contrary, but as near as conveniently may be to the laws of England, for the public good of the province; and to erect courts of judicature for the determination of all civil and criminal causes, with an appeal to the Palatine. But all the powers of government, so granted, were to be subordinate to the "power and regement," of the lords commissioners for foreign plantations for the time being. The Palatine also had authority to make ordinances for the government of the province, under certain restrictions; and a grant of full admiralty powers, subject to that of the Lord High Admiral of England. And the inhabitants, being subjects of the crown, were to enjoy all the rights and privileges of natural born subjects in England.1

§83. Under these ample provisions Gorges soon established a civil government in the province, and made ordinances. The government, such as it was, was solely confided to the executive, without any pow-* ers of legislation. The province languished in imbecility under his care; and began to acquire vigour only when he ceased to act as proprietary and lawgiver.2 Massachusetts soon afterwards set up an exclusive right and jurisdiction over the territory, as within its chartered limits; and was able to enforce obedience and submission to its power. It continued under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts until 1665, when the commissioners of the crown separated it for a short period; but the authority of Massachusetts was soon afterwards re-established. The controversy between Massachu

1 Haz. Coll. 442 to 445.

2 1 Chalm. Annals, 474, 479; 1 Holmes's Annals, 254, 258, 296. 31 Chalm. Annals, 480, 481, 483; 1 Hutch. History, 176, 177,

256;

1 Holmes's Annals, 296; 2 Winthrop's Journ. 38, 42.

4 1 Chalm. Annals, 483, 484; 1 Holmes's Annals, 343, 348; 3 Hutch. Coll. 422.

setts and the Palatine, as to jurisdiction over the province, was brought before the privy council at the same time with that of Mason respecting New-Hampshire, and the claim of Massachusetts was adjudged void.1 Before a final adjudication was had, Massachusetts had the prudence and sagacity, in 1677, to purchase the title of Gorges for a trifling sum; and thus to the great disappointment of the crown, (then in treaty for the same object,) succeeded to it, and held it, and governed it as a provincial dependency, until the fall of its own charter; and it afterwards, as we have seen, was incorporated with Massachusetts in the provincial charter of 1691.2

1 1 Chalmers's Annals, 485, 504, 505; 1 Holmes's Annals, 388.

2 1 Chalm. Ann. 486, 487; 1 Holmes's Ann. 388; 1 Hutch. Hist. 326.

CHAPTER VII.

CONNECTICUT.

§ 84. CONNECTICUT was originally settled under the protection of Massachusetts; but the inhabitants in a few years afterwards (1638) felt at liberty (after the example of Massachusetts) to frame a constitution of government and laws for themselves.1 In 1630 the Earl of Warwick obtained from the council of Plymouth a patent of the land upon a straight line near the seashore towards the southwest, west and by south, or west from Narraganset river forty leagues, as the coast lies, towards Virginia, and all within that breadth to the South sea. In March, 1631, the Earl of Warwick conveyed the same to Lord Say and Seale and others. In April, 1635,2 the same council granted the same territory to the Marquis of Hamilton. Possession under the title of Lord Say and Seale and others was taken of the mouth of the Connecticut in 1635.3 The settlers there were not, however, disturbed; and finally, in 1644, they extinguished the title of the proprietaries, or Lords, and continued to act under the constitution of

11 Hutch. Hist. 98, 99; 2 Hutch. Hist. 202; 1 Haz. Coll. 321; 1 Holmes's Annals, 269, 220, 228, 231, 232, 251; 1 Chalm. Annals, 286, 287, 289; 2 Doug. Summ. 158, &c. ; 1 Hutch. Hist. 100.

The substance of this frame of government is given in 1 Holmes's Ann. 251; and a full copy in 1 Haz. Collec. 437, 441.

2 2 Hutch. History, 203; 1 Haz. Coll. 318; 1 Holmes's Annals, 208; 1 Chalm. Annals, 299.

3 1 Chalm. Ann. 288, 289, 290, 300; 2 Hutch. Hist. 203; 1 Haz. Coll. 395, 396; 1 Holmes's Ann. 229; 1 Hutch. Hist. 47; 1 Winthrop's Journ. 170, 397; 3 Hutch. Coll. 412, 413.

government, which they had framed in 1638. By that constitution, which was framed by the inhabitants of the three towns of Windsor, Hartford, and Weathersfield, it was provided, that there should be two general assemblies annually; that there should be annually elected, by the freemen, at the court in April, a governor and six assistants, who should "have power to administer justice according to the law here established, and for want thereof according to the rule of the word of God." And that as many other officers should be chosen, as might be found requisite. To the general court each of the above named towns was entitled to send four deputies; and other towns, which should be afterwards formed, were to send so many deputies, as the general court should judge meet, according to the apportionment of the freemen in the town. All persons, who were inhabitants and freemen, and who took the oath of fidelity, were entitled to vote in the elections. Church-membership was not, as in Massachusetts, an indispensable qualification. The supreme power, legislative, executive, and judicial, was vested in the general court.2

§ 85. The colony of New-Haven had a separate origin, and was settled by emigrants immediately from England, without any title derived from the patentees. They began their settlement in 1638, purchasing their lands of the natives; and entered into a solemn compact of government. By it no person was admitted to any office, or to have any voice at any election, unless he was a member of one of the churches allowed in the

3

1 1 Haz. Coll. 437; 1 Holmes's Ann. 251.

2 Ibid.

3 1 Hutch. Hist. 82, 83; 1 Holmes's Ann. 244, 245; 1 Chalm. Ann. 290; Robertson's America, B. 10; 3 American Museum, 523.

dominion. There was an annual election of the governor, the deputy, magistrates, and other officers, by the freemen. The general court consisted of the governor, deputy, magistrates, and two deputies from each plantation;1 and was declared to be "the supreme power, under God, of this independent dominion," and had authority "to declare, publish, and establish the laws of God, the Supreme Legislator, and to make and repeal orders for smaller matters, not particularly determined in Scripture, according to the general rules of righteousness; to order all affairs of war and peace, and all matters relative to the defending or fortifying the country; to receive and determine all appeals, civil or criminal, from any inferior courts, in which they are to proceed according to scripture light, and laws, and orders agreeing therewith." Other courts were provided for; and Hutchinson observes, that their laws and proceedings varied in very few circumstances from Massachusetts, except, that they had no jury, either in civil nor criminal cases. All matters of facts were determined by the court.3

§86. Soon after the restoration of Charles the Second to the throne, the colony of Connecticut, aware of the doubtful nature of its title to the exercise of sovereignty, solicited and in April, 1662, obtained from that monarch a charter of government and territory.* The charter included within its limits the whole colony of New-Haven; and as this was done without the consent of the latter, resistance was made to the incorporation, until 1665, when both were indissolubly united,

1 3 American Museum, 523.

2 1 Hutch. Hist. 83, note.

31 Hutch. Hist. 84, note; 1 Chalm. Annals, 290.

4 2 Haz. Coll. 586; 1 Chalm. Ann. 292, 293; 1 Holmes's Ann. 320; 2 Doug. Summ. 164.