129, p. 418. It is irresistibly amusing to see how the Puritans copied England in bad things, though all the while bitterly blaming her. They ventured a revolution, because taxed without their own consent ; but in Note 91, it will be seen they adopted such a principle as quite right for them. They thought it vast indignity for the English to call us rebels. But so sure as an Indian, after being wheedled into an act of which he knew nothing of the import, i. e. a pro forma declaration of allegiance to the British Crown,)* dared to act contrary to loyally, he was a rebel of most malig- nant heinousness, and if he escaped with life and servile bondage might think himself full fortunate. (Mass. H. Coll. 1st ser. iv. 196.) * Here is a specimen. A Puritan governor tells a sachem, that the King is his friend and ally. The Indian replies to the compliment, that lie was the King's sub. jcct. Alas, poor Red Man I that had to go down in black and white.— Hulchiasou's Hist. i. 252. NOTES. 525 And, now, for the result of such severity. Some of these Indians escaped from servile bondage, returned, and helped to provoke wars and glut their revenge. (Same vol. and page.) But then I suppose we must believe, with Dr. Bacon, that such a war, on the part of the Puritans, as in the case of the hapless Pequots, is " a war as righteous as ever was waged." (Bacon's Hist. Disc. p. 330.) Had not Puritan advocates better be more chary of the reputation of the days of '76? if a war against rebels is as righteous as any, monarchical tories will make them a low bow for such exquisite orthodoxy.* NOTE 130, p. 420. Dr. Holmes, in his Annals, seems vexed with the Hon. Mr. Savage, for censuring so freely the execution of Miantonimoh. He calls his lan- guage the pleading of a mere advocate, and refers to Judge Davis's, as that of a ^M^g^e. (Annals, i. 272.) Indeed, good Doctor, and in your own is there nothing of the Puritan parson ? for you forget, entirely, to mention the instrumentality of the Elders in the awful matter. But take it, even with Dr. H.'s favorite reference, the reader cannot but be shocked, to see a professed minister of the Gospel sanctioning a dastardly assassination. " If," says Judge Davis, (and there is vast em- phasis in the if of the learned jurist — he would not have left the thing so open could he have helped it,) " If sad necessity required the sacrifice, there seems a revolting obliquity in the manner of its accomplishment." (Davis's Morton, p. 234, Note.) How could Judge D. call it less than shocking, when, like the familiars of the Inquisition, they kept their hor- rid purpose " a profound secret 1" (Trumbull's Connect, i. 134.) It cannot be astonishing that Puritan parsons should countenance the most shocking obliquities in 1643, if one of their successors can coolly defend such obliquities in 1829. NOTE 131, p. 425. (Last line of the footnotes.) Dr. Trumbull's language does not want strength, and yet says Dr. D wight, as if any thing like it must be utter slander, " The annals of the world cannot furnish a single instance, in which a nation, or any other * Rebellion against a Puritan theocracy is treason against God as well as man, as we have seen. But only let the Puritans get into power, and even such a violent writer as Dr. Mayhew says, " government is sacred, and not to be trifled with." — See his furious philippic preached against King Charles I.'s day, which was thought worthy of introduction into the " Pillars of Priestcraft and Orthodoxy Shaken," of the notorious Richard Baron — a man who abandoned even the Puritanic ministry in disgust. For the quoted words, see Pillars, &c., vol. ii. 336. 52C NOTES. body politic, has treated its allies or its subjects either with more justice or more humanity, than the New England Colonists treated these peo- ple," i. e. the Aborigines. .(Dwight's Travels, i. 167.) More justice or more humanity ! why, (not to repeat the terrible testimony already given,) as Winthrop admits, the English, aye the Puritan English, could put a poor prisoner, taken by his fellow-savages, to the torture : thus imitating their most fiend-like practice ; and, too, on the express plea of revenge for similar deeds ! (Sav. Wint. i. 223.) Their soldiers, taught under the auspices of Puritan chaplains, could talk of shooting an Indian as sportively as of shooting " a black duck." (Hutchinson's Hist. ii. p, 267.) Puritan parsons at home could say to the soldiers, to make them fiercer, (as Monks have said to Papists about to battle with heretics,) that the " Indians should be bread for them." (Mather's Troubles, p. 42.) And all this doubtless, because, as an honest Presbyterian tells us, the Indians were believed to be the agents and familiars of the prince of darkness. (Stone's Brant. Pref. p. xv.) * And still are we to be told, that more justice or more humanity can- not be found in " the annals of the world," than are to be found in the annals of Puritan treatment of the Aborigines! Oh, if so, then all I have to say is, that divines of Dr. Dwight's school need not trouble themselves to preach of a future place of woe : if this whole world, in all its history, cannot produce aught more of comfort than the Aborigines experienced at Puritan hands, it is sufficiently a Pandemonium already, to render a sadder place unnecessary. NOTE 132, p. 427. In allusion to the sentiment at the close, perhaps I cannot do better than quote Richard Baxter's most pertinent rebuke to the Puritans, for their harsh and wholesale way of condemning Churchmen in the gross, and upon mere suspicion, in the exercise of their all-discerning and infal- lible private judgment. The passage, too, is a fair and incidental illus- tration of a Churchman's way of judging, i. e. upon evidence. " You never try them, nor hear them speak for themselves, nor exam- ine any witnesses publicly agauist them, nor allow them any church- justice ; but avoid their communion, [another proof, by the way, that they disowned the sacraments of Episcopalians,] upon reports or pretence of private knowledge. They judge you personally, one by one. You con- demn whole parishes in the lu7np, unheard. They condemn you as for a * " Dogs, caitiffs, niiscreaats, and hell-hounds," says Belknap, " are the politest names given them by sonic writers." He alludes to such as Hubbard and Mather 3 whose terrific animosity against the Indians he cannot put up with, for all their Pu- ritanism.—Belknap's N. Hamp. i. 67. NOTES. 527 positive crime. But you condemn them without charging any one crime upon them, because they have not yet given you a satisfying proof of their godUness." (Baxter's Cure of Church Divisions, 2d edit. 1670. p. 255. And with Baxter's own itaUcs.) When I read in Clement Walker, that one of the six principles of the Puritan-Independents* was, " That if a man be questioned for any crime, though his judges have neither competent witnesses, proofs, nor evidence of his guiltiness, yet if they think in their conscience he is guilty, they may condemn him out of the testimony of their own private con- science"— when, I say, I read this, I thought Mr. Walker, though es- teemed highly by his Presbyterian brethren, might have strained a point a little. But as Baxter, whose name is almost a Puritan watchword, sustains him, I must suppose his judgment correct. And after all, what does Baxter censure, and what Walker, save but what we now see, only in a form less dangerous according to the circum- stances of our times, viz., the hasty and sweeping judgment of Puritans upon the piety, i. e. the secret state of the souls of those who differ from them : a judgment founded, not upon facts, but upon their own bare suspicions.! And how common this is, all of moderate acquaintance with them must know. They are the people : they only understand and exemplify the religion of the heart. Papists and Churchmen, on the one side, are believers in mere forms ; while Socinians and Universalists, on the other, are believers in false doctrines. They only are right in the sight of God ; and for any one who dares to differ from them, there is a shake of the head, and an uprolling of the eye, or a shrug, or an alas ! and your piety, oh, it becomes, Hke the bishops with Milton, the basest and the lowermost of all things. And to wind up this description, how like to the Papist, though he never suspects it, is the Puritan in this very thing ! The Papist de- nounces you for a heretic, without a qualm and without a pause, because he is infallible. The Puritan denounces you as destitute of piety, with as little compunction and as little hesitancy, because he, too, is no more liable to error. Both judgments are the most awful which can be pro- nounced upon a fellow-creature ; and yet the Papist on one side of us, and the Puritan on the other, will show us that they can be pronounced with a feariessness, which Gabriel the archangel— the highest perhaps of created names — would recoil from with a shudder. * Walker's Independency, Pt. iii. p. 23. t See this practically admitted by Milton ; who undertakes to prove, that Bishop Juxon and Charles I. were hypocrites, not by facts, but " by arguments j" i. e. by ar- guing facts into a shape to suit himself.— Prose Works, p. 939. ERRATA. In a work so difficult to print, in consequence of the numerous references, dates, and quotations, it is hoped the reader will excuse the following errata — and others, should he discover them. Page 66, 2d line of the foot notes, for 1663 read 1633. 82, 8th line from bottom of text, for " finally" read " formally." 86, 9th line from top, for " whome" read " whom." 202, 18th line from top, the word " for" omitted. 274, 10th line of the foot notes, for " Wells" read " Weld." 348, 4th line of the foot notes, for " More's" read " Moore's." 389, 1st line of foot notes, for 231 read 331. 396, bottom line, for " and" read " of." 1 .^--^ ^ .i 2. ^ to «•£ g cd ^ O O to G CO r- O -^ 03 '-^ rt o rf 5 ^ o CD ^ (n bO CO ^ ^ O I o Q o s§ en in O o c I