Unwilling ness of New Haven lead er tot annexed to religious liberty was promised. The result of this was an immediate influx of settlers from New England. A party from the Piscataqua country founded Piscataway by the river Raritan; others from Haverhill and Newbury made the beginnings of Woodbridge; but the most important accession, in some respects, came from the lately extinguished republic of New Haven. There were many persons in that colony who could not endure the thought of annexation to Connecticut. The two communities stood for widely different ideas. Among all the New Eng- Connecticut. land colonies the Puritan theocracy was most dominant in New Haven, whereas in Connecticut it was weaker than anywhere else except Rhode Island. In New Haven none but church members qualified for communion could vote or hold office; in Connecticut there was no such restriction. The tendencies of Connecticut, under the impress of the genius of Thomas Hooker, were democratic ; those of New Haven, under the guidance of John Davenport, were toward an aristocracy of "the saints." The civil magistrates there were "pillars of the church." Annexation to Connecticut meant giving votes and offices to men of unregenerate hearts; it meant administering justice by codes of secular law instead of the inspired law of Moses; it meant letting in a flood of democracy and ending forever the rule of the saints. Accordingly, when Davenport heard of the decision of the royal commissioners, he sadly exclaimed, "The cause of Christ in New Haven is miserably lost!" At this crisis the offer of complete civil and religious liberty in New Jersey produced a notable effect upon the New Haven towns. Those per Exodus from to New Jersey; Treat and sons who were willing to be citizens of Connecticut (and these were a majority of the population, including probably most of the unenfranchised) might stay at home and be contented. The minority who could not abide the change might go to New Jersey and there live according to their theocratic notions. The removal of these irreconcilables tended to make the change easier New Haven for Connecticut. In 1665-67 several parties from Guilford, Branford, and Milford settled on the Passaic River and made the beginnings of a flourishing town there, which was at first called Milford, from the home of one of its founders, Robert Treat. But the name was soon changed to Newark, after the English home of its pastor, the venerable Abraham Pierson, a true spiritual brother of Davenport. As for Robert Treat, he returned in 1672 to Milford, played a distinguished part in King Philip's War, and afterward became governor of Connecticut. It is Pierson who must be regarded as the continuator of the New Haven colony's existence in that of its daughter, Newark. The larger part of his Branford congregation followed him thither, and their town constitution provided that none but communing church members should vote or be eligible to office. Sixtyfour men signed this constitution, of whom twentythree were from Branford, and forty-one from New Haven, Milford, and Guilford. Six out of this number made their marks, a small propor sion of illiteracy for the seventeenth century. It has been well said that, "after 1666 the New Haven of Davenport and Eaton must be looked for upon the banks, not of the Quinnipiac, but of the Passaic. The men, the methods, the laws, the officers, that made New Haven town what it was in 1640, disappeared from the Connecticut colony, but came to full life again immediately in New Jersey." As for the aged Davenport, he moved to Boston and became pastor of the First Church there. bles in New The government of New Jersey was similar in form to the earlier governments founded in Virginia, Maryland, and the New England colonies; all alike were developments from the ancient English county court. The New Jersey legislature consisted of governor, council, and representative assembly, and it was as well understood Constituas in New England or Virginia that tional trouthere could be no taxation save through the assembly. But important constitutional questions came up at once for discussion, as in the first years of Massachusetts. The representatives of the people were annoyed at the veto power exercised over them by the governor and council, and accordingly they insisted upon meeting in joint session where their own numbers were sure to prevail. This attempt was successfully resisted by the proprietors, but the immediate result was that Governor Carteret's first assembly, which met in 1668, broke up in some disorder, and it was seven 1 Levermore, The Republic of New Haven, Baltimore, 1886, p. 120. years before there was another legal assembly. There was also the quarrel over quit-rents, which broke out in New Jersey as in so many other colonies. Quit-rents were always extremely unpopular. Carteret's colonists refused to pay them, and their opposition, organized as it was in town meetings, was too strong to be overcome. In 1671 the towns chose an illegal assembly, with James Carteret, a weak and debauched creature, a younger son of the lord-proprietor, for its president. For the moment constitutional government, according to the "Concessions," seemed overthrown, and Philip Carteret returned to England. The persistent energy of Sir George Carteret, backed by the Duke of York, presently restored order, but meanwhile Lord Berkeley lost his faith in the success of the enterprise and sold out for £1000 all his interest to a Quaker, John Fenwick, in trust for another Quaker, Edward Byllinge. This panic sale from Lord Berkeley to Quakers was one of the pivotal events in American history, for it soon resulted in bringing William Penn to the New World. But before we can enter upon this eventful story we must return for a while to the island of Manhattan and see what was going on there. Lord Berke ley sells out his interest to a party of Quakers. The peace of Breda, signed on St. Bartholomew's day, 1667, formally ceded New Netherland to the English, in exchange for Surinam in South America and the island of Poleron, one of the Banda group near the Moluccas. On New Year's, 1668, the peace was proclaimed in New York, and Governor Nicolls was able to add the welcome announcement that, for the next seven years at least, that province was to enjoy free trade with the Netherlands. Private affairs demanded Nic olls's presence in England, and the duke Departure Nicolls. accepted his resignation. In New York of Governor there was universal sorrow at his depar ture; seldom has a public man been so beloved. At the house of the Dutch mayor, Cornelius Steenwyck, near the Whitehall, there was a farewell banquet. The menu has not come down to us, but an inventory of the things in the house has been preserved; and one feels that in those tapestried rooms, with their carved French cabinets, their velvet and Russia leather chairs, the muslin and “flowered tabby" curtains, the tall clock in the corner, and the paintings by Antwerp masters, there were the elements of refined comfort. The Netherlanders at that time lived more luxuriously in their houses than any other people, and their habits had been carried with them to the New World. From these last pleasant scenes the upright governor made his way back to England. He was soon to die a soldier's death. In the third naval war between the English and Dutch he served on the fleet and was killed at the battle of Solebay, May 28, 1672, at the early age of forty seven. Nicolls's successor, Francis Lovelace, a man of far less distinction for character and ability, was nevertheless a worthy person, and New Francis York was prosperous under his rule. year of his arrival is memorable The Lovelace. for the aboli VOL. II. |