RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW.

ARTICLE 20.

A General History of Connecticut, from its first settlement under George Fenwick, Esq. to its latest period of amity with Great Britain; including a description of the country, and many curious and interesting anecdotes. To which is added an Appendix, wherein new, and the true sources of the present rebellion in America, are pointed out; together with the particular part taken by the people of Connecticut in its promotion. By a gentleman of the province. Plus apud me ratio valebit, quam vulgi opinio. Cic. Parad. 1. London; printed for the author, &c. 1781. pp. 436. BEFORE the American revolution, the knowledge even of well informed Europeans, respecting the present territory of the United States, was extremely circumscribed. Very little correct information concerning the British colonies had been given to the publick; curiosity to learn their extent, population, state of improvement, and the genius and character of the inhabitants had been but partially excited; and the great body of the people of Europe knew, and cared as little about us or our concerns, as we do, at the present moment, about the territories of the Prince of Nizam, or of the inhabitants and internal policy of the kingdom of Pegu. Ignorance, as has been often remarked, is the parent of credulity; and so ready are mankind in general to give credit to the marvellous, in descriptions of new and distant regions, that a traveller from our western wilderness, or from the interiour of Africa, who should fail to introduce to our acquaintance a host of "gorgons and hydras, and chimeras dire," would certainly be thought to have travelled to very little purpose, and perhaps be denounced as an impostor, who was endeavouring to palm upon the world a fictitious narrative. It is to the deficiency of authentick information respecting this country, and to the strong propensity of the human mind to listen to tales of fiction and exaggeration, that we are to attribute the credit which has been acquired, and which is in some degree still maintained by the "General History of Connecticut."

This history of Connecticut has been universally ascribed to the Rev. Samuel Peters, L L. D. who, at the commencement of the American revolution, was the episcopal clergyman at Hebron, in that state. When the attempt was made to enforce the stamp act, Dr. Peters discovered, both in his publick and private deportment, a strong disposition to aid the stamp officers in the execution of their duty. To escape the fury of an exasperated people, he soon after fled to England. In this state of exile from his country, partly, to revenge himself upon the people of Connecticut, by whom, in his apprehension, he had been greatly injured; partly, to recommend himself to the English government; and partly, and as we presume chiefly, to write something which would sell; he wrote and published the volume which is the subject of this review.

This history, so far as we have been able to learn, has never been expressly disclaimed by Dr. Peters. Since, however, the discontinuance of his pension from the English government, and the failure of his schemes of ecclesiastical promotion, other subjects of history have occupied his attention; and he has, at times, treated with apparent contempt, and affected even to disown this literary offspring of his earlier days. Whether he has been prompted to this course of conduct by the fear that the "General History of Connecticut" will ultimately disgrace its author, or by the no less natural apprehension, that the credit of the history must decline, in exact proportion as it is believed to be the production of his pen, is a point of more difficulty than importance to decide. Whatever may be his motive for pretending some mystery on this subject; no one acquainted with Dr. Peters will ever think of ascribing this work to any person but himself; and if it be inquired what chance the history itself possesses, if abandoned by its author, of rising superiour to the baseness of its origin, we are constrained to declare, that the ill-fated performance seems doomed still to be known under the no very equivocal appellation of "Peters's History of Connecticut."

Dr. Peters, in his declarations of impartiality and strict adherence to truth in the composition of his history, is not surpassed by Diedrick Knickerbocker himself. In his preface, he informs his readers, very gravely, that his “sole aim has been to represent the country, the people, and their transactions, in proper colours;" that he has "followed the line 35

VOL. VIII.

of truth freely, and unbiassed by partiality or prejudice ;" and whatever other historical requisite his volume may want, it must, he thinks, "be allowed to possess originality and truth."

Notwithstanding these strong asseverations, the work, in every part of it, exhibits the most notorious disregard to facts and authorities; and just about as much of the real history of Connecticut is to be obtained from its pages, as may be obtain: ed of the histories of France, Spain, or Italy, from the romances of the middle ages.

The original settlement of the state, the acquisition of the lands from the natives, the situation and character of the savages, the treatment which they received from the English, and the character and conduct of the first colonists themselves, furnish the author with themes of very ample abuse and misrepresentation. He seems not to have been unmindful of the peculiar advantages afforded him by this part of his story; and the simple tale of the first settlement of Connecti cut, and the early transactions of its government, have suffered, under his management, the most violent transformations. In opposition to "Mather, Neal, Hutchinson, and other writers of New England history, who," we are informed, "have uniformly deviated from the truth in representing Connecticut as having been first settled by emigrants from their darling Massachusetts bay;" we find that "in 1634, the first part of English adventurers arrived in Connecticut from England, under the conduct of George Fenwick, Esq. and the Rev. Thomas Peters, and established themselves at the mouth of the river Connecticut, where they built a town which they called Saybrook, a church and a fort." Dr. Peters, unintentionally we presume, has, in most of his perversions of the history of Connecticut, introduced some circumstances which satisfactorily account for his conduct. His strong desire to elevate himself and family, which is so apparent in this history; and, at the same time, his wish to blacken the character of the people of Connecticut, furnish a clue, in this labyrinth of errour, which will, almost invariably, guide the reader to the truth. This story, therefore, of the settlement of Saybrook, is evidently fabricated, that the Rev. Thomas Peters may appear as one of the fathers of Connecticut, as we are informed he was a "churchman of the puritanick order, zealous, learned, and of a mild disposition;" and that he "estab

lished a school in Saybrook, which his children had the satisfaction to see become a college, denominated Yale College"! The territory of Connecticut, it is well known, was originally possessed by a great number of petty sachems, who, in the exercise of their authority, were in a great measure independent of each other. Nothing like a subordination to any chief sachem was found among them.

Dr. Peters, however, gives a different representation. "The invaders," says he, "did not find Connecticut in a state of nature, but cultivated and settled by its Indian inhabitants, whose numbers were thousands, and who had three kings, viz. Connecticote, Quinnipiog, and Sassacus, of whom Connecticote was emperour, or king of kings; a dignity he and his ancestors had enjoyed, according to the Indian mode of reckoning, twenty sticks, i. e. time immemorial." (P. 28.) All this is told, undoubtedly, that the injustice and cruelty of the first emigrants to Connecticut may be put beyond doubt, for we have it, on the same authority, that these three sachems, with their wives and children, were killed by the English." (P. 22.) The account of the death of Quinnipiog will serve as a specimen of this part of the performance.

"Exact in tything, mint and anise, the furies of New Haven for once affected the weightier matters of justice. They had no title to the land: they applied to Quinnipiog, the sachem, for a deed or grant of it. The. sachem refused to give the lands of his ancestors to strangers. The settlers had teeming inventions, and immediately voted themselves to be the children of God, and that the wilderness in the utmost parts of the earth was given to them. This vote became a law for ever after. It is true, Davenport endeavoured to christianize Quinnipiog, but in vain ; however, he converted Sunksquaw, one of his subjects, by presents and great promises; and then Sunksquaw betrayed his master, and the settlers killed him. This assassination of Quinnipiog brought on a war between the English and Indians, which never ended by treaty of peace. The Indians, having only bows and arrows, were driven back into the woods; whilst the English, with their swords and guns, kept possession of the country. But, conscious of their want of title to it, they voted Sunksquaw to be sachem, and that whoever disputed his authority should suffer death. Sunksquaw, in return, assigned to the English those lands of which they had made him sachem. Lo! here is all the title the settlers of the dominion of New Haven ever obtained." (P. 60.)

The account which is given of the acquisition of other parts of the state, agrees with this in every important particu lar. The whole is so notoriously false, that any attempt at refutation, would be superfluous. The following sweeping

clause, as it contains, according to Dr. Peters, an account of the manner in which the first colonists of Connecticut proved their title to their lands, may not be unentertaining to the reader.

"In short, and upon the whole, possession, begun in usurpation, is the best title the inhabitants of Connecticut ever had or can set up, unless they can prove they hold the lands by a heavenly grant, as the Israelites did those of Canaan. This heavenly title was, indeed, set up by Peters, Hooker, and Davenport, the three first ministers that settled in Connecticut; and is generally believed through the colony to this day. They thus syllogistically stated it: The beatben are driven out, and we have their lands in possession; they were numerous, and we but few; therefore, the Lord hath done this great work, to give his beloved rest.” (P. 31.)

The reader who shall expect to find, in this work, any thing more than a very imperfect account of the form of government instituted in Connecticut, the union of the two colonies of Hartford and New Haven, and the various transactions of the government of the state, from the time of the union to the commencement of the revolution, will find himself not a little disappointed. The rest of the volume is made up of descriptions of the several towns, into which Connecticut was divided at the time the author left the country. These descriptions he generally commences with a few geographical sketches, some of which are substantially correct, while others are drawn entirely from fancy. As a specimen of extraordinary exaggeration, we give the following extract from his description of the town of New Haven.

"New Haven township comprises fourteen parishes; three of them Episcopal, and one Sandemanian. The town being the most beautiful in New England, if not in all America, is entitled to a minute description. It is bounded southerly by the bay into which the river Quinnipiack empties itself; easterly and westerly, by two creeks two miles asunder; and northerly, by a lofty mountain, that extends even to the river St. Lawrence, and forms a high land between the rivers Hudson and Connecticut; standing in a plain, three miles by two in extent. This plain is divided into three hundred squares, of the size of Bloomsbury square, with streets twenty yards between each division. Forty of these squares are already built upon, having houses of brick and wood on each front, about five yards asunder, every house with a garden which produces vegetables sufficient for the family. Two hundred houses are annually erected. Elms and button trees surround the centre square, wherein are two meetings, the court house, the jail, and Latin school; in the fronts of the adjoining squares are Yale College, the chapel, a meeting, and a church; all these grand buildings with steeples and bells.— Their shipping, of different burthens, consists of two hundred sail.” (P. 184.)