liiZfi^^^^Q^^tQ^Q^^tQSQl^^iQZi^Zfi i 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. I 
 
 Chap. ..F.^.l. 
 She/f .._A_^_f.. 
 
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, if 
 
THE LOYAL PETITIONS OF 1666. 
 
 REMARKS 
 
 READ BEFORE 
 
 THE MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY, 
 June 11, 1891. 
 
 BY 
 
 WILLIAM S. APPLETON. 
 
THE LOYAL PETITIONS OF 1666. 
 
 REMARKS 
 
 READ BEFORE 
 
 THE MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY, 
 
 June 11, 1891. 
 
 BY 
 / 
 
 WILLIAM S. APPLETON. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE • 
 JOHN WILSON AND SON. 
 
 1891. 
 

THE LOYAL PETITIONS OF wm. 
 
 Minorities, in religion, in politics, in science, have seldom 
 gained much credit ; and as a rule, have with difficulty obtained 
 justice from their oi)ponents at the time, and from historians 
 afterward, unless events have clearly shown them to be right. 
 There is one minority, in whicli I feel a strong personal inter- 
 est, and whose case I have long wished to restate. It is that 
 of 1666 in Massachusetts. It consisted of 171 persons, of 
 whom I claim eight as ancestors ; and the principal figure 
 in it was John Appleton, a relative but not an ancestor. 
 
 In the summer of 1666 the authorities of Mas.sachusetts 
 received a letter from King Charles II. by Secretary Morrice, 
 dated April 10. In it the king acknowledged the receipt of 
 the Report of his Commissioners and the account sent to Eng- 
 land by the Governor, and wrote that " it is very evident to his 
 Majesty . . . that those who govern the collony, of the Masachu- 
 sets doe . . . beleive that his Majesty hath noe jurisdiction over 
 them," and that therefore there was no right of appeal to his 
 Majesty ; he further recalled his Commissioners, and ordered 
 the Governor and Council to send five or four persons to Eng- 
 land, of whom Bellingham and Hathorn to be two ; he ordered 
 all persons imprisoned for petitioning the Commissioners to be 
 set free, and the question of bounds to be reserved for his 
 Majesty's determination. 
 
 The General Court met to consider this on September 11, 
 and by way of preparation devoted the whole of the next fore- 
 noon to prayer. The Court then approved a letter to Secre- 
 tary Morrice, in answer to two separate letters from the king, 
 declaring that reasons had been given (August 1, 1665) why 
 they could not submit to the Commissioners, that they have 
 nothing to add, and " therefore cannot expect that the ablest 
 persons among us could bee in a capacity to declare our cause 
 more fully." Palfrey rightly says that "This conclusion was 
 
not reached with entire unanimit}," and adds that " the sordid 
 and short-sighted timidity of commercial pohtics interposed ; 
 for ah-eady there was commercial prosperity enough to conflict 
 with the ancient strictness of public morality." 
 
 These tine-sounding words refer to the views of the minority ; 
 for the General Court at this same session had to deal with 
 petitions from Boston, Salem, Newbur}^ and Ipswich, in which 
 the petitioners " desire that seeing his Majestic hath already 
 taken no little displeasure against us as if we disowned his 
 Majesties jurisdiction over us, effectual care maj^ be taken lest 
 by refusing to attend his Majesties orders for clearing pre- 
 tences unto right and favour in that particular, we should 
 plunge ourselves into greater disfavour and danger " ; suggest 
 that " The doubtful interpretation of the words of a patent, 
 which there can be no reason to hope should ever be construed 
 to the divesting of a soveraign prince of his royall power over 
 his naturall subjects and liege people, is too frail a foundation 
 to build such a transcendent immunity and privilege upon" ; 
 and entreat " that application be made to his Majestic by meet 
 persons immediately to be sent for that end, to clear the trans- 
 actions of them that govern this colon}' from any such con- 
 struction, least otherwise that, which duly improved, might 
 have been as a cloud of the latter rain, be turned into that 
 which in the conclusion may be more terrible than the roaring 
 of a lyon." 
 
 This petition is printed, with no names attached, in Hutch- 
 inson's Collection of Original Papers, and with the signers' 
 names among the Danforth Papers in Vol. XVIII. of the Pub- 
 lications of this Society ; and Mr. Savage, for the Publishing 
 Committee of that volume, gives as one reason for reprinting 
 it, that in it " the minority of our fathers have exhibited so 
 much good sense and sound policy." Two copies of it are 
 among the English State Papers, bearing a note to the effect 
 that because of it " those gentlemen received a severe check, 
 the petition voted scandalous, they styled betrayers of the 
 liberties of the country, are still reputed ill affected to the 
 Government, and not suffered .to be chosen into any office 
 of magistracy." The luunber of signers was, from Boston, 26, 
 Salem, 33, Newbury, 39, and Ipswich, 73, — which last I take 
 to have been more than one fourth of the adult male inhab- 
 itants of the town. Palfrey calls the petition " unpatriotic," 
 
and is very sarcastic about the signers, saying: "Of those of 
 tliem who can be identified, some were of that class of per- 
 sons who establish a certain consequence by building up for- 
 tunes, though their fabric would scarcely rise above the ground 
 unless protected by the public spirit of the braver men whom 
 they embarrass." 
 
 Anything more unjust has seldom been written in the name 
 of histor}'. The signers were neither actuated by fear for 
 newly acquired wealth, nor by the timid conservatism of old 
 age. All ranks and all ages were represented by the signers. 
 Among those of Boston were John Winslow, Thomas Brattle, 
 and Simon Lynde ; among those of Newbury were Thomas 
 Parker, John and Benjamin Woodbridge, William Gerrish, 
 Richard, Percival and Samuel Lowle, Thomas Hale, Sen., An- 
 thony and Abiel Somerby, Tristram Coffin, John Knight, Sen. 
 and Jr., and Richard Knight ; and those of Ipswich were 
 headed by John Appleton, William Norton, George Gittings, 
 John Baker, Sen., Francis Wainwright ; while among them are 
 found, generally more than once, the names of Dennison, Hub- 
 bard, Perkins, Rogers, Whipple, Kimball. But the best evi- 
 dence of the cliaracter of the signers is seen in the vote of the 
 General Court, which " finding that the peticoners doe therein 
 unjustly charge, threaten, & reflect upon this Court, to the dis- 
 honor of the members thereof," ordered that Capt. William 
 Gerrish of Newbury, Capt. John Appleton of Ipswich, Mr. 
 Edmond Batter of Salem, Capt. Thomas Savage, Mr. Thomas 
 Brattle, Mr. Habbacuck Glover, and Mr, Thomas Deane, all 
 of Boston, '' all of them principall persons in the said petinons, 
 some of them persons in publicke trust, all save one freemen 
 of this colony & members of churches, be by the secretary 
 warned to attend this Court in October next, to answer for 
 the same." 
 
 Two letters among the English State Papers testify to the 
 same effect. Colonel Nicolls, one of the King's Commissioners, 
 wrote to Secretary Morrice, Oct. 24, 1666: "Most of the con- 
 siderable Merchants & men of estates in the countrey peti- 
 tioned the generall Court to comply with His Ma*'''" commands, 
 but they are now to be question'd before another Court as 
 seditious Persons." Samuel Mavericke wrote to Lord Arling- 
 ton, August 25, 1668, saying that on August 6, 1666, the ship 
 arrived with the King's letter, that the Council was not called 
 
6 
 
 together for six weeks, and that the General Conrt voted not 
 to send Bellingham and Hathorne, " which when known, many 
 of the considerablest persons within the government (some 
 of them Deputyes of that Court and Captaines of Com- 
 panyes) petitioned to the Court that his Ma"*''' command might 
 be obeyed ; but in stead of granting their request they sum- 
 moned them to appeare before them, where they receiv'd a 
 sharp i-eproofe for their presumption as they termed it." 
 
 The General Court met again on October 10; and now we 
 have a very curious fact. The Court approved exactly the same 
 letter as before to Secretary Morrice, but only the first half 
 of it, answering the earlier letter of the king, but making no 
 reference at all to his Majesty's letter of April 10. Why this 
 was done I cannot say. The printed " Calendar of State 
 Papers" shows that the September letter was sent and 
 received. 
 
 All the documents, which I have so far quoted, are in print ; 
 but the matter now becomes more personal, and I make use 
 of manuscript papers at the State House, all in Vol. 106 of 
 the Archives, being, so to speak, matters of secret session. 
 On October 17 Capt. John Appleton appeared before the 
 General Court, armed with the following document: — 
 
 The Answar of us whose names are heareto Subscribed to what Is 
 charged upon us by y*" honored Generall Court As by ther Summons 
 Appeares. 
 
 (1) As to y* Substance & purport of y'' petition for w*^.'' you'' petioners 
 are In question they must proffess they neyther doe nor can dare recede 
 from It. besides other obligations of contience & [)rudence Some of y".' 
 have taken y*^ oath of allegeance with many other y*' members of 
 y^ honored General Corte See little while since cannot be forgotten 
 by them nor can y' be of noe Signification to y? you' petitioners can 
 avouche y' according to ther Contiens And best perswasion ther real) 
 desire of y" good of y'' Generall Court & every Member of it, of y*" whole 
 Contry & Collony as of y*" Continuance of o' Libertys Granted by 
 his Majestie in o' Charter was y* Sole Reason why they have petitioned 
 & upon y* Same Grounds cannot recall it. 
 
 (2) You' petitioners doe most Seriousely profess it to be contrary to 
 their Judgem'" & intent in ther petition to cast any aspertion upon y*" 
 honored Generall Court or any member tlierof o' to Express y" least 
 disrespect or disafection to y^ whole or any of it being sensible of 
 y* duty to Authority And therfore pleade not Guilty as to their 
 
dessighne in ther petition, yet being Seriouse : as to y*^ matter of y* 
 petition and scoape therof as y"" Case Requires : you" petitioners were 
 more Carefull theraboute then Curiouse as for Any Gramaticall Criti- 
 cismes w".'' they might presume the Generall Court would not be most 
 observant of at such a tyme & in such a Case, whearein y** matf abundantly 
 swallowes up any Circumstance and therfore pleade for y*^ Candor of 
 y"" Generall Court in over looking what you'' petitioners might not soe 
 narrowly looke into upon y" acco' already given & that they would not 
 Strein Expressions to Enforc a bad Construction from y'" no' yet 
 would you'' petitioners be understood to acknowledge Guilt As to y* 
 Expressions more then in thir Intentions, they can but Guess at 
 what maye be anything capable of harsh Interpretation & therfore 
 shall give ther owne in all y* passages which maye to any seeme 
 Suspitiouse upon w"'' y" Charge Conteined in y" Summons maye pos- 
 sibly Be Grounded. 
 
 (3) As to y* Expressions following viz Being Involved by ther 
 Silence In the dangerouse mistakes of psons otherwise well mynded 
 Inclined to unsafe if not disloyall principalis t^c' And agayne desire 
 y' noe pty will soe Irresistably carry on any dessighne of soe dangerouse 
 Consequence In Answar heareunto you'^ petitioners Crave y" men- 
 tioning of thos many petitions y*^ Scoape wheareof y*" Generall Court 
 Cannot forgett, presented In October 1064 ^ besides y" fame ther was 
 of Croudes of petitions then ready to be Exhibeted to this Court of 
 y^ same tenno'' with thos & you'^ petitioners desire this honored Court 
 to understand Thos passages mentioned o"^ any of y* like nature in 
 y*^ petition to have Reffrence unto such petitions o' petioners whome 
 although they honor & Respect yet they cannot concurr with y"' in ther 
 apprehension of y^ j)sent Case & not to y*" Generall Court; & that you 
 maye be pleased with good Reason soe to understand you'^ petitioners 
 begg of y'' honored Court not to allow such an interpretation of y'' peti- 
 tion as should make it Controdict it self'e And to weigh with thos 
 former this Expression Necessaryly referring to y* Courte viz That 
 they would not be wanting in with holding any due Encouragem"* y' 
 their concurrence might aifbrde in soe arduouse A matter you"^ petioners 
 Conceave a Concurrence w'.'' y^ Generall Courte Intended is inconsist- 
 ante w'!" A Charging of it o"^ reflecting upon it. ffurther you"" petition- 
 ers make their address to y* Generall Courte as Supplicants & ther- 
 fore it maye be improbable y' should be Charged on y'" w'^'' was sued 
 unto by them. 
 
 [4] As to y' in y*" petition upon w'''' y'^ Charge of threatening must 
 be Grounded namely necessitating their brethren & Equally Engaged 
 w'!' them, &' You"^ petitioners answar Is y* it is impropper for thos 
 
 1 See printed Records of tlie Colony of Massachusetts, vol. iv. part ii. 
 pp. 136, 137. 
 
y' speake Supplications to Intend tlireatenings y'' Sollicitouseness iu 
 y* petion to avoide inconveniency not desired but y' maye in case be 
 Judged necessary is noe Comination ; faithful! advertisem"'^ of danger 
 argues noe will o' purpose of procuring but preventing it; you' petioners 
 in those words doe butt suppose what necessity y*^ bif;hest of Lawes 
 maj'e Enforce & affirme what themselfes are unwilling to w''' can 
 be noe threatening You' petioners with others need not have been 
 at y* trouble of troubling this honored Court but have waited y* gceed- 
 ings of it, and accordingly have acted privately in such a waye as Is 
 specified withoute y" proposing of such a danger to y*" Consideration 
 of y*^ Courte w'^'' their Ingenuity & respect to y* publique good & In- 
 trest of y^ whole would not allow for w''' you' petitioners presume they 
 may not suffer. 
 
 17 Octobe' ir.ef). 
 
 Capt. Jno Apleton Gave in this as his pticular 
 Ans. tho it be writt in the plurall number 
 it being so Intended then but now he gives 
 it in his singular Capacity and to that he 
 he desires to stand unto. E. R. S. 
 
 The substance of the document is better than tlie spelling, 
 to whi'ch I should be soi-ry to think that Captain Appleton 
 would "stand unto." All the persons warned to attend wei-e 
 discharged, the Court ordering the papers to be put on file, 
 but not recorded. This, however, was not quite the end. 
 Capt. John Appleton retained the confidence of liis fellow- 
 townsmen at Ipswich so fully that they sent him Deput}^ to 
 the General Court of iMay lo, 1667. He appeared to take his 
 seat ; but the next day the question of his right to it came up, 
 and was the cause of three papers, all only found on file. 
 
 May 16, 1667. The deputyes of the gen'.' Court findinge Cap* John 
 Appleton to be returned as a deputye for the Towne of Ipswich, & that 
 upon his presentation thereunto, some question is made of his capacytie 
 for that service, by reason of some expressions, in the petition by him 
 signed the tendency whereof have manifestly breathed forth some un- 
 faythfullnes to the Goverment here established, as by the generall 
 courts result on examination thereof may appeare, & that in the manag- 
 ment thereof he hath iiot retracted the sd offensive expressions, but 
 Justifyed himselfe under p'tence of his good Intentions, nor hath he here 
 in the debate thereof taken any blame to himselfe, but rather Impute 
 blame to this howse, Justify inge himselfe in all by his good Intentions as 
 afforesd, the p'mises considered, the deputyes doe hereby declare the 
 sd Cap' Appleton to be no fitt Member of theire body, & that the free- 
 men of Ipswich may on a legall warninge proceed to the choyce of 
 
9 
 
 another, whereby the liberties ot" the freemen may not be Infringed nor 
 
 the priviledges of this liowse Invaded. 
 
 Voted by the deputs by way of answer 
 to the freemen of Ipswich. 
 
 William Torrey Cleric. 
 
 Capt. John Appleton had his '' vindication " from his con- 
 stituents, as follows : — 
 
 The humble Petition of the ffreemen of the Towne of Ipsw''' to the 
 hon^*^ Gen" Court now assembled at Boston. 
 
 May it please this hon"' Court to understand that wheras according 
 to o' allowed p'^viledges and stated liberties, and in attendance unto, 
 and p'^suance of o' lawes specified in the 25'!^ page of o' Booke of Lawes : 
 Wee the ffreemen of Ipsw^:"" have orderly &, formally Elected Cap' Jn° 
 Appleton (flTor that hee hath allwayes app'^ved himselfe unto us a 
 Gentleman fully orthodox in his judgm! as to matters of fayth and 
 points of Religion, gfessed amongst us Right good, lionest pious and 
 prudent in his conversation true & firmly faithful! as to the interest of 
 the Colony and Governmf therof) to negotiate for us in these publicke 
 affaires wherin o'selves as others are concerned, as a member of y''. 
 house of Deputyes, And wheras y'^ sayd Cap' Appleton (allthough not 
 forward yet) was pleased to Gratify us w* the susception of the burthen 
 of such service & trust and accordingly to that End Repayred to y^ Hon"' 
 Co"!' and was there disaccepted, and thence dismissed unto o' great grief 
 (if not to o' damage, by virtue of the second Law referring to y'' choyce 
 of Deputies in the 25'^ page of y^ booke) especially for that wee cannot 
 understand what y*" reasons of such rejection were, nor that it was y* act 
 of the Co" entire according to w' is intimated as requisit in y*^ Law 
 abovesd. Yo' Petition'' are bold humbly to crave of this lion''^ Co'' that 
 y'^ sd Cap! Appleton may yet have his Admission as a member of the 
 house of Deputies for us, therin to discharge the trust committed to 
 him by us, But if there bee cause to y" contrary appearing to y® hon"' 
 Co'.' to whose determination wee are bound to submitt, Yet to y" End 
 wee may not bee in any capacity of jealousyes (w'^.'' wee would most 
 Religio isly decline) of any disregard to us, partiality or non attendance 
 to y J Lawes established amongst us, that ^ ee looke upon as o' sanctuary 
 of safety, & a mutuall bond unto all, w'^.'^ upon no pretext, or interest 
 w'ever, may be violate ; Wee ffurther therefore most humbly entreat of 
 this hon"' Co'.' that yV would bee pleased to favo' us, w"" the information 
 of the grounds of the procedure in this case, And yo' petitioners shall be 
 bound ever to pray &c. 
 
 Voted at a meeting of the ffreemen on the 27"' 
 
 of May 1667 that this petition be sent unto 
 
 the Gen'" Court. Aa attest Robert Lord clerke. 
 
10 
 
 In Answ' to this Peticcon, The mag'f App'^hend its meet that Cap' 
 Jno. Appleton be admitted or continued in his trust as a Deputy of this 
 Court, in behalfe of the ifreemen of Ipswich, or that a just reason of 
 his exclusion be rendred to the Court, that so there may be no just 
 ground of dissattisfaccon given by this court to the freemen of this 
 Jurisdiccon. The magist^ have past this their brethren the deputy^ 
 hereto consenting. Edw. Ravvson, Secret. 
 
 The deputyes consent not hereto 
 
 William Torrky Cleric. 
 
 28 : 31 67. 
 
 I find nothing more relating to the case, and think that 
 Capt. John Appleton was allowed to retain his seat, though 
 I cannot positivel}^ say so. If not, his name would hardly 
 have been left on the roll of Deputies, where it certainly is. 
 The incident, however, was thought of sufficient importance 
 to he mentioned by Samuel Mavericke in a letter to Lord 
 Arlington, Oct. 16, 1667. Writing of the session of the Gen- 
 eral Court, he says: "The first act they did was the expelling 
 Capt" Appleton of Ipswich who was chosen Deputy for that 
 Towne ; the crime laid to his charge was the subscription (to) 
 that Loyall Feticon presented to the last Court of which 
 coppies have been sent to your LordP" If he failed to approve 
 himself to Dr. Palfrey the historian, he yet was held in high 
 esteem by Samuel Sewall the diarist, who wrote thus : " 1699. 
 Seventh-day, Nov' 4. Capt. Apleton of Ipswich dies. He 
 was an Israelite indeed a great Ornament of y*^ Ch. & Town. 
 Died of y® Jaundies. 77 years." Of course this incident is 
 not one of great importance in the history of Massachusetts ; 
 but I think it is of some interest as bringing together the king, 
 the Colony, the General Court, the freemen of a town, and 
 a single deputy, each and all, as b}^ a common impulse, resist- 
 ing real or fancied invasion of those rights which were re- 
 garded as of too much value to allow the least suspicion 
 of infringement or change. I have thought it worthy of a 
 hearing by this Society for this reason, as well as because of 
 the opportunity of putting in print three documents from 
 the rich and valuable archives at the State House, now ex- 
 posed to all the risks inseparable from ancient manuscript 
 volumes. 
 
#^" 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 014 068 857 5 
 
 ■iM 
 
 ^ssf?: 
 
 W"^- 
 
 
 -< ^ ■ *■