Colonial Law Quotes
The code provided for trial by jury and for proportional taxation on property. It was called “The Duke’s Laws” in recognition of the English Duke of York from whom authority in the colony then derived as the English supplanted the Dutch.
Most of the Colonies had laws against Indians possessing guns and any white seeing such was allowed to attack such Indians. Rhode Island had peaceful relations with the Indians and not only allowed Indians to carry firearms for hunting but hired them to do the hunting as they were better at it and did not value their time as highly as the whites. However, travelers coming from out of the colony would see an Indian with a gun, and shoot at him thereby killing or injuring friendly Indians and causing racial problems when there were few. The quotation also illustrates that there was little uniformity amongst the colonies as to how to deal with their various social and political problems.
Lopez had come from Portugal and had been living in Rhode Island for 9 years and was active in shipping, whaling and candle making. He, and another Jew, Issac Elizer, petitioned the Rhode Island Superior Court for naturalization and citizenship rights. The court turned them down and they appealed to the Rhode Island Assembly—then not only the legislature but the highest court in the colony. The assembly came up with a compromise. The Jews were allowed to continue to live and work in Rhode Island but they could not hold public office or vote. They told the Superior Court to reconsider the case however as Lopez and Elizer were model citizens—but for religion just the kind the colony wanted. This case and many others were known to the founding fathers who were determined to put a stop to the practice of conditioning voting and office holding rights on adhering to the particular sect of the majority of the colony. Lopez and Elizer then appealed again to the Superior Court.
Racial intermarriage was quite common in Colonial America. Virginia passed this law—the first of many in Virginia to try and eliminate miscegenation—which they never did.
Member of the Triumvirate. This was the set of laws for the Roman colony in Urso, Spain. It is much like Roman law and it is very valuable because so much of it has been preserved whereas the laws of Rome itself comes to us in fragments and from secondary sources. There was no right of assembly in the dictatorial Roman Empire and a person needed approval even to stage a play. This law was actually drafted by Julius Caesar. Antony later issued it.
Interestingly, before 1705, there was no legislative prohibition against Indians and Free Negroes being full citizens including holding public office and voting. This act prohibited them from holding public office, but did not prohibit them from Voting provided they met the general voting requirement of being a landholder. However, 18 years later, voting by these minorities was no longer allowed. See Quotation 643588.
The colony created out of a political dispute with the Massachusetts Bay Colony, was created when in June of 1636, Hooker and his entire congregation, driving their cattle and carting their belongings, left Massachusetts and set out for the Connecticut Valley, founding Hartford and a new colony. The following year the constitution was written and ratified. It was in many ways similar to the Massachusetts legal system except that it was written and could not easily be changed. However, there were two important historical innovations. First, while Massachusetts had limited voting rights to members in good standing of the Puritan Church, The Fundamental Orders provided for separation of church and state and allowed others (males only) to vote as well. See {624151}. The other innovation was that this appears to be the first introduction of term limits in America. It limited the Governor to a single term, unlike Massachusetts where Governor Winthrop was a fixture.
Many modern Americans who look to the founding fathers for modern guidance regarding gun rights, foreign policy, and many other facets of government are shocked to learn that there was almost unanimous opposition to maintaining a standing army in times of peace. That there was very little concept of military preparedness.
