Volume I—A To Elba (continued 34)

C. Cushing, Bolivar and the Bolivian Constitution (North American Review, January, 1830).

In the United States "no question, in its day, excited more heat and intemperate discussion, or more feeling between a President and Senate, than this proposed mission to the Congress of American nations at Panama; and no heated question ever cooled off and died out so suddenly and completely. … Though long since sunk into oblivion, and its name almost forgotten, it was a master subject on the political theatre during its day; and gave rise to questions of national and of constitutional law, and of national policy, the importance of which survive the occasion from which they sprung; and the solution of which (as then solved), may be some guide to future action, if similar questions again occur. Besides the grave questions to which the subject gave rise, the subject itself became one of unusual and painful excitement. It agitated the people, made a violent debate in the two Houses of Congress, inflamed the passions of parties and individuals, raised a tempest before which Congress bent, made bad feeling between the President [John Quincy Adams] and the Senate; and led to the duel between Mr. Randolph and Mr. Clay. It was an administration measure, and pressed by all the means known to an administration. It was evidently relied upon as a means of acting upon the people—as a popular movement which might have the effect of turning the tide which was then running high against Mr. Adams and Mr. Clay. … Now, the chief benefit to be derived from its retrospect—and that indeed is a real one—is a view of the firmness with which was then maintained, by a minority, the old policy of the United States, to avoid entangling alliances and interference with the affairs of other nations;—and the exposition of the Monroe doctrine, from one so competent to give it as Mr. Adams."

T. H. Benton, Thirty Years' View, chapter 25 (volume 1).

ALSO IN: G. F. Tucker, The Monroe Doctrine, chapter 3.

C. Schurz, Life of Henry Clay, chapter 11 (volume 1).

International American Conference (of 1889): Reports and Discussions, volume 4, History appendix.

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1830-1886. Revolutions and civil wars. The New Confederation (1863) of the United States of Colombia. The Republic of Colombia.

"New Granada was obliged in 1830 to recognize the disruption of Colombia, which had long been an accomplished fact. From this date the three states have a separate history, which is very much of a piece, though Venezuela was for some years preserved from the intestine commotions which have from the beginning distracted New Granada and Ecuador. … Mosquera, who had won the election which decided the fate of Bolivar did not long occupy the presidency. … Mosquera was soon driven out by General Urdanete, who was now at the head of the conservative or Bolivian party. But after the death of their leader, this party suffered a natural relapse, and Urdanete was overthrown early in 1831. The history of New Granada may be said really to commence with the presidency of Bolivar's old rival and companion in arms, Santander, who was elected under the constitution of 1832. … His presidency … was a comparatively bright episode: and with its termination in 1836 begins the dark and troubled period which the Granadines emphatically designate by the name of the 'Twelve Years.' The scanty measure of liberalism which Santander had dealt out to the people was now withdrawn. Marquez, his successor, was a sceptic in politics and a man of infirm will. … Now began the ascendancy of clericalism, of absolutist oligarchy, and of government by the gallows. This same system continued under President Herran, who was elected in 1841; and then appeared on the scene, as his chief minister, the famous Dr. Ospina," who brought back the Jesuits and curtailed the constitution. Liberalism again gained ground, electing General Lopez to the presidency in 1849 find once more expelling the Jesuits. In April 1854 a radical revolution overturned the constitution and President Obando was declared dictator. The conservatives rallied, however, and regained possession of the government before the close of the year. {488} In 1857 Ospina entered on the presidency and civil war soon raged throughout the country. "After a hundred fights the revolution triumphed in July, 1861. … Mosquera, who was now in possession of the field, was a true pupil of Bolivar's, and he thought the time had come for reviving Bolivar's plans. … In 1863 Mosquera's new Federal Constitution was proclaimed. Henceforth each State [of the eight federal States into which the 44 provinces of New Granada were divided] became practically independent under its own President; and to mark the change the title of the nation was altered. At first it was called the Granadine Confederation: but it afterwards took the name of Colombia [the United States of Colombia], which had formerly been the title of the larger Confederation under Bolivar. Among the most important facts in recent Colombian history is the independence of the State of Panama, which has become of great importance through the construction of the railway connecting the port of Colon, or Aspinwall, as it was named by the Americans, on the Atlantic, with that of Panama on the Pacific. This rail way was opened in 1855; and in the same year Panama declared itself a sovereign state. The State of Panama, after many years of conservative domination, has now perhaps the most democratic government in the world. The President is elected for two years only, and is incapable of re-election. Panama has had many revolutions of its own; nor has the new Federal Constitution solved all the difficulties of the Granadine government. In 1867 Mosquera was obliged to have recourse to a coup d'état, and declared himself dictator, but he was soon afterwards arrested; a conservative revolution took place; Mosquera was banished; and Gutierrez became President. The liberals, however, came back the next year, under Ponce. Since 1874 [the date of writing being 1879], General Perez has been President of Colombia."

E. J. Payne, History of European Colonies, chapter 16.

"The federal Constitution of 1863 was clearly formed on the model of the Constitution of the United States of America. It remained in force until 1886, when it was superseded by a law which gave the State a centralized organization and named it the 'Republic of Colombia.'"

Constitution of the Republic of Colombia, with Historical Introduction by B. Moses (Supplement to Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science, January, 1893).

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1885-1891. The Revolution of 1885. The constitution of 1886. The presidency of Dr. Nuñez.

"Cartagena is virtually the centre of political power in Colombia, for it is the residence of President Nuñez, a dictator without the name. Before the revolution of 1885, during which Colon was burned and the Panama Railway protected by American marines, the States enjoyed a large measure of home rule. The insurgents who were defeated in that struggle were Radicals and advanced Liberals. They were making a stand against centralized government, and they were overthrown. When the followers of Dr. Nuñez were victorious, they transformed the constitutional system of the country. … Dr. Nuñez, who had entered public life as a Radical agitator, swung completely around the circle. As the leader of the National party he became the ally of Clericalism, and the defender of ecclesiastical privilege. Being a man of unrivalled capacity for directing public affairs and enforcing party discipline, he has established a highly centralized military government without incurring unpopularity by remaining constantly in sight and openly exercising authority. … Strong government has not been without its advantages; but the system can hardly be considered either republican or democratic. … Of all the travesties of popular government which have been witnessed in Spanish America, the political play enacted in Bogotá and Cartagena is the most grotesque. Dr. Nuñez is known as the titular President of the Republic. His practice is to go to the capital at the beginning of the presidential term, and when he has taken the oath of office to remain there a few weeks until all matters of policy and discipline are arranged among his followers. He then retires to his country-seat in Cartagena, leaving the vice-President to bear the burdens of state."

I. N. Ford, Tropical America, chapter 12.

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1892. Re-election of President Nuñez.

In 1892, Dr. Rafael Nuñez was elected President for a fourth term, the term of office being six years.

Statesman's Year-book, 1893.

—————COLOMBIAN STATES: End—————

COLONI.

See DEDITITIUS.

COLONIA AGRIPPINENSIS.

Agrippina, the daughter of Germanicus and the mother of Nero, founded on the Rhine the Colonia Agrippinensis (modern Cologne)—probably the only colony of Roman veterans ever established under female auspices. The site had been previously occupied by a village of the Ubii. "It is curious that this abnormal colony has, alone, of all its kindred foundations, retained to the present day the name of Colonia."

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 50.

COLONIA, URUGUAY.

See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1580-1777.

COLONIZATION SOCIETY, The American.

See SLAVERY, Negro: A. D. 1816-1847.

COLONNA, The.

See Roman: 13TH-14TH CENTURIES, and A. D. 1347-1354; also PAPACY: A. D. 1294-1348.

COLONUS, The.

See SLAVERY, MEDIÆVAL: GERMANY.

COLORADO: A. D. 1803-1848. Acquisition of the eastern part in the Louisiana Purchase and the western part from Mexico.

See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1798-1803; and MEXICO: A. D. 1848.

COLORADO: A. D. 1806-1876. Early explorations. Gold discoveries. Territorial and state organization.

The first American explorer to penetrate to the mountains of Colorado was Lieutenant Zebulon Pike, sent out with a small party by General Wilkinson, in 1806. He approached within 15 miles of the Rocky Mountain Peak which bears his name. A more extensive official exploration of the country was made in 1819 by Major Stephen H. Long, whose report upon the whole region drained by the Missouri, Arkansas and Platte rivers and their tributaries was unfavorable and discouraging. Fremont's explorations, which touched Colorado, were made in 1843-44. "The only persons encountered in the Rocky mountains by Frémont at this time were the few remaining traders and their former employees, now their colonists, who lived with their Mexican and Indian wives and half-breed children in a primitive manner of life, usually under the protection of some defensive structure called a fort. {489} The first American families in Colorado were a part of the Mormon battalion of 1846, who, with their wives and children, resided at Pueblo from September to the spring and summer of the following year, when they joined the Mormon emigration to Salt Lake. … Measures were taken early in March, 1847, to select locations for two United States forts between the Missouri and the Rocky mountains, the sites selected being those now occupied by Kearney City and Fort Laramie. … Up to 1853 Colorado's scant population still lived in or near some defensive establishment, and had been decreasing rather than increasing for the past decade, owing to the hostility of the Indians." In 1858 the first organized searching or prospecting for gold in the region was begun by a party of Cherokee Indians and whites. Other parties soon followed; the search succeeded; and the Pike's Peak mining region was speedily swarming with eager adventurers. In the fall of 1858 two rival towns were laid out on the opposite sides of Cherry Creek. They were named respectively Auraria and Denver. The struggle for existence between them was bitter, but brief. Auraria succumbed and Denver survived, to become the metropolis of the Mountains. The first attempt at political organization was made at the Auraria settlement, in November, 1858, and took the form of a provisional territorial organization, under the name of the Territory of Jefferson; but the provisional government did not succeed in establishing its authority, opposed as it was by conflicting claims to territorial jurisdiction on the part of Utah, New Mexico, Kansas, Nebraska, and Dakota. At length, on the 28th of February, 1861, an act of Congress became law, by which the proposed new territory was duly created, but not bearing the name of Jefferson. "The name of Colorado was given to it at the suggestion of the man selected for its first governor. … 'Some,' says Gilpin, 'wanted it called Jefferson, some Arcadia. … I said the people have to a great extent named the States after the great rivers of the country … and the great feature of that country is the great Colorado river.'" Remaining in the territorial condition until July 1876, Colorado was then admitted to the Union as a state.

H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States, volume 20: Colorado, chapter 2-6.

—————COLORADO: End—————

COLOSSEUM, OR COLISEUM, The.

"The Flavian Amphitheatre, or Colosseum, was built by Vespasian and Titus in the lowest part of the valley between the Cælean and Esquiline Hills, which was then occupied by a large artificial pool for naval fights ('Naumachia'). … The exact date of the commencement of the Colosseum is doubtful, but it was opened for use in A. D. 80. … As built by the Flavian Emperors the upper galleries ('mœniani') were of wood, and these, as in the case of the Circus Maximus, at many times caught fire from lightning and other causes, and did much damage to the stone-work of the building."

J. H. Middleton, Ancient Rome in 1885, chapter 10.

ALSO IN: J. H. Parker, Archaeology of Rome, part 7.

R. Burn, Rome and the Campagna, chapter 9, part 2.

See, also, ROME: A. D. 70-96.

COLOSSUS OF RHODES.

See RHODES.

COLUMBAN CHURCH, The.

The church, or the organization of Christianity, in Scotland, which resulted from the labors of the Irish missionary, Columba, in the sixth century, and which spread from the great monastery that he founded on the little island of Iona, or Ia, or Hii, near the greater island of Mull. The church of Columba, "not only for a time embraced within its fold the whole of Scotland north of the Firths of Forth and Clyde, and was for a century and a half the national church of Scotland, but was destined to give to the Angles of Northumbria the same form of Christianity for a period of thirty years." It represented some differences from the Roman church which two centuries of isolation had produced in the Irish church, from which it sprang.

W. F. Skene, Celtic Scotland, book 2, chapter 3.

ALSO IN: Count de Montalembert, The Monks of the West, book 9 (volume 3).

G. F. Maclear, Conversion of the West: The Celts, chapters 7-10.

See CHRISTIANITY: 5TH-9TH CENTURIES, and 597-800.

COLUMBIA, The District of.

See WASHINGTON (CITY): A. D. 1791.

COLUMBIA, The District of: A. D. 1850. Abolition of slave-trade in.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1850.

COLUMBIA, The District of: A. D. 1867. Extension of suffrage to the Negroes.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1867 (JANUARY).

—————COLUMBIA, The District of: End—————

COLUMBIA, S. C., The burning of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (FEBRUARY-MARCH: THE CAROLINAS).

COLUMBIA, Tennessee., Engagement at.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (NOVEMBER: TENNESSEE).

COLUMBIAN EXPOSITION, The World's.

COLUMBIAN ORDER, The.

See TAMMANY SOCIETY.

COLUMBUS, Voyages of.

See AMERICA: A. D.1484-1492; 1492; 1493-1496; 1498-1505.

COMANA.

Comana, an ancient city of Cappadocia, on the river Sarus (Sihoon) was the seat of a priesthood, in the temple of Enyo, or Bellona, so venerated, so wealthy and so powerful that the chief priest of Comana counted among the great Asiatic dignitaries in the time of Cæsar.

G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 5, chapter 22.

COMANCHES, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SNOSHONEAN FAMILY, and KIOWAN FAMILY, and APACHE GROUP.

COMANS, The.

See KIPCHAKS; PATCHINAKS; COSSACKS, and HUNGARY: A. D. 1114-1301.

COMBAT, Judicial.

See WAGER OF BATTLE.

COMES LITTORIS SAXONICI.

See SAXON SHORE, COUNT OF.

COMES PALATII.

See PALATINE COUNTS.

COMITATUS. COMITES. GESITHS. THEGNS.

Comitatus is the name given by Tacitus to a body of warlike companions among the ancient Germans "who attached themselves in the closest manner to the chieftain of their choice. They were in many cases the sons of the nobles who were ambitious of renown or of a perfect education in arms. The princeps provided for them horses, arms, and such rough equipment as they wanted. These and plentiful entertainment were accepted instead of wages. In time of war the comites fought for their chief, at once his defenders and the rivals of his prowess. … In the times of forced and unwelcome rest they were thoroughly idle; they cared neither for farming nor for hunting, but spent the time in feasting and in sleep. … {490} Like the Frank king, the Anglo-Saxon king seems to have entered on the full possession of what had been the right of the elective principes [to nominate and maintain a comitatus, to which he could give territory and political power]: but the very principle of the comitatus had undergone a change from what it was in the time of Tacitus, when it reappears in our historians, and it seems to have had in England a peculiar development and a bearing of special importance on the constitution. In Tacitus the comites are the personal following of the princeps; they live in his house, are maintained by his gifts, fight for him in the field. If there is little difference between companions and servants, it is because civilization has not yet introduced voluntary helplessness. … Now the king, the perpetual princeps and representative of the race, conveys to his personal following public dignity and importance. His gesiths and thegns are among the great and wise men of the land. The right of having such dependents is not restricted to him, but the gesith of the ealdorman or bishop is simply a retainer, a pupil or a ward: the free household servants of the ceorl are in a certain sense his gesiths also. But the gesiths of the king are his guard and private council; they may be endowed by him from the folkland and admitted by him to the witenagemot. … The Danish huscarls of Canute are a late reproduction of what the familia of the Northumbrian kings must have been in the eighth century. … The development of the comitatus into a territorial nobility seems to be a feature peculiar to English history. … The Lombard gasind, and the Bavarian sindman were originally the same thing as the Anglo-Saxon gesith. But they sank into the general mass of vassalage as it grew up in the ninth and tenth centuries. … Closely connected with the gesith is the thegn; so closely that it is scarcely possible to see the difference except in the nature of the employment. The thegn seems to be primarily the warrior gesith; in this idea Alfred uses the word as translating the 'miles' of Bede. He is probably the gesith who has a particular military duty in his master's service: But he also appears as a landowner. The ceorl who has acquired five hides of land, and a special appointment in the king's hall, with other judicial rights, becomes thegn-worthy. … And from this point, the time of Athelstan, the gesith is lost sight of, except very occasionally; the more important members of the class having become thegns, and the lesser sort sinking into the ranks of mere servants to the king. The class of thegns now widens; on the one hand the name is given to all who possess the proper quantity of land, whether or no they stand in the old relation to the king; on the other the remains of the old nobility place themselves in the king's service. The name of thegn covers the whole class which after the Conquest appears under the name of knights, with the same qualification in land and nearly the same obligations. It also carried so much of nobility as is implied in hereditary privilege. The thegn-born are contrasted with the ceorl-born; and are perhaps much the same as the gesithcund. … Under the name of thegn are included however various grades of dignity. The class of king's thegns is distinguished from that of the medial thegns, and from a residuum that falls in rank below the latter. … The very name, like that of the gesith, has different senses in different ages and kingdoms; but the original idea of military service runs through all the meanings of thegn, as that of personal association is traceable in all the applications of gesith."

William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, chapter 2, section 14 and chapter 6, sections 63-65.

ALSO IN: T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 4, chapter 7.

See, also, COUNT AND DUKE.

COMITIA CENTURIATA.

"Under the original constitution of Rome, the patricians alone … enjoyed political rights in the state, but at the same time they were forced to bear the whole burden of political duties. In these last were included, for example, the tilling of the king's fields, the construction of public works and buildings; … citizens alone, also, were liable to service in the army. … The political burdens, especially those connected with the army, grew heavier, naturally, as the power of Rome increased, and it was seen to be an injustice that one part of the people, and that, too, the smaller part, should alone feel their weight. This led to the first important modification of the Roman constitution, which was made even before the close of the regal period. According to tradition, its author was the king Servius Tullius, and its general object was to make all men who held land in the state liable to military service. It thus conferred no political rights on the plebeians, but assigned to them their share of political duties. … According to tradition, all the freeholders in the city between the ages of 17 and 60, with some exceptions, were divided, without distinction as to birth, into five classes ('classis,' 'a summoning,' 'calo') for service in the infantry according to the size of their estates. Those who were excepted served as horsemen. These were selected from among the very richest men in the state. … Of the five classes of infantry, the first contained the richest men. … The members of the first class were required to come to the battle array in complete armor, while less was demanded of the other four. Each class was subdivided into centuries or bodies of a hundred men each, for convenience in arranging the army. There were in all 193 centuries. … This absolute number and this apportionment were continued, as the population increased and the distribution of wealth altered, until the name century came to have a purely conventional meaning, even if it had any other in the beginning. Henceforth a careful census was taken every fourth year, and all freeholders were made subject to the 'tributum.' The arrangement of the people thus described was primarily made simply for military purposes. … Gradually, however, this organization came to have political significance, until finally these men, got together for what is the chief political duty in a primitive state, enjoyed what political privileges there were. … In the end, this 'exercitus' of Servius Tullius formed another popular assembly, the Comitia Centuriata, which supplanted the comitia curiata entirely, except in matters connected with the religion of the family and very soon of purely formal significance. This organization, therefore, became of the highest civil importance, and was continued for civil purposes long after the army was marshalled on quite another plan."

A. Tighe, Development of the Roman Constitution, chapter 4.

ALSO IN: W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 6, chapter 1

W. Ramsay, Manual of Roman Antiquity, chapter 4.

{491}

COMITIA CURIATA.

"In the beginning, any member of any one of the clans which were included in the three original Roman tribes, was a Roman citizen. So, too, were his children born in lawful wedlock, and those who were adopted by him according to the forms of law. Illegitimate children, on the other hand, were excluded from the number of citizens. These earliest Romans called themselves patricians (patricii, children of their fathers'), for some reason about which we cannot be sure. Perhaps it was in order to distinguish themselves from their illegitimate kinsmen and from such other people as lived about, having no pretense of blood connection with them, and who were, therefore, incapable of contracting lawful marriages, according to the patrician's view of this religious ceremony. The patricians … were grouped together in families, clans and tribes, partly on the basis of blood relationship, but chiefly on the basis of common religious worship. Besides these groups, there was still another in the state, the curia, or 'ward,' which stood between the clan and the tribe. In the earliest times, tradition said, ten families formed a clan, ten clans a curia and ten curiæ a tribe. These numbers, if they ever had any historical existence, could not have sustained themselves for any length of time in the case of the clans and families, for such organisms of necessity would increase and decrease quite irregularly. About the nature of the curia we have practically no direct information. The organization had become a mere name at an early period in the city's history. Whether the members of a curia thought of themselves as having closer kinship with one another than with members of other curiæ is not clear. We know, however, that the curiæ were definite political sub-divisions of the city, perhaps like modern wards, and that each curia had a common religious worship for its members' participation. Thus much, at any rate, is significant, because it has to do with the form of Rome's primitive popular assembly. When the king wanted to harangue the people ('populus,' cf. 'populor,' 'to devastate') he called them to a 'contio' (compounded of 'co' and 'venio'). But if he wanted to propose to them action which implied a change in the organic law of the state, he summoned them to a comitia (compounded of 'con' and 'eo'). To this the name comitia curiata was given, because its members voted by curiæ. Each curia had one vote, the character of which was determined by a majority of its members, and a majority of the curiæ decided the matter for the comitia."

A. Tighe, Development of the Roman Constitution, chapter 3.

ALSO IN: T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 1, chapter 5.

F. De Coulanges, The Ancient City, book 3, chapter 1, and book 4 chapter 1.

See, also, COMITIA CENTURIATA, and CONTIONES.

COMITIA TRIBUTA, The.

See ROME: B. C. 472-471.

COMMAGENE, Kingdom of.

A district of northern Syria, between Cilicia and the Euphrates, which acquired independence during the disorders which broke up the empire of the Seleucidæ, and was a separate kingdom during the last century B. C. It was afterwards made a Roman province. Its capital was Samosata.

COMMENDATION.

See BENEFICIUM

COMMERCIUM.

See MUNICIPIUM.

COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC SAFETY, The French Revolutionary.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (MARCH-JUNE), and (JUNE-OCTOBER).

COMMITTEE ON THE CONDUCT OF THE WAR, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861-1862 (DECEMBER-MATCH: VIRGINIA).

COMMODUS, Roman Emperor, A. D. 180-192.

COMMON LAW, English.

"The municipal law of England, or the rule of civil conduct prescribed to the inhabitants of this kingdom, may with sufficient propriety be divided into two kinds; the 'lex non scripta,' the unwritten or common law; and the 'lex scripta,' the written or statute law. The 'lex non scripta,' or unwritten law, includes not only general customs, or the common law properly so called, but also the particular customs of certain parts of the kingdom; and likewise those particular laws that are by custom observed only in certain courts and jurisdictions. When I call these parts of our law 'leges non scriptre,' I would not be understood as if all those laws were at present merely oral, or communicated from the former ages to the present solely by word of mouth. … But, with us at present, the monuments and evidences of our legal customs are contained in the records of the several courts of justice, in books of reports and judicial decisions, and in the treatises of learned sages of the profession, preserved and handed down to us from the times of highest antiquity. However, I therefore style these parts of our law 'leges non scriptre,' because their original institution and authority are not set down in writing, as Acts of Parliament are, but they receive their binding power, and the force of laws, by long and immemorial usage, and by their universal reception throughout the kingdom."

Sir W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England. introduction, section 3.

ALSO IN: H. S. Maine, Ancient Law, chapter 1.

J. N. Pomeroy, Introduction to Municipal Law, sections 37-42.

COMMON LOT, OR COMMON LIFE, Brethren of the.

See BRETHREN OF THE COMMON LOT.

"COMMON SENSE" (Paine's Pamphlet), The influence of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776 (JANUARY-JUNE).

COMMONS, The.

See ESTATES, THE THREE.

COMMONS, House of.

See PARLIAMENT, THE ENGLISH, and KNIGHTS OF THE SHIRE.

COMMONWEALTH OF ENGLAND, Establishment of the.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1649 (FEBRUARY).

COMMUNE, The.

The commonalty; the commons. In feudal usage, the term signified, as defined by Littré, the body of the bourgeois or burghers of a town who had received a charter which gave them rights of self-government. "In France the communal constitution was during this period (12th century) encouraged, although not very heartily, by Lewis VI., who saw in it one means of fettering the action of the barons and bishops and securing to himself the support of a strong portion of his people. In some cases the commune of France is, like the guild, a voluntary association, but its objects are from the first more distinctly political. In some parts of the kingdom the towns had risen against their lords in the latter half of the eleventh century, and had retained the fruits of their hard-won victories. {492} In others, they possessed, in the remaining fragments of the Karolingian constitution, some organisation that formed a basis for new liberties. The great number of charters granted in the twelfth century shows that the policy of encouraging the third estate was in full sway in the royal councils, and the king by ready recognition of the popular rights gained the affections of the people to an extent which has few parallels in French history. The French charters are in both style and substance very different from the English. The liberties which are bestowed are for the most part the same, exemption from arbitrary taxation, the right to local jurisdiction, the privilege of enfranchising the villein who has been for a year and a day received within the walls, and the power of electing the officers. But whilst all the English charters contain a confirmation of free and good customs, the French are filled with an enumeration of bad ones. … The English have an ancient local constitution the members of which are the recipients of the new grant, and guilds of at least sufficient antiquity to render their confirmation typical of the freedom now guaranteed; French communia is a new body which, by the action of a sworn confederacy, has wrung from its oppressors a deliverance from hereditary bondage. … The commune lacks too the ancient element of festive religious or mercantile association which is so conspicuous in the history of the guild. The idea of the latter is English, that of the former is French or Gallic. Yet notwithstanding these differences, the substantial identity of the privileges secured by these charters seems to prove the existence of much international sympathy. The ancient liberties of the English were not unintelligible to the townsmen of Normandy; the rising freedom of the German cities roused a corresponding ambition in the towns of Flanders; and the struggles of the Italian municipalities awoke the energies of the cities of Provence. All took different ways to win the same liberties. … The German Hansa may have been derived from England; the communa of London was certainly derived from France. … The communa of London, and of those other English towns which in the twelfth century aimed at such a constitution, was the old English guild in a new French garb: it was the ancient association, but directed to the attainment of municipal rather than mercantile privileges."

William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, chapter 11.

"Oppression and insurrection were not the sole origin of the communes. … Two causes, quite distinct from feudal oppression, viz., Roman traditions and Christian sentiments, had their share in the formation of the communes and in the beneficial results thereof. The Roman municipal regimen, which is described in M. Guizot's 'Essais sur l'Histoire de France' (1st Essay, pages 1-44), [also in 'History of Civilization,' volume 2, lecture 2] did not every where perish with the Empire; it kept its footing in a great number of towns, especially in those of Southern Gaul."

F. P. Guizot, Popular History of France, chapter 19.

ALSO IN: Sir J. Stephen, Lectures on the History of France, lecture 5.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1070-1125; also, CURIA, MUNICIPAL, and GUILDS OF FLANDERS.

COMMUNE, The Flemish.

See GUILDS OF FLANDERS.

COMMUNE OF PARIS, The Revolutionary, of 1792.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1792 (AUGUST).

The rebellion of the.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1871 (MARCH-MAY).

—————COMMUNE OF PARIS: End—————

COMMUNE, The Russian.

See MIR.

COMMUNE, The Swiss.

See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1848-1890.

COMMUNEROS, The.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1814-1827.

COMNENIAN DYNASTY.

The dynasty of Byzantine emperors founded, A. D. 1081, by Alexius Comnenos, and consisting of Alexius I., John II., Manuel 1., Alexius II., and Andronicus I., who was murdered A. D. 1185.

See CONSTANTINOPLE: A. D. 1081.

COMPAGNACCI, The.

See FLORENCE: A. D. 1490-1498.

COMPASS, Introduction of the Mariner's.

"It is perhaps impossible to ascertain the epoch when the polarity of the magnet was first known in Europe. The common opinion which ascribes its discovery to a citizen of Amalfi in the 14th century, is undoubtedly erroneous. Guiot de Provins, a French poet who lived about the year 1200, or, at the latest, under St. Louis, describes it in the most unequivocal language. James de Vitry, a bishop in Palestine, before the middle of the 13th century, and Guido Guinizzelli, an Italian poet of the same time, are equally explicit. The French, as well as Italians, claim the discovery as their own; but whether it were due to either of these nations, or rather learned from their intercourse with the Saracens, is not easily to be ascertained. … It is a singular circumstance, and only to be explained by the obstinacy with which men are apt to reject improvements, that the magnetic needle was not generally adopted in navigation till very long after the discovery of its properties, and even after their peculiar importance had been perceived. The writers of the 13th century, who mention the polarity of the needle, mention also its use in navigation; yet Capmany has found no distinct proof of its employment till 1403, and does not believe that it was frequently on board Mediterranean ships at the latter part of the preceding age."

H. Hallam, The Middle Ages, chapter 9, part 2, with note.

"Both Chaucer, the English, and Barbour, the Scottish, poet, allude familiarly to the compass in the latter part of the 14th century."

G. L. Craik, History of British Commerce, volume 1, page 138.

"We have no certain information of the directive tendency of the natural magnet being known earlier than the middle or end of the 11th century (in Europe, of course). … That it was known at this date and its practical value recognized, is shown by a passage from an Icelandic historian, quoted by Hanstien in his treatise of Terrestrial Magnetism. In this extract an expedition from Norway to Iceland in the year 868 is described; and it is stated that three ravens were taken as guides, for, adds the historian, 'in those times seamen had no loadstone in the northern countries.' This history was written about the year A. D. 1068, and the allusion I have quoted obviously shows that the author was aware of natural magnets having been employed as a compass. At the same time it fixes a limit of the discovery in northern countries. We find no mention of artificial magnets being so employed till about a century later."

Sir W. Thompson, quoted by R. F. Burton in Ultima Thule, volume 1, page 312.

{493}

COMPIEGNE: Capture of the Maid of Orleans (1430).

See FRANCE. A. D. 1429-1431.

COMPOUND HOUSEHOLDER, The.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1865-1868.

COMPROMISE, The Crittenden.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1860 (DECEMBER).

COMPROMISE, The Flemish, of 1565.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1562-1566.

COMPROMISE, The Missouri.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1818-1821.

COMPROMISE MEASURES OF 1850, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1850.

COMPROMISE TARIFF OF 1833, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1828-1833.

COMPURGATION.

Among the Teutonic and other peoples, in early times, one accused of a crime might clear himself by his own oath, supported by the oaths of certain compurgators, who bore witness to his trustworthiness.

See WAGER OF LAW.

COMSTOCK LODE, Discovery of the.

See NEVADA: A. D. 1848-1864.

COMUM, Battle of (B. C. 196).

See ROME: B. C. 295-191.

CONCIONES, The Roman.

See CONTIONES, THE.

CONCON, Battle of (1891).

See CHILE: A. D. 1885-1891.

CONCORD. Beginning of the War of the American Revolution.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 (APRIL).

CONCORDAT OF BOLOGNA, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1515-1518.

CONCORDAT OF NAPOLEON, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1804.

CONCORDAT OF 1813, The.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1808-1814.

CONDÉ, The first Prince Louis de, and the French wars of religion.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1560-1563, and 1563-1570.

CONDÉ, The Second Prince Louis de (called The Great). Campaigns in the Thirty Years War, and the war with Spain.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1642-1643; 1643; GERMANY: A. D. 1640-1645; 1643-1644.

In the wars of the Fronde.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1647-1648; 1649; 1650-1651; 1651-1653.

Campaigns against France in the service of Spain.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1653-1656, and 1655-1658.

Last campaigns.

See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1672-1674 and 1674-1678.

CONDÉ, The House of.

See BOURBON, THE HOUSE OF.

CONDÉ: A. D. 1793.-Siege and capture by the Austrians.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (JULY-DECEMBER).

CONDÉ: A. D. 1794. Recovery by the French.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794 (MARCH-JULY).

—————CONDÉ: End—————

CONDORE, OR KONDUR, Battle of (1758).

See INDIA: A. D. 1758-1761.

CONDOTTIERE.

In the general meaning of the word, a conductor or leader; applied specially, in Italian history, to the professional military leaders of the 13th and 14th centuries, who made a business of war very much as a modern contractor makes a business of railroad construction, and who were open to engagement, with the troops at their command, by any prince, or any free city whose offers were satisfactory.

CONDRUSI, The.

See BELGÆ.

CONESTOGAS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SUSQUEHANNAS.

CONFEDERACY OF DELOS, OR THE DELIAN.

See GREECE: B. C. 478-477, and ATHENS: B. C. 466-454, and after.

CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA. Constitution and organization of the government.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (FEBRUARY).

CONFEDERATION, Articles of (UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1777-1781.

CONFEDERATION, Australian.

See AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1885-1892.

CONFEDERATION, The Germanic, of 1814.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1814-1820.

Of 1870.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1870 (SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER).

CONFEDERATION, The North German.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1866.

CONFEDERATION, The Swiss.

See SWITZERLAND.

CONFEDERATION OF THE BRITISH AMERICAN PROVINCES.

See CANADA: A. D. 1867.

CONFEDERATION OF THE RHINE, The.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1805-1806; 1806 (JANUARY-AUGUST); and 1813 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER); also, FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH).

CONFESSION OF AUGSBURG.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1530-1531.

CONFLANS, Treaty of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1461-1468.

CONFUCIANISM.

See CHINA: THE RELIGIONS.

CONGO FREE STATE, The Founding of the.

"Since Leopold II.'s accession to the throne [of Belgium], his great object has been to secure colonial possessions to Belgium for her excess of population and production. To this end he founded, in October, 1876, with the aid of eminent African explorers, the International African Association. Its object was to form committees in several countries, with a view to the collection of funds, and to the establishment of a chain of stations across Africa, passing by Lake Tanganyika, to assist future explorers. Accordingly committees were formed, whose presidents were as follows: in England, the Prince of Wales; in Germany the Crown Prince; in Italy the King's brother; in France, M. de Lesseps; and in Belgium, King Leopold. Sums of money were subscribed, and stations were opened from Bagomoyo (just south of Zanzibar) to Lake Tanganyika; but when toward the close of 1877, Stanley reappeared on the Atlantic coast and revealed the immense length of the marvelous Congo River, King Leopold at once turned his attention in that direction. That he might not put himself forward prematurely, he acted under cover of an association and a committee of exploration, which were in reality formed and entirely supported by the King's energy and by the large sums of money that he lavished upon them. Through this association King Leopold maintained Stanley for five years on the Congo. During this time a road was made from the coast to Stanley Pool, where the navigable portion of the Upper Congo commences; and thus was formed the basis of the future empire. During this period Stanley signed no less than four thousand treaties or concessions of territory, on which upward of two thousand chiefs had placed their marks in sign of adhesion. {494} At a cost of many months of transportation, necessitating the employment of thousands of porters, light steamers were placed on the upper river which was explored as far as Stanley Falls. Its numerous tributaries also were followed up as far as the rapids that interrupt their courses. Many young Belgian officers and other adventurous explorers established themselves on the banks of the Congo and the adjoining river, the Kouiliou, and founded a series of stations, each occupied by one or two Europeans and by a few soldiers from Zanzibar. In this way the country was insensibly taken possession of in the most pacific manner, without a struggle and with no bloodshed whatever; for the natives, who are of a very gentle disposition, offered no resistance. The Senate of the United States, which was called upon, in 1884, to give an opinion on the rights of the African Association, made a careful examination of the matter, and recognized the legality of the claims and title deeds submitted to them. A little later, in order to mark the formation of a state, the Congo Association adopted as its flag a gold star on a blue ground. A French lawyer. M. Deloume, in a very well-written pamphlet entitled 'Le Droit des Gens dans l'Afrique Equatoriale,' has proved that this proceeding was not only legitimate, but necessary. The embryo state, however, lacked one essential thing, namely, recognition by the civilized powers. It existed only as a private association, or, as a hostile publicist expressed it, as 'a state in shares, indulging in pretensions of sovereignty.' Great difficulties stood in the way of realizing this essential condition. Disputes, on the one hand with France and on the other with Portugal, appeared inevitable. … King Leopold did not lose heart. In 1882 he obtained from the French government an assurance that, while maintaining its rights to the north of Stanley Pool, it would give support to the International Association of the Congo. With Portugal it seemed very difficult to come to an understanding. … Prince Bismarck took part in the matter, and in the German Parliament praised highly the work of the African Association. In April, 1884, he proposed to France to come to an understanding, and to settle all difficulties by general agreement. From this proposition sprang the famous Berlin conference, the remarkable decisions of which we shall mention later. At the same time, before the conference opened, Germany signed an agreement with the International Association of the Congo, in which she agreed to recognize its flag as that of a state, in exchange for an assurance that her trade should be free, and that German subjects should enjoy all the privileges of the most favored nations. Similar agreements were entered upon with nearly all the other countries of the globe. The delegates of the Association were accepted at the conference on the same footing as those of the different states that were represented there, and on February 26, the day on which the act was signed, Bismarck expressed himself as follows: 'The new State of the Congo is destined to be one of the chief safe-guards of the work we have in view, and I sincerely trust that its development will fulfill the noble aspirations of its august founder.' Thus the Congo International Association, hitherto only a private enterprise, seemed now to be recognized as a sovereign state, without having, however, as yet assumed the title. But where were the limits of its territory. … Thanks to the interference of France, after prolonged negotiations an understanding was arrived at on February 15, 1885, by which both parties were satisfied. They agreed that Portugal should take possession of the southern bank of the Congo, up to its junction with the little stream Uango, above Nokki, and also of the district of Kabinda forming a wedge that extends into the French territory on the Atlantic Ocean. The International Congo Association—for such was still its title—was to have access to the sea by a strip of land extending from Manyanga (west of Leopoldville) to the ocean, north of Banana, and comprising in addition to this port, Boma and the important station of Vivi. These treaties granted the association 931,285 square miles of territory, that is to say, a domain eighty times the size of Belgium, with more than 7,500 miles of navigable rivers. The limits fixed were, on the west, the Kuango, an important tributary of the Congo; on the south, the sources of the Zambesi; on the east, the Lakes Bangweolo, Moero, and Tanganyika, and a line passing through Lake Albert Edward to the river Ouelle; on the north, a line following the fourth degree of latitude to the Mobangi River on the French frontier. The whole forms one eleventh part of the African continent. The association became transformed into a state in August 1885, when King Leopold, with the authorization of the Belgian Chambers, notified the powers that he should assume the title of Sovereign of the Independent State of the Congo, the union of which with Belgium was to be exclusively personal. The Congo is, therefore, not a Belgian colony, but nevertheless the Belgian Chambers have recently given valuable assistance to the King's work; first, in taking, on July 26, 1889, 10,000,000 francs' worth of shares in the railway which is to connect the seaport of Matadi with the riverport of Leopoldville, on Stanley Pool, and secondly by granting a loan of 25,000,000 francs to the Independent State on August 4, 1890. The King, in a will laid before Parliament, bequeaths all his African possessions to the Belgian nation, authorizing the country to take possession of them after a lapse of ten years."

E. de Laveleye, The Division of Africa (The Forum, January, 1891).

ALSO IN: H. M. Stanley, The Congo, and the Founding of its Free State.

CONGREGATION OF THE ORATORY, The.

"Philip of Neri, a young Florentine of good birth (1515-1595; canonised 1622) … in 1548 instituted at Rome the Society of the Holy Trinity, to minister to the wants of the pilgrims at Rome. But the operations of his mission gradually extended till they embraced the spiritual welfare of the Roman population at large, and the reformation of the Roman clergy in particular. No figure is more serene and more sympathetic to us in the history of the Catholic reaction than that of this latter-day 'apostle of Rome.' From his association, which followed the rule of St. Augustine, sprang in 1575 the Congregation of the Oratory at Rome, famous as the seminary of much that is most admirable in the labours of the Catholic clergy."

A. W. Ward, The Counter-Reformation, page 30.

{495}

"In the year 1766, there were above a hundred Congregations of the Oratory of S. Philip in Europe and the East Indies; but since the revolutions of the last seventy years many of these have ceased to exist, while, on the contrary, within the last twelve years two have been established in England."

Mrs. Hope, Life of S. Philip Neri, chapter 24.

ALSO IN: H. L. S. Lear, Priestly Life in France, chapter 4.

CONGREGATIONALISM.

See INDEPENDENTS.

CONGRESS, Colonial, at Albany.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1754.

CONGRESS, Continental, The First.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1774 (SEPTEMBER), and (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER).

The Second.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 (MAY-AUGUST).

CONGRESS, The First American.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1690.

CONGRESS, The Pan-American.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1889-1890.

CONGRESS, The Stamp Act.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1765.

CONGRESS OF AIX-LA-CHAPELLE, The.

See AIX-LA-CHAPELLE, THE CONGRESS AND TREATY.

CONGRESS OF BERLIN.

See TURKS: A. D. 1878.

CONGRESS OF PANAMA.

See COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1826.

CONGRESS OF PARIS.

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1854-1856, and DECLARATION OF PARIS.

CONGRESS OF RASTADT, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (APRIL-SEPTEMBER).

CONGRESS OF VERONA, The.

See VERONA, THE CONGRESS OF.

CONGRESS OF VIENNA.

See VIENNA, CONGRESS OF.

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES.

"The Constitution created Congress and conferred upon it powers of legislation for national purposes, but made no provision as to the method by which these powers should be exercised. In consequence Congress has itself developed a method of transacting its business by means of committees. The Federal Legislature consists of two Houses—the Senate, or Upper and less numerous branch, and the House of Representatives, or the Lower and more numerous popular branch. The Senate is composed of two members from each State elected by the State legislatures for a term of six years, one third of whom retire every two years. The presiding officer is the Vice-President. Early in each session the Senate chooses a President pro tempore, so as to provide for any absence of the Vice-President, whether caused by death, sickness, or for other reasons. The House of Representatives is at present [1891] composed of 332 members and four delegates from the Territories. These delegates, however, have no vote, though they may speak. The House is presided over by a Speaker, elected at the beginning of each [Congress]. A quorum for business is, in either House, a majority. Congress meets every year in the beginning of December. Each Congress lasts two years and holds two sessions—a long and a short session. The long session lasts from December to midsummer [or until the two Houses agree upon an adjournment]. The short session lasts from December, when Congress meets again, until the 4th of March. The term of office then expires for all the members of the House and for one-third of the Senators. The long session ends in even years (1880 and 1882, etc.), and the short session in odd years (1881 and 1883). Extra sessions may be called by the President for urgent business. In the early part of the November preceding the end of the short session of Congress occurs the election of Representatives. Congressmen then elected do not take their seats until thirteen months later, that is, at the reassembling of Congress in December of the year following, unless an extra session is called. The Senate frequently holds secret, or, as they are called, executive sessions, for the consideration of treaties and nominations of the President, in which the House of Representatives has no voice. It is then said to sit with closed doors. An immense amount of business must necessarily be transacted by a Congress that legislates for nearly 63,000,000 of people. … Lack of time, of course, prevents a consideration of each bill separately by the whole legislature. To provide a means by which each subject may receive investigation and consideration, a plan is used by which the members of both branches of Congress are divided into committees. Each committee busies itself with a certain class of business, and bills when introduced are referred to this or that committee for consideration, according to the subjects to which the bills relate. … The Senate is now divided between 50 and 60 committees, but the number varies from session to session. … The House of Representatives is organized into 60 committees [appointed by the Speaker], ranging, in their number of members, from thirteen down. … The Committee of Ways and Means, which regulates customs duties and excise taxes, is by far the most important. … Congress ordinarily assembles at noon and remains in session until 4 or 5 P. M., though towards the end of the term it frequently remains in session until late in the night. … There is still one feature of Congressional government which needs explanation, and that is the caucus. A caucus is the meeting of the members of one party in private, for the discussion of the attitude and line of policy which members of that party are to take on questions which are expected to arise in the legislative halls. Thus, in Senate caucus, is decided who shall be members of the various committees. In these meetings is frequently discussed whether or not the whole party shall vote for or against this or that important bill, and thus its fate is decided before it has even come up for debate in Congress."

W. W. and W. F. Willoughby, Government and Administration of the United States (Johns Hopkins University Studies, series ix., numbers 1-2), chapter 9.

ALSO IN: W. Wilson, Congressional Government, chapters 2-4.

J. Bryce, The American Commonwealth, part 1, chapters 10-21 (volume 1).

A. L. Dawes, How we are Governed, chapter 2.

The Federalist, numbers 51-65.

J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, book 3, chapters 8-31 (volumes 2-3).

CONI. Sieges (1744 and 1799).

See ITALY: A. D. 1744; and FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (AUGUST-DECEMBER).

CONIBO, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.

CONNAUGHT, Transplantation of the Irish people into.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1653.

{496}

CONNECTICUT: The River and the Name.

"The first discoveries made of this part of New England were of its principal river and the fine meadows lying upon its bank. Whether the Dutch at New Netherlands, or the people of New Plymouth, were the first discoverers of the river is not certain. Both the English and the Dutch claimed to be the first discoverers, and both purchased and made a settlement of the lands upon it nearly at the same time. … From this fine river, which the Indians call Quonehtacut, or Connecticut, (in English the long river) the colony originally took its name."

B. Trumbull, History of Connecticut, chapter 2.

According to Dutch accounts, the river was entered by Adriaen Block, ascended to latitude 41° 48', and named Fresh River, in 1614.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1610-1614.

CONNECTICUT: The Aboriginal inhabitants.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1631. The grant to Lord Say and Sele, and others.

In 1631, the Earl of Warwick granted to Lord Say and Sele, Lord Brooke, Sir Richard Saltonstall, and others, "the territory between Narragansett River and southwest towards New York for 120 miles and west to the Pacific Ocean, or, according to the words of President Clap of Yale College, 'from Point Judith to New York, and from thence a west line to the South Sea, and if we take Narragansett River in its whole length the tract will extend as far north as Worcester. It comprehends the whole of the colony of Connecticut and more. This was called the old patent of Connecticut, and had been granted the previous year, 1630, by the Council of Plymouth [or Council for New England] to the Earl of Warwick. Yet before the English had planted settlements in Connecticut the Dutch had purchased of the Pequots land where Hartford now stands and erected a small trading fort called 'The House of Good Hope.'"

C. W. Bowen, Boundary Disputes of Connecticut, page 15.

In 1635, four years after the Connecticut grant, said to have been derived originally from the Council for New England, in 1630, had been transferred by the Earl of Warwick to Lord Say and Seal and others, the Council made an attempt, in connivance with the English court, to nullify all its grants, to regain possession of the territory of New England and to parcel it out by lot among its own members. In this attempted parcelling, which proved ineffectual, Connecticut fell to the lot of the Earl of Carlisle, the Duke of Lennox, and the Duke of Hamilton. Modern investigation seems to have found the alleged grant from the Council of Plymouth, or Council for New England, to the Earl of Warwick, in 1630, to be mythical. "No one has ever seen it, or has heard of anyone who claims to have seen it. It is not mentioned even in the grant from Warwick to the Say and Sele patentees in 1631. … The deed is a mere quit-claim, which warrants nothing and does not even assert title to the soil transferred. … Why the Warwick transaction took this peculiar shape, why Warwick transferred, without showing title, a territory which the original owners granted anew to other patentees in 1635, are questions which are beyond conjecture."

A. Johnston, Connecticut, chapter 2.

See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1635.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1634-1637. The pioneer settlements.

"In October, 1634, some men of Plymouth, led by William Holmes, sailed up the Connecticut river, and, after bandying threats with a party of Dutch who had built a rude fort on the site of Hartford, passed on and fortified themselves on the site of Windsor. Next year Governor Van Twiller sent a company of seventy men to drive away these intruders, but after reconnoitering the situation the Dutchmen thought it best not to make an attack. Their little stronghold at Hartford remained unmolested by the English, and, in order to secure the communication between this advanced outpost and New Amsterdam, Van Twiller decided to build another fort at the mouth of the river, but this time the English were beforehand. Rumours of Dutch designs may have reached the ears of Lord Say and Sele and Lord Brooke—'fanatic Brooke,' as Scott calls him in 'Marmion'—who had obtained from the Council for New England a grant of territory on the shores of the Sound. These noblemen chose as their agent the younger John Winthrop, son of the Massachusetts governor, and this new-comer arrived upon the scene just in time to drive away Van Twiller's vessel and build an English fort which in honour of his two patrons he called 'Say-Brooke.' Had it not been for seeds of discontent already sown in Massachusetts, the English hold upon the Connecticut valley might perhaps have been for a few years confined to these two military outposts at Windsor and Saybrooke. But there were people in Massachusetts who did not look with favour upon the aristocratic and theocratic features of its polity. The provision that none but church-members should vote or hold office was by no means unanimously approved. … Cotton declared that democracy was no fit government either for church or for commonwealth, and the majority of the ministers agreed with him. Chief among those who did not was the learned and eloquent Thomas Hooker, pastor of the church at Newtown. … There were many in Newtown who took Hooker's view of the matter; and there, as also in Watertown and Dorchester, which in 1633 took the initiative in framing town governments with selectmen, a strong disposition was shown to evade the restrictions upon the suffrage. While such things were talked about, in the summer of 1633, the adventurous John Oldham was making his way through the forest and over the mountains into the Connecticut valley, and when he returned to the coast his glowing accounts set some people to thinking. Two years afterward, a few pioneers from Dorchester pushed through the wilderness as far as the Plymouth men's fort at Windsor, while a party from Watertown went farther and came to a halt upon the site of Wethersfield. A larger party, bringing cattle and such goods as they could carry, set out in the autumn and succeeded in reaching Windsor. … In the next June, 1636, the Newtown congregation, a hundred or more in number, led by their sturdy pastor, and bringing with them 160 head of cattle, made the pilgrimage to the Connecticut valley. Women and children took part in this pleasant summer journey; Mrs. Hooker, the pastor's wife, being too ill to walk, was carried on a litter. Thus, in the memorable year in which our great university was born, did Cambridge become, in the true Greek sense of a much-abused word, the metropolis or 'mother town' of Hartford. The migration at once became strong in numbers. {497} During the past twelvemonth a score of ships had brought from England to Massachusetts more than 3,000 souls, and so great an accession made further movement easy. Hooker's pilgrims were soon followed by the Dorchester and Watertown congregations, and by the next May 800 people were living in Windsor, Hartford, and Wethersfield. As we read of these movements, not of individuals, but of organic communities, united in allegiance to a church and its pastor, and fervid with the instinct of self-government, we seem to see Greek history renewed, but with centuries of added political training. For one year a board of commissioners from Massachusetts governed the new towns, but at the end of that time the towns chose representatives and held a General Court at Hartford, and thus the separate existence of Connecticut was begun. As for Springfield, which was settled about the same time by a party from Roxbury, it remained for some years doubtful to which state it belonged."

J. Fiske, The Beginnings of New England, chapter 3.

ALSO IN: J. G. Palfrey, History of New England, volume 1, chapter 11.

G. L. Walker, History of the First Church in Hartford, chapters 4-5.

M. A. Green, Springfield, 1636-1886, chapter 1.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1636-1639. The constitutional evolution.

"It must be noted that [the] Newtown, Watertown, and Dorchester migrations had not been altogether a simple transfer of individual settlers from one colony to another. In each of these migrations a part of the people was left behind, so that the Massachusetts towns did not cease to exist. And yet each of them brought its Massachusetts magistrates, its ministers (except Watertown), and all the political and ecclesiastical machinery of the town; and at least one of them (Dorchester) had hardly changed its structure since its members first organized in 1630 at Dorchester in England. The first settlement of Connecticut was thus the migration of three distinct and individual town organizations out of the jurisdiction of Massachusetts and into absolute freedom. It was the Massachusetts town system set loose in the wilderness. At first the three towns retained even their Massachusetts names; and it was not until the eighth court meeting, February 21 1636 (7), that it was decided that the plantacon [c tilde] nowe called Newtowne slalbe called & named by the name of Harteforde Towne, likewise the plantacon [c tilde] nowe called 'Watertowne shalbe called & named Wythersfeild,' and the plantacon [c tilde] called Dorchester shalbe called Windsor.' On the same day the boundaries between the three towns were 'agreed' upon, and thus the germ of the future State was the agreement and union of the three towns. Accordingly, the subsequent court meeting at Hartford, May 1, 1637, for the first time took the name of the 'Genrall Corte,' and was composed, in addition to the town magistrates who had previously held it, of 'comittees' of three from each town. So simply and naturally did the migrated town system evolve, in this binal assembly, the seminal principle of the Senate and House of Representatives of the future State of Connecticut. The Assembly further showed its consciousness of separate existence by declaring 'an offensive warr ag' the Pequoitt,' assigning the proportions of its miniature army and supplies to each town, and appointing a commander. … So complete are the features of State-hood, that we may fairly assign May 1, 1637, as the proper birthday of Connecticut. No king, no Congress, presided over the birth: its seed was in the towns. January 14, 1638 (9), the little Commonwealth formed the first American Constitution at Hartford. So far as its provisions are concerned, the King, the Parliament, the Plymouth Council, the Warwick grant, the Say and Sele grant, might as well have been non-existent: not one of them is mentioned. … This constitution was not only the earliest but the longest in continuance of American documents of the kind, unless we except the Rhode Island charter. It was not essentially altered by the charter of 1662, which was practically a royal confirmation of it; and it was not until 1818 that the charter, that is the constitution of 1639, was superseded by the present constitution. Connecticut was as absolutely a state in 1639 as in 1776."

A. Johnston, The Genesis of a New England State (Johns Hopkins University Studies, number 11).

The following is the text of those "Fundamental Orders" adopted by the people dwelling on Connecticut River, January 14, 1638 (9), which formed the first of written constitutions: "FORASMUCH as it hath pleased the Allmighty God by the wise disposition of his diuyne pruidence so to Order and dispose of things that we the Inhabitants and Residents of Windsor, Harteford and Wethersfield are now cohabiting and dwelling in and vppon the River of Conectecotte and the Lands thereunto adioyueing; And well knowing where a people are gathered togather the word of God requires that to mayntayne the peace and vnion of such a people there should be an orderly and decent Gouerment established according to God, to order and dispose of the affayres of the people at all seasons as occation shall require; doe therefore assotiate and conioyne our selues to be as one Publike State or ComonweIth; and doe, for our selues and our Successors and such as shall be adioyned to vs att any tyme hereafter, enter into Combination and Confederation togather, to mayntayne and prsearue the liberty and purity of the gospell of our Lord Jesus wch we now prfesse, as also the disciplyne of the Churches, wch according to the truth of the said gospell is now practised amongst vs; As also in or Ciuell Affaires to be guided and gouerned according to such Lawes, Rules, Orders and decrees as shall be made, ordered & decreed, as followeth:—1. It is Ordered, sentenced and decreed, that there shall be yerely two generall Assemblies or Courts, the one the second thursday in Aprill, the other the second thursday in September following; the first shall be called the Courte of Election, wherein shall be yerely Chosen fro tyme to tyme soe many Magestrats and other publike Officers as shall be found requisitte: Whereof one to be chosen Gouernour for the yeare ensueing and vntill another be chosen, and noe other Magestrate to be chosen for more than one yeare; pruided allwayes there be sixe chosen besids the Gouernour; wch being chosen and sworne according to an Oath recorded for that purpose shall haue power to administer iustice according to the Lawes here established, and for want thereof according to the rule of the word of God; wch choise shall be made by all that are admitted freemen and haue taken the Oath of Fidellity, and doe cohabitte wthin this Jurisdiction, (hauing beene admitted Inhabitants by the maior prt of the Towne wherein they liue,) or the mayor prte of such as shall be then prsent. {498} 2. It is Ordered, sentenced and decreed, that the Election of the aforesaid Magestrats shall be on this manner: euery prson prsent and quallified for choyse shall bring in (to the prsons deputed to receaue the) one single papr wth the name of him written in yt whom he desires to haue Gouernour, and he that hath the greatest nuber of papers shall be Gouernor for that yeare. And the rest of the Magestrats or publike Officers to be chosen in this manner: The Secretary for the tyme being shall first read the names of all that are to be put to choise and then shall seuerally nominate them distinctly, and euery one that would haue the prson nominated to be chosen shall bring in one single paper written vppon, and he that would not haue him chosen shall bring in a blanke: and euery one that hath more written papers then blanks shall be a Magistrat for that yeare; wth papers shall be receaued and told by one or more that shall be then chosen by the court and sworne to be faythfull therein: but in case there should not be sixe chosen as aforesaid, besids the Gouernor, out of those wch are nominated, then he or they wch haue the most written paprs shall be a Magestrate or Magestrats for the ensueing yeare, to make up the foresaid nuber. 3. It is Ordered, sentenced and decreed, that the Secretary shall not nominate any prson, nor shall any prson be chosen newly into the Magestraey wch was not prpownded in some Generall Courte before, to be nominated the next Election; and to that end yt shall be lawfull for ech of the Townes aforesaid by their deputyes to nominate any two who they conceaue fitte to be put to election; and the Courte may ad so many more as they, iudge requisitt. 4. It is Ordered, sentenced and decreed that noe prson be chosen Gouernor aboue once in two yeares, and that the Gouernor be always a meber of some approved congregation, and formerly of the Magestracy wthin this Jurisdiction; and all the Magestrats Freemen of this Comonwelth: and that no Magestrate or other publike officer shall execute any prte of his or their Office before they are seuerally sworne, wch shall be done in the face of the Courte if they be prsent, and in case of absence by some deputed for that purpose. 5. It is Ordered, senteneed and decreed, that to the aforesaid Courte of Election the seurall Townes shall send their deputyes, and when the Elections are ended they may prceed in any publike searuice as at other Courts. Also the other Generall Courte in Septemher shall be for makeing of lawes, and any other publike occation, wch conserns the good of the Comonwelth. 6. It is Ordered, sentenced and decreed, that the Gournor shall, ether by himselfe or by the secretary, send out sumons to the Constables of eur Towne for the cauleing of these two standing Courts, on month at lest before their seu'all tymes: And also if the Gournor and the gretest prte of the Magestmts see cause vppon any spetiall occation to call a generall Courte, they may giue order to the secretary soe to doe wthin fowerteene dayes warneing; and if vrgent necessity so require, vppon a shorter notice, giueing sufficient grownds for yt to the deputyes when they meete, or els be questioned for the same; And if the Gournor and Mayor prte of Magestrats shall ether neglect or refuse to call the two Generall standing Courts or ether of the, as also at other tymes when the occutions of the Comonwelth require, the Freemen thereof, or the Mayor prte of them, shall petition to them soe to doe: if then yt be ether denyed or neglected the said Freemen or the Mayor prte of them shall haue power to giue order to the Constables of the seuerall Townes to doe the same, and so may meete togather, and chuse to themselues a Moderator, and may prceed to do any Acte of power, wch any other Generall Courte may. 7. It is Ordered, sentenced and decreed that after there are warrants giuen out for any of the suid Generall Courts, the Constable or Constables of ech Towne shall forthwth give notice distinctly, to the inhabitants of the same, in some Pubhke Assembly or by goeing or sending fro howse to howse, that at a place and tyme by him or them lymited and sett, they meet and assemble the selues togather to elect and chuse certen deputyes to be att the Generall Courte then following to agitate the afayres of the comonwelth; wch said Deputyes shall be choseu by all that are admitted Inhabitants in the seurall Townes and haue taken the oath of fidellity; pruided that non be chosen a Deputy for any Generall Courte wch is not a Freeman of this Comonwelth. The foresaid deputyes shall be chosen in manner following; euery prson that is prsent and quallified as before exprssed, shall bring thr names of such, written in seurrall papers, as they desire to haue chosen for that Imployment, and these 3 or 4, more or lesse, being the nuber agreed on to be chosen for that tyme, that haue greatest nuber of papers written for the shall be deputyes for that Courte; whose names shall be endorsed on the backe side of the warrant and returned into the Courte, wth the Constable or Constables hand vnto the same. 8. It is Ordered, sentenced and decreed, that Wyndsor, Hartford and Wethersfield shall haue power, ech Towne, to send fower of their freemen as deputyes to euery Generall Courte; and whatsoeuer other Townes shall be hereafter added to this Jurisdiction, they shall send so many deputyes as the Courte shall judge meete, a reasonable prportion to the nuber of Freemen that are in the said Townes being to be attended therein; wch deputyes shall have the power of the whole Towne to giue their voats and alowance to all such lawes and orders as may be for the publike good, and unto wch the said Townes are to be bownd. 9. It is ordered and decreed, that the deputyes thus chosen shall haue power and liberty to appoynt a tyme and a place of meeting togather before any Generall Courte to aduise and consult of all such things as may concerne the good of the publike, as also to examine their owne Elections, whether according to the order, and if they or the gretest prte of them find any election to be illegall they may seclud such for prsent fro their meeting, and returne the same and their resons to the Courte; and if yt proue true, the Courte may fyne the prty or prtyes so intruding and the Towne, if they see cause, and giue out a warrant to goe to a newe election in a legall way, either in prte or in whole. Also the said deputyes shall haue power to fyne any that shall be disorderly at their meetings, or for not coming in due tyme or place according to appoyntment; and they may returne the said fynes into the Courte if yt be refused to be paid, and the tresurer to take notice of yt, and to estreete or levy the same as he doth other fynes. {499} 10. It is Ordered, sentenceJ and decreed, that euery Generall Courte, except such as through neglecte of the Gou'nor and the greatest prte of Magestrats the Freemen themselves doe call, shall consist of the Gouernor, or some one chosen to moderate the Court, and 4 other Magestruts at lest, wth the mayor prte of the deputyes of the seuerall Townes legally chosen; and in case the Freemen or mayor prte of the, through neglect or refusall of the Gouernor and mayor prte of the magestrats, shall call a Courte, yt shall consist of the mayor prte of Freemen that are prsent or their deputyes, wty a Moderator chosen by the: In wch said Generall Courts shall consist the supreme power of the Comonwelth, and they only shall haue power to make laws or repeale the, to graunt leuyes, to admitt of Freemen, dispose of lands vndisposed of, to seuerall Townes or prsons, and also shall haue power to call ether Courte or Magestrate or any other prson whatsoeuer into question for any misdemeanour, and may for just causes displace or deale otherwise according to the nature of the offence; and also may deale in any other matter that concerns the good of this comon welth, excepte election of Magestrats, wch shall be done by the whole boddy of Freemen. In wch Courte the Gouernour or Moderator shall haue power to order the Courte to giue liberty of spech, and silence vncensonable and disorderly speakeings, to put all things to voate, and in case the voate be equall to haue the casting voice. But non of these Courts shall be adiorned or dissolued wthout the consent of the maior prte of the Court. 11. It is ordered, sentenced and decreed, that when any Gemerall Courte vppon the occations of the Comonwelth haue agreed vppon any sume or somes of mony to be leuyed vppon the seuerall Townes wthin this Jurisdiction, that a Comittee be chosen to sett out and appoynt wt shall be the prportion of euery Towne to pay of the said leuy, prvided the Comittees be made vp of an equall nuber out of each Towne. 14th January, 1638, the 11 Orders abouesaid are voted."

Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, volume 1.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1637. The Pequot War.

See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1637.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1638. The planting of New Haven Colony.

"In the height of the Hutchinson controversy [see MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1636-1638], John Davenport, an eminent nonconformist minister from London, had arrived at Boston, and with him a wealthy company, led by two merchants, Theophilus Eaton and Edward Hopkins. Alarmed at the new opinions and religious agitations of which Massachusetts was the seat, notwithstanding very advantageous offers of settlement there, they preferred to establish a separate community of their own, to be forever free from the innovations of error and licentiousness. Eaton and others sent to explore the coast west of the Connecticut, selected a place for settlement near the head of a spacious bay at Quinapiack [or Quinnipiack], or, as the Dutch called it, Red Hill, where they built a hut and spent the winter. They were joined in the spring [April, 1638] by the rest of their company, and Davenport preached his first sermon under the shade of a spreading oak. Presently they entered into what they called a 'plantation covenant,' and a communication being opened with the Indians, who were but few in that neighborhood, the lands of Quinapiack were purchased, except a small reservation on the east side of the bay, the Indians receiving a few presents and a promise of protection. A tract north of the bay, ten miles in one direction and thirteen in the other, was purchased for ten coats; and the colonists proceeded to lay out in squares the ground-plan of a spacious city, to which they presently gave the name of New Haven."

R. Hildreth, History of the United States, volume 1, chapter 9.

"They formed their political association by what they called a 'plantation covenant,' 'to distinguish it from a church covenant, which could not at that time be made.' In this compact they resolved, 'that, as in matters that concern the gathering and ordering of a church, so likewise in all public offices which concern civil order, as choice of magistrates and officers, making and repealing of laws; dividing allotments of inheritance, and all things of like nature,' they would 'be ordered by the rules which the Scriptures hold forth.' It had no external sanction, and comprehended no acknowledgment of the government of England. The company consisted mostly of Londoners, who at home had been engaged in trade. In proportion to their numbers, they were the richest of all the plantations. Like the settlers on Narragansett Bay, they had no other title to their lands than that which they obtained by purchase from the Indians."

J. G. Palfrey, History of New England, volume 1, chapter 13.

ALSO IN: C. H. Levermore, The Republic of New Haven, chapter 1.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1639. The Fundamental Agreement of New Haven.

"In June, 1639, the whole body of settlers [at Quinnipiack, or New Haven] came together to frame a constitution. A tradition, seemingly well founded, says that the meeting was held in a large barn. According to the same account, the purpose for which they had met and the principles on which they ought to proceed were set forth by Davenport in a sermon. 'Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out seven pillars,' was the text. There is an obvious connection between this and the subsequent choice of seven of the chief men to lay the foundation of the constitution. … Davenport set forth the general system on which the constitution ought to be framed. The two main principles which he laid down were, that Scripture is a perfect and sufficient rule for the conduct of civil affairs, and that church-membership must be a condition of citizenship. In this the colonists were but imitating the example of Massachusetts. … After the sermon, five resolutions [followed by a sixth, constituting together what was called the 'fundamental agreement' of New Haven Colony], formally introducing Davenport's proposals, were carried. If a church already existed, it was not considered fit to form a basis for the state. Accordingly a fresh one was framed by a curiously complicated process. As a first step, twelve men were elected. These twelve were instructed, after a due interval for consideration, to choose seven out of their own number, who should serve as a nucleus for the church. At the same time an oath was taken by the settlers, which may be looked on as a sort of preliminary and provisional test of citizenship, pledging them to accept the principles laid down by Davenport. Sixty-three of the inhabitants took the oath, and their example was soon followed by fifty more. By October, four months after the original meeting, the seven formally established the new commonwealth. They granted the rights of a freeman to all who joined them, and who were recognized members either of the church at New Haven or of any other approved church. The freemen thus chosen entered into an agreement to the same effect as the oath already taken. They then elected a Governor and four Magistrates, or, as they were for the present called, a Magistrate and four Deputies. … The functions of the Governor and Magistrates were not defined. Indeed, but one formal resolution was passed as to the constitution of the colony, namely, 'that the Word of God shall be the only rule attended unto in ordering the affairs of government.'"

J. A. Doyle, The English in America: The Puritan Colonies, volume 1, chapter 6.

{500}

"Of all the New England colonies, New Haven was most purely a government by compact, by social contract. … The free planters … signed each their names to their voluntary compact, and ordered that 'all planters hereafter received in this plantation should submit to the said foundamentall agreement, and testifie the same by subscribing their names.' It is believed that this is the sole instance of the formation of an independent civil government by a general compact wherein all the parties to the agreement were legally required to be actual signers thereof. When this event occurred, John Locke was in his seventh year, and Rousseau was a century away."

C. H. Levermore, The Republic of New Haven, page 23.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1640-1655. The attempted New Haven colonization on the Delaware. Fresh quarrels with the Dutch.

See NEW JERSEY: A. D. 1640-1655.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1643. The confederation of the colonies. The progress and state of New Haven and the River Colony.

See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1643.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1650. Settlement of boundaries with the Dutch of New Netherland.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1650.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1656-1661. The persecution of Quakers.

See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1656-1661.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1660-1663. The beginning of boundary conflicts with Rhode Island.

See RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1660-1663.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1660-1664. The protection of the regicides at New Haven.

"Against the colony of New Haven the king had a special grudge. Two of the regicide judges, who had sat in the tribunal which condemned his father, escaped to New England in 1660 and were well received there. They were gentlemen of high position. Edward Whalley was a cousin of Cromwell and Hampden. … The other regicide, William Goffe, as a major-general in Cromwell's army, had won such distinction that there were some who pointed to him as the proper person to succeed the Lord Protector on the death of the latter. He had married Whalley's daughter. Soon after the arrival of these gentlemen, a royal order for their arrest was sent to Boston. … The king's detectives hotly pursued them through the woodland paths of New England, and they would soon have been taken but for the aid they got from the people. Many are the stories of their hairbreadth escapes. Sometimes they took refuge in a cave on a mountain near New Haven, sometimes they hid in friendly cellars; and once, being hard put to it, they skulked under a wooden bridge, while their pursuers on horseback galloped by overhead. After lurking about New Haven and Milford for two or three years, on hearing of the expected arrival of Colonel Nichols and his commission [the royal commission appointed to take possession of the American grant lately made by the king to his brother, the Duke of York], they sought a more secluded hiding place near Hadley, a village lately settled far up the Connecticut river, within the jurisdiction of Massachusetts. Here the avengers lost the trail, the pursuit was abandoned, and the weary regicides were presently forgotten. The people of New Haven had been especially zealous in shielding the fugitives. … The colony, moreover, did not officially recognize the restoration of Charles II. to the throne until that event had been commonly known in New England for more than a year. For these reasons, the wrath of the king was specially roused against New Haven."

J. Fiske, The Beginnings of New England, pages 192-194.

ALSO IN: G. H. Hollister, History of Connecticut, volume 1, chapter 11.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1662-1664. The Royal Charter and annexation of New Haven to the River Colony.

"The Restoration in England left the New Haven colony under a cloud in the favor of the new government: it had been tardy and ungracious in its proclamation of Charles II.; it had been especially remiss in searching for the regicide colonels, Goffe and Whalley; and any application for a charter would have come from New Haven with a very ill grace. Connecticut was under no such disabilities; and it had in its Governor, John Winthrop [the younger, son of the first governor of Massachusetts], a man well calculated to win favor with the new King. … In March, 1660, the General Court solemnly declared its loyalty to Charles II., sent the Governor to England to offer a loyal address to the King and ask him for a charter, and laid aside £500 for his expenses. Winthrop was successful, and the charter was granted April 20, 1662. The acquisition of the charter raised the Connecticut leaders to the seventh heaven of satisfaction. And well it might, for it was a grant of privileges with hardly a limitation. Practically the King had given Winthrop 'carte blanche,' and allowed him to frame the charter to suit himself. It incorporated the freemen of Connecticut as a 'body corporate and pollitique,' by the name of 'The Governor and Company of the English Collony of Conecticut in New England in America.' … The people were to have all the liberties and immunities of free and natural subjects of the King, as if born within the realm. It granted to the Governor and Company all that part of New England south of the Massachusetts line and west of the 'Norroganatt River commonly called Norroganatt Bay' to the South Sea, with the 'Islands thereunto adioyneinge.' … It is difficult to see more than two points in which it [the charter] altered the constitution adopted by the towns in 1639. There were now to be two deputies from each town; and the boundaries of the Commonwealth now embraced the rival colony of New Haven. … New Haven did not submit without a struggle, for not only her pride of separate existence but the supremacy of her ecclesiastical system was at stake. For three years a succession of diplomatic notes passed between the General Court of Connecticut and 'our honored friends of New Haven, Milford, Branford, and Guilford.' … {501} In October, 1664, the Connecticut General Court appointed the New Haven magistrates commissioners for their towns, 'with magistraticall powers,' established the New Haven local officers in their places for the time, and declared oblivion for any past resistance to the laws. In December, Milford having already submitted, the remnant of the New Haven General Court, representing New Haven, Guilford, and Branford, held its last meeting and voted to submit, 'with a salvo jure of our former rights and claims, as a people who have not yet been heard in point of plea.' The next year the laws of New Haven were laid aside forever, and her towns sent deputies to the General Court at Hartford. … In 1701 the General Court … voted that its annual October session should thereafter be held at New Haven. This provision of a double capital was incorporated into the constitution of 1818, and continued until in 1873 Hartford was made sole capital."

A. Johnston, The Genesis of a New England State, pages 25-28.

ALSO IN: B. Trumbull, History of Connecticut, volume 1, chapter 12.

Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, 1665-78.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1664. Royal grant to the Duke of York, in conflict with the charter.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1664.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1666. The New Haven migration to Newark, N. J.

See NEW JERSEY: A. D. 1664-1667.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1674-1675. Long Island and the western half of the colony granted to the Duke of York.

In 1674, after the momentary recovery of New York by the Dutch, and its re-surrender to the English, "the king issued a new patent for the province, in which he not only included Long Island, but the territory up to the Connecticut River, which had been assigned to Connecticut by the royal commissioners. The assignment of Long Island was regretted, but not resisted; and the island which is the natural sea-wall of Connecticut passed, by royal decree, to a province whose only natural claim to it was that it barely touched it at one corner. The revival of the duke's claim to a part of the mainland was a different matter, and every preparation was made for resistance. In July, 1675, just as King Philip's war had broken out in Plymouth, hasty word was sent from the authorities at Hartford to Captain Thomas Bull at Saybrook that Governor Andros of New York was on his way through the Sound for the purpose, as he avowed, of aiding the people against the Indians. Of the two evils, Connecticut rather preferred the Indians. Bull was instructed to inform Andros, if he should call at Saybrook, that the colony had taken all precautions against the Indians, and to direct him to the actual scene of conflict, but not to permit the landing of any armed soldiers. 'And you are to keep the king's colors standing there, under his majesty's lieutenant, the governor of Connecticut; and if any other colors be set up there, you are not to suffer them to stand. … But you are in his majesty's name required to avoid striking the first blow; but if they begin, then you are to defend yourselves, and do your best to secure his majesty's interest and the peace of the whole colony of Connecticut in our possession.' Andros came and landed at Saybrook, but confined his proceedings to reading the duke's patent against the protest of Bull and the Connecticut representatives."

A. Johnston, Connecticut, chapter 12.

Report of Regents of the University on the Boundaries of the State of New York, page 21.

ALSO IN: C. W. Bowen, The Boundary Disputes of Connecticut, pages 70-72.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1674-1678. King Philip's War.

See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1674-1675; 1675; 1676-1678.

CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1685-1687. The hostile king and the hidden charter. Sir Edmund Andros in possession of the government.

"During the latter years of the reign of Charles II. the king had become so reckless of his pledges and his faith that he did not scruple to set the dangerous example of violating the charters that had been granted by the crown. Owing to the friendship that the king entertained for Winthrop, we have seen that Connecticut was favored by him to a degree even after the death of that great man. But no sooner had Charles demised and the sceptre passed into the hands of his bigoted brother, King James II., than Connecticut was called upon to contend against her sovereign for liberties that had been affirmed to her by the most solemn muniments known to the law of England. The accession of James II. took place on the 6th day of February 1685, and such was his haste to violate the honor of the crown that, early in the summer of 1685, a quo warranto was issued against the governor and company of Connecticut, citing them to appear before the king, within eight days of St. Martin's, to show by what right and tenor they exercised certain powers and privileges." This was quickly followed by two other writs, conveyed to Hartford by Edward Randolph, the implacable enemy of the colonies. "The day of appearance named in them was passed long before the writs were served." Mr. Whiting was sent to England as the agent of the colony, to exert such influences as might be brought to bear against the plainly hostile and unscrupulous intentions of the king; but his errand was fruitless. "On the 28th of December another writ of quo warranto was served upon the governor and company of the colony. This writ bore date the 23d of October, and required the defendants to appear before the king' within eight days of the purification of the Blessed Virgin.' … Of course, the day named was not known to the English law, and was therefore no day at all in legal contemplation." Already, the other New England colonies had been brought under a provisional general government, by commissioners, of whom Joseph Dudley was named president. President Dudley "addressed a letter to the governor and council, advising them to resign the charter into the king's hands. Should they do so, he undertook to use his influence in behalf of the colony. They did not deem it advisable to comply with the request. Indeed they had hardly time to do so before the old commission was broken up, and a new one granted, superseding Dudley and naming Sir Edmund Andros governor of New England. Sir Edmund arrived in Boston on the 19th of December, 1686, and the next day he published his commission and took the government into his hands. Scarcely had he established himself, when he sent a letter to the governor and company of Connecticut, acquainting them with his appointment, and informing them that he was commissioned by the king to receive their charter if they would give it up to him."