BOUGHT WITH THB INCOME FROM THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND THE GIFT OF iienirs M. Sage A....s-s-..d-z-i ^Muh±. Date Due FLD L21963M ?^^^^fe m '?^T' ^C"^' SaGS2iaiaf#-***& Cornell University Library JK51 .S91 1885 The origin of repubiican form of governm Clin 3 1924 030 452 084 Cornell University Library The original of tliis bool< is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030452084 THE ORIGIN OF REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA lUMVI l.(;iTY OSCAR S. STRAUS BY " The name of Republic will be exalted, until every neighbor, yield- ing to irresistible attraction, seeks new life in becoming part of the great whole ; and the national example will be more puissant than army and navy for the conquest of the world."— Charles Sumner's " Prophetic Voices Concerning America." NEW YORK & LONDON P. PUTNAM'S SONS ST^e '^rackithocht ^tess 1887 A. 5-332/ COPYRIGHT BY G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS 1885 Press of G. P. Putnam's Sons New York DEDICATED TO THE CHERISHED MEMORY OF Ha itotte PREFACE. The reasons why the people in the thirteen American colonies, when they dissolved their connection with Great Britain, adopted as their form of polity a Democratic Republic, are usu- ally taken for granted and accepted as a matter of course. I have nowhere been able to find more than a passing allusion to this important subject. During the winter of 1883-4, I de- livered two lectures, one in the city of New York and the other before the Long Island Historical Society in the city of Brook- lyn. The interest awakened by these lec- tures induced me to further investigate the subject and embody the result in a more per- manent form. That this little treatise is ex- haustive of the subject is not claimed, but some facts are presented which I trust may be deemed worthy of consideration. The older and more permanent our government becomes, the greater will be the interest that attaches to its origin vi Preface. and development. Historians have traced the various stages of this development, but I am not aware that it has ever been attempted to present the reasons why the Republican form of government was selected in preference to every other form of polity. I have been led to ascribe its origin mainly to ecclesiastical causes, which operated from the time the Pil- grims set foot upon our continent, and to the direct and indirect influence of the Hebrew Commonwealth. For valuable aid in preparing this book for the press I express grateful acknowledgments to Mr. John Foord, of Brooklyn, and Mr. Daniel G. Thompson, of New York City. Oscar S. Straus. 20 West 46th Street, -New York City, October, 1885. CONTENTS. Chapter I. Introductory. American Colonies Priqr TO Revolution Other revolutions — Forms of government in the various colonies— ^Passing of stamp act — Action of colonial assemblies — First colonial congress — Petition to the king — Declaration of Independence — Revolutions of i68S and 1776 — " Divine right " of kings — Important questions of political development — Course of William III. — Authorities for doctrine of " divine right." Chapter II. The Political Causes of the Revolution Desire for independence of slow growth in the colonies — Nationality of the various colonists — Contributions of colonists to England — Ambition of England — Molasses act and its results — Birth of independence — Greed of England — Statap-act congress — American sympathies in England — Franklin before the House of Commons Resistance to parliamentary encroachments — Boston massacre — ^ Boston tea party — Port bill — England's treatment of Canada — Action on port bill. viii Contents. Chapter III. Religious Causes of the Revolution . 42 Distinction between Puritans and Pilgrims — Colonists not adventurers — Roger Williams — Settlement of Rhode Island — Its Jewish form of government — Religious intolerance in Virginia and Massachusetts — Acts of Virginia Assembly — Attempt to erect an episcopate in the colonies — Parsons' salaries in Vir- ginia — Attitude of different sects toward revolution — Sects in the various colonies — Protestant majority in America. Chapter IV. The Genesis of the Republic ... 70 Disturbances in England not felt by the colonies — Bible and theocracy in New England — Cotton Mather — Hebrew commonwealth as a model of government — Election-day sermons — English commonwealth and its failure — Other republics. Chapter V. Monarchy and the Church _. . .88 Primitive Christians — Catholicism — Union of church and state — Doctrine of ' ' divine right " — Execution of Charles I. — Church of England — Episcopalians in America. Chapter VI. The Hebrew Commonwealth, the First Federal Republic . . . _ j-gj Model for United States— History of children of Israel — Separation of church and slate — Recognitioii of civil equality — Theocratic government not in the hands of priests — Division of Hebrew government — The " con- gregation"— Sidney on Hebrew government— Laws of Moses. Contents. ix Chapter VII. The Influence of the Hebrew Common- wealth, upon THE Origin of Repub- lican Government in the United States ii8 This influence not always recognized — Jonathan Mayhew — Other sermons — Americans compared to Israelites in many discourses — Hebrew commonwealth also held up as a model in political writings — Offer of the soldiers to Washington — Monarchical party spirit — Thomas Paine — Device for seal — Conclusions. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY. THE AMERICAN COLONIES PRIOR TO THE REVOLUTION. My purpose in these pages is to trace the denouement of the last act of the great drama of Empire, the origin of Republican Form of Government in the United States of America. Revolutions similar in many respects to the American Revolution had, before the latter occurred, taken place in the history of nations. Prior revolutions, however, either terminated in failure, and are designated in history as rebel- lions, or when successful, had been so only to the extent of overthrowing the then dominant ruler and putting another in his place, who in a short time relapsed into the abuses of his pre- decessors, or else resulted in the formation of another type of government which contained within itself the same or similar elements of 2 The American Colonies tyranny and oppression. In the oft-quoted couplet : ' ' For forms of government let fools contest. What e'er is best administered is best,'' the philosophical poet Pope, who was born in the year of the Revolution of 1688, expressed in proverbial phrase the experiences of the Eng- lish, who during the preceding generation had witnessed the establishment of no less than four distinct forms of government, which in this short space of time rapidly succeeded one another. First, Absolutism under the guise of limited monarchy during the reign of Charles I., then Parliamentary government under the Long Parliament, then the Commonwealth, then Absolutism again under the last of the Stuarts, and finally Constitutional Monarchy under Wil- liam and Mary. All of these governments were administered with such a degree of partiality that amounted to persecution. The Anglicans, the Presbyterians, the Catholics, and Puritans were either persecutors or persecuted, as they hap- pened to be the dominant party or the reverse. The forms of government that existed in the various American colonies were a mixture of the monarchical and republican types — that is to Prior to the Revolution. 3 say, they were as nearly republican as it was possible to be and yet be circumscribed by royal charters and under the ultimate control of the King and Parliament of Great Britain. On the other hand they were as nearly monarchical as possible and yet be three thousand miles dis- tant from the seat of authority. The com- plaints of the people in the colonies were at no time because of the form of their government, or of that of the mother country, but because of the encroachments upon, and utter disregard of, those natural rights, privileges, and immunities to which they deemed themselves entitled, equally with thoseresiding in England. A brief outline of the colonial governments before the Revolution will give an idea in what respect they were republican and in what monarchical. In the settlement of the various colonies three distinct forms of government were established, arising from the diversity of circumstances under which the respective col- onies were settled, as well as from the various objects of the first settlers. These forms were known as the Provincial or Royal, the Proprie- tary, and the Charter. At the Revolution the Royal form existed in 4 The American Colonies seven colonies, Virginia, New Hampshire, North CaroHna, South Carolina, New York, New Jersey, and Georgia. Under it the King ap- pointed the Governor and Council for the prov- ince, the Assembly was elected by the people. The Council formed the upper house, the lower house being the Assembly. The Proprietary existed in three colonies, Maryland, Pennsyl- vania, and Delaware. It was in most respects similar to the Royal, with this difference mainly, that to the Proprietor, or person to whom the colony was granted, were delegated the powers of the King. The Charter governments were confined to the New England colonies. To these had been granted charters by the King, which gave them in substance the right of local self-government. In them the Governor, Coun- cil, and Assembly were originally, as a rule, chosen by the people. Whatever oppressions and encroachments upon their rights the colo- nists were made to suffer, came through those agencies of their respective forms of govern- ment which owed their existence to the King and Parliament. In the Charter forms, where those agencies did not exist, the King claimed ultimately the right, in opposition to the re- Prior to the Revolution. 5 peated and firm protests of the colonists, to change, alter, and even to abrogate their charters at his pleasure. The New England, or Charter colonies, believing their liberties secure under the express provisions of their charters, natu- rally felt most aggrieved at the royal encroach- ments, and it was not singular that in these colonies the earliest and most determined spirit of independence should have been developed. The colonies were quite contented, so far as their government and connection with the mother country was concerned, until the pass- age of the Stamp Act. They had no desire for a government totally independent of England. In 1764 Virginia, in its appeal to Parliament and the King, declared that if the people could enjoy "their undoubted rights, their connec- tion with Britain, the seat of liberty, would be their great happiness." A separation from Great Britain was viewed with alarm 'and trepidation, and was not only opposed by the Tory party as a whole, but also by many Whigs, who feared it might lead to anarchy and its attendant evils. Many, again, — especially in New York, New Jersey, Pennsyl- vania, and in the Southern colonies, — were dis- 6 The American Colonies posed to trust to the natural lapse of time to bring about redress of grievances. There was another class, who, while they favored separa- tion from the mother country, were positively opposed to Republicanism. The Pennsylvania Assembly (Nov. 9, 1775), mainly through the instrumentality of Dickin- son, instructed its delegates in Congress to endeavor to restore harmony between Great Britain and her colonies: " We strictly enjoin you," is the language, "that you, in behalf of this colony, dissent from and utterly reject any propositions, should such be made, that may cause or lead to a separation from our mother country, or a change of the form of this gov- ernment." ' The Assembly of New Jersey, on the 28th of November, directed its delegates " not to give their assent to, but utterly to reject, any propo- sitions, if such should be made, that may sepa- rate this colony from the mother country, or change the form of government thereof." Governor Franklin, of New Jersey, in his speech to the Assembly, November 16, 1775, 'Reed's " Life of Reed, " I., 155. Frothingham's "Rise of the Republic," p. 463. Prior to the Revolution. 7 said : " As sentiments of independency are by some men of present consequence openly avowed, and essays are already appearing in the public papers to ridicule the people's fears of that horrid measure, and remove their aversions to republican government, it is high time every man should know what he has to expect." The Assembly, in reply, stated that they were aware of such sentiments, and that they had already expressed their detestation of such opinions.' The Maryland Assembly (which assembled) on the 7tli of December, expressed ' similar views. The New York Provincial Con- gress, on the 14th of December, declared that, in their opinion, " none of the people of this colony had withdrawn their allegiance," and that their turbulent state did not arise " from any desire to become independent of the British Crown * * * but solely from the in- roads made on both by the oppressive Acts of the British Parliament," devised for enslaving the American colonies.' The Delaware As- sembly instructed its delegates to promote reconciliation. ' Pennsylvania Evening Post, Nov. l8, 1775. Frothing- ham's " Rise of the Republic,'' p. 466, etc. ' New York Constitutional Gazette, Dec. 16, 1775, 8 The American Colonies By these and similar expressions, and by all the proceedings of the first Congress of dele- gates that met on the 5th of September, 1774, at Carpenter's Hall in Philadelphia, it distinctly appears that the object sought to be attained was a redress of grievances and not the estab- lishment of a separate and independent govern- ment. This Congress in its address to the people of Great Britain directly denies any such purpose. It said : " You have been told that we are impatient of government and de- sirous of independence. These are calumnies. Permit us to be free as yourselves, and we shall ever esteem a union with you to be our greatest glory and our greatest happiness." And again, in the petition to the King written by Dickin- son, containing the ultimate decision of America, the Congress says : " Your royal authority over us and our connection with Great Britain we shall always support and maintain." And they besought the King "As the loving father of his whole people, his interposition for their relief, and a gracious answer to their petition." " We ask," they continued, "but for peace, liberty, and safety. We wish not a diminution of the prerogative, nor the grant of any new right." Prior to the Revolution. 9 By the resolution of the Congress on the loth of May, 1776, it was resolved "to recommend to the respective assemblies and conventions of the United Colonies, where no government sufificient to the exigencies of their affairs had been established, to adopt such a government as should in the opinion of the representatives of the people, best conduce to the happiness and safety of their constituents in particular, and of America in general." ' President Adams, than whom no one more clearly understood the temper of the American people, nor could better read the signs of the times, in his inaugural ad- dress delivered 4th of March, 1797, said : " When it was first perceived in early times that no middle course for America remained between unlimited submission to a foreign legislature and to total independence of its claims, men of reflection were less apprehensive of the danger from the ■ Elliot's Debates, vol. I., 54. " The Declaration we commemorate expressly admitted and asserted that ' Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes.' It dictated no special forms of government for other people and hardly for ourselves. It had no denunciations or even disparagements for monarchies or for empires, but eagerly contemplated, as we do at this hour, alliance and friendly relations with both." — Hon. Robt. C. Winthrop, Centennial Oration, Boston, July 4, 1876. lo The American Colonies formidable power of fleets and armies they must determine to resist, than from those contests and dissensions which would certainly arise con- cerning the forms of government to be insti- tuted over the whole and over parts of this extensive country." The Declaration of Independence was no formative act. It asserted liberty, but did not organize it ; it was what its title implies, a solemn statement of the grievances of the op- pressed and outraged colonists against the tyranny of their rulers, setting plainly, vigor- ously, and eloquently forth the reasons for their action, grounded upon " self-evident truths," upon those fundamental rights of man and principles of civil liberty which were as old as the Bible, and had been asserted again and again under various forms and not unlike cir- cumstances by every uprising of the people against the injustice and oppressions of the governing power, which had taken place from the days of Moses until the Declaration was published to the world. As to the objects of the Declaration, let the author speak for him- self : it was " not to find out new principles or new arguments never before thought of, not Prior to the Revolution. 1 1 merely to say things which had never been said before, but to place before mankind the common-sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take." " It was no dissertation on government, nor concerning the forms of government, nor did it propose any other change than the transformation of the colonies into " free and independent States." While it provided for a new State, it did not contemplate a new species of State. It nowhere even so much as hinted at a preference for one species of government over another — that was not in the contemplation of the instrument. " We hold these truths to be self-evident," is the language : " that all men are created equal ; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalien- able rights ; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to ' Letter by Jefferson to Henry Lee, May 8, 1825. 1 2 The American Colonies abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." " The closing scene of the great drama of Em- pire was being enacted, this solemn protest of the American people against every form of arbitrary power. The manifestations of the same forces that brought about the Revolution of 1688 also produced the Revolution of 1776; with this difference, that the English revolution stopped when constitutional limitations had been placed around the prerogatives of the crown, while the American revolution was a grand step onward, destined to transfer the sov- ereign powers of the crown to the people, to whom they always belonged, but with whom they so rarely abided. The might, the right, and the power, of the people having been wrested from them in the dawn of history and exalted so high over their heads by the arts of designing princes, that they prostrated them- selves before this trinity of their own creation and worshipped it under the form of " Divine right of kings." The usurper's title, through Prior to the Revolution. 1 3 ages of wrongs and bloody oppressions, by the servility of cunning ecclesiastics, went through an evolution of fanatical consecration, and there- by transformed its bearer into a demi-god under the appellation of " King by the Grace of God." The natural notions of polity, by violent re- straints put upon the promulgating of any juster derivation of the rights of mankind, were erased out of the minds of men, and they were imbued with a confused notion of something adorable in monarchs as the personal represen- tations of the Divinity. So habituated were the people to the pomp and the power of monarchy, that they blindly and by force of habit associated with it their most exalted ideas of natural right and personal liberty. The claims of the British monarch to these divine attributes had not been abandoned, as we shall have occasion to show in another chapter, so far as the colonies were concerned, at the time even immediately prior to our revolu- tion. The Declaration of Independence was so radical a protest against this absurd worship- ping of kingly person and power, that some of the churches of the- colonies had to change 14 The American Colonies their litany to conform with its teachings.' In our day we can with difficulty form a correct conception of what mighty battles of reason had to be fought in order to educate the popu- lar mind up to the standard which made the Declaration of Independence possible ; and after the Declaration, all during the trying period of the revolution, what a moral force and power of persuasive argument it required, especially during intervals of reverses, to keep alive the spirit of liberty ; or even after the revolu- tion, until the adoption of the Constitution, what a power of lofty patriotism based upon the fundamental principles of natural right was brought into living action to overcome the hereditary awe for royalty and the confused no- tions as to " unlimited submission." Such revo- ' ' ' This day (29th July, 1776), the Virginia convention resolved that the following sentences in the morning and evening church service shall be omitted : ' O Lord, save the King and merci- fully hear us vifhen we call upon thee. ' That the fifteenth, six- teenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth sentences in the Litany for the King's majesty and the Royal family, etc., shall be omitted. That the two prayers for the King's majesty and the Royal family in the morning and evening service shall be omitted. That the prayers in the Communion service which acknowledge the authority of the King, and so much of the prayer for the church militant as declares the same authority, shall be omitted." — New York Gazette, July 29, 1776. Prior to the Revolution. 1 5 lutions as that of i ^16 had taken place before. They had occurred in Greece, in Rome, in Carthage, in Switzerland, in Holland, and even in England. What distinguishes the Revolu- tion of 1776, and marks it with such singu- lar pre-eminence, is not its feats of bravery, though they were by no means insignificant; not its duration, for it was short compared with many wars that history records ; not the numbers that were brought face to face in hostile array, for the armies were but insig- nificant compared with those that had con- tended on many blood-dyed battle-fields; but the results that followed, — the glorious fact that the crown was lifted from the royal brow and placed upon the head of the people, that civil liberty gained all the sword had won. The ever-important questions of political de- velopment are : By what means were these results attained ? From what sources of political sci- ence did the great founders of our government draw their inspiration ? What guiding pre- cedents sanctified by authority did they follow ? What models applicable by reason of the bless- ings of liberty thereunder secured did they adopt ? It is an established fact in the history 1 6 The American Colonies of nations, that systems are reformed by revert- ing to first principles. The accumulated rub- bish of ages is dug away and the pillars of state are made to rest on original and firm foundations. Says Dr. Price, the philosophical author and distinguished contemporaneous ob- server of early American political affairs: " The" colonies were at the beginning of this reign (George III.) in the habit of acknowledging our authority, and of allowing us as much power over them as our interest required ; and more, in some instances, than we could reasonably claim. By exertions of authority which have alarmed them, they have been put upon ex- amining into the grounds of all our claims. Mankind are naturally disposed to continue in subjection to that mode of government, be it what it will, under which they have been born and educated. Nothing rouses them into re- sistance but gross abuses or some particular oppressions out of the road to which they have been used." ' When England began her encroachments upon the rights and liberties of the colonies, their first step was to petition for relief, the next was re- ' " Observations on the Nature of Civil Liberty," etc., p. 34. Prior to the Revolution. 1 7 course to reason and argument and appeals to the principles of right and justice, and their natural ultimatum was the implements and munitions of war to defend their lives, protect their liberty, and preserve their property. While it is true that the Revolution of 1688 had se- cured for England definite constitutional rights, the effect was not the same in the colonies. If the rights the colonies then were permitted to enjoy can be termed liberty, it was only that un- settled and restricted kind of liberty that the English people possessed before the Bill of Rights. Even William III., who was born a citizen of a republic, a descendant of the found- ers of Batavian liberty, who might naturally have been expected to be a friend of popular institutions, was no herald of liberty to the colonies. His course was as absolute towards them as that of the Stuarts. He revived against them the navigation acts, and also the Board of Trade and Plantations. He withheld from them the writ ol habeas corpus, and he and his successor violated, changed, and abrogated their charters. What was acknowledged as the constitutional rights of the Englishman was denied to the Americans. This was forcibly set forth in the 1 8 The American Colonies address of the delegates in Congress to the people of Great Britain, bearing the date 5th of September, 1774, in the following language: " Can the intervention of the sea that divides us cause disparity in rights, or can any reason be given why English subjects who live three thousand miles from the royal palace should enjoy less liberty than thdse who are three hundred distant from it?" The consequence was that the people in America had to fight over again the same battles for constitutional liberties which the English had fought before them, and in fighting them they were brought face to face with natural rights, the basis of all sovereignty and government. George III., so far as his claims over the colonies were con- cerned, relied as much upon the kingly preroga- tives, the doctrine of "Divine Right," as ever did James I. All of these pretensions, all of the questions of right and liberty, had to be re- argued. To refute this false theory of kingly power it was not only expedient but necessary to revert to the earliest times, to the most sacred records, the Old Testament, for illustra- tions and for argument, chiefly because the doc- trine of " Divine Right," " King by the Grace Prior to the Revolution. 19 of God," and its corollaries, " unlimited sub- mission and non-resistance," were deduced, or rather distorted from the New Testament, ' having been brought into the field of politics with the object of enslaving the masses through their religious creed. This incubus had to be lifted from the science of politics before the simplest principles of personal liberty could logically be contended for. It was of first im- portance to employ such argument as possessed the sacred stamp of the Scriptures. Any other, though as conclusive as mathematical axiom, would not avail, especially among those to whom the Bible was a political as well as a religious text-book and of infallible authority. These authorities and arguments were found in the Old Testament, woven into the history and de- velopment of the Hebrew Commonwealth." In ' Romans xiii., i-8. I. Peter ii., 13 and 14. '^ " It is, at least, an historical fact, that in the great majority of instances the early Protestant defenders of civil liberty de- rived their ^political principles chiefly from the Old Testament, and the defenders of despotism from the New. The rebellions that were so frequent in Jewish history formed the favorite topic of the one — the unreserved submission inculcated by St. Paul, of the other. When, therefore, all the principles of right and wrong were derived from theology, and when by the rejection of traditions and ecclesiastical authority. Scripture be- came the sole arbiter of theological difficulties, it was a matter 20 The American Colonies. what manner and with what force and effect they were employed will be seen in the suc- ceeding chapters. of manifest importance, in ascertaining the political tendencies of any sect, to discover which Testament was most congenial to the tone and complexion of its theology." — Lecky's " Ration- alism in Europe." vol, II., i58. CHAPTER II. THE POLITICAL CA USES OF THE HE VOLUTION. The impelling causes of the revolution were of two separate and distinct classes, \vhich became united during the decade immediately preceding that event. They were religious and political, or the long and the short causes re- spectively. In this chapter we shall confine ourselves to summarizing the political causes, even at the risk of repeating that which is familiar to the general reader, so that they may be more readily contrasted with the religious causes, which will be considered in the succeed- ing chapters. In the American colonies both the desire and purpose of establishing a separate, independent or republican form of government were of very slow growth.' Not one of the statesmen who ' The New York Gazette of April 8, 1776, contains a paper entitled " Plan of the American Compact." The writer asks : ' ' For what are we to encounter the horrors of war ? " etc. He answers : " It is a form of government which Baron Montes- 21 22 The Political Causes assisted in the framing of the new government had been originally a republican. Even Jeffer- son, as late as August, 1/75, in a letter to John Randolph, expresses himself as belonging to that class of Americans who had rather be de- pendent upon England, under proper limitations, than to be dependent on any other nation or on no nation whatsoever. The people who planted the colonies were originally subjects of rival powers, and this circumstance was an additional incentive for their successors to cherish their allegiance to England, with the object of claim- ing the protection of the mother country against the threatening aggressions of other European nations, as well as against the en- croachments of one colony upon the other. The Congress that adopted the Declaration of Independence recognized the natural tendency of every people to hold fast to the blessings of peace rather than resort to the arbitrament of war quieu and the best writers on the subject have shown to be attended with many mischiefs and imperfections, while they pay high encomiums on the excellency of the British Constitu- tion. The Continental Congress has never lisped the least de- sire for independency or republicanism. All their publications breathe another spirit." This plan was reprinted in pamphlet, entitled " Observations on the Reconciliation of Great Britain and the Colonies." Of the Revolution. 23 so long as " ills are sufferable." Its^words are : " Prudence indeed will dictate that govern- ments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes ; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer while ills are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them to absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such governments, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the pa- tient sufferance of these colonies ; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government." In the struggle between England and France for dominion in America, not one of the colo- nies proved false to its allegiance. Their zeal surpassed even that of the mother country. The war was not undertaken for the relief or the advantage of the colonies, but to gratify the ambition of England by enlarging its colonial dominion, yet as they had derived from its successful ending considerable benefit, this fact 24. The Political Causes was made the plausible basis for the claim that they ought to bear a portion of the burden of expense it had entailed upon the nation. The fact that the colonies had of their own ac- cord already contributed about twenty-five thousand lives and over sixteen millions of dollars, was not considered, or if taken into account did not serve to restrain the rapacity of George III., his ministers and Parliament. Whatever serious differences, if any there were, between the colonies and the mother country, prior to this war, had been removed by its suc- cessful termination. " This event," says Pit- kin, " produced great joy amongst the colonists, and was accompanied with feelings of gratitude toward the young prince (George III.), in whose reign it was accomplished. Their feelings would have continued but for new encroach- ments upon their rights." ' These encroach- ments were not slow in coming. The English Government no longer requiring the aid of the colonies upon the continent of America, through whose arms and money she had van- quished her most powerful rival, sought to make them contribute to, lighten the pressure ' Pitkin's " History of the U. S.," vol. I., 155. Of the Revolution. 25 of the general expense of the home govern- ment. In accordance with this policy, Parlia- ment attempted to put into execution an act passed many years before under George II., but which had become a dead letter upon the statute-books, " An act for the better securing and encouraging the trade of" his Majesty's col- onies in America," commonly known as the " Molasses Act," whereby a duty of six pence was placed on molasses and other articles, being in some instances one half of their value. A determined attempt to enforce these laws to the letter was the forerunner of a system of direct taxation, the result of which, if allowed to begin, no one could foretell. Cruisers were stationed along the coast, custom-house ofificers and informers were stimulated by oifers of re- ward, and writs of assistance were granted which gave the possessor the right to search and seize merchandise, on the plea that it was smuggled, no name or specific offence being set out in the writ ; the officer holding it could select any house he saw fit and search it, he alone being sole judge if there existed probable cause for so extraordinary a proceeding, which was a gross violation of that sacred principle of 26 The Political Causes the common law, that every man's house is his castle. The legality of these writs was denied. When the cause which was to determine this question came on for trial in the city of Boston, in the council chamber of the Old Town House in February, 1761, James Otis, a lawyer of marked ability, resigned his lucrative office of advocate-general of the Crown, which would have obliged him to argue in favor of the writs, and together with Oxenbridge Thatcher ap- peared as counsel for the petitioner in opposi- tion thereto. Here was ignited the torch of liberty that kindled the bonfires of the Revolu- tion. " Then and there," according to John Adams, who was present at the hearing, " was the first scene of the first act of opposition to the arbitrary claims of Great Britain. Then and there the child Independence was born. In fifteen years — that is, in 1776, he grew up to manhood and declared himself free." Otis is described upon this argument as being " a flame of fire." He stood up as the bold and brilliant advocate of colonial rights and human liberty. It was he who on this occasion uttered the stirring words, the very keynote of indepen- dence, " Taxation without representation is Of the Revolution. 2 7 tyranny." The plea of Otis, formulated in legal terms and in eloquent phrases the rights and grievances of the colonies. It asserted principles and cited proof to sustain them, the truth of which was felt before, but never until now so boldly and forcibly expressed. The court has not to -this day given its decision ; that decision was destined to be written in the blood of revolution, and is now recognized as of binding authority by all constitutional gov- ernments of the earth. The need and greed of England kept the colonies in constant alarm. In February, 1765, Mr. Granville, the King's Prime-Minister, intro- 'duced into Parliament the bill which is known as the Stamp Act, and which passed with but little opposition. The law was not to go into effect until about eight months after its passage. As soon as the news of the passage of this bill reached America, newspapers, pamphlets, and the pulpits issued their protests against it in words so forcible and direct that did not leave men to doubt that the colonies knew their rights, and that unless England would soon retract its policy, they would have the courage to maintain them at the hazard of their lives 28 The Political Causes and fortunes. The General Court of Massa- chusetts assembled in May, and immedi- ately resolved that all the colonies should be invited to send delegates to a general con- gress, to be held in New York the October following, to consult together on the present state of affairs, and to determine what course to be pursued. An agreement not to import any goods from England till the obnoxious act should be repealed was very generally entered into. Delegates from nine colonies assembled in New York on the 7th of October, they published a Declaration of Rights, and addressed a petition to the King and to the two houses of Parlia- ment. After a session of little more than a fortnight this congress, known as the " Stamp Act Congress," dissolved. The cause of the colonies was taken up in England by some of her ablest statesmen, amongst whom was William Pitt, afterwards Earl of Chatham, energetically seconded by Conway, Colonel Barr6, and, also, by Lord Camden, afterwards the Lord Chancellor, one of the highest legal authorities in the realm. This powerful oppo- sition brought about a change of ministry in July, 1765. Dr. Franklin, who lived during this Of the Revolution. 29 time in London, as the agent of the colony of Pennsylvania, was summoned before the House of Commons, in a committee of the whole, to be examined touching the wishes and feelings of the colonies. The examination lasted ten days. The Journal of the Commons records: "February 13, 1766, Benjamin Franklin, having passed through his examination, was excepted from further attendance " ; and, February 24th, the committee reported " that it was their opin- ion that the House be moved that leave be given to bring in a bill to repeal the Stamp Act"; and on the i8th of March the repeal was signed. Franklin's testimony served to in- form the people of England of the precise attitude of the colonies, as well as the grounds upon which they rested their opposition to such legislation. A brief extract from this examina- tion will give the best insight into the question at issue : " Q. If the Stamp Act is not repealed, what do you think will be the consequence ? "A. A total loss of the respect and affections the people of America bear to this country, and of all the commerce that depends on that respect and affection. 30 The Political, Causes " Q. If the Stamp Act should be repealed, would it induce the AssembUes of America to acknowledge the right of Parliament to tax. them? " A. No, never ! * * * No power, how great soever, can force men to change their opinions." It had been argued that this class of legislation was just, as a means of compelling the colonies to reimburse England in part for the money spent on their account in wars with the French and the Indians. How this was met and refuted by Franklin this examination will show. " Q. Do you think it right that America should be protected by this country, and pay no part of the expense ? "A. That is not the case. The colonies raised, clothed, and paid, during the last year, nearly twenty-five thousand men, and spent many mil- lions." He further testified concerning the French and Indian wars : " I know that the last war is commonly spoken of here as entered into for the defence, or for the sake, of the peo- ple of America. I think it is quite misunder- stood. It began about the limits between Canada and Nova Scotia ; about territories to which the CrowA indeed laid claim, but which of the Revolution. 3 1 were not claimed by any British colony. None of the lands had been granted to any colonist ; we had therefore no particular concern, nor interest in that dispute." ' ' Another equally high authority, one of the greatest philosophers of his time, and no indif- ferent observer of Britain's treatment of her colonies. Dr. Richard Price, said : " But we have, it is said, protected them and run deeply in debt on their account. Will any one say that all we have done for them has not been more on our own account, than on theirs? The full answer to this has been already given. Have they made no compensation for the pro- tection they have received ? Have they not helped us pay our taxes, to support our poor, and to bear the burden of our debts, by taking from us, at our own price, all the commodities which we can supply them ? In short, were an accurate account stated, it is by no means cer- tain which side would appear to be most in- debted." ' Every new attempt of Parliament to enforce under a different guise its unjust claims of taxa- ' Hansard, XVI., 205, etc. ' "Observation on the Nature of Civil Liberty," etc., by Richard Price (1776), p. 22. 32 The Political Causes tion, met with renewed resistance and with stronger opposition, thereby alienating more and more the affection of the colonies, and to that extent tended to unite them in a closer union. The rejoicings caused by the repeal of the Stamp Act had scarcely ceased when an- other act was passed by Parliament with the same object in view, imposing duties on all teas, paper, glass, paint, and lead, that should be imported into the colonies. This act was passed under the guise of regulating trade, and was intended to escape the objections made against the former act, as the tax was external. The flame of the opposition was kindled anew, non-importation agreements were renewed, ex- tending not only to taxed articles, but to all British commodities. This struck straight back into the pockets of the English people, which, to a commercial nation, is always a most sensi- tive and vulnerable point of attack. The colonists petitioned for the repeal of the act, and in compliance with their demand the duty was taken off from all the articles mentioned save only tea ; this was but a paltry tax, being three pence per pound, with a drawback on the value, of a shilling on the pound, the amount of the Revolution. 33 originally paid on the importation of the article into Great Britain ; which resulted in making the price of the tea lower than if there were no tax or drawback. The question at stake was not the three pence, but the right of Britain to levy the tax.. This once acquiesced in, other taxes would inevitably follow. The Massachusetts Assembly met and deter- mined on stringent measures. It was resolved to send a petition to the King wherein were set forth the conditions of their settlement as a colony, and maintaining that there could not be taxation without representation ; they also protested against the presence of a standing - army. Governor Bernard and the Crown offi- cers sent to the King counter-memorials, setting forth the rebellious attitude and independent spirit of the colonists, and recommending the presence of a fleet and troops. In 1768, two regiments of British troops, which were subse- quently increased to four, were sent to Boston, which was then, and had always been, the hot- bed of opposition. Conflicts between the citi- zens and the revenue officers in Rhode Island and elsewhere were reported, and the people in Boston became every day more irritated by the 34 The Political Causes presence of spldiers who were there for the pur- pose of dragooning the people into submission. The General Assembly, foreseeing that a con- flict between the citizens and soldiers was likely to occur at the slightest provocation, and desirous of avoiding any hostile collision, re- quested Governor Hutchinson that the troops be withdrawn. This request was denied, the Governor shielding himself by asserting lack of authority. On the 5th of March, 1770, a con- flict between the citizens, or rather a mob, and the soldiers took place, insults were followed by missiles and missiles by fire and shot, then by promiscuous firing from a number of sol- diers, whereby three of the citizens were killed and several wounded. This collision was ex- aggerated until it gained the alarming title of the Boston Massacre. The anniversary of this event, celebrated by public gatherings and by the pulpit, served to inflame the passions of the multitude and to develop and keep alive resist- ance to English authority. The fact was lost sight of that the officers and soldiers who had fired on the populace, and were indicted and tried for murder, were all acquitted except two, these being found guilty of manslaughter and of the Revolution. 35 slightly punished, and that they had been de- fended by John Adams and Josiah Quincy, two young lawyers who were among the most ar- dent of the popular leaders. The " Molasses Act " was one of the first causes of bitterness between England and her colonies; the "Sugar Act" in 1764 did not at all sweeten these relations; and now, in 1773, the kettle of discord was destined to boil by reason of the duty on tea. In this year the contest was brought to a crisis by reason of ar- rangements which were entered into on the part of the ministry with the East India Company for the consignment of several cargoes of tea to the principal American ports. The tax on tea had been retained for the express purpose of up- holding and vindicating the authority of Parlia- ment. This tax was substantially nullified, partly by smuggling, and partly because America did not import much of this commodity. As soon as this project with the East India Company be- came known in the colonies, steps were taken to counteract it. At Philadelphia a public meeting was held ; eight resolutions were passed against taxation by Parliament, and denounced as an enemy to his country " whoever shall aid or abet 36 The Political Causes in unloading, receiving, or vending the tea." In Boston a town-meeting was held at which Han- cock presided, and adopted the Philadelphia reso- lutions. A committee was appointed to wait upon the consignees and request them to resign the cargoes. This the consignees refused to do. On December i6th the crisis was reached by a band of about fifty men, dressed as Mohawk Indians, boarding the tea vessels and emptying three hundred and forty-two chests in the water. History doth not record who these fifty men were. Circumstances would seem to indicate they were not of that class that constitute mobs, but men who acted no insignificant part in the stirring events that made the next ten years memorable for all time to come. When the news of this occurrence reached England the indignant ministry resolved to mete out punishment to the rebellious Bostonians. An act was passed to shut up the port of Boston, known as the " Boston-Port Bill " ; a second, " for better regulating the government of Mas- sachusetts Bay," amounting practically to an abrogation of the charter. A third act, intend- ed not only to meet cases like the Boston Massacre, but reaching much further, provided of the Revolution. 37 for the trial in England of all persons charged in the colonies with murder or other capital offences. A fourth provided for the quartering of troops, four more regiments being sent to Boston, so that the town was now strongly- guarded. General Gage, who -was directed to resume command, was also commissioned, as Governor of Massachusetts, to succeed Hutchin- son. A fifth bill, known as the " Quebec Act," passed at the same session, for the purpose of preventing Canada from joining with the other colonies. It guaranteed to the Catholic Church possession of its vast amount of property and full freedom of worship. The boundaries of the province were also extended to the Missis- sippi on the west and the Ohio on the south, so as to include, besides the present Canada, the territory of the five States that are now north- west of the Ohio. This last act, with the ex- ception perhaps of the Boston Port Bill, was most effectual in alienating the colonies. It was construed as an effort on the part of Par- liament to create an Established Church, and that not alone, but the establishment of that church which was most hateful to and dreaded by the great majority of the people in the colo- 38 The Political Causes nies. The object Parliament intended to effect by the passage of this act was purely one of state policy, and so far as Canada herself was concerned, it was a wise and diplomatic step. But viewed from the side of the other colonies, it had quite a different character. It was re- garded as an experiment for setting up an arbitrary government in one colony which was more submissive than the others, in order to extend by degrees a like method of government over all the other colonies. Had an equally conciliatory course been followed by England toward her own original colonies, which were bound to the mother country by all the ties of loyalty, origin, kindred, a common tongue, and the Protestant religion, what happened in re- spect to Canada would undoubtedly have been the result in the other colonies. Canada had been won by conquest, having been ceded to England only twelve years before this time, by the Peace of Paris, in 1762. Force was the only bond of union between her and England. A breach between England and her other Ameri- can colonies now existed, which the first four bills above referred to were not likely to mend, but, on the contrary, to widen. Such being the of the Revolution. 39 circumstances, Parliament foresaw that Canada would probably embrace this opportunity to rid herself of the power that held her ; so it threw to her the bait that she would be most likely to take — the two matters that lay closest to the hearts of the people of that province — the sub- stitution of the French civil or Roman law in all civil matters, and the establishment of the Catholic religion. The ancient hostility be- tween Romanism and Protestanism was thus utilized and placed as a wedge of separation' between Canada and the thirteen colonies.' The particulars of the destruction of the tea were received in London by the New York mail on January 19, 1774. On the 7th of March the King in messages to both Houses recom- mended the matter to their serious considera- tion. The Boston-Port Bill was moved by ' This subject was very pointedly referred to by the minority in the House of Commons when the Quebec Act came up for discussion. It was claimed that this measure could not fail to add to the discontent and apprehension of the other colonies, in that they could attribute the extension given to arbitrary military government, and to a people alien in origin, laws, and religion, as the Canadians were, to nothing else but the design of utterly extinguishing the liberties of the other American colonies, and bringing them, by the arms of those very people whom they had helped to conquer, into most abject vassalage. — See Dodsley's Annual Register iox 1774, p. 76. 40 The Political Causes Lord North on the 14th of March, and on the 31st it received the royal assent and be- came a law. The act was received in Boston on the loth of May ; it was printed soon after on paper with mourning lines. The Committee of Correspondence invited the committees of eight neighboring towns to meet for delibera- tion in Faneuil- Hall. Samuel Adams pre- sided and Joseph Warren drew up its papers. The inhabitants addressed a circular-letter to all the sister colonies. The effect of the recep- tion of these circulars in the various colonies was the noble purpose to stand by Massachu- setts. Providence resolved that all the colonies were concerned in the; Port Act, and recom- mended a congress. In Virginia the House of Burgesses, in resolutions penned by Jefferson, declared that an attack made on one colony was an attack on all, and recommended that the Committee of Correspondence communicate with other committees on the expediency of holding an annual congress. Expressions in favor of a general congress of all the colonies came pouring in from all sides. The people were aroused. The Tories favored the measure as a means most likely to obtain a redress of the Revolution. 41 of grievances, and the Whigs as the first move toward resisting the encroachments of Parlia- ment and for bringing the colonies into a firmer union.' The Boston Evening Post of June 20th stated that a congress " was the general desire of the continent, in order to agree on effectual measures for defeating the despotic designs of those who were endeav- oring to effect the ruin of the colonies." ' For a very minute summary of the action taken in the vari- ous colonies relating to a congress the reader is referred to Richard Frothingham's excellent work, " The Rise of the Re- public of the U. S.," p. 332, etc. CHAPTER III. RELIGIOUS CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION. The religious element of the revolution was imparted to it by the very circumstances which caused in September, 1620, a company of Eng- lish Protestants, exiles for religion, to encounter the dangers of the deep and set sail for a new world, and by the causes which impelled Win- throp and his band of Puritans ten years after to fly from the tyranny of Laud, and settle along the northern shores of Massachusetts Bay. " It is certain that civil dominion was but the secondary motive, rehgious the primary, with our ancestors in coming hither and settling in this land." ' A distinction is to be noted between the two colonies above mentioned, in respect to their attitude toward the Established Church. The first of these colonies is known as the Pilgrims, the second as the Puritans. The Pilgrims were ' President Ezra Stiles. 42 of the Revolution. 43 organized as a church before they left Holland ; they were independents in religion and were separated entirely from the Church of England. Their residence in Holland had made them acquainted with various forms of religion, and had the effect of emancipating them to a degree from bigotry and intolerance ; wherefore they manifested in their subsequent history a much more tolerant and liberal spirit than their brethren of the Bay. They maintained that ecclesiastical censures were wholly spiritual, and not to be visited with temporal penalties. The Puritans of Massachusetts Bay Colony were not separated from the Church of England, "though they scrupled conformity to several of its ceremonies." The reign of James I. was a period of transition from arbitrary govern- ment to an incipient assertion of popular rights, and his long and continuous quarrels with Par- liament led to an investigation of political principles, and to the questioning of the claims of arbitrary power. The Puritans were at the bottom of this conflict, and during its con- tinuance they grew in numbers, in hope, and in courage. In 1625 James died, and the acces- sion of a new sovereign was an opportune 44 Religious Causes occasion for the friends of popular rights to organize. What was at first a question in the Church concerning ceremonies was now trans- formed into a principle in poUtics, between the King on the one side and the Parliament on the other. For four years more under Charles the conflict went on in this form, when a temporary- victory was gained for royalty by the King dis- solving the third Parliament in a passibn, in utter contempt of every claim and principle of popular right. When the Parliament of 1629 was dissolved all hopes of relief through legis- lative means had to be abandoned. The powers of Church and State were now allied in an ag- gressive policy against puritanism and freedom. Laud, the most despotic of bishops, was by Charles promoted step by step in the episcopal office till, in 1633, he was consecrated Arch- bishop of Canterbury, the primate of the Epis- copal Church, the representative man of the Hierarchy, and chief of the High Commission. " As this dismal state of things approached, and especially when it was reached, patriotic and religious Englishmen asked themselves, and one another what was the course of honor and of safety. While some among them still of the Revolution. \S looked for relief to a renewal and a happy issue of the struggle that had been going on in Parliament, and resigned themselves to await and help on the progress of a political and re- ligious reformation in the kingdom ; others, less confident, or less patient, pondered on exile as the best resource, and turned their view to a new home on the Western Continent." ' The class of emigrants that were now coming to America were of a grade socially and intel- lectually superior to the Pilgrims. There were among them clergymen and physicians, univer- sity graduates, and English country gentlemen of no inconsiderable fortunes. The causes and motives that impelled them to leave homes of ease and comfort in England, and the pleasant society of friends, to risk the dangers of the deep and the still greater dangers and uncer- tainties that awaited them on land, were not such as would be likely to leave only a fading impression on them or their immediate descend- ants. The colonists were not adventurers who had all to gain and nothing to lose. They were not men who were driven by a restless spirit of enterprise, nor by thirst for gold, but purely by ' Palfrey's " History of New England," vol. I., 93. 46 Religious Causes a desire for the enjoyment of spiritual liberty, without which life was to them unendurable, and for the love of which they were ready to hazard all. The motives which actuated these early colonists were in one sense narrow and selfish, but of that kind of selfishness which is so near akin to public virtue, that it is fre- quently confounded with it. Hence arises the abuse and reproach which many writers heap upon our Puritan forefathers for the bigotry and intolerance which characterize their early history, forgetting, or losing sight of the fact that they came here purely and simply to seek freedom of worship for themselves, and that they founded their colonies so that they might have a dominion of their own to exercise it in. The golden rule found no application outside their own contracted sphere. The great God of nations never intended this vast continent of ours for a faction, nor for a sect ; it was to be the asylum for the oppressed of every land. The problem of liberty was to be solved in this new world, and all the old world was destined to contribute to its solution. Every new act of oppression on the isles and continent of Europe drove additional exiles to our shores, of the Revolution. 47 and every new colony represented a different shade of religious opinion. The earliest champion of religious freedom, or " soul liberty," as he designated that most precious jewel of all liberties, was Roger Wil-' liams. He came to America on the 5th of February, 163 1, when he was about thirty years of age, to escape the Laudian persecution. He was a distant relative of Oliver Cromwell, and a friend of Milton and Henry Vane, the younger. To him rightly belongs the immortal fame of having been the first person in modern times to assert and maintain in its fullest plenitude the absolute right of every man to " a full liberty in religious concernments," and to found a state wherein this doctrine was the keystone of its organic laws. Before the great Locke advo- cated the principles of toleration, before Milton wrote his Eiconoclastes, before the patriotic hero and martyr Sidney taught the people the true origin of their rights in his " Dis- courses Concerning Government," Roger Wil- liams, the first pure type of an American freeman, proclaimed the laws of civil and re- ligious liberty, that " the people were the origin of all free power in government," that 48 Religious Causes God has given to men no power over con- science, nor can men grant this power to each other; that the regulation of the conscience is not one of the purposes for which men combine in civil society. For uttering such heresies this great founder of our liberties was banished out of the jurisdiction of the Puritans in America, and driven into the wilderness to endure the severity of our northern winter and the bitter pangs of hunger. For means of subsistence he depended on the Indians, whose trustworthy and trusted friend he became and ever remained. He endeavored at a subse- quent period to procure a repeal of the sen- tence of his banishment, but the rigorous spirit of intolerance prevailed, and the founder of Rhode Island continued till his death an out- law from Massachusetts.' "' The reader is referred to a series of articles by John Foord, now editor of the Brooklyn Union, which appeared in the Sun- day edition of the New York Times, in May, 1876, entitled "Religious Liberty in the United States," with special refer- ence to the life, trials, and eminent services of Roger Williams, and from which we quote : ' ' He was the first thorough-going democrat who had a share in moulding the institutions of this continent, and he was the first to demonstrate that perfect re- ligious freedom is compatible with civil order, and that perfect civil liberty admits of no constraint being placed on the opinions or consciences of men. . . . On the subject of of the Revolution. 49 Some time about June, 1636, Williams, with his five companions, left their frail canoe and came on shore and founded the town, which, in grateful remembrance of " God's merciful providence to him in his distress," he gave the name of Providence. " I desired," said he, " it might be for shelter for persons distressed for conscience." The infant community at Provi- dence at once set about to frame laws for government in strict accord with tlie spirit of the settlement. All were required to sub- scribe to the following covenant or constitution : " We, whose names are hereunder written, being desirous of to inhabit in the town of Providence, do promise to submit ourselves in active and passive obedience to all such orders or agreements as shall be made for public good of the body, in an orderly way, by the major consent of the present inhabitants, masters of families incorporated together into a township, and such others as they shall admit into the same, only in civil things." This simple instru- religious freedom lie promulgated views which were gieatly in advance of the age which saw their publication, and which are far from being generally accepted in an age which owes to the triumph of such principles nearly all which it possesses in the way of enlightenment and culture." So Religious Causes ment is the earliest constitution of government whereof we have any record, which not only tolerated all religions, but recognized as a right, absolute liberty of conscience. The colony at Providence was rapidly increased by the arrival of persons from other colonies, and from Europe, attracted thither by the liberal pro- visions of its laws and freedom in matters of conscience which were there guaranteed. In 1637-8, Portsmouth and Newport were settled, practically as one colony. The settlers were, like Williams and his companions, exiles or emigrants from Massachusetts. " In imitation of the form of government which existed for a time among the Jews, the inhabitants chose Mr. Coddington to be their magistrate, with the title of Judge ; and a few months afterward they elected three elders to assist him.'" In 1663 a charter was obtained from Charles II., being the second charter of the colony, which contitiues to the present day to be the funda- mental law of the State. It contains this most important provision embodying the principles upon which the colony was founded. " No per- son within the said colony at any time hereafter ' " Memoir of Roger Williams," by Prof. Knowles, p. 145. of the Revolution. 5 1 shall be any wise molested, punished, disquieted, or called in question for any differences in opinion, in matters of religion, who do not actually disturb the civil peace of our said colony ; but that all and every person and persons may from time to time, and at all times hereafter, freely and fully, have and enjoy his own and their judgments and consciences, in matters of religious concernments." Some writers have claimed for Lord Baltimore, proprietor of Maryland, priority in estabhshing religious liberty on this continent. Undoubted author- ity, however, proves that not only in point of time did the first laws of Rhode Island in respect to religious liberty precede those of Maryland, but that they also were more com- prehensive in their liberaHty. The first law of Maryland respecting religious liberty was enacted in 1649, while in Rhode Island in 1647 the first General Assembly adopted a code of laws, relating exclusively to civil concerns, and concluding with these words : " All men may walk as their consciences persuade them, every one in the name of his God." ' ' For a full discussion of the question see Knowles' " Roger Williams," p. 371, 52 Religious Causes Without detracting from the glory of Lord Baltimore, for the liberty he established in Maryland was fully a century in advance of his times, it evidently did not rise to the standard of Rhode Island, in that it extended only to Christians. Having briefly traced the dawn of religious liberty in the smallest of the original colonies, we will now take a view of the religious struggle and its intolerant attitude in the two principal colonies, Virginia and Massachusetts. The colony of Virginia was the first permanent settlement of Englishmen in North America, dating from the founding of Jamestown in 1607. The charter of this colony enjoined the estab- lishment of religion according to the doctrine and usages of the Church of England. Devotion to the Church was a test of loyalty to the King, its " head and defender." In each parish all the inhabitants were .taxed alike for the support of the churches of the established order. Dur- ing the civil war in England, the colony of Virginia, which now had a Legislature of its own, espoused the cause of the King against Crom- well and the Parliament, and hence adhesion to the Established Church was made a test of of the Revolution. 53 loyalty to the colonial government, and non- conformity was identified with republicanism ahd disloyalty. The party in power had re- course to religious persecutions, which, as often happens, had more to do with political policy than the question of faith. In the establish- ment of the " Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts," incorporated by act of Parliament, these worldly considerations were not without influence. The conversion of the Indians was its nominal object, but its real purpose was to strengthen the Church of Eng- land in America, and to render the colonies duly subservient to England.' ' Hildreth's " History of the U. S.," vol. II., 215, 230, 232. " The most politic of all the schemes that were at this time (1749) proposed in the British cabinet, " says Grahame in his "Colonial History of the U. S." (vol. II., 194), " vi^as aproject of introducing an ecclesiastical establishment, derived from the model of the Church of England, and particularly the order of bishops, into North America. The pretext assigned for this innovation was, that many non-juring clergymen of the Episco- pal persuasion, attached to the cause of the Pretender, had recently emigrated from Britain to America, and that it was desirable to create a board of ecclesiastical dignitaries for the purpose of controlling their 'proceedings and counteracting their influence ; but doubtless it was intended, in part at least, to answer the ends of strengthening royal prerogative in America— of giving to the State, through the Church of Eng- land, an accession of influence over the colonists, — and of im- parting to their institutions a greater degree of aristocratical 54 Religious Causes Several acts of the Virginia Assembly, of 1659,. 1662, and 1693 had made it penal in parents to refuse to have their children bap- tized. " If no execution took place here," says Mr. Jefferson, "as did in New England, it was not owing to the moderation of the Church, or the spirit of the Legislature, as may be inferred from the law itself ; but to historical circum- character and tendency. The views of the statesmen by whom this design was entertained were inspired by the suggestions of Butler, Bishop of Durham, and were confirmed and seconded by Seeker, Archbishop of Canterbury, and the society instituted for the propagation of the gospel. This society had received very erroneous impressions of the religious character of the colonists in general, from some worthless and incapable mis- sionaries, which it sent to America ; and Seeker, who partook of these impressions, had promulgated them from the pulpit in a strain of vehement and presumptuous invective. Such de- meanor by no means tended to conciliate the favor of the Americans to the proposed ecclesiastical establishment. From the intolerance and bitterness of spirit disclosed by the chief promoters of the scheme, it was natural to forebode a total ab- sence of moderation in the conduct of it." President John Adams, in a letter to Dr. Morse in 1815, re- ferring to this subject, says : ' ' Where is the man to be found at this day, when we see Methodistical bishops, bishops of the Church of England, and bishops and archbishops and Jesuits of the Church of Rome, with indifference, who will believe that the apprehension of Episcopacy contributed, fifty years ago, as much as any other cause, to arouse the attention, not only of the inquiring mind, but of the common people, to close thinking on the constitutional authority of Parliament over the colonies? This, nevertheless, was a fact as certain as any in the history of North America." of the Revolution. 55 stances which have not been handed down to us." ' Fot a century or more the Anglicans retained absolute control, and so long as such was the case the colony was bound hand and foot in political subjection ; the ideas of liberty came creeping in with the Dissenters. It has often been observed that when men have restricted and arbitrary laws of church govern- ment, they naturally incline to political systems in which all powers of self-government are cen- tralized, and from which the popular element is excluded. The one is a schooling and a prece- dent for the other. In testimony of this we have a high authority in the Virginia Anglican divine and historian, Boucher : " The constitu- tion of the Church of England is approved, coniirmed, and adopted by our laws, and inter- woven with them. No other form of church government than that of the Church of England would be compatible with the form of our civil government. No other colony has retained so large a portion of the monarchical part of the British constitution as Virginia ; and between that attachment to monarchy and the govern- ment of the Church of England, there is a ' Notes on Virginia, Works, vol. VIII., p. 398. 56 Religious Causes strong connection." And again : "A levelling republican spirit in the Church naturally leads to republicanism in the State ; neither of which would heretofore have been endured in this ancient dominion." ' This same author also bears testimony to the approach of Virginia and New England to the same result : " And when it is recollected that till now the opposition to an American episcopate has been confined chiefly to the demagogues and independents of the New England provinces, but that it is now espoused with much warmth by the people of Virginia, it requires no great depth of political sagacity to see what the motives and views of the former have been, or what will be the con- sequences of the defection of the latter." The rumor, that the colonies were to be erected into an episcopate of the Established Church, more than once alarmed the people of New England, and, according to John Adams : " The objection was not merely to the office of a bishop, though even that was dreaded, but to the authority of Parliament, on which it must be founded. * * * If Parliament can erect ' Boucher's view, pp. 103-104, from a sermon "On the American Episcopate," preached 1 771, in Caroline County, Va. of the Revolution. 57 dioceses and appoint bishops, they may intro- duce the whole hierarchy, establish tithes, forbid marriages and funerals, establish religions, forbid dissenters." In the winter of 1768, the Assembly of Mas- sachusetts appointed a committee to take into consideration the condition of public affairs. The number and names of this committee will show how much iiflportance was attached to their action. It consisted of Mr. Gushing (the Speaker), Colonel James Otis, Mr. Adams, Major Hawley, Mr. Hancock, and four others. This Committee, in its letter to Mr. Deberdt, the agent of the province in London, after re- ferring to the establishment of the Catholic religion in Canada, and enumerating the impending evils, come to this grievance : " The establishment of a Protestant episcopate in America is also very zealously contended for ; and it is very alarming to a people whose fathers, from the hardships which they suffered under such an establishment, were obliged to fly their native country into a wilderness, in order peaceably to enjoy their privileges, civil and religious. Their being threatened with loss of both at once, must throw them into a 58 Religious Causes disagreeable situation. We hope in God such an establishment will never take place in America, and we desire you would strenuously oppose it. The revenue raised in America, for aught we can tell, may be as constitutionally applied towards the- support of prelacy, as of soldiers and pensioners." ' How the people of Boston were alarmed by such a threatened contingency, is shown by a caricature in the Political Register oi 1769, entitled: "An Attempt to Land a Bishop in America." A ship is at the wharf, the lord bishop is in full canonicals, his carriage, crosier, and mitre on deck, the people appear with a banner inscribed with " Liberty and Freedom of Conscience," and are shouting, " No lords, spiritual or tem- poral, in New England." " Shall they be obliged to maintain bishops that cannot main- tain themselves ? " They pelt the bishop with Locke, Sidney on Government, Barclay's Apol- ogy, Calvin's Works, and the unhappy prelate has mounted the shrouds, ejaculating, " Lord, now Lord, lettest thou thy servant depart in peace." " The Society for the Propagation of ' Tudor's " Life of Otis," p. 307. ° See the picture in Thornton's Pulpit of the American Revol- ution. of the Revolution. 59 the Gospel in Foreign Parts was active in this scheme for establishing the Church through an American episcopate. In October, 1776, Dr. Charles Inglis, Rector of Trinity Church, New York, wrote to the society : " The present re- bellion is certainly one of the most causeless, unprovoked, and unnatural that ever disgraced any country. Although civil liberty was the ostensible object, yet it is now past all doubt that an abolition of the Church of England was one of the principal springs of the dissenting leaders' conduct." He further asserts that " All the society's missionaries in New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, have proven themselves faithful, loyal subjects," shutting up their churches rather than cease praying for the King, and he urges the establishment of the episcopate as an encouragement to such fidel- ity.' William Tudor, in his " Life of James Otis," wherein he dwells quite fully on the con- temporary events from 1760 to 1775, says: "A jealousy of the designs of the English hier- archy was kept constantly alive by the indica- tions given from time to time of anxiety to extend its authority over this country, and by 1 " Doc. Hist, of New York," III., 637. 6o Religious Causes the indiscreet conduct of some of its mission- aries. Fear, hatred, and a long course of hereditary prejudice against this church, com- bined almost all the dissenting clergy of New- England against it, and naturally led them to sympathize with those who opposed the con- stitutional acts of political power." To return to Virginia. In 1755 a short crop of tobacco having suddenly enhanced the price, the Assembly passed a temporary act authoriz- ing the payment of debts, instead of in tobacco, as heretofore, in money at twopence for the pound of tobacco. Three years after, this tender act was renewed. The salaries of the parish ministers, some sixty-iive in number, were payable in tobacco. As they were con- siderable losers by this act, they sent an agent to England, and by the aid of Sherlock; Bishop of London, procured an order in council pro- nouncing the law void. Suits were immedi- ately brought to recover the difference between twopence per pound and the value of the tobacco. Patrick Henry was one of those engaged to plead against " the parsons." The contract was that Maury, " the parson," should be paid sixteen thousand pounds of tobacco. of the Revolution. 6i The act of 1758 fixed the value at twopence per pound ; it was worth thrice that sum in 1769. The question of law at issue was simply this: the act of 1758 having been duly and regularly enacted, could it be annulled by the King in Council ? As interpreted by Henry, it was a question between the prerogative and the people of Virginia. He defined the uses of the Established Church and to what extent obedience is due the King. " Except you are disposed," are his words, " yourselves to rivet the chains of bondage on your own necks, do not let slip the opportunity now offered of making such an example of the reverend plaintiff, as shall hereafter be a warning to himself and his brothers not to have the temerity to dispute the validity of laws authen- ticated by the only sanction which can give force to laws for the government of this colony, the authority of its own legal representatives,' with its council and governor." The jury promptly rendered a verdict of a penny dam- ages, and it had the effect, as prophesied by the Bishop of London, who said : " The rights of the clergy and the authority of the King must stand or fall together." Thus, singularly 62 Religious Causes enough, it united ecclesiastical and constitu- tional questions as causes of the revolution in Virginia, as they had been united in Massachu- setts from the beginning of her settlement.' And the same sparks of liberty that were kin- dled by Otis in Boston in 1 761, in his argument against writs of assistance, were ignited anew in Virginia by Patrick Henry in the " parson's case." When the revolution came, we find the Bap- tists and Presbyterians were almost to a man in its favor, influenced by dual considerations, civil and ecclesiastical, by the hope of seeing in the success of the revolution the overthrow of an establishment which they regarded with fear and repugnance. Under such conditions, it was naturally to be expected that assaults on the Established Church would be made, and they were made, not without success. At its first meeting after the Declaration, the Presby- tery of Hanover, in Virginia, addressed the Virginia House of Assembly a memorial recom- mending, in a spirit of fairness and equal justice to all, a separation of Church and State, leaving ' See Hon. Mellen Chamberlain'^ address on John Adams, before the Webster Historical Society, January l8, 1884. (Published by the Society, Boston.) • of the Revolution. 63 the support of the gospel to the voluntary efforts of its votaries. " In this enlightened age," runs the memorial, " and in a land where all of every denomination are united in the most strenuous efforts to be free, we hope and expect that our representatives will cheerfully concur in removing every species of religious as well as civil bondage. Certain it is, that every argument for civil liberty gains additional strength when applied to liberty in the con- cerns of religion." From this memorial It would appear, that in the opinion of these memorialists, a majority of the population of Virginia were Episcopalians. Mr. Jefferson, on the other hand, states that two thirds of the people had become dissenters at the com- mencement of the revolution. " I am inclined to think," says Robert Baird," " that the greater part professed or favored Episcopacy, but that a decided majority were opposed to its civil establishment." Mr. Jefferson was the great champion of religious liberty, and he advocated the cause with a devotion and fervor of purpose that carried before it every opposition ; but it was not until the winter of 1785-6, ten years ' Baird's " Religion in America," p. 220. 64 Religious Causes after the beginning of the revolution, that an act for establishing religious freedom was adopted in Virginia, and the last vestige of a united Church and State was obliterated.' The plan of an Established Church, according to Rev. Robert Baird, was at one time adopted in all the American States except Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. The nature of the estab- lishment, however, varied in the different States. In Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Vir- ginia, and South Carolina it was almost as strict as in England. The early efforts to promote religious liberty in Virginia doubtless had its direct influence in the other colonies. In No- vember, 1776, measures to the same effect were adopted by the legislature of Maryland, and the union of Church and State was in a like manner dissolved by the Legislatures in New York, South Carolina, and all the other colonies in which the Protestant Episcopal Church was predominant. Of all these States, Connecticut and Massachu- setts were the last to yield to the advancing spirit of religious liberty. It was not till 18 16 that the connection was dissolved in the former, ' See Act for Establishing Religious Freedom, Jefferson's Works, vol. VIII., 454. of the Revolution. 65 aad not till 1833 that the finishing blow was given to it in the latter State, The religious complexion of no two of the American colonies was precisely alike. The various sects at the time of the revolution were grouped as follows: The Puritans in Massachusetts, the Baptists in Rhode Island, the Congregationalists in Con- necticut, the Dutch and Swedish Protestants in New Jersey, the Church of England in New York, the Quakers in Pennsylvania, the Bap- tists, Methodists, and Presbyterians in North Carolina, the Catholics in Maryland, the Cava- liers in Virginia,, the Huguenots and Episco- palians in South Carolina, and the Methodists in Georgia. Owing to these fortunate diversi- ties, to the consciousness of dangers from ecclesi- astical ambition, the intolerance of sects as exemplified among themselves as well as in foreign lands, it was wisely foreseen that the only basis upon which it was possible to form a Federal union was to exclude from the National Government all power over religion. " It was impossible that there should not arise perpetual strife and perpetual jealousy," says Judge Story, " if the National Government were left free to create a religious establishment. But this alone 66 Religious Causes would have been an imperfect security, if it had not been followed up by a declaration of the right of the free exercise of religion, and a pro- hibition of all religious tests." ' It is fair to presume that no one sect a hun- dred years ago, if it had possessed the exclusive power, would have established by law, absolute religious liberty for all sects. When, therefore, we trace the origen of religious liberty as guaranteed by the Constitution, it is erroneous to ascribe it to the acts or liberal tendencies of any one or more particular sects. On the con- trary, the credit belongs as much to the in- tolerant as to the tolerant sects. The constitu- tional provisions on this subject clearly bear ' story on the Constitution, § 1879. Mr. Jefferson, when President, wrote the following letter, in 1S02, to the Danbury Baptist Association : ' ' Believing with you, that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach action only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legis- lature should ' make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced that he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties." of the Revolution. 67 the marks not of mutual concessions, but of reciprocal distrust. That there was good ground for such distrust, the provisions of the early constitutions of several of the States on the subject of religion bear anaple testimony. And even to this day the Constitution or laws of several of the States require a belief in the being of a God, and in a future state of rewards and punishments as a qualification for holding civil ofiSce and for testifying in a court of jus- tice. But these laws are fast falling into disuse. The laws of the States of North Carolina and Maryland have within recent years been modi- fied in this respect. At rare intervals even at the present day we see* cropping up the old spirit of intolerance in efforts to desecularize the public schools, or in a bill offered in the Legislature to convert a sectarian holiday into a secular dies non. These attempts are general- ly predicated upon the false basis that Christian- ity is in some way a part of our laws, or on the Protestant majority claim. As to the first claim, Jefferson clearly disproved that, by a careful examination of the ancient authorities upon which the claim was supposed to rest. " We may safely affirm," says he, " that Chris- 68 Religious Causes tianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law." ' The treaty adopted between the United States and Tripoli on Nov. 4, 1796, and signed by Washington, recites in the eleventh article, as a reason why harmony with that Mohammedan country could be preserved, that " the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." "^ A word only as to the second claim, that of the Protestant majority, which says the majority religion in this country being the Protestant, and the majority of Protestants being in favor of reading the Protestant Bible in the public schools and the like', therefore the minority ought to submit. The answer to this argument is, that while in political matters the majority rules, in matters of religion and of conscience, our Federal and State constitutions delegate no such authority, and the majority possesses no ' Letter to Thomas Cooper (1814), Works, vol. VI., 311. " For other authorities see Vidal vs. Girard Executors, 2 How., 198 ; Andrew vs. Bible Society, 4 Sandford, 182 ; Cooley on Constitutional Limitations, p. 472 ; Bloom vs. Richards' Ohio State Rep., 387, also Minor vs. Board of Edu- cation in Cincinnati (1870). See Arguments in same case by J. B. Stallo, George Hoadley, and Stanley Matthews, counsel for defendants (published by Rob't Clarke & Co., Cincin- nati, O.). of the Revolution. 69 such power as to discriminate against a minority however small. To such as would ask why- religion was left out of the Constitution ? we answer in the words of Washington, " Because it belonged to the churches, and not to the State." • ' Letter in Massachusetts Sentinel, Dec. 5, 1789, to the Presbyterians of New Hampshire and Massachusetts, who complained of ' ' the omission of God " in the Constitution. CHAPTER IV. THE GENESIS OF THE REPUBLIC. The social, religious, and political upheavals that kept the governments of England and the Continent in constant change and commo- tion, had as yet little effect in the colonies. The people here were busy with their own affairs, and England having not as yet laid her rapacious hands upon them, they prospered all the more by reason of this neglect. Beliefs that had lost much of their vigor in Europe re- tained all their ancient force in the colonies. The inestimable privilege of worshipping God in accordance with their own conscience was denied to the first settlers of New England in the mother country, and they came to the wilds of America to enjoy that boon. The Bible was to them not only their guide in religion, but their text-book in politics. They studied the Old Testament and applied its teaching with a thoroughness and literal devotion that no 70 The Genesis of the Republic. 71 people, excepting only the Jews, and perhaps the Scotch, had ever exemplified, for they seemed to recognize a striking similarity be- tween their own hardships, history, and condi- tion and those of the children of Israel under Moses and Joshua. They quoted its texts with a literal application. Their condition they characterized as " Egyptian Bondage," James I. they styled " Pharaoh," the ocean whose dangers and hardships their ancestors were driven to encounter they spoke of as the " Red Sea." They likened their own numbers to that of the children of Israel, " three million souls," America in whose wilds they had come was their " Wilderness," and in after days Washington and Adams were frequently re- ferred to as their Moses and Joshua. Their first conception of the form of an American union was a Theocracy, the same form of gov- ernment in all its essential characteristics, and expressly modelled thereafter, as the children of Israel set up over the twelve tribes under their great lawgiver Moses. They continued this Theocracy for a period of forty-one years, from 1643 to 1684, and under it they organized the New England Confederacy. " This confederacy 72 The Genesis of the Republic. of the four New England Colonies," says Pit- kin, " served as the basis of the great con- federacy afterwards between the thirteen States of America." ' An examination of the two systems discloses a similarity not only in name, but in principles. The Puritans, especially the New England Puritans, evinced a greater pref- erence for the Old Testament than perhaps they themselves were aware of. The persecu- tions they had suffered in the mother country instead of subduing or disbanding them, had transformed them from what at first was a sect into a faction, united together by the strongest ties of union with spirit^ rendered more determined by the severity of the hardships they had endured. The wilderness they had conquered by their patient toil was now blos- soming as a garden interspersed within grow- ing villages and populous towns. Their first and only concern was to preserve this new Canaan for themselves, and to establish such laws and regulations for their government as might secure this end beyond peradventure. The Mosaic laws were framed under divine sanction to accomplish a similar end. To these ' Pitkin's " History of the U. S." vol. I., p. 52. The Genesis of the Republic. 73 laws they turned as a guide, not taking into account that more than thirty centuries had rolled by, and that the social regulations of those times were no better fitted for the then times than the vestments of that clime would suffice as a proper protection against the New England winter. They did not seem to under- stand that however severe the Mosaic code was, it was mild in comparison with the laws that preceded it, and that the social relations of mankind had undergone a change during the many centuries that had rolled by. They even baptized their children no longer by the names of Christian saints but by those of the Hebrew prophets and patriarchs. In a word, they adopted not the spirit but the letter of the Old Testament, and here was the radical error of their social regulations. The question suggests .itself : Why could not the social laws and religious regulations of the Hebrews be adopted by the people of New England with the same propriety, justice, and applicability as their form of government ? The answer is plain. The former were framed upon the central idea of exclusiveness. The children of Israel were, as they believed, God's 74 T^^ie Genesis of the Republic. chosen people. Social and religious regulations were made with this chief end in view, that' they might not by contact with surrounding nations lapse into idolatry. On the other hand, their form of government was constructed upon laws of universal humanity, upon the broad principles that all men are equal, that God alone is King; which were as true when the Declaration of Independence was adopted as in the times of Moses and Joshua, and as true in New England as they were in Canaan. Early in the history of the American people, Cotton Mather, who was an extreme Old Tes- tamentarian, said : " New England being a country whose interests are remarkably en- wrapped in ecclesiastical circumstances, minis- ters ought to concern themselves in politics." Verily they followed his advice. They mus- tered not only in the ranks of the Continental army, with their firelocks in hand, fighting the battles of the revolution, but on Sunday their eloquent voices were heard from the pulpit and in camp denouncing not only as false in prin- ciple, but as against the true spirit and meaning of the Scriptures, the slavish doctrines of " un- limited submission and non-resistance," which, The Genesis of the Republic . 75 they explained, had been invented by crown sycophants and court chaplains to flatter the ears of tyrannical rulers. They pictured in glowing words the rise and fall of the Hebrew Commonwealth, and read to their hearers again and again the warnings and admonitions of Samuel, and the references by the prophets against the wrongs and injustice of kings, and the consequential sufferings of the people because of their rejecting God's established rule, the government of the people as it ex- isted under Moses, Joshua, and the Judges. " And the Lord said unto Samuel, hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee ; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not rule over them " (Samuel viii., 7). " Now there- fore hearken unto their voice : howbeit yet pro- test solemnly unto them, and show them the manner of the king that shall reign over them " (/