200

SPIRIT OF CAPTAIN WADSWORTH.

militia of Connecticut, and insisted on the exercise of that command. The legislature of the colony, deeming that authority to be expressly given to the colony by charter, would not submit to his requisition; but desirous of maintaining a good understanding with Governor Fletcher, endeavoured to make terms with him, until the king's pleasure should be further known. All negotiations were, however, unsuccessful; and, on the 26th of October, he came to Hartford, while the assembly was sitting, and, in the king's name, demanded submission; but the refusal was resolutely persisted in. After the requisition had been repeatedly made, with plausible explanations and serious menaces, Fletcher ordered his commission and instructions to be read in audience of the trainbands of Hartford, which had assembled upon his order. Captain Wadsworth, the senior officer, who was exercising the soldiers, instantly called out, "Beat the drums!" which, in a moment, overwhelmed every voice. Fletcher commanded silence. No sooner was a second attempt made to read, than Wadsworth vociferated, "Drum, drum, I say!" The drummers instantly beat up again, with the greatest possible spirit. "Silence, silence!" exclaimed the governor. At the first moment of a pause, Wadsworth called out, earnestly, "Drum, drum, I say!" and turning to his excellency, said, "If I am interrupted again, I will make the sun shine through you in a moment!" Colonel Fletcher declined putting Wadsworth to the test, and abandoning the contest, returned with his suite to New York.

It has been observed, that the history of the American colonies has been decidedly undervalued and neglected in England; this must have been the case even with the best educated classes of society; or surely, after such specimens of determined independence of spirit as the history of this colony and of Massachusetts exhibits, the measures which ultimately led to an entire separation would never have received the sanction of the British senate.* *

In the year 1700, Yale College was founded. The project

* Hinton.

YALE COLLEGE FOUNDED.

201

had been the subject of conversation for two years, and at length eleven gentlemen who had been appointed as trustees assembled at Branford, and laid the foundation of the college. In the year following, the trustees obtained from the general assembly an act of incorporation and a grant of £120 annually. It was originally established at Saybrook; and, in 1702, the first degrees were there conferred. Elihu Yale made several donations to the institution, and from him it derives the name it bears. It was subsequently removed to New Haven, where a succession of able instructors has given it a rank among the first institutions in the country. The attention which was paid by the early inhabitants of New England to the establishment of institutions for the diffusion of education among all classes of the people, has produced the most important results. The general intelligence thus disseminated has proved one of the surest guarantees of the republican institutions to which the citizens have always been so warmly attached; and the leading part taken by the northern states in promoting public instruction, has been the most effective means of securing that powerful influence which they have uniformly exerted in national affairs.

VOL. I. 26

S we have stated in a former chapter, when treating of an apprehended invasion of Connecticut by the Dutch, the New England colonies formed a confederacy for their mutual advantage. The motives which led to this union were various, all centring in the general security and common defence of the settlements. The aborigines in their neighbourhood were numerous enough to challenge the united force of all the colonies; the settlers of New Netherlands had become hostile, on account of their occupation of Connecticut; and the High Church party in England had given significant intimations of their discontent at the undisturbed existence of puritanism, even on the western side of the Atlantic.

GORGES GOVERNOR-GENERAL.

203

So early as the year 1633, the English government issued a proclamation reprobating the designs that prompted emigration to New England, and ordering all ships, that were about to proceed thither with passengers, to be detained. This ordinance, however, was suffered to remain unexecuted; and Charles, at a later period, reverted so far to his original policy, as to promote the expatriation of Vane, of whose political and religious sentiments he was well informed. After an interval of hesitation, more decisive measures were adopted.* In 1635, a commission was granted to the great officers of state and some of the nobility, for regulating the American colonies. By this commission, Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, and others, were authorized to make laws and constitutions for the colonies of New England; to establish an order of clergy, and assign them a maintenance; and to punish capitally or otherwise all who should violate their ordinances. The same persons were intrusted with a discretionary power to revoke charters. The English grand council of Plymouth actually surrendered their charter to them; and a process of quo warranto was commenced in the Court of King's Bench against the charter of Massachusetts, of which no intimation was given to the parties interested, and which was never prosecuted to a judicial issue.

In 1637, the king appointed Sir Ferdinand Gorges, GovernorGeneral of New England, and prohibited all persons from emigrating thither, without a special royal permission, to be granted only to those who had taken the oaths of supremacy and allegiance. This attempt to change the whole political and religious character of the colonies, was defeated by the growing troubles in England, which increased puritan emigration and directed the attention of Gorges to the defence of his master's interests at home. The death of Mason, the coadjutor of Gorges, and the chief instigator of these hostile movements, was another cause of their frustration.

A fleet of eight ships, bound for New England, with emigrants, was detained in the Thames by an order of

* Grahame.

204

HOSTILITY OF THE KING.

council. Mr. Grahame asserts that Hazlerig, Hampden, Pym, and Oliver Cromwell, were among the intended passengers. This is extremely improbable, so far as Cromwell and Pym are concerned; and it is hardly less so with respect to the others; because, when the restriction was removed, the ships sailed without any of these distinguished men as passengers.

In pursuance of the hostile policy of the king, a requisition from the privy council was transmitted (September, 1638,) to the governor and general court of Massachusetts, requiring the charter to be sent to England, that it might abide the issue of the process of quo warranto, that was depending against the colony. In return, the general court petitioned for a fair trial, before they should be condemned; recited the story of their sufferings and sacrifices; and prayed to be heard with their patent in their hands. If it were forcibly withdrawn, they protested that they must abandon the colony. They retained possession of their patent; and before an answer could be returned to their petition, the insurrections which broke out in Scotland directed the whole attention of the king to matters which more nearly concerned him.

The convocation of the Long Parliament afforded the colonists of New England a prospect of exemption from the dangers which had recently menaced them in the arbitrary and hostile proceedings of the king. To promote their interests with the parent state, Hugh Peters and two other persons were despatched as agents, and the mission proved so successful, that in 1643, by a vote of the House of Commons, the inhabitants of all the plantations of New England were exempted from the payment of any duties, upon exports or imports "until the house should make further order therein to the contrary." In return, when the civil war broke out in England, the colonists prohibited the raising of any party for the King of England under the penalty of death. They, however, permitted a trade between their own ports and those in the mother country which were in possession of the royalists. They were also prudent enough to decline the invitation which they received, to depute John Cotton and others of their