dington is said to have been one of the richest merchants in Boston, and that he built the first brick house there; his wealth and the high station he had held in the Massachusetts government, had, no doubt, their influence in procuring him the power which was granted him by the Rhode-Island colony, and in moulding their first form of government.

John Coggeshall, who was appointed one of the three elders, "was (says the able editor of Winthrop's Journal) a gentleman of high consideration, represented Boston in the first, second, third, sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth courts. He was elected for the twelfth, but with Aspinwall, was dismissed from being a member, for affirming that Wheelwright was innocent, and that he was persecuted for the truth."

William Aspinwall, here mentioned, was the first secretary of the Rhode-Island colony; he was banished by the general court of Massachusetts, but in 1642, returned and made his peace.*

On the 28th April, 1639, five of the original purchasers of the island, and four of the after comers, agreed " to propagate a plantation in the midst of the island, or elsewhere."†

They formed their plantation at the southwest end of the island, and on the sixteenth of May following it was called Newport. The first house built there was built by Nicholas Easton and sons.

In March, 1640, the plantation of Pocasset was ordered to be called Portsmouth; and then it was ordered that the Chief Mag.

*Winthrop, vol. 2, p. 62. In the proceedings of the judge and elders of the Rhode-Island colony on the 7th of February, 1638-9, is the following record: "Mr. Aspinwall being a suspected person for sedition against the state, it was thought meet that a stay of the building of his boat should be made, whereupon the workman was forbidden to proceed any farther."

+ The following is a copy of the agreement:

"On the 28th of the second month, 1639,

66

"It is agreed,

By us whose hands are underwritten, to propagate a plantation in the midst of the island or elsewhere, and do engage ourselves to bear equal charge answerable to our strength and estates in common, and that our determination shall be by major voice of Judges and Elders, the Judge to have a double voice.

“Wm. Coddington, Judge; Nicholas Easton, John Coggeshall, Wm. Brenton, Elders; John Clarke, Jeremy Clark, Thomas Hazard, Henry Bull; Wm. Dyre, Secretary.

istrate of the island should be called Governor, the next DeputyGovernor, and the rest of the magistrates Assistants; that the Governor and two Assistants should be chosen in one town, and the Deputy-Governor and two other Assistants in the other town. Mr. William Coddington was chosen Governor for this year, "or till a new be chosen," and Mr. William Brenton, Deputy-Governor ; Nicholas Easton, John Coggeshall, William Hutchinson, and John Porter, Assistants.

On the 16th March, 1641-2, at the General Court of the freemen, (fifty-eight being present and their names recorded,) it was declared that their government was a democracy, and then was passed the ordinance in favor of liberty of conscience, as has been mentioned.

In September, 1642, a Committee was appointed to consult about the procuring of a patent for the island, and to write to Sir Henry Vane upon the subject.

In March, 1644, it was ordered that the island should be called the isle of Rhodes, or Rhode-Island.

The fourth town, of the Narragansett plantations, in the order of time, is Warwick. This settlement began in January, 1642-3. Its history is intimately connected with Massachusetts, and constitutes some of the most melancholy pages of her history.

About four years after the settlement of Providence, some of the proprietors removed to the lands on the Pawtuxet. To this settlement came Samuel Gorton, from Rhode-Island. All the settlements on the Narragansett Bay, being formed originally by voluntary associations, and their political obligations resting only in mutual covenant, without any authority from the mother country to make laws to punish their violation, doubts arose which rendered it difficult to preserve the peace and to administer justice. When all were disposed to submit to the determination of those who were appointed to administer justice, between man and man, all went well; but it was soon found that a government of more energy was required. Some of the inhabitants of Pawtuxet, in November, 1641, complained to Massachusetts of Samuel Gorton and others, and desired advice and assistance. Massachusetts declined assistance, or advice, unless they would submit themselves to her jurisdiction, or that of Plymouth. This they were then not prepared to do. In 1642, four of them, did so, and then Massachusetts took

cognizance of their complaints, and sent their orders to Gorton and others. If Massachusetts had not been very desirous of extending her limits to the Narraganset Bay, and perhaps of crushing the settlement which she, originally, endeavored to prevent, she must have seen that she was here exercising most unwarrantable authority. All her authority, over Englishmen, was derived from her patent, and within her territorial jurisdiction. To attempt to go beyond this, was to set herself up as the sovereign of the country; but she herself owed allegiance and subjection to the king of England, and Gorton, and his associates, were, according to the laws of England, within the territory and under the protection of this king, and could not be made subject to her but by the authority of their common sovereign. To attempt therefore to derive this authority from the submission of the four Pawtuxet men, who had no right to subject themselves and their lands, much less to subject Gorton to the Massachusetts jurisdiction, was a pretence which they might have used to blind others, but we can hardly think was sufficient to blind themselves. Governor Winthrop, however, betrays the secret. They had cast their eyes upon their neighbor's vineyard, and though the sin of covetousness was well understood, yet it was easy to hide it under a desire to do justice, if not to root out all heretics from the land. The words of Winthrop are remarkable, and though few, are not the less significant. After narrating the submission of these four men and their lands to Massachusetts, and their receiving them under their government and protection, he adds: "This we did partly to rescue these men from unjust violence and partly to draw in the rest in those parts, either under ourselves or Plymouth, who now lived under no government, but grew very offensive, and the place was likely to be of use to us, especially if we should have occasion of sending out against any Indians of Narragansett, and likewise for an outlet into the Narragansett bay, and seeing it came without our seeking, and would be no charge to us, we thought it not wisdom to let it slip." 97* Had they not invited these men to put themselves under their jurisdiction, and refused them their advice, as good neighbors, unless they did so, how then could it be said "it came without our seeking?"

* Winthrop, vol. 2, p. 84.

This act of the Pawtuxet men, was in violation of their covenant with Roger Williams and his associates, by which they agreed to submit to the majority of the inhabitants of Providence; upon this condition their lands were granted to them, and they were admitted into the town fellowship. In the second year of the Providence plantation, it was ordained, "that no man sell his field or his lot granted in our liberties, to any person but to an inhabitant, without the consent of the town." The attempt, therefore, to subject their lands to a foreign jurisdiction, was virtually a forfeiture of them, and of course conveyed no legal or equitable right to Massachusetts. Gorton, and his associates, viewed this order of Massachusetts as unwarrantable, but thought it prudent to remove from the neighborhood of their accusers and further from the growing and grasping colony of Massachusetts. They moved south of the Pawtuxet river, and on the 12th of January, 1642-3, purchased Shawomet of Miantinomo the chief Sachem, Pumham the petty Sachem having signed the deed. The conveyance is from Miantinomo as "chief Sachem of the Narragansett," and says that it "was sold and possession of it given to the persons therein mentioned, with the free and joint consent of the present inhabitants, being natives, as it appears by their hands hereunto annexed." The name of two other natives appear to the deed, besides Pumham's.*

It was not so easy to escape from the power of Massachusetts. Through the instrumentality of those, of Pawtuxet, who had endeavored to subject Gorton and his associates to her authority, Pumham was induced, with Saccononoco, who claimed to be Sachem of Pawtuxet, to go to Boston and submit themselves and their lands to Massachusetts. Pumham alleged that he was compelled by Miantinomo to sign the deed, that he had refused to receive any part of the price, and that he was an independent Sachem and not subject to Miantinomo. Pumham then preferred complaints against Gorton and his associates, upon which they were summoned to answer at Boston, by a warrant dated the 12th September, 1643.

Here we behold a further assumption of power-the right to determine the prerogatives and powers of an independent native prince

*The first purchasers of Warwick were Randall Houlden, John Greene, John Weeks, Francis Weston, Samuel Gorton, Richard Waterman, John Warner, Richard Carder, Samson Shotton, Robert Potter, William Wuddall.

in relation to his lands, and the authority he claimed over inferior Sachems; and the right to determine the facts in relation to this deed, which conferred at least a prima facie title in fellow-subjects, so far as the rights of the natives were concerned, who had the same right to buy land of the natives, as Massachusetts had to derive jurisdiction from them.

Massachusetts undertook to decide all these points, and decided them of course in her own favor. Upon this decision, founded in usurpation, she claimed the right to summon Gorton and his associates to her bar, and, the summons not being obeyed, to send after them an armed force. That they were not called upon to answer to the mother country, for the murder of her subjects, was not owing to their prudence, or forbearance, but to the merciful interposition of a preserving providence.

We forbear to detail the perfidy by which Gorton, and his company, were made prisoners of war; the destruction of their property; the suffering and dispersion of their families; their imprisonment at Boston for trial; the manner in which the people and magistrates were addressed, previously to their trial, from the pulpit, to induce them to take away their lives, fearing too much lenity might be shown them; the apprehending them on one set of charges, to give color to their arrest, and without trying them for these, charging them with blasphemous and heretical opinions, which they denied; their narrow escape, with their lives, by a majority of two votes, being reserved for a punishment in chains and labor, resembling Algerine servitude; and their final discharge and banishment, lest the people should be corrupted by their heresies, with a prohibition not to occupy their lands at Shawomet, under pain of death. Their stohas filled a volume,* and is too full of painful emotions to be here dwelt upon. Happily they escaped, and found protectors in England, powerful enough to rescue them from oppression; they returned to their plantation, and, in testimony of their gratitude to the noble earl who had interposed in their behalf, they called it Warwick.

ry

Gorton lived down many of the calumnies which had been heaped on him; held several important offices in town and colony; and enjoyed the confidence of his fellow-citizens, at Warwick, until his

* Coll. R. I. Hist. Society, vol. 2.