1653-4 RETURN OF WILLIAMS. 423 pronounce judgment on prizes, and commissions were granted to three officers, one of them that restless adventurer Underhill, another, William Dyer, the Secretary of the colony.1 At a later day the colonists, in an apology for these proceedings, ascribed them mainly to the personal cupidity of the Secretary.2 Meanwhile the Council of State in England had issued orders to Rhode Island to stay Dutch vessels.3 The Assembly at Providence, while accepting this instruction, sought to weaken its effect. They directed that each plantation should prepare for defence, and that no provisions should be supplied to the Dutch. But at the same time they ordered that no seizure of Dutch property should be made in the name of the colony without direct authority from themselves, thus as far as in them lay neutralizing the action of the islanders.1 The return of Williams from England in the summer of 1654 brought better things. He bore with him Return of written proof of the success of his mission. Williams. From Cromwell he had obtained a safe conduct through the territory of Massachusetts. He had called into the field too an ally of old standing. If Vane failed his Antinomian friends in their hour of need, he did much to atone for that failure by later services. Years too, at least such years as Vane had spent, could hardly fail to bear fruit. The impetuous and unstable egotist had learnt sobriety of thought and speech. He now sent a letter by Williams urging unity upon the settlers of Rhode Island. He reproved them for their divisions, for headiness, tumults, disorders, injustice.' Such evils, he says, indicate dangerous disorders' and 1 R. I. Records, vol. i. pp. 265-7. 2 This is stated in a letter from the Assembly to Sir Henry Vane (R. I. Records, vol. i. pp. 287-9). 3 Colonial Papers, 1652, Oct. 1. 4 R. I. Records, vol. i. p. 261. 5 It is in Hazard (vol. i. p. 495). This is given in full by Backus (vol. i. p. 288). 'incurable wounds.' And we can scarcely doubt that there is an implied threat of absorption by Massachusetts when he tells them that the English government' gave them their freedom as supposing a better use would be made of it.' Nor was Williams himself behindhand in pressing home these remonstrances. Respect for their advisers or dread of their encroaching neighbours prevailed with the settlers of Rhode Island. A conference was held, at which each town was represented by six commissioners. That conference decided that the rights of government and of legislation should henceforth be vested in a body composed like itself. At the same time the independence of each separate town and the direct control of the freemen over the laws was preserved by re-enacting that peculiar system of legislation originally introduced in 1647.1 Final Two years later the last remaining sparks of the old strife were extinguished. Coddington by a formal act of submission resigned his claims and accepted pacification. the new order of things.2 In 1658 the dispute as to Patuxet came to an end. Only four freemen remained there, and of those two had already accepted the authority of Rhode Island. The other two hesitated, avowedly from fear of offending Massachusetts. That colony now resigned its claim.4 The consolidation of Rhode Island was complete, and recurrence of the former disturbances was guarded against by a statute forbidding a citizen to place his land under any foreign jurisdiction, or to seek to introduce any foreign power. Yet the troubles of Rhode Island were not over. pp. 276-80. 2 Ib. p. 327. 1 R. I. Records, vol. i. 3 This is stated in a letter written by Roger Williams to the General Court of Massachusetts, November 15, 1655, published in the R. I. Records (vol. i. p. 322). 4 Mass. Records, vol. iv. 5 R. I. Records, vol. i. pt. i. p. 333. P. 401. 1653 civil autho DISPUTES ABOUT CIVIL AUTHORITY. 425 The disunion of conflicting townships was succeeded by the disunion of anarchical citizens. That the teaching of Disputes Roger Williams involved the denial of all civil concerning restraint was the contention of Cotton and the rity. other orthodox teachers of Massachusetts. The doctrine thus imputed to Williams was now definitely asserted by certain disaffected citizens. A disturbance took place in Providence. The officers of the law interfered, and as a consequence a declaration was put out, setting forth the doctrine that it was blood guiltiness and against the rule of the gospel to execute judgment upon transgressors.' Loyalty to the state, eagerness to disclaim tenets which had been falsely imputed to him, and innate love of controversy, all urged Williams at once to take up the contest. All for which he contended, he says, was absolute freedom in the one point. of worship. He likens the commonwealth to a ship, whose crew are made up of many religious denominations. Let all worship in their own respective fashions, but still let the captain control the course of the vessel and enforce general discipline. Here, as before, Williams finds it easy to solve a difficulty of which he misses the practical importance. He overlooks the fact that religion is not a detached department of life, but an element which pervades and determines all civil and social relations.1 But though his letter may be inadequate as a controversial statement of the question, it was effective enough as a practical answer to those for whom it was meant. In Rhode Island there was assuredly no danger that the necessities of civil order would be made a plea for interfering with freedom of thought or worship. Two years later the doctrines which Williams had resisted were again set forth in a form somewhat more The disturbance is described in the letter of Williams published by Backus (vol. i. p. 296). William difficult to answer. One Harris, a man of undoubted ability, destined for many years to disturb the peace Arrest of and endanger the unity of Rhode Island, wrote Harris. a pamphlet arguing that, if a man conscientiously disbelieved in the right of any human authority, he ought not to be forced to obey it.' It might have been possible for an astute controversialist to show that such a doctrine was implied in the teaching of Williams. Williams, however, at once adopted weapons other than those of abstract controversy. He issued a warrant for the apprehension of Harris. The charge was with good judgment based, not on the implied disobedience to the colonial government, but on the denial of the authority of the Protector and Parliament. The writings on which the charge of sedition was founded were sent to England, and Harris himself was bound over to keep the peace pending the inquiry." The Restoration put an end to the proceedings in England. At a later day Harris figured prominently in the history of the colony, not as a preacher of anarchical doctrines, but as the advocate of the territorial claims of Connecticut against Rhode Island. Effects of the Restoration in If the Restoration enabled Harris to escape, in other respects it brought an assurance of security to the troubled settlements in Narragansett Bay. The energies of Massachusetts were too fully the colony. needed for defence to leave any room for aggression, and the absorption of Newhaven by Connecticut reduced the Confederation to a nullity. The future integrity of Rhode Island was secured. Her founder, he who had been her champion against cupidity without and anarchy within, now fitly falls into the 1 This, at least, is the formal statement of his teaching, as described in a resolution of the Assembly (R. I. Records, vol. i. p. 364). 2 The warrant itself is given by Mr. Arnold (vol. i. p. 263 n.); cf. the Records as above. 1657 POSITION OF WILLIAMS. 427 background. In 1657 he for the last time held the office of Governor. Henceforth he only comes into prominence when some special emergency of political strife or theological controversy calls for him. The great constructive work of his life was done. He had founded a commonwealth where, in spite of the contemptuous forebodings of Massachusetts chroniclers and the persistent efforts of Massachusetts statesmen to make those forebodings true, religious freedom and civil order stood together. |