462
Court at Hartford did not pay any attention to the latter part of the business on which Baker &Hand were sent. This poor woman had a trial in E. Hampton for Witchcraft, but nothing wasdone. It was referred to the Gen' Court at Hartford .
At this day it appears surprising that not only those who settled in the American Wilderness shouldbe so infatuated about Witches and Witchcraft but that King James I. , Lord Justice Holt and someof the first characters in the English Nation should be so carried away with notions of this kind. Ifthe aflair of witches has made more noise in this country than it has in some Countries of Europe , itis not owing to their having been more executed for that supposed crime here : for I have no doubtthere has been, during the same time, as many executed in England only, as there have been in allNew England & Virginia, for it was not confined to New England but prevailed also in other parts.In Europe , the execution of a few individuals would be effaced from the page of History by moreimportant events that were continually taking place during the last century. But in this country itwas a singular affair, & has been handed down by our own writers, and dwelt upon, with wonder, byEuropean writers who have endeavored to account for it from the enthusiastic ideas of the Inhabi-tants here, not considering that they acquired these ideas in Europe from books published by men ofcharacter & information. It is to be hoped this infatuation is done away among the Citizens of bothsides of the Atlantic but it is not justice for one side to suppose that this infatuation prevailed onlyon the other. If King James , Lord Holt and others of information, who believed in witchcraft, areexcusable, certainly those persecuted exiles who fled to a savage wilderness are equally clear of blame.Perhaps the law of Moses by which in many cases the first settlers were governed, was a Mean ofurging them on in the belief of Witchcraft and its evils.
“ November 29. 1662. It is jointly & fully agreed that Mr. T. Baker, M r Tho‘ James, & M r LionGardiner , M r Robert Bond, Mr John Mulford, Tho” Tomson and Tho* Chatfield shall go to South-ampton the next second day to compound a difference between Us & Capt. John Scott Esq r and MrJohn Ogden about Meantaquit, and do hereby engage to ratifie and confirm what our committee shallconclude upon : & also we do empower this our Committee to joyne with Southampton and Southoldabout a Patten grant.”
To whom they proposed to apply for a Patent I dont know. New York was then in the hands ofthe Dutch. It was either to King Charles 2 nd or to the Government of Connecticut .
“Novemb: 23 1663. A committee was appointed to Join Southampton & Southold Committeesand if they see cause, to establish laws for settling government amongst us, And what our Com-mittee or a Major part of them shall doe herein we engage ourselves to stand unto.”
It was, doubtless in contemplation to have the three towns join in one government as offer townson this continent have done.
“ February 23. 1663. [o. s. ] It was agreed that Muntauk shall pay fifty pounds of the 150 thatis to purchase the pattent right.”
March 25. At a Town Meeting, after long debate, it was agreed to that the Purchase of Pattentright should be borne by all the Inhabitants according to the land every Man Possesses.
“April 26. 1664. At a Town Meeting the Town doth desire those men, that doe goe to Hartford ,to debate together with the Neighbouring Plantations for the things of Mutual Government betweenHartford & Us for our future Settlement, but to conclude of nothing, as understanding that the Gov-ernour will come over, or a Committee from the General Court.”
“ Dec 21, 1664. The inhabitants of this Town—understanding that we are off from Connecticut ,and the magistrates not willing to act further on that account, that we may not be without laws &Government, it is agieed the former laws shall stand in force till we have further order from York .It is agreed that the Constable of the Town shall be secured by the Town for not gathering the Rates.
The “ rates” referred to in this Resolve probably refers to the adjudication that was made at New