Browsing named entities in George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition.. You can also browse the collection for 1644 AD or search for 1644 AD in all documents.

Your search returned 8 results in 4 document sections:

repared by the vindictive ferocity of the natives, with whom a state of hostility had been of long continuance. In 1643, it was enacted by the assembly, that no terms of peace should be entertained with the Indians; whom it was usual to distress by sudden marches against their settlements. But the Indians had now heard of 1644 the dissensions in England, and taking counsel of their passions, rather than of their prudence, they resolved on one more attempt at a general massacre Chap. VI.} 1644. believing that, by midnight incursions, the destruction of the cattle and the fields of corn, they might succeed in famishing the remnant of the colonists whom they should not be able to murder by surprise. On the eighteenth day of April, The reader is cautioned against the inaccuracies of Beverley, Oldmixon, and, on this subject, of Burk. See Winthrop's Journal, II. 165. Compare the note of Savage, whose sagacious conjecture is confirmed in Hening, i. 290, Act 4, session of February,
desert the Bay of Massachusetts for the Chesapeake. Winthrop, II. 148, 149. But secret dangers existed. The aborigines, alarmed at the rapid increase of the Europeans, vexed at being frequently overreached by their cupidity, com- 1642 to 1644. menced hostilities; for the Indians, ignorant of the remedy of redress, always plan retaliation. After a war of frontier aggressions, marked by no decisive events, peace was reestablished on the usual terms of submission and promises of friendshing to be hoped from royal patronage, he declared for the popular party, and, with the assistance of one Ingle, who obtained sufficient notoriety to be proclaimed a traitor to the king, Bacon's Preface. Chalmers, 217. he was able to promote a 1644. Jan. rebellion. By the very nature of the proprietary frame of government, the lord paramount could derive physical strength and resources only from his own private fortunes, or from the willing attachment of his lieges. His power depended on a
y of the patricians was long maintained sometimes by wise delay, sometimes by a judicious sermon; till, at last, a compromise divided the court into two branches, 1644. Mar and gave to each a negative on the other. The controversy had required the arbitrament of the elders; for the rock on which the state rested was religion; f Providence. It is Mr. Cotton's Letter, lately printed, Examined and Answered. By Roger Williams, of Providence, in New England. London. Imprinted in the yeere 1644. Small 4 to. pp. 47. It is preceded by an address of two pages to the Impartial Reader. With corresponding distinctness he foresaw the influence of his principles A new rule of practice by immediate revelations, was now to be the guide of their conduct; not that they expected a revelation Welde, 45, ed. 1692, or 42, ed. 1644. in the way of a miracle; such an idea Anne Hutchinson rejected as a delusion; Testimony of John Cotton. in Hutchinson, II. 443. they only slighted the censure
d absolute charter II. Mass. Hist. Coll. ix. 185. of civil government for those parts of his abode. Winthrop, II. 193. Knowles, 200. See also Callender and Backus,—both very good authorities, because both followed original documents Thus 1644 Mar. 14. were the places of refuge for soul-liberty, on the Narragansett Bay, incorporated with full power and authority to rule themselves. To the Long Parliament, and especially to Sir Henry Vane, Rhode Island owes its existence as a political policy; the sentence of exile against Wheelwright was rescinded; a proposition was made to extend the franchises of the company to those who were not church members, provided a civil agreement among all the English could be formed for Chap. X.} 1644. asserting the common liberty. For this purpose letters were written to the confederated states; but the want of concert defeated the plan. The law which, nearly at the same time, threatened obstinate Anabaptists with exile, was not designed to