n of a Congregational Church at New Plymouth, and
imbibes his views; and forthwith sets himself to abolish the old Church,
and found a new one, and proceeds at length to banish as seditious and
mutinous those who would not forsake the old way of worship and follow
him in his new way of worship.

Some of the above quoted language of Dr. Palfrey and Mr. Bancroft
implies improper conduct on the part of the brothers Brown, for which
they were banished. Even if that were so, their position of unchangeable
loyalty to their post and of good faith to their Company might be
pleaded in justification of the strongest language on their part. But
such was not the fact; it was their _position_, and not their language
or tempers. Mr. Bancroft himself says, in the American edition of his
History, that "the Browns were banished _because they were Churchmen.
Thus was Episcopacy professed in Massachusetts, and thus was it exiled.
The blessings of the promised land were to be kept for Puritan
dissenters_."[37] This statement of Mr. Bancroft is confirmed and the
conduct of Endicot more specifically stated by earlier New England
historians. In the "Ecclesiastical History of Massachusetts," reprinted
by the Massachusetts Historical Society, the whole affair is minutely
related. The following passages are sufficient for my purpose:

"An opposition of some consequence arose from several persons of
influence, who had been active in promoting the settlement of the place.
At the head of this were Mr. Samuel Brown and Mr. John Brown, the one a
lawyer and the other a merchant, who were attached to the form and usage
of the Church of England. The ministers [Higginson and Skelton],
assisted by Mr. Endicot, endeavoured to bring them over to the practice
of the Puritans, but without success." "These gentlemen, with others,
were conscientious Churchmen, and desired to use the Liturgy, and for
this purpose met in their own houses. The magistrates, or rather Mr.
Endicot, sent to demand a reason for their separation. They answered,
that as they were of the Church established by law in their native
country, it was highly proper they should worship God as the Government
required, from whom they had received their Charter. Surely they might
be allowed that _liberty of conscience_ which all conceived to be
reasonable when they were on the other side of the water. But these
arguments were called _seditious_ and _mutinous_."

"Mr. Bentley imputes the errors of