4588 NEW-ENGLAND. 



established separate governments. Hence several slips, torn from 

 the original government of New-EnglaBd by religious violence, plant- 

 ed themselves in a new soil, and spread over the country. Such was 

 that of New-Hampshire, which continues to this day a separate juris- 

 diction ; such was that of Rhode-Island, whose inhabitants were dri- 

 ven out from the Massachusetts colony (for that is the name by which 

 the government first erected in New-England was distinguished) for 

 supporting the freedom of religious sentiments, and maintaining that 

 the civil magistrate had no right over the speculative opinions of man- 

 kind. These liberal men founded a city, called Providence, which 

 they governed by their own principles ; and, such is the connection 

 between justness of sentiment and external prosperity, that the go- 

 vernment of Rhode-Island, though small, became extremely populous, 

 and flourishing. Another colony, driven out by the same persecuting 

 spirit, settled on the river Connecticut, and received frequent rein- 

 forcements from England, of such as were dissatisfied either with the 

 religious or civil government of that country. 



America, indeed, was now become the main resource of all dis- 

 contented and enterprising spirits ; and such were the numbers which 

 embarked for it from England, that, in 1637, a proclamation was pub- 

 lished, prohibiting any persons from sailing thither, without an ex- 

 press licence from the government. For want of this licence, it is 

 said that Oliver Cromwell, Mr. Hampden, and others of their party, 

 were detained from going to New-England, after being on ship 

 board for that purpose. 



New-Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode-Island, and Connecticut, 

 though always confederates for their mutual defence, were at first, 

 and still continue, under separate jurisdictions. They were all of 

 them, by their charters, originally free, and in a great measure inde- 

 pendent of Great Britain. The inhabitants had the choice of their 

 own magistrates, the governor, the council, the assembly, and the 

 power of making such laws as they thought proper, without sending 

 them to Great Britain for the approbation of the crown. Their laws, 

 however, were not to be at variance with those of Great Britain. To- 

 wards the latter end of the reign of Charles II, when he and his mi- 

 nisters wanted to destroy all charters and liberties, the Massachusetts 

 colony was accused of violating their charter, in like manner as the 

 city of London, and, by a judgment in the King's Bench of England, 

 was deprived of it. From that time to the revolution, they remained 

 without any charter. Soon after that period, they received anew one, 

 which, though very favourable, was much inferior to the extensive 

 privileges of the former. The appointment of a governor, lieutenant- 

 governor, secretary, and all the officers of the admiralty, was vested 

 in the crown ; the power of the miiitia was wholly in the hands of thQ 

 governor, as captain-general ; all judges, justices, and sheriffs, to 

 whom the execution of the law was entrusted, were nominated by the 

 governor, with the advice of the council; the governor had a nega- 

 tive on the choice of counsellors, peremptory and unlimited ; and he 

 was not obliged to give a reason for what he did in this particular, or 

 restrained to any number; authentic copies of the several acts passed 

 by this colony, as well as others, were to be transmitted to the court 

 of England, for the royal approbation ; but if the laws of this colony 

 were not repealed within three years after they were presented, they 

 were not repealable by the crown after that time ; no laws, ordinances 

 election of magistrates, or acts of government whatsoever, were valid 



