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 Hazard or search for Hazard in all documents.

Your search returned 80 results in 9 document sections:

George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Colonial History (search)
uld repair to this New World? The commission gave Cartier full authority to ransack the prisons; to rescue the unfortunate and the criminal; and to make up the complement of his men from their number. Thieves or homicides, the spendthrift or the fraudulent bankrupt, the debtors to justice or its victims, prisoners rightfully or wrongfully detained, excepting only those arrested for treason or counterfeiting money,—these were the people by whom the colony was, in part, to be established. Hazard, i. 19—21. The division of authority between Cartier and Ro- 1541 berval of itself defeated the enterprise. Hakluyt, III. 286—297. Roberval was ambitious of power; and Cartier desired the exclusive honor of discovery. .They neither embarked in company, nor acted in concert. Cartier sailed Holmes, in Annals, i. 70, 71, places the departure of Cartier May 23, 1540. He follows, undoubtedly, the date in Hak. III. 286; which is, however, a misprint, or an error. For, first the paten<
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter 3: (search)
in Hakluyt, III. 47. It was not difficult for Gilbert to obtain a liberal patent, The patent may be found in Hakluyt, III. 174—176; Stith's Virginia, 4, 5, 6; Hazard, i. 24—28. formed according to June 11. commercial theories of that day, and to be of perpetual efficacy, if a plantation should be established within six years.r. 25. from which the Protestants of France had been expelled. Having presented a memorial, he readily obtained from Elizabeth a paten Hakluyt, III. 297—301. Hazard, i. 33—38. as ample as that which had been conferred on Gilbert. It was drawn according to the principles of feudal law, and with strict regard to the Christian e first efforts of England in North Carolina and the final colonization of Virginia. The colonists at Roanoke had emigrated with a charter; the new instrument Hazard, i. 42—45. was not an assignment of 1589 Mar. 7 Raleigh's patent, but extended a grant, already held under its sanction, by increasing the number to whom the
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter 4: (search)
f Popham and Gorges, Gorges, c. v. and VI. applied to James I. for leave to deduce a colony into Virginia, the monarch promoted the April 10. noble work by readily issuing an ample patent. The first colonial charter; See the charter, in Hazard, i. 51—58; Stith's Appendix, 1—8 Hening's Statutes of Virginia at large, i. 57—66. In referring to this collection, I cannot but add, that no other state in the Union possesses so excellent a work on its legislative history. under which the Englcome a very powerful body, without any regard to the rights or wishes of those who had already emigrated under the sanction of existing laws, the constitution of Virginia was radically May 23. changed. The new charter In Hening, Stith, and Hazard, II. transferred to the company the powers which had before been reserved to the king. The supreme council in England was now to be chosen by the stockholders themselves, and, in the exercise of the powers of legislation and government, was inde<
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter 5: (search)
lavery, This may be inferred from a paper on Virginia, in Thurloe, v. 81, or Hazard, i. 601. though the laws of the colony, at a very early period Chap. V} discosly. See Cobbett's Parl. Hist. i. 1489—1497. The commons acted by petition. Hazard, i. 193. which was followed by a royal proclamation. Hazard, i. 193—198. SeHazard, i. 193—198. Sept 29 The people of England could not have given a more earnest proof of their disposition to foster the plantations in America, than by restraining all competition he commissioners arrived from the colony, and made their report to the king. Hazard, i. 190, 191. Burk, i. 291, 292. They enumerated the disasters which had befalall to the Dissolution of the Virginia Company; London, 1651, p. 15. See, also, Hazard, l. 191; Chalmers, 62; Proud's Pennsylvania, i. 107 and the patents were cancelt faction, but formed the administration on the principles of accommodation. Hazard, i. 189. 192. Burk, II. 11, from ancient records. The vanity of the 1625 mona<
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter VI (search)
ablished as usages by his salutary neglect. Hazard, i. 202—205. Burk, II. 14, 15. There is nem. In the Mar. 4. commission now issued, Hazard, i. 230—234. the monarch expressed his desire an the king proceeded to issue a commission Hazard, i. 234—239. to John Harvey. The tenor of the Francis 1639. Nov. Wyatt Rymer, XX. 484. Hazard, i. 477. Savage on Winthrop, II. 160, 161. Hed Chap. VI.} 1651. Oct. 14. at Jamestown. Hazard, i. 553 and 558. But would Virginia resist theroyal ordinance imposed on its consumption. Hazard, i. 49, 50. When the weed had evidently becomess the heavy impost had been paid; May 25. Hazard, i. 89. a proclamation enforced the royal decrtures in America were at liberty to reject. Hazard, i. 634, 635. The memorable ordinance of 1were entirely disregarded. Thurloe, v. 80. Hazard, i. 599—602. A remonstrance, addressed to Crom time referred to in the rambling complaint in Hazard, i. 600, and still more in the very rare littl[10 more.
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter VII (search)
y King James a 1624 member of the council; Hazard, i. 189. and, on the accession of Charles, wast also near the mouth of the Susquehannah. Hazard, i. 430. Relation of Maryland, 34. Thurloe, v. 486. Hazard, i. 630. Maryland Papers, in Chalmers, 233.Thus the Chap. VII.} colony of Virginia n a colony from which the careful exclusion Hazard, i. 72 of Roman Catholics had been originally espondence between the respective colonies. Hazard, i. 337. Bozman, 381 and 265. Chalmers, 231 nted its commissioners. In the ordinance Hazard, i. 636. for the reduction of the rebellious he Bay of the Chesapeake; Thurloe, i. 198. Hazard, i. 557. Hammond, 20, 21. and it must be allo 1654, as Strong asserts. McMahon, 206, cites Hazard doubtingly. Bacon, 1654, c. XLV. Hammond, 22irmness which his lieutenant had displayed. Hazard, i. 629. Strong. The pretended assembly was eise of power. Thurloe, i. 724, and IV. 55. Hazard, i. 594, quotes but one of the rescripts. Ham[4 more...]
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter 8: (search)
all the profits to be derived from America; while the interests of the nation were boldly sustained by others, who were desirous that no monopoly should be conceded to either company. The remonstrances of the Virginia corporation, Stith. 185. Hazard, i. 390. and a transient regard for the rights of the country, could delay, but not defeat, a measure that was sustained by the personal favorites of the monarch. After two years entreaty, the ambitious adventurers gained 1620 Nov. 3. every thihad solicited; and King James issued to forty of his subjects, some of them members of his household and his government, the most wealthy Chap. VIII.} 1620. and powerful of the English nobility, a patent, Trumbull's Connecticut, i. 546—567. Hazard, i. 103—118. Baylies, i. 160—185. Compare Hubbard, c. XXX.; Chalmers, 81—85. which 1620. in American annals, and even in the history of the world, has but one parallel. The adventurers and their successors were incorporated as The Council es
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter 9: (search)
Hist. Coll. i. 125—139; Smith, in III. Mass. Hist. Coll. III. 25; Hazard, i. 151—155. Compare Prince, Morton, Hutchinson, Belknap, and Chal9 Nov. 7. procure a new patent; and he now received a fresh <*> Hazard, i. 290—293.to the territory between the Merrimac and Chap IX.} Pi. 10. St. Croix, and south of the St. Lawrence. The patent is in Hazard, v. i. p. 134—145; in Purchas, v. IV. p. 1871. See, also, Gorges' Nr all the prerogatives with which he had been lavishly invested, Hazard, i. 206, and ff. Biog. Brit. sub voce Alexander. with the right of, England Chap IX.} 1629 May. was without a rival. Memoires, in Hazard, i. 285—287. Charlevoix, i. 165, and ff. Compare, also, Haliburtoneness of falsehood; and it was readily agreed to restore Quebec. Hazard, i. 314, 315. Perhaps an indifference to the issue prevailed in Fraton and undefined Acadia. Charlevoix, i. 176. Winthrop, i. 13. Hazard, i. 319, 320. Williamson, i. 246, 247. Dummer's Memorial, in I
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter 10: (search)
enturers were encouraged by a proclamation, Hazard, i. 311, 312. 1630 Nov. 24. which, with a vieand. Winthrop, i. 135. 137. Hubbard, 153. Hazard, i. 341, 342. To this requisition the emigranterties prejudicial to the royal prerogative Hazard, i. 344—347. Hubbard, 264—268. Hutchinson, i Gorges, b. II. c. II. Hubbard, 226—229. Hazard, i. 383 Thus far all went smoothly; it wasny, distinctly avowed in their public acts. Hazard, i. 382. 390—394. Now was the season of grittle intrigue to renew. Winthrop, II. 12. Hazard, i. 403. The severe censures in the Star Ce fury of the bishops. Rushworth, II. 410. Hazard, i. 420. Neal's Puritans. Nugent's Hampden. sued to prevent the emigration of Puritans; Hazard, i. 421. the king refused his dissenting subje Connecticut, put him to death. Records, in Hazard, II. 7—13. I. Mather's Ind. Troubles, 56, 57. ceful intercourse with Manhattan continued. Hazard, II., has all the documents on this subject [15 mor