ton, and in that vicinity. John Winthrop, one of their number was chosen Governor, and Thomas Dudley with eighteen others, Assistants. In these "conjointly with all the freemen who should settle in New England" were vested all the corporate rights, powers and privileges of the Company: In 1631 the General Court resolved that the Governor, Lieutenant Governor and Assistants, should thereafter be chosen by the freemen only, and that none should be admitted to the freedom of the colony, but such as were chosen members, and could procure certificates from their ministers that they were of the orthodox faith; and that none but freemen should be permitted to vote as electors or to act as magistrates.

The rapid increase of their settlements now so much excited the apprehensions of the natives that a war with them seemed inevitable; but the small-pox broke out among the Indians, and in a very few weeks whole tribes of them were destroyed. The tracts of country thus desolated were rich and well selected, and seemed vacated to open a ready and fit resting place for the thousands who now crowded to these shores to avoid the increasing cruelties of intolerance. Towns and villages, thriving and beautiful, sprung up almost with the power of magic in the howling wilderness. This dispersion of the settlers from the immediaté vicinity of the seat of their government, where each freeman was required to appear in person, rendered it necessary to appoint delegates to appear for them, fully empowered to deliberate and decide on all matters of public interest or general importance. Here again, as in the Colony of Virginia, we remark the origin of that distinction which obtains between a republican, or representative form of government, and one purely demo

cratic. The latter is practicable only in small communities, and is known only in the infancy of society; the former is the necessary result of its extension and distribution. This change did not actually take place, however, until the year 1634, when the several settlements sent delegates to the General Court, which had hitherto been composed of the whole body of the freemen. These delegates, with the Governor and his Council of Assistants, thereafter constituted the General Court. Thus was formed the first representative assembly ever held in New England, and the second held in America. At this session a Bill of Rights was passed, which guaranteed to the people of Massachusetts Bay all the rights and privileges of civil and religious liberty. It was also declared that the General Court alone had power "to enact laws, to elect officers, to impose taxes, and to sell lands"-that "every town might thereafter choose persons as representatives (not more than two) who should have the full power of all the freemen, except in the choice of public officers and magistrates, wherein every freeman must give his own vote."

This independent plan of government soon attracted the attention of the Crown of England, and commissioners were appointed to superintend and regulate the affairs of the Colonies in America. Among other things, they were directed to "cause the revocation of such letters patent as were unduly obtained, or contained grants of powers and privileges infringing upon the royal prerogatives." The result of this investigation was, that the Council at Plymouth surrendered back its patent to the Crown. In 1637-8, a writ of quo warranto was issued against the Company of Massachusetts Bay; upon which it was adjudged that the

Company had forfeited its charter. It does not appear that any proceedings were instituted against them in pursuance of this judgment, further than that the Privy Council ordered the Governor and Company to send their charter back to England, to be cancelled. The General Court replied, in a petition to the Commissioners—“ We dare not question your Lordships' proceedings in requiring our patent to be sent unto you; we only desire to open our griefs; and if in anything we have offended his majesty, or your lordships, we humbly prostrate ourselves at the footstool of supreme authority; we are sincerely ready to yield all due obedience to both; we are not conscious that we have offended in anything, as our government is according to law we pray that we may be heard before condemnation, and that we may be suffered to live in the wilderness."

The domestic troubles which at about this time visited the unfortunate Charles I., and diverted the attention of the commissioners, preserved their charter to the colonists. The Governor and Assistants continued to sit with the Delegates, as one house, until the year 1644, when they were divided into separate houses; the Governor and Assistants composing the Upper, and the representatives the Lower house, each of which had a negative on the acts of the other. "From this period we must consider this colony, not as a corporation whose powers were defined, and its mode of procedure regulated by its charter, but as a society which, having acquired or assumed political liberty, had, by its own voluntary deed, adopted a constitution of government framed on the model of that of England."* But, we may add, in many of its most important and inter

* Robertson.

esting features widely different. The colony continued under this form of government down to the great revolution of charters which took place in the year 1684, when its charter was also overthrown.

Charles II. died in the following year and was succeeded by James II. who pursued the same warfare against the colonies, with an unrelenting hostility to the spirit of independence and freedom which had grown up under their previous forms of government. We find the controversy to have continued, almost without interruption, down to the revolution in England in 1689, when William and Mary, the Prince and Princess of Orange, were crowned King and Queen of England. The intelligence was received in this colony with great joy, and inspired them with the hope that they might regain their ancient charter. The Governor and Council were requested by the people to resume the exercise of the authorities and powers with which it had vested them, and the form of government which had previously existed under it, was again erected. The Crown assented to the exercise of these powers, until such times as it could provide a new charter, which was issued in 1691. Under it the colony became incorporated as a Province and continued to be known as such until after the American revolution. The principal features of administration wherein this charter differed from the other will be observed when we come to the third division of our history. It now

included within its territorial limits "all the old colony of Massachusetts Bay, the Colony of New Plymouth, the Province of Maine, the territory called Acadia or Nova Scotia; and all the lands lying between Nova Scotia and Maine," under the name of "THE PROVINCE OF MASSACHUSETTS BAY IN NEW ENGLAND."

CHAPTER IV.

THE progress of our history brings us next to notice the colonies of Connecticut and New Haven. This territory, which is now comprehended within the limits of the State of Connecticut, was originally conveyed by the Council at Plymouth, to the Earl of Warwick, ir. 1630. This grant from the Company was confirmed to the grantee by a patent from Charles I. and was subsequently conveyed to Lords Say, Brook, Seale and others, in 1631. In 1632 they sent out adventurers to explore the coast and the interior of the country. This expedition penetrated the Connecticut river, as far up as Windsor, but it does not appear that they made any arrangements for a settlement. A small fort was established at Saybrook in the year 1635, under the direction of Mr. Lyon Gardiner. The permanent settlement of this part of the country must be attributed, however, to the religious dissensions which had, at this early period, begun to distract the colony of Massachusetts Bay. In 1634 several individuals, under the direction of the Rev Mr. Hooker, made an application to the General Court of Massachusetts Bay, for permission to quit that colony for the purpose of planting a settlement in some favoured spot. Their petition was denied, and considering that the oath which they had taken when they were admitted to the freedom of the company, bound them to yield implicit obedience to the directions of the General Court; they abandoned the purpose of emigration. Subsequently however the General Court assented to their application, and they were permitted to re