AT the election, May 12th, 1698, there was a considerable al-teration in the legislature. Major-general Fitz John Winthrop, by his address, and the success of his agency in England, had ren-dered himself so popular, that he was elected governor. The former governor, Treat, who had, for many years, presided, and who had grown old in the service of the colony, was elected dep-uty-governor; William Jones, Esq. who, for a number of years, had been deputy-governor, was left out of the council.1 Mr. Joseph Curtis was chosen magistrate, to fill the vacancy made by the preferment of general Winthrop.

Until the session in October, 1698, the assembly consisted of but one house, and the magistrates and deputies appear to have acted together. But, at this time, it was enacted, that the General Assembly should consist of two houses: That the governor, or, in his absence, the deputy-governor and magistrates, should com-pose the first, which should be called the upper house: That the other should consist of the deputies, regularly returned from the

1Deputy-governor Jones was son-in-law to governor Eaton. He brought over a good estate from England, and made a settlement at New-Haven. He was, for the term of about six and thirty years, either magistrate or deputy-governor of the col-ony of New-Haven or Connecticut. In 1662, he was chosen magistrate for the colony of New-Haven. Two years after, he was elected deputy-governor. Upon the union, in 1665, he was chosen one of the magistrates of Connecticut, in which office he served until July 9th, 1691, when the assembly elected him deputy-gov-ernor. In May, 1692, he was chosen to the same office by the freemen. He was annually re-chosen, until May I2th, 1698. At that period he was about 74 years of age, and retired from public business. He died October I7th, 1706, aged 82 years. The General Assembly was sitting at New-Haven, at the time of his decease, and voted, "That in consideration of the many good services, for many years done by that honored and religious gentleman, Mr. William Jones, then deceased, a sum should be paid out of the treasury towards defraying the charges of his funeral."




several towns in the colony, which should be called the lower house. This house was authorised to choose a speaker to preside, and when formed, to make such officers and rules as they should judge necessary for their own regulation. It was also enacted, that no act should be passed into a law of this colony, nor any law, already enacted, be repealed, nor any other act, proper to this General Assembly, be passed, except by the consent of both houses.

At the general court, in October, an act passed, regulating the county court. It ordained, that it should consist of one chief judge, and two justices of the quorum.

On May 11th, 1699, the governor and deputy-governor were re-elected. Richard Christopher was chosen into the magistracy, and captain Joseph Whiting, treasurer.

At this session, the lower house, for the first time, formed sep-arately, and chose Mr. John Chester speaker, and captain William Whiting clerk. This assembly passed an act exempting the clergy from taxation. Several acts were also passed, relative to the set-tlement of new townships.

In June, 1659, governor Winthrop obtained liberty of the as-sembly, to purchase a large tract at Quinibaug. Soon after he made a purchase of Allups, alias Hyemps, and Mashaushawit, the native proprietors, of the lands comprised in the townships of Plainfield and Canterbury, lying on both sides of Quinibaug river. There were a small number of families on the lands, at the time of the purchase; but the planters were few, until the year 1689, when a number of people, chiefly from Massachusetts, made a purchase of the heirs of governor Winthrop, and began settle-ments in the northern part of the tract. At their session, in May, 1699, the General Assembly vested the inhabitants with town priv-ileges. The next year, it was named Plainfield.

The legislature, in the October session, 1698, enacted, that a new plantation should be made at Jeremy's farm. It was deter-mined, that it should be bounded southerly on Lyme, westerly on Middletown, and easterly on Norwich and Lebanon. This was most commonly termed the plantation at twenty mile river. The settlement began about 1701. In 1703, the assembly gave the planters a patent, confirming to them the whole tract. Some of the principal planters, were the Rev. John Bulkley, Samuel Gilbert, Michael Tainter, Samuel Northam, John Adams, Joseph Pomeroy, and John Loomis.

At the same session, a plantation was granted, upon the peti-tion of the inhabitants of Guilford, at a place called Cogingchaug. It was bounded northerly on Middletown, easterly on Haddam, westerly on Wallingford, and southerly on Guilford. The peti-tioners were thirty-one, but few of them moved on to the lands. For this reason, the settlement went on very slowly. The two




first planters, were Caleb Seward and David Robinson, from Guilford. Some others afterward removed from the same town, and made settlements there. May 11th, 1704, it was named Dur-ham. But the whole number of inhabitants was very small. In 1707, the number of families was no more than fifteen. The in-habitants held meetings, and acted as a town, but were not in-corporated with town privileges, until May, 1708. After this time, the plantation increased rapidly. There was a great accession of inhabitants from Northampton, Stratford, Milford, and other towns.

Committees were again appointed, at the session in October, to attempt a settlement of the boundaries between Massachusetts and Connecticut, and between this colony and Rhode-Island. However, like all former ones, they were unsuccessful.

March 28th, 1700, his majesty, king William, in council, was pleased to confirm the agreement made between Connecticut and New-York, in 1683, respecting the boundary line between the two colonies. New-York neglected, however, to run the line. Connect-icut, therefore, about twelve years after, applied to governor Hun-ter, to appoint commissioners to complete the running of the line, and mark it with proper bounds. He laid the affair before the legislature of New-York: but, as they would adopt no measures for that purpose, and, as there was no appearance that they de-signed it, Connecticut presented a petition to his majesty king George the first, praying that he would issue his royal commands to his government of New-York, that they should forthwith ap-point commissioners, in concert with Connecticut, to complete the running of the line, and the erecting of proper monuments. In consequence of this, the legislature of New-York, in 1719, passed an act empowering their governor to appoint commission-ers to run the line parallel to Hudson's river, to re-survey the former lines, and to distinguish the boundary. In May, 1725, the commissioners and surveyors of the two colonies, met at Green-wich, and, having agreed upon the manner in which the work should be accomplished, the survey was executed, in part, imme-diately, and a report of what they had done, was made to the respective legislatures of Connecticut and New-York. On the 14th of May, 1731, a complete settlement was made. By the par-tition line, finally established, Connecticut ceded to New-York a tract of 60,000 acres, as an equivalent for lands which New-York had surrendered to Connecticut, lying upon the sound. This tract, from its figure, has been called the Oblong.

In 1700, the governor and council were all re-elected.

Many acts of violence, since the last session of the assembly, had been committed against the inhabitants of Windsor and Sims-bury, by the people of Enfield and Suffield. They had made en-croachments two miles upon the land of those towns, beyond all




former Instances. Great animosities subsisted between those towns on the account of the encroachments and damages, which the inhabitants of Connecticut suffered by them.

To compose these difficulties, if possible, the assembly appoint-ed William Pitkin, Esq. Mr. John Chester, and Mr. William Whit-ing, a committee, with plenary powers, to address the general court of Massachusetts, and to represent to them the readiness of the legislature of Connecticut, to join with them in any just measures, for an amicable settlement of the boundary line. The court of Massachusetts appointed colonel Hutchinson, Mr. Tay-lor, Mr. Anthrum, and Mr. Prout, a committee, but with limited powers, to find the southernmost line of Massachusetts, run by Nathaniel Woodward and Solomon Saffery. The general court, also, on the 5th of June, passed an act, in answer to the proposal made by Connecticut, in which they insisted on the line run by Woodward and Saffery. These were termed skilful and approved artists. The court also, in their act, insisted, that all grants, made by them to the inhabitants of Woodstock, or of any other place, should remain good and valid to the grantees, though the places should be found south of the line of Massachusetts. To these hard terms the committee conceded, upon the condition, that all the grants made by Connecticut, to the inhabitants of Windsor and Simsbury, should be acknowledged as valid, and the land granted be reserved to the proprietors. But the court of Massa-chusetts would not concede even this. No accommodation could therefore be effected.

The general court of Massachusetts determined to rely upon, and maintain the line run by their sailors, in 1642. They insisted that it had been the boundary between the colonies, for nearly sixty years: that the colony of Connecticut was bounded on the south line of Massachusetts, which they said was not an imag-inary, but well known line. They pleaded, that Mr. Winthrop, when he procured the charter, knew that to be the line, and that no other could be intended.

Connecticut, on the other hand, maintained, that the south line of Massachusetts, according to the express words of their charter, was a line running due west from a point, or station, three miles south of every part of Charles river; and that the station fixed by Woodward and Saffery was too far south. It was also insisted, that, even allowing Woodward's and Saffery's station to be right, a due west line from it would run far north of Bissell's ferry house at Windsor. The committee, appointed by the court of Massa-chusetts, reported, that the line would run north of Bissell's house; yet the court of Massachusetts would not run the line, nor come to any accommodation; but insisted on the line as it had been run by them, in 1642, and on Connecticut's ceding their rights




to all the lands which they had granted, whether they lay north or south of said line.1

Though Colchester held their lands from the colony, which claimed by virtue of Uncas's deed in 1640, major Mason's pur-chase, in behalf of the colony, and surrender of the lands in the presence of the general assembly, and by virtue of Joshua's will; and though the inhabitants had deeds from Owaneco, and the Moheagan sachems, covering the whole tract, yet they met with great difficulties, in the settlement of the town, from Owaneco and the Moheagans, who were made uneasy, and stirred up to mischief, by designing men. The Masons, Daniel Clark, Nicho-las Hallam, major Palms, major Fitch, and others, about this time, conceived the plan of obtaining a large tract of land, com-prising Colchester, part of Lyme, and New-London, Plainneld, Canterbury, and Windham, for themselves. They imagined, that the surrender of major Mason, in the general assembly, was not legal, and that the circumstances of those early transactions were so far obliterated from the memory of the living, that they should be able to recover, in law, all the lands made over, by Uncas, to major Mason, acting as agent of the colony in 1659.

The legislature, though they viewed their title to the lands in the colony legal and indubitable, yet judged it expedient, rather than to have any difficulty with the Indians, to treat with them, and make them easy.

The governor and council were appointed a committee for these purposes. They were instructed to obtain a quit claim of the Indians upon reasonable terms, and to advise the inhabitants, with respect to their settlements. Captain Samuel Mason, who was one of the magistrates, was particularly desired to use his influence with the Indians to promote the design, and quiet the planters.

From the first settlement of the colony, it had been customary to make grants of land to officers, soldiers, and others, who had been specially serviceable to the colony. Grants had been made to major Mason, to his officers and soldiers, in the Pequot war. This encouraged the volunteers, who had performed such signal feats in the Narraganset war, to make application to the assembly, for the grant of a new township, as an acknowledgment of their good services. Upon the petition of captain Thomas Leffingwell, of Norwich, and Mr. John Frink, of Stonington, in behalf of them-selves and other volunteers, the general assembly, in October, 1696, granted them a township of six miles square, to be taken up in the conquered lands. A committee having surveyed the lands and made their report to the assembly, four years after, a township was confirmed to the petitioners, by the name of Vol-untown. It was bounded by a due north line, from the pond at

1Records of Connecticut, acts and letters on file.




the head of Pawcatuck river, to Greenwich path, thence west to the bounds of Preston, thence bounded by Preston and Stoning-ton to Pawcatuck river, and thence by the river to the pond, the first mentioned bounds. Nineteen years after, the assembly granted an addition of a considerable tract on the north part of the township.

In May, 1701, governor Winthrop and deputy governor Treat were re-chosen. The magistrates were Andrew Leet, James Fitch, Samuel Mason, Daniel Witherel, Nathaniel Stanley, Moses Mans-field, John Hamlin, Nathan Gould, William Pitkin, Joseph Curtis, John Chester, and Josiah Rossiter, Esquires. Joseph Whiting, Esq. was re-elected treasurer, and Eleazar Kimberly, secretary.

Ever since the union of the colonies, the assembly had con-vened at Hartford, both in May and October; but, at this ses-sion, an act passed, that the assembly, in October, should be holden, at the usual time, in New-Haven. It was also enacted, that the court of magistrates, which had been commonly holden at Hartford, in October, should, for the future, be holden at New-Haven, on the first Tuesday of the same month. A respectable committee was appointed again, this year, to make a settlement of the boundary line with Rhode-Island, and committees were appointed, from year to year, for the same purpose, but all at-tempts, for a long time, were unsuccessful.

The election in May, 1702, made no alteration in the legislature.

The inhabitants of Windham having agreed upon a division of that town, on the 3Oth of January, 1700, the assembly, at this session, confirmed the agreement, and enacted that Windham should be divided into two towns, and that the town at the north end should be called Mansfield. The next May, the assembly vested them with distinct town privileges. Patents were granted, at the same time, to both townships. The Indian name of Mans-field, was Nawbesetuck. Settlements were made here soon after they commenced at Windham.

Danbury had been surveyed for a town in 1693, soon after a plantation was made upon the lands. Some of the principal planters were James Beebe, Thomas Taylor, Samuel and James Benedict, John Hoit, and Josiah Starr. The general court at this session, gave them a patent, granting them a township extending eight miles in length, north and south, and six miles in breadth, according to the original survey.

In October, the general assembly was holden at New-Haven.

The colony having received intelligence of the demise of king William, and a gracious letter from queen Anne, voted, that a letter should be addressed to her majesty, congratulating her upon her happy accession to the throne of her ancestors, and express-ing their thanks for the favorable notice she had taken of the colony.




The only alteration made, by the election, in May, 1703, was the choice of Peter Burr, Esq. into the magistracy.

At this assembly, an addition was made to the town of New-London of all that tract, lying north of the former bounds, in-cluded in a line drawn from the northeastern corner of Lyme, to the southwestern corner of Norwich, as it goes down to trading cove. A patent was, at the same time, given to the inhabitants, confirming this and all other parts of the town to them forever.

At the same session, it was enacted, that all the townships in this colony, to which the assembly had given patents, should re-main a full and clear estate, with all the privileges and immunities therein granted, in fee simple to the proprietors, their heirs and assigns forever. It was also enacted, that all lands sequestered, and given to public or private uses, should remain forever, for the ends for which they had been given.

Queen Anne, the emperor of Germany, and the States General, in May, 1702, declared war against France and Spain. Conse-quently the American colonies were again involved in a French and Indian war. The legislature, at the session in October, 1703, found it necessary to adopt measures for the safety of the country. A requisition was made, by governor Dudley, and the general court of Massachusetts, of a detachment of a hundred men, to assist them in the war against the eastern Indians. Soldiers were detached and sent forth for the defence of the western towns in Connecticut. A committee of war was appointed to send troops into the county of Hampshire, in Massachusetts, and to the fron-tier towns in this colony, as emergencies should require.

At this assembly, it was enacted, that the town of Plainfield should be divided, and that the inhabitants on the west side of the river should be a distinct town, by the name of Canterbury. It seems, that the settlement of this tract commenced about the year 1690. The principal settlers, from Connecticut, were major James Fitch and Mr. Solomon Tracy, from Norwich, Mr. Tixhall Ells-worth and Mr. Samuel Ashley, from Hartford; but much the greatest number was from Newtown, Woburn, Dorchester, Barn-stable, and Medfield, in Massachusetts. Among these were John, Richard, and Joseph Woodward, William, Obadiah, and Joseph Johnson, Josiah and Samuel Cleaveland, Elisha Paine, Paul Dav-enport, and Henry Adams.

On the 15th of March, 1704, a special assembly was convened to provide for the common safety. To prevent mischief from the friendly Indians, and preserve them from being corrupted and drawn away by the enemy, both the civil and military officers, in the respective towns, were directed to take special care of them; to keep them within their own limits, and not to suffer them, upon their peril, to remove from the places which should be assigned them, nor to hold any correspondence with the enemy, or any




foreign Indians, nor by any means to harbor them. A premium of ten pounds was proposed, as an encouragement to every friend-ly Indian, who should bring in and deliver up one who was an enemy.

Orders were given, requiring every particular town, in the colony, to convene and determine upon the manner of fortifying and defending themselves. In case of any sudden attack or in-vasion, the commissioned officers, in the several towns, were au-thorised to detach and send forth any number of soldiers, not exceeding half the militia, to repel and pursue the enemy. It was resolved, that a grand scout should be employed by the committee of war, upon the frontiers, for the discovery and annoyance of the enemy. Until this could be sent forth, it was determined, that small scouts, from the frontier towns, should be constantly kept out, to discover and give notice of the motions of the enemy. It was ordered, that the hundred men, solicited by the Massa-chusetts, should be raised forthwith, to act against the eastern Indians, and that governor Dudley should be requested to call them out immediately. A detachment of sixty men was ordered for the public service, principally with a view to the defence of the county of Hampshire. These were to be under the command of the committee of war in Connecticut, and the commanding offi-cer in that county.

At the court of election, May, 1704, the former governors and magistrates were re-chosen. John Alien, Esq. was chosen mag-istrate, to fill the vacancy made by the death of Moses Mans-field, Esq.

Committees were appointed in the several counties to meet to-gether, to consult and determine upon the best measures for the general defence and safety.

As the deserting or giving up of any place, would encourage the enemy, disserve her majesty's interests, and the welfare of the colony, it was enacted, that if any persons or families, in any of the frontier towns, should desert their habitations or places of residence, without leave from the assembly, they should forfeit their freehold of lands and tenements in that place. It was fur-ther enacted, that if any male person, of the age of sixteen years, should so remove from any frontier town, he should pay a fine of ten pounds, and that the fine should be applied to the defence of the town from which he had removed.

Good policy required, that as great a number of the friendly Indians as possible, should be employed in the public service. Gentlemen were, therefore, appointed to enlist them as volunteers. Good encouragements were given for this purpose. Indians were the best troops to scout and range the woods; and in proportion as they offered themselves, Englishmen, whose labours were much more useful, were kept at home.




Besides the hundred men dispatched to the eastward, four hun-dred were raised for the defence of this colony, and of the county of Hampshire. They were required to be always ready. That they might be completely ready, both in summer and winter, to march immediately, upon any emergency, it was ordered, that they should be furnished with snow shoes, that they might travel and run upon the snow. A number of men in every town were obliged to prepare themselves in this manner.1

For the maintenance of good morals, the suppression of vicious and disorderly practices, and the preservation of the common peace, the assembly ordered, that a sober, religious man, be ap-pointed by the county court, in each of the counties, to be an attorney for her majesty, to prosecute all criminal offenders.

The colony, at this time, was in the most critical situation. It was not only in danger, and put to great expense, by reason of the war, to defend itself, but to still greater, to defend the neigh-bouring colonies of Massachusetts and New-York. It was con-tinually harassed by the demands of Joseph Dudley, Esq. gov-ernor of Massachusetts, and of lord Cornbury, governor of New-York and the Jerseys, for men and money, as they pretended for the defence of their respective governments.

At the same time, the colony had a number of powerful enemies, who, by misrepresentation and every other artifice in their power, were seeking to deprive them both of their lands and all their chartered rights and privileges. Governor Dudley, lord Corn-bury, and their instruments, combined together to despoil the colony of its charter, and subject it entirely to their government. It appears, from the letters and acts on file, that Dudley wished to unite all New-England under his own government. At the same time, it seems, he flattered lord Cornbury, that, if they could effect the re-union of all the charter governments to the crown, he should not only have the government of the southern colonies, but of Connecticut. Dudley was a man of great intrigue and duplicity, well versed in court affairs, and had powerful connec-tions in England. He had been connected with Sir Edmund An-dross in the government of New-England, and was an enemy to all the chartered rights of the colonies. While he was soliciting the government of Massachusetts, he had a view to the govern-ment of all New-England. As he had conceived this plan as early as the latter part of the reign of king William, he opposed what-ever he suspected would operate against it, and prevent the sus-pension of all government by charter. When he found, therefore, that Sir Henry Ashurst was appointed agent for Connecticut, about the beginning of the present century, he opposed his under-taking the agency with all his influence, because he knew his friendship to the colonies, and that he was a powerful man. He

1Records of the colony.




united all his influence with the court party, and the enemies to the liberties of the colonies, to vacate all the charters in America. He so far succeeded, that, in the latter part of the reign of king William, a bill was prepared for re-uniting all the charter gov-ernments to the crown. Early in the reign of queen Anne, it was brought into parliament. It imported, that the charters given to the several colonies in New-England, to East and West New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Carolina, the Bahama and Lucay islands, were prejudicial and repugnant to the trade of the king-dom, and the welfare of his majesty's subjects in the other planta-tions, and to his majesty's revenue arising from the customs. It also further alleged, that irregularities, piracies, and unlawful trade, were countenanced and encouraged by the authority in the chartered colonies. It therefore enacted, "That all and singular, the clauses, matters, and things, contained in any charters, or letters patents, granted by the great seal of England, by any of his royal predecessors, by his present majesty, or the late queen, to any of the said plantations, or to any persons in them, should be utterly void, and of none effect. It further enacted, that all such power, authority, privileges, and jurisdictions, should be, and were re-united, annexed to, and vested in his majesty, his heirs and successors, in right of the crown of England, to all intents and purposes, as though no such charters or letters patent had been had or made."1

Sir Henry Ashurst, viewing the act as unjust, and subversive of the civil and religious rights of the colony, preferred a petition to the lords spiritual and temporal in parliament assembled, rep-resenting that said bill would do great injustice to the inhabitants of Connecticut: That it would make void the charter granted to the colony by king Charles the second: That the government was, by said charter, granted to them, and was so interwoven with their property, that it could not be taken away, without exposing them to the utmost confusion, if not to utter ruin: That the inhabitants had never been accused of mal-administration, pirati-cal or unlawful trade; and that their case was different from his majesty's other plantations in America. He, therefore, humbly prayed to be heard, by his council, at the bar of the house, in their behalf.2 In consequence of this, it was granted, May 3d, 1701, that the petitioner should be heard against the bill.

Sir Henry was a faithful man, had honourable connections, and his influence at court was very considerable. He raised all the opposition to the passing of the bill in his power. Representa-tions were made, not only of the ample rights and privileges granted to Connecticut, by charter, but that they were granted for important considerations, and particular services performed: That the inhabitants, at great expense and danger, had purchased,

1Copy of the bill on file.

2Petition on file.




subdued, and planted an extensive country; had defended it against the Dutch, French, and other enemies of the nation; had enlarged his majesty's dominions, and increased commerce: That the charter not only gave the inhabitants powers of government, but secured the title of their lands and tenements; and that, in these views, the passing of the bill would be an act of great in-justice; would be ruinous to the colony, and prejudicial to the general interest. It was insisted, that it would be still more arbi-trary and unjust, as the colony had not been even accused of mal-administration, piratical or illegal practices, or so much as heard on the subject. It was pleaded, that the colony had ever been loyal and obedient, and if any irregularities, or inadvertences should finally be found in the government, it would, on the first notice of it, undoubtedly be reformed. At the same time, the taking away of so many charters, was, at once, calculated to de-stroy all confidence in the crown, in royal patents and promises; to discourage all further enterprise, in settling and defending the country; to create universal discontent and disaffection in the colonies; and to produce effects much more prejudicial to the nation, than any of those which were then matter of complaint. It would, also, afford a precedent most alarming to all the char-tered corporations in England. These various considerations op-erated so powerfully against the bill, that it could not be carried through the houses.

Governor Dudley and lord Cornbury, however, were not dis-couraged. They determined to make a more open and powerful opposition to the charter rights of Connecticut. And they deter-mined, as much had been made of this argument, that Connecti-cut had never been accused of maladministration, piracy, or any illegal trade, to remove it out of the way, by a direct impeachment of the colony of high misdemeanors. They were both powerful enemies. Governor Dudley was not only a man of great intrigue, but had a party at court, who were men of art and influence. Lord Cornbury was nearly related to her majesty, queen Anne, and had many noble connections, whose weight with her royal person and the court, was not inconsiderable. Exclusive of these, the colony had enemies among themselves. Nicholas Hallam, major Palms, captain Mason, Daniel Clark, and others, had either appealed to England against the colony, or were scheming to possess themselves of large tracts of land, and, for that purpose, were encouraging the Moheagan controversy. Hallam had ap-pealed to England against the colony, and lost his case. The king, in council, had established the judgment given against him in the courts of Connecticut. Major Palms, who had married the daugh-ter of John Winthrop, Esq. the first governor of Connecticut, under the charter, had imagined himself injured by the adminis-trators on the governor's estate, and had brought an action against




them. Losing his case before the courts in this colony, he had appealed to England. He was particularly irritated against the colony, and against his brother in law, Fitz John Winthrop, Esq. then governor of the colony. These malcontents all united their influence, by the grossest misrepresentations, and all other means in their power, to injure the colony in its most essential interests.

Lord Cornbury was poor, and not unwilling, by any means, to get money. He had made a demand of four hundred and fifty pounds upon the colony, for the defence of New-York. Connecti-cut judged, that it was not their duty to comply with his demand, as their expenses already were as great as the colony was able to bear.

Dudley and Cornbury, therefore, proceeded to draw up articles of complaint against the colony. Dudley employed one Bulkley to write against the government. He drew up a large folio book, which he termed the doom or miseries of Connecticut. In this, he not only exceedingly misrepresented and criminated the col-only, but expatiated on the advantages of a general governor of New-England, and highly recommended the government of Sir Edmund Andross.1

Among other complaints, the principal articles particularly charged, were, summarily, these: That the governor did not ob-serve the acts of trade and navigation, but encouraged illegal commerce and piracy: That the colony was a receptacle of pi-rates, encouraged and harboured by the government: That the government harboured and protected soldiers, seamen, servants, and malefactors, who made their escape from other parts, and would not deliver them up, when demanded. It was, also, charged against the colony, that it harboured great numbers of young men, from Massachusetts and New-York, where they were obliged to pay taxes for the expenses of the war, and induced them to settle there, principally, because it imposed no taxes for that purpose: That the colony would not furnish their quota for the fortification of Albany and New-York, and the assistance of Massachusetts Bay, against the French and Indians: And that, if any of her majesty's subjects, of the other colonies, sued for debt, in any of the courts of the colony, no justice could be done them, if the debt were against any of its inhabitants. It was also charged, that Connecticut, under the colour of their charter, made capital laws; tried murders, robberies, and other crimes, and punished with death and banishment; and that their courts of judicature were arbitrary and unjust: That the legislature would not suffer the laws of England to be pleaded in their courts, unless it were to serve a turn for themselves: That they had refused to grant appeals to her majesty, in council, and had given great vexation to those who had demanded them: That the govern-

1Letter of Sir Henry Ashurst, on file.




ment had refused to submit to her majesty, and to his royal high-ness's commission of vice admiralty, and for commanding its militia; and had defeated the powers which had been given to the governors of her majesty's neighbouring colonies, for that purpose. Finally, it was charged, that the legislature had made a law, that Christians, who were not of their communion, should not meet to worship God, without license from their assembly, which law extended even to the church of England, as well as to Christians of other denominations tolerated in England.

While governor Dudley was thus attempting the ruin of the colony, in the court of England, he kept up the appearance of the most entire friendship towards it, in this country; and in a letter, of about the same date with his complaints, thanked the legislature for the great supplies which they had given him and the colony.

The general assembly had appointed the most respectable com-mittees, and taken great pains to compromise all difficulties with Owaneco and the Moheagans; and though they had made re-peated purchases and obtained ample deeds of their lands, yet, rather than have any uneasiness among the Indians, they offered Owaneco such a sum of money, to make him easy, as was entirely satisfactory to him; but Mason and the other malcontents, who wished to possess the Indian lands, would not suffer him to ac-cept it, and frustrated all attempts for an accommodation.

While Mason and other enemies were practising their arts, in Connecticut, Hallam, assisted by Dudley and his party, with other malcontents, on both sides of the water, was making griev-ous complaints, in England, of the injustice and cruelty of the colony towards Owaneco, in driving him from his lands, and de-priving the Moheagans even of their planting grounds. It was pretended, that, in the late grant and patent to the town of New-London, the legislature had conveyed away all his lands in that quarter, whereas particular care was taken, both in the grant and patent, to secure all the property and privileges of the Moheagans. The assembly had taken the most faithful and tender care of them, from the first settlement of the colony to that time. According to their agreement with major Mason, then deputy governor of the colony, when he resigned the Moheagan land to the assembly, they granted him a farm of five hundred acres, and it was laid out to him at a place called, by the Indians, Pomakuk. They had also reserved a fine tract of land, of between four and five thousand acres, to the Moheagans to plant on, which was much more than sufficient for that purpose. But the representations, which these evil minded men were constantly making to Owaneco and his people, at some times, made them uneasy, and some of them probably imagined, that they were really injured. At the same time, the affair was so represented in England, as made impres-sions on the minds of many very unfavorable to the colony.




In this situation of affairs, Hallam, assisted by the malcontents in England and America, preferred a complaint and petition to her majesty, queen Anne, representing, that the sachems of the Moheagan tribe of Indians were the original and chief proprie-tors of all the lands in the colony: That they were a great people, and had received and treated the first planters in a peaceable and friendly manner: That, for an inconsiderable value, they had granted their lands to them, reserving to themselves a small parcel only for planting ground; and that the general assembly of Con-necticut had passed an act by which they had taken that from them, which, until that time, they had always enjoyed. For these reasons, it was prayed, that her majesty would appoint commis-sioners to examine into all these matters, and into all the other injuries and violences which had been done to the Moheagans, and to determine respecting them according to equity.

Her majesty, imposed upon and deceived by these representa-tions, and not waiting to give the colony an opportunity to be heard, on the 19th of July, 1704, granted a commission to Joseph Dudley, Esq. the great enemy of the colony, Thomas Povey, Esq. lieutenant governor of Massachusetts, major Edward Palms, and others, to the number of twelve, authorizing them to hear and determine the whole affair, reserving liberty to either to appeal to her majesty in council.

At the session in May, a respectable committee was appointed, with ample powers, to examine into all the complaints of Owaneco and the Moheagan Indians, and to report to the assembly in Oc-tober. The committee appointed time and place, and attempted to accomplish the business, for which they had been appointed; but captain Mason, whom Owaneco had chosen for his guardian, had art enough to frustrate the design. He made a journey to Boston, at the very time, and Owaneco would do nothing without him. In the mean time, the commission was granted by the queen, and the colony were unhappily drawn into a long and expensive controversy.

The Masons claimed the lands purchased by their ancestor, deputy governor John Mason, by virtue of a deed given to him by Uncas, in 1659, while he acted as agent of the colony, and denied the legality of the surrender which he had made of them, in the general assembly, the next year. They insisted, that it respected nothing more than the jurisdiction right, and that the title to the soil was vested in their family, as guardians or over-seers of the Indians. While they pretended great concern for the Indians, their sole object was to hold all those lands, included in said deed, for themselves and others, who had united with them in prosecution of the affair against the colony.

Sir Henry Ashurst, wishing to preserve the important privileges of the colony, had taken pains to postpone the hearing of the




complaints against it, as far as possible, that the governor and company might have intelligence concerning them, and send their answer; but, on the 12th of February, 1705, the hearing came on, before her majesty in council. Governor Dudley and Lord Cornbury had spared no pains to carry their point before her majesty. Dudley had been careful to procure and lay before her an opinion of the attorney general, in king William's reign, "that he might send a governor to Connecticut." Further, to prepare the way for the decision which he wished, he procured another opinion of the attorney and solicitor general, respecting the case of Connecticut, as it then appeared, "that if it were as governor Dudley had represented, there was a defect in the government: That the colony was not able to defend itself, and in imminent danger of being possessed by the queen's enemies: And that, in such case, the queen might send a governor, for civil and military government; but not to alter the laws and customs."

Her majesty had directed Sir Henry to appear and show rea-sons, if any he had, why she should not appoint a governor over the colony. He considered every thing dear to it at stake, and therefore made exertions in some measure proportionate to the magnitude of the cause. Lord Paget, a man of great influence, was his brother by marriage, and he was related to, or intimately connected with other principal characters at court. He made all the interest, and obtained all the influence which he possibly could, either by himself or his connections, in favor of the colony. He obtained two of the best counsel in England; both parliament men, possessing an estate of a thousand pounds a year. He stood firm against all the charges of Dudley, lord Cornbury, Congreve, and others, against the colony, and by his counsel, for an hour and an half, defended it against all the art and intrigue of its ad-versaries, and all the law learning and eloquence of the attorney and solicitor general.1

As Connecticut was entirely ignorant of the charges brought against it, and no information or evidence could be thence ob-tained, Sir Henry and his counsel were necessitated to employ such means as were in their power. They amply stated the rights and privileges granted by the royal charter, the territory it con-veyed, and the powers with which it vested the governor and company. They showed, that these patents were confirmed by a non obstante, and always to be construed in the most favorable light for the grantees. It was demonstrated, that the legislature were vested with ample powers to make laws, criminal and cap-ital, as well as civil; to inflict banishment, death, and all other capital punishments, in all capital cases, no less than in others. It was also represented, that the governors, or commanders in chief, were, by charter, vested with plenary powers to assemble

1Letter of Sir Henry Ashurst, February 15th, 1705, on file.




in martial array, and put in warlike posture the inhabitants of the colony, for their defence, and to commission others, for the like purposes. It was also clearly shown, that, by charter, they had the same right to fish, trade, and do all other business, and enjoy all other privileges, by land and sea, which any other of her majesty's subjects had a right to do, or enjoy. It was there-fore, urged, that all those matters, charged against the colony, respecting their making capital laws, and inflicting capital pun-ishments, whether death or banishment, were no crimes; but things which the legislature not only had a right, but were bound in faithfulness to do, as circumstances might require. For the same reason, it was also insisted, that the colonies claiming a right to command their own militia, and defeating the designs of the governors of the other colonies, who wished to command it, were no crimes. It was insisted, that doing them was no more than defending themselves in the enjoyment of their legal rights.

With respect to the irregularity and injustice of the courts in Connecticut, it was observed, that general charges deserved no reply. That it did not appear, that what was charged was any thing more than mere hearsay and clamor. But it was pleaded, that, on the contrary, they had substantial evidence of the justice of the courts in Connecticut. That several appeals had been made, to her majesty, from the judgment of those courts: That these had been different cases, and in every instance, the judg-ments given by the courts in Connecticut, had been approved by her majesty, and the lords committee of council. This, it was said, was a notable evidence of their justice; and that, so far as appeared, there had been no injustice or irregularity in any one court in the colony.

With respect to governor Dudley's complaint, that Connecticut did not furnish the men which he demanded, and that of lord Cornbury, that it did not comply with his demands for money, it was answered, that it did not appear, from the charter, that the colony was obliged to comply with those requisitions: That the governors of other colonies had no right to command the legislature and people of Connecticut: and that they were under no obligations to obey them, any further than it should be re-quired by her majesty. It was further observed, with respect to the money, that it appeared from his lordship's letter, that the general assembly of Connecticut had taken the requisition into their consideration, and had determined to know her maj-esty's pleasure, before they gave away their money. It was af-firmed, that there was nothing disloyal in such a determination: That the colony had a right to grant, or not to grant their money, as they judged it expedient or not: That they had a right to know the purpose for which they granted it; and that their re-




ferring it to her majesty's pleasure, was an implication of their obedience to it, whenever it should be known.

With reference to Connecticut's harboring deserters, malefac-tors, pirates, and the like, it was observed, that it was a general charge of little weight, and deserved no answer. It was af-firmed to be a common thing, even in England, for soldiers and others to go from one country into another, and not to be found; yet it might not be any crime or fault of the country where they secreted themselves. As to captain Matthews finding two sol-diers at Stamford, and sending for major Silleck to secure them, it did not appear that there was the least fault in the major. It was evident, from his lordship's letter, that he went to Stamford, that the soldiers were brought, and that, while the major and Matthews were conversing together, in a private room, they made their escape. It was said, it might be more the fault of Matthews than of Silleck; for it did not appear that Matthews was kept there by any force or constraint, but was examining into the affair, or talking generally upon the subject.

With relation to the complaint of lord Cornbury, in his letter of June, 1703, "that he labored under great misfortunes, in rela-tion to the neighboring provinces: That the coast of Connecticut is opposite to two thirds of Long-Island; by which means they filled all that part of the island with European goods, cheaper than their merchants could, because they paid duties, and those of Connecticut paid none; nor would they be subject to the acts of navigation; by which means there had been no trade be-tween the city of New-York and the east end of Long-Island, from whence the greatest part of the whale oil came; and that it was difficult to persuade those people that they belonged to that province," it was replied, that there appeared to be no fault in Connecticut in this respect. It was maintained, that the inhabi-tants had a right to trade where they pleased, if it were not re-pugnant to the laws of England. It also was pleaded, that there was no evidence, that they had been guilty of any illegal trade or practices; and that they were a poor people, and carried on little trade.

In a letter of the same date with the former, his lordship had observed, "that he was satisfied this vast continent, which might be made very useful to England, if right measures were taken, would never be so, till all the propriety and charter governments were brought under the crown." To this it was replied, that this might, or it might not be the case: that the same, as circumstances might be, might be said of all the charters in England. It was however insisted, that the words sounded harsh, and had an ill relish.

It was, however, much insisted on, that the attorney and solic-itor general had reported, "that her majesty might appoint a




governor for Connecticut." To this, the counsel for the colony answered, that the report was hypothetical, founded on the sup-position that the colony was not able to defend itself, and was in danger of falling into the hands of her majesty's enemies; but that there was no evidence of these facts. It did not appear, they said, that Connecticut was in a more defenceless state, or in greater danger of becoming a prey to her majesty's enemies, than any of the other colonies. It was pleaded, that the attor-ney and solicitor general had not reported, that either of these was the case, and therefore their opinion could not be made a plea for sending a governor to Connecticut.

Further, it was strenuously maintained, that it was an essen-tial right of every individual and corporation, to be heard before they were condemned; and that the governor and company of Connecticut ought to be heard upon the articles exhibited against them, before any judgment be formed respecting them. It was observed, that governors, who, by enlarging their own territories, might increase their honors and profits, were apt to complain: that they were under peculiar temptations, especially at such a distance, where it was so difficult to make enquiry and obtain the truth: that there was more reason to suspect the governors complaining, than the governor of Connecticut, who acted with a council and an assembly. It was therefore affirmed, that there was every reason, that the colony should be heard in its own defence. If either the governor of New-England or New-York were impeached, and the same complaints made against them, said the counsel, which they have brought against Connecticut, her majesty would do nothing with respect to them, until they had been heard. It would be contrary to all law and reason; much more so, to treat a whole colony in this manner, in a case in which their charter might be forfeited, and their fortunes ruined. It was observed, that governors appointed during pleas-ure, often committed barbarous acts to enrich themselves; and that they had nothing to lose but their office; whereas the col-ony of Connecticut was of great substance, and had every thing to lose: that even in ordinary cases, in which the character and property of one man only were concerned, nothing was deter-mined, but upon sufficient evidence, given upon oath, and that it could never be reasonable to condemn a colony upon mere suggestions: that it might appear, upon a full examination, that the governor of Connecticut was much better qualified to gov-ern, than the governor of New-York or Massachusetts. It was therefore pleaded, that the articles of complaint might be sent to the governor and company of Connecticut, and that they might have an opportunity to answer for themselves: that there could be no danger in this; and if any irregularities should be found,




in the management of their government, they would most cer-tainly reform and obey her majesty's commands.1

Upon this full hearing, it was determined, that the lords of trade should draw out the principal articles of complaint, and send a copy of them to the governor of Connecticut, and to the two principal complainants, governor Dudley, and lord Cornbury, and that Connecticut should send their answer, with evidence respecting the several articles, legally taken, and sealed with the public seal of the colony. Governor Dudley and lord Cornbury were also directed to transmit their evidence of the articles charged, publicly and legally taken.

By this means, Dudley, Cornbury, and their abettors were caught in their own snare, their selfishness and duplicity were made to appear, in a strong point of light, and their whole scheme at once totally ruined. They were totally unable to support the charges which they had brought against the colony. At the same time, the legislature of Connecticut could produce the most sub-stantial evidence, that the very reverse of what had been pre-tended, was true. They had the last, and this year between five and six hundred men in actual service. Four hundred of this number had been employed, principally in the defence of Mas-sachusetts and New-York. The committee of war, consisting of the governor, most of the council, and other principal men in the colony, had met, with officers and commissioners from Massachusetts, and most harmoniously united with them in opin-ion, and measures for the common defence. The legislature were not only able to prove these facts from the records of the colony, and from the resolutions of the committee of war, but, what was still more confounding to governor Dudley, to produce a letter of his, under his own hand and signature, acknowledging their generous and prompt assistance in the war, and thanking them for the aid which they had given him.2 They produced substan-tial evidence, that when they had scarcely two thousand pounds, in circulating medium, in the whole colony, they had, in three years, expended more than that sum, in the defence of her maj-esty's provinces of Massachusetts and New-York. They were able to evince, that they had shewn the utmost loyalty and attach-ment to the queen; been punctual in their observance of the acts of trade and navigation; had not been pirates themselves, nor at any time harboured pirates, deserters, servants, or crimi-nals among them.

With respect to appeals to her majesty, the legislature affirmed, that they had not refused to admit them, only in cases in which

1Case of Connecticut stated, and pleadings before her majesty, February 12th, 1705, on life.

2They were able to produce letters of thanks, from the commanding officers, ministers, and principal gentlemen in the county of Hampshire, for the assistance which they had given them. Those letters are now on file.




proper security, or sufficient bondsmen had not been offered. In the appeals of major Palms, which seem to have been the only instances of which complaint had been made, the court judged, that the security offered was insufficient. The men, who offered themselves to be bound, appeared to have little or no property. As to the vexations complained of, these respected the obtaining of copies of the judgments of the courts in his case. It seems he applied to the assembly for them, but the assembly declined giving them, insisting, that it was not their province to give copies of the doings of other courts. He was therefore referred to the courts in which the judgments had been given.

In the appeals of major Palms, and in all other instances, the judgments of the courts in Connecticut were finally established. Upon a full examination of the complaints, they appeared not only groundless, but invidious. The loyalty, justice, and honor of the colony appeared more conspicuous than they had done before: but it was some time before the evidence of the true state of the case could be collected and transmitted to England.

Meanwhile Dudley and Cornbury never lost sight of their ob-ject, but vigorously prosecuted the design of subverting the gov-ernment. There had been, nearly fifty years before, a law en-acted against the quakers, but it does not appear, that it had ever been acted upon, in Connecticut, and was, at that time, become obsolete. It appears, by a letter of the governor's, to Sir Henry Ashurst, that he did not know of one person, then in the colony, who was acknowledged to be a quaker. But gov-ernor Dudley, by some means, obtained a copy of the law, and procured a publication of it in Boston. The knowledge of it was communicated to the quakers in England, and they were spirited up to petition for a repeal of the law of Connecticut against the quakers. A petition, about the beginning of April, was preferred to her majesty, on the subject, reciting said law, and representing, that it was calculated to extirpate their friends from that part of her majesty's dominion, and praying that she would disallow the said law. Sir Henry Ashurst presented a petition to the lords of trade and plantation, to whom the petition of the quakers had been referred, praying them to advise her majesty to come to no determination on the subject, until the colony should have notice of the petition, and have time to send their answer. He represented, that the law was made against Adamites and Rant-ers: That it was become obsolete, and quakers lived as peace-ably in Connecticut, as in any of her majesty's plantations. He represented to their lordships, that there had been more com-plaints exhibited against this poor colony, in three or four years, without any crime proved, than had been before from the time of its first settlement, which made him believe, that there were disaffected persons, who were attempting, by all means, to make




them weary of their charter government: That before the ap-pointment of a certain governor for New-England, the colony had enjoyed uninterrupted peace, for many years, and would have done to that time, had it not been for his misrepresentations. He assured them, that he had been informed, that governor Dud-ley had, about two years before, ordered the act against the quak-ers to be printed, in Boston, on purpose, that the quakers, in England, might join with his other instruments in clamors against Connecticut, to deprive it of its charter privileges.1

Her majesty, upon the advice of the lords of trade and planta-tions, declared the act against the quakers null and void, without giving the colony a hearing.

Sir Henry Ashurst, writing to the colony soon after, says, "You see how you are every way attacked."

The enemies of the colony in Connecticut and New-England were no less active than those on the other side of the water. As they had obtained a commission for the trial of the case be-tween Connecticut and the Moheagans, they spared no pains to carry their point. On the 5th of July, 1705, captain John Chandler, in behalf of Owaneco, captain Samuel Mason, Hallam, and others, who interested themselves in recovering the lands from the colony, began the survey of the Moheagan country, and having accomplished the work, drew a map of it, with a view to the trial, before Dudley's court, which was approaching. The governor sent an officer and prohibited his entering upon the survey; but the party gave large bonds to indemnify him, and he proceeded notwithstanding. The boundaries, as surveyed and reported by Chandler, captain John Parke, Edward Culver, and Samuel Sterry, who assisted him, were, on the south from a large rock, in Connecticut river, near eight mile island in the bounds of Lyme, eastward, through Lyme, New-London, and Groton, to Ah-yo-sup-suck, a pond in the northeastern part of Stoning-ton; on the east, from this pond northward, to Mah-man-suck, another pond, thence to Egunk-sank-a-poug, whetstone hills; from thence to Man-hum-squeeg, the whetstone country. From this boundary, the line ran southwest, a few miles, to Acquiunk, the upper falls in Quinibaug river. Thence the line ran, a little north of west, through Pomfret, Ashford, Wellington, and Tol-land, to Mo-she-nup-suck, the notch of the mountain, now known to be the notch in Bolton mountain. From thence the line ran southerly, through Bolton, Hebron, and East-Haddam, to the first mentioned bounds. This, it appears, was the Pequot conn-try, to the whole of which the Moheagans laid claim, after the conquest of the Pequot nation, except some part of New-London, Groton, and Stonington, which had been the chief seat of that war-like tribe. The Moheagans claimed this tract as their hereditary

1Petition on file.




country, and the Wabbequasset territory, which lay north of it, they claimed by virtue of conquest.

On the 23d of August, 1705, the court of commissioners, ap-pointed by her majesty, to examine into the affair of the Mo-heagan lands, convened at Stonington. Writs had been previ-ously issued, summoning the governor and company, with the claimers of lands in controversy, and all parties concerned, to attend at time and place. The court consisted of Joseph Dudley, Esq. president, Edward Palms, Giles Sylvester, Jahleel Brenton, Nathaniel Byfield, Thomas Hooker, James Avery, John Avery, John Morgan, and Thomas Leffingwell.

It seems that the governor and general assembly of Connecti-cut had not been served with a copy of the commission, by which the court was instituted, and viewed it as a court of enquiry only, to examine and make report to her majesty, and not to try and determine the title of the lands in dispute. The committee, ap-pointed by the assembly, to appear before the court, were condi-tionally instructed. Provided the court was instituted for en-quiry only, they were to answer and show the unreasonableness of the Moheagan claims, and the false light in which the affair had been represented; but if the design was to determine with respect to the title of the colony, they were directed to enter their protest against the court, and withdraw. All inhabitants of the colony, personally interested in any of the lands in controversy, were forbidden to plead or make any answer before the court.

Governor Winthrop addressed the following letter to the pres-ident.

"New-London, August 21st, 1705.


"I understand, by your excellency's letter of July 30th, your intentions to be at Stonington, on the 23d inst. to hear the com-plaints of Owaneco against this government. I have, therefore, in obedience to her majesty's commands, directed and empow-ered William Pitkin, John Chester, Eleazar Kimberly, Esquires, major William Whiting, Mr. John Elliot, and Mr. Richard Lord, to wait on your excellency, and show the unreasonableness of those complaints, and the unpardonable affront put upon her majesty, by that false representation, and the great trouble to yourself thereby; and I conclude, in a short hearing, your excel-lency will be able to represent to her majesty, that those com-plaints are altogether groundless. The gentlemen shall assist your excellency's enquiry, in summoning such persons as you shall please to desire, and all things else, reserving the honor and privileges of the government."

When the committee came before the court, they perceived that they determined to try the title of the colony to the lands, and judicially to decide the whole controversy. They resolved, there-




fore, not to make any answer or plea before them, but to protest against their proceedings. The protest is entered as followeth:

"To his Excellency, Joseph Dudley, Esquire, captain-general and governor in chief of her majesty's colony of Massachu-setts Bay, &c.

"We, the commissioners of her majesty's colony of Connecti-cut, are obliged, by our instructions from this government, to certify your excellency, that, in obedience to her majesty's com-mands to this colony, we are ready to show the injustice of those complaints against the government, made by Owaneco, to her majesty, in council, if your excellency sees good that the com-plaints be produced, (provided the commissioners, mentioned in her majesty's commission, with your excellency, be qualified to act as members of the court of inquiry constituted thereby,) that so your excellency and commissioners may, upon inquiry, be enabled to make such a true and just report of the matters of fact, mentioned in said complaints to her majesty, as you shall see meet. But if your excellency, (as appears to us,) does con-strue any expressions in the said commission, so as to empower the said commissioners, by themselves, to inquire and judicially determine concerning the matter in controversy, mentioned in the said complaint, concerning the title of land or trespass, and do resolve to proceed accordingly, as we cannot but judge it to be contrary to her majesty's most just and legal intentions, in said commission; so we must declare against and prohibit all such proceedings, as contrary to law and to the letters patent under the great seal of England, granted to this her majesty's col-ony, and contrary to her majesty's order to this government, concerning the said commission and complaint, as well as to the known rights of her majesty's subjects, throughout all her do-minions, and such as we cannot allow of. We only add, that it seems strange to us, that your excellency should proceed in such a manner, without first communicating your commission to the general assembly of this her majesty's colony.

"william pitkin, &c.

"August 24th, 1705."

The inhabitants who had deeds of the lands in controversy, made default, as well as the colony; but the court proceeded to an ex parte hearing. Owaneco, Mason, Hallam, and their council, produced such papers and evidence, and made such representa-tions as they pleased, without any person to confront them. Af-ter such a partial hearing, of one day only, the court determined against the colony, and adjudged to Owaneco and the Moheagans a tract of land called Massapeag, lying in the town of New-Lon-don; and another tract, of about eleven hundred acres, in the northern part of the town, which the assembly had granted as an addition to that township, in 1703. The court, also, adjudged




to them a tract in the town of Lyme, two miles in breadth, and nine miles in length, with the whole tract contained in the town of Colchester. The court ordered Connecticut immediately to restore all those lands to Owaneco, and filed a bill of cost against the colony of 573l. 12s. 8d.1 Thus a cause of such magnitude, in which the essential interests of a whole colony, and the fort-unes of hundreds of individuals, were concerned, was carried wholly by intrigue and the grossest misrepresentations. The commission was granted by her majesty, wholly upon an ex parte hearing, upon the representation of the enemies of the colony; and the men who carried on the intrigue, were appointed judges in their own case. Without hearing the case, contrary to all reason and justice, they gave judgment against the colony, and hundreds of individuals. They gave away lands holden by con-quest, purchase, ancient deeds from the original proprietors, well executed and recorded, by charter, acts, and patents from the assembly, and by long possession. The chief judge had been using all his art and influence to ruin the colony, and was now supposed to be scheming for a portion of its lands, as well as for the government. Major Palms had been a long time in contro-versy with the colony, was exceedingly embittered against it, and against the governor, his brother in law. Others of the commis-sioners were supposed to be confederate with Mason and Clarke, and interested in the lands in controversy. Hallam, Clarke, and several of the commissioners were witnesses in the case. They were witnesses and judges in their own cause, heard themselves, and no others. Owaneco was placed, in state, on the right hand of the president, and the colony were treated worse than crim-inals, with dishonour and contempt.2

After the court had given judgment against the colony, on the 24th of August, they spent three days in hearing such complaints as Owaneco, Mason, and other persons interested in the lands, or inimical to the colony, were pleased to make. When they had heard all the complaints and misrepresentations which they had to make, they represented to her majesty, that Owaneco com-plained he was disseised of a tract of land, containing about seven thousand acres, called Mamaquaog, lying northward of Wind-ham; of another tract called Plainfield, and considerable skirts and parcels of land, encroached upon and taken in, by the towns of Lebanon, Windham, and Canterbury. The court prohibited all her majesty's subjects from entering upon, or improving any of those lands, until a further hearing and determination of the case. Further, in the plenitude of their power, they appointed captain John Mason to be trustee, or guardian, to Owaneco and his people, and to manage all their affairs. They represented,

1Moheagan case, in print.

2Petition to her majesty, printed in Moheagan trial.




from the evidence of major James Fitch and captain John Mason, that the colony had left the Indians no land to plant on, and that they consisted of a hundred and fifty warriors, one hundred of whom had been in the actual service of the country that very year.1

These Indians were enlisted and sent out by the colony of Connecticut, and went as cheerfully into service this year, as they had done at any time before. This gave demonstrative evidence, that there was no general uneasiness among the Moheagans, Had there been, two thirds of their warriors would not have en-listed into the service of the government. Indeed, Owaneco him-self was not uneasy only at turns, when the Masons, Clarke, Fitch, Hallam, and others, made him so; who were scheming to deprive him and the Moheagans of their lands.

So far was it from being true, that Connecticut had injured them, or taken their lands from them, they had treated them with great kindness, defended them by their arms, and at their own expense, and prevented their being swallowed up by their enemies. They had left them a fine tract of land, of between four and five thousand acres, between New-London and Norwich; and both in the grant and patent to New-London, there was an express reservation of all the rights and property of the Indians.2 The colony had not only reserved lands for the Moheagans, but for all other Indians in it, to plant upon. They suffered them to hunt, fish, and fowl, in all parts of it, and even to build their wigwams, and cut such wood and timber as they needed, in any of their uninclosed lands.

Dudley's court, having finished such business as was agreeable to its wishes, adjourned until the next May; but it never met again. Before that time, the intrigue and duplicity of governor Dudley and the malcontents, became so evident, that all their designs were frustrated.

The assembly, at their session in October, appointed a com-mittee to examine into all matters respecting the Indians, and the complaints which had been made against the colony, and, as soon as possible, to transmit a particular and full answer to their agent. They were instructed fully to acquaint him with a true statement of the Moheagan case, and of the whole management of Dudley and his court. They were to represent, that Dudley, Palms, and others of the commissioners, were interested, and parties in the cause, and to insist, that the manner in which the commission was procured, to governor Dudley, major Palms, and others, was matter of intrigue, and the whole process arbitrary and illegal.

Sir Henry Ashurst, on receiving the papers relative to the case,

1Proceedings and judgment of the court in print, Moheagan case, p. 26 to 67.

2Records of the colony, and Moheagan case, in print.




presented a petition to her majesty, representing the title of the colony to all the lands in controversy, by conquest, purchase, royal charter, long possession and improvement: That Uncas, when the English became first acquainted with him, was a revolted Pequot, expelled his country, and had not a sufficient number of men to make a hunt; and that the lands reserved to him, were not reserved to him in consequence of any right of his, but was a matter of mere permission: That Joseph Dudley, Esq. Hallam, Palms, the Averys, Morgan, and Leffingwell, had grants of sev-eral parts of the controverted lands, and, in their own names, or in the name of John Mason, were attempting to set up their titles to them: That Dudley and Hallam, by misrepresentation, had obtained a commission from her majesty, by surprise, under the great seal of England, directed to the said Dudley, Palms, the two Averys, Morgan, Leffingwell, and others, most of whom were of Dudley's and Hallam's denomination, and under his in-fluence; and that in the court, thus instituted, they were the accusers, parties, and judges: That they had assumed to them-selves jurisdiction, in a summary way, to try her majesty's pe-titioners' titles to their lands, and to evict and disseise them of their freeholds, properties, and ancient possessions, without any legal process, or so much as the form of a trial. This, it was represented, tended to the destruction of all the rights of the colony, and was directly contrary to divers acts of parliament, made and provided in such cases. The agent, therefore, in be-half of the colony, appealed from the judgment of said court to her majesty, in council, and prayed that the case might be heard before her.1

In consequence of this petition, her majesty, some time after, appointed a commission of review. The affair was kept in agita-tion nearly seventy years. It was always, upon a legal hearing, determined in favour of the colony. The final decision was by king George the third, in council.

The commissioners of review, in 1743, not only determined the title of the lands to be in the colony of Connecticut, but "That the governor and company had treated the said Indians with much humanity, at all times; and had, at all times, provided them with a sufficiency, at least, of lands to plant on; and that no act, or thing, appeared, either before the judgment of Joseph Dudley, Esq. or since, by which they, the said governor and com-pany, had taken from the Indians, or from their sachem, any tracts of land, to which the Indians or their sachem had any right, by reservation, or otherwise, either in law or equity."2 The proceedings of the several courts of review, and the plead-ings before them and his majesty, in council, will most properly

1Petition in print, Moheagan case, p. 153-157.

2Judgment, in print, Moheagan case, p. 140.




be noticed in the time of them, and will not be anticipated in this volume.

The agent of the colony petitioned her majesty, in its behalf, to hear the complaints exhibited by governor Dudley and his accomplices, that it might have an opportunity of demonstrating how false and groundless they were. He also prayed, that as Dudley had surprised her, to grant a commission of high powers to the subversion of the rights of her loyal subjects, and contrary to her gracious intentions towards them, and had abused her name and authority to serve his own dark designs, that her maj-esty would, in some exemplary manner, discountenance the said Dudley and his abettors.

However, it does not appear, that Dudley, or lord Cornbury, were ever obliged to bring forward any evidence in support of the charges which they had exhibited, or that her majesty, by any public act, discountenanced their intrigue and falsehood. They had such powerful friends at court, that they seem to have palliated, and kept the affair, as far as possible, out of public view; and it seems to have been passed by without any further exami-nation.

There was no alteration made in the legislature, at the election in May, 1706.

The assembly adopted the same measures, for the defence of Connecticut and the neighbouring colonies, which they had done the year preceding. The same officers were appointed, and the same number of men sent into the field.

The colony had assurances from their agent, Sir Henry Ash-urst, that they had a clear right to command their own militia; that the governors of the neighbouring colonies had no right to command their men, or money; and that this was the opinion of the best counsel in the nation. He assured them, that they were under no obligations to them, to do any thing more, than to furnish such quotas as her majesty should require.

Connecticut had done much more than this, both in the reign of king William and queen Anne. Nevertheless, notwithstanding the abusive treatment of governor Dudley, lord Cornbury, and their associates in mischief, and the great expense which had been brought upon them, not only by the war, but in consequence of the defence which their agent had been obliged to make for them, in England, such was their zeal for her majesty's service, and their concern and good will for their sister colonies, that they exerted themselves no less for their defence, than if they had been under the command of their respective governors. It was de-clared to her majesty, that had this been the case they could have done no more.

At the session in October, the assembly passed the following act in favor of the clergy, "That all the ministers of the gospel




that now are, or hereafter shall be settled in this colony, during the continuance of their public service in the gospel ministry, shall have their estates, lying in the same town where they dwell, and all the polls belonging to their several families exempted, and they are hereby exempted and freed from being entered in the public lists and payment of rates." By virtue of this act, for the encouragement of the clergy of this colony, they have always, from that to the present time, been exempted from taxation.1

The colony, at this period, was in very low circumstances. Its whole circulating cash amounted only to about two thousand pounds. Such had been its expense in the war, and in defending itself against the attempts of its enemies, in England and America, that the legislature had been obliged to levy a tax, in about three years, of more than two shillings on the pound, on the whole list of the colony. The taxes were laid and collected in grain, pork, beef, and other articles of country produce. These com-modities were transported to Boston and the West-Indies, and by this means money and bills of exchange were obtained, to pay the bills drawn upon the colony, in England, and to discharge its debts at home. These low circumstances, these misrepresenta-tions, abuse, and dangers, from their enemies, our venerable an-cestors endured with an exemplary patience and magnanimity. Under the pressure of all this expense and danger, they cheer-fully supported the gospel ministry and ordinances, in their re-spective towns and parishes. They contemplated their dangers and deliverances with wonder and thanksgiving, rejoiced in the enjoyment of their privileges, and in the divine care and benefi-cence.