212 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bull. 191 



and other Indians and to treate with them as they in theire wisdoms and dis- 

 cretions shall think fitt [Hening, 1819-1823, vol. 1, pp. 402-403]. 



An action of this same Assembly passing sentence upon Colonel 



Hill, for some "weakness" during a "late expedition against the 



Indians," which is usually interpreted as constituting a sequel to the 



passage just quoted, was passed down between March and December 



1656. 



Debate and consideration of the charge and defence of Coll. Edward Hill by 

 the general and unanimous assent and vote of both houses without any con- 

 tradiction hath been found guilty of these crimes and weaknesses there alleaged 

 against him and for the vindicating themselves from any imputation of his crimes 

 and deficiencies have ordered that his present suspension from all offices military 

 and civil that he hath had or may have continue & be made uncapable of resti- 

 tution but by an Assembly, and that he be at the charge of whats alreadie expended 

 in procuring a peace with the Richahecrians and if the Governour or Councel 

 shall find any nearer way to effecting thereof that it shall be acted at the said 

 Coll. Hills proper cost and charge (Bland MS., in Hening, 1809-23, vol. 1, pp. 

 422-423). 



In addition we must consider Lindestrom's description of an 

 English defeat at the hands of the Black Minqua, and two passages 

 appearing in Lionel Gatford's "Publick Good without Private In- 

 terest . . ." (1657). 



The Planters have turned some of the Indians out of their places of abode and 

 subsistence, after that the Indians have submitted to the Colony, and to their 

 government, and have taken up their own lands, after the custom, used by the 

 Colony. As they did otherwise also very unchristianly requite the service which 

 one of the Indian kings did them in fighting against other Indians, that were 

 presumed to be enemies to the English, and to draw towards them, to do them 

 mischief. For that, when the said King desirous to show his fidelity to the 

 English, if not in obedience to some of their commander's orders, did adventure 

 too far with his own Indians, in the pursuit of those other Indians, and thereby 

 lost his life in that action, as some report, though others thought him to be taken 

 alive by the enemies. His wife and children that were by him, at his expiring, 

 recommended to the care of the English . . . were so far from receiving the favour 

 and kind usage, merited by their father, that they were wholly neglected, and 

 exposed to shift for themselves. 



And though it be alleged by some, as to the former part of this grievance, that 

 the portion of land which was taken from the said King, before his death, by an 

 English colonel was acknowledged openly in court, yet 'tis generally believed, 

 and by some stoutly asserted, that the said King was affrighted and threatened 

 into that acknowledgement by the said Colonel .... 



. . . The Planters [of Virginia] did lately, viz. Anno 1656, (when a numerous 

 people of the Indians, more remote from the Colonie, came down to treat with 

 the English about setling of a Peace, and withall a liberty of trade with them) 

 most perfidiously and barbarously (after a declaration of their desires and in- 

 tention) murther five of their Kings, that came in expectation of a better reception) 

 [sic] and brought [sic] much Beaver with them to begin the intercourse of the 

 commerce. [Gatford, 1657, pp. 6-8.] 



