New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-02-21

viii no. say q the S.pAratists were won't
to cay a: their leaving of England, "Fsre'
well, Babylon, farewell, Rome. But We will
,sy, Farewell, dear England, Farewell, the
church Of God in England, and all the Christian
friends there" On this DR.. PaIffey quietly re-
marks, 4" IL 10 rot Necessary here to raise the
general question Of the trustworthiness Of the
tstimsny of Cotton Mather. Ii is enough TO say
that in this instance, be is testifying in 1907 to
words represented 70 have been uttered in 1929
on the other side Of the water"
In Ike msnner, DR.. Palfrey estimates the pro.
ceedipgs Of the coonists in the celebrated contro-
yersies with Roger Williams and Ann Hutchinson,
from their relation to the political, rather than the
religious, wel-beins Of the iafant common wealth.
The view which he presents Of these prominent in
dividuals is widely different from that maintained
BY Bancroft and other champions Of the widest
mental freedom, and shows far deeper sympathy
with the conservative principle Of the Common
wealth than. with the progress Of thought in the
pursuit Of truth. He however argues the csuse
of the established authorities as against innovation
and radicalism, with earnestness and zeal, though
room for opposite convictions.
TWAS not so much the Biological opinions pro-
pounded by Williams, according to author. that
excited the displeasure of the magistrates as the
bold assaults on their authority BY hot-headed
youpg map, from the FIRST pulpit of the colony.
This they believed to be incompatible with good
government and the public peace. His position
with regard to the right Of the coil was deemed by
the magistrates to be fraught with danger. 1t
called in question both the validity Of the Kings
grant, and the legitimacy Of possession BY the
coonists. This could be obtained, according to
Williams, in no other way than BY compromising
with the natives Hence, his doctrine tended not
only to bring into question the titles Of estates, but
to occasion high dispessure at the English Court
His own line Of conduct moreover, irrespective OF
bis opinions served 10 ALLEVIATE him from the COM
monweath, of which no was member. He de-
nOunced the magistrates, and accommodated all
churches but his own. Even with that he re-
nounced fellowship, because it would not withdraw
from the communion of the other churches. He
refused to join in family prayer or grace at table
with his own wife, because she was unwilling to
comply with bis INJUNCTION Of e1clusiyeness. As
Dr. Palfrey somewhat quantity remarks: "While
the imputed intolerance of others provoked Will
liams's vehement displeasure, he INDUCED himself
in the largest liberty Of being exclusive in ways of
his OVID" BY this time the authorities had come
10 the conclusion that Williams and their cOnstitu-
ehts could not advsntageously live together, and it
was not difficult to infer that be could much more
easily remove than they. DR.. Palfrey argues, and
with considerable show of reason, that the sound
and general principle Of perfect freedom Of the
conscience in religious concerns can hardly W
proved to have been involved in this dispute.
There was no question on dogmas between VIII
Gams and the magistrates. Az long as he was in
Massachusetts, he was NOT charged with heresy.
The questions which provoked opposition related
solely to political rights and to the administration
Of government. He was banshed from Massachu-
setts, not by the clergy, but BY the magistrates;
not for theological dissent, but for civil turbulence.
DIR. Palfrey discusses in . similar vein the CON-
motion excited by Ann Hutchinson. But We will
present his views on this topic in his own words,
especially as the passage which We quote contains
the most complete exhibition of bis theory as to the
design Of the Massachusetts, colOnists, which is TO
be found in the volume.
II would be an unjust representation Of the case
of Mrs. Hutchinson and her psrtsans, to allege that
they were punished for entertaining opinions dissste-
full TO their associates dark questions OF theology.
Il is not enough to object TO that view thst would
not accord with the recognised habit OF the time and
place. Reasoning on any obvious principles Oh human
nature-especiay of the nature Of such men ss then
had the trust Of the common veal in Massachusetts,
il 10 impossible for who takes due note OF the ex
stpg state of things TO Justify that Interpretation of
their proceedings. They stood between two great
pers on the one hand, rupture with the most for
mdabe VI the native tribes, accompanied by the im-
ninent danger of it's becoming allied with tho tribe
next in force and consequently with oil the tribes OF
lees confederation the other hand, the threat OF
invasion from the parent country, danger requiring
to be parted by concentration of their resources
and by further accessiOns OF strength from abroad
such could be obtained. 1t is eKtravagant 70 suppose
that in such circumstances the fathers OF the State
would have allowed themselves ~ be diverted into
mere distroctng contest Of speculative poemcs
Men about them might look upon such questions as
the real matter In controversy and possibly the lead
ers might be willing to avail themselves OF the sur
rounding excitement FOR the aid gave to their coun
GELS for the security. But il In assuming little
for them TO say that their dscernment clearer
and their aim more practical
In the simplest form in which the controversy pre-
sents itsalf the active adberents Of Mrs Hutchison
had made themselves amensble 10 public csnsure,
principles recognized by all civilized communities.
When Greensmitb, the Oely sufferer for more than
year after the beginning the troubles, ned forty
pounds for saying that al the minister's except Cot
ton, Wbeewright, and he thought, Hooker, did teach
a covenant of works" the common case Of SANDER
had occurred. charge Of this tenor, made in the
present state Of sentiment might be regarded by masy
untrue and uDkind bat il would scarcely be felt
intolerabe afront and wrong: while 10 the men Of
whom we are speaking, life would not be worth having
if prolonged under the liability Of being met at every
corner with that accusation. In the limited vocsbu-
lazy of Hhich The nae now forbidden the law OF