1629 MINISTERS ENGAGED. 123 ministers were engaged. One of them, Francis Higginson, had been a beneficed clergyman of the Church of Ministers England, but had either resigned his living or engaged. 6 been deprived for nonconformity. After this he had held one of those lecturerships which the Puritan party maintained by voluntary contributions. He may be looked on as the earliest of those New England divines who were men of letters as well, and to whose writings we owe a large share of our knowledge of the secular affairs of the colony. His accounts of his voyage and of the fertility and wholesomeness of his new abode are graphic and at times picturesque, and he was probably one of those who were charged with having sent home too large commendations of the country,' and thereby prepared the way for much disappointment.1 Of the two other ministers engaged, Bright and Skelton, we know less. They were both graduates of Cambridge, but there is nothing to show that they were in holy orders. The agreement with the three ministers is extant.2 Each was to be sent out free of cost, with the right of a passage back at the expiration of three years. A house and a hundred acres of freehold were to be given to each, with two cows, whose produce was to be shared by rather a complicated arrangement between the ministers and the Company. In the event of their staying seven years another hundred acres was to be allotted to them. Higginson and Skelton each ended their days in Massachusetts after a short sojourn there. Bright was one of those who turned back, disheartened, as it would seem, by the difficulties of colonial life.3 A fourth minister, Ralph Smith, also went out, not apparently by agreement, but as a volunteer. He differed 1 Dudley, in his letter to the Countess of Lincoln (Young, M. C., p. 310), makes this complaint. Higginson's journal of his voyage, and a pamphlet by him entitled New England's Plantation, are in Young, M. C., pp. 213, 229. The latter is also published in Force, vol. i. 2 Young, M. C., p. 205. 3 Dudley's letter, p. 316. from the other three in that he was a Separatist, they only Nonconformists. He soon became dissatisfied with the colony, and wandered about in great difficulty and want, till at length he found a flock more akin to him in opinions at Plymouth. The fleet of ships which took out the ministers also carried out some three hundred and fifty emigrants, with a large supply of live stock, a matter in which the colony was well provided from the outset.2 instruc tions. At the same time the Company sent a letter to Endicott with a copy of the charter, followed in the Endicott's next month by further supplementary instructions. A considerable part of these is occupied with advice about trade, and with provisions for carrying out the system of land tenure already described. Nothing is said about the conversion of the natives; indeed the instructions concerning them rather prohibit any attempts in that direction. 'For avoiding the hurt that may follow through much familiarity with them,' they are to be suffered to visit the colony only at certain specified times and places. All the settlers are to be trained in the use of arms, and regular musters are to held. At the same time strict justice is to be observed in all dealings with the savages, and if their territorial rights are infringed they are to receive compensation. They are also to be guarded against the evils resulting from the introduction of spirits. The credit due to the Company for this precaution is somewhat lessened when we read that there is much strong waters sent for sale,' 1 Bradford, p. 172. The Company in their instructions to Endicott (p. 151) say, 'Mr. Ralph Smith, a minister, hath desired passage in our ships.' 2 Smith distinctly says six ships and three hundred and fifty emigrants. See his Advertisements for the Unexperienced, or the Pathway to erect a Plantation (Works, p. 949). This was his last published writing, and appeared in 1630. The Company's archives confirm this. Higginson, strangely enough, says five ships, and does not mention the number of emigrants. 3 Arch. Am. vol. iii. pp. 79, 93. 1629 ENDICOTT'S INSTRUCTIONS. 6 125 and that the purchase of drink by the savages is not to be forbidden, but only so ordered as that the savages may not, for our lucre's sake, be reduced to the excessive use, or rather abuse, of it.' One of the most important points dealt with in Endicott's instructions was his treatment of the old planters. It was but natural that they resented the suddenly imposed control of a body in whose constitution and administration they had no share. Endicott was instructed to conciliate them by giving them the freedom of the Company, with all rights of trade belonging thereto, confirming them in their holdings, and supplementing these with grants of land at his own discretion. Another difficulty lay in the fact that these old planters had been in the habit of growing tobacco. The members of the Company had wholly set their faces against this form of industry, seeing, no doubt, that it was incompatible with those social and economical arrangements at which they aimed. The old planters, however, were allowed to continue tobacco culture if they pleased. At the same time the Company did its best to dissuade them by pointing out the unprofitable nature of the crop, while all other settlers were forbidden either to grow, sell, or use it. In addition to the growth of tobacco the Company found it necessary to prohibit the sale of guns and ammunition to the Indians. This prohibition was probably aimed rather at traders and captains of fishing vessels than at permanent settlers.1 The conduct of Morton too, as reported by Endicott, may have helped to bring about this measure. In any case it illustrates the difficulties of the Company in dealing with a country which was already in part settled. 1 Dudley in his letter says that the factors employed in the beaver trade by merchants from Bristol and elsewhere were special offenders (Young, M. C., p. 309). 1 Setting aside Morton, the only one of the old planters who seems to have caused the Company any serious trouble was Oldham He had obtained rights over a portion of the soil as a sub-tenant of Robert Gorges. The archives of the Company contain several references to disputes with him, but do not give us sufficient material for fully understanding them.2 It is clear that the difficulty was due partly to the uncompromising tenacity with which Oldham upheld his rights, partly to his sanguine and speculative disposition. At one time he seems to have sought for employment as a factor or trading agent for the Company, for which post he was, after much consideration, pronounced unfit. Then he tried to establish a private partnership with a monopoly of the beaver trade. Endicott was instructed to prevent this, and also to establish a settlement in Massachusetts Bay, near the present site of Boston, by way of making good his footing there against Oldham. How Oldham's claims were disposed of does not appear, but his later relations to the government of Massachusetts show that peace was established between them. cipline The servants sent out at the Company's expense were subjected to a rigid system of discipline. They Strict dis- were to be divided into groups, or, as they enforced. were called, families. Every family was to be placed under a head, either a minister or a layman, chosen for his moral and religious fitness and for knowledge of some trade. Each of these overseers was to keep a register of the work done by those under him, and these registers were to be sent in to the Governor and forwarded to the Company in England. Industry was to be enforced, not merely on the servants of the Company, but on all the settlers. No idle drone' is 1 For this grant see the Company's Records (Arch, Am. vol. iii. p. 95). 2 Ib. pp. 15, 22, 31. 3 Ib. p. 99. 1629 ECCLESIASTICAL SETTLEMENT. 127 to be permitted to live in the settlement. For the better governing and ordering' of the settlers, and especially to check indolence, a house of correction is to be built.2 ment. At the same time the ecclesiastical organization of the settlement was effected. The ease and rapidity with Ecclesias- which this was carried out shows how slight tical settle- was the difference between Puritanism within the Church and Congregationalism, and how readily the former passed into the latter when circumstances favoured the change. The founders of the colony had not as yet avowed themselves hostile to the Church of England, and of the four ministers taken out only one, as we have seen, was a Separatist. But the whole party, laymen and clergy alike, were bound to the Church only by expediency and not by any real loyalty. In their new home all motive for compromise was at end. If an example had been needed one was furnished by the neighbouring colony of Plymouth. Before the ministers arrived one Fuller, a surgeon and an Elder in the Plymouth church, had visited Salem, and had given Endicott advice concerning the religious constitution of his settlement. Accordingly, as soon as the ministers landed Higginson and Skelton were elected to the offices of pastor and teacher respectively. Each then in turn ordained the other by laying hands on him. A church covenant, that is, we may suppose, a system of faith and discipline, was then drawn up by Higginson, and accepted by thirty of the settlers. Elders were appointed, and the ceremony of ordination apparently repeated by them.3 Bradford and some of the chief men from Plymouth set forth to attend this ceremony, but from contrary winds arrived too late.1 1 Arch. Am. vol. iii. p. 105. 2 Ib. 3 The whole of this proceeding is described by Bradford (p. 173). |