Page images

and future.


When I had read it, I asked them, whom this paper came from. They answered, all the plantation, or a great many of them at least. demanded, why then did none said, all in good time.

subscribe it. They

So I put it up in my pocket. They demanded an answer to it. I told them, I would consider of it.

28th March 1693. The abovesaid brethren, together with the said Hutchinson, came again at night for an answer to the abovesaid paper. I told them, I had not considered of it yet.

14th April 1693. Our displeased brethren, John Tarbell, Samuel Nurse, and Thomas Wilkins, came again, bringing with them said Hutchinson and Francis Nurse. After a little while, I went down from my study to them, asking them if they would speak with me. They said, yes, they came to discourse about the paper (abovesaid), they had brought to me. I told them, I had no time to talk, I was this day to preach to a private meeting. Nor was I willing to discourse with them alone; but appoint time and place, and I would meet with them. So we agreed, after our next lecture, to meet at Bro. Nathaniel Putman's.

20th April. After lecture, myself, Captain Putman, Ensign Flint, and the two Deacons, met the four displeased brethren abovesaid at Lieut. Nathaniel Putman's abovesaid, where we found together with them and for them, said Mr. Hutchinson and Mr. Israel Porter. After a little while, I told them, to gratify them, I was come to hear what they had to offer. They demanded an answer to the paper abovesaid. Whereupon I pluckt it out of my pocket, and read it openly. They owned that to be the paper. I asked them what they called it; they being to seek a name for it. I told them, I looked upon it as a libel. They then produced a like paper, subscribed by said brethren and divers more, to the num

[blocks in formation]

ber of forty and two names; but all seemed to be one and the same hand. I desired the original paper. They said, they knew not where it was. Then it was asked, whether those men wrote their own names. It was answered, yes, or they were written by their order. Then I desired them to subscribe this paper with their hands to it, testifying, that no name was there, but such as had consented thereto. But none would yield to this. Then I told them, we must know what to do. Had I to do with displeased people, or displeased brethren? They answered, they came as brethren. Then I told them, none but brethren should have been present. They said, they had been with me already, and I refused to give them satisfaction. I answered, I did not understand they had. When they came first, I did not understand their drift, and therefore did not discourse them, as I would have done, had I apprehended they came to reason as such as had taken offence. And when they came the second time, they brought but one brother, viz. William Way, and took others of themselves. Lieut. Putman said, it was not too late yet, now there were several of the brethren present, and they might take any two of them, and discourse with the Pastor. No, they said, they had done it already. Thus much time was spent till just night, and myself and other brethren upon going home. The four displeased brethren agreed to meet me to-morrow morning about an hour after sunrise, with the two Deacons, and Bro. William Way, and Bro. Aaron Way, to discourse the matter, to which I readily assented.

21st April 1693. This morning, we met as abovesaid at Deacon Ingersoll's. After a little while, I began with prayer. Then brother Nurse read a large scroll of about fifteen articles, as reasons why they withdrew communion from us. Seven of them, I think, were reasons of absenting from public wor

ship with us, and the other eight, I think, causes of separation from my ministry. I desired to see them, but was denied for a great while. At length, I had liberty to read them myself, upon the promise of returning them to them. After all, I demanded them, or a copy of them. But they would not consent thereto, nor to the desire of the other four indifferent brethren, tho' we urged it by arguments. But the dissenters said, no. They had told me, and that was enough; and they desired me to call the church, and then I should have all."

[N. B. Thus far Mr. Felt copied verbatim the Rev. Mr. Parris's account of his difficulties; but, as they are prolix, he made only the following abstract of the residue.]

Sab. 30th April 1693. A church meeting was proposed. 18th May. It was held. The displeased brethren appeared with their complaints; but it was voted, that they had proceeded disorderly; and that the church would hear these brethren, if they would bring their charges in an orderly manner.

[The following is copied verbatim.] 13th October 1693. "I received a letter from the Rev. Mr. John Higginson, directed to myself and brethren of this church. The sum whereof was, to advise us to join the complainants in calling a council of neighbouring churches, not excepting against any one on either side. Which letter, he writes, was occasioned by another letter, received from Mr. Willard in the name of the elders of Boston, directed to him, and Mr. Noyes, and Mr. Hale, to desire him to persuade us so to do. Communicated the same letter, this day, to sundry of the brethren at a private meeting at Deacon Ingersoll's."

"14th October 1693. I received a letter from Rev. Mr. Hale and Mr. Noyes, directed to myself and church, of the same tenor for substance with the abovesaid of Mr. Higginson's, only herein were sev

eral conditions, on which a council should be chosen, omitted in that."

[The following are abstracts.] Sab. 15th October, Church meeting appointed to consider the advice of the letters, and the petitions of the displeased brethren to General Court, and several remote churches. 19th October 1693. Church met, and agreed to have a mutual council.

23d October 1693. A letter was sent to the Rev. Messrs. Higginson, Noyes, and Hale, stating that the church had agreed to a council. It was signed by Rev. S. Parris, with consent of the brethren of the church.

Salem, June 14th 1694. As there was a difficulty in executing the vote for a mutual council, the following ministers sent advice of the above date to the church by all means to have a council to settle their troubles. John Higginson, James Allen, John Hale, Samuel Willard, Samuel Cheever, Nicholas Noyes (signed on condition that he should not be one of the council), Joseph Gerrish.

September 10th 1694. Similar advice was repeated by five of the preceding ministers, Mr. Noyes's name not subscribed under it.


[Written at my request, and presented to me 22 March, 1828, by the Rev. Elijah Kellogg, Missionary to the Passamaquoddy Indians from the Society for propagating the Gospel among the Indians and Others in North America.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »