| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
work in progress. | | | Executed by King James I in 1606, the first charter of the Virginia colony reserved the territory reaching from modern day South Carolina to Canada -- "that part of America commonly called Virginia" -- to the dominion of the King, and granted land use rights to the colonists. The charter extended basic English common law, "all liberties, franchises and immunities within anie (sic) of our other dominions," to the residents of Virginia. It granted them the right to import armor, weapons and munitions to be used in defense of the colony, and empowered them to use force to expel any intruders or foreigners. The first charter (and subsequent revisions) remained in force until it 1609, when it was incorporated into the first colony's first comprehensive set of laws.
Notes
:
:
:
| |
<
< | The "Lawes Divine, Morall and Martiall of the Colony of Virginea Britannia" were issued to satisfy the shareholders of the Virginia Company as much as they were to govern the colony of Virginia. The laws reflect the conditions of a harsh and disciplined lifestyle, of a colony struggling to survive. Resources were scarce; colonists could face death for bartering or trading with Indians, or for giving or selling any commodity to a mariner to be transported out of the country. Comprising the vast majority of the statutes, the Martial Laws depict a strict, Spartan society in which a soldier would be "put to death with such Armes he carry" for a whole host of infractions -- from failing to report for marching duty, to losing one's arms in battle, to mutiny. Drawing a sword within a town or garrison was punishable by the amputation of the right hand; firing a gun any place without order from a superior officer was punishable by death It was forbidden for a man to "sell, give, imbezzell, or play away his Armes, or any part thereof, upon paine of death." These early statutes reveal many of the major themes that will later dominate the laws of the Virginia Colony - strict and severe control of soldiers, a fear of Indians and foreigners, and the tight regulation of arms.
Notes
:
:
:
:
:
| >
> | The "Lawes Divine, Morall and Martiall of the Colony of Virginea Britannia" were issued to satisfy the shareholders of the Virginia Company as much as they were to govern the colony of Virginia. The laws reflect the conditions of a harsh and disciplined lifestyle, of a colony struggling to survive. Resources were scarce; colonists could face death for bartering or trading with Indians, or for giving or selling any commodity to a mariner to be transported out of the country. Comprising the vast majority of the statutes, the Martial Laws depict a strict, Spartan society in which a soldier would be "put to death with such Armes he carry" for a whole host of infractions -- from failing to report for marching duty, to losing one's arms in battle, to mutiny. Drawing a sword within a town or garrison was punishable by the amputation of the right hand; firing a gun any place without order from a superior officer was punishable by death. It was forbidden for a man to "sell, give, imbezzell, or play away his Armes, or any part thereof, upon paine of death." These early statutes reveal many of the major themes that will later dominate the laws of the Virginia Colony - strict and severe control of soldiers, a fear of Indians and foreigners, and the tight regulation of arms. | | | [*** How armed?
"Hee shall not suffer in his Garrison any Souldier to enter into Guard, or to bee drawne out into the field without being armed according to the Marshals order, which is, that every shot shall either be furnished with a quilted coate of Canvas, a headpeece, and a sword, or else with a light Armor, and Bases quilted, with which hee shall be furnished: and every Targiteer with his Bases to the small of his legge, and his headpeece, sword and pistoll, or Scuppet provided for that end. And likewise every Officer armed as before, with a firelocke, or Snaphaunse, headpeece, and a Target, onely the Serjeant in Garrison shall use his Halbert, and in field his Snaphaunse and Target." (p32)*] | | | With the reversal of the free trade law in 1665, the Virginia legislature entered another cycle of the intensification of restrictions, following by their gradual liberalization. In 1675, after noting that trade of arms with the Indians continued despite being outlawed, the General Assembly enacted more comprehensive restrictions and steeper penalties. It was now illegal to "trade, truck, barter, sell or utter, directly or indirectly, to or with any Indian any powder shott or armes," and those in violation "shall suffer death without benefitt of clergy, and shall forfeite his or their whole estates." Moreover, any person found in any Indian town or more than three miles outside of the English plantations "with powder, shott or other armes and ammunition, except one gunn and tenn charges of powder and shott for his necessary use, although he or they be not actually tradeing, trucking, bartering, selling or uttering to or with the Indians, he or they soe found, and thereof lawfully convicted shalbe adjudged guilty of selling and suffer accordingly." The statute went as far as to assert that any Indians living peacefully amongst the colonists "if they be not supplyed with matchcoates, hoes and axes to tend their corne and fence their ground, must of necessity perish of ffamine or live on rapine." A single exception to the strict provisions of this statute was made for the furnishing of a small quantities of arms to Indians employed by whites, such that "shall reasonably be thought to be usefull and to be expended by them in such their service and not otherwise." Natives could not be trusted with arms, it seems, except in the service of white men. The following year, the legislature revoked provisions which had allowed for the trade of certain non-restricted goods with the Indians, and banned all trade of any kind. An exception, however, was made for Indians in the employ of Englishmen, who could continue to collect the value of their wages.
Notes
:
:
:
:
| |
<
< | By the end of 1676, however, relations with the Indians had improved significantly. The legislature declared that "all persons have hereby liberty to sell armes and ammunition to any of his majesties loyall subjects inhabiting this colony, and that the Indians of the Easterne shore have like and equall liberty of trade or otherwayes with any other our ffriends and neighbouring Indians." The following year the legislature endorsed free trade with friendly Indians and even provided for the establishment of marts or fairs to facilitate such trade. It noted, however, "that it shall not be lawfull or permitted any Indian or Indians resorting to or meeting at any those aforesaid marts or ffaires to travell with or carry armes, or appeare there armed, except only the carrying home such armes or ammunition as they shall then and there purchase." By the early 18th century, Indians in Virginia enjoyed nearly unfettered access to guns. The only legal restriction remaining, it seems, was the requirement that Indians be unarmed when they exercises their licenses to fish in English waters. [vol 3, 467]
Notes
:
:
| >
> | By the end of 1676, however, relations with the Indians had improved significantly. The legislature declared that "all persons have hereby liberty to sell armes and ammunition to any of his majesties loyall subjects inhabiting this colony, and that the Indians of the Easterne shore have like and equall liberty of trade or otherwayes with any other our ffriends and neighbouring Indians." The following year the legislature endorsed free trade with friendly Indians and even provided for the establishment of marts or fairs to facilitate such trade. It noted, however, "that it shall not be lawfull or permitted any Indian or Indians resorting to or meeting at any those aforesaid marts or ffaires to travell with or carry armes, or appeare there armed, except only the carrying home such armes or ammunition as they shall then and there purchase." By the early 18th century, Indians in Virginia enjoyed nearly unfettered access to guns. The only legal restriction remaining, it seems, was the requirement that Indians be unarmed when they exercises their licenses to fish in English waters.
Notes
:
| | |
Slaves | | | | |
<
< |
- *Note
- This document is a little hard to read; the high resolution version was too large (~190MB) to upload here. If anyone can tell me how to upload a larger document or how to make a document smaller without losing quality, that'd be great.
| | |
| META FILEATTACHMENT | attachment="masslawexcerpts(small).pdf" attr="" comment="Duplicate (can't figure out how to delete)" date="1256462500" name="masslawexcerpts(small).pdf" path="masslawexcerpts(small).pdf" size="3865602" stream="masslawexcerpts(small).pdf" user="Main.JuliaS" version="1" |
|---|
| META FILEATTACHMENT | attachment="MassLawExcerpts(lowres).pdf" attr="" comment="Excerpts from the Colonial Laws of Massachusetts" date="1256462760" name="MassLawExcerpts(lowres).pdf" path="MassLawExcerpts(lowres).pdf" size="3865602" stream="MassLawExcerpts(lowres).pdf" user="Main.JuliaS" version="1" |
|---|
|
|