The Power of Congregational Churches As Serted and Vindicated.20 Civil As Well As Ecclesiastical Developments Attracted the Attention of the New Arrivals
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE NEW HAVEN COLONY BY ISABEL MAcBE.A.TH CALDER ASSIST..:L°"'T PROFES.SOR OF HISTORY IN WELLS COLLEGE :N~W HAVEN: YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON: HUfil>HREY)fThFORD OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS MDCCCCXXXIV COPYRIGHT, 1934 BY YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS PRIXTED ~ THE ~-rTED STA.TES OF !Y:EB-ICA. YALE illSTORICAL PUBLICATIONS MISCELLANY XXVIII PUBLISHED U~""'DER THE DIRECTIOX OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY FROM: THE L~COME OF THE :FREDERICK JOHN KINGSB'C"RY MEMORIAL FU~""'D PREFACE N writing the History of the Colony of New Haven, before and after the Union with Connecticut (New I Haven, 1838), Edward R. Lambert e~amined the manuscript records of the colony and of some of its towns, and broke the ground for later writers, but left much to be done. In preparing The Republic of 1-lew Ha ven (Baltimore, 1886), Charles H. Levermore used the Records of the Colony and Plantation of New Haven, from 1638 to 1649, and Records of the Colony or Jurisdic tion of New Haven, from May, 1653, to the Union, edited by Charles J. Hoadly and published at Hartford in 1857 and 1858, but made scant use of manuscripts, and labored under the influence of a theory that has long since been discarded. Carrying their narratives beyond the union of the New Haven Colony and Connecticut in 1665, both Lambert and Levermore devoted but little space to the history of the New Haven Colony and confused the his tory of the colony with that of the town after 1665. In the History of the Colony of New Haven to Its Absorption into Connecticut (New Haven, 1881), Edward E. Atwater used the published records of the colony and to-wn of New Haven and manuscript records of the to'W'll, and Hmited himself to the history of the New Haven Colony, but he failed to exhaust other manuscript sources of informa tion in either America or England. This defect a second edition in 1902 failed to remedy. Misled by the ambigu ous and obscure language of the early records, all three writers have misinterpreted the constitutional and legis lative efforts of the founders of the colony. For these reasons, almost three hundred years after . Vl THE NEW HAVEN COLONY the founding of the smallest and strictest of the Puritan commonwealths, a fourth history seems in order. Settled by ultra-conservative Puritans, unrestricted by royal charter, far removed from the ecclesiastical organization of England, the colony on Long Island Sound served as a laboratory in which Puritan theories of ecclesiastical and civil organization might be tested. More than any other. colony in New England it represents the goal toward which the most orthodox wing of the Puritan party was striving. With the rise of the Puritans to power in Eng land, the c.olony on Long Island Sound increased in pres tige, but at the same time it became less necessary. With the restoration of the Stuarts to the throne it disap peared, and today it is almost forgotten. From the undergraduate courses of Professor Albert Beebe Wbite of the University of Minnesota the writer carried a love of historical research and the vision of a problem to be solved. Under the guidance of Professor Charles McLean .Andrews a doctoral dissertation pre sented at Yale University has gradually evolved into the present study. Professor Leonard W. Labaree of Yale University has made valuable suggestions regarding both text and notes. Miss Anne S. Pratt of the Yale University Library has freely given her assistance. Other librarians and archivists in the United States, England, and the United Netherlands have furthered the work. The Bulk ley Fellowship in American History and the Bulkley Currier Fellowship in the Graduate School of Yale Uni versity and a fellowship of the American Council of Learned Societies have made possible the leisure neces sary to complete the study. For the interest, guidance, and assistance of all, the writer will always be indebted. I. M. C. Wells College, June 4, 19S4. CONTENTS Preface V . I. St. Stephen's, Coleman Street 1 II. Massachusetts Bay 32 III. Staking Out a Colony 50 IV. Settlers of the Outlying Plantations 67 V. The Congregational Way 83 VI. Moses His J udicials 106 VII. For the Service of God in Church and Com monwealth 130 \till. Farmers, Artisans, and Merchants 146 IX. New England Confederates 170 X. Puritan England 206 XI. The End of Christ's Kingdom 216 XII~ Epilogue 260 Bibliographical Note · 264 Index 275 ILLUSTRATIONS Portrait of John Davenport frontispiece From the painting in the Gallery of Fine Arts, Yale Uinilversity Map of the Settlements between the Connecticut and Delaware Rivers, 1638-1665 following index THE NEW HAVEN COLONY CHAPTER I ST. STEPHEN'S, COLEMAN STREET HE parish of St. Stephen, Coleman Street, London, extends from about a hundred feet west of Cole T man Street to Drapers' Gardens, and from Loth bury to beyond the Wall. The church stands on the west side of Coleman Street, in the southwest corner of the parish. In the seventeenth century Coleman Street ,vas '' a faire and large street, on both sides bn.ilded with diuerse faire houses,'' and the principal artery between Moorgate and Lothbury. To the east and west of this main thoroughfare was a network of alleys : Chimney Alley, Nunnes Court or Alley, Swanne, Whites, Bell, and George Alleys on the east, and Gleane and Byrdes Alleys on the west, "with small tenements in great number. " 1 With the parish of St. Olave in the Old Jewry on the south, and part of the parish of St. Margaret, Lothbury, on the east, the parish of St. Stephen, Coleman Street, constitutes Coleman Street ward. The right to present a vicar to the church of this parish originally belonged to the prior of Butley in Su:ff olk, but with the dissolution of the monasteries in the reign of Henry VIII, it passed to the crown, and in the year 1590, rectory, advowson, and fee farm were granted to the par ishioners by letters patent of Queen Elizabeth. A vicar was always chosen subject to the approval of the Bishop of London, but through their control of the purse, the 1 John Stow, A Survey of London ( 2 ,ols., 1908, Charles L. Kingsford, ed.), I, 284; St. Stephen's, Coleman Street, Churchwardens' Accounts, 1586- 1640. 2 THE NEW HA VEN COLONY parishioners guarded against undue interference from without. To their vicar they granted an annual salary of £11, and the Bishop of London could force the installa tion of a candidate only at this nominal remuneration, but to the vicar of their choice, they granted both salary and a gratuity of :£39.2 In the early seventeenth century ecclesiastical and civil affairs of the parish were conducted in general vestries and in vestries of committees. The former were meetings of between thirty and eighty householders of the parish who paid scot and bore lot and were probably free of the city. The committees were a self-perpetuating group of the more important householders who, in the intervals between general vestries, managed the affairs of the par ish. At a general vestry which assembled in Easter week, the householders chose churchwardens and sidesmen,3 in accord with the canons of 1603, collectors for the poor, and auditors of the accounts of ~hnrchwardens and col lectors. At a general vestry which met as a precinct of the ward in December of each year, they chose two common councilmen, two constables, seven members of the ward mote inquest, and two scavengers. They had difficulty in :611ing these offices in parish and ward, and often fined several individuals for refusal to serve before they elected a man willing to undertake the duties of constable or scavenger. The wealthier householders of the parish bought immunity from all offices by paying a fine of £10. At special meetings of the general vestry, the household ers chose a new vicar or filled a lesser office that had be come vacant, audited the churchwardens' accounts, and levied tithes. At the vestries of committees, the select 2 Edwin Freslrlield, '' Some Remarks upon the Book of Records and His tory of the Parish of St. Stephen, Coleman Street, in the City of London,'' .&rchaeologia, L, 17-57. s At St. Stephen's, Coleman Street, elected in :March, 1624, and April, 1625, but not thereafter. ST. STEPHEN'S, COLEMAN STREET 3 group in charge of parish affairs nominated vicars, and after their election made settlements with them regard ing salary, benevolences, gratuities, gifts, and tithes. They designated grc~ps of themselves as feoffees in whom the title to the real property of the parish rested, decided all questions regarding the property of the par ish, directed law suits in which the parish was involved, and assessed tithes on new houses. They granted allow ances for ihe archdeacon's visitation and for the dinner which followed the annual perambulation of the parish by its officers and young urchins. They voted to make a collection for the purchase of communion silver. They settled questions regarding the poor within their bounds, ordered the churchwardens to take out letters of admin istration of the estates of orphans, directed the overseers of the poor to apprentice poor children, took charge of the poor chest and its keys, made regulations regarding coal for the poor, granted pensions, and regulated the pensioners. In characteristic seventeenth-century fash ion, no distinction was made between parish and precinct business. The deputy alderman of the ward often at tended general vestries in Easter week for the choice of parish officers, and sometimes served as a committee of the parish, and a vestry of committees occasionally filled an office vacant in the precinct.4, In the concluding year of the reign of J runes I,.