« PreviousContinue »
'for New-England, and that Sir Edmund Androsse late gover'nor of New-England had sent to the French king for them to 'come over, and the country should be delivered up into his 'hands, and that they expected that before they should arrive, 'it would have been delivered into the hands of the French.
'Benjamin Majery of Salem, Jersey-man, also testifieth, that 'he being taken the same day, and at the same place in the 'Ketch Diligence, Gilbert Peters commander; as is abovesaid 'in the evidence of John Langford, he heard the same related, 'by several of the company on board the other French ship of 'war that was in company with the Lumbuscado; viz. The 'Frugum, so called, that there was ten sail of them came out 'directly from France together; that Sir Edmund Androsse 'late governor of New-England had sent to the king of France 'for them to come over, and he would deliver the country into 'their hands, and that they were bound directly for Boston in * New-England but had lost most of their ships coming over.
The mark M of Benjamin Majery.
'John Langford and Benjamin Magery, both made oath 'to the truth of their respective evidences in Salem, Novem'ber 23, 1689.
'Before me, John Hathorne, assistant.'
'Joshua Conant testifieth, That he being commander of the 'Ketch, Thomas and Mary of Salem, he was taken by three x French ships off from Tarbay, near Cansoe, upon Tuesday 'the 17th of September last, two of which were ships of war, 'the other a merchant-man, and being put on board the Admiral, 'viz. the Lumbuscado, and therein carried to Port-Royal a 'prisoner, Mr. Mero told me that the French on board told him, 'that there was ten sail of them ships of war came out in com'pany together from France, and that they came directly from 'France, and were bound to Boston in New-England, and 'that Sir Edmund Androsse had sent to the French king for 'them, and that the country was to be delivered up into their 'hands; but having lost several of their ships in their voyage, 'and hearing that Sir Edmund Androsse was taken, and now 'in hold, should not proceed at present, but threatened what 'they would do the next summer.
* Joshua Conant personally appeared before me, and made 'oath to the truth of the abovesaid evidence. Salem, Novem'ber the 23d, 1689.
'John Hathorne, assistant.'
'Phillip Hilliard of Salem, Jersey-man, testifieth, That he 'was taken by the French in a Ketch belonging to Salem; viz.
* the Thomas and Mary, Joshua Conant commander off from 'Tarbay near Cansoe, this autumn, September 17, and being 'carried on board the Lumbuscado, did on board the said ship 'hear several of the company say, that there was about twelve 'sail of them ships of war, came out in company together from 'France, and were bound directly for Boston in New-England, 'and that Sir Edmund Androsse, the late governor there had
* sent into France for them to come over.
The mark 8 of Phillip Hilliard.
'Phillip Hilliard personally appeared before me, and made 'oath to the truth of the abovesaid evidence. Salem, Novem« ber the 23d, 1689.
'John Hathorne, assistant.'
'James Cocks of Saltm, mariner, testifieth, That he was 'taken by the French in the Ketch Margaret of Salem, 'Daniel Gygles commander, on Tuesday the 17th of Septem'ber last past, off from Tarbay near Cansoe, by two French 'ships of war, who had one merchant-man in company with 'them, and he being carried on board the admiral, viz. the 'Lumbuscado, he there met with a man he had known in Lon'don, one of the said ship's company, who was a Biscay born, 'named Peter Goit, who told him that there was thirteen ships 'of them came out of France in company together, and that 'they were bound directly for Boston in New-England, ex'pecting that the country was before, or would be at their 'coming delivered up to the king of France, and told him, before
* they could get clear of the coast of France, several of their 'ships were taken by the English ships of war, and the rest of
* their fleet taken or dispersed, and lost about Newfoundland.
'The mark of S S of James Cocks.
* James Cocks personally appeared before me, and made oath ( to the truth of the abovesaid evidence. Salem, November 23d '1689.
'John Hathorne, assistant.' But
But as to one of the crimes objected against Sir Edmund Androsse and his accomplices, Habemus confitentem reum. Mr. Palmer cannot deny but that they levied monies on the king's subjects in New-England, contrary to the fundamentals of the English government, which doth not allow the imposition of taxes without a parliament. The New-Englandcrs supposed that their late oppressors had been guilty of no less than a capital crime by their raising money in such a way as they did; and we are assured that one of them after he received, and before he acted by virtue of his illegal commission from the late king, professed, that if ever he had an hand in raising a penny of money without an assembly, his neck should go for it; and yet no man that we know of had a deeper hand in it than this person had. But Mr. Palmer, for the justification of this so foul a business, lays down several positions which he would have no man deny; one of his positions is, That it is a fundamental point consented to by all christian nations, That the first discoverer of a country inhabited by infidels, gives a right and dominion of that country to the prince in whose service and employment the discoverers were sent. These are his words, p. 17. We affirm, that this fundamental point (as he calls itj is not a christian, but an unchristian principle. It is controverted among the School-men, an dominium fundatur in gratia. Papists are (as Mr. Palmer is) for the affirmative, but the scripture teaches us to believe that the heathen nations, and the sons of Adam, and not the children of Israel only, have a right to the earth, and to the inheritance which God hath given them therein, Deut. 32. 8. When Mr. Palmer hath proved that infidels are not the sons of Adam, we shall consent to his notion, that christians may invade their rights, and take their lands from them, and give them to whom they please, and that the pope may give all America to the king of Spain. But let him know, that the first planters in New-England, had more of conscience and the fear of God in them, than it seems Mr. Palmer hath. For they were not willing to wrong the Indians in their properties; for which cause it was that they purchased from the natives their right to the soil in that part of the world, notwithstanding what right they had by virtue of their charters from the kings of England. Mr. Palmer's position is clearly against Jus Gentium fy Jus Naturale, which instructs every man, Nemini injuriam facere. He that shall violently, and without any just cause take from infidels their lands, where they plant, and by which they subsist, does them manifest injury. And let us know of Mr. Palmer, if christion princes have power to dispose of the lands belonging to infidels in the West-Indies, whether they have the like dominion over the lands belonging to the infidels in the EastIndies, and if these infidels shall refuse to consent that such christians shall possess their lands, that then they may lawfully vi fy armis expel or destroy them, as the Spaniards did! We may send Mr. Palmer for further instruction in this point to Balaam's ass, which ingenuously acknowledged that her master (though an infidel) had a property in, and right of dominion over her, Numb. 22. 30. But this gentleman hath some other assertions which he would have us take for postulata, and then we shall be his slaves without all peradventures. He tells us in page 17, 18, 19, that the English plantations (in particulur New-England^) are no parts of the empire of England, but like Wales and Ireland, which were conquered, and belong to the dominion of the crown o/-England, and that therefore he that wears the crown, may set up governments over them, which are despotick and absolute, without any regard to Magna Charta, and that whereas in Barbadoes, Jamaica, Virginia. fyc. they have their assemblies, that is only from the favor of the prince, and not that they could pretend right to such privileges of Englishmen.
And now we need no further discovery of the man. Could the people of New-England who are zealous for English liberties ever endure it long, that such a person as this should be made one of the\r judges, that by squeezing of them, he might be able to pay his debts? And can any rational man believe, that persons of such principles did not tyrannize over that people when once they had them in their cruel clutches, and could pretend the authority of the late king James for what they did? in our opinion Mr. Palmer hath not done like a wise man thus to expose himself to the just resentments and indignation of all the English plantations. If ever it should be his chance to be amongst them again, what could he expect but to be looked on as communis hostis, when he thus openly declares that they have no English liberties belonging to them ?— That worthy gentleman Sir William Jones (who was Attorney General in the reign of king Charles the second) had certainly more understanding in the law than Captain Palmer, and yet Captain Palmer (we suppose) is not ignorant that when some proposed, that Jamaica (and so the other plantations) might be governed without any assembly, that excellency Attorney (not like Captain Palmer but like an Englishman) told the then king, that he could no more grant a commission to levy money on his subjects there without their consent by an assembly, than they could discharge themselves jrom their allegiance to the English crown; and what Englishmen in their right wits will venture their lives over the seas to enlarge the king's dominions, and to enrich and greaten the English nation, if all the reward they shall have for their cost and adventures shall be their being deprived of English liberties, and in the same condition with the slaves in France or in Turky! And if the colonies of NewEngland are not to be esteemed as parts of England, why then were the quo warranto's issued out against the government in Boston as belonging to Westminster in Middlesex! Are the English there, like the Welsh and Irish a conquered people? When Mr. Palmer hath proved that he hath said something. They have (through the mercy of God) obtained conquests over many of their enemies, both Indians and French, to the enlargement of the English dominions. But except Mr. Palmer and the rest of that crew will say, that his and their domineering a while was a conquest, they were never yet a conquered people. So that his alledging the case of Wales and Ireland before English liberties were granted to them, is an impertinent story. Besides, he forgets that there was an original contract between the king and the first planters in New-England, the king promising them, if they at their own cost and charge would subdue a wilderness, and enlarge his dominions, they and their posterity after them should enjoy such privileges as are in their charters expressed, of which that of not having taxes imposed on them without their own consent was one. Mr. Palmer and his brethren oppressors will readily reply, their charter was condemned. But he cannot think, that the judgment against their charter made them cease to be Englishmen. And only the colony of the Massachusetts had their charter condemned. And yet these men ventured to levy monies on the king's subjects in Connecticut colony. For the which invasion of liberty and property they can never answer. Indeed they say the corporation of Connecticut surrendered their charter. But who told them so? It is certain, that no one belonging to the government there, knoweth of any such thing; and how their oppressors should know that Connecticut made a surrender of their charter when the persons concerned know nothing of it, is very strange. We can produce that written by the secretary of that colony with his own hand, and also signed by the present governor there, which declares the contrary to what these men (as untruly as boldly) affirm. Witness the words following.