A Test of Puritan Justice

Abstract

AMERICAN historians in recent years have successfully removed from the New England Puritans most of the stigmata that had been attached to them by earlier scholars. Most present-day students of history are quite willing to acknowledge the sweet reasonableness of the Puritans in literature, theology, daily life, and even-with some minor reservationsin political administration.' But at least one aspect of Puritan society remains under a cloud: its treatment of its Indian neighbors. The French in Canada and the Quakers in Pennsylvania are acknowledged to have been considerate of the rights and wishes of their native populations, but the dealings of the Puritans with the New England tribes usually have been ignored or sharply criticized. Aggressive and merciless warfare, arbitrary confinement of Indians to reservations, and swindling and greedy trade practices are among the charges frequently leveled at the New England colonists.2 And almost without exception, historians have assumed that the Indian, even when he had recourse to a colonial court of law, stood no chance of impartial justice. While it would be reckless to deny that injustices did on occasion take place in early New England, there is much to be said in rebuttal to the accepted stereo-