Chapter
I
Grants, Patents & Charters:
Vehicles
for the Crown's Plan for New England
²œ
1.
The
Corporate Origins of the New England colonies
One of the two sources of influence
on the settlers were the charters issued in London for trading companies, and
not for religious groups to found any city of God on earth. We must remember
that colonization in the early seventeenth century was a commercial process set
in a context of international competition for new outlets in the New World.
a)
Trade
competition among European nations and the situation in North America.
After the loss of Calais
in 1558, the dreams of the English changed from a continental empire to
overseas possessions. However, they needed to act quickly since the Spanish and
the Portuguese had already shared the New World between themselves, which had
even been acknowledged by a papal bull of 1506[1]. Yet the Spanish, who were thereby
to control the Western part of the New World - except for Brazil - were
actually in possession of the southern half. The English, along with the
French, the Dutch and even the Swedes, thus had a legitimate right to claim the
lands in North America which were not actually settled by Spain. As a result,
English settlers financially backed by the merchants of the Virginia Company
founded Jamestown in 1607, the first lasting English colony in North America.
b)
The trading
Companies.
The trading companies to
which the charters for overseas territories were granted were supposed to exert
political power in the colonies they controlled. The conditions and details of
how and by whom power and authority were to be shared was stipulated in the
charters, and this is what we shall examine here.
In the early seventeenth
century English trading companies had existed for a long time, starting with
the medieval guilds, and operated not only on a national level but also on a
European level. There were also companies, trading specifically with foreign
nations, which had monopolies over certain given areas because of the high
costs of maintenance.
There were two types of
companies: the "regulated" companies, in which each member traded on
his own capital, according to the rules of the company, which were common to
all; the second type of companies were the joint-stock companies, in which
losses and profits were shared by the stockholders, and in which individual
enterprise was replaced by mutual efforts.[2] They were intended to return a
profit and a substantial percentage of the initial investment injected by the
adventurer, but were also looking for new outlets, trying to trade beyond the
depressed European market, and to escape rigid regulations.
As early as 1617, some
Separatist Puritans from Scrooby in Lincolnshire,[3] then established at Leyden in the
Netherlands, contemplated emigrating to America. They had heard of successful
plantations in Virginia and thought it was better for them to emigrate on
"English" soil, provided it was not England itself. That year they
sent two agents to negotiate a patent from the Virginia Company, which they received
in February 1620. They were allowed to settle within the bounds of the Virginia
Charter.[4]
During the negotiations
for their grant in America, the Pilgrims' agents agreed with the Adventurers on
creating a joint-stock company for seven years, sharing profits and losses for
all that time.[5] This modus vivendi lasted until 1623, when the stock company broke up
and stopped the financing on account of insufficient profits. The Company was
finally dissolved in 1627 under pressure from William Bradford, then the Governor
of Plymouth Plantation: the Pilgrims had been left to fend for themselves for
four years and it was enough.
A triangular examination
of the links between the companies' chief investors, the Puritan circles and
the spheres of power and authority might interestingly reveal motivations not
visible at first glance and explain why Puritans, who were considered as little
more than heretical traitors, were granted not only land overseas, but also the
right to settle and prosper freely. Beyond the fact that settlers were hard to
find and that the leaders of the Virginia Company needed some to start a new
plantation in North Virginia, the Virginia Company liked the group from Leyden
because, by their sober and religious life, the latter embodied the ideal settlers.
Moreover, the Earl of Warwick, an avowed Puritan, was the leader of the Council
of New England,[6] and Ferdinando Gorges[7] complained that it was through
Warwick's influence - and in his own absence - that the Dorchester group
obtained a patent from this Council on 19 March, 1628 - to be transformed into
a royal charter the year after. It must also be pointed out that the six men
who obtained it were all identified with Devon Puritans, less radical than
their East Anglian counterparts, but Puritans all the same. Two of them
furthermore, Sir Henry Rosewell and Sir John Yonge, did or had occupied the
office of high sheriff of Devon.[8] However they lacked money and they
had to make a deal with wealthy and powerful London merchants. Among them,
Matthew Cradock, the future first Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Company,
"owned £2000 worth of East India Company stocks", Theophilius Eaton
was deputy-governor of the Eastland Company, Samuel and William Vassall were
the "sons of a Huguenot member of the Virginia Company".[9] There were others like William
Pynchon, Isaac Johnson, Richard Bellingham and later John Winthrop who were or
had been in a position of power at county level.[10] This tangled web of wealthy,
powerful and adventurous Puritans helps to understand why Puritans managed to
be granted land in such a generous manner as we shall explore next.
2.
The content
of the New England charters
In spite of their length and redundant
phraseology, these documents are a mine of information on the territorial
boundaries of the area granted, the reasons officially invoked for
colonization, and the rough shape of government that were established, which if
course is the part that is the most important for our study. Nevertheless, the
other two are also helpful in so far as they convey a clear idea of the territories
we shall be dealing with and the mind of the men in charge of the companies. As
far as the shaping of government is concerned, we shall be looking for
provisions which the settlers had to consider as binding.
a)
Territorial
extent
As the starting point of
all subsequent English North American colonial ventures, the 1606 Virginia
Charter gave English settlers a right over lands located between the
thirty-fourth northern parallel and the forty-fifth, which means between
present-day North Carolina and the border between Vermont and Canada, on a
coastal basis, and then from "sea to sea".[11] Two colonies were established: one
with right over land between the thirty-fourth and the forty-first parallels -
where Long Island now lies - in which Jamestown was founded, and in which the
Leyden Pilgrims were expected to settle. The second colony was to settle lands
situated between the thirty-eighth and the forty-first parallel.
When news reached
England that the Pilgrim Fathers had eventually landed outside the bounds set
by the Virginia charter - Plymouth lying approximately at the level of the
forty-second northern parallel - the patent they had obtained was useless and
they needed another one. It was drafted on 3 November, 1620 and now granted
them land between the fortieth and the forty-eighth parallels, from sea to sea,
thus including French Canada, provided it was actually possessed neither by
other Christian subjects, nor by Indians, who had anyway been destroyed by a
"wonderfull plague"[12] a few years before. Since they
claimed lands which were utterly unoccupied, they had a legitimate right to
stay there.
The territorial extent
which they could claim was clarified by the 1629 Royal Charter, which was based
upon, and made reference to, the 1620 Charter of New England. The Pilgrims were
also granted the area between the Kennebec River and the "Western
Ocean", both in present-day Maine. In the charter of Massachusetts, March
4, 1629, the Charles River, "in the bottom of Massachusetts Bay", was
the southern limit of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, whereas the northern bound
was the Merrimac River, plus three miles beyond both rivers - which implied
that they had monopoly over the rivers, a very important trading asset. The grant
extended from sea to sea as well. The future colonies of Connecticut and New
Haven were later carved from the land granted by the 1620 Charter, but they
were out of the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts Bay Colony.
Other parts were granted
to Ferdinando Gorges and John Mason, both prominent men in the story of the
English North American colonial experience. The lands they dealt were
especially in New Hampshire and Maine.
The existence of Rhode
Island was recognized and legalized by a 1643 patent granted by Parliament. The
northern limit was the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the eastern limit was Plymouth
Plantation, they could extend up to the sea in the south and up to the
Narragansetts country in the west. All this land was not granted to them: they bought
it from the Indians. Acknowledging the Indians as the proprietors of the land
was an innovation and remained exceptional.
b)
Reasons
invoked for settlement
The reasons invoked for
settlement in the charters did not necessarily reflect the deep beliefs of the
drafters and the recipients. First it must be reminded that all the companies
from the Virginia Company to the Massachusetts Bay Company were trading companies set up for purely
commercial purposes. The Massachusetts Bay Company originated from the
Dorchester Company, which was an attempt at making cod-fishing easier and less
expensive, something very far from building New Jerusalem.
As Samuel Eliot Morison
has pointed out[13], the initial motivations for overseas
settlements were always on a threefold level. The first one was patriotism,
namely extending the bounds of the realm, in the same trend as can be discerned
from the Middle Ages to Victorian imperialism.
The second reason was
commercial: the trading companies speculated on potential gains which could be
derived from overseas trade, or the exploitation of overseas resources, in
order to lower the dependence of England on the importation of raw materials,
and especially gold and silver from Spanish America.
Since at the time
religion was omnipresent at all levels of life and society and had not been
challenged yet by rationalism, the progress of science and the philosopher of
the enlightenment, it would then seem illogical that religion - here in the
form of evangelization - should not be one of the three main reasons for
colonization. One must not forget that kings, and especially James I, were
deeply convinced of deriving their power from God, and that every little
departure from the State-established religion - we are not even contemplating
any form of atheism, this would follow in the eighteenth century - was
considered as heresy, and heretics, if discovered, where mercilessly burnt at
the stake. However, bringing the Gospel to the heathens was not a priority, it
was not the real reason that pushed them overseas. If they could convert a few
Indians to Christianity, and thus according to them to civilization, then it
would give a moral guarantee to the adventure. However, as far as English plantations
were concerned, religion was initially not intended to be a dominant factor of
the life of the colonies, as opposed to French Canada, where fur traders had
been accompanied by Jesuit priests who directed life over there[14]. And unlike in Canada, where the
King of France would not allow Huguenots[15], James I as well as Charles I
allowed dissenters, even avowed Separatists, to occupy the colonies. In the
case of the Leyden Pilgrims, we may well wonder whether King James and the
Virginia Company jointly used them as pawns to people North Virginia before it
was totally controlled by the French and the Dutch, and at the same time
getting rid of unwanted subjects. On the other hand, James might have had to
accept the terms of the Virginia Company, who had already reached an agreement
with the Pilgrims. Indeed, James was aware that the Adventurers and the
merchants in general were the only men from whom he could borrow money.
Now if we examine the
reasons as they were stated in the charters themselves, the priorities become
even more evident. The only religious part in the Instruction for the Virginia
Colony (1606) can be found in the last sentence - "every plantation that
our Heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted out"[16] - and gives the whole flavor of
these deeply Protestant times: anything that had not been (pre-)ordained by
God, be it kings or the practices of the Church, had no value, and was not
worthy of existing. This reminder stands out even more strikingly in the
Instructions for the Virginia Company, a down-to-earth text entirely concerned
with finding the North-West passage - in order to get an easier and quicker
access to the riches of Orient, not
to potential recipients of Christianity - and with practical advice, warnings
and military preparations against hypothetical enemies.
Paradoxically, the only
motivation explicitly stated in the Virginia Charter of 1606 deals with the
Indians, referred to as "infidels" and "savages" living
"in darknesse and miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and worshippe
of God", who were to be brought to "humane civilitie and to a settled
and quiet governmente."[17] Obviously this kind of rhetoric
assuming that any different culture is de
facto inferior and needs to be "westernized" is typical of any
colonizing nation. It is therefore not surprising to find it here, but it is
disturbing to think that it is the only motivation they felt the need to state.
The commercial aspect was obvious enough by the sheer fact that the Charter was
granted to a trading company,
therefore implying that the Adventurers were risking their money in the hope of reaping a good percentage of
their initial investment. Moreover, the accompanying Instructions for the
Virginia Colony contains an even more revealing, if yet involuntary so, piece of advice: the center of the town
would be the market place, with "every street's end opening on it"[18].
The Instructions for the
Virginia Company and the Virginia Charters do not concern New England.
Nevertheless Virginia was the only English colonial precedent when Plymouth and
the Council of New England were founded, so we must start by examining what the
Virginia Charter stipulated. In the first of the three documents[19] which are the most relevant to us -
namely the Charter of New England of 1620, the Charter for Plymouth Plantation
of 1629 and the Charter of the Massachusetts Bay Company of 1629 as well - the
reasons given in the texts of reference (the three Virginia Charters) are given
again. The first one is the "inlargement of Christian religion, to the
glory of God Almighty," followed by the territorial expansion of the royal
dominions, and the settlement of "those deserts with people governed by
lawes and magistrates", which is not even bringing civilization to the heathen
since there were none, almost all of them having been decimated by the
"wonderfull plague" already evoked. As royal possessions, they were
to be considered as overseas offshoots of Old England, hence their name of New England[20], coined by John Smith. After these
prerequisites, the motives of the Company were updated. Subsequently to the
"wonderfull plague" of 1617, the savages who remained "wandering
in desolacion and distress" were to be converted to "Civil Societie
and Christian religion", two concepts which can be equated. The second
principle was again the "inlargement of our dominions", and the third
was now the "advancement of the Fortunes[21] of the Settlers", about which
we may wonder if it is the Adventurers - the investors who remained in England
- or the Planters - the actual settlers, who held shares as well - who were
referred to.
The Royal Charter
granted to William Bradford in 1629 being only a confirmation of the previous
patents issued by the dissolved trading company financially backing the
Pilgrims, the document is much shorter and the reasons for colonization
unchanged. They were just summed up as, first, the propagation of religion, and
"the great increase of trade to his Majestie's realm"[22].
Like the Charter for the
Plymouth Colony, the Charter of Massachusetts Bay of 1629 was based on the 1620
Charter of New England. Actually, it also referred to a patent granted by the
Council of New England of the year before, and it was much more concerned with
establishing a clear form of government, rather than giving any reasons why the
Massachusetts Bay Company should settle in the land they were granted. This, as
we shall see later, was not the only missing clause in this particular charter.
The only reference to the influence that the settlers might have on the Natives'
life is that "by their good life and orderly conversation"[23] they might incite them to turn to
Christianity, and thus to Civilization. But we might wonder whether it was an
encouragement to evangelize the Indians, or rather for the Puritans to behave
themselves.
There were other motivations, given how the economic situation in England had changed since the early 1620s. The economic slump would not end and unemployment was rampant. Crime and the number of vagabonds were soaring. Because of the system of guilds and of enclosures, it was more difficult to enter the work market and to have access to land. Moreover, there had been bad harvests in East Anglia in 1630 and 1631, and riots caused by unemployment. If these reasons might not all have played a part in the decision to create the Massachusetts Bay Company, they did in the peopling of New England. To these reasons must be added the loosening of the mores which infuriated and disgusted the Puritans,[24] and the persecutions against them engineered by William Laud, Bishop of London, later to become Archbishop of Canterbury.
[1] Sir George Clark, Early Modern Europe (1450-1720), Oxford
UP, 1966, 67.
[2] G. M. Trevelyan, English Social History: A Survey of Six
Centuries, from Chaucer to Queen Victoria, Pelican, London, 1944, 215.
[3] Separatists were Puritans who
rejected the Church of England as hopelessly corrupt because it made no
difference between the saved and the damned, an idea derived from the Calvinist
doctrine of predestination. We shall come back on the idea of separatism again
and present it more precisely when necessary. For a very thorough introduction
to separatism, see Edmund S. Morgan, Visible
Saints: the History of a Puritan Idea, Cornell University Press, New York
1963.
[4] George D. Langdon, Jr., Pilgrim Colony - A History of New Plymouth
(1620 - 1691), Yale University Press, New Haven, 1966, 8.
[5] Ibid.
[6] It was created by the First
Virginia Charter in 1606 to colonize the Northern part of Virginia. So far,
there had been no permanent settlement apart from Jamestown.
[7] Another leading adventurer,
always faithful to the Crown, he was granted several areas in North America -
in present-day Maine and New Hampshire, upon which the Plymouth patent
overlapped. See Samuel Eliot Morison, Builders
of the Bay Colony, Boston, 1930,
reed. 1958, 33.
[8] Ibid., 32, 33.
[9] Ibid., 34.
[10] Ibid., 34, 66.
[11] See The Second Charter of
Virginia, 1609.
[12] See the Charter of New
England, 1620. It was later interpreted as a sign from God, clearing the land
so that it could be duly settled.
[13] Morison, Builders of the Bay Colony, 5-6.
[14] Trevelyan, English Social History, 229.
[15] Ibid., 228.
[16] Instructions for the Virginia
Company, 1606. This was inspired by Matt. 15:13, "Every plant, which my
Heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up."
[17] The First Virginia Charter,
1606.
[18] The Instructions for the
Virginia Company.
[19] All the quotations in this
paragraph come from the Charter of New England, 1620
[20] However plausible, this
argument is debatable, given that all the possessions of European nations were
called "New" followed by the name of the colonizing power: New Spain, New France, New Netherlands and even
New Sweden, and this is not a reason why these possessions must be identical,
or as close as possible to the Mother country. Yet the English overseas
plantations were the only ones where some kind of transfer of the traditional
model was attempted; they were also the only ones intended to be peopled and
not to serve as mere trading posts. The idea of a transfer of the English model
in the legislative and judicial fields will be more thoroughly studied in
chapter IV.
[21] Italics mine, meant to draw
the reader's attention on the ambiguity of the polysemous word
"fortune": in the early seventeenth century, it could refer to riches
and to luck. See Oxford English
Dictionary.
[22] Charter for New Plymouth
Plantation to William Bradford, 1629.
[23] Charter of Massachusetts Bay,
1629.
[24] See Winthrop's letter to his
wife Margaret (May 1629), in Everett Emerson, Letters from New England - the Massachusetts Bay Colony 1629 - 1638,
University of Massachusetts Press, Amhearst, 1976, 41, and Edmund S. Morgan, The Puritan Dilemma: the Story of John
Winthrop, Harper Collins Publishers, 1958, 36-37.