IV. The Cold War of the Constables
The escalating cold-war between the two colonies prompted a meeting of Rhode Island’s governor, Benedict Arnold, with his council (being “all the magistrates of the Island, at Newport”) on July 20, 1670. The assembly determined that it had sufficient“information that some persons vnder pretence of authority audibly read in the presence of the people there assembled. from his Majesties Colony of Conecticott, are goeing about to erect a Court, or to exercise jurisdiction within the Nayhantick and Narragansitt countries granted vnto the Governor and Company of this his Majesties Colony.” The Council empowered its constables, Thomas Gould and Thomas Mumford, amongst others, to go to forthwith to the Narragansett Country “with all possible speed.” Once there, the constables were to find out if there were any persons “exercising jurisdiction vnder pretence of any such authority derived from the Colony of Conecticot.” Upon encountering any such interlopers, the constables were duty bound to “require them to leave off such actions which are contrary to his Majesties express will and pleasure.”[1]
In the event any Connecticut person refused this demand and continued to “persist in such illegal proceedings,” the constables were directed to “seize such persons and bring them before vs or some other Generall Assistant or Assistants of this Colony, to be proceeded against according to law.” Recognizing the possibility that the intruders from Connecticut might “by force resist,” Constables Gould and Mumford were instructed not to engage in violence but rather to deliver a prepared “prohibition” or pre-prepared proclamation, “audibly read in the presence of the people there assembled.”[2]Governor Arnold then ordered the Sergeant to procure a boat, belonging to Robert Carr, and to hire two men, Thomas Langford and Jacob Pender, to transport the constables to the mainland.[3]
While the Rhode Island government was meeting, Connecticut’s was moving– specifically, to Wickford.[4] Its purpose was to set up the apparatus of government there, populated by Connecticut agents and local sympathizers. In a document “dated in Wickford, June 20, 1670,” and “published” there on the following two days, Connecticut’s commissioners Allyn, Richards and Winthrop proclaimed their intent: “That the General Court of Connecticut thought it good to renew and establish gouernment againe in the sayd country, and haue commissionated us to attend and effect the same, whoe doe see cause to declare you the inhabitants of Wickford, to be under the gouernment of his Majesties Colony of Conecticat, and by authority of the aforesayd Court, we doe require you in his Majesties nameto yeild due obedience to the sayd gouernment of Conecticutt, whoe will be careful to establish necessary officers amongst you, that so you may haue equall justice administered to you and may be countenanced in ways of godliness and honesty, and enjoy your just rights without disturbance.”[5]
On June 21, Connecticut agents rode along the “King’s Highway” (Post Road) to “warne the people of Wickford” that they should attend a meeting at Captain William Hudson’s farm. Hudson was a Connnecticut partisan. Along the way they encountered Constable Mumford, who seized them, so that they could be brought in to answer to the Rhode Island authorities. Commissioners Allyn, Richards and Winthrop promptly complained that Mumford “hath assaulted and detained two of our men whoe were inoffensiuely rideing on the King's highway.” They further complained that “upon demand, you seem to deny them to our messengers.” Then the Commissioners added: [We] inform you, that as we doe undoubtedly declare you (being within the Narraganset country) to be under the gouernment of Connecticut Colony, and we are commissionated by the Generall Assembly to settle gouernment in these parts, which worke we are now about.” Finally, protesting the “insolency” of the Rhode Islanders, they demanded that it “deliver up our men” or face the consequences. [6]
On June 29, 1670, just days before Walter House’s death, the Rhode Island General Assembly met again. At least 32 men were present in an official capacity, including Deputy Governor Nicholas Easton, ten assistants (including Roger Williams and Captain John Greene) and twenty deputies (including John Clarke). This is a remarkable collection of individuals, considering that the total population of Rhode Island in 1670 is estimated to have been only 2,155 souls.[7]The agenda was long and included several administrative matters. One item, however, was momentous. It would, if carried through, likely lead to a resolution of Rhode Island’s territorial dispute with Connecticut.
The General Assembly took up this item, “to take care for present defence against the violent intrusiones and invations then made vpon the libertyes of the Collonye, in the King's Province, by Connecticut.” It decided the best approach was to send agents to England to bring the dispute directly to the Crown for resolution. Governor Benedict Arnold was elected to serve as the agent. Physician John Clarke, who had previously traveled to England to obtain the colonial charter, was named as alternate, as was John Greene. This effort would involve great expense for the colony and the assembly determined that three hundred pounds would be needed. Each of the colony’s various towns (Providence, Newport, Portsmouth, Warwick, Block Island, “Canonicut,” and “Pettaquamscott” was subject to an assessment. Westerly, sitting on the Pawcatuck River and at the very boundary line asserted by Rhode Island, was exempted from contributing. Pettaquamscutt’s share was only sixteen pounds, a judicious assessment not only because of its sparse population but also because of Connecticut’s designs upon it. The General Assembly also voted to send yet another letter of protest to Connecticut. There is no record of that letter or that Rhode Island’s agent ever actually set foot aboard a ship bound for England and the King.
V. Competing Investigations
This was the unstable state of affairs between Rhode Island and Connecticut as June transitioned into July. The epicenter was Wickford, in the disputed “King’s Province,” It was then, in early July, 1670, when Walter House’s death in Wickford was discovered and the “hue and cry” went out for the apprehension of Thomas Flounders. Immediately, a dispute arose over which colony – Connecticut or Rhode Island – had jurisdiction not only over the criminal investigation into facts of the homicide but also with respect to the apprehension and trial of its perpetrator. The winner of this dispute would de factohave a much stronger argument in favor of its boundary and governance claims.
One of the first documented references to the crime is found in a report dated “Narragansett, 11 or 12 day of July, 1670.”[8]Subscribed by Constable Samuel Eldredge, John Cole and eight other Connecticut-leaning Wickford residents. It was delivered to Thomas Stanton, Connecticut’s sergeant for the disputed lands east of the Pawcatuck.[9] The letter informed Stanton that “[a] sad accident has befallen the towne of Wickford, in Connecticut Colynye.”[10]Specifically, the “accident” was that Walter House was “murthered” by Thomas Flounders, “as we all heare.” The cause of House’s death was determined following an examination of the body and it was attested to by the signatories to the report. They found a "hole strucke in the fore parte of his head, and seuerall other bruises ; oneupon his left arme, another bruise upon his backe, which wee judge to be the cause of his death.” [11]
Word of the alleged murder reached the Rhode Island government in Newport on July 13th. Samuel Wilson and Jireh Bull, Conservators of the Peace[12]in the King’s Province, crossed over to the island and met with Governor Arnold, his Deputy Governor and their Assistants. Wilson and Bull reported that a man was “slain in the said Province, and within this Colony, who hath been illegally and disorderly buried by some persons without the view of a Coroner or inquest.”[13]The governor and his council felt it “necessary that the corps be viewed” so that there could be a “just proceeding” in such an important matter.[14]Accordingly, the Assembly ordered that Henry Palmer, the Constable of Newport, be appointed “high Constable” and that he go to the Narragansett Country as soon as possible, Immediately upon arrival there, the constable was to notify Samuel Wilson, Conservator of the Peace and “Coroner in his behalf,” as well as Conservator of the Peace Jireh Bull, that they both were to “repaire forthwith” to the spot where Walter House was buried. There, House’s body was to be exhumed and “a juries inquest to pass thereon.”[15]
The Assembly also ordered High Constable Palmer to “vse his vtmost indeavor to apprehend the person or persons suspected to be guilty” of the death of Walter House. The instructions in this regard included authorizing him to “break open any house or place” where any suspect might be believed to be hiding. [16]
No doubt mindful of the ongoing struggle with Connecticut generally over governance of the King’s Province and more acutely the events occurring in Wickford, the Assembly took action. It empowered the High Constable to “apprehend the persons that did interrupt the Conservators of the Peace in the lawful discharge of their trust,” presumably with respect to their initial efforts to investigate the case. [17] In this regard, Henry Palmer was authorized to bring these persons before the Governor and Magistrates in Newport to “answer their said contempt” of the Crown. Likewise, Palmer was “empowered and required” to arrest anyone else who attempted to “interrupt or hinder the execution of this order…”[18]
But, while Samuel Wilson and Jireh Bull were meeting with the Governor and his Council in Newport, Connecticut’s Constable Samuel Eldredge was busy in Wickford, penning another missive to his superior, Thomas Stanton, of Connecticut.[19]In this letter, Eldredge recounted events that had occurred in Wickford earlier that day. No doubt these events propelled Wilson and Bull to pay their visit to the Governor. The events are described by Eldredge in his own colorful and biased prose. He reported that Wilson, Bull and Thomas Mumford “with his black stafe” came into Wickford intent on empaneling a coroner’s jury to examine the body of Walter House. Eldredge reportedly told them “they had nothing to doe heare to panill a jury…” However, he offered that “if they would loke upon the corps they mite, which seuerill of them did.” Then, according to Eldredge, the Rhode Island contingent commanded him, along with John Cole and several others, to serve “as a jury man upon the inquest.” Eldredge and his confederates refused, “as we war under Conittycut.” Instead, Eldredge commanded that Wilson, Bull, Mumford and their companions serve on the coroner’s jury under Connecticut’s jurisdiction. Each side claimed that its commands were made “in his Majesties name.” Or, as Eldredge so eloquently put it: “Soe theare was myty commanding in his Majestys name one both sides, and myty threatening of carrying to jayl; in soe much that neither partis could twelfe men one a side”[20]
The Rhode Island peace officers then decided to empanel a coroner’s jury with less than twelve men, if need be, and proceed with the inquest with as few as six. At this point, the Connecticut men took preventive action. – “[T]the dores were shet wheare the corps was.” The Rhode Islanders called the people present “to bare witness tht they were obstructed in thare power and commande us in his Majisties name not to berie the man,” at least not until they had spoken with their “masters” in Newport. Notwithstanding, Eldredge reported that he and his colleagues “proceeded, and beried the man…”[21]Whether the burial was occasioned by pure spite or by a disinclination to leave an un-embalmed corpse lying in a closed-up shed in mid-July is not disclosed in the letter.
Lastly, Eldredge’s letter informed Stanton that he and his men “haue searched for the murtherer, but cannot find him and therefore would intreat you to send out after him and send sum this this way, for we haue neuer an ofeser here to grant me one…. fore we are in greater trobil than euer we were, and like to be in wors…”[22]
On July 15thHigh Constable Henry Palmer returned to Newport, bringing with him as prisoners not only Connecticut’s Wickford constables, Eldredge and Cole, but also the prime suspect, Thomas Flounders. Governor Arnold informed Flounders that he was brought in to be examined on “a very sad matter” involving the death of “one of his Majesties subjects named Walter House.” [23]
VI. Thomas Flounders’ Story
When Flounders asked who accused him of the crime, the governor told him that he was accused by “twelve men.” Flounders said there was a witness named “Lodowick Vandicke,” who was present in the shop at the time of the “difference” between him and Walter House. Asked if he had any “scuffling” with House, Flounders replied that House was at his shop. “When hee went out hee gauve him very bad words.” Then, Flounders was asked if “any blows passed betweene them,” Flounders said he “thought hee struck him one blow.” Perhaps referencing the presence of Mr. Vandicke, the prisoner was asked if he “suspected any other person to bee guilty of his death.” Flounders brief response was “noe” [24]
The examination continued. With no Constitutional Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and no Sixth Amendment right to counsel, Flounders continued to answer questions. When asked if he struck only one blow, Flounders responded, “but one blow, and that with a small stick.” He added that Walter House was “holding vp his arme, the said House fell backward and hit his head against a rafter.”[25]
Flounders also told the Governor and Council that “House was at the doore about the threshold and he himselfe was in the shop” when he struck him. When asked if he had a “fork stale in his hand,” Flounders replied. “noe.” Rather, he claimed it was “a little stick.” And, he then “laid down the stick and that Lodowick did not take it from him.” [26]
The inquiry then shifted to the issue of motive. Flounders was asked about “the reason of their quarrel.” He said it “was about some language.” Walter House told Flounders that he had “taken an oath against him in Warwicke before the Deputy Governor, and that was the discourse between them.” The nature and purpose of the “oath” was not described in the records. Flounders also said that House “provoked him with some other bad language,” which he was not able to recall. [27]
In this respect, there is some evidence that may supplement, perhaps contradict or, alternatively explain, the nature of the quarrel. In an addendum to a letter from Thomas Stanton to John Allyn, Secretary of Connecticut, dated July 14, 1670, is the following note: “We can give you no further information concerning the murther other [than that it was] about a pees of medow; and an ould grudge between them.” [28]
A “pees of medow” would have been valuable real estate in 1670. The Wickford area’s terrain was and still is a land of swampy wetlands, rocky outcrops, piles of boulders and other geological features left behind in the terminal moraine as the last ice age receded.
It is quite possible that the dispute between the two men related to ownership or other conflicting rights to use a particular tract of meadowland in the Wickford area. Considering that two different colonies were actively asserting legal authority over the area, it also is conceivable that House was “forum shopping,” hoping to gain some advantage by invoking Rhode Island’s jurisdiction (and thereby its statutory and common law principles) by “taking an oath” in Warwick, whereas Flounders may have sought a perceived advantage under Connecticut law. This, of course, while plausible is nevertheless conjectural. It is especially interesting considering that both men were signatories to petitions seeking Connecticut’s governance of the Narragansett Country. But was Flounders still a supporter of Connecticut?
If, indeed, the quarrel that escalated to deadly violence was triggered by House giving an “oath” to the Deputy Governor in Warwick, it would perhaps have worked to Flounders’ benefit to have the dispute resolved there. After all, his father-in-law was Captain John Greene of that town. Then again, this may have led to ungentlemanly and provocative comments by House about Flounders’ wife, Sarah.
During his examination, Flounders was asked “why hee hid himselfe” from the authorities after House’s death. He replied, that he hid because he heard that Mr. Eldridge “with some others were out to take him.” He added that he was “loath to goe whither they intended to take him; which as hee was informed was toward Connecticut.”[29]Perhaps, Thomas Flounders changed his allegiance some time after he and Walter House jointly signed the petition asking Connecticut to take over the reins of government in Wickford.
Having been examined by the Assembly and having given his side of the story, the Council ordered that Flounders be “committed to close prison till next Generall Court of Tryalls.”[30]
[1]Records of the Court of Trialsat 322.
[2]Ibidat 333.
[3]Ibid at 335.
[4]Perhaps only legend, and certainly not well documented, there is a story that “Wickford” got its name as a result of a visit by Connecticut’s governor, John Winthrop and his wife, the former Elizabeth Reade to Richard Smith, Jr. at Cocumscussoc. Smith was trying to curry favor with Connecticut at the time. Mrs. Winthrop commented that the area around Smith’s Castle reminded her of her home-town in England. Smith asked her the name of the town. When she replied, “Wickford,” Mr. Smith told her that he would henceforth call the village “Wickford” in her honor. What the story may lack in documentation, it has in plausibility. Governor Winthrop wanted to extend jurisdiction over the area. Smith was willing to accommodate him. And, Elizabeth Winthrop was born in the village of Wickford, Essex, England in 1615. See, www.https://wikitree.com/wiki/Reade-50.
[5]Ibidat p. 321.
[6]Ibid at pp. 321-322.
[7]En.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony _of_Rhode_Island_and Providence_Plantations.
[8]The report is contained in the Records of the Colony, Vol, II at pages 343-344. Thomas Stanton and Thomas Minor certified that it was “a true coppie of the originall, taken out and compared by us this 14thof July, 1670.”
[9]Thomas Stanton’s office of “sergeant” was conferred by the Connecticut Commissioners, Allyn, et al. on June 23, 1670. A “sergeant” in the historical sense, was a bailiff or other government appointed officer “performing duties for the Crown.” Blacks at p.1489.
[10]Records of the Colony, Vol. II, p.343-344.
[11]Ibid.
[12] A “conservator of the peace,” also known as a “peace officer” is a “civil officer (such as a sheriff or police officer) appointed to maintain public tranquility and order; esp., a person designated by public authority to keep the peace and arrest persons guilty or suspected of crime.” Black’s, at p. 1245.
[13]Records of the Colony, Vol. II, at p. 340.
[14]Ibid at p. 340-341.
[15]Ibid. The Assembly also ordered Richard Baily to “goe over to Narragansett and to be assistant to the Coroner…”
[16]Ibid.
[17]Ibid. Italics supplied for emphasis.
[18]Ibid.
[19]Letter from Samuel Eldredge to Thomas Stanton, Narragansett, 13 July, 1670. Records of the Colony at p.344.
[20]Ibid.
[21]Ibid.
[22]Ibid.
[23]Records of the Colony, Vol. IIat p. 341.
[24]Ibid.The “Lodowick Vandicke” mentioned by Flounders is, no doubt, Lodowick Updike, nephew of Richard Smith, and later proprietor of Smith’s Castle at Cocumscussoc and developer of “Updike’s New Towne” in what is now known as historic Wickford, Rhode Island.”
[25]Ibid.
[26]Ibid.
[27]Ibid.
[28]Records of the Colony, Vol. II at p. 346.
[29]Records of the Colony, Vol II, at p. 342.
[30]Ibid.